November 1, 2006 Posts
04:38 The Kerry Factor 10:53 King Weighs In On SCSU Polling 11:54 Steve Beren Speaks Out Against Kerry 13:46 Joy Padgett: The Real Deal 13:58 The Ultimate Picture 16:41 Murtha Endorses Keith Ellison 18:00 The Silence is Deafening 20:02 Hillary Joins Unilateral Surrender Club
The Kerry Factor
Most every political blogger has reported Kerry's assinine original statement. They've also commented on Kerry's defiant-sounding press conference today, where he tried blaming "the Republican smear machine" while 'admitting' that he'd botched a joke about the President. I haven't seen many opinionists talking about something that I'll name the 'Kerry Factor'. Here's what I mean:
As a political junkie, I remember watching Frank Luntz doing the focus groups on MSNBC during the Bush-Gore debates. What those focus groups taught me was that they didn't like confrontation or negativity. Let's transfer that to today's version of those Luntz focus groups-- independent voters.
I suspect that they won't buy Kerry's statement that he wasn't talking about the military. Further, I suspect that they've already started abandoning Democrats. Don't be surprised if Democrats experience an erosion with independant voters from now till election day.
The truth is that every candidate that had scheduled a Kerry visit will be asked if they thought Mr. Kerry should apologize. Another consequence to the Kerry Factor is that it allows for the dredging up of Kerry's December, 2005 comments on Face the Nation:
Sen. KERRY: ...And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the--of--the historical customs, religious customs.I suspect that people are viewing Kerry's positions on the military as being similar to their candidate's positions.
The other political consequence this will have is that this will guaranteedly rev the GOP base up more than the best GW speech ever could've.
Posted Wednesday, November 1, 2006 4:39 AM
Comment 1 by Freealonzo at 01-Nov-06 08:56 AM
As a moderate liberal who is looking forward to the tidal wave that is about to hit the Republicans, I wish Kerry hadn't said what he said. However, in the grand scheme of things, I don't think it's in the Republicans' best interest to keep the focus on Iraq, which they are in effect doing by pounding Kerry and his remarks. I'm guessing most independents know that Kerry is a decorated veteran and isn't likely to slam veterans. However it gives the Dems another chance to talk about Iraq and the President's disastrous conduct of that war.
Comment 2 by Jake at 01-Nov-06 11:44 AM
The second statement about terrorizing Iraqis is fine by me. It's the truth. The second statement that says get and education or you'll be sent to Iraq is just dumb. Kerry's back tracking is even worse.
But, please don't try to tie these idiotic statements to the first true statement.
But sometimes I wonder if John Kerry is a plant. He screws up so royally and consistently hands ammo to Republicans that I just can't help thinking it's on purpose.
Comment 3 by Jake at 01-Nov-06 11:46 AM
Freealonzo,
No, this will only do damage to Democrats. Now the debate about Iraq isn't so much about whether we should be there or whether we should get out. The debate is now "Democrats think our troops are dumb and Republicans think they are smart."
Like I said, Kerry must be some kind of a plant.
King Weighs In On SCSU Polling
King Banaian has weighed in on the SCSU poll that was just released. Here's the most telling graph from the post:
In looking at survey data I find much instruction from the marginal analyses as to the premise of the poll. If you think there are currently 12% more Democrat voters in Minnesota than Republican -- regardless of the number you identify as independent -- you don't need a poll any more. Your premise is one word: tsunami. You believe that there has been a large wave that moved Minnesota from battleground state to a very blue state.Michael Barone wrote something over a year ago that said, absent a major life-changing event, the best barometer on current polling is the most recent election. Liberals will tell you that several "major life-changing events" have happened, with them citing Katrina, the Iraq War and the middle class squeeze. I'd suggest that these are major issues within the Democratic Party. I'd further suggest that they aren't the earth-moving events to most citizens that they are to BDS-afflicted haters.
The trend coming out of the 2004 elections was realignment with voters aligning themselves with conservatives more than in the past. We're supposed to believe that that trend has not only abated but dramatically reversed itself? Forgive me if I'm a bit skeptical of that reversal.
Posted Wednesday, November 1, 2006 10:53 AM
No comments.
Steve Beren Speaks Out Against Kerry
Seattle voters, there's only one candidate deserving of your vote. His name is Steve Beren. Read Steve's official statement and tell me he isn't the only adult in the WA-7 race:
Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, has once again insulted our troops. This morning he said: "You know education ... if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't you get stuck in Iraq."Mr. McDermott's Vietnam bias shines through when he says "the troops are just kids put into a foreign land..." Perhaps that was true in Vietnam but I'd seriously doubt that our troops are as youthful as Mr. McDermott suggests. I'd further suggest that our troops are battle-tested warriors who know what's at stake in Iraq. I wouldn't say that Mr. McDermott has a clue about what's at stake with Iraq.
His remarks are available in an online video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLuMWiQ6r2o
In these challenging times, we need to remain strong on national security. Our troops have overthrown dictatorships in Afghanistan and Iraq, and as a side effect, Libya dropped their nuclear program and was neutralized. Due to the heroism, nobility, and sacrifice of our troops, we are safer today.
Of course, we are not safe enough, we still face the dangers posed by North Korea, Syria, and Iran. But can you imagine how much worse it would be if Saddam Hussein and the Taliban were still in power, and if Qaddafi was still pursuing his nuclear program.
We can't let Kerry, Pelosi, Kennedy, Cantwell, Howard Dean, and Jim McDermott set the national agenda. Kerry's comments come as no surprise, but they do reflect an antagonism, arrogance, and elitism to those who protect our freedoms.
Of course, in the campaign of my opponent, Jim McDermott, the same negative attitude to our troops has been evident. Jim McDermott is a strong opponent of the liberation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and at every turn he opposes the efforts of the United States and its allies in the war against terrorism. Late last year, antiwar blogger Joshua Holland quotes Congressman McDermott as saying:
"As long as our troops are there they're going to be a continued irritant in the situation, partly because, and this is a very important point, the troops are just kids put into a foreign land where they don't know who the enemy is and they don't know the language. So they protect themselves and innocent Iraqis get killed, and that fans the fires of the insurgency."
Source: http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/26777/
I have quite a different view. My campaign platform states:
"Support our troops and their mission. Remain firm in the war against international terrorism. Combat terrorism at its roots by spreading democracy through the Middle East. We must not allow the Iranian dictatorship to acquire nuclear weapons. Maintain the terrorist wiretapping program, the Patriot Act, and other tools in the war against the terrorists."
And in my May 27 speech to the Washington State Republican convention, I told the delegates:
"I support our troops in Iraq. They are today's 'band of brothers.' I support them and I support their mission. Their mission is our mission. But Jim McDermott has called our troops in Iraq 'a continued irritant.' Actually it is McDermott who is an irritant to the state of Washington. If ever a congressman should pursue an 'exit strategy,' it's Jim McDermott."
Posted Wednesday, November 1, 2006 11:55 AM
No comments.
Joy Padgett: The Real Deal
Pundits from across the political spectrum have largely written off Joy Padgett's chances of replacing Bob Ney in the U.S. House. Don't buy into that because pundits are wrong on this. They're wrong because Joy Padgett won't vote for amnesty to illegal immigrants but she will vote to cut taxes and reduce the deficit.
Any voter in OH-18 would love having the option to vote for someone who's rignt on the three most critical issues of this year. In poll after poll, people have said that they want our borders secure before we do anything else. They've said this with a clear, unambiguous voice. They've voiced their opinions in such numbers as to suggest that they'll throw out those that talk about 'comprehensive immigration reform'. Most polling show this to be a 70-30 issue and Joy's on the 70% side of it.
I'd further posit that conservatives of all sorts want fiscal sanity. Informed people would term Glenn Reynolds as either liberal or moderate on the so-called social issues. Captain Ed is a social conservative. Despite their differences on social issues, though, there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Glenn and Captain Ed on spending restraint. This is another issue where Joy Padgett is on the right side of a 70-30 issue.
Michael Barone, the pre-eminent authority political, says that you can't lose if you're on the right side of a couple 70-30 issues. That's so logical that you can understand why Democrats don't get it. That's why I haven't written Ms. Padgett off. That's why I wouldn't be surprised to hear the Agenda Media dejectedly declaring Ms. Padgett the winner next Tuesday night.
Posted Wednesday, November 1, 2006 1:47 PM
No comments.
The Ultimate Picture
Check out Drudge's home page for the picture from Iraq. I'd post the picture but the IImage Browser feature isn't working. I'll guarantee that you'll get a hoot out of the picture.
Posted Wednesday, November 1, 2006 1:58 PM
No comments.
Murtha Endorses Keith Ellison
I know that most Pennsylvanians don't know much about Keith Ellison. I'll fill you in on that shortly. First, though, let me start by saying that endorsing Keith Ellison is an idicator of Mr. Murtha's willingness to say anything to achieve greater power. Here's what's posted on the Ellison for Congress website about Mr. Murtha's endorsement:
Said Rep. Murtha today: "Keith Ellison has a solid record of standing up for what he believes in and working tirelessly for his constituents. He is a bright, courageous public servant who is going to make Minnesota very proud in Congress."Study those words because I want you to view them through the lens of what Keith Ellison has said in the recent past:
In 2000 he spoke at a fundraiser for longtime fugitive Kathleen Soliah, aka Sara Jane Olson. The text of his speech was posted on a website, www.soliah.com, by Minneapolis resident Greg Lang.Mr. Murtha says that "Keith Ellison has a solid record of standing up for what he believes in and working tirelessly for his constituents" adding that "he is a bright, courageous public servant who is going to make Minnesota very proud in Congress."
Ellison praised Soliah for "fighting for freedom." At the time, she faced charges of planting pipe bombs under two Los Angeles police cars as a member of the Symbionese Liberation Army, a paramilitary organization whose slogan was "Death to the fascist insect that preys on the life of the people." Soliah pleaded guilty in 2001. In 2002 she also pleaded guilty to the murder of Myrna Opsahl, a bank customer shot by another SLA member during a holdup. She's now serving a long prison sentence. But Ellison's call to the crowd was broader than a plea to aid Soliah. "We need to come together and free,all the Saras," he proclaimed.
Praising a convicted copkiller as someone "fighting for freedom" isn't my idea of a "bright, courageous public servant" who will "make Minnesota very proud in Congress." I suspect that PA-12 voters won't agree with Mr. Murtha's statement either. Here's another Ellison statement that PA-12 voters should know about:
As a criminal defense attorney, Ellison told the crowd, he saw "startling similarities" between Soliah and the gang members he represents: Bloods, Vice Lords, Gangster Disciples. He portrayed gang members as misunderstood victims, ordinary folks whose parents "scrimp, save,maybe sell plates of BBQ chicken so Junior can get an attorney." Gangs are "stigmatized" and "vilified," he explained, just as Soliah's Symbionese Liberation Army was. "Nobody ever knows what it means to BE a Blood," he maintained, "because they've already said this is 'just evil.'"Ellison strays into the truth when comparing gangbangers and Kathleen Soliah. He says that he saw "startling similarities" between Soliah and the gang members he represents." So do I. They're criminals. He says that parents of detained gangbangers "scrimp, save,maybe sell plates of BBQ chicken so Junior can get an attorney." Might they not be better off teaching "Junior" not to get involved in gang violence so that they don't have to "scrimp, save,maybe sell plates of BBQ chicken so Junior can get an attorney"?
In fact, in Ellison's view, young black men in prison seemed almost to morph into civil rights advocates. "The people who govern this society," he suggested, are "incarcerating all these young black men" in some kind of retribution for the victories of '60s civil rights activists, and those who campaigned to "free Nelson Mandela." For the powerful, he said, the "very idea of,black people having civil rights has got to be obliterated with [obviously] the criminal justice system and incarceration."
Remember what Mr. Murtha said: "Keith Ellison has a solid record of standing up for what he believes in and working tirelessly for his constituents." Unfortunately, Mr. Ellion's 'constituents' appear to be criminals. Working tirelessly to get criminals off isn't my idea of someone with a "solid record" on anything. I suspect that PA-12 voters would have difficulty seeing anything redeeming about such advocacy on Ellison's behalf or Mr. Murtha's endorsing him.
Then again, Mr. Ellison is Murtha's second choice in this race. Mr. Murtha endorsed former Minnesota DFL State Chairman Mike Erlandson in the runup to the primary. When Ellison won, I suspect that Mr. Murtha decided that endorsing second best was better than not endorsing anyone.
Of course it's possible that Mssrs. Ellison and Murtha are similar. One of Mr. Ellison's biggest supporters is CAIR, a terrorist supporting organization. Code Pink, the anti-war organization that protests outside Walter Reed Army Medical Center, 'honored' Mr. Murtha as their Man of the Year. Doesn't that sound like a 'hand-in-glove' fit?
PA-12 voters, this isn't even the tip of the proverbial iceberg with Ellison or CAIR. I'd strongly recommend reading Joe Kaufman's writings on CAIR and like-minded organizations. I'd also recommend that you google Code Pink and find out the specifics about their agenda. I'll guarantee that the more you know about Code Pink, the less you'll like John Murtha.
Posted Wednesday, November 1, 2006 4:41 PM
Comment 1 by terrorfree at 01-Nov-06 07:27 PM
CAIR - 1, FREE SPEECH - 0
Islamonazi CAIR Intimidates Yet Another American Business In Dhimmitude
http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/videos/MS092506.php - MSNBC video
Free Patriotic Corner Banners: http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/cb/
The Silence is Deafening
That's part of the title to this Irey campaign press release. Here's the most important sections of that press release:
"The silence from Johnstown is deafening. Yesterday I called on Jack Murtha to demand an apology from his good friend John Kerry for offensive remarks directed at the good men and women of the American military. Two days have now passed since Senator Kerry's insult, and still there's no word from Jack Murtha. But there is movement in the story line; yesterday Sen. Kerry not only refused to apologize, he actually compounded his original insult, by lashing out at those who dared demand an apology."We're waiting Jack. Do you agree with Sen. Kerry's insulting reference to our soldiers? Are you withholding your condemnation because you know that you're guilty of insulting our troops on an equally disgusting level? You shouldn't be so uncharacteristically shy Mr. Murtha.
---------------
"What are you waiting for, Jack? Is it possible that you AGREE with John Kerry that only uneducated or lazy men and women end up in Iraq? "Or are you worried that calling on Sen. Kerry to apologize would immediately lead to a request for a SECOND apology, an apology from YOU, for slandering the Marines you declared had 'killed innocent civilians in cold blood' at Haditha, before the first Marine was charged, before the first court-martial was convened, before the first Marine was convicted?"
Posted Wednesday, November 1, 2006 6:00 PM
Comment 1 by lance at 21-Dec-06 03:19 PM
Update on Haditha: Murtha and Kerry have nothing to apologize for.
Hillary Joins Unilateral Surrender Club
Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations, Hillary Clinton joined the Unilateral Surrender Club. Here's what she said in her 'declaration':
Concerning Iraq, Clinton blasted the administration's policy, and said the best policy instead would progressively redeploy US troops in the region , call for a regional conference to help discuss options and advocate for the creation of an organization aiming at guaranteeing a division of oil income among all Iraqis.Translation: Let's forget all consideration of defeating the terrorists in Iraq. It's just too time-consuming and it's difficult.
Talk of regional conferences and creating "organizations aiming at guaranteeing a division of oil income among all Iraqis" is just that. TALK. Liberals talk about process; Republicans focus on achieving the highest priorities. In Iraq, that means it's imperative that we crush the Iranian-backed militias. That means giving the military everything they need to crush Iraq's enemies. That means getting topnotch equipment into Iraqi troops' hands, getting them trained in using that equipment and getting them to a high level of expertise with that equipment.
That's been the plan all along. It's a plan that takes time to accomplish. It's difficult to (1) create a military while the country is under attack; (2) equip that military with the proper equipment and (3) train that new military with the new equipment while building that military's infrastructures (command, equipment, logistics). Then factor in that one political party is expressing indignation that we can't snap our fingers, stand up that military, permitting our troops to leave.
Frankly, it's amazing that no one's seriously taken on these long-winded blowhards for suggesting that we aren't making progress at unprecedented rates in the history of mankind. People like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden should be taken to task for intimating that we aren't making progress at a fast enough rate.
When you consider all that must be accomplished to start a military while fighting a war that seeks to prevent the creation of that military, it's insane to think that 3 years is nearly enough time to accomplish all that.
Posted Wednesday, November 1, 2006 8:03 PM
No comments.
