And, believe me, they are doing everything in their power to try to make that happen. If it means disenfranchising the military votes, THEY ARE READY TO DO IT.
Yesterday Matt Drudge had a page from the Colorado Election Guide directing workers to invent stories of voter intimidation even if none exists.
Oh ya, the DNC immediately said that Drudge was attacking them, but my question is, why is that directive in their election guide?
It’s already starting – read this article at Alternet focusing on - "A voter registration outfit largely funded by the Republican National Committee is being accused of destroying the registration forms of hundreds of newly registered Democratic voters in Nevada"
Forget about the 6,000 felons that a Democratic National Committee shadow organization registered in Colorado! Their focus is on anything Right Wing.
This morning we are hearing reports of legions of lawyers going to training classes to learn how to be ‘election monitors’. One of the groups, the People for the American Way, caught my attention….I have heard about them before and it isn’t good my friends. Their name is deceiving but their intent is to counter anything 'Right Wing'.
People for the American Way states this on their website: For over 20 years, People For the American Way Foundation (PFAWF) has countered the Right Wing’s efforts to roll back, or stop, social justice progress and to reshape government and society to its liking. Our research center monitors the power of right-wing groups, documenting their connections, funding, and reporting on their political influence.
An article provided by PFAWF for a group called The Body called The Truth About Gay and Lesbian Issues in the Public Schools talks about the fact that “local communities have chosen to incorporate these programs because they meet the needs of students.”
Now fast forward - Thomas P Kilgannon is the president of Freedom Alliance, a foundation dedicated to preserving American sovereignty reports:
Next month, the United States will have the distinction of having joined the elite club of countries like Sierra Leone and Sri Lanka whose elections are scrutinized and critiqued by international election monitors. It is a national disgrace that is openly advocated by leftist activists and a group of congressional Democrats.
After UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan turned down a request from ten Democrat Congressmen to send poll watchers (he said the petition had to originate with the executive branch of government) the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) gleefully accepted a similar invitation channeled through the State Department. Soon afterward a Canadian newspaper headline gloated - accurately - "Third World Monitors U.S. Elections."
The OSCE has already dispatched a group of five "election experts" to the United States. There really wouldn't be a problem with the OSCE observing our election if they were here as observers; that is, to learn how democracy works and witness democratic elections in the country that does it better than any other.
But that is not the case. This group of international busy bodies is in the United States to cast judgment and provide support and cover to a hopelessly disgruntled group of partisan Democrats who, if George Bush is re-elected, will contest the election on any and all grounds. In debate on the House floor, Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas said a coalition of "some 10,000 or more lawyers" is ready to challenge election results that favor Republicans.
***NOTE: GUESS WHO IS INCLUDED IN THE LIST? That’s right – People for the American Way!
In its preliminary report, the OSCE began laying the foundation from which liberal partisans can contest the November 2nd results. During their visit here, the agenda of OSCE monitors was overwhelmingly stacked with liberal organizations: Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, NAACP, People for the American Way, and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, among others. The group met with eight representatives from Congress - all but one of them were Democrats.
The OSCE echoed Democrat complaints about the Help America Vote Act which established the Election Assistance Commission (EAC). "The establishment of the EAC was noticeably delayed," the OSCE report stated. The report also complained that without a national election guru in Washington, Secretaries of State "were left without needed guidelines, and found it impossible to avail themselves of the funding for new voting technology."
The OSCE carped that voter identification is made more difficult because Americans are not required to carry a "national identification document." This group of outsiders predicted "greater controversy" in the 2004 election than there was in 2000 because voting machines do not "produce the necessary paper trail."
In its history, the OSCE has given its seal of approval to the re-election of national dictators who garner more than 90 percent of the vote. Given that, you might think it would commend the U.S. electoral structure as a system in which vibrant, competitive races take place which often produce close, and sometimes very close, results.
The group also charged that states which allow overseas voters to voluntarily waive their right to a secret vote by faxing a marked ballot are "not consistent with...the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and OSCE commitments." What the OSCE sees as a violation of a United Nations declaration is what we in America call freedom of choice. If the OSCE demanded we apply Kofi Annan's standards, thousands of U.S. military personnel living and fighting abroad could be deprived of their right to vote.
The OSCE report bemoans the fact that the U.S. has no "central election body" like the IRS which would efficiently administer the presidential election.
Our Founders called that federalism and they purposely decentralized the voting process. We believe that citizens can better administer elections at the local level than can bureaucrats in Washington, much less Third World novices. Despite some glitches here and there, voters, poll workers, party monitors and the media apply checks and balances against one another to ensure the integrity of U.S. elections.
These European election police claim authority to sit in judgment of our elections because the State Department consented to the Copenhagen Document, an obscure diplomatic agreement, even though their own report states, "the absence of a central body administering elections in the U.S. creates a lack of clarity as to which authority...should provide accreditation to international observers."
No government authority should have invited international monitors to cast judgment on our elections. They are here only because Democrats, should they lose, will do all they can to embarrass their country. They have submitted our elections to a "global test" and rigged it so that we will fail. Their hatred for George W. Bush has taken them beyond the extreme.
This all is beyond the pale. Knowing that people are 'energized' about an election is quite different than discovering illegal activities and purposeful actions towards that end.
It has been said that this election is the most important since the birth of our country. I believe that is true.
10/14/2004
Elizabeth Edwards Should Learn When To Keep Her Mouth Shut
Elizabeth Edwards, chiming in on the Kedwards' outing of Cheney’s daughter:
ELIZABETH EDWARDS ON ABC RADIO: "She's overreacted to this and treated it as if it's shameful to have this discussion. I think that's a very sad state of affairs… I think that it indicates a certain degree of shame with respect to her daughter's sexual preferences… It makes me really sad that that's Lynne's response."
Lynne Cheney acting as if she is ashamed of her daughter? I beg your pardon Elizabeth Edwards.
Shame on you and all of your DNC goons – your “Kerry will make them walk again” husband one of the worst – shame on you for stooping so low!
Lynne Cheney is not ashamed. She is acting as any other parent would if their child were attacked in such a personal way.
Mary Cheney has done nothing to bring herself into the national spotlight.
It is the tawdry – yes TAWDRY – look it up, Elizabeth Edwards – tawdry, shameful attacks that your husband and John Kerry did to an innocent bystander.
The SHAME is on the Kerry/Edwards campaign.
ELIZABETH EDWARDS ON ABC RADIO: "She's overreacted to this and treated it as if it's shameful to have this discussion. I think that's a very sad state of affairs… I think that it indicates a certain degree of shame with respect to her daughter's sexual preferences… It makes me really sad that that's Lynne's response."
Lynne Cheney acting as if she is ashamed of her daughter? I beg your pardon Elizabeth Edwards.
Shame on you and all of your DNC goons – your “Kerry will make them walk again” husband one of the worst – shame on you for stooping so low!
Lynne Cheney is not ashamed. She is acting as any other parent would if their child were attacked in such a personal way.
Mary Cheney has done nothing to bring herself into the national spotlight.
It is the tawdry – yes TAWDRY – look it up, Elizabeth Edwards – tawdry, shameful attacks that your husband and John Kerry did to an innocent bystander.
The SHAME is on the Kerry/Edwards campaign.
Now There's Proof
That we are dealing with criminals in the form of the DNC.
Drudge has a copy of a page from the DNC Colorado Election Day Manual, instructing their goons and thugs to INVENT STORIES OF VOTER INTIMIDATION EVEN IF NONE EXISTS.
Drudge has a copy of a page from the DNC Colorado Election Day Manual, instructing their goons and thugs to INVENT STORIES OF VOTER INTIMIDATION EVEN IF NONE EXISTS.
FrontPage: ABC's Mark Halperin a Soros Connection?
FrontPage Magazine's article The ABC's of Media Bias is a great analysis of the making of a biased left-wing liberal. Not that I am giving Mark Halperin a pass on his shocking memo sent only hours prior to the second presidential debate, but reading this will bring into focus the intent of the memo. Halperin clearly has a bias and he was using his authority to try to influence the outcome of the debate.
Halperin's father, Morton Halperin, it turns out is today the Senior Vice President of the left-wing Center for American Progress (CAP) and Director of the Open Society Policy Center established by eccentric billionaire international financier George Soros.
Couple that fact with Morton Halperin's socialist, far-left background and this story just jumped back to page one.
I suggest you read the entire story and judge for yourself...
DR
Halperin's father, Morton Halperin, it turns out is today the Senior Vice President of the left-wing Center for American Progress (CAP) and Director of the Open Society Policy Center established by eccentric billionaire international financier George Soros.
Couple that fact with Morton Halperin's socialist, far-left background and this story just jumped back to page one.
I suggest you read the entire story and judge for yourself...
DR
Is The Plot Thickening...
..as the story begins to unravel?
Thomas Lipscomb writes in the New York Sun about the Mystery Surrounding Kerry's Discharge. Lipscomb points to this Navy document on Kerry's website titled "Honorable Discharge from the Reserves".
He questions the timeline and points out that - the document is dated February 16, 1978. But Mr. Kerry's military commitment began with his six-year enlistment contract with the Navy on February 18, 1966. His commitment should have terminated in 1972
Kerry's own timeline on his website states the following: April 29, 1970 Kerry listed as Registrant who has completed service
Lipscomb reminds us of the fact that - Mr. Carter's first act as president was a general amnesty for draft dodgers and other war protesters. Less than an hour after his inauguration on January 21, 1977, while still in the Capitol building, Mr. Carter signed Executive Order 4483 empowering it. By the time it became a directive from the Defense Department in March 1977 it had been expanded to include other offenders who may have had general, bad conduct, dishonorable discharges, and any other discharge or sentence with negative effect on military records. In those cases the directive outlined a procedure for appeal on a case by case basis before a board of officers. A satisfactory appeal would result in an improvement of discharge status or an honorable discharge.
Not being an expert on these matters, my commenting is limited to the facts as reported by those that are.
One of the most interesting parts of the Lipscomb piece is this:
There are a number of categories of discharges besides honorable. There are general discharges, medical discharges, bad conduct discharges, as well as other than honorable and dishonorable discharges. There is one odd coincidence that gives some weight to the possibility that Mr. Kerry was dishonorably discharged. Mr. Kerry has claimed that he lost his medal certificates and that is why he asked that they be reissued. But when a dishonorable discharge is issued, all pay benefits, and allowances, and all medals and honors are revoked as well. And five months after Mr. Kerry joined the U.S. Senate in 1985, on one single day, June 4, all of Mr. Kerry's medals were reissued.
Thomas Lipscomb writes in the New York Sun about the Mystery Surrounding Kerry's Discharge. Lipscomb points to this Navy document on Kerry's website titled "Honorable Discharge from the Reserves".
He questions the timeline and points out that - the document is dated February 16, 1978. But Mr. Kerry's military commitment began with his six-year enlistment contract with the Navy on February 18, 1966. His commitment should have terminated in 1972
Kerry's own timeline on his website states the following: April 29, 1970 Kerry listed as Registrant who has completed service
Lipscomb reminds us of the fact that - Mr. Carter's first act as president was a general amnesty for draft dodgers and other war protesters. Less than an hour after his inauguration on January 21, 1977, while still in the Capitol building, Mr. Carter signed Executive Order 4483 empowering it. By the time it became a directive from the Defense Department in March 1977 it had been expanded to include other offenders who may have had general, bad conduct, dishonorable discharges, and any other discharge or sentence with negative effect on military records. In those cases the directive outlined a procedure for appeal on a case by case basis before a board of officers. A satisfactory appeal would result in an improvement of discharge status or an honorable discharge.
Not being an expert on these matters, my commenting is limited to the facts as reported by those that are.
One of the most interesting parts of the Lipscomb piece is this:
There are a number of categories of discharges besides honorable. There are general discharges, medical discharges, bad conduct discharges, as well as other than honorable and dishonorable discharges. There is one odd coincidence that gives some weight to the possibility that Mr. Kerry was dishonorably discharged. Mr. Kerry has claimed that he lost his medal certificates and that is why he asked that they be reissued. But when a dishonorable discharge is issued, all pay benefits, and allowances, and all medals and honors are revoked as well. And five months after Mr. Kerry joined the U.S. Senate in 1985, on one single day, June 4, all of Mr. Kerry's medals were reissued.
Lynne Cheney: Kerry Pulled a Cheap and Tawdry Political Trick
Lynne Cheney accused John Kerry on Wednesday night of "a cheap and tawdry political trick" and said he "is not a good man" after he brought up their daughter's homosexuality at the final presidential debate.
10/13/2004
Don Evans
Secretary of Commerce just had a great line:
"President Bush wants to sign the FRONT of your check...
...Senator KeWWy wants to sign the BACK of it...
"President Bush wants to sign the FRONT of your check...
...Senator KeWWy wants to sign the BACK of it...
A Couple of Questions...
...that I am putting 'out there':
1 - I have heard from several sources that Kerry did not originally get an honorable discharge from the military - perhaps one of the reasons he refuses to sign the release form? How can we verify this? A continuance to that question is - some people are also discussing the fact that his 'honorable discharge' wasn't officially given until during Billary's years...anyone know the facts on this?
2 - what about this rumor that the Kerry campaign is keeping an 'enemies list?'
oh, and there is a #3 - Kerry bringing up Cheney's daughter again...low and dirty politics...I mentioned it earlier but as I give it more thought it really is getting dirtier and sleazier...motive?
just a few thoughts as I digest the past couple of hours....
