Saturday, October 23, 2004


I was pretty sure the Guardian, the British rag consummed with ABB (Anybody But Bush) rage, couldn't sink any lower than their unsuccessful effort to illegally influence battleground state voters. Obviously, I was wrong:
On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?
Charlie Brooker stepped way over the line with his murderous column in today's edition. Read the whole article here.

Brooker is much more than just a liar (the truth is vast populations of the civilized world are emploring God for a Bush victory). By his words, Mr. Brooker, has revealed himself to also be a blasphemer, a heretic, and a goulish advocate of the culture of death that has infected the world's few remaining leftists.

Now it's time for Americans to respond to this travesty by flooding the Guardian with e-mails demanding the firing of Charlie Brooker. You can e-mail Emily Bell, the Guardian chief editor, at

SUNDAY UPDATE: The Blogosphere has done it again! The Guardian has issued this correction to the Brooker column:
The final sentence of a column in The Guide on Saturday caused offence to some readers. The Guardian associates itself with the following statement from the writer.

"Charlie Brooker apologises for any offence caused by his comments relating to President Bush in his TV column, Screen Burn. The views expressed in this column are not those of the Guardian. Although flippant and tasteless, his closing comments were intended as an ironic joke, not as a call to action - an intention he believed regular readers of his humorous column would understand. He deplores violence of any kind."

Friday, October 22, 2004


Next time one of the Old Media Men (Peter, Dan, or Tom) talks about the "group think" of the Bush administration, they need to be reminded of their own "bias bubble" concerning reports about Iraqi WMD. Since long before the war started the Old Media have been silent on reports that the WMDs had been transported into Syria and Lebanon.

The following report (read the entire article) never made it to the Old Media:
October 18, 2004: Charles Duelfer told the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier this month he could not rule out Saddam's transfer of Iraqi missiles and weapons of mass destruction to Syria.
But that's not the first report (read the entire article) that Saddam had been hiding his WMDs in Syria:
February 2, 2004: Indeed the US administration and its intelligence agencies, as well as Dr Kay, were all provided with Syrian maps marked with the coordinates of the secret weapons storage sites. The largest one is located at Qaratshuk at the heart of a desolate and unfrequented region edged with marshes, south of the Syrian town of Al Qamishli near the place where the Iraqi, Syrian and Turkish frontiers converge; smaller quantities are hidden in the vast plain between Al Qamishli and Az Zawr, and a third is under the ground of the Lebanese Beqaa Valley on the Syrian border.

These transfers were first revealed in February 2003 a month before the war. We also discovered that a Syrian engineering corps unit was detailed to dig their hiding places in northern Syria and the Lebanese Beqaa.

But that's not the first report (read the entire article) that Saddam had been hiding his WMDs in Syria:
January 8, 2004: Nizar Najoef, a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to Western Europe and is known for bravely challenging the Syrian regime, said in a letter Monday, January 5, to Dutch newspaper “De Telegraaf,” that he knows the three sites where Iraq’s WMD are kept.

But, wait, there's more. One of the most dangerous terrorist groups is Hisballah. Hisballah and Hamas have terrorized Iraelis with relentless attacks with homicide bombers and mortar and rockets launchings. It is well documented that Syria and Iran have supported Hisballah terrorism with finances, training and material. Well, my fellow citizens, it looks like Iraq was helping out a bit as well, as far back as 2002. Read the entire article here:
December 30, 2002: The powerful blast that reverberated across eastern and central Lebanon Sunday, December 29, was caused by the explosion of a big surface missile in Hizballah hands and of Iraqi origin. Reporting this, DEBKAfile’s exclusive military and Lebanese sources reveal that the Lebanese Shiite terrorist group has recently taken delivery of a shipment of surface missiles, presumed to be medium-range, from the Iraqi army.


There are a number of conservative pundits (read the comments) now predicting the Democrats have depleted their bag of political dirty tricks, therefore there will not be an October Surprise against President Bush. Some even rumor that Kerry has already conceded his loss to his inner circle. As my old granddaddy used to say, “When a cornered varmint can't run or hide, he’ll use his teeth.” I hope President Bush’s grandpappy filled him in on the rest of his “run and hide” slogan against Kerry.

I definitely believe the Democrats have an October Surprise strategy, and I call that strategy the October Subpoena. The Democrats are definitely backed into a political corner. Over the last decade the Democrats have lost control of the House, the Senate and the Presidency. All the "teeth" they have left are the judiciary, the old media, and the public education system.

Did I say all? Each of those power centers wield significant power to influence this election, both directly through activist judges, relativistic postmodern educators, and biased yellow journalism. There is one other X-factor the Democrats will exploit to exert pressure on the US electorate, but I’ll get to that in a moment.

The first phase of the all-out assault by the Democrats on the election has already begun. Thousands of partisan lawyers have been deployed to the “battleground states” as “special forces” to launch covert operations to undermine the legitimacy of this election. We are already seeing the nightly news reports of voter fraud, intimidation, and disenfranchisement, particularly in Florida, the ground zero of this war.

The strategy is to flood the media with anecdotal reports of early voters having to run a gauntlet of Republican efforts to deny them their right to vote. In reality, it is the Democrats who are instigating the confusion and distrust through their attacks on Republican offices and their illegal voter registration tactics. Just today there is a report that “independent” foreign election observers are criticizing the election preparations in Florida.

This strategy is similar to the one the Democrats used to swing the student vote toward Kerry. Remember back with Rangel and Hollings sponsored bills in Congress to reactive the military draft on the premise the poor were disproportionably represented in the Iraq War? They were quietly counterfeiting evident for their subsequent accusation that the Bush Administration was making secret plans to draft all youths after winning the election.

The charge has been proven to be totally bogus, however the strategy has been devastatingly effective for Kerry. Fortunately, a large percentage of liberal students are also lazy slackers (trust me, I’m speaking from personal experience) and most won’t actually vote.

Now, what is this mysterious X-factor the Democrats will use to “show their teeth”? I believe that just before the November 2 election the World Court in the Hague will charge the Bush Administration with war crimes for the Iraq War. The Secretary-General of the UN, Koffi Annan, quietly laid the groundwork for the process when he declared the war to be “illegal”.

The old media will flood the airways, newspapers, blogs, etc., with a flood of reports about the atrocities of the US in Iraq (including Michael Moore’s soon to be released video). Remember, the Old Media operates on the principle that what’s important isn’t the truth of the evidence, but the seriousness of the accusation.

I know this X-factor scenario sounds farfetched, however, the Democrats have been moving toward a global test for American foreign policy for decades. They have embraced the idea of a global community of nations modeled on the democratic socialism of the European Union, rather than the Constitution of the United States. Ideas have consequences. The consequence of a Kerry election would be a greater loss of the individual rights protected by our Constititution. That is why we must not be lulled into complacency by polls and projections. We are literally fighting for the future of our nation. Remember, this varmint has sharp teeth.

Thursday, October 21, 2004


I knew it! And I predicted he would go for it once he finished his book. It was just a matter of time before the announcement would be made, and the DrudgeReport has the link.

Days after President Bush was inaugurated, I predicted Slick Willie would set his sights on the only higher office still open to him--the King of the World, uh, I mean, the next Secretary-General of the United Nations. Koffi Annan's term expires in 2006.

Try to wrap your brain about the possiblity of Bill Clinton being the head of the UN when Senator Clinton makes her bid for the presidency in 2008. Bill and Hill would be the most powerful couple in the cosmos! Now that's a terrifying thought!

Tuesday, October 19, 2004


My neighbor just sent me the linked article. He is a diehard Kerry Kool-aid drinker and I love him like a brother. I promise I'm not making this up (well, maybe the satirical parts.)

Encouraged by the recent endorsements of the ABB (Anybody But Bush) campaign by Old Europe, China, North Korea, and the Palestinian Authority, the extreme wing of the Democrat party has just declared solidarity with Jesus Christ, the dead progressive revolutionary, not to be confused with the other dead progressive revolutionary, Che Guevara.

In a CommonDream NewsCenter article by noted theologian Gary Vance (who?) from Loretto, TN, (where?) it is painstakenly revealed that only liberals are true Christians, and that conservatives are not only greedy losers, but they are totally un-Jesus and should be ashamed of themselves and grovel on their bellies on a gravel road until they agree with Edwards that they have lost their minds and finally admit Bush stole the 2000 election by not allowing law-abiding felons in Florida to vote early and often. They should also admit that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Powell/Rice physically forced noted conservative Democrats Charlie Rangel and Fritz Hollings to sponsor bills in Congress to reinstate the national draft to scare the bejesus out of the nation's college slackers.

Vance's heavily researched and annotated paper (oops, Gary must have forgotten the footnotes) presents the real Jesus, a peace loving hippy who would have volunteered to single-handedly clean the portable potties at Woodstock. Not at all like the hobnail-booted, war-mongering bigot those disgusting Republicans like to make him out to be. Finally we have the definitive work on the life and times of Jesus. He was a lot like Gandhi, only Jewish (shhhh, don't let Arafat and the mullahs know Jesus was a Jew. They may pull their Kerry endorsements.)

Please accept my apology if the above post offended you. It was not my intention. My intention was to satirically expose the hypocricy of the article and the lameness of the author's arguments. Vance reconstructed Jesus through the lens of his liberal worldview. In reality, Jesus was the perfect sinless man and the holy righteous God, all in one. If is folly to button hole Him into one camp or the other. He was sinless. Guess what? Neither liberals nor conservatives share that trait. "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Jesus was perfectly balanced between the extremes of today's conservatism and liberalism. He occupied what I like to call the "radical middle". To twist our Lord's life and works to fit a politicial agenda is shameful and bordering on heresy.


Did you hear about the "non-partisan" Rock the Vote campaign with Bruce Springsteen and his buddies touring the country to promote the Kerry campaign? (Hat tip to Hugh Hewitt.)

Guess what? There's an evangelical Christian non-profit organization REDEEM THE VOTE encouraging Christians to vote for conservative Christian values on November 2.

Click here to see a video of Jim Caviezel, the actor who played Jesus in The Passion of the Christ, promoting the Redeem The Vote message.

