lgf: Newsweek Poll: Stacked?

Look at the makeup of Republicans vs. Democrats in Newsweek’s poll from September 11, 2004: NEWSWEEK POLL: Campaign 2004.

391 Republicans (plus or minus 6)
300 Democrats (plus or minus 7)
270 Independents (plus or minus 7)

Compare against the same data from the new poll, which Newsweek is using to claim that Bush’s poll lead has “evaporated:” NEWSWEEK POLL: First Presidential Debate.

345 Republicans (plus or minus 6)
364 Democrats (plus or minus 6)
278 Independents (plus or minus 7)

Did Newsweek choose a lower percentage of Republicans for the first debate to set up Kerry’s “comeback,” or did they stack the deck with more Democrats in the second poll?

Town Board Meeting Audio

Town Board Meeting 6/14/04

Town Board Meeting 7/12/04

Note: When I record these meetings on my iBead it creates a file with a nondescript name and no date. Then I copy these files to my computer and rename them with the current date so I won't forget which is which. Many times I will also record the date verbally on the file before I start recording. It's a pity I didn't do either of these with this file. It is either August or September's meeting. If you figure it out let me know. As a matter of fact I'm not that positive about the other two either.

Town Board Meeting 8/9/04

Commentary: Bush Won the Debate with Kerry

San Francisco Chronicle columnist Debra Saunders today gives the President a “W” for the first debate based on substance and hammers Kerry for being a walking contradiction when it comes to the issue of Iraq. The central issue of Saunders’ attack and Kerry’s unraveling is that, “Either Kerry voted for a war that, by his own lights, he should have seen as wrong, or if he knew it was wrong, he voted for it anyway.”

'60 Minutes' Creator Slams Guard Story

Hewitt said he's sorry that "60 Minutes" and Rather were perceived as doing Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's job for him "by bringing up an old issue, and they weren't careful enough to not make mistakes. And the minute you make one mistake, you're dead."

Hewitt added that it was "stupid" for Kerry to have injected his Vietnam service into the presidential race, which opened the door for anti-Kerry groups such as Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Not only have previous presidential candidate war veterans avoided such talk, but Kerry had followed up his Vietnam service by becoming an outspoken opponent of the war, he said.

"You can't play war hero if it's about a war where you threw your medals away," Hewitt said.

Red Meat

After scanning the net I have come up with the following.

Polls: This is a tight race, there are only 10 points in play to begin with and going into the debate Bush had most of them. Bush had nowhere to go but down and Kerry has nowhere to go but up. Those 10 points are very volatile. I expect to see a slight Kerry bounce for a few days until the counter ads hit and then go back to where they were before the debate.

The debate has created new ad opportunities for Bush.

Coalition of countries: Kerry wants to destroy the coalition of countries trying to solve the problem in North Korea (Japan, China, Russia, S. Korea) and go it alone. At the same time he claims to want a coalition of countries for Iraq. But he denigrates those countries that are already on our side by calling them, "The coerced and the bribed" as well as denigrating the Iraqi President. In addition France and Germany have stated they will NOT send troops to Iraq so after he chases away the partners we have now who will he get, who is left? What country is stupid enough to send troops to Iraq that Kerry claims is the, "Wrong war at the wrong time at the wrong place"

Weaken our military: He wants to weaken our military by stopping a nuclear bunker buster bomb because he doesn't trust us with that weapon but just having that weapon will send shivers down the spine of Sadam wannabes who think they can hide in a bunker.

Global test: Here Kerry states that any action from the US has to pass a global test which translates to getting permission from the world before we do anything and everybody knows that means he will do nothing. Bush said he would not get permission to take action to protect America. Hey, don't get mad at me, that's what Kerry said and he obviously believes it.

The Plan: Kerry has been saying he has a plan but no one knows what the hell it is. At some point he will have to reveal this 'plan' so the voters can judge it. Barring that his plan will be scorned as it should be. So far all he has said is he will have a summit and do it, "Better and faster" WTF? That's not a plan and it sounds stupid.

