WWW Opinion Times

Thursday, September 30, 2004

Bush on Goal of Iraq

Bush made an excellent point in response to the question "when will we bring troops back."

He said:

Objective: SEe that Iraqi's take charge of their nation. 1st duty is train Iraqi's.

End Game:
1) Iraq will be a strong ally.
2) Iraq will help secure Israel
3) Iraq will add to the strength of reformers in Iran.

These were good statements. Some observations.

1) The President has actually helped himself by expanding the case that it was a good thing to go into Iraq and free the people there. He could have done more, but this was a great way to handle it.

2) It was a bit of a risk to mention Israel being more secure with a reformed Iraq. I wonder with the reaction in the Arab world will be to that statement. I sense Al Jazeera will be running that over and over again.

3) It was a great statement to speak of the way a free Iraq would help the situation in Iran. Yes, we sided with Saddam during the Iran/Iraq war and have paid the price for that. But now we will have an opportunity with a stablized southern Iraq (and it is stable) to influence Shi'ites in Iran and Iraq. Ths will be a benefit to us.

Kerry and More Troops

Kerry says he wants to add two more divisions to meet our international needs.

What about the Peace Dividend Senator? Did you not understand that something like this would come when you supported a draw down of our military and our weapons programs?

Debate Facts

You'll note to the right under my personal profile that I have added the News Feed for the Bush/Cheney Debate Facts. You can monitor debate facts live during the event tonight.

I will be blogging at the same time and afterward, so you can monitor analysis here on Opinion Times.

INDIANA: Kernan Makeover Admits Failure

Update in the Indiana Governor race: incumbent makes classic logical mistake. Read below.

The Hoosier Parliament: Kernan Makeover Admits Failure

Wednesday, September 29, 2004

Colorado The Irrelevant

Erick dissed me on my comments about Alan Keyes earlier (just kidding buddy!). But he hit the nail on the head with his comments on the Colorado initiative. Excellent analysis on the subject (except for the comments that the Electoral College is archaic--ok, so I am a purist!).

Read On. Best read I have seen yet on the subject. Another example of why the blogsphere is changing the way we find important information.

Confessions Of A Political Junkie: Colorado The Irrelevant

Speaking When Tired

Gives Clinton-speak a new twist.

Mark A. Kilmer's Political Annotation: "So it seems Mr. Kerry was trying to steal a page from the master. There is a problem, as the official GWB blog points out. It comes from a March article in the Washington Post:
'I actually did vote for his $87 billion, before I voted against it,' he told a group of veterans at a noontime appearance at Marshall University."

Eerie Comparison

Erick Erickson at Confessions of a Political Junkie found the link below.

I think we have finally figured out the origin of Kerry's policy statements. Click here: Kerry Color Analysis

Today's Funny

A friend sent this to me by IM today:

"The National Weather Service has issued a warning for yet another catastrophic hurricane following on the heels of Ivan and Jeanne. The path of this hurricane is highly unpredictable, and prone to frequent zigzags. Experts predict it will likely cause the most damage the United States has seen in four years. They are naming it Hurricane Kerry.

Be advised. The only way for citizens to protect themselves is by hiding behind a Bush."

PBA Ban Appealed by Administration

The Bush Administration has once again stood for the principle of Life.

The gruesome practice of Partial Birth Abortion was banned by Congress and immediately challenged by pro-death advocates in court. Federal Courts in Nebraska and New York recently ruled against the ban based on a 2000 Supreme Court decision requiring a health exception to the ban.

It is time to change the culture of death in the country by pulling out the root. Abortion has been a stain and has done more to degrade our cultural heritage than anything except possibly the ban on prayer in schools.

This years election season has raised the Culture War to a new level of engagement. The next President will decide the ultimate fate of Roe v. Wade by appointing 2-3 Supreme Court judges. The Court may hear the Administration's Appeal in it's next term.

Bush Administration Appeals Rulings Against Partial-Birth Abortion Ban
National Right to Life

Voter Registration on the Rise

In a Washington Times article excerpted below, many places across the country are seeing a tremendous rise in the number of people registering to vote.

