Letters from NYC

Deconstructing Kerry's Health Plan

Below is an email response I sent to my best friend, whom I believe is trying to win me back to the left. I've got news for her, I was never part of the left even when I worked in DC during the Clinton era. Anyway, this will be the first in a series of articles "Deconstructing Kerry's" platforms.

Dear Lisa:

Thanks for forwarding Paul Krugman's op-ed piece to me. I'm sure you did so trying to enlighten my moderate/centrist views by trying to prove that the media is biased against Kerry. Unfortunately, you're both way off the mark here. In all fairness, this is one time you really can't blame lack of coverage of Kerry's Health Care platform on a biased media. Nope, you can't even blame it on what Krugman is calling the "Triumph of the Trivial." in the news. The reason Krugman hasn't found any information regarding Kerry's Health Plan is because their isn't any. At least there wasn't anything new in his acceptance speech that he didn't say in the primaries. Nope; no details, no updates, not even fine print.

Oh, on the johnkerry.com website you'll find the following general outline embedded within several pages deep, but there's nothing new since the primaries. Well, except for John Edward's name being added to the site. Here's the general outline:

"The Kerry-Edwards plan will provide $177 billion in tax credits to make health care more affordable for people and businesses that BUY into the new Congressional Health Plan. These credits include:

- A 25 percent credit for seniors aged 55 to 64 whose salaries fall below 300 percent of poverty.
- A 75 percent credit for people between jobs and whose salaries fall below 300 percent of poverty.
- A tax credit of up to 50 percent for small businesses that cover low-to-moderate income workers.
- A tax credit for workers not eligible for other provisions of the Kerry-Edwards plan. This credit would limit premiums to less than 6 percent of income for workers below poverty, then phase out to 12 percent of income for workers at 300 percent of poverty."

Please note, that you have to BUY into his plan in order to be eligible for it. You also have to PAY ALL your premiums and then, only if you file your income tax, and providing you meet the income/deduction qualifications imposed by the IRS, then and only then can you get your money back as a tax credit.

Oh wait, I forgot to mention one very, very important thing: when you fall 300% below the poverty level not only are you eligible for Medicare (another Federal Health Care Program made more robust under Clinton), you're also too freakin' poor to worry about health care. Why? Simple, you're too busy scrounging for food and how to pay for electricity and heat to care if you live or die!

Now in the interest of fair play and objectivity, I will examine what these extremely poor folks options are, other than suicide. Regarding every child being insured.... they already are under a federally funded program, free of cost to low income parents (as a result of Hillary's Health Care Commission). It's also available to middle class parents at a moderate cost. It's been that way since before Clinton left office.

As for the millions of people uncovered by health insurance, the federal gov't currently gives money to states (also done under the Clinton Administration) in which those families that fall through the cracks (not poor enough to be eligible for Medicare and still not financially able to afford health insurance) are able to get insurance at reduced premiums with HMO's. BTW, small businesses are also covered in 16 States under a similar program, where low cost premiums are available to employers and their employees.

FYI, this money is given by the federal gov't, in a lump sum to each state earmarked specifically for health insurance programs for it's citizens not institutions. In NYS, Pataki used the state's surplus to match federal money and created the Small Business Health Insurance Program, the first of it's kind in the nation, which was quickly adopted by other states.

Now my question is, how does Kerry actually intend to cut "government" waste and "bloatedness" if he's adding layers to the federal health care programs already in existence. Oh, wait, I just got it! Maybe he plans to do away with Medicare. Wow, why didn't I think of that. That's a really effective cut in waste. Then my financial calculations on how Kerry's programs will be paid, that is without "increasing taxes". The math will finally jive and balance out without increasing the deficit too much. Hmmmm, that's an interesting concept. If you only insure the abject poor, then those that are only struggling financially will eventually fall into a hole and thus meet the financial requirements to be eligible for his programs, and so then everyone is insured. I must say, it’s a clever plan.

So as you can see, the reason there's nothing out there for Kruger to read, is because there is nothing out there for anyone to read. God forbid they publish something and put the fine print in print. Then of course there's the campaign, the road trip and all. They've been to busy to flesh things out and update their site. Oh and there's the complexity thing. You and I both know Health Care is sooooooo COMPLEX, we really can't be trusted to understand it all. They really want us to leave it to the John's.

I wonder how Krugman would feel once he discovers that Kerry's $650 billion health insurance plan DOES NOT cover lower and middle-income families (as Kerry alleged in his speech). Well at least it won't until they fall 300% below the poverty line. Yep, too bad I don't have Krugman's address, otherwise I’d share a link and a thought or two with him.

The Great Democratic Experiment

Dearest Jon:

Thanks for posting your essay on “Death Of Democracy�. Before I offer my 2 cents I want to point out that the excerpts of the letter you used (which I tried to find unsuccessfully) was based on information that has since been rendered obsolete as a result of new discoveries in the past century. Then there’s that troubling Euro-centric view that was all the rage in those days, which makes me want to respond to the gentleman in question forcefully, but I can’t, since it’s fruitless to argue with a corpse.

To begin, "the average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history" is NOT 200 years. In 1787, Alexander Tyler, was pehaps not aware of this fact, so making such a statement might have been acceptable then. However, if he meant to focus on democratic civilizations, then we must focus on ancient Greek civilization and not just Athens as he does. Today we know that the Greeks' use of democratic principles in government lasted more than 200 years. Initially, these principles were not created, adopted or even voted on by the masses, so it’s not the democracy we know it today.

Still, it’s important, for the sake of history, that we acknowledge that our founding fathers took our democratic principles from what worked and didn’t work in Greek civilization. The one person one vote has of course undergone great transformation even from our early days. But in all fairness, Mr. Tyler probably didn’t have the opportunity that we have today, of reading the discussions and evaluations of Greek democratic principles that John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson’s record in their papers and diaries.

Tyler was not able to see how these men explored and debated long and hard over what exactly led to the demise of Greek Civilization, when he made his democratic doomsday prediction. I have been able to read these and am all the more grateful for it. Our founding fathers were acutely aware that those who did not study history would be doomed to walk blindly into the same trappings. Their letters of discussion to each other where the blogs of their day.

Our founding fathers not only used their knowledge and experience in these discussion, they also used creativity and hope in forging a constitution that were chock full of democratic principles, some of which had never been tested before. Actually, it would be appropriate to call that initial time in our history as “The Great Democratic Experiment� for what they set out to guarantee, protect and make available to its citizens was, and still is, unprecedented.

Other democracies around the world have still not caught up to the level of success our democracy has proven to be. For those that will read these words and roll their eyes at me I say: “Go ahead, prove me wrong with your own facts.� For if you point to the democracies of England, Israel or France, I hope you will substantiate your point on how these “Socialist Democracies� have caught up to the level of success found in our system of government.

Yes Jon, there are inherent problems with our democracy, such as citizens not exercising their right to vote, which results in candidates entering office who do not have the interest of a majority at heart. However, even situations like this can be rectified through a democratic process that we have seen make the appropriate correction, such as happened with the Governor in California.

So Jon, I not only believe that Mr. Tyler is way off base. I can truthfully assert that our Democracy is not only very much alive, it has built in safeguards so that it will never fail. Our Armed Forces would never let that happen, and our freedom loving citizens would die for this country before allowing such a travesty as a dictator to assume control of our government. Our founding fathers were blessed with too much foresight for that to happen.

So what say you Jon, do you think Tyler would still believe democracy to be in danger in 2004?

The McGreevey Affair

Jeff Jarvis has been a bit angry and writing about the McGreevey affair and its repercussions. I’m pissed too! People here are angry for a number of reasons. There's the McGreevy political and moral transgressions, and there's those of his party. By now, the transgressions of the party, reflected in the number of scandals, just keeps increasing without a sign of contriteness or remorse by any of the party leaders.

McGreevey's political sins, though many, can only be accused of the following:
- breaking state laws by hiring an incompetent lover for a very important position
- attempting to break federal law by insisting federal agencies give Cipel security clearances that had been denied him due to his lack of qualifications.
- jeopardizing the lives of people in New Jersey and New York by hiring an unqualified individual to run one of the most important positions in the state after the governorship.

Sterling of MemeFirst, believes that New Jersey's US Attorney "may blanch at the idea of prosecuting Gay America's new poster boy."

But the guiltiest of all, are the leaders of both parties for continuing to turn a blind eye to the corruption in Trenton and elsewhere and for denying it’s citizens the opportunity to choose a qualified CREDIBLE AND HONEST candidate to succeed McGreevey.

The citizens of NJ have not only been repeatedly denied their voice in politics, they have been denied the opportunity to vote, as they are being locked out of a political process by the maneuvering of a select few. The Dem party bosses maintain a stranglehold in Trenton, in spite of the evidence of corruption in the highest offices of the party. I guess, the Torrecelli corruption scandal was not the exception as we all thought, it now seems it's the norm in Trenton. Once again, the political bosses are putting the interests of the party ahead of the citizens.

What bothers me even more is the silence. Where are the business leaders? Where are the community or political leaders? Where are the equally outraged citizens that are being denied a voice in this process? I hear no one demanding he leave now and a special election called be called. Put simply, Jersey citizens are being strong armed and silenced into submission by a party that has no interest in what is best for New Jersey or its people.

TERESA HEINZ TRUE IDENTITY UNCOVERED!

Thanks to the dear Elder from Fraters Libertas
for helping to uncover the truth and helping to spread the news around the blogosphere.

Of Terrorism, Targets and Elections

While doing my daily catch-up with fellow bloggers last night, I saw that Bravo Romeo Delta’s blog – Anticipatory Retaliation – had an incredible post sparked by Alexander Tytler’s essay entitled “Terrorism and Elections�.

This is the same portion of Tytler's essay that _Jon of We Swear wrote his post on Tytler's pronouncement of "The Death of Democracy." Inspired by both _Jon and Tytler I wrote "The Great Democratic Experiment" in which I pronounce Democracy alive and well, thank you very much. Until yesterday when I went to lunch and was caught in the middle of protestors struggling with Police, who had managed to bring them down off the side of a sky scraper after they defaced private property. Thus, I wondered as I stood there watching their struggle, could this scene be a metaphor for democracy in the event of a terrorist attack?

This was a question Bravo Delta Romeo felt up to the task in answering through his post. There he examines the very life blood of Democracy -Elections- in the event of a terrorist attack, and elaborates as to “Al Qaeda’s objectives and ... what might be affecting their current operational mindset�. However, before reading this insightful essay, you must sit down with a nice beverage, as his post is chock full of intriguing and thought provoking assumptions that will get your spinning wheels turning at greater velocities.

I agree with some of his points, and disagree with others. A point of agreement between us is Al Qaeda’s selection of “counter force� and “counter value� targets and their merits. However, I would add one additional motivation for Al Qaeda to his list, their belief of superior moral and religious ideology. This fact is discussed by Lawrence Aster at FrontPageMagazine.com (via Barcepundit).

The first point of disagreement comes in with Bravo’s assessment, that Al Qaeda’s “focus on financial institutions really isn't well suited to have great symbolic impact when things like the Sears Tower, Statue of Liberty, or the White House beckon.�

My understanding is there are some key important reasons why Al Qaeda has chosen financial targets versus symbolic ones. The combined target list announced recently has the same high value as the WTC with one notable exception, simultaneous attacks on Citibank, Prudential, NY Stock Exchange, NASDAQ, and Chicago Mercantile Exchange, along with the IMF and World Bank, would result not only in temporarily paralyzing the US economy, but would also stop us from economically sustaining foreign governments friendly to our political policies (especially the members of the Coalition of the Willing). What would be the end result of these simultaneous attacks?

