Monday's Notes

Mainly notes today, but info of use and interest:

1) Re: Sinclair airing 1 hour swift-boat vets anti-kerry video. Since contacting Sinclair's advertisers appears to be working (advertisers are starting to pull out of Sinclair stations), we should keep up the pressure. Monday's New York Times Article on the effect.


UPDATE: The link for Sinclair advertisers I gave last time is no longer up. That's because they've now made a SUPER-EASY email page, where you write your own or use their template and it gets sent to ALL THE ADVERTISERS!!! Please forward this link around:
http://www.grassrootsnation.com/sinclair/

And remember, sell any Sinclair Broadcasting Group (SBGI) stock you have (and tell your mutual funds to do so also). The stock is falling!


2) LINKS OF INTEREST

ANOTHER ELECTORAL VOTE SITE - as detailed as electoral-vote.com but much prettier and has additional information such as "Will Nader be on this state's ballot?" etc.
http://race2004.net/

JON STEWART ON CNN'S CROSSFIRE (Quicktime Video). I previously hailed Jon Stewart as a god. Where can I go from there? In his Crossfire appearence, he was NOT FUNNY AT ALL. He was deadly serious. Though he did call Tucker Carlson a d**k. See Jon SLAM the news media!


NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE on Bush. Wow. I've only read part of it but... scary scary man. PASS the link around!


3) On polls and visiting polling sites.
DO NOT SWEAT THE POLL SITES!

For example, on electoral-vote.com, if there are 3 polls for a state taken during the same period, regardless of if they are independant, republican, or democrat run, he only picks one, based on the middle-date of the poll. So early last week, there was a strong Bush win in OH on that map. This poll was from a GOP firm, that ALWAYS skews to Bush, from Oct 11. 2 other polls showed a Kerry win but were not included since the GOP poll was 1 day more recent. Those other polls simply disappear.

I've already gone through my panic days with these polls. I don't worry about it so much now, cuz it keeps flipping around every few days. Consistent trends are the most important thing.
Also Gallup is at it again. While 5 other major national polls for the same exact dates all show statistical ties (within the margin of error) Gallup puts Bush up 8 points. Gallup is just a mess, since among registered voters they show a tie, but they altered their Likely Voter model yet again to make it a big Bush win. No other organization is doing this.

http://2.004k.com/national/
http://2.004k.com/tracking/

BOTTOM LINE: The bottom line reccomendation is to work the campaign like you were 8 points down (very doable but requires ground work).

Scott

"All your debates are belong to us"

Quick Summary before work:

In a way, I'm actually impressed with people. I was willing to say that it wasn't so bad for Bush, in terms of delivery and style. On content it was horrid, IMO. But, actually, the outside world apparently thinks less of Bush's performance than I do.

Bush's main point in debate #3 seemed to be: "You are all losing jobs overseas because you're dumb and need a better education." He never answered the jobs question, always switched to education.

Kerry was ended up on top for debate #3.
Even the "pundits" agree.
Even the polls agree:


Early post-deabte polls (real ones, not internet ones - Kerry REALLY won big there, but not "scientific")

Kerry Bush
CBS 39% 25% (200 "undecideds")
ABC 42% 41% (38% GOP, 30% DEM)
CNN 52% 39% (36% GOP, 36% DEM)

Even the close one is actually GOP heavy. Real voting has always been at least even or Dem heavy.

On any claims of Kerry "exaaageerating":

We have already destroyed Bush on the Osama comment. The press appears to be latching on to this most obvious lie.

The only worry is the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) statement. It sounded like the only Kerry comment that could essentially be called incorrect....

But:

From the head of the CBC, in 2003:

"...the CBC's requests for meetings with [the Bush administration] have gone unanswered for more than two-and-one-half years..."


From MSNBC:

"Bush did meet with the Congressional Black Caucus during his first two weeks in office — on Jan. 31, 2001 — but Kerry's overall charge was correct: Bush has repeatedly turned down requests to meet with the group since then. Caucus members have complained that not only has Bush refused to meet with them on specific issues, including his plans to attack Iraq, but also the White House often has not even responded to their letters. Bush dropped by a meeting that national security adviser Condoleezza Rice had with the caucus earlier this year."

There was one meeting more recently, when the CBC essentially invaded the White House to demand a meeting right then and there.

OK...Gotta go...till later.

Conservative Network to air Anti-Kerry Film just before election

I go away canvassing in Ohio for a weekend and look what happens:

LA Times article here.

Petition is here:
http://www.stopsinclair.org/
(only been up a few days and over 13,000 have signed)

"The conservative-leaning Sinclair Broadcast Group, whose television outlets reach nearly a quarter of the nation's homes with TV, is ordering its stations to preempt regular programming just days before the Nov. 2 election to air a film that attacks Sen. John F. Kerry's activism against the Vietnam War"

"Sinclair has told its stations — many of them in political swing states such as Ohio and Florida — to air "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal," sources said."

This film was created by, guess who?

Swift Vets and POWs For Truth. The new and expanded Swift Vets for "Truth". This GOP partisan organization is DIRECTLY TIED TO THE BUSH campaign. And every claim they have made to date has been proven as a lie. Every claim. Proven as a lie - either by non-partisan FactCheck.org or the US NAVY itself.

http://www.stopsinclair.org/

(By the way, Sinclair was last in the news when they refused to honor the (then) 700+ killed US soldiers in Iraq by pre-empting a Nightline show listing all of our fallen men and women. Nice guys.)

THAT'S how a REAL liar LIES!

Cheney to Bush: "See, my boy, THAT'S how a REAL liar LIES!"

You can go to factcheck.COM, as Cheney said, if you'd like but... (that's an easy slipup to make)
However, please DO go to the site Cheney meant us to see:

www.factcheck.org

where most of the mangled facts from this debate are indeed covered today.
(Silly fact, Cheney personally met Edwards at least two times before tonight)

But, the most evil lie was made by Cheney:

From today's Washington Post:

Early in the debate, Cheney snapped at Edwards, "The senator has got his facts wrong. I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11." But in numerous interviews, Cheney has skated close to the line in ways that may have certainly left that impression on viewers, usually when he cited the possibility that Mohamed Atta, one of the hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001, met with an Iraqi official -- even after that theory was largely discredited.

The Post cites 3 examples, just a random sample only from interviews on "Meet the Press":

12/9/01: "it's been pretty well confirmed that [Atta] did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack." (Meet the Press)

9/8/02: Atta "did apparently travel to Prague. . . . We have reporting that places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer a few months before the attacks on the World Trade Center." (Meet the Press).

2003: Cheney described Iraq as part of "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

gave it a rest.

I gave writing a rest while I concentrated on other things... Though I did send off two different Letters to the Editor following the debate. Since the chance of one getting published is just about zero, I'll paste them here:

Sen. Kerry will make America more secure.

Now the nation has seen the next President of the United States in action.
Senator John Kerry spoke forcefully and clearly in last night's debate against President Bush.
John Kerry stated he would resolutely defend us against all enemies and would do so making the right choices. Senator Kerry said, consistently, that President Bush's choice to invade Iraq was a colossal error in the War on Terror and that the President's choices were all wrong. Senator Kerry said he has a clear plan for dealing with Iraq while the President had no plan at all. President Bush could defend none of these accusations. Our security lies with a new President, John Kerry.

I followed it up with an attack letter:

Bad commanders should be given desk jobs.

In the debate on September 30th, President Bush was visibly furious that someone could openly – and to his face - question his ability as Commander-in-Chief of the United States. It looked like he felt his sole reason for continuing to be Commander of the US Armed Forces is that he already has the job. How could we possibly change commanders? The President does not seem to realize that when wiser minds prevail in wartime, commanders who show colossal errors in judgment and general incompetence in war – as President Bush has - are routinely removed from battle command. They are given desk jobs pushing pencils, so they can no longer harm anybody. It is time for all of us to show similar wisdom.

