This Election Is Going To Be Tight

The last four polls released have the race tied in the three way battle. Kerry has pulled almost even in the head-to-head composite. Encourage everyone to get out and vote as if their life depended on, because it just may.

Update: The Mason-Dixon poll was proved the most accurate in 2002. They now have Bush up in most battleground states.

Bush, Sharon, Arafat and the Peace Process

Trudy Rubin suggests that Bush has allowed the Israeli/Palestinian peace process to be relegated to the back burner:

He has changed little from his days as head of the Palestine Liberation Organization in Beirut in the late 1970s, when journalists like me were kept waiting until the wee hours of the morning to hear his opaque pronouncements. He never made the leap from guerrilla fighter to statesman, and he missed the chance to finalize the deal with Ehud Barak and mediator Bill Clinton in the waning days of the Clinton presidency.
But Arafat's flaws became the Bush administration's excuse for consigning the peace process to the deep freeze. U.S. officials contended there was no Palestinian negotiating partner to deal with. That wasn't true.
When the moderate Mahmoud Abbas became Palestinian prime minister and told his people in no uncertain terms that terror must cease, the Bush administration failed to support him or press the government of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to do so. With such support, Abbas might have challenged Arafat; without it, he had to resign.
Bush's benign neglect was based on the mistaken assumption that victory in the Iraq war would force the Palestinians to capitulate. Instead, violence has continued, as has Israeli retaliation in the West Bank and Gaza. Arab TV shots of this carnage, combined with footage of the chaos in Iraq, provide a propaganda bonanza for al-Qaeda recruiters.

First off, Abbas is no moderate. Second Bush did not fail to support him, Arafat undermined him from the beginning. To blame Bush is more than disingenuous, it's revisionist. Rubin has come out against the security fence that has been installed and has been silent on the UN jihad against Israel. Note the distinct similarities between todays column and this column from February of this year. She continually pushes for Israeli capitulation and hammers Bush in every column she writes. How about this line:

Would a second-term President Bush revise his current policy? No sign this is likely. Might a President Kerry galvanize the peace process by backing Palestinian elections and appointing Clinton as special peace negotiator? If he cares about Israel and Mideast reform and the fight against jihadi terrorists, he certainly would.

The Clinton plan would have been a disaster for Israel and Ehud Barak rightly suffered a quick political death because Clinton pressured him into buying off on that plan. Sorry Trudy, Clinton isn't coming back.

Fifty Reason To Vote For Bush In Pictures

American Digest has an excellent post.

Cronkite Is Insane

Walter Cronkite is friggin' nuts. He is as unhinged as Jimmy Carter. Uncle Walter is now pushing Rove/bin-Laden conspiracy theories:

KING: OK, Walter. What do you make of this? CRONKITE: Well, I make it out to be initially the reaction that it's a threat to us, that unless we make peace with him, in a sense, we can expect further attacks. He did not say that precisely, but it sounds like that when he says...KING: The warning. CRONKITE: What we just heard. So now the question is basically right now, how will this affect the election? And I have a feeling that it could tilt the election a bit. In fact, I'm a little inclined to think that Karl Rove, the political manager at the White House, who is a very clever man, he probably set up bin Laden to this thing. The advantage to the Republican side is to get rid of, as a principal subject of the campaigns right now, get rid of the whole problem of the al Qaqaa explosive dump. Right now, that, the last couple of days, has, I think, upset the Republican campaign.

My God, is there anything liberals will not attempt to get themselves back in power? Fortunately, most people stopped listening to anything Cronkite says ten years ago.

Hitchens Comes Full Circle

Christopher Hitchens has changed his endorsement yet again. Now that is nuance. Also, be careful when you make a bet, it may come back to bite you.

Happy Halloween

The weekend before the election and the fervor is like it hasn't been in decades. Here's a report on blogs and the election (and Howard Fineman whining like a girl).

And of course, today's required reading is Mark Steyn:

In that respect, the Qaqaagate story is fascinating. What happened and when in Saddam's al-Qaqaa facility is somewhat murky. Had the shameless gang at "60 Minutes" had their way, the missing explosives story would have aired 36 hours before the polls opened, with no time for anybody to put the alternative to the Bush incompetence scenario -- i.e., that the stuff was moved to Syria before the war began. But never mind that. And never mind that the source for this story is a discredited U.N. official, Mohammed el-Baradei, on whose watch the IAEA not only missed entirely Libya's WMD program but has proved remarkably accommodating of Iran's.
Forget all that. The main problem with this story is that it makes no sense in terms of the Democrats' own narrative. For a year and a half, they've told us there were no WMD, Saddam wasn't a threat, and "BUSH LIED!!!!!!!!!" about it all. I happen to disagree with that, but there's no doubt that simply by hammering it home all day and night the Dems had some effect. Now they're saying whoa, let's back up, yes, as it happens, these non-existent weapons that Bush lied about the non-threatening Saddam having he did, in fact, have -- and that fool Bush let the non-existent weapons get away.

A Veiled Surrender From Osama?

The indispensible Belmont Club blog has an interesting take on the new bin-Laden tape:

It is important to notice what he has stopped saying in this speech. He has stopped talking about the restoration of the Global Caliphate. There is no more mention of the return of Andalusia. There is no more anticipation that Islam will sweep the world. He is no longer boasting that Americans run at the slightest wounds; that they are more cowardly than the Russians. He is not talking about future operations to swathe the world in fire but dwelling on past glories. He is basically saying if you leave us alone we will leave you alone. Though it is couched in his customary orbicular phraseology he is basically asking for time out.
The American answer to Osama's proposal will be given on Election Day. One response is to agree that the United States of America will henceforth act like Sweden, which is on track to become majority Islamic sometime after the middle of this century. The electorate best knows which candidate will serve this end; which candidate most promises to be European-like in attitude and they can choose that path with both eyes open. The electorate can strike that bargain and Osama may keep his word. The other course is to reject Osama's terms utterly; to recognize the pleading in his outwardly belligerent manner and reply that his fugitive existence; the loss of his sanctuaries; the annihilation of his men are but the merest foretaste of what is yet to come: to say that to enemies such as he, the initials 'US' will always mean Unconditional Surrender.
Osama has stated his terms. He awaits America's answer.

I agree that the rhetoric has been toned down dramatically and the other points made. Al-Qaeda has not had it easy since 9/11 and the call to jihad seems to have not had the intended effect of a global Islamic uprising. An optimistic view would be that maybe the people of the mid-east are ready to join the rest of the civilized world and not fight this fight. The US-led coalition has bin-Laden and al-Qaeda on the run and maybe, just maybe, this is a sign that they no longer have the stomach for this fight.

Halloween Fun For The Entire Family

Scary and funny all in one!

The Jewish Vote

Are Jews finally understanding that a vote for the Donkeys is not in their best interest? Perhaps:

Bush has turned out to be the best friend Israel has had in the White House for a very long time. Clinton was willing to pressure Israel into giving in to virtually all of Arafat's demands. But despite this, Arafat rejected Israel's concessions and launched the latest intifada, which is now in its fourth year and has resulted in hundreds of deaths.
After 9-11, it became obvious to President Bush that the war against terror had to include the terrorist regime of Arafat, whom he no longer considered to be a legitimate partner for peace. As a result, he has set aside decades of liberal policies supported by previous presidents, the pro-Arab State Department, the pro-Palestinian European Union, the United Nations and the Arab League. He has rejected his own father's view that the Jewish settlements were an obstacle to peace. In fact, the present President Bush recognizes Israel's right to retain some key West Bank settlements as part of any peace plan with the Palestinians.
The president has also said that he would recognize a Palestinian state only if it renounced terrorism, is democratic and willing to live in peace with Israel. This is the best support that any American president has ever provided Israel.

Granted what is best for Israel does not sway the Jewish vote, however, recent events show such as the US vetoing yet another anti-Israel UN scam is resonating with the Jewish community. Is Bush going to get greater than 50% of that vote? No. Will he get a double digit increase from 2000? Yes.

Osama Is Back

A new bin-Laden video was shown by al-Jazeera that seems to be recent in that he mentions Kerry. Will it sway the election? Unknown of course, but some think it may aid Bush. He parrots Michael Moore and John Kerry.

