Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DID JIM LEHRER WINK AT KERRY?

Posted on 09/30/2004 11:10:27 PM PDT by itsinthebag

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-107 last
To: hershey
You connected some very suspicious dots.

Yes. But other than cast a wary eye at the alleged perpetrators, I'm not sure anything will come of it.

101 posted on 10/01/2004 5:11:37 PM PDT by JPJones ("We'll cross all our tee's and dot all our.....lower case j's")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: JPJones

I can not remember anything else that he said about the questions other that he ALONE made up the questions.


102 posted on 10/01/2004 5:15:25 PM PDT by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: peekaboo

YES - I heard Susan make that remark. It got my attention because she seemed so emphatic when she said it.


103 posted on 10/01/2004 5:23:58 PM PDT by Baka_nina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: surrey
I posted the following on 09/30/2004 at 9:28:01 PM CDT (I believe I was the first one to point it out), but it was pulled to incorporate it into the Debate Thread:

KERRY'S EARLY COMMENT INDICATES HE CLEARLY GOT THE QUESTIONS AHEAD OF TIME

Posted by Concerned
On News/Activism 09/30/2004 9:28:01 PM CDT · 6 replies · 428+ views

Me | 09/30/2004 | Me
"Kerry made an early comment during the debate which clearly indicates he got the questions ahead of time. Kerry said something to the effect of "we'll get to homeland security in a later question" in a way which indicated it was coming up with certainty. In addition, it is clear that Kerry has a specific answer for every question. Considering he has not answered ANY question with specificity for TWO YEARS, he could not have had all those specific details for every question without foreknowledge of the questions for which he would need answers."

104 posted on 10/03/2004 11:45:17 PM PDT by Concerned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: JPJones
"That was a tactical mistake, and was probably political to let the Afghans feel like they had accomplished something"

. . .yes; it would have been nice to see the mountain blown up. . .but that probably would not have impacted Osama or our going ultimately into Iraq. . .

. . .fact is; they did not know for certain where he was; how/why would we commit troops/manpower/MONEY to blow up a mountain; not knowing for certain. . .that Osama was there; speculating as well that he well may have escaped by underground tunnels; or that we could not say that he was NOT - by any chance - in a hospice in Pakistan. . .

The terrain in Afghanistan is supposedly some of the most difficult in the world; we needed the Afghans who know the territory; and who can negotiate it more readily than Americans. That said the size alone;the scope of the area; the unforgiving environment all lends me to believe that we made the 'right' decision.

Short of a temporary PR coup; what difference would it have made to have Osamma's head on a stick - so to speak? Dead; disabled or imprisoned; it would have been a short PR victory. The same people who decry our not finding him; are the same who would have debunked the impact of his capture as a waste of money; given that he had so many at the 'ready' to replace him and continue the 'Ossama plan'. . . Personally think he has been dead for a while; but so what?

Iraq was the money center for terrorism and we have only to look at the 'food for oil' program to know that Kofi and company were not about to change that; we were spitting in the wind; and they were playing games of 'hunt for WMD's. . .and packing their pockets with millions of dollars.

To repeat a variation of the most oft heard criticism . . ."If we knew then; what we know now; about the U.N. folks and 'friends'; enriching themselves by Saddam's oil deals - we would have been left with the same decision. . .and obviously without their approval. WHAT A JOKE!

They were not about to give up their second incomes; they were playing us for the 'fool'. . .and laughing their way to the secret bank accounts.

Their choices were/are beyond criminal; the human toll almost not calculable. . .including all those innocent; and our soldiers being killed as we speak. . .

105 posted on 10/04/2004 2:22:09 PM PDT by cricket (Don't lose your head. . vote Republican. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JPJones; All

Re Ossama; Ossamma; Osamma. . .et al. . .make that Osama. . .fingers flying oer the keys. . .


106 posted on 10/04/2004 2:25:46 PM PDT by cricket (Don't lose your head. . vote Republican. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Mike Fieschko

It's not that simple? If Jim Lehrer winked at Kerry, then that means that His "Questions" favored Mr. Kerry. If His questions favored Kerry, then that means that Kerry "looked" more prepared then President Bush. Not very fair on Lehrer's part. Am I right anyone?


107 posted on 10/08/2004 1:28:03 PM PDT by mjkoonce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-107 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson