BushCheney2004

Friday, July 30, 2004

For all of your John Kerry acceptance speech, check out Blogs for Bush.

I'll be in Vegas so blogging will be non-existent ;)
- posted by KP @ Friday, July 30, 2004 |

Thursday, July 29, 2004

Does the Kerry Campaign Know the Truth About Their Own Campaign? (cont.)

The story that won't die!

I blogged about this one earlier, but like many stories mainstream media ignores, the blogosphere has kept the fires burning with this one and traditional media is catching on:

The "bunny suit" pictures of Sen. John Kerry climbing around inside the shuttle Discovery earlier this week disappeared from NASA's Web site for several hours today, but the bizarre political flap surrounding them will not go away.

NASA's lawyers advised the agency to delete from its Internet sites the pictures of Kerry and three current and former senators, including legend John Glenn, getting an exclusive tour of Kennedy Space Center and the shuttle during a campaign swing through here Monday. Later in the day, after a legal review, NASA decided to put the photos back online.

But it doesn't end there!

Not to be outdone, the lawyers (aka John Edwards' pre-Senate professional peers) got involved and tried to get the photos removed (by claiming this technicality only wonks like me knew or understand -- hey, I grew up in the DC area) but compromised by having these ridiculous photos appear on the NASA site:

Which obviously looks far more ridiculous than the original photo.

But WAIT! There's more! The lawyers have once again enetered the fray and cleared the photos for posting by NASA! (scroll to 4pm update) Yea! Lawyers saved the day...

... Or was it the teletubbies?

Photo via Allahpundit.
- posted by KP @ Thursday, July 29, 2004 |

Wednesday, July 28, 2004

Does the Kerry Campaign Know the Truth About Their Own Campaign? Part II

After their previous gaffe was called a "dirty trick" and wrongly blamed on Republicans, you would think the Donkeys would get their stories straight before assigning blame, wouldn't you? If so, you'd be wrong:

Ever since voters began telling Teresa Heinz Kerry that they didn't think much of the pumpkin spice cookie recipe her office had submitted to Family Circle's presidential cookie bake-off, an aide said, Mrs. Heinz Kerry, the wife of the about-to-be Democratic nominee, has been thinking how she could tell America the truth: the recipe isn't hers.

So who is at fault for this bad recipe? Why, "sombody" with an ulterior motive:

Mrs. Heinz Kerry said: "Somebody at my office gave that recipe out and, in fact, I think somebody really made it on purpose to give a nasty recipe. I never made pumpkin cookies; I don't like pumpkin spice cookies."

But the kicker is this:

Ms. Romash would not say why Mrs. Heinz Kerry would think an aide would want to harm her.

Um, maybe the answer is Mrs. Heinz has been reading the Kerry campaign's talking points for responding to embarrassing gaffes?

As I keep saying, you can't make this stuff up.
- posted by KP @ Wednesday, July 28, 2004 |

Winning the War on Terror: Afghanistan Update

Following Bill Clinton's speech Monday night, many Democrats would like to forget the truth about the false sense of security American's felt as Clinton left office. The Taliban ruled Afghanistan with a murderous iron fist and harbored the most nototorious terroriust in the world in Osama bin Laden. Well, a lot has changed since reality shook the world on 9/11 and it seems Afghanistan and millions of others are a lot better off for it:

The first-ever public opinion poll in Afghanistan shows that people there are optimistic about the future and excited about upcoming elections. . . .

Afghanistan has a constitution, is registering voters and is moving toward holding a presidential election in October. And the survey of 804 randomly selected male and female Afghan citizens, commissioned by the Asia Foundation notes that:

* 64 percent say the country is heading in the right direction.

* 81 percent say that they plan to vote in the October election.

* 77 percent say they believe the elections will "make a difference."

* 64 percent say they rarely or never worry about their personal safety, while under the Taliban only 36 percent felt that way.

* 62 percent rate President Hamid Karzai's performance as either good or excellent.

This was no pro-Bush put-up job. The polling firm, Charney Research, is a partisan Democratic polling firm. And superstar Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, who's read the study — and who has worked on similar polling in developing countries — calls it "very reliable."

Hat tip Instapundit.
- posted by KP @ Wednesday, July 28, 2004 |

Misrepresenting the Truth: Democrat's Convention on Stem Cell Research

A lot of hoopla was made over Ron Reagan Jr's "non-partisan" speech (and if you believe it was non-partisan I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you). Well, it turns out this "independant" commentator plays with the truth as much as the Democrats he so loves:

There was also some discussion of embryonic stem cell research last night. The Bush Administration is actually the first in history to provide Federal funding for this research, as this chart shows:

At the same time stem cell research is dramatically expanded, the President's policy recognizes an important ethical principle: that our government should not sanction the destruction of a human embryo.

