The prosecuting attorney for Oakland County who is handling the case surrounding the Pistons-Pacers game announced that charges are being filed against a dozen people. Attorneys are hollering that their clients are being singled out for punishment.
BS!
They were caught on video participating in the worst brawl in NBA history, with punches, drinks, popcorn and chairs being thrown during the melee.
Would these people do this in their own house? Some might, but the vast majority wouldn’t. Why in the world would they do it in a public venue then?
Most will get slaps on the wrist. Some will get short jail sentences with probation. The idiot who threw the chair is also being sued because the chair injured an elderly fan who was minding his own business during this nonsense. This genius is facing felony assault charges.
Some fans will face trespassing charges; fans are not allowed onto the court during the game. There were some with criminal records who will receive stiffer sentences as well.
For those fans who were banned from the Palace and are crying about it, that’s too bad. Go to another venue and BEHAVE YOURSELF!! Better yet, stay home and watch the game on TV because you obviously can’t behave in public.
I don’t blame people for saying they’re sick and tired of seeing the videos. I am too, but it was an ugly incident that didn’t need to happen. And for those attorneys who are saying that the Pacers players will be in court during playoffs, get over it. They’re merely reaping what they sowed.
Most of the players who will be in court are suspended anyways, so they aren't going to help the Pacers during playoffs, except to save money on payroll!
Thursday, December 09, 2004
Rumsfeld Challenged By Soldiers: A Set-Up?
I was pleased to hear that soldiers had questioned Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on the unarmored Humvees that are deployed to Iraq but was angered when it was announced that a reporter may have coached the soldiers on what questions to ask and how to ask them.
The story started yesterday when a couple of soldiers asked why it was necessary for them to scrounge metal to armor the Humvees themselves and to look for hardened glass to make the windows bullet-resistant. Rumsfeld, of course, was gruff when he made his replies and the story received widespread media attention around the world. Here’s that part of the story.
Then it came out today that a reporter from the Chattanooga Times Free Press had coached the soldiers and then approached the Sgt. in charge of the question and answer session with the Defense Secretary to “make sure his guys got out of the crowd.”
This is coming across as a reporter engaged in dishonest reporting. He’s making the news rather than simply reporting on it. If the story of the plant is correct, this guy needs to be reigned in a bit by his bosses.
Activism vs. reporting seems to be a recurring problem these days and some of these people ought to get off it. “It” being their political activism supplanting their duties as journalists.
The story started yesterday when a couple of soldiers asked why it was necessary for them to scrounge metal to armor the Humvees themselves and to look for hardened glass to make the windows bullet-resistant. Rumsfeld, of course, was gruff when he made his replies and the story received widespread media attention around the world. Here’s that part of the story.
Then it came out today that a reporter from the Chattanooga Times Free Press had coached the soldiers and then approached the Sgt. in charge of the question and answer session with the Defense Secretary to “make sure his guys got out of the crowd.”
This is coming across as a reporter engaged in dishonest reporting. He’s making the news rather than simply reporting on it. If the story of the plant is correct, this guy needs to be reigned in a bit by his bosses.
Activism vs. reporting seems to be a recurring problem these days and some of these people ought to get off it. “It” being their political activism supplanting their duties as journalists.
Monday, December 06, 2004
Spain Attacked by Basque Separatists: They WERE Taking Notes From 3/11
Spain is learning a painful lesson on why nations do not give in to terrorist demands. Ever.
On March 11th, 2004, a few days before the Spanish elections were to take place, al-Qaeda attacked the central Madrid train terminal and killed hundreds of people. Four trains were destroyed by the blasts. The al-Qaeda goal was to force the pro-Iraq War government out of power; the Spanish people knuckled under and voted a Socialist into office.
The turnover was huge; before the bombs started going off, the former government was ahead in pre-election polling. The Spanish electorate surrendered to the terrorists first, and then the government knuckled under too. The Spaniards went SCREAMING out of Iraq as fast as they could because they didn’t want al-Qaeda killing any more Spaniards. Bad move.
I wrote an article saying that the Basque separatists were probably taking notes and that it would be open season on the Spanish government, which had proven that it could be intimidated by terrorists. I’m sorry to say that I was right. At least ten bombs have gone off in the last two days; the first attack involved the near-simultaneous destruction of five gas stations in and around Madrid. The terror group Eta, which supports independence for the Basques, called in warnings before the bombs started going off.
The Spanish government could have prevented this from happening, but they were too weak and stupid to realize that their actions would have consequences in their own country. Instead of honoring their dead and working with the international community at the source, the Spanish government has made a concerted effort to forget that 3/11 ever happened. Many families who lost loved ones continue to be aghast that their own government has ignored their pleas for justice. And their government gave in to the terrorists. This was a HUGE green light for Eta to break the truce and begin attacking inside Spain, in the hopes that the government would knuckle under again.
Two lessons come to mind: indecision and disengagement encourages terrorists to be more aggressive, not less. The other lesson is that just because an idea is popular (like pulling troops out of Iraq) doesn’t make it right. Spain made a series of bad choices after suffering a very bad day, and now they’re paying the price for their lack of vision.
On March 11th, 2004, a few days before the Spanish elections were to take place, al-Qaeda attacked the central Madrid train terminal and killed hundreds of people. Four trains were destroyed by the blasts. The al-Qaeda goal was to force the pro-Iraq War government out of power; the Spanish people knuckled under and voted a Socialist into office.
The turnover was huge; before the bombs started going off, the former government was ahead in pre-election polling. The Spanish electorate surrendered to the terrorists first, and then the government knuckled under too. The Spaniards went SCREAMING out of Iraq as fast as they could because they didn’t want al-Qaeda killing any more Spaniards. Bad move.
I wrote an article saying that the Basque separatists were probably taking notes and that it would be open season on the Spanish government, which had proven that it could be intimidated by terrorists. I’m sorry to say that I was right. At least ten bombs have gone off in the last two days; the first attack involved the near-simultaneous destruction of five gas stations in and around Madrid. The terror group Eta, which supports independence for the Basques, called in warnings before the bombs started going off.
The Spanish government could have prevented this from happening, but they were too weak and stupid to realize that their actions would have consequences in their own country. Instead of honoring their dead and working with the international community at the source, the Spanish government has made a concerted effort to forget that 3/11 ever happened. Many families who lost loved ones continue to be aghast that their own government has ignored their pleas for justice. And their government gave in to the terrorists. This was a HUGE green light for Eta to break the truce and begin attacking inside Spain, in the hopes that the government would knuckle under again.
Two lessons come to mind: indecision and disengagement encourages terrorists to be more aggressive, not less. The other lesson is that just because an idea is popular (like pulling troops out of Iraq) doesn’t make it right. Spain made a series of bad choices after suffering a very bad day, and now they’re paying the price for their lack of vision.
Sunday, December 05, 2004
Thompson Blunders in Press Conference
Retiring Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson did something that was simply astounding: he said “For the life of me, I cannot understand why the terrorists have not attacked our food supply because it is so easy to do," at a press conference.
Well, Mr. Thompson, thank you very much for the unneeded insight. Idiot!!
He’s probably created a security problem now that the entire world has been alerted to the fact that the food supply is vulnerable to terrorist attack. He shouldn’t have said that. If something happens to the food supply now, there will be plenty of blame for him to share in.
This is like the Pentagon announcing an offensive against Fallujah to see what the terrorists would do to stop them, and then launching the actual offensive three weeks later after they analyzed the movements of the enemy forces in and around Fallujah. The difference is that the military acted on what it found, formulated a plan, went in and kicked some tail. Thompson's comments came across as spur-of-the-moment. He sounded frustrated that he couldn't get money to protect the food supply so he may have been trying to force the issue.
In any case, it was not a smart play, and waving a banner around that says "TERRORISTS: ATTACK HERE!!" to draw attention to a government shortfall is not the way to effect change. Thompson should have known better.
Well, Mr. Thompson, thank you very much for the unneeded insight. Idiot!!
He’s probably created a security problem now that the entire world has been alerted to the fact that the food supply is vulnerable to terrorist attack. He shouldn’t have said that. If something happens to the food supply now, there will be plenty of blame for him to share in.
This is like the Pentagon announcing an offensive against Fallujah to see what the terrorists would do to stop them, and then launching the actual offensive three weeks later after they analyzed the movements of the enemy forces in and around Fallujah. The difference is that the military acted on what it found, formulated a plan, went in and kicked some tail. Thompson's comments came across as spur-of-the-moment. He sounded frustrated that he couldn't get money to protect the food supply so he may have been trying to force the issue.
In any case, it was not a smart play, and waving a banner around that says "TERRORISTS: ATTACK HERE!!" to draw attention to a government shortfall is not the way to effect change. Thompson should have known better.
Thursday, December 02, 2004
Target Stores: The Grinch is Running the Place!
Given Target’s reputation, is it any wonder that they’ve thrown Salvation Army bell-ringers out into the cold?
Which reputation do I speak of, you ask?
A friend of mine living in Marquette, MI, who is active in Vietnam War veteran fundraisers approached Target for a solicitation to help local veterans with a project that would benefit the entire community.
He got a letter about a week later saying that his request for help was being denied and that the only group that Target officially supported was a gay-rights group that no one had ever heard of up there. They weren't even locals!
So my friend organized a boycott of the Target store in Marquette. Letters were written to the local newspapers with copies of the letter enclosed, and the veterans raised a major commotion. I don’t think it had a major impact on the Target store, but the point was made.
