Wednesday, October 27, 2004


Dem lawyers already filed 9 suits in Florida

According to Powerline, Dems have so far filed 35 suits in 17 states....Dems have 2000 lawyers in Florida

Stem cell activists steal Bush signs

Crazy Floridian tries to run over Katherine Harris

ABC News sits on terror tape that would without question benefit Bush

Illegal alien is deputy registrar and registers people who tell her they're illegals!!!!!

The evidence of corruption, law breaking, lying, anything goes tactics isn't exclusive to the Dems but officially organized Dems are for more active and ALL the loons acting on their own are liberals...of course that's no surprise.

Kerry's rhetoric; aid & comfort

"Kerry's rhetoric is giving the bad guys a thread to hang on," he wrote. "They're hoping we lose our nerve. They're more concerned with the U.S. elections than with the Iraqi ones."

So, who is really to blame?

While this is just a trumped up story in an attempt to sway the moronic as yet undecided voters the missing Iraq explosives story is about 380 tons of an estimated 1 million tons of explosives currently estimated to exist in Iraq. That's 0.03% of the estimated total! The New York Sun today has a story that puts the blame mostly on the UN's atomic watchdog (the IAEA) who failed to act on a warning in 1995 by inspectors about the explosives in question.. Apparently the Iraqi's successfully argued with the watchdogs and all other failed diplomatic groups that they need these explosives for construction and mining...uh huh!

Bush Responds, Finally!

Bush at rally in Pennsylvania:

“After repeatedly calling Iraq the wrong war, and a diversion, Senator Kerry this week seemed shocked to learn that Iraq is a dangerous place, full of dangerous weapons…”“If Senator Kerry had his way…Saddam Hussein would still be in power. He would control those all of those weapons and explosives and could share them with his terrorist friends. Now the senator is making wild charges about missing explosives, when his top foreign policy adviser admits, quote, 'We do not know the facts.' Think about that: The senator is denigrating the actions of our troops and commanders in the field without knowing the facts…..”

“Our military is now investigating a number of possible scenarios, including that the explosives may have been moved before our troops even arrived at the site. This investigation is important and it's ongoing. And a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief."

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Conservatives playing the game as well?

I don't know if this is legit (Comrade Kerry)...but the timing sure makes it dubious...of course since it's potentially negative towards Kerry no mainstream media picks this up versus the several bogus Bush screwed up stories that were born in the last 24 hours.

The media is trying to influence the election

Gee new Bush National Guard papers came to light today? Are you kidding me? I don't see any details on any paper literally just unearthed today? So is this just like the 380 tons of explosives bullshit trying to sound like something current, new and bad? I assume this will be a daily event for the opinion (not news) media.

More of The Liar

Blogger travino of has a nice up to date list of Kerry's lies with documentation!

Kerry's speaks the truth?

Kerry is fond of saying he will always tell the truth to the American people, implying that Bush and his team don't. I could give dozens of examples of Kerry lying but the latest is so brazen it defies what I would assume to be the collective intelligence of the Democratic campaign strategists. An old story by an embedded NBC News crew from April 2003 where they accompanied troops into an Iraqi weapons storage facility(drudge) expecting to find hundreds of tons of two particular explosives known to be there but they were not found. You can also see a CNN story on the timing of the actual event. and the actual NBC news footage here Mind you this happened and was reported one day after the liberation of Iraq.

Fast forward to today...Kerry has been on the stump in the last few days talking about the incompetence of Bush for loosing these weapons. Not only were the weapons gone before we got there but the implication is also that this was recently discovered. Kerry also claims Bush failed to secure the 380 tons of explosive and we are less secure because of it. The Dems couldn't figure out this was old news and that the stuff was gone when we got there? Or they knew but decided this was a good lie? Or Kerry is suggesting we should have, or he would have, gone into Iraq earlier and thus that stockpile would have still been there? OK you dems explain this one to me....explain the honesty of you long face Kerry! CBS is also a turd in that they were going to run a 60 minutes piece on this just before the election as if reporting it this way was factual. The liberal power brokers are the most dishonest lying cheating bastards around!

Armchair Quarterback

A nice WSJ piece today on Kerry's new mantra of the Bush administration incompetence and that he would execute a more competent war. This is along the lines of my post on Kerry says not a single thing is going right....and he is the king of hindsight, nothing that he claims is bad would be if he owned it. I would love to ask Kerry: "You claim Bush himself is at fault for the hundreds of things you have said are messed long after you take office can we place their blame on you?" I think that's a great, but loaded,'s easy to say what you would do after the fact, but you inherit a world that has a lot of moving parts you have no control over so it's more about how you react to the hard sudden situation. The journal sums it up with:
But in order to win a war, you have to have the vision and determination to
fight it despite setbacks and political difficulties. Americans should be wary
of politicians who promise more "competent" leadership in a war that those same
politicians say they'd rather not fight.

Monday, October 25, 2004

No media bias here

I guess a few days ago some second cousins (6 of them) who have never met or know Dubya personally launched a website supporting Kerry. If you do a google search on "bush relatives" you will find thousands of media picking up this story along with thousands of website's deciding it's newsworthy. Now, go read what the distant relatives, well informed group with studious analysis of why to vote for Kerry isn't it!

