Friday, October 29, 2004

In the Fray

This weekend none of us will be around to blog because we're off doing our part for our favored Presidential candidate. With less than half a week remaining before election day there are countless question marks surrounding the election. With a Bush win in Ohio, Florida, and Wisconsin this race could be over before it even reaches the West Coast. If Kerry were to win Pennsylvania and Ohio then he stands a fighting chance of taking the Presidency. With that said, we're off working across the country in Pennsylvania, New York, Nevada, etc. My prediction (and endorsement) is for four more years of Bush in the White House! Even though we won't be around to offer semi-witty (or not-so-witty depending on your point of view) we'd like to leave everyone with our official endorsement for President of the United States.

In the last four years a lot has happened in America. We've faced down terrorist attacks, a recession, and a changing geopolitical climate. Bush has handled each of these challenges with reasonable and deliberate responses. We've changed our terrorist policies from the status quo of the Clinton era, as Bob Woodward put it in his book Bush at War, "pounding sand," to the type of response that will make all terrorist groups think before attacking. We've answered the call of an economic recession by delivering more money to all of the American workers (more than just the top 1% as Kerry claims). We've added approximately 1.9 million jobs in the last year or so. I think the numbers speak for themselves.


I know many will list Bush's seemingly endless list of faults; I'm one of those people. But just because the man has faults doesn't mean that he hasn't done the best possible job given his abilities as President. Sure he could have been more fiscally responsible or a better planner when it came to Iraq reconstruction; these points are not disputed. But above all else, I have faith that he's acted in accordance with his beliefs as to what's the best possible thing for America. He is a genuine guy with an overwhelming faith in American potential.

While sometimes it appears to the contrary, I have faith that Senator Kerry would also do fine as President. He is a remarkably intelligent, liked by the international community (well at least more than Bush is), and he has at least some sort of a vision. Kerry's downfall is his predicament that his political ideology places him in. Will he be forced to cater to the extreme left when it comes to evaluating a timetable in Iraq? Will he try to weather the conflict without regard for his base? Would he repeal all of Bush's tax cuts (which he'd undoubtedly have to do) to pay for his healthcare programs? These questions are too great to gamble on with the Senator. His record speaks louder than his rhetoric and I think Senator Kerry would be an uncertain choice in times that demand certainty.

All of us here at the Right Wing Conspiracy implore you to vote on election day. If you're liberal or conservative, it doesn't matter, just vote. The American regime is a shining city on a hill; it stands as a guiding post in the world as other countries seek to make themselves as free. Thus it is our responsibility to make sure that that "shining city" continues to function and persevere. I'm not even going to try to mimic late-President Reagan, so I'll allow his words to speak for themselves:

"We are the showcase of the future. And it is within our power to mold that future-this year and for decades to come. It can be as grand and as great as we make it. No crisis is beyond the capacity of our people to solve; no challenge too great."

Election Day is November 2nd...remember to vote, and vote George W. Bush for President.

...Read More!

Thursday, October 28, 2004

This Dem says she'd vote for Bush...

Well, sort of. You all might not know but I'm a big fan of Stephanie Herseth, even if she is a Democrat. Here's more reason to like her:

From the National Journal's Hotline:

Rep. Stephanie Herseth (D-SD AL) said on 10/27 that she would vote for Pres. Bush if the presidential election ended up being decided in the House.

Herseth made the comment during a televised debate with ex-state Sen. Larry Diedrich (R). She was asked by a reporter how she would vote if neither Bush nor John Kerry won the election outright and it ended up being decided in the House.

Herseth said she would be guided by SD voters, who are projected to vote for Bush by a wide margin: "I represent South Dakota. And I'm going to put South Dakota first." Diedrich also said he would vote for Bush but questioned whether Herseth had "dodged a direct answer" by saying she would be "guided" by SD voters. Herseth said that her meaning was clear: "I guess Larry is going to keep parsing my words. ... I would vote for George Bush for president."

The exchange was typical of others during the hour-long debate, during which the candidates "minced specifics" on such issues as prescription drugs and energy policy and diverged slightly on whether to support a request by the Bush admin. for $70B or more for the war in Iraq (Woster, Rapid City Journal, 10/28)

...Read More!

about that explosives cache

Of course the Kerry-Edwards camp was quick to point out about the gross ineptitude of the Bush Administration and how it blundered so disgracefully in its conduct of war. Our own faithful reader Jordan reiterated those points in his comment. Since then, things have become a bit more interesting.

The Washington Times is reporting that Russian special forces assisted in relocating weapons caches before Operation: Iraqi Freedom began. This could also possibly include the Al-Qaqaa cache that has been in the news lately.

"The Russian arms-removal program was initiated after Yevgeny Primakov, the former Russian intelligence chief, could not persuade Saddam to give in to U.S. and Western demands, this official said. "

If this is true, and it seems that it is, then there needs to be some tough questions asked. And there needs to be reconciliation with reality. If you take this incident and couple it with the U.N. Oil for Food scandal, you'll have to legitimately ask whether or not any sort of consensus could ever be achieved in the UN Security Council. It's become a lot clearer (and I had my suspicions since the UN debacle began in late 2002) that the countries opposed to the U.S. didn't have a natural antipathy towards war; they were clearly working to advance their own interests. France, Germany, and Russia have an interest in a multi-polar structure of power in the world. They will do what is necessary to obstruct American power. All of this has been merely a ploy for power redistribution. This is a much needed wake up call for idealists and vindication for realists who have always realized that rational state actors always lookout for their own interests first, and then maybe consider the needs of others.

So my big question to Kerry, Kerry apologetics, and die-hard multi-lateralists: how do you bring your "friends" and "allies" to the table if they have their own agenda to advance and are willing to work to subvert the common goal and ambitions of the UN?

And you wonder why we have to "go it alone".

To be fair and 'balanced', there are other reports about the weapons cache. The Al-Alksa Brigade claims that American agents gave them the explosives. Other reports that I have read indicated that they claim "Western agents" provided these.


...Read More!

The Best Case Yet...

The Curse is Reversed! The Red Sox won the World Series tonight and have officially broken the Curse of the Bambino...and it only took 86 years! Congratulations Boston. Keeping with the Red Sox mania circling the internet, everyone should check out this entry on Blogs for Bush. Allow me to summarize their main points, but please do check it out:

"Curse Reversed Under Bush at Busch Gardens" (oh man that's eery but it gets better)

"It's been 86 years since last World Series win by the Red Sox... 86 = 43 x 2; 2 terms of the 43rd President of the United States!"

"Let’s not forget, Kerry had the choice of a Red Sox World Series win, or the White House…. Red Sox just won the World Series… time for Kerry to lose the White House!"

Okay now that that fun is over, time to discuss Senator Kerry's awful record on his favorite team, the Boston Red Sox. Yes, that's right, Senator Kerry even has a record to run from when it comes to baseball. I hope everyone takes this lightly, though all these statements are true facts:


From a Fox News article, "Kerry Flubs Bosox Score, Again":

Game 1:
Twice on Sunday, the Democrat said he was basking in Boston's 10-9 win in Game 1 the night before. Problem is, the Red Sox won 11-9.
"Ten-9, the Sox did fabulous," Kerry said with a big smile as he ducked into church Sunday morning in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
"Coming from Boston, I had a special reason to clap," Kerry explained to the congregation when he took the pulpit. "The Red Sox won 10-9."
Kerry spokesman David Wade said the senator got the score wrong because 10-9 was the last update he got from the pilot during his late-night flight to Florida.
Problem is, the score never was 10-9. The Red Sox won on a two-run homer, meaning they went from 9 runs to 11.


