Saturday, July 31, 2004
- Kerry imposes on some Marines at a Wendy's.
- Debra Saunders, a favorite columnist of mine, says the Democrats should have picked Dean. And, I agree they should have. At least they would have been energized about him. I always believe that if you are going to go down, go down fighting and with your guy. Dean would have lost to Bush just like Kerry is going to, maybe even worse. But, if I were a Democrat, I'd think Goldwater in 1964.
- Caption contests at The Mudville Gazette and Captain's Quarters.
- Finally, someone takes on Kerry's nonsense about "opening firehouses in Baghdad while closing them here."
- Power Line discusses the lack of a Kerry "bounce" from the convention.
- Andrew Sullivan has gotten off his knees and is back once again to seeing Kerry for what he is. No matter though. He'll go back to finding ways to support Kerry again soon enough. Forget all of Sullivan's past bullshit about his support for the war on terror, Sullivan is a one-issue militant homosexual. No wonder his readership is way down. Many people like me feel like they have been had.
- I hate polls, but if Bush is this close in New Jersey, Kerry is truly in deep shit.
- Dick Morris calls it "The Bagel Candidacy."
And, the L.A. Times Michael Ramirez has these 2 works of brilliance:
Friday, July 30, 2004
Thursday, July 29, 2004
Click here to read Paul Drabek's Blog.
Some quick hits:
- You could hear a pin drop when Kerry talked about fighting terrorism until he got to the part about the "back-door draft" in the National Guard. Oh, please.
- Sad how he mentioned how troops could not afford body armor when he voted against funding them.
- Someone tell him to call "investing" in health care and jobs is really nothing more than social welfare.
- 40,000 new troops, but "not in Iraq?" What is he offering, a new jobs program through the military?
- I haven't God mentioned that much since I last watched The 700 Club. Nice try by Kerry. He is fooling no one.
- Why hasn't Kerry, if he has so many good ideas about how to fight terrorism, introduced any legislation concerning terrorism during the 19 years as a Senator?
- 25% of the children in Harlem have asthma???!!!
- Someone, somewhere, show me an example where a Republican questioned a Democrat's patriotism. Yet, there are quite a few examples of Democrats doing that to Republicans.
- Kerry askes that we "judge him by [his] record." Well, I have been, and that is why I started this blog.
- If Bush talks about 9/11 during his speech anything like Kerry did, Bush will be accused of "politicizing" 9/11.
- Boy, those Democrats hate John Ashcroft. I love the guy, and thank God we have him.
- I thought there were "Two Americas?" Get you story straight with Edwards, will ya?
- Nice of him to take credit for helping to bring peace in Vietnam.
- 50 years of peace and prosperity after WWII? For a guy who reminds us of Vietnam every 5 seconds, it is funny how quickly he could ignore it.
- With the way they used Max Cleland, I thought I was watching the Jerry Lewis telethon.
- If Kerry is so against dependency on Saudi oil, why is he against drilling in Alaska, when the people there support it and the unions he is owned by support it too?
- Nice downplay of the good economic news of the last few months, spinning it that Bush is saying that we can't do any better. Big-time credit to who wrote that part of the speech.
- I liked his nationalism in certain parts. Too bad we all know, just like his God references, that he didn't mean a word of it. If Bush had done that, he would have been called a fascist.
I hope 50 million people saw that "you can't get ahead with us" speech.
Agree? Disagree? Did I miss something? Throw your 2 cents in the comments section.
"Wages are falling, health care costs are rising and our great middle class is shrinking. People are working weekends; they're working two jobs, three jobs and they're still not getting ahead," he was to say.
Well, he can first look to his running mate as one of the main causes of rising health care costs. And, many people are working two jobs to get ahead. What is wrong with some struggling? The only way he can fix that is to place more people on the government dole. What does his think? That we need to sleep more like the French do? Or adopt France's failed 35-hour work week? I work 2 jobs, and have most of my life. I don't need help from the government, help that really can't provide anyway. Americans are much better off than Kerry and Edwards want people to think. When Fred Thompson, former Tennessee Senator and current Law and Order actor, was asked why he didn't run for President in 2000, he responded:
"I don't want to spend several months trying to convince people they're not as well off as they think they are."
Amen, brother. And then there's this:
"Strength is more than tough words," he was to say in a speech for the Democratic National Convention.
Kerry is absolutely right, in an unintended way. Him and his fellow Democrats have been all talk for years, while Bush has been all action. Funny, isn't it, how they accuse of Bush of doing too much and too little at the same time? And, he'll claim:
"Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response," he was to say. "I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security. And I will build a stronger American military"
"an administration where "America never goes to war because we want to, we only go to war because we have to."
So, he'll wait for us to be attacked before he responds. Thanks to Kerry for at least making one thing clear.
Kerry is nothing but empty slogans and promises. The truth is right in front of you. The question is only if you want to accept it or not, or if you even care.
Toting slogans like "strength is more than tough words," the former Vietnam veteran who insisted on getting a purple heart for a scratch he might have acquired in combat, will address the DNC tonight with more of the same.
The Democrats have made great play off Kerry's war record, to the point of near ridiculousness. Yes, he served in a war. But the nature of war has changed so much that his experience is near to worthless. If anything, it might be a liability. Politicians that were once warriors tend to meddle in military operations, rather than take the more sensible approach, as is the case with George W. Bush.
While I will acknowledge that Kerry is highly decorated, that admission comes with the mindful caveat that it is a well-known fact that in that unpopular war, decorations in the US Forces were handed out liberally. Of course, I'm not saying that the decorated Vets don't deserve to be honoured. I'm merely suggesting that the facts seem to indicate that Kerry won his medals under less than exceptional circumstances. He wasn't "in country", like most veterans, for 12 months. He was there four months and 12 days. Having acquired a sufficient number of purple hearts (the scratch put him over the line), he was able to leave Vietnam early. Now, I can't speak for Kerry. But most of the soldiers I met in the course of researching my novel left me with the distinct impression that this would be considered tantamount to a desertion of their unit.
Is John Kerry a good man? I don't pretend to know. Is he a good politician? Well, he's only managed to get eight laws enacted. Eight laws sounds great, until you consider that the man's been in office for decades. One does get the distinct impression that until deciding to run for the presidency, this guy was the American equivalent of a member of the British House of Lords... happy to just have the job and the prestige that comes with it, and will coast along cheerfully, doing not much of anything at all.
But you would get a different impression if you listened to Kerry. Here's a great article dealing with the issue of his role in modern American legislation.