Glass Empty

I can barely stand it anymore.....while it would probably help Bush's cause to admit more often that some things could have been done differently in his nearly 4 yrs and that Iraq has been tougher than he thought, the other side sees an empty glass. Is every aspect of your life that the government can have an affect on screwed up? Employment, economy, housing, healthcare, security, infrastructure, your personal (not what you think it is for the poorest down trodden sole in your city) scorecard on these items an F? On any of them? I think for the majority its like good to better on all counts. Yet when you listen to Kedwards or any dem talking head EVERYTHING is completely hosed. There isn't one thing in this country that is going ok or right. Just try and find anything to the contrary from this crowd. And yet, today Clinton (the one who likes interns) says the republicans are trying to scare people to vote for Bush?

Kerry says he is big on telling the truth and he has a plan....but he has a plan for fixing so many things even beyond his control it's not only ludicrous it's political snake oil or lies. Things that would have been or will be different according to Kedwards if he/they had been or becomes president.

  1. Osama would be dead
  2. Iraq, Iran, N. Korea or any other rogue nation wanting WMDs or nukes would acquiesce simply from UN pressure
  3. The economy (already better) would rain money
  4. Housing (already better) would had by all
  5. Christopher Reeves would alive and walk
  6. Every citizen could get elective surgery
  7. Corporations would pay a lot more tax and magically they could without laying people off
  8. The French, Germans, Spain, etc. would all hold hands with us on the battlefield
  9. The UN would be the new world super power
  10. All children would get private school quality education at public schools
  11. Every city would have more fire fighters and police
  12. The border would be more secure, every container, parcel or letter would be inspected
  13. Every person with a terrorist plot would be identified by the Minority Report triplets
  14. The people paying nearly all taxes now would pay even more
  15. Drugs would be free, new drugs would spring up like Starbucks coffee houses because you would be allowed to use the remnants from abortion clinics and childbirth free from scrutiny
  16. All parents with gay children would be identified publicly.
  17. All profiling, for any purpose would be banned....except for college entrance, employment and government grants!

Too many more to list....seems like an easy choice.

University Sheep!

A very eloquent and boldly critical op/ed piece in today's WSJ by professor Ruth Wisse of Harvard. Ms. Wisse put aside likely backlash to write this piece which speaks to the fear university staff have to not go along with the sheep but also the "scandalous uniformity in a university community that advertises its diversity". What a shame for our children, when their minds should be opened up to all the possibilities they are instead handed blinders. The best line in Ruth's piece was in reference to Harvard's president kowtowing to the liberal bias so prevalent in our universities and describes that environment as "regnant culture of pusillanimity" (I admit I had to look up two of the 4 words! :))

Friday, October 22, 2004

Polls, how accurate? Bias?

I think its pretty clear the country is close to equally divided on this election. I do however give the edge to the democrats because while both sides skirt the line the dems are far more willing to cross it (draft and social security fears, voter fraud, blah, blah). I often wondered why news outlets were so eager to quote various polls...although they pick and choose the poll and also the piece of the poll to fit the message they already decided to give! Interesting to look at this polling site and see a) the delta between polls and b) that certain polls will have numbers for separate items leaning all towards democrat or republican. Gee, why would that be? How does the AP find itself off of other polls by double digits?

Kerry's International Coalition

Is this what Kerry had in mind when he speaks of he will do a better job at building an international coalition? Brit's trying to influence US election! To bad it probably back fired into garnering more support for Bush! Stupid limey bastards! :)

Bush Hater Profile!

For a profile look here! Ok, I realize that's a silly generalization but it scary that people have become so vehemently anti the point of thinking he's evil. Why is it so scary? Because they can vote!

Too many young people do no homework at all on important issues. They get what they think is the definitive story from MTV, musicians, actors and Rolling Stone articles. They believe that entertainment sources have some enlightened and unbiased positions on things outside of entertainment. They think Sean Penn saw the real Iraq. They think a CEO of Fortune 500 company screwed a bunch of little people to make his millions and yet the wonderful great role model millionaire NBA players or rap artists earned every dime. They believe Michael Moore disseminates facts. They believe Bush actually knew Saddam had no WMD's left in Iraq even though half a dozen foreign country intelligence agencies along with our own (and Kerry) believed he did. They believe if you can think up a conspiracy then one likely exists. They think others around the world liking us is more important than nearly anything else. They think the UN is a wonderful honest collection of altruistic people. They believe in freedom of speech unless the word "god" is involved. They have selective hearing and site and will not recognize anything that is in conflict with their beliefs.

I in fact believe the number of young people who fit these descriptions is large....and I'm sure some who are no longer young would actually fit this profile as is overwhelmingly scary to have a person in power these head in the sand people would vote for.

UPDATE: I have never heard of this group, California College Republicans, but it's nice to see some college age kids that don't fit my fearful profile. The CCR has an interesting press release and protest of MTV planned because of their claim that MTV has participated in the blatant military draft lie spread to scare young adults into voting for Kerry. Also interesting that the Chairman of the CCR is a student at the Peoples Republic of Berkeley!...maybe there's hope after all!

Liberal or Conservative, who is more racist?

