Post McCain/Plain Speech poll bounce, But what’s it’s term?

Short Term or Long Term? that, my friends, is the question of the hour.

According to the latest Gallop poll, John McCain is taken a nice 5 point lead, above the 2% margin of error, over Barack Obama.

Quote:

John McCain leads Barack Obama, 49% to 44%, in the immediate aftermath of the Republican National Convention, according to the latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking results.

These results are based on Sept. 5-7 interviewing, and are the first in which all interviews were conducted following the completion of the GOP convention. Immediately prior to the convention’s Sept. 1 start, Aug. 29-31 interviewing showed McCain with 43% support among registered voters, compared with 49% today. Thus, Gallup credits McCain with a six-point convention bounce.

That is slightly better than Barack Obama’s four-point bounce from 45% in Aug. 22-24 polling before the Democratic National Convention started to 49% immediately after it concluded. Since 1964, the typical convention bounce has been five percentage points.

Here are the charts:

080908DailyUpdateGraph1_n4b7v2

080908DailyUpdateGraph3_j6n8b4

This really nothing new because there’s been a bounce like this since 1964:

080909DailyUpdateGraph2_j8b6v3

Like I wrote yesterday. the big question is, will this bounce on McCain’s part be short term or long term? I’m sure that John McCain and the Republican Party is betting the farm that the bounce will remain and John McCain will simply glide into the White House. However, this is not 1980 and John McCain is not Ronald Reagan, neither is Sarah Palin, I mean, she’s a good speaker, and kinda cute, for an older Woman, but she’s no Reagan. Plus, the country is in a much different shape; politically and financially, plus, I think it is just a different world, we have two wars, that America wants to just see ended, preferably with good results.

Which leads me to my next point. I simply do not understand why Adam McKay had this Nuclear melt down on The Huffington Post. I mean, let’s not discount the Democratic Party or Barack Obama until the damn polls close on Novemeber 4, 2008, please. We’re very early in this race.

The best advice or comment that I can give, is watch the polls for the next few weeks, is about all I can truly say here. The long term polls will tell the story. I think that if Obama wants to regain his lead, he has to drive the point home the point that the Republican Party IS the Party of George W. Bush. They will have remind Americans of the nonsense of the Bush Administration, on FISA, on the Attorney General scandal, Valerie Plume gate, and on and on…. They need to remind America about John McCain’s ties to lobbyists, even possibly infer that he slept with one, They also need to remind and tell America how Sarah Palin lied about the Jet, her flip-flop on the bridge to nowhere and so on. That is what will win this.

So, the bottom line is:

This is a very early poll and there’s many more to come, before November 4, 2008.

Others: Hot Air, JammieWearingFool, Ace of Spades HQ, and more via Memeorandum

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Bob Barr, The Right Choice for America…..

Bob Barr For President 2008

So far, Bob Barr has raised $836, 686, 52.

Join Bob Barr’s effort to retake America. Donate today

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Rachel Maddow, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A movie that every American should watch, before voting

(H/T to AP at Hotair.com)

This movie, if it caught on in the Media would ruin Obama’s chances of being elected President.

Trailer 1:

Trailer 2:

Wow…. I don’t think Barry will have to worry about snipers. He’d better worry about this movie.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Lying asshole "Shock Troops" Author back in the news

Unbelievable.

Via Pajamas Media:

Quote:

It seemed we’d heard the last of Scott Thomas Beauchamp and Elspeth Reeve in late January, after I posted copies of the sworn statements gathered during the “Shock Troops” investigation on Confederate Yankee. The documents included Beauchamp’s own sworn statements — his first, where he did not see any of the minor atrocities written about in “Shock Troops,” and a backdated one where he finally admits he was the author. The documents also included the sworn statements from 22 other soldiers saying that the minor atrocities written about in “Shock Troops” were events that they did not witness.

Even the editor of the New Republic, Franklin Foer, announced a month previously in December that he could not stand behind Beauchamp’s stories. But just when we though it was all behind us, Beauchamp is back, (with his former fact checker wife still supporting him), courtesy of Spencer Ackerman in Radar magazine.

