|
August 06, 2004
I Endorse Democrat John Tanner For Congress In TN
Oh great. A nutjob, racist, crank named James Hart managed to get himself on the ballot in Tennessee's 8th District.
He's running in a district that has been gerrymandered to make sure a Democrat is going to win, so apparently the Party didn't realize he was a young Robert Byrd until it was too late to stop him from getting elected. A guy named Dennis Bertrand gave it a shot, but it was too little, too late. Hart was the only Republican actually on the ballot and voters, most of whom probably didn't know anything about him except that he was a Republican, pulled the lever and got him on the ticket.
And this guy Hart is just a despicable bigot. Just read this quote from a Newsmax article on him and you'll see exactly what I mean...
"When I knock on a door and say white children deserve the same rights as everybody else, the enthusiastic response is truly amazing," (Hart) said.
If a black person opens the door, he says he simply drops off campaign literature and leaves."
Here's more from Hart's ACPOTI worthy website......
---
What if they had integrated?
* There would never have been an electric light.
* There would never have been an automobile.
* There would never have been an airplane
---
Oh, what a crackpot.
So, because Hart is such a racist scumbag, I will have to utter the dreaded "words of curse" for any conservative, which are: I endorse the Democrat.
I'd suggest that all Republicans in that area vote for Rep. John Tanner this time around. He may have a lot of flaws, but he can't possibly be worse than James Hart.
Hat tip to Freedom Nation for pointing this one out.
John Kerry's Decisive Leadership: 'You Bet We Might Have!"
Is this the sort of "decisive leadership" in the war on terrorism that we can look forward to if John Kerry gets in the White House?
"John Kerry must be frustrated in his campaign if he is armchair-quarterbacking based on cues from Michael Moore," Giuliani said. "John Kerry is an indecisive candidate who has demonstrated an inconsistent position on the war on terror, who voted against funding for our troops at war, and who cannot give a clear answer on his position concerning the decision to remove Saddam Hussein."
That last shot, a frequent taunt from the Bush campaign to Kerry, came after the Democrat told the UNITY gathering that he "might" have gone to war if Hussein had refused to disarm.
"You bet we might have," Kerry said, adding that the result would not have cost as much in American casualties or taxpayers' money."
How is it that we're almost 18 months out from the start of the war in Iraq and Kerry still can't definitively say whether the war was worth it or not?
Can you imagine John Kerry at other times in our history?
At the signing of the Declaration of Independence...
Q: "So Kerry, are you going to sign it or not? Come on, John Hancock is getting antsy!"
A: "You bet I might sign this document...at some point...depending on how the war goes."
After Pearl Harbor...
"...and I just want to tell the American people that you can bet we might respond to this day that will live in infamy...as long as our allies say it's OK."
At the Berlin Wall...
"One day, you bet I might tell Mr. Gorbachev to tear down this wall...if the UN and our European allies give me approval to use that sort of strong wording."
Even if we were at peace, we couldn't trust someone as wishy-washy as John Kerry with the Presidency. But in a time of war, having a weak & vacillating commander-and-chief will lead to a lot of Americans dying unnecessarily while he sits around paralyzed, trying to figure out how to have it both ways on every issue.
Do I Work Here?
This has nothing to do with conservatism, but it's really funny....
Lol...
*** This graphic was created by Nick15 for a Fark photoshop thread called "The customer is always right, but usually an idiot. Photoshop the signs or notices companies wish they could post for their customers". ***
Swift Boat Veterans For Truth On Kerry's War Record
Despite the fact that John Kerry has made his four months in Vietnam the centerpiece of his entire campaign, the mainstream media has given him a complete free pass on his time spent in Vietnam. Perhaps more importantly, the media has allowed John Kerry to gloss over his days after the war, when his disgraceful behavior could be fairly compared to that of other radical anti-war protestors like Ramsey Clark and Jane Fonda.
However, because of the Democrat's foolish attempt to muzzle the VERY EFFECTIVE new Swift Boat Veterans For Truth ad, this entire issue is starting to break wide open.
Now, I'm not a vet, and I'm not going to criticize John Kerry for time in Vietnam. To the contrary, I applaud him for risking his life in Vietnam, serving his country, and winning medals. The White House has taken the same position. Here's a quote from the Bush Admin in a misleadingly titled article called, "White House repudiates anti-Kerry ad"...
"We have been very clear in stating that, you know, we will not and we have not and we will not question Senator Kerry's service in Vietnam," spokesman Scott McClellan said as US President George W. Bush made a campaign stop here."
Note that they did not actually repudiate the ad, they just ** WISELY ** said they're not criticizing Kerry's record (although blowhard John McCain, who loves nothing better than going against the grain in a situation like this in order to draw praise from a fawning press, did speak out against the ads).
That being said, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has members who fought beside of John Kerry (albeit in different boats), who were in his chain of command, & who actually had their photos used in Kerry campaign ads.
So as far as I'm concerned, they are VERY CREDIBLE and have EVERY RIGHT to publicly nail John Kerry if they think he's exaggerating his record. In fact, I think they're more credible than his shipmates in many respects. After all, you gotta figure it's human nature for guys who fought together on the same boat to stick up for each other.
But, you have to wonder why almost everyone who served with Kerry other than his shipmates doesn't seem to think much of him. What about the doctor who treated the wound -- with a band-aid I might add -- that led to Kerry's first Purple Heart? Why doesn't he support Kerry? Why is it that "19 of 23 officers who served with Kerry & every commanding officer he ever had in Vietnam" all think he's "unfit to be commander-in-chief"? Why is it that men who were fighting side by side with John Kerry in other boats are telling stories like this one?
"Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, however, in signed affidavits now in UPI's possession, say Kerry's shrapnel wounds were self-inflicted earlier in the day when he tossed a grenade into a sampan carrying rice and that there was no enemy fire at Kerry's boat or others involved in the incident. They point to mentions of the buttock wounds from the grenade and flying rice grains that appear in a number of stories by Kerry or about him in earlier articles and books, in contrast to his account for the casualty report.
