Saturday, July 31, 2004
TABOR upheld in Colorado
Once again, the people have won a battle against those who feel that government should have unlimited access to your wallet and can spend tax money any way they please. What a great stand for taxpayers' rights. Now if we could only do the same thing nationwide and at the Federal level, the politicians would understand just how we really feel about tax hikes and entitlement programs.
Marines not impressed by Kerry
Just another sorry attempt to re-invent himself and his hopes for the campaign. When will he ever learn, tricks are for kids, and veterans don't like wishy-washy leaders who don't support them or their mission.
Friday, July 30, 2004
Just remember to flush twice for good measure!
Hat tip to a YotaTech member for this one.
Moore on the Tonight Show tonight
Moore's on The Tonight Show tonight, and Jay's falling all over him with softball questions and free publicity for his "documentary" trash film. To use a large word, Jay's being obsequious towards Moore, and it makes for such bad t.v. This is enough to give me nightmares tonight!
Flash: Moore just admitted that the film is less than fair to President Bush, verifying the film's anti-Bush leanings. He also just coined a new word, "hate-riots", which he uses to describe Republicans who don't like the left and actively speak out against people such as Moore and Linda Ronstadt.
Wow, we really need people like him coining new words to describe people & views that he doesn't like or disagree with his opinions. We already have plenty of words that exist to describe him and his ilk, but I'm not going to lower myself to his level.
Thursday, July 29, 2004
DNC Convention wrap-up
- Sen. Barak Obama from Illinois: very charismatic speaker, seen by many as a rising star in the Democratic party by both sides. He'll be one to watch since he seems to be a shoe-in for the Senate seat from Illinois this November.
- Sen. John Edwards: Did what he does best, appeals to the sympathetic side of the audience much as he plays to the same in a courtroom, even when he doesn't have a good case to present. As I said earlier, he's a balancing factor for Sen. Kerry.
- Sen. John Kerry: Tried to shed his stiff New England intellectual image to try and appeal to the masses; tonight he was the most animated and relaxed I've ever seen him. They must have found the handlers that they needed for Al Gore's campaign in 2000, as well as talking some lessons from his running mate.
In general, I found this convention to lack the substance of those from year's past on both sides, especially when I have only three "highlights" from the four nights of this event. Instead, this event became an homage to Michael Moore and all the extreme left-wingers that have hijacked the Democratic Party, and this was made painfully clear by the amount of media attention paid to these fringe elements at the expense of the candidates themselves. Even Ted Koppel on Nightline, once one of the most respected journalists in the nation, was fawning all over Moore last night on Nightline, acting like he was an emissary from on high. I find it sad and disturbing that these people are able to wield such influence over the most important process in our nation's government, and even more so that the saner elements of the DNC allow this to happen with relative ease. Talk about dividing the nation, these fringe elements have it down to both a science and an art form!
Well, with the wrap up of this week's events, I'm going to take a couple of days off to wrap up my trip to Illinois and spend some off-line time with The Fetching Mrs. Morrison. I'll be back sometime early next week once I get settled back at home, so keep checking back for more exciting political analysis, commentary and insight. After tonight, all it can do is get more exciting as we head toward the RNC convention and Nov. 2nd.
I'm John Kerry, and you're not...
West Wing of Fitzsimmons Army hospital? What a horrible joke, and it showed in the tepid response. I almost thought that he was going to say his mother was his wolf den mother, but he pulled that one off.
He learned to be an American by riding his bike into East Berlin and then getting grounded. Sounds like another bit of confusion about his sense of duty. He also answered JFK's call to action and duty; unfortunately, he and his party left the goals and ideals of JFK far behind a long time ago.
He's going to tell the truth to the American people and restore trust to the White House. How, by cheating in a close election? He also fought to increase police officers, for women's rights, and worked with Sen. McCain on the POW issue, all of which are good issues. But what about terrorism and arming our troops to fight ant win those battles? Oh, I guess his sense of duty kept him away from those votes on those issues.
He's going to help motivate our economy, improve wages, create jobs and stop outsourcing. He says people are worse off if they have to work two or three jobs, and on weekends to make ends meet. How's he going to make life better for these people, tell businesses to pay them higher wages, that they can't be open on the weekends, and then tax them into oblivion for all this? He's really trying to win the presidency of the United States of France!
What a surprise, he accepted the nomination! Going through the family thing and railing on President Bush and V.P. Cheney in standard form. And as for embracing Theresa as the First Lady, I'd rather embrace a porcupine than her.
