July 29, 2004

More little things...

If you've picked up upon the tone of the websites... (by "the websites", I'm referring to Bush/Cheney 2004 and Kerry/Edwards 2004...) you can find a distinctly negative, very much agitated tone on W's reelection site. We're not talking like... soft stuff. Things like "John Kerry's "Extreme Makeover" and other eye-catching, but really otherwise fairly nasty stuff. That picture of Kerry in the cleansuit... Jeebus. That's no Dukakis tank trick, and I don't think that Bush's dogs believe that Americans are that dumb to believe that John Kerry was trying to act like he was in outer space, trying to tap at the entire "going to Mars" thing. If they do, well, I think many Americans would take exception. Maybe not... but I believe they would. For those of you who are unaware of what I'm talking about, members of the Bush team, but not the Bush team officially, have been circulating this photo of Kerry in one of these blue "clean suits" that scientists have to wear at Kennedy Space Center in order to prevent static charges and contamination. These Bushies have been sending the photo with captions such as, "Earth to John Kerry" and other pretty witless comments. They also seem pretty intent on trying to pick apart John Kerry... maybe not pick... it's more like hacking. They provide no legitimate reason why anyone should vote for W based on his policy. They're just working their damnedest to smear Kerry.

The John Kerry site, on the other hand, seems more tame, currently with a picture of John Edwards with the caption, "Hope Is On The Way." Seems pretty positive, doesn't it? In fact, there's nothing that jumps out or is really too visually grabbing or, as some would say, offensive. I'm not going to be discussing content of the sites right now. That's a whole other day that requires more time than I have at my disposal right now...


if you do want some content checking, go to FactCheck and you can find a whole of non-partisan verification or negation. It's a good site... I give it 4.5 of 5.0 on content and presentation.

One more thing... according to Drudge, CNN outfoxed FoxNews in convention coverage, garnering 2,169 thousand (2,169,000) viewers last night (7/28/04) compared to Fox's 1,770 thousand. Overall, CNN has averaged, the past three nights (7/26-28),  2,178 thousand viewers, with FNC having averaged 1,917 thousand per night. Both FNC and CNN, though, trounced MSNBC, despite having one of the most hyped speakers in recent memory, Ron Reagan, sitting in through much of the after-convention night coverage.

That's all for tonight, boys and girls.

Pizza Hell and more tales from the dark side.

It's 12:38 am, an early, early Thursday, 29th July, and I'm sitting in front of a computer monitor shortly after leaving work. Why? Because I care.

Anyway, I'm searching for something to comment on... John Kerry formally wrapped up the nomination... the Republican attack dogs are hot on his heels... and I haven't a damned clue what exactly to write about. Politics. Sheesh.

Drudge is reporting that John Kerry's Vietnam footage that was shown at convention was a setup from the get-go and that Kerry " was thinking Camelot when he shot that film". A serious charge... but, c'mon. Of course if I'd been John Kerry in the rivers and swamps of Vietnam I would have been plotting my 35+ year trek to the White House. I mean, who wouldn't?

I smell disgruntled former comrades who Kerry didn't like in Vietnam. Who's with me on that?

Anyway, that story is here: http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc8.htm

I've noticed something... CNN doesn't really report. It presents. Like FoxNews and all those other gooberball cable networks. I mean, it just glosses the top of the stories that it "reports." Reporters? Hah! Journalists? Don't make me laugh. Insiders with connections to protect? Oh yeah. Most definitely.

Apologies for having nothing considerable to discuss tonight. Open for responses, if anyone wants to post comments... since I have such a huge fanbase.


July 27, 2004

Out Here... In No Man's Land

The political stage is halfway set for the Presidential election in November, with the Democratic National Convention currently ongoing. John Kerry tapped John Edwards to be his running mate in the November election (as speculated here) just following the 4th of July holiday and the Democrats are set to confirm the Kerry/Edwards ticket. Now that leaves President George W. Bush to be officially nominated by the Republican party in late August. There has been some speculation in political circles that Bush may drop Vice President Dick Cheney in favor of a more appealing candidate, and names such as George Pataki and Rudy Giuliani have circulated. Whether this actually happens or not, only time will tell.

The Bush re-election campaign is working hard to paint John Kerry as two things. One of those is a hardcore liberal or, as the Bush campaign's website says, "... the Senate's most out of the mainstream member." The other is that John Kerry is opposed to benefitting our nation's soldiers. I'm actually on the phone right now with the Bushies (been on hold for the last, let's say, 15 or so minutes) trying to see how exactly John Kerry voted against soldiers being able to have body armor. Still waiting. Well, as I wait, I'll continue with my initial note about the Bushies trying to portray Kerry as the Senate's most left-wing nut job.

There was an interesting op-ed (actually with the heading "Op-Chart") entitled "Where Do They Stand?" published in Monday's (7/26) New York Times. Compiled by Sarah Binder, Thomas Mann, Alan Murphy, and Paul Sahre, the piece made note of several things. John Kerry is not Ted Kennedy. That's right, he's actually right of Ted. For shame, Bush. For shame. What unfortunately skews Kerry's record is his lack of voting on social and foreign policy issues. Dare I say for shame Kerry? Bush's campaign has also sought to paint John Edwards as another liberal out of touch with American values. Wrong again or so this op-ed says. John Edwards, according to the authors, right of the the party's center. So, Kerry is left and Edwards is right of D-center. Let us then compare this to the Bush ticket. President Bush's stated positions on issues put him right of the right's center. Okay... What about Dick Cheney? With little to go on over the last four years, the authors used Cheney's terms in the House as litmus. If Democrats could be called acids (pH less than 7) and Republicans could be called bases (pH greater than 7), Dick Cheney, based on his final two years in the House, would be more basic than 90% of his fellow partisans... putting him with NaOH (sodium hydroxide... or as we know it... lye.) So much for the Democratic ticket for being out of touch.

Alright, I hung up on the Bushies. Didn't take me off hold. Tried calling them back... no answer. I think I'll try to get hold of the Kerryites. No such luck. Well, whatever. I've got more than an itching feeling that the vote wasn't only about body armor, though. When I get the goods on the vote, I'll edit this.

So, in conclusion... it appears the Bush team is actually more out of touch with mainstream America than John Kerry and John Edwards are. The Bush team is peddling a lie? No shit.