Is lying about the reason for a war an impeachable offense?

Page 5 of 13  
wrote:

One wag pointed out that if you took an Afro-American male from Compton and sent him to a combat infantry unit in Mosul, his safety would INCREASE compared to his risk of death in South LA.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
And your boy is a lily white pure truthful soul, huh?
Let's take an example of his truthfulness:
"Health Care Humbug
Thursday, September 16, 2004; Page A30 Washington Post
AMERICANS HAVE come to expect political ads to stretch the truth, but a recent duo from the Bush campaign cross the line. One, titled "Medicare Hypocrisy," tries to blame Democratic nominee John F. Kerry for the recent hike in Medicare premiums. The second, called "Healthcare: Practical vs. Big Government," says the Kerry health care plan would amount to a "government-run healthcare plan" costing a whopping $1.5 trillion over 10 years.
On the matter of Medicare premiums, Mr. Kerry landed the first below-the-belt punch. Seizing on the news of a 17.5 percent increase in Medicare premiums, the Kerry spot said President Bush "imposes the biggest Medicare premium increase in history" -- as if the decision about how much seniors would pay were up to Mr. Bush, rather than determined by a preset formula. Still, if Mr. Bush didn't "impose" the premium hike, he's not blameless, either: The biggest part of the increase is attributable to higher payments to physicians provided by the new Medicare bill that he backed; another chunk is the result of the bill's extra payments to insurers to induce them to offer coverage to seniors.
The Bush campaign responded with an ad that made the Kerry campaign look like a model of honest rhetoric. "John Kerry: He actually voted for higher Medicare premiums -- before he came out against them," the Bush ad said, managing to simultaneously blame Mr. Kerry and summon the Kerry-as-flip-flopper image. The ad seeks to score points off Mr. Kerry's statement that a 1997 law instituting the premium formula was a "day of vindication for Americans" -- as if Mr. Kerry had been celebrating socking it to seniors. In fact, the law, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, included a well-intentioned effort to rein in Medicare costs, but what Mr. Kerry was praising was its child tax credits for working-class families and expanded coverage for uninsured children. Does Mr. Bush disagree with that assessment?
This week the Bush campaign unveiled an ad accusing Mr. Kerry of advocating "a government-run healthcare plan" that puts "Washington bureaucrats in control." This is not a caricature of Mr. Kerry's plan -- it's fiction. The cost of Mr. Kerry's plan is open to debate; the Kerry campaign puts it at $653 billion, while the Bush campaign, not surprisingly, cites the $1.5 trillion estimate of a conservative think tank. What's not open to debate is the falsity of the Bush campaign's description of the Kerry plan as "a hostile government takeover of our nation's health care system."
In fact, what's striking about Mr. Kerry's approach is the degree to which it builds on the existing system. There are no employer mandates, no price controls, no premium caps; instead, Mr. Kerry seeks to lessen the financial pressure on employers through a voluntary program in which the government would shoulder some of the costs of catastrophic care. He also attempts to lower insurance costs for individuals and small businesses by letting them buy into a version of the plan offered to federal employees. And he would expand coverage for, among others, uninsured children -- in the very government program for which Mr. Bush pledged, in his nomination acceptance speech, to "lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of poor children who are eligible but not signed up."
There's a legitimate debate to be had about the wisdom of the two campaigns' health plans. But so far no one's having it. "
-snip-

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Snip of article from

...which is the pinnacle of unbiased reporting
My point is that on an issue I understand intimately, Kerry's lies are blatant and obvious. There are more subtle issues that I do not have as complete of knowledge on, but it's reasonable to expect that since he lies so completely on this one topic, it's likely that he's lying on other topics to an equivalent degree.
My point also included the thought that, since neither one of 'em are someone I'd care to take to dinner, I'm picking the one whose record is closest to my personal point of view.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

-snip
My heavens! It seems we're quite polar opposites on this matter.
I'm sorry, but it does seem that actually Bush's are much more blatant and proveably wrong. Maybe I need to watch more Fox. But then, a lot of folks don't seem to understand the difference between 527s that lie to smear and those that simply present distasteful information that is, nevertheless proven factual. Or, for that matter, the given reason for war in Iraq. Or that it ain't currently on the happy road to democracy.
Renata
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I see that you get your news from Dan Blather.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 14:49:46 -0400, "Al Reid"

