CE Volume 4

[JesusLooksLikeMe]

What does "five deferments" refer to?

[pissin2]

I like how Kerry said, hey If you like the US now, vote for bush. If you want a change, come with us. Pretty straight forward and he's not bashing bush by saying this.

[chrisfan]

shin said:

Well if Zell Miller, Ed Koch (who admittedly agrees with Bush on exactly zero policies), and the mayor of Youngstown Ohio don't support Kerry, then you're right, the Dems are in total disarray. Nothing's united when you can't claim Ed Koch on your rollcall.

Come on, you know the Dems are united like never before. How many times have you heard the phrase "Anybody But ____" in a campaign? Even if it's AGAINST someone as opposed to FOR someone, it's still united.

Shin, I think the problem here is another example of your not allowing for ANY shades of gray in a discussion. I pointed out some notable Democrats who have come out in favor of Bush to refute your claim that the Democrats are free of dissent and TOTALLY together right now. By saying that claim is not true, I am NOT saying "They are in total disaray". I am saying "they are not in total agreement". There is a huge huge huge space between one statement and the other.

But to add to my refuting your claim, I heard polling numbers which simply do not support what you are saying. The support for President Bush among people who strongly identify themselves as Republicans right now is somewhere in the 90's percentage wise. On the flip side, support for Senator Kerry among people who strongly identify themselves as Democrats right now is somewhere in the 60's percentage wise. So, perhaps you're right,and Democrats are in the 90s in their agreement that Bush should not continue as president -- I dont know. I have not seen that poll done. But the numbers indicate that is where their agreement ends. And honestly, not wanting Bush in office is going to be enough to get Kerry elected.

I guess I have to ask -- if the Democrats are as strongly together as you are saying they are right now, why is Kerry either in a dead heat, or lagging behind slightly, in the polls?

[Galactus]

It's odd, most of the polls I've seen have Kerry slightly leading. It doesn't matter anyway because on Nov. 2 is when all the people who don't take place in polls (hopefully) go out and vote. In any case EVERY poll I've seen has them close( except polls that are done in areas of one extreme or the other of course. I'm sure for every poll you can find I could find a poll that says the opposite. They don't matter.

[chrisfan]

Mary said:

I might be misreading the comment I bolded, and then teh comment about journalism school, so honest question - not trying to put words into your mouth: are you suggesting that the article I posted was too one-sided, since it focused only on Republican distortions of Kerry's record? Or that the media generally is too one-sided (which side, then?)

I agree with the statement on its face, I'm just not sure if there's a hidden sarcasm here that I'm not fully getting. I do think journalists should routinely engage in this detailed deconstruction of politicians' remarks on the campaign trail, for both sides. I don't have a problem with salon.com only doing it to Bush, because salon.com is an editorial site with an admitted liberal disposition. But it would be great for our democracy if there were conservative sites doing the same thing to Kerry's comments. (I assume there must be?!) And it would be even better if plain old journalists writing for major papers would get some balls and fact-check politicians' statements from all over the ideological spectrum.

To answer your question in short Mary, I'm saying that BOTH the article you posted, and the media in general, is too one-sided. Allow me to make a few distinctions.

First, I'm glad to see you acknowledge that salon is a liberal leaning editorial site, because there are several around here who'd argue that it's a reliable source of news. I make (and from what you've said in the past I think that you do too) a very strong distinction between journalists and commentators/editorialists/pundits. By definition of what they do, I think that the commentators/pundits must express their opinions and bias, and should be up front about where they are coming from, bias-wise. Journalists on the other hand, should not be expressing their opinions, and we shouldn't know where they are coming from bias-wise.

More often than not, when I refer to the media, I'm referring to journalists, not commentators/pundits (which I'm going to call just pundits from this point forward for the sake of my fingers). That's why I crack up when comments made about the liberal media are refuted by people citing people like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. They're NOT journalists! But, since pundits can fairly be put under the "media" umbrella, I can see where the misunderstanding can come from. I've been accused in the past of putting an unfair standard on journalists with an expectation of their keeping their opinions out of their jobs. But even though I did it on a small scale, I've done the job, so I think it's fair for me to put that expectation there. And I don't think it's out of line to claim that journalists have a liberal bias, because the simple truth is that the strong majority of journalists ARE liberal.