Kerry Exaggerates Role in Some Key Legislative BattlesThe list goes on, and you can see the entire thing here.
He says he "led the fight" on several fronts, but few bills bear his name. January 30, 2004
John Kerry is fond of saying "I led the fight" on a lot of things -- against Arctic drilling, against Bush's Medicare prescription drug legislation, for federal grants for 100,000 new police officers, against Newt Gingrich's attempts to lessen environmental regulations.
But reporters who cover Congress often gave others credit for the leading roles in some of those fights -- with scant mention of Kerry.
And The Associated Press last July found that only eight laws had Kerry as their lead sponsor, five of them "ceremonial," two relating to the fishing industry, and one providing federal grants to support small businesses owned by women.
A sampler of the many fights Kerry says he's led:
At the Democratic Presidential Debate in Durham, NH, December 9, 2003 :
I led the fight to stop Newt Gingrich from undoing the Clean Air and Clean Water Act.
At the Democratic Presidential Debate in Iowa , January 4, 2004 :
I led the fight to put 100,000 cops on the streets of America .
At the Democratic Presidential Radio Debate January 6:
I led the fight to stop the drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge.
On CBS News' Face the Nation program, January 25:
I have led the fight for deficit reduction in 1985 with Fritz Hollings and Senator Gramm of Texas.
On "Fox On the Record with Greta Van Susteren," January 19:
I personally led the fight to hold Oliver North accountable for what I believe were unconstitutional activities.
And from a Kerry TV ad that aired in Iowa in December, 2003:
There is a special interest feeding frenzy going on in Washington. A $130 billion dollar giveaway to the drug companies. John Kerry led in the fight against it.
John Kerry In Quotes: Version 4.0
Like we said at the top: We don't have to make anything up here. Kerry writes it for us. (or in this case, for RWN)
DNC Fires Blogger
Matt Stoller "quickly lost his slot on the official blog of the Democratic National Convention Committee this week because of a critical comment on an unrelated group blog," the National Journal’s Technology Daily reports.
"Stoller continues to blog on his personal site and retains the credentials he was granted to help other bloggers make preparations to come to the convention, the first major political gathering to grant credentials to such individual Web posters. But the post at The Blogging of the President, where Stoller is the editor, prompted the DNCC to sever its affiliation with Stoller and remove his name from the blog of the committee's Web site."
This is an example why we here will not hesistate to post dissenting opinions. We have enough courage in our convictions to withstand scrutiny. Obviously, the DNC does not.
Everything is about the campaign. Now, these pictures of Kerry are taken at NASA, and they are immediately available for all to see, as are the pictures of Kerry after every single place he visits. But, since these pictures make Kerry a laughingstock, right away his campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill yells that there were a "diyty trick" by NASA to "leak" these photos to "smear" Kerry. Can anyone honestly believe that?
Now, NASA has been ordered to remove the pictures (no crushing of dissent here, right? Imagine the censorship cries if pictures of Bush were removed) and NASA has been forced to defend themselves from Kerry's dopey minions.
No wonder the Democrats are not excited by Kerry. Just look at the incompetence of his campaign. If you are a Democrat, you should be embarrassed that this is the "best" guy your party could offer up for President.
Thanks for putting up this website... I am a Republican in Boston and it's been hard... I posted this on Craig's List and I thought you all could use some of it...
I am appalled at the ignorant comments and hateful things that all of you democrats are saying! I am personally a proud republican (although I agree that Cheney is a loser and Bush should put McCain on his ticket instead), who does agree with some liberal standpoints on social issues such as pro choice and the environment. I have the understanding that you all hate us because "all republicans are bigots and morons...etc..." and that you are all fighting for the greater, softer America. How come then, when I walk down the street (not saying anything, mind you) and I choose to wear a shirt that simply states, "I support my troops and respect my president," do I have hateful and racist and ignorant things yelled at me?
My friend wore a shirt proclaiming his position as a Republican and some crazy Democrat got OUT OF HIS TRUCK, and told my friend that he was going to "skull-fuck" him... Riiiight, way to be. Are you proud of yourselves for calling me a Nazi because I disagree with your foreign policy? That seems pretty pathetic to me. I don't mind intellectual discussion regarding politics, but I am deeply offended that some dumbass punk on the street who has no job and no moral fiber, but simply buys into the liberal media, has the nerve to call me a Nazi, when my grandfather fought those bastards and my father fought in Vietnam. HOW DARE YOU! Shame on you for screaming righteousness from the rooftops and then turning around to try and squash my rights to free speech.
You call yourselves Americans. I call you goddamn hypocrites. Get it together people."
Anyway, that's my two cents. I can't wait until the infestation of liberals leaves my city. I can't stand all this pro-Kerry bullshit. He's a goddamn hypocrite and a flip-flopper. I don't think he's ever stuck with an issue in his life.
Thanks for listening!
Wednesday, July 28, 2004
"Decisive. Strong. Aren't these the traits you want in a commander in chief?"
Yes, I do. And we already have that in George Bush.
And, Edwards will say this about our soldiers:
"The Stars and Stripes wave for them. The word `hero' was made for them. They are the best and the bravest. They will never be left behind, and you understand that. And they deserve a president who understands that on the most personal level, what they have gone through — what they have given and what they have given up for their country."
Gee, that's quite rich coming from a guy who voted against financing the troops because it was in his personal political interest to do so. The liberal media has already written how "electric" and "presuasive" Edwards' speech was, they just have to wait until he delivers it to run the articles.
It must be nice to be a Democrat. Say one thing before, say a totally different and opposite thing today, and no one in the party holds you to account.
Hilarious note in Entertainment Weekly: Liev Schreiber is filming a book called Everything is Illuminated and went out of his wayt to hire an aspiring Iraqi filmmaker who he'd seen on MTV's True Life:
"We felt really guilty about what our country had done to his country," says producer Peter Saraf. "And then, of course, he gets here, and it never occurred to me that he would say something like 'But I love George Bush--he changed my life!'"
That is just example of the new opportunities that Iraqis (and Afghanis) have thanks to President Bush. John Kerry, who is in hock to the left-wing kooks who talk about human rights but don't do anything beyond blaming America and Israel for everything, would throw them all under the bus if it were politically expedient to do so.
Kerry served his country admirably. It is his actions since he returned that I have serious problems with.
Is it me but it seems like they Democrats are going way out of their way to come off as Republican as possible? If you just listened to what they are saying at that the convention you'd think that they are a party of pro-war born again Christians.