So when I read that Target has banned the Salvation Army from ringing their little bells, it doesn’t surprise me in the least. It falls right into line with their treatment of the Vietnam veterans. There's a Grinch at Target HQ, so look for more petty antics from your friendly neighborhood Target.
Which reputation do I speak of, you ask?
A friend of mine living in Marquette, MI, who is active in Vietnam War veteran fundraisers approached Target for a solicitation to help local veterans with a project that would benefit the entire community.
He got a letter about a week later saying that his request for help was being denied and that the only group that Target officially supported was a gay-rights group that no one had ever heard of up there. They weren't even locals!
So my friend organized a boycott of the Target store in Marquette. Letters were written to the local newspapers with copies of the letter enclosed, and the veterans raised a major commotion. I don’t think it had a major impact on the Target store, but the point was made.
So when I read that Target has banned the Salvation Army from ringing their little bells, it doesn’t surprise me in the least. It falls right into line with their treatment of the Vietnam veterans. There's a Grinch at Target HQ, so look for more petty antics from your friendly neighborhood Target.
Wednesday, December 01, 2004
Rumsfeld Accused of War Crimes in German Court: ICC Trouble?
There was a news blurb over the weekend that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and other Administration officials are being charged with war crimes that stem from the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The case is being brought in a German court and is not getting much attention yet.
This is the result of certain nations who have taken it upon themselves to act as the world’s criminal court system.
It’s kind of funny that those who scoff at American suggestions that the International Criminal Court system will be misused to settle scores against prominent American politicians and troops are the very ones who are taking this course of action.
While I am not opposed to international tribunals building strong cases against former leaders, I am dead-set against any international court attempting to go after sitting Presidents and their cabinets. Once they leave office, that’s another issue, but for an international court to be able to serve warrants on and take custody of the sitting President of the United States or Secretary of State is abhorrent.
As far as I am concerned, if the President is impeached first by the House, tried by the Senate and found guilty, then the international courts can have the person after American justice is carried out. If the cabinet member resigns or is removed from his/her post, then I have no problem with Interpol coming in and taking the accused away.
The ICC treaty (Article 27) does not recognize immunity for sitting leaders. Article 27 also does not provide for removal of leaders according to the laws of the country where the accused leader resides. So the Constitution would be subordinated to the ICC treaty. This is also abhorrent.
To surrender national sovereignty to a system that could be abused is dangerous, and is a very good reason for the U.S. to refrain from endorsing the treaty. This reason is different from the military point of view, but in my view, supercedes the military reasons for opposing the treaty.
While Rumsfeld should answer very serious questions about the prison scandal, it should not be while he is still in a cabinet position.
This is the result of certain nations who have taken it upon themselves to act as the world’s criminal court system.
It’s kind of funny that those who scoff at American suggestions that the International Criminal Court system will be misused to settle scores against prominent American politicians and troops are the very ones who are taking this course of action.
While I am not opposed to international tribunals building strong cases against former leaders, I am dead-set against any international court attempting to go after sitting Presidents and their cabinets. Once they leave office, that’s another issue, but for an international court to be able to serve warrants on and take custody of the sitting President of the United States or Secretary of State is abhorrent.
As far as I am concerned, if the President is impeached first by the House, tried by the Senate and found guilty, then the international courts can have the person after American justice is carried out. If the cabinet member resigns or is removed from his/her post, then I have no problem with Interpol coming in and taking the accused away.
The ICC treaty (Article 27) does not recognize immunity for sitting leaders. Article 27 also does not provide for removal of leaders according to the laws of the country where the accused leader resides. So the Constitution would be subordinated to the ICC treaty. This is also abhorrent.
To surrender national sovereignty to a system that could be abused is dangerous, and is a very good reason for the U.S. to refrain from endorsing the treaty. This reason is different from the military point of view, but in my view, supercedes the military reasons for opposing the treaty.
While Rumsfeld should answer very serious questions about the prison scandal, it should not be while he is still in a cabinet position.
Monday, November 29, 2004
Alexander Flops at U.S. Box Office
The much-overhyped and overblown epic about Alexander the Great has fallen flat on its face; not because of the acting, but because of sexuality. For those that don't know, Alexander is portrayed in the film as a bisexual.
The studio must have realized that this would be a social test that could go either way, so the smart money would have been to have a smaller budget, and see how it went. But instead they rammed $155 million into the production of the film and $55 million into promoting it and hoped for the best. It appears they got the worst.
Box Office Mojo reports that as of today, November 29th, the film grossed $21 million.
Here are some other films with big budgets that made it because they were more acceptable to a wider audience:
Lord of the Rings: Return of the King....$144 million to make & market, made $377 million (U.S.), $1.1 billion (worldwide). Opening weekend in U.S.: $72 million.
Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers...$139 million to make & market, made $326 million (U.S.), $926 million (worldwide). Opening weekend in U.S.: $62 million
Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring...$143 million to make & market, made $314 million (U.S.), $871 million (worldwide). Opening weekend in U.S.: $47 million.
Titanic...$240 million to make & market, made $600 million (U.S.), $1.8 billion (worldwide). Opening weekend in U.S.: $28 million. This one was a gamble too, but Leo's star power and James Cameron's attention to detail made it work.
Braveheart...$72 million to make, made $75 milion (U.S.), $210 million (worldwide). Opening weekend in U.S.: $9 million.
Though I am loathe to admit it, the studio should have followed Michael Moore's example with Fahrenheit 9/11 ($9 million to produce, $15 million to market, $100 million plus in ticket sales in the U.S. , $100 million plus worldwide for a total of $220 million in ticket sales.) Bush-bashing was/is very popular worldwide, but Moore was smart enough to keep his budget down. As much as I disliked his distortions and hatred, it was targeted at a specific (unhealthy) emotion that was present in the American and global public before the election.
But with Alexander, the studio took a huge gamble and missed the mark. The only thing that can save the studio from a loss will be if the movie is a hit in other Western nations, which it could well be.
Re-imagining the Alamo didn't work either. They spent $75 million on making it, and made $25 million worldwide. I liked this film as I thought it was more realistic than what American history has made it out to be over the years. The "Was Davey Crockett captured and executed?" debate continues to rage on.
The lesson here is for movie studios to go conservative on the budget with their movies that have controversial issues. Better yet, don't even produce movies that contain raging social issues as they will be perceived as having a political agenda as "Alexander" is being described in some circles.
(All the figures above come from www.boxofficemojo.com)
The studio must have realized that this would be a social test that could go either way, so the smart money would have been to have a smaller budget, and see how it went. But instead they rammed $155 million into the production of the film and $55 million into promoting it and hoped for the best. It appears they got the worst.
Box Office Mojo reports that as of today, November 29th, the film grossed $21 million.
Here are some other films with big budgets that made it because they were more acceptable to a wider audience:
Lord of the Rings: Return of the King....$144 million to make & market, made $377 million (U.S.), $1.1 billion (worldwide). Opening weekend in U.S.: $72 million.
Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers...$139 million to make & market, made $326 million (U.S.), $926 million (worldwide). Opening weekend in U.S.: $62 million
Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring...$143 million to make & market, made $314 million (U.S.), $871 million (worldwide). Opening weekend in U.S.: $47 million.
Titanic...$240 million to make & market, made $600 million (U.S.), $1.8 billion (worldwide). Opening weekend in U.S.: $28 million. This one was a gamble too, but Leo's star power and James Cameron's attention to detail made it work.
Braveheart...$72 million to make, made $75 milion (U.S.), $210 million (worldwide). Opening weekend in U.S.: $9 million.
Though I am loathe to admit it, the studio should have followed Michael Moore's example with Fahrenheit 9/11 ($9 million to produce, $15 million to market, $100 million plus in ticket sales in the U.S. , $100 million plus worldwide for a total of $220 million in ticket sales.) Bush-bashing was/is very popular worldwide, but Moore was smart enough to keep his budget down. As much as I disliked his distortions and hatred, it was targeted at a specific (unhealthy) emotion that was present in the American and global public before the election.
But with Alexander, the studio took a huge gamble and missed the mark. The only thing that can save the studio from a loss will be if the movie is a hit in other Western nations, which it could well be.
Re-imagining the Alamo didn't work either. They spent $75 million on making it, and made $25 million worldwide. I liked this film as I thought it was more realistic than what American history has made it out to be over the years. The "Was Davey Crockett captured and executed?" debate continues to rage on.
The lesson here is for movie studios to go conservative on the budget with their movies that have controversial issues. Better yet, don't even produce movies that contain raging social issues as they will be perceived as having a political agenda as "Alexander" is being described in some circles.
(All the figures above come from www.boxofficemojo.com)
Sunday, November 28, 2004
Princess Diana: Seven Years Later and the Controversy Continues
Am I the only one who thinks people should get over Princess Diana’s death and stop reopening the wounds of her sons and family?
“Sensational” books are still being released, secret videos, stories of secret lovers and whispered conversations are being leaked on a regular basis. For crying out loud, let her rest in peace and give the princes a chance to move on. How many people think that Prince William and Prince Harry want to read about their mother and the scandals that she may or may not have been involved with? WHO CARES!
I think these opportunistic money-grabbers look for perfection in an imperfect being. That's a very hard standard to follow, so of course they're going to find faults with someone. She was a human being and made human mistakes. Get over it!
Anyone in favor of letting the past stay in the past? I see no sense in drawing this idiocy out any more. Seven years on, and she's still being analyzed.
