Liberally Conservative

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free....... ~Ronald Reagan~

Sunday, October 31, 2004

Juan Williams...NPR Clown & Dem Shill

Once a week I watch Fox News Sunday and Juan Williams is part of the "Fair and Balanced" group of panelists. He sickens me by his lack of analysis and partisan rhetoric. Each week he never fails to blame Swift Vets for Truth for coming forward with their story. Not once has Williams mentioned George Soros, or Michael Moore and his mis-portrayal of facts. Williams comes off as someone who fails to grasp relevant issues simply ranting and raving with a stump speech instead of valid analysis. Juan Williams is a misinformed, uneducated shill for team Kerry. He is an embarrassment to viewers, listeners and anyone who comes across this simpleton of a correspondent. Today former Vietnam POW Paul Galanti, a man who spent 2,432 days in captivity, returns with a column in the the Richmond Times-Dispatch that amounts to a closing statement. Clown Williams should read and digest this statement for what it is...The Truth! Kerry's Legacy:No One Who Has Aided the Enemy Deserves to Become President

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Iran's Latest Message

Iran's parliament unanimously approved the outline of a bill Sunday that would require the government to resume uranium enrichment, legislation likely to deepen an international dispute over Iran's nuclear activities. Shouts of "Death to America!" rang out in the conservative-dominated parliament after lawmakers voted to advance the nation's nuclear program, an issue of national pride that provides a rare point of agreement between conservatives and reformers. Attic Note: When voting remember, Ten Out of Ten Terrorists and Their Sponsoring Countries Support John Kerry for President. Source: Associated Press

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Race To The Finish Line

As we near election day and the polls are a vast array of contradictions with large one day swings it's probable the final result depends on voter turnout in 10 battleground states. National polls seem to be insignificant and relying on any one poll would not be helpful. RealClearPolitics averages do not provide an accurate picture based on real statistical sampling because many polls are simply biased. What segments are energized? What groups (unions, newly registered voters, Hispanic, African-American) will vote in larges forces? How much fraud will take place in Milwaukee, St. Louis and Chicago as well as battleground areas such as Ohio and Florida? Will the military vote be fully counted and meet required absentee deadlines? Will lawyers turn the election into courtroom circuses? Some electoral math shows the president leading in 28 out of the 30 states he carried in 2000, trailing only in Ohio and New Hampshire, which would give him a total 254 electoral votes, 16 short of what he needs to clinch a second term. Mr. Bush also has the edge in several additional states that then-Vice President Al Gore won in 2000, including New Mexico (5), Iowa (7) and Minnesota (10), which could put him over the top. Early voting has shown very large turnout which traditionally benefits the Democrats. This election year, the most devisive ever, Republicans will show up to the polls in mass and hopefully put the President over the top. It's my contention (I am not a betting man) Mr. Bush will narrowly win the popular vote and capture a little over the 270 Electoral votes needed to win re-election. I believe the President will win New Mexico, Hawaii, Iowa, Wisconsin, Florida and Ohio and serve four more years.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Saturday, October 30, 2004

Attic Quote of The Day

"When it's the fourth quarter and the game is on the line, you want somebody with a cool head calling the plays."

Mike Tice, Minnesota Viking Coach introducing and endorsing George Bush today in Minnesota.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Donald Rumsfeld Discusses A "Draft"

Like many Americans, I have recently heard a great deal of misinformed talk about a so-called "secret plan" to bring back the draft. This plot is so secret that it doesn't exist. Neither our commander-in-chief nor the secretary of Defense know anything about it. That's because it simply is not true. Let me be even more emphatic on that point. To my knowledge, in the time I have served as secretary of Defense, the idea of reinstating draft has never been debated, endorsed, discussed, theorized, pondered, or even whispered by anyone in the Bush administration. When asked about it, the president has flatly rejected the idea. Similarly, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has said a draft is not needed or desirable. And the U.S. House of Representatives voted down a bill, offered by several Democratic congressmen, to reinstate the draft by a resounding 402-2 just two weeks ago. Yet based on absolutely no actual evidence, partisans, conspiracy mongers, and troublemakers are attempting to scare and mislead young Americans by insisting that a draft is coming. This is mischief-making masquerading as a serious policy debate. It is shameful. This entire deceit is underhanded and just plain wrong.

Source: National Review Online

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Thursday, October 28, 2004

Weapons, Russia and Syria

The Washington Times has a blockbuster front page article discussing missing explosives, the Russian Army and Syria. John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, "almost certainly" removed the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility, south of Baghdad. "The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole series of military units. Their main job was to shred all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the Iraqis. The others were transportation units," said John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security. "Their main job was to shred all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the Iraqis. The others were transportation units. Most of Saddam's most powerful arms were systematically separated from other arms like mortars, bombs and rockets, and sent to Syria and Lebanon, and possibly to Iran," Shaw explained. Mr. Shaw said he believes that "the withdrawal of Russian-made weapons and explosives from Iraq was part of plan by Saddam to set up a "redoubt" in Syria that could be used as a base for launching pro-Saddam insurgency operations in Iraq." Defense officials said the Russians can provide information on what happened to the Iraqi weapons and explosives that were transported out of the country. Officials believe the Russians also can explain what happened to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. Maybe Senator Kerry can explain.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Wall Street Journal's Tax Idea

We've all heard about the Alternative Minimum Tax, or at least most of us will sooner or later. That convoluted scheme to ensure we can't use deductions to avoid paying our "fair" share is predicted to ensnare a record 12.3 million taxpayers next year, and between one-quarter and one-third of all filers by 2010. But the disclosure that Teresa Heinz Kerry paid a federal tax rate of only 12.4% on her income in 2003 has given us a different idea. How about a Kerry Maximum Tax? That is, no taxpayer should have to pay a larger share of his income in taxes than John Kerry and his mega-millionaire spouse, who are after all bidding to become role models as America's First Couple. Polls have long shown that when Americans are asked how much income people ought to pay in taxes, they typically say no more than 20%. This comports with Americans' general sense of fairness that success shouldn't be punished with confiscatory tax rates. Millions of Americans pay far more than that, of course, and the Alternative Minimum Tax rates are 26% and 28%, capturing those with enough deductions who imagine they can escape the 39.6% top marginal rate proposed by Senator Kerry. We now know from their tax returns that the Kerrys think that a fair rate of tax should be much lower than 20%, which means that if Mr. Kerry wins on November 2 he'll be well positioned to lead a bipartisan Maximum Tax movement. And if Mr. Kerry loses, we'll be delighted to see him put his name on any Maximum Tax bill so he can claim at least one major accomplishment in Congress. Source: Wall Street Journal

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Attic Quote of the Day

"Business is great. Successful companies are the engine of a healthy society and nothing short of the foundation of a free and democratic world. While government is a key part of society and vital to all of us, it makes no money of its own. All the necessary things it provides -- from the justice system to welfare and hospitals -- come from some form of tax revenue paid by companies and their employees. Government is the support for the engine. It is not the engine. A great leader in this day and age must appreciate the value of business to the world. He cannot beat it down, denigrate its participants, or create an environment where business people must struggle to build opportunity. When business is weak, America is weak."

