Welcome to PatsFans.com

Dems step in it again....

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by ctpatsfan1, Aug 20, 2006.

  1. ctpatsfan1

    ctpatsfan1 On the Game Day Roster

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    You really have to ask yourself why anyone lies anymore with all the internet sites that verify all political statements for accuracy. You know its going to be debunked if you lie so why do it........

    From Factcheck.org


    Democrats Ask, Do You Feel Safer?
    But a party web video strains some facts about homeland security.
    August 18, 2006


    Summary

    A Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee ad that appeared on the Internet this week attacks the record of "Bush and the GOP" on homeland security, but makes some factual stumbles.

    It claims terror attacks have increased four-fold under Bush, which isn't true. The official count jumped due to a much broader definition of what constitutes a terrorist attack.

    The ad says "law enforcement" spending has been cut $2 billion, but that refers only to cuts in aid to states and localities and ignores a big increase in spending on federal anti-terrorism activities.

    It says that only 6 percent of cargo containers are being inspected. That’s about right, but its also a big improvement from three years earlier when the figure was only 2 percent. Also spending has increased seven-fold.

    The ad's biggest stumble was political, not factual. It correctly noted that millions of illegal aliens have entered the US in recent years. But the ad's images of bazooka-toting terrorists and Osama bin Laden, associated with men furtively crossing the border, drew objections from Hispanics and the DSCC quickly took the ad off their website.

    Analysis


    This Internet ad first appeared on the DSCC home page Aug. 14, and ran for several days before being taken down. It lays out a partisan line of attack that we expect to see Democrats imitating in Senate and House campaigns in coming months.


    DSCC Ad: "Secure"

    (On Screen: A montage featuring pictures of President Bush and Sens. Allen, Talent, Santorum, DeWine, Burns, Chafee, and Kyl.)

    Text: Security under Bush and GOP?
    Not Enough Troops...
    Body Armor...or armed Humvees in Iraq.
    Four times as many terror attacks in 2005.
    Two billion cut from law enforcement.
    Iran developing nuclear weapons. Just 6% of containers inspected.
    Millions more illegal immigrants.
    North Korea has quadrupled its nuclear arsenal.
    Feel Safer?
    Vote for change.
    www.dscc.org

    More Terror Attacks?

    The ad says that there were "four times as many terror attacks in 2005." However, that's not true.

    The Washington Post did report on April 29 that "the number of terrorist attacks worldwide increased nearly fourfold in 2005 to 11,111." But a look at the underlying statistics shows that's an apples-to-oranges comparison reflecting a much broader legal definition of "terrorism."

    The article draws its figures from the State Department's 2005 Country Report's on Terrorism. However, the National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC) which compiled the statistics for the report explained in a release that those figures could be misleading because of a change in terminology:

    NCTC: The previously used statutory definition of "international terrorism" ("involving citizens or territory of more than one country") resulted in hundreds of incidents per year; the currently used statutory definition of "terrorism" ("premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets") results in many thousands of incidents per year.

    The report goes on to note that this discrepancy "limits our ability to do 2004/2005 comparisons." The Post noted this vital caveat (toward the end of its story) but the DNC ad did not.



    $2 billion cut from law enforcement?

    According to the ad, $2 billion has been cut from "law enforcement" funding. We find the claim to be true regarding federal aid to state and local law enforcement, but not true of law enforcement spending generally or counter-terrorism spending in particular. The funds that have been cut have gone towards such things as cannabis eradication, prescription drug monitoring and pet Congressional projects such as the Chattanooga Endeavors program and Ridge House in Reno , NV .



    President Bush proposed eliminating the state-local aid entirely in fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2007, which would have amounted to a cut of $2.8 billion from fiscal 2001. Congress restored some of that funding, however.

    There has not been a reduction in domestic counter-terrorism spending, which has gone from $2.5 billion in fiscal 2003 to $4.5 billion in fiscal 2006. And the White House has requested $4.7 billion in spending for 2007 that, if approved by Congress, would represent an increase of more than $2 billion since 2003.

    Six per cent of containers inspected?

    The ad says "just 6% of containers inspected," in regard to U.S. ports. The Washington Post did report on May 5 that the Department of Homeland Security currently inspects 6 percent of the 11 million cargo containers that enter U.S. seaports annually. That may actually be high: the US Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP) has not officially endorsed any particular percentage, but the Rand Corporation has put the number at 5 percent. Either way, it represents a big improvement since 2003. A hearing by the House Subcommittee on the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation in 2003 found that only 2 percent of containers were physically inspected.

