Quote:

---

DNC apology for backdrop of Russian ships


By Sam Fellman - Staff writer

Posted : Wednesday Sep 12, 2012 12:17:31 EDT

Democratic officials apologized Wednesday for mistakenly displaying an image of the Russian Navy during a tribute to America’s veterans at last week’s Democratic National Convention. But they also used their response to take a swipe at Republican rival Mitt Romney.

The Russian warships, many of Soviet-era origin, were shown on a giant screen Sept. 6 above 50 veterans while retired Adm. John Nathman honored veterans’ contributions to America. The former sailor who spotted the error and notified Navy Times had asked for an apology.

The Democratic National Convention Committee did just that in a statement Wednesday, but also criticized Romney for failing to mention service members during his convention speech in Tampa, Fla.

“Due to vendor error, incorrect images appeared briefly on screen behind fifty-one veterans during the convention and the DNCC apologizes for this mistake,” the statement said. “This error should not distract from the words of Admiral Nathman and others who spoke to President Obama's strong record on issues that impact those who have served our nation. We're proud of the service and sacrifice of our veterans and military families, and while they were an important and active part our of convention, Mitt Romney failed to even mention them in his speech in Tampa.”

A DNCC spokeswoman said the image of what's believed to be the Russian Black Sea Fleet appeared on screen due to an unspecified “vendor error,” but was unable to say how it had occurred or whether the photo had been digitally altered. Naval experts who reviewed the image believe that the photo is a composite of Russian ships and F-5 trainer jets — which are not used by the Russian Navy — streaking overhead in a maneuver.

Naval experts identified the fourth ship in the column, in the foreground on the right, as the Kara-class cruiser Kerch, which was recently put on a list to be scrapped. The next closest ship, or third in the column, is believed to be the guided missile destroyer Smetlivyy, while there’s less agreement about the more distant first two ships. But based on this specific grouping of these ship classes, one expert concluded that they were most likely the combatant muscle of the Black Sea Fleet.

A.D. Baker III, a former editor of “Combat Fleets of the World” who inspected the image, concluded that three of the four ships in the photo represented the bulk of the Black Sea Fleet's surface combatants. Baker believes the second ship in the line is a Krivak-III-class frigate in the Ukrainian Navy — based upon the position on its helicopter pad and the type of air search radar at the masthead — and surmised the photo was likely taken at least six years ago at a Navy Day parade near Sevastopol, Ukraine, where both the Ukrainian Navy and Russian Black Sea Fleets are based.

One former Air Force pilot told Navy Times in an email that the wing configuration and distinctive formation made it likely that these planes were the Turkish Stars, an aerial demonstration team of the Turkish Air Force. An image he sent appeared to show planes in a very similar formation, however there are slight differences, such as eight planes versus seven in the DNCC image, which could have been edited out.

Many Navy Times readers have cite the image’s erroneous broadcast as evidence that the Democratic Party was out of touch with veterans.

“A retired admiral with a shot of Soviet-era ships behind him,” one reader, who said he was a Navy vet, commented via Facebook. “Is the Democratic Party that far removed that they can’t check up on a simple picture?”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
DNC apology for backdrop of Russian ships

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Yeah, displaying the wrong image for a few seconds is terrible. They would have been better just ignoring the troops alltogether. The Romney way! Because that's being in-touch.

LOL!

Rappyland!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Romney, by his own admission, doesn't find the troops to be important. That's what HE said.

Sorry you don't like that and can't handle the truth, Rappy, but the fact is, Romney made no mention of the troops at all in his speech, and when asked about it, he said you have to address what's important. Clearly the troops are not important to him at all, even though he said he considers Russia our greatest foe. (Hey, at least he didn't call it the Soviet Union this time; that shows improvement!)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Can't grasp what isn't there, Storybook.

---

Quote:

---

I don't 'vanish', as I'm clearly still here. I just don't have any interest in continuing to kick your ass into the dirt any FURTHER than I already have.

What's done is done.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
THAT is the truth, that YOU and Storybook absolutely CAN NOT HANDLE !

---

Quote:

---

Yeah, displaying the wrong image for a few seconds is terrible

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:


Pretty clear to see how far to the ultra, extreme far Left the Dems have drifted.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by STORYMARK:
Hilarious. The poor fool has become such a zealot, I think he really believes anything that he doesn't agree with is "extreme far left".

Meanwhile, the rest of EVERYONE will continue not giving a shit about this non-story.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by STORYMARK:
Hilarious. The poor fool has become such a zealot, I think he really believes anything that he doesn't agree with is "extreme far left".

Meanwhile, the rest of EVERYONE will continue not giving a shit about this non-story.

---

The fool is you, who think I actually care that you don't agree w/ me. That's not the point. The point is that you be HONEST with me and yourself, as to WHY you believe in what you believe.

Democrats are so stupid, so out to lunch when it comes to things concerning the military, they'll gleefully post pics of the RUSSIAN navy, all the while thinking they are displaying images of the US navy...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Rappy calling for honesty. LOL!

The irony is reaching epic proportions.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:


So was Herman Cain so out of touch, so fucking STUPID, when it came to China's nuclear program and claiming they might get nuclear weapons?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
How many years did Romney serve in the military? How many tours of duty did he serve in Vietnam?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:


So was Herman Cain so out of touch, so fucking STUPID, when it came to China's nuclear program and claiming they might get nuclear weapons?

---

Not as stupid as Obama claiming there are 57 states, or allowing his publisher to claim he was really born in Africa, and not Hawaii, for all those years.