~Jack Welch, former chairman and CEO of General Electric

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Bush For President

With President Bush and Senator Kerry having concluded their debates and Anericans preparing to make up their minds, The New York Sun endorses the president for a second term. We have little doubt that we'd have done this even without the outbreak of what Norman Podhoretz has called World War IV. The reason we picked up the flag of the Sun in launching this paper is that we were inspired by its long commitment to limited government, honest government, low taxation, economic growth, constitutionalism, and equality under the law. By all these measures Mr. Bush strikes us as the far better candidate - more intelligent, more principled, more trustworthy. But the biggest issue before the voters is the war, in respect of which Mr. Bush is, compared to the man from Massachusetts, the greater leader offering the more inspiring vision. Our concerns with Mr. Kerry go back to Vietnam, a battle in a Cold War in which, by our lights, Mr. Bush served with greater distinction than Mr. Kerry, despite the medals the senator threw away. We comprehend and respect that many honorable Americans dissented from the Vietnam War, but this newspaper is with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the veterans of the communist dungeons in North Vietnam who will be appearing in advertisements in the final weeks of this campaign. We, too, find it difficult to forgive Mr. Kerry's testimony before the Senate after his return from Vietnam, his treating with enemy diplomats in Paris while our GIs were in the most desperate hours of the fight, and his belittlement of the idea of a communist threat. These columns were among the first to voice concern that Mr. Kerry's behavior then would be a predictor of his eventual stance in respect of the current war, a concern that, sad to say, has proven all too well placed. At every turn Mr. Kerry's arguments about the war are riddled with contradictions. He voted for it but against the funds to fight it. Just last week, in the second debate, he said that Iraq before the war was a threat, then he said it wasn't a threat. He counsels appeasement with the mullahs in Tehran. He wants to bow to North Korean demands for direct negotiations with the Americans over Pyongyang's A-bomb program, a program that advanced on the watch of the previous Democratic administration. Mr. Kerry's derision of our allies in this war is an astounding blunder, particularly for a man who attacks Mr. Bush's willingness to go it alone. President Bush, importantly, has a vision for spreading freedom and democracy abroad, so as to put an end to the regimes that support, harbor, and spawn terrorists. Whether this will actually stop the terrorism is still to be shown. But history shows that free countries are less likely to attack us than tyrannies are. And freedom is America's cause, even apart from the war on terror. Mr. Bush has a record of accomplishment in the war so far. The Taliban regime in Afghanistan is gone, replaced by a government that held free elections in which women were allowed to vote. Saddam Hussein is in a prison cell, awaiting trial for his crimes against the Iraqi people. Three-quarters of the known leaders of Al Qaeda have been killed or captured, Mr. Bush says. At times during this campaign Mr. Kerry has struck a posture more hawkish than Mr. Bush, as when he speaks of adding new divisions to the American military and when he faults the president for not capturing or killing Osama bin Laden and for letting threats gather in Iran and North Korea. But this is not credible given Mr. Kerry's record, not only with respect to Vietnam but with respect to the first Gulf War, which he opposed, and in the Reagan-era struggle against communism in Central America, another war that Mr. Kerry opposed. Nor is it consistent with his reliance on a United Nations that is a cockpit of anti-Israelism and at which the terrorist-sponsoring state of Syria recently held a seat on the Security Council. It is our hope, our belief, that a second term for Mr. Bush would allow the president to consolidate his achievements and make further gains both at home and abroad. A second Bush term could bring tort reform that would slow the growth in medical expenses and decrease insurance and legal expenses for American businesses. It could bring Social Security reform with private savings accounts that would make more Americans owners and provide another boost to New York's financial services industry. It could bring extensions of the Bush tax cuts that have restored prosperity to New York. It could bring before the Senate a distinguished series of nominees to the federal courts, no doubt including the Supreme Court, who will hold a view of the Constitution that editors operating under the flag of the Sun have been supporting since the days of Lincoln. It is well to remember that in those days there were also many, right here in our own city, who warned against a rush to war, or against a war at all, for the kinds of principles and rights that were at stake in the Civil War and are at stake in this war, too. There were important newspapers in the city, or in neighboring Brooklyn, that sided with the South. New York was crawling with copper-head Democrats who stood with the South. There were riots against the draft. Then, and in every war America has been fought since, there have been terrible and trying moments of defeat and discouragement, when there were calls to retreat or to abandon the fight - or to settle. It is Mr. Bush who reflects the spirit of those leaders who stood with the fight. His is the leadership that inspires us as we prepare to vote in November. Source: New York Sun Staff Editorial

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Attic Quote of the Day

The "I feel your pain" liberals of the Kerry/Clinton ilk are con-men of the worst sort, for whom others are simply means to their own ends. These slick operators translate their basic attitude toward others into political behavior by grabbing power by selling a bill of goods to those who are down and out that government can solve all their problems. Rather than telling the truth, that even in the worst economic environment, it is only through personal responsibility that people can pull themselves up, these con men view others' misfortune as an opportunity for their own political gain. Source: Star Parker, President of the Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

NY Times...Ultimate Fraud & Kerry Shill

Yesterday's big New York Times page-one takedown of President Bush was "Huge cache of explosives vanished from site in Iraq." Today the Times reports "Iraq explosive become issue in campaign." Fortunately other media outlets are uncovering facts about the explosives at the Al Qaqaa ammunition dump south of Bahgdad. NBC News reported that on April 10, 2003, its crew was embedded with the U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division when troops arrived at the Al Qaqaa storage facility south of Baghdad. While the troops found large stockpiles of conventional explosives, they did not find HMX or RDX, the types of powerful explosives that reportedly went missing, according to NBC. Baghdad fell on April 9, 2003. According to NBC, troops from the 101st Airborne arrived the next day to find that the material was already gone. Once again the NY Times supplies Kerry with more campaign fodder only to have the facts prove their fake and fraudulent front page "news."

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Liar, Liar, Pants On Fire!

When do the John Kerry fabrications end? Hopefully by midnight (or sooner) on November 2nd. Kerry's campaign is now highlighted by every NY Times headline while the Times shills for the Democratic candidate and supplies him with talking points. It's also important to note we now have a Draft Dodger and Impeached former President campaigning with a candidate with a sordid military background which allegedly contains treason as part of the resume. Ridiculous photo-ops and continuous streams of lies in a desperate attempt to become Commander-In-Chief are now the constant Kerry campaign theme. The unfortunate part is almost 1/2 of the country remains uninformed or ignorant of the truth. Many in the electorate simply hate Bush and could care less about Kerry's horrible past as a fake "war hero", war protestor and lazy Senator. John Kerry has called truthfulness "the fundamental test of leadership." He told National Guard veterans last month, "As president, I will always be straight with you — on the good days and the bad days." Mr. Kerry fabricated a meeting with the "entire" U.N. Security Council in October 2002 just before the United Nations voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq. Of the 15 ambassadors who sat on the council in 2002, four say they have never even met Mr. Kerry. Neither has their staff. Mr. Kerry met individually with the French, Singaporean and Cameroon delegates as reported in the Washington Times. Speaking before the Council on Foreign Relations in December 2003, Mr. Kerry said he had met "with the entire Security Council, and we spent a couple of hours talking about what they saw as the path to a united front in order to be able to deal with Saddam Hussein." In the second presidential debate, Mr. Kerry again trotted out the meeting to argue that "this president hasn't listened ... I went to meet with the members of the Security Council in the week before we voted. I went to New York. I talked to all of them." The Washington Times goes on to state, In all likelihood the reality is that Mr. Kerry chose to trump up the importance of piecemeal meetings with a few delegates as part of his effort to cast the president as disdainful of allies and hasteful as commander in chief. Mr. Kerry had wanted to make himself appear the better on both accounts. It helps, of course, if the acts of diplomatic finesse one ascribes to one's self actually took place. Just as it helps to have a truthful record when trying to cast an opponent as a deceiver. Clearly, Mr. Kerry has some explaining to do. The facts are the facts. John F. Kerry is a liar, and deceitful human being who cannot be trusted.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Sunday, October 24, 2004

Senator H. John Heinz Rolling In His Grave

Four years after Senator Heinz was killed in a plane crash and inheriting the Heinz $500 million fortune, Teresa Heinz married Senator John F. Kerry. She became a registered Democrat and the process of her radicalization was set in motion. A lot of hard earned money has fallen into the hands of two people who despise successful people and who believe in the confiscatory redistribution of wealth. How does John Heinz money get spent? Between 1995-2001 Teresa Heinz-Kerry gave more than $4 million to an organization called the Tides Foundation (See ACORN blog below). What does the Tides Foundation do with the Heinz money?

