Saturday, October 30, 2004
Everyone knows we aren't really winnng these wars with Germany and Japan. Oh, we've made some gains against the Axis of evil, but it's been 3 years, and we STILL haven't caught the bad guys who did this to us. Hitler is still sending out his propaganda, and he isn't even the one who REALLY attacked us, after all. The links between Germany and Japan have been exaggerated by this administation, to say the least. And why are we attacking Italy? Mussolini doesn't even have an army to speak of, and has never been a direct an imminent threat to this country. This President's stubborness and misjudgement in going after Germany and Italy rather than the REAL enemy, Tojo and Japan, have led us to this quagmire. And, Roosevelt obviously has no real plan for peace. Eveyone know that. It's obvious he's seeking to make this some kind of World War in order to make good his cousin Teddy's failed legacy. Everyone know that.
And look at our losses. Thousands of sons and fathers dead. And for what? We are still bottled up in England, for God's sake. And the British, and that incompetent drunk Churchill appear to be our only real allies. Oh, some small countries have joined us, due to our coercion and bribery, but the bulk of the money and the dying are coming from the United States. Everyone knows that.
That's why Roosevelt really should not be reelected. The man really is incompetent. We won't even get in to his abysmal jobs record, or the burgeoning Federal Deficit. My God, we were attacked at Pearl Harbor 3 years ago! And, he was allying with Stalin, after all. Certainly he can't be trusted to bring the war to a decent conclusion after allying with a known war criminal. And that new running mate of his! What's his name, Truman? Good Lord. What does that say about Roosevelt's judgement.
And our candidate knows how to win a war, having spent 4 months in the trenches in Belgium. Eveyone KNOWS those Trench Soldiers for Truth are all lying. Even after our candidate clarified that he did not spend Christmas with the Kaiser in 1917, but was CLOSE to Germany. Even then these 160 men won't leave him alone.
Support our Troops. And remember what our Candidate has said in battleground states from Wisconsin to Iowa to his home state of Massachussetts, Help IS on The Way. Any One But Roosevelt in '44.
The universes connect in odd ways, don't they?
Just recieved an email from Hugh. He will be on WIND 560 from 8 to 11 pm in the Chicago Market That's great news! .
He [Bush] adopted despotism and the crushing of freedoms from Arab rulers and called it the Patriot Act under the guise of combating terrorism. . . .
It's Ashcroft's fault. Where do you suppose he got that?It never occurred to us that the commander in chief of the American forces would leave 50,000 citizens in the two towers to face those horrors alone at a time when they most needed him because he thought listening to a child discussing her goat and its ramming was more important than the planes and their ramming of the skyscrapers. This gave us three times the time needed to carry out the operations, thanks be to God. . . .
This is, of course, pure Michael Moore. Obviously bin Laden has seen Fahrenheit 9/11, or at least heard about it from other terrorists who have seen it. Just as obviously, they approve of Moore's movie.
Do you suppose there are any Democrats honest enough to be embarrassed that Osama bin Laden has enthusiastically adopted their campaign themes?
We didn't find difficulty dealing with Bush and his administration due to the similarity of his regime and the regims in our countries. Whish half of them are ruled by military and the other half by sons of kings and presidents and our experience with them is long. Both parties are arrogant and stubborn and the greediness and taking money without right and that similarity appeared during the visits of Bush to the region while people from our side were impressed by the US and hoped that these visits would influence our countries. Here he is being influenced by these regimes, Royal and military. And was feeling jealous they were staying for decades in power stealing the nations finances without anybody overseeing them. So he transferred the oppression of freedom and tyranny to his son and they call it the Patriot Law to fight terrorism. He was bright in putting his sons as governors in states and he didn't forget to transfer his experience from the rulers of our region to Florida to falsify elections to benefit from it in critical times.The media is spouting the idea that the Bush administration UBL is talking about is W. But read the whole quote above. He's talking about Bush 41. This is a nuanced (to use a Kerry term) reference to Iraq and Desert Storm. The only difference between Usama's statement and a Michael Moore rant is that Usama has a longer term and better grasp on historical context. At least Usama knows there is and was a connection between himself and Iraq.
This is indeed a time to keep the radio on. Usama doesn't make these tapes in vain. They've always been a harbinger of an attack. So it is now. With the weakness of Spain as the template, Usama's plan has always been to influence the US election. And he intends to influence them in the same way he did before. All that's missing is a Kerry/Edwards bumper sticker on his cave wall.
The question has always been:
Are you voting with the terrorists, or emphatically against them?
This has been, and remains, the only issue of the most important election since 1864.
America chose correctly then.
I pray we are courageous enough to choose correctly now.
Friday, October 29, 2004
John Kerry’s sensibility is mostly against the human exploration of the solar system. His votes on space exploration have been, almost consistently, negative. His hostility towards the space shuttle and the International Space Station are just one indicator of how he feels about the whole idea of human exploration and colonization of the solar system. His record on space issues tracks closely with that of the senior Senator from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy, who may be America’s single most anti-space politician since Bill Proxmire.This article continues with a detailed look at the President's record on Space Exploration over the past 4 years. Unlike many presidents, including his own father, Bush's promises regarding the Moon and Mars have quietly been taking shape in realistic ways.
On the other hand, Kerry's record once again betrays him.
Thursday, October 28, 2004
There is a long history of similar American political invective. The elections of 1864 saw far worse slurs. Statesmen like Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan were routinely decried as savages, baboons and senile. For all the current name-calling, no one has accused either candidate of fathering illegitimate children, turning the country over to the Pope, or being intoxicated while on the job -- standard election year slander of the past. There are no riots in the streets, as was common in 1968.
Yet the true nature of our loud divisiveness is rarely remarked upon. In the last three decades, there has been a steady evolution from liberal to moderately conservative politics among a majority of the voters, whether gauged by the recent spate of Republican presidents or Bill Clinton's calculated shift to the center. Now the House, Senate, presidency and the majority of state governorships and legislatures are in Republican hands. A Bush win will ensure a conservative Supreme Court for a generation.
First of all, It wouldn't surprise me, nor would it lower in any way my esteem for Abraham Lincoln. I believe he would have much to say about our current election. He too faced reelection in the midst of war, and he too faced a weak, media hyped candidate in MacClellan. He was by no means certain to win, but thank God he did. His courage during that awful period of time stands as one of the great triumphs of human will in history. But there is danger in viewing history through the prism of our own cultural battles. History in the end is immutable and unchangeable, despite numerous Star Trek episodes to the contrary. It must be seen through the prism of its time, not our own.
The review makes much of Lincoln's style of writing, and his close friendship with Joshua Speed, among others. The main arguments appear to be that they shared a bed, and Lincoln ended his letters to Speed with "Forever Yours." Sharing rooms and beds was not at all uncommon in that day and age. To make the leap to homosexual affairs says more about agendas than it does about history.
At another point, much is made of a close friendship between his bodyguard, Captain Dickerson and Lincoln, even quoting some Washington gossip of the time:
The Dickerson-Lincoln affair was common gossip in Washington’s high society, as Tripp notes with a citation from the diary of the wife of Assistant Navy Secretary Gustavus Fox: "Tish says, Oh, there is a Bucktail soldier here devoted to the president, drives with him, and when Mrs. L is not home, sleeps with him. What stuff!"What is missed here is historical context. Lincoln would have been quite content if the worst name he was called was homosexual! Tyrant, great ape, buffoon, and worse were hurled at Lincoln from the beginning of his administration right to the end, with John Wilkes Booth shouting "Sic Temper Tyrannus!" as he vaulted from the Presidential box with Lincoln's blood on his hands.
It is easy to see the past through our own filters of the present, and a bad study of history to do so. Lincoln's letters are filled with intimacy. I would refer you to a wonderful compilation of his letters The Living Lincoln, by Paul M. Angle and Earl Schenck Miers. Time after time, Lincoln ends his letters with variations of "Forever Yours." To pounce on this one phrase seems forced to me.
There appears to be a tendency within the gay community to confuse male bonding and intimate relationships between men with sex. I would include references to David and Jonathan as an example. It reveals the same chauvinism as seeing women as only sex objects, and being unable to see that a man can have a relationship with a woman without sexual behavior being a part of it. It appears to be a part of our 21st century culture. It would be tragic to place our society's view of sexual behavior on our reading of the history of the 19th century.
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
Titan, the only known moon in the Solar System with an atmosphere. Taken yesterday by The Cassini probe orbiting Saturn
Tuesday, October 26, 2004
Hmmm. Seems Sadam was already spiriting those EXPLOSIVES out of the cache during our year long "rush to war." Wonder what else he got out. WMD, anyone?
Sounds like the only CaCA in this non story is all over the faces of both Kerry and The New York Times.
Oh, and all over any Kerry Kool Aid drinker who believed it.
Honestly, how can you vote for this guy?
Sunday, October 24, 2004
Friday, October 22, 2004
From Charles Krauthammer:
And this at the end:
The centerpiece of John Kerry's foreign policy is to rebuild our alliances so the world will come to our aid, especially in Iraq. He repeats this endlessly because it is the only foreign policy idea he has to offer. The problem for Kerry is that he cannot explain just how he proposes to do this.
The mere appearance of a Europhilic fresh face is unlikely to so thrill the allies that French troops will start marching down the streets of Baghdad. Therefore, you can believe that Kerry is just being cynical in pledging to bring in the allies, knowing that he has no way of doing it. Or you can believe, as I do, that he means it.
He really does want to end America's isolation. And he has an idea how to do it. For understandable reasons, however, he will not explain how on the eve of an election.
Think about it: What do the Europeans and the Arab states endlessly rail about in the Middle East? What (outside of Iraq) is the area of most friction with U.S. policy? What single issue most isolates America from the overwhelming majority of countries at the United Nations?
The answer is obvious: Israel.
In what currency, therefore, would we pay the rest of the world in exchange for their support in places such as Iraq? The answer is obvious: giving in to them on Israel.
John Kerry says he wants to "rejoin the community of nations." There is no issue on which the United States more consistently fails the global test of international consensus than Israel. In July, the U.N. General Assembly declared Israel's defensive fence illegal by a vote of 150 to 6. In defending Israel, America stood almost alone.
You want to appease the "international community"? Sacrifice Israel. Gradually, of course, and always under the guise of "peace." Apply relentless pressure on Israel to make concessions to a Palestinian leadership that has proved (at Camp David in 2000) it will never make peace.
The allies will appreciate that. Then turn around and say to them: We're doing our part (against Israel), now you do yours (in Iraq). If Kerry is elected, the pressure on Israel will begin on day one.
I have no faith or trust in John Kerry. He turns with every political gust, with no anchor save one. He's a globalist. He has shown, again and again, that he trusts the "international community" more than he does the People of the United States. And he has shown a deep distrust of all things military. This would be a disaster to the current war.
His election would be a change of Presidents in the midst of a global war, and I firmly believe would signal to the Islamo-Fascists a renewed optimism. His law enforcement approach to terrorism would be a return to September 10th. And I fear, on this dark and gloomy day, that this nation may not survive another September 11th.
Hopefully, the clouds will lift, as will my mood. To awaken on November 3rd to President Kerry would be the beginning of storms for all of us.
Thursday, October 21, 2004
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
Q: You'd be different from Laura Bush?How uppity can you get? Apparently quite a bit more if you are Teresa Heinz Kerry.
A: Well, you know, I don't know Laura Bush. But she seems to be calm, and she has a sparkle in her eye, which is good. But I don't know that she's ever had a real job — I mean, since she's been grown up. So her experience and her validation comes from important things, but different things. And I'm older, and my validation of what I do and what I believe and my experience is a little bit bigger — because I'm older, and I've had different experiences. And it's not a criticism of her. It's just, you know, what life is about
Please don't buy the spin. This is a profound document, written with love and compassion for both sides. It is a call for unity, with an understanding that unity may not be possible. It leaves the door open for both sides, yet is firmly based on the historic, orthodox beliefs of the Church. I am most profoundly touched by these words, at the end of the report:
156. We call upon all parties to the current dispute to seek ways of reconciliation, andThese are words that should give pause to both sides of the dispute. The Windsor Report invites and encourages unity, yet shows a realistic understandng that unity may not be possible. A thoughtful summary of the report can be found here.
to heal our divisions. We have already indicated (paragraphs 134 and 144) some
ways in which the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Diocese of New
Westminster could begin to speak with the Communion in a way which would
foster reconciliation. We have appealed to those intervening in provinces and
60 dioceses similarly to act with renewed respect.105 We would expect all provinces
to respond with generosity and charity to any such actions. It may well be that
there need to be formal discussions about the path to reconciliation, and a
symbolic Act of Reconciliation, which would mark a new beginning for the
Communion, and a common commitment to proclaim the Gospel of Christ to a
broken and needy world.
157. There remains a very real danger that we will not choose to walk together.
Should the call to halt and find ways of continuing in our present communion
not be heeded, then we shall have to begin to learn to walk apart. We would
much rather not speculate on actions that might need to be taken if, after
acceptance by the primates, our recommendations are not implemented.
However, we note that there are, in any human dispute, courses that may be
followed: processes of mediation and arbitration; non-invitation to relevant
representative bodies and meetings; invitation, but to observer status only; and,
as an absolute last resort, withdrawal from membership. We earnestly hope that
none of these will prove necessary. Our aim throughout has been to work not for
division but for healing and restoration. The real challenge of the gospel is
whether we live deeply enough in the love of Christ, and care sufficiently for
our joint work to bring that love to the world, that we will “make every effort to
maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4.3). As the primates
stated in 2000, “to turn from one another would be to turn away from the
Cross”, and indeed from serving the world which God loves and for which Jesus
It would appear Bishop Frank Griswold, Presiding Bishop for the Episcopal Church USA, may not heed the counsel of this report. This is sad, but a part of the process will be a period of denial and anger. . This report is but the first step in a long process, either toward unity, or separation. Time will tell which way the Anglican Communion goes.
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
Last night I had the strangest dream. I guess it was a nightmare, really. I remember most of it, except how it ended.It goes downhill from there.
First I dreamed Kerry won the election. That wasn't so bad in itself. He seemed Presidential enough for the job. He had a dignified bearing, spoke well, didn't mangle his phrases. People were weary after four years of uncertainty under George Bush and ready to try something new.
Kerry started off well. On January 22, in a burst of world optimism, he went to the U.N. and laid down his mea culpa. America had gone it alone too long, he said. We were ready to cooperate with the rest of the world. The General Assembly gave him a 15-minute standing ovation. His speech was cheered wildly in cities from Paris to Berlin to Peshawar. A new day had dawned. Peace was at hand.
The only concrete result that came out of his U.N. visit, however, was that Poland decided to accelerate its troop withdrawal, already scheduled for 2005. Other allies said that since Kerry was throwing in the towel, they were going to leave sooner than later as well. Everyone but Great Britain packed up and headed home. Meanwhile, Kerry visited France and Germany to hold long talks with President Chirac and Chancellor Schroeder. The main outcome, however, was that they told him Iraq was his problem and wished him well. Meanwhile, terrorists in Iraq stepped up their operations
On a similar note, look who is endorsing Kerry. None other than Yasser Arafat and the PLO.
And who is Israel supporting? Well, who do you think? These two facts should give Jewish Americans pause as they pull the lever on November 2nd, or earlier in some states.
On more than one occasion, Senator Kerry has referred to the fight at Tora Bora in Afghanistan during late 2001 as a missed opportunity for America. He claims that our forces had Osama bin Laden cornered and allowed him to escape. How did it happen? According to Mr. Kerry, we "outsourced" the job to Afghan warlords. As commander of the allied forces in the Middle East, I was responsible for the operation at Tora Bora, and I can tell you that the senator's understanding of events doesn't square with reality.And this:
Someone is either wrong or lying. Who do you believe here? Tommy Franks, or John Kerry? You can't believe both. You may desperately want to believe John Kerry, but do you really? General Franks was there, and has everything to lose by lying. John Kerry has everything to lose by telling the truth. Hmmm.....
Contrary to Senator Kerry, President Bush never "took his eye off the ball" when it came to Osama bin Laden. The war on terrorism has a global focus. It cannot be divided into separate and unrelated wars, one in Afghanistan and another in Iraq. Both are part of the same effort to capture and kill terrorists before they are able to strike America again, potentially with weapons of mass destruction. Terrorist cells are operating in some 60 countries, and the United States, in coordination with dozens of allies, is waging this war on many fronts.
As we planned for potential military action in Iraq and conducted counterterrorist operations in several other countries in the region, Afghanistan remained a center of focus. Neither attention nor manpower was diverted from Afghanistan to Iraq. When we started Operation Iraqi Freedom we had about 9,500 troops in Afghanistan, and by the time we finished major combat operations in Iraq last May we had more than 10,000 troops in Afghanistan.
Sunday, October 17, 2004
The highlight of the evening was a handshake with Alan Keyes, just before he gave a rousing speech that brought the house to its' feet several times. He does fill a room with his presence. He has a rare ability to focus completely on the person he is talking to. When you talk to him, you truly do feel there is noone else in the room. It's a rare gift, and serves him well in one on one campaigning. It was a great evening, even though I had to leave early, and get home to take my nebulizer. Too many people, too little air in the room. Sigh. But it was worth it.
More than 30 Canadian internet pharmacies have decided not to accept bulk orders of prescription drugs from US states and municipalities.Well, at least Canada isn't one of the coerced and the bribed....
The move delivers a potentially serious setback to US politicians most notably Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry campaigning to give Americans easier access to cheap drugs from Canada.
Saturday, October 16, 2004
Friday, October 15, 2004
After the second presidential debate, in which John Kerry used the word "plan" 24 times, I said on television that Kerry has a plan for everything except curing psoriasis. I should have known there is no parodying Kerry's pandering. It turned out days later that the Kerry campaign has a plan -- nay, a promise -- to cure paralysis. What is the plan? Vote for Kerry.
This is John Edwards on Monday at a rally in Newton, Iowa: "If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk, get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."
As a doctor by training, I've known better than to believe the hype -- and have tried in my own counseling of people with new spinal cord injuries to place the possibility of cure in abeyance. I advise instead to concentrate on making a life (and a very good life it can be) with the hand one is dealt. The greatest enemies of this advice have been the snake-oil salesmen promising a miracle around the corner. I never expected a candidate for vice president to be one of them.Read the whole thing. Dr Krauthammer is both a doctor, and paraplegic. He has the authority and the experience to chastise the really asinine remarks made by the junior Senator from North Carolina.
|Statement by John O'Neill on "Nightline" Appearance|
|Dated:||Friday, October 15 2004 @ 08:00 AM PDT|
While I have a tremendous amount of respect for Ted Koppel and ABC News I was appalled to learn that ABC News would go to the lengths of traveling to Vietnam to interview three Viet Cong communists in yet a third attempt by ABC to corroborate John Kerry’s version of the events that took place on February 28th, 1969.
Thursday, October 14, 2004
And Kerry had no answer. I've got to read the transcript later to figure out what he did say, but it was obvious he was fumbling the response. It's great that he was an altar boy. Rumor has it he also served in Vietnam for a few months, but it really doesn't explain why he votes in favor of the extremist position of killing babies about to be born, or why Catholic Bishops would recommend voting against the first Catholic nominee for President in a generation. And on questions of faith, Mr. Kerry looked puzzled. You could almost see the spin wheels turning, knowing he must say something profound, but simply couldn't find it.
