We Get E-Mails. It's Hard Work.

I got this one today from Ken Mehlman of Bush/Cheney04; the stuff in italics is mine:

Dear truth1,

Over the next few days, at the office (It's hard work), at your children's football or soccer games, (that's hard work) and in your homes, people will be talking about last night's debate. Here are some important facts to keep in mind as you're talking with friends and neighbors about the exchange. (Other than the butt-whupping Kerry put on The Smirking Chimp.)

President Bush spoke clearly and from the heart last night (OK, I admit I am beginning to laugh) about the path forward - toward victory and security - in the War on Terror. The President spoke candidly about the difficulties facing our troops in Iraq (It's hard work) and Afghanistan (It's hard work) as these countries prepare for their first free elections. The terrorists will continue to fight these steps toward freedom because they fear the optimism and hope of democracy. They fear the prospects for their ideology of hate in a free and democratic Middle East.

President Bush detailed a path forward in the War on Terror - a plan that will ensure that America fights the enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan - not in America's cities.

John Kerry failed the one test he had to pass last night: he failed to close the credibility gap he has with the American people as his record of troubling contradiction and vacillation spiraled down to incoherence.

People have a clear choice between President Bush's clarity (He Knows Who Osama Bin Laden Is, Even Though He Prefers He Not Be Named!!!!) and strength to fight and win the War on Terror and John Kerry's attacks and reversals - born out of political calculation, not a vision for winning the War on Terror. People saw for themselves last night where John Kerry would lead our military, our allies and the world in the War on Terror - down a bumpy road paved with indecision, vacillation and cynicism. (Funny thing, Ken, you're the only one who saw this vision. Do you need your meds adjusted?) John Kerry has a record of wavering in the face of real challenges.

Truth and optimism are not competing ideals. The War on Terror is difficult - there will be good days and bad days, but the war is essential to our safety at home and victory is the only option.

Sincerely,

Ken Mehlman


Hey, Kenny-boy, that's why I'm voting for Kerry!

George W. Bush: Dumb Liar

Tony Karon: 'Reality check: George Bush'

The Claim:
"The A.Q. Khan network has been brought to justice." (Khan is the Pakistani nuclear scientist who shipped nuclear weapons technology to North Korea, Iran, Libya and possibly other states.)

Reality Check:
Observers generally concur that there's no way Khan could have acted without the authorization and support of Pakistan's military leadership, yet the U.S. accepted an outcome in which Khan received a slap on the wrist and wasn't even made available for questioning by U.S. officials, nor was any obvious attempt made to hold his superiors accountable — perhaps because of Pakistan's crucial role in hunting al-Qaeda.

In point of fact, Khan received a pardon. Bush says he was brought to justice. So when Clinton pardoned Marc Rich, he brought him to justice?

The Claim:
Bilateral talks with North Korea would be a fatal mistake that would precipitate the collapse of the six-party talks on Pyongyang's nuclear program.

Reality Check:
Some of the key parties to those talks, including China, Russia and South Korea, are in favor of the U.S. talking directly to North Korea in order to provide Pyongyang with security guarantees that would improve the prospects for success in the six-party process.

Plus, why do we need China at the table? Are they going to pelt North Korea with cheap plastic consumer goods? Is South Korea going to march across the DMZ? I don't think so.

The Claim:
We have 100,000 Iraqi troops trained now.

Reality Check:
There are around 100,000 people currently recruited to various Iraqi security forces, although the number who've been fully trained is closer to 20,000. And the number on whom U.S. commanders believe they can currently rely in frontline combat situations against the insurgencies is thought to currently number no more than 5,000.

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

The Claim:
We have 30 nations in our coalition; our coalition is strong.

Reality Check:
There isn't a single Arab country in the coalition, in contrast to the wide Arab participation in the Gulf War. And the U.S. and Britain between them provided more than 90 percent of the troops. Moreover, eight of the countries that initially joined the U.S. have since pulled out their soldiers, and more are expected to follow. Efforts to persuade Muslim countries to send troops have foundered.

Instead, we are joined by those powerhouse countries Afghanistan (If we have 11,000 troops in Afghanistan, what help are they sending us? our own guys???), the Marshall Islands, and Micronesia.

