Jump to content

Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Kerry backs away from "Crooked liars" comment

Election 2004 John Kerry 2004

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#21 Norville

  • Islander
  • 4,502 posts

Posted 11 March 2004 - 10:06 PM



The audio itself, however, is creepy. It's almost totally infectionless.

I would hope it's infectionless! ;) Wait a second, you said it was only "almost totally" infectionless...  :eek2:

:lol: The word is, of course, inflectionless. A missing letter can do interesting things to one's meaning. ;)
"The dew has fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning."
- Marvin the Paranoid Android, "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy"

Rules for Surviving an Autocracy
Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen

#22 Drew


    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 12 March 2004 - 09:53 AM

You know what's really cheesing me off? I was just surfing Google News, and today there are a slew of articles about Bush's latest campaign ads in which he criticizes Kerry for his tax plan and for his votes on national security issues. Fine, fine, . . . all standard stuff. But what's cheesing me off is that the media is characterizing these ads as "the first negative ads of the general election."

Excuse me, but I've been watching Kerry's ads critical of Bush for quite some time now. These are hardly the first negative ads. They might be Bush's first, but Kerry went negative before this.

Not that I care much. It's expected that one be critical of his opponent's record. (And again, that's not "mudslinging.") But the media is now telling everyone that Bush's negative ads are the first of this election. Or that Bush's new ads now signal a downturn in the tone of the election. (I guess the "crooked liars" comment was part of the "high tone" that's marked this campaign so far, eh?)

Just a few examples.

Cashed-up Bush Fires First Volley

Bush Unveils First Negative Ads of General Election

Bush assails Kerry as tone of ads sours

I can't help but come away with the impression that if a Democrat "goes negative," it's considered taking the high road. But if a Republican should address his opponent's record, it's beneath contempt.

(By the way, let me make it clear that at least some of these articles do make clear that Kerry had ads critical of Bush much earlier--if you get down to the 12th or 13th paragraph--but their headlines and lead paragraphs tell a different story. That's what's annoying me.)

Edited by Drew, 12 March 2004 - 10:11 AM.

"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#23 GiGi


    Lipstick wearing PIG kisser!

  • Islander
  • 8,774 posts

Posted 12 March 2004 - 01:18 PM

^ I still find Bush & Co's "Poll Pushing" the most vile, but I really wish they would all knock it off.  Talk about the issues and the different stands on the issues, that is what is important.  That is also why I liked and voted for Edwards.
"Life is as dear to a mute creature as it is to man. Just as one wants happiness and fears pain, just as one wants to live and not die, so do all creatures." -- HH The Dalai Lama

#24 G1223


    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 12 March 2004 - 03:07 PM

But that is all Kerry has. if he talks the issues then he has to defend the position the issues create. and that is not John Kerry. But do worry next week he will have new positions . The only consistancy of the man is that he is inconsistant.

Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Election 2004, John Kerry, 2004

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users