Poll Roundup

Posted by Peter

For a roundup of the polls, check out Duane - of Hugh Hewitt fame:


Polls still showing a close race in Minnesota. Even closer if you remove the always erroneous Minnesota Poll from the Star Tribune.

Another Stolen Bush Sign

Posted by Peter

Last night I went out and put up our Bush/Cheney 2004 lawn sign on the street near our house, along with several other signs for other candidates. I put it up there because our townhome association wouldn't allow us to put up signs outside our townhome.

On our way to church this morning, guess which sign was missing already - after being up for only one day? The Bush Cheney sign. Go figure. Every piece of Bush promotional material that I put up this year (bumper sticker and lawn sign) was either stolen, or told to me that i had to remove it.

I also saw someone with a lawn sign up in Bloomington for Kerry Edwards, with another bigger sign next to it saying, "You can steal our sign, but you can't change our vote".

My thoughts exactly.

Kerry's problem with Catholics

Posted by Peter

From Philly.com

By Frank Wilson

Inquirer Books Editor

Only one signer of the Declaration of Independence wrote his address on the document. That was "Charles Carroll of Carrollton," who added his place of residence, he said, so that the British would have no trouble finding him should they wish to hang him.

Carroll was also the only signer of the declaration who was a Roman Catholic. His brother, the Jesuit John Carroll, became the first U.S. Catholic bishop.

Catholics have played a key role in American politics from the very beginning, as George J. Marlin amply demonstrates in The American Catholic Voter: 200 Years of Political Impact (St. Augustine's Press, $30). The book is filled with fascinating facts and interesting statistics, but that hardly explains why its author is getting invited onto national talk shows. That's come about because, in the last chapter, the Brooklyn-born Marlin - a former executive director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and a onetime Conservative Party candidate for mayor of New York City - shows how the Catholic vote could tip the election to President Bush.

That may seem odd, given that Sen. John F. Kerry is the third baptized Catholic to be nominated for president by a major political party. Moreover, Catholic voters may make up about a quarter of the electorate, but, as Marlin pointed out in an interview, theirs is "not the monolithic vote it was in the days of Al Smith or John Kennedy."

The problem for Kerry, Marlin says, is that Catholics who favor him live mostly in states such as New York and Massachusetts that he is likely to win anyway, whereas more traditional - and generally older - Catholics are concentrated in such battleground states as Wisconsin, Ohio, Missouri and Pennsylvania.

"Bush lost Wisconsin [in 2000] by a quarter of 1 percent," he says. "The state is 30 percent Catholic."

"Like most other Americans," Marlin adds, "Catholics consider the war on terrorism the No. 1 issue, but in a close election... the issues and voters along the margins matter." Abortion matters greatly for more traditional Catholics, and they find Kerry's position on the issue more than a little problematic.

In July, in an article in the Washington Post, Kerry was quoted as saying, "I oppose abortion... . I believe life does begin at conception." But, he added, "I can't take my Catholic belief, my article of faith, and legislate it on a Protestant or a Jew or an atheist."

That's morally and intellectually incoherent. "Every time you cast a vote on the floor of the United States Senate," Marlin says, "you're voting to impose your beliefs on somebody else. If you vote for higher taxes, you're voting to impose them."

He has a point. The Catholic view that life begins at conception is not put forward as a mere gynecological factoid. The church draws a moral conclusion from it: If human life begins at conception, then abortion - the direct and intentional termination of a fetus' life signs - amounts to the taking of innocent human life. It is hard to see how one could accept this as an article of religious faith, as Kerry says he does, and feel no obligation to act on it - in fact, to feel obliged not to.

Indeed, he seems to have done everything he could on behalf of those who espouse the opposite view. At this year's annual NARAL Pro-Choice America dinner, he pledged "no overturning Roe v. Wade, no packing of the courts with judges hostile to choice, no denial of choice to poor women." (NARAL Pro-Choice America is the former National Abortion Rights Action League.) Kerry voted against the Partial Birth Abortion Act and has voted against bills requiring parental notification in the case of teens seeking abortion.

There is, to be sure, a line of reasoning in Catholic discourse that could be stretched to justify Kerry's position. It is the so-called seamless-garment ethic put forth by the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, which argues against overemphasizing one moral issue - specifically, abortion - while downplaying others, including poverty, racism and war.

Kerry would seem to have alluded to this during the third presidential debate, when he said that "I think that everything you do in public life has to be guided by your faith, affected by your faith, but without transferring it in any official way to other people. That's why I fight against poverty... . That's why I fight for equality and justice."

This viewpoint is not, however, accepted officially by the church. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has stated that "not all moral issues have the same moral weight... . There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion... about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not, however, with regard to abortion and euthanasia."

Last week, a Zogby International poll found Catholic voters as a whole equally divided between the two presidential candidates. This could indeed be good news for President Bush because, in 2000, Al Gore won the Catholic vote by about 56 percent to 44 percent.

Kerry's professed religious belief that human life begins at conception simply cannot be reconciled with his record of steadfast support for abortion rights. During the last presidential debate, he quoted the second epistle of St. James: "Faith without works is dead." By that standard, the depth of Kerry's faith can be fairly estimated at about six feet under.

Colorado Teacher Apologizes After Kicking Student Wearing College Republicans Shirt at Restaurant

Posted by Peter

ABC News:

Fort Lewis College student Mark O'Donnell said he was showing people his College Republicans sweat shirt, which said "Work for us now … or work for us later," when Maria Spero kicked him in the leg at an off-campus restaurant.

Spero then said "she should have kicked me harder and higher," said O'Donnell. "To physically take that out on someone because you disagree with them, that is completely wrong."

Police Sgt. Mitch Higgins said Saturday that O'Donnell wanted to press charges and a misdemeanor summons would be issued.

