PDA

View Full Version : lily-livered liberals



Sparrowhawk
07-13-04, 05:12 PM
I'm Sparrowhawk, and I approve this message lol <br />
<br />
<br />
You know your campaign is in trouble, when the most liberal newspaper in America throws up its arms in frustration over the most liberal US...

Sparrowhawk
07-13-04, 05:56 PM
PS

It has not been confirmed that the union of Rosie and Moore will produce another Hillary.

<hr>

Rosie & Moore


Rosie Takes Shot At Bush During Gay-Friendly Cruise
Cruise To Stop In Key West Later This Week

PORT CANAVERAL, Fla. -- On the eve of a possible U.S. Senate vote to make gay marriages unconstitutional, Rosie O'Donnell spoke out against the Bush administration's plans to ban same sex unions during a stop on a gay-friendly cruise, according to Local 6 News.

Rosie Promotes Cruise, Discusses Possible Gay Marriage Ban

"I think this cruise comes at the perfect time, when they're considering an amendment making it illegal for us to have families," O'Donnell told Local 6 News partner Florida Today.

O'Donnell, who is a strong advocate of gay marriage and adoption, railed against President George W. Bush and the administration, according to the report.

"It will be the first time, except for prohibition, that bigotry has been added to the Constitution," O'Donnell said. "That the prevention of rights and exclusion of rights takes paramount over some religious ideology. And, supposedly, that is what we are fighting in Iraq -- A religious extreme government that is not letting people live freely."



<hr>


The Democrats and Straightjacket Politics
by Vincent Fiore
11 July 2004

Nothing has been off-limits in this most hate-filled political season in anyone’s memory.


Imagine being driven by the very opposite of emotions you once supposed most prevalent in an enlightened society; that answering the call to a civic responsibility is not heeded out of duty and necessity, but out of conspiracy and distrust.

Imagine that the purpose you feel in competitive strivings is born of hate and fear and not of belief and trust, and the deadliest enemy in your life is not the terrorist who has bloodied this nation, but the president that leads that nation.

Imagine no more.

Today's hard left of the Democratic Party has trafficked heavily in advancing the absurd. Further, they delight in dictating such reprehensible and squalid demagoguery as to give the adjective, Machiavellian, a whole new meaning.

With four months to go until election Tuesday, progressive leaders and a surprisingly large minority of the party faithful have begun to break the confines of their political straitjackets.

Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is celebrated among the left as a documentary of truth and faith, inasmuch as Christians celebrate the Gospel. Moore is so stupendously wrong in his entire cut-and-paste Bush-bashing that even noted liberal soothsayers had to abandon the premise of Moore’s movie being "just an opinion.”

Newsweek's Michael Isakoff and Mark Hosenball use nearly 2500 words to take apart Moore's documentary, and further expose just how transparently mendacious some members in the Democratic Party are in their zealous and overreaching attempts to steer an election for Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry.

Even Richard Clark, the former Bush terrorism czar-turned-Bush-critic, cannot save Moore on his claim that Bush allowed prominent Saudi officials, and members of the bin Laden family, to fly out of the United States in the immediate days after 9/11. Moore's assertions, says Clark, is "a mistake… it didn't get any higher than me."

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen’s latest piece says it all in its title: "Baloney, Moore or Less." Cohen has made his living trashing Republican administrations. For him and others like Vanity Fair columnists Christopher Hitchens, the Boston Globe’s Ellen Goodman, and the New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof, hanging Moore out to dry was the equivalent of journalistic cannibalism.

Nevertheless, as difficult and odd as this may seem to most leftists, tossing Moore over the side has taken on a sense of urgency; for the elite in-the-know members realize that for their side, this election ceased to be about politics quite some time ago, and more about the phantasmic and grandiloquent killing of President Bush.

Nothing has been off-limits in this most hate-filled political season in anyone’s memory. Enraged leftist Democrats, and those who embrace the “anybody but Bush” campaign, have even penned a short litany in book form that describes multiple ways on how one would literally kill George W. Bush.

On August 24, Nicholson Baker will debut a 115-page novella titled Checkpoint, a sickening and shocking tale of how the book’s main character, “Jay,” tells his friend, “Ben,” that he is going to assassinate President Bush. Though this is mere fiction, the author’s feelings regarding his “discontent” with Bush are insanely real. The reader will be treated to such engaging and penetrating prose as: “I’m gonna kill that bastard,” and “He’s one dead armadillo.”

It is amusing to hear Washington liberals lament that all civility in political discourse is lost upon hearing vice-president Cheney tell the Senate’s most notorious partisan, Vermont Senator Pat Leahy, Democrat, to “F*** yourself” during the annual Senate photography session. Lost in scandalous thought over this, the media tsk-tsk’s the raging flames of incendiary hate set in every medium by raving segments of the Democratic Party while it decries the minor flair-up in the oft-times cynical United States Senate.

The rabble supporting “anybody but Bush” for president has put John Kerry in a difficult position: He can either denounce what has been going on in the name of “democracy,” which he has not done, or continue not to notice the wild-eyed and growing liberal presence that has begun to cast a large shadow upon his campaign. If he turns away from the democratic fringe loudly and publicly, he will lose a good percentage of their support and money. If he continues to tactfully wrap a quasi-embrace around this rabble, the majority of the electorate will rightly conclude that a Faustian mentality has pervaded his campaign.

In 1958, the rise of the John Birch Society (JBS) had many believing that this was the face of conservatism. Led by Robert Welch Jr., the society became very influential in the early sixties, aiding Barry Goldwater’s run for the White House in 1964. But along the way, the JBS became rife with conspiracy theorists and extremism. By 1965, the JBS was generally considered radical and reactionary.

Around this time, a young, modern conservative named William F. Buckley stood athwart the JBS and in 1965, denounced and largely ended the Birch Society’s influence in conservative politics through his popular magazine, National Review. Calling the JBS claims “paranoid and unpatriotic drivel,” Buckley righted the conservative movement, thereby steering conservatism toward the mainstream of the country’s beliefs.

Who will be the Democratic Party’s version of William F. Buckley? Who will stand opposite today’s liberal mob, yelling “Stop?” As the loons gather and infest the political landscape this election, who will step up and tell the party of FDR and Kennedy that they sound about as rational and believable as a deacon caught in a ***** house with his pants off.

Meanwhile, cooler heads among the electorate will continue to denounce them and their words for the unhinged twaddle that it is.

Vincent Fiore contributes commentary for several web sites on a weekly basis, and occasionally has commentary posted on NewsMax.com. Your comments are always welcomed.

d c taveapont
07-13-04, 08:08 PM
i'm going to be the pain in the rear end...did the CiC say that we did not find the tons of WMDs YET...but we were right in going into iraq and removing saddam....and by removing him we are...

HardJedi
07-13-04, 11:38 PM
hmmmm well, DC, it's a sketchy line isn't it? a preemptive war? 900 dead for us, and how many because of those 900 dead will now live longer and safer lives? who knows? ther is, of course, no way of knowing.

I have said this before though. We, America, that is, have a MORAL RESPONSIBILITY to protect those who cannot protect themselves, and whenever possibleto end the riegn of tyrants, in order to protect the innocent. you wanna know more about this, or in more detail? Just ask, I am almost never at a loss for words.

OH! and one MORE thing. There ARE no TERRORISTS. There is only the ENEMY! ( said that before too.) ;)

enviro
07-14-04, 01:32 AM
Oh it's real easy to sit back and criticize all of the measures taken to prevent terrorists actions from happening. But if we didn't do anything and terrorists were having their will with us on OUR...

Sparrowhawk
07-14-04, 11:53 AM
Saddam Hussein ordered the assassination of President George H. W. Bush, while he was in Kuwait in April of 1993.

Now, I really don't care if it was Clinton, Carter or Reagan. An assassination was planned by Iraq against a former US President, who represents American, and in the end Americans.

That alone was reason to take out Sadam Hussein.

As it were Clinton only send off a handful of Tomahawk guided missiles at the Iraqi hintelligence headquarters in Iraq in the middle of the night and killed a couple of janitors, some two months afterwards, and then he only did it, because the press was going to release information that Iraq was responsible for the assassination attempt.

It was a very weak response by a sitting president, and our nation like other terrorist acts committed against us during the Clinton era was seen as slow to respond and even slower at holding anyone responsible.

yellowwing
07-14-04, 05:14 PM
It looks like Rosie won,

WASHINGTON (CNN), July 14, 2004 (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/14/mccain.marriage/)
McCain: Same-sex marriage ban is un-Republican
..."The constitutional amendment we're debating today strikes me as antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans," McCain said. "It usurps from the states a fundamental authority they have always possessed and imposes a federal remedy for a problem that most states do not believe confronts them."

He and five other Republican stood up to the 'Yes men' and reminded them that the Rebulican Party is about less Federal Governemt

But I am very disappointed that my boy John Kerry didn't wote at all on this issue.

Sparrowhawk
07-14-04, 07:04 PM
that he has been straddling the liberal fence line so much, I think I'll send him a new voter registration form, so he can go ahead and register as a Democrat.

enviro
07-14-04, 07:44 PM
http://www.sagentic.com/images/image0011.jpg

Sparrowhawk
07-14-04, 10:21 PM
that pic is a keeper

Sparrowhawk
07-14-04, 10:28 PM
Slim-Fast pulls Whoopi's ads over raunchy anti-Bush rant


http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20040715/mdf628732.jpg

Goldberg is seen in an ad for Slim Fast's 'Big Loser' campaign in a picture released December 30. (Slim Fast Foods/Reuters)



Comedian Whoopi Goldberg will no longer appear in ads for diet aid maker Slim-Fast following her lewd riff on President George W. Bush name at a fund-raiser last week, the company said on July 14, 2004.

Florida-based Slim-Fast said it was 'disappointed' in Goldberg's remarks at last Thursday's $7.5 million star-studded fund-raiser at Radio City Music Hall in New York.


The company disavowed the barbs by Goldberg, who repeatedly made a sexual pun on Bush's surname at a celebrity concert in New York attended by presidential candidate John Kerry and his running-mate John Edwards.


A statement said Goldberg's monologue Thursday at Radio City Music Hall "does not reflect the views and values of Slim-Fast" which made the sassy comedienne its spokeswoman "because of her commitment to losing weight."


"We are disappointed by the manner in which Ms. Goldberg chose to express herself and sincerely regret that her recent remarks offended some of our consumers," the company said. "Ads featuring Ms. Goldberg will no longer be on the air."


Scathing anti-Bush tirades by Goldberg and other celebrities had already drawn the ire of the Bush campaign, which called the concert a "star-studded hate fest" and demanded the Democrats release videotape of the event.


Kerry said nothing at the concert about the comments but praised all the performers as representing the "heart and soul" of the country. His campaign later distanced itself from some of the insults.

Sparrowhawk
07-14-04, 11:31 PM
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20040709/capt.sge.lvs94.090704155429.photo00.default-154x384.jpg

Americans allergic to the subtle Democratic flavor of Heinz ketchup can now plunge their 'freedom fries' into a 100-percent guaranteed, patriotic alternative: 'W Ketchup'(AFP/HO)

thedrifter
07-14-04, 11:59 PM
Might as Well Face It, You're Addicted to Love

"This is the first time I've appeared anywhere without John Edwards in the last four days. I'm feeling this withdrawal."--John Kerry, quoted in USA Today, July 13


Ellie

http://ruinsmiley.tripod.com/PAGE5_files/hearts.gif

thedrifter
07-15-04, 12:05 AM
'Doonesbury' Artist Trudeau Skewers Bush

NEW YORK - Cartoonist Garry Trudeau, who has skewered politicians for decades in his comic strip "Doonesbury," tells Rolling Stone magazine he remembers Yale classmate George W. Bush as "just another sarcastic preppy who gave people nicknames and arranged for keg deliveries."


Trudeau attended Yale University with Bush in the late 1960s and served with him on a dormitory social committee.


"Even then he had clearly awesome social skills," Trudeau said. "He could also make you feel extremely uncomfortable ... He was extremely skilled at controlling people and outcomes in that way. Little bits of perfectly placed humiliation."


Trudeau said he penned his very first cartoon to illustrate an article in the Yale Daily News on Bush and allegations that his fraternity, DKE, had hazed incoming pledges by branding them with an iron.


The article in the campus paper prompted The New York Times to interview Bush, who was a senior that year. Trudeau recalled that Bush told the Times "it was just a coat hanger, and ... it didn't hurt any more than a cigarette burn."


"It does put one in mind of what his views on torture might be today," Trudeau said.


Having mocked presidents of both parties in the "Doonesbury" strip since 1971, Trudeau said Bush has been, "tragically, the best target" he's worked with yet.


"Bush has created more harm to this country's standing and security than any president in history," Trudeau said. "What a shame the world has to suffer the consequences of Dubya not getting enough approval from Dad."


Rolling Stone was publishing the interview Friday.


Rolling Stone Article..... Doonesbury Goes to War

Garry Trudeau talks about Iraq, the coming election and his old classmate George W. Bush
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story?id=6298171


Ellie

d c taveapont
07-15-04, 04:04 PM
Enviro: You said that i'm the type of person that the terrorist would love...now how in the hell did you come to that conclusion...by what i posted...damn your wrong son...i spend a year hunting the VC in the jungles of Viet-Nam...now don't make me laugh....you know i read this once...The unwilling, lead by the unskilled, to do the Unnessary, for the Ungreatful...in some ways it reminds me of this war....and those fighting it...

ivalis
07-15-04, 04:54 PM
apparently enviro would prefer a police state if it abolished crime.

enviro refer's to the UN resolutions that Iraq violated. I little tip for the fella, the US has never violated a UN resolution because it has veto power and therefore there has never been a UN resolution passed with which it doesn't agree. it puzzles me when those that say that the US doesn't need the UN while at the same time they refer to the UN resolutions as a reason to go to war.

Iraq was supported by the US in its war w/Iran.

The US had a "contract" out on Saddam, I guess we're just as tough as Saddam, who happened to be as legitimately elected as our president.

Don't recall where Iraq ever threatened the US, the only US troops at risk where those on Iraqi soil.

As far as going after those that sponsored terrorism, Pakistan & Saudi Arabia are bigger culprits than Iraq.

Afghanistan is back to its pre Taliban ways, war lords & opium.

enviro
07-15-04, 05:25 PM
I thought I explained my conclusion very thoroughly. Read it again - only slower this time.

I spent a year hunting a peek at my third grade teacher's boobies. I also spent 9 months hunting the Taliban through the deserts of Afghanistan.

We are very willing - our leaders are inspiring - our cause is just - and the people will always have its ingrates (they're called liberals).

Now - you're going to argue that Iraq can violate all the resolutions it wants because it's "not fair - the U.S. has veto power" C'mon!

Let me make this clear, fella, - the U.S. does not need UN approval to go to war or to hunt down the enemy wherever they may go. It's "not fair - the French have veto power"

Saddam was elected? Check your facts - Saddam joined the socialist Baath party when he was 19. He made his mark three years later when he participated in a 1959 assassination attempt against Iraqi Prime Minister Abudul Karim Kassim. Saddam was shot in the leg during the botched effort and fled the country for several years, first to Syria, then Egypt.

In 1968 he helped lead the revolt that finally brought the Baath party to power under Gen. Ahmed Hassan Bakr. In the process, he landed the vice president’s post, from which he built an elaborate network of secret police to root out dissidents. Eleven years later he deposed Bakr and plastered the streets with 20-foot-high portraits of himself.

Don't recall where Iraq ever threatened the US? Your memory is slipping. That research is too easy. Besides, I gave you examples.

Pakistan & Saudi Arabia are bigger culprits than Iraq? By who's scale? What do you use to measure this? So, we should have left everyone else alone and attacked two countries with nuclear inventories and do it with absolutely NO SUPPORT from anyone or any country.

Afghanistan is far from it's pre-Taliban ways. But then again, people like you think that since Vietnam, a secret Air Force laboratory invented a Fairy Wand that makes things happen OVER-FREAKING NIGHT!

HardJedi
07-15-04, 07:12 PM
a fairy wand!:D Dear god, I do NOT think Enviro was advocating a police state. ( though one might do us some good sometimes I think)

ahh well, opinions will vary, I suppose.

Sparrowhawk
07-19-04, 09:15 AM
Anything to deceive the public, as to who you really are!



http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2004/01/25/image595668x.jpg http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040715/i/ra2906614279.jpg




XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX SUN JULY 18, 2004 19:53:02 ET XXXXX

KERRY BACK TO WRINKLES

After opting for a fresh-face-look for most of the campaign year, Dem presidential hopeful John Kerry has boldly gone back to wrinkles!

Snaps taken of the candidate last week [before his Nantucket vacation] show Kerry's face completely losing its smooth appearance.

Has Kerry been too busy for . follow-up injections of Botox? (http://www.lasernews.net/lasernews/lasernewsv3.nsf/0/65f2d006112a77a485256bbf001ec1ca?OpenDocument)

Will he go for a touchup before his closeup in Boston?

Is the candiate simply running low on rest?

Did the face never change to begin with?

The American people need answers

DrBeall
07-19-04, 11:53 AM
Personally, I think that Bush as doing a great job with the war and the country until he started letting the lilly-livered liberals start pulling his strings, when he started trying to be "not so much a cowboy" and getting to close to an election. Someone whispered in his ear and told him a lie, "if you don't become a little nicer and easier, you're going to loose the next election." I believe most americans are still the same, they want a good and strong leader!

Just my opinion, thanks yall.

Rene

hrscowboy
07-19-04, 01:17 PM
here here taveapont i agree totally. buttom line is america does not need to be the police department for every little country that cant take care of there selfs. enviro let me also remind you that alot of these young men and women that are in this war are vietnam vets children and grandchildren and where not going to let any body F**k them over like they did Us.

HardJedi
07-19-04, 06:17 PM
hmmmm. guess I am the lone remaining human on the planet with any sense of MORAL RESPONSIBILITY! ( i won't bother explaining it for the TENTH time on these forums)

enviro
07-19-04, 07:26 PM
Besides morals - it's the fact that people think we can just let the world crumble around us and America won't feel a thing. Wake up - we may have all the power, but we will fall fast if we don't take care of business overseas.

HardJedi
07-19-04, 07:34 PM
Amen , Enviro.


some people just LIVE with that ostrich syndome. Tell ya though, burrying your head in the sand only makes your a$$ a more inviting target ;)

Sparrowhawk
07-19-04, 07:39 PM
Mon Jul 19, 5:24 PM ET


LAS VEGAS - Singer Linda Ronstadt (news) not only got booed, she got the boot after lauding filmmaker Michael Moore and his new movie "Fahrenheit 9/11" during a performance at the Aladdin hotel-casino.

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040719/capt.aphs10907191513.multimedia_7047189_ronstadt_p erforms_at_cma_awards_aphs109.jpg
AP Photo



Before singing "Desperado" for an encore Saturday night, the 58-year-old rocker called Moore a "great American patriot" and "someone who is spreading the truth." She also encouraged everybody to see the documentary about President Bush (news - web sites).


Ronstadt's comments drew loud boos and some of the 4,500 people in attendance stormed out of the theater. People also tore down concert posters and tossed cocktails into the air.


"It was a very ugly scene," Aladdin President Bill Timmins told The Associated Press. "She praised him and all of a sudden all bedlam broke loose."


Timmins, who is British and was watching the show, decided Ronstadt had to go — for good. Timmins said he didn't allow Ronstadt back in her luxury suite and she was escorted off the property.


Ronstadt's antics "spoiled a wonderful evening for our guests and we had to do something about it," Timmins said.


Timmins said it was the first time he sent a performer packing.


"As long as I'm here, she's not going to play," Timmins said.


Ronstadt had been booked to play the Aladdin for only one show.


Calls to Ronstadt's manager were not immediately returned.


In an interview with the Las Vegas Review-Journal before the show, Ronstadt said "I keep hoping that if I'm annoying enough to them, they won't hire me back."


Looks like she got her wish.

Sparrowhawk
07-19-04, 07:59 PM
AP: Clinton Adviser Probed in Terror Memos <br />
<br />
43 minutes ago <br />
<br />
<br />
By JOHN SOLOMON <br />
<br />
WASHINGTON - President Clinton (news - web sites)'s national security adviser, Sandy Berger, is the focus of a...

HardJedi
07-19-04, 08:09 PM
Same thing that happened to Ronstadt happend here in Kansas City at the Red, White, and Boom concert to Liz Phair. Got booed big time, hell , I almost went up to the stage to ***** her out, cause she made some comments about the Marine Recruiters at the show. Only thing that kept me from it was the fact I was with my 14 year old neice.

thedrifter
07-20-04, 08:49 AM
Kerry-Edwards: The same old song
July 20,2004
OUR OPINION

To put a twist on Bill Clinton's internal slogan during his 1992 campaign, the Kerry-Edwards economic policy seems to be "it's the envy, stupid."

They're running on the "Two Americas" theme that John Edwards followed to defeat in the Democratic primaries. There has been some hope that Kerry would take something from the Edwards camp, just not that.

With a strong economic recovery propelling the Bush administration toward the November elections, class envy just isn't going to sell, especially when the two salesmen are multimillionaires.

"George W. Bush has chosen tax cuts for the wealthy and special favors for the special interests over our economic future," reads the issues briefing on the Kerry Web site; yet most Americans got a tax cut, not just the wealthy.

The Kerry environmental agenda is just as bad. "Kerry will ensure that we have 'Clean and Green Communities' throughout America by coordinating federal transportation policies, federal housing incentives, federal employment opportunities and the use of federal dollars to acquire parks and open space" to "take on ... sprawl." That means expensive mass transit and zoning schemes that cost billions, limit land use and raise housing prices.

And with "federal" used four times in one sentence in the Web briefing, it's clear distant federal bureaucrats would take even more control over citizens' lives.

Detroit News columnist Thomas Bray wrote on July 11, "(A) Kerry-Edwards ticket may look attractive, but beneath the well-coiffed surface it hints strongly at a two-pronged assault on Middle America. John Kerry's environmental extremism would be joined by the penchant of John Edwards and his powerful trial-lawyer backers to sue every job creator in sight."

It's too bad Sens. Kerry and Edwards can't come up with some proposals that really would help all Americans get ahead.


http://www.jacksonvilledailynews.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=24171&Section=Opinion

Ellie

Sparrowhawk
07-20-04, 04:16 PM
Communist Party USA supports John Kerry
The St. Augustine Record ^ | 7.14.04


Posted on 07/14/2004 7:35:12 AM PDT by ambrose


Perspective: Communist Party USA supports John Kerry

By D.P. HEIMBOLD
St. Augustine
Publication Date: 07/14/04


The southern Democrats must be thrilled by the news that the Communist Party of The United States of America, CPUSA, is publicly supporting the election of John Kerry.

The CPUSA has made available on its Web site, cpusa.org, an advertisement entitled Top Ten Reasons To Defeat Bush. This advertisement can be downloaded. The communist party urges readers to place this ad in local newspapers throughout the country to defeat President Bush.

Remarkably, the "Top Ten Reasons" of the Communist party are identical to those of the Democratic party; out-sourcing, homosexual rights, abortion and the like.

At first, I thought "this is only a coincidence." The Democratic party of the United States couldn't be in lock step with the Marxists! So, I wrote to a spokesman of the CPUSA in Georgia and here is part of his letter:

" The CPUSA supports the John Kerry campaign with donations and volunteer effort. We believe that defeating George Bush is the single most important issue this November ..."

Next, I discovered that one of Kerry's campaign themes is " Let America be America Again." This slogan was borrowed from a Communist poet, Langston Hughes. This is not common knowledge to the average American.

"Let America be America Again" sounds good but is a rambling, gloomy poem. Interestingly, another poem by Langston goes as follows;

"Goodbye, Christ Jesus, Lord, God, Jehova, Beat it on away from here now.

Make way for a new guy with no religion at all -- A real guy named Marx, communist, Lenin, Peasant, Stalin, Worker, ME -- I said, ME!"

Then, if this was not enough to convince me that the Democratic party has lost it, a third discovery!

A Vietnam vet group took a trip to Communist Hanoi to investigate a report that John Kerry was in the "Hanoi Hall of Fame." Yes, there is a museum in Hanoi with a section dedicated to foreign activists who help defeat the United States Military in Vietnam. Of course, you would expect Jane Fonda's picture to be there. But, alas, there is John Kerry's picture shaking the hand of a communist official.

Never has there been such a tragedy.

Never has there been such a threat to America. The Democratic party has been taken over by the far, far left!

Not only the communists but the homosexual activists who are appalled that George Bush is married to a woman! They are enraged that the president wants a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage between a man and woman.

Then we have the ACLU running to a federal activist judge with every piece of legislation that doesn't fit into their leftist agenda. They support every Democratic socialist whim. The removal of the Ten Commandments is their top priority!

Why can't our children read? The liberal NEA runs the government schools. You can't mention God or the Ten Commandments, but you can teach Islam and have the children pray to Allah and pass out condoms. The teachers union is solidly behind the Democratic candidate, John Kerry.

How about the AFL-CIO? Solidly Democratic. How about the press? Solidly behind the left.

Case in point: Viacom owns CBS and Dan Rather. Dan is really the president of the American Leftist Establishment. Every night Dan informs the country what we, the troops and the president did wrong that day. His boss, Viacom, just happens to own the company that published Richard Clark's attack on George Bush and company. Clarke was the hero of the 9-11 hearing. Viacom pushed up the publication date of Clark's book to coincide with the hearings.

Oh, by the way, Viacom not only owns CBS and Dan Rather, but MTV!

Yes, the same MTV that featured Janet Jackson's breast at the Super Bowl half time!

Hollywood? There might be one or two votes for Bush from the filmmakers. But don't count on it. Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" propaganda film hurt the president. Impressionable youth fall victim to lies.

But, not to worry.

Truth means nothing to the Left.

The quality of character of the Hollywood crowd is best illustrated by the recent antics of the starlet Britney Spears. After her 24-hour marriage, Britney is now engaged to a loser who left his unmarried, pregnant girlfriend and little child. There was not one eyebrow raised by the Hollywood-infatuated Network News. This is normal behavior for the left.

The deck is really stacked against the re-election of President Bush.

Now even the mass murderer Saddam Hussein agrees with Kennedy and Kerry that the president is a criminal. Before the election in November the press will clean up Hussein to look like a saint and George W. Bush a gangster.

John Kerry promises to save the union by going to the UN. Kerry may have to deal with Muslim Kofi Annan's son, Kojo, who received "consultant" fees from Swiss company, Cotecna, which oversaw Iraq's Oil-For-Food program. Some of the $10 billion that was funneled through the "family run" UN program ended up in al Taqwa and Asat Trust, two of al-Qaida's front organizations. Funny, there are al-Qaida in Florida and the UN, but not in Iraq! Alas, but who is chopping off heads in Iraq?

While the bulk of our National Guard are over seas fighting terrorist, every leftist weirdo is coming out of the closet to hi-jack the November presidential election.

The question is: What are the "real" southern Democrats going to do?

Will they join the CPUSA, NEA, ACLU and a host of other radical leftist groups or help save the country from this mob.

thedrifter
07-20-04, 05:43 PM
This is G o o g l e's cache of http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0227a.html.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.




John Kerry Unveils Comprehensive Plan to Fight the War on Terrorism


February 27, 2004

For Immediate Release
Los Angeles, CA –

In a speech today at the UCLA International Institute, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry offered his comprehensive approach to fighting the global war on terrorism. In the second of a series of speeches on national security, Kerry presented a plan to identify, disrupt, and eliminate terrorist networks using all the resources at our disposal. As CIA Director George Tenet starkly reminded us this week, we are threatened by a far-flung terrorist network that will continue to operate even if Bin Laden is caught. Last December, John Kerry addressed the Council on Foreign Relations and outlined a global vision to make America safer and more secure. Today, he is detailing the terrorism component of that vision, strengthening the nation’s position in the global war on terror.

Kerry will act militarily when necessary, build strong alliances with other nations and enhance our intelligence and law enforcement capabilities. Kerry addresses the root causes of terrorism and offers a real plan to secure our homeland by safeguarding our chemical and nuclear facilities, bolstering port and aviation security, restoring 100,000 COPS on the street and adding 100,000 new firefighters in our communities.
“We cannot win the War on Terror through military power alone,” Kerry told an audience at the University of California at Los Angeles. “As President, if necessary, I will use military force to protect our security, our people, and our vital interests. But the fight requires us to use every tool at our disposal. Not only a strong military – but renewed alliances, vigorous law enforcement, reliable intelligence, and unremitting effort to shut down the flow of terrorist funds.”

“To do all this, and to do our best, demands that we work with other countries instead of walking alone. For today the agents of terrorism work and lurk in the shadows of 60 nations on every continent. In this entangled world, we need to build real and enduring alliances.”

“We need a comprehensive approach for prevailing against terror – an approach that recognizes the many facets of this mortal challenge and relies on all the tools at our disposal to do it.”

Kerry also criticized the Bush Administration’s failure to maintain the post-9/11global coalition, inaction in stemming the rise of terrorism and inadequate efforts to defend the homeland.

“Day in and day out, President Bush reminds us that he is a war President and that he wants to make national security the central issue of this election. I am ready to have this debate. I welcome it. I am convinced that we can prove to the American people that we know how to make them safer and more secure – with a stronger, more comprehensive, and more effective strategy for winning the War on Terror than the Bush Administration has ever envisioned.”

John Kerry outlined a seven-point comprehensive plan to fight the war against terror:

I. Use Direct Military Action: Kerry will use military force when necessary to capture and destroy terrorist groups and their leaders. He will also increase active duty end strength and tailor forces to be better prepared for post-conflict and stability operation.

II. Improve International Intelligence and Law Enforcement: Kerry will strengthen communication networks between intelligence agencies, build cooperative capacity with international law enforcement agencies, increase the number of linguists trained in critical languages and create a real Director of National Intelligence with budget and personnel power.

III. Cut Off the Flow of Terrorist Funds: Kerry will impose tough financial sanction against banks or nations that engage in money laundering or fail to act against it and will launch a “name and shame’ campaign against those that finance terror.

IV. Control the Spread of Weapons on Mass Destruction: Kerry will appoint a high-level Presidential envoy to lead the effort and expand the Nunn/Lugar program to buy up and destroy stockpiles of loose WMD materials.

V. Win the Peace in Iraq and Afghanistan: Kerry will bring real security in Iraq by broadening the coalition, including the United Nations, and creating a real Iraqi security force that can take care of itself and the people it is supposed to protect. In Afghanistan, Kerry would put forward a major increase in security and fund the promised a Marshall Plan for reconstruction.

VI. Win the War of Ideas and the Future of a Young Generation: Kerry will build bridges to the Arab and Islamic world by supporting and assisting human rights groups, independent media, and labor unions dedicated to building a democratic culture.

VII. Secure America's Homeland: Kerry will restore funding for the COPS program, add 100,000 firefighters to our streets, secure and protect our nuclear and chemical facilities, bolster port and aviation security.



John Kerry: Winning the War on Terror

I. An Integrated Strategy to Destroy Terrorists Groups

Terror is the principle threat we face. John Kerry will deny terrorists sanctuary in every cave and with every tool, by:

1. Direct Military Action. John Kerry will always be prepared to use military force when necessary to neutralize terrorists and drain the swamps where they breed.

Deploy the Best-Equipped Forces Backed by the Most Accurate Intelligence. Kerry will increase the size of the special operations forces; and, increase training for peace-keeping missions so that failed states can be secured and terrorist sanctuaries denied. He will ensure that America’s fighting men and women always have the best equipment and information.
Tailor Forces to be Better Prepared for Post-conflict and Stability Operations. Kerry will add more engineers, military police, psychological warfare personnel, and civil affairs teams to the military to ensure combat forces are not drawn away to fill roles that stability forces should fill -- and that a security vacuum does not threaten hard-won victories.
Increase Active Duty End Strength. To better meet the needs of the War on Terror and America's global obligations, John Kerry has called for a temporary increase of about 40,000 active-duty Army troops: 20,000 in such specialties as military police and civil affairs, and 20,000 combat.

2. Improve International Intelligence and Law Enforcement. John Kerry will lead our nation in building strong international cooperation to ensure that America has the best information available and works effectively to cut financing for terrorist organizations.

Strengthen Communication Networks Between Intelligence Agencies. Kerry will ensure that our intelligence agencies receive the most accurate and timely information through established channels with intelligence and law enforcement agencies in other countries.
Build Cooperative Capacity with International Law Enforcement Agencies. Kerry will ensure that we are able to impart the latest and most effective techniques in battling terror to law enforcement agencies abroad as appropriate.
Increase the Number of Linguists Trained in Critical Languages. A Kerry Administration will increase funding and training for linguists competent in critical languages like Arabic so that American intelligence agencies have the best, most timely and translated information about terrorist planning and staging.
Create a Real Director of National Intelligence with Budget and Personnel Power. John Kerry will make the Director of the CIA the true Director of National Intelligence with real control of national intelligence personnel and budgets. John Kerry will also undertake and complete a national intelligence review immediately.
Back to Top

3. Cut Off the Flow of Terrorist Funds

Impose financial sanctions against nations or banks that fail to cooperate in the effort to control money laundering. This is an urgent step to ensure that rhetoric is backed by the tough action required to cut the stream of terrorist financing.
Launch a "name and shame" campaign against individuals, banks and foreign governments that are financing terror. Those who fail to respond will be shut out of the U.S. financial system. There will be no sacred cows as we take the steps that are necessary to protect America.
Back to Top

4. Control the Spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Appoint A High Level Envoy to Lead the Effort. John Kerry will ensure that the urgent and critical challenge of controlling the spread of WMD does not fall prey to inter-agency differences, and that a single individual is empowered to rally other nations to join an American-led effort to secure nuclear weapons and nuclear materials around the world.
Keep WMD from terrorists by aggressively refocusing and expanding efforts to secure stockpiles of loose WMD materials. Kerry will lead in this effort, and create a new international protocol to track and account for existing nuclear weapons and deter the development of chemical and biological arsenals.
Create a U.S.-Russian Commitment to Secure Russia’s Nuclear Weapons. Kerry will ensure that all of Russia’s nuclear weapons and materials are effectively secured within four years. He will significantly increase funding for Comprehensive Threat Reduction programs.
Back to Top

continued.........

thedrifter
07-20-04, 05:44 PM
5. Win the peace in Iraq and Afghanistan. John Kerry will bring real security in Iraq and Afghanistan to prevent terrorists from reemerging in Afghanistan or establishing a base in Iraq.