They noted the self-inflicted rice injury was mentioned on page 105 of the book "John F. Kerry: The Complete Biography by the Boston Globe Reporters Who Know Him Best" and in the book "Tour of Duty." But according to the official casualty report, "Lt. J.G. Kerry suffered shrapnel wounds in his left buttock and contusions on his right forearm when a mine detonated close aboard PCF-94" (his boat). There was no mention of a wound that would draw blood on the arm.
Swift boat veterans who spoke to UPI also said that when the mine exploded some 50 yards from Kerry, he initially "fled" the scene, leaving other patrol boats to circle the stricken vessel and rescue men in the water, before returning four to five minutes later to join the rescue effort when it was clear they were not under fire.
"The truth is, the one who left everybody behind was John Kerry. Everyone else stayed," one of the Swift boat veterans said.
Rassmann, according to Thurlow, fell off Kerry's boat after Kerry accelerated when the mine went off under the other boat, which was on the other side of the river.
"There was absolutely no fire coming from any direction," Van Odell, a gunner aboard a boat behind the stricken vessel told UPI. "There were no tracers, there were no bullet holes in the boats, no one else was wounded. We came around (to rescue men) ... and at this point, of course, Kerry's boat was way down river.
"If there was any fire we should have had holes in our boat, we should have had other wounded. We didn't. Kerry fled the scene and then he comes back. We couldn't leave. The (damaged) boat was dead in the water. We stayed there to protect those people."
The media should be asking why all these men who fought side by side with a war hero, not only don't back him for President, but think he's unfit to be commander-and-chief.
To make a long story short, this isn't some bunch of kooks or a group secretly hand picked by Karl Rove. They're vets, a lot of them knew John Kerry in Vietnam, & they risked their lives for our country too. So as far as I'm concerned, the voters deserve to know what these men have to say...
*** More quotes from the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth here. ***
*** Update #1 ***: Ugh...read this story about Kerry and ask yourself if we can trust him to be the next leader of the free world...
"George Bates, an officer in Coastal Division 11, participated in numerous operations with Kerry. In UNFIT FOR COMMAND, Bates recalls a particular patrol with Kerry on the Song Bo De River. He is still "haunted" by the incident:
With Kerry in the lead, the boats approached a small hamlet with three or four grass huts. Pigs and chickens were milling around peacefully. As the boats drew closer, the villagers fled. There were no political symbols or flags in evidence in the tiny village. It was obvious to Bates that existing policies, decency, and good sense required the boats to simply move on.
Instead, Kerry beached his boat directly in the small settlement. Upon his command, the numerous small animals were slaughtered by heavy-caliber machine guns. Acting more like a pirate than a naval officer, Kerry disembarked and ran around with a Zippo lighter, burning up the entire hamlet.
Bates has never forgotten Kerry's actions."
*** Update #2***: Here's John O'Neill from Swift Boat Veterans For Truth tearing into John Kerry for his disgraceful behavior...back in 1971!
"I'd like to turn to a second issue. Mr. Kerry is the type of person who lives and survives only on the war weariness and fears of the American people. This is the same little man who on nationwide television in April spoke of, quote, "crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command," who was quoted in a prominent news magazine in May as saying, quote, "war crimes in Vietnam are the rule and not the exception," unquote. Who brought 50 veterans down to Washington to testify about alleged atrocities in April, the same 50 who after they had appeared on every major news network refused to provide any depositions or provide any details of any kind.
Never in the course of human events have so many been libeled by so few.
There were two and a half million of us who served there in Vietnam under the most severe restrictions in this nation's history. We have brought this war close to a close. We never engaged in mass bombing of population centers, as all nations did in World War II, and the reason we did not is because we are a moral people.
Fifty-five thousand Americans died there in Vietnam no matter what they thought about the war because they believed in this country, and those of us who survived came back to this country, by and large determined just to resume our normal lives after the disruption caused by war.
We encountered a variety of problems: unemployment, discrimination, other problems, and then we encountered the biggest problem of them all, the big lie by Mr. Kerry and his group, that we were either each individually war criminals or that we were collectively the executioners of a criminal policy.
You've seen that all before, guilt by association. If one or 50 or 150 veterans testify as to war crimes, then all two and a half million of us must be war criminals. That's the same as saying if one Jew or one black commits one murder in this country, then all the Jews and all of the blacks in this country must be murderers, and that is something that we must not stand for in this country...."
*** Update #3 ***: More from John Cole at Balloon Juice & BitsBlog on the way the Democrats & the press are dealing with these huge broadsides being leveled at John Kerry's credibility.
August 05, 2004
Which Part Of The "Two Americas" Is The Grandmother You're Plowing Over A Part Of?
Found at Yahoo...
"Democratic Presidential nominee John Kerry runs past a woman as he heads toward a Vietnam-era Huey helicopter, at a Vietnam memorial as he stopped to greet supporters along route 61..."
Hat tip to Henry Hanks from Croooow Blog for finding this one.
Gun Lovers Vs. Hypersensitive Liberals!
Folks -- and I kid you not -- I now stand accused of being part of a bizarro-world, racist, t-shirt conspiracy.
 It all started with this shirt, modeled by Glenn Reynolds from Instapundit.
I, along with Glenn Reynolds and Frank J. from IMAO, all endorsed the shirt (The company selling the shirts, Those Shirts, is a former RWN advertiser). Here's what we had to say about it...
