Sampley is the guy who attempted to start rumors that John McCain was a KGB agent as a way of generating press for his (Sampley's) POW/MIA organization. Kerry should have known better than to let him get a rise out of him (if in fact the alleged event actually occurred).
Sampley also had a run in with the group that built and maintains the Vietnam memorial. He was selling t-shirts and souvenirs that used the image of the statue of the three servicemen. When asked to license the image (all proceeds to have gone to the maintenance of the memorial) he refused, and has yet to make any payments following the court case that found against him.
Edit: Giant's link covers this stuff in better detail
And just to clear up: I meant Americans: Don´t be so tight assed. What a politician does with his middle finger to a VERY annoying demonstrator (short of anything physical) should not affect anyone. At Washington Journal I once heard a caller say that noone should vote for Liebermann because he had remarried. Forget what policies people stand for, lets look at their marriages and how they react to annoying people What I say is I have never heard reaction like that here. Hence don´t be so tight assed.
No one here is particularly interested in the purported gesture other than NaplesX and Jubelum. What we seem to be most concerned about is the conservative media's ability to manufacture and repeat lies-- and in my case, the spamming of AO with those lies.
No one here is particularly interested in the purported gesture other than NaplesX and Jubelum. What we seem to be most concerned about is the conservative media's ability to manufacture and repeat lies-- and in my case, the spamming of AO with those lies.
Of course you will accuse me of some right wing bias. But here goes.
Maybe the major media that has been proven again and again to lean to the left is ignoring this story so as to make it appear it is a non story. Conspiracy theories can go both ways, you know.
Maybe it is a little of both, maybe it is totally bogus, although I think that if it was false a lawsuit would be in order or at least a rebuttal from the Kerry camp.
I knew this would happen, but you must at least consider it valid until proven otherwise. If it is false, fine. i never claimed I swallowed the story.
No one here is particularly interested in the purported gesture other than NaplesX and Jubelum. What we seem to be most concerned about is the conservative media's ability to manufacture and repeat lies-- and in my case, the spamming of AO with those lies.
Reminds me of something I read on NRO this morning:
Quote:
[alleged problems with the WaPo article on the Bush 04: It's Not His Fault campaign's relatively high level of negative attacks on Kerry]
The first concerns a speech by Vice President Dick Cheney, delivered in Arkansas on May 24. "Vice President Cheney said Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry 'has questioned whether the war on terror is really a war at all,'" Post reporters Dana Milbank and Jim VandeHei wrote. Cheney's charge, along with others made by the Bush campaign was, the authors said, "tough, serious ? and wrong, or at least highly misleading."
"Kerry did not question the war on terrorism," Milbank and VandeHei explained, suggesting that Cheney's statement was not only untrue but also part of a Bush administration effort to deflect attention from its own record. The article explained:
Quote:
The strategy was in full operation last week, beginning Monday in Arkansas. "Senator Kerry," Cheney said, "has questioned whether the war on terror is really a war at all. He said, quote, 'I don't want to use that terminology.' In his view, opposing terrorism is far less of a military operation and more of a law enforcement operation."
But Kerry did not say what Cheney attributes to him. The quote Cheney used came from a March interview with the New York Times, in which Kerry used the phrase "war on terror." When he said "I don't want to use that terminology," he was discussing the "economic transformation" of the Middle East ? not the war on terrorism.
But that account appears to be incorrect itself; contrary to what Milbank and VandeHei claimed, Kerry did indeed say what Cheney said he said. Kerry's interview with the Times is available on the paper's website, and in the portion in question, he said the following:
Quote:
The final victory in the war on terror depends on a victory in the war of ideas, much more than the war on the battlefield. And the war ? not the war, I don't want to use that terminology. The engagement of economies, the economic transformation, the transformation to modernity of a whole bunch of countries that have been avoiding the future. And that future's coming at us like it or not, in the context of terror, and in the context of failed states, and dysfunctional economies, and all that goes with that.
Obviously, he was saying "...and the war [of ideas]..." and not "the war [on terrorism]..." but apparently Brian York (not to mention Cheney) thinks his readers are dumb enough to eat up this BS ... and maybe they are.
Of course you will accuse me of some right wing bias. But here goes.
Maybe the major media that has been proven again and again to lean to the left is ignoring this story so as to make it appear it is a non story. Conspiracy theories can go both ways, you know.
