Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Guild 3-23-2004 Our house is a very, very, very fine house...

Posted on 03/23/2004 4:15:18 AM PST by BigWaveBetty

This is an aerial view of some of the buildings on Teresa Heinz Kerry's 90-acre family farm in Fox Chapel, Pa., just outside Pittsburgh, on Monday, March 22, 2004. This is one of at least five sites that Heinz Kerry and her husband, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry (news - web sites), own with a cumulative value at nearly $33 million. (AP Photo/Keith Srakocic)

Democratic Presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites)'s Ketchum, Idaho vacation home on the Wood River is seen in this March 17, 2004 photo. From a sailing mecca to a ski resort, presumptive Democratic nominee John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, enjoy the trappings of their wealth in at least five homes and vacation getaways across the country valued at nearly $33 million. (AP Photo/Troy Maben)

The Nantucket, Mass., home of Teresa Heinz Kerry is seen, Thursday, March 18, 2004. From a sailing mecca to a ski resort, presumptive Democratic nominee John Kerry (news - web sites) and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, enjoy the trappings of their wealth in at least five homes and vacation getaways across the country valued at nearly $33 million. (AP Photo/Rob Benchley)

This is a view of the Georgetown home of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites), D-Mass., and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, on O Street NW in the Georgetown area of Washington, D.C., Thursday, March 18, 2004. From a sailing mecca to a ski resort, presumptive Democratic nominee John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, enjoy the trappings of their wealth in at least five homes and vacation getaways across the country valued at nearly $33 million. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Sen. John Kerry sold his foreign mansion in Italy just weeks before he announced a run for the White House in January of 2003, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

Actor George Clooney purchased the stunning 18th century mansion located in the Italian village of Laglio [50 miles north of Milan] from Kerry and his wife for $7,800,000. Clooney first learned about the listing from Brad Pitt, who had been holidaying with his wife Jennifer Aniston at Versace's compound nearby.

While Kerry and his wife's homes in the United States are worth at least $23,733,705, it is not clear if the candidate currently owns property overseas.

The campaign has repeatedly denied requests for any information on foreign assets held by Kerry.


TOPICS: The Guild
KEYWORDS: theguild
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-183 next last
To: daisyscarlett
Thank goodness, four whole days without Lurch.

"Better eat up son, after I'm elected your mom won't have two nickles to rub together."

161 posted on 03/29/2004 7:32:47 AM PST by BigWaveBetty (Have you forgotten - - How we felt that day?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: BigWaveBetty
LOL!

As Rush says, there has to be a basis of truth in humor!
162 posted on 03/29/2004 7:39:36 AM PST by Timeout (Down with Donks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: lodwick
I will heed your advice about the lip licking search. Heaven only knows what I might run into.

My car is loaded and I'm ready for my roadtrip. I'll check in from the road as I can.
163 posted on 03/29/2004 7:46:13 AM PST by Iowa Granny (Impersonating June Cleaver since 1967)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Iowa Granny
Safe travels on the roadie - beware the road rats.
164 posted on 03/29/2004 7:58:18 AM PST by lodwick (Wake up, America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: daisyscarlett
Did you see the video of Kerry at the church in St. Louis (the one where he blamed Bush for a recent drive-by shooting)? He was clapping to the music, kind of. I've never seen any man, white or black, with so little rhythm. He looked like he was in a catatonic state.
165 posted on 03/29/2004 9:06:36 AM PST by mountaineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: mountaineer
Just out of curiosity, I did a search and found Al Gore's acceptance speech at the 2000 Dem convention. Richard Clarke tells us "there was no higher priority" in the Clinton admin than terrorism.

So Gore gave it prominent attention in his speech...right? Here's what he said:

We must confront the new challenges of terrorism, new kinds of weapons of mass destruction, global environmental problems, and new diseases that know no national boundaries and can threaten national security.
That's it. Terror rolled up with WMD, the environment and new diseases. I searched the document for "attack", "Cole", and "bin". No hits. Some focus!
166 posted on 03/29/2004 9:52:13 AM PST by Timeout (Down with Donks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: mountaineer
I've never seen any man, white or black, with so little rhythm.

LOL, check out the old videos of the AlBaby doing the Macarena.
If you can't find those just watch him clapping in an audience; he can barely find one hand with the other let alone keep time.

167 posted on 03/29/2004 11:04:25 AM PST by MaeWest ("Fat, dumb, and spastic is no way to go through life, Al.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: daisyscarlett
I don't cherish this role in the least, but I may have to take up for Kerry in the church in a ski suit - I used to ski in Taos and various spots in Colorado (yes, I was young once) and it wasn't uncommon for churches to allow skiers to attend church in ski clothes - it was quite common. I haven't accidentally strayed to a black diamond in quite some time, but I can't imagine it has changed.

