Kerry for Prez? Hah? Fuhgeddabowdit!

Tonight kicks off the Republican National Convention. Unfortunately, I missed most of what McCain said, but he was passionate and obviously sincere in his support of Bush. I've already heard pundit Jon Stewart joke he would have to take deep breaths as he "forced" out strained lines of support. I've even heard that pillar of balance and moderation, Janeane Garafalo say that she honestly wondered if McCain would just lose it and say over the microphone that he just "can't support a lie and a failed Presidency". This is the modicum and down to earth viewpoints that are drawing the swing voters over to Air America's side in numbers well over the single digits. How much has already been packed in tonight, before I tuned in, could not be given justice without writing many paragraphs. But I do want to point out a couple things that I think will not only resonate with many of the so-called undecided voters, but will incur the lightning fast wrath of the Left pundits before tomorrow's sun even rises.
-

September 11th, 2001

-

"Thank God George Bush is our President". Those are the exact words Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani said that he spoke on the morning of 9/11 and that he still says today. I think there was a general (mis)understandning that 9/11 wasn't going to really be brought up at either convention, because it would "politicize" it. I believe this will prove to be a serious miscalculation of the DNC, as it in no way is a day that belongs to either "party", but belongs to the entire country. The fact that the RNC would respectfully approach the topic was unmistakable with the very date emblazoned on the rear wall of the stage in 6-foot letters. Many undecideds look at the protests and outright disparagement of the war on terror and see millions of people who have somehow committed the inconceivable and unforgivable act of having forgotten September 11th. -

Giuliani did not beat around the bush at all. (The text to Giuliani's speech) He called Kerry by name as an opportunist who does not have what it will take to protect our nation. He said with 60 plus days till the election, "Kerry could change his position 4 or 5 more times!"

Rudy brought up the very important point, that I agree with, that Bush has already proven he will take the offense in the war on terror, not the defense; that he will take the war over there, so we will no have to fight it in NYC, Chicago, or Boston. This puts a huge kibosh on the argument that we "should only fight a war when there is an imminent threat". I think that's a ridiculous, dangerous, feel-good ideology. If 9/11 cannot show how flawed that logic is, then nothing can do it.

-

One of the most, "OH NO HE DIN'T" moments was when ex-Mayor Rudy said that the now archaic mentality of appeasing terrorists is the only way someone like Yasser Arafat could possibly win the Nobel Prize! Now, plenty of people already know how true this may be, but I don't know if it's been trumpeted in a larger forum than this before. I can't help but envision the picture of Clinton grinning ear to ear as he shakes hands with Arafat, ashamedly the most invited world leader to the White House during Clinton's Administration. I don't know if Carter is watching the RNC tonight. If he is, I'm sure Carter came down a few notches on his pedestal from his most recent Nobel Prize, awarded specifically as nothing but an immature foreign jab at Bush.

I knew the Republicans were going to have a very well orchestrated convention, but I could hardly envision a more convincing and effective speech than that of Giuliani. His sincere passion and love for those lost on 9/11, NYC, and the soldiers fighting the war on terror is matched by his articulate defense of Bush's international decisions and policies.

-

One thing I have to interject that is overly offensive is the canard repeatedly thrown around that there would be no women or minorities represented at the RNC, only at DNC. That line may have been convincing some years back, but the more it's paraded out, the more it's going to make the speaker look foolish, arrogant, and bigoted. There's an enormous minority presence that's very comparable to what I witnessed in the televised coverage of the Democrat's convention. The next time they try to pretend they are somehow less of a sea of white faces, tell them that racist line doesn't fly.

We need a picture of a Saudi and an Iranian! Pronto!
Get the Photoshop boys on it!

-
I thought this was an interesting juxtaposition of pictures on a FOXNews.com article. They used the same clipart for a Saudi and an Iranian "terrorist". (Saudi's are Arabic and Iranians are not - they're Persian. It's a common misconception). I guess the guy laying out the page thought it looked fine...either that or their clipart is really that limited.
-
Speaking of Iranian problems, there was a very intriguing article recently about the Iranian Defense Minister himself saying that if it appears that America may use a "preemptive strike" against Iran, just like we did with Iraq...then they will very likely unleash a "preemptive strike" against us first!
-
A lot of people didn't catch this, but some of us argued endlessly about it on FARK.com forum.

I'll make the SwiftVets an offer they can't refuse.

-
A couple of days ago, I wrote a blurb about John Kerry appearing on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. I admit I was a little critical of Stewart, but nothing like the short piece they did on it in the New York Post.
-
My new theory is that Stewart deliberately acted like he was bumbling his questions to make Kerry look better, not that he needed help, but Stewart can easily overwhelm non-entertainers (usually politicians and book authors) with his quick wit, when he WANTS TO.