It's interesting that today many still think of conservatives (Republicans) as slow talking, not so smart descendents of slave owners who still wish slavery was with us. In my experience and in my observations of those aligned as liberal or conservative the former seems to have a propensity to racist behavior. It's also easy to find examples of blacks who are racist while spending a career claiming others are. You can find these examples with little effort..if you're curious study the websites of the Congressional Black Caucus and the NAACP. An example that caught my attention was the recent cartoon depicting Condoleezza Rice as a mammy and an editorial on this by the WSJ editorial board. Check the cartoonists defense at the end of the piece! Any bets on whether any supposed black leader or the NAACP had any issue with this cartoon?

Gee, speak of the NAACP....National Association for the Advancement of Colored People! As a white person, don't I have color? (I assume beige is a color) Does the NAACP support my advancement? Would anyone have a problem if I said my company has no problem hiring colored people? I think this falls under the bullshit hypocrite double standard of it's ok for a black to say the n word but not me. The front page of the NAACP site says:
Today we face a renewed effort as the forces of racism and retrogression in
America are again on the rise. Many of the hard-earned civil rights gains of the
past three decades are under assault.
Of course I didn't see examples of this referenced...only the link to join and donate under this statement. Of course if this evil wasn't on the rise and it was generally accepted as no longer being an issue the NAACP would have no reason to exist? Sort of a conflict for these boys isn't it?

What's wrong with public schools?

The answer comes from my brother-in-law who shot me School Says Halloween Disrespectful to Witches. This is the over the top politically correct don't hurt the feeling of a tree, insect or a, give me a f'ing break, witch kind of people who are teaching our kids. God help us all!

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

Media Elite Continue Bias Denial

Today in Kansas City we had Peter Jennings, the ABC News anchor, telling a local TV reporter:
"I'm a little concerned about this notion everybody wants us to be
objective, and when we don't think we can be fully objective, to be

You have to be kidding me.....why can't you be objective? If you want to give your F'ing opinion then don't call it the ABC News with Peter Jennings, call it ABC's My Damn Opinion with Peter Jennings!

Is Kerry Worth Dying For?

I feel just like James Tarranto of the Wall Street Journal that Kerry's desire to have international buy-in overshadows his words that he would act unilaterally if we had to. That's just not believable. The thought of him as president is very scary...I think we can kiss goodbye the first strike don't wait until there's an imminent threat approach with Kerry in the Whitehouse. That's why I think the title of Tarranto's piece below should say Kerry instead of the UN!

Is the U.N. Worth Dying For?
From an article in today's Washington Post on John Kerry's approach to foreign policy:

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."

So the U.N.--that club of dictators and anti-Semites--is worth dying for, but America isn't? This quote sharply summarizes why the thought of waking up two weeks from today to the news that Kerry is president-elect invokes in us a sense of utter dread.

For a concrete example of how this might play out, we turn to Park Sang-seek, a Korean "peace studies" academic, who writes (with apparent approval) in the Korea Herald:

Kerry is likely to rely on the United Nations in dealing with any future crises
in Northeast Asia and the Korean Peninsula. Take a hypothetical situation in the
Korean Peninsula: it is discovered that North Korea has experimented with
nuclear weapons or exported nuclear materials to hostile nations or terrorist
groups. Bush may make a surgical strike without consulting South Korea and the
United Nations. Kerry is likely to try to solve the issue through multilateral
forums, particularly the United Nations.

If North Korea gives nukes to terrorists and this is how a President Kerry responds, soldiers may not be the only Americans to die for the U.N.

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Jonestown II

Interesting how a speech by Al Gore is more reminiscent of a Jim Jones speech to his sheep who joined in mass suicide than one of a former Vice President of United States of America! How so you ask? Well, do you see any basis in fact? Do you see any logic or historical reference to back up the rhetoric and hyperbole suggesting Bush is insane. Only non-questioning, non-thinking, blindly loyal wanabee flower children sheep would sit in open approval and adoration of such theatre. How anyone can be a proud Democrat is beyond me.

Thursday, October 14, 2004

Contemptible Democrats

Blogger Stephen Green (Vodkapundit) did a great job describing exactly why he, and I, have contempt for the Democrats right now. The Democrats loyalty to our country, personal honor and integrity take a back seat to this election.

Sex, Lies, I have a "plan", Armchairs and Fear

Unbelievable that people support Kerry. But this, I believe, proves the existence of EBD (emotional brain disorder typically caused by hatred of Dubya) as it is the only way to explain that anyone with half of their cranium functioning doesn't recognize that Kerry is simply veneer!

Sex: cheap shot by Kerry...when he mentioned Cheney's lesbian daughter in the last debate it was clearly to remind the most conservative Republicans that a gay person was close to the administration. If Edwards had a gay child and Bush thru that out (especially as Kerry did with little to no connection to the topic) the mainstream press would have crucified Bush....see much on this story?

Lies: Both Kerry and Bush got facts wrong...ok call that a tie

Plan: Proof that libs have EBD....apparently if you just say "plan" a bunch of times people who have EBD will say they heard details of the careful if you ask someone afflicted with EBD to give you some details of the plan...they may experience convulsions and loose control of their bowels.

