Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Fury on November 03, 2000, 07:34:00 AM
-
So, how big of a story will Bush's DUI arrest become in the next few days, and will the story influence any voters out there?
Is the timing of the story relevant, or is it just that Americans are entitled to know the whole truth about a political candidate?
I'm not going to pretend that I can guess why this story was released so close to the election. It may very well be a simple release of a story, or it may be deliberate mudslinging in an effort to sway voters away from Bush.
I wonder how big of an issue the media will make of this story, and if Gore or any of his supporters or spin doctors will try to capitalize on it. And I wonder how many Americans will see that Bush was arrested for DUI, and let that sway their opinion towards the other side.
I wonder if revelation of a DUI arrest that happened 24 years ago is relevant in this campaign. One side of me says yes, it's always good to know who you are dealing with. The other side of me says no, this happened 24 years ago and has little bearing on today.
A few years ago, this might have had a greater impact on me. I'm not talking Repulican or Democrat, I'm talking any story about any candidate. I wonder how many people have the same feelings as I used to have -- that this story has an impact on the election.
Here's why I believe this story is irrelevant to the election. The DUI arrest happened 24 years ago. Mr. Bush says he has been clean and sober for 14 years. I beleive that people do have the capability to change; I believe that he did make a terrible mistake by DUI, it is human nature to make mistakes. Insanity is defined as making the same mistake a second (or more) time, expecting different results each time. Mr. Bush has apparently changed his ways, this mistake happened 24 years ago, and I have no reason to believe he is the same man he was 24 years ago -- thus I do not believe this is relevant. I can only base my feelings of irrelevance on my own personal experience. I have been clean and sober for two years now, and I can tell you that I am not the same person I was two years ago (or for the last 15 years, for that matter). Of course, you'll just have to accept my word on that -- you guys don't know me any better than you know any political candidate.
We all have skeletons in our closet (except maybe for the saints out there). Don't get me wrong, I believe Mr. Bush made a stupid mistake 24 years ago. I will not hold him accountable for it today, because I know personally the extent that people have the ability to change.
I am curious to know how many people do think it is relevant; I am confident that this will play out in the next few days. I am curious to see how long the media holds onto this one.
Fury
>> hmmm, I am seriously considering not posting this, I really don't see any point to it, but since this is an OT board and I do wonder out loud if this will have any impact, I'm going to do it. Apologies for including a personal spin; I suppose it's another form of purging.
<<edit: let me be clear, if this had happened recently, I believe it should have an impact>>
As of this post, a cnn.com poll looks like this:
Will the news of George W. Bush's 1976 DUI arrest in Maine influence your vote?
Yes, it makes me question his judgment. 16% 5151 votes
No, what happened 24 years ago isn't relevant to the election.
63% 19586 votes
I wasn't voting for Bush anyway.
21% 6521 votes
[This message has been edited by Fury (edited 11-03-2000).]
-
Interesting that Clinton or Gore would have denied the story if it had happened to them. In Clinton's case, he would have tried to re-define "Drunken Driving" as he tried in in "Sexual Relations" or would have said "But I didn't exhale into the breath-a-lizer....and Gore would have said "I was urinating since I drank too much tea while the Buddists discussed campaign finance when the officer arrested me"....
Interesting enough, the Gore campaign said they had no comment and nothing to do with the story, yet the Lawyer that dug up the story was a delegate to the Democratic National Convention.
Everyone that's a republican voter was waiting for this, I was surprized that it came so late in the election. Shows you how desparate the Gore camp is.
It will have no bearing what so ever on the election, since everyone knows someone close to them, or someone they love that went thru the same mistake, or ourselves may have been in the same situation but didn't get 'caught'. Bush was pulled over because he was going to slow. I think it makes him a stronger candidate to come out and NOT deny the story, said he made some mistakes along time ago, and carry on.
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 11-03-2000).]
