Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Why don't you like Bush?

Before the election, I would like to know why or why not you are voting for a certain candidate. Also, I would like to know why, specifically you do not like President Bush, or what you don't like about his policies. I know everyone has some gripe. But, I want it to be entirely rational and able to be backed up. I don't want any lame "He went to war for oil!" bull-crap. I want a real, verifiable answer to policy issues. I would put them now, but they are many, and I am doing something else at the moment - just wanted to put this out while it was still in my mind. I meant to do this a while ago, but I forgot amongst all the other things I was doing. I will either put it in the comments, or in another post in the near future.

Oh, and I will be doing another survey, much like the one about the fictional characters a while back. I have to think of a new thing, though, that will cause thought. Or, if that doesn't happen, I will just do the fictional character thing again, because not all of you saw it, and less actually took the time to really do it.

Thursday, October 21, 2004

Important voting instructions!!

You may have seen the adds for all the Get Out the Vote and the Vote or Loose campaigns, ect. They all want you to vote; to get as many people as possible to perform their civic duty. And they all have an agenda...most target young people - a rather large group - who don't normally vote for some reason, but when they do, tend to be convienient, no? I would have to say that, statistically, at least one would be honest, just wanting to get people to vote. But certainly not all.

Anyways, they all claim to just want you to get out and perform your civic duty and vote. Well, guess what: you don't have the civic duty to vote. In fact, there are times when you should just stay home on the polling day. Why wouldn't you vote, if you are perfectly able and willing? I will explain:

The founding fathers, even more than a monarchy, feared mob rule. They knew that the average bumkin was not smart enough, not informed enough, to make a proper decision on who would be in charge of their country. They would fall to the ebbs and tides of popular opinion, easily swayed to someone else's informed opinion, as they have none of their own. Prone to vasilate in their own opinion, depending on whom they are talking to at the time. Or, even worse, a person would vote right on party lines - not because of any agreement philisophicaly, but just because it is their party, which must have, at one time, appealed to them in some way, but now may be completely different, and the voter will not notice, or care - have to vote for my party. If such a thing happened today, pretty much every election (at least presidential) would go to the Democrats, the party of Roosevelt and Kennedy. Also, there are people that are just too stupid to operate a voting machine properly. Even the incredibly simple butterfly ballot is too hard for some people. Those people should not vote. All these are most definitely NOT what the Founders wanted.

Well, David, you are saying that just because I am a Democrat?
No, not at all. I am saying that if you have not done research into actual positions, actual political history, of each candidate. You should ABSOLUTELY NOT vote entirely based on what the candidates will say they will do. Campaign promises are not promises; they are but possiblilties, mere suggestions to the candidate if elected. The only campaign promises you should even begin to believe are the ones that they have been actively persuing in the past, and havn't accomplished. Unfortunately, we, as Americans (even as a human species it seems; but Americans especially), vote based on what a candidate says, not on what they have done, and thus will most likely do in the future. If this is you, do not vote.

If you have based your vote on the debates, do not vote. Nothing new was said; nothing changed from before (except the polls...); it is just for useful soundbites and seeing who can give a better speech. All I said about campaign promises above doubles, triples, here.

If you are basing your vote just on what you see on the news, or read in the newspapers, do not vote. You are not properly informed. You are only partially informed. You need to look around. Congressional records, or state records, are pretty good. You don't have to hit the books yourself; someone else has done the research, and posted the results on the internet. You just have to look for that. (Sometimes it would just be easier to just look up those records yourself). A good place to look is They...check the facts...of what the candidates say. That is a good way to stay informed. Shoot, if you actually read the e-mailed articles I send you, you are pretty well-informed, but I would still suggest you do some of your own work, too.

This is not just my opinion. Go here and read what this guy says, at least up to the first emoticon. The rest is about a campaign rally. If you want to read the rest, be my guest. If not, as it is quite long, read the begining part.

Wednesday, October 13, 2004

Liveblogging the Debate!

Was eating my pudding. Saw Kerry's skeletal face, first thing I saw. Not something you want to see when you are eating dessert.

Kerry and Bush zinging each other so far. Both seem to have good points and counter-points at this time. Bush talking about education training for jobs in response to a question about job loss. Kerry points this out. Kerry now talking about deficit in response to this. What is this? Talking about extending unemployment benifits.

Good question. About realistic effect of pres. on jobs. Kerry says can't stop outsourcing, when he just was berating Bush on it. Bush laughes at Kerry about Boing thing. Kerry says will fight for even playing field on jobs. Will fight for our jobs as much as he fights for his. That is pretty hard, methinks. Bush now saying taxes are our moneys, not governments. Saying more stuff about Kerry's votes. Kerry says Bush playing with his votes. Bush says he is on the "far-left bank;" Kennedy conservative Mass. senator.

