Donate to Swift Boat Vets for the Truth HERE.
Posted on 09/02/2004 3:07:45 PM PDT by RWR8189
I'm quaking in my boots. Look at how well the first $60 million worked!
BTW, didn't Custer say something like, "things can turn around" right before the last wave of Indians came over the ridge?
"...Sen. Kerry privately is said to be "bouncing off the walls" in frustration..."
Now that has to be a sight!
I would have thought Kerry was too brittle to bounce.
$45 million dollars? Covering what time period? They only have 75 million to spend for the next 2 months, don't they?
Nope.
Nothing to see here. folks.
No cooperation from a willing national press corpse at all in propping up Kerry's campaign, nor in getting out his message directly from the dnc.
Nothing to see here, folks. Just moveon.org .
How would you like to have to eat breakfast with THAT bunch?
LOL
Kerry's in the water floundering, calling for the Clintons to throw him a life preserver. I'm thinking what they just threw him is an anchor.
Great quote.
If the Clintons thought they had miscalculated, and that perhaps Kerry was going to win in the fall anyway, they would have made sure that Hillary was the Veep. When Edwards was announced as the Veep, I knew Bush's chances were very, very good, no matter what the polls showed.
I knew the Clinton team would be on our side, and let's face it, they're pretty good at subtle and dirty politics.
I'm not. They became so afraid that Dean would win the nomination that they made a snap decision. What other reasonable choices did they have? All the intensity was from the anti-war left. Lieberman supports our actions in Iraq.
Kerry's anti-war record was good enough to please that crowd, and his tendency to be on both sides of every issue, at least before casting a vote (and sometimes after) might confuse enough moderates to vote for him.
Remember, he basically won the nomination during all the commotion over Farenheit 9/11. The Rats thought that movie would destroy Bush.
"Is anyone else as astounded as I am that the Rats nominated this guy? "
I have wondered the same thing myself.
They were SO desparate to win, that they thought a "war hero" would disarm the patriotic right, who would prefer Kerry to a non-active-duty-serving Bush??
Sounds like Kerry was using this strategy even during his "stellar" 4 month service -- packing his resume as best as he could. . .
Kerry is really, really, really out of touch -- esp. with veterans and patriotic America. He and the Dims thought we would SWALLOW his line ?? his callowness is NOT heroism, not by any stretch of the imagination . . .
Apparently this strategy has worked for him in the past -- silencing critics of his "war record." BUT he failed to realize that the USA is not the same as Massachusetts.
There is no sympathetic backlash for Kerry among middle America (where most of the veterans come from) resulting from his playing up his veteran status. His response was a FLOP big time; because he doesn't even realize what motivates REAL veterans . . . not accolades and medals by any possible means -- but SERVICE.
He is SELF-serving -- like Clinton. He can't even imagine the motivation of SELFLESS service. So he mistakenly thinks veterans are like himself. He is SO wrong because he does not possess the moral compass to register such concepts. He is blind to them. No wonder he miscalculated so badly, and the Dims along with him . . .
You hit the nail on the head!
"The reason is campaign finance reform"
Uh, no, the reason is that your candidate is a dork. Next!
Yeah, yeah. It's all Shrum's fault, who, BTW, has advanced Dim causes far, far beyond their appeal to a semi-sane world. No word that the problems are caused by...Mr. Kerry's lies and liberal record.
Someday soon, there will be a whole boatload of people in the media and elsewhere who are going to be saying this. It is clear he is not up to the leadership task of running an organization such as the executive branch of our country.
A political scientist would tell us that a principal function of a political party is to vet its candidates not just for adherence to doctrine for but for disqualifications which might shipwreck his campaign or, worse, the country. For years now the Democrat party has singularly failed in this responsibility culminating in Bill Clinton whose very candidacy was an affront to good government and whose stewardship of scandal at every level vindicated the predictions about him which were not heeded.
They were not heeded in part because the media resolutely turned its face away ´from the plain facts of his shenanigans in Arkansas because they have abandoned their traditional role in vetting candidates. Even audio tapes presented by Jennifer Flowers were dismissed as fraudulent on patently trumped up evidence.
With no big media to catch them out and no internal institutional conscience which had survived its own inconsistencies, the Democrat party has simply stopped vetting its candidates as good stewards entrusted with our national future should do.
But the world has changed since 1992 perhaps the last year big media could dominate the agenda. We have a revolution in media and nothing symbolizes it better than the tectonic shift achieved by the Swift Boat Veterans. Nevertheless, big media still has a big punch and they will swing it and very soon and very hard. Within a matter of hours, literally hours, we can expect a blitz against Bush on some subject or another which will make Frances look like a zephyr.
Maybe it's this: Pleasurecaptians.com
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.