Sunday, October 31, 2004

Packers 28, Redskins 14 - Bad News for Bush

The Green Bay Packers defeated the Washington Redskins today, 28-14 in Washington. This is bad news for President Bush and good news for Senator Kerry. Read the article to see why. This has been as reliable as the Iowa Election Markets in predicting the presidential election, although the Redskins have been at it longer.

Thursday, October 28, 2004

Kerry's the One

That's not just my opinion. That's the opinion of the writer of this article from The American Conservative magazine. I thought about quoting parts from the article, but the entire thing is wonderful. It deals with President Bush's deficit problem, as well as the problems of letting the neocons control our foreign policy. And it comes from a traditional/conservative perspective! Read the entire thing.

Friday, October 22, 2004

Why I'm For Kerry

I think that Bob has abandoned CwR, and I am not sure why. I number of possible reasons come to mind:

  • He has gotten really really busy.

  • He didn't pay his ISP bill.

  • He got tired of the low quality of the competition.

  • He realized that in fact I have been right all along.

I think the last one is the most probable, especially when my predictions about the Swift Boat Vets and the lack of WMDs have come true.

At any rate, back when Bob was participating, he used to accuse me of being for "Anybody But Bush" instead of being pro-Kerry. Then Bob would attack John Kerry for being a "liberal (strike 1) Senator (strike 2) from Massachusettes (strike 3)" and so forth, without giving very much in a positive statement for our current president.

Well, today, David Corn has published on his blog an entry entitled Why I am for Kerry. I couldn't agree with it more. This explains why I think John Kerry would make a great president. Enjoy the read.

Friday, October 08, 2004

No WMDs - what a shock

Well, the Duelfer Report is out, and the final conclusion is that there were no WMDs in Iraq, nor did they have any programs in place to create them.

I can honestly say that I am a little surprised.

I mean, I was skeptical that we would find "stockpiles" of WMDs when we attacked Iraq, but I thought we would find little pieces of something. We haven't. And it appears that we won't. It appears, as I have been saying, and as the more reasonable pundits on the left have been saying, that the Bush Administration seriously mislead us into the War in Iraq, which they continue to associate with a completly different war - the War on Terror.

John Dean wrote this article last June about what a serious offense against the nation and the world this misleading really is. I highly suggest reading the entire piece. It is even more poignant now that the Duelfer Report is out. These paragraphs at the beginning are particularly important in my mind:
Presidential statements, particularly on matters of national security, are held to an expectation of the highest standard of truthfulness. A president cannot stretch, twist or distort facts and get away with it. President Lyndon Johnson's distortions of the truth about Vietnam forced him to stand down from reelection. President Richard Nixon's false statements about Watergate forced his resignation.

Frankly, I hope the WMDs are found, for it will end the matter. Clearly, the story of the missing WMDs is far from over. And it is too early, of course, to draw conclusions. But it is not too early to explore the relevant issues.

Well, the story was "far from over" in June of 2003, but I hope that America will wake up and that it will be over on November 3. The article then goes on to list many of the statements that President Bush made to the world concerning the certainty of these WMDs. Near the end of the article are these paragraphs:
To put it bluntly, if Bush has taken Congress and the nation into war based on bogus information, he is cooked. Manipulation or deliberate misuse of national security intelligence data, if proven, could be "a high crime" under the Constitution's impeachment clause. It would also be a violation of federal criminal law, including the broad federal anti-conspiracy statute, which renders it a felony "to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose."

It's important to recall that when Richard Nixon resigned, he was about to be impeached by the House of Representatives for misusing the CIA and FBI. After Watergate, all presidents are on notice that manipulating or misusing any agency of the executive branch improperly is a serious abuse of presidential power.


Wednesday, October 06, 2004


Well, the first two debates, including the one and only VP debate, are over.

There seems to be a general consensus that John Kerry picked up some significant ground in the first debate against President Bush. That is, he kicked butt.

The VP debate is closer. I was personally disappointed in John Edwards in that he kept answering "the previous question" and I wish he hadn't. has a pretty good breakdown of some of the major points made by both sides, and it appears that although both Edwards and Cheney distorted reality, Edwards was generally closer to the truth.

From my perspective, it appears that of the four principles, three of them are smart enough for the jobs they are trying to hold. The fourth is our President.

I also noted that both President Bush and VP Cheney continue to try to tie 9/11, Al Queda, and Saddam Hussein together, which is a continuation of the misleading rhetoric which they used to get into the war in Iraq. In my opinion, this type of "leadership" is morally corrupt and self serving. I honestly believe that Cheney and Bush had a goal on January 20, 2001 to attack Iraq and get rid of Saddam Hussein. They distorted the facts and discarded all of the evidence which didn't support this goal, especially after 9/11. This course of action was reckless and irresponsible, and they continue it in these debates.

This people have to be fired.