What a Difference a Debate Makes...

What a Difference a Debate Makes...one and a half little hours.

I probably don't need to comment on the debate - except that it confirms everything about Kerry's abilities that I've learned over the past 5 months.

The early result, Newsweek poll:

Kerry 47% Bush 45% (with Nader)
Kerry 49% Bush 46% (without Nader)
(Previous Poll K: 45% B: 50%)

Of course, buyer beware, as always. Who knows how this poll was weighted. I am more cautious about believing any poll now, after seeing the Gallup fiasco.

Anyway, it's good press.

[update]
Gallup now has Kerry and Bush tied 49% - 49%. That's a gain of 8 points from their last poll even with their skewed polling methods. Or maybe they fixed their methods.

Anyway, the important thing is it's good press momentum.

News Analysis - Kerry's Iraq views 100% consistent

An analysis by the San Fran Chronicle anylizes all of Kerry's comments on Iraq:

[A]n examination of Kerry's words in more than 200 speeches and statements, comments during candidate forums and answers to reporters' questions does not support the accusation [of flip-flopping]. As foreign policy emerged as a dominant issue in the Democratic primaries and later in the general election, Kerry clung to a nuanced, middle-of-the road -- yet largely consistent -- approach to Iraq ...

[T]aken as a whole, Kerry has offered the same message ever since talk of attacking Iraq became a national conversation more than two years ago.

Which echoes what I wrote in a Letter to the Editor (who knows if it will get accepted):

John Kerry has had one single stance on Iraq: To insure inspections found
any remaining threats to the United States, we should talk tough and carry a
loaded gun.
In his 2002 vote, he handed President Bush the gun and bullets.
He insisted the President fire only if Saddam rebuffed our inspectors. And
only if our strong allies were ready to join in the gunfight.
If the president failed that, Sen. Kerry said he would "be among the first
to speak out."
The President aborted a successful inspection regime.
The President drove our most powerful allies, along with their guns, away.
The President was given a loaded gun and the President misfired, over and
over.
Now our troops suffer for this incompetence.
As he promised, John Kerry has spoken out, again and again, one simple
message:
If you are going to go to war, do it right.
In Iraq, Bush has done everything wrong.

Kerry stronger - here come the Terror alerts!

Remember when Kerry was was ahead in the polls in June and July and after the convention.

There sure were alot of Terror Alerts!

Since late August until this past week, though, with Bush ahead in the polls... waddaya know, the terrorists have been taking a siesta or something. Maybe it's cuz the French take August off for holiday, right?

NOW, though, now that that polls show that the race has returned to a tie (within the margin of error), comes the first rumblings of the next terror alert.

I predict that once Kerry shows higher National polls than Bush, suddenly the terrorists will remove their sombreros and get back to work - Terror Alert Time!
(I'm hardly the only one having these premonitions.)

Stoned Slacker Poll: Daily Show Viewers MOST INFORMED GROUP!

As mentioned earlier, O'Reilly thinks all us daily show viewers are "stoned slackers."

Well.

Turns out, though, according to an Annenberg Poll:

Daily Show viewers have higher campaign knowledge than national news viewers and newspaper readers - even when education, party identification, following politics, watching cable news, receiving campaign information online, age, and gender are taken into consideration.

emphasis mine

And a nice big sample this: 19,013 people.

Hey! We is smart-like!

Pass the bong!

Kerry on Letterman- VIDEO and AUDIO

If I get a transcript I will post it.

[UPDATE] Video and Audio are both HERE!


The BEST I've ever seen him. He was quite comfortable.
He also gave some of the clearest series of policy statements AND attacks on Bush&Co, I have seen EVER.
It had a LOT of substance with clarity and humor.

This all falls in line with his speeches and campaign appearences in the last 2 weeks.

FWIW, much better then the Daily Show appearence, which was more playful and un-serious (emmy winning fake news, after all)

O'Reilly: Daily Show Viewers "Stoned Slackers"

Jon Stewart was on Bill O'Reilly last night. Stewart is the master!

The transcript is officially at
http://www dot foxnews dot com/story/0,2933,132946,00.html
but I won't link to Fox: linking to them will send a stream of slimey ooze spewing all over my place.

Here's another site with the transcript.
Small bit here:

O'REILLY: You actually have an influence on this presidential election. That is scary.

STEWART: If that were so, that would be quite frightening.

O'REILLY: But it is. It's true. I mean, you've got stoned slackers watching your dopey show every night, OK, and they can vote.

STEWART: Yeah.

O'REILLY: You can't stop them.

STEWART: Yeah, I just don't know how motivated they would be, these stoned slackers.

O'REILLY: Yeah, it just depends if they have to go out that day.

STEWART: What am I, a Cheech and Chong movie? Stoned slackers?

O'REILLY: Come on, you do the research, you know the research on your program.

STEWART: No, we don't.

O'REILLY: Eighty-seven percent are intoxicated when they watch it. You didn't see that?

STEWART: No, I didn't realize that.

O'REILLY: Yeah, we have that there.

STEWART: We come on right after, I believe, puppets that make crank calls...

O'Reilly with another one of his made-up facts. O'Reilly really is a pathological lier.

Kerry's Plan for Iraq. Great Speech!

I'm just lazy again. Here I quote from The Al Franken Show, who sums up Kerry's fantastic attack today:

Read Kerry’s speech.

Read it.

He’s hitting Bush on Iraq--hard. Directly.

His two main rationales – weapons of mass destruction and the Al Qaeda/September 11 connection – have been proved false… by the President’s own weapons inspectors… and by the 9/11 Commission. Just last week, Secretary of State Powell acknowledged the facts. Only Vice President Cheney still insists that the earth is flat.

And:

Before the war, before he chose to go to war, bi-partisan Congressional hearings… major outside studies… and even some in the administration itself… predicted virtually every problem we now face in Iraq.

This President was in denial. He hitched his wagon to the ideologues who surround him, filtering out those who disagreed, including leaders of his own party and the uniformed military. The result is a long litany of misjudgments with terrible consequences.

He’s right. And it’s clear. He runs through the litany. Then:

In Iraq, this administration has consistently over-promised and under-performed. This policy has been plagued by a lack of planning, an absence of candor, arrogance and outright incompetence. And the President has held no one accountable, including himself.

In fact, the only officials who lost their jobs over Iraq were the ones who told the truth.

Bam! And then Kerry goes into the officials who told the truth and got the boot.

And it’s clear from the speech that not only has Bush done a terrible job--Kerry will do a better one. Why? Simple.

George Bush has no strategy for Iraq. I do.

Is that direct, or what? That’s the difference between Bush and Kerry.

George Bush has no strategy for Iraq. I do.

The specifics of the plan:

1. Hold an emergency summit of major allies and Iraq’s neighbors to rebuild the coalition.
   
2. Greatly expand the project to train Iraq’s troops, and make sure they’re trained better--he’d double classroom training time.
   
3. Fire the officials responsible for screwing up Iraq’s reconstruction and hire more Iraqi firms instead of Halliburton. Actually spend the reconstruction money.
   
4. Pull together a U.N. protection force to make sure the elections go forward.

Good ideas. (If people tell you that Bush’s plan is the same as Kerry’s, ask them to list the Pentagon officials who’ve been fired for mismanaging the reconstruction. And ask them which countries are invited to Bush’s emergency summit.)

The key thing, though, is that if people recognize that Kerry has a plan and Bush doesn’t, Kerry will win.

Spread the word: if you still think Kerry isn’t fighting back, you aren’t paying attention.

A Wake-up call from Michael Moore!

Full Quote from his website. Read it!