In “Notes on a Scandal,” Ackerman interviews Scott Beauchamp and Elspeth Reeve — and no one else — and shockingly comes to the conclusion that the magazine that fired Ackerman for his anti-war views was wrong to pull its support for a series of articles (”Shock Troops” was just one of three Beauchamp stories) that reinforced those views.

How did Ackerman conduct this investigation? He hung out with Beauchamp and Reeve at a bar and later communicated with them via email. What he did not do is present any evidence to support the contention that Beauchamp’s claims are true, or that Franklin Foer was wrong to pull support for stories that still lack on-the-record evidence of any kind.

I have to admit it, he does have balls. But he is a damn liar. He’s now trying to cash in on the fame. Lying ass liberal prick.

I remember when this story come out and then it came out that it was all lies. That was one the moments when I really began to rethink my political position. I mean, if liberals are willing outright lie to make a political point, something is just wrong. Which is why I consider myself now a Moderate Conservative, not a “Republican”, not by a long shot. But I’ll be damned if I’ll ever vote Democrat again.

Others:
BLACKFIVE and AMERICAN DIGEST

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Don't buy the hype, we are winning the war in Iraq

These videos are from Iraq Vets for Freedom:

Here is the video:

Check out the Vets for Freedom website

Don’t buy the bullshit of the communist liberal defeatists. This is the real deal.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

Brutality beyond words…..In Iraq

Liberals, This is why we cannot fail in Iraq.

CNN.com:

“There are the bloodstains on the wall, and here it is dried on the floor,” Abu Muhanad said as he walked through a torture chamber in a Baghdad mosque where more than two dozen bodies have been found.

“And here, a woman’s shoes. She was a victim of the militia. We found her corpse in the grave.”

Chunks of hair waft lazily across the floor in the hot Baghdad breeze.

“This was the torture room,” said Muhanad, the leader of a U.S.-backed armed group that now controls the mosque.

You see my friends. We simply look at Iraq as a Bush political failure. The Iraqi’s see it as thier reality. If we fail these people, we will pay dearly for a very long time.

Memo to McCain: You cannot tell the Media how to cover you!

This comes via Politico:

Sen. John McCain‘s (R-Ariz.) campaign manager Rick Davis asked Sunday for a meeting with Steve Capus, the president of NBC News, to protest what the campaign called signs that the network is “abandoning non-partisan coverage of the presidential race.”

Davis made the request Sunday in a letter that is part of an aggressive effort by McCain to counter news coverage he considers critical.

In this case, the campaign is objecting to a statement by NBC’s Andrea Mitchell on “Meet the Press” questioning whether McCain might have gotten a heads-up on some of the questions that were asked of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who was the first candidate to be interviewed Saturday night by Pastor Rick Warren at a presidential forum on faith.

Warren told the audience that McCain was being held in “a cone of silence” so he wouldn’t hear the questions, which were similar for both candidates.

Warren referred again to “the cone of silence” when McCain came onstage, and the senator joked: “I was trying to hear through the wall.”

Mitchell reported that some “Obama people” were suggesting “that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama. He seemed so well prepared.”

A McCain aide said that is not the case: “Senator McCain was in a motorcade led by the United States Secret Service and held in a green room with no broadcast feed.”

Mitchell made the comment in the context of saying McCain did better, and that the Obama camp was defensive. In response to the campaign’s letter, she pointed out that journalists get criticism from both sides.

“I wasn’t expressing an opinion,” Mitchell said. “I was reporting what they were saying.”

The Letter in Question:

August 17, 2008
Mr. Steve Capus

President, NBC News
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112

Steve:

We are extremely disappointed to see that the level of objectivity at NBC News has fallen so low that reporters are now giving voice to unsubstantiated, partisan claims in order to undercut John McCain.

