Clelland's Tantrum

[Patrick]

From Fox News quoting ex-senator Clelland: "These scurrilous attacks on John Kerry's credibility and war, his courage, his valor, are false and George Bush is behind it," Cleland told members of the press after trying to deliver the letter. "That's why I tried to deliver a letter to the president's home and hand it to either him or one of his aides but that was unsuccessful and I'm sorry it was."

Of course, the falsity is a still a matter of debate, and George Bush isn't "behind it". Clelland is still screeching about losing his senate seat, which occurred because his voting record drifted way off from his constituency, but he tried to blame it on ads. Now he's trying to get revenge on the republicans, by supporting yet another unproven democrat slur against Bush, akin to the endlessly-trumpeted, never-proved "Bush lied about WMDs" propaganda-for-morons. Clelland did serve honorably in vietnam, and it's very sad that probably the last act in his public life is this vindictive act, allowing himself to be used for democrat slur propaganda in a lost cause.

 

[rdtjr]

In fairness the GOP did launch attack adds against Clelland that put the war veteran, who lost limbs in defense of his country, in league with Osama bin Laden and basically called him both a communist and ally of international terrorists. So he might be a little overly defensive when he sees other attack adds against another veteran. I think we might be able to forgive him for his oversensitivity if we keep this in mind.

I'm not saying he is right, but to quote Chris Rock: "I understand!"

 

[Dorian Gray]

Just for the record, the United States Navy completely supports John Kerry's version of events - not the swiftboat veterans' version.

Just for the record, Senator John McCain, who is behind Bush for election (not reelection) for president, supports John Kerry's version of events.

Just for the record, one of the Bush campaign's top lawyers has resigned because he gave legal advice to the swiftboat veterans group - a violation of the 527 rule and a clear indication that there are ties between the Bush campaign and the swiftboat veterans group.

And just for the record, Bob Dole hinted that the military was handing out medals like candy during the Vietnam War. That is insulting to all the armed forces of that era that fought in Vietnam.

Bush would be wise to condemn this group and take the focus off Kerry's record. Otherwise, the records of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, etc., will surely have to be examined.

 

[crimresearch]

"That's why I tried to deliver a letter to the president's home and hand it to either him or one of his aides but that was unsuccessful and I'm sorry it was."


Hmmm...now on the video footage that I've seen repeatedly, a uniformed military aide to the President asks Cleland if he can deliver the letter to the President...after Cleland demands that a local LEO do it...Cleland keeps the letter.

Yeah I guess you could call that 'unsuccessful'...but you can't call it honest.

 

[Cleon]

First of all, the man's name is Cleland. Not Clelland.

Although I live in GA, I didn't vote for him (I didn't vote for Chambliss either). Nor will I vote for Kerry (or Bush).

But the fact remains that the GOP propaganda campaigns against Vietnam vets like McCain, Cleland, and Kerry have been nothing short of nauseating. The ads Chambliss showed--associating Cleland with bin Laden and questioning his patriotism--were sleazeball politics at their worst. If anyone is qualified to identify that kind of demagoguery and BS propaganda, it's Max Cleland. I don't begrudge him this.

 

[corplinx]

Just for the record, the United States Navy completely supports John Kerry's version of events - not the swiftboat veterans' version.

Oh wow, I really expect the Navy to say "false medal citations were filed".

Mind you, I don't know if the SBTFT record of events is true but Kerry's version is the gospel since it was recorded.

So the Navy backing Kerry's version shouldn't be taken for more than that.

I doubt we will ever have real evidence either way, but I don't really care. I wasn't even born until 1975. To me its ancient history.

I do think its funny when people buy the excuse of the day to support Kerry's version but ignore the SBVT's explanations when things come out like Larry Thurlow's own bronze star citiation.

 

[BPSCG]

Now this is interesting, if for nothing more than the amazing irony.

Max Cleland, who made a staged appearance at the Bush ranch Wednesday, was appointed by President George W. Bush to the board of directors of the Export-Import Bank in 2003. The same Max Cleland who is spending nearly all of his time attacking President Bush is, amazingly enough, a Bush political appointee.

 

[corplinx]

The ads Chambliss showed--associating Cleland with bin Laden

The ad in question is on the internet in quite a few places. It certainly doesn't "morph" Cleland into Osama. I think the effect of the ad is different depending on who you are before you watch it.

To boring people like me, the ad essentially accuses Cleland of voting against homeland security measures and it shows pictures of Osama and Hussein after it shows Cleland. Now, the really boring explanation is that people have short memories and showing them pictures of our enemies (at that time) served well to drive the point home.

For the rabid anti-bush person, this ad makes an innuendo that Cleland is in league with Osama and Hussein.

I think it would be interesting to test this ad on a group of people and see what they think and see if your assertion that the ad links them is supported.

Whaddya say Claus? Ready to do some skeptical inquiry?

 

[Cleon]

The ad in question is on the internet in quite a few places. It certainly doesn't "morph" Cleland into Osama. I think the effect of the ad is different depending on who you are before you watch it.