Bush was clear, and at times positively wonkish. A good performance overall. The halting, tired look of the first debate is gone. Makes you wonder what was going on that night? Last night he was clear and open, especially when explaining his education programs. You can tell these are close to his heart, as are tax cuts. Bush can be quite eloquent when discussing his core beliefs, and stands in sharp contrast to Kerry, who again appears to have few if any core values, except the ambition to get elected.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
We will stop juvenile diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and other debilitating diseases... When John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going get up out of that wheelchair and walk again.In August, Charles Krauthammer wrote a remarkable column:
Compassion? There's nothing less compassionate than to construct a political constituency of sufferers (and their loved ones) by falsely and cruelly intimating that their disease is on the very cusp of cure if only the President would stop playing politics with the issue. Why, after all, was Reagan addressing the nation on a subject of which he knows nothing? Because his famous father died of Alzheimer's, and some (including, sadly, Nancy Reagan) have been led to believe that Alzheimer's is curable using stem cells. This is nonsense. Cynical nonsense. Or as Ronald D.G. McKay, a stem-cell researcher at the National Institutes of Health, admitted candidly to the Washington Post, a fiction: "People need a fairy tale." Yet Kerry began his radio address with the disgraceful claim that the stem-cell "ban" is standing in the way of an Alzheimer's cure.
When I was 22 and a first-year medical student, I suffered a spinal-cord injury. I have not walked in 32 years. I would be delighted to do so again. But not at any price. I think it is more important to bequeath to my son a world that retains a moral compass, a world that when unleashing the most powerful human discovery since Alamogordo — something as protean, elemental, powerful and potentially dangerous as the manipulation and re-formation of the human embryo — recognizes that lines must be drawn and fences erected.
For Senator Edwards to promise that people like Christopher Reeves and Charles Krauthammer will walk again if Kerry is elected President is well beyond grandstanding and pandering. It reveals the same levels of political and moral inexperience Edwards showed in his debate with Dick Cheney.
That may change after being one of the few who found, and actually listened to the first debate between Alan Keyes and Barack Obama. You too can be one of the 4 or 5 people who actually found the debate last night by clicking the link.
Truth is, Keyes ran circles around Barack Obama. From farming to transportation to national defense, Obama simply didn't measure up. I'm thinking he's been believing his own press releases.
Yes, Alan Keyes is an outsider. But he had Illinois issues down cold. He spoke eloquently, and perhaps more important, reasonably, about the need for a third airport. His command of the facts included knowing more about the Rockford airport than Obama or the local media asking the questions.
Take a listen to the debate. Or better yet, listen to the next one on 10/21/04 if you can find it. But don't write off Alan Keyes just yet. Though Judy Barr Topinka , the supposed head of the Illinois Republican Party has done everything in her power to sabotage his candidacy, Keyes support downstate appears to be growing. Perhaps not enough to win, but enough to make it interesting, and perhaps allow Conservatives to take back the Republican Party.
Mr. Obama's stand on issues has not been explored, in part due to the lack of support from Illinois Republican leaders. This site is a beginning.
Monday, October 11, 2004
"Thanks to the efforts of the ISG team, we now know that there was another, even less palatable, explanation for their duplicity. Far from seeking to protect their lucrative trade ties, the real explanation for the opposition of France and Russia to the war was that both countries' political establishments were deeply implicated in a lucrative scam to divert the profits of the UN's oil-for-food programme into their own private coffers."
Saturday, October 09, 2004
Friday, October 08, 2004
In my speeches, I have said that the United States paid a price for not stopping the looting in Iraq in the immediate aftermath of major combat operations and that we did not have enough troops on the ground to accomplish that task. The press and critics of the war have seized on these remarks in an effort to undermine President Bush's Iraq policy.
And there is this. Media Bias, anyone?
The press has been curiously reluctant to report my constant public support for the president's strategy in Iraq and his policies to fight terrorism. I have been involved in the war on terrorism for two decades, and in my view no world leader has better understood the stakes in this global war than President Bush.