I believe Al Qaeda’s primary goal, is to induce a global economic depression greater than has been previously experienced, which would bring about secondary and terciary goals which have been brought to light in some of their taped messages, websites and manifesto. Some of these objectives include:
- creating economic instability for our “Willing� allies, thus preventing them from further involvement in any response we may take (due to economic & political constraints in their countries).
- destabilizing fledgling political democracies around the world, allowing for Muslim Fundamentalists and extremists to easily take control of various countries in Asia and Eastern Europe.
- adversely affecting our relationships with impartial countries, such as Libya, who will perhaps help Al Qaeda’s efforts against the US as they did before. Only this time their alliance will go unchecked by a weakened UN due to the dire financial situation of it’s members. [BTW, like Iran, Libya too has modest nuclear capabilities.]
- collapsing an economic system (capitalism) that is against the socialist principles Al Qaeda embraces and which many muslims belive the Koran condems.
- combining their "counter value" attacks with "counter force" measures where our forces are deployed, in order to drain our government and military resources.
- engaging in terrorist activity and urban guerilla warfare throughout the middle east (not just Iraq) eventually eroding the political stability of friendly arab nations, such as Egypt, Jordan, and Turkey, where Israel will be the first casualty.
- recruit an inexhaustible supply of politically and economically disenfranchised martyrs from around the world (not just Syrians and Saudis) who will continue to terrorize and select ad-hoc targets so as to render us defenseless and permanently alter our quality of life and our freedoms.

_Jon of We Swear recently wrote an impassioned post addressing the social repercussions and our response if such objectives were to actualize. However, my concern is that as incredible and powerful as our military is, it would not be able to effectively eradicate and systematically deal with the kinds of attacks Israel has been enduring these last 10 years.

Al Qaeda was temporarily successful in destabilizing the futures and stock markets on 9/11, when they dumped/sold millions of dollars worth of stocks they had purchased in the airlines, investment banks and other companies that were directly affected by the attacks on the WTC. Talk about hedging a stock; their attacks netted Bin Laden personally over a million dollars in profit. In essence, his profits helped him recoup his initial investment and helped fund future terrorist activities. So 9/11 for them, was an economic experiment with far reaching political implications.

We have already seen the political implications, or after effects if you will, played out on the campaign trail. There are voters out there who are terribly concerned about the political choices being offered to them. The Nader/Camejo ticket has been banished to oblivion, while "undecided" Americas anxiously consider who is the strongest candidate that will protect us in all aspects, in the years ahead.

As I indicated before in a comment on Bravo’s site: “The recent Spanish elections demonstrated what one simple act of terror can do to a population, who -remembering the deadly grip of fascism under Franco- willingly supported the US in Iraq,� only to be “terrified� into turning it’s back on the lessons of it’s own history.

If an attack were to occur on US soil (or against our soldiers in Iraq) prior to the election, I believe it will be those who are yet undecided that will vote based on their fears, thereby tilting the direction to the left, where the largest numbers of “infrequent� voters� reside. What I am even more concerned about, is that our beloved country’s political fragmentation will deepen, creating a polarization, such as the kind New Yorkers have found themselves in since 9/11. New Yorkers are bracing themselves for the Republic National Convention, with some concern over their safety and the future of this state.

If another attack should occur in NY, the ensuing chaos that will be experienced in our society, but especially within the political and economic spheres, will be one where our national freedoms will be so altered as to move us back towards a “Jacksonian� isolationism, that will also fragment further the world's social divides.

In the end, my hope is that Al Qaeda’s goal of economic and political chaos and our ultimate destruction, in order to stop the spread of globalization, will not succeed. Ultimately, it will be the cohesiveness of our social fabric and our moral conviction as a nation, that will determine the depth and duration of that chaos. I pray that if anything does happen, we as a nation will have the spiritual fortitude to become tireless defenders of our country, both on our shores and on foreign battlefields. Without those strengths, our existence will be one of a daily survival in an ideological russian roullette that no one is destined to win.

UPDATE: For those of you who wrote me emails at my old site (before it was hijacked and my pc infected) as to why I thought Al Queda targetted the US in general and NY in particular, the subsequent links will answer your questions. Thank to Melissa for the reminder.

I was recently referred by BarcePundit to two important posts at NetWar. The first is an essay by Waller R. Newell on Postmodern Jihad. There you will find information as to how Al Queda's ideological philosophy, vis a vis Bin Laden, was formed. A subsequent post gives us portions of Al Qaeda's Manifest. It is there that NetWar's author, Juan A. Hervada, says we can see how "The manual goes well beyond the mere terrorist how-to, to give ethical guidance (with the support of fatwas when needed) and …for purposefully killing civilians".

These essays/posts should give you an ideological and philosophical understanding of how they view us and why we will forever be their enemy, tacitly or not.

French Revisionism in the Liberation of France

I was doing a bit of catch-up with my favorite European bloggers last night. Two which I read faithfully are: Barcepundit and NO PASARAN!.

This week, both have powerful stuff up on their site...

Douglas and Erik have posted some incredible stuff at No Pasaran! in the last few days which I recommend you read. One item Douglas posted particularly saddened me, because it seems the French leadership is engaging in some revisionism of their history as it pertains to France’s Liberation in WW2.

As the New York Times indicated this past week, ‘the love affair is over’ between us. Actually, the US and France has been slowly growing apart since before Chirac came to power. I always thought him an opportunist and he continues to show his colors to this day!

Anyway, this evening I was watching France2, the french evening news broadcast in North America, and what were they discussing, the celebration of the liberation of France 60 years ago. Except, in their version there were no mention of allies. The French underground and a rag tag of troops did it all by themselves. What?!! Even though Douglas wrote about it at length I still could not believe it until I heard it with my own eyes. NOW I'M ANGRY!

For once I'm with Rumsfeld, I will from now on no longer think of Europe in terms of France and Germany. I will from now on think of the NEW Europe which includes Poland and the Czech Republic.

BTW, you will learn more by reading the comments to that and the previous post.

As for Franco Aleman of BarcePundit, well for those intimidated by Castellano, you can visit his BarcePundit English site. He has a wonderful writing style and is currently doing guest blogging at The Command Post. His site is a must read as well. Although both sites have mostly similar stuff, there are unique articles to each that make checking both sites worthwhile.

Now I'm off to de-stress, give my hands a break and watch some olympian feats!

Is Kerry stupid or wise?

It seems that Kerry is all the there is to talk about these days. I'm rather suprised at the simplistic and sweeping generalizations I've been reading from both sides. While a rare few bloggers (Anticipatory Retaliation) examines the possible viability of a Kerry Presidency, many, many more have posted about Kerry's intellectual and experiential assets, or lack thererof, as a candidate. To some he's an insightful and intelligent choice. To others, like Mark Steyn he is downright stupid. (via BarcePundit).

I'm not of the thinking that Kerry is either. With credentials like his (several degrees, including one from Harvard Law School), he could be called slimy, a liar or even an opportunist, but never inept or stupid. Let me explain why.

Having worked in Washington as a lobbyist, and with both parties in NY State’s legislature and in congress, I think I know and understand the Democratic National Committee's (DNC) process and thinking in their selection of Presidential Candidates. It is the same thinking that enabled them to consider Clinton despite the accusations against him for sexual misconduct during his tenure as Governor of Arkansas. He successfully navigated the waters of criticism and outrage during his Presidential campaigns of 1992 and 1996.

How did the leaders of the DNC approve Kerry as a Democratic candidate? Simple, first they looked at the sentiments of their constituency (DNC voter base) and what their key issues were for the mid-term congressional elections Then they either approach or are approached by those who fit that mold. Kerry fits the later category.

Second, they looked at Kerry’s qualifications (the committees he serves on, voting record, background, personal and professional organizations he belongs to, financial status, public statements, personal lives of he and Teresa, to see if it matches with their voters base demographics and issues.

After this, the DNC looks at his electability, presence, likeability and trustworthiness. I'm not even remotely kidding about this. The DNC even does focus groups just on that aspect alone. It is well known in Washington DC that Kerry paid for his own focus groups to test his electability strength, 14 months before he threw his name in the ring.

Once all this analysis is completed, the DNC gathers this information together and meets with DNC leadership to carefully review the results, in order to asses the candidate's worthiness or viability of getting him into the White House. In Kerry's case, it was a real plus that he had such a powerful and affluent wife that could financially out spend Bush.

To those who think it was stupid for a former Vietnam veteran turned anti-war, political activist to suddenly use his military record as the cornerstone of their campaign, I say 'think again'. The members of the DNC and Kerry/Edwards campaign are NOT stupid. Misguided perhaps. A self-seeking opportunist definitely! But Kerry, stupid? No way, far from it!

I believe the DNC's thinking is that Kerry can do better than Clinton did (with his sexual harassment accusers) and go further. Well, Kerry will soon enough as he's hired one of the best media spinners there is in this country. This spin guru will make sure Kerry's Vietnam record will not turn into a liability but rather a positive issue.

In Clinton’s case, the spin guru portrayed him as a man's man that just couldn't help himself because he was married to an unattractive wife. Poor Mr. Clinton worked very long hours next to a beautiful office staffer (Jennifer Flowers), who was infatuated with him. In fact, many men thought it was understandable as a one time thing; besides, it was her fault as she threw herself at him. How could he say no? So, instead of his philandering becoming an issue, it was eventually spun into a private matter between a husband and wife, and NOT a big deal. We were told by pundits and the Dem leadership, lets consider everything he has to offer and the alternatives. Is it worth throwing out such an excellent candidate for some momentary indiscretion or the imaginary accusations of an infatuated employee?

No, instead we were told to focus on the alternative, a Bush reelection. A 2nd term by a man who broke his promises, ran up a deficit, raised taxes and mired us in double digit inflation as a result of the Gulf War. A war that was fought without consultation and assistance from our allies or tacit approval from Arab leaders.

Does all this seem familiar to you? Well if it does, you get a gold star and get to sit up front with the teacher. It's familiar because it's the same "campaign playbook" that was used by the Dems against W's father. They just dusted off the binder and put in new names and with updated stats.

Kerry will soon turn the plummeting polls around by ingratiating himself in the hearts and minds of all those undecided voters; all thanks to his new spin guru. This guru will come up with plenty of plausible explanations to occupy everyone's minds once the Republican convention hype dies down. That is, his guru will work on these spins if Al Qaeda doesn't beat him to the punch.

An additional factor Kerry is counting on is the public getting more bad coverage/news from Iraq. Just as the backlash voters in Spain decided who to vote for based on the tragic attack a few days before their election, so will the undecided voters in the US consider the prevailing situation and news in the last days before our election. The DNC is all too familiar with this phenomenon and is banking on Kerry winning based on the data from polls and surveys.

As for the subsequent question: How will Kerry convince undecided voters that he is the guy he's portrayed to be? That's simple, make your opponent look worse than you, stupider, more evil, and someone who'll bring about the world's destruction, and afterwards you'll look pretty good to just about anyone. How will they manage to accomplish this, ahhh, easy. They have something up their sleeve! Yes, I’m just waiting for the other shoe to drop to learn what it is.

Which begs the question: Why haven’t they come out and used any ammunition (which I suspect they have) on countering the Swift Boat Vets or George's negative comments? One word answer - TIMING!

To reveal anything now, would mean that it would be immediately overshadowed by the events at the Republican National Convention. We must also remember there’s that little detail about the Bush candidacy, he is not the official Republican Presidential candidate as of yet. Which means that if stuff were to hit the fan before or during the convention, John McCain, the current darling of the Republican party and of Independent/Undecided voters everywhere, McCain could easily step in and get the nomination. Sorry, Cheney’s out of the running immediately after GW's candidacy is thwarted, but that’s a post for another occasion.

So, in view of all this, I would like to predict here and now, that approximately 10-14 days after the convention, the Kerry camp will drop the bomb other shoe on Bush, thereby giving bloggers everywhere, like Glenn Reynolds, lots to write about until the election.

Question of the Week?

Can someone please explain to me why Michael Moore is sitting in the press area at the RNC?

I'm baffled as to why such a false documentarist is sitting amongst credentialled members of the press.

RNC Arrests at 1,596

Yesterday, the stats of convention related madness went through the roof. Yesterday alone: close to 1,000 arrests were made, 16 police officers were hospitalized or treated for injuries, 23 civilians were attacked by protestors (some of them RNC delegates) and were treated at nearby hospitals. There’s more, but at this point I’m just sick of reporting it and I’ll let you read it and see pictures from the NY Daily News, NY Newsday (see photos), and NY Times. Please keep in mind that these papers are very liberal and are minimizing the true effects of what’s going on.

In the late afternoon, as I went around the corner for a latte, I accidentally got caught in the middle of a protest where activists surrounded an RNC delegation bus. I stood there speechless watching for a brief few seconds as they banged, threw things and rocked the bus from side to side. Fed up and angry as hell at their terror tactics I wanted to run up to the bus, peel each one off and give them a good whooping. Instead, I ran back into my building headed straight for our security command center in the lobby, and informed our Security Director of what was going on.