  1. Tides supports numerous anti-war groups, including Ramsey Clarks International Action Center. Clark has offered to defend Saddam Hussein when he's tried.
  2. Tides supports the Democratic Justice Fund, a joint venture of the Tides Foundation and billionaire hate-monger George Soros. The Democratic Justice Fund seeks to ease restrictions on Muslim immigration from "terrorist" states.
  3. Tides supports the Council for American-Islamic Relations, whose leaders are known to have close ties to the terrorist group, Hamas.
  4. Tides supports the National Lawyers Guild, organized as a communist front during the Cold War era. One of their attorneys, Lynne Stewart, has been arrested for helping a client, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, communicate with terror cells in Egypt. He is the convicted mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
  5. Tides supports Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Rights Action League, and the Abortion Action Project.
  6. Tides supports the most violent of all homosexual action groups, ACT-UP.
  7. Tides supports the "Barrio Warriors," a radical Hispanic group whose primary goal is to return all of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas to Mexico.

These are but a few of the radical groups that benefit, through the anonymity provided by the Tides Foundation, from the "generosity" of the would-be First Lady and Fairy God Mother to the radical left, Teresa Heinz-Kerry.

Source: G2 Bulletin, WorldNetDaily

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Sunday, October 17, 2004

ACORN Gone Nuts

Newspapers are reporting an incredible surge in new voter registrations this year. Democratic and Republican activists have sponsored registration drives in the hope that millions of new voters will elect John Kerry or George W. Bush president. Voter offices are swamped with thousands of last minute registrations. ACORN—it stands for “Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now”—has received wide attention for claiming to have registered more than one million new voters nationwide. But in state after state allegations are surfacing that ACORN activists are padding the registration books. “There’s a lot of fraud committed,” said former ACORN Miami-Dade field director Mac Stuart in the October 2 Florida Today. He charges that ACORN submitted thousands of invalid registration cards while failing to turn in cards from registered Republicans. ACORN’s founder and chief organizer is one Wade Rathke, a veteran activist who is also president of the New Orleans-based Local 100 of the Service Employees International Union. More importantly, Rathke is chairman of the board of the San Francisco-based Tides Center and a board member of its affiliated Tides Foundation, the left-wing grantmaker that specializes in helping new political advocacy groups get organized. Grants from the Heinz Endowments, whose chairman is Teresa Heinz Kerry, to and from the Tides organizations have been the subject of major news stories recently, which speculate on the impact Heinz Kerry’s private philanthropy will have on the policies of a Kerry administration. The Tides connection to ACORN raises even more questions. Hmmmmmm.....Now You Know! Source:

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Saturday, October 16, 2004

Mary Cheney Is Not "Fair Game"

Team Kerry believe the gay daughter of Vice-President Cheney is part of their hunting expedition. His campaign manager Mary Cahill let slip the truth when after the debate she told Fox News's Chris Wallace that Mary Cheney was "fair game." William Kristol aptly compares Edwards use of Mary Cheney as gay bait to Kerry's unpolished version of "fair game." "Kerry was supposed to do what his more skilled and cleverer debating partner, John Edwards, did. He was supposed to sugarcoat his use of Mary Cheney more effectively. But Kerry forgot his lines. Kerry's appropriation of Mary Cheney came in no such lawyerly and sugary packaging. The rawness of his ruthlessness was there for all to see. The Democrats are terrified of a debate on same-sex marriage, and used Mary Cheney to try to brush back the Bush-Cheney ticket from forcing a real policy debate. " Cheney has always been open about his daughters sexual preference without embarrassment. The Vice-President and the President have also candidly expressed differing viewpoints in regard to homosexuality and marriage issues. What is revealed in the Kedwards debacle is malice with planning and forethought. I might add, desperation.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Friday, October 15, 2004

Feeling A Draft?

As the polls begin leaning in favor of President Bush, John Kerry is on the campaign trail in Iowa once again claiming the draft is inevitable if George Bush is re-elected. The President has flatly told the American people that under no circumstances would a draft be implemented as long as he is President. The Des Moines Register has the full story. Bush campaign Iowa spokesman Dan Ronayne responded: "Senator Kerry's comment is irresponsible, patent nonsense and the mother of all cheap political scare tactics. He knows better, and that statement is just another example of John Kerry's willingness to say absolutely anything he thinks will benefit his political fortunes, and as a result he is losing credibility with the American people." Kerry is losing traction and campaigning in close battleground states. Another indication Kerry is in trouble is the recent poll for New Jersey which has the candiates in a dead heat. New Jersey is a state in which Kerry should be leading by double digits. The most current national polls show the President increasing his margins since the final debate. (See my poll analysis below)

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

John O'Neill, Swift Vet Author Speaks Out

John O'Neill, Author of "Unfit for Command" and leader of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has expressed himself concerning ABC, Ted Koppel and Nightline in their weak attempt to corroborate John Kerry's Vietnam claims. Here is what Mr. O'Neill had to say. While I have a tremendous amount of respect for Ted Koppel and ABC News I was appalled to learn that ABC News would go to the lengths of traveling to Vietnam to interview three Viet Cong communists in yet a third attempt by ABC to corroborate John Kerry’s version of the events that took place on February 28th, 1969. I would only ask the American people: "Who do you trust more, three members of a communist regime that tortured and killed our American troops or a group of more than 280 highly decorated American veterans, who proudly served their country and are now responsible members of their respective communities?" The number of veterans who support John Kerry’s accounts of his military service would not fill one Swift Boat. But instead of sitting down to interview some of the 280 plus members of our Swift Boat organization, ABC News chose to travel to Vietnam taking extraordinary and highly suspect steps to find someone to corroborate John Kerry's story. ABC News Nightline has now dedicated three separate programs to this one incident while ignoring John Kerry's now discredited Senate testimony that he spent Christmas in Cambodia, his receiving a purple heart after all three of the officers required to approve such an issuance rejected his application, or his constantly changing account of the circumstances surrounding his remaining medal, a bronze star. Further, one has to wonder why ABC News will not address the serious questions as to why John Kerry only received an honorable discharge through the act of then President Carter, seven years after his discharge, and had to have all of his military citations reissued, on the same day, when he became a United States Senator in 1985. And, finally, why has Nightline found it of no interest to permit any POWs to come on their program to explain why they believe John Kerry betrayed their nation, caused them to be incarcerated for an additional two years and caused them tremendous additional hardship and suffering.

-- John O'Neill

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.


Pulitzer Prize winning, Charles Krauthammer, a paraplegic from a spinal cord injury and Dr. by training, writes a blistering commentary on the Kerry-Edwards team in Anything To Get Elected. John Edwards recent comments on the campaign trail raised Mr. Krauthammer's hackles. Edwards said Monday in Newton, Iowa: "If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk, get up out of that wheelchair and walk again.'' Here is some of what Mr. Krauthammer goes on to say. "In my 25 years in Washington, I have never seen a more loathsome display of demagoguery. Hope is good. False hope is bad. Deliberately raising for personal gain false hope in the catastrophically afflicted is despicable." "Bush is the first president to approve federal funding for stem cell research. There are 22 lines of stem cells now available, up from one just two years ago. As Dr. Leon Kass, head of the President's Council on Bioethics, has written, there are 3,500 shipments of stem cells waiting for anybody who wants them." "Edwards and Kerry constantly talk of a Bush "ban'' on stem cell research. This is false. There is no ban. You want to study stem cells? You get them from the companies that have the cells and apply to the National Institutes of Health for the federal funding." Mr. Krauthammer further implodes Kerry for a radio address claiming a ban on stem cell research is standing in the way of a cure for Altzeimers disease. "This is an outright lie. The President's Council on Bioethics, on which I sit, had one of the world's foremost experts on Alzheimer's, Dr. Dennis Selkoe from Harvard, give us a lecture on the newest and most promising approaches to solving the Alzheimer's mystery. Selkoe reported remarkable progress in biochemically clearing the "plaque'' deposits in the brain that lead to Alzheimer's. He ended his presentation without the phrase "stem cells" having crossed his lips." Ronald D.G. McKay, a stem cell researcher at NIH, has admitted publicly that stem cells as an Alzheimer's cure are a fiction, but that "people need a fairy tale.'' Mr. Krauthammer concludes, "They are shamelessly exploiting this fairy tale, having no doubt been told by their pollsters that stem cells play well politically for them. Politicians have long promised a chicken in every pot. It is part of the game. It is one thing to promise ethanol subsidies here, dairy price controls there. But to exploit the desperate hopes of desperate people with the promise of Christ-like cures is beyond the pale. There is no apologizing for Edwards' remark. It is too revealing. There is absolutely nothing the man will not say to get elected."

