Thursday, September 01, 2005
Big Brother IS Watching - and Thank God!
What a great story. This Girl had her life saved thanks to a computer program that spots swimmers who aren't moving. TEchnology isn't all bad.
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
Byron Brown "Accomplishments"
Can someone explain to me whatByron Brown has ever accomplished? Can you point to the Masten district and say things are better since he began to represent the area? His claim to fame seems to be projects like Tops Markets opening on the east side. That is a Tops Markets accomplishment. If we are going to give him credit for that,let's be sure we credit him with the acts of violence and the unemployment rate in the neighborhood too. Byron Brown represents the status quo in a city and county with control boards. Do we really have to say anything more?
Out of Iraq?
After watching this country cut and run in the 1970's, I don't think this country is ready for the MAxine Waters' of the world.OpinionJournal - The Western Front
Friday, July 29, 2005
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Cheney 2008!!!
I was hoping for Condoleeza, but now I hope the Vice President will at least announce!DRUDGE REPORT FLASH 2005�
Monday, July 04, 2005
G-L-O-R-I-A-!
Haven't heard her speak outagainst how these people treated others but good to see she is still in the limelight. Oh by the way, Gloria, the Geneva Convention applies to armies who are in uniform - not to terrorists.
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Saturday, February 19, 2005
Monday, January 24, 2005
Thursday, November 11, 2004
Naples Fails to Back up This Claim
Comptroller critical of Giambra 'red' budget - 2004-11-11 - Business First of Buffalo The fact is, the green budget would create an environment that is unacceptable to even more citizens.
Sunday, November 07, 2004
Friday, November 05, 2004
As the dust settles . . .
Here are some of my thoughts on the election.
First of all, I am thrilled with the outcome. The validation of the President and the growth in the GOP margins in the House and Senate are heartening. I had the opportunity to go door to door in Ohio, work at the Erie PA headquarters, and make calls to voters in New Mexico. I will cherish those memories.
There are a lot of reasons for the President's vicotry, and I will try to list them in descending order of importance.
The President. President Bush has led us through one of the most difficult times in our nation's history, and through it all he made decisions that he felt were best for the country rather than best for his re-election prospects. He is a man of integrity and courage.
The Vice President. Although he was (unfairly) a lightning rod for criticism, he remained unflappable, and a stalwart ally for the President. He will go down in History as the most powerful VP ever simply because he was the first to put any of his own political aspirations aside to help push the President's agenda.
The First Lady. Laura Bush connected with America in a way that only Barbara Bush and Jackie Kennedy have done in my lifetime. What an incredible asset - she is real, and she is a lady. The comparison to the alternative was starker than the comparison to the two Presidential candidates.
The GOTV operation. Karl Rove, Karen Hughes, Mehlman, Racicot et al ran the best campaign in my lifetime. They stayed on message and made very few mistakes.
Other observations:
This election marked the highwatermark of the paleomedia. Evan Thomas' expectation of the media being worth 15 points to Kerry was probably 50% high. ABC and CBS in particular had their lunch eaten by bloggers. CNN, part of the mainstream, but not necessarily paleomedia saw its influence wane as well. The NYTimes and the birdcage liner folks will face a steeper decline in influence.
The internet has long held the promise of a more informed electorate. the ability for people to investigate for themselves things like voting records, transcripts of past speeches and appearances had the potential to keep them all honest. This election is probably the first to see the internet take a major place in campaigns. From Dean's onloine fundraising to the bloggers who exposed the fraud of CBS, to the Vets and POWs whose internet presence forced the paleomedia to take notice all impacted the election in a big way.
Kerry to took great pains to point out his beleif that he should not force his morality on others. Had the judges in his state and the Mayor of San Franciso felt the same way, the red states would not have been nearly as galvanized.
Even the Blue states passed resolutions banning Gay Marriage.
Early indications are that the left still doesn't get it. Consider:
I say forget introspection. It's time to be honest about our antagonists. My predecessors in this conversation are thoughtful men, and I honor their ideas, but let's try something else. I grew up in Missouri and most of my family voted for Bush, so I am going to be the one to say it: The election results reflect the decision of the right wing to cultivate and exploit ignorance in the citizenry. I suppose the good news is that 55 million Americans have evaded the ignorance-inducing machine. But 58 million have not. (Well, almost 58 million—my relatives are not ignorant, they are just greedy and full of classic Republican feelings of superiority.)
He says Red State people are dumb, and before three sentences pass, he refers to Republican feelings of superiority!
If the President is successful in advocating for school vouchers, or a tax credit for K-12 tuition, and if Condoleeza Rice is on the 2008 ticket, African Americans may no longer be a homogeneous voting bloc. Bush solidified his support within the Black community, but with the above, they may come back to the party of Lincoln for good.
Life is good. The economy is growing.
And the President's margin just grew.
God Bless America!
First of all, I am thrilled with the outcome. The validation of the President and the growth in the GOP margins in the House and Senate are heartening. I had the opportunity to go door to door in Ohio, work at the Erie PA headquarters, and make calls to voters in New Mexico. I will cherish those memories.
There are a lot of reasons for the President's vicotry, and I will try to list them in descending order of importance.
The President. President Bush has led us through one of the most difficult times in our nation's history, and through it all he made decisions that he felt were best for the country rather than best for his re-election prospects. He is a man of integrity and courage.
The Vice President. Although he was (unfairly) a lightning rod for criticism, he remained unflappable, and a stalwart ally for the President. He will go down in History as the most powerful VP ever simply because he was the first to put any of his own political aspirations aside to help push the President's agenda.
The First Lady. Laura Bush connected with America in a way that only Barbara Bush and Jackie Kennedy have done in my lifetime. What an incredible asset - she is real, and she is a lady. The comparison to the alternative was starker than the comparison to the two Presidential candidates.
The GOTV operation. Karl Rove, Karen Hughes, Mehlman, Racicot et al ran the best campaign in my lifetime. They stayed on message and made very few mistakes.
Other observations:
This election marked the highwatermark of the paleomedia. Evan Thomas' expectation of the media being worth 15 points to Kerry was probably 50% high. ABC and CBS in particular had their lunch eaten by bloggers. CNN, part of the mainstream, but not necessarily paleomedia saw its influence wane as well. The NYTimes and the birdcage liner folks will face a steeper decline in influence.
