October surprise comes from the left
Who would have thought the inevitable October campaign surprise would come by way of John "Botox" Kerry? And who knew Mr. Integrity himself would dig his own political grave while simultaneously bringing down the entire DNC?
Speaking to a group of students at Pasadena City College on Monday, Kerry said: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. And if you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
As a blogger on
Hot Air says..."I just want to know how Karl Rove got Kerry to say that."
Here are the updated details on Kerry's brainless remarks and his
indignant refusal to apologize...
| Sen. John Kerry held a press conference moments ago to address a controversial remark he made implying those who are uneducated serve in the military and get stuck in Iraq. |
Unlike the MSM,
Michelle Malkin has followed every step of this story.
The
American Legion asks Kerry to "apologize now."
Readers of conservative blogs write in...
Contrary to Senator Kerry's foolish remark that the uneducated end up fighting in Iraq, a remark that reflects liberals ignorant prejudice about the military, military people are better educated than their civilian equivalents, not to mention better trained for their jobs. 94.4% of military members have a high school education or better, compared to 89% of their civilian equivalents (see link below with table of statistics).
http://www.dod.mil/prhome/poprep2002/chapter3/c3_education.htm
Generally, you must have a high school diploma to join the military as an enlisted man. You must have a college degree to become an officer. There are no such requirements for the equivalent jobs in the civilian world. If you have no academic credentials, you are not going to end up in the military. If you are uneducated, you are much more likely to end up as an ignorant civilian supporting Kerry than a grunt in Iraq.
In the Air Force, I met a fair number of sergeants with bachelor's degrees, some master's degrees, and even a couple PhDs. I don't see the same in the civilian blue collar work force.
As an officer, you must earn a master's degree to win promotion to major, which comes at the 13 year point. That means all the mid-level managers in the officer corps have graduate degrees. The same is hardly true of civilian mid-level managers. In the Air Force, one out of eleven officers, have doctorates or professional degrees (JD, MD, etc).[http://www.afa.org/magazine/may2006/0506structure.pdf, p. 53, USAF Educational Levels] I do not see the same level of education in the civilian world, where only a third of the people have an undergraduate degree. [http://www.time.com/time/covers/20061030/who_we_are/]
All this academic work is aside from the system of professional military education which teaches military members to do their jobs, unlike the civilian system where workers learn their jobs largely by trial and error. The military values education and training and puts its money where its mouth is, maintaining a myriad of programs and institutions to improve yourself. By contrast, the civilian world would rather somebody else paid for training its workforce.
I suppose now that Kerry will tell us that he was for the military before he was against it.
- Steve G. |
I have to ask though...is anyone surprised by this? Seriously, this is the same guy who has been calling our troops rapists and killers since his swift resume building trip to Vietnam. This is the same character that came home and defended the oppressive and murderous leaders of communist North Vietnam. It's the same guy who his literally called for his own country to surrender in the War on Terror. Now he calls our military stupid and people are shocked?
The only thing shocking about this story is how the MSM has tried to turn it into a "GOP Attack" on Kerry.
There was nothing honorable or intelligent about what Kerry said. He spoke his true feelings and exposed to the world what most of us have been saying all along. Most of the Democratic leadership opposes our military. I truly don't know why, but they just do. It's no different than the nut job city advisor in SF calling for the complete and total removal of an American military.
What these tool sheds say only exposes how absolutely dumb they really are. Kerry says if you don't do well in school you end up in the military. And yet this is the same guy who's SAT and High School scores couldn't get him into any of the military academies. SF supervisor says we should get rid of the military but keep the police and Coast Guard, unaware that the Coast Guard is a branch of the military.
You see, sometimes it's just best to keep your mouth shut. But too many politicians are so full of themselves, they can't stop. Kerry is a prime example. I'll wax more on this later because I think it's important to examine why idiots like this are able to get into leadership positions and I'd also like to examine why they are so anti-American.
Quick thought: we went to Vietnam to stop communism. You had our freedom and peaceful way of life, and you had the oppressive and aggressive North Vietnamese invading the south. John Kerry opposed our fight against the North. After we left Vietnam, more than 2 million South Vietnamese peasants were killed by the communist regime. And John Kerry opposed our fight against them. Think about it. October surprise? Or October wake up call?
Feeling the anti-corporate love?