Police arrived within 2 minutes of my informing him. After an intense, but well coordinated, effort, police arrested those they could and gave the delegation an escort into their hotel. By the time the police arrived, every available member of our security team (over 20) was in the lobby and ready to detain anyone coming in who was not an employee. The plan, according to our security staff, to help the police by making citizens arrest for trespassing. I looked across the street, the same was the case for other buildings, their security personnel was outside guarding their perimeter. My lasting impression of this incident, this is the kind of thing I would expect in the middle east, not in Manhattan. More about these tactics and domestic terrorism in my next post.

As if life were not stressful enough, our President will be within a half mile of my apartment building tonight. He's scheduled to pay a surprise visit to a local firehouse while he's in the area. Our local firehouse (which is 250 ft away from my bedroom) lost 2 firefighters on 9/11, one of them was my best friend, Larry. This firehouse is the closest one to the function he's attending and it's an easy place to secure, so it would make a logical choice to visit. But with all due respect, I've had enough security checks for this year and I really need a break.

It's been so stressful, the first thing I did this morning was schedule next week as vacation week for me. I’m headed for the hills or the beach and hopefully not coming back (well, at least not till my vacation is over).

To my dear fellow bloggers in Florida, Tammi and Boudicca, I will be praying you stay dry and safe!

Kerry & the DNC Rapid Response Team

This is a response to a post from distinguished journalist, Juan Hervada, which can be found at NetWar04. His commentary is a must read, if you want to understand how Europeans and the various groups within Islam view us. He writes in various languages including English, however, a simple translation at Babel Fish will help you understand everything he writes.

Hi JH,

These are a number of the reasons why Bush was pulling ahead in the polls prior to the convention, and Kerry was floundering.

It can mostly be attributed to the Swift Boat Vets advertising. They were just too powerful and damning of an indictment on the "strong Commander in Chief" image Kerry presented during his speech at the convention. Too many veterans are still angry over being called monsters, baby killers, murderers all thanks to John Kerry and his accusations. They also remember his flamboyant press conference in which he threw all of his medals in the harbor. Of course later, Kerry admitted he threw out all but the most valuable 2 medals on that day.

There just too many of his former Swift Boat crewmembers (19) who contradicted Kerry's story and that of his 3 supporters. There's also the question whether or not he really won 2 of his purple hearts. Among Kerry's critics is his former Swift Boat Commander who said he never saw nor signed the purple heart citation. Pentagon documents show it's a rubber stamp (a lot of humor could be used here).

When Kerry never responded to the ads directly, actually he still hasn't, the ads started to take on a life of their own. He just let them be out there... and they were out there, nationwide for over a week. Even more momentum was built up when they began to give talk show interviews in groups of 3 or 4.

Most importantly, Kerry's campaign was being hurt by a lack of a strong cohesive strategy. What's influencing their strategy? Two things, first, he chose to fill his team with tier 2 people instead of top experienced campaign strategists. Second, the Heinz Diva who holds the purse strings. She was basically telling campaign staffers to zig when they should have zagged and the good minions that they were, they obeyed.

According to press reports Monday, Kerry took time off from the campaign (3rd time he's done so since April) "to regroup and re-strategize". In the middle of that he fired his top key advisors and strategist and replaced them with many of Clinton's former team. This shows tremendous weakness in contrast to Bush. When Bush vacation’s at his ranch in Texas we still see him holding meetings and giving press conferences and meeting with dignitaries. When Kerry takes time off, he’s skiing, windsurfing or on the beach. Don’t even get me started with poor Edwards.

As for the strong Republican showing in the polls this week, you must credit the "DNC Rapid Response Team" at the convention for that. They really looked weak and ineffective. Key mistakes made: an example is how quickly they responded to a few items in Miller's message and not the overall tone. It was the same thing that happened last night when Kerry came out at midnight for a special rally to respond to the president's speech. What was his strongest comeback? His Vietnam service, the very service which is being called into question in spite of McCain and Bush, saying that’s not a nice thing for these veterans to do.

Behind the Dems rapid response strategy was the thinking that they would be taking momentum away from powerful speakers with a rapid response, but instead they looked like a kid in the playground kicking dirt on a pitcher that has thrown you out of the game (sorry, I couldn't come up with a soccer analogy). Here the difference is discernable. When post convention Kerry was doing just slightly better after the convention, Bush simply waited for his turn at bat, and let those players preceding him hit the balls out of the park. Bush came in simply to end the game.

For Kerry, the midnight rally was one that had an air of desperation. The setting, the visuals, the message, and it's timing were totally mismatched and extremely ineffective. He looked like a pale ghostly beggar, who was not allowed to have a seat, let alone to share from the feast at the banquet.

He should have learned from the republicans who virtually did their own thing, during the democratic convention while the republicans campaigned in swing states without responding directly to the Dems speeches.

Finally, there is also the Teresa Heinz Diva factor. She is being captured by the media at her absolute worst moments. Disheveled, slurring her speech (after a long liquid lunch), and being condescending, obnoxious and overbearing towards members of the press. That's a bad move, to behave that way towards journalists who wield so much power. This is in stark contrast to the sweet, demure, well-coifed and perfectly poised Mrs. Bush.

I’d say, things won’t be looking to bright for Mr. Kerry anytime soon, unless, that is, we suffer another terrorist attack on American soil.

As always, you are doing some amazing posting! Thanks.

Michele

Nazis and Islamists - An Unholy Alliance

I was one of those children that always loved to stay up and listen to adults discuss the news of the day. Since we didn't have a tv set (my parents were against owning one) my sole entertainment were the political discussions my parents, grandparents and our elderly Jewish neighbors had from time to time.

It was from them that I learned about the Geopolitical factors that led to WWII. But of all the historical stories they told me, there was one that I just couldn't believe. Who could believe that Muslims would join hands with Nazi's in an unholy alliance to eradicate Jews from the world?

Well, that story was so fantastic, even to such a young kid like myself, that I chalked it off as simply an exaggeration of the very elderly, or that our neighbors, because of their advanced age, remembered things wrong.

That was what I believed until today. Then, I stopped over at NetWar and to my astonishment, I came across a post on this topic. NetWar’s author, J. A. Herveda, not only gives a background on this alliance, he also provides some historical data along with a few pictures.

I was not only stunned, I had goose bumps from realizing two things: (a) that the single thing my neighbor talked about most often was true, and (b) Muslims have additional reasons to want us dead, hence the inflammatory coverage on Al-Jezeera and the silent and behind the scenes complicity of other Arab nations in supporting the insurgents in Iraq.

For the first time I see to what length they will go to, to eliminate Jews from the face of the earth. They will make friends with their enemies enemy, albeit temporarily, just so they can achieve their ends. As Israel's ally, we are just as hated. Now I realize, that the WTC Towers were Bin Laden's portable crematorium.

Now I understand the context in which Bush said “this is a war we can’t win.� I’m relieved that at least they’re going to try.

Please read this amazing post, which serves as excellent lesson in history.

UPDATE: I've received 5 emails questioning the veracity of this information. Please know that I never post anything unless I fact check it first through reliable sources(unlike CBS), and it can be easily and publicly confirmed by a regular reader.

There are a multitude of books on this subject in English, French, German and Spanish. There's also a number of sites which the author of NetWar used. Please note, if you use the following key phrases at Amazon.com or google you will get links to books, quotes and sites with information that confirm's NetWar's post.

a) "Waffen SS Handschar Division"
b) "Turkestani Legion"
c) "Caucasian Mohammedan Legion"

I'm glad you emailed to question this post, because it tells me that you're not accepting anything you read as gospel truth!

UPDATE: Comments closed due to abusive language being posted.

A New York Ad

Yesterday, after I wrote the Little Nut Brown/Ronnie post and received wonderful emails of support, I decided do my daily internet walkabout. I went to visit one of my favorite sites by a gifted Spanish writer I respect very much. Barcepundit has had several Insta-lanches in the past year due to his incredibly insightful breaking news, and I always start my day there or at NetWar04.

As his page loaded I saw an all too familiar image in an ad I was unfamiliar with. The image seemed inocuous at first, then I read the ad text and BAM! I got the full impact of the ad campaign by the trigger of one word - "ENJOY"! The online ad is designed to increase subscriptions to this Spanish news website which is the equivalent to the NY Times.

It is without question the most offensive, opportunistic, sadistic and immoral ad I have ever seen. I waited more than 24hrs before posting, to see if there would be a detraction or an apology to New Yorkers or US citizens, but none has been forthcoming.

The caption on the photo is MEANT to be deceptively ambiguous and you'll see why later. There are several translations that are possible because the "object" of the phrase is missing.

Here are 3 translations:

Literal: A lot can [give/hit/be done/happen] in one day. [Spanish verb: Dar]

Ver 1. "You can do a lot in one single day; just imagine what can happen in three months" - Franco Aleman of Barcepundit (Spanish blogger who broke the story)
Ver 2. "A lot can happen in one day, imagine what can happen in three months" - Commenter on TimBlair.com
Ver 3. "A lot can be done in one day, Imagine what can occur in 3 months" - translation mine. This is the translation I'm going with having lived there and being of Spanish ancestry.

The ad continues:

"Now, if you subscribe to elpais.es before Oct 8th, we will give you 3 months free.

"In elpais.es you will find up to the minute updates, information analysis from all perspectives, the latest news, more than one million articles published since 1976..." the ad ends with

"Subscribe now and ENJOY 3 months of news free"

What's implied with the photos is that if you subscribe to this online journal (the equivalent of the NY Times in Spain), you will enjoy news of this kind (see smoldering photo) with your free subscription. In my view, the only people that enjoyed 9/11 was Al Qaeda and its sympathizers.

There are many Spaniards who are equally angry at this Socialist rag for this campaign. If you also go to Roger Simon, Little Green Footballs or Tim Blair's site, you'll see/read and eyeful from them and others.

I Forgive You

Spain's El Pais (its national newspaper equivalent to the NY Times) apologizes to New Yorkers and to US citizens for their use of 9/11 images in their online ad campaign. Below is my translation to their editorial apology.:

"El PAIS asks forgiveness for the use of images of the attack against the Twin Towers of New York, which happened the 11 of September of 2001, in a campaign to increase circulation of online subscribers to ELPAIS.es. This lamentable campaign, made through electronic mail, gleaned two photographs of New York, one with the Twin Towers and another one of its smoldering remains, with the subtitle "A lot happens in one day. Imagíne what can happen in three months ". The promotion began Monday, 13 of September, and was sent to more than 50,000 adressees before it was cancelled on Wednesday, 15th of September."

"El PAIS, its publishing company and the Group PRISA are deeply sorry that a tragedy like this has been used to support an advertising effort, that in this case cost the life of more than 2,700 people. We ask forgiveness for that reason to the victims and their relatives, the citizens of New York who lived the aggression more directly, to whomever saw or was invaded by this electronic mail campaign's ominous message, and to the readers of our newspaper.

Any explanation is insufficient to account for the chain of errors that took place in the launching of this campaign, that some of our readers have described with justice as repugnant. We share their sentiment, which they have expressed in numerous messages and letters to the director and lament what happened.

The [owners] PRISA Group have opened an internal investigation to clarify how it was decided to put in circulation this promotional campaign and to adopt the suitable measures to prevent this from happening again. We have immediately requested from the company in charge of the electronic marketing campaign that this letter of apology be sent to all those who received the initial distribution of the campaign.

El Pais wants to express once again, like it has done in its 28 years of publishing and almost 10,000 editions, its solidarity with the victims of terrorism. As it said in the article published in El PAIS on the 12 of September of 2001, we declare today in all terms, those attacks affected all citizens of good will, without distinction of continent or borders and constituted an attack "against those who share democratic principles ".

The attempt of Barbarians who soon have followed with attacks elsewhere in the world, among them Madrid, have confirmed the necessity of a firm stand and attitude for democracy and against terrorism, of which must be excluded all irresponsible use of these types of images for gain."

Debate 1 Observations & Humor

This was the most painful debate to watch in my entire lifetime of watching debates.

The debate and rhetorical skills were unevenly matched as were the visuals. Those I give to Kerry hands down. However, the winner of providing the most factual information was Bush, although he missed a few opportunities to really do damage. I chalk that up to him trying to be a gentleman.

