USA TODAY

New political group pokes fun at Kerry's football gaffes
By Brian Tumulty, Gannett News Service
WASHINGTON � Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has a new political attack group to contend with.

  John Kerry passes the ball while watching practice with the Green Bay West High School football team in Wisconsin. 
Scott Olson, Getty Images

Two Washington-based lawyers supporting President Bush's re-election have registered an advocacy group, Football Fans for Truth, as a Section 527 organization allowed to accept unlimited political donations. They plan to publicize Kerry's recent sports misstatements such as his reference to home of the Green Bay Packers as "Lambert Field" instead of Lambeau Field.

Other gaffes they hope to bring wider attention to include Kerry's talk of the Buckeyes � the nickname of Ohio State University's team � while campaigning in University of Michigan Wolverine territory.

Lawyers Jeff Larroca and Dino Panagopoulos, both members of the law firm Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll, said in a conference call Wednesday they have no plans to raise large amounts of cash.

Instead, they hope to get free publicity from sports talk radio and other media.

"Our goal is to basically find ways to get out the political humor about John Kerry's unsuitability to be sportsman-in-chief," Larroca said.

Greg Le Duc, a Green Bay native who has written a screenplay about the life of Packers founder Earl "Curly" Lambeau that he is shopping around Hollywood, indicated in an e-mail Wednesday that Kerry's mistake is understandable.

"For John Kerry, it was probably just a slip since Lambeau is such a unique name compared to Lambert," said Le Duc, who would like to see Burt Reynolds play Packers co-founder George Whitney Calhoun in his movie.

Larroca and Panagopoulos characterized Kerry as a "sports poser" who said his favorite Boston Red Sox player was someone never on the team.

"Some people like the fact that he is an avid dove hunter," Larroca said.

Asked about their involvement in the Bush campaign, they would only say, "We both have yard signs."

This campaign season, both gave $1,000 to the Bush-Cheney campaign and $250 to moderate Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, who had a tough primary battle in the spring against a conservative challenger. Larroca also gave $250 to Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., according to Federal Election Commission records.

Meanwhile, the Bush campaign has played up its tenuous affinity to the Packers with Wisconsin voters.

Last week Vice President Dick Cheney visited Green Bay, Sheboygan and Milwaukee with former Packers quarterback Bart Starr.

In Green Bay, Cheney pointed out he worked 38 years ago for then-Wisconsin Gov. Warren Knowles.

"And one of the privileges of working for the governor was he was a great Packer fan," Cheney said. "And we used to catch football games."

The founders of Football Fans for Truth claim they came up with their idea about a week ago � neither could remember the exact day � during a fantasy football league draft when friends were laughing about Kerry's lack of sports knowledge.

"As the chuckles drew roars, somebody said, 'You should start a 527,'" said Larroca, referring to the section of Internal Revenue Service code that allows political advocacy groups to receive tax-exempt donations.

Panagopoulos, a former Texan who is a Dallas Cowboys fan, and Larroca, who grew up in the Washington area as a diehard Redskins fan, agreed Wednesday that Lambeau, for whom Lambeau Field is named, was one of the original Three Stooges.

They were joking, right?

"I'm serious," Larroca said. "I believe Curly Lambeau was one of the Three Stooges, and that's my final answer."

"We know it has been named Lambeau Field for several years," Panagopoulos added. (1965 to be exact.)

True Packers fans know that Lambeau is a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame and coached the team for 31 years, winning three consecutive championships from 1929 to 1931.

So will the founders of Football Fans for Truth care if the Packers have a winning season, building on their impressive victory on "Monday Night Football" against the Carolina Panthers?

"I root for the Packers when they play the Redskins," said Panagopoulos, the Dallas fan.

As if football is SO important to this election. Give me a f*cking break! ::)

I myself found this funny, but also meaningless.

But it does show what can happen when a politician makes a gaffe.

Haven't got time to read this now, maybe I'll print it out and read in while I'm in the waiting room
waiting form my gynecologist to show me his love. ;D

Haven't got time to read this now, maybe I'll print it out and read in while I'm in the waiting room
waiting form my gynecologist to show me his love. ;D




LMAO!!  ;D ;D ;D



Cat

OH MY GOD, GWB finally found something mildly amusing in the political arena.  On the other hand, considering the national mania with sports, and the timing of the election (mid football season), this could just tip the scales - in favor of Kerry, whose lack of specific knowledge regarding professional sports could be taken as a plus, even by avid sports fans (he's focused on more important things)  ;)  ;)

I am a Bush supporter who just hates the idiocy of some of his supporters....I liken it to all whites supporting the KKK....PLEASE don't judge me for the ignorant few ::)

I am a Bush supporter who just hates the idiocy of some of his supporters....I liken it to all whites supporting the KKK....PLEASE don't judge me for the ignorant few ::)


I don't want to be insulting R&RF but given the worst job loses since the depression, the increase in poverty, and those without health insurance, attcaks on the environment and overtime pay, the failures leading to 9/11, the mess in Iraq, attacks on civil liberties, attempts at election fraud, etc, I have to conclude that anyone supporting Bush has to be ignorant of the dangers we face with another 4 years.