-
Doesn't mean squat to me. Nor does his VP's run in's in the 60's. I don't think any of us didn't do something in the past that we would not want published in your local paper today. It's just another attempt to swing the "undecided" voters over to gore. Typical democrat technique of confusion of the issues and priorities in an attempt gain votes. Same reason Gore has to have Jimmy Buffet at rallies and Ed Asner scaring seniors, they are desperate as they see themselves losing this election. I think this DUI release will back fire on them. Most of the public are smart enough to see through this latest lame smear attempt.
Eagler
-
<SALUTE> Fury (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I have the utmost admiration for 12 Steppers everywhere, whether AA, ACOA, NA, OA, GA, or any of the other programs. It is a wonderful and rewarding way to live a life. I know this from my own experience with friends who are 12 Steppers; they are some of the most thoughtful and genuine people I've had the pleasure of knowing.
Here is my take:
First of all, I believe that American voters have the right to know all about the candidates for President, or any other public office. It matters little how the information of Bush's DUI came out.
Secondly, Sophisticated voters will not believe that 26 year old DUI conviction has much relevence to the Bush of today. It may hurt Bush with other voters.
Personally, I believe in Bush, I believe in the conservative platform, and I will vote that way.
Gunthr
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Interesting that Clinton or Gore would have denied the story if it had happened to them. In Clinton's case, he would have tried to re-define "Drunken Driving" as he tried in in "Sexual Relations" or would have said "But I didn't exhale into the breath-a-lizer....and Gore would have said "I was urinating since I drank too much tea while the Buddists discussed campaign finance when the officer arrested me"....
Come on, Rip...any excuse is right to save Bush's face for you?...
I dont mind who will get the White House, Gore or Bush, as both seem equally bad from my (far,far) point of view.
But Bush has been caught, and instead of the reaction you'd have had if Gore was the one involved, we see a: "well at least he didn't deny it"...
Come on, Rip...this is a thing much more easy to proof than Lewinsky thing. You only need access to the police records and you have the info. It is impossible to deny such a thing, without being a stupid.
I am just being objective here: If was Gore, not Bush, who was the one caught we'd have another "say the truth" thread. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif), or, at the very very least, another ironic thread from you...
Instead you exculpate him (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Dont get me wrong, its clear you support Bush and you believe in him, but one thing is to believe in a candidate and another is to support him blindly against all odds, and this is a good example of it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
(BTW I am the first to think that the Bush's story with driving drunk 26 years ago its quite irrelevant now...but well, he was the "honest" and "morale keeping" candidate, isnt it?...after all he has based a lot of his campaign on attacking Gore&Clinton on the grounds of their inmorality...so he has been caught in his own trap)
Oh, Well (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I do think that this can shift some votes from Bush to Gore. Dunno what will be the result anyway (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 11-03-2000).]
-
Ram
Rip is just pointing out the fact that Clinton / Gore have never admitted to any infractions brought against them no matter how strong the evidence. Bush immediately acknowledged this mistake he made twenty something years ago, while Clinton / Gore are busy lawyer double talking their way out every current accusation regardless the strength of the evidence. The democrats are great at finding loop holes or creating new ones or just flat out lying. If I ever need a lawyer I will be sure to look up a democrat.
Eagler
-
And I point out that it was the only clever exit for the situation ,eagler (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
The problem is, that if Bush denies it, you only need access to Police archives to proof that he has lied. There is NO point in saying "no I didnt do it" when its easy to proof that you DID it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
And there is no "legal" loop possible. you know why?:
1-When you drive drunk, you drive drunk. There is no medium point (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
2-after "shooting" thousands of accusations of "liers" to Gore&Clinton, if Bush tries to do a "legal loop" or to discharge him with some excuse, he will be gilty of the very same things he has been condemning in Democratic party...and of course Gore will immediatly take advantage of it in his next speech...
Result? Bush's political death. Unnafordable.
He has done the ONLY thing he could to to keep his options for the White House more or less intact. He has clever advisors, for sure, and he follows their advices.