DR
1 - I have heard from several sources that Kerry did not originally get an honorable discharge from the military - perhaps one of the reasons he refuses to sign the release form? How can we verify this? A continuance to that question is - some people are also discussing the fact that his 'honorable discharge' wasn't officially given until during Billary's years...anyone know the facts on this?
2 - what about this rumor that the Kerry campaign is keeping an 'enemies list?'
oh, and there is a #3 - Kerry bringing up Cheney's daughter again...low and dirty politics...I mentioned it earlier but as I give it more thought it really is getting dirtier and sleazier...motive?
just a few thoughts as I digest the past couple of hours....
DR
Bush Opens a Super-Sized Can of Whoop-Ass on KeWWy
I didn't try to do the 'blog-by-every-sentence' thing tonight and I am glad for that decision.
Bush kicked AZZ!
Bush kicked AZZ!
Kerry Outs Cheney's Daughter
Again - the Democratic challenger(s) outed Dick Cheney's daughter, a low blow, and one that I think is a clear indicator of their grasping (or gasping) during the final last breaths of this campaign.
FOUR MORE YEARS!
FOUR MORE YEARS!
Gonna chill for the remainder of the day
and rest up for the debate tonight.
Sorta like an extended desert-style siesta......
DR
Sorta like an extended desert-style siesta......
DR
Miller: Iwo Jima, if covered by media today
Over at the Washington Times, Zell Miller is at it again. He writes as he speaks, with great clarity and a lot of humor thrown in.
Our world of instant everything - news, software via download, messages: email-text-instant, gratification (just threw that one in to see if you were paying attention :) - this instantaneous speed that we move at causes us to look at things a little skewed perhaps.
There is merit to the "Rome wasn't built in a day" theory.
President Bush, upon committing this country to a war against terror, warned us that it was going to be long, arduous - boring sometimes - and yes, even lethal. I think we should be guarded against falling into the instantaneous mentality and not apply those same rules to this important phase in protecting our nation's security.
That's what Zell Miller is trying to get across, I think. Hopefully people will listen.
I love Miller's approach to things. He is able to address issues head-on, probably with more zing since he is a lame duck as M@ over at Manifest Content - who turned me on to this piece - points out.
Our world of instant everything - news, software via download, messages: email-text-instant, gratification (just threw that one in to see if you were paying attention :) - this instantaneous speed that we move at causes us to look at things a little skewed perhaps.
There is merit to the "Rome wasn't built in a day" theory.
President Bush, upon committing this country to a war against terror, warned us that it was going to be long, arduous - boring sometimes - and yes, even lethal. I think we should be guarded against falling into the instantaneous mentality and not apply those same rules to this important phase in protecting our nation's security.
That's what Zell Miller is trying to get across, I think. Hopefully people will listen.
I love Miller's approach to things. He is able to address issues head-on, probably with more zing since he is a lame duck as M@ over at Manifest Content - who turned me on to this piece - points out.
10/12/2004
DNC: The Party of Thugs and Criminals
Remember this one - the liberal that assaulted the conservative for speaking out at a Kerry rally?
Now we are getting reports about break-ins at Republican campaign headquarters, burglaries and vandalizing, computers stolen, protesters going inside Republican campaign headquarters and refusing to leave.
In Orlando, Florida, injuries and damage were sustained when protestors forced their way into the campaign office fracturing the arm of one staffer and vandalizing the premises. In Michigan, protestors entered a headquarters and engaged in activities that disrupted volunteers trying to make phone calls.
It has gotten so bad that - on Monday, Bush-Cheney '04 established a hotline for victims to report incidents of voter intimidation at 1-888-303-7125.
Today there are reports that in Colorado there are 6,000 felons on the voting records, and one group - the Colorado Voting Project, signed up 77 voters Sept. 29 in the Denver County Jail.
What is going on here??
Liberals have been pissed off since 2000 when they lost control of Congress and the presidency. We all know that. And we know that they will go to extremes to get back in power.
But this isn't about their screeching about first amendment rights - theirs, not ours - this is about criminal activity.
Is it time to play by their rules?
I say it is time to take the gloves off. Writing nice civilized letters asking them to 'please stop' isn't going to go anywhere, Racicot.
These thugs have set the ground rules...let the games begin.
10/11/2004
Can O' Woopass
Woop
Thanks to Desert Cat for this link......just couldn't link..........just HAD to post the pic on my site too.................
Choice? There IS no Choice!
I don’t know about you all, but I am SICK and TIRED of having to listen the handlers interpret what was said – each and every time the two johns open their mouths.
Last time I checked, we are living in the United States of America where English is the primary language spoken.
So, how come every time Kerry – or Edwards, for that matter - opens his mouth we have to suffer through a meticulous elucidation of what he REALLY meant to say?
It is uncanny…almost before you can blink your eyes and say “WTF did he just say????”…there they are! On every news channel, over speaking anyone that tries to ask “WTF did he just say????” with their “well, even though YOU – you right-wing-obnoxious-pig-conservative – heard THIS, what he REALLY MEANT TO SAY was THIS”
Let me tell you, if this man - Kerry - is elected president of these United States, overnight you will find an entirely new profession open up. My guess is, all of us will be moving to DC before January 20, 2005 to take advantage of the wave.
The wave? Why becoming a ‘PI’ of course.
No, not private investigator…….Presidential Interpreter!
Of course I jest. What else is left to do after suffering through all the hogwash and bulls**t tonight?
Give me someone that is steadfast, unwavering, resolute in the defense of his country. GW Bush fits that bill.
We think most men's actions to be the interpreters of their thoughts. --Locke
Arizona Bloggers Rock!
I have been remiss about acknowledging all of the AZ bloggers that I have added to my blogroll. Since I can't remember who was acknowledged or not, i am going to list them all here now (in alphabetical order so as not to show preferential treatment ~g:
Blogspirator
Cactus Road
Desert Cat Musings
Desert Tusk *new guy on the block for me - but good stuff
Kerry Haters
No Pundit Intended
Way Off Bass - oops - update ! - my bad - WOB is not actually in AZ, but he will still remain on the DR blogroll...
Arizona bloggers ROCK!
Four More Years!
GW will be here tomorrow night and he will see what support is here in AZ for him.
btw - did anyone else notice last Friday night when Kerry bumped into someone, Kerry turned around and there - in full view of the camera lens - all of the people had their backs turned to Kerry....waiting to speak to President Bush.
Kerry...go back home with terezaahhh...fly your kite...ride your windsurfer....lie to your gardener...lie to your housekeeper...lie to everyone that is on your payroll........
BUT........................................................
DON'T LIE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Blogspirator
Cactus Road
Desert Cat Musings
Desert Tusk *new guy on the block for me - but good stuff
Kerry Haters
No Pundit Intended
Way Off Bass - oops - update ! - my bad - WOB is not actually in AZ, but he will still remain on the DR blogroll...
Arizona bloggers ROCK!
Four More Years!
GW will be here tomorrow night and he will see what support is here in AZ for him.
btw - did anyone else notice last Friday night when Kerry bumped into someone, Kerry turned around and there - in full view of the camera lens - all of the people had their backs turned to Kerry....waiting to speak to President Bush.
Kerry...go back home with terezaahhh...fly your kite...ride your windsurfer....lie to your gardener...lie to your housekeeper...lie to everyone that is on your payroll........
BUT........................................................
DON'T LIE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
10/10/2004
Kerry - Uber-Liberal - Thinks Americans are Stupid
If you can get past the first few paragraphs - Kerry Haters points out the ridiculous notion that Kerry now wants us to believe that he was looking for his gun in the first moments of 9/11. Perhaps Kerry is conveniently forgetting his exchange with Larry King describing how he was 'unable to think' for at least 40 minutes after hearing the news.
The New York Times Magazine article about Kerry is very revealing.
Hugh Hewitt has some great comments about what was written.
A key point that struck me was this - while George Bush might not be as articulate as John Kerry during a debate - Kerry has YET to articulate to this nation his plan for national security. Oh yes, he SAYS he has a PLAN, but does he share it with us?
Let me give you an example of what his aides are telling about Kerry's PLAN when asked by Matt Bai of the NY Times Magazine:
..what I heard from some of them in response was that Kerry's theories on global affairs were just too complex for the electorate (***Note: that's us, folks) and would have been ignored -- or, worse yet, mangled -- by the press. ''Yes, he should have laid out this issue and many others in greater detail and with more intellectual creativity, there's no question,'' one adviser told me. ''But it would have had no effect.''
This is, of course, a common Democratic refrain: Republicans sound more coherent because they see the world in such a rudimentary way, while Democrats, 10 steps ahead of the rest of the country, wrestle with profound policy issues that don't lend themselves to slogans. By this reasoning, any proposal that can be explained concisely to voters is, by definition, ineffective and lacking in gravitas.
The New York Times Magazine article about Kerry is very revealing.
Hugh Hewitt has some great comments about what was written.
A key point that struck me was this - while George Bush might not be as articulate as John Kerry during a debate - Kerry has YET to articulate to this nation his plan for national security. Oh yes, he SAYS he has a PLAN, but does he share it with us?
Let me give you an example of what his aides are telling about Kerry's PLAN when asked by Matt Bai of the NY Times Magazine:
..what I heard from some of them in response was that Kerry's theories on global affairs were just too complex for the electorate (***Note: that's us, folks) and would have been ignored -- or, worse yet, mangled -- by the press. ''Yes, he should have laid out this issue and many others in greater detail and with more intellectual creativity, there's no question,'' one adviser told me. ''But it would have had no effect.''
This is, of course, a common Democratic refrain: Republicans sound more coherent because they see the world in such a rudimentary way, while Democrats, 10 steps ahead of the rest of the country, wrestle with profound policy issues that don't lend themselves to slogans. By this reasoning, any proposal that can be explained concisely to voters is, by definition, ineffective and lacking in gravitas.
Oh, and don't forget - Kerry told us that he will hold 'summit meetings':
In all of this, Kerry intends to use as leverage America's considerable capacity for economic aid; a Kerry adviser told me, only slightly in jest, that Kerry's most tempting fantasy is to attend the G-8 summit.
The fact is, Kerry just doesn't understand the mindset of terrorists that want to instill Islamic rule worldwide, who will decapitate their enemies in the name of God. That, John Kerry is the world vision that al-Zarkawi has for you, for me, for everyone in this country. And if you aren't willing to deal with reality, you aren't going to lead this country.
Perhaps Bai's most telling statement of all, while he was trying to write a piece that supports John Kerry's multi-positions on every issue, is this:
...his less lofty vision might have seemed more satisfying -- and would have been easier to talk about in a political campaign -- in a world where the twin towers still stood.
Yes, pre-9/11, that is the very dangerous mindset of John Kerry - the man who would be president...
My New Favorite Columnist
T.R. Fehrenbach, Express-News contributing columnist and one of the most respected historians in Texas, writes about today's events through the prism of his profession. He has written several books; his best known work on the state's history is called "Lone Star."
His column on George W. Bush "Hate W.? Well, what you see is what you get " is excellent. Highly recommended on the reading list. Here is a sampling:
W. believes that compared to national security, all other issues fade into historical insignificance, and he realizes that no American president ever has, ever can or ever will allow foreigners to dictate U.S. policy, however much it ticks off peace parties and foreigners.
His economic policies angered all (though they dare not speak it) who favor redistribution in their hearts. His education policy — more federal funds than ever in history — is detested by educators because it was a start on accountability, which they fear more than the devil abhors holy water. He allowed the GOP to spend like drunken Democrats in pursuit of power, upsetting not only Democrats but some Republicans.
He made an openly Christian believer attorney general and believes faith must play a role in American society. Whoa! Unlike Clinton, he has little regard for movie stars. Hollywood hates it when it gets no respect. He does not read published criticism but has hires dissect and defuse it. (He acts like an executive rather than a Jimmy Carter.) That makes self-important editors who believe they should be running the country candidates for strokes.
(Requires a username/password but for those that have AZ Central ones that will work - free to sign up otherwise)
His column on George W. Bush "Hate W.? Well, what you see is what you get " is excellent. Highly recommended on the reading list. Here is a sampling:
W. believes that compared to national security, all other issues fade into historical insignificance, and he realizes that no American president ever has, ever can or ever will allow foreigners to dictate U.S. policy, however much it ticks off peace parties and foreigners.
His economic policies angered all (though they dare not speak it) who favor redistribution in their hearts. His education policy — more federal funds than ever in history — is detested by educators because it was a start on accountability, which they fear more than the devil abhors holy water. He allowed the GOP to spend like drunken Democrats in pursuit of power, upsetting not only Democrats but some Republicans.
He made an openly Christian believer attorney general and believes faith must play a role in American society. Whoa! Unlike Clinton, he has little regard for movie stars. Hollywood hates it when it gets no respect. He does not read published criticism but has hires dissect and defuse it. (He acts like an executive rather than a Jimmy Carter.) That makes self-important editors who believe they should be running the country candidates for strokes.
(Requires a username/password but for those that have AZ Central ones that will work - free to sign up otherwise)
Kerry's Supreme Court nominee votes
Even though, during the second presidential debate, Kerry said this:
A few years ago, when he came to office, the president said, these are his words: What we need are some good conservative judges on the courts. And he said also that his two favorite justices are Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas. So you get a pretty good sense of where he's heading if he were to appoint somebody.
The fact of the matter is that Kerry voted for Scalia's appointment to the Supreme Court.
According to this article by Terrence P Jeffrey
Kerry is for government by un-elected liberal judges.
