Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Well, 30 days to go...

by J. Vega / September 30, 2004 6:00 AM PDT

Well, 30 days to go. Then it'll be the afternoon of Friday, 29 October. What's so special about that time and date? It will be the Friday before the election.
Think back to 4 years ago and remember the thread on the Forum about the old "throw a bomb" the Friday before the election. An old DWI, or whatever the "bomb" may be, the "trick" is in the timing. Throw it on the afternoon of the Friday before the election. The point is to leave insufficent time for response to the bomb. Late Friday gets it on the Friday national network news public broadcasts. On Saturday and Sunday the national broadcast evening news programs are in reduced "weekend mode". This leaves just the Monday before the election as the only normal working-day full news day for a counter/discussion.
So, in just 30 days it'll be the standard time to pull that trick again, and we'll see if the Democrats will try to do it again.

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Well, 30 days to go...
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Well, 30 days to go...
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Re: Well, 30 days to go...
by Josh K / September 30, 2004 6:10 AM PDT
In reply to: Well, 30 days to go...
An old DWI....

So you think the Dems have the ammo to toss another DWI bomb? How many more old DWIs do you think Bush has?

Wink
Collapse -
Short memory, Josh...
by J. Vega / September 30, 2004 9:14 AM PDT

Short memory, Josh. The "bomb" can be another bogus memo or other document, there are many types of bombs. 4 years ago it was just that old DWI, but this time they would throw another style of "bomb" the drill is to throw it at the last second. They're not stupid they would vary the type of "bomb" so an not to show a pattern with past bombs. BTW, I doubt if it would be the old illegitimate child routine, it's a good one due to the time it usually takes to show that the charge is bogus, but it's been done before in the past, and in a big contest like this one it's best to come out with something new.

Collapse -
Hey, you're the one...
by Josh K / September 30, 2004 11:31 PM PDT
In reply to: Short memory, Josh...

...who said "an old DWI" as if there was more than one.

The "bomb" failed to do any damage last time; I don't see it happening again. If something legitimate comes up though (say, they find bin Laden being holed up in a hotel room with CIA guards ready to announce his "capture" two days before the election) then the timing would not be the issue.

Wink

Collapse -
Re: Well, 30 days to go...
by Dan McC / September 30, 2004 6:46 AM PDT
In reply to: Well, 30 days to go...

Do you expect the rest of bush's arrests to come to light at that time?

Dan

Collapse -
Well now, let's see..........
by Mac McMullen / September 30, 2004 6:57 AM PDT
In reply to: Well, 30 days to go...

If it's purely political, the nominal response will be:
...there they go again......,

and

If it's purely Bush, the response will probably be:
....just for that, I'm going to vote for him...... .

Collapse -
Re: Well, 30 days to go...
by EdH / September 30, 2004 9:38 AM PDT
In reply to: Well, 30 days to go...

With their record so far this campaign they'll probably fumble the bomb and lose a few fingers. Kerry will take some shrapnel in his butt and claim another Purple Heart.

Collapse -
One day to go....
by Josh K / October 31, 2004 10:22 PM PST
In reply to: Well, 30 days to go...

...and no bomb has been thrown by either side.

Collapse -
Of course, Josh...
by J. Vega / October 31, 2004 10:48 PM PST
In reply to: One day to go....

Of course, Josh, the Times blew the missing weapons attempt by springing it before the planned 60 Minutes Sunday release. But what the hades, you have been waiting 30 days to say that I was wrong so I will say that you are correct. The 60 Minutes planned Sunday release was not a planned Friday evening release.

Collapse -
The bomb could have easily been
by TONI H / October 31, 2004 10:51 PM PST
In reply to: Of course, Josh...

the release of all of Kerry's record......and it disgusts me that none of the media have ever pushed for it.

TONI

Collapse -
Re: The bomb could have easily been
by C1ay / October 31, 2004 11:15 PM PST
The bomb could have easily been the release of all of Kerry's record and it disgusts me that none of the media have ever pushed for it.

And after they sued to make sure they had all of Bush's records. I think it's about time someone started looking into holding the media accountable.

Collapse -
What surprises me, Clay...
by J. Vega / November 1, 2004 12:03 AM PST

Clay, the Navy has said that there are over 100 pages of Kerry's records that have not been released. What surprises me is than no one got their hands on some of it and "leaked" it to the press. Granted, if someboby in the military or government who had access to it did so, if they got caught they would be in the well-known "hurt locker", but I'm surprised that somebody didn't try to get away with it. Maybye I shouldn't be surprised, if it had happened, there is a good chance that the "anonymous" source of the leak would be hunted down and identified eventually.
Oh well, it's about time for me to stop drinking coffee and catch a taxi to the hotel in perparation for a Thursday planned situation. One of these days I've got to get around to getting a little laptop computer so when I'm on a "road trip" I could still have fun on the web. I'll be back to the Forum on Friday, off to the land of room service and cable TV for a while.

