Slashdot Mirror
Football Fans For Truth
Football Fans For Truth, a real 527 organization, has updated their site with more evidence showing that John Kerry is not a true sports fan or athlete. Among the charges: he doesn't know the name of the venerable home of the Green Bay Packers, he "throws a football like a girl," and he "can't catch a football at all." Not limiting themselves to football, they also provide plenty of evidence he doesn't know much about baseball.
Or else they might seriously base their vote on who knows sports better. ;) Anyways, the next stop on the road to removing corporate influence from politics: restricting 527 organizations. Who's interested in trying to get that to happen?
US businesses that currently accept chip and PIN/signature
The election is for Presedent, not head coach.
Wouldn't it be nice if schools got all the money they wanted and the army had to hold jumble sales for guns
Ok, so John Kerry claims to like football, but he isn't a hardcore football fan. Who cares.
;). I can tell you that I don't have much respect for Dale Junior, that I think Tony Stewart has a serious attitude problem, and that I'd love to see Mark Martin's Viagra-endorsing self win the cup again. I watch the race almost every week. But beyond that, I can't tell you much.
I consider myself to be a NASCAR fan. I can tell you that I root for Mayfield and Kahne (despite driving a Chevy myself
There are people out there who could tell you, from memory, Junior's last five wins, which tracks they were at, which months they took place. There are people who could tell you how many yards Brett Favre has passed for in his last 10 games, what team he was up against in each of those games, and who the opposing QB was.
There are people who could recite all kinds of NASCAR stats, or football stats, or baseball stats, or QuakeCon winners, because they're obsessed.
John Kerry "throws like a girl?" GWB was a freakin' cheerleader. Let's see the "Football Fans for Truth" post that on their front page...
Did I miss something?
Granted, I'm not in one of the swing states, I live in Tennessee... So I have yet to see a Kerry ad on TV, all I've seen are Bush commercials. However, I've tried to keep up with both campaigns online, not only at their own websites but in terms of political discussion elsewhere. I don't recall hearing that Kerry ever claimed to be a pro football player, or even an expert about football. What did I miss?
In November, I'm going to be voting for my choice of presidential candidates (among a number of local offices as well). And, in the immortal words of Lee Elia for you sports fans, "I'll tell you one fucking thing" - whether or not the candidates are good at sports, know about sports, or even like sports has absolutely zero effect on who I'm going to vote for. Please tell me that the American electorate has not devolved into a sports contest.
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
Pleasure Boat Captains for Truth: George W. Bush is no party animal. And never was.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
Sorry, it's 5AM and I've been up since 9AM yesterday, with a dental appointment in the meantime. Disregard grandparent rant. Scaling and root planing has a way of affecting one's sense of humor, until it stops hurting!
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
Just as long as he doesn't invade other countries under false pretenses. That's all. I'm not setting the bar very high here.
Soylent Green is peoplicious!
Seems we all need to acknowledge that the Youth International Party was right along: Pigasus for President!
The difference between
Restricting 527 (non-profits) is bad for our "free" society.
Sure, they can be propped up by corporations and even candidates - but removing yet another voice is wrong. Think about the ads you see without 527s. All you would see is RNC, DNC, Bush and Kerry ads. And that would get really confusing really quick. Both candidates lie about the positions of the other and play on American's ignorance.
Remember, 527 status wasn't intended for Swift Boat Veterans or MoveOn. 527 status was intended to help out legitimate organizations that wanted to have a voice, while keeping them from contributing directly to candidates. It was supposed to encourage people to speak up instead of sending a check to their party.
Imagine that you are a farmer. In theory you could get with a group of farmers and create a "527" and advertise without throwing your money in the candidates pocket. Why would you do that? Because your position may not even be on their radar. Sure, you may side with [NAME] but are they really listening? Once you get your voice heard then people start to ask questions and your issue becomes important. Case in point: Swift Boat Veterans for Truth/Lying. To many of us (hopefully most of us) it didn't matter, but to them it did (we hope, again). Their screams were so loud that this became the topic of talks for weeks.
Think of 527 groups as those third party candidates that don't have a chance. If they don't run, many of those issues go un-addressed. Remember, not everyone can challenge the President and not everyone is a reporter. Sometimes the rest of us need a voice too.
To get rid of 527 groups would mean that we would rely on "journalists" when it comes to bringing up the issues we care about. How good are they at doing that now? With 527 groups, slashdotters could form a non-profit and actually take out ads. Without them, we'd have to rely on our inadequte two party system.
Get your Unix fortune now!
