Bush Campaign Launched - Bush uses Government Position to slam Kerry

[jj]

President Bush, speaking from the White House, as president, using goverment money, today took a swipe at John Kerry's position on national defense.

The guy who got us into a war by mistake attacks the guy who actually went out and fought one, and what's more, the guy who got us into a war by mistake uses his government position as a pulpit.

Gotta love it, absolutely NOTHING is sacred here, from using government coercion to hold protesters against their will and illegally interfere with their political speech, to using the morning White House briefing for a dodger to slam a war hero.

What's amazing to me is that people aren't calling him on this. It shows just how well the big lie tactics of the Republicans work.

After all, it's the little guy whose job they outsourced, whose dinner they lost, and whose rented house they made more expensive by denying the small-time landlord a tax break while giving the big-time stock speculator a huge one, who is voting for them.

You have to give the present Republiguns credit for being good liars, at least.

[Judith]

And the repubes have always been good at managing their voter base. They lure poorer people
who don't get the tax breaks with social issues (gays trying to destroy our America)
and then give the tax breaks to others. Keep em scared of boogymen to keep them from noticing the economic policies are doing them no good.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Judith
Keep em scared of boogymen to keep them from noticing the economic policies are doing them no good.

Actually it probably has to do with the fact that most of those people don’t look to the government to solve their problems, if they did, they would be voting "democrat".

[Luke T.]

Is Kerry still a Senator? Getting paid for it, is he? Thought so.

[Luke T.]

I see Kerry missed a vote on the Senate floor today. (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=2&vote=00016) Think they'll dock his pay for that?

Oh. Edwards missed voting today, too.

[jj]

Originally posted by Luke T.
Is Kerry still a Senator? Getting paid for it, is he? Thought so.

I don't see him standing at the podium on the Senate floor, speaking to his campaign.

Surely you must see the difference?

[Sundog]

Originally posted by jj


I don't see him standing at the podium on the Senate floor, speaking to his campaign.

Surely you must see the difference?

How about jetting around the country on our tax dollars to speaking engagements that, time after time, just "happened" to coincide with the Democratic primaries?

They have no shame at all.

[jj]

Originally posted by Sundog


How about jetting around the country on our tax dollars to speaking engagements that, time after time, just "happened" to coincide with the Democratic primaries?

They have no shame at all.

Who's paying for it? You mean the Shrub or Kerry? Hard to know quite where you're headed there.

If it's the Shrub, that had better count under his campaign limits.

[Sundog]

Originally posted by jj


Who's paying for it? You mean the Shrub or Kerry? Hard to know quite where you're headed there.

If it's the Shrub, that had better count under his campaign limits.

Oh, sorry. The Shrub.

Oh, no, it won't. He claims that it's just coincidence. I wonder if he'll apply for the JREF prize.

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by jj


I don't see him standing at the podium on the Senate floor, speaking to his campaign.

Surely you must see the difference?

He belongs on the Senate floor!

No, I do not see a difference. He is being paid to be in the Senate and casting votes. Instead, he is campaigning, slamming Bush, while getting paid for not doing his job.

No difference.

[Luke T.]

Hey, here's (http://kerry.senate.gov/high/record.cfm?id=217367) Kerry using his official government web site to slam Bush!


Kerry Calls on Bush Administration to Plan for Returning Troops and Protect Veterans’ Health Care


“It is my hope Secretary Rumsfeld will immediately address the back-log in our Army medical system” says Kerry

Friday, January 23, 2004

Washington D.C – Senator John F. Kerry today called on the Bush Administration to explain how they plan to provide quality health care to the thousands of troops returning from overseas duty without further stressing an overburdened Veterans health care system.

“I am outraged by the fact that soldiers are being forced to wait in substandard housing to receive medical care,” Senator Kerry said. “We must provide adequate medical care for those who put their life on the line for America. I am disappointed that the administration has not acted sooner in alleviating the health care crisis facing our veterans and better planned for our returning troops. It is my hope that this administration will immediately address the back-log and keep faith with those who keep our country safe.”