Broaden the Coalition in Iraq, Include the UN and Create Real Iraqi Security Forces for Stability. Kerry will do the tough diplomacy and hard bargaining to get more international boots and dollars and get the target off the backs of American troops. Kerry will rally the UN to help forge a transition to Iraqi sovereignty based on the need to build a stable democracy in Iraq. Kerry will be upfront about the costs, and he will make sure we meet our obligations fairly by rolling back tax cuts for the wealthiest and getting real international contributions.
Restore Security in Afghanistan and Undertake the Promised Marshall Plan. Kerry would expand the ISAF force and extend its reach into the provinces; and increase the trainees in the Afghan National Army (ANA). Kerry would pressure donor nations to meet the aid commitments they made at the Bonn Conference. He would double our counter-narcotics assistance to the Karzai government and make available a team of American counter-narcotics experts to provide technical assistance.

II. Win the War of Ideas and the Future of a Young Generation

John Kerry’s plan for building bridges to the Arab and Islamic world recognizes the key challenge posed by burgeoning youth cohorts. America’s security demands that young people have a future of promise and opportunity that is a clear alternative to terror and extremism.

Build Networks to Improve Education and Fight Brain Drain. Kerry will build closer integration between business communities and educational institutions so that curricula are developed and tailored to impart marketable skills to students. The project should build an infrastructure of knowledge and excellence that has suffered from brain drain and a dearth of important materials – from textbooks to news programming.
Assist Civil Society Through Human Rights Groups, Independent Media, and Labor Unions. Kerry will ensure that the U.S. government works with the private sector and international institutions to help civil society groups and governments aid democracy, public participation, free expression, transparency and efficient economic management.
Back to Top

III. Secure America's Homeland

Recent reports have revealed alarming gaps in security procedures at our nation’s most critical facilities. John Kerry will secure out nuclear weapons storage sites, nuclear power plants and chemical facilities. Kerry will ensure our first defenders are equipped, that we can respond to biological attacks, and air transportation security is made safer.

1. A New First Defenders Initiative to Ensure Local Responders are Equipped and Ready. John Kerry will ensure that first defenders have the gear to do their jobs safely and effectively. John Kerry has proposed creating a new fund for fire fighters – named after a September 11th hero, Father Mychal Judge, the chaplain of the New York City Fire Department who died delivering last rites. The Father Judge Fund would be similar to the COPS program and will hire up to 100,000 new firefighters and to provide the equipment necessary to assure firefighters are prepared. Kerry also believes we must restore funding to COPS to realize its initial mission of 100,000 new police officers. This initiative would also develop appropriate standards for preparedness in our cities and provide resources so communities can meet these goals.

2. A National Homeland Health Initiative. America’s public health system has risen to important challenges before, but it lacks the advances necessary to detect or contain a major outbreak. John Kerry believes we must connect the nation’s public health systems with a real time detection system to pool patient data across the country. This initiative would also provide training in developing plans for a surge in patients. We also need to increase research – and bring together the best of the public and private sectors to develop broad-spectrum designer antidotes so that our first responders and our population can be protected and treated from the widest possible range of attacks.

3. Increase Port Security and Accelerate Border Security. Currently, 95% of all non-North American U.S. trade moves by sea, concentrated mostly in a handful of ports. John Kerry believes improvements in port security must be made, while recognizing that global prosperity and America’s economic power depends on an efficient system. Kerry’s plan would develop standards for security at ports and other loading facilities for containers and assure facilities can meet basic standards. To improve security in commerce, John Kerry believes we should accelerate the timetable for the action plans agreed to in the U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico “smart border” accords as well as implement security measures for cross-border bridges. Finally John Kerry will pursue modest safety standards for privately held infrastructure and will help owners find economical ways to pay for increased security.

4. Secure Nuclear Power Plants, Nuclear Weapons Facilities and Chemical Facilities. John Kerry will appoint an Energy Secretary who takes nuclear plant security seriously and ensures meticulous follow-up to any security violations. He would also order an immediate review of engagement orders and weaponry for plant guards, and ensure attack simulation drills be as realistic as possible. A Kerry Administration would ensure that security of our nuclear weapons facilities is a U.S. government responsibility – not cede it to private contractors as the Bush Administration considered doing. A Kerry Administration will tighten security at chemical facilities across the nation that produce or store chemicals, focusing first on facilities in major urban areas where millions of Americans live within the circle of vulnerability.

5. Tighten Aviation Security and Combat Threats to Civilian Aircraft. John Kerry will close loopholes in existing regulations on cargo carried by passenger flights and increase the reliability of new screening procedures. Kerry will increase perimeter inspections of U.S. airports and work with international aviation authorities to make sure the same standards are in place at all international airports. He will work with our allies to crackdown on the sale of shoulder-fired missiles that could be used in an attack on civilian aircraft, and are sold on the black market.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:-D_V0TfzaH0J:www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0227a.html+Kerry+press+release+port+securi ty&hl=en


Ellie

Sparrowhawk
07-20-04, 07:10 PM
Jul 20, 4:53 PM (ET)

By RON FOURNIER

(AP) Former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger is seen Sunday, Feb. 22, 1998, in Washington. Berger,...
Full Image



WASHINGTON (AP) - Former national security adviser Sandy Berger, the subject of a criminal investigation over the disappearance of terrorism documents, stepped aside on Tuesday as an informal adviser to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.

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

The investigation had threatened to become a political problem for Kerry a week before his nominating convention in Boston in which he hopes to persuade voters that he is ready to be commander in chief. The cornerstone of Kerry's argument against Bush is that he used faulty intelligence and poor judgment in waging war against Iraq.

Berger, former President Clinton's national security adviser, is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department after highly classified terrorism documents disappeared while he was reviewing what should be turned over to the Sept. 11 commission.

Berger's home and office were searched earlier this year by FBI agents armed with warrants after the former Clinton adviser voluntarily returned some sensitive documents to the National Archives and admitted he also removed handwritten notes he had made while reviewing the sensitive documents.

However, some drafts of a sensitive after-action report on the Clinton administration's handling of al-Qaida terror threats during the December 1999 millennium celebration are still missing, officials and lawyers told The Associated Press.

Sparrowhawk
07-20-04, 07:12 PM
Tuesday, July 20, 2004

PHOTOS VIDEO PHOTO ESSAYS


http://www.foxnews.com/images/132044/0_23_071904_berger_sandy.jpg


•Berger Steps Away From Kerry Campaign•Fast Facts: Sandy Berger•Bush Looks at Possible Iran-Sept. 11 Link•Iran Denies Harboring 9/11 Hijackers•9/11 Panel to Recommend Combining Intel Agencies•Sept. 11 Panel Asks Cheney for Evidence
WASHINGTON — Former President Clinton's national security adviser is under criminal investigation for taking highly classified terrorism documents that should have been turned over to the independent commission probing the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, FOX News has confirmed.

Sandy Berger (search) is under scrutiny by the Justice Department (search) following the disappearance of documents he was reviewing at the National Archives.

Berger's home and office were searched earlier this year by FBI (search) agents armed with warrants after the former Clinton adviser voluntarily returned some sensitive documents to the National Archives (search) and admitted he also removed handwritten notes he had made while reviewing the sensitive documents.

However, some drafts of a sensitive after-action report on the Clinton administration's handling of Al Qaeda terror threats during the December 1999 millennium celebration are still missing, officials and lawyers said. Officials said the missing documents also identified America's terror vulnerabilities at airports to seaports.

Berger and his lawyer said Monday night he knowingly removed the handwritten notes by placing them in his jacket, pants and socks, and also inadvertently took copies of actual classified documents in a leather portfolio.

thedrifter
07-21-04, 11:00 AM
Cab company denies free ride for head of state
By Cosmo Macero Jr.
Recent Columns by Cosmo Macero Jr.
Wednesday, July 21, 2004

It promises to be one of the boldest and most buzzworthy little product promotions that this - lattes raised - ``small c'' conservative city has seen in awhile. Not a bobblehead George W. Bush. But a dangling-by-a-string-as-if-perhaps-beheaded President Bush [related, bio] noggin greeting...


http://news.bostonherald.com/columnists/view.bg?articleid=36458


Ellie

:no:

thedrifter
07-21-04, 01:48 PM
"Swiftees" Respond To Kerry

Swift Boat Quotes about John Kerry
Editor note: Please read all quotes to get the whole picture. This page only reflects one of the many inconsistencies of John Kerry flip-flops included just to cater to the populous at large.

Anyone, irregardless of political persuasion can not honestly consider that John Kerry should be our President of the USA. Looking at all the information available on this candidate for President, no one could be serious in giving it a second thought. If he does become our President then God help us!

Click link to read them.........
http://www.bushcountry.org/john_kerry/n_072104_swift_boat_john_kerry.htm


Ellie

yellowwing
07-21-04, 03:09 PM
Wonder of Wonders - A Newspaper with enforced ethics rules!

S.F. Chronicle Editor Suspended for Kerry Donation (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040721/media_nm/politics_kerry_journalist_dc)

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A San Francisco Chronicle editor who gave Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry $400 has been placed on leave for possibly violating the newspaper's rules, the newspaper said on Wednesday.

The newspaper's letters editor, William Pates, reached at home by telephone, confirmed that he had contributed about $400 to the Kerry campaign but declined to comment on his paper's response. Pates said he had worked for the Chronicle for the past 35 years.

"He's on paid leave while we are investigating. We have not made any judgment at this point as to whether the policy was violated," said editorial page editor John Diaz.

"It would be a concern to have somebody who is involved in selecting letters make what amounts to a public demonstration of support for a particular candidate."

The paper, whose editorials backed Democrat Al Gore in the 2000 election, bars staffers from making campaign contributions without the approval of editors. The San Francisco area is known as one of the most politically liberal in the country.

The paper learned of the contributions from a researcher at a media watchdog group "On the News" who gathered a list of political contributions by San Francisco area journalists.

Last year the Chronicle fired a technology columnist who was arrested during an anti-Iraq war protest for creating an appearance of an ethics conflict.

Now if all the others would enforce ethics...and I still wonder why they practice political endorsement at all.

grayshade
07-21-04, 03:36 PM
Yeah! Who needs 'em. Lily-livered Liberals @#$*&% suck ass.
-Paid for by the Bush campaign



P.S. Sandy Berger must get probed alot. He looks like he needs a good probin'. Probe, probe, probe. Hey, more probe over here for the B-man.


:yes:

thedrifter
07-21-04, 05:28 PM
Vietnam Vets Mobilize Against John Kerry
By Cliff Kincaid
February 25, 2004



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fresh from an interview where he questioned President Bush about his Vietnam War-era service in the National Guard, Tim Russert of Meet the Press thinks that the Democrats are going to continue hammering on the issue. They think Bush’s service in the guard on U.S. soil stands in stark contrast to Kerry going to Vietnam and serving in combat. But they ignore a critical issue. As claimed by Mike Benge, a former civilian Vietnam POW, “John Kerry has fought harder for the Vietnamese communists than he fought against them in Vietnam.”

This is the aspect of Kerry’s record that the major media don’t want to touch. They are apparently intimidated by the medals he won while fighting for the U.S. side against the communists. But there are two groups determined to get the media to pay attention to what Kerry did after he returned from service. They want the public to know that Kerry came back to America, accused his fellow soldiers of atrocities, marched with those seeking a communist victory in Vietnam, and then ran a Senate committee that gave up hope of rescuing American POW/MIAs that were left behind after the war.

The groups are Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry and Vietnamese Americans Against John Kerry. The Vietnamese Americans are angry that Kerry promoted diplomatic relations with Hanoi while failing to promote human rights in Vietnam. They are not alone. One 30-year U.S. Army veteran wrote to us saying that he is “revolted” that the media are failing to reveal Kerry’s dark “secrets.” He calls Kerry the “War ‘Hero’ Traitor” because of how he turned against the war when his fellow soldiers were still fighting and dying on the battlefield.

POW/MIA researcher Roger Hall comments, “Now that it is fashionable for veterans to promote their military status publicly—now that it is popular to be a Vietnam Veteran—Senator Kerry touts his service and medals. But in the 1970s, when it became fashionable to protest the war, he chose that issue to begin his political career and appeared to throw his medals over the fence. Now he retrieves them to flash before our eyes to distract us from his devious ways.” Hall acknowledges that Kerry performed honorably in Vietnam. But he adds, “One brave moment does not outshine a devious and duplicitous person.”

He points to something that has been documented by the Center for Public Integrity, which is hardly a conservative group. It notes that Kerry ran a Senate committee “to investigate the possibility that U.S. prisoners of war and soldiers designated missing in action were still alive in Vietnam.”

But it notes that Kerry’s participation in the committee “became controversial in December 1992 when Hanoi announced that it had awarded Colliers International, a Boston-based real estate company, an exclusive deal to develop its commercial real estate potentially worth billions.” Stuart Forbes, then the CEO of Colliers, is Kerry’s cousin. For his part, Kerry decided there were no living American POW/MIA in Vietnam and the process of restoring diplomatic relations with Vietnam proceeded. Kerry later visited Hanoi to meet with its Communist rulers.

Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at aimeditor@yahoo.com


http://www.aim.org/publications/media_monitor/2004/02/25.html


Ellie

thedrifter
07-22-04, 07:59 AM
Vietnam, protests put Kerry in early spotlight


WASHINGTON – The cavernous Senate hearing room was packed, with the usual well-groomed Capitol crowd mixed with scores of scruffy-looking military veterans, some in partial uniforms.

Sitting alone at the witness table in front of six graying senators was a young man, his green jungle fatigues adorned with three rows of ribbons, his long-jawed face framed by a thick mop of hair.

John Kerry, a decorated former Navy officer and the Ivy League-educated scion of an old Massachusetts family, urged the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to end the war in Vietnam because every day men were dying so the United States did not have to admit "that we have made a mistake."

"How do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" a 27-year-old Kerry asked.

That electrifying appearance April 22, 1971, catapulted Kerry into national prominence, setting the stage for a political career that has the Massachusetts senator on the verge of accepting next week's Democratic nomination for president.

In his bid for the White House, Kerry has relied heavily on his record as a thrice-wounded veteran and on the support of hundreds of fellow veterans, including the "band of brothers" of former sailors he led.

But he has been assailed by other Vietnam veterans who still burn with anger over Kerry's role in the anti-war movement.

Although Kerry already had doubts about the war, he has said he felt an obligation to serve because a number of his close friends at Yale were joining the military and because of his background. Kerry was born in a Denver military hospital in 1943; his father was an Army Air Forces pilot.

Kerry reported to Officer Candidate School at Newport, R.I., in August 1966 and three months later was commissioned as an ensign in the Navy Reserve.

His first assignment was to the Gridley, a guided-missile frigate, at Long Beach Naval Station, where he was responsible for keeping the ship clean and rust-free.

In his officer's evaluation, Kerry was described as:

"A most capable officer who demonstrates a high degree of maturity beyond his age and experience His division's morale is one of the highest on the ship due to his dynamic leadership."

But retired Navy Capt. James F. Kelly, who drafted that report as the Gridley's executive officer, recently condemned Kerry for protesting the Vietnam War while he and others were still fighting.

"Many of us felt betrayed that one of our own, a decorated hero, gave comfort to the enemy by such actions," Kelly said in a letter to a Navy journal.

Death of a friend
After the Gridley sailed for Vietnam in February 1968, Kerry received word that Richard Pershing, one of his closest friends at Yale, had been killed in combat.

The loss of Pershing – the first of several of Kerry's friends to fall in Vietnam – might have planted the seed for his zealous opposition to the war.

In a letter to his future wife, Julia Thorne, Kerry wrote:

"If I do nothing else in my life, I will never stop trying to bring to people the conviction of how wasteful and asinine is a human expenditure of this kind."

Although he had grown distressed over the war, Kerry already had volunteered to plunge into the conflict, requesting assignment to swift boats, one of the most dangerous Navy jobs in Vietnam.

The swifts, officially Patrol Craft Fast, were 50-foot, aluminum-hull boats with little in the way of armor to protect the six-man crew, but a lot of firepower. They were used for patrols along the coast and into the maze of rivers in the Mekong Delta.

After coming back for training at the Naval Amphibious Base Coronado, Kerry returned to Vietnam on Nov. 17, 1968.

Without a boat of his own, Kerry spent weeks with other swift boat officers on coastal patrol, where the main danger was frequently violent storms.

To break the boredom, Kerry volunteered for a Dec. 2 mission on a small boat with two sailors looking for vessels violating curfew. A night encounter with a group of Vietnamese led to an exchange of fire that left Kerry with a slight arm wound, earning him a Purple Heart.

Kerry later called the incident "a half-assed action that hardly qualified as combat, but it was my first and that made it very exciting."

He was soon given a swift boat of his own, PCF-44, with a crew of five.

At that time, Vice Adm. Elmo Zumwalt – a future chief of naval operations – assumed overall command of the U.S. Navy in Vietnam, and Capt. Roy Hoffman took over the Coastal Command, which included the swift boats. Hoffman ordered a more aggressive policy to "take the fight to the enemy

Firefights on patrol
In the following weeks, Kerry and his crew conducted numerous patrols in the small winding rivers and canals of the Mekong Delta, repeatedly taking fire from automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades from unseen enemies on the densely covered banks.

Kerry later noted that he was disturbed by the willingness of Vietnamese troops and some swift boat crews to shoot at apparently unarmed people, and that his gloom deepened upon hearing that Bob Crosby, a good friend from training, had been killed in an accidental shooting.

Late in January 1969, the skipper of another swift boat was badly wounded, and Kerry was given command of that boat, PCF-94, and its veteran five-man crew.

On one of their early missions, the crew encountered a sampan in the dark. Kerry told his crew to fire a warning shot, but the sailors opened fire. Boarding the craft, they found a woman with a baby, blood on the deck and a dead child. A man thought to be aboard to sampan was not found.

Kerry said the incident haunted him for years.

In the next weeks, the crew conducted 18 missions and engaged in numerous firefights. On Feb. 20, a rocket-propelled grenade hit the boat, sending shrapnel into Kerry's left leg and earning him a second Purple Heart.

Eight days later, Kerry's boat and another swift boat engaged in a series of firefights that reportedly killed nine Viet Cong guerrillas and earned Kerry a Silver Star, the third-highest decoration for valor.

As Kerry directed his boat toward the riverbank in response to enemy fire, a guerrilla popped up and aimed a rocket launcher at the vessel. Apparently because the fighter was too close to his target for the rocket to arm, he ran.

Fred Short, the crew gunner, said he could not fire his twin .50 caliber guns forward because the pilothouse was in the way. But he said Tommy Belodeau, in the bow, fired his M-60 machine gun, hitting the guerrilla in the leg.

"That guy never broke stride," Short recalled.

Kerry, armed with an M-16 rifle, jumped from the boat and chased the armed Viet Cong, followed by Mike Medeiros and Belodeau. Short said Medeiros told him the enemy soldier stood up aiming his rocket but that Kerry shot him before he could fire.

Critics would later question whether Kerry's action had been appropriate and necessary, but Short and Del Sandusky, the boat's senior enlisted man, said Kerry saved their lives.

If Kerry had not chased and killed the Viet Cong guerrilla, "we would have been dead," Sandusky said in an interview.

Adm. Zumwalt pinned the Silver Star on Kerry, citing him for "conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action."

Exit from Vietnam
On March 13, Kerry's boat and four other swift boats conducted a mission that would earn him two more medals and a ticket out of Vietnam.

After an incident ashore in which Kerry was hit in the buttock by shrapnel, the boats were leaving the area when they were raked by gunfire from the shore. Mines planted in the river exploded around them.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040721/images/2004-07-21kerry.jpg

John Kerry was awarded a Silver Star, a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts in Vietnam between his arrival in November 1968 and his departure in March 1969. Associated Press


http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040721/images/kerry2.jpg

Associated Press
Peace demonstrators cheered John Kerry, then 27, when he testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 21, 1971, as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

As Kerry directed his boat to shield a damaged swift boat, another explosion rocked his boat, throwing him into a bulkhead and smashing his right arm.

Another blast knocked Army Green Beret Lt. James Rassmann from one of the other boats. Amid continued enemy fire, Kerry raced his boat back to reach the soldier and, despite an injured arm, ran from the cover of the pilothouse to pull the Green Beret aboard.

Rassmann nominated Kerry for another Silver Star. But he was awarded a Bronze Star with a citation praising his "professionalism, great personal courage under fire and complete dedication to duty."

Kerry also received a third Purple Heart, making him eligible to request assignment out of Vietnam.

Kerry insists that the transfer papers were filed routinely for him, but his critics say an individual had to make the request personally.

Regardless, Kerry flew out of Vietnam in late March 1969, after just over four months of a normal 12-month tour in country.

Back stateside, he requested early release from active duty in January 1970, returned to civilian life and joined the Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

In one of his first activities with the veterans group, Kerry addressed a Labor Day rally at Valley Forge, Pa., following Jane Fonda.

continued..........

thedrifter
07-22-04, 08:01 AM
Kerry then attended the anti-war veterans group Winter Soldiers gathering in Detroit, where dozens of men who identified themselves as combat veterans described horrible deeds they said they...

thedrifter
07-23-04, 06:59 AM
Kerry's political ambitions date back to his youth

By Finlay Lewis
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE

WASHINGTON – John Kerry sat ashen-faced and in shock on the bench, his mind far from the action on the field.

It was late November 1963 in New Haven, Conn., and rumors had started circulating sometime during the first half of the Yale-Princeton soccer game. By the final whistle, the news had been confirmed: John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th president of the United States, was dead.

Saying little to his teammates, John Forbes Kerry, a sophomore substitute, quickly dressed and headed for church. He then took a solitary walk deep into the night before returning to his dormitory at Jonathan Edwards College on the Yale campus.

For the rest of the weekend, Kerry stayed glued to a small black-and-white TV in a darkened room, watching developments and mourning the assassination of his hero, who only 15 months earlier had taken him sailing off the coast of Rhode Island on Narragansett Bay.

Recalling that weekend, Harvey Bundy, one of Kerry's roommates then, remembered, "John was visibly shaken up. He was in a state of, in effect – 'How could this happen?' "

But the assassination did nothing to undermine his deep-seated sense of mission and purpose. From adolescence, Kerry was transparent about ambitions nourished by the career of a diplomat father and the commitments of a public-spirited mother.

Now 60, Kerry is expected to be officially named the Democratic presidential nominee at next week's convention in Boston, a culmination of his 19-year career as a U.S. senator from Massachusetts.

"There was never a question in our minds – whether it was before or after the Kennedy assassination – that John was going to go into public service," said Bundy, a nephew of Kennedy aides William and McGeorge Bundy.

Harvey Bundy, now a prominent money manager in Chicago, continued: "John is a leader. John is someone who wanted to lead, who wanted to serve – he's kind of orchestrated his life that way. We didn't know he would run for president, but we certainly weren't surprised because . . . we sat around the room talking about what our Cabinet positions would be."

Daniel Barbiero, another Yale roommate, remembers taking Kerry home during a class break and introducing him to his staunchly Republican mother as a future president. After the weekend was over, she pledged that Kerry would be the first Democratic presidential candidate to receive her vote. Now 88, Barbiero's mother recently wrote to Kerry and said she would keep her word.

Barbiero first met Kerry as a classmate at St. Paul's School, an exclusive college preparatory school in New Hampshire. Kerry, one of four children, entered St. Paul's in 1957 while his father, Richard, was on assignment with the State Department in Europe. He studied at the school for five years before entering Yale in 1962.

Kerry's path to St. Paul's and Yale led him through a variety of temporary addresses and schools in the United States and abroad, leaving the impression of a rootless childhood. Kerry was born in Denver on Dec. 11, 1943, where his father, an Army Air Corps test pilot, was recovering from tuberculosis.

In 1954, Kerry entered a Swiss boarding school while his parents moved to Berlin, where Richard Kerry had been assigned as legal adviser at the U.S. mission. Two years later, Kerry entered the Fessenden School in a Boston suburb, while his parents remained abroad. The next fall, Kerry found himself at St. Paul's.

Still a couple of years from a growth spurt that would turn him into an athletic 6-footer, Kerry felt himself something of an outsider upon entering the equivalent of the eighth grade at the all-boys Episcopalian school that had been educating wealthy bluebloods for more than a century. A Catholic, the youngster attended Mass in Concord while his classmates went to chapel on the campus.

Kerry, whose family was making ends meet on a diplomat's salary, did not learn until a year ago that his paternal grandfather was a Jew born in the Austrian Empire – now the Czech Republic – who changed his name from Fritz Kohn to Frederick Kerry. He did so to guard against anti-Semitism in Europe. He married a Jewish woman named Ida Lowe and the couple and their newborn son were baptized as Catholics in 1901. The family immigrated to the United States four years later.

On the other hand, his mother, Rosemary, was a descendant of two of New England's oldest and most storied families: the Winthrops and the Forbeses. .


continued.........

thedrifter
07-23-04, 06:59 AM
Making a mark
Barbiero remembers encountering Kerry in a faculty member's living quarters at St. Paul's. The teacher, John Walker, a rarity in those days as a black faculty member at an elite school, was enormously popular among the students for his counsel, which is why the two young boys had separately sought him out.
Walker, who would later become the Episcopal bishop of Washington, said to Barbiero, "This is Johnny Kerry, and he's feeling a little sad because he doesn't think he's popular."

Barbiero, now an employee benefits consultant, recalled: "I immediately liked him. I sort of liked his seriousness. I liked his intensity, and I told him so."

During his five years at St. Paul's, Kerry might not have been overwhelmingly popular with his schoolmates but he made his mark in other ways, as a skilled athlete, brilliant debater and strong student. He founded a political club, appeared on stage in "Julius Caesar" and "The Caine Mutiny," and was active in the French club.

A teammate on the lacrosse and hockey teams, John Rousmaniere, now an author of books on sailing, said: "He was a little remote emotionally. I agree he's very similar now to what he was then. . . . He seemed a little contrived, maybe. A little unclear: not a gregarious, warm, outgoing guy."

On a hockey team captained his senior year by Robert Mueller, now the director of the FBI, Kerry had the reputation among some on the team as a selfish player, who did not pass the puck often to open teammates, Rousmaniere said.

"I don't remember it much," added Rousmaniere, the goalie. "He was a very graceful skater, a strong skater. . . . And people like that very often tend to be" the designated puck handlers on thrusts against the other team's goal.


A brush with JFK
Kerry's political convictions were no secret.
In a school whose student body was notably Republican, Kerry stamped himself early as a Democrat, arguing Kennedy's case against a Richard Nixon partisan on the eve of the 1960 election.

Kerry lost the debate, but had the satisfaction of having backed the winner at the ballot box.

Aside from his partisan leanings, Kerry had several other ties to the young president. Not only were Kerry's initials also JFK, but in the months leading up to his freshman year at Yale, Kerry dated Jacqueline Kennedy's half-sister, Janet Auchincloss. One date – at the Auchincloss estate in Rhode Island – resulted in a family sail, skippered by the president.

While at Yale, Kerry's political interests came into sharper focus.

David Thorne, one of Kerry's closest friends from Yale days on and brother of Kerry's first wife, Julia, observed: "He, among very few others in college, was actively interested in a political career, running for office. There is no question about that."

Cameron Kerry, the senator's younger brother, said: "Certainly in terms of being engaged in issues, our parents inculcated a very strong sense of public duty. . . . Part of the influence was also the effect of being in places where you were exposed to things that gave you a sense of the impact of politics and world affairs on people's lives."

John Kerry played varsity soccer – he scored three goals his senior year in the Ivy League championship game against Harvard; proved his mettle as a debater against college students from across the nation and Britain; won the presidency of the Yale Political Union despite the Republican tilt of the student body; and began flying lessons as a senior and that year joined the exclusive Skull and Bones Club, an honor reserved for a tiny fraction of seniors thought to be destined for great things. (President Bush was tapped for the same club a couple of years later.)

"I think John was not the most attentive student in the world," Thorne said. "I think it was not that he wasn't a good student. There were other things he was really engaged in. . . . He was focused on what he was really interested in."


Vietnam's shadow
Kerry and his friends were also attentive to news reports of a growing U.S. involvement in Vietnam.
In the winter of Kerry's junior year, William Bundy, then a State Department official responsible for Vietnam policy, came to speak on the campus. Afterward, he visited the rooms of his nephew, Harvey, and his roommates.

"We asked him about Vietnam," Barbiero recalled. "He very seriously told us that this was a place we should go and we were needed there. And so that was a defining moment for us."

For Kerry, John F. Kennedy's rally cry – "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country" – had a powerful resonance. But questions and doubts about America's commitment to preserving the South Vietnamese regime in Saigon began to intrude.

Kerry, given the honor of delivering the Class Day oration his senior year, tore up his original speech after it had been published in an official campus journal and delivered one with a sharply skeptical political tone. He criticized the Johnson administration for a military venture that did not advance the nation's vital interests and that effectively isolated the United States from the international community.

But by that time, Kerry had already committed himself to seeking a Navy commission, knowing it would probably expose him to combat in Vietnam.

"This was 1966," said Thorne, who, like Kerry and Barbiero, also was headed for Vietnam. "By 1968, I'm not so sure we would have made the decision to serve. I'll speak for myself, . . . this was truly a moving train, a transitional moment of great significance for all of us, and the country as well."


http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040719/images/2004-07-19news_kerry.jpg

Knight Ridder News Service
During John Kerry's five years at the exclusive St. Paul's School in New Hampshire, he made his mark as a skilled athlete and a brillant debater.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/federal/20040719-9999-1n19youth.html


Ellie

thedrifter
07-23-04, 05:59 PM
Pentagon Finds Bush's Military Payroll Records
Fri Jul 23, 2004 05:01 PM ET


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Payroll records related to President Bush's service in the Air National Guard three decades ago that the Pentagon said earlier this month were accidentally destroyed now have been located, defense officials said on Friday.
Bush's whereabouts during his service as a pilot in the Texas Air National Guard in the United States during the Vietnam War have become an election-year issue, with some Democrats accusing him of shirking his duty.

Defense Finance and Accounting Service spokesman Bryan Hubbard said the microfilm payroll records were found in Denver, and blamed a clerical error for the Pentagon's previous failure to find the records.

"We're talking about a manual process for records that are over 30 years old," Hubbard said.

The Pentagon previously said microfilm payroll records of large numbers of service members, including Bush, were ruined in 1996 and 1997 in a project to save large, brittle rolls of microfilm.

Bush moved to Alabama in May 1972 to work on a political campaign and, he has said, to perform his Guard service there for a year. But other Guard officers have said they had no recollection of seeing him there.

Last February, the White House released hundreds of pages of Bush's military records. Those records did not provide new evidence to place Bush in Alabama during the latter part of 1972, when some Democrats had said he was basically absent without leave

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=5761332


Ellie

OLE SARG
07-23-04, 07:36 PM
I THINK THAT ARTICLE SAID KERRY WAS A REAL MASTER BATER OR WAS THAT DEBATER:)

When Kerry was doing all of his anti-Vietnam protesting he was still an Officer (and I use THAT word loosely - I wouldn't follow him to a dog fight) in the Naval Reserve. You could say some of his actions represented him to be a TRAITOR!!!!!!!!!

I think of him as a Jane Fonda loving SOB. (AND I SAY THAT FROM THE HEART):banana:

OLD SARG

thedrifter
07-24-04, 06:48 AM
Kerry banking on foreign-policy skills <br />
<br />
By Finlay Lewis <br />
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE <br />
July 23, 2004 <br />
<br />
WASHINGTON – The call from Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis cranked up the pressure on John Kerry, whose...

thedrifter
07-24-04, 06:49 AM
The prism of Vietnam
Throughout Kerry's Senate career, the Vietnam War has been a constant, shaping his attitudes. Aides say his searing combat experiences left him with an enduring skepticism about government, which helps account for some of his differences over the years with traditional liberals such as Kennedy.
That attitude, former aides say, materialized in an aversion to government waste. Over the following decade, Kerry and a handful of colleagues waged war – sometimes successfully – on boondoggles such as subsidies to producers of wool and mohair (a special wool that was used to make Army uniforms during the Korean War).

Karen Kornbluh, at one point Kerry's budget expert, recalls overhearing then-Sen. Phil Gramm, the Texas Republican with an important wool-raising constituency, shout desperately into a telephone, "They're going after mohair again!"


"(Kerry) came to Washington to make government responsible," Kornbluh said. "That's why he came to Washington after the war. That's really the driving force: that government should be transparent and it should be responsible. I think he thought that not to cut the budget where there was waste and then to just try and spend more where you thought it was a good idea was irresponsible."

Kerry's wartime experiences and his Senate career fused most dramatically in 1992, when he agreed to lead a select committee investigation of the POW/MIA situation in Vietnam. The assignment paired Kerry with a fellow veteran, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

The hearings often turned testy.

"It was hideous," recalled Frances Zwenig, Kerry's staff director for the investigation. "Every day we felt under attack from the true believers – people who were totally convinced there were a lot of Americans still being held behind in Vietnam. . . . They were just rude."

McCain in particular had to endure accusations of being a traitor. At one point, Zwenig recalled watching as Kerry laid a gently restraining hand on the seething senator's arm.

"I remain grateful to him for doing that," McCain said later.

At least one senator on the committee, Robert C. Smith, R-N.H., was sympathetic to the claims of some MIA advocates. But in the end, Kerry managed to win even Smith's support for a unanimous finding of "no compelling evidence that any American remains alive in captivity in Southeast Asia."