I Love Jimmy Breslin

Jimmy Breslin: 'A leader showed up; his name was Kerry'

George Bush reiterated time and again last night that it was hard work to run this government. It was hard work to lead a country out of tyranny and into democracy. It was hard work to read casualty reports. The war was hard work. And he made it plain that talking with somebody about his record as president was the grueling, hardest work you could want.

**********

And don't tell me he's not dumb. Yes, he was matched against an absolutely first-rate mind last night. But he could have done a little bit better at covering his helplessness than flusters of college boy anger.

He whined and brayed about consistency. He used that word so he could underline his famous "flip-flop" attacks on John Kerry. He said that by opposing the way the war in Iraq is going, Kerry was sending "mixed messages" and they are harmful to our troops. I, Bush, never change.

There were problems to this. One, Kerry cheated on him and turned a fine line: "Don't confuse the war with the warriors." Then in the middle of Bush's reiteration of dusty phrase after dusty phrase, we should remain as we are, was Ralph Waldo Emerson's, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen ..."

It was better than anything you are going to read from anybody from now to the end of the election, and you will see that Emerson quote come alive whenever Bush opens his mouth and starts the same old lines. George Bush writes in crayon.

**********

[T]hey opened the night with John Kerry talking. He was strong, passionate, sending a fine intellect out into the night. And when he got tough, he looked like a guy who could kill somebody if he had to for the country. Again. And that wimp next to him looked like he would, again, flee to the dentist.

Kerry wins

Pre-debate: Bush has never lost a debate.

Tonight, 12:41 a.m. EST: Howard Fineman on Scarborough: 'Bush has never been a good debater. He proved that tonight.'

Why Isn't there a DNC Commercial that Asks, "Why Did Bush Threaten to VETO the $87 Billion for Our Troops?

Why didn't I know this? Read this article.

Joe Conason: 'Here's what Kerry needs to tell us'

Question: What about your vote on the $87 billion appropriation for the war? You said you voted for it before you voted against it. Weren't you having it both ways?

Kerry: You're asking all my favorite questions tonight. But I hope you will ask the President why he repeatedly threatened to veto that same $87 billion bill. I suspect most Americans still don't know about his veto threat.

He told us he would veto the $87 billion if we tried to share the burden with the Iraqis by making a loan instead of a grant. He said he would veto that bill if we allocated money to provide medical care for our veterans, and for our National Guard and Reserve families. He threatened a veto unless we agreed to add that $87 billion to the deficit, rather than reduce his most profligate tax cuts.

In the Senate, we knew that the needs of our troops would be met one way or another, but we sharply disagreed over the best way to do that. I wanted a fiscally responsible bill that provided medical care for military families. The President cared more about preserving tax cuts for those who need them least. And now we know that he has failed to spend nearly all of the $20 billion in reconstruction funding that Congress appropriated--while the costs of the war balloon toward $200 billion. The administration's incompetence is costing American and Iraqi lives.

Terry MacAuliffe, wake up & make this commercial (right after the Kristen Breitweiser commercial.)

Big Networks Won't Run Fahrenheit 9/11 DVD Release Ads

Nikki Finke: 'When might turns right: Golly GE, why Big Media is pro-Bush'

Surprise, surprise, the SCLM won't run ads for the Fahrenheit 9/11 DVD release.

Read the article & see how the major television networks are all owned by the far right who have a vested interest in seeing Prances in Flightsuit get four more years.

L.A. Weekly has learned that CBS, NBC and ABC all refused Fahrenheit 9/11 DVD advertising during any of the networks' news programming. Executives at Sony Pictures, the distributor of the movie for the home-entertainment market, were stunned. And even more shocked when the three networks explained why.

"They said explicitly they were reluctant because of the closeness of the release to the election. All three networks said no," one Sony insider explains. "It was certainly a judgment that Sony disagrees with and is in the process of protesting."

**********

WHERE IS THE LEVEL playing field? Gone, thanks to the shenanigans of Big Media. Nor is it an exaggeration to state that the networks increasingly look like they're doing everything possible to help George W. win re-election. At least that wily old codger Sumner Redstone had the balls to come out this weekend and say what everyone already knows is true: "There has been comment upon my contribution to Democrats like Senator Kerry. Senator Kerry is a good man. I've known him for many years. But it happens that I vote for Viacom. Viacom is my life, and I do believe that a Republican administration is better for media companies than a Democratic one."