But I"m getting off topic. Back to the point which is journalists role in politics. I don't think it's any mistake that the role of journalists is specifically mentioned and protected in the bill of rights. I wish that they'd start recognizing the responsibility that comes with that right a little more. DED asked me last week if I t hought political ads that lie should be allowed to air, and I said yes. I have two primary reasons for believing that. The first (and probably biggest) is that since the definition of a "lie" in politics can be such a subjective thing that I don't think anyone could really be trusted to be the orator of truth in political advertising. The second reason is that I believe it is the role of journalists to aid the public in serving the role of truth detector. It's their job to sort through the claims and find the facts to support and refute those claims, and hand that information over for the voters to decide. In some cases, I think they do that very well. Unfortunately, I think that way too many of them are inspired to do just that when "their guy" is being "lied" about. But their inspiration should come from their job ... not their "guy".

[chrisfan]

JesusLooksLikeMe said:

What does "five deferments" refer to?

The deferments from being drafted that Cheney got during Vietnam.

[pissin2]

A few of my favorite Bush qoutes from last night:

"2/3 of all moms work outside the home"
(everyone cheers. I still don't see how this is a good thing)

"There will be 7 million more affordable homes!"
(yeah right)

Says he "will not focus on what children can't do, but what they can do"
(I don't really see how this is a good thing. Shouldn't teachers be helping with kids weaknesses?)

[Proud]

i have to admit that i've lost some respect for arnold in recent history, but i give him kudos for mentioning richard nixon. imo, richard nixon was a better president than people give him credit for, and a much better guy. he just got manipulated, then got extremely paranoid, and then became a joke in the eye of the american public. poor guy.

[Galactus]

SPRINGFIELD, Ohio (CNN) -- Striking back less than an hour after the completion of the Republican National Convention, where he was the subject of countless GOP barbs, Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry re-entered the fray, calling President Bush "unfit to lead this nation."

"I have five words for America: This is your wake-up call," the Massachusetts senator told a cheering crowd at a midnight rally in Springfield, Ohio.

"We all saw the anger and distortion of the Republican convention," Kerry said. "For the past week, they attacked my patriotism and my fitness to serve as commander-in-chief.

"Well, here's my answer: I'm not going to have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq."

Kerry was a decorated Navy officer in Vietnam who became a prominent antiwar activist upon returning home, and that history has played a major role in his presidential campaign.

The speech followed Wednesday night's attacks on Kerry by Vice President Dick Cheney and by renegade Democratic Sen. Zell Miller, who savaged Kerry as unfit to serve as commander-in-chief.

The Georgia senator blasted the party he still nominally belongs to as one "motivated more by partisan politics than by national security," while Cheney said Kerry "does not seem to understand the first obligation of a commander in chief, and that is to support American troops in combat."

Kerry counterpunched in his Ohio speech by saying, "Misleading our nation into war in Iraq makes you unfit to lead this nation.

"Doing nothing while this nation loses millions of jobs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting 45 million Americans go without health care makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting the Saudi royal family control our energy costs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Handing out billions of government contracts to Halliburton while you're still on their payroll makes you unfit. That's the record of George Bush and Dick Cheney, and it's not going to change."

"The vice president even called me unfit for office last night," Kerry said. "I guess I'll leave it up to the voters whether five deferments makes someone more qualified to defend this nation than two tours of duty."

Cheney was the recipient of the Vietnam-era draft deferments.

Kerry said the next 60 days leading up to the November 2 election are key and give Americans a simple choice -- "If you believe this country is heading in the right direction, you should support George Bush, but if you believe America needs to move in a new direction, join with us."

"For four days in New York ... we heard almost nothing but anger and insults from the Republicans, and I'll tell you why," he said. "It's because they can't talk about the real issues facing Americans. They can't talk about their record because it's a record of failure."

