Posted by Peter

my new favorite bumper sticker:

Posted by Peter

Today would have been my grandfather's 82nd birthday, he died a relatively young man in his mid-60s. I thought i would mark his birthday by posting photos of my grandma and grandpa, just after he returned from World War II. We miss you grandpa!

Posted by Peter

With recent "peace" protests around the world, I thought it would be a good thing to take a look at what an Iraqi thinks about their "no war in iraq" and "war for oil slogans:

It’s very cozy and comfortable to drink the tea in the morning, getting out of your first-class houses, driving your fancy cars, speaking loudly against your governments, criticizing your prime ministers and presidents, saying “ I want this thing”, “ I don’t agree on this decision”, “ I hate Blair and Bush”…..etc.
Look you coddled pampered people… why don’t you want us to do what you’re doing now ? why don’t you want us to live like you ? Are you idiots? Selfish? Or what ?
You ‘protestors’ I’m sure you didn’t use your mind when you got out of your houses.. just let me tell you something: when you want to refuse something or say that’s wrong, first of all you should study the whole case and discuss it thoroughly before saying it’s wrong, and when you say it’s wrong, GIVE A PROPOSAL to solve the case, now when you said “ No war….” What is the right thing to do to get rid of Saddam and build democratic countries in the region? Tell me …

Otherwise, when you don’t know ANYTHING about Iraq and Iraqis do you know what to do? JUST SHUT UP and stay at home

For all those who say that the war on Iraq was wrong and G.W.Bush or T.Blair depended on wrong information and their intelligence agencies were misled cause it depended on faulty sources regarding WMD ..etc.
And also for those who emphasize that the war on Iraq was mainly because of WMD..
Just tell me what’s your ‘great idea’ that should have been used to get rid of Saddam and put an end to his regime? Or you think that you have nothing to do with Iraq and Iraqis? And you don’t care about their lives and the way they were living under Saddam?
Is it fair to leave people suffering and dying of hunger and oppression, those people who were tortured by monsters and you just stand and watch at them or think in a way to help them which will last for years to be carried out and I doubt if it would be.
If you have all the power to put an end to someone who torments millions of people, wouldn’t you help them? We lost innocent men, women and children, millions fled abroad, others left their schools and jobs cause they didn’t earn enough money to eat, millions were executed and then you say “ NO, leave them, we have nothing to do with all of that”.. !
I can’t cover all the complaints and sufferance of Iraqi people with a simple post….
It’s not fair to leave people under dictatorship and tyranny while others enjoy the democracy and freedom.


MORE HERE

A Blowout in the making

Posted by Peter

Dick Morris gives his take on the upcoming election:

March 24, 2004 -- THE Bush ads are working: Two weeks ago, the Washington Post poll showed Sen. John Kerry ahead of President Bush by 11 points, and the Gallup Poll had him up by 8, while more recent polls reflect a dead heat between the two.
Zogby (March 21) has Kerry up by only 48-46, and Rasmussen (March 20) has it Bush 46, Kerry 45.

Interestingly, the new surveys don't show Bush gain ing so much as they show Kerry dropping. In the odd configurations of political strategy, that is good news for the Republicans.

If Bush were simply gaining because of good news or a bump from the recent focus on terrorism, he could go down as easily as he went up. Let the news turn bad, and Bush would go back to the low ratings of a few weeks ago.

But with the gap closing because of Kerry's drop, the impact is likely to last a lot longer. The fact is that 6 to 9 percent of Americans were voting for the Democrat two weeks ago and now are undecided. The doubts that Bush's ads are raising about Kerry are not going to go away; they will grow as the ads continue and the facts pile up.

The polls are starting to reflect the effectiveness of Bush's ads, which depict Kerry explaining his ultra-liberal record to the voters. This Democrat, who escaped scrutiny by posing as the un-Dean in the primary, is now being revealed as the leftist he is.

Having defeated the three candidates of his party who might have beaten Bush - Wesley Clark, Joe Lieberman and John Edwards - Kerry is finding out that America is a centrist nation.

I have doubted the conventional wisdom that this election would be close. If Bush continues to stay on the offensive and Kerry's responses remain as inept as they've been, the Massachusetts Democrat will go downhill faster than he is now doing on his skiing vacation.

Bush's attacks have focused on the issues of terrorism and taxes. Kerry has not even answered the first charge and has given only a ritualistic denial of the second. Instead of answering Bush's charges in detail, he piously asks, in his ads, if the president has anything more to offer America than negative ads. But Americans don't see the Bush ads as below the belt, but as welcome information about a man they don't know who is running for president.

