60 Minutes has no credibility - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/15/2004 11:16:50 PM · #54

Originally posted by bdobe:

Those that still defend Mr. Bush's National Guard record do so out of blind loyalty to the "W" brand, the Republican party, and out of willful ignorance on Mr. Bush's record -- from his failure to fulfill his National Guard commitment to Mr. Bush's War of Choice in Iraq.

So anyone that disagrees with your political opinion is ignorant??? I guess I'm ignorant. Hey, it truly is bliss!

Oh yeah, Kerry missed 64% of the votes last year and 80% this year so far. That's probably a good thing since in 20 years he has voted for tax increases 350 times!!! That's about 17 times per year. Also, in those 20 years he has been such a leader in the senate that he initated a whopping 2 bills. Yes 2 (I didn't miss any zeros). That's one per decade. Again though, that's probably a good thing for us since he also suggested raising the gas tax by $.50 per gallon and ending most of the weapons that we reply on today. Heck, he's doing such a great job as senator, lets promote him to president!!! Maybe we should give him another medal too! But what do I know, I'm ignorant.

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

09/15/2004 11:37:58 PM · #55

And don't forget his running mate, John Edwards.

bdobe

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

09/16/2004 12:23:00 AM · #56

Originally posted by David Ey:

David Ey,

The answer to your question is simple:

1. Republicans control the House.

2. Republicans control the Senate.

3. Republicans control the Executive (Presidency).

4. Democrats are in the minority in both the House and the Senate, and they certainly don't control the Executive.

5. According to parliamentary/legislative procedure, the Rules Committee in both the House and the Senate must agree to bring a motion to the floor of their respective chambers. But hey, guess what, Republicans control the Rules Committee in the both the House and the Senate.

6. Since Democrats are in the minority in both chambers they cannot bring motions forward without the consent of the majority party, oh, that's right, the Republicans.

7. The National Rifle Association (NRA) clearly opposed the "Assault Weapons Ban," and the Republican party is clearly aligned with the NRA. For example, in 1999 alone, 81% of the political donations made by the NRA were made to the Republican party. (I couldn't find more recent figures.)

8. So, let's see, Republicans control the House, the Senate and the Presidency, and one of their biggest supporters just happens to be the lobbying group of the weapons industry that just happens to oppose "Clinton's Assault Weapons Ban."

9. To sum up: Republicans and the NRA wanted the ban lifted and they had the means to do it.

10. Just some screen shots:

Lemme guess who does the NRA support?

Message edited by author 2004-09-16 00:42:46.

MadMordegon

09/16/2004 12:38:00 AM · #57

Originally posted by louddog:

since he also suggested raising the gas tax by $.50 per gallon

If only gas prices in the US had gone up and been similar to that of the rest of the world. We might not be in 10mpg SUV's and wondering why we are stirring up a bees hive in the Middle East.

Read The Prize and learn what makes this world tick.

09/16/2004 12:54:44 AM · #58

Originally posted by louddog:

That's probably a good thing since in 20 years he has voted for tax increases 350 times!!!

Louddog!! Cut that out this minute.. :D

You lose credibility when you take THAT shovel and start heavin' all that around.

09/16/2004 12:57:28 AM · #59

Originally posted by louddog:

I bet the right can find at least three guys with equally impressive titles that can say he did nothing wrong.

I bet you can't! :)

09/16/2004 01:21:33 AM · #60

Originally posted by louddog:

Also, in those 20 years he has been such a leader in the senate that he initated a whopping 2 bills. Yes 2 (I didn't miss any zeros). That's one per decade.

I just googled for Kerry and legislation he introduced. I lost count at about ten or so. I saw one source that said he introduced or cosponsored 57 bills.

Give the Fox News talking points a rest.

bdobe

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

09/16/2004 11:22:11 AM · #61

Originally posted by frychikn:

Because he has basically abandoned his senate job, which he is still being paid for (he really needs the money!) in order to spend all his time running for president.

Let's just see what our self-described war president's record is:

[ Bush by numbers: Four years of double standards ]

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

09/16/2004 11:30:37 AM · #62

Hey bdobe. Do you always double-post because

a) you think that no one who reads one political thread, reads others?

b) you fear that someone might miss the propaganda you wish to spread?

c) you don't want to pass up ANY opportunity to vent your hatred for Bush?

d) you don't care HOW much DPC server space your bloated postings consume?

or

e) like a dog, you just HAVE to leave your mark on every hydrant.

