If I’m the GOP and I’m seeing all the over-the-top plans for protestors, I’d be salivating. I’d be saying, “Bring it on.”
I am VERY concerned over this orgy of protesting. I’m not entirely sure of the purpose of it. It comes across to me as massively self-indulgent in that not only will it accomplish nothing in terms of affecting the opinions of Bush and Company, but it may well swing undecided voters to the Bush camp. Why? Because Americans lean toward underdogs, and as protestors do everything they can to make the lives of the GOP delegates as miserable as possible, all they’re gonna do is make the GOP come across as sympathetic. “Those poor Republicans, can’t even have their convention without demented naked Kerry supporters trying to hog the spotlight.”
It’s bad enough with these garbage Swiftboat commercials (although if Kerry expected anything else, he was being naive. The GOP successfulyly painted John McCain, a POW, as “loony,” and Max Cleland, who lost two legs and an arm to a war, as being soft on American security issues, so Kerry thought…what? They wouldn’t pull the same crap on him?) eroding Kerry’s numbers. But Kerry’s own supporters may be the GOP’s best friends.
PAD
• 
Karen,
You keep making these claims that are absolutely untrue! And you say people like Rush (who I never listen to, by the way, but you bring him up quite often) don’t check their facts?
If you actually, you know, take a look at the numbers,
A.) Bush and Kerry actually have raised about the same. Bush currently has more to spend because his convention is a month later.
B.) If Bush has raised more, it is because people like myself have donated to his campaign. It is the first time i have made a monetary contribution to a candisate for President. That’s how important I think it is. Anyway, it is a FACT that the Republicans, the so-called “party of the rich”, receive more contributions of $500 or less than the “defender of the underdog” Dems do. We don’t receive contributions by most of the Hollywood elite, Big Labor or George Soros. We make it up in numbers.
C.)Really, MoveOn.Org’s budget has hardly been a “pittance”, ESPECIALLY when talking about 527s. I don’t believe the SwiftBoatVets even now would have enough money to attempt to buy ads during the Super Bowl, which MoveOn.Org obviously had BACK IN JANUARY (and whic should have been allowed to run by the way. I am for free speech).
D.) What is dishonest about the second SwiftBoat ad? It’s Kerry’s own words. They’re haunting him? My heart bleeds.
E.) McCain is the one who co-authored the inane campaign finance “reform” we have now in the first place, and now HE is filing suit to stop 527s from running ads. Are you angry at him as well? Or is it only “suppression” when Dubya does it?
PAD said: “To be fair, I think when she said “no one” she was referring to the people in the administration actually running the war. You know: The draft dodgers whose agents are trying to smear the candidate who did NOT dodge the draft.”
This kind of language is beneath you, PAD. For most of my life I have had to listen to these jáçkáššëš call people who used legitimate options and deferments “draft dodgers,” as if there’s any dishonor in not wanting to get shot at.
Quote the hypocrites who claimed (at least until early 99) that Vietnam service is a prereq for credibility, tell the Kerry naysayers that an unimpressive 4 months is 120 days more than GW ever served overseas. Whatever. But don’t join those jerks in their namecalling just because it’s currently working in your favor.
karen wrote:
“As for how many protesters there were, just look at a picture in ANY newspaper. Without an exact count we can all believe that there were A LOT.”
Yes Karen, there were definitely a lot of people… but there’s a big differnce in claiming there were 500,000 people versus other claims of about 100,000–120,000 people. 500,000 is just such an inflated number.
Just to show an alternate view– try http://blindpig.blogs.com/outside_the_perimeter/2004/08/when_anarchists.html
It’s a video so you don’t just have to take someone’s word on it.
Ha! Hundreds of thousands shouting down Bush but a handful of guys supporting the President of the United States deserve to be attacked?
Bush is the Nazi? Republicans are the attack machine? Conservatives are violent war mongers?
More tale of peace-loving first amendment fans can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/31/politics/campaign/31protest.html?ei=5006&en=a9ba78aba9c3fa99&ex=1094616000&partner=ALTAVISTA1&pagewanted=print&position=
It’s from that right wing rag The New York Times. (And kudos to the Times for reporting the uncomfortable truth.)
Seriously, give these geeks a bunch of brown shirts and armbands.