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Thursday, October 14, 2004

Kerry Claims "Tort Reform" Is Part of His Agenda

Anyone who believes in the Tooth Fairy believes team Kerry/Edwards would actively pursue Tort Reform with a rich trial lawyer on the ticket and the largest lobby, Trial Lawyers, supporting them. However, if you still believe Kedwards will keep this promise it is only fitting to see the swarming of lawyers coast to coast for the upcoming election. Marc Elias, the general counsel for the Kerry team, has said the campaign intends to be able to "fight five statewide recounts and still have funds available to the campaign." The New York Law Journal reports that the local Lawyers Committee for the Kerry Campaign has raised $2 million to support recount efforts. Democrats have already launched lawsuits in Florida, New Mexico and Ohio and the Kerry camp has set up its own nationwide legal network, in lieu of the usual local Democratic Lawyers Associations. Lawyers are critically important to the Democrats these days and further accentuates their clout as a constituency. Think John Kerry is going to crack down on malpractice suits when he's president? Not likely. Collin Levey of the NY Post suggests, "For the lawyers, the delicious turn of events since Florida 2000 is about oh-so-much more than just assuring a future tort reform veto. If every election is now potentially reversible in court, the litigation lobby will finally have achieved its ascendancy over all three branches of government. And for the Democratic Party, that seems to be a small price to pay for never having to admit they've lost." I suppose Tort Reform for Kerry and Edwards means, "Elections For the People, by the Courts."

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Top Economists State "Kerry Bad for U.S."

A group of economists Wednesday accused Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry of advocating policies that would lower the U.S. standard of living. The group included Nobel laureates Gary Becker, James Buchanan, Milton Friedman, Robert Lucas, Robert Mundell and Edward Prescott. In an open letter released by the Bush campaign, the 368 economists said they oppose some of Kerry's economic policies, including what they said are his reluctance to lower trade barriers, calls for tax increases, and new federal spending proposals. The economists also attacked what they called his denial of the need for entitlement reform. The economists said Kerry's policies would, over time, "inhibit capital formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive internationally. The end result would be lower U.S. employment and real wage growth." They further stated, "Kerry favors economic policies that, if implemented, would lead to bigger and more intrusive government and a lower standard of living for the American people."

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Kerry Joins Edwards in Woodshed

Main stream media is grappling with the 3rd Presidential debate talking about who looked more "Presidential" and resting on a "misstatement" spun into the ground concerning Mr. Bushs two-year old comment about Osama Bin Laden. Some actually dare to label Kerry as a man with the "facts" and a "clear plan." I clearly thought Mr. Bush came to Arizona with the gloves off and was well prepared to defend himself against repeated Kerry attacks, and provide a well thought out offensive into Kerry's liberal record as a Senator. From a visual standpoint Kerry lost his tan, looked tired and very rigid while the President appeared rested, smiling and very comfortable in his own skin. Kerry was robotic answering questions without style, simply providing memorized statistics which were often very inaccurate and reassuring the public of his plan which no one can figure out. This was his attempt to keep the President on the defensive. Kerry also made promises on Social Security and Health Care which were over the top economically and fiscally. The President was not perfect, I didn't like his answer on assault weapons or minimum wage but Kerry generally had no viable retort but to constantly criticize the President, playing out the constant blame game. I am sure will have a field day rebutting claims on both sides but Kerry made more promises which most economists sufficiently characterize as welfare creating measures. The biggest "low blow" of the evening was a repeat of Edwards discussing the Lesbian daughter of Dick Cheney on a question regarding homosexuality. This was uncalled for and most talking heads agree the public thought this was a terrible tactic and one that will cost Kerry some undecided voters. Kerry's response demonstrated a lack of purpose and displayed no class. President Bush was focused labeling Kerry as the "No. 1 Liberal" and finally brought up Kerry's vote of "No" concerning the 1991 invasion of Kuwait when the U.N. Security Council and even Syria voted to remove Saddam Hussein from a neighboring country. Mr. Bush was constant, unfluttered and unrelenting in his pursuit to let the electorate know about Kerry's tax voting record and his anti-defensive posture in the Senate. The media will skew this debate in favor of Kerry so the polls will probably remain unchanged. I view the debate as clearly a victory for the President.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Wednesday, October 13, 2004

Outdoor Life with John Kerry

Howie Carr of the Boston Herald has a wonderful article in the NY Post today relating to more balderdash concerning Mr. Kerry and his outdoorsman tales. Here is what Mr. Carr writes: When it comes to courting all those blue-collar outdoorspersons — those "regular folks," as he calls them — Kerry works the margins. All year he's been giving interviews that are, well, Kerry-esque, in their nuanced recollections of his days as a nimrod in the deep woods of Massachusetts. In July, he told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that "I go out with my trusty 12-gauge double-barrel, crawl around on my stomach." Crawling in the woods is tough, not to mention loud, work — which is why almost all hunters except Kerry prefer to either stand or climb up into tree stands. "I track and move and decoy and play games and try to outsmart them." He was presumably referring to deer, not voters. But Kerry, a "former law-enforcement person," as he is also wont to describe himself, seems to have forgotten that the use of decoys is forbidden under Massachusetts law. Just using a decoy deer can mean a fine of up to $100, 30 days in jail, and/or loss of hunting license. In the current issue of Field & Stream, the outdoorsperson was asked about the biggest deer he'd ever killed — er, harvested. "Probably an 8-pointer," Kerry replied, "something like that. Nothing terribly big." Actually, an 8-pointer would be a rather large kill to most hunters — the kill of a lifetime in fact. But Bwana John wasn't done. "I once had an incredible encounter with the most enormous buck — I don't know, 16 points or something. It was just huge. And I failed to pull the trigger at the right moment. I was hunting down in Massachusetts, on the Cape." The Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife doesn't keep such statistics, but an open invitation on the radio for calls from Cape hunters turned up no one who had ever glimpsed such a 16-pointer in Barnstable County.

Do you suppose if he got injured in a hunting accident Kerry would put himself in for a Purple Heart?

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Liberal Hate Campaign

David Horowitz has written an editorial at the invitation of The Philadelphia Inquirer. The Inquirer is running 21 anti-Bush editorials between now and election day as part of its "21 Reasons to Elect Kerry" series. The Inquirer has invited conservative op-eds for the sake of balance. Better late than never. This is an excellent editorial.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Taxes: Kerry vs. Bush..An Independent Analysis

Low and Middle Income Earners Benefit Tax cut critics and John Kerry have argued that Bush tax cuts have only helped the wealthiest Americans. However, 7.8 million low and middle-income families had their entire income tax liabilities erased by the cuts. The two provisions most responsible for removing these families from the tax rolls were the new 10 percent tax bracket and the doubling of the value of the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000. results show that these families are overwhelmingly modest-income, married couples with children who work full-time and are younger than age 45. When all of the dependents of these households are counted, roughly 25.5 million Americans were taken off the tax rolls by the Bush tax cuts. Top One-Percent of Earners...Who Are They? Most of the people in the top one percent of earners are business owners and entrepreneurs, not just high-income individuals with trivial business income on the side. So many businesses now report their profits on individual tax forms instead of corporate forms Bush tax cuts in the top individual tax rates provided an extra bang for economic growth and hiring. 55 percent of all income taxes in 2004 will be paid by business owners. High-income business owners ($200,000 or more) will pay most of that 37.4 percent of all income taxes. Who Pay's Taxes...Who Doesn't 40 percent of Americans pay no income tax. With the bottom 40 percent paying no income tax, that leaves the top 60 percent to pay it all, and data shows that the lion’s share is being paid by the top quintile. “Top quintile” is the term for the top-earning 20 percent of the country—mostly dual-income couples and business owners. High-income people invested those funds in the economy, creating jobs and fueling the recovery. Kerry Tax Plan vs. Bush Tax Plan

The Bush plan relies on simple across-the-board rate cuts, which are highly transparent. Kerry plan features an avalanche of targeted tax credits and rule changes.

