Dems Refuse To Release Tape Of Hatefest

[clocker]

Originally posted by j2k4@12 July 2004 - 14:13

If you could create a demand for the release of such tapes, I'm sure the Republicans wouldn't balk; so far, though, I've heard nothing.

Not so.

On two recent Republican fundraising tours to Colorado (one each by Bush and Cheney) reporters weren't allowed anywhere near the actual events themselves.
Lots of folks are curious, especially since the City of Denver got stuck with a $56,000 bill for extra police security.
The city is considering suing the GOP for the money.
The GOPs response ( so far) has only been that there was "Presidential business" conducted also, although no one is willing to say exactly what that might entail .

Looks to me that not only are the Republicans equally as guilty of holding closed fundraisers, but all of the citizens get to pick up (at least part of) the tab to boot.

[SuperJude™]

I am middle of the road, neither Dem nor Republican. I can see good and bad in both.

Just wanted to state that one.

See the issue I have is with this semi-erudite, elitist leftist snob shit, like if you don't agree with us you are a goose stepping Bush Lover. I am in the heart of liberal country BTW, and I have to say: People who support Bush are more polite than the so called liberals.

I am in customer service btw. But here is what really gets me, more than the half baked theories, more than the support for bad candidates like Dean and Kerry, more than the mean spirited liberal/nazi attitude of agree of you are wrong: Hypocracy.

You can go to websites and learn how to disrupt the Republican convention in a host of mean and nasty ways. Hey, nothing wrong with some shennanigans, though some fringe groups say they want to "throw off bomb sniffing dogs" for whatever reason.

But.

What if the Republicans said they were going to do the same to the Dems? It would be holy hell to pay in the media. Folks we really are living with a double standard in our media but because we have a mostly unlikeable president nobody sees it.

Long as there is Bush to hate, nobody sees ANYTHING it seems, at least where I live.

I had a guy claim getting rid of Bush would solve all the worlds problems. I had a woman say she would rather give money to "stop Bush" than to give to the needy. I had an ulta liberal tree hugger type tell me he wished somebody would assasinate Bush. I had a guy yell at me because the store I work at carried the Washington times ( conservative), since he thought we should ONLY carry leftists mags and newspapers.

So much for liberal balance. I now think many of these people are not really liberal at all, just trying to not be what their parents were. Many are mean, uninformed, close minded and judgemental, much like the people they then talk smack about.

Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't, but sure seems like a lot of people are so hypocritical I cannot even have discussions with them anymore. You have no idea how many times my day starts with somebody buying the paper and making stupid comments to me.

It gets old, and then I look and say "are these the type of people I identify with?"

Not really.

-SJ™

[j2k4]

Hmmm.

That's rather unfortunate; I hope they get their reimbursement.

I wonder, though-we've all seen snippits of the Dem fund-raiser, because they want you to know how "well-loved" they are by all these important people from Hollywood, but the only images accompanied by audio is of Kerry running his jib.

To me, that's tacit admission that the actual verbal content provided by these Hollywood types would be objectionable to potential voters.

"We'll let you see 'em, but you don't need to hear 'em"

That type of selectivity might pose a bigger buggaboo for the Dems than an outright media ban does for the 'Publicans.

Of course, I could be wrong.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by SuperJude™@12 July 2004 - 16:45
I am middle of the road, neither Dem nor Republican. I can see good and bad in both.

Just wanted to state that one.

See the issue I have is with this semi-erudite, elitist leftist snob shit, like if you don't agree with us you are a goose stepping Bush Lover. I am in the heart of liberal country BTW, and I have to say: People who support Bush are more polite than the so called liberals.

I am in customer service btw. But here is what really gets me, more than the half baked theories, more than the support for bad candidates like Dean and Kerry, more than the mean spirited liberal/nazi attitude of agree of you are wrong: Hypocracy.

You can go to websites and learn how to disrupt the Republican convention in a host of mean and nasty ways. Hey, nothing wrong with some shennanigans, though some fringe groups say they want to "throw off bomb sniffing dogs" for whatever reason.

But.