Whoa…I thought McCain was good but Gulliani hit the ball out of the park.
To quote Giuliani:
“We need George Bush more than ever.”
Yeah, he just proved to me that he’s a bigger idiot than I imagined.
“So the fact that some of Bush’s records have been lost allows Kerry to deliberately hide his?”
Not all, but if you’re going to demand that Kerry produce his in their entirety, it’s only fair that Bush do the same. Saying that they’re lost seems awfully convenient, don’t you think? Especially given that when he allegedly transfered to another state, no one seems to remember actually seeing him report for duty.
Jerome,
It has been widely reported that the Bush fund raising has been way more effective than Kerry’s. Also, stop bringing up Hollywood types. There are plenty who are Republican as well. Ron Silver and Stephen Baldwin were at the convention last night and I’m sure, just as at the Dem convention, they will be pulling more pro-Bush stars out through the week. What about Charleton Heston? What about Dennis Miller? There are many others, but I don’t seriously follow the political leanings of Hollywood, so I’ll let someone else do a more complete list. And I think McCain is wrong also. I wrote above that I think the ads that are lies should be condemned. I never said they should not be allowed to air. There is still a little thing called the 1st amendment.
Karen:
>It has been widely reported that the Bush fund raising has been way more effective than Kerry’s. Also, stop bringing up Hollywood types. There are plenty who are Republican as well. Ron Silver and Stephen Baldwin were at the convention last night and I’m sure, just as at the Dem convention, they will be pulling more pro-Bush stars out through the week. What about Charleton Heston? What about Dennis Miller? There are many others, but I don’t seriously follow the political leanings of Hollywood, so I’ll let someone else do a more complete list. And I think McCain is wrong also. I wrote above that I think the ads that are lies should be condemned. I never said they should not be allowed to air. There is still a little thing called the 1st amendment.
Everytime Hollywood actors get knocked for their pushing a candidate, I shake my head and know that I’d feel a lot more comfortable if all who were pushing cadnidates were as public about it. Much better to have public Hollywood types giving time and money, than the plethora of faceless, multi-millionaires and billionaires who not only give their ungodly resources to the Republican Party, but also have a heavy hand in development of policy.
I’m surprised that more people don’t focus on this, rather than simply look at the evil Hollywood.
“NPR is reporting the number at around 500,000. Its very common for the Authorities to low ball the numbers.”
Really, then you actually believe the Million Man March was actually that big???
Ron Silver supports Nader, not Bush.
Nonetheless, hespoke at the convention and was very supportive of Bush. One doesn’t usually speak at a convention if one is not for the candidate.
Karen said:
“What lies? I am strictly talking about service to the country in the military. Are you trying to tell me that Bush DID see combat and the Democrats are saying he did not deserve his medals?”
And I was talking about the myriad of lies Democrats have told about Bush.
Bush went AWOL: Lie.
Bush lied about WMDs: Lie.
Bush is connected with the SBV: Lie.
Anyone who speaks otu against Bush is punished (a viewpoint you have stated more than once): Lie.
“Hmmm. 30 years of hatred to 4 years of working against a Bush re-election. There is ample evidence that O’Neil hates Kerry. What is your evidence that McAulife hates Bush?”
You’re joking, right? You have to be joking.
“There are still missing pieces. His service records have not all been found.”
Which does NOT prove he did anything wrong. Jesus, Kerry REFUSES to release his records, so that does that automatically mean there’s something hidden in there? Riddle me that…
“He asked Bush to condemn the lies about his service. He did not call for a ban. When McCain asked that ads with him complaining about Bush’s treatment of him be pulled, they were. Kerry took responsibility for those ads, even though McCains words are a matter of record. Has Bush called for pulling ads which have been proven false?”
He did not call for a ban? So, sending letters to television stations telling them not to run the ads and threatening to file lawsuits is the epitome of free speech? Honestly, that would sound better coming from anyone but you, who keeps harping about fictional sanctions made against Democrats who area gainst Bush. In any case, Bush has NO CONTACT with the SBV, no matter what magical world the Democrats live in where tenuous connections exist. Hey, is the fact that I work in the same school district as Alice Cooper went to school at forty years ago mean that my Repubilcan masters are behind his recent statements? Must be, because all that’s needed is a possible connection, not real proof.
