Peter_Puget Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Sure kerry jumps on the lost explosives bandwagon and slams Bush using a foreign source obviously trying to influence the election. But as the story unfolds any rational person will see the real story is kerry's ability to be manipulated. Developing Story More detailed analysis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Are you referring to that Minnesota network affiliate with the film of US troops examining the explosives, just before they were called away leaving the site unsecured? I don't trust them damn Norweigan gentlemen farmers either, they call jello with marshmallows in it "salad." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 I think the real story is that either side will stoop to anything at this point to get elected. Pretty disheartening, really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted October 29, 2004 Author Share Posted October 29, 2004 SC – That’s probably the first political thing you’ve written that I wholeheartedly agree with. The fact that we are stuck with this choice at this time is truly sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 I don't trust them damn Norweigan gentlemen farmers either, they call jello with marshmallows in it "salad." And word is there's a bunch of anorexic homos in tights out at Smith Rock, hanging on the rope and clipping bolts that are five feet apart and calling it "climbing." Scandal! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Oh this is rich!! Fox news and another blogger! Yea, um, we found it and didn't tell anyone, that's it! Priceless. http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6651894 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted October 29, 2004 Author Share Posted October 29, 2004 Hmm sounds like the same "will to believe" grousing that occurred when CBS revealed those darn forged documents! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 All this bickering over the details of when the explosives were looted is a bit distracting, though important in establishing what really happened. The real issue, and the one Kerry is trying to highlight, is that all those explosives (HMX/RDX or otherwise) were left unguarded... for many weeks. Very bad. If we had had enough troops, more of the ammo could have been guarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 "a foreign source obviously trying to manipulate the election"... classic paranoia! Keep it up, man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 I think the real story is that either side will stoop to anything at this point to get elected. Pretty disheartening, really. i strongly disagree. it may be reductionist to focus on missing high-grade explosives but this story is truly indicative of what has gone on. invading a country under pretense of imminent danger when in fact increasing danger through the dispersion of weapons that were closely garded by an anti-fundamentalist regime and united nation inspectors, points to some of the lies that this venture has been built upon. as for the overall "what does it take to win an election today?" i am afraid there is little choice in the matter considering the immmense role of the media in determining who'll be president and the unfortunate tendency of many to focus solely on soundbytes. a little reductionism seems a small price to pay considering the alternatives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 i should also add that the evolution of the reporting of this story is also extremely useful in seeing the extent to which part of the media will go to any length of deception to make the bad news go away. juan coles comments on the spin of the day: "But if DiRita thought that this officer would clear the whole thing up, he was clearly disappointed. The major said explicitly that he had not seen any seals of the International Atomic Energy Commission, which means that he cannot testify that his unit destroyed the HMX. Then he was asked if insurgents could have carried off 150 tons of that stuff in a short period of time as a practical matter. He replied that it seems like a lot, but in fact it could be done really quickly. Then he let it slip that his unit was at al-Qaqaa on April 13, before the KSTP video was shot of US soldiers examining HMX there. So Pearson's unit could not have removed all the HMX at that time. Since he didn't see IAEA seals, it seems likely that his unit didn't remove any HMX." http://www.juancole.com/2004_10_01_juancole_archive.html#109906976577919924 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dberdinka Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Watching the Republican Party try and spin the story around is almost more interesting than the facts themselves. As the story unfolds any rational person will see the real story is Peter Puget's ability to be manipulated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Posted October 30, 2004 Share Posted October 30, 2004 As the story further develops we see that the military folks that were there earlier did take away weapons, but these were more convential items, not the mx and such. They never even saw the IAEC seals on the bunkers according to today's Pentagon briefing. And the film from the ABC affiliate in Minnesota that shows the intact seals was take two weeks after the cited military unit was there, AND LEFT. Hey Peter Puget, where are you when your right wing trolls go south? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Posted October 30, 2004 Share Posted October 30, 2004 But as the story unfolds any rational person will see the real story is kerry's ability to be manipulated. whoops.... yet another beautiful quote from a bush supporter in denial. So, who exactly is being manipulated? Believe everything you read on fox? You typically seem smarter than that. Just think - only three days until our unelected moron-in-chief is shipped back to dumb-ass redneckville, and we can wake up from this four-year nightmare. The champagne is on ice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted October 30, 2004 Share Posted October 30, 2004 Just think - only three days until our unelected moron-in-chief is shipped back to dumb-ass redneckville, and we can wake up from this four-year nightmare. The champagne is on ice. ...and by this time next week the unopened bottle will rest at the bottom of your pail under the warm, stagnant water that was once so cold, clean and crystalized - awaiting a celebration never to be. BTW: Bush was chosen in 2000 by the electoral college. Many subsequent recounts, even those done by left-leaning papers, demonstrate this to be so. It is likely time for you to grow up and accept our constitutional system of government and elections. This election holds the potential for Bush to win the popular vote, yet lose the election in the electoral. This is our way. I will accept it if it comes to pass. (however unlikely) I will not carry on like a whiney little bitch for 4 years about our "unelected" leader. Grow some hair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snafflehunter Posted October 30, 2004 Share Posted October 30, 2004 Just think - only three days until our unelected moron-in-chief is shipped back to dumb-ass redneckville, and we can wake up from this four-year nightmare. The champagne is on ice. ...and by this time next week the unopened bottle will rest at the bottom of your pail beneath the warm, stagnant water that was once so clean and crystalized - awaiting a celebration never to be. BTW: Bush was chosen in 2000 by the electoral college. Many subsequent recounts, even those done by left-leaning papers, demonstrate this to be so. It is likely time for you to grow up and accept our system of government. This election holds the potential for Bush to win the popular vote, yet lose the election in the electoral. This is our way. I will accept it if it comes to pass. (however unlikely) I will not carry on like a whiney little bitch for 4 years about our "unelected" leader. Grow some hair. Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 The latest! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6367631/site/newsweek/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted October 31, 2004 Author Share Posted October 31, 2004 But as the story unfolds any rational person will see the real story is kerry's ability to be manipulated. whoops.... yet another beautiful quote from a bush supporter in denial. So, who exactly is being manipulated? Believe everything you read on fox? You typically seem smarter than that. Just think - only three days until our unelected moron-in-chief is shipped back to dumb-ass redneckville, and we can wake up from this four-year nightmare. The champagne is on ice. Upon reading my post again I realize that I was only half correct..Kerry on some level is being manipulated but he is also aware and quite probably grateful for the help. Here is more help he is getting: [T]he Zogby poll published in the Rapid City Journal ... showed Republican Thune leading Daschle, 48.5 percent to 45.5 percent, just within the margin of error. At first, however, the poll had shown an even larger Thune lead, which seemed so improbable that the pollsters adjusted their voter turnout estimates and arrived at the narrower gap. link Zogby's carefully consistent and thought-through polling procedures turn out a result that's just "too improbable" for his tastes so he adjusts his numbers..... Despite the overwhelming bias of the MSM, Zogby and others the soon to be Bush win will indicate the true weakness of the left. A weakness that the left will have to deny. This denial will manifest itself as various claims of voter fraud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 (edited) This election is gonna get ugly. And it's not gonna be over by Thanksgiving. That's my bet Edited October 31, 2004 by chucK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 Is PP really a Bush supporter? Damn, all this time I thought he was a pretty smart guy who liked to troll! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 I think the real story is that either side will stoop to anything at this point to get elected. Pretty disheartening, really. i strongly disagree. it may be reductionist to focus on missing high-grade explosives but this story is truly indicative of what has gone on. invading a country under pretense of imminent danger when in fact increasing danger through the dispersion of weapons that were closely garded by an anti-fundamentalist regime and united nation inspectors, points to some of the lies that this venture has been built upon. as for the overall "what does it take to win an election today?" i am afraid there is little choice in the matter considering the immmense role of the media in determining who'll be president and the unfortunate tendency of many to focus solely on soundbytes. a little reductionism seems a small price to pay considering the alternatives. One of the problems I see though with Kerry being the touter of an anti-war agenda is that he originally gave Bush the authority to go to war. Congress was cowed in a similar way as were the German law-makers in the early '30's. And Kerry was complicit. I agree that the information is important, but I'm not absolutely convinced Kerry is an honest messenger. In fact, how can he, with a straight face, be using the war as an election issue when he originally voted to give Bush the authority to execute it? Did he really think Bush is a swell guy, wanting to avoid war???? Come on, he's not THAT ignorant! He reads PNAC, he knows what the neocon agenda is, and HE VOTED TO GIVE THESE GUYS WAR POWERS! (Kerry is a cow, a political machination, and he really pisses me off right now!) The ONLY two democrats worthy of their party title are Kucinich and Sharpton. The rest can take their kowtowing and hypocrisy straight to Iraq, and help out with the mess they authorized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted October 31, 2004 Author Share Posted October 31, 2004 LOL : As far as Bush I am a one issue supporter: WOT. I think that our choices are pathetic and have been for some time. The state of political debate is so poor right now that it is truly amazing - my take is that these guys are chosen specifically to keep the debate at a low level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 WOT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 The military folks I know call it GWOT (gee-wot): Global War on Terror. I'm pretty sick of all the campaigning right now... how anyone can still be undecided is a mystery to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 LOL : As far as Bush I am a one issue supporter: WOT. do you expect anyone to believe this? come on, apart from a few social issues, you have supported bush in everything he has done. as if picking the sole issue of wot to hang your hat onto should legitimize the "strong leader" bs, whereas, in fact, if there is someone not fit to handle questions of national security it is certainly the bungler. I think that our choices are pathetic and have been for some time. The state of political debate is so poor right now that it is truly amazing - my take is that these guys are chosen specifically to keep the debate at a low level. as if the level of debate was any better when your hero, reagan, displayed his acting "talent" in the whitehouse. are you trying to conveniently bundle kerry with bush because you know you have no chance of convincing any thinking person of bush's intellectual fitness for the job? your not-so-subbtle attempts at encouraging 3rd party voting are duly noted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.