Collapse -
Re: Of course, Josh...
by Josh K / October 31, 2004 11:00 PM PST
In reply to: Of course, Josh...

I only saw one segment of 60 Minutes last night. It wasn't about missing weapons but it was damning enough -- it was about the armor-less Humvees our troops have been using, how they've tried jerry-rigging them with sandbags and plywood, how they're just not getting the armored vehicles they need because the planners of this war just didn't plan on there being an insurgency. Basically calling attention to the fact that when Bush says the troops are getting everything they need, he's either wrong or lying.

Collapse -
and still no records oh well yellow
by Mark5019 / October 31, 2004 11:06 PM PST
In reply to: Re: Of course, Josh...

belly after bushes reelected will see if we can force him to show all

Collapse -
What does that have to do with armored Humvees?
by Josh K / October 31, 2004 11:55 PM PST

Oh yes, of course. NOTHING.

Collapse -
Re: What does that have to do with armored Humvees?
by Mark5019 / November 1, 2004 12:39 AM PST

and we will see what his records are hideing every thing so we see

Collapse -
Re: Of course, Josh...
by Dragon / October 31, 2004 11:21 PM PST
In reply to: Re: Of course, Josh...

'Among the items to come out of these missions are the Armor Survivability Kits being installed now on HMMWVs in Iraq. Team 1 reported this issue last fall, beginning a fast-paced effort by personnel from the Army Research Laboratory in Maryland and the Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center in Michigan to develop an easy-to-install kit to protect Soldiers in HMMWVs from issues such as improvised explosive devices. Thousands of the Armor Survivability Kits are being produced through the Army Depot System and shipped overseas.'

http://www.rdecom.army.mil/rdemagazine/200403/people_RDECOM_bronze_stars.html

They are installing those as fast as they can.

Collapse -
Re: Of course, Josh...
by Josh K / October 31, 2004 11:59 PM PST
In reply to: Re: Of course, Josh...

And according to last night's broadcast, these kits do NOT include armor for the vehicles' undercarriages, so even with the kit installed, a bomb planted in the road can still damage the vehicle and kill its occupants.

And the real question is why didn't they get armored vehicles from the get-go? How many young men and women have died as a result of being blown up while riding in a non-armored Humvee?

As the old saying goes, people don't plan to fail; they fail to plan. This Administration failed to plan and a lot of kids have died as a result.

Collapse -
Re: Of course, Josh...
by Edward ODaniel / November 1, 2004 1:06 AM PST
In reply to: Re: Of course, Josh...

Spoken like someone without any military experience.

" And according to last night's broadcast, these kits do NOT include armor for the vehicles' undercarriages, so even with the kit installed, a bomb planted in the road can still damage the vehicle and kill its occupants."

Which is exactly why psp and sandbags are used just as they were in WW II, Korea, Vietnam, and the Balkans. Thin skinned utility vehicles are kept as light as possible to keep their speed, ground clearance, and maneuverability as optimal as possible. Moving foxholes not only attract the eye but don't provide the protection of a stationary bunker or revetment.

"And the real question is why didn't they get armored vehicles from the get-go? How many young men and women have died as a result of being blown up while riding in a non-armored Humvee?"

Again because thin skinned utility vehicles loose some of their utility with add on armor. Just like the jeeps of old (even the gun jeeps) they are kept as light as possible. The specific conditions of Iraq allow for add on armor to some degree so it was added as fast as it could be. The simple fact is that military operations and requirements are beyond the ken of most civilians and this provides the opportunity for biased and agenda based media "reporting" to confuse those who are unfamiliar with military needs and mission requirements and system specifications.

Josh, in simplest terms the unarmored HUMVEE provides its occupants with far more protection than the jeeps we had and used prior to replacing them.

Collapse -
Re: Of course, Josh...
by John Robie / November 1, 2004 2:07 AM PST
In reply to: Re: Of course, Josh...

Ed is correct. The Humvee was a replacement for the old Jeep and not designed to be a armoured 'tank'. I saw Jeeps during the Korea and Nam wars that had .30 or .50 Cal. mounted machine guns that had no undercarriage armor. Those Jeeps were also used in convoys like the Humvee with mounted machine guns, just like UNARMOURED trucks.