-snip-
I rarely watch teevee news and never CBS.
So, you still think the war in Iraq is justifiable based on the threat of a near immediate attack on the USA, with mushroom clouds an' all? I mean, those new!, improved! SCUDs now can go 1/2 way round the world!
(An', ya know, electin' Kerry is sure as shootin' gonna bring on a guar-an-teed 'terrist' attack on US. So, if that ain't a reason to vote for shrub, I sure don't know what is).
And, you think Iraq is happily on the way to democracy?
Things are youknowwhere in a handbasket on so many fronts, but the admin has y'all so scairt and keep adding to that fear. DON'T change horses mid stream, even if the horse (and rider) is underwater and drowning!
*** Over the weekend I swore off repsonding to politics, but I failed already. Based on the responses in this thread, I give up, and maybe will hold to my pledge. Besides, the shop is slowly getting unburied, and maybe I'll be able to do some ww'g soon.
Renata
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not really, in the big picture, you could argue quite well that things are going as could be expected with all the terrorists flushing themselves out. We were in Japan for 7 years before we could leave, and people said back then that creating a democracy could not be done there. Ever notice that virtually all the violence is constrained to the Suni Triangle, and even then mostly in Fallujia? What about the 25 million other people? When's the last time you heard of significant problems in Basra, which I think is the second largest city in the country?
dwhite
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
@optonline.net says...

Not really an exact parallel, but a useful point about Japan. I hadn't heard this brought up in this context before.
- Al
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


What, you disagree that he's lying about assault weapons, or you disagree with me that a flash surpressor and bayonet lug on a semi-auto firearm that looks like a machine gun doesn't help Bin Ladin crash airplanes into our buildings?

Dunno, I don't watch Fox. But as I said, on a topic that I know intimately, Kerry's lies are so blatant and obvious that I clearly can't trust him. Since it's also an issue I feel strongly about, the combination of his voting record on the topic, and his blatant lying about it, make it a deciding issue for me. I mean, the guy can't make his point with truth, so he resorts to lies about what the assault weapons ban was about? (you _do_ know it was about 4 cosmetic features rather than anything functional, right?)

And a lot of people don't understand that there is nothing inherently evil about a "527", and that by making it so an organization of interested people can't express their opinion is a bit on the side of anti-freedom-of-speech.

And whose fault is that? Kerry voted to approve the war too, remember? He also said, a week or two ago, that even knowing what he knows now, he'd _still_ vote to approve going to war. How do you reconcile that with yourself, I wonder?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
... snip