"Got my shirt, and love it. Perhaps I'll wear it to a faculty meeting..." - Professor Glenn Reynolds
"ThoseShirts.com has not only some of the highest quality shirts I've ever seen, but they also deflect bullets, give you super strength, and ward off monkeys. I hate monkeys." - Frank J. of IMAO
"I have the Celebrate Diversity shirt and it looks great. If only you had a T-shirt that makes fun of the French as well -- wait -- you do!" - John Hawkins of Right Wing News
Now, most people...ehr, make that anyone who isn't a huffy, hypersensitive liberal...would look at this shirt and probably think "Ha! That's a cute pro-gun t-shirt" or "It's taking a dig at the way liberals obsessively bloviate about diversity while also promoting the 2nd Amendment."
Now here's the take that lefty moonbat Steve Gilliard had on this shirt and our comments after being inspired by what Atrios had to say about the t-shirt...
"I think Atrios is being far too kind about this. Just look at the comments, which is why I posted them. Monkeys? Why not say n*gger, because that is what you mean.
...(T)hat noxious shirt is one no decent person would wear, because there is no joke in it. A number of handguns and "celebrate diversity" on it implies something pretty dark and evil. Especially with the colors used on the white shirt, red, yellow and green. You would have to be a moron not to see the pan-African connotation with. I mean, you have easily made that shirt with the tag line "variety is the spice of life", the joke made, and not even the most hypersensitive liberal could say a word. Reynolds even jokes about wearing it to a faculty meeting, something he doesn't have the balls to do because he would be called on it.
That shirt is the kind of thing you see at Klan and militia rallies. It isn't about political correctness either, because it implies the only kind of diveristy is a heavily armed one which is clearly anti-black in tenor and temperment."
Ok, the "monkeys" thing is a long running gag on IMAO that quite unsurprisingly has to do with...well...monkeys. Furthermore, I find it amazing that the ultra-observant geniuses, Atrios and Gilliard, couldn't even get the colors of the shirt that Reynolds was wearing right, despite having a picture to look at.
But those quibbles aside, I have a very relevant question, that being "how do people this hypersensitive make it through the day"?
I mean do they refuse to play 8-Ball because it requires you to use a white ball to knock a black ball down into a hole? What about trash bags? Do they think it's appropriate for a white guy to stuff garbage into a black trash bag or does that imply "something pretty dark and evil" too? Oh and don't even get these guys started on the symbolism behind a white person eating blackberries or you'll really get an earful!
What silly, silly, people Atrios and Gilliard are...
Viet Cong Vets for Kerry Refute Swiftboat Book By Scott Ott
To preempt the release of a new book questioning John Forbes Kerry's account of his service in Vietnam, the Kerry-Edwards presidential campaign announced it had received the endorsement of yet another military veterans group.
Viet Cong Veterans for Kerry (VCVFK), an ad hoc group of North Vietnamese soldiers who served in the early 1970s, said their support is "payback for all Mr. Kerry did for us in his 1971 testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He almost single-handedly put an end to U.S. atrocities against innocent Viet Cong soldiers and their families."
The Viet Cong veterans' support comes at a crucial time for the Kerry-Edwards campaign, just days before the release of Unfit for Command : Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry.
"Despite what the American swiftboat veterans claim, we know that John Kerry is a true leader who lifted our morale at a time when we were concerned that we might lose the war," said an unnamed spokesman for VCVFK. "He is not a narrow nationalist who believes that America is always right. He's willing--even eager--to admit his own nation's shortcomings. This is the kind of man we need in the White House."
If you enjoyed this satire by Scott Ott, you can read more of his work at Scrappleface.
Misc Commentary For Aug 5, 2004
-- It's hard for me to believe that a company like Subway would be dumb enough to do something like this...
"Picture this: a gigantic cheeseburger (with tomatoes and lettuce) slamming into two high-rise buildings, as cartoon characters run from the flaming ruins.
It's clearly a takeoff on the 9/11 terror attacks on the World Trade Center, and according to the Virginia-based Center for Individual Freedom, the illustration appears on page 18 of a 30-page "food diary" distributed by Subway sandwich shops in Germany.
Last week, the Center for Individual Freedom launched a grassroots campaign against anti-American tray-liners at German subway stores.
The tray-liners -- a promotion for the film "Super Size Me" -- showed an obese Statue of Liberty holding a burger and fries in her hands, under a headline asking, "Why are Americans so fat?" According to the Center for Individual Freedom, the headline used the word "Amis," which is considered a derogatory term for Americans."
In America it's "Oh, look at how much weight Jared has lost with our delicious sandwiches" and in Germany's it's "Watch us mock the Statue of Liberty and knock down (wink, wink) the WTC".
I'll remember that the next time I'm deciding where to pick-up a sub.
-- Here's Larry Kudlow on who really took a bath when the economy was soft earlier in Bush's term...
"There was a recession in 2000-01 and it was deep. But you have to look behind the headline real GDP numbers to understand it. When you do that, you find that a very unusual set of events were at work four years ago. Events worth remembering today.
Consumer spending never once declined in the recession of 2000-01. This is because middle-class income actually increased by nearly 5 percent between 2000 and 2002, according to the latest IRS statistics. This fact runs completely counter to the Kerry-Edwards argument about a “middle-class squeeze.”
Still, overall individual income declined 5 percent during this period. Why? Upper-end income suffered mightily. The top tax brackets lost about 28 percent of their income, on average, largely from the stock market crash and the fall in high-paying jobs. Twelve percent of the folks who fought their way above $200,000 a year slipped below that level in 2002.
At the rarified income level of $10 million or more, those with the highest propensity to save and invest lost a stunning 63 percent of their income during 2000-02. Total capital-gains income fell by 29 percent, and dividend income dropped 17 percent. When Bill Clinton recently told the Democrats in Boston that top tax-rate payers don’t need the extra money, he was sorely uninformed."
-- -- This game is ridiculously addictive. It's too bad I ran across it today or I would have gotten my fave Bible Quotes out today instead of tomorrow...
-- I'm really looking forward to reading Michelle Malkin's new book ""In Defense of Internment: The Case for 'Racial Profiling' in World War II and the War on Terror."