Having recently been in West Virginia, I know that the registration efforts there are strongly favoring Republicans. The RNC has a strong registration effort taking places through the Christian community.

There is always a caveat in my mind regarding increased registration: will it lead to actual votes. Democrat registration efforts (largely in the union, black and Hispanic communities) have largely not turned out the vote with the exception of the defeat of Bob Dornan a few years back. Republican registration efforts typically have not seen large gains in the short term. But Republican efforts have been very successful in the long term with the rise of voting in the Christian Conservative movement from the 1980's until now.

My personal feeling is that the rise in registration is largely favoring the President. But with Philadelphia and Cleveland seeing increases, there is a chance that Bush will have a tough time of it in two states critical to his electoral success.

Bush still wins the election, though.

Voter-registration effort booms as deadline looms - The Washington Times: Metropolitan - September 29, 2004: " The AP reported that Cleveland has seen nearly twice as many new voters registering compared with 2000; Philadelphia is having its biggest boom in new voters in 20 years; and counties are bringing in temporary workers and employees from other agencies to help process the new registration forms. Philadelphia borrowed employees from other city agencies and started working overtime two months earlier than the usual post-Labor Day push.
The AP also reported that clerks have hired extra workers in Colorado, Ohio and West Virginia. "

Tuesday, September 28, 2004

Poll Shows Bush With Solid Lead (washingtonpost.com)

Although the Washington Post in this article strains to make George Bush out to be a "divider", it lays out the case for his win in November.

Note to the Post: President's who win a majority of the vote didn't divide anything. Did Clinton ever win a majority?

Poll Shows Bush With Solid Lead (washingtonpost.com): "'Actually I would have voted for Kerry three months ago, but he's not improved or not shown his positions any more clearly in the last three months than he did a year ago,' Vyvyan said. 'I think he's trying to be everything to everybody, and you just can't.' "

Alan Keyes v. Barak Obama: Fundamental Race of the Season

The Alan Keyes v. Barak Obama race has turned into a difficult one to watch. To see Alan so far behind in published polls is difficult for this fan of his.

Keyes fundamental problem is his unwillingness to speak in soundbites and finesse issues with the purpose of achieving an end goal while taking "losses" along the way. This will serve him well in the Senate (if he can make it there), but has made him unelectable to the present.

In 2000, Alan's campaign for President was excellent. His message was on target and it resonated with the conservative base. But in Maryland before and Illinois now, he has had Republican Party organizations which were unable and unwilling to see the ultimate benefit of having him in Congress: namely that those who bring the debate higher inspire the base and build the party.

To be sure, Alan would not be the "constituent service" sort of legislator, but he would bring the level of debate on the floor of Congress to a level it hasn't reached since the 80's. With a Republican Congress and a President in his second term willing to "try things", this could pay off in long term dividends for the key issues facing the country right now; abortion and the tax code. But Alan doesn't play the game the way the "players" like, so he finds himself in a pickle at present.

Hopefully there is a miracle in the offing, but campaigns are rarely won in such a manner. Blessings to the man, curses to those unwilling to seek something higher than mere wins and losses.

Read the article below.

Illinois Conservative Politics

All the good things they never tell you about today's Iraq

All the good things they never tell you about today's Iraq

Monday, September 27, 2004

Note to President Bush: You're Winning

RealClear Politics - Polls

Check out this rolling list of Bush/Kerry Polls.

The President is beginning to pull away. If Bush has a good debate and no October surprises........it's over.

Dear President Bush:

It's time to begin stumping for the Congressional and Gubernatorial Candidates.

P.S. Other Presidential candidates have done this in the past, and it seems to cause great success for the party as a whole.........just a thought.

Grassroots Campaign Mail

From: Confessions of a Political Junkie
Click on picture to enlarge

Go to lastpage

Sunday, September 26, 2004

Bush Volunteered For Vietnam?

