US Presidential Election 2004 VI

Politics International Politics
1

The silly controvery over the bulge under Bush’s jacket is so typical of the GOP that it’s worth taking a quick look at how it represents the Republican way of treating American voters like idiots. nytimes.com/2004/10/09/polit … oref=login A photo turns up showing a big rectangular bulge under Bush’s jacket. The White House reaction?

Lie and issue frantic, baseless statements that the photo must have been doctored.

However, when TV footage showed that it wasn’t merely that photo but pretty much every camera with a view of the president that showed a big rectangular bulge under Bush’s jacket, the Republicans went into their second phase, denial mode.

“There was nothing under his suit jacket,” said Nicolle Devenish, a campaign spokeswoman. “It was most likely a rumpling of that portion of his suit jacket, or a wrinkle in the fabric.”

No explanation at all for why the fuck a wrinkle looks like a big rectangular box. Now, we have to wonder why the Republicans have such difficulty telling the truth about the tiniest things.

salon.com/news/feature/2004/ … ex_np.html has a great article covering the likely technology involved and one instance in which the president may have also been caught out using it:

'Suggestions that Bush may have using this technique stem from a D-day event in France, when a CNN broadcast appeared to pick up – and broadcast to surprised viewers – the sound of another voice seemingly reading Bush his lines, after which Bush repeated them. Danny Schechter, who operates the news site MediaChannel.org, and who has been doing some investigating into the wired-Bush rumors himself, said the Bush campaign has been worried of late about others picking up their radio frequencies – notably during the Republican Convention on the day of Bush’s appearance. “They had a frequency specialist stop me and ask about the frequency of my camera,” Schechter said. “The Democrats weren’t doing that at their convention.” ’

It reminds me of when Bush crashed his bike while on another one of his vacations down in Crawford – the GOPsters felt they had to lie about the weather to cover up for his spill. dailykos.com/story/2004/5/23/201822/996 has the scoop: “It’s been raining a lot and the topsoil is loose,” [White House spokesman Trent] Duffy said. “You know this president. He likes to go all-out. Suffice it to say he wasn’t whistling show tunes.”

Here’s the rainfall for the days leading up to the accident:

May 22: 0"
May 21: 0"
May 20: 0"
May 19: 0"
May 18: 0"
May 17: 0"
May 16: 0"
May 15: 0"
May 14: 0.03"
May 13: 2.79"
May 12: 0"
May 11: 0.15"
May 10: 0"
May 9: 0"

Basically, if you hear a Republican say it’s sunny outside, you’d better check a window.

2

christmas in cambodia? seared, SEARED! :smiley:

3

Aren’t Republicans somewhat ashamed of how poorly the GOP has been putting down the rumors that Bush isn’t just a puppet … of Cheney, Rove, Big Oil, etc.?

The testimony with Cheney in front of the 9-11 Commission was embarrassing enough. Then he shows up in a televised presidential debate basically serving as a speaker for somebody else’s voice. There he is with a fucking shoebox stuck on his back, with what looks like a cable heading up to his collar. Considering that pretty much the only thing I’ve shared in common with Bush is his tailor, I don’t accept the “wrinkle” defense.

At least being the speakerbox for Karl Rove would help explain the odd interlude in the debate in which Bush shouted: “Let me finish!” despite still having time on the clock and there being nobody (at least nobody we could hear) interrupt him. In truth, I sincerely hope that the voices in Bush’s head are at least the result of technology instead of coke flashbacks or mental disturbance, I really do.

‘On several occasions, the president simply stopped speaking for an uncomfortably long time and stared ahead with an odd expression on his face. Was he listening to someone helping him with his response to a question? Even weirder was the president’s strange outburst. In a peeved rejoinder to Kerry, he said, “As the politics change, his positions change. And that’s not how a commander in chief acts. I, I, uh – Let me finish – The intelligence I looked at was the same intelligence my opponent looked at.” It must be said that Bush pointed toward Lehrer as he declared “Let me finish.” The green warning light was lit, signaling he had 30 seconds to, well, finish.’ salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/08/bulge/

Considering Elton John’s recent outrage about Madonna supposedly lip-synching on stage, I think we can all rest easier knowing that he hasn’t yet opened up on Bush’s performance.

4

So what if Bush wore a bullet-resistant vest with a ceramic trauma plate in it? Big fat hairy deal. If I were President, and going into a public arena for a debate, I would too.

They just interrogated some nutjob from New York who had threatened to assassinate Bush. No doubt there are plenty more out there, such as perhaps yourself, who would love to do that too.

