| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/06/2004 01:09:44 AM · #1 |
Here's just one BLATANT lie by Mr. Cheney:
During The Vice Presidential Debate, Cheney Said The First Time He Met Edwards Was At The Debate That Night.
During the first vice presidential debate, Vice President Cheney said:
"In my capacity as vice president, I am the president of the senate, the presiding officer, I'm in the senate most tuesdays in session. The first time I met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."
HOWEVER!
Cheney Thanked Edwards At the National Prayer Breakfast.
Addressing the National Prayer Breakfast, Cheney said:
"Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I honored to be with you all this morning." [FDCH Political Transcripts, Cheney Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, 2/1/01]
---------------------------------------
The question then becomes, what other lies have Bush/Cheney told us?
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 01:30:51 AM · #2 |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 01:41:46 AM · #3 |
LOL.
Could be the tide is turning and the mainstream media is sensing that Bush is in trouble and is jumping on the Kerry/Edwards bandwagon. That could mean big trouble for the Bush election campaign. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 02:23:49 AM · #4 |
You know, in spite of what Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney are saying at their well orchestrated rallies, I've begun to get the sense that the Bush/Cheney ticket's heart is not in it. Here's what I mean. During the VP debate there were various moments where Mr. Cheney simply refused to retort or to elaborate on a point; and, in those moments, I sort of got the distinct impression, Hey, this guy's heart is not in it... he's just giving up and is not fighting back. In the other hand, Mr. Edwards just kept on going right at Mr. Cheney. Man, Mr. Edwards was relentless. (I would defiantly want someone like Mr. Edwards on my side, fighting for me if I ever needed a lawyer.)
Anyhow, does anyone have any thoughts on whether my impression of the Bush/Cheney ticket is right. Do you think their heart is still in it? Do they really want to win? Do Bush/Cheney simply figure, Hey, we've created such a mess that it might just be easier to leave it to someone else to clean up. What do you guys think?
Message edited by author 2004-10-06 02:29:53.
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 03:34:51 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by bdobe:
You know, in spite of what Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney are saying at their well orchestrated rallies, I've begun to get the sense that the Bush/Cheney ticket's heart is not in it. Here's what I mean. During the VP debate there were various moments where Mr. Cheney simply refused to retort or to elaborate on a point; and, in those moments, I sort of got the distinct impression, Hey, this guy's heart is not in it... he's just giving up and is not fighting back. In the other hand, Mr. Edwards just kept on going right at Mr. Cheney. Man, Mr. Edwards was relentless. (I would defiantly want someone like Mr. Edwards on my side, fighting for me if I ever needed a lawyer.)
Anyhow, does anyone have any thoughts on whether my impression of the Bush/Cheney ticket is right. Do you think their heart is still in it? Do they really want to win? Do Bush/Cheney simply figure, Hey, we've created such a mess that it might just be easier to leave it to someone else to clean up. What do you guys think? |
I did not see the debate with Cheney and Edwards but it's interesting to note that you use the word "heart" when describing Cheney's waning fortitude. Mr. Cheney has a heart condition and it could be that for the state of his health he needs to maintain a calm and even-keeled demeanor, lest he get all excited that could put a stress on a weak organ system. In addition, it's been a long campaign and both Cheney and Bush could be quite tired, especially with all the stress in running a country during a war. Plus, all the questions they have to answer these days really put their "feet-to-the-fire" and they themselves, at this point could be running scared.
Regarding your question about lies in your first post above, I would say at this time anything that Bush or cheney pronounce needs to be questioned as to it's veracity. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 03:47:01 AM · #6 |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 08:49:40 AM · #7 |
hope in the form of an ambulance chasing laywer? what a dark day for America if that happens... I would be ashamed to admit he was our Vice President...
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 08:59:55 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by bdobe:
You know, in spite of what Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney are saying at their well orchestrated rallies, I've begun to get the sense that the Bush/Cheney ticket's heart is not in it. Here's what I mean. During the VP debate there were various moments where Mr. Cheney simply refused to retort or to elaborate on a point; and, in those moments, I sort of got the distinct impression, Hey, this guy's heart is not in it... he's just giving up and is not fighting back. In the other hand, Mr. Edwards just kept on going right at Mr. Cheney. Man, Mr. Edwards was relentless. (I would defiantly want someone like Mr. Edwards on my side, fighting for me if I ever needed a lawyer.)
Anyhow, does anyone have any thoughts on whether my impression of the Bush/Cheney ticket is right. Do you think their heart is still in it? Do they really want to win? Do Bush/Cheney simply figure, Hey, we've created such a mess that it might just be easier to leave it to someone else to clean up. What do you guys think? |
I disagree with you on this - I think they want to win very much. First of all, losing merely hastens the time when they will be prosecuted for war crimes. I am serious about this.
Secondly, these folks, in my opinion, care not at all about helping the public, or their fellow man. They play this game for the spoils. And they HATE to lose.
I think we should not be misled by Cheney's lack of vigor - it probably was a health issue not even a good sit in a chair could disguise. Karl Rove, Cheney, and the Petulant One are on a mission to secure their butts from a prison cell, and they know it, IMO, and will do anything at all to stay in power.
War crimes:
//msnbc.msn.com/id/4999734/site/newsweek/
//www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20040314a5.htm
//www.ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=22018
//www.counterpunch.org/stephens05202004.html
//www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/law/2003/0128uslawyers.htm
//www.truthout.org/docs_04/092004A.shtml
//www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_11-9-2003_pg7_6 |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 10:06:34 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by bdobe:
Here's just one BLATANT lie by Mr. Cheney:
During The Vice Presidential Debate, Cheney Said The First Time He Met Edwards Was At The Debate That Night.
During the first vice presidential debate, Vice President Cheney said:
"In my capacity as vice president, I am the president of the senate, the presiding officer, I'm in the senate most tuesdays in session. The first time I met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."
HOWEVER!
Cheney Thanked Edwards At the National Prayer Breakfast.
Addressing the National Prayer Breakfast, Cheney said:
"Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I honored to be with you all this morning." [FDCH Political Transcripts, Cheney Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, 2/1/01]
---------------------------------------
The question then becomes, what other lies have Bush/Cheney told us? |
The fact is that Cheney actually met Edwards three times. Still, if you care to insist that it was a "blatant lie", then consider:
Here's just one BLATANT lie by Mr. Edwards:
During The Vice Presidential Debate, Mr. Edwards said ""The first Gulf War cost America $5 billion. We're at $200 billion and counting."
HOWEVER...
The war so far has only cost around $130 billion. The $200 billion figure qpouted by Edwards includes those targeted for next year, as well as those to be used for continued reconstruction in Afghanistan.
------------------------------------------
The question then becomes, what other lies have Kerry/Edwards told us?
Message edited by author 2004-10-06 10:42:23. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 10:40:05 AM · #10 |
| I thought this was a good article on it. //www.truthout.org/docs_04/100704Z.shtml |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 10:53:04 AM · #11 |
To me, it looks like they are doing the Mocarena dance. ;)
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 11:00:44 AM · #12 |
Speaking of the debate, remember Cheney's plug?...
"They know that if you go, for example, to FactCheck.com, an independent Web site sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania, you can get the specific details with respect to Halliburton."
Well, did any of you actually go to factcheck.com to see what they had to say? I nearly fell out of my chair laughing!!!
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 11:25:53 AM · #13 |
It's a redirect to George Soros' website... What else would you expect?
Registrant:
Name Administration Inc. (BVI)
Box 10518 A.P.O.
Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands B.W.I.
KY
Domain name: FACTCHECK.COM
Administrative Contact:
Domain, Administrator admin@nameadmininc.com
Box 10518 A.P.O.
Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands B.W.I.
KY
+1.345.946.6879
Technical Contact:
Domain, Administrator admin@nameadmininc.com
Box 10518 A.P.O.
Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands B.W.I.
KY
+1.345.946.6879
Registrar of Record: DomainNameSales
Record last updated on 12-Sep-2004.
Record expires on 04-Feb-2007.
Record created on 04-Feb-2004.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.15X.NET 66.199.187.170
NS2.15X.NET 66.199.187.171
Domain status:
REGISTRAR-LOCK
Message edited by author 2004-10-06 11:28:56. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 11:42:03 AM · #14 |
Most Americans probably won't get to see this, but for those who can, this is a link to the CBC's Fifth Estate feature, The Unauthorized Biography of Dick Cheney. It's airs tonight at 9:00p eastern.
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 11:51:26 AM · #15 |
| Russel, what are you arguing? Cheney simply mispoke. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:09:07 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Russell2566:
It's a redirect to George Soros' website... What else would you expect?
|
I would expect our VP to not plug a link to a Soros site. Maybe I ask too much.
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:19:08 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by Trinch:
Originally posted by Russell2566:
It's a redirect to George Soros' website... What else would you expect?
|
I would expect our VP to not plug a link to a Soros site. Maybe I ask too much. |
I'm sure it wasn't a link to his site at the time...
Edit:
So was it suppose to be factCheck.org? The site is down if it is? I'm sure the left would be calling foul and for President Bush's firing if the opposite happened...
Message edited by author 2004-10-06 12:21:47. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:20:54 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Russell2566:
Originally posted by Trinch:
Originally posted by Russell2566:
It's a redirect to George Soros' website... What else would you expect?
|
I would expect our VP to not plug a link to a Soros site. Maybe I ask too much. |
I'm sure it wasn't a link to his site at the time... |
Actually it was.
Registrar of Record: DomainNameSales
Record last updated on 12-Sep-2004.
Record expires on 04-Feb-2007.
Record created on 04-Feb-2004.
That acording the dotster.com 'whois' search.
Try again. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:24:28 PM · #19 |
When the record was created doesn't mean anything... It's all up to the DSN pointers... A couple of my websites point to static DSN numbers but I can change IP the go to on the fly.... hence I can change what website it goes to every day and the created date or modified date would still be from years ago...
