The Right State

This is why I do not watch CNN.  They have come up with such an outrageous poll, I do not see how anyone can take it seriously.

President Bush’s unpopularity — due largely to the war in Iraq — seems likely to affect GOP candidates in congressional midterm elections in November, according to a CNN poll released Wednesday.

Fifty-five percent of 1,004 Americans said they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who has supported Bush administration policies, according to the poll conducted by Opinion Research Corporation on behalf of CNN. Forty percent said they would be more likely.

If anything, this poll has shown that the Democrats have done a better job of selling their message than has President Bush.  The US is winning the war on terror.  We have not had a terror attack on this country since that fateful September day.  Somehow the America people have bought into the Democratic package that this country is not safe, that the war in Iraq is a distraction, that we can not win this war—hook, line and sinker.  The only problem is that the only solution the Democrats have is to cut and run.  I would see that question on a poll, but I am not holding my breath.

The poll definately has some problems.  The idiotic question of whether Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks on the United States is still being asked even though the White House acknowledges he was not.  This one question, in my mind, puts the entire poll into question.

Asked whether former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, 52 percent said he was not, but 43 percent said they believe he was. The White House has denied Hussein’s 9/11 involvement — most recently in a news conference August 21, when President Bush said Hussein had “nothing” to do with the attacks.

The CNN article stops right there.  There is absolutely no mention of how Democrats rated in the same poll.  But of course there does not need to be one if the power brokers at CNN are trying to influence public opinion. This is what CNN is trying to hide.

Only 12 percent of those questioned said they are satisfied with what Congress has done so far this year, according to poll results released Tuesday.

Eighty-four percent said they wished Congress had done more.

Sixty-four percent of those questioned disapprove of the way congressional Republicans are handling their jobs, while 31 percent approve.

Democrats fared little better. Fifty-seven percent said they disapprove of how Democrats in Congress are doing, as opposed to 35 percent who approve of how Democrats are doing their jobs.

Let’s look at some of these numbers.
Those satisfied with Congress in general—12%
Those satisfied with Republicans in Congress—31%
Those satisfied with Democrats in Congress—35%
Those satisfied with President Bush—41%

So both Republicans and Democrats in Congress are within the margin of error when it comes to the public’s perception of who is doing the better job.  President Bush’s numbers are higher than significantly higher than Congress in general and both of their respective parties.  CNN normally has a link to PDF file showing the questions asked and the demographics of the respondents.  This time they did not so I don’t know if they called as many Republicans as Democrats.  Past history shows that the Opinion Research Corporation oversamples Democrats significantly.

There are other numbers which show this perceived discontent with Republicans is in actuality a discontent with incumbents, something else not disclosed in the CNN article.

A majority — 55 percent — said they are more likely to back a challenger in races on this year’s ballot. Such anti-incumbent sentiment is higher than the 48 percent recorded as “pro-challenger” in a similar survey in 1994, when the GOP took control of both houses of Congress.

Nonetheless, 48 percent said that, if most of the present members of Congress were replaced with new members, there would be no difference. By contrast, 42 percent said such a scenario would change Congress for the better, and 7 percent said it would change Congress for the worse.

Now this is significant—a significant number of respondents believed replacing Congressional members would have virtually no impact.  This seems to suggest the attitude in and around Washington was the problem, not the members of Congress.  Just something to think on.

Most respondents believe that Republicans are better leaders of the country than Democrats while Dems are more ‘progressive.’

Nearly half of the respondents — 49 percent — said they considered the GOP the party of strong leadership. But 56 percent said they considered the Democrats the party of change, with 49 percent considering them the more forward-looking party.

I am not sure these numbers mean a thing since the poll also found that only 9% of respondents believed the economy was ‘very good.’  The economy is growing at a fantastic rate and the unemployment is at an unbelievably low 4.7%.  I wonder if the only ones Opinion Research Corporation was able to reach by phone were people who did not have a job while everyone else was working.

With Opinion Research Corporation and CNN conducting these surveys, is it little wonder so many believe the MSM is siding with the Democrats in this upcoming election.  Poll after poll the Democrats are oversampled just to push their agenda.  The MSM are driving Bush’s poll numbers down and pumping up their Democratic cohorts.  ‘Journalists’ like David Gregory do not even attempt to hide their bias as he routinely quotes from the Democratic talking points.  Then he pretends to be insulted when confronted with his overt bias.  Little wonder the MSM is losing what little credibility they have left.

