Random Thoughts

Just cleaning out the closet…

by Heidi Parent
06/01/04

Stop the panic!

I hereby call on the panicking about Bush’s chances in the Presidential election to stop. Things may look bleak now, but November is still five months away, for goodness sake. Yes, things are touchy in Iraq, but that was to be expected. The terrorists who oppose a free Iraq will do all they can to stop our progress. But it is also worth noting that despite resistance by these terrorist groups and Saddam loyalists, the majority of Iraqis have not joined the uprising and instead are eager to move down the path to self-rule. And yes, with the media focusing on only the bad in Iraq, Bush’s approval ratings have dipped. But it is interesting to note that even with the media’s relentless hysterical drumbeat of Bush’s failures, voters are hesitant to jump on Kerry’s bandwagon. His ratings have pretty much stayed the same. Moreover, many events will take place and many factors will change between now and the election. Aside from the conventions and the presidential debates (which both have the ability to turn any election), things will get better – Iraq will stabilize, gas prices will fall, and economy will continue to pick up steam. So let’s keep our heads. Stop the panicking until there is something to panic about. Like a Kerry Administration.

Savior John

What is with the media’s obsession with John McCain? Political pundits from coast to coast are predicting that if McCain joined Kerry’s ticket, Bush should just give up and make the plane reservation back to Crawford. Sounds nice, but on what evidence is their prediction based? I mean other than their wishful thinking. Just look at McCain’s track record. He ran for president once and failed to get his party’s nomination. What makes them believe John McCain has the ability to bring home the goods for Kerry when he couldn’t bring them home for himself?

Thank you for your nomination. I’ll get back to you.

Speaking of winning a nomination, Kerry’s camp recently considered having John F. hold off accepting his party’s nomination when it is offered at the Democrat National Convention. They wanted to delay his official acceptance for five weeks so the campaign could continue to raise and spend money before federal matching funds were disbursed and new spending rules kicked in. (Spending rules that were established in part by Democrats, I might add.) Kerry changed his mind after outrage poured in from all sides - campaign finance reform supporters, Republicans, broadcast networks (after all, such a move turns the convention from an event that’s held to nominate a Presidential candidate into a four-day infomercial for Democrats). But was anyone surprised that a Democrat would even contemplate such a move? It's no secret that money drives their every decision. Their primary season was adjusted over money. Heck, their convention was scheduled when it is so they would receive federal matching funds as soon as possible. Moreover, we’ve long recognized that rules and precedence can be changed or ignored as long as it benefits a Democrat. (Consider two examples from the last U.S. Senate primary: Bob Torricelli in New Jersey and Patsy Mink in Hawaii). This ploy is just further proof that in the end, for Democrats, it’s all about money and winning at any cost. Don't believe me? Read on...

Winning at any cost

Instead of focusing on the positives that have occurred as a result of Saddam’s removal, Democrats would rather focus on what’s gone wrong. Not surprising since they're in the midst of an election. But sadly, winning at any cost is always first and foremost in their minds. House Majority Leader Tom Delay said it best, “This is what the heirs of Roosevelt and Kennedy have become: a collection of appeasing partisans who see our every casualty in Iraq as a potential campaign gimmick. They want to win the White House more than they want to win the war, and our enemies know it (my italics). I am not questioning their patriotism. Don't let them play that little game again. I am questioning their judgment and their fitness to lead.” Well said. And here’s proof…

Shameful is right

In a recent speech on the Senate floor, Ted Kennedy said, “Shamefully we now learn that Saddam’s torture chambers reopened under new management – U.S. management.” This man is an embarrassment. His attempt to morally equate the systematic torture inflicted by Saddam Hussein on innocent citizens to the abuse inflicted at Abu Ghraib is what’s shameful. First off, forcing a prisoner to wear women’s underwear or scaring him with a barking dog is not equal to drilling holes in his body, gouging out his eyes, hanging him from a meat hook, or burying him alive. Moreover, unlike Saddam’s regime, the U.S. is investigating the incidents at Abu Ghraib and bringing the perpetrators to justice. Under Saddam the torture was at his direction and the torturers were rewarded. Big difference, Ted.

Shameful: Part 2

John Kerry recently said, "When Bill Clinton left office not one American soldier in uniform was dying in a war over seas.”

In an effort to get voters to pause and think, “Yeah, under Clinton we weren’t at war,” Kerry hopes to score points for his side. But to imply that U.S. soldiers are dying for no reason at all is the height of shameful politicization. Memo to John Kerry: the United States was attacked on September 11, 2001 by terrorists and we have been engaged in a War on Terror ever since. The key word there being “war.”

The truth is if his side had taken seriously the threat posed by terrorist groups, we would not have lost 3,000 people on 9/11.

(Thought within a thought: Kennedy and Kerry make their statements and the world keeps turning. But let a Republican candidate make a similar statement about a Democrat and you’d be able to time how quickly the media rips the meat from his bones with the fast hand on your clock.)

I thought it was none of our business

When Bill Clinton was in the midst of his Monica Moment Democrats defended him on the grounds that his sex life was his business. But when confronted with pictures of soldiers having sex with each other at Abu Ghraib prison Democrats are outraged. Hmm. I guess for a Democrat only the commander in chief is allowed to have sex on duty.

Ready for a weird one?

Okay, this is a weird one but here goes. Every candidate has a habit of doing something that is inevitably pointed out by the media and becomes his “thing.” Reagan had the grandfatherly grin and headshake. For Bush 41 it was his habit of running his words together as one (notgonnadoit). With Clinton it was the lip biting. Gore…well he was too weird to have just one. Bush 43 has the smirk. But I’ve yet to hear the media point out Kerry’s. And he definitely has one.

When speaking, John Kerry sticks his tongue out during long pauses. And I’m not talking about sticking it out just a little bit in order to lick his lips. No, I’m talking about sticking out the whole tongue; like a German shepherd on a hot day. Watch him. He opens his mouth and runs it out past his bottom lip, like Charlie Brown trying to catch a snowflake. It’s really pretty gross. But I’ve noticed he’s done it for a very long time. You can see it in footage of his anti-war activities as far back as 1971. I guess old habits are hard to break; even disgusting ones.