Monday, October 25, 2004

Add Your Comments!

We welcome your Feedback!

Feel free to post your own Comments
by clicking on the "COMMENT" link at
the bottom right corner of each posting...

You don't need to add your name, since
postings by "Anonymous" are allowed...

Go ahead! Post your replies to our Musings here...
Opinions, thoughts, responses, etc., from ALL
sides of the spectrum are encouraged!

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Deflating Kerry

It can be frustrating for us Republicans to hear
the President out on the stump each day (and in
the now-infamous debates) leave SO much good material
"on the table" with regard to Kerry's attacks.

So HERE (since this is my li'l old Blog) I am going
to take the opportunity to make a few quick points
that apparently President Bush's campaign manager
isn't having his man trumpet far and wide:

The President has NOT "taken his eye off the ball".
While I agree that the push into Iraq was probably premature,
and (in hindsight) based on weak intelligence, the plain fact
of the matter is that this is a war on TERRORISM, not on
Osama Bin Laden or any other single terrorist. President Bush
was given information that led him (and Tony Blair, AND the
US Congress, including John Kerry!) to believe that Iraq
was the hub of a dangerous mixture of Terrorists and WMD.
An *excellent* target, then, for an attack, don't you think??

Even though the search for WMD proved fruitless, it's STILL
true that there is an epicenter of terrorist movement in that
entire region: Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Iran, Kuwait, and
even Saudi Arabia (you could include Egypt, Sudan, and even
Palestine, too).

So I wish the President would tear down Kerry's straw-man
argument, about "the hunt for Bin Laden" and REMIND America
that the fight against TERRORISM has ALWAYS included Iraq.

Yes it's messy over there; and YES we probably underestimated
our enemy there; but with people like Kerry voting AGAINST
funding for additional supplies, what's a President to do???
And now is the time for steel-jawed Resolve, not Fear-mongering.

Oh, and one more thing: Kerry promises he will "build a coalition
of our Allies," and "hunt down and kill the terrorists". Oh really?
Is that why he voted AGAINST the Gulf War offensive, depsite
the VAST Coalition of our Allies at the time? And just *where*
does Mr. Kerry suppose he's going to "find and kill" terrorists?
Afghanistan is an EASY war to support AFTER it's already been won.

Here is one that is so easy to expose as nothing more than
Resentment-baiting by the Kerry ticket: Kerry claims that the
Tax breaks won by the President serve mostly the upper 1% of
America's most wealthy, people making over $200,000 a year.

It's simply a matter of Fairness, with some easy Math thrown in:
If you, the Taxpayer, PAY more taxes (based on your income), you
will RECEIVE more back from a Tax rebate. It's that simple.

Kerry loves to toss out the figure "89 b-i-l-l-i-o-n dollars....!" in
rebates to "the richest Americans," hoping to stir up RESENTMENT
among the Middle Class and especially the Poor.

Far from a BAD thing, this should be a sign of PROSPERITY
in America! Think about it: There are apparently enough wealthy
Americans (if we accept the definition of "wealthy" as the 200k and
above people) in this country that a Tax rollback to them -- a FAIR,
income-based percentage -- adds up to those billions of dollars.

And President BUSH is the only one, of the two, who GETS it when
it comes to spurring economic growth through Small Businesses.
What more can a President do than to take back a portion of the
money a "vote-themselves-a-pay-raise-in-the-middle-of-the-night"
Congress wants to keep and give it BACK to America, while
encouraging would-be Investors and Entrepreneurs to use that
money to jump-start Commerce in this country??

I am so tired of hearing Kerry blast the President on a spate of issues
which NO President has much *direct* control over. Look, there is
one message that you sometimes hear from Fearless Republicans and
which you NEVER hear from the polls-driven Democrats, directed at
the general American public:


Stop blaming Government for every single problem in your lives!
RUN from any candidate who makes sweeping Promises about how
HIS administration is going to come in and "change all that," who
patronizes Voters with vague scenarios of "a stronger America".

How about STRONGER CITIZENS?? How about a new generation
of Americans who take far more responsibility for their lives?
If your kid drops out of school, discipline him/her! If your company
outsources your job, re-train yourself for another career, or find
something else to do in that or another company... If your health care
costs are too high, start taking better care of yourself! If you are an
Illegal Alien, you are breaking the Law and ought to be prosecuted
(ask any Californian about the *strain* on public services there,
caused by a flood of Illegals pouring into that state...).

A strong Republic is a PARTNERSHIP between Citizens and those
they elect, requiring the former to work hard, be smart, and limit
their dependence on Government as much as possible, while the latter
works to create the conditions in which those efforts can be
fruitful and long-lasting...

If YOU have more, that you'd like to see posted here, WRITE to me:

Sunday, October 17, 2004

Subjective Morality

I read on today's CNN web site that the New York Times
has officially endorsed John Kerry for president.

This comes as no surprise at all: The New York Times
is not exactly known for its fair and balanced position
on most issues, remaining in a long-standing contest with
the Boston Globe and the Washington Post for the title
of "most liberal newspaper" in this country...

What really had me shaking my head, though, was the
quote from that publication which characterizes Kerry as
"a man with a strong moral core..."

Moral?? Does that word even *mean* anything in today's
postmodern, pluralistic, anti-traditional-values Society??

It amazes me how anyone -- including liberal publications
like the NYT, Time magazine, and many others-- can, on the
one hand, support so-called "Abortion Rights" and the
homosexual agenda and then turn right around and pronounce
anything or anyone else "moral" or "immoral"...