Tags: Democrats, President Bush, Bias, Politics, War by Chuck
No Comments »

At one time John Murtha may have been a brave marine as he fought for his country . Now he is just one of a long list of whiney Democrats who run scared every time someone mentions the word: war. Well, Mr. Murtha sometimes war is necessary for the defense of this country in spite of your spin to the contrary.

I find it hypocritical and ironic that Secretary Rumsfeld and President Bush, in their latest speeches to spin the war in Iraq, both commented that “many still have not learned history lessons,” as they drew inflammatory parallels between Nazism and today’s war in Iraq designed only to provoke unreasonable fear in the hearts of Americans.

Clearly it was the ignoring of history that got President Bush and his ideological policymakers into the quagmire that now exists in Iraq. As history dictated, it was absolutely foolish to believe that by occupying Iraq, the United States would transform the country into a beacon of American style democratic ideals. The British failed in its occupation attempts during the early 1900s. You only have to press rewind to hear the now haunting yet familiar words of a British Commander in Baghdad in 1917 say, “Our armies do not come in to your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators.” After a decade of fighting with the population they had forcibly “liberated,” the British were finally expelled from what is today Iraq by a population who resented foreign occupation and control.

President George Herbert Walker Bush was obviously more astute than his son when it came to the learning of History lessons. During the first Gulf War he rejected the urging of many to march into Baghdad, fully understanding the complexities and pitfalls of such an act. President GW Bush should have spent a little more time under the tutelage of his much more insightful father.

Obviously the former marine needs to spend a little more time talking to the commanders in the field and the soldiers on the ground. They tell a different story, one in which most of the Iraqi people welcome the United States as liberators. Sure there are areas where troublemakers continue to undermine our efforts, but the people have tasted freedom and they like it. As the Prime Minister said, “Iraqis have tasted freedom and they will defend it.”

Anyone can take a few footnotes in history and twist them around to show that something will not work. I can take a few moments in history and show the United States should not be a democracy. Take for example the Whiskey Rebellion or perhaps even the Articles of Confederation. Finding examples and twisting them is easy. The hard part comes in defending your beliefs as our soldiers have done, as the Iraqi people have done. The Iraqi people have tasted freedom for the first time. They have voted for their own representatives, for the first time. They have a written constitution which guarantees individual rights, for the first time. To think that the people would voluntarily move away from these freedoms and towards some sort of Taliban like government is incredibly short-sighted. But then it seems many lily-livered Democrats are short-sighted. People like you say no war is worth fighting. People like you say no American blood worth shedding for liberty. Thank God this country still has people who are willing to give their all for this great country.

It is a shame your constituents do not know more about your views. If they knew some of the things you have done, like calling our soldiers murderers, they would most likely not re-elect you for another term. It is veterans like you who give veterans like me a bad name.

Update:  I saw this post and had to include it.  Apparently I am not the only one who does not think much of this Murtha guy, Common Man/Uncommon Sense has a post showing how this former marine is lost, truly lost.

Anybody who supports this guy has no business calling Bush dumb. (snip)

As a current conservative supporter I want all those that I could support held to a high standard. And even though Benedict Arnold was a Revolutionary War officer and hero, it is no compliment today to be called a Benedict Arnold. And it is no honor to be called a John Murtha. We appreciate your service and respect you for it but it doesn’t give you a get out of jail free card. I’m not voting for someone who couldn’t beat Forrest Gump at checkers.

Ouch!  I never thought much of Murtha, but after reading this post, I think even less of him now.

Tags: Democrats, Democracy, History, President Bush, Politics, Iraq, War by Chuck
No Comments »

Sometimes I wonder whose side the ACLU is actually on when it comes to the Global War on Terror.  They have filed lawsuit after lawsuit challenging almost every tool at our government’s disposal to keep America safe.  You would think by the very name of the organization, the American Civil Liberties Union, they would be for at least some of the things which make this country great, God, the military, patriotism and the Constitution.  This ultra liberal organization has gone as far as redefining patriotism from being proud of the accomplishments of the United States and its history to apologizing for its faults and defending those who attack us.  This country was founded on the principle of religious freedom and yet the ACLU has made every attempt to take God out of our country.  This country was founded on the idea that people have the right to defend themselves and yet the ACLU wants to outlaw guns.  And now they are trying to protect the same people who are trying to kill us.  This organization is trying to protect them from the United States government which is charged with protecting us.