Put Away Your Hankies...a message from Michael Moore

9/20/04

Dear Friends,

Enough of the handwringing! Enough of the doomsaying! Do I have to come there and personally calm you down? Stop with all the defeatism, OK? Bush IS a goner -- IF we all just quit our whining and bellyaching and stop shaking like a bunch of nervous ninnies. Geez, this is embarrassing! The Republicans are laughing at us. Do you ever see them cry, "Oh, it's all over! We are finished! Bush can't win! Waaaaaa!"

Hell no. It's never over for them until the last ballot is shredded. They are never finished -- they just keeping moving forward like sharks that never sleep, always pushing, pulling, kicking, blocking, lying.

They are relentless and that is why we secretly admire them -- they just simply never, ever give up. Only 30% of the country calls itself "Republican," yet the Republicans own it all -- the White House, both houses of Congress, the Supreme Court and the majority of the governorships. How do you think they've been able to pull that off considering they are a minority? It's because they eat you and me and every other liberal for breakfast and then spend the rest of the day wreaking havoc on the planet.

Look at us -- what a bunch of crybabies. Bush gets a bounce after his convention and you would have thought the Germans had run through Poland again. The Bushies are coming, the Bushies are coming! Yes, they caught Kerry asleep on the Swift Boat thing. Yes, they found the frequency in Dan Rather and ran with it. Suddenly it's like, "THE END IS NEAR! THE SKY IS FALLING!"

No, it is not. If I hear one more person tell me how lousy a candidate Kerry is and how he can't win... Dammit, of COURSE he's a lousy candidate -- he's a Democrat, for heavens sake! That party is so pathetic, they even lose the elections they win! What were you expecting, Bruce Springsteen heading up the ticket? Bruce would make a helluva president, but guys like him don't run -- and neither do you or I. People like Kerry run.

Yes, OF COURSE any of us would have run a better, smarter, kick-ass campaign. Of course we would have smacked each and every one of those phony swifty boaty bastards down. But WE are not running for president -- Kerry is. So quit complaining and work with what we have. Oprah just gave 300 women a... Pontiac! Did you see any of them frowning and moaning and screaming, "Oh God, NOT a friggin' Pontiac!" Of course not, they were happy. The Pontiacs all had four wheels, an engine and a gas pedal. You want more than that, well, I can't help you. I had a Pontiac once and it lasted a good year. And it was a VERY good year.

My friends, it is time for a reality check.

1. The polls are wrong. They are all over the map like diarrhea. On Friday, one poll had Bush 13 points ahead -- and another poll had them both tied. There are three reasons why the polls are b.s.: One, they are polling "likely voters." "Likely" means those who have consistently voted in the past few elections. So that cuts out young people who are voting for the first time and a ton of non-voters who are definitely going to vote in THIS election. Second, they are not polling people who use their cell phone as their primary phone. Again, that means they are not talking to young people. Finally, most of the polls are weighted with too many Republicans, as pollster John Zogby revealed last week. You are being snookered if you believe any of these polls.

2. Kerry has brought in the Clinton A-team. Instead of shunning Clinton (as Gore did), Kerry has decided to not make that mistake.

3. Traveling around the country, as I've been doing, I gotta tell ya, there is a hell of a lot of unrest out there. Much of it is not being captured by the mainstream press. But it is simmering and it is real. Do not let those well-produced Bush rallies of angry white people scare you. Turn off the TV! (Except Jon Stewart and Bill Moyers -- everything else is just a sugar-coated lie).

4. Conventional wisdom says if the election is decided on "9/11" (the fear of terrorism), Bush wins. But if it is decided on the job we are doing in Iraq, then Bush loses. And folks, that "job," you might have noticed, has descended into the third level of a hell we used to call Vietnam. There is no way out. It is a full-blown mess of a quagmire and the body bags will sadly only mount higher. Regardless of what Kerry meant by his original war vote, he ain't the one who sent those kids to their deaths -- and Mr. and Mrs. Middle America knows it. Had Bush bothered to show up when he was in the "service" he might have somewhat of a clue as to how to recognize an immoral war that cannot be "won." All he has delivered to Iraq was that plasticized turkey last Thanksgiving. It is this failure of monumental proportions that is going to cook his goose come this November.

So, do not despair. All is not over. Far from it. The Bush people need you to believe that it is over. They need you to slump back into your easy chair and feel that sick pain in your gut as you contemplate another four years of George W. Bush. They need you to wish we had a candidate who didn't windsurf and who was just as smart as we were when WE knew Bush was lying about WMD and Saddam planning 9/11. It's like Karl Rove is hypnotizing you -- "Kerry voted for the war...Kerry voted for the war...Kerrrrrryyy vooootted fooooor theeee warrrrrrrrrr..."

Yes...Yes...Yesssss....He did! HE DID! No sense in fighting now...what I need is sleep...sleeep...sleeeeeeppppp...

WAKE UP! The majority are with us! More than half of all Americans are pro-choice, want stronger environmental laws, are appalled that assault weapons are back on the street -- and 54% now believe the war is wrong. YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO CONVINCE THEM OF ANY OF THIS -- YOU JUST HAVE TO GIVE THEM A RAY OF HOPE AND A RIDE TO THE POLLS. CAN YOU DO THAT? WILL YOU DO THAT?

Just for me, please? Buck up. The country is almost back in our hands. Not another negative word until Nov. 3rd! Then you can bitch all you want about how you wish Kerry was still that long-haired kid who once had the courage to stand up for something. Personally, I think that kid is still inside him. Instead of the wailing and gnashing of your teeth, why not hold out a hand to him and help the inner soldier/protester come out and defeat the forces of evil we now so desperately face. Do we have any other choice?

Yours,

Michael Moore
www.michaelmoore.com
mmflint@aol.com

Polling Balm and Worst Negatives for Bush

For what it's worth - this could change in the blink of an eye:

Look below at the current national poll bar chart from PollingReport.com.
Note the Gallup poll way out of synch with the rest?
On the national average (1000 people throughout the US) this race is close.

Further, in the brand new Zogby Battleground state polls, there is much improvement.
Quoting MyDD:

Kerry "leads" (I'm counting leads inside the MoE as leads for the sake of this post) in AR (0.1), FL (0.6), IA (3.0), MI (6.0), MN (9.7), NH (3.6), NM (12.7), OR (12.0), PA (3.1), WA (8.7) and WI (2.4). Bush leads in MO (5.4), NV (2.2), OH (3.3), TN (5.5) and WV (12.4). It all looks good except for West Virginia.

Especially important is that Kerry has surged to a double-digit lead in Oregon. Voting is already underway out there, so being ahead now counts as much as it does in many states on November 1st.

This should bring the very fluid Electoral-Vote map to a more pleasing level, probably Kerry up in the lead for an instant. Though I'm sure it will bounce all over the place before all is said and done.

Oh yeah and this from one of the most trusted pollsters:

President Bush's Ratings Slip to Lowest Level of His Presidency, According to Latest Harris Poll

ROCHESTER, N.Y. - September 17, 2004 - President Bush's ratings have slipped to 45 percent positive and 54 percent negative, the lowest ratings of his presidency, according to a new Harris Poll. These numbers compare to 50 percent positive, 49 percent negative in June and 48 percent positive, 51 percent negative in August. This downward trend no doubt helps to explain why the lead which the president enjoyed over Senator Kerry immediately after the Republican convention in New York - the so-called "convention bounce" - has now disappeared.

Strong Talk

Here's something hardhitting and quite blunt from a diary at Daily Kos.

It is aimed at people who, with very meager evidence, say "oh Kerry's gonna lose. He sucks. The media is all against us. It's already been decided." BTW, with some wild exceptions, this thing remains a race with about a 2% difference between Kerry and Bush - all within the margin of error.

Note: This may sound like an attack. It's not. It's a rally cry. Trust me, the right-wing has this down to a science. There's no "what if we lose?" over there, no matter what the polls say. We can be like that too at least for the short term, while the fight is on.

I'm just quoting this in full...for sensitive eyes I blurred the critical word, though it's obvious:

So, shut your f--king pie-hole...