Krauthammer

Charles Krauthammer is on:

This is all barely remembered and barely noted. Most amazing of all, John Kerry has managed to transform our Afghan venture into a failure -- a botched operation in which Bush let Osama bin Laden get away because he "outsourced" bin Laden's capture to "warlords" in the battle of Tora Bora.
Outsourced? The entire Afghan war was outsourced. How does Kerry think we won it? How did Mazar-e Sharif, Kabul and Kandahar fall? Stormed by thousands of American GIs? They fell to the "warlords" we had enlisted, supported and directed. It was their militias that overran the Taliban.
"Outsourcing" is a demagogue's way of saying "using allies." (Isn't Kerry's Iraq solution to "outsource" the problem to the "allies" and the United Nations?) And in Afghanistan it meant the very best allies: locals who had a far better chance of knowing which cave to storm without getting blown up. As Kerry himself said on national television at the time of Tora Bora (Dec. 14, 2001): "What we are doing, I think, is having its impact and it is the best way to protect our troops and sort of minimalize the proximity, if you will" -- i.e., not throwing American lives away in tunnels and caves in alien territory. "I think we have been doing this pretty effectively and we should continue to do it that way."
Now, as always, the retroactive military genius says he would have done it differently. Yet in the same interview, when asked about how things were going overall in Afghanistan, he said, "I think we have been smart; I think the administration leadership has done it well and we are on the right track."
Once again, the senator's position has evolved, to borrow the New York Times' delicate term for Kerry's many about-faces.

That'll leave a mark.

Lileks

James:

All you need to know about Arafat was that he insisted on wearing a pistol when he addressed the UN General Assembly. And all you need to know about the UN, I suppose, is that they let him.He’s not dead as I write this, unless of course he is. Right now Drudge has the AHH-OOOGAH WOAW WOAW WOAW HOLY CRAP flashing light up about Russians moving the missing Iraqi weapons to Syria. Who could imagine those three names mentioned in the same sentence? Perhaps “Today Russia, Syria and Iraq announced plans for a global custard franchise,” or “Surprising many long-time observers, Russia has joined with Syria and Iraq to develop a new generation of cheap, bitter cigarette where all the tobacco dribbles out one end before you even get the chance to light it.” But arms smuggling? In defiance of the UN? I’ll believe it when I see it in the New York Times.

Hitch, Whom May Or May Not Have Supported Kerry

Hitchens on al-Zarqawi:

Possibly injured as he escaped the collapse of the Taliban regime, he seems to have gone to Iran before showing up in Baghdad a few months before the Coalition did.
During that time, according to the Jordanians, he got hold of nerve gas and chemical weapon shells with which to try to blow up Jordan's security services HQ.
He also helped launch a mini-war against the Kurdish leadership in northern Iraq, who were then living outside Saddam Hussein's direct control.
His organisation was then called Ansar al-Islam, or fighters for Islam. It has since mutated to its newly-minted name "al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia". This coincided with a recent website proclamation of loyalty to bin Laden.
It seems probable it was actually more like a rival bid to take over a world-wide franchise.

Read the whole thing.

HCB

Nice.

Andrew Sullivan has been brainless for far longer than this report suggests.

Why I'm Voting Bush Part Deux

I know you all know numerous "single issue voters", the type who dislike Bush because of his opposition to the UN, gay marriage, abortion, etc. They plan to vote for Kerry because thay believe that he would be the more amenable candidate to their position. The time is ripe to explain to them that another attack-- one that dwarfs 9/11-- essentially makes their "single issue" moot. The only issue in this election is militant Islam and their sole goal of killing us. One major attack and the other issues are non-starters.

The French Feel Arafat's Pain

Our "allies" the French are upset that Yasser is illin':

PARIS, Oct. 28 (Xinhuanet) -- France will be always on the side of the Palestinian Authority leader Yasser Arafat, French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier declared Thursday. "France, as I told you (Arafat) in Ramallah on June 30, will be always on your side to back your effort in favor of a just and negotiated peace," Barnier said. "It is with concern and sympathy that I keep informed of the development of your health," said Barnier. "I wish to express my most sincere wishes for your recovery, hoping that you can return rapidly to your place to lead the Palestinian Authority," he said.

The French make me want to puke.

Hat tip: LGF

Update: The Frogs still want Kerry though.

Mugger

Russ, whose Redsox unfortunately won on a Wednesday after his column was done, has another excellent essay:

According to the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz (Oct. 25), who wrote about Kerry's journalist buddies girding for the worst next week, some fear the apocalypse is right around the corner. Columbia professor Todd Gitlin, a frequent Times essayist, said: "I would not be surprised to see outbursts of political violence the likes of which we haven't seen since the Weather Underground of the 1970s."
Get a grip, man. Does Gitlin really believe, in private, that without the military draft, which mobilized the youth-led protests of the 60s, that another four years of Bush will result in "political violence"? Maybe he hopes so—a delightful acid flashback—but 21st-century kids, at least those not indoctrinated by Boomer academics like Gitlin, have more to worry about than the media-created hobgoblin named George W. Bush.

Like, perhaps, this guy.

Liberal Bias?

How does your favorite (fiskee) columnist vote? No surprise here.

Lileks Whacks the Shit Out Of Sully

Andrew Sullivan endorses Kerry and Lileks rightly takes him to task for his reasons:

This is not, should not be, and one day cannot be, Bush's war. And the more it is, the more America loses, and our enemies gain.
And this argument is not, should not be, and one day cannot be, and dasn’t be, and at the end of the day might not be, convincing. This is like saying vote McClellan, lest the war against secession and slavery be seen as Lincon’s war. Our enemies gain when America aligns itself with the nations and institutions disinclined to see America win. They don't want us to lose, necessarily, but our clear triumphs are so damnably inconvenient. In any case, it’s not Bush’s war if he wins the election, is it? And if the French and moo-lahs and disaffected café-sitters in Cairo still think it’s Bush’s war after he wins 40 states, who gives a tin merde? Kerry can buy five minutes of good will by putting the screws to Israel, and reap the accolades of those who cannot wait for the inevitable flowering of liberal democracy in Arafat’s Instant Sea-Monkey Paradise (just add statehood!) but once those five minutes are up, and the Arab press starts pointing out Kerry’s Jewish roots, and the bombs go off again in Tel Aviv, does anyone think France will petition the Security Council to bomb Hezbollah camps in Syria?I admit. I have a fantasy. Kerry wins. He’s having a summit with Tony Blair. In the middle of the conversation, Chirac calls up; Kerry excuses himself and has a brief chat about a new resolution to let French oil companies bid on reconstruction projects, and they have an amiable conversation in French. Kerry hangs up.“Your predecessor,” Blair says, “spoke to him in English.”“I know,” says President Kerry. “He couldn’t speak French.”“He didn’t have to,” Blair notes. He gives a tight smile. And sighs. And gets down to explaining what now must be done.If Tony B. ran against Kerry in this country, I wonder who'd win? I'd vote for him. Everything else aside, he gets it. He always has.

Uh, I have nothing to add.

The Worlds Oldest Terrorist Is Not Doing Well

Yasser Arafat is in a bad way:

RAMALLAH, West Bank Oct 27, 2004 — Yasser Arafat collapsed Wednesday evening, was unconscious for about 10 minutes and remained in a "very difficult situation," Palestinian officials said. A team of Jordanian doctors was urgently summoned to treat the ailing Palestinian leader.
Arafat had been eating soup during a meeting with Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia, former Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas and another official between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m. (2 p.m. or 3 p.m. EDT) when he vomited, according to a bodyguard who was in the compound at the time.
Arafat was brought to the clinic inside the compound, where he collapsed and was unconscious for about 10 minutes, the guard said. His doctors were urgently summoned.
On news that Arafata's health was worsening, scores of top Palestinian officials descended on his Ramallah compound. Israeli security officials said his wife, Suha, who lives in France, was expected to arrive Thursday.

I'm doing my best to summon sympathy...wait, no, I can't do it. I hope Bill Clinton is well enough to go to his funeral.

Why I'm Voting For Bush

I'm voting for President Bush for several reasons, which I'll get to. Is he perfect? No. The Prescription Drug Bill was a new entitlement we can't afford. The education bill he signed with Ted Kennedy was a sop to this election and will cost billions. He is not perfect, especially with respect to domestic policy, however, the single biggest issue is the War on Terror.

We were attacked by radical Islamists on September 11 whom don't give a damn about anything but bringing down the worlds greatest nation. If the terrorist element that prefers us dead feels even remotely emboldened, we will suffer greatly. If they succeed, the domestic issues are moot. Let's imagine a dirty bomb, or worse yet, a rogue nuke detonated in midtown Manhattan, what the hell does a tax cut or increase mean? Nothing. These are people who want us dead! It doesn't matter if you're a Liberal or Conservative, a Democrat or Republican, they want you dead.

Bush is the man in this election who will protect our nation the best possible way. We take it to the terrorists where they are, in an offensive method, not sit back and wait for the next 9/11/01 or 5/17/05. This is serious, this is more than 1,000 soldiers dying to protect us. That my friends is 30-year old thinking. We must fight this battle now and decisively, outside the US.

