Sunday, November 21, 2004
There's been hints and whiffs of a war crime being committed here. That something out-of-bounds occured and should be addressed by an official body of the US.
Frankly, I agree. The full might and scrutiny of the United States of America should be applied to this obvious traitorous behavior. The full scorn and disgust of the American people should be felt by the singlular perpitraitor of this heinous act...
Who is the traitor? What is the act? What is the war crime? It is the network producer who released the content of this all-too-common tragedy of warfare. This short-sighted, weak excuse for a professional should be expelled from patriotic American scociety to live in France (or some other appropriate nation).
The decision to release that content comes from the same idiocy that interrupted regular programming to air a special report announcing the death of Arafat. Only this decision is much, much worse. It gives to our enemies propaganda to incite and inflame a population already restless. It further endangers our people over there and over here. And it does this to the exclusion of anything good or beneficial to our own people.
It begs the question, "Idiot, what are you doing?" And the answer, "People have a right to know..." is phoney baloney and they know it. (where that sentiment true, our airwaves would be filled with more of the good stuff, too) So, again, "Idiot, what are you doing?"
The frustration is endless. This soldier must live with the righteous - albeit still - stains of his actions from not only that day, but all the other days. Forever. He did nothing wrong. Period. In fact, if he didn't act the way he did, I would be hard-pressed as his commander to trust him in battle.
Our guy was totally justified in his actions. The video guys were totally unjustified by their actions. The video guys need to go... and their replacements would be very wise to learn from their predecessors' collosal and dangerous derth of judgement.
Sunday, November 14, 2004
Things are settling down now that the election is over. The lefty nutburgers are fading once again into the woodwork, although I think it will take a little while longer to punch themselves out.
I think the swan song of these guys was Lawrence O'Donnell's blurt about "a serious discussion of cessation on the next 20 years." Democrats tried that already once and it didn't quite work out. Do they want to go for 0 for 2?
Wouldn't it be great if these whiners took all that tantrum-energy and focused it on solving something - I mean really solving a national ill. One thing - just one! Now, they would have to do it all on their own (no taxes or whatnot).
With the Soros-level money men, movie stars and singers' millions, they could end poverty in the Appalachian Mountains. They could enrich the Arts programs in inner city schools. They could go a long way to improving the culture of violence and exploitation that plague young minority men in the population centers of America. They could do so many valueable things...
But they won't. They'll just rant and whine and spin tales of paranoia and conspiracy.
Thursday, November 04, 2004
I reject this as supremely absurd and beyond riduculous.
The reality is that he did effectively communicate his personhood. He effectively broadcast his policies, ideals, personality, etc. Americans saw, understood, and decided who shall be President of the United States based on the full disclosure of Kerry on Kerry.
The decision was: No, thank you. Period.
No amount of revelations or communications would have changed the outcome (untruths and malicious manipulations notwithstanding). Kerry came, was seen, and was rejected precisely because he is who he is and what he believes. There's nothing underhanded or mean about that rejection. It is a reality of a presidential election. One (or more) guy loses - and there's nothing wrong with that.
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
I can't say how happy I am to see Kerry's call to concede the contest to President Bush. Do you think he had a moment of clarity where he saw that there was no place for him in the Oval Office? Do you think he got a call from Bill after Ted left late last night? Do we really care?
I'm glad it's finally over, but I think there's some spanking to do. Namely, the MSM, exit pollsters, all those singers, actors, and sundry performers, and finally, the MoveOn guys et al. These guys have manipulated, cajoled, and perhaps even cheated some.
And George W. Bush beat them all, with a little help from us.
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush! Bush!
Monday, November 01, 2004
Tuesday, October 26, 2004
The uncoordinated, yet unmistakable relationship between the likes of 60 Minutes/New York Times and the DNC/Democrat Elites is very much the same as the uncoordinated, yet unmistakable relationship between Saddam Hussein and Al Queda.
Monday, October 25, 2004
Elizabeth Edwards, courtesy of CSPAN, was caught on tape saying another evil thing. (the "Cheney family is ashamed of their daughter" was the first that broke through my radar)
This is a giant, steaming, black, tarry, lump of yuk for the Dems. Once again, shoing the true nature of the they have become.
I remain repulsed. My mom, who was so turned off by her first remark, says that I am "looking at it wrong." I said, "How else do you look at it? What would a smart lady like that be doing saying something so obviously ... well, threatning?"