Final Mason-Dixon Battleground Polls Hint At Bush Win

Posted by Peter

From Powerline:

In what should be the final iteration of the Mason-Dixon polls that have been remarkably stable over the course of this election cycle, George Bush has a significant edge over John Kerry and appears headed to a victory on Tuesday. With a margin of error at 4%, the battleground states stack up like this:

Florida - Bush, 49-45 (27 EV)
Arkansas - Bush, 51-43 (6 EV)
Colorado - Bush, 50-43 (9 EV)
Ohio - Bush, 48-46 (20 EV)
Iowa - Bush, 49-44 (7 EV)
Michigan - Kerry, 47-45 (17 EV)
Missouri - Bush, 49-44 (11 EV)
New Hampshire - Kerry, 47-46 (4 EV)
Nevada - Bush, 50-44 (5 EV)
West Virginia - Bush, 51-43 (5 EV)
Oregon - Kerry, 50-44 (7 EV)
Pennsylvania - Kerry, 48-46 (21 EV)
Wisconsin - Kerry, 48-46 (10 EV)
Minnesota - Bush, 48-47 (10 EV)
New Mexico - Bush, 49-45 (5 EV)

Posted by Peter

President Bush at the Target Center with Tim Pawlenty, Laura Bush, Mike Tice and others.

Posted by Peter

Here is a great picture - my favorite football team, and my favorite president. Go Vikings - Go Bush!

Posted by Peter

Something to get away from election madness .... a cute puppy! For those of you who know our puppy Nala, she is not sick anymore and is back at our house.

U.S. Team Took 250 Tons of Iraqi Munitions

Posted by Peter


WASHINGTON — A U.S. Army officer came forward Friday to say a team from his 3rd Infantry Division took about 250 tons of munitions and other material from the Al-Qaqaa (search) arms-storage facility soon after Saddam Hussein's regime fell in April 2003.

Update from Powerline:

Major Pearson says that his team removed around 250 tons of munitions and other materials from Al Qaqaa. He doesn't recall any "sealed" areas and can't say exactly what the munitions were, but the Pentagon says they believe some of the destroyed material was RDX.

Is this enough, from President Bush's standpoint? It certainly should be. The obvious conclusion is that the New York Times and John Kerry shot from the hip, accusing the Army of incompetence when they didn't know the facts. They relied on a patently self-serving and anti-Bush letter from Mohammed El Baradei, a less-than-honest U.N. bureaucrat. It is quite likely that the allegedly missing explosives have been accounted for; around half disappeared before January 2003, according to the IAEA's own records, and the remainder was most likely destroyed by American troops. (The total amount at issue, 377 tons, represents less than one-tenth of one percent of the munitions the U.S. Army has destroyed in Iraq.)

At a minimum, the unfolding facts support President Bush's contention that the subject needs to be investigated, and that Kerry, out of political opportunism, jumped to a conclusion that is very likely false.

Pentagon Destroyed Ammunition And Kerry's Credibility

Posted by Peter

Captain's Quarters:

"CNN is showing a Pentagon briefing with an Army officer who is describing how the explosives at Al Qaqaa were destroyed in June 2003 after having captured it in April 2003. I'll have more as the story breaks.
UPDATE: Does the Pentagon's press conference answer the questions? Some of them, I think. First, Kerry was all wrong when he said that the Al Qaqaa site and its weapons were abandoned by the Army. By 13 April, the Army had loaded up 250 tons of explosive ordinance, including plastic explosive which could have been the RDX. The major said that the materials hauled off included crates and barrels such as those shown in the ABC video. However, ABC reported that the video was shot on 18 April, meaning that the weapons it showed were left behind, if the dates are correct.
At any rate, no one ignored warnings about Al Qaqaa, and the Army was well aware of the importance of the site. The area had been secured by the 3ID and 101st Airborne and remained pacified, making the notion that looters carted off many tons of materials extremely suspect. "

Premeditated Voter Fraud in Minnesota?

Posted by Peter

From PowerLine:

Minnesota is one of the few states that allows same-day voter registration and has become infamous for its lax same day voter registration requirements. Under Minnesota's registration law, an eligible but previously unregistered individual may register to vote in his precinct by showing proof of residence in the precinct or, in the absence of such proof, having a voter registered in the precinct vouch under oath that he personally knows that the unregistered individual is a resident of the precinct. Although the requirements necessary to establish residence are minimal, they are not non-existent and they are the statutory protection against vote fraud and serial voting.

Among the well-funded and supposedly independent groups supporting John Kerry in the campaign is Americans Coming Together (ACT). ACT has taken notice of Minnesota's special vulnerabilty to vote fraud and organized a sophisticated effort to exploit it in a manner that violates Minnesota law. In Minnesota the Bush campaign has come into the possession of the following email from ACT to its Minnesota volunteers:

Election Day is upon us. You are confirmed to volunteer with ACT (America Coming Together - http://www.actforvictory.org/) on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov 2.

We will be creating name badges that include your Ward and Precinct information for each of the thousands of volunteers that day to make it easier to find a volunteer to vouch for a voter at the polls.

I am emailing you to request your street address, city and zipcode. We've already got your other contact information, but your record in our database does not include this information.

You can save us time on election day by replying today to this email with this information, or give us a call at [phone number with St. Paul area code].

In order to get your badge correct, please reply by Thursday.

Thank you for your help and cooperation. See you on Election Day!

This email is a smoking gun of massive premeditated vote fraud. The ACT effort contemplates the prepositioning of registered voters as volunteers at their precincts of residence to provide the "vouching" necessary to get individuals registered to vote on election day in the precinct whether or not the volunteer "personally knows" the residence of the unregistered voter. It is a recipe for illegal voting in every precinct of the state.

In addition to its offensive ground game in the state, the Bush campaign here has organized a defensive game plan to identify and prevent election-day fraud -- a key component of the Kerry supporters' plan for carrying Minnesota. Organized vote fraud -- we'll see it on election day!

Why Christians can support the War in Iraq

Posted by Peter

LaShawn Barber: Onward, Christian Soldiers

To determine whether Jesus’ teachings are inconsistent with war, we must let the Bible speak for itself. Philosophical arguments and Scripture stripped from its context do not get to the heart of the matter.

