guess the right wing has nothing to say bout this one...hmmmm...

Oh, burn. Good Ad.

~Zoo

what is there really to say? It is an ad that says a congressman didn't vote to send the proper armor....why are you inciting the "right" to a conflict? I thought the left didn't do those things? But really......the left is FAR from innocent in those types of things too.....

But....I am still not sure as to why you think the right should defend (for which you would make it personal and attack) or not defend (for which you are still making it personal, and are attacking).

Did you post anything about the left's reasons for being proud to be an American (from Draginol's thread coming from Democratic Underground Link: https://forums.joeuser.com/?forumid=34&aid=130446#1009610 )? If not....then I guess the "left" has nothing to say about it....

Silliness if you ask me...but, I guess you didn't ask that question....

mino,

a) i am not a "leftie" as you describe, but it is typical for anyone from the extreme far right to accuse me of it. i have WAY too many GOP affiliations to be called a leftie or anything derrogatory or suggests that i don't look fairly at all sides of the aisle. i held elected office as a republican, my family has held office, run for office and ran campaigns for MANY gop causes. look and see who runs Joe Wilson's (R-SC, and a personal friend of george bush) beaufort office, it's my mom. it's a position she took after getting him elected twice, and his predecessor (the late congressman Spence) elected before him. she was also given an award from the REPUBLICAN dominated south carolina legislature, "The Woman of Achievement Award for leadership and exemplary service to the community and to The State of South Carolina."

i could go on and on about my republican ties, my father chairs a GOP organization, my brother and my uncle have both run for office on very conservative GOP platforms. but where my political stances come from is critically discerning facts over the years. i don't lean left, i don't lean right...i lean towards truth. and it's funny to me that only far right wingers try to peg me as some liberal wacko, just like they do anyone who speaks any truths that may hurt their power hold on this country. but that's ok, i'm used to it.

by the way, if you really need to know my affiliations, the only party affiliation i have is that i'm still registered as a libertarian. not that i agree with them all the time either. when i vote, i vote my concience...party affiliation doesn't ever really come into play.

but what i do see as a more impartial observer than most is the right wing driving more wedges in this country than ever has happened for us. i see the left merely trying not to get buried in ruthless propoganda wars. i see them reacting, not really driving the way the GOP has done under Bush / Cheney leadership. I have seen that accelerate under ken mehlman's tenure. no, neither party has an exclusice on negative advertising, but when objectively fact checked, the left does score many more points. i see the right attempt to twist more facts and get involved in actual doublespeak vs. the left trying to have a more (but not totally) honest debate.

as far as draginol's article, i never saw it, sorry,,,but i do remember responding to a sim. question last week on what one likes about this country and what i dislike. i don't know if it was a spin off of this aritcle, or vice versa, as i don't remember any exact dates and frankly i don't pay that much attention here as i t simply doesn't matter to me.

i can say that sometimes i just stop responding to trollers (and they know who they are) when stuff just starts getting silly or i simply have things to do in my real life. but i think everyone of reason does that, regardless of any political affiliations. and like everyone else, i get suckered into nonsensical debates over strawmen and red herrings. but that's blogging, for better or worse...

the reason i would think right wing republicans here might defend george allen is that up until a month ago, he was their boy. he was the name that right wing circles were touting as the next pres. nominee after people realized mc cain and giulianni were only R.I.N.O.'s. but since the "macaka" crack last month, the yhave seemingly abandoned him. that appears to be the case here too. but i fail to understand when i attacked anyone personally/...just facts.

i see times when the left is speechless as well, but i'm guessing you wouldn't accuse me of personally attaking someone if i pointed something out over there. to you, and your perspective, i would just be reporting facts.

this attack the messenger stuff, and trying to "turn tables" on anyone who questions the administration' s policies is really getting quite stale. the fact of the matter is that any republican who can honestly look at this administration and say they have ben true to any real conservative ideas and policies is really just fooling themselves. this administration has grown goverment, is engaging in nation building, nosing around in people's private lives and have not reflected any real conservative values. real conservatives are actually closer to libertarians than anything this administration has put forward in their whole tenure. real conservatives believe in seperating america from the world, not trying to reorchestrate the world according to their specifications. real conservatives abhor growing goverment. real conservatives are about as strong on personal liberty as anyone throughout the political spectrum. this administration used republicans and conservatives to hijack the party and we are now seeing the distaster of all that.

if the administration put as much effort into actually having some winning strategies about winning against our enemies abroad as they do attacking good americans, maybe we wouldn't have the mess we have now.

and without checking out the link, i'm guessin anyone calling themselves "democratic underground" is probably not part of any mainstream movement. it's probably 1 guy and a computer and hardly represents anyone else.

this is just nonsense mino, i didn't personally attack anyone...just merely posted a video and no one has questioned it's facts...so, does that mean case closed, george allen isn't supporting our troops as promised? i don't know...you tell me.

