PHONY OUTRAGE STORY BREAKING HARD --- Hannity is on it; can mainstream media keep hiding?

dfu, Hannity show | 3-8-04 | dfu

[doug from upland]

Ladies and gentlemen, it is breaking hard right before our eyes. Sean Hannity is talking now about the phony outrage story regarding the President Bush ads.

We are going to find that the RATS contacted family members who are anti-war, anti-Bush and who lost relatives on 9-11. We will find they were given the phone numbers of newsrooms. We will find they were given talking points.

Although some who called got out of hand, we got the NY TIMES to take notice of the story. They were deluged with phone calls. I understand Neal Boortz was on the story as well as other hosts.

We will not let this stand. John Effin Kerry is attempting to use 9-11 for his political benefit. John Effin Kerry, no effin way.

Please post on this thread links to previous threads. Keep it moving, FReepers.

[cake_crumb]

Have you noticed how the polls are suspiciously all over the map on anything concerning President Bush?

[whereasandsoforth]

What CNN/Gallup doesn't tell you is the poll was conducted in Boston, in the middle of a weekday, speaking with 772 private housekeepers and nannies.

[Cboldt]

That looks like it might be a memorial service.

The photo is from Kerry's Senate web site. The podium in that picture has something on the front, that I can't quite make out. I'm sure it's not an official seal, and it looks more like political campaign material.

[dixiechick2000]

"A big part of the story though, is that the media didn't report the connection in the first place."

I think, in their haste to get these folks on the air, they failed to properly research the story. I don't think they knew of this connection. And, once again, they are left looking like partisan hacks.

As much as it pains me to say this, that includes FNC. However, I do expect Brit Hume to have something to say about this on "Special Report", probably in the Grapevine segment. He won't be able to help himself. ;o)

[RonDog]

From www.nypost.com:

"Families are enraged," said Bill Doyle, 57, whose son, Joseph, died in the attacks. "What I think is distasteful is that the president is trying to use 9/11 as a springboard for his re-election. It's entirely wrong. He's had 3,500 deaths on his watch, including Iraq."

[doug from upland]

Rush had his suspicions and he should get credit for starting the ball rolling. I give kudos to Sean because he will get this on TV. Maybe the mainstream can be shamed into writing it.

[Born Conservative]

bttt

[cajungirl]

I am so disheartened. They always have us playing catch up and no matter what we do, how much we expose their dirty tactics, they win support. I am very afraid.

[coloradomom]

I take your point. My sister and BIL live in near Boston. Her 3rd grade daughter told her that all of her friends hate President Bush because "he started the war." My sis and BIL are rare Republicans in their (very affluent) neck of the woods.

[RightField]

bump for later read

[RonDog]

From www.azcentral.com:

9/11 belongs in debate as issue, not maneuver

Doug MacEachern
Republic columnist
Mar. 7, 2004 12:00 AM

Objecting to TV ads by the Bush re-election campaign, one woman whose husband died in the World Trade Center attack told the New York Daily News on Thursday that the ads were in poor taste.

"After 3,000 people were murdered on his watch," she said, adding that running such ads takes a lot of audacity.

Fair enough. Taken at face value, no one could ever dispute the heartfelt opinions of those who lost their loved ones to the most heinous attack on American civilians ever.

But, then, another twin towers attack survivor was interviewed Friday on NBC's Today Show. She, too, spoke emotionally about the inappropriateness of the ads. She, too, referenced the 3,000 people killed "on his watch."

Other language used by other victims' survivors began sounding strangely, oddly similar. Two women both referenced the fact that Bush had been reading to children when the attacks occurred. Other similarities, other themes, seemed repeated in the words of people objecting to the Bush ads.

Now, heaven help anyone who dares suggest such people are not welcome to their opinions - are not due an opinion. Whatever they have to say - whether coached or not, whether prepared as a statement in conjunction with other survivors or not - is ground their personal tragedies give them free rein to tread.

But then there are the coaches themselves. That is another matter.

If Democratic operatives are in fact manipulating the reactions of Sept. 11 survivors to the Bush campaign ads, then all I can say is that the predictions of people like John McCain - that this coming 2004 presidential election may be the dirtiest in history - already are coming to pass. It would be craven.

Residents of New York have come to view the land once occupied by the World Trade Center religiously. They have taken possession of it as Catholics have taken ownership of Lourdes, France. So when the sister of a computer programmer who died in the North Tower bitterly concluded "this is a political party stepping on my brother's grave," no one dares claim such a statement is anything but heartfelt.

But it is far from fair or reasonable.

The ads launched by the Bush campaign are, by almost any measure, inoffensive and upbeat. Nevertheless, nobody should be surprised that partisan Democrats were spring-loaded to jump on Bush for any campaign allusions to Sept. 11.

