Sunday, October 31, 2004
Latest MSM coverups
reports about the changing of the transcript at NBC of a Brokaw interview of sKerry from an admission that his military records are not public to dropping the admission. This type of coverup is fruitless because there are too many records of the original transcript, as well as the original tapes. Seems to me that the MSM hypocrisy and lying has again been exposed by the blogosphere.
................What happened to the rest of the answer? NBC must have decided to cut it off, but its excision appears to make NBC look complicit in an attempt to cover up an embarrassing admission -- that despite months of assertions to the contrary, John Kerry knows full well that he has not released his full service records. Unfortunately for NBC, they haven't realized yet that the original transcript still exists on their servers.
NBC needs to explain to their viewers why they felt the need to edit John Kerry's response, and who made the decision to do so. In an electoral cycle that has seen the mainstream media burn its credibility time and again, it looks like NBC is the next in line to self-immolate.
Andrew Sullivan and sKerry
No Mark Steyn
column or comment (hat tip to Betsy
) can pass me by without comment, as he is among the most brilliant writers in the world today. His dismissal of the Andrew Sullivan endorsement and discussion of the sKerry illogic regarding non WMD/disppearing WMD in the latest attempted MSM ambush gives many of us a lift in spirits:
Sullivan's big idea is that the best way to force the Democrats to get serious about the war is to put them in charge of it. That's a helluva leap of faith -- and, in John Kerry's case, it's at odds with a 30-year track record of not being serious on the Cold War, Grenada, Central America, the first Gulf War, etc. As Dr. Laura would advise, you should never marry a man in hopes of reforming him.
(hat tip to Instapundit) catches the intertwining of Osama, Michael Moore, and Walter Cronkite, perhaps to be designated the latest "unholy trio". Maybe Cronkite's senile ramblings are simply more of what we heard without recognizing the source for many of his years as a newreader. There is little question that our "they're not anti-war, they're on the other side" left wing enemies will not recognize the ironies addressed:
Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!
- Osama Bin Laden, from his latest video
OK, in reality he's saying things about goats. (I'm sure few people in the world know more intimate details about goats than Osama.) Just in time for Halloween he's come out swinging, one would assume with his best stuff, and lo and behold it's Michael Moore quotes. Ironically following on the heels of Kerry's own desperate plea , this should be a wake up call to the slumbering Left. Jim Geraghty is right, look in the mirror. I'd like to think they'll follow his advice, but the trouble is every time I've thought they would look into that mirror they haven't. When the real wake up call comes they choose to snooze, preferring to delay the inevitable confrontation with the not joking, real-world nightmare.
Will this time be different?
Unfortunately I think not. Because the American Left has never failed to disappoint me. It follows that I think Mr Geraghty is wrong in this statement: "A Bush landslide is now exponentially more likely..." though he chose his words carefully so as not to actually predict said landslide, I'm convinced that the Left that wants to believe that the President of the United States was acting with Saudi royals and Osama Bin Laden on 911 will certainly not stay home or change their votes just because Osama made a campaign video quoting Mike Moore supporting Kerry.
Likewise it doesn't matter whether Cronkite was joking or not when he told Larry King "I'm a little inclined to think that Karl Rove, the political manager at the White House, who is a very clever man, he probably set up bin Laden to this thing." Plenty of Americans believe it.
Saturday, October 30, 2004
BOO! Scare a Donk.
Borrowed from Glenn Reynolds
via Pamela Barbey. How perfect this is!
Friday, October 29, 2004
There he goes again
posted by Marcia.
Kerry, just as he did in Viet Nam, has put the American soldier on the defensive against his (her) own country. We all know, or should know, what happened to our American POW's (who truly are heroes) when Kerry traveled to Paris and sided with the Viet Cong against our soldiers. Rather than being elected president ,John Kerry should be prosecuted as a traitor to his country.
Now , we can"t believe our own eyes when we see Kerry once again finding joy in supposed missdeeds of our soldiers, where on the oher hand the preident takes pride in their heroic actions. To turn this country over to this U.N. loving, AMERICAN hating, military demeaning, traitor, John F. Kerry,would be the end of our country as we know and love it.
Vote GEORGE W. BUSH , A TRUE AMERICAN HERO, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR FOUR MORE YEARS.
Lord Haw-Haw Michael Moron
at the National Review has a quote that I can't resist because my mother was born a Littlejohn:
The debate was lively, but I must credit Richard Littlejohn with the best line of the afternoon. Littlejohn is an amazing life force: Probably Britain’s best-read political columnist, absolutely savagely fearless in debate, and a passionate supporter of George W. Bush and the Anglo-American relationship. Anyway, he got off the best line of the evening: He called Michael Moore the “Lord Haw-Haw of the war on terror.”
Black Cat Theory
Mr. Tyrell at the Washington Times
raises the latest Democratic Party "black cat" attack and goes through some of the history of previous attempts always aided by "their loyal MSM secretarial staff":
The stupendously unedifying display of a U.S. presidential election is now coming down to its last whoop-whoop, its last gross deceit, its last idiotic accusation. Naturally, once again a black cat news story has, of a sudden, leaped across the path of the Republican candidate, hexing his chances at the polls and sending him into eternal ignominy. That, at least, is the hope of the Democrats and their loyal secretarial staff in the media, both of whom gin up these black cat stories. The stories themselves are always highly exaggerated scandals heavily larded with the irrational and intended to stir up the moron vote. This story claims that vast amounts of explosives were left unguarded after being discovered by the Bush administration in Iraq and are now under the control of hostile forces that only John Kerry can thwart. ...................
has summarized sKerry and his followers in a scornful label of "retroactive genius". Perhaps we could learn from his discussion:
Once again, the senator's position has evolved, to borrow The New York Times' delicate term for Kerry's many about-faces.
This election comes down to a choice between one man's evolution and the other man's resolution. With his endlessly repeated Tora Bora charges, Kerry has made Afghanistan a major campaign issue. So be it. Who do you want as president? The man who conceived the Afghan campaign, carried it through without flinching when it was being called a ``quagmire'' during its second week, and has seen it through to Afghanistan's transition to democracy? Or the retroactive genius, who always knows what needs to be done after it has already happened -- who would have done ``everything'' differently in Iraq, yet in Afghanistan would have replicated Bush's every correct, courageous, radical and risky decision -- except one. Which, of course, he would have done differently. He says. Now.
Thursday, October 28, 2004
Predictions from New Hampster
- arguably one of the very best columnists practising their craft today - provides us with some predictions and wit. We can only pray that he's right:
...........In lively elections such as this the media usually run endless features on ‘angry white men’, a demographic to which they’re not notably partial. After ‘angry white men’ threw out the Democrats’ congressional leadership in the 1994 elections, Peter Jennings, the exquisitely condescending Canadian who anchors ABC News, sniffed that ‘the voters had a temper tantrum’. But this time round the angry white men are all on the Democrat side, and the media seem to think it’s perfectly normal...........
.......My sense is that the 2002 model is still operative, and that the Democrats and the media, talking to each other in their mutually self-deluding cocoon, have overplayed the Bush-bashing. Next Tuesday the President will win the states he won last time, plus Iowa, Wisconsin, New Mexico and Maine’s Second Congressional District to put him up to 301 electoral votes. Minnesota? Why not? Nudge him up to 311 electoral votes. Oh, and what the hell, give him Hawaii: that’s 315. The Republicans will make a net gain of two seats in the Senate, one of which will bring with it the scalp of the Democrats’ leader, Tom Daschle. Despite distancing himself from Kerry and running ads showing him and Bush embracing, Daschle’s floundering in South Dakota, and his lugubrious mien will be even more lugubriouser within the week. Look for a handful of Republican House gains, too. And Democrats tearing their hair out — or John Kerry’s and John Edwards’s hair, if they can penetrate the styling gel.....