His record is uncharacteristically consistent here. He has flip-flopped only once on Supreme Court justices.As a freshman senator representing a state with a large Italian-American population, Kerry joined a unanimous vote to confirm Antonin Scalia, the first Italian-American ever nominated to the Supreme Court. But on May 19 of this year, Kerry told the Associated Press he regrets supporting Scalia. "If you're looking for me to admit that I made a mistake in my years in the Senate, there you go--there's one," he said.
Meanwhile, Kerry voted against confirming Rehnquist as chief justice, and against confirming Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas as associate justices. More recently, he even voted to block up-or-down votes on Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen and Miguel Estrada, constitutionalists whom President Bush nominated as federal appeals judge.
Steven B Presser at Legal Affairs admits to changing his vote from Kerry to Bush because Bush understands that justices should interpret laws and protect our liberties the way the founders intended.
Presser commits himself further by saying: I WILL VOTE FOR GEORGE W. BUSH INSTEAD OF JOHN KERRY because I still believe in the rule of law, and I want to do whatever I can to preserve it.
This is one of the more critical and serious considerations - after national security - that voters will have to take with themselves into the voting booth on November 2nd.
Presser finishes with some very compelling food for thought:
But if modern social science has taught us anything, it is that we take our values not from within ourselves, but from the culture into which we are born and from our fellows, and, for those of us who believe in a higher power, from our God. The radical individualism—or more properly, the naïve lunacy—of the mystery passage is a prescription for anarchy and chaos, not the rule of law. The mystery passage and decisions based on it give license to judges to make law or change the meaning of the Constitution at will, and thus to reduce American liberty. Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas understand this, and so does George W. Bush.
A few years ago, when he came to office, the president said, these are his words: What we need are some good conservative judges on the courts. And he said also that his two favorite justices are Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas. So you get a pretty good sense of where he's heading if he were to appoint somebody.
The fact of the matter is that Kerry voted for Scalia's appointment to the Supreme Court.
According to this article by Terrence P Jeffrey
Kerry is for government by un-elected liberal judges.
His record is uncharacteristically consistent here. He has flip-flopped only once on Supreme Court justices.As a freshman senator representing a state with a large Italian-American population, Kerry joined a unanimous vote to confirm Antonin Scalia, the first Italian-American ever nominated to the Supreme Court. But on May 19 of this year, Kerry told the Associated Press he regrets supporting Scalia. "If you're looking for me to admit that I made a mistake in my years in the Senate, there you go--there's one," he said.
Meanwhile, Kerry voted against confirming Rehnquist as chief justice, and against confirming Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas as associate justices. More recently, he even voted to block up-or-down votes on Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen and Miguel Estrada, constitutionalists whom President Bush nominated as federal appeals judge.
Steven B Presser at Legal Affairs admits to changing his vote from Kerry to Bush because Bush understands that justices should interpret laws and protect our liberties the way the founders intended.
Presser commits himself further by saying: I WILL VOTE FOR GEORGE W. BUSH INSTEAD OF JOHN KERRY because I still believe in the rule of law, and I want to do whatever I can to preserve it.
This is one of the more critical and serious considerations - after national security - that voters will have to take with themselves into the voting booth on November 2nd.
Presser finishes with some very compelling food for thought:
But if modern social science has taught us anything, it is that we take our values not from within ourselves, but from the culture into which we are born and from our fellows, and, for those of us who believe in a higher power, from our God. The radical individualism—or more properly, the naïve lunacy—of the mystery passage is a prescription for anarchy and chaos, not the rule of law. The mystery passage and decisions based on it give license to judges to make law or change the meaning of the Constitution at will, and thus to reduce American liberty. Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas understand this, and so does George W. Bush.
John Kerry - Mr. Gullibility
This is a good article on Kerry's outrageous - and somewhat overlooked - statement “I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide (Iran) the nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes.”
Trial Lawyer's Pot of Gold
Just found this article, Democrats' Forked Tongue on National Security, Health Care, at Human Events Online that has some startling statistics:
The Kerry-Edwards campaign hopes Americans believe that their administration would mean peace and prosperity. Anyone who knows their real record on Clinton Executive Order 13166, which declared that all recipients of federal funds must provide translation services into any language anyone speaks at any time, knows better.
What is the Clinton Executive Order 13166 you ask?
The number of interpreters of languages critical to our national security is finite. According to Kirk Belnap, a professor of Arabic at Brigham Young University, no more than 200 non-Arab Americans in the entire country had a professional-level proficiency in Arabic in 2001. That shortage has not lessened. According to The 9/11 Commission Report, "The total number of undergraduate degrees granted in Arabic in all U.S. colleges and universities in 2002 was six."
Does the name Sandy Berger ring a bell?
Sandy Berger, former National Security Advisor to Bill Clinton and then-advisor to John Kerry, was caught smuggling documents out of the National Archives [see "Will Justice Indict Berger?"]. Among those reportedly stolen documents, as the New York Post revealed on July 29, lay proof that the Clinton Administration knew about the Arabic translator shortage prior to deciding to make it even worse via E.O. 13166:
"Urgent complaints that the FBI could not decipher bugged conversations between members of a Brooklyn mosque and Afghan terrorists because it lacked translators were included in the documents former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger removed from the National Archives."
While the FBI was begging for translators, the Clinton Administration chose to take care of its pals, the trial lawyers, instead. This fact, Berger may have recognized, would further undermine public confidence in the Democratic Party's ability to put America's national interest ahead of its own self-interest.
In addition, numerous Clinton holdovers who have burrowed in as career employees of the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights (HHS OCR), are now deciding how E.O. 13166 should be enforced.
The result: the Tucson Unified School District, where at least 40 languages are spoken, signed a 2002 consent decree with HHS OCR agreeing to provide translations and interpreters upon demand.
Their Senate records show that a Kerry-Edwards Administration would be far more aggressive in its enforcement of E.O. 13166. Both Senators Kerry and Edwards have cosponsored Sen. Tom Daschle's (D.-S.D.) "Health Care Coverage for Minorities" legislation (S 1833), which would codify E.O. 13166 as a permanent part of federal law.
There remains a pot of gold for trial lawyers as a result of E.O. 13166: increased malpractice litigation due to translation errors both real and imagined.
E.O. 13166 regulations propounded by HHS OCR insist that friends or family members should not be used as translators. Granted, a 2003 study published in Pediatrics Magazine found that family members made at least one translation error roughly 77% of the time in a medical setting. But according to that same study, trained, professional interpreters still made at least one mistake 53% of the time.
Poor people seldom sue their equally impoverished relatives for translation mistakes. Suing an employee of a wealthy hospital is quite another matter.
What might these lawsuits cost? Consider that a plaintiff in a 1984 case was awarded $71 million when paramedics misinterpreted just one word "intoxicado."
Efforts to require hospitals to determine whether patents are legally here have been attacked as interfering with urgently needed medical treatment. Yet a doctor or nurse is expected by E.O. 13166 to determine the precise language and dialect spoken by every patient who is carried through their door.
E.O. 13166 also ensures that there will be lawsuits when a hospital sends a speaker of Mandarin Chinese to translate for a speaker of Cantonese Chinese, or a speaker of Castilian Spanish is asked to interpret for a speaker of Puerto Rican Spanish.
Americans pay millions of dollars to provide health care and medical treatment for illegal aliens. According to a recent article in the Washington Post, the U.S. government will help subsidize "a four-year, $1 billion program to pay some of the costs of treating illegal immigrants [without requiring] hospitals to ask patients about their immigration status." Sen. Jon Kyl (R.-Ariz.) fostered this latest federal subsidy with funds in the Medicare bill. As an example of costs to American taxpayers consider Houston's Harris County Hospital District, which, according to the February 2003 Phyllis Schlafly Report, spent $330 million to treat and immunize illegal aliens over three years time.
On top of these already-staggering costs, E.O. 13166 means that every word uttered in a hospital to people who should not even be in the United States could provoke a ruinously expensive lawsuit.
Rep. Peter King (R.-N.Y.) has introduced legislation (HR 300) to repeal E.O. 13166. His bill has attracted 77 cosponsors to date.
Rep. Ernest Istook (R.-Okla.), from his post on the House Appropriations Committee, has twice included language into an appropriations bills that ensures that states and localities are not required to post road signs in languages other than English.
Translation: Lip service on their concern about the staggering costs of health care is just that, lip service.
Both Kerry's and Edward's record on this are proof positive that their primary concern is to line their own pockets by taking care of their litigation attorney friends....all at taxpayer expense.
The Kerry-Edwards campaign hopes Americans believe that their administration would mean peace and prosperity. Anyone who knows their real record on Clinton Executive Order 13166, which declared that all recipients of federal funds must provide translation services into any language anyone speaks at any time, knows better.
What is the Clinton Executive Order 13166 you ask?
The number of interpreters of languages critical to our national security is finite. According to Kirk Belnap, a professor of Arabic at Brigham Young University, no more than 200 non-Arab Americans in the entire country had a professional-level proficiency in Arabic in 2001. That shortage has not lessened. According to The 9/11 Commission Report, "The total number of undergraduate degrees granted in Arabic in all U.S. colleges and universities in 2002 was six."
Does the name Sandy Berger ring a bell?
Sandy Berger, former National Security Advisor to Bill Clinton and then-advisor to John Kerry, was caught smuggling documents out of the National Archives [see "Will Justice Indict Berger?"]. Among those reportedly stolen documents, as the New York Post revealed on July 29, lay proof that the Clinton Administration knew about the Arabic translator shortage prior to deciding to make it even worse via E.O. 13166:
"Urgent complaints that the FBI could not decipher bugged conversations between members of a Brooklyn mosque and Afghan terrorists because it lacked translators were included in the documents former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger removed from the National Archives."
While the FBI was begging for translators, the Clinton Administration chose to take care of its pals, the trial lawyers, instead. This fact, Berger may have recognized, would further undermine public confidence in the Democratic Party's ability to put America's national interest ahead of its own self-interest.
In addition, numerous Clinton holdovers who have burrowed in as career employees of the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights (HHS OCR), are now deciding how E.O. 13166 should be enforced.
The result: the Tucson Unified School District, where at least 40 languages are spoken, signed a 2002 consent decree with HHS OCR agreeing to provide translations and interpreters upon demand.
Their Senate records show that a Kerry-Edwards Administration would be far more aggressive in its enforcement of E.O. 13166. Both Senators Kerry and Edwards have cosponsored Sen. Tom Daschle's (D.-S.D.) "Health Care Coverage for Minorities" legislation (S 1833), which would codify E.O. 13166 as a permanent part of federal law.
There remains a pot of gold for trial lawyers as a result of E.O. 13166: increased malpractice litigation due to translation errors both real and imagined.
E.O. 13166 regulations propounded by HHS OCR insist that friends or family members should not be used as translators. Granted, a 2003 study published in Pediatrics Magazine found that family members made at least one translation error roughly 77% of the time in a medical setting. But according to that same study, trained, professional interpreters still made at least one mistake 53% of the time.
Poor people seldom sue their equally impoverished relatives for translation mistakes. Suing an employee of a wealthy hospital is quite another matter.
What might these lawsuits cost? Consider that a plaintiff in a 1984 case was awarded $71 million when paramedics misinterpreted just one word "intoxicado."
Efforts to require hospitals to determine whether patents are legally here have been attacked as interfering with urgently needed medical treatment. Yet a doctor or nurse is expected by E.O. 13166 to determine the precise language and dialect spoken by every patient who is carried through their door.
E.O. 13166 also ensures that there will be lawsuits when a hospital sends a speaker of Mandarin Chinese to translate for a speaker of Cantonese Chinese, or a speaker of Castilian Spanish is asked to interpret for a speaker of Puerto Rican Spanish.
Americans pay millions of dollars to provide health care and medical treatment for illegal aliens. According to a recent article in the Washington Post, the U.S. government will help subsidize "a four-year, $1 billion program to pay some of the costs of treating illegal immigrants [without requiring] hospitals to ask patients about their immigration status." Sen. Jon Kyl (R.-Ariz.) fostered this latest federal subsidy with funds in the Medicare bill. As an example of costs to American taxpayers consider Houston's Harris County Hospital District, which, according to the February 2003 Phyllis Schlafly Report, spent $330 million to treat and immunize illegal aliens over three years time.
On top of these already-staggering costs, E.O. 13166 means that every word uttered in a hospital to people who should not even be in the United States could provoke a ruinously expensive lawsuit.
Rep. Peter King (R.-N.Y.) has introduced legislation (HR 300) to repeal E.O. 13166. His bill has attracted 77 cosponsors to date.
Rep. Ernest Istook (R.-Okla.), from his post on the House Appropriations Committee, has twice included language into an appropriations bills that ensures that states and localities are not required to post road signs in languages other than English.
Translation: Lip service on their concern about the staggering costs of health care is just that, lip service.
Both Kerry's and Edward's record on this are proof positive that their primary concern is to line their own pockets by taking care of their litigation attorney friends....all at taxpayer expense.
Steyn On Edwards
Thanks to Kerry Haters for pointing me to this Mark Steyn article about last week's VP debate. Steyn has fun with Edwards, then turns serious with this:
...I find it hard to believe that 51 percent of folks in states totaling 270 electoral votes are willing to cast a delusional ballot to return to the fictions of Sept. 10. But, if they are, so be it. If a majority of Americans want to pretend that the U.N. isn't a sewer of corruption and that the French are America's allies, not Saddam's, well, we'll just have to live with the consequences.