And no, as fasr as I know, Bush hasn’t called for the end to Democratic ads that are strict lies, and since most of them are, I think I can confidently say that unlike Kerry and the Democratic party, Bush believes in free speech.
“Again, where is your evidence? Most of his past is a matter of public record. What lies are you talking about?”
What do you mean “Again?” Let’s look at the facts:
Which candidate and party tried to block legal ads from being shown on TV? Democrats.
Which candidate and party threatened to sue in order to keep the ads from shownig? Democrats.
Which party is wishing that protestors back off? Democrats.
Which candidate refuses to allow any discussion of the issue to occur? Democrats.
As for lies, after hearing Dean, Gore, Kennedy and McCaulife spout out about how Bush lied about WMDs, something the 9-11 Commission definitively stated was NOT TRUE, how can you even say with a straight face those people haven’t been telling lies about Bush?
“And what evidence do you have for this statement? I have not heard any Dem call anyone unpatriotic for disagreeing with them.”
Oh, well, if you haven’t heard of it. Just because it happens every single time…
“Are you kidding? Do you truly think we don’t know there is opposition to Kerry? The protest-zone story was all over the media. I think it more likely that Republicans didn’t bother to protest because they think they will win the election without having to resort to that.”
Well, the part about the Republicans winning the election isn’t in dispute, true.
Charles K,
Nice point-by-point post. Thanks.
“Nonetheless, hespoke at the convention and was very supportive of Bush. One doesn’t usually speak at a convention if one is not for the candidate.”
I missed him speaking at the convention, but saw him on After Hours and he was supporting Nader.
Karen,
I’m glad to see that we at least agree on the First Amendment and that campaign-finance laws, particularly McCain-Feingold, are more trouble than they’re worth at best, and undemocratic at worst. Political ads are the only way for candidates or those who support them to get their message out unfiltered. I find it amazing that there are those who are First Amendment absolutists, who don’t believe in “hate speech” and who feel that warning labels on rap albums are “repressive”, yet favor campaign-finance restrictions because of the supposed “problem” of money in politics. THe MAIN PURPOSE of the First Amendment is the right to speak out for or against the government! That’s one of the fundamental rights that makes the U.S. special! So, I say let everyone from MoveOn.Org to the SwiftBoatVets be heard. The only people who really whine about them are the candidates made to look bad and the mainstream media who lose their monopolistic control over filtering and reporting and spinning the campaigns.
Jerome,
Don’t forget the Republican and Democratic parties, too. I’m sure they aren’t happy that they don’t get to control everything that gets on the air.
Charles K,
One day the truth of this administration will come out and it won’t be pretty. You may believe Bush completed his service, told the truth about WMD’s, and has no relationship to SBV, but at least 50% of this country don’t.
Karen,
You may believe Bush went AWOL, lied about WMD’s, and is behind SBV, but at least 50% of this country don’t.
Funny how words can be twisted against you, eh?
Starving:
>>Karen,
You may believe Bush went AWOL, lied about WMD’s, and is behind SBV, but at least 50% of this country don’t.
>Funny how words can be twisted against you, eh?
I have a hard time believing that half the country could be wrong….. I’m much more cynical/realistic than that. It’s much more likely that we are all being deceived. 🙂
You may believe Bush went AWOL,
Do we have Bush’s record to prove otherwise?
lied about WMD’s,
Do we have WMD to prove otherwise?
and is behind SBV,
Well, it was Bush’s lawyer, not Kerry’s, who resigned for having given advice to the SBV group.
But then, the GOP opening fire on Kerry shouldn’t be a surprise – they’ve opened fire on just about anybody else who’s gotten in their way these last 4 years.
Still more stories of gentle protestors, from the nazi stooges at reuters:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040830/us_nm/campaign_protest_broadway_dc_4
I especially like the reasoned, well thought out point “Republican murderers go home and kill your babies!”. Good to see those deabate team skills carry on into adult life.
“I have a hard time believing that half the country could be wrong….. “
I have a hard time believing that half the country is any where close to an accurate figure!
Most likely 30% or less!
“Do we have Bush’s record to prove otherwise?”
The lack of MP hunting him down seems more telling than the lack of 30 year old military records!