Armchair Quarterback: This didn't work in my title, but it is interesting that everyone I have watched the debates with or talked to about them after the fact had responses at various spots for each debate that would not have just been better than what the candidate said but would have annihilated the opponent. One would think both of these guys would think better on their feet. Now I realize we are just armchair quarterbacking here and that's an order of magnitude easy than real time with cameras rolling...but I sure wish Bush would have said the following at some point in any of the debates. "You know, my opponent basis his entire candidacy on the notion that not a single thing in our country is working. To believe him every single thing that effects you that the government can affect is broken. But wait, he has a plan to fix every single one of these broken things." and you can can go on and on.

Fear: If you're intellectually honest (and don't have EBD) you can easily see that the entire Democratic machine is using a fear campaign. Kerry and Edwards say everything is wrong, broken and getting worse, that we're no safer than before 9/11, etc. Official DNC efforts, or by operatives give us the bogus draft campaign, violent protestors at events along with the many RNC office attacks. The DNC handbook that tells local offices to charge voter intimidation even if none exists. The DNC talking heads are saying "just watch the republicans will try to steal the election again". Look, do some research. The effort to use fear and smear is huge on the DNC side...if you can't run on your record and detailed ideas what else can you do.

Monday, October 11, 2004

Rudy!..A Must Read

Remarks vebatim from Rudy Giuliani on Bush-Cheney compaign conference call today...I LOVE THIS GUY!

For some time, and including when I spoke at the Republican Convention, I’ve wondered exactly what John Kerry’s approach would be to terrorism and I’ve wondered whether he had the conviction, the determination, and the focus, and the correct worldview to conduct a successful war against terrorism. And his quotations in the New York Times yesterday make it clear that he lacks that kind of committed view of the world. In fact, his comments are kind of extraordinary, particularly since he thinks we used to before September 11 live in a relatively safe world. He says we have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they’re a nuisance.

I’m wondering exactly when Senator Kerry thought they were just a nuisance. Maybe when they attacked the USS Cole? Or when they attacked the World Trade Center in 1993? Or when they slaughtered the Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972? Or killed Leon Klinghoffer by throwing him overboard? Or the innumerable number of terrorist acts that they committed in the 70s, the 80s and the 90s, leading up to September 11?

This is so different from the President’s view and my own, which is in those days, when we were fooling ourselves about the danger of terrorism, we were actually in the greatest danger. When you don’t confront correctly and view realistically the danger that you face, that’s when you’re at the greatest risk. When you at least realize the danger and you begin to confront it, then you begin to become safer. And for him to say that in the good old days – I’m assuming he means the 90s and the 80s and the 70s -- they were just a nuisance, this really begins to explain a lot of his inconsistent positions on how to deal with it because he’s not defining it correctly.
As a former law enforcement person, he says ‘I know we’re never going to end prostitution. We’re never going to end illegal gambling. But we’re going to reduce it.’ This is not illegal gambling; this isn’t prostitution. Having been a former law enforcement person for a lot longer than John Kerry ever was, I don’t understand his confusion. Even when he says ‘organized crime to a level where it isn’t not on the rise,’ it was not the goal of the Justice Department to just reduce organized crime. It was the goal of the Justice Department to eliminate organized crime. Was there some acceptable level of organized crime: two families, instead of five, or they can control one union but not the other?

The idea that you can have an acceptable level of terrorism is frightening. How do you explain that to the people who are beheaded or the innocent people that are killed, that we’re going to tolerate a certain acceptable [level] of terrorism, and that acceptable level will exist and then we’ll stop thinking about it? This is an extraordinary statement. I think it is not a statement that in any way is ancillary. I think this is the core of John Kerry’s thinking. This does create some consistency in his thinking.

t is consistent with his views on Vietnam: that we should have left and abandoned Vietnam. It is consistent with his view of Nicaragua and the Sandinistas. It is consistent with his view of opposing Ronald Reagan at every step of the way in the arms buildup that was necessary to destroy communism. It is consistent with his view of not supporting the Persian Gulf War, which was another extraordinary step. Whatever John Kerry’s global test is, the Persian Gulf War certainly would pass anyone’s global test. If it were up to John Kerry, Saddam Hussein would not only still be in power, but he’d still be controlling Kuwait.

Finally, what he did after the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, where I guess at that point terrorism was still just a nuisance. He must have thought that because that’s why he proposed seriously reducing our intelligence budget, when you would think someone who was really sensitive to the problem of terrorism would have done just the opposite. I think that rather than being some aberrational comment, it is the core of the John Kerry philosophy: that terrorism is no different than domestic law enforcement problems, and that the best we’re ever going to be able to do is reduce it, so why not follow the more European approach of compromising with it the way Europeans did in the 70s and the 80s and the 90s?

This is so totally different than what I think was the major advance that President Bush made – significant advance that he made in the Bush Doctrine on September 20, 2001, when he said we’re going to face up to terrorism and we’re going to do everything we can to defeat it, completely. There’s no reason why we have to tolerate global terrorism, just like there’s no reason to tolerate organized crime.

So I think this is a seminal issue, this is one that explains or ties together a lot of things that we’ve talked about. Even this notion that the Kerry campaign was so upset that the Vice President and others were saying that he doesn’t understand the threat of terrorism; that he thinks it’s just a law enforcement action. It turns out the Vice President was right. He does and maybe this is a difference, maybe this is an honest difference that we really should debate straight out. He thinks that the threat is not as great as at least the President does, and I do, and the Vice President does.