The Bush administration on Friday asked a federal judge to delay enforcing her order for a halt to the government’s warrantless communications surveillance program.

The Justice Department argued that ending the intelligence-gathering program threatens “the gravest of harms to the government and to the American public” and leaves the country “more vulnerable to terrorist attack.”

“We respectfully submit that this court should not override the national security judgment of the president and the nation’s senior intelligence officers regarding the harm that would result” from the program’s suspension, the government lawyers argued in a motion filed with the court.

Why doesn’t the ACLU get it?  The terrorists want to kill all of us, not just Republicans.  They will kill flower children as quickly as they would soldiers.  They hate us, period.  Why is that so difficult to comprehend?  It is almost as if the ACLU does not understand the nature of the warrantless surveillance program.  This is from their own website.

Too many people think we can stop terrorism by monitoring all the hundreds of millions of people who live in America, and by removing the legal safeguards that protect us against government spying.

The problem is, the government is not interested in domestic phone calls, nor do they listen to private phone calls unless those calls either originate in countries that sponsor terrorism or the phone calls are made to those countries.  The ACLU says that the President violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by secretly okaying the surveillance (of course they would defend the New York Times for releasing this super secret information), when most of the FISA judges says the President Bush did not violate the law.

After a while of reading some of the lawsuits filed by the ACLU, I get the distinct feeling they care more about achieving an agenda than protecting the Constitution of the United States.  Robert Novak wrote that our activist courts are in a state of chaos.

The background of a federal district court declaring President Bush’s national security eavesdropping unconstitutional was a conservative’s fantasy. The judge, a former Democrat politician and civil rights activist, wrote what read more like a political manifesto than a judicial opinion. What’s more, she was responsible for contributions to an organization that was a plaintiff in the case she decided.

District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor’s decision has been stayed and probably will be reversed by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. Nevertheless, she was playing more than a cameo role on the stage of history. For this opinion ever to have been issued by an activist judge in Detroit, in the opinion of several legal scholars and distinguished lawyers whom I contacted, shows the judiciary in a state of chaos.

Taylor ended up with the case because of forum-shopping: filing multiple lawsuits in quest of a favorable venue. With the executive and legislative branches in Republican hands, liberals count on activists in the federal judiciary such as Judge Taylor. That explains why normally censorious legal scholars tend to excuse her shoddy judicial opinion and ethical trespassing.

In picking Judge Taylor, the ACLU should have done their homework.  This woman is wacky.  In her opinion she wrote: “There are no hereditary kings in America.”  Phrases like these tend to make me scratch my head and say, “Huh?!”  But to the point, this liberal organization went court shopping in order to secure a verdict of their liking.  It was not about protecting the constitution or protecting someone’s social security check from the vile clutches of an evil government.  This lawsuit was about winning against a Republican President.

The President is charged with protecting the people of the United States, while the ACLU seems to believe it is their duty to protect everyone else from the United States.  The sad thing is they really do not believe they are hurting America by their litigious behavior.  It is incredibly dangerous to be speeding down a one-way street going the wrong way with your eyes closed, which is exactly what the ACLU is doing.  Their idiotic behavior is endangering the American people and they do not even know it.  Or even scarier, they do know they are endangering the American people and they just don’t care.  Either way, the ACLU and their ultra liberal henchmen judges are a danger to the United States.

Tags: Terrorism, President Bush, Judges, Politics by Chuck
No Comments »

George W. Bush gave a speech before the American Legion in Salt Lake City, Utah. He started the speech with some of the things he has done for veterans and then continued on why we need to stay involved in the Global War on Terror and how Iraq is a central part of that war. Here are some of the points of his speech as I watched it on Fox News.

President Bush has raised VA benefits by 75% since 2001.

Terrorists are enemies of freedom. They see freedom as a threat to their twisted view of Islam.

Veterans have seen this kind of war before when battling Nazism. This war will be long but will end in the defeat of the terrorists.

We are in a war we did not ask for but a war we can, will, and must win.

Iraq is a central front is the GWOT.

During the cold war we supported Middle Eastern dictatorships who did not like communism. These dictators repressed their people and terrorism was born. Terrorists have killed Americans at the World Trade center (twice), the Marine barracks in Lebanon, Khobar Towers, and the USS Cole. (He listed others) The lack of freedom in the ME made the area an incubator for terrorism. We do not treat terrorism as a law enforcement matter. We will face terrorism there so we do not to face them here in our own country.

