Gosh, I haven’t seen you since this morning when I looked at the news!
Democrats are urging Bush to denounce independent campaign ads against Kerry. The latest is Former Georgia Sen. Max Cleland, who went to the President’s Ranch in Crawford, Texas to deliver a letter. No one there would accept it. Max, you don’t need to deliver the letter at all. Just get enough people involved with Kerry’s campaign to scream like banshees about this and Bush will just see it on the news.
By the way, why is Bush denouncing all the activity of the 527’s not good enough for the Kerry campaign? First, because they are a bunch of whining babies. Second, because they are a bunch of whining babies. And third, the 527’s helping the Kerry campaign have spent more than 54 million big ones trashing Bush, while the swiftees have spent a paltry half a million. “Mother” Teresa Heniz-(Kerry) probably owns half a million in shoes.
The media has thousands of litters of kittens over one volunteer for the Bush campaign who has helped the Swiftees. What about all the connections Kerry people have with 527’s like the perfidious ACT and the perfidious-er MoveOn.org?
Don’t cry, Kerry staffers! Mommie will be along with your blankie, your martini, and your mutual fund statement any time now. Just know that it’s your candidate who decided to run on his Vietnam record. Bush didn’t make this an issue.
UPDATE: Letter to Kerry – “You can’t have it both ways.”
You can’t have it both ways. You can’t build your convention and much of your campaign around your service in Vietnam, and then try to say that only those veterans who agree with you have a right to speak up. There is no double standard for our right to free speech. We all earned it.
You said in 1992 “we do not need to divide America over who served and how.” Yet you and your surrogates continue to criticize President Bush for his service as a fighter pilot in the National Guard.
You forgot to mention that the Democrats are a bunch of whining babies.
I’ve been saying it for years – the demos are whining babies!
Cleland evidently served honorably and at great personal sacrifice in Vietnam. That does not mean that he is now an honorable man. For a couple years now he’s been falsely accusing Bush and the GOP of calling him unpatriotic when he unsuccessfully sought reelection. What they actually did was argue that his policy views and in particular his Senate votes were bad for the country. Cleland evidently thought that his Vietnam service should make him immune to criticism of his politics. When he now joins in further attacks on Bush, his previous lack of credibility and character should be noted.
I agree. He’s gone from honorable veteran to Kerry Hack Extraordinaire.
I believe Cleland is on the Kerry payroll, along with James Rasmussen (sp?), the soldier whose life Kerry saved. If they’re not on the payroll, they’re at least getting their expenses paid. That doesn’t mean what they’re saying is therefore false — but the Swifties are criticized in the media for having “ties” to Republicans and thus their views are questionable, but all Cleland and Rasmussen do these days is stump for John Kerry and they get a free pass.
The dems do not care about fairness…they hate it when they’re suddendly turned into ganders….has Kerry or the DNC denounced the upcoming attempts to disrup the RNC???
The Swift Boat Veterans’ for Truth ad is not just questionable because of their ties to the Republican Party, but also because they have no proof, not to mention there are Navy records contradicting what they’re saying. Are we really supposed to believe that the Navy falsified records 30 years ago so John Kerry could run for President 30 years later? Give me a break.
Although I think all 527s should be gotten rid of, the ads against Bush are based on actual information.
It didn’t take Nathan much effort to knock over that strawman. Nobody’s claimed a Navy conspiracy to aid Kerry.
However, the fact that Kerry used to go back and film re-creations of his experiences does indicate that he had his mind on self-promotion even then. His eagerness to jump in front of any camera available has earned him the local nickname “Liveshot”.
My take on the Swift Boat case is that Kerry was probably honest sometimes (e.g., when he reported pulling the guy out of the water), and probably exaggerating sometimes.
Does anybody think that a ban on 527s would hold up against a First-Amendment challenge?
If the whole rotten McCain-Feingold bill can stand up to a First Amendment challenge, then a ban on 527s probably could too.
They wouldn’t ban 527’s (at least according to McCain); they’d merely subject them to the same $2000 per person limit that applies to candidates, etc (which would nullify their usefulness). As Victor says, if the monstrosity that is McCain-Feingold survived, so will closing the 527 loophole.
And, just as McCain-Feingold “produced” 527s (it really didn’t, it just made this pre-existing part of the law profitable to exploit), if 527 were subject to the same limits, a new “loophole” would be found and, like water, the money will find the rivulet or hole or path it needs to influence the outcome of the election.
The whole notion of campaign-finance regulation is just one big (and not very funny) joke.