Us presidential election 2004

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Bush Aggravates Hamsters?

[Bernadotte 0]

The Boston Herald has endorsed Bush/Cheney.  I tried very hard to read the whole thing, but could not get past the following line:

Quote[/b] ]...

Certainly, both John Kerry and George Bush love this country. Both are men of good will, deep faith and vast intellect.

...

[EiZei 0]

The Boston Herald has endorsed Bush/Cheney. I tried very hard to read the whole thing, but could not get past the following line:

Quote[/b] ]...

Certainly, both John Kerry and George Bush love this country. Both are men of good will, deep faith and vast intellect.

...

For those interested in media endorsements..

http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php/2004_Media_Endorsements

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

So heeeeeeeerrreeeee we go again. Another reason why europeans dislike Bush. Very simple, just read the articles in his favourite newspapers and you will know.

For the swedish members, go read this but watch your bloodpressure.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/content....tym.asp

just a short extract

THE INFAMOUS SNOBS of the Swedish Academy, brooding in the land of military cowardice, interminable winter, and one of the highest suicide rates in the world, have returned to their habit of awarding the Nobel Prize for Literature to an unknown, undistinguished, leftist fanatic: The 2004 prize has gone to Elfriede Jelinek, of Austria. This time they got a two-fer shot at destroying literary standards, since Jelinek's writings mainly verge on gross pornography.

Denoir is gonna love it!

I realy realy hope god blesses America if he gets elected. Otherwise stoneage.

[m21man 0]

Quote[/b] ]Just consider m21man, who exercised his right to 'express' himself about articles without even reading them

The NY Times article was about "Stolen Honor", not the Sinclair special featuring footage from SH in a report on POWs and the media. The article was about the pain of Vietnam veterans about Kerry's post-war behavior ("Sinclair" is only mentioned twice, both times in the introduction to the review.). You, of course, know this, because I'm sure that you read that New York Times review (I did before I posted) .

Edit - One might wonder why Akira was doubting whether there would be footage from F 9/11 in either documentary. After all, "Stolen Honor" is about John Kerry's record and the Sinclair special is about "POWs and the media". I don't think that footage from F 9/11 would be relevant to either one (Unless F 9/11 has a secret "Vietnam POWs" segment that is hidden from ordinary viewers ).

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

BTW Fahrenheit 9/11 is going to be shown on German TV the 1st of November.

What channel? Dubbed into German or subtitled?

Fahrenheit 911 will be on PRO-7 on the 1st of November in English and WITH german SUBTITLES only

Well done Pro-7, good choice. So the forum members from the Netherlands and Belgium can watch it too.

Thumbs up Mr. President

[denoir 0]

For the swedish members, go read this but watch your bloodpressure.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/content....tym.asp

Nah, apart from the childish attacks on Sweden, he's more or less right - with the exceptions of Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Neruda and Sholokhov.

They tend to go very left on occasion. For instance Dario Fo should have never gotten the prize.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Fahrenheit 911 will be on PRO-7 on the 1st of November in English and WITH german SUBTITLES only

Is Moore using a loophole or he is going to be disqualified?

[Bernadotte 0]

Quote[/b] ]Just consider m21man, who exercised his right to 'express' himself about articles without even reading them

The NY Times article was about "Stolen Honor", not the Sinclair special featuring footage from SH in a report on POWs and the media.

Akira:  I wonder if this "documentary" on the use of media in politics is going to show excerpts from Fahreinhet 9/11.  Somehow I doubt it.

m21man:  I'd doubt it too. After all, it's a film about veterans' anger toward Kerry's post-Vietnam behavior, not a film about the media.

So how do you figure that the documentary Akira referred to is not about the media when the NYT article describes it as "an hourlong news program about political use of the media?"

How confused can a person be?  

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]I hate being right.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin....&EDATE=

Quote[/b] ]

In fact, Sinclair has been in private communication with Senator Kerry's campaign, including a recent face-to-face meeting with senior campaign officials, for approximately two weeks in order to negotiate participation in the special by either Senator Kerry or his designee.  Although the Kerry

campaign declined to participate, Sinclair has left the invitation open and will make every effort to accommodate the Senator up to the air date for the program should he become willing to present his viewpoint for Sinclair's audience.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]Just consider m21man, who exercised his right to 'express' himself about articles without even reading them

The NY Times article was about "Stolen Honor", not the Sinclair special featuring footage from SH in a report on POWs and the media. The article was about the pain of Vietnam veterans about Kerry's post-war behavior ("Sinclair" is only mentioned twice, both times in the introduction to the review.). You, of course, know this, because I'm sure that you read that New York Times review (I did before I posted) .

Edit - One might wonder why Akira was doubting whether there would be footage from F 9/11 in either documentary. After all, "Stolen Honor" is about John Kerry's record and the Sinclair special is about "POWs and the media". I don't think that footage from F 9/11 would be relevant to either one (Unless F 9/11 has a secret "Vietnam POWs" segment that is hidden from ordinary viewers ).

