President Bush will be in Milwaukee tomorrow, at an arena downtown that seats almost 13,000. I know of six different moms who are going, all with kids in tow. Should be quite the event.
Stay tuned; I'll be sure to blog about it when we get home.
Also, check out Ann Althouse writing on Instapundit, who also noted the slander against Ohioans that I noted this morning, spoken by Bob Kerrey on Meet the Press.
That's a convoluted sentence, but the point is that she and I reacted the same way when Kerrey said Ohioans "didn't give a damn about the war in Iraq." That's a direct quote from memory, but I checked it out and that's exactly what the transcript says. Go to the transcript link, do an Edit, Find on Page, "Damn". There you go.
Sunday, October 31, 2004
President Bush will be in Milwaukee tomorrow, at an arena downtown that seats almost 13,000. I know of six different moms who are going, all with kids in tow. Should be quite the event.
Heard some of the talking heads this morning.
Saturday, October 30, 2004
Yes, I know, I know, I said do not trust the polls. So you still shouldn't... but if you're getting all gloomy and doomy (as at least one person is, and I mean you, P.M.M.!) just go here for some very encouraging news. And while you're there, go to the main page and browse around; he's pretty good.
Now, I'm going to try to get the little kids to bed pretty soon, because this is my favorite night of the entire year: It's the get-one-more-hour-of-sleep night, yahoo!
Here's a great article about how the new Bin Laden tape shows that we are making major progress in this war, and why we should now re-elect Bush to see that war through to the end. Instapundit had the link first, of course. Here's a great paragraph from the end of the article:
Syndicated columnist Austin Bay, who just returned from several months in Iraq, wrote about how we are winning in August 2003. To students of this war, it is no surprise that many of al Qaeda's claws have been pulled. I say as always, we must not let down our guard but neither should we relent in the attack to crush al Qaeda now once for all. I think that there is a good chance the new bin Laden tape shows the corner has been turned. President Bush said after 2001 that the war against al Qaeda would occupy several successive administrations after his. I myself wrote in Sept. 2001 that the task ahead would take decades. Now I am more confident than ever. The collapse of Islamist terrorism may well come very quickly, especially as an internationally-coordinated effort. Casual Islamist terrorist groups will still work death, as in Chechnya, but the days of central resourcing and coordination out of al Qaeda are pretty much done.********
Now for something on the lighter side, because otherwise my head will explode. Here are some interesting little tidbits about the Blogosphere:
1) Some people now use faux html coding (like < strong > for bold) to indicate their sarcasm or lack thereof. E.g.: < sarc on > Oh I'm so scared by that Bin Laden tape. < /sarc off > Maybe this doesn't seem all that funny or clever to you, but if you're a neophyte html coder like me, it's a laugh riot, trust me.
2) The latest trend is to be first when posting a comment to a popular blog, and all you have to do is write "First!" and then post it. That's it. Funny, isn't it? Or just goofy? I report, you decide.
3) Hmmm. I guess I don't have a "3" right now. Sorry.
Back to cleaning the kitchen, while simultaneously trying to lighten up about the election. I'm still very confident, but the back-and-forth nature of this whole thing is making me crazed. I've talked to so many women lately who say the same thing: They can hardly stand the stress, and they can't wait for this to be over.
Now go and post your prediction!
Went door to door today; it was cold, unbelievably windy, and slightly damp and drizzly. My ears still haven't completely warmed up, 3 hours later. But that's not the reason for hope.
The reason for hope is this: At one neighbor's house, the woman told me that she always votes Republican, and her husband never has in his entire life.
Except this time. He'll be voting for George W. Bush.
I'm hoping there are millions more like him.
Now don't forget to go here and post your prediction! And scroll down for my other post from today, since I haven't really posted anything for awhile, just in case you want to know what I've been up to, blog-wise.
OK, guys, this is it. Three days left, time to throw your hat into the prognosticating ring.
I'll start. I'm sticking with my prediction of an Electoral landslide for Bush, with him getting over 310 Electoral College votes. Well, maybe that's not really a "landslide", as in Reagan/Mondale 1984 (oh, that would be so sweet!) but it's better than the possible 269-269 tie that's been talked about. Ugh.
As far as popular vote, I'm going with Bush 52%, Kerry 47%.
Now it's your turn. Put your predictions in a comment, anonymously or not. I was thinking about awarding a prize -- but then started to wonder if there are all kinds of legalities about awarding prizes in contests, and would that be considered betting on an election, etc. etc. So, for now let's just say that the prize will be bragging rights!
And I will be working and praying my way through every hour. Today, I'll be going door to door in the GOP GOTV effort, and then again on Monday and Tuesday, I'll be making phone calls. If you want to join in the effort to pray, go to this site and pledge as much or little as you wish: Fast For Hope. And if you haven't yet called your local GOP Victory office, please do so today! Talk to your neighbors, wear your Bush campaign pin everywhere you go, and above all, as Sean Hannity says, "let not your hearts be troubled!" (But who said it first? Jesus! John 14:1)
The President is going to be in Milwaukee Monday morning, and I would love to take the kids to go see him again, but don't know if we'll be able to swing it. I can imagine it's going to be a huge, very pumped-up crowd. I heard that Kerry's going to be in Milwaukee at about the same time, at City Hall (I'm guessing it's going to be another out-in-the-street kind of event, like he's been doing lately). That should be interesting, with both of them just blocks apart. Bet the Secret Service just loves that.
A few things have stacked up here since I last blogged (as I said, just too darn busy, and not only that but twice when I'd almost completed a long post, my PC just "blipped out" and shut down. AAARaaargh!!!) So, here they are:
1) Those wacky lefties over at Daily Kos and elsewhere are convinced that Repubs have to sign some sort of "loyalty oath" to get into a Bush event. What the heck are they talking about? I've been to one, and I know lots of people who have been to them, and there are no loyalty oaths. Sheeesh. Some Dems will believe anything, which could explain why they're voting for Kerry.
2) Funny how quickly the ABC video with the "American" Islamofascist fell off the news cycle, and the same with the 300 tons of explosives which turned out to be not such a big deal anyway. Osama shows up and hogs the limelight. Belmont Club notes that he seems to be surrendering, sort of. I'd have to tentatively agree. But I guess this definitely puts to rest the speculation that he's dead.
What effect will this have on the election? Really, I have no clue, but of course that won't stop me. So here's what I think: It will help Bush. There's sort of a rally-around-the-Prez effect, I believe, just from seeing Bin Laden again. But the main thing is how eerily similar Bin Laden's talking points are to Michael Moore's and thus Kerry's. Wouldn't that make any undecided voters switch to Bush? After all, who wants to vote for the candidate endorsed by Bin Laden?
Oh sure, I know he didn't really endorse Kerry, but since he sounded so much like Michael Moore, even talking about Bush being in the classroom on 9/11, it's sort of a proxy endorsement. Not only that, but the lefties at Daily Kos were quite panciky about how this might hurt their guy, and both Kos and Josh Marshall at another leftie site, Talking Points Memo, were spending considerable time and mental effort trying to calm them down. Point made.
3) The polls are completely worthless. DO NOT TRUST THEM. Nobody knows, this time around.
OK, I feel a little better having blogged today.
Just as I typed this, I got yet another automated phone call, this time from a pro-life group, asking me to vote for Bush and Michels. I can't count how many of those I've received, many from pro-Bush celebrities. Living in a battleground state has advantages, such as those visits from the President, but I have to say I'll be glad when we're not getting quite so much attention in terms of phone calls, TV commercials, and radio ads. Just three more days....
Thursday, October 28, 2004
Yep, another birthday to celebrate! My brother, faithful reader of this blog, who asks me why I haven't posted lately (standard answer: too busy), just celebrated a birthday! Yes, I'm late in posting this; his birthday was yesterday. So sue me.
Anyway, happy birthday, brother! And in your honor, here's a link to a very goofy little animation.
Visitors, feel free to post a birthday greeting in the comments section! Oh, and by the way, he just turned ... oh never mind, because if I rat on his age he'll tell everybody I'm older... so... he's somewhere in his 29's, I think.
Monday, October 25, 2004
The Chicago Tribune today had an article (Section 1, page 19) titled, "Kerry offers voters more personal glimpse with focus on faith".
"My faith, and the faith I have seen in the lives of so many Americans, teaches me that, 'whatever you do to the least of these, you do unto me,'" said Kerry, referring to a biblical statement of Jesus about helping the unfortunate.Exactly! Which is the best reason yet to be pro-life. If we kill the "least" of all of us, the defenseless, innocent, unborn baby, wouldn't that mean that we are committing a terrible crime against Jesus himself?
And still, Kerry doesn't get it.
