How close, you ask? Try a 1 point lead for the Nuanced Nuisance over Bush if you figure Rabid Ralphie into the mix. Subtract Nader from the equation and it's a massive 2 point lead for the Botoxed Wonder From Eastern Massachusetts.
No wonder KampKerry is sending the newly stitched up Bubba to Philly later this week....and no wonder W was in south Jersey this week hammering Kerry like a nail.]]>Generalhttp://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=101Wed, 20 Oct 2004 22:18:33 -0700<![CDATA[Should We Be Afraid Yet?]]>
http://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=100
inventive get out the vote ideas, the infamous "handbook", and other fun things, now there's this gem:
Yep. Screw the results, we'll just declare victory and sue anyone that says otherwise. Very dangerous tactic here, seeing that not a lot of folks are gonna take this if Kerry gets smacked down in the Electoral College.
It gets even better as this idea gets an even deeper look over at NRO's Kerry Spot.
Like I stated in the title...should we be afraid of these goobers trying to pull off something very much illegal? I'm concerned to say the least. At this rate, the Dems are doing a WONDERFUL job in possibly turning the US electoral process into something we'd have seen in places like Zimbabwe, Venezuela, or a Milosevic-run Serbia.
Somewhere, up above, our Founding Fathers must be looking down upon this and shaking their heads....]]>Generalhttp://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=100Wed, 20 Oct 2004 22:12:50 -0700<![CDATA[RE: THK....FYI...STFU!]]>
http://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=99
Evidently Cruella De Condiments never met a microphone or a tape recorder she didn't like...and once again, she puts her foot into her mouth yet again...thanks to a tiny interview in USA Today. (hat tip: Blogs For Bush)
Read it for yourself, but I'll pass along the money quote, so to speak....
Q: You'd be different from Laura Bush?
A: Well, you know, I don't know Laura Bush. But she seems to be calm, and she has a sparkle in her eye, which is good. But I don't know that she's ever had a real job — I mean, since she's been grown up. So her experience and her validation comes from important things, but different things. And I'm older, and my validation of what I do and what I believe and my experience is a little bit bigger — because I'm older, and I've had different experiences. And it's not a criticism of her. It's just, you know, what life is about.
Yep, marrying condiment heirs and inheriting their estates after they buy the farm in an unfortunate accident is SUCH a rewarding and more fulfilling career track than getting one's Master's and working as a librarian and teacher (like Laura did). Yep, color me and the rest of the public impressed.
However, it seems that Cruella De Condiments has learned somewhat from her past transgressions....namely, she issued an apology. However, as the link states, the stated apology is missing from one site you'd think it should be running at...namely Kamp Kerry.com
Then again, I'm not shocked...it's more or less typical.
]]>Generalhttp://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=99Wed, 20 Oct 2004 21:57:38 -0700<![CDATA[There's Something About Mary: A Slight Rant On Same Sex Marriage]]>
http://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=98
Well, as I look back, the crack by John Edwards about the sexuality of VP Dick Cheney's daughter Mary in the VP debate was a bit low, even for a lawyer. At the time, I took the road that the VP did and let it slide. OK, I thought, it was a one shot deal. Nothing more..
Wellp, leave it to Kamp Kerry to hit bottom and bust out the mining equipment. In the last debate out in Arizona, what does John Kerry do? Parrot his moronic VP nominee in dragging out Mary. Of course the President didn't take the bait and let Kerry make a fool of himself.
Then of course, there was Mary Beth Cahill coming out after the final debate and stating that Mary Cheney and her sexuality was "fair game." That's when the warning lights went off. Also hearing reports that along Spin Alley at the final debate that the press were audibly groaning when Kerry spoke those magic words, "Mary Cheney, who is a lesbian." made me think that the Kerry Kamp had just gone ahead and had it's Kitty Dukakis Moment*.
Now, the second time around and the mistake of making it "fair game" wasn't going to win Kerry/Edwards any points. And it also gave the Cheneys a chance to fire back, as Lynne did the next day, by stating that Kerry was "not a good man". Totally entitled, IMO, seeing that Kerry and Edwards were taking shots at HER child. Going after kids in a campaign is a strict no-no last time I checked.
