Archives for October 2004

I am not willing to concede that we lost 380 tons of weapons (or failed to protect, or whatever), because I have seen no evidence to indicate ther even were in the depot when our soldiers got there. In fact, the BULK of the evidence leads a normal person to believe they had been moved after the IAEA inspection but before pour troops reached the site. Let’s add in some other facts:

– the two sources of the story, 60 Minutes and the NY Times (led by Jill Abramson), are not what I would call creedible sources when the issue is George Bush.

– the op-ed’s in today’s NY Times and the continued faux journalism (“Iraq Explosives Become Issue in Campaign“) demonstrate that not only do they have an interest in keeping this false story alive to defeat Bush, but that they have a monetary interest at stake.

– the information was ‘leaked’ to the NY Times by Al Abaradei, who Bush is opposing for a third term at the IAEA, in a rather clear act of politicking.

– the information was not even leaked- our own Iraqi Survey group reported there were no weaponks there a month after our troops initially inspected the site and found no weapons.

– the timing. This is nothing more than an attempted October surprise.

– the misinformation. The explosives in question would have been in bulk powder form, and not necessarily weaponized.

– even if our troops missed the explosives initially, the insurgency did not start for another 6-8 months after the Iraq Survey Group deemed there were no weapons present.

– There simply was no military action by the Iraqi military in the month period in between our troops hitting the depot and the Iraq Survey group. Remember, the Iraqi army ‘melted away.’

– Even if the explosives were there, you don’t just loot 380 tons of explosives through mob looting. This would have taken at least 40 special trucks and cranes. This couldn’t have been a group of Ba’athist sympatizers carrying televisions and a box of explosives under their arms, but rather a large scale operation.

It simply didn’t happen. Period.

But even if you belong to the Democratic kool-aid crowd, and you desperately want to believe this, I think a little perspective is necessary. Even if we did lose 380 tons of explosives (which we didn’t), that pales in comparison to the 400,000 tons we have confiscated and destroyed. For Democrats, maybe a visual aid or two will help. This is a picture of the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69):

According to the Navy fact file about the Eisenhower, it is 1092 feet long and 252 feet wide. Fully loaded, as pictured, it weighs 97,000 (ninety-seven thousand) tons.

This is a picture of the an LCAC.

According to the Navy fact file, the LCAC is 87 feet 11 inches long, 47 feet wide, and fully loaded can weigh 170-182 tons. The LCAC is out 1 1/2 times the size of the small boat in the foreground of the carrier pictured above, so you have some perspective.

To date, we have confiscated/destroyed this many tons of weapons:

The Democrats are claiming (falsely, I believe) we have lost this many tons of explosives:

STFU, donks.

You know, even if Kerry wins, if I dedicate the same amount of willful ignorance and venom to ruining Kerry’s Presidency as the Democrats have done to Bush since day one, they are going to wish they had never won.

*** Update ***

To those of you in the comments claiming my bullets are dounterfactual, chew on this. And quit making shit up. You know- it is no surprise that the same people who were defending the Rather memos up until the moment even RATHER admitted they were frauds that think of course the Army and Bush screwed up here.

Another thing- while they think they are attacking Bush, you know who they are really shitting all over with these partisan attacks? Yep.

Some Perspective for the Willfully StupidPost + Comments (44)

Wow. I can’t believe how bad Lawrence O’Donnell broke down against John O’Neill. Although, if you have ever read the comments section at the Washington Monthly, Pandagon, or the Daily Kos, that is how the unhinged left argues. A conservative makes a statement, 40 leftists scream ‘liar’ or ‘brownshirt.’

If you want a classic example, check out this Ezra Klein post in which Ezra enligtens us that if the Democratic draft does become a reality, and Bush is re-elected, brave Ezra will dodge the draft. This is a great post for two reasons- it helps to give some insight into the mindset of the left, a group of people who swooned for 8 years over a draft-dodger and then decided the most important qualification to be President and basis for an entire general election was service in Vietnam. Except you aren’t allowed to question them on their service.

At any rate, check out Linda trying to have a civil conversation and get shouted down. Then think back to Mr. O’Donnell, who I will never listen to again. That’s the closest I have ever been to donating to the Swift Vets.

