Bush & Kerry: Why Are They Giving Free Press to bin-Laden?

Osama bin-Laden entered the U.S. political fray with a videotaped message to the world, announcing that he’s still alive and that U.S. foreign policy could trigger another terrorist attack.

It’s unfortunate that the two candidates are trying to use the bin-Laden video to their advantage. This election has progressed to the point that they have to rely on. . . OSAMA BIN-LADEN to help them win?

Disgusting!

I don’t know which side started this, but it looks really bad. The two campaigns should have contacted one another and agreed to ignore the video in the campaign, and not give it any press whatsoever; leaving it to Homeland Security, the FBI and the CIA to deal with. Instead it’s the centerpiece of the campaign with less than forty-eight hours to go before the election.

I do not like politicians using the bin-Laden video to score brownie points on one another. By calling more attention to the bin-Laden video, they are giving bin-Laden more press than he deserves.

New Video Sheds Some Light on Disappearance of Iraqi High Explosives

Newly surfaced video of the al-Qaqaa ammunition facility shows U.S. soldiers standing around what some are describing as drums of high-explosives, lending credence to the story that the explosives disappeared after the facility fell to the U.S. military, and casting doubt that the Russians were involved in the disappearance of three hundred tons of high explosives (at this facility).

I’m told that in conventional warfare, it’s customary to either use, burn or destroy ammo dumps like this so that enemy soldiers who are caught behind the advancing lines cannot access ammo/weapons to wreak havoc on other advancing units and supply lines that are following the leading regiments. The supply lines came under attack as the U.S. military stormed northward. Experts are unsure if the weapons stolen have been used or who has them.

Key questions: did this happen at other facilities too? What were the rules of engagement during the drive to Baghdad? What other orders were our soldiers following? Was it in the plan to capture and then abandon enemy weapons depots?

This story is changing by the hour, so I'm putting a disclaimer on this post as details are changing rapidly.

Washington Times Report: Russian Involvement in Disappearance of Iraqi Weapons

The Washington Times is running a story that says Russian spetsnatz (special forces) moved special weapons of Russian manufacture out of Iraq and into Syria and Lebanon before the war began, including the missing high explosives that have seen so much political play in the U.S. Presidential campaign this week.

According to the report, the Russians were unable to convince Saddam to give up the arms programs, so they struck a deal with Iraqi intelligence services to remove the weapons and disperse them, with Saddam’s knowledge. Iraqi reports written by Saddam’s government and captured by the coalition provide a revealing insight into what the Russians did.

Whether the missing Iraqi weapons of mass destruction program were part of the deal is not yet known.

This would explain a great many things, such as the failure to find weapons that the Iraqis had before the war began, and how Saddam could obsess over Iran gaining nuclear technology, while being determined to keep apace with Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

If this story is proven to be correct, then we have to ask ourselves: has a new Cold War begun between the U.S. and Russia? What was taken out of Iraq by the Russians? Where are those weapons now? And what is yet to come?

Finally, is this the long-awaited “October Surprise” that will vindicate Bush’s decision to invade Iraq?

It’s going to be very interesting to see how this plays out.

Here’s the story.

Man Claims First Amendment Protection After Vehicular Assault On Harris

In the latest example of irrational left-wing rage, someone tried to run over Representative Katherine Harris, the former Florida Secretary of State who oversaw the 2000 Florida election disaster, and several Harris supporters.

The man turned himself in a short while later to Sarasota police, saying that he was trying to “exercise his political expression” in attempting to mow the group down as they were walking on a sidewalk.

This is almost beyond belief! Some people need serious psychological help as they are devolving right before our eyes. Behavior like this should be seriously punished; at the very least, idiots like this should be institutionalized so that they can start to get straightened out.

And there will be idiots on TV supporting the actions of this pyscho, too!

Bush Re-Election Offices Attacked Across Country

For all the statements coming in from voters that they are intimidated at the polls, it seems that the Republicans have incurred more damage and injury from angry anti-Bush nutters than any other group this election year.

