Barney Frank is a tricky one. Between watching the banking industry, including Frannie Mae and Freddie Mac, fail and then finding anyone and everyone else to blame but himself on one hand and seemingly espousing libertarian ideals on the other, it makes a liberty minded individual scratch their heads. Unfortunately, it seems that, indeed, words are seldom as important as deeds.
|
In looking for a reason for our current economic issues it appears that most people think the problem is just a few years old. They find a point that backs their cause and stop looking. Democrats point to Gramm-Leach-Bliley and say ‘look, deregulation!’ Republicans point to the Community Reinvestment Act and say ‘look, social engineering’. And while both are partially right, and partially wrong, they both stopped looking at the real core problems that started in late 1970s that really opened the doors to this mess. I’ve written often about the hypocrisy of politicians in the past, but nothing prepared me for the full story on President Obama’s latest display of unmasked hypocrisy. Ending the school voucher program in Washington DC is a blatant slap in the face of anyone who thought this type of behavior would change. For years peace loving individuals have been rightfully upset about President Bush’s abuse of our Constitution in response to the War on Terror. To date, President Obama has changed the name of this action, and little else. Except for the fact that he has attempted to acquire even more power in defense of these actions than even President Bush dared push for. Is this because President Obama is more creative or is it more of a natural progression to fascism that our duopoly is driving us towards? In a letter to Edward Libby of AIG detailing his resignation from the company, Jake DeSantis provides the evidence that will most likely be missed by the populist rush to further the class warfare that this administration is waging as to why a political body has no business dabbling in running a business. President Obama, who’s supporters claim is a pragmatist, showed the exact opposite character trait and instead displayed a wonderful example of demagoguery. Well, that didn’t last long. One of the shining positive moments I had with the Obama administration lasted a whole week. Attorney General Eric Holder had promised to call off raids on Medical Marijuana dispensaries who were operating their businesses within state laws. However, yesterday that all seems to have gone up in smoke with a DEA raid on a dispensary in San Francisco. In his first 57 days in office, President Obama has seemingly tried to play both sides of an issue with little concern by anyone listening, especially the initiated, that it is happening. When will the Daily Show, where most young people get their news these days, start picking up on these? While we congratulate Barack Obama for his win for the office of President of the United States, I am hearing a lot about how this election has ushered in change. Unfortunately, as we look at the presidential and, more specifically, the rest of the elections that took place, I am not seeing as much change as one is led to believe. Three recent troubling lawsuit decisions have gotten me wondering who is responsible for ensuring that our presidential candidates meet the legal requirements of the office they are attempting to win? After some investigation, it appears that at the present time, that would be ‘no one’. There is a feeling in this country that the Republicans are solely responsible for the failures of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, that their failure was a result of a lack of oversight and regulation that is indicative of Republican operating methods. But is that true or does it require ignoring sticky facts?