The president was right when he concluded that Saddam Hussein was a menace who needed to be removed from power. He understands that our enemies are not confined to Al Qaeda, and certainly not just to Osama bin Laden, who is probably trapped in his hide-out in Afghanistan. As the bipartisan 9/11 commission reported, there were contacts between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's regime going back a decade. We will win the war against global terror only by staying on the offensive and confronting terrorists and state sponsors of terror - wherever they are. Right now, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Qaeda ally, is a dangerous threat. He is in Iraq.
President Bush has said that Iraq is the central front in the war on terror. He is right. Mr. Zarqawi's stated goal is to kill Americans, set off a sectarian war in Iraq and defeat democracy there. He is our enemy.
Our victory also depends on devoting the resources necessary to win this war. So last year, President Bush asked the American people to make available $87 billion for military and reconstruction operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The military commanders and I strongly agreed on the importance of these funds, which is why we stood together before Congress to make the case for their approval. The overwhelming majority of Congress understood and provided the funds needed to fight the war and win the peace in Iraq and Afghanistan. These were vital resources that Senator John Kerry voted to deny our troops.
Mr. Kerry is free to quote my comments about Iraq. But for the sake of honesty he should also point out that I have repeatedly said, including in all my speeches in recent weeks, that President Bush made a correct and courageous decision to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein's brutality, and that the president is correct to see the war in Iraq as a central front in the war on terrorism.
A year and a half ago, President Bush asked me to come to the Oval Office to discuss my going to Iraq to head the coalition authority. He asked me bluntly, "Why would you want to leave private life and take on such a difficult, dangerous and probably thankless job?" Without hesitation, I answered, "Because I believe in your vision for Iraq and would be honored to help you make it a reality." Today America and the coalition are making steady progress toward that vision.
Although everybody's talking about weapons of mass destruction, the story that's not being reported --you'd almost think the press "wants Kerry to win"-- is the complete collapse of John Kerry's foreign policy case, and the reason for that collapse.
The weapons of mass destruction case is a bit more, um, nuanced than a lot of the press treatment makes it sound, of course. No weapons have been found, but the Iraq Survey Group's report makes clear that Saddam wanted to outwait sanctions and then start making the weapons again:
The ISG, who confirmed last autumn that they had found no WMD, last night presented detailed findings from interviews with Iraqi officials and documents laying out his plans to bribe foreign businessmen and politicians.
Although they found no evidence that Saddam had made any WMD since 1992, they found documents which showed the "guiding theme" of his regime was to be able to start making them again with as short a lead time as possible."
But hey, Kerry voted for the war, so his arguments on that topic boil down to either (1) Bush lied, and I'm gullible: or (2) Bush and I both got fooled, but I'll do better next time. Neither is very compelling.
Thursday, October 07, 2004
It's going to take a little while to read and digest all 1,000 pages of the Duelfer Report. But his key findings can be summed up in just a few sentences:
The economic sanctions against Iraq had begun to disintegrate as early as 1996. By 1999, they were well on the way to disappearing altogether. As soon as they did so, Saddam Hussein intended to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction using the scientists and know-how he had carefully preserved through the 1990s.
In other words: If Iraq was not an imminent threat to the United States in 2001, Saddam Hussein fully intended for it to become an imminent threat as soon as possible thereafter.
There are people who regard this conclusion as no big deal. Let?s hope none of them become president.
Here's the Duelfer Report. Haven't plowed through it yet, but wanted to get out as quickly as possible.
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
This was clearly a Cheney win. Edwards was clearly out of his league. Cheney was, well, Cheney. Calm, dry humor, cutting sarcasm. Just the thing against a trial lawyer with minimal public service experience.
Jackory, take note. Good article, you may want to follow up. This certainly falls more in your expertise than mine.
UpDate From Jackory
Very much worth reading. A well balanced critique from an expert in all things musical.