The internet has long held the promise of a more informed electorate. the ability for people to investigate for themselves things like voting records, transcripts of past speeches and appearances had the potential to keep them all honest. This election is probably the first to see the internet take a major place in campaigns. From Dean's onloine fundraising to the bloggers who exposed the fraud of CBS, to the Vets and POWs whose internet presence forced the paleomedia to take notice all impacted the election in a big way.
Kerry to took great pains to point out his beleif that he should not force his morality on others. Had the judges in his state and the Mayor of San Franciso felt the same way, the red states would not have been nearly as galvanized.
Even the Blue states passed resolutions banning Gay Marriage.
Early indications are that the left still doesn't get it. Consider:
I say forget introspection. It's time to be honest about our antagonists. My predecessors in this conversation are thoughtful men, and I honor their ideas, but let's try something else. I grew up in Missouri and most of my family voted for Bush, so I am going to be the one to say it: The election results reflect the decision of the right wing to cultivate and exploit ignorance in the citizenry. I suppose the good news is that 55 million Americans have evaded the ignorance-inducing machine. But 58 million have not. (Well, almost 58 million—my relatives are not ignorant, they are just greedy and full of classic Republican feelings of superiority.)
He says Red State people are dumb, and before three sentences pass, he refers to Republican feelings of superiority!
If the President is successful in advocating for school vouchers, or a tax credit for K-12 tuition, and if Condoleeza Rice is on the 2008 ticket, African Americans may no longer be a homogeneous voting bloc. Bush solidified his support within the Black community, but with the above, they may come back to the party of Lincoln for good.
Life is good. The economy is growing.
And the President's margin just grew.
God Bless America!
Thursday, November 04, 2004
This Guy IS a Hoot
Areln Specter, who sits in his office because the President, angering many of his supporters, didn't do anything to help SPecter's challenger in the primary.Now Specter is trying to assert himself by ironically stating that he doesn't want the president to nominate any people who are pro-life, but at the same time wants judges who reflect the values of the people. Hello? Did you see the map Arlen?
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
I would be happy to pack their bags . . .
Can you beleive this actually got published? I am still waiting for Alec Baldwin to leave from last time...
Monday, November 01, 2004
Sunday, October 31, 2004
Higher Ed- the Free and Open Exchnage of Ideas Redux
Perhaps someone should tell this part time prof a thing or two about civil discourse.
Any question what bumper sticker is on his camel?
TheGreat commentary on the Osama tape. The only thin spearating the tape from a Kerry commercial was "The infidel Bush has lost more jobs than anyone since herbert Hoover" and "Did I mention Mary Cheney is a lesbian?"
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
Monday, October 25, 2004
The Academy as Bastion of the Free and Open Exchange of Ideas
There is no lonlier person on a college campus, no student more marginalized, no student less tolerated than a conservative. I don't condone racist behavior, but I do not condone double standards either. The Tillman piece was equally offensive and there were no repercussions.
It is Ironic
Here's a guy whose basis of support seems to be people who are adamant that the President lied, yet this guy, between his "seared memory" of Christmas in Cambodia and a non existent summit with the UN Security Council has a pattern of what the DSM IV would call "delusional Behavior". It just dawned on me. While it doesn't explain the Security Council, I bet the "World Leaders" who Kerry said support him include Prince, and Queen Latifah.
Sunday, October 24, 2004
Add Rosie...
Rosie Odonnell has made her views known. Still no word from Paris Hilton or Charlie Weaver.
Power Line: Will the Election Be Stolen?
Once againthe folks at Powerline hit an important issue right on the head.
There is plenty of evidence that the Democrats have intentions of stealing the election. The crack for votes program and the fact that Franklin County has seen such a surge in new voter applications that its list of voters exceed the number of residents should give everyone pause. The only hope for this democracy is for the President to win by enough votes to offset the Democrats shenanigans as well as to shatter the concept that it was a close race.
There is plenty of evidence that the Democrats have intentions of stealing the election. The crack for votes program and the fact that Franklin County has seen such a surge in new voter applications that its list of voters exceed the number of residents should give everyone pause. The only hope for this democracy is for the President to win by enough votes to offset the Democrats shenanigans as well as to shatter the concept that it was a close race.
Walked a Mile in My Shoes
While this isn't exactly "by the book" qualitative research this guy from Slate seems to capture the essence of the divide.
Saturday, October 23, 2004
Friday, October 22, 2004
Finally
A lot of people have written me with comments like - "I am still kind of undecided. I have been reading a lot, and I know where Carrot Top, Matt Damon and Barbra Stresiand stand on this election, but what about Eminem? A guy like him has got to have some insight." Well now we know. I will let you know if I get any updates on J LO or Fantasia Barrino.
Thursday, October 21, 2004
Jimmy Carter
The folks at PowerlineBlog have some good insights into Carter's appearance on his former speech writer's hardball show. Carter was on the air via telephone yesterday with the WBEN morning team. While he seems to be a nice guy in a Mr. Roger's kind of way, he seems to be slipping. He has shown with his grasp of the Revolutionary war that as an author, he is good at building houses.
With all due Respect...
It is amusing that the libs in England are still trying to educate their younger siblings who still don't get Benny Hill. The only thing better for the Republicans would be if the French tried to teach us a few lessons about when and how to protect ourselves.
Trying to Steal Ohio
While the attempts at fraud appear to be unprecedented it makes Hugh Hewitt seem prescient indeed.
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
Global Test
OK, so he wants us to believe wouldn't give other countries a veto over our actionsyet he only thinks a death would be "worth it": if we were fighting under the UN mantle?
The man who would have been
a presidential candidate had it not been for that little plagiarism problem. Their desperation is showing . . .
Good for Them!
Although there is always some risk of throwing the "baby out with the bathwater"I agree with the Partnership that the risks of status quo exceed the risk of any loss of good members (as they are clearly in the minority).
This Guy is Trying to buy this election
I believe George Soros may be the biggest threat to Democracy in my lifetime. It looks more and more like McCain Feingold has been an unmitigated disaster. These 527's (including the Swift Vets) are muddying the waters and mucking up the works.
