Can we at DU STOP helping the GOP Push their STUPID Lies and Swiftboating Tactics

and just stick to the facts.

There are plenty of more links, hard to find to be honest with you but one needs to remember just how far they will go, what they will say and IMPLY and accuse someone of therefore leaving people to spend HOURS defending themselves. IT doesn't have to be the truth, all they have to do is make the accusation. SAD very sad when we fall for it time and time again.

The newest outrage in order to attack Hillary is because President Bill Clinton likened his wife to be swiftboated? How soon we forget how President Clinton worked hard to be able to help the candidates fight these criminals and freaks..and just what they are capable of, he knew, he had the scars and still carries them today..

Enough, I could care less at this time if you like Hillary clinton or Not, at least let us be honest with facts on why and not make up reasons to dispise her.

We have a new election coming up, the voting fraud issue still not investigated to satisfaction, and I have no doubt that if attacking the dem candidates there by diverting attention away from how they did this before and what they are doing now and why their ratings are sooo soo low then we have no one to blame but ourselves for one again allowing this unfit present day leaders of this country to steal even more of our country's proud republic right out from under out noses.

Read some of this, remember it, don't forget and DON'T let it happen again.


We must lead them, don't let them lead us in the wrong direction!

First of all, President Clinton did defend Kerry against the slime machine of the GOP swiftboaters and he did help Kerry and attempted to help him fight against them..

CLINTON: ANTI-KERRY AD BEARS 'FALSE WITNESS'
Monday, August 30, 2004

·
NEW YORK — Former President Bill Clinton defended John Kerry on Sunday, telling FOX News that one of the independent campaign ads questioning Kerry's Vietnam service bore "false witness."
"There has been too much controversy or discussion about the politics of it and little about its merits," Clinton told FOX News' Geraldo Rivera. "The ad was paid for by a big supporter of the president and the campaign's lawyer and one of the military advisers participate accurately in it and it was wrong. It was false witness."

So far, the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has released several ads critical of Kerry's actions or comments during and after the Vietnam War. Although he did not specify which ad he was talking about, Clinton likely was talking about an ad the group ran that said Kerry was lying about what happened in Vietnam.


"All the guys that were on the boat with him say he told the truth. The records say he told the truth. There have been no serious disputes about any of the incidents in which he earned his medals," Clinton said outside the Landmark Riverside Church in upper Manhattan.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,130532,00.html


A visibly angry Bill Clinton had some choice words for the politics of distraction that the Republican party has employed to keep from having to confront their blind support for failed policies.

Of course, CNN’s John King is obliged to bring up the Clenis for “balance.”

CLINTON: …This was classic bait and switch.

COOPER: Focus on that as opposed to focus on what’s really happening ….

CLINTON: Oh yeah. That’s right. “I don’t have to deal with Iraq. I don’t have to tell anybody what I’m going to do. Everything we do in Iraq is obviously right because they said this about Petraeus,” as if it was the only issue in the whole wide world. Come on, these Republicans were all upset about Petraeus-this was one newspaper ad-these are the people that ran a television ad in Georgia with Max Cleland, who lost half his body in Vietnam, in the same ad with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. That’s what Republicans do. And the person that rode into the Senate on that ad was there voting to condemn the Democrats over the Petraeus ad. I mean, these are the people that funded the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. The President appointed one of the principal funders of the Swift Boat ads to be an ambassador, but they’re really about the Petraeus one. It’s okay to question John Kerry’s patriotism on the blatantly dishonest claims by people that didn’t know what they are talking about. So it was just bait and switch. It was “Oh, thank goodness, I can take this little word here and ignore what we’ve done in Iraq and what we’re gonna do and the outrageous way that we’re gained political power by smearing John Kerry.”
Filed Under: Bill Clinton, Smears, The Situation Room/

http://www.crooksandliars.com/category/clintons/bill-clinton/


Bill Clinton Takes the Gloves Off

Finally! Finally, Bill Clinton has got mad. The ailing Osama doesn't get as many kicks to the head on a daily basis as does Bill Clinton. And it looks like maybe he's had enough. The interview with Fox's Chris Wallace will not air until Sunday but already the rough transcript of the show has been released. Fox is spinning it as an out of control Clinton who has gone a little crazy. I say it's Bill Clinton telling the truth to that little worm Chris Wallace. Here is a good link to what took place in the interview.