Blogging will be light this week because I'm going to spend any spare time helping the campaign! Call TODAY if you haven't yet and sign up to help. Read this, from Captain Ed's blog:
You can deliver door hangers, make phone calls, drive people to the polls who can't get there on their own, or serve as poll watchers on Election Day. You can bet that our opponents have their ducks in a row for the final week, and if we want to compete we all need to sacrifice some of our time. I don't know about you, but I'd hate to wake up to find out that we lost the election and say to myself, "I could have done a couple of hours making calls instead of watching the Vikings last Sunday."
Sunday, October 24, 2004
The Democrats are going to pull something awful later this week, most likely Friday. Last time, they managed to drag up Bush's ancient DUI. It was true, but really not relevant, and the timing was the devious part.
This time, what could they possibly have? All the dirt that could ever be dug, has been. Bush has been president for four years; we know him about as well as is possible.
So, it'll have to be a big lie. Again, it's hard to imagine what they could have, even with a lie, because Michael Moore and Kitty Kelly have told pretty much told all the untruths imaginable about George W. Bush and his family.
Also, the Dems already played the Social Security scare card, and they've lied about how bad the economy is (because it's actually better than it was at the end of Clinton's second term), so that means they've used what are usually the two biggest issues.
As far as Iraq and the war on terror, Mainstream Media has helped the Dems quite a bit by focusing only on the negative and never reporting the progress being made. Not technically a lie, but certainly not the whole truth, either.
So I can't predict what the lie will be, but I do predict it will happen by Friday at the latest. Perhaps it will be of the "not the whole truth" variety, such as a spate of really bad news from Iraq. Perhaps there will be a dramatic lie about President Bush or someone in his cabinet. Whatever, it will be an attempt to keep Bush voters home, discouraged and disillusioned. I believe that this is the reason the Bush campaign has been consistently urging supporters to vote early via absentee ballots. (It also crossed my mind that they might have a concern about a terrorist attack that would disrupt voting, although no one seems to be talking about that anymore.)
Don't let it keep you home, whatever it is.
Funny: David Broder is on "Meet the Press" and I just now heard him tell people to vote early! His reason is there will be long lines at the polling places. The other talking heads seem to agree. They also all agree that the key to this election is turnout, and that people are far more intense about this election than any other in recent history. I've noticed this, too.
Friday, October 22, 2004
1) Please, if you're just dropping by, go here and post a nice little birthday greeting to my good friend, Kathy. And check out the link, too, even if it's not your birthday.
2) Don't miss my husband's essay, "Wild Goose Chase".
3) Hat tip to my brother, "pmm": Here's an excellent article about John Kerry, a.k.a. "Mr. Empty Suit". As I said in an earlier post, the man has no guiding principle except "what's best for John Kerry".
Field & Stream poster boy John Kerry's foul fowl photo op.
by Tom Swart
Let's get this straight, politics is a dirty game. That's why John Kerry had to head off to the duck blind with a trio of real hunters to fire off another round of make-believe in an attempt to spiff up his image with the supporters of the second amendment. Unfortunately for him, his voting record on gun owner rights blasts buckshot holes right through this pretty picture. Believe me, he wouldn't have been there if there were not a Presidential election looming 12 days away.
A real hunter, who truly enjoys the sport, would carry the goose he'd bagged. But for Kerry that wouldn't play well with the animal rights activists in his base, so he had another fellow in the hunting party carry the bird with his explanation that he's "too lazy" and "still giddy over the Red Sox. It was hard to focus". What does the Red Sox victory have to do with carrying what you've shot? Ah, politics is a dirty game, but don't expect Kerry to get his hands dirty. I see through this; it tells me that he wants to be seen as a hunter for the camera, the shotgun in the crook of his arm, the camouflage, the buddies, all of the appearances, but he's disassociated from the results, He doesn't carry his kill nor clean it. The result is a hygienic, staged hunt where he flips the bird to one of his hunting partners. Personally, I'd have flipped the bird right back at him.
What's more, I don't believe he shot that goose. Maybe if you threw a loin cloth on it he might've plugged it in the back. But it is an interesting snapshot after all because the photo does capture something. It shows someone who's as phony as an orange-skin tan. One thing that Americans are usually quite good at sniffing out is a fake and nothing will blow an election for you faster. There have been exceptions to that, but only for those most polished at it, such as the last Democrat to live in the White House. But this photo is so transparent, it speaks to the essence of John Kerry. And it screams of the reasons why this guy shouldn't be leader of the free world.
I'm not naïve about photo ops; I know all politicians do them as a necessary evil. But I recommend going with something that you really are. John Kerry is no more a hunter than he is a Radio City Music Hall Rockette. Now there's a photo op for you, but the press would have to check local obscenity laws before running that one.
Contrast this photo with the one of George W. Bush embracing Ashley Faulkner upon learning that her mother was a World Trade Center victim. It was snapped by Ashley's father. Could this have been staged as well? Perhaps, but I think not. It's not a particularly good picture of Bush, and it looks like an amateur photo. The father took the picture with his digital camera without looking through the view because he didn't want to disrupt the moment being shared by his daughter and the President. Again, this photo captures something as well. It shows the genuine pain and concern written across the face of Bush - it tells you that he's not a phony. He's sincere and that's really him.
So Kerry's on a wild goose chase, trying to shake the liberal label enough to pick up some sportsmen votes. But don't fall for this decoy, he's off target again. I guess we can be grateful that he finished the hunting trip without collecting another purple heart.
Happy Birthday to Kathy,
an old a longtime friend! Yes, we've been been friends for (gulp) 32 years now. Since we were... toddlers. Yeah, that's it, toddlers! Yeah!
Anyway, we've been friends through all the years, in spite of having different opinions on almost everything, and of almost never living in the same town since college days. That's a true test of friendship, don't you think?
So, happy birthday, dear friend, and many happy returns of the day. And in your honor, here's a link to one of the silliest little things on the web. It will make you smile. I promise, it's completely a-political. The web site isn't even in English. When you get there, just click on the little red button on the top of the sphere.
One last thing: To my readers -- if you happen to stop by today, feel free to leave a nice Happy Birthday greeting for Kathy in the comments section, OK? OK!
Thursday, October 21, 2004
This time, she insults teachers and librarians. That's right, because she says about Laura Bush: "I don't know that she's ever had a real job."
Now, Laura Bush is both a librarian with a Master's Degree, and a teacher who taught in Texas public schools for almost 10 years. But Theresa doesn't think that's a "real job", apparently. Nor does she consider being First Lady, whether of the state of Texas or the United States of American, a "real job".
That's as far as I got yesterday, because I had my real job to do: my job as a mom and homemaker. That's right, the job that Theresa "I'm-an-heiress-who-are-you" Heinz Kerry didn't consider enough of a real job to even mention when she slammed Laura Bush yesterday, nor in her apology that came shortly afterwards. Laura, classy First Lady that she is, today said that no apology was necessary, that she knows all about those "trick questions" from the press.
Anyway, that first part of this post, above, was as far as I got yesterday, and then today I had a few minutes, so I wrote a really great post, with links, and clever comments, and brilliant insights -- but you'll just have to trust me on all that because something in Blogger fouled up and I lost it.
So for now, because my real job is calling again, just go here (Lileks, who as a stay-at-home dad is fantastic on the subject) and here (Hugh Hewitt, who also is great on the topic, and besides, he's just so goshdarn optimistic and cheery on Bush's election prospects, so you oughta read him everyday, just for your good mental health.)
Oh, and you can read my former post on Theresa, where I said I thought I might like her but she's going to hurt the KE04 campaign. I stand by that remark, though today, I'm no longer so sure I'd really like her all that much. I'm pretty sure I'd like Laura a whole bunch more.
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
This election is becoming hazardous to one's health, considering the recent stomach-curdling, headache-inducing reports of voter fraud and media bias I posted about earlier. There's no vaccine for Election Flu, of course, but even if there was, there probably would be a shortage because of the action of trial attorneys like John Edwards. More about that in another post...
For now, here's another article about voter fraud. But be forewarned: It will probably make your blood pressure rise.
How is it that "get out the vote" organizations are being allowed to pay people for new voter registrations? Isn't that just a big, huge, wide-open invitation to fraud? Yes, it is. Here's something that will curdle your stomach:
Former ACORN Miami-Dade field director Mac Stuart has declared an intent to sue ACORN and has made charges of rampant voter fraud operations. Stuart was employed and specifically tasked by ACORN to generate 103,000 new voter registrations from Dade County. He reports that ACORN threw out Republican registrations while paying for Democratic ones. Stuart also charges that ACORN targeted ex-cons and that he personally set up registration tables outside the Miami police department and Dade County jail. He went on to state, "The voter registration project has been operating illegally since it started."Here's another thing that is giving me a huge headache:
ACORN has paid workers for every voter registration card collected -- a felony in Florida and also illegal in Missouri and Pennsylvania. ACORN also routinely accepted signatures for Amendment 5 from individuals who were not currently registered to vote -- a requirement under Florida law.
CNN's HOWARD KURTZ: "It is a tight race. Do you believe that most reporters want John Kerry to win?"That means that media bias is worth somewhere between 5 and 20 million votes for Kerry, according to an RNC estimate.
