Would you support slandering a documented Repuke war hero's record?

[Proud2BAmurkin]

if it meant winning a presidential election? Would you question his wounds and run ads to influence the dumbshits in West Virginia?

I would, because the Repukes did it to us.

It's not about "ideas and discussion" like some think. It's about winning so you can put your agenda into policy. There's no way to win without using filthy Repuke-like tactics.

Anyone disagree? If so point to a recent presidential election where the winner didn't get into office by using filty dirty means.

[BlueEyedSon]

1. The rules don't apply anymore. The gloves are off.

[Catch22Dem]

2. Nope, I wouldn't do that to anyone

Just because they did it to us is not adequate justification for me. Besides, where are they gonna find any real repuke war heros?

[Proud2BAmurkin]

6. "where are they gonna find....."

:rofl:

[BlueEyedSon]

13. Ditto. 8^)

[ThomWV]

3. No

I would not slander a military record nor would I honor one. By the way, I have one myself.

[burrowowl]

14. I agree with you! eom

[gratuitous]

4. First, the Republicans would have to run an actual war hero

And they haven't done that since Eisenhower, and before that Teddy Roosevelt. I don't think it's something we have to worry about, strategy-wise.

[ellenfl]

33. you mean like mccain? eom

[Jackpine Radical]

48. We never had to slander McCain.

Rove did it for us.

I just don't think there are many war heroes who could pass muster as slimy enough to be a successful Puggy candidate, so we can always expect them to do the dirty work for us. They will destroy any decent humans they might still have among them, and we will never actually have to face that question.

[gratuitous]

54. I don't mean to denigrate Mr. McCain

But my understanding is that he was captured (many adjectives, most probably "unfortunate" applies), imprisoned (pro forma) and tortured (tragic), then released after five years. While I'm glad he lived through his ordeal, I don't see heroic there. But that's probably just me.

[GiovanniC]

61. He Had the Chance To Be Released

Because he was the son of a high-ranking military officer.

He refused unless his fellow POWs were also released. He would not leave them behind.

That's fucking heroic.

I wish he was that goddamned heroic in 2004, when he was off shilling for Bush instead of defending this country against the evil bastards that muddied his good name.

[Sgt. Baker]

63. He is a great man

His father was an admiral in the navy I believe. Because of this he was offered special treatment but refused it unless it was given to all the men he was being held prisoner with. He never broke throughout five years of torture. They broke his arm countless times and knocked out a bunch of his teeth. He still refused to do anything for his captors. They attempted to release him on numerous occasions but McCain refused to go without all of his fellow prisoners. When he finally did get to come home he was to ride in a spacial plane because of who his father was. I forget who it was but someone cancelled the special flight for him and McCain rode with the other pow's. He later thanked the man who cancelled the flight for preserving his honor.

This may not make him a hero as we think of it but I see him as a hero and I'm sure all the men he was imprisoned with do as well.

[malmapus]

71. Let not forget he also survived the hell that became of the Forrestal

There is footage of him leaping out of his Skyhawk through the flames and onto the deck.

Anyone who was on that ship that day is a hero to me

[Jackpine Radical]

73. McCain behaved honorably as a POW, but I'm not trying to elevate

him. He's been pretty much of an opportunist as a politician, combined with some deplorable right-wing core sentiments. I was just citing him as an example of what the Puggies do to people who earned their medals.

[teach1st]

5. I wouldn't

I believe in playing hard, but playing right.

[etherealtruth]

8. I'm in total agreement n/t

[Proud2BAmurkin]

10. brace yourself for a lifetime of Repuke rule

that's your choice

[SmokingJacket]

57. Honestly, I don't think it would work for us.

The voters in each party have different values, and doing things like wearing those purple-heart bandaids would have BACKFIRED if Democrats had done it... big time, if I may hazard a guess.

There is a segment of the Republican party that is truly, truly vile -- being repubs doesn't make them vile, but vicious, cruel people are attracted to a party that elevates selfishness and thinks that violence and aggressiveness is the solution to every problem. Tactics most decent people find revolting succeed in rallying this hardcore base of repubs -- but wouldn't work for us. At all.

That said, there **is** a way we can play hardball without becoming that which we hate: and I think Howard Dean is working hard to find that narrow path. Whether he succeeds or not is yet to be seen. But you're right -- spinelessness will fail.