But they cannot escape the fact that Bush is the leader of a nation that has been at war since that day and his record is defined by actions he has taken since that day.

Whether Bush's record is judged poorly, as many certainly have and will, or creditably, the fact remains that Bush was one type of leader on Sept. 10, and an entirely different type on Sept. 11. On Sept. 10, the majority of Americans would have expected Bush to hold to his campaign vow to withdraw the United States from its wide spread of involvement beyond our shores. As of Sept. 11, we were at war with a foreign enemy. And Bush was a war president. Just like Democratic icon Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Roosevelt did not merely insert images of Pearl Harbor into his re-election campaign of 1944 against Tom Dewey, he literally made it his campaign theme. The words "Pearl Harbor" and its images emblazoned Roosevelt campaign buttons and posters. Like Bush, he was the nation's war president, and he did not shy away from letting prospective voters know that by changing administrations in the middle of a war, they might threaten the war's outcome.

Was it crass? Hardly. The war was part of Roosevelt's record. Come Election Day, voters had the opportunity to express their displeasure with the man who had dragged them into the "European" war, or they could celebrate the job he'd done.

If surviving families of Sept. 11 victims wish to see the coming campaign through their chosen lens, that is their right.

But cold-eyed political strategists have no such right to deny anyone the issues - and, yes, images - of the coming debate.



Reach MacEachern at doug.maceachern@arizonarepublic.com or (602) 444-8883.

[Cboldt]

I think, in their haste to get these folks on the air, they failed to properly research the story. I don't think they knew of this connection.

You're giving more benefit of the doubt than I would. The 9/11 widows have been "making waves" since about October 2001, and all the media folks are familiar (or should be familiar) with their political inclination and anti-Bush sentiment. I'm not saying these folks should not have a voice, but it is deceptive to trot them out as representative of general sentiment. And, to try to "balance" it later, by giving time to other direct victims of 9/11 doesn't constitute balance at all.

I want the media to be exposed for what is is, an active advocate for the DNC positions.

[bray]

Isn't that the speech that the Vets turned his back on him??? Can we get a picture of the crowd??

Pray for W and The Truth

[Bob]

I think, in their haste to get these folks on the air, they failed to properly research the story. I don't think they knew of this connection. And, once again, they are left looking like partisan hacks.

That's similar to my view but with a few changes:

I think, in their haste delight to get these folks on the air, they deliberately failed to properly research the story. I don't think they knew wanted to know of this connection. And, once again, they are shown to be left looking like partisan hacks.

[texasbluebell]

...that the majority of the American people think that Bush's use of 9/11 images in campaign ads is inappropriate.

I wonder if most Americans thought the same thing when Pearl Harbor was used on one of FDR's campaign items, a plaque.

link

[chilepepper]

Hillary is doing her bit for George in 2004... she will help push this story out.

[finnman69]

unsure..I did a google search of joh kerry and vietnam memorial wall. Its from 2002.

[doug from upland]

Thanks for the tip on that article, RD. I just spoke with Heidi Singer, the article's author at the NY POST. She did not know about the Peace Tommorows/Heinz Foundation connection. She gave me her email and wants to know.

As I said from the beginning. This was a total setup by Kerry operatives. It may well backfire on them big time.

[dixiechick2000]

"The 9/11 widows have been "making waves" since about October 2001, and all the media folks are familiar (or should be familiar) with their political inclination and anti-Bush sentiment."

I agree with you. I just don't know if they knew of the Tides connection. If not, they should have before they blew this story all out of proportion.

"I'm not saying these folks should not have a voice, but it is deceptive to trot them out as representative of general sentiment. And, to try to "balance" it later, by giving time to other direct victims of 9/11 doesn't constitute balance at all."

This is very deceptive, but I expect nothing less from them. Has Katie Couric given equal time to the 9/11 Bush supporters? If so, I missed it.

[finnman69]

the photo is from here:

http://www.vietnamwar.com/JohnKerryVNWall.jpg

http://www.vietnamwar.com/JohnKerryNov112002.htm

November 11, 2002 - John Kerry Speaks at the Vietnam Wall in Washington
By: John Kerry

Washington, D.C.: Statement of Senator Kerry


For all of us this is a moment of special pride and remembering. For those who served in Vietnam it is that and much more.

Seven letters that's all it takes to make the word Vietnam.

But we know it is much more than a word. More than the name of a country. Vietnam. It is a period in time -- it is a one word encapsulation of history -- a one word summary of a war gone wrong, of families divided, generations divided, a nation divided. It carries in its seven letters all the confusion, bitterness, love, sacrifice and nobility of America's longest war. It is a one word all encompassing answer to questions: What happened to him? Where was he injured? When did he change?