Franks Sets the Record Straight on Bin Laden
I only wish the President had made this case during Kerry's demagoguery at the debates.
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
Monday, October 18, 2004
Another anti-semite for Kerry!
Mahathir tells American Muslims to vote for Kerry - OCT 18, 2004 Can Bin Laden's endorsement be far behind?
Sunday, October 17, 2004
Gallup is Losing it!
Although these results would give some cause to celebrate - the 8 point lead for the President isn't belieivable. On the other hand - the Washington Post Tracking poll gives the President a 4 point lead. Zogby says 2. As does Rasmussen. GOTV!!!!
Young Voters
It is encouraging to see that young voters appear to be registering in larger numbers. If they actually vote, it might mean that they will no longer be taken for granted. As this article implies young voters are expected to tilt towards Kerry. With no pun intended, that may be because they are not terribly well educated yet. If they were, they would look past the scare tactics of the Democratic party and Rock the Vote accusing the President of wanting to bring back the draft. When they pull back the curtain they will find that the legislation to bring back the draft was sponsored by 13 Democrats and no Republicans. They would also, with a little research, find that not only is it Dems who would like the draft to return, but it was a Democratic Governor who thought even though they were considered old enough to die in a war, they are not mature enough to drink.
Hat's Off to theis Tonawanda Hero
I am inspired by guys like this who have skills that can help people and are willing to use them even when it puts them in harms way. Godspeed Col. Kubus.
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Two Can Play at That aAme
Some businesses may bend to pressure to pull their ads from Sinclair stations. Perhaps we should boycott those companies that pull their ads!
Catholics Catch On
At least in Colorado the Catholic church is pointing out the differences between "receiving envelopes" and living a Catholic life. Clearly no candidate in the race will do exactly what the Pope wants. Kerry voted for the war, Bush waged it. Both (I believe) support Capital Punishment. Bush is pro-life, Kerry Pro-choice (abortion), including partial birth abortion. Kery supports fetal stem cell research even though it is without any known medical benefit, Bush is opposed. Bush is for choice (Schools) Kerry is opposed. Kerry's attempt to become the first divorced Catholic President should be rebuffed.
What Liberal Media?
How long can NBC last as the only credible broadcast network? Is it any wonder that Fox's ratings continue to grow?
Monday, October 11, 2004
Sunday, October 10, 2004
ABC News: Afghan Election Hailed a Loss for Taliban
Not their lead story but clearly Halperin msut be fuming that they covered this at all.
What a Shame!
This would never have happened if Kerry were President! To think that the truth angers the French! C'est absurd! Kerry would not stand for this. Then again, if Kerry were President the Frnch would still be getting wealthy off Saddam's bribes!
Democracy on the March!
The Afghan elections should provide a huge boost for the President, as it shows that Democracy can take hold in such a volatile region. It is amazing to see photos and to see how far this country has come. The NY Times has a great picture that includes women who had never dreamed of being allowed to vote.
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
Sunday, October 03, 2004
Did Kerry Cheat?
Little Green footballs has some interesting discussion about whether Kerry had a Blackberry or crib notes at the debate.
Friday, October 01, 2004
Too Long
I think the most compelling thing about the debate last night was that it was too long. Sixty minutes would have been plenty.
They both pretty much reiterated their stump speeches.
The President looked tired and at times testy.
Kerry looked effete at times, but I am sure he appeared Presidential to many for the first time.
Both had minor missteps and scored some minor points. I think the "global test" line could haunt Kerry - he gives the impression of someone who will look to France for leadership.
He may also have put too much emphasis on finding Bin Laden. He will look pretty foolish if his corpse turns up in the next 30 days.
I look forward to Cheney & Edwards and hope for more....
They both pretty much reiterated their stump speeches.
The President looked tired and at times testy.
Kerry looked effete at times, but I am sure he appeared Presidential to many for the first time.
Both had minor missteps and scored some minor points. I think the "global test" line could haunt Kerry - he gives the impression of someone who will look to France for leadership.
He may also have put too much emphasis on finding Bin Laden. He will look pretty foolish if his corpse turns up in the next 30 days.
I look forward to Cheney & Edwards and hope for more....
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
High School?
The author of this piece does a nice, albeit misguided attempt at describing this election in high school terms. I think college is more appropriate. Think Animal House. Bush is definitely Eric "Otter" Stratton. Kerry is the quintessential Omega Man Greg Marmalard.
I don't buy his image of Kerry (like today's NYT piece) that paints Kerry as the tough closer. Yeah - a liberal incumbent Dem "came back to beat a Rep". What an accomplishment!! At least he (and the times, and AP) are remaining upbeat and doing what they can to help. The rest have begun to simply cast aspersions on the electorate.
I don't buy his image of Kerry (like today's NYT piece) that paints Kerry as the tough closer. Yeah - a liberal incumbent Dem "came back to beat a Rep". What an accomplishment!! At least he (and the times, and AP) are remaining upbeat and doing what they can to help. The rest have begun to simply cast aspersions on the electorate.
Who's the one living in Fantasy Land?
There are a whole lot of Dem's out there wearing tinfoil hats, checking under their beds for John Ashcroft and Karl Rove, but this guy takes it to a whole new level!! The writing is almost laughable. Some of the adjectives are clearly tongue in cheek, but in reality it reads more like an Onion parody of the far left.
These kooks are great! First they do everything to perpetuate this myth that "their guy" is this statesman, while Bush is a moron, then at the same time, Bush is a genius for his ability to manipulate just about everything but the weather (and those Hurricanes, and the aid checks they brought seem to have some questioning even that.
Dan Rather was either complicit in or ignorant to a fraud conspiracy of . Watergate proportions. Bush deflected attention from the "real story"? What is the bigger story - a rich kid is alleged to have gotten preferential treatment without asking for it personally" or "The Tiffany Network has become the Dollar Store Network".
It is a tragedy when forged documents are revealed to be forgeries, dirty politics when the CBS-DNC connection is established, but it is fair game to call 250 heroes any name you want without ever once looking into the substance of their charges (including of course, the famous "Christmas in Cambodia" that was "seared into John Kerry's memory" that never took place. Fantasy land indeed!