Good response about homosexuality being a choice. Says adults have the right to live the way they want, but marriage is between man and woman. Woried about activist judges going over people's heads.
Kerry says we all God's children. That will get the DU in a fuss. Mentions Cheny's daughter. Says gays made the gay. Discrimination bad.

Kerry says he is Catholic, and that voting for himself is not a sin; can't legislate faith; abortion between "woman, God, and her doctor." Mentions he was an altar boy. Mentions that all things have to be guided by faith, but can't transfer that through legislation. Kennedy: We are to do God's work. How can you do God's work of not doing abortions, while supporting abortion, like a good Catholic? Can't find "faith w/o work is dead" in my Bible. Makes me sad. Means I have to mark up my usual scriptures. Can't believe I havn't done that yet.

I found it: it is James 2:17. Oh, and they are talking about the rise of health-care costs. Kerry talking about Bush blocking Canuck crap drugs. Kerry looks less like a skeleton and more like an old man now. Less scarry. Wants health care for all Americans.

Kerry says will take Medicaid kids away from states, so all kids can have health care. Yet he says they don't have to give them the kids. will that work. Bush just screwed up about Kerry mentioning the media saying Bush misrepresents his healthcare plan. Should have gone through with it. Oh well. Missed opportunity. Bush now talking about how health care run by government is crap. Kerry agrees. Says he will not have a govn run plan. Even though he has a plan, and he wants to be the government.
Now talking about social security. Talking about the cost of changing the system. Lets see if he will mention the costs of not changing. Doesn't look like he is going to. His major weakness. Oh, wait, maybe he will. Mentions it will cost more, but not how much. Kerry says that young people getting own money is not good. Mentions that people paying SS now are paying for the old people's benifits. Says he will not cut benefits, but will keep things the same, but better(?). Says fixed SS in the 90's. Says, basically Greenspan, inventor of money (I am pretty sure; he is that old), is wrong about the tax cuts for rich. He has a plan to put Americans back to work, and to fix SS. Bush says Kerry voted for tax on SS benefits. Talking about 1.9mil job gain in past whatever months. Again.

Now asking about illegal immigration. Bush says it is an issue in basically everything. Talking about how he is trying to make borders secrue, but now talking about temp worker card. Booo! Basically ex post facto making illegals legal. Same with the employers. Now saying amnesty bad. Isn't that what he was saying he was for earlier.
Now Kerry going back to income! Get back to the question! Now back. Says he will be tough. Says probably should enforce laws agains the hiring of illegals. Wants Big Brother technology to positively identify people that have no prior identification.

Kerry wants to raise minimum wage to $7.00. This is incredibly bad. Sure, the people who earn minimum wage will get more. But you know what happens when that happens? It is called outsourcing.
No Child Left Behind is a jobs program? Sounds plausible, if it actually works.

Kerry talking about Iraq and how much of the army is all tied up. Roommate says (and I agree) that they (the candidates) should fight. Kerry now talking about increasing alliances, and how Bush does not have a real alliance, and that our forces are over-extended, blahblahblah. Kerry just got the $200 bil for Iraq sort of right. "Eventually" is the key word. Always implied money already wasted.
Kerry saying that no nation gets veto over US stuff, but needs to pass a test of honesty.

Bush says he supported AWB, but it would never be extended anyways, so he didn't push it. Says best to bust those that commit crimes.
Kerry says he owns guns, and is a hunter. MWAAHAHAHAHHAA! He doesn't even know how to operate the shotgun. Says law enforcement don't want none AW in the hands of the public. The civilians (even though they themselves are civilians) don't need them, the plebians. They should accept their place under us.
Also says terrorists can get AW in gun shows. I don't think that the kind of people there would let a middle-eastern-looking person get close to a gun. Plus, you can't (legally) get automatic weapons at a gun show, which, by definition, is an assault weapon. Not some scarry-looking gun.

Zzzzzzzzzzzz...more of the same.

Bush pounding on podium about minorities owning own homes, more than ever before. Should have also mentioned that it is up all across the board.

Bush says that religion is a big part of his life. Good for him. Not denying that it is a part of his policy, or trying to deny his faith influencing him, like Kerry.
Kerry talking about Indian blessing. Now talking about his Christian schooling. More distant past, rather than the near. Talking about "two Americas." Both saying how they respect person's choice to worship or not. Sounds good on that front.

Almost done. Come on. Hurry up!

Bush's lopsided grin is really distracting. Kind of like my brother.
Last question! Huzzah!

Talking about wives and daughters. Bush says he is really lucky to be Laura's husband. I wonder if Kerry will say the same thing. Talking about marrying up! Yes, indeed. Talking about his mother leaving him with the words "integrity, integrity, integrity."