Gloria Allred -- an avowed, radical, left-wing Feminist --
appealed to "moral duty" a year or so ago, reacting to
Michael Jackson's dangling of his infant son off a
German balcony... Porn purveyor Larry Flynt was quoted
as saying he would not publish the nude photos he owns
of PFC Jessica Lynch because "sometimes you just
have to do the right thing."

Apparently our American mindset has gone so wildly off
the track that we suppose we can legitimately apply the
words and concepts of "Morality" to this or that, here and
there, wherever we choose; we've apparently lost all concept
of the fundamental idea that unless there is an Absolute
STANDARD -- unflinching, unchanging, and applicable to ALL --
then the idea of what is "moral" and what is not "moral"
loses all meaning. Who does the NYT think they're fooling???

For the Christian, however, this is not surprising: The Bible
says that "the heart of man is deceitful above all things and
desperately wicked" (Jeremiah 17:9). It is not until a person
comes near to our Holy GOD and bows down before Him that any REAL
idea of what is "Moral" and "Immoral" begins to make any sense.

Thursday, October 14, 2004

Reaction to Debate 3

I watched nearly all of the third presidential debate
last night (kept flipping over to the Cards game, to
see our team put down the Astros in Game 1 of the
NLCS... Go Cards!!)...

In a word, I believe president Bush *trounced* Kerry.
From the very start, Kerry mumbled, stumbled,
struggled for words, and merely babbled on and on
with the same stale rhetoric that has become the
hallmark of his campaign. He was *clearly* off-center,
not anywhere NEAR as confident and precise as many
had judged him in earlier debates.

The President, by contrast, was comfortable, cheerful,
invigorating, affable and at ease, and his Content was
far, far better than it had been previously.

But HERE is where -- to me -- the contrast between
President Bush and John Kerry becomes starkest:

1. When asked about Faith, Kerry was clearly
uncomfortable, tossing a RIDICULOUS bone to
the New Age movement by dead-panning,
"We're ALL God's children..." ( if he's Catholic,
I doubt his PRIEST appreciated that.... that is,
unless he's part of this new "Catholic" movement
that rejects most of the traditional doctrinal
stances of the Church...)

Bush, by contrast, was clear and unwavering in
his personal statements of faith, making the very
wise connection between Faith, the kind of Person
his Faith makes him, and therefore the kinds of
PRINCIPLES he stands on, which then, inevitably,
influence his Public Policy decisions.
(The subject of Kerry's LACK of personal Principles
is an entire discussion unto itself...)

2. When asked about their Wives, President Bush was
the epitome of class, kindness, and love: He wisely
mentioned -- right off -- the lesson of *listening* to
his dear wife, and then he shared a few tender, gentle,
loving, and sincere comments about how he and his
wife met, and about his profound affection for her...

Kerry, on the other hand, was downright AWKWARD
when mentioning his own wife, leaning heavily on a
self-deprecating joke about *himself* rather than
saying much about any Love he feels for his wife,
or the role she plays in his life, or how they met, or
how he feels about her, or how she might help him
serve as president...

It's clear to me -- now more than ever -- that the
FUEL of the Kerry campaign consists in not much more
than simply TEARING DOWN the Bush administration;
the President's comment about Kerry's "Litany of Complaints"
is classic! That's all Kerry *has*, and what is the Senator's
common refrain, offered as some kind of "answer"??
"I have a Plan...." Uh, right. Gosh, that's SO inspiring...
(As is his liberal voting record in the Senate...)

And notice, Kerry RARELY uses the pronoun "WE".
Poor John Edwards: He's the Ugly Stepsister who is
hardly ever invited to share the spotlight with Captain

The LAST thing this country needs right now is a
self-aggrandizing, liberal Democrat who follows the party
line of, "The Government can solve all your problems,
America". This country NEEDS President Bush, who is
not afraid to say that good governance is a partnership
between hard-working and responsible Citizens and an
administration that works toward a safe and free Society
in which those Citizens can pursue Life, Liberty, and Happiness.

Despite all the help from our Leftist media, and regardless
of the disrepectful and whining campaign of the Kerry-Edwards
ticket, I look forward to watching President Bush win on
election day...

Saturday, October 09, 2004

Reaction after 2 debates

I watched both the presidential debates with keen interest,
since Debate is a process I personally enjoy (always have).

Now we all knew, going into both, that Kerry is simply a
better extemporaneous speaker than President Bush.
It's very clear to me, after watching him in two debates,
that Kerry has some well-honed skills in the area of
thinking on his feet, constructing his thoughts, speaking
in careful, measured tones, emphasizing key points,
and leaving his audience with those important little
nuggets to mull over. He's good at this stuff.

By contrast, the President is more colloquial, with more
of an "Everyman" style and approach. Unfortunately,
he seems to feel the need to speak in high-pitched tones
and alarmist rhetoric, and many of us Republicans are
dismayed at the WEALTH of material against Kerry that
President Bush is simply leaving on the table. In short,
I think his debate coach is short-changing him.

But here's what I have to say about the debates, in sum:

So Kerry is a more accomplished public speaker than
President Bush; SO WHAT. So he can turn a phrase
more quickly than the President; WHO CARES.

The bottom line is that Kerry's record on critical issues --
from Taxes to the Military to Abortion to Homosexuality
and others -- not to mention the whole Character question,
still makes the President the more trustworthy and
respectable candidate. THAT kind of thing isn't changed
by these media-driven debates we've been seeing.