Ohio Countdown 2004

2004 Presidential battleground analyzed by a grizzled campaign veteran and Ohio's Top Targeted Undecided Perfectly Predictive Swing Voter - His Mom.

10/26/2004

PD Only Undecided Voter Left In Ohio

You know how pundits like to say that they can't imagine how anyone, ANYONE AT ALL, could POSSIBLY still be undecided this election year? Apparently that doesn't apply to the Plain Dealer.

In the most un-plain dealing I've ever read in a newspaper, the PD decided today to endorse neither John Kerry, nor George Bush for president. No endorsement. I'm not sure this has ever happened in Cleveland history.

Make whatever conclusion you will about this pussy rollover, irresponsible lilly-livered, yellow bellied, weak in the knees, cowardly, pathetic, idiotic irrelevance...I shall withhold judgment.

But the rumor is that the paper's owner vetoed an ed board decision to endorse Kerry. Why not just report that? That, after all, would be news.

1 Comments:

At 8:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

SITES LIKE REDSTATE.ORG AND BLOGSFORBUSH ARE SECRETLY CENSORING OPPOSITE POINTS OF VIEW

Thought you should know that Republican web sites are secretly censoring comments. Today, both Redstate.org and Blogsforbush.com deleted the comment below without any explanation. Redstate and Blogsforbush have been doing this to me for some time. Apparently, like Fox News, they permit some Democratic posts, but sift out the good ones away from their bloggership community. I believe that web sites who censor good hard hitting comments like this so they can't even be debated on their sites should at least be upfront about what they are doing. BOTTOM LINE: RATHER THAN HONESTLY DEBATING THE ISSUES THESE SITES WOULD RATHER SECRETLY DUMP STRONG OPPOSING POINTS OF VIEW IN THE TRASH TO AVOID EXPOSING THEM TO THEIR BLOGGERSHIP. SUPPRESSION, RATHER THAN DEBATE OF, OPPOSING POINTS OF VIEW SEEMS TO BE A THEME WITH REPUBLICANS, WHO REQUIRE PEOPLE TO SIGN "LOYALTY OATHS" TO BUSH BEFORE ATTENDING THEIR RALLIES.


CENSORED COMMENT:


ELECTION IS HERE: TIME TO BOTTOM LINE IT


EVERYBODY KNOW’S THIS ELECTION IS A REFERENDUM ON BUSH. IF HE’S BAD, THEN IT’S TIME TO GIVE THE NEW GUY KERRY A CHANCE. IF NOT, THEN LET HIM GO FOR MORE YEARS.


KEY AREAS OF BUSH RECORD ON A SCALE OF 1 TO 10


TERRORISM – 2 OUT OF 10. THE BUSH RECORD: Bin Laden is yacking again trying to influence our election. Disgraceful and we should ignore him. But why is he still out there yacking??? The newspapers are saying bin Laden used sophisticated video equipment to record his latest message. Why is bin Laden if not caught, at least not desperately recording from some cave somewhere? Initially, Bush did a good job retaliating for 9/11 against the Taliban in Afghanistan by taking them out militarily, but then he took his eye off the ball. Bush moved on to invading Iraq before he finished the job of finding bin Laden. Bush even said he wasn’t concerned about bin Laden in 2002. Specifically, on March 13, 2002 according to an official White House transcript Bush said "We haven't heard much from him [bin Laden]. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is . . . . I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run.” With all the President’s tough talk and bravado and flipping back and forth on the issue of the importance of bin Laden, he has been weak, very weak, in focusing our military resources in the relentless push that is needed to completely dismantle al Qaeda. And while Bush lags back in the offensive against terrorism, in this country, even today, 95% of shipping containers are not inspected. Cargo holds in airplanes are not inspected. Luggage on buses is not inspected. Al-Zarqawi’s terrorism in Iraq is on the rise, resulting in more and more American and Iraqi lives lost each month, and al-Zarqawi recently announced he is teaming up with al Qaeda. As a consequence, with bin Laden and al Qaeda at large, now the President admits it’s not a matter of if the next terrorist attack will occur against the US, but when. Let’s hope bin Laden is similarly blowing smoke when he says he’s gearing up for another attack that will make 9/11 pale in comparison. BOTTOM LINE: BAD JOB FOR BUSH.