The Democrat's misleading information is laughable and more and more obvious to any diligent reader.
- posted by KP @ Wednesday, July 28, 2004 |

Tuesday, July 27, 2004

Does the Kerry Campaign Know the Truth About Their Own Campaign?

Matt Drudge is reporting the Kerry campaign's response to the cornball photos taken of John Kerry's visit to the Kennedy Space Center:

Kerry campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill claims 'dirty tricks' by NASA after it released 'surprise' photographs showing the Dem presidential hopeful dressed in a space suit crawling through a rocket hatch.

Cahill, asked by FOXNEWS whether it was a dirty trick, said: 'Well, what do you think?' No photos were supposed to be taken, she said.

Be sure to read the transcript Drudge provides to see their prevaricating and attempted smear of Republicans. Check out Glenn Reynold's take on the Kerry campaign's own web of lies regarding these photos:

How out of touch is the Kerry campaign? A bunch of these pictures were made public on the Kennedy Space Center website. As reader David Mayer emails: "Just scroll on past the (pretty cool) MESSENGER stuff, and there's a series of official Bunny Senator photos. It's pretty hard not to look dumb in a suit like this; that's why few people have them in their wardrobe. But pretending that it's all a dirty trick is very avoidably stupid."

"Avoidably stupid." Not much of a campaign style. Perhaps they'll do better. But hey, not everybody thinks it's stupid. Reader Bill McLane emails: "What a genius this guy is! Who else would have cleverly gone for the bee keeper vote?"

As I said before, you can't make this stuff up.
- posted by KP @ Tuesday, July 27, 2004 |

Pagans For Kerry

Feel free to join this growing list of Pagans for Kerry:

This is a group for Pagans and Agnostic believers. George Bush has voilated our constitutional rights...

George Bush has already attacked many minority groups. Targeting "gay marriage", womens rights, veterans benefits, elders care, children programs, HIV underfunding, removing "patriot" rights... how long do you think it will be, before George Bush goes after Pagans?

Vote God out of office in November!

Which right-winger brought this to you? Why Rob at DailyKos of course:

A new Yahoo group KerryPagan has been started to organize the NeoPagan community for Kerry Edwards. The NeoPagan community (which includes Pagan, Wicca, Druid, and Asatru) is the fastest growing religious group in the United States with an estimated 1 to 5 million members. It is the 5th largest nationally behind Christianity, Judaism, Islam and Hinduism.

You can't make this stuff up.
- posted by KP @ Tuesday, July 27, 2004 |

A Theory on the Bush Hatred

Instapundit is pointing his readers to Virginia Postrel's interesting explanation for the Bush hatred so prevelant in today's society:

When I was in New York a few weeks ago, a friend in the magazine business told me he thinks the ferocious Bush hating that he sees in New York is a way of calming the haters' fears of terrorism. It's not rational, but it's psychologically plausible--blame the cause you can control, at least indirectly through elections, rather than the threats you have no control over.
I thought of that insight today when I glanced at Maureen Dowd's column and read this sentence, "Maybe it's because George Bush is relaxing at his ranch down there (again) while Osama is planning a big attack up here (again)."

That is the voice of a petulant child, angry that she has a tummy ache while Daddy is at work or Mommy is visiting a friend, or the voice of a grouchy wife angry that she has a migraine while her husband is out coaching the kids' baseball team. You're upset that you're in pain (we've all been there), so you get mad at someone whose presence wouldn't make the pain any better.

No mature student of politics believes the president of the United States goofs off on vacation. It's not the kind of job you escape. George Bush may be completely insane to voluntarily spend July in Texas--as opposed to Bill Clinton's favored coastal retreats--but Osama bin Laden is no more or less a threat than in Bush were in Washington. But if blaming Bush makes people feel better, safer, or at least able to focus their anger on someone they can hurt, they'll blame Bush.

I think there is a lot of merit in this as I regularly discuss politics with both friend and foe in New York and find their hatred less about his choices. All rational people I know admit Saddam was evil and Bush was using the best available intelligence but they still don't think war should have been the option at that time. However, the visceral reaction could partially be explained by the helplessness that terrorism inspires.

