October 15, 2004
Thank Mike for the link.
Elizabeth Edwards, you did not mess with Lynne Cheney's relationship with her daughter. The last guy to do that was Alan Keyes, and now the only place you see him is on the side of a milk carton.
This is going to outrage the right, and I don't see the middle being thrilled with this either.
Update: Scott Ott right on the money, as usual.
Update: Little Miss Attila has more. Excerpt:
God help this country if these creeps get elected. They are the scum of the earth.
I can't stand what's happening to this country, and I can't wait till this election is over.
Ohio, don't fail us.
Final Update: No really! And it's from Lileks, so it was worth the wait. Excerpt:
Besides, why would anyone want to go into politics if their children are now fair game, as Kerrys campaign manager said? So the Cheneys have a gay daughter. OMG! I go to church, ergo I should hate the Cheneys for not putting her under wooden planks and pressing her death with stones, old-skool style! This is truly upsetting to me, because as someone who believes in a permanent reduction in capital gains tax and a strong military posture I must ergo obviously stands-to-reason rear back in horror at the very idea of gay people walking around freely instead of herded into camps and made to sew pink triangles 18 hours a day. Kerry was right to expose this festering obscenity! What if she visits the White House? What if she touches the silverware? Icky icky icky!
Jeez. Thanks for crossing that line, guys.
Update: Yeah, I lied. Sue me. Powerline details what might a growing "Cheney backlash". Excerpt:
Truthfully, Cheney didn't make much of an impression on me. He was as diffident as you would expect, and, as with most famous people, my main thought upon seeing him in the flesh was that he looked just like he does on television.
The person who did make a deep impression on me was Mary Cheney. She appeared to be in charge of her father's security detail. She was wearing a leather jacket and a microphone, through which she communicated steadily with other security personnel. She seemed very intense and looked tough, but not at all unattractive. In all my life, I have never seen such a striking image of protectiveness. She hovered over her father, cleared a path for him, scanned the small crowd anxiously. It was obvious that she adored her father; incongruously, perhaps, she reminded me of an eagle protecting its young.
Mary Cheney does not, I think, do campaign speeches and interviews. Perhaps she is not comfortable in that role. But we all serve where we can. That day four years ago, it was very clear that if anyone sought to harm Dick Cheney, he would have to do it over his daughter's dead body.
Mickey posits a perilous race analogy:
What if Kerry were debating a conservative on affirmative action, and that conservative had a black wife, and Kerry gratuitously brought that up in an attempt to cost his opponent the racist vote? Would Andrew Sullivan approve? I don't think so. ...
First off, I don't buy the cynical explanation of Kerry's reference.
And there you have it: complete, unadulterated horse poopy. When you "don't buy" the cynical explanation about a Panderer-in-Chief's position as the most likely explanation, you have proved yourself to be
a) a freaking idiot or
b) a mindless apologist the person opposing the candidate that you hate
Since Sully obivously isn't stupid, I'm leaning towards choice "b". Yeah, I know. I'm going out on a limb here.
Update: Ace adds his take on this subject while linking to some others. Not surprisingly, I'm not the only one that noticed Sullivan's, umm, nuance on this particular subject.
October 14, 2004
I've given my "what the hell has happened to the Democrat party?" speech before, so I'm not going to replay it now. However, I cannot stress how much damage these assholes are doing to this great country of ours, all with the sole purpose of aquiring power. Apparently, Democrats feel(and not all Democrats- don't screw with me here) that the presidency belongs to them by divine right. Not only the presidency, of course. I'm certain that the red state boobs who continually vote for Republicans are on the Democrats' shit list, too.
Here's what needs to happen: the Dem's as a party need to get their collective asses kicked on November 2. If, by some stroke of luck, Kerry actually wins, you can kiss the country that you've known and loved goodbye. You think I'm overstating the case? Consider this:
1) The country will be deluged by a flood of lefty moonbat political advertisements, not so cleverly disguised as movies, which will make Farenheit 9/11 look mild by comparison. Expected release dates? Every election cycle. Count on it.
2) States in which the Democrats control the courts will overturn, twist, or neglect any law that acts as a potential barrier to a Democrat getting elected. The Torricelli option will become the gold standard for the entire country.
3) The broadcast networks will drop all pretense(okay, it's almost a done deal now) of objectivity in their newscasts. Any and all allegations about possible Republican misdeeds will become the subject of nightly investigative coverage. In the event that no evidence is discovered, the talking heads will simply announce that "the investigation is continuing". Videotapes of Democrats robbing the local 7/11 will be ignored or decried as "partisan attacks". You think things are being swept under the rug now? Pshaw. You haven't seen anything yet.
The last time I voted for a Democrat running for a serious office was when I submitted a ballot that I had checked for Doug Wilder, the first-and only, so far- black governor in the USA. At this rate, I may not vote for a Democrat again. Ever.
update 3: In another moment of pomo-inspired dementia, some of the lefty sites are urging their readers to spam the online pollsand then are reporting breathlessly on those very spammed poll results to prove a sizeable Kerry victory. Which is a lot like calling yourself the greatest lover in the world when all you ever do is masturbate. I think.