Nowhere was this more evident than with NBC chief correspondent Andrea Mitchell’s comments on “Meet the Press” this morning. In analyzing last night’s presidential forum at Saddleback Church, Mitchell expressed the Obama campaign spin that John McCain could only have done so well last night because he “may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama.” Here are Andrea Mitchell’s comments in full:


Mitchell: “The Obama people must feel that he didn’t do quite as well as they might have wanted to in that context, because what they are putting out privately is that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama. He seemed so well-prepared.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 8/17/08)

Make no mistake: This is a serious charge. Andrea Mitchell is repeating, uncritically, a completely unsubstantiated Obama campaign claim that John McCain somehow cheated in last night’s forum at Saddleback Church. Instead of trying to substantiate this blatant falsehood in any way, Andrea Mitchell felt that she needed to repeat it on air to millions of “Meet the Press” viewers with no indication that 1.) There’s not one shred of evidence that it’s true; 2.) In his official correspondence to both campaigns, Pastor Rick Warren provided both candidates with information regarding the topic areas to be covered, which Barack Obama acknowledged during the forum when asked about Pastor Warren’s idea of an emergency plan for orphans and Obama said, “I cheated a little bit. I actually looked at this idea ahead of time, and I think it is a great idea;” 3.) John McCain actually requested that he and Barack Obama do the forum together on stage at the same time, making these kinds of after-the-fact complaints moot.

Indeed, instead of taking a critical journalistic approach to this spin, Andrea Mitchell did what has become a pattern for her of simply repeating Obama campaign talking points.

This is irresponsible journalism and sadly, indicative of the level of objectivity we have witnessed at NBC News this election cycle. Instead of examining the Obama campaign’s spin for truth before reporting it to more than 3 million NBC News viewers, Andrea Mitchell simply passed along Obama campaign conspiracy theories. The fact is that during Senator Obama’s segment at Saddleback last night, Senator McCain was in a motorcade to the event and then held in a green room with no broadcast feed. In the forum, John McCain clearly demonstrated to the American people that he is prepared to be our next President…..

We are concerned that your News Division is following MSNBC’s lead in abandoning non-partisan coverage of the Presidential race. We would like to request a meeting with you as soon as possible to discuss our deep concerns about the news standards and level of objectivity at NBC.

Sincerely,

Rick Davis
Campaign Manager
John McCain 2008

This is, of course, absolute nonsense, considering Andrea Mitchell is the wife of Allen Greenspan, the former head of the Federal Reserve and both a Republicans.

Keith Olbermann shares his thoughts about this and serveral other idiotic actions of McCain:

Transcript: (Via MSNBC)

Four times in just two days, Sen. McCain’s campaign managers have, simply, hung him out to dry.

First, trying to scapegoat the media, in the exact way that has spelled doom for other presidential candidates already watching from the sidelines.

Second, doing so with a petulant statement so full of holes that it virtually confirms that which was reported, and which set off this pointless temper tantrum in the first place.

Third, sending the candidate out to speak before the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention, even as the millstones of a series of disastrous, anti-veteran votes, still figuratively dangled from around his neck.

And fourth, encouraging Sen. McCain, while there, to address his opponent in the language of unseemly contempt, undignified calumny, and holier-than-thou persiflage unsupported by reality, near-nonsensical bluster that at best makes the speaker look like a dyspeptic grouchy neighbor shouting “Hey you kids, get out of my yard.”

“Though victory in Iraq is finally in sight,” you told the VFW today, Sen. McCain, “a great deal still depends on the decisions and good judgment of the next president. The hard-won gains of our troops hang in the balance. The lasting advantage of a peaceful and democratic ally in the heart of the Middle East could still be squandered by hasty withdrawal and arbitrary timelines. And this is one of many problems in the shifting positions of my opponent, Sen. Obama.”

The shifting positions of Sen. Obama?

Sen. McCain, on the 22nd o
f May, 2003, you said, of Iraq, on the Senate floor, “We won a massive victory in a few weeks, and we did so with very limited loss of American and allied lives. We were able to end aggression with minimum overall loss of life, and we were even able to greatly reduce the civilian casualties of Afghani and Iraqi citizens.”

Senator, you declared victory in Iraq, five years and nearly three months ago.

Today you say, “victory in Iraq is finally in sight?”

The victory you already proclaimed five years ago?

Are we going back in time Sir?