[I Have A Dream]

7. No, I couldn't live with myself.

I believe in karma, and I wouldn't want to have that happen to me.

[Gman]

9. In a New York minute

there are no more rules. Decency has to go by the wayside for now. If we win, decency will be restored.

[Maccagirl]

11. If you have to lie

Winning isn't worth it. Tell the truth about Repukes-Yes. Slander-No.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

16. So you wouldn't slander Hitler if it meant he lost power?

:shrug:

[wtmusic]

21. unrealistic

of course, if you could be guaranteed of that. But can't happen, so it's not really an issue.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

31. What if it meant 1700 soldiers would be alive today if

if the Democratic candidate slandered one Repuke war hero's record?

[wtmusic]

34. I see what you're going after

A similar dilemma occurs when a police officer tells a suspect he will go to the gas chamber if he doesn't talk, and it's an outright lie. They do it all the time. Sometimes they get information that takes a murderer off the street. Other times the suspect tells a lie right back.

So in reality it doesn't work that way. It's unpredictable. Here's one for you: what if we invaded Iraq and discovered Saddam did have WMDs, and in fact had a crack commando unit with plans to smuggle a nuke into Manhattan? Would Bush be justified in lying to the public that he *knew* there were WMD's?

[GiovanniC]

62. If The Truth Won't Scare People Away From Bush

How could any lie possibly work?

[in_cog_ni_to]

12. If any existed...GO FOR IT!

They have war heroes?

ALL'S FAIR IN LOVE AND WAR AND THIS IS WAR!

[annabanana]

15. No I would NOT...

Service is service and sacrifice is sacrifice. Their families have paid the price of this heroism and I would not add to their burden.

[XemaSab]

17. The closest thing to a war hero they have

--McCain--has already been slandered.

We're too late.

They beat us to it.

[marmar]

20. True

They'll eat their own if they have to...

[kliljedahl]

43. Slandered yes, but not his war record

Keith’s Barbeque Central

[XemaSab]

64. That's not my memory

I seem to recall they as good as said he was brainwashed by the VC and had committed atrocities.

[pnorman]

18. We'd be suckered into playing THEIR game.

And it's a game that the Karl Roves are far better than we could EVER hope to be.

pnorman

[Jon_da_brockman]

19. Nope

Not a chance. If we can't win without resorting to this sort of filth, then we do not deserve to win.

[tabasco]

22. Nope. I have something called ethics.

I won't let these fuckers turn me into a scumbag like that lady with the Purple Heart bandaid on her ugly fucking chins.

If the American people are so fucking stupid that they can't recognize lies and vote for more of this shit, then they deserve what they get.

[tjwash]

24. Amen brother!

:yourock:

[JitterbugPerfume]

30. If we do such a deed

then we become THEM -----
only worse , because it is against our nature

[Bouncy Ball]

37. Exactly.

That stunt drove me to tears of rage. My own husband has two Purple Hearts (first Gulf War), his father does too (from Vietnam). I would NEVER EVER question a war hero's medals, wounds, service record. That is lower than low.

If that is how you have to win elections in America nowdays, forget it. But I am not throwing my lot in with people who would do such things. That's despicable and low.

[understandinglife]

23. No. "An injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere!"

Peace.


www.missionnotaccomplished.us - Please, everyone, don't stop at 500,000 signatures; don't stop at 10,000,000 signatures; don't stop until Bush and the neoconsters are indicted and prosecuted for their heinous crimes against humanity and our Constitution.

[mandyky]

25. No, if it isn't the truth don't doit!

I do not want Swift Vet Liars on our team. They belong on the team with the other crooks and liars.

[ripple]

26. The Rove machine did that to McCain

I respect McCain's service and I agree with a few of his positions (actually, I used to more than now...kind of like Powell), but I will NEVER forgive him for laying down and rolling over when they did it to Kerry, too. Especially, after the very same people did the same thing to him in the 2000 primaries.

We need to be clever, but we don't want to become what we despise.

[Todd B]

27. No, because unless I walked a mile in their shoes, I have no justification

No, I don't think I would.

How could I honestly justify slandering someone who has put their life on the line for this country when I haven't.

It smacks of hypocrisy - besides, it's good for the Republicans because they can't exactly run on the issues so they have to resort to childish name calling and purple heart bandaids.

