Daily Ramblings:
License To Kill ...11/08/2004 03:38:54 pm
The mind-numbingly prolific columnist Mark Steyn has already written about 15 pieces post-mortem-ing the election - I think this one ties it all together pretty well: Believe it or not, it wasn't just rednecks who voted for Bush.
Maybe I'm just not reading enough, but I have yet to see anyone make the point I'm about to vent upon here.
The mainstream media is full of dedicated Democrats trying to get their heads around the "moral values" element in the exit polls. Of-course the general theme that this issue (not that it is a true definable single issue) was the dominant one is itself something of a distortion. The clearly very sloppy poll which determined this made "moral values" the most important factor for 22% of voters, but then split up the numbers for "Terrorism (19%)" and "Iraq (15%)." So in reality, the poll is saying that the war against Islamofascism was the most important issue to 34% of voters - making it the single biggest issue, as well it should be. (Imagine a poll in 1944 splitting up the war in Europe and war in the Pacific, and concluding that the desire for a TV set in every home was the most important issue to voters that year.)
In any case, commentators who obviously would have preferred to see Senator Kerry win are nevertheless giving wide-eyed credit to the evil genius Rove and his compliant marionette Bush for summoning these great hordes of "moral valuers" through their shrewd demagoguing of the gay marriage issue. This is a predictable failure to see the truth on two counts.
First, of-course Bush and Rove did not put gay marriage on the front burner. This was done by the proponents of gay marriage, notably the Massachusetts Supreme Court and the mayor of San Francisco. It was obligatory that the presidential candidates take some kind of position on the issue. President Bush considered it and consulted with people he trusted, and took the position that was natural to his philosophical outlook. Senator Kerry, in typical fashion, tried to have it both ways, opposing gay marriage and also opposing taking the only direct action possible to prevent its imposition, i.e. a constitutional amendment.
Secondly, and this is the main point, gay marriage was just one of a panoply of social/moral issues that swirled around this election and defined the gulf between the candidates. One of the most significant ones was not one that Bush and Rove brought up at all, but which Senator Kerry chose to make one of the pillars of his campaign: embryonic stem cell research. It's astounding to me that no one is talking about this as one of the conspicuous failures of the Democratic ticket.
During the Democratic National Convention, this issue was brought up in almost every speech, in a way that was clearly coordinated. It was highlighted most of all by the major speech given by the smarmy Ron Reagan Jr.. It continued being an issue through the campaign, and rose to almost pre-eminent prominence again when Christopher Reeve died. The Democrats considered this a winner. They described President Bush as "anti-science." Senator Kerry firmly planted his flag upon the ground of those who advocate consuming the young in order to prolong the lives of the old, and using federal tax dollars to do so. A harsh way of describing it? Not as far as those who believe that life begins at conception are concerned. And those are the self-same voters who turned out in larger than usual numbers to vote for President Bush. They are the mysterious "moral values" voters. While the Democrats scratch their heads and wonder at the evil scheming of the Republicans that got these voters to the polls, they would do well to just look at their own platform. However, it's a safe bet that they will not.
The talking point now is that the Democrats simply failed to frame their issues using moral language, as if a few Biblical quotes and prayerful pleadings would make an issue like embryonic stem cell research suddenly appealing to conservative religious folk. However, the problem is not the language used to sell a policy of harvesting nascent human life for the benefit of Christopher Reeve and Michael J. Fox and indeed potentially any one of us. The problem is the policy itself. A lot of people don't want any part of their tax money being spent in a search for a cure that they equate with cannibalism.
It's not the packaging; it's what's inside that stinks. That's true on this and a range of issues, including the war, taxes and health care. As long as the Democrats continue to spin their wheels around that fact, they will remain effectively a minority party.
A Satisfied Mind ...11/05/2004 07:13:41 pm
Victor Davis Hanson, who (just like Right Wing Bob) called this election correctly all along throughout 2004, deserves a read as he gloats in the only way a brilliant historian can (i.e., brilliantly).
Some of us have been saying for months that there was no way John Kerry was going to erase a stubborn 2-3 percent shortfall, for a variety of reasons. His unsolvable problems ranged from his Brahmin, aristocratic coldness and deductive pessimism, to his transparent and opportunistic flip-flopping, to the venomous "help" of the Michael Moore/Howard Dean/Al Franken extremist fringe, to the incongruity of billionaires voicing boutique leftism — whether that be the often-polarizing Teresa Heinz Kerry or the creepy George Soros. The electorate also sensed that a Kerry victory would represent to the Europeans, the Arabs, and our enemies in the field a repudiation of the current struggle against the terrorists.
