You are on an archive page

Click here to return to the main page


Wikipedia does good things. Reward them.

The Daily Links Page
Got a link to submit?
  • New Evidence Proves First Flag Made By Betsy Ross Actually Shirt For Gay Friend
  • Colbert Leads Huntsman in S.C.
  • Polish prosecutor 'shoots self after news conference'
  • Jim Rome leaving ESPN. Bonus: Footage of Jim Rome getting attacked by Jim Everett & crying like a baby
  • Broncos, Tim Tebow stun Steelers in OT, win 29-23 in NFL playoffs
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Video: Remember 2008
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop faces weapon and drug charges
  • Video: Green Bay anchorman loves lamp
  • Video: Rodgers & Raji in the new Discount Double Check ad
  • Jim Rome: out of The Jungle and onto the (horse) farm
  • New IL Law Requires Photo ID To Buy Drain Cleaner
  • Fawn Cuddles Kitten, Hearts Explode
  • The priest who changed the course of history for the worse... by rescuing four-year-old Hitler from drowning in icy river
  • Get Fit or Get Fined: Web Service Offers to Charge You for Skipping the Gym
  • Fine proposed for botching US national anthem
  • Why Best Buy is Going out of Business...Gradually
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Edina boutique takes heat for trashing $4,000-plus gowns
  • Law Student Goes 'Homeless by Choice' Touts Value of Gym Club Membership
  • VIDEO: Snoop Dogg on 'The Price Is Right'
  • Flynn and Out
       [ 3 comments ]
  • Don't put Bielema on the firing line
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Your end of the season Vikings comment thread
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Mass. budget motel fights forfeiture by feds
  • Vikings scrutinize downtown Mpls. stadium site near basilica
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Kelly Clarkson criticized on Twitter after singer endorses Ron Paul for President 
  • Political Predictions for 2012
  • We're All Doing The Best We Can
  • Video Of Little Girl Getting Pissed Off About Pink Toys Will Make Your Heart Swell
  • The 10 best sports-related Hitler Reactions of 2011
  • Happy Endings on the housing crisis
  • Why You Just Got New York Times Spam
  • There Will Be No Friday This Week In Samoa
  • The Most Hipster State In The US
  • Online Merchants Home in on Imbibing Consumers
       [ 1 comment ]
  • On islamic fashion
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Sears as Lampert's 'Mismanaged Asset' Loses Customers to Macy's
       [ 1 comment ]
  • 5 social network predictions for 2012
  • Cheetah, chimp star of classic Tarzan movies, dies at 80
  • The Hottest Things on TV in 2011
  • Beer in cans: It's not just for Bud anymore
  • Seven Packers earn Pro Bowl selections
  • The Worst Angry Christmas Tweets In the World
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Minnesota cities try to hold back on rented housing
  • Why Iowa Shouldn't Vote First Anymore
  • Some Falcons Players Upset Drew Brees Went For The Record Last Night
  • We've Identified Jilted Packergirl
  • With its 'W' initiative, ESPN tries to solve the equation of serving women sports fans
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Owner surprised to find cat regularly catches bus
  • Charles Barkley: Skip Bayless Has Surpassed Peter Vecsey As The Biggest Jackass In The History Of Journalism
  • Handicapping the 2011 NFL MVP Race, 2.0

     

  • September 30, 2004

    October State of the Blog report

    [Posted by james]

    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. ;-)



    1. Blogs for Bush
    2. Kottke.org
    3. Ace of Spades HQ
    4. mypetjawa
    5. Daly Thoughts
    6. Wide Awake
    7. Stix Blog
    8. La Shawn Barber's Corner
    9. California Yankee
    10. Kilabee's Hive
    11. Boots and Sabers
    12. TaxProf Blog
    13. Sondra K
    14. Pardon my English
    15. The National Debate

    16. tobias covers it all
    17. Backcountry Conservative
    18. The Crease
    19. Raincross Conservative
    20. Michelle Malkin
    21. Aldaynet
    22. Bit's Blog
    23. Blogs of War
    24. Slantpoint
    25. New England Republican
    26. PoliPundit
    27. Patriots for Bush
    28. Digger's Realm
    29. IMAO
    30. Outside the Beltway

    Posted by jkhat at 11:31 PM | Comments (0)

     

    Ready & Waiting For Some Debating

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 07:21 PM | Comments (12)

     

    Kerry in Drag - Not a Pretty Sight

    [Posted by ]

    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:

    Posted by at 12:51 PM | Comments (1)

     

    More GMail Invitations

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 09:56 AM | Comments (1)

     

    September 29, 2004

    Latest Witty Comeback from the Kerry Campaign

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 09:11 PM | Comments (4)

     

    So that's what that was?

    [Posted by james]

    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.

    Posted by jkhat at 04:29 PM | Comments (0)

     

    John Kerry: Political Maverick?

    [Posted by ]

    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...

    Posted by at 03:50 PM | Comments (2)

     

    Florida Presidential Ballot Revealed!

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 11:11 AM | Comments (0)

     

    Wictory Wednesday

    [Posted by ]

    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:

    Posted by at 10:20 AM | Comments (0)

     

    September 28, 2004

    Secret Service Hunting for Man Intending to Assassinate President Bush

    [Posted by james]

    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.

    Posted by jkhat at 02:27 PM | Comments (0)

     

    Bush Tidal wave among young voters

    [Posted by james]

    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!

    Posted by jkhat at 02:10 PM | Comments (9)

     

    Great Moments in Presidential Debates

    [Posted by ]

    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:

    My Top Five Presidential (and Vice Presidential) Debate Moments

    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?

    Posted by at 08:39 AM | Comments (1)

     

    The First Amendment doesn't protect disorderly conduct

    [Posted by james]

    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.

    Posted by jkhat at 01:41 AM | Comments (2)

     

    September 27, 2004

    Latest Marching Orders of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

    [Posted by ]

    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?

    Posted by at 12:45 PM | Comments (8)

     

    World Shut Your Mouth

    [Posted by ]

    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... "


    Posted by at 11:01 AM | Comments (5)

     

    Conservative Ads Gone Bad

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 09:02 AM | Comments (0)

     

    September 26, 2004

    Arrogant Dems Strike Again

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 07:41 PM | Comments (1)

     

    1 (800) 379-8414

    [Posted by james]

    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.

    Posted by jkhat at 04:08 PM | Comments (25)

     

    September 25, 2004

    Facing the Truth

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 10:30 PM | Comments (1)

     

    Thank You

    [Posted by james]

    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.'

    Posted by jkhat at 05:01 PM | Comments (2)

     

    September 24, 2004

    Electoral College Prediction-Pre-October Surprise Edition

    [Posted by ]

    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. ;-)

    Posted by at 01:13 PM | Comments (3)

     

    The Anti-Smartypants Brigade

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 10:23 AM | Comments (0)

     

    September 23, 2004

    Bucky Backer Says Thanks

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 11:15 AM | Comments (4)

     

    Speechless?

    [Posted by james]

    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.

    Posted by jkhat at 10:45 AM | Comments (1)

     

    September 22, 2004

    Comments messed up

    [Posted by james]

    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.

    Posted by jkhat at 10:14 PM | Comments (4)

     

    Wictory Wednesday

    [Posted by ]

    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:

    Posted by at 08:31 AM | Comments (0)

     

    September 21, 2004

    Wanted: Clever Sign Slogans

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 03:09 PM | Comments (0)

     

    Kerry v. Kerry

    [Posted by ]

    Another perfect cartoon from Cox & Forkum.

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

    Posted by at 01:10 PM | Comments (0)

     

    September 20, 2004

    CBS Biased? That's crazy talk!

    [Posted by james]


    via rusty.

    Posted by jkhat at 02:38 PM | Comments (3)

     

    Kerry's Sister Tries to Undermine US/Australia Alliance

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 02:06 PM | Comments (0)

     

    The Most Irrelevant Poll Yet

    [Posted by ]

    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!).

    Posted by at 12:53 PM | Comments (0)

     

    Text of Rather's 'apology' Statement

    [Posted by james]

    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.

    Posted by jkhat at 11:29 AM | Comments (0)

     

    September 19, 2004

    Who wants Gmail?

    [Posted by james]

    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

    Posted by jkhat at 04:50 PM | Comments (4)

     

    Why 'Football Fans for Truth' Matters

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 10:10 AM | Comments (3)

     

    September 18, 2004

    Kerry Fairy Football

    [Posted by james]

    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.

     

    Dems Already Looking to 2006?

    [Posted by ]

    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.

    Posted by at 12:15 PM | Comments (1)

     

    September 17, 2004

    Res Ipsa

    [Posted by james]

    Posted by jkhat at 10:36 PM | Comments (2)

     

    Suggestions, Anyone?