But I dont think that, had Bush been able to escape from this story by any means that wont involve his political death, he would have acted the same way.
To say "yes I did it" will cost him a lot of votes. To say "no I didnt" would cost him the race for the White House...
You REALLY think that if a "no I didnt" would've costed him less votes than a "yes" he would've admitted it?...I dont think so (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
Come on, he is a politician. His business is to lie in a convincing way... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[edit] lawyers are all the same, democrat or republican (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)...a lawyer is -ALWAYS- a lawyer. That means that his business is to lie -STILL MORE THAN A POLITICIAN- (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)[/edit]
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 11-03-2000).]
-
Ram, there's also enough evidence that both Clinton and Gore have lied about their past too, but they continue to deny it. Its nice to see a candidate stand up and say "yes, I made a mistake"...something ego-maniacs cannot do. Eagler hit spot on of my post, just pointing out the fact that one candidate can admit to mistakes, rather than to make up poor excuses such as "I did'nt inhale"...
-
Ripsnort, Eagler,
Your right Clinton and Gore don't readily admit to any ifractions they have had.
The first Differance is they(Clinton and Gore) didn't build their entire campain on "Integrity" and "Character". The entire Bush campain has been based around what an honest guy he's supposed to be. The reality about him though is that he was a cokehead drunk until the age of 40 and has never been forthcoming with any of his faults.
Remember Clinton was elected for a second term after the Paula Jones sex story and the other girl. Most Americans don't care about that kind of thing and don't want to elect officials based on it. But the same Republican party who has run this squeaky clean campain image for George W. is the same group that chased Monica Lewinski around for four years. So when some dirt comes out on Georgy boy just think of it as what's good for the Goose, not how could they do that.
Later
F4UDOA
-
I understand perfectly your point, Rip...but you still didnt answer me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
You REALLY think that if a "no I didnt" would've costed Bush less votes than a "yes" he would've admitted it?...
I agree that Gore&Clinton have a lot lot to explain about their "half truths"...but their lies were the best way to preserve their votes. And so, they lied.
I am sure that if Bush had to lie to preserve his votes, he would promptly do it. But the best way, given his attitude in the race for the White House, for him to preserve the most votes possible would be admitting it with no problems, he promptly did it.
But that doesnt make me thing that Bush is more or less lier than Gore or Clinton (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif). Again, he is a politician...And politics are all about being the best lier possible (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
i think it will matter how the story is presented to the sheeple...err i mean people.
right now the press is kinda trying to stir up drama by asking "did they release this so close to the election to ruin bush?"
as long as they keep on that story line bush is ok and it will backfire on gore - if they (the press) decide to start turning this into a righteous moralizing session then he might be in trouble - it all depends on what the more emotional and dramatic story is in the long run -
thats what the people want and thats what the press will feed their sorry prettythanges - there are two possible angles - interesting to see which they pick to dish out.
go bush!
-
He couldda killed someone.
Dead people don't come back 24 years later.
At that time, he would be old enough to know better.
I don't know the man, I don't know if he has changed. But what he did was pretty damned horrible.
But, if the yanks decide on this thing, 24 years back, then they're more stupid than I think.
Read cnn that Gore officials didn't comment on it. Would be dumb of them to do so, since the election ain't about what happened 24 years ago, unless you elect for personality.
Which Bush has said he doesn't want people to do.
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Sorry, but the issue of Bush's 1976 DUI does not reflect on Bush's integrity at all. Many of you voters were not even born at that time. Bush immediately confirmed the recent report of the DUI. Bush also asserted that he has not taken a drink for years and years. I believe him. The man confronted his drinking problem and took direct action to address it. Nor has he made any excuses for his behavior. This shows Bush's character.
Undoubtably, Bush knew way back when he first decided to run for president that he might at some point be discussing the DUI in public. Can you blame him for not bringing up the topic himself?