I wonder how anybody supporting Kerry reconciles anything w.r.t that candidate. Aside from sheer, visceral hatred for Bush, they really can't point to any reason to vote *for* Kerry. [Actually, they can point to some Kerry position that they may support, but then I could point to the equal but opposite position that Kerry has articulated on that same subject at some different time].
Kerry supporters must reconcile that:
- Kerry voted for the war in Iraq - Kerry is against the war in Iraq - If given the chance to vote again, he would still vote for the war in Iraq
- Kerry supports our troops - Kerry voted against the incremental funding to support our troops in Iraq (but, in fairness, he voted for it before he voted against it)
- Kerry decries the ads by the Swift Boat Veterans through a 527C and called upon President Bush to pull those ads (which is not possible since Bush cannot be directing that 527c organization) - Kerry calls on Bush to denounce the Swift boat ads - Kerry tacitly and overtly accepts the support of Moveon.org and *that* 527c organization, refusing to denounce the wildly untruthful and near libelous accusations put out by George Soros's organization
- Kerry agreed that Iraq had WMD's - Kerry indicates that it is wrong for Bush to have taken action upon the intelligence that Iraq had WMD's
- Kerry would go to the UN and get our allies to help in any future actions - Kerry will not place this nation's sovreignty under the control of the UN - Kerry will run a "kinder, gentler" war by involving our allies and going to the UN
- Bush is unfit to lead the country in a time of crisis because he spent an extra 7 minutes reading to children on the day of the 9/11 attacks (before details regarding what exactly was happening had even been sorted out) in order not to create panic - Kerry, by his own admission, "couldn't think for 40 minutes" after learning of the attacks. But, if he had been in Bush's shoes, he would have immediately left to lead the country during this attack.
- The commission of war crimes and actions reminiscent of Jengis Kahn (his pronounciation) does not disqualify one from seeking the office of President of the US - Missing a physical in the air national guard disqualifies one from becoming president of the US
- Kerry decries the fact that the "assault weapons" ban has expired and his more restrictive measures were not passed - Kerry accepted a gun as a gift from the United Mine Workers -- a gun that would have been prohibited under the weapons ban he supported and that further would have made it illegal for him to accept as a gift.
- Kerry decries the waste of SUV's and their waste of fuel - Kerry celebrates the production of SUV's when speaking to UAW members, indicating that he has several - Kerry indicates that the SUV's aren't his, they belong to his family, he just rides in them [Actually this is very consistent for a rich elitist -- we *should* preserve those natural resources -- for him]
- Kerry believes we should spend whatever it takes to be successful in Iraq - Kerry believes we are spending too much money in Iraq
- Kerry is concerned about the deficit and decries our expenditures in Iraq - Kerry believes we should be spending the money we are spending in Iraq here at home on things like education and medical coverage for everyone
- Kerry would get our troops out of Iraq as soon as he becomes president - Kerry would get our troops out of Iraq within two years after becoming president - Kerry would get our troops out of Iraq within five years of becoming president
- Kerry believes life begins at conception - Kerry won't impose that view on others, thus, it is OK in his eyes, to kill what he believes is a life
- Kerry was a Vietnam hero, getting medals for his service - Kerry was an anti-war activist who accused all other Vietnam military personnel of committing atrocities
- Kerry received 3 purple hearts - Kerry never missed a duty day while in Vietnam
- Kerry admitted that he committed atrocities that were against the Geneva convention like all other soldiers in Vietnam - When confronted by a fellow Swift-boat veteran, he indicated that he was not accusing the Swiftees of committing atrocities, it was all the "other" soldiers [which, I'm sure, made all those "other" veterans feel real good]
- Bush should come clean and release all his records of his ANG duty. (Bush has done so, he has signed form 180 allowing the Pentagon to release that information) - Kerry has not, and refuses to release *his* records (He has not signed standard form 180 yet).
- Kerry indicated that a person's service or non-service in Vietnam should not be an issue or indicative of someone's ability to lead the country. (Articulated during the Clinton campaign) - Kerry indicates that his service in Vietnam is indicative of his ability to lead the country
- Kerry spent Christmas 1968 in Cambodia, ordered to be there by a president who denied any military personnel were in Cambodia and having to dodge bullets from celebrating drunken South Vietnamese soldiers while he was there that Christmas Eve. - Nixon wasn't even president in 1968 - Kerry's own journals as documented by his biographer indicate he spent Christmas eve 1968 far from the Cambodian border
On a more humorous side (as in, why lie about this?) - 17 years ago, Kerry took great pride in telling a gathering about his Irish ancestry - In February or March this year, he claims he never claimed to have Irish ancestry
... and that's only a partial list
Does anyone, anywhere, have any idea what, exactly does John F Kerry stand for?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You well remember though that Billy The Twit waffled just as badly, and they elected him, twice.
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The problem with that analogy is that Kerry isn't anywhere *near* as good at lying as Bill is. Although he's working on his weasel words. Maybe Lockhart is coaching him. Case in point. In response to questions about his Navy records, Kerry announced that he has released all of the records that the Navy has given him. The key weasel words are "has given him". An excellent example of a statement that may be technically accurate, but is designed to leave a false impression. The fact is, Kerry has so far refused to sign a form 180 to authorize the Navy to release everything it has.
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
There is no problem here. It simply illustrates how many unobservant idiots the US contains. Either one is/was transparent to anyone paying attention.

remember?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

it
now,
that
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
What are you talking about? You jump into the middle of a conversation, don't know who or what is being discussed and start in under your own assumptions. I'll fill you in. The comparison was between Kerry and Clinton. Both of which have a real problem with the truth.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

that
knows
reconcile
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'll quit top posting when Usenet ceases to exist (or I do, whichever comes first). Pay attention and everything flows smoothly.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 09:55:32 -0700, CW <> wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Something Bush and Clinton have in common is the way they smirk when they tell certain lies. When they know that they aren't fooling anyone but their supporters don't care, that is when they both have this evil smirk on their face.
When they think they hav eto fool people to get away with lying that is when they seem absolutely sincere.
Both are a marked contrast to Reagan who apperas absolutely sincere all the time. Probably Reagan was sincere inasmuch as he always believed what he was saying, even if he knew it was untrue. That's called 'The Method'.

More to the point voters might prefer a liar over an honest candidate based on the policies they espouse. I say might, because it may never come to pass that voters have a choice between an honest and a dishonest candidate.
--

FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
(Fred the Red Shirt) wrote:

We had that choice in 1996. Too bad the honest one was such a boob.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.