My bud...Randy Emery

This is a shout out to my buddy Randy Emery. Randy is a little disillusioned with politics lately and says it is all "quid pro quo. Everybody is beholden to somebody". He's good comic relief at the office here. And he also recently decided to start his own blog! You can find it here. Here's a good story he passed to me recently:

Once upon a time, on a farm...

...in Arkansas, there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered quite a few grains of wheat.
She called all of her neighbors together and said, "If we plant this wheat,
we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?"
"Not I," said the cow.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Not I," said the pig.
"Not I," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen.
And so she did; The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain. "Who
will help me reap my wheat?" asked the little red hen.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Out of my classification," said the pig.
"I'd lose my seniority," said the cow.
"I'd lose my unemployment compensation," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen, and so she did.
At last it came time to bake the bread. "Who will help me bake the bread?"
asked the little red hen.
"That would be overtime for me," said the cow.
"I'd lose my welfare benefits," said the duck.
"I'm a dropout and never learned how," said the pig.
"If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen.
She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They
wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share.
But the little red hen said, "No, I shall eat all five loaves."
" Excess profits!" cried the cow.
"Capitalist leech!" screamed the duck.
"I demand equal rights!" yelled the goose.
The pig just grunted in disdain.
And they all painted "Unfair!" picket signs and marched around and around
the little red hen, shouting obscenities.
Then a government agent came, he said to the little red hen, "You must not
be so greedy."
"But I earned the bread," said the little red hen.
"Exactly," said the agent. "That is what makes our free enterprise system so
wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under
our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the
fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle."
And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who
smiled and clucked, "I am grateful, for now I truly understand."
But her neighbors became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked
bread because she joined the "party" and got her bread free.
And all the Democrats smiled. 'Fairness' had been established. Individual
initiative had died but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared, as long as
there was free bread.

Jon Stewart, buddy...we can't thank you enough for what your show has done...

(SHHHH...we etend-pray we're impartial-ay)

Oh...uh, right...I mean....having me on the show tonight.

-
I was a little surprised tonight to see the guest on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (aka TDS) as none other than John Kerry!
-
I say a"little" surprised, because The Daily Show tries to pawn itself off as moderate, supposedly making fun of both the Left and the Right. Even though I think it's one of the funniest shows on TV, I only wish that were more true. They lean quite a bit to the left, and Stewart has had a hard time hiding it lately. In the last couple of months alone they've had for guests: DNC head Terry McAuliffe, Michael Moore, Maureen Dowd, Bill Clinton, and now John Kerry. I'm sure TDS will soon also invite on President Bushahahahahahahaha. Ohhhh, seriously, though...
-
Kerry was quite gracious, intelligent and lucid. He looked pretty tired, but carried himself very well. Stewart, on the other hand seemed a little constipated, straining extra hard to not show his partisanship.
Uh...he technically did not kiss Kerry, but Stewart would probably still be eligible for common-law rights in many states. Some of his questions were funny, but not in a way I think he meant them to be.
Here's a quick rundown on some of the things they covered in the ultra short "interview":
-
Stewart would make jokes by taking anything referred to as things that were said or done by the GOP, and then simply exaggerate it to ridiculous levels.
This is Stewart's quick and dirty way at making "spontaneous" jokes that don't require a lot of thought and he thinks are goofy and make him look endearing.
One example: Kerry asked, "what exactly is a compassionate conservative? Someone who sends kids to die without flak vests"?" (not Kerry's most gracious point) and Stewart replied, "yeah but those on the Right will simply say that you'll only send them out in gabardine".
This actually got a big laugh. Ridiculous. Non-sensical. Comedic genius.
-
Stewart warmed up the interview with the non-partisan, no holds barred question, "Are you surprised that they are coming out against you as hard as they have been".
They won't rename TDS to Hardball with Jon Stewart anytime soon.
Kerry answered, "not really, not since we've discovered how far the web and network goes".
A lot of this doublespeak seems to require a translator if you're not watching the news closely. Stewart was referring to the Swiftvets commercials and Kerry was referring to the alleged direct ties they have to Bush, Rove, etc.
-
Kerry went on to say Bush would rather keep on these topics (i.e. Kerry's war record) instead of real issues and he'd rather play gung-ho politics that are "angering the entire world".
Wow. The whole world. I guess it must be true. Kerry said it AND it was on TV! By the way, I believe Bush just denounced the Swiftvets ads yesterday (with all "527" groups) and supposedly has never himself (or his administration) publicly said anything bad about Kerry's war service. He's even praised it, that I know of for sure. But many think it's fair game to question Kerry's service, since that's what was the main theme of the DNC in Boston. I have, I believe, a slightly more balanced approach I'll probably divulge at a later time.
Stewart immediately saw comedic gold and interjected, "No! We need to know! Did you or did you not spend Christmas in Cambodia!"
Uproarious laughter.
-
Stewart then said OK, I have some real serious questions you have to answer.
I think Kerry wrote and handed them to Stewart beforehand.
1) Are you "the most liberal Senator"? Kerry's answer: "No. "
This is a major contention for Stewart, probably more than Kerry. He grilled a Republican guest Senator about it, who was familiar with the general aspects of who contributes the data for these polls, but not the exact National Journal article in question. Stewart went out of his way to try to make the Senator look stupid. Great host.
Next Question:
2) Do you flip-flop? Kerry's answer: "Flip-flop. Flap-flip."
I'm serious. He could have interjected a vehement "NO" just like the first question, but didn't. To his credit, he knew what it was about (his voting for the war, which he then came out against, but also says he will stick with if elected, etc. etc.)
-
Kerry then went on about how Bush lied to the Senate to get them to vote for the war because he promised an international coalition.
Ooooookay. Personally I don't want a Prez who will hesitate to do what must be done to proactively protect the US just because some of the UN (mostly France and Germany) disagree with us.
Then Kerry said Bush did not exhaust UN inspections.
UN inspections were a joke. The only mistake Bush made was to cave in and allow them in the first place. Saddam had 12 years to learn how to either hide or quickly ship his weapons out. The UN boys in the blue hats bought him more time, if anything.
-
Kerry said we should go to war because we have to, not because we want to.
This is the same exact policy the DNC had before September 11th, 2001. It's simply bad policy now. Bush actually is doing what "has" to be done...regardless of whether or not it's popular.
-
At one point, Kerry said, "maybe we could have the inauguration on the show here". Stewart's response was, "sure, no problem".
No really...that's what Stewart said. Too bad it wasn't Bush on the show asking this question, Stewart would have actually turned his brain on and come up with a joke, possibly funny or even very funny, at this point. Instead we got the riveting, "sure, no problem".
-
Believe it or not, I think The Daily Show is one of the funniest shows on TV...Stewart included. I just think he's not exactly at his best when he's "just doing his duty to help get rid of Bush". It looks awkward and cheap. I think they all probably go home and shower a little bit longer lately.
-
In any case, we'll see how well they do with the RNC coming up in NYC in the next few weeks. I'm sure they'll be as fair as they were at the Democratic conventionahahahahahahahahahaha.....