“And hey Peter David? You’re the biggest First Amendment supporter around here, even to the point of allowing somebody like that “shrouded” troll run around amok for way longer than it deserved to. Heck, you even let me post on your blog despite my nasty actions to you several years ago. There is no question how highly you value the First Amendment. So why have you been absolutely mum on this subject? The Kerry campaign is outright attempting to supress free speech! But not a peep from you.”
I tend to think it would be obvious: The First Amendment doesn’t support libel and slander. And considering you’ve got people who back in 1996 stood next to Kerry and called him a hero now claiming he’s a coward, I think the “reckless disregard for the truth” test is reasonable.
PAD
Kerry not wanting to address the charges of the book and instead wanting to silence them tells the real story, I think. If these accusations are indeed libel and slander, then he is in a position of strength. But he isn’t behaving as though he is in a position of strength, is he? Michael Moore makes a high profile movie full of documented and proven lies and slanderous accusations and Bush did nothing to stop people from seeing it. Why can’t Kerry be that cool about one book and three tv ads?
From Karen:
“You may believe Bush completed his service…”
Yeah, well there’s always that pesky little honorable discharge from the National Guard that says he completed his service.
Oh, I see, we can believe Military records when it comes to Bush’s discharge, but things like medals are unearned and the records are wrong when it comes to Kerry. Thanks for clearing this up for me.
250 vets whose story hasn’t changed vs. Kerry (who has changed stories at least 5 times just on the Christmas in Cambodia) and his 14 vets on his side. Karen…….. you do the math… : D
I tend to think it would be obvious: The First Amendment doesn’t support libel and slander. And considering you’ve got people who back in 1996 stood next to Kerry and called him a hero now claiming he’s a coward, I think the “reckless disregard for the truth” test is reasonable.
Just so that I get this straight.
Had the Republicans attempted to shut down Moore’s crockumentary, which shows a “reckless disregard for the truth” (as many websites have documented), you would’ve been OK with it?
Just asking.
You are not understanding, to PAD F9/11 was truth and SBV are liars, so it would hamper the 1st Admendment to stop Moore but not the Veterans.
See, 1st Admendment rights are dependent on PAD’s point-of-view.
From Karen:
“You may believe Bush completed his service…”
From Jeff:
“Yeah, well there’s always that pesky little honorable discharge from the National Guard that says he completed his service.”
I’m an Army Reservist. Trust me, that “honorable discharge” is no validation of the actual service that a member put in to get it. You can have gaps of months upon months, and still qualify for such discharge. The real problem when you want to RETIRE from a reserve or guard component with such a spotty record; you need to to perform enough duty each year of service to earn enough points to have them qualify as “good years” towards retirement. You need 20 good years to retire.
I saw the new SBV ad and it is not filled with lies. The men talk about how they felt betrayed when Kerry went before Congress. (Let’s forget about the fact that atrocities were committed in Vietnam) This ad doesn’t denigrate his service, but disagrees with his actions after the war. This one is more honest. I still think it was courageous of Kerry to go before the Senate hearing to relate what other vets had told him about their time in country. And I still think the first ad lied about the actions he took while in Vietnam. But I will concede that this one is more a matter of their opinion instead of distorting Kerry’s military record.
Oh, and while the SBV’s try to rewrite history to deny that horrendous things happened, we still have vets with flashbacks due to horrors they witnessed or perpetrated.
Karen,
Although I usually dsagree with you, vehemently, let me say do enjoy talking with you since
1.) You’re almost never vicious (sometmes I’ve even ‘ve been accused of going on diatribes, if you can believe that:)
2.) You at least attempt to be “fair” when listening to the other side of the debate
Yes, I actually fnd the recent SBV much more effective than the first. Regardless of the perceived fairness or accuracy of the first ad, the truth is none of us were there. I frmly beleve the SBV’s depcton of events, but there’s no way any of us can know for sure.
But Kerry’s TESTIMONY back in 1971 s definitely far game. THAT s how he ntally made a name for hmself, and t was those words that hurt many Vetnam vets to ths day. Even McCain said that stuff was fair game.
Catori,
“The problem is many people on the right equate askng Bush to justify his actions with Bush bashing.”
Uh,no. We don’t.
1.) We consider Bush constantly called a fascist as Bush bashng.