All I can tell you is the terrorism strengthens my resolve. But then again, I am voting for Bush (surprise).
- posted by KP @ Tuesday, July 27, 2004 |

Sunday, July 25, 2004

Michael Moore to be Very Visible at Democrat's Convention

This should be fun:

Michael Moore will walk the Democratic convention floor after all.

In fact, he'll give an interview to Larry King, appear on MSNBC with Ron Reagan and talk on ABC's "Good Morning America" from the floor this week.

He'll even share a box at the convention with invited VIP guests such as Al Franken and Ben Affleck.

Moore said Saturday that the Democratic Party is welcoming him, even though he first believed a "low-level, disgruntled person" was trying to deny him the access he sought to the convention.

Of course, in Moore's eyes, it could only be the "little people" who would deny passes for a man of Moore's stature . . . HA!

- posted by KP @ Sunday, July 25, 2004 |

Is the New York Times a Liberal Newspaper?

"Of course it is."

-- Daniel Okrent, public editor for The New York Times, 7/25/04

That is the lede in his column today. Read the whole thing and send it to every liberal friend you know.

Update: Roger Simon, a man who voted for Gore in 2000 but with vote for Bush in 2004 (hello Mort Kondracke! there's one for you) has summed up the implications of the above article nicely:

For this reason, they will end up giving tremendous space and blind acceptance to obvious prevaricators who support what they think is their side (Joseph C. Wilson), while doing their best, at least for a while, to change the subject on embarrassments to what they believe to be their own cause (Sandy Berger). And, of course, the UN Oil-for-Food scandal is seemingly far less important to them than Enron, although UNSCAM, objectively, has vastly greater implications for humanity.

Indeed.
- posted by KP @ Sunday, July 25, 2004 |

Saturday, July 24, 2004

African-Americans and the GOP

I have written more than a few posts on this topic although I ignored the non-story of Bush skipping the NAACP convention due in large part to their racist ads against him in 2000.

Well, at his Urban League speech the President poses some great questions for the black community. Questions I believe will resonate far more strongly them than the NAACP or Democratic party would like you to believe:

Does the Democrat party take African American voters for granted?

Is it a good thing for the African American community to be represented mainly by one political party?

How is it possible to gain political leverage if the party is never forced to compete?

Have the traditional solutions of the Democrat party truly served the African American community?

Does blocking the faith-based initiative help neighborhoods where the only social service provider could be a church?

Does the status quo in education really, really help the children of this country?

Does class warfare -- has class warfare or higher taxes ever created decent jobs in the inner city?

Are you satisfied with the same answers on crime, excuses for drugs and blindness to the problem of the family?

Indeed. Thanks Glen.
- posted by KP @ Saturday, July 24, 2004 |

My Kind of Republican National Convention Protest

As someone living in New York City, I had passively followed the comical conflict over the protest efforts of those who oppose the liberation of millions and thereby end up siding with genocidal dictators. These people are more laughable since now that they have permits to march past the convention and down the west-side of Manhattan, they are complaining that the city isn’t FUNDING their protests by providing the “protesters with water and toilets; commit to not using metal barricades; give the group about $150,000 for a sound system; and provide free subway passes, as well as a shuttle from nearby stations”! Are you kidding me???

I was alerted to a couple of unique posts regarding the designs of protesters at the Republican National Convention of groups like Not In Our Name and Counter Convention. Well, the post that really inspired me was Greg.org’s post:

How I Would Protest At The Republican Convention

Due to a work-related trip out of the country, I will miss the Republican Convention when it comes to town. If I were here, I would protest. I would not use signs, or puppets, or chants; I would protest by reenacting the shocked, dusty exodus from lower Manhattan on the morning of September 11th.
Here's how I would do it:

- start downtown, maybe even below Canal street
- wear expendable business attire.
- set up a step ladder on the street and,
- using a mesh tray like they use for goldpanning or a handsifter, even, I would have a friend cover me with dust.
- It would be chalk dust, or line chalk from a football field, rosin, baby powder, or some other fine, whitish, grayish non-toxic dust.
- I would cover my mouth with a handkerchief while doing this, snd keep it with me to wipe my sweaty, dusty face.
- I would offer to cover as many thousands of my fellow protestors in the same manner.
- Then, I would start walking north.
- Or I would start walking across the Brooklyn Bridge, en masse.
- I would let verisimilitude and photogenics dictate my route more than proximity to Madison Square Garden.
- I would be eerily, even unsettlingly, quiet and orderly.
I would take seriously my responsibility as a New Yorker who lived through that horrible day, and take its symbolism back from the politicians who ignored the warnings, did nothing to prepare, sat or flailed wildly when it happened, sowed fear with it ever since, used it to falsely justify a war of misplaced vengeance, put us all in even greater danger than we were before, and who are now coming to town to usurp the most widely shared monument to their failure.