I’m afraid we temporarily have. And that is my hope that it remain temporary, though that hope is fading as we continue down the path of scaring people into compliance and willingness to give up their individual liberties to a governing body that we give dominion over us. Once again, the Democrats controlling congress have put the screws to the poor in the United States. By passing into law the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 they have taken away one of the few avenues for poor and lower income families to acquire homes, requiring them to ‘give’ money to rich landlords instead of earning equity on a house that they would be buying themselves. It seems a recent event in Illinois has caused a racial stir and has the Obama campaign asking for one of his delegates to step down. Has a new banned word entered our vocabulary? And further, is the understanding and inclusive Obama doing the right thing by asking this delegate to give up her position? This week marks an important, but not very publicized, admission by the Department of Homeland Security that the attempts to institute a National ID card may well be out of their reach. What happens in the next phase of this fight is anyone’s guess. Yes, this is no April Fool’s joke. This past week, in another example of how even long time party politicians are walking away from what their parties, Mike Gravel officially became a member of the Libertarian Party. And his reasons for joining are much like those I hear from people still reluctantly holding on both sides of the aisle. No, this article is not about The Red Green Show, a great comedy show that ran from 1991 to 2006 unfortunately. Instead, this is about how many in the Green movement are little more than socialists seeking to obtain authoritarian control of every aspect of our lives. On August 28, 1963 Martin Luther King, Jr gave a speech that today is still recognized as one of the greatest speeches ever. It stirred a nation already fighting ideals of injustice, hatred and racism, providing a true focal point for all of those emotions that were stirred up to hone in on. But how much are we still focused on that message today? Or has that energy and focus been diverted to other purposes that are not about freedom but the restriction of it? While doing some research on another article I came across a poll performed by Rasumussen Reports that has convinced me that we my be past the point of no return on Civil Liberties in this country. It seems that more than 51% of Americans say that security is more important than privacy. President Bush is being stonewalled, not by the compliant Democratically controlled congress, but by the states, in his attempt to implement a National ID Card. But why is there so much pushback? Wouldn’t it solve a lot of problems? That is debatable, but at what cost? And specifically, what is it about THIS particular card that draws the ire of many civil rights advocates? In part four of the LP Platform series I examine what the freedom of religion really means in the United States, both legally and politically. At a time when most countries required citizens to honor a specific religion, the US decided the freedom was more important than forcing others to believe a certain way. How has this experiment been working out in the years since the Constitution was ratified? And how does my visit to hear the Dali Lama speak have anything to do with it? Part three of the LP Platform series brings us to the Freedom of Communication section of the Libertarian Party platform. Defending our freedom of speech and methods of communication is an imperative and the platform provides us a view of how libertarian principles see the issue. In part two of my sixteen part series discussing the various sections of the national Libertarian Platform, we start getting into the meat of the issues. This time we look at Section 1.1, Freedom and Responsibility. Part one of sixteen. Because of a lot of misinformation about the Libertarian Party exists, some innocent and some malicious, over the next sixteen articles in this series I plan to discuss each section of the national Libertarian Party platform as way to illuminate readers on basic libertarianism and the Libertarian Party in specific. In this first article we begin at the beginning, the Libertarian Party’s Statement of Principles. A petition drive is in the works to get ballot initiatives on several states to lower the drinking age from 21 to 18. Proponents of this drive bring up the argument that a person who can vote and join the military should be allowed to make their own decision. Push back is being given by groups such as MADD and The National Transportation Safety Board who tell us that the higher age saves lives. The question is, which is the more principled stand, to keep us safe or the right to make our own decisions? The buck in this well known phrase is not a dollar bill but an old poker term for an object used to identify the current dealer of a hand. The Buck Stops Here is another phrase using the term as well. While I’m not aware of how many people know this little fun-fact, it is clear that President Bush is not very familiar with these phrases at all. It appears that not only are Americans becoming increasingly un-enthralled with the Republican Party but the Democratic Party is also losing much of the support it had. The result, for the first time I can remember we are becomming an Independent country. Most who have read my writings knows that I supported the invasion of Iraq in order to remove Saddam Hussein from power and have written about my reasons behind that belief, a belief I still stand behind. However, besides being upset with how the Bush administration ’sold’ the war I was even more disgusted by the management of the post-war Iraq. Recently I’ve seen several members of the Democratic Party suggest that the great thing about their party is that members are free to have different opinions. They are a diverse group, I hear. But how true is that, especially when it comes to the war? Two recent incidents make me wonder if this idea of a unified diversity isn’t starting to show cracks. When the Democrats across the country ran for control of congress in 2006, they did so citing massive pork and overspending by the Republicans controlling the federal government. And they were right, the Republicans over the previous six years had spent us into more and more debts all the while making sure that as much money as they could get went back to their local communities in the form of pork projects. of SOMETHING. The Democrats are just sure of it. To that end Senator Henry Waxman will be calling for hearings into the