I guess the folks at
SFGate.com don't mind showing their disdain for corporate America. The notoriously corporate news web site, owned by Hearst Communications Inc., used their culture blog this morning to rip Comedy Central for
asking YouTube to remove assorted video clips of popular CC shows.
The culture blog rumbles with the usual "anti-establishment" rhetoric one commonly hears coming from the pierced lips of an aggressively-ticked off juvenile. They try to cite "incredible reach" and free marketing as a reason these clips should remain. But the corporately paid writers at SFGate seem to forget one thing that is posted in big letters on their very own web site.
COPYRIGHTYou see kids, there is a little law called copyright infringement that allows your content to be protected from theft. It means I can't take SFGate material and post it right here as mine and make money off it. It seems as though your corporate check-signers seem to understand this with their
big copyright page easily accessible on the front page of your site.
So how did it miss your misfit boat? Clearly without corporate dollars from Hearst, the culture blog would not exist. And so you'd be quickly booted to the gutter of the media world while trying to prove your subversive ideas are better than the vastly successful copyright protected ways of corporate America.
You see, I respect Viacom for protecting their content. There is no doubt that YouTube has a tremendous reach. But YouTube founders Steve Chen and Chad Hurley wouldn't be worth $1.6 billion right now had they posted their video sharing idea on a blog for free while damning the man. Would the culture blog have an once of the traffic they do right now without the power and money of Hearst? Didn't think so!
So Mark Morford, quit blasting the corporate media for protecting their content as you hide behind your own corporate curtain.
Inspiration moves me to continue
Posted by
Quiet Observer, 10.22.06 at 10:34 pm...
It is unfortunate that today, here in "the land of the free," the land of guaranteed "free expression," the land of diverse opinion and the freedom to disagree even with our own government, one such as The Real Republican must muffle his voice, must be politically correct, must not rock the infamous left wing boat, lest he might jeopardize his job, his livelihood, his right to enjoy his constitutional liberties by daring to counter that sentiment that would destroy those very freedoms and liberties in our land.
The neo-communists, the socialists, the neo-fascists, the partisan Democrat party would crush the right of free people to exercise their individuality and control of the government the people themselves have created solely to quench their thirst for power. Thus, The Real Republican must go silent to prevent retaliation by a totalitarian political faction and its followers bent on the absolute subservience of our people. |
Yes! You are correct! There is nothing else I can say but...right on!
Folks, reading a comment like this reminds me that I cannot sit back in silence as our nation is taken over by the socialist-left. A comment like this reminds me of why I enjoy politics and why I feel it is my duty to express my conservative views. A comment like this reminds me that freedom truly is the fabric of American culture.
So to Quiet Observer and my other readers, I will continue. I've made some logistical changes throughout the blog that will hopefully allow me to continue with my writings. I've removed some links, hired some freelance help and will push this sucker forward so the world understands the true Republican perspective.
A wide man once said, "Never give up! Never give up! Never give up that ship!" As long there is extremism in the world, this voice from the Bay certainly won't!
When democrats attack!
A Phil Angelides campaign rally turned ugly this afternoon in downtown Oakland. In a typical display of liberal "tolerance," Angelides supporters attacked a young campaigner holding a lone Schwarzenegger sign.
I had just finished lunch in downtown Oakland when I heard what sounded like yet another protest. We walked down to see what was going on when we stumbled upon the Angelides campaign rally in front of a City of Oakland building.
For those with a finger on the political pulse of California, for Angelides to be campaigning this late in downtown Oakland - supposedly his voter base - it was a true sign of desperation.
But I digress... I didn't really care about the rally itself, but I'm always fascinated with these displays of political loyalty. So I decided to walk over and watch for a few minutes. It was at that point when I noticed one Schwarzenegger supporter in the union based crowd. But what struck me was the harassment this young supporter was taking.
I watched as an older woman kept getting in the Schwarzenegger supporters face and was trying to hit his sign with her campaign poster. As the Schwarzenegger supporter moved around to avoid the harassment, about 10 Angelides supporters followed making rude comments and threatening remarks. At that point, a young male with dreadlocks yanked the sign and began ripping it apart.
The Schwarzenegger supporter was resilient and came back with another sign. Again, he was not saying a word, just holding his sign in the air. The crowd around him again began attacking him verbally and pushing him around. Again, the Angelides supporter with dreadlocks slammed into this young man and yanked the second sign away, walked off to rip it apart as well.
