Ladies and Gentlemen, the State of the Blog is good. This last September we saw our highest traffic ever, and that traffic is continuing to uptrend. September brought us our first ever guest contribution from sometime blogger Joel, and it also brought us our first ever reader submitted contribution from reader Jason. The little map over on the right hand side of the page, courtesy of Dale's ECB, has continued to get bluer and bluer, and that is what this is ultimately all about. We can only hope that these positive trends continue through October and all the way to November 3, when we all wake up knowing that we've secured the future of the free world for another 4 years by re-electing George W. Bush President of the United States of America.

As our longtime readers may know, every first of the month we like to publish a list of our top blog referrers, our way of saying "thanks" to those who've sent traffic our way. Be sure to check them out, they can't be all bad if they're linking to us. ;-)

7:18 pm
While I'm not up for the Presidential Debate Drinking Game, I have to confess that I will be having a beer or two during this debate. Condemn me if you must, but at least I'm not a "one-can Wendy" like some candidates I could mention.

7:30 pm

I'm a little nervous for Bush, but I know that the more people see of John Kerry, the less they like him. And they'll see a lot of 'ole leatherface tonight. Of course, some people will actively avoid the debates. A woman I work with taped all of her favorite shows last night so she can relax at home and not watch the debate tonight. I think there are many millions just like her out there.

7:59
Yikes, that's one bright red carpet. Why does the stage have to be red, white and blue? How about a nice olive and grey? Fox says Bush has to tone down the "testosterone levels"? Huh? People like him because he's not a pussy like Kerry. Donna Shalala gave tickets to the debate to U of Miami students. That's pretty cool. I have fond memories of Shalala from her time at UW-Madison. I appreciated that someone on campus was shorter than me.

8:06 pm
Kerry says he would reach "out to the Muslim world, which the President has almost not done." Um, doesn't that mean that he has done it? Bush blew his response. He should have called Kerry on his "allies" B.S. Point all the allies we have and point out how Kerry has insulted them. Bad rebuttal.

8:10
Wait, we should have allies in Iraq, but Bush was wrong to rely on allies in Afghanistan. I hope Bush points that out.

8:13
Opium? Huh? What the hell? Hmm...maybe there's a reason Kerry has opium on his mind.

8:22
Kerry's approach to Homeland Security is to focus on cops and firefighters because they're "first responders"? That's just great. How does that protect anyone from an attack? Isn't that more of an admission that Kerry's focus is to hand out other people's tax money after we're attacked again?

8:30
Grrr...Bush, please call Kerry on the allies comments. Now. He needs to point out all the other countries in Iraq right now. It would be devastating.

8:32
Thank you. It's about time Bush layed the smack down on this nitwit. I have the feeling Bush wants to jump across the stage and pound Kerry. If he doesn't, I certainly want to. Heh...way to forget about Poland, Kerry.

8:46
Why does Kerry keep bringing up Vietnam? Did he serve there or something?

8:52
I'm glad that Bush nailed Kerry on his remarks about Allawi. I wish Bush would have pointed out that Kerry didn't even have the decency to be in Congress for his speech. If he's so concerned about allies, don't you think he'd be first in line to meet them? God, I hate Kerry. I can't stand even 45 minutes of this man. I feel so sorry for Teresa. No wonder she's so angry.

8:55
I was just going to mention that Bush should mention his diplomatic success with Libya. And he did. Yay, Bush. I think he needs to make the point that different situations call for different solutions. Now Bush needs to say this: "Osama Bin Laden didn't attack us. Radical Islamic terrorists attacked us."

9:00
Sweet, Kerry is admitting that he'd go to the UN for a permission slip. Also, didn't North Korea get nukes in the Clinton administration? Oooh, now Kerry is going to bring up Kyoto. It's like he's reading from the insane leftist script tonight. He even said the magical liberal leftist word (Halliburton). This is awesome, Bush is bringing up the International Criminal Court. Of course, he's not explaining his reasoning very well.

9:09
Darfur is genocide and according to Kerry we have a moral obligation to send troops. So, is genocide in Iraq not worthy of sending troops? Kerry's just talking out of his ass tonight. It's too bad Bush can't just say, "hey, we let the UN take the lead in Darfur, like my opponent wants them to take the lead in the War on Terror. The events in Darfur show the half-assed job the UN would do. Aren't you glad that I'm for having America take the lead in defending herself?"

9:14
Okay, Kerry's comment on Bush's sense of certainty is actual his best point of the night. I can understand how Bush's certainty might be a comfort to some and a concern to others. This is by far the most lucid point Kerry has made.

9:17
Here's the first line from a review of Kerry's book that he just referenced:

In a cursory overview of international crime, Senator Kerry (D-Mass.) implausibly calls for foreign criminal law to be imported into the United States to prosecute nationals of other countries who plan crimes here then conduct them abroad.

This doesn't sound like it has anything to do with nuclear proliferation.

9:24
Praise the Lord, this is almost over. I feel like Kerry's main message is that "I will do the same things Bush does, but different and better." What the hell does that mean?

9:29
What's interesting is that Kerry talks in vague terms about "his plans", while Bush is closing with some actual tactics. It comes down to this: Bush is a doer and Kerry is a criticizer. It makes sense because, as a Senator who rarely actually votes, Kerry has very little real experience in making decisions.

9:30
I like that Bush closed by asking for our votes. People forget that you have to ask for what you want. I think Bush was okay, but Kerry was horrible.

9:32
I'm still really pissed that Kerry forgot all about Poland's contribution in Iraq.

9:38
Fox is actually giving pretty high remarks to Kerry. They say the President looked tired. I think in Bush's case that's not a bad thing. He should be tired. He's doing an extremely hard job while Kerry's out windsurfing.

Grandpa John's, which is featured in today's Blogger Showcase, has some fun putting the Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates in drag. The concensus here is that Dick Cheney makes by far the most attractive woman.

John F'ing Kerry, on the other hand, does not make an attractive woman. In fact, I think he bears a striking resemblance to Randall Flagg, the devil in "The Stand" miniseries. But don't let me tell you what to think, judge for yourself:

I have six more GMail invitations. If any of you would like one, please email me at Kris at Dummocrats.com or leave a note in the comments and I'll be happy to send one your way.

Bloggers aren't the only ones who've noticed John F'ing Kerry's new leatherface look. Lynne Cheney's noticed it too.

During a campaign stop with her husband, a group of volunteers moved into the crowd with microphones for the question-and-answer period. Vice President Dick Cheney told supporters to look for the people with dark orange shirts.

When Cheney paused as if searching for the words to describe the shade of orange, Lynne Cheney said, "How about John Kerry's suntan?"

