John Kerry's $8,000 bike
Mike Krueger
mountain bike to John Kerry's $8,000 Serotta Ottrott. What the heck makes a
seemingly-ordinary looking road bike worth $8,000?
Dan Brussee
>mountain bike to John Kerry's $8,000 Serotta Ottrott. What the heck makes a
>seemingly-ordinary looking road bike worth $8,000?
The fact that people will pay that much.
Andre
extra charge (Kerry is quite tall) for $5000. The guy isn't running Ada of
Lightweight wheels (ksyriums), so there's no way it would cost $8000.
--
--------------------------
Andre Charlebois
AGC-PC support
http://agc-pc.tripod.com
BPE, MCSE4.0, CNA, A+
"Mike Krueger" <skub...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040801131657...@mb-m17.aol.com...
Arthur Harris
I read an article recently (I forget where) that said Kerry rode an $8000
Italian bike. Maybe the author thought Serotta was Italian.
Art Harris
James Spencer
<y9aPc.331749$rCA1....@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, Andre
<agc...@rogers.com> wrote:
> I checked it out on www.serotta.com. Custom geometry is included at no
> extra charge (Kerry is quite tall) for $5000. The guy isn't running Ada of
> Lightweight wheels (ksyriums), so there's no way it would cost $8000.
I wondered too. The Serrotta Ottrott ST lists at $5000 for frame only,
no fork. With fork, a top of the line gruppo (does anyone know what he
has on that puppy), decent wheels, carbon handlebars (recently
replaced) etc. $8000 is well within reach. Surprised the heck out of
me.
--
James P. Spencer
Rochester, MN
"Badges?? We don't need no stinkin badges!"
Jee Doy
>extra charge (Kerry is quite tall) for $5000. The guy isn't running Ada of
>Lightweight wheels (ksyriums), so there's no way it would cost $8000.
>
Maybe its because he's a politician running for the presidency and it includes
secret stuff wired (or wireless) to protect him.
Edward Dike, III
It could be for the copious amounts handlebar tape he uses if in fact that
bike gets ridden much.
It must get re-wrapped every time he rides.
That bright, shiny yellow tape does not appeared to be much used.
ED3
Werehatrack
A buyer willing to fork over the cash. Nothing else.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
SMMB
message de :
news:GmbPc.16$%g.2...@news.uswest.net...
--
Bonne route,
Sandy
Paris FR
Andre
way this frame could be significantly better than an off the rack trek oclv
110 frame. What the hell is Ben thinking?
You wouldn't want to ride it for fear of crashing it...
--
--------------------------
Andre Charlebois
AGC-PC support
http://agc-pc.tripod.com
BPE, MCSE4.0, CNA, A+
"James Spencer" <jspencer...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:010820041403330298%jspencer...@charter.net...
(Pete Cresswell)
>What the heck makes a
>seemingly-ordinary looking road bike worth $8,000?
"Worth"...dunno. But cost gets pretty hight pretty fast when you order a
custom frame - as Kerry probably did to accomodate his body size.
My (extremely...) limited experience is that custom frames aren't any better
than good off-the-shelf frames - but they cost a lot more to make due to the
nature of the production process.
The big advantage of a custom frame to me is that if you're a statistical
outlier body-wise, you get a frame that fits rather than having to do cruel and
unusual things to an off-the-shelf frame.
--
PeteCresswell
David Johnson
> Holy crap! Now I see that $5000 is frame only! What a ripoff! There's no
> way this frame could be significantly better than an off the rack trek oclv
> 110 frame. What the hell is Ben thinking?
He's thinking that people will pay that much?
At my current income, I make due with what I have. If I had
significantly more money, I'd get something better, but I'd spend a lot
of time researching to figure out how to get the best value in a dream
bike. If I were wealthy in the Bush/Kerry range, I'd find a good bike
shop, explain what I wanted, and that it was cost-no-object, then I'd
come back in a couple of weeks and pick it up. I'd know I was going to
pay more than I had to, but at that level, my time would be worth more
than I could save.
TBGibb
(Mike Krueger) writes:
Privilege
Tom Gibb <TBG...@aol.com>
James Spencer
wrote:
> At my current income, I make due with what I have. If I had
> significantly more money, I'd get something better, but I'd spend a lot
> of time researching to figure out how to get the best value in a dream
> bike. If I were wealthy in the Bush/Kerry range, I'd find a good bike
> shop, explain what I wanted, and that it was cost-no-object, then I'd
> come back in a couple of weeks and pick it up. I'd know I was going to
> pay more than I had to, but at that level, my time would be worth more
> than I could save.
Amen. Add to this that even buying the most extremely expensive bike
is still peanuts compared to other "hobbies". We might all get aghast
at Kerry spending $8000 on a bike or even Bush spending $3500 but the
fact is that these expenses are trivial compared to say the cost of the
Bush's offshore power boat.
Actually, when you think about it, considering all the benefits of
riding over other recreational endeavors, it is a buy. I have a lot of
very definately middle class friends who own boats. Now they spend a
lot of time with their boats in the summer but probably not any more
than I do with my bike. Still, I was pretty shocked at myself when I
put out for a $2500 bike but I certainly never get shocked when I hear
that a friend has bought a simple fishing boat with motor and trailer.
However, the fact is that even that simple fishing package in most
cases cost more than even Kerry's bike which is getting close to the
maximum one can spend for a bike. Similarly, Robin Williams apparently
spends a small fortune every year on bikes etc. but even his
expenditures are small potatoes compared to what Jay Leno spends on
collector cars or what David Letterman spends on racing cars.
Heck, for the amount that people I personally know spend every year for
upkeep on their power toys or boats, I could probably have a new
Colnago every year and not even have to sell off the old one!!!
(...maybe but as much joy as I get from a new bike, it's not as much as
I get from riding an old friend that fits well and can be counted on to
behave as expected.)
Spence
Weisse Luft
Point taken on the custom size but I had a IF Crown Jewel frame made
for under $2000. The Otrott is carbon fiber but my experience is
aerospace grade CF tube costs no more per pound than high quality super
alloy steel (Aermet 100). And the Otrott shouldn't have a greater mass
of CF tube than woould be required for a steel frame.
--
Weisse Luft
Fx199
>spends a small fortune every year on bikes etc. but even his
>expenditures are small potatoes compared to what Jay Leno spends on
>collector cars or what David Letterman spends on racing cars.
I'll bite. what is it that Robin is buying?
carl...@comcast.net
<jspencer...@charter.net> wrote:
>In article <410d...@joe.HOME>, David Johnson <djohn...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
[snip]
>
>Amen. Add to this that even buying the most extremely expensive bike
>is still peanuts compared to other "hobbies". We might all get aghast
>at Kerry spending $8000 on a bike or even Bush spending $3500 but the
>fact is that these expenses are trivial compared to say the cost of the
>Bush's offshore power boat.
>
[snip]
Dear Bullwinkle,
I'll see that offshore power boat and raise a $35 million
Gulfstream V private jet named . . . well, I'll leave that
as an exercise for the reader.
Cheers,
Rocky
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Francis Xavier,
Look, it's none of our business what celebrities--
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?s=35f47f11f7b23ef8024349bf6241d147&p=4318#post4318
Carl Fogel
Terry Rudd
thinks a thing about paying $45-$55K for a full-sized SUV, which no one
"needs". I can far more easily imagine paying $8K for a bike that is
good for me than $50K for a vehicle I don't need, which is also
expensive to insure and would cost me a couple of grand a year to keep
gas in. Ben's bikes aren't for everyone- either you accept the price or
you ride someone elses bikes.
Terry
bfd
"Fx199" <fx...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040801234257...@mb-m21.aol.com...
Robin has something like OVER 60 bikes. Lance has said something like "I've
ridden with Robin at least 50 times, and he has never had the same bike
twice!"
Robin buys from my LBS (A Bicycle Odyssey in Sausalito, CA) and I've seen a
few bikes they've built up for him. One I remember was an all black Colnago
C40 with Record 10 and really fancy Colnago carbon wheels. Costed him
something like $10K - basically a latte for Robin...
Ryan Cousineau
"bfd" <bfd...@mindspring.com> wrote:
What, do we all have "Robin rides a..." stories? A guy at one of the
local bike shops in my neighbourhood makes some rather radical custom
cruiser/lowrider bikes (often with a mountain-bike influence, like the
one he was building last I saw with a SRAM 9-speed rear end on a grip
shifter mounted below the seat). Apparently Williams, on a recent trip
to Vancouver, bought one of his creations from a downtown shop where it
was on display.
My wife is disturbed by the number of bikes I have, but I only have two
that cost more than $20,
--
Ryan Cousineau, rcou...@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.
B
the bikes are more enjoyable.
B
(remove clothes to reply)
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
>Funny, folks get all bent out of shape over an expensive bike but nobody
>thinks a thing about paying $45-$55K for a full-sized SUV, which no one
>"needs".
Ahhh, some of us think expensive SUVs are nutty and offensive for most
users.
JT
Fx199
>thinks a thing about paying $45-$55K for a full-sized SUV, which no one
>"needs"
Why doesn't anyone need one?
H
> There is an article in today's NY Times comparing George Bush's $3,500 Trek
> mountain bike to John Kerry's $8,000 Serotta Ottrott. What the heck makes a
> seemingly-ordinary looking road bike worth $8,000?
If one can afford it, it is good to purchase state-of-the-art stuff.
