Full Version: T Boone Picken's Challenge to Kerry
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312283,00.html
Ok... the deal basically is that T Boone Pickens, the Chair of BP Capital is saying that if John Kerry can prove a handful of facts that he believes true, that he'll give $1M to a charity of Kerry's choice.
I'm curious, why wouldn't John Kerry have proven these things wrong yet? Does it really need a $1M bet?
Questions for debate:
1. Are T Boone Pickens' claims inaccurate, and if so what evidence supports that notion?
2. Why wouldn't John Kerry release his military records? Is there something to hide?
3. If there is evidence exhonorating Kerry, why didn't it present itself during the election?
4. Will J Kerry have the ability to and/or actually even show up at a public forum to argue these ideas?
Ok... the deal basically is that T Boone Pickens, the Chair of BP Capital is saying that if John Kerry can prove a handful of facts that he believes true, that he'll give $1M to a charity of Kerry's choice.
I'm curious, why wouldn't John Kerry have proven these things wrong yet? Does it really need a $1M bet?
Questions for debate:
1. Are T Boone Pickens' claims inaccurate, and if so what evidence supports that notion?
2. Why wouldn't John Kerry release his military records? Is there something to hide?
3. If there is evidence exhonorating Kerry, why didn't it present itself during the election?
4. Will J Kerry have the ability to and/or actually even show up at a public forum to argue these ideas?
QUOTE(aevans176 @ Nov 20 2007, 10:27 AM) 
I'm curious, why wouldn't John Kerry have proven these things wrong yet? Does it really need a $1M bet?
Questions for debate:
1. Are T Boone Pickens' claims inaccurate, and if so what evidence supports that notion?
2. Why wouldn't John Kerry release his military records? Is there something to hide?
3. If there is evidence exhonorating Kerry, why didn't it present itself during the election?
4. Will J Kerry have the ability to and/or actually even show up at a public forum to argue these ideas?
Questions for debate:
1. Are T Boone Pickens' claims inaccurate, and if so what evidence supports that notion?
2. Why wouldn't John Kerry release his military records? Is there something to hide?
3. If there is evidence exhonorating Kerry, why didn't it present itself during the election?
4. Will J Kerry have the ability to and/or actually even show up at a public forum to argue these ideas?
I think you and FNC got the nuance wrong. Pickens did not directly challenge Kerry. He challenged anyone and John Kerry happened to take him up on it. Accuracy, evn if trivial, isn't much concern at Fox.
QUOTE
BOSTON --Sen. John Kerry, whose 2004 presidential campaign was torpedoed by critics of his Vietnam War record, said Friday he has personally accepted Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens' offer of $1 million to anyone who can disprove even a single charge of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachus...boat_challenge/
I have a counter question. Why is Pickens ripping the scab off a three year old wound at this point?
None of your questions are valid if Pickens himself gets to rule on what constitutes proof. Perhaps a panel of neutral legal scholars could make such determination. In my opinion, Pickens wasn't interested in truth when he smeared Kerry in 2004, so I doubt he's much concerned about it now. I wonder what ulterior motives possess him.
1. Are T Boone Pickens' claims inaccurate, and if so what evidence supports that notion?
You mean I could get $1,000,000 for this information? And you expect me to post it in a public forum?
Go fish.
2. Why wouldn't John Kerry release his military records? Is there something to hide?
Got me. Ask him, and what does it matter anyway? I'll bet most people who actually fought in Vietnam have things to hide. Come to think of it, many politicians who have *not* fought in *any* war have lots of things to hide. That's more important than beating dead horse flesh.
3. If there is evidence exhonorating Kerry, why didn't it present itself during the election?
Innocent until proven guilty . . . the evidence against Kerry was too shaky to consider as anything but the rantings of attack dawgs. Maybe it impacted the 2004 election, maybe not. Imagine what would have happened had Demos attacked GWB's combat record.
Oh yeah, there is none. So you see the reason for the attacks on Kerry, being that he does have one. But say it was attacks on that Republican who actually has a combat record . . . or a record of being a POW. I don't think the Repubs would put up with it. They can only do that to each other.