matter by bringing Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald to testify before congress about his investigation that resulted in the conviction of VP Cheney’s Chief of Staff, I. Scooter Libby, on two counts of Making False Statements and two counts of Perjury. Indiana Representative Dan Burton has been in trouble recently for missing 19 votes due to a scheduling conflict with a golf tournament. So when it was discovered that as the second ranking Republican member of Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs he was absent for the recent hearings on the problems at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, it was understandable that the local media wanted to know why he wasn’t able to make it. His response sure didn’t disappoint. Today the House of Representatives passed the Employee Free Choice Act. Though it is very doubtful that this bill will ever be passed by the Senate and then survive a promised presidential veto, I’ve been reading up on the bill to determine why it is being implemented and I have to say that the need for this escapes me completely and further makes me wonder just who the supporters of the bill are trying to protect. For the past several months we have seen many stories in the press about Senator Barack Obama and how he has wide appeal among voters. He is seen as someone who can unite those on both sides of the aisle and independents as well. Or, so the press would have you believe. But is this the truth or just another example of how the media is trying to frame the debate once again. When I first read the good news that Maine had decided to not be bullied into enforcing the ill-conceived Real ID act, I thought it was a nice gesture but would be a minor footnote once the entire story was written years from now. But as I learned more about what other states are doing in regard to this intermediate step towards a national ID I was joyous to find that several of them are also taking a hard look at how best to respond to the law and the conerns appear to cross party lines. Sen. Richard Lugar yesterday commented on the recent non-binding resolution on the Bush troop surge in Iraq passed by the senate. As one of the few Republican leaders that I feel has the qualities to actually run for president of the United States, his opinion seems to me to be shared by most people who are against the idea of increasing the troop numbers in Iraq but not politically invested in the Democratically controlled Congress. Is the idea to stop the troop surge or just make political points? In an amazing example of just how much this day is a ’slow news day’, one of the top stories on Google News is that John Kerry has announced that he would not seek a presidential bid for 2008. Shocking! Not that he isn’t running, I think that was a no-brainer, but that anyone thought he would or cares that he isn’t. Sometime this evening, if it hasn’t already happened, Saddam Hussein will most likely be executed for a portion of the crimes he committed during his reign as dictator of Iraq. While his lawyers are pleading for a stay of execution for various reasons, many in Iraq are glad to see this chapter of Iraq come to an end. However, should he be executed now without being tried for the many other crimes he’s been accused of? And what does the execution mean in the grand scheme of events in Iraq? It’s becoming more frustrating to be an American every day, especially one that still believes in equal rights for individuals. Now we learn that South Africa is more enlightened than the United States of America by moving towards ensuring that homosexual citizens who love each other will be granted the same legal rights as heterosexual citizens enjoy. Once again today we are given an example of exactly why John Kerry was not elected president of the United States. At a time when the country was screaming for SOMEONE with any political savvy or even common sense to stand up against George Bush, the best that the Democratic Party could trot out is this poor excuse of a leader. It is a real shame to think that this was the best person that the Democrats had for the job in 2004. Recently the Republican controlled government, with the help of many of the Democrats who say that they should be counted on to counter the Republican’s advances, passed and signed into law a Port Security bill. Unfortunately, in an example of big government politics they also added a rider to the bill that had absolutely nothing to do with Port Security and has crossed a line in policing the Internet that opens the door to turning us more into China and Germany than we ever thought possible. As election time rolls near and you see many on the left correctly and sometimes incorrectly accusing the right of using dirty tricks against their opponents, don’t let them fool you into thinking that Republicans are the only ones who use these techniques. Recent examples show us the levels that Democrats and their supporters are willing to stoop in order to win the latest “Most important election in our history”. Today’s story turns out to be about body armor. I recently was in a conversation with someone about what Democrats are standing for these days. I was not impressed with the rhetoric but lack of specifics on the DNC website (not that the RNC website was any better) and was told to go look at individual sites of the candidates. In doing so I ran across a bill by Dianne Feinstein named PERFORM (S. 2644). For the past few months we’ve been subjected to the details of the Democratic primary race in Connecticut. I’ve seen many who were against the war in Iraq point to this election as a validation that their position was the majority now, including pointing to polls supporting their position. But are they really right? Harry Browne’s passing earlier this year was a sad day for many. He was a smart and engaging person who really understood how government works, or rather doesn’t work, and why. Before his passing he left on a list of the Seven Principles of Government that I feel should be required reading in our Civics classes. Of course, our education being controlled by Government helps those in power stay in power so I fear it will never happen. However, I wanted to go over those principles and examine them in the context of what we see happening around us now. I’ve not commented on the issues going on in the Middle East much. My disgust with both sides has really caused me to start becoming hard hearted to the whole situation. But a discussion with my wife about the subject caused me to see the issue in a little different light that has me thinking of what I now believe is the only real way to resolve the whole affair.