The following Bush/Cheney re-election offices have been attacked or damaged by person or persons unknown in the last four weeks:

Canton, Ohio
Orlando, Florida (office was shot at)
Fairbanks, Alaska
Galatin County, Montana (twice)
Huntington, West Virginia (office was shot at)
Knoxville, Tennessee (office was shot at)
Spokane, Washington
Edwardsville, Illinois
Flagstaff, Arizona
Bellevue, Washington
Gettysburg, Pennsylvania (twice)
Cincinnati, Ohio
Columbus, Ohio

In addition, there are widespread reports of cars sporting Bush/Cheney bumper stickers being vandalized, B/C 2004 yard signs being stolen or vandalized, homes with Bush/Cheney signs in the front yard being damaged or broken into, and Bush supporters being assaulted. The news has daily occurrences of hate-related crimes related to the election.

You would expect these types of political crimes in Nazi Germany or in Third World countries with two-bit dictators who are trying to keep the opposition from booting them out of office, not in the United States. I’ve never seen such widespread hate before, and the ones who are perpetrating these crimes are not mainstream Kerry supporters. This is the radical left at work.

In elections past, party headquarters on both sides have been ransacked or vandalized, but nothing approaching the damage that has been done to Bush/Cheney offices and staff this election year.

In all fairness, Kerry yard signs are being ripped off too, and some vandalism against Kerry offices and supporters have taken place. But Bush supporters are taking the brunt of the violence and property damage. People who are doing these crimes, no matter what their persuasion, and no matter who they support, ought to be ashamed of themselves. What’s happening goes far beyond the First Amendment. This is not free speech. This is a bunch of malcontents taking advantage of a political situation for whatever pleasure they derive from violence and hatred.

CBS News Is At It Again

Many people were angered by news that over three hundred tons of high explosives have gone missing from a former Iraqi Army base in Iraq and were quick to point the fingers at Bush and the military for allowing it to happen.

It’s bad enough that these weapons and explosives are missing. I’m not too concerned about the timeline as to when they disappeared; before the war, during, or after. And some in our country were unconcerned that the same thing couldn’t have happened to any nuclear/biological/chemical stockpiles that Iraq could have had?

This has had a major effect domestically. CBS was going to hold the report until twenty-four hours before the U.S. Presidential election began, instead of releasing the news immediately. They were scooped by a couple of newspapers who released the stories within hours of confirming the information.

This latest episode proves that CBS News is willing to make itself the news once again; their claims of being neutral in their reporting are proven false, and all their gains in apologizing for airing false documents that attacked Bush’s record have been erased.

I have nothing but contempt for news organizations that play the news to influence American voters.

Kerry & Congress & the $87 Billion Backtrack

Do you know why Kerry voted for war against Iraq but voted against the funds to support it?

The answer is simpler than you think.

Some in Congress are more likely to vote for a use of force if they are assured that only certain types of weapons will be used (not ground troops), or no military action will be taken. Remember when the U.S. launched major air strikes in Iraq in 1998 (Operation Desert Fox) to force Saddam to allow arms inspectors back into Iraq? The not-hawks in Congress were pushing for military action then, fully realizing that then-President Clinton wouldn’t use all the military force he had available to force the issue. In fact, Clinton was dragging his feet, which made the not-hawks even more bombastic about authorizing the use of force, because they knew that Clinton was going to limit his military options or go for a diplomatic solution and forget about using force. In fact, military action had been delayed the month before (Operation Desert Viper) due to Saddam agreeing to let the inspectors back in; the B-52s were airborne and twenty minutes away from launching their missiles, and Saddam knew it.

Well, the same thing happened when many in Congress (including Kerry) voted for the use of force against Iraq in 2003. When they realized that they had a President who was going to use the military firepower at his disposal, some of them backtracked (including Kerry), voting against the $87 billion in additional military spending for military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

This backtracking is right in line with their past history, so we shouldn’t be too surprised that this has been a major campaign issue, and that Kerry has gotten massacred in this area.

The simple fact is that the not-hawks gambled, lost and then backtracked, which has lead to Bush having a huge stick to beat Kerry with repeatedly and often.

This is an example of what happens when politics interferes with good common sense.

They voted to send our military off to war, then didn’t back up their vote under the pretense that money was being spent in this congressional district, but not that one. No, no, no. They got cold feet, pure and simple.

For those that are interested, “not-hawk” = war hawk…not!