---

Quote:

---

We don’t need to rewrite the Constitution of the United States of America, we need to reread the Constitution and enforce the Constitution. … And I know that there are some people that are not going to do that, so for the benefit of those who are not going to read it because they don’t want us to go by the Constitution, there’s a little section in there that talks about “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
You know, those ideals that we live by, we believe in, your parents believed in, they instilled in you. When you get to the part about “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” don’t stop there, keep reading. Cause that’s when it says “when any form of government becomes destructive of those ideals, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.” We’ve got some altering and some abolishing to do!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Gee, the grumpy old ass who complains about people cherry picking, cherry picked a quote to distort a point.

Never stops being funny.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Gee, the grumpy old ass who complains about people cherry picking, cherry picked a quote to distort a point.

Never stops being funny.

---

Didn't know Mike was a grumpy old ass.

BTW, did you clear this with him before you hit "save response"?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Gee, the grumpy old ass who complains about people cherry picking, cherry picked a quote to distort a point.

Never stops being funny.

---

Didn't know Mike was a grumpy old ass.

BTW, did you clear this with him before you hit "save response"?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Rappy calling for honesty. LOL!

---

Quote:

---

The irony is reaching epic proportions.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
And the tag-team leaps into action once again.

Boom. Boom.

As Mike and Story respond to the same post within 10 minutes of each other.

---

Quote:

---

So Mike. Tell us how much more time you spent in Vietnam than Mitt Romney again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Rappy calling for honesty. LOL!

---

I always do. Sorry if you missed that memo.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

I've never NOT been honest here. You, of all people, ( changing your own posts, after the fact, via altering 1 word to change what you said ) should be the least of us all to go there.

---

Bullshit. You've been called on that lie so often it's not even funny, and you've never provided one iota of evidence.

Quote:

---

I've been human, which means being wrong, from time to time, but I've never lied here. You have.

---

Prove it.

Quote:

---

I proudly wear the target of ridicule for buffoons like you and your ilk. Tells me I'm hitting a nerve, and am right on target with what I'm saying. You'd not be pissed otherwise.

---

I have an "ilk"?





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
And the tag-team leaps into action once again.

Boom. Boom.

As Mike and Story respond to the same post within 10 minutes of each other.



So Mike. Tell us how much more time you spent in Vietnam than Mitt Romney again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

but I've never lied here.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh look - Geezer and Rappy posted within 15 minutes of each other yet again. The tea-taggers are back in the ring yet again!

---

Quote:

---

Can you show me where I made that claim to have spent more time in Vietnam than Romney?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Can you show me where I made that claim to have spent more time in Vietnam than Romney?

---

You just suggested that folks who've spent time in the military and in Vietnam have more credibility when talking about the military. Since you tend to posit on such matters quite a bit, I just wanted to know your credentials.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Since Geezer doesn't have the integrity to answer the actual question, the answer would be "no, he can't."

Now Geezer can whine about me backing up Kwick, and ignore the fact that he keeps pushing a lie.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

but I've never lied here.

---

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAHHAAA!

It never stops being funny!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh look - Geezer and Rappy posted within 15 minutes of each other yet again. The tea-taggers are back in the ring yet again!

---

Ah, but were we responding to the same post? No. That's a Mike and Story speciality.

---

Quote:

---

Then again, since you'd lie about stuff like Andrew Sullivan being an American, could I believe you anyway?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Moving the goalposts? That's a GeezeRappy specialty!

---

Quote:

---

Actually, I suggested that people who are draft dodgers tend to have remarkably little credibility when it comes to the military.

---

Quote:

---

Well, you could always start screaming "You're a sick fuck!" and then run away like you do. Kinda caught you lying when you said you were leaving RWED, didn't I? How will anyone ever believe you about anything?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Moving the goalposts? That's a GeezeRappy specialty!

---

Goalposts? So it really is a trolling competition to you? What a surprise.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Well, you could always start screaming "You're a sick fuck!" and then run away like you do. Kinda caught you lying when you said you were leaving RWED, didn't I? How will anyone ever believe you about anything?

---

Took ya long enough. I know you're really floundering when you pull this one out. How long ago was that, anyway? Please check in the grey filing cabinet and let me know.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
I note for the record that you don't even try to deny it, thereby confirming your status as a known liar.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
I note for the record that you don't even try to deny it, thereby confirming your status as a known liar.

---

Nor have you denied lying about Andrew Sullivan's citizenship.

The again, saying I was leaving, and then coming back, was just changing my mind.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Hey, me saying he was an American, then clarifying that he isn't, was just me "changing my mind."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Why do you hate auto elevator installers ? They have families to feed too.

Cites ? I confess. You got me on this one. Dagnabbit.

It's not 30 Billion $'s to taxpayers.

It's more. A LOT more.

GM: Still $42B in the Hole

BY: Bill McMorris
July 26, 2012 2:26 pm

Despite President Barack Obama’s stories about a resurgent GM ready to repay its bailout tab, the automaker and its former bank still owe taxpayers nearly $42 billion, according to an inspector general’s report.

GM owes $27 billion on the nearly $50 billion it received from the auto bailout and Ally Bank, the company’s lending arm, owes $14.7 billion of the $17.2 billion taxpayer-funded bailout it received...

GM’s stock has plummeted in recent months after stagnant development in overseas markets. It hit a new low on Wednesday, falling to $18.80, a 52 percent drop from its January 2011 high of $38.90


http://freebeacon.com/gm-still-42b-in-the-hole/

(Stock prices as of Sept 7,2012 are listed as $23.37 per share )

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Why do you hate auto elevator installers ? They have families to feed too.

Cites ? I confess. You got me on this one. Dagnabbit.

It's not 30 Billion $'s to taxpayers.

---

So you were lying.


Go figure.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:


So, by your "logic", the fact that you mis-spoke makes you a liar.

---

Quote:

---

Mike. You're a liar and a troll. Face it. Accept it. Glory in it.

---