In February of 2002, Kevin Smith wrote a short called “The Flying Car“. It featured Dante and Randal, two characters in Kevin’s Clerks and the soon to be released Clerks II movies. While it is a very funny short, Kevin wrote a climactic monologue for Randal that I have always thought wonderfully captured what is missing in the US these days, especially in the world of politics. I’ve been seeing the domestic abuse billboards around my town for some time and I think they are great. They provide information and possible hope to those involved to seek help, real help, so that the violence will stop. But I noticed the other day as I read one quickly that there is another kind of abuse going on that fits the same patterns that very few seem to be educating and fighting for. That, of course, is Governmental Abuse. Today a measure was passed to give the president a ‘line item veto’. This of course confuses me, and it may you as well, considering that the Supreme Court struck down a similar measure when Clinton was in office. So why did they waste more of our money repeating the process again when they’ve been shown that it isn’t constitutional? Well, the answer comes into play every couple of years in the US. Instead of following the suggestion of a coalition of tech companies, academics and computer programmers that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was too oppressive and should be scaled back, congress is now determined to EXPAND the powers of the federal government to combat copy protections through a new amendment to the DMCA. IPac has recently gotten a hold of the new bill entitled The Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2006 (IPPA) and it’s worse than anyone could have imagined. Socialism has been with us for some time and for many people who are convinced they speak for the best of all of us it has been touted as the only true humane form of government. Unfortunately, it only works when it can take the human part out of the equation. Diversity must be ignored and abandoned if we are to live in a truly socialist world, something that I believe most people are not willing to give up. I love everyone having access to discuss and expand upon the traditional journalism as we have seen over the past few years. However there is a dark side to this freedom that results in inaccurate or wildly theoretical opinion being presented and built upon as fact. No greater example of this can be seen than with the recent explosion in the blogosphere of damning but questionable articles concerning the Plame case. While both parties are guilty of reaching to the heart of their constituents instead of their heads by using fear, anger and hatred to convince them to support them or more likely to NOT support ‘the other guy’, recently the democratic party has stepped up the game in order to regain the control that they’ve lost over the past few years. Once again a black person is using their race to explain their inappropriate actions. Rep Cynthia McKinney, accused of striking a Capitol Hill police officer, stated Friday that the officer started the incident by “inappropriately touching and stopping” her after she walked past a security checkpoint. Joined at her side were the usual suspects, Harry Belafonte and Danny Glover. And why was the touching and stopping ‘inappropriate’? Why else, because the policeman is a white male and she is a black female. When an injustice or problem comes before us we instinctively want something to be done to fix it. If someone is down on their luck or a person is being unfairly victimized based on something they have no control over, we want to see the little guy ‘win’ and beat the system that is causing their pain. So many times we say to ourselves, ‘There Ought To Be A Law’ to prevent this from happening again! But is making another law really the best way to handle these events? With a capital T; that rhymes with P; that stands for Police State. Recently our congresscritters and president decided to beef up and update the laws regarding violence against women, including harassment and stalking. Of course, they added in a few additional riders that had little or nothing to do with the purpose of the bill (new ATF and Postal Service rules are included). However, under section 113 under the heading ‘Preventing Cyberstalking’ is an unfortunately worded new law that could get many of us on the internet thrown in jail for doing nothing more than what I am doing right now. Recently an event that I would like to call “Much Ado About Nothing”, or as Bill O’Reiley preferred to call it “The War on Christmas”, took place in Talk Radio Land and the Blogosphere. It was a story about how a majority group felt persecuted because a few governmental and private corporations decided to call the tree used to celebrate the Christmas holidays a ‘Holiday Tree’ instead of a ‘Christmas Tree’. Of course, the Christmas Tree has been deemed a secular symbol for as long as I can remember so I wonder where the persecution came in. However, now it’s Christianity’ turn to do the persecuting by determining that an airing of