Bill Clinton's hijack solution
I took the from Clayton Cramer's Blog
because I couldn't resist the irony and humor of a piece referring to a man who hasn't been on a scheduled airline in his adult life, nor does he associate with anyone who has:
I have the solution for the prevention of hijackings, and at the same time getting our airline industry back on its feet. Since men of the Muslim religion are not allowed to look at naked women we should replace our female flight attendants with strippers.
Muslims would be afraid to get on the planes for fear of seeing a naked woman, and of course, every businessman in this country would start flying again in hope of seeing a naked woman. Hijackings would end and the airline industry would have record sales.
Why didn't Bush think of this? Why do I still have to do everything myself? Well, I just got out of the hospital.
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
The sKerry Draft
Vernon Dozier, a commenter at No Left Turns
, brings up the relative likelihoods of a draft under Bush or under the Poodle, and which would be more likely. Of course he is correct that only involuntary conscription could keep up the Armed Forces under a much despised Kedwards as Commander -in-Chief. The percentage of expired enlistments and resignations would be at least 30-50%:
Hasn't anyone considered that Kerry would need a draft a lot more than Bush? Bush is very popular among current military personnel (he stands to get 75% to 80% of the military vote), and the various branches are currently meeting recruitment goals. In contrast, Kerry is reviled by about 95% of those who served directly with him because he pissed all over them with false accusations of atrocities merely to promote his own political ambitions. Who the hell would volunteer to serve under such a commander in chief?
Tuesday, October 26, 2004
The politics of decapitation
's first accepted column since the one which was rejected (suppressed, censored, etc) continues the same vein after taking on the British press' call for the assassination of President Bush:
.......By the weekend, the Guardian had thought through the implications of Brooker's comments, and decided that it would be rather embarrassing to be flying in the lucky winners of the big Clark County competition for their US vacation only to discover, as the plane was diverted to Guantanamo, that the entire editorial staff had been placed on a Justice Department watch list. So in re Charlie Wilkes Harvey Brooker, they issued a clarification: "Charlie Brooker apologises for any offence caused by his comments. Although flippant and tasteless, his closing comments were intended as an ironic joke, not as a call to action - an intention he believed regular readers of his humorous column would understand. He deplores violence of any kind."..........
........The ersatz emotions that gripped Britain in the run-up to Kenneth Bigley's decapitation were also the product of a passive culture unwilling to come to grips with the real challenges it faces. A week ago, I wrote: "In the last three weeks of Mr Bigley's life, the actions of various parties made it more likely that more Britons and other infidels will be kidnapped and beheaded." When I say I wrote it "a week ago", I actually wrote it two weeks ago, but that first Bigley column got spiked by the Editor. Which I regret more and more, because the above point needs to be hammered home. The kidnapping of Margaret Hassan is, very obviously and tragically, a direct response to the mass Bigley wallow...........
Perhaps if the Telegraph and the British Government had paid attention to his points, a person cold have been saved from the tender mercies of the SAVAGES.
Monday, October 25, 2004
Follow on for lies
writes in the American Spectator
to reinforce my point in the preceding post:
.........Name one policy proposal they advocate that is either supported by a majority of Americans or is likely to be in the near future. The Nation's version of the "good society" is one that most Americans no longer share, if they ever did. Yet it's inconceivable to them that their ideas no longer hold sway over a majority of this country, so they desperately invent reasons why they are losing. It's coup plotters. It's those corporate moguls. It's those damn maniacal wide-eyed true-believing Christians. If we could just defeat this vast right-wing conspiracy, then Americans would vote their true interests and the left-wing nirvana would be upon us.
The fact of the matter is that America is changing in ways that a far-left magazine can no longer stomach. It increasingly rejects government solutions, wants an aggressive foreign policy against terrorism, and admires individualism. President Bush's reelection will only accelerate these trends.
No wonder The Nation is on the verge of losing it.
And from his Blog the statement about "bombshells":
For it to be a bombshell, it would have to be either, (1) a story showing that Kerry is lying about an issue position that has become synonymous with his campaign, or (2) Kerry on tape saying that America was to blame for the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
Kedwards and the impact of lies
For the past 48 hours there has been a buzz of excitement throughout the blogosphere about a story to be published Monday in the Washington Post or Times, purporting to be "about foreign affairs and Kerry lies". When I read the whole article, my immediate reaction and that of my wife was "is that all - just another Kerry lie?" The shame of this campaign season is that the MSM is so protective of the lies of the left and so condemning of the misspeaks of the center/right, that we all have the reaction above of "another Kerry lie - so what"! The Democrats have proven that, with the help of their MSM allies , the fascist/communist principle of " a lie repeated enough becomes the perceived truth", or at least makes the public so weary that it simply reinforces their partisans and no longer fails to offend or enrage. Thank God that at least we have our corner of the blogosphere to counteract the legacy media.
As Steven den Beste
says in a comment to Jay Rosen
(hat tip to Instapundit):
Technological change has always had profound social consequences, but few inventions in history have caused more political and cultural change than movable type printing. Before Gutenberg, "truth" and "history" were largely properties of the Christian Church (and there was only one Christian Church, then).
Movable type printing took away control over "the truth" from the Church and placed it in the hands of a secular elite.
Now the Internet is taking away that secular elite's control over "the truth" and giving it to the broad populus. That's the connection. Everything you listed is a side effect of that fundamental change.
This "counter" provides hope for the future that may yet rescue at least the USA from the morass of hate and vitriol found in almost one-half of the population (the Democratic Party) according the the probably fictionalized "polls" which are spun to create "self-fulfilling ends".
The weariness of the public hopefully will cause a backlash against the legacy media and accelerate the reach of the new media.
Sunday, October 24, 2004
Only human animals can stoop so low. The Diplomad
identifies some recent savages and their works:
And speaking of animals, the kind that we need to make sure are extinct, we see this story from CNN: "'Bodies of 51 Iraqi soldiers found; Reports say young graduates were forced to lie down, then shot in head." What type of animal does that? Probably the same type that would slash the throats of airline stewardesses and crash planes filled with innocent men, women and children.
gets a little philosophical in his political observations tonight, but this makes him no less correct:
Democrats believe that we are stupid because we don't understand shitty people. We're not. THEY ARE. But they believe that behaving like a religious cult, forgiving shitty people for being shitty, and gazing at your own navel to understand why some people are shitty is a GOOD thing, for everybody. I don't.
Those mindless zealots scare the shit out of me.
Stolen from blogoSFERICS
Kerry is not a serious man
starts each day he's published with a new and fresh outlook about the "wonders" of sKerry:
Maybe I'm getting old. I've been covering politics for 53 years, and that's just since John Kerry's convention speech. I'm sick of this election, even before the Democratic Party's chad-diviners have managed to extend it to mid-December. These are serious times and the senator is not a serious man. And so we have a campaign that has a sharper position on Mary Cheney's lesbianism and the deficiencies of Laura Bush's curriculum vitae than on the central question of the age...............
Saturday, October 23, 2004
Islam and the Democrats vs. Western Civilization
Deacon at Powerline provides an analysis of the war between the Democratic Party and their Islamic brethren/MSM supporters which explains their entire rationale:
........Yet, the rationalization reveals the true source of Bush-loathing -- hatred of the religious and core philosophical underpinnings of western civilization (represented in the leftist parable by the ancient Greeks). But if you hate these things, what remains worth defending about the west? The only thing I can think of is its hedonism. That's how the Islamofascists see it too. And they have figured out that, if that's all the west is fighting for, the west will lose..................