The issue did come up. Bush has faced it in public. Now, it is behind him.
<S> Gunthr
.
.
.
.
[This message has been edited by Gunthr (edited 11-03-2000).]
-
I dont really think that a DUI reflects on someones morality, judjment sure, but morality no.
As for Clintons double speak, the first time I heard his "I didnt inhale" comment, my first impression was, how can I vote for someone who is so stupid that he cant even figure out how to smoke dope properly.
Shamus
-
Originally posted by Gunthr:
Undoubtably, Bush knew way back when he first decided to run for president that he might at some point be discussing the DUI in public. Can you blame him for not bringing up the topic himself?
in fact, if he had done that, I'd be sure that his claims about moral integrity are truth, Gunthr.
As it is I only think that he is another politician,not better ,not worse than others. He chose to launch his campaign from the "moral keeping" side as he couldn't afford to critize seriously Clinton's administration economic results, international policy, or internal matters. He could launch an attack on the reduction of militar bugdet, and about the moral thing.
Lewinsky scandal was too good a chance to lose it as a platform to discredite Gore&Clinton and the Democratic party as a whole. So he chose to play the "morale master" the "man with deep moral convictions", etc.
A man with deep moral convictions that risked other's lifes driving drunk?...if he had started the campaign saying "look what I did, I did it wrong and now I am a different man",he would have some big credit from my point of view. And IMO it would've been a VERY good political move in his "moral crusade" against CLinton&Co.
Instead he let the thing go as secret as possible hoping that it wouldnt explode, and now that he has NO OTHER CHANCE than to admit the story and to say he has changed, now he expects people to believe him?...
Come on, he is as lier as Clinton...happens that he chose another way of action, nothing more, nothing less...the only way for him to go out more or less untouched was to say "yes I did it but I am now a new man" and hope that people believe him...
otherwise would be a political suicide. And bush may be a lot of things...but he WANTS to be the President of the USA, and the only way for him to sit in the White house is just the way he has taken now.
But that says nothing about his integrity. In fact says a lot...about his not-so-true integrity.
But well I'm spanish and I dont vote in USA's elections (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
The sucky part about political campaigns is that your past will *always* come back to haunt you.
I can't imagine any candidate starting a campaign by airing his own dirty laundry. It would certainly be interesting to see though.
It's not like I walk through life telling people of my own past miseries...if it comes up, I have no problem talking about it. If I apply for a job, or meet new people, I don't say "Hey you know, I did so-and-so a few years ago". Most people just are not ready to deal with stuff like that.
Anyways, my initial point was how the public would react to something that happened so long ago, when Mr. Bush has admitted he no longer does stuff like that. Should be an interesting few days.
Fury
-
Originally posted by Fury:
The sucky part about political campaigns is that your past will *always* come back to haunt you.
I can't imagine any candidate starting a campaign by airing his own dirty laundry. It would certainly be interesting to see though
well, the past will come back to haunt you unless you start saying "Look gentlemen I did this, this this and that. I regret it, and changed by ways, now I am a new man".
THAT is integrity. Not to wait for someone to find the garbage on your past and spreading it to the 4 winds.
And if he had done that, I am sure that Bush's credibility would be way better than it is now. Instead of playing the "caught-in-the-cheat-morale-king" he would be playing the "I-did-wrong-but-now-am-a-good-man"
Again, noone answered me to THIS question (and this is the quid of all the matter):
You REALLY think that if a "no I didnt" would've costed Bush less votes than a "yes" he would've admitted it?...
The lack of direct answer to this question, says a lot about Bush's credibility ,IMO...
-
Originally posted by Shamus:
As for Clintons double speak, the first time I heard his "I didnt inhale" comment, my first impression was, how can I vote for someone who is so stupid that he cant even figure out how to smoke dope properly.
Shamus
amen brother shamus- (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Not to wait for someone to find the garbage on your past and spreading it to the 4 winds.
