Comments on: Snope a Dope, Part Duh

By: Fielding

Fielding — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 17:52:26 +0000

well, Joel – these voices – as you state – have faded into the past…

where was your outrage when he elected to the Senate six years ago?

while I don’t think Sen Robert “KKK” Byrd of West Virginia (former recruiter for the Klan) is in the same grand tradition of this style oratory – where is your condemnation of his past? he is not “past” – but the most senior member of Democratic party in the US Senate today

getting back on topic – I think Kerry’s statements on his desire to shut down a number of these weapon systems says more about his intentions than a vote up or down on DoD appropriations bills – there well could have been (and likely was) specific projects within these conference reports and/or bills that he promised to his constituency

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 17:34:13 +0000

Your entire case boils down to “Snopes said it, I believe it, that settles it.” That will not do.

Another resort to blatant lying. You’ve not even rebutted Snopes, you just resorted to an inane ad hominem: Roderick says Snopes was wrong on Jacobsen, ergo Snopes is wrong on RNC spam. Pathetic.

Moreover, I’ve pointed out, ad nauseum, links to FactCheck.org, and the fact that Kerry voted for 16 of 19 Defense Appropriations bills while in the Senate, hardly the “against, against, against” lunacy Zell described.

Moreover, I’ve pointed out that BushI and Cheney have cut or tried to cut the same systems which Zell accuses Kerry of being agin’. For you to say my whole case boils down to Snopes is the result of utter disingenuousness or congnitive dissonance on your part.
-

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 06:48:47 +0000

Alex, you’re the one living in bizarro world. It’s one thing to be a skeptic, and quite another to claim to have disproved something that you haven’t disproved, nor even touched. Your entire case boils down to “Snopes said it, I believe it, that settles it.” That will not do.

Meanwhile, Prof. Bainbridge and others have found some evidence to back up Miller’s central assertions. They’ve made the prima facie case. Now the burden has shifted to those who think Miller is wrong.

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 03:29:54 +0000

It was Miller who made the accusations. It is Miller (and by extension his acolytes, like Patterico) who bears the burden of proof.

A point I’ve made several times. But you’re in a bizarro universe, where the truth of falsehoods are irrebutable, and the facts which rebut them are invisible.

For all the Democrats making an issue of Zell Miller having made a racist remark 40 years ago. . .

Just like some wingnut lunatics ignore Kerry’s pro-defense voting record in the Senate and make an issue out a flyer some campaign staffer wrote 20 years ago before the man was elected.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 03:10:56 +0000

Joel, give me a break. For all the Democrats making an issue of Zell Miller having made a racist remark 40 years ago, not one had a problem when the same Zell Miller spoke at the Democrat convention 12 years ago. If the Dixiecrap was ancient history then, it’s prehistoric now.

By: Joel

Joel — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 02:10:12 +0000

Ah, yes, “old time polical oratory.” As befits a twice-candidate on the dixicrat ticket.

I grew up in the South during the twilight of American apartheid. I’ve certainly lived long enough to be familiar with “old time political oratory.” George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Strom Thermond. Thank God these old time voices are silenced. Their feeble, sclerotic echos in the Alzheimers-tinged ramblings of Zell Miller recall a shameful history of nastiness and distortion.

By: Fielding

Fielding — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 01:46:57 +0000

well, that was entertaining – Sen Miller’s speech at the RNC was in the tradition of old time political oratory – which is seldom heard these days (don’t mistake the ramblings of Sen Byrd for it) and that’s a shame

I will grant that Sen Kerry voted for a number of the appropriations bills and the accompanying conference reports, but I believe Patterico has gotten the better of Alex here

I would add that during my 11+ years in the Senate as a staffer, I never once heard Sen Kerry’s name associated with a significant piece of legislation – in fact, I only heard his name as trivia – the “other” Sen from Mass…

the Kerry campaign’s silence on his Senate record is deafening and damning in its self indictment

moving on…

By: Ctl

Ctl — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 01:42:00 +0000

Alex said, “your faith in Zell’s veracity is indicative of foaming-at-the-mouth zealotry.” but earlier Patterico said, “Maybe Kerry did vote for one of these systems. Maybe he didn’t. I don’t know, and I’m not doing the research for you.”

Does this constitute evidence that Alex is illiterate?

By: Joel

Joel — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 01:40:57 +0000

In this rather tedious dialog, the major point is missed. It was Miller who made the accusations. It is Miller (and by extension his acolytes, like Patterico) who bears the burden of proof. Not Kerry. Not Alex. If Miller and his supporters fail to meet this standard, it is not a draw–Miller (and Patterico) loses.

By: ProfessorBainbridge.com

ProfessorBainbridge.com — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 00:46:15 +0000

Zell Miller v. Fred Kaplan on Kerry on Weapons Systems: A Draw
At the recent GOP convention Zell Miller argued that:”For more than 20 years, on every one of the great issues of freedom and security, John Kerry has been more wrong, more weak and more wobbly than any other national figure,”