I'm guessing someone probably owned factcheck.com and when they heard it used they just redirected it... But I'm shooting in the dark as none of us actualy know!
edited a bad word :)
Message edited by author 2004-10-06 12:28:08. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:35:28 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by Russell2566:
When the record was created doesn't mean anything... It's all up to the DSN pointers... A couple of my websites point to static DSN numbers but I can change IP the go to on the fly.... hence I can change what website it goes to every day and the created date or modified date would still be from years ago...
I'm guessing someone probably owned factcheck.com and when they heard it used they just redirected it... But I'm shooting in the dark as none of us actualy know!
edited a bad word :) |
Even if your theory is true, it wouldn’t have been completed this fast. It takes 24-48 hours for a redirect to propagate throughout the internet or an IP/DNS change. So, no. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:36:08 PM · #21 |
While I have not had a lot to say about the presidential candidates, I do have strong feelings about the vp candidates.
I'm from NC. As a woman of child-bearing age (son is almost three, daughter on the way), I have seen the effect Edwards has had on the OB/GYN practice. Their malpractice insurance has skyrocketed, because of him. Many good doctor's left to practice elsewhere because the costs went up. Insurance rates went up. At one point in NC, there was fear that there would be a severe shortage of OB/GYNs in the state.
Granted, other factors may have "helped" this rate increase, but consider the "integrity" of Mr. John Edwards --
An OB in Charlotte, NC, was sued by the parents of a child born with mulitple disabilities. Under the advice of Edwards, the delivering OB was sued for malpractice, saying it was her negligence that caused the disabilities. In reality, many of the disabilities pointed to a genetic metabolic disorder that could have been identified with a blood test, but the parents (who stood to win 23 million) and Edwards (who was going to take home roughly a 1/3 of that) would not allow the blood test, because obviously, that would have hurt or ended their case. Instead, the doctor gave up her career and practice. It is accepted in NC that Edwards didn't take any case -- only the ones he stood to win millions on.
I know, I know, you want transcripts of the cases, etc. I'll peruse the archives of the Charlotte newspaper, etc. so I can get dates and see what I can find for you by way of hard evidence.
Also, as a North Carolianian, quite frankly, I feel that I rate very low on Mr. Edwards' list of priorities. Not only did he miss many key votes in the Senate, where he is supposed to be representing me and my neighbors, but during recent flooding of my town and neighboring towns due to Hurricanes Francis and Ivan (we are in Western NC, this was not a normal occurrance), he made an appearance for the papers and at one of the churches and was quoted as saying he would do everything possible in Washington to get us all the help he could. He then flew to Oregon to campaign. It apparently was Elizabeth Dole who helped secure the aide we needed.
The best thing about Edwards being VP is that he would no longer be one of my Senators. And as Senator or VP, the best thing is that my OB/GYN practice (whom I admire and respect and trust) can breathe a little easier. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:38:18 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Trinch:
Speaking of the debate, remember Cheney's plug?...
"They know that if you go, for example, to FactCheck.com, an independent Web site sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania, you can get the specific details with respect to Halliburton."
Well, did any of you actually go to factcheck.com to see what they had to say? I nearly fell out of my chair laughing!!! |
Indeed that was hilarious.
This Slate article //slate.msn.com/id/2107809/ puts it together well with details on what Cheney had meant to say and that even what he meant to say (or have known) was not answering Edwards questions anyway. I also don’t like to use the word 'lie' when referring to these *cough bastards cough* politicians, but when it comes to Cheney, there is no other word to use. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:42:23 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Even if your theory is true, it wouldn’t have been completed this fast. It takes 24-48 hours for a redirect to propagate throughout the internet or an IP/DNS change. So, no. |
Thats only when you change the DNS server... For instance I use ZoneEdit, but there are thousands more. When I make a change it literaly only take 2-10 minutes for the new redirection to take place.
I'm guessing VERY highly that this is what happens, if you pay attention a redirection DOES occure, and I'm pretty sure it's a server side redirect, not HTML. |
|
|
|
10/06/2004 12:59:57 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Originally posted by Trinch:
Speaking of the debate, remember Cheney's plug?...
"They know that if you go, for example, to FactCheck.com, an independent Web site sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania, you can get the specific details with respect to Halliburton."
Well, did any of you actually go to factcheck.com to see what they had to say? I nearly fell out of my chair laughing!!! |
Indeed that was hilarious.
This Slate article //slate.msn.com/id/2107809/ puts it together well with details on what Cheney had meant to say and that even what he meant to say (or have known) was not answering Edwards questions anyway. I also don’t like to use the word 'lie' when referring to these *cough bastards cough* politicians, but when it comes to Cheney, there is no other word to use. |
Re-directing to a site the user obviously was not intending on going seems like a dirty trick to me? Sounds like something sleezy porn sites do. It is funny how it all worked out though. Cheney plugging an anti Bush site...
(edit - stupid code error...)
Message edited by author 2004-10-06 13:00:40.
|
|
|
|
10/06/2004 01:06:21 PM · #25 |
| Read that article louddog. Even though Cheney meant factcheck.org (obviously), factcheck.org does not defend the question Edwards posted to him. Just another mislead and distraction. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/29/2025 04:42:58 PM EDT.
