But....but....but....but....but.....Kerry is smarter than Bush.   HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!



Kerry's not- so-amazing race, on film



Link

I hear that John Kerry loyalists are kicking themselves for cooperating last year with filmmaker Steve Rosenbaum on "Inside the Bubble," a potentially devastating behind-the-scenes look at the Massachusetts senator's failed presidential campaign.
I'm also told that Hillary Clinton partisans are licking their chops to see the film, which "could end up being the silver bullet that kills Kerry's presidential chances for 2008," says a Lowdown spy.

Kerry spinmeister David Wade - one of the senior staffers who allowed Rosenbaum to film his private moments - tried to dismiss Rosenbaum's effort as "a childish home movie destined to be forgotten."

Wade E-mailed me: "The 20 poor souls subjected to this movie will be reaching for caffeine and begging for old Lamar Alexander tapes on C-Span 2. Michael Moore has nothing to fear. I think the working title was 'The Snore Room.'"

But people who've screened the documentary say it's compelling and revealing.

It features, among other not-ready-for-prime-time moments, Clinton scowling and rolling her eyes over an apparent Kerry gaffe during a presidential debate; Kerry pretending to interview himself and babbling in Italian while waiting for a real interview to begin; Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) cursing at reporters during a campaign stop, and Kerry message guru Robert Shrum confidently declaring a few days before the 2004 election: "Zogby [a prominent pollster] just announced who's gonna win. Us!"

Shrum told me he personally didn't cooperate with the movie, which captures him on camera only a couple of times.

Asked if he plans to see it, he answered: "Absolutely not."

As for media critic Michael Wolff - who severely slags off the Kerryites at regular intervals - "I refused to be interviewed by [Rosenbaum], even though at one point he called me from his bespoke tailor."

A press release claims the movie - which won't be shown publicly until Thursday - "turns a harsh but deeply revealing mirror on the campaign ... a disorganized, contentious, self-absorbed team that thought they could win by 'not making mistakes,' and keeping their candidate in the public eye without clarifying a position on anything."

Director Rosenbaum, meanwhile, told me: "I'm a lifelong Democrat and I supported Kerry. I think people will see the film as fair, and maybe searing."

All this does is help Hillery or Gore.

tagged.

Quoted: All this does is help Hillery or Gore.

How so?

<fight4yourrights>WHO?</fight4yourrights>

Don't think Gore is making any kind of comeback, even as second fiddle. His political clout days have come and gone.

I... would not mind seeing this...

Much as I loathe Kerry, this could be very humorous especially since he lost and they probably thought this would be some triumphant victory film... Now it's justifiably kicking the SOB while he's down...

Quoted: Quoted: All this does is help Hillery or Gore. How so?

Because with Skerry positioning himself for ANOTHER possible run, this film will show him for the truly inept asshat that he and his staff are/were thus making Hillary look better

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: All this does is help Hillery or Gore. How so? Because with Skerry positioning himself for ANOTHER possible run, this film will show him for the truly inept asshat that he and his staff are/were thus making Hillary look better

Concur, but for slightly different reasons/

Himmery wants to be president more than almost anyone alive, but she doesn's want to fight for it, she wants a walk in, just like the way her senate seat was handed to her.

With Kerry out of the picture, it's theoretically her versus someone on the Repub side not currently in the spotlight.

Also, CONFORM.

Quoted: Don't think Gore is making any kind of comeback, even as second fiddle. His political clout days have come and gone.

He has always been against the war. He could use it in the upcoming election.

I'm a firm beleiver that once you lose a presidential election, your political career is washed up...

Nixon would contradict that...

kerry presidential hopes= deader than disco

I LOL when I see that pick of Kerry in his sperm costume.

Quoted: kerry presidential hopes= deader than disco

Not in his mind. He's kept his campaign funding & list of fund raisers, I've heard. He may very well run again & it would not surprise me if he did so.