Already the only salve the left has left is how much smarter they are than everyone else, especially people who drink beer go to church or watch sports. Why can't people see this? is their mantra. It's kind of sad, really.
These kooks are great! First they do everything to perpetuate this myth that "their guy" is this statesman, while Bush is a moron, then at the same time, Bush is a genius for his ability to manipulate just about everything but the weather (and those Hurricanes, and the aid checks they brought seem to have some questioning even that.
Dan Rather was either complicit in or ignorant to a fraud conspiracy of . Watergate proportions. Bush deflected attention from the "real story"? What is the bigger story - a rich kid is alleged to have gotten preferential treatment without asking for it personally" or "The Tiffany Network has become the Dollar Store Network".
It is a tragedy when forged documents are revealed to be forgeries, dirty politics when the CBS-DNC connection is established, but it is fair game to call 250 heroes any name you want without ever once looking into the substance of their charges (including of course, the famous "Christmas in Cambodia" that was "seared into John Kerry's memory" that never took place. Fantasy land indeed!
Already the only salve the left has left is how much smarter they are than everyone else, especially people who drink beer go to church or watch sports. Why can't people see this? is their mantra. It's kind of sad, really.
Saturday, September 25, 2004
Give Rather the boot.
I have toldWIVB TV4 Buffalo, NY that I will not watch their news again until it is no longer followed by Dan Rather.
Disgraceful
Kerry has shown what we knew was trueWhat's good for the country is bad for Kerry, and what is good for Kerry is bad for the world.
Disgraceful
Kerry has shown what we knew was trueWhat's good for the country is bad for Kerry, and what is good for Kerry is bad for the world.
Friday, September 24, 2004
I try to Answer Michael Moore's Letter to the President
Dear Michael Moron: (Please disregard any typos, as this was done on a 1972 IBM selectric typewriter with superscripts, but no spell check)
Thanks for your letter. If you are out of breath, you might consider a change in diet. I kid.... Anyway, I know you are genuinely interested in the issues, so I will attempt to explain it to you. Don't worry, I have a grasp of your acumen, so I will type s-l-o-w-l-y.
First of all, I should point out that there have been tremendous breakthroughs in understanding the human genome. One thing they have found was that conventional thinking had been correct, and the thoughts of one generation are not controlled by the previous one. That is good news for any offspring you might ever have. With that in mind, I will jump right to your 2000 paragraph. Before I do, though, let me point out that throughout history, nation states have formed alliances with other nation states only to have world events impact those alliances. Would a photo of FDR, Winston Churchill and Stalin grinning upset you as much as the one to which you refer? IF so, it is good that you are not a student of history.
I would tell Mr. Lehrer the same thing I told him in 2000. In fact, I believe it remains one of the things that differentiates me from my current opponent - "I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place". As Mr. Kerry mentioned just yesterday - Iraq is a magnet for terrorists. I believe it is better to fight them in Najaf than Newark.
As your 2001 quote of Dr. Rice and Secretary Powell suggest, our early assessment of Saddam Hussein was that he was kept in check by the UN and opponents within his country. Do you disagree? Should we have acted sooner?
I am not sure what to make of your "Late 2001" quote. It does of course include a link to that Reputable "News Program" 60 Minutes, quoting a disgruntled former employee and all, but still.... I am quoted, via these two filters, as saying "Saddam! Find out if there's a connection.'" That would seem to most to be an earnest attempt at fact finding, wouldn't you think? I know you do things differently in your "documentaries", but I prefer to act based on facts.
That brings us to 2003. I didn't change my mind about why we chose to invade. There were countless reasons for invading, and I believe if you check the record, when I spoke to the American people, I went through a long list of them. Perhaps the list was longer than your attention span, but perhaps you can re-read it.
Next, let me quote you "
2003: MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! Yes, everyone saw you say it -- in costume, no less!"
Michael - again, I am not sure if you are having trouble separating your fantasy "docu-life" from reality, bit I wonder who it is that "saw me say that"? Your question was asked (much more intelligently) just about a year ago. Let me refer you to the transcript
Q Mr. President, if I may take you back to May 1st when you stood on the USS Lincoln under a huge banner that said, "Mission Accomplished." At that time you declared major combat operations were over, but since that time there have been over 1,000 wounded, many of them amputees who are recovering at Walter Reed, 217 killed in action since that date. Will you acknowledge now that you were premature in making those remarks?
THE PRESIDENT: Nora, I think you ought to look at my speech. I said, Iraq is a dangerous place and we've still got hard work to do, there's still more to be done. And we had just come off a very successful military operation. I was there to thank the troops.
The "Mission Accomplished" sign, of course, was put up by the members of the USS Abraham Lincoln, saying that their mission was accomplished. I know it was attributed some how to some ingenious advance man from my staff -- they weren't that ingenious, by the way. But my statement was a clear statement, basically recognizing that this phase of the war for Iraq was over and there was a lot of dangerous work. And it's proved to be right, it is dangerous in Iraq. It's dangerous in Iraq because there are people who can't stand the thought of a free and peaceful Iraq. It is dangerous in Iraq because there are some who believe that we're soft, that the will of the United States can be shaken by suiciders -- and suiciders who are willing to drive up to a Red Cross center, a center of international help and aid and comfort, and just kill.
It's the same mentality, by the way, that attacked us on September the 11th, 2001: we'll just destroy innocent life and watch the great United States and their friends and allies crater in the face of hardship. It's the exact same mentality. And Iraq is a part of the war on terror. I said it's a central front, a new front in the war on terror, and that's exactly what it is. And that's why it's important for us to be tough and strong and diligent.
Our strategy in Iraq is to have strike forces ready and capable to move quickly as we gather actionable intelligence. That's how you deal with terrorists. Remember, these are people that are willing to hide in societies and kill randomly. And therefore, the best way to deal with them is to harden targets, harden assets as best as you can. That means blockades and inspection spots. And, as you notice, yesterday, one fellow tried to -- was done in as a he tried to conduct a suicide mission. In other words, an Iraqi policemen did their job.