a South Park episode is an abomination and must be silenced. It was a scary story fulfilling the darkest fears of every one of us concerned with the far reaching spying of our government upon us. For a report, a student at the University of Massachusetts was instructed to check out the original Peking version of “The Little Red Book” by Mao Zedong. The student did as directed and was visited some time after by two agents from Homeland Security. The agents informed the student that the book was on a ‘watch list’ and that, coupled with the fact that he had spent time abroad, triggered an investigation. This information was then given to the professor at the university and he decided to make it public. The unfortunate reality? The student later broke down in tears as he admitted that the entire story was made up. There has been mention lately in the comments on these blog pages about what the government should be doing, can do and is constitutionally allowed to do. But underneath those discussions we need to understand what makes government different from other organizations. Private organizations like the Red Cross, the NAACP, MADD, the Salvation Army, Angie’s List and the ACLU can all perform functions the citizens of a regional area need. Most things the government can do can be performed by similar privately ran organizations, so what is it that the government can do that these organizations can’t? Simply put, the government is the only body that we have legally given the power of force over its citizens. A new theory for the creation of the universe has been developed and subsequently named ‘Unintelligent Design’. While the theory is new it is only slightly more recent than the increasingly discussed theory by the similar name ‘Intelligent Design’. Followers of the new theory are hoping to petition school boards across the country to teach this theory alongside Evolution and Intelligent Design and are hoping that the supporters of other similar origin science theories support their right to be included in our children’s educational curriculum. Many people may feel that Irwin Schiff is an despicable man, spending decades pointing out a serious flaw in our income tax code that what individuals earn are wages, not income, and therefore not subject to current federal income tax laws. Others may feel that he is a hero for taking on the federal government in what they see as a major overstepping of federal power. Still others may not even know who Irwin Schiff is. But we should all agree that the ‘justice’ being handed down to him now by an overzealous Department of Justice is worse than anything done in Abu Grahib or Guantanamo, and it is being done to a 78 year old American Citizen. The administration did a quick job of removing Saddam Hussain from power in Iraq with very little loss of life. For that, I commend them. However, the post invasion actions in Iraq have been, to put it mildly, embarrassing. Not only that, any attempt to win the hearts of the Iraqi people have failed at a high cost to the United States. If the Iraqi people supported our occupation, understanding their security would be improved by the additional security that we could provide, then perhaps it would be worth it. Helping a fledgling new democracy get their constitution and government in order. But we know the sad truth now that our approval there by the very people we are trying to help is at an all time low. Well, my home state of Indiana is at it again. Sen. Patricia Miller has introduced a bill that would make it illegal to have children though assisted pregnancies, unless you are married. Even further, intrauterine insemination, in vitro fertilization or other procedures must be approved by the state and those participating must register with the state and provide information such as values, hobbies and talents, personality descriptions and religious background. Not only is the proposed law blatantly unconstitutional, it steps all over the basic ideals that this country was founded upon. For years there have been disagreements about the place of religion in the United States. Some say that religion is destructive to enlightenment and free thought. Others say that a person’s religion is their own business and should be left to them to decide how to believe as long as it doesn’t infringe on anyone else’s right to the same. Still others are certain that only religion can keep our society from anarchy and push the bounds of the Separation of Church and State daily. Is there a way to determine which is correct? In my previous article entitled Failure on Every Level, I detailed some of the failings in the events leading up to and during the horrific images and stories we were presented on our TV screens during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. It was obvious from these events that New Orleans was failed by the Mayor’s office, Governor’s office and FEMA. However, it appears that I left someone out that may have failed us all during that same time. The hurricane Katrina passed over New Orleans last week. In it’s wake it left a city destroyed and a