    [Posted by james]

    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.

    Posted by jkhat at 09:12 PM | Comments (4)

     

    Meet Teresa

    [Posted by Joel]

    (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.

    Meet Teresa

    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


    Posted by Joel at 10:17 AM | Comments (1)

     

    September 16, 2004

    The Democratic Party's last gasps

    [Posted by james]

    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 subject for another post) - t's just the "rich v. poor" strategy, dressed up in a new tux. They parade around some unfortunate soul who lost everything because he didn't have health insurance, and they want you to think that this is a widespread problem - it isn't. To put it in PETA terms, they're showing thirty year old tapes. The real problem here isn't that people don't have insurance, it's that health care is too expensive. The reasons that health care is so expensive are many, and I think that those problems need to be addressed. But one thing that won't solve that problem is letting the government to step in and start making the too-expensive payments. That solution will accomplish the same thing as their solution to the 70's economy problem - it will only make the problem way, way worse, while making people increasingly dependent on the party that supports the plan. In short, the Dems want to be your coke supplier, they want to be your crack dealer. They want to be a necessary middleman, so that you always have to "go through them" to get what you need.

    Ronald Reagan showed people that government is not the answer to their problems, but that government is the problem - he came in and slashed tax by over 50%, and the economy flourished. Freed from the yoke of government oppression, people began to see that he was right. This was the beginning of the Democrats' demise.

    The Dems have been steadily losing power over the last 20 or so years, and their drastic shift to the extreme left is all too telling evidence of that. Like PETA, the Dems have been forced to get more and more extreme just to get your attention. I think that one way to put it is to say that "they want to solve your problems, they just don't want your problem to be solved." And people have this pesky way of thinking that when solutions are implemented and conditions drastically improve, that the problem has been solved. "Oh No," screams the Dems. "Just pay attention to me for one second. I'll show you problems you never even knew you had!"

    Ask yourself, when is the last time you ever heard a Democrat talking about how good we have it? When is the last time you've heard a Dem say "We did it. We solved that problem. Now lets move on to something else." You've never head a Democrat utter those words. If you put a Dem on a stage, all he'll do is tell you how terrible you have it, how terrible America is, and how he can fix the problem. He'll scold you for being happy and content, tell you you're a bad person for not supporting his program to help the group of the day. You're shameful, you're selfish. He will guilt you into voting for him. All he needs is that stage, and he will do literally anything to get it.

    I ran across this great article by Christopher Ruddy today that really shows what a dire position the Dems are in:

    The Democrats are desperate.

    How desperate? Very.

    As Anderson sees it, the Democrats are almost totally out of power.

    He reviewed the political landscape for me. The White House is Republican.

    And so are the Senate and the House. Even the Supreme Court predominates with Republican appointments.

    At the state level it gets worse. In the last election cycle, a majority of state legislatures became Republican, and Republicans hold a majority of state governorships.

    The largest four states in population have Republican governors: George Pataki in New York, Rick Perry in Texas, Jeb Bush in Florida ­ and we even snatched one from the Democrats in California with Arnold Schwarzenegger's election.

    Dems have been telling folks "this is the important election of your life!" They've got it wrong - this is most important election in their lives. This election will determine the fate of the Democratic Party. You've already seen the cracks in the foundation - Kerry's campaign is apparently split into warring factions, other Dems are following Zell's lead and breaking rank, even bolting from the party. This is it folks - you may one day tell your grandchildren stories about the "democratic" party just like your grandparents may have told you about their support for the Progressives or Southern Democrats.

    (linked to today's otb traffic jam)

    Posted by jkhat at 05:00 PM | Comments (7)

     

    Dem insider says Kerry campaign in chaos

    [Posted by james]

    According to CBS news, the Kerry campaign is in complete disarray:

    Longtime Democratic insider Tony Coelho lashed out at the John Kerry presidential campaign, characterizing it as a campaign in chaos. With yet another appointment of a former Clinton administration staffer to Kerry’s team on Tuesday, Coelho argues the problem is worsening.

    “There is nobody in charge and you have these two teams that are generally not talking to each other,” says Coehlo, who ran Al Gore's campaign early in the 2000 presidential race. As Coelho and other detractors see it, there is a civil war within the Kerry campaign

    No one in charge, now why does that not surprise me? John Kerry is not a leader, John Kerry is a patsy. He's spent his entire life riding on the coattails of others to get where he is. John Kerry has never "led' a single thing in his entire life, except I hear he may have once commanded a swift boat in Vietnam. John Kerry didn't get himself into poltiics, his dad's connections and his badmouthing of the Vietnam war did. John Kerry didn't get himself elected Lt. Governor his state, Mike Dukakis did. John Kerry didn't get himself elected Senator, Teddy Kennedy did. John Kerry didn't even get himself on the Democratic ticket this year, Theresa and Howard Dean did. And now, if Kerry somehow manages to get himself elected, it will because of Bill Clinton's staff.

    Seriously, imagine Kerry trying to manage a baseball team - he'd try, fail miserably, then say "Hey, the Braves used to do pretty well - I'll just hire all of their old players!"

    John Kerry can't even run his own campaign effectively and he wants to be trusted to run a country? John Kerry can't take charge and decide on one single plan of attack, and he wants to make foreign policy decisions?

    Over the last few weeks, it's been looking more and more like the Dem establishement never intended Kerry to have a chance at getting elected.

    Then again, this news story may be completely wrong. After all, it did come from CBS news.

    Posted by jkhat at 02:40 PM | Comments (0)

     

    September 15, 2004

    Dan Rather, always first to break a story

    [Posted by james]

    WaPo reports that Dan Rather has, for the first time, expressed doubts about the authenticity of the forged documents of TypewriterGate:

    "If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story," Rather said in an interview last night.

    YEAH! You go Dan! Ace reporter, on the job!

    When you're done with that, I've got another one for ya - and let me tell you, it is a DOOZY! Now, believe it or not, I've heard rumors (and these are only rumors, mind you) that President Clinton (*gasp*, are you sitting down?) had an affair with an intern. Can you believe that?!?! I kid you not, Dan, that's what these rumors say. I don't beleive it either, but if anyone can break the embargo on the truth, it's you, Dan.

    (psssst..... and don't tell too many people that I told you this, but there are rumors that OJ might have actually *done it*. SERIOUSLY! but don't say i told you... i don't want to look like a nutjob.)

    Posted by jkhat at 10:21 PM | Comments (1)

     

    Outside State Lines

    [Posted by ]

    With the rise of MoveOn.org and organizations like Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the specifics of the McCain/Feingold legislation have come under further scrutiny. One aspect of campaign finance, however, that still doesn't get much press is the influence of out-of-state money on state races.

    The Thune v. Daschle is a great example of this phenomenon. As a member of the leadership of the Democratic Party, Daschle receives financial support from around the country. To counter that, now Republicans nationwide are donating to Thune.

    My own congressional district is another prime example. My Congresswoman is Tammy Baldwin, an extremely liberal lesbian. As such, she's the darling of numerous national gay & lesbian organizations, as well as a host of women's organizations. Her top contributers from 2002 and 2004 reads like a liberal who's who.

    According to Open Secrets, this is hardly the norm. They say that, "candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives typically get the great majority of their campaign dollars from donors within their home state."

    If that's the case, then the chart below shows just how much Baldwin varies from that norm.

    An actual majority of Baldwin's money comes from out-of-state. Her list of individual contributers reads more like a list of the Hollywood liberal elite than that of someone representing south central Wisconsin.

    Shouldn't this be more of a concern? To me, this is much more important than eroding our freedom of speech by banning 527 organizations. Should out-of-staters be allowed to financially control local races? Is this truly representative government? Our constitution is set up so that geographic areas of the country will have a voice in Congress, not so that single-issue voters will. Unfortunately, I think Baldwin represents gays and lesbians, unions, and socialists far more than she does the average voter in her district.

    The simple solution here is for voters to give Baldwin the boot. But unfortunately, it's not that easy. Because she's so well funded, she hasn't faced much in the way of opposition until now. Her last opponent was a ex-firefighter whose claim to fame was being fired for passing out anti-gay literature on the job. What a choice!

    Why not just prohibit individual out-of-state campaign donations? If you can't vote in a state, why should you be allowed to try to influence the result of the election?

    Posted by at 04:00 PM | Comments (0)

     

    Wictory Wednesday

    [Posted by ]

    There are a few items on our agenda today.

    1. Please volunteer for the Bush/Cheney campaign. Be forewarned that you may not be able to wear your pajamas while doing so.

    2. Also consider requesting an absentee ballot. You'll get all of the voting and none of the hassle for just a 37 cent stamp. Plus, on election night you can sit home in your pajamas smugly watching all the suckers in line on TV.