I hated the debate because it was too rigid. It forced the candidates to be too artificial or contrived.

The President's facial expressions kept reminding me of Mad Magazine's popular character, Alfred E. Newman [wait for all the pictures to load].

The Lady WANTS YOU!

Yes, Lady Liberty wants you to register to vote or update your registration, if you haven't done so already. The deadline in some last few states is this week. For New York, it's October 6th.

If you haven't registered then you can still do so from the comfort of you're own home [and in your jammies if you prefer]. Just stop by the League of Women Voter's website. Simply follow the instructions and make sure you print and mail it by your state's deadline.

The representatives from the democratic party were all over New York City this past weekend. There were so many Kerry buttons around I was afraid I had stumbled onto a Kerry Convention. Almost hourly I was asked by someone if I wanted to register to vote. All were wearing Kerry propaganda items, I felt like a fish out of water, struggling for air. You should hear the fear they were putting in people's head's with their horrific statements. "If Bush gets into office again we'll have the beginning of WW3." I wanted to vomit when I heard that one!

BTW, how come no one is writing or speculating about the stolen laptops from Bush's campaign headquarters? Nothing else was stolen. Hmmmm, is this the start of Laptop Gate or Affair?

Election results

No, I've not lost my marbles. I simply want to jump for joy over the Australian elections, which is a very important event. John Howard has won his 4th Consecutive election, and picked up 85 seats for the Coalition, to retain his position as Prime Minister of Australia.

Pixy of Ambient Irony, gave a detailed description or breakdown of how things stand per region. These elections were important because John Howard, is a strong supporter and an important member of the Coalition of the Willing in the Iraqi war. For some thoughts on what this means to Americans, visit Nicole at Potomac Ponderings.

Now, only one election remains for this year, ours. Let me say that from walking around NYC this weekend things do not look well for Bush in NY. Yes, despite having a Republican mayor and governor, the Democratic machine and celebrities have been out in full force these past 2 weeks.

I just learned that although Bruce Springsteen is encouraging people to vote during local concerts, he is also saying that "if you mislead the public you deserve to lose your job", to which the crowd responds with a roaring cheer and applause.

I feel that John Kerry has helped people forget the lengthy process we suffered at the hands of the members of the United Nations. It was very painful to watch.

So as I wait for the election results from Afghanistan, which will probably take weeks to learn, I wonder if Al Queda will make good on it's promise to attack us during Ramadan which begins October 16th. Ramadan has long been a time of Jihad for radical muslims. It is also the time when various branches of Al Queda flex their muscles in Indonesia, the Philippines, Israel, and Iraq.

All I can do is pray that God protect our beloved country and our citizens throughout the world.

Provisional Ballots - the hanging chads of 2004

UPDATED 10-12-04 at 10:12pm: I have provided 8 new source links on this post to show the seriousness of the situation. In visiting a reader's site, The Cassandra Page, I also came across this link to a Powerline post that talks about a reently uncovered voter fraud scheme in Wisonsin, relating to provisional ballots.

As if the 2000 elections were not bizarre enough, and the current political condition not tense or divisive enough, along come provisional ballots. What’s that you ask, “what are provisional ballots?� Well they are nothing more and nothing less than paper “ballots [made available to] voters if they cannot be found on registration lists, are in the wrong polling place or don't have proper identification but insist they are eligible to vote. Those people will be given "provisional" ballots that will be kept separate from others until their eligibility can be confirmed.�

Now lets see, if they’re at the wrong polling place, doesn't that mean that someone will check with the correct polling place that they didn’t already vote there before counting it here? Funny, I made sure I was able to vote and check my polling place online. I also checked what documentation I will need to present in order to vote. Of course the democratic party here has also sent me voting information on my polling place. That was nice of them, don’t you think?

There are already legal challenges in “5 of the most hotly contested states in the presidential race: Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Missouri and Colorado�. It seems that the Democratic Party’s intent via their 2002 Help America Vote Act legislation, was to ensure that people were able to vote. It was this skillfully crafted piece of legislation that allowed for these provisional ballots. Here’s some facts I’m sure will find interesting:

“27 states require that votes be cast in the precinct where the voter lives…
17 states allow votes to be cast in the proper municipality, county or, in some cases, anywhere in the state.
6 states either offer Election Day registration or don't require registration… (source: USA Today)

Hey, I should check to see if I can vote several times, after all, I do have official ID in: my maiden name and my formal name which is actually 4 names: first, middle, last name hyphenated with my ex-husband’s last name (I’m in the middle of my divorce). I also have my international driver’s license which only has my middle name and my maiden name.

But wait, my work ID only has my middle name and my married name on it, and I can use my library card which has my first and last names mis-spelled. Of course, I must thank the Democratic party for all these opportunities to vote. It kind of makes up for the few times that I lived in such remote areas that I wasn’t able to get absentee ballots in time to vote. Well, here’s my opportunity to correct that by voting several times. Won’t you join me in casting legitimate votes too?

Bush wins today's Hip-Hop Debate

Bush and Kerry endured a fierce battle today, Hip-Hop style. To see a replay of the action and the debate results view this mini-clip. Once you've seen all their moves, you too can VOTE for your favorite candidate and make it a decisive victory!

On Health Concerns

The Commissioner for the NYC Health Dept said yesterday that the Federal Government was to blame for this flu vaccine disaster. He said more, but I wasn’t willing to listen beyond this point as this alone made me angry. No blame was placed on Chiron or the decision of US drug companies to get out of the vaccine market years ago due to the federal constraints and interference.

Never mind that British officials were warning for almost a year now, that they might have to shut down Chiron, the 2nd largest flu vaccine maker in the world, for health and manufacturing violations. I get angry with this commissioner for laying blame elsewhere, when in this crisis could have been managed more effectively and with a more positive spin.

Instead of blaming George Bush, why not take responsibility for your failure to plan and find other alternatives, like educating the public to the flu mist option and urging people to observe safe health practices before and when they do get sick. Instead, they are creating panic and fear, which has caused dangerous situations in NY, Georgia and Florida. Of course, the media is doing a great job at helping to create panic and fear instead of disemminating good information. So I raise my coffee mug in salute to the harbingers of doom.

To get a different perspective on drug companies visit Laughing Wolf and read his post "On Merck, Drugs, and Medicine.

On Things Electoral

With the DNC and Pres. Jimmy Carter, demanding that foreign observers be dispatched to our polls on election day, citing the 1965 Voting Rights Act; and with the Justice Dept. sending over 1000 election monitors nationwide, I expect November 3rd to be a contentious day in America, thanks to the unresolved issues over provisional ballots and computerized voting. I took a look at provisional voting earlier in the week, here are some news articles that discuss the issues surrounding these machines: FoxNews, Christian Science Monitor,

What do you envision on Nov. 3rd?

T-Minus 3 and Counting

I don’t know about you, but I find it ironic that P. Diddy’s latest voting campaign ad, “Vote or Die� was taken to new heights by Osama bin Laden yesterday. Not only is he taunting us to vote in his latest video, he threatens us with more acts of terror if we vote Bush back in office.

Hmmm, now let me get this straight, Osama – a well known terrorist, who yesterday admitted to being the mastermind and financier of the 9/11 attack which killed over 3,000, is threatening me with violence if I vote for Bush? Of course later he says that we will not be safe as a nation if we interfere with any Islamist nation, no matter who is president.

As any new yorker would say: “What is he… stupid!?� Does he think that I’m actually going to listen to what he has to say to me? Does he really think that I can threatened into changing my vote?

I just realized that’s the 3rd Islamist endorsement Kerry has received in the last 7 days. It seems that Kerry's sister Beth, was busier than I originally thought in getting ex-patriots and others oversease to campaign or vote for Kerry.

Truthfully though, I expected an attack all week long. When it didn't come yesterday morning I wondered what was the sick old man up to? Well, like clockwork, he showed up on tv. First it was Zarqawi over a week ago, now the Boss himself. Let me explain.

Having followed Al-Qaeda since the So. Tower was bombed in 1993, I know that the 7th and 15th day of Ramadan has always produced tapes and or attacks against the West in one form or another. That’s why the tape earlier this week, with the American-English speaking Pakistani, didn’t surprise me, it actually reminded me bin Laden's tape were overdue.

You see during Ramadan, Muslims around the world enter a month long fast. Have any of you fasted? well, the first 3 days is really not a big deal, it's after that point that your body and mind begins to betray you. At around the 7th day, if you are not a positive thinking and prayerful person, your negative thoughts come in to wreak havoc, making you ill-tempered unable to think clearly and your sense of the world around you shifts.

I've often thought that Al-Qaeda focuses on bringing messages to muslims during Ramadan to increase recruitment by capitalizing on the physiological vulnerabilty of pilgrims during this period. The only analogy I can use is pretending that Mel Gibson is a military leader and uses his movie "The Passion of the Christ" to unite christians around the world, while at the same time to subliminally fostering enough anti-semitism to cause rationally thinking people to harbor hate for Jews.

But getting back to the series of tapes released in the last 2 weeks. Since the Zarqawi tape hardly garnered any publicity, and the subsequent english speaking tape, by the robed Pakastani threatening violence, didn’t get much airplay, the Islamists brought out their heaviest gun - Osama. In his taped message, he once again issues threats; most of which I consider overkill.

Threats or not, Osama does not strike any fear in my heart. If anything, I am more determined than ever to vote and in doing so, actively fight against his political and cult beliefs of hate. I take no interest in what he has to say, I leave that to the intelligence experts and the authorities.

Finally, "I don’t know if Michael Moore fans pause when they hear their own propaganda repeated approvingly by a genocidal maniac," what I do know is that on Nov 2nd, come what may, I’m going to use the power of the ballot as My rude gesture toward bin Laden and his cowardly cohorts.

For some really good observations, read:
- The Jawa Report on why "bin Laden is pro-Bush"

-Right on Red with his post on "Michael bin Moore"

GOP Mandate!!!

The people have spoken and so will Kerry today, conceding at 1PM.

I am so glad that American citizens taught lawyers, judges, the media and all other vote challenger or nosey bodies a lesson: that local areas can handle voting and tallying if given good reliable equipment and enough personnel to handle the influx. Instead of looking for problems, they need to make sure there's enough staff to make it easy for citizens to vote!!!!

Looking beyond the presidential race, I see that we picked up 5 seats in the House and 4 seats in the Senate. Three senate seats we picked up were: Tom Daschle’s, John Edwards and Zel Miller’s!

Zel Miller, now if there was anyone who told the democrats the plain old truth, in honest to goodness southern speak, it was Zel. To bad the dems wrote him off so quickly! They could have learned a great deal from him.

Things we can look forward to:

• Full control of Congress, having a large majority in Senate and House
  
• At least 2 sane conservative Justices in the Supreme Court,
  
• Will tip the balace on conservative judges across the country
  
• Europeans shutting their mouths for the next 4 years,
  
• The Dems finally being forced to shut up and work towards unity and understanding across the land, or be forced out of office as Daschle was.

All of this for the price of a vote… That IS Priceless!

Update: Wizbang listed a few more items supporting the GOP mandate which I felt needed to be posted here:

• Bush is the first President to be re-elected while gaining seats in the House and Senate since 1936 and the first Republican President since 1924 to be re-elected while re-electing Republican House and Senate majorities.

• The first President to win a majority of the popular vote since 1988.

• He received 57.4 million votes - more than any other candidate in history. He broke President Reagan's 1984 mark of 54.5 million. (96% reporting)

• He increased the popular vote by seven million votes since 2000 - more than twice Clinton's increase from 1992 to 1996.

• He improved his percentage in every state except four (MD, OR, VT and WY). This includes a four percent increase in John Kerry's home state, Massachusetts.

  I would simply add this.
  

• When he was thrown the hot potato issue of Gay Marriage, he didn't balk. Instead, he stood toe to toe against liberals unapolegetically, and rallied his base and brought to his side those on the left who felt our nation's moral values were at stake.

All I have to say now is "Let freedom ring." And let it start in Philadelphia!

A Powerful Political Tool

Bloggers are a force to be contended with, and we are here to stay!

I have to admit, bloggers like Wonkette and her leftists ilk, did a great disservice to the credibility of bloggers everywhere on election night. They created a damaging situation by releasing unverified, speculative poll numbers prematurely on the web. In doing so they spun things out of control.