No difference!

edited to add: And look at the date on the link. Kerry did it first!

[jj]

Originally posted by Luke T.


He belongs on the Senate floor!

No, I do not see a difference. He is being paid to be in the Senate and casting votes. Instead, he is campaigning, slamming Bush, while getting paid for not doing his job.

No difference.

"No difference"?

So, the president can campaign, but Kerry can't?

Or nobody can campaign?

Quite aside from that, what's the point about any democrat being in the Senate to vote? The coerced party-line voting implimented by the repubiguns makes them all irrelevant anyhow. The willingness of the shrub to bypass the judicial appointments process (yes, it is (*&(*ed up indeed) to put friendly judges in places where there can be election disputes is ok by you?

[jj]

Originally posted by Luke T.
Hey, here's (http://kerry.senate.gov/high/record.cfm?id=217367) Kerry using his official government web site to slam Bush!






No difference!

edited to add: And look at the date on the link. Kerry did it first!

So, a veteran pointing out that veterans get the short end from the VA and a dodger is somehow wrong?

I used to live near a residence VA hospital. The staff cared, really, but the place was appalling, the buildings appalling, and people who qualified to use the hospital were scared s**tless of it.

But it's wrong to point that out? After the way that the VA treated 'nam vets? Come on, Luke!
Really?

[SRW]

JJ do you have a link to what Bush said?

[Sundog]

Originally posted by jj


So, a veteran pointing out that veterans get the short end from the VA and a dodger is somehow wrong?

I used to live near a residence VA hospital. The staff cared, really, but the place was appalling, the buildings appalling, and people who qualified to use the hospital were scared s**tless of it.

But it's wrong to point that out? After the way that the VA treated 'nam vets? Come on, Luke!
Really?

We only like REPUBLICAN veterans.

[jj]

Originally posted by SRW
JJ do you have a link to what Bush said?

Sorry, no, watched it on MSNBC at lunch.

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by jj


"No difference"?

So, the president can campaign, but Kerry can't?

Or nobody can campaign?

Quite aside from that, what's the point about any democrat being in the Senate to vote? The coerced party-line voting implimented by the repubiguns makes them all irrelevant anyhow. The willingness of the shrub to bypass the judicial appointments process (yes, it is (*&(*ed up indeed) to put friendly judges in places where there can be election disputes is ok by you?

The name of this topic is "Bush Campaign Launched - Bush uses Government Position to slam Kerry." Now that I have not only established that Kerry does the same thing, but started doing it first, you have retreated to just another rabid rant.

So what's new here?

[geni]

How many weeks are left until this election?

[jj]

Originally posted by Luke T.


The name of this topic is "Bush Campaign Launched - Bush uses Government Position to slam Kerry." Now that I have not only established that Kerry does the same thing, but started doing it first, you have retreated to just another rabid rant.

So what's new here?

You have established nothing, and your opinion is thereby shown to be not only biased, but biased and based on false logic.

Kerry didn't show up for his vote. It doesn't matter and we both know it.

Bush used his governing powers to run his campaign.

Kerry used his own web site.

Bush used AF 1 to campaign.

Kerry paid for his own.

Do you REALLY see no difference between sapping everything one can from their office and not doing so?

Do you REALLY think the "free speech zones" are anything but a deliberate use of government weapons and agents to create a false impression AS PART OF A CAMPAIGN?

Bush has used AF1, the Secret Service, his office, his press officers, and you compare that to Kerry not showing up for a vote where he know's he's outvoted, and Kerry using his web site to point out the abuse of Veterans via the VA.

Do you really think they are the same? Really? If you do, my opinion of you just went right in the toidy.

[Solitaire]

Originally posted by geni
How many weeks are left until this election?
Does what? Oh! You mean, when is it over.
November 2 or about thirty six weeks.