Kerry has shown to not have the backbone required for this battle. From his vote against the first Gulf War to voting against the $87-million to fund the troops, he has proved to be spineless.

This to me is personal-- personal in a way that any parent can understand--I do not want my son fighting my battle ten years from now. If Kerry is elected, we will return to the defensive reactionary position of the Clinton years; soldiers are killed in Mogadishu; we retreat. Two embassies are destroyed; we do nothing. The World Trade Center is bombed; still nothing. I furtively believe that Kerry will become Jimmy Carter within two years. We cannot afford that.

An Historic Day

The Main Stream Media tried to pull their own October Surprise and got caught;

Israel had an historic vote and did more in one day that Slick Willy could accomplish in 8-years of meeting with Arafat;

Gay couples must be referred to as Mr. and Mrs. in Canada;

John Kerry channels Joe Biden; and

Most importantly, the election is winding down and Bush is still leading. At least the early results say so.

I expect to post some election thoughts tomorrow or Thursday, this being the most important election in my life thus far and all that.

10 Reasons To Not Vote For Bush

Jim Treacher has 10 reasons to not vote for W including this gem:

10. Do you really think it's a good idea to be Hitler, George? Hitler killed millions of people and his approval ratings are for shit. Why can't you be somebody who people like? Regis, maybe, or the Prophet Mohammed. Anybody but Hitler! Being Hitler = BAD IDEA.

The comments are priceless too, such as this reply to #10 above:

10. Bush is not like Hitler. The German people elected Hitler. We all know Bush was not elected. The German People LOVED Hitler. The German people HATE GW. Therefore GWB is NOT like Hitler, and on this point your argument fails.

Ha!

Update: More hilarious satire here (rough language).

Speaking Of Ann Coulter

Right Wing News has a hilarious interview with Ann:

John Hawkins: One of the many things you've said that really cheeses off liberals is,
"When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors".
Do you regret saying that?
Ann Coulter: Only that I didn't say it loud enough and in a large enough public forum. And when I said we should "execute" John Walker Lindh, I mis-spoke. What I meant to say was "We should burn John Walker Lindh alive and televise it on prime-time network TV". My apologies for any misunderstanding that might have occurred.
John Hawkins: A lot of your detractors on the right refer to you as the right-wing version of Michael or Al Franken. What do you think about that comparison?
Ann Coulter: The fact that only my detractors say this says it all.
John Hawkins: Any initial reaction to the $60 million dollar sexual harassment suit against Bill O'Reilly?
Ann Coulter: Last week I received an obscene phone call that began, "Ann from New York, you're in the Zone. What say you, and what are you wearing?" and ended, "I'll give you the last word."
John Hawkins: How about dashing off a quick sentence or even just a word or two about the following individuals...
- George Bush: A 21st century Churchill.- Dick Cheney: Takes a licking, keeps on ticking.- Jonah Goldberg: Who?- Andrew Sullivan: Every inch a lady.- Tucker Carlson: See what happens when you try to be mainstream?- John Kerry: 30 years later he's still shooting himself in the foot.- Teresa Heinz Kerry: To be first lady, first you have to be a lady.- John Edwards: Jury's still out - expect a huge settlement.- Max Cleland: At least he earned his medals.- Dan Rather: A space alien -- and I have the Microsoft documents from the fifties. that prove it!
John Hawkins: Can you tell us a little bit about your new book, "How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)"?
Ann Coulter: It's like Bill Clinton's book, only interesting. If you can't find it in your local bookstore, look behind the stacks of left-wing books about President Bush with the word "lie" in the title

The Guardian Was Just Joking

See if you can pick out the ironic humor in this:

On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod’s law dictates he’ll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?

What, you couldn't find it? The loathesome dirtbags at the sorriest paper in the world deleted it from their website and posted an apology in its place:

The final sentence of a column in The Guide on Saturday caused offence to some readers. The Guardian associates itself with the following statement from the writer.
"Charlie Brooker apologises for any offence caused by his comments relating to President Bush in his TV column, Screen Burn. The views expressed in this column are not those of the Guardian. Although flippant and tasteless, his closing comments were intended as an ironic joke, not as a call to action - an intention he believed regular readers of his humorous column would understand. He deplores violence of any kind."

The din of the MSM is deafening. Yeah right. Remember when Ann Coulter said this and the media crucified her?

Lileks is Cranky

Lileks eviscerates Bill Maher for following the typical Liberal M.O. and giving an anti-American rant to a foreign interviewer.

Rehnquist Ill

Chief Justice William Rehnquist is hospitalized and being treated for cancer:


WASHINGTON (AP) - Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the leading conservative figure on the Supreme Court for a generation, has thyroid cancer but will continue working while receiving treatment.
Rehnquist, 80, underwent a tracheotomy at Bethesda Naval Hospital in suburban Maryland on Saturday. While no details about his condition were released, a statement issued by the court said he is expected to be back at work next week when justices resume hearing cases.
Even so, Rehnquist's hospitalization little more than a week before the election gave new prominence to a campaign issue that has been overshadowed by the war on terrorism. The next president is likely to at least one - and likely more - to a court that has been deeply divided in recent years on issues as varied as abortion and the 2000 election itself.

What looney-left site will be the first to post dubious comments about this? The nice ladies at NOW have nothing on their site about this, although they have a nice "Love Your Body" link.

We have a winner:

Rehnquist is a CNP shill, this is a cover for Bush on the weapons

Why didn't I go to the DUmmies first?

Bush By 5%

The newest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll has Bush up by 5% in the likely voter category. CNN, of course, is spinning their own poll:

(CNN) -- The presidential race continues to be tight, with President Bush possibly holding a slight lead over Sen. John Kerry among likely voters, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup national opinion poll published Monday.
Fifty-one percent of likely voters said they would back Bush, and 46 percent expressed support for Kerry.
The margin of error was plus or minus 3 percentage points, meaning the true leader was unclear.

I'm just an idiot blogger, but if the margin of error is three and Bush is up by five that would mean that Bush is the clear leader.

Bush By 5%

The newest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll has Bush up by 5% in the likely voter category. CNN, of course, is spinning their own poll:

(CNN) -- The presidential race continues to be tight, with President Bush possibly holding a slight lead over Sen. John Kerry among likely voters, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup national opinion poll published Monday.
Fifty-one percent of likely voters said they would back Bush, and 46 percent expressed support for Kerry.
The margin of error was plus or minus 3 percentage points, meaning the true leader was unclear.

I'm just an idiot blogger, but if the margin of error is three and Bush is up by five that would mean that Bush is the clear leader.

Rove = bin Laden

You have to love an article entitled "Karl Rove: America's Mullah" and has a subhead that reads "This election is about Rovism, and the outcome threatens to transform the U.S. into an ironfisted theocracy." The LA Times is frothing at the mouth like a rabid Akita and are pulling out all the low-down rhetoric they can:

Rove, however, is more than a political sharpie with a bulging bag of dirty tricks. His campaign shenanigans — past and future — go to the heart of what this election is about. Democrats will tell you it is a referendum on Bush's incompetence or on his extremist right-wing agenda. Republicans will tell you it's about conservatism versus liberalism or who can better protect us from terrorists. They are both wrong. This election is about Rovism — the insinuation of Rove's electoral tactics into the conduct of the presidency and the fabric of the government. It's not an overstatement to say that on Nov. 2, the fate of traditional American democracy will hang in the balance.Rovism is not simply a function of Rove the political conniver sitting in the counsels of power and making decisions, though he does. No recent presidency has put policy in the service of politics as has Bush's. Because tactics can change institutions, Rovism is much more. It is a philosophy and practice of governing that pervades the administration and even extends to the Republican-controlled Congress. As Robert Berdahl, chancellor of UC Berkeley, has said of Bush's foreign policy, a subset of Rovism, it constitutes a fundamental change in "the fabric of constitutional government as we have known it in this country."Rovism begins, as one might suspect from the most merciless of political consiglieres, with Machiavelli's rule of force: "A prince is respected when he is either a true friend or a downright enemy." No administration since Warren Harding's has rewarded its friends so lavishly, and none has been as willing to bully anyone who strays from its message. There is no dissent in the Rove White House without reprisal.

Emphasis mine. According to this idiot, if Bush is elected, the entire American democratic system is going to be replaced by a theocratic dictatorship. The author of this drivel is completely unhinged.

The idea of the United States as an ironfisted theocracy is terrifying, and it should give everyone pause. This time, it's not about policy. This time, for the first time, it's about the nature of American government. We all have reason to be very, very afraid.

I can see Bush relegating all homosexuals and Atheists to North Dakota on November 3, can't you?

Bush Fills Alltel Stadium

Bush packed them in in Jacksonville. Here are some great pictures and here is a first hand account of the event. That is good news for Bush if the folks in northeastern Fla. are pumped up.

It's Going to be Close

The composite polling data has bush up slightly with a week and change to go. This promises to be the ugliest week of politics in several generations. The battleground states show Bush taking New Mexico, West Virginia,Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, Colorado, and with a slight lead in Florida. Kerry has Washington, New Hampshire, Maine, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Minnesota, Michigan, and Oregon. Ohio is a tie.

Boring Through Democratic Oppression

As you may recall when Michael Moore brought us the brilliant campaign commercial Fahrenheit 9/11 the Republicans did everything in their power to stop this "important film" from ever being shown. You remember the rounding up of Moore and other lefties and their eventual confinement in the gulags of Montana. The theaters that showed the movie were burned to the ground to stop the masses from seeing this "truthful" movie. Remember that? Me neither. Republicans took the thoughtful approach of letting the world see it and then picking it apart with facts so that it became irrelevant.

The Democrats however, are doing anything in their power to stop the airing of Stolen Honor, a damning documentary about Kerry and the VVAW in 1971. But fortunately, through the great technology available to us, you can watch it here. It is 42 minutes and the picture is small but at least it's viewable. The impact is devastating to Kerry. To have former POW's describe the torture they were suffering and to hear them say the words they do about Kerry is brutal to listen to.

Bush Smarter Than Kerry?

You know how Bush is an idiot and all? It's been in all the papers. What of Kerry's intelligence?

To Bush-bashers, it may be the most infuriating revelation yet from the military records of the two presidential candidates: the young George W. Bush probably had a higher I.Q. than did the young John Kerry.

Via Glenn Reynolds.

The Joy Of Universal Health Care

Mark Steyn on the election, prescription drugs through Canada, and the Canadian healthcare system:

So this is no time to vote for Europhile delusions. The Continental health and welfare systems John Kerry so admires are, in fact, part of the reason those societies are dying. As for Canada, yes, under socialized health care, prescription drugs are cheaper, medical treatment's cheaper, life is cheaper. After much stonewalling, the Province of Quebec's Health Department announced this week that in the last year some 600 Quebecers had died from C. difficile, a bacterium acquired in hospital. In other words, if, say, Bill Clinton had gone for his heart bypass to the Royal Victoria Hospital in Montreal, he would have had the surgery, woken up the next day swimming in diarrhea and then died. It's a bacterium caused by inattention to hygiene -- by unionized, unsackable cleaners who don't clean properly; by harassed overstretched hospital staff who don't bother washing their hands as often as they should. So 600 people have been killed by the filthy squalor of disease-ridden government hospitals. That's the official number. Unofficially, if you're over 65, the hospitals will save face and attribute your death at their hands to "old age" or some such and then "lose" the relevant medical records. Quebec's health system is a lot less healthy than, for example, Iraq's.
One thousand Americans are killed in 18 months in Iraq, and it's a quagmire. One thousand Quebecers are killed by insufficient hand-washing in their filthy, decrepit health care system, and kindly progressive Americans can't wait to bring it south of the border. If one has to die for a cause, bringing liberty to the Middle East is a nobler venture and a better bet than government health care.

The Canadian system is still better than the British one from what I've heard.

I'm out for tonight to watch Houston and St. Louis battle it out to face Boston. I'm pulling for Houston because it'd be nice to have two new teams in the series. A plus is they keep showing Roger Clemens' wife and we'd get to see that for another week and a half.

The Iraqi "Street" Outlook On Our Election

Iraq the Model has an interesting look into the view Arabs and Iraqi's have on the election:

“Yes, as Mr. Bush said; the world has become a better place without Saddam. For me, it became a happier place, only our happiness is not a complete one yet because of the foreign terrorists who entered our country”.Ibrahim-Baghdad.

“Bush is a better choice than Kerry. Regardless of the reasons behind the war in Iraq, I’m hearing news about Iraqis happy with the liberation and frankly speaking, some of the Arab media are very hypocritic when it comes to the situation in Iraq and they exaggerate things greatly.We-the Arabs-are getting to understand many new subjects” Mohammed Kerim Al Sabti - Oman.

“From my point of view, I see that Bush lost the battle and now he’s trying to defend his policy but he will lose more. While if John Kerry behaved rationally and improved his position to prove that Bush was wrong, then he’ll be a better choice than Bush. While if he decided to follow Bush’s course then he will be his successor in failure.Anyway, I believe that Kerry is going to change his country’s policy in Iraq because America is now sinking in a swarm and day by day it’s getting more difficult to get out of this swarm”Khalil-Iraq.
“Don’t you agree that our Arab brothers are not paying attention to what Iraqis themselves think about the war on Saddam?”Huda-Baghdad.

“Don’t you agree that our Arab brothers are not paying attention to what Iraqis themselves think about the war on Saddam?”Huda-Baghdad.

Of course, the Zionists are mentioned:

“No, because it’s the Zionist lobby that steers the wheel of the American policy regardless of who the president was, Kerry or Tom and Jerry.I, like all other honest Iraqis wish for Bush to win so that he can keep the course of sterilizing the world from the germs that use Islam as a cover”Ahmed Al Shammari-Baghdad.

Mugger

Russ Smith, as I say every week, is an excellent writer who must get a blog. What would diehard Sox fan Mugger say today after whacking the Yanks last night? We won't know because he doesn't have a blog. Here's a snippet from this weeks column in the NY Press:

I don't watch Fox's Hannity and Colmes anymore—Hannity's not stupid, but he's as much of a shill for Bush as the Washington Post's Dana Milbank is for Kerry—but thanks to Mickey Kaus' blog, which linked to another site, I read the transcript of veteran Democratic political consultant Pat Caddell on the subject. As I mentioned last week, the Kerry camp isn't, as of yet, drawing black voters in the overwhelming numbers that Clinton or Al Gore did, partly because of resistance to the senator's pro-abortion and pro-gay rights positions.
Caddell, no Bush partisan, but unusually honest, had a different take on Kerry's unctuous reference to Mary Cheney. He said: "This is the biggest issue that's never been discussed in this campaign, the same-sex marriage issue… And among [the] most ardent opponents of gay marriage are African-Americans, Hispanics, and voters over 65, the heart of the Democratic Party. That's who Kerry was speaking to."
Now, while Kerry's proved to be a superb candidate in a debate setting, something he can prepare for, on the campaign stump he's no match for Bush. Forget Kerry's fear mongering of last week, when he told the Des Moines Register, "With George Bush, the plan for Iraq is more of the same and the great potential of the draft." That's standard fare: Even though Bush explicitly ruled out a draft during the second debate, Kerry's desperately trying to reach young voters.
And Kerry's ludicrous claim in Ohio on Oct. 17 that Bush plans a "January surprise" to cut Social Security benefits must've been crafted by the reptilian and tone-deaf Joe Lockhart. Kerry's an experienced politician: Does he really believe, if Bush wins, that the reelected president would announce such a measure in his second inaugural speech?
Still, my favorite quote from the temporarily populist senator came from a rally in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, last Friday. Maybe trying to neutralize the self-inflicted damage from last month when he called the Green Bay Packers' home "Lambert Field" instead of the correct "Lambeau Field," Kerry uncorked this one-liner: "Some brats, some cheese, a few beers, and then I can go out and talk about health care."
So that explains Kerry's goofy, Hillaryesque health care proposals during the debate. He had one too many bottles of Trois Mont!
And lest we forget—thanks to Jack Hitt's Oct. 17 Times article—Kerry's not a "brats" and nachos kind of chap. Hitt writes about the day in July when the Democratic ticket made a big deal of eating at a Wendy's. Yet afterwards, as Hitt writes: [T]hey returned to their bus, where they were greeted with a meal smuggled in from the Newburgh Yacht Club: shrimp vindaloo, grilled diver sea scallops and prosciutto-wrapped stuffed chicken."

I agree with him about all of this, including the Hannity reference. I can't listen to Hannity at all anymore. He was different when he was only on WABC in New York, less grating, less redundant. He is a shill that will gloss over anything Bush does. I actually have no problems with a partisan, hell thats politics, I do have a problem with a partisan who is an apologist and will cover for a candidate or incumbent who screws up or says something stupid.

