Swiftbooaters now going after Murtha, questioning his

[babylonsister]

military credentials. Brazen, and no shame at all!:mad:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x131963

[ginnyinWI]

1. Maybe now people will realize the game that they're playing

Now that Republican credibility is low, and WH credibility--now that they're doing the exact same thing to Murtha, people will remember how they did it to Kerry and before that to Cleland and McCain. Maybe.

They've got to think people are really dumb to believe another smear like this. I hope they're wrong.

[babylonsister]

2. It does seem so transparent, doesn't it. WE see it, but

will any repug, or will they just swallow whatever is shoved down their collective throats? x(

[karynnj]

3. You would hope people would see a pattern - but they didn't learn

from McCain and Clealand. Here, it almost seems that the group IS somewhat concerned that the attack on Kerry - which ultimately appears to have mostly convinced only the people on FR - might have made a difference.

They admit that it was Kerry's antiwar stuff that motivated the SBVT:

"The Murtha controversy is reminiscent of the flap surrounding the war record of 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry. But while critics like the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attacked Kerry in 2004 because of his anti-war activism of the 1970s, Murtha's three chief accusers all made their allegations years and in some cases decades before Murtha emerged last November as a prominent anti-war activist."

The only reason for adding this is that they know people might connect it to the Kerry lie campaign. If they thought people believed the SBVT, they would either not mention it (as people who believe it might be more likely to believe Murtha tricked the system too.) or they would have it in the beginning. (ie Just like John Kerry, who didn't deserve his medals, Jack Murtha....)
They don't say they lied about Kerry but they come close - So they can say, but now we're telling the truth! (Not the most convincing argument.)

It's so deja vue with the release your records nonsense. (I assume they figure there might be some dirt there)

[ginnyinWI]

7. yeah, sometimes I think people are really gullible,

and other times I think they realize everything isn't on the up-and-up, but let it go by, because their side is doing it, and "anything for the cause" and all that. Even committing felonies, apparently. As long as they "keep us safe".
:eyes:

[Island Blue]

4. These people are beyond friggin' comprehension.

So let me get this straight - it's NOT okay to ask tough questions of a nominee to the Supreme Court (a LIFETIME appointment) because (oh, the horrors) it might make someone's wife cry, but it is okay to smear the name of good, brave and honorable men who put their lives on the line fighting in a war. I really, really don't like Republicans.

[karynnj]

5. Well you know how sensitive Republicans are

No one, other than Graham, even said he was a bigot - just that he was allied with them in CAP. Meanwhile Teresa only had to hear that her husband was a traitor, a war criminal, a coward, a liar, that he married her for money and hundreds of other things. Not to mention that they attacked her just because she was married to him.

That the ad company that did those awful SBVT attacks on Kerry, which were well beyond anything the sensitive Mrs Alito had to deal with, supposedly has made an ad attacking the Democrats for being mean is beyond comprehension. (Now if Teresa in the face of all this would have even had tears in her eyes - they would have attacked her for that.)

[TayTay]

6. The Rethugs treat everything as all out war.

They don't mean to discredit people or get them to reconsider a position only. The Rethugs go after people with the idea of permanently damaging them and eliminating them as a threat. It's what they do. They believe in the idea of politics as war and they do not believe in taking prisoners. They believe the ends justify the means and that standards and the idea of ethics and morality are for other people because all is fair in love and war.

This is what they do. If Jack Murtha is perceived as a threat then eliminate the threat by smearing him. First, get the smear into the news and get as many people talking about it as possible so that it enters the echo chamber of the RW Noise Machine. After the idea has entered the echo chamber, then you can pull back and distance the official spokespeople of the RNC and the Rethug Party from the dirt kicked up by this. But only after the smear has entered the public dialogue. This is what they do.

Some smears work better than others. I don't think the Murtha smear worked that well because Cong. Murtha just didn't fit the smear right. (Honestly, he doesn't seem to the casual observer to be part of the 'I hate America' crowd that the Rethugs fantasize about. Still, this is what they do. They are dead serious about it.