Karl Rove by Mark Steyn
This is the best discussion of the realities of Karl Rove I've ever seen, un-muddied by the hatred spewed by the Democrats. Mark Steyn
does it again:
............Their envy was directed at Karl Rove, the President's longtime adviser or (to quote the title of a biography of him) "Bush's Brain". The slightest misstep by Senator Kerry and the more paranoid Democratic websites are quick to detect the fingerprints of Rove - even though, like most evil geniuses, he doesn't leave any.............
Kerry Anti-terrorism plan
friend, Don Kates has discovered the details of the Kerry anti-terrorism plan and published them with Cramer and others. This breach in National Security will be solved if the spineless ideologues are elected. I've been a regular reader of Mr Cramer for several years, and recommend him to everyone. His remarks about the fools at the Guardian (scroll down) are also extremely appropriate:
Since John Kerry announced the existence of his secret plan for victory over terrorism, public and media interest in its secret details has been intense Some of the details are finally surfacing based on perhaps inadvertent comments by the senator and his chief foreign policy adviser, Richard Holbrooke, Predictably the revealed details are stirring up multiple controversies. The controversies have, in turn, prompted various critical revisions of the secret plan.
The center-piece of the plan is the aggressive distribution here and abroad of millions of bumper stickers denouncing terrorism. These stickers will be in bright day-glow lettering with luminescent highlights for better visibility at night. The plan originally envisioned them being in green, red, yellow and black colors. That has now been revised to using neutral colors because of objections that use of an Islamic-Arab color scheme might be offensive to terrorists.
There have also been objections to some proposals for the bumper stickers' wording. Initially the idea was just one version of the sticker with the wording being "Defeat Terrorism." But that wording has been discarded as too belligerent and macho. Next the plan was revised to involve distributing different bumper sticker wordings calculated to appeal to different segments of the population. One wording would be used for East Coast people, another for West Coasters, another for Southerners, yet others for (respectively): intellectuals and Democrats; urban, suburban, and rural residents and yet another for the so-called NASCAR-types Unfortunately it turns out that all suggestions for wording that might appeal to Southerners or the NASCAR crowd seemed unacceptably aggressive to many or most of Kerry's staff and advisers. (Other objections have also been made, for instance the wording "Terrorism Sucks" was rejected as potentially offensive to women and gays.)
Finally the bumper sticker plan has gone back to the idea of a one-wording-suits-all bumper sticker. At this point the Kerry staff seems virtually agreed on the wording "Terrorism May Be Inappropriate."
This hyper-aggressive bumper sticker campaign will be supplemented by the display on all federal buildings of banners reading TERRORISM IS WRONG – but with the subtitle "Of Course, One Man's Terrorist is Another Man'; Freedom Fighter." In response to objections that this phraseology might make women feel excluded or diminished, there is a lot of sentiment to instead usng the subtitle "Of Course, One Person's Terrorist is Another Person's; Freedom Fighter."
A third part of the Kerry Plan which has leaked involves the use of B1 and B52 bombers equipped with a new form of "Daisy Cutter" bomb. Instead of explosives these bombs will be filled with leaflets and pamphlets deploring terrorism. The Kerry staff emphasizes that these materials will be very emphatically written.
A major official on the Kerry staff has stressed that not all of its elements will be so negative, however. Some elements of the Kerry Plan will seek to produce greater understanding between Americans and the peoples of the Middle East, For instance, recognizing that for decades various Middle Eastern and Islamic governments have been reprinting and distributing Arabic language versions of Hitler's autobiography MEIN KAMPF, the Kerry plan calls for mass distribution in the U.S. of English language copies of MEIN KAMPF. While everyone in the Kerry camp deplores the book's sentiments, they also recognize that terrorism can only be dispelled by promoting greater sensitivity to Islamic concerns among Americans.
Friday, October 22, 2004
Democratic Party Rage and Hatred
Silverwing at SSDB
seems to have analyzed accurately the hidden reasons for the hatred and internal meanesses displayed by the modern Democrats. Read the entire article and be enlightened. We win - they go, maybe forever:
I think - IMHO - that the Democratic leadership is facing a genuine turning point in their history, just as the rest of the nation is, but for them it’s a whole lot more dangerous. As a nation, we’re resilient - we could probably survive four years of President Kerry, because the system is set up so that no one man - or party - can do terminal damage. The problem here is that from everything I can see, the DNC seems to be actively trying to wreck the system - the lawyer SWAT teams, the plans to scream fraud even when none is suspected, the threats of litigation that could hold up a decision for weeks again. All of it seems to me to be intended to destroy our confidence in the system and in our own influence on it. Why would they be doing this?
Because they fear what could happen if they lose. For the first time, there is serious discussion about taking care of Social Security. There is serious discussion about changing the income tax to a sales tax. A Bush victory - especially a solid, unquestionable one - will bring these discussions into the forefront, and that makes them a threat to Democratic power. They can survive being out of office, but they cannot survive losing their hold on taxes and Social Security. To do that means they lose their influence. To lose influence is to lose. Period.
Light humor from Ann Coulter
From a cyber-interview of Ann Coulter by John Hawkins
John Hawkins: How about dashing off a quick sentence or even just a word or two about the following individuals... - George Bush: A 21st century Churchill.
- Dick Cheney: Takes a licking, keeps on ticking.
- Jonah Goldberg: Who?
- Andrew Sullivan: Every inch a lady.
- Tucker Carlson: See what happens when you try to be mainstream?
- John Kerry: 30 years later he's still shooting himself in the foot.
- Teresa Heinz Kerry: To be first lady, first you have to be a lady.
- John Edwards: Jury's still out - expect a huge settlement.
- Max Cleland: At least he earned his medals.
- Dan Rather: A space alien -- and I have the Microsoft documents from the fifties. that prove it!
Vote fraud and vote suppression
at NRO explains the difference between the political parties with reference to the upcoming election and voting :
................But there's a huge difference between the two sides' tactics. The Republicans' lawyers aren't preemptively declaring the election is fraud if they don't win. Simply put, they aren't trying to undermine the legitimacy of the American political system. The Democrats - who constantly decry Bush's "politics of fear" even as they warn of a draft and tell blacks they'll be disenfranchised - have taken the position that a Bush victory is by its very nature proof of voter fraud. That is the Holder Doctrine. If all the votes are counted, Kerry wins. Period. If Bush wins, the votes must not have been counted............................
...............Judged on these two criteria, it's hard to see how the Democrats can call themselves democrats.
It's frightening to watch our internal enemies trying to overthrow a democracy by lies, trickery, and deceit. Their rage and hateful vitriol is of course ratified and supported by their brothers in the MSM, which unfortunately magnifies their sickness.
Thursday, October 21, 2004
International Hatred due to internal enemies
John Derbyshire at NRO Corner
posts the following from a reader. It quickly becomes rather obvious that the observer has a correct insight:
A reader who is teaching in China: "One of the things I find particularly distressing is how the careless and hateful rhetoric of Democrats and the media have been swallowed hook, line, and sinker by the Chinese, who receive it via (God help us!) the BBC. Bush evil. Bush stupid. That's what my students believe; the dismissive tone of their voices, when they mention President Bush's name, speaks more than any words can. Democrats and the media are so insular, that they do not begin to conceive of the impact of their propaganda and how that shapes the way the rest of the world views us. What has poisoned the perception of the U.S. abroad is not the actions of GWB, but that of the Democrats and the media who noised abroad their disdain and lack of support for Dubya, all for political gain. Had the Democrats and media done what was right, the U.S. would be in different odor around the globe."