The committee's work, completed in 1993, paved the way for the decision a year later by President Clinton to end the trade embargo with Vietnam and, in 1995, to normalize relations with the Vietnamese government.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20040723-9999-1n23kerry.html


Ellie

thedrifter
07-24-04, 07:42 AM
Understanding 'The Siege'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 20, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com


Those of you who are sick and tired of watching liberals drool over Michael Moore's miserable "Fahrenheit 9-11" are probably wondering why our side doesn't have something better to watch. Well, now we do.

Herb Meyer's video on "The Siege of Western Civilization" is taking off among conservative Americans. The video has sold out twice in just the last month – and one students' organization recently bought 1,400 copies for distribution to all their chapters at colleges throughout the country.

In "The Siege of Western Civilization," Herb Meyer outlines the real threats to our country's security, our economy – and above all to our culture. And he really "gets it." As Herb puts it, "Our culture is Western Civilization. This is who we are. We need to understand what Western Civilization is all about, such as the rule of law, human rights and economic liberty, and above all we need to teach this to our children. Today our civilization is under siege, and if our children don't understand what our civilization really is and what we stand for, they won't understand why it's worth defending."

Herb outlines the three main threats to our way of life and our future: the war that radical Islam is waging against us, the culture war within the United States that he calls "a second Civil War," and plunging birth rates in Europe, Japan and even here that not only will wreak havoc with our economies but could, quite literally, lead to the extinction of entire populations. And he does all this in a friendly, informal way that makes "The Siege of Western Civilization" good viewing not only for concerned adults, but for students as well.

If you ask students who attend the local public high school what "Western Civilization" is, will they volunteer such concepts as religious liberty, individual freedom and democracy? Will they talk of great art and literature, as well as daring inventions and discoveries that changed the course of history? How about the rise of the middle class and the highest living standard the world has ever known?

Not likely, according to Herb Meyer.

Let me take a moment to tell you something about Meyer, who is the kind of sharp thinker Western Civilization has long produced. This former CIA analyst was one of the first American scholars to predict the implosion of the Soviet Union. Other American intelligence officials looked at the Soviet Union and saw a bustling country with at least 3 percent annual growth as far as the eye could see. They saw a Cold War that would sooner turn hot than turn off.

Herb Meyer didn't. And he didn't have to tap any super-secret veins of information, either. He read newspapers and other completely public documents. "The most vital, most actionable pieces of intelligence aren't "secret" at all," he wrote recently on National Review Online. "They are visible to anyone with a reasonable grasp of politics and economics ..."

So while other analysts saw continued growth, he saw reports of mills and factories closing for lack of raw materials. He saw workers rioting to protest the lack of meat and soap, and memos from the Politburo putting pressure on various bureaucracies to find new ways of generating hard currencies. Things, in other words, you don't see in countries with 3 percent growth. He concluded the Soviets would become more aggressive and try to "win" the Cold War hurriedly – before they went broke.

Fortunately, President Reagan shared Meyer's view, leading him to launch an arms buildup the Soviets couldn't match. The rest is history.

Which brings us back to those students I mentioned earlier. "We've forgotten what Western Civilization is," Meyer says. "We no longer teach it in the schools. If you come to the schools where I live and ask a group of high-school students 'what is Western Civilization?' they'll tell you it's slavery, the oppression of women and that we don't recycle."

Such a colossal injustice is what led Meyer, a former associate editor of Fortune magazine and author of several books, to produce "The Siege of Western Civilization." We have to go back and understand just what it is we are fighting for," Meyer says. "When you understand Western Civilization, then you have a very clear sense of who the enemy is, what they are attacking and why it's worth defending."



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you want to understand the threats our country and our culture face – and if you want to poke a finger in Michael Moore's eye – purchase a copy of "The Siege of Western Civilization". You can order through the website or by calling 1-800-393-1266.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rebecca Hagelin is a vice president of the Heritage Foundation, a research and educational think-tank whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values and a strong national defense. She is also the former vice president of communications for WorldNetDaily and her 60-second radio commentaries can be heard on the Salem Communications Network.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39532


Ellie

Sparrowhawk
07-24-04, 07:34 PM
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kerry camp spins its wheels
By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published July 24, 2004

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AURORA, Colo. -- Sen. John Kerry spoke about the plight of the American worker when he traveled to Detroit earlier this week, a safe message for the blue-collar workers who build cars there.
So it was a little strange that the campaign picked as its press-pass logo for its Motor City tour the gleaming showcase car of a foreign auto company -- Rolls-Royce -- that makes cars priced far outside the financial reach of any middle-class voter.
"That's an insult to the auto worker, it's an insult to the American worker, it's an insult to mainstream America," said Sam Burwell from Corunna, Mich., a third-generation auto worker for General Motors. "It also shows who he's really in touch with: his European, elitist French friends and not Americans like me. A Rolls-Royce, for cryin' out loud."
The Kerry-Edwards traveling press pass was designed by Mr. Kerry's campaign advance team in Michigan and distributed to the reporters who flew with him to Detroit to attend the 2004 National Urban League Conference. Dominating the pass is the photograph of a Rolls-Royce 100EX, an opulent convertible complete with the famed "Spirit of Ecstasy" hood ornament.
Asked about the press-pass logo, Kerry spokesman David Wade said it was unintentional error by a campaign volunteer and then criticized President Bush's economic policies.
"I could say that the Rolls-Royce is the perfect symbol of who got the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, but sometimes objects in the rearview mirror are closer than they appear," he said.
"Under President Bill Clinton, our strong economy actually helped bring Rolls-Royce jobs to the United States for American workers," Mr. Wade said. "Now, with health care costs rising and no end in sight under George Bush, American automakers say they may have to outsource jobs overseas. That's why John Kerry's health care plan offers relief to American companies and hope for the United Auto Workers who are fighting to put John Kerry and John Edwards in the White House."
While Detroit's auto industry has become more globalized in recent years, it remains locked in a fierce fight with foreign competitors over automobile market share here and abroad. Auto workers are zealous boosters of their American cars and are deeply suspicious of foreign trade.
A campaign cornerstone for Mr. Kerry and his running mate, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, has been protecting American workers from foreign competitors. They often blame President Bush for the flow of American jobs overseas.
Bill Ballenger, editor of Inside Michigan Politics newsletter, said the Kerry campaign may have thought that since Mr. Kerry was addressing the Urban League, a civil rights organization, and not an auto industry group, such a snafu would go unnoticed.
"The whole reason the black population, or just about any population, is here is because of the auto industry," he said. "It's a bone-headed play by Team Kerry."
In addition to being a foreign-built car -- Germany's BMW, which now owns the legendary luxury automaker, built the car in Munich -- the image of such a luxury car undermines the message Mr. Kerry wants to convey.
As the Yale-educated son of a diplomat who married ketchup heiress Teresa Heinz Kerry -- who is worth more than $500 million -- Mr. Kerry already faces some obstacles connecting with America's middle-class workers.
"Kerry needs to spend the campaign not behaving like an elitist and not giving voters a reason to remember that he and his wife have a lot of money," said Jennifer Duffy of the Cook Political Report. "It doesn't help him connect with the average voter."
The Rolls-Royce press pass reminded Miss Duffy of the time former President George Bush didn't recognize a grocery store scanner.
"It's that kind of thing," she said. "It makes him look elitist and out of touch."
The Rolls-Royce 100EX -- an experimental car not in full production yet -- features cashmere lining under the hood and dark Curzon leather upholstery, mahogany and teak wood inside the passenger cabin.
"Nobody wants to care for bleached teak wood decking, which is liberally used inside and out on the 100EX," Christian J. Wardlaw wrote earlier this year about the car for Autosite car buyer's guide. "Then again, if you're buying a Roller, chances are that caring for it is someone else's job."
The only Rolls-Royce in production today -- the Phantom -- starts at $324,000.
"The Detroit trip was right after his Nantucket trip, right?" asked Miss Duffy, referring to Mr. Kerry's summer home on the exclusive island of Nantucket off the coast of Massachusetts. "Maybe it was a tough transition for him."
Yesterday, Mr. Kerry began his tour across America from his birthplace, an Army hospital here in Aurora. The "Journey on America's Freedom Trail" will conclude at the Democratic National Convention next week in Boston.
"We have an economic plan that will revitalize manufacturing, put America back to work and create new, good-paying jobs," Mr. Kerry said yesterday. "We value an America that exports products, not jobs.
"We value American workers and we will give them a level playing field," he said. "Because if you give American workers a fair playing field, there's no one in the world that the American worker can't compete against."




Copyright © 2004 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Return to the article

Sparrowhawk
07-24-04, 07:49 PM
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Inside the Ring
By Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough
Published July 23, 2004

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Covering up?
U.S. officials tell us that the FBI is focusing on a single document in its investigation of former White House National Security Adviser Samuel R. Berger. Investigators are trying to determine why Mr. Berger improperly removed a highly classified after-action report by Richard A. Clarke, an aide to Mr. Berger, that was harshly critical of the Clinton administration's response to the so-called millennium terrorist plot to bomb Los Angeles International Airport and other targets in late 1999.
Mr. Clarke was the National Security Council staff aide who ended up as a Democratic holdover in the Bush administration. He went public before the September 11 commission with harsh criticism of President Bush and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice for failing to take his advice in doing more against al Qaeda before the 2001 terrorist attacks.
Officials said the investigation into the removal of the Clarke memorandum is expected to lead to the declassification and publication of the document. This could expose the duplicity of Mr. Clarke, who had little criticism of the Clinton administration in public.
U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies have used the millennium plot as an example of a counterterrorism success. But the Clarke memorandum is likely to portray a different picture.

enviro
07-24-04, 09:12 PM
Berger rejected four plans to kill or capture bin Laden


By James G. Lakely
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


President Clinton's national security adviser, Samuel R. Berger, rejected four plans to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, worrying once that if the plans failed and al Qaeda launched a counterattack, "we're blamed."
According to the September 11 commission's 567-page report, released Thursday, Mr. Berger was told in June 1999 that U.S. intelligence agents were confident about bin Laden's presence in a terrorist training camp called Tarnak Farms in Afghanistan.

Mr. Berger's "hand-written notes on the meeting paper," the report says, showed that Mr. Berger was worried about injuring or killing civilians located near the camp.
Additionally, "If [bin Laden] responds" to the attack, "we're blamed," Mr. Berger wrote.
The report also says that Richard Clarke, Mr. Berger's expert on counterterrorism, presented that plan to get bin Laden because he was worried about the al Qaeda leader's "ambitions to acquire weapons of mass destruction."
These revelations come as Mr. Berger is under investigation by the Justice Department for smuggling several copies of classified documents that dealt with the Clinton administration's anti-terror policies out of the National Archives.
Commission Co-chairman Lee Hamilton said Thursday, however, that the missing documents Mr. Berger has acknowledged taking doesn't affect "the integrity" of the final report.
According to the report, the first plan of action against bin Laden presented to Mr. Berger was a briefing by CIA Director George J. Tenet on May 1, 1998. Mr. Berger took no action, the report says, because he was "focused most" on legal questions.
"[Mr. Berger] worried that the hard evidence against bin Laden was still skimpy and that there was a danger of snatching him and bringing him to the United States only to see him acquitted," the report says.
Mr. Clarke asked Mr. Berger: "Should we pre-empt by attacking [bin Laden's] facilities?"
Mr. Berger decided against it, but later that year, Mr. Clinton ordered an attack on a chemical plant in Sudan that was suspected of providing bin Laden with dangerous weapons material.
Another opportunity to strike at bin Laden occurred on Dec. 4, 1999, according to the report, when Mr. Clarke suggested carrying out an attack on an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan in the last week of the year.
"In the margin next to Clarke's suggestion," the report states in a footnote, "Berger wrote, 'no.' "
Finally, in August of 2000, five months before Mr. Clinton left office, Mr. Berger was told that aerial surveillance from a Predator drone suggested another opportunity to kill bin Laden.
Mr. Clarke told Mr. Berger that the imagery captured by the Predator was "truly astounding," and expressed confidence that more missions could find bin Laden. Mr. Berger, however, "worried that a Predator might be shot down, and warned Clarke that such an event would be a 'bonanza' for bin Laden and the Taliban."
"In the memo's margin," the report states, "Berger wrote that before considering action, 'I will want more than verified location: we will need, at least, data on pattern of movements to provide some assurance he will remain in place.' "
The commission's report also notes a speech that Mr. Clinton gave to the Long Island Association on Feb. 15, 2002, in which — in the answer to a query from a member of the audience — he said that Sudan offered to turn over bin Laden to U.S. custody, but Mr. Clinton refused because "there was no indictment" in hand.
Mr. Clinton told the commission in April that he had "misspoken" and was never offered bin Laden.
Frank J. Gaffney, a former assistant secretary of defense for international security policy under President Reagan, said the September 11 report makes it clear that the Clinton administration "didn't take terrorism terribly seriously."
"Their approach to terrorism was like their approach to national security in general," Mr. Gaffney said. "They certainly didn't pursue it in any consistent and robust way."
To strike at al Qaeda the way Mr. Clarke suggested several times, Mr. Gaffney said, would have involved defending the actions as thoroughly as President Bush has the invasion of Iraq.
Mr. Berger defended the bombing of the suspected Sudan chemical factory in a February 1999 press conference by saying that "had we not and had a chemical weapon been used subsequently in the San Francisco subway system, I would find it hard to have defended our inaction."
"At the very least, [striking at bin Laden] should have been tried," Mr. Gaffney said. "It would have been better and easier and more prudent to deal with that threat in Sudan or in Afghanistan rather than have to deal with it in New York or Washington."

thedrifter
07-25-04, 07:24 AM
Berger rejected four plans to kill or capture bin Laden


By James G. Lakely
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


President Clinton's national security adviser, Samuel R. Berger, rejected four plans to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, worrying once that if the plans failed and al Qaeda launched a counterattack, "we're blamed."
According to the September 11 commission's 567-page report, released Thursday, Mr. Berger was told in June 1999 that U.S. intelligence agents were confident about bin Laden's presence in a terrorist training camp called Tarnak Farms in Afghanistan.

Mr. Berger's "hand-written notes on the meeting paper," the report says, showed that Mr. Berger was worried about injuring or killing civilians located near the camp.
Additionally, "If [bin Laden] responds" to the attack, "we're blamed," Mr. Berger wrote.
The report also says that Richard Clarke, Mr. Berger's expert on counterterrorism, presented that plan to get bin Laden because he was worried about the al Qaeda leader's "ambitions to acquire weapons of mass destruction."
These revelations come as Mr. Berger is under investigation by the Justice Department for smuggling several copies of classified documents that dealt with the Clinton administration's anti-terror policies out of the National Archives.
Commission Co-chairman Lee Hamilton said Thursday, however, that the missing documents Mr. Berger has acknowledged taking doesn't affect "the integrity" of the final report.
According to the report, the first plan of action against bin Laden presented to Mr. Berger was a briefing by CIA Director George J. Tenet on May 1, 1998. Mr. Berger took no action, the report says, because he was "focused most" on legal questions.
"[Mr. Berger] worried that the hard evidence against bin Laden was still skimpy and that there was a danger of snatching him and bringing him to the United States only to see him acquitted," the report says.
Mr. Clarke asked Mr. Berger: "Should we pre-empt by attacking [bin Laden's] facilities?"
Mr. Berger decided against it, but later that year, Mr. Clinton ordered an attack on a chemical plant in Sudan that was suspected of providing bin Laden with dangerous weapons material.
Another opportunity to strike at bin Laden occurred on Dec. 4, 1999, according to the report, when Mr. Clarke suggested carrying out an attack on an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan in the last week of the year.
"In the margin next to Clarke's suggestion," the report states in a footnote, "Berger wrote, 'no.' "
Finally, in August of 2000, five months before Mr. Clinton left office, Mr. Berger was told that aerial surveillance from a Predator drone suggested another opportunity to kill bin Laden.
Mr. Clarke told Mr. Berger that the imagery captured by the Predator was "truly astounding," and expressed confidence that more missions could find bin Laden. Mr. Berger, however, "worried that a Predator might be shot down, and warned Clarke that such an event would be a 'bonanza' for bin Laden and the Taliban."
"In the memo's margin," the report states, "Berger wrote that before considering action, 'I will want more than verified location: we will need, at least, data on pattern of movements to provide some assurance he will remain in place.' "
The commission's report also notes a speech that Mr. Clinton gave to the Long Island Association on Feb. 15, 2002, in which — in the answer to a query from a member of the audience — he said that Sudan offered to turn over bin Laden to U.S. custody, but Mr. Clinton refused because "there was no indictment" in hand.
Mr. Clinton told the commission in April that he had "misspoken" and was never offered bin Laden.
Frank J. Gaffney, a former assistant secretary of defense for international security policy under President Reagan, said the September 11 report makes it clear that the Clinton administration "didn't take terrorism terribly seriously."
"Their approach to terrorism was like their approach to national security in general," Mr. Gaffney said. "They certainly didn't pursue it in any consistent and robust way."
To strike at al Qaeda the way Mr. Clarke suggested several times, Mr. Gaffney said, would have involved defending the actions as thoroughly as President Bush has the invasion of Iraq.
Mr. Berger defended the bombing of the suspected Sudan chemical factory in a February 1999 press conference by saying that "had we not and had a chemical weapon been used subsequently in the San Francisco subway system, I would find it hard to have defended our inaction."
"At the very least, [striking at bin Laden] should have been tried," Mr. Gaffney said. "It would have been better and easier and more prudent to deal with that threat in Sudan or in Afghanistan rather than have to deal with it in New York or Washington."


http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040723-111413-2905r.htm


Ellie

Sparrowhawk
07-25-04, 08:35 AM
Was nothng more then Clinton's Political PR man, so that is why our National Security suffered. if anyone is to blame for not putting 9-11 all together, it was Berger and he should be hung.

Along with Clark.

Sparrowhawk
07-25-04, 05:11 PM
.

greensideout
07-25-04, 09:17 PM
LOL, they try so hard to be different but end up all looking alike.

thedrifter
07-26-04, 05:51 AM
Clinton in Spotlight at Kerry Convention <br />
<br />
By DARLENE SUPERVILLE <br />
<br />
BOSTON - Bill Clinton had the spotlight on Day One of John Kerry's convention, as the soon-to-be Democratic presidential nominee...

thedrifter
07-26-04, 06:02 AM
Former President Clinton questions Bush on Iraq war

By: Associated Press -

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Former President Clinton is questioning his successor's choices about the war in Iraq.

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Clinton called President Bush's doctrine of pre-emption "a very tricky, slippery slope" that was "never realistic because we are not going to go to war with Iran or North Korea."

Clinton, set to speak at the Democratic Convention in Boston on Monday, has been careful not to speak too harshly about Bush.


"I have tried to talk about this president and his administration in a respectful tone," he said.

But he took jabs at the current administration in an interview posted Sunday on the newspaper's Web site.

"The American people can decide who they think is right and wrong, but the Bush administration believed Iraq was far and away the biggest security problem of the country, despite the fact that there was more support for al-Qaida within Pakistan and now we know more contacts with Iran," he said. "There were other responsible people who had different views."

Clinton, who called Osama bin Laden "the biggest threat to the country," declined to say whether he would have invaded Iraq. He said he would have let United Nations weapons inspectors finish their work before deciding.

"But the factors in my thinking would have been how well we were doing in Afghanistan, stabilizing the entire country, and what our reasonable prospects of getting bin Laden were."

"I don't have any problem with getting rid of Saddam Hussein," Clinton said, "but we have over 900 American dead now and we are still dealing with this, and we are not dealing with other things with the same gusto."

While calling Bush "a great politician," Clinton said his response to the Sept. 11 terror attacks were misguided and may cost him the November election.

"After 9/11, we all wanted to follow the leader and be united as a country. The Republican right which dominates the policy of this White House, took our patriotism to be weakness and tried to push the country to the right and push the world around, and there was a predictable reaction," he said.



http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/07/26/military/20_28_547_25_04.txt


Ellie

thedrifter
07-26-04, 07:17 AM
Meeting America





Boston event will give Kerry a chance to introduce himself, his ideas to voters
By George E. Condon Jr.
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
July 25, 2004



BOSTON – John Kerry is counting on this week's Democratic National Convention to accomplish what a year of campaigning and millions of dollars' worth of TV advertising have not: "introduce" him to the interested but still-skeptical nation he hopes to lead.

"This is going to be his first handshake with the American public. We always get a real sense of somebody with that initial handshake, and this one needs to be a firm one and one of confidence," said pollster Peter Hart.

Kerry touts values in return to Iowa
A rushed hello and goodbye for party elders at Democratic convention
AP Survey: Top priority of Democratic delegates? It's the economy



"He needs to introduce himself to the country and tell people what he stands for, what he's going to do and leave them with the impression that he is a viable candidate for president," said Al From, head of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council.

"If he does that, then he will be the next president."

The idea that an introduction is still needed for a candidate who has been all over the nation's TV screens, on the cover of news magazines and crisscrossing the country for more than a year may seem strange.

But campaign professionals say this might be the first time many Americans pause in their daily chores and devote any real time to the 2004 campaign.

"Yes, Kerry has been campaigning for a ton of time," Hart said. "But it wasn't an election that had a lot of drama to it. . . . This was one of those 'hello-goodbye' campaigns, it was over so fast. You met him early, and then he was gone."

Boston-based Democratic strategist and longtime Kerry ally Mary Anne Marsh said the four-day convention, starting tomorrow in Boston, is critical for voters who want to be comfortable with a challenger.

"A lot of people will tune in for the first time Thursday night when he gives his acceptance speech or will see some coverage of it," she said. "So it's a great chance for him to make a good first impression on people who haven't been paying attention yet, which is more people than you think."

A Republican strategist, who asked not to be identified so as not to get in the way of the official White House comments, called the Democratic convention "the kickoff event of what normal people consider the real campaign."

He said both polling and history suggest that for most Americans, "80 percent of what they perceive to be the presidential campaign hasn't happened yet. For normal people, the campaign is the two conventions and three debates."

For the Massachusetts senator and his advisers, the four days in Boston are a chance to counter the effects of $90 million in advertising by President Bush's campaign that was mostly negative and cast Kerry as a "flip-flopper" who changes positions frequently for political gain.

"A little bit of that stuck," Kerry acknowledged last week in an interview with USA Today.

A campaign official also acknowledged that the flip-flopper label is a problem. "But," he said, "there is no evidence that has taken hold in a deep and penetrating way that is having an impact on the outcome of this election."


Not well-known
A more general problem is that few voters feel they really know the 60-year-old Kerry, who is in his fourth term in the Senate.
At a recent session with pollster Hart in Dayton, Ohio, voters used words such as "uptight," "aloof" and "stiff" to describe Kerry.

Such perceptions will be attacked in Boston by telling and retelling Kerry's life story, with a heavy emphasis on his decision to volunteer for the Vietnam War and his highly decorated service there.

"If voters don't know he's a Vietnam veteran now, they sure will by the time this convention is over," said Steve Murphy, who ran Rep. Dick Gephardt's presidential campaign in the primaries.

"What we are hoping to get is people deepening their knowledge of John Kerry," said the senator's pollster, Mark Mellman. "People are saying in a variety of polls and a variety of ways that they want to know more about John Kerry, and this is an opportunity to learn more about his family, his commitment to service, to middle-class opportunity, to the core values of the American people.

"I want them to know his biography and his background. I think it's important that people know that he risked his life in Vietnam to save the lives of others and won medals for his heroism," he said. "I think it's important that people understand that he has a lifelong commitment to faith and family."


Strong punch
With TV ratings for the national conventions having plummeted from their highs in the 1960s, some doubt whether a modern convention can still accomplish much for a candidate. But two recent conventions proved that these quadrennial gatherings still pack a powerful punch, even though they no longer exist primarily to pick a nominee.
In 1992, Democrat Bill Clinton went from third place to first and saw his approval ratings soar by more than 20 points after a successful convention in New York. That same year, many moderate voters were turned off by a Republican convention in Houston that seemed dominated by mean-spirited attacks and talk of "culture wars."

Heeding the lesson from Houston, Kerry recently told supporters to tone down their anti-Bush remarks during the convention. "I care about the tone. . . . I hope people will adhere to my wishes," he told USA Today.

His warning was prompted by the backlash against actress Whoopi Goldberg after her attacks on Bush at a Kerry event this month.

"I hope there is restraint," From said. "They don't have to tell people why they dislike George Bush. They already know that."

But Republicans doubt that Kerry can rein in delegates, many of whom are driven by strong antipathy toward the president. "Kerry very seldom speaks a paragraph without attacking the president," said Republican strategist Charlie Black. "He'll have to be careful because people don't want that."

Kerry spokesman David Wade expressed confidence that Boston will not be a Bush-bashing extravaganza. "John Kerry and John Edwards will set the tone for the convention," he said. "War heroes like (former Sen.) Max Cleland and the senator's river boat crews in Vietnam will set the tone. All Bush-Cheney have are tired old labels."

Another potential convention trap for Kerry is talk of taxes, said Sam Popkin, who teaches at the University of California San Diego and has advised Democratic candidates. "Taxes are the pitfall, not anti-Bush or anti-America," he said. "They can't preach class warfare. Don't side with the lower class in a country where everybody thinks they are middle class."

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20040725-9999-1n25dems.html


Ellie

thedrifter
07-26-04, 11:29 AM
Democrats Defend Heinz Kerry's 'Shove It'

By PETER JACKSON, Associated Press Writer

BOSTON - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites) doesn't have a problem with his wife telling an insistent journalist to "shove it" when urged to explain her plea for more civility in politics. Neither does Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (news - web sites).


"I think my wife speaks her mind appropriately," Kerry told reporters Monday when asked about the exchange between his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, and the editorial page editor of the conservative Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.


Asked about the response on CNN's "American Morning," Clinton said Monday, "A lot of Americans are going to say, 'Good for you, you go, girl,' and that's certainly how I feel about it."


Heinz Kerry attended a Massachusetts Statehouse reception Sunday night for fellow Pennsylvanians, telling them, "We need to turn back some of the creeping, un-Pennsylvanian and sometimes un-American traits that are coming into some of our politics." She criticized the tenor of modern political campaigns without being specific.


Minutes later, the Tribune-Review's Colin McNickle questioned Heinz Kerry on what she meant by the term "un-American," according to a tape of the encounter recorded by Pittsburgh television station WTAE.


Heinz Kerry said "I didn't say that" several times to McNickle. She then turned to confer with Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell and others. When she faced McNickle again a short time later, he continued to question her, and she replied: "You said something I didn't say. Now shove it."


A spokeswoman for Heinz Kerry later said, "This was sheer frustration aimed at a right-wing rag that has consistently and purposely misrepresented the facts in reporting on Mrs. Kerry and her family."


Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) recently came under criticism for using a four-letter obscenity in an exchange with Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record), D-Vt., on the Senate floor. He later was unapologetic about the remark, saying: "I felt better after I said it."

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040726/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_heinz_kerry_shove_it

Ellie

thedrifter
07-26-04, 02:10 PM
Boston baseball fans boo Kerry
Democrat throws out 1st pitch before hometown crowd at Fenway

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 25, 2004
11:25 p.m. Eastern





John Kerry was booed in his hometown as he threw out the first pitch in Fenway Park before the start of the Boston Red Sox-New York Yankees game tonight.

Kerry put in a surprise appearance at the Yankees-Red Sox baseball game Sunday night to throw out the opening pitch, making an early arrival in the city where Democratic delegates were gathering to nominate him for president.

Kerry continued to smile as he threw a ball that sank and hit the dirt before the catcher – a soldier home from Iraq – could catch it.

Kerry arranged for his flight between the battleground states of Ohio and Florida to be diverted to Boston, where he had not been scheduled to make his grand entrance to the convention city until Wednesday evening. He said he had planned the trip in secret about a week ago.

"The idea of missing a Yankees-Red Sox series right before a convention week was not acceptable, so we changed the policy," Kerry told reporters on the plane.

Kerry threw out the first pitch to Spec. Will Pumyea, 23, a military police officer in the Massachusetts National Guard from Woburn, Mass., who had just returned from Iraq and who also had previously served in Afghanistan.

Kerry then watched the game from the owners' box with his wife, his two daughters, Pumyea, former Sen. John Glenn of Ohio, Red Sox owners John Henry and Tom Werner, and Katie Couric, the co-anchor of NBC's "Today" show who is dating Werner. Glenn fought in Korea with Ted Williams, the legendary Red Sox slugger.

The game was the third in the Boston homestand between the two fierce rivals – who are also the teams representing the two convention cities. The Republicans gather in New York in late August. The Yankees won the first game Friday and the Red Sox came back with a dramatic two-run homer in the bottom of the ninth inning to win a fight-marred game last night.

The Red Sox won tonight 9-6.


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39633


Ellie

thedrifter
07-26-04, 05:28 PM
Beantown Becomes Blogtown
At the Democratic convention, online journalism arrives.

Monday, July 26, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT

BOSTON--It isn't news that more than 15,000 journalists are descending on this city to cover the Democratic convention. What is news is that for the first time several dozen political bloggers will receive media credentials to report on the event. Pay attention to these savvy computer mavens, for their postings are one of the most interesting ways in which the Internet is empowering people and shaping political coverage.

Blogs--short for Web logs--are online journals that combine running commentary with links to related sites. Bloggers tend to have contrarian outlooks, employ irreverent humor and frequently update their sites in order to draw readers back. New technology allows anyone with just a smattering of technical knowledge to become minipublisher and reach anyone with an Internet connection at very little cost. A study by the Perseus Development Corp. estimates that by next year over 10 million blogs will have been created, most by people merely chronicling their daily life in a sort of public diary.





Only 4% of Americans go to blogs for news and opinions, according to a 2003 Pew Internet Survey. But they're influential nonetheless. Blogs attract high-profile readers in media and politics with nonstop access to a computer--that is, they influence the influencers. "They provide links to information that would not otherwise come to my attention," says former Treasury Department official Bruce Bartlett, who counts Lucianne.com, RealClearPolitics.com, ABC News's The Note and the Drudge Report among the most valuable sites.
Pentagon officials say that coverage of Iraq's liberation and its aftermath was made richer by military bloggers who provided on-scene commentary that even journalists embedded with the U.S. military also appreciated. One Marine's blog report that the Arab TV channel al-Jazeera was paying people to shoot at U.S. troops was read by military officers and led to arrests. Salam Pax, a pseudonymous Baghdad blogger, toured his city with ABC's Ted Koppel for an episode of "Nightline" and has since landed a book deal.

Popular political bloggers such as Mickey Kaus, Josh Marshall, Glenn Reynolds, Andrew Sullivan and James Taranto often provide an early-warning system on breaking stories and wind up helping to shape the coverage of big media outlets. In late 2002, bloggers of all political stripes vigorously denounced the insensitive racial remarks of Sen. Trent Lott, prompting mainstream journalists to cover Mr. Lott's remarks and his racial history, and helped force his resignation as Senate majority leader. Jim Romenesko's Media News, a blog sponsored by the Poynter Institute, served as a bulletin board for the complaints of disgruntled New York Times reporters after the Jayson Blair scandal and along with other bloggers created pressure that forced executive editor Howell Raines to quit.

"Stories were developed on various blogs and grew in importance and repetition and elaboration until the mainstream, elite press took note and began to follow the stories and create an 'opinion storm,' " says Hugh Hewitt, a blogger and radio talk show host. "Radio gave print a big elbow, and then television gave radio a body blow. The fourth generation of technology has arrived, and blogs are at the center of it."

Dan Weintraub, a columnist for the Sacramento Bee, can testify to the usefulness of blogs to journalists. He started his blog just before last year's California recall election and received many valuable tips through it, such as a heads-up that Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, the leading Democratic candidate, was trying to circumvent campaign-finance restrictions by soliciting contributions for a dormant 2002 political committee that was governed by looser rules. The revelation steered his campaign into a crater and he was eventually forced to pay a large fine. Journalists "can't put out 100 telephone calls a day, but you can put something on the Web that people can read and either take the time to e-mail or call," Mr. Weintraub says.

Mickey Kaus, who wrote for The New Republic and Newsweek and now blogs for Slate, says a great advantage of blogging is that "you can post something and provoke a quick response and counterresponse, as well as research by readers. The collective brain works faster, firing with more synapses." At its best, he believes, the speed of blogs can move "fast enough to have real-world consequences that print journalism or even edited Web journalism can't have."

Of course, blogs can also serve as transmission belts for errors, vicious gossip and last-minute disinformation efforts. But they also can almost instantaneously correct themselves. Newspapers take time to do that, and TV news programs rarely admit error.





Blogs are also becoming a boon to political campaigns. Howard Dean vaunted to the front of the pack of Democratic presidential candidates last year partly on the popularity of his Blog for America, which drew 100,000 visitors a day, drove up Internet contributions and enabled his supporters to coordinate public meetings and reinforce each other. "What I find fascinating is that his campaign has ended, but his blog is still alive," Paul Gronke, a political scientist at Reed College, told United Press International.
Since then, campaigns have cultivated blog readers. John Kerry sent the first word of his selection of John Edwards as his running-mate to his e-mail supporters. George W. Bush's campaign responded with a campaign ad on its Web site, featuring an endorsement by Sen. John McCain, whom Kerry had pitched to consider a spot on his ticket.

Technology is moving so fast that there are now a growing number of video bloggers, or "vloggers," who look toward the day when they can produce original programming, bypassing the usual broadcast networks and cable channels.

Some congressional campaigns are now advertising on blogs. Earlier this year, Kentucky Democrat Ben Chandler bought $2,000 worth of ads on several popular political blogs to promote his candidacy in a special election for the House. The ads wound up bringing in $80,000 in contributions. Mr. Chandler won the previously Republican seat.





Blogging is also branching out in new directions. MooreLies.com exposes inaccuracies and hype in Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11." In an upcoming paper, political scientists Henry Farrell and Daniel Drezner report on how blogs serve "as repositories of local knowledge" that supplement what local media report on stories in their area. In Colorado, the Rocky Mountain Alliance of Blogs is covering the hot GOP primary between beer magnate Pete Coors and former Rep. Bob Schaeffer with a great deal more insight than the Denver newspapers.