In Kerry's case, he gets bonus points for buying from an American
company who manufactures their stuff in America (I think). He also,
most likely, purchased his bike at an lbs and is a regular customer.
Qui si parla Campagnolo
seemingly-ordinary looking road bike worth $8,000? >><BR><BR>
Ben is all about gizmos, with the OTTROTT being a perfect example. Carbon with
ti lugs. Take a wonderful material(titanium) that lasts forever and glue a
bunch of carbon plugs on it. For good measure, make it compact. For the price
of the frame($5000) you could have MANY complete bicycles.
I doubt John payed for this bicycle tho.
Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"
Qui si parla Campagnolo
Lightweight wheels (ksyriums), so there's no way it would cost $8000.
$5000 for the frame-$500 for the fork, $1800 for the group, add about $700 for
everything else-
Qui si parla Campagnolo
'se rota' spanish for 'it's broken'....
B
>foreverything else-Peter Chisholm Vecchio's
And give the bill to my wife please.
Don Wagner
>There is an article in today's NY Times comparing George Bush's $3,500 Trek
>seemingly-ordinary looking road bike worth $8,000?
GPS system, cloaking device and waffle maker.
--Don--
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
rocketman58
> mountain bike to John Kerry's $8,000 Serotta Ottrott. What the heck makes a
> seemingly-ordinary looking road bike worth $8,000?
But I thought Kerry was the candidate for the average citizen, not the
rich and powerful. So why is he riding a bike that cost twice as much
as the rich Republican candidate? The average citizen can't afford a
bike a tenth of that price!
Hmm... If I vote for Kerry, do I get a free Serrota? (Heck, I be
happy to get Bush's $3500 Trek)
B
>rich and powerful. So why is he riding a bike that cost twice as much
>as the rich Republican candidate? The average citizen can't afford a
>bike a tenth of that price!
Maybe, like his huge SUV, it is his "family" bike and not his.
S o r n i
> In Kerry's case, he gets bonus points for buying from an American
> company who manufactures their stuff in America (I think). He also,
> most likely, purchased his bike at an lbs and is a regular customer.
Hmmm. If he'd known he was going to run for President, he probably would
have bought a Trek...AND TAKEN A FILM CREW ALONG, TOO!
Bill "cynical Monday" S.
Benjamin Lewis
> skub...@aol.com (Mike Krueger) wrote in message
> news:<20040801131657...@mb-m17.aol.com>...
>> There is an article in today's NY Times comparing George Bush's $3,500
>> Trek mountain bike to John Kerry's $8,000 Serotta Ottrott. What the heck
>> makes a seemingly-ordinary looking road bike worth $8,000?
>
> But I thought Kerry was the candidate for the average citizen, not the
> rich and powerful. So why is he riding a bike that cost twice as much
> as the rich Republican candidate?
I had no idea George Bush was selling so cheaply. I still wouldn't buy
him, though.
--
Benjamin Lewis
Seeing is deceiving. It's eating that's believing.
-- James Thurber
(Pete Cresswell)
>So why is he riding a bike that cost twice as much
>as the rich Republican candidate?
It's probably an even smaller fraction of his disposable income than most
people's "beater" bikes are...and when he bought it, he was just thinking about
getting a nice bike to fit his elongated bod....as opposed to consulting some
spin doctor.
--
PeteCresswell
JP
> But I thought Kerry was the candidate for the average citizen, not the
> rich and powerful. So why is he riding a bike that cost twice as much
> as the rich Republican candidate? The average citizen can't afford a
> bike a tenth of that price!
That's about the stupidest application of logic I have ever heard. Are
you saying that a rich person can't have any compassion for someone
less fortunate than him- or herself? If your wife was worth half a
billion would you get a REALLY nice bike, or would you ride bike that
costs "a tenth of that price" just to prove that you care about your
fellow human beings?
(The rich Republican candidate also has a 10+ mile mountain bike trail
on his own property, if you want to get picky.)
Hell, since he's got so much money, maybe Kerry should just quit
politics and spend the rest of his years touring the world by bicycle.
He's not doing what he's doing because he needs the work. When I read
his biographical data I can find no motivation for his life's work
other than a sense of duty toward- and a love for the USA and its
people. I say give him his fancy bike and just be glad he didn't
devote his life to trying to screw the rest of us, as the Bush family
has.
JP
Drew Eckhardt
Andre <agc...@rogers.com> wrote:
>Holy crap! Now I see that $5000 is frame only! What a ripoff! There's no
>way this frame could be significantly better than an off the rack trek oclv
>110 frame. What the hell is Ben thinking?
A nice new car depreciates over $5000 in the first year.
You could spend less money buying a new Serotta every three years and throwing
it out afterwards than people do on leased automobiles.
--
<a href="http://www.poohsticks.org/drew/">Home Page</a>
Life is a terminal sexually transmitted disease.
Jay Beattie
"JP" <SocSecTr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1f323b67.04080...@posting.google.com...
> artist...@worldnet.att.net (rocketman58) wrote in message
news:<70ce0d5a.04080...@posting.google.com>...
>
> > But I thought Kerry was the candidate for the average
citizen, not the
> > rich and powerful. So why is he riding a bike that cost
twice as much
> > as the rich Republican candidate? The average citizen can't
afford a
> > bike a tenth of that price!
>
> That's about the stupidest application of logic I have ever
heard. Are
> you saying that a rich person can't have any compassion for
someone
> less fortunate than him- or herself? If your wife was worth
half a
> billion would you get a REALLY nice bike, or would you ride
bike that
> costs "a tenth of that price" just to prove that you care about
your
> fellow human beings?
>
> (The rich Republican candidate also has a 10+ mile mountain
bike trail
> on his own property, if you want to get picky.)
Don't go there. Teresa could buy and sell G.W., and his bike
trails.
> Hell, since he's got so much money, maybe Kerry should just
quit
> politics and spend the rest of his years touring the world by
bicycle.
> He's not doing what he's doing because he needs the work. When
I read
> his biographical data I can find no motivation for his life's
work
> other than a sense of duty toward- and a love for the USA and
its
> people. I say give him his fancy bike and just be glad he
didn't
> devote his life to trying to screw the rest of us, as the Bush
family
> has.
Actually, Kerry is a shill for Big Ketchup. After he takes
office, the U.S. will invade small, tomato growing countries on
the pretext that they harbor terrorists. There will be a huge
tomato grab, and the price of ketchup will sky-rocket, and so
will Teresa's stock. It is all in my new documentary,
"FarenHeinz 57." -- Jay Beattie.
Tom Sherman
> artist...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
>
>
>>skub...@aol.com (Mike Krueger) wrote in message
>>news:<20040801131657...@mb-m17.aol.com>...
>>
>>>There is an article in today's NY Times comparing George Bush's $3,500
>>>Trek mountain bike to John Kerry's $8,000 Serotta Ottrott. What the heck
>>>makes a seemingly-ordinary looking road bike worth $8,000?
>>
>>But I thought Kerry was the candidate for the average citizen, not the
>>rich and powerful. So why is he riding a bike that cost twice as much
>>as the rich Republican candidate?
>
>
> I had no idea George Bush was selling so cheaply. I still wouldn't buy
> him, though.
By Federal election law, George Bush can only sell himself for $4000 per
election cycle.
--
Tom Sherman – Quad City Area
Prometheus
--On Monday, August 02, 2004 4:34 PM -0700 Jay Beattie
<jbea...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
Here's the ketchup kicker though. The US Government only uses Hunt's in its
cafeterias, eateries, and military kitchens.
Now, there are plenty of ROTC programs here in Pittsburgh colleges. How do
they feel, using Hunt's in the land of Heinz?
Probably the same way Theresa will feel putting it on her burger from the
white house kitchen.
Mike
Mechanical Engineering 2006, Carnegie Mellon University
Remove nospam to reply.
RonSonic
>artist...@worldnet.att.net (rocketman58) wrote in message news:<70ce0d5a.04080...@posting.google.com>...
>
>> But I thought Kerry was the candidate for the average citizen, not the
>> rich and powerful. So why is he riding a bike that cost twice as much
>> as the rich Republican candidate? The average citizen can't afford a
>> bike a tenth of that price!
>
>That's about the stupidest application of logic I have ever heard. Are
>you saying that a rich person can't have any compassion for someone
>less fortunate than him- or herself? If your wife was worth half a
>billion would you get a REALLY nice bike, or would you ride bike that
>costs "a tenth of that price" just to prove that you care about your
>fellow human beings?
>
>(The rich Republican candidate also has a 10+ mile mountain bike trail
>on his own property, if you want to get picky.)
>
>Hell, since he's got so much money, maybe Kerry should just quit
>politics and spend the rest of his years touring the world by bicycle.
>He's not doing what he's doing because he needs the work. When I read
>his biographical data I can find no motivation for his life's work
>other than a sense of duty toward- and a love for the USA and its
>people.
Or a desire to accumulate power, prestige and wealth. Get real. He isn't
offering to take out your trash for you, he wants to rule. Now whether he says
he will rule wisely or justly or compassionately, he still wants to rule.
> I say give him his fancy bike and just be glad he didn't
>devote his life to trying to screw the rest of us, as the Bush family
>has.
Huh?
Ron
RonSonic
Not at all expensive compared to his recreations/habits/vices of some years ago.
Ron
B
>his biographical data I can find no motivation for his life's work
>other than a sense of duty toward- and a love for the USA and its
>people.
