Monday, August 16, 2004



The latest DNC commercial for John Kerry stoops to a new low in partisan bull shit. It says up front that we should stick together and then accuses the Bush campaign of questioning Kerry's plans for fighting terrorism, implying that the Democrats in this country have stayed behind the President 100% in the fight against terrorism since 9/11. That could not be farther from the truth! The Democrats have been dragging their feet in Bush's efforts in that regard for at least 2 years! They've even gone so far as to question the President about his support for things that they themselves also claimed to support after that terrible day. This political ad had me rolling on the floor with its claims - I couldn't believe my ears the first time I heard it.


Thursday, August 12, 2004


A "sensitive" war on terror....

John Kerry wants to fight a "sensitive" war on terror. Now that is funny. Perhaps we'll fight a sensitive war on terror like he fought a sensitive war on the Vietnamese whose village he burnt to the ground with his Zippo lighter? I suppose this is another case of his planning to talk to the terrorists and convince them not to attack us again. Of course, the only way that will work is if we totally acquiesce to their demands and become radical Islamists ourselves, giving up our freedoms to these two-bit thugs. Sure sounds like the right solution to me!


Tuesday, August 10, 2004


Do we want an admitted war criminal for President?

John Kerry is an admitted war criminal. He freely admits to shooting a Vietnamese in the back and to burning down a Vietnamese village and killing farm animals in the village. He claimed that he saw many of his fellow Vietnam veterans do similar or worse. We now have some eyewitnesses to John Karry the "war hero" who have come forward to report on his questionable actions 30+ years ago and those witnesses provide grave evidence of a clear lack of character on the candidates part. These same witnesses say that they did not participate in such actions and would not dream of it, in fact putting themselves in danger to avoid harming innocent civilians. Instead of running for President, perhaps John Kerry deserves to be brought up on war crime charges. Of the 23 surviving Swift boat veterans who commanded boats during Kerry's tour and have direct experience with him, only 1 supports the candidate for president and 18 are against his candidacy. Of course, these veterans are being smeared for speaking out.

Additionally, they provide documented evidence that two of Kerry's three purple hearts were for self inflicted accidental injuries and none required significant medical attention. Unlike most purple heart awards, apparently Kerry actually submitted his own paper work in order to recieve those medals after his commander refused to do so. Kerry has claimed he spent Christmas in Cambodia (on the Senate floor, no less!), yet there is substantial evidence that that was a lie. If these Swift Boat veterans are not telling the truth, why doesn't Kerry release his Vietnam records instead of sicking his houndogs on these veterans to call them liars? The tool of those who can't defend their claims using real evidence is ad hominem attacks against there opponent and these veterans who have come forth have been the victims of just such attacks.

Based on these claims, John Kerry is not fit to be our Commander-in-Chief.


Friday, August 06, 2004


Glen Canyon

I'm torn between being sad for the loss or happy for the improved access to scenary. We traveled up to the Glen Canyon Dam and the SW end of Lake Powell last week on our way back from visiting some of the canyon country of Northern Arizona and Southern Utah including Monument Valley and Natural Bridges National Monument (which deserve separate posts by themselves!). I've been thinking about the possibility of boating on Lake Powell, particularly with the water level more than 100 feet below the maximum level. What parts of Glen Canyon are available now that have been lost for more than 20 years under the waters of Lake Powell? We picked up a couple books on the area, including "Glen Canyon Dammed" and "The Colorado River Through Glen Canyon: Before Lake Powell" which discuss the canyon and show some of the many wonderful pictures of what now lies beneath the lake. It must have been wonderful to raft down the river and hike up the side canyons. Seeing the narrow canyons, the indian ruins, the Gregory Natural Bridge and all the other things must have been spectacular.

On the other side of the story, the lake has made those same areas - at least those not flooded - available in ways that were not possible before the Dam. One can boat up the lake, camp along its shores, do day hikes or even over night hikes from the lake and get to places that would take days of hiking to get to from outside the canyon boundaries. At high water, you can boat right up to Rainbow Natural Bridge. Even today at very low lake levels, the hike is only a couple miles rather than the 10 day horseback expeditions required of Teddy Roosevelt or Zane Grey early in the 20th Century. Many, many more visitors are able to see the scenary that was inaccessible to all but the hardiest of explorers before the dam.

But again, the loss and sacrifice that required - the plant and animal life that drowned as the canyon flooded behind the Dam. The historic sites that are no longer available to study. Imagine the Grand Canyon below the Dam with water up to the rim at the overlooks along the south rim drive. Imagine that all below that would no longer be accessible. Is the tradeoff worth it? The improved accessibility. The power generating capability of the Dams along the Colorado and it's feeder rivers. The water storage capacity of the lake which evens out the irregular year-round flow of the river and also provides water to cities of the southwest. It's a tough call.


Tuesday, August 03, 2004



Have you heard John Kerry's latest TV ad? It shows a snipet from the DNC where he says: "...we need strong alliances, we will be able to tell the terrorists, you will lose and we will win. The future doesn't belong to fear, it belongs to freedom."

Can you believe this!?! Does he actually believe this nonsense?!? We'll tell the terrorists that they will lose and we will win. Yeah, right and they'll say "Oh, Ok, well, nevermind, we'll leave you alone." He doesn't have a clue! These terrorists are part of radical groups who hate what we stand for, regardless of whether you are a Democrat or Republican - it is that you don't believe exactly what they believe and that you believe in freedom. That you believe in a different god than they do, or even - gasp! - no god! You allow your women to actually have choices and to vote and to show their faces in public. You allow everyone choices in what they want to do or believe. That is why they hate us and no amount of appeasement will abate their ruthless, terrorist, criminal actions. We must stand up to these two bit thugs and take positive action as our current President has done.

I, for one, am glad that Al Gore was not in office when the terrorists attacked our country almost 3 years ago, and I am convinced that it was the inaction and lack of resolve of our previous president that allowed those terrorists to be so bold and who helped cripple our intelligence communities abilities to gather the evidence they needed to recognize the threat by starving them during his administration. He depleted our military without restocking it while he lobbed a couple of random cruise missles in Bin Laden's general direction and he turned tail and ran at the first sign of resistance in Mogadishu.

Yes, war is terrible, but sometimes it is necessary. This world is much better off without the likes of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein in power giving refuge and support to terrorists and carrying out ruthless campaigns against their own people.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?