Trent Lott and Bill Frist would crush him.

Quoted: I'm also told that Hillary Clinton partisans are licking their chops to see the film, which "could end up being the silver bullet that kills Kerry's presidential chances for 2008."

Don't exactly need one...

The fake italian interview is too funny

How is this going to help Kerry, Gore, or hillery?

Two already are loosers, the other will be after the 2006 election.

The only people who think Hillery has a chance are a few wierdos on this board, and a coitere of female journalists on the Veiw and the Lifetime network...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: All this does is help Hillery or Gore. How so? Because with Skerry positioning himself for ANOTHER possible run, this film will show him for the truly inept asshat that he and his staff are/were thus making Hillary look better Concur, but for slightly different reasons/ Himmery wants to be president more than almost anyone alive, but she doesn's want to fight for it, she wants a walk in, just like the way her senate seat was handed to her. With Kerry out of the picture, it's theoretically her versus someone on the Repub side not currently in the spotlight. Also, CONFORM.

We need to organize a campaign to register as Democraps, so we can make sure Hitlery doesn't get the nomination...

Quoted: The only people who think Hillery has a chance are a few wierdos on this board, and a coitere of female journalists on the Veiw and the Lifetime network...

Keep telling yourself that...if gun owners should have learned anything during the Klinton years, it should be to never underestimate them. IMHO, she most certainly has the nomination if she wants it, and has a very good chance at being Klinton 44...

(I can't believe I wasted post 3k on that cunt)

Regardless of how much I hate Kerry, I don't think I'll pay for it. This film will probably be about the same quality as Michael Moore's "documentories"...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: All this does is help Hillery or Gore. How so? Because with Skerry positioning himself for ANOTHER possible run, this film will show him for the truly inept asshat that he and his staff are/were thus making Hillary look better Concur, but for slightly different reasons/ Himmery wants to be president more than almost anyone alive, but she doesn's want to fight for it, she wants a walk in, just like the way her senate seat was handed to her. With Kerry out of the picture, it's theoretically her versus someone on the Repub side not currently in the spotlight. Also, CONFORM. We need to organize a campaign to register as Democraps, so we can make sure Hitlery doesn't get the nomination...

It would be better if we all worked to make sure that fucking RINO McCain doesn't get the republican nomination.

Quoted: Quoted: The only people who think Hillery has a chance are a few wierdos on this board, and a coitere of female journalists on the Veiw and the Lifetime network... Keep telling yourself that...if gun owners should have learned anything during the Klinton years, it should be to never underestimate them. IMHO, she most certainly has the nomination if she wants it, and has a very good chance at being Klinton 44... (I can't believe I wasted post 3k on that cunt)

During the Clinton years there was no Internet.  And the Democrats had taken control of the media.  Gun owners- and Republicans in general, had ample proof of the fallicies and down right lies the democrats were using but no way to organize or get their message across.

This has now ended.  Those days are gone, and unless the Internet is allowed to fall under goverment or corporate control it will never return.

Its amazing that there are still some people, even those who communicate regularly on the internet fail to see this obvious point.

Quoted: Quoted: All this does is help Hillery or Gore. How so?

Kerry, being as clueless as he is, probably harbors hopes for 2008.

The Democrats will shun him for losing to Bush.  It's just unforgivable, they thought they had a slam dunk in 2008, and Kerry failed them in the worst possible way.  Kerry was their "safe" candidate, they chose him over their sweetheart who talked like they really felt, Howard Dean.  They used their sorry excuse for a head and picked Kerry, and it got them nothing.  Kerry's finished.  

Al Gore in their eyes was robbed and the election was stolen, and he breathed fire afterwards.  He's ok in their eyes.

The fact is, an appallingly stupid and shallow a candidate as Kerry, STILL GOT MORE VOTES than Clinton ever did! That's what having a socialist party with the full force of the pop-and "alternative" culture can get you. They pulled out all the stops....and still lost, but not by much.

