Freerepublic.com moves to the middle of an Egyptian River

[Walt Starr]

Can you say, Denial?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1234730/posts

The editorial they are jabbering about is this one:

Did President Bush ‘Sandbag’ Kerry At The Debate?
Lee P Butler

In Nascar, the term ‘sandbag’ is used to describe a maneuver in which a driver who has a really fast car doesn’t utilize the full potential of the car’s strength during that race. The idea is to intentionally make the other drivers; who aren’t expecting this to happen, think they may have the fastest cars so they make fewer adjustments to their cars...to make them even faster...and they show everyone else what they have during the race.

Once the race is close to the finish, the driver who has been ‘sandbagging’ knows what adjustments the other race teams have made, knows who he has to contend with and what kind of racing performance the top cars potentially have. So he moves to the front of the race and in the last few laps fights for or cruises to the win at the finish.

It is my contention that President Bush ‘sandbagged’ Kerry during their debate and I’ll explain why, but I also want to point out that this is only speculation on my part. If indeed this was a planned tactic by the Bush team, they already gleaned the information they needed... and set Kerry up in the process...to finish the race with strong momentum and the Kerry people can now do little to ‘adjust’ their game plan to compensate for the setback this brilliant maneuver has created.

Okay, so let’s start with the elite media. They were chomping at the bit before the debate about how this would be the defining moment for John Kerry. That this debate would turn around his faltering campaign, because he would overwhelm the President with his extensive debating prowess and his stellar intellectual superiority, giving the American electorate no choice but to flock to Kerry in awe and wonderment.

http://www.opinioneditorials.com/freedomwriters/lbutler_20041004.html

[JuniorPlankton]

1. Denials

Plus conspiracy theories is potent mix.

[ET Awful]

2. So their new idea is that Bush is a dumbshit on purpose? :) n/t

[sangh0]

20. They're misunderestimating bush*

bush* doesn't need to put any effort into looking like a dumbass.

[Wat_Tyler]

3. To lose is to win, right?

Paging Mr. Orwell.

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Sandbagging for the last 4 years?

Fiendishly clever, these Pugs.

[MexedMissage]

7. It's strategeric thinking...

...Dems don't think that way.

[IdaBriggs]

12. "Strategeric" -- LOVE IT! Welcome to DU! nt

[MexedMissage]

16. thanks!

I'm a DU vet, just trying out a new moniker.... :D:thumbsup:

[newyawker99]

22. LOL!! I like Richardo better!

:hi:

[MexedMissage]

25. ;-)

:hi: newyawker99!

I'm sure I'll stay with Richardo. I've got 8,500+ post equity! :wow:

[shaolinmonkey]

5. Rrrrriiiiiiight. He threw the debate that was supposed to be

his strong suit. Now he's completely fuXored. So the plan is that Kerry will just kick back and drink maragaritas and not prepare for the next two?

Morans.

[theorist]

6. Ummmmm....this is moronic on so many levels.

First, a series of debates is not anything like a nascar event. There's nothing to "win" in a series of presidential debates, except votes. The real prize is the Presidency.

Taking his metaphor, but using it as a microcosm for the entire election, it would appear that Kerry is "sandbagging". His campaign has waited several months, allowing the Bushies to play all of their cards, e.g. SBVT and the CBS thing. Now Kerry has switched gears, pulling the discourse over to the issues, mainly Iraq.

[Bunny]

8. That's either really funny or really scary.

Can they be that delusional? Evidently.

[IdaBriggs]

9. Its true! Completely true!

Bush is probably going to whomp all over Kerry during the next two debates! Bush is just too well liked by everyone in the country, and he's too well informed, and too smart, and Kerry -- he's not very likable, and he's tall, and he doesn't talk well. Plus, the VP debate tomorrow is going to be a slaughter as (to quote another poster) a stupid lil southern boy gets his butt handed to him by a slick talking Washington insider! My friends, we have been sandbagged! We can only wait and pray the American people do not get too embarrassed by our candidates performance! Woe is us! Woe is us! <tee hee>

P.S. Don't forget to join in the Debate Prayer: “That both candidates show their true character, those watching are able to discern this, and choose between them with wisdom for the benefit of all of us.”