Of course, a much smarter campaign would have let this dog lie. Not so the MENSA members running the Kerry campaign. Shortly after Lynne Cheney struck back as only a mom could do, Elizabeth Edwards decided to jump in the fray, insinuating that the Cheneys were "ashamed" of the fact that Mary happened to be a lesbian. Naturally, by deciding to insert her foot in her mouth instead of a Twinkie, Lizzie made things a whole heck of a lot worse for the Dems.
Now, time for my 2 cents on the matter...
I could care less that Mary Cheney is a lesbian. Heck, if she's happy with a man, a woman, a sheep, a blowup doll, a hot apple pie, I DON'T CARE. it doesn't make her any less of a person in my eyes because she happens to prefer women to men..and it sure as heck doesn't make her any less in Dick and Lynne's eyes either. To them, she's their daughter and that's what's important. What she or any other person in this country does behind closed doors is their business and theirs alone, as long as nobody's being unduly forced into it or getting killed because of it.
It kinda dovetails into my views on the whole same-sex marrage thing. I'll go on the record. I'm NOT in favor of same-sex marrage. However, I am in favor of civil unions for same-sex couples with full benefits and other rights as married hetero couples that would ONLY APPLY for same-sex couples (meaning there's no way that a man and woman who lived together could get a civil union in place of a marrage). I'm NOT in favor of the Defense Of Marrage Amendment only because I'm not a fan of monkeying around with the Constitution, especially when the Defense Of Marrage Act is already on the books (and it was passed under Bubba).
However, what happened in Massachusetts (where the SC overruled the Legislature and made same-sex marrage legal) is what I and a lot of other folks have a problem with. To me, let the Legislative Branch do it's job and let's not have activist judges write laws from the bench. Handle it like the folks in Oregon are this year, with a state wide referendum on the matter. If they pass it, fine. If not, too bad. It's the WILL OF THE PEOPLE, not the WILL OF THE JUDGES last time I checked.
*--The Kitty Dukakis Moment relates back to the 1988 Presidential Debates when Dem nominee Michael Dukakis fumbled an easy question on capital punishment, saying he wouldn't have endorsed it even if someone had raped and killed his wife. Needless to say, it started The Duke on his long slide to an electoral smackdown at the hands of Bush 41.
]]>Generalhttp://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=98Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:11:06 -0700<![CDATA[CNNs Crossfire Becomes OpenFire]]>
http://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=97
The Daily Show's Jon Stewart. Actually, "snippy" would be a mild understatement...more like downright nasty.
Yep, in the words of the WWE's Jim Ross, this one was an ol' fashioned slobberknocker....and it was still going on Monday...
"I thought that he looked ridiculous," Carlson said in an interview Monday, "and I think the tape makes that clear."
Carlson said Stewart continued lecturing the "Crossfire" crew after the show went off the air. "I wasn't offended as much as I was unimpressed," he said.
Stewart wasn't talking about the confrontation on Monday, a spokesman said. Comedy Central executive Tony Fox said there may be some regret over the vulgarity, but that Stewart has been a longtime critic of cable news networks and their political argument shows.
The comedian hasn't gone out of his way to endorse Kerry. In a public forum last week in New York, he was asked who he would vote for, and he said he'd back the Democrat.
Carlson noted that many of the great comedians kept their political opinions to themselves, not for fear of offending anyone, but because it could hurt their art.
"You're selling out," he said. "If you are a satirist or an acute social observer, and he is, and all of a sudden you suspend disbelief on someone or suck up rather than prod or poke someone, people will look at you and say, `Even if I agree with you, I don't like it,"' he said.
Fair criticisms from the bowtied one. If a comedian makes it known they stand one way or another on politics, they stand a chance of ticking off part of their fanbase. Personally, I'd rather stick with a comic that hits both sides with deadly accuracy. And yes, I'm man enough to laugh at jokes about the guy I support. Heck, some of the good Bush jokes out there are quite funny and I've laughed at some of the riffs on Bush on The Tonight Show or Late Night or The Late Show.
Anyways, what started this whole bruhaha? Here's some of the choice shots from Carlson and Stewart...
STEWART: What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery...
CARLSON: You had John Kerry on your show and you sniff his throne [by throwing him softball questions], and you're accusing us of partisan hackery?