Surely the sophisticated Kerry camp returned Cheney's comments with a their own brand of urbane wit. Um, not so much. Here's what they had to say:

Responding to her comments, Kerry campaign spokesman Bill Burton said, "Is Mrs. Cheney jealous considering how hard it is to get sun in the undisclosed location with her husband Dick?

What the hell is that? The political equivalent of "I know you are, but what am I?" Even if you took Burton's remark at face value it's still incredibly stupid. Is he faulting Cheney for hard work and being on the job? Does he think the Cheneys should just take a few weeks off to go windsurfing?

While Kerry is the worst Presidential candidate in a long, long time, his staff may be even worse. If these people are a reflection of the "talent" a President Kerry would surround himself with, then God help us all if he wins.

It's a "security" blimp? What the hell is that?

I caught a glimpse of this thing when I got off the metro at Judiciary Square today and, let me tell you, I thought that Congress had opened up a used car lot on Capitol Hill or something.....

OK, I'm off for a run now. Hopefully the "security blimp" doesn't fall on me or anything.

After his infamous "Lambert Field" gaffe, John Kerry is desperate to connect with Wisconsin voters. His latest attempt is to frame himself as a political maverick, in the mold of "Fighting Bob" LaFollette, Lee Dreyfus and Russ Feingold.

Kerry communications director Stephanie Cutter says, "You can't really put a label on John Kerry. He's been an independent thinker and a fighter all his life."

Oh Stephanie, thank you so much for bringing a little laughter into my day. Yes indeedy, John Kerry is such an independent thinker that he's voted with Ted Kennedy a mere 93% of the time in the Senate in 2003. Now, I know that you contrarians out there will say "that's not a good measure because Kerry didn't show up to vote very often in 2003". Okay then, on key votes over the course of his Senate career, Kerry votes with Kennedy 94% of the time.

I know that hoity-toity Yale-educated east-coasters think that Wisconsinites are not their intellectual equals, but even we know that a man who votes with liberal leader Ted Kennedy 94% of the time is not an "independent thinker".

What will they try next? John Kerry as football star? John Kerry as war hero? John Kerry as activist? Oh wait...

Jason, from That Hero reports from Miami where he's uncovered the 2004 Presidential ballot. Take a look.

As one of the few non-lawyers in the blogosphere, I cannot decipher this. Hopefully James or one of our readers can give it a shot.

Today's Wictory Wednesday featured candidate is Lisa Murkowski in Alaska.

If you're not of a mind to help out a fellow Pollock, then consider volunteering for your own local candidates. Even if you're in a traditionally Democratic area, don't give up hope. If the polls continue to move in the President's favor, he could have some awfully long coattails and some surprising Dems could down with Kerry's sinking ship.

I don't agree with everything Bush does, but I'm quite certain that a Kerry administration would be all over itself apologizing to Yusuf Islam, among other terror supporters.

That really has nothing to do with Wictory Wednesday, but I needed an excuse to post this hilarious graphic from Blogs of War.

See the fun you can have exploring other blogs? Check out some of the other Bush supporters below:

Be on the lookout for this man. Last week, he was the upstate New York man who was wanted for "questioning" in connection with an alleged threat on President Bush's life. This week, he's a whacko fugitive on the run, who allegedly "left his upstate New York home Wednesday with a .30-30 lever-action hunting rifle in the trunk of his car, telling a neighbor, 'I'm not coming back.'" "Inside his house in Bainbridge was a picture of Bush with the words "Dead Man" spray-painted near it, law enforcement authorities said."

Thanks to Ace and to memento moron for the alerts.

I just got this email from the College Republican National Committee:

President Bush 53%, Senator Kerry 41%

A recent Washington Post/ABC poll shows President Bush leading John Kerry among young voters by 12 points, 53-41%.

Since August, John Kerry lost 20 points and the President gained 18 points--a 38-point turnaround! The following is the polling data of the 18-30 year-old registered voters:

Washington Post / ABC August 1
Bush 35%
Kerry 61%

Washington Post/ABC August 30
Bush 45%
Kerry 53%

Washington Post / ABC September 10
Bush 46%
Kerry 49%

Washington Post / ABC September 28
Bush 53%
Kerry 41%

Your hard work on campus is paying off in working to re-elect President Bush for four more years. Keep it up for 34 more days!

Another season of Presidential debates start Thursday. I can only hope that these debates have more great (and by "great" I mean "funny") moments. This site has Presidential debate transcripts dating back to the 1948 campaign. While some may love the "You're no Jack Kennedy" quote, I prefer these gems:

5. From 1980:

REAGAN: But, when I had quoted a Democratic President, as the President says, I was a Democrat. I said many foolish things back in those days.

4. From 2000:

BUSH: Look, this is a man who has great numbers. He talks about numbers. I'm beginning to think not only did he invent the Internet, but he invented the calculator. It's fuzzy math. It's a scaring -- he's trying to scare people in the voting booth.

3. From 1996:

MODERATOR: Senator Dole, the President said in his opening statement we are better off today than we were four years ago. Do you agree?

DOLE: Well, he's better off than he was four years ago.

CLINTON: I agree with that. That's right.

2. From 1980:

MR. CARTER: I think, to close out this discussion, it would be better to put into perspective what we're talking about. I had a discussion with my daughter, Amy, the other day, before I came here, to ask her what the most important issue was. She said she thought nuclear weaponry - and the control of nuclear arms.

1. From 1992:

MODERATOR: Admiral Stockdale, your opening statement, please, sir?

ADMIRAL STOCKDALE: Who am I? Why am I here?

Heh. I just love that Stockdale debate. That was good stuff. Anyone else have some humorous debate quotes they'd like to share?

The Washington Post reports that a woman was arrested for talking too loudly on her cell phone. Despite the fact that they set it up as a "free speech" issue, especially with their oh-so-clever and whimsical headline "For Metro, a Case of Too-Free Speech," nothing could be farther from the truth.

A brief background, some of which I've edited to remove the WaPo's clever re-casting of the story:

(not a direct quote)
Sakinah Aaron was walking into the bus area at the Wheaton Metro station talking loudly on her Motorola cell phone.

Officer George Saoutis of the Metro Transit Police told Aaron to lower her voice.

She told the officer he had no right to tell her how to speak into her cell phone.

Their verbal dispute quickly escalated, and Saoutis grabbed Aaron by the arm and pushed her to the ground. He handcuffed the 23-year-old woman, called for backup and took her to a cell where she was held for three hours before being released to her aunt.

She was charged with two misdemeanors: "disorderly manner that disturbed the public peace" and resisting arrest.