Backcountry Conservative found some interesting information on Bush's Guard ServiceRead More Here: "One of the criticisms leveled at the President is that he sought guard service to keep him from serving in Vietnam. [Colonel] Morrisey says, 'not so.'
'The Air Force, in their ultimate wisdom, assembled a group of 102's and took them to Southeast Asia. Bush volunteered to go. But he needed to have 500 [flight] hours, but he only had just over 300 hours so he wasn't eligible to go,' Morrisey recalls. "

As we continute on in this debate over military service, it seems that analysis turns on its head: John Kerry went to Vietnam, served, received medals and came back to trash the military he claims to have honorably served; George Bush seems to have dodged the draft, served in the National Guard and volunteered to be dispatched into harms way (although denied the opportunity).

Remember the biblical parable of the two servants. One was asked to do something, said yes and then backed out and the other said no and then did what was asked. Which one was obedient?...It's a good analysis of these two Presidential candidates!

Friday, September 24, 2004

Andrew Sullivan Nails It! Kerry's Not Ready.

Readers of this column will know that I am strongly in favor of the war in Iraq and that I don't share the cynicism of many regarding how the President is handling it now. Andrew Sullivan is highly critical of the Bush Administration's handling of Iraq, but he hit it on the head today in his review of Joe Lockhart's comments in the LA Times today.

"BEYOND BELIEF: I'm going to wait till after next week's national security debate to make a final assessment of John Kerry on the war, but this statement by Joe Lockhart about Ayad Allawi is just vile:

'The last thing you want to be seen as is a puppet of the United States, and you can almost see the hand underneath the shirt today moving the lips.'

This is the same Joe Lockhart who calls nutjobs in Texas at the behest of CBS. Look, Bush's war-management deserves ferocious criticism, but the notion that Kerry is fit to wage this war is getting more and more untenable as the days go by. He has sent signals that he wants to withdraw troops soon; he disses our allies; he shows contempt for a man risking his life to bring democracy to Iraq. We're in a war, senator. Fight the enemy, not our friends."

I don't often agree with Sullivan, but he got it right this time. And people (read: voters) of each party affiliation will not react well to this comment. Just another in a long line of bad lines from the Kerry camp.

Kerry and Political Discourse

Proving once again that John Kerry never saw a flip-flop he couldn't resist, the Massachusetts Senator asserted on CNN's Crossfire in 1997 that the United States reserved the right to unilaterally attack Saddam Hussein's Iraq in the national interest.

In the
Washington Times today, Kerry is reported as saying then when he appeared with Cong. Peter King, "We know we can't count on the French. We know we can't count on the Russians. We know that Iraq is a danger to the United States, and we reserve the right to take pre-emptive action whenever we feel it's in our national interest."

What a difference seven years and a Republican Presidential opponent can make!

One of the major reasons Mr. Kerry is failing in the polls at present is that his position on issues changes in a manner analogous to those prescription glasses which darken gradually when exposed to the sun. And he hasn't mitigated this problem with a positive, practical agenda.

At first, this seemed to be for Mr. Kerry just a few examples of typical political-speak. As more of these shifts in position are revealed, we find him lampooning himself. The shades of grey revealed shift back and forth making Kerry seem like the Mood Ring of American politics.

No matter how hard he tries, John Kerry will not win this race unless the American people believe he will make a positive difference for the country. Attack Dog politics will only move the polls so far. There is a
Laffer Curve in politics which proportionally maximizes or negates voter support for a candidate based on net accumulation of negative campaign inputs (I'll call it the Pfaff Curve for the purposes of this article :) ). John Kerry reached his peak on that curve around May of this year. As he loses more voters over time without providing a counterbalanced positive agenda, he complains about Swift Boat Veterans and an opponent ignorant of our place in the world in his estimation rather than providing a clear contrast a challenger needs to gain electoral success. Voters receive perspective from negative attacks, but ultimately cannot attach to them.