But, as well, that we've got to make sure that not only do we harden targets, but that we get actionable intelligence to intercept the missions before they begin. That means more Iraqis involved in the intelligence-gathering systems in their country so that they are active participants in securing the country from further harm.
Remember, the action in Iraq was -- to get rid of Saddam Hussein was widely supported by the Iraqi people. And the action -- the actions that we're taking to improve their country are supported by the Iraqi people. And it's going to be very important for the Iraqi people to play an active role in fighting off the few who are trying to destroy the hopes of the many. You've heard me say that before. That's just kind of the motto of the terrorists. It's the way they operate.
So Michael, you see, if you are interested in a conversation based in reality, I am sure you can find it. Your simple ad hominem attacks and your straw man arguments make me believe otherwise, however. Please keep up the good work though, as every time you or Whoopi, Carrot Top or Ben Affleck open your mouths I feel a little more wind at my back (Kerry wind surfing metaphor, get it?).
Sincerely,
DR for GWB
===============================================================================
9/22/04
Dear Mr. Bush,
I am so confused. Where exactly do you stand on the issue of Iraq? You, your Dad, Rummy, Condi, Colin, and Wolfie -- you have all changed your minds so many times, I am out of breath just trying to keep up with you!
Which of these 10 positions that you, your family and your cabinet have taken over the years represents your CURRENT thinking:
1983-88: WE LOVE SADDAM. On December 19, 1983, Donald Rumsfeld was sent by your dad and Mr. Reagan to go and have a friendly meeting with Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq. Rummy looked so happy in the picture. Just twelve days after this visit, Saddam gassed thousands of Iranian troops. Your dad and Rummy seemed pretty happy with the results because The Donald R. went back to have another chummy hang-out with Saddams right-hand man, Tariq Aziz, just four months later. All of this resulted in the U.S. providing credits and loans to Iraq that enabled Saddam to buy billions of dollars worth of weapons and chemical agents. The Washington Post reported that your dad and Reagan let it be known to their Arab allies that the Reagan/Bush administration wanted Iraq to win its war with Iran and anyone who helped Saddam accomplish this was a friend of ours.
1990: WE HATE SADDAM. In 1990, when Saddam invaded Kuwait, your dad and his defense secretary, Dick Cheney, decided they didn't like Saddam anymore so they attacked Iraq and returned Kuwait to its rightful dictators.
1991: WE WANT SADDAM TO LIVE. After the war, your dad and Cheney and Colin Powell told the Shiites to rise up against Saddam and we would support them. So they rose up. But then we changed our minds. When the Shiites rose up against Saddam, the Bush inner circle changed its mind and decided NOT to help the Shiites. Thus, they were massacred by Saddam.
1998: WE WANT SADDAM TO DIE. In 1998, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others, as part of the Project for the New American Century, wrote an open letter to President Clinton insisting he invade and topple Saddam Hussein.
2000: WE DON'T BELIEVE IN WAR AND NATION BUILDING. Just three years later, during your debate with Al Gore in the 2000 election, when asked by the moderator Jim Lehrer where you stood when it came to using force for regime change, you turned out to be a downright pacifist:
I--I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president [Al Gore] and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I--I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place. And so I take my--I take my--my responsibility seriously. --October 3, 2000
2001 (early): WE DON'T BELIEVE SADDAM IS A THREAT. When you took office in 2001, you sent your Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and your National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, in front of the cameras to assure the American people they need not worry about Saddam Hussein. Here is what they said:
Powell: We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they have directed that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was 10 years ago when we began it. And frankly, they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. --February 24, 2001
Rice: But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt. --July 29, 2001
2001 (late): WE BELIEVE SADDAM IS GOING TO KILL US! Just a few months later, in the hours and days after the 9/11 tragedy, you had no interest in going after Osama bin Laden. You wanted only to bomb Iraq and kill Saddam and you then told all of America we were under imminent threat because weapons of mass destruction were coming our way. You led the American people to believe that Saddam had something to do with Osama and 9/11. Without the UN's sanction, you broke international law and invaded Iraq.
2003: WE DONT BELIEVE SADDAM IS GOING TO KILL US. After no WMDs were found, you changed your mind about why you said we needed to invade, coming up with a brand new after-the-fact reason -- we started this war so we could have regime change, liberate Iraq and give the Iraqis democracy!
2003: MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! Yes, everyone saw you say it -- in costume, no less!
2004: OOPS. MISSION NOT ACCOMPLISHED! Now you call the Iraq invasion a "catastrophic success." That's what you called it this month. Over a thousand U.S. soldiers have died, Iraq is in a state of total chaos where no one is safe, and you have no clue how to get us out of there.
Mr. Bush, please tell us -- when will you change your mind again?
I know you hate the words "flip" and "flop," so I won't use them both on you. In fact, I'll use just one: Flop. That is what you are. A huge, colossal flop. The war is a flop, your advisors and the "intelligence" they gave you is a flop, and now we are all a flop to the rest of the world. Flop. Flop. Flop.
And you have the audacity to criticize John Kerry with what you call the "many positions" he has taken on Iraq. By my count, he has taken only one: He believed you. That was his position. You told him and the rest of congress that Saddam had WMDs. So he -- and the vast majority of Americans, even those who didn't vote for you -- believed you. You see, Americans, like John Kerry, want to live in a country where they can believe their president.
That was the one, single position John Kerry took. He didn't support the war, he supported YOU. And YOU let him and this great country down. And that is why tens of millions can't wait to get to the polls on Election Day -- to remove a major, catastrophic flop from our dear, beloved White House -- to stop all the flipping you and your men have done, flipping us and the rest of the world off.
We can't take another minute of it.
Yours,
Michael Moore
mmflint@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com
Thanks for your letter. If you are out of breath, you might consider a change in diet. I kid.... Anyway, I know you are genuinely interested in the issues, so I will attempt to explain it to you. Don't worry, I have a grasp of your acumen, so I will type s-l-o-w-l-y.