“Sensational” books are still being released, secret videos, stories of secret lovers and whispered conversations are being leaked on a regular basis. For crying out loud, let her rest in peace and give the princes a chance to move on. How many people think that Prince William and Prince Harry want to read about their mother and the scandals that she may or may not have been involved with? WHO CARES!
I think these opportunistic money-grabbers look for perfection in an imperfect being. That's a very hard standard to follow, so of course they're going to find faults with someone. She was a human being and made human mistakes. Get over it!
Anyone in favor of letting the past stay in the past? I see no sense in drawing this idiocy out any more. Seven years on, and she's still being analyzed.
Nasty Ukrainian Vote Fraud Story
If the story below is true, how can any government on Earth say that the Ukrainian elections were fair and impartial?
Vladimir Putin should be ashamed of himself!
Here's the Telegraph story.
Vladimir Putin should be ashamed of himself!
Here's the Telegraph story.
Friday, November 26, 2004
Ukraine in Turmoil
A political nightmare is playing itself out in the Ukraine.
It’s become painfully obvious that democracy hasn’t completely taken hold yet. Reports of widespread cheating have thrown the recent presidential elections there into chaos and have led hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians to take to the streets to protest the announced results.
The Russians have inserted themselves into the Ukrainian elections, which is a major part of the problem. While many Ukrainians feel that they share bonds with Russia, they do not want Moscow interfering with their internal affairs. The two countries are not joined at the hip in a Soviet-dominated political system and sometimes Moscow seems to forget that.
Vladimir Putin has a very bad habit of taking sides in other elections, which is very unfortunate. So he ought to quit complaining when the U.S. doesn’t go along with his choice for Ukrainian president.
It’s become painfully obvious that democracy hasn’t completely taken hold yet. Reports of widespread cheating have thrown the recent presidential elections there into chaos and have led hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians to take to the streets to protest the announced results.
The Russians have inserted themselves into the Ukrainian elections, which is a major part of the problem. While many Ukrainians feel that they share bonds with Russia, they do not want Moscow interfering with their internal affairs. The two countries are not joined at the hip in a Soviet-dominated political system and sometimes Moscow seems to forget that.
Vladimir Putin has a very bad habit of taking sides in other elections, which is very unfortunate. So he ought to quit complaining when the U.S. doesn’t go along with his choice for Ukrainian president.
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1789---The Real Thanksgiving Holiday--Not "Pilgrims and Indians"
Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me "to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"
Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted' for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.
And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have show kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.
Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d dy of October, A.D. 1789.
(signed) G. Washington
Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted' for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.
And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have show kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.
Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d dy of October, A.D. 1789.
(signed) G. Washington
School Bans the Declaration of Independence
The attempted whitewash of U.S. history continued in California with a school banning U.S. historical documents like the Declaration of Independence from being taught to schools.
This is going way beyond anything that they have tried in the past.
The reason? The Declaration and other similar documents that were instrumental in the formation of our country and are a part of its foundation have references to God that atheists in California object to.
So the school punished a Christian teacher who ignored the school’s ban. The teacher turned around and sued the school district for discrimination.
Banning the Declaration of Independence because it mentions God?? This is an attack on the very heart and soul of our nation. If it wasn’t for the Declaration, many parts of our current Constitution wouldn’t be there either, including the very Bill of Rights that some idiots are busy raping.
When will this nonsense end? Here's the story. Fools. They ought to ban stupidity like this!
This is going way beyond anything that they have tried in the past.
The reason? The Declaration and other similar documents that were instrumental in the formation of our country and are a part of its foundation have references to God that atheists in California object to.
So the school punished a Christian teacher who ignored the school’s ban. The teacher turned around and sued the school district for discrimination.
Banning the Declaration of Independence because it mentions God?? This is an attack on the very heart and soul of our nation. If it wasn’t for the Declaration, many parts of our current Constitution wouldn’t be there either, including the very Bill of Rights that some idiots are busy raping.
When will this nonsense end? Here's the story. Fools. They ought to ban stupidity like this!
Monday, November 22, 2004
Hunting Massacre in Wisconsin: A Hunting Dispute?
There's more to the story of the five hunters who were killed in Wisconsin than first meets the eye.
From what the mainstream media is saying, it was a dispute over a hunting spot. But from what details have come out, I do not think that the accused killer was hunting deer.
He was hunting humans.
He chased after the fleeing hunters, and gunned them down in cold blood. That was no argument over a hunting spot. The only reason he stopped was that he ran out of ammunition.
This guy is a predator. Gun control advocates will say that it's another reason to ban guns and hunting, but gun control laws wouldn't have stopped this guy. If he can kill five human beings without batting an eye, he'd have found a way to kill without the use of a firearm. Serial killers do that.
From what the mainstream media is saying, it was a dispute over a hunting spot. But from what details have come out, I do not think that the accused killer was hunting deer.
He was hunting humans.
He chased after the fleeing hunters, and gunned them down in cold blood. That was no argument over a hunting spot. The only reason he stopped was that he ran out of ammunition.
This guy is a predator. Gun control advocates will say that it's another reason to ban guns and hunting, but gun control laws wouldn't have stopped this guy. If he can kill five human beings without batting an eye, he'd have found a way to kill without the use of a firearm. Serial killers do that.
Sunday, November 21, 2004
NBA Suspends Players Involved in Detroit/Indiana Brawl
The NBA came down hard on the juvenile behavior displayed at the Detroit Pistons/Indiana Pacers game, suspending nine players without pay.
The combined pay that will be forfeit will be over $10 million. I hope the teams donate this money to charity.
The “children” who were most directly responsible for this behavior will sit out a combined 143 games.
It’s not enough.
Now there should be civil and criminal prosecutions of both players and fans. The Auburn Hills police department has copies of the brawl that the networks filmed and are working on building cases. The sooner the better!
That had better be the last melee like this in the NBA.
The combined pay that will be forfeit will be over $10 million. I hope the teams donate this money to charity.
The “children” who were most directly responsible for this behavior will sit out a combined 143 games.
It’s not enough.
Now there should be civil and criminal prosecutions of both players and fans. The Auburn Hills police department has copies of the brawl that the networks filmed and are working on building cases. The sooner the better!
That had better be the last melee like this in the NBA.
Saturday, November 20, 2004
NBA Means: No Brains Anywhere--Pistons vs. Pacers
Once again, professional athletes are being condemned for their behavior against fans. By now everyone has heard about the Pistons-Pacers game at the Palace of Auburn Hills and how players went after fans who were throwing stuff at them.
To the players and fans in attendance that participated in this brawl, shame on you for demeaning elementary, middle and high school basketball in this way. Oh, sorry, did I say that? I forgot, it was an NBA pro basketball game. Anyways, shame on you for providing a very bad example for aspiring (underage) athletes to look up to.
Hefty fines, suspensions, and arrests should follow. The example needs to be set: behave like total asses, and suffer the consequences. With any luck, the fines will run into the millions.
To the players and fans in attendance that participated in this brawl, shame on you for demeaning elementary, middle and high school basketball in this way. Oh, sorry, did I say that? I forgot, it was an NBA pro basketball game. Anyways, shame on you for providing a very bad example for aspiring (underage) athletes to look up to.
Hefty fines, suspensions, and arrests should follow. The example needs to be set: behave like total asses, and suffer the consequences. With any luck, the fines will run into the millions.
Friday, November 19, 2004
Kerry Says bin-Laden Message Cost Him Election
John Kerry is saying that the Osama bin-Laden tape that surfaced just before the election scared the electorate and cost him the election.
With all due respect, no it didn't.
He lost the election because he was too far to the left, was a flip-flopper and couldn't solidify his Democratic base.
"Anyone but Bush?" Not hardly.
With all due respect, no it didn't.
He lost the election because he was too far to the left, was a flip-flopper and couldn't solidify his Democratic base.
"Anyone but Bush?" Not hardly.
Thursday, November 18, 2004
Separation of Church and State Means Establishment of State Religion
The first sentence of the First Amendment reads:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Over the years, this has been construed by the courts as meaning “separation” of church and state. This is not correct.
This was to stop the establishment of an official state religion.
Now consider this:
By banning crosses, stars of David, crescents and other religious symbols (like the Ten Commandments or Nativity scenes) in public places and so forth, the court system is forcing secular humanism on the American people.
The court system has to recognize that secular humanism is a faith in itself. It professes faith in the works of man over the works of a divine creator, which religious people find offensive. Quite frankly, I find the concept of one group of people forcing their viewpoint on all others through the court an affront.
It is wrong for the court system to impose secular humanism on people who are faithful to God, or to the precepts of their own religious faith.
When will the courts stop hijacking the First Amendment?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Over the years, this has been construed by the courts as meaning “separation” of church and state. This is not correct.
This was to stop the establishment of an official state religion.
Now consider this:
By banning crosses, stars of David, crescents and other religious symbols (like the Ten Commandments or Nativity scenes) in public places and so forth, the court system is forcing secular humanism on the American people.
The court system has to recognize that secular humanism is a faith in itself. It professes faith in the works of man over the works of a divine creator, which religious people find offensive. Quite frankly, I find the concept of one group of people forcing their viewpoint on all others through the court an affront.
It is wrong for the court system to impose secular humanism on people who are faithful to God, or to the precepts of their own religious faith.
When will the courts stop hijacking the First Amendment?
Constitutional Protections: For All, Not For Some
I am of the opinion that proposed Constitutional Amendments which restrict the rights of the American people are very bad news and should be rejected by those in power out-of-hand.