If that had not been enough, in June of 2003, with even Fox News noting “many argue the conflict (in Iraq) isn’t over,” you answered, “Well, then why was there a banner that said ‘Mission Accomplished’ on the aircraft carrier? Look, I have said a long time that reconstruction of Iraq would be a long, long, difficult process, but the conflict, the major conflict is over, the regime change has been accomplished, and it’s very appropriate.”

In 2003, your war was won, because somebody was putting up a banner.

In 2008, your war might finally be won, because you are putting up a campaign based on the mirage that Iraq is winnable.

And yet it is Obama shifting positions on Iraq?

Even if this country were to forget, Senator, the victory lap you and President Bush took five years ago just on their face, your remarks today at the VFW, Senator, are nonsensical.

“Senator Obama commits the greater error of insisting that even in hindsight, he would oppose the surge. Even in retrospect, he would choose the path of retreat and failure for America over the path of success and victory.”

This construction, Senator, is extremely simple.

If your surge worked, the troops would be home from Iraq. Or most of them, would be. Or all of them who were surged, would be. Or at least we’d have the same number of troops in Iraq now, as we did then. Or maybe one or two guys would be out of harm’s way.

Please, Sen. McCain, stop! This is embarrassing. Whether on his own impetus or an advisor’s, the Senator also foolishly invoked his opponent in that speech today.

Previous political careers have foundered on the rocks of the VFW Convention: The Republican majority in Congress and the Senate, the very viability of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, began to unravel at this convention two years ago—that was the venue for the first of Rumsfeld’s two references to Bush critics as Nazi Appeasers.

Prudence and judgment, demanded that Sen. McCain tred lightly. Instead he told the convention, “I suppose from my opponent’s vantage point, veterans concerns are just one more issue to be spun or worked to advantage.”

This would explain why he has also taken liberties with my position on the GI Bill.

“As a political proposition, it would have much easier for me to have just signed on to what I considered flawed legislation. But the people of Arizona, and of all America, expect more from their representatives than that, and instead I sought a better bill. I’m proud to say that the result is a law that better serves our military, better serves military families, and better serves the interests of our country.”

Sen. McCain spoke out against that very bill last May on the asinine premise that the rewards to our heroes were so good that it didn’t encourage them to stay in the service. Or perhaps force them. More over, Sen. McCain missed 10 of the 14 Senate votes on Iraq up to the middle of last year. This year, he has missed them all including one to honor the sacrifice of the fallen.

He has voted to table or oppose:
# $20 million for veteran’s health care facilities
# $322 million for safety equipment for our troops in Iraq
# $430 million for veterans outpatient care
# $1 billion in new equipment for the National Guard

And, in separate votes:
# $1,500,000,000 in additional Veterans’ medical care, to be created by closing tax loopholes
# $1,800,000,000 in additional Veterans’ medical care, to be created by closing tax loopholes

And yet, Sir, you have the audacity to stand in front of the very Veterans you repeatedly and consistently sell out, and claim it is your opponent who has put politics first, and country second.

“Behind all of these claims and positions by Sen. Obama lies the ambition to be president,” you said, with a straight face, today. “What’s less apparent is the judgment to be commander-in-chief. And in matters of national security, good judgment will be at a premium in the term of the next president as we were all reminded ten days ago by events in the nation of Georgia.”

Senator, three points:
# Your increasingly extremist and reactionary language towards Sen. Obama really the method by which you want to try to achieve the Presidency or perhaps split the country if you succeed?
# Criticizing a man for having quote “the ambition to be president?” Seriously? You do realize you are currently running for president, as well, right? That either you also have “ambition to be president” or, what?, somebody’s blackmailing you into it?
# You might want to ask somebody, somebody other than say, your Foreign Policy Advisor, Randy Scheunemann whether or not you are making a jackass out of yourself every time you bring up the conflict between Georgia and Russia.

The Georgians have paid Mr. Scheunemann and his companies 800-thousand dollars over the last several years to lobby for them. It’s pretty clear the Georgians have bought Mr. Scheunemann. And, Sen. McCain, it sure as hell looks like the Georgians thought they had bought you.