OK, so the woman was behaving obnoxiously, disorderly, if you will, and when asked to stop, she bascially told the cop "f-you, I can do whatever I want!" Unfortunately for Ms. Aaron, she was wrong about that.

Of course, the WaPo doesn't report this as a disorderly conduct case; instead, they try to frame the issue as if somehow disorderly conduct is a constitutionally protected right. They even cite an ACLU director:

Johnny Barnes, executive director of the Washington area chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, called Aaron's arrest "troubling."

"There seems to be an unusual attention paid to activities of patrons," Barnes said. "One should be able to ride the Metro and exercise a range of rights without fear of intervention from Metro police."

Yes, Mr. Barnes, one should be able to exercise a "broad range of rights" while riding metro. The problem with your argument is that disorderly conduct is not a right, disturbing the peace is not a right, dosobeying a lawful order from a police officer is not a right, and resisting arrest is not a right.

What Ms. Aaron did is akin to walking into a Wal-Mart with a megaphone, then insisting that "free speech" protects her actions. That's ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as WaPo's attempt to manufacture "outrage" over this incident.

In case you missed it, A Small Victory is on the ball and reminding all of you right wingers about our latest evil mission.

You can tell it's authentic because Karl uses his trademark "Hello, Kitty" notecards.

Karl is such a genius. With each hurricane, Florida has moved more towards Bush. At the start of hurrican season, Gerry at Dales' had Florida at a slight advantage for Kerry. In his latest update, the state has moved to a slight advantage for Bush. And who knows what will happen when the latest polls come out.

So, it makes perfect sense for our leader Karl to turn his attention to the Pacific Northwest. Dales' ECB lists Washington as "leaning to Kerry". Clearly Karl thinks it'll take a volcanic eruption to turn the state to Bush. I'd imagine that he's probably thinking that an major earthquake combined with the eruption could produce tidal waves that would also bring Oregon into the fold.

I know that our master doesn't take many suggestions from his minions, but I think he should also consider these natural disasters to bring the rest of the blue states around.

Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine and Rhode Island, New Hampshire: how about another "perfect storm" , but this time the damage is more on land rather than at sea.

Vermont, New York, New Jersey & Pennsylvania: I think Karl should plan on a sudden outbreak of West Nile Virus. These states haven't had many human cases and it could create a nice panic if they suddenly got a whole slew of them.

Maryland, DC & Delaware: Why should Florida have all the fun? I know that Karl says the earthquake machine is broken, but I'm sure that he's just trying to throw those sleuths in the Democratic Underground off his trail.

Michigan, lllinois, Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota: These states should be easy. Karl just has to warm up the early season blizzard machine.

New Mexico: For New Mexico, I'm thinking a drought could do the trick. They're faring well so far, but no rain until Election Day should turn them to the "right" side (pardon the pun).

California: Bring on the big earthquake (finally), although Karl may want to wait until 2008 so he can make sure Hillary Clinton doesn't get elected.

Hawaii: Hmm, what's left? I think Hawaii will just have to succumb to a tsunami.

I know this will disupt so many lives, but master Karl says it's necessary to bring about the eternal reign of the Bush dynasty, so whatcha gonna do?

The lyrics of Julian Cope are suddenly very appropriate:

She sings world shut your mouth
Shut you mouth
Put your head back in the clouds
And shut your mouth

Why? Red Line Rants links to a simply amazing article from last week's Guardian. Jonathan Freedland thinks that the world should be able to vote in America's Presidential election. WTF? Is he high? Well, probably, but his actual "reason" is that since America has the ability to affect the rest of the world the rest of the world should have a say in electing our President.

It may sound wacky, but the idea could not be more American. After all, the country was founded on the notion that human beings must have a say in the decisions that govern their lives. The rebels' slogan of "No taxation without representation" endures two centuries later because it speaks about something larger than the narrow business of raising taxes. It says that those who pay for a government's actions must have a right to choose the government that takes them.

Now, I know that Mr. Freedland probably wrote this article to piss off Americans like me and I shouldn't take the bait. But, you know, it's a Monday. In any case, he misses the point of his quote. First, "no taxation without representation". Is the rest of the world taxed by America? Nope. Instead Americans give billions to other nations. So, is he proposing that the rest of the world pay taxes with the money going into American's coffers? Or, does he think the citizens of Europe, for example, should be able to vote in our elections and still not pay taxes? Hmm, somehow I do think that "representation with no taxation" could be more American. I'm just saying...

Freedland somehow thinks that the rest of the world needs to give their consent to be governed by America. Perhaps I'm missing something, but is America governing the EU? Or Japan? Or even Iraq? No, we're not. Unlike Europeans and their precious Union, we actually still believe in the concept of sovereignty.

Euroweenies like Freedland are ticked off by two things. First, that America is far more powerful than their shriveled empires. Second, that we persist in electing leaders that put America first, rather than bowing to their European betters.

As Tyler from Red Line Rants put it, "You want to vote in an American election? Simple. Move to America. We'd love to have you. We'll have some extra room too once all of the celebrities and DU'ers clear out after November... "

Folks in Wisconsin are constantly bombarded with national political advertising. I'd estimate that one of every six ads I see are political. I've seen all the MoveOn ads, the Swiftie ads as well as everything produced by both campaigns.

In the last few days I've seen several pro-Bush ads from the Progress for America Voter Fund. While I appreciate their efforts on behalf of the President, I wonder if they're actually undermining him because of how awful their ads actually are.

Compare their surfer dude ad with the Bush campaign's similar windsurfing ad. They both make the same point, but the Bush ad does so in an elegant, classy way, while the Progress ad is tacky and amateurish. These ads are for a Presidential candidate, not Mentos.

Even worse are the ads that are supposed to be serious. Check out the rest of the spots on the Progress website. Now, I have no problem with the content, but I swear to God that Doug Jeffers does the voiceover. He's the same guy who narrates Miller High Life ads.

In the commercials, Jeffers' oratory is one of a rugged, traditional High Life man who shares his strong male viewpoints on the world in a no-nonsense manner.

(Unfortunately, I couldn't find an example of the High Life commercials online, but Miller's High Life website does have a little summary of the campaign. Hopefully, that'll jog your memory.)

So, this persona isn't really that far from Bush's image. But the problem is that the High Life ads are satire. By using the same guy (or, if it's not him, then using someone who sounds exactly like him), they run the risk of making their own ads sound like a joke. And these are ads that are about the war on Terror and how Bush takes it so seriously compared to Kerry. They are just a disaster.

If I were on either the Bush or Kerry campaign I'd be terrified more by the 527s that support me than those that oppose me. In their zealousness to "help" their candidates they could instead be doing irreparable harm.

