NationStates Jolt Archive

that Bush recieved $84 from a timber company, or was he mistaken? Seems he was mistaken as the company Bush recieved the $84 from was an oil and gas company, and didn't become a timber company until after the infamous $84.

That's kind of nitpicky, right? The point was that Bush qualifies as a small business under the current rules, not the specific industry that Bush is involved in.

Does that somehow invalidate the actual point that Kerry was making, that by using Bush's definition of 'small business' Bush and Cheney both qualify as small business'? Or are you just kicking up dust?

That's kind of nitpicky, right? The point was that Bush qualifies as a small business under the current rules, not the specific industry that Bush is involved in.
Yes it's nitpicky, and yes Kerry's intent was correct, but what I've seen here is that Bush lied etc. etc. when in actuality it wasn't a timber company when the $84 came into question, and didn't become involved in such until years later.

I don't like the misinformation being shouted around these forums, and I try to point it out when people engage in such.

Kerry's intent was correct and his point was valid. However, the anti-Bush crowd used the response to claim Bush was/is a liar.

True, but Bush still claimed "royalties" from that company that had become a timber company in 2002 and 2003, classifying him as a "small business owner," under the tax code. That was Kerry's whole point, that the numbers Bush was using to indicate "small business owner" was inflated due to this kind of tax-trickery.

I have to give you props though, TheOneRule. You're a reasonable person. There are some extreme Bush supporters out there who still think the US found WMD's in Iraq.

Yes it's nitpicky, and yes Kerry's intent was correct, but what I've seen here is that Bush lied etc. etc. when in actuality it wasn't a timber company when the $84 came into question, and didn't become involved in such until years later.
Now you're just being silly. Absolutely silly. See, the thing is that Kerry quoted factcheck.org saying that Bush got $84 from a lumber company, which you so nitpickingly pointed out wasn't a lumber company yet but is now and Bush responded "I own a lumber company, thats news to me." See, thing is, it is a lumber company now. So Bush's response, while not damning and no one is making it damning-just yet another Bushism, was incorrect. You know what's great? You all are making a bigger deal out of this than anyone else. Congradulations.

I don't like the misinformation being shouted around these forums, and I try to point it out when people engage in such.

Kerry's intent was correct and his point was valid. However, the anti-Bush crowd used the response to claim Bush was/is a liar.

Okay, as long as you admit it's nitpicking. I understand your point.

I don't like the misinformation being shouted around these forums, and I try to point it out when people engage in such.

Kerry's intent was correct and his point was valid. However, the anti-Bush crowd used the response to claim Bush was/is a liar.

Well, to be accurate TheOneRule, the place is NOW a timber company, and Bush was saying he didn't know he owned it NOW. Bush didn't say, "I didn't know I owned a timber company in 2001."

Technically, since it's a timber comany NOW, Bush did lie. The $84 is irrelevant.

Now you're just being silly. Absolutely silly. See, the thing is that Kerry quoted factcheck.org saying that Bush got $84 from a lumber company, which you so nitpickingly pointed out wasn't a lumber company yet but is now and Bush responded "I own a lumber company, thats news to me." See, thing is, it is a lumber company now. So Bush's response, while not damning and no one is making it damning-just yet another Bushism, was incorrect. You know what's great? You all are making a bigger deal out of this than anyone else. Congradulations.
Actually Im getting the discussion(argument) that I crave... the threads just haven't been getting my attention these last 2 days :D

But, saying that this is "just yet another Bushism" is not being honest either now is it? How many people know what is in their portfolios down to the last $84? Bush owns partial interest (just like any other stock holder, and quite a bit less than many) in a company who at the time was in the oil and gas business. It is entirely possible that the company chose to diversify without getting Bush's permission or even knowledge. Yet people jump on it as if it were a "Bush lied, people died" bandwagon. Horribly disengenious don't you think?

Now you're just being silly. Absolutely silly. See, the thing is that Kerry quoted factcheck.org saying that Bush got $84 from a lumber company, which you so nitpickingly pointed out wasn't a lumber company yet but is now and Bush responded "I own a lumber company, thats news to me." See, thing is, it is a lumber company now. So Bush's response, while not damning and no one is making it damning-just yet another Bushism, was incorrect. You know what's great? You all are making a bigger deal out of this than anyone else. Congradulations.No kidding. It's not like this whopper--assuming it is one to begin with--is even in the top twenty of the all-time whoppers that have come out of Bush's mouth. Maybe not even in the top 100.

You know what's great? You all are making a bigger deal out of this than anyone else. Congradulations.

That's not entirely true. I forget where, but I read something about the blunder to the tune of, "Well, if Bush can't even manage his own finances correctly, how can we expect him to manage the nation's finances?" That's making a mountain out of a molehill.