...if you've written a diary asking "what we should do if we lose". You know when we'll worry about what's after losing? AFTER we lose! And you know the only way we'll lose? If people like you spend one more moment worrying about losing. You think the Republicans are worried about losing? They aren't. You think they were worried about losing when they were down in the polls? They weren't. They are a lot of things... immoral... compassionless... selfish... terrified sheepeople... but they are not worried about losing. Thinking about losing is for losers. For once... let's not be the losers.

And shut your f--king pie-hole if...

...you claim not to be able to understand John Kerry's position on the Iraq war. OK... I'm... Going... To... Take... This... Very... Slow.

1. John Kerry voted to give the President the authorization for war so the President would have some leverage with our allies.

2. John Kerry trusted the President would use that leverage (as John Kerry would have) wisely and would go to war only as a last resort.

3. The President went and f--ked it all up.

Got it? No? Need it simpler.

Under a President Kerry, there would be no war in Iraq. Under President Bush there is.

And shut your f--king pie-hole...

...if your first reaction to polls is to cry about "methodology" or "sample size" and "skewing" and "bias" and "internals." NONE OF IT MATTERS ONE F--KING BIT. Remember the polls from a month ago? We were winning. Remember the polls from three months ago? We were losing. Remember the polls from 8 months ago? Howard Dean was ABSOLUTELY the Democratic nominee. Remember the polls from a year before that? No Democrat should bother running against the Asshole in Chief because he's utterly invincible. The polls will change seven times between now and November 2nd and ONLY on November 2nd should you or anyone you know spend anytime freaking about how many White, Male, Frog-Loving, Single, Transsexual, Democrats Gallup has or has not included in its sample.

And shut your f--king pie-hole...

...if you are still saying the words "Nader" and "I" and "will" and "vote" and "for" and "him" in the same sentence. There are no "safe states". There are no "protests votes". There are no "send a messages". There is only my daughter who must not be forced to live in a country where she does not have some semblance of control over her own body. There is only my soon-to-be-second-child who must not live in a world where -- should he or she be gay -- he or she is told on a moment to moment basis that he or she is LESS than some drunk, shit-head music star who took her saline enhanced chest down to a Vegas drive through and pretended to understand the meaning of "forever". There is only the air these two children breathe and the water they drink and the level of mercury in the fish they eat. Ralph Nader is NOT and option for anyone this time around. Don't even open your f--king pie-hole to argue.

And while I'm at it, shut your f--king pie-hole...

...if the word f--king has you in a tizzy. F--king is the reason you and I are here today. It is a word without nuance and I chose it EXACTLY for that reason. There is no way to escape its denotation or connotation or are-you-absolutely-paying-attention?

The game is on. 43 days to save this country. I refuse to lose.

Now... shut you're f--king pie-hole and get back to work.

There are many (generally positive) responses to the post --- mine joins in like this:

Yes! Thank you Jeff!

Excellent concept and excellent EXECUTION!

You're being blunt and I love it.

1) Language: To anyone worrying about how this kind of talk sounds to little old ladies in Pasadena... well I bet you alot of them might love it too...

But this post was for US!

It's called a rally.
And because it's on a blog and not in a public square, colorful language may be used if trying to make a point. It's been done before here and elsewhere.

2) Goose-stepping?
You don't have to DO what Jeff or anyone says. The point is it's a rally to get us to focus.

3) Repressing freedom of speech?
Critiques are fine, where you make suggestions about how to do something better.
But if some wish to insist on endlessly saying:

"Oh what was Kerry thinking?", "we're doomed,", "Kerry's gotta DO something, but I dunno what", "Kerry sucks why do we always loooooooooose?"

Well, fine. Keep saying these things.
But you won't have alot of fans.
Why?
Saying these things means either

• you have given up and want the rest of us to join in your misery
  
• you want SOMEONE to do SOMETHING (which is fine but how is claiming defeat here gonna help?)
  
• you want US to be disheartened - a TROLL function.
  

Sometimes, it's hard to tell the difference, so I'm beginning to ignore ALL of it.

3) lalalalalanotlisteneing??
Everyone here knows VERY WELL the dangers of not winning this election. The idea of a rally is partly to suppress that fear to leave us the energy to fight for victory.

If an army is facing the enemy lines, they could justifiably say, "Oh My God! We could get KILLED!"
But if you are at the stage of facing down the opposing army you have a choice:

• Fight and Win
  
• Fight and Lose
  
• Stand there and scream "Oh My God! We could get KILLED!"
  
• Drop your weapons and run away.

We are facing the opposing army. What is our choice?

RNC Kicker identified!

The RNC Kick-Her-While-She's-Down Guy has been Identified!!!

Bush Bounce -Be-Gone

Two National polls released today:

(Bush-Kerry-Nader-Dunno?)

---------------------------B----K---N---?

Pew LV (9/11-14)..........47...46...1...7

Pew LV (9/08-12)..........54...38...1...7

Pew LV (8/05-10)..........45...47...2...6


Harris LV (Mid Sept)......47...48...2...3

Harris LV (Mid Aug).......47...47...3...3

An interesting analysis:
Apparently state-by-state polls tend to lag behind the national polls. It's unclear to me why that is.
For example, During the Post-GOP-convention Bush bounce in national polls (between 4-11%) the individual states added up to a large Kerry win.
Then a week later the state polls started shifting Bush-wards, while the nationals started creeping downwards (toward even).
Now the national polls appear to by shifting back to even. So looking at the state polls today looks bad for Kerry - but if it all follows, the state polls will reflect this next week.

DAMN THESE POLLS!!

You know the only people who need to know these poll results are THE CAMPAIGNS!

All they do for US is give us heartburn.

Limbaugh Admits He Is Advising Bush Campaign

From MyDD blog:

This fits right into what my source said in my previous diary entry, that the Bush campaign has been emailing radio talk show hosts at ABC like Hannity, Limbaugh, Malzberg, and Laura Ingram. The emails are weekly talking points for the hosts to keep the focus on.

Rush Limbaugh Becomes Official Unpaid Advisor to Bush-Cheney '04 September 13, 2004

I made an official announcement to open the program today. I have become, and have been for a while, an official, unpaid advisor to the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign, and we decided to go public with this because there's no problem with it whatsoever.

There was thought about my stepping down from the Golden EIB Microphone two or three days a week on the days that I was giving advice, but we decided not to do that. There's no conflict here. There's absolutely no conflict whatsoever. The line has been successfully blurring now for years and years and years.

I will not be giving up my precious seat behind the Golden EIB Microphone. I will continue to serve both functions with credibility on both sides, an official unpaid advisor to the Bush-Cheney reelection campaign '04, as well as your host here on the EIB Network.

Kerry to Bush: "When it comes to your record, we agree. You own it."

A major campaign speech, containing some language written by a blogger!! (Here's the original suggestion by Zackpunk.)

In a big speech today, the theme of the speech is covered by the AP as:

DETROIT (AP) - Presidential candidate John Kerry, contending the Bush administration has created "more excuses than jobs," said Wednesday the Democratic ticket would shore up the middle class.

"The president would have us believe that his record is the result of bad luck, not bad decisions," Kerry said in remarks prepared for delivery at the Detroit Economic Club. "In fact, this president has created more excuses than jobs. His is the excuse presidency - never wrong, never responsible, never to blame."

More from Associated Press

Kerry's economic attack sought to pin more accountability on Bush for the economic unease persisting after the hits that the economy sustained early in the president's term.

"At that convention in New York the other week, President Bush talked about his ownership society," Kerry said. "When it comes to your record, we agree. You own it."

(snip)

"We are punching back," Kerry told radio host Don Imus in an interview Wednesday. "I am absolutely taking the gloves off. I'm prepared to take them on and everything."