Today, internment is treated as a black and white issue. But, I've never thought it was as clear cut as it's made out to be. When you're in a fight to the finish with another country that's going to end with one side or the other being decimated and conquered, I don't think you can afford to let citizens of that enemy country roam free within your borders -- even if they have dual citizenship (which is part of the reason I oppose the whole concept of dual citizenship).
Let's just say that I'll be keeping an open mind on the subject and I'll be very interested to see what Michelle has to say about the subject in her book.
-- I'm with Bridget Johnson. Negative ads and dirty campaigning is a necessity in these days and times, especially for Republicans.
The reality is that the mainstream press is full of liberals who are to going ignore or bury much of the negative information about a Democratic candidate while playing up anything negative they can find in the record of a Republican candidate to the hilt. So, if you're a Republican and you're not willing to go negative to win, then you don't belong in a competitive political race on the national level.
Besides, the voters deserve to know not only the picture that the candidate wants to paint of himself, but all the warts and negatives too. Talking about the virtues of particular candidates is fine, but their flaws are just as important...
August 04, 2004
If The Choice Is Between Your Job Or A BLT, Take Your Job.
Ah...there's nothing like knowing that most of your readers aren't going to agree with you even before you even start writing a post. But what the heck, I've never let it stop me before...
"A Central Florida woman was fired from her job after eating "unclean" meat and violating a reported company policy that pork and pork products are not permissible on company premises, according to Local 6 News.
Lina Morales was hired as an administrative assistant at Rising Star -- a Central Florida telecommunications company with strong Muslim ties, Local 6 News reported.
However, 10 months after being hired by Rising Star, religious differences led to her termination.
Morales, who is Catholic, was warned about eating pizza with meat the Muslim faith considered "unclean," Local 6 News reported. She was then fired for eating a bacon, lettuce and tomato sandwich, according to the report.
"Are you telling me they fired you because you had something with ham on it?" Local 6 News reporter Mike Holfeld asked.
"Yes," Morales said.
...Local 6 News obtained the termination letter that states she was fired for refusing to comply with company policy that pork and pork products are not permissible on company premises.
However, by the company's own admission to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, that policy is not written, Local 6 News reported.
"Did you ever sign to or agree to anything that said I will not eat pork?" Holfeld asked Morales.
"Never," Morales said. "When I got hired there, they said we don't care what religion you are."
Attorney Travis Hollifield is representing Morales in a lawsuit against the company.
"It's just un-American," Hollifield said. "It's not in compliance with the laws of this country."
..."It's a classic case of religious discrimination," Hollifield said. "They have not articulated a single reason other than religious reason behind the policy."
Now, if the company said Morales had to be a Muslim to work there or if Morales' religion mandated that she eat pork, I'd side with her.
But, as it stands, it sounds to me as if her company had every right to fire her.
If she hadn't been informed of the policy, that might be an issue, but it sounds like she was warned previously about eating pizza in the lunch room.
Furthermore, Morales wasn't fired because she was a Catholic or asked to do anything against her religion, so as far as I'm concerned, she doesn't have a leg to stand on if she's claiming "religious discrimination". Being asked not to eat pork at work doesn't qualify as being "persecuted for your faith" in my book.
Last but not least, while I think the idea of banning pork products at work is a bit quirky, I think Rising Star had a right to do it. Moreoever, just because you think a company's rules and regulations are silly doesn't mean you can just disregard them at will. In Lina Morales' case, she decided that eating a BLT at work was more important than keeping her job. As far as I'm concerned, she made her choice and now she should have to live with the consequences.
Michael Moore's Armed Guards?
If you were asked to name America's most prominent advocate of gun control, who would it be? If there was a poll of RWN's readers, I suspect that Mr. "Bowling For Columbine" himself, Michael Moore, would probably be chosen as the foremost enemy of the 2nd Amendment.
And that is why I found this quote from Spike Lee to be absolutely FASCINATING...
"Michael Moore would not need armed guards around him 24 hours a day if that film had no impact," says Lee, who spoke to Moore a few days ago. "He's not happy about it, with his life being threatened. I wouldn't be happy either."
Well, well, well, could a man who believes that you don't have the "right to bear arms" actually have a gun packing bodyguard protecting him? I guess as far as Moore is concerned, there's one standard for all of us peons and another standard for VILs (very important liberals) like himself.
Sure, Moore may think that "ordinary people" -- like YOU -- can't be trusted to have a gun to defend your families. It's just too risky. Oh, but if Michael Moore might be in danger, well that's a different matter all together; he's special, you see, the rules that he wants to apply to the "little people" shouldn't apply to him.
If Spike Lee is right and Michael Moore's bodyguards are packing heat, then even liberals should roll their eyes in contempt when, in defiance of the Constitution, he calls for taking guns away from his fellow Americans.
Chirac Explodes The Myth By Traps
French President Jacques Chirac says that France would have won both world wars without any British or American assistence. "If anything the Allies were more trouble than they were worth. Germany's invasion of France was nothing more or less than a French plan to encourage tourism during a slow period".
Asked about the Germans raping women, looting, shooting defenceless citizens getting drunk and being sick everywhere, Chirac said that the journalist had obviously not visited Paris during an England away game.
Chirac went on to say that he was sick and tired of hearing that the French had abandoned their posts and run away : "It was nothing like that. The Germans will confirm that it was a skilfully worked stampede with crying, begging and screaming thrown in to give it a touch of realism, but nothing more than that."
What about wholesale collaboration? "As I have said before it was not collaboration, it was tourism at it's finest. The Germans were so impressed they stayed for four years."
What about DDay then? "Yes, well we're still annoyed about that. Just as the Germans were readying themselves for a long term stay what happens? You guessed it those pesky kids and the hooligans come storming the beaches. Do you think we have been able to entice one German onto the beach in the last 60 years? Not a chance?"