But maybe that's just me.

Greg's protest idea is brilliant. If they could actually pull that off, I would support their efforts for water, funding speakers, whatever. And I am a tax-cutting, free market, pro-Bush, pro-liberation Republican.

Please, please, please remind EVERYONE what happened that day. Please, please, please remind everyone that this was a conflict STARTED BY THE JIHADISTS but will be finished by us. Please, please, please never forget that day. I pray the protestors are "smart" enough to pull Greg's idea off.

But maybe that is just me.
- posted by KP @ Saturday, July 24, 2004 |

Dishonor and Dishonesty From Sandy Berger

Following Matt's post, I feel compelled to double post. This is so typical of the disingenuousness and dishonesty rampant in the Democratic party, with Sandy Berger stepping aside (as if he wouldn't be shoved out the door!) as an adviser to the Kerry campaign with the following explanation:

"Mr. Berger does not want any issue surrounding the 9/11 commission to be used for partisan purposes. With that in mind he has decided to step aside as an informal adviser to the Kerry campaign until this matter is resolved," said Lanny Breuer, Berger's attorney.

WHAT!!???? Use the 9/11 Commission for partisan purposes???

That is the only thing the Democrats HAVE used the 9/11 commission for. They timed the release of Richard Clarke's anti-Bush book to his testimony. Berger himself pointed the finger directly at Dr. Condoleeza Rice in his opening statement (see my original post for the exact text). Democratic Commissioners have grandstanded and filibustered throughout their questioning (only to accuse the Republican respondants of exactly that). And this doesn't even scratch the surface of the criminal investigation on Berger's actions and motives for violating serious laws in his developing scandal.

What a martyr for "sacrificing" his position as adviser to keep partisanship out of the 9/11 Commission and its report. The pathetic legacy of the Clinton era's dishonesty continues.
- posted by KP @ Saturday, July 24, 2004 |

Monday, July 19, 2004

Kerry Campaign Adviser Guilty of "3rd Rate Burglary"?

John Kerry chief foreign policy adviser, Democratic Committee Platform member and someone seen as short-listed for a Kerry administration secretary of state, Sandy Berger, is being investigated for removing classified documents and keeping them from the 9/11 Commission:

President Clinton's national security adviser, Sandy Berger, is the focus of a criminal investigation after removing highly classified terrorism documents and handwritten notes from a secure reading room during preparations for the Sept. 11 commission hearings, The Associated Press has learned.

Berger's home and office were searched earlier this year by FBI agents armed with warrants after he voluntarily returned documents to the National Archives. However, some drafts of a sensitive after-action report on the Clinton administration's handling of al Qaeda terror threats during the December 1999 millennium celebration are still missing.

Berger and his lawyer said Monday night he knowingly removed handwritten notes he had made while reading classified anti-terror documents he reviewed at the archives by sticking them in his jacket and pants. He also inadvertently took copies of actual classified documents in a leather portfolio, they said.

Berger says he was "sloppy" and apologizes, but this is an incredible breach on Berger's part and should be investigated thoroughly. If Berger were a Republican you can imagine the major frontpage news this story would be in all the liberal rags.

Well before this I though Berger would go down as one of the worst NSA's in history. This only augments his perceived ineptness and further solidifies the Clinton Administration's legacy as one of the most ethically dubious ever.

Update: Berger's 9/11 Commission testimony has a few interesting nuggets in light of his pilfering of classified intelligence documents from the Commission's grasp:

as your intensive investigation surely has revealed, it is easier to see how puzzle pieces fit together when you have in hand the final picture. History is written through a rearview mirror but it unfolds through a foggy windshield. Our challenge now is to sharpen, to the greatest extent we can, our ability to look forward, because the dangers and opportunities our country must confront he before us, not behind.

When the Clinton administration ended, we did our best to alert the incoming team to the terrorist threat in general and the al Qaeda threat specifically. During the transition, Bush administration officials received intensive briefings on terrorism. As the press has reported, I told my successor Condoleezza Rice that she would be spending more time on terrorism and bin Laden than any other issue.

...

A New York Times editorial captured the feelings of many Americans on the first anniversary of the September 11 attacks: "By now we've all mapped our whereabouts in the city of memory - where we stood, what we saw, who we knew or lost, how close we came, how far away we felt." None of us will ever forget that day - what we lost and why we grieve.