Had the margin of victory been narrower, the would have created a situation that would have been worse than Florida in 2000. In the eagerness to scope the media, they hurt Kerry campaigners and volunteers, by leading them to believe a false victory.

I found, that honest, self-respecting bloggers on the right, did not engage in spin. Instead, they stated the facts as facts, and their hopes as personal opinions and were up front about it all.

In this past year, five things made it clear for me that the internet, as a political tool and medium, was here to stay:

1. Howard's Dean's online fundraising efforts made it clear that the internet is not only a viable information tool, but also a grassroots campaign fundraising tool. Dean's fundraising began explosively and increased exponentially the moment after he went online.

2. Kerry's "Plans" were laid out in detail on his website, which garnered many hits from people on both sides of the aisle. People on the opposite side of the aisle (like me) used it as ammunition to deconstruct his policies and show the plain truth behind them.

3. The DNC was able to use the internet to:

• raise over 5 Million dollars in campaign funds,
  
• mobilize people/protestors during the RNC, and
  
• get out their message and "rapidly respond" or spin statements made by Republicans during their convention.

4. The Swift Vote Vets were able to get their message out, even when the Main Stream Media was supressing it. This caused Kerry's post convention bounce to slow to a dribble.

5. Two words: CBS' Memogate.

I firmly believe that Bush's re-election was directly obtained by those who worked tireless to spread his message, who questioned and relentlessly dogged the opposition and the media medium by holding them accountable for their half-truths.

In the end, the internet has grown up and now has the role as the seeker and vanguard of truth.

Sweet Retribution

Remember how the UK newspaper, the Guardian, who gave out addresses to British citizens so they could write to Ohio residents in order to influence our presidential vote last September? Well, it turns out that my old comrade at The Politburo Diktat is issuing a similar challenge, in order for us to do the same.

In the Commisar's post, 'My fellow non-Britons ...' he gives us important details and links to a similar project in which we try to influence the voters of Monmouth, Wales (a swing region) to vote for who goes to live at 10 Downing St.

If you're up for the challenge, and are not intimidated by the Queen's English, then I suggest you write to a Briton and return the favor. Tom, the person I wrote to in Ohio, not only wrote back to thank me, he also informed me that he was of like mind. It was really cool!

To find out more details or to get involved visit our dear Comrade in arms at the link above. Thanks!

Biased BBC & UN

I read a post by Ed Thomas yesterday, titled "BBC and the UN's problem with morality", in which he outlines the continual bias of these organizations against the US and UK governments. He uses the example of the UN’s recent renewal of Zimbabwe's seat, as a member of the UN’s human rights commission. He argues that these 2 organizations often overlook issues/abuses by African governments, in order to maintain their criticism against US/UK and their foreign policie. The reason for his criticism is summarized below.

This just sums up the wrong headedness of the Beeb (BBC) and the UN, who often these days seem partners in crime. The cause of suffering, ie. the tolerance of foul and callous leadership in Africa, is demoted to a footnote, while the sticking plaster of what amounts to compassionate… is foregrounded- and thus we get warm and fuzzies about the UN and totally misled about [their] failures to confront the evils that plague Africa.

It's a criticism with which I concur, except that I would have used stronger language. I have many problems with Zimbabwe's renewal; mostly for what it means for both the UN and Annan, that they are once again escaping public scrutiny and hiding behind a diplomatic cloak. But I'm especially angry, for what it means, in terms of the tacit approval given, to Zimbabwe's government; that it's OK to tolerate corruption and fraud, so long as your taking some small miniscule step to feed and help your people while pointing the finger at others. It seems that the criticism labeled at us stems from the US/UK holding off or cutting aid and support until the UN cleans up it's act and honestly conducts a thorough investigation in the Oil for Food program scandal.

Military Banned

I’ve been mulling over _Jon’s post (of We Swear) on “College campus’ ban of military recruiters�. There were several reactions that came up for me as soon as I read it. The first and most immediate one was anger with the news story. Imagine what would have happened to women’s sports if the federal government had not threatened to cut off funds to schools receiving federal money, and not using at least 25% of it to go towards women’s athletics. Women's sports wouldn’t exist! As it is, Title IX has never achieved the parity with men's sports that it sought. However, women’s athletics have come a long way since the days of no women’s sports in schools.

Imagine if colleges had said to the federal government, we’ll take your money, but you know what you can do with your ideas of equality.

Well, his post was compelling enough to make me want to do research on this issue. Below are the basic facts that I culled from various sources including the Thomas Register, which is the Library of Congress’ archival repository for current and past legislation. That way I filter out the middlemen (Sorry _Jon, but just because a guy at the Washington Post says trust me on this, doesn’t me I do.) So in my research I culled some basic and very important relevant facts:

- The policy being used as a pretext to push the military off campus is the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy implemented by the military in 1993.

- The Solomon Amendment, requires all institutions, not just educational, who receive federal grants, to give limited access to military recruiters, so they can make unobtrusive presentations (in the form of pamphlets being left behind or visits by recruiters) to people who may be interested in a career in the military. This is done with the consent and approval of the school.

- The was passed under a number of laws in 1995 and extended to educational institutions in 1997. when interim rules were established.

- The final institutional rules were implemented in 1998.

Hmmm, I wonder who was President during this period?

I have several arguments to make on against the ban:

First, it was not until recently, with our government actively involved in a war, that this became an issue and recruiters and their pamphlets were banned from campuses across the country. Colleges still continued to use and accept federal grants and aid. in spite of violating the Solomon Amendment. During my tenure as undergraduate student government president from 1995 to 1997, this was an issue for some students (the anarchists and extreme left) and faculty. Administrators on my campus were indifferent because they relegated military recruiters to the same space credit card representatives were given at the edge of our campus.

Second, the overriding issue that I see is the denial of Free Speech. It’s OK for students, faculty and staff to openly object to the war, but let one ROTC or military recruiter come on campus with their recruiting table and pamphlets and all hell breaks loose.

So what I see in this fight, is more than just a simple college ban, it is college staff and administrators systematically limiting dialogue or free speech and denying students’ the exposure to a differing point of view.

In the extended entry you will find a letter a former mentee of mine (and an impending law school graduate) will be sending to the Washington Post and New York Times. His argument is different from mine. Weigh in if you wish, I’ve posted my 2 cents on this issue.

Dear Editor:

It is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore the dishonesty and hypocrisy surrounding the jihad against military recruiters on campuses led by [on campus] leftists. While some critics of military recruiting practices may be motivated solely by their concern for the welfare of LGBTQ [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer] students, it is not entirely unreasonable to regard the campaign against the DADT ["Don't Ask, Don't Tell"] policy as little more than a smokescreen for the Left's rabid hatred of the American military. Having failed to stop the Iraq war with their heated propaganda and Chomskyite conspiracy theories, leftist opponents of the military are now venting their frustration on military recruiters on campuses.

In their zeal to attack the military, opponents of DADT ignore the hypocrisy of their "principled" stand against discrimination. Law school administrators condemn military recruiters for promoting discrimination against LGBTQ students. However, these same law schools routinely engage in systematic racial discrimination, euphemistically termed "Affirmative Action," against Caucasian and Asian students [several cases still pending against a number of Law Schools]. Where is the condemnation of this blatant discrimination?

While leftist critics of military recruiters are correct to regard DADT as a seriously flawed policy, these critics have no right to condemn or banish military recruiters while promoting a far more widespread and damaging form of censorship and discrimination themselves. Taking a truly principled stand against unreasonable discrimination is laudable. Exploiting a flimsy pretext to wage a hypocritical crusade against the military, however, is not.

MJP

Hillary's Long Term Memory Loss

Last night I wrote another long post on the North Korean nuclear debate. In it I provided some background, history and listed a number of agreements and highlights facts that are relevant to today's situation. Why did I do this? Because pundits are very good at providing opinions and not sharing facts. I just care about the facts, I can formulate my own opinions thank you! Unfortunately, my computer began crashing, and I lost my post. Curses!

So I'll just summarize my most interesting observations and points and let you do your own research. For instance, I find it interesting that most people in our government, who have taken a position against this administration's policy on North Korea’s nuclear proliferation have never even visited South Korea, in order to get a glimpse into the mindset of North Koreans and it's presidenial dictator, Kim Jong II. Only then can they asses the real threat involved and assess the true character of Kim Jong.

I also find Hillary Clinton’s flawed memory absolutely unbelievable. It seems that in blaming the current administration’s policy, of seeking a multi-lateral compromise between North Korea and it’s neighbors, she overlooks what in fact brought us to this point.

Lest she forget I think I should reminder of several important facts:
First, it was agreements her husband made and pushed for, which forced the South Koreans to sell the nuclear reactor to North Korea in the first place. The South Korean government and it's people protested vociferously at the time and resented Bill's interference in their affairs. The US sent a delegation to threaten economic sanctions against a country whose major industries at the time (automobile parts and computer parts) were suffering heavily.

Second, within 2 years of the reactor being operatonal, North Korea began threatening to use it to create nuclear weapons. Weapons, South Korea beleived Kim Jong would build in spite of his pledge not to.

Three, it was subsequent agreements which Bill Clinton pushed for and brokered which essentially paid the North Koreans for not producing nuclear weapons, so they wouldn’t make good on their threat of bombing South Korea, Japan and China.

Four, these payments happened in spite of protests by the South Korean/Pan Asian governments warning, that paying off Kim Jong was tantamount to paying off a terrorist and letting them keep their weapons plant.

Well, even if Hillary has forgotten I haven't. I lived in Asia at the time and was angered by our payments to a political criminal and murderer! But then, in looking back over Clintonian history I see this is something he practiced repeatedly!

Filibustering, by any other name

Last night, as I was doing computer upgrades and trouble shooting, I was listening to the radio on that day's filibustering in the Senate. Well, to hear what was going on was a mind-numbing experience.

I've posted in the extended entry a one page transcribed excerpt I found on either Hewitt's site or Fox news (sorry lost the link & page), just in case anyone was interested in seeing our hard earned tax dollars at work. Here's a link to the MP3 excerpt (via radioblogger.com) of the portion I didn't transcribe because of the overwhelming urge to laugh and scream simultaneously. For the love of God, can anyone tell me what this man means by the Republicans "Hamanizing" the Senate?

I'm interested in what others are doing to stay informed, so please let me know what you think and if you've kept up with the filibustering. Sometimes the personal annecdotes drive me over the edge, because I think to myself: "this is the crap that's going into the senate record for the day!"

Read on McDuff's, you be the judge and see if the wheels of democracy have come to a screeching halt.

Cast of Characters:
RB - Senate Dean - Robert Byrd, D-W.Va.,
BF -Senate Majority Leader - Bill Frist,
Chair - Senate Chair - VP Cheney

BF: Will the Senator yield for a question?

RB: Well, let me finish.

RB: Here's my guide, the Constitution of the United States. What does it say? Does it say that each nominee shall have an up or down vote? Does it say that? I ask the Senator from Tennessee, I ask any Senator to respond to that question. Does this Constitution accord to each nominee an up or down vote on the Senate floor?

BF: Mr. President, I'd be happy to respond to the question directly.

RB: Let me ask unanimous consent that I may yield without losing my right to the floor.

Chair: Is there objection? Without objection, the Senator from Tennessee is recognized.

BF: The question, does the Constitution say that every nominee of the President deserves an up or down vote? And the answer is no, the language is not there. And up or down vote, that's the language we use to signify that when the President of the United States to the highest court in the land says, which is his or her responsibility, which is in the Constitution, they send it to this body for advice and consent. And it's common sense to me, in fairness to me, that when they come over to get advice and consent, we go through the Judiciary Committee. If they make it out of Judiciary Committee, the way we give advice and consent on this floor is a vote. That's what we're elected to do. That's what...and vote no. I don't mean you have to vote yes on them. But advice and consent to the American people who are listening now, when they elect us here, what is fair, what is our responsibility, what is our duty, is to vote. That's how we give voice. You can't cut these nominees in half. You can't reshape them. You can't amend them. You can't send them to conference. All of those things...that's why filibuster...I'm a tremendous advocate for the filibuster for legislative matters. But when you have a nominee that comes over, all you can do is shine the light. You examine them, you debate it, unlimited debate...and then to give advice and consent, which is in that Constitution, advice and consent, right there, how do you do it? Vote. Yes, no. Confirm, reject. We accept it. 100 people have spoken, and then we move on to the next nominee.

