"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" II

George Soros, rapacious, international currency-speculatin', scumbag, building his latest manipulated short position on an election near you (on your money, too, but he's o.k. because John Kerry and the Democrats say so). I suppose it's alright with them that Soros is buying them votes, but will it be o.k. with them when Soros executes his short trap and takes big money from all of us? Will John Kerry appoint Elliot Spitzer to investigate and proescute? Will Elliot Spitzer, special genius prosecutor of the people, investigate and prosecute on his own initiative? Is he investigating Soros now?...or is he fatting his campaign chest with Soros money like all the other Democrats and radical liberals?

A crystal clear exposition on the reason to reelect the President...

...by Tammy Bruce.

The New York Times ceased being credible II

Here. Recycling old news as new...being dishonest when confronted..."I am Oz, great and powerful!" Endless intellectual dishonesty day in and day out...all in the name of a world view and a failed political system (Marxist statism) that wants it's boot on your throat above all else.

The New York Times ceased being a credible newspaper...

...in the late '70's. It's just taken 25 years+/- for the dry rot to finish it's work. It was once a great, sometimes wondrous, paper.

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"

This piece by Victor Davis Hanson brings to mind many things, but most comically, the late scene in "The Wizard of Oz" when the fraud of the Wizard is revealed by Toto.

Two of the curtains of lies pulled back by the little dog of truth are:

1. How is it that the "Party of the People" can have sold itself to the rapacious currency speculator Soros? How can "they", the leaders of the "Party of the People", so smart and aware by their own testimony, believe that the rapacious currency speculator Soros is in this campaign because he detests GWB philosophically and wants to defeat him for the "good of the people"? How can "they" not see that history says much more strongly that the rapacious currency speculator Soros is in this campaign to set up his next great short position and profits (on the back of the US$) by electing a prep school buffoon whose economic policies will make us long for the days of the greatest Presidential failure in history, Jimmy Carter. Do "they" know what a short position is? Do "they" understand that the people really hurt by the return of such economic chaos here will be "the People" and NOT the eternal snipe of "the rich who do not pay their fair share" (you mean, like, who pay a bit less than 13% rather than about 30%?).

2. If Michael Moore is such a "man of the people", why's he pimpin' college kids for $30K an hour? Is he pimpin' the Hollywood and Park Avenue types that much?...or, proper populist Marxist that he is, is he charging the Hollywood and Park Avenue types "according to their ability"? How big would that fee be?...or do the Hollywood and Park Avenue types get a rectal-smooching discount?

"To all you of the therapeutic mindset, listen up."

The thing that first grabbed me in this piece by Victor Davis Hanson was how absolutely '50's John Kerry worldview is....

Inconvenient nuance for the prepschool blowhard

"Most telling of all, out of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council -- the body Kerry and others insist Bush ought to have gone to for permission to do anything short of moving his left pinky toe -- it's likely that only the U.S. and Britain were not on the take from Hussein."

Want more detail? Go here.

I am sorry Mr. President...

...and Senator Kerry. There was "Easy Rider", uncut, on AMC, Nextel Cup and Busch series qualifying on SPEED, and Red Sox and Yankees, in sucession, on ESPN. I couldn't help it...I stayed away pretty much...over on those other channels lookin' for boobies (AMC left 'em in) n' speed n' a Red Sox clinch. I was also lookin' for a Yankees loss (didn't get it) and completely forgot to find out if the F1 guys'll be racin' in a typhoon.

Christopher Hitchens, recovering Trotskyite, on the state of the Left as made clear by the lens of 9/11:

"The United States was attacked by theocratic fascists who represents all the most reactionary elements on earth. They stand for liquidating everything the left has fought for: women's rights, democracy? And how did much of the left respond? By affecting a kind of neutrality between America and the theocratic fascists." He cites the cover of one of Tariq Ali's books as the perfect example. It shows Bush and Bin Laden morphed into one on its cover. "It's explicitly saying they are equally bad. However bad the American Empire has been, it is not as bad as this. It is not the Taliban, and anybody - any movement - that cannot see the difference has lost all moral bearings."

No Media Bias in post-Debate Reporting...

...NOT!

Pre-debate we are told over and over that Kerry is a polished debater since prep school, where he was so into it that he founded a debating society, that he is considered one of the best debaters in the Senate, and that Bush is unskilled and in for a whipping by Kerry.

The debate was 90 minutes of tedium with the only gaffe being Kerry's answer to the question on the use of preemptive force in the national interest. One would think that if the use of preemptive force in the national interest must first pass a "global test", then, by the time the global test is passed:

a.) it is most likely that the national interest (say...our interest in seeing that Iraq does not replace Afghanistan as the terrorists' base of global operations) will have been eviscerated by the global interests (maybe...France, Germany and U.N. officials skimming large amounts of Oil for Food money, therefore, being paid to ignore Iraq's evolution into the terrorists' base of global operations), which means that the national interest is lost in all likelihood, which is o.k. if you accept full well knowing that the terrorists have sworn to kill us and you are not willing to do anything about it; and

b.) the time and effort spent to gain global approval results in loss of all tactical surprise; a loss like that we are paying for now in Iraq.

Now we hear pundit after pundit after DNC hack after pundit telling us that, because we saw something that was near the pre-debate bloviation about a polished and comfortable guy being in there against a not as polished and less comfortable guy (great effort being made to stay away from the "global test" gaffe), Kerry won in some big way. He didn't. If anything Bush's unusual lower energy level and stick-to-it-tiveness on his central messages kept Bush from capitalizing on other Kerry gaffes and distortions.

...and the great Democrat response is to create a commercial of non-verbal facial expressions?! What up wit' dat?!! I suppose such a gambit would make sense if we were engaged in a race for fifth grade class president rather than for the leader of the free world...what's next? Are they following the President around with a microphone so they can create a Kerry radiospot of Chief Executive flatulence??!!!