    3. Start watching your House and Senate races. Wisconsin held its partisan primary yesterday and Tim Michels won the right to challenge Russ "oh hey there don't you dare use racial profiling to fight terrorism because that would erode some of our rights, but please kindly ignore the fact that McCain/Feingold violates the 1st Amendment" Feingold. I don't think the Republicans thought this was a seat they could win, but Michels easy primary victory, combined with Bush's growing strength in the state means this could be a hotly contested race.

    4. Visit these other great blogs. This past week we saw bloggers really come to the forefront and the absolute necessity of having people out there to fact check the media. Show them you appreciate them and boost their traffic.

    Posted by at 07:24 AM | Comments (1)

     

    September 14, 2004

    Rally against Genocide Pictures

    [Posted by james]


    via Glenn Reynolds.

    This is one of many photos taken at the American anti-Slavery Group's Rally against Genocide in Sudan, down the block from the UN.

    The rest of the gallery is here.

    Posted by jkhat at 09:52 PM | Comments (4)

     

    Missing The Story

    [Posted by ]

    The Columbia Journalism Review runs Campaign Desk, a website where they define the mission as:

    Using the power of the World Wide Web, The Campaign Desk attempts to get inside the news cycle and enrich campaign journalism in real time. Our goal is to straighten and deepen campaign coverage almost as it is being written and produced.

    The Desk is politically nonpartisan; its only biases are toward accuracy, fairness, and thoroughness.

    Dummocrats.com was featured in their Blog Report last month, so it's a site I continue to check. I read the latest Report today expecting to find an analysis about how the National Guard forgeries were changing the balance and duties of both bloggers and big media. Seeing as Columbia is one of the best Journalism schools in the world, who could blame me?

    This is what they have:

    Last week's CBS report on the disputed Jerry Killian memos and the blogosphere's role in first questioning their validity is the subject of much back-and-forth in the 'sphere this morning.

    (As an aside, the mainstream press moved in to give credit where credit's due. The Los Angeles Times ran a story crediting alert bloggers for first suspecting a hoax and introducing the possibility of forgery. And New York Times op-ed columnist William Safire today lashed out at Dan Rather, urging him to re-examine the sources.) Mostly, the frenzy consists of various bloggers swearing on the lives of their mothers that the Killian memos are authentic, and an equal number of bloggers swearing on the lives of their fathers that the Killian memos are fabricated.

    This is thoroughness? This is a huge story and they are ideally positioned to cover it. I don't understand why they're ignoring it.

    And that's exactly what I think is happening. This allegedly non-partisan site doesn't like this story, so they're not going to report on it. You can tell simply by the way they characterize the debate: "the frenzy consists of various bloggers swearing on the lives of their mothers that the Killian memos are authentic, and an equal number of bloggers swearing on the lives of their fathers that the Killian memos are fabricated."

    This isn't what is happening. One side has undertaken the kind of analysis big media should have and has analytically proven these documents are fake. The other side is simply screaming that either they're wrong or that Karl Rove is behind all of it. They offer no proof and no evidence.

    This is particularly disappointing because I'd hope that new journalists and journalists-in-training would view the Interent differently than the Ratheresque media dinosaurs, but it appears they're being taught the same disdain that their elders express.

    Posted by at 03:27 PM | Comments (0)

     

    September 13, 2004

    If The Profile Fits, We Must Ignore It

    [Posted by ]

    With the anniversary of 9/11 just past us, Amnesty International USA says that racial profiling is a "growing problem" in America. I say the only problem is that the use of racial profiling isn't growing enough. Amnesty has some of the looniest reasoning I've ever read:

    Racial profiling is a growing problem as the government has expanded its war on terror, the report said. Police, immigration and airport security procedures are the areas where the problem has gotten worse since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, it said.


    Citizens and visitors of Middle Eastern and South Asian descent, and others who appear to be from these areas or members of the Muslim and Sikh faiths, have become more frequent subjects of racial profiling over the last three years, the study said.


    Such racial profiling is a distraction to law enforcement and therefore, undermines national security efforts, the report said. As police primarily focus on Arab, Muslim and South Asian males, it said, they are more likely to overlook terrorists who are white.


    For example, recent cases of American Taliban John Walker Lindh and British shoe bomber Richard Reid show that al-Qaida has an ability to recruit a diverse range of sympathizers. These two would not necessarily have been identified by policies that focus on Arab, Muslim and South Asian males, the report said.

    Aside from the ill-effects on victims — depression and humiliation — racial profiling reinforces residential segregation, creates fear and mistrust and engenders reluctance in reporting crimes and cooperating with police officers, Amnesty International USA said.

    Okay, let me get this straight:

    1. The perpetrators of the 9/11 attack were 19 Arab non-citizens. They belong to a wider network of Muslim terrorists that has committed terrorist acts in Bali, Spain, Iraq and Russia, just to name a few.

    2. However, looking more closely at, let's say, Arab non-citizens, is a "distraction to law enforcement and therefore, undermines national security efforts".

    That makes sense. I would think that if, for example, a 6 ft man with red hair attacked me and drove off in a blue SUV, it'd just be a distraction for law enforcement to look for a red-headed man in a blue SUV. It'd be much more effective to look for an Asian man walking his dog. Besides, if the police questioned red-headed men, they might start to feel bad. And we can't have that.

    Even Arabs are willing to admit that terrorists are almost overwhelmingly Muslim. As a recent headline in an Arab newspaper said, ""The Painful Truth: All the World Terrorists Are Muslims!"

    Amnesty hysterically reports that "at least 87 million people — one in three — in the United States are at high risk of being victimized because they belong to a racial, ethnic or religious group whose members are commonly targeted by police for unlawful stops and searches." If you look at Amnesty's full report, you'll see that they define everyone who is not white as being at "high risk" for profiling. This number includes infants, toddlers, the elderly and more.

    I think Amnesty wants to paint a picture of America where the "peoples of color" are perpetually at risk of being "profiled" by white Americans. That fits their own "profile" of America - an America that's the root cause of much of the world's problems.

    Now don't get me wrong, I know that cops pull over black drivers far more often than white ones. I know that racism is alive and well. However, I also know that it's foolish to pretend that we don't know who the terrorists are. In the War on Terror, America shouldn't be divided into black and white. We should be united against those who seek to kill all of us, whether we're white, asian, native american, black, arab american, hispanic, samoan...whatever. And those who seek to kill all of us are overwhelmingly Muslim men.

    It's amazing to me that some people, including my own Senator Russ Feingold, think we should let some warped sense of political correctness handcuff our ability to fight terrorism. It won't be very comforting to the next Americans that die in an attack to think "well, at least we didn't depress or humiliate anyone."

    Amnesty International, like so many other liberals and liberal organizations, is pretending that there isn't an international War on Terror because to do so would distract from their own pet causes. 9/11 changed their status quo and instead of dealing with that they, like so many others, are trying to turn back the clock.

    It's just not that easy.

    Posted by at 08:17 PM | Comments (0)

     

    'Yummy Wonders'

    [Posted by james]

    We already know that Theresa Heinz Hypen Kerry is a nut, and here is evidence that she is a paranoid nut as well:

    Each election, the sitting first lady and the opposing candidate's wife submit cookie recipes that [Family Circle] readers can try and then vote on.

    This year, Theresa Heinz-Kerry sent in her "yummy wonders" recipe, but the folks at Family Circle said the recipe didn't work in the kitchen. This prompted her staff to submit a pumpkin spice cookie, which was deemed not only inedible, but plagiarized. Heinz Kerry suspected sabotage: "Somebody at my office gave that recipe out and, in fact, I think somebody really [wrote] it on purpose to give a nasty recipe.

    That's right, Heinz Hyphen Kerry, your own staff is mixed up in an intricate and dastardly plot orchestrated by Karl Rove to ruin your husband's election bid by sending nasty recipes in to Family Circle in your name.

    And now, for your pleasure:
    Q. Why did Theresa Heinz Kerry's cookies stick to the pan?
    A. Because instead of using it to line the pan, she fashioned the tinfoil into a helmet!

    Q. How did Family Circle know that the recipe submitted on her behalf wasn't truly a Theresa Heinz Kerry special?
    A. Because it didn't call for any NUTS!

    Thank you, I'll be here all week.

    Update: In a Dummocrats.com world exclusive, we've obtained a scan of the 1971 recipe sent in on behalf of THK to Family Circle from the CBS Evening News.

    Posted by jkhat at 10:49 AM | Comments (0)

     

    September 12, 2004

    Changing of the guard

    [Posted by james]


    Image found at cadethappy.com.

    See this one, too.