Saturday, October 09, 2004

Media bias promoted from within!

Those of us who like to base our opinion on researching a topic or person thru sources that we know to be more objective than subjective see the bias in big tv and print media everyday. We usually only see the bias in the report, now the Drudgereport breaks a story of this liberal bias being promoted from within at ABC News!

Friday, October 08, 2004

WMD's? Ask an Iraqi if they care!

A reprint of a post from a fellow blogger who just happens to be an Iraqi in Iraq!


I have been listening to the report about the WMD’s by Mr. David Kay. Now, all of you in the West must know that as far as we, the Iraqis, are concerned, we care very little that stocks of WMD’s existed or not at the time of liberation. For us Saddam and his regime were in themselves, the most lethal WMD that cost our people hundreds of thousands of victims not to mention the destruction of the economy and the very fabric of society in our afflicted country. That regime was a dead end for our people and with its continuation there was no hope whatsoever for the future. Mr. David Kay did mention something about this, and he should know, since he spent so much time in Iraq and has intimate knowledge of the situation. Saddamism is a cancer that we have yet to recover from. Western intervention lead by the U.S.A. was a God send to us, despite all the pain and misery that accompanied the operation and the repercussions that continue to rock the process of recuperation and rebirth of the nation. The U.S. soldiers are bravely standing in the thick of the turmoil and contributing with their blood and sweat not to mention the treasure of their land, towards curing us from the remaining ulcers of the disease after having performed the main surgery which no one else even dared even to think of.

Perhaps, the interests of our people were not the main consideration that led to that action; nevertheless, that does not change anything about the importance and implications for the people of Iraq of this tremendous historical act. Yes there is pain, chaos and loss; yet on the other hand, there is possibility of hope, and a clearly discernible “light at the end of tunnel”, to use this worn out phrase.

Were we better off during Saddam’s time? - A question to which many outsiders are very keen to know our answer. Well, in many respects the streets are much more insecure, yet the security that existed in Saddam’s days was like someone quietly waiting for certain death; like a cancer stricken individual carrying the disease in his guts with no hope or attempt at cure. Yes, the pain and torture may be much more terrible when the surgeon has operated and the disease is tackled; but at least there is hope of recovery and healing, and the prospect of life saving. And this is not allegory, nor a parable; this is coming from someone whose house has been standing in the midst of bombs and explosions for so long now, protected by none but the mercy and grace of the Lord; from someone who has suffered robbery, kidnapping and constant daily danger.

And here we are, trying to organize elections, trying to control the security situation, trying to restart the reconstruction, able to talk, able to think, able to watch satellite T.V., use the internet, the mobile etc. – in short everything that we have been forbidden to do before. And without the slightest hesitation, we hail with Love and Gratitude our giant U.S. friend and his allies, standing with us shoulder to shoulder, braving the elements, braving death, calumny and hatred, shedding blood; to help us heal, to help us reach the shores of safety. And make no mistake, the campaign is winning and will achieve its objectives. Make no mistake; you have already created an allied nation in the very heart of the M.E. despite all appearances, which will produce all the long term benefits and consequences so many times reiterated by President Bush, to the ridicule and insults of the profoundly mistaken, of the profoundly hating.

America, stay the course - God, Decency, Honor, Hope and everything that is virtuous and right is on your side, beside the majority of the Iraqi people. America do not waiver, for you have never waged a more noble and just campaign in your entire history. America, we are winning, God’s willing, and Victory is coming sooner than many might think.


Enlightenment on the Left Coast

I think many liberals believe they have a monopoly on appreciation and support of the arts. Of course this is total nonsense. It is interesting, as illustrated by this artist, how certain people are completely devoid of personal responsibility and I find parallels to how Kedwards both explain their past actions and statements!

Blogger Michelle Malkin posts the irony this artist (Maria Alquilar) created by misspelling the names of Einstein, Shakespeare, Vincent Van Gogh, Michelangelo and seven other historical figures on a $40k ceramic mural commissioned by the city of Livermore to adorn their new public library! The artists idiotic response to this mistake:

"The people that are into humanities, and are into Blake's concept of enlightenment, they are not looking at the words," she said. "In their mind the words register correctly."


My buddy Mike who lives near Livermore tells me that the local paper say Ms. Alquilar now says she won't come to town to fix the spelling mistake because she got so many negative and racist emails. I suppose people called her an "illiterate" and she either doesn't know what it means or maybe it's a common trait of "enlightened" artists like herself so offensive. What makes things worse is that the local paper mentions some California law that prevents a public official from modifying art without the consent of the artist. So I say take the whole thing down or put up a plaque immortilizing the enlightened one as an example of why one should use the public library! If they start a fund to do either I'll contribute.

Economy Fact Check

Don't believe what comes out of either camp on the economy in the 2nd debate or stump speeches...check for yourself. Here's a nice economic summary which provides all sources (with the majority being the Bureau of Labor Statistics).

Thursday, October 07, 2004

You want to talk denial?