Permanent tax cuts are good for stability; temporary ones aren’t. The centerpiece of the Bush plan would make the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent. The Kerry plan promises to revive the death tax, let the Bush tax cuts expire, repeal Bush’s cuts in top rates, and introduce new temporary tax credits. The Kerry plan is packed with temporary tax changes, which make it impossible for taxpayers to plan for the future and can affect the long-term performance of the economy. The Bush plan would reduce discrimination in the tax code by making top tax rate cuts permanent, along with a flat 15 percent rate on capital gains and dividend income. The Kerry plan would penalize U.S. companies who compete in global markets overseas, harming domestic workers in those industries.

Additionally, the Kerry plan would boost taxes on taxpayers earning $200,000 or more, which may cause slower job growth since many high-income taxpayers are also job-creating business owners who pay taxes through the individual income tax code. The Bush plan, on the other hand, is aimed mainly at promoting economic growth through permanent across-the-board tax reductions and improved expensing for small business. Source: The Tax Foundation

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Attic "Quote of the Day"

Today's quote is sourced from a Wall Street Journal Op-Ed Regarding John Kerry's claim that he can do a better job of building alliances. After he listened to the first U.S. Presidential debate, Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski had this to say to an interviewer from the Polish network TVN on October 1: "In this sense we can talk about our disillusionment with the fact that the attitude and sacrifice of these soldiers is being marginalized to such an extent. But I think it is all due to the campaign and the certain message that Senator Kerry, although not officially, tries to convey that he thinks of a coalition locating the U.S. alongside Germany and France. That is to say, countries opposing the current American stance on Iraq."

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Senior Kerry Advisor Threatens Broadcast Group

Kerry senior advisor, Chad Clanton, appearing on FoxNews daytime program "Dayside with Linda Vestor" threatened Sinclair Broadcasting Group who plans on showing a new documentary STOLEN HONOR: WOUNDS THAT NEVER HEAL, a story of former POWs who tell the compelling and chilling stories of their brutal life as prisoners of war in North Vietnam. The 45-minute film includes testimony from highly decorated POW's and their wives of previously undisclosed details regarding life in the North Vietnamese prison camps after John Kerry's congressional testimony and public anti-war statements and activities. Clanton remarked during an interview on concerns about the broadcast, "They (Sinclair Broadcasting) are going to be sorry if they do this. They better hope we don't win the election." Mark Hyman, vice president of Corporate Relations for Sinclair Broadcasting, in an interview with FoxNews stated these comments were certainly taken as a threat.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Drugs from Canada? Here is Why Not!

The issue of importing drugs from Canada came up in the 2nd Presidential debate. Bush side-stepped the issue but the N.Y. Sun provides a glimpse into the drug business and research. How quickly can one name a Canadian pharmaceutical company? Not so easy, is it? There aren't many famously successful ones because Canadian price controls and government regulation discourage innovation. Canada's bureaucrats even prevent Canadian patients from gaining access to the newest American drugs. In contrast, America, which lacks government price controls on medicine, has been a center, a powerhouse for pharmaceutical research and innovation and has spawned dozens of profitable, job-creating, life-saving companies such as Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, and Genzyme. When Mr. Kerry accuses Mr. Bush of siding with the drug companies, Mr. Bush could say, "You know what, Comrade Kerry, you are right. I'm for free enterprise. I do support America's drug companies. Their scientists are making amazing breakthroughs every day that are helping to cure or treat a lot of sick patients. Those companies are employing a lot of hardworking Americans. And the way we create that environment for innovation in America is with competition and the free market, not by letting some Canadian commissar dictate the prices." "Democrats can't love jobs but hate the people who create them"

John Kerry ~ September 25, 2003 during a Primary debate.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

John Kerry, "The New Soldier"

Upon return from Vietnam, John Kerry wrote a book called, "The New Soldier." It was rife with his view of Vietnam. This book is almost impossible to find as it is out of print and most copies have been, allegedly, purchased by Kerry surrogates. The fact is, Kerry does not want you to read this book. The real striking thing about this book of fiction is the cover. It depicts long-haired, bearded and mustachioed "soldiers" raising an upside down American Flag in a disturbing reenactment of Iwo Jima. Zell Miller has an interested parody in the Washington Times with a striking historical footnote. "In one of the bloodiest battles of World War II, when it was said "uncommon courage was a common virtue," 6,000 Marines were killed and 18,000 wounded. Some 21,000 Japanese were killed. The island itself is still barren and only a handful of people live on it. But after it was secured by the Marines, B-29s made over 2,200 emergency landings on it, saving the lives of more than 24,000 crewmen. AP photographer Joe Rosenthal won a Pulitzer Prize for the flag-raising photo. Of the six men in the photo, three were buried in that black volcanic ash, one came out on a stretcher. Only two walked off the island." Kerry and his despicable "Vietnam Veterans Against the War" were nothing more than a band of liars, many who were not veterans and never served in Vietnam. This tragic book is online for reading: JOHN KERRY'S THE NEW SOLDIER

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Kerry is more than a "Nuisance."

Most people are aware of John Kerry's interview with Matt Bai in the N.Y. Times Magazine, "Kerry's Undeclared War." Now for a wonderful analysis in The American Spectator comparing Kerry's comments to Neville Chamberlain's infamous statement, "Everything would have worked if only Hitler had kept his promises." William Tucker states, "Islamic terrorists are driven by religion, not money. Their motives are not economic, which is exactly the problem. Poverty and misery are not the underlying cause. In fact, the major appeal of Islamic fundamentalism has been among the educated elite. (Engineering students seem to make the best recruits.) Exposure to Western culture usually makes Muslim fundamentalists more radical, which is why Samuel Huntington has called it as "clash of civilizations." Al Qaeda does not want to blow New York off the map because it wants to sell more heroin. It wants to destroy America because it hates it and believes Islam is destined to rule the world." Tucker further explains, "So here will come John Kerry, shuffling around Europe and the Middle East, signing treaties, accepting promises, and assuring the folks back home that everything is all right." The American Chamberlain

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Attic "Quote(s) of the Week"

"We're not in a war on terror, in the liberal sense. The war on terror is like saying 'the war on poverty.' It's just a metaphor. What we're really talking about is winning the ideological struggle so that people stop turning themselves into suicide bombers." Richard Holbrooke....Clinton Era Diplomat & Kerry Secretary of State "We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance. As a former law-enforcement person, I know we're never going to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling. But we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally, it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life." John Kerry....Democratic Presidential Candidate 2004 Liberals speak, you decide.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Monday, October 11, 2004