[Guaranteed]

10. Sandbagging is MUCH different than throwing the fight.

Whoever wrote this doesn't know shit.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

11. Just because FratBoy looked and sounded like a sandbag...

...during the first debate is no reason to think that he is even remotely capable of "sandbagging" anyone.

They'll say or do anything to rationalize away FratBoy's performance, won't they?

[Mountainman]

13. I wish I could hear some professional shrink talk about this.

These folks just don't want to admit that Bush is a dumb shit!. The Bush they have in their heads is not the Bush they saw in the debates so they have to make up something that reconciles the difference.

All I can say is that I don't know who is more ignorant, Bush of the freeps! In any case they deserve each other.

[Jackpine Radical]

21. It's not so much ignorance, but WILFUL ignorance,

which is called denial. It's a defense mechanism. They cut themselves off from contradictory information, become very obstinate, kick, scratch & tantrum as they resist unwelcome truths.

From a Hazelden publiction:
"Sometimes, the truth is so painful that we avoid it at any cost.

Refusing to accept a painful reality that alters the perception of ourselves is a psychological defense called denial. As human beings, we may use denial to protect ourselves from knowledge, insight or awareness that threatens our self-esteem, mental or physical health, or security."

[aden_nak]

14. There's a problem with this theory.

The debates aren't a race. The spoils do not go to whichever candidate "comes in first" at the end. Performance in all three debates will affect how people view the candidates, and it already has, to be honest. "Sandbagging" (which I wasn't aware was a term reserved for chicanery and deception in NASCAR) is a great idea if only the last five seconds of the competition matter.

Of course, there are more obvious problems with the theory. The fact that Bush is a poor actor is one. The fact that Bush could have easily "Sandbagged" Kerry without doing half of the incredibly stupid things he did is another.

Someone get this idiot some more straws to grasp, it sounds like he is running out.

[CornField]

15. I'm shocked!

I had no idea that NASCAR dads knew what metaphors were, let alone how to use them.

[Cats Against Frist]

17. If this was such a big plan

then your editorial just blew the lid off of it, you fucking retard!

Now really -- if you've messed with Rove's plans, you can expect that some goons will show up at your door and force you onto a small plane, at gunpoint, that will subsequently crash.

These people are dumb and crazy.

***edit: punctuation

[ParanoidPat]

18. I think that bag is full of 'sailboat fuel'......

....transported to him via Halliburton of course. :evilgrin:

[trotsky]

19. First they tell each other he actually "won" the debate.

Now they want to think he threw it intentionally.

Which is it, freeps?

HA HA HA HA HA. Morans.

[Strelnikov_]

38. You Forgot "Kerry Got The Questions", "Kerry Had A Magic Pen"

I still don't understand the last one. Is this some sort of self-writing pen, kinda like a Quija board?

[trotsky]

40. Oh, it was no ordinary pen, check it out!

(Courtesy of zulchzulu on another thread)

[AntiCoup2K4]

23. It is my contention that pResident Bush has sandbags in his head

And so do the Freeps if they can't see what was taking place in that debate. I'm not Kerry's biggest fan and I doubt I ever will be, but there's no question that from start to finish in that debate, he was always at least two moves ahead of the idiot son of an asshole.

As I said on the first post after the debate, I recognized Kerry's use of the term "Nuclear Proliferation" as a trap, because dipshit couldn't pronounce either word, and as a result, stumbled through his rebuttal trying to discuss the subject without actually saying "nookular" or "profiliterization" (or how ever he would mangle that one)

[Merrick]

24. A republican using a racecar analogy?

I never thought I'd see the day. Vroom Vroom.

[The White Tree]

26. This description of NASCAR

is as hopelessly out of touch with the sport as George Bush is on the state of the world.