    Posted by jkhat at 10:39 PM | Comments (0)

     

    If The Middle East Were The Big Ten (Plus One)

    [Posted by ]

    I don't know exactly how to react to Notre Dame's upset of Michigan. As another Big Ten school fan, I've learned to hate both teams with a passion.

    It got me to thinking, a game between Notre Dame and Michigan is the Middle East equivalent of a war between the United States and Israel. The rest of the Middle East would have no idea who to root for.

    The United States is, sadly, in this scenario, Notre Dame. We're not actually a part of the conference, but always a factor in it. Clearly, Israel is the Middle East's Michigan. Everyone hates them, but they still usually win. But can we assign the rest of the Big Ten a Middle Eastern equivalent? Oh, I think we can.

    Egypt: If Israel is Michigan, then Egypt must be Ohio State. They're a traditional power, but in most years overrated. Plus, they usually lose to Israel when it matters.

    Iraq: Iraq is Iowa. They're rebuilding, but their leadership appears up to the task. They'll probably challenge for supremacy in the region well before anyone expects them to.

    Iran: is evil, but unsuccessful. That alone makes them a perfect match for Minnesota. Sorry Gophers, but sometimes the truth hurts.

    Saudi Arabia: is Northwestern. They're both located in the self-proclaimed center of their universes. They both try to foster great intellectual reputations, but neither has accomplished much of anything.

    Libya: and their leader Colonel Gadhafi are nothing if not Penn State and their aging leader JoPa. Both have essentially opted out of the "recruiting process".

    Palestine: has got to be Michigan State. Their rivalry with Michigan is even more lopsided (and vicious) than Michigan's with Ohio State. The rest of the Middle East is fond of either beating them or ignoring them unless they're up against Michigan, in which case they're everybody's best friend.

    UAE: The Emirates, in some ways, are a more progressive Middle Eastern state. They have banked on business and tourism for their future, not just oil. That sounds like Purdue to me. They're not stuck in the "three yards and a cloud of dust" past.

    Lebanon: has been a disaster for a long time. The rest of the Middle East does what they will with it. No one fears Lebanon. That's just like ... Indiana.

    Syria: like, Illinois, tries to beat up on its lesser neighbors like Lebanon, but can't compete with the big boys.

    Jordan: is my beloved Wisconsin. While overlooked by most, both are quietly building something both powerful and sustainable. Both owe a debt of gratitude to major powers for either money or Barry Alvarez, there is no love loss between the them and that power.

    I think you could apply a Big Ten analysis to almost any region. I'd love to see someone try this with Europe or Asia.

    Posted by at 09:20 AM | Comments (3)

     

    September 11, 2004

    Never Again

    [Posted by ]

    This is from Cox & Forkum and, as usual, they have the right idea. We can't gloss over the horror of that day and just hope it doesn't happen again. We are faced with an exceedingly evil enemy who will gladly kill men, women and children and piously shout "Allahu Akbar!" while they do it. It's our lot in history to defeat this evil. We may not want the task, but it is ours.

    Posted by at 09:19 AM | Comments (0)

     

    September 10, 2004

    Baghdad Bob finds new job?

    [Posted by james]

    via Barking Moonbat Early Warning System

    Posted by jkhat at 11:09 PM | Comments (0)

     

    Pyjama Party

    [Posted by ]

    Tonight Jonathan Klein, former executive vice president of CBS News and founder of FeedRoom.com, characterized the bloggers who broke the story of CBS using forged documents as people sitting around typing in their pyjamas. The insinuation is, of course, that bloggers are nothing more than crackpots in the basement who can write whatever crazy things they want because they don't have the "checks and balances" of the mainstream media.

    Sadly, the real problem is the incredible arrogance of the mainstream media (MSM). They took this story and ran with it. They either didn't know, or didn't care, that it was based on poor forgeries and incomplete reporting (60 Minutes didn't bother to talk to the family of the man who allegedly wrote these memoes. They don't believe any of it either).

    Bloggers took this story apart in less than 12 hours. This isn't to say that bloggers will always be right, but I think we've earned the right to be respected by the MSM. Instead, bloggers were ridiculed. Not that we should need to do it, but here's a look at the credentials of some of the main bloggers involved in breaking this story. (As an aside, you can read short bios on James and me too).

    • PowerLine, the blog that first broke the story (based on some posts on FreeRepublic, of course) is written by two Minnesota lawyers and a lawyer in DC.
    • Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs summarizes his credentials here:
      I actually received two emails from people questioning my expertise to examine and criticize the documents shown in the entries immediately below. Can you believe it? So here’s the skinny.

      I’ve been involved with desktop publishing software and scalable software fonts (as opposed to hot lead type) almost since their inception. I’m a former West Coast editor of a popular computer magazine for a now-orphaned computer, the Atari ST/TT. I also co-owned a software publishing firm, CodeHead Technologies, for whom I designed and laid out packaging and manuals for more than a dozen products (in addition to developing most of those products, using 680x0 assembly language). We used a combination of DTP and traditional typesetting techniques for these jobs, and I cut my teeth on some of the first serious DTP software ever created for personal computers—including Aldus Pagemaker and Aldus Freehand on the Mac, and less recognizable titles available for Atari computers (anyone still using Calamus or Pagestream out there?).

      My software company also marketed a word processing program (Calligrapher, written by a developer in Britain) that had the ability to import and use Postscript Type 1 fonts. And I had early experience with some of the dinosaur-like dedicated word processors that were available in the 70s/80s. I’m not boasting like this just to pump up my lizardoid ego; it’s to let you know that I have an extensive background in these subjects—and when I tell you that there’s no way the CBS News documents were created on any machine available in 1972/1973, I ain’t just whistlin’ Dixie.

    Bloggers, for the most part, are professionals with just as much, if not more, training in the type of critical analysis we'd expect from reporters in a situation like this. And, unlike reporters in the MSM, they actually use these skills.

    Posted by at 07:35 PM | Comments (3)

     

    View From The Front Row

    [Posted by ]

    Last week, the AP accused Wisconsinites at a Bush rally of booing when the President sent Bill Clinton best wishes for a speedy recovery. While of course this wasn't true, we thought we'd share some pictures of the event we just received from some Bush volunteers that were lucky enough to be invited to the rally.



    As you can no doubt tell, the "W" in George W. Bush clearly doesn't stand for "wrong" it stands for "Wisconsin". U Rah Rah!

    Posted by at 01:28 PM | Comments (1)

     

    September 09, 2004

    CBS news launches internal investigation

    [Posted by james]

    Drudge says:

    XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU SEPT 09, 2004 22:45:32 ET XXXXX

    CBSNEWS LAUNCHES INTERNAL INVESTIGATION AFTER SUSPICIOUS BUSH DOCS AIRED

    **Exclusive**

    CBS NEWS executives have launched an internal investigation into whether its premiere news program 60 MINUTES aired fabricated documents relating to Bush National Guard service, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

    "The reputation and integrity of the entire news division is at stake, if we are in error, it will be corrected," a top CBS source explained late Thursday.

    The source, who asked not to be named, described CBSNEWS anchor and 60 MINUTES correspondent Dan Rather as being "shell-shocked" by the increasingly likelihood that the documents in question were fraudulent.

    Rather, who anchored the segment presenting new information on the president's military service, will personally correct the record on-air, if need be, the source explained from New York.

    (emphasis added)

    I'm glad that a "top CBS news exec" is on record as saying that the "reputation and integrity of the entire news division is at stake." I agree with him - I think that the "reputation and integrity of the entire news division (of CBS)" is at stake as well. However, I'm quite certain that we have differing opinions on what, exactly, CBS's "reputation and integrity" hinges on.

    The "unnamed exec" seems to think that CBS's "reputation and integrity" hinges on whether they now investigate the story, and on whether they decide to retract the story or not.

    I think that is dead wrong - I think that CBS's "reputation and integrity" hinges on whether these documents are real or not. CBS has already made their "bold" and "groundbreaking" assertions. They're already vouched for the integrity of these papers, and they're guaranteed their authenticity with CBS's name and reputation.

    Shouldn't CBS have done this investigation before rushing to air to "break" the "story?" Isn't the "reputation and integrity of the entire news division" already ruined, seeing as how these forgeries were exposed by bunch of amateur, newsy wannabeess? (or, as the rest of the world calls them, "bloggers?")

    Or maybe CBS has lost touch of what it means to be a "reporter?"

    Posted by jkhat at 10:59 PM | Comments (1)

     

    Are 60 Minutes' AWOL Documents re: Bush Fake?

    [Posted by james]

    Right wing bloggers have been abuzz all day about the possibility that CBS (or someone else) faked the latest documents that "prove" Bush was AWOL from the National Guard.