NEWSWEEK'S EVAN THOMAS: "Yeah, absolutely."
KURTZ: "Do you think they're deliberately tilting their coverage to help John Kerry and John Edwards?"
THOMAS: "Not really."
KURTZ:"Subconsciously tilting their coverage?"
KURTZ:"Including at Newsweek?"
KURTZ:"You've said on the program 'Inside Washington' that because of the portrayal of Kerry and Edwards as young and optimistic, that's worth maybe 15 points. That would suggest."
THOMAS:"Stupid thing to say. It was completely wrong. I do think that the mainstream press, I'm not talking about the blogs and Rush and all that, but the mainstream press favors Kerry. I don't think it's worth 15 points. That was just a stupid thing to say."
KURTZ:"Is it worth five?"
So what do we have to do, if we want President Bush to win? We have to get out there and work! I am. Lots of my relatives are. Lots of my friends are. A volunteer told me she's taking a day of vacation on Election Day to help out as a poll watcher or runner. Get your kids involved. Talk to people. If every one of us finds TWO people who say they'll vote for Bush (and I mean two people you don't already know will vote for W), we'll make a huge difference. Talk to your hairstylist, the guy who runs the print shop, people at your favorite coffee shop, delivery people, your new neighbors. Find out what the local election laws are, and let people know how and when and where they can register to vote. Give them Bush campaign literature (call your local GOP office to get some).
Most important of all, PRAY.
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
I didn't have any time to post today (although I did have time to apply to the blogroll at ProLifeBlogs.com, and thank you to them for the link! I'm going to link permanently to their site very, very soon.)
Anyway, I did have time just now to read Glenn Reynolds, and so should you. He links to a great essay on whether or not Bin Laden is dead (and no, I won't tell you the verdict; you'll have to read it yourself), and this fabulous "alternate history" based on a real interview with Condi Rice (which is worth reading in itself; she how she nails George Stephanopoulos on hindsight bias). This is another good "alternate history", imagining what John Kerry would be saying if Bush hadn't invaded Iraq.
And then, there's even more. Here's a great video, just for fun, of John Edwards (The Breck Boy), Combing. His. Hair. Endlessly. Just go watch it, you know you want to. Even if you saw it early this morning, see it again, because this one's set to music, and you'll never guess whose band. Go watch it, then come back.
OK, one more video, and this link came directly to my own inbox, so at least once in this post I'm not just grabbing great stuff from Instapundit. This one's not funny, it's for real. So go watch it, and then say a prayer for our country, and then get some sleep.
Monday, October 18, 2004
Hugh Hewitt has another symposium question: "In 250 words or less, why vote for Bush and what's wrong with Kerry?" In my answer, below, I focus on "what's wrong with Kerry". I'll post again later, focusing on "what's right with Bush".
And here are my 250 words:
Bush is the better choice by far, because Kerry:
• thinks terrorism should be just a “nuisance”, and clearly doesn’t get the seriousness of the Islamofascist threat to all civilized countries.
• can’t be trusted on any issue, especially the war on terror, because he has a record of changing his mind according to whichever way the political winds are blowing. His only guiding principle: “What’s best for John Kerry?”
• thinks countries like France and Germany, who took bribes in the Oil-for-Food scam run by the corrupt U.N., are allies, but in fact those countries admit they won’t send troops to Iraq no matter who wins, and it’s pretty clear that those countries can’t readily be trusted, based on their willingness to take bribes from a mass-murdering dictator.
• badmouths true allies such as England, Italy, and Poland, as well as the new leader of Iraq, and then has the gall to say he would be able to get more international cooperation.
• wants to return to the pre-9/11 era, as in the Clinton years, when the U.S. bent over backwards to be “respected” in the world, but the terrorists used those years to plan, finance, and train for the 9/11 attacks, besides carrying out numerous attacks on our bases and embassies around the world, and they would do it again, no doubt.
• thinks it’s morally permissible to pull babies almost entirely out of the womb feet first, and then kill them, in the barbaric “partial birth abortion”.
I received an email today from an old friend (to whom I say, "hello! Glad you're checking out the link I sent!") asking everyone to encourage their "Republican friends who probably have only a fraction of an idea where their Bush vote will take them" to reconsider. Here's what I wrote in reply:
I’m a Republican, and contrary to your statement, I do know, as much as is humanly possible, where my vote for Bush will take me. I take that step proudly. I think it’s the best choice I could possibly make not just for myself, but for our country, for my children, for the future.This election is like no other I can ever remember. I've never had so many political discussions with people, from my hairdresser (undecided, leaning Bush), to the Teamsters Union truckdriver who made a delivery here (definitely Bush), to neighbors (mostly Bush), to long-time friends via email (this one, obviously Kerry -- or maybe Nader??) It's an interesting election. Only two weeks to go.
Kerry can’t be trusted on most of the major issues, because he changes his mind so often that who knows what he’d really do, and when he is clear (such as about abortion) he’s on the dead-wrong side of the issue. For example,
He thinks terrorism can be “managed” down to a “nuisance” level, and he clearly doesn’t get the international scope of the war on terror, nor the seriousness of the Islamofascist threat to all civilized countries. Did you happen to see what they did to the schoolchildren in Russia, for example? Or the children in Iraq, getting candy from soldiers? He can’t be trusted on any issue, especially the war on terror, because he has a record of changing his mind according to whichever way the political winds are blowing. He appears to have no inner core of principles guiding his statements and actions, except for “What’s best for John Kerry?” He has a record of little to no accomplishment in the Senate, and when he did bother to show up to vote, he voted the wrong way. He thinks countries like France and Germany, who were in Hussein’s back pocket taking bribe money in the Oil-for-Food scam run by the corrupt U.N., are our allies, but in fact they are now saying they won’t send any troops to Iraq no matter who wins, and it’s pretty clear to any thinking person that those countries can’t be trusted based on their willingness to take bribes from an evil, mass-murdering dictator. He badmouths our true allies like England, Italy, Poland, and over 35 other countries, including the new leader of Iraq, and then has the gall to say he would be better able to get other countries to work with us. He wants to return to the pre-9/11 era, such as in the Clinton years, when the U.S. bent over backwards to be “nice” to Arab countries, tried to give the Palestinians what they wanted, and tried to be “respected” in the world, and lo and behold, the terrorists used those years to plan, finance, and train for the 9/11 attacks, besides carrying out numerous attacks on our bases and embassies around the world. So if we return to those years, why should we think the terrorists won’t use their time in a similar fashion? He thinks it’s morally permissible to pull babies out of the womb feet first, (I apologize in advance for the graphic description to follow, but it’s the truth) stab them in the back of the head, use a suction catheter to suck out their brains, then crush their skulls and pull them out, dead (he voted 6 times to override the ban on this brutal procedure, partial birth abortion). President Bush had the moral integrity to sign the ban. (By the way, OB/GYN doctors have stated publicly that there is NEVER a time when this procedure would save the life of a woman, and that in fact it is potentially dangerous for the woman. The only reason to do this is to kill the baby, period.) He thinks it’s morally permissible to kill embryonic human life for parts (stem cells) in a misguided attempt to find cures for some at the expense of the sanctity of human life (and by the way, the science of this issue shows clearly that it’s much more promising to use adult stem cells, from living donors or from umbilical cords, anyway. But when do you ever hear Kerry/Edwards speak truthfully about the science of stem cell research? They don’t; instead they use demagoguery to promise people if Kerry is elected, people like Chris Reeve will “get up out of their wheelchairs and walk”. Oh, please.) As far as mainstream media “not telling us things”… do you mean like CBS, where Dan Rather used forged documents to try to slam President Bush? Or the AP news service which lied about the crowd “booing” Clinton at a Bush rally? I was at that rally in West Allis, and there were NO boos. None. And when the President said, “President Clinton will be in our prayers”, the crowd applauded as a sign of support. I was there. AP lied. Or by mainstream media, do you mean the media that, according to the editor of Newsweek, “Wants Bush to lose”? Sounds like you might be a “Fahrenheit 911” fan. I suggest, in fact I dare you, go to Blockbuster and get “Fahrenhype 911” to learn the truth about Michael Moore. He fabricated virtually all of the movie, from the so-called “editorial” about the recounts in Florida (fact: Bush won every single recount, by every single news organization that went down there), to the use of people’s words and images in such a way that they appear to be saying things they never said (just watch Fahrenhype to see what those people think of Michael Moore lying about them).
This email may sound harsh, but I feel, as you obviously do, that this election is mighty important. I am passionate about it. I’ve educated myself; I read and view mainstream media as well as more objective sources, I read liberal websites and publications as well as conservative ones, I know all the conspiracy theories and all the hatred spewed about Bush, and after all this, I truly believe he is the best man for this country at this time. If you want a tall guy who speaks smoothly, vote for Kerry. If you want someone who maybe doesn’t speak as clearly but who has the right set of beliefs to lead our country, then vote for Bush.