I believe that American politics benefits from negative attack (which I differentiate from personal attacks). Our election process has greatly benefited from it throughout our history. The American people reject politicians who cannot bring a light on truth. They seek answers and solutions, and cannot countenance mere diatribe. They want the truth because, as was so eloquently stated by George C. Scott playing Patton in the biographical portrait of that great general, "losing is hateful to Americans." Losing implies poor planning and neglect of facts. Americans judge their politicians based on their ability to see reality and implement workable solutions. Kerry does neither.

We wonder at those who complain about the tenor of political campaigns these days. When they do so, are they making a serious comment on the process, or are we only observing a defensive attempt to shield incompetence. I believe in the case of Mr. Kerry and the majority of the Democrat Party, we are observing the latter.

Edward R. Murrow once said, "When the politicians complain that TV turns the proceedings into a circus, it should be made clear that the circus was already there, and that TV has merely demonstrated that not all the performers are well trained."

The Washington Times: Inside the Beltway - September 24, 2004

Thursday, September 23, 2004



Abortion Tops "Healthcare" cases in Ghana

Abortion tops malaria and anemia as most frequently treated "health cases" in the country of Ghana

"Abortion cases supersede all other health cases reported at the various health centers in Jaman District of Brong Ahafo" in Ghana, West Africa.

Top Ten Ways CBS News Can Improve Its Reputation

Top Ten Ways CBS News Can Improve Its Reputation

Communists for KERRY

Communists for KERRY

This is a great website........check it out!

Kofi Annan--Bureaucrat Extraordinaire

UN Secretary General's speech

"The vulnerable lack effective recourse, while the powerful manipulate laws to retain power and accumulate wealth. At times even the necessary fight against terrorism is allowed to encroach unnecessarily on civil liberties. At the international level, all states - strong and weak, big and small - need a framework of fair rules, which each can be confident that others will obey. " --Kofi Annan

"The perfect bureaucrat everywhere is the man who manages to make no decisions and escape all responsibility." --Brooks Atkinson, Once Around the Sun, 1951

Kofi Annan in his UN Speech on Tuesday saw fit to accuse the United States of being an international bully. He has called the United States effort in Iraq "illegal." He claims international law as the standard by which he comes to this judgment. One of those values, as expressed in his speech at the UN on Tuesday, is "restraints on the strong." Is strength illegal?

In the ongoing battle against political-speak, let me make a grammatical distinction here: illegalities refer to laws made by some government or institution, wrongness refers to inappropriate action, behavior or function or to moral responsibility adjudicated by Divine Decree.

If we were to accept the fact that there is some international law which precludes the United States, or any country--strong or weak--from seeking military means to protect its people from harm after a 9/11-type event , then the United States took an "illegal" action. If we consider the moral grounds upon which the invasion of Iraq was taken, the United States was right.

The people of Iraq were gassed and tortured. They were stripped of basic human rights and treated as cattle slaughtered by government policy. No disgrace, indignity, cruelty or torture was withheld from them. The Hussein government supported terror all over the world to the fullest extent possible before and after sanctions were imposed upon them in the early 90's.

In the light of the horrible death of tens of thousands worldwide over the last few decades due to terror--highlighted by the toppling of the World Trade Center towers--it seems incumbent upon an organization founded to mitigate such disasters to take action. I guess Mr. Annan was too busy coordinating his oversight of the Oil for Food Program in Iraq.

Since the Secretary General believes his organization has principles by which we should abide, it seems necessary at this point to refer to the UN Declaration of Human Rights to provide him with some guidance. It will be a good exercise for us to consider this document as a means to help educate Mr. Annan as to the role and purpose of his organization.

Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law.

Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

.....And many more could be cited here. Clearly, none of these principles were being consulted when Kofi Annan and some UN member states decided to sit out the atrocities in Iraq. And when other members decided to act, offense was taken and irrational excuses were given to justify the irritation felt.

The point is this. Mr. Annan believes his political position over an international institution allows him an opportunity to find reasons to subjugate the "strong" when he believes they assert an authority higher than his. To do so, he must ignore the principles clearly outlined in the institution he leads. But worse than this, he has no independent moral judgment which causes him to look with compassion on subjugated peoples. But, many UN member states have no reason to desire freedom, and he maintains his political power through them.