4. Will J Kerry have the ability to and/or actually even show up at a public forum to argue these ideas?
Why would he do that? This is the year 2007, not 2004. He isn't running for president any longer, but I guess some people don't understand this. I hear the guy is rich. A million bucks probably doesn't mean so much to him as to me.
Well, ta-ta, I've got a million dollars to scoop up.
You mean I could get $1,000,000 for this information? And you expect me to post it in a public forum?
Go fish.
2. Why wouldn't John Kerry release his military records? Is there something to hide?
Got me. Ask him, and what does it matter anyway? I'll bet most people who actually fought in Vietnam have things to hide. Come to think of it, many politicians who have *not* fought in *any* war have lots of things to hide. That's more important than beating dead horse flesh.
3. If there is evidence exhonorating Kerry, why didn't it present itself during the election?
Innocent until proven guilty . . . the evidence against Kerry was too shaky to consider as anything but the rantings of attack dawgs. Maybe it impacted the 2004 election, maybe not. Imagine what would have happened had Demos attacked GWB's combat record.
Oh yeah, there is none. So you see the reason for the attacks on Kerry, being that he does have one. But say it was attacks on that Republican who actually has a combat record . . . or a record of being a POW. I don't think the Repubs would put up with it. They can only do that to each other.
4. Will J Kerry have the ability to and/or actually even show up at a public forum to argue these ideas?
Why would he do that? This is the year 2007, not 2004. He isn't running for president any longer, but I guess some people don't understand this. I hear the guy is rich. A million bucks probably doesn't mean so much to him as to me.
Well, ta-ta, I've got a million dollars to scoop up.
QUOTE(aevans176 @ Nov 20 2007, 12:27 PM)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312283,00.html
Ok... the deal basically is that T Boone Pickens, the Chair of BP Capital is saying that if John Kerry can prove a handful of facts that he believes true, that he'll give $1M to a charity of Kerry's choice.
I'm curious, why wouldn't John Kerry have proven these things wrong yet? Does it really need a $1M bet?
Questions for debate:
1. Are T Boone Pickens' claims inaccurate, and if so what evidence supports that notion?
2. Why wouldn't John Kerry release his military records? Is there something to hide?
3. If there is evidence exhonorating Kerry, why didn't it present itself during the election?
4. Will J Kerry have the ability to and/or actually even show up at a public forum to argue these ideas?
Ok... the deal basically is that T Boone Pickens, the Chair of BP Capital is saying that if John Kerry can prove a handful of facts that he believes true, that he'll give $1M to a charity of Kerry's choice.
I'm curious, why wouldn't John Kerry have proven these things wrong yet? Does it really need a $1M bet?
Questions for debate:
1. Are T Boone Pickens' claims inaccurate, and if so what evidence supports that notion?
2. Why wouldn't John Kerry release his military records? Is there something to hide?
3. If there is evidence exhonorating Kerry, why didn't it present itself during the election?
4. Will J Kerry have the ability to and/or actually even show up at a public forum to argue these ideas?
Talk about reframing!
Pickens offered "$1 million dollars to anyone who could prove any of the SBV'sT charges false."
Kerry came forward prepared to do so, and old man Pickens changed the rules and demanded Kerry's records. If Kerry wants to, he could probably get him on detrimental reliance or something... either way we now all know that Pickens is no man of his word.
Personally, I'm sure that Kerry fully expected to survive Vietnam being as privileged as he was, but even so, to denigrate that service while conveniently ignoring the comparative cowardice of so many others is about as dirty and transparent as a political tactic can get.
As for your questions;
1) Apparently Kerry has evidence to that effect.
2) Maybe he was 'loved long time' and it's none of our business. Remind me I said that when I demand the same from the chickenhawks.
3) It did, but Faux News didn't report on it, so some people wouldn't know.
4) Why should he? I strongly suspect that if he did, the chickenhawks would 'pull a "Pickens"'.
Stop getting info from Faux, it rots the brain.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.