What if the Republicans said they were going to do the same to the Dems? It would be holy hell to pay in the media. Folks we really are living with a double standard in our media but because we have a mostly unlikeable president nobody sees it.

Long as there is Bush to hate, nobody sees ANYTHING it seems, at least where I live.

I had a guy claim getting rid of Bush would solve all the worlds problems. I had a woman say she would rather give money to "stop Bush" than to give to the needy. I had an ulta liberal tree hugger type tell me he wished somebody would assasinate Bush. I had a guy yell at me because the store I work at carried the Washington times ( conservative), since he thought we should ONLY carry leftists mags and newspapers.

So much for liberal balance. I now think many of these people are not really liberal at all, just trying to not be what their parents were. Many are mean, uninformed, close minded and judgemental, much like the people they then talk smack about.

Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't, but sure seems like a lot of people are so hypocritical I cannot even have discussions with them anymore. You have no idea how many times my day starts with somebody buying the paper and making stupid comments to me.

It gets old, and then I look and say "are these the type of people I identify with?"

Not really.

-SJ™

Extremely well stated, that.

Sorry SJ, but I had to say that; now you must suffer the taint of my esteem.

[mogadishu]

no one seems to realize that liberals seem more disagreeable because of BUSH. conservatives have their president. Liberals disagree with him on all levels, not because they are hateful, but becaues they believe Bush is doing such an awful job. The reason it didnt happen from conservatives in the clinton admin is cus clinton was a better president. I am so tired of conservatives whinning about how liberals are calling people names. this isnt friggin 1st grade. grow up and focus on the real issues.

[ruthie]

Tell you what. The Bush administration can tell us who is on the energy task force, who leaked the CIA operatives name, and a list of many other "who, what, where" questions.
This administration is as close to a fascist regime as possible.
Bush and his cronies have their dirty little secrets. How about, "oops, we lost the files on Bush's service records, etc?

[rollwave]

Originally posted by mogadishu@12 July 2004 - 07:39
may i ask you what the hell this has to do with the actual election? I hate conservatives and their bullshit 'values' agenda. you refuse to focuse on anything but that some progressives use mean words when they talk about chimpy. WHAT THE FUCK ABOUT JOBS, HEALTHCARE, THE DAMN ECONOMY. but of course its more important to launch campaigns so kerry gets caught saying bad things or with the bad crowd. About these people reflecting america - hell, i bet they didnt go half as far as i would have.

btw - do you think most americans support bush running hateful ads about kerry absolutely everywhere?

So typical of hate-filled libs. And yes that's the point: why don't the libs talk about the economy ? Because the economy is doing great: home ownership at all time high, after tax income up 11% and the economy is predicted to grow at the highest rate in 20 years. Democrats can't lie about that anymore so they have to insult Bush.

[ruthie]

Maybe in your town/city, the economy is great. In my community, house sales are up, alright...but not for the people who have lived here a long time. You know who buys all these houses? People come up from NYC, drop a bundle, outbid each other, thus, driving the assessments sky high. We can't afford a house, and we should be able to
Great economy? Tell that to all the minimum wage earners out there, who can't support their families on the take home pay.
Economy great? Tell that to all the uninsured, who can't afford to see Dr.'s, let alone specialists.
Yup, the economy sure is better...for a tiny percentage of people..the ultra rich.

[rollwave]

Originally posted by Illuminati@12 July 2004 - 10:32
And once again, I have to say SOURCES? Sorry, but for every unbacked subjective post I see you make rollwave your ability to make a valid argument seems less and less.

I'll give an example - How about a study a couple of years ago on the IQ of the past twelve presidents?

In a report published Monday, the Lovenstein Institute of Scranton, Pennsylvania, detailed its findings of a four-month study of the intelligence quotient of President George W. Bush.

Since 1973, the Lovenstein Institute has published its research to the educational community on each new president, which includes the famous "IQ" report among others. There have been twelve presidents over the past 60 years, from F.D. Roosevelt to G.W. Bush, who were rated based on scholarly achievements, writings that they produced without aid of staff, their ability to speak with clarity, and several other psychological factors, which were then scored using the Swanson/Crain system of intelligence ranking.