[SRW]

Originally posted by Synchronicity

Does what? Oh! You mean, when is it over.
November 2 or about thirty six weeks.

Well the good thing for all the canidates: they will not have any nits left.

[Oso]

Originally posted by Luke T.
Hey, here's (http://kerry.senate.gov/high/record.cfm?id=217367) Kerry using his official government web site to slam Bush!

...

No difference!
Actually this is what Kerry was elected to do. It's his job to identify and suggest solutions to social problems.

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by jj


You have established nothing, and your opinion is thereby shown to be not only biased, but biased and based on false logic.

Oh, the irony!

Kerry didn't show up for his vote. It doesn't matter and we both know it.

It doesn't matter that he is shirking is duties?

Bush used his governing powers to run his campaign.

Kerry used his own web site.

And Kerry isn't using his governing powers to campaign? And it isn't his own web site. It is a web site paid for with tax dollars.


Bush used AF 1 to campaign.

So did Clinton, and probably every president before him.


Kerry paid for his own.

Campaign contributors pay for his.


Do you REALLY see no difference between sapping everything one can from their office and not doing so?

Yes, I can, and neither Kerry or Edwards or Bush are not doing so.


Do you REALLY think the "free speech zones" are anything but a deliberate use of government weapons and agents to create a false impression AS PART OF A CAMPAIGN?

Cue Art Bell theme music.


Bush has used AF1, the Secret Service, his office, his press officers, and you compare that to Kerry not showing up for a vote where he know's he's outvoted, and Kerry using his web site to point out the abuse of Veterans via the VA.

Do you really think they are the same? Really? If you do, my opinion of you just went right in the toidy.

Has Kerry turned down the use of his Secret Service officers during his campaign? Once he is the candidate designate, will he turn them down?

Kerry is outvoted on every vote, eh? You think today is the only vote he missed? Maybe every Democrat should follow his example and not bother voting because their vote won't count.

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by Oso
Actually this is what Kerry was elected to do. It's his job to identify and suggest solutions to social problems.

And then vote on them in the Senate. That is what he was elected to do.

[Luke T.]

I suppose it is a good idea for a President to ditch his Secret Service detail and travel on his own plane. After all, it's not like there are people out there who would like to kill him. :rolleyes:

jj, why do I have the feeling that this TV broadcast you saw was a press conference, and Bush was answering a question asked of him by a reporter?

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by Luke T.
jj, why do I have the feeling that this TV broadcast you saw was a press conference, and Bush was answering a question asked of him by a reporter?

It was probably his speech at the Republican Governor's Association from Monday. (At the Washington Convention Center)

There seems to be a lot of misconceptions in this thread about what sorts of campaigning are legal and what sorts are not.

Here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/) are recent White House events. Nothing from today that matches up with what jj claims. (perhaps they've left something out)

Here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040223-3.html) is Bush's speech to the National Governors Association, which doesn't seem to me to have anything about Kerry's position on national defense.

Here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040223-10.html) is Bush's speech to the Republican Governors Association, which is a partisan event, and in which he campaigns.

jj - what did you see on MSNBC?

[clk]

Originally posted by Luke T.



Has Kerry turned down the use of his Secret Service officers during his campaign? Once he is the candidate designate, will he turn them down?



Kerry and Edwards have both asked for and received Secret Service protection. It happened just recently, though.

[deanerk]

what did you see on MSNBC?

It was probably a story something like this (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&e=14&u=/nm/campaign_bush_dc) which doesn't make it all that clear that this was a partisan event. Of course Bush knew it would make news and it was likely a deliberate campaign move.

[jj]

Originally posted by Luke T.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you REALLY think the "free speech zones" are anything but a deliberate use of government weapons and agents to create a false impression AS PART OF A CAMPAIGN?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Cue Art Bell theme music.



Let me get this straight. You're denying, despite all of the news reports, that the Secret Service is barring protestors and non-Bush supporters from his rallies?

You're denying that? Yes or no?