The Bible makes distinctions between individual moral responsibility and governmental responsibility. To believers Christ says, “If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also….Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” The Sermon on the Mount, from which these words come, is a presentation of Christian discipleship, not a call to pacifism. Jesus was referring to our individual persecution as believers. We’re to pray for those who mock or harass us for our beliefs, but we are not prohibited from defending ourselves or others against the threat of robbers, rapists, murderers, etc., as permitted by law.

This is also clearly evident when He tells us that a man has no greater love than to lay down his life for a friend. The laying down of one’s life implies defending that friend against attack, which may result in our death....

Our government has a God-given responsibility to protect us from attack, including warring with our enemies if need be. This does not negate individual Christians’ God-given responsibility to pray for evil-doers. Defending the innocent against evil is not inconsistent with Christ’s teachings.

Why must these things be? Rest assured that one day we will know the why of all things. As you read headline after sad headline, remember that Satan is a defeated foe. For God’s own purpose, the evil one is allowed to roam the earth wreaking havoc until the King returns to cast him and his minions into the pit of hell. Christ says, “[W]hen you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be alarmed; this must take place, but the end is not yet.” (Mark 13:7)

Read the whole thing

Posted by Peter

George W. Bush playing Rugby at Yale

Going to the Vikings Practice!

Posted by Peter

I was just told by my boss this morning that all of the guys in my department get to go to the Minnesota Vikings practice today in Eden Prairie, MN. We'll have a catered lunch and get to watch the players as they gear up for their game against the Giants. Updates later with photos...


Ok, so the catered lunch turned out to be a bowl full of snack size bags of Doritos, and they didn't allow cameras into the practice. So no pictures.

We did get to watch an hour and a half of the Vikings practice though. Randy Moss wasn't doing too much, looks like he's still nursing his injured leg. He rode a stationary bike for a few minutes and then dressed in the locker room. The rest of the gang was looking pretty crisp though. Daunte was zipping passes into Campbell, Burleson and Robinson, and the defense was looking decent as well.

Kelly Campbell was the class clown today, showing off, and asking people on the sidelines to bring him a can of pop - or some Doritos. He was repeatedly told that we didn't have any pop. What a goof off.

After the practice Jerome Wiggins, the Vikings tight end, came over and signed autographs for a few minutes.. He seemed to be a pretty nice guy. Hopefully his Super Bowl ring will transfer to the Vikings this year.

All in all a fun afternoon - man are we going to cream the Giants this week!

More assorted news...

Posted by Peter

It's people like this that give both parties a bad name - probably people like this guy who are stealing the lawn signs.

Lake Worth man accused of 'political attack' on girlfriend:

WEST PALM BEACH – An 18-year-old Marine recruit remained in jail on Wednesday, charged with threatening to stab his girlfriend over her choice for president, news partner NewsChannel 5 reported in its noon broadcast.

The enlistee, Steven Scott Soper, of Lake Worth, became enraged Tuesday night when his 18-year-old girlfriend said she was leaving him -- and voting for John Kerry for president.

This Kerry supporter was arrested after police found 78 Bush and Martinez campaign signs in her trunk..

Stem Cell Activist arrested for taking down Bush signs...

Armitage is a Kerry supporter and a strong believer in stem cell research. She's featured in an advertisement urging Floridians to vote against Amendment 3 on this year's ballot. The amendment would cap how much money a lawyer can make from a medical malpractice lawsuit.

St. Johns County Sheriff Deputies arrested Armitage for grand theft and battery this week. They say she had 78 campaign signs supporting George Bush and Mel Martinez in her trunk.

This one just for fun: Kids give Bush four more years

Posted by Peter

They are not old enough to vote, but they've correctly predicted every presidential election since 1956, and this time around they are going solidly for George W. Bush.

Yahoo News:

Posted by Peter

Not sure where to go to vote? Go to Mypollingsite.com

Katherine Harris's Car Trouble - October 27, 2004

Posted by Peter

From the Smoking Gun:

A Florida man has been charged with attempting to run over controversial Republican congresswoman Katherine Harris with his Cadillac. According to the below Sarasota Police Department report, Barry Seltzer, 46, told cops that he was simply exercising his "political expression" when he drove his car at Harris and several supporters, who were campaigning last night at a Sarasota intersection.

Lawn Sign Theft

Posted by Peter

Kerry Spot

There are also sporadic reports of Kerry signs being stolen or defaced. If you are a Bush supporter, and you tear down Kerry signs, you are among the lamest human beings on the planet.
But so far, the majority of these cases ? and the ones involving the most disturbing details of bayonets, guns, fires, and swastikas ? are targeting Bush-Cheney signs.
There is, of course, a way to fight this.
And, coincidentally, it just happens to involve the primary sponsor of the Kerry Spot.
Are those of us ? left, right and center ? going to let a bunch of bullies push us around? In our homes, front lawns, and neighborhoods?
I quote the football coach in the movie, Rudy : "No one, and I mean no one, comes into our house and pushes us around."
Or, if you prefer the University of Maryland , WE MUST PROTECT THIS HOUSE!
In this case, "this house" means our right to publicly support the candidate of our choice. If somebody stole your sign, they're trying to send you a message ? that your voice shouldn't be heard, that their willingness to stroll onto your property break the law can trumps your First Amendment rights. Are you going to let those snot-nosed punks win?

As is noted in this above post, I think anyone who steals lawn signs from either side of the political spectrum is a complete moron. period. They can't win in the arena of ideas, so they try to keep you from expressing your first ammendment rights.

That said, I still think a majority of the more heinous acts (nazi symbols on lawns, swear words, epithets, vandalism, etc) are coming in from those on the left. I don't want anyone to think that I believe that average well meaning democrats are perpetrating these acts. I'm sure they're not. I do believe that the far left leaning element of the party that used to be fringe, but more and more seems to becoming the base of the party IS perpetrating many of these acts. As someone who has seen and experienced this attempt to violate my first ammendment rights first hand, I think it is just shameful.