(snip)

Kerry also told Imus that the book attacking his record in Vietnam, "Unfit For Command," is "a pack of lies." When asked whether there are any circumstances that the United States should have gone to war in Iraq, Kerry responded, "Not under the current circumstances, no. There are none that I see."

And the Zinger at the end:

"His is the Excuse Presidency: Never wrong, Never Responsible, Never to Blame. President Bush's desk isn't where the buck stops - it's where the blame begins. He's blamed just about everyone but himself and his administration for America's economic problems. And if he's missed you, don't worry - he's still got 48 days left until the election."

And the locals papers are all picking this up (Google News Search).

Gimme a hit o' that!

I'm moving slow today. Spent a bit of it under general anesthesia.
Kinda tired still.

Later...

Kerry Interview in Time Magazine

John Kerry interviewed by Time Magazine.
This is good

I'm just taking these excerpts straight from the Burnt Orange Report:

Kerry sat down with TIME magazine and had some really great stuff to say, a refinement of his campaign message.

I've been in worse situations in my life. The attacks don't attack me as much as they attack Americans and America. They're trying to distract people from the real issues that matter.

America is not as safe as we ought to be after 9/11. We can do a better job at homeland security. I can fight a more effective war on terror. The standard of living for the average American has gone down. People's incomes have dropped. Five million Americans have lost their health insurance. The deficit is the largest it's been in the history of this country. They're taking money from Social Security and transferring it to the wealthiest people in America to drive us into debt. They're shredding alliances around the world with people we have traditionally been able to rely on.

That's what bothers me.

It bothers me, too, John. So what you going to do about it?

Draw the contrast; be crystal clear about it. That's what I've been doing every day. George Bush has made the wrong choices for America. He's leading the country in the wrong direction. John Edwards and I have better choices. We have a health-care plan for all Americans. We're going to stop subsidizing jobs that go overseas and create jobs here in America. We're going to fund education and not leave millions of children behind every day. The trail of broken promises and reversed decisions of this Administration is unlike any I have ever seen at any time that I have been in public life, and I'm going to draw that picture as clear as a bell.

And that foreign policy stuff?

I believe very deeply that it takes a new President, a new credibility, a fresh start, to change the whole equation in Iraq. I will get countries involved in ways that the President doesn't have them involved today, and I will get our troops home.

TIME
How? Diplomats say that it is not in our allies' political interest...

—KERRY
George Bush has made it not in their interest today. There are all sorts of options with respect to Shi'ites, Sunnis and Kurds in the region that this Administration is not exploring. They have failed in their diplomacy utterly. In fact, they have made it easy for countries to say no, because of their arrogance, because of the way the President chose to go to war.

What's at stake?

All over the country we've got an enormous amount of energy, people are organizing, and I just think the choice is very clear. The Supreme Court of the United States is at stake. After-school programs are at stake. Health care is at stake. Social Security is at stake. Jobs are at stake.

The character of our country is at stake—whether we're going to have people who traffic in fear instead of real solutions.

Read the full article, it's one of the best interviews I've seen.

OK! I'm gonna read it right now!

New undisputed analysis: Bush AWOL for LONGER than previously thought

New analysis, unsullied by superscripted "th"s and proportional fonts.

From its own analysis of undisputed documents (some from Bush himself), US News and World Reports (not known to be a lefty journal) claims that Bush went AWOL for even longer than previously thought.

On the Bush administration's claims that Bush fulfilled his Air National Guard Duty

A review of the regulations governing Bush's Guard service during the Vietnam War shows that the White House used an inappropriate--and less stringent--Air Force standard in determining that he had fulfilled his duty.

Based on the number of drills the Air Force said he needed to attend to fulfill obligations:

Bush's own records show that he fell short of that requirement

Based on a more lenient requirement "suggested" by the Bush administration

Bush still fails the Air Force obligation standard

Based on yet a MORE lenient White House suggested standard

even using their method, which some military experts say is incorrect, U.S. News 's analysis shows that Bush once again fell short

and MORE AWOL

The U.S. News analysis also showed that during the final two years of his obligation, Bush did not comply with Air Force regulations that impose a time limit on making up missed drills. What's more, he apparently never made up five months of drills he missed in 1972, contrary to assertions by the administration.

And the REAL KICKER

Some experts say they remain mystified as to how Bush obtained an honorable discharge.

Ooooof.

Finally, I can detach from my computer

BostonHerald.com - the Edge: Air America radio waves hello to Hub

Air America, the fledgling liberal radio network featuring Al Franken and Janeane Garofalo, will soon be on the air in the Boston area, according to local radio sources, likely on some combination of local Clear Channel properties WKOX-AM (1200) in Framingham and WXKS-AM (1430) in Boston.

also

Franken recently beat Bill O'Reilly in New York City ratings, and his show is now also broadcast nightly on cable television's Sundance Channel.

and

Clear Channel's KPOJ-AM in Portland, Ore., carried a .03 share of the coveted 25- to 54-year-old radio audience before it dumped an oldies format for Air America. It shot up to a 4.9 share within a few months.

Bush Flip Flopping theme taking root!

This is very very good, I think.

Looks like the AP is picking up on the BUSH flip flops!

Here's the basic AP article.

It's actually written by Tom Raum. Remember him?

Maybe he wasn't really a GOP operative(?)

One of the article's premises is that Kerry hasn't hammered hard enough on "Bush=Flip-Floper."

But, bless him, Mr. Raum actually lists the flip-flops!

If he is a flip-flopper, Kerry has company.
_In 2000, Bush argued against new military entanglements and nation building. He's done both in Iraq.
_He opposed a Homeland Security Department, then embraced it.
_He opposed creation of an independent Sept. 11 commission, then supported it. He first refused to speak to its members, then agreed only if Vice President Dick Cheney came with him.
_Bush argued for free trade, then imposed three-year tariffs on steel imports in 2002, only to withdraw them after 21 months.
_Last month, he said he doubted the war on terror could be won, then reversed himself to say it could and would.
_A week after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Bush said he wanted Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." But he told reporters six months later, "I truly am not that concerned about him." He did not mention bin Laden in his hour-long convention acceptance speech.

YES!!
I can hear Al Franken's "Flwiiiip, Flop, Flippity-Floppity" right now!
And I like many of the headlines it is being published under (Google News Search).

Both Candidates Often Shift Positions
ABC News, United States
Both candidates often shift positions
USA Today
Bush rivals Kerry in `flip-flop' decision-making
Columbia Daily Tribune, MO
Dems tug Bush into flip-flop flap
New York Daily News, NY
Kerry a flip-flopper? Bush may be keeping him company
Salt Lake Tribune, United States
WASHINGTON TODAY: Shifting positions common to both candidates
San Francisco Chronicle, CA
Flip-flopping common to both candidates
Quad City Times, IA
Both Candidates Often Shift Positions
Miami Herald (subscription), FL

I hope this is just the beginning.
Perhaps some letters of support are in order?
(Reward good behavior)

info@ap.org
and the KE04 Letters to the Editor Tool (need to register as a volunteer. Same as a newspaper.)

Bush PUSH-POLLING caught in Wisconsin!

I saw this over at Electoral-Vote.com referring to an article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

First, what is "Push-Polling"? From EV:

push polling is where the pollster (on instructions from the client) asks a very slanted question in order to elicit the desired answer so the pollster can announce how well the client is doing.

Questions like "Do you support John Kerry even though he lied about getting medals in Vietnam?" or "Do you support George Bush even though he deserted the National Guard during war time?" fall in this category.

Legitimate pollsters would never ask such questions. Instead they might ask "Do you believe John Kerry earned his medals in Vietnam?" or "Do you believe George Bush fulfilled his duties in the National Guard?". Those are questions designed to determine public opinion, not create it

Another one was done in South Carolina 2000, when John McCain was running against George W. Bush for the GOP nomination: "If you knew that Senator John McCain has fathered an illegitimate black child, would you be more likely to vote for him or less likely to vote for him?" (See, he had adopted a child from Bangladesh, so you know, the kid was a "darkie" so who'd know the difference.)

