Posted on 10/11/2004 5:04:17 AM PDT by BigWaveBetty
Chrissy Matthews has gone around the bend...again. On tonight's show,he has now mentioned the "rumor" about Bush having an IFB in his ear to get help "in the debate last weekend". First, the rumor is about the first debate, not the one last weekend. Mostly, though, it's a RUMOR---based on a crease in the back of Bush's jacket. I'm gobsmacked that Chris has stooped to spreading trash like this...notably since he never picked up rumors about Kerry having notes at the same debate.
Chris has also brought up stem cell several times in the first 20 min. of his show...
[breathlessly] "Will Kerry release the taped message he got from Chris Reeves"?
That's pitiful, hoping to boost Kerry's campaign from the grave.
I've always given Chris a little credit for having a sense of decency missing in most Rats. But he's drunk the kool-aid now. I can only hope to have the pleasure of watching his sulky misery on election night.
I just finished reading a medical thriller by Robin Cook, SEIZURE. A good read about embryonic stem cell research and also thought provoking about the potential problems (i.e. impregnating young women with female fetuses and harvesting them at 5 months) vs the promising results for Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases.
Christ Matthews is a jerk. I think W was wired but for security reasons not for debate help. (so SS could communicate with him etc).
Barbara Bush, right, daughter of First Lady Laura Bush, left, introduced her mother to a crowd of over 1000 Bush supporters Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2004 in Las Cruces, N.M. (AP Photo/Bobbie Hernandez)
OK, I get your point. I always find it a bit suspect that any government entity (NIH in this case) can't find a way to spend every dollar it is awarded by the Congress. If it is true (and I admire Krauthammer emmensely) then it sure isn't Bush's fault that NIH isn't spending the money/there aren't enough original proposals to warrant awarding the money.
s/b "immensely" (I hate it that my spelling has deteriorated with age. Absolutely hate it.)
Yep - it doesn't get any better with the passage of time.
Trust me on this one, K.
All we can do, is eat more BBQue.
Cheers.
Watching Laura on LKL...I forgot until about 8:40! She's fabulous, of course.
I just thought of another good reason we just have to re-elect Dubya: Twin wedding!
Dang Lod, that sounds like a really good therapy - MORE BBQ. Sign me up!
Hi
exhausted here. too tired to tell about it. Bush in Cedar Rapids Friday. I'm not going, I've just got too much to do.
" Freshly Botoxed, gee, how could you tell?"
Freshly Botoxed? He looks more like he's freshly embalmed.
Good One!
CLINTON. "Very excited " is the exact wording on how he feels about next month's opening of his library. More folk than the entire population of Little Rock have been invited. More folk than he even mentioned in that 1,000-page book are coming. VIPs in Asia are flying over for it.
So, meanwhile, how's he feeling? The exact wording is: "He's taking walks. He gets tired but he's feeling better." Also: "He's eager to participate in the current election but so far he isn't."
And how does he pass the time? Reading historical or biographical books like the one lawyer pal Susan Thomases gave him. It's "Elizabeth the First," about the 500 years ago most powerful Queen of England ever.
Must be the guy's boning up on Hillary's future reign.
______________
I always figured the Hildebeaste as more of a Marie Antoinette kind of gal. Perhaps Blubba should read a bio of John and Abigail Adams. He might learn something.
Michael Goodwin
NY Daily News
Kerry's scary on terrorism - Unchanged by 9/11, he says, and no real ideas about what to do
In recent weeks, I was beginning to think that maybe, just maybe, John Kerry was waking up to the need to be ruthless on terrorism. He talked increasingly tough, saying in the second debate, "I will not stop in our effort to hunt down and kill the terrorists."
Boy, do I feel stupid. Comes now startling evidence that Kerry doesn't have a plan, or even much of a thought, about the greatest problem in the world today.
During long interviews on the subject with The New York Times Magazine, Kerry seemed to play down terrorism. He even made the shocking claim that 9/11 "didn't change me much at all."
That's one dumb thought a wanna-be commander-in-chief ought to keep to himself.
The article is a devastating portrait of the candidate as an empty suit. In it, Kerry doesn't have much to say about terrorism, nor does he seem even to think much about it.
The article has received lots of attention because Team Bush's Gotcha Gang jumped on this Kerry remark: "We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives but they're a nuisance. As a former law enforcement person, I know we're never going to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling."
The Bushies put out a TV ad saying the remark shows Kerry doesn't understand terror. President Bush, Vice President Cheney and surrogates like Rudy Giuliani cited the quote as proof Kerry lacks resolve.
The Bushies are only half-right. It's not what Kerry said that's the problem. It's what he didn't say that is truly frightening.
The author, Matt Bai, struggles mightily to divine just what the Democrat thinks and would do were he elected. Alas, he struggles in vain. Over three interviews, Kerry offers nothing more meaty than his standard stump speech - he would be more "effective" than Bush.
"He told me he would wage a more 'effective' war on terror no less than 18 times in two hours," Bai writes. "The question, of course, was how."
Bai's answer: "He would begin, if sworn into office, by going immediately to the United Nations to deliver a speech recasting American foreign policy."
That wouldn't help on Iraq, since most of our "allies" were reaping the benefits of billions in bribes and secret trade with Saddam Hussein.
But Bai plunges on. After interviewing Kerry's friends and aides, he comes away with a sketchy vision of a Kerry presidency that starts and ends with a dedication to diplomacy. The rest is the author's attempt to fashion a comprehensive Kerry Doctrine - even though he concedes Kerry has not offered one.