5

MaPoSquid

Does anyone know if the nutjob threatened Bush with an assault weapon?

6

In theory, it’s plausible that the Bush team would strap a radio device to Bush and feed him lines like a little puppet. The only problem is that Bush was so incoherent, confused, repetitive, and utterly unprepared, it

7

You should see the Electoral Vote site.

The guy running it is a Kerry supporter, and the DemocraticUnderground.com wackos have been hammering him because the poll results have been showing that Bush is way ahead. So now he’s started listing highly partisan polls, run by the Dems, in an effort to show Kerry leading.

The Dems have lived in their own little media-bubble for so long that they don’t know how to deal with the real world. Don’t like a law passed by the Republicans, find some hard-left judge to throw it out on a technicality. Don’t like the poll results on the web, organize a group of buddies to hammer the polls to show a drastic shift in opinion. Don’t like other peoples’ opinions, invade their campaign headquarters, steal their computers, smash their windows, or just shout them down.

Nevada is now a “Kerry” state thanks to Zogby’s latest push-poll. In Wisconsin, they couldn’t even rely on that, so they used the “Lake Snell Perry Democrats” poll to announce that Wisconsin has shifted to Kerry.

I’ll believe it if that’s what the results are on November 3rd. Right now, I’m staring at the map quaking in laughter, er, I mean “fear”.

8

LIE PATROL…It’s easy to get cynical about politicians lying, but last night’s debate was remarkable for the number of times Dick Cheney told flat-out fibs. Both candidates stretched the facts here and there, and both of them sometimes left out important context

9

I hope they are lying. I’d lie too if asked by the media what kind of protection the secret service fits the president with.

By the way, with the high tech stuff I have in my own house, why would the secret service need to equip the president with a shoebox-sized transceiver? Budget cuts? :loco: My cell phone is smaller than that.

10

Wolf,

Very interesting and informative post which shows just how far down the Republicans are willing to stoop to win this election.
Cheney either doesn’t care what the American people think, or he simply assumes that lying is a perfectly acceptable thing to do in order to get Bush re-elected (you know, “all’s fair in love and war”). In either case, it is too bad that there will not be another debate between these two so that Edwards could have a chance to hold Cheney accountable for what he said.
On second thought, since Cheney is such a skilled liar, he would probably simply come up with another batch of lies to explain away his original lies.

11

[quote=“wolf_reinhold”]Cheney was the only one to brazenly lie in front of a national audience, and he did it at least half a dozen times.

What He Said
“The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight.”

Cheney has met Edwards at least three times: at a prayer breakfast in 2001, at Elizabeth Dole’s swearing-in ceremony in 2003, and backstage at Meet the Press.[/quote]

Yes, Wolf, that one was amazing.


12

So far, we can’t trust the Republicans to tell the truth about:

  1. weird rectangular shoeboxes and cables under the president’s jacket;

  2. recent rainfall around Crawford, Texas;

  3. whether or not they’ve met their debate counterparts previously;

  4. what the press actually says;

  5. the actual U.S. percentage of Iraq casualties;

  6. the voting records of their opponents; and

  7. the lack of a connection between Iraq and 9-11.

One great part of the Republican lie machine is its predictability. Perhaps they’re just bending over backwards out of some exaggerated fear of ever being caught out as wrong – thus forcing them to go to ridiculous lengths never to acknowledge the validity of any criticism or fault no matter how valid or small. The president fell off his bike? It’s not because he’s a normal guy who can crash a bike, it’s because of “rain”, rain that hadn’t even fallen recently. Note that right before Bush crashed, Kerry also took a tumble on a bike and got a few scrapes – no big deal with the press because Kerry doesn’t need to cultivate a “Dear Leader”-ish aura of infalibility.

The only thing the GOPsters see as better than an outright lie is a misleading attempt to “correct” someone else’s truth – this may be what likely kicked in when Bush started shrilly bleating: “You forgot Poland!!” but is certainly what motivates nearly all Cheney rebuttal points.

The final step, when all else fails, is to attack the messenger. I figure MaPoSquid has adequately demonstrated that he’s got nothing but blanks to shoot, and so I wish to thank him now for fulfilling all my expectations.

13

Either Cheney lied about certain things during the debate (which makes him unfit to be vice president) or his mind is so addled that he honestly doesn’t know what he’s saying (which makes him unfit to be vice president).
Either way, he’s not VP material (not in a democratic country, anyway).