Game 2:
"Seven-1 Red Sox!" Kerry said as he bounded off the plane, wearing his Red Sox cap, to greet a group of supporters. New Hampshire is Red Sox country, and a cheer went up from the crowd that wasn't able to watch the game while waiting for his plane on the tarmac.
Problem is, the Red Sox were winning 6-1 at the time. They went on to win 6-2.


From The Weekly Standard:

On October 25, 1986, the Boston Red Sox were facing off against the New York Mets in the sixth game of the World Series...This infamous error was witnessed by none other than John Kerry, who on numerous occasions has claimed to have been seated at Shea Stadium that night, at a distance of no more than 30 yards from Buckner....

Kerry must have forgotten where he was that night:
N.M. GOVERNOR DETAILS HIS STATE'S SUCCESS STORY Published on October 26, 1986 Author(s): Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff
New Mexico's governor, who holds the highest elected post of any Hispanic nationwide, and the head of the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination were given awards for political excellence last night by the Massachusetts Latino Democratic Committee.
More than 250 people--including Gov. Dukakis, US Sen. John Kerry and an array of state Cabinet members--attended the banquet at the World Trade Center in South Boston honoring Gov. Toney Anaya and Alex Rodriguez.


From some random website (A MUST READ):
Of course, we all remember the fateful "pitch" Kerry threw out during the Sox-Yankees series this summer. He stood unusually close to home plate, but he still looked like he was throwing a bowling ball. Kerry, flustered, said that the Iraqi war veteran playing catcher was "a little nervous," as if Kerry would have hurled a 98-mph rising fastball if Varitek was behind the plate.
Red Sox fans were embarrassed but sympathetic. Kerry is in his 60s, we said. Our sympathy remained until Kerry said later that his favorite player on the Red Sox was "Manny Ortez". He corrected himself later, saying "David Ortez." Neither player exists. Neither do Larry McHell or Kevin McHell, Kerry's favorite Celtics players.
Kerry was then asked who his favorite all-time Red Sox player was. Ted Williams? Jim Rice? Carlton Fiske? Nope! Kerry answered "the walking man, Eddie Yost." This answer proved to me that Kerry is certifiably insane and thus not fit to be commander-in-chief. After all, Yost never played for the Red Sox. He earned his nickname with the Washington Senators for his proficiency at drawing walks, which explains why Kerry would like him. Both men have the same approach— crossing their fingers while waiting for their opponent to continuously screw up.


Okay, enough ranting from me. I hope you all enjoyed this humorous sports moment with John Kerry. The election is Tuesday, so make sure you've all voted. I'm mailing my absentee in tomorrow. Wonder who I'm going to vote for....

...Read More!

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

The Controversy Continues

Liberal blogs are currently spinning the Al Qaqaa controversy, claiming that the Bush Administration is still to blame. Let me say that the Administration may have made a mistake, but I believe it's a little premature to be claiming blame or a "holier than thou" attitude on either side. Senator Kerry claimed that, "this is one of the great blunders of Iraq and one of the great blunders of this administration." He then went further and blamed the whole incident on the "incredible incompetence" of the Bush Administration. This reckless commentary by the Senator must stop. No one knows for sure right now whether those weapons were even there when Baghdad fell. CNN raised some interesting points in a news story today that seems to confute some of the allegations being thrown around. I've heard the following from various sources:

1) The IAEA confirmed that the weapons were indeed sealed when the invasion of Iraq started
2) Pentagon sources confirm that the munitions were there when U.S. troops arrive

The CNN article (See Title Link) has the following statements that seems to debunk both these assertions (I won't even cover the testimony of the NBC reporters as people are already quickly claiming that these reporters had something to gain by claiming what they did):

The IAEA said Tuesday the last time it can vouch for the presence of the explosives at Al Qaqaa was in March 2003, before the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam.

News reports during the conflict indicated that troops from the U.S. 3rd Infantry Division entered the Al Qaqaa site on April 4, 2003, finding thousands of boxes of white powder that preliminary tests determined was an explosive. The 101st Airborne Division troops arrived six days later. No material under IAEA seal was found, but Pentagon officials said the troops were not under orders to conduct a thorough inspection.

None of this offers up definitive testimony that settles the matter, but it does show that there are many doubts surrounding the issue. A Washington Times story corroborates much of what CNN has to say, so be sure to check that out too. All I'm asking is that Senator Kerry be a little more careful next time before he offers up New York Times headlines as an indisputable fact.

By the way, everyone should watch this video from a fellow blogger.

...Read More!

What's that? The NY Times is at it again? you don't say!??

Well, I initially held off on blogging this just to let it play out and make sure it was really true. The good ol' New York Times does not even make an attempt to hide its blatant bias (as if we didn't already know that) and support for the Kerry-Edwards campaign by running this so-called 'inside scoop' about how the Bush Administration yet again blundered by losing 380 tons of explosives.

Someone at the NY Times forgot to tell NBC News the game plan because NBC News came out and pointed out the inaccuracy of the NY Times' claims. Turns out they had an embedded reporter with the 101st Airborne unit who saw first-hand that the explosives cache was already missing. While the NY Times adroitly fiddles with its words,

"The International Atomic Energy Agency publicly warned about the danger of these explosives before the war, and after the invasion it specifically told United States officials about the need to keep the explosives secured, European diplomats said in interviews last week. Administration officials say they cannot explain why the explosives were not safeguarded, beyond the fact that the occupation force was overwhelmed by the amount of munitions they found throughout the country."

Technically, they speak the 'truth' (emphasis on quotations). It does not make up for the fact that they intend to mislead the public and blame the Bush Administration to provide more fodder for Sen. Kerry. Sure, maybe they didn't 'vet' the story enough, but that just shows you how quick and eager they are to find something to pin on Bush. The Leftist media keeps on slinging the mud. We get it guys. You don't like Bush! But don't forget you have something called 'journalistic integrity'. That's been something sorely missed in this election cycle (besides a coherent Democratic candidate for President).

...Read More!

Monday, October 25, 2004

Recall, Once More?

That's right. Us crazy Californians in the land of fruits and nuts did it once, why not do it again? When California politics became fodder for the international media last year, it was because an historic event was unfolding. This time it is not the governor who is in trouble. Don't worry, despite some failures as chief executive, Arnold is safe. Secretary of State Kevin Shelley is on the cutting block this time. Will he face the same fate as Political reject Gray Davis? Only time will tell.

This is the second time that talk of recall has taken place in Sacramento since Arnold's election. When Attorney General Bill Lockyear failed to fulfill his constitutional obligations by refusing to stop gay marriages in San Francisco, people began screaming that word, RECALL! It is now like a looming monster over the politicians in Sacramento. It haunts the Democrats in a state where they should reign supreme.