Those who harbor terrorists will be on our list.

We will support democracy in the ME (Middle East). All people have the right to determine their own destiny. Freedom is a gift from the God Almighty. Freedom is the antitheses of terror.

We will support freedom and modernization. By doing this we will ensure our children are safe.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban supported and protected the terrorists who attacked us. Within a few weeks we defeated them and helped the people to have democracy. Our enemies saw progress, and fought against it. They attack the free institutions, they will fail. The future of Afghanistan belongs to the Afghan people.

In Lebanon, the UN forced Syria to leave. Hezbollah maintained a government within a government in the south. There they attacked Israel. The world community supported new democracy in Lebanon. Terrorists have no place in a free and democratic Lebanon.

Iran funds, arms and advises terrorists. They have had a hand in Iraq by arming and training the insurgents. They defy the UN. Nations are working together to stop Iran’s nuke program. It is time for Iran to make a choice, but there must be consequences and they must not be allowed to have nukes.

Iraq had an evil regime in Saddam Hussein. He defied UN, hid his WMD program, and shot at US and British planes enforcing no fly zones. Saddam is nowon trial. With the tyrant gone, the world is better off without him. Iraqi people have cast ballots, drafted a constitution, elected a government, in spite of the terrorists. Terrorists want to drive the US out of the ME to impose their dark vision on the ME. They use IEDs and assassinate leaders. Terrorists have failed to stop Iraqi democracy and they will fail to halt America or hinder their resolve.

The US commanders in Iraq say the country in not in a civil war which is only supported by a few people. 12 million voted in the last election. People have come a long way. Prime Minister Maliki says, “Iraqis have tasted freedom and they will defend it.” America is a patient nation as long as Iraq makes the necessary moves towards democracy. PM Maliki can count on the US.

I am giving the commanders a lot of latitude to fight this war. We are training Iraqi soldiers, police, and helping them become more capable. We will defeat the enemies of a free Iraq.

We can not expect immediate success. The American government is determined to help them succeed.

There is a lot of politics in Washington over the war in Iraq. Terrorists from all over the ME have come to Iraq to battle democracy. So much for a diversion. Iraq is central to GWOT. Pulling out now would be disastrous. Doing so would turn them over to Iran, and the terrorists would have new sanctuaries funded by oil. If the terrorists are not defeated there, then we will fight terrorists here in our streets. General Abizade says if we leave, they will follow us back here.

We will not leave until victory is achieved. It will require more sacrifice. And it will be a crushing defeat to our enemies. The world is watching, the forces of freedom will prevail. We have a choice. We can let the ME continue on its course and a generation from now the ME will have even more terrorists and WMDs as well. Or we can turn region into a democracy, a model for the rest of the ME to see, where neighbors do not attack their neighbors, where people have a voice in their government.

I see a day….when democracy will prevail. Freedom is always worth the sacrifice. Victory still depends on the resolve of the American people and patriots who are willing to fight for freedom. Will give our soldiers all the resources they need to accomplish their mission.

The President briefly spoke about Cpl. Adam Galvez which largest and longest applause. This guy is a true American hero. (as a side note, Adam’s brother father said it best, “You either support the war, or you don’t support the troops,” Tony Galvez said.)

This was a great speech the President gave. It was long on substance and short on hype. In brief, he said that Iraq is central to the GWOT, this will be a long war, a war we must win. I hope this new set of speeches President Bush gives this week will wake the American people up to what is at stake: the very security of the United States.

Tags: Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism, Iran, President Bush, Politics, Iraq, War by Chuck
No Comments »

I have found war protester Cindy Sheehan in a suit and tie and his name is Rocky Anderson, the mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah.  He is just as shrill and just as kooky as Cindy.  Rocky is joining a protest of President Bush as he speaks to the American Legion in a new effort to set the record straight on why we are in Iraq and remembering the attack on September 11^th, 2001.  The mayor has shown an incredible lack of class by joining the protests.  When the Democratic Party had their National Convention in Massachusetts, Governor Mitt Romney, a Republican, welcomed them even though he did not agree with many, if not most, of their stances.  In welcoming them, the Governor showed a lot of class.  But apparently class is lacking in the Democratic Party as shown by the behavior of the mayor in a very conservative state.  When the President comes to town, at the very least the mayor should be there to welcome him as a common courtesy.

But Rocky Anderson’s behavior has displayed for all to see, the tip of a much larger iceberg, Democrats have forgotten that we are at war.  Take for instance this poll taken by the Daily Kos, a popular website of the extreme left.  (Hat tip: Daily Kos via Right Wing News)

Ever since that fateful day in September, the Democratic Party has been in denial: denial that we were attacked by Islamofascists, and denial that we are at war.  Make no mistake about it; this is a war we must not lose.  For if we do the west as we know it is doomed.  Freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, freedom to be secure in our houses, and the right to a fair trial will all be gone if the Islamists win.  The Democrats philosophy towards the terrorists seems to be wrapped up in one little 1960s-70s slogan, “Why can’t we all just get along?”  They seem to think that by understanding our enemies, they will not hate us.  This is just wishful thinking, because the Islamists hate us for who we are.  They hate us for our rights, they hate us because of our culture, and they hate us because of our religions.  Sitting around in circles sing kum by yah with flowers in our hair just makes us quick and easy targets.

Donald Rumsfeld speaking before the American Legion convention in Salt Lake City, Utah has pretty much pigeon-holed the Democratic Party of today.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Tuesday accused critics of the Bush administration’s Iraq and counterterrorism policies of lacking the courage to fight terror.

In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the administration’s critics as suffering from “moral and intellectual confusion” about what threatens the nation’s security.

He went on to say that many critics have not learned from history’s lessons.  There is an history axiom which states, “Those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it.”  President Roosevelt knew the risks posed by inaction before World War II as did President Kennedy with the Cuban Missile Crisis and President Reagan with the Cold War.  These are men who faced a critical moment in history with decisiveness against many critics.  In this Global War on Terror, President Bush having learned from history knew doing nothing was the worst thing he could possibly do.  And so when we were attacked, this President faced a monumental decision either to send a few missiles into an empty desert and claim victory or to fight and win a long struggle against those who have been attacking this country for years.   With history in his corner, George W. Bush has become the first of what I hope will be many presidents who will declare war on terrorism.

Most of the people of Utah seem to understand and approve of how the President is conducting the war.  On the other hand, they do not approve of what the anti-war protesters are doing.  A poll of registered voters believes people like Cindy Sheehan and Mayor Rocky Anderson are undermining our war on terrorism.

The message seems to bolster a poll commissioned by The Salt Lake Tribune that shows 45 percent of Utahns believe anti-war demonstrators such as Anderson and Sheehan “aid the enemies of the U.S.” Some 27 percent say they “play an important role in the national debate over U.S. policy in Iraq.” Another 28 percent weren’t sure. The poll of 625 registered voters was conducted by the Washington, D.C.-based Mason-Dixon Polling & Research firm this month.

“Part of what undermines our strength is our enemies thinking we have weakness within our ranks,” [Jeff] Hartley [Utah Republican Party Executive Director] said. “If they can pressure us to cut and run and give up the fight . . . if politicians like Rocky Anderson prevail, then we’ll give up and quit.”

Jeff Harley is right.  These far left kooks are emboldening our enemies much like Jane Fonda did during the Vietnam War.  The actions of Sheehan and Anderson are helping our enemies and killing American soldiers.  The terrorists watch the news too.  They know if they kill enough soldiers, hold on just a little while longer, and if the ever compliant American media tell enough bad news; then the American people will demand the President pull the troops out of Iraq.

President Lincoln held tough against much public criticism and eventually won the Civil War.  President Roosevelt held tough when he fought Germany first and led the US in a victory against Nazism.  President Reagan held tough against public criticism and won the Cold War.  If President Bush and future presidents hold tough in the face of public criticism, the US will win in the GWOT.

Much of the public criticism against President Bush is from those few loud protesters who don’t like any war, even when this country is attacked as it was on September 11^th.  Whether we are at war with the terrorists is immaterial; they are at war with us.  A fact the far left moonbats seem to have forgotten.  The Democratic Party is a more than willing partner of the far left if it means money and winning elections.  The defeat of Joe Lieberman in Connecticut’s Democratic Party Primary shows there is little room in the party for warriors.  They might as well hold up a sign which reads, “Only wimps need apply”  If there is one thing Rocky Anderson has done, it is to show the rest of the United States that Democrats can not be trusted to keep us safe in the post 9/11 world.