Support the troops, indeed.

I don't subscribe to the "eye for an eye" theory.

[cry baby]

28. No, we're better than that.

[The Magistrate]

29. Certainly, Sir

"Politics ain't bean-bag."

[tx_dem41]

32. If I did, I would be dishonoring my father.

I would NEVER do that. How dare you even ask me to.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

36. I don't recall that anyone asked you personally. Why the indignation?

[Bouncy Ball]

35. Look, as the wife of a veteran, I am not going to attack ANYONE'S

service record. I will attack their positions on the issues, I will attack their character if it's lacking.

But I will not attack their service to their country as a member of the military. PERIOD.

What the smeary repukes did to Kerry was UNFORGIVEABLE and I will NOT do such a thing. EVER.

Example: I will tear up McCain left and right, sunup to sundown on his political views, his actions in Congress, his ass-kissing of bush, etc.

But his military service? NEVER.

That's dishonorable and I am NOT dishonorable.

[kliljedahl]

38. Give me an example first

I see no one in this administration who has any kind of military record at all, let alone be anywhere near a "war hero"



Keith’s Barbeque Central

[Bouncy Ball]

39. Good point.

Was it Truman who said "I don't give them hell. I tell the truth about them and they think it's hell."

[Media_Lies_Daily]

42. How about John McCain?

[kliljedahl]

44. I said "in this administration"

but no I wouldn't go after McCain's war record. He's got enough "dirty laundry" it wouldn't be necessary. & you wouldn't even have to resort to the cheap lies his own party used against him. He rolled over for them so I don't think it'd be any different if it came from us.


Keith’s Barbeque Central

[Media_Lies_Daily]

40. There's plenty of fertile ground to go after without attacking.....

...a truthful story about one's war record. That tactic will fail, and for good reason. Additionally, who is going to report such a story in the captive mainstream media?

And what's your problem with people that live in West Virginia or any other state for that matter? If I remember correctly, the last several so-called "elections" have been decided by the tabulations from electronic voting machines. Why aren't you attacking the manufacturers of those machines and their NeoCon supporters instead of displaying your own biases for all to see?

[cestpaspossible]

41. There are so few of them the question is practically moot.

but, of course, no.

[dansolo]

45. No, only the chickenhawks

It would be counterproductive, because without the assitance of the media, the attacks will just be easily turned around against us, characterizing the poor Republican as the victim.

[WillowTree]

46. "I would, because the Repukes did it to us."

Yeah, and, like, those are exactly the kind of people I want to emulate. I want everyone to think of me just like we all think of them.

** sigh **

[Bluebear]

47. A thousand times no. HOWEVER I would look their record over...

with a fine tooth comb. If there is something there that is factual and unfavorable, that is fair game. There is a big difference between that and slander.

[radio4progressives]

49. Don't need to go into "war hero records" the PNAC was an ABJECT FAILURE

and the dancing puppet-dunce aka dubya - and his puppet masters will be going down.

we'll get our moral bearings again, there will never be comparisons of war records because WAR IS A TOTALLY USELESS, DESTRUCTIVE AND VERY DANGEROUS VENTURE. We have HUGE GLOBAL COTASTROPHIES to prevent from occuring and the only kind of record that the American People are going to respect is HONESTY, INTEGRITY and an a record of GENUINE COMMITTMENT to lasting peace, ending nuclear arms proliferation, and taking emergency measures to deal with the Global Warming issues, honoring world treaties while implementing policy that cannot ever be undone at the whim of fascists pigs who happens to highjack our elections and occupy the white house.

[Adelante]

50. No

Never.

[IdaBriggs]

51. No. I won't slander a documented Repuke war hero's record.

I will, however, smack him down for every bit of stupidity he's ever shown in his life by being a Republican, and heaven help him if he's supported Cuckoobanana Boy. :)

[Flying Dream Blues]

52. No

I understand your logic, and it's truly tempting, but it's a slippery slope once you start...

[Zenlitened]

53. We don't need slander. We've got reams and reams of truth...

... to use against these bastards.

What we need is someone who'll shout it from the rooftops.

[Deep13]

55. Only, if I was sure ...

... I could get away with it.

[comsymp]

56. Hell no-

Ancient proverb: "You can't claim the high ground while taking the low road. That would make you a hypocrite Republican."

