That's Karl Rove under the wheels of Air Force One.
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
Pic of the Day
Gosh, something evil in me likes this:
That's Karl Rove under the wheels of Air Force One.
That's Karl Rove under the wheels of Air Force One.
Feeling the Draft
The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Feeling the Draft
For those of you concerned about a draft, this column will not help you feel more secure.
I doubt that Bush has any intentions to reinstate the draft, but his lack of foresight and doctrine of democracy by force leave us in a dangerous position. Any new military action, pre-emption against Syria or Iran, or defending an attack at home, while maintaining the same troop level in Iraq would give them no choice but to begin drafting.
Paul Krugman, the column's author, is an economist, so I am a bit more skeptical of columns that stretch too far out of that field. He has some good stuff here, though.
The administration's strategy of denial in the face of these realities was illustrated by a revealing moment during the second presidential debate. After Senator John Kerry described the stop-loss policy as a "backdoor draft," Charles Gibson, the moderator, tried to get a follow-up response from President Bush: "And with reservists being held on duty --"
At that point Mr. Bush cut Mr. Gibson off and changed the subject from the plight of the reservists to the honor of our Polish allies, ending what he obviously viewed as a dangerous line of questioning.
And during the third debate, Mr. Bush tried to minimize the issue, saying that the reservists being sent to Iraq "didn't view their service as a backdoor draft. They viewed their service as an opportunity to serve their country." In that case, why are they being forced, rather than asked, to continue that service?
For those of you concerned about a draft, this column will not help you feel more secure.
I doubt that Bush has any intentions to reinstate the draft, but his lack of foresight and doctrine of democracy by force leave us in a dangerous position. Any new military action, pre-emption against Syria or Iran, or defending an attack at home, while maintaining the same troop level in Iraq would give them no choice but to begin drafting.
Paul Krugman, the column's author, is an economist, so I am a bit more skeptical of columns that stretch too far out of that field. He has some good stuff here, though.
The administration's strategy of denial in the face of these realities was illustrated by a revealing moment during the second presidential debate. After Senator John Kerry described the stop-loss policy as a "backdoor draft," Charles Gibson, the moderator, tried to get a follow-up response from President Bush: "And with reservists being held on duty --"
At that point Mr. Bush cut Mr. Gibson off and changed the subject from the plight of the reservists to the honor of our Polish allies, ending what he obviously viewed as a dangerous line of questioning.
And during the third debate, Mr. Bush tried to minimize the issue, saying that the reservists being sent to Iraq "didn't view their service as a backdoor draft. They viewed their service as an opportunity to serve their country." In that case, why are they being forced, rather than asked, to continue that service?
Monday, October 18, 2004
John Kerry for President
The New York Times > Opinion > John Kerry for President
In case you missed it, the NYT endorsement of John Kerry:
Mr. Kerry has the capacity to do far, far better. He has a willingness - sorely missing in Washington these days - to reach across the aisle. We are relieved that he is a strong defender of civil rights, that he would remove unnecessary restrictions on stem cell research and that he understands the concept of separation of church and state. We appreciate his sensible plan to provide health coverage for most of the people who currently do without.
Mr. Kerry has an aggressive and in some cases innovative package of ideas about energy, aimed at addressing global warming and oil dependency. He is a longtime advocate of deficit reduction. In the Senate, he worked with John McCain in restoring relations between the United States and Vietnam, and led investigations of the way the international financial system has been gamed to permit the laundering of drug and terror money. He has always understood that America's appropriate role in world affairs is as leader of a willing community of nations, not in my-way-or-the-highway domination.
We look back on the past four years with hearts nearly breaking, both for the lives unnecessarily lost and for the opportunities so casually wasted. Time and again, history invited George W. Bush to play a heroic role, and time and again he chose the wrong course. We believe that with John Kerry as president, the nation will do better.
In case you missed it, the NYT endorsement of John Kerry:
Mr. Kerry has the capacity to do far, far better. He has a willingness - sorely missing in Washington these days - to reach across the aisle. We are relieved that he is a strong defender of civil rights, that he would remove unnecessary restrictions on stem cell research and that he understands the concept of separation of church and state. We appreciate his sensible plan to provide health coverage for most of the people who currently do without.
Mr. Kerry has an aggressive and in some cases innovative package of ideas about energy, aimed at addressing global warming and oil dependency. He is a longtime advocate of deficit reduction. In the Senate, he worked with John McCain in restoring relations between the United States and Vietnam, and led investigations of the way the international financial system has been gamed to permit the laundering of drug and terror money. He has always understood that America's appropriate role in world affairs is as leader of a willing community of nations, not in my-way-or-the-highway domination.
We look back on the past four years with hearts nearly breaking, both for the lives unnecessarily lost and for the opportunities so casually wasted. Time and again, history invited George W. Bush to play a heroic role, and time and again he chose the wrong course. We believe that with John Kerry as president, the nation will do better.
Thursday, October 14, 2004
Debate Three
Well, a busy schedule has forced me to limit my posts and also prevented me from seeing last night's debate. My analysis comes from what is being said in the press, and let's keep in mind that this is how most voters will get their information.
Overall, another Kerry win. A Kerry sweep, they say. Bush again appears to have given up on the middle, the undecided, and is focusing on rallying the base. By Kerry reaching to the center it makes him look like he cares more about the average American. Who can say which strategy wins more votes (in the states where that matters)?
And let's clear this up before it gets any more traction. Mary Cheney is out, Dick has mentioned her sexuality on the stump, and she WORKS for the campaign. A simple mention of her is entirely legitimate. Did Kerry smear her? Did he make fun of her sexuality? NO. It may have been an unnecessary comment, but it shows the hypocrisy in the Bush stance.
Where do we go from here? Well, in states in play like Colorado, we'll see more ads, more visits, more ground game. In the press we'll see a repeat of the "Kerry surge" from Iowa and pondering on how Bush can maintain his position. From the spinners? More nonsense and more ugliness. The Lynne Cheney response was planned and coordinated, mind you.
With any luck, it'll all be over on Nov. 3. Until it goes to court, that is.
Overall, another Kerry win. A Kerry sweep, they say. Bush again appears to have given up on the middle, the undecided, and is focusing on rallying the base. By Kerry reaching to the center it makes him look like he cares more about the average American. Who can say which strategy wins more votes (in the states where that matters)?
And let's clear this up before it gets any more traction. Mary Cheney is out, Dick has mentioned her sexuality on the stump, and she WORKS for the campaign. A simple mention of her is entirely legitimate. Did Kerry smear her? Did he make fun of her sexuality? NO. It may have been an unnecessary comment, but it shows the hypocrisy in the Bush stance.
Where do we go from here? Well, in states in play like Colorado, we'll see more ads, more visits, more ground game. In the press we'll see a repeat of the "Kerry surge" from Iowa and pondering on how Bush can maintain his position. From the spinners? More nonsense and more ugliness. The Lynne Cheney response was planned and coordinated, mind you.
With any luck, it'll all be over on Nov. 3. Until it goes to court, that is.
Sunday, October 10, 2004
Debate Two
Need wood?
My, there were many things to laugh about during this debate. Painful, too, in many ways.
Bush, again, came across as angry, leaping out of his chair and interrupting the moderator. Not very polite. Kerry, on the other hand, was at times clear and strong, but other times he returned to that senatorial doublespeak. I score it a draw simply because Bush didn't fall on his face like he did last time. I don't think that it has stopped the Bush/Cheney slide. Or maybe I should say that it will not stop the growing Kerry/Edwards momentum. The Bush attacks are not working. Kerry appears smart, direct and very clearly Presidential in these debates and this alone will win him votes from the undecided. And on the other side Bush looks defensive and annoyed. Slapping the "liberal" label on Kerry is only going to work with people who are already going to vote for Bush.
So with Bush on the defensive, his slew of "distortions" in this debate, and facts on the ground in Iraq not in his favor, Kerry has the opportunity this week to really take control.
And, yes, Bush has an interest in a timber company.
My, there were many things to laugh about during this debate. Painful, too, in many ways.