Tags: Democrats, Terrorism, President Bush, Iraq, Politics, War by Chuck
No Comments »

No matter how you slice it, the US economy is slowing down as a cursory examination of the housing market will show.  Democrats are going to look at the news of the slower than expected home sales as an indication of how Republicans are bad for the economy.

More alarm bells for the stumbling housing market rang Thursday, as a government report on new home sales showed a bigger-than-expected drop in sales, along with a continued rise in unsold homes and a further weakening of prices in the closely watched sector. (snip)

The pace of new home sales is now down 21.6 percent from year-earlier levels, with every region of the country showing double-digit percentage declines compared to July 2005.

No doubt Howard Dean will attribute the slower sales to President Bush’s failed economic policies.  But slower home sales are more of an indication of how high interest rates are than anything else.  Current Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has shown a willingness to raise interest rates about a quarter percentage point per month for the last two years.  As the interest rates have risen, people have to pay more to buy their home.  Eventually the rate is to the point where people have had enough and they stop buying houses until the interest rate declines.  The only problem is that the housing market is a good reflection of the rest of the economy.  When the housing market starts to slide usually, the rest of the economy follows.

The US economy is like a huge locomotive with a series of brakes.  When the interest rate is raised as it was two years ago, the effects of the change may not be seen for a while.  Our engineer (Fed Chairman) sets a brake, and another, and another.  When the engineer notices the train is slowing, he starts releasing brakes.  The problem is that the train is already slowing down and there are still other brakes set.  The train will still continue to slow until enough brakes are removed for the train to start speeding up again.  The US economy is huge, so huge it takes a series of interest rate hikes to slow the economy down.  Our engineer, Bernanke, has set the brakes without waiting long enough to see what the effect is.  Sometimes raising the rate a quarter point may not be felt until six months have gone by.  So raising the rate steadily for two straight years is overkill.  Bernanke needs to slow down and take his time.  The US economy is too cumbersome for quick fixes.  But don’t expect the Democrats to understand this.  All they know is that a slowing economy is George Bush’s fault.  Then again, don’t they blame him for everything that goes awry.

Tags: Democrats, President Bush, Politics by Chuck
No Comments »

What is happening over at Google? After receiving a tip from my brother, I googled the word “failure” and came up with some of the usual stuff, Failure Magazine, the movie ‘Failure to Launch,’ heart failure and others. But the very first entry is concerning our President. Michael Moore is listed number 4. I don’t understand that either.

George W. Bush

Biography of the 43rd President of the United States. www.whitehouse.gov/president/gwbbio.html - 20k - Cached - Similar pages

What does his White House biography have to do with failure? I don’t know what determines how different items are listed, but this looks mighty suspicious to me. Does anyone know?

Update: A reader directed me to this website by Google which tells how certain people have manipulated the system by a practice called googlebombing.  Now I know.

Tags: President Bush, Bias, Culture by Chuck
1 Comment »

Is there any wonder MSNBC is at the very bottom of the rankings of the cable news networks, especially when there are still anchors like extreme liberal Chris Matthews on?  I do not watch any MSNBC programs, but I ran across the text of an interview Van Taylor had with Chris Matthews and Paul Hackett.  Taylor is currently trying to unseat Democrat Chet Edwards from Waco, Texas in US Congress TX-17.  The liberal bloggers are saying Taylor was out of his league.  After reading the text, I disagree.  Taylor was on message, was knowledgeable, and held his own even when he was rudely interrupted by both Matthews and Hackett.  The MSNBC anchors came across as biased, rude, shallow, ill-informed, and extremely partisan.

Matthews starts off the program with a short dialog, wrong of course, but I include it to show how far to the left Matthews and his program has turned.

CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC ANCHOR:  You know a Republican is in a political state of mind when he starts talking about the Democrat Party, Democrat Party.  Those are fighting words meant to tick off the Democrats, stir up Republicans.  Two weeks before Labor Day, the country‘s top Republican wants a tussle.  He wants to fight any Democrat who takes on his Iraq policy.  You talking to me?  I‘m never leaving Iraq.  Let‘s play HARDBALL.

Good evening I‘m Chris Matthews and welcome to HARDBALL.  At his press conference Monday, President Bush drew a partisan line in the sand on the war in Iraq, saying that withdrawing troops would be a disaster with this dire warning.

Huh?  How is saying withdrawing troops would be a disaster drawing a partisan line?  If you’re the great Chris Matthews, you don’t need to explain yourself.