I'm Changing My Vote

I'm now going to vote for John Kerry based on this:

BOARDMAN, Ohio (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry said he bagged a goose on his swing-state hunting trip Thursday, but his real target was the voters who may harbor doubts about him.
Kerry returned after a two-hour hunting trip wearing a camouflage jacket and carrying a 12-gauge shotgun, but someone else carried the bird he said he shot.
"I'm too lazy," Kerry joked. "I'm still giddy over the Red Sox. It was hard to focus."
The Massachusetts senator was referring to Boston's American League championship Wednesday night. He stayed up late cheering his hometown team onto victory, then got up for a 7 a.m. hunting trip at a supporter's produce farm.
Kerry adviser Mike McCurry said it's important in the final days of the campaign that voters "get a better sense of John Kerry, the guy."

He's "the guy" for me. He watched the Red Sox win and is "giddy". I remember when the Phillies won the World Series in 1980, I was only twelve years old and I sure as hell don't remember thinking I felt "giddy". This dude is shameless.

The Yankees Choke, The Yankees Choke, Theeeee Yankees Choke!

Up three games to none the Yankees snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. My heart is pumping piss for all of NYC and north Jersey.

Update: Allah has spoken twice.

Note to Yankee fans, if you're going to jump off any bridges in the near future, do it quickly and don't screw up my commute. Thank you in advance.

I'm Pissed

Let's take a second and ponder this; Democrats and liberals were upset that Bush only went to the UN twice, once with Colin Powell laying it all out, and Bush personally talking to that congregation of moral virtue. They are wringing their hands because we freed a country that suffered the rape of its women by the sons of Saddam.

With regards to Sudan however, we have deferred to the UN to go in and protect the victims of genocide. Have they accomplished anything? No.

Three months ago, the UN described the situation in Darfur as "the world's worst humanitarian crisis". On my two-day visit, I found that nothing much has changed. The government of Sudan has reneged on its promise to disarm the Janjaweed. Their campaign has the sole objective of eradicating the black tribes and installing the Arabs in their place. If this isn't genocide, then it's difficult to imagine what on earth is.
I have sent a full report to Tony Blair and will ask a question about Darfur in the House of Lords today. My report is a catalogue of systematic violence driven by ethnic hatred and aided by the Sudanese regime. We heard first-hand accounts of the rape of girls as young as 10 and women as old as 80. Men wept as they recounted the humiliations and killings. The report is on the website of the human rights group the Jubilee Campaign, which arranged the visit (www.jubileecampaign.co.uk).
We joined a group of 17 women sitting in the shade of a tree, drinking coffee. Most were widows, and most had also lost fathers, brothers and sons. They need firewood for cooking and grass for their animals, and are thus forced to go beyond the camp. They had all, without exception, been the victims of attack and rape by the Janjaweed. Although they are clearly traumatised by the daily risks they run, they speak philosophically about it: "If our men go out, they die. If we go, we are raped. That's the choice."

Hawry, 35, told us that when her village was attacked, the men "harassed and beat" the women and girls before they rode off. These are euphemisms for rape; in their society, it is an unmentionable subject, bringing shame and humiliation on the victim and her family.
We were told that the "Arabs" carried razor blades and sharp knives to cut open the atrophied vaginas of old women before they raped them. When the Janjaweed had gone, Hawry said, the women abandoned the village. "My family once had 88 head of cattle, but I put one baby around my neck and another child on my back, and I started walking." Her other three children had to walk for the next eight days.

Looks like the UN has failed this "Global Test".

Put This In Your Pipe & Smoke It

The Dems are pulling out all the stops:

DEFIANCE, Ohio - A man was arrested Monday on a felony charge of submitting phony voter registration forms, and investigators were looking into allegations that he was paid with crack cocaine in exchange for his efforts, authorities said.
Chad Staton, 22, of Defiance, had fraudulently filled out more than 100 voter registration forms, Defiance County Sheriff David Westrick said.
"Staton was to be paid for each registration form that he could get citizens to fill out," the sheriff said. "However, Staton himself filled out the registrations and returned them to the woman who hired him from Toledo."
Staton was charged with false registration and was released on his recognizance to await arraignment on Friday in Defiance Municipal Court.
No other charges had been filed in the case Monday, authorities said.
Officers said they interviewed a Toledo woman who claimed that she had paid Staton with cocaine for the phony voter registrations. Officers said they obtained a search warrant and took voter registrations and drug paraphernalia from the woman's home.

Surprise, surprise, the NAACP is involved. (Link requires subscription, but Drudge has it free here.)

Why Do Blacks Support The Democrats?

I often wonder why the Democrats get the support they do from Unions, Jews, and African Americans. The unions have not been supported by the Donkeys since the 60's and yet they rail against the Republicans as corporate cronies. Look at the jobs union guys are working on, they are for the big corporations. The Jewish vote is definitely not the given it once was, and now the Black vote is being, if not taken by the Republicans, at least whittled away. The Reverand Wayne Perryman sent this letter to Terry McAuliffe:

Many African Americans agree with those psychologists who believe that the horrors of institutional racism established in part by the racist legislation of the Democrats, still haunt African Americans today. Despite these factual truths, the Democratic Party has never issued or offered an apology to African Americans in its 212-year history.Some have argued that the Republicans also owe African Americans an apology for abandoning them when they reached a compromise (with the Democrats) to remove federal troops from the South, in exchange for giving Rutherford B. Hayes the presidency. History notes that the compromise did indeed take place and troops were removed from the South. However experts say that like the problems facing today’s American troops in the Reconstruction of Iraq, it was impossible to have enough federal troops to cover the entire region (13 states) during the Reconstruction of the South. History reveals that from 1866 to 1877 Democrats and their Klan supporters launched a multitude of terrorist attacks against African Americans while federal troops were stationed in the region. Professor David Donald of Harvard writes: “Congress could require federal troops to supervise the registration of voters, but Negroes were waylaid and butchered on the roads to the registration office….” The troop’s presence had little affect on the reign of terror initiated by Democrats and their Klan supporters.When it comes to offering apologies, the one factor that may excuse Republicans is the fact that unlike the Democrats, Republicans have always had abolitionists and “Radical” members like Senator Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens to consistently and effectively challenge racist individuals within their party (racist Republicans like President Abraham Lincoln). Professor James McPherson of Princeton said, “The abolitionists became the respected spokesmen of the radical wing of the Republican Party.” From 1792 to 1960, the “radicals” in the Democratic Party weren’t spokespersons for African Americans they were the assassins that brought terror and death to African Americans.

Read the whole thing of course.

Via: Baldilocks

AFP Likes Connie

You've heard of Connie Cominsky, you know, Connie, the woman that AFP continually uses when they want to show how bad a man Bush is.

Not That There's Anything Wrong With That

Vodkaman is a stud...er, cool dude.

The Best Review Of Team America-World Police

James Taranto has this excellent line in his review:

This column doesn't normally do movie reviews, but we just have to let the world know how much we adore "Team America: World Police," which we saw Saturday night in a big-screen IMAX theater on Manhattan's Upper West Side. Seeing an audience in deep-blue Manhattan cheer the destruction of the Eiffel Tower restored our faith in American unity.

I hope to see TAWP this week and will give you my feedback.

Blair On Fire

Tim Blair has an hilarious couple of posts.

Bush In Burlington County

President Bush spoke in my town today and reiterated the Bush Doctrine. I had to work and couldn't attend, but having Bush visit a state Al Gore carried by sixteen points, just two weeks out from the election, says to me that New Jersey is more in play than anyone believed. Bush must have some internal polling that says the state is a maybe for him. An excerpt from the speech:

PRESIDENT BUSH: The prime minister of Iraq is a brave man who survived the assassins of Saddam. (Cheers, applause.) The prime minister -- the prime minister of Iraq deserves the respect of the world, not the scorn of a politician. (Cheers, applause.)As part of his foreign policy, Senator Kerry has talked about applying a global test. (Boos.) As far as I can tell, it comes down to this: before we act to defend ourselves, he thinks we need permission from foreign capitals. (Boos.) Yet even the Gulf War coalition in 1991 did not pass Senator Kerry's global test. Even with the United Nations' approval, he voted against removing Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. (Boos.) If that vast, U.N.-supported operation did not pass his test, nothing ever could. Senator Kerry's -- (applause) -- Senator Kerry's global test is nothing more than an excuse to constrain the actions of our own country in a dangerous world. (Applause.)I believe in strong alliances, I believe in respecting other countries and working with them and seeking their advice. But I will never submit our national security decisions to a veto of a foreign government. (Cheers, applause, chants of "USA.")Fourth -- fourth, we will win the war on terror and make America safer by advancing the cause of freedom and democracy. Free societies are hopeful societies which do not nurture bitterness or the ideologies of terror and murder. Free governments in the broader Middle East will fight the terrorists instead of harboring them. And this is why a free Iraq and a free Afghanistan are vital to peace in that region and vital to the security interests of our country.After decades of tyranny in the broader Middle East, progress toward freedom will not come easily, yet that progress is coming faster than many would have said possible. (Applause.) Across a troubled region we are seeing a movement toward elections, greater rights for women, and open discussion of peaceful reform.The election in Afghanistan, less than two weeks ago, was a landmark event in the history of liberty. (Cheers, applause.) That election was a tremendous defeat for the terrorists. (Applause.)My opponent has complained that we are trying to, quote, "impose" democracy on people in that region. Is that what he sees in Afghanistan, unwilling people having democracy forced upon them? We removed the Taliban by force, but democracy is rising in that country because the Afghan people, like everywhere, want to live in freedom.