Do you even read what you are replying too? What we are talking about? I quoted right from the article, so where is your confusion?

If you need I can add "See Spot Run" type language to help you out.....

[billybob2002 0]

test

[billybob2002 0]

what the hell!?!?

[m21man 0]

Quote[/b] ]So how do you figure that the documentary Akira referred to is not about the media when the NYT article describes it as "an hourlong news program about political use of the media?"

How confused can a person be?

Read. The. Title.

Here it is: A P.O.W. Story: Politics, Pressure and the Media

Please note the acronym "P.O.W." What do F 9/11 or Outfoxed have to do with POWs? Nothing, they're about TBA, not the Vietnam War and its political uses today. BTW, that title comes from Akira's quote.

Edit - In case you haven't noticed, the Sinclair special is focused on how Vietnam is used in the media. Or does Akira have some amazing explanation for why the special would be entitled "A POW Story" and not be about Vietnam?

Quote[/b] ]Do you even read what you are replying too? What we are talking about? I quoted right from the article, so where is your confusion?

You're basing your point upon the NYT's summary of it. You're completely ignoring that little word "POW" in the title of the special. And you haven't explained what F 9/11 has to do with POWs and Vietnam-related political moves.

Quote[/b] ]If you need I can add "See Spot Run" type language to help you out.....

See word "POW". m21man wonders what F 9/11 has to do with POWs. m21man wonders what Outfoxed has to do with POWs. Akira does not explain what F 9/11 has to do with POWs. Akira does not explain what Outfoxed has to do with POWs.

In fact, here's the quote where you wonder if Saint Michael & Co. will be featured in a special entitled "A POW Story":

Quote[/b] ]I wonder if this "documentary" on the use of media in politics is going to show excerpts from Fahreinhet 9/11. Or Outfoxxed.

I think it would be a reasonable if I asked that you make a coherent explanation of F 9/11's significance in "A POW Story" before flaming me.

[Bordoy 0]

Come on Bush, i think me being a catholic (though im not at all religous) may have somthing to do with it (abortion and stuff like that). Cant just choose on one issue (The War in Iraq). I can't vote though seeing as im English living in Engliand.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ] The director of a documentary that extols John Kerry's service during the Vietnam War has sued Sinclair Broadcast Group, which plans to air a documentary critical of his service on 39 of its stations tonight (Friday). George Butler, who directed Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry, claimed in a lawsuit filed on Thursday that Sinclair copied copyrighted photos for use in its controversial telecast, which will include portions of the anti-Kerry documentary Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal. The suit also claims that Sinclair used footage from the 1971 documentary Winter Soldier that Butler's film company had licensed from Winter Film. Earlier in the day a survey by Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports, was released indicating that 78 percent of people who are aware of Sinclair's plans believe that the company should air an opposing viewpoint. The survey was released as Sinclair rejected an offer from Kerry supporter Deborah Rappaport to buy time on Sinclair's stations for Butler's documentary. Rappaport had said that she would be willing to pay the company's regular rates plus kick in an additional $1 million.

I hate being right.

[Blake 0]

C'mon who's going to air such stuff, elections are at the door. They should done so months ago.

[Akira 0]

blah blah

Refer to my post at the bottom as they refuse to show another "documentary" about Kerry and Vietnam (this one pro).

While stating they are trying to get Kerry himself to be on the show, they refuse to air anything that is pro-Kerry (or anti-Bush for that matter).

Also from billybobs article:

Quote[/b] ] The news special will focus in part on the use of documentaries and other

media to influence voting, which emerged during the 2004 political campaigns,

as well as on the content of certain of these documentaries. The program will

also examine the role of the media in filtering the information contained in

these documentaries, allegations of media bias by media organizations that

ignore or filter legitimate news and the attempts by candidates and other

organizations to influence media coverage.

No where does it particularly say its just Vietnam. It says the use of "documentaries and other media to influence voting." Outfoxxed, F 9/11 would indeed fit in that catagory (as would TV, radio, publications etc). Perhaps you can show where the documentary is dealing with just Vietnam (POW can be a metaphorical expression...but I await your links).

EDIT: Also any links you can provide about the contnet of the documentary would be appreciated as well. What other documentaries they intend to show for their analysis of the use of media, otehr forms of media discussed, etc etc.

[Bernadotte 0]

Here's the explanation using m21man's own words and designed with big-print to accommodate his special needs:

...it's a film about veterans' anger toward Kerry's post-Vietnam behavior, <span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%'>not a film about the media</span>.

Read. The. Title.

Here it is: A P.O.W. Story: Politics, Pressure <span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%'>and the Media</span>

[orson 0]

You cant blame them really , after all they have been bombarded by the BushKerry machine on the TV 24/7.

Do yourself a favour....dont watch any TV today.

[shinRaiden 0]

And back to Florida, home of double-dipping snowbirds...

Quote[/b] ]

On Election Day, voters will be protected from campaign pressures by a 50-foot cone, an invisible barrier that campaign workers cannot breach. Not so for early voters.