If you're in a hurry and just want to read the rough transcript click here.

I would hope that our Senators Lincoln and Pryor take a tip from President Clinton and slap themselves enough to become mad as hell and not take it any more. They are certainly not doing the jobs we expect them to do and the jobs we pay them very well to do. It's time we all took off the gloves and socked it to the Republicans who have failed us, lied to us and twisted all truth out of existence.

http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/billikenman/2006/09/bill_clinton_takes_the_gloves.aspx


http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bush_administration_smear_campaigns:_John_Forbes_Kerry:_Latest_Headlines

A good source and read lest we forget how the bush smear machine works, I good summary.

The problem with that analogy is that it completely ignores what set the Swift Boat Vets apart: They manufactured nearly every claim they made about Kerry. They lied about documents; they lied about eyewitnesses. And they lied about their partisan leanings and connections.
And they also played the press for fools. At every turn in 2004, military records proved the Swift Boat veterans to be fakes. At every turn, each new inconsistency proved the Swift Boat veterans to be charlatans. But Beltway reporters and pundits for the most part remained hesitant, too timid to speak up, as they propped up the veterans as serious men.

Now the press is airbrushing the episode again by suggesting Giuliani's substantive critics are just like the Swift Boat vets. In truth, as The Carpetbagger Report noted, "The comparison is ridiculous. The Swiftboat attackers were lying; the International Association of Fire Fighters aren't. It's really that simple."

The problem with that analogy is that it completely ignores what set the Swift Boat Vets apart: They manufactured nearly every claim they made about Kerry. They lied about documents; they lied about eyewitnesses. And they lied about their partisan leanings and connections.

And they also played the press for fools. At every turn in 2004, military records proved the Swift Boat veterans to be fakes. At every turn, each new inconsistency proved the Swift Boat veterans to be charlatans. But Beltway reporters and pundits for the most part remained hesitant, too timid to speak up, as they propped up the veterans as serious men.

Now the press is airbrushing the episode again by suggesting Giuliani's substantive critics are just like the Swift Boat vets. In truth, as The Carpetbagger Report noted, "The comparison is ridiculous. The Swiftboat attackers were lying; the International Association of Fire Fighters aren't. It's really that simple."

"The members of the United States military are plenty smart, and they are plenty brave, and the senator from Massachusetts owes them an apology," Mr. Bush said during an appearance for a former GOP congressman, Mac Collins, who is trying to oust Democratic Rep. Jim Marshall.

Kerry, who is considering another run for the White House in 2008, angrily fired back. His statement called Republicans "assorted right-wing nut jobs."

And at a hastily arranged news conference in Seattle, Kerry said: "I apologize to no one for my criticism of the president and of his broken policy."

Snip

That, Kerry said, was meant as a reference to President Bush, not troops. Kerry said it is the president who owes U.S. soldiers an apology — for "a Katrina foreign policy" that misled the country into war in Iraq, failed to adequately study and plan for the aftermath, has not properly equipped troops and has expanded the terrorist threat.

The Massachusetts Democrat called the White House attack "a classic GOP textbook Republican campaign tactic" that reveals Republicans' "willingness to reduce anything in America to raw politics."

"I'm sick and tired of a bunch of despicable Republicans who will not debate real policy, who won't take responsibility for their own mistakes, standing up and trying to make other people the butt of those mistakes," he said. "It disgusts me that a bunch of these Republican hacks who've never worn the uniform of our country are willing to lie about those who did."

Unsubstantiated allegations about Kerry's Vietnam War heroism from a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth figured prominently in the 2004 Kerry-Bush race. Even Kerry has blamed his slow and uncertain response to the group's claims for helping to doom his White House chances, and Democrats viewed the Tuesday fracas as a test of that lesson.

"Enough is enough. We're not going to stand for this," Kerry said. "We are going to stay in their face with the truth."