We are unlikely to get any improvement or diminishment of hatred and vitriol from the disloyal opposition (new designation for the Democratic Party)(there's a reason their symbol is a Jackass) during the next four years either. They just can't abide "not them" being in power and working to destroy the US with doctrinal socialism and the replacement of capitalism with "command economics". The only good thing about Bill Clinton is that he was so self-centered and immoral that he wouldn't take the time and effort to really hurt his country, and therefore did less harm than his followers and the current Kerry syncophants wished.
has a marginally humorous outlook on the Democratic Party Hatefest for the current election. Unfortunately, in this instance, we must take her seriously:
/snip/.....Coincidentally, the very day of the vice presidential debate, a gun was fired into a Bush-Cheney campaign office in Bearden, Tenn. – one of a series of violent attacks on Republican offices around the country. (You can tell it was Democrats firing those guns because none of the shots ever hit anything.)/snip/........
.............If only we could get Democrats to show a little of that manly anger toward the terrorists, maybe Americans would be able to trust them with national security.
adds more on the essential internal meanness of Kedwards:
........Kerry knows these charges are untrue -- but still he makes them and encourages his supporters to do likewise. And his run for the presidency is not the first time in which John Kerry has been willing to spread lies to accomplish his aims.........
.........Lynne Cheney was right. This is not a good man -...................
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
Dying for the UN only
in The Weekly Standard comments on a quote from the WP about the Poodle's stance on US use of military force. I believe Rush Limbaugh also caught and spread this message among the faithful today:
WHO WOULD HAVE EXPECTED the Washington Post to inflict real damage on John Kerry's faltering presidential campaign? Yet they have.
Here is the third paragraph from today's front-page article by Helen Dewar and Tom Ricks on Kerry's foreign policy record:
Kerry's belief in working with allies runs so deep that he has maintained that the loss of American life can be better justified if it occurs in the course of a mission with international support. In 1994, discussing the possibility of U.S. troops being killed in Bosnia, he said, "If you mean dying in the course of the United Nations effort, yes, it is worth that. If you mean dying American troops unilaterally going in with some false presumption that we can affect the outcome, the answer is unequivocally no."
What a JERK candidate for Commander-in-Chief!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jimmy Carter - Professional Ass
Courtesy of LGF
, Chris Matthews
, and Betsy
, we are treated to more of the asshole foolishness of the worst President of the 20th Century:
CARTER: Well, one parallel is that the Revolutionary War, more than any other war up until recently, has been the most bloody war we’ve fought. I think another parallel is that in some ways the Revolutionary War could have been avoided. It was an unnecessary war.
Had the British Parliament been a little more sensitive to the colonial’s really legitimate complaints and requests the war could have been avoided completely, and of course now we would have been a free country now as is Canada and India and Australia, having gotten our independence in a nonviolent way.
The following letter is from a reader of NRO Corner
as posted by Mac Owens. The subject speaks for itself and puts the lie to any remote pretense of intelligence by the "Worst President in History":
Re my post on Carter’s claim that the revolution was an “Unnecessary war,” I received this e-mail:
Dear Mr. Owens
General Joseph Wheeler, who was in a position to know, counted the losses in all the battles of the seven years of the Revolution as 2,200 killed, 6,500 wounded; of 1812, 1,877 killed, 3,737 wounded; of the Mexican War 1,049 killed, 7,929 wounded; for a total of 19,227 men killed or wounded in all American wars before 1860 (The Causes of the War, speech delivered in the House of Representatives, Friday, July 13th, 1894, published in the Richmond Dispatch, July 31, 1894).
Gen. Wheeler noted that the total of 19,227 men killed or wounded in all wars before 1860 added up to less than half of Gen. Grant’s losses at the Wilderness and Spotsylvania (May 5 to May 12, 1864), "which should really be called one battle". Losses on the Union side alone from that one battle totalled 9,774 killed, 41,150 wounded, and 13,254 missing and never identified.
That's General "Fightin’ Joe" Wheeler (1836-1906) of the Confederate States of America (16 horses shot out from under him), Brigadier General in the Army during the Spanish-American War, Alabama Congressman for 18 years. There’s a statue of him in Statuary Hall in the Capitol in Washington, too.
Kevin Orlin Johnson, Ph.D.
Failure to censor at the NYT
Safire's latest column
was surprisingly not canned by the NYT like Steyn's last week was by the Guardian. I'm sure the gay left-wingers on the editorial board are gagging at having let this one slip by. I'm sure they're depending on another printed screed of lies by Krugman et. al. to counter it:
.......That's comforting, because the Fear Room at Kerry campaign headquarters is on a hair trigger to turn any breaking news into a personal threat..........
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
The Plan, the Plan
(Hat tip to Right Wing News
explains how the NYT presents their SECOND endorsement of M'sieu Kerry:
.......Future President Kerry has a plan for every aspect of American life, including...
* rolling back tax cuts to ease the guilt of small business people by allowing them to cover more of the federal government's expenses,
* getting back President Clinton's $5.6 trillion budget surplus by reinstituting the 1990s-era irrational exuberance,
* removing the last stains of market forces from the health care system to prevent patients from being rushed into surgical procedures without the months of contemplation enjoyed by our Canadian and European friends,
* bringing home our backdoor-drafted National Guard and Reserve troops and replacing them with French and German soldiers eager to experience the glory of fighting the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time,
* bypassing the six-nation talks on North Korean nuclear weapons which have done nothing but isolate Kim Jong Il from his neighbors and allies, and launching bilateral talks between President Kerry and the "Dear Leader," in a fashion reminiscent of Madeleine Albright, thereby winning Mr. Kim's trust.
"For all these crises and more, Mr. Kerry has a plan. We know that it's a great plan, because he can't tell us what it is until he sits in the Oval Office. It's a very presidential plan. It's not a mere legislative plan, otherwise Mr. Kerry would have introduced it as a bill during his 19 years in the senate. No, this plan is something grand, something majestic, something unexpected, mysterious and special. Frankly, we sit on the edge of our seats, eager to hear the details of the plan from the architect himself during his first televised address from behind the big desk at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue."
"This is perhaps the ultimate reason why Mr. Kerry must be elected. If America fails him at the ballot box and sends him back to finish his final term as senator, we will never get to hear the plan. It's just not the kind of plan you can talk about in the senate."...........
The Kerry Nightmare
John Scharf at Common Sense and Wonder
has a nightmare (credited to William Tucker at the American Spectator) that I hope we never have to face as a nation - albeit one which is very likely with a Kerry win:
........Like so many a President before him, John Kerry found himself at the mercy of events. All the pretty plans of his election campaign -- the diplomacy, the conferences with our allies -- were forgotten. Suddenly he was a commander-in-chief trying to rescue a stranded army.
Events didn't wait. Now convinced that America was abandoning the Middle East and no longer content to watch Iran develop a nuclear weapon that in two years would be able to hit Jerusalem, the Israelis sent a fleet of F-16s to drop bunker-busting weapons on three nuclear complexes at Bushehr, Natanz, and Arak. Rioting broke out in every Middle Eastern capital. Terrorists streamed into Baghdad from every direction. Syrian and Egyptian armies prepared for a retaliatory attack against Israel.
That's when I woke up.
I've been walking around in a cold sweat all day thinking about these things. But that's silly, I suppose. After all, it was only a dream. The American people couldn't possibly elect John Kerry President, could they?
We Don't Care
of FNC sums up the admirable attitude of American voters concerning the high-minded British socialists of the Guardian. My sentiments
(emphasis mine) exactly
What The Guardian editors wanted was to show what louts and lowlifes Americans are... and so they baited the trap with someone like Lady Antonia Fraser lecturing us about our politics.
..........Then The Guardian got all these wild letters from wild Americans. And I think that was their point, really: To show Brits that Americans are still loutish frontiersmen wearing animal skins and scratching and spitting and cursing.