I didn't say it did; I said it associated them, and I stand by that.

And again: I didn't vote for Cleland.

It's not a matter of "boring explanation" or not: these commercials show images for a reason. It's not a matter of "reminding" people of Osama bin Losten and Hussein; it's a matter of implying Cleland somehow supported these goons because he didn't vote for a particular bit of legislation.

 

[aerocontrols]

First of all, the man's name is Cleland. Not Clelland.

Although I live in GA, I didn't vote for him (I didn't vote for Chambliss either). Nor will I vote for Kerry (or Bush).

But the fact remains that the GOP propaganda campaigns against Vietnam vets like McCain, Cleland, and Kerry have been nothing short of nauseating. The ads Chambliss showed--associating Cleland with bin Laden and questioning his patriotism--were sleazeball politics at their worst. If anyone is qualified to identify that kind of demagoguery and BS propaganda, it's Max Cleland. I don't begrudge him this.

I live in Georgia and voted for Chambliss. I never saw the ads until after the election.

I would be interested to know why you think the ad questioned Cleland's patriotism and how you think the ad associated Cleland with bin Laden. When I watch it, I see neither of those things.

MattJ

 

[hgc]

I live in Georgia and voted for Chambliss. I never saw the ads until after the election.

I would be interested to know why you think the ad questioned Cleland's patriotism and how you think the ad associated Cleland with bin Laden. When I watch it, I see neither of those things.

MattJ

If you knew that the confluence of images didn't mean that Cleland and bin Laden were connected somehow, then the ad wasn't aimed at you.

 

[c0rbin]

 

[aerocontrols]

If you knew that the confluence of images didn't mean that Cleland and bin Laden were connected somehow, then the ad wasn't aimed at you.

The images at the start of the add are pictures in four corners:

-----------------------------------------------
| Bin Laden | US Infantry Men |
|=========================|
| US Fighter Jets | Saddam Hussein |
-----------------------------------------------

I don't buy the idea that this ad was meant to imply that Cleland and Bin Laden were connected, and I don't buy the idea that that's even an accidental implication of the ad.

Of course, since I can see that the images of Bin Laden and Cleland aren't connected in any way, I doubt claims of 'morphing faces' and 'questioning Cleland's patriotism' are aimed at me, either.

 

[Renfield]

I actually believe Bush when he says he's not behind it. I doubt he's actually behind any important decisions. They just wheel him out for the occassional press conferance and for campaign season to charm the yokels in the "red" areas with his straigh talkin' cowboy schtick, then stick him back in front of the teevee with a pat on the head when he's done.

 

[corplinx]

I actually believe Bush when he says he's not behind it. I doubt he's actually behind any important decisions. They just wheel him out for the occassional press conferance and for campaign season to charm the yokels in the "red" areas with his straigh talkin' cowboy schtick, then stick him back in front of the teevee with a pat on the head when he's done.

Last week he was the evil mastermind hellbent on grabbing oil. Would you people make up your minds.

Kidding aside, you will remember that people had these same thoughts about Reagan and also thought this Bush pre-911.

I think Woodward's books have dispelled these notions among intellectuals but I figure Joe Democrat will buy into them because he want to believe its true .

 

[Ladewig]

Cleland is still screeching about losing his senate seat, which occurred because his voting record drifted way off from his constituency, but he tried to blame it on ads.

If the ads weren't a factor in Cleland's losing the election, then why did the conservatives spend money on them?


I suspect that the people who don't see the ads as associating a U.S. congessman with murdering criminals are the same people who were shocked - shocked, I tell you - to find that at one point over half the American public mistakenly associated Hussein with the 9/11 killings.

 

[CBL4]

If Bush is not behind the ads, then why do you suppose that this is the 3rd straight election that Bush has maligned the military record of his opponent (McCain, Gore, Kerry)?

It is coincidence or because Bush has found out it it is an effective smear tactic? How it can succeed on behalf of a draft dodger who appears not to have fulfilled his is national guard duties is amazing.

My guess is that most real veterans do not like maligning the characters of other veterans. Kerry has learned it is a necessity to counter attack the sleaze.

CBL

 

[aerocontrols]

If the ads weren't a factor in Cleland's losing the election, then why did the conservatives spend money on them?

The ad pointed out how his voting record didn't match his rhetoric.

 

[Questioninggeller]

In fairness the GOP did launch attack adds against Clelland that put the war veteran, who lost limbs in defense of his country, in league with Osama bin Laden and basically called him both a communist and ally of international terrorists. So he might be a little overly defensive when he sees other attack adds against another veteran. I think we might be able to forgive him for his oversensitivity if we keep this in mind.

I'm not saying he is right, but to quote Chris Rock: "I understand!"

I was going to post that. The GOP should be ashamed of what they did to Cleland.

 

[Ladewig]

The ad pointed out how his voting record didn't match his rhetoric.

Fair enough. But why were photos of America's enemies part of an ad that criticized his voting record? Surely it would have been more effective to provide one or more quotes from Cleland (to show his rhetoric) juxtaposed against the wording of the bill(s) (to show his voting record).