The South Dakota Senate race between Minority Leader Tom Daschle and former Rep. John Thune is being aggressively covered by three blogs: Daschle v. Thune, South Dakota Politics and Sibby Online. They provide a credible counterweight to local South Dakota papers such as the Sioux Falls Argus Leader, which too often falls into the habit of ignoring new angles to the race and uncritically running Mr. Daschle's press releases.

Randell Beck, editor of the Argus Leader, is feeling the heat. In a column yesterday, he wrote:
Those perched on the political fringes have found a home on the Internet. True believers of one stripe or another, no longer content to merely bore spouses and neighbors with their nutty opinions, can now spew forth on their own blogs, thereby playing a pivotal role in creating the polarized climate that dominates debate on nearly every national issue. . . . If Hitler were alive today, he'd have his own blog."

According to Godwin's Law, an Internet discussion-group dictum that long predates blogging, when one side in an argument invokes Hitler, it proves he's lost. And indeed, Mr. Beck's column announced the Argus Leader's own tepid entry into the world of blogging.

It will always be possible for someone to point to many of the millions of amateur bloggers and dismiss them as nerdy faddists and their work as largely trivial. Most bloggers will burn out and move on to something else. But a handful are slowly building a shadow media infrastructure that will become a significant component of the media in the 21st century. There might not be much news at this year's Democratic convention, but a real story can be found in the bloggers who are making their debut this week at a major national political conclave.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110005399


Ellie

snipowsky
07-27-04, 04:39 AM
As far as I'm concerned....

John Kerry can kiss my cracker ass!

thedrifter
07-27-04, 05:16 AM
Democrats Defend Heinz Kerry's 'Shove It'
John Kerry, Hillary Clinton Defend Teresa Heinz Kerry's Telling a Reporter to 'Shove It'

The Associated Press



BOSTON July 26, 2004 — Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry doesn't have a problem with his wife telling an insistent journalist to "shove it" when urged to explain her plea for more civility in politics. Neither does Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.
"I think my wife speaks her mind appropriately," Kerry told reporters Monday when asked about the exchange between his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, and the editorial page editor of the conservative Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.





Asked about the response on CNN's "American Morning," Clinton said Monday, "A lot of Americans are going to say, 'Good for you, you go, girl,' and that's certainly how I feel about it."

Heinz Kerry attended a Massachusetts Statehouse reception Sunday night for fellow Pennsylvanians, telling them, "We need to turn back some of the creeping, un-Pennsylvanian and sometimes un-American traits that are coming into some of our politics." She criticized the tenor of modern political campaigns without being specific.

Minutes later, the Tribune-Review's Colin McNickle questioned Heinz Kerry on what she meant by the term "un-American," according to a tape of the encounter recorded by Pittsburgh television station WTAE.

Heinz Kerry said "I didn't say that" several times to McNickle. She then turned to confer with Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell and others. When she faced McNickle again a short time later, he continued to question her, and she replied: "You said something I didn't say. Now shove it."

A spokeswoman for Heinz Kerry later said, "This was sheer frustration aimed at a right-wing rag that has consistently and purposely misrepresented the facts in reporting on Mrs. Kerry and her family."

Vice President Dick Cheney recently came under criticism for using a four-letter obscenity in an exchange with Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., on the Senate floor. He later was unapologetic about the remark, saying: "I felt better after I said it."

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell said he didn't see anything wrong with what Heinz Kerry said.

"It was mild, polite and appropriate compared to Dick Cheney," Rendell said.


http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040726_783.html


Ellie

thedrifter
07-27-04, 05:16 AM
GORE'S REMARKS TO THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION, BOSTON
Mon Jul 26 2004 19:45:57 ET

GORE: Friends, fellow Democrats, fellow Americans: I'll be candid with you. I had hoped to be back here this week under different circumstances, running for re-election.

But you know the old saying: you win some, you lose some. And then there's that little-known third category. I didn't come here tonight to talk about the past. After all, I don't want you to think I lie awake at night counting and recounting sheep.

I prefer to focus on the future because I know from my own experience that America is a land of opportunity, where every little boy and girl has a chance to grow up and win the popular vote.

In all seriousness, I am deeply grateful for the opportunity you have given me to serve America. I want to thank you as Democrats for the honor of being your nominee for president four years ago. And I want to thank the American people for the privilege of serving as vice-president.

And most of all, I want to thank my family with all my heart -- my children and grandchildren, and especially my beloved partner in life, Tipper.

I love this country deeply, and even though I always look to the future with optimism and hope -- I do think it is worth pausing for just a moment as we begin this year's convention, to take note of two very important lessons from four years ago.

The first lesson is this: take it from me -- every vote counts.

In our Democracy, every vote has power. And never forget: that power is yours. Don't let anyone take it away or talk you into throwing it away.

And let's make sure that this time every vote is counted.

Let's make sure not only that the Supreme Court does not pick the next President, but also that this President is not the one who picks the next Supreme Court.

The second lesson from 2000 is this: what happens in a presidential election matters.

A lot.

The outcome profoundly affects the lives of all 293 million Americans -- and people in the rest of the world too. The choice of who is president affects your life and your family's future.

And never has this been more true than in 2004, because -- let's face it -- our country faces deep challenges.

These challenges we now confront are not Democratic or Republican challenges; they are American challenges -- that we all must overcome together.

It is in that spirit, that I sincerely ask those watching at home who supported President Bush four years ago: did you really get what you expected from the candidate you voted for?

Is our country more united today? Or more divided?

Has the promise of compassionate conservatism been fulfilled?

Or do those words now ring hollow?

For that matter, are the economic policies really conservative at all?

Did you expect, for example, the largest deficits in history? One after another? And the loss of more than a million jobs?

By the way, I know about the bad economy. I was the first one laid off. And while it's true that new jobs are being created, they're just not as good as the jobs people have lost. And incidentally, that's been true for me too.

Unfortunately, this is no joke for millions of Americans. And the real solutions require us to transcend partisanship.

So that's one reason why, even though we meet here as Democrats, we believe this is a time to reach beyond our party lines to Republicans as well.

I also ask tonight for the help of those who supported a third party candidate in 2000. I urge you to ask yourselves this question: do you still believe that there was no difference between the candidates?

Are you troubled by the erosion of some of America's most basic civil liberties?

Are you worried that our environmental laws are being weakened and dismantled to allow vast increases in pollution that are contributing to a global climate crisis?

No matter how you voted in the last election, these are profound problems that all voters must take into account this November 2nd.

And of course, no challenge is more critical than the situation we confront in Iraq. Regardless of your opinion at the beginning of this war, isn't it now obvious that the way the war has been managed by the Administration has gotten us into very serious trouble?

Wouldn't we be better off with a new President who hasn't burned his bridges to our allies, and who could rebuild respect for America in the world?

Isn't cooperation with other nations crucial to solving our dilemma in Iraq? Isn't it also critical to defeating the terrorists?

We have to be crystal clear about the threat we face from terrorism. It is deadly. It is real. It is imminent.

But in order to protect our people, shouldn't we focus on the real source of this threat: the group that attacked us and is trying to attack us again -- al Qaeda, headed by Osama Bin Laden?

Wouldn't we be safer with a President who didn't insist on confusing al Qaeda with Iraq? Doesn't that divert too much of our attention away from the principal danger?

I want to say to all Americans this evening that whether it is the threat to the global environment or the erosion of America's leadership in the world, whether it is the challenge to our economy from new competitors or the challenge to our security from new enemies, I believe that we need new leadership that is both strong and wise.

And we can have new leadership, because one of our greatest strengths as a democracy is that when we are headed in the wrong direction, we can correct our course.

When policies are clearly not working, we can change them. If our leaders make mistakes, we can hold them accountable - even if they never admit their mistakes.

I firmly believe America needs new leadership that will make us stronger at home and respected in the world.

We are here this week to present to the nation the man who should be our new president: John Kerry.

John and I were elected to the US Senate on the same day 20 years ago and I have worked closely with him for all that time. So I want to say a personal word about John Kerry the man.

He is a friend who will stand by you. His word is his bond. He has a deep patriotism that goes far beyond words. He has devoted his life to making America a better place for all of us.

He showed uncommon heroism on the battlefield in Vietnam. I watched him show that same courage on the Senate floor. He had the best record of protecting the environment against polluters of any of my colleagues - bar none.

He never shied away from a fight, no matter how powerful the foe. He was never afraid to take on difficult and thankless issues that few others wanted to touch -- like exposing the threat of narcoterrorism and tracing the sources of terrorist financing.

He was one of the very first in our party to take on the issue of drastic deficit reduction. He has developed a tough and thoughtful plan to restore our economic strength and fiscal discipline.

To put it simply, those of us who have worked with John know that he has the courage, integrity and leadership to be a truly great President of the United States.

And he showed wisdom in his very first decision as the leader of our party -- when he picked as his running mate an inspiring fighter for middle class families and families struggling to reach the middle class: John Edwards. John Kerry and John Edwards are fighting for us and for all Americans, so after we nominate them here in Boston and return to our home states across this land, we have to fight for them.

Talk to your friends and neighbors, go to "JohnKerry.com," raise money, register voters and get them to the polls, volunteer your time, and above all: make your vote count.

To those of you who felt disappointed or angry with the outcome in 2000, I want you to remember all of those feelings. But then I want you to do with them what I have done: focus them fully and completely on putting John Kerry and John Edwards in the White House.

Fellow Democrats, when I look out and see so many friends who have meant so much to me in my own public service, my heart is full tonight. I thank you for all the love you've shown Tipper and me. You will forever be in our hearts.

There's someone else I'd like to thank, and that's the man who asked me to join him on the ticket at our convention 12 years ago, my friend -- and my partner for eight years -- President Bill Clinton.

I'll never forget that convention or that campaign -- the way we barnstormed the country, carrying a message of hope and change, believing with our whole hearts that America could be made new again.

And so it was. And with your help, and with the leadership of John Kerry and John Edwards, so it shall be again.

Thank you -- God bless you and your families -- and may God bless the United States of America.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm


Ellie

thedrifter
07-27-04, 06:38 AM
Last update: July 26, 2004 at 10:04 AM <br />
Two Protest Groups Clash Near DNC Center <br />
By THEO EMERY, Associated Press Writer <br />
July 26, 2004 0726AP-CVN-PROTEST <br />
<br />
<br />
BOSTON (AP) - As delegates...

enviro
07-27-04, 06:57 AM
I can't stand AL Gore with a passion, but he was pretty funny at times. It was like Jay Leno wrote his speech.

Sparrowhawk
07-27-04, 09:07 AM
Teresa's Ted K tirade
By David R. Guarino/ Herald exclusive
Read Guarino's Road to Boston Blog
Monday, July 26, 2004

Teresa Heinz Kerry, years before becoming a Democrat, railed against the party's ``putrid'' politics, said she didn't trust Sen. Edward M. Kennedy [related, bio] and angrily called the liberal lion a ``perfect bastard.''

In comments published in a little-known 1975 book about political wives called ``The Power Lovers: An Intimate Look at Politicians and Their Marriages,'' Heinz Kerry lashed out at the senator she'll share the primetime convention stage with tonight.

``I know some couples who stay together only for politics,'' Heinz Kerry said at the time. ``If Ted Kennedy holds on to that marriage (to ex-wife Joan) just for the Catholic vote, as some people say he does, then I think he's a perfect bastard.''

Heinz Kerry, then married to Republican Sen. H. John Heinz III of Pennsylvania, said she ``didn't trust'' President Richard M. Nixon but added, ``Ted Kennedy I don't trust either.''

The combustible and ever-quotable Heinz Kerry said of Democrats, ``The Democratic machine in this country is putrid.'' Excerpts of the comments appeared in The Boston Herald American in January 1976.

Coming a day after Heinz Kerry was caught on camera telling a reporter to ``shove it'' when the reporter questioned her on statements made in a Boston speech, the remarks could undercut Democrats' ability to showcase a positive message at the convention.

Kennedy's office dismissed the comments as water under the bridge and said the two get along famously now _ regardless of what Heinz Kerry has said in the past.

``Over the years, Sen. and Mrs. Kennedy and John Kerry [related, bio] and Teresa Heinz Kerry have developed a deep friendship and strong mutual respect,'' Kennedy spokesman David Smith said in a statement to the Herald.

``A 30-year-old quote dug up by the Republican attack machine made long before they became friends is irrelevant.''

Heinz Kerry's spokeswoman also said the quotes' age makes them irrelevant.

``You are talking about statements that are more than 30 years old. A lot has changed since then,'' said Marla Romash, a senior adviser to Heinz Kerry.

But it isn't the first time quotes have emerged in which Heinz Kerry targets the legendary Bay State senator.

In an interview with The Washington Post in 1971, Heinz Kerry declared, ``Ted Kennedy I don't trust, like I don't trust Nixon, although I think Nixon's done a helluva lot better than I thought he would.''

Just last year, Heinz Kerry said she regretted the comments she had made to the Post regarding Kennedy.

Romash noted the number of times Heinz Kerry has campaigned with Kennedy and said Victoria Reggie Kennedy will host a luncheon for Heinz Kerry this afternoon at the Museum of Fine Arts.

``There's a very good relationship now,'' Romash said.

She said Heinz Kerry stood by her comments about the Democratic machine, saying state Democratic parties in New Jersey and Pennsylvania at the time were ``a big problem,'' Romash said.

``I think there are a lot of people who would say there were problems in state parties in Pennslyvania and New Jersey,'' Romash said. ``Those problems don't exist anymore.''

<hr>
PS Couldn't help meself, when I saw this picture, I had to put a caption to it.. LOL
Cook

thedrifter
07-27-04, 09:26 AM
Veterans Set to Play Historic Role at Convention Over 500 Veteran Delegates in Boston; Veterans to Speak, Take Part in the Program and Satellite In; Thousands More Poised to Help Elect a 'Brother in
PR News Wire
July 26, 2004 0726BC-CVN-VETERANS-
BOSTON, July 26 /PRNewswire/ -- With the convention set to begin today, veterans from across the country have converged in Boston to play a historic role in Democratic Party history. Working hard to elect a 'brother in arms' as President of the United States, veterans today will hold the first ever Veterans Caucus at the convention and Kerry Vietnam Crewmate David Alston will speak in primetime about his service with Kerry.

At noon today, veterans will convene the first ever Veterans Caucus at a Democratic convention. Led by notable veterans like Wesley Clark, Senator Max Cleland, Senator Bob Kerry, General Kennedy and General Tony McPeak, they will talk about John Kerry's commitment to America's veterans. The convention is marked with unprecedented involvement of veterans, with veterans events every day including a grassroots 'Basic Training' to learn how they can help organize veterans in their local communities and help elect John Kerry.

"Kerry as a combat veteran, he has demonstrated his leadership under fire. John Kerry will be a strong Commander-In-Chief. We need his leadership in the White House," said General Tony McPeak.

Kerry's Vietnam crewmates will be active throughout the week. In addition to participating in the program on Thursday night before Kerry accepts the Democratic nomination, they will take part in events throughout the city, including stopping at the New England Shelter for Homeless Veterans and the Veterans' Benefit Clearinghouse, an organization established in 1977 to address the needs of Vietnam era veterans of color returning to civilian life in Boston.

Over 500 veterans are attending the convention as delegates -- a Democratic party record. Thousands more veterans have attended pre-convention rallies, taken part in a veterans motorcycle ride from California to Boston and are joining John Kerry and John Edwards as they blaze America's Freedom Trail to the convention and campaign for the White House in the coming months.

"The involvement of veterans in this convention and this campaign is tremendous, historic. The overwhelming support of veterans speaks to John Kerry's service -- his experience as a veteran," said John Hurley, Director of National Veterans for Kerry.

Tonight, David Alston will be a featured speaker. A former crewmate of Kerry's, Alston will address the convention, relaying his experience serving with John Kerry. On Wednesday, Retired Marine Lt. Col. Steve Brozak, a candidate for Congress in New Jersey, will speak from the podium about the Kerry-Edwards plan for a stronger, more secure America.

This year's convention features a special exhibit to highlight John Kerry's service, as well as honor veterans. Called "John Kerry: A Lifetime of Strength and Service," this photo exhibit is on display inside the FleetCenter and includes photos taken by John Kerry's crewmates.

Veterans this week will also fan out and speak at caucus meetings for all 50 states.

John Kerry and John Edwards will keep America's promise to our veterans. Their plan includes mandatory funding for VA healthcare to ensure that all of America's veterans are properly cared for including the 500,000 veterans who are currently excluded from the system under George Bush. Kerry supports full concurrent receipt which will provide disabled military retirees their full pensions.

The Kerry-Edwards campaign has set a goal of organizing 1 million veterans by Election Day. Recruited through the 50 state-level Veterans for Kerry organizations, these 1 million veterans will be used in grassroots, veteran- to-veteran operations, including phone-banks, canvassing and GOTV efforts.

INFO ON TODAY'S VETERANS CAUCUS:

12:00 PM ET

Veterans hold first ever veterans caucus.

Sheraton Boston Hotel Grand Ballroom West

Prudential Center

39 Dalton Street

Boston, Massachusetts 02199

***Satellite truck parking on Belvedere St. 700ft cable required.

Satellite trucks must be set by 9 am.

KEEPING FAITH WITH AMERICA'S MILITARY, THEIR FAMILIES AND OUR VETERANS

"I make this simple pledge: If I am president, I will fight for a constant standard of decency and respect for those who serve their country in our armed forces -- on active duty and as veterans. It should be no other way and if I am president, it will be no other way." -- John Kerry

John Kerry and John Edwards Will Ensure Access to Health Care for All Veterans. John Kerry and John Edwards will end the game of playing politics with funding for veterans health care. As president, Kerry will push for mandatory funding for veterans health care so that America never pits veterans in one state against veterans in another.

John Kerry and John Edwards Will End the Disabled Veterans Tax. John Kerry and John Edwards will fight to end the "disabled veterans tax," under which military retirees who receive both veterans' pensions and disability compensation must surrender a dollar from their military retirement pay for every dollar they get for disability compensation. The Bush administration has fought to keep this unfair tax in place.

Kerry-Edwards Will Streamline the Veterans' Health Care System. Too many veterans wait in line to receive health care from the Veterans' health care system. A Kerry-Edwards administration will work to streamline this process so that veterans hear in a timely manner about their status and their benefits. And they'll use America's technological know-how to cut administrative costs by eliminating the billions of dollars lost through waste, fraud, and abuse in the health care system.

John Kerry and John Edwards Will Ensure That All Military Reservists Have Health Care. Members of the National Guard and Reserve are fighting and dying alongside members of the active duty component. John Kerry and John Edwards believe that these brave Americans deserve access to the same level of healthcare as other soldiers on the battlefield. As part of his Military Family Bill of Rights, John Kerry supports legislation to provide access to TRICARE, the military's health care system, for all members of the National Guard and Reserves.

John Kerry and John Edwards Have a Plan to Address Rising Health Care Costs. Kerry-Edwards have a five-point plan to build a stronger America by controlling health care costs for all Americans, including providing families and businesses relief; cutting prescription drug costs; eliminating waste, fraud and abuse in the health care system; improving efficiency and quality of care; and making malpractice insurance more affordable.

http://www.JohnKerry.com Paid for by John Kerry for President, Inc.

Contributions or gifts to John Kerry for President, Inc. are

not tax deductible -- Printed in house -- Labor Donated

http://www.startribune.com/stories/569/4895157.html


Ellie

thedrifter
07-27-04, 02:53 PM
Tuesday, July 27, 2004 10:13 a.m. EDT
Networks Pull Plug on Teresa's Speech

The three major broadcast networks have pulled the plug on tonight's Democratic convention speech by Teresa Heinz Kerry - just two days after she went off the deep end by telling a report to "shove it" as TV cameras rolled.

ABC, NBC and CBS have decided to draw the curtain on Teresa's big night, canceling live coverage of tonight's proceedings altogether, as fears mount among Democrats that Heinz Kerry, a loose cannon who either bores audiences with her slow, monotonous drone or shocks them by talking about her Botox injections and other indelicate topics, will say something inappropriate.

Story Continues Below


Political campaign consultants tend to fear personalities like hers, notes USA Today, because they throw the campaign off-message.
That's exactly what happened Sunday night, when Teresa's "shove it" outburst took the spotlight away from her husband's trip to Fenway Park to throw out the first pitch.

And despite much-ballyhooed speeches Monday night by both Bill and Hillary Clinton, the most talked-about moment of the convention so far continues to be Teresa's temper tantrum.

"I don't think this is the time for quirky," said Terry Madonna, a political analyst at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, Pa., noting that while Heinz Kerry will still speak, she will read from a prepared text under strict instructions not to ad-lib.

Still, the pro-Kerry editors at the networks are playing it safe, just in case Teresa's temper flares again.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/27/101535.shtml


Ellie

thedrifter
07-27-04, 09:04 PM
GOP to track Kerry's 'extreme makeover' <br />
<br />
<br />
By Donald Lambro <br />
THE WASHINGTON TIMES <br />
<br />
<br />
BOSTON — The Democrats will be giving Sen. John Kerry &quot;an extreme makeover&quot; at their party's national...

Sparrowhawk
07-27-04, 10:40 PM
DEMS CLAIM NASA LEAKED PHOTOS TO SMEAR
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20040727/capt.sge.qhn56.270704071914.photo00.default-384x281.jpg
Kerry campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill claims 'dirty tricks' by NASA after it released 'surprise' photographs showing the Dem presidential hopeful dressed in a space suit crawling through a rocket hatch.

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




Begin Transcript:

HUME: i must ask you about this photograph that suddenly turned up and fell in our laps last night nobody thought it was come. nobody had reported on the event which led to-t but there he was, the senator, on all fours in this very peculiar outfit, which i guess nasa had given him. how did that come about?

CAHILL: well, yesterday senator john glenn, obviously he was an astronaut in his previous life sexrvings senator carr took a tour of a bio facility at nasa. it was just the two of them, and the nasa staff, and all of a sudden this is a leaked photo.

HUME: it was leaked?

CAHILL: yes.

HUME: it was made by nasa, right?

CAHILL: yes, it was.

HUME: so the campaign had no idea there would be any photographs.

CAHILL: none.

HUME: when it was agreed he would put on his th costume.

CAHILL: there was no press there. there was -- nothing. all of the sudden these photographs are out.

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040727/capt.jey13d07271628.campaign_kerry_jey13d.jpg


HUME: do you smell a dirty trick here?

CAHILL: well, what do you think?

HUME: that isa is not a particularly political organization.

CAHILL: this was a pledge i want tour, obviously that, senator glenn and senator kerry were taking at cape canaveral, and all of the sudden these photographs appeared, and, you know, take it as you may.

brit: well, is there any concern that this photo might prove as embarrassing as the fabled tank photo did in 1988?

CAHILL: you know, i think probably nasa will release the photograph of senator glenn, former astronaut, in the same –

HUME: in fact, there is a shot with a bunch of them in these outfits. he is not running, of course.

CAHILL: and the thing is this is a legitimate tour of a nasa facility, and this photograph appeared out of nowhere. we were surprised. we're not surprised now.

HUME: you don't have anyone in mind? do you think -- CAHILL: i don't.

END


<hr>


Here he is posing for the picture, but they now say, they didn't know there was a camera present... LOL


http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040726/capt.ny14707262349.kerry_ny147.jpg

Sparrowhawk
07-27-04, 11:04 PM
Excerpt of her remarks to the Democratic National Convention

"This evening, I want to acknowledge and honor the women of this world, whose wise voices for much too long have been excluded and discounted."

Her speech, had to be approved by her husband... before she was allowed to deliever it. LOL

hrscowboy
07-28-04, 01:49 AM
Ok cook i am confused now. A former Kerry Campaign rival retired Army Gen Wesly Clark had sided with Kerry and also John Glenn. and all these vietnam vets that appearing at the convention? What gives here Cook?

thedrifter
07-28-04, 06:57 AM
Kennedy, Obama say Bush has failed to live up to America's ideals





By David Espo
ASSOCIATED PRESS
2:38 p.m. July 27, 2004

BOSTON – In the keynote address of the Democratic National Convention, Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama accused President Bush Tuesday night of failing to level with the American people before the invasion of Iraq.

Painting a rhetorical portrait of presidential candidate John Kerry as a war hero who made "tough choices when easier ones were available," Obama faulted Bush's war policies without mentioning him by name.

"When we send our young men and women into harm's way, we have a solemn obligation not to fudge the numbers or shade the truth about why they're going," he said in prepared remarks.


"... And to never – ever – go to war without enough troops to win the war, secure the peace and earn the respect of the world," added Obama, who is heavily favored to become the third black elected to the Senate since Reconstruction.

Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota picked up on the same two-pronged approach, saying Kerry risked his life to save the lives of others.

At the same time, in a slap at the Bush administration, Daschle said, "We reject the claim that we can't afford to provide our troops with access to affordable health care. When our soldiers do right by America, we must do right by them," according to remarks prepared for delivery.

The convention oratory meshed nicely with Kerry's own campaign rhetoric. In an appearance in Norfolk, Va., he issued a fresh challenge to Bush to implement many of the anti-terror recommendations made by the Sept. 11 commission.

"Backpedaling and going slow is something that America can't afford," said the Massachusetts senator.

Kerry campaigned toward a waterborne arrival in his convention city on Wednesday as delegates settled in for a second evening of political speeches. Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, Kerry's vice presidential running mate, flew to Boston in advance of his own convention speech Wednesday.

The lineup of speakers ran from party stalwarts to promising politicians, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and keynoter Obama among them.

Kerry's wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, and Ron Reagan, son of a conservative icon, also had prime speaking slots.

Kennedy, a liberal icon for a generation, was a familiar figure to Democrats inside and outside the hall as he stepped to the podium in the city that has nourished his family's political ambitions for a century.

Obama isn't likely to need an introduction for long. The 42-year-old state senator is without a Republican opponent thus far in his campaign for the open Senate seat in Illinois.

Obama, the son of a goat herder from Africa and a woman from Kansas, presented himself as "part of the larger American story."

He said Kerry would tackle the nation's economic problems, expand health care opportunities, work for energy independence and preserve civil liberties in a time of terrorism.

"John Kerry believes in an America where hard work is rewarded, so instead of offering tax breaks to companies shipping jobs overseas, he'll offer them to companies creating jobs here at home," he said.

Faulting Bush's foreign policy, he said that Kerry "believes that in a dangerous world, war must be an option, but it should never be the first option."

"Just as Lt. Kerry did not hesitate to risk his life to protect the men who served with him in Vietnam, President Kerry will not hesitate one moment to use our military might to keep America safe and secure," Obama said.

With Bush's campaign constantly assailing Kerry as a liberal trying to run from his record, Obama said "there are those who are preparing to divide us" in the campaign ahead.

"There's not a liberal America and a conservative America, there's the United States of America," he said.

Noting that so-called red states traditionally vote for Republicans and blue states for Democrats, he added: "We worship an awesome God in the blue states and we don't like federal agents poking around our libraries in the red states. We coach Little League in the blue states and have gay friends in the red states."


http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/federal/20040727-1438-cvn-conventionrdp.html


Ellie

Sparrowhawk
07-28-04, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by hrscowboy
Ok cook i am confused now. A former Kerry Campaign rival retired Army Gen Wesly Clark had sided with Kerry and also John Glenn. and all these vietnam vets that appearing at the convention? What gives here Cook?

Don't forget that over 1,500 anti-war veterans protested against the war. That's how Vietnam Veterans against the War was founded. It is now Vietnam Verterans of America (http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=1999/6/14/121208).

Many of those protesting in Washington at that time were not real veterans, reports over the years has verified this. Many were. Some of those appearing with Kerry were with him in Nam, that have stood by him all these years, as registered democrats.

There are many Vietnam veterans that served with Kerry that have exposed his lies about what really happened in Vietnam. They had remained silent like many of us, but finally decided to unite and set the record straight on Kerry, because of Kerry's lies about what happened in Vietnam. He was no hero. The gook he shot was already dead. No one saw how he got his 1st Purple Heart. it may have been a practice grenade one of his friends threw. His Co, would not authorize it, so Kerry went over his head and with his connections received it.

All those stories are found in many places, I'll see if I can find them.


Today

VIETNAM VETERANS AGAINST JOHN KERRY will DEMONSTRATE AT Democrat National Convention In Boston



I have always voted for the person, never the party.

Here like Bush pointed out the democrats have always counted on the black vote even Hispanic vote because many are registered Democrats. Because their families have always been registered democrats. Sometimes I think, John F. Kennedy was far more right wing then many Republicans are today.

Many people vote Republican or Democrat, along party lines. That's what we now have with Clark and Glenn appearing with Kerry.

The next post reveals more of that.....

Sparrowhawk
07-28-04, 08:02 AM
Losers Fall in Line Behind Party's Choice
Jul 28, 2:42 AM (ET)

By WALTER R. MEARS

http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/thumbnails//CVN_DEAN.sff_DNC230_20040727213304.jpg

(AP) Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean gestures during his speech Tuesday, July 27, 2004, at the...
Full Image

BOSTON (AP) - Loser by loser, the candidates who wanted to be where John Kerry is now paraded across the stage for the last rites of defeat.

Brief rites - six or seven minutes to speak at the Democratic National Convention, and to call for party unity behind the man who beat them all for the presidential nomination.

Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich made a point of releasing the delegates they won in the primaries and urging them to vote for Kerry in the nominating roll call.

That gesture was more symbolic than real because the delegates are tied to their candidates by choice and emotion, not firmly bound to vote for them.

Kerry has nearly 3,000 of the 4,300-plus delegates in his column. John Edwards, once his rival, had about 530, but since Kerry enlisted him to run for vice president, they already were lined up for Kerry. Edwards is among the convention performers, but he is a defeated candidate with the consolation prize, the No. 2 spot on the ticket.

The nomination will be formal when Kerry's count reaches 2,163 delegate votes. There may be scattered holdouts until the traditional call comes to make him the nominee by acclamation.

Dean, the former Vermont governor who once led the field and then collapsed, won more than 100 delegates, and for some of them, voting against him isn't easy. He still is a sentimental favorite as a man who stirred the party before Kerry emerged to take it over.

That showed Tuesday night when Dean took the convention microphone, to an ovation that outdid that accorded the patriarch of Massachusetts Democrats, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. Kennedy got his rounds of cheers, but the crowd roared for Dean.

"I was hoping for a reception like this," Dean said, "I was just kinda hoping that it would be on Thursday night instead of Tuesday." Kerry will accept the nomination at the closing convention session on Thursday.

"To everyone who supported me, you've given me so much, and I can't thank you enough," Dean said. "I want to ask you to give one more thing: Give America President John Kerry."

His partisans generally went along, although some say it wasn't easy. "To be honest, will the passion be in my voice?" said Mony Baggett, of Everett, Wash., a doctor like Dean. "I don't know." Her campaign button read, "Deaniac for Kerry."

Sarah Schact, 24, of Oak Harbor, Wash., said switching from Dean was a bit like losing a first love. "You think, 'Oh, my God, I can never love again.' But you do learn to love again. And that's what Dean delegates are going to have to do."

Along with the Dennis Kucinich delegates. The Ohio congressman, who never had a real chance but kept campaigning even after acknowledging that Kerry was the nominee, endorsed Kerry shortly before the convention and urged his 64 delegates to vote for the senator. "It's hard for some people to understand the Democrats had such a fierce debate in the primary and then unite around John Kerry for president," he said.

He gets his turn on stage Wednesday night.

So does Sharpton, the closest thing to a wild card left, since he endorsed Kerry without dropping his futile candidacy, and hasn't said he's releasing his 20 or so delegates.

Wesley Clark has about as many delegate supporters as Kucinich. Carol Moseley Braun and retiring Rep. Dick Gephardt didn't win any delegates to be released. In turn, they pledged support to Kerry, the man they'd debated, sometimes harshly. Nor did Sen. Joe Lieberman, an early campaign casualty, or Sen. Bob Graham, an even earlier one, but they got their turns, too.

These Democrats had their arguments, but Democrats have seen far more bitter moments. In 1968, unity was a forlorn hope after a nomination campaign torn by the Vietnam War, and the anti-war delegates never did come around to the ticket. President Carter was renominated 2-to-1 over Sen. Edward M. Kennedy in 1980, but the challenger's delegates didn't yield until after the roll call.

Four years ago, Sen. John McCain was the defeated rival who pledged fealty to the campaign of George W. Bush at the Republican convention, and Bill Bradley played that role as the Democrats nominated Al Gore. Their acts were solos. Now it is a losers' chorus.

And when it ends, the record will show Kerry the nominee by acclamation.

---

EDITOR'S NOTE - Walter R. Mears, a retired AP special correspondent, has reported on national political conventions since 1964.

enviro
07-28-04, 08:19 AM
Trust me, these guys are by far in the minority when it comes to the military community. There's an old saying in the Marine Corps:

"There's always that 10% that _____________"

1. Didn't Get the word
2. Can't be depended on
3. Slip through the cracks
4. Can't conform
5. Insert your favorite line here....

Sparrowhawk
07-28-04, 09:32 AM
I was looking for;

Senator John Kerry has made his 4-month combat tour in Vietnam the centerpiece of his bid for the Presidency. His campaign jets a handful of veterans around the country, and trots them out at public appearances to sing his praises. John Kerry wants us to believe that these men represent all those he calls his "band of brothers."


But most combat veterans who served with John Kerry in Vietnam see him in a very different light.





http://www.swiftvets.com/images/KerryBrothers.jpg

http://www.swiftvets.com/images/20Vetsafter.jpg


SWIFT BOAT VETERANS for TRUTH (http://www.swiftvets.com/)

yellowwing
07-28-04, 12:04 PM
I count 11 'unfit'. Didja see this afternoon's CNN coverage of Kerry's dockside speach? He had 13 fellow boatcrewman by his side.