It is likely that this recall will take place next summer. If he is not recalled then it is probable that he will either lose in a primary or will resign. There has even been talk of impeachment.

God I love California. It we can't beat them, we'll run 'em out of town!

T

...Read More!

Adding Fuel to the Fire

Reuters, 15 minutes ago, reported that Chief Justice William Rehnquist was diagnosed with thyroid cancer and is currently in the hospital. The nation, even those that don't agree with Rehnquist's jurisprudence, should be saddened, and I believe I speak for all of us here at the RWC when I wish Rehnquist the best of luck and a full and speedy recovery. Nonetheless, it appears that this could indeed be the end of Rehnquist's lengthy tenure on the Court. While speculation, not to mention the news media, has been pushing the impact of this election on the Court, it now appears that the next President will pick a new Chief Justice.

...Read More!

A Change in the Blocs

I've heard plenty about how "independents" usually break for the challenger, and how that will inevitably tip the election in Kerry's favor, but what I haven't heard enough about is shifts in the voting blocs. John Kerry is in serious trouble if the current trends continue within the African American community. President Bush, according to Dick Morris and many others, is actually gaining significant ground in a demographic that most consider all but certain to fall in the Democratic column. In 2000 Al Gore won approximately 90% of African American Voters, while Senator Kerry is polling around 69-18. Kerry has a commanding lead, no doubt, and I don't think a single person believes Bush will come even close to a majority, but in a tight race that extra 8-9% could come in handy for the President. The remedy by Senator Kerry: send out the man that was dubbed by some as the "first African American President." We'll see if former-President Clinton can achieve anything on the campaign trail; I have no doubts about his talent as a campaigner. The GOP is countering with their own star power, which reaches across cultural lines, Governor Schwarzenegger. Who will win the competition? I'm not sure. I do know one thing though: the Democratic Party will now listen as people say the African American vote can no longer be taken for granted.

...Read More!

Clinton Back in the News

I think that it is funny to look at the media's love affair with Clinton. For the past couple of days, there have been countless stories about Slick Willy. "Clinton is Back!" "Clinton Campaigning for Kerry" "Clinton and Kerry!" It seems a very obvious attempt for the media to associate a flop in the Democratic party to the King of the Democratic Party. Unfortunately, it won't work...The reign of Clinton continues.

T

...Read More!

If Hawaii's split over Bush and Kerry...

The news from Hawaii is a bit shocking and defies conventional political and electoral wisdom. Polls show a virtual dead-heat between President Bush and Sen. Kerry in Hawaii. This is the last state that anybody would ever expect a close race (other than maybe Massachusetts or California) to exist and yet, Bush and Kerry are running neck and neck. Hawaii has long been a liberal and Democratic bastion, so it is a pleasant surprise to see Bush holding so well in a state that has no Republican representatives or senators on the Hill. As the article suggests, the four electoral votes may make the difference. This was supposed to be a clear win for Kerry. If it's in the toss-up catergory this late into the election, Kerry's got yet another thing to worry about.

...Read More!

Kerry Caught in a "Misdirection"

I don't often bother with the Washington Times but this story is definitely worth a look. It seems that when Senator Kerry said the following in Debate # 2 he was not telling the whole truth:

"This president hasn't listened. I went to meet with the members of the Security Council in the week before we [the Senate] voted. I went to New York. I talked to all of them, to find out how serious they were about really holding Saddam Hussein accountable..."

In response to this charge, three identified members and one anonymous member of the U.N. Security Council (at the time of Resolution 1441) have denied that Kerry spoke to anyone in their Security Council delegation. Ambassador Adolfo Aguilar Zinser, who was then Mexico's ambassador to the U.N. Security Council, said the following:

"There was no meeting with John Kerry before Resolution 1441, or at least not in my memory."

While I understand why Senator Kerry claimed this, if he did in fact not meet with members of the Security Council it could be a devastating blow to the nation's confidence in the would-be leader.


...Read More!

Sunday, October 24, 2004

Congressional Turnover Not Likely

This article from the Washington Post details the current status of the House races in throughout the country. It appears that it will be nearly impossible for the Democrats to take back the House this election cycle. Speculation says the greatest net change will be 3 seats one way or the other, hardly the 12 needed. Barring an unexpected Kerry landslide, Republicans will maintain control of Congress.

T

...Read More!

Saturday, October 23, 2004

There's Two Sides to Every Story

Charles Moore wrote an excellent op-ed piece for the Daily Telegraph that's worth looking at. It reminds us that we do have great allies and that people in other countries can see the good in the President's actions. This election is getting incredibly close and I think all of us that support President Bush should see that we're not nearly as alone as Senator Kerry, and much of the media for that matter, would like us to believe.

...Read More!

Thursday, October 21, 2004

The Founders would be proud

Check out this article about Iraqi bloggers.

And then proceed to read this actual Iraqi blog.

I can only imagine what Madison, Hamilton, Jefferson, and Co. would have thought about the ability to blog. Freedom of the press, indeed.

...Read More!

Photo of the Day

With many questions surrounding why I post these photos of the day I thought I would remind everyone of the damage that just one picture can do to a presidential candidate. Of course, there is obviously one photo that I'm referring to and its possibly my favorite of all time:


...Read More!

The Pot Calling the Kettle Black

Senator Edwards today asked "who's minding the store" in the Bush Administration because of campaign activities. Funny, he didn't seem to think campaigning was so inappropriate in 2003 when he said the following:

"I try to look at the votes and see what looks like it's important not only for North Carolina but also the country, and try to be there for those votes..."

He then added the following on why North Carolina was actually getting benefits from Edwards being a Senator that was missing in action:

"It is important for the perspective of North Carolinians to be in the national debate."

Look, I don't have a problem with campaigning. I recognize that this is an activity that cuts across party lines. Presidents will always use "official business" as a chance to go out and campaign and challengers will always leave their former position behind to build their name ID and strengthen their message. Let's just call a spade a spade and not try to politicize an activity that Senators Edwards & Kerry know all too well.

...Read More!

ACT Flyer

There's a ton of allegations on both sides of the aisle about shady campaigning and illegal voter registration activities. I thought since the media was doing such an excellent job of covering the Republican issues, I would bring this flyer to everyone's attention. This gets back to what Byron discussed earlier: George Bush is obviously the one oppressing your right to vote. Perhaps before these charges are thrown around we should examine groups like America Coming Together and their literature that does nothing substantive and just plays on historic racial tensions.

...Read More!

The Reign of Clinton

I do not know the reliability of this source, so take it for what it's worth.

Clinton wants to take Koffi Annan's position as head of the United Nations in 2006. I think this would be a good thing. There is nothing quite like a man who has publicly proved where his morals are becoming the head of an organization known to be corrupt. I love it. Oil for !@#$, sorry, I can't elaborate more than that, since this blog is PG, but I think you all understand where I am going with that.

Ah, how I've missed Clinton.

T

...Read More!

