Back to School

I am back in school now at Arizona State University West campus full time. I also am working as a reading tutor at a local school.....plus doing an independent study in painting for a solo show this Fall.

Needless to say, I will only be blogging every once in awhile here. Not that too many people read this blog! But it is for me, I suppose.
I am taking a class called "Ethnic Women Writers" and as you can tell by the title, it is a feminist class.

My professor is feminist as well. Not so much the "man-hater" as I thought she would be, but she is feminist none-the-less.

We have to read several books written by women who have dealt with social issues like spousal abuse, slavery, homosexual discrimination, sexual molestation and abuse, etc. Sounds like fun reading, huh??

Well, so far, the books are proving to be interesting. I am not much of a fiction fan, so I am glad the we are reading autobiographies. It helps me to learn to write better when I read how others write about their lives and experiences. It should be a good class, if I can survive all the feminist jargon and babbling....sheesh. Women are great, but we are not that great! I love men and everything about them. I couldn't imagine a world without men. I understand that men are the dominant sex, but I think they have come a long way too...baby.

I also am taking many art classes as this is my final year as an art major. Those of you out there starting your college careers right out of high school, my advice to you is: STAY IN SCHOOL and GRADUATE in four years.

It is SOOOO hard to go back when you are in your thirties. I have been working on this degree for 19 years. No joke! It has been so hard, but worth it.

So stick with it no matter how hard it is. It does get better when you finally reach your senior year. It is all downhill from there, but not in enjoyment. It actually becomes more enjoyable. So hang in there through all those freshmen required clases.....

I have to make a video for one art class. It will be about ASU West and our campus activities. The final videos from our class will be broadcast as a commercial for the school on a local cable channel. That will be a challenge, but I have made a video last Fall and it all should come back to me.

The independent study will be about portraits. I am planning on painting many portraits done in different styles. Mostly abstract expressionism. Should be a fun challenge. To view my previous work, go to my web site: www.artbyruth.com


So, if I don't blog much, you will know why!

Word from a Marine in Iraq

A very good and well written article by a Marine helicopter pilot in Iraq. Not just because I agree with him....but because he is an eye witness to what is happening there.....from the NYT:

"The battle has been surreal, focused largely in the cemetery, where families continue burying their dead even as I swoop in low overhead to make sure they aren't sneaking in behind our forces' flanks, or pulling a surface-to-air missile out of the coffin. Children continue playing soccer in the dirt fields next door, and locals wave to us as we fly over their rooftops in preparation for gun runs into the enemy's positions."

"....I've not been deluded into thinking that we came here to free the Iraqis. That is indeed the icing on the cake, but I came here to prevent the still active "grave and gathering threat" from congealing into something we wouldn't be able to stop.

Weapons of mass destruction or no, I'm glad that we ended the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein.

My brother and other American jet pilots risked their lives for years patrolling the "no fly zone" (and occasionally making page A-12 in the newspaper if they dropped a bomb on a threatening missile battery). The former dictator's attempt to assassinate George H. W. Bush, use of chemical weapons on his own people, and invasion of a neighboring country are just a few of the other reasons I believe we should have acted sooner. He eventually would have had the means to cause America great harm - no doubt in my mind.

The pre-emptive doctrine of the current administration will continue to be debated long after I'm gone, but one fact stands for itself: America has not been hit with another catastrophic attack since 9/11. I firmly believe that our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq are major reasons that we've had it so good at home. Building a "fortress America" is not only impractical, it's impossible. Prudent homeland security measures are vital, to be sure, but attacking the source of the threat remains essential.

"When critics of the war say their advocacy is on behalf of those of us risking our lives here, it's a type of false patriotism. I believe that when Americans say they "support our troops," it should include supporting our mission, not just sending us care packages. They don't have to believe in the cause as I do; but they should not denigrate it. That only aids the enemy in defeating us strategically.

Michael Moore recently asked Bill O'Reilly if he would sacrifice his son for Falluja. A clever rhetorical device, but it's the wrong question: this war is about Des Moines, not Falluja. This country is breeding and attracting militants who are all eager to grab box cutters, dirty bombs, suicide vests or biological weapons, and then come fight us in Chicago, Santa Monica or Long Island. Falluja, in fact, was very close to becoming a city our forces could have controlled, and then given new schools and sewers and hospitals, before we pulled back in the spring.

Now, essentially ignored, it has become a Taliban-like state of Islamic extremism, a terrorist safe haven. We must not let the same fate befall Najaf or Ramadi or the rest of Iraq.
No, I would not sacrifice myself, my parents would not sacrifice me, and President Bush would not sacrifice a single marine or soldier simply for Falluja. Rather, that symbolic city is but one step toward a free and democratic Iraq, which is one step closer to a more safe and secure America.

I miss my family, my friends and my country, but right now there is nowhere else I'd rather be. I am a United States Marine."

Read the whole article...it is great. (via Instanpundit)

Weekly News

LBJ and John Kerry have a lot in common........a questionable Silver Star, short service in a war, and a camera brought along to record their actions during wartime ...maybe for a future run for President?? Read the article here:

"He wore the Silver Star in his lapel all his life, up to and through the presidency," said Robert Caro, a historian and Johnson biographer. "When he was campaigning in Texas and he wanted to draw people's attention to it, he would actually do this (with his lapel) when he was giving a speech," said Caro, demonstrating how Johnson would grab his lapel with the Silver Star and flap it.


After Japan's sneak attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, Johnson, then a lanky lawmaker from Texas, became the first member of Congress to enter active duty.
"The minute WWII began, he was a very ambitious politician, and he understood if he was going to run for some higher office down the road, he needed to have some kind of military service," said Robert Dallek, another Johnson biographer. "So he volunteered and became a naval officer. He's in Washington as a reserve naval officer, and he goes to see (President Franklin D.) Roosevelt and convinces him to send him on an inspection tour of the southwest Pacific."
Rare home movies, from a camera Johnson carried on that tour, show Roosevelt's young protege in Australia, where he met MacArthur, who allowed him to go on a single bombing mission as an observer.












This is a great article, from Truth Laid Bear blog, complete with a graph to show how the 527 groups have spent millions bashing the President as compared to the $100,00 spent by the Swiftboat Veterans....(from Instapundit)

Samples:

Swift Boat Veterans for TruthReceipts: $ 158,750OpenSecrets.org Description: "SBVT represents Vietnam Swift boat veterans who are critical of Democrat John Kerry's decision to make his military service a major part of his campaign for president. The group questions Kerry's record in Vietnam and denounces his anti-war activities following his military service. The group's donors include some major Republican contributors."

America Coming TogetherReceipts: $26,905,450 OpenSecrets.org Description: "One of the leading Democratic interest groups dedicated to defeating President Bush in November. Run by longtime Democratic operatives and financed in part by wealthy Democratic donors, the group plans a massive voter mobilization effort in 17 battleground states."
MoveOn.orgReceipts: $9,086,102 OpenSecrets.org Description: "Begun in 1998 to protest the impeachment of President Clinton, the group has become a powerful political force since then. Its political action committee, the MoveOn PAC, spends millions of dollars to support the election of Democratic candidates. The MoveOn.org Voter Fund is raising soft money, which may be contributed in unlimited amounts, for TV ads in key battleground states that are critical of President Bush."

I can see why the Kerry camp is worried about the Swiftboat Vets......

************************************************************************************
So, did the Left ever question Bob Dole's service and medals during the 1996 campaign?? This from NRO's Jim Geraghty explains......

YES, THE LEFT QUESTIONED BOB DOLE'S MEDALS IN 1996
Let's not hear any more talk about how high-minded the left was about Bob Dole and his medals eight years ago. The Nation argued that Bob Dole got his first Purple Heart for a self-inflicted wound. Robert Ellis, who, like Dole 10th Mountain Division in World War II, sought to debunk the "myth" of Dole's heroism:

"The truth about Dole's war record is considerably less than awe-inspiring. Yet the myth endures, and with the candidate running on the contrast between his and Clinton's military record[WHAT CLINTON MILITARY RECORD???], his campaign isn't eager to give a more accurate account. Dole, at the behest of his handlers, is less reticent about his service than in the past, but he mainly speaks about his wound and rehabilitation.
He has passed up several opportunities to correct the exaggerated versions in biographies, and in the case of his self-wounding has even approved a sanitized account in which his maladroitly hurled grenade goes unnoted. Journalists continue to portray him as a hero, winner of two Bronze Stars. Joe Klein, for example, writes in Newsweek that Dole knows "what guns do. He also knows what politicians do, which is rarely anything quite so dramatic as leading an army into battle." Such attempts to make political capital out of Dole's war service go beyond the respect due him for the role he played as a soldier with the 10th Mountain Division."

