Sorry. Dean supporters here tricked me on the "Osama ad" I apologize

[genius]

It is not a Kerry ad. The way the Dean people were attacking Kerry over the ad, I thought it was his. I apologize - particularly to the Kerry people. I heard the content but had not seen the ad when I did that other posting and now realize that the visuals were reprehensible. Yes, I think Dean's service is an issue - not because he did not serve - but rather because he went skiing when he supposedly had a back condition that prevented him from serving. Because of this I believe he is pre-empted from making an issue of Bush's AWOL record. With the majority of dumb Americans seeing Bush as a "war president" it will take someone with a credible military background (such as Kerry or Clark) or someone who had a valid excuse, is very honest and has the kind of Congressional committee experience Kucinich or Edwards has to beat Bush. As to which Dean supporters, see the earlier misleading post certain Dean supporters posted about the "Osama ad." Any Dean supporter posting anything claiming Kerry was involved in this ad also owes him and all his supporters an apology.

[Cuban_Liberal]

1. You can't make blanket statements about Dean supporters like that.

It's a rules violation. Make clear which ones, or modify your title.

"...4. Broad-brush statements about all or some of the supporters or opponents of any Democratic Primary candidate are forbidden. Don't paint people as disruptors or cult members...."

[genius]

6. To clarify, the Dean supporters who suggested Kerry resign over the ad

That was a strong false implication in that post that he was behind the ad. It was incorrect and misleading and should have been stepped on. They also owe Kerry an apology also.

[Cuban_Liberal]

8. Change the title, please.

It remains the same, I note.

[genius]

11. I have clarified. And I have a right to apologize to the Kerry people

The moderators can read this misleading post that helped to lead me to the wrong conclusion and note that I have clarified that I was discussing Dean suppoters involved in that posting.

[Cuban_Liberal]

16. Your title itself is misleading.

"...Dean supporters here tricked me on the "Osama ad...."

It gives the impression that ALL Dean supporters did this. Please change that, because that is not true.

[genius]

24. Your statement is misleading. Mine does not say all or imply all.

This is what bothers me about some of the Dean supporters. Many of them will criticize any attempt at accuracy. The posting very clearly specifies to which posting I am referring. There are Dean suppoters on this board who like to mislead. That does not mean they all do but there are way too many Dean supporters who behave that way on this board.

[Cuban_Liberal]

36. What part of 'title' is not clear?

It doesn't matter what you post in the BODY, if the title itself is misleading.

[mitchum]

26. He could clarify it by removing the period after "sorry"

Then it wouldn't be a blanket statement about all Dean supporters, only the sorry ones. We use sorry as an adjective in this way down in Dixie.

[Cuban_Liberal]

38. He could also do this:

"A FEW Dean supporters", or "Some posters". I'm not understanding why this is becoming such a Herculean effort to get it changed. :wtf:

[genius]

42. Thank you. Good suggestion.

Is it within the rules to say "Sorry Dean supporters?"

[Cuban_Liberal]

44. Rule 4:

"...4. Broad-brush statements about all or some of the supporters or opponents of any Democratic Primary candidate are forbidden. Don't paint people as disruptors or cult members....

It's plain English.

[WI_DEM]

2. I'll take Dean skiing over killing innocent people in the jungles

of Vietnam anyday. Another war the US shouldn't have been involved in and Dean has no reason to apologize he went and had his physical and the service found he wasn't able to participate in the war.

I know lots of good people did particpate in Vietnam--and I don't hold it against them, but Dean had nothing to be ashamed of and I'm proud that he has been up front on it and hasn't skirted the issue.

[shance]

29. AMEN***Im so sick and tired of people wearing Vietnam

as if it were a war worthy of pride and patriotism when in reality, it was a war built on lies, greed and more resources our country wanted and was willing to use our kids to go take over land that was NOT ours. (Sound familiar?)

Those kids were used, and Im glad to know there were some who were able to escape going over there. I wish we could have stopped ALL of them from going over there. It was an unjust war that served no purpose other than to line the pocketbooks of greedy individuals here in America in the name of stamping out communism.

I commend Kerry for feeling it was his duty to go, however SO DID AL GORE, who gets almost no credit for anything, and a hell of a lot of others.

Vietnam was a shameful act by our country and nothing TO BE PROUD OF. SO what the fuck is this litmus test? It is even MORE shameful to be trying to use this against kids who were against it to begin with.

[MrPeepers]

46. Just don't forget...

that Kerry was one of those kids who were against it. Don't forget his leadership in Vietnam Veterans Against the War, his testimony in Congress, etc.

Peepers

[quinnox]

3. Yea, Kerry disavowed any knowledge of the ad when it was first

aired. It is just bitterness that is driving some to make this link.

And anyway, I thought the ad was fine myself. Politics is hardball, and if you can't take the heat then don't play the game. Presidential politics are the big leagues.

[helleborient]

7. John Kerry disagrees with you...he said this tactic used against Cleland

Was wrong.