I have not found any ad opportunities for Kerry based on things Bush said at the debate. I'll keep looking but so far it seems that Kerry will continue with the same things. He might use pictures of Bush's looks at the debate in an attempt to make him look like Gore 4 years ago.

Over at the liberal stronghold, The Democratic Underground they have a long linked list of online polls and are encouraging democrats to take the polls and boost Kerry. I guess republicans could also do that but I haven't seen such an effort. I looked at their talking points and didn't find anything substantial. So I guess if they haven't found any red meat from the debate their isn't any and it is the red meat that will be the more lasting impression from the debate.

Transcript: First Presidential Debate

Debate #1 comments

I listened to the debate and the spinners afterwards. Nothing new, nothing earth shattering from either side. Both seem to have ammunition to use in ads but not a clear winner as in the Bush/Gore debates where Bush clearly won. The consensus seems to be that Kerry helped himself and may get a point or two out of it. I think he needed to do more to define himself. There is a lot of ammo that Bush's team will use as they have in the past. Same for Kerry's people. Kerry did not answer or address several outstanding questions that Bush raised. If I were being just partisan I would say Bush won just as his spinners said. But in truth this debate hasn't changed anything much. Kerry wasn't orange, didn't make any blunders at the debate. Bush looked good, also didn't make any blunders, explained his positions very well. Kerry has said he has a plan but didn't explain it etc. In order for Kerry to make inroads he had to have a slam dunk and that clearly didn't happen.

What the bloggers thought:

Power Line ran a live reaction to the debate and said, "On the whole, though, I think Kerry helped himself tonight."

Hugh Hewitt has a nice point by point table of the debate and had this to say, "Overall: Bush gets a big win, by hitting all his messages over and over again. He wins on substance. Biggest mistake by Kerry: "The Global Test."  Sorry, the American voters aren't interested in passing any global tests. Bush stresses steadfastness and resolve.  Kerry firmed up the hard-left vote, but you can't win on this."

At the liberal site The Washington Monthly they had this to say, "Wrapup: I don't really have anything very creative to say. Neither candidate made any huge mistakes." But of course he thought Kerry did better than Bush.

Most of the posters at Instapundit seem to agree there was no clear winner.

I'm a political junkie and it will be fascinating to see what the polls show in the coming days and what those out there who don't pay that much attention think after the debate.

Kerry Reneging on Light Agreement

An angry exchange between representatives of the Kerry campaign and the Commission on Presidential Debates took place just hours before the candidates were to meet at the University of Miami for the first of three debates, The Associated Press learned. Kerry's team threatened to remove the lights when they visit the debate site with Kerry later in the day. "We'll bring a screwdriver," said a Kerry aide familiar with what several people called an angry exchange.

The commission placed the lights on the lecterns in clear view of the television audience and those in the auditorium. An agreement between the Kerry and Bush campaigns specified that timing lights "shall be placed such that they are visible to the debate audiences and television viewers."

Maybe Kerry is worried the lights will give him a tan.

The New York Times: Like 'Fahrenheit 9/11,' Except Bush Is the Hero

The film does have a few "Fahrenheit"-style juxtapositions, like an image of the World Trade Center burning as Mr. Moore declares: "This needs to be said on national television. There is no terrorist threat." The discussion of Europe's slow response to Hitler is illustrated with a picture of French antiwar demonstrators in 1938 holding up signs saying "Non" - which inspired a hiss from the Republicans on Tuesday.


Debra Burlingame, whose brother was the pilot of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, said she found the film's sober tone a welcome contrast to Mr. Moore's approach.

"Michael Moore actually used footage of the Pentagon in flames as a sight gag," said Ms. Burlingame, a founder of a group of relatives of Sept. 11 victims who are supporting Mr. Bush. "It was really hard to sit there in the theater listening to people laugh at that scene knowing my brother was on that plane. I wish more people would see this film instead."

Rev. Jackson Brings Black Windsurfers Into Kerry Camp

Although the Rev. Jesse Jackson just signed onto the Kerry-Edwards campaign today as a senior advisor, he has already secured the endorsement of several influential African-American groups.

The American Society of Black Windsurfers (ASBW) today endorsed John Forbes Kerry's presidential candidacy calling him "the only candidate whom Jesse Jackson says understands our needs...dude."

Parlez-Vous Political Free Fall?

Recent polls show Bush ahead of Kerry by 9 points (CBS-NYT), 6 points (Gallup) or 3 points (Zogby). One Pew poll even put Bush ahead of Kerry by 16 points. The average of national polls has Bush 6 points ahead. Apparently, just like in Vietnam, it's taken Kerry only four months to piss off everyone around him.

Ann Coulter... Who else?

What Kerry Said

Don't go to war, but only go to war if it's a sure thing. However, If the war runs into a snag, then don't go to war in the first place.

Perhaps this is clearer:

Don't go to war, but if you have to go to war, make sure you're going to win, but if things go bad, then don't go to war.

Let me make this perfectly clear...

I can't not think of a good reason to vote not for John Kerry which is a good reason to vote for John Kerry. His position on Iraq is completely wrong which is why it is completely right and while you might think it a bad reason not to vote for him you should vote for him. They say he is on both side of every issue which is a bad reason to not vote for him. Bush, on the other hand, according to Kerry, is bad for America which is a good thing, but a bad thing in the process to consider which of them is the right thing to do for a good reason. With that in mind your decision should be very clear even in these murky circumstances about which position Kerry has on what issue that concerns you in your decision making process, and the fact, as it may be, that his position is not to your liking, does not preclude one of you changing his, or her, position that better matches the circumstances of the moment or perhaps you might change your mind which would only work if that process happened simultaneously with the shift, at the moment, in Kerry's position, so that they both, in these circumstances, meld, or merge, in order to match, as it were, the situation you find yourself in. But that would only apply to these specific circumstances that I have carefully outlined here and to no other, unless, of course, the previous circumstances were to change which would of course change the circumstances we are discussing here today. Now there is just one other case which you might find yourself in, but I will leave that to your determination on your own time. However, after carefully considering all of these facts and nuances it becomes perfectly clear that all of us should just vote for Bush.

CBS Does It Again

Network Uses Phony Documents to Promote Draft Conspiracy

September 28, 2004 20:41:03 EDT

Time for a break from reality

The question on everyone's minds these days is not what will be said at the debates, not who will win the debates, not what each candidate has to do at the debates. No, the real questions is what color Kerry will be when he shows up at the debates. All kidding aside Kerry showing up with an orange face the other day has lots of people guessing why the sudden change of color. And of course there are the jokes.

From Hugh Hewitt.

An e-mailer suggests it is just Kerry turning colors for the fall. Another writes that Kerry just wants to declare "Ich bin ein Pumpkiner." A third says its a play for the Great Pumpkin vote. And finally, one suggests it is just nature's pimpkin cycle: Blooms and grows in July. Turns Orange in September. Carved up in October. Thrown out in November.

After seeing those jokes I thought the other anti Kerry blogs might have some too. But they are all to serious today and haven't touched the subject. Still curious and in an almost desperate search for humor, I looked on Google news and only found an article from The New York Post, JOHN A 'BRONZE' STAR

John Kerry has suddenly become the man with a tan that even George Hamilton would envy — leading to accusations that something is shady just before the big presidential debate.

How the Democratic presidential candidate got his striking new orange glow depends on whom you ask.

The Kerry camp reportedly insisted he earned it fair and square -- by baking in the sun during a game of flag football last Friday in Bedford, Mass.

But a top New York dermatologist — after studying new photos of Kerry — told The Post yesterday that the deep bronze color appears to be one big fake.

"Wow! That is a tan! He has color all over his face. But if he had gotten it all outside, he wouldn't have been so evenly tanned," said Dr. Ted Daly of Garden City Dermatology.

"My diagnosis is: it's a tanning salon — some ultraviolet rays."