He's complimented President Bush on the unity of the nation after the 9/11 attacks, but then blames him in the same breath for dividing the nation. And as for fighting a war on the cheap, all I need to say is he voted against the $87 million dollars for equipment after voting to send the troops in. He also has a plan to tell every soldier & sailor that we'll never fight a war without knowing how to win the peace. Strange, we haven't had a Democrat since Truman who had an end strategy for a war. It's taken the Republicans to bail us out of each war since the end of WWII that the Democrats have gotten us into. Instead of adding more troops, why not bring them home from such areas as Haiti, the Balkans and other areas that are of little, if any, value or threat to the U.S., and who were deployed there by President Clinton under U.N. control.
I didn't know we were feared around the world, but maybe that's a good thing, since most cultures equate strength with respect and fear being conquered by a more powerful nation. This helps stabilize the world and makes it safer for all. He's also going to tell the terrorists that they won't win and that we'll stop them under his presidency. How, by using harsh language and U.N. mandates? We've seen how well those worked in the past, so I'm sure they'll work against a group of lawless, nationless thugs bent on destroying our way of life.
He's talking about family values, so here comes abortion, gay marriage, poor education, blah, blah, blah. Same old tired rhetoric. He's also not going to privatize Social Security, so we'll still be stuck with an insolvent retirement plan that we still have to pay for and that has outlived its useful and purposeful life span. Why doesn't he just take all the retirement plans in America and roll them into Social Security? After all, we know the government is great at managing your money and will look after your best interests better than you can.
"Help is on the way"? That sounds very similar to "I'm from the government, I'm here to help you." If that's help, I'd rather be left helpless and run as fast as I can in the opposite direction.
Here's his economic plan: a list of feel good ideas that fly straight in the face of our capitalist economic system and try to impose government's control over it. Very reminiscent of France or most of socialist Europe. Pay as you go? Under the Dems, that would be a neat trick without looting my wallet at payday. He's going to tax those earning over $200,000/year and give it to those who don't. Only in America, the land of success and dreams, are you taxed and repressed for working hard and being successful.
Uh oh, here comes the pitch for socialized medicine. Same old pitch, same old socialism a la Canada. Gee, let's stifle medical advancement when we need it the most. We're the only nation in the world that doesn't give every one health care? And where did the Founding Fathers state in the Constitution or Bill of Rights that medical care is a right?
Energy policy and dependence on foreign oil? Equating Iraq war and oil again (yawn). Wants to end our dependence on foreign oil but yet won't allow us to explore domestically for new sources of oil. Some great energy policy he has, won't eliminate any dependencies we have at all.
Called on George Bush and both parties to come together in unity and follow the Constitution in this election. I thought this was a Democratic convention; isn't party differences what this is all about in order to WIN the election? As as far as abiding by the Constitutional process, why has his side hired 2,000+ lawyers in case the election doesn't go his way? Hmmm....
His theme is now, "What if...?" Mine is too: What if JohnJohn does actually win this election, then what? He and his party really don't have a plan beyond regaining the seats of power in D.C. Then what? Ad lib, make up the rules as you go along, fake it 'til you make it? I don't think that's a very good plan for anyone, let alone someone who wants the most powerful and important job in the nation and the world. He talks of looking toward the future; my vision of JohnJohn's future is extremely dystopian and dark and one to fear.
Sen. Kerry's speech was much like Sen. Edwards's last night: one of quick sound bites and very little substance, packaged in a feel-good wrapper and handed out to the audience much like a Tootsie-Pop, except that when you reach the middle there isn't much there at all, let alone a sweet center. If this is an indication of the campaign ahead for the Democrats, then I don't think that President Bush and V.P. Cheney have nothing to fear, especially when you take substance and actions into account.
Well, the big(?) night has arrived
Be afraid, be very afraid.
Also, Mr. Bob has a great list of stats on his site. Check it out: The Daily Blogster .
Wednesday, July 28, 2004
Success is awesome
John Edwards: Just a po' boy from SC who done did good!
Just how close is he to his "poor boy" image? He's built his success by being a personal injury trial lawyer who pursues large corporations on the behalf of the "victims injured" by the practices of these companies.
My personal take on this is that he's made his money on the backs of these unfortunate individuals by attacking large corporations and winning large jury damage awards which financially cripple these companies, out of which he takes his cut before his clients are paid, if they ever are.