Ram, I'm trying to explain the finer points of American politics to you...
Bush's political enemies have known about his DUI conviction all along, as have many other people. It is a matter of public record. It was only a question of when they would use it.
Bush has always said that he had made some mistakes in his past. He hasn't attempted to conceal it, he just hasn't shouted it from the rooftops. I don't think we should have expected that from him.
Again, for myself and many other voters, this is just a minor blip in Bush's campaign for President. The conservative platform is what I'm voting for (along with my own pet issue, Education).
BTW, does the rain in Spain still fall mainly on the plain?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Gunthr
-
Originally posted by RAM:
well, the past will come back to haunt you unless you start saying "Look gentlemen I did this, this this and that. I regret it, and changed by ways, now I am a new man".
THAT is integrity. Not to wait for someone to find the garbage on your past and spreading it to the 4 winds.
Hey Ram
We're waiting, go ahead with your dirty laundry.. LOL.. Hate for it to be spread to the 4 winds. Let's see this integrity in action you preach above..
I didn't think so..........
Eagler
-
Ram:You REALLY think that if a "no I didnt" would've costed Bush less votes than a "yes" he would've admitted it?...
No, I don't, I think the majority have already made their minds up on who they will elect, and this won't change anything, as I stated in my original post.
St.Santa:"Read cnn that Gore officials didn't comment on it. Would be dumb of them to do so, since the election ain't about what
happened 24 years ago, unless you elect for personality.
They can't comment on it since theres too much black residue on the kettle to call the stove black!
-
I don't know the man, I don't know if he has changed. But what he did was pretty damned horrible.
========
Huh?
Did he rape half a dozen women? Did he leave his place in line to run from a war where his brothers and sisters were dying? Did he drive his car off a bridge and leave a young pregnant woman to drown inside a submerged vehicle waiting SEVERAL HOURS before reporting it? I could go on and on......
Horrible?
Yeager
[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 11-03-2000).]
-
I think this could backfire on the Democrats. It is very close to the election. I don't think that anyone has any doubts it was a purely political move on Gores campaign that this came out now.
Bush stepped up and took personal responsibility for it. That is such a refreshing change from the last 8 years it is incredible. That would never have happened under the current administration. The last 8 years have been nothing but sidestepping denials and outright lies until undeniable proof was delivered. After the proof was delivered there was a center ring circus of "lawyer" (liar) speek that will go down as a classic study in obfuscation.
Clinton / Gore have made lawyer jokes more truth than fantasy with their activities, IMHO. Both clinton's are a true shining example of the law profession.
Mav
-
One little side note. Bush's blood/alcohol level was AT the legal limit, not past the legal limit. He just didn't pass the field soberiety test. Have you ever tried to take one of those? Those are hard completely sober. Standing with your right foot 6 inches off the ground, out in front of you, legs straight, arms extended straight out to your side, palms up, looking straight up, saying your ABC's backwards. I don't think so! My point is: if this would have been Gore, he would have brought up all those facts, and defended himself on those grounds.......... Bush just said, I did it.
------------------
Nathan "NATEDOG" Mathieu
Art Director
HiTech Creations
-=HELLFIRE SQUAD=-
".... And on the eighth day, God created beer. "
-
It is refreshing to see a candidate admit a wrong-doing without hesitation. Hell, Clinton lied under oath, and with conviction. I would much rather have someone who can make a mistake and not be afraid to admit it than someone who feels like they have to lie under oath to cover it up. Making mistakes is going to happen, no one is perfect. It's how you deal with that mistake that displays your character. Lying about it is a cowardly act no matter how you slice it. It takes a far bigger man to admit wrong-doing.
And btw, Bush had my vote as soon as he called that reporter a "major-league amazinhunk." I like a guy who calls it like he sees it.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
Originally posted by NATEDOG:
Have you ever tried to take one of those?
