Tuesday, August 31, 2004

The Gay York Times

In the event the link disappears, this is the headline from this AMs print edition, "Giuliani Lauds Bush's Leadership on Terror: GOP Opposes Abortion and Gay Unions"

If it weren't so funny, it'd be sad.

non-sequitur (non-sek-kwih-toor) n.
1. An inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence.
2. A statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it.

Someone with whom I talk politics gives me a blank look when I tell him Kerry has not dealt with the VVAW yet.

Take a look at the flyer and then realize that the SBVT isn't even the shit on the fan.

(This was supposed to come with a link to a VVAW flyer reminiscent of Grishams closing argument in a Time to Kill. All this raping and pillaging. Now imagine you're Vietnamese!)

Here it is.

The VVAW is coming!

TCS: Tech Central Station - A Media Meltdown?

I love it! Barriers to entry!

A business term sure to cause puzzled looks and head scratching amongst the journalist profession.

Welcome to the prime reason the internet is not profitable for content.

Friday, August 27, 2004

Newsday.com: Bush Leads Kerry in 3 Key States

This month the dynamics of the election have changed from Kerry leading across the board to Bush doing so (qualified by the ubiquitous disclaimer, “within the margin of error”.)

As Republicans wondered why the Bush Administration did not answer the scurrilous charges through the months leading towards the Democrat nomination, I theorized that the Bush campaign was running a “whites-of-their-eyes” strategy which has lead them to wait until the last minute to fight back.

This theory was seeded by the ease with which Kerry’s lead in the polls following the primaries was vanquished. He was up 52-44 in early March, and after a couple weeks of pushback, Bush had flipped that to his favor, 51-47.

While news of Fallujah, Abu Ghraib and the build-up to the Democratic Convention dominated the news coverage, Bush did not answer the political yipping of the Kerry campaign. Frustrated, Republicans began to cast a pall over their November election hopes.

August came, and two ads by fellow Vietnam veterans erased the Senator’s leads. The Bush campaign’s strategy was justified.

The secret behind the strategy is this - insuring Kerry’s nomination. If Bush’s campaign had answered the political bombs thrown at him prior to the nomination, Democrats would have seen how weak a candidate Kerry was and could have chosen a stronger one. Instead, the Bushies lulled the Democrats into a sense of false arrogance, and proved, again, that an Administration venomously characterized as stupid has proven its adversaries to be more so. Polls don’t lie!

Thursday, August 26, 2004

John O'Neill Chat

One of the least trumpetted pieces of information is John O'Neill's political leanings. He's clearly not part of the Republican base.

(Also, on Hardball he answered the host's attempt at credibility destruction by stating he voted for Gore in 2000.)

The SVFT are not going to stop. This is personal.

Wednesday, August 25, 2004

I sense the major media is successfully changing the subject from Kerry's account of his Vietnam service to Bush.

The question I have is whether or not the major media has been successfully debunked by the internet as an example on via

As I was told as a child and will tell my child, "Keep your eye on the ball." The major media is doing its best to boo and hiss the American public into striking out.

Bush & Kerry Lawyers Advise 527s

That should be the headline as the article mentions two Kerry lawyers, one who advises ACT and the other who advises Moveon.org, to the one Bush lawyer who advises SBVT.

The actual headline is "Bush-Cheney Lawyer Advised Anti-Kerry Vets."

Tuesday, August 24, 2004

Joshua Micah Marshall

I wonder whether JMM realizes this is not about Bush but about Vietnam Veterans who despise Kerry for what he did as an anti-war advocate (and all the selective attending that entails)?

If he and his liberal brethren do not recognize this soon, they'll go down in flames in November (which BTW is what I believe should occur.)

Experts in Econimcs Are Not Experts in Other Disciplines

So Shifty Eyes (a moniker earned from his appearances on talk shows where he constantly refuses to look anyone in the eye as he relates his "facts") claims the reason for the nastiness that has arisen over the last 10 days is due to Bush not having anything to run on.