Bush, again, came across as angry, leaping out of his chair and interrupting the moderator. Not very polite. Kerry, on the other hand, was at times clear and strong, but other times he returned to that senatorial doublespeak. I score it a draw simply because Bush didn't fall on his face like he did last time. I don't think that it has stopped the Bush/Cheney slide. Or maybe I should say that it will not stop the growing Kerry/Edwards momentum. The Bush attacks are not working. Kerry appears smart, direct and very clearly Presidential in these debates and this alone will win him votes from the undecided. And on the other side Bush looks defensive and annoyed. Slapping the "liberal" label on Kerry is only going to work with people who are already going to vote for Bush.
So with Bush on the defensive, his slew of "distortions" in this debate, and facts on the ground in Iraq not in his favor, Kerry has the opportunity this week to really take control.
And, yes, Bush has an interest in a timber company.
Thursday, October 07, 2004
Cheney Rewriting History
MSNBC - Rewriting History
With virtually all of the administration’s original case for war in Iraq in tatters, Vice President Dick Cheney provided shifting and sometimes misleading arguments in last night’s debate with John Edwards about Saddam Hussein’s ties to terrorists and his access to weapons of mass destruction.
Just to set the record straight.
With virtually all of the administration’s original case for war in Iraq in tatters, Vice President Dick Cheney provided shifting and sometimes misleading arguments in last night’s debate with John Edwards about Saddam Hussein’s ties to terrorists and his access to weapons of mass destruction.
Just to set the record straight.
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
U.S. Report Finds Iraq Was Minimal Weapons Threat in '03
The New York Times > International > Middle East > U.S. Report Finds Iraq Was Minimal Weapons Threat in '03:
"At the time of the American invasion, Mr. Duelfer concluded, Iraq had not possessed military-scale stockpiles of illicit weapons for a dozen years and was not actively seeking to produce them. "
Ah, makes me proud.
"At the time of the American invasion, Mr. Duelfer concluded, Iraq had not possessed military-scale stockpiles of illicit weapons for a dozen years and was not actively seeking to produce them. "
Ah, makes me proud.
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
It's Ugly!
Again, I hate to detail a hasty reaction to the debate and then have to reconsider later, but I can't help thinking that Edwards wins this one. I think he had the issues, the substance. Cheney just seemed to prattle on about how right the Administration is, and when he wasn't prattling he was downright mean.
Let me be clear and honest here. I have a real visceral dislike for Bush/Cheney. These are not guys I would want to have a drink with. They just scare me. And they think they are absolutely right on everything and they shouldn't be questioned. No one can tell me that they're looking out for me. I don't believe it.
I do think Edwards missed opportunities here, but I think he was better at expressing his plan for making this country a better place. And that gets my vote.
Let me be clear and honest here. I have a real visceral dislike for Bush/Cheney. These are not guys I would want to have a drink with. They just scare me. And they think they are absolutely right on everything and they shouldn't be questioned. No one can tell me that they're looking out for me. I don't believe it.
I do think Edwards missed opportunities here, but I think he was better at expressing his plan for making this country a better place. And that gets my vote.
Bremer: 'Not enough troops' in Iraq after Saddam's ouster
CNN.com - Bremer: 'Not enough troops' in Iraq after Saddam's ouster - Oct 5, 2004
Not only was the war the wrong choice, but then we couldn't even do what was right there. While we can't dispute the necessity of going to war when we did, there is no question that the war was mismanaged. And who's going to make us safer?
Not only was the war the wrong choice, but then we couldn't even do what was right there. While we can't dispute the necessity of going to war when we did, there is no question that the war was mismanaged. And who's going to make us safer?
Sunday, October 03, 2004
Iraq: Politics or Policy?
The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Iraq: Politics or Policy?
Tom Friedman's back and he takes it to the Bush Administration:
This war has been hugely mismanaged by this administration, in the face of clear advice to the contrary at every stage, and as a result the range of decent outcomes in Iraq has been narrowed and the tools we have to bring even those about are more limited than ever.
Then there's this:
But my time off has clarified for me, even more, that this Bush team can't get us there, and may have so messed things up that no one can. Why? Because each time the Bush team had to choose between doing the right thing in the war on terrorism or siding with its political base and ideology, it chose its base and ideology.
And:
Mr. Bush is president, charged with protecting the national interest, and yet from the beginning he has run Iraq policy as an extension of his political campaign.
Boy, have we missed you, Tom.