The United Nations is dead from within because it is established not on the principles of freedom, but of bureaucracy.

Wednesday, September 22, 2004

OHIO--Swing State No More

Excellent Comments by Jay Click here for more: Jay Reding.com Swing State No More

"Based on polling and ongoing social and political factors, I consider Ohio to be now firmly in the Bush camp. That doesn't mean that it couldn't swing back into swing state territory later, but until there is evidence that support such a swing, I don't see Kerry having much of a chance of taking Ohio. If anything, there's a greater likelyhood of Bush increasing his margins in the state from 2000.

Ohio is one of Bush's must-win states, and as the race moves from that state to the newly appointed swing state of Pennsylvania, it appears as though the Bush campaign has a very strong chance of ensuring that the Buckeye State doesn't swing towards Kerry in November."

Judge In Norma McCorvey Case Blasts Roe v. Wade Abortion Decision

Judge In Norma McCorvey Case Blasts Roe v. Wade Abortion Decision

Bill Safire: First, Find the Forger

The New York Times > Opinion > Bill Safire

This is an excellent article which makes sense of the CBS Scandal. Puts a proper legal perspective on the situation.

Tuesday, September 21, 2004

Kerry Would Have Kept Saddam in Power

Kerry Accuses Bush of Incompetence in Iraq

John Kerry claims that our world would be more stable if George Bush had kept Saddam Hussein in power. Using the twisted logic of the pacifist, Kerry would have a President of the United States contain evil within certain boundaries hoping that it would spill out no further. Nevill Chamberlin once hoped evil could be contained by ceding Poland to a similar dictator; in Kerry's case, he would have ceded Iraq. Thus, John Kerry proposes to become the Dutch Boy of the White House by sticking his finger in the Dike of Terror. It worked in the fabled tale because those who did not notice the problem eventually came to help. No such help exists among the pacifist French, Russian and German governments who ignored the problem plainly evident to them.

Winston Churchill said, "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Totalitarianism has the virtue of imposing degrees of the misery of Socialism in equal proportion to the whims of cruelty devised by the dictator.

John Kerry has devised just such a formula in his political attempt to snatch the Presidency using the same dis-honoralbe tactics he foisted upon the American people in Congressional hearings more than 30 years ago after returning from Vietnam.

The Hoosier Parliament: Kerry Ignores Bayh's Warning

The Hoosier Parliament: Kerry Ignores Bayh's Warning

Scalia Predicts Bitter Supreme Court Nominations


Justice Anonin Scalia says that because of the "Supreme Court's willingness to decide political questions such as the death penalty and abortion," the next nominee will have a very difficult fight.

John Kerry and Dr. Phil

MichNews.com: John Kerry and Dr. Phil

Magazine says, "I Love Abortion"

LifeNews.com - The news source for the pro-life community.

Magazine denys the dignity of life and promotes items for sale that say "I Love Abortion."

Friday, September 17, 2004

West Virginia--Girl's Bush Cheney Sign Ripped Up By Kerry Supporters

Huntington, WV. Three year old has Bush/Cheney sign vandalized by Kerry Supporters

Click here to see the story and the picture

Thursday, September 16, 2004

Focus on the Family To Launch Nationwide Voter Registration Effort

A friend of mine, Jim Banks, a voter registration field representative for Focus on the Family, talks about his Focus's nationwide voter registration effort in the Rocky Mountain News.

Click here for article

ABCNEWS.com : U.S. Weapons Inspector: Iraq Had No WMD

The Left-Wing politicians and the media have, as we all know, been accusing President Bush of "beating the drums of war too soon" when it came to invading and liberating Iraq. Frankly, it becomes increasingly frustrating to hear the media (as in this ABC news report) continue to beat the drums of accusation that the Bush Administration lied to the American people about the reasons for going to war with Saddam Hussein.

