Sunday, October 31, 2004
Much talk has centered on the undecided voters in this election. As we close in on election day, we at LB in 04' decided to investigate what undecided voters are looking for in a candidate, and why neither Bush nor Kerry has penetrated what many see as the key to the election.
"I'm leaning toward Mondale," said self-professed undecided voter Karl Levin, "but I like Ford, too. It's just so hard to make up my mind - and all those negative ads don't help much neither. I don't watch em'. When they come on, I turn it off."
Undecided Voter Karl Levin: Leaning Toward Mondale
Other undecideds were more to the point. Dell Smothers of Cedar Rapids was an example: "I know the President is a religious man and that God told him to be president. But I'm a little worried - why didn't God tell him about the September 11 terror attacks in advance? Did the President not get the message? I'm not sure he's getting all of God's messages; and that worries me."
Cynthia Johnson, of Portman, Michigan, was not sure which candidate more closely reflected her views: "Well, I guess I'm pro-choice, want to save the environment, think Iraq was a bad idea, hate the idea of these huge deficits, believe that the government should help keep down the cost of health care, believe we need a larger military, think that economic stability would be helped by a more progressive tax system and think the country is headed in the wrong direction. I just can't tell which candidate is for me."
Smothers: Afraid Bush Isn't
Picking Up on God's Signals
Glenn Montrose of Sydney, Ohio, had this to say: "Everyone said this was the most important election ever, and so I said I'd vote. But the people calling me with questions about how I will vote won't talk to me for more than a few minutes unless I tell them I'm undecided. I don't like Bush, so I'm voting for Badnarik, because his campaign team says that he has the best chance of beating Bush."
Vern Cox of Topeka, Kansas, said that he had made up his mind shortly before we caught up with him. "I'm voting for the talking Iguana," he said.
One group of undecideds did not reflect the psychosis found in others. Tony Burns, of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, was emblematic. "I'm a republican. I voted for Bush in 2000, Dole in 96,' Bush in 92' and 88' - and of course, Reagan, Ford, Nixon. But this guy - with his irresponsible budgets, underfunding the military, trying to legislate his moral beliefs, not letting people with alternative views speak, incredibly negative advertising and gross incompetence and never standing up and taking the blame. What's worst about this administration, though, is the lack of contradicting views battling on their merits for adoption. . . it's like the conservative version of political correctness. This is not why I became a republican."
Will Old-Tyme Republicanism Stay With the President?
Saturday, October 30, 2004
LB in '04 is currently in lock down mode due to the bin Laden video tape. When the danger passes we will post again.
Friday, October 29, 2004
Citing the huge support he has been receiving in digitally doctored photographs of his campaign rallies, the Bush campaign has expressed confidence in winning, by a large margin, the vote of digitally created people.
"John Kerry likes to tell you that he's for you," Bush said at a recent rally of digitally created people on a computer screen in Bush campaign headquarters in Arlington, VA. "But if he's for you, where is he - how come he's not makin' the effort to reach out to you and talk to you." The president's remarks drew huge computer generated cheers from legions of replications of Pfc. Howard Otterman, Pfc. Joseph Cartman and Linda Hastings, of Eagleton, NE.
"We think that this is an untapped voting block that is perfect for this president," said Ken Mehlman, Bush campaign chief. "These people are the definition of a captured audience - and there no hecklers, they don't laugh when he says something stupid and they cheer whenever we want them to - really, they do - do you want me to make them cheer now?" In addition, campaign aides say, Bush doesn't have to stand up straight when addressing them.
Bush Speaking to Undecided Digitally Created People
The effort has not been without problems and controversy, however. Despite their best efforts, some digitally created people are turning against the president. The campaign has admitted some problems in this regard, but has created special "cyber-first amendment zones" where the wayward digitally created people may congregate.
Not All Digitally Created People Are Welcome at Virtual Rallies
Nonetheless, the Bush team feels confident that Bush will carry this crucial voting block; and have a strategy if things start to go the other way. "The great thing about this voting block," said one campaign advisor, "is that we can just keep reproducing these guys over and over again. The degredation is virtually non-existent. And we just get more voters."
Bush's team is also starting outreach to "digital-thingy voters" in an effort to expand further his base of support. "All prorgrams will vote for Bush," said the Bush Digital-Thingy outreach chief.
Will Out Reach to Digital Thingies Put Bush Over the Edge?
This afternoon, President George W. Bush made a daring pledge during a campaign stop in Tuscahootchiehassi Florida, vowing to take the swing state of "North Cadota". The President went on to call North Cadota, 'Bush Country'.