LoudDog

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/16/2004 12:25:50 PM · #63

Originally posted by gingerbaker:

Originally posted by louddog:

Also, in those 20 years he has been such a leader in the senate that he initated a whopping 2 bills. Yes 2 (I didn't miss any zeros). That's one per decade.

I just googled for Kerry and legislation he introduced. I lost count at about ten or so. I saw one source that said he introduced or cosponsored 57 bills.

Correct, Kerry sponsored 57 bills in his 20 years. I had bad information that I did not verify. I guess Iâ��m no better then CBSâ�¦

The other numbers I posted are true and verifiable.

LoudDog

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/16/2004 12:27:37 PM · #64

Originally posted by gingerbaker:

Originally posted by louddog:
I bet the right can find at least three guys with equally impressive titles that can say he did nothing wrong.

I bet you can't! :)

Cheeny, Powell, and G Bush Senior, just off the top of my head... What do I win?

ScottK

09/16/2004 02:06:38 PM · #65

Originally posted by RonB:

ROTFL! :)
But just to be fair, dbode (or, to use his current, more formal, name, X | X) doesn't hate Bush. Its just class envy.

MadMordegon

09/16/2004 02:15:27 PM · #66

Originally posted by louddog:

G Bush Senior

"To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day hero ... assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an un-winnable urban guerilla war. It could only plunge that part of the world into even greater instability."
George Bush Sr. in A World Transformed, 1998

Too bad Jr Bush doesnâ��t read.

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

09/16/2004 02:27:03 PM · #67

Originally posted by gingerbaker:

Actually of the 57, only 29 were Bills - the other 28 were only Resolutions. And of the 29 Bills he sponsored, only 7 made it to a floor vote without being referred to committee or held at the desk. Here are the seven:

100th Congress

01.S.2365: A Bill to authorize the release of 86 USIA films with respect to the Marshall Plan
Measure passed House, amended

102nd Congress

02. S.1563 : A Bill to authorize appropriations to carry out the National Sea Grant College Program Act
Signed by President

103rd Congress

03. S.1206 : A Bill to redesignate the Federal building located at 380 Trapelo Road in Waltham, Massachusetts, as the "Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center"
Became Public Law No: 103-234

04. S.1636 : A Bill to authorize appropriations for the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 and to improve the program to reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations
Became Public Law No: 103-238

105th Congress

05. S.469 : A Bill to designate a portion of the Sudbury, Assabet, and Concord Rivers as a component of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System
Status: On passage Passed without objection

106th Congress

06. S.791 : A Bill to amend the Small Business Act with respect to the Women's business center program
Became Public Law No: 106-165

107th Congress

07. S.174 : A Bill to amend the Small Business Act with respect to the MicroLoan Program
Status: Ordered to be Reported (Amended)

---------------------

Note that only ONE Kerry-sponsored Bill has ever made it to the President's Desk ( S.1563 ), though to his credit, it did get signed.

ScottK

09/16/2004 02:34:57 PM · #68

Originally posted by gingerbaker:

Sorta... but not really.

For one thing, its my understanding that cosponsering a bill is little more than saying "me too". It certainly doesn't display any leadership capabilities.

Check out this article at FactCheck.org. The true number is somewhere above 2, but far below 57. Here's a quote from an AP article within that article:

Kerry has been the lead sponsor of eight bills that have become law. Two are related to his work on the Senate panel on oceans and fisheries - a 1994 law to protect marine mammals from being taken during commercial fishing and a 1991 measure for the National Sea Grant College Program Act, which finances marine research.
In 1999, President Clinton signed his bill providing grants to support small businesses owned by women.
The rest of the laws he saw passed were ceremonial - renaming a federal building, designating Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day, National POW/MIA Recognition Day and World Population Awareness Week in two separate years.

So, there are a few more than 2 bills that Kerry has gotten passed into law (as opposed to simply introducing). But not many, and none of any deep significance, especially given his constant refrain of having led so many fights in congress.

