Quote:
Originally Posted by JP5";p="
So, lets see here: The DNC can coordinate with the liberal 527's. And the Kerry campaign can coordinate with the DNC. Don't you see the silliness in all this? Don't you see how disingenuous the 527's are? They are nothing but UNREGULATED SOFT MONEY.
|
Agreed. It's nearly impossible to prove collusion even if it exists, and 527s need to be reined in.
But you can't do it during this election cycle. You have to play this one out by the rules set up for it. It would be extremely magnanimous of Kerry to agree to a ban, but it would be both ineffective (the 527s would ignore him) and, if effective, politically suicidal.
Quote:
|
I haven't heard the Swift Boat vets saying they are nonpartisan.
|
Then you're not listening. From their Web site:
Quote:
|
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is a tax exempt non-partisan public advocacy "527" organization that consists of and is limited to former military officers and enlisted men who served in Vietnam on U.S. Navy "Swift Boats" or in affiliated commands.
|
Further, There's this transcript from John O'Neill's interview with Brit Hume on Fox:
Quote:
O'NEILL: Well, first of all. Of course, there are 254 guys in our operation, 60 of them won the Purple Heart. I'm only one of many people, but as to me, that is not true either. The actual records, which I actually drawn, show that I have given more money to Democratic candidates than to Republican candidates.
But I'm not a Republican or a Democrat. I have always voted for the person. I have given money for example to Duane Sand who went to the Naval Academy. On the other hand, I have given money to Bill White, who is a Democratic candidate for mayor of Houston. And I've done that because I thought they would be good people.
HUME: Well, what about the 14 grand? Were those contributions you actually did make to Republicans?
O'NEILL: Actually, about half of them were mine and I've given in excess of $25,000 to Democrats over the same 15-year period. About three times as much.
HUME: What about the rest of the other $7,000?
O'NEILL: Those are actually funds, as nearly as I can tell, that were given my law partner who has almost the same name, Edward J. O'Neill. I simply didn't give them. I would have been happy to give them. I just didn't.
|
Okay, first point, you have O'Neill trying to claim he's nonpartisan.
Now, second point. check this out:
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artma...cle_5062.shtml
I checked opensecrets.org, and the linked article is correct. O'Neill lied. He has never given money to a Democratic candidate, anywhere.
Quote:
|
All I know is that they can't ALL be lying. There's more of them than there are John Kerry Swift Boat supporters.
|
As I've said repeatedly: There are 250 SBVT who dislike Kerry. Only 13 have signed affidavits accusing him of lying. Most of the rest couldn't even if they wanted to; they didn't serve anywhere near him.
Kerry appears to have at least as many swift boat vets on his side: His crew, Rassman, the Chicago Tribune editor, and the other 3 or 4 who have spoken up at Kerry's request. That makes about 10, right? And that's just the ones who have agreed to speak up.
The numbers game is misleading and stupid.
Quote:
|
What Kerry did after the war is far more important to me. His anti-war activities, and his 20 years as one of the most liberal Senators is far more important. In a recent Fox News poll, some 76% of people say this is what is more important to them as well; not his Vietnam experience. Choosing that as his centerpiece for his campaign was a bad idea.
|
Okay. So why all the support for SBVT then? Both sides seem to be saying "I'll quit talking about it if only THEY would." Kerry at least has a reason to talk about it: burnishing his national security credentials.