Still looking for light humor I wandered over to Rush for the transcript of Kerry Goes Orange for Big Debate but I didn't read it because it was too long. While I was working earlier in the evening I heard a caller to a radio show opine that it may have been a reaction to Botox injections or some medication he took to reduce his sweating at the debate. Sadly my quest for humor on this subject is over. It's a pity too as I had such high hopes. As far as looking orange at the debates, that won't happen. Whatever his skin color is will be covered by makeup just as everyone does who goes on TV. I guess the mystery will never be solved and that's too bad because it was the first interesting thing that's happened in a very long time. -sigh-

Barbra Streisand

Babs is befuddled. There is just so much she doesn't understand and she vents it on her site. Almost all of it is one sided, wrong, inaccurate etc. Why oh why doesn't everyone just agree with her, can't they see what she sees? Well, yes, as a matter of fact we can but we also looked past the spin and found the truth but Babs obviously isn't interested in that. But check it out if you want a glimpse into the mind of the left...

Fox News beats all rivals

For the first time in its history, Fox News Channel beat the combined competition in primetime during the third quarter of 2004, with major headlines of the summer including the national political conventions and a brutal string of hurricanes.

According to Nielsen Media Research, Fox News averaged 1.8 million viewers, while CNN, MSNBC, CNBC and Headline News averaged a combined total of 1.7 million. The quarter ended Sunday.

CNN came in a distant second, averaging 882,000 viewers, while MSNBC drew 421,000. Headline News averaged 226,000 in primetime, and CNBC attracted a paltry 133,000.

People don't watch what they don't agree with.

IBM Claims Computer Speed Title

IBM Corp. plans to announce today that it has built the world's fastest supercomputer at one of its facilities in Rochester, Minn., wresting the title from a system in Japan.

KERRY ON ORANGE ALERT

Is Osama Bin Laden dead?

Think about it. When was the last time anyone heard or saw anything that would indicate he was still alive? Some think he was killed during the massive bombing at Tora Bora. His body might be buried at the back of some unknown cave there. If he was alive why haven't we seen any video tapes from him. It is to Al Qaeda's advantage to pretend he is still alive so if they knew he was dead they wouldn't let that news out. I've thought about this for a bit and I think the White House was told that he was likely dead but could not be proven. If that is true then hunting for him would be a waste of time and that would help to understand why we turned our focus on Iraq. There is much you and I do not know. We are not on the, need to know, list for that kind of information. I think we can assume that Bush knew what he was doing because he was advised by the generals and even if you think him an idiot you certainly can't think our military is too. I think that until proven otherwise we can safely assume that OBL is dead and when you do that a whole lot of things become clearer. Namely the war in Iraq being the next logical step to take in the war on terror after dealing with OBL. Makes sense to me.

How big is a ten point lead

In past elections the middle was thought to be 20 points, the pundits say that this election is much closer with only a 10 point middle. That means that each side gets their 45 points and both fight for the middle 10. Bush currently has every one of those ten points right now, and that's huge. Some polls show more, some less but that is an impossible hurdle for Kerry to overcome. The debates will not help him unless he does something spectacular and Bush simultaneously implodes. Neither will happen. Kerry might do better than Bush and that might mean a point or two but that is not going to be enough. If Bush fails at the debates he will have three weeks after they are over to regain what he might have lost to Kerry. Kerry has the same three weeks to come from way behind. It isn't going to happen. We could discuss the reasons to death but it is moot. It's over for Kerry and I sympathize with my Democrat friends who still hold out hope. I felt that Dole would win in 1996 right up until election night. He lost and so will Kerry, that's just the way it is.

Power Line: The CIA's War Against President Bush

We have talked repeatedly about the guerrilla war that the CIA, long a Democratic stronghold, has conducted for years against the Bush administration.

Manage the retreat or win the war

I'm old enough to have lived through the Vietnam war and our defeat in that war. For 20 years afterwards we suffered the pain and humiliation of losing that war. The main lesson learned from that war was that we went into it without the desire or goal of winning it. Our presidents who waged that war did not do it with victory in mind and we ultimately lost the war. Now we are in a war in Iraq, you can argue how we got there and why but that doesn't change the basic fact that we are there and the decision we have to make now is whether we are going to win or lose this war.