Here's an official transcript (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040210-3.html) on the other guy's spokesman try to dodge the question why haven't his 'Band of Brothers' come forth, even though they were offered $10k confirm his Alabama Guard duty.

enviro
07-28-04, 12:40 PM
Don't Michael Moore their story - the article said:

After arriving at Logan International Airport, Kerry sailed across Boston Harbor, accompanied by Vietnam War veterans.

I'm sure you could find a few Vietnam Vets that smoked way too much weed after the war and feel John Kerry is a hero.

yellowwing
07-28-04, 12:51 PM
I was quoting what the reporter said on air as his fellow boat crewmen filed past to shake his hand.

Michael Moore the story? I only wish I could make $100 million of off my schtick!

Here's another story on a dozen retired Admirals and Generals supporting (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5800398) Kerry. I guess now that they are retired they suddenly started hitting the bong?

eddief
07-28-04, 12:59 PM
I heard on CBS News on Monday that Kerry has cut into Bush's veteran support. Bush had a double digit lead, but now that's down to only 6 points. Damn those liberal vets! LOL!!

eddief
07-28-04, 01:03 PM
enviro
I wouldn't call him a hero, but at least Kerry went to 'Nam. Shrub was defending us from the VC in the Texas Air National Guard in an obsolete (for service in Vietnam) jet and snorting coke on his off time.

enviro
07-28-04, 01:12 PM
Now - that's an unfair accusation about Bush - (snorting coke)

I don't question his service, I didn't question Bill's draft dodging escapades either. I only question Kerry's because of what he did when he got home - ESPECIALLY throwing his ribbons (medals) over the fence. TO me, he's a disloyal fu(k. HE did nothing to make the plight of the Vietnam Vet any better - I think he made it worse.

eddief
07-28-04, 01:31 PM
He helped to get our troops home sooner. I say God bless him for that. The Gulf of Tonkin incident was a lie and Vietnam wasn't a threat to our national security. It was all about the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about. Our troops shouldn't die doing what the native population ought to be doing for themselves. When LBJ went beyond just having advisers in Vietnam I believe that was a mistake. This is not to dishonor the bravery and honor of those who fought there. My dad and uncle are among those who served over there. This is against the memory of LBJ and McNamara who I hope will both be burning in hell for sending our men into the meatgrinder for fatcat defense contractors and company men.

enviro
07-28-04, 03:30 PM
Yeah - He helped to get our troops home sooner and face retribution as baby killers, rapists, and etc... I say he can go screw himself for that.

I won't get into the causes of Vietnam. Personally I think the French are partially responsible.

Lock-n-Load
07-28-04, 03:57 PM
:marine:I'm not a Tim Russet follower, but he interviewed Kerry with the usual softballs; then, Russet brought up Kerry going before Congress in 1971...Kerry is on record spouting off about his Navy Fast River Boats shooting up the place in free fire zones...killing who knows what..raping at times, looting and killing gooks for sport...Kerry even admitted he was a war-criminal...all this rethoric before a Congressional panel in 1971...today The Navy Fast River Boat Assoc here at the FleetCenter...vehemently...DENIED...the River Boat vets ever did what Kerry stated before Congress way back...I give Russet high marks for this in-your-face slaps...Kerry measured his response slowly, hiding behind being a young outspoken and brash Navy Officer full of ...anger...as he put it...WOW!!...he blatantly branded himself as a war-criminal ...for attention before his first nation-wide public address [good olde live-shot] Kerry...the 250 members of the US Navy Fast River Boat Assoc..DENY..what Kerry sensationalized for his own personal political agendas...look how far it worked for him...he's running for ...President of these here United States...if by a miracle he wins...he can pat himself on the back as the 1st war-criminal as our President....I'm voting for GW Bush; GW may be imperfect in an imperfect world, but he's no war-criminal...what say you?? Semper Fi :marine:

eddief
07-28-04, 04:54 PM
I'm voting against Bush because of Iraq. Kerry isn't perfect, but he's not a PNAC neocon. I want to see all the warmongering neocons like Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz on the lecture circuit real soon. And Kerry doesn't need a miracle to win. This election is a toss-up. The country is divided and it won't be a mandate for whoever wins. I think I'd like to see Kerry win so we'll have a demo president and republican congress. That way the government won't be able to do so much damage to the republic. I also hope that Congess will take back their Constitutionally mandated responsiblity when it comes to declaring war instead of deferring it to the president like a bunch of gutless pussies.

thedrifter
07-28-04, 04:58 PM
Moore: Bush 'Didn't Tell the Truth'

Wednesday, July 28, 2004



BOSTON — This is a partial transcript from "The O'Reilly Factor," July 27, 2004 that has been edited for clarity.

Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET and listen to the "Radio Factor!"

It was a match-up the media and political observers have longed for. No, not George W. Bush against John Kerry. It's Michael Moore (search) against Bill O'Reilly.

Moore, the director who made "Fahrenheit 9/11" (search) and created one of the election season's biggest uproars, said he wouldn't go on "The O'Reilly Factor" until O'Reilly saw the entire movie. And he said any conversation would have to be aired without any editing and with the opportunity for Moore to ask O'Reilly questions.

All of the demands were met and Moore sat down with O'Reilly in the FOX News skybox high about the floor of the Democratic National Convention. Following is the full transcript of their meeting:

MICHAEL MOORE, FILMMAKER: That’s fair. We’ll just stick to the issues.

BILL O'REILLY, HOST: The issues… all right good. Now, one of the issues is you because you’ve been calling Bush a liar on weapons of mass destruction, the Senate Intelligence Committee, Lord Butler’s investigation in Britain and now the 9/11 Commission have all come out and said there was no lying on the part of President Bush. Plus, Vladimir Putin has said his intelligence told Bush there were weapons of mass destruction. Wanna apologize to the president now or later?

MOORE: He didn’t tell the truth, he said there were weapons of mass destruction.

O'REILLY: Yeah, but he didn’t lie, he was misinformed by — all of those investigations come to the same conclusion. That’s not a lie.

MOORE: Uh huh. So, in other words, if I told you right now that nothing was going on down here on the stage…

O'REILLY: That would be a lie because we could see that wasn’t the truth.

MOORE: Well, I’d have to turn around to see it and then I would realize, oh Bill, I just told you something that wasn’t true… actually it’s President Bush that needs to apologize to the nation for telling an entire country that there were weapons of mass destruction, that they had evidence of this and that there was some sort of connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11th, and he used that as a…

O'REILLY: OK, He never said that, but back to the other thing: If you, if Michael Moore is president…

MOORE: I thought you said you saw the movie? I show all that in the movie.

O'REILLY: Which may happen if Hollywood, yeah, OK, fine…

MOORE: But that was your question…

O'REILLY: Just the issues. You’ve got three separate investigations plus the president of Russia all saying… British intelligence, U.S. intelligence, Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass destruction; you say he lied. This is not a lie if you believe it to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious…

MOORE: Well, that’s almost pathological. I mean, many criminals believe what they say is true; they could pass a lie detector test…

O'REILLY: All right, now you’re dancing around a question…

MOORE: No, I’m not. There’s no dancing.

O'REILLY: He didn’t lie.

MOORE: He said something that wasn’t true.

O'REILLY: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources.

MOORE: Now you know that they went to the CIA, Cheney went to the CIA, they wanted that information, they wouldn’t listen to anybody.

O'REILLY: They wouldn’t go by Russian intelligence and Blair’s intelligence too.

MOORE: His own people told him. I mean, he went to Richard Clarke the day after September 11th and said, “What you got on Iraq?” and Richard Clarke’s going “Oh well this wasn’t Iraq that did this sir, this was Al Qaeda.”

O'REILLY: You’re diverting the issue… did you read Woodward’s book?

MOORE: No, I haven’t read his book.

O'REILLY: Woodward’s a good reporter, right? Good guy, you know who he is right?

MOORE: I know who he is.

O'REILLY: OK, he says in his book George Tenet looked the president in the eye, like how I am looking you in the eye right now and said, “President, weapons of mass destruction are a quote, end quote, ‘slam dunk.’” If you’re the president, you ignore all that?

MOORE: Yeah, I would say that the CIA had done a pretty poor job.

O'REILLY: I agree. The lieutenant was fired.

MOORE: Yeah, but not before they took us to war based on his intelligence. This is a man who ran the CIA, a CIA that was so poorly organized and run that it wouldn’t communicate with the FBI before September 11th and as a result in part we didn’t have a very good intelligence system set up before September 11th.

O'REILLY: Nobody disputes that...

MOORE: OK, so he screws up September 11th. Why would you then listen to him, he says this is a “slam dunk” and your going to go to war.

O'REILLY: You’ve got MI-6 and Russian intelligence because they’re all saying the same thing that’s why. You’re not going to apologize to Bush, you are going to continue to call him a liar.

MOORE: Oh, he lied to the nation, Bill, I can’t think of a worse thing to do for a president to lie to a country to take them to war. I mean, I don’t know a worse…

O'REILLY: It wasn’t a lie.

MOORE: He did not tell the truth, what do you call that?

O'REILLY: I call that bad information, acting on bad information; not a lie.

MOORE: A seven year old can get away with that…

O'REILLY: All right, your turn to ask me a question…

MOORE: “Mom and Dad it was just bad information…”

O'REILLY: I’m not going to get you to admit it wasn’t a lie. Go ahead.

MOORE: It was a lie, and now, which leads us to my question.

O'REILLY: OK.

MOORE: Over 900 of our brave soldiers are dead. What do you say to their parents?

O'REILLY: What do I say to their parents? I say what every patriotic American would say: “We are proud of your sons and daughters. They answered the call that their country gave them. We respect them and we feel terrible that they were killed.”

MOORE: But what were they killed for?

O'REILLY: They were removing a brutal dictator who himself killed hundreds of thousands of people.

MOORE: Um, but that was not the reason that was given to them to go to war: to remove a brutal dictator.

O'REILLY: Well, we’re back to the weapons of mass destruction.

MOORE: But that was the reason…

O'REILLY: The weapons of mass destruction…

MOORE: That we were told we were under some sort of imminent threat…

O'REILLY: That’s right.

MOORE: And there was no threat, was there?

O'REILLY: It was a mistake.

MOORE: Oh, just a mistake, and that’s what you tell all the parents with a deceased child, “We’re sorry.” I don’t think that is good enough.

O'REILLY: I don’t think its good enough either for those parents.

MOORE: So we agree on that.

O'REILLY: But that is the historical nature of what happened.

MOORE: Bill, if I made a mistake and I said something or did something as a result of my mistake but it resulted in the death of your child, how would you feel towards me?

O'REILLY: It depends on whether the mistake was unintentional.

MOORE: No, not intentional, it was a mistake.

O'REILLY: Then if it was an unintentional mistake I cannot hold you morally responsible for that.

MOORE: Really, I’m driving down the road and I hit your child and your child is dead.

O'REILLY: If it were unintentional and you weren’t impaired or anything like that.

MOORE: So, that’s all it is, if it was alcohol, even though it was a mistake — how would you feel towards me

O'REILLY: OK, now we are wandering.

MOORE: No, but my point is…

O'REILLY: I saw what your point is and I answered your question.

MOORE: But why? What did they die for?

O'REILLY: They died to remove a brutal dictator who had killed hundreds of thousands of people…

MOORE: No, that was not the reason…

O'REILLY: That’s what they died for…

MOORE: …they were given…

O'REILLY: The weapons of mass destruction was a mistake.

MOORE: Well there were 30 other brutal dictators in this world…

O'REILLY: Alright, I’ve got anther question…

MOORE: Would you sacrifice — just finish on this — would you sacrifice your child to remove one of the other 30 brutal dictators on this planet?

O'REILLY: Depends what the circumstances were.

MOORE: You would sacrifice your child?

O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself — I’m not talking for any children —to remove the Taliban. Would you?

MOORE: Uh huh.

O'REILLY: Would you? That’s my next question. Would you sacrifice yourself to remove the Taliban?

MOORE: I would be willing to sacrifice my life to track down the people that killed 3,000 people on our soil.

O'REILLY: Al Qaeda was given refuge by the Taliban.

MOORE: But we didn’t go after them, did we?

O'REILLY: We removed the Taliban and killed three quarters of Al Qaeda.

MOORE: That’s why the Taliban are still killing our soldiers there.

O'REILLY: OK, well look you can’t kill everybody. You wouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan — you wouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan, would you?

continued..........

thedrifter
07-28-04, 04:58 PM
MOORE: No, I would have gone after the man that killed 3,000 people.

O'REILLY: How?

MOORE: As Richard Clarke says, our special forces were prohibited for two months from going to the area that we believed Usama was…

O'REILLY: Why was that?

MOORE: That’s my question.

O'REILLY: Because Pakistan didn’t want its territory of sovereignty violated.

MOORE: Not his was in Afghanistan, on the border, we didn’t go there. He got a two-month head start.

O'REILLY: All right, you would not have removed the Taliban. You would not have removed that government?

MOORE: No, unless it is a threat to us.

O'REILLY: Any government? Hitler, in Germany, not a threat to us the beginning but over there executing people all day long — you would have let him go?

MOORE: That’s not true. Hitler with Japan, attacked the United States.

O'REILLY: From '33 until '41, he wasn’t an imminent threat to the United States.

MOORE: There’s a lot of things we should have done.

O'REILLY: You wouldn’t have removed him.

MOORE: I wouldn’t have even allowed him to come to power.

O'REILLY: That was a preemption from Michael Moore. You would have invaded.

MOORE: If we’d done our job, you want to get into to talking about what happened before WWI, whoa, I’m trying to stop this war right now.

O'REILLY: I know you are but…

MOORE: Are you against that? Stopping this war?

O'REILLY: No, we cannot leave Iraq right now, we have to…

MOORE: So, you would sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah? I want to hear you say that.

O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself..

MOORE: Your child? It’s Bush sending the children there.

O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself.

MOORE: You and I don’t go to war, because we’re too old…

O'REILLY: Because if we back down, there will be more deaths and you know it.

MOORE: Say, “I, Bill O’Reilly, would sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah.”

O'REILLY: I’m not going to say what you say, you’re a, that’s ridiculous…

MOORE: You don’t believe that. Why should Bush sacrifice the children of people across America for this?

O'REILLY: Look it’s a worldwide terrorism — I know that escapes you —

MOORE: Wait a minute, terrorism? Iraq?

O'REILLY: Yes. There are terrorist in Iraq.

MOORE: Oh really? So Iraq now is responsible for the terrorism here?

O'REILLY: Iraq aided terrorists. Don’t you know anything about any of that?

MOORE: So, you’re saying Iraq is responsible for what?

O'REILLY: I’m saying that Saddam Hussein aided all day long.

MOORE: You’re not going to get me to defend Saddam Hussein.

O'REILLY: I’m not? You’re his biggest defender in the media.

MOORE: Now come on.

O'REILLY: Look, if you were running he would still be sitting there.

MOORE: How do you know that?

O'REILLY: If you were running the country, he’d still be sitting there.

MOORE: How do you know that?

O'REILLY: You wouldn’t have removed him.

MOORE: Look, let me tell you something in the 1990s look at all the brutal dictators that were removed. Things were done; you take any of a number of countries whether its Eastern Europe, the people rose up. South Africa the whole world boycotted…

O'REILLY: When Reagan was building up the arms, you were against that.

MOORE: And the dictators were gone. Building up the arms did not cause the fall of Eastern Europe.

O'REILLY: Of course it did, it bankrupted the Soviet Union and then it collapsed.

MOORE: The people rose up.

O'REILLY: Why? Because they went bankrupt.

MOORE: the same way we did in our country, the way we had our revolution. People rose up…

O'REILLY: All right, all right.

MOORE: …that’s how you, let me ask you this question.

O'REILLY: One more.

MOORE: How do you deliver democracy to a country? You don’t do it down the barrel of a gun. That’s not how you deliver it.

O'REILLY: You give the people some kind of self-determination, which they never would have had under Saddam…

MOORE: Why didn’t they rise up?

O'REILLY: Because they couldn’t, it was a Gestapo-led place where they got their heads cut off…

MOORE: Well that’s true in many countries throughout the world…

O'REILLY: It is, it’s a shame…

MOORE: …and you know what people have done, they’ve risen up. You can do it in a number of ways . You can do it our way through a violent revolution, which we won, the French did it that way. You can do it by boycotting South Africa, they overthrew the dictator there. There’s many ways…

O'REILLY: I’m glad we’ve had this discussion because it just shows you that I see the world my way, you see the world your way, alright and the audience is watching us here and they can decide who is right and who is wrong and that’s the fair way to do it. Right?

MOORE: Right, I would not sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah and you would?

O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself.

MOORE: You wouldn’t send another child, another parents child to Fallujah, would you? You would sacrifice your life to secure Fallujah?

O'REILLY: I would.

MOORE: Can we sign him up? Can we sign him up right now?

O'REILLY: That’s right.

MOORE: Where’s the recruiter?

O'REILLY: You’d love to get rid of me.

MOORE: No, I want you to live. I want you to live.

O'REILLY: I appreciate that Michael Moore everybody. There he is.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,127236,00.html


Ellie

thedrifter
07-28-04, 06:27 PM
Democrats hopping mad over 'bunny suit' <br />
<br />
<br />
By Charles Hurt and Jennifer Harper <br />
THE WASHINGTON TIMES <br />
<br />
<br />
The campaign of Sen. John Kerry yesterday accused NASA of leaking a widely circulated photo...

enviro
07-28-04, 06:32 PM
No matter who wins, the dirtiness of politics will take on a new face. The Democrats have started an all out bitter war since Bush "stole" the White House.

If he's re-elected, they'll continue to try and block every move he makes and condemn him for it.

If Kerry is elected, Republicans will come back harder.

The only way for this to slow down is for one of the candidates to legitimately do something very wrong and lose the election big time. I.E. John Kerry beating his wife and telling her to keep her damn mouth shut. He gets arrested, he loses big time, and the Democrats get a big fat pie in their face.

Sparrowhawk
07-28-04, 07:32 PM
This guy has been planning all this from Vietnam, he didn't go there to fight communist, but to use the war to run for the presidency. <br />
<br />
We've been had... <br />
<br />
&lt;hr&gt;

Sparrowhawk
07-28-04, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by enviro
The only way for this to slow down is for one of the candidates to legitimately do something very wrong and lose the election big time. I.E. John Kerry beating his wife and telling her to keep her damn mouth shut. He gets arrested, he loses big time, and the Democrats get a big fat pie in their face.


All we have to do is for someone to ask Ms. Kerry why she wants us to trust her husband with our money when she won't trust him with hers?

Maybe someone after Thursday night's Kerry's speech, someone can ask Kerry if he has read the 9-11 Comission Report?

Word is out that he has said, he hasn't had time to read it... but calls for action right now?

Sparrowhawk
07-28-04, 08:28 PM
Originally posted by yellowwing
I count 11 'unfit'. Didja see this afternoon's CNN coverage of Kerry's dockside speach? He had 13 fellow boatcrewman by his side.

Wrong Yellowwing,


I don't watch CNN, but today I happened to catch that introduction, while he was on the boat. What you heard was what Kerry's wanted you to beleive was said.

When they introduced those in the background, they hid it with words that included both Vietnam veterans and who else was there that served with him, on his boat. I saw only one nod his head acknowledging that he was there with Kerry. The rest were not on his boat, but fellow veterans?


You'll see the same type of introduction tomorrow on C-Span, listen to how they are introduced.. This is a very deceitful individual.

eddief
07-28-04, 09:43 PM
Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican
A TvNewsLIES Reader contribution.
By John Gray Cincinnati, Ohio - jgray7@cinci.rr.com - July - 2004

Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and work as advertised.

All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn’t think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

Its noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe’s deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his life-time.

Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dads; his car is among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers didn’t want to make rural loans. The house didn’t have electric until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn’t belong and demanded rural electrification. (Those rural Republican’s would still be sitting in the dark)

He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn’t have to. After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.
He turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. (He doesn’t tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day) Joe agrees, “We don’t need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, I’m a self made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have”.

By John Gray Cincinnati, Ohio - jgray7@cinci.rr.com - Published July - 2004

enviro
07-28-04, 10:45 PM
Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican
By Kenny Haferkamp - Former Marine and Real Live person

Kenny gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning water and cereal bar. He fills his cup full of good clean drinking water from his delivered Sparkeletts dispenser because Kenny is an environmental specialist that worked for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality as an Environmental Investigator. He knows that all the liberal rants about more environmental laws is a load of croc because they just want to stiffle big business and not regulate municipal governments properly. He takes his daily Rol-Aids with his first swallow of water. His Rol-Aids are necessary to take because some liberal is trying to tax him more to pay for the lazy bastards who take advantage of the welfare system.

All of his medications and medical treatment are paid for by his employers medical plan because he now has a good job as the Environmental & Safety Manager for Pepsi. And he has decent medical care with the VA as he is a disabled veteran because liberals didn't get to cut the defense and veteran's spending bills this year. He doesn't eat bacon. Liberal's want you to believe that bacon is safe to eat, but it is high in fat content. Liberal's know this but Teddy Kennedy wants everyone to be bigger than him.

Kenny takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. However, we don't know if the chemicals are safe because some liberal and PETA stopped all animal testing. Guess he'll find out in a few years if he develops cancer. Kenny dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is nasty as hell because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air but rejected funding to support such laws in term of enforcing them and helping businesses comply with them. He drives to work for over an hour so his daughter doesn't have to go to an inner city school where liberals have taken away the pledge, allowed overcrowding by illegal immigrants, and pay teachers a miserable salary.

Kenny begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because his company doesn't have unions trying to squeeze every damn dollar out of the company to line their pockets since they union dues are so freaking high. Kenny is management and couldn't join a union anyways. This doesn't bother him since all of the workers are happy with their pay and benefits that start out at more than four times minimum wage. If Kenny is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because his company takes care of its employees. His company is allowed to do this because some republicans didn't try and kill the company with taxes.

Its noon time, Kenny doesn't need to make a Bank Deposit because he has Direct Deposit. Kenny's deposit is federally insured by the FDIC because some in 1933, a conservative congress and a conservative democratic president (Roosevelt) wanted to protect Kenny’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression.

Kenny has to pay his low interest, no-down-payment, VA backed, Mortgage and doesn't have to worry about student loans as his college was paid for by the military because republicans consistantly increase benefits for the military.

Kenny is home from work, he plans to take his daughter to soccer practice. He gets in his truck for the drive to the soccer fields; his truck is among the safest in the world because some republicans didn't try to tax him $1000.00 a year for a sin tax for driving a low gas mileage vehicle that is bigger and better made than a roller skate KIA.

He turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. Kenny agrees, “We don’t need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, I’m a self made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have” and "Thank God for the Fox New Channel on Sirius Satellite radio, other wise I would have to listen to bloated long winded liberals on all the other shows!"


I ain't connecting with your story Eddie.

thedrifter
07-29-04, 06:38 AM
US veterans remain sharply divided <br />
<br />
Vietnam vets in particular are torn over Kerry's combat record, while support for Bush is far from solidified. <br />
<br />
By Brad Knickerbocker | Staff writer of The...

thedrifter
07-29-04, 06:38 AM
Statement by Medal of Honor Recipient and Bush-Cheney ’04 Washington Veterans Chair General Pat Brady

SUMNER, WA – Medal of Honor Recipient and Bush-Cheney ’04 Washington Veterans Chair General Pat Brady issued the following statement regarding John Kerry and the Democrat National Convention:

“During John Kerry’s time in the Senate he has managed to vote for lower intelligence budgets, lower funding for veterans medical benefits, against higher pay for military families and both for and against the $87 billion dollar package that would provide body armor and increased benefits to the brave men and women serving overseas. Kerry has not yet provided a straight answer to the men, women and families of Operation Iraqi Freedom as to why he did not vote to fund them after sending them into harm’s way. One of those women in harm’s way was my daughter who served during the war in Iraq. I find his conduct on troop support irresponsible --even frightening. The senate record Kerry has provided shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the War on Terror, a lack of troop support, and a big reason why no Democrats are discussing it during their convention this week.”

“As a combat veteran I know from experience the importance of supporting our troops. John Kerry was right when he said a vote against funding our troops would be irresponsible but he was wrong to vote against it based on political winds. President Bush has a proven record of support our troops and the 25 million veterans that proudly served our nation.” He has earned and holds the highest respect of my daughter and her comrades.”

http://www.georgewbush.com/kerrymediacenter/Read.aspx?ID=3098


Ellie

thedrifter
07-29-04, 07:38 AM
July 28, 2004
Thursday's convention highlights
The convention will be in session from 4 p.m. to 11 p.m. EDT.

Major speakers in prime time:
--Retired Gen. Wesley Clark
--Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman
--House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi
--Alexandra and Vanessa Kerry introduce their father
--Former Georgia Sen. Max Cleland
--Presidential nominee John Kerry


Posted at 11:59 PM

A new beginning for Kerry
From Walter Mears

For John Kerry, this is the vital hour, his time upon a national stage to tell Americans who he is, what he seeks to do, and why he should be their president. After all the wearing miles, the countless campaign hours and speeches, the millions of dollars, Kerry, like any new presidential nominee, is beginning again.
So it is for the men who win presidential nominations and come before their national conventions to accept what they have sought so long -- as though there were doubt. It is called the acceptance speech, but for a nominee like Kerry, it really is the introduction, the keynote, the beginning of the ultimate campaign.

After his year-plus campaign for the Democratic nomination, Kerry already has told most of what he proposes to do should he win. But he has told it to limited audiences, first in the primary states, then, for nearly five months, in campaign speeches as the nominee in waiting.
But in those roles, he did not command national attention as he can Thursday night in the convention's climactic session. Nor can he expect to again before the Nov. 2 election, save in the campaign debates against President Bush. Like any challenger to an incumbent president, Kerry has a special challenge, since the White House provides Bush a pulpit he cannot match.

Kerry's major positions and proposals are on record. In his convention address, he's said to be planning to tell people more about himself, to break through the New England reserve and show the personal side.
He's told the war stories, dramatized his decorated Vietnam service by coming home to Boston on a harbor-crossing boat accompanied by fellow Navy crewmen from the swift boats he commanded in the Mekong Delta. That fits one of his chief campaign missions, to convince voters that he can lead from strength in the war on terror and national defense generally.

On that and other issues, Kerry needs to rebut the Republican television ad campaign and Bush's direct accusations that he is a flip-flopper, a senator on all sides of all sorts of issues.



Posted at 11:57 PM

A sneak-preview of Kerry's proposals
John Kerry gave a preview of his convention proposals in the victory speech he delivered on March 2, the night he effectively clinched the nomination in the primaries. His proposals then, and now:
_Repeal the Bush tax cuts for wealthy Americans, keep those for the middle class.
_Enact incentives to create manufacturing jobs and tax measures to punish, not reward, companies that move jobs abroad.
_Broaden health care programs toward eventual universal coverage.

Kerry said that night that Bush had "the most inept, reckless, arrogant and ideological foreign policy in the history of our country." Given his own campaign's admonitions against Bush's bashing at the national convention, he can't talk that tough himself. But he does have to renew the challenge he posted then: "If George Bush wants to make national security the central issue of the campaign of 2004 ... bring it on."
Convincing the voters that he is the right man to lead America in a time of war and terror is a special challenge for a 20-year Massachusetts senator with a liberal voting record. But Kerry can't beat Bush without persuading them on that above all.

Nor without convincing them that he is a leader they can learn to like, not some starchy, aloof Beacon Hill aristocrat. In his acceptance speech four years ago, Al Gore said "I know my own imperfections. I know that sometimes people say I'm too serious, that I talk too much substance and policy ... I know I won't always be the most exciting politician."
But Gore said the election choice shouldn't be based on a popularity contest because the presidency is "a day to day fight for the people," and he'd wage it.
Kerry's image problem is similar. Now it is his time to deal with it.


Posted at 11:53 PM

Pssst, cue the band
Somebody was sleeping at the Democratic switch late Wednesday when the convention officially made John Kerry its presidential nominee. It was a formality, but conventions usually whoop it up when their nominee gets his majority in the roll call of the states. These delegates cheered a bit after former Sen. John Glenn announced Ohio's unanimous vote for Kerry and said he was proud that it put him over the top.
But just a bit. Secretary Alice Germond started to resume the roll call before somebody remembered that they were supposed to celebrate and cued the band, which dutifully played "Celebrate," by Kool and the Gang. Even then, the rejoicing lasted a bare two minutes before the state-by-state call resumed.
Oh well, it was almost midnight after a long day.


To read more..........
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/external/apdigpol.ap.org/pblog/?SITE=CADIU&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT


Ellie

thedrifter
07-29-04, 10:32 AM
Kerry Embraces the Radical Feminist Agenda

July 28, 2004


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Carey Roberts

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

White males have been fleeing the Democratic Party over the last 30 years. Four years ago, candidate Al Gore managed to attract only 36% of the huge 45 million white male vote. That depressing trend no doubt weighed on the minds of the delegates who gathered this week in Boston for the Democratic National Convention.
Indeed, earlier this year Democratic pollster Celinda Lake began to spread the word that the Democrats would never retake the White House unless they began to reach out to the critical male vote. But the powerful feminist faction within the Democratic Party was none too happy with that idea.

Liberal John Kerry has closely aligned himself with the feminist cause. So when it became clear that Kerry would be named as the Democratic presidential candidate, Lake gave up on her crusade.

Of course the Democrats have every right to target women. But what is interesting is how the Kerry campaign plans to court the female electorate.

That strategy became apparent on the first day that John Kerry campaigned with his new running mate John Edwards. On July 7, an upbeat Kerry boasted that his team has “better vision, better ideas,” and – get this -- “we’ve got better hair.” Men, of course, have little interest in a candidate’s hairdo.

A look at the Kerry website reveals that Kerry believes that women will fall for all manner of obsequious pandering. This is what John Kerry is telling American women:

1. “We need a president who will put the American government and legal system back on the side of women.”
The truth is, practically every federal government agency has an office devoted to women’s issues. But none – that’s right, none -- has an office designated for men. The Congress and Supreme Court have enacted and upheld countless laws intended to help women, including the Violence Against Women Act, abortion rights, sexual harassment rules, and many others.

2. “John Kerry will increase funding for breast and cervical cancer research.”

The American Cancer Society reports that 230,000 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2004, compared to 216,000 women told they have breast cancer. But at the National Cancer Institute, funding for breast cancer outstrips prostate cancer by more than a 3:1 margin. Mr. Kerry, please help us to understand why any fair-minded woman would want to make that research disparity even worse?

3. “We must ensure that women earn equal pay for equal work.”

On average, men work 2,147 hours a year, compared to 1,675 hours for women. Men work in the more hazardous occupations such as construction and mining. And men have more work qualifications than women.

The myth of gender wage discrimination has been debunked by the Women’s Freedom Network and the Independent Women’s Forum. Anyone who still claims that women are paid unfairly is being intellectually dishonest….or is a die-hard socialist.

American women are arguably the most privileged of any group in history. But the Kerry-Edwards website makes it sound like women are on the verge of being shipped back to their suburban concentration camps: “But today, women are witnessing an unprecedented erosion of their basic rights.”

This past Monday, Kerry’s strategy to advance the radical feminist agenda was unveiled at a so-called “She Party” (rhymes with Tea Party – get it?). The featured speaker was the feminists’ “secret weapon:” none other than Peggy Kerry, sister of John.

And Peggy didn’t beat around the bush. “There are three things my brother is going to do when he’s elected president,” she promised. John will restore $34 billion in funding for the UN Population Fund for abortion services. Then he will assure the Senate ratifies the Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. Third, Kerry will “appoint pro-choice judges to the Supreme Court.”

There’s no doubt that the Democrats’ appeal to the massive white male electorate will continue to decline. So the question is, what will American women think of John Kerry’s sexy new hairdo?


Carey Roberts

http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/r/roberts/2004/roberts072804.htm


Ellie

thedrifter
07-29-04, 12:27 PM
Dems Proclaim 'Stronger, More Secure America' as Kerry is Nominated <br />
<br />
By Steve Roeder <br />
Talon News <br />
July 29, 2004 <br />
<br />
Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry was officially nominated by the Democratic Party on...

Sparrowhawk
07-29-04, 01:54 PM
In tonight's DNC John Kerry will be trying to identify himself to the American public. Here you get an insight on who he really is and can judge for yourself.

On Attacking President During Time Of War
On Death Penalty For Terrorists
1991 Iraq War Coalition
View Of War On Terror
Funding For Our Troops In Iraq



Who Is John Kerry? (http://stupidpoliticians.bizland.com/Kerry.chtml)

eddief
07-29-04, 03:08 PM
enviro
It's too bad you didn't like that little story. The fact is that without liberals this country would go fascist in a heartbeat. Of course if there were no conservatives it would go communist. We need the balance of liberal vs conservative.

enviro
07-29-04, 03:35 PM
It's pretty much why I am moderate and would definitely support a moderate party.

thedrifter
07-29-04, 03:43 PM
John Edwards, His Land of OZ
Written by Gordon Bloyer
Thursday, July 29, 2004


John Edwards says there are two Americas. He is right. There is the America most Americans live in and then there is the imaginary America that Edwards and all those delegates to the Democrat convention live in.

In the movie "The Wizard of Oz" little Dorothy goes from the black and white world she lived in, to the colorful world of Oz. At the Democrat convention John Edwards takes us from the REAL America to a dark black America he Al Franken and Michael Moore imagine. In little Johnny’s America most people are poor. grandma can’t get her drugs, most people work in dead end jobs or they can’t get a job, health care does not exist unless you are rich, no one can go to college unless the government pays for it, no one can get a raise unless the government can pass a law to give them one, and everyone needs a trial lawyer to protect them against the evil corporations. In their America our young people are being killed in a war that NO ONE supports. The President of Johnny’s America lies to the citizens every day and only he and John Kerry recognize the lies.