I'm amazed at the apparent lack of awareness by those who buy the misleading rhetoric that spews from the Kerry camp daily. This recent bit of sleazy lawyer speak from Edwards is a perfect example of desperation when your record is weak and substance is lacking. Edwards on Wednesday was in Palm Beach and gave an audience of supporters pearls like: "completely out of touch with reality'' and "They're in denial. They're in denial about everything."

Is this the "the other guy is mental" campaign? I guess these ridiculous statements go hand in hand with the Kedwards mantra of "we will do everything better". But seriously, how much of the general public buys that everything (economy, healthcare, security, education, etc.) is screwed up? Could everything be better? Sure, you bet...every single thing in my life can be better! But to listen to Kedwards there isn't a single thing that is at all good, or fine, or just ok. I was going to say Kedwards is in denial of all that is good, but I think they know and they're just lying to scare people into a vote. Would you believe a doctor who said not only can I fix your back, but I can make you smarter, sleep better, more attractive, funny and a world class athlete? This is effectively what they are saying about all things our government has effect on.

If you don't think, like me, that there just simply giving lip service to it can all be better...and you think they actually have a better plan, or a plan at all. I encourage you to visit their campaign website and show me the details of a plan for any of these things they will do better. For example show me the actual details of a plan, and a realistic one, for what they will do different than Bush on national security. It's easy to say we will improve this and that, it's another to actually get the Congress and House to cooperate or for foreign governments to respect you. On that later, you can be sure hostile or possibly hostile nations will not fear Kerry. While he says he will "Modernize The World's Most Powerful Military To Meet New Threats" he also says he will stop all nuclear related weapons systems development. Yet he believes a nuclear threat is our biggest! I guess being on the wrong side of history with the cold war and the effectiveness and deterrent power of awesome fire power is lost on Kerry.

Commies for Kerry!

If you're a Democrat you should really be questioning why so many wonderful, intelligent and generally all around nice folks find that your party lines up best with their thinking. Oh, you know, folks like those I mention in previous posts (Just good nice folks! and Give us your criminals, your immoral, your lazy!), or maybe like those who belong to overtly communists organizations (The People’s Weekly World is the newspaper of the Communist Party, USA ) right here in the good old USA. Funny how communists are so unprincipled as to ignore the most basic part of their doctrine "a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people" by embracing a candidate who is right at the top of American aristocracy!

Oh, let us not forgot those outside our great country who also dislike Bush and so for no other reason like Kerry: North Korea, Iran, Al Qaeda and the Ba'ath Party, Al-Jazeera and plenty more. Don't believe me? Just do a Google search of "terrorits for Kerry" and see what you get.

It's clear to me that majority of those now in support of Kerry do so for disingenuous reasons including it's really just a vote against Bush. What a joke!

Wednesday, October 06, 2004

Principles not Popularity!

Awesome piece in the WSJ by Claudia Rosett that echoes my feelings on America being popular around the world. No question in my mind that our principles, way of life and security is paramount to world opinion. Our principles being righteous will, in the end, also win a world popularity contest. While I liked what Claudia wrote I would have been more strong on the economics of why some dislike us. I have plenty of friends who have immigrated to America and when asked about this topic I have heard 2 common reasons....jealousy and arrogance. The two are related and are humorously illustrated by a quote from Claudia's article by author P.J. O'Rourke. The context is a retort to an American bashing Brit and goes like this:

"WE BE BAD. . . . We're three-quarters grizzly bear and two-thirds car-wreck and descended from a stock-market crash on our mother's side. You take your Germany, France and Spain, roll them all together, and it wouldn't give us room to park our cars. We're the big boys, Jack, the original giant economy-sized new and improved butt-kickers of all time."

Double Talk

After the first Bush/Kerry debate James Taranto of the WSJ Best of the Web pointed out how Kerry, after saying something powerful and sensible, would then follow it with a "but.." clause and either qualify or contradict it. Well, James points how in today's BOTW in a section he calls the "Kedwards Two-Step" that Edwards did a similar but to me more troubling double talk that unfortunately probably works with impressionable grey matter out there in tv land. Edward's is more sneaky than Kerry's, probably his tort lawyering skills showing up. Worth a read, but some examples of Edwards double talk that Taranto illustrated are:

Last night Edwards appealed to swing voters by acknowledging that "Saddam Hussein was a threat that needed to be addressed directly." Then he moved back to the left by saying that if the U.N. weapons inspectors "had time to do their job, they would have discovered what we now know, that in fact Saddam Hussein had no weapons, that in fact Saddam Hussein has no connection with 9/11, that in fact Saddam Hussein has little or no connection with al Qaeda."

It's a similar story on domestic policy. Kedwards want to cut taxes (yours) and raise taxes (on the other fellow, that rich scoundrel). They "believe that marriage is between a man and a woman," as Edwards said last night, but "we should not use the Constitution to divide this country."

Your're blinded by Bush related EBD if you think Kerry or Edwards gives direct and concise prose on topics or to questions on ANY would be hard pressed to find this kind of double talk coming out of Bush.

Spain might come after Iran!

This is amazing.....apparently the "terrorist act" elected Spanish socialist government under Zapatero is planning on cutting monies directed at the Catholic church in half via a system that allows citizens to direct a percentage of their tax dollars to the church...along with banning crucifixes from all public buildings. You could argue this is analogous to our separation of church and state, EXCEPT that at the same time the government has drawn up plans to finance the teaching of Islam in state-run schools and to give funds to mosques on the grounds that it will create greater understanding of the country’s one million Muslims.