John Kerry's Military Defense Record

As I have presented the "You Can Run, But You Can't Hide" premise on John Kerry's record earning him top honors as Number 1 Liberal in the Senate (see below), now Kerry's voting record on military defenses and campaign proposals from his "position papers" issued while running for Senate are well represented by Robert J. Caldwell of the San Diego Union-Tribune. During his 1984 Senate campaign, Kerry proposed slashing $54 billion from then-President Reagan's proposed $289 billion 1985 defense budget. Kerry's proclaimed long-range goal was to slice a Pentagon-gutting $200 billion from defense over four years. Kerry's proposed hit list of weapons systems he favored eliminating included: the Los Angeles class nuclear attack submarine, the Trident I submarine, the Trident I and Trident II submarine missiles, the Midgetman and Pershing II cruise missiles, the Navy's Aegis air defense destroyer and Aegis air defense cruiser programs and production of nerve gas munitions (a counter to the Soviet Union's growing arsenals of chemical and biological weapons). Subsequently Kerry's 1984 campaign proposed canceling an even longer list of defense projects: the MX intercontinental ballistic missile, the B-1 bomber, the missile-defense Strategic Defense Initiative, the Army's AH-64 attack helicopter, the Patriot air defense missile, reactivation of U.S. battleships, the Marines' AV-8B Harrier vertical takeoff fighter-bomber, the Air Force's F-15 fighter program, the Navy's F-14/A and F-14/D fighter aircraft programs, the Phoenix air-to-air missile and the Sparrow air-to-air missile. Kerry also called for a 50-percent reduction in production of the Tomahawk cruise missile, the Navy's primary long-range strike missile. In 1988, he voted to decommission two Navy aircraft carriers. From 1989 to 1996, Kerry voted 17 times to stop funding for the Air Force's B-2 Stealth bomber, the technological wonder which played central roles in the Afghanistan and Iraq campaigns. Kerry cast at least 10 votes from 1990 to 1996 against funding the Navy's Aegis air defense destroyers and cruisers, the backbone of the fleet's carrier escort force. In 1990 and again in 1996, Kerry cast five votes to stop production and upgrades of the Army's Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the indispensable infantry-carrying complement to the Army's M1A1 tank forces. Kerry voted six times in 1990, 1995 and 1996 against funding for the Air Force's C-17 long-range transport aircraft, vital for providing strategic reach for U.S. forces. He voted eight times in 1990, 1995 and 1996 to eliminate funding for the Navy's F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet fighter-bombers, now the core strike strength of Navy carrier air wings. Kerry voted against further funding for the F-16, the Air Force's main tactical fighter, at least nine times in 1990, 1995 and 1996. Kerry voted twice in 1990, on the eve of Desert Storm, to cancel the Patriot Air Defense Missile system, the Army's principal air defense weapon. Kerry opposed the Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, voting twice against funding this war-winning reconnaissance and intelligence drone in 1995 and 1996. Kerry cast four votes in 1990, 1995 and 1996 against further funding for the Navy's Tomahawk cruise missile, which proved a brilliant success in the 1991 Desert Storm campaign and later in both Afghanistan and Iraq. On at least five occasions from 1990 to 1995, Kerry opposed a new amphibious assault aircraft carrier for the Navy. He voted twice against the Air Force's F-22 Raptor advanced tactical fighter and then cast at least five more votes against F-22 funding in 1995 and 1996. Kerry also opposed the F-35 strike fighter, a joint Navy-Marine-Air Force project, in 1996. Kerry opposed and voted against some 40 weapons systems that now constitute the core strength of America's armed forces. These were the arms that won the Cold War and vanquished the Soviet Union without firing a shot, that brought victory in the 1991 Desert Storm campaign at a miraculously low cost in American casualties and that now equip U.S. forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world from Korea to Bosnia. Carefully reading my most recent blogs provides factual accounts of John Kerry the war protestor and John Kerry the anti-defense, tax increase voting, Number 1 Liberal in the United States Senate. As Joe Friday said in his day's with Dragnet, "The facts ma'am, just the facts!"

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

"Stolen Honor"...Kerry for what he really is.

In a new documentary STOLEN HONOR: WOUNDS THAT NEVER HEAL, former POWs tell their compelling and chilling stories of their brutal life as prisoners of war in North Vietnam and the additional suffering and extended captivity they endured after their North Vietnamese captors read to them John Kerry's words accusing American soldiers of atrocities and demanded the POWs confess to Kerry's "war crimes" allegations. Stolen Honor, produced by Red White and Blue Productions, Inc., an independent documentary producer based in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, was released Thursday, September 9 and previewed at the Marine Officers Reserve Building in Washington, DC with many POWs and their family members featured in the film. The 45-minute film includes testimony from highly decorated POW's and their wives of previously undisclosed details regarding life in the North Vietnamese prison camps after John Kerry's congressional testimony and public anti-war statements and activities. Sinclair Broadcasting plans to have its stations air the film between now and Nov. 2. Sinclair only reaches 24% of the U.S. market, however, downloads and videos are available at the Stolen Honor website which offers excerpts from the film and identifies each of the POW's who suffered from the remarks of John Kerry.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Kerry Can Run But He Can't Hide!

The National Journal states it is committed to providing publications and services that are nonpartisan, reliable and of the highest quality. National Journal's vote ratings rank members of Congress on how they vote relative to each other on a conservative-to-liberal scale in each chamber. Following is an analysis of Kerry's history in the Senate. Kerry has compiled a generally more liberal voting record. After winning election to the Senate in 1984, he ranked among the most-liberal senators during three years of his first term, according to National Journal's vote ratings. In those years -- 1986, 1988, and 1990 -- Kerry did not vote with Senate conservatives a single time out of the total of 138 votes used to prepare those ratings. Of the 62 Senate votes used to compute the 2003 ratings, Kerry was absent for 37 votes. As a result, in the 2003 vote ratings, Kerry received a rating only in the economic policy category, earning a perfect liberal score. A separate analysis showed that of the votes that Kerry cast in the two categories in which he did not receive scores in 2003 -- social policy and foreign policy -- he consistently took the liberal view within the Senate. The results of the vote ratings show that Kerry was the most liberal senator in 2003, with a composite liberal score of 96.5. Kerry had a perfect liberal rating on social issues during 10 of the 18 years in which he received a score, meaning that he did not side with conservatives on a single vote in those years. That included his 1996 vote, with 13 other Senate Democrats, against the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibited federal recognition of states' same-sex marriage laws. As I pointed out in a recent blog, Kerry also voted against the 1991 Persian Gulf War to oust Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. John Kerry's record speaks for itself.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Who's For Tax Cuts?

Sen. Kerry Has Voted 98 Times For At Least $2.3 Trillion In Tax Increases in his career as a tax and spend liberal. President Bush has implemented several tax reductions while in office and wants his tax cuts made permanent. In addition, the President is proposing an overhaul at IRS and a flat tax which has been argued for by Steve Forbes and Dick Armey for many years. John Kerry has always opposed a flat tax. A look at the available tax return information for 2003 reveals why Kerry opposes a flat tax and proposes tax increases for the "rich." Effective Tax Rates in 2003 for the candidates:

  • President and Laura Bush 30.4%
  • Typical Middle Class Family 20.4%
  • John and Teresa Kerry 12.8%

Many taxpayers use tax loopholes which are quite legal. The hypocrisy is John Kerry proposing tax increases when his income is considerably higher yet his effective tax rate is below the middle class which he "supports." The question is this: Will John Kerry correct his own huge tax paying disparity by removing the same loopholes he and his billionaire wife use to beat the system?

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Sunday, October 10, 2004

Something We Almost Never Hear About

Unfortunately the Bush campaign never pounces on the openings John Kerry provides on the campaign trail and in the debates concerning Kerry's voting record. A glaring omission is the Kerry vote on the Persian Gulf War in 1991. Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and Kerry's "Global Test" was passed. In Fridays' Washington Times Op/Ed Kerry's position is made quite clear. Mr. Kerry, who at the time was not running for higher office and essentially came as close to voting his conscience as any politician can, opposed authorizing the use of American forces to drive Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. If ever there was a case that met a "global" test, here it was. Without provocation, Saddam invaded and annexed a neighboring country. It was, perhaps, the most naked act of aggression since Hitler and Stalin invaded Poland in 1939. Far from rushing to war, President George H.W. Bush assembled a broad international coalition, including Mr. Kerry's current loadstar of legitimacy, France, and obtained one of the strongest resolutions ever adopted by the United Nations Security Council. At the time, Mr. Kerry claimed that diplomacy should be given a chance. Seeking a diplomatic solution does not, of course, suggest weakness, but it does presuppose something to negotiate. Unfortunately, from 1990 to 1991, there was nothing to discuss. Saddam had no just claim to Kuwait. If, in these circumstances, Mr. Kerry could not bring himself to support the use of force, it is difficult to conceive of any situation where, freed from political pressures, he would. Still feel safe with John Kerry?