He mentioned 35 million unemployed people and the fact that we need to create jobs for them to improve their lot in life. How does JohnJohn want to do this? Their plan is once again to attack the segment of the economy which generates jobs in order to take money from them and give it to the government before the people, who might never see it. And then, to turn around and force these companies to pay all workers a higher wage which will buy less, forcing many smaller businesses into bankruptcy. Then those employees will be out of work and on unemployment/welfare, right where JohnJohn want them! Talk about a plan for economic stagnation and unemployment, you have it right there, the creation of a new welfare state. He's created a whole new segment of people receiving government money, and they don't even have to go to a government office and fake working every day!
He's played the race card very ineffectively. I'm reminded of the opening line from the movie "The Jerk" where Steve Martin says, I was born the son of a poor black family." Obviously this was a comedic line, but JohnJohn is trying to make it seem to be a serious take on his relationship with minority voters.
He mentioned national security, playing on the fears and needs of the military. Strange, this coming from a man who's never served anything larger than his own self-interests, let alone his country through military service. Needless to say, that part of the speech left me dry.
He also mentioned the "two Americas" that has essentially been his stump speech throughout the campaign to date. Once again, he's attacking the wealthy by saying that they're dividing America into two camps and hurting the working class. Sounds like his entire career and money earning plan to date.
He also brought up national security and Iraq in an attempt to sound hawkish and pro-military, but that garnered little support from the crowd when mentioned. That shows where this crowd stands on the important issues of the day.
Overall, I think that John is a very charismatic speaker, but like most of the speeches I've heard this week, most of what he said was just a rehash of old ideas intermixed with campaign speeches and pieced together to provide good sound bites for the network news programs. He does have the energy and telegenic edge that John Kerry lacks in this campaign, which helps to balance the ticket for the television cameras. He also brings an image of southern "good ol' boy" charm to the ticket in an attempt to balance Kerry's "stiff intellectual" image, though unsuccessfully to this point in the campaign. He attempted to portray America as a nation divided on many issues to the point of polarization; however, I feel that with the exception of the crowd in attendance, this point fell on deaf ears across the nation as the nation as a whole feels more unified now than it did in 2000. He made vague general references to their plans for America, but no specifics. In short, while he delivered a rousing speech appropriate for a pep rally/party convention, he said very little of importance and no more than I expected for this event.
Now the states are going through the roll call of delegates for the formal nominations for President/VP candidates (yawn). Gee, I wonder who will win?
Al Sharpton for national strength?
Ann Coulter's "banned" article
Just remember, her article was pulled by the same people who hired Michael Moore to cover the RNC in NYC in August. Fair's fair, I think, he should have his column of bilge pulled the first day. We shall see if that actually happens.
Michael Moore, need I say more?
Tuesday, July 27, 2004
Death stare: Hillary to Theresa
Other thoughts from tonight
-Sen. Ted Kennedy: I missed him. Oh well.
-Ron Reagan Jr.: Just spoke about stem cell research, equated it with an ideological position held by a minorty of people who don't care about medical research and battling diseases such as Alzheimers and Parkinsons.
- News flash: President Bush and Congress didn't ban stem cell research, only the Federal funding of such research, cloning of humans for research (or any other reason), and the use of aborted fetuses in such research. There is no limit on private stem cell research or private funding of the same.
However, the major research organizations seem to think that they need federal money to conduct their research. That flies straight in the face of capitalism and makes them voluntary recipients of corporate welfare! There are statistics that show that research funding has increased since President Bush signed the bill banning federal funding, thus eliminating a major source of corporate welfare and pork-barrel spending. If the medical community thinks that stem cell research is such a great idea, then they should and will find ways to finance it in order to further the science and market it to the public.
Ron Reagan Jr. is definitely not his father's son ideologically.
-General tone of the convention: subdued and quiet. The delegates must be having a really great time in Boston, expending lots of energy during they since they very little energy tonight. That or we have the B-string in the audience tonight, saving the A-string for Thursday night when Sens. Kerry & Edwards arrive for thier coronation...I mean, nomination...speeches.
-Theresa Heintz Kerry: might watch her, not sure. Don't want to see a foreign gold-digger with more money than the entire economy of her native Mozambique (French colony) stand up there and play politics for her hubby since she thinks this is an amusing diversion. She might even tell more than just one reporter to, "Shove it!" while on the podium and then walk away in a huff.