And remember kids- dissent is patriotic, and therefore, by extension, so is draft-dodging.

MeltdownPost + Comments (16)

Sometimes you read stuff like this, you are just so shaken by the audacity that you are at a temporary loss for words:

I’m still trying to understand why the clearest delineation between Republicans and Democrats comes down to the franchise – one side wants to restrict it, the other wants to expand it. Terrorism, war, jobs, healthcare – no difference between the parties exists as starkly as their view of your right to vote.

What brings on this statement? Why the fact that Republicans are playing the same game as the Democrats, and are putting place observers to make sure that only qualified voters vote. How dare they?

Personally, I don’t want to keep people from voting, but I damn sure want to make sure that only those who are qualified to vote are able to do so. While the Democrats want to pretend that this is still 1952 and that large portions of the population are being systematically denied the franchise, that is not the case. The case is that while one party may have the dubious history of voter intimidation in its history, another party has just as glorious a tradition of voter fraud. Any guesses which party that might be?

– Which party stole the election in 1960?

– Which party, whenever it is mentioned, has an aneurysm when it is suggested that voters should have to provide identification so they can prove who they really are?

– Which party has the tradition of LBJ’s legions of dead voting for them?

– Which party, in the last election, went to friendly courts (the judge, of course, was a former staff member of Dick Gephardt’s)to extend voting deadlines beyond legal hours in St. Louis, but only in friendly precincts?

– Which party distributed voter registration cards to thousands of illegal aliens in California?

– Which party distributed cigarettes to voters in Michigan in 2000?

All the Republicans I know ant a fair election in which everyone eligible to vote is able to vote. What we don;t want is the kind of bullshit the Democrats have been pulling since Tammany Hall. The Democrats think all they have to do is squeal ‘disenfranchisement’ and we will continune to turn a blind eye to their hijinks. Not anymore, Jesse.

The reason Democrats so love ‘provisional votes’ is because it offers another opportunity for malpractice and malfeasance. However, they don;t like extensions to make sure the military can vote. Just ask Ed Rendell.

So, if you want to vote, and you want to be part of the solution, do the following:

1.) Don’t commit a felony in states where it is illegal for felons to vote.
2.) Make sure you are registered to vote well before the election.
3.) Show up on election day at the precinct where you are supposed to vote.
4.) Bring your registration card and perhaps a photo ID.
5.) Have a working idea how to use the voting system. The ballots are published in newspapers, on display in the polling places, and get this- you can even ask for help.

That doesn’t sound too hard, does it? If you don’t think so, you are probably a Republican. At any rate, don’t play their game. Jesse and his crowd want you to think Bull Connor himself is standing in front of every polling place, trying to keep the man down.

Oh- and one more thing. There are going to be voting irregularities and problems on election day- there always are. This a human system, so there will be flaws. What we need to make sure is that the Democrats don’t have the opportunity to try and turn this into something it is not. Don’t let them pretend that minor incidents are the systematic disfranchisement of entire classes of people. They already have their lawyers and their marching orders on how to play the race game this election, so be vigilant.

Oh, and btw- here in WV, it is still against the law to buy liquor on election day. Anyone want to take a wild stab at why this is the case?

*** Update ***

One more thing. In Florida in 2000, the infamous ‘butterfly’ ballot that somehow screwed thousands of Democrats was designed by a Democrat. tHis ballot, for 2004, which makes voting for Bush/Cheney a bloody mess, is even worse:

The Cuyahoga County, Ohio butterfly ballot (above) provides an intuitive solution for Kerry voters: punching the blue box (item 6) directly across from the Democratic ticket in the butterfly ballot does indeed result in a vote for the Democratic candidates.

Voters for the Bush/Cheney ticket, however, are required to substitute logic for intuition by making sure to punch the red box (item 4) in the ballot; punching the green box (item 14) in the corresponding space next to the Republican ticket would not represent a vote for Bush/Cheney.

*** Update #2 ***

Kevin Holtsberry has more thoughts on the same issue.

*** Update #3 ***

Precisely my point. But when you are a Democrat like Jesse, the goal is to win by any means necessary, so this is simply not an issue.

HutzpahPost + Comments (10)