2.)We consider Bush constantly beng compared to Hitler Bush bashng.
3.) We consider Julian Bond wondering aloud at an NAACP Conventon if Bush was going “to repeal the 14th Amendment” as Bush bashing.
4.) We consider Al Gore saying Bush “betrayed ths country!” to be Bush bashng.
5.) We consider Michael Moore’s lies – not his opinions, but his outright lies to be Bush bashng.
6.) We consider the people who say (and I have heard them say it to my face) that they would “rather vote for Osama Bin Laden than Bush” to be Bush bashing, in additon to being insane and offensive.
7.) We find the contnuous portrayal as “dumb” or an “idiot” to be Bush bashing
8.) We find the New York Times runnng 43 front page stories in 47 days on Abu Ghraib incidents to be Bush bashing, especially most of the stores contained nothing new. I mean, if they did that many front page stories on education or the environment, we may actually get somewhere. But those stores would not hurt Bush nearly as much as this “scandal”.
9.) We find Howard Dean inferrng that the Administraton was raisng terror levels for poltical gain to be Bush bashng
10.) We fnd the repeated callng of Bush to be a “liar”, “coward”, “deceiver” and “inept clod” to be Bush bashing
Just to, you know, set the record straight.
“Kerry not wanting to address the charges of the book and instead wanting to silence them tells the real story, I think. If these accusations are indeed libel and slander, then he is in a position of strength. But he isn’t behaving as though he is in a position of strength, is he?”
Right. Because aggressively saying that people are lying about you and that you want them to stop lying about you is a sign of weakness.
Coming soon: Up is down and black is white.
PAD
Karen,
I find it unfortunate you had to post that last statement statng that the SBV’s are trying to “rewrite history”. No, it’s you that has a warped view of history if you feel that way. Of COURSE many Vietnam vets have flashbacks due to thngs that happened. So do many World War II and Persian Gulf vets. But Vietnam was unique. First, it may take you three months to get home during World WarII, durng which they could decompress and prepare to reenter society. In Vietnam, one could be on the battlefield one day and home the next. Plus, of course, they had the lovely protesters calling them “babykllers” and people saying the war was dishonorable. Kerry’s testimony fed into that horrible stereotype and has the effect of making atrocities commtted in Vietnam seem to be routine and par for the course. He painted them all with the same brush, and now you pretty much have done the same thing. I’m dsapponted, and more than a little hurt. My father served in Vietnam, and he almost NEVER talks about it. But he does get hurt when he sees movies like “Platoon”. He’ll say to me, “It wasn’t like that. Honest.” And ‘ll say, “I know, dad.” But that’s the stereotype, of the drug using, women and chldren killing, village burning Vietnam soldier. It’s a stereotype Kerry played a huge part – heck, maybe the major part – in advancing as truth, and for that I will never forgive him.
“Had the Republicans attempted to shut down Moore’s crockumentary, which shows a “reckless disregard for the truth” (as many websites have documented), you would’ve been OK with it?”
You mean the way that Jeb Bush pressured Disney into dumping the film lest they suddenly find various tax advantages stripped from them in Florida? Or could you be referring to the way the GOP went after the Reagan biopic and drove it off network TV? Like that? You do realize those films found an audience in spite of GOP interference, not because of lack of it.
God, you people are so full of crap.
People who support a “compassionate conservative” who has governed as an arch conservative abrogate the right to complain about a liberal positioning himself as a centrist. People who support someone whose dad pulled strings to keep him out of the draft abrogate the right to complain about someone who went willingly to the draft. People who support someone who blindly got us into a war abrogate the right to complain about someone who doesn’t have a magic plan to get us out of that war. People who support someone whose major prior accomplishments were failed business ventures and being a lousy governor, abrogate the right to claim that someone with twenty years of government service has an undistinguished record. People who support someone who has trouble stringing together coherent sentences abrogate the right to complain about someone because they talk slowly and pedantically. People who support a war monger abrogate the right to complain about someone who protested war.
And really…seriously…if my opinions are so bothersome to you, which they obviously are…feel free to note the “exit” door. It’s over on the right.