The Guardian's point in all of this was to show the world that the American voter is not qualified to select the leader of the free world. And the letters they got from us will confirm that opinion among many around the world.
Well, here's a news flash to all those people wherever they are: We don't care.........
Monday, October 18, 2004
The blessings of talk radio
We've been traveling the last few days. The wife is a political junkie who has withdrawal symptoms without her daily fix of Rush, Sean, and FNC, so on trips, I have no choice but to listen to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity at a minimum. Having learned some survival techniques over the years, I quietly acquiesce to her demands. Today, I listened through Rush to portions of GW's speech from New Jersey, and was gratified by the "strike 'em back" tone that so many of us have been wishing for. May there be more of the same daily until Nov 2 - it would be so satisfying to us all!
After completing the trip, I observed that the audiences of Rush and Sean must surely exceed that of the NYT/WP/LAT and all of their left-wing minions - even the "news" sections of ABC/NBC/ABC/CNN. There is a comfort in the knowledge that Rush is a sure antidote to the mindless, meaningless and hateful scrawlings of a Molly Ivins or Maureen Dowd, influencing far more voters on a daily basis. This certainly explains the hateful spews of "Air Amerika" and the vitriol they hold for those who defend and love our country.
Perhaps we can save our country from the hatemongers and spite spitters again, at least for four more years.
Sunday, October 17, 2004
Hurray for Mark Steyn
provides further wisdom on the Kedwards "nuisance". Moveon, and other radical left wing groups thought we'd "moved on". Along with the Cheney daughter slur, maybe we should "never forget":
..........So, for all that Bush is accused of being ''stubborn,'' it's Kerry who refuses to change. He reckons that Americans are worn out by the wild ride of the Bush years and really do long to ''get back to where they were'' -- back to Sept. 10, to the summer of shark attacks and missing congressional interns. All that going back to Sept. 10 means is that you'll have to learn the lessons of the morning after all over again: I do believe that, if clueless, complacent Kerry won, more Americans -- and Britons and Canadians and Australians and Europeans -- will die in terrorist ''nuisances.'' But he won't win. Because enough Americans understand that going back to where we were means a return to polite fictions and dangerous illusions. That world is broken and you can't put that world back together.
Saturday, October 16, 2004
sKerry's emotional immaturity
Dan at Carnivorous Conservative
(read the whole thing) provides an insightful analysis of Kerry's hopefully last debate and the motives behind the Cheney slur:
............Finally, if you are still reading - how do I know the lesbian remark wasn't on purpose? Just listen to the tape. His voice lowers, he's embarrassed, that wouldn't happen to the Yale debate champion with a pre-planned or rehearsed line. It just wouldn't. What you saw was a man who has great difficulty connecting emotionally with the outside world in a time and place where he knew he had to do it. His mind remembered back to when Edwards used the line, it was something he thought human to say because his interpersonal instincts, weak at best, simply betrayed him. It was one of the few times he went off script that entire night. And, as usual with Kerry, whenever he does that - he's toast. He doesn't have the type of emotional maturity to speak spontaneously in an emotional context. Believe me, if he had run that line past any of his advisors they would have told him no and he never would have said it. He had too much to lose and nothing to gain and Kerry is not a risk taker. He's a compromiser, an appeaser and timid in how he approaches such things - particularly with so much at stake.
US News Cocoon
, the only moderate left at USNWR, provides a parody which rings so true that I'm surprised Scrappleface hasn't published it without change:
Many of us at this justifiably famous newspaper are sorely vexed by assertions that we are somehow guilty of tilting the news to fit our editorial views. We can assure you that here at the New York Liberal Cocoon, admittedly the finest paper in the world, we don't operate that way. It is simply untrue that we recently ran a story under the headline "Hurricanes Increase Under Bush Regime." Yes, severe tropical storms were more rare during the Carter and Clinton years, but evidence conclusively linking Bush and Cheney to disastrous hurricane activity and Mount St. Helens eruptions has not yet turned up. We do, however, have several reporters working on it....../snip/.......
..........Part of our job here at the Cocoon is explaining how good and fair we are. Yes, it's a great burden, but we believe we are more than up to the task.
Friday, October 15, 2004
Religion, Hypocrisy, and Politics
is always a good way to start the day on NRO (hat tip to Betsy
). He has Kerry's lies and contadictions (flip-flops within the same breath) identified for all:
...........I say you shouldn't pick and choose, but I understand that sometimes you have to — but in completely the opposite way John Kerry picks and chooses. Kerry invokes God's guidance on the little stuff, the easy stuff, the boilerplate. He turns his back to God on the big issue, abortion (and, with a wink, gay marriage).
It seems to me this is exactly backwards. God doesn't have a position on the minimum wage or Superfund, so politicians shouldn't feel the need to consult Him about that stuff. It's only on the grave fundamental questions in politics that God should speak to one's conscience. Thomas More didn't put his life on the line about how Henry VIII handled crop rotation.
And that's what I find a little galling about all of Kerry's God talk. Beyond the naked pandering of it, it's morally and religiously empty. He may talk about deeds backing up faith, but where his faith is unambiguous he wants no part of it. When it comes to the tough issues, what he really seems to want is grace on the cheap. It's as More said: "If honor were profitable, everybody would be honorable."
The Oldest Flip-Flop
on NRO reviews belatedly the Boston Globe's hagiography of Lurch by "those who knew him best".Frum's diagnosis of the Poodle hits home:
The overwhelming message of the Globe book is that Sen. Kerry's foreign policy ideas can best be summed up as "opportunistic oppositionism." It's a tactic well suited for a man trying to make his way by mobilizing angry out-of-power constituencies. But the conclusion I take away is that if Sen. Kerry should ever find himself in a position where he has to make the decisions - rather than react to decisions made by others - he would have absolutely no idea of what to do ... and would very likely do nothing at all while blaming others for everything that went wrong as a result of his own inaction.
Thursday, October 14, 2004
The Wisdom of the "Stupid"
always provides new insights into modern rituals and thinking, and this is a outstanding way to start the day:
I have discovered the solution to liberal media bias. What mainstream journalism needs are more stupid people.
Conservative critics of the journo-industrial complex might dismiss this advice as merely adding more jelly-beans to the jar. Liberal journalists would regard it as absurd, because surely it is their genius that makes them special. Why would the temple want any - much less, more - stupid priests?
Well, it turns out that having a few stupid people in the group makes the group smarter. I've long suspected this, but I found confirmation in James Surowiecki's new book, "The Wisdom of Crowds."
It works like this. Groups of experts tend to reinforce their own views, particularly because experts believe in the authority of experts, causing them to defer to the super-expert in the group. Stupid people are, to put it bluntly, too stupid to defer to smart people. Remember the story about the truck that got jammed in the tunnel because it was too tall? All the experts were stumped. But some kid yelled, "Let the air out of the tires," saving the day. This is essentially the moral of the fable of "The Emperor's New Clothes." Substitute kids with morons and you get the same thing.............
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
The Debate as a distraction from the Playoffs
The beauty of switching between liveblogging sites while watching both playoff games and the football game is that you don't have to listen to the droning, supercilious, arrogant Voice of the Democratic Party. I switched between the following liveblogging events:
thinks Bush won early on.
“With all due respect, I’m not sure it’s credible to quote leading ‘news’ organizations about… oh, never mind.” – President Bush, responding to Kerry’s claims that “two leading national news networks” had endorsed his plans for HillaryCare.
Is Bob Shieffer going to ask any question that doesn't come from a liberal perspective?
Now, another setup for Kerry on how polarized we are. Watch Kerry to blame this on Bush. I've lost count of how many softballs Shieffer has tossed Kerry's way.