It is all about POWER.
Qui si parla Campagnolo
the
rich and powerful. >><BR><BR>
welll, altho I will vote for Mr Kerry, he has a similar silver spoon in his____
as George Bubya.
JP
> Or a desire to accumulate power, prestige and wealth. Get real.
He has power, prestige and wealth.
> He isn't
> offering to take out your trash for you, he wants to rule.
You're right: he's not offering to take out the trash for me. Do you
think that by winning such an absurd point that it supports your
conclusion that "he wants to rule"?
> > I say give him his fancy bike and just be glad he didn't
> >devote his life to trying to screw the rest of us, as the Bush family
> >has.
>
> Huh?
Prescott Bush, banker for Nazi Germany; George I friend of the Saudis;
George II, friend of the corporate CEO (especially the energy CEO) and
anyone making more than a quarter of a million a year that really
feels entitled to more.
JP
JP
> bike trail on his own property, if you want to get picky.)
>
> Don't go there. Teresa could buy and sell G.W., and his bike
> trails.
Actually, the Cheney, Bush family and Teresa Heinz Kerry fortunes are
pretty comparable- somewhere in the hundreds of millions. Heinz Kerry
may be somewhat wealthier but I would not bet money on it (as if there
is any way to find out for sure). The Bush family is hard to guess
because so much of their wealth has been accumulated in ways not
subject to public reporting but it's up there. Carlysle Group, for
example, is a private investment fund. They are all extremely,
extremely wealthy. This stuff of pretending that Kerry is so wealthy
in comparison to Bush and Cheney is nothing but a Bush campaign
talking point, conveniently picked up by the mainstream media.
> Actually, Kerry is a shill for Big Ketchup. After he takes
> office, the U.S. will invade small, tomato growing countries on
> the pretext that they harbor terrorists. There will be a huge
> tomato grab, and the price of ketchup will sky-rocket, and so
> will Teresa's stock. It is all in my new documentary,
> "FarenHeinz 57." -- Jay Beattie.
That's funny. LOL. I hope you are able to recognize the difference
between your own clever satire and what is happening in Iraq.
JP
RonSonic
>RonSonic <rons...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message news:<6teug0pee5192ho29...@4ax.com>...
>
>> Or a desire to accumulate power, prestige and wealth. Get real.
>
>He has power, prestige and wealth.
And he wants more.
>> He isn't
>> offering to take out your trash for you, he wants to rule.
>
>You're right: he's not offering to take out the trash for me. Do you
>think that by winning such an absurd point that it supports your
>conclusion that "he wants to rule"?
He's running for President.
>> > I say give him his fancy bike and just be glad he didn't
>> >devote his life to trying to screw the rest of us, as the Bush family
>> >has.
>>
>> Huh?
>
>Prescott Bush, banker for Nazi Germany; George I friend of the Saudis;
>George II, friend of the corporate CEO (especially the energy CEO) and
>anyone making more than a quarter of a million a year that really
>feels entitled to more.
And Kerry and the misses have close to a freeking Billion. This is a whole
'nuther league. Bush isn't even close to that kind of money. Does that make him
a better person, of course not. But it does make me wonder what the hell you're
thinking when you praise Kerry as a man of the people.
Ron
Mark Hickey
>Actually, the Cheney, Bush family and Teresa Heinz Kerry fortunes are
>pretty comparable- somewhere in the hundreds of millions.
Not true.
>This stuff of pretending that Kerry is so wealthy
>in comparison to Bush and Cheney is nothing but a Bush campaign
>talking point, conveniently picked up by the mainstream media.
You ARE living in a dream world. This is all public domain stuff.
Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
JP
> SocSecTr...@earthlink.net (JP) wrote:
>
> >Actually, the Cheney, Bush family and Teresa Heinz Kerry fortunes are
> >pretty comparable- somewhere in the hundreds of millions.
>
> Not true.
You're right. I made a mistake with the numbers, and I admit it.
The fact is that the candidates all have net worths in the TENS of
millions, with George Jr. having the least at maybe $20 million.
However, the Bush *family* fortune is hard to put a number on but it
is probably larger than that of any of the individual candidates.
John and Teresa Kerry have a joint worth in the tens of millions of
dollars, somewhere in the same neighborhood as Cheney; the Heinz
fortune which Teresa is heir to is hers, not Kerry's, although it is
reported on Kerry's disclosure.
> >This stuff of pretending that Kerry is so wealthy
> >in comparison to Bush and Cheney is nothing but a Bush campaign
> >talking point, conveniently picked up by the mainstream media.
>
> You ARE living in a dream world.
Although I was mistaken about the numbers my statement above is still
true: This stuff of pretending that Kerry is so wealthy in comparison
to Bush and Cheney is nothing but a Bush campaign talking point,
conveniently picked up by the mainstream media.
> This is all public domain stuff.
It is public domain, and they are all extremely wealthy. I find it
more than a little sickening how Cheney and the Bushes (both Georges)
made their money turning political influence into profit. Haliburton
was fined $7.5 million yesterday for defrauding its shareholders while
Cheney was CEO. It was also discovered recently to have been illegally
trading with Iran through a subsidiary, also while Cheney was CEO. I
can't help but recall his debate with Lieberman in the 2000 campaign
where he made the famously snotty remark, "I can tell you, Joe, that
the government had absolutely nothing to do with it," ironic
considering Halliburton's government contracts, shareholder fraud, and
trading with the enemy.
JP
Todd Kuzma
considered an appropriate target for both comedians and
Republicans. The Republican party here in Illinois is up in
arms over the Democrats making issue of our local
congressman's fiancee.
Jerry Weller, my congressman, is engaged to the daughter of
a former Guatemalan dictator, Rios Montt, who was
responsible for the genocide of over 70,000 people. The
daughter is a current member of the Guatemalan legislature.
She tried, unsuccessfully, last year to get her father
back into the presidency.
The Republicans are quite angry that the Democrats have made
this an issue while gleefully talking up Teresa Heinz Kerry.
Personally, I have no problem talking about the Heinz family
money. However, I think that it is quite relevant to
dicsuss whether it is appropriate for a US congressman, and
member of the International Relations Committee, to be
married to the daughter, and supporter, of a genocidal dictator.
Todd Kuzma
Heron Bicycles
Tullio's Big Dog Cyclery
LaSalle, Il 815-223-1776
http://www.heronbicycles.com
http://www.tullios.com
Paul Richardson
In his "arse" is that what you meant to say ?
Mark Hickey
>Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote in message news:<0tk0h09e57v7renk0...@4ax.com>...
>> SocSecTr...@earthlink.net (JP) wrote:
>>
>> >Actually, the Cheney, Bush family and Teresa Heinz Kerry fortunes are
>> >pretty comparable- somewhere in the hundreds of millions.
>>
>> Not true.
>
>You're right. I made a mistake with the numbers, and I admit it.
>
>The fact is that the candidates all have net worths in the TENS of
>millions, with George Jr. having the least at maybe $20 million.
>However, the Bush *family* fortune is hard to put a number on but it
>is probably larger than that of any of the individual candidates.
You're still wrong unless you count the Bush family that makes the
baked beans (I have a sneaking suspicion they're tied in with the
Heinz family to get a better price on tomato products). ;-) Face it
(unless you can actually come up with something other than a WAG -
Kerry's richer than the other guys.
>John and Teresa Kerry have a joint worth in the tens of millions of
>dollars, somewhere in the same neighborhood as Cheney; the Heinz
>fortune which Teresa is heir to is hers, not Kerry's, although it is
>reported on Kerry's disclosure.
It's interesting to note that in order to finance his campaign early
on, John Kerry mortgaged "his" house worth many millions of dollars.
Of course, there'd be no way in the world on his income he could
possibly HAVE a house worth many millions of dollars... I don't hold
his wealth against him, BTW... but it's kinda ludicrous to try to
paint him as the common man up against the weathy.
>> >This stuff of pretending that Kerry is so wealthy
>> >in comparison to Bush and Cheney is nothing but a Bush campaign
>> >talking point, conveniently picked up by the mainstream media.
>>
>> You ARE living in a dream world.
>
>Although I was mistaken about the numbers my statement above is still
>true: This stuff of pretending that Kerry is so wealthy in comparison
>to Bush and Cheney is nothing but a Bush campaign talking point,
>conveniently picked up by the mainstream media.
The Kerrys are worth between $500 million to a BILLION dollars... John
obviously has access to some of that money, no?
>> This is all public domain stuff.
>
>It is public domain, and they are all extremely wealthy. I find it
>more than a little sickening how Cheney and the Bushes (both Georges)
>made their money turning political influence into profit. Haliburton
>was fined $7.5 million yesterday for defrauding its shareholders while
>Cheney was CEO. It was also discovered recently to have been illegally
>trading with Iran through a subsidiary, also while Cheney was CEO. I
>can't help but recall his debate with Lieberman in the 2000 campaign
>where he made the famously snotty remark, "I can tell you, Joe, that
>the government had absolutely nothing to do with it," ironic
>considering Halliburton's government contracts, shareholder fraud, and
>trading with the enemy.
I hadn't heard about the fines - it's not at all unusual for a company
dealing with the government to run afoul of the (many) regulations.
It's happened to companies I've worked for as well.
Still, the level of "proof" required by many on the left seems to
require nothing more than a hypothetical supposition on the part of a
partisan hack. That's really sad because it means REAL problems go
unnoticed because everyone's always crying wolf. That's not political
debate - it's simply propaganda.