A presidential candidate's fellow veteran makes claims, charging the candidate wasn't the hero his party says he was? Unprecedented!

The bias here is so painfully obvious that it sickens me. I am glad that Bob Dole is coming forward to question John Kerry's record.

***********************************************************************************

It's been a tough August for John Kerry.......this from Chris Lynch's "A Large Regular" via Instapundit:

Highlights:

Aug. 1 - Normally a candidate gets a "bounce" in the polls immediately after his convention - not so for Kerry.

Aug. 2 - Kerry advisor says Kerry will make world safer by giving Iran nuclear fuel and hope that they use it for good. Sane people everywhere say, "Are you friggin' kidding me?" Meanwhile the Kerry campaign suffers some guilt from association after Howard Dean questions the timing of terror alerts in New York - claiming they could be politically motivated. Again, sane people everywhere ask, "Are you friggin' kidding me?"

Aug. 3 - Swift Boat Veterans for Truth explain their version of the real story of John Kerry's military history - this picture was interesting

Aug. 4 - The Kerry campaign and DNC lawyers threaten legal action against any stations that air the Swift Boat ads. Instead of addressing the allegations made by the vets - Kerry decides that threat of legal action would be better. The campaign slogan is officially amended to "Bring it on.....and we'll sue!" Meanwhile Senator Kerry announces:
I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side and lives up to American values in history.

Aug. 5 - Kerry tells reporters that he would not have waited around like Bush did for 7 minutes on 9/11. He states:
"Had I been reading to children and had my top aide whispered in my ear, 'America is under attack,' I would have told those kids very politely and nicely that the president of the United States had something that he needed to attend to -- and I would have attended to it." This claim comes back to bite him in the ass when his actual reaction to the morning of 9/11 is revealed - over 40 minutes of not being able to think or act.

Aug. 6 - Former New York Mayor - Rudy Giuliani notes that it is sad that a man running for the president seems to be getting his clues from Michael Moore and Rudy adds for good measure:
John Kerry is an indecisive candidate [with] an inconsistent position on the War on Terror, who voted against funding for our troops and who cannot give a clear answer on his position concerning the decision to remove Saddam HusseinOn the Swift Boat front - the now controversial Michael Kranish pens a piece for the Boston Globe that claims that George Elliot has recanted his criticism of John Kerry. George Elliot responds under oath saying "I said no such things."

Aug. 7 - Kerry's wife Theresa contradicts Kerry's claim that the President did not act properly on the morning of 9/11 by saying:

"I think the president behaved correctly in terms of being quiet amidst stunning news like that in a classroom of kids," she told the host of MSNBC's "Hardball With Chris Matthews" during an interview before the Democratic National Convention last month. "You know, what can you do? It takes you a couple of minutes to digest what you have just heard. And then he was . . . not in his White House and in his office with all of his people. He was in the school in Florida."

It gets pretty bad when even your own wife disagrees with what you have said!!! Read the whole article..it is great fun!

************************************************************************************

It just Keeps Getting Worse and Worse.....

This article, from the Village Voice writer Sydney Schanberg regarding Kerry's cover-up of surviving POWs and MIAs still in Vietnam after the war, is devistating.......

"Senator John Kerry, a decorated battle veteran, was courageous as a navy lieutenant in the Vietnam War. But he was not so courageous more than two decades later, when he covered up voluminous evidence that a significant number of live American prisoners—perhaps hundreds—were never acknowledged or returned after the war-ending treaty was signed in January 1973."

"......In the end, the fact that Senator Kerry covered up crucial evidence as committee chairman didn't seem to bother too many Massachusetts voters when he came up for re-election—or the recent voters in primary states. So I wouldn't predict it will be much of an issue in the presidential election come November. It seems there is no constituency in America for missing Vietnam P.O.W.'s except for their families and some veterans of that war.
A year after he issued the committee report, on the night of January 26, 1994, Kerry was on the Senate floor pushing through a resolution calling on President Clinton to lift the 19-year-old trade embargo against Vietnam. In the debate, Kerry belittled the opposition, saying that those who still believed in abandoned P.O.W.'s were perpetrating a hoax. "This process," he declaimed, "has been led by a certain number of charlatans and exploiters, and we should not allow fiction to cloud what we are trying to do here."
Kerry's resolution passed, by a vote of 62 to 38. Sadly for him, the passage of ten thousand resolutions cannot make up for wants in a man's character."

Excellent article. Read the whole thing.

Hypocrasy at its Worst.....

John F. Kerry filed a complaint to the FEC to stop the Swiftboat Vets' ad........can you imagine what the press would be saying if the Bush campaign had filed a complaint against that Moveon. org "Bush is Hitler" ad????

"The complaint was filed against Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. It states that "based on recent press reports and SBVT's own statements there is overwhelming evidence that SBVT is coordinating its expenditures on advertising and other activities designed to influence the presidential election with the Bush-Cheney campaign."
Members of that group have denied any coordination with the GOP campaign, as have members of the Bush-Cheney team."

Notice they don't say that one of the Vets in the ad worked for John McCain:

"During the 2000 presidential primaries, Galanti was the Virginia Chair of Senator John McCain's presidential bid. "John is the only guy I know who is more positive than I am," says Galanti. "He did quite well in Virginia especially considering that the campaign was composed of an all-volunteer Army of political non-professionals"!

Galanti's military decorations include the Silver Star, Two Legions of Merit for combat, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Bronze Star for combat, nine Air Medals, the Navy Commendation Medal for combat and two Purple Hearts."

-From the Mudville Gazzette

I suppose that means that the Swiftboats are in connection to John McCain??? We'll see if Kerry's camp touches that one.......

Friday News....

This from NRO.....it states that the rich are paying more taxes since the Bush tax cuts were implemented. That surely goes against the Bush critics who are saying that the tax cuts went strictly to the rich.....

"One of the inconvenient facts for the foes of the Bush tax cuts is that the percentage of total taxes paid by the rich rose after the economic stimulus plan was put into effect. This consequence of the Bush tax cuts is highly damaging to the case by the Bush-haters that his tax cuts disproportionately benefit Halliburton executives and Bill Gates. Moreover, the Bush tax cuts took some 2 million low-income taxpayers off the tax roles entirely, so it's hard to argue that working families didn't get a financial benefit."

One final point: The CBO study confirms that the rich carry the bulk of the tax burden on their shoulders. The CBO estimate says that the share of income taxes paid by the richest 20 percent of earners fell from 82.5 percent to 82.1 percent in 2004. The report also states that the top 10 percent of earners will pay “only” 66.7 percent of 2004 taxes, with the top 1 percent paying 32.3 percent. Fully 80 percent of Americans pay less than 18 percent of total income taxes. Not even Al Sharpton could look at this data and say the rich are getting a free ride.
How much exactly does the Kerry-Edwards team want the rich to pay? Seventy percent? Eighty percent? One hundred percent? Does the Left want rich people like Barbara Streisand, George Soros, Teresa Heinz, and Ted Kennedy to pay all the taxes? Hey, now there’s an idea . . . " -Stephen Moore

Read the whole article...it's great!

Bob Novak seems to think the news will help Kerry....

"In the long run, however, the trouble with Holtz-Eakin is economic rather than political. His analysis is static, a zero-sum game that plays into Kerry's hands. It does not score the dynamic impact of the Bush tax cuts in not only promoting the economic recovery but also accelerating the ascension of Americans upward through the tax brackets. The study does not suggest that taxpayers in the top 20 percent are not the same today as they were in 2000."

Rep. Bill Thomas, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and star of the conference call, concluded from those numbers that ''the system is more progressive'' because of the Bush tax cuts. Thomas then explained to the journalists that ''progressive'' means the more you make, the higher percentage of taxes you pay. "

We'll see what happens at the RNC.........all I can say is that if the rich pay the most taxes, then they deserve a tax break. They will re-invest that extra money or spend it, which benefits the economy.


************************************************************************************
From Deborah Orin at NY Post:

"Their online dialogue is punctuated with questions about why the "mainstream media" have been mostly ignoring this story — and why the 13 pro-Kerry vets are automatically assumed to have more credibility than 264 anti-Kerry vets.

Just imagine the coverage if 264 vets who served with Bush in the Texas Air National Guard made similar charges. For those bloggers, this story has become a test of the mainstream media's credibility — and its liberal anti-Bush bias."

It makes my head spin when I think of how the media would be covering this if it were about Bush lying about his time in the TANG.

*******************************************************************************

From Swiftboats for Truth web site:

"In addition, Senator Kerry closed the Democratic National Convention with a story in which he claimed that five of the boats fled on March 13 after a mine went off and he came back. His campaign is now admitting that he fled and the rest stayed.
Attacking our organization does not respond to the facts that occurred in Vietnam. Senator Kerry says that he has learned to charge into an ambush in connection with this, instead he is fleeing down the river from the facts."

All John Kerry has to do is state facts to support his claim..... yet all he and his campaign are doing is spewing out ad hominems. Informal fallacies imply a lack of argument. Read John O'Neill's entire statement.

*************************************************************************

Duncan Currie over at Weekly Standard has a good article about how many first time voters are pro-life......

"On abortion, Pace Poll researchers slice the new voter demographic into four groups. There are those who believe "abortions should be legal and generally available" (21 percent); those who feel "regulation of abortion is necessary, although it should remain legal in many circumstances" (23 percent); those who say "abortion should be legal only in the most extreme cases, such as to save the life of the mother, incest, or rape" (41 percent); and those who think "all abortions should be made illegal" (13 percent). The survey shows that, essentially, 44 percent of new voters are pro-choice while 54 percent are pro-life. Among first-time Latino voters, pro-lifers outnumber pro-choicers 61 percent to 34 percent; among blacks, the pro-life/pro-choice breakdown is 59 percent/42 percent. Self-described "moderates" similarly tend to be more pro-life (52 percent) than pro-choice (45 percent). "

Interesting news indeed.........

************************************************************************************

And Now for Something Completely Different.....

A friend sent this to me.....it is so funny!

She claims that a man can be caught by the same methods mentioned here:

"They set a trap using as bait some doughnuts, honey and two cans of Rainier Beer. It worked, and the bear was captured for relocation."


I think she is right!

The TRUTH About Jane and John

"I would think that if you understood what communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees that we should someday become communist." -Jane Fonda, Michigan State University on November 22, 1969

Jane in Hanoi So many young people born in the 70's may only know Jane Fonda from her movies and exercise videos. I was a HUGE fan of hers when I was a liberal Democrat. I thought she was a strong example for young women. I loved the movie "Klute" and even owned a copy of it on video.

I am afraid that most young women today will never know the truth about Jane Fonda because the Liberal media has done such a great job at covering up her visit to the North Vietnamese camps during the Vietnam War.

In the book I just finished reading, "Reckless Disregard" by Robert Patterson, he brings to light the trip Jane took to the North Vietnamese camps in Hanoi and what she did there.

Things Hanoi Jane did while visiting the enemy:

1972- While American armed forces were being killed on the battlefields of Vietnam, Fonda visited Hanoi and had her picture taken sitting among the North Vietnamese. She wore a North Vietnamese helmut while sitting on an anti-aircraft gun pretending to shoot down an American jet.

She made radio broadcasts and films in Hanoi specifically designed to affect morale of the American troops. These braodcasts were used to encourage the Viet Cong as well. She told them to continue their struggle against America.

"I am speaking to the US servicemen, I don't know what your officers tell you....

but [your] weapoms are illegal and...the men who are ordering you to use

these weapons are war criminals according to international law.

In the past,in Germany and Japan, men who committed these kinds of crimes were tried and executed."

She returned home wearing a necklace given to her by the enemy. It was made from the melted parts of an American b-52 bomber shot down over Hanoi. Imagine you are a family member whose loved one was on that plane. And there is Jane Fonda wearing that necklace with pride.

It sickens me.

After returning home, she told the media that our prisoners were safe and being treated fairly. I found this information at this web site:

"When Jane Fonda was in Hanoi, I was asked by the camp communist political officer if I would be willing to meet with her. I said yes, for I would like to tell her about the real treatment we POWs were receiving, which was far different from the treatment purported by the North Vietnamese, and parroted by Jane Fonda, as 'humane and lenient.' Because of this, I spent three days on a rocky floor on my knees with outstretched arms with a piece of steel re-bar placed on my hands, and beaten with a bamboo cane every time my arms dipped."

"Jane Fonda had the audacity to say that the POWs were lying about our torture and treatment. Now ABC is allowing Barbara Walters to honor Jane Fonda in her feature "100 Years of Great Women." Shame on the Disney Company. "

Fonda's response when the released POW's contradicted her claims:

Fonda said the idea that the POWs she had met in Vietnam had been tortured was "laughable," claiming: "These were not men who had been tortured. These were not men who had been starved. These were not men who had been brainwashed." The POWs who said they had been tortured were "exaggerating, probably for their own self-interest," she asserted. She told audiences that "Never in the history of the United States have POWs come home looking like football players. These football players are no more heroes than Custer was. They're military careerists and professional killers" who are "trying to make themselves look self-righteous, but they are war criminals according to law." [http://www.snopes.com/military/fonda.asp]

If you do a Google search, you will find many more of these stories.

So, why am I writing about Hanoi Jane here on my blog??

Because Presidential Candidate John Kerry stood up with Jane Fonda and counted himself among her supporters.

In September 1970, John Kerry joined with Fonda and actor Donald Sutherland (her "Klute" co-star) and many other political and Hollywood celebrities on a so called "rapid American withdrawal" campaign. This lovely event was called the "F>ck the Army" tour, sort of a perverse USO tour. It was performed outside of military bases across the United States. Michael Moore can't hold a candle to Jane Fonda, that's for sure.

On these tours, she displayed disgruntled vets. Sort of like what was seen in "Forest Gump" movie starring Tom Hanks. She was the primary bankroller for Vietnam Vets Against the War, John Kerry's group. She had met with communists in 1967 and began her tirade against the war.

Freedom of speech was one of the many freedoms our soldiers were fighting for then and now, but what Ms. Fonda was doing was aiding and abetting the enemy. It is called: TREASON.

And yet, to this day, she has never been charged. Instead, she has been praised.

And John Kerry, to this day, has never come out and denounced his nor her actions back in 1972. The "Winter Soldier Investigation" was his biggest moment. He and Fonda used this "investigation" to undermine our efforts in Vietnam and to cause uprising here in the US.

It was found later that most of the tesimony of the "Vietnam Vets" could no be corroborated, though, and many were found to be frauds.

In the awesome book, "Stolen Valor" by BG Burkett, it was revealed that the "wintesses" were lying for effect. The documentary film of the proceedings was produced by a man, Al Hubbard, who claimed to be a Vietnam Vet. He had served in the military, he had not been the Air Force officer he claimed to be. Isn't it a federal crime to impersonate an officer??

Kerry and Hubbard went on "Meet the Press" together to denounce the war.

Then there was "Dewey Canyon III" in which many Vietnam Vets marched to the National Mall carrying the Viet Cong flag and other flags supporting Communist countries like Cuba, China, and North Korea. They spilled red paint on the steps of the Capitol. Their star speaker was John Forbes Kerry.

While Kerry was speaking at this event, American servicemen were being tortured in the infamous Hanoi Hilton. Retired rear admiral Jeremiah Denton was one of those servicemen:

"When Kerry joined me in the Senate, I already knew about his record of defamatory remarks and behavior criticizing U.S. policy in Vietnam and the conduct of our military personnel there. I had learned in North Vietnamese prisons how much harm such statements caused.
To me, his remarks and behavior amounted to giving aid and comfort to our Vietnamese and Soviet enemies. So I was not surprised when his subsequent overall voting pattern in the Senate was consistently detrimental to our national security.
Considering his demonstrated popularity during the Democratic primaries, I earnestly hope the American people will soberly consider Kerry's qualifications for the pres idency in light of his position and record on both our cultural war at home and on national security issues.
To put it bluntly, John Kerry exemplifies the very reasons that I switched to the Republican Party. Like the majority in his political party, he has proven by his words and actions that his list of priorities -- his ideas on what most needs to be done to improve this country -- are almost opposite to my own."