Like, duh! Who else but Dubya and his FCC frown posse, led by Michael Powell, is never going to meet one media merger after another they didn't like? And in return for all that conglomeration and consolidation, all Big Broadcasters have to do is fork over minor fines whenever they deflower the virgin ears and eyes of the public.

Another RIAW (Read It And Weep) article.

Gallup Inconsistencies

Donkey Rising has a great post about the ridiculous Gallup poll methodology, The "How Can Gallup........" Game

Like, for example:

How can Gallup......have Bush up by 13 nationwide, when he's only up by 2 points among Florida RVs?--and according to their own poll!

How can Gallup.....have Bush up by 13 nationwide, when he's only up by 2 points among Nevada RVs?--again, according to their own poll.

How can Gallup....have Bush up by 13 nationwide, when he's only up by 3 points in Ohio, according to Fox News?

How can Gallup....have Bush up by 13 nationwide, when he trailing by 5 points in Pennsylvania and 2 points in Michigan, according to Fox News?

DNC: Where is the Kristen Breitweiser commercial?

Terry MacAuliffe: Listen to the people. Unholster one of your best weapons. Get Kristen Breitweiser out front of the Kerry campaign. She's bright, she's articulate, she speaks from her heart & she knows more about September 11th than either of the candidates.

Sept. 11 Widow Joins Campaign

On Tuesday, the 33-year-old New Jersey widow was stumping in swing states with Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards for the second day in a row. It's here that Breitweiser's fresh face and emotional story are becoming an integral part of an effort to convince "security moms" that the Democratic ticket of Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) and Edwards can make them safer and that four more years with President Bush is dangerous.

Wearing her husband's wedding band, the only evidence of his life to be recovered at Ground Zero, Breitweiser said she steeled herself to hit the campaign trail this week with Edwards, a North Carolina senator. She fought back a fear of flying born out of the World Trade Center disaster and overcame her jitters about public speaking to become a blunt instrument of attack against a president she once supported.

"I would love to have heard President Bush and the Republicans in Congress say, 'Here's what we'll do better.' But they didn't do that. They circled the wagons, they stonewalled, they blocked, they foot-dragged," she said in an interview aboard the Edwards campaign plane.

Before large, sympathetic crowds here, as well as in Iowa and New Hampshire, she offered a blistering account of the obstacles she says she faced during a three-year battle to start the nation toward a new intelligence system. Her presentation is raw with anger and grief, and it registered strongly with the Democratic loyalists. At a town hall meeting, under a hot midday sun in downtown Manchester's Victory Park, she moved museum volunteer Fran Gordon, 84, to tell Edwards: "You should put her on a TV commercial. People need to hear her."

On the rope line later, as Edwards shook hands, Breitweiser was swamped. Jane Ryan, 54, of Hollis, Maine, begged her to stick with the campaign. "They need you," Ryan said. "You are so powerful."

My email to Keith Olbermann

I like Keith Olbermann. I always liked him when he was on ESPN. Now, he's one of the few reporters on television who isn't giving the Republican talking points of the day as the news.

So, I am trying to get him to cover this scandal of the Gallup poll numbers being cooked to favor Bush. Here's the email I sent him today, under the heading "Gallup Poll using skewed sample -- Who Will Report the Truth?"

Dear Keith Olbermann,

Please report the actual numbers behind the current Gallup Poll. If you do so, you will probably be the ONLY reporter on television giving Americans this story.

Today the media is reporting a Gallup poll that says President Bush has an 8 % lead over John Kerry.

What the media hasn't reported is that the Gallup polls are based on a sample that has 12 % more Republicans than Democrats! Here are the actual numbers behind the Gallup polls.:

Likely Voter Sample Party IDs – Poll of September 24-26
Reflected Bush Winning by 52%-44%

Total Sample: 758
GOP: 328 (43%)
Dem: 236 (31%)
Ind: 189 (25%

source: http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/002881.html

Republicans don't outvote Democrats by 12%. In the last two elections Democrats outvoted Republicans by 5%. Here are the numbers on voters from 1996 & 2000 from John Zogby:
According to John Zogby himself:

If we look at the three last Presidential elections, the spread was 34% Democrats, 34% Republicans and 33% Independents (in 1992 with Ross Perot in the race); 39% Democrats, 34% Republicans, and 27% Independents in 1996; and 39% Democrats, 35% Republicans and 26% Independents in 2000.

sources: http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/002806.html, http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=859

Please report the truth. The American voters need someone to give them the facts.