Saturday, October 16, 2004
All in all, I'm sticking with what I said in my first post on this blog.
UPDATE: Just a reminder, though: Don't trust the polls very much. Bush was up by 10% in Wisconsin the week before the last election, and he ended up losing the state by about 5,000 votes. Fraud? No doubt. Bad polls? Could be. Result of the Dems' last minute dredging up of Bush's DWI? Probably, in part.
So don't trust the polls too much, even though they're encouraging right now. Just get out there and work.
UPDATE: But I can't resist: via Drudge, a new CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL has Bush up by 8 among likely voters.
Also, locally, my husband's been keeping a tally of the yard signs. Bush signs outnumber Kerry signs in the neighborhood by 10 to 1. No surprise; we're in a very Republican suburb. But even outside of the neighborhood, heading toward the more Democratic part of the city, Bush signs lead, 20 to 5. Now, signs aren't everything, of course, and maybe they're close to nothing in terms of predictive power, but they're interesting, that's for sure.
Weekend Symposium 3: How deep a hole have John Kerry, Mary Beth Cahill and the Edwards dug for themselves? How lasting the damage?
I think the hole is deep enough to bury the entire campaign. That Kerry felt he needed to bring up Mary Cheney during the debate tells me he was desperate to try to wriggle out of the gay-marriage question in the first place. You can lay the blame at Edwards' feet; he brought up Mary's name in the Veep debate, staying true to form as a lawyer (say anything to sway that jury).
But truth be told, I think Elizabeth Edwards did the most damage, in an attempt at damage control that will backfire, big time. For her to accuse Lynne Cheney of being somehow ashamed of her daughter was incredibly rude, a lowbrow personal attack that shows she is clueless about why Lynne Cheney and the majority of Americans were outraged by Kerry's comment.
So the hole they dug is pretty deep. How lasting the damage? I think it might last for about two weeks -- which is just long enough.
UPDATE: Welcome, Hugh Hewitt readers! (Apparently, this is called a Hewittcane.) For your additional reading pleasure, click here and here for more posts on the depths to which KE04 will stoop.
Friday, October 15, 2004
In his Aug. 7 radio address to the nation, Kerry referred not once but four times to the "ban" on stem cell research instituted by Bush. At the time, Reeve was alive, so not available for posthumous exploitation. But Ronald Reagan was available, having recently died of Alzheimer's.It's a team effort, though, with Kerry's running mate also making appallingly outrageous claims. Krauthammer continues:
So what does Kerry do? He begins his radio address with the disgraceful claim that the stem cell "ban" is standing in the way of an Alzheimer's cure.
This is an outright lie. (Emphasis mine.) The President's Council on Bioethics, on which I sit, had one of the world's foremost experts on Alzheimer's, Dennis Selkoe from Harvard, give us a lecture on the newest and most promising approaches to solving the Alzheimer's mystery. Selkoe reported remarkable progress in using biochemicals to clear the "plaque" deposits in the brain that lead to Alzheimer's. He ended his presentation without the phrase "stem cells" having passed his lips.
As a doctor by training, I've known better than to believe the hype -- and have tried in my own counseling of people with new spinal cord injuries to place the possibility of cure in abeyance. I advise instead to concentrate on making a life (and a very good life it can be) with the hand one is dealt. The greatest enemies of this advice have been the snake-oil salesmen promising a miracle around the corner. I never expected a candidate for vice president to be one of them.How dumb do Kerry/Edwards think we are that we would believe these lies? I hope the majority of Americans prove to be much smarter than the Dems think they are.
Plenty of Republicans are worried about voter fraud. Here's what's going on in Milwaukee, as stated in an email sent out this week by Scott Walker, County Executive:
Yeah, good question. Why do they need so many ballots? Just how much do they intend to stuff those ballot boxes, anyway? Sheesh.
The City of Milwaukee asked for 938,300 ballots for the November 2004 election The total population in Milwaukee: 596,974 in 2000 and 593,920 in 2004 The total legal voting age population in Milwaukee in 2004: 423,811 Total votes cast in 2000 fall election: 245,670
The County Executive’s concern is simple, how does the number of ballots provided to the City of Milwaukee not cover them and why do they need so many more ballots? The county gave the city more than twice as many ballots as were cast in the city in the 2000 election and more than 200,000 more ballots than the total number of voting age people living in the city.
Thursday, October 14, 2004
Here's the full context of the President's remarks about Osama Bin Laden, which Kerry used out of context last night, and one of his ads is also using, out of context (via JustOneMinute):
"BUSH: ...I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.
But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became -- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we -- excuse me for a minute -- and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. "
Obviously, the President is saying he's not that concerned about Bin Laden because we've done so much to marginalize him! It's not that he "doesn't care" about Bin Laden, as Kerry tries to portray it.
Whatever you need, it’s yours. Need a job? You got it. Need a higher living wage? Done. Need cheap, universal healthcare? I’m your man. Need a better education? Have at it, paid in full. Relying on social security for your retirement? I’ll put it in a lock box.Also, Kerry Spot (National Review) is right on the money in saying that Kerry looked old and tired. Oh, did he ever look bad. Husband and I thought he looked like an old woman (Husband: "Kind of like that optical illusion in Psych 101 where the old crone can turn into the young woman... Kerry looks like the old crone.") He was boring as heck, droned on and on about obscure statistics.
Bush, on the other hand, looked young, healthy, happy. He was as passionate as he could be about everything discussed: Faith, family, freedom, the future. He was [UPDATE: Wow, I stayed up too late last night; never finished that sentence, and never even noticed till this morning! And today: no clue as to what I was going to say.]
OK, now let's get out there and WORK for this good President! And pray, and vote, and then pray some more.
This is the best summary I've read so far: Hugh Hewitt says,
Kerry finished the debate sequence as the candidate of global tests, truth tests, France, tax hikes, government health care, uncomfortable with faith, for taxpayer funded abortion, and very well spoken in saying all those things.
Bush finished the debate joking about his mangled syntax, speaking from the heart about his faith and prayer, praising Laura Bush to the sky, promising to keep working hard for children and the armies of compassion, resolute in the war, thrilled by Afghanistan, optimistic about Iraq, and comfortable with every voter in his potential pool.
Poor Chris Matthews, trying to get assault weapons to be the key issue of the night. he knows. Sleep easy, America. W for four more years.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
"Will we ever be safe and secure?"
Kerry: President rushed us into war. [NOTE: I'm updating this post to correct typos and some places where it wasn't clear if a candidate was talking, or it was my comment. My comments will be in parens.] (Nonsense.) Pushed away allies. (There he goes again, dissing our allies.) We should inspect ALL shipments in ALL ports. (Nonsense, impossible.) Have more cops and firefighters. (He's going for the "first responders" thing, but again, that just means he's waiting for the attack. Hunker down.) Kerry does some name-dropping of past presidents.
Bush: Yes, we'll be safe, but must stay on the offensive, chase down terrorists, spread freedom and liberty. (RIGHT HERE! This is it: This is the clearest difference between these two. Bush says go to where they are, get the terrorists, make us safer by making the world safer. Kerry says, hunker down, check everything, don't try to hunt them down; not really, anyway).
Bush also talks about the elections in Afghanistan. (Good! He's enthusiastic; positive; good job.)
Kerry again makes the point about outsourcing the hunt for Bin Laden. (That's stupid. He didn't outsource anything. Hope Bush can nail him on that.)
Bush: (Yep, he is nailing him on this. And he had a few people chuckle in the audience when he said "That's one of Kerry's exaggerations again!")
Flu shots?!? (Well, it's a new question. Bush is handling it well.) Says, we relied on a company in England and they had problems with their vaccines. So, don't get the flu shot if you're healthy; save it for old and very young. He says, "I'm not getting one!" Bush also scores a point for bringing up the need for legal reform, especially related to medicine.
Kerry: This underscores problem with American health care system. It's not working. (He's not answering the question about flu shots, really, just going on the list of how many people don't have health insurance etc. )
Bush reaction shot: (He looks good! Standing tall, smiling, not smirking.)
Bush: A plan is not a litany of complaints! (That's good.) He says Kerry is doing a "bait and switch", an empty promise on health care, to give everyone the same plan that Congress has.
NEXT QUESTIONS: How can you afford these plans, Senator Kerry, without running up our debt even more?
Kerry: Starts the list: Under Bush, exports go down, jobs lost, etc. etc. "I will change that; restore fiscal discipline." He says, I've shown how I'll pay for that... roll back Bush's unaffordable tax cuts for the wealthiest. Now he's onto the "loophole" for outsourcing. (He's all over the map on this question.)
Bush: "His rhetoric doesn't match his record. He voted 98 times to increase taxes." (Good, nail him on his record in the Senate.) Tries a lame joke on Pay as you Go... he says "Pay-Go" means you pay and he goes and spends. (Joke goes nowhere. Better, now, he's talking about pro-growth policies.)