The original Bill of Rights was designed to limit the government's ability to infringe on the rights of the American people. Among other things, the Bill was to restrict government control over the lives of the people and all of the Amendments since then have followed this general approach with the exception of one.
The 18th Amendment (1919) banned the import, manufacture and distribution of alcohol anywhere in the United States. It proved to be impossible to enforce and the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment fourteen years later.
The 18th remains the only Amendment that has been overturned in spite of recent efforts to overturn parts of the First (freedom of association, parts of free speech clause via the political correctness movement) and Second Amendments.
We must never surrender our Constitutional rights to security considerations. With the war on terror continuing to rage, the possibility of a shattering terrorist attack on our nation continues to exist, and with it the possibility of Constitutional alterations in the name of preventing a terrorist attack that may never happen.
Don't think Constitutional violations will happen? Constitutional protections are already being ignored by the Justice Department. Americans who were rounded up after 9/11 on suspicion of being terrorists have been held for three years without access to attorneys or the court system. There is no need to try these people in secret...bring the proceedings out into the open! If they have done no wrong, let the government beg for their forgiveness and offer compensation, but if they are criminals, then let the criminal system work.
The Sixth Amendment reads: "In ALL criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
Well, get on with it!
The original Bill of Rights was designed to limit the government's ability to infringe on the rights of the American people. Among other things, the Bill was to restrict government control over the lives of the people and all of the Amendments since then have followed this general approach with the exception of one.
The 18th Amendment (1919) banned the import, manufacture and distribution of alcohol anywhere in the United States. It proved to be impossible to enforce and the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment fourteen years later.
The 18th remains the only Amendment that has been overturned in spite of recent efforts to overturn parts of the First (freedom of association, parts of free speech clause via the political correctness movement) and Second Amendments.
We must never surrender our Constitutional rights to security considerations. With the war on terror continuing to rage, the possibility of a shattering terrorist attack on our nation continues to exist, and with it the possibility of Constitutional alterations in the name of preventing a terrorist attack that may never happen.
Don't think Constitutional violations will happen? Constitutional protections are already being ignored by the Justice Department. Americans who were rounded up after 9/11 on suspicion of being terrorists have been held for three years without access to attorneys or the court system. There is no need to try these people in secret...bring the proceedings out into the open! If they have done no wrong, let the government beg for their forgiveness and offer compensation, but if they are criminals, then let the criminal system work.
The Sixth Amendment reads: "In ALL criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
Well, get on with it!
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
PETA Starts “Fish Have Feelings Too” Campaign
The animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has launched a new ad campaign that is focused on the feelings of fish and that they (fish) don’t deserve to be eaten by evil meat-eating people.
This, after actor/activist Edward Furlong and some of his friends were arrested for drunk & disorderly conduct in a supermarket following a drunken attempt to liberate a lobster from a water tank.
Sounds like PETA leadership needs a drink too!
Common sense seems to be in dangerously short supply with some of these groups.
This, after actor/activist Edward Furlong and some of his friends were arrested for drunk & disorderly conduct in a supermarket following a drunken attempt to liberate a lobster from a water tank.
Sounds like PETA leadership needs a drink too!
Common sense seems to be in dangerously short supply with some of these groups.
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Psychologists Blast Limbaugh For Telling People to GET OVER IT!!
Now the shrinks in Florida are getting into the election blues, too!
A psychologist is blasting Rush Limbaugh for telling people to straighten up and move on. It was just an election, for crying out loud!
Rush was commenting on people getting counseling because Kerry lost the election.
The story began when Rush jokingly offered free counseling to depressed voters (I took it to mean a kick in the pants) but psychologists who are treating these idiots fired back and said that Rush wasn’t qualified to do that. DUH!!
I think the affected psychologists should be ashamed to be taking payment for stuff as ridiculous as this! And what’s more, I cannot believe that the liberal mainstream media who were heavily invested in the Kerry campaign are buying into this crap.
Perhaps Palm Beach County should join Canada, too. What utter nonsense!
Here’s the story.
A psychologist is blasting Rush Limbaugh for telling people to straighten up and move on. It was just an election, for crying out loud!
Rush was commenting on people getting counseling because Kerry lost the election.
The story began when Rush jokingly offered free counseling to depressed voters (I took it to mean a kick in the pants) but psychologists who are treating these idiots fired back and said that Rush wasn’t qualified to do that. DUH!!
I think the affected psychologists should be ashamed to be taking payment for stuff as ridiculous as this! And what’s more, I cannot believe that the liberal mainstream media who were heavily invested in the Kerry campaign are buying into this crap.
Perhaps Palm Beach County should join Canada, too. What utter nonsense!
Here’s the story.
Bush Cabinet Changes Continue
The exodus of President Bush’s cabinet continued with the resignations of Colin Powell, Spencer Abraham, Rod Paige and others.
It was unfortunate that Powell wasn’t listened to as the build-up to war continued and he warned that if we invaded and conquered Iraq, we would own all of Iraq’s problems. His presentation of wrong CIA facts as Gospel-truth to the U.N. Security Council diminished his international stature, but it wasn’t entirely his fault. He believed the information that the CIA presented to him and was shocked when CIA Director Tenet backtracked on the facts at a press conference that Powell watched on TV.
Abraham’s attempts to secure our country’s nuclear technologies were also noteworthy. On his watch, investigations revealed deep problems at the Los Alamos nuclear facility, where computer hard drives disappeared, materials were misplaced and nuclear warhead designs went missing. The latter half of his tenure was marked by attempts to enhance security at American nuclear facilities, and his failure to get an energy policy through Congress. Abraham received his share of blame for the soaring cost of oil and refusing to use the strategic oil reserves to manipulate the price of oil at the pumps.
Paige called the National Education Association a “terrorist group” and then apologized for it. He also got mixed reviews on his performance. The No Child Left Behind Act piled tons of paperwork on local school districts, leading some schools to withdraw from receiving federal funds. Paige was then hit with accusations that his Texas school district under-reported the number of dropouts and manipulated data to make Paige and the Houston school district look good.
As much as half of Bush’s cabinet is expected to leave. Don’t read into it too much as turnover happens quite often between a first and second Presidential term.
It was unfortunate that Powell wasn’t listened to as the build-up to war continued and he warned that if we invaded and conquered Iraq, we would own all of Iraq’s problems. His presentation of wrong CIA facts as Gospel-truth to the U.N. Security Council diminished his international stature, but it wasn’t entirely his fault. He believed the information that the CIA presented to him and was shocked when CIA Director Tenet backtracked on the facts at a press conference that Powell watched on TV.
Abraham’s attempts to secure our country’s nuclear technologies were also noteworthy. On his watch, investigations revealed deep problems at the Los Alamos nuclear facility, where computer hard drives disappeared, materials were misplaced and nuclear warhead designs went missing. The latter half of his tenure was marked by attempts to enhance security at American nuclear facilities, and his failure to get an energy policy through Congress. Abraham received his share of blame for the soaring cost of oil and refusing to use the strategic oil reserves to manipulate the price of oil at the pumps.
Paige called the National Education Association a “terrorist group” and then apologized for it. He also got mixed reviews on his performance. The No Child Left Behind Act piled tons of paperwork on local school districts, leading some schools to withdraw from receiving federal funds. Paige was then hit with accusations that his Texas school district under-reported the number of dropouts and manipulated data to make Paige and the Houston school district look good.
As much as half of Bush’s cabinet is expected to leave. Don’t read into it too much as turnover happens quite often between a first and second Presidential term.
Sunday, November 14, 2004
Another Arafat for Palestinians?
The terrorist group Hamas is planning on having one of their members run for President of the Palestinian Authority, the position formerly held by Yasser Arafat.
The opposition is said to be a jailed Palestinian terrorist who is being held for killing four Israelis and a Greek monk.
The jailed Palestinian is said to be in favor of a negotiated settlement with Israel, but Israel won’t release him.
Am I the only one who thinks that having two terrorists run for Palestinian President (formerly held by the father of modern terrorism) is a REAL bad idea? I was talking with someone over the weekend who thought it was not such a bad idea given the fact that the Palestinians are at war with Israel and that Arafat was a PLO terrorist. I told him that this was the kind of appeasement that would cause the Palestinians to be dominated by terror groups whether they wanted it or not.
This will set a very bad precedence and could hurt the democratic process in that region of the Middle East for years to come.
The opposition is said to be a jailed Palestinian terrorist who is being held for killing four Israelis and a Greek monk.
The jailed Palestinian is said to be in favor of a negotiated settlement with Israel, but Israel won’t release him.
Am I the only one who thinks that having two terrorists run for Palestinian President (formerly held by the father of modern terrorism) is a REAL bad idea? I was talking with someone over the weekend who thought it was not such a bad idea given the fact that the Palestinians are at war with Israel and that Arafat was a PLO terrorist. I told him that this was the kind of appeasement that would cause the Palestinians to be dominated by terror groups whether they wanted it or not.
This will set a very bad precedence and could hurt the democratic process in that region of the Middle East for years to come.
Saturday, November 13, 2004
Ashcroft Accused Judges of Interfering in National Security
Retiring Attorney General John Ashcroft says activist judges are threatening Bush Administration decisions on national security.
While I think he is right about activist judges, here’s what he forgot to say:
The Bush Administration decisions in question are unconstitutional and unconscionable. And Ashcroft, as the attorney general, was wrong to support such unconstitutional measures as detaining Americans without access to lawyers and the court system for over three years.