Asked about his qualifications to be vice president and thus -- in the event of John Kerry being felled by a grisly windsurfing tragedy -- president and commander in chief, John Edwards talked about what ''the American people want in their president and in their vice president.'' First, he said, ''they want to know that their president and their vice president will keep them safe.''
Oh, phooey. That would be a neat line if the American people had all got lead-poisoning and hired you to file the all-time class-action suit on their behalf. But no president can guarantee safeness in unsafe times. What he can do is demonstrate the necessary will to roll back the threat and exterminate it, and encourage the American people to maintain that resolve, too -- as Churchill did in Britain's darkest hour, after the fall of France and with German invasion imminent, when he told the people ''you can always take one with you.'' In time of war, free peoples don't stay free if they look to a smooth-talking shyster-president to shelter them in the embrace of the nanny-state.
The strongest force in international affairs is inertia. It's everywhere: a continuous pressure from the U.N., the EU, the Chinese, the Arab League, the State Department and half the federal bureaucracy to do nothing about anything -- do nothing about the Sudanese genocide until everyone's dead, do nothing about Iran's nuclear program until it's complete and the silos are loaded, do nothing about anything except hold meetings and issue statements of concern. To resist the allure of inertia will require enormous will, not just from the president but from the American people. After the vice presidential debate, it was said by many on the right that Dick Cheney came over as the grown-up and John Edwards as the callow youth. But that goes for the audience too. Cheney treated the American people as grown-ups, Edwards condescended to the electorate as a nation of coatless girls. He's wrong, I hope.
...I find it hard to believe that 51 percent of folks in states totaling 270 electoral votes are willing to cast a delusional ballot to return to the fictions of Sept. 10. But, if they are, so be it. If a majority of Americans want to pretend that the U.N. isn't a sewer of corruption and that the French are America's allies, not Saddam's, well, we'll just have to live with the consequences.
Asked about his qualifications to be vice president and thus -- in the event of John Kerry being felled by a grisly windsurfing tragedy -- president and commander in chief, John Edwards talked about what ''the American people want in their president and in their vice president.'' First, he said, ''they want to know that their president and their vice president will keep them safe.''
Oh, phooey. That would be a neat line if the American people had all got lead-poisoning and hired you to file the all-time class-action suit on their behalf. But no president can guarantee safeness in unsafe times. What he can do is demonstrate the necessary will to roll back the threat and exterminate it, and encourage the American people to maintain that resolve, too -- as Churchill did in Britain's darkest hour, after the fall of France and with German invasion imminent, when he told the people ''you can always take one with you.'' In time of war, free peoples don't stay free if they look to a smooth-talking shyster-president to shelter them in the embrace of the nanny-state.
The strongest force in international affairs is inertia. It's everywhere: a continuous pressure from the U.N., the EU, the Chinese, the Arab League, the State Department and half the federal bureaucracy to do nothing about anything -- do nothing about the Sudanese genocide until everyone's dead, do nothing about Iran's nuclear program until it's complete and the silos are loaded, do nothing about anything except hold meetings and issue statements of concern. To resist the allure of inertia will require enormous will, not just from the president but from the American people. After the vice presidential debate, it was said by many on the right that Dick Cheney came over as the grown-up and John Edwards as the callow youth. But that goes for the audience too. Cheney treated the American people as grown-ups, Edwards condescended to the electorate as a nation of coatless girls. He's wrong, I hope.
John Edwards on FoxNews Sunday Part III
Edwards boasting: I helped write the laws to keep this country safe after 9/11
Does that include the Patriot Act that they are so derisive of?
Does that include the Patriot Act that they are so derisive of?
John Edwards on FoxNews Sunday Part II
Edwards just claimed that - if necessary - they would take preemptive action against IRAN
John Edwards on FoxNews Sunday
John Edwards, Vice Presidential candidate, just told Chris Wallace on FoxNews Sunday that he and John Kerry would cut programs if the programs would cost more than the money generated from raising taxes on the 'wealthy'.
What does that mean?
As long ago as April 2004 the WashingtonTimes was reporting on Kerry's budget fallacies
Now, the PalmBeachPost has an article that includes information from a recent analysis by the Concord Coalition, a non-partisan Washington budget research group, has calculated that:
Kerry's proposals would, over ten years, raise taxes on upper-income earners - those who make more than $200,000 a year - by $286 billion; cut taxes on the middle class by $508 billion; and raise spending overall by $771 billion. Combined with other changes Kerry's proposed, his plan would add an estimated $1.3 trillion to the currently projected deficit.
So - election promises be damned - vote for Kerry on his empty promises - then he will get into office and cut the very programs he got elected on.
This is so typical of liberals. For years the mantra was to improve health coverage for seniors but it took a Republican Congress and a Republican President to get the job done.
What does that mean?
As long ago as April 2004 the WashingtonTimes was reporting on Kerry's budget fallacies
Now, the PalmBeachPost has an article that includes information from a recent analysis by the Concord Coalition, a non-partisan Washington budget research group, has calculated that:
Kerry's proposals would, over ten years, raise taxes on upper-income earners - those who make more than $200,000 a year - by $286 billion; cut taxes on the middle class by $508 billion; and raise spending overall by $771 billion. Combined with other changes Kerry's proposed, his plan would add an estimated $1.3 trillion to the currently projected deficit.
So - election promises be damned - vote for Kerry on his empty promises - then he will get into office and cut the very programs he got elected on.
This is so typical of liberals. For years the mantra was to improve health coverage for seniors but it took a Republican Congress and a Republican President to get the job done.
10/09/2004
A Message from Our Soldiers in Iraq
This email, posted by a soldier serving in Iraq, was sent to him by his Batallion Commander - and it is a POWERFUL message from the war front.
Just a sampling:
I believe that we are making progress in Iraq and in Afghanistan. Despite the ravings of pundits and uninformed ambulance chasers, this fight doesn't' hinge on oil or payback. It isn't about religion or race. And it damn sure is not about any innate desire to rule the world. These people will succeed or fail on their own merits. The task is daunting. You can release a person from bondage. You can remove a tyrant from power. You can create the conditions for liberty. But, you cannot simply grant or proclaim freedom. Freedom without honest action is a whisper in a storm just as change without vision and purpose is the illusion of progress....
Just a sampling:
I believe that we are making progress in Iraq and in Afghanistan. Despite the ravings of pundits and uninformed ambulance chasers, this fight doesn't' hinge on oil or payback. It isn't about religion or race. And it damn sure is not about any innate desire to rule the world. These people will succeed or fail on their own merits. The task is daunting. You can release a person from bondage. You can remove a tyrant from power. You can create the conditions for liberty. But, you cannot simply grant or proclaim freedom. Freedom without honest action is a whisper in a storm just as change without vision and purpose is the illusion of progress....
The threat we face is like nothing we've seen before. I've been in the streets with this enemy, fought him face to face, and have been lucky enough to kill him and come out alive. I have seen what he is capable of doing and the zeal with which he will do it. This threat won't fit neatly into "the box" or be governed by any paradigm. It is a cancer within our collective body as the human race. We are all threatened by this evil, and evil it is. This enemy has twisted and distorted things both sacred and profane to guide as well as justify its means and its stated end. Nothing is beyond the realm of the possible when it comes to the depths to which it will sink, the horror it is willing to commit, or the suffering it is willing to inflict. This enemy has no concept of mercy nor does it recognize combatants. Innocence is not a factor. You need only look at the headlines of the day to confirm that children, teachers, and doctors are murdered everyday by these villains. What makes them evil? I submit that it is not the act that earns them the epithet of evil - it is the intent to commit and the pride they draw from the act. These animals revel in the post act announcements that they are responsible. They feel vindicated by the proclamations that they perpetrated these horrors in the name of God and that having committed these acts some how elevates them. Make no mistake, this enemy is formidable but by no means invincible. To defeat this cancer requires the one thing that civilized people all over the world possess in absolute abundance - The will. The will to be free can only be surrendered by the person that has it - it cannot be murdered, raped, tortured, or stolen. It's not about being a martyr or a saint, it's about being a decent human being. And, the unvarnished truth is that the killing and the horror will continue until those with the will to endure prevail.
And probably one of the more powerful statements:
Beware the onslaught of false prophets who preach the one size fits all solution...
Read the entire message...it will surely give you something to ponder as you move through your weekend.
DR
Voices from Iraq
From Healing Iraq a very good article on the terrorists, clerics, and Iraqi citizens...a must read
Remember Her?
Hillary made a brief appearance on FoxNews last night after the debate...she was spouting the rhetoric that 'Kerry won'...but I was watching her very closely...and I am convinced that she is not supporting Kerry...she wants GW to win...in order to give her a clear shot at the seat in '08....but she DID make the obligatory appearance...aaaahh politics
Sean Penn Rips Puppet Movie
Apparently the drugs have finally taken hold in Sean Penn's brain...according to Drudge this is a copy of a memo that Penn sent to the creators of the new movie.
Sorry I can't offer a translation of it...but Penn does come off as a snob...and he does drop the f*** bomb...so I guess he really isn't that far out of touch with reality after all
Sorry I can't offer a translation of it...but Penn does come off as a snob...and he does drop the f*** bomb...so I guess he really isn't that far out of touch with reality after all
10/08/2004
Debate Impressions
I am not going to try to keep up with a line-by-line critique, but I will post stuff to this same post as they occur to me:
* Did Kerry have his eyebrows waxed? Or are they just dyed? Inquiring minds want to know...
* Kerry just insulted the crowd by saying "...and looking around here I don't think the (tax increase) will affect anyone but me, President Bush and Charlie (moderator)" - I bet there are some people in the crowd that make enough to be impacted...hope they vote for Bush
* You can tell that the memo from ABC has taken effect on Charlie the moderator...I sense Charlie being curt with the President...anyone else see it?
* there goes Kerry again name dropping...wonder how McCain feels to hear his name on the lips of both Kerry and Edwards...?
* the guy with the environmental question had a scowl...oh! Kerry just said not to 'throw labels around' - he, the ultimate Name Dropper...ugh
* ooooohhh...Kerry just said he is going to close the loophole for corporations that outsource jobs...does Tereza know about this?????
* does anyone else notice how many times Kerry says 'kids'? It doesn't even have to pertain to the question, but he gets 'kids' and 'children' in every answer.....wassup with that?
* oh - GW is talking about HSAs (health savings accounts) - a VERY good thing for health care coverage...
* well, chalk one up for Charlie the moderator...he is trying to hold Kerry to give an answer...but Kerry just slid by that one and went back to saying that the President is lying
* I must say that President Bush is doing much better in this format...he does connect well when speaking to fellow citizens
* Kerry's sleaze lawyer side is showing tonight...my opinion, I realize...but it is mine and I am sticking to it
* oh brother...Kerry just CANNOT answer a question...says he is a Catholic...recognizes life at conception...then goes on and on about...I can't remember...I think I dozed off
* hoo boy...Kerry just couldn't wait to answer the question about what mistakes Bush made...goes back to saying Bush rushed to war...name dropping again...blah...blah...blah...and I am richer than all of you...blah...blah...I visited kids that didn't have body armor...blah...
* okay, Bush reminds everyone that if some of the kids didn't have proper equipment, Kerry is to blame for NOT voting for the funding
* oh, and here is Haliburton...Kerry got it in at the last minute...sleaze...slime
* Closing: Kerry will never cede, never give a country veto over our security...BUT...here is the explanation for global test?...no...I have a plan...blah...I have a BETTER plan...blah...
I'm going to get a cold beer
* that lady that is sitting and scowling behind President Bush is getting on my nerves...why did she come anyway? now she's picking her teeth...will the nose be next?...hmmm
* Bush did a fine job with his closing
Now off to vote on the spam sites with all the liberals...and see what everyone else thought about tonight
** one last note - I know that I am biased, but it sure did look as if the President had a larger and more enthusiastic crowd around him...heh
* Did Kerry have his eyebrows waxed? Or are they just dyed? Inquiring minds want to know...
* Kerry just insulted the crowd by saying "...and looking around here I don't think the (tax increase) will affect anyone but me, President Bush and Charlie (moderator)" - I bet there are some people in the crowd that make enough to be impacted...hope they vote for Bush
* You can tell that the memo from ABC has taken effect on Charlie the moderator...I sense Charlie being curt with the President...anyone else see it?
* there goes Kerry again name dropping...wonder how McCain feels to hear his name on the lips of both Kerry and Edwards...?
* the guy with the environmental question had a scowl...oh! Kerry just said not to 'throw labels around' - he, the ultimate Name Dropper...ugh
* ooooohhh...Kerry just said he is going to close the loophole for corporations that outsource jobs...does Tereza know about this?????
* does anyone else notice how many times Kerry says 'kids'? It doesn't even have to pertain to the question, but he gets 'kids' and 'children' in every answer.....wassup with that?
* oh - GW is talking about HSAs (health savings accounts) - a VERY good thing for health care coverage...
* well, chalk one up for Charlie the moderator...he is trying to hold Kerry to give an answer...but Kerry just slid by that one and went back to saying that the President is lying
* I must say that President Bush is doing much better in this format...he does connect well when speaking to fellow citizens
* Kerry's sleaze lawyer side is showing tonight...my opinion, I realize...but it is mine and I am sticking to it
* oh brother...Kerry just CANNOT answer a question...says he is a Catholic...recognizes life at conception...then goes on and on about...I can't remember...I think I dozed off
* hoo boy...Kerry just couldn't wait to answer the question about what mistakes Bush made...goes back to saying Bush rushed to war...name dropping again...blah...blah...blah...and I am richer than all of you...blah...blah...I visited kids that didn't have body armor...blah...