, in a room full of Northern Alliance fans says:
This debate will wind up being recognized as a disaster for the Kerry campaign within the next 48 hours, and within 96 hours the polls will demonstrate it.Matt
provides one of the more detailed accounts and closes with:
Bush: Optimism, reform, education, health, compassion, resolve, freedom, prosperity. All up, no attacks.
was also channel hopping:
I’m too tired to be overly eloquent or verbose this evening. My basic snap judgment: Bush won tonight.
Part of the question is how many people watched tonight versus the first night, especially with the baseball games going (and man, the Cards have opened up on the ‘Stros).
And, for the definitive word, Instapundit
SURFING THE CHANNELS, the talking-heads seem to be giving this one to Bush, and Candy Crowley notes that Kerry felt he had to stress, again, that he could be trusted to defend America. Mary Beth Cahill tries to respond, but she doesn't sound like she means it -- in fact, she sounds like she's been crying. Laryngitis? Who put her on camera?
And as we close tonight, both ballgames are still playing, and we still got a good picture of the "Debate".
Thanks, Mr. Luskin, for your response
I'm constantly amazed at the reponses of the Blogosphere to meaningful observations at a level below the forgeries of CBS. Here is another example of simply reading several blogs and putting the information together where it would do the most good:
OKRENT IS CHECKMATED New York Times "public editor" Dan Okrent really may have to resign over his horrible lapse of judgment in his Sunday column, revealing the name and city of a man who had written what was, in fact, a mildly heated email to a Times reporter, and portraying the man as a hate-mongering coward. Read the man's impassioned reply in this open letter to Okrent -- I defy anyone to find Okrent in the right on this one.
When I questioned Okrent about it on Sunday, asking whether he had the man's permission to publish his letter, he said, "We called Schwenk only to confirm his authorship. He got furious, but in so doing confirmed. I neither asked for permission nor felt it necessary." If anyone at the Times was looking for an excuse to bag Okrent, he's found it.
Thanks to reader Bob Taylor for the link.
of the NY Sun provides an interesting and probably true analysis of the whys and wherefores of Lurch's discharge wanderings and awardings during the period after his original, undocumented (publically) discharge. The changed of a other than honorable discharge to a honorable discharge would explain his work in suppressing his military history by refusing to make all the records available (also discussed in Wizbang
, and Vodkapundit
........According to the secretary of the Navy's document, the "authority of reference" this board was using in considering Mr. Kerry's record was "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163. "This section refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. And it couldn't have been an honorable discharge, or there would have been no point in any review at all. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge......../snip/..
UPDATE: Junkyard Blog
........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.
excerpts some comments from the Freepers that fits within my personal experience and observations:
Just spoke with reporter friend in DC. She is talking with former USN ONI types who worked on DOD/USN investigation that resulted in total loss of Kerry’s Navy security clearance.
Kerry had been granted a Top Secret by the Navy on October 11, 1967 based on a routine background investigation by Office of Naval Intelligence. A top secret clearance was required for his work at that time.
Obtaining and holding a security clearance of any level, especially TS or above, requires certain terms, obligations, commitments and conditions from the holder. One of the most important is the holder of the clearance must promptly and fully any contacts with any foreign officials, agents, etc.
Lieutenant Kerry left active duty with the Navy on January 3, 1970, but he still carried those obligations as a commissioned officer of the Naval Reserve. Without telling anyone and without receiving permission from superiors,FBI or counter-intelligence officers, he traveled to Paris in the summer of 1970. He claimed the purpose of his trip was a honeymoon with his first wife, Julia Thorne, but there was another hidden purpose.
Numerous North Vietnamese and Viet Cong intelligence agents and officials were in Paris, having arrived a year earlier for the “Peace Talks.” While in Paris, Kerry met with agents on a number of occasions and had extensive discussions with them about U.S. plans, procedures and how to get the U.S. to essentially surrender in Vietnam.
These clandestine meetings were never reported to the Navy.
Almost a year later, in April 1091, speaking as the leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against The War, Lieutenant Kerry told a Senate hearing about his meetings with enemy agents. Senior DOD officials wanted to prosecute him as a Naval Reserve officer for violating a number of laws and regulations, but this was vetoed by the Nixon White House. They didn’t want to give the anti-war crowd any additional PR ammunition.
However, the Navy immediately pulled Kerry’s security clearance. He became a Naval Reserve officer who was known not to be trusted. He kept his commission, but lost all access to any classified information. In the words of one of the now-retired agents, “Lieutenant Kerry wasn’t cleared to know what time it was!”
I don't know if this is true, but it makes one heck of a lot of sense. Meeting with enemy officials is a sure way to lose one's security clearance.
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
publishes comments from "Oak Leaf" - a Major, probably in the Reserves. His analysis of the outcome of a sKerry win on the Armed Forces is exactly correct and perceptively describes the Armed Forces during Clinton and Carter CinC periods:
This “unthinkable” topic has been under discussion in military circles for several weeks now. For those not in the military, at my rank as a Major, I “sit in the room, but not at the table, with Colonels and Generals, but I walk with Lieutenants, Captains and Sergeants.” If you can follow that expression, you will understand what I need to say. The military is going to become extremely “risk averse” under a Kerry administration. Those discussions, of “what we need to do” are taking place as I write. The GWOT is extremely successful solely because soldiers are doing things that are beyond military orders or a civilian’s comprehension. Soldiers will only continue to do this because we believe this is the right war, at the right time, at the right place. Many leaders, including myself, have often stated that “we would lead our men to hell for President Bush.” That is the definition of leadership. No Officer or President can “order” a soldier into harms way, you have to lead them.
If this becomes the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time, myself and other commissioned and non-commissioned officers, will not place our comrades in harm’s way. Lawful orders will always be obeyed, however, they will be obeyed exactly as given, nothing more and nothing less. John Kerry will lead the military with his example from thirty years ago, “How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? (April 22, 1971) . G-d save the United States.
doesn't like sKerry and his racist pronouncements any more than I do, but he has a direct and refreshing way of describing the problem:
.......John Kerry is out courting the black vote in a way that descends far below the level of simple pandering. Kerry swims through a cesspool of lies and propaganda, piloting himself as the Swift Boat of bullshit, and comes up grinning like that jackass Jimmy Carter in the end....../snip/
..........My third point is that Democrats don't WANT Blacks to get that chip off their shoulder. They want to keep the slaves on the plantation because the slaves vote 90% Democrat. Instead of preaching education and achievement, the Democrats give the Tarzan yell while they ignore the obvious......./snip/
The Meaning of Politicians
Robert Kaplan in the Atlantic Monthly, as reported in The Braden Files
summarizes political speech as seen by a military person:
"I reject the notion that Bush is inarticulate. He is more articulate than Clinton. When Bush says something, he's clear enough that you argue about whether you agree with him or not. When Clinton talks, you argue over what he really meant."
I submit that the Clinton description certainly applies to the current standard-bearer of the Democratic Party as well. Flip-Flop indeed!
Mark Steyn's Rejection
has a deeply thought out discussion of the various reactions to the murder of the British hostage who was played with by the savages of the Middle East as if he were a mouse in front of a cat. The blame is, as usual, placed by the politically correct elite upon the victims and uninvolved governments, rather than the savage criminals of Islam. Mark Steyn's rejection of politically correct "editorial direction" by the Telegraph was an admirable act of courage and honor. Honor is a concept foreign to the "elite" and the savages of Islam who spend so much time in the public eye lately:
(cross-posted at Wizbang
Today, for the first time in all my years with the Telegraph Group, I had a column pulled. The editor expressed concerns about certain passages and we were unable to reach agreement, so on this Tuesday something else will be in my space.
