Thursday, September 30, 2004

It’s the non-issue that refuses to go away, thanks now to CBS. They spotlight a “Republican Mother” who will vote for Kerry if Bush plans to bring back the draft. The Media Research Center is all over the case.

But there’s more that MRC didn’t catch. Apparently the mother in question, Beverly Cocco is a chapter president for People Against the Draft. This group isn’t just anti-draft, it’s anti-war – and there’s clearly a hidden agenda that CBS either overlooked or chose to ignore.

Let’s say it right now: The draft isn’t going to happen. The Selective Service is in place in the event of a national defense emergency. It’s a prudent precaution in the event a major power, say, China, decides to attack the U.S. Using the draft to put boots on the ground in Iran, North Korea, etc. simply doesn’t make sense. The best article to date is here.

In any event, if I were in charge of CBS News, thanks to Rather's ridiculous 'fake but accurate' expose that aired two weeks ago, I would want to personally vet every program that went on the air until election day. But that organization is so ideologically driven that producers there aren't just wearing blinders, they're wearing toilet-paper-tube goggles. How much worse can they get?

Wednesday, September 29, 2004

The folks at are upset because their beloved presidential candidate isn't looking good in the polls. Their solution? Shoot the messenger:

If John Kerry believed in the Gallup poll, he might as well give up. A couple of weeks ago, a highly publicized Gallup poll of “likely voters” showed President Bush with a staggering 14-point lead.

But wait a minute. Seven other polls of likely voters were released that same week. On average, they showed Bush with just a three-point lead. No one else came close to Gallup’s figures. And this isn’t the first time the prestigious Gallup survey has been out on a limb with pro-Bush findings.
Let's cut to the chase. Their concern is that disillusioned Democrats, seeing their champion on the ropes, will decide to skip out on election day and not bother to cast their vote on a losing candidate.

Hey, guys, it works both ways. I might decide to skip out on election day because if my guy is winning, I don't need to waste my time voting.

Gallup's numbers may be more accurate than those other polls. But thinks it has a fair gripe about how those numbers are generated. Why? Because the owner (who isn't even involved in the polling operation of the company) is a Christian:

Gallup, who is a devout evangelical Christian, has been quoted as calling his polling “a kind of ministry....”
Oh, what a Neanderthal. They probably resort to tea leaves and animal sacrifices to pick the latest numbers, too.

Seriously, if there's an issue with the numbers, it will be apparent soon enough. From my own 'pollng', Kerry is going to get a harsh wakeup call on Election Day.

PS - IMAO calls the folks 'zombies' - as in Night of the Living Dead - heh. And check out this article by liberal pundit Mystery Pollster.
Living in the suburbs is hazardous to your health?

People who live in sprawling communities tend to suffer more health problems, according to the first study to document a link between the world of strip malls, cul-de-sacs and subdivisions and a broad array of ailments.
It's better to live in Manhattan than Atlanta, apparently. The evidence cited is pretty thin, though. Color me skeptical.

Friday, September 24, 2004

Oh my.

Update: Link fixed.

Thursday, September 23, 2004

I can't say I'm a big fan of international news agency Reuters. Their articles are slanted with a left-wing bias, and there's an anti-American taint to many of their stories (they're British). Of course, they think they're fair and balanced.

My biggest complaint by far, however, is that they don't know what a terrorist is. Because of an apparent unfamility with the English language, they don't seem to realize that a terrorist is one who deliberately targets to kill or injure innocents for a political cause. So, when a group of armed gunmen invade a school in Russia, hold children hostage, and shoot them in the back when they try to run, don't dare call them terrorists. Oh, no, they're militants. Ah. How nuanced.

But now the truth has been laid bare. I had thought that the reason they didn't use the terrorist label was because they're biased. Nope. It's because they're cowards. Apparently Reuters got upset when a subscribing paper added the banned word to an article:

"Our editorial policy is that we don't use emotive words when labeling someone," David A. Schlesinger, Reuters' global managing editor told the New York Times. "Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline."