Is it hypocritical for the people who have been saying that no one should use 9-11 for political gain to have a 9-11 moment of silence, parading wives of victims out again and again and talking about it every other speaker?
It's interesting how every other speaker applauds John Kerry's service in Vietnam when John Kerry and most of them were protesting the war and calling the soldiers who served "baby killers"?
If they are going to spend half of the convention talking about John Kerry's four months in Vietnam why not spend the other half talking about his decades of fighting our military, denying our soldiers the equipment and weapons that they needed and working to degrade out military and intelligence communities?
If as Terry Mcauliffe, the DNC Chairman said that the DNC is "not Michael Moore" why have they given him the key to watch the show from the Presidential Box?
Watch for the footage of Kerry in Vietnam, it's all fake as he went back and reenacted his battles days later. With the need to film him as a hero and shoot hours of footage including interviewing himself what does that say about his personality?
If 82% of the party is against the Iraq war why do they have a pro Iraq war position in their statement of election principles? Sounds like they are saying one thing to get elected while believing something else?
Tuesday, July 27, 2004
As you already know, most bloggers aren't making any money, and we hope you can spare a few bucks to help out the Captain.
We here at this site don't make a dime from our efforts, but we do this because we realize how important it is that President Bush be re-elected. We have never asked you for anything, but we are asking you to help Captain Ed to defray his huge expenses for the RNC convention. Send him a few bucks and tell him we told you to. $2, $5, whatever. You can give up a trip to Starbucks for him.
Here is a link to an NPR broadcast of Kerry’s pitch at Fenway.
It’s great, there are little Boston kids telling a reporter that “Kerry throws like a girl”.
Great site. Keep up the good work!
Thanks Josh. Funny, I saw the Kerry thing replayed several times. The only network that actually let you hear the boos was the BBC, which I saw while flipping through the channels last night.
Kerry was going to visit the Catholic National Cathedral outside Washington as part of his campaign. Kerry's campaign manager made a visit to the Cardinal and said to him, "We've been getting a lot of bad publicity among Catholics because of Kerry's position on abortion and the like. We'd gladly make a contribution to the church of $100,000 if during your sermon you'd say John Kerry is a saint." The Cardinal thinks it over for a moment and agrees to do it. Kerry shows up, and as the Mass progresses the Cardinal begins his homily. "John Kerry is petty, a self absorbed hypocrite and a nit-wit. He is a liar, a cheat, and a thief. He is the worst example of a Catholic I've ever personally known. But compared to Ted Kennedy, John Kerry is a saint."
I was active duty in the Corps in 68 to 71 and attained the coveted prefix "3" in 1969. My MOS was 31331 and during my three years on active duty, my best experiences were in the 539 Engr Det, 1st SFG(ABN). We did a lot of time off-island from Okinawa and assisted in training and personnle replacement of folks in RVN.
Also visit the following url site for info on a conference being held in Boston at the same time as the Dems are in convention - we hope to stir the pot a tad!
Regards, Walt Emerson
Mr Kerry: I would like to bring to light something that has bothered me for over thirty years. Antiwar protesters lead by the likes of you, John Kerry poisoned the public image of returning Vietnam veterans.
Because of the ostracism created by the antiwar crowd, and in particular the testimony offered by then Mr. Kerry at the Winter Soldier Senate hearings in 1971 - It has taken many years for some of us to acclimate themselves back into society, while others have never returned from Vietnam.
I had many job interviews, but when it came time to discuss my Army service, the fact that I had some combat time in Vietnam became a door closer for me. It took me almost a year to find a job, and at that, one that did not meet my expectations.
I point my finger at you, John Kerry and accuse you of openly of traitorous acts by communicating with the North Vietnamese to discuss a peace strategy, while we were still at war. As an unoffical representative of the United States of America, what gave you the right to meet with North Vietnamese?
Your activites on the POW commission are also unacceptable. Both you and Senator McCain should be run out of town.
(See McCain's exploits at http://www.usvetdsp.com/mccainpic.htm )
It should be noted that the North Vietnamese have his picture hanging on their war museum, under which reads in paraphrase - John F. Kerry helped us win the war against the American aggressors.
Those of us who served this great country will never forget the cries of baby killer and other niceties, instead of the "welcome home" thanks to the lies committed under oath by you at the Senate Hearing, and the followup leadership support he gave to the antiwar movement.
There are over 58,000 names on the Vietnam Veterans memorial that cannot speak for themselves against this individual that now calls himself a US Senator. We the living intend to make sure he gets the message that the fallen cannot utter.
Mr. Kerry, we do not want you as our next Commander-In-Chief. Remove yourself from the Presidential Race - that will be apology enough.
Regards, Walter F. Emerson
CPT, US Army (ret)
North Olmsted, OH 44070
Monday, July 26, 2004
Saturday, July 24, 2004
Island airport wants its share of John Kerry catering bill
Manager on overdue $847 commission: 'Apparently they don't feel like he needs to pay fees to the airport'
Friday, July 23, 2004
Kerry camp spins its wheels
AURORA, Colo. — Sen. John Kerry spoke about the plight of the American worker when he traveled to Detroit earlier this week, a safe message for the blue-collar workers who build cars there.
So it was a little strange that the campaign picked as its press-pass logo for its Motor City tour the gleaming showcase car of a foreign auto company — Rolls-Royce — that makes cars priced far outside the financial reach of any middle-class voter.
Using a Rolls-Royce logo in Detroit. This is beyond dumb. Of course, how do Kerry's people respond? By slamming Bush, as usual:
Asked about the press-pass logo, Kerry spokesman David Wade said it was unintentional error by a campaign volunteer and then criticized President Bush's economic policies.
"I could say that the Rolls-Royce is the perfect symbol of who got the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, but sometimes objects in the rearview mirror are closer than they appear," he said.
Where does Kerry find idiots like this? And, he's not finished, either.
"Under President Bill Clinton, our strong economy actually helped bring Rolls-Royce jobs to the United States for American workers," Mr. Wade said. "Now, with health care costs rising and no end in sight under George Bush, American automakers say they may have to outsource jobs overseas. That's why John Kerry's health care plan offers relief to American companies and hope for the United Auto Workers who are fighting to put John Kerry and John Edwards in the White House."
Wow. Riding Clinton's coattails, blasting Bush's "tax cuts for the rich," crying about healthcare and sucking up to unions, all in response to a dumb mistake by Kerry's campaign. Just hilarious!!
Something about this story tickles me.
CWA Challenges Kerry to Address Conservative Women’s Conference
What do you think?
Washington, D.C. – Today, Concerned Women for America (CWA) invited presidential candidate John Kerry to speak at CWA’s national convention this September when CWA, the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization, celebrates its 25th anniversary.
CWA challenges Sen. Kerry to meet his own standard for the presidency as he campaigns. He taunted President Bush at the NAACP convention earlier this month, saying, “When you’re the president, you need to talk with all of the people.”
“Sen. Kerry vowed that this is a prerequisite for the presidency,” said Michael Bowman, CWA’s director of state legislative relations. “What’s good for the president is good for the candidate. We’re giving Kerry a chance to prove himself just before voters come out for the election.”
“Sen. Kerry should recognize that this invitation is a unique opportunity to directly address some of the most politically engaged of CWA’s 500,000 members before November 2,” Bowman said. “Political pundits claim that the Kerry campaign is reaching out to conservative women. If that’s true, then CWA is the perfect audience.”
CWA has also invited President George W. Bush to speak at the convention. CWA eagerly anticipates receiving responses from both candidates.
Well, Frank, I'll tell you exactly what I think. Kerry won't show up, and the media won't give a damn. Conservative women are in the same category as pro-lifers, Black Republicans, and Log Cabin Republicans: They are persona non-grata because they dare stray from the liberal plantation.
Kerry can say and do anything, and his lapdogs in the media will protect him to no end. That is not an opinion, it is an undeniable fact.
Bush is the worst President in history and Kerry will fix all of his mistakes.
Wow. How enlightening. Perhaps he could write and explain both why Bush is the worst President ever (no one, and I mean no one was worse than Jimmy Carter) and how Kerry will fix Bush's "mistakes."
And this from Ryan:
It's a shame all this fun will end in November. Let's hope Hillary offers us as many laughs in '08.
My friend, please, oh please, let's get through this one before we worry about '08. After Bush wins in November, the press will start on the 2008 election sometime in January of next year.
And from Dean:
John Kerry's town meeting forum is censored like hell:
They boot you out and don't say anything to you.
And Tim offers:
Kerry is a botox swilling, Chablis drinking, preppie, make believe WASP, scumbag, limo liberal, Mfume kissing, Streisand loving, Sharpey face,father of two ugly broads,fake hero, Boston make believe Brahmin,BOSOX never winning rooting,Senate never there, flip flop flopper who tells whoppers, Sandy Berger stealing docs, ahole!
Tim, how dare you accuse Kerry of drinking Chablis without any solid proof?
And, there is this:
That sick liberal trash! I'm glad you guys keep hot to the media and report that twisted f***'s bullsh!t. This guy is nothing but bad news, from supporting additional taxes on already expensive gas prices to wanting to remove the troops from Iraq. And from there, it only gets worse. Did you know that he is part of this foreign act that supports the Marxist/Stalinist platform? That's right, he supports COMMUNISM! Because he wants to oust morals from every single American family and household and he supports homosexuality, he is helping to build the communist Marxist/Stalinist platform for removing government and controlling the ignorant populace. In secret, this guy is also involved in some dark groups that are the same ones trying to take control once America has no more moral values or protection against retardation. Let me just make one last thing clear: I'm leaving the country if Kerry wins. If Satan or one of Kerry's other mafia/ drug lords falsifies the votes and he somehow wins, I'm getting in a rowboat and going to some Jamaican Island. Well, enough rambling on. Keep the disses going on Kerry. Love it when you use his own jumbled up garbage against him.
Good Fan of the Site,
Thursday, July 22, 2004
Honestly? You want Bush to be reelected? (Yes, very much so)
(This is not hate mail. Why not publish this on your
site so you can respond? Or do you only publish
pro-Bush accounts? (We publish anything and everything))
Let's look at Bush's terrorism credentials. Since 9/11, Bush's government has failed to capture Osama bin Laden (So? Osama is either dead or living in a cave. Not much of a life now, is it?)or disassemble is [sic]organization. [True, but a hell of a lot of them are with Allah right now, aren't they? Gotta start somewhere.] What it has done is (1) push through the Patriot Act, [Thankfully so. Have you even read the thing? Even Kerry has stopped bashing the Patriot Act due to its high approval outside the ACLU and blame-America first liberals. You need to see the updated Dem talking points.) (2) invade Afghanistan, a good idea badly managed, (Huh? How exactly is that?)then (3)invade Iraq, for reasons all that have turned out to be false. (Oh, you mean the reasons supplied by Joe Wilson and Richard Clarke? What Bush said is no different that what Kerry, Clinton, Gore, Kennedy, Levin, et al said before him. The only difference is that Bush had the balls to do something about it. Go read the Iraq Liberation Act and the 1998 bin Laden indictment, for starters.)Indeed, it turns out Iraq had nothing to do
with terrorism at all (Other than Abbas and some of the other terrorists we found there after we invaded, right? When top al-Qaeda member al-Zarqawi was injured in Afghanistan, where did he go for treatment, and to have his leg amputated? He went straight to Baghdad. Do you even know who he is? Also, where did the 1993 WTC bombers go to right after blowing up that truck. That's right. Baghdad.) , and that Bush, Cheney and Rummy had been planning to invade Iraq all along, merely hijacking 9/11 and the nation's grief for its benefit. (What benefit is that? Bush has taken nothing but grief for his determined response) As Rummy's memo said regarding 9/11 days afterward: "How can we tie this to SH [Saddam Hussein]?" (What memo is this? Send the link. I am sure you twisted it somehow. He probably asked if Iraq was involved, as he should have)And,
having declared war on a completely irrelevant country, with no WMD, with no terrorists, Iraq has fallen into utter chaos, (Not so, pal. Read something other than the New York Times once in a while. My cousin is there and I get first-hand accounts.)and has become a breeding ground - and a new recruitment area - for terrorists. (Sure, because unlike unrealistic people like you, they are fully aware that the battleground for their own survial is there. It isn't like these guys were docile goat herders before hand.) Bush's incompetence is destructive, even beneficial to terrorists. 10/10 terrorists want him to stay, I promise. (That is the latest spin on the undeniable truth that terrorists want Kerry to win.)
