wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:10:30 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
snip
Bush didn't have a campaign in the 70s and 80s...you, like many
others,
seem to ignore that much of this is not new, and some of these
guys have
been saying this stuff about Kerry for decades. ...

These guys were proven to be liars in the 70's, proven to be liars
in the '80's and proven to be liars just last week. They can repeat
their lies in perpetuity but that doesn't turn lies into truth.

OK, let's suppose that is true (it isn't, but let's say it is).
Then
that absolutely proves that Bush (and his campaign) absolutely can't
be
behind the lies. But moreover, whether lies or truth, it
acknowledges
that they've been saying these things for 30-plus years, which
proves
Bush and his campaign aren't behind any of the assertions.

So, again, it's a "pick your problem" situation: giving you your own
rope, Bush isn't and can't be behind it, so he has no right,
responsibility, or means to stop it, and Kerry (and his campaign)
know
this isn't and couldn't be something cooked up by Bush or his
campaign.
Yet they repeatedly and publicly say otherwise. And in the
meantime,
hired, paid, and official members of the Kerry campaign serve on
multiple 527 boards and advisory committees that do "smear" ads on
Bush...face it, best case, Kerry is, again, no better than Bush.

HTH,
R

Hm........

So, if Curley Lambeau coached the Green bay Packer's in 1937, Vince
Lombardi couldn't possibly have done so in 1967, huh? Well, how can
you NOT love that kind of logic?

Have you ever considered actually working for a living or something?
I mean, you obviously ain't cut out for this ****.

Wolfgang