Read his entire statement. It is important.


Is Vietnam and that era relevant to what is happening today? Some Kerry supporters will say no. Others will say YES because they compare the War in Iraq to Vietnam. John Kerry himself brought up Vietnam throughout his campaign leading up to the Democratic National Convention ultimately culminating with his speech there. So, Vietnam is once again in the forefront.

I consider this to be a Godsend. All that John Kerry did after Vietnam is more important than anything he did while in Vietnam. He provided aid and comfort to our enemy. He stood alongside and supported (and received support from ) a treasonous woman named Jane Fonda. Americans need to know of his actions before they vote on November 2, 2004.

Had George W. Bush made his 6 year service to the Texas Air National Guard the center of his campaign, then his actions would also be fair game.

John Kerry has done this to himself. He chose to stand up and by Jane Fonda while American servicemen were being killed on the battlefields and tortured by the enemy while they used his speeches for brainwashing.

As J.F. Kelly put it so bluntly..........

"There is no question that John Kerry earned his decorations and that he put his life at risk in the service of his country. There is no doubt in my mind, moreover, that he has the intelligence to serve as president. But there is also no doubt in my mind that his anti-war activities while our troops were still fighting, dying and being tortured in filthy Vietnam prisons were despicable.
For that reason, even aside from his anti-defense voting record in the Senate, he is one ex-shipmate that I could never support as commander-in-chief of the armed forces."

Commander Kelly was the XO of the USS Gridley and commanded John Forbes Kerry from 1967-68.


Know the facts before you vote.

Cartoon

This cartoon by my husband. The terrorists are happy John Kerry has no time for terror briefings!!

Iraqi Soccer Team....Already Losers

Now I cannot cheer for the Iraqi Soccer Team...not for what they said about the President.....but because they claim that the insurgents are not "terrorists" and they would join them in the fight against our troops if they were not in Athens.

"To a man, members of the Iraqi Olympic delegation say they are glad that former Olympic committee head Uday Hussein, who was responsible for the serial torture of Iraqi athletes and was killed four months after the U.S.-led coalition invaded Iraq in March 2003, is no longer in power.

Here it comes...the ever present "but...."

But they also find it offensive that Bush is using their team for his own gain when they do not support his administration's actions in Iraq. "My problems are not with the American people," says Iraqi soccer coach Adnan Hamad. "They are with what America has done in Iraq: destroy everything. The American army has killed so many people in Iraq. What is freedom when I go to the [national] stadium and there are shootings on the road?"

Can you say, "ungrateful"????

What a shame. I say, let's put these guys on the firing end of a AK47 in the hands of a United States Marine in Fallujah. ....but I digress.

That Bush Ad....Nails It!

In the newest Bush ad, the announcer claims that John Kerry hasn't attended over 76% of the Senate Intelligence Committee meetings.....and yet Kerry claims he takes our intelligence and the War on Terror seriously.

This article pretty much shows that the Bush ad is correct!

Summary: "A Bush-Cheney '04 ad released Aug. 13 accuses Kerry of being absent for 76% of the Senate Intelligence Committee's public hearings during the time he served there. The Kerry campaign calls the ad "misleading," so we checked, and Bush is right.

Official records show Kerry not present for at least 76% of public hearings held during his eight years on the panel, and possibly 78% (the record of one hearing is ambiguous).

Kerry points out that most meetings of the Intelligence Committee are closed and attendance records of those meetings aren't public, hinting that his attendance might have been better at the non-public proceedings. But Kerry could ask that his attendance records be made public, and hasn't."

Read the whole article. It is great.

Kerry Supports the Troops??

"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."

-Senator John Kerry, March 16, 2004.

In his speech to the VFW in Ohio yesterday, John Kerry spoke about how he supports the US military and admires them for their service.

But his record says something completely different:

In 1991: Kerry voted to cut the defense budget by 2 percent and to shift these funds to social programs. [Charles R. Smith, "Kerry's Real Defense Record", Newsmax.com, March 4, 2004]

In 1992: Kerry voted to cut $6 billion from defense.

In 1993: Kerry voted against a militry pay raise. He voted to reduced overall defense spending by $8.8 billion. [Senatorial Congressional Resolution 106]
He also wanted to force early retirement of 60,000 active duty service members. This is the year that the World Trade Center was bombed and terrorists declared war on America.

In 1994: Kerry proposed cutting $43 billion from defense spending (remember, the terrorists delcared war on us...) Kerry said: "What we have offered to the Senate is an opportunity to register our votes for real choices for a set of choices that reflect what the American people would really like to be spending their money on as opposed to being forced to spend it by continuation of programs that the President [Clinton] has asked to have cut."[John Solomon, "Kerry's 1994 Effort to Cut Defense Eyed" Assoc. Press, March 19, 2004]

Not even Robert Byrd supported this bill: "We have already cut defense spending drastically.....Cutting another $4billion (for fiscal year 1995) is simply unwise and insupportable." [Ibid.]

In 1995: Kerry voted to freeze defense spending.

In 1996: Kerry proposed $6.5 billion Dept. of Defense budget cut. He also proposed a spending freeze. Not one single senator supported his proposal. Remember, by this time, embassies had been attacked by Al Queda and Americans were killed....the war was still on.
Kerry also stated that the missile defense system was not needed because "the supporters of this bill will say that North Korea, Iran, Iraq, or Lybia now have or will have shortly, the ability to launch a missile that can reach our shores. That is simply not the case."

From his Ohio speech yesterday: "For example, why are we unilaterally withdrawing 12,000 troops from the Korean Peninsula at the very time we are negotiating with North Korea – a country that really has nuclear weapons?"

An obvious example of Kerry's shortsightedness. Now he thinks North Korea is a threat, but back in 1996, they weren't a threat. Hmmm......read on:

In 1998, North Korea fired its Taepo Dong missile over Japan, on its way to dropping a simulated nuclear warhead off the west coast of the US. China has a ballistic missile tracking system, obtained from the Clinton administration, that can reach the US mainland.

6 of the last 10 years, Senator Kerry has voted to freeze or greatly reduce the defense budget even though Al Queda had delcared war on the United States.

He also voted against the $87 billion increase in the Iraq war funding...

This bill went towards supplying our troops with body armor, hazardous duty pay increases, humvees, and a $1.3 billion increase in medical care to military families. Bush also gave the military pay raises this year as well.

From his speech yesterday: "Military families are going through difficult times these days. Many of their loved ones are in faraway places, leaving them to care for their families alone. The last thing our servicemen and women need on their minds is the stress of wondering if their loved ones back home will be okay.... That means making sure families have competitive pay, good housing, decent health care and quality education for their children. "

Yep, and this bill will help these families.

Kerry did not vote for this bill and neither did other liberals like Kennedy, Harkin, Kucinich, and Pelosi. They claim that it was an "inappropriate" use of taxpayers dollars. [ Chad Allen, "The Only Spending Liberals Hate" Washington Dispatch, September 12, 2003]

So, John Kerry's idea of "supporting the troops" isn't what we Americans call support.

His record stands on its own.....and it stands on sand.

From his speech yesterday:

"What they need is a president who protects their families while they are putting their lives on the line protecting the American family."


Thank God they have one in office now.

Kerry Wants Iraq to Become Vietnam

Yesterday, liberal reporter/journalist Helen Thomas, wrote an editorial in the Seattlepi.com site. In this editorial, she blasted John Kerry for agreeing with President Bush's decision to send troops to Iraq.

She claims to be disappointed that John Kerry told America that knowing what he knows today, he still would have voted to give the President authorization to enter Iraq for the same reasons cited by the President.

She calls Kerry a "warmonger" type not much different than Bush.

In her article, she claims that Kerry, should he be elected, should do all he can to bring our troops home and end the war:


"Kerry has talked about drawing down American forces and an eventual pullout.

But he could learn something from two previous wartime Republican presidential candidates who had a better take on the public pulse and won the White House.

In 1952 during the Korean War, Dwight D. Eisenhower made a campaign promise that he would "go to Korea" and end the bloodshed. He did go to Korea and the war ended with a cease-fire standoff months after his inauguration.