There, the only time ever I will take up for Kerry. God, that hurts.
168 posted on 03/29/2004 12:12:46 PM PST by Endeavor (Don't count your Hatch before it chickens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: daisyscarlett
Is that a teleprompter in front of Kerry in that church?
169 posted on 03/29/2004 12:14:08 PM PST by Endeavor (Don't count your Hatch before it chickens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Timeout
The Best of the Web asked on Friday for opinions on President Bush's WMD humor from military persons or family. No suprize, our troops have a sense of humor. Here's a couple that made me LOL:

I served in Iraq, and it sucked. The dust storms that sandblasted your skin raw weren't fun. The heat was unbearable. We placed a thermometer in the sun in August, and it registered 157 degrees. At the same time, a thermometer in the shade read 137. Of course, for the most part, it was a dry heat, except I was in the South, and in late August and September, the wind would shift bringing moist air from the Persian Gulf. How about 120-plus and 90% humidity to brighten your day? Oh and the critters--rats, snakes, scorpions and my favorite, the camel spider. They live on the desert floor and have venom that numbs the poor camels they jump up on. After numbing the area, they chow down on the still-alive camel. The locals told me that its normal to see camels walking through the desert and their guts fall out because camel spiders eat their intestinal walls. The camel spiders also don't discriminate--people, camels, it's all the same to them. Did I mention the critters of the microscopic variety? Explosive doesn't do justice to the intestinal issues I encountered. Of course, I almost forgot the AK-47-wielding locals or the imported locals with explosives and rocket-propelled grenades. Yes sir, it truly sucked. Would I do it again? In a heartbeat! If you could meet the sincerely grateful Iraqis that I helped liberate, you'd understand.

To answer your question, do I care if the president makes a crack about WMDs? Not at all. Based on my experience, I'd be perfectly happy if the president's reason for going to war wasn't WMDs but rather that he was just having a bad day and wanted a piece of Saddam.

--K.B., Army

I am an American Army officer with seven years of service, including time as an armor officer and JAG attorney. One thing my experience has taught me about soldiers is that a foxhole never lacks humor or a sense of irony, even in the worst of times.

I have lost personal friends and professional acquaintances in Iraq. However, I still can find humor in events in the global war on terror. My friends and colleagues overseas find things to joke and laugh about, even as they wish for home. Mr. Bush's ability to lighten a serious mood with some humor is very soldierly. That Mr. Kerry cannot locate the humor in this situation demonstrates his inherent French-like haughtiness.

While I do not believe the jokes by Mr. Bush were in poor taste, even if they had been in poor taste they would have been preferable an appearance on the Senate floor for the purpose of leveling false accusations of war crimes against American service members. Of course, if I had wasted my youth hanging out with Jane Fonda, I would probably be dour and humorless as well.

--A.M. thread with link to more

170 posted on 03/29/2004 1:01:04 PM PST by BigWaveBetty (Have you forgotten - - How we felt that day?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Endeavor; All
E - Have you came across any new articles written by Richard Miniter about the new Richard Clarke? I've been waiting and wondering what he has to say concerning Clarke's about face.

In the meantime, a Q and A Miniter on 'Losing bin Laden' for those who haven't read it yet.

Clinton’s Loss?
How the previous administration fumbled on bin Laden.

171 posted on 03/29/2004 1:18:31 PM PST by BigWaveBetty (Have you forgotten - - How we felt that day?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: BigWaveBetty
No, but it would make interesting reading. I really think the White House is making a big big mistake in not letting Rice testify - it only serves to keep the Clarke stuff front and center in the news. Rice would be a compelling witness for the admin, who desperately needs a compelling witness right now. Unfortunately by not letting her testify to this point, it only assures that any public testimony before the commission at this point will only serve her up as food for a ravenous Richard Bin Viniste and Roemer and Gorelick.

This has been totally misplayed by the White House. I wish Karen Hughes was still running the pr aspects of this presidency. Bartlett, et al, is totally tone deaf.
172 posted on 03/29/2004 1:27:01 PM PST by Endeavor (Don't count your Hatch before it chickens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: Endeavor
Agreed: people refusing to testify, limiting testimony, or otherwise appearing to not be forthcoming and honest, on any issue, do not engender confidence or trust here.

Hoping that your afternoon is as brilliantly gorgeous as is ours.
173 posted on 03/29/2004 1:37:16 PM PST by lodwick (Wake up, America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: lodwick
You know, that's precisely the point, isn't it? There is some wisdom in picking your battles. I mean, it's one thing to find yourself at The Alamo, expecting Houston to get off his butt and send you troops and then to realize, "Hey, no troops are coming and we've got two choices - surrender or fight to the death." I mean - those guys were extremely courageous to go down fighting and because they did, Houston finally got his act together, the troops were inspired and Santa Ana was quickly disposed of shortly thereafter at San Jacinto.