The armoured Bradley Fighting vehicle was designed for fighting & carrying troops with protection:

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/article.cfm?Id=1456

Collapse -
All I can tell either of you is....
by Josh K / November 1, 2004 5:48 AM PST
In reply to: Re: Of course, Josh...

...that the soldiers interviewed did not agree with either of you, and they wanted the undercarriage armor. I'll grant that there may have been other soldiers interviewed who said otherwise, and whose interviews were not included in the segment. I'm just tellin' ya what I heard these men say.

Collapse -
You keep harping on that 'dead kid' issue, Josh!
by Dan McC / November 1, 2004 3:56 AM PST
In reply to: Re: Of course, Josh...

You know the important thing is 30 year old paperwork.

What could you be thinking?

Dan

Collapse -
Hmm...I'm trying to figure out how Mom mails ...
by John Robie / November 1, 2004 12:18 AM PST
In reply to: Re: Of course, Josh...

vehicle armor to son junior.

Sunday article in our local newspaper quoting the NY Times:

"Despite objections from the Pentagon, Congress approved a Defense appropriations bill this month that includes a measure to allow soldiers, their families and charities to be reimbursed for the cost of some combat equipment for use in Iraq and Afghanistan."

"...permits such groups and individuals to make claims for up to $1,100 for those purchases made between Sept. 11, 2001, and July 31, 2004."

"...will cover expenditures on health, safety and protective equipment - items like body and vehicle armor, special hydration gear, global positioning devices and advanced combat helmets."

The defense appropriations bill "...has been sent to the president and will take effect after he signs it."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/31/politics/31gear.html
User name: Speakeasygang
Password: Speakeasy

Collapse -
Re: Hmm...I'm trying to figure out how Mom mails ...
by C1ay / November 1, 2004 12:29 AM PST

Of course, Kerry and Edwards didn't seem to have the time to vote for this bill but then again, when's the last time either of them worried about doing the job they're getting paid for.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Kerry voted against that, didn't he?
by Cindi Haynes / November 1, 2004 12:44 AM PST
In reply to: Re: Of course, Josh...
Collapse -
Are you referring to that $87 million?
by Josh K / November 1, 2004 12:51 AM PST

If so, yes he voted against it, but not because he didn't think the troops should get the funding. The bill he voted against did not include any accountability for such things as the millions being handed to Halliburton. There wasn't enough in it about oversight of the expenditures. Kerry thought that was an irresponsible way to spend YOUR money and voted against that version of the bill.

Collapse -
an excuse
by Dragon / November 1, 2004 1:01 AM PST

He voted that way because he was in trouble with Dean during the primaries. This is the person you want for president? Who says one thing to one group of people and another to a different group? Says one thing one day and another a different day, and a third, still another day, then back again to the first statement on the fourth day?

The anti-kerry ad showing him windsurfing one direction and then another was very appropriate.

Collapse -
Check your calendar
by Josh K / November 1, 2004 2:18 AM PST
In reply to: an excuse

The vote took place in October 2003, long before the first primary was held. The yarn about "he was worried about losing votes to Dean" was one I heard for the first time during the debates. More RNC twaddle.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Calendar? That sounds like one of your 'exaggerations'
by Dan McC / November 1, 2004 4:03 AM PST
In reply to: Check your calendar
Collapse -
maybe but this is article written by a Kerry supporter --
by Dragon / November 1, 2004 4:43 AM PST
In reply to: Check your calendar

?...Off the record, he did it because of Howard Dean. On the record, he has an elaborate explanation.? Kerry originally supported an amendment sponsored by Senator Joseph Biden that would have funded the war by temporarily reducing Bush?s tax cuts to the wealthiest one per cent of Americans. But Biden?s bill had no chance of passing in a Republican-dominated Senate, and Kerry?s absurdly abbreviated account of the matter??I did vote for the eighty-seven billion before I voted against it??has left him open to relentless Republican ridicule. Biden himself ultimately voted for the money, and he confirmed that Kerry?s decision not to was ?tactical,? an attempt ?to prove to Dean?s guys I?m not a warmonger.?

Kerry prefers to describe his opposition as a protest vote, since he cast it knowing that the measure would pass...'

Collapse -
Given that it is now Monday @ 4PM and nothing's happened
by Ziks511 / November 1, 2004 4:18 AM PST
In reply to: Well, 30 days to go...

would you care to retract? It would be the decent honorable thing to do, and since you're concerned with fairness I'm sure you will.

Rob Boyter

Popular Forums

icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

FALL TV PREMIERES

Your favorite shows are back!

Don’t miss your dramas, sitcoms and reality shows. Find out when and where they’re airing!