Maybe it is a little of both, maybe it is totally bogus, although I think that if it was false a lawsuit would be in order or at least a rebuttal from the Kerry camp.
I knew this would happen, but you must at least consider it valid until proven otherwise. If it is false, fine. i never claimed I swallowed the story.
The venom here is astounding.
So you admit that the evidence against corroborating this story is nonexistent and must therefore resort to conspiracy theories? Sheesh. Honestly, I couldn't have discredited this story better myself. Still, you knew people would seriously question the validity of the story from the start, yet you still posted it? That to me sounds exactly like spamming. Fortunately, most of us here are far more critical and no do not consider anything "valid until proven otherwise." Despite your contradictory claim that you "didn't swallow the story," you still accept it-- and to me that's exactly the same thing.
I just realized I was looking at this whole thing all wrong. I thought Naples was criticizing him for giving this guy the finger, but really he's just annoyed that Kerry didn't kick him in the nuts and let the secret service cart him off.
I agree, naples. What's wrong with kerry that he allows lunatics like this to run around on the street? I mean, at least for dogs we have leash laws.
You must consider it valid until proven otherwise.
Please present proof that this never happened.
And of course, unless Bush sues you over this statement, or unless public denials are made, it will only go to show that Bush did indeed rape and kill a cub scout.
Bush would have to deny it and fight this accusation, and make sure that the notion of Bush raping and killing cub scouts gets maximum press coverage, it if it weren't true, wouldn't he?
And of course, unless Bush sues you over this statement, or unless public denials are made, it will only go to show that Bush did indeed rape and kill a cub scout.
Bush would have to deny it and fight this accusation, and make sure that the notion of Bush raping and killing cub scouts gets maximum press coverage, it if it weren't true, wouldn't he?
Oh good lord people. Please. It's much, much easier to do that this. All you do is pick a weak Bush state with a bunch of electoral votes--like Georgia--and use a push poll. One question:
"Would you be less likely to vote for George Bush if you learned that in his youth he raped and killed a cub scout?"
Simple. Worked for Bush against McCain in South Carolina in 2000.
Man, I enjoy sometimes how stories that are meant to hurt a person actually end up making them stronger. The sentiment I get from MANY people on this thread is overal positive. Way to go republicans, you just handed him *more* support.
You're a maroon, you did exactly as I predicted. You obviously did not read my post. I heard this first on a local RADIO TALK SHOW. I then found it reported on the web. Can't you read?
Well of course I did. If someone says something dumb it doesn't take a rocket scientist to predict the reaction.
Also it doesn't matter where it comes from ( old republican guard local talk show no doubt ) it's still dumb.
As stated earlyer, My only question is, if sampley is getting up in kerrys face and tawnting him, where the f&*^ was his secret service detail, he coulda avoided the whole thing by cracking some kind of joke or something, thus the sampley would look like a bafoon and kerry would have gotten a couple of seconds on the evening news, but no, kerry goes and flips the guy off!?!?
his handelers must be pulling their preverbial hair out behind closed doors in the "dark somke-filled rooms" at campaign HQ.
If kerry does that to a preverbil "pesant" just imagine if some forign leader disagrees with him, is he going to flip them off and thus start something realy ugly? this is a vital time, we dont want cold war II, and with the current state of china and N. korea...
As stated earlyer, My only question is, if sampley is getting up in kerrys face and tawnting him, where the f&*^ was his secret service detail, he coulda avoided the whole thing by cracking some kind of joke or something, thus the sampley would look like a bafoon and kerry would have gotten a couple of seconds on the evening news, but no, kerry goes and flips the guy off!?!?
his handelers must be pulling their preverbial hair out behind closed doors in the "dark somke-filled rooms" at campaign HQ.
If kerry does that to a preverbil "pesant" just imagine if some forign leader disagrees with him, is he going to flip them off and thus start something realy ugly? this is a vital time, we dont want cold war II, and with the current state of china and N. korea...
Yeah, like all those other times this has happened (if it actually DID happen) while Kerry's been serving as a US SENATOR.
a_greer, didn't we decide that this never happened?
if this never realy happened, then someone made up a LAME story, i mean if you are going to tell a lie like that put some bloodshed into the story for that great "edge" that Kerry is missing.
Comments
Originally posted by giant
What the hell are you talking about?