The study determined the following IQs of each president as accurate to within five percentage points:

182 .. William J. Clinton (D)
175 .. James E. Carter (D)
174 .. John F. Kennedy (D)
155 .. Richard M. Nixon ®
147 .. Franklin D. Roosevelt (D)
132 .. Harry Truman (D)
126 .. Lyndon B. Johnson ( D)
122 .. Dwight D. Eisenhower ®
121 .. Gerald Ford ®
105 .. Ronald Reagan ®
098 .. George Bush ®
091 .. George W. Bush ®

The six Republican presidents of the past 50 years had an average IQ of 115.5, with President Nixon having the highest at 155. President G.W. Bush rated the lowest of all the Republicans with an IQ of 91.

The six Democrat presidents had IQs with an average of 156, with President Clinton having the highest IQ, at 182. President Lyndon B. Johnson was rated the lowest of all the Democrats with an IQ of 126.

No president other than Carter (D) has released his actual IQ, 176.

Among comments made concerning the specific testing of President GW Bush, his low ratings are due to his apparently difficult command of the English language in public statements, his limited use of vocabulary (6,500 words for Bush versus an average of 11,000 words for other presidents), his lack of scholarly achievements other than a basic MBA, and an absence of any body of work which could be studied on an intellectual basis. The complete report documents the methods and procedures used to arrive at these ratings, including depth of sentence structure and voice stress confidence analysis.

"All the Presidents prior to George W. Bush had at least one book under their belt, and most had written several white papers during their education or early careers. Not so with President Bush," Dr. Lovenstein said. "He has no published works or writings, which made it more difficult to arrive at an assessment. We relied more heavily on transcripts of his unscripted public speaking." The Lovenstein Institute of Scranton Pennsylvania think tank includes high caliber historians, psychiatrists, sociologists, scientists in human behavior, and psychologists. Among their ranks are Dr. Werner R. Lovenstein, world-renowned sociologist, and Professor Patricia F. Dilliams,a world-respected psychiatrist.

This study was commissioned on February 13, 2001 and released on July 9, 2001 to subscribing member universities and organizations within the educational community

Source

Education doesn't mean anything like it used to - It can unfortunately be bought a lot easier than being earned. True interlectual ability however can be more of a benefit to presidents, but it isn't what you have but what you do with it

EDIT: The study has since been found to be a hoax (dammit! ), thanks for moga for letting me know about that. Didn't help that I got it a while back from the Guardian myself

Total liberal bullshit. Carter , the worst president in US history, at #2, and Clinton, an average president at best, #1. Hmmm, seems pretty suspect. How can they derive at this conclusion without the person actually taking the test. Sounds like a Michael Moore theory: no facts just just wild acusations. And just how does someone woth an IQ of 90 get an MBA from Harvard?

[rollwave]

Originally posted by ruthie@13 July 2004 - 00:51
Maybe in your town/city, the economy is great. In my community, house sales are up, alright...but not for the people who have lived here a long time. You know who buys all these houses? People come up from NYC, drop a bundle, outbid each other, thus, driving the assessments sky high. We can't afford a house, and we should be able to
Great economy? Tell that to all the minimum wage earners out there, who can't support their families on the take home pay.
Economy great? Tell that to all the uninsured, who can't afford to see Dr.'s, let alone specialists.
Yup, the economy sure is better...for a tiny percentage of people..the ultra rich.

Housing sales are going through the roof nationwide. In my town, houses are selling as fast as they can build them, and most are 300K and up. That's because interest rates are low--thank you Ronald Reagan-- and people have more money to spend because they are sending less to the government. As far as health insurance goes, what exactly is Kerry going to do about it? Why didn't Clinton use his huge IQ and fix the problem in his 8 years? Hmmm? Know why? Because liberals want the issue to run on every 4 years. Same thing they do with poverty. Besides, that's a bogus issue being ginned up by the Dems because they have no other issue. Some people don't have health insurance because they are uninsureable or they are in college and don't need it. I know many that fit into both camps.