Economically, then. The economy is growing (not in jobs, though), but ANY economy would grow with the stimulus the U.S. government is providing, piling its own cash into it, and creating soaring deficits. (Wait a second. I thought this was the worst economy since Herbert Hoover? Now things are good, but they would have been good no matter who was in? Make up your mind.) Because of all the red ink, the Admininstration is not only royally screwed, but the recovery, if not properly managed from now, risks running out of air as interest rates rise. (Gee, they have nowhere to go but up, considering that have been so damn low for the past few years.) Not healthy. (Yeah, and increasing taxes will fix everything, I'm sure.)
And don't forget Enron, that massive corporate fraud run by Bush's professed friend, "Kenny Boy" (as he calls him). What a leader. (Yeah, a leader who thinks nothing of prosecuting his friend. Where else in the world does that happen? Perhaps you should take a look at the pictures of Clinton playing golf with Lay. By the way, who was running the show when Enron was pulling their crap? That's right, Clinton.) And Ashcroft settled with Microsoft, and now they are performing exactly the same anticompetitive practices as before. What else?
Well, the constitution has been raped. Everything except the Second Amendment has been waved on the grounds of national security. Sad that when under attack, Bush's America would choose to sabotage its defining freedoms to "fight terrorism" rather than reassert itself. (Oh please. Not one thing has changed for anyone except potential terrorists. And stop listening to the ACLU. They are the ones using scare tactics to help increase their membership.)
As for Europe. I can't say France has been the U.S.'s friend much in the past few years anyway, but they were right when they said before Gulf War II that changing the world required a lot more subtlety and respect than raw military power (Gaddafi would disagree) could provide. (Of course, because they don't have any military power. Perhaps you should read "Of Paradise and Power" by Robert Kagan to learn something. It is only about 100 pages, an easy read. And, read "The French Betrayal of America" by Kenneth Timmerman too. Iraq was France's cash cow for a long time, and for Chirac personally. Fuck France and Fuck Chirac.) But that said, it was pointless for the Administration and the Pentagon to insult Europe ("That's old Europe"), like a sulking child, because it wouldn't do what America said. (Read Kagan)
What an utter mess. (If you were refering to the Democratci Party, you be 100% correct)
I doubt Kerry will fix all the damage the Republicans in the White House have created, but with some luck, the new Administration will stop wrecking things, not
give tax cuts to the rich (Stop it.)during the biggest deficit in history, not look out soley for corporate interests while the health system for normal people is nonexistant (Yeah, if you love the service you get at the post office and the DMV, just wait until the government controls health care. No thanks. I'll get my own.) and the education system nearing that. (Whose fault is that? Bush has spent more money on education that anyone in history. And, who wrote most of "No Child Left Behind?" Ted Kennedy did. I'll bet you didn't know that.) The first, if not the last, step to improve the country is to take these aristocrats out of government. (Oh, and Kerry is a man of the people? Sure he is. Many of us went to Swiss boarding schools and married several insanely rich women.)
Oh, one last thing. I read that letter on your site that says how Kerry or someone rang them on their cell and they consider this intrusive. You do realize that under the Patriot Act, government agencies can tap your phone or search your house without a court order, without probable cause and without you even knowing? Is that not intrusive? (Gee, other than that being pure bullshit, I don't how to respond. Read Section 223 of the Patriot Act. It allows you to bring a lawsuit if your rights are violated under the Patriot Act. How many have lawsuits have been brought forth by it? ZERO!) Vote Democrat - there's nothing better. (WOW!! A stunning endorsement of your party!!)
Finally, I'd like to leave you with a quote from your site that speaks for its own absurdity:
"As the Democratic party has drifted further and further left, many have speculated that it was only a matter of time before they became indistinguishable from our old enemies the Communists." (Hmmm. Other than Kerry using a slogan from the known-Communist Langston Hughes and Hillary Clinton, talking about taking things from us for the common good, I wonder where we ever got an idea like that.)
My friend, for all that writing, you still were unable to come up with one solid reason for anyone to vote for Kerry. It's all anti-Bush. I challenge you, and every other Kerry supporter for that matter, to give us a one solid reason to vote for Kerry on his own merits, without a single mention of Bush. I'd love to hear it. Hell, I'd just like to know where he stands on Iraq. I still don't know.
Your response is expected and will be posted.
Thought you might be interested....
I just received a phone call on my cell phone from a blocked number about
John Kerry. I'm not sure who it was actually was from (Kerry's campaign or
an independent group). They basically said that Kerry will be presenting
his positions over the next week or so and I should look into them.
I believe it is illegal for campaigns to call a cell phone unless one
specifically gives that number for that purpose. I never give out my cell
phone number to people I don't know, so I don't know how they got it. Is
this illegal? Who should I file a complaint with?
Unfortunately, I don't know who actually called so nobody can really get in
trouble for it. But my dislike for Kerry just went up.
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
[Via Allah Is In The House]
Kerry Camp Accuses White House of Berger Leak
Huh? So what if they leaked it? It doesn't matter how or why it came out, what Berger did is at issue here.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat John Kerry's presidential campaign accused the Bush White House on Wednesday of disclosing the existence of a criminal investigation against former national security adviser Sandy Berger for political advantage.
Kerry's people are shameless, as well as the rest of Berger's spin doctors. I just heard Burger's lawyer on Wolf Blitzer, and now, all Berger did was accidentally not adhere to the procedures of the National Archives. Of course, Blitzer didn't challenge him on it, and ask, why did he feel the need to hide things in his socks. This is a joke.
And, why did Berger do this? To help the 9/11 Commission? OK, prove it. Show us what he took. Until then, I'd be willing to believe that he did it to protect himself, Clinton, or Kerry. Or, who is to say that he wasn't helping some other country? Take a look at his law firm, Stonebridge International. Take a look at their profile:
Stonebridge International LLC is a global business strategy firm that helps U.S. and multinational companies shape and execute strategies to solve problems and seize business opportunities worldwide. Stonebridge Chairman Samuel R. Berger, former U.S. National Security Advisor, founded the firm on the principle that our success should be measured not just by the quality of our advice but also by our ability to help achieve concrete and timely results.
But who cares, right? It must be Bush's fault somehow. Then we get Clinton, who (brilliantly, I must admit) downplays the whole thing as a joke. Interestingly, Clinton knew about this for months. if he did, surely many others did too. They knew it would come out. Why didn't they just reveal it way back when? Did Kerry know when he made Berger an advisor? A lot of questions here, but we all know the answers already. Problem is, the "mainstream" media doesn't give a damn.