But if the Allies did not liberate France how would you have got rid of the Nazis? "One man's Nazi is another man's tourist. We were fully occupied, a country's dream".
Frenchmen did join with the Allies however. "Indeed there are those many many Frenchmen who felt duty bound to rid France of the Germans. All 4 of them joined the Allies."
Do you think France avoided Iraq because the French are lovers and not fighters. "What nonsense Frenchmen are worriers to a man. There's not a man in uniform who doesn't have a hiatus hernia or ulcer. Indeed no greater sacrifice can be expected of any man."
Mr President what if France leads the EU army? "If attacked we would simply turn Europe into one massive tourist trap."
If you enjoyed this column by Traps, you can read more of his work at The Spoof.
The 'Very, Very' Rule Of Building Traffic For Your Blog
I know there are a lot of bloggers out there who are wondering, "What in the world do I have to do to build traffic? Do I have to work for Nick Denton? Presents -- do I have to give Glenn Reynolds presents? Do I have to be a well known writer like Andrew Sullivan who switches over to blogging to build big traffic (incidentally, I think the Daily Dish is going to be better this month than it has been in a long, long, time =D)?"
No, you don't have to do any of those things (although once you crack 3000 readers a day there is a secret ceremony you have to participate in. You run a gauntlet blindfolded while bloggers like Steven Den Beste & Eugene Volokh take whacks at you with 1000 page books on 18th century law & engineering. I still have nightmares about it).
But, don't worry about that now. For the moment, all you have to do is read 'RWN's Golden Rule For Building Traffic For Your Blog (Otherwise Known As The 'Very, Very' Rule)'. Ready? Then let's make...uh...like something that goes...and uh...go.
"Remember that you will have to be very, very, good, for a very, very, long time, while working very, very, hard to promote your work and you will be very, very, underappreciated the whole time."
Think of it as "paying your dues", "doing leg work", "bad karma", whatever floats your boat -- but it takes forever to build traffic -- unless you're Michelle Malkin or Wonkette who must have had internet faeries sprinkle magic traffic increasing pixie dust on their blogs to help them grow so fast....awwww, that was ungracious of me.
Michelle is well known, incredibly talented, & has built one of the best political blogs out there right off the bat. She deserves all the success she has had so far and more. And Wonkette is uh....well...hmmm...a lot of people, myself included, really enjoyed the nifty faux lesbian pics she did with blogger/prostitute Jessica Cutler. That was really...uhm...
Ok...moving on...
Do you want to know how much traffic I had after a year of doing 8-12 updates a day on RWN (I had different format back then, sort of like the one Daily Pundit has today)? 300 sets of eyeballs per day on average.
Today, I am averaging 6000 readers a day over the course of a month...Of course, that number would probably be higher if I got a link from the guys over at The Corner or if Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit noticed my existence again. Neither of those blogs has linked me in months and months, despite the fact that I link them all the time, ranked them as my #1 & #2 favorite blogs, & have nothing but good things to say about them, I can't buy a link from either of them. Where's the love fellas? That's all I'm saying. Where. Is. The. Love? (Look for an upcoming post on "link whoring" soon).
But still, I know you're probably going "Hawkins, you said 'My Sacrifice' was your favorite song of all-time and I simply don't trust any man who believes Creed made the best song in the history of music."
I admit, that's a fair point. So don't just take my word for it, listen to one Drew Curtis, the man who runs Fark, a page that has more than a million readers per day. Here's a slightly edited transcript of a conversation we had on ICQ, back in Feb of 2003...
Drew Curtis: All of 1999 we got 50,000 pageviews. These days we get 5,000,000 per week (**Note that the numbers are higher now**) those are no BS numbers either. Everytime I ask someone how many page views they get, they automatically multiply by 5-10 times
John Hawkins: 50,000 for the whole year? It was basically the same page back then too right?
Drew Curtis: Yup. Check out the archives, it's saved. Yeah 50k for the whole year. But think about it, why would a page written from scratch as someone's personal homepage be any higher? I thought 50k was a freakin avalanche.
John Hawkins: Oh -- I know -- I've been though it myself -- but a lot of people think they're going to create a web page and then boom -- two months later they're going to be pulling 10k people a day.
Drew Curtis: Yeah I think just about everyone does. I get emails from folks all day. If you don't stick to it for at least two years straight day in day out it won't take off.
So all you conservative bloggers out there, take Drew's advice. Stick to it for at least two years straight and contribute money to RWN...
Ok, Drew didn't actually say you should donate money to RWN, but he was probably thinking it. Even if he wasn't, he should have been, and besides, I must mention the Chewbacca Defense at this point...
Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk, but Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now, think about that. That does not make sense!
Why would a Wookiee — an eight foot tall Wookiee — want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense!
But more importantly, you have to ask yourself: what does that have to do with what we're talking about?
If it does not make sense, you should contribute money to RWN, and think about it later. I rest my case.
Oh...And,
"Remember that you will have to be very, very, good, for a very, very, long time, while working very, very, hard to promote your work and you will be very, very, underappreciated the whole time."
PS: This advice only applies to conservative bloggers. Any of you liberals who don't grow as fast as Wonkette? Just go ahead and cut your losses, quit blogging, and make giant puppet heads for the big "No War With Iran" protests that'll be going on right after W bombs the ayatollahs in his 2nd term. The Commies who run those protests need dupes like you to grow and thrive! So don't let them down!
August 03, 2004
Misc Commentary For August 3, 2004
-- This guy, Wesley Bono, has a unique take on the 1st Amendment...
"A farmer who acknowledged spreading 3 tons of manure along the route of a gay rights parade pleaded innocent Monday, saying he was exercising his constitutional right to free speech."
Here's a hint for farmer Bono, the First Amendment doesn't say anything about dumping manure on the street. Admit you made a mistake, pay to have the manure cleaned up, and hold up a sign next time like everybody else.