Since NaplesX seems to be a bit.... impaired... when it comes to explaining things and posting links, allow me....
http://www.google.com/search?q=bugs+...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Originally posted by FormerLurker
Since NaplesX seems to be a bit.... impaired... when it comes to explaining things and posting links, allow me....
http://www.google.com/search?q=bugs+...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
I read the post totally wrong because I thought it was more nuanced.
Spending less time on AO has apparently made me expect more out of people than we see here.
IOW, 'look at the source".
Sampley also had a run in with the group that built and maintains the Vietnam memorial. He was selling t-shirts and souvenirs that used the image of the statue of the three servicemen. When asked to license the image (all proceeds to have gone to the maintenance of the memorial) he refused, and has yet to make any payments following the court case that found against him.
Edit: Giant's link covers this stuff in better detail
Originally posted by FormerLurker
Since NaplesX seems to be a bit.... impaired... when it comes to explaining things and posting links, allow me....
http://www.google.com/search?q=bugs+...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
I have to explain Bugs Bunny?
Now that is funny.
Originally posted by Anders
No. They report a healthy exchange of ideas.
And just to clear up: I meant Americans: Don´t be so tight assed. What a politician does with his middle finger to a VERY annoying demonstrator (short of anything physical) should not affect anyone. At Washington Journal I once heard a caller say that noone should vote for Liebermann because he had remarried. Forget what policies people stand for, lets look at their marriages and how they react to annoying people
No one here is particularly interested in the purported gesture other than NaplesX and Jubelum. What we seem to be most concerned about is the conservative media's ability to manufacture and repeat lies-- and in my case, the spamming of AO with those lies.
Stop the personal attacks in this thread. Those of you out there know who you are.
Be nice or face the wrath of Fellowship
Originally posted by ShawnJ
No one here is particularly interested in the purported gesture other than NaplesX and Jubelum. What we seem to be most concerned about is the conservative media's ability to manufacture and repeat lies-- and in my case, the spamming of AO with those lies.
Of course you will accuse me of some right wing bias. But here goes.
Maybe the major media that has been proven again and again to lean to the left is ignoring this story so as to make it appear it is a non story. Conspiracy theories can go both ways, you know.
Maybe it is a little of both, maybe it is totally bogus, although I think that if it was false a lawsuit would be in order or at least a rebuttal from the Kerry camp.
I knew this would happen, but you must at least consider it valid until proven otherwise. If it is false, fine. i never claimed I swallowed the story.
The venom here is astounding.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
No one here is particularly interested in the purported gesture other than NaplesX and Jubelum. What we seem to be most concerned about is the conservative media's ability to manufacture and repeat lies-- and in my case, the spamming of AO with those lies.
Reminds me of something I read on NRO this morning:
[alleged problems with the WaPo article on the Bush 04: It's Not His Fault campaign's relatively high level of negative attacks on Kerry]
The first concerns a speech by Vice President Dick Cheney, delivered in Arkansas on May 24. "Vice President Cheney said Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry 'has questioned whether the war on terror is really a war at all,'" Post reporters Dana Milbank and Jim VandeHei wrote. Cheney's charge, along with others made by the Bush campaign was, the authors said, "tough, serious ? and wrong, or at least highly misleading."
"Kerry did not question the war on terrorism," Milbank and VandeHei explained, suggesting that Cheney's statement was not only untrue but also part of a Bush administration effort to deflect attention from its own record. The article explained:
The strategy was in full operation last week, beginning Monday in Arkansas. "Senator Kerry," Cheney said, "has questioned whether the war on terror is really a war at all. He said, quote, 'I don't want to use that terminology.' In his view, opposing terrorism is far less of a military operation and more of a law enforcement operation."
But Kerry did not say what Cheney attributes to him. The quote Cheney used came from a March interview with the New York Times, in which Kerry used the phrase "war on terror." When he said "I don't want to use that terminology," he was discussing the "economic transformation" of the Middle East ? not the war on terrorism.
But that account appears to be incorrect itself; contrary to what Milbank and VandeHei claimed, Kerry did indeed say what Cheney said he said. Kerry's interview with the Times is available on the paper's website, and in the portion in question, he said the following:
The final victory in the war on terror depends on a victory in the war of ideas, much more than the war on the battlefield. And the war ? not the war, I don't want to use that terminology. The engagement of economies, the economic transformation, the transformation to modernity of a whole bunch of countries that have been avoiding the future. And that future's coming at us like it or not, in the context of terror, and in the context of failed states, and dysfunctional economies, and all that goes with that.
