i think that results speak well of america. bush won b/c he has been able to define himself and present the voters with "something to vote for"--kerry did not do that. he was a candidate who offered clear vision (whether one agreed with that vision or not, he/she clearly knew what he stood for), his core values center around faith and the value of life which resonate with middle america, and he's an "everyday" kinda guy. he may not have won the debates but in the end, i think people went in to those voting booths and had to decide if they were going to vote for someone they knew or someone they still could not define. bush was probably not a lot of those 51%-ers solid choice but rather their best among the two (or three).
i think bush should feel quite justified in taking office this time (not that he didn't the first time). he received more votes than any other president in history. he is the first president since his dad to have a majority of the votes at 51%, and he won states that clearly were up in the air last time with relative ease this time. he has a mandate now.
i'm trying my best to avoid bitter complaining about the liberal media but i do think that once again they have egg on their face this year. after disbanding the exit poll conglomorate post-2000, they re-configured it this year and still they got things wrong having boldly proclaimed kerry with 1-3% leads from 2pm on. as it turns out, those exit poll numbers were bogus just as they were in 2000. why, well i have a few theories on it with a simple one being that a lot of republican voters just flat don't want to share their voting preferences with exit pollsters and thus the majority of what they have to talk to is liberal/democratic voters (many of which would love to sit down and talk about their progressive votes over a double mocha latte). i think that the media did their best to push kerry's candidacy with suspect pre-polling practices, promotion of the "young vote" which again did not materialize, grandiosed news stories of little truth or releveance such as 60 minutes junk, kitty kelly, the missing bombs, and cable news shows openly endorsing kerry on Monday (chris matthews, imus, etc.). it makes me wonder had the liberal media not been in kerry's camp, would this have been a 10-12 point bush win?
my reference to secularism was not so much that bush is the great "chosen one" for christians but that this victory really speaks volumes to what many americans believe and feel about our country's origins and future. this country has firm religious roots that have created morals many in this country do not want to release or minimize. things such as gay marriage, abortion, and the ability/freedom to craft one's own destiny without government interference are issues that too many americans this time around were unwilling to see trampled. it's not that so americans are opposed necessarily to homosexual relationships as it is they don't want an institution that has core moral values at its epicenter to be de-valued for the sake of "progressivism". i think many americans are still quite appalled at the thought of abortion and it's air of "convenience" nowadays and saw kerry's unwillingness to stand up against what damn near any sane human being declares immoral and unnecessary in partial birth abortions. a great deal of americans also don't want the government to take things (like money, right to bear arms, etc.) from them that they feel the constitution is clear in telling them to butt out of. kerry's values of governmental redistribution of wealth apparently did not fly well with many voters even if they do think the rich have loopholes in tax law.
i say some of this b/c the sentiments expressed by many at the exit polls (which can be quite different in validity than the "who'd ya vote for" question) indicated that values topped the list of issues that swayed their voting while other issues such as the iraq war and the economy were well under that. that to me, says volumes about what this election really measured. it was a referendum of sorts. it was vote for the man more americans felt would preserve our way of life and uphold our country's 200+ year values and integrity. the u.s isn't perfect by any means. our ways are not necessarily the best ways. but they are just that, "our ways". those values define many of us and when it boiled down to touching the screen or punching that card, 51% of america trusted george w. bush to protect our future, preserve our past, and deliver on a year's worth of promises.that's why i'm so happy. that's why i voted for bush. that's why i think our future is in very good hands.
03 November 2004
30 September 2004
Crawford, TX Rag Dumps Bush for Kerry...Big Deal? Eh...
Yesterday a left-leaning rag in the tiny town of Crawford, TX--Bush's current home town and population 691-- came out in favor of Kerry over Bush. So is this a huge blow? Well, hardly. Let's take a look at the Iconoclast endorsement shall we.
http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/Columns/Editorial/editorial39.htm
....Iconoclast purports Bush has done the following as a "hidden agenda":
(my counter to the assertion in blue)
• Empty the Social Security trust fund by $507 billion to help offset fiscal irresponsibility and at the same time slash Social Security benefits.
Bush has borrowed from the "current surplus" in SS as has most every other president who's been in office sinc LBJ. I'd be interested in seeing what info tells them that SS benefits have been "slashed", I'm not aware of that and can't find reports that indicate such a truth. Perhaps they've stayed steady and b/c there is no increase that's perceived as a "slashing" of benefits. Bush has NEVER said he'd get rid of SS and even as recently as Tues. on O'Reilly stated that SS is a program that can't be abandoned and is an expectation since LBJ and he'll protect it yet would like to introduce a private component to it for those who'd like to invest rather than rely on the gov't handouts--which is quite progressive actually but dems didn't think of it so they hate it.