It's good to see that the american presidential campaign continues to be about stuff that really matters...... /rolleyes
First Mention is in this 7/15/04 Peter Gammons piece. Most of it is about Baseball, but here's the relevant paragraph:
This remarkable paragraph contains three assertions about Kerry: "middle initial", "medals", and "Yost." The first two are erroneous, and the third is not testable. "Middle initial" is false -- Kerry's middle name is his mother's maiden name, Forbes, a famous old Boston name. Gammons has an error in his "medals" story, Kerry threw ribbons over a fence; not medals in the water. You can read Thomas Oliphant's eyewitness account here or here. To summarize, Gammons makes three assertions about Kerry, and the first to are erroneous. What about the third? I don't know any way to prove a negative, but the very first mention of the "Yost" story that I can find, in Boston or anywhere else, is that 7/15 Gammons column. It's all over the blogsphere now, but Gammons has first mention. Given Gammons' other errors, I don't find it very credible.
Now just to complicate matters, Gammons brings up the "Yost" story again five days later in another column. Again, it's mostly about baseball, but here's the relevant paragraph:
This time, the "Yost" story is folded in with less controversial claims. If you're an anti-Kerry blogger, this version looks less foolish, but given the first mention amongst two canards, I don't find it credible on Gammons' say-so alone. I say bring me independent confirmation or dump it.
And now a bit on the meta-story. Let me shamelessy copy the Daily Howler and quote David Broder:
Almost. Ladies and gentleman, we're watching a brilliant campaign at
--- Often in error; never in doubt!
jeez... lighten up you left-wing zealots... It's just a joke (and a funny one, too).
If you are not too humor impaired to enjoy a more 'balanced' piece of humor check out Jib Jab.
He's a True Nerd then....
I'd much rather have a President that uses his time for personal and intellectual diversions rather than one that chokes on a pretzel while watching some mass-market crap aired on that most Republican of channels, Fox.
Great quote. Do you have a source for it?
a horrible place
I dare Bush and Kerry to a Linux install contest!
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
You know, Slashdot has been a lot more fun since they added this new humour section. I don't always find all of the jokes to be great, and I still don't get why there's an American flag for a logo, but it's still mostly amusing, nonetheless...
is the only thing that matters.
scottiebear
At least he can spell and eat a pretzel without requiring medical assistance.
I go out with my trusty 12-gauge double-barrel, crawl around on my stomach. I track and move and decoy and play games and try to outsmart them. You know, you kind of play the wind. That's hunting. He hunts deer while crawling around on his stomach?! Kerry is so full of crap.
That's a bonus for Kerry. Remember those guys in high school? Quick with a wet towel snap in the locker room, but slow with the wit in English or Math class. Those football guys were assholes.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
It's good to see the important issues come out, even if it is only on slashdot. What's even more refreshing is that we can debate such important things like whether a candidate is true to his team, without the conversation getting clutter up with even a single post modated as 'Funny" and a rating over 2. Way to keep focused on the issues Slashdot!
Oh, and Go Bucks!
I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand political campaigns should be serious and about serious issues. Not what candidate is better with photo-ops, or what they did as kids (yes 20 somethings are "kids") 35 years ago.
On the other hand this kind of jocular sniping has always been part of campaigns and is engaged in by both sides. On the other side we have seen Millionaires for Bush, Pleasure Boat Captains for Truth. Think of this as the Republican equivalent to giant paper maché puppets the far left trots out during street protests.
Such humorous jibes CAN be devastatingly effective though. To be effective though there must be a grain of truth and reflect some serious concern to (some) voters. It's sort of interesting that the Democratic jokes and Republican votes are very similar in this case. Pleasure Boat Captains for Truth, Millionaires for Bush and Football Fans for Truth are all saying basically the same thing... The candidate is a rich elitist who isn't like you, he does not share your values, he does not share your concerns. Consequently he will pursue policies that you won't agree with. Both political "practical jokes" also insinuate that the opposing candidate is a poser, a phony who is pretending to be something he is not.
These are not illegitimate arguments, even if they are raised in a humorous way.
Besides it's funny... laugh... if only because that is the ONLY way to defuse the "joke" politically. A candidate that laughs at his opponents jokes about him displays a comforting level of self-knowledge. He displays that he knows his own weaknesses, is willing to admit to his own failures and by implication is likely to address them in some way. A candidate that doesn't "get" a truly funny joke about himself is worrying because it suggests that he is not being dishonest with us, he is being dishonest with himself. It suggests that whatever weakness is being lampooned will not be properly compensated for if he is elected, with potentially disastrous consequences.
In 1971, Kerry declared, in Congress, "I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.
It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit, the emotions in the room, the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam, but they did. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.
They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, tape wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country side of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."
Kerry lied in order to advance his own career. His words endangered the lives of American soldiers in Vietnam.
Even after 30 years, some disgusting acts should never be forgotten. Achieving a political career by lying about the acts of American soldiers in Vietnam is absolutely disgusting.
If you hate what is happening to our nation, the USA, then write the following on the November ballot.
president: Bill O'Reilly
vice-president: Tammy Bruce
I didn't read the article, not that interested in American politics, but when I first read it, I was certain that it was a Kerry-endorsed spoof of the SVT campaign. Then I start reading the posts and come to the conclusion that this is real! I mean, come on, while I agree that it's important that elected officials not lie (or at least not get caught), we're talking sports here! Does his platform mention NFL reform? How about we look at our politicians in regards to where they stand on issues that they actually have power (or a declared intention) to change?