The arrogance of the Democrats never fails to amaze me. The latest in the long line of liberals to proclaim who much smarter they are than that dumb dumb (who's kicking their asses, by the way) George W. Bush is former Texas governor Ann Richards. Richards, in Madison, WI to talk to women voters is ever the charmer, saying that Kerry's main problem in the upcoming debates is that he just knows so much more than Bush.

Kerry, like Richards and other Democrats who have faced Bush in past debates, probably knows too much.

"As a consequence, we see issues in less simplistic terms than the president. The president speaks in terms that are so simple on the most complex issues that it sort of leaves you with your mouth hanging open," says Richards, who was unseated by Bush 10 years ago this fall.

For a woman who once lamented that George H.W. Bush was "born with a silver foot in his mouth", Richards seems to either have her own foot firmly entrenched between her lips or her head up you know where. She claims that Kerry's other main problem "is that there are just too many targets for Kerry to hit all of them." For such a smartypants, Richards seems to have no knowledge of the growing economy, rising employment, deaths of major terrorists, and of the upcoming elections in Afghanistan.

I have no idea why the Democrats persist in their strategy of trying to frame Bush as some kind of idiot. Maybe that worked a bit in 2000, when he was more of an unknown, but not now. And, even if people are listening to that message, all they're doing is lowering expectations for Bush's debate performance. The way the Democrats talk, it's a Bush victory if he comes out and manages not to droll on the podium.

The Democrats are so blinded by their hatred of Bush that, I believe, they can no longer think rationally (assuming they ever could) about him. I wonder if they realize how turned off undecided voters will be by classless Richards comments like this:

"He's walking with his arms a little wider, as if he's gonna go for his sidearms. I don't know whether his tailor is making his suits too tight under the arms or whether he's adopted a kind of Gary Cooper-John Wayne walk down the hall to the podium.

I believe that no matter who's in office, you show respect for the President of the United States. As a mature adult, you should be able to put aside any partisan differences and recognize the importance of the President's position both in American and in the world. You don't belittle your leader, particularly in times of war. Unfortunately, Richards, like far too many of her liberal friends, is not a mature adult.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have some frightening news for you - the moonbat movement is alive and well, and these people are battier than ever.

Get this - I've been getting a lot of calls from the number 1-800-379-8414. Every time it's the same - I pick up the phone, say "hello," then I just hear a "click" as the person on the other end hangs up. Curious as to who this number belongs to, I headed over to good ol' google and plugged in the number. First, it turns out that I'm not the only one getting hang up calls from this number. That was satisfying to learn - I can't say if its good or bad news, but I was at least happy to find some information in the number. What I found next, however, was much much more disturbing. And let me warn you, gentle reader, you will not believe the whackjobs that I've uncovered.

There is a discussion thread over at Indymedia in which a bunch of moonbats think that this number belongs to the CIA, and that they are specifically being targeted with these "hang up" calls because they've sent hate mail to president@whitehouse.gov in the past.

OK, now that you've picked yourself up off the floor, let me say that again: they think that the CIA is calling them and hanging up, as part of some sort of orchestrated harassment campaign, all because they've sent email to the President before. Think I'm kidding?

Here is one excerpt from a post by the lead moonie explaining the scheme:

Here is my experience with this number. Back in November 2002, when it became apparent Bush was hellbent on taking America to war with Iraq, I being an American that opposed such, began sending e-mailed messages to president@whitehouse.gov and cc to a number of other government flunkies. Soon thereafter I too began to get these mysterious phone calls. Pick up the ringing phone, silence, then a click, then silence, and finally if you stayed on line long enough, the sound began that of a line reaching a faxline. This happened late at night, and then early in morning, odd hours, multiple times a day. I naturally thought it was some government assholes, and so rigged my computer up to screen my calls, and then in spite of their no-number block, I managed to get the calling number of 1-800-379-8414. I have a relative that works for the government and made inquiry. What I was told was that if one writes a caustic, nasty, or very anti email, letter, or phone call to Bush @ White House, then it's noted (no reply is ever given...it's like your communication is ignored) and passed on to Homeland Secur- ity, FBI, Secret Service and no doubt others. They have data base that matches YOU up to their known threat data bank, and decide you're not an immediate threat, but are likely CRANK, a peace activist, a social activist, or some sort of person that isn't fitting their mold. They then have the regional or area Joint Terrorist Task Force (I think that's what they're called) to "check you out" and if necessary, to give you intimidating communications that will naturally arouse the suspicions of a thoughtful person, yet isn't possible to determine where it's originating, un- less one is willing to go to lots of effort. All this under the theory that it's easier to deal with crank-writers or the crank-caller by neutralizing their "crankiness" by mild intimidation tactics such as this. IF, this isn't enough, then you'll soon get a phone call from someone claiming to be from some "police benevolent group" with a hyper- aggressive old coot trying to pitch you into contributing to some bullshit fund. Frankly, these old character's are usually retired ultra-rightwing cops willing to work for p/t "security reasons" for the government, and they'll either do this from their home phones, or from the "safe phone" provided by the feds.

And it goes on, and and on, and on. And the nuts all buy it.

One whack job responds in earnest:

I have sent any negative e-mails to the white house or government in general--I generally don't think stuff like that is worth the time. But I have written several letters to the editor of different papers and some have been published with my full name (these letters included criticism of police tactisc at PDX protests and US foreign policy in the middle east). I also have been quoted around the internet in various stories about police brutality, so I would guess that any marginally competent cop with too much time on his hands could figure out my home number.

Another user chimes in

I have just received my first 800-379-8414 call.

Amazingly, this follows a volley of criticism I sent to president@whitehouse.gov.

Another one drinks the Kool-Aid as well:

Hi there - I don't have caller ID on my landline and I am hoping to find out who has been calling me at least twice daily for the last couple days. The calls are similar to others described above - silence, then a click and hang-up. I got one tonight, (on a Saturday!), one earlier today, one last night around 9 or so, leading me to believe it's not telemarketers. Also, I am on the national Do Not Call list. I've made an online contribution to the DNC, have made several anti-Bush statements online as well as silly anti-Bush searches on Google, all of which can probably (?) be traced back to my ISP and therefore phone number - is this right? Should I assume it's this government thing, or some wacko who found my name and number online screwing with me?

All I can say is.... WOW.

Il Foglio, an Italian newspaper just published a bunch of horrifying photos of beheadings and other murders from Iraq and Afghanistan. Why would they do this? They said it was to "to protest against the indifference, passivity, ignorance and submission with which the politicians and the media, above all in Italy, are facing up to the religious war and the clash of civilisations going on in the world."