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Attic "Quote of the Week"

John Kerry argues with John Kerry in his most recent and memorable quote during the debate in St. Louis. "I've never changed my mind about Iraq," the senator insisted. "I do believe Saddam Hussein was a threat. I always believed he was a threat." But when asked a question on Iran, Mr. Kerry said, "Iran is a threat. It's a huge threat. And what's interesting is it's a threat that has grown while the president has been preoccupied with Iraq, where there wasn't a threat." My, my and a big Whoops!

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Saturday, October 09, 2004

Right War(s), Right Time(s), Right Place(s)

Three important stories are surfacing today, all which reflect feelings and progress in the war on terror.

  • Australia Re-Elects Howard Prime Minister Prime Minister John Howard scored a convincing victory in Australia's federal election Saturday, winning a historic fourth term in a vote ensuring the staunch U.S. ally keeps its troops in Iraq. The election was widely seen abroad as the first referendum for the three leaders who launched the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, with President Bush facing a ballot next month and British Prime Minister Tony Blair probably facing voters next year.
  • Afghan Voters Express Optimism for Future As people lined up to vote across Afghanistan, they expressed optimism that the ballot would be successful and herald a new era after a quarter century of fighting. Gul Sum, a 60-year-old housewife dressed in a black veil, said the election was a chance for the country's often-warring ethnic groups to unite. "In the line waiting with me, there are people from all the different ethnic groups: Pashtun, Tajik, Uzbek, Hazara," she said. "These elections are also very good for women. For the first time, women are having a say in the future of Afghanistan." Retired farmer Hussein Ali, 65, dressed in a traditional shalwar kameez and fingering white prayer beads, said "This election will help improve Afghanistan's international identity and give it a voice in the world."
  • Al-Sadr Followers Will Hand Over Weapons Followers of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr said Saturday they will begin handing weapons over to Iraqi police next week in a major step toward ending weeks of fighting with American soldiers in Baghdad's Sadr City district.

In a final note, the United Nations Security Council voted unanimously to step up its campaign against terrorism but backed away from authorizing a new list of terrorists that could be subject to sanctions and punishment. The resolution states that hostage-taking and other acts against civilians aimed at provoking "a state of terror" can never be justified on political, philosophical, ideological, racial, religious or ethnic grounds. It calls on all nations to prosecute or extradite anyone supporting, financing or participating in these terrorist acts.

John Kerry should re-evaluate his position(s) now that the Bush Administration committments are showing positive results around the globe and in the U.N.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Kerry's Big Lie...It's Not the Economy or War

John Kerry was asked this question at last nights debate: "Thousands of people have already been cured or treated by the use of adult stem cells or umbilical-cord stem cells. However, no one has been cured by using embryonic stem cells. Wouldn't it be wise to use stem cells obtained without the destruction of an embryo?" Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and director of the James Madison Program at Princeton University has placed Mr. Kerry on notice for his outright lie during the national debate. Mr. George states, "Kerry answered with a lie. A lie that will falsely inflate the hopes of countless people who would dearly love to believe that "we have the option" of curing them." Kerry claims scientists have told him we have "options" of curing Parkinson's, diabetes, spinal-cord injuries, or any other disease using embryonic stem cells. Mr. George continues, "Despite the fact that there is no federal ban on embryonic-stem-cell research, and that such research can be funded with state money and is being publicly funded in various places abroad, no embryonic-stem-cell-based therapy is even in clinical trials." The Professor concludes, "For months now, the Kerry campaign and its surrogates, such as Ron Reagan Jr., have cruelly led suffering people to believe that cures for their diseases are just around the corner. All we have to do is replace Bush with Kerry, open the federal funding spigot, and presto! The blind see and the lame walk! The Kerry campaign's hyping of embryo-destructive research for political gain is the cruelest and most shameful episode in the story of the 2004 election." John Kerry and the Democrats are so hateful and power hungry they have no bounds in the lengths they take to fool the American electorate. It's shameful. The Democratic hopeful has been a consistent fraud for over 30 years.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Debate Two - Presidential Bush vs. Deceptive Kerry

Forget the biased polls and media pundits, bottom line is this. President Bush was Presidential, calm, confident, appealing, funny and plain spoken. Mr. Bush talked straight with the audience and American viewing public. He didn't stammer around looking for answers or parade around acting pompous. Like him or hate him George W. Bush said what was on his mind, defended himself and his record, explained the hand he was dealt and exactly how he managed the recession and the war on terror as well as world opinion. Mr. Bush demonstrated he puts America and American values ahead of world opinion and liberal bias. On the other hand, John Kerry was aloof and programmed like a robot. The "town-hall" forum was not a setting Mr. Kerry enjoyed. Repeatedly we were told "I have a plan" over and over again. Kerry suggested we go to his web site and check it out. It's apparent Kerry is afraid of flip-flopping on his plan so he won't discuss it publicly. Go to a web site and read it for yourself. Much of the Kerry plan is already being accomplished. Training Iraqi forces and security, involving allies, and fighting terrorist insurgents. Mr. Kerry believes his four months of "fighting" a war as a young soldier qualifies him to accomplish what military professionals are already doing, only better. Further, side shots of Mr. Kerry were not flattering at all. He looked nervous, smirked and looked like a "dandy" with red rouge on his cheeks. His botox treatments were not serving him well. The President handled his questions well even though pundits of both persuasions were micro-managing the event. A little fumble or pause was a reduction in scoring points. Oh My! What about substance? The President answered even the loaded questions. Mr. Kerry spoke out of both sides of his mouth frequently, even on the same question. In fact, John Kerry did what he does best; John Kerry frequently and consistently spoke half-truths, name dropped and outright lied. Kerry was, what Kerry is. A fraud. Score this one resoundingly for President Bush. I hope enough open minded undecided voters came to the same conclusion. America has only one choice in this election. George W. Bush!

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

One More Iraq Flip-Flop for John Kerry in Debate

John Kerry has now reached 11 mixed statements, aka, Flip-Flops on the war in Iraq. He has now surpassed the qualifications for David Letterman's Top Ten Iraq Flip-Flops. KERRY'S ELEVEN POSITIONS ON THE WAR IN IRAQ

  1. October 2002: Kerry Voted For Use Of Force Resolution Against Iraq.
  2. April 2003: Kerry Promised Not To Attack President When War Began, But Weeks Later, With Troops Just Miles From Baghdad, Kerry Broke His Pledge And Called For "Regime Change In The United States."
  3. May 2003: In First Dem Debate, Kerry Strongly Supported President's Action In Iraq.
  4. September 2003: Kerry Said Voting Against The $87 Billion Supplemental Would Be "Irresponsible."
  5. October 2003: Kerry Voted Against The $87 Billion Supplemental Supporting Our Troops.
  6. January 2004: After Voting For War And Trailing Candidate Howard Dean In The Democrat Primaries, Kerry Says He Is Anti-War Candidate.
  7. August 2004: In Response To President's Question About How He Would Have Voted If He Knew Then What He Knows Now, Kerry Confirmed That He Would Still Have Voted For Use Of Force Resolution.
  8. September 2004: Kerry: Iraq Is "The Wrong War In The Wrong Place At The Wrong Time."
  9. September 2004: Kerry Says There Were No Circumstances Under Which We Should Have Gone To War, But He Was Still Right To Vote For It.
  10. Kerry Said That The Removal Of Saddam Hussein Has Left America "Less Secure."
  11. Kerry On Whether The Iraq War Was Worth It: "It Depends On The Outcome."