Indeed, the latest New York Times/CBS survey indicates that 60 percent of the voters feel Kerry is telling them what they want to hear, not what he really believes. Bush is opening a credibility gap which is only widened by Kerry's ridiculous statement that he voted for the $87 billion appropriation for the war effort before he voted against it.

In the next round of attack ads, Bush should focus on Kerry's previous support for a 50 cent increase in the gasoline tax. Remember, it was the gas tax, more than any other issue, that cost the Democrats control of Congress in 1994. With pump prices closing in on $2 a gallon, Americans will not look kindly on someone who proposes to add another half-dollar per gallon.

Kerry's two gaffes - on foreign leaders with whom he allegedly spoke and on his flip-flop on the money for the war - were not unforced errors: They were fumbles caused by the aggressive pressure of the Bush campaign.

This Democrat is not ready to run for president, and the more the Republicans press him, the more he will self-destruct. His campaign advisers are hoping that a few hours extra sleep on his ski trip will restore his political judgment, but they ignore the fact that he never had a lot to begin with.

The fact is that Massachusetts liberal Democrats don't spend a lot of time learning how to appeal to middle America.

Kerry only won the nomination because Dean lost it and Edwards was hobbled by Clark so he could not get the momentum he needed to mount a real challenge. With the front-loaded process, decreed by financial-wizard-but-political-amateur Terry McAuliffe, the party is united but saddled with a nominee who can't handle prime time.

Bush needs to keep up the pressure and watch Kerry's ratings drop. In a few months, we may be wondering why the conventional wisdom ever thought this race would be so close.


Posted by Peter

I have been seeing the subject of cloning and fetal research come up with more and more frequency. I'm not 100% percent sure how I feel about the subject yet, but I'm coming down on the side of being against it. My main reasoning is because I hold all human life to be special, not something to be used/abused. Here is another blogger's take on the subject from over at "McConchie on BioEthics":

From a utilitarian perspective, you can argue against killing human embryos for "therapy" or research as well. The argument goes as such:

1) The protected status of human beings is either absolute or subject to definition.
2) If it is absolute, then every individual human being, regardless of age or state in life, have the right to all the protections accorded to every other human being.
3) If it is subject to definition, then those who control the definition inevitably have life and death control over the rest--the strong are able to control and enslave the weak.
4) The only way to avoid granting such powers to the strong is to adopt an absolute standard of human protection from conception to natural death.


More on this blog entry here

Las Vegas, NV

Posted by Peter

My wife Maria and I just got back from our amazing trip to Sunny Las Vegas, Nevada last week. We left Minneapolis - 20 degrees and windy and landed in Las Vegas 80 degrees and sunny. What a difference a 3 hour flight can make!

While we were there we had the chance to enjoy all sorts of activities. One of them was watching the fountains at the Bellagio Hotel and Casino (see the picture below). The fountains would go off every 15 minutes, and the water would shoot into the sky in choreographed movements with the music.. It was one of the most beautiful things we've ever seen. The picture you're looking at was taken from the top of the Eiffel Tower Replica that they have at Paris Las Vegas Hotel and Casino



Some of the other things we did while we were there include going to a show done by the Cirque du Soleil (Mystere), visiting the various casinos, going to the red rock canyon, going to see Sigfried and Roy's Secret Garden and Dolphin Habitat, visiting the Hoover Dam, and much much more.

To view some more pictures from the trip go to:

Pix1
Pix2
Pix3

Plucking Lies From Truth: Kerry’s Speech on the “21st Century Military

Posted by Peter

From the Evangelical Outpost:

Is John Kerry simply incapable of telling the truth? Take, for example, the speech he delivered yesterday at George Washington University on the “21st century military.” He begins the speech with a lie and proceeds downhill from there: More at evengelical outpost - click here


Posted by Peter

Quote of the Day:

"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it," - Democratic nominee, John Kerry.

Kerry the waffler - more links

Posted by Peter

http://www.kerrywaffles.com/

another instance of Kerry taking the politically expedient route and answering whatever his audience wants to hear:

Waffler

More Kerry Waffling:

Posted by Peter

From Powerline.com:

The Republican National Committee has compiled a remarkable set of statements by Senator Kerry in connection with his votes against funds for the troops in Aghanistan and Iraq: "Why John Kerry Opposed Funding Our Troops -- One Question, Five Months, Many Answers, Including One Really Confusing One."

The statements only begin with Kerry's widely quoted straddle to the effect that he "actually did vote for the $87 billion before [he] voted against it." The RNC compilation reveals several more faces of Kerry in addition to his well-known two:

Sen. Kerry, You Voted Against $87 Billion To Provide Body Armor For Troops In Combat, Higher Combat Pay, And Better Health Care For Reservists And Their Families. Why?

