OK DUers here's the assignment, should you choose to accept it:

[madmom]

yesterday in our local rag there was a ltte entitled "Lying about the president is unpatriotic"It talks about how democrats use "proven lies" to oppose bush. What I need is help with the facts to debunk him. His statements are as follows: 1. Bill Clinton was not impeached because of sex he was impeached because he lied to a federal grand jury... while this is basically true I want to point out the original charge, the ensuing additional trumped up charges and the cost the the taxpayer in time and money. 2.Dems refuse to accept that the election was not stolen, if the recounts would have continued bush would still have won...I know I recently read where Gore won but can't remember details 3. The swift boat vets proved in 2004 that Kerry's military record was very controversial and the atrocities he claimed were never committed..Kerry's new fight about proving they lied 4. There is no "credible" evidence that bush skipped out on his NG obligations and the documents were proven fakes...actually no one ever said the information contained in the documents was wrong did they? 5. Bush didn't lie to get us into the war, because dems like Clinton, Gore, and Kerry all believed they had nuclear or biological weapons in the late 90's and documents ar being released now to prove Saddam supported terrorism, the invasion of Iraq was not unprovoked.. Why were they using 1990's data in 2003?

As you can see I have my work cut out for me, so any help with links etc. would be GREATLY appreciated!! Thanks all.

[FloridaPat]

1. Here's one for 2000 that isn't talked about much.

www.gregpalast.com

Was the investigating reporter that found out 95,000 non-criminals were illegally put on the felon list in Florida in 2000. 95% were Democrats and half were African Americans.

[johnaries]

2. re: #4 - docs were fake; INFO WAS CORRECT!

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/15/guard.memos.congress/index.html

the information in those is correct," Knox told CBS anchor Dan Rather.

The same woman that verified that the docs were fake also verified that the info was correct!

[moblsv]

3. not fake either

"documents were proven fakes."

They were not proven fake at all. They were "bullied" fake, in public opinion, by right wing blogs, media and forums.

Mary Mapes did a great job of outlining the entire issue in her book on the subject "Truth and Duty: The Press, the President, and the Privilege of Power".

[MH1]

4. Swift Liars:

Media Matters has a ton of articles debunking their lies:

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/swift_boat_veterans_for_truth

You could also bring up Tiger Force. And remember that Kerry was speaking broadly of violations of the Geneva Convention - they can't seriously claim that "free-fire zones" didn't exist, did they?

A vet I know - who is inexplicably anti-Kerry, saying Kerry "lied" about atrocities, described to me how they would routinely cut off an ear of a killed "VC" and lay it on their wounded guy's chest, as a way of letting the wounded guy know, "we got him." (Yes, my jaw was bruised from hitting the pavement when he made those contradictory statements within about a minute of each other.)