• Cut Medicare by 17 percent and reduce veterans’ benefits and military pay.
Where are the facts on this? Did they account for the largest prescription drug plan in the history of the country that was just passed earlier this year? Truth is that Bush isn't reducing benefits to vets but rather opposes changing the law that currently reduces a vet's benefits by the amount of disability they've received. He cites fiscal responsibility as a reason to resist this $58billion deal. I thought dems were pissed b/c Bush is carefree in spending but now he's heartless b/c he won't spend--what do you guys want?
• Eliminate overtime pay for millions of Americans and raise oil prices by 50 percent.
Most of the workers who will lose overtime are already paid well. And more than 1 million low-wage workers -- who probably could use a salary boost -- would get overtime under the new rules. Salaried employees making less than $425 a week, or $22,100 a year, automatically would qualify for overtime, up from $155 per week, or $8,060, previously. Workers who make $65,000 or more would be exempt from overtime pay. And to suggest Bush can control oil prices is laughable. Period.
• Give tax cuts to businesses that sent American jobs overseas, and, in fact, by policy encourage their departure.
Bush gave tax cuts to everyone and those considered "rich" by most often times are our entrepreneurs, small business owners, etc. Furthermore, somehow Bush is spurring outsourcing by tax cuts--saving money sends jobs overseas--huh? Are people bitching in Japan when Toyota opens a car plant in San Antonio, TX which empolys thousands of skilled workers here in TX that didn't have jobs before? Japan's leader must suck too b/c of outsourcing. What would the dems propose? Increase taxes on corps thereby making cost of production higher and making them look out of the country for cheaper alternatives even more? Nice fix.• Give away billions of tax dollars in government contracts without competitive bids.
• Involve this country in a deadly and highly questionable war, and
This is an opinion, not an indesputable fact and no evidence of a hidden agenda for this is available so they shouldn't make such an assertion. Hate the war, that's fine but don't suggest a hidden agenda w/o proof.
• Take a budget surplus and turn it into the worst deficit in the history of the United States, creating a debt in just four years that will take generations to repay.
Can you say, recession? Can you say 9/11? Can you say Afghanistan and Iraq? These events caused this government to pump money into it to provide for safety and prevent a recession from becoming a DEPRESSION. The economy was beginning a tailspin when Bush came in to office and on the heels of 9/11 the economy was dealt a huge blow--just ask the airline industry and others. Bush chose a tried-and-true method to pump up the economy which is reduce taxes to increase economic spending. We now have an unemployment rate that is equal to Clinton's in '96 which many consider one of our country's most rubust economic times. We see growth rates in the economy at near record levels this year. Sound like it worked. Now as the economy grows and tax income increases via spending increases and employment rate growth, the deficit will be reduced over the next 5 yrs. as proposed by Bush.Again, just trying to give the alternative view since this editorial doesn't.
http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/Columns/Editorial/editorial39.htm
....Iconoclast purports Bush has done the following as a "hidden agenda":
(my counter to the assertion in blue)
• Empty the Social Security trust fund by $507 billion to help offset fiscal irresponsibility and at the same time slash Social Security benefits.
Bush has borrowed from the "current surplus" in SS as has most every other president who's been in office sinc LBJ. I'd be interested in seeing what info tells them that SS benefits have been "slashed", I'm not aware of that and can't find reports that indicate such a truth. Perhaps they've stayed steady and b/c there is no increase that's perceived as a "slashing" of benefits. Bush has NEVER said he'd get rid of SS and even as recently as Tues. on O'Reilly stated that SS is a program that can't be abandoned and is an expectation since LBJ and he'll protect it yet would like to introduce a private component to it for those who'd like to invest rather than rely on the gov't handouts--which is quite progressive actually but dems didn't think of it so they hate it.
• Cut Medicare by 17 percent and reduce veterans’ benefits and military pay.
Where are the facts on this? Did they account for the largest prescription drug plan in the history of the country that was just passed earlier this year? Truth is that Bush isn't reducing benefits to vets but rather opposes changing the law that currently reduces a vet's benefits by the amount of disability they've received. He cites fiscal responsibility as a reason to resist this $58billion deal. I thought dems were pissed b/c Bush is carefree in spending but now he's heartless b/c he won't spend--what do you guys want?
• Eliminate overtime pay for millions of Americans and raise oil prices by 50 percent.
Most of the workers who will lose overtime are already paid well. And more than 1 million low-wage workers -- who probably could use a salary boost -- would get overtime under the new rules. Salaried employees making less than $425 a week, or $22,100 a year, automatically would qualify for overtime, up from $155 per week, or $8,060, previously. Workers who make $65,000 or more would be exempt from overtime pay. And to suggest Bush can control oil prices is laughable. Period.
• Give tax cuts to businesses that sent American jobs overseas, and, in fact, by policy encourage their departure.
Bush gave tax cuts to everyone and those considered "rich" by most often times are our entrepreneurs, small business owners, etc. Furthermore, somehow Bush is spurring outsourcing by tax cuts--saving money sends jobs overseas--huh? Are people bitching in Japan when Toyota opens a car plant in San Antonio, TX which empolys thousands of skilled workers here in TX that didn't have jobs before? Japan's leader must suck too b/c of outsourcing. What would the dems propose? Increase taxes on corps thereby making cost of production higher and making them look out of the country for cheaper alternatives even more? Nice fix.• Give away billions of tax dollars in government contracts without competitive bids.
• Involve this country in a deadly and highly questionable war, and
This is an opinion, not an indesputable fact and no evidence of a hidden agenda for this is available so they shouldn't make such an assertion. Hate the war, that's fine but don't suggest a hidden agenda w/o proof.
• Take a budget surplus and turn it into the worst deficit in the history of the United States, creating a debt in just four years that will take generations to repay.
Can you say, recession? Can you say 9/11? Can you say Afghanistan and Iraq? These events caused this government to pump money into it to provide for safety and prevent a recession from becoming a DEPRESSION. The economy was beginning a tailspin when Bush came in to office and on the heels of 9/11 the economy was dealt a huge blow--just ask the airline industry and others. Bush chose a tried-and-true method to pump up the economy which is reduce taxes to increase economic spending. We now have an unemployment rate that is equal to Clinton's in '96 which many consider one of our country's most rubust economic times. We see growth rates in the economy at near record levels this year. Sound like it worked. Now as the economy grows and tax income increases via spending increases and employment rate growth, the deficit will be reduced over the next 5 yrs. as proposed by Bush.Again, just trying to give the alternative view since this editorial doesn't.
17 September 2004
14 September 2004
New Stavesacre Tunes!
Awesome new Stavesacre mp3 at purevolume.com [ http://www.purevolume.com/stavesacre ]
One of my fav bands of all time has a new tune for listening pleasure.
Please go give it a hear....
One of my fav bands of all time has a new tune for listening pleasure.
Please go give it a hear....
02 September 2004
RNC Day 3--The Zell Miller Show!
So where do I start with this one. I tell ya, I was so pumped after listening to Zell Miller lastnight that I almost came in and posted my thoughts right then and there. But, I decided to wait and see how I felt this morning before posting on my blog.
Lastnight was an amazing night in the history of American political conventions. Zell Miller took the stage with a passion and zeal not seen in a very long time...especially from the Republicans who tend to be afraid of such outburts and their perceptions. Zell came out firing from the word go and point-by-point filleted John Kerry on every stance he's taken in this campaign.
Zell was harsh but not personal. Don't listen to the editorialists in the major print media b/c they will tell you a lie. The New York Times, L.A. Times, Houston Chronicle, Washington Post and others will play the "insensitive" card and the "it was an attack unseen before" card but that's, let's see let's use a Zell-ism " a big bowl of mush!"
This speech WILL resonate with women too. It may come off as sexist but women in this country want a manly-man to tell them things are going to be ok and by damned those terrorists are going to have to deal with a mighty hammer the next time they even think of doing something like 9/11 again. Women want a strong, manly, leader in their home and it transfers to the presidency in a time such as this.
Zell's delivery will resonate with many voters, especially those in the south who know exactly where Zell's delivery style was coming from. See, in the south, we're familiar with a term called "bein' taken to the woodshed!" For those of you not so familiar with it, it's when the leading figurehead in your life as a child took you out back and "set you straight about some things". Sometimes it was a little barking like Zell unleashed lastnight and sometimes it was a little more, shall we say "physical."
The polls will be interesting to watch come the weekend and early next week. The libbies are running scared right now and not sure how to respond to Zell's rant lastnight. BTW, I hope you were able to watch Chris Matthew's show "WiffleBall" lastnight after the convention. On it, Zell tore in to Matthew's and left him and his bully style of interviewing speechless.
I leave you today with the best line from the speech lastnight...
This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces? U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?
Lastnight was an amazing night in the history of American political conventions. Zell Miller took the stage with a passion and zeal not seen in a very long time...especially from the Republicans who tend to be afraid of such outburts and their perceptions. Zell came out firing from the word go and point-by-point filleted John Kerry on every stance he's taken in this campaign.
Zell was harsh but not personal. Don't listen to the editorialists in the major print media b/c they will tell you a lie. The New York Times, L.A. Times, Houston Chronicle, Washington Post and others will play the "insensitive" card and the "it was an attack unseen before" card but that's, let's see let's use a Zell-ism " a big bowl of mush!"
This speech WILL resonate with women too. It may come off as sexist but women in this country want a manly-man to tell them things are going to be ok and by damned those terrorists are going to have to deal with a mighty hammer the next time they even think of doing something like 9/11 again. Women want a strong, manly, leader in their home and it transfers to the presidency in a time such as this.
Zell's delivery will resonate with many voters, especially those in the south who know exactly where Zell's delivery style was coming from. See, in the south, we're familiar with a term called "bein' taken to the woodshed!" For those of you not so familiar with it, it's when the leading figurehead in your life as a child took you out back and "set you straight about some things". Sometimes it was a little barking like Zell unleashed lastnight and sometimes it was a little more, shall we say "physical."
The polls will be interesting to watch come the weekend and early next week. The libbies are running scared right now and not sure how to respond to Zell's rant lastnight. BTW, I hope you were able to watch Chris Matthew's show "WiffleBall" lastnight after the convention. On it, Zell tore in to Matthew's and left him and his bully style of interviewing speechless.
I leave you today with the best line from the speech lastnight...
This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces? U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?
31 August 2004
RNC Day 1
Well I have to admit Day 1 of the RNC lived up to my hyped expectations. Sen. McCain was excellent and very statesman like. He definitely drove home the validity of Bush being the guy to deal best with terrorism and the threat it is to our safety. It was pretty clear that he will be a front runner in 2008 for the Republican nomination. Pair him up with a Condi Rice or Colin Powell and the Dems are doomed!
Guiliani was brilliant! He had the crowd in the palm of his hand and illustrated the Kerry inconsistencies with wit, humor, clarity and conviction. Here's the guy who led NYC thru that horrible disaster and who better to talk about what it takes to rise from such ruins than Giuliani. He praised Bush for his efforts and his humor while attacking Kerry's record allowed the point to be made without sounding harsh and cruel. He left me feeling very good about things and compared with that ridiculously boring DNC, I was quite impressed with the first speakers.
Well tonight is the governator and Laura. Two more good ones. Tomorrow night is Zell Miller and I can't wait for Zell!!!!!! He's gonna be so good.
Guiliani was brilliant! He had the crowd in the palm of his hand and illustrated the Kerry inconsistencies with wit, humor, clarity and conviction. Here's the guy who led NYC thru that horrible disaster and who better to talk about what it takes to rise from such ruins than Giuliani. He praised Bush for his efforts and his humor while attacking Kerry's record allowed the point to be made without sounding harsh and cruel. He left me feeling very good about things and compared with that ridiculously boring DNC, I was quite impressed with the first speakers.
Well tonight is the governator and Laura. Two more good ones. Tomorrow night is Zell Miller and I can't wait for Zell!!!!!! He's gonna be so good.
30 August 2004
Thank God the RNC is finally here!
Alrighty! The RNC is finally upon us. It begins today with speeches tonight by John McCain, Rudy Guiliani and Zell Miller(? I think he's tonight).
I'm looking forward to hearing some positive messages about our president and his efforts to make our country safer and more prosperous. I'm going to try and watch some of the speeches tonight although they are in direct conflict with the Dallas Cowboys' 3rd preseason game. The Cowboys get first dibs tonight.
I'm also interested in listening to the cable shows afterwards to see how they can dissect the speeches and what libbys they bring in to debunct the speeches. Whatever you can do, check in on Hardball and O'Reilly when Laura Ingraham is on so that you can get the real take on the conservative speak. She's outstanding!
I'm looking forward to hearing some positive messages about our president and his efforts to make our country safer and more prosperous. I'm going to try and watch some of the speeches tonight although they are in direct conflict with the Dallas Cowboys' 3rd preseason game. The Cowboys get first dibs tonight.
I'm also interested in listening to the cable shows afterwards to see how they can dissect the speeches and what libbys they bring in to debunct the speeches. Whatever you can do, check in on Hardball and O'Reilly when Laura Ingraham is on so that you can get the real take on the conservative speak. She's outstanding!
27 August 2004
Swifties and Kerry
For those of you who know me well, you are probably aware that I'm a bit of a political junky and dont' mind hashin' out the latest political-topic-du-jour! Of course right now the presidential election is taking front stage and thank God the RNC is coming up next week so we can hear some common sense for a few days in the mainstream media.
Anyway, I wanted to give my two cents worth on the whole Swift Boat v. Kerry thing. I've posted many a thoughts on the Vagrantcafe.com/forums website about my position on this matter. I think that where there's smoke there's usually fire. John O'Neill, who wrote Unfit for Command, has been an adversary of John Kerry for over 30 years now since he started rambling about atrocities and dispicable acts committed by U.S. troops in Vietnam. O'Neill's story has been consistent for 30 years. Now the Swift Boat Vets come along and are still quite pissed about Kerry's ramblings from 30 years ago and how they were played by the Viet Cong to torture our POWs. Many soldiers served admirably--make that most-- yet Kerry smacked them all in the face with his venomous words.
Something to keep in mind about all of this is the fact that O'Neill's story hasn't waivered for over 30 years however, Kerry's story seems to have a new chapter almost daily. Whether it's ribbons and medals are interchangeable, to whether he threw them over the fence in protest, to whether or not his boat was under fire to the latest of which is his commendation being re-written some 15 years posthumously. Not to mention new words added to it at that.
While I agree that the 527s have gotten completely out of hand and need to be controlled in a major way, the reality is that Kerry is not going to be able to run from this issue. He has been protected for a long time by just serving in the liberal enclave of Massachusettes. He was safe there and his record wasn't going to be contested to heartily there b/c of the leanings of the populous. However, now that he's running for the most powerful office in the world, those who've been willing to be silent all these years are not going to let this spineless, centerless, jellyfish of a candidate run without being held accountable for what he's done and said.
My prediction is that the whole did-he-or-didn't-he-deserve-the-medals-talk will die down well before the election. What won't die down, and hasn't for over 30 yrs, is the venomous and inflamatory words Kerry spoke when denouncing the war and it's troops actions. Those words hurt vets and their families and will continue to do so for a long, long time. That is what is hurting Kerry more than anything and that is what just may cost him the presidency.
Anyway, I wanted to give my two cents worth on the whole Swift Boat v. Kerry thing. I've posted many a thoughts on the Vagrantcafe.com/forums website about my position on this matter. I think that where there's smoke there's usually fire. John O'Neill, who wrote Unfit for Command, has been an adversary of John Kerry for over 30 years now since he started rambling about atrocities and dispicable acts committed by U.S. troops in Vietnam. O'Neill's story has been consistent for 30 years. Now the Swift Boat Vets come along and are still quite pissed about Kerry's ramblings from 30 years ago and how they were played by the Viet Cong to torture our POWs. Many soldiers served admirably--make that most-- yet Kerry smacked them all in the face with his venomous words.
Something to keep in mind about all of this is the fact that O'Neill's story hasn't waivered for over 30 years however, Kerry's story seems to have a new chapter almost daily. Whether it's ribbons and medals are interchangeable, to whether he threw them over the fence in protest, to whether or not his boat was under fire to the latest of which is his commendation being re-written some 15 years posthumously. Not to mention new words added to it at that.
While I agree that the 527s have gotten completely out of hand and need to be controlled in a major way, the reality is that Kerry is not going to be able to run from this issue. He has been protected for a long time by just serving in the liberal enclave of Massachusettes. He was safe there and his record wasn't going to be contested to heartily there b/c of the leanings of the populous. However, now that he's running for the most powerful office in the world, those who've been willing to be silent all these years are not going to let this spineless, centerless, jellyfish of a candidate run without being held accountable for what he's done and said.
My prediction is that the whole did-he-or-didn't-he-deserve-the-medals-talk will die down well before the election. What won't die down, and hasn't for over 30 yrs, is the venomous and inflamatory words Kerry spoke when denouncing the war and it's troops actions. Those words hurt vets and their families and will continue to do so for a long, long time. That is what is hurting Kerry more than anything and that is what just may cost him the presidency.
Welcome and Greetings!
Well I've re-tooled the blog with the idea that posts will be more regular and timely. I'm going to link the site with MOYL.com and my signature on Vagrantcafe.com so perhaps there will be more visitors.
My challenge will be to post thoughts on everything from sports to politics but all the while keep a good sense of humor about things along the way. I hope you like the place though it's a bit sparse right now. Come on back in a few days and see what's changed. Also, feel free to drop a post on a rant I have and we'll have some good discussions.
Late.
My challenge will be to post thoughts on everything from sports to politics but all the while keep a good sense of humor about things along the way. I hope you like the place though it's a bit sparse right now. Come on back in a few days and see what's changed. Also, feel free to drop a post on a rant I have and we'll have some good discussions.
Late.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)