To whom it may concern:
I live in the northern Virginia and work in Washington DC and have only lived in this area for 4 years. Like a good moderate I usually keep my political vies under my hat but because my the industry that I work in I am incessantly bombarded with Anti-Bush and Liberal rhetoric daily. Within the last couple of weeks, I have cut down listening to the news, because it can be overwhelming sometimes. This morning when I went for a walk with my 2 year old son to get breakfast I couldn't believe my eyes. Attached is the moving billboard. So what…. Freedom of speech…. Right? Well maybe until I went back later to snap a photo and realized that this Camper was blocking the parking lot. To me, this was indicative of the anti-Bush crew of people who are so desparate for votes that they will impede traffic so you have to look at the sign. I have attached small thunbnails if you are interested I larger formats please let me know. In the event you decide to include in your blog, I would prefer to be anonymous. Sorry for the attachments but I think they are worth it.
Do not be sorry for the attachments, Mr. X. They are greatly appreciated.
If you have seen something similar, get the pictures to us and we will post them right away.
Tuesday, July 20, 2004
I made this for my blog and I thought you'd all appreciate it.
Monday, July 19, 2004
1. Bush is destroying workers rights and outsourcing jobs instead of protecting the right to organize and creating new jobs rebuilding schools, bridges, roads and hospitals.
2. Bush is privatizing Medicare, Social Security and public education with phony reforms instead of enacting health care for all, protecting retirement funds and full funding for public education through college.
3. Bush is bankrupting the Federal Government with giant tax cuts for the very rich and super-funds to the military instead of securing the budget for human needs by taxing the rich and spending on human needs.
4. Bush is rolling back civil rights gains instead of enforcing and expanding affirmative action to end racism in all areas of life.
5. Bush is curtailing women's rights and choice by undermining Roe v. Wade instead of upholding the right to choice and ending the gender wage gap.
6. Bush is abusing immigrant workers in low-wage jobs instead of providing a clear path to citizenship and equal rights.
7. Bush is exploiting and ruining the environment by protecting corporate polluters instead of conserving our natural resources for the public good.
8. Bush's war in Iraq is a disaster for our security and economy. He is pushing for more preemptive wars and for first strike nuclear military policy instead of negotiations and cooperation utilizing the UN.
9. Bush is denying civil liberties and free speech in the name of fighting terrorism instead of repealing the USA Patriot Act and helping cities, towns and states fund firefighters and police.
10. Bush discriminates against Gays and Lesbians with a Constitutional Amendment instead of expanding civil rights and liberties for all.
Just how true is the old phrase, "birds of a feather flock together?" As the Democratic party has drifted further and further left, many have speculated that it was only a matter of time before they became indistinguishable from our old enemies the Communists. Lo and behold, the Communist Party USA has recently published on its web site the above document, "Top Ten Reasons to Defeat Bush." It could just as easily have been taken from the Democratic National Committee's web page, word for word. In fact, the list could double as Kerry supporter talking points. Let's take them one by one...Read the rest of the article
from Cavalier's Guardian WatchBlog
Sunday, July 18, 2004
Thursday, July 15, 2004
Someone needs to do that to Kerry:
Vietnam...now Black Power...All he needs to do now is say, "Peace, love, and good vibes to all.
Check out this USA Today editorial titled:
List Kerry as absent on school accountability
Wednesday, July 14, 2004
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic candidate John Kerrywhose campaign demanded to know on Wednesday whether President Bush read a key Iraq intelligence assessment, did not read the document himself before voting to give Bush the authority to go to war, aides acknowledged.
"Along with other senators, he was briefed on the contents of the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) by (then-CIA Director) George Tenet and other administration intelligence officials," said Kerry spokesman Phil Singer.
The only surprising thing here is that reuters actually ran this story with that headline.
The latest theory about Vice President Dick Cheney's future on the Republican ticket, advanced privately by prominent Democrats, including members of Congress, holds that Cheney recently dropped his personal doctor because of drug addiction so that he could hire a new one, who will conveniently tell him in August that his heart problems have made him unfit to run with Bush!
So reports the NEW YORK TIMES, in a planned Front Page story on Thursday.
Reporter Elisabeth Bumiller is set to kick the gossip into high gear with a 1,600-word speculative, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE.
This is what the alleged "paper of record" feels is front-page material? Gossip? They should just put "The offical paper for Kerry/Edwards" at the top and end the pretense. This "Cheney will be dropped" speculation plays right into Kerry's hands, and the Times knows it. The more people are talking about Cheney being dropped, the less they are talking about that worthless shyster John Edwards.
If Cheney is off the ticket, for whatever reason, I'd be shocked. Liberals hate him, and Conservatives love him. If you want real "gravitas," you'd look at Cheney, not Edwards.
This is nothing but another "flood the zone" scheme to foster nervousness amongst Republicans and fear that Cheney will cost Bush the election, kind of like how the Times went on a crusade against the Masters and Augusta. And the result will be the same. Failure.
Just ask yourself this: What legitimate conservative or Republican has called for Cheney to go? None. End of story.
Hey guys. I am thoroughly enjoying your website. I've got a question for ya. I have been looking for some stats on John Kerrys stand on education. I mean besides the krap on his website that I don't beleive as far as I could throw the jerk. I am making a pamphlet that has to be good to both candadates, and it's been quite easy making Bush look good, but Kerry, not so easy. Anywayz, anything yall could dig up would be super useful! Thanx!
Whatever you have, and can offer her help with, please leave it for her in the comments. We will offer up what we can soon.
Monday, July 12, 2004
"It is not the job of the president of the United States to decide what the religion of America is or what the religion of the world should be."
Memo to Edwards: The primaries are long since over. This crap will not work in the general election. Besides, how exactly is Bush trying to impose religion on anyone? Of course, don't expect the lapdog media to call him on that in this lifetime.
What I do know is that it was right to hold Saddam Hussein accountable, absolutely correct. And anybody who doesn’t believe it wasn’t correct ought to go dig around in those graves or even make a judgment about what would happen if you left Saddam Hussein alone to do this.
I'll give you a hint. Just sing to yourself, "They call him Flipper."
Hat tip: Ace of Spades
Sunday, July 11, 2004
Hat tip: Useful Fools
Some Key Conservatives Uneasy About Bush
Read that and laugh about how they justify that headline.
"This war is not going well," said Stefan Halper, a deputy assistant secretary of state under President Reagan.
"It's costing us a lot of money, isolating us from our allies and friends," said Halper, who gave $1,000 to George W. Bush's campaign and more than $83,000 to other GOP causes in 2000. "This is not the cakewalk the neoconservatives predicted. We were not greeted with flowers in the streets."