It should have been Ashcroft who was telling Bush that suppressing Constitutional protections was a wrong decision, instead of the idiot judges in question that Ashcroft has no control over. Further, suppressing the Constitution is not national security…it’s bad policy.
I think that the Bush Administration should spend a little bit of time studying the American Civil War, and President Lincoln’s attempt to suspend the writ of habeas corpus in 1861, so that Confederate sympathizers and copperheads could be arrested for the duration of the war. The Supreme Court eventually ruled the suspension without an act of Congress as unconstitutional.
Some of the Americans arrested shortly after 9/11 had nothing to do with terrorism, but because they are of Middle Eastern background, the authorities held onto them. Now I think they’re afraid to let them go without charging them with something, because they’ll have an open-and-closed case of false imprisonment, denying American citizens their civil rights, and other similar accusations. It’s a huge liability question for this Administration or the next one to deal with.
We cannot hold people prisoner until they do something wrong. If they haven’t done anything wrong, they should be released. Period.
While I think he is right about activist judges, here’s what he forgot to say:
The Bush Administration decisions in question are unconstitutional and unconscionable. And Ashcroft, as the attorney general, was wrong to support such unconstitutional measures as detaining Americans without access to lawyers and the court system for over three years.
It should have been Ashcroft who was telling Bush that suppressing Constitutional protections was a wrong decision, instead of the idiot judges in question that Ashcroft has no control over. Further, suppressing the Constitution is not national security…it’s bad policy.
I think that the Bush Administration should spend a little bit of time studying the American Civil War, and President Lincoln’s attempt to suspend the writ of habeas corpus in 1861, so that Confederate sympathizers and copperheads could be arrested for the duration of the war. The Supreme Court eventually ruled the suspension without an act of Congress as unconstitutional.
Some of the Americans arrested shortly after 9/11 had nothing to do with terrorism, but because they are of Middle Eastern background, the authorities held onto them. Now I think they’re afraid to let them go without charging them with something, because they’ll have an open-and-closed case of false imprisonment, denying American citizens their civil rights, and other similar accusations. It’s a huge liability question for this Administration or the next one to deal with.
We cannot hold people prisoner until they do something wrong. If they haven’t done anything wrong, they should be released. Period.
Police Use Stun-Gun on Six Year-Old
This one I have to question…
Police were called into Kelsey Pharr Elementary School in Miami to stop a six-year old boy from hurting himself and others with a shard of glass that he had gotten from breaking a picture frame in the principal’s office. He apparently cut himself and was wielding it like a knife to keep everyone at bay. There are several versions of the news story circulating on the web with different facts of the incident so I’ll leave it there.
The police arrived and used a stun-gun on the kid to immobilize him so that he could be disarmed.
Nailing a six-year old with 50,000 volts to take a piece of glass away? Give me a break! Why the hell didn’t two or three people rush the kid and take the glass from him? Was this boy 6’4” and 275 pounds and built like Arnold Schwarzeneggar? No, he’s probably 3’9” tall and weighs 45 pounds. Perhaps he’s obese and weighs 90 pounds. Who cares?
Both the staff at that school and the police need to be retrained on how they deal with aggressive six-year olds. DUH!!
I did a google news search on “boy taser” to research this story and came up with lots of news articles of cops using tasers to stop rampaging kids both successfully and unsuccessfully. There have been a handful of deaths resulting from police using these weapons on children.
Electricity can affect heart rhythm and 50,000 volts can have a devastating effect on a person’s long-term health. If we put this in another light, a medical procedure that used to be used to restart someone’s heart is now being used by police on children of all ages to control them. Is this wise?
Since the cops and the staff (all adults mind you) were overmatched by a six year-old child with a piece of glass, I guess they needed the help. I’M KIDDING!!
Police were called into Kelsey Pharr Elementary School in Miami to stop a six-year old boy from hurting himself and others with a shard of glass that he had gotten from breaking a picture frame in the principal’s office. He apparently cut himself and was wielding it like a knife to keep everyone at bay. There are several versions of the news story circulating on the web with different facts of the incident so I’ll leave it there.
The police arrived and used a stun-gun on the kid to immobilize him so that he could be disarmed.
Nailing a six-year old with 50,000 volts to take a piece of glass away? Give me a break! Why the hell didn’t two or three people rush the kid and take the glass from him? Was this boy 6’4” and 275 pounds and built like Arnold Schwarzeneggar? No, he’s probably 3’9” tall and weighs 45 pounds. Perhaps he’s obese and weighs 90 pounds. Who cares?
Both the staff at that school and the police need to be retrained on how they deal with aggressive six-year olds. DUH!!
I did a google news search on “boy taser” to research this story and came up with lots of news articles of cops using tasers to stop rampaging kids both successfully and unsuccessfully. There have been a handful of deaths resulting from police using these weapons on children.
Electricity can affect heart rhythm and 50,000 volts can have a devastating effect on a person’s long-term health. If we put this in another light, a medical procedure that used to be used to restart someone’s heart is now being used by police on children of all ages to control them. Is this wise?
Since the cops and the staff (all adults mind you) were overmatched by a six year-old child with a piece of glass, I guess they needed the help. I’M KIDDING!!
Thursday, November 11, 2004
Arafat: A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing
The world now knows that Yasser Arafat passed away quietly during the night. He wasn’t killed by a Hamas sniper, as the so-called Bible Code predicted; he died quietly in a hospital bed.
I do not like to speak ill of the dead, but the tributes coming in from world leaders are an affront to Arafat’s victims.
Exactly how many people did Arafat send to their graves when he was a radical PLO leader?
He ordered airliners blown out of the sky, the terrorist attack on the Olympics in 1972, bombings of pizzerias, bus stations and assassinations of his enemies. Some have said that he introduced modern terrorism to the world. Islamic Jihad and other terror networks benefited from Arafat’s support in their terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians.
Does the name Leon Klinghoffer ring a bell?
I’m not going to offer the Palestinians condolences on the loss of their leader. I hope that there isn’t a Palestinian civil war and that they and the Israelis find peace before they blow one another off the map.
May God show more mercy to Arafat than he showed to his victims.
I do not like to speak ill of the dead, but the tributes coming in from world leaders are an affront to Arafat’s victims.
Exactly how many people did Arafat send to their graves when he was a radical PLO leader?
He ordered airliners blown out of the sky, the terrorist attack on the Olympics in 1972, bombings of pizzerias, bus stations and assassinations of his enemies. Some have said that he introduced modern terrorism to the world. Islamic Jihad and other terror networks benefited from Arafat’s support in their terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians.
Does the name Leon Klinghoffer ring a bell?
I’m not going to offer the Palestinians condolences on the loss of their leader. I hope that there isn’t a Palestinian civil war and that they and the Israelis find peace before they blow one another off the map.
May God show more mercy to Arafat than he showed to his victims.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
Gonzales May Be Next Attorney General
White House counsel Alberto Gonzales is said to be an early favorite to replace John Ashcroft as Attorney General.
I’m concerned about this choice as he has been involved in creating some of the problems that I perceive within the Justice Department. He publicly defended policies of holding onto suspects without access to legal representation or to the court systems for prolonged periods of time. The Supreme Court has ruled that legal limbo is illegal under the due process clause as I’ve mentioned before.
We need a new direction, not a continuation of a failed direction.
This is most unwise. They need an independent thinker who is not a buddy of the President.
An Attorney General needs to have enough distance from the President to order up independent investigations in the event that wrongdoing by the President or the Administration is discovered. That is what infuriated me about Janet Reno; she didn’t when she should have; she did when she shouldn’t have. The Justice Department is not the White House defense team. As the nation’s top cop, the Attorney General needs to enforce the law, not disregard any aspect of it.
The President really needs to think this through.
I’m concerned about this choice as he has been involved in creating some of the problems that I perceive within the Justice Department. He publicly defended policies of holding onto suspects without access to legal representation or to the court systems for prolonged periods of time. The Supreme Court has ruled that legal limbo is illegal under the due process clause as I’ve mentioned before.
We need a new direction, not a continuation of a failed direction.
This is most unwise. They need an independent thinker who is not a buddy of the President.
An Attorney General needs to have enough distance from the President to order up independent investigations in the event that wrongdoing by the President or the Administration is discovered. That is what infuriated me about Janet Reno; she didn’t when she should have; she did when she shouldn’t have. The Justice Department is not the White House defense team. As the nation’s top cop, the Attorney General needs to enforce the law, not disregard any aspect of it.
The President really needs to think this through.
List of Ashcroft Replacements Being Circulated
There are names being circulated around Washington as to who might be John Ashcroft’s replacement. PepsiCo Executive Larry Thompson, New York Governor George Pataki, former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani, White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales, and Marc Racicot, chairman of Bush's re-election effort, are on the short list as well as some others that the Administration haven’t revealed yet.
I don’t know much about most of these names, but I think Giuliani would be a better Director of Homeland Security. He would do an excellent job as attorney general, but his statement that he would like to be the one to flip the switch on Osama bin-Laden gives me pause.
I am against the death penalty in all forms. That will set me against about 70% of Americans who favor the death penalty and 84% of Americans who think bin-Laden should get the death penalty if he is ever captured.
I do not know if it was a spur-of-the-moment comment, or if he meant it, but I think his style of leadership would be better put to use at Homeland Security as they are still in the formative stage. His book on leadership was excellent, and his acute powers of observation would get the Homeland Security Department to where it needs to be; protecting America’s security from external terrorist threats.
They may make their choice known later today.