[whometense]

8. More on this from James Webb, secretary of the Navy

in the Reagan administration.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/18/opinion/18webb.html

(I)n recent years extremist Republican operatives have inverted a longstanding principle: that our combat veterans be accorded a place of honor in political circles. This trend began with the ugly insinuations leveled at Senator John McCain during the 2000 Republican primaries and continued with the slurs against Senators Max Cleland and John Kerry, and now Mr. Murtha.

Military people past and present have good reason to wonder if the current administration truly values their service beyond its immediate effect on its battlefield of choice. The casting of suspicion and doubt about the actions of veterans who have run against President Bush or opposed his policies has been a constant theme of his career. This pattern of denigrating the service of those with whom they disagree risks cheapening the public's appreciation of what it means to serve, and in the long term may hurt the Republicans themselves. <…>

The political tactic of playing up the soldiers on the battlefield while tearing down the reputations of veterans who oppose them could eventually cost the Republicans dearly. It may be one reason that a preponderance of the Iraq war veterans who thus far have decided to run for office are doing so as Democrats.

A young American now serving in Iraq might rightly wonder whether his or her service will be deliberately misconstrued 20 years from now, in the next rendition of politically motivated spinmeisters who never had the courage to step forward and put their own lives on the line.

Kinda says it all, doesn't it?

[babylonsister]

9. whometense! Can I ask you for a favor?

On Democracy Now today, they mentioned this article/editorial? Don't know since I haven't paid for NY Times. It seems you have access. Can you find this, and post more info, if possible? Specifically, I'm wondering if this happened in 2000 or 2002, as that makes a huge difference. Thanks!

Bush Intelligence Assessment Called Niger Claim “Unlikely”


This was just reported on 'Democracy Now'. The NY Times has an article out today, which I'm not privy to, saying the * admin knew this in early 2000, and had the paperwork to back it up.
If anyone can access the NY Times for this, I think we need to read all about it.
Of course, wh sources won't acknowledge whether * knew about it or not

[whometense]

10. Here it is:

Here: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/18/politics/18niger.html?pagewanted=print

2002 Memo Doubted Uranium Sale Claim
By ERIC LICHTBLAU

WASHINGTON, Jan. 17 - A high-level intelligence assessment by the Bush administration concluded in early 2002 that the sale of uranium from Niger to Iraq was "unlikely" because of a host of economic, diplomatic and logistical obstacles, according to a secret memo that was recently declassified by the State Department.

Among other problems that made such a sale improbable, the assessment by the State Department's intelligence analysts concluded, was that it would have required Niger to send "25 hard-to-conceal 10-ton tractor-trailers" filled with uranium across 1,000 miles and at least one international border.

The analysts' doubts were registered nearly a year before President Bush, in what became known as the infamous "16 words" in his 2003 State of the Union address, said that Saddam Hussein had sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa...

...Chris Farrell, the director of investigations at Judicial Watch and a former military intelligence officer, said he found the State Department's analysis to be "a very strong, well-thought-out argument that looks at the whole playing field in Niger, and it makes a compelling case for why the uranium sale was so unlikely."

The memo, dated March 4, 2002, was distributed at senior levels by the office of Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and by the Defense Intelligence Agency....

...Mr. Wilson said in an interview that he did not remember ever seeing the memo but that its analysis should raise further questions about why the White House remained convinced for so long that Iraq was trying to buy uranium in Africa.

"All the people understood that there was documentary evidence" suggesting that the intelligence about the sale was faulty, he said.

[babylonsister]

11. Thank you! Rawstory also has it up. I think this is

a big deal, but I'm apparently the lone ranger. :argh:

[MH1]

12. It *is* a big deal...

but for many of us it's just another dollop on the s*** pile of stuff that was already visible to the American public if they just bothered to effin' look.