Update: Heard the following from a friend of mine:
If John Kerry were to be elected-he could give the State of the Union....and then give the opposition's response.
Update: And of course, no analysis would be complete without Rachel Lucas's take on it.
There is a Democrat running for a State House seat in Tennessee. Who cares, right? Well, the campaign of by Democrat Craig Fitzhugh is making news because of a flyer that he is circulating. The ad shows a picture of a Special Olympics participant running a race, with President Bush's head superimposed on top. The caption reads: "Voting for Bush Is Like Running In The Special Olympics: Even If You Win, You're Still Retarded." Well isn't that nice.
The flyers have been distributed from Fitzhugh's campaign office for two weeks. By the way, that office also serves as the Kerry/Edwards campaign headquarters. So now what is The Poodle's campaign going to say?
Assholes. Complete and utter assholes. Reminds me of Gore calling the Republicans the party with an extra chromosone. My friends with Down's Syndrome children were not amused. Somehow, I don't think that they'll be thrilled by this shit either.
You are about to read, my friends, why I could never possibly be elected if I were ever to decide to run for office.
Last night Bob Schieffer asked the candidates what they would tell to an individual who had lost his job to some worker overseas who would work for a fraction of the wages he was earning. Bush gave a mealy-mouthed response, and Kerry ignored the question altogether. Here is what I would have said ... and here is why I would never be elected:
"First of all, Bob, I would tell them that it is not their job. The job belongs to the employer, not the employee. You have the job skills. The employer has the jobs. If the employer can make a profit by purchasing your job skills to perform his job then you get a paycheck. If your job skills cost the employer too much, or if your job skills don't meet the employer's needs, then you don't get a paycheck. If you fail to develop your job skills, you run the risk of not having a paycheck. If your job skills don't match the employer's needs, you don't get a paycheck. If you charge too much for your job skills, you won't get hired. You have no right to a job. You do have a right to be left alone by government and your fellow citizens to develop your own God-given talents in such a way that employers will seek you out. You also have a right to ignore educational opportunities and to develop a slovenly work ethic so that employers will shun you. You make your choices, and you live with the consequences of your decisions. I would tell that person that any American with desirable job skills and a good worth ethic, properly priced, would have to hide under his bed to avoid getting a good job. If you believe in the year 2004 that you can build a sound career as a textile plant worker in South Carolina then you are living a lie, and that delusion will soon catch up to you. You need to understand that you are a free and sovereign individual. You don't belong to the government, and It's not the government's responsibility to provide you with a job. It's the government's job to clear the way for you to exercise your free choices, develop your skills, hone your work ethic, and contract with an employer eager to hire someone like you. Past that, you're on your own, and that's life in a free society."
And then there was the question about raising the minimum wage. That's another one you don't want to ask me.
"Look, Bob. Wages are something to be negotiated between the employer and the employee. It is not the job of government to set wages for private sector employees. Our Constitution specifically states that the government is not to alter the terms of a contract between individuals. The matter of wages paid for services rendered is something to be resolved in negotiations between the employer and employee and then expressed in the terms of a contract between the parties. The government has no role here. And while I'm addressing this, let's talk about the people who are actually earning the minimum wage. Most of these people are teenagers working in entry-level jobs. They're developing job skills and will only spend a minimum amount of time at the minimum wage. But what about that small number of people who are trying to raise a family on minimum wage. My opponent won't say this. It's harsh, but it's the truth. If you have done such a pathetic job of developing job skills and a work ethic that you cannot earn more than the minimum wage, then you have no business having children. We have far too many people in this country who have children that they know full well they cannot afford to raise. The answer to this problem is not to force employers to pay them more than they are worth. The answer is to educate people as to the cost of properly raising a child, and to encourage them to make sure they can pay the bills before they make the decision to have a baby."
Oh yeah ... that's going to get me a lot of votes. I think I'll just keep doing a talk show.
October 13, 2004
Denver Helmet Instructions: "INSERT RUNNING BACK, GAIN THOUSAND YARDS"
Denver substitute tailback Reuben Droughns, who entered the contest with 127 yard rushing in five years, ran for 193 yards.
If you're a football fan and not regularly reading Tuesday Morning Quarterback, well, what the heck is wrong with you?
And yet, on this overarching "what next" question, Bush is right. He is right that the best defense against terrorism is offense: Given the vast variety of targets from which terrorists can choose, the "homeland security" alternative is hopeless. He is right that preemptive war is a necessary option, and that we won't always know all of the facts about the threats we are preempting. And he is right, however unfashionable it may be to say so, that nation-building can be successful.
Thanks to Powerline for the link.
Update: The Alpha Patriot correctly mentions in the comments that the article's author is a real, honest to God liberal. He's not what you'd consider one of Bush's core supporters. If there are more like him, Kerry could be in trouble.
Update: Alpha Patriot also links to this site. The picture is just too darned funny.
Question: Oh great spirits of the unknown, please provide insight into John Kerry's more sensitive approach to the WOT.