Here's a link to some of the pictures. Please be warned that they are truly horrifying:

Il Foglio

I couldn't agree more with the paper's decision to show all of these pictures. Yes, they're horrifying beyond belief. But that's the point. We need to be shocked. We need to get mad in order to have the resolve to defeat these evil enemies of Western civilization.

Imagine the uproar if an American paper followed their lead. Even so, I don't understand why they don't. Instead they waste their time manufacturing stories. They'd bend over backwards to expose the "truth" about Bush's National Guard service, but almost ignore the ugly truth of the inhumanity of the Islamofascists. I think it's because too many journalists honestly believe Bush is a greater threat than these fanatics.

I cannot wait until the election is over. Maybe once Bush is securely in office for another four years, our media can actually just report the news rather than hide it or slant it.

Ben Stein has a great piece entitled "Swimming to Arkansas" over at the American Spectator.

Here I am swimming lazily back and forth, east to west, then west to east, in my wonderful swimming pool. The weather is perfect here in Beverly Hills, as it has been for weeks on end. Blue skies, temperature in the low eighties or high seventies, no humidity, slight breeze. It is marvelous. As I swim east to west, I look up at our house, which (to me) looks perfect. It's a 1929 Spanish style home with a balcony running along the second floor as it faces the pool. The roof is reddish tile and the palms tower above the roof.

In the other direction, as I am swimming west to east, there are the jacarandas in our garden. For some reason, they do not have the gorgeous blue blossoms other people's jacarandas have, but they are leafy and a rich, lustrous green. Glorious. It is always a thrill to think this is my life. I could have died in a concentration camp. I could have been mass marched to death in the snows of Poland. I could have died in a beating by Romanian thugs instigated by the Nazis. Instead, I get to swim lazily back and forth in my pool on a glorious summer day.

Would you like to know what the rhythm of my stroke is? You can guess. It's "Thank you, God, thank you God, thank you God." There is nothing I ever did to merit such a life.

Ben Stein was born in Washington, DC in 1945. When he speaks of his gratitude for all that he has in his life, and notes that he could have met a fate a thousand times worse than his life is great, note he isn't speaking from personal experience.

Wait, that's not quite what I meant to say--- let me try again. What I meant to say is, Mr. Stein, though he may feel a special connection to holocaust victims because of his faith, had no personal exposure to these atrocities, so his feelings of gratitude are particularly admirable.

Was that it? No, I don't think that I captured it there, either. Let me try one more time - This is what I meant to say: Ben Stein knows that it could have been him. But it wasn't. Just like you should know that it could have been you. But it wasn't.

Ben Stein is a very smart man.

It doesn't matter what your faith is, what your sex is, or what your race is - You could have been "exterminated" in a WWII era death camp. You could have been sold into slavery. You could have denied basic human rights for a lifetime.

You could have lived in that world, and You could have been that person. You could still be that person. You could one of the millions suffering in Africa or denied your basic human rights by the fanaticism of Muslim maniacs.

But you weren't, and you're not.

You know, I pay over $1000 per month for rent for a D.C. apartment that my Midwestern sensibilities tell me is worth maybe 1/10th of that. It is barely big enough to fit a bed, a couch, and a desk, let alone me. And it drives me crazy.

I go to school full time, and when it's all said and done, I should be over $100,000 in debt. I worry about that a lot, and fear that the debt will force me to take jobs that I don't really want, simply because those jobs pay more than the jobs that I really do want. I hate to admit it, but it keeps me up at night.

I don't understand how people do it - they excel at work, they have a strong family life, they maintain an active social life, they remain physically active, etc. I try to do half of those things and I have a hard time keeping up.

Right now, I'm training to run a marathon. I've never run a marathon before, and I'm really behind on my training plan, which isn't good seeing as how the marathon is about a month away. But I promised that I'd do it, so I'm sticking with it. On a typical day, after work and school, I finally get home at about 10pm or so, and all I want to do is go to bed. But I force myself to get out on the road and run. Believe me, it is quite a feat, especially because I know that completing the run will leave me with a scant 5 hours of sleep.

Filled with anxiety and impatience, I usually start off too fast in my run. I lose my breath, which is both good and bad - bad because that's no way to pace yourself, but good because it gets my mind off of my troubles and lets it wander.

I run past the National Cathedral, and I'm reminded of my grandmother, a devout Russian Catholic who grew up in the "athiest" USSR, whose fate was to be kidnapped from her family by the Nazis in WWII, only to be forced to work in a German work camp. I run past the Lincoln Memorial, and I'm reminded of the millions of Blacks that were stolen from their home land and forced into slavery around the world, especially in America. I see the the Vietnam and Korean Memorials that contain the names and tributes to over 50,000 American soldiers who died fighting against communism, fighting to promote American Ideals. I see the the WWII memorial, a monument built to honor the the millions upon millions who died just a scant 60 years ago, fighting to defeat an idea that today's liberals think is ancient history.

I think about my Grandfather who fought in WWII on a naval carrier in the great Pacific. I think of my other Grandfather, a Pollock who fought as a Pole, was defeated with the Poles, and was forced into German slave labor as a Pole. I think of my father, who was born in Europe, in the aftermath of the great war, and was lucky enough to make it to America with his family. As I run, and take all of this in, I know that he didn't have anything close to the opportunities that I have before me. He worked his entire short life so that his kids could have the opportunites that he never had.

I take all of this in, and I finally settle into a rhythm.

'Would you like to know what the rhythm of my stride is? You can guess. It's "Thank you, God, thank you God, thank you God." There is nothing I ever did to merit such a life.'

With the conventions over, now seems like a good time to revisit my electoral college predictions (past prediction are here and here).

I think this is the most optimistic I've been or will be. It's hard to imagine that the Kerry campaign will get worse (is that even possible?), so I think this is his realistic bottom number. The only other state I think is even a possibility for Bush is Minnesota. But, c'mon, it's Minnesota. You just know they'll vote for a loser. After all, they grew up with the Vikings as an example. ;-)

Recent polls show Wisconsin's incumbent Senator Russ Feingold with a scant 6 point lead over relative unknown Republican challenger Tim Michels.

Some theorize that Michel's sudden strength is the result of Bush's lengthening coattails, but I have a different theory. Feingold is losing support because he's become a smartypants. In the past he's been successful because he's held himself above the fray. He was just too darn good to get involved in dirty politics. Now the message is a little different. It's the 'ole "My opponent doesn't have any political experience. He doesn't understand how things work here in the big city."

And that's where he, and a lot of other politicians, make a big mistake. We don't want slick political insiders. We really want Jefferson Smith.