Final statements!
Kerry: We will all have health care! We will have equality! I served in Vietnam! Asks us to be respected in the world. Wants to be president.
Bush: I am optimistic. We have gone through a lot together. Thanks to you, we are doing better. Firm resolve, clear purpose, to fight terror. Spread liberty. Asking for vote.

It is over! On time. At ASU. Stupid school. Lots of girls though. Like, 70+%, according to rumors. I could look it up. But I won't.

Well, Bush gets Most Improved. Kerry improved as well, just not as much. Bush did well, but Kerry was on the ball. Bush was as well, but I think this one goes to Kerry. Just because. Bush on offensive more, but defense is a good place to be. Some guy on FOX says that Bush slaughtered Kerry. I will have to differ. Too much foreign policy in a domestic debate.

Well, soon, off to program my Lego robot. Make sure it runs the right course. Enough with this.

Saturday, October 09, 2004

Travel Advisory

Via a link from Nuke France (Look to the right under "Blogroll"):

April 12, 2002


FRANCE - In the last 18 months there have been over 400 hate crimes against Jewish targets in France including, in recent days, arson attacks against synagogues, Jewish institutions, beatings of Jewish school children and pedestrians and other acts of threats and intimidation in Paris, Marseilles, Lyon and other communities. As a result, the Simon Wiesenthal Center urges Jewish travelers to France to exercise extreme caution while traveling to that country.

BELGIUM - Since the Intifada II, Jews in Belgium have been subjected to threats, intimidations, and attacks including a daylight assault on the Chief Rabbi in Brussels. Many religious Jews no longer feel safe wearing the traditional skullcap in public. As a result, the Simon Wiesenthal Center urges Jewish travelers to Belgium to exercise extreme caution while traveling to that country.

For additional information and further developments, log on to

In response to hundreds of inquiries, the Simon Wiesenthal Center is releasing its first ever TRAVEL ADVISORY covering two countries.

I don't recall hearing anything about this in the news back then. (Odd, how the media is all run by the Joooooooooos!) We are now hearing about similar things. This indicates that things are only getting worse. And these are the "civilized" nations of the world.

Friday, October 08, 2004

Debate 2

Hmmmm...DU says that Kerry obvoiusly won the debate. They are basing this on online polls. Only the most accurate of polling methods, of course, are fit for Democrats, such as these online polls apparently, unlike the Gallup poll. Yup, scientific accuracy is what liberals crave, all right.

That was sarcasm, in case you didn't get it.

I didn't watch the debates, as Kerry is a big fat liar, and I already knows what he is going to say (well, maybe not; he seems to change it an awful lot; I guess I have a 50:50 chance of getting it right); and Bush just plain sucks at getting his message across. I may have to catch the debates later; or I could just listen to Frank J.'s reaction to it. He will be on Republican Radio tomorrow at about 1.45PM EDT (that's 10.45AM PDT/MST). Unless you are in Washington or northern Oregon, you will need to listen on the internet feed at that time.

Oh, and I added Bill Whittle's site back on the blogroll. Go and read his newest essay. Now. In fact, go and read all his essays. Print them out. Bind them some way. I have. You should too.

Monday, October 04, 2004

I am getting into the habit of this. This posting often thing.

I saw something that really bothered me today. The thing that bothered me is that it is by an author that is normally quite intelligent. And, that there are many other people that feel that way. Mainly people at the Democratic Underground*. Not the most intelligent people at all. Why would a normally rational, even smart person fall into this trap? I do not know. It is all rather tragic. To think that saving troops, or keeping them at home, is better than freeing an oppressed people, whether or not it keeps us safter for our troops to fight elsewhere. And the whole Freudian explanation? Not credible.

I don't give a darn about the "missing" WMD's, or that Iraq and Afganistan are not Germany in less than four years. All that was WMD business was to try to get the UN to join up with us (I don't know why we would want that; the UN had muddled up any conflict they have been in, from Korea on). The United States needs no international body to give it permission to defend its interest. We needed no international help at all to do what we have done. It is helpful to have the cooperation of 30 other countries, especially the full cooperation of Britain. It eases our burden. Nothing else. When we have a bigger, more capable military than the rest of the world combined, we need no help to take out some puny country that we smacked before, and have been keeping down, militarily, since.

My only problem has been the way Bush has been handling it. He fights like the opinions of the rest of the world matters. The only other country it matters to how we fight the war is Iraq. As we have seen with the recent Sammara actions, the Iraqis do not have the same restraints as we do. They are not afraid to even damage a "holy" mosque. Why do we? I say, most of us sane people dont. Just those DU people, and those like them. But then again, they do not like the whole war in the first place. Or, at least, not the "unilateral" way Bush is doing it (no coalition is complete without the frogs and krauts). All too crazy.

*Warning!!! DU is not for the feint of heart (or those who cannot control their tempers)!!