-- The names of the blogs that are going to be represented at the Republican National Convention are starting to trickle out. Their numbers include: INDC Journal, Power Line, WizBang!, Slant Point, Dean's World, Captain's Quarters, Blogs For Bush & A Small Victory.
Unfortunately, even though I received an invite, I won't be among them.
I was tempted to go just to make contacts and get interviews, but in the end, the 5 vacation days I would have ended up using and the prohibitive cost (a plane ticket to NY & back, a hotel, buying a lap top, etc, etc) were the deciding factors. Granted, I could have had a fund drive & asked for pledges, but I figured that if I had an extra 2 or 3 grand, I'd rather drop it on a computer or add it to my savings. Besides, I doubt if any news is going to be made at the convention. So, I'm not sure that I'm going to miss out on much...
-- The one and only Mark Steyn hammers home the truth about multilateralism and alliances...
"The Defense Secretary was using “success” in the multilateral-speak meaning of the word, which roughly translates into English as “failure”. The greatest of these many successes was the decision by the Alliance to expand its role in Afghanistan beyond Kabul to the country’s somewhat alarmingly autonomous regions. So the enlarged Nato mission ought to be great news, right?
Er, up to a point. After the Secretary-General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, put the squeeze on Nato’s 26 members, they reluctantly ponied up an extra 600 troops and three helicopters for Afghanistan. That averages out at 23.08 troops per country plus almost a ninth of a helicopter apiece. Credit where it’s due, the three Black Hawks all come from one country – Turkey. But it wants them back in six months’ time.
Now I very much like Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. I’ve met him a couple of times before his present eminence, and he’s one of the most thoughtful of European politicians – well disposed toward America, not into stringing along with Chirac and the other Europoseurs for the sake of it. But he finds himself presiding over a sham alliance. Theoretically, it has millions of conscript troops at its disposal. But it has no ability to project more than a few thousand out of area – ie, to any of the places anyone’s likely to need them in the years ahead.
In other words, if a military alliance means a press release and a black-tie banquet for Bush, Chirac, Schroder and co once a year, Nato works fine. If a military alliance means functioning armed forces capable of fighting side by side and killing the enemy, Nato is a post-modern joke.
I really, truly, mean no disrespect to our friends in the coalition, but everyone should be aware of what a military alliance actually entails these days. It's like a load being pulled by an American elephant, a British mule, and a horde of nations that have let their militaries atrophy down to the point that they're the equivalent of field mice. You may appreciate the help of the field mice, but do not forget how much of the load they are actually carrying...
-- Now this is a movie for the post 9/11 world...
"Wall Street Journal article that reveals details about Steven Spielberg's forthcoming, top-secret project about the tragic 1972 Munich Olympics.
WSJ reports that the film will be titled Vengeance and will star Eric Bana as an agent of the Mossad (Israel's secret service) who hunts down the Palestinians responsible for the murder of eleven Israeli athletes."
Israel Mossad agents roaming around the world wiping out Palestinian terrorists? I'm already there!
The Return Of Segregation At The University Of Colorado At Boulder?
A few decades ago in the US, bigots wanted to separate Americans by race because they didn't think white people should have to be around blacks. But today, we have politically correct nebbeches at the University of Colorado at Boulder trying to split Americans by race because they're afraid of what will happen if black kids have to be around whites...
"Students at the University of Colorado at Boulder can take the popular "School and Society" course on Fridays — as long as they're not white.
That particular section is reserved for "students of color," according to a course description. It is also open to those of any race who are first-generation college students. Other students can take the course, which is a requirement for education majors, but during a different period.
University officials say the restricted class offers minority students "a much safer and open environment" in which to discuss issues of race, gender and class. But some students say the course represents a disturbing throwback to the days of "separate but equal" education.
... The university began offering the race-restricted course last year as an experiment in response to the concerns of minority students, said Lorrie Shepard, dean of the School of Education.
"Often, a student of color would find they were the only nonwhite person in a given section, and ... very often, their class would turn to them whenever an issue of race was discussed," Miss Shepard told the Boulder Daily Camera. "They'd be asked if they agreed with a certain perspective or to defend a position. They'd be put on the spot in ways that made it feel like a hostile environment."
I could spend a couple of paragraphs riffing on all the things that are wrong with this sort of thinking, but Antonia Gaona, a Hispanic student who's suing over this class, has got it down pat...
"I'm frustrated with programs like this because they force students to identify themselves on the basis of race," Miss Gaona said. "This is something students my age are trying to get beyond, being identified on the basis of their skin color.
"It's like the university feels it needs to coddle minority students and have us work with students who only look like us, and that's not how the real world works," she added."
Hey Antonia, fight those creeps at the University of Colorado at Boulder who are treating you like a skin color instead of a person...and beat 'em. You're doing the right thing and I salute you...
Kerry Hires Edwards to Sue DNC Over 'Bounce' By Scott Ott
Democrat presidential candidate John Forbes Kerry today announced that he has retained attorney, and running mate, John Edwards to file suit against the Democrat National Committee (DNC) over injuries related to an alleged "post-convention bounce."
"We had received certain assurances from top DNC officials that this celebration of my client's nomination would result in a 10-15 point bounce in the presidential preference polls," said Mr. Edwards during a news conference on the steps of a Boston courthouse. "Bounce implies vigorous upward movement. But my client's current polling numbers look more like a 'bump' or even a 'dip'."
Mr. Edwards, who like his client is also a U.S. Senator, brought many of the gathered journalists to tears with his dramatic description of the plight of Mr. Kerry's popularity.
"I can hear John Kerry's popularity calling out to you from somewhere in the darkness," said Mr. Edwards. "A couple of weeks ago his popularity said, 'I'm fine." Just before the convention it said, 'I'm having a little bit of trouble but I'm doing okay.' During the convention speech, it said 'I'm having problems.' And after the convention John's popularity said, 'I need help.' But help was not on the way."