In the president's acceptance speech, he focused on his leadership following the Sept. 11, 2001, al Qaeda attacks on the United States, but also outlined about 15 domestic initiatives on education, health care, jobs and taxes, including proposing economic "opportunity zones" for poorer areas that would offer tax relief to lure new businesses.

Kerry's response: "All hat, no cattle" -- an expression common in Texas used to refer to phony cowboys who dress and talk the part but are pretending to be what they aren't.

[chrisfan]

DED said:

Having now seen Zell Miller's keynote speech I can now confortably say...holy shit what a whack job! I also saw when he flipped the fuck out on Hardball afterwards, that nutjob challenged Chris Mattews to duel. I don't know how that can veiwed as anything other then a gigantic black eye on the conventions, though I imagine someone will pull out "well, he says what he thinks" or "at least you know where he stands"...that doesn't make him any less crazy.

As I said yesterday, Thursday night was just Zell being Zell, and anyone who knows Georgia politics knows that's how he's always been ... which is exactly why he was asked to deliver the keynote address to the Democrats in 1992.

But I have to say, I find it very very telling that the criticism of Zell Miller thus far has been nearly exclusively about his demeanor, and so little is being said about what he actually said.

[pissin2]

I have to say once again that I'm really upset and disturbed with the general american public. I watch these guys on tv last night (and I'm not saying this just happens in the republican conventions) and they seem like such tools. They cheer for every little thing said like it's the greatest thing on earth. If I were running for president I'd be saying all that stuff too. It doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to do it. Again, I'm not just saying this about Bush supporters. But anyone chanting USA! or wearing big red white and blue sunglasses just seems so uninformed and brainwashed. And they bring their little kids there to wave a flag too, like they have any idea what's going on. If they would actually take the time to think about what is being said, maybe take notes on things, instead of just blindly cheering, we might have a better america. I'd also be able to go to bed earlier and wouldn't be so tired right now if they didn't explode into cheers every minute. And why was this on so late anyway? Do they not want the majority of people in tv land to see it? I think it's odd.

I know the people are there to show support for the prez, but it really shouldn't be handled as one big pep rally. They should be there more to just be informed. People should more often shut their mouth and open their eyes and ears. They disgust me.

[chrisfan]

DED said:

SPRINGFIELD, Ohio (CNN) -- Striking back less than an hour after the completion of the Republican National Convention, where he was the subject of countless GOP barbs, Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry re-entered the fray, calling President Bush "unfit to lead this nation."

"I have five words for America: This is your wake-up call," the Massachusetts senator told a cheering crowd at a midnight rally in Springfield, Ohio.

"We all saw the anger and distortion of the Republican convention," Kerry said. "For the past week, they attacked my patriotism and my fitness to serve as commander-in-chief.

"Well, here's my answer: I'm not going to have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq."

Kerry was a decorated Navy officer in Vietnam who became a prominent antiwar activist upon returning home, and that history has played a major role in his presidential campaign.

The speech followed Wednesday night's attacks on Kerry by Vice President Dick Cheney and by renegade Democratic Sen. Zell Miller, who savaged Kerry as unfit to serve as commander-in-chief.

The Georgia senator blasted the party he still nominally belongs to as one "motivated more by partisan politics than by national security," while Cheney said Kerry "does not seem to understand the first obligation of a commander in chief, and that is to support American troops in combat."

Kerry counterpunched in his Ohio speech by saying, "Misleading our nation into war in Iraq makes you unfit to lead this nation.

"Doing nothing while this nation loses millions of jobs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting 45 million Americans go without health care makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting the Saudi royal family control our energy costs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Handing out billions of government contracts to Halliburton while you're still on their payroll makes you unfit. That's the record of George Bush and Dick Cheney, and it's not going to change."

"The vice president even called me unfit for office last night," Kerry said. "I guess I'll leave it up to the voters whether five deferments makes someone more qualified to defend this nation than two tours of duty."