So...
A "Democratic activist and former lobbyist" got a call (oops!)from a Republican polling organization Moore Information asking the following question:

"Whose position do you think is closer to the truth - those 'veterans who served with John Kerry' and say that he does not deserve the medals that he received, or John Kerry who disagrees with the veterans that he served with and who appear in the ad?"

That's Push-Polling in Action!

From the Votemaster at Electoral-Votes.com: "I asked the president of Moore Information for his side of the story but he didn't respond. Henceforth I will not use any Moore Information polls. If anyone has documented evidence of other pollsters doing push polls, please let me know."

From a website I don't know anything about, push-polling is...

...phony and reprehensible from top to bottom. The push poll is a Godzilla in sheep's clothing. The tragic thing is, the average American knows far more about Godzilla than about push polls.

Good on ya!

Expert recants "forgery" claim

[UPDATE] From Time Magazine:

Bill Glennon, a technology consultant in New York City who worked for IBM repairing typewriters from 1973 to 1985, says those experts "are full of crap. They just don't know." Glennon says there were IBM machines capable of producing the spacing, and a customized key -- the likes of which he says were not unusual -- could have created the superscript th.

Well, whaddaya know!

From the Boston Globe:

After CBS News on Wednesday trumpeted newly discovered documents that referred to a 1973 effort to ''sugar coat" President Bush's service record in the Texas Air National Guard, the network almost immediately faced charges that the documents were forgeries, with typography that was not available on typewriters used at that time.

But specialists interviewed by the Globe and some other news organizations say the specialized characters used in the documents, and the type format, were common to electric typewriters in wide use in the early 1970s, when Bush was a first lieutenant.

Philip D. Bouffard, a forensic document examiner in Ohio who has analyzed typewritten samples for 30 years, had expressed suspicions about the documents in an interview with the New York Times published Thursday, one in a wave of similar media reports. But Bouffard told the Globe yesterday that after further study, he now believes the documents could have been prepared on an IBM Selectric Composer typewriter available at the time.

(snip old news)

As for the raised ''th" that appears in the Bush memos -- to refer, for example, to units such as the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron -- Bouffard said that custom characters on the Composer's metal typehead ball were available in the 1970s, and that the military could have ordered such custom balls from IBM.

"You can't just say that this is definitively the mark of a computer," Bouffard said.

Press Release: CBS to address memo crap tonight 6:30

From CBS News:

Wait for it

The issue will be addressed in Friday's Evening News broadcast, 6:30 p.m. ET.

Well, THAT'S good to know.  Jebus.

In a statement, CBS News said it stands by its story.

Thay, whaths all thith about?

CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the "th" superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush's official military records released by the White House, CBS said in a statement.

Do only petits footbals verts dispute these memos?

The White House distributed the four memos from 1972 and 1973 after obtaining them from CBS News. The White House did not question their accuracy.

Well...let's just see what they got.... I'm tired.  Went from being astonished to outraged to upset to suspicious to blahblahblah...

now I'm over it!  Yay!

Forged??? Not by MS Word anyway!

[UPDATE 2]: CBS will address this issue. Thank God.

[UPDATE 3]: "Expert" takes back forgery claim, others agree "no evidence of forgery"


From AP:

Independent document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines said the memos looked like they had been produced on a computer using Microsoft Word software. Lines, a document expert and fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, pointed to a superscript — a smaller, raised "th" in "111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron" — as evidence indicating forgery.

Microsoft Word automatically inserts superscripts in the same style as the two on the memos obtained by CBS, she said.

"I'm virtually certain these were computer generated," Lines said after reviewing copies of the documents at her office in Paradise Valley, Ariz. She produced a nearly identical document using her computer's Microsoft Word software.

This whole excercise is a joke!

Forget all this stuff below.
Just answer this:
WHERE are the White House Documents that DISPROVE all these allegations?
WHERE are the WH Documents that PROVE Bush fulfilled his service?


As suggested here and here the superscript "th" was not automatically or even manually applied by MS Word. You would have had to increase the offset much much more than the default settings.

Below is superscripting of "th" in Times New Roman and Times, with both automatic superscripting and manual superscripting.

Compare with the document from CBS news:






Not to mention the narrow top loop of the "8" in the CBS doc and the slightly lowered bottom of the "7."
Why are we even talking about this? Who are these "experts"????

[UPDATE] I take back the "th" thing. When you print it out, the "th" is similarly raised... I did it on a laser printer.
Not, however true for the "7" and "8", in MS Times NR font, when printed the 8-top loop is wide, and the 7 stem does not dip below the baseline and has a hook (near the "8") which the CBS doc does not have.

This is crazy, what a waste of time!

Cheney - Unfit to Lead

No comment:

Cheney - Unfit to Lead

Wow. It turns out Cheney himself proposed and boasted of cutting all the weapons systems he's criticizing Kerry for voting to cut. I'm just shocked, really. Just shocked.

From Atrios

Kerry responsible for at least 85 passed laws

Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. all say no bill that Kerry sponsored was ever passed

I already knew this, but to make it clear: They LIE AGAIN! (they can't stop)

A diary at Daily Kos compiles the top 50 of at least 85 passed laws sponsored by John Kerry in the US Senate.

(Original data from the US Government congressional website, THOMAS)

Click here for a simple list of the laws.

Bush was AWOL

Now even more documents prove Bush AWOL.
Just go here at Daily Kos for the summary with quotes.


Markos' final point:

The Ben Barnes thing is subject to debate, and partisans will line up on the obvious sides (like they have with the Swift Boat Liars). But the official documents uncovered by 60 Minutes (despite the White House's attempt to cover them up)? There's no way to spin those away. The facts are there in black and white.

(emphasis mine)

I don't know if this is going to spin out of the Bush camp's control or not. But the media is starting to run with it. For Bush-Cheney 'o4, it would be well-deserved, in my opinion.

Report: Bush did not fulfill his minimal National Guard obligations

It's official: George W. Bush did not complete his National Guard service. Therefore, he was Absent WithOut Leave...AWOL.

For those who haven't seen, this is pretty damning stuff that was completely overlooked - by the mainstream media - until today. A buch of key records were simply not looked at before. Go figure.

From the Boston Globe:

In February, when the White House made public hundreds of pages of President Bush's military records, White House officials repeatedly insisted that the records prove that Bush fulfilled his military commitment in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.

But Bush fell well short of meeting his military obligation, a Globe reexamination of the records shows:
Twice during his Guard service ... Bush signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a punitive call-up to active duty.

He didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment, the records show.

Read the article to get the details.

Also 60 minutes tonight (Wednesday, 8pm, CBS) will be covering this and the guy who squeezed W into the National Guard.

Jon Stewart: Zell Miller Hate Funnies!

Here's The Daily Show's take on the Zell Miller speech and his subsequent meltdown on CNN and MSNBC. It is REALLY good.

This is a direct link which MIGHT work in all video players, not sure though.

Or just go to The Daily Show's Video Page and Click on the Video "Zell on Earth."

Mac users, if neither works, get Windows Media Player for OSX or for OS9.

1001 American Soldiers Killed in Iraq

Well, we passed the 1000 mark.
Dunno if anyone cares.

Boston Globe article.

What can anyone say?

John Edwards' Trail Cases: You Decide

Here's a list of John Edward's Trial Cases at FindLaw.

Doesn't sound like coffee-burned-my-lap-gimme-a-million-dollars to me.

Bush Coke? Laura Pot?

Kitty Kelly's new book:

Boston Herald and Chicago Sun-Times:

''Bush did coke at Camp David when his father was president, and not just once either,'' Kelley quotes former sister-in-law Sharon Bush as saying, according The Daily Mirror of London.
The president first dabbled in drugs in the mid-1960s while at Yale and later snorted cocaine or smoked marijuana while in the National Guard, according to Kelley's new biography, ``The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty.''
The book, to be released later this month, also alleged first lady Laura Bush smoked pot in her youth.