Maybe Spain is the center of terrorism that Kerry was referring to when he said that Iraq was nowhere near it!

Four More Years!

Bush sure does better giving a podium speech than he did at the first debate and he proves that he did it at Wilkes-Barre PA which I read about here on Powerline. There's a link to the entire speech and more excerpts on security on Powerline that you should read. But I liked this section the best:

We have built a broad and solid record of accomplishment. In the past year, the United States of America has added about 1.7 million new jobs. (Applause.) More than Germany, Japan, Great Britain, Canada and France combined. (Applause.) Real tax -- real after-tax income -- that's the money in your pocket to spend on groceries or house payments and rent -- is up more than 10 percent since I took office. (Applause.) Home ownership is at an all time high in America. (Applause.) Farm income is up. Small businesses are flourishing. The entrepreneurial spirit is strong in the United States of America. (Applause.)

My opponent agrees with all this -- except when he doesn't. (Laughter.) Last week in our debate, he once again came down firmly on every side of the Iraq war. (Laughter.) He stated that Saddam Hussein was a threat and that America had no business removing that threat. Senator Kerry said our soldiers and Marines are not fighting for a mistake -- but also called the liberation of Iraq a "colossal error." He said we need to do more to train Iraqis, but he also said we shouldn't be spending so much money over there. He said he wants to hold a summit meeting, so he can invite other countries to join what he calls "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time." (Laughter and applause.) He said terrorists are pouring across the Iraqi border, but also said that fighting those terrorists is a diversion from the war on terror. (Laughter.) You hear all that and you can understand why somebody would make a face. (Laughter and applause.)

Just good nice folks!

There are plenty of examples, especially if you check the right hand column for the other blogs I like, of just plain moronic behavior targeting Bush and republicans....obviously these are democrats since they fit one of my union member profile of The Employed Democrat below. This particular incident yesterday is worth noting because it appears to be an organized strategy of the AFL-CIO in many cities. I would think the DNC would be calling each of these groups who resort to gun fire, property damage or physical harm to innocent people and read them the riot act. Why? Because any intelligent person who sees this behavior on the news and then associates them with anti-Bush and pro-Kerry would have a "I'm not with those idiots" reaction.

Of course maybe I'm all wet...the DNC might be going after the not so smart doesn't do their homework crowd. Their draft scare email campaign would suggest that.

Cold Efficiency...HELL YES

My quick look at various polls on the VP debate either sheepishly call it a tie or a win for Cheney. But as you read all the big media write ups you would think Edwards wiped the floor with him or Cheney sank himself. Lots of phrases like "Edwards had Cheney on the defensive", "Edwards pounced", and so on. I like the AP description the best:

With cold efficiency, Vice President Dick Cheney sought to eviscerate the credibility of the Democratic presidential ticket Tuesday night delivering a tough and terse message without the smirks and verbal miscues that cluttered President Bush's debate performance five days ago.

The first thing to note is the obvious BIAS of this opening sentence from a news (NOT OP/ED) service....but the total BS about miscues and cluttering a previous debate (huh?) aside....who would you rather have dealing with terrorists around the world everyday....someone with cold efficiency or a smiley southern drawl tort lawyer?

Along similar lines, I think Bush has a cold efficiency of his own....last night on the Tonight Show with Leno a great line from Dennis Miller:

That's why I like Bush. He doesn't over-think it. He wakes up every morning, jumps out of bed, lands on his two feet, scratches his balls, and says, "Let's kill some f@#@$ing terrorists!"

Tuesday, October 05, 2004

What about Halliburton?

These 3 words have often been the response I get when a liberal friend is trying to tell me how Bush lied about WMD's in Iraq and went in under false pretences. After I easily dispose of this EBD (see Right War, Right Place, Right Time post below) moment with a few questions and facts the off balance liberal usually retorts "What about Halliburton?". Again, this is easily dispatched by those who are willing to do some research and reading and aren't prone to evil conservative conspiracy theories...but it's always nice to see others provide eloquent prose on the topic as this WSJ piece does...have a read!

Media Bias Test

I would love to be surprised and wrong, but I doubt you will see coverage by mainstream media of evidence of WMD's and connections to al Qaeda and terrorism in Iraq. This would of course bode well for Bush's actions so clearly it won't get the coverage it should. And just like Theresa Heinz Kerry suggests that a good thing is really bad when she said she wouldn't be surprised if Osama bin Laden was caught prior to Nov 2, Democrats will question the timing of this as well. It's all a big conspiracy, wink, wink.

Give us your criminals, your immoral, your lazy!

As I see the story this morning that a Bush/Cheney campaign office in Knoxville was shot at this morning I'm reminded of who finds the Democratic Party fits their personal philosophy the best. I was first reminded of this by the many uniformed, unemployed, rude and lawless "supposed" protestors who hung around the RNC in NYC. Then here in California the stories (but not in the mainstream press) of the vandalism to vehicles with Bush/Cheney stickers. Isn't it interesting that these individuals with no respect for life, property and decency find that the Democratic Party and its candidates best fit their convictions? Sure not all Democrats stoop to criminal or immoral behavior. But, I find the vitriolic hatred of Bush with seldom a fact or knowledge to back it up that the rank and file Democrats emote puts them far closer to the worst of their party then they realize.