Guardian Newspaper Ends Anti-Bush Campaign

It was announced the United Kingdom left-leaning Guardian newspaper has abandoned its campaign to influence American voters in Ohio to vote against Bush.

Previously, the Guardian was exhorting its readers to send letters to undecided voters in Clark County, Ohio, to encourage them to vote against Bush. When the British paper realized that the opposite effect was happening, they put an end to their campaign. It turned out that the furious locals began volunteering to help Bush in the battleground state.

Good riddance, Guardian lefties. Don’t let the door hit you in the a$$. I hope the rest of the world observes strict neutrality in American domestic affairs and politics, even as we respect their politics and elections.

Design Flaws Ruled Out in WTC Structural Failures

Design flaws have been ruled out in the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.

Some have suggested that lack of fireproofing and lack of strength in the lightweight floors played critical roles in the eventual collapse of both towers after they were rammed by hijacked airliners.

A detailed report that was released yesterday points out that “the twin towers failed because the structural columns at the buildings' core, damaged by the impact of the airliners, buckled and shortened as the fires burned, gradually shifting more load to the tower's trademark exterior pinstripe columns.” Those external columns took most of the weight load of the floors above the impact areas and failed, which caused the structures to fall in on themselves.

In other words, the internal structures holding the buildings up were severed, severely damaged, or melted by the 1,000 to 2,000 degree fires that were raging in the damaged areas of the building. Eventually both buildings began to sag in the damaged areas and the weight was caught by the outside columns. You could almost see it happening when you look at video of the burning buildings.

Some of these columns were damaged by the impact as well, or were damaged also by the unbelievable heat, so failure was only a matter of time. When enough of the columns were weakened, the weight overcame the strength of the columns and the skyscrapers collapsed in a matter of seconds, killing thousands of people who were still inside the burning towers as well as people standing near the buildings who couldn’t escape the huge sections of building that came crashing down on top of them.

Here’s the New York Times story.

I don't know if any lessons can be learned from this or what can be done to strengthen existing skyscrapers against the same kind of thing happening. I don't think armoring new towers will help either. Steel and concrete have been shown to be susceptable to this new kind of terrorism. I can't see making the walls one hundred feet thick either. The weight load would be unbelievable. Could such a structure even be built and not collapse under its own weight? More questions than answers.

UK Guardian Newspaper Sends Anti-Bush Letters to Ohio Voters

The Guardian newspaper out of the United Kingdom sent anti-Bush letters across the Atlantic to Ohio after acquiring lists of unregistered voters in the battleground state.

Kerry campaign officials were quick to express horror at what has happened.

The news media in this country have begun to tear into the left-leaning Guardian for attempting to influence American voters. Fox News in particular has been very harsh in its coverage of the incident.

In the meantime, the Guardian has stood its ground in its blatant cross-Atlantic attempts to influence American voters to pick the British left’s choice for U.S. President.

Isn’t this kind of thing illegal in the U.S.?

This is what I was afraid of when other nations began to weigh in on our elections. Now we’ve got liberals from other countries sticking their noses in where they’re not wanted.

We don’t need input from overseas, thank you very much. I would suggest that the Guardian get its own house into order before it goes making suggestions on how to run ours.

International Leaders Begin to Weigh in on American Elections

The leaders of Russia and Malaysia have urged American voters to vote for Bush on terrorism issues.

While I do not totally disagree with their sentiment, I do disagree with them taking a side in an American election.

Nations need maintain their neutrality in the American political process, even as America maintains neutrality in their political campaigns. This is how it has always been.

This is a continuation of my condemning international polls that show that the rest of the world favors one candidate over another. We don’t care what the rest of the world thinks of our candidates since they are not electing the American President. The American people are.

This could open the floodgates for world leaders to publicly weigh in, which I would take as an attack on our right to choose our own leaders without being influenced by foreign interests.

So I would hope that other nations would remain silent, or if asked by the media, use appropriate diplomatic language that says that they are neutral in American politics.

Flu Vaccine Shortage: Solution Needed

The flu vaccine problem in this country needs to be handled differently.