When you had the tastelessness to paraphrase the rallying cry of 9/11 and say that we are now all Georgians, that nation’s President called you out. He said that your words were very nice, but he needed action not a verbal receipt from a lobbyist and his pet Senator!

Going back to the beginning of this sad 48 hours of paranoia from the McCain Campaign.

We have manager Rick Davis’s unfortunate letter to NBC News, about Andrea Mitchell’s reporting on the possibility that Sen. McCain violated the so-called “Cone of Silence” for the Rick Warren Presidential Forum over the weekend.

The coverage of this detail, and that forum in general, is, to start with, overwrought. But Mr. Davis has elevated them to the ridiculous.

As Nate Silver at the website 538.com noted, Andrea’s reporting, reporting of what the Obama camp claimed, included two essential observations:
# “McCain may not have been in the cone of silence” and that he
# “May have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama.”

Rick Davis writes to NBC: “The fact is that during Senator Obama’s segment at Saddleback last night, Senator McCain was in a motorcade to the event and then held in a green room with no broadcast feed.”

As Silver astutely notes, for roughly the first half of Obama’s participation, his own campaign manager places McCain in a car where he could have been made aware of the questions to Sen. Obama. “In a motor vehicle,” Silver writes, “one may use the radio, a cell phone, a Blackberry, Bluetooth Wireless, a Sling box, and perhaps a satellite TV feed. Whether McCain actually used any of those devices, we have no idea. But he absolutely had the ability to use them, which is all that Mitchell had reported. Silver also tripped over Mr. Davis’s strange observation that for roughly the second half of Obama’s participation, his own campaign places McCain “in a green room with no broadcast feed.” Not a green room without cell service or internet, nor without a closed-circuit feed, nor, for that matter, without a guy running back from the audience with notes, written in crayon.

Rick Davis’s argument is, in short, illegitimate.

It is an attempt to pick a fight with the media, over the journalistic equivalent of chewing gum in class.

“This is irresponsible journalism and sadly, indicative of the level of objectivity we have witnessed at NBC News this election cycle,” he writes.

“We are concerned that your News Division is following MSNBC’s lead in abandoning non-partisan coverage of the Presidential race. We would like to request a meeting with you as soon as possible to discuss our deep concerns about the news standards and level of objectivity at NBC.”

What Davis is really saying here, of course, is that he wants no level of objectivity, that the only campaign he wants questioned is Obama, and that “partisan coverage” consists of questioning whether McCain or his campaign support the stage whispers branding Obama as somehow ‘foreign,’ or whether McCain is to be inoculated from all criticism by dint of his military service.

Sen. McCain, did you pay any attention to the Democratic primaries?

Did you notice the hair-pulling frenzy of some of Sen. Clinton’s supporters who could not face the possibility that her loss might have been her fault or theirs and thus it must be ours?

Do you remember the apoplexy of a washed up Republican operative named Ed Gillespie, writing a furious letter to NBC on behalf of President Bush?

Mr. Bush’s support has since dropped.

And Sen. Clinton’s supporters have now relocated to such a degree that her “eighteen million voices” first re-counted themselves as “two million” and were then unable to get even 250 people to show up at a meeting.

The public sees through this nonsense, Senator, they see through it quickly.

NBC and MSNBC do not have the power to seriously impact an election.

If we did, Sen. Pat Buchanan would already be serving with you.

Besides which, Senator, who in your camp thought it was a good idea to take a shot at NBC and MSNBC during the Olympics on NBC and MSNBC?!?

During the Olympics, Sen. McCain, on which you have already run millions of dollars’ worth of McCain Campaign commercials on NBC and MSNBC!?!

Senator, let me wrap this up. You and your campaign need a serious and immediate attitude adjustment. Despite what you may think, Sen. McCain, this is not a coronation. Despite how you have acted, Sen. McCain, you have no automatic excuse to politicize anything you want.

Despite how you have whined, Sen. McCain, you have no entitlement to only sycophantic, deceptive, air-brushed coverage in the media. And despite how you have strutted, Sen. McCain, you have no God-given right to the Presidency.

Let’s have an adult campaign here, in other words and I am embarrassed to have to say this to a man who turns 72 at the end of this month Senator, grow up!