Hmmm...

Kerry on Bush: "The Wrong War in the Wrong Place at the Wrong Time"

The actual Election Campaigns starts Tuesday.

Kerry campaign change #1: The C-Word
Bring in a bunch of Clinton Campaign people to infuse the campaign with that Clinton mojo!
They are taking over key positions, including media relations.
This can only be a good thing.
Those guys knew how to run a hard as nails campaigin.

Kerry campaign change #2: The W-Word
The mojo at work.

Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry on Monday called the invasion of Iraq "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time" and said his goal was to withdraw U.S. troops in his first White House term.

Kerry has apparently found a new theme in jingo form:
"That's W! That's wrong! Wrong choices. Wrong Direction!"
Now you're thinking "oh, that's fricking hokey!"
But they're not aiming at us lot.
They want people who are still not paying attention to sit up and take notice.
For that you need a catch phrase. Hence, "Flip-Flop!" Stupid, but whaddaya know - it works!
This one counters the Bush campaigns "W is for Women!" (etc.) schtick.

Imaging 10-30,000 people at a Kerry rally chanting "Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!"
Scary, huh?

Polls Bouncing Down

Bush double digit lead dropping fast!

Format is "Candidate, Percentage, (Percentage in previous poll)

Gallup Poll
Registered Voters: Bush 49 (47) Kerry 48 (48)
Likely Voters: Bush 52 (50) Kerry 45 (47)

Rasmussen Poll
Bush 48 (9/4: 49) Kerry 47 (9/4: 45)

And the problems with the double-digit Bush leads of Time and Newsweek are discussed by Rasmussen:

For those who need to know the answer before the explanation, the bottom line is that the President is ahead by 4 to 5 points at this time. That's a significant improvement over the past few weeks, but not a double digit lead.

Young Compassionate Conservatives

...they kick women when they're down. And WABC caught it on videotape.

From Moroveus

ACT UP disrupted a speech by Andy Card. One of the protesters, a young woman, was being pinned down by Secret Service personnel, when an unknown Young Republican came forward and began kicking her. Here's a transcript of what the Young Republican in question had to say:

Reporter: We actually have you on camera kicking one of the protesters.

Young Republican: ...

Reporter: Did you kick one of the protesters?

Young Republican: I...don't...believe so. I dunno.

Reporter: We have you on camera kicking one.

Young Republican: Hmm.

Remember: When Bush says "helping" he means "hurting" seniors

Right after President Bush claimed to be helping seniors in the United States, the administration annouced that Medicare costs will now increasse by almost 20%.

From the New York Times:

A day after President Bush heralded his efforts to help the elderly cope with increased medical expenses, federal officials announced the largest premium increase in dollars in the Medicare program's history, raising the monthly expense by $11.60 to $78.20.

The increase, which amounts to 17 percent, results largely from increased payments to doctors and reflects rising medical expenses generally, officials said. The rise has nothing to do with a program that will start in 2006 to offer prescription drugs, for which beneficiaries must pay a separate premium.

The increase immediately became grist for an increasingly contentious presidential campaign. Phil Singer, a spokesman for the Kerry campaign, released a statement saying, "After doing nothing about the record increases in the cost of health care over the last four years, George Bush is presiding over a Medicare system that is socking seniors with the largest premium hike in the program's 40-year history."

Poll Crazy: Bush led Gore in every poll leading to Election Day

For more perspective on recent poll scares:
(from a nice diary at Daily Kos)

In 2000, from October all the way to Election day, Bush led Gore by as little as 2 and as much as 13 percentage points in almost every single poll (see Polling Report).

For instance, in the Gallup Poll (the most well-known of them all) Oct1 - Nov5:
Gore trailed bush by an average of 5% (standard deviation 3.5 for statistic mongerers)

Funny that on Election day, as you might remember, Gore won the popular vote
Gore: 48.38% Bush: 47.87% Nader (The Jerk): 2.7%

So there you have it. Polls, Schmolls? Statistical aberration? Who knows. That's for pollsters and statisticians to decide.

But it does put things in perspective.

That doesn't mean everything is okey-dokey, of course. People still need to get out the Vote.

Bush: A Man of His Word

Must see video: George W. Bush, A Man of His Word - Click Here!

Compassionate Conservatism

Here's - Compassionate Conservatism - at its best!

WEST ALLIS, Wis. (AP) President Bush on Friday wished Bill Clinton ``best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery.''

``He's is in our thoughts and prayers,'' Bush said at a campaign rally.

Bush's audience of thousands in West Allis, Wis., booed. Bush did nothing to stop them.

However, amazingly, the booing comment is starting to be deleted - as we speak!

[UPDATE] Unless a video is made available from some source, it's unclear if there was really booing at the rally and the comment was excised OR if that was some kind of mistake which was then corrected. Could be either. I'd really like to believe they couldn't have booed.

Clinton in Hospital Following Chest Pains

Former President Bill Clinton is in hospital to have heart bypass surgery.

From Daily Kos:

Some have asked about where to send cards -- cards may be sent to Clinton's office at:

The William J. Clinton Foundation
55 West 125th St.
New York, NY 10027

That said -- not to be presumptuous -- I think it's safe to say that he's going to get an overwhelming number of cards. Knowing what we do about Bill Clinton, he may well prefer that we all send off small contributions in his honor to the DNC, or to the Clinton Presidential Foundation, which supports a host of important charitable activities, most notably the Clinton HIV/AIDS Initiative.

Pat Buchanan slams Bush and the GOP !! (??!!)

Preface: I do NOT like Pat Buchanan's politics.

On Wednesday Morning (9/1) a full page ad was in the New York Times (page A11) for Buchanan's new book Where the Right Went Wrong.
(DOES anyone have a link to the image of this advertisement? The quotes are harsh!)

-in it he apparently SLAMS Bush and the NeoCons up and down
-claims what we all know, that the NeoCon fiscal policies are reckless and NOT conservative.
-Today's GOP is in it for pure power and nothing else.
-our economy has been gutted
-etc.

This is Pat Buchanan?!? He's no leftie by any means but: What does this mean for die-hard classic Republicans?

On Iraq: We invaded a country that did not threaten us, did not attack us, and did not want war with us, to disarm it of weapons we have since discovered it did not have. We may have ignited a war of civilizations it was in our vital interests to avoid. Never has America been more resented and reviled in an Islamic world of a billion people

On George W. Bush: George W. Bush has compiled a fiscal record of startling recklessness.

On today's GOP: The Republican party may be summarized thus: To hell with principle; what matters is power, and that we have it, and that they do not.

On Conservatism: The spirit of true conservatism appears to be dead.

Will this send a shiver down the Republicans' spine or do they think he's a kook?

Daily Show!! Bush - Words Speak Louder Than Actions

I love Jon Stewart!!!

Click on the video "George W. Bush's Words"

I'll mention when the excellent Zell Miller segment is put online.

Lies and omissions from Bush's speech

Excerpts from Associated Press.

President Bush glossed over some complicating realities in Iraq, Afghanistan and the home front in arguing the case Americans are safer and his opponent cannot deliver.

On Iraq, Bush talked of a 30-member alliance standing shoulder to shoulder with the United States, masking the fact that U.S. troops are pulling by far most of the weight. On Afghanistan and its neighbors, he gave an accounting of captured or killed terrorists, but did not address the replenishment of their ranks or the still-missing Osama bin Laden [...]

Nowhere did Bush mention bin Laden, nor did he account for the replacement of killed and captured al al-Qaida leaders by others.

Excerpts from the Washington Post.

• Kerry did not cast a series of votes against individual weapons systems, as Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.) suggested in a slashing convention speech in New York late Wednesday, but instead Kerry voted against a Pentagon spending package in 1990 as part of deliberations over restructuring and downsizing the military in the post-Cold War era.