I’m no expert on vaccinations, but there really should be a different way of getting the vaccine into the hands of people that need it the most. There is no reason for a 76-year old grandma or grandpa (lugging around an oxygen tank or standing there on a walker) to stand in line for six friggin’ hours to get a shot and then to get turned away because they run out of doses.

The report that an elderly lady died waiting for a shot really struck a nerve with me.

She apparently fainted from exhaustion, hit her head and died from her injuries.

Can’t the flu vaccine be administered orally and be sold at the local pharmacy, or supermarket, or wherever, and let people buy the damned things on their own time along with their groceries or other pills?

There has to be an easier way to do this.

Kerry and Bush are blaming one another for the shortage. They ought to shut up and fix the problem!

Army Investigating Mutiny of Reserve Unit in Iraq

Part of an Army Reserve platoon apparently disobeyed an order to deliver fuel and supplies to a base and have been placed under house arrest.

They felt that the mission was too dangerous to undertake and refused to carry out the order. Other soldiers from their unit carried out the order without incident.

The Army is conducting an investigation. But one thing is certain: they will probably face court-marital proceedings for disobeying an order.

For those of us who do not understand what size a platoon is, here is how the army is organized and who commands each:

Squad: 4-10 soldiers—Staff Sgt.
Platoon: 3-4 squads (16-40 soldiers)-Lieutenant
Company: 3-4 platoons (100-200 soldiers)-Captain
Battalion: 3-5 Companies (500-900 soldiers)—Lt. Colonel
Brigade: 3 or more battalions (3,000-5,000 soldiers)--Colonel
Division: 3 brigades (10,000-18,000 soldiers)—Major General
Corps: 2-5 Divisions (36,000-90,000 soldiers)—Lt. General
Field Army: 2-5 corps (54,000-450,000 soldiers)—General
These figures are approximate given the size and strength of each individual unit.

Approximately 17 soldiers are being held for questioning.

Before we condemn or support the actions of the soldiers involved in this apparent mutiny, we have to understand something…99.99999% of us weren’t there, so we don’t know if their refusing to obey a lawful order was justified or not.

Let’s give the Army time to sort this out.

Bush & Kerry Campaigns Leave Unpaid Bills Behind

One of the unfortunate consequences of a Presidential campaign coming to town is the bill that is left behind for the locals to deal with.

Under current campaign finance law, the local governments are able to get reimbursed for expenses incurred when a Presidential candidate comes for a visit. The exception is that the locality cannot be reimbursed for security expenses.

Excuse me, but security arrangements are often the biggest expense that there is. Many cities in battleground states are tired of the frequent visits and the ever-larger bill that they will have to deal with.

Here’s a rundown of some of the security tabs that some Midwestern city governments are dealing with:

Cleveland, Ohio: $270,000
Dubuque, Iowa: $36,800
York, Pennsylvania: $21,000
Cloquet, Minnesota: $10,000 (for a 45-minute visit from one of the candidates!)
Davenport, Iowa: $23,000
Akron, Ohio: $21,000
Traverse City, Michigan: $20,000
Grand Rapids, Michigan: $80,000

It is estimated that both campaigns have or will incur a total of $450,000 in unpaid-for security expenses across Michigan.

Michigan communities are making budget cuts to balance their budgets, laying off firemen and police officers, while Bush and Kerry are running up a tab for THEIR campaigns!

Thanks but no thanks.

The law needs to be changed so that towns that play host to national candidates are reimbursed for all of the overtime and security expenses. Or each candidate needs to budget at least $25 million to fully reimburse every community that they visit.

This is ridiculous!

Human Rights: International Setback

Recently a news story broke in the media about a U.S. intelligence unit that is interrogating high-value al-Qaeda leaders at a special Jordanian prison.

The reason that they’re in Jordan is because United States legal protections do not apply to prisoners that are being held by other countries, and Jordan permits torture and other human rights violations on prisoners. It has been shown in recent months that the government is willing to torture enemy prisoners to get information and so you can guess what these intelligence agents are doing in Jordan.

I’m not pleased with this development. The cause of human rights has taken several major body blows in the last couple of years. One of the major parties responsible for this is the United States government. In its pursuit of terrorists, it has disregarded the rule of law to get what it wants from enemy prisoners, and has been reckless in its treatment of civilians in occupied zones.