Bush, Kerry signs can vanish as fast as they pop up

Posted by Peter

Polls in Minnesota are showing a very close race - one Republicans have a chance to win this year in the Presidential election for the first time in a long time. Get out the vote!

Bush Admits He's Hiding Bad News

Posted by Peter

ScrappleFace: Bush Admits He's Hiding Bad News

Another attack on a GOP office

Posted by Peter

Hollister Free Lance

Sometime between Oct. 12 and Oct. 16 unknown suspects vandalized a large Bush/Cheney campaign sign posted in the 700 block of McCray Street, spraying vulgarities denouncing the president, according to a Hollister police report.

Volunteers found the sign on Saturday, Oct. 16 and immediately took it down, said Jeannie Glass, San Benito County Republican Party volunteer.

Including several obscenities splashed across Bush and Cheney’s name, at the bottom the vandals sprayed the “F” word followed by the words Texas and Florida....

Other than some signs being blown over in the wind, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) hasn’t had any problems with their signs being stolen or vandalized, said Jeanie Wallace, San Benito County Central Committee chairperson.

The election fraud has started

Posted by Peter

Power Line: It's Already Underway

The Washington Times reports that the Democrats have already filed nine separate lawsuits in Florida, challenging various aspects of Tuesday's election procedures:

Led by the Florida Democratic Party, the People for the American Way, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and the AFL-CIO, the lawsuits target, among others, Florida Secretary of State Glenda Hood, who was appointed by Republican Gov. Jeb Bush, President Bush's brother.
The suits say Republican officials refused to count provisional ballots, improperly disqualified incomplete voter registrations, established overly restrictive rules to disproportionately hurt minority voters and actively sought to disenfranchise blacks.

One suit challenges a ruling by Mrs. Hood to throw out forms on which new voters had failed to check a box indicating whether they were U.S. citizens, and another argued that although only 17 percent of the voters in Broward County and 20 percent in Miami-Dade County were black, more than a third of the voter-registration forms that were determined to be incomplete and invalid in both counties involved black voters.

One would think that someone newly registering to vote could be required to at least represent that he is an American citizen. Apparently not, according to the Democratic Party. Ken Mehlman commented on the Democrats' blizzard of lawsuits:

What you're seeing is an attempt, through lawsuits and through intimidation, by Democrats to convert their allies' registration fraud into voter fraud on Election Day. What you're going to see is an attempt by them, regardless of what the outcome is, to say: 'It's unfair. We're going to sue.'
I think that's exactly right. The essence of the Democrats' strategy is to use bullying tactics to facilitate voter fraud, which they hope will tip the election in their favor.

NY Times Keeps Running With Discredited Story

Posted by Peter

Captain's Quarters:

Despite the NBC News report that told America that its own reporters verified the HMX and RDX had been removed from the Al-Qaqaa bunker in Iraq before American soldiers ever got there, the New York Times continues to push its discredited "gotcha" on its front page:

The White House sought on Monday to explain the disappearance of 380 tons of high explosives in Iraq that American forces were supposed to secure, as Senator John Kerry seized on the missing cache as "one of the great blunders of Iraq" and said President Bush's "incredible incompetence" had put American troops at risk. ...
Yet even as Mr. Bush pressed his case, his aides tried to explain why American forces had ignored a series of warnings from the International Atomic Energy Agency about the vulnerability of the huge stockpile of high explosives, which was first reported on Monday by CBS and The New York Times.

In several sessions with reporters, the White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, alternately insisted that Mr. Bush "wants to make sure that we get to the bottom of this" and tried to distance the president from knowledge of the issue, saying Mr. Bush was informed of the disappearance only within the last 10 days. White House officials said they could not explain why warnings from the International Atomic Energy Agency in May 2003 about the vulnerability of the stockpile to looting never resulted in action. At one point, Mr. McClellan pointed out that "there were a number of priorities at the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom."

Times write David Sanger never bothers to mention the fact that NBC's report earlier tonight essentially negated the entire thrust of their argument (also at Drudge):

NBC News: Miklaszewski: “April 10, 2003, only three weeks into the war, NBC News was embedded with troops from the Army's 101st Airborne as they temporarily take over the Al Qakaa weapons installation south of Baghdad. But these troops never found the nearly 380 tons of some of the most powerful conventional explosives, called HMX and RDX, which is now missing. The U.S. troops did find large stockpiles of more conventional weapons, but no HMX or RDX, so powerful less than a pound brought down Pan Am 103 in 1988, and can be used to trigger a nuclear weapon. In a letter this month, the Iraqi interim government told the International Atomic Energy Agency the high explosives were lost to theft and looting due to lack of security. Critics claim there were simply not enough U.S. troops to guard hundreds of weapons stockpiles, weapons now being used by insurgents and terrorists to wage a guerrilla war in Iraq.” (NBC’s “Nightly News,” 10/25/04)
As I posted earlier, this confirms that the materials had already been moved or looted from the site before American troops arrived at Al-Qaqaa. After finding the IAEA seals already broken and no high-priority materiel on site, the Americans moved on to more pressing problems -- like combat and securing lines of communication.

The bigger question we should ask is why the Times feels the need to push this story so hard. It's not exactly like Rathergate in that no fraudulent documents have been used to rationalize the story, but it feels like the Times may be trying very hard to find anything that will embarass the President in the final week of campaigning. In this case, the Times rushed a story to its pages without doing any proper research on the underlying facts, and wound up getting smacked down by NBC.


Posted by Peter

From Drudge Report - another example of CBS News taking their Democratic bias to the next level - trying to blatantly affect the outcome of the election on election eve!

DRUDGE REPORT 2004?: "News of missing explosives in Iraq -- first reported in April 2003 -- was being resurrected for a 60 MINUTES election eve broadcast designed to knock the Bush administration into a crises mode... "

Kerry: Serial Liar

Posted by Peter

I just don't trust this guy - he seems to lie about even the smallest of things - how can we trust him on the big issues?

Football Fans for Truth: "30 Yards Away?