Kerry's appeals

As we near Election Day (11 days to go), Sen. Kerry has strived to create a more 'wholesome' image. He's portraying himself as a down-to-earth fellow to the electorate in the swing states. He went hunting today in Ohio, proudly toting his 12-gauge shotgun. He's made his support for the cursed Red Sox clear, mentioning their success at every opportunity in an effort to convince people that he enjoys...you know, real sports other than windsurfing and maybe polo and lawn croquet.

He's even stepped up his discussion of faith and its (failed) role in his life. Is this going to be effective? Doubt it. But it sure is a nice ploy. Perhaps if he had done this earlier in the campaign, before all the flip-flopping, wind-surfing attacks were leveled. But Kerry's not going to escape his patrician New England liberal background, no matter how many times he mentions God or how many geese or duck he kills.

Perhaps our dormant blogger, Nick, can write on Kerry's recent invocations of 'faith'.

And just maybe the Kerry campaign has struck a new low (hard to top what I already wrote about just a couple of days ago): Dick Cheney is 63 years old. He's not exactly the healthiest guy. You assume that of all people, Dick Cheney (lambasted for his health) would get a flu shot Lo and behold, he does, and the Kerry-Edwards camp's response is ridiculous.

...Read More!

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

Battle of the First Ladies

Teresa, in what is now becoming almost a daily occurence, is at it again. This time though she's not talking about arthritis or President Bush, but she has decided to comment on the First Lady. Laura Bush, a former public school teacher and librarian, apparently in the eyes of Mrs. Kerry, hasn't had a real job. Mrs. Kerry said the following:

But I don't know that she's ever had a real job — I mean, since she's been grown up. So her experience and her validation comes from important things, but different things.

I know Mrs. Kerry's life is not exactly the ordinary citizen, but surely even she can appreciate the noble profession that is education. Maybe she just misspoke or maybe, yet again, Teresa has proven how out of the mainstream she is.

...Read More!

Photo of the Day

Sometimes he just makes it too easy...


...Read More!

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Shocking

In comments regarding Vice President Cheney's accusations that Kerry hasn't given any reason to believe that he would be qualified in handling the protection of America, Mark Kitchens (national security consultant to Kerry) said the following:

He [Cheney] has the audacity to question whether a decorated combat veteran who has bled on the battlefield is tough and aggressive enough to keep America safe

(in case you have been in a hole for the past year, or somehow missed all of the DNC, and managed to miss every stump speech/debate...they're talking about Kerry and his purple hearts won thrice!)

I know this is a difficult thing for the Kerry/Edwards campaign to realize but less and less people care about Senator Kerry's service and more what his long record proves. Kerry's votes in the Senate are tough to defend, at best, and demonstrate why a ticket of two Senators, albeit one of the Senators doesn't really have a record, is tough to defend.

...Read More!

The Clairol Man

I know almost everyone has seen this by now but I wanted to direct any of our readers who haven't seen it to check this out. The "boyish good looks" of John Edwards are undoubtedly the envy of almost every politician. Since Michael Moore felt it relevant to include scenes of Bush Administration officials fixing their hair everyone should get to see Edwards rigorously attend to his appearance. We all know all candidates do this but it's just funny when it gets caught on camera!

...Read More!

Kerry-Edwards campaign is downright pathetic

- If you get the flu this winter, it's George W. Bush's fault.
- George W. Bush is oppressing your right to vote.
- If you vote for Dubya, you won't collect your Social Security check.
- If George W. Bush wasn't president, people like Christopher Reeves would be able to get up and walk again.
- If you elect President Bush, he's going to re-institute the draft.
- If you're gay, it's probably George W. Bush's fault.


Yeah, that's pretty much what we've been hearing from the Kerry-Edwards campaign. And people accuse Bush supporters for not having a brain?

Nothing smacks of politicking like blaming the flu on the President. How about truly being the party of two Americans and playing upon historic racial fears? What, is that the only way Democrats can keep the minority vote? Or resorting to conventional Democratic tactics to suppress the elderly population by falsely charging that Social Security benefits will be cut in January?

But what's probably the most ridiculous, demogoguery-ridden comment thus far has to be John Edwards' assertion that if Kerry was elected, people like Christopher Reeves wouldn't have died and EVEn been able to walk. Political pandering at its lowest.

You're looking at the most back-bending, spineless duo to ever run for the Presidency. If that's what you want, go ahead and vote for Kerry-Edwards.

...Read More!

Sunday, October 17, 2004

Jon Stewart on Crossfire

Usually we focus on actual politics, but Jon Stewart's appearance on CNN's Crossfire on Friday was ridiculous. Here is a man who arrogantly claims to be above the political system and yet profits at its expense by mocking the very process that he claims to hate. Not to mention that he is hardly above the partisan fray by openly endorsing John Kerry. Hey Jon, are you going to have a job if Kerry's the president? Cause like Tucker Carlson said on Friday, you're his butt boy and you'd never make fun of him the way you rip President Bush.

Here's the kicker: bashing our man, Tucker Carlson is ok. But ripping him for his bowties is not. And dissing Paul Begala was pretty low. I'm no fan of Paul Begala politically, but he's a pretty nice guy in person. Anybody who's seen Crossfire in person knows that the hosts are pretty good people when the cameras aren't running. Maybe that's what Jon Stewart is getting at: 'genuine' political discourse. Jon Stewart, take a look at yourself and your own joke show before you go on someone else's.

...Read More!

Friday, October 15, 2004

Trouble in the Rocky Mountain State

I can't believe it! The story found on Drudge yesterday regarding the Democrat playbook that calls for a "pre-emptive strike" on accusations of voter intimidation was picked up by a news agency in Colordao:

But Democrats, who verified as authentic the page from a playbook called "Colorado Election Day Manual: A detailed guide to voting in Colorado," said they must be pro-active to assure that minorities and all others are not scared away from the polls.

The Colorado Democrtas should be ashamed at such a tactic. Congrats Drudge on finally getting one right.

Note: For further info please see "Voter Intimidation" from October 14th, 2004

...Read More!

Teresa's Home Cure

Just because there's nothing that I enjoy more than making fun of Teresa Heinz Kerry, I thought this article was worth everyone's attention. Below is my favorite part:

Heinz Kerry ended with what she called “a highly effective” remedy for arthritis that drew laughter and some skepticism from the audience.
“You get some gin and get some white raisins — and only white raisins — and soak them in the gin for two weeks,” she said. “Then eat nine of the raisins a day.”


With a First Lady like that why on earth would the U.S. need bartenders?

...Read More!

4 points for Bush = 4 more years

After an interesting discussion with one of my roommates last night, we concluded that these are the reasons why we would support George W. Bush for President:

1. Iraq and Afghanistan: The President's plan has been neither glamorous nor popular, but it is ultimately steeped in a realist mind-set. The only fundamental way to bring about change and defeat terrorism is to seek out the roots of terrorism. That starts with a free and open society. It won't be pretty and it might not get better in the short-term, but it is the right plan in the long-run. And if Iraq and Afghanistan are revived and fully-running within the next four years, Bush's legacy will be etched into history forever.

2. Tax reform: Perhaps the National Retail Sales Tax was only an idea 'worth considering'. Maybe Bush won't have the political capital and clout to push forth dramatic tax reform. But be assured that Kerry will go nowhere near this idea. Tax reform is badly needed and Bush has already laid the framework with his tax cuts.