In 1968, Richard Nixon said he had a "plan" to end the Vietnam War and the voters, wanting peace, bought it. Nixon -- in part forced by Congress -- reduced the U.S. troop commitment to Vietnam, but U.S. forces were still there when Nixon was forced to resign from office in 1974 because of the Watergate scandal. But the war ended the following year.

These were not triumphal solutions but they did give Americans some hope of eventual escape from the two quagmires." [emphasis mine]

There is, however, a problem with Helen Thomas' logic and memory here. In the excellent book, "Reckless Disregard", Robert Patterson writes that Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Thomas Moorer saw the war in Vietnam as still winnable. Our US forces were winning major battles and holding the North Vietnamese back. In 1972, he urged President Nixon to bomb key strategic sites in and around Hanoi and Haiphong Harbor. Nixon agreed to this change from Johnson's policy. The result of this strategic air campaign worked.

On December 18, 1972, the US unleashed its "greatest arsenal assault on the enemy in the history of the war."

The 1972 bombing campaign forced the North Vietnamese to immediately ask for peace. They also began to treat our POW's more humanely. Nixon began to withdraw our troops from Vietnam. His "peace through strength" idea worked.

But, in 1975, when the North Vietnamese invaded South Vietnam again, the Democrats abandoned our ally. After the Watergate scandal and Nixon's resignation, the Democrats voted to "cut off all economic aid to all anti-Communist governments in Cambodia and South Vietnam." Both regimes fell within months after the vote...which lead to mass slaughter of these two countries. Almost 2 million people were murdered at the hands of their new Communist rulers. Nixon is partly to blame for this because of his lack of integrity in his administration. Had he been less concerned for getting relected and more concerned for our involvement in Vietnam, perhaps things would have been different. But, still, the Democrats took political advantage of Nixon's situation and used their new found power to get what they wanted: US troops out of Vietnam no matter what and the Communists allowed to do what they want.

I am sure our early withdrawal from Vietnam made some people feel better. But look at the consequences that were faced by our allies because of the selffishness and ineptitude of the Liberal Democrats in Congress back in 1972-1975.

Helen Thomas was a journalist back then and she is still spewing out the liberal diatribe now.

She wonders why John Kerry would still vote the same way now knowing what he knows about the intelligence and WMD's in Iraq...well, perhaps I can answer her question:

John Kerry said he would vote the same way because he knows that removing Saddam Hussein from power was the right thing to do and he saw what the intelligence said about the WMD's and he knows that Hussein posed a serious threat. But he would rather die than admit it, so he just says that he would still vote to give the President the authority to this day.

So, John Kerry is in a pickle of his own making. He is being pressured to vow to pull our troops out of Iraq after he is elected to please the Liberals who hate war no matter what the reason. And he is being pressured not to pull out the troops because of what happened to our allies after Vietnam and after the Gulf War I (The Kurds were slaughtered by Hussein....). He knows the consequences of both situations:

If he doesn't do what the Libs want, he will lose his base supporters....and possibly lose the election.

If he does do what the Libs want, he could be elected and withdraw our troops leaving the Iraqi people and the ME to be taken over by the terrorists who will attack America in retaliation. Vietnam all over again.

Too bad Helen Thomas is wrong about John Kerry: He is nothing like George W. Bush. Bush isn't led around by popular polls and his base supporters. He knows the consequences of removing our troops from Iraq too soon: mass slaughter of the Iraqi people and losing the ME forever to the terrorist regimes. Bush knows he must stand firm and remain steady during this time of testing because our enemies are watching our every move.

As Robert Patterson points out in his fine book, Osama Bin Laden has been studying our country's military policy since 1993. After the attack on the World Trade Center and Somalia went by without retaliation, he called our military "paper tigers" who cut and run when the casulaties mount and the pressure becomes too intense.

He was right about Clinton's administration, unfortunately. I am sure that Bin Laden would love for a Liberal people pleaser to be elected AGAIN this year so that our troops will once again cut and run.....and leave our allies in the wake of terror once again.

Helen Thomas is definitely wrong: we do have a choice this election. A clear choice indeed.

Swiftboat Vets' Ad Working....

Looks like an independent poll suggests that the ad has its effect on undecided voters. Read the whole article here.

Sample:

"The whole goal of a negative ad is to plant a seed of doubt — and it did," said Professor Chris Borrick of Muhlenberg College, who did the ad study with the firm HCD Research."

I, for one, am hoping the truth gets out there and continues to be defended.

Kerry Does it Again

The infamous "flip-flopper" has done it again...and in one month!

[Thanks to Hugh Hewitt:]

Three weeks ago on "This Week" on ABC, August 1:
Kerry: "I will have significant, enormous reductions in the level of troops [in Iraq]. We will probably have a continued presence of some kind, certainly in the region. If the diplomacy that I believe can be put in place can work, I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there, but elsewhere in the world. In the Korean peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps."

Today, to the Veterans of Foreign Wars
Kerry: "And this hastily announced plan [of Bush's] raises more doubts about our intentions and our commitment than it provides real answers. For example why are we withdrawing unilaterally 12,000 troops from the Korean peninsula at the very time that we are negotiating with North Korea ,a country that really has nuclear weapons."

The man is just so incredibly insincere. How the heck does he expect to be President of the United States with this record????

W stands for Women

Some info about George W. Bush:


Did you know: that President Bush supports giving employees the option of voluntarily taking time off instead of receiving overtime pay? President Bush wants to help working parents balance the demands of work and home by giving them access to comp-time and flex-time arrangements. (Find out more: www.georgewbush.com/Women/BushRecord.aspx)

2. Small business

Did you know: that President Bush recognizes that small businesses are vital to our economy and way of life? His 6-point economic plan assists small businesses and the people they employ.

Did you know: that under the President's Jobs and Growth Act, 25 million small business owners and entrepreneurs are receiving an average tax cut of $3,000 in 2004? These dollars create jobs, opportunity, and ability for women to expand their businesses.

Did you know: that the President's budget provides funding for small business owners? Combined with this year's increase, his budget for next year will have doubled the level of loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration (SBA). (Find out more: www.georgewbush.com/Women/BushRecord.aspx)

3. Tax Relief

Did you know: that in 2004, 81 million women will save, on average, $1,878 due to the President's tax relief packages?

Did you know: that the President led the effort to double the child tax credit from $500 per child to $1,000 per child? Unless this provision is extended, in 2005 the child tax credit will fall from $1,000 to $700, raising taxes for 28 million families.

4. Job Creation

Did you know: that the economy has posted job gains for each of the last 11 months - creating 1.5 million jobs since August 2003, including 32,000 new jobs in July according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics?

Now you know!! Good news indeed.

More on Kerry and Cambodia

This blog from a former Navy SEAL says "no way" to Kerry's Cambodia tale.....

"In order to get permission to conduct an illegal incursion into Cambodia by Swift boat the following must occur: 1. Extremely fresh intel of a high value target (think U.S. POW, or VC chieftain). 2. Take that intel outside the group and up to intel at a higher level (risking compromise) in order to obtain boat support from the Swifties to go into Cambodia. That is extremely unlikely to the point of absurdity."

From Froggy Ruminations

*****************************************************************************

This article, by Kathleen Parker, is good at pointing out what the Swiftboats may not be focusing on: Kerry's need for grandiose attention. It is so much so, that he is willing to lie in order to get what he wants....

"There's something near tragic about this latest political turn of events - brother warring against brother - but also revelatory on a level that even Kerry critics might not have anticipated. What is revealed isn't so much Kerry's lack of consistency in reporting personal history as his studious pursuit of power and an insatiable need for attention.
The pivotal moment in Kerry's life, according to his many testimonials on the subject, was Christmas of 1968, when, he has said, he was in Cambodia. This experience was central to his later becoming a war protester and to his lighting out on a political path destined to culminate in a rise to the U.S. presidency."

WMD News:

This from Washington Times (via Drudge Report) on Hussein possibly moving WMD's to Syria....

"Saddam Hussein periodically removed guards on the Syrian border and replaced them with his own intelligence agents who supervised the movement of banned materials between the two countries, U.S. investigators have discovered.

The recent discovery by the Bush administration's Iraq Survey Group (ISG) is fueling speculation, but is not proof, that the Iraqi dictator moved prohibited weapons of mass destruction (WMD) into Syria before the March 2003 invasion by a U.S.-led coalition. "

Read the whole thing....it is good!