Anti-Kerry Ads Heat Up

Oooooh, I crrrrush your head!

-

The anti-Kerry group titled "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" have released another TV commercial against Kerry. I guess their first one hadn't riled up enough people.
-
Things got even more heated today when Kerry's running mate, John Edwards publicly "called out" President Bush, claiming he could and should "stop these ads".
-
This is one of the clearer insights into Edwards style and personality since his being picked to run as the Democratic VP. An ex-lawyer, very persuasive and lucrative at that, he's taking a very interesting stand with this claim or 'challenge'. Think about it:
-
1) With one sweeping statement he indirectly asserts that Bush and his team are directly tied to the Swiftvets. This is pretty slick, as should be expected from a lawyer. It would be illegal for Bush to be directly connected to them. So, Edwards insinuates it without ever actually claiming it outright.
-
2) What would the ramifications be if Bush did "stop these ads"? Would that be legal? Would he be championed by the left at that point as a defender of personal rights, free press and free speech? I'd have a lot more respect for Edwards if I knew for sure that he is fully aware that Bush can not "stop these ads". At least then I would know he's just devious and not delirious.
-
3) Is this what we can expect from Edwards from this point on? Is he going to say the harsher, less "Presidential" sound bites, so as to let Kerry have his cake and eat it, too? I hope this isn't the start of a bad precedent. It would only highlight how ridiculous this has become if Cheney were to come out and start publicly attacking/long-distance arguing with Edwards over this matter. Vice President Cheney is endlessly lambasted and caricatured for alleged profanity spoken in private. Needless to say, if he were to use his position to argue about this, it would likely be desribed as beneath him and 'the office'.

Fit or Unfit?

In a suprise upstaging of the release of the book, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out against John Kerry", someone hacked today into Barnes and Noble's website and changed the picture of the book cover to read "Fit", instead of "Unfit".

-

Once it was reported by DrudgeReport.com, it wasn't long at all before B&N fixed it.

-

For an original screenshot of the page, click here. For the larger shot of the cover click here.

-

Besides the fact that I now have about zero confidence to purchase something on their website knowing that hackers ALREADY have access to it's inner workings, there's a bit of irony playing out here.

-

Nothing short of a childish prank in immediate effect, these pro-Kerry hackers have given an enormous amount of free publicity for this book. Now it's sure to stick out all the more in the short attention spans that are tired of the countless "tell all" election books already out there.

Bush Kills Salmon!!