NEXT QUESTION: What do you say to someone who's lost his job to outsourcing (I think that's how he phrased it) and is now making much less?
Bush: My policies will grow our economy; go to a community college; focus on education; solve problems in education; train the work force to be productive and competitive. Four more years: I've got more to do; emphasize math and science.
Kerry: "President switched from jobs to education." (Hey, he was talking about skills for better job.) Kerry makes some lame joke about Tony Soprano talking about law and order (being like the President talking about jobs, I think) and gets a chuckle. Now Kerry is going for "the President is out of it" approach... says the Prez just walks away from the jobs problem. Then Kerry says, "help workers transition"... well, that's what Bush was just talking about!
Follow up question to Kerry: He admits he can't stop outsourcing. Talks again about the loophole, says American workers subsidize the loss of their own jobs. (I don't believe that happens, personally.) He says he'll "close the loophole in a nanosecond."
Reaction shot of Bush: Wow, someone sure told him to stand up straight. He is. And don't smirk! He's not.
Bush reply: "Whew!" "Let me start with the Pell grants; we've increased them by a million workers." Let me talk to the workers: Starts listing the tax relief; marriage penalty relief, lower bracket (10%) for lower income families; child tax credit. "Kerry says we're going to spend the government's money, but he's going to spend YOUR money!" (Tom is in the basement painting; he's yelling "BOOM" and "KABOOM" so he must think Bush is doing well on these.)
Kerry responds: "I've voted for tax relief xxx times" (sorry, missed the number but it was big.) Bush jumps in: Senator, you voted to increase taxes XX times. "There's a mainstream in American politics and you're on the far left bank!" Wow.
NEXT QUESTION: Gay marriage. "Do you think homosexuality is a choice?"
Bush: "I don't know." Talks about tolerance, but also says I believe in protecting the sanctity of marriage. Also says he's against activist judges. He's deeply concerned that judges, and not the citizenry, is making these decisions. Says the best way to protect this is to change the constitution.
Kerry: "We're all God's children."
Blogging timeout: 5-year-old needs me.
OK, I'm back.
Kerry is saying that he protects the environment because of his religion. (Oh, but you can kill unborn babies and that's OK with your religion? Senator Kerry, I'm a Catholic, and I know Catholics, and Senator Kerry, you're no Catholic.)
Bush talks about promoting a culture of life. He talks about partial birth abortion; talks about funding maternity group homes, abstinence programs, adoption, "viable alternative". (Sorry, I don't think he nailed this question. He could have done better.) [UPDATE: Commenter thinks he did OK; on second thought, I think he did, too.]
NEXT QUESTION: Something about health care costs... didn't catch the whole question.
Bush laughs (I missed why, but he shouldn't laugh.) Is addressing rising costs of medical care; talks about medical malpractice, about generic drugs, about introducing more technology into the system. (Oldest daughter asks: Who do you think is winning? Me: I don't know yet. But I'm getting stressed, so I don't think that's a good sign.)
Kerry: Talking about windfalls to drug companies because of Bush; talks about other bad things Bush did... I missed some. Now he says we need health care for all Americans.
Bush: Nails him on his record; Kerry has NO record in the Senate about leadership on this issue. Now mentions the prescription drug plan for seniors.
Kerry: Says "I did so too pass bills in the Senate." Says the President is misleading people again.
NEXT QUESTION: How will you pay for your health care plan, Sen. Kerry?
Kerry: First, two major news networks (who, CBS and PBS? HA!) said the President isn't being truthful about his analysis of my plan. Says, my plan is all about competition, choice, is what the Congress has, your health care is important, but you can choose. Small business gets 50% tax credit on our already lower health care costs. (This is complete pie in the sky.)
Bush: "With all due respect, I'm not so sure it's credible to quote leading news organizations... oh never mind." (He was going for the same joke I made above about CBS. Didn't get a laugh.) Talks about the reality: other countries with federally controlled health care isn't good; our system is the best in the world; the best quality.
Kerry: Says President isn't funding the VA. Says, "I'm not promoting a government health care plan."
Bush: We've increased funding for VA twice the amount of my predecessor. Veterans know that. Of course we're meeting our obligations.
NEXT QUESTION: Social Security will run out of money. (OH Lord, the third rail.)
Bush: First, let me tell all seniors you're safe. You'll get your checks. Last election, they said, if Bush is elected you won't get your checks. (Good, he's calling them on their demagoguery.) Says, for our youngsters, we need to think differently. Says they could do better with a different plan; compounding interest effect. Says he's willing to take on the issue. (That's courage!) Cost of doing nothing far exceeds the cost of trying to save the system for our children.
Kerry: You just heard the Prez say that young people should be able to take money out of their accounts to invest. Says that's a prescription for disaster. Says the CBO says there'd have to be a cut in benefits of up to 40%. Says Prez isn't saying where the money will come from. Accuses him of driving the largest deficits in history (NOT TRUE! As a percentage of GDP, this one isn't that big.)
NEXT QUESTION: Let me stay on social security topic; quotes Greenspan as saying we can't pay the benefits promised unless we change retirement age, etc. Kerry, you just promised "no changes." Does that mean you'll leave the problems for our kids?
Kerry: No, of course not. (Is this going to be a flip-flop??) Now he's on to tax cuts; says the wealthiest Americans could have paid for (... something... Social Security? ... ) if they hadn't gotten that tax cut. Says we'll do what we did in the 1990's and fix the problem. (Doesn't say how, except by repealing tax cuts on rich??) Says, we need to create jobs. (How does this relate to the question????) "I have a plan to put America back to work."
Bush: He forgot to tell you he voted to tax S.S. benefits. I didn't hear any plan to save S.S. He talks about the tax cuts... they went to middle class Americans! (Good, he's talking about the facts on the tax cuts.) Says my opponent opposes tax relief. Says people need to remember about the stock market declining before I got in to office; reminds of 9/11 attacks; sure, there's more work to do, but we shouldn't increase taxes, etc. (Good answer, all around.)
NEXT QUESTION: Immigration.
Bush: (He's doing great on this already.) He talks about immigration as being a security issue, an economic issue, a human rights issue (something else, too, but lost it while typing). He says he was a border president so he knows about this (good answer!) He says, "no amnesty". Says if someone wants to come into this country they can wait in line like all the others. My opponent is for amnesty.
Kerry: Starts talking about take home pay and how the tax cuts were wiped out by increases in gas, ... etc. Throwing around stats comparing this time to other times in history. OK, now gets to immigration reform. Says Bush broke his promise on immigration reform. Says we need to harden our borders; crack down on illegal hiring (ends up saying something that I believe is for amnesty but he cloaks it pretty well.)
Bush: Says the borders ARE more protected; says Kerry doesn't know what the situation is.
Kerry: Says we should use thumbprint technology for people crossing the border (huh? I think Bush is right, he doesn't understand the borders.)
NEXT QUESTION: Minimum wage.
Kerry: Says President doesn't want women to be able to raise their kids on a decent wage. (Mean Bush, mean, mean Bush.) Says the rich get tax cuts but women don't. Says women get 76 cents on the dollar; says we want to raise women's pay (HUH? You can't raise women's pay! What the heck is he talking about!?) but the President is stopping that. (Mean Bush.) I will fight tooth and nail to pass the minimum wage.
Bush: Actually, there was a plan I supported (huh?) Says, We need to fix education. Talks about No Child Left Behind; says we have to increase standards. Talks about spending more money on education to fix problems. Says this is what people need. Says, we can't compete in the 21st century unless we have excellence in education. (Not a good answer, I don't think.)
NEXT QUESTION: Litmus test for judges? Overturn Roe v. Wade?
Bush: No litmus test.
Kerry: I won't appoint a judge who will overturn. (Apparently, Kerry has a litmus test: only pro-abortion judges.) Now is talking about unfairness in our society; black drop-out rate, etc. Says President refused to fully fund No Child Left Behind. Kerry is talking about something... Frankly, I'm getting tired of this.
Bush: "Only a liberal senator from MA would say a 49% increase in funding is not enough." (GOOD ANSWER!) Says we have to get people educated to end inequality (something like that.)
Kerry: "Kids lost afterschool programs." (Boo hoo. Wants the Nanny State to take care of everything, I guess.)
NEXT QUESTION: Back door draft? (military issues)
Kerry: Increase by two divisions (I think that's what he said). Relieve pressure on armed forces by recognizing that we are strongest when working with real alliances; statesmanship, diplomacy. (Dissing the allies again. Gosh, he's such an internationalist. Ugh.) Says Prez didn't choose war as a last resort. (Wrong time, I guess, out of the "Wrong War" refrain.)
Bush: Says the best way to relieve our troops is to win in Iraq; train Iraqis. Mentions 125,000 Iraqis trained by end of year. Personal story: Talks about high morale of serviceman; they want to serve their country. Says Kerry wants the "global test". Says "I will never turn over our defense to others." (Good.)
