Thursday, September 30, 2004

Got your marching orders?

What is going on with you Democrats? Where is your integrity? How can you walk in the street facing your neighbors and each other?

Dan Rather is at it again. Why does this man still have a job? As if using obviously forged documents wasn’t enough! I have spoken to several Democrats who until the last week STILL believed the documents were true. What’s worse is now that they are forced to admit the frauds they take the “ends justify the means” position that the documents while false embody the truth of the events. This is the same position Dan Rather and Killian’s secretary take. I’d like to see if a teacher would accept a forged or plagiarized paper on the premise that the body of it is factual and presents the student’s position faithfully. Rather now presents us with the “new draft” story using Brenda Coco, crossing-guard and mother, as well as unnamed emails, as sources. Rather completely disregards the undeniable FACT that the new draft movement was started, fostered, and nurtured by Democrats, namely Charles Rangle (D-NY) and Fritz Hollings (D-SC). It has amazed me to hear journalists refer to this story in the last few weeks and tie it to Republicans. I have also heard it from local Democrats, too.

Jason Blair at the New York Times was creating stories out of whole-cloth. His stories made the news as they were repeated across the media spectrum, because if the New York Times says it, it must be so. Blair fabricated quotes and events to suit the needs of his, and his editor Harold Raines’, philosophy. Both are now gone, but Blair’s writing books! What self-respecting publisher or reader would purchase the material of such a writer? Well, of course, his book has sold well and is in fact carried in my local library.

Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 911 is another one - Moore has been repeatedly exposed for a complete fraud, but across the world and here in Springfield flocked to his film, even after it was revealed for the propaganda it is. Bowling for Columbine is another film of his that is loaded with false information. This pathetic individual is actually presented to us as a columnist for a major news magazine and people read him.

This week John Kerry explains how his previously described “nuanced statement” of voting for and then against “the $87 billion” as ‘a poorly phrased comment made at a late night rally when he was tired’. This comment has been explained by Kerry and his supporters at least five times. Yet we are expected to believe that he has had “only one position on the war in Iraq”! Despite what his supporters want to tell us in 1997, fully a year before Bill Clinton signed the Iraqi Freedom Resolution (calling for military action in Iraq, I might point out), Kerry stood before Congress and decried Hussein’s WMD threat - that was 97, 4 years before Bush came to Washington! On the campaign trail, Kerry differentiated himself from Howard Dean’s insane claims that “America is less safe with Saddam in jail”, by standing on the position that Saddam was a threat and we were right to take him out. Once Dean was gone Kerry would have waged “a smarter, more sensitive war”. In August, Kerry stated that “knowing what we know now, we still should have gone to war”. Last month, John Kerry reversed that position word for word on national television. There’s something to be said for Kerry’s approach, no matter what he says he’s making someone somewhere happy.

I can understand why Democrats are such angry people. If my candidate for any office was such a weather-vane, I’d be angry too. The difference is I wouldn’t support or vote for him. Republicans hold candidates to a higher standard - remember Jack Ryan? Let me remind you - Ryan was a solid candidate, ahead in the polls. For some reason, still not revealed, a judge opened sealed divorce proceedings for journalists ‘fishing’ for a story. Ryan made some risque choices while on holiday with his wife. He resigned from the race rather than embarrass his family and party. Please contrast his behavior with that of Democrat New Jersey Governor James McGreevey

I asked when my town library would be getting “Unfit for Command” and the librarian's reply was “I really don’t want to get it, at all”, but she couldn’t point to one untrue element in the book. Asking about Zel Miller’s premise that his Party had become extreme, a local Democrat activist told me Miller should have left the party if he wanted to speak at the Republican Convention. I was flabbergasted, so I asked him if his position was “party-line-right-or-wrong” and after flopping around the issue his reply was “yes”! A local school principal, who sports a Dean bumpersticker, told me that he didn’t think Kerry lied when he said “I don’t own any SUVs”.

And you call people who listen to Limbaugh “mind-numbed zombies”!

Thursday, September 23, 2004

Tolerance? Civility? Party of the People?

This Just In....

I've always wanted to do that :) ~ but seriously, I just got wind of this.

There's a family in West Virginia, the father of which is very active in support of his political party - he's a Republican. He even brings his children to rallies and has them carry signs. I'm in a bit of a quandry: I used to feel that having children participate this way was wrong, but - hoist by my own petard - my five year old daughter wants to do what daddy and mommy do, so I am having to rethink my position.

Regardless of which side you're on, one would think that political discourse and disagreement would be respected. As it turns out, this is not the case. At least, not in West Virginia, or more accurately, not when the opposition are Democrats.