Very truly yours,

Gallup: Lies, Damn Lies, & Statistics

Gallup Is At It Again - Yesterday's National Poll Had 12% GOP Bias

Likely Voter Sample Party IDs – Poll of September 24-26
Reflected Bush Winning by 52%-44%

Total Sample: 758
GOP: 328 (43%)
Dem: 236 (31%)
Ind: 189 (25%)

So based on only 758 voters, 12% more Republicans than Democrats (even though in the last 2 elections 5% more Democrats than Republicans voted), every major news organization today reported with a straight face that Bush has an 8 percent lead.

Well, if you poll 12% more Republicans than Democrats, Bush does have an 8 percent lead. But if you weight those votes properly, Kerry probably has the same lead!

Who is the SCLM will report this fact? None I fear.

P.S., to my reader, I hope to see a LETTER published in the Packet soon pointing out this outrageous distortion.

Gallup is Wrong Because It's Owned by the Far Right

Gallup polls: Conditioning the public for vote rigging?

Gallup is owned by a rich right-winger. Maybe that's why they're showing Bush with a huge lead though Zogby (who was right in 2000) doesn't. The author's conclusion is that the false Gallup poll numbers will make the public more ready to accept a rigged election with the same false numbers.

While most political analysts predict the largest Democratic voter turn-out in history, Gallup is predicting in their methodology that Republicans will be 7-8% more of the total electorate than Democrats actually voting on election day. Based on the most recent elections, Democrats have usually been 7-8% more of the total electorate when the actual votes were counted. The swing in numbers using Gallup's distorted methodology would tend to give Bush a "fake" lead in the neighborhood of 15%.

As voters, we need to ask ourselves "why Gallup would use a methodology that would almost definitely mean that their election predictions would be wrong?" These writers are somewhat baffled in answering that question. Why would Gallup want to give the false impression of a Bush lead?

It is interesting to note that James Clifton, who bought the Gallup organization, is a big Republican donor. He gave thousands to Right Wing Republican Georgia Senate candidate Herman Cain. (See http://www.opensecrets.org) Cain ran as a huge backer of cutting taxes for the wealthiest Americans. This is essentially the same tax position supported with vigor by the Bush-Cheney ticket.

The Bush Administration has been re-writing the tax codes, labor regulations and business laws to give more wealth and power to large corporations along with wealthy and powerful individuals since their first days in office. Polling outfits, media companies and their owners have benefited as never before in history. Many of these entities and individuals are doing everything in their power to keep the Bush Republicans in power.

More News CBS Won't Report

Key Bush Assertions About Iraq In Dispute

Disputed by internal Pentagon documents, no less.

Liar, liar, go back to Crawford Texas.

Gump 2.0

OK, now I'm ready to deal with Friday night's nightmareish replay of Grady Little's managerial swan song last October.

Sox fans are calling new manager Terry Francona "Gump 2.0" because of his eerie resemblance to Grady (who had an eerie resemblance, verbally at least, to Forrest Gump.)

Friday night Francona embraced the role, choosing to send Pedro Martinez back onto the mound in the 8th inning, 101 pitches under his belt, a fine bullpen sitting on its keesters out past right field, & Hideki Matsui at the plate. Predictably, Matsui hits a home run. So it's time for Pedro to go, right? We're tied, he's tired, time for a pitching change. Oh, no. Bernie Williams doubles, Ruben Sierra brings him in to score with a single, & suddenly the Red Sox are not winning, they're losing.

And then I read this hideous fact in the New York Post this morning.

Friday's Fenway Freakout was the 1,918th regular-season game played between the teams. That number, 1918, keeps rearing its ugly head here, which means the Yankees can rejoice for the next 1,918 games between the two rivals.

That's the kind of thing that can make you believe in curses.

We won 12-5 last night, Schilling is on the mound tonight, this IS the year, but nights like Friday do give me the chills.

The Media Are Failing US

The Media, Losing Their Way, by David Broder

Even the SCLM know they've fallen & they can't get up.

Don't believe the polls

A Big Increase of New Voters in Swing States

Voter registration of new Democrats far outstrips registration of new Republicans in the critical states of Ohio & Florida.

Don't believe the SCLM. We're gaining. We will win if we outwork the bast**ds & never give up.