Kerry: "I never said that". No nation will have a veto over us. (Yeah, right, he wants the U.N. to have that, and we all know it."
Bush: Says Kerry voted against first Gulf War, even with a huge coalition. (Good.)
NEXT QUESTION: Gun control?
Bush: Best way to keep people safe from guns is prosecute those who violate laws.
Kerry: Failure of Pres. to fail to overturn gun ban. "I'm a hunter." (Did you see those pictures of him with a gun? Senator Kerry, I know hunters, and you're no hunter.) Says prosecutors wanted the assault weapons ban. Says terrorists can come in here and buy assault weapons. Refers to Bill Clinton. (Still going for those coattails?)
NEXT QUESTION: Affirmative action.
Kerry: No, we're not far enough along to get rid of affirmative action programs. Says this Prez hasn't met with the NAACP or the Black Caucus.
Bush: Says, it's not true that I didn't meet with the Black Caucus. Says we shouldn't have quotas; says we need more education and Pell grants. Make sure every child learns; make sure there's access.
(HELLO to everyone who's stopping by!! I just checked the Site Meter and, hey, I've got visitors!)
NEXT QUESTION: God. What role does faith play in your life?
Bush: I pray a lot. I pray for my little girls (that's sweet!). I believe in a free society you can worship or not; Christian or Muslim, as you see fit. Prayer sustains me. I receive calmness in the storms of the Presidency. I take comfort that people pray for him all around the country. Don't want to impose my religion, but I stand on principle. Mentions faith-based initiatives. I believe God wants everybody to be free! That's what I believe. That's part of my foreign policy. I'm so encouraged to see freedom on the march. (Oooh, good answer, but the lefties are going to HATE this.)
Kerry: I respect what he says. He says freedom is a gift; everything is a gift from the Almighty. Mentions Koran and Torah and native Indians. "I went to a church school" and was taught to love God with body, soul, strength, and love your neighbor as yourself. We have a long way to go in that.
(Daughters are mimicking his hand motions right now.
NEXT QUESTION: Division in America.
Kerry: PI want to pay a compliment to President right now; talks about speech after 9/11. Says he was touched. Says we were united, but now we are more divided than ever in history (huh? Ever hear of the Civil War?) [UPDATE/CORRECTION: Listened to the debate again last night, and and he only said "in recent memory". OK, Civil War doesn't apply, then.] Says congressman are locked out of meetings (huh?? I picture Bush turning a lock on some shouting senators. I don't think so.)
Bush: Biggest disappointment: This town is so partisan. Says No Child Left Behind (hereafter: NCLB) was bi-partisan. Says something about tax cuts. (Sorry, missed some of it.) (He's looking tired; I'm exhausted.) Says we were divided before, in the 1990's, in the 2000 election. Says Kerry mentions Sen. Cain; says Sen. Cain supports me. Says Kerry has a plan of "Retreat and Defeat" in Iraq. (Good line!! Why didn't he use that before!??)
NEXT QUESTION: "We all have strong women in our lives (Bob S, Kerry, Bush). What have you learned from this?"
Bush: "To listen to them." (Laughter!) I love my wife and daughters. (Gives a very touching answer.) Talks about loving strong women in his life.
Kerry: Says "we're lucky because we all married up!" (OH MY GOSH! I can't believe he said this.) Some say me more than others! (YIKES! He is BOMBING on this and the audience seems stunned!!!! Good God, man, don't admit your a gigolo!!!)
Kerry: Mentions Vietnam indirectly (Daughter says, "He almost forgot to get that in." Talks about our dreams, safety, says he'll never let other countries veto our security (yeah right). (He looks bad; a little shell-shocked. Maybe is thinking, "I'm a walking dead man." Goodbye fortune.)
Bush: Talks about a picture that symbolizes optimism. Talks about what we've been through; recession, attack, etc. Talks about education. (His voice is REALLY good here; not strident, just reassuring, strong, calm. He looks good.) He closes the sale, "I'm asking for your vote". (Strong, assured.)
UPDATE: (Thursday morning) Yes, Bush won; he didn't do really well in the beginning, but I believe he finished strong. Definitely more human than Kerry (who looked like an old, tired woman robot, for crying out loud.)
They're out. Handshake was good, not overly aggressive on either part.
Bush winked at somebody on the way to meet Kerry; cool.
Sticking with our tradition this year, watching PBS.
Third and last debate... Thank Goodness. Can't take any more of these.
What to look for: Softballs to Kerry (of course), "Tell me about your mistakes, President Bush", and then, "Now, Senator Kerry, YOU tell me about the President's mistakes."
I'm going to try my hand at live blogging tonight. I'm not one of the major leaguers, like Hugh Hewitt, Stephen Green (a.k.a. the wonderfully handsome Vodkapundit), Ann Althouse, and Glenn Reynolds (a.k.a. Instapundit, the Instafather, the Blogfather, etc.) But hey, I've got a blog, there are actually a few people who are nice enough to stop by and comment, so I'll give it a whirl. I'm hoping I won't be as nervous watching these blasted debates if I'm typing at the same time.
However. As the Genie says in "Aladdin" when explaining about the three wishes: There are a few Ifs, Buts, Quid pro Quos and Provisos.
I will live-blog if and only if:
1) The kids are content and quiet and don't need me for anything.
2) We finish dinner and clean-up in time (which isn't looking too likely, seeing as it's one hour before the debate and we haven't started yet).
3) The laptop battery holds out.
An update on the John Edwards "they'll get up and walk" statement:
Rush Limbaugh quotes Charles Krauthammer, columnist, and paraplegic:
For Edwards to make the claim he did is the worst demagoguery I've heard in Washington in a quarter century. To imply that Christopher Reeve was kept in the wheelchair because of the policies of the Bush administration on stem cells is ridiculous and insulting.And here's Krauthammer from last August, writing about the stem cell issue (and praising President Bush for his ethical approach to the subject):
When I was 22 and a first-year medical student, I suffered a spinal-cord injury. I have not walked in 32 years. I would be delighted to do so again. But not at any price. I think it is more important to bequeath to my son a world that retains a moral compass, a world that when unleashing the most powerful human discovery since Alamogordo — something as protean, elemental, powerful and potentially dangerous as the manipulation and re-formation of the human embryo — recognizes that lines must be drawn and fences erected.
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Get a load of what John Edwards said, via Drudge:
"When John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk. Get up out of that wheelchair and walk again..."No permalink yet, sorry, so if you don't click on Drudge right away I can't promise the headline and photo will still be there.
This actually is offensive on several levels. First, is he comparing Kerry to Jesus Christ? The language is Biblical enough to make me think so, and I really, really don't like that.
Second, if he's making that outrageous promise on the basis of fetal stem-cell research (which I'm assuming is the case), it's offensive because the use of human embryos for spare parts is morally reprehensible.
Third, it's offensive because it takes pandering to a new low. It's insulting that he thinks we're stupid enough to believe him, first of all, and it's sickening that he would make such a patently ludicrous statement to raise false hopes in those stricken with paralysis. And how outrageous is this, that he would capitalize on the death of Christopher Reeve and our natural sympathy for him and his family, just to shake out a few more votes?
Finally, it's offensive because it's so false. The science so far on fetal stem cells shows absolutely no progress whatsoever, while research into adult stem cells is much more encouraging.
Unbelievable. And yet, not really. I'm starting to expect this kind of demagoguery from the Kerry/Edwards camp.
UPDATE: Still no permalink, but Drudge has had this up all day so I'm convinced it's a legit quote. Here's what he's got at the top of the screen right now:
Edwards Stem Cell Vision: 'We will stop juvenile diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and other debilitating diseases... When John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going get up out of that wheelchair and walk again.' Edwards made the unprecedented campaign promises during 30-minute speech at Newton High School gym in Newton, Iowa...This kind of rhetoric is appalling, especially since the reality is that embryonic stem cell research has been fruitless and in some cases harmful: "In one of the most well-known human clinical trials using fetal stem cells, the cells were inserted into the brains of Parkinson’s patients. Unfortunately, the unpredictable young cells created terratomas (masses of tissue with hair and teeth) and tumors, and the majority of patients experienced increased symptoms." (Source) And this is what the Kerry/Edwards team is pushing.
A nuisance? I don’t want the definition of success of terrorism to be “it isn’t on the rise.” I want the definition of success to be “free democratic states in the Middle East and the cessation of support of those governments and fascist states we haven’t gotten around to kicking in the ass yet.” I want the definition of success to mean a free Lebanon and free Iran and a Saudi Arabia that realizes there’s no point in funding the fundies. An Egypt that stops pouring out the Jew-hatred as a form of political novacaine to keep the citizens from turning their ire on their own government. I want the definition of success to mean that Europe takes a stand against the Islamicist radicals in their midst before the Wahabbi poison is the only acceptable strain on the continent. Mosquito bites are a nuisance. Cable outages are a nuisance. Someone shooting up a school in Montana or California or Maine on behalf of the brave martyrs of Fallujah isn't a nuisance. It's war.And here's Lileks on Kerry's goal of "going back to where we were".