We have a responsibility of sober review - of asking the questions and demanding the answers that will help prevent such a brutal event from ever occurring again. A candid and fair examination of our experience is essential - neither to airbrush the past. nor to superimpose today's knowledge on yesterday's decision-making environment, but to help us sharpen our sights and our abilities as we move forward. As I said at the outset, the dangers and opportunities our country must confront lie before us, not behind.

Apparently there were a few puzzle pieces Berger never wanted anyone to see as well as blur any sharpening of the view on the Clinton Administration's actions to thwart Al Qaeda.
- posted by KP @ Monday, July 19, 2004 |

Sunday, July 18, 2004

What John Kerry Beileves on Iraq -- And Why the GOP Publicizes It More Often

Despite damning reports to the contrary, John Kerry would like you to believe that George Bush lied about pre-war intelligence involving Iraq to such an extent that people such as John Kerry (and the American public) were dupped into supporting the war effort. Well, the Bush campaign has a nice little response to this deceptive strategy of the Kerry campaign:

By the time the American people vote in November, expect the Bush campaign to try to box the Democratic presidential candidate in like this: Kerry had the same intelligence information as President Bush on Iraq, made statements to indicate he believed in the same threats, and voted to support Bush's position. So either he made a big mistake himself or the president made the correct decision.

"If Sen. Kerry now wants to come out and say, ' I looked at the intelligence ... I said (Hussein) was a danger. I said he had weapons of mass destruction. But the president is a liar for saying the same thing?' That's going to be a hard sell to the American people,'' Rove said in an interview during a stopover in Sacramento on Friday.

"In order to be intellectually honest, then (the Democratic presidential team) has got to say if Bush is wrong for believing these things, Kerry is equally wrong for believing them as well."

Of course, the Kerry campaign's response is a typical Democrat non-response. First, attack the messanger:

Kerry's campaign Saturday fired back at Rove over his suggestion that the Massachusetts senator wants it both ways on Iraq.

Rove is doing what he does best, which is attack, attack, attack. Maybe he should be spending his time coming up with a plan instead of attacking John Kerry

Huh? Excuse me? Karl Rove is a political advisor, he has not and does not determine policy -- despite the drumbeat of accusations from the Left ever since Bush took office. But you can almost forgive the Democrats reflexive response since every testimonial coming out of the Clinton White House said that instead of showing leadership and making unpopular yet needed decisions, politics absolutely drove the debate in deciding issues. Now that this has changed under the Bush White House, the Donkeys are slow to pick that up.

But it gets better. In their second breath they actually articulate a response in the general direction of the original Bush position they are asked to address:

"John Kerry voted to get rid of Saddam Hussein, but he was very clear that his position was that he believed we needed an international effort and not rush to war in a go-it-alone strategy.''

Let's break this response down:

1) John Kerry voted to get rid of Saddam Hussein -- as we all know he voted to get rid of Saddam Hussein BEFORE he voted against funding our troops to do the job. Nice show of leadership there Mr. Senator.

2) We needed an international coalition -- Yea, those public and physical statements of support from Britain, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Poland and Denmark, as well as Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia and Australia, Japan and others don't really make it an International Coalition. My bad.

3) Not a Rush to War -- Unlike President Clinton in Bosnia, George W. Bush patiently and painstakingly went ot the United Nations and deliberated month after month in the run-up to war and successfully came away with unanimous approval for United Nation's Resolution 1441 which authorized the US liberation of Iraq should Saddam Hussein be found in material breech. Hussein was in breech and Iraq was liberated despite the protests of "old Europe" and the rest of the countries who were being bribed in the billions of dollars by Saddam and the scandal laden UN Oil for Food program.

4) Go-it-alone effort -- see #2

So the Kerry campaign's response is typically disasterous, but Karl Rove doesn't leave it at that. He really drives the stake in with the following:

"I dare you to tell me what their plan is on education. I dare you to tell me what their plan is on health care,'' Rove said. "I dare you to tell me what their plan is on virtually any major issue."

"At the end of the day, there's no doubt in my mind that people will say we have a steady, solid, resolved leader who knows what it is that he wants to do and how he's going to get there,'' Rove said, "particularly somebody who shares our values and views on the economy ... our communities, and the challenges facing our society."

Response from the Donkeys?

We're still waiting.