I don't want to be insulting R&RF but given the worst job loses since the depression, the increase in poverty, and those without health insurance, attcaks on the environment and overtime pay, the failures leading to 9/11, the mess in Iraq, attacks on civil liberties, attempts at election fraud, etc, I have to conclude that anyone supporting Bush has to be ignorant of the dangers we face with another 4 years.
No Problem, Don Carlos...I respect your opinions...though mine differ I feel I deserve that same respect :)

the failures leading to 9/11


OK, let's see.  That was in September 2001.  Bush became President in late January 2001.  So he had an entire 7½ months.  How about the 8 years from the first WTC bombing, and Clinton leaving office?

There is enough blame here to go around.  But it is really wrong to keep trying to blame Bush for everything.  And I am not even going to comment on the rest.

OK, let's see.  That was in September 2001.  Bush became President in late January 2001.  So he had an entire 7½ months.  How about the 8 years from the first WTC bombing, and Clinton leaving office?

I LOVE THAT!...The Libs will HATE that...wait for it....v ::)

I LOVE THAT!...The Libs will HATE that...wait for it....v ::)

And if it had been the Republican for 8 years and the Dem for 7 1/2 months, youse guys would be saying....what?
:D

And if it had been the Republican for 8 years and the Dem for 7 1/2 months, youse guys would be saying....what?
:D
I'd be just as pissed at the 8 year guy had he been a Repuplican....it just so happens that is was Clinton though ::)

I'd be just as ticked at the 8 year guy had he been a Repuplican....it just so happens that is was Clinton though ::)


But according to Richard Clarke, who resigned as Bush's terrorism expert after serving in that job since the reagan admin. in Against All Enemies, Clinton focused lots of attention on Al Quida and Ossama under the table.  Clarke also asserts that he and others from the Clinton admin. warned Bush, Chaney, Rice and Rummy of the danger, but their focus was on Iraq, not Bin Laden.  There certainly were slip ups all along the way at lots of levels, no question, but the Bush team, with their idee fix were certainly part of the problem.

But according to Richard Clarke, who resigned as Bush's terrorism expert after serving in that job since the reagan admin. in Against All Enemies, Clinton focused lots of attention on Al Quida and Ossama under the table.  Clarke also asserts that he and others from the Clinton admin. warned Bush, Chaney, Rice and Rummy of the danger, but their focus was on Iraq, not Bin Laden.  There certainly were slip ups all along the way at lots of levels, no question, but the Bush team, with their idee fix were certainly part of the problem.
True. I am just more comfortable...not necessarily hapy right now....but IMO....I don't feel good about Kerry....and his WIFE makes Hillary look like a patron saint :P

True. I am just more comfortable...not necessarily hapy right now....but IMO....I don't feel good about Kerry....and his WIFE makes Hillary look like a patron saint :P


But Kerry's wife isn't running, last time I looked. 

awww, hasn't Cat taught you anything?  The women are actually the ones who "rule the roost" ;D



But you see, Cheer, I make him THINK he is ruling.  ;)




Cat

But Kerry's wife isn't running, last time I looked. 
She's the scariest potential first lady I've ever seen....AND she acts SO much like those trouble-making liberals we had to throw out of the bar last month :P

She's the scariest potential first lady I've ever seen....AND she acts SO much like those trouble-making liberals we had to throw out of the bar last month :P

After November 3, you'll never have to worry about THK again...unless she runs for senate in YOUR STATE!

But you see, Cheer, I make him THINK he is ruling.  ;)




Cat


And I let her think she has me convinced, mostly because she's right.

She's the scariest potential first lady I've ever seen....AND she acts SO much like those trouble-making liberals we had to throw out of the bar last month :P


Was THK in the bar with you?  Did she buy everybody a round? 

Without getting personal, or casting aspersions, I get the feeling that conservatives in general seem to be afraid of/angry at strong women.  I can't think of anything more boring than being with a weak, fawning woman who doesn't have the cojones (figuratively) to challange me on those few occasions when I'm full of ....  I like my women like my coffee, dark, strong, and sweet.