3. Social Security Reform/Health Savings Accounts: Entitlements are going to put the U.S. in economic distress if we do not rectify it. Privatizing Social Security and moving towards HSA's will , in the short-run, inflict a price upon the country that may cost political capital. But we believe Bush is serious about this. And this is a fundamental issue that will have to be addressed in the near future. Believe it when we say Kerry will not touch this with a ten-foot pole. Bush's plan makes more sense and is fitting of the times.

4. Supreme Court Justices/Federal Judges: President Bush will most likely appoint Supreme Court justices. Chief Justice Rheinquist just turned 80 years old. Bush appointees to SCOTUS and federal courts will end the rampant judicial activism that has dangerously titled the checks and balances.

If Bush is re-elected and manages to hammer through these four points, I will make the bold prediction that history will look back fondly upon the man who's "misunderestimated". Don't discount this as far-fetched; Bush has demonstrated as President that he has the boldness and initiative to pursue aggressive policies. It's on this record and anticipation that I will vote for George W. Bush on Nov. 2, 2004.

...Read More!

Thursday, October 14, 2004

Voter Intimidation

This is allegedly a piece of a Kerry/Edwards & DNC election manual. Now remember it is from Drudge so it has yet to be proven as legitimate:



Now if you read the fine print it calls on workers to charge voter intimidation in a pre-emptive fashion. So, on election day, should there be no cases of voter intimidation the Democrats might charge it anyways. This is always a great tactic: if you can't win then just pretend there was fould play. Makes sense to me. This is a story that I'm sure will continue to develop and might in the end be invalidated. We all remember Drudge's story about Kerry's affair that he shipped across the world so we wouldn't find out. That didn't pan out and so might be the fate of this memo. But if it does prove to be true the DNC has a lot of explaining to do.

...Read More!

Crossing the Line

Last night during the third, and last (thank God), Presidential Debate, Senator Kerry made sure to talk about a lot of things. He got in his talking point about how this Administration has lost 1.6 million jobs since the start of their four years (which is actually closer to 585,000 when you account for all the job creation outside the private sector), how evil President Bush is seeking to overturn the basic rights of Roe v. Wade (which we all know will never happen), and how if Bush is elected our senior citizens will no longer have social security (an outright lie that Gore tried to use too). I can’t spend all day reviewing the charges but what I can say is he did say at least one thing that crossed a line. When asked to discuss the question of whether homosexuality was a choice, Kerry answered:

And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as

I understand that he has every right to bring up Mary Cheney. In fact, to some extent I expected it. But this wasn’t the same as when Senator Edwards brought up how amazing the love and care that both Vice President Cheney and his wife Lynne Cheney show for their daughter. Senator Kerry almost seemed to be using Mary as a political tool to demonstrate a point.

I don’t agree with the President’s Constitutional Amendment but, like many others I’m sure, I saw the Senator’s remarks as downright disrespectful to the Vice President and his family. Lynne Cheney was also struck by the comment and characterized it as a “cheap and tawdry political trick.” Senator Kerry, I respect your position on this issue, but if you’re going to take a stand don’t hide yourself behind mentions of the Vice President and his daughter. Frankly, it seems cowardly.

Debate Commentary: I know you've all been inundated with commentary from the media so I won't dwell on this issue. But I do believe that the President did exceptionally well last night. He was personable, in command of the issues, and had a general sense of what he needed to say to rebut the Senator's arguments. I think we saw President Bush at his best and that alone will provide a bit of momentum going into the next 19 days.

UPDATE: Elizabeth Edwards now charges Lynne Cheney with being ashamed of her daughter's sexuality. The quote is as follows:

She's overreacted to this and treated it as if it's shameful to have this discussion. I think that's a very sad state of affairs… I think that it indicates a certain degree of shame with respect to her daughter's sexual preferences… It makes me really sad that that's Lynne's response...

Now, I can safely say that this has reached a point where Senator Kerry and now Mrs. Edwards have both crossed a line. Even a Kerry/Edwards campaign spokesman acknowledged that "it was not his [Senator Kerry] best moment." I guess we'll have to wait and see how this plays out in the minds of the voters. Even though I highly doubt it will even affect anyone it would still be nice to hear Senator Kerry admit wrongdoing.

...Read More!

Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Another Photo of the Day

Just because I think we all need to have a greater sense of what's important this election season, I submit the follwoing, very serious, second photo of the day:


...Read More!

Why I am NOT Looking Forward to the Last Presidential Debate

I do not like debates. Plain and simple. I am not just saying that because Bush is considered to be a weak debater. I will not dispute that point. I can not stand the debates because they do not tell me a thing. Both candidates are very guilty of reverting back to their talking points that have been public for the last six months.

What we need is a real, substantive policy debate. At the same time, I am realize that this would never happen. For a political junkie, the debates are old news, and the lines can even be predicted. For the majority of America they are a showcase of the shallowest principles of the candidates, which I guess is good. It is better for Americans to just scratch the surface in understanding their next president than simply flipping a coin. However, I do not believe that we should settle for this standard and inseated we should continue to try and further educate the electorate.

This is why I will watch the Baseball game instead of the debates.

T

...Read More!

Photo of the Day

Thank you so much Senator Kerry for a great image like this:



(Photo from a Bush/Cheney ad)

...Read More!

Ethics Run Amuck

I ask that all Americans demonstrate in their personal and public lives... the high ethical standards that are essential to good character and to the continued success of our Nation.
-Bill Clinton 1997

Representative Martin Frost (D-TX) has had a tough election season this year, as Tom DeLay has given Frost an early Christmas present. Frost's previously safe district is now a conservative leaning Dallas district, complete with an incumbent, Representative Pete Sessions, to run against. This is just one of those infamous Texas districts that Delayocracy has redrawn to better serve the needs of Republicans. Now, please ignore what sounds like sarcastic wit; there isn't a sight that I love to see more. But what does cause me a bit of dismay is what Frost is now doing as he grasps for anything to help him stay alive. Frost has apparently uncovered pictures of Sessions from college streaking down the street. Now, Frost is somehow saying that the conservative Republican "exposed himself to children and strangers." Just when I thought these campaigns couldn't get any more ridiculous Frost pulls out the college photos. Representative Frost, I'm glad to see that we're adhering to those "high ethical standards that are essential to good character and to the continued success of our Nation."

...Read More!

Monday, October 11, 2004

Photo of the Day

John Kerry: Democrat for President



22 Days and Counting!

...Read More!

Wealthy progressives are always the biggest hypocrites

Stephen Moore, president of Club for Growth, wrote an interesting piece today in the editorial section of the Wall Street Journal. John Kerry and his billionaire wife, Teresa Heinz-Kerry paid an effective tax rate of only 12.8%. The average middle-class family that Kerry always empathisizes and politicizes in his speeches, on average, pay a tax rate of 20%. President and Laura Bush pay 30% in taxes. Surprised? Of course not...this is what we've come to expect from self-conscious liberals who say whatever is politically expedient at the moment.

...Read More!