STEWART: Absolutely...You're on CNN. The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls....
CARLSON: ...There's no reason for you -- when you have this marvelous opportunity not to be the guy's butt boy, to go ahead and be his butt boy. Come on. It's embarrassing.
Having watched the interview of Kerry on The Daily Show, I'd have to agree with Carlson. Those were some softies that Jon was tossing to the Nuanced One. Then again, it was no different than what the NY Times or ABC has done in the past.
After that, well it went downhill in a hurry....I won't parse anymore from the CNN transcript, just read for yourself..and be warned as Stewart did cross the line a bit in his description of Carlson (think nickname for Richard Nixon and do the math)...
]]>Generalhttp://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=97Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:47:58 -0700<![CDATA[New Dem Push: Crack The Vote™]]>
http://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=96
Seems out in the Toledo, Ohio area, they have a new tactic...
Under normal circumstances, this would be funnier than anything I've seen in ages. However, seeing that Ohio is a battleground state, I'm more sickened than anything.
In the rush to get new voters on the rolls for the upcoming election, a representative of the NAACP Voter Fund paid off a volunteer to with crack cocaine to get new voter registration cards filled out. In itself, this would be bad enough. However, nobody ever said a guy on crack was the smartest tool in the ol' shed. Out of 130 completed forms, 124 were phonies.
Some of the names registered by this loon...
Mary Poppins
Jeffrey Dahlmer
Michael Jordan
Dick Tracy
Brett Favre
Janet Jackson
George Foreman
Now, there's always a cosmic chance that there could be a few folks in the greater Toledo area with those names, but those chances are about the same as me hitting Powerball.
Not to sound too alarmist, but I have a feeling that this is only the tip of the iceberg. The next 2 weeks and beyond are NOT going to be fun times.
]]>Generalhttp://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=96Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:27:44 -0700<![CDATA[Jimmy Carter....An Idiot In 1980, An Idiot in 2004]]>
http://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=95
This time Jimmah gives us a history lesson..and seeing I'm a history major (I have the sheepskin to prove it), this was news to me. Thanks to the transcript from last night's show, I was able to catch this (seeing that like 90% of America, my TV was squarely flipping inbetween the Sox-Yanks and 'Stros-Redbirds..).(hat tip to LGF)
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you the question about—this is going to cause some trouble with people—but as an historian now and studying the Revolutionary War as it was fought out in the South in those last years of the War, insurgency against a powerful British force, do you see any parallels between the fighting that we did on our side and the fighting that is going on in Iraq today?
Wow, Fat Crissy starts it off by framing a question about the entire Iraq situation which makes the Jihadi Scum look like an "insurgency". Hmmm...where oh where have I heard this steaming pile of manure before? Oh yah, wasn't it Michigan Fats who called the Jihadis "minutemen" a while back? Yep, that al-Zarqawi. He's a regular Thomas Frickin Jefferson. And that al-Sadr. I see parallels between him and the likes of a Sam Adams. Oh yah. *author is rolling eyes at this point*
Of course, any NORMAL ex-President would avoid this question like the frickin' plague. Not the Man From Plains. Nosiree. Well, here's the answer...
CARTER: Well, one parallel is that the Revolutionary War, more than any other war up until recently, has been the most bloody war we’ve fought. I think another parallel is that in some ways the Revolutionary War could have been avoided. It was an unnecessary war.
Wow. First, the Revolution was the most bloodiest war in our history. Wellp, Jimbo, too bad the numbers have it well against you. There was this tiny dust-up in years 1861 to 1865 that kinda trumps this. Kinda has some special meaning to me, seeing I went to college in SE Pennsylvania about 30 min. due east of a little town called Gettysburg. I seem to remember something about a 3 day battle there back around July 1863 that saw a lot of Americans die. Oh yah, I also seem to remember that I was about a 90 min. drive from a little town in Maryland called Sharpsburg...there's a little creek there, called Antietam. Think there was a battle fought there in 1862 that has the same name. Also seem to remember that it was the bloodiest day in American history ever, seeing the butcher's bill from that little conflict was higher than all the casulties in any previous war fought by the US COMBINED. Oh yah, one last thing...I seem to remember from my studies that in the battle of Cold Harbor (just outside of Richmond), the Union Army lost more men than the Continental Army did in 6 years of war vs. the British in a MATTER OF MINUTES.