DC: I done know why you call these "fawning" women  "weak'. I assume you are referring to lady conservative pundits like Laura Ingraham, Anne Coulter, Etc. These are not women who "Fawn", nut women who speak their own minds without resorting to screaming or violence to prove a point. If these angry/strong liberal women would do some research instead of listening the bitter jealousies of other angry people, maybe their opinions with have some creedence. (Hey, my sister is a very strong/angry Republican who can make her own mind.) It's these angry Democratic women who are afraid---of THE TRUTH. ;) 
P.S.: Apologies to your wife, who can form an opinion without shouting.



Was THK in the bar with you?  Did she buy everybody a round? 

Without getting personal, or casting aspersions, I get the feeling that conservatives in general seem to be afraid of/angry at strong women.  I can't think of anything more boring than being with a weak, fawning woman who doesn't have the cojones (figuratively) to challange me on those few occasions when I'm full of ....  I like my women like my coffee, dark, strong, and sweet.

DC: I done know why you call these "fawning" women  "weak'. I assume you are referring to lady conservative pundits like Laura Ingraham, Anne Coulter, Etc. These are not women who "Fawn", nut women who speak their own minds without resorting to screaming or violence to prove a point. If these angry/strong liberal women would do some research instead of listening the bitter jealousies of other angry people, maybe their opinions with have some creedence. (Hey, my sister is a very strong/angry Republican who can make her own mind.) It's these angry Democratic women who are afraid---of THE TRUTH. ;) 
P.S.: Apologies to your wife, who can form an opinion without shouting.




You assume wrong.  In fact, I was refering to the tendancy of conservative men who attack strong liberal women, like Hillary and Theresa, who speak out.  Frankly, While I think Ingram, Coulter @ Co don't know their A from their elbow, and lie through their teeth, I do admire their spunk, nor would I call them "fawning", which would imply that they were trying to curry favor.  Just seems to me  that many conservative men are too willing to apply the "B" word to forceful liberal women.  Suggests to me a lack of confidence and a lack of belief in equality between the genders.

I guess I'm confused.  You imply that, somehow, I'm shouting.  Actually, I'm  typing (badly).  Are you objecting to my use of capital letters (as in "THE TRUTH").  And how would you know that Cat doesn't shout?  Me thinks you presume too much.

....  I like my women like my coffee, dark, strong, and sweet.

Sylvester's restaurant in Northampton sells coffee mugs that say:
"Northampton: Where the coffee is strong and so are the women."
I just add a caveat, some women would have the slogan: "Where the women are stong and the men are passive sensitive new age guys who pretend to enjoy vegan cuisine and European movies."  I mean, I don't consider women "strong" when they require men to stop being men, just as I don't consider men "strong" when they feel threatened by powerful women.

Anyway, I was amused by Indy Gent's "lady conservative pundits."  See, the thing is about the conservative man's beloved conservative women is, from Ann Coulter to Margaret Thatcher, they tell conservative men what conservative men want to hear.  In other words, while your Phyllis Schlaflys and Beverly LaHayes of the world are out being b*ll-busting lawyers and politicians, they are d*mning the Gloria Steinems and Hillary Clintons of the world for encouraging women to work outside the home and make their own reproductive choices.

After November 3, you'll never have to worry about THK again...unless she runs for senate in YOUR STATE!
Hopefully she'll say she was born in one state and be proud of it...unlike Hillary...who was born in Illinios, then loyally from Arky...and suddenly she's bustin' out the Brooklyn accent and hangin' out on the docks in NYC for votes. What a fraud ::)

All I know is that she doesn't shout on the boards. Since you live with her, you would know more than I would. ;)
In light of Max's rebuttal of my lady's comments, I would like to say many Republican women (lawyers or otherwise) have disagreed with their husbands on a lot of issues, namely abortion and women's issues. The difference between the female Republican "pundits" and your preening talk show hosts is that they don't shout and show respect to people who disagree with them. When was the last time Gloria Steinam or Hillary C. didn't have a conversation without condemning all men as rapists, bigots, and male chauvanist pigs?
And how would you know that Cat doesn't shout?  Me thinks you presume too much.

Moi? Shout? Never. Scream maybe but never shout.  ;) ;D ;D





Cat

Maybe a few loud purrs in there ? ;)



I'll never tell.  :-X ;) ;D




Cat

When was the last time Gloria Steinam or Hillary C. didn't have a conversation without condemning all men as rapists, bigots, and male chauvanist pigs?



Ummmm... am I the only one who missed those conversations, I think you are repeating what you
have been told, as opposed to actually going to the source. ???

Maybe a few loud purrs in there ? ;)


If you rub her the right way  ;)