John Kerry has spoken many times of his agonized presence at Game 6 of the 1986 World Series:
'I was 30 yards away from Billy Buckner in that famous Shea Stadium game in '86.' (Cite: ESPN Page 2)
'Talking baseball on the plane, he reminisced, 'I was at Shea Stadium, 30 yards from Bill Buckner,' recalling the error that many consider cost the Sox the 1986 World Series.' (Cite: 'Sox Detour for Kerry', New York Daily News, 7/26/2004)
'The Bay State senator says he....watched in anguish as the ball rolled through Bill Buckner's legs in the 1986 Series against the Mets.' (Cite: 'Bogus Bosox Fan', New York Post, 9/19/2004)
'I was about 30 yards away from Billy Buckner when that ball wiggled away' (Cite: Kerry tries to rejuvenate his campaign, USA Today 11/24/2003)
Game 6 of the 1986 World Series was held in New York City, on the evening of October 25, 1986.
According to the Boston Globe, John Kerry was at a banquet in Boston on the evening of October 25, 1986. "

Security Council members deny meeting Kerry

Posted by Peter

From the Washington Times:

U.N. ambassadors from several nations are disputing assertions by Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry that he met for hours with all members of the U.N. Security Council just a week before voting in October 2002 to authorize the use of force in Iraq. An investigation by The Washington Times reveals that while the candidate did talk for an unspecified period to at least a few members of the panel, no such meeting, as described by Mr. Kerry on a number of occasions over the past year, ever occurred. At the second presidential debate earlier this month, Mr. Kerry said he was more attuned to international concerns on Iraq than President Bush, citing his meeting with the entire Security Council. "This president hasn't listened. I went to meet with the members of the Security Council in the week before we voted. I went to New York. I talked to all of them, to find out how serious they were about really holding Saddam Hussein accountable," Mr. Kerry said of the Iraqi dictator. Speaking before the Council on Foreign Relations in New York in December 2003, Mr. Kerry explained that he understood the "real readiness" of the United Nations to "take this seriously" because he met "with the entire Security Council, and we spent a couple of hours talking about what they saw as the path to a united front in order to be able to deal with Saddam Hussein." But of the five ambassadors on the Security Council in 2002 who were reached directly for comment, four said they had never met Mr. Kerry. The four also said that no one who worked for their countries' U.N. missions had met with Mr. Kerry either. The former ambassadors who said on the record they had never met Mr. Kerry included the representatives of Mexico, Colombia and Bulgaria. The ambassador of a fourth country gave a similar account on the condition that his country not be identified. Ambassador Andres Franco, the permanent deputy representative from Colombia during its Security Council membership from 2001 to 2002, said, "I never heard of anything." Although Mr. Franco was quick to note that Mr. Kerry could have met some members of the panel, he also said that "everything can be heard in the corridors." Adolfo Aguilar Zinser, Mexico's then-ambassador to the United Nations, said: "There was no meeting with John Kerry before Resolution 1441, or at least not in my memory." All had vivid recollections of the time frame when Mr. Kerry traveled to New York, as it was shortly before the Nov. 7, 2002, enactment of Resolution 1441, which said Iraq was in "material breach" of earlier disarmament resolutions and warned Baghdad of "serious consequences as a result of its continued violations." Stefan Tafrov, Bulgaria's ambassador at the time, said he remembers the period well because it "was a very contentious time." After conversations with ambassadors from five members of the Security Council in 2002 and calls to all the missions of the countries then on the panel, The Times was only able to confirm directly that Mr. Kerry had met with representatives of France, Singapore and Cameroon. In addition, second-hand accounts have Mr. Kerry meeting with representatives of Britain. When reached for comment last week, an official with the Kerry campaign stood by the candidate's previous claims that he had met with the entire Security Council. But after being told late yesterday of the results of The Times investigation, the Kerry campaign issued a statement that read in part, "It was a closed meeting and a private discussion." A Kerry aide refused to identify who participated in the meeting. The statement did not repeat Mr. Kerry's claims of a lengthy meeting with the entire 15-member Security Council, instead saying the candidate "met with a group of representatives of countries sitting on the Security Council." Asked whether the international body had any records of Mr. Kerry sitting down with the whole council, a U.N. spokesman said that "our office does not have any record of this meeting." A U.S. official with intimate knowledge of the Security Council's actions in fall of 2002 said that he was not aware of any meeting Mr. Kerry had with members of the panel. An official at the U.S. mission to the United Nations remarked: "We were as surprised as anyone when Kerry started talking about a meeting with the Security Council." Jean-David Levitte, then France's chief U.N. representative and now his country's ambassador to the United States, said through a spokeswoman that Mr. Kerry did not have a single group meeting as the senator has described, but rather several one-on-one or small-group encounters. He added that Mr. Kerry did not meet with every member of the Security Council, only "some" of them. Mr. Levitte could only name himself and Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock of Britain as the Security Council members with whom Mr. Kerry had met. One diplomat who met with Mr. Kerry in 2002 said on the condition of anonymity that the candidate talked to "a few" ambassadors on the Security Council. The revelation that Mr. Kerry never met with the entire U.N. Security Council could be problematic for the Massachusetts senator, as it clashes with one of his central foreign-policy campaign themes — honesty. At a New Mexico rally last month, Mr. Kerry said Mr. Bush will "do anything he can to cover up the truth." At what campaign aides billed as a major foreign-policy address, Mr. Kerry said at New York University last month that "the first and most fundamental mistake was the president's failure to tell the truth to the American people." In recent months, Mr. Kerry has faced numerous charges of dishonesty from Vietnam veterans over his war record, and his campaign has backtracked before from previous statements about Mr. Kerry's foreign diplomacy. For example, in March, Mr. Kerry told reporters in Florida that he'd met with foreign leaders who privately endorsed him. "I've met with foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly," he said. "But, boy, they look at you and say: 'You've got to win this. You've got to beat this guy. We need a new policy.' " But the senator refused to document his claim and a review by The Times showed that Mr. Kerry had made no official foreign trips since the start of 2002, according to Senate records and his own published schedules. An extensive review of Mr. Kerry's domestic travel schedule revealed only one opportunity for him to have met foreign leaders here. After a week of bad press, Kerry foreign-policy adviser Rand Beers said the candidate "does not seek, and will not accept, any such endorsements." The Democrat has also made his own veracity a centerpiece of his campaign, calling truthfulness "the fundamental test of leadership." Mr. Kerry closed the final debate by recounting what his mother told him from her hospital bed, "Remember: integrity, integrity, integrity." In an interview published in the new issue of Rolling Stone magazine, Mr. Kerry was asked what he would want people to remember about his presidency. He responded, "That it always told the truth to the American people."