ABC News tells us that a report about to be released by Charles Deulfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group, will state that at best Saddam had only the capacity to restart weapons programs long dormant and that he had only maintained "small research and development programs" which included attempts to import banned materials and to develop airborne methods for delivering chemical agents. It is difficult to see how this constitutes proof that the administration lied to us about intelligence or invaded Iraq under false pretenses.

Let's be clear at this point: our intelligence seems to have been quite incomplete overall when it comes to Iraq's pre-war weapons capabilities. But the description of this report, if accurate, seems to confirm the case President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair made prior to the war; that Saddam Hussein's intention was to have a strong chemical weapons program in place if and when international pressure was reduced on his government. It seems reasonable that the intelligence we were gathering prior to the war could have indicated that the shell programs described in this report took on the apprearance of full blown weapons programs. This would be exacerbated by the shell game weapons inspectors encountered during inspections before and after 9/11.

And, parenthetically, ABC news points out that there is still some question reports of a disposal of chemical weapons into Syria prior to the war which is still being investigated by the US Government. ABC and most other news organizations in this country have not seen it fit to investigate this possibility. And the Bush Administration is doing little to inform the public on this possibility either.

In addition to this, there is a nagging thought which seems to rare itself up. There was a scene played by the cable news organizations daysbefore the fall of Baghdad which showed the burning of the Iraqi government records building in that city. Reporters stated that US forces desired to control the building as soon as possible and that they were purposely avoiding bombing it. It was also reported that the fire which destroyed the building with tens of thousands of pages of government records seemed to have been set internally and not as a result of American bombing. It was believed that this building contained records of weapons programs and other evidence incriminating to Saddam. It would be interesting to hear a follow-up story investigating these assertions.

Tuesday, September 14, 2004

INDIANA--"Get Over It" Attitude Mocks Delimma Facing Many Voters

Last week, it was reported in this journal that the Indianapolis Star had told religious conservatives in an editorial to "Get Over It" when they expressed grave concern when they discovered Republican Gubernatoral Candidate Mitch Daniels' proposed a homosexual centered employment policy and then met homosexual activist groups. Chief among those who were targeted by the Star in an article for speaking concern was Micah Clark, Executive Director of the Indiana Chapter of American Family Association. His response to the controversy is submitted here.

The Mitch Daniels campaign is in the midst of a controversy over a closed-door meeting with homosexual activists at a gay church in Indianapolis. I was critical of this decision and was quoted in the Star pointing out that the meeting runs the risk of offending a large number of social conservatives whose support Mitch will need to become governor.

I thought this was an obvious point. After all, if a candidate who traditionally receives support from labor unions met with Right to Work advocates, would anyone be surprised if an AFL-CIO leader expressed concern? A politician who meets with groups holding polar opposite views on core principles rarely gains anything other than the distrust of both sides.

The Star chose to scold conservatives in an editorial titled Daniels and Gays: Get Over It. The editorial pointed out that the "next governor will be governor of all of Indiana." And that the governor "will need to listen to and serve all Hoosiers, no matter their stands on the controversial issues of the day." So, "Get over it" the editorial demanded.

This cliché sounds good in a political science lecture, but in practice it is not always true. For example, it is doubtful that a candidate for governor would meet with a group seeking to lower the age of sexual consent for minors. Yet, there are probably many Hoosiers who might hold this extreme view and if elected, the candidate would represent them as he would all Hoosiers.
I believe the meeting Daniels held was unwise. Still, by itself, it was certainly not a fatal political error. Yet, this controversy has brought attention to a position Daniels holds which elevates homosexual behavior and cross-dressing to a protected civil rights status equal to race and skin color. This position was reportedly discussed at the controversial meeting and it appears on the My Man Mitch web site contact page.

Many social conservatives have long feared that government endorsement of homosexuality is not only bad for individuals and society, it also poses potential threats to the religious freedoms of churches, private schools and religious-based businesses. The policy Daniels pledges to enforce could open up these institutions to lawsuits if they refuse to hire or choose to fire someone engaging in a behavior that contradicts centuries of religious teachings.
In order to win, the Daniels campaign must hold the support of over 150,000 Republican conservative voters who did not support him in the primary. Many of these voters are people of deep faith who hold principles that supercede political calculations. They view voting as something for which they will be held accountable by the same God who calls homosexual behavior "an abomination."