- posted by KP @ Sunday, July 18, 2004 |

Thursday, July 15, 2004

Whoopi Goldberg Slim-Fast Ad - We Aren't Smart Enough to Make This Up

Below is the actual Slim-fast ad featuring "former" (hehe) Slim-fast spokesman, Whoopi Goldberg:

Well that may be the ad, but I think more and more of America think it's the truth!!!

- posted by KP @ Thursday, July 15, 2004 |

Wednesday, July 14, 2004

Kerry Economic Program "Hard to Reconcile With Reality"

From a survey at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School of Business (arguably the #1 Business School in America), professor Jeremy Siegel has some interesting comments:

According to Siegel, however, Kerry's focus on middle-class economic woes is tough to reconcile with economic reality. "When you have a little bit more than 6% unemployment, that means you have more than 93% employment. With job losses now quite rare, the fear that employees will lose their jobs has diminished rapidly … I don't think I see a big squeeze [on the middle class]," Siegel adds. "It's a hard theme to play for. It played a lot better six months to a year ago when job losses were the fear, when people thought they would be next. That subject today is not as potent as it was."

Check out the whole thing or an extended post at Blogs fro Bush.
- posted by KP @ Wednesday, July 14, 2004 |

Monday, July 12, 2004

Remember, They're Not Against Bush, They're for the Terrorists

This article is almost too much to believe:

Fringe elements are hoping to spark major disruptions at the Republican National Convention with a series of sneaky tricks - including fooling bomb-sniffing dogs on trains bound for Penn Station, the Daily News has learned.

Internet-using anarchists are telling would-be troublemakers to decoy specially trained Labrador retrievers with gunpowder or ammonium nitrate-laced tablets in a bid to halt trains or even spur the evacuation of Madison Square Garden.

Top cops are girding against the attempt to foil strong anti-terrorist strategies aimed at protecting conventiongoers - including President Bush - as well as peaceful protesters during the Aug. 30 to Sept. 2 GOP fete.

"Where is the legitimate protest in trying to endanger the public?" an angry Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told The News.

"It is the height of irresponsibility," he added. "These hard-core groups are looking to take us on. ... They have increased their level of sophistication and violence."

So in addition to guarding against the most vile, organized and destructive of terrorists, Kelly and company have to combat a shadowy, loose-knit band of traveling troublemakers who spread their guides to disruption over the Internet.

Now, the typical democrat response is these are fringe elements of society whom they (the Democrats) don't condone etc. However, these are the identical people that make up the Democratic Underground who is linked on John Kerry's official site. Who are the Democratic Underground? Check out any of the below links provided by John Hawkins at Right Wing News:

Americans are just as bad as Al-Qaeda.

The US government had Nick Berg beheaded.

Your garden variety "Hate America" crowd.

And of course, the 10 worst posts from 2003.

Remember, this group is linked on John Kerry's official site. Yet they will disingenuously distance themself from the group in public and embrace them in private. They aren't anti-Bush, they're for the enemy.

Original article thanks to Blogs for Bush.
- posted by KP @ Monday, July 12, 2004 |

Sunday, July 11, 2004

Whose "Values" Are They Anyway?

So John Kerry thinks vulgar disrespecting of the President represents "the values of America" . . . :

Whoopi Goldberg delivered an X-rated rant full of sexual innuendoes against President Bush last night at a Radio City gala that raised $7.5 million for the newly minted Democratic ticket of John Kerry and John Edwards.
Waving a bottle of wine, she fired off a stream of vulgar sexual wordplays on Bush's name in a riff about female genitalia, and boasted that she'd refused to let Team Kerry clear her material. ...

Singer John Mellencamp sang a specially written song that called the president "just another cheap thug" and ridiculed him as the "Texas bambino." ...

Also on the Bush-bashing team was comedian Chevy Chase, who claimed the president is dumb as "an egg-timer" and said Edwards will make Vice President Dick Cheney look "as bright as a bundt cake" when they debate next fall. Latin comedian John Leguizamo said he refuses to believe there are any Hispanic Republicans, claiming that's "an oxymoron," because "Latins for Republicans - it's like roaches for Raid." ...

Kerry could be seen laughing uproariously during part of Goldberg's tirade - and neither he nor Edwards voiced a single objection to its tone when they spoke to the crowd. They hailed the fund-raiser as a great event. Edwards said it was "a great honor" to be there and insisted, "This campaign will be a celebration of real American values."

Hmmm, I think a couple hundred million Americans might disagree with him. Even the Washington Post has taken him to task for his dishonest distancing from the fundraising event.

Hat tip, Captain Ed.