And Tuesday Kerry signaled Republicans wouldn't "swift boat him" again, Axelrod reports.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/31/politics/main2139768.shtml


None of this stagecraft was exactly original, however, since John Kerry had been to the same Elks Lodge five days earlier. In a question-and-answer period, he reminded a voter that he had already asked Clinton to be his Middle East envoy—and that Clinton had accepted. When Kerry was having problems last summer connecting with voters at his campaign stops, Clinton, on a cell-phone call to Kerry on his bus, "gave him very good advice about framing the real impact of the Bush budget cuts in real-person terms," says a Kerry aide, "to bring it down to the people."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,578918,00.html?iid=chix-sphere

...as President Clinton did not really say what he is being accused of.


The news reports are simply media idiots trying (and unfortunately succeeding wildly) to start a fight.

fell for it and I was shocked and dismayed when it was more then obvious where it would lead to.

if someone would post a YouTube clip of President Clinton's words, this whole argument would be over immediately.

and he only "defended" Kerry if he was asked. and even then he would say crap like how he likes both Bush and Kerry and even defend Bush at times.

and none of that matters in this case anyways as Hillary is NOT being swiftboated and for him to claim she is is insulting to those who have been.

just stated is actual fact? How do you know this? Did you follow him around continuously? Did you listen in on every single interview he gave? Did you hear his every single word for at least a good year during the campaign? Curious, it must have been exhausting for you.

And yes it does matter since with your last sentence, its obvious that you to are falling for the way they are spinning his remarks.

We need to remember how easy it is taking statements out of context and how many times we all, every single one of us guilty of doing the same and in doing so, nine times out of ten we become completely wrong in our conclusions.

and he is willing to sell out his own to please them.

the criticisms against Hillary ?

she supported her Governor and understood why he was proposing the drivers license 3 tier solution that Homeland security endorses (and which Washington State has had for many years with accidents down and ins rates down), but she prefers a Congressional solution - and that is the exact same thing that Obama said (on ABC 5 days later) was his position.

Now the media runs with Rudy's derision act - and DU has its "swiftboaters" it seems.

They're the ones who challenged her in the debate. Yes she did answer in support of her Governor, and Dodd out and out opposed them. That's when she came back around and said she never said she supported them, even though her answer sounded as if she did. Dodd is the one who confronted her, and he wasn't lying when he did it. There has been no swiftboating.

said the exact same thing pn Sunday = supports the States , bur prefers a Congressional solution.

Hillary missed a few beats when Tim Russert tried to frame the question as licenses for illegala = and Dodd, and Edwards, grabbed on her partial answer.

Post the debate, Edwards, Rudy, and the media have tried to sell the moment as a "flip/flop" -and in total - in sum - we know - and Tim knew - that it was not a flip/flop.

Edwards and Dodd answerred the question Tim implied was at work in NY - giving an ID type license to illegals - and noted that Hillary was not saying that - of course Tim used New York's non-ID license to set her up.

Edwards and Obama and Dodd did not lie - but they were discussing a different question than what Tim had asked.

There are a lot of people I wish Big Dog would hate and plot against and skewer publicly, but for some reason he always plays Rodney King. Somehow Bill wins without hitting back and without decending to the gutter level of his detractors. Seemingly he doesn't believe in striking back in anger.

Sure, he should hate GHW Bush, but maybe he tries to get along with him because he thinks he can accomplish more long-term good by being friendly and forgiving.

If so, he's a better man than I am. Or than most people, for that matter.

:kick:

Hekate

to resonate with a certain crowd of Dur's because of my inability to talk up or down enough and I obviously don't have the vast education some have regarding how political circles work, but all that does NOT take away the fact that I am no better nor any worse than any other person in this country and that I care just as much, I once did not, I once did not take an active role in watching the running of this country and still I do not have full time which is needed, but I am only one of millions who I am have no doubt are as fed up as I am...

Its time to come together more, it's time to split up people into focus groups, it's time to ensure the people will always remain in control of what comes out of our government and what goes in.

I don't know it all, nor does anyone else, like it or not we need eachother, together on the same page, we are unstoppable, completely aware and with that much power, with that many minds and ideas formed together, working together, this much smaller population of government officials, a very small minority will be unable to withstand the onslaught of the majority voice demanding once again they acknowledge just whom honestly runs this country, rules this country, makes this country great, and it isn't them, it isn't us, its every single American Citizen as one.

So maybe you better turn you whine towards Bill because he's the one creating the problem. Nobody in that debate lied about Hillary. The End.

this is NOT about even arguing about such word play. And it is not Bill alone who is creating problems, if you doubt that you are just unaware of the post you just made.