Yikes! I am left shaking my head... I really wonder if this exchange will get any airtime. It should.
Saturday, October 23, 2004
I've been meaning to post on this for a couple of days, but am only now getting to it...
So, Kerry seems to be working double-time to undo the damage his wife Theresa did by saying that Mrs. Bush never had a real job, and then in some ways making it worse by saying she forgot that Mrs. Bush was a teacher and librarian (raising kids was notably absent from the job history -- oops!).
The subject of his radio address was written to address women... talking about how he will "fight" to close the so-called "wage gap," how raising the minimun wage to $7/hr will lift women and children out of poverty, filling grocery carts is hard, blah, blah, blah...
Is this an attempt to make up for his wife's collosal gaffe? Or is this an attempt to persuade all those Security "health-care-doesn't-matter-if-you're-killed-by-a-car-bomb" Moms that he's a better candidate?
I think that the former may be more true, because in this address he didn't mention his tough-talk on Iraq. If so, do we really want a President who must actively and publically clean up his wife's mistakes?! Do we really want a naturalized (is she?) billionairess in the White House shooting off her mouth every day because she so stinkin' rich she doesn't have to give a fig what anybody thinks? Do we really want to have to create a new Federal Department of Keeping Theresa Heinz-Kerry's Foot Out of Her Mouth (or, FDOKTHKFOHM).
Oh sure, it would be funny for a few weeks, but then it will become a national embarassment. Honestly, if President(gak!) Kerry has to run around apologizing for his gouche wife, how can he effectively lead? Do we really want that?
I think not.
PS. I want my elephant back!
Thursday, October 21, 2004
This is a huge gamble for Democrats. If they step in, declare victory and name a national security staff before the dust settles, they will be seen as interlopers attempting a coup d'etat... with a pledge to defend his claim?! Are you kidding me???
This is a new low in thuggery with the American Left... even if it's, "If we don't win, were gonna sue!" or "If we don't win, we'll say we did and make the prove it!" -- they are both doomsday scenarios, from a civil standpoint.
The Left is more willing to hijack our nation instead of taking it like men in the face of defeat.
What kind of message does that send our people? Our kids? Our allies? Our enemies?
I really hope this story gets some legs, because it is another keen insight in to the very heart and character of the rulers of today's Democrat Party.
Monday, October 18, 2004
"In 250 words or less, why vote for Bush and what's wrong with Kerry?"
What’s right about Bush?
He promised a tax cut to all Americans and all Americans now pay fewer taxes.
He promised to raise standards in our schools and passed the No Child Left Behind Act.
He promised that those who harbor terrorists are just as guilty and will be captured or killed accordingly, and Saddam Hussein in sitting a jail cell, and 75% of the largest terror network in the world are dead or jailed.
He promised to promote a culture of life and passed the partial-birth abortion ban.
He promised to help seniors with their prescription drugs, and the Medicare Supplemental Drug Bill for Seniors was passed.
He promised free elections for Afghanistan, and Afghanistan has completed it’s first free election ever.
What’s wrong with Kerry?
He wants a government-run health plan that doesn’t have anything to do with the government.
Before using force, he wants to pass a truth standard/global test, but says it won’t amount to a veto.
He warns that Bush will re-instate the Draft, but wants to expand our Armed forces by 40,000.
He pledges not to raise taxes, but will “roll-back tax cuts” the moment he reaches office.
He wants to fix Social Security by not doing anything.
He wants to protect us from nuclear weapons by exporting nuclear technologies.
After two decades of never taking a leadership role in government, he wants to be the leader of the free world.
One man is a man of his word and one man is a man of just words.
Sunday, October 17, 2004
I could just spit.
Sometime between 10am this morning and 1:15pm this afternoon, someone "borrowed" (read: stole) my cast aluminum elephant statue, leaving the Bush/Cheney sign untouched.
I'm all for pranks, but this is not one. This is a theft for the purposes of a punishment of some sort. Were this a prank, the elephant would be tipped over, egged, tp'ed, turned upside down; or the sign turned upside down, taken or otherwise maligned somehow. This, however was meant to inflict a pain. Why else take the heavy, bulky, relatively expensive, rare thing versus the light, cheap, common, easily concealable thing?
All circumstance points to one of the neighbors as the culprit. How much does that suck?!