But when we were there we were blind. When we were there we losing. When we were there we died. We have to get back to the place we were. We have to get back to 9/10? We have to get back to the place we were. So we can go through it all again? We have to get back to the place we were. And forget all we’ve learned and done? We have to get back to the place we were. No. I don’t want to go back there. Planes into towers. That changed the terms. I am remarkably disinterested in returning to a place where such things are unimaginable. Where our nighmares are their dreams.To really understand our enemy, you have to read Daniel Pipes. Then you'll truly see just how wrong Kerry is, and how he just doesn't get it. Here's a key quote:
The hardest thing for Westerners to understand is not that a war with militant Islam is underway but that the nature of the enemy's ultimate goal. That goal is to apply the Islamic law (the Shari‘a) globally. In U.S. terms, it intends to replace the Constitution with the Qur'an.I believe the threat is real. I don't believe we should ever think of it as just a "nuisance".
This aspiration is so remote and far-fetched to many non-Muslims, it elicits more guffaws than apprehension. Of course, that used to be the same reaction in Europe, and now it's become widely accepted that, in Bernard Lewis' words, "Europe will be Islamic by the end of the century."
You know what I think John Kerry's real problem is? He just doesn't believe our country is worth defending. Yes, yes, I know he went to Vietnam, but that was then, and as soon as he came back he argued that we were wrong to fight that war, wrong to defend the South Vietnamese against the communists, wrong to say that our way might possibly be a better way. Ever since he got back he's voted against weapons systems, defense funding, and intelligence funding; he voted against the first Gulf War, and is now against this war ("wrong war, wrong place, wrong time"). He voted against the $87 billion for our soldiers. He's showing no signs that he would actively fight the war on terror by taking it to the terrorists, wherever they are.
I believe that he now thinks of himself as an internationalist, who would never be so parochial as to think that the United States is any better than any other country, or that our values are worth promoting, much less defending.
And that's why I'm praying that he never becomes our President.
Sunday, October 10, 2004
Since John Edwards goes around saying "Halliburton, Halliburton" like a mantra, I thought I'd look into it a bit.
Halliburton is a huge company, employing about 100,000 people (though one of its webpages puts the number at about 83,000) in 120 countries, working in energy services and engineering and construction. Founded in 1919, Halliburton grew and expanded, eventually acquiring three other large companies doing the same kind of work.
That growth made Halliburton the only company big enough and experienced enough to do the work that was needed in Iraq, such as helping to rebuild the infrastructure, (most of which was long-neglected by Hussein, and some of which was damaged either in the war or by the terrorists), helping to rebuild Iraq's oil industry, feeding U.S. troops, and assisting with the transporting of supplies and equipment.
One of the Kerry/Edwards' charges is that Halliburton shouldn't have received these contracts, or at least not without competitive bidding. However, there's apparently no basis for such a charge. Here's a relevant quote from the New York Times:
Halliburton contracts awarded in the last six months have been won in competitive bidding. But the administration has said it would have been impractical to have open bidding on the oil wells contract [Ed. note: the first contract, just before the war started] since Halliburton already had an established position in Iraq and since making the contract public before the invasion would have compromised this country's war plans.To read major newspaper articles about Halliburton, click here for Halliburton's "News" page. My perusal of these articles, from the New York Times, L.A. Times, and others, indicates that Cheney does not have any improper financial arrangement with the company, that Halliburton did not gouge the U.S. on the Iraq contracts, that the initial no-bid arrangement was probably necessary, and that Cheney went beyond the minimum that was necessary to ensure that nothing improper happened because of his past association with Halliburton.
The nonpartisan investigative Government Accountability Office, formerly the General Accounting Office, agreed with the administration's assessment. It reported in June that the Halliburton subsidiary had been the only company ''in a position to provide the services within the required time.'' David M. Walker, who as comptroller general is chief of the G.A.O., told a House committee that the no-bid contract was justified ''given the war in Iraq and the urgent need for reconstruction efforts.''
This very recent Houston Chronicle article takes a sneering tone, but says Cheney has done nothing improper financially in regard to Halliburton, and that Edwards was not being truthful in his charges against Cheney.
Here is Halliburton's website for more information on the company in general. To learn more about their work on the frontlines in Iraq, click here. Be sure to read the letters from workers doing very difficult work in Iraq.
Halliburton has made its share of mistakes over the past 100 years, and, like every organization, has on occasion used poor judgment, no doubt. But it's easy to see that the "Halliburton" mantra nothing more than a shameless pandering to the non-thinking, America-blaming, corporate-hating, Michael Moore wing of the Democratic party.
Saturday, October 09, 2004
All reports are that the election was held without terrorist attacks, without shooting, with nothing but a little inter-party squabbling. Go to Instapundit for great links -- and photos!
This is a good sign for the future of Iraq. If the Afghanis could do it, so can the Iraqis. Do you remember before the invasion of Afghanistan? Remember all the predictions of "quagmire"? Defeat? Humiliation before the fierce Afghani and Taliban fighters? Remember all the gloom and doom about how the Russians spent their blood and treasure for years and never could defeat the Afghanis? And so we obviously wouldn't be able to either? What, you don't remember?
Well then read this, and take heart. The nay-sayers were wrong about Afghanistan -- amazingly, monumentally, head-smackingly wrong -- and they'll be just as wrong about Iraq.
You want more examples of how wrong they were about Afghanistan? Then read here and here (originally from Glenn Reynolds, a couple years back!) and here.
Then, heave a sigh of relief that they were all so stupendously wrong, and raise a toast to the free men and women of Afghanistan.
Hugh Hewitt is really good today. Here's a long, long quote from him, but you should read the whole thing.
In the past eight days, John Kerry has:
*announced to a national audience that American actions in defense of national security must pass a "global test";
*announced that he would sell nuclear fuel to Iran;
*could not answer, and badly filibustered a question on what he would do if Iran continued to push towards nuclear weapons acquisition;
*denounced as unilateralism the conation that George Bush put together to overthrow Iraq, and called for unilateral appeasement of North Korea;
*compared Iraq to Lebanon, but insisted a summit could entice other countries to join the effort in Iraq, even after the French and the Germans announced they would not do so even if Kerry was elected;
*twice identified the most pressing proliferation problem as the American effort to develop a new generation of nuclear weapons capable of destroying deep bunkers, thus equating the United States with rogue states like North Korea and Iran and proclaiming hostility to modernization of the American arsenal --vintage Kerry defense thinking;
*announced plan after plan for which no details exist;
*"absolutely" pledged not to raise taxes on anyone earning less than $200,000 annually, a pledge that even his most ardent admirers know is either a bald lie or a repudiation of most of his spending plans (e-mailer LL suggests a new Kerry slogan: "Read my flips: no new taxes!);
*ignored the creation of 1.9 million jobs over the past 13 months and ignored the economic consequences of the Clinton recession and 9/11 attacks while attacking Bush's tax cuts;
*while calling attention to his Catholic status, defended his vote against banning partial birth abortion, called for taxpayer support for abortion, argued that "parental notification" was connected to dads raping daughters and defended the wholesale harvesting of frozen embryos for research purposes --four positions completely opposite of Catholic Church teaching and far outside the American consensus opinion on abortion;...
*watched as Bush did not make a single memorable error in two debates while effectively underscoring Kerry's "global test" pratfall, focusing on Kerry's did-nothing time-serving two decades in the Senate, wrestle the ISG report to its appropriate place in the discussion of the Iraq War, persuade by repeated argument (which the Vice President also helped along) that coalitions can not be led or maintain by derision or democracies built by indecision;
*watched as Bush simply and devastatingly branded Kerry as not credible on taxes, spending and most important of all, defending the United States.
Say a prayer for the people of Afghanistan. They're having their first election today, and I'm praying that they will be able to do so without any terrorist attacks.
I would say "without any shots being fired", but that might be asking too much since we've already had shots fired here, a month before the election.
Friday, October 08, 2004
He was straight-forward, direct, much more aggressive in responding to the Kerry's false accusations, and he showed that twinkle in the eye that I said he needed in the first debate (but he didn't have it then!)
Can't blog anything else; I have family responsibilities here. First things first. For good analysis, go to www.hughhewitt.com. Haven't checked the other bloggers yet, but I think Glenn Reynolds was live-blogging, too: www.instapundit.com.
There are five issues in this campaign that will affect our country's future more profoundly than any other, including taxes, jobs, education, and even the war. They are:
The libertarian position on all five of these is basically, "whatever". Don't let government decide; people should be able to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't hurt another person in a direct and obvious way.
A utilitarian point of view would apply a cost-benefit calculation to each, and if the supposed benefits outweigh the perceived costs, then go ahead. So, in this calculation, if scientists think there might be some future benefits from harvesting fetal stem cells, then they should be allowed to do so.