[Straight Shooter]

58. No.

Throwing mud, and in bush's case, pigshit, at your opponent is part of politics in a campaign.

Slandering a war hero's record, no matter which side, is pigshit. I refuse to get my hands that dirty. We are the party of moral values, I don't care how much the Repubs claim that they are.

[leesa]

59. Whatever for?

[OnionPatch]

60. No

Wrong is wrong. There's just no way around it. If we lose forevermore because of something like this, then so be it. Like Bush, I answer to a "higher power" but unlike him, I wouldn't be able to answer for something like this.

I think when Republicans pull this stuff, we should make it a point to display it to the people. "Republicans are willing to lie and distort a good person's record, etc. etc. to win" and make it stick. Kerry didn't defend himself enough. If I were him, I would have been on national TV face to face debating with those Slimeboat scumbags.

[UTUSN]

65. No. Compartmentalize. Attack the Wingnuttiness.

It p.es me off how low wingnuts go. I have broken off contact with some of my Vietnam shipmates over politics. It seriously ticked me off in 2000 to see six Medal of Honor holders standing on Shrub's stage, endorsing him during the Big Steal. I called VFW and American Legion headquarters and asked whether they are non-political. They said they are. I complained to the VFW Magazine editor for running snide copy about KERRY, and he hung up on me. I then called VFW headquarters in D.C., where they at least listened. I called the Medal of Honor Association to complain about MoH holders signing an endorsement letter for Shrub. They said that individuals can do whatever they want, don't speak for the organization.

So. No, I wouldn't attack somebody's service, just their wingnuttiness. Same with members of all other groups: Minorities who are wingnut: Wouldn't be attacking their minority-ness, just the wingnuttiness, no matter WHO they are.

[Ravy]

66. Well, we had our chance in '96, and I didn't hear a peep about

Bob Dole's Purple Heart for a self-inflicted wound, although he apparently admits that it was.

Only time I heard anything about it was when he criticized Kerry for it.

[mzteris]

67. NO!!!!!!!!!

We're better than that! Or we're supposed to be. Stooping to their level would make us no better than they are.

The ends very very rarely justify the means. Evil begets evil, you know.

That's one of the problems with the world view of America now. People used to look to as a some sort of "moral authority". We Used to take the high road. We didn't "shoot guys in the back". We didn't attack unprovoked. Now America is no better than the terrorists that we claim we're fighting.

It's tempting to want to cheat to win. But winners never cheat and cheaters never truly win. Although it may seem that way in the short term. (OK ok - that's the MOM in me speaking. These are things a tell my boys - but I think it holds true for adults as well.)

Can you imagine an America - a world - where EVERYONE is lying and cheating and being vicious and hateful all the time? What would be the point of living.........

[malmapus]

68. Nope, I couldn't do that

If a Repuke attacked my record, I'd fight back. But I would never slander anyone who has been there and walked the walk.

[Tsiyu]

69. No, because I admire anyone who actually served their time

We don't do that, friend, even though "they" do it, because we value the truth, and we value the military. Find something else to smoke the Repuke with.

[Catherine Vincent]

70. I wouldn't.

I leave that for low life scum of the republican party to do stuff like that.

[WLKjr]

72. No. n/t

[Blue Belle]

74. No. I think it's time to raise this bar.

It doesn't matter if they've done it to us. Lying is wrong. Period. If we can't win on facts, and running a better candidate, then we don't deserve to win. I know they cheat... and they lie... and they run rumor campaigns... and have the full court press of corporate media on their side... but it has to stop somewhere. Lying is a lazy tactic... and we're far too clever to fall back on such a self destructive practice. Instead of falling into the step with the Republicans and trumpet that we are the party of "Moral Values" while we lie to slander our opponent, we're not offering a line of discernment to the voter. We'll literally fall in to the "do or say anything to get elected" catagory... how does that make us better again?? It's time to raise the bar and have some class.

[blm]

75. No. It would get turned on us anyway. THEY control the media and the only

dishonor would fall on those doing the slandering no matter what, anyway.

The only way they were able to get away with their lies was with a complicit broadcast media who allowed them to do it.

Do you think the corporate media pushing the fascist agenda is going to allow Democrats the time and leeway to lie shamelessly the way they allow Republicans?

Any lie by a Dem will get turned around to hurt us way worse.