Straight Talk

Now, everyone knows that there's nothing I love more than poking fun at Senator McCain's "straight talk express." Today I'm here to poke fun at a different "straight talker," one that is involved in a race that is near and dear to my heart. Dave Ross (D-WA), a former talk show host, is running to replace Congresswoman Jennifer Dunn in the 8th Congressional District of WA. The race is highly contested and closely watched all across the country. Ross is now claiming a 10 pt. lead in the race according to his polls:

Bellevue , WA – The Dave Ross for Congress campaign released the results of a new poll of likely voters today showing that Dave Ross, a Democrat, has a significant 10 point lead over Dave Reichert in the Eighth Congressional District race.
“This poll confirms what Dave Ross has been hearing from people across the district, they want an independent voice in Congress,” Dana Robinson Slote said.


And so no one accuses me of painting the "straight talking" image unfairly on Mr. Ross, here is an excerpt from
his campaign website:

It’s time for a moderate Democrat we can trust to tell it to us straight and represent our values.

So what does this seemingly endless rant mean? Mr. Ross's poll was conducted by a group called Goodwin-Simon Strategic Research. Since I've never heard of this company I figured I would investigate. It turns out that this polling company
solely works with Democrats, not to mention several pro-marijuana groups, and that's the company that Mr. Ross used to assess "the situation" in the 8th District. I don't have a problem with using biased polling agencies, in fact Sheriff Reichert (Ross's Republican opponent) was guilty of displaying a poll conducted by the National Republican Congressional Committee (showing a 16 pt. lead in his favor), but all I ask is that you "tell it to us straight" and mention the bias of the poll (as Sheriff Reichert did).

...Read More!

Ticking Time Bomb

I've posted before on the ridiculousness of Teresa Heinz Kerry but sometimes it just becomes too much to bear. Yesterday, the potential First Lady announced the following:

"John will never send a boy or girl in a uniform anywhere in the world because of our need and greed for oil..."

Mrs. Kerry, I know you're an independent thinker but perhaps you should start listening to your husband's advisors. When there is a continuing credibility gap on his ability to fight the War on Terror the last thing the American public wants to hear from their potential First Lady is that the Iraq war was over oil. You should save those lines for the New Republic or the New York Times; it's time to learn the ropes of being in the spotlight.

UPDATE: Real Clear Politics offered the following insight on this very story:

THE HEINZ KERRY GAFFE JUGGERNAUT ROLLS ON: Truly astonishing. Teresa Heinz Kerry is like a gaffe machine, churning out quote after quote that range from
embarrassing, to comical, to downright irresponsible. It's gotten so bad you have to start wondering if she really isn't a Republican mole working to sabotage her husband's campaign.

Now, I just hope the national media will start paying attention.

...Read More!

Sunday, October 10, 2004

There he (John Kerry ) goes again!

In an interview with The New York Times Magazine, Sen. John Kerry said, "We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance."

Right.

...Read More!

The Credibility Gap

I found an interesting new talking point from Bush/Cheney 04:

Bush estimated Kerry's spending promises at $2 trillion and that his plan to take away tax cuts for Americans making more than $200,000 a year would raise $600 billion to $800 billion, leaving a gap of at least $1.2 trillion. The Kerry campaign disputes those figures.

I've never been a big believer in Senator Kerry's plan to solely tax the rich and I think the Presiden't arguement has merit. While I'm not sure if the figures are completely accurate (the $600-$800 billion), I do believe we should study the cornerstone of Kerry's economic plan. Huge increases in non-defense discretionary spending and tax increases on only one class of society do not add up. Since the Senator seems content in engaging in class warfare perhaps it's time for the President to hit back. If Senator Kerry is the candidate of "fiscal restraint" like he would like us to believe -
"...when John Kerry puts forward a new idea, he'll tell you how he's going to pay for it...." - then the burden of proof falls squarely on him!

...Read More!

Just because we're conservative doesn't mean we're a lock for Bush

Here's an interesting article by former Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia about whether or not conservatives really have a legitimate candidate this November. Just because we are conservative doesn't mean we don't have our own beef with Presiden Bush. I think we just have a bigger problem with Sen. John Kerry. Take a read here.

...Read More!

Afghanistan's first election

I'm glad that the first free elections in Afghanistan were not marred by violence and death like many naysayers had pessimistically claimed. I wouldn't call them a success just yet since 15 of the candidates are crying foul over potential fraud. But I think we can all agree that we rather have peaceful disputes than car bombs exploding at polling places or widespread voter intimidation and extortion.

And hey, since former President Jimmy Carter knows all about elections, why not send him over there???

...Read More!

Saturday, October 09, 2004

Presidential (Ideological) Debate

After sleeping on it and thinking it over (without reading the pundit's opinions), I would have to score the Presidential debate a draw with a strong edge for the President. Bush gets the edge here simply because he did much better than last Thursday. Sen. Kerry demonstrated his skills again as a debater and speaker under pressure, but was put on the defensive when his Senate record was put on the spot. He also did an abysmal job explaining his position on stem cell research, which President Bush smartly followed up on by commenting how he couldnt' decipher all that Sen. Kerry said and proceeded with his own clear and concise response. And Bush's attacks on Kerry for not voting against the Partial Birth Abortion ban and Unborn Victims of Violence act were right on the mark. Bush's defense of the Iraqi war came across better than expected and his response to what type of Supreme Court justice he woud appoint was (for the most part) a clever one (I was scared though that he'd mess up using the Dred Scott case).

President Bush came across as what he was not in the first debate: he seemed like a real leader. He connected better with the audience. And he displayed a sense of confidence and determination that we have expected from him in the past 3.5 years. The President seemed a lot more comfortable and at ease being in the open than trapped behind the podium. I think that correlated with his performance. All in all, it was a strong ideological debate that gave America the chance to see where the candidates stood on the important issues.

*Kerry promised to not raise taxes on the <$200,000 income earners. A bold statement indeed, especially for a Democrat!*

...Read More!

Friday, October 08, 2004

September adds 96,000 jobs

The Labor Department released the latest payroll figures this morning: U.S. businesses addded 96,000 jobs. Not entirely exciting or great for President Bush, but it's better than no jobs at all. Unemployent stands at 5.4%. About 585,000 jobs will have been lost since President Bush took office in January 2001. This is certainly going to provide some rhetorical fodder for Kerry and the Democrats.

...Read More!

WMD's...or not.

So we now know that apparently Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The latest report also shows that he was not actively pursuing a WMD program nor acquiring WMD's. If this is the case, our intelligence has failed us miserably for the past 13 years. Everything that we have been led to believe and done, whether it be our sanctions, failed weapons inspections, Operation: Desert Fox under President Clinton, and yes, Operation: Iraqi Freedom, have all been conducted under false pretenses. And that needs to be rectified immediately. The Bush detractors and nay-sayers feel vindicated and will use this to lambast Bush in the coming days up until the election, but I am compelled to defend the President' s decision.

Simply put, the President weighed the costs and benefits of allowing Saddam Hussein to remain in power. He decided, based on the intelligence given to him at that time, that he could not allow even the most remote possibility for Saddam Hussein to acquire, sell, trade, or use WMD's against America or American interests. Bush's decision was steeped in realism, not the neo-conservative crusade talk that he's been criticized for. His description of what Iraq would become is steeped in neo-conservatism, but his pretenses and rationale for going to war are immersed in realism. I rather the President take a risk to defend our interests and be wrong than to not do anything at all. At that time, the worst thing that could have happened was inaction.