Tom Friedman's back and he takes it to the Bush Administration:
This war has been hugely mismanaged by this administration, in the face of clear advice to the contrary at every stage, and as a result the range of decent outcomes in Iraq has been narrowed and the tools we have to bring even those about are more limited than ever.
Then there's this:
But my time off has clarified for me, even more, that this Bush team can't get us there, and may have so messed things up that no one can. Why? Because each time the Bush team had to choose between doing the right thing in the war on terrorism or siding with its political base and ideology, it chose its base and ideology.
And:
Mr. Bush is president, charged with protecting the national interest, and yet from the beginning he has run Iraq policy as an extension of his political campaign.
Boy, have we missed you, Tom.
Friday, October 01, 2004
Debate Talking Points
Here are Kerry's key statements from the debate:
- I believe America is safest and strongest when we are leading the world and when we are leading strong alliances.
- I believe in being strong and resolute and determined. But we also have to be smart.
- You don't take America to war unless you have a plan to win the peace.
- We haven't done the work that ought to be done.
- I will bring fresh credibility, a new start.
- The truth is what good policy is based on. It's what leadership is based on.
- We need to be smarter about how we wage a war on terror.
- I've had one position, one consistent position: that Saddam Hussein was a threat, there was a right way to disarm him and a wrong way. And the president chose the wrong way.
- You have the president's plan, which is four words: more of the same. I think my plan is better.
- I have a plan to do it. He doesn't.
- Saddam Hussein didn't attack us. Osama bin Laden attacked us.
- I'll tell you this as president I'll never take my eye of that ball.
- You have to earn that respect. And I think we have a lot of earning back to do.
- It's one thing to be certain, but you can be certain and be wrong.
- We didn't need to rush to war without a plan to win the peace.
Print this out. Carry it in your pocket. Mention these things to your friends. Reinforce it with the fact that Kerry won the debate because he had ideas, he has a plan. Tell them Comeback Kerry is on the way.
Debate One Analysis
I was not watching the debate last night with glee, nor did I jump up and down in celebration at its end. I could not declare a Kerry victory right away. To tell the truth I was very nervous during the whole thing because I've seen how the Bush camp can turn the smallest thing into something significant. Kerry's comments were sometimes convoluted and he failed to summarize most responses into bumper sticker statements. He did manage though to be forceful and direct, which means he avoided being boring and pedantic.
Bush seemed to struggle through most of the debate. He succeeded in hammering the same points he's been using on the road, but this began to become a problem. There's not a lot behind his bumper sticker statements, and when given two minutes to elaborate Bush was often at a loss for words. He also failed to deliver any forceful attacks. We've heard what he has to say about Kerry and their differences for months (mostly because the press reads straight from the RNC talking points), and he had nothing new to say. And I think that's what was frustrating him.
Ironically, what may have hurt Bush most was Fox News's decision to use the split screen. We were then allowed to see Bush's pursed lips, smirks, rolling eyes, and seething anger. He was mad, and I don't think most people would see that as Presidential.
After the debate and thinking and talking about it for awhile, it became obvious that Kerry won, simply because Bush was forced to spend most of the ninety minutes defending himself. Kerry too managed to push his plan for Iraq and Bush was never able to counter with one of his own. He can only say "strong and resolute" so many times before we realize that it doesn't mean a thing. Reviewing the candidate's message last night it boils down to, for Kerry, "we can do better," and for Bush"it's hard work." I think one of these might work better for the American people.
But a Kerry victory last night only means that he's still in the game. Remember that the Bushies are better at controlling the message. The Dems will have to use those keys from last night, those things that had traction, and pound them. If the media begins to think that there's a Kerry comeback starting, that will dominate.
Bush seemed to struggle through most of the debate. He succeeded in hammering the same points he's been using on the road, but this began to become a problem. There's not a lot behind his bumper sticker statements, and when given two minutes to elaborate Bush was often at a loss for words. He also failed to deliver any forceful attacks. We've heard what he has to say about Kerry and their differences for months (mostly because the press reads straight from the RNC talking points), and he had nothing new to say. And I think that's what was frustrating him.
Ironically, what may have hurt Bush most was Fox News's decision to use the split screen. We were then allowed to see Bush's pursed lips, smirks, rolling eyes, and seething anger. He was mad, and I don't think most people would see that as Presidential.