Article of Faith

Posted by Peter

From National Review.

Apparently, whatever scruples Senator Kerry has about his Catholicism informing his views of abortion and embryonic-stem-cell research don't affect his stances on many other political issues. He declared,

My faith affects everything that I do, in truth. There's a great passage of the Bible that says, 'What does it mean, my brother, to say you have faith if there are no deeds? Faith without works is dead.' And I think that everything you do in public life has to be guided by your faith, affected by your faith, but without transferring it in any official way to other people. That's why I fight against poverty. That's why I fight to clean up the environment and protect this earth. That's why I fight for equality and justice. All of those things come out of that fundamental teaching and belief of faith.
So it's okay for Senator Kerry's Catholicism to influence his efforts against poverty, or to clean up the environment, or to fight for justice and equality. As he said, "All of those things come out of that fundamental teaching and belief of faith." But for some reason his Catholicism mustn't influence him to support the right to life for unborn children.

Thanks be to God, viewers of the debate were spared one misstatement Senator Kerry has imposed on audiences before: The claim that he accepts the Church's teaching on abortion, despite not being able to "impose that teaching on others." Presumably, he means by "accepting the Church's teaching on abortion" that he thinks abortion is something morally wrong and would never encourage a woman to have one. But, of course, the Church says more than that abortion is immoral. Cursing in your living room is immoral, but the Church doesn't advocate outlawing it.

Abortion is different because unborn children have an inalienable right to life, which the government must secure. Since Senator Kerry doesn't support the right to life for unborn children, it's false for him to claim to accept the Church's teaching on abortion, which includes supporting the right to life.

We have here a classic case of someone who seems so worried about "not imposing religion on people" that he doesn't even impose it on himself.

Would Kerry Have Done Things Differently?

Posted by Peter

Here is another reason why I can't vote for Kerry - He always says he "has a plan", but is never willing to go into details. Case in point - this article.

Posted by Peter

Campaign Violence in Oregon

Posted by Peter

Via Powerline:

The Democrats' campaign of violence and intimidation has spread from coast to coast. Now it's hit Oregon:

Someone smashed the windows of the Multnomah County Republican office in Southeast Portland on Thursday, perhaps the latest sign some Oregonians have tossed out civility in their zeal to put their man in the White House.
Patrick Donaldson, volunteer chairman of the Bush campaign in Multnomah County, said the broken windows, discovered early in the morning, follow weeks of harassment, including threatening phone calls and people walking into the office and ripping up signs.

In Oregon, as elsewhere, responsible Democratic officials refuse to condemn the spreading violence:

Oregon Democratic Party officials said they do not condone smashing the windows of Republican offices and discourage such acts.
"But the fact is that the reason the Republican Party is feigning righteous indignation is because they don't want to talk about the 30,000 jobs lost and the 180,000 Oregonians who have lost health care," said Neel Pender, executive director of the state Democratic Party.

In other words: We're Democrats, so violence is OK. That is the attitude that has swept across America, leaving our democracy more threatened than at any time since 1861.

Posted by Peter

After having our Bush bumper sticker stolen, and seeing countless others vandalized, I got a chuckle out of this sign.


It has been brought to my attention that both sides steal signs (which I never denied). Here is a story talking about someone stealing kerry signs and leaving nasty notes in their place. I think whoever did this is a complete moron, and ought to be ashamed of themselves. I still think that the numbers of stories of Bush signs being defaced/stolen etc outnumber those of kerry signs being stolen. I think if you research the numbers of stories on both sides you'll see what I mean.

Posted by Peter

Posted by Peter

Nothing makes me happier than seeing the Yankees lose.. Go Sox!

Another lefty attempt to squelch free speech

Posted by Peter

For the past several months I have proudly displayed my Bush Cheney 2004 bumper sticker/magnet on the trunk of my car. I want everyone to know who I'm voting for, and if it helps someone else in making their decision, all the better.
This weekend I was doing some shopping at a local Target store. I went to get some supplies for our new Shi-Tzu puppy, Nala. I wasn't in the store for more than a 1/2 hour. When I came out, I noticed something wasn't quite right. Something didn't look the same. It was then I realized that my Bush Cheney magnet on my trunk was gone!
How desperate to get their candidate elected does someone have to be in order to try and squelch the free speech of the other side by stealing their bumper sticker? How pathetic is that? (At least they didn't key my car or something worse like that).
To heap injury onto insult, when I got home there was a letter in the mail. It was a letter from our Townhome association asking my wife and I to remove our Bush Cheney lawn sign from in front of our townhouse. They cited some provision in the association by-laws and said if we didn't remove it by monday morning, we would be fined. That makes me so mad! The election is over in a couple of weeks, and they knew we'd be taking the sign down then - but they couldn't wait that long?
UGGHHHH!!! What a frustrating weekend!!

UPDATE: I was on the way to a funeral last night for a member of Maria's church, and I passed two Bush/Cheney lawn signs in Eden Prairie that had been defaced. One of the signs was the kind that is about 5 feet wide and 4 feet tall. The other was a smaller one. Both signs had been sprayed with paint drawing a big X through Bush's name on both. More of the left's tolerance of free speech?

Posted by Peter

A view of the downtown Minneapolis skyline from the Metrodome

Lileks for Senate 2006!