I know that in response to louddog's comment and his use of the word "initiated", that technically your response with numbers of bills introduced is legitimate. However, a key mark of leadership is the ability to actually accomplish things. This seems to me a significant sign that Kerry is actually very ineffective in accomplishing anything in his 19 years in the senate. Using your number of 57 bills "introduced or cosponsored", and the above number of 8 bills actually passed into law, thats less than a 15% success rate. That doesn't seem very good to me (but then I'll admit I don't know what would be considered average, let alone good, in congressional terms).

And to take it the next step, breaking this down by year, you get something like three pieces of legislation introduced or cosponsered (i.e. "sure I'll let you put my name on your work") per year, and only one success every two years.

Never mind that the pieces of legislation he was successful at getting passed don't look too earth shattering.

About the best thing I can see that you could possibly gleen from this is that, as he claims, he's really a behind-the-scenes mover and shaker. That means you pretty much have to trust Kerry and his democratic friends (which I'm sure you do, and of course I'm less likely to), and take their word that he's been effective. The problem I have with that (besides believability) is that it looks more like his attitude is "I'll work to help people get stuff done, but don't put my name on it and risk taking any blame if there's negative fallout." Either way, its a sign of a pretty weak leader to me.

ScottK

09/17/2004 03:57:56 PM · #69

As Rathergate continues to unfold (or unravel)...

Making the assumption (based on overwhelming evidence) that these documents are, in fact, forgeries, and that there do appear to be ties to a local democratic party in Texas, the following seems saliant and ups the stakes just a bit:

--------------------------------------------------------

From title 18 of the United States Code:

Sec. 2197. - Misuse of Federal certificate, license or document
Whoever, not being lawfully entitled thereto, uses, exhibits, or attempts to use or exhibit, or, with intent unlawfully to use the same, receives or possesses any certificate, license, or document issued to vessels, or officers or seamen by any officer or employee of the United States authorized by law to issue the same; or

Whoever, without authority, alters or attempts to alter any such certificate, license, or document by addition, interpolation, deletion, or erasure; or

Whoever forges, counterfeits, or steals, or attempts to forge, counterfeit, or steal, any such certificate, license, or document; or unlawfully possesses or knowingly uses any such altered, changed, forged, counterfeit, or stolen certificate, license, or document; or

Whoever, without authority, prints or manufactures any blank form of such certificate, license, or document, or

Whoever possesses without lawful excuse, and with intent unlawfully to use the same, any blank form of such certificate, license, or document; or

Whoever, in any manner, transfers or negotiates such transfer of, any blank form of such certificate, license, or document, or any such altered, forged, counterfeit, or stolen certificate, license, or document, or any such certificate, license, or document to which the party transferring or receiving the same is not lawfully entitled -

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

--------------------------------------------------------

Forged by democrats and in the possession of CBS and Dan Rather. Seems like some folks may need to make arrangements for an extended visit to a federal correctional facility. I wonder how far up the party this stretches.

(I know, this is still pretty speculative, but at this point its far less slanderous and speculative than most of the insults and accusations hurled at the president.)

Message edited by author 2004-09-17 15:59:56.

09/17/2004 09:29:57 PM · #70

Originally posted by ScottK:

Originally posted by gingerbaker:

Originally posted by louddog:

Also, in those 20 years he has been such a leader in the senate that he initated a whopping 2 bills. Yes 2 (I didn't miss any zeros). That's one per decade.

I just googled for Kerry and legislation he introduced. I lost count at about ten or so. I saw one source that said he introduced or cosponsored 57 bills.

Give the Fox News talking points a rest.

Sorta... but not really.

For one thing, its my understanding that cosponsering a bill is little more than saying "me too". It certainly doesn't display any leadership capabilities.

Check out this article at FactCheck.org. The true number is somewhere above 2, but far below 57. Here's a quote from an AP article within that article:

Kerry has been the lead sponsor of eight bills that have become law. Two are related to his work on the Senate panel on oceans and fisheries - a 1994 law to protect marine mammals from being taken during commercial fishing and a 1991 measure for the National Sea Grant College Program Act, which finances marine research.
In 1999, President Clinton signed his bill providing grants to support small businesses owned by women.
The rest of the laws he saw passed were ceremonial - renaming a federal building, designating Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day, National POW/MIA Recognition Day and World Population Awareness Week in two separate years.