Cheney was the recipient of the Vietnam-era draft deferments.

Kerry said the next 60 days leading up to the November 2 election are key and give Americans a simple choice -- "If you believe this country is heading in the right direction, you should support George Bush, but if you believe America needs to move in a new direction, join with us."

"For four days in New York ... we heard almost nothing but anger and insults from the Republicans, and I'll tell you why," he said. "It's because they can't talk about the real issues facing Americans. They can't talk about their record because it's a record of failure."

In the president's acceptance speech, he focused on his leadership following the Sept. 11, 2001, al Qaeda attacks on the United States, but also outlined about 15 domestic initiatives on education, health care, jobs and taxes, including proposing economic "opportunity zones" for poorer areas that would offer tax relief to lure new businesses.

Kerry's response: "All hat, no cattle" -- an expression common in Texas used to refer to phony cowboys who dress and talk the part but are pretending to be what they aren't.

I think that the Bush campaign team, and those who planned the convention, should really take it as quite a compliment that the Kerry campaign viewed the message they delivered all week as so strong that they had to take the unprecedented step of holding the rally last night. I thought it was a powerful week, but I'm biased. That really is quite a pat on the back from the Kerry campaign.

But I think it's a shame that a man like Kerry, who seems so concerned about truth and accuracy when people are talking about him, does not believe in truth and accuracy when talking about his opponet.

The Republicans did not question John Kerry's patriotism. In fact, Zell Miller said that specifically: "I do not question their patriotism. I question their judgement". Yet, John Kerry once again rolls out this "they're questioning my patriotism" whining. Let's get it straight once and for all. Patriotism is love for your country. In order to run for office, put into it what you have to do, and make the sacrifices (namely knowing there's enough of a target on your back every day that a team of agents have no other job but to guard YOU) that you must to be president, ANYONE who runs for office has a love for his or her country. They're all patriots.

And my biggest criticism -- as I said earlier -- is that I think it's an absolute joke that the man who said he wants to talk about the issues is running back to Vietnam yet again. John Kerry actually has the gall to say that George W Bush and ESPECIALLY Dick Cheney have not served their country????? Just how short-sighted can he be? This claim, by it's definition, implies that the ONLY way to serve your country is in the military. What a slap in the face to a huge number of people in America! Make no mistake about it -- serving your country in the military is a noble and honorable thing to do. But it's certainly not the ONLY way to serve your country! Dick Cheney has served his country by serving in Congress, serving in the administrations of multiple presidents, volunteer work, etc.

It's time for John KErry to get a grip on the words that he uses.

[Galactus]

Chrisfan said:

But I have to say, I find it very very telling that the criticism of Zell Miller thus far has been nearly exclusively about his demeanor, and so little is being said about what he actually said.

It was hard to listen to him when he was raving like mad man, but what I heard was baseless and bitter and amouted to nothing more then chumming the waters. Just like Arnold's "fantastic" speech...he didn't say anything. He spewed opinions as though they were fact and his facts were only half the story. So, How's this different from most speakers at either convention? Well, Zell did it while screaming like a lunatic...and then he challenged Chris MAtthews to a DUEL. A fucking duel. He pitched a big whiny baby fit because he was being asked hard questions and then said he wished he could challenge him to a duel. You simply can't justify that.

[JesusLooksLikeMe]

Aww, all the whooping and hollering, the pom-poms and cheerleading is as American as apple pie. To the outsider, it's all part of the distinctive American charm. Of course, so are Steinbeck, Hemingway, Faulkner... what a great, complex, grotesque-yet-beautiful nation.

You know what? We do it too. Any party conference speech over here is punctuated by about 17 standing ovations, all pre-arranged. People just dress a bit more drab is all.

[JesusLooksLikeMe]

Chrisfan said:

Dick Cheney has served his country by serving in Congress, serving in the administrations of multiple presidents, volunteer work, etc.

You were going well until this bit. Dick Cheney has primarily served Dick Cheney, Halliburton, and a few related special interest groups. His unpopularity is well deserved.