Posted on 10/03/2005 6:07:00 PM PDT by Phsstpok
Moby's anti-Bush tricks
One of Sen. John Kerry's celebrity supporters is ready to pull out all the stops to get him elected. Republicans are shrieking over a suggestion by rocker Moby that Democrats spread gossip about President Bush on the Internet.
"No one's talking about how to keep the other side home on Election Day," Moby tells us. "It's a lot easier than you think and it doesn't cost that much. This election can be won by 200,000 votes."
Moby suggests that it's possible to seed doubt among Bush's far-right supporters on the Web.
"You target his natural constituencies," says the Grammy-nominated techno-wizard. "For example, you can go on all the pro-life chat rooms and say you're an outraged right-wing voter and that you know that George Bush drove an ex-girlfriend to an abortion clinic and paid for her to get an abortion.
"Then you go to an anti-immigration Web site chat room and ask, 'What's all this about George Bush proposing amnesty for illegal aliens?'"
Moby didn't claim that he believed the abortion story.
(snip)
Republican National Committee spokeswoman Christine Iverson likened Moby's proposal to "dirty campaign tactics we're already seeing from John Kerry."
"His campaign was willing to use these kinds of voter suppression tactics against members of his own party in Iowa and New Hampshire," Iverson says. "John Kerry is a hypocrite. He pledged to run a clean campaign. Then he uses the lowest form of gutter politics to impugn his opponents, Democratic and Republican. It's unfortunate but this is probably just the beginning of the kind of tactics we're going to be seeing from John Kerry in the months to come."
Kerry spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said, "I doubt that Moby was suggesting anybody suppress the vote. We did not use any dirty tactics against any candidate.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Remember, grasshoppers, this is Shinola.
This place has been hijacked alright. I remember when you could show up here and actually have a conversation between people with different points of view.
Now if we do not agree with the opinions of the "If Bush does it, it must be great" crowd we must be stealth DU'rs.
This is a forum for conservative discussion, not a republican pep rally.
So let it fly about how I should be banned or belittled because I don't drink the kool-aid and question anyone who does.
"the same as the DUmocrat DUmpster divers.'
In light of the fact that Blue areas are largely urban, shouldn't that be the DUmocrat Urban Miners and Dumpster Divers"?
The best defense to this old and tired form of attack is repeated counterattacks with facts, to counter the emotions and opinions that can be demonstrated to have failed every time for the last 40 years.
Thanks, I had not seen those. Considering I knew next to nothing about her, I'm still trying to get a sense of her. I do trust GW, but I did like Janice Rodgers Brown.
This immigration issue is what is really hurting Bush, but I don't see where he is in a position to do much about it.
But if Republicans begin trashing Bush, Bush isn't going to suffer, Republicans will. The old "cut off your nose to spite your face" cliche.
Someone on another post said it will be awhile before we really know. That is very true, maybe years.
I, for one, wholeheartedly agree to anyone's statement of having concerns at this point. I dismiss as useless the position of anyone who has CONCLUSIONS at this point, unless they have personal direct knowledge, and then I want to know their bona fides.
If you are suggesting that I, who started this thread, am saying "If Bush does it, it must be great" then you're very mistaken and I want more info on who, exactly, someone is who makes such a claim. There are some people I'd accept that from (even if I disagreed with them). Are you one of them? Ann, is that you? Michelle? Hugh? JimRob? Nope, didn't think so.
I'm saying very explicitely that there's not enough information and we need to wait to make up our minds and not be stampeded by some very obvious Trolls.
Do you disagree with any of those statements?
I really am open to discussing the issues. I'm not open to trading invective. Please. Discuss.
Exactly where I am, but I was kinda pulling for Miguel Estrada, as well. From what I've seen Estrada is as articulate as Roberts and has the resume to please any conservative. And his personal tragedy during the grotesque Democrat fillibuster would have been an "in your face" moment that the dims couldn't walk away from, given the coverage a SCOTUS debate will have.
It's kind of like my hopes when daddy Bush said "watch this space" when talking about his VP choice at his 88 convention. My dream was Jean Kirkpatrick. I would have dearly loved to watch NOW implode over that one!
I want to hear the nominee. Not Bill Kristol or Pat Buchannen or even folks I like. I want to here her. I think I'll be able to make up my mind then. I did with Roberts and I'm VERY happy with him at this point.
Maybe GW has inside info that Ginzburg or Stevens is not long for the bench and he has more nominations to go? We can always hope.
Remember Bunker Hill. Don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes.
Suggesting people take a deep breath and learn more about her is asking people to "bow down and glorify Miers"?
I think that by the end of the confirmation process, we will see the Dems filibuster, and the Repubs invoke the nuclear option anyway.
There is no way Dems can not oppose her. Especially if she indeed is "born again". With no paper trail, they only have bigotry and smear tactics to fight her with.
I really believe the majority of Americans are sick of Christian bashing, and this fight will be a real eye opener. I hope that she is well spoken. As White House counsel, I have no concerns that she is less than well qualified.
I do believe that at least one more Justice will retire or die. GW is going to leave his mark on this court for years to come.
Do we have a count of Zots for today?
looks like a chute's and ladders board to me.
come on. enough of this. No one can read his mind.
All we can do is carefully consider what we know and don't know. Doesn't make anyone 'knee jerk' to consider the truth and consequence's
LOL!
I'd expect anyone who says "Baby Bush" and "daddy Bush" to be "disgusted". No one here cares what you think.
Some judges were trust me.
Welcome aboard newbie.
The cover story for the Globe tabloid this week claims Pres. Bush is drinking and arguing with Laura and their marriage is in jeopardy. That false story has been circulating a while of course but now it has been featured in 2 recent tabloids. Disgusting.
No it's not.
There may be an overreaction to the Miers nomination. I, myself, have probably overreacted a bit. It is my sincere desire that Miers is a strict constructionist. I want nothing more. I'm sure the same goes for you.This nomination is very important as to the course that the country will go over at least the next 30 years.
A valid concern for me, as well as other posters today, is that we don't know where she stands, and we are probably not going to know where she stands until long after she is on the Supreme Court. At that point it will be to late to do anything. It is hard to just trust Bush. It was/is hard to trust Bush on Roberts. I watched every second of Roberts confirmation hearing. He gave some excellent answers. Robert's is a very knowledgeable Chief Justice. That said, I still don't know where he stands on a lot of issues. Now we have to go through the same thing with Miers.
I like Bush. He is a hell of a president. He was the first president I was able to vote for, and I've voted for him twice. I wish Bush would have nominated a known entity. He didn't. I hope we don't live to regret that decision.
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.