OT: The Swiftees

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 1:21 pm

No president can keep 100% of people from losing their jobs. No president could have done anything to prevent Acclaim from going bankrupt, for example.

5.4% unemployment is good, and it seems like it's only getting better.

By the way, Kerry's post-Bush appearance last night was awful. The cracks are starting to show.

To keep this on topic...I think the swiftees are going to talk about Kerry's meetings with the North Vietnamese (while the war was still going on, while he was still part of the Navy Reserve) next. It's really amazing to me that Kerry hasn't been called out on this stuff before.

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 1:39 pm

5.4 Unemploment is decent but its a false employment number. It only measures people looking for a job. And it doesn't indicate if those working who lost their jobs, found another that pays less or more.

>>>>
No president can keep 100% of people from losing their jobs. No president could have done anything to prevent Acclaim from going bankrupt, for example.
<<<<

When you are the first President to have a Job Loss over 4 years that says something.

>>>>
To keep this on topic...I think the swiftees are going to talk about Kerry's meetings with the North Vietnamese (while the war was still going on, while he was still part of the Navy Reserve) next. It's really amazing to me that Kerry hasn't been called out on this stuff before.
<<<<<

The Swiftees will do some damage if Kerry stays quiet but now that the cat is out of the bag and after Bush's speech. I don't think the Democrats will let anything slide from this point forward. Expect Bushs war record to come into play again. Expect Cheney's as well. At some point, I would also hope that Kerry goes after Bush for his 7 minutes of silenece after he learned about the attacks on 9.11.

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 1:40 pm

It's really amazing to me that Kerry hasn't been called out on this stuff before.

This has been the only real chance he's had being elected prez. Btw, he was called out on it in 1972 but we're talking Mass elections here. Anyone who keeps re-electing Ted Kennedy isn't bothered by a little treason

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 1:52 pm

The Swiftees will do some damage if Kerry stays quiet but now that the cat is out of the bag and after Bush's speech. I don't think the Democrats will let anything slide from this point forward. Expect Bushs war record to come into play again.

Since when have they been letting anything "slide"? They've been attacking the man for close to a year. Kerry himself, 527's, "documentaries", etc. Susan Estrich may be a little too mad for her own good Now Kerry is playing the victim card...................

http://www.doctor-horsefeathers.com/

I would also hope that Kerry goes after Bush for his 7 minutes of silenece after he learned about the attacks on 9.11.

I hope he does too. Kerry admitted he "couldn't think" for 40 minutes. Wonder why Moore didn't bring this out in his film?

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:11 pm

" At some point, I would also hope that Kerry goes after Bush for his 7 minutes of silenece after he learned about the attacks on 9.11."

JRod:
What in the...?! Is that REALLY an issue to you?! I mean...are you serious? I responded to you yesterday about this...whatever you want to call it. Issue is the wrong word. Is this really something that you seriously think will resonate with anyone but you and Moore?! Good grief-this is getting more desperate by the day...

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:24 pm

The problem is it will play well much like the Swiftees. The reason is Bush continued play on his detemination. Seeing a President paralyzed would do some damage.

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:57 pm

FDR - Pearl Harbor.

Lot longer than 7, or even 40 minutes.

Net loss of jobs means very little, considering how overheated the economy was in 2000. Throw in corporate scandals stemming from the late 90s, 9/11, the dot com bust, and the natural "business cycle", and you have all the ingredients for a severe recession, which we haven't had.

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 3:05 pm

Seeing a President paralyzed would do some damage.

How do you know he was? Maybe he was waiting for clearance from the Secret Service (building safe to evacuate, safe and clear route to the airport)? Just b/c Micheal Moore says something doesn't make it true.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 3:11 pm

"Just b/c Micheal Moore says something doesn't make it true."

Just the opposite- if MM says it, it's likely a fantasy concocted whist drinking Mad Dog and staring at fat girl porn...

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 3:45 pm

FatPitcher wrote:FDR - Pearl Harbor.

Lot longer than 7, or even 40 minutes.

Net loss of jobs means very little, considering how overheated the economy was in 2000. Throw in corporate scandals stemming from the late 90s, 9/11, the dot com bust, and the natural "business cycle", and you have all the ingredients for a severe recession, which we haven't had.

I would say that the loss of jobs is pretty significant, even if you except the dot-com boom in the 1990s. He still has a poor job record, and the administrations predictions and promises of job recovery have not been met.

I think for a lot of people, it's also a quality of life issue. I think many folks feel like they are working more for less. The increase in worker productivity is excellent for businesses, but you're not seeing a rise in wages that is keeping pace with that rise in productivity. Many folks are underemployed. And we're also seeing a shift in job loss and outsourcing. It used to be that low-skill jobs would be the ones to be automated or lost to cheaper foreign/immigrant labor. But some of the outsourcing we're seeing, particularly in the IT field, is hitting college-educated, highly skilled workers, the kind of people who are more likely to vote. That certainly isn't a problem unique to one party, but Bush and the Republicans are likely to get blamed for it since they are the ones in power at the moment.