LOL! never...know why?...because when I blow on the alcohol machine I always give "0" on the alcohol rating, I neved drink when I am going to drive...and hear, I like beer,Vodka and Whiskey as much as anyone here can like it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Originally posted by Eagler:
Hey Ram
We're waiting, go ahead with your dirty laundry.. LOL.. Hate for it to be spread to the 4 winds. Let's see this integrity in action you preach above..
I didn't think so..........
Eagler
Eagler ,I will never try to be president of my country, and less using my moral integrity as a shield (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But if you ask me, I've never driven drunk, I've never tasted drugs and I've never have extramatrimonial relationships (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
So, guess that it makes me better than bush? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) naaaahhh...past is past, and we agree on that. I haven't personal sympathy for a governor who has sent several convicts to the death refusing to change their death penalties...but I have to admit that USA and Spain are different countries and we have different points of view on many things.
I am just saying that, when you use moral integrity and honesty as your campaign's flag, and you are caught on a thing like this...
Its not a good signal (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) nothing else.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 11-03-2000).]
-
Originally posted by RAM:
I am just saying that, when you use moral integrity and honesty as your campaign's flag, and you are caught on a thing like this...
Its not a good signal (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) nothing else.
RAM- moral character and integrity does not mean that you have to share every little detail of your life with the entire world. The fact that he readily admitted it shows his integrity. A man of low moral character would have tried to cover it up, or tried to justify it. Being a politician does not mean you have to invite the whole world to examine every detail of your life. I am much more concerned with what a candidate plans on doing in the present than what he did over 2 decades ago.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
I neved drink when I am going to drive...and hear, I like beer,Vodka and Whiskey as much as anyone here can like it.
====
Yes RAM but in your little country you can walk from one side to the other without crossing a road let alone get in a car!
JK (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Yeager
-
Originally posted by LJK Raubvogel:
RAM- moral character and integrity does not mean that you have to share every little detail of your life with the entire world. The fact that he readily admitted it shows his integrity. A man of low moral character would have tried to cover it up, or tried to justify it. Being a politician does not mean you have to invite the whole world to examine every detail of your life. I am much more concerned with what a candidate plans on doing in the present than what he did over 2 decades ago.
Raub I can agree with you-to an extent.
I agree that he has admited it, and taken the responsability for it...but, then again, he had NO other option, if he still wants to sit down in the W.H.
What could he do? Deny it? only to see how the police archives confirm the story?...
Start some kind of "evasive" explanation? only to see his attacks on Clinton and Gore applied over himself?
He did the ONLY thing possible, I dont say that he hasnt changed, or that he doesnt taste alcohol since his forties. I say that he had NO other exit for it...
--AND THAT HE COULD HAVE AVOIDED THIS SITUATION--...if he knew that this info would be published sooner or later...then why not use it to show that he has nothing to hide?...
Being as it is, now we see a candidate who has used integrity as flag and signal for his campaign, in a quite bad situation. He had no other choice than to do what he did.
His declarations doesnt show his honesty, only shows he has very very good image assessors, and that he is smart enough to follow their suggestions.
BUt I dont see any proof on his honesty here, to be true.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 11-03-2000).]
-
Originally posted by RAM:
But if you ask me, I've never driven drunk, I've never tasted drugs and I've never have extramarital relationships (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
<S>
I haven't personal sympathy for a governor who has sent several convicts to the death refusing to change their death penalties...[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 11-03-2000).]
This is the hardest thing a governor has to do if his state enforces the death penalty. They do not take it light heartedly. My grandfather, my namesake, had 1st hand experience in this matter. Governor of Ohio, 1959-63. His book "Power of Life and Death" is an excellent read concerning the issue.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0404624111/qid%3D973283153/104-1194710-9399160 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0404624111/qid%3D973283153/104-1194710-9399160)
Eagler
-
RAM- so you think that when a candidate starts to campaign, he should have a press conference and tell the world every little detail of his life, and every thing he has ever done wrong? That is simply ridiculous.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
Originally posted by LJK Raubvogel:
RAM- so you think that when a candidate starts to campaign, he should have a press conference and tell the world every little detail of his life, and every thing he has ever done wrong? That is simply ridiculous.