Perhaps you can post some citations on the above fines - I haven't
seen a thing on the Haliburton fines, including a search on the
excellent drudgereport.com site.
Mark Hickey
>I find it interesting that the wealth of Kerry's wife is
>considered an appropriate target for both comedians and
>Republicans. The Republican party here in Illinois is up in
>arms over the Democrats making issue of our local
>congressman's fiancee.
>
>Jerry Weller, my congressman, is engaged to the daughter of
>a former Guatemalan dictator, Rios Montt, who was
>responsible for the genocide of over 70,000 people. The
>daughter is a current member of the Guatemalan legislature.
> She tried, unsuccessfully, last year to get her father
>back into the presidency.
>
>The Republicans are quite angry that the Democrats have made
>this an issue while gleefully talking up Teresa Heinz Kerry.
>
>Personally, I have no problem talking about the Heinz family
>money. However, I think that it is quite relevant to
>dicsuss whether it is appropriate for a US congressman, and
>member of the International Relations Committee, to be
>married to the daughter, and supporter, of a genocidal dictator.
OTOH, the same Illinois Democrats made hay by dragging out that a
potential Republican candidate had propositioned (get this...) his
wife (in some sort of raunchy club apparently).
Let's face it - real debate (either side) is getting increasingly hard
to come by. There are fewer and fewer facts, and lots and lots of
wild speculation and hyperbole. Such is the political silly season,
no?
gwhite
JP wrote:
>
> ... and
> anyone making more than a quarter of a million a year that really
> feels entitled to more.
The actual situation is reversed. Someone makes a good buck and some
other loser thinks they are entitled to it.
Tom Sherman
> ...
> OTOH, the same Illinois Democrats made hay by dragging out that a
> potential Republican candidate had propositioned (get this...) his
> wife (in some sort of raunchy club apparently)....
It was mostly the press - a "sex scandal" involving a celebrity actress
(Jeri Ryan) gets good ratings. One of the parties that sued to have the
Ryan's divorce records unsealed was the Chicago Tribune - hardly a
liberal bastion (they usually end up endorsing the Republican candidate).
To his credit, Democratic candidate Barack Obama refused to discuss the
issue, saying it was irrelevant.
Pat
> >
> ><snip>
> >more than a little sickening how Cheney and the Bushes (both Georges)
> >made their money turning political influence into profit. Haliburton
> >was fined $7.5 million yesterday for defrauding its shareholders while
> >Cheney was CEO. It was also discovered recently to have been illegally
> >trading with Iran through a subsidiary, also while Cheney was CEO. I
> >can't help but recall his debate with Lieberman in the 2000 campaign
> >where he made the famously snotty remark, "I can tell you, Joe, that
> >the government had absolutely nothing to do with it," ironic
> >considering Halliburton's government contracts, shareholder fraud, and
> >trading with the enemy.
>
> I hadn't heard about the fines - it's not at all unusual for a company
> dealing with the government to run afoul of the (many) regulations.
> It's happened to companies I've worked for as well.
>
> Still, the level of "proof" required by many on the left seems to
> require nothing more than a hypothetical supposition on the part of a
> partisan hack. That's really sad because it means REAL problems go
> unnoticed because everyone's always crying wolf. That's not political
> debate - it's simply propaganda.
>
> Perhaps you can post some citations on the above fines - I haven't
> seen a thing on the Haliburton fines, including a search on the
> excellent drudgereport.com site.
>
> Mark Hickey
Here ya go:
Halliburton to pay SEC $7.5 million
Firm admits no fault in disclosure complaint from Cheney years
09:04 PM CDT on Tuesday, August 3, 2004
By JIM LANDERS / The Dallas Morning News
Halliburton Co. agreed Tuesday to pay $7.5 million to the Securities and
Exchange Commission, settling a complaint that it failed to disclose an
accounting change that inflated earnings during two years of Vice President
Dick Cheney's leadership.
You can read the rest of the story at the Dallas Morning News site.
It came out yesterday, August 3.
Pat in TX
Fx199
>From: "Pat" m...@privacy.net
>Date: 8/4/2004 9:11 PM US Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <2ndja7F...@uni-berlin.de>
Nickles and dimes in their operation.
Grow up
Todd Kuzma
ma...@habcycles.com wrote on 8/4/04 8:09 PM:
> OTOH, the same Illinois Democrats made hay by dragging out that a
> potential Republican candidate had propositioned (get this...) his
> wife (in some sort of raunchy club apparently).
The Democrats basically said nothing about it. Barack Obama called it
irrelevant. The state Republicans were upset that Ryan had lied to them
about it, and they have been a bit gunshy since the Gov. Ryan scandals. I
think that they were afraid of another scandal, but the sad part is that
their search for a replacement candidate has been far more embarassing that
anything that Jack Ryan did.
I didn't think Ryan's sex club story was a very big deal. It certainly had
nothing to do with whether he would have made a good Senator. I think that
the state Republican party over-reacted.
Todd Kuzma
Heron Bicycles
Tullio's Big Dog Cyclery
LaSalle, IL
http://www.heronbicycles.com/
http://www.tullios.com/
Andrew Lee
"Mark Hickey" <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote:
> >Although I was mistaken about the numbers my statement above is still
> >true: This stuff of pretending that Kerry is so wealthy in comparison
> >to Bush and Cheney is nothing but a Bush campaign talking point,
> >conveniently picked up by the mainstream media.
>
> The Kerrys are worth between $500 million to a BILLION dollars... John
> obviously has access to some of that money, no?
The Los Angeles Times said that the Kerry's were worth $500 million in 1995,
and they are now estimated to be worth between $900 million and $3.2
billion! Here is a link to the story:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=72035&messageid=1088433531
Kerry buying two $8000 bikes would be comparable to me buying a 50 cent
doughnut.
Qui si parla Campagnolo
only the wealthy can really participate, at the highest levels. Too bad because
there are some really great, but not wealthy, leaders out there.
Jay Beattie
"Todd Kuzma" <tul...@theramp.net> wrote in message
news:BD371072.227BE%tul...@theramp.net...
> in article h223h016o7lgml5eb...@4ax.com, Mark
Hickey at
> ma...@habcycles.com wrote on 8/4/04 8:09 PM:
>
> > OTOH, the same Illinois Democrats made hay by dragging out
that a
> > potential Republican candidate had propositioned (get
this...) his
> > wife (in some sort of raunchy club apparently).
>
> The Democrats basically said nothing about it. Barack Obama
called it
> irrelevant. The state Republicans were upset that Ryan had
lied to them
> about it, and they have been a bit gunshy since the Gov. Ryan
scandals. I
> think that they were afraid of another scandal, but the sad
part is that
> their search for a replacement candidate has been far more
embarassing that
> anything that Jack Ryan did.
>
> I didn't think Ryan's sex club story was a very big deal. It
certainly had
> nothing to do with whether he would have made a good Senator.
I think that
> the state Republican party over-reacted.
The funniest part about all of this is the state Republican
party's difficulty finding a replacement candidate. I think they
put a help wanted ad in the classifieds. -- Jay Beattie.
Ken Ferschweiler
: OTOH, the same Illinois Democrats made hay by dragging out that a
: potential Republican candidate had propositioned (get this...) his
: wife (in some sort of raunchy club apparently).
Well, actually, the way CNN reported it was that she alleged that he
"took her to sex clubs and asked her to engage in sexual activity in
front of other patrons." Apparently some of his constituents found
this to be at odds with his stance as a "family values" candidate.
I'm no expert in political science, but it seems to me that they may
have a point.
-Ken
jim c
Weisse Luft
SEALED divorce proceedings. Jerry did NOT want this information
released and it should have remained SEALED. But the Democratic smear
machine managed to get ahold of it.
Now how about Kerry's divorce papers???
Go Alan Keyes!!!
--
Weisse Luft
John Forrest Tomlinson
<Weisse.Lu...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>> yeah but, you *have* seen the guys wife, right? (7 of 9 from startrek)
>The news of Jerry and Jack Ryan was LEAKED to the media from their
>SEALED divorce proceedings. Jerry did NOT want this information
>released and it should have remained SEALED. But the Democratic smear
>machine managed to get ahold of it.
Just because two people want material in a divorce sealed doesn't mean
that they are going to get their way. If you use the court for
business the default is that there has to be a compelling reason for
the information to be kept secret. In this case a judge rules there
was not.
JT
Weisse Luft
There it goes again, the people exist for the benefit of the courts
:confused:
The court records are to be SEALED unless there is compelling evidence
to the contrary. Was its unwarranted release part of public safety, as
in the case of child molesters? No? How about national defense? No?
Was the information related to SEC action? No?
Then how is the personal dealings between two adults any part of the
public sphere? And why was it released contrary to the wishes of the
involved parties?
Just in case you forgot, the courts exist to serve the people. There
is no term "using the court for business". Tripe.
--
Weisse Luft
SMMB
"Weisse Luft" <Weisse.Lu...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> a écrit
dans le message de :
news:Weisse.Lu...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com...
> There it goes again, the people exist for the benefit of the courts
> :confused:
Your confusion follows :
> The court records are to be SEALED unless there is compelling evidence
> to the contrary.
This is nonsense. All documents filed with courts are open records, unless
a prior motion to seal has been granted by the presiding judge, and that
decision, were it rendered, remains subject to appeal.