"One can infer ...," Bai writes in a typical passage in which he tries to make a cloth out of loose threads, "that if Kerry were able to speak less guardedly, in a less treacherous atmosphere than a political campaign, he might say, as some of his advisers do, that we are not in an actual war on terror."
Right - no war. Try selling that to the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.
This is scary stuff. And for those who read all the way to the end, the author suggests he recognizes the vacuum he has glimpsed.
"I came to understand ... the attacks really had not changed the way Kerry viewed or talked about terrorism," Bai writes.
His verdict is that Kerry's "vision might have seemed more satisfying - and would have been easier to talk about in a political campaign - in a world where the twin towers still stood."
I take that to mean Kerry might have been a good President before Sept. 11, 2001. Sounds right to me.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/241762p-207055c.html
.... Schwarzenegger also described the moment when he told his wife, Maria Shriver, that he wanted to run for office. "We were sitting in the Jacuzzi one day and I said I wanted to run for governor - and she started shaking and crying," he revealed.
"It was very tough for her, but her mother - Eunice Kennedy [Shriver] - was in favor of me running, so she talked to Maria and she finally agreed." ....
____________________
Remember a few days ago, when I quoted Teresa Heinz Kerry touring the flood-ravaged communities near Pittsburgh, and she said that she wanted to see the damage but, of course, there was nothing she could do to help? Looks like Mel Gibson could teach her a thing or two:
Mel Gibson is sharing his box-office bonanza from "The Passion of The Christ" with the sick children of the world. The filmmaker just donated $5 million to L.A.'s Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and another $5 million to Mattel Children's Hospital at UCLA. The money is earmarked for pediatric patients from countries where they can't find, or afford, suitable medical care. Gibson has been working behind the scenes with the Healing the Children project. A source close to the charity confirms that Gibson donated more than $1.5 million to bankroll the 23-hour surgery in 2002 for conjoined twins Maria de Jesus and Maria Teresa Quiej Alvarez at the UCLA medical center.
Today he'll be campaigning in Madison, Wis., for John Kerry and will deliver two environmentally themed speeches on the candidate's behalf.
Madison, Wisconsin? Gee, do you think he'll find any likeminded enviroweenie socialists there?
Mornin', M. Need a whole pot before my synapses start firing.
Here's the link: Pushing to be Counted. And here's my letter to the Post's ombudsman who, in my estimation, has been fairly balanced in the past.
Dear Mr. Getler,I'm a Republican, so you may dismiss my anger over this article. I hope you will continue reading.
This article could be summarized in one sentence : "GOP officials in Florida are racists and are preventing blacks from voting". The reporters couldn't wait to work in a reference to "closed school house doors"...it's in paragraph 3. Later there's a quote invoking George Wallace. They even managed to work in Ax Handle Saturday, a 44-year-old disgraceful event. Certainly those were shameful times, but resurrecting them so prominently in this context is paramount to pouring gasoline on a fire.
Here is just one example of the sloppy and inflammatory language in the article:
On page 1:Summary: the new black voter registration rate, likely Democratic, was 3-1/2 times higher than new white voters (21% vs. 6%).
From the 2000 election to August 2004, nearly 200,000 black voters were added to the rolls in Florida, a 21 percent increase in large part because of registration drives by groups including America Coming Together. Registration by white voters increased almost 6 percent. Black people overwhelmingly vote Democratic...Five paragraphs later:3-1/2 times more registrations (likely Democrat), 3 times more flagged forms. No disparity, right? No information is offered that would attribute this to anything other than the law of averages. But, just in case the reader missed the reporters' point, the last sentence leads one to conclude that blacks are being disenranchised at a disproportionate rate.
A Washington Post analysis found nearly three times the number of flagged Democratic registrations as Republican. Broken down by race, no group had more flagged registrations than blacks.Early voting sites---not enough and not open on Sunday. Purging felons---the reporters make it clear they believe such laws are discriminatory, but they offer no proof. "Carlberg's office purges an average of 140 felons a month." The only example: a felon, legally purged from the rolls. In example after example, the reporters say the registration offices are following the law, but they do so in a way that implies they are manipulating the law. The reporters' treatment of the local election official was smug and dismissive, despite his having been sandbagged in a media-driven event.
Lastly, I read this article in the context of a highly-charged election. There have been dozens of recent articles throughout the country about problems with sloppy and fraudulent voter registration practices. Most involved "voter registration drives" like the one in this article. But that is not noted in this article, nor has the Post given prominent coverage to those incidents. I'm really curious to know why there are such widespread problems with the forms turned in by those groups. What is so hard about filling out the forms, especially if one considers that the people filling them out were hired for that specific task and are said to have been trained on how to do it? I read most national newspapers every day on-line and, as of this writing, no major investigative pieces have been written about this widespread phenomenon. It seems to me this is likely to be a major story after the election, given the Democratic Party's evident intent to cry foul over any problems at the polling place. Wouldn't it be wise to investigate it now, before we are in the heat of any post-election disputes? Is there more here than simple sloppiness? We don't know because, to date, no national newspaper has done an investigaton.
I am so disappointed in the Post's treatment of this story. I've always held your paper in very high esteem. But this article and it's prominent placement lead me to conclude that your editors still believe Southern whites (and perhaps Republicans in general) are closet racists practicing clever new forms of Jim Crow. That really hurts. I now feel it necessary to assure you that I would be as outraged as anyone else if anyone, black or white, was being wrongfully denied the right to vote. There are many grounds upon which to disagree politically, but the racist Republican stereotype is so beneficial to the Democrats, and harmful to Republicans, that your editors should have been much more careful not to let it creep into the Post's front page.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.