If he says he is the apex of integrity?. Sure. Not all his minor faults, but I understand that driving drunk is a felony, right?...
And no need to be harsh. You have your views, I have mine's (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
(and you vote, and I dont (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) )
-
Originally posted by Eagler:
This is the hardest thing a governor has to do if his state enforces the death penalty. They do not take it light heartedly. My grandfather, my namesake, had 1st hand experience in this matter. Governor of Ohio, 1959-63. His book "Power of Life and Death" is an excellent read concerning the issue.
Eagler...well, Bush never showed too much problems about the problem, and he has said several times that he supports death penalty. I have my views on that particular matter, nothing else (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Taken from cnn online:
"Karen Hughes, chief spokeswoman for Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush, accused Democrats today of leaking the story of his arrest 24 years ago in Maine for driving under the influence of alcohol and called it a "last-minute dirty trick." Tom Connolly, who ran unsuccessfully as a Democrat for governor of Maine in 1998 and was a Gore delegate to the party's nominating convention in Los Angeles this year, said he gave the information about the arrest to a reporter because "it makes me a good citizen." He said he has had no contact with the Gore campaign about the arrest."
Let the media frenzy begin!
Fury
-
If he says he is the apex of integrity?. Sure. Not all his minor faults, but I understand that driving drunk is a felony, right?...
====
It was a class D misdemeanor at the time.
Apparently Geedubya was driving too sloo and got pulled over hehe.....
Most Americans have had a direct impact from alcohol in their lives at one point or another.
I just read the CNN report about the guy from Maine who found this out and reported it. A total democratic hack dweeb. He was a Democratic candidate for governor of Main and was a Democratic delegate from Main at the 2000 DNC convention. He said it was *his duty* to bring this up now.
Garbage...
Yeager
-
Originally posted by StSanta:
He couldda killed someone.
Ted Kenedy did kill some one...
Udie
-
Yeah. See my point? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Originally posted by Fury:
Is the timing of the story relevant, or is it just that Americans are entitled to know the whole truth about a political candidate?
I am curious to know how many people do think it is relevant; I am confident that this will play out in the next few days. I am curious to see how long the media holds onto this one.
Fury
B]
I think it's relevant in the fact that Gore has to resort to this in the last 5 days of the campain. I'm sure it was planned long ago. Ripsnort and I were talking at the Con and I told him I wondered what this election's "October suprise" would be. It's realy simple, this kind of tactic is part of the clinton playbook. I also think that Bush has played this right. If he had "leaked" this out last year or 6 months ago Gore's hitmen would have pounded him on the issue everyday.
Udie
And don't think Gore didn't know about this...
-
What Udie, Gore said he had nothing to do with it. What, you don't believe Gore? You think Gore lies? I bet you a lot of people think the same way, if he'd resort to something this low and with his established record for lying, no one can now believe him when he says he had nothing to do with this latest scum ball tactic. Funny, maybe it'll help point this fact out to others and in the end really backfire on handsomehunkcrats.
Yeah, I want a leader who'll condone this type of campaign. Local radio was flooded with callers (democrats) saying they are switching to Gore because of this issue. What a load of crap! If Gore does pull it out, it'll just be testimony of how down right stupid, gullible and uninformed the average American is. It'll be a sad day for the nation as well.
Eagler
Bush 2000 !!
-
Quote from cnn online.... (Connolly is the person who "broke" the story to a reporter)
"Connolly said the information made its way to him Thursday from an undisclosed Maine Democratic Party official, who heard it from a chiropractor, who in turn said an elderly patient told him of the arrest. Connolly received a call about the arrest while at Biddeford District Court, as the Fox reporter was standing nearby."