First of all, I should point out that there have been tremendous breakthroughs in understanding the human genome. One thing they have found was that conventional thinking had been correct, and the thoughts of one generation are not controlled by the previous one. That is good news for any offspring you might ever have. With that in mind, I will jump right to your 2000 paragraph. Before I do, though, let me point out that throughout history, nation states have formed alliances with other nation states only to have world events impact those alliances. Would a photo of FDR, Winston Churchill and Stalin grinning upset you as much as the one to which you refer? IF so, it is good that you are not a student of history.
I would tell Mr. Lehrer the same thing I told him in 2000. In fact, I believe it remains one of the things that differentiates me from my current opponent - "I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place". As Mr. Kerry mentioned just yesterday - Iraq is a magnet for terrorists. I believe it is better to fight them in Najaf than Newark.
As your 2001 quote of Dr. Rice and Secretary Powell suggest, our early assessment of Saddam Hussein was that he was kept in check by the UN and opponents within his country. Do you disagree? Should we have acted sooner?
I am not sure what to make of your "Late 2001" quote. It does of course include a link to that Reputable "News Program" 60 Minutes, quoting a disgruntled former employee and all, but still.... I am quoted, via these two filters, as saying "Saddam! Find out if there's a connection.'" That would seem to most to be an earnest attempt at fact finding, wouldn't you think? I know you do things differently in your "documentaries", but I prefer to act based on facts.
That brings us to 2003. I didn't change my mind about why we chose to invade. There were countless reasons for invading, and I believe if you check the record, when I spoke to the American people, I went through a long list of them. Perhaps the list was longer than your attention span, but perhaps you can re-read it.
Next, let me quote you "
2003: MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! Yes, everyone saw you say it -- in costume, no less!"
Michael - again, I am not sure if you are having trouble separating your fantasy "docu-life" from reality, bit I wonder who it is that "saw me say that"? Your question was asked (much more intelligently) just about a year ago. Let me refer you to the transcript
Q Mr. President, if I may take you back to May 1st when you stood on the USS Lincoln under a huge banner that said, "Mission Accomplished." At that time you declared major combat operations were over, but since that time there have been over 1,000 wounded, many of them amputees who are recovering at Walter Reed, 217 killed in action since that date. Will you acknowledge now that you were premature in making those remarks?
THE PRESIDENT: Nora, I think you ought to look at my speech. I said, Iraq is a dangerous place and we've still got hard work to do, there's still more to be done. And we had just come off a very successful military operation. I was there to thank the troops.
The "Mission Accomplished" sign, of course, was put up by the members of the USS Abraham Lincoln, saying that their mission was accomplished. I know it was attributed some how to some ingenious advance man from my staff -- they weren't that ingenious, by the way. But my statement was a clear statement, basically recognizing that this phase of the war for Iraq was over and there was a lot of dangerous work. And it's proved to be right, it is dangerous in Iraq. It's dangerous in Iraq because there are people who can't stand the thought of a free and peaceful Iraq. It is dangerous in Iraq because there are some who believe that we're soft, that the will of the United States can be shaken by suiciders -- and suiciders who are willing to drive up to a Red Cross center, a center of international help and aid and comfort, and just kill.
It's the same mentality, by the way, that attacked us on September the 11th, 2001: we'll just destroy innocent life and watch the great United States and their friends and allies crater in the face of hardship. It's the exact same mentality. And Iraq is a part of the war on terror. I said it's a central front, a new front in the war on terror, and that's exactly what it is. And that's why it's important for us to be tough and strong and diligent.
Our strategy in Iraq is to have strike forces ready and capable to move quickly as we gather actionable intelligence. That's how you deal with terrorists. Remember, these are people that are willing to hide in societies and kill randomly. And therefore, the best way to deal with them is to harden targets, harden assets as best as you can. That means blockades and inspection spots. And, as you notice, yesterday, one fellow tried to -- was done in as a he tried to conduct a suicide mission. In other words, an Iraqi policemen did their job.
But, as well, that we've got to make sure that not only do we harden targets, but that we get actionable intelligence to intercept the missions before they begin. That means more Iraqis involved in the intelligence-gathering systems in their country so that they are active participants in securing the country from further harm.
Remember, the action in Iraq was -- to get rid of Saddam Hussein was widely supported by the Iraqi people. And the action -- the actions that we're taking to improve their country are supported by the Iraqi people. And it's going to be very important for the Iraqi people to play an active role in fighting off the few who are trying to destroy the hopes of the many. You've heard me say that before. That's just kind of the motto of the terrorists. It's the way they operate.
So Michael, you see, if you are interested in a conversation based in reality, I am sure you can find it. Your simple ad hominem attacks and your straw man arguments make me believe otherwise, however. Please keep up the good work though, as every time you or Whoopi, Carrot Top or Ben Affleck open your mouths I feel a little more wind at my back (Kerry wind surfing metaphor, get it?).
Sincerely,
DR for GWB
===============================================================================
9/22/04
Dear Mr. Bush,
I am so confused. Where exactly do you stand on the issue of Iraq? You, your Dad, Rummy, Condi, Colin, and Wolfie -- you have all changed your minds so many times, I am out of breath just trying to keep up with you!
Which of these 10 positions that you, your family and your cabinet have taken over the years represents your CURRENT thinking:
1983-88: WE LOVE SADDAM. On December 19, 1983, Donald Rumsfeld was sent by your dad and Mr. Reagan to go and have a friendly meeting with Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq. Rummy looked so happy in the picture. Just twelve days after this visit, Saddam gassed thousands of Iranian troops. Your dad and Rummy seemed pretty happy with the results because The Donald R. went back to have another chummy hang-out with Saddams right-hand man, Tariq Aziz, just four months later. All of this resulted in the U.S. providing credits and loans to Iraq that enabled Saddam to buy billions of dollars worth of weapons and chemical agents. The Washington Post reported that your dad and Reagan let it be known to their Arab allies that the Reagan/Bush administration wanted Iraq to win its war with Iran and anyone who helped Saddam accomplish this was a friend of ours.
1990: WE HATE SADDAM. In 1990, when Saddam invaded Kuwait, your dad and his defense secretary, Dick Cheney, decided they didn't like Saddam anymore so they attacked Iraq and returned Kuwait to its rightful dictators.