They could have run a dead cat (Bill!) and still come up with over 50 million votes. As it was, with a candidate who said contradictory things, whose credibility was shot down by the Swift boat guys, the Dems still got 60 million votes. They only lost because the GOP got 63 million, and 80,000 more in Ohio.

Party machines are THAT powerful.

Fortunately for us, in America, personalities can still outshine bureaucracies. Exhibit 1: Ronald Reagan.

The Reagan revolution was such because a dark-horse candidate that the official GOP people despised (they pulled out all the stops in 1976 to deep-six Reagan and his folk at the convention), over came internal opposition in 1980, running as an un-apologetic CONSERVATIVE...and won big time - proving that CONSERVATIVES WHO RUN AS CONSERVATIVES can win by land-slides, not by squeakers.

BushI runs as a wishy-washy "moderate" and squeaks by in '88.
BushII runs as a moderate-conservative in '00 against an idiot VP, and wins by less than 1000 votes. Part of the reason SO FEW Reagan Republicans turned out to vote was the rough-shod method the GOP bureaucracy used in the primaries to annoint Bush and crush his opponents. That left bad taste in alot of folks' mouths and alot of them didn't vote at all.

He won in 04 by only 80,000 votes...again by running as a moderate conservative.

Somehow the GOP official apparatus takes these victories as "evidence" that Rove is a genius and moving to the center wins more votes than staying to the right. Not sure what math they use over there but I'm pretty sure I know what they're smoking.

If GOP runs a left-leaning pro-abortion candidate in 08 they will lose and HILLARY WILL WIN. It's that simple. THE people who voted for Reagon won't vote for Hillary, but they won't turn out 100% for a Hillary-lite either.

Look at the pro-life March for Life every January. Freezing cold temperatures, during SCHOOL TIME, and every year well over 200,000 mostly young people show up to protest Roe vs Wade.
Every year you get 80% or more young, voting age people who have to take time off school to make it. They don't get free Media hype, they aren't lionized by the Popculture. Still, they show up when it's hardest to do so.

Meanwhile the Left has to cobble together every nut case cause in the world, and run their rallies on weekends IN THE SUMMER when most are off work or out of school. And even then they only get 100,000 or so. And how many in that crowd were young people or married couples with kids (you know, the ones who vote?)

Naturally the GOP loses the forest for the trees and runs wishy-washy candidates. Doh! If they ran an unabashedly Conservative we'd not have to worry about anyone the Dems put up. But they won't because 60% or better of the rank and file of the GOP aren't SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES - fewer and fewer of them aren't even fiscal conservatives.

Democrats know this. Hillary knows this. They're hoping the GOP implodes in 06 or by 08 into two parties. Rove probably knows this too. But it's anyone's guess what the GOP plans to do. I think we'll know by 06. For a long time the sub-text was "if you pro-lifers don't stay with us, you'll lose, so stay with us and shut up". Kind of a catch-22 situation that doesn't engender loyalty or going the extra mile for someone. But if the tables were turned? How many social-liberal Republicans would go Democrat for the sake of abortion? Like I say, 06 is the bell weather year.

Reagan's platform of 1980 and 1984 was HARD RIGHT. He won by 49 state landslides in a nation where more democrats are registered than Republicans. The official GOP party apparatus never forgave him and never learned the lesson he taught them. They're wetting their pants over Guilliani (which few Catholics will vote for) or Condi (still an unknown on many key issues).

Mark my words... unless the Dems implode first, the GOP will...in 2006. The Dems think their own chance in 08 is to run Hillary who is so HARD TO THE LEFT that she can fake "moderate" wink, wink. Conversely the GOPs  only chance to win in 08 is by running an unapologetic social and fiscal conservative. But their dilemna is that a good number of the actual folks in power AREN'T socially or fiscally conservative.

So you have to ask yourself - and they need to ask themselves...are they willing to "take one for the team"? Lose their jobs so as to keep Congress and the Presidency?

