Let My Voice Be Heard!
Blog Archive
Blog
Thoughts Afire!
04-30-2004
Ted Koppel wants to show pictures and read the names of the dead soldiers from the Iraq war. He says that he want sto "honor" the war dead. Other media outlets and Web sites want to show pictures of coffins arriving at Dover Air Force Base. Most at first claimed that they wanted to honor the dead. Now they are showing their true intentions--they are attempting a replay of the arriving body bags from Viet Nam. It is their hope that this will cause Americans to rise up against the President and demand that he end the war in Iraq.
I hate war with a passion. I love peace. But our President was elected to do a job, and he is doing it better than anyone else clamoring for that office could do. Even the scriptures say that God has appointed governments (not just a particular leader) to wield the sword against evildoers.
Romans 13:4-7 "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Werefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour."
The apostle Paul says that we are to pay our taxes for this very reason--that the government be funded to protect Christians from evildoers.
While I hate war, and killing, and destruction, I understand that governments will protect their citizens. That is what George W. Bush is doing. I won't fault him for that.
04-29-2004
Democrats don't have a political platform that America is willing to stand upon. So, to disguise this fact, they spend their time attacking President Bush and Vice-President Cheney's military service, or lack thereof, while touting Kerry's medals--which he threw away, but really didn't--or did he, actually? Who knows? Meanwhile the man has a history of being anti-American, anti-military, anti-defense, and pro-communist. That should say it all for the American citizen.
Unlike the President, Kerry won't take responsibility. He blames a snow-boarding accident on a Secret Serviceman who was guarding him. He blames many of his flip-flops on tiredness. I raised this issue myself a long time ago. Others are now seeing what I am seeing. This man does not have the stamina, the mental prowess, nor the courage to lead America.
For months the Democrat and liberal activists have repeated that "Bush lied", "Bush misled", and "Republicans are liars and crooks". Unfortunately, studies have shown that when people are told the same thing over and over for an extended period of time, they begin to believe it, whether or not it is true. The Democrats know this, and that is why they started this mantra, even during their so-called primary campaigns. There is even a double reward for their use of the word "misled". It is saying that he lied or deceived, while simultaneously declaring that he has led the coutnry in the wrong direction.
The Democrats are using "projection". Since Kerry has no character, he is accusing Bush of the same thing. Since Kerry has no plan for the war against terrorism, he accuses the President of not having one.ON and on...
His campaign is constructed along these lines:
(1) I am not George W. Bush.
(2) I oppose everthing that the President stands for.
(3) I will end the war on terrorism, and produce millions of jobs and a booming economy.
Yeah, right!
04-28-2004
Democrats are already starting to slam Bush's latest judicial nominee, Brett Kavanaugh. This is part of their plot to keep a majority of ultra-liberals on the US Supreme Court, so that they can keep "legislating from the bench". It is ciritical that we vote in an even larger number of senators and representatives who will stand up for conservatives in the courts. Too many liberals have been neglecting state and federal laws, as well as the constitution, in order to force the culture to adopt their liberal ideology.
Are you as sick and tired of it as I am? I hope so. Vote!
04-27-2004
Kerry says that Bush & Cheney are attacking him! This, from a man whose party, and his own campaign camp, for months accused President Bush of being AWOL during his National Guard stint. They kept demanding that George W. Bush reveal his service records. When he did, Kerry kept his hid for months.
Now, Kerry is whining because the Republicans are taking a careful look at his own service record, and his anti-war, anti-American attacks after he was discharged. For a man who was anti-military, anti-American, and pro-Communist in the 1970s, one has to wonder how much he has changed, and how he will serve this coutnry in the ongoing war on terrorism.
04-26-2004
Henry Ford said, "You can't build a reputation on what you are going to do." John Kerry needs to heed that advice.
Meanwhile, Kerry kept his military medals after he threw them away. Or, should that be, he threw them away before he kept them? Anyway, after he threw them away, he bragged about what he had done. Now, he says that he didn't really throw them away, but kept them. Did he, or didn't he? He has stated it both ways--as is usual for John Kerry.
Murderers of tiny, innocent, unborn children rallied in D.C. over the weekend. They are scared to death of President George W. Bush's insistence that we respect the life of these little ones in the womb. God bless the little children! God bless President Bush! God bless America!