Actually Im getting the discussion(argument) that I crave... the threads just haven't been getting my attention these last 2 days :D

But, saying that this is "just yet another Bushism" is not being honest either now is it? How many people know what is in their portfolios down to the last $84? Bush owns partial interest (just like any other stock holder, and quite a bit less than many) in a company who at the time was in the oil and gas business. It is entirely possible that the company chose to diversify without getting Bush's permission or even knowledge. Yet people jump on it as if it were a "Bush lied, people died" bandwagon. Horribly disengenious don't you think?
He used it as a comeback-regardless of whether people know what is in their portfolio or not it still seems ridiculous that Kerry knew Bush's investments better than Bush did, and it can be used as a sample of how much attention Bush pays. You'd have to find an instance of people making this a connection to "Bush lied, people died" to this particular flub. MKULTRA doesn't count. What I've seen, the reaction is really nothing more than headshaking-it doesn't even make the top 500 for reasons not to vote for Bush. I still contend that you all are making a bigger deal of this than anyone else.

No kidding. It's not like this whopper--assuming it is one to begin with--is even in the top twenty of the all-time whoppers that have come out of Bush's mouth. Maybe not even in the top 100.
Dammit, you beat me to it again (I listed it as not part of the top 500 reasons.....)
As ever, you're too fast for me.

No kidding. It's not like this whopper--assuming it is one to begin with--is even in the top twenty of the all-time whoppers that have come out of Bush's mouth. Maybe not even in the top 100.

of course if this "whopper" had been by bill clinton, the republican congress would be signing up a special prosecutor right about now.

that Bush recieved $84 from a timber company, or was he mistaken? Seems he was mistaken as the company Bush recieved the $84 from was an oil and gas company, and didn't become a timber company until after the infamous $84.

Question: How do you know when Kerry is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Question: How do you know when Kerry is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.
what lies are those? i thought he was just a vile flipflopper

Question: How do you know when Kerry is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Congratulations to Eutrusca for trotting out the tired, over-used, entirely homogenous joke.

Question: How do you know when Bush is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Question: How do you know when Clinton is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Question: How do you know when O'Reilly is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Question: How do you know when Pinocchio is lying?

....

Congratulations to Eutrusca for trotting out the tired, over-used, entirely homogenous joke.

Question: How do you know when Bush is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Question: How do you know when Clinton is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Question: How do you know when O'Reilly is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Question: How do you know when Pinocchio is lying?

....
when his lips..grow?...

Congratulations to Eutrusca for trotting out the tired, over-used, entirely homogenous joke.

Question: How do you know when Bush is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Question: How do you know when Clinton is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Question: How do you know when O'Reilly is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.

Question: How do you know when Pinocchio is lying?

....


*Overheard in Pinocchio's bedroom*

"Lie! Now tell the truth! Lie! Now tell the truth! Lie! Now tell the truth! Lie! Now tell the truth!"

Question: How do you know when Kerry is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.
BWWWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Priceless. Not only will you not follow links that might challenge your own 'paradigm' like the ones Here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=252) here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=247) here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=244) here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231) here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=209) here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=187) here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=177) here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=159) here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=155) here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=153) here, (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=147) and here. (http://factcheck.org/article.aspx@DocID=244.html)

But now you don't even look down ONE POST....classic.

But of course, Eutrusca refers to factcheck.org-that's factcheck.freakin' org! (http://factcheck.org/default.aspx.html) as "one man's lame attempt at refutation......."

But then, if there was any need to establish that Eutrusca was a paranoid freak, there would be this thread here. (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=362859)

*Overheard in Pinocchio's bedroom*

"Lie! Now tell the truth! Lie! Now tell the truth! Lie! Now tell the truth! Lie! Now tell the truth!"
OHMYGOD THATS NASTY!

OHMYGOD THATS NASTY!

Yet hysterical.

Yet hysterical.

Be careful of my joke there, it's an antique.

Be careful of my joke there, it's an antique.

Like a masochist in Newport, we're Rhode Island bound....

Question: How do you know when Kerry is lying?

Answer: When his lips are moving.
In this thread at least you should know better than to do this.... this is exactly the thing Im trying to point out, for all of us to avoid, so we can have real discussions.

That's not entirely true. I forget where, but I read something about the blunder to the tune of, "Well, if Bush can't even manage his own finances correctly, how can we expect him to manage the nation's finances?" That's making a mountain out of a molehill.

You read that in my thread, and if you read the title of the thread, you would've realized that it was my suggestion on how the Kerry campaign should characterize it. And I honestly don't think it's making too big a deal of it. Bush himself made a huge deal of trying to make Kerry ought to be either crazy or a liar, and the fact that Bush was wrong just proves even more clearly how little concept he has of conveying the truth to the American public.