Say the word Vietnam to a veteran and you can smell the wood burning fires, hear the AK-47's and B-52's, see pajama clad Viet Cong skirting a tree line and the helicopters darting across the sky -- you can feel all the emotions of young men and women who in the end were fighting as much for their love of each other as for the love of country that brought them there in the first place.

Today we come here to remember and to memorialize forever all that was Vietnam. In doing so we do not just read the names and remember those who gave their lives. We remember and celebrate what they were and remain part of -- a great nation committed to peace, individual liberty, freedom for all -- a nation which outlined in the writing of a constitution fundamental rights which belong to every one of its citizens and which we remember today are worth dying for. Today -- because of those engraved forever on these black panels - we celebrate rights and aspirations that are bigger than any individual and which each of us as individuals are willing to defend with life itself.

We celebrate the nobility of young Americans willing to go thousands of miles from home to fight for the notion that in the final measurement someone else's freedom was connected to our own.

It doesn't matter that politics got in the way. It doesn't matter that leaders remained wedded to their own confusion. Nothing -- not politics, not time, not outcome -- nothing will ever diminish one iota the contributions of these brothers and sisters, nothing can ever lessen the courage with which they waged war. Nothing reduces the magnitude of their sacrifice, nothing can take away the quality of their gift to their nation.

We mark 20 years of this memorial with the determination to set the record straight. Politicians may have lost the larger objectives, our allies may have lost the ability to hold on by themselves, we may have suffered losses in ambush, but in 10 years American soldiers never lost a battle.

The Vietnam soldiers, airmen and sailors fought with as much conviction, as much commitment, as much courage and as much selfless sacrifice as soldiers in any war. And we did so with love of country and love of fellow soldiers as great as any despite our nations political divisions at home and the difficult circumstances we were required to confront. This memorial will forever remind the generations to come of that special spirit the special bond of soldier to country and soldier to soldier.

And we remember today also with pride at the outcome -- that for our generation of Veterans the war did not end when we came home. For us the fight continued -- the recognition honoring our deeds came when Veterans pushed for it -- Agent Orange, outreach centers, extension of the GI Bill -- increased funding for Veterans Affairs , these all happened because Veterans remembered their brothers and sisters and never stopped fighting to keep faith with the promise to veterans.

We also remember those soldiers captured by the enemy who did not return and those we've yet to account for. One of the things we are most proud of is that we initiated the most extensive, exhaustive accounting for the missing or captured in all the history of human warfare. No nation has ever gone to such lengths to remember and to account their missing. Today -- because of the veterans of Vietnam -- when we send our young men and women into harms way, never again will we allow anyone to be left behind never will it take so long to find and bring every one home.

The truth is that every advance we've made on behalf of our Veterans has been the result of the commitment of Veterans and to each other and their vows never to give up the fight. This Wall itself grew out of that spirit.

That spirit bonded men and women together -- making us more than we were when we left for Vietnam, and didn't diminish once we had returned. Each panel, each name, tells the story of that journey. And one of those soldiers tells us about all of them.

Panel 31W, Row 42. On February 24, 1969, 19 year-old Marine Lance Corporal Wolfendale, just 17 days from coming home, was at the tail end of a three day firefight. Only one bunker of Viet Cong remained when a group of Marines suddenly got trapped in a depression in front of it.

Ed Wolfendale was safely away from the bunker and could have easily stayed there and kept his head down. Instead, like so many of our comrades, Ed thought little for his own safety and acted -- he grabbed a Light Anti-Tank Assault Weapon and charged into the line of fire. On his way, Ed took a direct hit and bled to death in the field. When the men in his platoon saw what Wolfie had done, they immediately followed his lead and soon overtook the bunker.

This could have been where the story ended -- but the spirit that brings us here today had a hand in this story. A member of Ed Wolfendale's platoon, Tom Smith, saw Ed go over that hill and was in the wave of men who followed him.

Though he didn't really know Ed Wolfendale, Tom never forgot what he did. After he returned home, Tom spent the next thirty years searching for Ed's family to ensure they knew how he died.

He didn't know his real name, he just knew Wolfie, so it wasn't until recently that he was able to track down his family. To his shock, Tom learned that not only did Ed's family not know how he died, he discovered that Wolfie had only received a Purple Heart. A few years back, because Tom Smith never forgot his comrade, Ed Wolfendale's 82-year-old mother Stella and five of his six brothers accepted the Silver Star on his behalf.

Tom Smith remembered a man he barely knew, and like so many of the Veterans who returned from the war, he remembered his brother.

That is why we come here today. To keep faith. To celebrate Ed Wolfendale and the 58,226 brave men and women who didn't return from Vietnam, who knew the Lord's words that "There is no greater love than sacrificing yourself for a friend." And so, it is in that spirit that we remember all who fought with our brothers and sisters -- for our families -- for our nation.

God bless them all and may God bless the United States of America.