If you ARE denying that, then let's hear your own Art Bell fable about how all the people who weren't allowed to protest, and who were held against their will without warrant or being arrested during Bush's speaces all imagined that.

Come on, Art. You can do it. Maybe it's flying saucers!

[jj]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
There seems to be a lot of misconceptions in this thread about what sorts of campaigning are legal and what sorts are not.


Fine, confuse legal with ethical, go ahead. It's not clear Ken Lay broke the law, either, is it, now?

[jj - what did you see on MSNBC? [/B]
Press conference, handled some other stuff, went on to Kerry-kicking. On circa noon. Sorry, didn't think I'd need to cite it.

[jj]

Originally posted by clk


Kerry and Edwards have both asked for and received Secret Service protection. It happened just recently, though.

That's justified, though. There's a world of difference between having SS protection (good) and having them move all the protesters out of sight of the cameras, and then all of the cameras out of sight of the protestors, though.

[jj]

Originally posted by deanerk


It was probably a story something like this (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&e=14&u=/nm/campaign_bush_dc) which doesn't make it all that clear that this was a partisan event. Of course Bush knew it would make news and it was likely a deliberate campaign move.

Unless it (MSNBC report) was creatively edited (which is always a possibility, but that usually happens to non-ultra-rightist nowdays) that's not it. It is interesting to note the lies in that speech, but so it goes.

Bush must be awfully confident, to just lie outright like that.

[clk]

Originally posted by jj


That's justified, though. There's a world of difference between having SS protection (good) and having them move all the protesters out of sight of the cameras, and then all of the cameras out of sight of the protestors, though.

I wasn't trying to make a point with my statement, I was just responding to Luke's comment about the SS, in case he didn't know that Edwards and Kerry had just received SS protection.

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by jj


Let me get this straight. You're denying, despite all of the news reports, that the Secret Service is barring protestors and non-Bush supporters from his rallies?

That's the job. You want someone taking a shot at him? Are you that pissed off at him?

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by jj

Press conference, handled some other stuff, went on to Kerry-kicking. On circa noon. Sorry, didn't think I'd need to cite it.

Of course you didn't. That is because you are biased like everyone else. All you cared about was making an attack on Bush, not substantiating it. Making a bogus claim. You said he was speaking from the White House and yet no one is able to find anything to back you up.

It is obvious what the real agenda is here, jj. You just want to rant against Bush. That's fine. At least be honest about it. Don't make stuff up.

Oooohhh! Bush is campaigning! What a shock! What an outrage!

Like I said at the top, what is new here? What is Bush doing that no one else is doing or has done?

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by jj


That's justified, though. There's a world of difference between having SS protection (good) and having them move all the protesters out of sight of the cameras, and then all of the cameras out of sight of the protestors, though.

Okay, jj, I 'm going to have to ask you to show where and HOW the Secret Service kept the cameras out of sight of the protestors.

Did they shut down an entire city in a media blackout?

edited to add: Hey, Al Franken was a hero for punching a Dean protestor. Where was your outrage then?

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Judith
And the repubes have always been good at managing their voter base. They lure poorer people
who don't get the tax breaks with social issues (gays trying to destroy our America)
and then give the tax breaks to others. Keep em scared of boogymen to keep them from noticing the economic policies are doing them no good.

Judith??

Are you by any chance carrying the head of Holofernes? ;)


"Repubes".... :D that's mature. :D

-z

[Sundog]

Originally posted by Luke T.


That's the job. You want someone taking a shot at him? Are you that pissed off at him?

Do you honestly not know that the level of separation is unprecedented, that it's well documented, that it's unconstitutional, or do you simply not care?

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by Sundog


Do you honestly not know that the level of separation is unprecedented, that it's well documented, that it's unconstitutional, or do you simply not care?

Show me.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Sundog


Do you honestly not know that the level of separation is unprecedented, that it's well documented, that it's unconstitutional, or do you simply not care?

Doggy's back! ;)

Good to see ya there son!

-z

BTW: If you are willing to say GWB or the SS is doing something "unconstitutional", you should at least provide the article of the Constitution that you believe he/they is/are violating.

[Sundog]

Originally posted by rikzilla


Doggy's back! ;)

Good to see ya there son!

-z

BTW: If you are willing to say GWB or the SS is doing something "unconstitutional", you should at least provide the article of the Constitution that you believe he/they is/are violating.

Hiya Rick!

Kinda obvious, isn't it?

Scenario: Kerry is president. He's screwing up mightily. People are enraged. At all his public appearances, though, he declares free speech null and void for a several-block radius, and packs events with his supporters, giving the picture that everything is rosy.

You go along with this, understanding the security concerns, and don't even THINK of complaining that he's stonewalling..

Riiiiight. :D

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by jj

Press conference, handled some other stuff, went on to Kerry-kicking. On circa noon. Sorry, didn't think I'd need to cite it.


The press conference you say you saw still (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/) isn't listed as one of the events from Feb 25. Maybe there's a cover-up. Perhaps it was a secret press conference?

[SRW]

Originally posted by Luke T.


Of course you didn't. That is because you are biased like everyone else. All you cared about was making an attack on Bush, not substantiating it. Making a bogus claim. You said he was speaking from the White House and yet no one is able to find anything to back you up.

It is obvious what the real agenda is here, jj. You just want to rant against Bush. That's fine. At least be honest about it. Don't make stuff up.

Oooohhh! Bush is campaigning! What a shock! What an outrage!

Like I said at the top, what is new here? What is Bush doing that no one else is doing or has done?

Now now Luke, JJ is preforming a service here reporting on
a press conference that appeared on his TV and apparently no where else.

Every time this happens we should all post a link. However I propose Paranormal would be a better place. ;)

[Luke T.]

Secret Service Ordered Local Police to Restrict Anti-Bush Protesters at Rallies, ACLU Charges in Unprecedented Nationwide Lawsuit (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=13699&c=86)


At events attended by President Bush and other senior federal officials around the country, the Secret Service has been discriminating against protesters in violation of their free speech rights, the American Civil Liberties Union charged today in the first nationwide lawsuit of its kind.

Doing your work for you, Sundog. Don't ever claim I'm not a fair person. :D

The article is dated September of last year. Maybe you can find an update for us and let us know how things turned out. ;)

[Sundog]

Originally posted by Luke T.
Secret Service Ordered Local Police to Restrict Anti-Bush Protesters at Rallies, ACLU Charges in Unprecedented Nationwide Lawsuit (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=13699&c=86)



Doing your work for you, Sundog. Don't ever claim I'm not a fair person. :D

The article is dated September of last year. Maybe you can find an update for us and let us know how things turned out. ;)

Why thanks. I don't actually care enough to do any work. :D

I'm generally going to try to stay out of political discussions. They take too much out of me.

[jj]

Originally posted by Luke T.


That's the job. You want someone taking a shot at him? Are you that pissed off at him?

I said nothing of the sort.

Please retract your accusation of criminal behavior on my part immediately.

[jj]

(article deleted)

[jj]

(article deleted)

[Evolver]

Originally posted by jj
The guy who got us into a war by mistake ...


I beg to differ. Bush war was planned. Waaay before 9/11.

[jj]

(article deleted)

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by jj


I said nothing of the sort.

Please retract your accusation of criminal behavior on my part immediately.

I was not accusing you of criminal behavior.

[Sundog]

Originally posted by Luke T.


I was not accusing you of criminal behavior.

Not terribly civil, though. Where's a moderator?

Oh. :p

[jj]

Originally posted by Luke T.


I was not accusing you of criminal behavior.

None the less, your statement, now made, exposes me to very serious and lasting, unjustified consequences.

I can not accept your accusation, nor can I accept this half-hearted disavowal.