04-23-2004
Photos of war dead. Photos of flag-draped coffins. Why are they controversial? It is simple. Conservatives wish respect for the families of the deceased, who are already struggling with a terrible loss. The family members will indeed get to see the flag-draped coffins--that won't be denied them. But why do the liberals want such photos released? To create a furor in America, hoping that so many will call for an end to the war, that the USA will pull out of Iraq, and leave it in chaos--a breeding ground for further attacks on the USA.
War is horrible. I love peace. I pray that the killing will stop. But the country is being led by a man, and his advisors, who saw no way around this conflict--this world-wide war on terrrorism. This is World War III. It should not be exlploited by liberals who see no difference between democracy and a murderous communist regime, or dictator.
John Kerry had this to say in 1971:
"Senator, I will say this. I think that politically, historically, the one thing that people try to do, that society is structured on as a whole, is an attempt to satisfy their felt needs, and you can satisfy those needs with almost any kind of political structure, giving it one name or the other. In this name it is democratic; in other it is communism; in others it is benevolent dictatorship. As long as those needs are satisfied, that structure will exist."
04-22-2004
The liberals and leftists can't read the writing on the wall. They want to talk to terrorists, to ask them what we have done to offend them, and what we can do to stop the violence. Sadly, the terrorists seem to understand what the leftists don't--only force and violence holds any persuasion over them.
Usama bin Laden hides in the caves while his minions blow themselves to bits in order to kill innocent people. Arafat cowers in his compound while his followers blow themselves up. But as the American noose tightens around bin Laden, he suddenly tries to strike a deal with appeasing Europe. And as the Israelis close in on terrorist leaders, Arafat expels terrorists that he has been sheltering.
A question--why don't bin Laden and Arafat, two of the leading inspirations for suicide bombers, set the example by blowing themselves up? Why don't they become martyrs for the cause? The answer tells that they love life more than their "causes". Yet they continue to urge others to "die for the cause".
I would ask those liberals and leftists in this country, who criticize the USA while singing the praises of the likes of Arafat, bin Laden, and others, to move to one of those countries and continue their lifestyle of criticizing their new home country's policies and government. Let them move to the West Bank, or Gaza, and criticize the leadership. Let them take their lifestyles of excess--adultery, fornication, pornogrpahy, homosexuality, lying, etc., to a Muslim country and laud the benefits of them to the population there! These folks need a reality check!
04-21-2004
Well, well! Kerry has relented, and is releasing his military records, including how he got his three purple hearts. Or is he? Only two out of the three! The first was the one awarded--apparently at his own insistence--for a scrape along his arm. For some reason he still does not want to release that one! Hmmm? The wannabe Commander-in-Chief is mighty reluctant to release his stellar military service records. Strange, is it not?
Meanwhile, the U.N./Iraq oil-for-food corruption scandal is heating up. It appears that several of the players who resisted taking down Saddam Hussein were in on the rich payouts. Stay tuned!
04-20-2004
Kerry still refuses to reveal his "purple heart" military records, including how he got his first one--apparently no more than a scrape or scratch. His staff are scared to death that he will no longer be able to tout his "war record" as qualification to be Commander-in-Chief of US armed forces.
Woodward's new book? Much ado about nothing. Another in a long line of sleazy attacks on President Bush. It is clear as to what the Democrat strategy is--and so far it is working. By having a new front on which to attack the President week by week, they keep the Bush campaign and his staff on the defensive, while sowing seeds of doubt and distrust about the President.
04-19-2004
Kerry continues to bash President Bush on the war in Iraq, saying that he should not have "gone it alone". He keeps forgetting years of UN sanctions, and Bush asking the UN to help. The UN declined. Kerry forgets! He also forgets the 80 or so other nations who were on board in the invasion. I guess Kerry would just talk to the terrorists, and ask them to please stop. By the way, Saddam Hussein was a terrorist. Look what he did to his own citizens, as well as Iran and Kuwait.
Kerry won't make his military record public. How did he get his Purple Hearts? His wife won't release her income tax records. Kerry doesn't like a discussion of his anti-war past. Why not? Kerry doesn't want a review of his voting record? Why not?
He knows that his heroism in Viet Nam is anything but. His anti-war past reflects upon his will and ability to be commander-in-chief. He claims to be a "working man", in effect, while he lives in the lap of almost unrivaled luxury. And his voting records show that he is weak on the military and defense. He doesn't want us to know.