1991: WE WANT SADDAM TO LIVE. After the war, your dad and Cheney and Colin Powell told the Shiites to rise up against Saddam and we would support them. So they rose up. But then we changed our minds. When the Shiites rose up against Saddam, the Bush inner circle changed its mind and decided NOT to help the Shiites. Thus, they were massacred by Saddam.
1998: WE WANT SADDAM TO DIE. In 1998, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others, as part of the Project for the New American Century, wrote an open letter to President Clinton insisting he invade and topple Saddam Hussein.
2000: WE DON'T BELIEVE IN WAR AND NATION BUILDING. Just three years later, during your debate with Al Gore in the 2000 election, when asked by the moderator Jim Lehrer where you stood when it came to using force for regime change, you turned out to be a downright pacifist:
I--I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president [Al Gore] and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I--I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place. And so I take my--I take my--my responsibility seriously. --October 3, 2000
2001 (early): WE DON'T BELIEVE SADDAM IS A THREAT. When you took office in 2001, you sent your Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and your National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, in front of the cameras to assure the American people they need not worry about Saddam Hussein. Here is what they said:
Powell: We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they have directed that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was 10 years ago when we began it. And frankly, they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. --February 24, 2001
Rice: But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt. --July 29, 2001
2001 (late): WE BELIEVE SADDAM IS GOING TO KILL US! Just a few months later, in the hours and days after the 9/11 tragedy, you had no interest in going after Osama bin Laden. You wanted only to bomb Iraq and kill Saddam and you then told all of America we were under imminent threat because weapons of mass destruction were coming our way. You led the American people to believe that Saddam had something to do with Osama and 9/11. Without the UN's sanction, you broke international law and invaded Iraq.
2003: WE DONT BELIEVE SADDAM IS GOING TO KILL US. After no WMDs were found, you changed your mind about why you said we needed to invade, coming up with a brand new after-the-fact reason -- we started this war so we could have regime change, liberate Iraq and give the Iraqis democracy!
2003: MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! Yes, everyone saw you say it -- in costume, no less!
2004: OOPS. MISSION NOT ACCOMPLISHED! Now you call the Iraq invasion a "catastrophic success." That's what you called it this month. Over a thousand U.S. soldiers have died, Iraq is in a state of total chaos where no one is safe, and you have no clue how to get us out of there.
Mr. Bush, please tell us -- when will you change your mind again?
I know you hate the words "flip" and "flop," so I won't use them both on you. In fact, I'll use just one: Flop. That is what you are. A huge, colossal flop. The war is a flop, your advisors and the "intelligence" they gave you is a flop, and now we are all a flop to the rest of the world. Flop. Flop. Flop.
And you have the audacity to criticize John Kerry with what you call the "many positions" he has taken on Iraq. By my count, he has taken only one: He believed you. That was his position. You told him and the rest of congress that Saddam had WMDs. So he -- and the vast majority of Americans, even those who didn't vote for you -- believed you. You see, Americans, like John Kerry, want to live in a country where they can believe their president.
That was the one, single position John Kerry took. He didn't support the war, he supported YOU. And YOU let him and this great country down. And that is why tens of millions can't wait to get to the polls on Election Day -- to remove a major, catastrophic flop from our dear, beloved White House -- to stop all the flipping you and your men have done, flipping us and the rest of the world off.
We can't take another minute of it.
Yours,
Michael Moore
mmflint@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com
Ani's Insight, and "Olmsted's Vision"
I think (at least hope) we may see the beginning of the end of the ceult of celebrity in this country Buffalo and Ani DiFranco may help us get there. Not exactly Churchil . . . by the way, scroll down a bit and see if you aren't wondering to yourself how the guest list at that party typically talk about Mr. Snowden when they are in the "right company"...
Desparate for some sign of Leadership from Hoyt
It has been pretyy obvious for a while that Donn Esmonde and the Off Main Street gang have been enamored with Sam Hoyt. The trouble is, even they are getting a little tired Buffaloof his preference for form over substance. That doesn't mean that they won't grasp at straws to bolster him - he opposed closing Childrens Hospital - you're kidding me!! Who in their right mind wanted to close it? What politician would even consider joining that chorus?
Where Higgins and Smith had the cajones to stand up to Sheldon Silver, Sam put his tail between his legs.
Prediction - if it is a 3 way race for Mayor in the Dem Primary - Byron wins. If it is a 2 way - Byron wins. If it is Masiello, Brown, Hoyt and Griffin, welcome back Jimmy!
Where Higgins and Smith had the cajones to stand up to Sheldon Silver, Sam put his tail between his legs.
Prediction - if it is a 3 way race for Mayor in the Dem Primary - Byron wins. If it is a 2 way - Byron wins. If it is Masiello, Brown, Hoyt and Griffin, welcome back Jimmy!
Clark is a Symptom
This is what we get when the Dems and GOP fail to field two qualified canddiates - laziness. First he doesn't want to prosecute gun legislation because it disproportinately affects minorities. Now he can't see the difference betweenPolitics and legislative duties. Well, maybe he has given us an opening. If that line is in fact blurred, then how about if we remove all of those "blurred" jobs from the public payroll, and instead allow elected officials to have staffs only if they are paid for by their political campaign funds?
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
What if?
It would be interesting to see what the election would look like if Ralph Nader was the Dem candidate . . .
Not Hypocrisy
I don't take issue with teachers from governement schools for doing what's best for their children. I do take issue with the leaders of their union, however, that work to deny people of lesser means from having the ability to make the same choice that these teachers have made.
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
Another picture of Iraq
You wonder if the mainstream media will ever show us this picture of Iraqi life. Don't hold your breath...
Neo - Riefenstahl
I have long held that Michael Moore is the Leni Riefenstahl of his generation and I think this is evidence. This is exactly what Leni or Tokyo Rose would have wanted had the opportunity presented itself in WWII or if the media had been as in bed with the enemy.
Viacom trying to impact the Election?
Clearly Mel Karamazin had it in for President Bush and his FCC appointee Michael Powell. THen we had the Dan Rather embarrasment to the Viacom empire. The question now is, How High does the conspiracy go at CBS Viacom?
Espionage?
Perhaps this is what Kerry meant when he was talking about those mysterious "world leaders" that support his candidacy.