populous in desperate ways. For too many days the remaining survivors of the hurricane that did not make it out to safety before were left without water, security and protection from the elements and those looking to harm others. The makeshift shelters were nowhere near adequate to protect them and help did not arrive in time to save the lives of some. But where was the failure? Who is to blame? I was hoping it wouldn’t happen, but it sure didn’t take long for the conspiracy theorists and hatemongers that make up the far left of the Democratic party and the zenophobic bigoted righteous far right came out of the woodwork in respect to Katrina. There are obviously plenty of areas for debate in the coming months, once we have stabilized the situation, to determine if the lack of funding FEMA had anything to do with the disaster, those discussions are proper and do not look good for the president at this time. However, those are not the discussions I’m speaking about. Let’s take a gander at some of the discussions going on today… (warning, some quoted language is a bit harsh) Normally conservatives are picked out as being a group consistently trying to bring back the past. But over the past few years their penchant for nostalgia has been far surpassed by the liberals who are trying to liken any event to the ‘good old days. Those days, of course, are during the civil rights movement and Vietnam, the age of flower power and Woodstock. These were important events on either side of the spectrum and should be held in remembrance for the enormity of what they meant. Unfortunately, in calling their images back into vogue and comparing every event of the day to them for attempted political gain is only cheapening and sullying what that time in our history meant. After reading Paul Siegel’s post regarding a national sales tax from yesterday along with many of the responses that were either wrong or misinformed I decided to go ahead with this post that addresses HR 25, the implementation of the fair tax plan instead of addressing them in the comments of his post, which was directed more generally at sales taxes. First, let’s simply state what HR 25 is. As debate on an ‘exit strategy’ for Iraq continues on (and on and on) the one thing that strikes me is how both political parties are completely missing the point. The end result is that we end up with the two large parties slugging it out for political gain, leaving the real needs for Iraq, the US and the Middle East twisting in the wind. Recently there has been a lot of discussion about western Islamic groups denouncing terrorism. Like many of us I said ‘Finally!’ and started reading more about who was saying what. And, just as I was afraid, the media isn’t looking close enough at the story to give it an accurate account. With the media, things aren’t always what they seem. I know, there are probably hundreds of articles written throughout the blogosphere with this title, but I wanted to take a look at the one thing that I think the current group of terrorists are right about. When Al Qaeda decides to attack an American, they don’t care if that American is white, black, yellow, rich, poor, southern, etc. All they see is an American joined together by more common goals than separate us from each other. So why can’t we see that same thing? In a decision handed down by the US Supreme Court, the Federal, State and Local governments have just invalidated all private land ownership and turned all titles into ‘lease agreements’ that can be nullified at a moment’s notice simply because someone has convinced any group of elected or appointed officials that they can do more with your property that you are. Bob Geldof is not making many friends by warning performers in his Live 8 concerts not to openly criticize President Bush. He has stated both that “he wants to bring Bush in, not run him away” and “They refuse to accept, because of their political ideology, that he has actually done more than any American president for Africa, but it’s empirically so.” As you can imagine, this may be ruffling the feathers of many who are scheduled to perform, as well as leaders of many left-leaning political action groups. However, this isn’t the only issue that those ‘on the left’ have with the Live 8 concerts. Much of the conversation around same-sex marriages and whether they should be allowed or not have centered around the inability for same-sex couple to have children. This, we are told by some, is the reason for marriage. While I’ve shown previously that this logic is flawed, it is also not a viable excuse for limiting this right to same-sex couples as before as detailed in this new study. Recently the US Supreme Court ruled against the Libertarian Party of Oklahoma in their Ballot Access suit. The court overturned a unanimous 10th Circuit Court of Appeals finding in favor of the Libertarian Party. The court ruled that the state of Oklahoma does not have to allow members of other parties to vote in its primary. People who tried to keep Terri Schiavo alive argued at times about a possible “slippery slope” that we could