    These numbers include cargo containers examined by x-ray, gamma or other radiation machines, and in some cases actually physically opened for visual inspection. The CBP says it "screens" 100 per cent of all cargo, but that refers to looking at database information to select "high-risk" shipments for possible physical inspection.

    Also, the CBP cautions that the low inspection numbers can be misleading because inspection is targeted because of increased inspection at points of origin. The issue has certainly received more congressional attention as funding has increased 700 per cent in the last five years.



    Millions More Illegal Immigrants?

    The DSCC ad claims “millions more illegal immigrants†have entered the country. This is true. According to the best estimates we can find, millions of illegal immigrants have indeed entered the . According to the federal Immigration and Naturalization Service, there were an estimated 7 million illegal immigrants living in the in Jan 2000. Two years later the Urban Institute estimated the illegal immigrant population to be 9.3 million. Most recently, Jeffrey S. Passel, a Senior Research Associate with Pew Hispanic Center and a contributor to the Urban Institute’s 2002 study, conducted a study which estimated the illegal immigrant population to be between 11.5 and 12 million people. That implies a minimum 4.4 million increase from the INS’s Jan 2000 estimate.

    Bazookas, bin Laden & illegal immigrants

    The ad's immigration claim made news, but not because of any factual mistake. It showed images of bazooka-toting terrorists and Osama Bin Laden in association with two men illegally crossing the border. The comparison came as an unwelcome surprise for some members of the Hispanic community. The Associated Press quoted Lisa Navarrete of The National Council of La Raza saying: "This is the same kind of fear mongering we condemn in the extreme media and now we are seeing it at the DSCC…It's appalling." The AP also reported that Carol Alvarado, a Houston City councilwoman, sent the DSCC's chair, Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a letter requesting the ad be pulled for fear it would alienate Latino voters. The website that once led you to the ad now displays a new ad featuring quotes from key Republicans and asking voters if they want a “new course†in Iraq. The new ad makes no reference to immigration whatsoever.

    Nuclear threats

    The ad is on more solid ground when it says that Iran is "developing nuclear weapons," and that "North Korea has quadrupled its nuclear arsenal." These are both fair statements based on the best public knowledge of each country's capabilities.

    Iran is openly developing the ability to enrich uranium into material that could be suitable for weapons. They claim to be doing so for peaceful purposes and havedenied any intention otherwise. However, the U.S. has claimed to have evidence to the contrary and the U.N recently set an Aug. 31 deadline for Iran to stop enriching uranium.

    As for the North Koreans, according to a congressional report the CIA believed that they had enough plutonium for one or two nuclear warheads prior to 2002. In 2004, the former Director of Los Alamos National Laboratory testified in front of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations after a visit to North Korea. Based on his observations and expertise he concluded the North Koreans had enough plutonium for four to six nuclear weapons. Assuming that the material has actually been made into bombs (which isn't clear) those two vague estimates imply that the "arsenal" has at least doubled and may have increased six-fold.

    -by Justin Bank and Emi Kolawole
     
  2. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,370
    Likes Received:
    307
    Ratings:
    +838 / 7 / -3

    Well, the GOP has become an embarassment to the conservative cause, but the Dems clearly have NO message or platform. The only things DEMs can do is criticize and lie. Again, with a 2 party system, the people loose.
     
  3. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    41,253
    Likes Received:
    255
    Ratings:
    +990 / 2 / -9

    The Democrat world and the Left Wing Media world is collapsing all around them and they refuse to accept it, thanks to Internet,Talk Radio, Cable News and the "Late Night Blogger"

    They can't sh!t us anymore. :)
     
  4. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,626
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    I agree with most of your post.
    I disagree with the part "The only things DEMs can do is criticize and lie". If they did that in the last election as vigorously and repetitively as the rebubs did, they would have done better.
     
  5. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    So let's stop pulling for the Dems and the GOP and wake up to the reality that we, the people, are getting screwed from all sides. And let's remember that the next time we're arguing some talking point that's been beaten to death.
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2006
  6. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,327
    Likes Received:
    708
    Ratings:
    +1,810 / 35 / -29

    #87 Jersey

    DITTO....&.....DITTO!!!
     