Posted by Peter

The Forest For The Trees: Run Lileks, Run

Charles Krauthammer: Anything to get elected

Posted by Peter

Miracle Cure?:

"WASHINGTON -- After the second presidential debate, in which John Kerry used the word ``plan' 24 times, I said on television that Kerry has a plan for everything except curing psoriasis. I should have known there is no parodying Kerry's pandering. It turned out days later that the Kerry campaign has a plan -- nay, a promise -- to cure paralysis. What is the plan? Vote for Kerry.
I'm not making this up. I couldn't. This is John Edwards on Monday at a rally in Newton, Iowa: ``If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk, get up out of that wheelchair and walk again.''
In my 25 years in Washington, I have never seen a more loathsome display of demagoguery. Hope is good. False hope is bad. Deliberately raising for personal gain false hope in the catastrophically afflicted is despicable.

Where does one begin to deconstruct this outrage?
First, the inability of the human spinal cord to regenerate is one of the great mysteries of biology. The answer is not remotely around the corner. It could take a generation to unravel. To imply, as Edwards did, that it is imminent if only you elect the right politicians is scandalous. "

Nader May Hurt Kerry After All

Posted by Peter

Power Line:
"I've been assuming that Ralph Nader wouldn't be a factor in next month's election, both because of the difficulty he has had getting on ballots in many states, and because the polls show his support to be at very low levels. However, the dust has now cleared, and, as today's New York Times reports, Nader may yet be a factor.
The bottom line is that Nader will be on the ballot in at least 30 states. These include Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Wisconsin. Six of these are states where Nader drew his strongest support four years ago: Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Wisconsin. If, as some believe, the election is decided in the Upper Midwest, Nader's presence could possibly tip the balance in Wisconsin, Iowa or Minnesota....
So Nader may well be a significant factor after all.

Debate Three Wrap-up

Posted by Peter

Last night's debate was the only one of the three I actually had the pleasure (is that the right word?) of watching. The debates, and all their surrounding pageantry, punditry scheming, spinning etc have begun to lose appeal for me. It almost seems like It has turned into a style contest, with both candidates trying not to be the first to slip up and make a inappropriate facial expression, or mispronounce a word. It seems like the content of the candidate's words are almost secondary.

So who do I think won the debate last night? I think Bush looked like the more presidential figure last night, standing firm and resolute, telling what he would do in his second term, while talking about his administration's accomplishments during the last four years. He felt more caring and human, showing best in his answers to questions about faith, and how he feels about the strong women in his life.

John Kerry on the other hand continued on with his standard format of "complain about bush, complain some more, and then say, "i have a plan"" I'm still waiting for the details on most of those "plans".

Both candidates had their strong and weak points during the debate. I think Bush scored some big points during the questions about faith, his wife and on social issues. On those issues Kerry reminded me of a squirrel, who when he sees a car coming, runs one way then another, then back again trying not to get hit. Talk about straddling the fence, he was trying to be on both sides of just about every issue.

Kerry seemed stronger in some of the policy/economic issues, with he and Bush going back and forth trading dueling economic numbers and plans. I don't think either candidate came out on top and these parts of the debate were essentially a wash.

Based on Bush's stronger performance in the area of social policy, I think Bush ended up winning this debate.

Posted by Peter

Kerry on Faith - Big Whiff...

Posted by Peter

From Captain's Quarters: On faith, Kerry again slipped into lecture mode when given the opportunity to humanize himself, in contrast to Bush who spoke at length about the personal value his faith gives him:

Well, I respect everything that the president has said and certainly respect his faith. I think it's important and I share it. I think that he just said that freedom is a gift from the Almighty.
Everything is a gift from the Almighty. And as I measure the words of the Bible -- and we all do; different people measure different things -- the Koran, the Torah, or, you know, Native Americans who gave me a blessing the other day had their own special sense of connectedness to a higher being. And people all find their ways to express it.

I was taught -- I went to a church school and I was taught that the two greatest commandments are: Love the Lord, your God, with all your mind, your body and your soul, and love your neighbor as yourself. And frankly, I think we have a lot more loving of our neighbor to do in this country and on this planet.

We have a separate and unequal school system in the United States of America. There's one for the people who have, and there's one for the people who don't have. And we're struggling with that today.

And the president and I have a difference of opinion about how we live out our sense of our faith. I talked about it earlier when I talked about the works and faith without works being dead.

I think we've got a lot more work to do. And as president, I will always respect everybody's right to practice religion as they choose -- or not to practice -- because that's part of America.

It's worse than a non-answer. It's an interminable lecture, and the puzzlement is why Kerry kept whiffing the softballs. He showed himself incapable of connecting in a human way to the audience yet again, taking a golden opportunity and instead droning on about guaranteeing freedom of worship as president, as if we have a problem with that now."

Was Kerry Dishonorably Discharged from the Navy?

Posted by Peter

Mystery Surrounds Kerry's Navy Discharge - October 13, 2004 - The New York Sun

New Puppy

Posted by Peter

Maria has been asking for a puppy for well over a year and a half, and I finally agreed. I want to introduce everyone to our new little puppy, Nala. Nala is an 11 week old Shi Tzu, with a happy tempermant, and an overactive bladder.
After quite a bit of research, we bought Nala from a breeder in Eden Valley, MN over the weekend. We actually went to look at one of her littermates, who ended up being sick, and not for sale any longer.
Now for the fun work of getting her housetrained!.

Posted by Peter

Fallen Leaves in the Parking Lot.

Posted by Peter

As you all know by now, the Twins didn't fare so well over the weekend. We were at the game on Friday when they lost 8-4. We ended up leaving an inning early because Maria didn't feel well, but the game ended up pretty much the same. Oh well, another year, another loss to the Yankees :(.

Good to be in D.C. - New Cartoon from JibJab.com

Posted by Peter


Twins VS. Yankees - Game 3

Posted by Peter

At the last minute my boss at CarSoup.com where I work realized he had two tickets to the Twins Division Playoff Game 3 tonight versus the Yankees. He called me into his office and gave them to me as a thank you for all my hard work lately. Woohoo - go twins! Full report on the game later!

Twins Lose? This is starting to look familiar...