"the civilized world will not be intimidated...by these evil fishies?"

"Bush Kills Salmon" are the words on a picket sign waved at one of many recent protests by Klamath Tribes against Bush's environmental policies.
-
The story and the picture that first caught my eye was on the somewhat radical website, Independent Media Center. The website and it's moniker says they're "independent", and even says that they can't stand Kerry any more than Bush...but best I can tell, it's merely because Kerry's not radical enough.

-

I couldn't help but notice the protesters are mad because there are supposedly much less salmon for them to catch, KILL, and eat. If I could talk to the sign bearer, I think I would ask him why his sign doesn't say Bush and I Both Kill Salmon!
-
Many seem to have become so vitriolic towards the POTUS, and are so fully at ease with tossing every possible variation of disparagement at him, that they don't even blink an eye when it's completely ridiculous or ironic.

-

I wonder if at least maybe full-on vegans would spot the hypocrisy? If so, would they betray their fellow Bush haters? Hmmm.....

-

OK, maybe that's not very fair of me...hang on while I Google for a Vegans for Bush site. (hum the Jeopardy theme before proceding) OK. Well, apparently this is the only site on all of Google that even mockingly contains the exact phrase, "Vegans for Bush", so I'm not convinced we can count on any of them to speak out, at least on this particular protestor's duplicity.

I think I saw somewhere that it's also cool to do "pop culture" references on your blog, and I don't want to not be cool, so here goes:
I've been laughing so hard for the last 15 minutes, I was literally grateful for the commercial so I wouldn't stroke out. If you want to laugh 'til your head hurts, get the DVD Kevin James - Sweat the Small Stuff (2001) - absafreakinlutely hilarious! (In case you didn't know, he plays Doug Heffernan on The King of Queens). I like every once in a while to watch stand up on Comedy Central, but most of it isn't even a little bit funny compared to this guy.

Wait a second, I just realized I probably quadrupled my chances of getting Googled by simply adding his name....so THAAAAAT'S why it's "cool" to have pop culture references in your blog. Got it.

Speaking of poop culture references....the 7th most watched movie in America right now is Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle. (Notice the lack of linkage?) Now, I admit some of the commercial clips do look a little funny. But after they gradually slipped in the "stoned out of their minds on the couch" scene into their TV trailer...that's when it occured to me that someday this movie will be only as highly revered and praised as Far Out Man, starring Cheech and Chong. Maybe even "Kumar" will be successful enough that he'll supplement his social security checks with a bong website that will then morph him into a total bullcrap hollywood, pseudo "political prisoner". But I don't really have an opinion about it.

Open letter to Michael Moore


I recent emailed Michael the following email. Just days afterwards, people from his organization have deluged me with literally DOZENS of icy stares and cold, drawn out silences. I expect very soon that even Michael himself may send me the same treatment...if he accidentally checks his inbox before his pixies filter/delete it. But enough about me...here's an email written by me:


Mr. Moore
I just want to thank you for taking time out of your obviously very busy schedule to personally read my email! Now, I know you've been straight forward and passionate about your not wanting to see President George W. Bush elected in November. Some even believe that pretty much everybody in the whole entire world, except for the GOP and the terrorists, want to see him kicked out! Hahahahahahaha!
Ohhhhh...but I digress. Here's the fo-shizzle: recently, I made a bet with a friend that I think only YOU can truly resolve!
(I already told her that I believe you're so down to earth, that you would in fact respond to this. I can only cross my fingers!)
-------------------------------------------
QUESTION:
If you had a 100% guarantee that President George W. Bush would be removed from the office of President by your simply saying something misleading and partially untrue about him, would you in fact do that?
(Also, just for sake of make believe, the assumption could be that your statement would be orchestrated well enough to not incur any legal consequences - for libel, etc. - on your part. In fact, we could pretend you would receive huge praise, acclaim and even lots of money. What the heck...why not throw in a free pony, since we're makin' wishes!)
SO.....WOULD YOU DO IT?
--------------------------------------------
By the way, this is not a trick question, i.e. - whatever you say, you're not screwed and won't have it twisted around to slam you. In fact, I don't think that there's a "right" or "wrong" answer, just one that's answered honestly or not. And only you would know for sure, if you did!
And if you don't simply give a semi-short yes or no reply with the briefest of qualification, well I gotta tell ya....I would be VERY disappointed, as it would hint to me that you could one day stoop as low as running for office. I guess I just want to continue picturing you as being above that.
By the way, I did see your movie. You are definitely very skilled at what you do. I assume you treat your dogs very well, too.
Sincerely,
(PShene)

The reference to him being "good to his dogs" is a playback to his recent answer to a "reporter's" question, can you say one good thing about Bush. He said he assumed he was kind to his pooches. As soon as he replies, I'll immediately post it here. Or my grandkids...or theirs...