Our intelligence services need to be bound to observe United States law, whether they are in the United States or in other countries. An unknown number of enemy prisoners have died while in captivity; some have died during interrogation. What caused their deaths during the interrogations? Drugs? Beatings? Other inhumane torture methods? Natural causes?

In addition, we are still holding al-Qaeda and Taliban prisoners in Cuba. The methods used there to get information have been called into question in recent months. We already know about the sex abuse scandals in Iraqi prisons. We also know that there are still Americans who are being held on terror-related charges but have been left to languish in prison with no attorney, no trial and no recourse. This is wrong.

This is not the United States legal system at its finest hour.

The United States no longer has the right to criticize the human rights abuses of other nations. This is a sad moment in our history. Until the U.S. straightens up its act and gets with the program of advancing the cause of human rights in its relations with other nations and brings those who are responsible for the violations to justice, it can no longer call itself a champion of human rights.

This country was founded on principals of liberty and justice for all, not liberty and justice for some. Our government needs to do much better. By all means, bring these individuals into courtrooms and charge them with specific crimes, but do not leave them in darkened rooms, outside of the legal system, with nothing but beatings and interrogations to look forward to. This is so wrong.

Final Bush-Kerry Debate: Surprise Victory for Bush

Tonight’s debate was a clear victory for Bush. I was very surprised that he did as well as he did. I was equally surprised by Kerry’s lackluster performance tonight. Kerry looked worn out and came out on the short end of the stick. Bush stayed on the attack while Kerry was on the defensive for most of the debate.

Some talking points:

Kerry insisted 1.6 million jobs have been lost under Bush. The number is closer to ½ that.

Bush insisted that 75% of al-Qaeda’s leadership has been eliminated. I’m sure the terrorists have found others to replace the pre-9/11 leadership.

In my opinion, Kerry made a tactical error in bringing up Cheney’s daughter. Kerry stuffed words into her mouth. He’ll probably end up apologizing to her tomorrow, both in public and in private. She’s a private citizen, not a political figure.

He also screwed up when he said that Bush had never met with the Congressional Black Caucus. Bush met with them a little more than two weeks after he was inaugurated (January 31, 2001) and during the crisis in Haiti (February 25, 2004).

Bush and Kerry both promised to cut the deficit in half in the next term. Nope. Can’t happen. If they disbanded the military, laid off 98% of the government, ended Social Security and did a whole bunch of other nasty things, they MIGHT cut the deficit by 2009 as both have promised.

Kerry seems to be faltering. Bush got stronger and stronger as the debate went on. Bush's best effort yet.

Reviewing my predictions: I had predicted a Kerry victory in the first debate, a Bush win on the second one, and a draw on the third one. I was correct about the first debate, the second debate was a draw and the third one turned out to be a Bush win. I didn't see that one coming.

Twenty days to go before the election. We'll see what happens next.

Let "Stolen Honor" Run on TV

So, let me get this straight.

The Bush haters had no objections to the Michael-Moore/anti-Bush "Fahrenheit 9/11" movie, and the CBS fraud on Bush, but OBJECT to "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal" being shown on TV.

What kind of double standard is this?

There ought to be equal time for so-called "documentaries" on both candidates. It seems to me that Michael Moore started a food fight, and now the DNC doesn't want to get hit by food that is being caught and thrown back. Someone once told me never to start a fight unless I was prepared to take major damage in return. The Moore crowd and the DNC is coming across as having thrown a vicious punch and now are begging Bush supporters not hit back and begging the referee to stop the recovering Bush from hurting them back.

Moore made well over $100 million with his movie. The people who created "Stolen Honor" won't make a fraction of that amount. The Bush haters cheered the inaccuracies in Moore's movie, but won't tolerate the same thing in return on Kerry?

Unbelievable hypocrisy.

Edwards Politicizes Reeve's Death

John Edwards' turning the death of actor-turned-activist Christopher Reeve into a political speech to rah-rah John Kerry is sickening and could backfire.