The second question posed to John Kerry at the debate in St. Lous was the claim he has not changed his mind on Iraq. "I've never changed my mind about Iraq. I did believe Saddam Hussein was a threat. I always believed he was a threat – believed it in 1998, when Clinton was president. I wanted to give Clinton the power to use force if necessary." (Sen. John Kerry, Second Presidential Debate, St. Louis, MO, 10/8/04)

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Friday, October 08, 2004

Escalating Liberal Violence

Hate and violence are taking shape this election year by forces supporting the Democratic causes. In Madison, Wisconsin a swastika was burned into the lawn of a Bush-Cheney supporter. State of Wisconsin Republican Party officials claim it's the latest in a series of desperate acts by Democrats. Bush-Cheney Headquarters in Orlando, Florida were ransacked, with two people receiving minor injuries. A Democrat was charged with slugging the area GOP chief in Gainesville, Florida. In Miami, more than 100 union protesters stormed the Bush-Cheney campaign office and pushed volunteers inside. In Tampa, about three dozen protesters crowded into the second-floor office of the local Bush-Cheney headquarters where three elderly volunteers, two interns and a campaign staffer were working at the time. Shots were fired into a GOP headquarters in Knoxville, Tennessee. Gunshots shattered the plate-glass front doors of a local Bush-Cheney campaign headquarters Tuesday morning before volunteers reported to work. Three Duluth, Minnesota teenagers walked into the Duluth News Tribune on Wednesday afternoon admitting they were responsible for vandalizing Bush campaign signs and painting a swastika and the word "Nazi" at a London Road residence last weekend. While the teenagers were remorseful for what they did, they stood by their contempt for President Bush. More than 50 demonstrators supporting Democrat presidential candidate John Kerry stormed a Republican campaign office in West Allis, Wisconsin at mid-day today, trespassing, creating a disturbance through the use of a bullhorn in the office and then refusing to leave when asked. Now Powerlineblog has reported nearly fifty members of Congress have written to Attorney General John Ashcroft to ask for an investigation of a series of coordinated attacks on Bush-Cheney campaign offices yesterday. The attacks were apparently carried out at the direction of the AFL-CIO. It appears to Don's Attic the Al Gore "brown shirts" are, in fact, organized haters supported and encouraged by the DNC and their surrogates.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Oil for Food or Oil for Death?

Claudia Rosett is a journalist in residence at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, and an adjunct fellow with the Hudson Institute first exposed the U.N. Oil for Food program for what is was; A corrupt program which aided and abetted the enemy, Saddam Hussein. Ms. Rosett neatly follows-up in the National Review and how the CIA chief weapons inspector Charles Duelfer has exposed the Oil-for-Food for "Oil-for-WMD." Duelfer reports, "Oil-for-Food allowed Saddam to replenish his empty coffers, firm up his networks for hiding money and buying arms, corrupt the U.N.'s own debates over Iraq, greatly erode sanctions and deliberately prep the ground for further rearming, including the acquisition of nuclear weapons. As set up and run by the U.N., Oil-for-Food devolved into a depraved and increasingly dangerous mockery of what was advertised by the U.N. as a relief program for sick and starving Iraqis." "Saddam followed a deliberate strategy of using bribes in such forms as contracts for cheap oil via the U.N. program, or outright gifts of vouchers for oil pumped under U.N. supervision, to gain political influence abroad. He grossly violated U.N. rules, with illicit trade agreements, oil smuggling, and arms deals (conventional, but still deadly) — and the U.N. did not stop him." His strategy, notes the Duelfer report, succeeded "to the point where sitting members of the Security Council were actively violating resolutions passed by the Security Council." Among Duelfer's findings was that Oil-for-Food riches had positioned Saddam to massively ramp up chemical-weapons production in a matter of months. On the WMD front, Duelfer reports that while no weapons of mass murder were found, Saddam had made a point of preserving the know-how. By corrupting the U.N. setup of sanctions and Oil-for-Food, he was deliberately amassing the resources and networks to go right ahead as soon as sanctions were gone. No one has ever heard these facts from the U.N. itself, certainly not from such prime violators as France, Russia, and Syria — nor from the man most directly responsible for protecting the honor of the institution, Secretary-General Annan.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Bremer Straightens Out the Media

Portions of The N.Y. Times op-ed piece by L. Paul Bremer "The press has been curiously reluctant to report my constant public support for the president’s strategy in Iraq and his policies to fight terrorism. I have been involved in the war on terrorism for two decades, and in my view no world leader has better understood the stakes in this global war than President Bush." "Mr. Kerry is free to quote my comments about Iraq. But for the sake of honesty he should also point out that I have repeatedly said, including in all my speeches in recent weeks, that President Bush made a correct and courageous decision to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein’s brutality, and that the president is correct to see the war in Iraq as a central front in the war on terrorism." "A year and a half ago, President Bush asked me to come to the Oval Office to discuss my going to Iraq to head the coalition authority. He asked me bluntly, "Why would you want to leave private life and take on such a difficult, dangerous and probably thankless job?" Without hesitation, I answered, "Because I believe in your vision for Iraq and would be honored to help you make it a reality." Today America and the coalition are making steady progress toward that vision."

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

Protectionism and Kerrynomics!

Despite the gloom and doom John Kerry invokes daily, the latest numbers on jobs is out and more ammunition is on the table for the President to argue against the "Kerry Doctrine." The unemployment rate is down from 6.3 percent to 5.4 percent in a year. It's back where it was when Bill Clinton was re-elected in 1996. The president was faced in his first year with a tech bubble that had burst, a terrorist attack that had killed 3,000 Americans and the worst corporate accounting scandals in history. None of these was Bush's fault; Clinton deserves at least some of the blame for all three. The largest job losses occurred in the beginning of the Bush administration, due in large part to 9/11. The bulk of the job increases have occurred this year in large part because of the tax policies and incentives to small business. John Kerry is espousing "Protectionist" policies and accusing the Bush administration of "Outsourcing" jobs. The latest statistics show that of the 1.5 million jobs lost last year in mass layoffs, less than 1 percent were sent abroad. Daniel Drezner of the University of Chicago also points out that while 4,633 workers were laid off from offshoring in the first quarter, Kodak laid off 15,000 because of the growth of digital photography. Many industries such as textiles have gone abroad resulting in lower prices for Americans. Economic Facts:

  • Unemployment is lower than the average for the past three decades.
  • Gross National Product, the nation's total economic output, grew nearly 5 percent for the year. That's greater than in any 12-month period during the Clinton administration.
  • 69 percent of Americans own their own homes, the highest proportion ever.
  • Personal income is up 5 percent in the past year.

The Labor Department announced today that the nation added 96,000 payroll jobs in September, a number that will be considered disappointing. The Department also revised its March 2004 jobs estimate upward by adding 236,000 jobs to the total estimated for that month. The only significance of these numbers is political and will provide Kerry with ample "on paper" material for debate. Evidence of economic strength further lies in some telling information not provided in the Labor Departments jobs report which the President should add to his debate arsenal.

Employment gains are edging higher in a period of high uncertainty regarding oil prices and heavy storm weather for the southeastern portion of the country. The biggest surprise in the report was that the Bureau of Labor Statistics failed to provide their own estimate of the impact of the hurricanes on September payrolls, this should certainly be factored in.

Economic Analysis: The weak trend in payroll growth continues but contrasts to stronger improvement in earnings, the length of the workweek and the downward trend in unemployment. Labor productivity and tightfisted labor investment is still a strong force. Employment trends lag the overall economy as final demand (in excess of labor productivity) feeds in to labor demand. The unemployment rate has turned sharply lower from a 6.4% June 2003 peak as employment is found in small companies. Hourly earnings have turned higher as labor demand turned stronger. The length of the workweek hasn't yet shown a sustained rise. Overall, the employment situation has improved but only modestly.

Steady growth with strong fiscal policy, as provided by the current adminstration, should be stressed after inheriting a recession and loss of 1 million jobs within 3 months of 9/11. Modest growth is welcome, while Kerrynomics would certainly follow his friends in Germany and France where unemployment is 10.6% and 9.9% respectively and economic growth is stagnant.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.