So many successful American politicians have governed with the constant criticism that they weren't smart. In my lifetime alone, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Arnold Schwarzenegger have all been portrayed by the press and their opponents as playing with less than a full deck.

Whether those allegations are true or not, Americans keep voting for the anti-smartypants. Why is that? Is it, as some say, that the electorate is stupid? Do we vote only on personality? Is it really all about who we want to have a beer with?

People far smarter than me have written about anti-intellectualism in American politics. But too many people wrap it up in terms of regionalism or class. It's more than just that. Americans don't vote for smartypants because we reject the notion that politicians know what's best for us. Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying that we want politicians that we think are our intellectual inferiors, but rather that we want politicians that recognize that the best solutions to America's problems are not necessarily generated in Congress. As Ronald Reagan said, "The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would steal them away."

To bring this back to the present, men like Russ Feingold and John F'ing Kerry are not just content with advocating government solutions to all problems, they also must ridicule those who disagree with that view. So Feingold can harp on his opponent's lack of "experience" and Kerry can mock Bush for not reading the newspaper (as if the President is better off getting his news from CBS rather than, say, the FBI and CIA). That's what brands them a smartypants. And hopefully it's what will also make them Election Day losers.

Thank you for all the great sign ideas. Since the comments for that post are broken, I thought I'd list them here. Also, there's still a day left to give me some good ideas (hint hint). Here's what I've got so far:

Joe of UnaBrewer suggests:

It's LAMBEAU dumbass! Punt Kerry.

John Kerry says
GO BADGERS! GO NITTANY LIONS! I'LL STAND BY YOU TO THE BITTER END

Chris D. says, "Flush the Johns"

Drew from LongHorn Mafia:

• John Kerry: "I was for the BCS before I was against it"
• Badgers and Bush: Making oppenents see RED in 2004
• It's 10:00 and OU still sucks (as does Kerry)

Hawk says:

• WISCONSIN is home to Lambeau Field and CAMP RANDALL!

  Enlighten
  Sleepy (or Snobby)
  Presidential
  Nominee

Dittybopper says:

• Penn State Veterans For Truth: Go Lions.

Um, yeah, that's not going to work out Ditty ;-)

And finally, there's GeeJanes with:

• Welcome to Randolph Stadium.
• Go Budgers!
• First and goal for W!
• The Badgers are in the W column!
• On Wisconsin! (with a really big W)

Thanks again to everyone. So far, I'm leaning to the "I was for the BCS before I was against it" one so far.

Drudge reports:

SPEECHLESS
Thu Sep 23 2004 10:36:12 ET

John Kerry found himself speechless Wednesday, a serious predicament for a candidate for president.

The Des Moines Register reports: Laryngitis forced the Democratic nominee to dump plans to campaign in eastern Iowa today. Instead, his running mate, John Edwards, will take his place at a town hall-style event in Davenport and a rally in Cedar Rapids, campaign aides said.

Kerry "strained his voice. He's going to be resting his voice for the debate," said the candidate's Iowa spokesman, Colin Van Ostern.

The first of three nationally televised presidential campaign debates is Sept. 30 in Florida. The others follow quickly - Oct. 8 in St. Louis and Oct. 13 in Tempe, Ariz.

Developing...

One has to wonder, did he really lose his voice, or did someone on the campaign staff finally convince him that when he speaks, he only hurts his own chances to win? As I'm sure they all know by now, Edwards is the guy that they should have run anyway, so letting him speak can't be that bad of a thing. (certainly can't be worse than Kerry speaking - have you seen the polls in the "battlegrounds" of Missouri and Ohio lately?)

Think this idea is a little too crazy or too "out there?" (or do you just thik that Kerry isn't that smart? :) Perhaps. But, remember, he did just flat out stop speaking to news reporters alltogether for over a month there - so he's gotta know that his best chance at winning is to STFU.

Update: It looks like our comments are working again. We still don't know what happened. For those of you who gave us sign ideas, rest assured that Kris did receive your comments via email and is even now plotting how to use them to get on ESPN.

Our comment system is all screwed up right now. I don't know why, and unfortunately, I have a very busy next few days ahead of me and I'm not gonna be able to do much about it. Kris will continue to hold down the fort by herself, as usual, with her typically excellent posts. I'm just sayin - if you comment, and the comment doesn't show up, don't be surprised.

Hopefully Kris will get some help from some of our "regular" contributors who contribute every once in a while. (some of our "regulars," believe it or not, have never even actually contributed anything. can you believe that? if you're interested in becoming a contributor, drop kris a line.)

On the upside, this is probably gonna expedite our move off of movable type.

The new theme for Wictory Wednesdays is to support major Senate races around the country. Today's featured race on Polipundit is in Florida where:

Mel Martinez is the Republican candidate for Senate from Florida. He’s a Cuban-American immigrant success story, who will help the president attract a larger share of the Hispanic vote. If Martinez wins, he’ll be replacing the notoriously nutty Democrat Senator Bob Graham, who’s retiring this year.

As an aside, I really dig the phrase "notoriously nutty". I hereby vow to use it soon.

While I'll root for Martinez to win, I can't promise to send him any money. I've got my own Senate race to worry about. Here, Tim Michels is challenging the goody-goody campaign finance poster boy Russ Feingold. While I do believe Russ is a man with integrity, I also believe he's a man with some bad ideas.

Wherever you live, help out your right-minded candidates. And don't forget to vote for them and pester other people to too!

And, of course, don't forget to check out the participating sites below:

Loyal readers, I need your help! ESPN's Gameday crew will be traveling to Madison this Saturday for the matchup between the Badgers and Penn State. They'll broadcast live from just behind Camp Randall from 9:30-11:00 am (central time) Saturday morning.

I'm planning to go, but I want to make an impact. For that, I need a good sign that expresses both a knowledge of football (or ESPN in general) and a general anti-Kerry message. I'm stumped. Help me think of a catchy slogan! Please leave any ideas you may have for me in the comment section.

Another perfect cartoon from Cox & Forkum.

Here's more on Kerry's ever more muddling position(s) on Iraq.

via rusty.

The Crease links to an amazing article in The Australian. Diana Kerry, John F'ing's little sister, is actively undermining our alliance with Australia. She told an Australian newspaper:

"Australia has kept faith with the US and we are endangering the Australians now by this wanton disregard for international law and multilateral channels," she said, referring to the invasion of Iraq.

Asked if she believed the terrorist threat to Australians was now greater because of the support for Republican George W. Bush, Ms Kerry said: "The most recent attack was on the Australian embassy in Jakarta -- I would have to say that."