Once again, I very much agree with Olbermann. John McCain had better clean up that campaign, otherwise, he might just find himself beaten by a very marxist Liberal.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Editorial: Russia and Democratic Neglect

One of the biggest issues with this Russian/Georgian conflict is the fact that there is a lack of verifiable information. One minute you hear that the conflict has ended and the fighting has stopped the very next, you hear that the fighting is still happening, and that the Russians are not honoring the cease-fire agreement. It is all rather confusing, and it makes for a very frustrated blogger. Because the last thing a blogger wants to be, is wrong.

However, more than that is the lack of the Main Stream Media’s ability to look at this entire conflict in a historical context. Many are pointing to the actions of Ronald Reagan for dissolving the Soviet Union Empire, as being the cause of this conflict. I happen to disagree with that notion. I believe personally that it was the foolish actions of President Harry Truman, that is the cause of this conflict or shall I say the harvest of seeds planted by Harry Truman’s actions.

On December 7, 1941, the empire of Japan attacked the United States naval base in Oahu, Hawaii. This act of brazen hostility brought the United States of America into World War II, despite President Franklin Roosevelt’s pledge to remain neutral in the ever-growing conflict. As history would show, The United States fought the war and finally Hitler was defeated, and Japan surrendered. However, the method used to end the war, is in my opinion the underlying cause of this conflict.

It is a known fact that the United States soundly defeated Hitler by fighting them on the ground and air, using conventional weapons. However, we stopped the war, and to end the conflict with Japan, we used atomic weapons. This I feel was a tragic mistake. This is because Truman was a different kind of a Democrat than Roosevelt. Roosevelt was an “old line” Democrat, who saw the Communist threat, knew what the Communist doctrine was truly about, the repression of freedom and he stood to defeat it. No matter how long it took.

However, Truman was another matter entirely. President Truman represented the “new line” of Democrats who felt that war was unneeded and that peace was a better path. This was a precursor to the “peacenik” Democrats of the sixties. This was evident when President Truman gave his infamous “Military Industrial Complex” speech, at the end of his term. * — See Below With Hitler out of the way, Truman, feeling the ever-increasing pressure to end the war and return the country to pre-war status, devised a plan to end the conflict with Japan.

While using the Atomic bomb might have been an effective means of ending a war, its impact and stain upon the United States would be long ranging, to this very day, is to be considered a very poor decision by the United States. On many websites in Japan, including those in English, denounce America as being brutal for dropping the bomb. However, those who had friends and relatives that died at Pearl Harbor felt that Japan got what it deserved.

It is in the opinion of this writer, that the United States should have fought the war, all the way to Russia, until communism was soundly defeated. Furthermore, The United States of America, should have never dropped the atomic bomb on the empire of Japan, but rather, should have fought that war on the ground, until Japan surrendered. This would have resulted in the total defeat of communism. However, as we all know, this never happened.

Because of this obtuse neglect, the United States of America began a “Cold War” with the empire of the Soviet Union that lasted until a Conservative President, a real conservative President, whom came on the scene in the eighties to plant the seeds that would eventually bring down the soviet empire. However, as we have seen here in the last few days, Russia is not a free and democratic society; it is simply a police state, without the outright communism.

Putin, a man who is sympathetic toward the old soviet empire, filled to the brim with communist doctrine, is wagging his finger in the face of the United States and making a mockery of the supposed democracy in the European continent. This is the harvest of the neglect of the Democratic Party of the forties.*

* Update: Oops! I blew it, Truman did NOT give the military-industrial complex speech, Dwight Eisenhower did. My bad. I blew it, I should have checked. 🙄 But my point about the Democrats and the cold war as it relates to Russia still stands.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Possibly one of the weakest responses to a situation…Ever

Okay, call me a cynic, call me a jerk, call me a… whatever… But this is just weak

I mean, Bush essentially went out and said… “Bad Russia, Bad!” But offered absolutely no repercussions, if Russia continued to attack Georgia. No threats of invasion, nothing.

He could have done better, in my opinion. It just sounded weak.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,