PAD
PAD:
“You mean the way that Jeb Bush pressured Disney into dumping the film lest they suddenly find various tax advantages stripped from them in Florida? Or could you be referring to the way the GOP went after the Reagan biopic and drove it off network TV? Like that? You do realize those films found an audience in spite of GOP interference, not because of lack of it.”
And yet, both of these products saw distribution. Disney had problems with F/9-11 from the very beginning and the Disney execs were probably glad to have the film taken off their hands because of the built in controversy around it. There are lots of things Disney (Eisner) has done wrong, but chosing not to alienate roughly half of the US isn’t one of them. The Reagans got to air also. Viacom changed their original plans because of viewer and advertiser complaints.
Kerry had lawyers trying to stop the SBV ads which are legal following the McCain-Feingold bill, and stopping the ads anyway would be an infringement of the 1st Ammendment. Wanna take a guess on how Kerry and Edwards both voted on that bill?
There is no “Truth In Advertising” law when it comes to political commericals. So, even if the ads were totally full of lies it’s still legal to run them. The only way a station could not run the ad would be to turn down every political ad, and there’s just too much money involved for a broadcasting station to do that (for better or worse).
Karen says
“Oh, and while the SBV’s try to rewrite history to deny that horrendous things happened, we still have vets with flashbacks due to horrors they witnessed or perpetrated.”
I don’t know that they deny that ANY horrendous things happened. However it IS undeniable that SOME of the incidents that Kerry talked about were made up–the meeting he was referring to had more than a few tellers of tales who later turned out to have not been actual Vietnam vets.
I think that Kerry may take the opportunity today to apologize (he’s speaking to a Vets group). It may be the only way to get this behind him. If done well an apology can make you look stronger (though it helps if it isn’t done when there is beginning to be a clear whiff of flop-sweat).
PAD says:
“”You mean the way that Jeb Bush pressured Disney into dumping the film lest they suddenly find various tax advantages stripped from them in Florida?”
Was this ever actually proven to be anything more than something imagined by Michael Moore? The story that Disney “suddenly” dumped the film was shown to be untrue–they had warned Miramax that they would not support the film long before it was finished and Miramax just figured they’d change their mind.
If there is ANY evidence at all implicating Jeb Bush in malfeasence regarding this film could someone point it out? Or is this a comforting urban legend?
As for the rest of your stement, I’ll chalk it up to grumpiness at the (so far) success of the Republican convention. “Abrogate the right to complain”??? Yikes! I should have such power…
Not when we disagree with some of the compassionate conservative agenda (aka the Medicare expansion).
Some of us never complained about it and would rather focus on issues.
Wrong. Kerry is saying he’s going to “get us out of Iraq” and “get more allies into Iraq”. I want details. What magic foreign policy is going to get more allies into a war zone at the same time we are pulling out? I don’t think asking for a bit more information is irrelevant. The same details I wanted when we went into Iraq. (This of course leads to the inevitable screaming of “Bush Lied”, “No, it was bad intelligence”, so let’s stipulate that we disagree on that.)
It’s not that he has an undistinguished record, it’s that he doesn’t want to talk very much about his Senate record – which is far more relevant to me than his Vietnam service. Why is it that Kerry voted for presidential authority in Iraq, but not for the money? He says it’s because the President needs that authority. If true, then why did he vote against the first Iraq War when we had UN backing and an international coalition? He has a consistent record of voting for increased taxes and increased entitlement spending – something I don’t like as a general rule.
Again, not an issue for me.
This is like saying people who don’t vote shouldn’t complain. They have every right to complain, but they should start complaining at the ballot box instead of the water cooler.
Bottom line – a person doesn’t abrogate their right to question Kerry just because they support Bush. The last I checked, that right was pretty well guaranteed.
“God, you people are so full of crap.
People who support a “compassionate conservative” who has governed as an arch conservative abrogate the right to complain about a liberal positioning himself as a centrist. People who support someone whose dad pulled strings to keep him out of the draft abrogate the right to complain about someone who went willingly to the draft. People who support someone who blindly got us into a war abrogate the right to complain about someone who doesn’t have a magic plan to get us out of that war. People who support someone whose major prior accomplishments were failed business ventures and being a lousy governor, abrogate the right to claim that someone with twenty years of government service has an undistinguished record. People who support someone who has trouble stringing together coherent sentences abrogate the right to complain about someone because they talk slowly and pedantically. People who support a war monger abrogate the right to complain about someone who protested war.