"I don't think there's any question that there is growing restiveness in the Republican base about this war," said Halper, the co-author of a new book, "America Alone: The Neoconservatives and the Global Order."
Just look at the title of the book. Anyone who would co-write a book with that title could never be a true Bush supporter.
The entire article is a joke. But, if it makes you liberals feel better, then, well, enjoy.
The incumbent has the advantage especially as the campaign goes on due to actually performing the job in question. The only way for a challenger to win is to lead big in the polls early because over time no matter what you do your numbers will be whittled away. Kerry can't even get out of the margin of error against President Bush so it's looking less likely that he has any chance of winning.
The closer we get to November the more evidence I have to back up my gut feeling that Kerry and the Democrat Party is going to go down in a big ball of flames. I say good riddance.
Click here to read Paul Drabek's Blog.
WASHINGTON - John Kerry's choice of John Edwards as his running mate was received favorably by the public, polls suggest, but it has made little difference so far in the race with President Bush.
Kerry strategists are trying to lower expectations for a "bounce" in the polls that presidential candidates sometimes get after choosing a running mate or attending a convention. Bush strategists were quick to raise expectations of a double-digit "bounce" for the Kerry-Edwards team by the end of the Democratic National Convention.
I don't think that the Bush team ever really thought that Kerry would get such a huge bounce from his pick of Edwards. By putting out this expectation, Bush pollster Matthew Dowd set up this disappointment for Kerry/Edwards, a stroke a political brilliance.
Now, really, how many people actually said, after Edwards being the VP choice, "Well, I was going to vote for Bush, but now I am definitely going to vote for Kerry." You know the answer to that: practically zero.
A young woman and her baby were attacked in a suburban train near Paris on Saturday by unidentified men who drew swastikas on her stomach with a pen in what police said was an anti-Semitic assault.
The six attackers who were armed with knives clipped the 23-year-old woman's hair, and cut her t-shirt and pants before drawing three swastikas on her body.
The men of North African origin also overturned the pram with her baby of 13 months.
This is why I really cannot hold France in ultimate disdain for resisting efforts to reform the Middle East militarily. By attempting same, we face small groups of invaders. They face mass insurrection in their huge Muslim enclaves.
A celebration of real American values? The heart and soul of our country??? Since when has Whoopi Goldberg been representative of anything other than the crass pig-ignorance of the doofy Hollywood liberal set?
July 9, 2004 -- Whoopi Goldberg delivered an X-rated rant full of sexual innuendoes against President Bush last night at a Radio City gala that raised $7.5 million for the newly minted Democratic ticket of John Kerry and John Edwards.
Waving a bottle of wine, she fired off a stream of vulgar sexual wordplays on Bush's name in a riff about female genitalia, and boasted that she'd refused to let Team Kerry clear her material.
"I Xeroxed my behind and I folded it up in an envelope and I sent it back with a big kiss mark on because we're Democrats - we're not afraid to laugh," she said.
She addressed fresh-faced vice-presidential candidate Edwards as "Kid," and "young Mr. Edwards" and cracked, "He looks like he is about 18 "
"I'm going to card his ass tomorrow."
Other celebs also competed to bash Bush. Singer John Mellencamp sang a specially written song that called the president "just another cheap thug" and ridiculed him as the "Texas bambino."
Kerry could be seen laughing uproariously during part of Goldberg's tirade - and neither he nor Edwards voiced a single objection to its tone when they spoke to the crowd.
They hailed the fund-raiser as a great event.
Edwards said it was "a great honor" to be there and insisted, "This campaign will be a celebration of real American values."
Kerry thanked all the performers for "an extraordinary evening," hailed the "great producers" - Harvey Weinstein of Miramax and Jann Wenner - and said "every performer tonight ... conveyed to you the heart and soul of our country."
Aren't these people even slightly concerned about the kind of message that is sent to the people of America, when two men, running for president and vice president, eagerly patronize an event wherein the current president is ridiculed and compared to female genitalia? Much like their beloved Bill, these polemical jerks hold no respect for public office, and should they achieve the presidency themselves, would no doubt be chafing at the bit to start renting out the Lincoln bedroom to Chinese 'sponsors', and ramming cigars into regions where tobacco just wasn't meant to boldly go.
Naturally, after the event, both candidates expressed 'concern' over the disrespectful language taken by some of the 'performers'. But only through aides, and only after the press really began to clamour. Both men refused to themselves condemn the perfomers's totally unnecessary rhetoric.
John Kerry and John Edwards claim to disagree with things that they roared laughter at, and then openly praised, just an hour before, and Kerry's insipid rich wife could not stop enthusiastically jibbering about.
Edwards' own stupider half thought that grossly insulting the current head of state isn't just socially acceptable, but entirely justified.
Other people known for their dislike of the American president, namely Agence France-Presse decided that nothing untoward happened at all.
I'm sure that deep down, Francophile John Kerry believes much the same. He won't tell you that though. Not when it's much easier just to lie to you. This is the same man that has seen fit to lecture President Bush on morality. Yes, that's right, a rich-spinster-snaggin', self-confessed Vietnam atrocity-junkie, a man that, as a senator, has only seen 8 pieces of his legislation adopted in his entire political career, proving that he is an utterly inept politician, criticized the morality of a man that has seen us safely through major terrorist attacks and two foreign wars. All without bedding anyone outside of his wife.
John Kerry vows he is going to restore truth to the presidency. He says this, then he refuses to allow the full tape of the public fundraiser to be released to the media. He has no interest in truth that isn't self-serving.
I am seriously starting to doubt the man's capacity to lie straight in bed.
What does Kerry think Edwards might bring to his campaign? Does he think the soft Carolina drawl and smug good looks will remind voters of Bill Clinton? So many pundits are cooing over Edwards' appeal to women that female voters should be insulted. Democrats seem to think of them of as nothing more than walking hormone factories with the inexplicable ability to vote. Women, it is believed, will vote for the "prettiest" candidate without doing all that nasty thinking about his policies or experience. Contrary to Democrat opinion, women do think. Just like men, they're thinking, "Is this man really ready to be Vice-President of the United States?"