Posted by Peter

This is starting to look awfully familiar. This year's series has now started out similar to the way last year's series started. Game 1 - Twins win. Game 2 - Yankees win. I think most Twins fans are feeling a little bit nervous after watching last night's collapse with the Twins giving up the lead, and the game in the bottom of the 12th.

So what is it going to take? I think we are going to have to have some stellar pitching performances by our starters. Our middle relief and closers are decent/good on most occassions, but have a tendency to make things a little too interesting, giving up walks and hits in the worst situations.

I think we need to win the next two games at home if we stand a chance. Without that, we'll be headed back to New York, and their brutal stadium and fans.

So come on Twins, let's win the next two! Let's win it so we can show those rude obnoxious Yankees fans who's #1.

Yankees fans heckle Nathan after the Yankees scored the winning run.

Democratic, Union Thugs Attack Bush/Cheney HQ in Minnesota

Posted by Peter

Captain's Quarters: "While Al Gore wails about 'digital brownshirts' who dare to write criticisms of the entrenched Left, the real variety of brownshirts have attacked Republican campaign offices across this country, shooting, stealing, and intimidating political volunteers in what certainly appears to be a coordinated effort to scare Republicans into silence. Michelle Malkin has compiled a list of attacks on GOP offices, including these:
* Orlando, FL - 2 GOP volunteers injured by AFL-CIO protestors storming the building
* Knoxville, TN - Gunmen shoot the windows out of Republican campaign office
* Gainesville, FL - Democratic activist punches GOP volunteer in the face
* Columbus, OH - A wounded soldier is assaulted by anti-war demonstrators
The Democrats not only seem to be losing their minds, they appear to be doing it on purpose. The latest example occured in St. Paul yesterday, in an office where I've done some volunteer service, when AFL-CIO goons barged into Republican HQ and commandeered the lobby and the building's intercom system to disrupt the work of Bush/Cheney volunteers:"

Read the whole thing

Posted by Peter

Jacque Jones points skyward in tribute to his father after hitting his home run to put the Twins ahead 2-0 in Game 1 of the series with the Yankees. Jones's Homer Means More Than Just a Run for the Twins


Posted by Peter


Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski has slammed Dem president hopeful John Kerry for not recognizing Poland's contributions and sacrifice to the war in Iraq.

'It is sad that a senator with 20 years of experience does not recognize Polish contribution. This is immoral,' Kwasniewski told FACTS in an interview commenting on the US Presidential Debate.

'It is sad that a senator with 20 years of experience underestimates Polish sacrifice, this is sad.'

The Polish President added however that one should consider this was a part of the ongoing electoral campaign.

'I do not think this was out of ignorance,' the president emphasized on the TVN Facts.

'There is one thing which should be stated clearly: this coalition is not just the United States, Great Britain, Australia alone; it also involves participation of Polish, Ukrainian, Bulgarian and Spanish soldiers who have died. It is immoral not to recognize the involvement we contributed based on our conviction that there should be unity in fighting terrorism, that there was a need to display international solidarity and that Saddam Hussein was a dangerous individual of this world.'

'President Bush acted like a real Texan gentleman, he made sure to show appreciation for other countries' involvement in the coalition,' Kwasniewski pointed out."

An Illustration of why John Kerry won the debate

Posted by Peter

Dennis Prager: How Kerry won

The answer, again, is that it can mean either.

I believe that this debate can lead to only one conclusion: Either John Kerry is a man of few principles who will say almost anything on the most vital issues of life and death in order to get elected; or he is personally so confused on this issue that he will repeatedly make self-contradictory statements.

There is no other explanation for this unassailable fact: John Kerry won the debate because he sounded better; and he sounded better in large measure because he got away with saying whatever any voter wanted to hear.

That is one reason President Bush looked so annoyed at times. It is very hard for the principled to listen to the unprincipled.

CNS News: Documents Link Saddam To AQ, WMD, Other Terrorists

Posted by Peter

From: Captain's Quarters

In a blockbuster article if their sources pan out, CNS News reported today that it has documents from the Saddam regime which not only document active operational links to al-Qaeda and other terrorists as late as 2000 but also contain directives to use WMD stocks to attack Americans:

Bush and 'But'-Head

Posted by Peter

James Taranto points out that John Kerry is a but man.

John Kerry made some strong and sensible statements during the debate last night, but did you notice what the next word usually was? Here are some Kerry quotes:

• “I’ll never give a veto to any country over our security. But...”

• “I believe in being strong and resolute and determined. And I will hunt down and kill the terrorists, wherever they are. But...”

• “We have to be steadfast and resolved, and I am. And I will succeed for those troops, now that we’re there. We have to succeed. We can’t leave a failed Iraq. But...”

• “I believe that we have to win this. The president and I have always agreed on that. And from the beginning, I did vote to give the authority, because I thought Saddam Hussein was a threat, and I did accept that intelligence. But...”

• “I have nothing but respect for the British, Tony Blair, and for what they’ve been willing to do. But...”

• “What I want to do is change the dynamics on the ground. And you have to do that by beginning to not back off of the Fallujahs and other places, and send the wrong message to the terrorists. You have to close the borders. You’ve got to show you’re serious in that regard. But...”

• “I couldn’t agree more that the Iraqis want to be free and that they could be free. But...”

• “No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to pre-empt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But...”

• “I’ve never wavered in my life. I know exactly what we need to do in Iraq, and my position has been consistent: Saddam Hussein is a threat. He needed to be disarmed. We needed to go to the U.N. The president needed the authority to use force in order to be able to get him to do something, because he never did it without the threat of force. But...”

Maybe Kerry misunderstood when someone told him he needed to have the “qualifications” to be president. But it’d inspire a lot more confidence if he had followed any of these remarks with a “therefore” clause instead of a “but” one.

Captain's Quarters

Posted by Peter

Captain's Quarters

The Kerry campaign has always denied that Kerry wrote the after-action report that won him the Bronze Star. It looks like Lipscomb has demonstrated that Kerry's denials have been less than truthful.