Monday, October 04, 2004
This entire 90 minute debate comes down to one question: Which man will protect the United States and the American people to the best of his ability? John Kerry will heavily consult world leaders for their acceptance. He will seek assistance from the United Nations and trust it to actually support the United States, something it rarely does.
President Bush realizes that sometimes you have to take control of your own future. The war on terror is not new. It started in the 1970s in Iran. Its very possible that it will end in Iran. John Kerry and the European Union want to give the Islamic fundamentalist leaders of Iran a loaded gun in the form of nuclear fuel. George Bush does not. That was tried in North Korea by another Democratic president. I think history shows clearly that this kind of ''diplomacy'' doesnt work.
Putting it in common terms, if you had an unarmed murderer in front of you, would you hand him the gun to kill you and then hope he doesnt use it? America, lets use some common sense. You dont arm the enemy and you dont seek the worlds permission to defend yourself. Looking good standing behind a podium has little to do with making a good commander in chief. It really is that simple.
Ironic that the last astronaut to fly in Mercury, Gordon Cooper, should die today at 77. While Mercury was certainly the vehicle to put Americans on course to the Moon, it also signaled the death of the X program, rocket planes that flew through the 50's and early 60's. In many ways, Space Ship One is a trip back to those heady days of the X-15. While winning the race against the Soviets, we lost our way in Space. With the X Prize behind us, the way is open to regaining the excitement of space travel that Americans knew during the Mercury and Gemini years.
Godspeed, Gordo. You will be missed.
Exclusive: Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties -- 10/04/2004: "(CNSNews.com) - Iraqi intelligence documents, confiscated by U.S. forces and obtained by CNSNews.com, show numerous efforts by Saddam Hussein's regime to work with some of the world's most notorious terror organizations, including al Qaeda, to target Americans. They demonstrate that Saddam's government possessed mustard gas and anthrax, both considered weapons of mass destruction, in the summer of 2000, during the period in which United Nations weapons inspectors were not present in Iraq. And the papers show that Iraq trained dozens of terrorists inside its borders.
One of the Iraqi memos contains an order from Saddam for his intelligence service to support terrorist attacks against Americans in Somalia. The memo was written nine months before U.S. Army Rangers were ambushed in Mogadishu by forces loyal to a warlord with alleged ties to al Qaeda."
Sunday, October 03, 2004
Here's a quote:
We in Massachusetts know John Kerry. He got his first taste of politics 32 years ago in the cities and towns of Greater Lowell.
In his 20 years in the U.S. Senate, Kerry, a Navy war hero, hasn't risen above the rank of seaman for his uninspiring legislative record. He's been inconsistent on major issues. First he's for the 1991 Persian Gulf War, then he opposes it. First he's for the war in Iraq, then he's against it. First he's for a strong U.S. defense, then he votes against military weapons programs. First he's for the U.S. Patriot Act, then he opposes it.
Kerry's solution to stop terrorism? He'd go to the U.N. and build a consensus. How naive. France's Jacques Chirac, Germany's Gerhard Schroeder, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and other Iraq oil-for-food scam artists don't want America to succeed. They want us brought down to their level. And more and more, Kerry sounds just like them. In a recent campaign speech, Kerry said America was in the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
No doubt John Kerry sincerely wants to serve his country, but we believe he's the wrong man, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
Americans should think back three years ago to the smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center. There among the mist lay the images and memories of fallen firefighters, police, a Catholic chaplain and ordinary working citizens moms, dads, sons, daughters.
President Bush, through heartfelt tears, told us never to forget the twisted carnage and the massacre of the innocents. Yet some of us are forgetting.
President Bush told us the attacks must never happen again. Yet some of us are wavering because of the brave sacrifice of soldiers that our nation's security demands.
Well, President Bush hasn't forgotten. Nor has he lost the courage and conviction to do what is right for America.
We know if there is one thing the enemy fears above all else, it is that George Bush's iron will is stronger than his iron won't.
The Sun proudly endorses the
re-election of President George W. Bush.