Kerry's Withdrawal Problem

John Kerry's plan of withdrawing US troops from Iraq six months after he is sworn in as President may sound wonderful to the hundreds of thousands of military families dealing with the daily stresses of having a loved one gone and serving in Iraq or Afghanistan.....but, the problem with that plan is that is sounds hauntingly familiar to what John Kerry has said in the past about troop withdrawal from Vietnam:

Regarding the threat of the Communist North Vietnamese attacking the South Vietnamese should the American forces withdraw immediately from Vietnam, John Kerry said back in April 22, 1971 testimony before Congress:

"I would say to this question of world peace. I think it is bogus, totally artificial. There is no threat. The Communists are not about to take over our Mc Donald's hamburger stands."

Of course, the "threat" that the Communist North Vietnamese posed wasn't so much towards the USA, but towards the poor people of South Vietnam who did not want Communism. It was in the best interest for America that Communism to be thwarted from that region.

No threat, Senator Kerry?

From the book, Reckless Disregard by Robert Patterson:

"The nonexistent threat resulted in 750,000 Vietnamese being forced into Communist "reeducation" camps and more than 130,000 Vietnamese becoming "boat people", fleeing the Communist regime. Laos fell to the North Vietnamese Communists, was subjected to a Stalinist government, and has killed an estimated 100,000 Hmong tribesmen (American allies during the war). The Communist Khmer Rouge conquered Cambodia, killing more than 2 million people in their reign of terror."

MORE THAN TWO MILLION PEOPLE!! After the USA lost 3,000 on September 11, 2001, that number is simply incomprehensible to me.

Do we, as a country, honestly desire our troops to come home so much so that we are willing to totally abandon our allies in Iraq like Spain and the Philippines have done recently? Can we live with ourselves if, by leaving early, we read in the papers or see on TV that millions, MILLIONS, of Iraqis are slaughtered by the terrorists??

John Kerry's plan of withdrawing troops early may appease some here at home....which is what he wants to do....BUT the consequences of that reckless and irresponsible action will be too high. He knows this. He acted to bring the US troops home from Vietnam. He saw the results of those actions. We will be leaving our Iraqi allies to torture, rape, and horrible deaths that we Americans cannot fathom.

As a former Marine wife, I know what it is like to have my husband gone for many months at a time. It hurts. It is so incredibly hard and all you want is for him to come home...no matter what.

I pray that these families will remain strong, hold fast, and stay faithful.

But America has a job to do and we do not want to suffer the consequences we did after pulling out of Vietnam in an irresponsible way.

John Kerry's plan will not work.....and he knows this all too well.

The Commander-in-Chief Speaks

Bush gave a speech today outlining his adminsitration's plans to move US troops in ways not seen since the Korean War. His speech also takes on John Kerry's accusations about Bush's lack of funding for the War in Iraq.....it is a powerful speech:

"Bush also took a pointed shot at both Kerry and Edwards. The president argued that over the past four years, his administration has enacted the largest increase in defense spending since the Reagan era, increased military pay by 21 percent, provided better housing, training and maintenance for the military. In the supplemental budget request sent to Congress last September, Bush added, he proposed more money for body armor, hazard pay, health benefits, fuel, ammunition, spare parts and other items.

Twelve senators voted against the legislation, "two of whom were my opponent and his running mate," Bush said.

Taking another swipe at Kerry, Bush noted that the senator has said while he voted in favor of the $87 war funding package earlier in the year, his vote against the supplemental was a "complicated matter."

"There's nothing complicated about supporting our troops in combat," Bush countered."

And Veterans' affairs....

"Bush also vowed that his administration would further help the nation's veterans who fought in various wars overseas throughout the years. Kerry has used his veteran status much on the campaign trail and is trying to round up most of the veteran vote.

"Our nation's veterans have made serving America the highest priority of their lives and serving our veterans is one of the highest priorities of my administration," Bush said, pointing out that so far, his administration has "a solid record of accomplishment for our veterans."
If Bush's proposed 2005 budget passes Congress, it would increase overall funding for veterans by almost $20 billion — a 40 percent increase since 2001.

"We have increased funding for our veterans more in four years than the previous administration did in eight years," Bush said.

Veterans' medical funding has increased by 41 percent over the past four years; since 2001, the government has enrolled 2.5 million more veterans in health-care services, increased outpatient visits from 44 million to 54 million and increased the number of prescriptions filled for this demographic from 98 million to 116 million. The backlog of disability claims has been reduced by about one-third, Bush said, and the processing time has been cut by 70 days.
"We're getting the job done," Bush said."

Damn straight.

Kerry: The Man of the People.......

ABC's The Note has some interesting thoughts on John Kerry's wind surfing adventure....

"But the exotic nature of some of the sports he plays (say, kite-surfing in Nantucket) and the great lengths he goes in order to play them (say, flying from Idaho to Oregon to windsurf), can have the unintended effect of making him seem out of touch with the hard-pressed middle class whose cares he says have been his concern.
As his plane was flying from Oregon to Idaho on Saturday, Kerry defended his taste in sports, saying, "The guys who do it are all local guys -- plumbers, construction workers."
Asked if these regular folks fly from one state to another, the husband of the condiment heiress downplayed the cost, saying, "What? 250 bucks for a ticket?"
Luckily for Kerry, the moment was not on camera. But it was the kind of moment -- if captured on camera -- that could undo months of work. (Think of George H.W. Bush looking perplexed at a super-market scanner in 1992)." [emphasis mine]

It seems that Kerry is indeed the "man of the people": the filthy rich people.

"Ladies and gentlemen...the President of the United States of America!"

Yesterday, President Bush came to Phoenix to speak to his supporters. My friend made 75 phone calls at the Bush/Cheney headquarters, so she got 4 VIP tickets. She invited me and my son to see George W. Bush and other speakers. We were thrilled!

My son is a HUGE Bush fan. He has written a letter to the President and is hoping for a reply to his letter soon. So, we were both excited to go see Bush speak.

We arrived 3 hours early to find parking and then go through the security check. My friend and her daughter drove us and we found a great parking place 2 miles away from the Veteran's Memorial Coliseum. In the past, the Phoenix Suns used to play there and many Rock groups have entertained inside its round edifice. It is where Elvis Presely once appeared, too!

Well, we parked and then prepared for a long hike in the hot sunshine. It was 115 degrees at the time we started walking. I wasn't sure how my son would handle it. It had been awhile since he had been in the sun and walking like that. You can easily get heatstroke if you are not used to the heat.

We all began walking with our hats on and water bottles in hand. My son did great. He did not complain at all. My friend's 15 yr. old daughter, on the other hand, complained a lot. Her whining about the heat lasted for at least the first mile. It sounded like nails on the chalkboard.

I noticed that others around us were also complaining....so I decided to speak up because I cannot stand whining of any kind.

I looked at the 15 yr. old and said, "You know right now, our soldiers and Marines are patrolling in 135 degree heat with kevlar vests, helmuts, and cammies on plus full gear. If they can do their jobs in such incredible heat, then surely we can walk 2 miles in tank tops and shorts to hear their Commander-in-Chief speak."

My remarks were met with silence....and it sounded good.

We made our way to the front gates and flashed our VIP tickets which moved us along rather quickly. Once we passed through the security stations without any problems, we went inside to save our seats. I was amazed with how many people were there 2 1/2 hours ahead of time, but it felt good to see so many people there to support the President.

We found some space on some steps and planted ourselves there firmly. We all felt as if we were melting outside, so the cool air inside felt great. Then we waited for the big moment.

The guest speakers started early and they helped pass the time away. The first speaker was my friend, Mike Broomhead. He lost his brother in Iraq last May. It broke my heart when I found out. Mike is a good guy and he was so proud of his brother. Several of his brother's troops came to the funeral and told Mike how his brother saved many lives before he died. But Mike is mostly proud of the handwritten letter his mom received from the President himself. It was not a copy...but the original written in ink. She was very touched.

Mike wrote an e-mail to the President thanking him for the kind gesture. Several months later, Mike had a chance to see the President and to his astonishment, Mr. Bush asked about Mike's mom and he remembered Mike's e-mail. Pretty amazing since this President probably receives thousands of e-mails daily.

So, Mike Broomhead went up to the podium and told the story of his brother's heroic fate in Iraq. This brings on a surge of cheers from the growing crowd. Many more people are filing in to the building.