This America is so dark and evil, I wonder why thousands of people are crossing the borders daily to get here? I wonder how 66% of Americans own their own homes? I wonder why the colleges are so crowded? I wonder why the economy is rolling along at a pace not seen in twenty years? I wonder why Michael Moore, Al Franken, Alec Baldwin, Barbra Streisand, Rob Reiner and Susan Sarandon live here? I wonder why President Bush is not twenty points behind in the polls.

The America little Johnny and the Democrats live in is so out of touch with reality, you have to wonder where they get these ideas? Could it be from their willing accomplices in the media? The "we distort you decide" crowd at the networks refuse to give the good news about the economy, they mislead Americans about what is going on in Iraq and they will never describe anyone as a liberal. John Kerry and John Edwards are trying to hide behind the curtain. It is time to click the heels on our ruby slippers and come back to the real America. It is time to stop pitting people against each other with this phoney class warfare. I don’t think people are going to be fooled in November. Kerry and Edwards will be left standing with their rear ends exposed, running from Barney Frank. The America that the "Two Johns" live in does not exist.

I find it hard to believe the Democrat Party has sunk so low. They depend on the ignorant, the uneducated, the uninformed and non-citizens to win elections. They depend on lies, distortions and fear. They are an angry defeated group. This election could be the turning point in the history of the party. A big defeat could send them into oblivion. Let us hope so. Hope is on the way.

The Gordon Bloyer Show can be seen at... http://gordonbloyershow.com/


About the Writer: Gordon Bloyer has been called a Renaissance man by Ronn Owens of KGO radio in San Francisco. Rush Limbaugh read from a letter by Gordon on his national radio show. President Ronald Reagan invited Gordon to the White House to thank him for his support. He has appeared on numerous radio and television shows. .

http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=8736


Ellie

thedrifter
07-29-04, 06:25 PM
John Kerry and War

Published: July 29, 2004

When he accepts the Democratic presidential nomination tonight,

John Kerry needs to give the nation a clearer idea of how his choices would have differed from President Bush's - particularly when it comes to the war in Iraq. The nation deserves to be told whether Mr. Kerry would have voted to authorize the invasion if he had known that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction.

Mr. Kerry, as the world already knows, is not a black-and-white kind of thinker, especially when it comes to foreign policy. That's good - it should give voters a real sense of choice this fall, given George Bush's tendency to view the world in absolutes. But it's not an excuse for fudging every issue. Mr. Kerry's history on the critical Iraq question has been impossibly opaque. He voted to authorize Mr. Bush to go to war. He voted against $87 billion to pay for extra costs - after offering an amendment to raise the money by increasing taxes on the wealthy. That produced the infamous explanation, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.''

Mr. Kerry is very, very sorry for that phrasing. His campaign is well aware that if he had simply said, "I voted to spend the money - I just opposed increasing the deficit," the Republicans would have been deprived of one of their most salient commercials. We hope he's also sorry that he tried to parse his votes both ways during the difficult days of the Democratic primaries, when Howard Dean's antiwar candidacy was breathing down his neck.

Mr. Kerry and his running mate, John Edwards, have said that they voted to give the president the power to go to war to strengthen Mr. Bush's hand with the United Nations. They also had been given alarming intelligence reports, which they believed were accurate, showing that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling biological and chemical weapons and at least attempting to develop nuclear bombs.

Those reports were wrong, and Congress was wrong in presuming that Mr. Bush would go the last mile to get United Nations support. We can appreciate Mr. Kerry's complaints that he was misled on both counts. But he and Mr. Edwards have refused to say whether they would have acted differently if they had known then what they know now. That's unfair. When it comes to using force abroad, voters deserve a clear idea of how high Mr. Kerry would raise the bar from where Mr. Bush lowered it.

We know that Mr. Kerry does not rule out preemptive strikes if a country poses a clear and serious danger to the United States or its allies - that's longstanding American policy, and it's in the U.N. charter. But that was not the case with Iraq.

Saddam Hussein was a vicious dictator, certainly, who was continuing to disdain United Nations resolutions on weapons of mass destruction and refusing to give full access to weapons inspectors. But we know now that because of the resolutions and the inspections, Mr. Hussein no longer had the forbidden weapons, even if he still harbored ambitions of getting them someday. Knowing that, Mr. Bush still insists that he was right to invade. He says the war was justified because of Mr. Hussein's military ambitions and because Iraq is better off without him.

Voters need to know whether Mr. Kerry agrees. Or would he have held back on invading Iraq and chosen instead to pursue the hunt for Osama bin Laden and the destruction of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and to focus diplomatic resources on places like North Korea and Iran? Mr. Kerry's advisers don't want more accusations of flip-flopping, and they've told him to avoid hypotheticals. But while voters are certainly prepared to accept a candidate with a complex worldview, they also value the courage that comes with occasionally taking a leap and giving an answer that's straight and simple.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/29/opinion/29thu1.html?hp


Ellie

thedrifter
07-29-04, 08:40 PM
&quot;I have no intention of using it.&quot; <br />
What John Kerry once said about the footage of him in Vietnam. <br />
by Stephen F. Hayes <br />
07/29/2004 4:00:00 PM <br />
<br />
Boston <br />
THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION will...

Sparrowhawk
07-29-04, 11:15 PM
DNC CONVENTION DIRECTOR DON MISCHER AIRED ON CNN AS KERRY ENDS SPEECH, HEARD WORLDWIDE: 'No confetti. No confetti yet. Go balloons. Go balloons. More Ballons. All balloons. All balloons. Come on guys, let's move it! Jesus. We need more balloons. I want all balloons to go, *******! No confetti. No confetti. No confetti. I want more balloons. What's happening to the balloons? We need more balloons. We need all of them coming down! Balloons. Balloons. Balloons. What's happening! They're not coming down. All balloons. Where the hell! Nothing is falling. What the fu*k are you guys doing up there? We want more balloons coming down. More balloons. More balloons'...

where's the F***ing balloons? mp3 (http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc.mp3)


http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040730/capt.dnc15907300309.cvn_kerry_dnc159.jpg

thedrifter
07-30-04, 06:17 AM
Gays to gain in Kerry White House


By Cheryl Wetzstein
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


BOSTON — A parade of Democratic leaders and Hollywood stars, including Ben Affleck, yesterday reassured homosexual delegates and advocates that they have a lot to gain by defeating the Bush administration and electing a Kerry administration.
"If nothing else, you will have a mom in the White House," Teresa Heinz Kerry said before the packed hotel room of homosexual delegates and advocates.

"You're pushing the envelope, and we, as a country, have to respond with policies and cultural acceptance," said Mrs. Kerry, wife of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry.
Dignity and respect are paramount qualities, she said. If any of the Kerry children were to say they were homosexual and wanted to marry their partner, she said, "I would ... share my joy and my pride with all my friends," just as if they were marrying someone of the opposite sex.
One of her better-known qualities, Mrs. Kerry added, is "that I like to nurture" people, and family members and friends sometimes call her "Dr. T" or "Momma T." As she departed, the crowd chanted, "Momma T, Momma T!"
Boston-born Mr. Affleck joked about his famous marriage woes, but quickly attacked political efforts to block same-sex "marriage."
"As somebody, to be perfectly frank, who has enough trouble figuring out who to get married [to], I don't need the state or federal government telling me who I can or can't marry," said the star of "Good Will Hunting" and "Armageddon."
Hollywood actor and director Rob Reiner said the Bush administration's support for the Federal Marriage Amendment was just one more "irrefutable" reason to defeat him in November.
"This, in fact, is the most important election in our lifetime," said Mr. Reiner, whose sentiments were echoed by actors Robert Gant of Showtime's "Queer as Folk" and Steve Buscemi, formerly of HBO's "The Sopranos."
About a dozen Democratic politicians said they would work to advance homosexual interests, including passing laws to allow domestic partners to share Social Security benefits, expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act to include domestic partners and defeating a recently passed House bill that disallows federal courts to rule on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act.
Instead of pushing for a federal marriage amendment, lawmakers should reverse course and push for a "gay rights constitutional amendment," said Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, New York Democrat.
"Let's go on the offensive," she yelled to the crowd. "I'm tired of being on the defensive."
"The stakes have never been higher," said Rep. Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin Democrat and the first openly lesbian official elected to Congress.
"We have an extraordinary presence at this conference," she said, noting she was appointed conference vice chairman and gave a prime-time speech. Homosexuals should support the Democratic ticket because "our nominee for president is the most pro-gay nominee in U.S. history."
The homosexual community "is no longer put on the sidelines," said New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. "You're an essential part of the Democratic family."



http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040729-120324-4788r.htm


Ellie

thedrifter
07-30-04, 06:29 AM
Kerry casts Bush as unfit
to lead frayed military
Democratic presidential nominee
promises ‘help is on the way’
”I’m John Kerry, and I’m reporting for duty,” Sen. John Kerry told cheering delegates at the start of his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention.

By Alex Johnson
Reporter
MSNBC
Updated: 11:58 p.m. ET July 29, 2004Pledging to “restore trust and credibility to the White House,” Sen. John Kerry accepted the Democratic presidential nomination Thursday night by promising to defeat terrorism but to “never mislead us into war.”


As he bounded up on the podium at the FleetCenter in Boston, Kerry, 60, the junior senator from Massachusetts, saluted sharply and said, “I’m John Kerry, and I’m reporting for duty!” He then challenged President Bush on the war in Iraq and told Democratic delegates and a national audience that he would “bring back this nation’s time-honored tradition: The United States of America never goes to war because we want to; we only go to war because we have to.”

For all four days of the Democratic National Convention, most speakers obeyed party leaders’ instructions to avoid attacks on Bush. But when Kerry took the podium shortly after 10 p.m. ET — wading through the crowd of delegates on the floor to the strains of Bruce Springsteen’s “No Surrender” — he brought with him an indictment charging the administration with abandoning U.S. forces overseas during wartime, misusing the Constitution “for political purposes” and selling out the middle class to wealthy special interests.

After four years of the Bush administration, he said, the task at hand was to “reclaim democracy itself.” He accused Bush and his team of “wrapping themselves in the flag and shutting their eyes and ears to the truth,” declaring: “We are here to affirm that when Americans stand up and speak their minds and say America can do better, that is not a challenge to patriotism; it is the heart and soul of patriotism.”

Kerry a ‘hero’; Bush a ‘fraud’
Throughout the convention, speaker after speaker had reminded delegates of Kerry’s service in Vietnam, a theme that was culminated when he was joined on the podium by several of his former Navy crewmates.

He was introduced by former Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia, who lost three limbs in Vietnam. Cleland emotionally described Kerry as “an authentic American hero” who had “never let me down.”

Retired Gen. Wesley Clark, whom Kerry defeated for the presidential nomination, made the other half of the Democrats’ military case against Bush. Clark brought the crowd to its feet earlier in the evening with a hard-edged address in which he denounced the president from the perspective of a career soldier.

In particular, Clark accused Bush of acting as though the Republicans had “a monopoly on the best defense of our nation.” By doing so, he said, Bush was “committing a fraud on the American people.”

“Enough is enough,” Clark said. “A safe America — a just America — that’s what we want; that’s what we need.”

News analysis
Tom Curry: Speech leaves unanswered questions



‘Help is on the way’
Speaking from the perspective of a decorated veteran, Kerry argued that Bush had cynically led the United States into war in Iraq on false pretenses.

“Saying there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq doesn’t make it so,” Kerry said. “Saying we can fight a war on the cheap doesn’t make it so. And proclaiming ‘mission accomplished’ certainly doesn’t make it so.”

Kerry accused Bush of letting the military wither even as it was fighting a deadly war thousands of miles away.

“We will add 40,000 active-duty troops, not in Iraq, but to strengthen American forces that are now overstretched, overextended and under pressure,” he said, specifically criticizing the administration for recalling National Guard members and reservists to active duty after they had completed their presumed commitments, a practice he denounced as “the backdoor draft.”

“On my first day in office, I will send a message to every man and woman in our armed forces: You will never be asked to fight a war without a plan to win the peace,” he said.

“To all who serve in our armed forces today, I say: Help is on the way.”

And he had promises for Democrats concerned by what many have characterized as the arrogance of the Bush administration:

“I will be a commander in chief who will never mislead us into war.

“I will have a vice president who will not conduct secret meetings with polluters to rewrite our environmental laws.

“I will have a secretary of defense who will listen to the best advice of our military leaders.

“And I will appoint an attorney general who actually upholds the Constitution of the United States.”

Echoes of Clinton
A binding theme throughout was Kerry’s contention that the United States had lost much of its respect around the world by marching into Iraq without significant allied support.

“We need to make America once again a beacon in the world,” Kerry says. “We need to be looked up to and not just feared.”

But even as he denounced the president, Kerry portrayed Democrats as “optimists” who were more interested in looking to the future than to the past. At one point, he addressed Bush directly:

“In the weeks ahead, let’s be optimists, not just opponents. Let’s build unity in the American family, not angry division,” he said. “Let’s honor this nation’s diversity, let’s respect one another and let’s never misuse for political purposes the most precious document in American history, the Constitution of the United States.”

At the same time, Kerry completed the party’s rehabilitation of former President Bill Clinton, who was virtually cast aside four years ago by his own vice president, Al Gore.

Kerry urged Americans to recall the Clinton years, when “we balanced the budget, we paid down the debt, we created 23 million new jobs, we lifted millions out of poverty and we lifted the standard of living for the middle class.”

“We just need to believe in ourselves, and we can do it again,” he said.

Kerry’s promises
Following are the main campaign promises Sen. John Kerry made in his speech accepting the Democratic presidential nomination Thursday night:
— Cut the deficit in half over four years by ending corporate tax cuts.
— Offer targeted tax breaks for the middle class; roll back tax cuts to people earning over $200,000 a year.
— Close tax loopholes to companies moving jobs abroad and give breaks to firms keeping good-paying jobs at home.
— Pledge not to privatize Social Security or to cut benefits.
— Invest in new technology and alternative fuels to lessen U.S. dependence on foreign oil.
— Pledge never lead the United States into a preemptive war.
— Immediately implement the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission and reform intelligence gathering.
— Rebuild alliances with other nations.
— Ensure the United States would lead the global effort against nuclear proliferation.
— Add 40,000 active-duty troops; double the number of U.S. Special Forces.
— End the military’s heavy reliance on National Guard and military reservists.
— Offer incentives that would save families $1,000 a year on health insurance costs; allow Americans to buy prescription drugs from countries like Canada.

Text of Kerry's acceptance speech
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5552784/

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5344731/


Ellie

thedrifter
07-30-04, 08:58 AM
. . . with muzzles


By Donald Lambro


BOSTON. — John Kerry is nominated this week on a surge of anti-Bush feelings that became so intense Democrats told pollsters they were driven more by their hatred for the president than by any warm connection to the aloof Massachusetts liberal.
But hatred is an unpredictable political weapon that can backfire. Ask Howard Dean. Days before Mr. Kerry arrived here to accept the Democratic nod, he was told by the party's elder statesmen an anti-Bush diatribe alone could not win back the White House. He had to can the hatred, cool the party's passions and find a substantive vision for his campaign.

The often distant, emotionless Mr. Kerry clearly had some heavy lifting to do at the national convention this week to turn himself into a warmer, well-liked candidate that swing voters would actually want to vote for, senior party people told me. But first he had to stop bashing Mr. Bush and start talking about what he would do as president.
"Kerry has to give an extraordinary good speech," said Democratic strategist Harold Ickes, a top White House adviser to President Clinton. "A lot of what is propelling him is just anti-Bush sentiment. But, in order to close the sale with the people, he needs to lay out where he wants to take the country."
"The anti-Bush theme is not enough. It's been a large part of his campaign. He's been saying a lot of things, but it hasn't come into focus," Mr. Ickes told me just before the convention.
Mr. Ickes was also blunt about the senator's weaknesses going into this convention and the final stages of the campaign. One, he says, is that despite 20 years in the Senate, Mr. Kerry never really achieved a national reputation for anything beyond being a usually reliable liberal vote out of 100 lawmakers. "There are a lot of uncommitted voters but they don't know nearly enough about Kerry for him to close the deal. He is not a national senator. He was not a national personage," Mr. Ickes said.
"The bad news for the president is that traditional swing voters are open to an alternative. The good news for the president is that Kerry is not that well known among people that they are prepared to say yes to him."
Leon Panetta, Mr. Clinton's former White House chief of staff, had similar advice for Mr. Kerry at the start of the convention. "They've got to keep the Bush-bashing down because basically that conveys the impression that the campaign's about hate as opposed to hope," Mr. Panetta told me.
"And they've got to keep the issues as close to the center as possible," he added because the election will be decided by swing, middle-of-the-road voters. "Clearly the convention model they wanted to replicate is what Clinton did in 1992 and the momentum that followed Clinton's convention speech" that paved the way to his election.
The early convention speeches by Mr. Clinton, Al Gore and others suggest Mr. Kerry has eased the convention's hot rhetoric. But can he close the deal with voters with his own speech Thursday night?
No one ever accused Mr. Kerry of being a compelling speaker. In most pre-primary candidate forums, his lackluster podium performance paled compared to Howard Dean's palpable antiwar anger that often lifted Democrats to their feet.
But Mr. Kerry faces other obstacles Mr. Bush's campaign will exploit. How is it possible the senator could vote for the war resolution on Iraq to send our troops to war and then vote against the money to defend them? How could he vote for the anti-terrorism Patriot Act and then turn around and denounce it to curry favor with anti-war Dean voters? How could he vote against the death penalty for terrorists?
Republican National Chairman Ed Gillespie and a team of party officials were here this week to recite Mr. Kerry's 20-year voting record and to define him as a flipflopper who did not have the courage of his convictions. The Democrats were attempting an "extreme makeover" to cover up his real voting record and turn him into a Clinton-look-alike centrist, Mr. Gillespie told reporters this week.
Can it work? We'll know from the post-convention polls. But there were deeper currents that trouble Democratic veterans:
First, the latest state-by-state polls show Mr. Bush now leads Mr. Kerry in the electoral count, the only number that really matters in the end.
Second, Mr. Kerry's biggest regional weakness, in the Southern states, has gotten weaker. He pulled his ads out of Louisiana and Arkansas because polls show him running behind Mr. Bush in both states. North Carolina, running mate John Edwards' home state, tilts heavily in Mr. Bush's favor. The Gallup Poll this week shows Mr. Bush ahead in Florida by 4 points.
"Florida is close, but the rest of the South will stay with Bush because Southerners support him on Iraq and trust him more on the economy," said Merle Black. the veteran southern political scientist at Georgia's Emory University. If Mr. Bush sweeps the South, the Kerry-Edwards ticket will need to "take 70 percent of the remaining electoral college vote. That's hard to do but it's certainly possible," Mr. Black told me.
Meanwhile, Democratic graybeards say Mr. Kerry needs to embrace some great idea larger than his political ambitions and more inspiring than his party's ugly hatred for George Bush.

Donald Lambro, chief political correspondent of The Washington Times, is a nationally syndicated columnist.


http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20040728-081954-2477r.htm


Ellie

thedrifter
07-30-04, 09:15 AM
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth

The purpose of this photo is to correct the misleading use of our images -- against our will -- to further John Kerry's campaign.

http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php?topic=SwiftPhoto


Ellie

thedrifter
07-30-04, 07:51 PM
‘Just Not True’ <br />
Kerry Accuses Bush of Distorting His Record <br />
ABCNEWS.com <br />
S C R A N T O N, Pa., July 30, 2004— A day after delivering his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention,...

thedrifter
07-31-04, 07:35 AM
Speaking for Kerry
The Democrats can't decide on a message, but have plenty to say in Boston.

BY PEGGY NOONAN
Thursday, July 29, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT

The major American political conventions have become like the party conferences of the conservative Tory and liberal Labour parties in England. The point is to showcase the party's reigning and rising stars. There's some arguing and maneuvering in the background but it's in smoke-free green rooms, and it's not between politicians but media consultants, and it's over things like whether the spermatozoa-esque pictures of John Kerry crawling in a dust free space suit should be a) laughed off, or b) responded to with dark suggestions of leaks by NASA operatives. They went with plan b, and a fluke became a story. Sometimes candidates must think like the king in Shakespeare: "First thing, let's kill all the consultants."





Unlike most Americans I have been watching it all on TV. I am enjoying it because I love politics and speeches. Some observations.
So far, a lot of the speeches have seemed to be an expression of the Democratic Party's persistent problem, which is that it can't seem to decide on a message. The speeches have been about everything--health care, technology, minimum wage--but a speech about everything is a speech about nothing. You have to decide.

Some of the speeches had a stale, canned and fulsome quality. Ted Kennedy seemed ponderous and heavy. With his new round glasses he looks like old pictures of his father if his father had grown corpulent. He brought out old chestnuts, quoted JFK, tried mightily to rouse. "John Kerry offers hope, not fear." "An economy that works for everyone." "That's the kind of America we'll have with John Kerry in the White House." He has outlived his rhetorical age. It was the speech of someone desperate to move you. Speeches like this never do.

When Barack Obama began his speech everyone watching thought: A star is born. Talk about famous overnight. His Bill Cosby-esque line--"the slander that a black youth with a book is acting white"--was right for the times, which is to say in line with common wisdom, and when he spoke of blue states where "we worship an awesome God," he was not just hitting a note but using the authentic language of American evangelism. When you first see him he is a plain man of irregular features and jug ears. But when he begins to speak his features blend into harmony and handsomeness. This kind of thing only happens if you have magic. At one point the C-Span cameras went to an unhappy looking Jesse Jackson in the stands. He looked like he was thinking, "I don't remember passing a torch." But it was passed.

Teresa Heinz Kerry's speech was an odd and interesting mix, just like Teresa Heinz Kerry. She is such a distinctive personality, so unusual as a presidential candidate's wife, that when she began to thank the delegates in five languages a friend asked me with some alarm if she was speaking in tongues. It was weird that she didn't talk much about her husband--if she doesn't have special insights or stories to share on him who does?--but it was fun when she dealt with her verbal indiscretions by breezily calling herself "opinionated." What saves Mrs. Heinz Kerry is a singularity, an individualism, and a retained femininity. She seems like someone who'd come to your house with homeopathic medicine if you had a sinus infection. But there's a disconnect. There is about her too an air of grievance--the sighs, the resigned shrugs--as if she feels she has been a victim of unusual suffering. She seems not to have noticed that all her life she has been a child of privilege. It's odd. I wonder sometimes if some liberals have somehow never been told that bad things happen in life, and who are constantly perplexed by whatever misfortunes befall them.

Hillary Clinton was in comparison cold, robotic and too heavily botoxed. At a certain point Botox can become a problem for those in public life. Mrs. Clinton now has to pop her eyes out to show excitement. Worry lines are honorable, and in Mr. Clinton's wife they are understandable. She should keep them. She has obviously been practicing public speaking--her voice was lower, more modulated and less screechy than usual. Her speech was full of assertion--"I know a thing or two about health care"--but lacking in wit or grace. As always she seemed full of certitude and lacking in sincerity.

Ron Reagan is too coached in media. He has the smooth round tones of a game show host. He patronized his audience. "Let me paint as simple a picture as I can," he said of stem cell research. This is how liberals say, "I'll talk slowly, stupid." When he began with "I am not here to make a political speech," he seemed like a salesman on the lot: "This is not a used car, it is a pre-owned car." By the end he seemed to me like Ron Popeil of the late night pocket-fisherman infomercials: And by the way, no fetal tissue is used in this process! He seemed a nicer person years ago when he was dancing in his underpants on Saturday Night Live. He is that unusual person who seems less authentic when not in a tutu.

As in conventions past, some of the best and most revealing moments came away from the podium and in interviews. A sleek Caroline Kennedy hit all the anchor booths, and with Tom Brokaw seemed to leave open the idea that she will be running for office. So will, one senses, Ben Affleck. "You have to enervate the base," he told Chris Matthews, who introduced him on "Hardball" as "a great writer." (He must have been thinking of Jayson Blair.) What Mr. Affleck has going for him in terms of politics, besides moviestardom, is, the above notwithstanding, a quick intelligence. Going against him will be this: When he's watching himself on the monitor and doesn't know he's on camera his bright boyish eyes become clever, sensual and vain. He has Clinton eyes.





While watching the convention this week I have been reading the early 20th century novels of Indiana's Booth Tarkington, the once wildly popular chronicler of American mores and social arrangements as our great rise began. I had a hunch I'd find things pertinent to our times. Sure enough, in the short story collection "In the Arena," Tarkington gives this description of a political ward heeler. "He was a pock-pitted, damp looking soiled little fungus of a man who had . . . through the operation of a befitting ingenuity, forced a recognition of his leadership." This of course reminded me of Michael Moore, a modern sort of ward heeler, who was seated in the presidential booth with Jimmy Carter and who early in the week became the face of the convention. It would be good for Mr. Kerry if he seizes the stage from Mr. Moore, and Mr. Affleck, et al., tonight. It is time he came to dominate the proceedings with focus, and a message. He should not let this convention speak for him. He should speak for him.
Ms. Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and author of "A Heart, a Cross, and a Flag" (Wall Street Journal Books/Simon & Schuster), a collection of post-Sept. 11 columns, which you can buy from the OpinionJournal bookstore.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/


Ellie

thedrifter
07-31-04, 10:03 AM
The Biggest Liar of Them All

By David Horowitz
FrontPageMagazine.com | July 30, 2004

Now we can understand why Democrats spent the last year attacking the President as someone who lied to take America into an unnecessary war and destroy brave young American lives for his corporate friends in Texas. They did it to disarm and anesthetize us, to deconstruct the very idea of what truth is or what a fact is or what is is -- and prepare us for the most shameless charade in political memory, the phoniest convention for the phoniest party ever to mount an American electoral stage.

In Boston the Democrats -- the party of Al Sharpton, Jimmy Carter, Teddy Kennedy and Michael Moore -- presented themselves as the party of patriotism and military glory and American military strength, and John Kerry as a man whose life has been one long preparation to be commander-in-chief. "I am John Kerry," he saluted his audience to begin his convention speech, "reporting for duty." Pardon me while I hurl. This is a man who came back from Vietnam to stab not only his country but his comrades-in-arms in the back. This is a man who to this very day has an honored place in the Communist enemy's "War Crimes Museum" -- that's American war crimes. This is a party and a wannabe commander in chief that has clamored and voted to oppose America's wars in Vietnam, the Persian Gulf and in Iraq. This is a party and a commander in chief that lent comfort and aid to Communist dictators in Central America during the last years of the Cold War and nearly brought the Reagan presidency down for attempting to oppose the Communist tide.

This is a man and a party that voted to cut America's military and its intelligence services year after year, a man and a party who refused to institute the security measures that would have prevented 9/11. And this is a man and a party that has sabotaged the war on terror since the day Baghdad was liberated, that has embraced the reprehensible traitor Michael Moore, and the antiwar left of the Dean campaign, that has spread monstrous lies about its commander in chief and and in doing so undermined the nation's credibility and defenses. If another terrorist state were to become a threatening nuclear force (Iran comes immediately to mind) what American president can now face that enemy down with a credible military threat?

This is a party that from the beginning to the end of its convention pretended to be what it is not. And that is because it fears that American people already know what it is.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Horowitz is the author of numerous books including an autobiography, Radical Son, which has been described as “the first great autobiography of his generation,” and which chronicles his odyssey from radical activism to the current positions he holds. Among his other books are The Politics of Bad Faith and The Art of Political War. The Art of Political War was described by White House political strategist Karl Rove as “the perfect guide to winning on the political battlefield.” Horowitz’s latest book, Uncivil Wars, was published in January this year, and chronicles his crusade against intolerance and racial McCarthyism on college campuses last spring.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14451


Ellie

thedrifter
08-01-04, 06:03 AM
The Case Against George W. Bush <br />
<br />
The son of the fortieth president of the United States takes a hard look at the son of the forty-first and does not like what he sees <br />
<br />
By Ron Reagan <br />
September...

thedrifter
08-01-04, 06:05 AM
Fanciful but terrifying scenarios were introduced: Unmanned aircraft, drones, had been built for missions targeting the U. S., Bush told the nation. &quot;We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom...

thedrifter
08-01-04, 06:07 AM
More serious by an order of magnitude was the administration's dishonesty concerning pre-9/11 terror warnings. As questions first arose about the country's lack of preparedness in the face of terrorist assault, Condoleezza Rice was dispatched to the pundit arenas to assure the nation that "no one could have imagined terrorists using aircraft as weapons." In fact, terrorism experts had warned repeatedly of just such a calamity. In June 2001, CIA director George Tenet sent Rice an intelligence report warning that "it is highly likely that a significant Al Qaeda attack is in the near future, within several weeks." Two intelligence briefings given to Bush in the summer of 2001 specifically connected Al Qaeda to the imminent danger of hijacked planes being used as weapons. According to The New York Times, after the second of these briefings, titled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside United States," was delivered to the president at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, in August, Bush "broke off from work early and spent most of the day fishing." This was the briefing Dr. Rice dismissed as "historical" in her testimony before the 9/11 Commission.

What's odd is that none of these lies were worth the breath expended in the telling. If only for self-serving political reasons, honesty was the way to go. The flight of Air Force One could easily have been explained in terms of security precautions taken in the confusion of momentous events. As for the carrier landing, someone should have fallen on his or her sword at the first hint of trouble: We told the president he needed to do it; he likes that stuff and was gung-ho; we figured, What the hell?; it was a mistake. The banner? We thought the sailors would appreciate it. In retrospect, also a mistake. Yup, we sure feel dumb now. Owning up to the 9/11 warnings would have entailed more than simple embarrassment. But done forthrightly and immediately, an honest reckoning would have earned the Bush team some respect once the dust settled. Instead, by needlessly tap-dancing, Bush's White House squandered vital credibility, turning even relatively minor gaffes into telling examples of its tendency to distort and evade the truth.

But image is everything in this White House, and the image of George Bush as a noble and infallible warrior in the service of his nation must be fanatically maintained, because behind the image lies . . . nothing? As Jonathan Alter of Newsweek has pointed out, Bush has "never fully inhabited" the presidency. Bush apologists can smilingly excuse his malopropisms and vagueness as the plainspokenness of a man of action, but watching Bush flounder when attempting to communicate extemporaneously, one is left with the impression that he is ineloquent not because he can't speak but because he doesn't bother to think.


GEORGE W. BUSH PROMISED to "change the tone in Washington" and ran for office as a moderate, a "compassionate conservative," in the focus-group-tested sloganeering of his campaign. Yet he has governed from the right wing of his already conservative party, assiduously tending a "base" that includes, along with the expected Fortune 500 fat cats, fiscal evangelicals who talk openly of doing away with Social Security and Medicare, of shrinking government to the size where they can, in tax radical Grover Norquist's phrase, "drown it in the bathtub." That base also encompasses a healthy share of anti-choice zealots, homophobic bigots, and assorted purveyors of junk science. Bush has tossed bones to all of them—"partial birth" abortion legislation, the promise of a constitutional amendment banning marriage between homosexuals, federal roadblocks to embryonic-stem-cell research, even comments suggesting presidential doubts about Darwinian evolution. It's not that Mr. Bush necessarily shares their worldview; indeed, it's unclear whether he embraces any coherent philosophy. But this president, who vowed to eschew politics in favor of sound policy, panders nonetheless in the interest of political gain. As John DiIulio, Bush's former head of the Office of Community and Faith-Based Initiatives, once told this magazine, "What you've got is everything—and I mean everything—being run by the political arm."

This was not what the American electorate opted for when, in 2000, by a slim but decisive margin of more than half a million votes, they chose . . . the other guy. Bush has never had a mandate. Surveys indicate broad public dissatisfaction with his domestic priorities. How many people would have voted for Mr. Bush in the first place had they understood his eagerness to pass on crushing debt to our children or seen his true colors regarding global warming and the environment? Even after 9/11, were people really looking to be dragged into an optional war under false pretenses?

If ever there was a time for uniting and not dividing, this is it. Instead, Mr. Bush governs as if by divine right, seeming to actually believe that a wise God wants him in the White House and that by constantly evoking the horrible memory of September 11, 2001, he can keep public anxiety stirred up enough to carry him to another term.


UNDERSTANDABLY, SOME SUPPORTERS of Mr. Bush's will believe I harbor a personal vendetta against the man, some seething resentment. One conservative commentator, based on earlier remarks I've made, has already discerned "jealousy" on my part; after all, Bush, the son of a former president, now occupies that office himself, while I, most assuredly, will not. Truth be told, I have no personal feelings for Bush at all. I hardly know him, having met him only twice, briefly and uneventfully—once during my father's presidency and once during my father's funeral. I'll acknowledge occasional annoyance at the pretense that he's somehow a clone of my father, but far from threatening, I see this more as silly and pathetic. My father, acting roles excepted, never pretended to be anyone but himself. His Republican party, furthermore, seems a far cry from the current model, with its cringing obeisance to the religious Right and its kill-anything-that-moves attack instincts. Believe it or not, I don't look in the mirror every morning and see my father looming over my shoulder. I write and speak as nothing more or less than an American citizen, one who is plenty angry about the direction our country is being dragged by the current administration. We have reached a critical juncture in our nation's history, one ripe with both danger and possibility. We need leadership with the wisdom to prudently confront those dangers and the imagination to boldly grasp the possibilities. Beyond issues of fiscal irresponsibility and ill-advised militarism, there is a question of trust. George W. Bush and his allies don't trust you and me. Why on earth, then, should we trust them?

Fortunately, we still live in a democratic republic. The Bush team cannot expect a cabal of right-wing justices to once again deliver the White House. Come November 2, we will have a choice: We can embrace a lie, or we can restore a measure of integrity to our government. We can choose, as a bumper sticker I spotted in Seattle put it, SOMEONE ELSE FOR PRESIDENT.


http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2004/040729_mfe_reagan_5.html


Ellie

thedrifter
08-01-04, 07:59 AM
SPICY HEINZ ADDS A DASH OF UNEASE

By DEBORAH ORIN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Email Archives
Print Reprint



August 1, 2004 -- Botox. Billionaire. Prenup. Private plane. Eccentric. "Mama T." Sexy. Cheeky. "Shove it!"
Hardly typical images for a would-be first lady, but ketchup heiress Teresa Heinz Kerry, 65, is one of a kind — as she showed last week with an all-about-me convention speech that mixed feminism, globalism and New Age lingo.