That qoute is better than a soap opera! "I heard from my wife, who heard from her friend, who heard from her hairdresser, who heard from her Sears repairman....." (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
I suppose if the chain goes back far enough, you can't track who is really trying to smear Mr. Bush? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Fury
[This message has been edited by Fury (edited 11-04-2000).]
-
Well RAM, what's there to say that Bush didn't plan on revealing this as part of the campaign? Seems like he has the most to gain from it anyway...
------------------
Rickenbacker (Ricken)
-ISAF-
the Independent Swedish Air Force
-
Ram, Driving while under the influence of alchohol in the USA is NOT a felony. It is only what is called a "misdemeanor" in the US. Most first offenders do not serve jail time, and are allowed to keep their driving licenses. They usually get a heavy fine, and costs for attorney fees and everything can total 4-5 thousand dollars.
I understand the penalties in other countries are far more severe.
-
A DUI charge 24 years ago is A LOT easier to admit than having an affair with a 22 year old woman in the Oval Office. Especially when you have a daughter who is well old enough to fully comprehend all it entails.
If Bush is so honest, why won't he address questions relating to his use of Cocaine? 8 years ago you republicans made such a big deal about Clinton once smoking pot. Now that a Republican has a shot at it, you welcome him and his drug & alchohol infested past with open arms. A little hypocritcal, no? Typical.
-
8 years ago you republicans made such a big deal about Clinton once smoking pot.
=====
Igloo,
Most Americans could care less that bubba smoked dope during college. What people didnt like was the infantile denial via the *I didnt inhale* plea (which is just one measely example of the mans inbred capacity to be blatantly dishonest). If Geedubya lied in any way about the DUI, rather than not answering, then he is in big trouble!
And rightfully so!
Also, you make the typical mistake of politically ignorant people (not meant as a personal slam, just an observation on my part) that the President is somehow totally responsible for anything good, as well as anything bad, that happens as a result of policy initiated at the federal government level.
To say that a democratic president is solely responsible for the excellent economy, when both houses of congress have been under republican control for the last 6 out of 8 years, is typical liberalistic socialist demagoguery.
You need to understand something here igloo, the President must work with congress to hammer out compromise legislation. They both MUST agree to pass ANYTHING into law! Do you understand this?
Bush is right when he says the economy is the result of the resourcefulness of the American people *in spite* of the government!
I am in agreement with Bush.
Yeager
[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 11-05-2000).]
-
Of course you are. You're republican.
-
I am a constitutional conservative.
I dont care much for political party affiliations. If you are a conservative democrat than you are just as worthy as a conservative independant or conservative republican.
Yeager
-
Originally posted by Igloo:
Of course you are. You're republican.
And you're a liberal Canadian. About time for your countrymen to start driving 25 in a 55 mph zone down here. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Eagler
-
I believe that the Will of the People will outweigh the Good of the People. I believe that the pandering of polticians to their perceived mandates has driven us to a point where our Political Parties are neigh on to indistinguishable and none dare take a stand on critical issues lest they be found unpopular by some influential group.
I believe Geo W Bush is Alfred E Neuman (of Mad Magazine) and Al Gore is a mannequin desperatly trying to pose as a person.
The fact is our social entitlement programs are unsustainable in the face of the population curve. These dolts will make gestures at reformation but nobody really wants to talks about what it's going to cost to fund social security and medicare in the face of a declining work force. The first guy that honestly states that benefits will be cut, taxes will be raised or huge deficit spending is required will be left twisting in the wind.
You tell me where it's going? Like so many I don't give a crap until it effects me or mine and then I'm pissed. My fear is that by the time we come to our collective senses and deal with big issues the abilty to influence outcomes will be foreclosed.
Okay, now I'm going to finish my sandwhich.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
-
Originally posted by Igloo:
Of course you are. You're republican.
Obviously this is a man so blinded by his own political straightjacket that he cannot conceive that other people are not as ideologically imprisoned as he is.
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 11-06-2000).]