March 16, 2004

“I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.” (Richard W. Stevenson and Adam Nagourney, “Bush’s Campaign Emphasizes Role Of Leader In War,” The New York Times, 3/17/04)

March 6, 2004

“‘That $87 billion has nothing to do with the preparatory money’ for such supplies, Kerry said in an interview with Fox News Channel.” (Patrick Healy, “In Swipe At Bush, Kerry Says Us Troops In Iraq Ill Prepared,” The Boston Globe, 3/7/04)

January 31, 2004

Kerry “wanted part of the money to come from rolling back GOP-backed tax cuts.” (Patrick Healy, “As Campaign Heats Up, Veterans Taking Sides,” The Boston Globe, 2/1/04)

January 16, 2004

“[T]he [vote] reflected his conviction that American troops would be more at risk if Congress paid for a reconstruction plan so ill-considered that it risked ‘leaving behind a failed state.’” (David E. Sanger, “Democrats Split On Security, But Agree In Faulting Bush,” The New York Times, 1/17/04)

October 26, 2003

“‘This president has done it wrong every step of the way,’ Kerry said. ‘He broke every promise and he’s done it wrong every step of the way. I’m not going to vote for him to continue to do it wrong.’” (Andrew Miga and David R. Guarino, “Iraq Viewpoint Dominates Dem Detroit Debate,” Boston Herald, 10/27/03)

October 25, 2003

Kerry “said he opposes Bush’s $87 billion spending request because of the administration’s failure to internationalize the reconstruction effort and ‘take the target off of American troops.’” (“The Democratic Presidential Candidates On The Issues At Sunday's Debate,” The Associated Press, 10/26/03)

October 23, 2003

“Now there’s a clear track record and a clearer set of very bad choices, and I’m voting against those choices.” (David M. Halbfinger, “Kerry Still Nagged By Questions On Vote To Authorize Iraq War,” The New York Times, 10/24/03)


October 17, 2003

Kerry Voted Against Senate Passage Of Iraq/Afghanistan Reconstruction Package. (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed 87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry Voted Nay)

“‘My vote is a clear statement, making it absolutely clear that this president has not pursued the best policy . . . to make our troops safe,’ Kerry said.” (Susan Milligan, “Among White House Hopefuls, It’s 3 Opposed, 2 In Favor,” The Boston Globe, 10/18/03)

October 16, 2003

“Presidential hopeful Sen. John F. Kerry said he opposed the funding because he believes Bush has not put forward an adequate plan to protect troops and bring in other nations to help and because the money comes at the expense of domestic priorities.” (Noelle Straub, “Kennedy Out To Kill Iraq Fund,” Boston Herald, 10/17/03)

Posted by Peter

A list of Minnesota Speed Traps for all you speed demons out there..:


http://www.speedtrap.org/speedtraps/ste_city.asp?state=MN

Quote of the Day

Posted by Peter

"War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

-- John Stuart Mill

The myth of Jobs losses

Posted by Peter

From Captain's Quarters Blog:

"Sean's excellent blog, Everything I Know Is Wrong, explodes the myth of the three-million-job loss during the Bush administration in a funny and well-sourced post from last night. Apparently, Sean did what John Kerry's entire staff was unable to do and check out the data at the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

It took about as long to do it as it took you to read about it. Take a look at the left side of the table; the column marked “Jan”. Now look down to the rows marked 2001, 2003 and 2004. The Jan 2001 figure is 137,790,000 (the numbers are all in thousands) and the Jan 2004 figure is 138,566,000. That means that there are 776,000 more jobs now than there were in the first month of George Bush’s administration. Look at the Jan 2003 number, 137,477,000, which means there are 1,119,000 more jobs than this time last year.

Sean attributes Kerry's inability to figure this out to either stupidity or dishonesty. Sean reports, you decide, although I'm willing to entertain the notion that it's a combination of both ..."

Posted by Peter

John Kerry's Waffles

Posted by Peter

John Kerry has another embarrassing piece of his record to stand up to - last year he missed 64% of Senate roll call votes. Talk about collecting a paycheck for little work:

The Herald reports: "During his run for the presidency, Kerry has missed every one of the 22 roll call votes in the Senate this year and was absent for 292, or 64 percent of the roll call votes last year, according to a Herald review of Senate records." Isn't this one Bush campaign commercial that writes itself?

MORE HERE

Posted by Peter

Here is the only film version of "The Passion" guaranteed not to offend:

HERE