Your statement, in and of itself, regardless of intent, has the potential to bring the entire weight of the government down on my family. I can not accept that on behalf of my children, who you have threatened entirely as much as you have (perhaps inadvertantly) threatened me.

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by jj


None the less, your statement, now made, exposes me to very serious and lasting, unjustified consequences.

I can not accept your accusation, nor can I accept this half-hearted disavowal.

Your statement, in and of itself, regardless of intent, has the potential to bring the entire weight of the government down on my family. I can not accept that on behalf of my children, who you have threatened entirely as much as you have (perhaps inadvertantly) threatened me.

Pain and suffering!

I am the government around these here parts. Well, okay, a bidlackey, but still...

Now where'd I leave my jackboots?

P.S. Love the new sig. :D

[Sundog]

Originally posted by Luke T.


Pain and suffering!

I am the government around these here parts. Well, okay, a bidlackey, but still...

Now where'd I leave my jackboots?

P.S. Love the new sig. :D

"Sorry, didn't mean it like that" just too hard, eh?

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by Sundog


Not terribly civil, though. Where's a moderator?

Oh. :p

Okay, I have reported myself to me and in response, I sent me a PM telling me to knock it off and to apologize.

So, jj, I'm sorry.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Luke T.

That's the job. You want someone taking a shot at him? Are you that pissed off at him?[/b] Originally posted by jj
I said nothing of the sort.

Please retract your accusation of criminal behavior on my part immediately. Luke's question was clearly rhetorical and begging the question. There is absolutely no chance whatsoever that Luke's question has "the potential to bring the entire weight of the government" down on your family.

If there was such a chance, an apology or withdrawal from Luke would do nothing to stop it. Echelon has no such capability. Anyone who investigated such an accusation would be just as likely to consider the source of the question as the withdrawal and find the source just as mitigating as the withdrawal.

You should look out your window to see if there are any black helicopters. Remember "just because you are paranoid does not mean that people are not out to get you". I remember this kind of paranoia from right-wingers during the Clinton era.

I hesitated to respond since I know how much you dislike me JJ and I know how hot under the collar you get at any perceived slight but, ....sheesh. Most BS like this does not get through on this forum. I guess it is tolerated more from some than others. I doubt JK or American could have pull this one off.

[LFTKBS]

Originally posted by Luke T.


Okay, I have reported myself to me and in response, I sent me a PM telling me to knock it off and to apologize.

So, jj, I'm sorry.

I trust that this is actually sincere?

[RandFan]

Originally posted by LFTKBS
I trust that this is actually sincere? Luke does not need me to speak for him. However, anyone who has followed Luke for any period of time would know that this is sincere.

The question is, with so many insults, pettiness and real malice on this forum why is Luke's sincerity even in question?

Well, to be honest, I have only been back a day, so it is probably unfair of me to jump in between Luke's and jj's affair. Funny since I swore that if I came back I would be more like Luke and less like myself.

I don't agree with jj but it is not my business. Luke offered an apology and it should have been left at that without my sticking my nose in. I will apologize for that.

RandFan

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by LFTKBS


I trust that this is actually sincere?

Yes, it is sincere. I am afraid I must confess I cannot tell if jj is really mad or not. I got the feeling from his last couple of posts and his new sig that he was being humorous in his own jj kind of way and everything was ok, and so I have been a little humorous in my own way, too. But since he has been absent for a while now, I am beginning to wonder. If jj is still mad, I hope my levity, which has a sincere element of comradeship for jj to it, has not elevated his animosity to an even higher level. This is in no way my intention, and I am very sorry if I have badly misread jj.

jj and I disagree more than we agree, but we have always been friends of a sort to each other. I hope I haven't screwed the pooch on this one.

[Sundog]

RandFan!

Great to see you. :D :D :D

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Sundog
RandFan!

Great to see you. :D :D :D Thanks Sundog,

I don't know how much I'm going to be back. Work is slow right now so I'm taking advantage of that fact.