    Drudge reports:

    '60 Minutes' Documents on Bush Might Be Fake /// 32-year-old documents produced Wednesday by CBSNEWS 60 MINS on Bush's guard service may have been forged using a current word processing program // typed using a proportional font, not common at that time, and they used a superscript font feature found in today's Microsoft Word program, Internet reports claim... Developing...

    Drudge also linked to a post on Power Line Blog that seems to have knocked it off the internet, so I have no idea what the post says.

    Captain Ed recounts a couple of Power Line Blog's observations:

    As Power Line notes and Free Republic first saw, something is terribly amiss with this memo. Take a look at "187th". The suffix is represented in superscript, which in 1973 could only be accomplished with a typesetting device -- which in 1973 would have cost thousands of dollars, making it extremely unlikely to have been used for a simple memo like this. Also, take a look at the apostrophes. Typewriters use straight up-and-down apostrophes rather than curved (same for quote marks), and these are curved.

    Both excellent points.

    However, I do believe that Dr. Rusty Shackleford also makes an excellent point:

    In the absence of more compelling evidence, I would suggest the right-leaning bloggers lay off this forged documents business. Since we now have a witness to 'W' being in Bama, what is the point? Please stop. You're making us look like a bunch of barking-moonbats. The problem with conspiracy theories is that they usually turn out to be false. Usually. Since they are usually false it seems safe to me to put the burden of proof on those trying to prove the conspiracy.

    What a way to spice up a Thursday, huh?

    Allah has a good running update of the coverage.

    UPDATE: I must say, I do find the results of this experiment pretty compelling evidence - Jeremy Chrysler popped open MS-Word, used the standard default settings and just re-typed the text of document - he didn't try to replicate the formatting at all, he just typed. Guess what folks? The result was a perfectly IDENTICAL document. Allah points out that several others got the exact same results.

    UPDATE #2: Allah has a second post going. In it, he reports that he tried to duplicate a similar but known authentic document in Word - he couldn't do it.

    INDC has contacted a forensic document examiner, and this post is really a must-read. His professional opinion:

    I asked him to put a percentage on the chances that this was a fake, and he said that was "hard to put a number on it." I then suggested "90%?" Again he said it's "hard to put an exact number, but I'd say it's at least that high, sure. I pretty much agree that that font is Times New Roman."

    At least 90%, huh?

    Explainations of methods used in arriving at that conclusion at INDC Journal.

    UPDATE #3: Reader joe points out that at least some on the left have already resigned to their fate, and they are currently speculating that none other than Bush himself is behind the forgeries.

    I'm now very suspicious that the Bush campaign set this up, if you were really forging wouldn't you do a better job? Posted by: Vanya on September 9, 2004 at 3:48 PM
    Kevin P: So, if the documents are fake, can we speculate about who faked them?

    If no typewriter in the early 70's could have produced them, then they are such poor forgeries, and there is such disincentive for Kerry's campaign to do so, that only two culprits come to mind:

    1) A very wacko left-winger who personally hates Bush, like that former Clinton buddy that was behind a lot of the attacks on Clinton.

    2) Karl Rogue.
    Posted by: Advocate for God on September 9, 2004 at 3:52 PM

    UPDATE 4: Gerry Dale is covering the story, and he notes that another forensic document expert concurs, "almost certainly fakes." Also, he cites evidence that Brigadier General Staudt was retired before this document was allegedly written.

    UPDATE 5: The Command Post has a reprint of the original Power Line Blog story here. Power Line Blog broke this story, and getting a link from Drudge took their server down.

    UPDATE 6: LGF superimposed the two images on top of one another- the one from CBS, and the one created by MS-WORD. This is the result.

    Posted by jkhat at 02:09 PM | Comments (2)

     

    September 08, 2004

    State Senator answers call to duty

    [Posted by james]

    39 year old Ohio State Senator Steve Stivers, a Republican, has been deployed to Iraq - and he's going, despite being eligible for a "lawmaker's deferment."

    Stivers said he never considered taking the deferment:

    "I always knew that mobilization was a possibility, and now the time has come," Stiver said.

    In other words, of course he's going - he made a promise 19 years ago, and he's a man of his word. I wonder, though, is Stivers a rare find in this day and age of lacking personal responsibility and double-talk patriotism, or is he responding to the call the way most Americans would? I'd like to think that Senator Stivers is the norm, not the exception, but after looking at some of comments about this story on this thread on Fark, I'm not so sure. There are a fair number of people that are genuinely surprised that he wouldn't "take the deferment."

    I wonder, out of the people who are surprised, are they suprised that he didn't take the deferment because they think that any person, given the chance, would skirt their duty, or is it that they think that any lawmaker, when given the opportunity, would take the dishonorable way out? Is it that they themselves would jump at the chance to avoid meeting their obligation, or is it that while they would personally answer the call, they feel that most others wouldn't? Is it possible that the answers to these questions lead to something more profound, revealing a fundamental difference in the way that half of us view the world?

    I don't know the answers to these questions, but whatever they are, I do know that they aren't flattering to the current state of morality and humankind.

    Posted by jkhat at 09:02 PM | Comments (4)

     

    Voter Turnout Redux

    [Posted by ]

    Dear Readers,

    I think there's been some kind of misunderstanding. Today I posted:

    As an aside, is there any reason we don't get off of work and school on Election Day? Isn't it a holiday in most other countries? If we're so concerned about low voter turnouts, wouldn't giving most people the day off of work go a long way to solve that "problem"?

    and some of you took this to mean that I was concerned about low voter turnout. Please note the scare quotes around the word "problem" above. Don't overlook the scare quotes, people! I don't really want to try too hard to encourage the stupid, the uninformed and the dummocrats to vote. In fact, I have sinister plans to distract my liberal friends from voting (okay, perhaps "sinister" is too strong of a word, let's just say my plans include alcohol and lots of it, and leave it at that). If anything, I was agitating for another paid day off. I have no doubt that even if Election Day was a Federal holiday, the non-voters would still find a way to avoid the polls. And God bless 'em for it.

    Posted by at 07:44 PM | Comments (0)

     

    Will We Ever Learn?

    [Posted by ]

    The new catchphrase of the blinded Left is dialogue. Shouldn't the Russians start a dialogue with the "Chechen separatists"? Shouldn't the Russians ask themselves "Why do they hate us?" It's the same apologist bullshit we heard after 9/11. Luckily, it sounds like the Putin will be as resolute as Bush:

    Vladimir Putin has attacked the West for calling on Russia to seek political dialogue with Chechen separatists in the wake of last week's school hostage siege in which almost 400 people died.

    The hardline leader also ruled out holding a public inquiry into the storming of the Beslan school after a three-day stand-off with rebels who demanded Chechnya's independence.

    "Why don't you meet Osama bin Laden, invite him to Brussels or to the White House and engage in talks, ask him what he wants and give it to him so he leaves you in peace?" Britain's Guardian newspaper quoted Mr Putin as telling a group of foreign journalists and academics.

    "You find it possible to set some limitations in your dealings with these bastards, so why should we talk to people who are child-killers?"

    Exactly. Why is it that these looney lefties will scream every time someone might allegedly "blame the victim" in a rape case, but will turn right around and blame the victim (America, Russia, Israel) when thousands of people are brutally murdered?

    I think the answer is that some of them are still in denial about what we're up against. Their theory is that terrorism is no big deal. Certainly nothing compared to the horrors they've been subjected to under the boot of the Bushitler regime. And anytime the veil is lifted and the terrorists are exposed as, well, terrorists, that chips away at their joke of a theory. But that's not all. The more seriously society takes the threat of terrorism, the more likely we'll choose a President who's committed to dealing with it. And therefore, the more likely it is that we'll have four more years of President Bush and the looney lefty pet causes will continue to languish and society deals with more pressing problems.

    That's why we don't see images from 9/11 anymore. That's why reporters condemn Russian tv for showing video from the attack last week. That's why these chilling words from a British-based cleric are virtually ignored:

    Omar Bakri Mohammed, the spiritual leader of the extremist sect al-Muhajiroun, said that holding women and children hostage would be a reasonable course of action for a Muslim who has suffered under British rule.

    "As long as the Iraqi did not deliberately kill women and children, and they were killed in the crossfire, that would be okay."

    • We are facing an enemy who think it's "okay" to kill women and children in the name of religious fanaticism.
    • We are facing an enemy that has already killed 3,000 people on American soil in a single morning.
    • We are facing an enemy that regularly kills Israelis just trying to ride the bus.
    • We are facing an enemy that has killed over 500 people in just the last couple of weeks in Russia.
    • We are facing an enemy that has stated they have the "right" to kill four to ten million Americans (apparently there's scholarly debate over the exact number of us that "deserve" to be killed).

    Will we ever learn to take this threat seriously? The best case scenario is that the Left will come into the fold when the election's over and they can no longer dream of defeating Bush.