Ms. Kerry is essentially telling the Australians that if they abandon Iraq and appease the terrorists, they will no longer be in danger. At the same time, her brother (who she campaigns for) is today saying that the first point in his four-point plan for Iraq is to "secure international support". How does trying to frighten off our allies accomplish this?

I think that Bush spokesman Steve Schmidt is just absolutely dead on when he says that "John Kerry's latest position on Iraq is to advocate retreat and defeat in the face of terror. This sends the wrong signal to our troops, our allies and our enemies."

Of course, his guess is as good as mine since the Kerry camp can't seem to figure out exactly what their "brilliant" Iraq strategy is. Idiots.

The Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, released survey results last week that shows that citizens of nearly every country would vote for Kerry over Bush in overwhelming numbers.

In 30 out of 35 countries polled, from all regions of the world, a majority or plurality would prefer to see John Kerry win the US presidential election—especially traditional US allies. The only countries where President Bush was preferred were the Philippines, Nigeria, and Poland. India and Thailand were divided.

A couple of notes:

1. Thanks Poland, for sticking with our President. The Poles are a gallant people, as we at Dummocrats well know.

2. Why should we care? Should we want a President that the rest of the world feels will put their interests first, or would we be better off with a President that puts America first? And that's just in the foreign policy arena, it doesn't even begin to consider domestic issues.

3. I don't understand the purpose of this poll. My best guess is that, with the numbers looking good for Bush, someone figured out that the most positive numbers for Kerry would be generated by people that cannot actually vote for him. Perhaps next week we'll see the long-awaited poll results from Sennett Middle School or La Petite Academy (hey, that sounds French, I'm sure those toddlers will swing to Kerry!).

From Drudge:

EXCLUSIVE // Mon Sep 20 2004 11:58:02 ET
STATEMENT FROM DAN RATHER:

Last week, amid increasing questions about the authenticity of documents used in support of a 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY story about President Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard, CBS News vowed to re-examine the documents in question—and their source—vigorously. And we promised that we would let the American public know what this examination turned up, whatever the outcome.

Now, after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically. I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where—if I knew then what I know now—I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.

But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry. It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism.

Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully.

And if you buy that, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona. (From the front porch, you can see the sea.) (audio)

Dan, you've completely ruined CBS's credibility. You and the entire staff has only one choice - it's time to go.

I have 6 gmail invites to give away. If anyone wants one, email me and I'll send one your way. james -at- dummocrats.com

James posted earlier about Football Fans for Truth. And he's not the only one. They've already had stories in numerous papers. For the most part, they're treated like a cute joke. I think even they think they're a cute joke. But I think that behind this cute joke is more than a kernel of truth.

Why does it matter that John Kerry doesn't know about sports and can't play our major sports? Let me count the ways.

1. I don't care that John Kerry doesn't know anything about the Boston Red Sox. Neither do I. I do care that John Kerry tries to fake an interest and a knowledge of the team. He's a faker. He's a panderer. He's lying about who he is in order to get votes. I'd respect the guy a hell of a lot more if, when asked questions like this, he simply said he didn't watch a lot of baseball. Of course, that would require Kerry to give a simple, truthful answer. That's something he's apparently incapable of doing.

2. As an American, there are certain things you should know in order to be culturally literate. The frozen tundra of Lambeau Field is one of those things. To not be familiar with Lambeau Field, to not know your Buckeyes from your Wolverines shows a disdain for the things that the rest of America really cares about. But that makes sense, because John Kerry isn't like you or me. He's better than us. As Mind Killer puts it:

Kerry is, undeniably, aristocracy. President Bush, with his small town mannerisms and southern drawl, can skirt the fact he was silver spoon-fed. Kerry has no such luxury. Judging entirely on appearances, Kerry has the look of a spoiled child. From his upturned nose to his high forehead, Kerry's image screams, "I am better than you." His affiliation with the Catholic Church, long seen in the Bible belt as a sign of irreligiousness and Yankee wealth, does nothing to improve the image. The truth does not matter. Democrats grab on to this image and use it to propel an already degrading party image. Most of America gets the message--John Kerry is better than you are and so is the Democratic Party.

How, one might ask, does the Democrats dream-child, John F. Kennedy factor into this equation. Here was a man who was part of what is realistically, although not literally, labeled American royalty. The difference is that Kennedy knew how to use his aristocratic roots to his advantage. Instead of being the pedant snob, superior to typical Americans, Kennedy portrayed himself as gracious royalty--the knight in shining amour sent to protect and revitalize America. Kennedy was not an intellectual naysayer. Many Americans want to attend to a backyard barbeque with President Bush. The same Americans wanted to go to a state dinner with President Kennedy. Few would choose to spend any time with Kerry.

You cannot wear both the smock of the common man and the mantle of the elite. Nor can you fool all of the people all of the time--eventually one image will prevail. Unfortunately for the Democratic Party, the effort to woo the elites in Hollywood, the media, and education has isolated the most important majority in the prospective voters. A party cannot live by New York and California alone. Kerry may win the White House, but if he does, it will be entirely out of anti-Bush sentiment. Few want Kerry to be their President. A Kerry victory would be an anomaly, a last handhold as the Democrats fall down the slope from prominence to dissolution and irrelevance.

3. Finally, it's not just that Kerry lacks sporting knowledge, it's that he also lacks sports experience. Kerry windsurfs, mountain bikes and skis. And, it pains me to say this, but so do I. I enjoy individual sports far more than team ones. I wrote this awhile back, but it bears repeating:

Participating in the team sport means they know how to work with others, how to accept coaching, how to belong to something bigger than themselves and how to represent someone else, whether it’s their school or a local bar.

In other words, participating in a team sport helps you learn valuable lessons in leadership. That's not a shocking revelation. But I think it's important to remember that Kerry has never been a leader, unless you count his months in Vietnam (and we've all seen how well he did with that). He's never been a Governor. He's never even been the senior Senator from his state. He doesn't have any leadership roles in Congress. He's never been in charge of a business.

He's never had the opportunity to learn how to lead, and the Presidency just isn't the place to learn skills he should have picked up back on the JV football team.

Are you ready for some football? I know I am!

NFL football is the second best game on earth, second only to college football. As such, I spent all week getting my fantasy teams ready to go: making those first post-draft adjustments, scouring the waiver-wire for steals, swinging trades, etc, you know how it goes.

I'm pumped to see hear the Packers maul the Bears, and I'm cheering for my current "hometown team," the Washington Redskins, as they look to continue their "Return of Joe Gibbs" winning ways and cream the cellar dweller Giants.