Let's dismiss this with a simple observation. Vietnam Veterans (VV) attack John Kerry, the besmircher of their service, and this is because GWB has nothing to run on?

I believe the nastiness is due, not to GWB, but to a couple of generations of Democrats who have been indoctrinated in the American history of Vietnam, as written by the winners of that conflict - the Left and its American culture destroying Power to the People-ism.

Now that thier indoctrination is being examined and shown to be based on lies and half-truths (non-Vietnam Vets claiming to be such in VVAW - JFk this is still coming!- VC being influenced by USSR, Pol Pot), their world is being turned upside down. It is this removal of ideological blinders that is causing the hysteria of the LEft.

Monday, August 23, 2004

Nicely Said, but Does George Soros or Harold Ickes or John Podesta Care?

I give the NYT credit for running this long op-ed. Whether is counteracts the preaching the paper does to the Leftist choir which is its readership, I can not discern.

Esp when it is whipped into a frenzy around the projecting of Vietnam on to Iraq. And the fact that a Vietnam vet turned anti-Vietnam vet is the candidate for POTUS may be too virulent an elixir for the Lefties' mental skills to battle. (Or should I have said, "got together and kumbaya-ed" as "battle" may be too militant a word?_

Friday, August 20, 2004

Disparage Freedom - Good! Disparage Kerry - Unconsciousable!

Op-ed #3 in the past ten days or so (I'd say "week" but some parsing idiot may say, "It's 8 days! You are not credible! Liar!") which lays the groundwork for the Bush Administration (Jeb or GW. Pick one.) to steal the election via Jim Crow tactics.

Nevermind that no one has sued anyone over alledged 2000 intimidation. Never mind the voter fraud via dead people voting would necessarily mean checking on old people. All inconsequential is the perpetuation of myths which justify demagoguery.

Shifty-eyed Krugman and the original paean to skin color being the most important qualification to work, Bob Herbert, have gotten on the wagon.

What seems implausible is the mock indignation being expressed by the media (Chris Matthews comes foremost to my mind) over the questioning of Kerry's Vietnam story while the the most influential daily beats the drums for election theft via voter intimidation!

The New York Times: Drinking the Kerry Kool-Aid, Too?

First, at least the POR recognizes that Vietnam is a pillar of Kerry's campaign.

But to refute the claims by blaming Bush seems to be an example of kicking th edog after a bad day at work.

The insinuation the POR makes is that because Bush is from Texas and John Oneill is from Texas that makes the charges libelous. The connections are natural given Republicans politics in Texas. Just as I'd expect incestuous connections in party politics at high levels of every state.

And undermining this premise further is the fact that Bush needed to know beforehand that Kerry would run for POTUS in 2004. Otherwise, the connections mean squat.

A fortuitous confluence is all.

Seems this will boil down to Kerry's reconciliation of war hero vs anti-war activist as memories are disputed and CYAP becomes the Third Tablet.

Thursday, August 19, 2004

Bad News for Kerry

Excellent news for the President. Amongst registered voters, Kerry leads 46-45. Given that reg voters normally lean towards the Democrat, a "likely" voter poll probably shows a Bush lead.

My still unanswered question is why the major polling firms went away from "likely" voters this past spring.

I'm trying to sort through the whole SBV issue right now. My current conclussion is that JFK had his memory of events filtered through his anti-war passion and politic life.

Just as we re-examine our past as new information comes to light, JFK changed his Vietnam experience as his anti-war passions were ignited and his political career took off.

Weak, but something is there because JFK gives no direct refutation of the charges. He only resorts to the attacks against Bush.