I don’t know much about most of these names, but I think Giuliani would be a better Director of Homeland Security. He would do an excellent job as attorney general, but his statement that he would like to be the one to flip the switch on Osama bin-Laden gives me pause.
I am against the death penalty in all forms. That will set me against about 70% of Americans who favor the death penalty and 84% of Americans who think bin-Laden should get the death penalty if he is ever captured.
I do not know if it was a spur-of-the-moment comment, or if he meant it, but I think his style of leadership would be better put to use at Homeland Security as they are still in the formative stage. His book on leadership was excellent, and his acute powers of observation would get the Homeland Security Department to where it needs to be; protecting America’s security from external terrorist threats.
They may make their choice known later today.
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
Ashcroft Resigns
I wish John Ashcroft well on his health and his retirement.
I hope President Bush chooses a jurist and not an ideologue for the post of Attorney General. He needs someone who will run the Justice Department, defend the Constitution in all aspects, and enforce the law, not supersede it.
I hope President Bush chooses a jurist and not an ideologue for the post of Attorney General. He needs someone who will run the Justice Department, defend the Constitution in all aspects, and enforce the law, not supersede it.
Kerry Liberals Need Group Therapy??!
On the heels of a Kerry volunteer committing suicide at Ground Zero over Kerry’s loss to Bush, it was revealed today that some people in Palm Beach County, Florida, are seeing counselors because of their depression over the election.
People ought to quit crying and get on with their lives. Most mature people shrug their shoulders and vow to win the next time around and go back to their jobs.
I’ve been pointing out the dangers of rampant emotionalism the last few posts. There was so much liberal rage at Bush that you had to wonder what was going to happen to these idiots next. Well…here’s the story.
I wasn’t happy about Clinton winning in 1992 or 1996 or his surviving impeachment on the only charge that mattered, lying under oath, but I sure as hell didn’t need group therapy to talk about my feelings. Idiots! Grow up!! Get over it!
People ought to quit crying and get on with their lives. Most mature people shrug their shoulders and vow to win the next time around and go back to their jobs.
I’ve been pointing out the dangers of rampant emotionalism the last few posts. There was so much liberal rage at Bush that you had to wonder what was going to happen to these idiots next. Well…here’s the story.
I wasn’t happy about Clinton winning in 1992 or 1996 or his surviving impeachment on the only charge that mattered, lying under oath, but I sure as hell didn’t need group therapy to talk about my feelings. Idiots! Grow up!! Get over it!
Monday, November 08, 2004
Federal Judge Stops Illegal Military Commission Prosecution
Finally, a little common sense in the U.S. legal system!
A federal judge stopped a military commission from prosecuting Osama bin-Laden’s former driver until his status is ruled upon by a “competent tribunal.”
I’m not objecting to the trial of this man, but it should be in a civilian court, not a military one as the legality of military commissions is still in dispute.
This is a good decision based on Constitutional law, something that the Ashcroft Justice Department has been turning a blind eye to for far too long.
One of the consequences of re-electing Bush is that we have to be ever vigilant in protecting our Constitution and Bill of Rights from ill-conceived and reactionary acts of the Administration and the Justice Department.
That means never willingly surrendering our freedoms in the name of security.
Here’s the story.
A federal judge stopped a military commission from prosecuting Osama bin-Laden’s former driver until his status is ruled upon by a “competent tribunal.”
I’m not objecting to the trial of this man, but it should be in a civilian court, not a military one as the legality of military commissions is still in dispute.
This is a good decision based on Constitutional law, something that the Ashcroft Justice Department has been turning a blind eye to for far too long.
One of the consequences of re-electing Bush is that we have to be ever vigilant in protecting our Constitution and Bill of Rights from ill-conceived and reactionary acts of the Administration and the Justice Department.
That means never willingly surrendering our freedoms in the name of security.
Here’s the story.
Street Fighting in Fallujah: What Did He Say??!
SecDef Rumsfeld said today that there was little possibility of large numbers of Iraqi civilians getting killed as coalition and Iraqi ground forces engage militants in street combat for control of Falljuah.
Why does he make statements like that? Of course there will be large numbers of civilians killed or wounded. When you’re talking about 200,000 non-combatants being in between the coalition and the insurgents, and bullets and bombs flying in every direction, of course there will be large numbers of Iraqi civilians killed or wounded. Plus the enemy looks like the civilian population AND the enemy has no problem with gunning down unarmed civilians to throw blame on the coaltion.
With untold thousands of Iraqi civilians dead from this war, and tens of thousands more wounded, “one would think” (Rumsfeld lingo) that the Secretary of Defense would learn not to make broad statements like that.
It’s statements like this that make me think that Rumsfeld needs to retire.
Why does he make statements like that? Of course there will be large numbers of civilians killed or wounded. When you’re talking about 200,000 non-combatants being in between the coalition and the insurgents, and bullets and bombs flying in every direction, of course there will be large numbers of Iraqi civilians killed or wounded. Plus the enemy looks like the civilian population AND the enemy has no problem with gunning down unarmed civilians to throw blame on the coaltion.
With untold thousands of Iraqi civilians dead from this war, and tens of thousands more wounded, “one would think” (Rumsfeld lingo) that the Secretary of Defense would learn not to make broad statements like that.
It’s statements like this that make me think that Rumsfeld needs to retire.
Sunday, November 07, 2004
Some Americans Looking at Leaving U.S. Over Bush Win
It’s being reported that the number of Americans visiting a Canadian immigration web site is way up following George W. Bush’s victory. If Americans want to go live in Canada, they will receive a warm welcome; Canada wants 200,000 people to immigrate there next year.
But a mere election being the primary cause for some Americans wanting to quit their jobs, uproot their families, renounce their U.S. citizenship and move across the border into another country seems radical to me. That’s their choice, but I have difficulty believing that there aren’t other reasons for such a drastic move. In days past, people have fled across the border to avoid the draft or to outrun the IRS.
Some job-seekers will be happy if lots of people move to Canada; that means there will be job openings left behind here in the U.S.
People ought to stay at their jobs and express themselves in a more meaningful way, like starting a web site or running for office instead of tucking tail and running across the border or putting a gun to their heads.
More rampant emotionalism overriding common sense.
But a mere election being the primary cause for some Americans wanting to quit their jobs, uproot their families, renounce their U.S. citizenship and move across the border into another country seems radical to me. That’s their choice, but I have difficulty believing that there aren’t other reasons for such a drastic move. In days past, people have fled across the border to avoid the draft or to outrun the IRS.
Some job-seekers will be happy if lots of people move to Canada; that means there will be job openings left behind here in the U.S.
People ought to stay at their jobs and express themselves in a more meaningful way, like starting a web site or running for office instead of tucking tail and running across the border or putting a gun to their heads.
More rampant emotionalism overriding common sense.
Man Kills Himself Over Bush Victory at Ground Zero
Yesterday there was a report of a man who was so despondent over Kerry’s loss to Bush that he killed himself at Ground Zero in New York.
I don’t understand this at all. What kind of conditions existed in this man’s life that he felt life had no meaning anymore with Bush’s victory on Election Day? This is almost beyond belief. Did he not realize that eventually Bush will have to leave office due to the 22nd Amendment term-limiting the President?
Democracy will survive any President that comes along.
What is at stake, libs, is not democracy, but our interpretation of what democracy is. The modern liberal interpretation took a beating on Election Day, because it doesn't represent mainstream America anymore. It lost because the man who represented it was more concerned about getting Bush out than for representing the people who he claimed to represent.
So when someone puts a 12 gauge shotgun to his head and pulls the trigger over a lost election, that's rampant emotionalism overriding common sense. That's not a disaster for democracy. That's a disaster for that man's family and friends.
This was a man who was preparing to get married. It just doesn't make any sense.
I don’t understand this at all. What kind of conditions existed in this man’s life that he felt life had no meaning anymore with Bush’s victory on Election Day? This is almost beyond belief. Did he not realize that eventually Bush will have to leave office due to the 22nd Amendment term-limiting the President?
Democracy will survive any President that comes along.
What is at stake, libs, is not democracy, but our interpretation of what democracy is. The modern liberal interpretation took a beating on Election Day, because it doesn't represent mainstream America anymore. It lost because the man who represented it was more concerned about getting Bush out than for representing the people who he claimed to represent.
So when someone puts a 12 gauge shotgun to his head and pulls the trigger over a lost election, that's rampant emotionalism overriding common sense. That's not a disaster for democracy. That's a disaster for that man's family and friends.
This was a man who was preparing to get married. It just doesn't make any sense.
Friday, November 05, 2004
Constitutional Amendment: Change Term Limit of the U.S. President?
Someone raised a question of what would it take to term-limit the President to (1) six year term.
The 22nd Amendment limits the President to (two) four-year terms. It would have to be repealed and a new Amendment written with the new six-year term limit.
I’m not sure if they could repeal the 22nd and write the new term limit in one Amendment, or if it would take an Amendment to repeal the 22nd and then another Amendment to set the limit at one six-year term.
If it was decided that it would take two Amendments, there is a danger.
Current Constitutional law calls for the Amendments to be ratified by two-thirds of the House and Senate respectively. The Amendments then have to be ratified by three quarters of the states in order to go into effect.
With two Amendments, what happens if the repealing of the 22nd Amendment is approved and goes into effect, but the “six-year term” Amendment fails? The end result…no term limits for the President whatsoever. He/she could serve as many terms as they wanted, depending on the voters. With someone as popular as Bill Clinton was (bleah!) he could still be in power today.