In recent days the President has felt very confident about his re-election chances but the pledge has his campaign staff worried.
"We're not really sure there is a North Cadota," said Campaign Director Lester Hill. "It's great that we're going to win there, but we know very little about that state."
After the President's bold claim, campaign officials huddled together in a five hour meeting in an attempt to interpret the President's vow. Most agreed the President meant North Carolina and/or North Dakota. Some disagreed.
"Those states are already in the bag," said one anonymous campaign staffer. "It wouldn't make sense to vow to carry a state that's in the bag. If the President says he's winning in North Cadota then he's winning in North Cadota."
"That's how strong Bush-Cheney is," said GOP Chairman Ed Gillespie. "We're going to sweep states that don't even exist."
Fox's own Bill O'Reilly has decided to settle the sexual harassment suit brought against him by a former Fox employee. The terms of the settlement are confidential but a source close to the "No Spin Zone" host was willing to talk to LB in '04.
The married Bill O'Reilly has agreed to the following:
1- A payment of money damages even though he did nothing wrong;
2- Mr. O'Reilly will limit his phone calls to female Fox employees to three a week;
3- Mr. O'Reilly may masturbate during two of those phone calls;
4- If Mr. O'Reilly wishes to use a vibrator while on the phone, he may do so once a month;
5- Fox News will pay 50% of the costs for the batteries.
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
Crystal, from Texas, has duly chastised LB in '04 for a recent article comparing Texas to Massachusetts. Welcome Crystal. We're glad you read and enjoy Lickin Bush.
i assume that since you think that bush is such a horibble person you also assume every one from texas is exactly like him? have you ever been to texas? im sure you all think that we all still ride horses and say howdy too? and we all have a southern cowboy accent? is that what you think cause you should realy keep your mouth shut untell you actually have any clue, of what texas is like! and your percentages are are erelavent if you actually used your brain youd relize texas is alot bigger than mass. so ofcourse texas is going to have a bigger percentage! sorry if i seem rude im not upset with the writer or anyone really, i just hate those people that talk so much shit to be like all the other bush haters and they dont even know anything about it, its just the cool thing to do, theres people every were that dislike some other person, theres good and bad people so get over it already you dislike bush fine your intitled to your own opinion but whats the point of taking it out on texas!!
crystal 07.26.04 - 12:33 am
We here at LB in '04 would like to apologize to Crystal from Texas. We mistakenly thought that using percentages would be proper when comparing different sized states. Next time we'll use the actual numbers rather than percentages. No more per capita for us.
We have also reviewed the article and found no reference to President Bush, cowboy accents or people saying 'Howdy'. We are willing to find those numbers, Crystal. If you are correct, we'll certainly indicate that the percentage of people in Texas who say 'Howdy' has plummeted.
One correction, however. You do not 'seem rude'. Telling someone to 'shut-up' or 'if youd use your brain' does not make you seem rude. Obviously, you are not a Bush supporter. I deduce that fact from your use of the word 's--t'. Please feel free to write again, but we do not allow profanity at LB in '04. We feel it detracts from the wholsesome, Family Values image we try to project.
Your point about not going to Texas is a good one. Before we publish any more Federal Statistics, we'll go to Texas and actually count the number of people living below the poverty level and speak with those who have been raped and murdered. We do value accuracy.
Thanks for the imput, Crystal. We relize you are intitled to your opinions, even if you think we're erelevant and horibble. We're happy you enjoy Lickin Bush as much as we do. Keep Lickin Bush and Yeah for Texas!
DID YOU KNOW:
Texas is 48 in the nation in using capital letters;
Has suffered from a punctuation drought since 1979;
In anticipation of the Massachusetts bashing we can expect next week from the Republicans, we thought we'd look at some actual facts.
Under the Education governor, George Bush, we expect to see a high level of educational achievement. In the People's Republic of Massachusetts, failed public schools.
In Texas, 75.7% have obtained a high school diploma;
In Massachusetts - 84.8
The national average - 80.4
In Texas, 23.2% have obtained a BA
In Massachusetts - 33.2%
The national Average - 24.4
Standard of Living
With its pro-business and pro-deregulation stance, Texas must produce good jobs with good pay, creating a high household income and low poverty.
In Texas, 15.4% live below the poverty level
In Massachusetts - 9.3
The national average - 12.4
OK, but with the oil industry, income must be really good, right?
The median household income in Texas, $39,927
In Massachusetts - $50,502
The national average - $41,994
Here's one where Texas can compete, right? With right-to-carry laws and its tough on crime policy, death penalty and pro-gun culture, this one is a no-brainer.