While the Voter's Bill of Rights in state law says they have a right to "vote free from coercion or intimidation by elections officers or any other person," a glitch in the newer early voting law does not include the same 50-foot guarantee.

As a result, with early voting taking place in busy public places like City Halls and libraries, voters are voicing complaints of being blocked by political mobs, or being singled out for their political views. Others say they have been grabbed, screamed at and cursed by political partisans of all stripes.

Quote[/b] ]

One woman who voted early in Boca Raton, at the Southwest County Regional Library, complained that as she stood in line, two men behind her were "trashing our president," Fletcher said, declining to identify the woman. She tried to ignore them. Then the man touched her arm and said, "Who are you voting for?"

"I said, `I don't think that's an appropriate question,'" the woman said she responded.

"Uh oh! We have a Bush supporter here," screamed the man behind her.

For the 2 1/2 hours she had to wait in line, she was heckled by the man. As they neared the voting room, someone in the rear of the line yelled, "I sure hope everyone here is voting for Kerry!" she reported.

That's when the man behind her held his hand over her head and screamed, "We have a Republican right here!" There were "boos and jeers" from the crowd.

"I felt intimidated, harassed and threatened!" the woman wrote in her complaint to the Republican Party.

Elaine Fandino complained to the Republican Party that she took her mother to vote on South Military Trail in Palm Beach County and was confronted by 25 people supporting John Kerry for president. The crowd was "very angry and used foul language," she reported. She said the man next to her said, "Where's my shotgun?"

Quote[/b] ]

Gottfried, who used to be a Democrat, said the things he saw were "ridiculous."

"There is a time for partisanship and it's OK to have a different point of view, but don't violate the sanctity of the polling area," he said.

[Akira 0]

And back to Florida, home of double-dipping snowbirds...

Yes. The Republicans are saints.

Also please note that the story is a third person acount, not one of the reporter having witnessed it.

"If you must know I saw a pink elephant yesterday," she said.

EDIT: From your article too...

Quote[/b] ]

Republican Rep. Tom Feeney of Oviedo said the antagonizers are "Kerry thugs" out to harass Bush voters.

"If you ask me whether I believe there is an organized effort to intimidate Republican voters, the answer is absolutely yes," said Feeney.

Quote[/b] ]Democratic Party officials in Tallahassee said they've had some complaints, too.

"We have had incidents as well," said Christine Anderson, spokeswoman for the Kerry campaign. "We've had quite a few."

Next time try quoting the whole article...especially if you are going to link it then cut and paste the parts you want.

Quote[/b] ]She said the party hasn't taken affidavits from voters and found it shocking the Republicans were so focused on the issue rather than working to make sure people can vote.

[shinRaiden 0]

Yes, the issue of ensuring the voting 'rights' of felons, non-citizens, double-dipping transients, and the like has already been discussed here at length in posts about ACORN and similar organizations, the Unions, and the Kerry Campaign.

If the Kerry Campaign is worried about voting rights, why are they slacking off in not supporting their voters all the way to the polls?

-edit-

Smiley added for Akira, since he is evidently too up-tight. People take offense when I sling wild accusations around, and when you guys do the same I'm just supposed to sit idlely by and nod my head? How boring.

[Akira 0]

Yes, the issue of ensuring the voting 'rights' of felons, non-citizens, double-dipping transients, and the like has already been discussed here at length in posts about ACORN and similar organizations, the Unions, and the Kerry Campaign.

If the Kerry Campaign is worried about voting rights, why are they slacking off in not supporting their voters all the way to the polls?

It sounds like its the Republicans that are bitching and not doing anything to ensure their voters get to the polls alright. Or is the story you posted just a bunch of crap?

So "felons, non-citizens, double-dipping transients, and the like" are just Democrats right? How ingeniously prejudiced of you!

[denoir 0]

And back to Florida, home of double-dipping snowbirds...

It's interesting to see how people are passionate about politics to the extreme. In Sweden, we usually have a high voter turnout 80-90%, but people are pretty much blazé about politics. There's little debate, and while people have different opinions on political issues, the general attitude is that your political preferences are your own business and not something you discuss with others. You won't find any political talk shows here etc The politicians are partly to blame for thier very non-confrontal approach to their opponents.

I love to debate politics, so I'm verry much annoyed with such attitudes.

In the rest of Europe, things are generally better, but the interest is still more directed to regional politics than to European-level politics. The EU is still for many just an abstraction, and while some people do indeed show interest in EU politics, it has still to capture the interest of the majority.

That's why US politics is so interesting to watch. It's so passionate, so dyanmic, vibrant and sometimes bordering to the fanatical. It's really refreshing compared to ours. I really envy you in that respect.

Of course, with passion comes hate, but that's to be expected. You have a lot of media outlets, both right and left wing that really spread hate propaganda. They're immensly fun to read, but I can see that it might also create certain problems. Hostilities go with the territory as the followers clash. It's not pretty, but hopefully those are rare events.