> Just in case you forgot, the courts exist to serve the people. There
> is no term "using the court for business". Tripe.
One uses the courts for business regularly. It is not the tabernacle, you
know ...
--
Bonne route,
Sandy
Paris FR
Weisse Luft
Sandy, if you knew of the case, you would know both parties had agreed
to sealing the records. This isn't a public trust case, its PRIVATE.
Just like Senator Kerry's divorce papers but the media isn't going to
go fishing for an unsealing in this case. Another example of liberal
bias in the media. Yes, it was the MEDIA that pushed for unsealing of
the Ryan divorce documents.
--
Weisse Luft
SMMB
dans le message de :
news:Weisse.Lu...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com...
> Sandy, if you knew of the case, you would know both parties had agreed
> to sealing the records. This isn't a public trust case, its PRIVATE.
> Just like Senator Kerry's divorce papers but the media isn't going to
> go fishing for an unsealing in this case. Another example of liberal
> bias in the media. Yes, it was the MEDIA that pushed for unsealing of
> the Ryan divorce documents.
>
You don't change anything here with your comments. The matter is public ;
the motion to seal (apparently consented to) may have been granted ; having
a right to public information, even when sealed, the press must have done
their legal best and obtained a reversal of the judge's orders. No, I don't
know the particular pleadings, but it is the vulturism in some corners of
the press, not their liberal or conservative leanings, that offends you,
apparently.
One can blame the press for intruding into personal matters, perhaps. In
other instances, private papers have been sought and obtained and published,
and the results have been monumentally important to the public.
S o r n i
> Another example of liberal bias in the media.
Only 92% of media reps at the DNC favor Dems, according to a recent poll
(taken anonymously, of course). You call that a BIAS?!?
Bill "shock et surprise, n'est-ce pas?" S.
Jay Beattie
"SMMB" <leu...@free.fr> wrote in message
news:ceu8c8$lrs$1...@news.tiscali.fr...
> "Weisse Luft"
<Weisse.Lu...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> a écrit
> dans le message de :
> news:Weisse.Lu...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com...
>
> > Sandy, if you knew of the case, you would know both parties
had agreed
> > to sealing the records. This isn't a public trust case, its
PRIVATE.
> > Just like Senator Kerry's divorce papers but the media isn't
going to
> > go fishing for an unsealing in this case. Another example of
liberal
> > bias in the media. Yes, it was the MEDIA that pushed for
unsealing of
> > the Ryan divorce documents.
When Clinton was getting reamed for his dalliance with Monica,
was that liberal bias in the media? How about Gary Hart, or even
Jimmy Carter and "lust in his heart" and the killer rabbit. The
fact is that the press will go after any titillating story. The
conservatives may get hit harder because they preach family
values and then get caught picking up 'ho's.
> >
> You don't change anything here with your comments. The matter
is public ;
> the motion to seal (apparently consented to) may have been
granted ; having
> a right to public information, even when sealed, the press must
have done
> their legal best and obtained a reversal of the judge's orders.
No, I don't
> know the particular pleadings, but it is the vulturism in some
corners of
> the press, not their liberal or conservative leanings, that
offends you,
> apparently.
>
> One can blame the press for intruding into personal matters,
perhaps. In
> other instances, private papers have been sought and obtained
and published,
> and the results have been monumentally important to the public.
The press objects to sealing orders more often than you might
think -- and so do other interest groups, often plaintiff's
attorneys who want to get information for the purpose of filing
similar lawsuits against the same defendant. If you are a
litigant, you have to assume that every filed document will
become a public record -- even in a marital dissolution case.
Like it or not, this is the essence of an open court. -- Jay
Beattie.
Fx199
>Jimmy Carter and "lust in his heart"
Oh yeah...BIG STORY there..<yawn>
(imbecile flush)
bfd
"Fx199" <fx...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040805195802...@mb-m06.aol.com...
> >or even
> >Jimmy Carter and "lust in his heart"
>
>
>
> Oh yeah...BIG STORY there..<yawn>
>
talks about Jimmy Carter and his wife riding their Rivendells:
http://dordude.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/carter.jpg
Tom Sherman
2002 was also a fiasco for Illinois Republicans, with their hopes for
electing a US Senator resting on name confusion (Durbin the Democratic
incumbent and Durkin the Republican challenger).
Tom Sherman
> ...
> The news of Jerry and Jack Ryan was LEAKED to the media from their
> SEALED divorce proceedings. Jerry did NOT want this information
> released and it should have remained SEALED. But the Democratic smear
> machine managed to get ahold of it....
Is the Chicago Tribune part of the Democratic "smear machine"?
P.S. It is Jeri Ryan, not Jerry Ryan.
John Forrest Tomlinson
<Weisse.Lu...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>
>Just in case you forgot, the courts exist to serve the people.
The people are, in this case, the citizens of the state. Not just the
two Ryans. That's the key principle here.
> There
>is no term "using the court for business".
I meant to resolve their affairs. Not a legal term. But plain
English.
> Tripe.
Doofus.
JT
John Forrest Tomlinson
<Weisse.Lu...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>The court records are to be SEALED unless there is
> compelling evidence to the contrary.
This is fundamentally wrong. It is a completely wrong interpretation
of the role of courts in our society.
Restate what you wrote about the opposite of how you wrote it and then
you'll have it right.
JT
Tom Sherman
Here is a picture of former US Senate candidate Jack Ryan's former wife,
Jeri Ryan on a trike (cycling content):
<http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove/jeriryan115.jpg>.
Todd Kuzma
> P.S. It is Jeri Ryan, not Jerry Ryan.
Hey, there's a lot of Ryans to keep track of. Most of them
the Illinois Republicans would like to forget: George Ryan,
Jim Ryan, and Jack Ryan. Jim Ryan was trying so hard to
distance himself from George Ryan that he eventually
campaigned as just "Jim!"
Todd Kuzma
Heron Bicycles
Tullio's Big Dog Cyclery
LaSalle, Il 815-223-1776
http://www.heronbicycles.com
http://www.tullios.com
JP
> "Mark Hickey" <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote:
>
> > >Although I was mistaken about the numbers my statement above is still
> > >true: This stuff of pretending that Kerry is so wealthy in comparison
> > >to Bush and Cheney is nothing but a Bush campaign talking point,
> > >conveniently picked up by the mainstream media.
> >
> > The Kerrys are worth between $500 million to a BILLION dollars... John
> > obviously has access to some of that money, no?
>
> The Los Angeles Times said that the Kerry's were worth $500 million in 1995,
> and they are now estimated to be worth between $900 million and $3.2
> billion!
That's Teresa's money, not John Kerry's. Their mutually shared wealth
is well under $100 million.
JP
JP
> SocSecTr...@earthlink.net (JP) wrote:
>
> >Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote in message news:<0tk0h09e57v7renk0...@4ax.com>...
> >> SocSecTr...@earthlink.net (JP) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Actually, the Cheney, Bush family and Teresa Heinz Kerry fortunes are
> >> >pretty comparable- somewhere in the hundreds of millions.
> >>
> >> Not true.
> >
> >You're right. I made a mistake with the numbers, and I admit it.
> >
> >The fact is that the candidates all have net worths in the TENS of
> >millions, with George Jr. having the least at maybe $20 million.
> >However, the Bush *family* fortune is hard to put a number on but it
> >is probably larger than that of any of the individual candidates.
>
> You're still wrong unless you count the Bush family that makes the
> baked beans (I have a sneaking suspicion they're tied in with the
> Heinz family to get a better price on tomato products).
You don't know I'm wrong because you don't know what George Sr. is
worth now any more than I do, but I do know that George Sr. was worth
$5 million twenty years ago, before he got involved with Carlyle, and
that he has used his influence as an ex-president to make his business
investments since 1993 extremely efficient.
> ;-) Face it
> (unless you can actually come up with something other than a WAG -
> Kerry's richer than the other guys.
No he's not. And that's not a guess, wild or otherwise. His joint
wealth with Teresa is well under $100 million.
> It's interesting to note that in order to finance his campaign early
> on, John Kerry mortgaged "his" house worth many millions of dollars.
So? Look at the value of Bush's "ranch".
> Of course, there'd be no way in the world on his income he could
> possibly HAVE a house worth many millions of dollars...
His income is not limited to a his Senator's salary, but then neither
is Bush or Cheney's (especially Cheney) limited to their income as
POTUS/VPOTUS.
> I don't hold
> his wealth against him, BTW... but it's kinda ludicrous to try to
> paint him as the common man up against the weathy.
I'm not painting him as the common man against the wealthy, I'm
calling him a wealthy man representing the interests of the common man
and woman against the wealthy men representing the interests of the
wealthy.
> The Kerrys are worth between $500 million to a BILLION dollars... John
> obviously has access to some of that money, no?
He has access to the the part of the fortune, less than $100 million,
that is theirs jointly. For financing his campaign, he has access to
$2000 of the money that is Teresa's.
> >It is public domain, and they are all extremely wealthy. I find it
> >more than a little sickening how Cheney and the Bushes (both Georges)
> >made their money turning political influence into profit. Haliburton
> >was fined $7.5 million yesterday for defrauding its shareholders while
> >Cheney was CEO. It was also discovered recently to have been illegally
> >trading with Iran through a subsidiary, also while Cheney was CEO. I
> >can't help but recall his debate with Lieberman in the 2000 campaign
> >where he made the famously snotty remark, "I can tell you, Joe, that
> >the government had absolutely nothing to do with it," ironic
> >considering Halliburton's government contracts, shareholder fraud, and
> >trading with the enemy.