Phil Parlock, as mentioned before, a hyper-active supporter, took two of his children, 11 yr old Alex and 3 yr old Sophia, to a Democratic rally where John Edwards was scheduled to appear. All three sported Bush/Cheney placards. They were set upon in unbelievable mob fashion by union workers, students, and even old women! The party of tolerance, the party that spins itself as the 'Civil Rights Party', besieged a 3 year old waif, ripped a placard from her hands, and tore it to shreds.

When the little girl cried, did they stop and apologize? Did they realize what they'd done and ask forgiveness? Did they come out of their 'feeding frenzy'? Did the 'mob mentality' abate? No, they laughed and jeered.

In the aftermath several news sources have since reported on this episode, though I never heard a peep in the mainstream ~ I understand it wouldn't reflect well upon Kerry/Edwards and that this is a story even Dan would Rather not use to distract us from his own troubles. What's more, the Democrats are attacking the father as having setup the whole event, suggesting that the Painters' Union Thug (on the left) is actually an elder son of Parlock. They persist in this fantasy even after the IUPAI has apologized on behalf of the thug in the photo they recognize as one of their own.

Washington Times


The Herald-Dispatch tells us that "the only signs that were allowed by the Kerry-Edwards campaign staff were the signs the campaign itself provided" and they'd have us believe that their events aren't staged from start to finish? Handbags, backpacks, briefcases ~ I can understand that, given the world we live in today, but to confiscate signs at a rally says to me that the organizers don't trust their own followers. On second thought, that shouldn't surprise me, considering the source.

Let me get this straight ~ the mean-spirited Republicans want to destroy the environment, starve the children, and throw the elderly out of their homes and the Democrats are the even-tempered, kindly, and caring people. Go on, pull the other one!

Suppression or Free Expression?

I watched C-SPAN last night and Sheila Jackson Lee was speaking to an empty house. This isn't really unusual, as many floor speeches are made simply to get into the record and most congress people have better things to do than listen to each other drone on and on. What was interesting about Lee's comments last night was her topic - Voter Suppression. In this campaign cycle, this has become a cause celeb with many people decrying the violations of Florida 2000 and swearing to not let it happen this time.

Lee was grousing about Ohio and it's system for Provisional Voting. She had visited the state recently and was appalled at the 'problems' in the system and how it's being attacked. For those who don't know, Provisional Voting allows you to enter any polling place and vote provided you are registered somewhere within the state of Ohio. This is great for people like students, people who travel a lot, and homeless. The problem is that it's also a system designed for voter fraud. There's really no clear-cut way to keep people from voting "early and often". It would appear that Lee doesn't mind the flaws and is appalled that anyone would even suggest that voters in Ohio would behave in such a manner.

Normally, I'd not have made an issue of this, I find Shiela Jackson Lee to be one of the most egregious Grape Kool-Aid Drinkers I've had the misfortune to be exposed to. However, just this morning some REALLY interesting stories have come to light. Democrats across the country have been hitting the podiums wailing about the Voter Suppression in Florida and vowing to stop it from happening again (no, there's no such thing as 'talking points'). It seems that the Democrat definition of Voter Suppression is when dead and fictitious people aren't allowed to register, or when Democrats aren't allowed to vote more than once.

No, I'm not talking about the story from a few weeks ago about New York voters who then voted again in Florida, but rather voters in Ohio and Michigan. Two Democratic Action Groups have been "Getting Out The Vote" by registering new Dems in droves. The problem is that they have been registering people who are already registered, registering dead people, registering people who don't exist by changing the spelling of a name, and a host of other creative practices.

Detroit Free Press

Lansing City Pulse

Cleveland/Akron News Channel 5

I happen to be a Notary Public in Vermont and take the time to register people of ALL persuasions. Unlike Hillary Clinton, I believe EVERYONE should vote, no matter which side they support. I am personally responsible for every registration form I put my name to. Why is it that the Public Interest Research Group in Michigan (PIRGIM), Project Vote, and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) are not willing to be held responsible for the actions of their representatives, people that where their badges, people they trained and gave marching orders to?

The most amazing thing here is how often the Dems are 'caught with their hands in the cookie jar' and yet they shamelessly and with a straight face say, "It was a small group of low-level staffers and is not indicative of any wrong-doing." or "Oh, everybody does it!" When will the Democratic Party get some integrity?

Wednesday, September 22, 2004

Don't Put Words In My Mouth

It is interesting to note that the first politicians to step up to the podium and demand civility and decency in the political arena are always Democrats. Why is that interesting? Oddly enough, I try to follow politics and I expect people to do what they say. I like to call that integrity. So, it’s interesting to me when people don’t. Watching Democrats is like watching "Jeopardy"; there’s that tension to see who’s going to pound on that buzzer first.