If you enjoyed this satire by Scott Ott, you can read more of his work at Scrappleface.
Americans Don't Like Soccer Because It's So Boring It Sucks Your Will To Live
Writer Michael Mandelbaum has produced a column called, "Why America hates (soccer)". Mandelbaum speculates that Americans dislike "footie" because...
-- Baseball, basketball, & football are already popular here
-- it's so similar to BASKETBALL (that's simply a bizarre argument)
-- the games end in draws too often.
Of course, this ignores the "elephant in the living room," perhaps because the pachyderm in question is conked out asleep & laying in a puddle of his own drool after being forced to watch a game of soccer.
Put quite simply, if there were a competition for the "most boring, least action packed sport on Earth," soccer would be a strong contender for the crown. I mean, almost every sport you can imagine has more going on than soccer. Baseball, golf, cricket, WNBA basketball, slow pitch softball, ping pong, freeze tag, foosball, you name it, it's all a thrill-a-minute rocket ride down the side of Mt. Everest compared to footie.
Soccer is like watching the "Blair Witch Project" for the sixth time, counting grains of sand on the beach, or trying to sing every verse of "37,000 bottles of beer on the wall". How all of these "soccer hooligans" can stay awake through an entire game, much less muster the energy to riot afterwards, is beyond me.
Moreover, soccer is such a tedious "slug race on a sheet of flypaper" sport, that the only enjoyment most Americans get out of it is knowing that when we win, the fact that we don't care is like a shiv to the heart of soccer fans from whiny, ungrateful, countries around the world who complain incessantly about our country.
That being said, isn't the real question: "Why the hell is soccer so popular?"
Most people seem to think it's because all you need is a ball and a few sticks to put in place for a goal to get a game going. Personally, I think it has to do with the fact that socialism helps turn people into zombies who enjoy dull, slow paced, effeminate games that may as well have been designed by the sort of knock-kneed milksops who think dodgeball is too competitive of a game for children to play.
So here's an alternative suggestion: try thumb wrestling or mercy tournaments. They're more exciting than "footie" and it'll help prepare you for life in the capitalist system instead of helping to turn you into a socialist weenie who actually knows something about David Beckham beyond the fact that he plays soccer.
PS: I was just kidding about everything except the parts where I emphasized how boring and lame soccer was.
August 02, 2004
Know Thy Enemy: Democrats By Frank J.
Who gave the Democrats a national convention? Well, before their crazy ideas can spread too far, I sent my crack research team to find all they can about the dreaded Crat’s of Dem.
FUN FACTS ABOUT DEMOCRATS
* Democrats chose the donkey as their symbol because the Democrat base smells as bad as one and has the same verbal skills. In the donkey's defense, it's smart enough to understand a butterfly ballot.
* Democrats are big into class warfare. They also are for gun control which has caused the deadliest firearms to be too expensive except for the rich to buy. So, if class warfare ever goes to blows, it won't last long.
* Though there are more registered Democrats, they don't vote as much as Republicans percentage-wise because of their tendency to be distracted by shiny things.
* Democrats have lost most of the men's vote because they're a bunch of girlie men. Don't tell them that, though, because they'll cry.
* Democrats are always trying to get into your wallet to spend money on their wacky ideas. If you see a Democrat near your wallet, hit him on the head with a rolled up newspaper. You have to catch him in the act or he'll never learn.
* While the Democratic leadership is currently devoid of any real leadership or substance, they may try and make up for that with important-looking hair.
* Some Democrats may have served in Vietnam. You can find out which ones by seeing who tells you that fact over and over and over.
* And over and over and over.
* Many Democrats intensely hate Bush because it's easier than confronting the irrelevancy of their ideas. It’s funny to dump a bucket of cold water on them and hear them blame Haliburton.
* If your plagued by Democrats, they can be scared away with snakes, guns, or concepts of individual responsibility.
* Bill Clinton, who cost the Democrats their majorities in the House, Senate, and Governorships while he was president, is still venerated by Democrats because... uh... I guess they're just frick'n retards.
* Democrats will often visit maternity wards and shake their fists angrily at all those who escaped the wrath of choice.
* Democrats are secretly trying to destroy capitalism. If you see a Democrat near capitalism and looking suspicious, immediately report him to the police.
* In a fight between Democrats and Aquaman, Aquaman would be slurred by an NAACP ad that links him to lynching.
* The Democrats have built a giant statue in tribute to Michael Moore which eyes glow red, shoots fire out of its ass, and constantly demands tributes of ham.
* Or maybe that is just Michael Moore wearing a gray sweat suit. Whatever it is, don't let it fall on you because it's heavy.
* The foreign policy ideals of the Democrats involved waiting for the might France to approve anything they plan on doing. This should allow them to snap into action about the time half the earth is destroyed by radical Islamists.
* Every time someone votes for a Democrat, baby Jesus cries.
If you enjoyed this satire by Frank J, you can see more of his work at IMAO.
Misc Commentary For August 2, 2004
-- Since I was a big fan of M. Night Shyamalan's "Signs," I was looking forward to seeing "The Village" this week-end. So was it another world beating "Signs" or a good, but not great movie like "Unbreakable"? Well, unfortunately, while the movie wasn't a stinker, it was kind of slow and I had basically the same reaction to it that my parents had to "From Dusk Til Dawn", which was "I liked the movie until evrybody turned into vampires"! While there were no vampires in this one, there were some twists of that magnitude and I liked the movie less & less after each one happened. So let's just call it a thumbs-in-the-middle, perhaps leaning slightly skywards because I thought Bryce Dallas Howard's character, Ivy Walker, was just about the most likeable female character I've ever seen in a movie.
-- I hadn't seen any poll numbers on the first ladies, but Deborah Orin managed to find numbers somewhere...