RB: Mr. President...

Chair: The Senator from West Virginia.

RB: This says, that he, the president, shall have power to nominate...

[He then went on to shift the conversation to the personal and eventually pulled out the bible and began reading from the book of Esther (specifically the story of Mordachai and Haman) to make his next point. In the middle of this reading Frist, who by now had had enough, walked out of the chamber, mad as hell and obviously not willing to take it anymore, while Byrd continued (click through for audio of the senator reading)]

RB: I ask the Leader that he please not “Hamanize� the Senate of the US! [and the filibustering continued]

Sorry, but as an english major who loves language, I reached my breaking point at the introduction of the word "hamanize" into the American lexicon. When I rolled my eyes at the radio I knew it was time to stop listening.

There's nothing much I can do/say to persuade Hillary of my viewpoint, as I understand she's already made up her mind. Besides, her staff is involved in a campaign finance scandal that involves huge amounts of money, so I know, she's busy covering her tracks elsewhere.

You have the info you be the judge!

A compromise?!!!

Here's a memo Bill Frist released yesterday afternoon (see extended entry), regarding what he, as Majority Leader, has proposed to the Senate in order to bring an end to the filibustering (see next entry for a small sample) which has been going on this week.

The proposal? That there be 100 hours of debate on each nominee, with each senator getting one hour of floor time. On Tuesday, 4 nominees are scheduled to be considered.

I believe that Senators, who after reading the JC's (Judiciary Committee's) comprehensive report (which includes nominees profiles and credentials) and the transcript of the interviews, they are still unable to make up their mind on nominees (who are currently sitting on the bench in Circuit Court) or are incapable of debating their credentials concisely on the floor, then these Senators don' t deserve to be on the hill!

Upon completion of action on the pending highway bill, the Senate will begin debate on fair up or down votes on judicial nominations. As is the regular order, the Leader will move to act on judge nominations sent to the full Senate by the Judiciary Committee in the past several weeks. Priscilla Owen, to serve as a judge for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, and Janice Rogers Brown, to serve as a judge for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, will be the nominees of focus.

The Majority Leader will continue to discuss an appropriate resolution of the need for fair up or down votes with the Minority Leader. If they can not find a way for the Senate to decide on fair up or down votes on judicial nominations, the Majority Leader will seek a ruling from the Presiding Officer regarding the appropriate length of time for debate on such nominees. After the ruling, he will ensure that every Senator has the opportunity to decide whether to restore the 214-year practice of fair up or down votes on judicial nominees; or, to enshrine a new veto by filibuster that both denies all Senators the opportunity to advise and consent and fundamentally disturbs the separation of powers between the branches.

There will be a full and vigorous Senate floor debate that is too important for parliamentary tactics to speed it up or slow it down until all members who wish have had their say. All members are encouraged to ensure that rhetoric in this debate follows the rules, and best traditions, of the Senate.

It is time for 100 Senators to decide the issue of fair up or down votes for judicial nominees after over two years of unprecedented obstructionism. The Minority has made public threats that much of the Senate’s work will be shut down. Such threats are unfortunate.

The Majority Leader has proposed his Fairness Rule: up to 100 hours of debate, and then an up or down vote on circuit and Supreme Court nominations. Further, the Fairness Rule would eliminate the opportunity for blockade of such nominees at the Judiciary Committee. And finally, it will make no changes to the legislative filibuster.

If Senators believe a nominee is qualified, they should have the opportunity to vote for her. If they believe she is unqualified, they should have the opportunity to vote against her.

Members must decide if their legacy to the Senate is to eliminate the filibuster’s barrier to the Constitutional responsibility of all Senators to advise and consent with fair, up or down votes.

Political Emancipation

Keith Thompson, San Francisco Chronicle - http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/05/22/INGUNCQHKJ1.DTL - 5-22-05

In the sixties, America correctly focused on bringing down walls that prevented equal access and due process. It was time to walk the Founders' talk -- and we did. With barriers to opportunity no longer written into law, today the body politic is crying for different remedies.

America must now focus on creating healthy, self-actualizing individuals committed to taking responsibility for their lives, developing their talents, honing their skills and intellects, fostering emotional and moral intelligence, all in all contributing to the advancement of the human condition.

At the heart of authentic liberalism lies the recognition, in the words of John Gardner, "that the ever renewing society will be a free society (whose] capacity for renewal depends on the individuals who make it up." A continuously renewing society, Gardner believed, is one that seeks to "foster innovative, versatile, and self-renewing men and women and give them room to breathe."

One aspect of my politics hasn't changed a bit. I became a liberal in the first place to break from the repressive group orthodoxies of my reactionary hometown.

This past January, my liberalism was in full throttle when I bid the cultural left goodbye to escape a new version of that oppressiveness. I departed with new clarity about the brilliance of liberal democracy and the value system it entails; the quest for freedom as an intrinsically human affair; and the dangers of demands for conformity and adherence to any point of view through silence, fear, or coercion.

True, it took a while to see what was right before my eyes. A certain misplaced loyalty kept me from grasping that a view of individuals as morally capable of and responsible for making the principle decisions that shape their lives is decisively at odds with the contemporary left's entrance-level view of people as passive and helpless victims of powerful external forces, hence political wards who require the continuous shepherding of caretaker elites.

Leftists who no longer speak of the duties of citizens, but only of the rights of clients, cannot be expected to grasp the importance (not least to our survival) of fostering in the Middle East the crucial developmental advances that gave rise to our own capacity for pluralism, self-reflection, and equality. A left averse to making common cause with competent, self- determining individuals -- people who guide their lives on the basis of received values, everyday moral understandings, traditional wisdom, and plain common sense -- is a faction that deserves the marginalization it has pursued with such tenacity for so many years.

The News That's NOT Being Reported

If DC news is not your cup of tea then move on to the next post and read about all the books that are currently being banned or challenged in cities and towns across American. Yes, folks in that list you'll find the threats to freedom and our way of life! [For those that don't know me...please read with an extremely sarcastic tone.]

- Greenspan still sees "froth in housing market." He based his comments, given at the Mortgage Bankers convention, on new data developed by Fed staff economists on increased home values, how much has been extracted in home equity loans, and the latest loan to value ratios.

- President Bush offers continued access to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Yesterday, following a briefing at the Energy Department, President Bush offered further access to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and noted work to open refineries and pipelines, to allow foreign hulls to bring gasoline imports, and to waive EPA blending regs. Mr. Bush concluded with a strong call for conservation by motorists.

- The Former and Current head of FEMA testified today that it has spent $16.0 b. so far. That leaves $46.3 b. to be spent. House Appropriations will begin today three days of hearings on hurricane relief spending starting with FEMA, Homeland Security and HUD tomorrow, the Army Corps of Engineers on Wednesday, and the Transportation Department Thursday. President Bush is readying a third package of rebuilding aid to send to Congress that could exceed that amount. Senator Frist's (R-TN) top budget aide Bill Hoagland told a Washington audience today that federal hurricane relief and rebuilding funding would be closer to $100 b. than to $200 b., which "has no basis in analysis." But who's to know what the cost will be?

- Continuing resolution till November 18th will be enacted by midnight Friday. With only two appropriations bills enacted so far, out of 13, Congress and President Bush have no choice but to enact a continuing resolution. The House has passed all its appropriations, and the Senate has four more to go, and conference committees are working on five. transfer from airport requested via hotel.

- 18 Al Qaeda Operatives Sentenced in Spain. Europe's biggest trial of alledged al Qaeda members to date concluded in Madrid today with sentences ranging from 6 to 27 years in prison. Suspected al Qaeda cell leader Imad Yarkas drew the longest sentence from Spain's High Court, 27 years, for conspiracy and leading a terrorist organization. Yarkas was found guilty of collaborating with the 9/11 plotters, but he was cleared of any specific role in the attacks in NY & DC. The High Court dismissed the most serious charges. Six additional defendants were acquitted of all charges.

So that's all the news I have time to print. Gotta get back to work and do massive amounts of reading today. If you're looking for me I'm the one that is surrounded by mountains of paper. Too bad it's all white, I could use some color!

The US & Israel "Must Be Wiped Out�

Statements like these from Iran's Interior Ministry, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad don't surprise me in the least. Does it surprise you?

This didn't surprise because they have disregarded all nuclear proliferation regulations and rejected repeated EU & UN requests for meetings to negotiate their proliferation. As per their Minister it is Iran's way of showing the western world and their Asian neighbors to the East they are a true islamic fundamentalist regime that the world will have to reckon with sooner or later (their statements not mine).

So it also not surprising to me that they are harboring 25 top Al Qaeda operatives and Bin Laden's sons? Is it surprising to you?

National Political Notes

As reported in the White House Bulletin:

All things Presidential: A front-page piece in today’s Washington Post on Sen. Hillary Clinton says she has “has fashioned a political persona that generates intense passions but defies easy characterization.� … An ABC News poll out this weekend shows 54% approving of Sen. Clinton nationally, but 42% disapproving, and 42% saying they would vote against her under all circumstances [ It seems that most NY'ers are in the 54% crowd. This blogger is NOT among them]. … Al Gore’s potential as a 2008 candidate continued to receive press coverage this weekend, including a New York Times piece saying he appears not to be interested [yeah right!]. In a separate NY Times article, columnist Frank Rich says Democrats interest in Gore “says more about the desperation of the Democrats than it does about him.� … In his Time column this week, Joe Klein argues that Illinois Sen. Barack Obama should run in 2008, while the Chicago Tribune reports that fellow Illinoisan Dick Durbin has been encouraging him to do so in private [Obama for President? He's barely out of Senatorial diapers. Several pieces of legislation he proposed have died a very silent and chilly death. Although he's a good orator, he's unfortunately a very inexperienced and isolated senator.]

On All Things Presidential

In an article in the NY Daily News, columnist Goodwin discusses the talk surrounding a possible bid for the Presidency by NYC Mayor, Michael Bloomberg (R)> In it Goodwin says that although Bloomberg “has ventured onto the national stage on gun control, immigration and stem-cell research, he is nobody's fool -- and he knows he doesn't stand a chance of winning the presidency.� … And they're both right; not only does Bloomberg not have the national exposure, he is no Rudy Giuliani.

On Fox News’ O’Reilly Factor last night, political pundit Dick Morris [you remember Dick... he was the advisor to Pres. Clinton who often talked to Bill while shacking up with one of his steady NY call-girls when in town]... well, Dick said that Al Gore is running for President again! Gore denies it now because he “doesn't want to be seen as running while he's putting out this movie. I guess he wants to check the temperature of his political exposure in a few weeks as the furor/excitement/criticism/box office money over the movie dies down. Anyway, Dick's point about Gore is that he really is now the un-Hillary [candidate] of the Democratic primary.� I think Dick thinks Gore has a chance. Unfortunately, he lost my unimaginable vote when he claimed to have invented the internet.

Hmmmmm, Tim Berners-Lee for President? Now that's a candidate I can get behind on!

All Things Presidential

Congressional Quarterly Politics column reports this morning that the RNC brought in $8 million last month and began June with $43.7 million in the bank, while the DNC brought in $5 million and had $10.3 million in the bank.

In related news... in a speech yesterday at the National Press Club, John Edwards was testing the big themes on his road tour to the White House in 2008. The topics ranged from �a call for eliminating poverty by 2036" to fixing social programs for seniors. [Methinks Edwards is either naive or delusional] A Quinnipiac poll out this morning shows that while 61% of New Yorkers think Rudy Giuliani would make a “great� or “good� president, only 49% of respondents thought Sen. Hillary Clinton would.

Q: How Do You Respond To A Bully?

This post was birthed in response to blog sis Teresa's post North Korea - Trying to Be Big Man On Campus. Her commentary made me laugh, though I wasn't laughing when I heared the news of the launching. Nope, it pissed me off that this idiot will probably manage to kill lots of his people and his neighbors just to try to show he's got (cough, cough) viable rockets.

To answer Teresa on the distance and capability of these long range missiles: they are second hand, 20 to 30 yr old Russian medium to long range missiles that were sold to the North Korean's (NK's) close to 20 years ago. These missiles were always unreliable, only 1 in 4 ever managed to hit their long range target when they were in the Russian arsenal. Needing to get rid of the old before buying new ones (as stipulated by treaties Kissinger & others brokered in the 70 & 80's), the Russians wound up selling them to the NK's in the late 80's with the UN's blessing. The UN sanctioned the sale because back then China was still a military and political threat to everyone in Asia, including their own allies.