04-16-2004
New revelations from CIA officials before the 9-11 Commission: the CIA reported to Bill Clinton and his administration in 1995 that Islamic terrorists intended to attack within the US, and in 1996 specifically mentioned Usama bin Laden by name. Democrats on the commission have tried repeatedly to blame the George W. Bush administration for failing to prevent the 9-11 attacks. Even after the CIA testimony, they insist that the threat was not known until 1999--still trying to give Bill Clinton a pass on responsibility by saying that warnings came too late in his second term for him to act. (What about the WTC bombing in 1993--wasn't that early enough?)
It further turns out that the administration's counterterrorism group under Richard Clarke was furnished with vast amounts of data on Islamic terrorists, but apparently Clarke did nothing with the information. More than selling books, it looks like his recent foray into public media was to cover his own butt, as well as to put the Bush administration--which demoted him due to his ineptitude--on the defensive during an election year.
Usama bin Laden has apparently told the Europeans that if they will get out of Arab and Muslim countries, he will stop terrorizing their countries. No takers, yet...but it probably would not take much for France and Germany to buy into this appeasement. Such appeasement would buy the Muslim militants enough time to rest, regroup, and resupply their forces, as well as time to come up with new attack plans.
04-15-2004
The world grows more interesting as the dangers are being slowly revealed. President Bush finally took a stronger stance against the terrorism launched against Israel from Gaza and the West Bank. He supports Israel's PM Sharon's plan to pull out of Gaza, but to occupy some of the West Bank. I was wondering when, in the war on terrorism, he would finally stand against "Palestinian" terrorism, which is just another branch of Islamic (Muslim) terrorism. I have always regarded the terrorism in that area to be the same as terrorism anywhere. Terrorism is terrorism, even if you choose to refer to it as "freedom fighting". Indeed, these are freedom fighters, as they fight freedom wherever they find it!
Meantime, the 9-11 Commission is defending its member, Jamie Gorelick, although she served as the #2 person in Clinton's and Reno's Justice Department, and authored a memo that severely obstructed the FBI's ability to exchange terrorist information with the CIA. Since that is the very thing that is being investigated, she needs to resign the commission and appear before it as a witness. No wonder their "investigation" has turned into a political witch-hunt. So much for understanding the intelligence failures, and fixing them to prevent future 9-11s.
As Ashcroft and others have alluded, but not openly stated in uncertain terms, the failures were brought on by the Clinton administration. Clinton didn't like the CIA, refusing to meet with his own CIA director. He and Hillary used the FBI to cover scandals during their administration. (Remember Vince Foster, and the missing files that magically reappeared in Hillary's room months later?) Remember the request for a list of FBI dossiers on Republicans so that the Clintons could use the information gleaned from them against those Republicans? The FBI was in Clinton's back pocket, merely dong his bidding. He ignored the CIA. No wonder 9-11 hit us without warning!
04-14-2004
Much has been made of John Kerry's war record, and he has been called a "war hero with three purple hearts". How did he get them? Kerry came out of the war anti-military and anti-defense, which he has been pretty much ever since. He contemptously tossed his medals, then embarked upon a crusade against the government. This is the man that we want defending our country from terrorist attacks? I don't think so!
President George W. Bush gave a speech last night in which he reminded the US that Osama bin Laden and militant Muslims declared war upon us, and that we are at war. Some keep forgetting that. If you are one of those who have forgotten, please take the time to view this PowerPoint slide show.
04-13-2004
It appears that terrorism on home soil was not a big concern of the Clinton administration. Clinton Attorney General Janet Reno blames much of the "intelligence failures" on the separation of CIA and FBI operations, citing privacy issues as a reason that the FBI did not do a better job. Peculiarly, Reno spent her time attacking Branch Davidians in Waco, and local militia in Ruby Ridge. She was worried about violating citizen privacy in going after foreign terrorists in country, yet pitted the FBI against America's own citizens?
Ironically, Jamie Gorelick, an aggressive ciritic of the Bush administrations's handling of pre-9/11 intelligence, was the author of the memo that severely limited inter-agency cooperation!
Clinton FBI Director Louis Freeh whines that there was not enough money or resources to prevent the 9-11 attacks. To his credit, he does admit that militant Muslims had declared war on America as early as 1992. The Clinton administration treated the terrorism on his watch as mere crimes, although bin Laden had declared war. Clinton was distracted by more pressing matters (Monica Lewinsky).
