August 24, 2004

• Nope, I'm with Bob Dole on this one: the U.S. should be PROUD of atrocities comitted during the Vietnam War. Hooray for atrocities!
• Dole's got Libby to think of. I'm pretty sure the usual suspects told him if he didn't do this, they'd pull support for her when she needs to run for reelection. Dirty? Sure. But that's pretty much business as usual.
• Would this be a good time to mention that Bob Dole can't get it up?
• Who gives a fuck if Kerry bled or not? The very fact that he was out there, in the boat, exposed to enemy fire, and perhaps even got an abrasion or two at least gives him more credit for putting his life on the line than Bush. Of course, the Republicans' reaction makes perfect sense. They'd only be happy if John Kerry was a TRUE war hero - the dead kind. God forbid John Kerry didn't lose a leg or an arm in Vietnam. You can't really have put your life on the line for your country unless you have the amputations to show for it!
• PigAlien: Didn't Max Cleland lose three limbs and still get smeared as soft?
• Yup. Doesn't matter what your sacrifice was, if you're not one of them. They smeared the shit out of Cleland, after he gave as much as possible without dying.
• damn i'm happy to see this thread.
• Only a pawn in their game.
• Forgive me if I've said this before here: You're not supposed to pick a President based on a) war wounds, b) how fast they can kill a man with their teeth, or c) the worth of the precious metals used to make their war medals. Some are saying the issue of military service may have a major effect on the election results. How you guys can possibly allow the discussion over where America is headed in the next four years to turn into a pissing match over one man's military career (and not even the guy who apparently deserted!), when there are so many other pressing issues on the table... you can't have a true democracy without an informed citizenry, and with the airwaves flooded with everything BUT discussion on domestic and foreign policy issues, this year looks to be a new low.
• We would love nothing but that, chrom.
• Previous thread on Tiger Force. Also on MeFi.
• Elections interest me in the same way as the Eurovision Song Contest interests me. It's a sort of non-athletics based sport that you can bet on. As an Australian I can't even vote in this one but that said I do have a horse in the race this time because the outcome of the US election is likely to have big ramifications here as well. The question is whether the Australian govt calls an election before or after the US poll. Howard's fate is intricately interconnected with that of G.W. Bush's. Australia has been America's single-most uncritical and staunchest ally and I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that as a running-dog Howard even out-poodles Tony Blair. Anyway, Howard is a shameless and conniving liar and he has to go and while I'm not terribly excited about Kerry, Bush, who I think is without question the most damaging and incompetent Presidents the US has ever had, has to go too. So I'm watching this dirty-tricks campaign with quite a bit of interest because Howard draws so much of his gameplan from the Republican Party handbook: Wedge politics, character assassination, surrogate attack dogs etc. Regarding the current Vietnam nonsense: I think Josh Mashall explains pretty well what this is about. The strategy is to throw more shit than can possibly stick and then point out how whiny the victim is if he complains about it. Rather than take any of this crap seriously, Kerry needs to find a way to redirect the searchbeam back onto Bush. "Oh man, the bullshit piled up so fast in Vietnam, you needed wings to stay above it." -- Willard, Apocalyse Now
• If we're going to pick presidents based on wartime heroics, someone better put together a McCain/Stockdale ticket. Both Kerry and Bush ought to have their heads examined for even making this an issue. The only people either of them look good against in this is each other, Bush the worst since Kerry 'wins' if only by virtue of presence. GOD I wish politicians would employ just the tiniest bit of common sense in these things. Instead, we all as voters have to line up and vote for one of these two dumbasses. It's the political equivalent of picking the second shitty side at Boston Market - what'll you have, the cloyling, sickly-sweet hot apples, or the tasteless, rubbery mixed Cali veggies? Bleh.
• Both Kerry and Bush ought to have their heads examined for even making this an issue. Well, I couldn't find a better example, though there must be one: Kerry said yesterday that he had not decided whether to make Bush's service an issue in the general election. Asked whether he has suggested that surrogates pursue this line of attack, he said: "I have not suggested to any of them that they do so, and I spoke out against the use of the word deserter, which I thought was inappropriate, wrong and over the top." Point being, Kerry wasn't going that route but Bush's (or rather Karl Rove's) paid goons threw up a mountain of shit to obscure Bush's weak points: namely his record, his over-the-top religious views, his misunderstanding of the issues, his inability to communicate. The conservative politicians, under the guidance of the RNC, are throwing caution to the wind and using any and every dirty trick they believe they'll get away with. And they're getting away with it. Bravo Swift Veterans for Rove - Bra-vo.
• And they're getting away with it. Only partially. When the LA Times calls shenanigans on you, maybe it's not working as well as you think.
• Hitchens: "The Democrats... have done something eye-rubbingly unprincipled, doing what Reagan and Kissinger could not do: rehabilitating the notion of the Vietnam horror as 'a noble cause.'"
• Another Election about Nothing?
• I think it's working very well. I don't know that the primary point is necessarily to discredit Kerry, as much as it is to distract us with the shiny thing away from anything resembling a rational debate of the issues. This is why they've gotten so good at spin, talking points, and framing: nothing keeps meaningful dialogue away from where it is badly needed like sophistry and name-calling-by-proxy. It works, it works very well. Compare the number of swift bullshit related comments to comments about, say, trade agreements or the Kyoto protocols -- or even the new nukes that Bush is developing (and Clinton is practically screaming about, though the so-called liberal media has made less mention of it than of his past indiscretions). Good strategy.
• Yeah, it's really what the Iowa local evening news broadcasts, and in that sense they're getting away with it. Not here, not on the blue, not in Slate or a few other places. But Iowa Channel KWWL isn't swinging that way. And that's the damage - you know they know it. They'll get villified on "News Hour" or maybe even a negative spin on NBC but FOX and Sarasota are gonna give them play. Cunts.