Percentages are per 100,000 people
Rape in Texas, 37.7 (does not include "Texas Foreplay)
In Massachusetts - 26.7
Murder in Texas, 5.9
In Massachusetts - 2.0
Violent Crime in Texas, 545.1
In Massachusetts - 407.6
Texas is ranked 8th in violent crime, nationally
Massachusetts is ranked 42nd
Statistics can be found here and here.
The leading cause of death in Massachusetts is cardiac arrest, most prevalent in September. This stat is skewed due to the number of Red Sox fans.
The leading cause of accidental death in Texas is being crushed by a jacked-up home while trying to change a tire.
The violent crime rate in Texas is artificially low and is expected to rise once shooting your buddy in a drunken rage is criminalized.
Higher education statistics tend to be skewed in Texas because 9th Grade is considered post-graduate work.
Don't do drugs.
The Editors would like to apologize for the lack of updates. Stockton has been busy with his parole officer and Tweed is away for a few days at the annual NAMBLA Jamboree. We expect to post something soon. To tide you over, some predictions and observations:
Bush or Kerry will be the next President; Nader will not, we repeat, will not, win;
Mississippi will go for Bush;
Kerry will take Rhode Island;
There are more teeth in New York than in all the red states combined;
The poorest states vote Republican due to the high percentage of stupid people living therein;
Half of these predictions are 60% accurate.
Tuesday, October 26, 2004
I'm not changing my election prediction, though I would tweek some of it as time goes on. I believe that massive voter turn out, the majority of which favors Kerry, is the most likely of a great number of possible election outcomes.
But while my election predictions are famously accurate (I missed only Oregon and Florida (arguably) for the 2000 election, and accurately predicted Bobby Courmier's election to student body president in 8th grade), I am not confident that my prediction is likely, in the sense that there is a greater than 50% chance of its occurence.
Stockton can attest to my long held belief that this election will result in massive litigation. There is a 99% chance of this occuring, I think. Legions of lawyers are already positioned in battleground and non-battleground states for post election litigation. Lawsuits have already been filed, criminal investigations have commenced and the facts that will likely result in such suits and criminal charges are ocurring.
But what will that mean?
Well, in my rosey scenario, probably not much with respect to a Kerry victory. Kerry's electoral victory will be so great that even close results in multiple states is unlikely to unhinge the election. No guarantee here, but if Kerry carries Florida by 100,000 votes, it probably won't matter.
But in a close race, the answer is too difficult to determine. What happens if Kerry and Bush win Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida, Nevada, Iowa, Colorado, Minnesota and New Mexico by razor thin margins? This is, according to many pundits and polls, a likely result. It doesn't take a crystal ball and psychic ability to do the electoral math to determine, for Bush or Kerry, which elections need to be challenged.
May it Please the Court: I Win.
As I mentioned, lawyers are already gearing up for the election - and not all of them preparing for post-election action. Just as there are two major party candidates, there are two major party positions when it comes to voting: Democrats want to see as many people as possible vote; and Republicans want to see as few people as possible vote. This battle will be waged before (already started) and on election day, as Republicans challenge voters as they try to vote, and Democrats try to get people past the Republican watchdogs.
On election day, expect madness and chaos across the country. Republican efforts to ensure that only elligible voters vote will look an awful lot like the application of Jim Crow laws. Already, they are attempting to move polling stations and make certain that too few stations to handle the high voter turnout are set up in democratic strongholds. You can imagine how well that will go over. Election day fun will include voter intimidation on a scale I always thought unimaginable in post 70s America.
Don't Forget Your Secret Passcode
The consequence? Election results postponed until well after the day after election day. It is distinctly possible that close to 100 electoral votes will be up for grabs after the election as accusations of vote fraud fly. And don't be confused here: I'm not talking about a legal battle to determine the mechanism for recounting a states vote; I'm talking about accusations of criminal conduct on the part of state political parties, government officials, special interest groups and the surrogates of the major party candidates.
This will jeapordize the election. In mid-December the electoral votes are cast. If a state cannot determine the winner of the election, how can those votes be cast? According to Bush v. Gore (which the justices declared to be non-binding authority), the Florida state legislature intended that Florida's votes should be counted in mid-December, regardless of questions concerning the legitimacy of the count, and therefore, disputes be damned, the "official" result, regardless of how accurate, is to be counted. If this principle holds true, some result will be reported in mid-December, and we will likely know the winner at that point.
