Sunday, November 05, 2006

The Dems embrace an anti-war hoaxer

Here is how Democrats think they can win power...do anything, say anything.
Are you going to reward this behavior on Tuesday???

Posted by The Game at 6:42 PM

14 comments:

Dedanna said...

How about the Repugs stealing power again, by announcing Saddam's impending death in Iraq just before the election, as predicted for the last several months?

Most news stories are proclaiming it a "surprise verdict" -- hell, it's no shocker to this kid -- it was more than expected..

November 05, 2006 9:30 PM
The Game said...

nice to see you here dedanna...
I don't think you have any proof of that...you guys give republicans so much credit for doing so many powerful things but then say how stupid and incompetent they are...
wouldn't you rather just go into a hateful tirade like donkey?

November 05, 2006 10:48 PM
Jim said...

And Repugs embrace dirty tricks with multi-state robo call scam. They will do anything to maintain power, even if it is against the law.

November 05, 2006 11:18 PM
The Game said...

way to address my topic as usual...
you are like the little kid who gets caught doing something wrong and says, "but he did it too"

November 05, 2006 11:30 PM
Jim said...

Wow! THIS IS HUGE! Amazing.

It appears that the man was REMOVED from the ad. Just exactly HOW would that me EMBRACING him.

Michele Malkin is nothing, has nothing and her integrity is nothing.

And your phoney complaint about "he did it too"? That's your line. Remember Gerry Studds and Barney Frank when the Foley thing came out.

What a hypocrite!

November 05, 2006 11:48 PM
Marshal Art said...

Yeah, Dedanna. Karl Rove was in constant contact with the Iraqi judge just waiting for the opportune moment to pass sentence. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Jimmy, you foolish boy,

Bringing up Studds and Franks wasn't a "he did it too" situation. Those dudes were brought up to highlight the hypocrisy of the lefty rants against Foley, and by extension, the entire GOP. You point the finger and say shame on you when any from the right act improperly, but you excuse and rationalize the same behavior (in this case, same but to a worse degree) by your own people, and even re-elect them, while calling for the heads of our people.

And the embracing came way before the removal. Due to his crapping on the admin, the left held him up as a somewhat heroic figure, and now we see that he's not all you hoped for. Thus, the Dems were embracing an anti-war hoaxer. Get it?

November 06, 2006 12:57 AM
The Game said...

marshall, you were to smart and complicated for Jim, he will not get it...
give hime a minute to look through the DNC talking points he was given this morning

November 06, 2006 6:48 AM
PCD said...

Courtesy of Baklava at Sister Toldjah, 5 myths that dedanna, Jim, Jay, and rhyno buy into because their left wing sources tell them to.

http://www.defenselink.mil/home/dodupdate/For-the-record/docs/2006-10-31a.html

November 06, 2006 7:16 AM
PCD said...

Oh, Jim, here's the Editorial Page Editor of the Dubuque Telegraph-Herald bitching about the Democrat Candidate's ad misusing what the T-H said about the candidate. The blog is www.newsconference.blogspot.com

Sorry, game, the post was several from the top and you know the libs if the URL supplied isn't to the specific spot, the will claim that the post isn't there.

Thursday, November 02, 2006
The rest of the editorial
I returned home from a two-day business meeting today to see a flier from congressional candidate Bruce Braley. This mailing in particular caught my eye because it showed the Telegraph Herald masthead. The flier reprinted Sunday's TH editorial, which endorsed Braley by a slight margin over Republican Mike Whalen.

That's OK. Candidates have long touted their newspaper endorsements. Braley's web site announces endorsements by the TH and The Des Moines Register. Whalen's site does the same with the Quad-City Times (Davenport) and The Gazette (Cedar Rapids). It is somewhat flattering that the candidates consider endorsements important.


However, I am unhappy. The flier conveniently omits the portion of the editorial that takes issue with Braley on health care.

When I receive the courtesy of a request to reprint something we published, I stipulate that the piece must be reprinted "as is," without alterations, unless we give specific approval. The reason: We don’t want others misrepresenting our work. I feel that is exactly what happened here.


No one from the Braley campaign contacted me, and I would not have OK'd the way our editorial was manipulated. As the flier depicts it, a reader might erroneously conclude that our editorial had nothing good to say about Whalen (except general reference to both candidates being "solid" and "capable"). That was not the case.