So, there are a few more than 2 bills that Kerry has gotten passed into law (as opposed to simply introducing). But not many, and none of any deep significance, especially given his constant refrain of having led so many fights in congress.

I know that in response to louddog's comment and his use of the word "initiated", that technically your response with numbers of bills introduced is legitimate. However, a key mark of leadership is the ability to actually accomplish things. This seems to me a significant sign that Kerry is actually very ineffective in accomplishing anything in his 19 years in the senate. Using your number of 57 bills "introduced or cosponsored", and the above number of 8 bills actually passed into law, thats less than a 15% success rate. That doesn't seem very good to me (but then I'll admit I don't know what would be considered average, let alone good, in congressional terms).

And to take it the next step, breaking this down by year, you get something like three pieces of legislation introduced or cosponsered (i.e. "sure I'll let you put my name on your work") per year, and only one success every two years.

Never mind that the pieces of legislation he was successful at getting passed don't look too earth shattering.

About the best thing I can see that you could possibly gleen from this is that, as he claims, he's really a behind-the-scenes mover and shaker. That means you pretty much have to trust Kerry and his democratic friends (which I'm sure you do, and of course I'm less likely to), and take their word that he's been effective. The problem I have with that (besides believability) is that it looks more like his attitude is "I'll work to help people get stuff done, but don't put my name on it and risk taking any blame if there's negative fallout." Either way, its a sign of a pretty weak leader to me.

I don't think the measure of a leader, or the measure of who will make a good president, is necessarily how many bills you write as sole author or coauthor as a Senator.

Kerry has proven himself a leader of men on the battlefield. We know he thinks and responds well and bravely under stress. And we know he is not afraid to do the wildly unpopular thing when he feels it is the right thing to do - look at his testimony about the Viet Nam war.

Perhaps a better measure of how a Senator might prognosticate to a President is not how many bills he sponsors alone, but the opposite. How many people he can persuade to to commit to his cause. Or how well he can get a group to reach concensus.

That is one way things get done down there in that strange world of the beltway.

09/17/2004 09:41:02 PM · #71

Originally posted by ScottK:

I heard it was forged by Sauron in the fires of Mount Doom. :D

Hye5

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

09/17/2004 09:55:46 PM · #72

Originally posted by gingerbaker:

I don't think the measure of a leader, or the measure of who will make a good president, is necessarily how many bills you write as sole author or coauthor as a Senator.

True, nor is the measure of a leader whether he completed a few hours of National Guard Service 30+ years ago or how he served a few months in Vietnam 30+ years ago or anything else that is unrelated to service in public office. The measure of a good leader is how they have served the public good in recent years and their positions on issues of importance to their potential constituents (read: the Nation). Despite what you say, reasonable minds will differ on such service based on individuals' views on issues that are important to them.

Originally posted by gingerbaker:

Kerry has proven himself a leader of men on the battlefield. We know he thinks and responds well and bravely under stress. And we know he is not afraid to do the wildly unpopular thing when he feels it is the right thing to do - look at his testimony about the Viet Nam war.

And how exactly do we know that he has proven himself as a leader of men?? Do you have specific personal knowledge of how he conducted himself in the field? A leader of men who has admitted about committing war crimes, who turned his back by testifying against those with whom he served? A leader of men who can't seem to decide exactly where he stands on the important issues? Puhlease.

Originally posted by gingerbaker:

Perhaps a better measure of how a Senator might prognosticate to a President is not how many bills he sponsors alone, but the opposite. How many people he can persuade to to commit to his cause. Or how well he can get a group to reach concensus.

I don't know that this would necessarily be indicative of a strong leader. Perhaps. On the other hand, perhaps what is indicative of a strong leader is the fact that he will take action which he/she believes appropriate without waiting for the popularity contest results. Everyone will see it differently. However, I don't see that Kerry has had any great success in pursuading anyone to reach a concensus. If you're holding your breath thinking that Kerry will be able to "unite the world" over Iraq, think again. It really doesn't matter who is at the helm. The "world concensus" will likely remain as is.

Message edited by author 2004-09-17 21:57:12.

Flash

Nikon D700

09/20/2004 09:05:00 PM · #73

This story just keeps getting uglier.

Flash

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

09/21/2004 07:56:47 PM · #74

Uglier still.

mrorange002