Then they show a video clip with MSNBC correspondent David Shuster who gets his facts all messed up.

BUSH:  Imagine a world in which Saddam Hussein was there stirring up even more trouble in a part of the world that had so much resentment and so much hatred that people came and killed 3,000 of our citizens.

SHUSTER:  The problem is that none of the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqis.

BUSH:  What did Iraq have to do with what?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  The attack on the World Trade Center.

BUSH:  Nothing except for its part of—and nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack.

SHUSTER:  But before the war, President Bush himself suggested Iraq was involved.

No, President Bush never said that.  Osama bin Laden said he attacked the US because we had troops in Saudi Arabia.  We had troops in the Saudi Kingdom because of Saddam Hussein.  Shuster is being incredibly deceitful.  He twisted around Bush’s words to make his own point.  No wonder people do not trust MSNBC.

Chris Matthews bias shines through when he introduces Van Taylor as a Congressional Candidate while Paul Hackett is introduced as an IRAQ WAR VETERAN.  Van Taylor is also an Iraq War veteran, so why wasn’t he introduced the same way?  Maybe Hackett should have been introduced as ‘Paul Hackett, Failed Congressional Candidate.’  The point is, MSNBC is trying to make a point by influencing their viewers.

This is a typical statement by Paul Hackett.

HACKETT:  Chris, if I may interject—if I may interject, Chris, Van obviously doesn‘t understand the war on terror.  Where is Osama bin Laden?  Where is the 6‘2” white robe-dressed, left-handed Arab who is walking around in Pakistan or Afghanistan?  That was the war against those who attacked us on our soil.

War on terror?  I mean, that‘s a ridiculous soundbite.  Terror, as you know, Van, is a military strategy.  It‘s not a philosophy.  You are not going to defeat a strategy.  You are going to defeat a philosophy.  And if you want to defeat it, you have to address what compels those people to sacrifice their lives and kill innocent women and children.

No wonder Hackett lost his Congressional election in Ohio.  This is the liberal mantra, we just have to understand what it is that offends these people.  That way we can stop doing it and they will not attack us anymore.  What rubbish.

After reading the whole transcript, Chris Matthews and Paul Hackett come across as shallow, hide your head in the sand, cut-and-run Democrats.  As Matthews was saying goodbye to Hackett, he fawns all over him, telling Paul he needs to run for office again.  Chris just tells Van goodbye.  MSNBC’s low ratings are well deserved.  The behavior of Chris Matthews has ensured it.

Van Taylor came across as knowledgeable.  A review of just a couple of statements by Van Taylor will illustrate this fact.

TAYLOR:  Al Qaeda is trying to foment an insurgency in Iraq.  We have got to secure our country against terrorists and they are attacking us right now, U.S. forces are risking their lives fighting al Qaeda terrorists that seek to destroy our country and our way of life.  We have got to do whatever it takes to finish the job in Iraq and make sure that we give a secure country to our children.

TAYLOR:  OK, we have got to win the war on terror.  Al Qaeda is a vicious terrorist organization.  They are seeking to destroy our way of life.  They have come to this country.  They have attacked us.  They are attacking U.S. forces in Iraq.  They have attacked U.S. forces around the world.  They‘ve got to be dealt with.  You cannot put your head in the sand.  You cannot walk away.

Van Taylor is a guy who understands the problems with Iraq and knows what is at stake, our security and our freedoms.  We definitely need to be supporting Van Taylor over Chet Edwards in the Congressional election, the stakes are too high to make a mistake now.

Tags: President Bush, Democrats, Bias, Iraq, Politics, War by Chuck
No Comments »

Is there any wonder many Republicans do not like John McCain?  Laura at the Wide Awake Café says “I’m sure my children grew up thinking that “jerk” meant the rude person who drove his car right into my parking place……..

I have a new definition for jerk now: John McCain.”

McCain claims he is a Republican, but on several occasions he has acted more like a Democrat stabbing his party in the back.

The White House on Wednesday was playing down a remark from Republican Sen. John McCain a day earlier in which he said the Bush administration had misled Americans into believing the Iraq war would be “some kind of day at the beach.”

McCain, a longtime defender of the war, said he still does not believe it’s wise for the U.S. to start withdrawing forces from Iraq, but the administration should have been more forthcoming about the challenges the military would face there.