Obviously, he was saying "...and the war [of ideas]..." and not "the war [on terrorism]..." but apparently Brian York (not to mention Cheney) thinks his readers are dumb enough to eat up this BS ... and maybe they are.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Of course you will accuse me of some right wing bias. But here goes.
Maybe the major media that has been proven again and again to lean to the left is ignoring this story so as to make it appear it is a non story. Conspiracy theories can go both ways, you know.
Maybe it is a little of both, maybe it is totally bogus, although I think that if it was false a lawsuit would be in order or at least a rebuttal from the Kerry camp.
I knew this would happen, but you must at least consider it valid until proven otherwise. If it is false, fine. i never claimed I swallowed the story.
The venom here is astounding.
So you admit that the evidence against corroborating this story is nonexistent and must therefore resort to conspiracy theories? Sheesh. Honestly, I couldn't have discredited this story better myself. Still, you knew people would seriously question the validity of the story from the start, yet you still posted it? That to me sounds exactly like spamming. Fortunately, most of us here are far more critical and no do not consider anything "valid until proven otherwise." Despite your contradictory claim that you "didn't swallow the story," you still accept it-- and to me that's exactly the same thing.
You must consider it valid until proven otherwise.
Please present proof that this never happened.
I agree, naples. What's wrong with kerry that he allows lunatics like this to run around on the street? I mean, at least for dogs we have leash laws.
Originally posted by addabox
Bush raped and killed a cub scout.
You must consider it valid until proven otherwise.
Please present proof that this never happened.
And of course, unless Bush sues you over this statement, or unless public denials are made, it will only go to show that Bush did indeed rape and kill a cub scout.
Bush would have to deny it and fight this accusation, and make sure that the notion of Bush raping and killing cub scouts gets maximum press coverage, it if it weren't true, wouldn't he?
Originally posted by shetline
And of course, unless Bush sues you over this statement, or unless public denials are made, it will only go to show that Bush did indeed rape and kill a cub scout.
Bush would have to deny it and fight this accusation, and make sure that the notion of Bush raping and killing cub scouts gets maximum press coverage, it if it weren't true, wouldn't he?
Oh good lord people. Please. It's much, much easier to do that this. All you do is pick a weak Bush state with a bunch of electoral votes--like Georgia--and use a push poll. One question:
"Would you be less likely to vote for George Bush if you learned that in his youth he raped and killed a cub scout?"
Simple. Worked for Bush against McCain in South Carolina in 2000.
Originally posted by NaplesX
You're a maroon, you did exactly as I predicted. You obviously did not read my post. I heard this first on a local RADIO TALK SHOW. I then found it reported on the web. Can't you read?
Well of course I did. If someone says something dumb it doesn't take a rocket scientist to predict the reaction.
Also it doesn't matter where it comes from ( old republican guard local talk show no doubt ) it's still dumb.
his handelers must be pulling their preverbial hair out behind closed doors in the "dark somke-filled rooms" at campaign HQ.
If kerry does that to a preverbil "pesant" just imagine if some forign leader disagrees with him, is he going to flip them off and thus start something realy ugly? this is a vital time, we dont want cold war II, and with the current state of china and N. korea...
Originally posted by a_greer
As stated earlyer, My only question is, if sampley is getting up in kerrys face and tawnting him, where the f&*^ was his secret service detail, he coulda avoided the whole thing by cracking some kind of joke or something, thus the sampley would look like a bafoon and kerry would have gotten a couple of seconds on the evening news, but no, kerry goes and flips the guy off!?!?
his handelers must be pulling their preverbial hair out behind closed doors in the "dark somke-filled rooms" at campaign HQ.
If kerry does that to a preverbil "pesant" just imagine if some forign leader disagrees with him, is he going to flip them off and thus start something realy ugly? this is a vital time, we dont want cold war II, and with the current state of china and N. korea...
Yeah, like all those other times this has happened (if it actually DID happen) while Kerry's been serving as a US SENATOR.
Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself
a_greer, didn't we decide that this never happened?
if this never realy happened, then someone made up a LAME story, i mean if you are going to tell a lie like that put some bloodshed into the story for that great "edge" that Kerry is missing.
</sarcasem>