The ad was unacceptable then, when Republicans used the tactic, according to John Kerry.

He should say it is unacceptable now...but if it benefits him, or gives him money....

[The Magistrate]

10. If He Is Not Responsible For The Advertisement, Sir

Why should he defend his opponent?

[dsc]

15. Because he is a hypocrite if he doesn't

either the ad is wrong all the time or it isn't.

[The Magistrate]

19. If He Is Not A Hypocrit, Sir

The he is in the wrong line of work.

Sen, Cleland is his friend and his comrade; Gov, Dean is his opponent, and made use of his own attack lines against Sen. Kerry at every opportunity. They are rivals, and whar harms one benefits the other.

This sort of thing does not bother me.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dsc]

27. Iguess that is why you support who you do

and I support who I do.

[The Magistrate]

39. My One Desire, Sir

Is the defeat and ruin of the criminals of the '00 Coup. What seems most likely to encompass that will have my unflinching support.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[helleborient]

23. By your reasoning...he was wrong to attack the Republicans as well..

So Kerry was off base one way or the other due to his own inconsistency.

You are factually incorrect, but then you didn't know enough to even know this happened until it was pointed out earlier.

[The Magistrate]

33. Not In The Least, Sir

One defends one's friends; one's enemies can go hang. Like most matters of any importance, it is quite simple.

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, philosophers, and divines."

[GodHelpUsAll2]

53. If he denied it.............

It must be true! It is shamefull to use the events of 9/11 for ANY type of gain what so ever. By the standard of "politics is hardball" then I guess no one should mind if Bush and co use footage of the raping, murdering and general brutal abuse the innocent in Vietnam suffered at the hands of the American military. As for the Osama ads, read the articles in the Associated press today and tell me Kerry has clean hands.

KERRY-BACKED SPECIAL INTEREST
GROUP “TORCHED” HOWARD DEAN

(Sharon Theimer, “Unions, Torricelli Finance Anti-Dean Ads,” The Associated Press, 2/11/04

Jim VandeHei, “Kerry Fundraiser Helped Finance Anti-Dean Ads,” The Washington Post, 2/11/04)

(Charles Donefer, “Campaign 2004: LCV Goes On The Air For Kerry,” Greenwire, 2/2/04)

(Deborah Orin and Brian Blomquist, “John’s Eco-Pals Got Wife’s Greenbacking,” The New York Post, 2/10/04)

(Christopher C. Horner, Op-Ed, “Playing Ketchup: Recipients Of Heinz Money Making Strong Kerry Pitch,” National Review Online, www.nationalreview.com, 1/28/04)

(Mike Glover, “Kerry Nets Environmental Endorsement,” The Associated Press, 1/24/04)

[TheDonkey]

4. I'm glad you saw the truth of that Kerry smear.

I'd be outraged if JK directly pumped money into that nasty ad. But Dean does not have the AWOL card which is playing very well.

[GumboYaYa]

5. It must be those evil Dean supporters' fault....

Those ads are readily availale all over the web. Try this: www.google.com next time.

[genius]

9. It would help of Dean supporters would stop posting false stories about

the candidates. This is why I don't like the Dean campaign. When I was working on it, I could never get any accurate information. Most of what I've seen coming out of the Dean campaign about the other candidates is extremely misleading - to put it mildly.

[KaraokeKarlton]

21. genius, Kerry IS tied to that ad

Someone who is raised money for Kerry's presidential bid paid $50,000 towards the attack ads on Dean. In fact, it's entirely possible that some of the money he raised from Kerry supporters could have gone directly to the making and airing of that disgusting ad...especially if they live in New Jersey. Gephardt also had ties to the ads. This is a valid issue to criticize Kerry over because he has been refusing for months to denounce those ads. Now we discover that one of the contributors to the group that ran the ads in question is a Kerry fundraiser...of course we are going to ask questions about that. So should you. If it was Dean who had ties to a similar ad I would be asking plenty of questions.

[seaglass]

40. So is Dean. Two of his contributors funded this group. n/t

[GodHelpUsAll2]

59. It would help

If the population would put forth a little effort and do a little research instead of getting all of their information from 10 second sound bites in the media.

[Exgeneral]

12. Funny, Kerry's favorite fundraiser did the ad

well, PAID for it.

Nothing to see here. Move along folks.
Nice spin , preceeding posters of whom I read exactly zero.

[seaglass]

22. Two of Dean's contributors funded the group that ran the ad. n/t

[helleborient]

25. Those individuals contributed to multiple campaigns...there were no Dean

contributors who funded this ad who contributed only to Dean.

But there were some who contribute large funds to both Kerry and Gephardt, who, by the way, are allies now.

[seaglass]

34. I didn't say that they only contributed to Dean. Do you think

when they contributed to Dean that Dean knew they were going to run this ad?

[genius]

37. And they have the nerve to attack Kerry?

No wonder Dean is losing crediblity.