My liberal friends will probably bring up something like abortion doctor killers....but these are far more isolated than the tens of thousands of participants in what I speak of and also a connection to an overall party philosophy is completely off base. Again people with EBD (defined in a previous post) fail to recognize their party consists of two easily defined groups with not much inbetween. I'm a proud republican! The two types of Democrats:

The Employed Democrat

  • The well off elite who think those less fortunate, and the planet, should benefit from their good fortune regardless of the cost to business and to the self esteem of those receiving a hand out.
  • They suffer from pseudo intellectualism.
  • They're vain, diet constantly, prone to plastic surgery and other lazy methods of improving ones self.
  • That vanity extends past our borders as they long for approval of other nations.
  • They belong to a union or group who guarantees (in their mind) employment...they get paid the same amount as everyone else whether good, bad, impassioned or apathetic
  • They do little to no homework on issues and people they are willing to ridicule or to embrace.
  • They confuse the rights provided by our constitution with entitlements.
  • They believe belief in a god, and mentioning it occasionally, is evil.

The Unemployed Democrat

  • Actually some are employed at coffee houses, music stores or are paid protestors...but come on, this isn't really being employed!
  • While they hold contempt for those who have better jobs than the afore mentioned, they believe those individuals should pay for their existence.
  • They don't believe in personal responsibility...everything is the fault of a rich person, a big business or the government.
  • They don't particularly care for grooming or personal hygiene.
  • The do even less homework on issues and people then the Employed Democrats do.
  • They confuse the rights provided by our constitution with entitlements.
  • They believe belief in a god is evil.

Dirty French Laundry

My friend Kurt points me to this interesting article in the UK's Guardian Unlimited about things France would rather you didn't know....of course for most of us informed political junkies the fact that France had an internment camp in WWII, and as France was being liberated (and for as long as 4 years after the end of the war) directly or indirectly made the internees disappear in order to hide this fact, comes as no surprise. Does this reflect on the current day French aristocracy? Well if you look at the UN Oil For Food scandal I think one can infer a long lineage of questionable French character.

Saturday, October 02, 2004

Right War, Right Place, Right Time

You must read this WSJ op/ed piece by the life long democrat sister of 9/11 flight 77 and co-founder of 9/11 families for America.

It's amazing to me how the hypocrisy so often demonstrated by liberals is so oblivious to them. The other amazing observation about liberals is what I call EBD, or emotional brain disfunction! This is where one takes a position on a topic, or person, with absolutely no facts, logic or coherency but instead is overtaken by emotion that is typically rooted in vitriolic hatred of a person or issue. EBD also renders the afflicted with the inability to recognize undisputed facts which are in direct conflict with their position. Without exception every harsh criticism I have heard about Bush by liberals is based on EBD with their position completely collapsing with just one or two questions. In this WSJ piece you see EBD shown in the form of hypocrisy as they use 9/11 family members on the stump when they criticized the Bush camp for doing so. But the worse form of EBD comes with simple moronic statements I hear from liberals all the time. Do these sound familiar: "Bush lied about WMDs", "he was just thinking about his friend at Halliburton", or my personal favorite: "everything they're saying about him is true, they just haven't found the evidence yet".

EBD sufferers loose all ability to research a topic or person. They can no longer recognize unbias sources of information and conclude they are instead bias if the information conflicts with their EBD based position. I have given the all so elusive (to liberals) facts and sources to many who suffer from EBD and watched the smoke emanate from their's not pretty.

So, before you catch EBD and spew about the lack of connection between Saddam, Iraq, Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda I suggest you both read opinions from those who have read the 9/11 Commission report or read it yourself...I did.

Friday, October 01, 2004

Pre or Post 9/11 Mentality? You Decide!

The debate last night was interesting to watch. I think there was no clear winner. The partisan media and pundits on both sides are, of course, saying their guy won. Terry McAuliffe even did a monster pre-debate email on how all the sheep should go to every news website and vote in the online polls, call talk radio, blah, I'm sure the sheep are being sheep. I thought both candidates did better than I thought they would. The only thing that was clear (and not much to me is clear about Flipper) is that one is stuck in a Sep 10 mentality and the other in the very different world of post 9/11. You just need to decide which of those makes sense for a safer world.

Kerry will disarm us, look for international approval for any important move and while insulting world leaders and our military somehow get them to do things that Bush couldn't...SURE!


I know its easy for us to arm chair quarterback, especially in hindsight, how Bush could have responded either to questions or in rebuttal to OrangeBoy. And I would agree if he could responded at all or more strongly to some of the more ridiculous things Floppy said he could have ended the race entirely. But I take some solace in the fact that some of the better responses Bush could have used that friends have sent me I could see Bush saying, meaning that he would believe them. Oh outstanding response I WISH Bush had used that a friend provided is:

This is a race for the President of the US, NOT for the Presidency of the UN. I am here to do everything I can to protect the US – not to just make the UN happy. We did that before and it gave us 9/11, the Cole bombing, the first attack on the WTC.