Hindsight is always 20/20. I do not think that the President came into office with a plan to invade Iraq. He would have asked his generals to dust off the previous Iraqi war plan from 1991, revise it, and execute. Some argue that 9/11 was the excuse to go into Iraq. That is incorrect. The President changed after 9/11; he did not become a neo-con. He transformed from a more isolationist-leaning realist to an active realist who understood that any future attack on America was not only impermissible, but unforgivable.

Should the President apologize? Apologize? For what? Doing the right thing? Doing what is the best for the nation's long-term security interests? It is unfortunate that we went to war under these pretenses. But that does not make this entire endeavor a "grand diversion" or a 'colossal mistake' or 'wrong war, wrong place, at the wrong time'. No, what we are doing is securing what will be a free and democratic state in the Middle East. This is the first step in the long-term strategy to stomp out Islamic discontent and militancy. The neo-conservative chanting for freedom and democracy coincide with the President's realist leanings. He understands that a free and democratic Islamic nation (not theocracy) is the most effective way to win the war on terrorism in the long-run. And that's exactly what he has done.

...Read More!

Thursday, October 07, 2004

The Photo of the Day

And they say Bush is the one that makes faces...



Thank Drudge for another great picture!

...Read More!

Wednesday, October 06, 2004

Intelligence Overhaul

The Senate voted today to restructure the Intelligence community. S. 2845 passed 96-2-2. Senators Byrd and Hollings voted Nay. Big surprise, Senators Kerry and Edwards were absent for this vote. The National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 adopts many of the changes proposed by the 9/11 Commission. The House will vote on their version of the bill tomorow.

T

...Read More!

Talking tough for political utility

"You cannot use tough talk during the course of a 90-minute debate in a presidential campaign to obscure a 30-year record in the United States Senate..."

-Vice President Dick Cheney

I think Cheney made it clear that John Kerry and John Edwards (as we have been stressing on this blog for a while now) will say whatever is politically expedient (i.e. flat out lie) at the moment to garner political capital. Cheney should have just licked his index finger and stuck it in the air to see which way the wind was blowing in that basktball gym last night to illustrate his point. But he said it well enough, and hammered it home over and over again. Cheney's methodical attacks and rebuttals to John Edwards' talking points put the Senator on a visibly uncomfortable edge.

Cheney has bought President Bush a little time. But we do not elect vice-presidents; we elect presidents. And President Bush needs to capitalize what his vice-president did for him last night.

...Read More!

Vice President Cheney Strikes Back

Tonight Republicans were given something to rejoice. After the President's disappointing performance last Thursday the Republicans shifted their hopes to the VP in tonight's debate. Cheney undeniably proved why he is still on this ticket; there is not a politician in D.C. that is more seasoned and shrewd than he is. He not only was articulate with his message but delivered it in an effective manner. The format of this debate was clearly more flattering for him than the previous debate's format was for the President. To Senator Edwards' credit he proved to be a skilled debater and excellent at portraying an empathetic image. But that still didn't stop him from getting attacked, at least in the mind of Chris Matthews, with a Howitzer when he only was only brandishing a water pistol. The liberal and conservative pundits all, for the most part, had kind words to say about the Vice President's performance and I think that's infinitely more important than what the silly internet and major news polls found. Cheney went into this debate at a major disadvantage and proved that even he could please some Americans. Bravo, Mr. Vice President! I'm glad you're on the ticket!

As a side note, I transcribed the following from Senator Edwards' remarks tonight (they for some reason weren't in the copy of
the transcript that I found on Fox News):

I want to make sure that people understand that the President is proposing a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage that is completely unnecessary. Under the law of this country for the last two-hundred years, no state has been required to recognize another state’s marriage. Let me just be simple about this. My state of North Carolina would not be required to recognize a marriage from Massachusetts…There is absolutely no purpose in the law…

Now, if I haven't made it clear in the past I would like to make it clear now that I stand in opposition to the President's Constitutional ban on gay marriage. I just don't think it's sound policy. But that having been said, Senator Edwards seems misguided at best in this phrase. Occasionally you hear nasty "rumors" that Senators and Congressmen don't read the bills that they pass, but I wasn't aware that they also didn't read the
U.S. Constitution. Article IV Section I clearly states:

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.

As a result, I can't see how other states wouldn't be required to uphold individual states' marriage licenses. This is why Congress passed and President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act in the 1990's. Now, if Senator Edwards is right then why on earth would there be so much concern. Perhaps he's just never heard of the "Full Faith and Credit Clause." I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one but frankly in all his debate preparations I would have thought that someone would have caught this egregious mistake.

...Read More!

Tuesday, October 05, 2004

Paul Bremer...say what?

Several people also chanted "Paul Bremer, you can't hide. We charge you with genocide."

"I'll tell you one thing, if people had behaved like this in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, they would be dead," Bremer said at one point.


...Read More!

Dick Cheney (Darth Vader) beats up John Edwards (the Boy Wonder...Robin!)

Vice President Cheney eviscerated Sen. John Edwards tonight. He came out firing and was unrelentless in his responses. John Edwards looked a bit dazed and confused with what the Vice President threw at him. That's all right though. I only wish our President was able to deliver the zingers like his Vice President did. Hands down, Vice President Cheney won tonight's debate.

some memorable liners:

"I couldn't figure out why that happened initially. And then I looked and figured out that what was happening was Howard Dean was making major progress in the Democratic primaries, running away with the primaries based on an anti-war record. So they, in effect, decided they would cast an anti-war vote and they voted against the troops.

Now if they couldn't stand up to the pressures that Howard Dean represented, how can we expect them to stand up to Al Qaida?"

"Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session.

The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."

Don't listen to those stupid instant polls. It's clear that we have a Vice President who knows what he is talking about and not resorting to populist sentiments and talking points.

...Read More!

The Draft?

It seems that it is the House Republicans that are ready to kill Charlie Rangel's (D-NY) bill to reinstate the draft. For those of you just joining this controversy I would like to point out the irony that the Republicans are the ones voting down the issue of the draft. Approximately two weeks ago, Senator Kerry charged the Bush Administration with the possibility of bringing back the draft. He said, "If George Bush were to be re-elected, given the way he has gone about this war and given his avoidance of responsibility in North Korea and Iran and other places, is it possible? I can't tell you." Yet the bill proposed in both the House and Senate to reinstitute the draft is being proposed by Senator "Fritz" and Rep. Rangel, both of which are ardent anti-war Democrats. It seems like there is some double-talk going on in the Democratic Party and perhaps they should be the ones to clue in America that their symbolic efforts to reinstute the draft are being countered by the Republicans. But somehow I doubt that will happen, after all, George Bush is the "evil warmonger."

...Read More!