And really…seriously…if my opinions are so bothersome to you, which they obviously are…feel free to note the “exit” door. It’s over on the right.”
PAD
Does your little diatribe work in reverse? If not, then… meh, I’m unimpressed. As for your final sentiment, this time I will chalk it up to the lateness of the hour of your post. Because I really don’t believe you’re telling everyone who disagrees with you not to support your work, which they may well enjoy despite your rabid liberalism and frightening double standards. Or are we to support your work, but as far as our opinions go, we should cram it?
Blackjack:
>>And really…seriously…if my opinions are so bothersome to you, which they obviously are…feel free to note the “exit” door. It’s over on the right.”
>>PAD
>Does your little diatribe work in reverse? If not, then… meh, I’m unimpressed. As for your final sentiment, this time I will chalk it up to the lateness of the hour of your post. Because I really don’t believe you’re telling everyone who disagrees with you not to support your work, which they may well enjoy despite your rabid liberalism and frightening double standards. Or are we to support your work, but as far as our opinions go, we should cram it?
Actually, there is some history between PAD and Starving Writer. I’m pretty sure that this statement was directed at him.
Posted by Fred Chamberlain at September 1, 2004 09:54 AM
“Actually, there is some history between PAD and Starving Writer. I’m pretty sure that this statement was directed at him.”
If that’s the case, then I apologize for overreacting. Long morning, my bad.
That doesn’t exactly match up with:
(emphasis mine)
PAD is always talking about choosing words carefully. If he really meant this for just one person, then he should have said so. As it is, the rest of the statement comes off as a blanket statement against Bush supporters.
PAD,
So people “abrogate the right to complain” (a line you used six times) if…well, basically if they view Bush in a positve light at all, obviously. Quite ironic comng from a First Amendment absolutist like yourself. You have stated on more than one occason that you want this site to be an “intellectual garden” and an “exchange of ideas”, but your last diatribe makes it sound like deep down, you feel you are 100% correct, and everyone who disagrees that Bush is a “warmonger”, “Blindly” led us into a war, or that Kerry’s actions 33 years ago were less than honorable not only have differing opinions from you, but are flat out wrong. know you and Starving Writer have some history, and what he did s beyond sleazy – which is why I have yet to talk to him – but most of the rest of the Bush supporters on this board did not deserve your attack.
Jerome says:
“…your last diatribe makes it sound like deep down, you feel you are 100% correct, and everyone who disagrees that Bush is a “warmonger”, “Blindly” led us into a war, or that Kerry’s actions 33 years ago were less than honorable not only have differing opinions from you, but are flat out wrong.”
I don’t mind being called flat out wrong–after all, I think the same of the person doing the calling–but the whole “abrogate” thing was kinda weird. Don’t really see where we could do anything of the kind…I suppose PAD could abrogate our access to the site but that doesn’t seem like something he’d do and I think the site would lose a lot of character (not to mention characters). But it seems like the kerry slide is raising temeperatures among those who had begun to see him as having a better than fighting chance at winning (and for the record I think it’s WAY WAY WAY to early to even consider writing off Kerry’s chances. Being a few points down in the polls this far from the election is no big deal. A good showing at the debates could seal the deal for either candidate and I think that Kerry can expect a bounce from the inevitable Tet Offensive that the Iraqi inssurgents will do if they have anything resembling a a brain in their heads).
Well, it’s begun. Any comments on this?
AIDS activists interrupt Republican event
Last Updated Wed, 01 Sep 2004 15:45:42 EDT
NEW YORK – Activists criticizing U.S. President George W. Bush’s record on fighting AIDS disrupted the Republican National Convention on Wednesday, blowing whistles and chanting “Bush kills” as young Republicans and security officers tackled them.
The incident came just after Bush’s 22-year-old daughters Jenna and Barbara left the convention’s main stage at Madison Square Garden. They had introduced White House chief of staff Andrew Card to a gathering of youth delegates.
About 10 activists jumped up from where they had been sitting, drowning out Card’s speech with their chants of “Bush kills,” “Stop AIDS now” and “Bush lies.”
That enraged the youth delegates, who tackled the protesters and scuffled with them until police officers and Secret Service agents could move in.