I've called around, and nobody's seen anything, including strangers (in cars or otherwise).
Perhaps it will be returned -- I don't know. Call me a poor sport, but this is super un-cool and I am pissed.
Well, a couple of interesting things happened, but the thing in particular was a response my Bill Kristol on the matter of trusting one news source over another (or something). It's a good thing I TiVo'ed it, because at first I didn't think I heard him right.
He said something along the lines of, "Why are we expected to believe Dan Rather after what he had to say about where the documents he obtained came from? ... " Which was I think the second example of what I thought was a scathing riff of MSM's recent track record of egregiously manipulating the public's consumption of news.
Kristol superlatively illustrated in about four anecdotal examples, the problem with news organizations. What made it so damning was that he rattled off a collection of very recent examples that occured pretty much all in a row and that he said all in a row pretty much without interruption. (the opposition's best tool is interruption!) This rash of bias, I think, rises to the level of congressional inquiry. (But then, I guess it would be more fun to let the markets decide -- it just takes sooo long!)
This ongoing manipulation of The News is a giant story, and I recognize that lots of ink has been dedicated to it. But I think that a larger picture/pattern needs to be presented to the American people. And it needs to be presented in a reasoned, methodical, non-screechy way by someone fair-minded, non-partisan, and with an off-the-charts Q rating. (sorry Stossel, O'reilly, Goldberg, et al!)
Of course I'll allow for the possibillity that perhaps everything is already in motion, and I'm the one who should take a step back and look!
Saturday, October 16, 2004
If you haven't read it already, Ender's Game is a book written... oh, orignially I think it was 1977 or so as a novella and then re-worked into a novel in the mid-80s by a fellow called Orson Scott Card. Shadow of the Hegemon was written much later, I think published in late 2000. (To me, it seems like the movie Starship Troopers was made in the same universe, though sometime after the end of the first book.)
Anyways, the understanding Card has of the development arc of technology is pretty impressive (and the story's good, too.) In particular is the rise of global conversations held by individuals on the 'Nets,' and the subsequent political power certain individuals gather by analysis and debate of world events.
Does this make Cheney as guilty as Kerry/Edwards of using is daughter Mary for political gain? No; but is was a brilliant move nonetheless. And I do think it was a move... a move to expose Kerry/Edwards as the bottom-feeders they have proved themselves to be.
The reason this story has legs is because is goes to the central character of these men and their surragates. I, too, saw the hesitation by Kerry when he made that infamous remark. It seemed as though he didn't want to say it - like he was coming through on a dare or something.
It doesn't matter, though. He did it. And by doing so, Cheney's trap laid a week before was sprung tighter than -- well I can't think of anything right now... but something really tight!
I think this episode shows us a little more about Cheney/Bush, too. They had the maturity, patience, and right-ness to get themselves out of the way and allow these Kerry/Edwards guys set themselves up and knock themselves out.
Friday, October 15, 2004
Q. How deep a hole have John Kerry, Mary Beth Cahill and the Edwards dug for themselves? How lasting the damage?
A. The clear strategy to besmirch the Cheney family by the backhanded remarks in the Vice-Presidential debate and again in the 3rd Presidential debate is totally unconscionable. If this were Colonial America, I would see them yoked in the town square so that folk could rightly scorn and throw rotted vegetables at them for a week. But hey, I’m a Republican. I was never going to vote Democrat, anyway.
Furthermore, I don’t know enough people to predict how lasting the damage is to the Kerry/Edwards campaign and to the Democrat Party. But I can tell you how my mom, a self described loyal Democrat and “freethinker” reacted.
When Edwards seemed to go out of his way to mention Ms. Cheney, my mom said, “Well, maybe [Edwards] was trying to be nice and talk about the strength of their family by bringing it up.” Though she couldn’t stop the grimace on her face when she said it.
Then Kerry repeated it, Mrs. Cheney responded, and Mrs. Edwards pointed out the Cheney family’s “shame.”
My mom is totally disgusted. She was convinced that Edwards was the Democrat’s Golden Boy. Edwards now has lost her vote, forever. These three utterances by Edwards, Kerry, and Mrs. Edwards have forever turned my mom off to the Democrat Party. (She disregards Cahill’s remarks.)
Kerry/Edwards created such a shocking reduction of positive regard that the hole they created is, in fact, a black hole from which they may never escape.