Interesting ad. After checking into it, I found the vote they reference was an amendment (Landrieu Amdt. No. 452 to S. 762). The text is as follows:

SA 452. Ms. LANDRIEU proposed an amendment to the bill S. 762, making supplemental appropriations to support Department of Defense operations in Iraq, Department of Homeland Security, and Related Efforts for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other purposes; as follows: In chapter 3 of title I, under the heading ``PROCUREMENT'', insert after the matter relating to ``PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE'' the following: National Guard and Reserve Equipment For an additional amount for ``National Guard and Reserve Equipment'', $1,047,000,000.

Allen voted to table the amendment.

S. 762, the original bill to which her amendment was to be attached passed Senate with amendments by Yea-Nay Vote. 93 - 0 on 4/3/2003. S.762 was a Supplemental Appropriations Act to Support Department of Defense Operations in Iraq for Fiscal Year 2003.

A few interesting points.

Allen voted to table the amendment. Many times when an amendment is tabled, it is as good as dead, but not necessarily. Allen didn't actually vote 'against giving our troops this' as stated in the ad. He voted to table this particular amendment to an appropriations bill which he apparently voted for at a later date. His reasons for voting to table this amendment aren't apparent.

The tie between an amendendment to increase appropriations for National Guard and Reserve Equipment and what is issued to active troops in Iraq is vague. Perhaps someone could elucidate.

I haven't verified that SA 452 did in fact specify the particular type of body armor seen in the ad. Perhaps someone could find the specific language.


Finally, as far as best ad, I give it high marks for 'gotcha' value, but low marks for honesty. But hey what do you expect? It's a political ad.
Relevant link: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00116

"Finally, as far as best ad, I give it high marks for 'gotcha' value, but low marks for honesty. But hey what do you expect? It's a political ad."

That is somewhat the point I was trying to make (probably in a vague way, though....).

As far as Conners and his political siding goes....just because your family is republican doesn't make you republican....my entire family is staunchly democrat...that doesn't mean I am democrat....far from it.

But when you post this: "but what i do see as a more impartial observer than most is the right wing driving more wedges in this country than ever has happened for us. i see the left merely trying not to get buried in ruthless propoganda wars. i see them reacting, not really driving the way the GOP has done under Bush / Cheney leadership."

that just makes me LAUGH.....and nearly fall out of my chair laughing....The democrats have been taking part in propaganda to the extreme (anyone remember Moore's 9/11...which, oddly, my dad fully believes, and as for your discussion above as to why you are not on the left, I should and would fully believe 9/11 too because my family does)....When you say something like the above, you set yourself in "their" camp....just like those on the right do when they say something similar about the republican leadership.

I am on the right....conservative....but extreme or far right? haha....too funny....


Chris

guess the right wing has nothing to say bout this one...hmmmm...

When your articles are just bait, why bother? You don't appear to be interested in discussion and you definitely protest too much, with little if any provocation.

Now, flame away.

As far as Conners and his political siding goes....just because your family is republican doesn't make you republican....my entire family is staunchly democrat...that doesn't mean I am democrat....far from it.


did you read what i wrote? i didn't claim to be a republican, but i have been known to both support republicans and their causes when i found them just.

update.....the allen campaign is in dissaray at this point after repeated and seemingly credible people have been coming forth since the "Macaka" incident charging that Allen, not just once, but repeatedly used racial slurs, most notably, the "N" word in his past. his lack of a credible explanation to anyone for the comment (cmon george, everyone else seems to know where ya got the word from, just admit it), the shying away from admitting the jewish heritage of his mother (still don't know why he did this) and now these new charges have left allen defending himself instead of talking about issues. it's a shame.