    Posted by at 12:00 PM | Comments (1)

     

    Wictory Wednesday: Vote Early

    [Posted by ]

    Every Wednesday, we've been telling you to do that thing you do to help re-elect President Bush. But now you can do even more. You can vote early (but not often, after all we're not Democrats people). Order an absentee ballot now and you won't have to worry about Election Day hassle, and you can volunteer for the campaign all day long on November 2.

    As an aside, is there any reason we don't get off of work and school on Election Day? Isn't it a holiday in most other countries? If we're so concerned about low voter turnouts, wouldn't giving most people the day off of work go a long way to solve that "problem"?

    Anyway, something else you can do each and every Wictory Wednesday is check out some of the blogs listed below. If you're like me, and live in the heart of liberal looneyland, it's wonderful to find other like-minded people.

    Posted by at 08:00 AM | Comments (4)

     

    September 07, 2004

    Greeting fellow Right Wing Zealots

    [Posted by james]

    As our regular readers may know, I get more mail from the Democratic leadership than many registered Democrats. The reasons are many, but let's summarize them by saying that "I've managed to get myself on a lot of lists," and "I live in a zip code that makes them think that I have a lot of money."

    The mailings are always good for a laugh, to say the least, and it makes me feel good to know that the Dems are wasting their $ sending me their materials. (And, of course, I always return their postage-paid envelopes to them empty.

    The craziest letters always from top Nut Nancy Pelosi, and this letter didn't disappoint. It opens,

    TRUTH:
    George W. Bush and the right-wing Republican Controlled Congress are advancing a radical agenda backed by a bizarre alliance of right-wing zealots, ultra-conservative idealogues, and greedy special interests.

    Oh, now there's irony: The Fanatic Freak calling someone a zealot.
    Oh, now there's irony: The Leftiest Lefty referring to calling her opposers extreme.
    Oh, now there's irony: Nutty Nancy alleging that the Republicans cater to "special interest" groups.

    Oh, this stuff just kills me.

    Be sure to sign up to get Democratic materials delivered to your home - I'm tellin ya, it's better than the The Onion.

    And for those of you that missed the current edition of Nutty Nancy Pelosi's Lies and distortions, be sure to look for her at a comedy club near you.

    Posted by jkhat at 07:52 PM | Comments (2)

     

    Kerry co-sponsored bill banning gun he waves

    [Posted by james]



    Drudge: KERRY COSPONSORED BILL BANNING GUN HE WAVES

    Read the whole story at Drudge.

    Update:From this press release by the National Shooting Sports Foundation:

    Remington President Tommy Milner said, "Rest assured, Remington was neither aware of this presentation in advance nor in any way supportive of its intent to support Senator Kerry's candidacy. In fact, the company remains amused by ongoing photos of Senator Kerry shooting without either ear or eye protection while discharging a firearm."

    hahaha.

    XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX TUE SEPT 07, 2004 11:46:05 ET XXXXX

    KERRY COSPONSORED BILL BANNING GUN HE WAVES

    Was Dem presidential hopeful John Kerry seen this weekend waving a gun which would have been banned if legislation he co-sponsored became law?

    Kerry co-sponsored S. 1431 last year (“The Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003) which would have banned a "semiautomatic shotgun that has a pistol grip.”

    Opponents of the bill successfully argued how nearly all guns have "pistol grips," inluding millions of Browning Auto-5 shotguns produced since 1903.

    Photos show Kerry's hand resting on the "pistol grip," as loosely defined in the bill. [Section SEC. 2; (H) (ii) and (b)(42): "The term 'pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip."]

    Kerry was presented with the semiautomatic shotgun during a Labor Day stop in Racine, West Virginia.

    "I thank you for the gift, but I can't take it to the debate with me," Kerry told a cheering crowd as he held up the device.

    But Kerry's gun bill would have also banned any "gift" transaction!

    [It is not clear if Kerry completed the required paperwork (Form 4473) before he claimed the gun.]

    Developing...

    -----------------------------------------------------------
    Filed By Matt Drudge
    Reports are moved when circumstances warrant
    http://www.drudgereport.com for updates
    (c)DRUDGE REPORT 2004
    Not for reproduction without permission of the author

    Posted by jkhat at 07:45 PM | Comments (1)

     

    September 05, 2004

    Bypassing NYT registration

    [Posted by james]

    From the comment section over a La Shawn Barber's place:

    How to bypass the NY Times Web registration:

    Their Web server is set up to let Google searches through. So if it sees a referrer URL coming from Google, it will let it through. Therefore:

    1. Right-click (Ctrl-click if you’re on a Mac) on the NY Times link and choose “Copy URL” (I think it’s called “Copy link location” in Internet Explorer).

    2. Open up Google.

    3. Paste the URL into Google’s search page. Click Search.

    4. Google’s search results give you a link to the URL you just pasted in.

    5. Click that link. Voila, the NY Times Web server sees a referrer URL coming from Google and lets you in.

    comment by Robin Munn — 09.05.04 @ 2:59 pm

    Awesome, it works. I'm gonna write a Firefox plugin that takes advantages of this "feature."

    Posted by jkhat at 07:49 PM | Comments (1)

     

    France Forgery?

    [Posted by james]

    Italian diplomats have have come forward with some pretty serious allegations:

    Italian diplomats say that France was behind forged documents which at first appeared to prove that Iraq was seeking "yellow-cake" uranium in Niger - evidence used by Britain and America to promote the case for last year's Gulf war.

    They say that France's intelligence services used an Italian-born middle-man to circulate a mixture of genuine and bogus documents to "trap" the two leading proponents of war with Saddam into making unsupportable claims.
    ...
    "Their aim was to make the allies look ridiculous in order to undermine their case for war."

    While these allegations are pretty serious, I have to say that I wouldn't at all be surprised if they were true. I doubt, however, that the Frenchies' aim was to protect their "trading status" with Iraq, as the article reports. Rather, I think it's much more likely that the goal was to gain international respect and re-emerge as a world power.

    To better understand their deep desire for international respect and admiration, it is important to understand something about France: France believes, very, very, very strongly that a world with only one superpower is a very, very, very dangerous world. They will go to almost any end to avoid living in a one superpower world, regardless of who that one superpower is. This strong belief has been the driving force behind much of France's foreign policy over the last 10 years or so. It's been the driving force in their drive to strengthen the UN, and it's been the main driving force behind the decision to form the EU European superstate.

    Whether they're right or wrong about the dangers of the single superpower world, the Frenchies are almost certainly wrong in the ends that they will go to ensure that one nation doesn't achieve "superpower" status while others flounder. They are wrong in that they aren't above tearing the other side down to their level rather than building themselves up to meet the opposition.

    France's plan may have gone something like this:


    1. Get the US and UK to rely on fake documents.
    2. Be very, very loud about how wrong the US and the UK are.
    3. Suddenly produce evidence that shows that you were right all along.
    4. Earn international respect and emerge as a world leader.

    The plan has a certain sort of "finesse" that makes it a very French plan, don't you think? It's an attempt to outsmart an opponent, not to beat them with force. It's an attempt to gain respect by being craftier and brainier than the other side. It's an attempt to paint themselves as being classy, quick and nimble, while calling the other side uncivilized brutes. France is no stranger to this type of plan, either - remember the Maginot Line, which they thought would make their "finessed" smaller army "superior" to the brutish German army? How long did that hold up, about a day?

    Every day, I see at least one bumper sticker that reads "Bush Lied, People Died." In fact, this was the very theme of Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11. So, if these Looney Lefties are logical at all, and if this report pans out to be true, then these same folks will start calling for a "regime change" in France, right?

    Don't count on it.

    Posted by jkhat at 07:08 PM | Comments (0)

     

    September 04, 2004

    To MSNBC, some values of 3 are larger than others

    [Posted by james]

    When is a 47%-44% polling result "a big lead" and when is it "almost dead even?" According to MSNBC, it depends on who's leading.

    I was just watching MSNBC when the anchor-lady pointed to a poll with a +/- 3 point margin of error that asked people whom they trusted to better undertand their needs/situation. The results were 47%-44%, in favor of John Kerry. The anchor-lady expressed great shock and incredulity when she mentioned a recent Time magazine poll that shows an 11-point Bush lead, and asked a colleague on-air "doesn't that 11-point lead seem strange to you, seeing as how so many more Americans trust John Kerry..."

    So many more, huh? 3%? In a poll with a 3 point margin of error. OK, I thought, so the lady doesn't understand "margin of error...." I'm forgiving like that - after all, I thought, "she's a newscaster; how bright can she be?"