Posts like that regarding my opt are part of the problem, you didn't take time to read it or understand its meaning nor did you even ask me to explain it to you since it's obvious you were completely unaware of what I meant to impart.

He was wrong. That's all there is to it.

sets in, more often then not words become a bit muddled and sometimes what is meant to be said comes out the wrong way, happens to the best of us. Hope you have a good week.

that he would use that term in relation to such a trivial matter. His people are the ones who said to stop talking about Vietnam, when talking about Vietnam was the innoculation against swift boat smears. They fucked up Kerry's campaign on so many levels because they can't see any kind of politics except junkyard politics themselves.

know it!

Yes, let's be honest with the facts, that is always a good thing. The facts of the matter is that Hillary's fellow candidates called her on her double talk. The fact is that this always goes on in a primary. The fact is that Bill has over-reacted by accusing his fellow Dems of "swiftboating" The fact of the matter is that both he and his wife need to be called on this low class bullshit, which is what the posters were doing.

The fact of the matter is that these Clinton critics here are not trolls or freepers or what have you. They are good, liberal, ligit members of the Democratic party and the left wing in this country. You're criticizing them for voicing their honest opinion in this matter, why? Why do you wish to stifle this honest criticism, this honest questioning? You may not think that it is such a big deal, but for many of us it is simply another signpost of Clinton's unfitness for the White House. If you are going to drag out the swiftboating claim, then you had better have met the criteria. Clinton's treatment, by her fellow Dems, didn't even come close.

Sure, there may be "better" things to discuss, but think of this. While this may not be a priority for you, for many of us it is. The posters set the priorities around here, and you are perfectly free to skip over threads that don't meet your criteria. But for you to chide and scold us for participating in a thread that you personally don't think is worthy smacks of, well, censorship. It is not your place to decide what views do and don't get aired around here, that is up to the posters. Sure, you have every right to criticize what you wish, but your protests, as listed above, smack more of partisan politics rather than honest criticism. You imply that we should be discussing more lofty topics such as voter fraud and the upcoming election, well guess what. We can all multi-task, we can all set our own priorities in what issues we do and don't address. If you think this is such a "distraction", then don't bother with that particular thread. Instead of doing that however, you decided to further that "distraction" and create your very own self serving thread here, most of which is devoted to either scolding those of us who offer legit criticism or defending Bill. Hmmmm, hypocritical much?

above

I'm not addressing the specifics of what Clinton said, nor am I addressing what Obama said days later. I am addressing the hypocrisy of attacking people for being rightly critical of Clinton, for attacking the other Democratic candidates when they are behaving like, well, candidates and attacking their fellow candidate's apparent double talk. I am addressing the over the top name calling that Bill is engaged in, and the apparent hypocrisy that he is doing this while his wife has stated time and again that she is her own woman and is separate from her husband.

But then again, I suppose you must think that I'm one of the those "DU swiftboaters":eyes: Class act you're not.

expected -

In the debate Hillary did fall down on a Tim question that asked about a 3 tier homeland security drivers license that is not an ID and which follows the process in other states like Washington - she answerred the question - and did not pick up on Tim's wording that changed the question into an un-nuanced "divers license for illegals"

Dodd
5 days later Obama states as his own the exact same position as Hillary tried to express in the debate but was too in-articulate.

than to answer the accusations, which were hardly critical enough. I wish someone would ask her about her Iran AIPAC speech which was almost identical to the one from Cheney that Dennis read on the house floor yesterday. That is the type of hard question she should answer. Why is her foreign policy the same as the neocons?....



http://www.senate.gov/~clinton/news/statements/record.cfm?id=268474


“U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal,” Clinton told the crowd. “We cannot, we should not, we must not, permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons, and in dealing with this threat, as I have said for a very long time, no option can be taken off the table.”