04-12-2004
After time off to celebrate my wife's __th birthday, and to enjoy the Easter weekend, it is time to look at the world around us. Several American soldiers have died in combat in Iraq, as radical Muslim preachers there continue to stir anti-American hatred, urging attacks. Several civilians have been captured and threatened, though most have now been released.
Condi Rice has appeared before the 9-11 panel, where she aptly defended herself and the President from partisan attacks. The fabled PDB for 08/06/01 has been released, and as Dr. Rice says, showed no specific threat, although some have tried to string together different lines in the report to say it spoke of flying airplanes into landmarks, such as the WTC. It did not.
What it did speak of was the possibility of a hijacking in order to negotiate for the release of jailed Muslim terrorists. Historically, this was the reason for hijackings, not to use them for guided missiles. The mention of federal buildings and explosives in the report lent to the impression that the terrorists might want to pull off another truck bombing, such as was done on the first attack on the WTC in 1993 under Bill Clinton's watch. Only, this time, it seemed as if government buildings would be the target, not public buildings.
Are you as sick of Democrats using every small thing that they can as a lever to oust President Bush? The President has led the country wonderfully during this trying time. it would be nice if his political opponents cared more about the country than about winning back the presidency in the fall election.
Recent testimony reminds us that Bill Clinton avoided dealing with the CIA, refusing to meet the CIA director for daily briefings on their findings and concerns. He also was disinclined to involve the FBI in much. Though many from his administration seek to excuse him, the truth is that he cared little for espionage and surveillance, whether domestic or foreign.
Give President Bush the break that he deserves. Let's fix the problems, and move on!
04-08-2004
Condoleeza Rice appeared publicly before a sometimes hostile 9-11 Commission panel today. She had previously given the same testimony to them in private. So, what gives? This is a public show so that Democrats can try to embarrass Dr. Rice, and President Bush. Democrats on the commission took a hostile, accusatory tone, instead of merely asking questions.
It still amazes me that the Democrats are screaming that George W. Bush did not do in 8 months what Bill Clinton did not do in 8 years. Worse yet, as Dr. Rice pointed out, the staff that was supposed to be looking into terrorism was held over from the Clinton administration. Richard Clarke, accusing the Bush administration of failing to act within weeks of the swearing in of the new President, has no criticism for Clinton, who had 8 years to prepare and carry out an anti-terrorism strategy--but failed to do so. Rice said:
"Many of these ideas had been deferred by the last administration, and some had been on the table since 1998."
This is true. Clinton spent his last weeks in office writing Presidential pardons for criminals, and signing controversial Executive Orders that he did not have the guts to institute while in office, when he would have had to answer for them.
I am sick and tired of the lies of Democrats. Enough, already!!!
04-07-2004
Just yesterday I wondered aloud to my wife--as well as in my blog--if anyone would recall Ted "Liar, Liar" Kennedy's successful attmpts to cover up his lies and deception about the Mary Jo Kopechne death at Chappaquiddick. Today I note the stirring of the aroused animal of recall. A few conservatives dare to remind the nation of that event, and the subsequent lies and cover-up by Ted Kennedy and the Kennedy political machine. Well done! President Bush has told the truth, and Kennedy leads the Democrat charge falsely accusing our President of lying. The well-documented lies that Kennedy forged to cover his trail need to be brought to the attention of a younger generation who might not know about his sordid past.
What is the basis of Kennedy's, and other Democrats', claims that President Bush lied? Using a routine political ploy, they have enrolled the assistance of the liberal mass media to repeat a mantra until the nation accepts it as truth. Their current mantra is "Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq". They, as is common to this practice, have further reduced it to "Bush lied!" The Democrats, feverishly supported by the liveral media outlets, originally said that the President lied about yellow-cake uranium bought from Africa. They have since switched to saying that he lied about WMD.
Why won't anyone go back and review the President's 2003 State of the Union speech, in which he allegedly lied? The Democrats orginally claimed that the President lied about this yellow-cake uranium purchase, based upon one line in the speech:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
British Prime Minister Ton Blair was called to task about this same accusation, and was found innocent of deliberate misleading. Our President based his speech on the Bitish intelligence, and said so. When the Democrats saw that this allegation would not stick, they switched it to: "He lied about WMDs!"