    But then, in the very next breath, less than a minute later, the exact same lady pointed to another poll that asked which candidate they trusted more with (i think it was national security? i don't recall.) The results of THAT poll, also with a +/-3 point margin of error, were 50% Bush and 46% Kerry - and she called it "A VIRTUAL DEAD HEAT!"

    So, according to MSNBC, when Kerry leads by 3 points (within the margin of error) he is far ahead, and when President Bush leads by 4 points it's a "virtual dead heat."

    And who said the media was biased?

    Posted by jkhat at 10:13 AM | Comments (1)

     

    September 03, 2004

    Get Well, President Clinton

    [Posted by ]

    Word from New York is that former President Clinton is facing bypass surgery after suffering chest pains. We wish President Clinton a speedy recovery. Our thoughts and prayers are with him and his family. Plus, it's only fun to tease him if he's still around ;-)

    Update: Some people in the crowd in West Allis, WI apparently booed when President Bush offered Clinton best wishes for his recovery. That's awful. I'm ashamed of my fellow Wisconsinites. The only thing I can think of is that they got into their brandy old fashioneds too early, or, that they weren't booing, but rather saying "boo-ill", "boo-ill".

    And why in the world does that article mention that Bush "did nothing to stop them"? The press is showing their bias in trying to blame Bush for not "stopping" them. It's like reporting "a woman had a heart attack at a bush rally... bush did nothing to help her." The insinuation is that he is somehow responsible. He wasnt the one booing. In fact, he was wishing Cinton WELL. They take a noble and kind act and turn it into a negative for what he didnt do, completely ignoring what he did do. I mean, he could have just not mentioned it at all.

    Update #2: Okay, so now it sounds like the AP made up the boos. Wow. It's amazing how often the media shocks me with their biases. You'd think I'd be used to it by now. Thanks to our reader Sherry for the tip.

    Update #3
    Here is a link to the actual audio of the event. (mp3, ~500k). As you can hear for yourself, there is no booing. (as soon as i saw this article, i mailed kris and said "no way did a wisconsin crowd boo, this can't be true. --james)

    Be sure to check out the thread posted in update #2, as it's chronicling the media's issuance then unexplained retraction of this story.

    Update #4: Behold the awesome power of Lexis/Nexis, as Galley Slaves uncovers the original AP article, complete with byline by one "Tom Hays." (perhaps they meant Tom Hayden? :-)

    Update #5: I've sent an email to Mr. Hays inviting him to give his "side of the story." Who thinks he'll actually respond? (Of course he won't, after all, why should the press be accountable to the people?)


    Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 10:49:57 -0500
    From: James Hat
    To: thays@ap.org
    Cc: kris@dummocrats.com, tlhughes@ap.org
    Subject: West Allis rally story retraction

    Mr. Hays,

    My name is James Hat, I run a weblog (blog) entitled "dummocrats.com." From
    what I understand, you are the reporter who was originally credited with the
    byline to Friday's AP story, "HEADLINE: Bill Clinton hospitalized with chest
    pains, will face bypass surgery."

    As a proud Wisconsinite, I was understandably horrified at what you initially
    reported, that the crowd erupted into "boos" when President Bush announced that
    former President Clinton had been hosptalized. Indeed, my college Kris
    initially posted on the dummocrats.com weblog about your story, and in her post
    (available at http://www.dummocrats.com/archives/000408.php) she expressed
    disbelief and shame that her fellow Wisconsinites would react in such a way.

    Since that time, however, we've had the opportunity to review audio tape of
    President Bush's announcement at the West Allis rally, and I have to say, we
    are hard pressed to discern a single "boo," let alone the "thousands" of boos
    that you intimate.

    I can only assume that the AP had similar problems with your account, as they
    have since "pulled" the story and replaced it with another version, sans your
    byline, that doesn't "report" the boo-ing that you alleged.

    I and my readers would like to give you an opportunity to tell "your side of the
    story," Mr. Hays. Were you actually present at this rally, and, if so, were
    you located "within earshot" of the crowd of thousands? Are you in any way
    hearing impaired? Was your account based on firsthand knowledge of the events,
    or were holed up in a little studio in NYC while you slandering the good people
    of Wisconsin? How long have you been an AP "reporter?"

    Thank you for your time.

    Sincerely,

    James Hat

    Posted by at 02:21 PM | Comments (6)

     

    Reporters Can't Be Bothered To, You Know, Report

    [Posted by ]

    Madison's Capital Times (not so fondly known to me as the "Communist Times") prints a sob story of a area resident who accidently got caught up in protests in NYC and was arrested. Now don't get me wrong, I feel bad for the guy. He was just moving his daughter back to college and ended up in jail. But the "reporter", Samara Kalk Derby, wants to put her own spin on the whole event. She quotes the unfortunate man's daughter:

    The whole ordeal left her wondering if the New York City Police Department was using special powers granted under the USA Patriot Act.

    "It makes me think about what is happening in this country right now with some of our basic rights getting abused and taken away."

    That's how the article ends. Kalk Derby doesn't actually investigate whether or not the NYPD did have any special powers granted by the Patriot Act or anything else. She leaves it to some 20-year old to speculate about it. This is completely irresponsible journalism. Kalk Derby wants to blame the Patriot Act for this but doesn't want to actually do a lick of work to prove that it had anything to do with what happened in NYC. And Big Media wonders why they are becoming more irrelevant every day.

    Update: Both the DNC & RNC were designated as "national special security events" The NYPD has lots of information about the event, but I see no mention anywhere of the Patriot Act, except for people protesting against it.

    Posted by at 11:25 AM | Comments (0)

     

    Quotable Notables

    [Posted by ]

    I truly enjoyed most of the speeches at the RNC. I thought Bush was a little less poetic than I would have liked. Honestly, I could barely keep my eyes open. But, I think he needed to be a little boring. He needed to talk about plans, not be grand.

    Here are my favorite quotes from the major convention speakers. Feel free to add yours too.

    John McCain:

    President Bush made the difficult decision to liberate Iraq. Those who criticize that decision would have us believe that the choice was between a status quo that was well enough left alone and war. But there was no status quo to be left alone.

    The years of keeping Saddam in a box were coming to a close. The international consensus that he be kept isolated and unarmed had eroded to the point that many critics of military action had decided the time had come again to do business with Saddam, despite his near daily attacks on our pilots, and his refusal, until his last day in power, to allow the unrestricted inspection of his arsenal.

    Our choice wasn't between a benign status quo and the bloodshed of war. It was between war and a graver threat. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Not our critics abroad. Not our political opponents.

    And certainly not a disingenuous film maker who would have us believe that Saddam's Iraq was an oasis of peace when in fact it was a place of indescribable cruelty, torture chambers, mass graves and prisons that destroyed the lives of the small children held inside their walls.

    Rudy Guiliani:

    And since September 11th President Bush has remained rock solid.

    It doesn't matter how he is demonized.

    It doesn't matter what the media does to ridicule him or misinterpret him or defeat him.

    They ridiculed Winston Churchill. They belittled Ronald Reagan.

    But like President Bush, they were optimists; leaders must be optimists. Their vision was beyond the present and set on a future of real peace and true freedom.

    Some call it stubbornness. I call it principled leadership.

    President Bush has the courage of his convictions.

    In choosing a President, we really don't choose a Republican or Democrat, a conservative or liberal.

    We choose a leader.

    Arnold Schwarzenegger:

    My fellow immigrants, my fellow Americans how do you know if you are a Republican? I'll tell you how.

    If you believe that government should be accountable to the people, not the people to the government...then you are a Republican! If you believe a person should be treated as an individual, not as a member of an interest group... then you are a Republican! If you believe your family knows how to spend your money better than the government does... then you are a Republican! If you believe our educational system should be held accountable for the progress of our children ... then you are a Republican! If you believe this country, not the United Nations, is the best hope of democracy in the world ... then you are a Republican! And, ladies and gentlemen ...if you believe we must be fierce and relentless and terminate terrorism ... then you are a Republican!

    Laura Bush:

    I could talk about the small business owners and entrepreneurs who are now creating most of the new jobs in our country... women like Carmella Chaifos - the only woman to own a tow truck company in all of Iowa. The President's tax relief helped Carmella to buy the business, and modernize her fleet, and expand her operations. Carmela is living proof of what she told me. She said: "If you're determined and you want to work hard, you can do anything you want to. That's the beautiful thing about America."

    Zell Miller:

    He is not a slick talker but he is a straight shooter and, where I come from, deeds mean a lot more than words.

    I have knocked on the door of this man's soul and found someone home, a God-fearing man with a good heart and a spine of tempered steel.

    The man I trust to protect my most precious possession: my family.

    Dick Cheney:

    The fanatics who killed some 3,000 of our fellow Americans may have thought they could attack us with impunity because terrorists had done so previously. But if the killers of September 11th thought we had lost the will to defend our freedom, they did not know America and they did not know George W. Bush.