Friday, September 17, 2004
A Proud Moment for Kerry
The acrmony can only be expected to rise over the next 47 days, as an ever more deperate leftcomes to terms with te will of the people. Expect violence and more bizarre accusations in the weeks to come . . .
Rather Resign!
When even the curmudgeonjoins the chorus, it is time to ride off into the sunset.
My concern is, that over the next 47 days we will see an even more desperate press, Hollywood establishment and DNC grasp ratchet up to "by any means necessary" to bring down the President.
My concern is, that over the next 47 days we will see an even more desperate press, Hollywood establishment and DNC grasp ratchet up to "by any means necessary" to bring down the President.
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
An Excellent Treatment of the CBS Scam
CBS is clearly backtracking now with their statement saying more or less that the documents are probably forgeries, but the content is real. Give me a break! Now it is time to demand that CBS release the originals. There is no excuse not to. The future credibility of Viacom news is at stake.
Even veterans from CBS join the chorus
The longer Rather protests, the clearer it appears that the reason he is stonewalling is because he will have to expose the Kerry camp for passing on the fraudulent documents. Given his years in the business, you would think Rather would let them twist in the wind for playing him for the dupe. Unless he was complicit in the fraud . . . anyway, Schieffer has joined in.
Monday, September 13, 2004
Endorsements
Tomorrow is primary day in NY. Here are my endorsements:
For US Congress Paul ClarkHe has a solid record in West Seneca and he is running on his own. He has held real jobs in his life, and so he know what it is like. His biggest opponent Brian Higgins, is better than many in the Assembly, and he at least had the guts to stand up to Silver, but show us you can get results at the state level before you go for the promotion.
Fran Cartonia over Louise Slaughter - Slaughter has done everything she can to stifle this token opposition.
NY State Senate
Although there is no favorite here, Byron Brown over challenger Al Coppola, although Al scores points for a flashier web site. Both of these men have held this office to no result. I go with Brown strictly because of seniority, although it looks like he will bail next year and run for Mayor anyway.
NY State Assembly
146th Tom Casey over Hoak, Schroeder and Sullivan.
Casey has keyed in on the right issue - Schools. The others are just mouthpieces hoping to inherit the next promotion.
144 Golombekover Sam Hoyt. Golombek is a bright light among dim bulbs on the council, and Sam has watched as jobs and employers have left NY in large numbers.
Whoever you vote for, VOTE.
For US Congress Paul ClarkHe has a solid record in West Seneca and he is running on his own. He has held real jobs in his life, and so he know what it is like. His biggest opponent Brian Higgins, is better than many in the Assembly, and he at least had the guts to stand up to Silver, but show us you can get results at the state level before you go for the promotion.
Fran Cartonia over Louise Slaughter - Slaughter has done everything she can to stifle this token opposition.
NY State Senate
Although there is no favorite here, Byron Brown over challenger Al Coppola, although Al scores points for a flashier web site. Both of these men have held this office to no result. I go with Brown strictly because of seniority, although it looks like he will bail next year and run for Mayor anyway.
NY State Assembly
146th Tom Casey over Hoak, Schroeder and Sullivan.
Casey has keyed in on the right issue - Schools. The others are just mouthpieces hoping to inherit the next promotion.
144 Golombekover Sam Hoyt. Golombek is a bright light among dim bulbs on the council, and Sam has watched as jobs and employers have left NY in large numbers.
Whoever you vote for, VOTE.
There is no longer any doubt
Clearly the CBS documents are forgeries. It is time for Rather and Viacom to come clean and for Rather to sign off with Brokaw.
Saturday, September 11, 2004
Bush Stays above the Fray
The White House is playing things perfectly when it comes to the CBS Phony memo controversy. First of all, there has never been allegations (by anyone rational) that Bush asked for special treatment other than to serve out his last few months in Alabama rather than Texas. So, even if the memos were genuine, it wouldn't mean anything.
Clearly, Rather's house of cards is really starting to fall apart. It is now appearing that Viacom and CBS are circling their wagons in earnest. They asked a handwriting expert for his opinion on typewriters. They got corroboration from a Guard member, but it turns outthey misled him.
INDC shows that the Kerry apologists at the Boston Globe have also gotten into the mess, misquoting an expert. Clearly Globe and Viacom are interested in this thing being considered a closed case.
It is evident that Kerry, Rather, and the liberal mainstream press will continue to kvetch. Ed Gillespie warns that the Libs will getmore and more desparate.
It may not matter especially as the Bush lead appears solid and 52 days left.
Clearly, Rather's house of cards is really starting to fall apart. It is now appearing that Viacom and CBS are circling their wagons in earnest. They asked a handwriting expert for his opinion on typewriters. They got corroboration from a Guard member, but it turns outthey misled him.
INDC shows that the Kerry apologists at the Boston Globe have also gotten into the mess, misquoting an expert. Clearly Globe and Viacom are interested in this thing being considered a closed case.
It is evident that Kerry, Rather, and the liberal mainstream press will continue to kvetch. Ed Gillespie warns that the Libs will getmore and more desparate.
It may not matter especially as the Bush lead appears solid and 52 days left.
Friday, September 10, 2004
More convinced now than before
Given Dan Rather's awkward and weak defense and the challenges laid out for him to back up his flimsy story I am more convinced now than ever that CBS and Viacom are circling their wagons to protect whatever credibility CBS news has left.
So, Edwards thinks that Bush shouls discuss his National Guard records from 30 years ago, including what appear to be forged documents, yet he doesn't think that Kerry should release his own service records? Please.
Thursday, September 09, 2004
55 days left - let's hope the lead can hold and that the press can move toward some level of objectivity. Who am I kidding?
At least this is an op-ed piece, but what world is this guy living in? Will there ever be a smimilar article in the NYT that actually looks even somewhat objectively to the charges of SVT?
Gee, what is he afraid they will ask? The more they try to focus on Bush's time in the guard, the more legitimacy they are giving to the questions raised by the SwiftVets. Why won't Kerry release his records?
Monday, September 06, 2004
Now it looks like even Kerry's apologist is joining the choir calling for Kerry to release his records. You would think that a biographer would have asked for that some time ago . . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