14

[quote=“wolf_reinhold”]Either Cheney lied about certain things during the debate (which makes him unfit to be vice president) or his mind is so addled that he honestly doesn’t know what he’s saying (which makes him unfit to be vice president).
Either way, he’s not VP material (not in a democratic country, anyway).[/quote]
I would tend to give Cheney the benefit of the doubt. After all, Edwards is such a pathetic little nobody that the Dems have had to tell people that his hair is a reason to vote for him. If I were Cheney, I wouldn’t bother remembering the little dweeb either.

15

Used to be you could count on conservatives to be wonderfully cynical – now they’re desperately looking for the silver lining in every cloud, sweat pouring down their faces as they make fevered pitches to the electorate.

16

I’d give Cheney the benefit of the doubt as well. Despite Mofo’s contrived post above, Cheney only met Edwards what… a total of three times including then at the debate. That means he met Edwards only twice prior to the debate, and at least once was for a morning prayer breakfast or something. I don’t always remember meeting people that I have little to do with. It could also be that Cheney was exaggerating to make a point of Edward’s frequent absence from the Senate. Moreover, Edwards didn’t respond to Cheney’s statement, did he? If Edwards didn’t respond, then apparently the prior meetings were hardly memorable.

In any case, it doesn’t even seem to be something that I would characterize as a little white lie.

I’m more concerned with the real substantive matters… such as Kerry’s apparent cluelessness re Iraq and total lack of any plan for dealing with the same… such as the fact that while Kerry continues to spout his nonsense about being for the middle class, he and his billioniare wife managed to pay only 12% of their income to the IRS… I mean, come on… Kerry made a big deal of Bush owning a timber company in order to deduct US$ 80 from his income tax… yet Bush paid 30% of his income to the IRS… while Kerry paid only 12% of his income to the IRS. Kerry managed to find all types of deductions to reduce his taxes, yet he is opposed to the ideas Bush has for simplifying the US income tax code.

Go figure. :s

17

Why do you hate America so much?

18

I hope that someone will bring a scanner along to this next debate. I think that’s the only way to tell what the mystery bulge was - a bible or a wire. Then they could broadcast what they heard on the scanner for the whole world to hear.

If Bush was cheating, he’s sure to be worried now, so it could give him the impetus to actually debate instead of waffle until the soothing voice fills his earpiece with information.

19

[quote=“Tigerman”]I’d give Cheney the benefit of the doubt as well. Despite Mofo’s contrived post above, Cheney only met Edwards what… a total of three times including then at the debate. That means he met Edwards only twice prior to the debate, and at least once was for a morning prayer breakfast or something. I don’t always remember meeting people that I have little to do with. It could also be that Cheney was exaggerating to make a point of Edward’s frequent absence from the Senate. Moreover, Edwards didn’t respond to Cheney’s statement, did he? If Edwards didn’t respond, then apparently the prior meetings were hardly memorable.

In any case, it doesn’t even seem to be something that I would characterize as a little white lie.

I’m more concerned with the real substantive matters… such as Kerry’s apparent cluelessness re Iraq and total lack of any plan for dealing with the same… such as the fact that while Kerry continues to spout his nonsense about being for the middle class, he and his billioniare wife managed to pay only 12% of their income to the IRS… I mean, come on… Kerry made a big deal of Bush owning a timber company in order to deduct US$ 80 from his income tax… yet Bush paid 30% of his income to the IRS… while Kerry paid only 12% of his income to the IRS. Kerry managed to find all types of deductions to reduce his taxes, yet he is opposed to the ideas Bush has for simplifying the US income tax code.

Go figure. :s[/quote]

You got the facts wrong. Mother Theresa recently posted the photographs of their previous encounters: Edwards meets Edwards

Cheney has met Edwards at least three times: at a prayer breakfast in 2001, at Elizabeth Dole’s swearing-in ceremony in 2003, and backstage at Meet the Press.

And about the tax issue, you seem to be saying that Bush’s plan to cut Kerry’s taxes is a good one. Kerry says his taxes are too low, Bush says cut them. Not the other way round.

20

[quote=“twocs”]You got the facts wrong. Mother Theresa recently posted the photographs of their previous encounters: Edwards meets Edwards

Cheney has met Edwards at least three times: at a prayer breakfast in 2001, at Elizabeth Dole’s swearing-in ceremony in 2003, and backstage at Meet the Press.[/quote]

OK, so they met thrice, not twice, prior to the debate. My statements above still stand.

Bush wants to lower taxes and simplify them at the same time. Kerry has “complained” that his taxes are too low all the while using every deduction available in our current overcomplicated tax law.

If Kerry really thinks his taxes are too low, why is he opposed to simplifying the tax code - a move that would do away with many of the tax loopholes Kerry utilizes now to reduce his tax burden?