[seaglass]

43. Because Dean speaks half-truths that some mistake for truth. n/t

[HFishbine]

52. Source? Link? (nt)

[seaglass]

56. I already posted it in one of the 5 threads that was posted

on this topic today, this is getting really repetitive.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Anti-Dean-Ads.html
snip

"The group drew some big donors, including two giving $100,000 each.

They are Slim-Fast Foods tycoon S. Daniel Abraham of Florida, who also contributed $2,000 each to Dean and several other Democratic hopefuls; and Yankees Entertainment & Sports Network LLC, a New York-based sports cable channel that televises New York Yankees' baseball games. The network's chief executive, Leo Hindery, contributed $2,000 to Gephardt.

Abraham wasn't the only Dean donor giving to the group. California attorney Ken Ziffren gave $5,000 to the Jones group and $2,000 each to the campaigns of Dean, Gephardt and John Kerry. Abraham and Ziffren did not immediately respond to messages left Tuesday at their offices by The Associated Press seeking comment."

[bigtree]

28. Proof that Kerry approved or had anything to do with the ad

No proof. Hearsay, innuendo, unsupported claim.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

60. Hearsay..............

The Associated Pres, The Washintgton Post and several other papers have articles about those ads today.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Skip Intro]

14. Awol card vs. Fraudulent Iraq Invasion card

I'd say lying the nation into an illegal invasion, with all the damage, death and misery still coming daily, far outweighs the awol issue.

So? So how can someone who still refuses to say invading Iraq was wrong challenge bush on it - hold the regime accountable for its lies and murders?

Again I say it, and this goes for Edwards too - when rove and the gang bring up JK/JE support for the invasion, how do JK/JE respond? "I support your decision but I condemn it" seems about the best either of these candidates could offer.

I want the liars to pay for their lies, and Dean can play that card.

[Uzybone]

17. Well said

n/t

[dsc]

18. No wonder you want children to vote

I wouldn't accept such a lame excuse from a middle schooler.

[genius]

30. Ever read "The Emporer's New Clothes." They wouldn't vote for Dean

They wouldn't be taken in. Being taken in by Dean is an adult failing.

[DU GrovelBot]

31. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##

RUN C:\GROVELBOT.EXE
 
This week is our first quarter 2004 fund drive.
Please take a moment to donate to DU. Thank you
for your support.
 
- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot

Click here to donate.

[helleborient]

32. Is this like Bush "tricking" Kerry into supporting the Iraq War?

Just curious...

[genius]

35. Or like Bush tricking Dean into supporting both the war and the occupation

Remember, the resolution Dean supported was more pro-war than the one Kerry supported. Of course, Dean won't tell you that.

[Cuban_Liberal]

41. Incorrect.

Biden-Lugar was not more pro-war.

[genius]

48. Biden-Lugar was much worse than the one that passed.

It didn't have any safeguards.

[Cuban_Liberal]

49. Prove it.

Furthermore, that does not make it more 'pro-war', even if it were true, which it is not.

[genius]

50. Read it.

Before you blindly support a resolution, you should read it.

[Cuban_Liberal]

55. I have.

That's how I know your statement is incorrect.

[genius]

45. I'd like to see Dean apologize to Kerry and Kucinich for his ads

Kucinich and Sharpton were the only two candidates (outside of Clark) who did not support some kind of war resolution. Dean's Biden-Lugar resolution was more pro-war than the one that passed so his attacks on Kerry are also unfounded.

[Cuban_Liberal]

47. Incorrect.

Biden-Lugar was NOT more pro-war.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cheswick2.0]

54. yes we are a tricky bunch

:eyes:

[Cuban_Liberal]

57. "The dog ate my homework"

That was my first thought when I saw the initial post. :P

[kerry-is-my-prez]

58. Article: It was 2 Dean donors & Gep backers. Torricelli used to back Gep.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0211-08.htm

WASHINGTON - Labor unions, former Democratic Sen. Bob Torricelli and one of presidential hopeful Howard Dean's own donors were among big givers to a group that ran ads criticizing Dean in three early voting states.

-snip-

They are Slim-Fast Foods tycoon S. Daniel Abraham of Florida, who also contributed $2,000 each to Dean and several other Democratic hopefuls; and Yankees Entertainment & Sports Network LLC, a New York-based sports cable channel that televises New York Yankees' baseball games. The network's chief executive, Leo Hindery, contributed $2,000 to then-Dean rival Dick Gephardt.

Abraham wasn't the only Dean donor giving to the group. California attorney Ken Ziffren gave $5,000 to the Jones group and $2,000 each to the campaigns of Dean, Gephardt and John Kerry. Abraham and Ziffren did not immediately respond to messages left at their offices by The Associated Press seeking comment.

-snip-

Nearly all the group's donors were backers of Gephardt, who staked his candidacy on Iowa and was in a head-to-head battle with Dean there in December.

[Moderator]

61. Locking.....

1. If you start a thread in this forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. The moderators have the sole authority to decide whether a thread topic is inflammatory. Extremely inflammatory or inappropriate topics will be deleted rather than locked, and the thread's author will receive a warning.



DU Moderator