Nobody "sandbags" in NASCAR to try to get other people not to adjust their cars (it wouldn't work anyway because they adjust them based on how fast they are going and not other drivers). Actually nobody sandbags period. Some guys may lay back in restrictor plate races like Dale Jarrett did yesterday (40th for most of the race then finishes third) but that is entirely different, everyone including the announcers knew he was doing it because he was trying to avoid being caught in a big wreck. The conditions change far too much and the competition is way too intense for anyone to sandbag in a race.

Maybe 20 years ago they did this but not now.

If Bush was trying to sandbag the debate he really screwed himself big time because he does not have the equipment to beat Kerry ever and it is he who would need to make the adjustments, not Kerry.

[TwilightZone]

27. I don't think that this is as unlikely as it first may appear.

I wouldn't flatly dismiss the possibility that Bush "threw" the first debate, though it seems pretty unlikely. Bush looked legitimately defensive, angry, and completely out of his league in the debate. If he's faking it, he's pretty good.

On the other hand, many people have claimed that Bush has been "sandbagging" his entire political career. A lot of people believe that Bush can't possibly be as dumb or ignorant as he appears to be and think it's all an act, the intent of which is to make people underestimate him. Bush himself has, of course, stated that he's the master of low expectations.

And, we certainly have "misunderestimated" him in the past. Perhaps we didn't underestimate Bush personally, but I believe that we have underestimated the people around him and the depths to which they will sink.

[ProfessorPlum]

28. If Bush hadn't been so busy trying to "teabag"

the country for the last four years, he wouldn't have to "sandbag" Kerry now.

What a laugh.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

41. Heh heh. I'm also glad he pointed out that

this was "only speculation" or I might just have believed it. :eyes:

[Infomaniac]

29. If I knew a way to get this to the Daily Show's attention...

so that it could be incorporated into a skit. The effort to spin Bush's appalling performance as something other than a complete screw-up on Bush's part is not getting any traction. I do hope Jon Stewart does a review of the "reasons" offered by Shrub's campaign for Chimpy's village idiot performance.

[evilqueen]

30. The human mind...

...is a strange thing. Rationalizing away what seems plain for all to see is the psyche's defense mechanism. The length and breadths to which these individuals will go to explain their candidate's incompetence reminds me of how pathological liars create an entire fantasy world to justify whatever their words or actions are. Their candidate has kept himself away from the real world for so long, not allowing *real* Press conferences, not allowing followup questions, pre-screening and filtering out dissenting viewpoints... he has his followers (and, indeed, in evangelical religions there are masses of fawning followers) enthralled by every mock sound bite and canned speech, and he has played them like a well-tuned orchestra. When your speeches, rallies, and press conferences are more like scripted docu-dramas, complete with cinematic embellishments, is it any wonder they, on the RightWing, are in this state of absolute, utter shock at having the reality of their candidate, which they refused to see for what he was, revealed on international television in front of 62.5 million viewers (and countless millions online, as well).

[MsTryska]

31. seems to me, it's the exact opposite....

kerry's been sandbagging bush, let them throw whatever they want at him, and opening up his horses now for the last leg.


caveat - i have never watched a Nascar race in my life.

[strizi64]

32. That's BS. Sandbaggin on his (supposed to be) strongest

part of all debates doesn't make any sense. They have planned to trash Kerry and they failed. Shrub is in a loose-loose situation right now and he will pray that Cheney get's him out of this deep black hole. If Cheney fails, the non-elected resident in the WH is toast....

edit: gramma

[rumguy]

33. not all buy the theory

"Keep dreaming. No sane Presidnet or advisor would let his opponent shift momentum headed into October and breath life into a campaign. No one! Partcicularly when we could have put him away.

Bush is not Seabiscuit!

Two more performances like last Thursday -- and we will have a President Kerry.

35 posted on 10/04/2004 7:45:19 AM PDT by Iron Eagle"

[rocktivity]

34. Of course Bush was holding back that night

how could be not, with all that water he drank?

:headbang:
rocknation

[zbdent]

35. The problem with the "sandbag" idea is this:

A lot of emphasis was placed on the first debate.