After the debate and thinking and talking about it for awhile, it became obvious that Kerry won, simply because Bush was forced to spend most of the ninety minutes defending himself. Kerry too managed to push his plan for Iraq and Bush was never able to counter with one of his own. He can only say "strong and resolute" so many times before we realize that it doesn't mean a thing. Reviewing the candidate's message last night it boils down to, for Kerry, "we can do better," and for Bush"it's hard work." I think one of these might work better for the American people.
But a Kerry victory last night only means that he's still in the game. Remember that the Bushies are better at controlling the message. The Dems will have to use those keys from last night, those things that had traction, and pound them. If the media begins to think that there's a Kerry comeback starting, that will dominate.
News you may have missed this week
House Ethics Panel Rebukes DeLay The committee admonished Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) Thursday night for offering a political favor to a Michigan lawmaker in exchange for the member's vote on last year's hard-fought Medicare prescription drug bill.
House Rejects Same-Sex Marriage Ban The House joined the Senate yesterday in refusing to approve a constitutional amendment to bar same-sex marriage, described by Republican supporters as a vital protection for traditional families but denounced by Democratic foes as a divisive pre-election ploy to inflame prejudice.
Growing Pessimism on Iraq A growing number of career professionals within national security agencies believe that the situation in Iraq is much worse, and the path to success much more tenuous, than is being expressed in public by top Bush administration officials, according to former and current government officials and assessments over the past year by intelligence officials at the CIA and the departments of State and Defense.
Oil and Gas Hold the Reins in the Wild West Land-Use Decisions Largely Favor Energy Industry
Senate Confirms Rep. Goss as Intelligence Director The Senate voted overwhelmingly yesterday to confirm Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) as the new head of the CIA, brushing aside complaints from some Democrats that he is too partisan and insufficiently interested in reform to head the embattled agency.
Key Part of Patriot Act Ruled Unconstitutional A federal judge in New York ruled yesterday that a key component of the USA Patriot Act is unconstitutional because it allows the FBI to demand information from Internet service providers without judicial oversight or public review.
Thanks to WashingtonPost.com (registration req'd and worthwhile)
And then there's this editorial in yesterday's New York Times:
Playing With the Election Rules
"In Colorado, Secretary of State Donetta Davidson, also a Republican, has issued a bizarre ruling of her own on this issue. She will allow provisional ballots cast at the wrong polling places to count for only the presidential race. The Senate race in Colorado, among the closest in the nation, could determine control of the Senate, and there is no reason all valid provisional ballots should not count in this race or for statewide ballot propositions. Colorado Common Cause is challenging Ms. Davidson's rule, but she should not need a court to tell her to count the votes."
House Rejects Same-Sex Marriage Ban The House joined the Senate yesterday in refusing to approve a constitutional amendment to bar same-sex marriage, described by Republican supporters as a vital protection for traditional families but denounced by Democratic foes as a divisive pre-election ploy to inflame prejudice.
Growing Pessimism on Iraq A growing number of career professionals within national security agencies believe that the situation in Iraq is much worse, and the path to success much more tenuous, than is being expressed in public by top Bush administration officials, according to former and current government officials and assessments over the past year by intelligence officials at the CIA and the departments of State and Defense.
Oil and Gas Hold the Reins in the Wild West Land-Use Decisions Largely Favor Energy Industry
Senate Confirms Rep. Goss as Intelligence Director The Senate voted overwhelmingly yesterday to confirm Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) as the new head of the CIA, brushing aside complaints from some Democrats that he is too partisan and insufficiently interested in reform to head the embattled agency.
Key Part of Patriot Act Ruled Unconstitutional A federal judge in New York ruled yesterday that a key component of the USA Patriot Act is unconstitutional because it allows the FBI to demand information from Internet service providers without judicial oversight or public review.
Thanks to WashingtonPost.com (registration req'd and worthwhile)
And then there's this editorial in yesterday's New York Times:
Playing With the Election Rules
"In Colorado, Secretary of State Donetta Davidson, also a Republican, has issued a bizarre ruling of her own on this issue. She will allow provisional ballots cast at the wrong polling places to count for only the presidential race. The Senate race in Colorado, among the closest in the nation, could determine control of the Senate, and there is no reason all valid provisional ballots should not count in this race or for statewide ballot propositions. Colorado Common Cause is challenging Ms. Davidson's rule, but she should not need a court to tell her to count the votes."