Where is the inspiration in the WH refusing to let Rice testify? Technically, a case could be made that this commission is not an extension of Congress and Rice could testify w/o jeopardizing executive privilege. Politically, this just seems like a no brainer. Yet here we are. And what do we gain from it? Some questionable ruling on executive privilege. Whatever.
174 posted on 03/29/2004 4:32:04 PM PST by Endeavor (Don't count your Hatch before it chickens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Endeavor; lodwick; BigWaveBetty
I agree with the president's decision about Dr. Rice's testimony.

I shared emails with Jonah Goldberg on this subject today...we were discussing how the media is offering NO CONTEXT on the executive privilege issue...

Jonah,
You're right that the media has given no context to Dr. Rice's refusal to tesify.

That context might include:
1) No NSC advisor in history has testified on policy issues. (Every instance of previous NSC testimony was in the context of a criminal investigation.)

2) Unlike Cabinet heads, advisors to the president are not confirmed by Congress. The president relies on the unfettered opinions of his advisors. If they worried that every conversation was subject to Congressional review, would they feel as free to agree---or disagree----with the president in the messy early days of policy formulation?

3) We are at war. Do we want our NSC advisor disclosing policies and strategies in public? I feel certain that, if Dr. Rice testified publicly, partisan members of the commision would ask repeated questions to which Dr. Rice would be compelled to answer, "I cannot discuss that for national security reasons". It would make her look bad.

4) If the White House allowed her to testify, what's to stop Congress from citing other "important matters" and demanding that she testify on, say, Iraq policy? Or Pakistan policy. Or Israel policy. All important, and thus ripe targets for future Dem mischief. The wall of separation between the oval office and capitol hill would have been breached for all time.

I would guess most Americans interpret the refusal to testify as evidence of something to hide. And why shouldn't they---given the lack of context provided by the media?


175 posted on 03/29/2004 4:53:42 PM PST by Timeout (Down with Donks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Timeout; Endeavor
You both are right however I think we might be seeing a rope - a - dope strategery (hey, just trying to keep my thinking outside the box thingy ready).

Perhaps it's because Condi is so smart and that I'm no where near her kind of brain power but I believe she would run circles around even the slimiest of those (Ben Venesta) on the panel. Holding to their guns on the issue of privilege then giving in satisfies all sides. And brings more attention to a public hearing, which makes it hard for the media to pick and choose what they want to report.

I don't mind, call me naive. :-)

On Special Report tonight, Brit said that some of Condi's interview was cut out of the 60 minutes show Sunday night. Specifically when she told Bradley that Tenet had met with the president 46 times with some other info.

176 posted on 03/29/2004 5:29:53 PM PST by BigWaveBetty (Have you forgotten - - How we felt that day?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Timeout
The problem is, the White House is providing no context for the executive privilege argument. They can't depend on the media to put forth their point of view. The White House should be pounding the airwaves with WHY it's a big deal, not just that it IS a big deal. After all, they're the ones standing on precedent.
177 posted on 03/29/2004 5:33:21 PM PST by Endeavor (Don't count your Hatch before it chickens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: BigWaveBetty
Ck Drudge - the WH is now going to compromise and release Condi's testimony. What are they thinking??? Either her testimony was classified or it wasn't. She's a most articulate individual who would only further their cause if she were allowed to testify publicly. Instead, they're going to put our her testimony in written form, which no one but us political types is going to read and which keeps this in the news cycle and w/o putting the best spokeswoman you could ask for out there. Arrghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
178 posted on 03/29/2004 5:48:51 PM PST by Endeavor (Don't count your Hatch before it chickens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: BigWaveBetty
I think we might be seeing a rope - a - dope strategery...

I agree.

Never trust a man who wears a purple tie.

179 posted on 03/29/2004 6:09:57 PM PST by MaeWest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Endeavor
The WH has gotten out some info on precedent but I don't know how wide spread.

Did the WH ever say Condi only met with the committee (they don't use testify, she's not under oath) because the info is classified? I haven't heard that, thought it was because of the privilege not because of classified material.

Hold on to your horses, in the middle of April Woodward's book comes out and it's supposed to be another hit job on the WH and or President Bush. Woodward didn't have access this time so I can't wait to read the "quotes" from people in comas and conversations between a married couple in bed and one of them isn't Woodward.

On a happier note, Bill Sammons has a book out soon and he was given access.

180 posted on 03/29/2004 6:34:24 PM PST by BigWaveBetty (Have you forgotten - - How we felt that day?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-183 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson