Wednesday, November 10, 2004

Jimmy Carter, Our Heart's Desire

Editor

I am very glad that Brady Klopfer included the H. L. Mencken quote: “On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” I knew there had to be some explanation for Jimmy Carter. I wonder what explanation Mencken had for Bill Clinton?

To give credit where credit is due, it was the majority of eligible voters (led by Abraham Lincoln, our first Republican president), that first voted in the reforms which ended slavery, and later brought universal suffrage. Only forty years ago Republicans overcame the opposition of Southern Democrats to pass landmark civil rights legislation. Yes, the minorities that opposed these reforms were wrong, the majorities were right.

Now, as then, Republicans are the primary force for reform, against reactionary Democrat policies. In the United States, President Bush is providing bold leadership to finally reform Social Security, public education, immigration and Medicare, reforms which should have been done but weren’t during the long period dominated by the “do nothing” Democrats.

President Bush also has a vision for a world free of the tyranny of religious extremists and terrorists. In Afghanistan, women vote, attend school, can work outside their homes, and no longer need suffer the pain and humiliation of genital mutilation. Afghanis are free to worship or not worship as they please. In Iraq, the majority Shiites and minority Kurds were freed from Sunni oppression and will soon control their own destinies. Twice in January, in historical firsts, Arabs will freely elect their own leaders.

“If people are not liberals at 20, they have no hearts. If they are still liberals at 30, they have no brains.” The election results show we have a brainy majority.

Monday, November 08, 2004

After We Won! 2004

In this Fools Paradise for Liberal Democrats, I would like to say some nice words of consolation: You have very good looking political yard signs here in the Land of the Lost.

You have already picked a sure-fire winning rationale for your loss – American voters are too uneducated and uninformed to be trusted to vote intelligently. Since the Left dominates public education and the main stream media, it is interesting to hear that we, the ignorant right-wing scum (as I was labeled in a letter to the ICO) are the fruits of your labors.

You accuse us of being violent and narrow-minded, and yet it is our yard signs that are destroyed as fast as they are put up, and yours aren’t. I spent hundreds of dollars, and several hours of driving, to provide a friend two large Bush/Cheney signs. He spent time and materials to place them on his property, and within two days they were gone. Many Republican friends would not display the smaller yard signs and bumper stickers I bought for them, because they were afraid of vandalism and their neighbors’ reactions.

You say that now the election is over, President Bush and the growing Republican majorities in the House and Senate should work with you. How about you working with us? Did the thought ever occur to you that if your ideas are better than ours, you would have won, and would be leading?

You challenged us to watch Fahrenheit 9/11, and we did, but then we watched Fahrenhype 9/11 to learn of all the lies and distortions Michael Moore fed to a gullible audience. I challenge you to watch Fahrenhype 9/11 – the truth may set you free, believing lies won’t.

I feel your pain, and am glad it’s not mine.

Friday, September 10, 2004

World A Better Place Without Saddam?

“Anti-war” Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle and John Kerry wrote on Oct. 9, 1998, in a letter to the Clinton White House: "[W]e urge you …to take necessary actions …to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Bill Clinton responded. On December 16, 1998, he unleashed Operation Desert Fox "...to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs, and its military capacity to threaten their neighbors. Their purpose is to protect the national interests of the United States..."
Previously, on February 17, 1998, Bill Clinton noted: "Saddam's son-in-law and the chief organizer of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, defected to Jordan." Therefore, Clinton said, “(we know Iraq has) an offensive biological warfare capability, notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum...2,000 gallons of anthrax, 25 biological-filled scud warheads, and 157 aerial bombs."

Surprisingly, Senator Tom Daschle, D-S.D., recently praised the Bush administration's war and nation-building work in Iraq and said he has no serious concerns about the lack of weapons of mass destruction.

"I give the effort overall real credit," Daschle said. "It is a good thing Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. It is a good thing we are democratizing the country." Does it sound like the world is a better place without Saddam in power?

“Perhaps so,” huffed the ICO Editor.

With the Taliban gone, Al-Queda on the run, Saddam captured, no terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11, Libya and Iran admitting nuclear arms plotting, North Korea cheating exposed, United Nations Resolutions on Iraq finally enforced, and even senior Democrats applauding – perhaps even the ICO Editor will admit the world is a far better place without Saddam. Because Saddam caused the deaths of three million Moslems, more than any other person ever, even some Moslems admit the world is a better place without him.

Facts, not opinions.

Friday, September 03, 2004

You won't find this in the San Francisco Chronicle, or the New York (All the news that's fit to print) Times.


Establishment Survey (W-2 payroll employment)Total employment as of December 2000 = 131.878 million

Total employment as of August 2004 = 131.475 million

So, the truth is that 403,000 W-2 jobs have been lost since George Bush took office; not the 900,000, 1 million, or even the 2 million that you see, from time to time, in various liberal and partisan-Democratic circles.

On the other hand:Household Survey (W-2 employment, 1099 contractors, self-employment, etc.)Total employment as of December 2000 = 135.836 million

Total employment as of August 2004 = 139.681 million

Hmm. I don't think the Associated Press, the New York Times, MSNBC, or Reuters, want to run the following headline: "Economy generates nearly 4 million net jobs under George W. Bush." So, therefore, it would appear that the establishment survey is the one with which the liberal media will continue to be preoccupied.

Tuesday, August 10, 2004

John Kerry Invents Virtual Foreign Relations

Editor,

John Kerry’s latest TV ads accuse President Bush of “misleading America.” Yet just a week ago, John Kerry said: "I've met with foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but, boy, they look at you and say: 'You've got to win this. You've got to beat this guy. We need a new policy.' Things like that."

Interestingly, there is no evidence that John Kerry met with any foreign leaders since he began his campaign. In fact, the only time he was in the same town (Wash., D.C.) as a foreign leader was Sept. 24, 2003. On that same day, President Bush was in New York meeting with the leaders of Germany, India, Pakistan, Ghana and Mozambique.

Apparently John Kerry feels that if he did talk to foreign leaders, they would tell him how much they prefer him, so why go to all the trouble – just report what they would have said given the chance. Kim Jong Il, for example.

Kerry says President Bush “misleads.” In truth, John Kerry lies.

Monday, August 02, 2004

Do They Have To Retake The Senate Picture?

Editor

Recently 24 recipients of the Medal of Honor released a letter criticizing Kerry for voting against a $1.3 billion increase in veterans' health care benefits and missing some Senate votes related to veterans.

Kerry says he supports veterans’ health care benefits and President Bush doesn’t. However, a recent study shows veterans’ benefits went up 30 percent in eight years of Clinton, and 40 percent in three years of Bush.

On June 21 Kerry rushed back to Washington, D.C. to register support for a guarantee of federal funding for veterans' health care. The Republicans postponed the vote. Kerry then charged that GOP leaders shelved the vote to disrupt his campaign and deny him an issue he has championed. Republicans replied that Kerry, often absent from the Senate during his campaign, was grandstanding. Later that day, the Senate official photo was taken in the chamber; had Kerry missed it, he would have been the only absentee.

Kerry, who has missed 89 percent of the Senate's votes this year as of Monday, and 64 percent last year (including several votes on veterans' health care issues)., said Bush should immediately call a special session of Congress to implement the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission. Kerry said he would interrupt his campaigning to be there for debate and voting "when necessary."
Why now? Do they have to retake the Senate picture?

Saturday, July 10, 2004

Bush Smarter Than Kerry - Duh?

Editor

The Washington Times reported yet another Kerry lie, this one told repeatedly of how he met for hours with all members of the U.N. Security Council just a week before voting in October 2002 to authorize the use of force in Iraq. Since United Nations ambassadors from many of the Security Council nations are saying the meeting never occurred, I guess it will be up to our Main Stream Media to attack these ambassadors in the same way they attacked the Swift Boat veterans. Although the Swifties prevailed and proved John Kerry never spent Christmas 1968 in Cambodia, and by his own journal Kerry admitted he had not yet been in combat until the week after he supposedly was “wounded” for his first Purple Heart, the Main Stream Media continued to warp the truth.

The New York Times continues to fight for Kerry, now running a story about missing Iraqi high explosives even after NBC reported the explosives were gone before U. S, forces captured the site. Kerry and Edwards are making a big deal of the Times treatment of the story, making me wonder if they are saying we should have attacked sooner.

The New York Times sometimes gets it right. The Times just ran an article about President Bush having a higher IQ than Kerry, based on their scores on Officer Qualifying Tests (Bush scored at the 95th percentile, Kerry at the 91st). The article also reported that President Bush’s SAT score was 1206, which relates to an IQ of 129 and supports above a 95th percentile ranking. It is one point below qualifying President Bush for membership in Mensa. President Bush is measurably smarter than almost every liberal now reading this, with a Yale degree and a Harvard MBA for good measure.