Schlesinger indicated changes like those made at CanWest could lead to "confusion" about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations.

"My goal is to protect our reporters and protect our editorial integrity," he said.
How noble. Reuters, trying to make its mark in the Middle East, is concerned about intimidation from Muslim thugs.

I guess you wouldn't want to lose your press pass at PLO headquarters, would you, Reuters?

UPDATE: Just to underscore my point, Reuters publishes kooky news like this. Millions of felons unable to vote because of laws "that have roots in the post-Civil War 19th century"? Shocking! Where's the ACLU?
Larry Elder's column has a great story about someone who was tired of having his Bush/Cheney yard signs stolen...check it out (skim past the Rathergate section).

I have an interesting yard sign story too - someday I'll post it....
Four days ago I suggested that Democrats were hinting that the draft might be restored just to scare up votes. Turns out I was prescient....

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. Sept. 22, 2004 — Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, citing the war in Iraq and other trouble spots in the world, raised the possibility Wednesday that a military draft could be reinstated if voters re-elect President Bush.

(And he made his statement here in WPB? Ironic....)

Actually, talk about bad strategy. Why didn't he make that point on a college campus or something? In senior citizen laden Florida, he should have spent more time on the "Bush wants to trash Medicare" meme.

Heh. He should hire me to run his campaign. He still wouldn't win, but at least I'd keep it from looking like a McGovern/Dukakis upset.

UPDATE: Snopes has more on the drafting issue - looking more and more like a myth.

And here's what our military has to say about it.

And finally here's the word from Congress - the one pending bill - stuck in committee....

Tuesday, September 21, 2004

Left-wing blogger Josh Marshall thinks that Kerry's campaign needs a new slogan. Well, Iowahawk comes to the rescue - NEW SLOGANS! My favorites:
I Will Keep Our Enemies Guessing, Too
Projecting American Strength Through Intricately Complex Nuance
The Thinking Man's Self-Confessed War Criminal
Vote For Me or My Running Mate Will Sue
I Will Do For You the Many Wonderous Things I Have Done For Massachusetts
Fear Not, America, I Have Deigned to Lead You
The Next Time America is Attacked, I Promise To Open Up a Carafe of Whupass
I Have Three Words For George Bush -- Bring It On
I Have Five More Words For George Bush -- Call Off Your On-Bringers
Some Look at Things As They Are And Say, 'Why?' Others Look at Things As They Are Not And Say, 'Why Not?', And I Suppose A Few Might Look at Things As They Are Not, And Say 'Why?', and Vice-Versa, and So Forth, And One Might Be Tempted To Look at These People Looking at Things And Ask 'Who?' But This Would Not Be Constructive, Because The Important Thing To Realize Is That Some People Like To Look At Things, And This Is Precisely My Point

I’ve wanted to write about John Kerry for a long time, but haven’t had the time to (and don’t now). But let’s recap the current campaign, shall we?

John Kerry beats out a number of other candidates with questionable qualifications for office to get the Democratic nomination for President.
He spent some 4 months there, as a commander of a swiftboat patrolling the rivers of Vietnam. He was ‘wounded’ 3 times, two of those under highly questionable circumstances, and was able to return stateside before his tour of duty was up. Other questionable aspects of his war experiences have been raised.
The moment Kerry returns to the U.S., he joins the anti-war movement and testifies in Congress about atrocities that presumably happened in Vietnam. For some reason he doesn’t seem to understand why Vietnam veterans aren’t supporting him.
He has yet to make a speech without invoking some aspect of the time he spent in Vietnam. In his own mind he’s apparently a military hero. That he drops the fact that he was in Vietnam into EVERY conversation is almost laughable.
Why isn’t this multiple-term senator running on his record? Apparently it’s a pretty pathetic record. Ted Kennedy would be proud, but that’s about it. It’s been a fat target – even Zell Miller called Kerry out on it during the Republican Convention.
What's more, Kerry has been AWOL (to pick a military phrase) from numerious committee meetings, and refuses to have attendance information released that could exonerate (or elaborate) his absenses.
I suppose I could criticize Kerry’s political positions – if he had one. The caricatures keep coming because they’re easy. There isn’t ONE position you can tie him down on, unless it’s a solid social liberal issue.