>
> I hadn't heard about the fines - it's not at all unusual for a company
> dealing with the government to run afoul of the (many) regulations.
> It's happened to companies I've worked for as well.
We're talking about defrauding shareholders by using fraudulent
accounting practices while Cheney was CEO. Same deal as Enron.
> Still, the level of "proof" required by many on the left seems to
> require nothing more than a hypothetical supposition on the part of a
> partisan hack.
There's nothing hypothetical about this. Wonder what would've happened
if the head of the SEC was not a Bush appointee.
> That's really sad because it means REAL problems go
> unnoticed because everyone's always crying wolf. That's not political
> debate - it's simply propaganda.
This "phony" problem- accounting fraud- has cost shareholders hundreds
of millions of dollars. Even Key Lay, CEO of Enron, looks like he may
serve some jail time. What about the CEO of Halliburton?
> Perhaps you can post some citations on the above fines - I haven't
> seen a thing on the Haliburton fines, including a search on the
> excellent drudgereport.com site.
Drudge? You gotta be kidding.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37936-2004Aug3.html
A search of News.Google turns up numerous references. You do have a
point though: it's amazing how many media outlets failed to report the
story.
JP
Fx199
>No he's not. And that's not a guess, wild or otherwise. His joint
>wealth with Teresa is well under $100 million.
>
Oh, whew, for a minute there I thought he was rich. A measly 100 million
Mark Hickey
>Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote...
>> You're still wrong unless you count the Bush family that makes the
>> baked beans (I have a sneaking suspicion they're tied in with the
>> Heinz family to get a better price on tomato products).
>
>You don't know I'm wrong because you don't know what George Sr. is
>worth now any more than I do, but I do know that George Sr. was worth
>$5 million twenty years ago, before he got involved with Carlyle, and
>that he has used his influence as an ex-president to make his business
>investments since 1993 extremely efficient.
Translation: you have no idea.
>> ;-) Face it
>> (unless you can actually come up with something other than a WAG -
>> Kerry's richer than the other guys.
>
>No he's not. And that's not a guess, wild or otherwise. His joint
>wealth with Teresa is well under $100 million.
Well I guess he IS a man of the poor downtrodden poor then - only $100
million? ;-)
>> It's interesting to note that in order to finance his campaign early
>> on, John Kerry mortgaged "his" house worth many millions of dollars.
>
>So? Look at the value of Bush's "ranch".
Ever been to Texas? We're not talking Manhattan real estate prices
here.
>> Of course, there'd be no way in the world on his income he could
>> possibly HAVE a house worth many millions of dollars...
>
>His income is not limited to a his Senator's salary, but then neither
>is Bush or Cheney's (especially Cheney) limited to their income as
>POTUS/VPOTUS.
Translation: Yeah, he did mortgage Theresa's house.
>> I don't hold
>> his wealth against him, BTW... but it's kinda ludicrous to try to
>> paint him as the common man up against the weathy.
>
>I'm not painting him as the common man against the wealthy, I'm
>calling him a wealthy man representing the interests of the common man
>and woman against the wealthy men representing the interests of the
>wealthy.
I can paint my little dog as a leopard and it doesn't change the way
it acts in reality.
>> The Kerrys are worth between $500 million to a BILLION dollars... John
>> obviously has access to some of that money, no?
>
>He has access to the the part of the fortune, less than $100 million,
>that is theirs jointly. For financing his campaign, he has access to
>$2000 of the money that is Teresa's.
Did you mean $2 million?
>> >It is public domain, and they are all extremely wealthy. I find it
>> >more than a little sickening how Cheney and the Bushes (both Georges)
>> >made their money turning political influence into profit. Haliburton
>> >was fined $7.5 million yesterday for defrauding its shareholders while
>> >Cheney was CEO. It was also discovered recently to have been illegally
>> >trading with Iran through a subsidiary, also while Cheney was CEO. I
>> >can't help but recall his debate with Lieberman in the 2000 campaign
>> >where he made the famously snotty remark, "I can tell you, Joe, that
>> >the government had absolutely nothing to do with it," ironic
>> >considering Halliburton's government contracts, shareholder fraud, and
>> >trading with the enemy.
>>
>> I hadn't heard about the fines - it's not at all unusual for a company
>> dealing with the government to run afoul of the (many) regulations.
>> It's happened to companies I've worked for as well.
>
>We're talking about defrauding shareholders by using fraudulent
>accounting practices while Cheney was CEO. Same deal as Enron.
Hardly. Large corporations get their wrists slapped all the time for
minor bookkeeping transgressions. Enron melted down a huge
corporation. Only someone blinded by propaganda can't see the
difference.
>> Still, the level of "proof" required by many on the left seems to
>> require nothing more than a hypothetical supposition on the part of a
>> partisan hack.
>
>There's nothing hypothetical about this. Wonder what would've happened
>if the head of the SEC was not a Bush appointee.
Hmmmmm. Interesting question. Lessee what happened with the SEC
under Slick Willy. Oh my, he relaxed the regulations that LET THE
ENRON SITUATION HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE. Now let's look at the Bush
administration. Hmmmm, they prosecuted the Enron violators. Heh.
>> That's really sad because it means REAL problems go
>> unnoticed because everyone's always crying wolf. That's not political
>> debate - it's simply propaganda.
>
>This "phony" problem- accounting fraud- has cost shareholders hundreds
>of millions of dollars. Even Key Lay, CEO of Enron, looks like he may
>serve some jail time. What about the CEO of Halliburton?
You seem to have Enron confused with Halliburton. And yeah - Ken Lay
is probably going to jail - what's that you were saying about
favorable treatment by the Bush administration?
>> Perhaps you can post some citations on the above fines - I haven't
>> seen a thing on the Haliburton fines, including a search on the
>> excellent drudgereport.com site.
>
>Drudge? You gotta be kidding.
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37936-2004Aug3.html
Sorry - requires registration. Not worth the hassle.
>A search of News.Google turns up numerous references. You do have a
>point though: it's amazing how many media outlets failed to report the
>story.
That's 'cuz it's not a big enough story to be newsworthy. Probably
wouldn't have made the outlets it did except for the incidental Cheney
connection (and the minute amount of political hay that could be made
from it).
Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
Tom Sherman
> ...
> Hmmmmm. Interesting question. Lessee what happened with the SEC
> under Slick Willy. Oh my, he relaxed the regulations that LET THE
> ENRON SITUATION HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE. Now let's look at the Bush
> administration. Hmmmm, they prosecuted the Enron violators. Heh....
What about the SEC under George Herbert Walker Bush? Didn't they shelve
the investigation of a certain Harken Energy Director named George
Walker Bush, for his not properly reporting personal transactions
involving stock/finances? I wonder why that happened?
Mark Hickey
It's obvious. It was a non-issue or the left and media would have
pounced on it and made it front page news for months at a minimum.
Tom Sherman
Sort of like the Clinton's involvement in Whitewater - a non-issue?
Mark Hickey
>Mark Hickey wrote:
Bad example - that one made the news in a big way, for quite a while.
Then again, the news that's printed often has little to do with the
importance of the news item itself.
Consider if you will that the hallowed New York Times ran almost fifty
FRONT PAGE stories about the Iraqi prison abuses, many intimating that
they were orchestrated by the administration.
Now that it comes out that there were NO connections beyond those
involved - they print that story too.
Once, on page seven.
Tom Sherman
> Tom Sherman <tshe...@qconline.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Mark Hickey wrote:
>
>
>>>It's obvious. It was a non-issue or the left and media would have
>>>pounced on it and made it front page news for months at a minimum.
>>
>>Sort of like the Clinton's involvement in Whitewater - a non-issue?
>
>
> Bad example - that one made the news in a big way, for quite a while.
>
> Then again, the news that's printed often has little to do with the
> importance of the news item itself....
Yes, the "liberal media" was much harder on Clinton than it is/was on
Reagan, Bush I and Bush II.
JP
> Tom Sherman <tshe...@qconline.com> wrote:
>
> >Mark Hickey wrote:
>
> >> It's obvious. It was a non-issue or the left and media would have
> >> pounced on it and made it front page news for months at a minimum.
> >
> >Sort of like the Clinton's involvement in Whitewater - a non-issue?
>
> Bad example - that one made the news in a big way, for quite a while.
>
> Then again, the news that's printed often has little to do with the
> importance of the news item itself.
>
> Consider if you will that the hallowed New York Times ran almost fifty
> FRONT PAGE stories about the Iraqi prison abuses, many intimating that
> they were orchestrated by the administration.
>
> Now that it comes out that there were NO connections beyond those
> involved - they print that story too.
In other words no one was involved who was not involved?
Actually, it came out yesterday that there were others aware of what
was going on:
"Intelligence officers implicated in Abu Ghraib"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5663747/
It's ridiculous to claim that those pathetic National Guard MPs were
the only ones who knew what was going on. It would be difficult to
find a single enlisted person in the entire US armed forces who
believes that. The only question is whether there will be an
investigation of sufficient independence to see just how far up the
chain of command the whole thing goes.
JP
JP
> >worth now any more than I do, but I do know that George Sr. was worth
> >$5 million twenty years ago, before he got involved with Carlyle, and
> >that he has used his influence as an ex-president to make his business
> >investments since 1993 extremely efficient.