As for the Revolutionary War being avoidable, well the Continental Congress tried that. Something about the Olive Branch Petition they sent off to Westminster to King George III and his government. However, the King and Parliament kinda scoffed at that. Oops. Then again, if the Crown had just let a few reps from the Colonies represent themselves over at Parliament, I don't think the folks here would have had too much of a problem with the taxes the Crown kinda forced on the Colonists. Still, things happened the way they did, and ya know what, it turned out pretty darn well. I'm happy enough to live in a country where Jimmy Carter can say something like this and I have the right to call him a blithering idiot.
So, in closing, I'll say this, when it comes to historians, I'll take my chances with the likes of Victor Davis Hansen, a Stephen Ambrose, or a John Keegan. I sure as heck wouldn't take my chances on a man that was a miserable failure as the leader of the free world (Remember, who was on watch when the Mad Mullahs took over Iran? Who was it that had the comments about "malaise" again? I rest my case.)
]]>Generalhttp://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=95Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:13:50 -0700<![CDATA[Yet Another Abject Apology]]>
http://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=94
I know I haven't posted in ages. Work, my weekend activities (as in working at the local Victory HQ trying to ensure that the President can make a move in the numbers here in the deep blue state of Connecticut), and the Playoffs have cut into my time. Sadly, the Factory took the brunt of it.
Seeing there's 14 days to go, I'll make darn sure I'm on top of things down the stretch...
]]>Generalhttp://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=94Tue, 19 Oct 2004 20:45:25 -0700<![CDATA[Yep, It Can Sure Happen Here Too....]]>
http://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=93
Leader Of Waterbury Mosque's House Raided By Feds (linkage: Waterbury Republican-American)
Yep, seems the fella in charge of Waterbury's mosque did some charity work...and well, read on and see who this charity might have links to....
A leading figure in Greater Waterbury's faith community reacted with outrage Thursday to the news that federal agents raided a local Muslim leader's Wolcott home, apparently as part of a terrorism investigation.
Majeed Sharif, president of the United Muslim Mosque in Waterbury, was not arrested and it is unclear what, if anything, was seized from his home Wednesday. Sharif has ties to an international Muslim charity headquartered in the Sudan that the Treasury Department accused Wednesday of funneling money to Osama bin Laden, Al-Qaida, Hamas and the Taliban.
Like I said...nice to see things like that on the top fold of the local paper. For the record, the Feds also hit the HQ of this charity, the Islamic American Relief Agency, in Columbia, Missouri.
The story in the local paper goes on to detail comments from one of the leaders in the interfaith groups in the area...who also happens to be the reverend over at the local Methodist church. Seeing we all live in a pretty small town, I really shouldn't be too critical of this spokesperson, but this one comment kinda rankled me a bit....
"Those of us who really try to work for more understanding, this sets us back, and racial profiling of any dimension sets us back as people of faith," [the Reverend] said. "I understand they were not harassed, but agents came into their house; they probably will go to the mosque looking through papers. It's really, it's an invasion."
Sorry, Reverend. When your pal Sharif there is listed on IARA paperwork as a representative and there's a good chance this group JUST MIGHT HAVE funnelled money to folks that want us kinda dead, it is NOT racial profiling. It's more like trying to keep the likes of AQ, OBL, and Hamas from getting more cash to buy something that would be used against us (think explosive and not very healthy for the surrounding area).
Dunno, but when it comes to the jihadis, I kind of subscribe to the "Darth Sidious Rule"...known as..."Wipe them out.....all of them." Harsh? Yep. Then again, unlike some politicians, having some of the jihadis park an airplane or two into some rather recognizable buildings is hardly a nuisance....it's more like a death wish on their part.
]]>Generalhttp://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=93Fri, 15 Oct 2004 21:11:03 -0700<![CDATA[More Abject Apologies From Your Humble Correspondant]]>
http://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=92
Plenty of good stuff coming up....]]>Generalhttp://cluebatfactory.us/nucleus/index.php?itemid=92Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:09:44 -0700