“I think one of the biggest mistakes we made was underestimating the size of the task and the sacrifices that would be required,” McCain said. “Stuff happens, mission accomplished, last throes, a few dead-enders. I’m just more familiar with those statements than anyone else because it grieves me so much that we had not told the American people how tough and difficult this task would be.”

The problem?  President Bush never made these comments.  He has consistently told the American people that this war would be long and difficult.  McCain is well aware of this fact.  He is playing to the crowd.  When a Republican starts acting like a Democrat, we are all in trouble.  We have heard the same old song and dance from the cut-and-run Democrats for three years now.  It is not any more believable now than it was back then.

McCain is a certified war hero having fought in the Vietnam war.  Consequently he was shot down and spent several years as a POW.  By everybody’s admittance, we did not know what we were getting into when we took over for the French after losing the Battle of Dienbienphu.  Our mindset was formed by the ‘domino theory’ that one country falling to communism would lead to another.  But in Iraq, things are different.  We had intelligence data from all over the world which said Saddam was developing WMDs.  We know he did have them at one time and have no evidence he destroyed them.  We know he harbored and supported terrorists.  And we know if we left Iraq today, Iran would take over.  So to say that the President mislead the country is misleading at best, deliberately lying at worst.  Iraq is not Vietnam and yet McCain acts as if it was.

The Arizona Senator must on some level believe that attacking the President on the war like a Democrat will help him win the Presidency in 2008.  But if he keeps attacking George Bush, he doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the Republican Presidential Primary, much less the Presidency.  He claims that leaving Iraq now would be even more dangerous.  Come on Johh, you can not have it both ways.  For a long time John McCain has snubbed the Republican Party becoming a media darling in the process.  Only lately has he become more ‘conservative.’  In the end the Senator may see Republicans snub him.

Tags: Iran, Democrats, Terrorism, History, President Bush, Politics, Iraq, War by Chuck
No Comments »

For eighteen years Joe Lieberman has been a Senator.  He rose to national prominence when Al Gore picked the Connecticut Democrat to be his running mate for the 2000 Presidential election.  Joe has been a ‘good’ Democrat having voted against George Bush 92% of the time (I would call anyone who votes against the President 92% of the time an obstructionist) Then we were attacked on 9/11 and Joe Lieberman did the unthinkable.  He supported President Bush in his attack on Saddam Hussein and still supports it today.  But supporting the President in a time of war is unpopular with rank-and-file Democrats, so he Joe lost the Democratic Primary to single issue anti-war candidate Ned Lamont.  Throughout all of this Lieberman has shown remarkable tenacity and has decided to run for the Connecticut Senate as an Independent.  Leftist Democrats like John Kerry have come out against his decision to run for the Senate as an Independent.

The run to the left fringe continues for failed presidential candidate John Kerry.  The Massachusetts liberal went full scale on the attack against Connecticut US Senator Joe Lieberman on Sunday when he appeared with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos.

According to a report on the ABC web site, Kerry accused the 2000 Democratic vice presidential candidate of “adopting the rhetoric of Dick Cheney,” on the issue of Iraq.

Just when I thought Joe Lieberman was showing some guts in supporting the war in Iraq specifically and the Global War on Terror generally, the Senator starts this ‘me too’ nonsense.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, attacked by fellow Democrats as being too close to the White House on the Iraq War, on Sunday called on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to resign but said the United States cannot “walk away” from the Iraqis.

Democrats have earned their reputation as ‘cut-and-run Democrats.’  The lone exception to this rule was Joe Lieberman who saw the war in Iraq for what it was, a small piece of the GWOT.  As the Democrats turned against the war, the Main Stream Media obediently followed.  As the MSM began to toe the Democratic Party line, the American public who were only allowed to see the bad in Iraq began to buy into the ‘we can not win in Iraq’ mantra.  Joe’s primary loss to Ned Lamont was one of the results and seemed to have scared the Senator.

Not everyone is buying Lieberman’s change in positions.  Even Ned Lamont found the Senator’s newfound position on Iraq hard to swallow.

“His new found ‘criticism’ of the war won’t convince Connecticut voters after so many years of stubbornly rubber-stamping Bush’s failed policies,” the statement said.

What happened to the Senator’s renown independent streak?  Where are his guts?  I guess he is afraid of losing his seat in the Senate if he continues to unconditionally support the war.  While I did not like the old Lieberman very much, I dislike the new Lieberman even more.

Tags: Democrats, President Bush, Bias, Politics, War by Chuck
No Comments »