But for all of these issues, there is a different point of view, one that takes the sanctity of human life into account, and one that recognizes far more fully the true costs of violating natural law. The Catholic Church is the only entity with a consistent, meaningful, and coherent position on all these issues. All of her moral reasoning is based on a belief in a loving Creator God, who is our Heavenly Father.
The Church teaches that abortion, euthanasia, fetal stem-cell research, cloning, and same-sex marriage are not compassionate solutions to human problems, even though proponents would have us think so. Abortion masks itself as a reasonable choice for a woman in a tough spot, but it kills her child and strips the woman of her dignity. Euthanasia is presented as "merciful", but it makes human life cheap and human suffering nothing more than animal pain. Embryo's are created for spare parts; human beings are cloned just because we can; frozen embryos languish in freezers -- all of this shows a frightening callousness about the sanctity of human life.
Finally, same-sex marriage: In a culture that values tolerance more than anything else, it's hard to see what could be wrong with letting people be happy together, no matter what their lifestyle. But the Catholic Church knows that calling sinful behavior just another "choice" will never lead to lasting happiness. We are all sinners. Calling a weed a flower won't change how it looks or the way it chokes out other plants; it just makes us less likely to pull it up by the roots. So no matter what our sin, sexual or otherwise, we need to ask for forgiveness and then change our ways, remembering that we are called to hate the sin, but always, always, love the sinner.
For more information about the Five Issues, click here. For more information on the Church's truly compassionate answer to those who struggle with homosexuality, go to the Courage website.
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
Instapundit linked to this great article by Austin Bay, who just returned from Iraq. Read it, so you have a better idea of who's fighting -- and winning -- this war. Read it, if you've been feeling all wobbly about Irag and Afghanistan. Read it, to counter the bias in Old Media. Mostly, read it to honor the men and women in our armed services.
Even after all these years since Roe v. Wade, abortion is still one of the most important issues in a Presidential election.
John Kerry is an ardent supporter of abortion -- including the sickening practice of partial-birth abortion. This article states that Kerry has received campaign contributions from Martin Haskell, who invented the horrific procedure (only click on that link if you can stomach Haskell's description, in cold, clinical terms, of how he kills the baby), Warren Hearn, and George Tiller, all of whom advertise their willingness to perform late term abortions -- even into the last month of preganancy.
In addition, Kerry voted against the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban six times over the last few years. How can you trust the judgement of someone who condones such an intrinsically evil act? Would you vote for someone who was in favor of slavery? Or genocide? (Which in many cases, abortion is, literally: The killing of someone based on his or her genes, if there is some birth defect, or even if the baby is just the "wrong" gender.)
Being on the wrong side of this issue is simply a disqualifier. If you're in favor of partial-birth abortion, which so clearly is wrong, then you are not morally qualified to lead a civilized nation.
But if you agree with Kerry and the abortionists that this gruesome killing of a child ought to be legal, then go ahead and vote for him. Just know that you are voting along with the abortionists.
First, you may have noticed I've taken down my Bush/Cheney signs (the "days left till the election" calendar, and the Bush/Cheney news feed), as well as the oh-so-cool clock.
I took them all down because they were affecting the way the posts displayed; the last post on the screen usually was cut off. So, no more cool stuff in the sidebar.
Also, I just wanted to say how much I'm enjoying the comments being posted here. I usually don't know who you are (except for you, TJS!) but your comments are great. And to those of you who so far are just hanging around (I hate to call you "lurkers"; that sounds so sinister), welcome!
More than once, Edwards looked like a little boy who'd been taken to the woodshed. When the Vice-President was going after Edwards' terrible attendance and voting record in the Senate, Edwards looked like he'd swallowed his tongue.
I think it's going to be harder and harder for voters to take the Kerry/Edwards team seriously. Edwards is clearly a liability for the ticket. He not only looks like a college kid (no offense there to my college-age students!), he can't defend the indefensible. He can't make sense of Kerry's record, because it makes no sense. He also has nothing of his own to contribute: he won't carry North Carolina for the Dems, he has no significant, credible, experience, and now we know that his attendance and voting record shows that he doesn't even take his own U.S. Senate job seriously.
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
I had a long post earlier about the break-ins, shootings, and other acts of vandalism taking place around the country against Bush/Cheney headquarters, but had a computer freeze-up and lost the whole thing. Rats.
But let's see if I can quickly link to the stories:
1) Break in and burglary at Bush/Cheney headquarters in Washington; laptops with campaign plans were stolen.
2) Shooting into a Bush/Cheney headquarters in Tennessee; no one was hurt. More photos here from Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit), who lives nearby and stopped in to take pictures.
3) A shooting into a Bush/Cheney headquarters in West Virginia.
3) Shooting and rock-throwing into a Bush/Cheney headquarters in Pennsylvania.
4) Repeated acts of vandalism at Bush/Cheney headquarters in Montana.
5) Vandalism at a Bush/Cheney headquarters in Ohio.
6) The violent storming of the Bush/Cheney headquarters in Orlando, discussed in previous post; the attack was apparently coordinated by the AFL/CIO.
To be fair, I also found a few sites reportings acts of yard sign theft and some petty vandalism directed against the Kerry/Edwards campaign, but I didn't find anything like the shootings, break-ins, and agressive behavior, sometimes resulting in injuries, directed against Bush/Cheney.
Again, the left says it's the "tolerant" party? Please.
This time, they burned a swastika into the lawn of a Bush-Cheney supporter (thanks to Instapundit pointing to the link).
I believe that all these acts will create a backlash, generating a sort of sympathy vote for Bush. I really don't believe that independents or undecided voters -- at least the thinking ones -- want to be associated with this kind of behavior. Or, at least, it will convince some of the Dems to stay home, rather than go out on Election Day to support a party that spawns such nastiness.
Secondly, it will motivate Bush voters to get out there and work twice as hard for their candidate. I know I will.
Monday, October 04, 2004
According to this, Bush still leads Kerry, even after the first debate, which, judging from the polls I've seen, Kerry won.
So with the polls still favoring Bush, many believe that Kerry's chances depend on Dems getting out the vote - especially first time voters, or those who almost never bother to vote. According to this Washington Post story, "Kerry is particularly popular among occasional voters -- a sign that the election may hinge for Kerry on his campaign's ability to get newly registered voters and those with only a spotty voting record to go to the polls."
And that really bothers me, because that means that people who are either clueless or simply couldn't care less could just make the difference in this election.
Here's an example of the kind of voter I'm talking about. The Daily Kos site posted an email from a dad who described his 19-year-old son walking into the room for the first 10 minutes of the debate. At that point, reports proud papa, the 19-year old says, "Dad, can I vote?" Dad says, yes, you have to register first, but you are eligible to vote. Son next queries, "Is the tall dude Kerry?"
OK, now at this point I have to take a deep breath before I go over the edge, so I can summarize what we've learned so far: Teenage kid, who doesn't know the legal voting age, also doesn't know which of the two "dudes" at the presidential debate actually is the President.
But that's not the best part, oh, no. The best part is that this 19-year-old was able to decide, after 10 minutes of the debate, that he wanted to vote for Kerry. As he so eloquently put it, "Because, I can tell if they were both captured by terrorists Kerry would keep telling them to go f*** themselves, and Bush would cry like a baby and tell them anything they wanted to know."
So he doesn't know anything about our voting system, who our President is, what the issues are, but he's such an astute judge of character that after 10 minutes of a televised debate, he wants to vote for the tall one.
I just re-read the comments thread on Daily Kos. Most of the comments were of the "Right on!" variety, which is in itself pathetic. However, toward the end, the dad posted again, defending his child from those few who had said some disparaging things about him. Apparently this kid had a very tough early life. He was abused, was in foster care, then a group home, had a bunch of diagnoses. At about age 16, the dad who wrote the email took him in as a foster child. The dad said some very nice things about the kid, which reflect well on both of them. They may very well be good-hearted people, and I wish them all the best.
OK. That STILL doesn't mean I'm happy that this completely uninformed kid is going to vote in the election for President of the United States of America.
The other thing that bothered me about the Daily Kos thread was the dishonest attitude expressed by several posters. Here are a couple examples from that thread:
1) One poster had doubt about the veracity of the 19-year-old-voter story, but said: "it's suspicious... but we can certainly start the meme ourselves. We don't need to pretend some 19-year old said it."
So what if it isn't true? Make it up, according to him.
2) Another poster congratulated those who cheated in online polls as to who won the debate:
"Nice work everybody who was hitting these polls. I think the freepers [Free Republic posters] were up all night after the debate but they just weren't making a dent. I kept deleting my cookie and revoting in the MSNBC poll."Oh swell, we've got voter fraud, and it's not even November 2 yet. No, of course those online polls don't matter, but what does matter is the attitude that cheating is OK; the end justifies the means.