* okay, Bush reminds everyone that if some of the kids didn't have proper equipment, Kerry is to blame for NOT voting for the funding
* oh, and here is Haliburton...Kerry got it in at the last minute...sleaze...slime
* Closing: Kerry will never cede, never give a country veto over our security...BUT...here is the explanation for global test?...no...I have a plan...blah...I have a BETTER plan...blah...
I'm going to get a cold beer
* that lady that is sitting and scowling behind President Bush is getting on my nerves...why did she come anyway? now she's picking her teeth...will the nose be next?...hmmm
* Bush did a fine job with his closing
Now off to vote on the spam sites with all the liberals...and see what everyone else thought about tonight
** one last note - I know that I am biased, but it sure did look as if the President had a larger and more enthusiastic crowd around him...heh
ABC Too???
I heard about this tonight on the way home Drudge is reporting that ABC Political Director Mark Halperin sent the following memo out right before the debate:
Halperin Memo Dated Friday October 8, 2004
It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave
I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.
The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.
Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.
We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.
I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.
It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right.
If this is a valid document...this is HUGE
Halperin Memo Dated Friday October 8, 2004
It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave
I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.
The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.
Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.
We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.
I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.
It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right.
If this is a valid document...this is HUGE
Bremer Sets the Record Straight
Thanks to Paul Bremer, he responded today to Kerry and Edwards' spin on what he said about Iraq.
Bremer has always been a Bush supporter - as evidenced by this: A year and a half ago, President Bush asked me to come to the Oval Office to discuss my going to Iraq to head the coalition authority. He asked me bluntly, "Why would you want to leave private life and take on such a difficult, dangerous and probably thankless job?" Without hesitation, I answered, "Because I believe in your vision for Iraq and would be honored to help you make it a reality." Today America and the coalition are making steady progress toward that vision.
Bremer also reminds us:
The president was right when he concluded that Saddam Hussein was a menace who needed to be removed from power. He understands that our enemies are not confined to Al Qaeda, and certainly not just to Osama bin Laden, who is probably trapped in his hide-out in Afghanistan. As the bipartisan 9/11 commission reported, there were contacts between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's regime going back a decade. We will win the war against global terror only by staying on the offensive and confronting terrorists and state sponsors of terror - wherever they are. Right now, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Qaeda ally, is a dangerous threat. He is in Iraq.
President Bush has said that Iraq is the central front in the war on terror. He is right. Mr. Zarqawi's stated goal is to kill Americans, set off a sectarian war in Iraq and defeat democracy there. He is our enemy.
And finally, Bremer says this to John Kerry: Mr. Kerry is free to quote my comments about Iraq. But for the sake of honesty he should also point out that I have repeatedly said, including in all my speeches in recent weeks, that President Bush made a correct and courageous decision to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein's brutality, and that the president is correct to see the war in Iraq as a central front in the war on terrorism.
Think we'll hear anything about this in the MSM?
Naw.......
Bremer has always been a Bush supporter - as evidenced by this: A year and a half ago, President Bush asked me to come to the Oval Office to discuss my going to Iraq to head the coalition authority. He asked me bluntly, "Why would you want to leave private life and take on such a difficult, dangerous and probably thankless job?" Without hesitation, I answered, "Because I believe in your vision for Iraq and would be honored to help you make it a reality." Today America and the coalition are making steady progress toward that vision.
Bremer also reminds us:
The president was right when he concluded that Saddam Hussein was a menace who needed to be removed from power. He understands that our enemies are not confined to Al Qaeda, and certainly not just to Osama bin Laden, who is probably trapped in his hide-out in Afghanistan. As the bipartisan 9/11 commission reported, there were contacts between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's regime going back a decade. We will win the war against global terror only by staying on the offensive and confronting terrorists and state sponsors of terror - wherever they are. Right now, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Qaeda ally, is a dangerous threat. He is in Iraq.
President Bush has said that Iraq is the central front in the war on terror. He is right. Mr. Zarqawi's stated goal is to kill Americans, set off a sectarian war in Iraq and defeat democracy there. He is our enemy.
And finally, Bremer says this to John Kerry: Mr. Kerry is free to quote my comments about Iraq. But for the sake of honesty he should also point out that I have repeatedly said, including in all my speeches in recent weeks, that President Bush made a correct and courageous decision to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein's brutality, and that the president is correct to see the war in Iraq as a central front in the war on terrorism.
Think we'll hear anything about this in the MSM?
Naw.......
Kerry's Power Trip
David Horowitz has an excellent column today on the “War is not the answer” rhetoric we keep hearing from the anti-war crowd.
His point, and the name of the article, is: On Iraq, It's Important to Ask the Right Questions.
There absolutely is no disputing the fact that Iraq is a mess. Horowitz correctly points out that the mayhem in Iraq is the disarray of the terrorist forces, which is good, and the war itself is the only language they understand.
Horowitz goes on to question whether Bin Laden is still alive and reminds us that the most important and destructive terrorist alive today is Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. And he’s in Iraq.
Let me sat that again – Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is in Iraq. Always has been.
He wasn’t in Afghanistan, so no matter how long a war was waged in that country, al-Zarqawi would have been allowed to continue unfettered had the US and its allies not waged war on Iraq – specifically Saddam Hussein.
Horowitz paints a scenario that speaks to Kerry’s insistence that sanctions and UN inspectors would have ‘weakened’ Saddam Hussein and he – Kerry – would have been able to keep him under control.
If we had not invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein would still be in power; Abu Musab al-Zarqawi would be in command of an al-Qaeda army in northern Iraq; the UN’s, 17th resolution ordering Saddam to comply or else would have been successfully defied, the largest chemical weapons factory in the Third World, in Libya, would still be humming along with an advanced nuclear weapons plant (both now shut down). And what would the forces of terror – the Zarqawis and Zawahiris – be doing in the face of another toothless appeasement by the world community? That, of course, is the question that Saletan and Kerry – and those who agree with them – cannot answer.
A very salient point is this – the only reason Saddam Hussein let the UN inspectors back into Iraq was due to the fact that more than 200,000 troops were massing along the Iraq border – a decision that President Bush made in order to back up those toothless threats from the countless UN sanctions. Which, by the way, were voted on unanimously by the UN Security Council.
Yesterday we heard from the U.S. Iraq Survey Group that Saddam Hussein had used the U.N. oil-for-food program to buy influence at the United Nations.
According to the Washington Times, The report accused key officials — including former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua, Indonesian President Megawati Sukarnoputri, Russian politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky and retired U.N. oil-for-food director Benon Sevan — of accepting oil vouchers, which could be exchanged secretly for cash.
Their reaction? Denial of course! The Times article explains what we already suspected: Some of the gravest accusations in the report by the U.S. Iraq Survey Group (ISG) are against senior French officials, including charges that they accepted payoffs to counterbalance U.S. power inside the sanctions committee on the U.N. Security Council.
And that was Hussein’s plan all along - divide and conquer. According to the key findings report, in July 2000 Saddam was claiming victory over UN sanctions, stating that Iraq was “accelerating its pace to develop its national security despite UN ‘blockades’.”
His point, and the name of the article, is: On Iraq, It's Important to Ask the Right Questions.
There absolutely is no disputing the fact that Iraq is a mess. Horowitz correctly points out that the mayhem in Iraq is the disarray of the terrorist forces, which is good, and the war itself is the only language they understand.
Horowitz goes on to question whether Bin Laden is still alive and reminds us that the most important and destructive terrorist alive today is Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. And he’s in Iraq.
Let me sat that again – Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is in Iraq. Always has been.
He wasn’t in Afghanistan, so no matter how long a war was waged in that country, al-Zarqawi would have been allowed to continue unfettered had the US and its allies not waged war on Iraq – specifically Saddam Hussein.
Horowitz paints a scenario that speaks to Kerry’s insistence that sanctions and UN inspectors would have ‘weakened’ Saddam Hussein and he – Kerry – would have been able to keep him under control.
If we had not invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein would still be in power; Abu Musab al-Zarqawi would be in command of an al-Qaeda army in northern Iraq; the UN’s, 17th resolution ordering Saddam to comply or else would have been successfully defied, the largest chemical weapons factory in the Third World, in Libya, would still be humming along with an advanced nuclear weapons plant (both now shut down). And what would the forces of terror – the Zarqawis and Zawahiris – be doing in the face of another toothless appeasement by the world community? That, of course, is the question that Saletan and Kerry – and those who agree with them – cannot answer.
A very salient point is this – the only reason Saddam Hussein let the UN inspectors back into Iraq was due to the fact that more than 200,000 troops were massing along the Iraq border – a decision that President Bush made in order to back up those toothless threats from the countless UN sanctions. Which, by the way, were voted on unanimously by the UN Security Council.
Yesterday we heard from the U.S. Iraq Survey Group that Saddam Hussein had used the U.N. oil-for-food program to buy influence at the United Nations.
According to the Washington Times, The report accused key officials — including former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua, Indonesian President Megawati Sukarnoputri, Russian politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky and retired U.N. oil-for-food director Benon Sevan — of accepting oil vouchers, which could be exchanged secretly for cash.
Their reaction? Denial of course! The Times article explains what we already suspected: Some of the gravest accusations in the report by the U.S. Iraq Survey Group (ISG) are against senior French officials, including charges that they accepted payoffs to counterbalance U.S. power inside the sanctions committee on the U.N. Security Council.
And that was Hussein’s plan all along - divide and conquer. According to the key findings report, in July 2000 Saddam was claiming victory over UN sanctions, stating that Iraq was “accelerating its pace to develop its national security despite UN ‘blockades’.”
Those words were Saddam's boasts.
Kerry’s statements about this war being the “wrong war” only reinforce his naiveté or just plain ignorance of world politics. He is either choosing to ignore the facts or trying to paint a completely different picture to confuse the American people – all in the name of politics.
This might not be as egregious an act if Kerry were simply seeking reelection to his senatorial seat in Massachusetts, but this man is looking for our approval to appoint him Commander-in-Chief, able to make decisions regarding our national security.
One more point for consideration – John F Kerry has had access to much more detailed information than any of the sources I am referencing today. Kerry has sat on committees that are provided with sensitive information about all of this. He knows the threats that our country is facing, yet he continues to spout rhetoric that speaks against – and denounces - this President in a time of war.
Political ambition is one thing, but when you let that ambition get in the way of the security of a nation – that is a clear indicator of the character of the man who would be president. Anyone that is willing to compromise my security – my family’s security – for his personal gain is not worthy of even a second thought.
I’m going with the man that has stood up to the world and stated so clearly “My job is to protect the American people” – popularity and political ambition be damned. George W. Bush is the ONLY person qualified for the job of President of these United States of America.
Kerry and Edwards Not Doing Their Job
Funny, isn't it, how President Bush still finds time to run this country even though he is also campaigning for reelection?
Not Kerry or Edwards, though. Take a look at this vote tally from a couple of days ago. Not that this was an IMPORTANT ISSUE!
The ONLY TWO Senators that DIDN'T BOTHER TO VOTE.
Another bill last November on Defense To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2004 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes - the only NOT VOTING Senators? You guessed it! Kerry and Edwards.
Okay, okay - one more - A bill making appropriations for military construction, family housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other purposes......Two NOT VOTING - Kerry and Edwards.
HOWEVER....when they WERE around for a vote, both Senators voted NAY on this bill, tagged the "Laci and Connor Law" (remember Laci Peterson?)
A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice to protect unborn children from assault and murder, and for other purposes.
Not Kerry or Edwards, though. Take a look at this vote tally from a couple of days ago. Not that this was an IMPORTANT ISSUE!
The ONLY TWO Senators that DIDN'T BOTHER TO VOTE.
Another bill last November on Defense To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2004 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes - the only NOT VOTING Senators? You guessed it! Kerry and Edwards.
Okay, okay - one more - A bill making appropriations for military construction, family housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other purposes......Two NOT VOTING - Kerry and Edwards.
HOWEVER....when they WERE around for a vote, both Senators voted NAY on this bill, tagged the "Laci and Connor Law" (remember Laci Peterson?)
A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice to protect unborn children from assault and murder, and for other purposes.
10/07/2004
Is ANYONE Paying Attention???
Here we go with voter fraud again in Florida - and in the name of ISLAM!!!!
According to this article, Law enforcement officials are investigating voter registration irregularities in at least three counties in Florida, and election supervisors fear that the problem is so widespread it could lead to massive confusion on Election Day
The article goes on with this tidbit of information: Of the forms collected by the voter mobilization groups, many are incomplete, have suspicious signatures or may have been forged, elections officials said Wednesday.
This guy in South Carolina turned in a voter registration form for the Mayer....Voter registration and elections director Russell Barrett says a registration form for Florence Mayor Frank Willis sent up a red flag. Barrett says he is pretty sure the mayor was already a registered voter and had been for some time.
DUHHH!!! Can't these dumbass criminals/liberals get it straight?
Wisconsin weighs in with this gem.....the law also requires that the deputy registrars must be present with the person being registered when the registration application is being filled out.
Blakely said he did not solicit any people for voter registration applications but signed applications brought to him by other Project Vote workers.
He said he tried to verify the identity of the person named on the application in some cases but generally trusted that the workers had met with the people named on the applications....
Uh-huh...
And - finally - this fine prototype for voter fraud...from Nevada....Washoe County Voter Registrar Dan Burk said Friday he will ask the FBI to investigate a recent spate of complaints that out-of-state groups submitted fraudulent voter registration forms and refused to register anyone but Republicans.