It is not likely that these people with such deeply held counter-cultural views will quickly "get over" this issue simply to help a candidate they may have opposed only a few months ago. To expect them to blindly discard their principles is not only condescending, it is unrealistic.

Micah Clark is the Executive Director of the American Family Association of Indiana

Saturday, September 11, 2004

September 11, 2001 - To All The Heros.....Thank You

September 11, 2001 - www.ezboard.com

Friday, September 10, 2004

Kerry Delusional Thinking

The Republican Convention is over. The dust has settled from the "pomp and circumstance" portion of campaign politics we call the National Party Conventions. Of the two, the Republicans clearly put on the better show. They were more well organized. The speakers were well chosen and stuck to Bush's conservative message against their generally moderate leanings. Zell Miller's speech was the equivalent of Barry Bonds on "Home Run Derby". The final outcome of both conventions is this: Bush the statesman of today scores a sizeable bump while outlining a plan for his next administration; Kerry the Vietnam War Veteran cannot (will not?) lay out a plan for the future and suffers a "negative bounce."

So I wake up this morning readying myself to analyze the Presidential race. I come across many examples of angst amongst John Kerry supporters about what he should be doing to bring himself back from the precipice in the polls. The comments from the left show a lack of understanding of what connects with average people.

Here's a relevant example:

From The Friday Project
: in an interview with Director, Writer and Comedian Sam Seder, The Friday Project asks: "What does John Kerry need to do to win in November?" Seder answered, "I think Kerry needs to focus more on the economy and begin introducing more populist language into his campaign. The war in Iraq is a disaster and he should continue to speak of it but he must remind Americans that Bush has been a failure in every facet of his Presidency. In the final analysis, all of us who don't want to see the rich get richer at the expense of the rest of society, a series of bloody needless wars and diminished civil rights, need to mobilize voters who have never voted before."

In a nutshell, this is the left's advice to John Kerry: go populist, beat on the anti-Iraq drum; beat up on Bush; beat up on the rich; beat up on Iraq again; pull out the race card; find more voters in the penumbra of a disinfranchised electorate.

All along, the "real" electorate is wondering what John Kerry will do as President. This is evident from the recent polls.

Michael Grant, in an article
which appeared at National Review Online during the primary season, opined as to why Jonathan Edwards would beat John Kerry in South Carolina. One of the reasons he stated was, "It is assumed [by South Carolinians] that people from Massachusetts are effete snobs who order their dinner in French with a haughty air. Kerry isn't helped by the fact that, in his case, this happens to be true." Kerry's problem of being an elite Northeasterner is not only with people in the South (no, Jon Edwards will not help Kerry there), it is also a problem he is having with most Americans--excepting Democrat voters. He cannot connect because he seems an elitist and he offers nothing in his campaign which would suggest the contrary.

Kerry's campaign has done very little to express to the country his plan if he becomes President. It's as if he assumes that the average voter already knows what he will do as President, and that they need only be reminded of their latent hatred of President Bush. Or, more to the point, as Theresa Heinz-Kerry recently stated
, people who didn't accept her husband's national health care plan are "idiots," John Kerry himself seems to imply by his lack of a coherent statment of his agenda that voters who do not already understand his "plan" for America are just wrong-thinking conservatives "duped" by the "lies of this administration."

The polls make it clear: that kind of thinking is delusional.

Giuliani as Nominee in 2008?

I have spoken today with people who are saying he is already lining up support for 2008. The question is, can he get a nomination dominated by Christian Conservatives? Chad Allen makes some intersting points which I believe will be relevant when the time comes.

The Washington Dispatch: If Bush wins a second term, watch the Supreme Court as it will determine the fate of Rudy Giuliani's potential to become the GOP's presidential nominee in 2008."