>
> Translation: you have no idea.
Translation: you suggest that since I can't put a specific number on
their wealth it doesn't count.
> >> ;-) Face it
> >> (unless you can actually come up with something other than a WAG -
> >> Kerry's richer than the other guys.
> >
> >No he's not. And that's not a guess, wild or otherwise. His joint
> >wealth with Teresa is well under $100 million.
>
> Well I guess he IS a man of the poor downtrodden poor then - only $100
> million? ;-)
I didn't say $100 million, I said well under $100 million, roughly the
same ballpark as Bush and Cheney (and Edwards, for that matter).
> >So? Look at the value of Bush's "ranch".
>
> Ever been to Texas? We're not talking Manhattan real estate prices
> here.
I'm from Texas, 6th generation as a matter of fact. (Just so you know,
the Dixie Chicks are not the only Texans ashamed of George Bush.)
Opensecrets.org has an image of Bush's asset declaration on it with
the ranch's estimated value. No it's not Hill Country but it ain't
West Texas desert, neither. It's 1500+ acres, just off I35 (the
Austin-DFW corridor) worth $1-5 million, I'm guessing near the higher
end based on almost $2k/acre + improvements. It would sell for more
than $5 million.
> >> Of course, there'd be no way in the world on his income he could
> >> possibly HAVE a house worth many millions of dollars...
> >
> >His income is not limited to a his Senator's salary, but then neither
> >is Bush or Cheney's (especially Cheney) limited to their income as
> >POTUS/VPOTUS.
>
> Translation: Yeah, he did mortgage Theresa's house.
No, he mortgaged *their* house. If it was Teresa's house *he* could
not do it. But are you saying that there is something wrong with
self-financing of a presidential campaign? Bush still leads Kerry by
about $40 million in fundraising.
> >> I don't hold
> >> his wealth against him, BTW... but it's kinda ludicrous to try to
> >> paint him as the common man up against the weathy.
> >
> >I'm not painting him as the common man against the wealthy, I'm
> >calling him a wealthy man representing the interests of the common man
> >and woman against the wealthy men representing the interests of the
> >wealthy.
>
> I can paint my little dog as a leopard and it doesn't change the way
> it acts in reality.
What you do to your dog has nothing to do with Kerry's platform and
what he represents.
> >> The Kerrys are worth between $500 million to a BILLION dollars... John
> >> obviously has access to some of that money, no?
> >
> >He has access to the the part of the fortune, less than $100 million,
> >that is theirs jointly. For financing his campaign, he has access to
> >$2000 of the money that is Teresa's.
>
> Did you mean $2 million?
No. The limit on contributions from any individual is $2000.
> >We're talking about defrauding shareholders by using fraudulent
> >accounting practices while Cheney was CEO. Same deal as Enron.
>
> Hardly. Large corporations get their wrists slapped all the time for
> minor bookkeeping transgressions. Enron melted down a huge
> corporation. Only someone blinded by propaganda can't see the
> difference.
$7.5 million is not a slap on the wrist, but as avoidance of criminal
procedures it's a pretty good deal. Halliburton shareholders are not
happy about it, though, and have filed suit against the company for
defrauding them.
> >There's nothing hypothetical about this. Wonder what would've happened
> >if the head of the SEC was not a Bush appointee.
>
> Hmmmmm. Interesting question. Lessee what happened with the SEC
> under Slick Willy. Oh my, he relaxed the regulations that LET THE
> ENRON SITUATION HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE.
No, that was under George Sr. In January 1993 Bush appointee Wendy
Gramm (wife of former Senator Phil Gramm) exempted Enron and other
energy traders from regulations applied to other futures trading.
(Wendy went on to serve with negative distinction on the Enron board
of directors and audit review board.)
> Now let's look at the Bush
> administration. Hmmmm, they prosecuted the Enron violators. Heh.
Lay's indictment was nicely timed- Bush couldn't go into an election
with that hanging out there, could he? What Bush didn't do was issue
any regulations that would significantly reform these accounting
practices.
They prosecuted the CEO of Enron, but they "slapped the wrist" of
Halliburton because the CEO of Halliburton is THE VICE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES!
> >> That's really sad because it means REAL problems go
> >> unnoticed because everyone's always crying wolf. That's not political
> >> debate - it's simply propaganda.
> >
> >This "phony" problem- accounting fraud- has cost shareholders hundreds
> >of millions of dollars. Even Key Lay, CEO of Enron, looks like he may
> >serve some jail time. What about the CEO of Halliburton?
>
> You seem to have Enron confused with Halliburton.
Not at all. I think it's you who's confused, or, more likely, trying
to confuse. I ask why the CEO of Halliburton is not investigated, you
say, "Ken Lay is probably going to jail".
> And yeah - Ken Lay
> is probably going to jail - what's that you were saying about
> favorable treatment by the Bush administration?
We'll see what happens. My prediction: Bush wins, Lay walks; Bush
loses, Lay is pardoned.
> >> Perhaps you can post some citations on the above fines - I haven't
> >> seen a thing on the Haliburton fines, including a search on the
> >> excellent drudgereport.com site.
> >
> >Drudge? You gotta be kidding.
> >
> >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37936-2004Aug3.html
>
> Sorry - requires registration. Not worth the hassle.
You're the one who asked for the cite. 'Scuse me all to hell.
> >A search of News.Google turns up numerous references. You do have a
> >point though: it's amazing how many media outlets failed to report the
> >story.
>
> That's 'cuz it's not a big enough story to be newsworthy. Probably
> wouldn't have made the outlets it did except for the incidental Cheney
> connection (and the minute amount of political hay that could be made
> from it).
Cheney is the CEO of a company that is fined $7.5 million to settle
allegations of accounting fraud and you're telling us it's not
newsworthy?
JP
Mark Hickey
>Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote in message news:<fr9gh01g85vmfgl46...@4ax.com>...
>> SocSecTr...@earthlink.net (JP) wrote:
>>
>> >Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote...
>>
>> >You don't know I'm wrong because you don't know what George Sr. is
>> >worth now any more than I do, but I do know that George Sr. was worth
>> >$5 million twenty years ago, before he got involved with Carlyle, and
>> >that he has used his influence as an ex-president to make his business
>> >investments since 1993 extremely efficient.
>>
>> Translation: you have no idea.
>
>Translation: you suggest that since I can't put a specific number on
>their wealth it doesn't count.
It means you don't know.
>> >> ;-) Face it
>> >> (unless you can actually come up with something other than a WAG -
>> >> Kerry's richer than the other guys.
>> >
>> >No he's not. And that's not a guess, wild or otherwise. His joint
>> >wealth with Teresa is well under $100 million.
>>
>> Well I guess he IS a man of the poor downtrodden poor then - only $100
>> million? ;-)
>
>I didn't say $100 million, I said well under $100 million, roughly the
>same ballpark as Bush and Cheney (and Edwards, for that matter).
You're right - Bush is worth nowhere near $100 million.
>> >So? Look at the value of Bush's "ranch".
>>
>> Ever been to Texas? We're not talking Manhattan real estate prices
>> here.
>
>I'm from Texas, 6th generation as a matter of fact. (Just so you know,
>the Dixie Chicks are not the only Texans ashamed of George Bush.)
>Opensecrets.org has an image of Bush's asset declaration on it with
>the ranch's estimated value. No it's not Hill Country but it ain't
>West Texas desert, neither. It's 1500+ acres, just off I35 (the
>Austin-DFW corridor) worth $1-5 million, I'm guessing near the higher
>end based on almost $2k/acre + improvements. It would sell for more
>than $5 million.
$2000 an acre for land in the middle of nowhere in Texas? Let me sell
you a ranch, please! I can buy nicer land in Arizona for a tenth of
that.
>> >> Of course, there'd be no way in the world on his income he could
>> >> possibly HAVE a house worth many millions of dollars...
>> >
>> >His income is not limited to a his Senator's salary, but then neither
>> >is Bush or Cheney's (especially Cheney) limited to their income as
>> >POTUS/VPOTUS.
>>
>> Translation: Yeah, he did mortgage Theresa's house.
>
>No, he mortgaged *their* house. If it was Teresa's house *he* could
>not do it. But are you saying that there is something wrong with
>self-financing of a presidential campaign?
I know it's hard to keep track of the difference between the Kerry and
Theresa assets, with Kerry even getting confused as to whether or not
he owns SUVs (he apparently does if he's talking to Detroit auto
workers, but doesn't when being interviewed by greenies).
>Bush still leads Kerry by
>about $40 million in fundraising.
So? FWIW, I think it's a lot closer than that now, but who cares?
>> >> I don't hold
>> >> his wealth against him, BTW... but it's kinda ludicrous to try to
>> >> paint him as the common man up against the weathy.
>> >
>> >I'm not painting him as the common man against the wealthy, I'm
>> >calling him a wealthy man representing the interests of the common man
>> >and woman against the wealthy men representing the interests of the
>> >wealthy.
>>
>> I can paint my little dog as a leopard and it doesn't change the way
>> it acts in reality.
>
>What you do to your dog has nothing to do with Kerry's platform and
>what he represents.
I for one don't like what Kerry represents. His lies about his
"heroic actions" in Cambodia are going to bite him big time (I
predict, though the media is doing backflips to avoid the story).
>> >> The Kerrys are worth between $500 million to a BILLION dollars... John
>> >> obviously has access to some of that money, no?