Any questions?
Okay then, class dismissed!
According to this article, Law enforcement officials are investigating voter registration irregularities in at least three counties in Florida, and election supervisors fear that the problem is so widespread it could lead to massive confusion on Election Day
The article goes on with this tidbit of information: Of the forms collected by the voter mobilization groups, many are incomplete, have suspicious signatures or may have been forged, elections officials said Wednesday.
This guy in South Carolina turned in a voter registration form for the Mayer....Voter registration and elections director Russell Barrett says a registration form for Florence Mayor Frank Willis sent up a red flag. Barrett says he is pretty sure the mayor was already a registered voter and had been for some time.
DUHHH!!! Can't these dumbass criminals/liberals get it straight?
Wisconsin weighs in with this gem.....the law also requires that the deputy registrars must be present with the person being registered when the registration application is being filled out.
Blakely said he did not solicit any people for voter registration applications but signed applications brought to him by other Project Vote workers.
He said he tried to verify the identity of the person named on the application in some cases but generally trusted that the workers had met with the people named on the applications....
Uh-huh...
And - finally - this fine prototype for voter fraud...from Nevada....Washoe County Voter Registrar Dan Burk said Friday he will ask the FBI to investigate a recent spate of complaints that out-of-state groups submitted fraudulent voter registration forms and refused to register anyone but Republicans.
Any questions?
Okay then, class dismissed!
What the Main Stream/Elite Media Would "Rather" You Forget
Don't let this stuff get put on the back burner:
Viper's Vietnam has an excellent website with links to anti-Kerry websites and news stories.
Kerry's book he DOES NOT WANT US TO READ: 'The New Soldier' If you haven't read it yet, download now and see for yourself what John F. Kerry wrote:
New Soldier Introduction
New Soldier Main Content
New Soldier Epilogue
Kerry: Unfit for Command
Vietnam ExPOWs against Kerry
Vietnam Veterans Against Kerry
and this UNBELIEVABLE quote from the Vietnam News - the same Communists that Kerry met with in Paris - now praising Kerry:
Candidate in this year’s American presidential elections, John Kerry, who fought in the war, went further in his criticism. In a statement to the US’ Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in 1971, he said the war crimes committed by US soldiers in Southeast Asia "were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command."
But despite these abuses, the Vietnamese did not reciprocate in kind; instead, they treated captured US troops humanely.
Viper's Vietnam has an excellent website with links to anti-Kerry websites and news stories.
Kerry's book he DOES NOT WANT US TO READ: 'The New Soldier' If you haven't read it yet, download now and see for yourself what John F. Kerry wrote:
New Soldier Introduction
New Soldier Main Content
New Soldier Epilogue
Kerry: Unfit for Command
Vietnam ExPOWs against Kerry
Vietnam Veterans Against Kerry
and this UNBELIEVABLE quote from the Vietnam News - the same Communists that Kerry met with in Paris - now praising Kerry:
Candidate in this year’s American presidential elections, John Kerry, who fought in the war, went further in his criticism. In a statement to the US’ Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in 1971, he said the war crimes committed by US soldiers in Southeast Asia "were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command."
But despite these abuses, the Vietnamese did not reciprocate in kind; instead, they treated captured US troops humanely.
Florida Election Ballot
A liberal friend sent this to me - I thought it was funny...he doesn't see the humor in it ~g
This is Good Stuff
Just read a great post over at Cold Fury's blogspot on why he supports President Bush.
DU Spamming Debate Polls
For some reason the people over at Democratic Underground are crowing about their 'success' in spamming the debate polls.
Success? Who are they kidding? Who is paying attention to 'polls' at CNN or AOL and taking that information seriously?
I set up a username and posted a message to let them know that they aren't fooling anyone but themselves. Hoo Ha! It took about 15 nanoseconds before the post was deleted, my username was nuked and my posting priviledges were....REVOKED!
So much for free speech.
But, it also may be that the sponsors of the site are worried about their users hearing....THE TRUTH...can't let that happen.
Success? Who are they kidding? Who is paying attention to 'polls' at CNN or AOL and taking that information seriously?
I set up a username and posted a message to let them know that they aren't fooling anyone but themselves. Hoo Ha! It took about 15 nanoseconds before the post was deleted, my username was nuked and my posting priviledges were....REVOKED!
So much for free speech.
But, it also may be that the sponsors of the site are worried about their users hearing....THE TRUTH...can't let that happen.
10/06/2004
10/05/2004
Susan Estrich (and ALL dem DEMS) Meltdown
I am still LOL...for all the hairspray (to calm down the wild frizzzzz), makeup, MAKEOVER stuff, clothing changes.....Susan Estrich is still...............
SUSAN ESTRICH!
geeze, Democrats, can't you find someone more coherent to express your views and get your 'message' across??
Estrich accused fellow talking heads of lying...well, the Republican or right-leaning ones, anyway...what did you expect? The Liberal "machine" is out doing damage control tonight. I even heard someone say "oh, how can you apply sports terms to a debate??" Anyone notice the change in rhetoric since last Friday??
HA!
Edwards got creamed...Cheney's cool ruled the day. That's what happens when you allow children to mix it up with adults.
And, right now, I say let the adults take care of America's security.
SUSAN ESTRICH!
geeze, Democrats, can't you find someone more coherent to express your views and get your 'message' across??
Estrich accused fellow talking heads of lying...well, the Republican or right-leaning ones, anyway...what did you expect? The Liberal "machine" is out doing damage control tonight. I even heard someone say "oh, how can you apply sports terms to a debate??" Anyone notice the change in rhetoric since last Friday??
HA!
Edwards got creamed...Cheney's cool ruled the day. That's what happens when you allow children to mix it up with adults.
And, right now, I say let the adults take care of America's security.
Arizona Democratic Party illegally took $100,000 from corporations
This just in - the party of the scoundrels actually got the illegal donations in 1998 and has kept the funds while appealing through the courts!
Judge Daniel Barker, writing the majority decision, stated that the aim of the party is "to elect all Democrats.'' And that, Barker said, means a donation to the party furthers that goal and, by definition, influences elections.
Marty Harper, one of the lawyers for the party, has a different opinion (obviously) - Harper said Judge Barker is at least partially off base in suggesting that the sole purpose of the party is electing candidates. Harper said it has other functions, including developing a philosophy.
HUH???
That is lame, Harper...you should lose your lawyer-ing license for lame-brained excuses such as that.
The real issue, though, is that you know....I know...we ALL KNOW...that the AZ Democratic party knew when they took those funds that it was illegal and they were just hoping to get away with it.
Judge Daniel Barker, writing the majority decision, stated that the aim of the party is "to elect all Democrats.'' And that, Barker said, means a donation to the party furthers that goal and, by definition, influences elections.
Marty Harper, one of the lawyers for the party, has a different opinion (obviously) - Harper said Judge Barker is at least partially off base in suggesting that the sole purpose of the party is electing candidates. Harper said it has other functions, including developing a philosophy.
HUH???
That is lame, Harper...you should lose your lawyer-ing license for lame-brained excuses such as that.
The real issue, though, is that you know....I know...we ALL KNOW...that the AZ Democratic party knew when they took those funds that it was illegal and they were just hoping to get away with it.
Then Call Me Crazy.......
Matt Drudge is reporting that John Edwards, in a show of macho bravado on ABC News Nightline told Bob Woodruff "Do I seem soft to you?", after Woodruff stated that some people claimed Edwards was being "too soft" in his campaign rhetoric.
The quote from Edwards goes like this - "I'd say if you live in the United States of America and you vote for George Bush, you've lost your mind."
Kerry's Secret Messages to Our Enemies
According to two articles, one in Front Page Magazine:
"THE NECKTIE JOHN KERRY WEARS during the next two presidential debates might be a secret semaphore revealing where his loyalty lies. During much of the campaign Kerry has worn neckties whose pattern, suggests New York journalist Joan Swirsky, is like a secret signal of support to the Muslim world.";
and the other at NewsMax, reminding us of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski's neck tie messages:
Given the subtlety, indeed archness, of this mode of communication, I'm beginning to suspect that John Kerry also is employing the necktie strategy in signaling America's enemies that he is on their side.
While it may seem far-fetched at first glance, one wonders why a billionaire like Kerry would wear only one necktie during most of his public appearances?
Intriguing indeed. Coupled with Kerry's odd fascination with Iran and his outrageous statement during the first presidential debate - "With respect to Iran," Kerry said during the September 30th first presidential debate, "I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes."
I personally find this approach to a nuclear threat brainless and irresponsible. Give someone that HATES you a loaded gun and wait to see if they are going to use it to wave the American flag.
IF Kerry is truly sending a secret message to this country's enemies - this man is more dangerous than any of us ever perceived. We didn't underestimate him - he is trying to outfox us. This would go far beyond the usual political rhetoric and double speak.
Kerry has shown us in the past his willingness to befriend enemies of the United States, even during a time that the US was at war with that enemy, by his meetings with the North Vietnamese during that other war.
My grandma always told me - "A zebra doesn't change his stripes."
John F Kerry: zebra; antiwar protester; collaborating with the enemy - is this the man we want leading our country?
"THE NECKTIE JOHN KERRY WEARS during the next two presidential debates might be a secret semaphore revealing where his loyalty lies. During much of the campaign Kerry has worn neckties whose pattern, suggests New York journalist Joan Swirsky, is like a secret signal of support to the Muslim world.";
and the other at NewsMax, reminding us of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski's neck tie messages:
Given the subtlety, indeed archness, of this mode of communication, I'm beginning to suspect that John Kerry also is employing the necktie strategy in signaling America's enemies that he is on their side.
While it may seem far-fetched at first glance, one wonders why a billionaire like Kerry would wear only one necktie during most of his public appearances?
Intriguing indeed. Coupled with Kerry's odd fascination with Iran and his outrageous statement during the first presidential debate - "With respect to Iran," Kerry said during the September 30th first presidential debate, "I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes."
I personally find this approach to a nuclear threat brainless and irresponsible. Give someone that HATES you a loaded gun and wait to see if they are going to use it to wave the American flag.
IF Kerry is truly sending a secret message to this country's enemies - this man is more dangerous than any of us ever perceived. We didn't underestimate him - he is trying to outfox us. This would go far beyond the usual political rhetoric and double speak.
Kerry has shown us in the past his willingness to befriend enemies of the United States, even during a time that the US was at war with that enemy, by his meetings with the North Vietnamese during that other war.
My grandma always told me - "A zebra doesn't change his stripes."
John F Kerry: zebra; antiwar protester; collaborating with the enemy - is this the man we want leading our country?
10/04/2004
2 1/2 Hours Compared to 20 Years....
So, according to the latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll: Poll puts Bush, Kerry about even
They even went so far to say : Results indicate gain for senator over last such survey
To that I say: Bullshit!
Here's what I think happened: The pollsters spoke to a targeted audience, intended to skew the results to what they are proclaiming today.
You can't tell me that Kerry's Cirque-de-Soliel performance of 2.5 hours last week will circumvent the 20 years he has spent in the Senate. His voting record there speaks for itself.
These Liberals are so desperate, they are working on stealing electoral votes; skewing polls; lying about their candidate using cheat sheets in a debate....in other words - they will do whatever it takes to Lie, Cheat and Steal their way back into power.
Don't let up - in fact, turn the heat up. All of this needs to go to the next level.
The Liberal Media is there pulling punches - but this Media is gaining strength daily. It is time for us to let loose with everything we have.
They even went so far to say : Results indicate gain for senator over last such survey
To that I say: Bullshit!
Here's what I think happened: The pollsters spoke to a targeted audience, intended to skew the results to what they are proclaiming today.
You can't tell me that Kerry's Cirque-de-Soliel performance of 2.5 hours last week will circumvent the 20 years he has spent in the Senate. His voting record there speaks for itself.
These Liberals are so desperate, they are working on stealing electoral votes; skewing polls; lying about their candidate using cheat sheets in a debate....in other words - they will do whatever it takes to Lie, Cheat and Steal their way back into power.
Don't let up - in fact, turn the heat up. All of this needs to go to the next level.
The Liberal Media is there pulling punches - but this Media is gaining strength daily. It is time for us to let loose with everything we have.
COLORADO OPERATIVES ARE TRYING TO STEAL THE ELECTION
This article in the Weekly Standard needs to be read and understood by everyone. (If you don't have a subscription, I have reprinted it here)
The Bush reelection campaign will want to begin paying serious attention to a scheme now underway in Colorado to alter the formula by which that state awards its votes in the Electoral College. Like 47 other states and the District of Columbia, Colorado has traditionally allocated its electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis--to whichever candidate secures a statewide popular plurality. (Maine and Nebraska give their overall popular ballot winner a two-electoral-vote "bonus" and then divvy up the remainder according to who comes out on top in each congressional district.) Thus it was that in 2000 George W. Bush, with 50.8 percent of Colorado's popular vote (to 42.4 percent for the second-place Al Gore), won the state's entire 8-vote Electoral College allotment.
Not incidentally, Bush's total Electoral College margin was a mere 5 votes: 271 to 266. And it ought to have been just 4; one Gore elector in the District of Columbia withheld his vote "in protest."
So, also not incidentally, Democrats who live in Colorado (financed almost entirely by Democrats who don't live in Colorado) are now collecting signatures for a November ballot initiative that would alter the state's Electoral College allocation formula--beginning with this year's presidential election.