"Mrs. Bush is rated 66 percent favorable and 12 percent unfavorable — a 5-to-1 positive ratio — while Heinz Kerry is rated 27 percent favorable and 26 percent unfavorable."
-- More poll numbers, this time from John Tierney at the New York Times...
"But do journalists really want John Kerry to defeat George W. Bush? It depends where they work and how you ask the question, at least according to the unscientific survey we conducted last weekend during a press party at the convention. We got anonymous answers from 153 journalists, about a third of them based in Washington.
When asked who would be a better president, the journalists from outside the Beltway picked Mr. Kerry 3 to 1, and the ones from Washington favored him 12 to 1. Those results jibe with previous surveys over the past two decades showing that journalists tend to be Democrats, especially the ones based in Washington. Some surveys have found that more than 80 percent of the Beltway press corps votes Democratic."
What liberal bias, right?
-- John Kerry is a billionaire with "five homes and vacation getaways across the country valued at nearly $33 million" and a wife who's so pampered and out of touch with ordinary people that she doesn't even know what chili is, and yet he's presenting himself as a populist who's going to protect the "little guys" from...well...other people like him I guess.
Is that an "only in America" story or what?
Was The Democratic Convention The Turning Point Of The 2004 Election?
Bush strategist Matthew Dowd predicted Kerry would get a 15 point bounce from the convention. Terry McAuliffe predicted an 8-10 point bounce. But, at the last RWN blogger symposium, we didn't expect to see Kerry get that sort of bump...
"John Hawkins: So Matthew Dowd with the Bush campaign predicted Kerry will get a 15 point bump from the Democratic convention. You buy that?
Donald Luskin: 15 at the convention? Hard to believe. That would be severe.
Cassandra: I don't think people are as into conventions as they used to be.
John Hawkins: Well I believe the big 3 networks are only going to give both conventions an hour a night during prime time. So I suspect they're not going to get the usual bounce.
Cassandra: I don't think there's going to be a repeat of the legendary Clinton bounce.
John Hawkins: I'm going guess a 5 point bounce for the Dem convention.
Chris Muir: 3 points."
Ahem...Bloggers (1) -- The Pros (0)
From Newsweek: "Coming out of the Democratic National Convention in Boston, Sen. John Kerry now holds a seven-point lead over President George W. Bush (49 percent to 42 percent) in a three-way race with independent Ralph Nader (3 percent), according to the latest NEWSWEEK poll The poll was taken over two nights, both before and after Kerry's acceptance speech. Respondents who were queried after Kerry's Thursday night speech gave the Democrat a ten-point lead over Bush. Three weeks ago, Kerry’s lead was three points.
Kerry’s four-point “bounce” is the smallest in the history of the NEWSWEEK poll."
From a USA TODAY / CNN / Gallup Poll: "In the survey, taken Friday and Saturday, the Democratic ticket of Kerry and John Edwards trailed the Republican ticket of Bush and Dick Cheney 50% to 46% among likely voters, with independent candidate Ralph Nader at 2%.
Before the convention, the two were essentially tied, with Kerry at 47%, Bush at 46%."
You're going to hear left-wingers spin these numbers every way you can imagine. They're going to go off on tangents about internal poll numbers, tout every gain they made in any battleground state, come up with anything they can, but these numbers are a DISASTER for the Kerry campaign.
Just look back at the last few bounces Democratic challengers have received...
Jimmy Carter in 1976: 16 points
Walter Mondale in 1984: 16 points
Michael Dukakis in 1988: 11 points
Bill Clinton in 1992: 30 points
Al Gore in 2000: 19 points
John Kerry in 2004: +4 points to -5 points
Not only was Kerry's bounce (if he got one at all) anemic, you have to remember that George Bush still has a money advantage & has his OWN CONVENTION coming up in September that will give him a bump, quite possibly a bigger one than Kerry received. Folks, this should be the apex of John Kerry's campaign and according to USA Today, he's BEHIND.
My guess is that when story of the 2004 election is written, it's entirely possible that the last week will be considered the turning point of the campaign, the very moment when the Kerry campaign started into a downward spiral it never really recovered from.
And why? At the convention they didn't...
...really grab onto to any big issues and make them theirs other than stem cell research which isn't going to swing a lot of votes in November.
...launch as many salvos as you'd expect at George W. Bush because, by design, they were trying to play up how "bipartisan" they were.
...have the most effective cast of characters speaking. I'm not sure the average American is going to get terribly jazzed up about a party that trots out liberals like Michael Moore's buddy Jimmy Carter, Al Sharpton, & Howard Dean as speakers....and quite frankly, having Bill Clinton on hand probably didn't help much either in large swaths of the country.
...effectively refute the attack ads the Republicans have launched that paint John Kerry as a flip-flopping, Massachusetts liberal, who's weak on defense, has an undistinguished record in the Senate, and will raise your taxes (incidentally, the attacks work so well because they're true).
While the Dems did talk a lot about defense, that's what it came across as -- talk -- and for good reason. If the GOP came out at their convention and claimed they were the party that really wanted to work with the UN, sign international treaties, and make friends with the French, would anyone buy into that? Of course not, because it wouldn't match the Republican record.
The same goes for the Democrats; they're not a hawkish party, everybody knows it, and no matter how much time they spend talking about how tough they're going to be on terrorism, people aren't going to believe them until the put the rubber to the road.
In the end, I think voters are looking for something more in a President than a guy who fought for four months in Vietnam, promises to suck up to Europe, and "isn't George Bush". Unfortunately, even after the convention, that's all John Kerry seems to be offering.
The Best Quotes From Thomas Sowell's 'The Vision Of The Anointed
I recently finished Thomas Sowell's magnificent book, "The Vision of the Anointed" and I'd give it my highest recommendation. After you take a look at these quotes that I prepared, go out, buy the book, and read it ASAP. It will have a really help you understand how liberals think...(Cont)
|