I’m sure the Braley camp will point to the disclaimer. In tiny type -- not even a capital letter is used – the flier states, editorial excerpted.


Here is the portion of our editorial the Braley camp did not share with voters:


However, Whalen scores more points than Braley on the issue of health care. Both candidates acknowledge that the current system needs repair. However, Braley would move toward universal health care to help the 47 million Americans without coverage. Turning over all health care to the federal government is not a good idea. What assurance do citizens have that government is up to the task, and could provide for quality and timely care at an affordable cost? The recent implementation of a Medicare prescription plan surely won't inspire a vote of confidence. Whalen's suggestion that health care be more consumer-driven, with his "private, personal, portable" plan, is more realistic.

Both candidates have good ideas and, if elected, would challenge the problems. Unfortunately, voters might not realize that about them. Both Braley and Whalen allowed a partisan free-for-all advertising campaign of wild accusations and misstatements about their opponents. Unfortunately, neither had the political courage to call on their respective parties to take down ads that clearly misrepresent (if not out-and-out lie) about their opponents' positions, and there were some they personally approved. That is the biggest disappointment of this campaign.

On the positive side, the Braley web site does carry the entire editorial, including the section above, without alteration.

In any case, I do not appreciate how Braley manipulated and misrepresented our endorsement.






posted by Brian Cooper @ 5:23 PM 1 comments

November 06, 2006 8:04 AM
PCD said...

Oh, got this in the mail. Seems an appropriate answer to Kerry.



SENATOR JOHN KERRY
304 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510>

DEAR SENATOR KERRY:



WE ARE STILL LAUGHING OVER HERE IN IRAQ AT YOUR JOKE ABOUT THE TROOPS BEING DUMB. WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT YOU ARE A LOT SMARTER THAN WE ARE BECAUSE YOU WERE ABLE TO GET OUT OF COMBAT IN THREE MONTHS. THIS IS WHY WE ARE SEEKING YOUR ADVICE. PLEASE GIVE US GUIDANCE.

1.) WHERE IS THE LEAST PAINFUL AREA ON THE BODY TO INFLICT A WOUND?
2.) DOES IT HAVE TO BLEED OR WILL A SCRATCH DO?
3.) WHERE DO YOU GET THE FORMS TO FILL OUT RECOMMENDING YOURSELF FOR A PURPLE HEART?
4.) DO YOU NEED A WITNESS? IF SO, HOW MUCH DOES THAT COST?
5.) ARE THREE PURPLE HEARTS STILL GOOD FOR A TRIP HOME?
6.) WHAT IS A REALISTIC PERIOD OF TIME IN WHICH TO ACQUIRE THESE WOUNDS? LESS THAN THREE MONTHS SOUNDS A LITTLE SUSPICIOUS EVEN TO US.

THANKS FOR YOUR HELP AND KEEP THE JOKES COMING.

JUST A DUMB G.I.

November 06, 2006 8:13 AM
PCD said...

Here's a Christmas Gift suggestion for those who want to buy the libs a card but don't know which kind.

(Game, it's a tangent, but does fit here.)

http://rightvoices.com/2006/11/06/just-in-time-for-christmasthe-absolute-moral-authority-card-a-gift-for-that-hard-to-buy-for-liberal/

November 06, 2006 10:03 AM
Dedanna said...

pcd said...

because their left wing sources tell them to.

I haven't even gone to any sources for this one, other than to see the news story posted of Saddam's verdict, and remembering that it was spoken about affecting the election before it happened right here and I can't find it right now, but I explicitly remember a thread where Jason's first post was discussing the topic of the Saddam guilty verdict affecting the election.

I'm sure there's more if I go through this site. Just making a point here that it was discussed, and predicted, for that matter, right here at this blog, and you deny it now?

You is craaaazzzy.

November 06, 2006 10:11 AM
PCD said...

Dedanna,

It may have been discussed, but you have NO PROOF, except your bile, prejudice, and delusions, that Bush, Rove, or anyone else deliberately timed the trial to end this week.

Now, I made another prediction as soon as the verdict was announced. That prediction was that there'd be Liberals calling for Saddam to be released and returned to power. Do you Deny that?

November 06, 2006 10:51 AM
Marshal Art said...

PCD,

Loved the letter to Kerry. It would be great if he were to ever get that kind of letter.

November 07, 2006 12:39 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)