At this point, someone, not sure who, finally said to leave the sign alone.
I decided it was time to go back to my office to get my camera and give you all a glimpse of the tolerance the democratic party loves to tout. What occurred in downtown Oakland today was disgusting and yet another sign of liberal true colors.
The above photo are the Schwarzenegger supporters with one sign roughed up and the other ripped to shreds by the lovable and accepting Angelides supporters.
It should be noted, the Schwarzenegger supporters were members of the
Berkeley College Republicans. And yes, the
Tax Man was there as well!
Jihad/Google takes over YouTube
Some interesting news from the Wall Street Journal this morning...
Google Is in Talks to Buy YouTube
Google Inc. is in talks to acquire online video site YouTube Inc. for roughly $1.6 billion, according to a person familiar with the matter. The discussions are still at a sensitive stage and could well break off, this person says. |
Even more interesting news is how YouTube has handled political videos. Seems as though pro-jihad movies are allowed but anti-jihad movies are getting banned. Here's more from
Michelle Malkin...
If you've had an anti-jihad video pulled from YouTube, feel free to sport the badge on your site (thanks to AllahPundit).
I like the Jawa Report's take on a new YouTube logo, too (credit Ragnar). Welcome to AllahTube: |
| That one's very appropriate given today's piece in the NYTimes on the proliferation of jihadi propaganda on YouTube--at the same time anti-jihad videos are being yanked and conservative videos flagged as "inappropriate." While YouTube has removed a few of the terrorist videos from its site, many more remain: |
Liberal sexual affairs 101
I swore I would stay away from this one since it was all over the place, but I can hold out no longer. The raging hypocrisy of the liberal media and Democratic elite is just about as sick as the Foley IMs to under-age pages.
I open my email this morning and find this headline in one of my political newsletters...
Republicans struggle on how to spin Foley case. As a Republican, I think it's time I point out there is no spin, nor struggle in this case.
Michelle Malkin has some good stuff on the details.
Townhall Blog has updated coverage and
HotAir has video from the Hastert news conference.
I do try to avoid some of these big ever-changing issues because of time constraints. But after watching the countless reports on the evening news and getting emails with the above headline, I couldn't hold my silence. What the former Rep. Foley did while in office was wrong. There is no spin about that. But what Democrats are doing by politicizing the issue is just as wrong.
Here's a short history lesson for you about this issue and other sources of corruption in the political world.
In July of 1983, a story broke about the sexual affairs with House pages by Democratic Reps. Daniel Crane and Gerry Studds. It turns out Studds not only had sex with a 17-year-old page but had propositioned many more. Studds ran for re-election and was proudly returned to office six more times by liberal voters in his district.
It should also be noted, there was absolutely no speculation by Republicans and the media over whether Speaker Tip O'Neill should resign amid the scandal.
As
Ann Coulter points out...
The 46-year-old Studds indignantly attacked those who criticized him for what he called a "mutually voluntary, private relationship between adults."She goes on with details of how the media denounced critics as "against gays" and defended the actions of Studds - actions that were clearly more 'of the act' so to speak...
| Washington Post columnist Colman McCarthy referred to Studds' affair with a teenage page as "a brief consenting homosexual relationship" and denounced Studds' detractors for engaging in a "witch-hunt" against gays: "New England witch trials belong to the past, or so it is thought. This summer on Cape Cod, the reputation of Rep. Gerry Studds was burned at the stake by a large number of his constituents determined to torch the congressman for his private life." |
Fast forward to June 6, 1994 when Congressman Mel Reynolds engaged in explicit phone conversations with 16-year-old "campaign worker," Beverly T. Heard. A tape of the explicit conversation was entered as evidence in People v. Melvin Reynolds, a trial that ended in Reynolds' conviction. Reynolds was sentenced to several years in federal prison.
Debbie Schlussel
points out some of the details from these conversations...
| Various underwear choices and sex acts are graphically described by Reynolds to his youthful female target. This includes a planned threesome with a 15-year-old Catholic schoolgirl named Theresa. Awestruck with the prospect, Reynolds rhetorically asks, "Did I win the Lotto?" |
How did the left respond? In 2001 Bill Clinton pardoned ex-Congressman Mel Reynolds. And that wasn't even good enough... Reynolds was hired by Rev. Jesse Jackson's Operation PUSH to decrease the number of young blacks going to prison. Guess his skills with the young ladies would help his street cred.