Should the "Make Your Vote for President Count" initiative succeed, Colorado's electoral votes will be proportionally awarded according to its popular-vote results. If George W. Bush again wins 50.8 percent of Colorado's popular vote, for example, he'll be allowed to claim only 50.8 percent of its Electoral College delegation (rounded to the nearest vote), not the whole thing. And had this rule been in effect last time around, for further example, Bush and Gore would have split Colorado's electoral votes, 5 to 3--a 6-vote swing that all by itself would have put Gore in the White House.
To the obvious objection--that their plan looks and smells like the purest, rawest partisanship--its sponsors respond indignantly. It's a matter of simple principle, don't you know: "What we are proposing to do, at least in Colorado," says (Democratic campaign consultant) Rick Ridder, the initiative's lead operative, "is to come much closer to the notion of one-man, one-vote." And (Democratic) state senator Ron Tupa, a high school government teacher, agrees. How's he supposed to explain to his students an electoral process that elevates George W. Bush to the presidency despite the fact that Al Gore won more votes? "People can't understand why we have this kind of system that seems so outdated and hasn't been reformed in 200 years."
Funny then, isn't it, that Sen. Tupa & Co. are proposing a "reform" that works best, for their purposes, only if all the other states don't adopt it? Had a proportional-allocation system been in effect in Colorado--and nowhere else--on Election Day 2000, Al Gore would indeed have been elected president. But had the very same plan been in force throughout the country, it turns out it wouldn't have made much difference at all.
We've done the math: Bush would have lost a single electoral vote--to Ralph Nader--but Gore would still have been three votes short. In other words, the popular vote winner would still have been denied an ultimate victory. Surely this is not what the new Colorado initiative's backers (pretend to) have in mind.
The Bush reelection campaign will want to begin paying serious attention to a scheme now underway in Colorado to alter the formula by which that state awards its votes in the Electoral College. Like 47 other states and the District of Columbia, Colorado has traditionally allocated its electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis--to whichever candidate secures a statewide popular plurality. (Maine and Nebraska give their overall popular ballot winner a two-electoral-vote "bonus" and then divvy up the remainder according to who comes out on top in each congressional district.) Thus it was that in 2000 George W. Bush, with 50.8 percent of Colorado's popular vote (to 42.4 percent for the second-place Al Gore), won the state's entire 8-vote Electoral College allotment.
Not incidentally, Bush's total Electoral College margin was a mere 5 votes: 271 to 266. And it ought to have been just 4; one Gore elector in the District of Columbia withheld his vote "in protest."
So, also not incidentally, Democrats who live in Colorado (financed almost entirely by Democrats who don't live in Colorado) are now collecting signatures for a November ballot initiative that would alter the state's Electoral College allocation formula--beginning with this year's presidential election.
Should the "Make Your Vote for President Count" initiative succeed, Colorado's electoral votes will be proportionally awarded according to its popular-vote results. If George W. Bush again wins 50.8 percent of Colorado's popular vote, for example, he'll be allowed to claim only 50.8 percent of its Electoral College delegation (rounded to the nearest vote), not the whole thing. And had this rule been in effect last time around, for further example, Bush and Gore would have split Colorado's electoral votes, 5 to 3--a 6-vote swing that all by itself would have put Gore in the White House.
To the obvious objection--that their plan looks and smells like the purest, rawest partisanship--its sponsors respond indignantly. It's a matter of simple principle, don't you know: "What we are proposing to do, at least in Colorado," says (Democratic campaign consultant) Rick Ridder, the initiative's lead operative, "is to come much closer to the notion of one-man, one-vote." And (Democratic) state senator Ron Tupa, a high school government teacher, agrees. How's he supposed to explain to his students an electoral process that elevates George W. Bush to the presidency despite the fact that Al Gore won more votes? "People can't understand why we have this kind of system that seems so outdated and hasn't been reformed in 200 years."
Funny then, isn't it, that Sen. Tupa & Co. are proposing a "reform" that works best, for their purposes, only if all the other states don't adopt it? Had a proportional-allocation system been in effect in Colorado--and nowhere else--on Election Day 2000, Al Gore would indeed have been elected president. But had the very same plan been in force throughout the country, it turns out it wouldn't have made much difference at all.
We've done the math: Bush would have lost a single electoral vote--to Ralph Nader--but Gore would still have been three votes short. In other words, the popular vote winner would still have been denied an ultimate victory. Surely this is not what the new Colorado initiative's backers (pretend to) have in mind.
10/03/2004
Kerry with Cheat Sheet? Is This How DESPERATE Kerry REALLY IS??
Matt Drudge has a link to the video - watch it and see what you think. I am going to watch the debate again.
Funny thing is, Thursday night I was thinking that it looked like Kerry was ticking things off a list or something - but as devious as he is, especially when Kerry acts so disdainful towards President Bush's debating skills, WHO WOULD THINK THAT KERRY WOULD HAVE TO RESORT TO CHEATING?????
Bocce Boy
1984
from Weekly Standard article by Duncan Currie "Another War He Didn't Like"
The best place to look for evidence of Kerry's views on the Cold War is his first campaign for the Senate in 1984. Packaged as a candidate who rarely met a weapons system he wouldn't cancel or an international dispute in which America was on the right side, he won.
Just like his goofy approach to 'sports', Kerry's poisonous position on America hasn't changed either.
Effective National Popular Results: Bush 47.2%, Kerry 45.2%
According to Daly Thoughts, Bush is ahead in both the popular vote and electoral vote count.
Current Electoral Vote tally: Bush 232; Kerry 154.
When you throw in the tossups: Bush 291; Kerry 207
The Effervescent Tad Devine
Devine earlier this summer on Meet the Press
This morning on FoxNews Sunday, Tad Devine looked like he had taken his happy pills. You could tell by the way his hands were clenched that he was consciously trying to keep his sneer under control.
Devine was probably remembering Rush Limbaugh's words from August 17th: "His facial expression looks like he's sneering. I saw him last night. He was on Matthews' show, Hardboiled, and he was on with Matt Dowd, who's from the Bush-Cheney committee, and they were arguing about something else, but this Tad Devine, I mean just looks like he's sneering. You know, all these Kerry people look like they're mad at the world and mean and all these celebrity supporters out there mad at the world and mean and all the Michael Moores -- you just wonder, this does not seem to me to be the recipe for going out and spreading the love and compassion and good vibes and all that."
Tad Devine HAS to be on good behavior. A prime example of his outright lies is this exchange with Judy Woodruff on CNN:
WOODRUFF: Tad Devine, let me ask you about something that Dick Cheney said that some people might say was a devastating criticism. He said, "John Kerry declared at the Democratic Convention, ‘We will forcefully defend America after we have been attacked’." He went on to say, "My fellow Americans, we’ve already been attacked." How do you answer that?
DEVINE: I answer that, Judy, by saying that that is an absolute complete lie, and the vice president of the United States knows it.
Hmmmmmmm, Tad...what is your definition of "Attack???"
10/02/2004
Old Media....calling themselves "Patriotic Media" - HA!
Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings defended Dan Rather today.
Brokaw: What I think is highly inappropriate is what going on across the Internet, a kind of political jihad ... that is quite outrageous," the NBC anchor said at a panel on which all three men spoke.
Actually, Tom, that is exactly what youse guys have been doing to the American public all these years.....
"I don't think you ever judge a man by only one event in his career," said Jennings, anchor on ABC.
Oh, Peter, trust us - we're NOT!
May I remind you of this - Rather Confirms Ramsey Clark a “Big Help”in Landing Hussein
and
THIS - CBS Shows Iraqi Calling Bush a “Coward”for Rejecting Debate
and
THIS - Rather Demurs on If Hussein Is “a Lying Sonof a Bitch”
I could go on, but you get the picture...Dan Rather is a puke.
Bin Laden Deputy Thanks Kerry for 'Great Ideas'
Thanks to ScrappleFace for this latest piece of information......
New Document Indicates Kerry Wrote Disputed Vietnam Report
A new article at Swift Boat Vets written by Thomas Lipscomb, which provides new evidence that John Kerry wrote the after-action report covering the incident for which he received the Bronze Star. Lipscomb points out that Kerry was "the principal beneficiary of its glowing references to his performance" and notes that the report "completely leaves out how Kerry's own boat, PCF 94, ran downriver, leaving James Rassman overboard and the other three boats to deal with the ambush and the sinking PCF 3."
Heinz-Kerry...Ramsey Clark...IAC...Slobodan Milosevic...Kim Jong-IL
The Million Worker March scheduled for October 17 2004 in Washington DC is bringing a lot of interesting characters, Kerry supporters, together.
Included in the "Demands" are:
**Guaranteed pensions that sustain a decent life for all working people
**Funding a vast army of teachers to end functional illiteracy in America and unleash the talent and potential of our abandoned children and adults.
**Progressive taxation that increases taxation on corporations and the rich while providing relief for the working class and poor.
**Creating efficient, modern and free mass transit in every city and town
**Amnesty for all undocumented workers
**Open the books on the secret budgets of the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies in the service of corporations and banks and the pursuit of imperial war on the poor everywhere.
Endorsements have come in from: Danny Glover; Casey Kasem; Baltimore NAACP; Bay Area Local of Socialist Party; Detroit Socialist Party, local affiliate of the Socialist Party USA;
Executive Committee, Socialist Youth of Barcelona, Spain-Ferran Pedret Santos; Justice for Palestinians; National Education Association; National Immigrant Solidarity Network; Operation PUSH/rainbow coalition and Jesse Jackson; Congresswoman Barbra Lee, CA ---- just to name a few.
Oddly enough the "About Us" section of their website is "coming soon", but the anti-American rhetoric is plentiful, and it looks like this is part of Ramsey Clark's International Action Center whose platform is Information, Activism, and Resistance to U.S. Militarism, War, and Corporate Greed, Linking with Struggles Against Racism and Oppression within the United States.
Why is this important you might ask? The dots are starting to connect.
Teresa Heinz-Kerry's Tide's Foundation has grant money that has flowed to Clark's IAC - IAC is part of the socialist movement supporting (sponsoring?) the upcoming Million Worker March.
Why is it that people don't catch on when language like "worker" is thrown about - "proletariat" was Marx's definition of "the lower social class". What is it going to take to make people wake up??
The article first linked here notes about Heinz-Kerry's Tides Foundation: Most disturbing is the link to Ramsey Clark’s International Action Center, which has supported Slobodan Milosevic and North Korean strongman Kim Jong-Il. The IAC is the force behind International ANSWER, which sponsored the major antiwar (and anti-Bush) rallies before the invasion of Iraq. When ANSWER was outed as a Communist organization, United for Peace and Justice, headed by longtime Communist Party member Leslie Cagan was created as a "moderate" alternative. UFPJ is also a Tides grant recipient.The Tides-funded “A Better Way Project,” which opposed war in Iraq, also coordinated efforts of United for Peace and Justice and the Win Without War Coalition. The celebrity-laden Win Without War Coalition, along with the Bill Moyers-funded Florence and John Schumann Foundation, ran full-page ads in the New York Times opposing the War on Terrorism. This will not be the last overlapping of far-Left causes.
Pay attention class!!! The truth about John Kerry and his wife is just below the surface. One only need scratch a little to lay it all bare.
Included in the "Demands" are:
**Guaranteed pensions that sustain a decent life for all working people
**Funding a vast army of teachers to end functional illiteracy in America and unleash the talent and potential of our abandoned children and adults.
**Progressive taxation that increases taxation on corporations and the rich while providing relief for the working class and poor.
**Creating efficient, modern and free mass transit in every city and town
**Amnesty for all undocumented workers
**Open the books on the secret budgets of the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies in the service of corporations and banks and the pursuit of imperial war on the poor everywhere.
Endorsements have come in from: Danny Glover; Casey Kasem; Baltimore NAACP; Bay Area Local of Socialist Party; Detroit Socialist Party, local affiliate of the Socialist Party USA;
Executive Committee, Socialist Youth of Barcelona, Spain-Ferran Pedret Santos; Justice for Palestinians; National Education Association; National Immigrant Solidarity Network; Operation PUSH/rainbow coalition and Jesse Jackson; Congresswoman Barbra Lee, CA ---- just to name a few.
Oddly enough the "About Us" section of their website is "coming soon", but the anti-American rhetoric is plentiful, and it looks like this is part of Ramsey Clark's International Action Center whose platform is Information, Activism, and Resistance to U.S. Militarism, War, and Corporate Greed, Linking with Struggles Against Racism and Oppression within the United States.
Why is this important you might ask? The dots are starting to connect.
Teresa Heinz-Kerry's Tide's Foundation has grant money that has flowed to Clark's IAC - IAC is part of the socialist movement supporting (sponsoring?) the upcoming Million Worker March.
Why is it that people don't catch on when language like "worker" is thrown about - "proletariat" was Marx's definition of "the lower social class". What is it going to take to make people wake up??
The article first linked here notes about Heinz-Kerry's Tides Foundation: Most disturbing is the link to Ramsey Clark’s International Action Center, which has supported Slobodan Milosevic and North Korean strongman Kim Jong-Il. The IAC is the force behind International ANSWER, which sponsored the major antiwar (and anti-Bush) rallies before the invasion of Iraq. When ANSWER was outed as a Communist organization, United for Peace and Justice, headed by longtime Communist Party member Leslie Cagan was created as a "moderate" alternative. UFPJ is also a Tides grant recipient.The Tides-funded “A Better Way Project,” which opposed war in Iraq, also coordinated efforts of United for Peace and Justice and the Win Without War Coalition. The celebrity-laden Win Without War Coalition, along with the Bill Moyers-funded Florence and John Schumann Foundation, ran full-page ads in the New York Times opposing the War on Terrorism. This will not be the last overlapping of far-Left causes.