That’s my take on the procedural side of it.
Some would argue that a single term would allow a President to get more work done instead of having to campaign in his/her fourth year of their first term.
Others would argue that the President should follow the example of George Washington and only run for two terms. Which is better?
The 22nd Amendment limits the President to (two) four-year terms. It would have to be repealed and a new Amendment written with the new six-year term limit.
I’m not sure if they could repeal the 22nd and write the new term limit in one Amendment, or if it would take an Amendment to repeal the 22nd and then another Amendment to set the limit at one six-year term.
If it was decided that it would take two Amendments, there is a danger.
Current Constitutional law calls for the Amendments to be ratified by two-thirds of the House and Senate respectively. The Amendments then have to be ratified by three quarters of the states in order to go into effect.
With two Amendments, what happens if the repealing of the 22nd Amendment is approved and goes into effect, but the “six-year term” Amendment fails? The end result…no term limits for the President whatsoever. He/she could serve as many terms as they wanted, depending on the voters. With someone as popular as Bill Clinton was (bleah!) he could still be in power today.
That’s my take on the procedural side of it.
Some would argue that a single term would allow a President to get more work done instead of having to campaign in his/her fourth year of their first term.
Others would argue that the President should follow the example of George Washington and only run for two terms. Which is better?
Ashcroft & Rummie Have to Go
The time for cabinet changes in the Bush Administration is now.
Two definite changes: Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Attorney General Ashcroft need to go.
I have been dissatisfied with the last two people to hold the directorship of the Justice Department: John Ashcroft and Janet Reno. Reno liked circumventing the Constitution in dealing with legal issues, and Ashcroft is turning a blind eye to parts of it (due process).
All parts of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights need to be observed by the government and John Ashcroft's Justice Department has not done their part. He’s still holding American citizens on U.S. soil without legal counsel and without their day in court as he thinks they may have had something to do with 9/11.
If so, then why haven’t they begun criminal proceedings? Legal limbo is illegal under the due process clause. It’s being said that Ashcroft may leave on his own terms before President Bush is sworn in for his second term. This would be an excellent start.
Bush needs a competent Secretary of Defense and Rumsfeld is clearly not up to the task. The entire battle plan for Iraq needs to be redone and goals clearly spelled out. Treating Iraq like a liberated Soviet satellite nation was a huge mistake. I think Poland, Lithuania, and other nations under Soviet domination would have welcomed U.S. troops and taken full advantage of their freedom, but Iraq is a Muslim nation that has been invaded by largely non-Muslim armies of the West.
Now that we’re there, it is important to get the Iraqi army, paramilitary and police set up with all the tools that they need to retake their country in all respects, and to secure their own country.
Two definite changes: Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Attorney General Ashcroft need to go.
I have been dissatisfied with the last two people to hold the directorship of the Justice Department: John Ashcroft and Janet Reno. Reno liked circumventing the Constitution in dealing with legal issues, and Ashcroft is turning a blind eye to parts of it (due process).
All parts of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights need to be observed by the government and John Ashcroft's Justice Department has not done their part. He’s still holding American citizens on U.S. soil without legal counsel and without their day in court as he thinks they may have had something to do with 9/11.
If so, then why haven’t they begun criminal proceedings? Legal limbo is illegal under the due process clause. It’s being said that Ashcroft may leave on his own terms before President Bush is sworn in for his second term. This would be an excellent start.
Bush needs a competent Secretary of Defense and Rumsfeld is clearly not up to the task. The entire battle plan for Iraq needs to be redone and goals clearly spelled out. Treating Iraq like a liberated Soviet satellite nation was a huge mistake. I think Poland, Lithuania, and other nations under Soviet domination would have welcomed U.S. troops and taken full advantage of their freedom, but Iraq is a Muslim nation that has been invaded by largely non-Muslim armies of the West.
Now that we’re there, it is important to get the Iraqi army, paramilitary and police set up with all the tools that they need to retake their country in all respects, and to secure their own country.
Thursday, November 04, 2004
2004 Election Ends
The 2004 election ended this morning when John Kerry threw in the towel after doing the math and correctly deducing that he wouldn’t have enough punch left from the provisional ballots in Ohio to capture the Buckeye state and turn the election.
Kerry was very gracious in his concession on TV today, promising to help reunite the country and thanking his supporters for their dedication to his campaign.
I did not agree with many of his stands, and was appalled by some of his personal choices in choosing liberal politics over his faith. His stock went through the ceiling with me when he stuck a fork in the election and pronounced it done without resorting to the legal system to get his way, as Gore did in 2000.
He even said that the election is best left in the hands of the American people, and not in the legal system. In spite of all the pre-election lawsuits that happened, and some of the antics of party challengers in many states at the polling stations, the election went very smoothly, and I wanted to express my appreciation to Kerry for keeping his word and not allowing a repeat of the 2000 election fiasco in Florida.
I’m very glad this campaign and election is over.
Oh, and if you are reading this and still have campaign signs up in your yard, or stuck them onto roadsides at various places around where you live, please pick them up. They will become major eyesores now that the election has come and gone. Thank you for helping to keep the litter problem to a minimum.
Kerry was very gracious in his concession on TV today, promising to help reunite the country and thanking his supporters for their dedication to his campaign.
I did not agree with many of his stands, and was appalled by some of his personal choices in choosing liberal politics over his faith. His stock went through the ceiling with me when he stuck a fork in the election and pronounced it done without resorting to the legal system to get his way, as Gore did in 2000.
He even said that the election is best left in the hands of the American people, and not in the legal system. In spite of all the pre-election lawsuits that happened, and some of the antics of party challengers in many states at the polling stations, the election went very smoothly, and I wanted to express my appreciation to Kerry for keeping his word and not allowing a repeat of the 2000 election fiasco in Florida.
I’m very glad this campaign and election is over.
Oh, and if you are reading this and still have campaign signs up in your yard, or stuck them onto roadsides at various places around where you live, please pick them up. They will become major eyesores now that the election has come and gone. Thank you for helping to keep the litter problem to a minimum.
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Moveon.org and Other Idiots Cause Voting Problems in Michigan
The radical liberal group moveon.org has caused problems at several polling stations in the Michigan cities of Grand Rapids, Lansing, Milford, Dearborn and Troy. They are supposed to be watching the election, not actively interfering.
In Detroit, the police were summoned to shoo away white Republican Party members from Grand Rapids who were pestering the residents of mainly African American areas of Detroit. Then the Democrats showed up with attorneys wearing hunters orange vests. Oh yay. Attorneys. And insulting hunters, too!
Polling monitors should keep their mouths shut or go home. This is why this kind of behavior should be strictly enforced by the courts. Under Michigan law there is no campaigning within 100 feet of a polling place, but that is not enough.
Party challengers need to be banned. I’m glad that the election workers were uncooperative with the self-appointed party challengers. Instead of intimidating people, the self-appointed party challengers ought to be contributing to society instead of being two-bit bullies.
In Detroit, the police were summoned to shoo away white Republican Party members from Grand Rapids who were pestering the residents of mainly African American areas of Detroit. Then the Democrats showed up with attorneys wearing hunters orange vests. Oh yay. Attorneys. And insulting hunters, too!
Polling monitors should keep their mouths shut or go home. This is why this kind of behavior should be strictly enforced by the courts. Under Michigan law there is no campaigning within 100 feet of a polling place, but that is not enough.
Party challengers need to be banned. I’m glad that the election workers were uncooperative with the self-appointed party challengers. Instead of intimidating people, the self-appointed party challengers ought to be contributing to society instead of being two-bit bullies.
Space Shuttle Enterprise On Permanent Display
The space shuttle Enterprise has finally returned to the public eye, taking its rightful place as the centerpiece of a new display at the National Air and Space Museum's Udvar-Hazy Center near Washington, DC.
The original space shuttle never left Earth’s atmosphere, but was a testing platform for the active shuttle fleet, including the Atlantis, Discovery and Endeavor, and the two doomed space shuttles Challenger and Columbia.
Built in 1976, the Enterprise has been mothballed for many years and is now finally available for the public to view up close. The shuttle had been available for a year to view, but from the other end of a hangar.
The shuttle has proven useful over the years; most recently, parts of it were used to conduct experiments which led scientists to conclude that a damaged wing led to the destruction of the shuttle Columbia on February 1st, 2003, as it re-entered Earth’s atmosphere.
In a scenario recreation of the foam coming off the shuttle as Columbia lifted off, foam was fired at the leading edge of the Enterprise’s wing to see what effect the foam would have. An audible gasp was heard from the stunned scientists as the foam penetrated the wing, leaving a large hole where the heat shield would have been.
This led investigators to declare that the smoking gun had been found, and that super hot gasses entered the Columbia’s wing, catching everything on fire and causing the Columbia to break up 203,000 feet above Texas, while traveling across the sky at Mach 18.
For the moment, the parts of the wing that were borrowed from the Enterprise have been replaced with plastic substitutes. It should be noted that parts of the shuttle are flight-ready as NASA still uses the Enterprise for testing purposes. The missing pieces have been ordered and will be installed in 2005, according to NASA.
I wrote a letter to NASA two days after the Columbia was destroyed, asking about whether the Enterprise would be on permanent display and NASA sent a beautiful letter back, with a link to the new display that was being constructed. I was happy to hear back from NASA that the Enterprise was on the front burner and that America’s first space shuttle was going to be honored with a display of its own.
The Enterprise display opened up yesterday. Along with the Enterprise, there are over a hundred other displays in the hangar, all from America’s space program. Outstanding!