It’s just like the Democrats turning the memorial service for Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota into a political rally. The Democrats paid dearly for their campaigning at Senator Wellstone’s funeral. A furious then-Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura stormed out of the service and chose an independent to take Wellstone’s seat for the remainder of the term, and the Democrats lost in national elections that they were expected to win eleven days later. The Republicans captured control in the Senate and widened their lead in the House. The liberal Democrats were moaning for months afterwards. Oh, and they lost Wellstone’s seat in the election too, in spite of popular liberal Democrat Walter Mondale taking Wellstone's place in the campaign.

Edwards' making wild promises that defy logic and science could cost the Kerry ticket dearly as well. The solution to spinal cord injuries is not four years, or eight years away. It’s decades away; for all the research that has been done so far, the kind of research that could have helped or cured Christopher Reeve is still in its infancy.

This is the worst kind of politics that there is, and I thought that John Edwards would be above that kind of politicking. Revolting!

Opportunistic politician.

Goodbye, Christopher Reeve

I was saddened to learn of the death of actor Christopher Reed this morning.

He was an example of someone who overcame tremendous odds and confronted his physical disability with a great deal of courage and determination. He was a living, breathing embodiment of a real-life “Superman.”

He went into cardiac arrest and died following a short hospitalization for treatment of a pressure wound, which is a common injury for those who are paralyzed.

I remember when his near-fatal horse accident happened in 1995, and the appearances that he made after his recovery had begun. He gave hope to many who have similar kinds of injuries and their families by becoming an activist for spinal cord research, and lived his life as an example for others to follow.

My favorite quote from him was this: “America is better when all of us take care of all of us.” Words to live by.

Farewell, Superman. You will be missed.

Global Warming Spike, Political Move, or Data Error?

A British newspaper is reporting that CO2 emissions have risen sharply over the last two years and that a global breakdown of the Earth’s ability to absorb carbon may be occurring.

I do not know the science behind it, but I do understand the politics of it. It is funny that this report is issued the day before the global warming disaster movie “Day After Tomorrow” is released on video and DVD.

To some, this will come across as a publicity stunt, while others will take it seriously, while yet others will scratch their head and wonder what is really going on.

Here’s my take on it: I’m suspicious about the timing of this news story and something else: why did they put a CO2 sensor on top of a volcano in Hawaii? Of course there will be more CO2 there. This entire report is based on some sensor readings from Mauna Loa and I think it’s borderline fraud to use data from there. If a volcano enters an active phase, it will give off CO2 emissions. The Rim of Fire is entering an active phase for some reason, and many volcanoes that have lain dormant for years are all of a sudden coming back to life.

Here’s the report. Take it as you will.

Election Timeframe Change Needed

There must be major changes to the way that elections are held.

The states need to change their primary election dates so that they are in May through mid-July with both parties having their conventions in the late July/early August timeframe. This leaves the candidates who remain plenty of time to get to work and campaign for the general election in November.

The states are responsible for this very long campaign by scheduling their primaries earlier and earlier. It's ridiculous! Who wants a campaign for eight months? I am so sick and tired of the endless inaccurate polls, the nastiness of the two candidates, the nonsense, and the endless prattle of TV analysts who make predictions that are way off.

We're waiting...and waiting...and waiting...for the election in November so that this ENDS!

Enough, already!

Is Bush the Worst President in American History?

An opinion column in today's Los Angeles Times has declared that George W. Bush is the worst President in American history. Columnist Jonathan Chait wrote in part:

“I used to think U.S. history had many bad presidents. Now, my 'bad' category consists entirely of George W. Bush, with every previous president redefined as 'good.'

"There's also the fact that, on a personal level, I despise him with the white-hot intensity of a thousand suns. What I'm saying is, advocating Bush is kind of tricky." But "what I'll argue instead is that his very awfulness is the reason he deserves reelection. Begin with the premise that a second-term Bush administration is unlikely to make things a whole lot worse." Bush's presidency "is a great mass of contradictions. There's an enormous gap between his purported values - fiscal discipline, toughness against terrorists, a commitment to social conservatism - and his true record.

"Sure, it would be emotionally satisfying to see Bush rejected by the voters once again. But maybe, for this president, defeat is too kind a fate."

-------------------------------------
My, my, my. Such rage.