UPDATE: Reader Charles Jones e-mails with some interesting ways to combat the hate speech of someone like Whoopi Goldberg:

For reason's unknown, Whoopi is officially employed as a spokesperson for Slimfast, appearing in Slimfast's webpage, TV and print adds. I would like to encourage people to email and let Slimfast know what they think about their spokesperson, and swear off Slimfast products until this vulgar person is released from their diet products contract!

Do your part today!

Thanks for writing Charles.
- posted by KP @ Sunday, July 11, 2004 |

What's It Like to Be Pro-George Bush in New York City?

Just ask Ari, from Ari Goes Down fame. (note: foul language inside):

Oof. The abject shock and disgust. The silence that suddenly engulfed the room. It would have been far warmer received had I said:

* ok, so the proper way to skin and prepare a squirrel is…
* oh, I don’t mind kicking the elderly.
* the Holocaust was like sleepaway camp for the European Jews.
* safe sex? But AIDS just a silly urban legend.
* there’s meat in the veggie lasagna, shh don’t tell anyone.
* so you don’t take from the collection plate? Interesting…
* I smuggle books out of the library all the time!
* 3 second rule applies to food that falls in the toilet.
* swastikas are both versatile and art deco!
* …and then I said screw the Hispanic community.
* is it just me, or was Uday Hussein kinda hot in that raffish way?
* poor people like being hungry, why else be poor & starving?
* ****ing Jews, they control the media and Wall Street.
* obese sweaty men without shirts really add to the subway ride fun.

...

But really, all I’d said was;

“There’s no way in hell I could vote for Kerry”

Hat tip, Karol.

PS: for the hypersensitive, Ari is a cute Jewish woman who, although a registered Democrat, is voting for Bush (thanks to the lobbying of the aforementioned Karol).
- posted by KP @ Sunday, July 11, 2004 |

Saturday, July 10, 2004

Joe Wilson is a Lying Sack of Shit . . . So Says the Washington Post

OK, they don't use my choice of words but in a scathing rebuke, the Washington Post shows that the Joe Wilson/Yellowcake Uranium Scandal/Publicity Tour was full of self-serving, dishonest and all-aroung wrong statments, allegations and propoganda by the former Ambassador who "outed" the Bush White House's ignoring of his warning that Iraq didn't seek Uranium from Niger. Turns out the White House was correct and Joe Wilson is a publicity seeking liar:

Former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, dispatched by the CIA in February 2002 to investigate reports that Iraq sought to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program with uranium from Africa, was specifically recommended for the mission by his wife, a CIA employee, contrary to what he has said publicly.

Wilson last year launched a public firestorm with his accusations that the administration had manipulated intelligence to build a case for war. He has said that his trip to Niger should have laid to rest any notion that Iraq sought uranium there and has said his findings were ignored by the White House.

Wilson's assertions -- both about what he found in Niger and what the Bush administration did with the information -- were undermined yesterday in a bipartisan Senate intelligence committee report.

The panel found that Wilson's report, rather than debunking intelligence about purported uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts. And contrary to Wilson's assertions and even the government's previous statements, the CIA did not tell the White House it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence that made its way into 16 fateful words in President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address.

Yesterday's report said that whether Iraq sought to buy lightly enriched "yellowcake" uranium from Niger is one of the few bits of prewar intelligence that remains an open question. Much of the rest of the intelligence suggesting a buildup of weapons of mass destruction was unfounded, the report said.

The report turns a harsh spotlight on what Wilson has said about his role in gathering prewar intelligence, most pointedly by asserting that his wife, CIA employee Valerie Plame, recommended him.

...

The report also said Wilson provided misleading information to The Washington Post last June. He said then that he concluded the Niger intelligence was based on documents that had clearly been forged because "the dates were wrong and the names were wrong."

"Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the 'dates were wrong and the names were wrong' when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports," the Senate panel said. Wilson told the panel he may have been confused and may have "misspoken" to reporters. The documents -- purported sales agreements between Niger and Iraq -- were not in U.S. hands until eight months after Wilson made his trip to Niger.

Now when Joe Wilson had tons of fabricated things to say against the Bush White House he was a media darling, getting top billing on all news shows and evening news programs. How much time do you imagine any of these news shows or evening news programs will spend telling the public that everything they reported was lies?