JD Hayworth, one of our Representatives, gave a rousing speech just trashing John Kerry in a humurous way. It was great fun. Rick Schroeder, the NYPD Blue actor, spoke about his endorsement of the President. He was there with his wife and two sons. Then our beloved Luis Gonzales spoke about the 2001 World Series against New York. He spoke about how the team went to Ground Zero while in New York and seeing the carnage there really changed him. His support of Bush is solidified in the President's stance on defeating terrorism.

A few more speakers and some musical entertainment continued on until it was finally time to see the President. Mike asked all of us to shout "4 more years!" as loud as we could until we saw the President come in. I looked around at all the people screaming and waving signs, pom poms, and balloons. It was like a rock concert!! One of the Presidential aides came out and placed the official Seal of the President of the United States on the podium. That simple act drew thunderous cheers and shouts from the audience.

John McCain and John Kyle (our US Senators) came out and then it was time to welcome the President. The announcer yelled the President's name and there were so many screams and yells, that I could barely hear my son ask if I saw "him" yet.

"Not yet!" I yelled out. Bush was still shaking hands of some delegates behind the podium. One of the delegates handed Bush his stetson cowboy hat and the President playfully held it up to the crowd. More screams from an already energetic crowd responded to the President's actions. Dressed casually in a blue oxford shirt rolled up at the sleeves in a "ready for business" style and dark Dockers, he stood there at the podium and I asked my son if he could see him. "Yes!" he screamed back with a huge smile. We dutifully waved our pom poms at our President. He was about 25 feet from us and because we were on steps, we were eye level with him. The white lights were so bright, it was like being outside. He made eye contact with us many times and I just waved and yelled at him. I felt like a kid! Bush was blushing red and laughing. He could not believe the response. He looked at McCain, who was a few feet next to him, and McCain gave him a "See? I told you so..." look. Apparently, he had told the President that Phoenix was very excited to see him.

Seeing that McCain's statement was the understatement of the year, Bush just smiled and waved at people. He read our signs. He pointed at them in acknowledgment. More screams.

Finally, John Kyle introduced John McCain who introduced the President. More screams.

Then George W. Bush did what he usually does best: he spoke to his audience in a very personable, polite, sincere, and meaningful way. He seems to be as approachable in person as he is on TV interviews. He laughed alot and smiled a lot. He covered pretty much every issue in this campaign. Each point was met with rousing applause and approval.

I glanced around the coliseum because I love to see people's reactions. Some people were lightly listening, others were listening intently. Some uniformed Army soldiers were listening with stoic expressions. I wasn't sure if it was because they hadn't heard anything they liked yet, or if because they were in uniform they felt they shouldn't respond...I still don't know.

When the topic reached the War on Terrorism, the crowd responded with overwhelming approval as to how this administration was handling things. One lady, in the front, held up a sign that read, "My son is in Iraq" and waved it up toward the President. He read the sign and acknowledged her. He told everyone he saw her sign and then reassured her that her son is serving honorably in Iraq. Everyone applauded. His speech lasted way over an hour mostly because of all the applause. But I felt satisfied that he covered every issue succinctly.

After his closing, he hopped down and made his way through the crowd in the front row shaking their hands, taking pictures with them, and signing autographs. The lady who had the son in Iraq, made her way to the front. The Secret Service agent there made sure she stayed put to meet with the President. He found her, shook her hand, listened to her, then signed her photo. My friend's 15 yr. old daughter ran to the front and pushed her way to meet the President. He passed her, so she ran all the way to the end of the row, and he saw her. He stopped to shake her hand. She was so excited.

He stoped by some more people and one man handed Bush a little baby boy. This baby wasn't more than 30 days old. President Bush held up the boy and stared at him lovingly. Then he drew him close to his cheek and smiled for a photo. The boy's dad was taking a cellphone photo. The President kissed the baby then gave him back to his dad. I could just tell that Bush can harldy wait to be a Grandpa. He just looked so longingly at that little baby boy. He'll be a wonderful Grandpa. You know, the kind who teaches his grandkids things like baiting a hook, hitting a ball, removing brush from the ranch, etc.

After that moment was captured, several more parents held up babies to the President for more photo ops. I can hardly blame them. It makes for a cute picture. He willingly obliged.

Then, with one final wave to the rousing crowd, he was gone.

I just looked at my son, who was sitting now, and smiled. I knew he would remember this moment for the rest of his life.

Well, that makes 2 Presidents I have seen in person: George H. W. Bush in 1991, and now his son, George W.

Later, after the appearance, a talk radio show host interviewed a young Iraqi man who attended the rally. He spoke of how grateful he was to be in America and to see the President. He told the story about his family fleeing a war torn Iraq and an evil Saddam Hussein. It was a heartfelt testimony.

Leaving the rally, we all passed by protestors exercising their freedoms. Their signs had the usual hate speech, vulgarity, and cursings toward our President. My son asked why the protestors were there and I told him about the freedom of speech we have here in America.

He understood. I sure am glad that my son lives in a country he won't have to flee from anytime soon. I am also glad that he got to see America at its finest.

Prayer for Our Troops

"The Almighty God has blessed our land in many ways.
He has given our people stout hearts and strong arms with which to
strike mighty blows for freedom and truth. He has given to our country
a faith which has become the hope of all peoples in an anguished world.
So we pray to Him now for the vision to see our way clearly-to see the
way that leads to a better life for ourselves and for all our fellow men—
to the achievement of His will to peace on earth."

--Franklin D. Roosevelt

Remember our troops in prayer today as they battle the enemy all around them. Ask God to lift them up high upon the Rock and protect them with His mighty Right Hand.

********************************************************************
From Drudge:

U.S. forces say they have killed 360 Sadr loyalists so far in Najaf. Sadr's spokesmen say far fewer have died in what is the second rebellion by the militia in four months.

So, we'll have to rely on what our soldier and Iraqi bloggers say about the battle to know the truth.........as usual.

***********************************************************************************
John Kerry: Flip-Flopper of all time!

George F. Will on the subject of Kerry's flip-flops:

"But what's really troubling is the distinct impression that Kerry remains haunted by Vietnam syndrome — which leads one to wonder whether a President Kerry would be prepared, if necessary, to commit to using military force to defend this nation."

Read more here.



NYT has some interesting tidbits about Kerry's flip-flop on the war here.

"So far, his aides and advisers concede, he has failed to get his message across, as Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have mocked his efforts as "a new nuance" that amount to more examples of the senator's waffling."

**********************************************************************************

Iraqi Soldiers are doing their job, insensitively........must make John Kerry angry!


"BAGHDAD - Joint Iraqi Police Service, Iraqi National Guard, and U.S. Special Forces operations in Al Kut, Aug. 11, against Mehdi Militiamen may have broken the back of anti-Iraqi forces in the city, according to the city's governor,The actions came after Iraqi police stations and other government buildings were attacked and overrun in some cases.

The fighting culminated in one area when Iraqi guardsmen and police launched an assault across the Tigris River in a small boat under machinegun fire and retook a key bridge in the city. Iraqi forces continue to hold the bridge."

Read the whole message....it is great news!

******************************************************************************

More on Stem Cell Research:

Stem cell reporting is usually incorrect.

From a 37 yr.old with Parkinson's disease:

(PRWEB) August 1, 2004 -- "Everyday I read articles and watch newscasts pertaining to President Bush and his "non-support" of stem cells, these are very misleading. There is no total restriction on stem cell research in the United States. The restrictions imposed are for "embryonic stem cell research" only and the policy only restricts utilizing federal funds (our tax dollars) for embryonic stem cell research. Adult stem cell research is open to federal funding , along with some embyronic, and scientists are free to use private funding to pursue embryonic research and have been doing so with great success as seen by the number of Universities opening up research laboratories.. " read more here.

Kudos to Instapundit for posting this info.

**********************************************************************************










*************************************************************************

What is Liberation? And it is worth it?

"Yes, Saddam Hussein was a horrible man, evil, terrible man and it is a good thing we got rid of him, but......"

-Typical Liberal diatribe regarding the War in Iraq.



I am currently reading a book about The Rape of Nanking, by Iris Chang.