Personally, "outrage fatigue" describes me pretty well right about now. Yesterday I had this guy at work bring up Clinton's impeachment when I suggested if he really wants the other side (like he's said he does), he ought to watch Gore's speech. Out of the blue he starting say, "gee can you imagine how the Democrats would be going after * if he had an affair" and the conversation devolved from there. He didn't want to talk about the issues with Bush, just that the Dems are being partisan to get revenge for Clinton. (I guess that's what he was trying to say. It really made no sense). So I'm done with the a*hole. I just can't imagine people being so willfully blind.

So let me join you...

:argh:

and again...

:argh:

[whometense]

14. I'm with MH1 and you -

it certainly is a big deal.

but for many of us it's just another dollop on the s*** pile of stuff that was already visible to the American public if they just bothered to effin' look.

Yeah. How can you tell if a Bushie is lying? His mouth is moving. I think a lot of people in this country have just stopped listening in order to avoid stratospheric blood pressure.

[babylonsister]

15. I didn't mean 'the lone ranger' in here, but in general.

Lots of people just don't see that interested; I do understand the outrage fatigue.

[TayTay]

16. But this stuff does seep in.

IT's not any one thing that is causing the drop in approval for the Bush Admin and for the Repub Congress, it's the accumulated mass of things that are doing it. It wasn't just the response to Katrina that really started this, not at all. IT was Bush flying back from his treasured ranch in Texas to sign the Terry Schiavo bill that was an obvious over-reach of both Congressional and Legislative power. It was the Bush attempt to break Social Security. It was Bush's callous treatment of Cindy Sheehan last summer and so forth.

There are indeed a lot of scandals and bad actions out there. But they are coming out now for a reason. The beginning of this Admin had some pretty bad press. Bush's numbers did not go up until the artifical boost of 9/11. The country, for better or worse, then associated the Pres with the effort to protect the nation from another terrorist attack. That was huge. It affected the coverage the press gave the President and it affected what stories came out. (The New York Times and other newspapers had a huge, huge story about the Florida 2000 vote count and it got buried because it came out just after 9/11. The newspapers gave their own expensive story a pass and effectively buried it because of bad timing. They simply did not want to question the legitimacy of the President in a time of crisis.)

That war fever and the need to rally around the President in order to rally around the flag is fading. The country is starting to notice all the things that went wrong and there are a lot of them. The scandals are starting to get more and more traction in the press. Don't forget, Abramoff has been running around for over 20 years. 20 years! They couldn't nail this bastard over the reprehensible actions that he and Delay took to keep the wretched labor conditions in the Marianas Island. That took place in 1997. You couldn't touch this guy. The press knew about it and he laughed it off and continued buying up Rethug power and influence and getting Rethug Congressmen to vote for his clients.

Something has changed. The errors are coming out. The illegal activity is getting notice. Indictments of Rethugs are coming down. Abramoff's activities are now so poisonous that people are returning any money even remotely having to do with this bastard. (Crap, I bet his paperboy or girl ends up returning his holiday tips. That's how radioactive this horrible bastard is right now.)

I know that it seems like no one thing will dislodge this group of criminals from our government. Take a step back for a minute and look at all the real trouble they are in. This Administration and this Congress are collapsing. They really are. Three years ago, I had people call me an unpatriotic terrorist sympathyzing bitch because I dared to say that we shouldn't go to war with Iraq because the case wasn't made and the evidence of WMD wasn't there. (C'mon, you guys had this happen to you too, at least a couple of times, right?) Look at where we are now. Bush is averaging around 42-43% in the polls. This is after the full-court press by the Admin in the last two months to get out and 'sell' the war. This is after all the best Rethug minds in DC have tried to repair the damage caused by the truth getting out. 42-43% and that's a minor improvement in his standing.

You will never get all the naysayers. It's not going to happen. But I think we are starting to get *enough* of them to make a huge difference. And that's the real goal, to get enough to make a difference. We are winning, take that to the bank.

[ProSense]

17. Well said.

The thing I remember most about Bush post 9/11 is all the undoing of the Clinton doctrine he engaged in. He practically ignored the Israeli/Palestinian situation and spent a lot of time on vacation. Everything from 9/11 on is as you stated, and I'm convinced that Bush's day will come.

[FreedomAngel82]

13. I agree

They're disgusting pigs.