The Debate, the Media Perspective
Newspaper Editiorials
The Washington Post: Both performed credibly enough to keep voters tuned in for the next debate.
New York Times: If the question was whether Senator John Kerry would appear presidential, whether he could present his positions clearly and succinctly and keep President Bush on the defensive when it came to the critical issue of Iraq, Mr. Kerry delivered the goods... Mr. Bush, whose body and facial language sometimes seemed downright petulant, insisted, again and again, that by criticizing the way the war is being run, Mr. Kerry was sending "mixed signals" that threatened the success of the effort.
LA Times: In contrast to the president, who at times seemed tired and annoyed at having to share the stage, Kerry's command of the facts didn't get in the way of his being lucid and direct. The senator and former prosecutor delivered a powerful indictment of Bush's foreign policy record.
USA Today: The view here is that Kerry's analysis of Iraq is on the mark. But it is an observation made in hindsight — a fact Bush jumped on repeatedly Thursday by charging Kerry had shifted his opinion for political advantage.
The question that matters now is which candidate's world approach will be more effective going forward.
Rocky Mtn. News: Sen. John Kerry turned in his strongest performance of the campaign in Thursday's debate. He was calm, assured, clear, forceful and articulate. His supporters must be ecstatic.
Polls on who won the debate
ABC News: Kerry 45%, Bush 36%, tie 17%
CBS News: (Uncommitteds) Kerry 43%, Bush 28%, tie 29%
CNN: Kerry 53%, Bush 37%
The Headlines
Iraq Takes Center Stage in Debate
Bush and Kerry Clash Over Iraq in Debate
Bush, Kerry Trade Barbs on Iraq War
Candidates clash on terror, Iraq
Kerry, Bush clash on national security
Iraq war dominates Bush, Kerry debate
The Washington Post: Both performed credibly enough to keep voters tuned in for the next debate.
New York Times: If the question was whether Senator John Kerry would appear presidential, whether he could present his positions clearly and succinctly and keep President Bush on the defensive when it came to the critical issue of Iraq, Mr. Kerry delivered the goods... Mr. Bush, whose body and facial language sometimes seemed downright petulant, insisted, again and again, that by criticizing the way the war is being run, Mr. Kerry was sending "mixed signals" that threatened the success of the effort.
LA Times: In contrast to the president, who at times seemed tired and annoyed at having to share the stage, Kerry's command of the facts didn't get in the way of his being lucid and direct. The senator and former prosecutor delivered a powerful indictment of Bush's foreign policy record.
USA Today: The view here is that Kerry's analysis of Iraq is on the mark. But it is an observation made in hindsight — a fact Bush jumped on repeatedly Thursday by charging Kerry had shifted his opinion for political advantage.
The question that matters now is which candidate's world approach will be more effective going forward.
Rocky Mtn. News: Sen. John Kerry turned in his strongest performance of the campaign in Thursday's debate. He was calm, assured, clear, forceful and articulate. His supporters must be ecstatic.
Polls on who won the debate
ABC News: Kerry 45%, Bush 36%, tie 17%
CBS News: (Uncommitteds) Kerry 43%, Bush 28%, tie 29%
CNN: Kerry 53%, Bush 37%
The Headlines
Iraq Takes Center Stage in Debate
Bush and Kerry Clash Over Iraq in Debate
Bush, Kerry Trade Barbs on Iraq War
Candidates clash on terror, Iraq
Kerry, Bush clash on national security
Iraq war dominates Bush, Kerry debate
My letter
Below is my letter to the editor published today in the Denver Post regarding the race in Colorado's 6th between Republican Tom Tancredo and Democrat Joanna Conti:
Tom Tancredo has done nothing in the House but focus on immigration. He has stated that not only is illegal immigration a problem, but legal immigration as well. He has used the issue to push a racially questionable agenda, and this does not represent the residents of the 6th Congressional District.
Joanna Conti is a fiscally conservative Democrat, and she is well-suited to serve the district. She believes that our representative in the House should focus on things besides wedge issues. She is definitely not gutless, and she shows it by taking on the Republican incumbent in a heavily Republican district. And I applaud her for it.