>> >
>> >He has access to the the part of the fortune, less than $100 million,
>> >that is theirs jointly. For financing his campaign, he has access to
>> >$2000 of the money that is Teresa's.
>>
>> Did you mean $2 million?
>
>No. The limit on contributions from any individual is $2000.
Hmmmm. Hock's Theresa's house, finances campaign.
>> >We're talking about defrauding shareholders by using fraudulent
>> >accounting practices while Cheney was CEO. Same deal as Enron.
>>
>> Hardly. Large corporations get their wrists slapped all the time for
>> minor bookkeeping transgressions. Enron melted down a huge
>> corporation. Only someone blinded by propaganda can't see the
>> difference.
>
>$7.5 million is not a slap on the wrist, but as avoidance of criminal
>procedures it's a pretty good deal. Halliburton shareholders are not
>happy about it, though, and have filed suit against the company for
>defrauding them.
We'll see what comes of it. If it wasn't an election year, this would
be a non-story.
>> >There's nothing hypothetical about this. Wonder what would've happened
>> >if the head of the SEC was not a Bush appointee.
>>
>> Hmmmmm. Interesting question. Lessee what happened with the SEC
>> under Slick Willy. Oh my, he relaxed the regulations that LET THE
>> ENRON SITUATION HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>
>No, that was under George Sr. In January 1993 Bush appointee Wendy
>Gramm (wife of former Senator Phil Gramm) exempted Enron and other
>energy traders from regulations applied to other futures trading.
>(Wendy went on to serve with negative distinction on the Enron board
>of directors and audit review board.)
<snipped a lot of boring stuff>
>Cheney is the CEO of a company that is fined $7.5 million to settle
>allegations of accounting fraud and you're telling us it's not
>newsworthy?
Errr, believe it or not, Dick Cheney isn't the CEO of any company.
Really. What apparently isn't newsworthy are the swiftboat commanders
who don't support Kerry, and have called him on his lies about being
in Cambodia. Just a "little thing" that he's basing his candidacy on,
you know - nothing important...
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
>SocSecTr...@earthlink.net (JP) wrote:
>
>>Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote in message news:<fr9gh01g85vmfgl46...@4ax.com>...
>>> SocSecTr...@earthlink.net (JP) wrote:
>>>
>>> >Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote...
>>>
>>> >You don't know I'm wrong because you don't know what George Sr. is
>>> >worth now any more than I do, but I do know that George Sr. was worth
>>> >$5 million twenty years ago, before he got involved with Carlyle, and
>>> >that he has used his influence as an ex-president to make his business
>>> >investments since 1993 extremely efficient.
>>>
>>> Translation: you have no idea.
>>
>>Translation: you suggest that since I can't put a specific number on
>>their wealth it doesn't count.
>
>It means you don't know.
Mike, on this issue you are playing lame rhetorical game. Give it up.
JT
Tom Sherman
> ...Bush is worth nowhere near $100 million....
No kidding!
So we agree that Shrub has little worth. ;)
JP
> SocSecTr...@earthlink.net (JP) wrote:
>
> >Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote in message news:<fr9gh01g85vmfgl46...@4ax.com>...
> >Translation: you suggest that since I can't put a specific number on
> >their wealth it doesn't count.
>
> It means you don't know.
It means I don't know the exact number.
> >I didn't say $100 million, I said well under $100 million, roughly the
> >same ballpark as Bush and Cheney (and Edwards, for that matter).
>
> You're right - Bush is worth nowhere near $100 million.
>
> >> >So? Look at the value of Bush's "ranch".
> >>
> >> Ever been to Texas? We're not talking Manhattan real estate prices
> >> here.
> >
> >I'm from Texas, 6th generation as a matter of fact. (Just so you know,
> >the Dixie Chicks are not the only Texans ashamed of George Bush.)
> >Opensecrets.org has an image of Bush's asset declaration on it with
> >the ranch's estimated value. No it's not Hill Country but it ain't
> >West Texas desert, neither. It's 1500+ acres, just off I35 (the
> >Austin-DFW corridor) worth $1-5 million, I'm guessing near the higher
> >end based on almost $2k/acre + improvements. It would sell for more
> >than $5 million.
>
> $2000 an acre for land in the middle of nowhere in Texas? Let me sell
> you a ranch, please! I can buy nicer land in Arizona for a tenth of
> that.
Have you ever been to Texas? I'll tell ya, you don't know what the
flip you're talking about. It might not get $2k/ acre but it is
certainly between $1500-2000.
If you think that Crawford is in the middle of nowhere, that is
further evidence that you don't know what you're talking about. You
are truly clueless. Get a map.
And I've lived in Arizona, too, BTW. I'd be interested to know what
you think is "nicer land" for $200/acre, because there is no
comparison beween Arizona desert and the land on the I35 corridor
between DFW and Austin.
> >No, he mortgaged *their* house. If it was Teresa's house *he* could
> >not do it. But are you saying that there is something wrong with
> >self-financing of a presidential campaign?
>
> I know it's hard to keep track of the difference between the Kerry and
> Theresa assets,
Only to you.
> with Kerry even getting confused as to whether or not
> he owns SUVs (he apparently does if he's talking to Detroit auto
> workers, but doesn't when being interviewed by greenies).
Like I said, your confusion, not his. He was pretty clear: he does not
personally own an SUV but his family does.
> >What you do to your dog has nothing to do with Kerry's platform and
> >what he represents.
>
> I for one don't like what Kerry represents. His lies about his
> "heroic actions" in Cambodia are going to bite him big time (I
> predict, though the media is doing backflips to avoid the story).
Kerry's Vietnam service history is backed up by the men who actually
served under him. At a time when fragging was widespread and there was
little respect for the chain of command, I think the loyalty of
Kerry's men speaks volumes about his service. The mainstream media is
not giving credence to people who don't even know what they're talking
about. If there is any justice in the world the person getting bit
will be Bush who will not put a stop to this slander or even disavow.
Even McCain says no one should impugn Kerry's service.
Kerry hasn't talked about his heroic actions in Cambodia, just stated
that he was there. In fact he talks very little about the specific
incident that got him the Silver Star.
> >No. The limit on contributions from any individual is $2000.
>
> Hmmmm. Hock's Theresa's house, finances campaign.
Like I said, if it's Teresa's house, he can't do it. If it's their
house he can. But if he could self-finance his entire campaign, I'd
say more power to him.
> >$7.5 million is not a slap on the wrist, but as avoidance of criminal
> >procedures it's a pretty good deal. Halliburton shareholders are not
> >happy about it, though, and have filed suit against the company for
> >defrauding them.
>
> We'll see what comes of it. If it wasn't an election year, this would
> be a non-story.
It happened- accounting fraud in Halliburton on Cheney's watch. $7.5
million fine. Each citizen should decide for themselves whether it
says anything about Cheney's ethics or management ability. Personally,
I think it does; you don't, but by your standards Bush and Cheney
don't seem to be responsible for anything that ever went wrong in
their entire lives. Poor things, helplessly tossed about by the tides
of fate.
> >No, that was under George Sr. In January 1993 Bush appointee Wendy
> >Gramm (wife of former Senator Phil Gramm) exempted Enron and other
> >energy traders from regulations applied to other futures trading.
> >(Wendy went on to serve with negative distinction on the Enron board
> >of directors and audit review board.)
>
> <snipped a lot of boring stuff>
Nice rebuttal.
> >Cheney is the CEO of a company that is fined $7.5 million to settle
> >allegations of accounting fraud and you're telling us it's not
> >newsworthy?
>
> Errr, believe it or not, Dick Cheney isn't the CEO of any company.
> Really.
When the accounting fraud took place that incurred the fine, he was
the current CEO of Halliburton. It was stated ironically in the
present tense. Now, got anything substantive to say?
> What apparently isn't newsworthy are the swiftboat commanders
> who don't support Kerry, and have called him on his lies about being
> in Cambodia. Just a "little thing" that he's basing his candidacy on,
> you know - nothing important...
The evidence is that Kerry probably was in Cambodia, and the evidence
is also that those other boat skippers would not have known one way or
the other; some of them were not even assigned to that unit at the
same time as Kerry. What do his men say?
There's a pretty good analysis of the issue at:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_08/004487.php
The Washington Monthly and Kevin Drum are without question a
progressive news and punditry medium, but ask yourself the question:
what is the value in lying about it? Kerry's medals and service in
Vietnam are well documented; that he might have been assigned to some
covert incursion into Cambodia is nothing more than a footnote to the
overall story.
JP
Fx199
>personally own an SUV but his family does.
>
LOL!!!!!!!
Qui si parla Campagnolo
Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"
Mark Hickey
>be glad when the election is over.....
Me too... I pronounce this thread officially imploded from its own
mass.
Tom Sherman
> vecc...@aol.com (Qui si parla Campagnolo ) wrote:
>
>
>>be glad when the election is over.....
>
>
> Me too... I pronounce this thread officially imploded from its own
> mass.
Do you expect anything other than an off-topic flame war in any thread
with either "Bush" or "Kerry" in the thread name? ;)
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>>> be glad when the election is over.....
>> Me too... I pronounce this thread officially imploded from its own
>> mass.
> Do you expect anything other than an off-topic flame war in any
> thread with either "Bush" or "Kerry" in the thread name?
Make that "Bush", "Kerry", or "Helmet". They are interchangeable.
Jobst Brandt
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org