Some delegates loved it but others were aghast as she bragged of speaking five languages and showed off a few words in each, then talked of the Galileo space probe and "the mystic chords of our national memory" — but not much about husband John Kerry.

"It stinks. And it ain't going to play in Peoria," groaned a New York Democrat who's at least as liberal as Heinz Kerry.

It wasn't just the speech that showed why Heinz Kerry is seen as a loose cannon — her temper exploded last week when she told a reporter to "Shove it!" for daring to question why she bashed foes as "un-American."

No wonder the chattering classes are buzzing about whether she is a problem for her husband's White House bid — and what he should, or can, do about it.

Kerry aides know the risks. Asked if her unorthodox convention speech will hurt her husband, a campaign aide replied with a smile: "Only if people saw it."



It seems Team Kerry's strategy was to hide her in plain sight by having her speak Tuesday, the one convention night with no prime-time network coverage. By contrast, Kerry's two daughters got spotlighted Thursday, when he spoke.

"She's an enigma. Voters are intrigued, but her message doesn't wear that well," said Republican pollster Frank Luntz after analyzing Heinz Kerry's speech with a group of 20 voters in pivotal Ohio.

"She is so different, so unique that you don't know what to expect. She's an asset with partisan Democrats, a liability for core Republicans — and it's undetermined with swing voters."

Most men stayed mum in the focus group, suggesting Heinz Kerry makes them uneasy but they don't want to get into a fight about her. Luntz found the same male attitude toward Hillary Rodham Clinton early on.

Most political strategists doubt that wives have a major impact on the election, but Mrs. Kerry sure doesn't look like an asset compared to the super-popular Laura Bush, a former school librarian.

Mrs. Bush is rated 66 percent favorable and 12 percent unfavorable — a 5-to-1 positive ratio — while Heinz Kerry is rated 27 percent favorable and 26 percent unfavorable.

No wonder President Bush now seems to get extra-loud applause for a standard line in his stump speech — that a prime reason to re-elect him is to keep Laura as first lady.

"A wife can personalize, can humanize. She says, 'I love him and you can, too.' That's why the most bizarre thing is that [Heinz Kerry] is out there talking about herself instead of him," says Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway.


Heinz Kerry has also blabbed that she loves costly wrinkle-smoothing Botox injections and got a prenup to limit the would-be president's access to the billion dollars or more that she inherited from her late husband, Republican Sen. John Heinz. She boasts that she's "sexy" and calls herself "Mama T."

Remember how Sen. Clinton once said she could have avoided controversy by staying home and baking cookies? Heinz Kerry has gotten into a squabble with Family Circle magazine over just that: cookies.

Every four years since 1992, the magazine holds a candidate wives' cookie contest — bake their cookies and vote for your favorite.


It was Laura Bush's oatmeal chocolate chunk vs. Teresa Heinz Kerry's pumpkin spice — but last week Mrs. Kerry suddenly raged that dirty tricks were afoot by her own staff to make her look bad with a "nasty" recipe.

She accused ex-press secretary Christine Anderson of submitting a phony recipe: "Somebody at my office gave that recipe out and in fact I think somebody really made it on purpose to give a nasty recipe."

No wonder a New York convention delegate warned: "They've got to get her under control."


http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/28359.htm


Ellie

thedrifter
08-02-04, 05:56 AM
RUDY'S SORE OVER MOORE


July 30, 2004 -- BOSTON — An emotional Rudy Giuliani yesterday lashed out at the director of the Bush-bashing film "Fahrenheit 9/11," saying, "I don't need Michael Moore to tell me about Sept. 11th."
Giuliani, billed as "America's Mayor" for his handling of the terror crisis almost three years ago, took aim at the flabby filmmaker during a GOP rally in Boston just hours before John Kerry accepted the Democratic presidential nomination.

"I lived through it," Giuliani told a reporter who had asked him if Moore's blockbuster documentary would push Bush out of office, as some pundits have suggested.

"I saw too much pain, too much suffering," the ex-mayor said.

Though Giuliani hasn't seen Moore's controversial documentary — which has grossed over $100 million — he dubbed it "pure propaganda, propaganda for political purpose and for profit."

Giuliani then ripped into Democrats for treating Moore like a "rock star" at the convention.

While Moore was given no official role at the convention, he has been treated like a celebrity at many events — and even sat in ex-President Jimmy Carter's box Monday night.



The former mayor was the latest and most notable Republican to take on the Democrats outside the convention, part of a rapid-response team that also included Giuliani's former police commissioner, Bernard Kerik.

GOP leaders clearly saved Giuliani for last, hoping to cash in on his enormous national popularity on the same day that Kerry was set to make his acceptance speech.

Giuliani will be one of the key speakers at next month's Republican convention in New York. Yesterday he took aim at the Democrats, accusing Kerry and his running mate, John Edwards, of representing the "the far liberal wing of their party." As for the speeches this week, Giuliani said Democrats struggled to ignore the Massachusetts Democrat's lengthy Senate record, particularly when it comes to the war on terror.

"We had an inclination, and it turned out to be correct, that this would be a reinvention convention, a makeover convention," Giuliani said at the GOP rally.

Giuliani mocked Kerry for his shifting positions on Iraq and questioned how he could vote to authorize the war but then oppose an $87 billion aid package to fund the troops.

"What we need is a strong, principled leader who is going to stand up for what is needed when it is popular and when it is unpopular," he said.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/25844.htm


Ellie

thedrifter
08-02-04, 10:19 AM
Perspective: Communist Party USA supports John Kerry

By D.P. HEIMBOLD
St. Augustine







The southern Democrats must be thrilled by the news that the Communist Party of The United States of America, CPUSA, is publicly supporting the election of John Kerry.

The CPUSA has made available on its Web site, cpusa.org, an advertisement entitled Top Ten Reasons To Defeat Bush. This advertisement can be downloaded. The communist party urges readers to place this ad in local newspapers throughout the country to defeat President Bush.

Remarkably, the "Top Ten Reasons" of the Communist party are identical to those of the Democratic party; out-sourcing, homosexual rights, abortion and the like.

At first, I thought "this is only a coincidence." The Democratic party of the United States couldn't be in lock step with the Marxists! So, I wrote to a spokesman of the CPUSA in Georgia and here is part of his letter:

" The CPUSA supports the John Kerry campaign with donations and volunteer effort. We believe that defeating George Bush is the single most important issue this November ..."

Next, I discovered that one of Kerry's campaign themes is " Let America be America Again." This slogan was borrowed from a Communist poet, Langston Hughes. This is not common knowledge to the average American.

"Let America be America Again" sounds good but is a rambling, gloomy poem. Interestingly, another poem by Langston goes as follows;

"Goodbye, Christ Jesus, Lord, God, Jehova, Beat it on away from here now.

Make way for a new guy with no religion at all -- A real guy named Marx, communist, Lenin, Peasant, Stalin, Worker, ME -- I said, ME!"

Then, if this was not enough to convince me that the Democratic party has lost it, a third discovery!

A Vietnam vet group took a trip to Communist Hanoi to investigate a report that John Kerry was in the "Hanoi Hall of Fame." Yes, there is a museum in Hanoi with a section dedicated to foreign activists who help defeat the United States Military in Vietnam. Of course, you would expect Jane Fonda's picture to be there. But, alas, there is John Kerry's picture shaking the hand of a communist official.

Never has there been such a tragedy.

Never has there been such a threat to America. The Democratic party has been taken over by the far, far left!

Not only the communists but the homosexual activists who are appalled that George Bush is married to a woman! They are enraged that the president wants a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage between a man and woman.

Then we have the ACLU running to a federal activist judge with every piece of legislation that doesn't fit into their leftist agenda. They support every Democratic socialist whim. The removal of the Ten Commandments is their top priority!

Why can't our children read? The liberal NEA runs the government schools. You can't mention God or the Ten Commandments, but you can teach Islam and have the children pray to Allah and pass out condoms. The teachers union is solidly behind the Democratic candidate, John Kerry.

How about the AFL-CIO? Solidly Democratic. How about the press? Solidly behind the left.

Case in point: Viacom owns CBS and Dan Rather. Dan is really the president of the American Leftist Establishment. Every night Dan informs the country what we, the troops and the president did wrong that day. His boss, Viacom, just happens to own the company that published Richard Clark's attack on George Bush and company. Clarke was the hero of the 9-11 hearing. Viacom pushed up the publication date of Clark's book to coincide with the hearings.

Oh, by the way, Viacom not only owns CBS and Dan Rather, but MTV!

Yes, the same MTV that featured Janet Jackson's breast at the Super Bowl half time!

Hollywood? There might be one or two votes for Bush from the filmmakers. But don't count on it. Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" propaganda film hurt the president. Impressionable youth fall victim to lies.

But, not to worry.

Truth means nothing to the Left.

The quality of character of the Hollywood crowd is best illustrated by the recent antics of the starlet Britney Spears. After her 24-hour marriage, Britney is now engaged to a loser who left his unmarried, pregnant girlfriend and little child. There was not one eyebrow raised by the Hollywood-infatuated Network News. This is normal behavior for the left.

The deck is really stacked against the re-election of President Bush.

Now even the mass murderer Saddam Hussein agrees with Kennedy and Kerry that the president is a criminal. Before the election in November the press will clean up Hussein to look like a saint and George W. Bush a gangster.

John Kerry promises to save the union by going to the UN. Kerry may have to deal with Muslim Kofi Annan's son, Kojo, who received "consultant" fees from Swiss company, Cotecna, which oversaw Iraq's Oil-For-Food program. Some of the $10 billion that was funneled through the "family run" UN program ended up in al Taqwa and Asat Trust, two of al-Qaida's front organizations. Funny, there are al-Qaida in Florida and the UN, but not in Iraq! Alas, but who is chopping off heads in Iraq?

While the bulk of our National Guard are over seas fighting terrorist, every leftist weirdo is coming out of the closet to hi-jack the November presidential election.

The question is: What are the "real" southern Democrats going to do?

Will they join the CPUSA, NEA, ACLU and a host of other radical leftist groups or help save the country from this mob.

http://www.staugustine.com/stories/071404/opi_2435145.shtml


Ellie

thedrifter
08-03-04, 08:28 AM
The quagmire nobody talks about
July 29th, 2004


December of this year will mark the nine-year anniversary of US and NATO intervention in the Balkan War of 1992-95. For almost a decade, our troops have been conducting stability and support operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and, later, provided secure bases for the air war against Serbia in 1999. Then-President Bill Clinton promised that the troops would be home by Christmas of 1996, but as the years passed, US military units that deployed to the Balkans became the “forgotten” soldiers of a self-absorbed, pre-911 Clinton Administration.

Now that most of the US troops will be withdrawn, leaving behind only a small headquarters contingent, the American people rightly expect an accounting of our troops’ accomplishments from the same media that actively promoted this Balkan adventure by nightly broadcasts of the terrible plight of the Bosnian people. However, the airwaves have remained strangely silent about the results of our mission in the Balkans. Worse still, the deliberate deception by the media and the Clinton Administration about the true nature of the conflict, and the often confusing array of questionable foreign policy decisions associated with it, have now opened up an unexpected front in the War on Terror.

In the early 90s, TV crews showed us every detail of the Bosnian battlefields, burning farmhouses, and battered marketplaces, in order to paint a picture of a complex ethnic war. In reality, the Clinton administration just could not bring itself to declare that the war was largely a fight of national identity to gain freedom from a tyrannical dictator by the name of Slobodan Milosevic. After all, Slobo was Bill and Hillary’s ideological ally, a centralizer and a socialist.

This obfuscation resulted in a series of astounding and often contradictory decisions concerning vital military and national security matters. Initially, the Clinton Administration agreed to an arms embargo, but then tacitly allowed weapons to be smuggled in from the Middle East to help the Bosniac Muslims. He then went along with regional isolation protocols to prevent outside help from reaching all the belligerents. Then, he turned a blind eye to the infiltration of about 200 Mujahadeen fighters into Bosnia. Either deliberately or unwittingly, former President Clinton had sown the seeds for a new Islamo-fascist threat; this time in Southeastern Europe.

After the Bosnian war, and after initial stability had been achieved, ostensibly, the Mujahadeen settled around Mostar, which is southwest of Sarajevo. They married, raised families, and assimilated into the Bosnian society. Now, however, The Telegraph (UK) reports that Bosnia has become

a "one-stop shop" for Islamic militants heading from terrorist battlegrounds in Chechnya and Afghanistan to Iraq, according to European intelligence officials.

The story goes on to say that Bosnia is a terrorist way-station, where fighters can pick up guns, money, and forged documents. The foundation for this network, of course, was established by the “Muslim foreign fighters” who settled in Bosnia after the war. However, The Telegraph does not go into any detail as to how these Wahhabi fighters got into the quarantined region in the first place. After nine years, the media can’t seem to find a single US Soldier or Bosnian farmer to tout the progress we have made in that country now that we are leaving. Perhaps it is because we have spent our treasure and blood building up a country that can now function as a safe haven for transient Islamic militants.

The only person The Telegraph could find to comment on the nine-year US operation was the head of the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights in Sarajevo. Madeleine Rees said

The US had everything going for it here. It stopped the war, set up and funded human rights initiatives. But then it bypassed the local police, courts and legal system, and now confidence in the US has plummeted.

(This probably had something to do with the fact that the local police and courts were accomplices in the world-renowned Balkan drug trade and sex slave schemes. But I digress.)

This is all the gratitude we get from Madeleine and the UN. Meanwhile, the US now has been forced to deploy hundreds of military intelligence and CIA operatives to keep tabs on the Mostar Chapter of the Friends of Bill. It was only a few months ago, that the mainstream media blasted the current Bush Administration for turning around the redeploying 1st Armored Division so they could put down the uprising of the extremist Shia cleric, Muqtada al-Sadr. The American people were told daily how cruel and heartless President Bush and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld were in doing such a thing. These poor soldiers were supposed to go home, and this further proves that Bush didn’t have a plan, etc.

The mainstream media should now explain why the US has to put 300 intelligence agents on the ground in Bosnia, when they could be put to use in other obvious places. But, then again, our National Guard has been stuck there for years, and the media has yet to refer to that situation as a quagmire. Sadly to say, once the EU takes over, this quagmire could get deeper yet.

Clinton allowing the Mujahadeen to enter the Balkans in the early 90s, with US air support no less, is a replay of the classic scene out of the first Alien movie. The ship’s science officer, who is an android programmed to aid and abet in the capture of the Alien, busts the quarantine regulations to let a crewmember with an infant alien attached to his face through the airlock, and into the ship. Later, as the android finishes examining the comatose crewmember and the attached creature, Warrant Officer Ripley asks the science officer, “How is our guest doing?” To which the science officer replies, “He’s one little, tough son-of-a-*****.” Ripley simply states,

“And you let him in.”

Douglas Hanson is our military affairs correspondent.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3711


Ellie

LONEEAGLE
08-03-04, 08:58 AM
If there is any truths to any of the news reporting this would be a miracle in itself. Kerry? Did he earn his "HERO" name as a Vietnam Combat Veteran? Voting record. Easy to find out. His wife? 'Scuse me? I don't think she would be much of a "First Lady."
Many are sayin', "scuttlebutt" that this will be Bush's downfall.
Who attacked whom? The sad part about this entire issue, and this 9-11 commission report is, the fighting will continue until we put the "RIGHT" countries out of "TERRORIST" business. And who are those countries? And will the U.N. (a worthless bunch of nimrods) no, not will, what can they do? Their record is plain as day. "NOTHING" They are a joke.
I hope someday the real truth will come out about Irag, like the Kennedy assanation, "the magic bullet?" WMD? To much speculation, to much just downright bull****, comin' from all over.
I don't understand. People in Hollywood are people first, actor's/activist second. Sometimes we forget this. But why are they bashing Bush? Is it because of the money we have spent over there, while people here lose their jobs, and so many with two working in a family cain't even afford insurance? The elderly? Eat, or medicine? I feel like one thing Bush has done wrong, not unlike his Father, he's forgotten about us, the American Citizen.
And I can only Say God help the Vets from this war/conflict, as the VA's aren't ready. Not until we start drillin' where these goof balls won't let us, we'll be forever tryin' to defend all nations who give us oil. Is it worth it? When we got it in our backyard? Solar, electric power? It ain't gonna work. The world is to fast to have a vehicle run 60mph tops, and then the cost, Holy Cow.
I'm gonna vote for Mr. Bush, as I feel he's done the best he could do. Thanks.

thedrifter
08-03-04, 11:38 AM
August 02, 2004

Edwards has moderate voting record on military
But rivals are using 2003 record to brand veep hopeful a liberal

By William Matthews
Special to the Times


Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., the Democrats’ apparent candidate for vice president, has been labeled the fourth- most-liberal member of the Senate by his Republican rivals.
But his Senate voting record on military matters over five years is more moderate. Among his votes on various issues:

• Military pay raise for U.S. troops: Yes.

• Research for a new generation of nuclear weapons: No.

• Use of military force against Iraq: Voted yes in 2002 while 23 other senators voted no.

• Adding 20,000 troops to the Army: Yes.

Edwards has opposed base closings — not surprising since his home state hosts a half dozen major military bases. In early 2003, he supported President Bush’s request for $79.5 billion to pay for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But six months later, Edwards, like his running mate, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., voted against Bush’s request for $86.5 billion for wartime operations in 2004.

At the time, Edwards said he voted against the funding bill because Bush “has failed to outline a credible long-term plan for rebuilding the country, to persuade allies to help shoulder the costs, and to stop sweetheart deals for politically connected companies.

“We have a responsibility to support our troops in Iraq,” Edwards said. “We have a responsibility to help rebuild Iraq. But our troops will not be safer and this mission will never be successful unless the president dramatically changes course.”

Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have used Kerry’s votes to label Kerry a “flip flopper.”

Three times since entering the Senate in 1999, Edwards has voted to go slow on missile defense. In 1999, 2002 and again this year, he voted not to spend about $10 billion a year to deploy warhead interceptors until they have been proven to work.

Support for missile defense has become something of a loyalty test among Republicans.

Early in his single six-year Senate term, Edwards’ voting record on military issues was that of a “Southern moderate,” said John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable World, an arms-control organization in Washington. Edwards generally supported military budgets and defense initiatives.

Edwards’ voting became more liberal after he decided in 2003 to run for president and began trying to appeal to Democrats who were likely to be voting in primaries, according to Isaacs and other analysts.

That shift led to the “fourth- most-liberal” label.

In February, the National Journal, a magazine devoted to politics, analyzed 62 Senate votes on a wide variety of issues in 2003 and rated senators from liberal to conservative.

From the left, Kerry was first, followed by Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.; Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.; and Edwards.

William Matthews is a staff writer for Defense News.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story.php?f=1-MARINEPAPER-275154.php


Ellie

enviro
08-03-04, 02:46 PM
Edwards actually votes on the side of the military in most cases. It's everything else that makes him the 4th rated liberal.

Heck, with the amount of military bases in the Carolinas, he would be stupid not to.

eddief
08-03-04, 03:52 PM
Who cares if the Communist Party USA is supporting Kerry? I'm sure the KKK and neo-nazis are supporting Bush. Does that make Bush a racist and a nazi?

enviro
08-03-04, 04:11 PM
You're sure the KKK and neo-nazis are supporting Bush?

Forgive me for asking, but, where is this tidbit of information at so that we may verify your claim?

eddief
08-03-04, 04:18 PM
I've seen the KKK live with pro-Bush signs (they're real happy that Bush is killing "sand ******s"), and the neo-nazis usually go along with their redneck white-trash brothers. It's not a big deal in the big picture. Just like some communists supporting Kerry is no big deal. These groups have no voice whatsoever in DC.

enviro
08-03-04, 04:35 PM
The only difference I see is that Bush has never endorsed or met with (publicly) a leading member of the KKK or neo-nazis.

However, John Kerry HAS endorsed and met with publicly a leading member of the communist party (Madam Win Thi Binh)

Sparrowhawk
08-03-04, 05:13 PM
Originally posted by enviro
The only difference I see is that Bush has never endorsed or met with (publicly) a leading member of the KKK or neo-nazis. However, John Kerry HAS endorsed and met with publicly a leading member of the communist party (Madam Win Thi Binh)

He should have still been in the military. So, he asked for an early out and it was granted to him, in less than, thirty days? Who does he know?



Had he met with her when he was still in the military, he could have been court-marshaled for treason

eddief
08-03-04, 05:23 PM
That's ancient history to me, and I don't think we have to worry about Kerry bringing communism to the American people. I see the Republican controlled Congress bringing Kerry to the center. I see Bush going farther to the right if he gets re-elected. That's why I'm voting for Kerry. I'd much rather have a centrist than a rabid right winger (with a Republican Congress behind him) as president.

Sparrowhawk
08-03-04, 07:20 PM
Originally posted by eddief
That's ancient history to me, and I don't think we have to worry about Kerry bringing communism to the American people. I see the Republican controlled Congress bringing Kerry to the center. I see Bush going farther to the right if he gets re-elected. That's why I'm voting for Kerry. I'd much rather have a centrist than a rabid right winger (with a Republican Congress behind him) as president.






Can A Leopard Change Its Spots?

Do bears s hit in the woods?

Is the pope catholic?

Is money the root of all evil?

Is Ted Kennedy Kerry's mentor?

Is Fidel Castro a commie?

Kerry has been the same since before he went to Vietnam, and you think he's going to go to the center, because of the Republicans? ROTFLMAO



Why Did Kerry Hide he's Spots, during the DNC?

To deceive the American People.


Kerry not only s hits in the woods, he presents himself a hero, while he has taken a dump on the honor of Vietnam Veterans, and continues to do so, with his fake Veterans in support of him. He just resurrected his old anti-war wannabees and they now appear with him on stage.

He married his first wife for her money, and his second wife even a dingbat as she is won't trust him with her money, why should we?


Kerry even tries to deceive God. He takes communion every Sunday in violation of his own Catholic laws, so if his spiritual commitment is so blatantly disregarded, how can we trust him with eartly matters?

If he is elected, Ted Kennedy, will be sitting in the Oval Office!

Is Kerry a commie? A socialist for sure, but he certainly remains in cahoots with Jane Fonda, with her support of Communism

Kerry will move towards the center, when his body weight drops when he is lowered to the ground.


Now, ask me what I won't vote for him


My name is Cook Barela, and I approved this message.

eddief
08-03-04, 10:43 PM
I get the point that you're making. I'm not excited about Kerry. I'm casting my vote against Bush and his PNAC foreign policy. I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm an "Anybody But Bush" voter. It's more of a protest vote for me than anything else, especially since I live in Bush country.

enviro
08-03-04, 11:07 PM
I appreciate your honesty eddie - however, I am thankful that your vote won't count for much in our state. All electoral votes from where we live will go to Bush. Either way, please do vote.

yellowwing
08-03-04, 11:27 PM
I believe in our American system of governance. The checks and balances of the three branches of Government work just fine. I am also of the non-liberal belief that the Second Amendment is the People's ultimate check and balance.

There is alot of 'chatter' on both Presidential Candidates. Both parties have become very adept on minimizing opposition victories and minimizing shortcomings.

Kerry and O'Neill have been going at it since June 30, 1971, in the televised Dick Cavett debates (http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=KerryONeill). It's long reading but it is of strong interest. O'Neill did great against the verbal skills of Kerry, until he started going against the findings of the Pentagon Papers.

The GWB team is has their work cut out for them in prepping for the 2004 debates. I predict there is where Kerry will get his 'bounce'.

In a historical twist, both parties are striving to reach the Veterans vote (http://www.iht.com/articles/532498.html). It's about time they listen to us! What bothers me is the foot dragging of the process of counting absentee ballots of Iraq - Afghanistan servicemen (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=548&ncid=696&e=10&u=/ap/20040803/ap_on_el_ge/military_voting).

What is the RNC objection of counting their votes? Are they afraid the thousands of week-end warriors won't toe the party line?

However the vote goes in November, I strongly believe that our Republic will stand. I do not believe that we will slide into Facism or Socialism. What we have all volunteered to stand up for and defend, the Consititution of the United States of America, will prevent such extremities.

By God, we served four to thirty years, giving up many of our Rights for the priviledge to Serve. If the average American completely understood this, we would have a 98% turn out at the voting polls.

If the majority of 98% choose GWB, I would have no further argument on the matter.

Sparrowhawk
08-04-04, 12:52 AM
Originally posted by yellowwing
It's about time they listen to us! What bothers me is the foot dragging of the process of counting absentee ballots of Iraq - Afghanistan servicemen (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=548&ncid=696&e=10&u=/ap/20040803/ap_on_el_ge/military_voting).

What is the RNC objection of counting their votes? Are they afraid the thousands of week-end warriors won't toe the party line?


It's not the Republican Party that is holding that process up, they have asked for the troops to be allowed to get their ballots early and mailed back early, so that their votes will count.

Remember after the Florida votes it was the Military votes that were coming in, in support of Bush, but they weren't counted by Florida, because they were "received late".

The majority of the troops support Bush and that is why the ballots are not being pushed to be counted and it’s not by the Republicans.

yellowwing "I believe in our American system of governance. The checks and balances of the three branches of Government."

You've forgotten the fourth branch, Hollywood and the media. Take a look at that new show on TV for example, "THE GRID" (http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/ShowMainServlet/showid-26937).

"The Grid (TV-14, LSV) is an international project that looks in detail at a terrorist cell operating on a global level and a team of American and British counter-terrorists who are tasked to stop it.

The problem is that the first two hours series aired three days before the 9-11 Commission Report was released, but if you read the third chapter of that report, it reads like the script for the TV series. It seems like Sandy Berger wasn't the only one taking home some top secret documents, but here they released them to the fourth branch of government.

And it gets uglier, there are some secret deals being considered should Kerry win, between some very "Liberal Arabs," and the Hollywood crowd, and if you think Hollywood and the New York Times are liberal, wait till you see the Arabs ways of thinking in that arena.
<hr>

People voting for Kerry because they oppose the president makes, no sense especially when we might end up with a president that has said that the only two wars he has opposed, is the Vietnam War that he was in, and the Iraq War that he voted for.

Now that makes as much sense as voting for Kerry, because you don’t like the president. Vote for Nader, I would, if I had no choice, or wasn't sure. Now that is a protest vote.

I had a good friend of mine, that used to come around bragging high and mighty about Kerry, and I just listened. Now, he can’t stand the man. The DNC changed a lot of minds, but the Democrat insiders accomplished more then they had hoped for.

Get people angry at Bush, for any reason, and no one seems to be able to pin point the real reasons why. Because the early reasons pushed were and have been proven to be lies. But perhaps the democrats do have it all figured out after all. Give them an idiot choice like Kerry and in four years they will get Hillary elected.







,

Sparrowhawk
08-04-04, 01:02 AM
Spin Buster
August 03, 2004
Row, Row, Row Your Boat - Backwards

Reporting today on a batch of new post-convention poll results that seem to show a minor bump in support for John Kerry, Adam Nagourney of the New York Times writes that "before the [convention], a senior Bush political adviser, Matthew Dowd, distributed a memorandum arguing that based on history, Mr. Kerry should gain at least 15 points, though most independent pollsters called that projection unrealistic in such a tight race."

It's true that Dowd predicted a 15-point bounce, and that many independent observers disagreed. Most assumed, no doubt correctly, that Dowd was playing the well-worn game of setting an unnaturally high bar for Kerry, so that the candidate would be seen as failing to meet expectations after the convention.

But the Times leaves out a key part of the story: One major reason why Dowd's memo received the attention it did was because the Times itself gave it so much credence. Here's how the Times' Richard Stevenson and Jim Rutenberg reported Dowd's prediction last month:

Matthew Dowd, Bush's chief campaign strategist, said he expects the race to shift from dead even now to as much as a 15-point advantage in national polls for Kerry by the end of the Democratic convention.

Though campaigns typically seek to set expectations as low as possible and Kerry's aides have said they do not expect to any such lead, Dowd's public forecasts have tended to be relatively accurate. He said his prediction is based on the average upward bounce in the polls for challengers against incumbents over the last three decades at this stage in the race.

"We could easily be 14 or 15 points behind in the first week of August," Dowd said. "How long that lasts and what happens after our convention, well, we'll have to wait and see."

This looks to us like a classic example of a "rowback" -- a non-correction correction. Kerry's actual post-convention bounce has, unsurprisingly, been much smaller than Dowd predicted. That's left the Times looking vaguely foolish for having taken Dowd's spin at close to face value. So now the paper is returning to the scene of the crime, and suggesting that no one took Dowd's prediction seriously in the first place.

The larger point is this: When campaign operatives -- even those with seemingly accurate track records -- offer specific numerical predictions about the race, it's safe to say that they're not doing it as a public service. Treating those predictions with the skepticism they deserve would spare news outlets from having to go back and cover their tracks.

--Zachary Roth

Lock-n-Load
08-04-04, 02:58 AM
:marine: A bounce upward by 5, 6 or even 7 at most....and that will only be temporarily...same projection for the GOP Convention is the Mclaughlin Group's [DC Think Tank] projection...I agree with their more realistic assessment. S/F :marine:

yellowwing
08-04-04, 09:31 AM
GWB has the power to request emergency legislation on the military absentee voting issue (http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/dailystar/32815.php). "Nearly 30 percent of military voters who requested ballots in 2000 didn't get them in time to vote." That is atrocious.

Whether it's a hard Corps I MEF Lance Corporal or a Army Reservist not able to sell real estate, their votes need to be counted.

hrscowboy
08-04-04, 10:43 AM
I for one would like to see the electorial votes done away with and go with the popular vote only. I have always said that the electorial votes where carrbage..

enviro
08-04-04, 12:06 PM
I personally think the military should handle it's own voting for national elections. That way it will get done and the numbers reported back to the states in a much better fashion. It's very difficult at best to get your absentee ballot by mail and send it back in time.


As for a protest vote, I say vote Nader. It would send a clear message to both Republicans and Democrats if a third party were to make a significant dent at the polls. American was prepared to put Ross Perot in office until he dropped out and then tried to come back.

If not Nader choose one of these parties currently exsisting:

Constitution Party
Green Party
Libertarian Party
Natural Law Party
Reform Party
Alaskan Independence Party
America First Party, established by former Reform Party members in 2002
American Heritage Party
American Independent Party
American Nazi Party
American Party
American Reform Party, established by former Reform Party members in 1997
Christian Falangist Party of America
Communist Party USA
Conservative Party of New Jersey
Conservative Party of New York State
Constitutional Action Party
Family Values Party
Freedom Socialist Party
Grassroots Party
Independence Party of Minnesota
Independent American Party
Labor Party
Liberal Party (New York State)
Light Party
National Democratic Party of Puerto
National Republican Party of Puerto Rico
New Party
New Progressive Party of Puerto Rico
New Union Party
Peace and Freedom Party
Popular Democratic Party of Puerto Rico
Progressive Party (Vermont)
Prohibition Party
Puerto Rican Independence Party
Reform Party
Republican Moderate Party (Alaska)
Revolutionary Communist Party
Socialist Action
Socialist Alternative
Socialist Equality Party
Socialist Labor Party
Socialist Party USA
Socialist Workers Party
Southern Party
Southern Independence Party
Spartacist League
U.S. Pacifist Party
We the People Party
Workers World Party
Working Families Party

Sparrowhawk
08-04-04, 12:25 PM
It seems now from the web site only One former swift boatmate supports kerry?

Anyone know what happened?

http://www.swiftvets.com/images/KerryBrothers.jpg


http://www.swiftvets.com/images/Vets_after.jpg

hrscowboy
08-04-04, 03:29 PM
I would like to see how many of the enlisted personnel that actually worked with kerry support him instead of officers that was only around him from time to time..

thedrifter
08-05-04, 08:14 AM
Subject: Have you seen this information from Green Beret Don Bendell-looks like
some critical information Americans need to check out

Sent to numerous news media. You may distribute.

URGENT OPEN LETTER TO MY FELLOW AMERICANS

As a former green beret, who is still involved in that tight-knit community, I was “shocked and awed” when I saw Michael Moore during an interview at the DNC actually say that “Bush did not have Special Forces on the ground in Afghanistan for more than two months after 9-11.”

That was laughable; it was such a stupid, bold-faced lie. Many, many green berets and ex-green berets know that two A-detachments were on the ground in Afghanistan within forty-eight hours of the 9-11 attacks.

Robin Moore, a friend and the author of the number one best seller THE GREEN BERETS, wrote of those detachments in THE SEARCH FOR BIN LADEN. Just about everybody in SF, also knew that MG Geoff Lambert, then commanding JFK Special Warfare Center, had those Special Forces team members on alert within two hours of the first jet hitting the World Trade Center tower one.

One of those brave Green Beret sergeants who served on those two teams and who lost his leg was probably sitting at home gnashing his teeth while hearing such trash. It is a feeling many of us have each time we hear those well-meaning apologists, “doves,” and Michael Moore-followers, do to the brave young men and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan what was done to our men and women serving in Vietnam. It must stop now!

If you are a fellow Vietnam veteran reading this, “welcome home” and thank you for your service. Whether you are a Democrat, Republican, Independent, or apolitical, I am an American first, before any political party, and I am sure most reading this are, too. We must not allow anybody to belittle or disrespect any military service, in war, or at home, National Guard, reserves, coast guard, or any service. It is all honorable and all part of one big machine, needing each part to function properly.

This goes far beyond politics. Victimizing our military is one of the most selfish and self-destructive things we can do. Protesting in a free country, is “chump change” when compared to a willingness to lay your very life on the line for what you believe in, like our fighting men and women do. With a broken-heart, I survived the aftermath of Vietnam’s “anti-war movement.” Those young brave American men and women in today’s military will NOT go through the same treatment as long as my fellow veterans and I have a breath in our bodies.