Now fast forward to our current scandal. Last Friday, Rep. Mark Foley
resigned from Congress amid questions about e-mails to a teen House page. We're not talking about secret IMs that were released a few days later. We're talking about emails that simply asked questions like "what do you want for your birthday?"
There isn't one person who will condone the actions of Foley. But based on the evidence that had been released by the page's family, the only information available to Republican leadership was overly friendly emails. And this information was enough for the FBI to dismiss any wrongdoing. So for the left to go on the attack of Republicans for not doing enough is not only factually wrong, but downright looney based on the way they've handled similar scandals within their own party.
Yes, the IM messages are bad. Yes, Foley resigned in embarrassment. But bring yourselves back into reality here folks. We're talking about a gay man's interest in teenage boys. If I had a nickel for every time a guy had interest in, commented on, dreamt about or ogled a teenager, I'd be wealthier than George Soros.
The story here is the manner in which these cases were handled after they went public. The Republican resigns office and there's a mass investigation. The Democrat gets re-elected six times, pardoned, and given a lucrative job. You tell me which is a bigger scandal!
I'll leave you with this final quote from Ann Coulter's latest column...
But now, the same Democrats who are incensed that Bush's National Security Agency was listening in on al Qaeda phone calls are incensed that Republicans were not reading a gay congressman's instant messages.
This is the very definition of political opportunism. If Republicans had decided to spy on Foley for sending overly friendly e-mails to pages, Democrats would have been screaming about a Republican witch-hunt against gays. But if they don't, they're enabling a sexual predator. |
Exactly!
Liberal food fight
While most blogs are ranting and raving about former Rep. Mark Foley's disgusting overtures to minors, I figured I'd go down a different road and talk about fat.
Just in case you’re wondering about my position on Foley...I'll keep it simple. Any child predator, regardless of political affiliation, is a disgrace and should be put away. There's your story. Anything beyond that is political posturing and should be ignored.
Now, let's get to the meat - err, fat - of another story that's making the airwaves. Under a plan announced last week,
a New York City proposal would ban restaurants from using partially hydrogenated oil. Doesn't seem like a real juicy story until you take a step back and think about it. The greasy detail here is of yet another government plan to tell private businesses and individuals what to do.
Under a plan announced last week, chefs at thousands of restaurants would be barred from using partially hydrogenated oil, which has been found in some shortenings and frying oils for decades.
Artificial trans fatty acids are thought to cause cholesterol problems and some studies have blamed them for an epidemic of heart disease deaths. |
Now, it sounds like a just cause. And proponents will quickly point out that these fatty acids are killers. But so is almost everything we eat. Excess Gatorade can be bad for you if you drink too much. So the question is...what is the true cause of this epidemic? Is it the local chef who is cooking for a large audience that will make or break his success if the food isn't good? Or is it our lustful desire to eat these foods high in fat and cholesterol.
Think about it. What sounds tastier right now...a grassy salad with a dash of vinegar and a side of no-salt wheat-thins or a juicy New York strip with a side of mashed potatoes and butter. I won't lie; I'd go with the steak every time. But I do so because that is my personal right. My wife and I understand that when we eat out we can't always tell what's in our food. We know that generally speaking it is healthier to eat at home. But these are decisions we can make. We also make the decision to workout daily and run 5k's.
When a "father knows best" government starts trying to right all the wrongs in the world by taking away my freedoms, something is wrong. An epidemic of heart disease doesn't come from Chef Gordon Ramsey's cooking style. It comes from our inability to take responsibility for our own actions. Every person that walks into a NYC restaurant has the ability to choose the fatty burger and the ability to run it off the next day before work. It's not my government’s job to do that for me. Because rather than educate society on the benefits of a semi-healthy diet and a daily workout we end up with government mandated cooking styles and a generation of people who can't think for themselves.
Newsbusters points out how our MSM is making their support of this ban 'Crisco-clear.'
Richard Berman at the
New York Daily News reports on how this is more about the growth of our irrational fears as opposed to a sudden rise of fat pools in our shrimp scampi.
Of course, it wouldn't be a liberal cause without
Hollywood.
You decide if this ban is good for New York...but keep in mind the NYC government doesn't think you can.