Kerry has stated that it was and is the wrong war and he has also stated that he will remove troops from Iraq from 6 months to 4 years. That is the definition of retreat and you cannot win a war you are retreating from. The terrorists who are fighting us will see that all they have to do is hold out until Kerry leaves and then move in and take over.

But consider this. As Kerry pulls troops out of Iraq, what happens to those who are left. As more and more troops go it leaves those left more and more vulnerable to attack. Kerry himself said that he didn't want to be the last solder who died in a war that was a mistake. Isn't that the fate he has destined for the last solders he pulls out of Iraq? It comes down to whether you as an American want to suffer the humiliation of a defeat and lose the war in Iraq or do you want to win.

Kerry has stated that he wants to lose, he wants to retreat, he doesn't want to win. I want to win, I know what it felt like for 20 years after the loss in Vietnam and I don't want to feel that again. I want the loved ones of those who gave their lives to know that it wasn't done in vain, that they gave their lives for freedom. I want our solders to come home victorious and be able to hold their heads high and not feel ashamed for losing the war. Kerry doesn't have it in him to give us victory, he only knows loss, he only knows how to lose, he is a loser. I want a winner and I want to win. I want Bush because he has always said it would be hard, that it would take a long time and that he would stay the course and win.

And that's what I want... Do you?

Sister Kerry

Diana Kerry, John's younger sister, has returned to the fold. And last week she put her foot squarely in John Kerry's mouth.

Kennedy says Bush makes U.S. more vulnerable to attack from space aliens

Oops, that's next weeks headline. This is this weeks headline: "Kennedy says Bush makes U.S. more vulnerable to nuclear attack" Sorry about that, just getting ahead of myself. But just wait till the week after next, oh boy, now that's a beauty. Kennedy's head spins a full 360 degrees, and then detaches from his body, which melts, and then his head flies off into outer space on a flying saucer. It's a beautiful thing, being crazier than a loon.

Celsius 41.11

Dryden NY: Lawn Mowers Causing Big Problem

Consumer-News 9-27-04

I was pleasantly surprised to find that it is legal to drive a lawn mower on the sidewalks of Dryden and not too surprised to find that to the consternation of some, it is often done,. Complaints of being 'driven' off the sidewalk by these lawnmower motorists were made to the town to no avail. It's illegal to drive them on the streets but legal on the sidewalk. The town can't pass a law making them illegal without also making powered wheelchairs and electric scooters for the elderly illegal.

Aren't the problems in small towns so much more fun to read about than national politics.

NY Times hatchet job against left-wing bloggers

And from the left it looks like the times can't win in this fight.

Voter Fraud in Wisconsin by Democrats

(This) piece by Mark Belling on the groundwork that the Democrats are laying to commit voter fraud on a massive scale in Wisconsin:

An outfit called the "New Voter Project" claims to be nonpartisan but is being bankrolled and staffed by leftists. The organization is already active in Wisconsin and already involved in trouble. Thousands of "voters" registered by this group in the last few weeks have submitted registration forms without the legally required proof of identification.

Records Show Bush Skipped Kiwanis Breakfast in 1972

Fear and Laptops on the Campaign Trail - via - Hugh Hewitt

Rarely has an institution gone to such great lengths to confirm its own bias and validate its increasing irrelevance as the New York Times does this morning in the almost unbelievably unbalanced New York Times Magazine piece on the blogosphere.  The responses at Allah, LittleGreenFootballs, and Ace of Spades are fine jumping off points for a scorecard on the article's absurdities, and Betsy'sPage is keeping track of the responses from the center-right of the blogosphere.

I am with Glenn in being neither surprised nor upset, but not for his reasons.  This piece is what the lawyers call "an admission against interest" combined with an undeniable expression of liberal bias in MSM.  The admission is that the blogosphere matters a lot. The expression of bias is the incredible series of whopping omissions in the coverage.  This is MSM's attempt --and there will be many more-- to "credential" some of their favorites in the blogosphere, thus elevating them and hopefully their readership.  How can you be surprised that the way left Times profiles way left bloggers for their way left audience to hopefully bookmark and consult as a sort of internet annex to the still dominant New York Times.