Pay attention class!!! The truth about John Kerry and his wife is just below the surface. One only need scratch a little to lay it all bare.
John Kerry - the Candidate of American Failure
Mark Steyn wrote about Kerry's insults to Ayad Allawi, the first prime minister of post-Saddam Iraq last week, drawing our attention to the fact that while Kerry boasts frequently of his ability to reach out to America's allies, he misses no opportunity to insult them. Free Iraq isn't unique to Kerry's disdain, just add it to the list.
Steyn notes What a small, graceless man Kerry is, and that point is well taken. Kerry asked pointedly whether Allawi was "living in fantasyland" when Allawi made remarks on the situation in Iraq. This to the man that lives the terror 24/7? This from the candidate that is going to call summits with world leaders and talk his way to world peace. Insult them first then bring them to the table?
Kerry continues to press his anti-war rhetoric, all the while sustaining the efforts of America's enemies. Steyn continues: Kerry finds himself a month before the election with no platform to run on other than American defeat. He has decided to co-opt the jihadist death-cult, the Baathist dead-enders, the suicide bombers and other misfits and run as the candidate of American failure.
I couldn't agree more.
Steyn notes What a small, graceless man Kerry is, and that point is well taken. Kerry asked pointedly whether Allawi was "living in fantasyland" when Allawi made remarks on the situation in Iraq. This to the man that lives the terror 24/7? This from the candidate that is going to call summits with world leaders and talk his way to world peace. Insult them first then bring them to the table?
Kerry continues to press his anti-war rhetoric, all the while sustaining the efforts of America's enemies. Steyn continues: Kerry finds himself a month before the election with no platform to run on other than American defeat. He has decided to co-opt the jihadist death-cult, the Baathist dead-enders, the suicide bombers and other misfits and run as the candidate of American failure.
I couldn't agree more.
Oho! Connect the Dots: Ramsey Clark/Dan Rather
I totally forgot about this! In February 2003, Dan Rather appeared on Larry King Live:
Dan Rather confirmed on Thursday's Larry King Live on CNN that far-left, anti-American crusader Ramsey Clark, who has drawn up charges of impeachment against President Bush accusing him of “crimes against humanity,” was a “big help” to CBS News in landing the Saddam Hussein interview for the network.
And....AND....THIS!
CBS acknowledged that former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who is prominent in the global anti-war movement and met with Saddam on Sunday, put in a good word for Rather in helping secure the interview. Clark has known Rather for a long time, said CBS News spokeswoman Sandra Genelius.”
This article at Media Research Center went on to state Only people as far away as Baghdad could be unfamiliar enough with CBS News to buy the idea that it has a “reputation as an independent news organization.”
They also recognized that Clark is a prominent part of the far-left collection of former communist sympathizers with ANSWER. Their Web site: http://www.internationalanswer.org/
As Michael Kelly revealed in January, “International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) is a front group for the communist Workers World Party. The Workers World Party is, literally, a Stalinist organization.” For Kelly's January 22 column, with go to:"MarchingwithStalinists"
Dan Rather confirmed on Thursday's Larry King Live on CNN that far-left, anti-American crusader Ramsey Clark, who has drawn up charges of impeachment against President Bush accusing him of “crimes against humanity,” was a “big help” to CBS News in landing the Saddam Hussein interview for the network.
And....AND....THIS!
CBS acknowledged that former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who is prominent in the global anti-war movement and met with Saddam on Sunday, put in a good word for Rather in helping secure the interview. Clark has known Rather for a long time, said CBS News spokeswoman Sandra Genelius.”
This article at Media Research Center went on to state Only people as far away as Baghdad could be unfamiliar enough with CBS News to buy the idea that it has a “reputation as an independent news organization.”
They also recognized that Clark is a prominent part of the far-left collection of former communist sympathizers with ANSWER. Their Web site: http://www.internationalanswer.org/
As Michael Kelly revealed in January, “International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) is a front group for the communist Workers World Party. The Workers World Party is, literally, a Stalinist organization.” For Kelly's January 22 column, with go to:"MarchingwithStalinists"
FrontPage: San Francisco Schools For Jihad
According to FrontPage Magazine the San Francisco Unified School District is hosting an event today in support of overseas terrorist groups given by the International Solidarity Movement and its affiliate, International ANSWER. Taking place at Horace Mann Middle School in San Francisco’s Mission District, the event is titled “The Struggle for Palestine: 4th Anniversary of the Intifada.”
What is so curious about this group is that they are so blatantly supporting those terrorists that are killing our soldiers in Iraq – and not one iota of their program has been challenged by the San Francisco Unified School District. The organizers state:
Support for resistance in Palestine, and to make links with others who are fighting against the U.S. occupation of Iraq, and against U.S. imperialism around the world. (my emphasis added)
Lee Kaplan goes on to say Can you guess what the organizers of this event mean by “fighting against the U.S. occupation in Iraq?” They mean killing of our sons and daughters in Iraq who are in the U.S. military. And can you guess who’s fighting against them? The terrorists from al-Qaeda, the Ba'ath Party, Ansar Al-Islam and any other members of the terrorist network.
One other weird connection in all of this is Ramsey Clark , former attorney general under Lyndon Johnson. Ramsey Clark is founder of International Action Center (IAC) and Clark is now Saddam Hussein's attorney.
Read the articles and if you are as outraged as I am about this, contact San Francisco Schools Superintendent Arlene Ackerman and let her know how you feel: ackermana@sfusd.edu . According to Kaplan, her office has stonewalled any common sense solution to not letting this event go forward. While you’re at it, contact Governor Schwarzenegger as well: http://www.govmail.ca.gov/.
What is so curious about this group is that they are so blatantly supporting those terrorists that are killing our soldiers in Iraq – and not one iota of their program has been challenged by the San Francisco Unified School District. The organizers state:
Support for resistance in Palestine, and to make links with others who are fighting against the U.S. occupation of Iraq, and against U.S. imperialism around the world. (my emphasis added)
Lee Kaplan goes on to say Can you guess what the organizers of this event mean by “fighting against the U.S. occupation in Iraq?” They mean killing of our sons and daughters in Iraq who are in the U.S. military. And can you guess who’s fighting against them? The terrorists from al-Qaeda, the Ba'ath Party, Ansar Al-Islam and any other members of the terrorist network.
One other weird connection in all of this is Ramsey Clark , former attorney general under Lyndon Johnson. Ramsey Clark is founder of International Action Center (IAC) and Clark is now Saddam Hussein's attorney.
Read the articles and if you are as outraged as I am about this, contact San Francisco Schools Superintendent Arlene Ackerman and let her know how you feel: ackermana@sfusd.edu . According to Kaplan, her office has stonewalled any common sense solution to not letting this event go forward. While you’re at it, contact Governor Schwarzenegger as well: http://www.govmail.ca.gov/.
10/01/2004
Communism on Campus
These were taken outside the auditorium where Michelle Malkin was giving a lecture in Dwinelle Hall on the U.C. Berkeley campus on Wednesday, September 8, 2004.
There are more at Zombie Time, just in case you doubted my earlier assumptions and fears of communism spreading like wildfire with our youth....
Kerry wears lipstick...and makeup too?
Okay - let's see -
Kerry has hardly graced the Senate floor with his presence while campaigning...Bush still runs the country.
Debate Day To Do List:
Kerry: go to the spa to get hair coiffed, nails done, face done (how thick do ya think the pancake makeup is to get rid of that orange glow??), and lipstick. More Botox injections?
President Bush: travel to hurricane disaster sites to comfort citizens that were affected.
"Progressive Cause" - just another word for Communism
Joel Kotkin wrote for the New Republic: Self-proclaimed progressives in California today are basically socialists in Democratic clothing, who favor using state government to redistribute wealth and power to deserving state workers, favored minority and sexual-preference groups, and various servants of statism, such as trial lawyers.
Why am I even speaking about this you ask? Lately I have noticed with more regularity the use of the term "progressive cause" when Liberals are speaking. I am concerned about the youth of this country, who do not have the institutional memory of the Soviet Union and Communism, who are taken in by this lofty phrase.
Progressive sounds new, and it is natural for young people to gravitate to anything that is different than what their parents espouse. But there is also danger in the phrase.
Leon Trotsky, when interviewed in 1937 about principles and tactics in war, used the word progressive nine times. Trotsky, you will remember, was a Russian revolutionary and Communist theorist who helped Lenin and built up the army; he was ousted from the Communist Party by Stalin for his opposition to the authoritarianism of Stalin and his emphasis on world revolution.
In the article Trotsky is quoted as saying: The proletariat of a capitalist country which finds itself in alliance with the USSR must retain fully and completely its irreconcilable hostility to the imperialist government of its own country. (my emphasis)
Sound familiar?
Whether or not the anti-war crowd has knowingly embraced the teachings of Trotsky, a communist, and others that are clearly communist remains to be seen, but the facts are striking.
Why am I even speaking about this you ask? Lately I have noticed with more regularity the use of the term "progressive cause" when Liberals are speaking. I am concerned about the youth of this country, who do not have the institutional memory of the Soviet Union and Communism, who are taken in by this lofty phrase.
Progressive sounds new, and it is natural for young people to gravitate to anything that is different than what their parents espouse. But there is also danger in the phrase.
Leon Trotsky, when interviewed in 1937 about principles and tactics in war, used the word progressive nine times. Trotsky, you will remember, was a Russian revolutionary and Communist theorist who helped Lenin and built up the army; he was ousted from the Communist Party by Stalin for his opposition to the authoritarianism of Stalin and his emphasis on world revolution.
In the article Trotsky is quoted as saying: The proletariat of a capitalist country which finds itself in alliance with the USSR must retain fully and completely its irreconcilable hostility to the imperialist government of its own country. (my emphasis)
Sound familiar?
Whether or not the anti-war crowd has knowingly embraced the teachings of Trotsky, a communist, and others that are clearly communist remains to be seen, but the facts are striking.
John F Kerry doesn't - CAN'T - relate to the working class.
Joel Kotkin, in an article about Kerry's elitism, states: In recent years, the Democratic Party has shifted away from its working- and middle-class roots to identify more and more with the rising elites of the information age. Look at Kerry's chief supporters and you see a new kind of elite, a veritable "hip-ocracy" of high-tech tycoons, Hollywood moguls and celebrities, and a bevy of Wall Street financiers. This group is bolstered by Americans with graduate degrees and a growing number of college and university faculty members.
These core Kerry constituencies, the technical and professional intelligentsia, increasingly show signs of seeing themselves as a new social elite, what urban guru Richard Florida has anointed as the nation' s "creative class." Most make their homes in the peculiarly elitist economies of post-industrial metropolises such as greater Boston, Manhattan, San Francisco and the west side of Los Angeles, where the definition of middle class often comes with a million-dollar-plus mortgage, a PhD and, often enough, more than a few pence handed down from the parents. Kerry, a Yale graduate identified by Burke's Peerage as having more royal blood than any presidential candidate in U.S. history, educated in Swiss boarding schools and married to his second heiress, is an almost-too-perfect representative of this new class.
Middle class = a million-dollar-plus mortgage???? WTF is that?? Kerry's take on what is 'normal' is a trillion miles away from my life - and we are not doing so bad, I tell ya.
I DO know one thing - NO WAY do I want some aristocratic F*** like Kerry - or his cronies - making decisions about the country I live in.
These core Kerry constituencies, the technical and professional intelligentsia, increasingly show signs of seeing themselves as a new social elite, what urban guru Richard Florida has anointed as the nation' s "creative class." Most make their homes in the peculiarly elitist economies of post-industrial metropolises such as greater Boston, Manhattan, San Francisco and the west side of Los Angeles, where the definition of middle class often comes with a million-dollar-plus mortgage, a PhD and, often enough, more than a few pence handed down from the parents. Kerry, a Yale graduate identified by Burke's Peerage as having more royal blood than any presidential candidate in U.S. history, educated in Swiss boarding schools and married to his second heiress, is an almost-too-perfect representative of this new class.
Middle class = a million-dollar-plus mortgage???? WTF is that?? Kerry's take on what is 'normal' is a trillion miles away from my life - and we are not doing so bad, I tell ya.
I DO know one thing - NO WAY do I want some aristocratic F*** like Kerry - or his cronies - making decisions about the country I live in.
President Bush won hands down
Kerry may be smoother in style (I call it greasy and slimey) - but that is typical of pathological liars. I suspect that there are a lot of people out there that WANT to go into the voting polls and cast a ballot for Kerry and go home with a little bit of their conscience intact, but last night's performance made it more difficult for those people. Of course Kerry's "base" - the far left Deaniacs - are going to call it a success, but it is the more moderate Dems that I think Kerry is having trouble with and he just gave them more reasons last night to question their choice.
President Bush got pissed off - who wouldn't with lies coming in from every direction - but Bush easily won by staying the course.
President Bush got pissed off - who wouldn't with lies coming in from every direction - but Bush easily won by staying the course.
Just found out - I'm a Neocon ~g
The way Liberals spit out the word Neocon makes one wonder who they are talking about, doesn't it? But I think THEY are misinformed.
A brief background on Neoconservatism in America by Irving Kristol will probably surprise a lot of you as it did me. Kristol is referred to as the "godfather" of neocons.
A brief background on Neoconservatism in America by Irving Kristol will probably surprise a lot of you as it did me. Kristol is referred to as the "godfather" of neocons.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)