"Oh, What the Hell; Give Half to Bush and Half to Kerry"
This would be bad for the country, in my opinion. If the election is as close as I've described, and the results are disputed, forcing the issue would rightly taint the results. Without a full airing of the grievances, how can we be confident of the results of a close election? And the opposition party (particularly if they're republicans) will relentlessly pursue this line in dealing with the new administration. This could have tragic consequences, particularly if Kerry comes out on top. Remember, republicans were willing to impeach a president for fibbing about getting BJs.
I can easily imagine Denny Hastert and Bill "Cat Killer" Frist declaring Kerry legislation DOA, refusing administration appointments and forcing an informal power sharing arrangement. I can see it, because republicans are true believers - it is in their political character to believe that they know best, despite what the constitution might say. Could Bush pull an Al Gore and call upon his backers to accept the legitimacy of a Kerry Presidency? Gore's speach (which you should go re-read) legitimized Bush's presidency for many people (including me). I don't think Bush has the moral authority to do it. I think it would take a combination of statements from Bush, Cheney, Frist, Delay, Ed Gillespie, Hastert and Ashcroft for that to work. I seriously doubt it would come to pass. There will be strong holdouts (the Delay wing), and others are too stupid (Bush, Frist), too mean (Cheney, Cheney and Cheney) or too filled with conviction (Ashcroft, Gillespie) to really do it. No matter what, there will be a fairly large, if not a majority, of republicans that believe Kerry is not the president - including many in the house and a couple in the senate.
This may have one positive outcome - the creation of the Republic of Texas. (Heck, I'll give them OK, LA, AL, MS, GA (sorry, Rusty, Jen and Steve), SC and even FL.)
If Bush ends up on top, I don't know what to expect. However, democrats are usually a little better with respect to respecting the rule of law when it comes to the internal operations of government. A speach by Kerry, like the one Al Gore made in finally conceding the presidency to Bush (again, which you should all go re-read), would work. But maybe not. I, for one, would never accept Bush's presidency as legitimate in such circumstances. I understand the need for moving on - but at the same time, the thought of another stolen election, to keep the presidency in the hands of this incompetant boob, is horrifying.
(Honestly, the thought that such a large percentage of Americans is willing to vote for this guy is horrifying enough. I must be living in an alternative universe, because I can't imagine how anybody thinks that this guy has done any better as president than he did at all of his other endeavors - Yale, getting into law school, business, managing a major league baseball team, speaking in complete sentences, etc. - is unbelievable. Seriously -unbelievable. (Which may be why I would have no problem letting the Republic of Texas come into existence.) And the worst part about all this mess is that this time Daddy Bush is not there to bail out his wayward son.)
I Can't Stand It
But is there another possibility - another path?
Yes there is.
The Supreme Court could take itself out of the process, let the suits proceed and recognize that a state that fails to get its results in on time is SOL. This could result in some states not getting their electoral vote count in on time; and no candidate receiving the required majority of electoral votes.
And there is a constitutional solution. The election would be thrown to the congress.
From a pro-Kerry standpoint, this is not optimal. Chances are Kerry would lose here. By my count, republicans hold a majority in 30 congressional delegations, with four (MN, MS, TX and WI) evenly split and 16 in the hands of the democrats. So Kerry loses, and maybe we again have a president who has lost the popular vote and has attained the presidency without a popular mandate.
Will These Presidential Electors Give Up Their "Right"
To Determine Who Will Be the Next President?
But such a result is supremely better than leaving it to Antonin Scalia and the Supremes. If our electoral process is so screwed up that we can't determine the results in time to determine a president, we will have highlighted the not-so-secret and festering problem with how elections are conducted in this country. Such a consequence could spark actual reform - reform of our electoral process and of the electoral college (speaking of which; does anyone have a degree from there?). Consider this: Clinton won in 1992 and 1996 without a majority of the popular vote - although he did win the plurality. Gore beat Bush in the popular vote. In short, no president since 1988 (well before any of my children were born) has received the mandate of a majority of the voters. (But who really knows given how they do things in Florida?)
In the face of an election marred by allegations of fraud and other abuses, we may never feel comfortable with the results. Recent polling suggests that we are entering this election with those doubts already well in hand. A congressionally determined president may not be the way we like it; but in the face of allegations of vote fraud and who knows whatever else, such a president would at least have the taint of legitimacy. The constitutional process will have worked.
But God help us if it happens.
In the wake of the 'Wolves' fiasco, Chief PR man for the Bush-Cheney team, Clyde Newsome, has resigned. Newsome issued a brief statement indicating that he opposed the 'Wolves' commercials and wanted the campaign to take a different route.
"I thought it was hokey and over the top," said Newsome. "When you're spending millions of dollars to lie about the opposition, you want to get it right. I wanted to go in a different direction but the President wouldn't hear about it. He was fixated on wolves."