All I can say is that this is the worst campaign I have seen from a Democratic candidate. Even worse than Dukakis. Can you look worse than running around driving a tank? Yep.

It's just astonishing how the best candidate the Democrats can field is this one. More on that later.

The Mainstream Media – not a Bush fan among them – has given up trying to find nice things to say about Kerry. Now they’re scrambling trying to find nasty things to say about Bush. Halliburton is making profits from the war! Oh, no! Documents say he skipped medicals, had improper influences getting him into the National Guard! Oh, my! Well, no.

He’s in the news today: “I have one position on Iraq.” Yeah, only it just keeps changing.

Sunday, September 19, 2004

I get word that one of my daughter's friends is worried about the draft if Bush wins in November. The proof? This article, from the prestigious "Earth Crash Earth Spirit" website.

It's an article written by a discredited senator (anyone remember George McGovern?) who didn't come close to getting elected president. It was published 18 months ago in an obscure, leftist website which hasn't even published anything new since February 2004. This article posits the shocking possibility that Bush plans to invade North Korea and Iran "after finishing with Iraq." I've seen better foreign policy analysis from high schoolers. Why not add China to the list? Anybody remember China taking down one of our planes, back in 2001? I'll bet old G.W.'s got an axe to grind there, too!

So, we can dispense with anything particularly thoughtful and relevant coming out of this article.

NOW, let's move on. Why would we invade Iran and North Korea? It is still part of the "Axis of Evil" so proclaimed by GW Bush 3 years ago. They both are developing nuclear weapons, and sources there have made no secret of using them when they fully acquire them. So okay, the possibility of an invasion - by Bush *OR* by Kerry - does exist. (Kerry will likely wait until Philadelphia and Atlanta are hidden under mushroom clouds first, though.) I guess this whole episode just gets a big "so what?" from me.

Iran has no real military - what little one they have has been devastated through multiple wars with Saddam. Any military conflict will be resolved in weeks (especially if Iraq can be used as a staging area). North Korea is a little more problematic, if for no other reason than nuclear weapons could be involved. They must import 100% of their oil, which means they can literally have their fuel cut off, their reserves bombed, and their refineries gutted. In order to have a war, you MUST have fuel.

[Ed. Note: I'm not a military analyst, so don't quote me!]

The original concern, though, is that the draft will be reinstituted. I think this is a sad tactic to scare up Democratic votes. The only serious proposal to restart the draft has been by Democratic (!) Congressman Charles Rangel (information links here and here). Apparently he's upset that too many minority and lower-class youth are volunteering, and a draft might even up demographics of our military.

From what I hear from my military sources, recruitment is stable, and our military numbers are adequate for now. Everyone in Washington pretty much agrees that a draft would be a bad idea.

The world will be a far more dangerous place with Kerry in the White House. What's worse than getting drafted? Getting drafted with this grasping, spineless twit as president.

Thursday, September 16, 2004

I HATE my cell phone
So I reach for my phone to call Delta Airlines, because my SECOND flight to Atlanta (which I had JUST rescheduled) has been cancelled. The "helpful" screen saver on my phone is displayed, so I press the "No" button to clear it. RIGHT AFTER I press the "No" button, a call immediately comes in. Well, I had just pressed the "No" button. If you press that button while the phone is ringing, it rejects the call. Do I know who it is? Nope. I suspect it's Delta Airlines, calling me to tell me my flight is cancelled. But I'll never know, because they didn't leave a message.