So let me get this straight…this character is willing to put aside old liberal arguments against other Presidents to denounce the current President? What about George Washington, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, William Henry Harrison and John Tyler, who presided over wholesale slaughters of Native American tribes? By their own arguments, liberals have pushed new interpretations of history into the schools that say these men allowed genocide against a race of human beings to occur. So, by liberal standards…Bush is worse than them? For the record, George Washington was a great President, and I wouldn't compare "W" to George Washington at all.

Let’s look at some other Presidents: James Polk, William McKinley, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and George H.W. Bush engaged in wars of aggression against weaker opponents. Kennedy’s and Johnson’s Administrations got us heavily involved in Vietnam, a war that cost 58,000+ American lives. Bush is worse than that?

Remember the Gulf of Tonkin lie that Johnson used to escalate the war in Vietnam, which led to tens of thousands of American deaths and millions of Vietnamese deaths? Bush is worse than that?

I think this joker needs to read some more books, and not liberal history books, which are subject to the whim of popular opinion. From how he describes his hatred of Bush, it sounds like he has some anger management problems, so he should take a pill, or do whatever to control himself.

A More Sensitive War? Yeah, Right!

To the Israeli people and members of the Jewish faith, the words "never again" have special meaning. They were, of course, talking about the Holocaust that the Nazis carried out on European Jews and other enemies of the Nazi regime.

I know I feel the same way about those two words when I think about people throwing themselves out of skyscrapers to escape the 2,000 degree heat as the World Trade Center burned. I think about the firefighters and police officers and first responders who were vaporized as the towers fell. I think about all the first responders who were crushed underneath the collapsing towers. I think about Todd Beamer and the other passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93 who fought to retake their hijacked airliner from terrorists who had killed the pilots and were steering the plane toward their target. I think about the 3,000 lives that were lost that day. And all of the kids that lost family members...

Never again. Not like that.

One of the candidates wants to sit around and wait for another terrorist threat to materialize. We need a wartime president who will kick the enemy in the ass HARD, not sit around and wait for them to hit us first!

The sitting President will do a better job with the war on terror.

Fight a more sensitive war? Against a merciless enemy who did all of those things on 9/11?

If you believe that kind of hooey, then I've got some land in Fallujah that I'd like to show you.

Does The U.S. Military Need More Soldiers?

One of the interesting debates going on between George Bush and John Kerry is whether to increase or decrease the size of the military. I have a few things to say about that.

Kerry’s argument is that the military is overstretched and we need two more divisions. He also wants to double the number of Special Forces.

Bush’s argument is that those extra soldiers are unnecessary and is pulling two heavy divisions out of Europe and thousands of soldiers out of Asia, including South Korea. The brigades that will be taking the places of the 1st Armored Division and the 1st Infantry Division will be smaller units with the new Stryker fast assault vehicles and air support to move them around the world in short amounts of time.

I have to disagree with both of them.

North Korea is crazy enough to start a war and not worry about the consequences. If they think they can win, or win by bluffing, they will invade South Korea with their million-man army, or launch missiles at Japan. Whether this huge force can be put into the field at the same time is questionable, but if they think they can win concessions from the United States, they'll do their best to make trouble.

We also need more troops on the ground to secure Iraq and Afghanistan; now is not the time to be reducing the size of the military. We still need large divisions and massive firepower to secure the peace.

With respect to Kerry's and Bush's plans for the military and North Korea's ambitions, it's a proven fact that armored forces with infantry and air support (or vice versa) will stop the enemy faster than sniper, sapper and demolition operations can. Special Forces belong behind enemy lines wreaking havoc.

Changing the basic structure of the the military is a very unwise move. I'm not sure I follow Bush's logic in doing this. With most of the U.S. Army on the move to or from Iraq (nine out of ten divisions), we need the extra strength to fulfill our treaty obligations, complete our current campaigns and have a fresh military force that is ready to strike terrorists worldwide.

Let's do the job right so we can accomplish ALL of the missions that we have (foolishly at times) taken on and have enough military power in reserve to deal with new threats.

My advice would be to add four more heavy divisions and the mobile brigades, plus triple the number of Special Forces soldiers.

Cheney vs. Edwards: VP Candidates Debate

The Vice-Presidential debate between Vice-President Cheney and Senator Edwards was excellent, with both men scoring critically needed points on one another.