Michael Moore, in a German press conference, referred to Americans as the “dumbest people on the planet.” Now, many well-meaning Americans, are making him look correct, and are making him even richer by buying tickets and believing his hype. One of my four sons even told me that I should not knock it until I watch it. I said, “Son, I won’t put a dime in Michael Moore’s pocket!” Dave Kopel did a lot of careful research on Michael Moore’s FARENHEIT 9/11 and points out “56” outright lies. I ask you, please take the time to read it carefully.
http://davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

For example, the 9-11 Commission already stated that the bin Laden’s did not leave the US until the air travel ban was lifted, but in Moore’s film, he makes it seem as if there was a big conspiracy, and President Bush let them leave the country when nobody else could travel.

Michael Niewodowski, a chef at Windows on the World at the top of the World Trade Center was supposed to report for work shortly after the jets slammed into the twin towers, and he has also written a scathing piece about Moore’s mockumentary. Please read it, too. http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1163058/posts.

Mr. Niewodowski, who is a chef not a professional writer, in his Sarasota Herald-Tribune article, points out that there are over 20 motion pictures about Pearl Harbor and its aftermath, and they espouse “patriotism, courage, and nationalism.” What films do we have about the 9-11 disaster? FARENHEIT 9/11, a complete sham.

I received 2 significant e-mails from Iraq recently; 1 from an army master sergeant and 1 from a sergeant first class, serving in different units, but both men asked if I could help them, explaining that young soldiers are seeing bootleg copies of FARENHEIT 9/11 and are becoming disheartened and demotivated, as they have had no experience with the political process, and they think that if the movie has been made and distributed, it must be true. Shortly after receiving those e-mails, I also received other forwarded e-mails with very similar words from Iraq.

Even if you are totally against the war, we must do all we can to keep our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan motivated, which in turn, helps keep them safe and alive. How can you say you support our troops, without also supporting their commander in chief? No President, Democrat or Republican, in US history, during a time of war, has been so publicly chastised and disrespected as President George W. Bush. This plays right into the enemy’s hands and propaganda machine.

John Kerry betrayed his fellow Vietnam veterans making us his “Abandoned Brothers,” which is exactly what he is doing now to our current troops. He knows, full well, the many lies contained in FARENHEIT 9/11, but it helps him get votes, so he is silent. That is the same as embracing Michael Moore, which; in itself, would take very, very long arms at best. During the DNC, the Spielberg-backed video about Kerry, briefly showed a photograph of Kerry and 20 fellow sailors, even after John Kerry and Kerry’s campaign were issued a “cease and desist” letter from an attorney representing 11 of the men in the photograph who detest Kerry. In fact, only 1 man in that photograph of 20 supports Kerry for President www.swiftvets.com.

By the way, Senator Kerry, you were a “sailor” in Vietnam. Be proud of that and stop referring to yourself as a “soldier” in Vietnam. The liberal members of the news media, who also are helping destroy our troop’s morale, are just as bad.

I have received hundreds of thousands of e-mails, calls, letters, and other communiqués since February 11th, mostly from veterans, and many from active duty military personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan, or their family members, and those items are over 100 to 1 against Kerry and for Bush.

And, if you insist on the tired political line that Bush was a “draft-dodger,” go strap yourself in the seat of an F-102 jet, pilot it down the runway at several hundred miles per hour, and then up into the air and bypass the speed of sound, then afterwards, go seek out the 140 Medal of Honor recipients who were in the National Guard, and tell them their service is akin to “draft-dodging.”

Or, if you want to insist on the other politically-spun myth that President Bush lied about going to war in Iraq, then simply look on the internet at the numerous quotes about WMD in Iraq, the need for US military action, and Hussein needing to be toppled; with those many quotes from John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Madeleine Albright, and other democratic leaders. In the Aug 1 issue of PARADE, GEN Tommy Franks (retired) a man of honor, stated that in January, 2003, (2 months before the start of the War in Iraq) Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah both told Franks that Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction, or WMD. According to GEN Frank's, President Mubarak told him point blank: 'Saddam has WMD--biologicals actually--and he will use them on your troops.”

Within an hour, Tommy Franks relayed that message to Washington, and the president of Russia, and other countries, trading with Iraq also reported that Hussein had WMD’s and was ready to use them.

Now, for political expediency, they have turned it all around and say President Bush lied. Sorry, but President Bush led, not lied.

Before politics, before our own agendas; if you want a cause, please use the cost of a movie ticket to FARENHEIT 9/11 and instead send a “care package” to one of our troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, send money or toys to help Iraqi children through www.operationiraqichildren.org , or similar groups, or just write our military men and women, and show them our full support, love, and appreciation.

Please join me and circulate this to everybody you know, and send it to the media, over and over.

Don Bendell served as an officer in four Special Forces Groups, including a tour on a green beret A-team (Dak Pek) in Vietnam in 1968-1969, and was in the Top Secret Phoenix Program, is a top-selling author of 21 books, with over 1,500,000 copies of his books in print worldwide, a 1995 inductee into the International Karate Hall of Fame, and owns karate schools in southern Colorado.
mailto:don@donbendell.com web: www.donbendell.com .

Permission is hereby granted to reprint, copy, or pass this on wherever and to whomever you choose. This is the 8th in a series of editorials about John F. Kerry, and is posted on my website with the other 7. The 7th editorial is also pasted below, in case you have not received it. Please sign my Guestbook and read the entries.
Blessings,
Don Bendell



Ellie

thedrifter
08-06-04, 07:14 PM
Thursday, Aug. 5, 2004 6:28 p.m. EDT <br />
McCain: Hanoi Hilton Jailers Used Kerry Speech Against Us <br />
<br />
Sen. John McCain attacked a group of Vietnam veterans on Thursday for their appearance in a campaign...

d c taveapont
08-06-04, 09:39 PM
damn ya had me going for awhile i even went to see the doc about my &quot;lilly Liver&quot; man i was glad when the doc said that my liver was fine and not Lilly...yup i listened to kerrys shipmates..Now did...

hrscowboy
08-06-04, 11:22 PM
I agree also d.c. taveapont i have yet to figure out why all this crap is coming out now when it should have been taken care of along time ago.

thedrifter
08-10-04, 01:14 PM
Issue Date: August 09, 2004


By Laura Bailey
Times staff writer


The director of the controversial movie Fahrenheit 9/11 tricked the Marine Corps into letting his crew film two recruiters as they targeted young people in the parking lot of a Flint, Mich., mall last spring, according to a spokesman for the Corps’ recruiting command.
“We did not know that the footage was going to be used for that movie. It turns out they deceived us essentially,” said Maj. David Griesmer, a spokesman for Marine Corps Recruiting Command, based at Quantico, Va.

Director Michael Moore is well known for his guerilla interviewing tactics, which include ambushes of unaware documentary subjects, but in Fahrenheit 9/11, there seems no doubt members of Moore’s crew are welcomed guests as they follow Staff Sgt. Dale Kortman and Sgt. Raymond Plouhar during an afternoon of fast-talking recruiting at the local mall.

Welcomed, they were, until it turned out they were they were wolves in sheep’s clothing, says the Marine Corps.

Critical of the war in Iraq, the film uses the recruiting footage as part of a larger segment about military recruiting in Flint, where there are few job opportunities for young people. In one shot, viewers hear the recruiters choosing to go to a mall in the poorer part of town rather than the wealthier mall, presumably because it will yield better results.

Griesmer said Moore’s production company fooled the Corps into believing they were working on a documentary solely about Marine Corps recruiting.

According to him, the New York-based Westside Productions company approached the Corps with a proposal for a documentary.

“In no way did they communicate they were working for or were associated with Michael Moore’s production team,” he said.

“That might have eliminated it right then,” he said. “We don’t get involved in political or partisan projects.”

According to Griesmer, the Marine Corps agreed to the project and the footage was taken April 16. Members of Recruiting Command did not know it was used for Moore’s movie until his office came across images of the recruiters on an Internet advertisement about a month before the film debuted.

The Marine Corps normally requires big-screen movie producers to work with its entertainment liaison office in Hollywood, which advises producers on military subjects and vets proposals for real-life footage. This time they skipped that process because the proposal seemed like a small television project and a good opportunity, Griesmer said.

“We wanted to work with this company,” he said.

“Based on the information they provided, we decided to support it. It seemed like a good opportunity to educate people.”

He said repeated calls to the company to discuss the discrepancies were not returned.

The film’s supervising producer Tia Lessin said the Marine Corps was not deceived.

“If they didn’t go through the proper channels that’s not our fault,” she said. “They were fully aware that is was a motion picture documentary.”

Lessin said Westside Productions told the Corps the footage would be part of a scene looking at the choices for youth in Flint and what attracted some high school graduates to the military. The recruiters signed full waivers and were eager to be on film and share their work, she said.

The film waivers were for Westside productions, which did not spell out that they were associated with Michael Moore, she said.

“If they had asked we certainly would have told them. We didn’t hide that fact it just didn’t come up,” Lessin said. According to her, the production team did tell the recruiters the footage “was part of a longer documentary on the post 9/11 environment.”

Lessin said she was disappointed and surprised that the Corps felt deceived. “They were very enthusiastic. They gave us open access. They expressed no concerns at all,” she said.

“There shouldn’t be the supposition that the film was against the Marine Corps recruiters,” she said.

The point of the segment, said Lessin, was that “the people who have the least are the first to defend our freedom.”

While Kortman and Plouhar both left recruiting jobs in June, their move had nothing to do with the film, Griesmer said.

“They had reached the end of their three year tour and it was time for their rotation,” he said.

Kortman is now with the 2nd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion at Camp Lejeune, N.C., while Plouhar has moved to the 3rd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment at Camp Pendleton, Calif.


While the Corps says their recruiters participated unknowingly in Fahrenheit 9/11, another Marine may be in trouble for his willing participation.

Cpl. Abdul Henderson, a reservist with the 3rd Air Naval Gunfire Liaison Company, based in Long Beach, Calif., appears side by side with Moore in one of the director’s signature-style interview antics.

Dressed in his Service Alphas, Henderson accompanies Moore as the director sneaks up on Congressmen outside the Capitol and asks if they would consider enlisting their sons in the military.

The film includes footage of Henderson, an Operation Iraqi Freedom veteran, proclaiming his disagreement with the war and saying he would not go back if ordered to do so.

A spokesman for the Reserve said his unit is reviewing the role Henderson played in the movie to decide if he should face any punishment.

“We’re looking into it to determine if there was any impropriety. It’s way too early to tell,” said Capt. Patrick Kerr, a Reserve spokesman.

Kerr said the Marine Corps Reserve was not aware of Henderson’s participation in the movie, but that after it debuted, the active duty representative for his unit initiated a preliminary inquiry.

“We’re not out to get this guy. His chain of command is reviewing the facts,” said Kerr.

Kerr said the unit is not conducting an official investigation and that any decisions to punish Henderson would be up to his commanding officer.

According to a July 29 USA Today story, Henderson, a five-year reservist was awarded the Marine Corps Achievement Medal after trying to rescue British soldiers who were trapped in an overturned Humvee.

In an interview with the paper, Henderson was quoted saying the question from Moore surprised him but that his answer “came from the heart.”

Describing himself as a patriot, Henderson, a business major at California State University – Los Angeles, is quoted saying he would willingly deploy to Afghanistan because it harbors terrorists, but not Iraq. “Where’s the imminent threat?,” he asks.

While Henderson said he would not go back to Iraq, it is unclear whether he will have to back up his claim anytime soon. Kerr said he was not aware of any plan of the unit returning to Iraq in the near future.



http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story.php?f=1-MARINEPAPER-281634.php


Ellie

Phantom Blooper
08-10-04, 04:06 PM
Cook I agree with your statements a few posts up but I have to ask you this on this quote...
Do bears s hit in the woods? This is most likely to be true,but I have wondered where polar bears went to s hit? Any answers?:banana: Semper-Fi! Chuck Hall

thedrifter
08-10-04, 09:09 PM
General Franks: You Are Fair Game

Tommy Franks' recent pronouncement that Kerry is "absolutely" qualified to become President of the US struck me like a punch from Mike Tyson (and Mike, you still rock). The Commanding General, who also "absolutely" believed there were weapons of mass destruction Iraq (as Kerry did as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee), who was our main military man in initiating the war on terror in Afghanistan (who will be judged as the man who let Bin Laden escape), who is now trying to his book on the best seller list.

General Franks, you were untouchable to the military until you wrote a book and began a media campaign. You are now fair game.

I was never a war hero. I joined an ROTC unit during my freshman year in college. The year was 1974. That was not the most popular time to join the military, with the stench of our loss in Vietnam affecting the nation's perception of the war. That stench was fanned into the homes of the US by people like Jane Fonda and John Jerry. We were a raping and pillaging force the like of which the world had not seen since Genghis Khan. We were the epitome of evil, and the ultimate example of the capabilities of our degenerate society.

So why did I join? I believed that we lived in the greatest country in the world. A country formed by basic ideals and principles that were written by people over 200 years ago. And while history has forgotten for the most part what those founders put on the line, I was aware that most of them, men and women of wealth and privilege, lost everything. Their wealth, their position, their families and their lives.

My relatives came to this country, legally, to find a better place. My Irish side was driven here because of an induced famine and policy of confiscation that drove the poor out of Ireland. My Polish side landed here legally in the early 1900's, with only the promise that our streets were lined of gold and there was no poverty. Both sides found a very harsh reality. America is a place of great potential, but one that left the poor to perish.

My families did the dirty work. Our homes were "on the other side of the tracks" Yet it was a great environment - race nor religion mattered, if you were out of line everyone not only knew, but had the power to "enforce".

Why do I raise the past? Because this Country was a much better place than the places of my ancestry. Here, a parent did not not have to decide on which child lived or died. Here, a parent could make a good living, without blood lines being an issue. Here, you could build your own house, or even your own business, without having it taken away.

I joined the military in 1974 because of a deep rooted belief that freedom was no free. We all owe something to keep our great Nation the best in the world.

I was ridiculed, chastised, disavowed, and I am sure hated. But I never wavered. I looked very out of place with a short hair cut, but I was upholding the honor that those before me had laid the foundation. My father and grandfather had served honorably in World War Two and the Korean War. My Uncles all served in either World War Two or Korea. Policeman, Fireman, Carpenters and Masons - before and after the wars.

I served proudly on active duty and in the US Army Reserves.

When Clinton was elected, things changed. We were downsizing the military from the get go, but my record kept me intact.

Then I asked myself a very basic question - would you follow an order from this Commander In Chief. I wrestled with that for a few months. In the end, I came to the conclusion that I would always question an order from the current CIC, and my hesitation would or could get someone killed on a battlefield. And, rather than resign my commission, I chose to go "INACTIVE". After 14 years of exemplary service, I made the decision to forfeit a pension over betraying my values.

Tommy Franks has a much better story to tell. But I can question whether he was a man who accepted the military status quo, or who challenged his chain of command.

I take note of the fact that Colin Powell and Norman Swartzkopf both resigned soon after Clinton was elected. General Franks did not, and was promoted under the Clinton Administration.

Officers loyal to this Country resigned or retired under Clinton. Politicians like General Franks betray our great Nation by schilling a book for money in his pocket.

This is a man who has no loyalty to our country, and a man of whom we can ask why he continued to serve....

Jim Manion

http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/letters/2004/reader081004.htm


Ellie

thedrifter
08-12-04, 12:41 PM
A TIME FOR MANHOOD

By DUNCAN MAXWELL ANDERSON

August 11, 2004 -- THIS November's election is about something everyone is thinking about, and almost no one is talking about. Words like "national security" are fig-leaves for the real subject: manhood.
Why does manhood matter? Because we're at war. What kind of leader do you want when armed lunatics are trying to kill you and your family? Do you need a master of nuance or a leader of men? Do you want Alan Alda or Braveheart? (Hmm. Let me think.)

You might wonder why the recent Democratic convention was the gaudiest display of militarism and macho talk since the Berlin Olympics of 1936 — this, from the party that successfully ran a draft-dodger for president twice, and which won't fund a candidate who doesn't bow to the feminist abortion-god.

I'll tell you why. Everyone in the United States knows what time it is: It's after 9/11.

The 9/11 attacks have precipitated a crisis of manhood that is shaking our society to its roots. But for so many years, we have been so entangled in the delicate sensibilities of feminism that we can't even put our confusion into words.

To state the crushingly obvious, war is a male thing. Even when directed by the occasional Maggie Thatcher or Joan of Arc, war is fought by men's rules, by men. At the same time, not all men are enthusiastic warriors; in peacetime, for the sake of civilization, there is a need for men who are contemplatives, diplomats, artists and even complainers.

Martial men are always eager to believe it's time for action, that the enemy is at the gates. It can make them seem crude and scary. But on 9/11, it was suddenly obvious that the everyday heroism of soldiers, firemen and cops was indispensable.



Meanwhile, the stock of intellectuals goes down in a life-or-death crisis, especially for those who weren't that brilliant to begin with. Some men claim the status of artists simply because they don't know how to change a tire. Men from the arty class can become parasites, making their try for greatness simply by throwing muck at men who are truly great.

For some reason, that makes me think of Michael Moore. If his latest movie — which perhaps should be entitled "Paranoid 9/11" — were truthful, no one would go see it. Its appeal is that it's deliciously false. It's the revenge of the weenies like Moore, who resent the new importance of masculine men like George W. Bush. Moore's audiences want to believe that the Arab jihad against us isn't real, so they can force the rest of us to read their lousy poetry.

Hoping for votes from normal people as well, John "Botox" Kerry has been trying to recast himself as a he-man. Kerry served in Vietnam 35 years ago, as you may have heard him say once or twice. But now the new book by Vietnam swift boat officer John O'Neill, "Unfit for Command," suggests that the recent bunny-suit image of Kerry at NASA was not far off. Testimony by Kerry's mates and commanding officers describes him as a timorous whiner who lied his way to several combat medals.

Some of the first heroes of post-9/11 America had no medals or military records. They were ordinary guys catching an early flight to San Francisco. As the 9/11 commission report definitively concludes, early stories about heroism on board doomed United Flight 93 on 9/11 (often pooh-poohed as comforting fairy tales in the mainstream press) were correct.

Black box recordings prove that at 9:57 a.m., a contingent of passengers "overwhelmed" (i.e., killed) the hijackers in Flight 93's cabin and bashed their way into the cockpit of the plane, which was being piloted toward Washington by the two surviving hijackers. As they were being overcome, the jihad "pilots" ditched the plane in a field in Shanksville, Pa., rather than die fighting.

The fighter jets sent up to defend Washington did not know Flight 93 was approaching, and could not have stopped it. The last line of defense was that group of strangers — ordinary Americans who counterattacked against their enemies and destroyed them.

For these times, in place of Kerry's limp salute and tedious 55-minute acceptance speech, I prefer Bush's terser words, on the phone to Vice President Dick Cheney on Sept. 11, 2001, on his way to the airport: "I heard about the Pentagon. We're at war. Somebody's gonna pay."

Bush's directness reminds me of Jeremy Glick, the 225-pound judo champion who called home from Flight 93 on his cell phone to say goodbye and explain what was about to happen: "The men voted to attack the terrorists."

Glick's fellow passenger Todd Beamer put it this way: "Are you guys ready? Let's roll."

Duncan Maxwell Anderson is president of High Tor Media, Inc., a New York book-packaging company. E-mail:

dmanderson@hightormedia.com

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/26628.htm


Ellie

thedrifter
08-17-04, 07:59 AM
THE RACE TO THE WHITE HOUSE <br />
Losses and Lessons for Bush and Kerry <br />
After defeats in early races for Congress, both learned to fight and to get up and try again. <br />
<br />
By Maria L. La Ganga, Times Staff...

thedrifter
08-17-04, 07:59 AM
The Sun "appealed to the basic, hard-core, blue-collar guy and told them why they should be upset with this guy thinking he could own the district," said Kendall Wallace, then the newspaper's city editor and now its publisher. "Carpetbagger. Who does he think he is? It branded him."

The Sun's editorials were especially negative, calling into question Kerry's patriotism and fitness for office.

"His reputation as a valiant naval officer was tarnished in the process of his becoming widely known as a radical protester against the war," Sun editor Clement C. Costello wrote on Oct. 30, 1972.

Polls that had shown Kerry leading Cronin by as much as 26 percentage points found that his advantage had shrunk to 10. Then Durkin, the independent, dropped out of the race just before election day and endorsed Cronin.

"I threw myself on a grenade," is how Durkin described it in a recent interview. "I said the most important thing is to stop a guy who isn't a local person running for office."

Vallely, the campaign field organizer, remembers election night as if it was yesterday.

Kerry laid into the Sun during his concession speech, recalled Vallely, saying, " 'Lookit, I want to tell Clem Costello one thing: If I had it to do all over again, I'd be on the Mall with the veterans tomorrow.' … The place went crazy. That's the real tough side of Kerry."

After the crowds went away and the loss sunk in, said biographer Brinkley, Kerry holed up in his Lowell home and put together model airplanes and ships. He read novels. Over the next few years, he went to law school and became a prosecutor, winning praise even from the Sun. It took a full decade for him to get back into politics with a successful run for lieutenant governor in 1982.

What Kerry learned in the House race, DiNatale said, was that "the time to be on guard, be at your best, throw the punch, is at the end. He wasn't ready to fight tough enough at the end, and he decided never to let that happen to him again."

He also learned not to let up before an election is over, said David Thorne, Kerry's then-brother-in-law and still his best friend. After the primary victory, Thorne said, Kerry should have reached out and strengthened his political base.

"You never take anything for granted. You make political friends. Those are the lessons," said Thorne, who managed the House campaign. "The other lesson is that you can lose and rise again."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A product of Dimmitt High, Texas Tech and the University of Texas Law School, Kent Hance loved to portray himself as more of a Texan than George W. Bush. And at forum after forum, he would stand by Bush and tell his favorite story about the time he'd worked one summer on a ranch.

"A guy stopped in a car and asked me how to find a certain ranch," Hance would say. "I told him you go five miles east and then take a right …. And you come to a cattle guard. Turn left, go a mile, and you'll be at the ranch."

The driver would roll up his window and head off in "a great, big, beautiful Mercedes, with Connecticut tags," Hance would continue.

"George, you were in Connecticut, right? In fact, you were born there. A while later, the young man came back, rolled down his window and said, 'Excuse me, but what color uniform did the cattle guard have on?' "

Hance also hammered Bush for raising most of his money from "Northeastern, Rockefeller-type Republicans who have always wanted West Texas oil and gas."

The elder Bush hosted fundraisers for his son. Contributors included William C. Ford, vice chairman of the Ford Motor Co. and President Ford. Bowie Kuhn, former commissioner of baseball, donated, and so did Donald H. Rumsfeld, former secretary of Defense.

The money, in part, went for intensive television advertising, which helped make the battle relatively close.

But the final blow for Bush came near the race's end. His supporters arranged a Bush Bash, complete with free beer, and advertised the event in the local paper. One of Hance's men, a member of the Church of Christ, copied the ad and mailed it out to 4,000 voters of the same denomination.

Hance played it pretty low key — "It just shows the campaign is not in touch with our values in West Texas" was about all he'd say.

Bush chose not to fight back. He might have attacked Hance for owning a building that housed a college beer joint, but he didn't.

Hance won, with about 53% of the vote.

"The main thing Bush learned in that race … was not to be outdone as a populist," said Buchanan, the University of Texas political scientist. "He resolved never again to be out-hustled as a friend of the people."

Hance eventually switched parties, ran for railroad commissioner and became a stalwart Bush friend, ally and fundraiser. Bush stayed out of politics until 1994, when he beat incumbent Ann Richards to become governor of Texas.

"I learned," he said while campaigning in 2000, that "I need to respond. I let a half-truth go unanswered. While I abhor the politics of tearing people down, I understand the need to counterpunch."

Times staff writer Maura Reynolds contributed to this report.


http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-na-house16aug16,1,6068651.story


Ellie

thedrifter
08-18-04, 08:57 AM
Mad Dog <br />
<br />
&quot;Shut up!&quot; and other deep thoughts from the angry mind of Bill O'Reilly. The truth about Fox News' number-one bigmouth <br />
<br />
By JOHN COLAPINTO <br />
<br />
<br />
At 2:30 p.m. every weekday, Bill O'Reilly...

thedrifter
08-18-04, 08:57 AM
In the run-up to the Iraq war, he worked hard to sell his viewers on the idea that Saddam was harboring weapons of mass destruction, but he came out with an apology (long before the New York Times did) for unintentionally misleading his audience when the aftermath revealed no stockpiles of WMD. And he spent much of early April, weeks prior to the Abu Ghraib revelations, slashing away at Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for his "giant screw-ups" in Iraq and stopped just short of calling for his dismissal because of the "mess" he'd made there -- a stance, he admits, that will "lose some of the far-right Kool-Aid drinkers." Never mind that O'Reilly openly admits that a good deal of his outrage at Rumsfeld derives from his refusal to appear on the show. ("We're upfront about it," O'Reilly says. "If you're a detective and the guy won't answer your questions and lawyers up, you're going to be more suspicious of the guy -- correct?") As true devotees of the show know, the meta-drama of The Factor is that it's all about Bill, all the time. Hovering over the proceedings is a tacit, winking question: How am I, Bill O'Reilly, going to react to the person I am interviewing, and then how are you, the viewer, going to react to me reacting to that person, and then, how am I going to react to your reaction? Which may be why O'Reilly likes to mess with people's heads over the unexpected liberal views he pugnaciously promotes. For instance, he's for gun control, same-sex adoptions and civil unions (as long as he doesn't have to watch gay-pride parades, which he says are among "the most offensive spectacles of all"); he's an environmentalist to the extent that he "believes in global warming"; as a practicing Catholic, he pulls back from actually endorsing abortion, but he doesn't believe it should be made illegal; and he's against capital punishment. But the precise shade of O'Reilly's conservative politics is beside the point when it comes to his indispensability to the Fox News Channel and its right-wing agenda. This was especially evident in an "interview" he conducted last year - an encounter that tops the list of Most Egregious Things O'Reilly Has Done. In February 2003, he had on as a guest a young man named Jeremy Glick, whose father, a Port Authority worker, died in the World Trade Center attack. A self-described "radical leftist," Glick was invited on The Factor to explain why he had signed an anti-war statement by a group called Not in Our Name, which accused America of committing atrocities "similar" to the September 11th attacks in Panama, Iraq and Vietnam. O'Reilly was openly disgusted by Glick's politics and splutteringly furious at his guest's refusal to endorse the invasion of Afghanistan that toppled the Taliban ("Who killed your father?!" O'Reilly bellowed). When Glick tried, repeatedly, to be heard above his host's interruptions, O'Reilly shouted, "I don't really care what you think," and was soon yelling at Glick to "shut up!" He eventually told his engineer to cut Glick's mike. (Glick later said that O'Reilly told him, after the taping, "Get out of my studio before I tear you to ****ing pieces" -- although Glick also admits that he baited O'Reilly, off-camera, with insults about his show.) According to Douglas Rushkoff, an author and media/popular-culture theorist, O'Reilly's poor impulse control is precisely what makes him so valuable to Fox News Channel. According to Rushkoff, O'Reilly's appeal to anger, emotion and opinion are not merely ratings-grabbing devices; they are part of a larger program of ideological coercion. "As the conservative-message machine geared up in the 1970s," says Rushkoff, "its strategy was to make the political landscape more emotional and less factual - galvanizing a new base of conservative support around hot-button issues. That's why Fox tries to replace news with opinion." O'Reilly, Rushkoff says, is crucial to this strategy, with his opinion-based news analysis and short temper. "The net effect of people getting their information from the O'Reilly show, instead of from a news operation, is that they're more apt to believe that the arguments that sway them most emotionally deserve their allegiance."

O'reilly comes by his anger honestly. Born in New York on September 10th, 1949, the eldest of two children of William and Angela O'Reilly, he was physically and verbally bullied by his father, William Sr. An imposing six-foot-three ex-naval officer, William Sr. was a frustrated, thwarted man who, despite becoming an accountant at a large oil company, felt he never reached his full potential, even after he bought a house and moved his family to the tranquil middle-class suburb of Westbury, on Long Island, when Bill Jr. was a year old. "He'd get into a fight at the drop of a hat," says an elderly Westbury neighbor who recalls William's hair-trigger temper. O'Reilly says his father took out his frustrations on his son, whom he yelled at for minor offenses and even at times punched in the arm. "There were times when my heart was black with the urge for revenge," O'Reilly has written about his late father. When I ask O'Reilly how his dad's bullying affected him, he shrugs. "I can't really tell you," he says. "I've never been into analysis, or a shrink at all, so I have no idea. And I really don't care." This response certainly fits O'Reilly's pose as a down-to-earth guy with zero patience for highfalutin indulgences such as therapy. However, his books are filled with tortured efforts to come to grips with his unresolved feelings about his dad. Relations with his mother were better, but not much. "I had as little to do with my parents as humanly possible," he says.

O'Reilly graduated from Marist College in 1971, then worked for two years as a high school teacher in Miami. Unhappy, he enrolled in the master's program in broadcast journalism at Boston University. After graduating in 1975, he landed a job at a tiny station, WNEP-TV in Scranton, Pennsylvania. From the start, O'Reilly had an innate understanding that emotion and outrage grabbed viewers. "He liked the looking-out-for-the-little-guy stories," says Elden Hale, then the station's news director, "the consumer stories, the who-got-ripped-off stories." The fearless-crusader routine made him an instant star in the tiny market of Scranton. Within nine months, he caught the eye of one of the country's best local TV stations: WFAA in Dallas. O'Reilly has written about his disastrous tenure at WFAA ("I made every possible political mistake"), but he also says that the intense dislike he engendered among his colleagues stemmed from his excess of moxie and a too-strong impulse for honesty. Portraying himself as a straight shooter among spineless co-workers, O'Reilly says he was the only employee to challenge management for hiring a female anchor who was sleeping with "one of the station honchos" -- an act of bravery that earned him a two-week suspension for "insubordination."

But the picture that emerges of O'Reilly from talking to former colleagues at WFAA is very different. They accuse him of lifting stories from the newspaper and undermining newsroom colleagues. "In a business where there are a lot of reprehensible people," says longtime WFAA reporter Byron Harris, "he stood out as particularly dishonest, obnoxious, self-centered."

After two years at WFAA, O'Reilly moved to KMGH-TV, a station in Denver. He was at first as unpopular in Denver as he had been in Dallas. "One of the things that's never endeared him to people is how remarkably pushy he is," says one former KMGH co-worker. But after a year there, O'Reilly had become a bona fide star, and he gathered around himself a coterie of awed, mostly younger reporters. Bob Cullinan, a twenty-three-year-old from Nebraska, was one of them. Cullinan says that O'Reilly cultivated these "disciples" who included fellow reporters Joe Spencer and Michael Scott. After work, the four of them would hit the local dance bars, where O'Reilly was clearly the alpha male on the party circuit. "I was like the original James Bond," he says.

O'Reilly was setting the agenda in the KMGH newsroom, too. "Bill was only twenty-nine or thirty, but he pretty much ran that place," says Cullinan. But Cullinan was sometimes troubled by his mentor's approach. "I helped him produce some stories," he says. "He would write the story before he did the interviews. Then he'd get the person to say what fit with his narrative."

In 1979, O'Reilly moved on again, this time to anchor a news broadcast in Hartford, Connecticut. By 1980, he was let go because of what the station called a "conflict of chemistry." He recovered quickly, when he was hired to host a local evening magazine show at WCBS-TV in New York. After a year, O'Reilly got his big break, becoming a CBS network correspondent, filing stories for the CBS Evening News With Dan Rather. It didn't take long before controversy found him again. In June 1982, he was sent to CBS' bureau in Buenos Aires during the Falkland Islands war. Shortly after arriving, O'Reilly went to cover a story about a crowd of angry Argentines who had gathered in the streets. He was convinced he'd landed a scoop that would put him in a prominent spot on the evening news. But his bosses gave the story to CBS' star correspondent in Buenos Aires, Bob Schieffer -- a classic case of "big-footing," which one member of the bureau points out is "normal for young reporters. That's just part of TV news." But O'Reilly wouldn't stand for it. He reportedly threw a tantrum with his bosses in Buenos Aires and had an ugly confrontation with Schieffer. Within days of arriving, O'Reilly was kicked out of the bureau. "They literally sent him home," recalls one of the team members.

continued.......

thedrifter
08-18-04, 08:58 AM
O'Reilly soon left CBS and began a series of ignominious local TV gigs that included weekend anchoring on the lowest-rated local station in Boston. In 1986, he got another shot at a network position:...

thedrifter
08-18-04, 03:07 PM
Wednesday, Aug. 18, 2004 11:48 a.m. EDT
Jane Fonda Takes 'Vaginas Vote' Campaign to New York

John Kerry's old anti-war protest partner "Hanoi" Jane Fonda is coming to New York in the wake of the GOP convention as part of a get-out-the-vote rally she's calling "Vaginas Vote."

A press release issued Wednesday by Fonda and her partner, "Vagina Monologues" playwright Eve Ensler, announces:

"'V-Day's V is For Vote' and Rock the Vote's 'Chicks Rock, Chicks Vote,' in conjunction with The White House Project's 'Vote, Run, Lead' and Omega Institute, announce THE event of the election season: 'Vaginas Vote, Chicks Rock.'"

"On the evening of September 13th, actors, singers, dancers, thinkers and leaders will all come together at the historic Apollo Theater in Harlem for a night of entertainment and political empowerment."

While ostensibly nonpartisan, the Fonda event boasts of such anti-Bush headliners as Susan Sarandon, Gloria Steinem and Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowsky.

"'Vaginas Vote, Chicks Rock' takes place less than 2 months before the presidential election," the Fonda release says. "And organizers are using the power of arts and activism to motivate and inspire all women - especially young women - to raise their voices and get out the vote to end violence against women and girls."

A call to the Kerry campaign for reaction to "Hanoi" Jane's efforts on his behalf was not returned by press time.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/8/18/114927.shtml


Ellie