Board answers: Ooh, ooh, it's moving! And the first letter is A. Okay, what's next? Wait, there it goes again... and it's on P. Gosh, I'm so excited. I have no idea what's next.... and now it's sliding again towards the right side of the board- no wait, now it's moving to the left side- now back again to the right- and now to the left. Is the answer the Hokey Pokey? Why does it keep moving its position back and forth like it can't make up its mind? I have no idea.
Okay, it seems to be settling down and moving towards... L. A-P-L; Animal Planet? No, it's moving again. And. It's. Settling. On... the letter A. I wonder if it's done? No no! It's sweeping around the board and ... the letter N. A-P-L-A-N. Aplan? Aplan? What does that mean? Well, it looks like the cursor has stopped moving and we're stuck with a nonsensical, say nothing answer. Or maybe we just don't have the insight to decipher it. Anyway, I thank the spirits for their help. The fault must lie with me for being unable to understand the response. Time to get some real answers.
Question: Does John Kerry plan to win the WOT?::shake-shake::
Answer: It is decidely so.
Answer: My Sources Say No.
Question: What? Are you just yanking my chain by giving me different answers to the same question?
Answer: It Is Certain.
Question: Are you purposely giving me opposite answers to every question?
Answer: You May Rely On It.
::mutter-mutter piece of crap mutter-mutter::
Question: Will Kerry's plan involve the French?
Answer: Reply Hazy, Try Again
Question: Will it involve the Germans?
Answer: Concentrate and Ask Again.
Question: Does John Kerry really have a plan?
Answer: Yes Definitely.
Question: Will we ever find out the details?
Answer: Don't Count On It.
And there you have it. Incontrovertible proof that Kerry does have a Plan™ to wage a more sensite WOT. What more do you need?
October 12, 2004
October 11, 2004
|To All American Voters,|
I am a senior citizen. During the Clinton Administration I had an extremely good and well paying job. I took numerous vacations and had several vacation homes. Since President Bush took office, I have watched my entire life change for the worse.
I lost my job.
I lost my two sons in that terrible Iraqi War.
I lost my homes.
I lost my health insurance.
As a matter of fact I lost virtually everything and became homeless. Adding insult to injury, when the authorities found me living like an animal, instead of helping me, they arrested me. I will do anything that Senator Kerry wants to insure that a Democrat is back in the White House come next year. Bush has to go.
I just thought you would like to know how one senior citizen views the Bush Administration.
Thank you for taking time to read my letter.
October 08, 2004
I've been participating in NFL pools(purely for entertainment, of course) since 1981 and had a losing week a total of 3 times before this season. I've managed to accomplish that particular feat twice already this year. Somehow, I just can't get a handle on the teams this year. Oh well. Anyway, I've decided to risk more humiliation by posting my weekly picks here on my blog. Feel free to ridicule my choices and/or post your own. So here they are:
Pittsburgh over Cleveland
Atlanta over Detroit
New England over Miami(my team sucks right now)
Minnesota over Houston
Dallas over NY Giants
Indy over Oakland
New Orleans over Tampa Bay
NY Jets over Buffalo
San Diego over Jacksonville
SF over Arizona
Denver over Carolina
St. Louis over Seattle
Washington over Baltimore
Green Bay over Tennessee, with 51 total points being scored
Have at it.
One good thing came from living with someone dying from cancer, albeit over a long period of time: I learned that you shouldn't concern yourself with the possibility of dying because it's the living that's important. My grandmother's hair had fallen out, she had lost a lot of weight and she was taking more pills daily than the average pharmacist dispenses. Her comment on the whole situation? Simply this: "I've lived a long and happy life. What do I have to be bitter about?"
I don't know how I would handle it if I discovered that I was dying from cancer. What I do know is that I've been shown a great example to pattern myself after.
Anyway, onto the business at hand. It's time for the 3rd annual boobiethon.
For $50, you get to see the unedited NSFW photos. However, any amount will be graciously accepted. It's for a good cause, you see. The boobage is just a bonus.
Mama(that's what we called our grandmother), this post is for you.
Chili Soup(3 gallons)
Kidney beans, dried *** 2 lbs.
1) Weigh beans before washing. Wash beans. Soak overnight in cold water. Drain.
Margarine 6 oz.
ground beef 6 oz.
green pepper, 1 ea.
chopped 10 oz.
onion, chopped 1lb.6oz.
chili powder 1/2 oz.
curry powder 1 Tbsp.
garlic, crushed 1 clove
2) Cook beef, pepper, onion, chili powder, curry powder and garlic in margarine until meat is browned.
Beef stock 1-1/2 gal.
tomato puree 2 qt.
salt 1/2 oz.
pepper 1/4 tsp.
sugar 2 oz.
worcestershire 1 Tbsp.
3) Add stock, drained kidney beans, tomato puree and remaining seasonings. Bring to a boil. Cover and simmer until beans are tender, 2 to 2-1/2 hrs.
flour 6 oz.
cold water 3 cup
4) Mix flour and water. Add to soup. Simmer 15 minutes. Remove from direct heat.
***3 lb. drained, canned kidney beans may be substituted for each 1 lb. of dried kidney beans.
102 queries taking 0.1917 seconds, 288 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.