During the Democratic primaries, Kerry attacked Edwards for not being experienced enough to run for office. Asked by a young woman at an event in Des Moines why she should vote for him instead of Edwards, Kerry said, "When I came home from Vietnam in 1969, I don't know if John Edwards was out of diapers then yet or not, I'm totally not sure. I don't know." John Edwards' entire political career consists of less than one term as a junior Senator. He decided not to seek reelection, possibly due to voter dissatisfaction over his abysmal attendance record. Edwards missed 32% of the votes in 2003 (90% in September alone), while Kerry missed a whopping 60% during the course of the year. (Note that President Bush is expected to be President 100% of the time while campaigning, vacationing or even sleeping.) During his short time in the Senate, Edwards introduced precisely zero bills that made the passage into law. That's it -- that's his entire political resume. His appeal on the campaign consists of a smooth line of patter, a wide smile and "better hair."
When asked by a reporter how John Edwards stacked up against current Vice President Dick Cheney, President Bush snapped right back, "Dick Cheney can be President. Next." Think about that for a second.
What is the job, the real job, of the Vice President? Besides presiding over the Senate -- a sure cure for insomnia -- his or her job is to be ready to step in and take over the country in the event of the President's death or incapacitation. In the best of times, that's an awesome and heavy responsibility to bear. In wartime, the most likely scenario for such a change would be the assassination of the President, with America in a state of chaos. In the kind of fight we face today, the Vice President may need to take over and run the United States smoothly in the midst of economic and social upheaval and fear the likes of which have never been seen before. The slightest mistake could cause a crash -- economic or otherwise -- from which the country would take decades to recover. What would an inexperienced politician like John Edwards do when faced with sole responsibility for America at war during a new terrorist attack, perhaps with weapons of mass destruction, with the President and thousands or tens of thousands of Americans dead in their own homes or places of business, and with no way to tell when or where the next strike will hit? What good will his smile and slick talk do any of us then? Who's he going to sue?
For that matter, what life experience makes John Kerry think he's capable of running any country, much less the United States of America? What experience does he have at running anything at all? Was he the mayor of even a small town? Has he been governor of even a small state? How about a list of the companies he has personally run as CEO? Has he managed a professional baseball team, or even coached Little League? Has he even been a board member of the local PTA? Kerry's entire list of qualifications (besides being in a war thirty years ago for a few months) consists of taking up one side of every issue, then the other, then maybe switching back to the first. Neither Kerry nor Edwards is qualified to run a hot-dog cart, much less the most powerful country on Earth. It would be equivalent to installing someone whose boating experience is limited to white-water rafting as Captain of the Queen Mary 2. Without a truly great first officer to balance the Captain's inexperience, that ship is destined to end up on the rocks, even without terrorists in the engine room. A Governor like Tom Vilsack might have provided the experience necessary to balance John Kerry's lack of executive credentials, but John Edwards can not do so.
This is wartime, and a new kind of war to boot. This is no time for on-the-job training in the White House. We just can't afford it.
Saturday, July 10, 2004
"I will work with Congress to lift the immigration ban on HIV-positive people that has prohibited the United States from hosting this lifesaving meeting."
How the hell could anyone besides a dopey liberal even think of wanting to lift this ban? So we can pay for their healthcare? (Oh wait, our healthcare sucks. Just ask Kerry.)
Of course, Kerry voted for this ban several years ago. So, basically, he was against AIDS before he was for it.
Friday, July 09, 2004
- In the Senate four years -- that is the full extent of [his] public life. No international experience, no military experience.
- The American people want an experienced hand . . . . This is not the time for on-the-job training in the White House on national security issues
- If his intent is to remove special interests from Washington, why has he . . . taken more than $11 million from lawyers and law firms?
No wait...I didn't come up with those thoughts. John Kerry did.
I said this a few weeks ago:
Want to see a Democrat take the side of Enron? Just wait until this happens:
Sources: Enron's Lay May Be Indicted Soon
HOUSTON - Kenneth Lay, Enron Corp.'s founder and former chairman, could be indicted on charges stemming from its 2001 collapse by the end of June, sources close to the case told The Associated Press on Saturday.
After all their screaming about Ken Lay and Enron, as soon as this indictment comes down, the Democrats will scream about it being nothing but a political tactic.
Funny, isn't it, that Democrats have blamed Bush for all of Enron's crap, yet it all happened under Clinton's watch, and it ended under Bush's? It is purely amazing how Democrats and liberals are able to completely forget history. I wish I could do that. There are plenty of things I'd like to forget about forever.
John Kerry is way too predictable:
"Values are putting the full force of the Justice Department on day one in an effort not to take three years and a few months before the election before you bring Ken Lay to justice," Kerry told a morning fund-raiser in New York.
I thought Kerry was once a prosecutor? Surely he knows that a complex case like this takes a long time to put together. The Justice Department has been slowly going up the ladder, now finally getting to Lay. Would Kerry have Bush rush to prosecute Lay for pure political reasons? That's what he is suggesting. Of course, who cares, when you can bash Bush and Enron in the same sentence.
Monday, July 05, 2004
Richard Gephardt, Missouri Congressman - Most "experts" think that Gephardt, an unbridled union lackey, would bring Kerry Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. That's good. I hope they continue to think that way. The union rank-and-file already has the Democrats in their back pocket. Gephardt will not add one vote for Kerry outside of Missouri, and I would bet that Bush would win Missouri anyway. If Gephardt had all that union juice we keep hearing about, he would have had a hell of a lot better showing in union-dominated Iowa caucuses, which Gephardt won in 1988.
But, I am predicting right here and now that Kerry picks Dick Gephardt. Why? Because the Democrats will go right along with the playbook, despite that it has failed them time after time. Gephardt is an establishment Democrat, who will not do anything to hurt Kerry. (He also would not do anything to help him either) Plus, he has all that "union support" we keep hearing about. Gephardt will be the VP on Kerry's ticket.
Kerry-Gephardt. It's gonna happen.
I said it then, and I stand by it. Think of it like this: If you were going to a club where the only men there are you and a person of your choosing, who would you take with you, Brad Pitt or Carrot Top? Of course you'd take the guy who none of the girls are going to look at, instead of the one that will overshadow you. Using that same reasoning, there is no way Kerry picks Edwards. (or Hillary for the same reason, although she is an ugly hag) Kerry has only kept Edwards in play in order to keep the trial lawyer cash coming from the suckers who think their boy and champion will get the pick.
Really, who gives a damn about the VP? There is only 2 things for a VP to do: Break ties in the Senate and be ready if the President dies or becomes incapacitated.
Gephardt will be his choice. You will likely know if I am right or wrong by the time you read this, but my prediction is on record. I expect full props from Mark Kilmer, The Viking Pundit, Lee from Right-Thinking, and Erick Erickson if I am correct. They all told me I was nuts when I said Gephardt 3 months ago.