end up following if we allowed her feeding tube to be pulled while there was a controversy over what she wanted to have happen in the situation. And, while I disagreed with their view and believed that legally the proper channels were taken, it appears that they may have been right in the case of Mae Magourik. Now that my home state of Indiana has decided to go down the sad path of “shielding the sanctity of marriage from activist judges” and opponents of the measure decried it as “singling out gays and lesbians for discrimination” I felt it was time to examine how both sides of the issue are both right and wrong. And unfortunately it doesn’t look like either’s deep felt beliefs will allow them to see the common ground that exists and could result in a compromise that would be both legal and proper. It’s happening again, political amnesia rampant in the liberal leadership. Recently it was the sudden lack of any desire to deal with Saddam Hussein that displayed this quaint condition to the public. A condition that so many in both parties seem to suffer from when not in power. Now it is the Social Security crisis, the very one that they themselves championed during the same years they were calling for the removal of Hussein, that they are claiming is an imagined one. While Iraq was being debated, many people asserted that the UN had become irrelevant and nothing more than a lawyer filled debating club. This was defended by many who believed that the UN was capable of filling the role needed by a world organization that could help resolve disputes and prevent war. Unfortunately, I am ever increasing of the mind that they are wrong, evidenced by such things as the Oil for Food scandal and refusal to put any teeth behind their resolutions. And their latest blunder, their unwillingness to label the death, rape and torture of thousands of people because they are not Arab as a genocide just reinforces that belief. Recently, Colin Powell intimated that one of the possible benefits of the tsunami relief efforts was that it would change the hearts of those in the world that look unfavorably on America and American values. There is a belief that our outpouring of generosity will put an end to terrorism around the world once and for all. When President Bush made his case for the invasion of Iraq, he unfortunately did so with little regard on making the full case. This is one problem I have with his administration, not that he couldn’t have, but that he didn’t. His advisors, his intelligence, the intelligence of our friends and years of knowledge about what was going on in Iraq led him to believe that the case was a “Slam Dunk” as has been often repeated. October 28, 2004 — John F. Kerry today blamed President Bush for allowing the lunar eclipse to occur last night. After spending the first fifteen minutes of his speech in Boston today celebrating the Red Sox win in the World Series, Senator Kerry launched into an attack on President Bush for failing to do anything about the terror created by the lunar eclipse. The presidential election is upon us now and appropriately enough it will be within days of Halloween. That’s because the major parties are using fear to drive people to the polls, towards their candidate and away from their opponents. Perhaps we should have Joe Rogan doing a special ‘Fear Factor, Election Night’ show for us next Tuesday night? Most everyone has heard the argument before. “If you are going to vote for a third party candidate, you’re just throwing your vote away!” I’ve heard it over and over again, usually by partisans who are worried that their candidate will lose and are trying to win you over to ‘their side’. But who is really wasting their votes? Jeff Jacoby brought up an interesting point in an article that he wrote this morning. In the article he writes the answer that you didn’t hear in this year’s debates but SHOULD have at least one time or another.
Who is John Kerry is a question that many voters are asking. According to a recent Rasmussen Reports survey, performed between the second and third debates: * 77% of voters say that they have a clear idea of where President Bush stands on key issues and 16% do not. * 56% of voters say that they have a clear idea where Senator Kerry stands on key issues and 34% do not. Last week I wrote Hypocrisy on my personal blog. I was not the first person to point out the glaring hypocrisy in John Kerry and his camp calling for the end of SBVT ads and accusations coordination between Bush’s campaign and the 527 group, nor have I been the last. But a recent look into the history of Kerry and his use of the 527’s brings even more of this to light. Hypocrisy n - insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have. John Kerry has taken his campaign to a new level today. He finally answered the charges of the group Swiftboat Veterans for Truth, but not as you would hope he would. Instead of refuting what they said or documenting some of the flaws in their documentation which is what we all hope he would do, he took it as an opportunity to attack his opponent George Bush instead. |
|