In 1937, the Japanese invaded and conquered China at Shanghai. From there, they made their way to Nanking....slaughtering hundres of thousands of people along the way. Those that were not slaughtered were enslaved. Thousands of women were taken as "comfort women" or sex slaves. They were used as slaves to possible thousands of Japanese soldiers over and over again.

There were reports of cannibalism because the Japanese ran out of food supplies for its military. The men resorted to eating the dead Chinese.

These horrific tales were not written or spoken about for many years. The Rape of Nanking is not mentioned in many history books or memoirs of World War II.

I ask: Why?

Last week, on the Rush Limbaugh show, a caller stated that we Americans should pause and reflect on the 59th anniversary of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He implied that we, America, should feel sad and guilty for what happened on those days.

In a recent post on this blog, I wrote about the Bataan Death March survivors and what they experienced. What I did not write was what event in history freed them from their captors: the Japanese.

The boming of Hiroshim and Nagasaki ended the war with Japan and freed the thousands of American POWs in Japan. Many survivors said that had those bombs not landed, they probably had only days left to survive. They were more than happy for the bombings.

It is reported that 170,000 people were killed on Aug 6 and Aug. 9th 1945 in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That is indeed a tragedy....but many military strategists predicted that over million Japanese and American soldiers would have been killed in the land assault that would have taken place if the bombs were not dropped. Many survivors of the POW camps predicted that their guards would have killed all of the POW's to hide the evidence of cruelty.

So, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki indeed saved millions of lives.

But why did the caller say that we, Americans, should reflect on those historical events when 170,000 people were killed?.....and yet no mention of the Rape of Nanking is ever mentioned for its anniversary when 350,000 people were systematically slaughtered at the hands of the Japanese military?

Because the Japanese cleverly tried to erase it from its history. But they failed.

So, why am I writing about "liberation" and its meaning? Because many countries knew, beforehand, what was happening to China. Many countries knew and did nothing.

Just like many people (countries) knew what was happening with the Jews in Europe at the hand of Hitler's National Socialist Party.......and yet nothing was done.

Many countries knew what Stalin was doing to his own people in the Soviet Union.....and did nothing.


And as a result: millions of people were imprisoned, tortured, and murdered while other countries waited, appeased, and theorized about what to do.....including the Untited States of America. All in the name of "appeasement, containment, and sanctions"


While reading this book, The Rape of Nanking, I found myself constantly thinking of the people of Afghanistan and Iraq and their plight. I thought about how many years they went imprisoned and intimidated by ruthless regimes while other countries like France, Germany, and Russia knew of their situation...and did nothing to stop it. Indeed, they profited from the situation, all while hundreds of thousands were enslaved, imprisoned, tortured and murdered for years....decades.

Many Liberals state that they do not think the war in Iraq was worth it to liberate the people of Iraq. They often times state that we "should have waited for the inspections to be overwith before we invaded." This assumes, of course, that after we found no stockpiles of WMD's (only capabilities of producing them) the US would have just continued to use sanctions and resolutions to contain Hussein because, afterall, it was working, wasn't it?

Well, those thoughts are luxuries to us as we sit in our air conditioned and heated homes while we TiVo programs, watch movies on our DVD players, and surf the internet.

But to the Iraqi people who were purposefully being starved by Hussein (and France was getting rich with the "oil-for-food" scandal....) and while children sat in prison cells awaiting torture, rape and death....waiting for inspections, sanctions, and resolutions to work their magic on Hussein and his sons was not an option. Certainly, not a luxury.

I am surprised when "bleeding heart" Liberals state this plan or idea to me in their blogs because I think it goes against what Liberalism used to mean: stopping social injustice and tyranny.

One man wrote in a blog comment that he did not think the Iraqis were worth it to liberate.

This statement brings me back to the Rape of Nanking. Many other countries did not think the Chinese were worth protecting so they let them face the evils of the Japanese.

Who are we to sit and decide who is to be liberated and who is not? Has our wealth and privilege in this country given us the right to decide these things: who is "worth it" and who is not?

I believe this ideology of the Left is why I read and re-read so many of the blogs out of Iraq and the soldier blogs as well. I long to hear of the good things....and there are many!....coming out of Iraq daily. Yes, DAILY.

I read about the Spirit of America working with the Seabees and Marines to teach Iraqi men how to use powertools: not for torturing children of the enemy like in Hussein's days, but for building things. I read about the Marines helping to build sewing centers for young Iraqi women who need to earn income. In the sewing centers, these women sew IP & ING uniforms and have a child care right there in the center for their children!

All because some Marines thought the Iraqi people are WORTH IT to liberate.

God bless them all.

The Rape of Nanking, like the Bataan Death March, was purposefully kept from people for a time. It was reduced to a few sentences in history books until brave people came out and began to research it. Now, books are written about it and a museum is built to commemorate it.

As a painter, I will be doing an independent study on the Rape of Nanking this Fall at college. It will be my way of honoring the Chinese who were victims to one of the worst acts of human evil in world history. It will be a lot of work, but it will be worth it.

To all the Iraqi people.....what happened to you under Hussein will be in the history books because you are being heard. Tell your story so we all can learn from it.

Because one day, it may be us, the Americans, who will need to be liberated from our enemies.......and I sure hope other nations like Iraq and Afghanistan will consider us "worth" liberating.


"Blessed is he who considers the poor! The LORD delivers him in the day of trouble;
the LORD protects him and keeps him alive; he is called blessed in the land;
thou dost not give him up to the will of his enemies."

-Pslam 41:1-2

Gen. Tommy Franks

I got this e-mail today regarding Tommy Franks. I heard him on the Sean Hannity show last week. He was great:

Wednesday, Aug. 4, 2004 10 a. m. EDT
Gen. Franks: Iraq Had WMD in 2003

NewsMax. com's Fr. Mike Reilly was on hand Tuesday when Gen. Tommy
Franks, former head of the U. S. Central Command, launched the tour for
his new book, "American Soldier," and picked up some stunning quotes
from the man who led American troops to victory in Iraq.

Jordan's King Abdullah and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak personally
assured Gen. Tommy Franks that Iraq possessed weapons of mass
destruction less than two months before the U. S.'s attack, the former
Centcom Commander revealed on Tuesday.

"The Jordanians have reliable intelligence and sources in Iraq that say,
in fact, that Saddam Hussein has biological and chemical weapons,"
Franks said King Abdullah told him.
The Jordanian king passed the WMD intelligence on to Franks during a
face-to-face meeting in January 2003.

The one-time top military man revealed King Abdullah's comments to ABC
Radio Network host Sean Hannity, who interviewed Franks for his debut
book signing at Huntington, N. Y.'s Book Revue.
A warning from Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was even stronger,
Franks said.

In "American Soldier" the ex-Centcom chief quotes Mubarak saying,
"You've got to be very, very careful, general. We have spoken with
Saddam Hussein. He is a madman. He has weapons of mass destruction,
biological weapons. And he will use them against your troops."
"A number of other leaders in the Mideast told us he had them, too,"
Franks told Hannity, adding, "If you were president of the United
States, could you avoid paying attention to that?"

The capacity crowd cheered when Hannity announced: "How about Tommy
Franks for president? I'll tell you there'll be no more terrorism."
"We don't want our kids to fight," Franks told Hannity. "But sometimes
they have to fight and when they do, we have to support them," he added,
before saluting two servicemen in uniform standing in the back of the
room.

"It doesn't take a lot of bravery for the general," Franks told the
crowd, "but it takes a lot of bravery by guys like those standing right
there."

The Iraq war commander, who calls himself a political independent, said
he wasn't ready to announce which candidate he's backing in this year's
presidential election. But he told Hannity, "I'm leaning towards George
W. Bush."

Asked about Sen. John Kerry, Gen. Franks responded that because of the
war on terror, America now needs its military more than it has in
decades. "And we just need to ask ourselves, 'Is Senator Kerry going to
be very respectful of the military of our country?'"

But he took umbrage at Kerry's decision to protest the Vietnam War while
U. S. troops were still in harm's way.
"I guess at the end of the day John Kerry will have to live with
himself," the former Centcom chief said.

Gen. Franks also took issue with conspiracy filmmaker Michael Moore, who
recently challenged Fox News Channel host Bill O'Reilly to say whether
he would send his son off to "die for Fallujah."

U. S. troops, said Franks, "are not there to die for Fallujah; they're
there to protect the United States of America."


(emphasis mine)