- posted by KP @ Saturday, July 10, 2004 |

Wednesday, July 07, 2004

Two Story's That Either Won't Be Published or Will Be Buried Deep in the News

The US Found Two Tons of Uranium in Iraq

British Intelligence Confirms Iraq Tried to Buy Uranium from Africa (and Niger Specifically)
- posted by KP @ Wednesday, July 07, 2004 |

The Ted Rall Quotient: Racism is "A-OK!" So Long As it is Against Republicans

Ted Rall is one of the lowest forms of human beings I can imagine. His utter contempt for others is beyond belief. We have seen his disgusting behavior before, but as usual no amount shame will stop his brand of hate speech. The latest attack is calling up the memory of racist remarks by Harry Bellafonte and other cartoonists:

What is scary is many more of the Left are lockstep with Ted Rall than you could ever imagine.

- posted by KP @ Wednesday, July 07, 2004 |

A stubborn Kid Rocks the Bush Vote

Not exactly but at least he stood up for the Prez and boycotted Fahrenheit
9/11. And believe me the weather stunk and there was nothing to do that night so
Kid Rock made a real sacrifice! (and the link opens with a nice Michael
Moore bashing note):

Standing in front of the box office and perusing the titles, [music producer Russell] Simmons suggested that everybody catch the 7:15 showing of "Fahrenheit 9/11."

Kid Rock balked.

"I don't want to see that, it's all propaganda," the rock star said - sparking
a prolonged political debate right there on the sidewalk.

"Russell, don't you understand, everything we got in this country, we got
from fighting," Kid Rock argued, according to Simmons' account. "It's just
a movie. ... I'd rather go to the bar across the street."

Kid Rock refused to see the movie, and said goodbye. The others bought tickets
and went into the theater.

A couple of hours later, Simmons returned to his parked car. On his windshield
was a scribbled note:

"Vote Bush. Bush Rocks," apparently written by Kid Rock himself.

Yea Kid Rock!!!!

- posted by KP @ Wednesday, July 07, 2004 |

Thursday, July 01, 2004

W is For "W"omen!

Even though the media will continually tell you about the "gender gap" and how women don't vote for Republicans (hey, what about the Democrats "gender gap" and the men who won't vote for Democrats?), these women seem to like our President quite a bit:

Women voters want their communities and homes to be safe from terrorists, and that is the most important single campaign issue for them, according to speakers at a women's rally Wednesday in Rogers for President Bush.

Featured speaker was Deena Burnett, widow of Tom Burnett, who died Sept. 11, 2001, after organizing fellow passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93 in a counterattack upon terrorists who hijacked their airplane. The plane crashed in rural Pennsylvania, in part because the passengers waited until the plane was over a rural area before rushing the cockpit. Mrs. Burnett moved to Little Rock with her three daughters after her husband's death, to be with family.

"It is necessary and comforting to have a strong leader like George W. Bush who values our place and role in the world" as a nation, Burnett told a group of at least 40 women, including Arkansas first lady Janet Huckabee, who met for the kickoff rally for the Arkansas "W is for Women," a group of volunteers in the president's re-election campaign. The group met in the Crumpet Tea Room in Rogers, which was selected in part as a business owned by a woman.

Why hasn't the media embraced women like Deena Burnett who supports the President like they embrace the 9/11 families who oppose the President? Oh, wait, my question answers itself.

(BTW: Flaherty just singled in the winning run over the Red Sox . . . so sorry Matt! Go Yankees!)
- posted by KP @ Thursday, July 01, 2004 |

John Kerry For Forest Fires

The Bush Administration has an exceptional "Healthy Forest Initiative" progarm that creates jobs and prevents forest fires. Of course, because John Kerry is actually an extreme liberal despite rhetoric trying to mask his 20+ year record, he is against Bush's plan.

The Bush-Cheney campaign says Senator John Kerry's criticism of efforts to ease wildfire threats with expedited logging of national forests shows how badly his brand of environmentalism is out of step with most Westerners.

Kerry's campaign countered that the Bush administration's forest policy is aimed more at bolstering timber industry profits than protecting communities from fire threats.

And Nevada Senator Harry Reid said Wednesday that President Bush has failed to make available the money necessary to effectively reduce fuel buildups near communities in the Sierra and around Lake Tahoe.

Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey ... says the Forest Service was able to reduce fuel build-up primarily through thinning forests across more than 2.5 million acres last year. That's about double the previous year. This year they expect to treat fuels on nearly four million acres this year as a result of the initiative's easing of some environmental restrictions.

Yeah, like most American, I too hate creating jobs and preventing forest fires . . . (sarcasm meter now off).
- posted by KP @ Thursday, July 01, 2004 |

Bush Campaign Airs New Ad Showing Kerry's Lack of Honesty
- posted by KP @ Thursday, July 01, 2004 |