Bush has never wavered on the War on Terror and that is why he will win.

Navy May Get Rid Of Bell Bottoms

The US Navy is looking at changing the uniforms from E-1 through O-10. Here's a picture of the ones that will be tesed. I kind of like them.

Fly Eagles Fly...

The Eagles are 4-0 going into today gainst Carolina. T.O. is everything adverstised and McNabb is having a Pro Bowl-type year. I haven't mentioned anything about them because I'm being cautiously optimistic. Three straight NFC Chamionship games, three straight losses to weaker opponents. That hurts.

This what it's like to be a birds fan; Imagine meeting a beautiful girl who is smokin' hot, has the same interests as you and you have a passionate affair for 6-months. One day she just leaves with no forewarning. She just breaks your heart. It takes you half a year to even stop crying at the thought of her. You finally get to the point that you can go on without her and maybe even date someone else. Out of the blue she calls you again and the relationship becomes torrid again. Then after six more months she up and leaves, same as before. You feel worse this time because you've told yourself that this time it was forever. Six months later she calls...

That is what being a birds fan is like. This time it feels different though...

At the beginning of the season, it looked as though the schedule would be brutal, now it looks as though the schedule is among the easiest in the NFC. The Giants are playing decent ball but the birds whooped their asses on opening day. The Steelers and Ravens should be a test but the birds defense is awesome and McNabb is throwing the ball to 7 different receivers every game. Making the playoffs is not enough, making it to the NFC Championship game again is not enough, the Superbowl is the only goal.

BTW, they also have the hottest cheerleaders in the business.

The Philadelphia Inquirer, Now An Official Whore For The DNC

The Inquirer has had quite a week in the partisanship department. First they started off with the 21-day endorsement of Kerry, then they made sure they prominently displayed this headline: Kerry sees Bush draft risk, albeit below the fold but on the front page. Even though the Inquirer knows Bush has disavowed any talk of a draft (twice), they have to go with the DNC sponsored scare line of the week. Then today they run these two articles, which it seems they used their entire cadre of reporters to write and investigate:

The first:

WASHINGTON - In March 2003, days before the start of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, American war planners and intelligence officials met at Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina to review the Bush administration's plans to oust Saddam Hussein and implant democracy in Iraq.
Near the end of his presentation, an Army lieutenant colonel who was giving a briefing showed a slide describing the Pentagon's plans for rebuilding Iraq after the war, known in the planners' parlance as Phase 4-C. He was uncomfortable with his material - and for good reason. The slide said: "To Be Provided."
An Inquirer Washington Bureau review of the Iraq policy and decisions of the administration has found that it invaded Iraq without a comprehensive plan in place to secure and rebuild the country. The administration also failed to provide about 100,000 additional U.S. troops that American military commanders originally wanted to help restore order and reconstruct a country shattered by war, a brutal dictatorship, and economic sanctions.
In fact, some senior Pentagon officials had thought they could bring most American soldiers home from Iraq by September 2003. Instead, more than a year later, 138,000 U.S. troops are still fighting insurgents who slip easily across Iraq's long borders, diehards from the old regime, and Iraqis angered by their country's widespread crime and unemployment and the United States' sometimes heavy boots.
"We didn't go in with a plan. We went in with a theory," said a veteran State Department officer who was directly involved in Iraq policy.

This is typical old-school reporting, sources that aren't revealed and no proof that they even exist. The Sunday Inquirer is the most read of the week and this is displayed prominently on page 1.

Then there's this:
The national Democrats have found God.
For decades, the party most closely identified with secular values had generally avoided talking about religion, except while stumping for African American votes on Sunday. But now, as evidenced by John Kerry's newfound willingness to air his Catholicism, national party leaders have determined that he can't win the 2004 presidential race unless he convinces uncommitted voters that faith informs his politics.
So there he was, in the third debate last Wednesday, quoting from the New Testament Book of James ("What does it mean, my brother, to say you have faith if there are no deeds?"), sharing the childhood lessons he learned in a church school ("Love the Lord, your God, with all your mind, body and soul, and love your neighbor as yourself"), and declaring that "my faith affects everything that I do and choose."
He has quoted the Bible on the road, invoked God at the national convention ("Faith has given me values and hope to live by... from Sunday to Sunday"). His surrogates have weighed in, notably Barack Obama, the Senate candidate from Illinois, who declares, "We worship an awesome God in the blue [Democratic] states!"
This rite of religious passage hasn't been easy for Kerry; as a reticent New Englander, he wasn't raised to parade his faith. Nor has it been easy for the national party, which, until it recently hired a "religion outreach" strategist, seemed intent on maintaining total separation of church and state, to the point where all talk of God was deemed out of bounds.

Praise the Lord and pass the ammo, the Donkeys got religion. This may not be a good thing however, one complaint I've heard from people about Bush is that he wears his religion on his sleeve and that bothers them. How far do you think the Kerry/Religion line will go if he gets elected, I doubt we'll never hear of it again.

I concluse that the Inquirer has puuled out all stops to put Kerry over the top in eastern Pennsylvania, which should give him the state. There is hope though:

A FEW GUYS are trying to launch a new paper in town. They're calling it the Evening Bulletin.
That name worked for a century and a half for a Philly broadsheet published from 1847 to 1982.
Kevin Williamson, who recently stepped down as editor of the Main Line Times, appeared on Michael Smerconish's Big Talker 1210-AM show yesterday morning to announce he would be the editor of the Evening Bulletin, which he said would be on the streets before Thanksgiving.
Williamson declined comment yesterday, but e-mailed us a statement:
"The Evening Bulletin, a general interest daily newspaper serving Philadelphia and its suburbs, will begin publishing in November.
"The Evening Bulletin will be published afternoons, Monday through Friday.
"The Bulletin's mission is to present timely local news, commentary, cultural reporting and advertising in an accurate and comprehensive fashion."
On Smerconish's show, Williamson likened the paper to the Fox News Channel, which he called an alternative to mainstream media.
Williamson, 32, is a motorcycle-riding former Texan described by a former colleague as "scary"-looking, and also "Catholic, very conservative, very bright, very hard-hitting, with a shaved head, and leather pants."
On Smerconish's show, Williamson said Narberth-based investment banker Tom Rice would be the publisher and financier.
Rice is also said to be conservative. He could not be reached yesterday for comment.
Williamson hopes to put honor boxes on the street and use newsboys to hawk the paper, which for now has only a Center City office and a barebones Web site, theeven ing bulletin.com.

A conservative newspaper in Philly again? Yes.

Bush By 3%

Bush is up by 3% in this composite poll at RealClear Politics. The newest Newsweek poll has Bush up 6% with Nader gatting 1%, while Time has Nader with 3%. I have no idea if Nader will even get 1% but wouldn't it be sweet if he could 3%?

Lileks For Senate '06

Alas, I can't vote in Minnesota, at least being a Republican I can't. Democrats in Chicago and Philly vote whether they be dead or alive. I would vote for James but he's hedging:

That’s one response. “Blow it out your jaw-hole, Hairboy” is another. Neither works in the chummy, collegial atmosphere of the Senate. They might work in the cloakroom, where you’re allowed to use small sharp knives such as might fit into the handle of a walking stick, but really, I’m not a stabby kind of guy, so that won’t work. If nominated, I will not run. If elected, I will not serve. If mailed the paychecks nevertheless, I will cash them with a heavy heart: really, the people of Minnesota deserve so much better.

Wussy boy.

Bias? What Bias?

Wizbang shines the light on more bias.

John Kerry Repeatedly Gets Beat Up By a Girl

Ann Coulter whacks the bejesus out of Kerry (again):

He would do a better job, Kerry said, "most importantly – and I mean most importantly – of restoring America's reputation as a country that listens, is sensitive, brings people to our side, is the seeker of peace, not war, and that uses our high moral ground and high-level values to augment us in the war on terror, not to diminish us."
Imagine President John Kerry at the Berlin Wall. "Mr. Gorbachev ... I challenge you to get to an emotional place where you can imagine a different kind of non-wall reality, that fully respects the 'wallness' of your current reality, yet takes us on a spiritual journey in which ..."
Republicans are more simple-minded, but for some things you want to be a little less contemplative, a little less nuanced. In a war against rabid savages trying to nuke Manhattan, you want a policy more along the lines of: Kill 'em! Republicans will shoot burn and bury the terrorists. Kerry will give them a speech.

Ann is hardcore and I'm really glad she's on my side.

No Spin?

Bill O'Reilly is either getting drug through some serious shit or is one sick dude. I will comment when things play out.

How The Debate Should Have Been

I wouldn't have fallen asleep if it'd been like this.

(Hat tip: Oxblog)

Another Reason to Vote For Bush

Do your patriotic duty and don't piss off Dick Cheney:

GREENSBORO, NC—In an announcement that has alarmed voters across the nation, Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that he will personally attack the U.S. if Sen. John Kerry wins the next election.
Above: Cheney issues a warning to Greensboro, NC voters.
"If the wrong man is elected in November, the nation will come under a devastating armed attack of an unimaginable magnitude, one planned and executed by none other than myself," Cheney said, speaking at a rally in Greensboro, NC. "When they go to the polls, Americans must weigh this fact and decide if our nation can ignore such a grave threat."
Added Cheney: "It would be a tragedy to suffer another attack on American soil, let alone one perpetrated by an enemy as well-organized and well-equipped as I am. My colleagues and I urge voters to keep their safety in mind when they go to the polls."
Although Cheney would not comment on the details of his proposed attack on a John Kerry-led U.S., national-security experts said he possesses both the capabilities and the motivation to pose a serious threat.

Hilarious, I bet the dirtbags at Democratic Underground really believe this.

Bring. It. On

Hamas officially considers us an enemy:

In a press release in Arabic on its official web, Hamas leaders said: “Hamas is condemning the U.S vote and stating that Hamas considers the U.S as an enemy and as an accomplice to the Israeli enemy aggression against the Palestinians. Hamas regards the U.S position as a criminal act that puts her in a confrontation with ”weak“ nations. The U.S will face responsibility for its position as an accomplice with Israel to the animosity.”

Emphasis mine. I think it's high time we assist the Israeli's covertly in their quest to root out the terrorist vermin of Hamas.

The Dems Sink Lower

The donkeys act pre-emptively and unilaterally:

DNC ELECTION MANUAL: CHARGE VOTER INTIMIDATION, EVEN IF NONE EXISTS**World Exclusive**The Kerry/Edwards campaign and the Democratic National Committee are advising election operatives to declare voter intimidation -- even if none exists, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal. A 66-page mobilization plan to be issued by the Kerry/Edwards campaign and the Democratic National Committee states: "If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a 'pre-emptive strike.'" [HIGHLIGHT OF ELECTION DAY MANUAL, NOVEMBER 2004. CLICK FOR IMAGE .JPG FILE] The provocative Dem battle plan is to be distributed in dozens of states, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. One top DNC official confirmed the manual's authenticity, but claimed the notion of crying wolf on any voter intimidation is "absurd.""We all know the Republicans are going to try to steal the election by scaring people and confusing people," the top DNC source explained.

The politics of fear are thriving in the Kerry camp. I can't wait til Bush wins so we can see Terry McAuliffe run out on a rail. Stephen Green discusses it in much more detail here:

To these guys, winning office is more important than the sanctity of elections. Holding power is more important than the Constitution. Much as I despise at least half of what most Republicans stand for, they don't seem nearly as willing to trash the system they're trying to run. Too many Democrats, especially at the national level, just don't care that our system, our nation is far more important than any single election.
I could mention the Lautenberg Trick in New Jersey. Or Gore's ballot shenanigans in Florida. Or the voter-registration fraud currently going on in Colorado, Nevada, and elsewhere. Or the Democrats' successful call to bring election observers into this country. Bring them in from where, Venezuela? Hey, no big deal sullying the reputation of the world's oldest continuously-functioning democracy, just so long as we can make the Republicans look bad, right?

To paraphrase Al Davis, "Just beat Bush, baby"!

Get A Friggin' Room

If I ever write a paragraph even remotely like this, please put me out of my misery:

In person, Gorbachev is less imposing than the history he carries within him. His hair has turned snowy white, and the famous birthmark fades in the light of his charisma.

Egads woman, get off your knees. Gorbachev was a dictator that was brought to bear by Reagan. He did not lead the Soviet Union out of the oppression, he realized that communism is a dead ideology and he couldn't hold the fractious union together. He was beaten by a drunk who was on the take and left the country with no choice but to "elect" a near dictator in Putin. I shudder to think how this woman would debase herself in the presence of Castro or Kim Jung-Il.

Gay Baiting?

I recall watching the debate last night and the moment Kerry brought up Mary Cheney and her being a lesbian I thought; bad move. Mary Cheney is not "fair game" as Mary Beth Cahill believes, she has been on the campaign trail at limited appearances but has been mostly in the background. Imagine if Bush said something to the effect of Kerry's daughter posing in a see-through dress at Cannes was immoral. That wouldn't belong in an American presidential debate and neither did bringing up Mary Cheney. BTW, I respect Lynne Cheney defending her daughter but am equally disgusted that Liz Edwards interjected her stupid opinion in the debate.

Congratulations Detroit!

Detroit is home of the reigning NBA champion and a more well-deserved title:

DETROIT (AP) Men's Health magazine has rated Detroit the nation's sexual disease capital and Newark, N.J., the runner-up. The magazine's October issue based the ranking primarily on gonorrhea, syphilis and chlamydia data gathered in 2002 by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Detroit and Newark, N.J., were followed by Baltimore, Md. The magazine's safest cities for sex diseases were Anaheim, Calif., Santa Ana, Calif., and Spokane, Wash.

My guess is Dennis Rodman and Carmen Electra have been back in town in the last year. I wonder if they'll riot because of this championship.

Equal Time For Liberals

Michelangelo Signorile (who the hell names their kid that?-ed.) is about the most liberal writer being published regularly. He, in fact, is on his own personal jihad against Drudge that has led to the NY Press being de-linked by Drudge last year. In the spirit of the free exchange of ideas I've decided to link to him and post his weekly article:

TELEVISION NEWS coverage has become so twisted that CNN commentators are not only withholding judgment on who won each debate, waiting to get spun by the campaigns—they're admitting that they're doing so. Meanwhile, Fox News' pundits have been immediately straightforward and honest, defying the spin.
"I think Kerry won this debate as he won the first debate," Fox news commentator Mort Kondracke said directly after Friday's debate in St. Louis. "I thought that Kerry was much more aggressive and the president was basically on the defense and didn't have new arguments."
What gives? I'll get to that later. First, some words on why Kondracke is absolutely correct. George W. Bush was as off his game on Friday as he was on the Thursday prior. He managed to hold back the scowls and grimaces, mostly, but the anger and petulance were unleashed through his darting around the stage, screaming and shouting his answers to the audience and cutting in on Charlie Gibson, at one point taking control of the debate from the moderator. If, in the first debate, Bush looked like a first-grader making faces while in class, in the second debate he came off as the same child on Ritalin. (Or perhaps presidential-grade meta-amphetamine?)

Almost funny in a Maureen Dowd-on-PCP kind of way. More, referring to the second debate:

On domestic issues, Bush rarely seemed credible. Does anyone really believe he's an environmentalist? He didn't answer any of the questions with passion, except the one that dealt with abortion. Since most Americans, including those undecided voters and women, believe in a woman's right to choose, this did him little good except, again, to energize his base while underscoring how much he tilts to the right. Bush belittled a questioner who offered valid concerns—concerns polls show most Americans share—about the Patriot Act by saying he doesn't "think" it takes away civil liberties and then asking the man if he really believes that. Then, when asked to name three mistakes he has made while in office, Bush refused, rambling back into a defense of Iraq.
All of which is why it has been pitiful to watch tv commentators pander to Bush in the post-debate analysis. The Hardball panel on MSNBC went out of its way to compliment Bush after both debates—Salon noted that they seemed to have watched some other debate on another planet the first time around—while Tim Russert and Tom Brokaw punted, pining on with sentimental crap about how debates show the true spirit of democracy. On CNN on Friday night, Jeff Greenfield blurted out a wish-washy analysis that basically amounted to saying the debate was a draw—though he didn't even want to be that definitive—while Wolf Blitzer waited until Judy Woodruff offered up a report from the "spin room."