The original space shuttle never left Earth’s atmosphere, but was a testing platform for the active shuttle fleet, including the Atlantis, Discovery and Endeavor, and the two doomed space shuttles Challenger and Columbia.
Built in 1976, the Enterprise has been mothballed for many years and is now finally available for the public to view up close. The shuttle had been available for a year to view, but from the other end of a hangar.
The shuttle has proven useful over the years; most recently, parts of it were used to conduct experiments which led scientists to conclude that a damaged wing led to the destruction of the shuttle Columbia on February 1st, 2003, as it re-entered Earth’s atmosphere.
In a scenario recreation of the foam coming off the shuttle as Columbia lifted off, foam was fired at the leading edge of the Enterprise’s wing to see what effect the foam would have. An audible gasp was heard from the stunned scientists as the foam penetrated the wing, leaving a large hole where the heat shield would have been.
This led investigators to declare that the smoking gun had been found, and that super hot gasses entered the Columbia’s wing, catching everything on fire and causing the Columbia to break up 203,000 feet above Texas, while traveling across the sky at Mach 18.
For the moment, the parts of the wing that were borrowed from the Enterprise have been replaced with plastic substitutes. It should be noted that parts of the shuttle are flight-ready as NASA still uses the Enterprise for testing purposes. The missing pieces have been ordered and will be installed in 2005, according to NASA.
I wrote a letter to NASA two days after the Columbia was destroyed, asking about whether the Enterprise would be on permanent display and NASA sent a beautiful letter back, with a link to the new display that was being constructed. I was happy to hear back from NASA that the Enterprise was on the front burner and that America’s first space shuttle was going to be honored with a display of its own.
The Enterprise display opened up yesterday. Along with the Enterprise, there are over a hundred other displays in the hangar, all from America’s space program. Outstanding!
See-Saw Legal Battle in Ohio Elections
In an 11th hour decision, a superior court in Ohio has allowed party challengers to go to the polls this morning to challenge the identity of voters in that state.
The lawyer who represents the African American voters that filed the lawsuit have fired an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is uncertain if the high court will intervene.
As many as 23,000 voters will be challenged and stopped today as that is the number of voters that the Republicans suspect of being frauds.
The political parties should keep their noses out of the balloting areas.
Major questions:
How do the challengers know which people to challenge? Are they working off of a list of suspected names? Are they picking people at random to challenge? Are they challenging everyone? What questions are they asking? What makes them more qualified to determine who is eligible to vote? Do the poll judges have the power to override the challengers? Will there be batteries of attorneys who will be standing outside the polls to offer legal representation to those voters who are turned away?
I can see violence happening in the Ohio polling places due to this. This is an unfortunate turn of events.
The lawyer who represents the African American voters that filed the lawsuit have fired an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is uncertain if the high court will intervene.
As many as 23,000 voters will be challenged and stopped today as that is the number of voters that the Republicans suspect of being frauds.
The political parties should keep their noses out of the balloting areas.
Major questions:
How do the challengers know which people to challenge? Are they working off of a list of suspected names? Are they picking people at random to challenge? Are they challenging everyone? What questions are they asking? What makes them more qualified to determine who is eligible to vote? Do the poll judges have the power to override the challengers? Will there be batteries of attorneys who will be standing outside the polls to offer legal representation to those voters who are turned away?
I can see violence happening in the Ohio polling places due to this. This is an unfortunate turn of events.
Monday, November 01, 2004
Federal Judges Outlaw Ohio Party Challengers
In a positive development today, two federal judges in Ohio barred “party challengers” from being deployed across the state to check on voter eligibility. In addition, they decided that poll workers are the sole judges of who is/is not eligible to vote. The “challengers” in the Ohio court case are not the poll workers themselves, but Democratic or Republican Party representatives who float around and stop whomever they want from entering the polling place. This court decision will eliminate another Democratic reason to claim voter intimidation in the battleground state.
Party challengers should be banned across the country!! Having a stranger stopping you outside the voting station and demanding identification could be intimidating all by itself, especially for first-time voters. Then there is the possibility that certain party members could be challenging for reasons other than simple identification and eligibility validation, which is troubling.
Where I come from, you fill out a card, sign it, and a poll worker checks your name and valid ID against a master list to determine if you are eligible to vote. If you are, they hand you the ballots and you move on to a voting booth. If not, you are asked to leave or given directions on what to do next. This system is fair and efficient.
The Ohio Republican Party, strangely enough, was in favor of the party challenge system and is vowing to appeal the decisions. While I support the conservative movement, I do not agree with the Ohio Republican stance. We don’t need another “2000 Florida-style” Presidential election.
I think they need to have a little more faith in the poll workers, who can compare a valid picture ID against a master list of eligible voters. If there are legitimate cases of voter fraud going on in Ohio, then I don’t know what the solution is. Thumb prints? I have no idea. Criminal punishment? Definitely!
There is no guarantee that everyone who registers to vote will vote, either. Let the polling judges do their work.
Here’s the story.
Party challengers should be banned across the country!! Having a stranger stopping you outside the voting station and demanding identification could be intimidating all by itself, especially for first-time voters. Then there is the possibility that certain party members could be challenging for reasons other than simple identification and eligibility validation, which is troubling.
Where I come from, you fill out a card, sign it, and a poll worker checks your name and valid ID against a master list to determine if you are eligible to vote. If you are, they hand you the ballots and you move on to a voting booth. If not, you are asked to leave or given directions on what to do next. This system is fair and efficient.
The Ohio Republican Party, strangely enough, was in favor of the party challenge system and is vowing to appeal the decisions. While I support the conservative movement, I do not agree with the Ohio Republican stance. We don’t need another “2000 Florida-style” Presidential election.
I think they need to have a little more faith in the poll workers, who can compare a valid picture ID against a master list of eligible voters. If there are legitimate cases of voter fraud going on in Ohio, then I don’t know what the solution is. Thumb prints? I have no idea. Criminal punishment? Definitely!
There is no guarantee that everyone who registers to vote will vote, either. Let the polling judges do their work.
Here’s the story.
Pre-Election Lawsuits Underway
Lawsuits are underway in a dozen states. The ballots haven't even been cast yet, and they're already suing.
So much for a clean one-shot election.
If this keeps up, it will be taken out of the hands of voters and put into the hands of the lawyers. Again.
If some of these lawsuits are carried through, elections will be delayed for weeks in some of the most vote-heavy states until replacement voting machines can be manufactured and delivered. Ridiculous!
So much for a clean one-shot election.
If this keeps up, it will be taken out of the hands of voters and put into the hands of the lawyers. Again.
If some of these lawsuits are carried through, elections will be delayed for weeks in some of the most vote-heavy states until replacement voting machines can be manufactured and delivered. Ridiculous!
Osama bin-Laden & News Coverage: ENOUGH!!
With twenty-four hours left before Election Day, the news networks are giving Osama bin-Laden lots of press attention, and so are the campaigns. Osama doesn’t deserve it. The only news coverage he should be getting when he is either captured or confirmed dead. Osama's message was designed to distract American voters and/or pass on messages to his al-Qaeda terror network. Nothing more, nothing else.
The news networks should focus on non-bin Laden issues, not videos from a terrorist who has stepped away from his radical Islamic speech and addressed the American people in a political speech. I do not hear the words of killers; I see their actions and the need to stop them first, then punish them. Everything Osama says is to fit his own agenda. Coming from a bastard who has vowed to kill four million Americans, his rhetoric is meaningless, and I hope the candidates and the news media put bin-Laden on the back burner. Let Homeland Security, the FBI and CIA worry about him for now.
All Americans need to worry about is getting to the polls.
The news networks should focus on non-bin Laden issues, not videos from a terrorist who has stepped away from his radical Islamic speech and addressed the American people in a political speech. I do not hear the words of killers; I see their actions and the need to stop them first, then punish them. Everything Osama says is to fit his own agenda. Coming from a bastard who has vowed to kill four million Americans, his rhetoric is meaningless, and I hope the candidates and the news media put bin-Laden on the back burner. Let Homeland Security, the FBI and CIA worry about him for now.
All Americans need to worry about is getting to the polls.
Sunday, October 31, 2004
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.
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.
Friday, October 29, 2004
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.
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.
Thursday, October 28, 2004
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.
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!
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!
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
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.
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.
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.
Tuesday, October 26, 2004
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!
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!
Friday, October 22, 2004
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$$. I hope the rest of the world observes strict neutrality in American domestic affairs and politics, even as we respect their politics and elections.
Previously, the Guardian was exhorting its readers to send letters to undecided voters in Clark County, Ohio, to encourage them to vote against Bush. When the British paper realized that the opposite effect was happening, they put an end to their campaign. It turned out that the furious locals began volunteering to help Bush in the battleground state.
Good riddance, Guardian lefties. Don’t let the door hit you in the a$$. I hope the rest of the world observes strict neutrality in American domestic affairs and politics, even as we respect their politics and elections.
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
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.
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.
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
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.
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.
Monday, October 18, 2004
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.
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.
Sunday, October 17, 2004
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!
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.
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.
Saturday, October 16, 2004
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!
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!
Thursday, October 14, 2004
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.
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
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.
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.
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.
Monday, October 11, 2004
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.
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.
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.
Sunday, October 10, 2004
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!
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!
Friday, October 08, 2004
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.
“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.
Thursday, October 07, 2004
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
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.
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.
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.
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
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.
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.
Monday, October 04, 2004
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)