IRAQ – 1 OUT OF 10. THE BUSH RECORD: Bush rushed us into this war against Iraq to stop Sadam Hussein from amassing weapons of mass destruction. We heard evidence of Sadam rebuilding his nuclear program, stocking chemical weapons etc. IT WAS ALL WRONG. Where does the buck stop? Bottom line, with the President. All the other post-hoc reasons given by Bush for going into Iraq are lame. Bush now says we went in to liberate Iraqi’s to build democracy. Bunk. The poor Iraqi citizens are not even safe to walk in their own streets and whole sections of their country are lawless war zones. The reason things are so bad in Iraq is all our fault -- we had no decent plan to secure the peace in that country. We also set a poor example of how a democratic country acts by scooping innocent civilians off the street to have low level military personnel subject them to bizarre torture designed to offend their religion and sexual mores. This is weird and unprecedented. If the President kept asking his military generals and administration officials about their plans, why didn’t he ask them how we are going to secure the safety of the Iraqi people after the war is over? It is well known that detailed plans for securing the peace were created by the State Department, only to sit on Rumsfeld’s desk and be chucked. The President’s other excuse for going into Iraq is that Hussein was planning on planning to obtain nuclear weapons. Weak! At the same time we were invading Iraq, North Korea had obtained nuclear weapons and was building more nuclear weapons and Iran was in the process of obtaining nuclear weapons. Also, for the record, North Korea’s citizens were far more oppressed and impoverished and in need of liberating than Iraq’s by any standard. Lot’s of people are asking, if we had to invade another country, did we choose the right one? Should we have gone into Iran or North Korea? Or nowhere! BOTTOM LINE: BAD CHOICES, BAD JOB.


THE ECONOMY: 3 [out of 10]. THE BUSH RECORD: Nice tax cut, even if it mostly benefited the rich, but no bang for the buck. If this is “trickle down” economics, where is the trickle? Maybe it’s trickle up economics because, for the first time since Herbert Hoover’s administration, we lost more jobs than we created. Net net over a million jobs are gone over the past four years! Even over the past several months during the so-called “recovery”, job creation hasn’t even kept up with population growth. Now government deficits are out of control and we will be paying for them for years to come. And what about the long run? As we all know, the key to economic success in the long run in a modern economy is the quality and level of education of the labor force. How are we doing there? Bush made a big deal out of the Head Start program to educate our young ones when he took office, but with all the spending and emergency spending on the war with Iraq, he ended up underfunding it by tens of billions of dollars! And what about the rest of his education program? There’s just not much to speak of. There’s no focus on what America really needs to be competitive: top quality high school and higher education for normal students from average income families. As for programs to help Americans get by with rising health care costs and fuel costs – there’s not much. The drug program for seniors is very hard to understand, especially for seniors, and is really a drop in the bucket compared to Bush’s failure to make good on his promise of legalizing the importation of drugs from Canada. There is no reason not to legalize drugs imported from Canada every day over the past four years and RIGHT NOW, except that the Bush administration is beholden to the big pharma/drug companies. Drugs in Canada are the same drugs manufactured in the same factories as the drugs we take in the US. Whole communities have been forced to break the law by sponsoring bus trips to Canada to avoid their elderly and sick from becoming impoverished from the astronomical cost of drugs in the US.


SOCIAL ISSUES: 4 [out of 10]. THE BUSH RECORD: The country is completely divided down the middle on these issues. There’s not much to speak about here, as there are reasonable arguments on both sides of the aisle. It’s a shame Bush couldn’t build more unity, but you can’t blame him entirely for people being put off by his big Texas swagger. Except for stem cells that is. In the abortion debate, it’s a real live fetus lost versus no gain for anybody. With stem cell research, it’s not even a fetus versus gain for millions of sick people. Bush says he is permitting stem cell research, but according to all the stem cell doctors I’ve heard speak, he really isn’t. There are only a few old and sick cell lines that can be used. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of embryos are frozen only to be ultimately discarded because it’s against the law to use them for stem cell research. Makes you think.


BOTTOM LINE: Given Bush’s weak record, it’s time to give the new guy a chance. Kerry proved himself capable and Bush’s match during the debates. Many of the people hollering about Kerry should remember about all the similar hollering about Clinton, who turned out to do a pretty good job for America. No big wars on his watch. A great economy. Lots of terrorist attacks averted through hard work leading up to the turn of the millennium, whereas the Bush administration ignored similar signs leading up to 9/11.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com