I find it amazing that the Mike and I watched the same debate and two completely different views developed. The free exchange and all that is making me feel so open-minded (please shoot me):

Another reason for the disparity is that many liberal commentators in the media bought into the Iraq war rationale and now feel like utter fools. The more they criticize Bush on the one issue central to the campaigns and the debates, the more they are admitting their own stupidity at having been suckered by him. The Washington Post editorial page, which often pummels Bush for conservative positions on same-sex marriage, signed on early to the war in Iraq and not only refuses to admit its folly now, but still supports Bush's rationale for war. Not surprisingly, the Post was one of the few editorial pages (even among conservative papers) that actually opined that Bush held his own during the first debate, a position that seems laughable now. Like Bush, these commentators are loath to admit they ever made a mistake.

That's it. In the interest of a two-sided debate, I posted a Signorile piece and allowed his brilliance to flow over you. Did you feel it? Do you feel smarter and better informed? Me neither. Now I'm going to puke with the thought that this guy is on my blog.

Todays Must Read

Russ Smith in the NY Press:

The AP report went on: "Black turnout is key to Kerry's plan for victory in Florida and elsewhere—less than 10 percent of black voters nationally supported George W. Bush in 2000. But Kerry's campaign says there have been efforts to turn religious blacks against him based on his support for abortion rights and civil unions for same-sex couples. Jackson told worshippers their political concerns are issues that touch their everyday lives [apparently the reverend/marriage counselor/philanderer doesn't include religion], not gay marriage. 'November 2, the power is in your hands, hands that once picked cotton.'"
Who knew that so many Miami residents were 175 years old and former slaves, but then I don't have the pipeline to the Almighty that Jackson apparently enjoys. Sharpton, needing an attention rush even more than Eliot Spitzer, helpfully added, "Everything we have fought for, marched for, gone to jail for—some died for—could be reversed if the wrong people are put on the Supreme Court." Copy that, Al. If Bush is reelected there's simply no doubt that Stonewall Jackson, John Calhoun, Jefferson Davis and Sen. Robert Byrd will be exhumed and placed on the high bench. Wait: instant correction. The former KKK member Byrd is still alive. As Kerry might say on his forays into black neighborhoods, "My bad."

The so-called "Black vote" that the donkeys have taken for granted may not be the 90-10% given it has been in recent elections. Couple that with the loss of a good amount of the Jewish vote and that may put Bush over the top. Mugger continues:

The New York Times is Kerry's foremost print cheerleader, but let's not forget the senator's hometown Boston Globe. Surpassing even the Times for biased columnists—which is an almost Herculean task—the Globe gives op-ed space to Dan Payne, a "media consultant" who has worked on Kerry's Senate campaigns, but isn't affiliated with his presidential effort. At least officially. Writing on Oct. 9, Payne, under the headline "Bush's incredible shrinking lead," offers the following Terry McAuliffe-sanctioned nugget. "Florida dreaming. Kerry has to overcome Bush brother Jeb, ballot mischief, cheating on overseas military ballots, major GOP absentee voting program, Ayatollah Rove's evangelical jihad, disenfranchisement of African-American voters. Desperate Bushes may steal Florida again. Only this time, results won't be close."
At least Payne didn't equate Bush with Hitler or Stalin.
Still, last week's groaner came once again courtesy of the Times, with its "The Town Hall Debate" editorial of Oct. 9. Strikingly partisan and condescending at the same time, one can only wonder what Bill Keller and Gail Collins will order up from its editorial grunts for the upcoming Kerry endorsement.
This excerpt is typical: "Town hall meetings are one vestige of early American democracy that modern presidential candidates know very well. No one who has survived a New Hampshire primary season needs to be told what it's like to answer questions tossed out by a group of average [emphasis mine] citizens. It's the democratic process in its most amiable state: earnest Americans asking serious questions about the issues… [T]he president was utterly incoherent when asked about whom he might name to the Supreme Court in a second term. His comment about how he didn't want to offend any judges… was a joke—but an unfortunate one, given the fact that the president owes his job to a Supreme Court vote."
Got it. The headline for the paper's Kerry pick is "Re-Defeat Bush." Not original, but George Soros will approve.

The MSM is balanced though, just ask them.

A Weak Debate?

Glenn thinks so. Usually domestic issues don't light a spark under anybody's ass, but I'm seeing some fire in W and Kerry seems off his game. Kerry just brought the NAACP into it and Bush is now slamming him.

Drunkblogging

Stephen Green is doing it. This is a nice line:

8:02 (Mountain Time-ed.). This thing is, mercifully, two-thirds over. Kerry is doing what Bush did in the first debate. He's smirking "off" camera, he's droning, he's dull. Bush, no matter how boring I find the material, at least sounds passionate. Problem is, other than intoxicated political junkies like me, who the hell is still watching?

I am Vodkaman, I am.

Debate Blogging I

Bob Schieffer asked a question to this effect (and I paraphrase), "It is estimated that 8,000 people per day cross the border from Mexico, are our borders safe". Kerry, in a rebuttal to Bush claiming that less people cross the border, said this (and I paraphrase) "4,000 people cross the border every day...". My beautiful wife pointed out that Kerry just proved W's point. That's why I love her. BTW, Bush is doing a great job this evening as opposed to the first debate.

Why Elect John Kerry? It'll Take 21 Days To Tell You

The Philadelphia Inquirer officially endorsed Kerry on Sunday. No big shocker there. Here's an excerpt of their endorsement editorial:

You also deserve a fair picture of the second half of the case for change: the record and views of John Kerry.
This, very few of you have gotten during a petty, dispiriting campaign. Some blame rests with the Democrat. He has not framed the debate with the force and clarity he must master to be an outstanding president.
More blame, though, rests with Bush. Awash in millions from the corporate donors to whom his White House caters so avidly, the President has spent more time ridiculing Kerry through distortions than presenting his own plans.
Bush backers cling to a tired, tiresome slogan of elections past: Kerry is a clueless liberal, out of touch with the American mainstream.
Here is what Kerry thinks, and what his record as a U.S. senator, lieutenant governor and prosecutor underscores:
John Kerry thinks government should pursue solutions to problems that haunt American lives, but must pay for each initiative as it goes - not stick the nation's children with the tab. Robert Rubin, the superb Treasury secretary under Bill Clinton, praises Kerry as a senator who stood tall on the tough votes that tamed deficits.
He thinks work is better than welfare; he voted for welfare reform.
He thinks it's unacceptable that 45 million Americans lack health coverage; he has a smart plan to shrink that number dramatically.
He wants science to do all it can to speed cures for illnesses.
He knows that protection of America's air, land and water can't be left to the whims of corporations.
He doesn't just shrug when he sees American children slipping into poverty, or more paychecks losing buying power.
If those aren't mainstream American values, then God help America. But of course these are American values.

Typical populist rhetoric; Bush awash in millions from corporations, blah, blah, blah...But this is the kicker, they will explain why they chose Kerry for the next 21 straight days til the election. They will have a pro-Kerry editorial daily through November 2nd. Granted, they are allowing a Republican read the editorial prior to publishing and respond to the editorial the same day (today it was David Horowitz), but they are actually going to take 21 days to explain Kerry to the Philly metro area. The guy has been here a few dozen times and has been in two articles praising him on a daily basis for months. They still think they need to explain Kerry for three friggin' weeks.

Lileks

James Lileks takes Kerry to task concerning this comment:

When I asked Kerry what it would take for Americans to feel safe again, he displayed a much less apocalyptic worldview. "We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance," Kerry said. "As a former law-enforcement person, I know we're never going to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling. But we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally, it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life."

Lileks has this reply:

A nuisance?A nuisance? I don’t want the definition of success of terrorism to be “it isn’t on the rise.” I want the definition of success to be “free democratic states in the Middle East and the cessation of support of those governments and fascist states we haven’t gotten around to kicking in the ass yet.” I want the definition of success to mean a free Lebanon and free Iran and a Saudi Arabia that realizes there’s no point in funding the fundies. An Egypt that stops pouring out the Jew-hatred as a form of political novacaine to keep the citizens from turning their ire on their own government. I want the definition of success to mean that Europe takes a stand against the Islamicist radicals in their midst before the Wahabbi poison is the only acceptable strain on the continent. Mosquito bites are a nuisance. Cable outages are a nuisance. Someone shooting up a school in Montana or California or Maine on behalf of the brave martyrs of Fallujah isn't a nuisance. It's war. But that's not the key phrase. This matters: We have to get back to the place we were.But when we were there we were blind. When we were there we losing. When we were there we died. We have to get back to the place we were. We have to get back to 9/10? We have to get back to the place we were. So we can go through it all again? We have to get back to the place we were. And forget all we’ve learned and done? We have to get back to the place we were. No. I don’t want to go back there. Planes into towers. That changed the terms. I am remarkably disinterested in returning to a place where such things are unimaginable. Where our nighmares are their dreams.We have to get back to the place we were.No. We have to go the place where they are.

'Nough said.