But Iran is a threat not only because of the hateful rhetoric spewed by its president, not only because of its nuclear ambitions, but because it uses its influence and its revenues in the region to support terrorist elements that are attacking innocent Israelis; and now we believe attacking American soldiers. Hezbollah's attacks on Israel this summer using Iranian weapons clearly demonstrate Iran's malevolent influence even beyond its borders.



http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2007/10/23/cheney-raises-anti-iran-rhetoric-by-jim-lobe/

“Given the nature of Iran’s rulers, the declarations of the Iranian president, and the trouble the regime is causing throughout the region - including the direct involvement in the killing of Americans - our country and the entire international community cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its most aggressive ambitions,” Cheney warned in a major policy address to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP).

“The Iranian regime needs to know that if it stays on its present course, the international community is prepared to impose serious consequences,” he added. “The United States joins other nations in sending a clear message: we will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D04E5D61630F936A15750C0A9619C8B63&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss


Earlier this year, Vice President Cheney insisted that the administration had not ''taken any options off the table'' as Iran continued to defy United Nations calls for it to abandon its nuclear ambitions. The response from Democrats was not long in coming. Senator Clinton helped lead the charge, reminding the president that he did not have the authority to go to war with Iran on the basis of the Senate's authorization of the use of force in Iraq in 2002. But what Senator Clinton did not say was at least as interesting as what she did say. And what she did not say was that she opposed the use of force in Iran. To the contrary, Senator Clinton used virtually the same formulation as Vice President Cheney. When dealing with Iran, she insisted, ''no option can be taken off the table.''

Think for a minute what a campaign would be like if the other candidates could not use the words of their opponents against them.

Bill Clinton knows exactly what is and is not 'swiftboating' as that term arose in connection with the Kerry Campaign attacks. This is no where close to engaging in that kind of conduct.

The Edwards Campaign has a very effective ad running which takes clips of Clinton's own words and shows how she gave different answers when questioned at the Debate on the issue at hand.

Does anyone think for a minute that Repubs did not pull down Clinton's various answers and are not waiting to use it during the General Election Campaign?

Sorry but your position on this issue is not supported by the evidence, and Bill Clinton should retract his statement that this amounted to 'swiftboating' of Hillary.

I sometimes wonder if the resident Clinton detractors actually yearn for the days of Nixon/Agnew and/or Raygun/Bush. :shrug:

I have heard good, generous and respectable Dems and liberals go from just misgivings and oppositions to Humphrey and Carter to undercutting their elections. Nothing good came out of it for liberals or the party. it never turned more liberal- in 'reaction" after defeat- and each GOP slimeball that used these "righteous" talking point dissensions for the political debate dragged everything down into the dirt. And we are still digging and flinging and raging like hell ain't hot enough for our personal torment.

Labor and liberals came around and supported the Dems with loyalty tempered by discouragement and dissatisfaction. Maybe it was not the reason for the loss. maybe the "I told you so" was right. But, damn it, this time, for the sake of better times and a better party will will propel our human clay back to the center of a real democracy. Don't waste your time on the fears, the spite, the grouching, the faintness of fading passion. The DFA poll was partly about a recognition of a common agenda more than a common candidate, a protest against the contest and a voice for the Voice. There isn't a person running who has more irritating baggage than Humphrey carried with him after the Chicago riots and crushing of the youthful left, no someone who had as much media dramatized failure and a record of disappointing the liberal agenda as Carter. What exactly is the excuse for a wide opened empowerment of fascism with our present day dissatisfactions? The Germans had depression, a scarring loss of WWI, a vacuum and a fear ripe for demonic possession. We seem spoiled in comparison and despoiled like perpetual suckers. Will be get the exact opposite of the Bush anti-President? The guarantee is that we will have a legitimate and REAL president for the first time in eight years and an impetus, depending on our resolve to make better like it never was in American history, ever.

One bitter Republican told me that he didn't see how electing a bunch of Dems would solve anything. Nothing solves anything unless WE elect the 'winners" and not propaganda, big money or the best lying machine. They must owe the people and they must pay with due service.

Many DUers LOVE the right wing propoganda, and it's not just about candidates. Today, there is a thread about an article in Reason magazine, a right wing propoganda magazine. The article is about porn.

Someone read the article, posted it here on DU, and DUers are agreeing with it without considering the source. When the right-wing affiliation is pointed out, the response is "Even broken clocks blah blah blah"

There is no hope that it will stop because many DUers are of average intelligence or lower and only care about expressing themselves. They have no concern for the consequences of their actions. Some are even proud of their indifference to the effects of their actions