Since I'm only here in Washington "temporarily," I'm the very definition of a transplant fan - and every year that I've been here I've tried to get more "in" to the skins. I admit, the Gibbs factor makes it a lot easier. (or is it the overdue absence of Steve Spurrier that does it? who can say for sure....)

In any event, even though I currently live in Washington DC, believe me, I have no confusion about who *my* team is; believe me, when this Halloween rolls around, I'll be wearing solid Green and Gold. (as i run the marine corps marathon, btw.)

To celebrate this glorious football Sunday, be sure to check out the website of the latest and greatest 527 group, Football Fans For Truth.

UPDATEAzCat points out this great picture.

Either the Dems are looking to 2006 or John F'ing Kerry has finally gone batshit crazy. Kerry's latest desperation ploy is to claim that Bush has a secret troop call up plan ready for implementation immediately after the election. Outside the Beltway has a good discussion on the story and at best it sounds like Kerry is misrepresenting the already stated intention to called up the Individual Ready Reserve. At worst, he's trying to scare the beejesus out of National Guard families.

Recent polls give Kerry ample reason to be desperate, but I don't see how hysterical rants that he can't prove help him. Is his campaign going to serve up some more forged documents?

My theory is that the Dems have already given up on Kerry and they're looking to the 2006 mid-term elections. They'll have Kerry make all sorts of wild accusations. If they stick now, great. But the real purpose is, for example, to be able to once again claim that "BUSH LIED" if troops are increased and more Guard units are called up any time between November 2004 and the 2006 elections.

Hello, loyal readers!

We're contemplating a somewhat major overhaul of the site, and we'd like to get your opinions / comments / suggestions / etc.

• What do you like about the site, what don't you like?
• What would you like to see added? i.e., would you like to see a more robust discussion system with user account access? Better design? More profanity?
• Who comes here for the articles, who comes for the daily links?
• Who would like the ability to comment on the daily links page? fark style comments or slashdot style comments?

I realize that not everyone has a blog of their own, nor do they want to maintain one, so who would be interested in a "personal" dummocrats page, where you could use a really simple interface to post a thought every now and then, for instance, at dummocrats.com/yourname? Let's say that the user pages would come with the ability to use a link queue similar to one we use to enter our daily links? Would anyone use that?

Not to sound masochistic, but what we want to hear are insults, "I like you site but I hate the logo, because I have a Mac and it doesnt look right on it," or "Your material is stupid" or "You post too many drudge stories" or "I wish I could customize the page so that I only see the latest 2 posts, because I always hit reload and my employer monitors my bandwith." We want creative ideas to help us make the site both more functional and more interesting.

Basically, if you have any comment, suggestion, idea, whatever, at all, let us hear about it.

Post in the comments here or email your feedback to james dummocrats.com.

Thanks.

(please welcome our first guest blogger, Joel. Joel currently resides in Seattle, Washington and he can give us a West Coast perspective and continue our tradition of having writers stuck in liberal looneylands.)

Listening to the Train song, "Meet Virginia" gave me a great idea for a parody. I hope you like it.

She doesn't love the press, but there's nothing she's afraid to express
If you catch her saying it "shove it", she won't confess
She's Continental
She flip flops every day, oh wait, that's me but anyway
She doesn't care a thing about that, hey,
She thinks I'm Continental
Meet Teresa

She never eats at Wendy’s, loves the watch she got from Fendi
Wears what ex-Clinton advisors say is trendy
Ain’t that Continental
Meet Teresa

Well she wants to be in France
Yeah, we know who wears the pants
Pulls away at every dance
You just gotta know there’s no romance

She’s got all the accouterments, but Pennsylvania’s just full of filthy peasants
Her husband was a fine Senator for its residents
Although my positions are largely unknown
She gave my campaign a big, fat loan
We just like to sit in our Brownstone, and rip on the President
Meet Teresa

Well she wants to be in France
Yeah, we know who wears the pants
Pulls away at every dance
You just gotta know there’s no romance

She only likes the Midwest, after Electoral votes are
assessed, her timing is “questionable”
You see her arrogance is tragic, but her checkbook is magic
And the organizations she funds - questionable

Meet Teresa-I can’t wait to
Meet Teresa-yea

For the last 3 or 4 years, I've been privately predicting the complete collapse of the Democratic Party by 2010. Once a party of innovative social policy and reform, the Dems have long ago abandoned that mission. Instead, they've continued to milk their past contributions for all they're worth. To hear a Dem campaign, you'd think that we are currently living in the great depression. To hear a Dem tell it, you'd think that the Civil Rights Acts had never been passed.

The Dem strategy has consistently been to keep recasting every problem we face as being the result of racial or class injustice. And as they've steadily lost power, they've shifted further and further to the extreme left, employing what I like to refer to as the PETA strategy, which is "Even after his cause has been made moot, a guy can keep using it to push another cause of his that's been rejected. And it helps to be shocking and extreme."

PETA, when they first started out, did some good work in stopping a lot of animal cruelty on large factory farms. People were receptive to that message and that cause, and they reacted by supporting PETA. Becasue that practice has been largely stomped out, that point has been made moot. PETA has also always preached that vegetarianism is the only way to go - that point, on the other hand, has been largely rejected.

So PETA's strategy has been to use mooted point #1 to shock people into supporting them so that they can push already rejected point #2. When you see PETA distributing videos of animal cruelty, notice that the video that you are seeing is over twenty years old. People see this, donate $, and support PETA. They look the other way when PETA does wacky attention-grabbing stunts, and mistakenly rationalize supporting them by saying "well, they do some good work in other areas."

The Dems do the exact same thing with issues of race and class. In the past, the Democratic party has been very successful in winning elections when vast and widespread problems existed in these areas. And now that problems in these areas are much much fewer and are much more isolated, thanks in large part to the efforts of the Dems, do they apply their problem solving prowess to new problems? No. They instead choose to invent problems, to allege problems that don't exist, and to vastly distort the problems that do exist because they have no ideas on how to tackle the new and actual problems of today. This is exactly why they allege racial injustice at every turn, and this is exactly why they make every issue into a "rich v. poor" problem.

They've had great success harping on their two pet issues, race and class. For example, when the economy was failing in the 1970's, the Dem response was "People are out work because the rich have too much money!" With that, the people had someone to blame for their problems, and the Dems succeeded in raising taxes on the rich. When their "solution" of blaming the rich didn't solve the problem, but in fact made it much, much, worse, they just kept blaming the rich. And as more people lost their jobs, they gained more and more voters. And people kept voting for them. And they kept raising taxes. Around and around, until the hghest income tax rate was over 70%.

They are doing the exact same sort of thing today, with almost every "issue" - take health care, for instance (which I hesitate to call an "issue," but that's a