Multi-lateralism was not something the UN or the U.S. supported in response to that threat for 2 reasons: a) we were the biggest producers of weaponry and wanted to have lots of clients. b) Our enemies in that region were communist countries that were financially hurting: Russia, China, North Korea & Vietnam.

The political climate changed in NK with the death of Kim Jun's father. Strange things (per eastern standards) were immediately begining to take place. Among them was Kim Jong Jr. wanting to declare himself first King, then Emperor. There were many other things that indicated things were not right in NK, but with an extremely closed society, where even a contemplation of a mixed marriage meant incarceration, little information was getting out.

What people in the US Gov't perhaps didn't realize (or maybe overlooked) was that Kim Jr. was as crazy as a loon and needed to go the way of Idi Amin, Noriega, Sadam and others. But I'm deviating from missiles at hand.... it has the capability of reaching San Francisco (which Norad believes based on intellegence and statements from Kim Jong himself). Experts believe that it could reach SF only on a very good day, when weather, people and machinery are all working at peak conditions to produce NK's desired results. Given these missiles track record and history, I doubt they will successfully reach us.

As for NORAD, they have the capability to know whenever a missile is deployed anywhere in the world. They can also tell within a 50 mile radius where it originated from, where it's conceivably going (within a 100 mile radius) and where it ultimately lands. NORAD also has the capability to orchestrate any missile's destruction by shooting it down in the sky before or as it enters our air space. The danger comes in if it's a nuclear warhead. If you destroy a missile containing a nuclear warhead in our air space (or somebody else's) you essentially have a disaster worse than Chernobyl on your hands. I say this based on the amount of weapons grade uranium they have allegedly produced.

More political background:
Under the Bush administration, the US has refused to negotiate exclusively with the NK's regarding nuclear proliferation and containment because they have historically violated every agreement they ever signed with the Clinton administration, the UN and their neighbors. When the Bush team refused to continue making the financial payments tied to these agreements (as originally arranged by Clinton), as punishment for non-compliance, the NK's demanded we go back to the table to re-negotiate. When their demanding attitude didn't work they began to threaten to enrich plutonium and uranium on their own, when that didn't work they threatened to bomb us. That was 5 years ago. What they are doing/saying now is nothing new.

In my estimation, if there's one thing that this Gov't has gotten dog gone right is in insisting in muli-lateral negotiations that includes all of Kim's neighbors, with the stipulation that no financial incentives be offered for their participation (they have notoriously called meetings and then never showed up) or ours. Of course you can imagine how that went over in the UN. Other countries now participating in these talks have buckled, out of fear of being nuked by this madman, and have offered NK financial incentives tied to compliance benchmarks. But the NK Government continues to go back on negotiations or violate every single agreement they have made to date. The most famous violation, which occurred approx 16 months ago, was an agreement that was only observed for 24 hrs. To try to force through their demands, the NK's have gone on record threatening to blow up their neighbors and the U.S.

Teresa, when the diplomats say they have no idea what the military is doing they mean it. Kim Jong rules with an iron fist and micro manages with secrecy. He makes Lenin look like a pussycat. Just to give you an idea of what Kim's made of... the famine in his country has killed millions in the last decade, and yet he refuses to have humanitarian aid come in because he fears being overthrown by outside influence, ideas and propaganda. The man is nuts, and the UN knows it. If they actually do something it will be to schedule endless meetings (what they've done to date) or put the ball in our court by asking us to agree to Kim's black mail demands. 'That's what they are when you name a monetary figure and say if we don't pay that they'll blow us up. He's been threatening to blow us up ever since Bush cut off the Clinton money.

So there you have it Teresa, the last decade in a nutshell. BTW, pun was intended. So to answer the more important question: How Do You Respond To A Bully? Talk softly, don't pay bribery money, and carry really big missiles that can blow your palace to kindom come.

Russia/China oppose UN Sanctions

Why, you may ask, is Russia and China taking North Korea's side? Simple, the same reason they oppose imposing sactions on Iran: money and fear!

Like Iran, North Korea makes considerable purchases of items other countries would not even consider buying from Russia & China adding considerably to each country's revenue.

Then there is the Kim Jong - powder keg factor. Who wants to go against a madman that has weapons that are locked and loaded on his neighbors and can easily be launched against them without provocation.

Kim Jong has tested his missiles just outside Russian, Japanese and Taiwan's airspace without so much as a warning, making dialogue and diplomatic relations tenuous at best. Russia and China have not supported the US on sanctions in the past (like when thousands of North Koreans were dying every day) so this little matter of nuclear/military proliferation, will eventually die a quiet death, as it has in the past, until Kim Jong gets bored again and decides to stir up troupble.

He's like Britney Spears, can't stand not being in the limelight and the center of attention, but hate the negative attention they draw thinking they are undeserving of criticism.

150 heads & counting

Today is the opening session of the UN's General Assembly. Yesterday I forgot about how many heads of state come in early for this shindig and I ran into several of them.

Okay guys, get ready to play, let's see if you know any of these peoples names without googling:

- The King of Jordan
- First female African President
- First female head of state of an EU country
And for major bonus points: which nutcracker will get to address the General Assembly tomorrow shortly after Bush. I'll give you a hint: he's repeatedly called for the obliteration of Israel & the anhilation of the Jewish race and their western supporters.

Answers will be in the comments towards the end of the day. I wanted to play this game of Spotting Politicos w/Eric last year when he came to visit but worked for the witch from hell and was having a bad week so I forgot.

Top Democrats Defend Bush

Chavez insults for the past 2 days have united members on both sides of the aisle in defending President Bush. Some of the highest ranking Democrats have been quoted as saying:

Charles Rangel: "You don't come into my country, you don't come into my congressional district, and you don't condemn my President."

Senator Charles Schumer: Chavez was "despicable and disgusting"

Former President Clinton: "Obviously, I think he made a mistake."

Reverend Jesse Jackson: [Who was attended the Harlem event] "I urged [Chavez] to stop [his Bush attacks] for his own good."

The NY press has also weighed in on the fray. Today's New York Daily News Front Page headline read "El Loco" and in their page 1 lead told Chavez to ''ZIP IT!'' The New York Post called him a ''JERK!'' and the ''Caracas Crackpot.'' Of
course, the NY Times has simply referred to Chavez as outspoken, minimizing the lengthy barage of insults Chavez has lobbed at our President.

On the other side of the aisle we have:

Governor Pataki: "The best thing he can do is go back to Venezuela and try to provide freedom for his people instead of what he's done here in New York."

Open Letter To Former President Clinton:

I hear from news reports that you became very upset with Chris Wallace during an interview when he asked you if you had done all you could on the war on terror.

What Chris seems to have missed and which I remember is that Sunday was the 10th Anniversary of the Khobar Bombing. You remember that one don't you? It was one of many that occurred under your term.

I know you must have been extremely upset with Chris, especially after "The Path of 9/11 pointed out how Sandy Berger, Madeleine Albright and you didn’t go to every length to find the perpetrators of ALL the terrorist attacks during your 8 years in office. And then to read Louis Freeh’s article, on the Anniversary of the Khobar Towers bombing, your own appointed investigator of that bombing, piercing the veil of your deceitful revisionist history must have just been too much for you.

Well, Mr. Clinton, your disgraceful execution of office will forever be judged not by the spin you try to portray but on what you did in response to the continual attacks on American citizens and interests abroad. Yes, history will judge you, but it will do so solely on the actions you and those in your administration took or did not take, not on whether Chris Wallace is a conservative and you an immoral liberal. Having lived through this history, I will help others know the truth and remember long and hard every single failed foreign policy and action that brought about the death of my loved ones. But like many of your predecessors, history will judge you with a magnifying glass and a keen eye. For you will be judged, not just by the lack of character and judgment you exhibited during your lifetime, but by the miniscule successes and the massive failures of ALL your actions and inactions in office.

And then sir, you will realize that no amount of lies, deceitful charm will protect you from the American People discovering the truth.

Fantastic!!!

My day yesterday started out at 5:30am. after having gone to bed around 2:00am. I was busy setting up a pick up schedule and had to email, txt message or call everyone to confirm their pick up time to take them to the voting center, after which I had to get the house spotless to be turned into a mini day care center. I volunteer to help shuttle the elderly & disabled to and from the voting site from 6:45am to 8:00am. Then from 8:00am to 9:15am I open my home to single parents w/toddlers in the neighborhood who need someone to watch the kids while they vote.

Needless to say it was a morning where there was little dialogue between my son and I because things had to get done & he had to help, plus he was going to vote with me for the first time. When I layed out his school uniform and asked him to get dressed he kept delaying and then tried to negotiate out of his uniform, or so I thought. I gave him my no-nonsense look with the "no back talk or negotiation" warning as we had a very tight schedule and he'd be in big trouble. Resigned he put his school uniform on, quickly ate breakfast and off we went. My first group of 9 Seniors were the first people in line. I voted quickly, though angrily, when I saw that for some offices 1 candidate was running on the Republican, Democrat, and Right to Life Party simultaneously. Where on earth is democracy there? At that moment I definitely would have voted for myself via written ballot just out of my constitutional principal, but I was on a time schedule.

On our last shuttle ride home my son said he had a request. I asked what that was and he said, "since there's no school today can I wear my regular clothes". Oh, I felt like such a heel and I apologized profusely while hugging and kissing him. Trying to push my guilt to his advantage he asked if he could also have a popsicle stick when we got home because he was thirsty from all the running around. "Sorry Mr., not a chance.!"

In the hour I hosted daycare I had a total of 12 kids. My day began to peak when a cute tiny 5yr old that I adore walked in and kept staring at me while his mom and I talked. He kept staring at me even as his mother was trying to say goodbye. Finally I squatted down to his level, and with a smile and gentle voice asked why he was staring at me so much, did he like my choker or my earings. He shook his head and finally worked it all out in his head and said to me: "You're pretty!" with such a sweet sincerity that I just had to give him a big kiss on the cheek for starting my day off right. He then ran away from me to the children's table as he wiped the kiss off his cheek. I sighed and reflected on how yet another man was running away from me.

By 10:00am I was back at my desk working like mad. On my way to the copier I passed a collegue who stopped to stare at me forcing me to look at the front of my blouse to make sure my buttons weren't open. Finally he says to me, "You look faaaantastick!" To which I asked in a sweet voice and with a slight smile on a straight face: "As opposed to the rest of the time when you don't say anything because I look like crap?" He was speechless and turning beet red. Me I was laughing on the inside because I knew my point had been brought home. He had gone over board with the exhuberance so he definitely wanted something from me which now he couldn't ask because he realized his charm didn't work on me.

At 1:30 my old boss, Mr. Global IT Director for Division 1, called me to go upto his office for a chat. It had been over a year since I had left him. I didn't really want to take another position, but leave I had to just so I could have my life back. When working for him I worked at times 18 hrs a day. While in his office we chatted for awhile about changes in the dept. structure, personnel and technology. We caught up on the global projects I had managed and on our personal lives. Then suddenly his tone changed. It was the tone that he used during my annual performance reviews, when he cleared his throat a gazillion times trying to find the right words to convey his message. While he's doing this, I'm wondering what time it is because I have to pick up my son at 3:00pm and by now I know I'll be cutting it close.

Suddenly from his mouth I hear: "I think you would be perfect for this new position in London. I'm hoping you'll consider applying for it as you'll have my full support." Then my mind starts racing with questions and objections, and I'm thinking could I raise a happy, healthy, sane child and have a normal life doing RSM's job in London. That's when my cell phone began to go off like crazy and I realized I had 5 min to get into the elevator go down 40 flights, run through the huge lobby & out into the street to pick up my son.

So as calmly as possible I interrupted him, thanked him for the offer, letting him know that I had to leave immediately to pick up my son and asked if we could continue the conversation tomorrow. Luckily my son was late which gave me a few mintues to let it all sink in: living in London, working again in IT, working for one of the best bosses I've ever had... as I sit here writing this all I can muster to think or say is... WOW. And I know the feelings will be short-lived because I don't have enough information to wrap my head around it. Still, it's like finally being asked to the prom. I was never asked to go to the prom, but if I had been asked, I bet you it would feel like this - faaaaantastic.