Officers dragged one female activist out of the arena by her knees and shoulders as television cameras rolled.
The AIDS-awareness group ACT UP claimed responsibility for the incident.
Security was expected to be much tighter on Wednesday night when Vice-President Ðìçk Cheney is scheduled to speak to Republican delegates in the same room.
Thousands of protesters have descended upon New York for the duration of the Republican event, which concludes on Thursday night with Bush’s formal acceptance of his party’s presidential nomination.
On Tuesday alone, police arrested about 1,000 protesters, many of them activists decrying what they call the Bush administration’s lack of concern with halting the spread of AIDS at home and abroad.
Written by CBC News Online staff
If I sound un-choked up over the prospect of conservatives departing this website, it’s because I regard them all with suspicion for one simple reason: I’m wondering who is going to be the next one who tries to screw me over.
I’m reasonably sure the people who agree with me won’t be writing to those who employ me, trying to get me fired. I’m pretty sure those of a liberal mindset won’t be going around screaming “Boycott Peter David.” I’ll go out on a limb and predict that those of a similar political leaning to me won’t say they’re writing lie-filled letters to national organizations, forcing me to have to warn my employers of possible repercussions. I’m pretty sure liberals won’t be signing me up for right wing magazines and book clubs, causing me to get unsolicited mail at my home and billed for it. I doubt they’ll be flooding my e-mail box with belligerent letters, or working overtime to try and crash this site.
In short, I doubt any liberals will be trying to take advantage of my generosity or use my support of the First Amendment as an excuse to harass me or my family and then, when I take steps to prevent it, send me more e-mail claiming I’m a hypocrite.
Should I be concerned about alienating those who disagree with my politics but support my work? That concern pales next to my concerns over the personal grief they give me and the damage they try to do to me and my career. I am freakin’ sick of it, and every day I consider how much simpler my life would be if I just used this board for announcements regarding my work and nothing else.
And by the way, not for nothing, but every time somebody tries to punish me for having differing opinions by attacking this website, it causes Glenn a ton more work. But the last time I suggested people donate to the tip jar to show their appreciation for all the work he puts into this place, not only did I catch flack about it, but the total amount left was under ten bucks. So frankly, I’m losing patience with everybody.
PAD
Wow.
Hopefully a weekend of Dragon*Con will help bring up your mood Peter (and please don’t infer anything other than a hope you have a good time).
I found this site originally looking for details about your work. Then discovered the open discussions and thought that it was wonderful for a professional to open himself up like this to his fans. The majority of fans only get to meet writers/aritsts/whatever for a couple of seconds in an autograph or sketch line. Here, you’ve opened up youself in a unique way and it’s not brought you “down” to the level of the fans, but rather us “up” to the level of the writer. Here, you’re writing TO us, not FOR us, and I believe it has helped me appreciate your writing even more.
But of course, no good deed goes unpunished. There’s always one or two (maybe more?) people that will always try to ruin things for others. Maybe someday it will be possible to find a way to teach these children some manners, short of the Jay and Silent Bob method (finding the posters, going to their house and kicking the crap out of them).
We disagree on politics, but that’s a GOOD thing. Who wants to have a discussion only with people that agree with them? That would be boring. Strong opinions often lead to strong words, but there’s no reason to be uncivil about it. And in full disclosure myself, I’ve written many replies here that I’ve had to go back and change before posting because I drifted from a discussion of the topic to a discussion (slam) of the person I’m replying to. It’s just too easy to make a target of the person rather than the ideas, and I’d rather not go for an easy hit.
So, THANK YOU Peter. Thanks for taking the time to make room for us in your life. Time that sure could be used for other things like writing and didn’t I hear something about you having a wife and kids…? ; )
As for Glenn. Who cares what a web guy does? It can’t be that hard.
JOKE! JOKE! Glenn, thanks for your hard work not only here, but on your own site and Kathleen’s.
Final thought. Peter, if there’s a tip jar out on the table at D*C, I’ll be glad to drop an amount at least equal to the $10 you mentioned above in it. Use it for yourself, give it to Glenn, buy the baby something, anything you want. At least it will give me a better excuse to come up and introduce myself to you. We’ve spoken at D*C before, but I didn’t introduce myself then. Now, I’ll have a good reason.