the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

So it seems to be confirmed then not confirmed, then confirmed again. It's a confusing mess.

Bill wrote:So it seems to be confirmed then not confirmed, then confirmed again. It's a confusing mess.

Judges are often faced with deciding who is telling the truth and who is lying. Some of the factors they look at are whether the person offering testimony may be biased, how close was the person to the event being described (someone who actually witnessed the event can testify, someone who was told about it can not, with some exceptions if other indicia of reliability exist. Judges can and will also look at what they know about the person before them.

In the article I cited on the one side you had people who were actually in the boat when the event took place whose bias in favor of Kerry, if such bias existed, would have been based on his behavior during the incident in question.

On the other side you have a group of people who first claim to have no ties to the republican party, and then it is proven that they were in fact connected to the party as fund raisers for Bush. Generally, being caught in a lie will damage ones credibility, both in court and out. Then, if you look at it, the lie they were caught in was an attempt to establish they were not biased, when the facts prove they were biased towards Bush and against Kerry.

Last, they were not actually on the swift boat in question, and can only claim to have been in the area.

So, if you were a judge, how would you decide the case?

On the one hand you have eyewitnesses to the event, with no proven bias and no damage done to their credibility by their actions before you.

On the other hand you have people once removed from the event who have damaged their credibility by lying to you, and that lie was shown to provide strong evidence of bias.

Behind it all you have an AWOL national reserve pilot, former cocaine user and recovered alcoholic who doesn't have the courage to directly attack his opponent on the issue but hides behind "soft money" political allies.

You are really are having trouble sorting this one out?

Walter
I like to think I go where the facts lead me. You've given me some good stuff but I need to look into it deeper before I see it your way.

Walter Joyce wrote:Behind it all you have an AWOL national reserve pilot, former cocaine user and recovered alcoholic who doesn't have the courage to directly attack his opponent on the issue but hides behind "soft money" political allies.

Nice, and it's actually the truth too! Cheney never served either, but he's sure quick to keep the invasion alive and profitable. Also, regarding Bush's alcoholism: People who work with alcoholics for a living, have said that Bush is what they call a "dry drunk" - in other words, inside he's a mess; going onward with his life but never treating his underlying compulsion and sickness. It does kind of fit if we think about it.

Bill wrote:Walter
I like to think I go where the facts lead me. You've given me some good stuff but I need to look into it deeper before I see it your way.

Bill,

I didn't mean to preach, I was honestly trying to offer guidance. I am not overly fond of John Kerry, but I am less fond of dirty tricks in politics, or life for that matter. You are right though, we all need to see things for ourselves.

WTJ

So, Obama has the delegates, and Hillary needs a few days and is seeking input from her "18 million voters" on her website www.hillaryclinton.com What happened to her forecasted concession speech? Looks like the Boston Globe got it wrong.

Amazing now she's pandering to Oblama so she can get her foot in for the VP slot. Heard her this morning on the radio "Obama has united this country..blahblahblah...made our country stronger because of it...blahblahblah". And for the past year she's been trying her best to drag this man through the mud and have fun while doing it. Man, what a two-faced shill she is.

Obama would be best to distance himself from her...

Mike

Actually, Hillary is very powerful and has a lot of sway with democrats.

she isn't disliked or even disapproved of and her being close to Obama is key to the change Obama seeks. He needs her.

As a VP? I don't know, but definitely her support and her wisdom and knowledge will be a boon to his presidency.

I'm happy for Obama. The dude abides and is clearly the best choice to take America forward as president.

McCain only appeals to Octogenarians it seems and people who hate democrats have to 'chew their liver' so to speak and go with him because there is no other choice for conservative America, which is the really sad part.

The Bush admin has completely disgraced and discredited conservative America to the point where it is regarded as synonymous with his ridiculous terms of power.

Bush is without a doubt the worst president the US has seen in modern times. It will be a great day to see him gtfo of the oval office.

Darth Rock&Roll wrote:Bush is without a doubt the worst president the US has seen in modern times. It will be a great day to see him gtfo of the oval office.

Darth Rock&Roll wrote:Actually, Hillary is very powerful and has a lot of sway with democrats.

Huh? Then why did all of the Democrap God-Heads back Oblama? Kennedy, Leahy, Dean, Kerry, Edwards...

As a VP? I don't know, but definitely her support and her wisdom and knowledge will be a boon to his presidency.

Not really. Since he's already stated before that he wouldn't give her the VP slot. Oh I get it, the nomination race is over and so is the make-believe mudslinging. Sorry, I didn't get the memo...

I'm happy for Obama. The dude abides and is clearly the best choice to take America forward as president.

Why?

Mike

McCain could come in real handy when the next crisis hits the headlines in late October and all them "octogenarians" think Osama/Obama is coming to get them. Or Iran "suddenly" becomes Public Enemy #912.

I'm sort of having a hard time staying focused on the "reality" of the situation. Considering the near-total election fraud of 2000 and 2004, how can a body see this as anything but bizarre entertainment? Considering the various fiscal and material problems surfacing daily in our fair kingdom, how is it acceptable to spend $200 million and 18 months insulting someone and then suddenly want to be their best buddy? Please give me some of that double speak kool-aid so I can enjoy the ride y'all are on, 'cause it looks like fun.

Sourpuss Killjoy Was Here

EDIT: when I say "double speak", I mean the politicos, not you all.

reality? none of these guys deal in reality.

Looks like Walter was right, it's probably going to be Obama and Clinton, but just as I said Clinton was at Bilderberger in 2006, it took another Bilderberger meeting of Obama and Clinton (and their paymasters) to rearrange the ticket.

Info Wars
Obama’s Office Won’t Deny Senator Attended Bilderberg

Canada Free Press
Bilderberg boys will decide who’s Obama’s “chosen” Veep

World Net Daily
Did they or didn't they?
Speculation about Obama, Clinton attending Bilderberger meeting

Raw Story
Bilderberg meeting attracts prominent politicians, businessmen

Well, whoever's elected will probably attend the Bilderberg conference, the Tri-Lateral Commission meetings as well as the "Group of 8", etc. It will be what that person does or says there that will matter. If a candidate simply said "I wouldn't attend", those meetings would still go on. But, being in a secret society hasn't stopped a president from being elected. And, I'm not sure --no, I'm sure that it's not necessary to know. Judge the tree by the fruit.