- Edit: I was right, she didn't say much. Tried a half-hearted approach to appeal to minorities and imigrants by using the unity card, but only received mediocre applause during her speech. She also said that "we" (she and John) will create new jobs, guarantee education for all children food for all families. Can you say F.D.R.'s famous "a chicken in every pot" statement? If all else fails, trot out the tried and true welfare statement. Over all, my original impression still stands and she is not First Lady material.
Not sure who else is on the card for tonight, mostly minor pinch hitters, so not going to stay up for them. Tomorrow should be more interesting as Sen. Edwards will be there along with Gov. Bill Richardson (D- NM) , Elizabeth Edwards and others. The theme? Why, a stronger, more secure America, of course!
Click here for a list of speakers from the official convention website: DNC Speakers.
Check back tomorrow for more insightful commentary and analysis of the convention.
Watching a rising star?
So far, he's said nothing new that would convince me that he, Sens. Kerry & Edwards, and the Dems as a whole, would bring any positive or beneficial change to our nation if they we're to be elected. Instead, he's making a feel-good positive spin speech at what has become nothing more than a very expensive pep rally for the party faithful. I will compliment him on the fact that he is a very charismatic orator and said nothing negative about President Bush in his entire speech. But since it was nothing more than a puff piece, he couldn't do much harm with it even if he tried.
Now, why did I call him a rising star? He's currently running for the Senate from Illinois in the much publicized race against Jack Ryan. That is, until Jack Ryan was forced to quit the race because the Chicago Democrat controlled media (read: Richard M. Daly machine) dug through the court records of his divorce from actress Jeri Ryan and published them for the world to see, even though both parties to the divorce thought the records were sealed after the divorce. So Sen. Obama seems to be a shoe-in for the Senate seat this November. But what of the Republican challenger? So far, the party has approached several prominent figures, including former Bears coach Mike Ditka, to run, but all have refused for various reasons. And even if they did find a replacement candidate, they couldn't officially list them on the ballot since Mr. Ryan hasn't completed the paperwork to officially terminate his candidacy with the state election board! And who said that politics in Springfield were boring?
Now you know why his star is rising, but if he's the best hope the Dems have, then we have nothing to fear.
Monday, July 26, 2004
Fair and balanced
Done for tonight, going to watch Bill & Hillary on TV. More on this tomorrow.
A picture says a thousand words.
Here's the article.
Smart or scared?
Also, Ralph Nader has been banned from the Convention. Not a great loss, since he left the good graces of the party elite decades ago and hasn't contributed much to their cause except to siphon votes away from the nominee. All I can say is, "Run, Ralph, Run!" Keep up the good work. Speak of the devil, he's on O'Reilly right now. Ahh, the wisdom and armchair quarterbacking from the non-influential fringe of politics.
More to come...
CNN is salivating...
They just aired a snippet from a taped interview with Hillary Clinton, and she said that she also wished they could change the date of the election & inauguration. Not due to terrorist threats, but so they could place Sen. Kerry in office and we could all "benefit from a change in leadership". How, like we did when President Clinton was in office? Social Security recipients, veterans and interns beware!
Sunday, July 25, 2004
Candidates, conventions and correspondents, oh my!
The fact that the Big Three broadcast networks will only show three hours total of the convention proceedings has me torn. On one side, I think that the networks are doing the American people a great disservice for not broadcasting anything other than the highlights (edited, of course) and not allowing people to see for themsleves who they might be supporting. On the other, their denial of full coverage might help shield us from the blatant hatred that the current crop of Democratic supporters has for our president, a la the Paul Wellstone memorial service. Since the nominating conventions have devolved into nothing more than five day long parties with lots of rhetoric and little accomplishment, it should be in the least some good entertainment to those of us with C-SPAN access.
Saturday, July 24, 2004
9/11 Report, initial thoughts
1. There is no one agency to blame for the 9/11 attacks. This is true since you have a myriad of government agencies that historically have not worked well together while working the same missions. These agencies have been were banned from sharing information by Cold-War era rules to separate the various agencies into foreign & domestic for management and general citizens' rights protections. This, along with the fact that most of our intelligence gathering agencies are still working on fighting the Soviet Union in World War III exposes the inflexibility of our intelligence gathering programs and the reluctance to change that is exhibited daily by the senior management of these agencies, as well as their respective Congressional oversight committees.