  7. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,327
    Likes Received:
    708
    Ratings:
    +1,810 / 35 / -29

    #87 Jersey

    Sometimes Wistah...I think it's as simple as what is called Pure & simple logic. Democrats somewhat and liberals definitely are more emotional in decision making then the right. I have said it here and I see it here.

    When a decision is blatantly emotional or blatantly logical there is no problem for either the right or the left. But on the border line 50/50 calls, which most of the Swift Boat stuff was. The democrats got very emotional over the charges while the right got very logical.

    The right...through their logical side saw a very emotional left and made a beeline to the polls...in record numbers. The left...so stuck in complaining and so sure their complaining had done the job stayed home...result is Bush wins.

    If the regular people who voted...voted in that election...in other words no newbies..then Kerry wins. Logic is more powerfull than emotion because it results in swifter action. There are some here who will not agree with this...but honestly take a look at most elections and you will see decisive victories, sometimes may start with emotion...but the victory is always a logical path to the winners circle.

    Knowing how to win always triumphs over wanting to win. The democrats all too often think that there is overwhelming emotion to garner victory. Then, when they lose they wonder why...such as in Gore & Kerry where the democrats ran mostly on emotion.

    Before you lefties attack me here...I must say I see some change. Not alot, just some change. If the democrats and moderate left can overtake the extreme emotional left (Cindy Sheehan, Jesse Jackson, Michael Moores) then the democrats will run the White House, Senate, and Congress. Because America wants smart decisive leadership, which is what the G.O.P has always portrayed.

    They can be beat at their own game (The G.O.P.), but the right candidates must run. the democrats have blown it with Lieberman...he the logical leader was thrown to the wolves...he will return the favor by trouncing the emotional candidate. That will show all i have written above is not a bunch of hot air.
     
  8. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,327
    Likes Received:
    708
    Ratings:
    +1,810 / 35 / -29

    #87 Jersey

    Funny thing here is that I am amazed at how many libertarians we have in this forum. Way more than what the average should be. I wonder myself sometimes if i am one and don't realize it.

    If the democrats were smart they would boost the libertarian party stealing votes from the republicans. The republicans would then boost the green party to steal from the democrats.

    The real smart and innovative people will get together and create a people's party(new version) from the green and libertarian parties....creating the 1st real, true powerfull 3rd party.

    The right and left will then throw massive money at these people with promises of lucrative jobs and/or pork. If they resist...politics goes back to the people where it belongs...I would love it because I truly despise both parties...these people argue in public while they dine in fine style together.
    They are more in bed with each other than Hollywood actors and actresses are...it is simply disgusting and it makes me sick, to see anyone in here saying one party is better than the other when they both suck.
     
  9. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,738
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Your side didn't get logical, you got in the sewer. An incredible number of cowards jumped up and down screaming about sh!t they didn't or wouldn't understand and the country's been nothing but damaged as a result. There's no logic in totally abandoning the truth. Just the fact that you'd try and call that shameful slander 'logical' shows how far your side has sunk.
     
  10. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,626
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    I don't advocate anyone abandon the truth. I agree that it would be bad if the whole country went down the sewer, but I fear it already is for the most part, culturally in the sewer as we speak. American Idol is perceived as a real wellspring of talent in the country by the majority of TV viewers. Americans will believe anything they see on TV. If the country's in the sewer, someone's gotta go in to get it out. There are few times when the end justifies the means. Protecting your family and the Constitution are the only two examples I can think of, as long as neither gets hurt in the process.
     
  11. Mainefan

    Mainefan Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    FBN--the Republicans more logical, the Democrats more emotional? It looks exactly the opposite to the Democrats. And, being logical, I don't know of any way to prove the theory, since the meaning of the words depends very much on context.

    I think this theory of yours is just a way of reassuring yourself that you're on the "right" side. But if you want to discuss it, I'm game. Let's start with a very strong emotion--the persistent belief that you are right, regardless of the evidence. That one is George Bush's standard operating procedure.

    How's it working for him?
     
  12. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Take the World's Smallest Political Quiz and find out. Yes, the questions are somewhat loaded toward a libertarian answer, but it's still a pretty good measure.

    I'd say internet users lean more libertarian than the population at-large, which is why we see so many here.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>