Are you planning to redeem your vote this year? Thousands of Christians have not voted in past elections. We must be salt and light in our culture. We are not of this world but we are definitely in it and we are to do everything we can to promote godly living. The citizens of Afghanistan, for the first time ever, were able to vote for the next leader of their nation. Will you redeem your vote?

Monday, October 18, 2004


My wife Josie wasn't too pleased with the results of the 7-Eleven stores national coffee poll for the presidency. Here is a clip from The Hill (scroll down to the post):
The Bush campaign will be pleased to know that real men take their coffee black — and vote Republican. Among all coffee drinkers, President Bush and Sen. John Kerry are tied at 44 percent. But among black-coffee drinkers, Bush leads 48 percent to 42 percent. Kerry takes the cream-and-sugar crowd by a margin of 50 percent to 36 percent.
Josie is a politely conservative Christian who prefers her coffee creamy (she weaned herself off sugar a while back.) Seems she'll be bucking the national trend of coffee addicts on Election Day.


Hugh Hewitt Symposium: Why vote for Bush, and what's wrong with Kerry?

Why I'm voting for President Bush.

First, I lived in Texas for a while so we have kind of a, cowboy bonding thing going on.

President George W. Bush walks like a horseman,
talks as little as possible,
works as hard as he can,
plays as hard as he should,
appreciate people praying for him,
likes to clear underbrush,
drives a pickup,
runs a chainsaw,
loves dogs,
kicks cats,
would die to protect his wife and kids,
believes God hears him when he prays,
his word is his bond,
his handshake is as good as his signature,
is loyal to his friends,
keeps an eye on his enemies,
can spot a phony a mile away,
won't tolerate posturing,
thinks kids should pray in school,
loves real sports--like baseball,
believes in the Constitution,
believes life begins at conception,
hates the killing of innocent life through abortion,
thinks justice should be swift and severe,
believes the guilty should pay bigtime for their crimes,
believes marrage is sacred and between one man and one woman until death,
believes sin is real and evil must be defeated,
believes the president's first job is to protect Americans from people who want to hurt them,
and believes finishing well is more important than starting good.

As the Kerropeans say, "He's a cowboy, just like Reagan."
And I say, "Amen!"

Why I'm not voting for Kerry:
He's not a cowboy.


In the final presidential debate, both President Bush and Senator Kerry talked openly about the impact of their faith on their political careers. Their comments illustrate the growing riff between the religious and secular voters in this election. A recent article in Christian World News explains:
Religion has become one of the major determiners of how you vote. To put it simply, those who pray a lot tend to vote Republican. Those who don't tend to vote Democrat.

A new poll shows 63 percent of those who attend religious services more than once a week say they'll vote Republican. Sixty-two percent of those who rarely or never attend such services, say they’ll vote Democrat.
Not only is there a gap between the religious and the secularist but there's a God gap within the professing church. A recent article in the conservative Christian magazine Touchstone reports:
The National Council of Churches recently published “Christian Principles in an Election Year,” which identifies “ten non-partisan, biblically based guidelines” for voters in this election year. What are the ten areas of concern? War/conflict, urban decay/poverty, foreign policy, economic justice, racial justice, environmental justice, immigration, health care, and criminal justice. The non-partisan guide makes no mention of “gay marriage” or sanctity of life issues such as abortion, embryonic stem-cell research, or euthanasia.
Now, don't get me wrong, I believe the social justice issues raised by the NCC are important issues, however, I do not believe they are the most critical issues facing us today. My list would include the following:

1. Defeat of global terrorism;

2. Control illegal immigration;

3. Restore states rights usurped by an activist federal judiciary;

4. Pass the Human Life Amendment to the US Constitution;

5. Pass the Protection of Marriage Amendment to the US Constitution;

6. Restore the right of private prayer in public school.


The Jerusalem Post revealed today that the Palestinian Authority has endorsed John Kerry in the upcoming US presidential election, joining the French, the Germans, the North Koreans, and the Iranian mullahs.
The Palestinian Authority made its first open statement Monday expressing support for US democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.
It is logical that the PA would pick Kerry after the vast majority of the Israeli people polled for President Bush. Talk about being on the wrong side of issues. This is not going to help Kerry when he talks about fighting a tougher, smarter war on terror and he is endorsed by the Axis of Evil!


A number of Evangelical Christian organizations joined forces this weekend in Washington DC to publically proclaim their support for a Protection of Marriage Amendment to the Constitution. Prominent speakers included Chuck Colson, Anne Graham Lotz, Dr. James Dobson, Alan Chambers, and a host of other leading evangelical leaders. Read the article here.

Thousands of people, many of them evangelical Christians, gathered on the Mall yesterday for a three-hour rally to protest same-sex marriage and defend what they call "biblical, traditional marriage."

If someone said to you, "What's wrong with letting gays marry?", how would you answer? Have you thought deeply about God's intention for marriage? Do you believe that marriage is a unique institution designed by God for the physical and spiritual union of one man and one woman? Are you able to give a clear and sound explanation of why it is so important that the biblical, tradition form of marriage be protected by our federal government?

If not, I suggest you read this article about the sanctity of marrage.