2. There is no one president/administration to blame. This may come as a shock to many on the left side of the house, but President Bush and his Cabinet are not the singular scapegoats for the events culminating in the attacks, let alone the troubles of the world. They did not come into office in 2001 and have all this knowledge suddenly implanted in their heads by the outgoing administration. The issue runs much deeper than that, and spans multiple administrations over a time span of 15-20 years. While presidents from the 1946-1990 prioritzed fighting (and winning) the Cold War, global terrorism was a tertiary issue at best, an annoyance to be left to analysts and small sections of the Middle Eastern desks of the CIA & FBI. After 1990, the world changed but our methods didn't, hampered by presidents who didn't understand global terrorism, let alone foreign policy in the Middle East.
3. Airlines have placed profits above passenger safety and security. Let's face it, all companies are in business to make a profit. However, ethical businesses tend to also place some emphasis on customer satisfaction and safety so those same customers will live and return another day. Our major domestic carriers have yet to turn a profit or refuse a government handout in the past 30 years. This is due in large part the to the contracts that the various unions have imposed upon the airlines and that hamper the management in making decisions in these areas. AS a result, things like safety tend to get side-stepped and thus exploited by those who committed the 9/11 attacks.
4. The military/law enforcement community didn't do enough to stop the attacks. Let's face it, the 9/11 attacks we're a complete departure from the standard hijacking methods of the past 40 years. During this time, almost all hijackings led to the plane landing and the hijackers making demands of various governments, and then the passengers being released. Our military/law enforcement agencies had no precedent for attacks on this scale or type, thus were caught unprepared. Also, the entrenched mentality of "I'm not sticking my neck out" hampered the quick decision making process that was needed by the military when the attacks happened, since most in command were/are more worried about losing their jobs than doing them to protect the country, which is their primary duty.
Note: this also applies to this day to previous presidential administrations as is evidenced my Mr. Berger treating the National Archives as his own personal lending library in order to cover his own backside and keep his former boss out of trouble.
5. The report/commission were non-partisan. To quote COL. Sherman from MASH, "Horse-hockey!" The committee was indeed partisan in the way it treated people such as Condoleeza Rice, who has more experience in foreign policy issues than the majority of the committee, to the way they treated President Bush while giving President Clinton a virtual pass-over in the testimony. Although they released a report which raised a lot of issues and has many good recommendations for improving our security, it was still a partisan attempt to pin blame upon our current president.
I've also heard that there is some reaction to the news that President Bush is going to have a committee review the report and give him an analysis of it. For those of you who live in the ivory tower of academia or the land of TV news sound bites, here's a fact: President Bush has an entire nation to run and a war to be fought, and that takes up a good part of his day. He doesn't have time to read the report from cover to cover, so his advisors will analyze it and give him a summary so that they can all plan a course of action for implementation of the recommendations in the report. This is known as an executive summary and is used daily around the world; if its good enough for the chairman of General Motors, then its good enough for him. That's why he has a Cabinet, to advise him on a course of action.
These are my initial thoughts, I'll have more once I've read the report for myself.
Opening day, first report
Having just moved to Northern Virginia from Denver, I do miss listening to Hugh on the radio, but then I have the miracle of the Internet which allows me to be educated and informed while relaxing here at home. And with luck, soon he'll be back on in the D.C. market.
Speaking of good things, I've also just ordered Hugh's new If%20It/104-5634324-0284765'>book along with his previous book as a combo from Amazon, so I'm eagerly awaiting them both to arrive. My wife has also brought home The 9/11 Report, so I'm also going to read that and give my interpretation of the findings.
Now, a little about me. I've moved to Northern Virgina from Denver about 8 weeks ago, and got married in mid-June. I'm a contract computer engineer for the Federal Government and the DOD by trade, and a political consultant the rest of the time. I'm a lifelong Republican and have been involved in the party for the past five years in Metropolitan Denver, especially in the Denver Metro Young Republicans. Having moved to the center of politics for the nation, I'm going to work at getting as actively involved out here as I was in Denver; there are always causes to be championed, candidates to be aided, campaigns to run and work to be done. When I grow up, I'd also like to do political commentary on a radio show and teach constitutional law.
I'm also a Petty Officer Second Class in the Naval Reserve, and have been for about three years; that has been one of the best and most interesting experiences of my life, and would do it again if given the choice. I did join later in life (when I was 31) but it was a life-long goa of mine to serve my country and the Navy had the best program for doing so. It also helped the my dad and many friends were/are in the Navy, so I was a little biased!
I will try to post as often as possible, but not daily due to work & travel constraints. If you have questions or comments, please email me.
-Rich a.k.a GOP Man