Damon Garr, Golden
(Also, a letter to the Editor of the Metropolitan that I wrote in March, 2002, during the height of the Enron crisis is still online here.)
Tom Tancredo has done nothing in the House but focus on immigration. He has stated that not only is illegal immigration a problem, but legal immigration as well. He has used the issue to push a racially questionable agenda, and this does not represent the residents of the 6th Congressional District.
Joanna Conti is a fiscally conservative Democrat, and she is well-suited to serve the district. She believes that our representative in the House should focus on things besides wedge issues. She is definitely not gutless, and she shows it by taking on the Republican incumbent in a heavily Republican district. And I applaud her for it.
Damon Garr, Golden
(Also, a letter to the Editor of the Metropolitan that I wrote in March, 2002, during the height of the Enron crisis is still online here.)
It's On!
Initial reactions here as I look around at reactions to last night's debate and it is pretty darn clear that Kerry won. Bush was defensive and mad, and it showed. You tell me which one looked more Presidential.
The fight is on.
More to come on this later.
The fight is on.
More to come on this later.
Thursday, September 30, 2004
Fox is running the show
Politics News Article | Reuters.com: "Fox News Channel, whose turn it is under a rotation system to operate the 'pool' cameras for all the networks in the first debate on Thursday in Coral Gables, Florida, said it would follow its own editorial judgment in operating its cameras. "
Keep this in mind tonight.
Keep this in mind tonight.
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
Couldn't Have Said It Any Better Himself
washingtonpost.com: Couldn't Have Said It Any Better Himself
Maybe puppet is a strong word for Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi, but this editorial by the Post's Dana Milbank shows that much of Allawi's speech was eerily familiar. I would guess that Bush's little evangelical speech writer, Michael Gersen, is behind this one.
There is little doubt that Allawi was brought here at this time to aid Bush's reelection. He deserves a lot of credit for being willing to lead Iraq during these times, but let's remember who gave him the job.
Maybe puppet is a strong word for Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi, but this editorial by the Post's Dana Milbank shows that much of Allawi's speech was eerily familiar. I would guess that Bush's little evangelical speech writer, Michael Gersen, is behind this one.
There is little doubt that Allawi was brought here at this time to aid Bush's reelection. He deserves a lot of credit for being willing to lead Iraq during these times, but let's remember who gave him the job.
Prewar Assessment on Iraq Saw Chance of Strong Divisions
The New York Times > Washington > Prewar Assessment on Iraq Saw Chance of Strong Divisions:
"The same intelligence unit that produced a gloomy report in July about the prospect of growing instability in Iraq warned the Bush administration about the potential costly consequences of an American-led invasion two months before the war began, government officials said Monday."
So, can Bush say that he "miscalculated" the problems in "post-war" Iraq if he had a good idea from this report of what the problems were likely to be?
Note that the CIA guy responsible for the prewar assessment and the recent estimate, Pillar, was the subject of a recent Robert Novak editorial. It sounds like Pillar's a little peeved over Bush saying that the CIA was "just guessing."
"The same intelligence unit that produced a gloomy report in July about the prospect of growing instability in Iraq warned the Bush administration about the potential costly consequences of an American-led invasion two months before the war began, government officials said Monday."
So, can Bush say that he "miscalculated" the problems in "post-war" Iraq if he had a good idea from this report of what the problems were likely to be?
Note that the CIA guy responsible for the prewar assessment and the recent estimate, Pillar, was the subject of a recent Robert Novak editorial. It sounds like Pillar's a little peeved over Bush saying that the CIA was "just guessing."
Monday, September 27, 2004
Alleged Re-Enlistment Threats
CBS 4 Denver: Degette Seeks Inquiry Into Alleged Re-Enlistment Threats
It's being reported that soldiers are being required to re-enlist or risk being sent to sent to Iraq.
Do we really need a formal draft if we can take advantage of our citizen soldiers, the National Guard, as well as issuing stop-loss orders and now things like this?
It's being reported that soldiers are being required to re-enlist or risk being sent to sent to Iraq.
Do we really need a formal draft if we can take advantage of our citizen soldiers, the National Guard, as well as issuing stop-loss orders and now things like this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)