The President clearly used language in the speech that indicated that the possibility of making WMDs existed. Here is what he said (italics mine):
"The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons materials sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax; enough doses to kill several million people. He hasn't accounted for that material. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed it.
The United Nations concluded that Saddam Hussein had materials sufficient to produce more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin; enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure. He hasn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.
Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. In such quantities, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He's not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them."
The President did not say that Hussein had the weapons, but that he had the materials that could be used to produce them, if he desired. He did not even say that Hussein still had the materials! He said that Hussein produced no evidence--whcih he had been asked to do by the UN and the US--that he had destroyed them.
Yet the Democrats are so dirty and desperate that they twist the words to suit their false accusations. I wish someone would call them on the carpet about their false accusations. Is someone lying here? I'll give you a hint--it's not President Bush!
04-06-2004
Several days since I have written. Life--and death--takes precedence. We buried one of my wife's aunts. And the tax man cometh...
Soldiers are being killed every day in Iraq, several at a time these days. While some fret that we are "bogged down, just like in Viet Nam", I wonder what the world will be like once we give up and invite the Muslims to conquer us. Are you ready to covert to Islam?
Ted Kennedy keeps trying to convince voters that George W. has "misled" the public. Does the name Mary Jo Kopechne mean naything to anyone? How about Chappaquiddick? In this article, Kennedy makes a Clintonesque "I did not have sex with that girl" type of speech. Talk about misleading the public! At least Monica Lewinsky is still alive!
04-01-2004
Lots going on in the world. Muslims in and around Tallujah, Iraq, murdered both military and civilian Americans. Muslims cheered and celebrated as the burned civilian bodies were dragged through the streets, and then were dismembered and hanged from a bridge.
We are too strongly reminded of the fiasco in Mogadishu, Somalia, under Bill Clinton. The Bush administration and the military command are saying little. We are hearing the worn-out rhetoric that "Islam is a peaceful religion", and that this was done by a "few, hardline militants". I beg to differ. The stated goal of Islam is to dominate the world, and make it an Islamic one. We saw the cheering in the streets by the Muslims of the West Bank and Gaza when Muslims killed about 3,000 in the World Trade Center bombings on 9-11-2001.
We can pretend that the Muslims aren't killing Russsians, Israelis, Spaniards, Serbs, Macedonians, Phlippinos, Indonesians, Indians, South Africans, Nigerians, Algerians, Sudanese, Ethiopians, Australians, and Americans, on and on, ad infinitum. Pretending that it isn't happening won't stop the killing. Muslims don't like non-Muslims. They consider them as devils, or animals to be slaughtered. Convert, or die, is their motto and creed.
They keep accusing the Americans of a war on Islam--why? Because they have declared war on us, and on the rest of the world. Why won't our leaders admit it? We didn't attack them, they attacked us!
President Bush signs the bill giving rights to the unborn. It's about time that our most innocent victims be acknowledged as being human. We have stood silently too long while abortionists have slaughtered innocent children by the millions. God forgive us!
Meantime, liberals have launched their own talk-show radio station, Air America, hoping to combat the popular conservative radio shows of the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Tony Snow, and others. The liberals behind their new station say that its goal is to remove President Bush fromt he White House. Meantime, Jesse Jackson gets a radio show, and Al Gore is working on a television channel. This could get uglier than it already is! The Democrats will say and do anything to get their nominee elected.
Contact Politicians and Officials:
Multiple Senators or Representatives
Individual Senators or Representatives
Political News
Read the Republican Contract With America that liberals still refer to contemptuously, and see what you think (notice that Bill Clinton took credit for much of what it undertook).
Now that the dust from the 2000 Presidential election has settled, we need to lobby for:
(1) Election day should a national holiday to allow an equal chance for all voters to go to the polls, not just union members, welfare recipients, and retirees.
(2) All polls must be closed in the entire United States before news people can start projecting winners.
(3) News stations, newspapers, and magazines must state their party affiliation or leaning. Opinions must be identified as such and not passed off as "news".
(4) In close elections, there must be a
four-member canvassing board to review hand counts. They should consist of two
representatives of each party whose candidate stands to win or lose on the strength of the
recount. A minimum of three people must decide for whom the ballot was cast, else it is
rejected as a non-vote.