John Kerry for President - Speech to the 2004 Democratic National Convention

John Kerry

“….many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents, but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis, with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command….They told stories that, at times, they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam….we could be quiet, we could hold our silence, we could not tell what went on in Vietnam, but we feel, because of what threatens this country, not the reds, but the crimes which we are committing that threaten it….The country doesn't know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence…” Excerpts from John Kerry April 22, 1971

“I know what kids go through when they are carrying an M-16 in a dangerous place and they can't tell friend from foe. I know what they go through when they're out on patrol at night and they don't know what's coming around the next bend. I know what it's like to write letters home telling your family that everything's all right when you're not sure that's true.” John Kerry July 29, 2004

The second quote was powerful. It was delivered during the junior Senator from Massachussets acceptance speech at the Democrat National Convention. ()

Wednesday, August 18, 2004

WSJ.com - Strength at Home

And I might add, "Fuck you, Michael Moore!"

Google Owners Bitch-Slapped by Wall St

A colleague of mine remarked last week that she wished to have the money to get into GOOG. I countered that the stock will probably drop below its offering price very quickly.

This AM I am greeted by the news that GOOG is dropping its price. I'm not even sure that it won't drop even further after opening.

Tuesday, August 17, 2004

The New York Times Drinks AFT Kool-Aid

Without knowing what types of students attend charter schools, it is difficult to compare.

If the typical student is one who is performing well-below the average, then the fact that charter school results show that student almost at parity to be a great improvement.

If the typical student is well-below average then there would be a two-fold positive effect on public school scores. One, by moving below-average students out of the pucblic school sample, the public school scores automatically rise. Second, if the below-average student takes inordinate resources such as time then moving them out would improve public school scores.

Of course, the real test is over a a twelve year period as a cohort is traced from alpha to omega of public schooling. But twelve years is a long time for the politically driven to wait.

MoveOn.org Avoids Direct Rebuttal

Interesting rebuttal to the Swift Boat Ads - Don't address the disputed facts but attack George W Bush.

Monday, August 16, 2004

Until Courts Do Us Part (washingtonpost.com)

Wapo seems to have hit this one on the head.

Friday, August 13, 2004

Bush Approval at 51%

So yesterday afternoon between laughter about the McGreevey news, I noticed the latest Gallup poll came out. The headline was Bush 50 Kerry 47. It was not up on yet so i waited for this AM's USAToday where is was surprised to see Bush 48 Kerry 47.

So off to for the details, and lo and behold, the USAToday piece used registered voters versus likely voters.

Just keep the pro-Kerry onslaught moving forward!

The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > Report Finds Tax Cuts Heavily Favor the Wealthy

Use quintiles and then take an average which uses the highest incomes to skew that average upward.

How about reporting where the top quintile income begins? According to this, it is $84,016 and the top 5% begins at $150,002.

Thursday, August 12, 2004

The Post on WMDs: An Inside Story (washingtonpost.com)

Another self-flagellation from a major newspaper.

These things are "Duh" pieces. No kidding you missed some stories and/or did not emphasis them adequately. Hindsight is like that!

I am not seeing any flagellating over the hindsight view that no one bullhorned the possibility that WMD may not be found in "stockpiles" but in dribs and drabs and that the programs were intended but, after 30 years of totalitarianism, the brain drain would be so enormous that the lack of ability would not be present. (in this case, best effort was not good enough!)

The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > Leveraging Sept. 11, Giuliani Raises Forceful Voice for Bush

Off the top, the New York Times is a gay paper. No doubt at all. It carries the gay agenda. Proof? last week, it ran a big article on A3 about transsexuals in Iran. Transsexuals in Iran? With limited papges for reporting international events, this was chosen? is there nothing more pressing in Iran that freakin' transsexuals?

Also, a sports column about trannies competing in the Olympics. Which Twilight Zone episode am I in?

So with groundwork laid (also see article on www.4ounces.com about the gay marriage headlines in the Times), I can address the above-linked piece.

In it, the times feels the need to point out, twice, that Republicans would not vote for Rudy in national election because he stayed with a gay couple during his divorce.

The easy to draw implication is that Republicans do not like gay people.

Unfortunately, the Times can't see straight through their gay-colored glasses. How about the particulars leading-up to his divorce? The mistress on the side? McFly? McFly?

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?