I’d written about Kenneth Bigley, seized with two American colleagues but unlike them not beheaded immediately. Instead, sensing that they could exploit potential differences within "the coalition of the willing", for three weeks the Islamists played a cat-and-mouse game with Mr Bigley’s life, in which Fleet Street, the British public, governments in London and Dublin and Islamic lobby groups in the United Kingdom were far too willing to participate. As I always say, in this war the point is not whether you’re sad about the dead people, but what you’re prepared to do about it. What "Britain" – from Ken Bigley’s brother to the Foreign Secretary – did was make it more likely that other infidels will meet his fate.
Wretchard goes on to summarize several other equally cowardly and self-serving opinions from both the British press and the savages of Islam residing in Britain. The conclusion shown below should be imprinted on the foreheads of all the cowards of the Left:
Radical Islam is self-evidently at war with the West because their efforts are limited only by their capability. And the West is just as clearly not yet at war with radical Islam because its actions are still limited by its intent. Zarqawi sawed off Bigley's head simply because he could; America spares Fallujah from choice. That inability to think of ourselves as being truly at war underlay the rejection of Mark Steyn's column. He had only stated the obvious.
"Senator von Munchausen" Kerry
H. D. Miller
in The American Spectator discusses a length the "Fabulist" history of the Democrat's Presidential candidate from hies lies about hunting through the Cambodia Lie and it's "supporting lies" (the magic hat and the "seared, seared memory"), the Boston Marathon Lie, on to his lies about flying aircraft over the Middle East. The selective double standard of the MSM shows in the lack of coverage of these and more, explaining how the directions of Mark Halperin of ABC are followed religiously by his "journalists" (political hacks):
But who knows if that's really true or not. At this point I just can't be bothered running down every unsubstantiated claim Senator von Munchausen makes. I've got more important things to do with my time, like trying to invent a carburetor that gets 200 miles to the gallon.
My ironclad policy is this: when, towards the end of the evening, the pompous drunk on the next barstool turns to you and claims to have dated Morgan Fairchild, as both Senator Kerry and Jon Lovitz's Saturday Night Live character Tommy Flanagan the Compulsive Liar have done, you just shrug your shoulders, say, "Yeah, that's the ticket," and turn away.
Braves Out Again
This is getting to be an annual observance - that the Atlanta Braves again fail to reach or win the World Series - even though they have one of the best records in Baseball over the last decade plus. Sadly for us fans, they may soon reach the legendary status of the Red Sox or the Cubs.
Monday, October 11, 2004
Demo Mess coming up?
Taken from Grouchy Old Cripple
and his friends Woody and Pres. I can't add anything useful to the above.
Laura Hagen, commenting to Jeff Jarvis
, elucidates a new, penetrating insight into the relative dangers of Kerry and Bush that need far more discussion:
For the most part, what you fear from Bush cannot be implemented by the President alone. But what you fear from Kerry CAN be.
Do you see what I'm getting at? Everything you fear from a Bush II administration, I do too. But he won't be able to do it -- for the most part -- without significant help from Congress. Right-wing judges? They would have to be confirmed. The Dems aren't even in the majority and they're managing to block the judges they want to block. The gay marriage amendment Bush wanted? DOA in Congress. I don't expect that to change under Bush II. What Bush wants that I don't like isn't going to be completely under his control.
By contrast, there is no power on Earth that can force a Kerry administration to bypass the UN when it's necessary. There is no provision for Congress to sidestep the President and send troops. What you fear from a Kerry administration CAN be, and WILL be, implemented by the President alone. It will be solely up to John Kerry....
, as usual, eloquently and accurately expresses a devastating view of the John-Johns and their elite sponsors:
...... And yet, if you're as invested as the Democrats are in reconstructing the cardboard façade of Sept. 10, 2001, before the terrorist attacks, I can understand why you would think Pretty Boy did a grand job last Tuesday. That's what my tennis/football analogy boils down to: one team's playing by September 11 rules, the others are running a Sept. 10 campaign. I find it hard to believe 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 United Nations 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. ........
Blame, Blame, Blame
Let's see now - in the past three days, Lurch and Pretty Boy have blamed the President for the following "outrageous crimes": 1. The President "killed" Cristopher Reeves with his policy on Stem Cells; 2. The President caused the Breck Girl to miss so many Senate sessions and committee meetings because he "had to be defeated"; 3. The President caused the flu vaccine shortage by his "ideological and stubborn stance" on public health and his "willful neglect" of the "needs of the 'People'" . Surely the alphabets (CBSNBCABCCNNNYTLATWP) who form the media wing of the Democratic party can spread these positions widely and convince more "swing voters". I, fortunately, believe that a majority of the American People are significantly smarter than their "betters" in the elite left can fathom. Bless the Blogosphere for providing access for those
wonders about this, too:
My first thought upon learning that Christopher Reeve has died was to wonder how long it would take before someone accused President Bush of having killed him with stem cell policy.
That just isn't healthy.
Here is an attack and collection of misinformation published on MSNBC
: I told you so.......What a surprise that such crap gets MSM attention! Also note the name of the author.
By Patti Davis
Updated: 11:56 a.m. ET Oct. 12, 2004 Oct. 12 - I wonder if President Bush could look into the eyes of Christopher Reeve’s family and tell them that it’s because he values life so deeply that he is preserving clusters of cells in freezers—cells that resulted from in-vitro fertilization and could be used for embryonic stem cell treatment—despite the fact that more people will die as a result of his decision. I..............
Go to Treacher to read and enjoy the Superman cartoon and Reeves "tribute" titled:"As long as I'm going to burn in Hell anyway
Kerry's GWOT Plan
(hat tip to Betsy
) sums up the Democrat's war "plan" in words the NYT political operatives certainly wouldn't think of:
.... So, French policy is to morally equate America's presence in Iraq to Hitler's Nazi occupation of France. This is the foundation of Mr. Kerry's plan to win the war in Iraq. A notional President Kerry would find himself seated at the summit table negotiating peace terms with the literal cutthroats of our fellow citizens. This, Mr. Kerry calls realism, while he characterizes President Bush's determination to defeat the cutthroats of the world as "fantasy.".. ....
....In France, in 1940, the men and women who dreamed of liberation and eventually formed "la resistance" were not being realistic. The realist was the austere, aristocrat Marshall Petain, who negotiated a collaborator's peace with Hitler and called it Vichy. Five years later, his followers were shot in the village squares by patriotic Frenchmen. There is a lot of Petain in Mr. Kerry.
John Kerry may have won the debate, but he would lose the war.
Sunday, October 10, 2004
NRA Does Hunt!
sKerry's Law Enforcement on Terrorism
The following quote from the NYT Magazine on the CNN
website is said to be going to be used in Bush/Cheney Ads in the upcoming days....it certainly doesn't make me feel more comfortable with the traitorous, incompetent SOB or his left-wing party:
The article, a largely analytical cover story in the magazine, says the interviewer asked Kerry "what it would take for Americans to feel safe again."
''We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance,'' the article states as the Massachusetts senator's reply.
''As a former law enforcement person, I know we're never going to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling. But we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally, it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life.''
Update: Similar subject on Carnivorous Conservative.
Update 2: Laura Ingraham
provides a clear evaluation of the latest Lurch Party Position;
....The world is a dangerous place, filled with deadly people. Not just people who are misunderstood. Not just people who are poor. Not just people who have different "values." After 3,000 of our fellow citizens were incinerated on September 11th by Islamist mass murderers, John Kerry can still tell the New York Times Magazine this week that "[w]e have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance." How amazingly irresponsible and stunningly stupid. Deadly people with the means and commitment to inflict large casualties on U.S. citizens will never just be nuisances. President Bush knows this. The American people know it. American liberals don't......