AP Poll Has Bush With Small Lead

My Way News: "Among those most likely to vote, the Republican ticket of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney holds a lead of 51 percent to 46 percent over Kerry and Sen. John Edwards, with independent Ralph Nader receiving 1 percent."

Thursday, September 09, 2004

INDIANA--Rep. Governor Candidate angers conservatives

"In politics, nothing is contemptible." --Disraeli

The Indiana Governor's race took a strange turn this week with the revelation that Mitch Daniels, the Republican candidate, met with gay and lesbian activists at the homosexual Jesus Metropolitan Church in Indianapolis over the weekend. Conservative leaders took exception to the meeting which was billed as an "outreach" to constituents. Those conservative leaders were scolded by the Indianapolis Star in an editorial today for speaking out against the meeting. The Daniels campaign has denied any affront to the conservative movement in the state.

Adding fuel to the fire, the stated employment policy for the Daniels campaign (listed at the bottom of the contact page of the www.MyManMitch.com website) recommends an anti-discrimination policy which exceeds Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidelines and standard business practice for discrimination based on "sexual orientation." Daniels campaign extends anti-discrimination practices to such issues as "gender identity." His website asserts that a Mitch Daniels administration would "implement this [anti-discrimination] policy in state government."

Conservatives are concerned about Daniels' meeting especially in light of his decision to implement a pro-homosexual employment standard. This puts into question Daniels stated support for laws in Indiana defining marriage as between one man and one woman. And they are concerned that the implementation of his anti-discrimination policy in state government would effectively require companies who do business with the state to implement the same policy themselves.

Harry Truman said, "whenever a fellow tells me he is bipartisan, I know he is going to vote against me." Conservative Republicans know by experience that "moderate" Republican candidates who seek the support of liberal groups will always "vote against" conservative causes if elected. It is not a flaw in the character of Christian Conservatives to feel betrayed by these actions as the Indianapolis Star claims in its editorial today. They cannot "get over it" because they know Daniels will betray their support if he is elected under these circumstances. They suddenly can see no difference between Daniels and his opponent who strongly supports gay rights as it is. It is negligent on the part of the Daniels campaign to assume conservatives could support such actions.

Dwight Eisenhower said, "A people that value its privileges above its principles soon loses both." The same can be said of politicians. Candidates must build a base in natural constituencies to be successful. To do so requires ideological consistency in words and deeds. Seeking acceptance from un-natural constituencies always ends in betrayal and at the same time causes a breakdown in alliances with natural supporters. That is the sin of the Daniels campaign. Mitch Daniels himself should clear the air by assuring his supporters that they need not "get over it."

Related Stories:

Daniels' outreach is leaked

Indy Star Rebukes Leak

Wednesday, September 08, 2004

Life Begins at (the court's) conception

Link: Terri Schiavo Case Could Go to Supreme Court, if Terri's Law Overturned

Link: Gruesome and Constitutional--Buckley

A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.
----Thomas Jefferson, Rights of British America, 1774


Once again, the courts seek to have it their own way. Those things which are evident in the words stated in our founding documents are somehow ignored when some judge or group of judges wants to promote a political ideal. When it comes to Terri Schiavo, whatever happened to the guarantee of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence?

Activist judges continue to ignore the principles that have held the republic together and made us the most prosperous, free nation in the history of the world. Are the foundations of our republic so fragile that we must allow individuals to destroy life merely for the convenience of not having to deal with the "problems" associated with sustaining life? Alan Keyes said, "When we surrender moral government to the courts, we have surrendered the very essence of freedom. We have surrendered its only real meaning, and we will not be free again until we get it back."

The Bible says in 2 Timothy, "But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant...without self-control, brutal, haters of good ... lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God." Until we understand that the inconveniences of life require sacrifice and commitment; until we learn that the foundation of liberty is sacrifice and self-government, not governmental largesse; until we come back to the principle that "we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights" (italics mine), we will go swiftly to a socialist state where individual liberty is granted by government and not by God Himself. In a sense, we will have gone full circle to the place where we started in the early 1770's(if we are not there already): despotic government giving and taking rights at its own whim.