If not, look for a looooooooong twilight struggle against socialism come 2008.

Quoted: The fact is, an appallingly stupid and shallow a candidate as Kerry, STILL GOT MORE VOTES than Clinton ever did! That's what having a socialist party with the full force of the pop-and "alternative" culture can get you. They pulled out all the stops....and still lost, but not by much. They could have run a dead cat (Bill!) and still come up with over 50 million votes. As it was, with a candidate who said contradictory things, whose credibility was shot down by the Swift boat guys, the Dems still got 60 million votes. They only lost because the GOP got 63 million, and 80,000 more in Ohio. Party machines are THAT powerful. Fortunately for us, in America, personalities can still outshine bureaucracies. Exhibit 1: Ronald Reagan. The Reagan revolution was such because a dark-horse candidate that the official GOP people despised (they pulled out all the stops in 1976 to deep-six Reagan and his folk at the convention), over came internal opposition in 1980, running as an un-apologetic CONSERVATIVE...and won big time - proving that CONSERVATIVES WHO RUN AS CONSERVATIVES can win by land-slides, not by squeakers. BushI runs as a wishy-washy "moderate" and squeaks by in '88. BushII runs as a moderate-conservative in '00 against an idiot VP, and wins by less than 1000 votes. He won in 04 by only 80,000 votes...again by running as a moderate conservative. Somehow the GOP official apparatus takes these victories as "evidence" that Rove is a genius and moving to the center wins more votes than staying to the right. Not sure what math they use over there but I'm pretty sure I know what they're smoking. If GOP runs a left-leaning pro-abortion candidate in 08 they will lose and HILLARY WILL WIN. It's that simple. THE people who voted for Reagon won't vote for Hillary, but they won't turn out 100% for a Hillary-lite either. Look at the pro-life March for Life every January. Freezing cold temperatures, during SCHOOL TIME, and every year well over 200,000 mostly young people show up to protest Roe vs Wade. Every year you get 80% or more young, voting age people who have to take time off school to make it. Meanwhile the Left has to cobble together every nut case cause in the world, and run their rallies on weekends IN THE SUMMER when most are off work or out of school. And even then they only get 100,000. Naturally the GOP loses the forest for the trees and runs wishy-washy candidates. Doh! If they ran an unabashedly Conservative we'd not have to worry about anyone the Dems put up. But they won't because 60% or better of the rank and file of the GOP aren't SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES - fewer and fewer of them aren't even fiscal conservatives. Reagan's platform of 1980 and 1984 was HARD RIGHT. He won by 49 state landslides in a nation where more democrats are registered than Republicans. The official GOP party apparatus never forgave him and never learned the lesson he taught them. They're wetting their pants over Guilliani (which few Catholics will vote for) or Condi (still an unknown on many key issues). Mark my words... unless the Dems implode first, the GOP will. Their only chance to win in 08 is by running an unapologetic social and fiscal conservative.

Your tinfoil is too tight

Kerry voted against Rosenbaums film until he voted for it.

GM

edited my original post. see for details: I WISH I had tin-foil on my head.

Sadly, I don't.

Quoted: Trent Lott and Bill Frist would crush him.

These two barely speak. You think they'd be on the same ticket???????    

Quoted: It would be better if we all worked to make sure that fucking RINO McCain doesn't get the republican nomination.

Times one million! He is NO friend to the gun owners!

During the Clinton years there was no Internet

Don't let Gore find out, he will be crushed.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: All this does is help Hillery or Gore. How so? Because with Skerry positioning himself for ANOTHER possible run, this film will show him for the truly inept asshat that he and his staff are/were thus making Hillary look better

Big deal.


So all they have to do is nudge people towards getting the Democrat nod for candidate, and when it's official release the film and blow him out of the water.

Too bad they won't wait long enough to release the film to do that.

Kerry should run in 2008! Go Kerry go!