    George W. Bush:

    In the last four years, you and I have come to know each other. Even when we don't agree, at least you know what I believe and where I stand. You may have noticed I have a few flaws, too. People sometimes have to correct my English -- I knew I had a problem when Arnold Schwarzenegger started doing it. Some folks look at me and see a certain swagger, which in Texas is called "walking." Now and then I come across as a little too blunt -- and for that we can all thank the white-haired lady sitting right up there.

    One thing I have learned about the presidency is that whatever shortcomings you have, people are going to notice them -- and whatever strengths you have, you're going to need them. These four years have brought moments I could not foresee and will not forget. I have tried to comfort Americans who lost the most on September 11th -- people who showed me a picture or told me a story, so I would know how much was taken from them. I have learned first-hand that ordering Americans into battle is the hardest decision, even when it is right. I have returned the salute of wounded soldiers, some with a very tough road ahead, who say they were just doing their job. I've held the children of the fallen, who are told their dad or mom is a hero, but would rather just have their dad or mom.

    Posted by at 07:59 AM | Comments (3)

     

    September 02, 2004

    An Economic Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

    [Posted by ]

    Retailers are experiencing a very disappointing back to school season. The late Labor Day means that many schools are starting later so the season will actually last well into September. However, the late start date isn't the only reason for slow sales. The AP reports:

    But overall, sales were hurt by consumers' concerns about money and jobs. On Tuesday, the Conference Board reported a larger than expected decline in consumer confidence, and attributed the slide to Americans' worries about the job market.

    Why are Americans so pessimistic about this economy? Most economic indicators are moving in the right direction. The unemployment rate is as low as it was back in Clinton's "boom" years.

    I believe the answer is that the media's and the Democrats' unrelenting negativity are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. The Democrats have put themselves in a position where bad news for America is good news for them. If the economy is humming along and efforts in Iraq are positive it means Bush is more likely to win re-election.

    So, the Dems keep preaching about unemployment and the economy and their willing accomplices in the media play along. The America people continue to hear, day after day, that the economy is going in the wrong direction. Good economic news is buried. No wonder why consumer confidence isn't where it should be.

    This is good news for no one, except for those whose only goal in life is to defeat George W. Bush.

    Posted by at 10:29 AM | Comments (1)

     

    September 01, 2004

    Cheney: Not Zany

    [Posted by ]

    Zell Miller was full of fire and brimstone. Dick Cheney, well, wasn't. Cheney isn't the most inspiring of speakers, is he? I think he was a little boring, but I don't think that's a problem.

    I think one of the goals of that speech was to contrast Cheney with John "Boy Wonder" Edwards. Cheney is a serious man for serious times. He's not a token VP that gets pulled out to go to state funerals in Luxemburg. He's doing real work. He's going to just kill John Edwards in the debates.

    Posted by at 10:03 PM | Comments (3)

     

    GOP convention, Wednesday

    [Posted by james]

    OK, Zell Miller's speech was great. Best speech of the convention, so far. Somehow, i find myself saying that after every speech. (except for the bush girls' embarassing escapade.) Anyone note the second primetime reference to the UN? (somethin's a-brewing....)

    McCain is on nbc news now saying "I just don't agree with Zell Miller that the Democrats are unpatriotic. They may have different views, but they're not unpatriotic."

    Umm, John, did you watch his speech at all? Miller didn't say that dems are unpatriotic - in fact he said the exact opposite, something to the effect of "it isn't that they're not patriotic, it's that they have a fundamental difference of ideas."

    I'll update here when I find the text of the speech.

    UPDATE:
    Thanks to Kris for sending me this link to the text of the speech.


    But don't waste your breath telling that to the leaders of my party today. In their warped way of thinking America is the problem, not the solution.

    They don't believe there is any real danger in the world except that which America brings upon itself through our clumsy and misguided foreign policy.

    It is not their patriotism - it is their judgment that has been so sorely lacking. They claimed Carter's pacifism would lead to peace.

    They were wrong.

    They claimed Reagan's defense buildup would lead to war.

    They were wrong.

    And, no pair has been more wrong, more loudly, more often than the two Senators from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry.
    (emphasis added)

    The bolded line from Miller's speech clearly states that patriotism is not lacking, but, rather, judgment is lacking. But McCain charges that Zell Miller insinuated that the Dems were "unpatriotic," and he took issue with that. What speech was McCain listening to?

    Comeon, McCain, lets try to actually *listen* to the speeches before you opine. You're a media darling for sure, but with this blatant lie you end up looking like a two dollar whore. The only question is, who's paying your fee?

    Posted by jkhat at 09:27 PM | Comments (2)

     

    The God I Believe In Isn't Short Of Cash, Mister

    [Posted by ]

    I've loved U2 from the first second I heard "Boy". Bono can be more than a little pompous sometimes, but his heart is in the right place. Tonight he was on the O'Reilly Factor live from the Republican Convention. Bono wants America to give more to fight AIDS in Africa. According to the stats he quoted, the Marshall Plan cost one percent of our GDP, while today we spend .15% of our GDP to fight AIDS in Africa.

    Bono's heart is in the right place. He refuses to trash either party or candidate because saving lives in Africa is more important to him than looking cool in front of other musicians. I think he's worthy of tremendous admiration.

    However, Bono's thesis tonight was that by going full force to fight AIDS in Africa, America will regain the love of the world. I don't know if Bono really believes that or if that's just his sales job. In any case, I completely disagree with him. The idea that we need to regain the love of the world smacks of the whole "why do they hate us?" reaction to 9/11.

    The world doesn't hate America because we don't give enough money (we give more in total than anyone else) to poor countries. They hate us because we're successful. They hate us because we're free. They hate us because we're powerful.

    We've liberated millions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Afghani girls can go to school. Iraqs don't have to fear Saddam's torture chambers. When our President pointed out this fact during the Olympics, what did the world do? They complained. How dare we?

    This isn't to say that we shouldn't do more in Africa, particularly if organizations like Bono's are only willing to work with regimes that aren't lining their own pockets with our largess. But what we do in Africa (and elsewhere) should be done because it's the right thing to do, not because we feel like we need to win a popularity contest.

    Posted by at 07:56 PM | Comments (1)

     

    Top Referrers for August

    [Posted by james]

    Keeping with tradition, I've compiled a list of our top referrers for the month of August. As always, thank you to all the bloggers who have seen fit to link to us. We appreciate the support and the readers you helped to discover us.

    Right Wing News
    Pennsylvanian in Exile
    Blogs for Bush
    Behind Enemy Headlines
    Daly Thoughts
    Ace of Spades
    Stix Blog
    Just One Minute
    Boots And Sabers
    Kilabe's Hive
    California Yankee
    Red Line Rants
    Backcountry Conservative
    Davids Medienkritik
    LaShawn Barber
    Campaign Desk
    Sondra K


    The Longhorn Mafia
    PoliPundit
    The Crease
    E-Nough
    BitsBlog
    IMAO
    The National Debate
    Patriots for Bush
    The Joshua Blog
    Aldaynet
    Captains Quarters
    Anti Anti-Flag
    Mypetjawa
    Allah Pundit
    Slant Point
    Pardon My English
    Neophytepundit
    Truth Laid Bear

    We also get a fair amount of traffic from various forums. Here are some of those top referrers:

    Pr0k Forums
    Xanga
    Total Fark
    Bimmerfest

    Posted by jkhat at 01:11 PM | Comments (0)

     

    Wictory Wednesday

    [Posted by ]

    You know the drill: if you want to help ensure that America isn't "blessed" with a John Kerry Presidency then pleasedonate to the Bush campaign. Even better, sign up to volunteer for the campaign.

    Watching the convention, I'm a little jealous I'm not there myself. It seems like it's worth getting involved in the party for events like this. My former congressman, Scott Klug, is a Wisconsin delegate. This morning on the radio he told a story about how some woman came up to him and a couple of other people in the Wisconsin delegation. She was originally from Mequon, WI and still loved the state. She invited Klug and a couple of others to visit her husband's office that night. Turns out her husband is the President of the NY Yankees, so Klug and friends ended up watching part of the worst loss in Yankees history from this guy's office and later from George Steinbrenner's office.

    So, getting involved is more than just making phone calls and sealing envelopes. There could be some awesome fringe benefits too.

    And don't just limit your efforts to Bush/Cheney either. If nothing else, the last couple of days show just how many worthy leaders the Republican Party has. Get involved working for your congressional candidates or even those seeking state level offices.

    And, keep visiting these great sites full of bloggers for Bush:

    Posted by at 08:42 AM | Comments (0)

     


      page rendered in 0.3278 seconds | ©2004 Dummocrats.com