• Both Vice President Cheney and Miller have said that Kerry would like to see U.S. troops deployed only at the direction of the United Nations, with Cheney noting that the remark had been made at the start of Kerry's political career. This refers to a statement made nearly 35 years ago, when Kerry gave an interview to the Harvard Crimson, 10 months after he had returned from the Vietnam War angry and disillusioned by his experiences there. (President Bush at the time was in the Air National Guard, about to earn his wings.)

• President Bush, Cheney and Miller faulted Kerry for voting against body armor for troops in Iraq. But much of the funding for body armor was added to the bill by House Democrats, not the administration, and Kerry's vote against the entire bill was rooted in a dispute with the administration over how to pay for $20 billion earmarked for reconstruction of Iraq.

Zell Miller Banned from Bush's Speech

Do they think they went just a little too far?

After gauging the harsh reaction from Democrats and Republicans alike to Sen. Zell Miller’s keynote address at the Republican National Convention, the Bush campaign — led by the first lady — backed away Thursday from Miller’s savage attack on Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, insisting that the estranged Democrat was speaking only for himself.

Late Thursday, Miller and his wife were removed from the list of dignitaries who would be sitting in the first family’s box during the president’s acceptance speech later in the evening. Scott Stanzel, a spokesman for the Bush campaign, said Miller was not in the box because the campaign had scheduled him to do too many television interviews.

There was no explanation, however, for why Miller would be giving multiple interviews during Bush’s acceptance speech, or what channels would snub the president in favor of Miller. Nor was it made clear why Miller’s wife also was not allowed to take her place in the president’s box 24 hours after his deeply personal denunciation of his own party’s nominee.

The change was made only a few hours after Laura Bush, asked about Miller’s speech, said in an interview with NBC News that “I don’t know that we share that point of view.” Aides to President Bush and his campaign said.

(From Josh Marshall - Talking Points Memo)

Surprise! Bush considering backing out of some debates

Well. Who didn't see this coming?

The commission, without a formal agreement by the Bush camp, set debates for Sept. 30 in Coral Gables, Fla.; Oct. 8 in St. Louis; and Oct. 13 in Tempe. A vice presidential debate between incumbent Dick Cheney and Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's running mate, North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, was set for Oct. 5 in Cleveland.

GOP strategist Scott Reed was quoted by the Reuter news agency this week as saying the Bush camp's position is that "two debates are sufficient and will not dominate the entire fall schedule."

"Three debates would have a tendency to be a little overbearing on your campaign strategy and tactics," Reed was quoted as saying.

snip

"John Kerry is willing to go to a debate every week," Kerry campaign spokeswoman Laura Capps said.

snip

Former Wyoming GOP Sen. Alan Simpson, who was on the commission when it proposed the three debates but who now is helping the Bush-Cheney campaign, said the idea that the Bush camp may want only two debates is "very disturbing."

Republicans Dishonor Veterans!

Just go here for a nice summary of what republicans feel about Veterens and Soldiers.

Background here: Republican delegates wear purple heart band-aids.

(thanks to Atrios)

Kerry's counterattack

Now, if all you heard is the Republicans this week being hate-mongerers, and the President begging to let him give him another chance to try doing things right for once......

Take some Pepto or Tums...

And read the speech which begins with John Kerry's vicious counter-attack:

Key line all over the news right along with Bush's speech:

I'm not going to have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq.

Excerpts of John Kerry's Remarks:

The election comes down to this. If you believe this country is heading in the right direction, you should support George Bush. But if you believe America needs to move in a new direction, join with us. John and I offer a better plan that will make us stronger at home and more respected in the world. And we need your help to do that.

For three days in New York, instead of talking about jobs and the economy, we heard anger and insults from the Republicans. And I'll tell you why. It's because they can't talk about the real issues facing Americans. They can't talk about their record because it's a record of failure.

We all saw the anger and distortion of the Republican convention. For the past week, they attacked my patriotism and my fitness to serve as commander in chief. Well, here's my answer. I'm not going to have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq.
The vice president even called me unfit for office last night. I guess I'll leave it up to the voters whether five deferments makes someone more qualified to defend this nation than two tours of duty.

Let me tell you what I think makes someone unfit for duty. Misleading our nation into war in Iraq makes you unfit to lead this nation. Doing nothing while this nation loses millions of jobs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting 45 million Americans go without healthcare makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting the Saudi Royal Family control our energy costs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Handing out billions of government contracts to Halliburton while you're still on their payroll makes you unfit. That's the record of George Bush and Dick Cheney. And it's not going to change. I believe it's time to move America in a new direction; I believe it's time to set a new course for America.

And we have a specific plan to do just that. So tomorrow morning, John and Elizabeth and Teresa and I are hitting the road across America's heartland. From here, we'll go out and talk with Americans in towns across Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Michigan. And because a stronger America begins at home, we'll talk about our plan to create jobs, cut taxes for the middle class, lower health care costs, and make America safer and more secure.

Very Scary Convention Night-Miller Chiller

Just go to the convention site and watch the videos of Zell Miller (D-GA) and VP Dick Cheney.

Ooof. And not oof, wow what a smack in the face for the Democrats. No...oof yuck, there is talk that Miller was actually a Democratic Mole trying to undermine the GOP from the inside. I think he helped do that!

I mean even CNN and MSNBC were ripping him a new one!

Watch Chris Matthews! Damn.

Garrison Keillor calls the Republicans out

Anyone who can, please read this piece by Garrison Keillor!

He says much of the things I was thinking, and more, but with his pure Midwestern storytelling genius.

It begins...

Something has gone seriously haywire with the Republican Party. Once, it was the party of pragmatic Main Street businessmen in steel-rimmed spectacles who decried profligacy and waste, were devoted to their communities and supported the sort of prosperity that raises all ships. They were good-hearted people who vanquished the gnarlier elements of their party, the paranoid Roosevelt-haters, the flat Earthers and Prohibitionists, the antipapist antiforeigner element. The genial Eisenhower was their man, a genuine American hero of D-Day, who made it OK for reasonable people to vote Republican.

snip

The Nixon moderate vanished like the passenger pigeon, purged by a legion of angry white men who rose to power on pure punk politics. “Bipartisanship is another term of date rape,” says Grover Norquist, the Sid Vicious of the GOP. “I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.” The boy has Oedipal problems and government is his daddy.

snip

The Union is what needs defending this year. Government of Enron and by Halliburton and for the Southern Baptists is not the same as what Lincoln spoke of. This gang of Pithecanthropus Republicanii has humbugged us to death on terrorism and tax cuts for the comfy and school prayer and flag burning and claimed the right to know what books we read and to dump their sewage upstream from the town and clear-cut the forests and gut the IRS and mark up the constitution on behalf of intolerance and promote the corporate takeover of the public airwaves and to hell with anybody who opposes them.

There's much more. Read it read it read it.

MSNBC gives no choice - Vote GOP!

To MSNBC,

In your online poll this morning you give two options:
from MSNBC.com

Did Rudy Giuliani's speech reassure you or move you to support the Bush-Cheney ticket? Reassure Move you to support Vote to see results

Remember the old-Soviet journal Pravda? Sounds similar

Are you a Fox affiliate?

Can Air America have a similar poll?
-------------------
Is MSNBC a supporter or a mouthpiece of the GOP? 1) Supporter 2) Mouthpiece

Is MSNBC just un-American or a Communist Propaganda Machine? 1) Un-American 2) Communist
-------------------
Can your organization explain its betrayal of American values?

-Sent to MSNBC.COM


[UPDATE 1:52pm] Poll finally changed:

Did Rudy Giuliani's speech move you to support the Bush-Cheney ticket? * 8197 responses Yes 45% No 55% Thank you for voting. Click here for some background, and send us an e-mail to share your thoughts. Plus, see past voting results.