Yet another example of the quote "people get the government they deserve" being more true than anyone would want.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
This is the problem with politics. Football doesn't matter. Cocaine doesn't matter. War service doesn't REALLY matter, since neither had high-level command roles. Ranching doesn't matter.
I'm not seeing any arguments about security or the economy that's about the intellectual level of 2 grade school kids saying "uh-huh" and "nuh-uh".
Do neither of these guys have a plan? Or is this a high school class president election?
The real issue is that they are trying to paint Kerry as an elitist. Yeah Kerry is an elitist. The big problem is that Bush is an elitist too. The bumbling idiot Bush routine actually helps him look like a regular guy. In reality Bush is friends with the Saudi government, the Enron guys, and all the big corporations. Not to mention that he got elected president because of his dad.
This isn't about whether or not he can throw a football, its about what he is trying to say. He is fake he is trying to show that he is an average guy when he isn't he is elitist, he doesn't relate to the average union guy, who may never had been on any football teams but know the scores for every game. Think about what they are trying convey not just what stupid things are said, otherwise you will miss what most people catch. Oh and like most of you I also was working on my computer last night instead of whatching whatever monday night football game there was, but there was a huge amount of people that did watch the game and where they would rather you not pretend to be a fan to get there vote and just be yourself.
The appearance of leadership (Bush facing down terra/tourists) is more important than actuall leadership. Notice Tom Osbourn is a Senator after 20+ years of coaching Nebraska. I'm shocked Steve Largent (wide receiever from Tulsa) didn't win the governor spot in Oklahoma, however Barry Switzer was behind Brad Carson (our governor). I'd be willing to bet if Bo Schembeckler (sp?) ran for governor of Michigan he'd win.
Popularity matters more than ethics, implementing sound policies, saving troops lives by not starting bullshit wars, etc...
Not limiting themselves to football, they also provide plenty of evidence he doesn't know much about baseball.
Instead: would Kerry have traded Sammy Sosa?
Wow, could this be a reason to actually LIKE John Kerry? Someone in this country who shares a similar COMPLETE DISINTEREST in football, baseball, and their moronic fans?
OMFG Kerry doesn't know the name of a field or how to throw a football - yeah, I'll make sure to remember that when I'm voting on real issues like illegitimate wars, a gigantic and profligate government deficit, growing trade imbalance, continual erosion of civil liberties, etc.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
How is any of that lying? Are you going to deny that atrocities happened in Vietnam?
Did you read the page you linked to? It does not, by any stretch, confirm that Kerry lied. People told him those stories.
As for disgusting acts not being forgotten, I agree, we need to remember the shame that we brought upon this country through our actions in Vietnam.
A blog about stuff.
Well, since we're repeating the Vietnam tragedy all over again in Iraq, it seems we Americans have a very short national memory.
Thanks for the vote of support; I totally agree. Sometimes you can attract moderator attention by putting "mod parent up" in the subject; unfortunately, that's already the name of this thread!
--- Often in error; never in doubt!
"can't we all just take a joke?"
It's unfortunate, but this article should not be in the "Funny" section. Most experts on politics agree that having a "macho" images is very important for both of the candidates. So, while we all laugh at this, a lot of swing voters will pick the guy who seems more "manly".
This is probably going to get modded as flame bait, but compare how many photo-ops that Bush and Kerry have showing them doing some sort of physical activity, and then see how many they have posing with groups that demand truth about the Iraq war and 9-11, truths that many of us consider sacred.
The point is, you're blind to American politics if you write physical image off as inconsequential.
When I wrote He's explicitly withholding support for Bush's way of disarming Saddam. I should have said "He's explicitly withholding support for Bush's unilateral way of disarming Saddam." Let's take it from the top. You quote Kerry as saying: Now translate it phrase by phrase:
I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity,
Kerry objects to Bush's unilateralism;
but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein.
Kerry objects to Bush's unilateralism, but doesn't object to having Saddam disarmed.
And when the president made the decision, I supported him,
Kerry supports his president in time of war. "All disagreements end at the borders of the US" and all that.
and I support the fact that we did disarm him.
Kerry supports th fact of disarming Saddam. Not the unilateral way.
Your interpretation only works by taking sentences out of context. In context, at the beginning, Kerry explicitly states his reservations about Bush's unilateral ways. Then he states what parts of Bush's actions he does support. I hope this is finally clear.
Also, don't forget that I'm making a two pronged argument here. One prong is that Kerry didn't reverse himself; the other is that there's no crime in reversals, even unacknowledged reversals, and that Bush does the latter all the time. Just so it doesn't get lost in the shuffle, I repeat my list:
--- Often in error; never in doubt!