I’ll set the stage by accepting, in a left-handed fashion, that my side engages in nastiness occasionally. Dick Cheney ‘dissed’ Patrick Leahy on the floor of Congress and Democrats were aghast and expected an apology. Frankly, I think that Cheney was absolutely right to do what he did - Leahy had been bad-mouthing both him and his boss in vehement and vitriolic diatribes. What Cheney said was said man-to-man, face-to-face, when Leahy came looking for a photo-op. Why are Democrats shocked when ‘that sense of collegiality’ collapses in the wake of their attacks?

What the Democrats are willing to excuse and fluff-off is totally amazing to me.
Teresa Heinz Kerry tells a reporter to "shove it" and she’s not held to account, but rather applauded as heroic - she did what we’d all like to do, but don’t have the chutzpah to do. The truth is, if she had taken his pen and pad and "shoved" it for him, I’d have applauded too, but that’s not what happened. She gave a speech to the Pennsylvania delegates to the Democratic National Convention in which she called for more civility in American politics, "that we keep this at a high level, with dignity, with respect". In her fervor she opined that "we need to turn back some of the creeping, un-Pennsylvanian - and sometimes un-American - traits that are coming into some of our politics." All very fine and good. Except shortly thereafter Colin McNickle asked her what she meant by ‘un-American’ and she told him that "I never said said something I didn’t, shove it." Folks, I saw the event live on TV! Not one Democrat that I’ve heard or met thinks she did anything wrong. Not one wants to know what she meant.
In the August issue of Ladies Home Journal Teresa is asked if Americans have a narrow-minded view of the role of the First Lady. Her reply should send up alarms. "I don’t think American people are at all [narrow-minded]", all fine and good - if she had stopped there. But no, she didn’t. She went on, "I always go back to Pittsburgh...and to the hard-working, honest and tender people of that place...a lot of them are not very educated in the formal sense...that’s where I get my grounding in terms of who Americans are." Do the Democrats just assume she’s only referring to the Republican citizens of Pittsburgh? Sure, you can say she meant that they didn’t have college educations, but even so, how much more elitist, arrogant, derisive, and condescending can one get?

Just this month, she’s calling her, and her husband’s, detractors "scumbags" and "idiots". Leslie Marshall, a radio talk show host (yes, the left do have some), actually praised Teresa for these sterling epithets. I can’t imagine Leslie being so awed by a Republican spewing language that the left has tried to qualify as hate speech. In fact, Teresa is described as eloquent and feisty, opinionated and unafraid to speak her mind. "I’m a woman of a certain age and I deserve my opinions," Teresa says of herself, "I’ve earned them the old-fashioned way." (By which, she means marriage, I assume - the same way she earned her wealth in marriage to her first husband, Republican Senator, H. John Heinz III.)

But we’re not voting for Teresa, Democrats are quick to point out. Which is a fair position. But keep in mind: ‘one is judged by the company one keeps.’

How about the snow-boarding incident? John Kerry falls on the slope, but he didn’t fall because "I don’t fall...that son of a bitch" Secret Service Agent (who’s there to take a bullet meant for you, Mr. Kerry) got in his way and tripped him. Of course the Agent was not on the slope the next five times Mr. Kerry "didn’t fall." This behavior is just plain unacceptable and no one would tolerate it EXCEPT from one of the elite.

Then there was Cedric Brown at the Town Meeting in Bethlehem. Mr. Brown wanted to know who the foreign leaders were that had been telling Mr. Kerry that he really needed to beat George Bush. John Kerry’s response was "That’s none of your business!" Again, I watched it live on television and the vitriol in Mr. Kerry was palpable. In fact, he then encouraged the crowd to chant against this 52 year old gentleman - and I use that description specifically.
How about the assault weapons ban? Kerry vilified Bush for allowing that ban to lapse and subjecting all Americans, if not the world, to automatic gun-fire on the streets. And yet, it was the responsibility of Congress to present a bill to extend the ban to Bush to sign. The President supported the ban, but couldn’t do anything without a bill from Congress. Where was Senator Kerry on this ‘most’ important issue? In fact, Kerry co-sponsored a bill that would have expanded the weapons covered by the assault weapons ban - a bill which he didn’t have the leadership capabilities to gather a following to pass. At a recent rally, Kerry was given a weapon as a gift - that weapon would have been illegal under his own bill! Did he refuse the gift on the grounds he believed it was an illegal weapon? No, he gladly took it.

Joe Lockhart just explained to us that he spoke to Bill Burkett but the topic Bill called him to discuss "never came up". Bill wants to trash the President’s National Guard Service. The Kerry Campaign wants to trash the President’s National Guard Campaign. CBS and Dan Rather want to trash the President’s National Guard Service. CBS puts Bill intouch with Joe because he has ‘the goods’ to effect everyone’s goal. But we are to believe that Joe never talked to Bill about it.

Where, oh where, is the civility, decency, and integrity in the Democratic Party today?