Update 3: Eugene Volokh seems equally nonplused over the Kedwards "nuisance" statement:
....But what remarkable analogies Kerry started with: prostitution and illegal gambling. The way law enforcement has dealt with prostitution and illegal gambling is by occasionally trying to shut down the most visible and obvious instances, tolerating what is likely millions of violations of the law per year, de jure legalizing many sorts of gambling, and de jure legalizing one sort of prostitution in Nevada, and de facto legalizing many sorts of prostitution almost everywhere; as best I can tell, "escort services" are very rarely prosecuted, to the point that they are listed in the Yellow Pages......
Dan at Carnivorous Conservative
has become a regular read for me, approaching Scrappleface with his excellent writing. I'm surprised more Blogs haven't picked up and linked to some of his posts. Here's another one I enjoyed:
Kerry Releases Plan for GWOT
Sen. John Kerry's campaign today announced a sweeping and detailed plan of how a Kerry administration would shake up the Homeland Security Department, make the nation more secure by focusing new resources on defending the homeland and capture Osama Bin laden.
"These are bold and needed changes in areas where President Bush has failed," said a campaign spokesperson. "It will grow the coalition, make efficient use of existing technologies to protect our ports, water supply and intelligence information while assuring every citizen of their ability to survive any confrontation with a terrorist enemy. And it also contains a specific plan to capture Osama Bin laden and bring him to justice."
If elected, a Kerry administration would immediately appoint renowned French Inspector Jacques Clouseau as head of Homeland Security. Clouseau would likely be assisted by Israeli ex-patriot and Anti-Terrorism expert Golan Cipel. Cipel is credited with blowing New Jersey's Homeland Security Department up into the size of a formidable agency. Additional Kerry plans dove tail precisely with his latest campaign and debate rhetoric......./snip/.....
Saturday, October 09, 2004
Must Read Mark Steyn Now!
latest required reading:.
.....And, if you want to know the real difference, after 90 minutes of debate it came in the final exchange of the night: "The truth of that matter," said Bush, "is, if you listen carefully, Saddam would still be in power if he [Kerry] were the President of the United States."
Kerry replied: "Not necessarily." That's John Kerry: the "not necessarily" candidate. ...........
ABC and left wing bias
As reported in Drudge
, Mark Halperin of ABC gives orders to his political news minions to not treat the two candidates equally.
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.
Puggs at Random Nuclear Strikes
provides a insightful translation of the whole memo:
Translation, kerry is losing, so step up the pressure on Bush. Rather’s selfinflicted wound didn’t teach the media anything about being rabidly partisan, they learned nothing. So much education, yet so little common sense.
UPDATE: Carnivorous Conservative
provides further insight into the outrageous hypocrisy and arrogance of ABC's wing of the MSM:
I wonder, is Mr. Halperin planning on moving into the Whitehouse so that when it comes time to make a serious decision that could impact millions of lives he can be there to help Kerry "grow" through that experience, too? If Mr. Halperin's sense of his journalistic duty isn't the hallmark of liberal thinking, nothing is. In Halperin's world he is, apparently, the commissioner of affirmative action.
He said, "One of the biggest changes in the last two years is that Republicans used correctly to believe that the press was liberally biased. Now, the Democrats believe the press is biased against them."
If I read that correctly what Mr. Halperin is saying is that Republicans are right to feel the media is against them ... and that seems just fine with him.
Kerry's 29 plans
Below are sKerry's 29 plans enumerated at the debate last night and recorded by Legal XXX
(hat tip to Betsy
I have a plan to put people back to work.
I've proposed a plan that can capture it and contain it and clean it within four years.
I could do a better job. My plan does a better job.
You can pull it off of the Internet. And you'll find a tort reform plan.
I have a plan.
I have a plan to lower the cost of health care for you.
I have a plan to cover all children.
I have a plan to let you buy into the same health care senators and congressmen give themselves.
I have a plan that's going to allow people 55 to 64 to buy into Medicare early.
And I have a plan that will take the catastrophic cases out of the system....
What means something is: Do you have a plan?
And I want to talk about my plan some more...
Let me begin by saying that my health-care plan is not what the president described.
Choose your doctor, choose your plan. (Ed--Now even YOU have a plan!)
The only people affected by my plan are the top income earners of America.
Now, you didn't hear any plan from the president, because he doesn't have a plan to lower the cost of health care.
I have a plan to cover those folks. And it's a plan that lowers cost for everybody...
We've got to create the products of the future. That's why I have a plan for energy independence within 10 years.
The Wall Street Journal said 96 percent of small businesses are not affected at all by my plan.
The president rushed our nation to war without a plan to win the peace
I have a plan that will help us go out and kill and find the terrorists
But I'll also have a better plan of how we're going to deal with Iraq
I have a plan to provide health care to all Americans
I have a plan to provide for our schools...
I have a plan to protect the environment...:
The Conservative Movement
publishes his analysis of the American Conservative Movement versus the Legacy Liberals in "Why America Leans Right":
..../snip/....Conservatism's 40-year climb to dominance receives an examination worthy of its complexity in "The Right Nation," the best political book in years. Its British authors, John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge of the Economist, demonstrate that conservative power derives from two sources -- its congruence with American values, especially the nation's anomalous religiosity, and the elaborate infrastructure of think tanks and other institutions that stresses that congruence.
Liberals, now tardily trying to replicate that infrastructure, thought they did not need it because they had academia and the major media. But the former marginalized itself with its silliness, and the latter have been marginalized by their insularity and by competitors born of new technologies....../snip/...
Friday, October 08, 2004
addresses the Kerry contradictions on abortion below. Another comment from Steven Taylor
- "In re: the abortion question–by his logic ("I can’t take an article of faith and legislate from it") we can’t legislate against human sacrifice either
Maybe Kerry can't legislate personal morality, but why does he have a track record of voting to finance abortions and to make them more generally available? He won't legislate what he claims he believes, but he will legislate what NARAL believes. I don't get that. Meanwhile, Bush talks about the "Culture of Life." If there was one reason I would never support somebody like Kerry, it's precisely this issue.
Debate - Bush Wins!!
I heartily concur! Several Kerry lies (including the Shinseki
lie) unrebutted, but all-in-all a satisfactory night.
Within the first 5 minutes of John Kerry’s nomination acceptance speech, I called it an “unmitigated disaster.”
Within the first 5 minutes of George W. Bush’s nomination acceptance speech, I called it a “success.”
Within the first 5 minutes of the first presidential debate, I declared Kerry the winner, and “not just in the high-school debate-coach sense of the word.”
And now, within the first 5 minutes of the second presidential debate, I’m saying Bush is cleaning Kerry’s clock.
Bush has the easier task. If he just showed up and didn’t scowl a lot, he’d beat expectations.
But the rout goes well beyond that. Kerry is rattling off numbers and sounding negative, not connecting with his questioner. Bush, on the other hand, is sure, at ease, and scoring hits on Kerry.
As far as make-up, look-and-feel, preparation, and likability go, this is convention-speech Kerry vs. convention-speech Bush. And it’s no contest.
Victor Davis Hanson provides his always insightful opinion:
Pundits will harp that Kerry was adept at masking his liberalism, Bush missing key chances to remind the American public that Kerry had voted against the first Gulf War and was a virtual pacifist during a mediocre 20-year Senate career. Maybe, maybe not. But Bush held his own against an accomplished debater, and proved himself the more human and honest—and that will finally make all the difference in the world.
Courtesy of Cracker Barrel Philosopher
. I couldn't resist stealing this.