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 4:02 pm

I think for a lot of people, it's also a quality of life issue. I think many folks feel like they are working more for less. The increase in worker productivity is excellent for businesses, but you're not seeing a rise in wages that is keeping pace with that rise in productivity. Many folks are underemployed. And we're also seeing a shift in job loss and outsourcing. It used to be that low-skill jobs would be the ones to be automated or lost to cheaper foreign/immigrant labor. But some of the outsourcing we're seeing, particularly in the IT field, is hitting college-educated, highly skilled workers, the kind of people who are more likely to vote. That certainly isn't a problem unique to one party, but Bush and the Republicans are likely to get blamed for it since they are the ones in power at the moment.

Brando I agree with most of what you said here. But Dems get as much blame as the GOP for the outsourcing imo. Clinton signed NAFTA into law, btw. But you're right. The GOP record on this is shameful......but there's blame enough to go around for the other side too. whenever manufactoring workers were getting outsourced nobody ---Dems included gave a rat's behind. They were too busy talking about job re-training in "high tech" fields that is when they were not branding anyone who spoke out about it as "racist". Both sides are more than willing to spread the welcome mat out for illegals. Guess what? Those illegals ain't the bargain they were touted to be..........

http://ktla.trb.com/news/nationworld/na ... tla-news-1

Since the "I've got mine club" are now being outsourced, I wonder if it's racist to speak out about it now? I share you disdain though for the gov't handling of this and the disdain is richly deserved.

Inuyasha · Post by **Inuyasha** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 4:58 pm

busted once again:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u ... veterans_1

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 5:50 pm

Yeah it's hardly a shock most of these guys would be Bush supporters to begin with.

But they all supposedly "served with" Kerry.

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 7:39 pm

Yeah it's hardly a shock most of these guys would be Bush supporters to begin with.

So what? Are you shocked Micheal Moore is a Kerry supporter? How about Mr Soros? Zack Exley went from being a MoveOn.org executive to the Kerry campaign. But of course this doesn't count. We're all familar with the rules now...........Bash Bush all day every day and any way you can, but say one thing about Kerry and you're a hatemonger.

dougb · Post by **dougb** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 8:49 pm

Well, I think there have been slightly more than a few attacks against Kerry

Pretty much the whole Republican campaign has been a John Kerry smearfest.

Best wishes,

Doug

Wish I could get that great wizard of Oz picture with Bush, Cheney, Rice, and Rumsfeld to display!

Oh, here's one. I decided not to use the "Swiftboat Veterans Remembering the crucifixion" - perhaps a little to incendiary.

Anyway...

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Fri Sep 03, 2004 9:39 pm

Both campaigns, as evidenced by this incredibly partisan thread, have been smear campaigns.

Both sides have totally convinced me that the other side is incapable of holding the nations highest office...........

Both sides have made perfectly logical arguements. Both sides have backed them up with VERY compelling evidence.

I can only be sure of one thing.

Whomever is elected president this November is totally and completely incapable of holding that office.........

You have scared me.......

The human race is finished

GOOD JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 4:33 am

I don't think the swifties cost Kerry much in the polls. I think his psychotic reaction(s) did/are.

Hillary is a very happy woman right about now.

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 11:00 am

I don't think the swifties cost Kerry much in the polls. I think his psychotic reaction(s) did/are.

Kerry cost himself. It may not be over either.................

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004 ... 0242.shtml

"Kerry received five medals during his four months in combat in Vietnam, including a Silver Star with a "Combat V" designation. A Navy source confirmed last week, however, that in the entire history of the Navy, no Silver Star has ever been awarded with "Combat V.""

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 11:07 am

Duke:

You're very well-versed in this Swift Boat controversy. You really stay on top of all the angles surrounding it.

Quick question: Can you give me as detailed of an outline of Bush's plans for domestic and foreign policy for the next four years? You know, his detailed blueprint for the future?

Thanks,
PK

mobiggins · Post by **mobiggins** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 1:41 pm

at least tealboy and I can finally agree on one thing: NHL2k5 is one badass game!

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 7:12 pm

PK..............I don't like Bush any more than you do. I think he tries to pass himself off as a conservative and he isn't. He talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk. Ronald Reagan he ain't. IMO he's nothing more and nothing less than the lesser of the two evils when next to Kerry. I'm not defending Bush when I'm commenting on the swiftees but but in Kerry I know a liar when I see one. Kerry is a ...................
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1207414/posts

fraud, a coward, and a liar and he's proven it through his actions then and with the way he's handling the current situation now. Instead of going after their credibility why don't he get off his lying ass and answer their questions? Heck his own book he wrote a few years back he contradicts what's "seared into his memory" now and the media is giving him a pass. Wouldn't the truth end this little thing?????? I also think Bush was chickensh!t then but at least he isn't trying to destroy the reputations of those questioning his service record. These are men (Swiftees and Vet vets who were slandered by Kerry in 1971) who really were shot, imprisoned, and tortured. When it comes to Bush however the media is Kerry's willing enablers in an effort to get him elected either by ignoring damaging information about him or slanting news stories in an effort to make the prez look bad or if that doesn't work they'll make something up................................

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1207644/posts

So much for the media not being biased. Give me a freakin break

Re Bush: If McCain, Keyes, Zell Miller, or even Pat Buchanan were running Bush wouldn't be worth my time

The Traitor and his trashy "supporters" sitting behind him.[/url]