Bill Kristol deserves less kudos for consistency, but gloats quite effectively anyway.
IT HAS HAPPENED AGAIN. Here at home, a great many people who fashion themselves his moral and intellectual superiors turn out once more--as he might put it--to have misunderestimated George W. Bush. And it has happened abroad, as well, where the president's opponents and enemies--which is to say America's opponents and enemies--must now be pulling their hair and gnashing their teeth with frustration and resentment. The exit polls said Kerry would win. The New Yorker had endorsed him. And still those idiot Americans reelected Bush!
How sweet it is to contemplate the misery of people who think like this.
Addendum: much more fun than Bill Kristol is Iowahawk. Maybe the essential gloat, in fact - at least as of this day 3 of our gloating.
---------------------------------------------------------
Sittin' On Top Of The World ...11/05/2004 02:15:25 pm
A reader from France who has kindly written to me before (yes, not only are there conservative Dylan fans, there are conservative French Dylan fans out there) just wrote me again to convey his congratulations on Dubya's victory.
You should have seen the face of the French journalists and politicians when they got the news, it was SO FUNNY ! These useless twats spent the evening of the election talking about how they view GWB and kept on praising Kerry. Apparently they thought he would win. Stupid people ! I personally knew all along that he'd win and that he'd win with lots of advance. I'm glad this is what happened...
Merci beaucoup, mon ami.
It's worth bearing in mind - just as in yesterday's post where the numbers show that President Bush generally had the support of at least 4 out of 10 voters even in states where Kerry "easily won," so there are also many people all over the world, even in countries whose governments scorn us, who draw great pleasure and hope from this election result. And that should give additional hope to all of us.
Hurricane ... 11/04/2004 04:15:03 pm
On the subject of this being "a bitterly divided country," and on the subject of mandates, consider this factoid, which I just determined for myself while looking at the C-Span election map.
President Bush did not get less than 40% of the vote in any state other than Vermont, where he received 39% (and of-course the District Of Columbia, where he got 9%!). (Oh, and I just noticed pipsqueak Rhode Island, where he got 37%.)
Senator Kerry, on the other hand, failed to hit the 40% mark in 14 states, by my count.
Furthermore, Kerry received only 30% or less in three states: Idaho, Wyoming and Utah.
So, even in states where Kerry won relatively easy, those states that Katie Couric said today are suffering from "blue state blues," at least 4 out of every 10 voters went to the voting booth and voted for George W. Bush, despite knowing in most cases that Bush had no chance of winning their state.
Kerry, by contrast, failed to muster numbers above the embarrassment level in a huge swath of the country.
This was not close.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Are You Ready? ...11/04/2004 01:32:45 pm
... because that's just the way it's going to be.
...11/03/2004 09:25:12 pm
The consequences of President Bush's re-election are clearly being felt here and there all over the world.
------------------------------------------------------------
Crash On The Levee ... 11/03/2004 02:23:15 pm
There is so much hilarious but also sad insanity on the left wing forums today - it would be an endless task trying to sum it up. However, appropriately to this site, here's a sample of something from a Dylan related forum:
I feel sick. Come see us in four years, when it will be mandatory to attend Bob Jones University and against the law to breathe without permission, if we're even able to breathe through the pollution thanks to King George II's environmental policies.
I look at my daughter right now and worry whether she'll have healthcare in four years (my wife's a public school teacher, Public Enemy Number One to this administration). I look at my city and wonder just how many more jobs we can lose. I look around the world and wonder how many more countries will hate us, if there are any left at all.
Good luck, I hope we make it.Is it any wonder, reading this bizarre balderdash written by someone so utterly disconnected from reality, that the Democrats are finding themselves turning into a permanently marginalized and minority party?
Addendum: here is the county by county map showing the 2004 election results (from USA Today). The red areas are where, um, Bush won.
--------------------------------------------------
Har Har Har!! ...11/03/2004 11:40:04 am
Tim Russert talking to Katie Couric just now on NBC - they're developing their themes for the next four years. "Bush's most important task now is to try and unite the country." How? By being conciliatory. Nominations for the Supreme Court coming up - Russert suggesting Bush should toss them to the Democrats as a salve for their wounds or something.
Let me see ... you win the largest popular vote in American history. Your party increases its majority in the U.S. Senate and in the House. You have crucial decisions and court nominations coming up that will influence the course of this nation for decades. Do you concede these to those that despise and hate you and those whose plans have been resoundingly rejected by the American people?
No way, José.
This President will govern just as he did after the disputed 2000 election - as a leader determined to use the position given to him to do the right thing. To lead, and not to mark time. If anything, I sincerely hope he is more forceful, and does not make more tactical concessions like the obscene "Campaign Finance Reform" law.
One thing I know: he's not giving in on the Supreme Court. He knows what that counts for, and the influence it will have on issues that he considers fundamental to the long term health of this nation.
Who's replacing the loser Tom Daschle as Senate minority leader? Whoever you are: you wanna tangle on the Supreme Court? Here's three words that John Kerry was forever saying and never meaning: bring it on. (note to Senator Kerry: it's been brought.)
And by the way, I've come to the conclusion that my dog is smarter than these mainstream media talking heads.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's All Over Now, Baby Blue ... 11/03/2004 08:20:03 am
More people voted this year for George W. Bush for President than have voted for any President in American history. He should end up with somewhere around 60 million votes. That's about 10 million more than he received in 2000. Compare it further to the only 47.4 million that Clinton received in 1996.
The Democrats wanted turnout. "VOTE OR DIE." "ROCK THE VOTE," etc etc.
Well, the people indeed turned out in unprecedented numbers.
And they voted for four more years of President George W. Bush. Republicans increased their majorities in the Senate and in the House. You want legitimacy - that's legitimacy.
Take THAT - Islamofascists.
Take THAT - Michael Moore.
Take THAT - George Soros.
Take THAT - Jacques Chirac.
Take THAT - Yasser Arafat.
Take THAT - Kim Jong Il
Take THAT - Bruce Springsteen.
Take THAT - Tom Daschle!
Like Dylan's first song in last night's setlist in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, it's just ABSOLUTELY SWEET.
O Hi O!! ... 11/03/2004 12:45:32 am
It's over. Thanks be to God.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Democratic Response ... 11/02/2004 11:31:02 pm
We live in a nation of idiots.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trusting the American people ... 11/02/2004 09:58:24 pm
--------------------------------------
... 11/02/2004 08:50:25 pm
Theme is developing that Exit Polls are skewed towards Kerry ... while actual results (which generally carry more ultimate weight) are more favorable to Bush.
--------------------------
... 11/02/2004 07:54:32 pm
It would seem it's going to be long night, if not week. C-Span's website has a pretty nifty and user-friendly map of results as they come in.
------------------------------------------------------
Culpa, Not Mea ...11/02/2004 5:12:07 pm
The Corner at National Review Online, which contributed a great deal to the mid-afternoon blues with their uncritical posting of exit polls, makes some amends with a cogent analysis from a "GOP insider":
There are media reports that we are behind in early exit polls. Here’s my sense of things. The early exit poll numbers are hard to make sense of right now, until we dissect and analyze them, which is being done even now. It’s of course still early, and it depends on where in the state the numbers are coming from. Much more importantly, our data also suggests what Drudge is reporting: the early samples are heavily weighted toward women (58 percent), which would of course give an artificial advantage to Senator Kerry. That imbalance will not hold up. Indeed, among men we are winning 53-45. To put it another way: if we’d one down in states with a sample that is heavily female, we’re in good shape with the overall population. To put it a third way: it looks like the first exit polls are a reflection of the composition of the electorate, not how the president is performing. Once those return to norm, the President should gain several points (2-3 pts) and Senator Kerry should lose several points (2-3 pts), giving the President the lead in a number of states.
Also of note: right now we are ahead among Catholic in Wisconsin by ten points (we lost Catholics in Wisconsin in 2000). The same is true of Pennsylvania. And in the early exits nationally, we are getting 40 percent of the Hispanic vote (in 2000, we received 35 percent).
One other thing: the early exit polls in 2000 looked a good deal bleaker than what we are seeing today. For example, early exit polls in 2000 showed us down by four in Arizona; we won by six. Early exit polls in 2000 showed us even in Colorado; we won by nine. And early exit polls in 2000 showed us down by three in Florida; we ended up slightly more than even.
I’m not being Pollyannaish here; the race will be a close one. But I would simply caution against putting too much weigh on such early polls. This drama has a ways to go before it fully unfolds.
---------------------------------------------------
"Distressing" ... 11/02/2004 4:00:02 pm
Latest video of kidnapped aid worker Margaret Hassan pleading for her life is "too graphic" for Al-Jazeera to air.
These creatures need to be totally and completely defeated. The choice between some kind of nuanced co-existence, or total victory over this scum, is what is at stake in this election. It's just a question of how many people realize that.
--------------------
...11/02/2004e
Exit poll garbage - is it really worth the heartburn?
Exit poll mania spread through media and campaign circles Tuesday afternoon after first wave of morning data showed Kerry competitive in key states.... National Election Pool -- representing six major news organization -- shows Kerry in striking distance -- with small lead -- in Florida and Ohio, sources tell DRUDGE... But early sample was based on a 59- 41 women to men ratio...
So if Kerry is leading by one point or so based on that kind of sample, it means he's not leading at all. This is nuts. Is the depression of Republican turnout - by releasing ginned up exit poll numbers - the last anti-Bush trick by the mainstream media?
--------------
...11/02/2004d
And this is the kind of stuff that is inspiring the faithful over at Democratic Underground:
(a supposed member of the Bush team is quoted as saying to somebody's anonymous friend in the Kerry campaign): " ... there is incredible discord at the top. cheney is absolutley livid with rove on the overall strategy ("we peaked too soon you bastard") and with karen hughes for not adequately preparing bush for the debates ("he looked like a g** d***** mental patient"). cheney is apparently a "real monster". the rnc doesn't know what to do because they can't get any clear direction from the top."
Yes, Michael Moore fans, the Republicans are flailing around in insane fury. Cheney, the real evil mastermind, is lashing out in frustration as control of the world is slipping from his hands ...
And I guess the Democratic Underground posters would say that this is President Bush attempting to shoot himself on Dick Cheney's orders ...
But no, they wouldn't be that witty, would they? Actually it's Bush in his Ohio campaign headquarters today, liking what he's hearing quite a lot, if you ask Right Wing Bob ...
-----------------
...11/02/2004c
One more, from Rasmussen.
Election 2004
Date Bush Kerry FINAL 50.2 48.5 Nov 1 48.8 47.4 Oct 31 48.1 47.1 Oct 30 47.9 47.1 Oct 29 48.7 46.7 Oct 28 48.9 46.9 Oct 27 48.8 47.1 Oct 26 47.8 47.8 Oct 25 46.4 48.4 Oct 24 47.6 47.2 Oct 23 48.0 46.7 Oct 22 49.1 45.9 Oct 21 48.8 46.2 With Bush's numbers suddenly breaking 50% after hovering around 48 for so long, which way would you say the undecideds are breaking?
-----------------------------------------
Bring It On ... 11/02/2004b
In the spirit of the M.I.A. Allah Pundit, a quick link drop. This column is a few days old, but is well worth reading today: Victor Hanson on the fork in the road we're about to follow. For last minute undecideds, Iowahawk compares the candidates' positions. Powerline is tallying Democratsy in action with tips from their many readers; e.g who knew liberals were so opposed to busing? LGF in a surprise move endorses Bush with a reminder of what this is really about. Michelle Malkin has a round up of worldwide happenings that voters here would be well advised to keep in mind. Wizbang is already analyzing why Kerry lost ... but wait, they're also chewing over why Bush lost. If pre-mortem post-mortems seem a little painful or premature, what about pre-voter votes?
And here's one last encouraging poll, from Battleground (pdf).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(If you're not dead, a felon or mentally incompetent) VOTE! ... 11/2/2004
Barbara and Jenna look optimistic, and that's good enough for me (courtesy of this Free Republic thread).
On the other hand ...
Got My Mind Made Up ... 11/1/2004b
Popular radio personality Rush Limbaugh has the quote of the day, as far as I'm concerned: "Folks, we meet tomorrow at dawn." Damn right - enough of this crap we've been enduring since the Democrats started their primary season way back last year in September or so - it's time to win this thing. And that's just what Right Wing Bob predicts, like all along. Bush is going to win - and decisively. All of these absurd polls gerrymandered to show a tie - phooey. It's universally acknowledged that, compared to 2000, Bush has made huge progress amongst women, has made at least some progress amongst Jews (important in FL), and is, shall we say, less unpopular amongst blacks, thanks to issues like gay marriage. How does that add up to a tied contest here? Bush won in 2000 despite being a relative unknown running in a time of pseudo-peace and apparent prosperity against the effective incumbent. He has since forged a deep bond with ordinary Americans - a truly visceral bond. He has an enormous lead with the military and their families. And I do not believe he's lost a significant portion of the supporters he already had in 2000 (lying C-Span callers to the contrary). Kerry, if elected, would be easily the most liberal President this country has ever had, and in a time of war. None of it adds up.
Nevertheless, of-course anything can happen in politics, and if Kerry should somehow win tomorrow, Right Wing Bob will support him in any righteous endeavors, most particularly in fighting and winning this war. Which we will win, regardless. It will just be longer and costlier in terms of human life if we have a President who displays weakness and emboldens the enemy.
For a look at how the enemy is emboldened already by Bin Laden's mere attempt to influence the election, check out these editorial cartoons in Palestinian Authority newspapers. It's a reminder that there was dancing in the streets after 9/11 in that part of the world, and that any perceived success by Bin Laden will lead to huge celebration by those who - let's face it - hate America. People have been trying to make the perverse argument that Bin Laden wants Bush to win because he is so good for "Al- Qaeda recruitment." Garbage. Success is what's good for recruitment - failure is bad news. That's a truism of human nature, which even Bin Laden well recognizes, with his "strong horse" quote from some years back. Remember how the Arab street was set to seethe and explode over the invasion of Afghanistan? That all went away pretty fast when the Taliban were blown to smithereens and chased into rat holes. Ditto with the invasion of Iraq. How exquisite was the disappointment of Al-Jazeera-watching Egyptians in cafes when Saddam's vaunted Republican Guard dissolved on contact. The current insurgency is fed by hardcore cases who still hope against hope that Americans really are weak and decadent and won't be able to stay the course. The re-election of George W. Bush will discourage them ... and the retaking of Fallujah will also be a major bummer. Their only hope is some sign that America is tiring of the job, and that if they just ratchet up the violence they can win. And any sign that they have momentum will draw many more new recruits to their ranks.
Tomorrow will be historic, one way or another. A confident vote by a decisive American electorate to stay the course will dismay enemies from Al-Zarqawi to Kim Jong-Il to the mullahs of Iran - and it will make it easier to win battles through diplomacy - as both real and potential enemies will know that we have a President who will stick to the red lines that he draws around their behavior.
A vote for the kind of ill-defined change represented by John Kerry would tragically lead to America's will and stoicism being tested, repeatedly, in an incredibly dangerous world by enemies who anticipate vacillation.
Right Wing Bob is confident that's not going to happen.
-----------------------------------------------
Expecting Rain provides a link this morning to this Washington Post story on Mavis Staples. It includes more than just a cursory mention of Dylan - Mavis goes on the record about their relationship at greater length than I've seen before:
"We met Dylan right here in New York," Staples notes. "We came here to do a television show for Westinghouse and somebody introduced him to us, and he said, 'I know the Staple Singers.' And I said, 'How do you know us?' and he said, 'I've been listening to the Staple Singers since I was 12 years old!' "
Dylan said that as a boy in Minnesota, he heard Randy Wood's show on Nashville's high-wattage WLAC. He "even quoted verses from 'Sit Down Servant,' said, 'Pops, you have this velvet voice and Mavis, you have this big, robust voice . . . '"
"We didn't know [Dylan], but that's when we started checking out his songs," Staples adds. "Pops said, 'This little guy, he writes some good stuff, we can sing some of this stuff.' "
For years, she kept the romantic element of the relationship private, though several Dylan biographies recount an episode at the Newport Folk Festival where Dylan yelled, "Pops, I want to marry Mavis!" To which Pops replied, "What you telling me for, tell Mavis!"
Laughing at the memory, Staples says, "I thought he was just jiving, but he was serious. For a long time, people asked, but I didn't want to put his business in the street. But Bobby and I are now up in age and movin' on so, yes, we courted for about seven years, and it was my fault that we didn't go on and get married. We had gotten with Dr. King and I was young and stupid, and I was thinking Dr. King wouldn't want me to marry a white guy."
"Finally I told Daddy and he said, 'Mavis, what is wrong with you? Do you see all the white people marching with us?'
"I just wasn't thinking, I just knew what our purpose was in the movement and thinking I'd better stay black. It was really too bad. I often wonder when I see Bobby's son Jakob [of the Wallflowers], how would our son have looked and how would he have sounded."
Dylan, she says, "was the love that I lost."
More On The Memoir ... 10/31/2004
The Washington Times (neo-con rag and mouthpiece for Bushitler and his fellow fascists) has a nice review of Chronicles this morning.
In Xanadu ... 10/30/2004
This might be the best written review of Chronicles yet, in terms of skipping right past the preconceptions and putting a finger on the real greatness of the book, as a book. Written by one of our Australian friends.
With its word-play and word-magic, its flights of daft numerology and its detours, its evasiveness on the trivia and utter candour on the things that matter, this is an aesthetic memoir to place next to Coleridge's Biographia Literaria.
I haven't read Coleridge's tome. However, the full text is online here (and likely many other places) and would no doubt reward further reading. Considering the comparison made by the reviewer, dig these opening sentences of Coleridge's chapter one:
IT has been my lot to have had my
name introduced both in conversation, and in
print, more frequently than I find it easy to
explain, whether I consider the fewness, unim-
portance, and limited circulation of my writings,
or the retirement and distance, in which I have
lived, both from the literary and political world.
Most often it has been connected with some
charge, which I could not acknowledge, or
some principle which I had never entertained.Sounds like he and Bob could have shared a lot of war stories over cigars, or something. I'm going to keep reading, and will definitely put a siren up if I find any references to this guy:
(!) ... 10/29/2004c
He criticizes the Patriot Act for Pete's sake:
"He (Bush) adopted despotism and the crushing of freedoms from Arab rulers and called it the Patriot Act under the guise of combating terrorism..."
Where was John Kerry when this tape was made? Let me see, both of them are tall and thin ... both of them hate Bush ... both of them have been photographed carrying guns, but not using them ... both of them blame America for all the world's ills ... both of them are filthy rich ... and both are likely to very unhappy on November 3rd ... hmmm ...
Addendum:
"Bush the father did well in placing his sons as governors and did not forget to pass on the expertise in fraud from the leaders of the (Mideast) region to Florida to use it in critical moments. "
"It appeared to him (Bush) that a little girl's talk about her goat and its butting was more important than the planes and their butting of the skyscrapers."
There is no longer any question but that Bin Laden wrote his harangue within a very short time of watching "Fahrenheit 9/11" - on a bootlegged DVD, no doubt. Michael Moore could not but listen to this tape and applaud the sentiments.
You are one sonofabitch of a traitor, Mr. Moore.
---------------------------------------------------------
Bin Laden Embraces Kerry's Platform ... 10/29/2004b
I might have to change my vote, now that the Sheikh himself has spoken and endorsed the senator from Massachusetts. Good timing, Osama. This is why the Islamofascists are destined to dominate us - they're just so damn smart.
"This war brings billions of dollars to big companies, either to those that manufacture weapons or those who reconstruct Iraq, like Halliburton and its sister companies."
""By describing us and our actions as terrorism, you are necessarily describing yourself and your actions ..."
"I plead with the honest people, intellectuals, activists and traders to form a permanent committee to raise people's awareness for the justice of our causes -- on top of which comes Palestine."
I haven't seen the full text yet, so these are excerpts from the excerpts that the AP is reporting at this minute. But I can't see any daylight between what Bin Laden is saying there and the essential beliefs and talking points of much of John F. Kerry's broad coalition, including George Soros, Michael Moore and their many minions at Democratic Underground and beyond.
Will this make these people look in the mirror and realize the extent to which they are in bed (due to naivete rather than malignancy in most cases) with our enemy?
Well ... no, it won't. But Dubya's likely electoral college numbers aren't getting any thinner thanks to this.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Goin' Down, Down, Down ... 10/29/2004
It was always going to be the case that Kerry's own depravity would do him in. What happened this week with the "missing explosives" story is just a wonderful encapsulation of his entire career and character in one nicely compressed package. Number one: he's a craven opportunist and a fool. Number two: he always blames America first (and last). Number three: he is always proved wrong by events.
Original text copyright © 2004 by RightWingBob.com
Quotes from the works of others are linked to their source or are as otherwise attributed, and are used in accordance with Fair Use guidelines. Contact: rightwingbob(at)gmail.com
Right Wing Bob On:
Who Am I And What Is This Site About?
More to come ...
Email: RightWingBob@)gmail.com
Powered by Bushmills