I gave the edge to Cheney on foreign policy and the overall debate, while Edwards did better in domestic issues. The debate did get heated in some spots, and Cheney was able to get Kerry’s voting record back on the table. Since people still do not know who John Kerry is, they have to look at how the senator voted on various issues over the last twenty years to determine where he stands on issues and what is important to Kerry.

The picture there is confusing at best. Kerry knows this, and that's why his campaign is telling voters not to look to the past, but to the future.

I also saw no signs of cheating, which is very good news. Both stretched the truth as only politicians can, and now the various news web sites and networks are analyzing both candidates' statements for accuracy. But they were both on even ground, and the rules were enforced by the moderator.

It was obvious that Edwards was on Cheney’s ground and was uncomfortable with it. I liked Edwards during the Democratic primary because he was always more positive than the other candidates (I preferred Joe Lieberman on the Democratic side). But last night he had to fight Cheney in a negative way, and he didn’t do as well as he would have if his orders weren’t to “get Cheney” or “hold Cheney accountable,” as the political banners on CNN’s web site are loudly proclaiming this morning. Journalistic integrity on display at cnn.com?

Now, about the morning-after polls: my advice would to be to ignore the polls that are coming out. They can manipulate the data by interviewing more Democrats or Republicans to get the result that they want to see and by interviewing fewer undecided voters. That’s why so many polls have had different results. It all depends on who they are polling, not what they are polling about.

Polish President Responds to Kerry's Snub

The President of Poland shot back at Kerry's ignoring his country's contribution (and war dead) in the Iraq War during the debate.

Said President Kwasniewski: "It is sad that a senator with 20 years of experience does not recognize Polish contribution. This is immoral.....There is one thing which should be stated clearly: this coalition is not just the United States, Great Britain, Australia alone; it also involves participation of Polish, Ukrainian, Bulgarian and Spanish soldiers who have died. It is immoral not to recognize the involvement we contributed based on our conviction that there should be unity in fighting terrorism, that there was a need to display international solidarity and that Saddam Hussein was a dangerous individual of this world."

The Polish President was unhappy that Kerry disrespected the coalition and ignored the fact that few countries can match our military strength or contributions to the Iraq situation. Why Kerry chose that tactic during the debate defies belief, and undermined a possible Kerry Administration. It wouldn't surprise me if those countries that he insulted went flying out of Iraq en masse if he won the election and took office in January.

He's got some explaining to do to the coalition.

News Organizations Screwing Up

CBS News, Fox News and the Wall Street Journal have all made blunders recently that call into question their editorial command-and-control systems.

CBS News, which aired falsified documents on their 60 Minutes program, is again being accused of a similar situation, this time involving a woman who is “petrified” that her sons may be drafted. CBS omitted the fact that the woman in question is the head of a liberal group called the “Parents Against the Draft”, that the Selective Service debunked any talk of a draft, and that a mass e-mail that was sent out a few weeks ago concerning the possible reinstatement of a draft was totally false. Here’s what FactCheck says.

Fox News had to apologize because of a story (that was supposed to be humorous and kept in the office) ended up being posted on their web site. In it, they made up a whole bunch of false Kerry statements; kind of like some of Jay Leno’s skits on the first Presidential Debate. But they posted it as news and then hurriedly took it down after the mistake was discovered. Dumb! Who was the genius who approved that article?

The Wall Street Journal is defending one of its reporters who wrote a nasty e-mail about Iraq that ended up on the Internet. She had just returned from Iraq, and wrote that “Despite President Bush's rosy assessment, Iraq remains a disaster. ... [the] Iraqi government doesn't control most Iraqi cities. ... The situation, basically, [is] a raging barbaric guerilla war.” This has led the Wall Street Journal to defend her journalistic neutrality on her reporting from the war zones.

Journalistic integrity seems to be in trouble these days. When reporters break rules, or take shortcuts to get a story out, or do whatever they do to call their integrity into question, it is bad news for the free press. It takes people a long time to forget that an incident happened. And government oversight is NOT the answer. That would lead to government judging whether news content is “good” or “bad” or “approved”, which is a violation of the First Amendment.

News organizations need to be doing their jobs better, and their stories need to be verified before the story sees the light of day.