Economic Growth

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The upward revision in the rate of economic growth to 3.3 percent in the second quarter of 2004 is another indication of the health of the U.S. economy, Vice Chairman Jim Saxton said today. Today the Commerce Department announced the upward revision in real Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the output of goods and services produced by labor and property in the U.S. The Commerce Department statistical release also showed that over the last four quarters, the U.S. economy has expanded at a rate of 4.8 percent.
The data also indicate that the strength of investment over the last year has made an important contribution to economic growth. For example, real fixed business investment climbed 11.6 percent over the last four quarters. An expansion of tax incentives for investment in 2003 spurred investment, and thereby boosted economic growth

...Read More!

Monday, October 04, 2004

The Photo of the Day

Bush signed his Middle Class tax cuts today in Iowa. This was an excellent political and practical move for the President and I've been in complete support of the extension since it was proposed this summer. Tax cuts, especially for those working families who could use a helping hand, will be beneficial right now to help drive the economic recovery that we're currently enjoying. Additionally, it will hopefully (but I'm sure it won't) quiet Senator Kerry's calls of Bush's favoring the rich. These tax cuts are directed toward middle and lower income families and consequently Senator Kerry should have to think twice before he accuses Bush of pandering to the rich. I'm sure nothing will change though and we'll continue to have more of the same:


...Read More!

Moore should get worked up about this!

an excerpt (read the rest here)

This is Crossroads South Middle School in Monmouth Junction, New Jersey. On Thursday, there was a back-to-school night for parents of students. Veteran English teacher Shiba Pillai-Diaz says she was shocked when three parents confronted her. The three, insisting the teacher either add John Kerry's photo to the montage of presidents or remove the Bush photo. When Pillai-Diaz refused, she says the school's vice-principal threatened her job which is an act that has parents here fuming.

Last time I checked, John Kerry wasn't President!

...Read More!

Sunday, October 03, 2004

It's Just the Beginning...

It looks like John Kerry and George W. Bush are tied up again. While this certainly isn't the best news that I've heard, it doesn't mean it's the end (or the beginning) for any candidate. Right now it appears that the American public is easily swayed and is ready and willing to listen to what these candidates have to say. As a result, President Bush must come out swinging in this next debate and not screw it up royally (like an earlier debate to remain nameless). It also demonstrates the power of the press on the voters. Undoubtedly, every news station proclaiming that Kerry had trounced Bush, with no mention of some of the inconsistencies that plagued his remarks, helped him in the poll. Either way, all it means is it's time to roll up our sleeves and work. This election isn't over and when we're done Bush will certainly have another four years. So consider this a call to arms, a plea for help, or whatever it is that might motivate you; please get out and help this President get the next four years in the White House that he so desperately deserves.

...Read More!

Saturday, October 02, 2004

The Photo of the Day

Just when we thought Senator Kerry was talented at catching a football he goes and shows us his skills at hiking it:



I don't mean to demean Senator Kerry. In fact, I think he is a talented candidate with excellent rhetorical skills (the President should hope for even half those skills) but pictures like these just look embarrassing in the long run.

...Read More!

Post Debate Analysis

Well the debate analysis that we've all been waiting for is finally here. Gallup recently released its polling done directly after the Presidential Debate, which both gauged public sentiments on who won the debate and who people favor on the issues. Remarkably, the public has proven that a great deal of their mind has already been made up. On the issues covered Kerry gained LITTLE to no ground in overtaking Bush. A man seen as the undisputed winner of the debate did not manage to sway many people. Who knows, as the public sees more of the Senator they may change their minds, but in the mean time it appears Bush still has the advantage. Here's a few high points from the poll but do check out the results yourself:

Regardless of which candidate you happen to support, who do you think did the better job in the debate -- [ROTATED: John Kerry (or) George W. Bush]?

Kerry 53/ Bush 37/Equal 8/Neither 1


Next, regardless of which presidential candidate you support, please tell me if you think John Kerry or George W. Bush would better handle the situation in Iraq.

Kerry 43/Bush 54 (Post Debate)
Kerry 40/Bush 54 (Pre Debate)

Similarly, viewers pointed to Bush as the candidate they would trust more to handle the responsibilities of commander in chief -- before the debate by 55% to 42%, and after the debate by 54% to 44%.

Expressed himself more clearly: Kerry 60/Bush 32
Had a good understanding of the issues: Kerry 41/Bush 41
Agreed with you more on the issues you cared about: Kerry 46/Bush 49
Was more believable: Kerry 45/Bush 50
Was more likeable: Kerry 41/Bush 48
Demonstrated he is tough enough for the job: Kerry 37/Bush 54

Kerry must still overcome both the assumption that he is not as strong as Bush when it comes to national security and his likeability. These two things alone are enough to keep his support low and will ultimately be his undoing. Senator Kerry, there is much time to go and you proved yourself an excellent debater. Now, prove me wrong and capitalize on the rhetorical skills we all know you have.

...Read More!

Friday, October 01, 2004

A Tale of Two Senators

I like most people watching the debate had mixed reactions from what I saw. Senator Kerry gave an excellent stylistic portrayal of his ideas and his message. He emphatically showed the country that he’s not George Bush and that’s good enough for him. President Bush on the other hand philosophically laid out what it is his Administration has stood for and will undoubtedly continue to stand for into the next term. If I had to score the debate my feeling is that Senator Kerry won overall, but only by a small margin. Now, I know many reading this will just accuse me of being a partisan, that’s correct I’m a Republican, but I’m not blinded by partisan talking points and optimism. I love my party and I’ll work to get this President reelected but I can indeed see his shortcomings and faults. Last night President Bush started strong. He gave the American people exactly what they knew and continue to need to see from their Commander-in-Chief: steadfast leadership and unwavering beliefs in uncertain times. He demonstrated that he knows where we’ve been and what it will take to navigate us out of this mess. Senator Kerry on the other hand, ended amazingly strong, demonstrating his command for policy points and rhetorical skill. On every point that the President made Senator Kerry had some sort of a response. He never looked uncertain and was ready with a talking point for almost all of the charges. This doesn’t mean that he realistically answered any of the President’s charges; but that’s for the American public to decide. Senator’s Kerry’s win came because I believe the totality of his win in the second half was comparatively larger than the President’s victory in the first half. That having been said, Senator Kerry left some gaping holes in his arguments last night. Byron has already pointed out one but please check out the following excellent article from Professor Jack Pitney for the others.

Update: RNC just released this video. Check out the flip-flops of John Kerry from last night's debate in video format. If it doesn't work right away keep trying because the servers are incredibly busy.

...Read More!

A colossal mistake...a grand diversion...

from realclearpolitics.com :

KERRY: Well, you know, when I talked about the $87 billion, I made a mistake in how I talk about the war. But the president made a mistake in invading Iraq. Which is worse?
I believe that when you know something's going wrong, you make it right. That's what I learned in Vietnam. When I came back from that war I saw that it was wrong. Some people don't like the fact that I stood up to say no, but I did. And that's what I did with that vote. And I'm going to lead those troops to victory.
LEHRER: All right, new question. Two minutes, Senator Kerry.
Speaking of Vietnam, you spoke to Congress in 1971, after you came back from Vietnam, and you said, quote, "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"
LEHRER: Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake?
KERRY: No, and they don't have to, providing we have the leadership that we put -- that I'm offering.

...Read More!