This was going to set the tone, and, with George W. Bush ahead in the polls, people were pushing the idea that "W" was a lesser debater than Kerry. So he needed to do a decent job, and the media would give glowing reports about how well he did.

Trouble was, he fucked it up.

And a lot of people tune in to the first debate. Viewership tends to fall off, or so the story was going.

PLUS, the "War on Terror" was supposed to be Bush's STRONG POINT.

Bush fucked it up, and people were exposed to W getting flustered and mexing up his missage.

Look for W to try to weasel out of the 2nd and 3rd debates as part of the "sandbagging" process.

Bush lost his control in a controlled environment where HE had set the rules and the moderator was a respected journalist who would not blindside either candidate (right?). Imagine how he would do in the town-hall style debate where his handlers hadn't hand-picked the questioners and weren't given the questions in advance. Down in flames.

[warrens]

36. The FRetards have a point

Why, it's just like in baseball, where you deliberately run into outs to kill your team's scoring chances so the other team will get overconfident. Maybe even deliberately drop a fly ball so a few runs will score and they'll get even MORE overconfident. And you can get to watch their footspeed as they cross home plate. Then all you have to do is wait til the 9th and score 8 runs against their closer.

Or in football. Just let the other team score a few times, tire them out.

Freepers are a laff riot.

[Zero Gravitas]

37. Desperation

The wing nuts are getting desperate.. they know President Kerry trounced their tin pot little "Great Leader" and they suspect that this is "tipping point" in the campaign. Kerry had a better command of the facts, appeared more "Presidential", and came across as the strong leader than the incumbent "President".

[Insomnicole]

39. "He meant to do that!" Uh, yeah.

That this debate would turn around his faltering campaign, because he would overwhelm the President with his extensive debating prowess and his stellar intellectual superiority, giving the American electorate no choice but to flock to Kerry in awe and wonderment.

What the hell was this guy reading before the debate? The media had Kerry all but dead in the water before last Thursday. And it was like pulling freakin' teeth to get some of them to admit very grudgingly that Kerry actually did well in the debate.

[Buck Rabbit]

42. There was ease in Bushy's manner as he stepped into his place

There was ease in Bushy's manner as he stepped into his place,
there was pride in Bushy's bearing and a smile lit Bushy's face.
And when, responding to the cheers, he lightly doffed his hat,
no stranger in the crowd could doubt t'was Bushy at the bat.

Ten thousand eyes were on him as he rubbed his hands with dirt.
Five thousand tongues applauded when he wiped them on his shirt.
Then, while the writhing pitcher ground the ball into his hip,
defiance flashed in Bushy's eye, a sneer curled Bushy's lip.

And now the leather-covered sphere came hurtling through the air,
and Bushy stood a-watching it in haughty grandeur there.
Close by the sturdy batsman the ball unheeded sped --
"That ain't my style," said Bushy. "Strike one!" the umpire said.

From the benches, black with people, there went up a muffled roar,
like the beating of the storm waves on a stern and distant shore.
"Kill him! Kill the umpire!" shouted someone on the stand,
and it's likely they'd have killed him had not Bushy raised his hand.

With a smile of Christian charity, great Bushy's visage shone,
he stilled the rising tumult, he bade the game go on.
He signaled to the pitcher, and once more the dun sphere flew,
but Bushy still ignored it, and the umpire said, "Strike two!"

"Fraud!" cried the maddened thousands, and echo answered "Fraud!"
But one scornful look from Bushy and the audience was awed.
They saw his face grow stern and cold, they saw his muscles strain,
and they knew that Bushy wouldn't let that ball go by again.

The sneer has fled from Bushy's lip, the teeth are clenched in hate.
He pounds, with cruel violence, his bat upon the plate.
And now the pitcher holds the ball, and now he lets it go,
and now the air is shattered by the force of Bushy's blow.

Oh, somewhere in this favored land the sun is shining bright.
The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light.
And, somewhere men are laughing, and little children shout,
but there is no joy in Freeperville -
mighty Bushy has struck out.