Anyway, I gotta go to bed. I can't think about this now 'cause I'm dog dead tired!

Is Coulter Killing Conservatism?

A big number of conservative bloggers, some who attended the recent Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) think so. In fact, they are so outraged by Coulter's use of vitriolic and divisive rhetoric during CPAC, they have called for her exclusion and a tougher stance against such tactics, as they believe its a threat to their political movement. What say you? Where do you stand on the use of name calling and bias language to make a political point and foster further debate? Is it really a victory when you get more media coverage for the reprehensible remarks made by one attendee, than for your entire conference or your political agenda?

Humor deflation in a Blue State

So I was right in the groove of a really funny political post which has been brewing since I returned from DC. And I was trying to finish in time to listen to Ellison on the radio when I got a call from my son's school.

It was my son's teacher calling because of a little incident she had with my son in her history class. For Woman's History Month they are studying woman leaders, among them Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton. Well, began to tell me that the class was asked how Americans feel about Pelosi being Speaker of the House, and my son raised his hand and said "Ashamed" without hesitation.

I said nothing waiting for her to finish telling me what my son had done wrong. After a long pause she asks: "Are you there, are you listening?"

Me: Yes, I'm here, I was just waiting for you to finish your account so I could respond appropriately.

Teacher: Well, I just want you to know that he was quite insistent and wouldn't change his mind and went as far as calling her inconsiderate. When I asked him why he said to me, "because of what she did to my mommy and to others." I understand that your politics may be different, but we need to teach our children, especially boys, that we need to be proud of all women, especially our women leaders.

Me: [As I exhale slowly gathering patience for this interuption at work] My son has a personal issue with and strong feelings for Ms. Pelosi and her staff. I suspect that it will be a long while before he's able to let them go.

Teacher: What possible personal issues could a 7 yr old child have with the Speaker of the House?

Me: Her staff kept pushing back our meeting into the late afternoon after which they cancelled our meeting, which made me miss my flight home, along with dinner and my bedtime routine with him. We both have a lot of reasons to be angry with her, so I'm not going to convince him to feel otherwise.

Teacher: Uhm, but that's different she's the Speaker of the House, she's dealing with important matters. [Blah, blah, blah...]

Me: And I'm a mother of a 7 year old that doesn't understand what was happening in DC this week that required my presence there. I've taught my son that lateness and rudeness is inexcusable and to tell him their behavior was ok because of their position would negate what we believe in and would create a false standard. All he knows is that his mom didn't come home for dinner, didn't read him a bed time story, and wasn't able to pray with him or hug or kiss him goodnight as she does every night. That, in his world, carries more weight than any of the Speaker's issues.

Teacher: Blah, blah, blah, ..... [as far as I was concerned our conversation was over, but I had to let her finish. Unfortunately it continued beyond what it had to, but since he's going there on a scholarship I have to walk a think line and be on my best behavior. But yes, we all have a lot of reasons to be angry with Pelosi. except my issues go back... way back!]

Closer to home...

I've been so busy lately with federal legislative issues that I've not been able to deal with things closer to home. And believe me, there's a lot that has been going on right here.

It seems that the NYC Council, which governs over the 5 boroughs and close to 8 million people, have taken more actions towards getting more press for themselves. And I see that in the process, they've caught the attention of some who are quite pissed. I'd really like to know how the NY City Council intends to enforce this law against people using the "N" word.

I'd like to remind readers & bloggers, that these are the same people that have chosen to become the food / fat police, and the cigarette vigilantes. Now you see why I'm looking for greener pastures to graze on. I just told someone yesterday, that my dreams/goals are not coming true fast enough for me. After this morning (see post below), I feel like I needed to leave this city yesterday and move to Montana where I'll have to deal more with cows than with people!

But a thought just occurred to me... when I leave, what will my new blog be called?

As the House Turns

House Judiciary Votes to Subpoena White House Staff

In the ongoing saga of "As the House Turns", a Judiciary subcommittee voted unanimously today to subpoena several senior current and former White House officials. They are seeking testimony regarding the firing of eight federal prosecutors which you have undoubtedly heard about. Some of those who will be served subpoena's are: Karl Rove, former White House Counsel Hariet Miers, their deputies, and Kyle Sampson, former chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

In taking the vote, the committee rejected yesterday’s offer by President Bush to make his aides available to talk privately with the House and Senate Judiciary committees, but not under oath or on the record. Shortly before the vote, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said of the committee, “The question they’ve got to ask themselves is, are you more interested in a political spectacle than getting the truth?” Subcommittee Chair Linda Sanchez responded, “There must be accountability.” Tune in for tomorrow's episode of this intriguings saga which I will dubb: "Will they or won't they [testify]?"

Guest Blogger - Jon of We Swear

This post was an email I received as part of an offline conversation with my blog-bro, Jon of We Swear (whose blog is currently down due to technical difficulties). In our discussion, I stated my reasons why Rudy Giuliuni's chances for becoming president are non-existent. In my opinion, the 6 marriages alone, between him and his current wife Judith, are enough to kill his chances. Since I was pressed for blog-fodder and found some of his arguments compelling, I've posted it here in its entirety with his permission.

Voting Trends and Rudy's Chances

First, there are several groups of Presidential voters in this country;
- The Non-Voters (who will never vote)
- The May-Voters (who vote if they’re really motivated - note that Republicans, Democrats, & Centrists/Libertarians/Independents may be in this group)
- The Centrist / Libertarian / Independent (CLI) Voters (are swing voters, who vote for either Republicans or Democrats depending on the issues of the day)
- The Democrat Voters (always vote their party line, and usually vote)
- The Republican Voters (always vote their party line, and usually vote)
(There may be others... [but I agree w/Jon are few in numbers and therefore inconsequential to his point])

Who will vote for Rudy vs other candidates and why?
The Republicans and CIL’s voters will put National Security *way* (^10) above other issues.
The Democrat voters will only look at who is supporting their personal (pet) issues.

The "swing" - if you will - are the Republicans & CLI’s. They will support a Democrat if: a) The Republicans are really weak, b) The Democrats are really good, or c) National Security is not an issue. Most people don't want to have the FedGov actively involved in their life. Democrats do a pretty good job of that. Even the moderate Right Wing (which is different than Repub's) have a "leave everyone alone to live their lives as they see fit, God will decide their fate" attitude.

History has shown that a president who is active overseas will be active domestically. He will interfere with people's day-to-day lives and Republicans generally do that. So in order for a Republican to be elected, (against a strong Democrat) he has to be the type that people (Republicans & CLI’s) believe will not interfere with their way of life while supporting National Security.

Republicans are a very forgiving bunch. I'd bet that nearly every R has a friend who has been re-married. And they are still friends. It isn't an "exclusionary" issue. Neither is adultery. While it is still bad, it isn't something that causes a person to exclude them from their life - like lying or stealing. Those things get you kicked out of a friendship. Relationships? Na. That's private stuff and Republicans & CLI’s don't judge like that.

I predict Rudy will succeed because he crosses the bridge that Republicans, CLI’s and some Democrats see as allowing him to be "acceptable". Remember, in a two-party system, the one who wins is the "lesser of two evils". He will be that.

A very important chunk of voting comes from the second group above, the "May-Voters". Within that are all three of the Democrats, Republicans, and CLI’s. They follow politics but need a "motivation" to vote. They skew polls because they claim to be "likely to vote", but the usually don't. In this election, their motivation to vote will come from the two candidates - some a pull towards, some a push away. The pull towards is the Republicans who love Rudy and the Democrats who love Hillary (yes, she will come out of the DNC as the candidate). The push, however, is going to be a huge motivator. And it will be against Hillary. I've seen polls (yes, the polls I just said were skewed) where 45% of the likely voters would vote just to *oppose* Hillary. That's a _huge_ number. Even if it is skewed by a factor of 10, it is still 5% of the voters who will vote for whoever is running against Hillary. And 5% would have been decisive in the last two elections.

As always, the primary determinant between the R and the D will be which party gets their "base" out to vote. With the Electoral College the way it is (and that's a good thing), the Republicans will have more areas voting on the basis of National Defense than the Democrats will on their disparate issues. And with Rudy being the strongest imaginable on National Defense, he's got a huge chunk right there. If you throw in that he supports many things that CLI’s and "may-vote" Democrats have (abortion, gay marriage) - heck and even the personal issues of many Democrats - he's going to win.

The issues you bring up may be a problem for him with the far-Right. But they are *huge* pulls for people from the center, center-left, and even into the middle-left. And those three groups are much bigger than the far-right.

I'm not saying he will be a _great_ president, I'm just predicting he will be our _next_ president.

LIAR LIAR Pants on Fire!

This morming George Tenet was interviewed by Tim Russert on Meet The Press. In that interview Tenet said repeatedly that although he had opportunities to counter false data or skewed interpretation he did nothing to stop it.

"I should not have allowed my silence to imply acquaissance" with the information that was being disseminated.

Tim Russert pointed out various times Tenet's sins of ommission, by not speaking up to the President & Vice-President, led them and the American people astray. In each instance he admitted that he did not correct the President and he did not establish the truth because he was unaware of what the President said. However, the truth is. as Russert pointed out, he or his office approved every fact in every speech and every position the White House took in every speech during his tenure. Tenet's silence or lack of correction of the facts is not just a sin of ommission, it is in fact lying to the American People!

What gets me angrier, if that's possible, is that in one breath he charges that the Bush Administration was gung ho in going to war in Iraq in one breath, while in another he admits all the intelligence was flawed and he kept his silence. So which is it Tenet? What is the truth? Or perhaps the truth is that you're incapable of telling the truth! And since you're incapable of telling the truth it means you're incapable of recognizing the truth as presented by the French, the British and Italian intelligence agencies!!!

What I see now is a man backpeddling over intelligence where he either repeatedly lied or failed to provide evidence to the White House staff of exactly what was going on prior to 9/11. Tenet should never have been allowed to remain in office as long as he did.

Each time Russert confronted Tenet with key statements in his book, Russert showed that Tenet lied in those passages. His explanation... he either didn't know or he never read the speech or press reports on what the White House said or reported.

THIS MAN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CREDIBILITY OF OUR LEADERS AND OF OUR COUNTRY BEING TARNISHED BEFORE THE WORLD STAGE TIME AND AGAIN. HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LYING REPEATEDLY THROUGH OMMISSION DURING CONGRESSIONAL AND SENATE HEARINGS. HIS RESPONSE - "I MADE A MISTAKE" IS COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE.

In retrospect, Tenet admission that by August 2001, "we weren't giving the President more intelligence, and more of the types of information he needed" to make the correct assessment on the impending Al Qaeda attack is enfuriating.

Tim Russert did an exceptional job at pointing out each time he lied at important moments in history and in his book and though I'm grateful, I still believe Tenet's failures are border on treason.

To say that I'm angry, is to say very little. I have always believed that the intelligence failures and the cuts in funding to the CIA in the 90's caused the deaths of 9/11. Tenet's (gov't lacky) attitude failed us through out his term, but especially when he relied and gave inexperienced operatives and individuals like Valerie Plame and her husband the opportunity to obtain intelligence.

Tenet is right in one thing - when you don't get the right type of intelligence, you're at risk. He still believes we as a nation are at risk; so do I. Folks, that's the ony thing he and I will ever agree on.

I'm Blocked!

Are you? Check and see if your website is banned by our wonderful 'Trade Partners & friends' at the People's Republic of China by clicking through the link and taking the test.

[H/T to D-Ring]

Our Next President?

My temporarily blogless Blog-bro _Jon, thinks so and shares with us this link to a one on one interview with Fred Thomson. What do you think? Should he run? Is he a viable candidate?

Appeal for Courage

I was very angry when I saw the political ad purchased by 3 retired generals and being aired by the MSM. I was angered because its a blatant attempt by 3 very ambitious men to capitilize and politicize the war.

Imagine my elation when I saw the troops counter their efforts via an appeal of their own in a legitimate form of redress for their betrayal at the hands of former commanders. Through an Appeal for Courage that was delivered to Congress these men and women seek to correct a very grave and selfish wrong! Imagine this, in a little over 24 hours 2,936 active military members have signed the Appeal. Please spread the word to others so they may sign too!

[Hat tip to my Good Lt.]