According to Newsome, the President refused to listen to other ideas and insisted the campaign commercials use "Wolfs". Newsome said, "that's all he said. 'I want wolfs, I want wolfs."
Newsome's two ideas were immediately shot down by President Bush.
Friday, October 22, 2004
As the Presidential race concludes, you may see some serious posts on LB in '04. For despite our mirth, this is the most significant election of our lifetime. That cliche is misused every election year and this might be the first year since I was eligible to vote that it's accurate. Did anyone really think a Dole Presidency in '96 would have been a calamity? A Dukakis Presidency? The result now could be.
If Kerry loses this election, please, lets forgo the recriminations. As Democrats, it may be difficult, but no recrimination is deserved.
Has Kerry run a perfect campaign? No. Does anyone run a perfect campaign? No. Has Bush made mistakes? Yes. Has Kerry? Yes. Could I ask more questions? Yes? In theory, two candidates could run perfect campaigns, hit all the high notes, and one will still suffer defeat.
The fact of the matter is, the campaigns are probably where they would have been without any Swift Boat lies or Bush's horrendous debate performance. That is, extremely close. Bush's strength lies with those who view him as a "good christian" and a "firm, resolute" leader. Those people cannot be swayed because they are inoculated against reason. Kerry's base lies with die hard Democrats and anti-Bush people. They cannot be swayed because reason has them in its grips. The undecideds? I don't who or how someone can be undecided. Secretly, I think there are less undecideds than the polls indicate. Some take a perverse pride in declaring themselves independent or undecided. As if those two positions occupy some moral high ground. Get off the high ground, join the fray. Don't be mere witnesses!
No candidate is ideal. Each of the major Democratic candidates would be in Kerry's position right now, give or take a state or two. Each had their strengths and weaknesses. Each would have benefited from the "Bush is a miserable failure" feeling among many people. Each would benefit from the bitter aftertaste of 2000.
Gephardt is probably the candidate most interchangeable with Kerry. Both are men with years of experience, neither has any real ethical baggage. Their resumes are impressive. Gephardt would have suffered for being something of a retread candidate, a man that had been around forever. Ironically, many believed Kerry and Gephardt would be pounded as "Washington Insiders." That attack never really flew because the Bush people began touting foreign policy experience (did the choice of Edwards take the Washington Insider theme off the table?). Gephardt could also give a damn fine stump speech. But, just where are his eyebrows?
Yes, Edwards was charismatic, with boyish (Stockton-like) good looks, but he would have been hammered by BC-04 and the media on the gravitas issue. Fair or not, it would have happened. So, which is better, gravitas or charisma? This year, gravitas.
Edwards may have played better in the south. But, would playing better in the south translate into wins? Doubtful. Maybe Arkansas. But, would he have played well in NH or WI or PA. I dont' know, but chances are he would have had his shortcomings somewhere. Edwards has a future (perhaps as the lead in The Music Man), but I question whether he would have survived the constant "foreign policy gravitas" barrage from the media and talking heads.
I began 2003 very interested in a Dean candidacy (ask Tweed). Dean turned me off fairly quickly (as someone said, he reminded women of their first husband). He turned on many, however, and did energize the party. I shudder to think what Rove would have done with the "scream". Imagine the campaign commercials? Ugly. Yes, the "scream" was shamelessly replayed by the media. Still, a campaign that could try and portray a war hero as a traitor and a draft dodging junkie as a war hero would have gotten a lot of mileage out of the "scream". Is it right? No, just a reality.
Dean would also have suffered from a "lack of foreign policy" attacks, much like Edwards. Assuming the accuracy of some state polls, Dean would not be within striking distance in VA, NC, or WV right now. Conversely, I feel that with Dean as the candidate, MN, WI, & OR would never have been considered battle-grounds.
I can't say much about Clarke. In debates, he was weak. His stump speeches did end up sounding pretty damn good towards the end of the primaries. I think there was some raw material there to work with, just not enough time. He's the biggest question mark in my mind. It could have been a brilliant victory. It could have been a major defeat.
Anyone who seriously utters the word 'Joe-mentum' is not qualified to be President.
So, I question those who will say "Dean would have been better....Clarke would have been better...Gephardt would have been better." I don't see it. I don't see any significant change in where we are today if another nominee had been selected. Those who once thought only Dean could galvanize new voters are those same people highlighting new voter registration. Those who believed Dean's courageous anti-war stance would somehow be unpopular are witnessing a growing tide of people disillusioned with our foreign adventure. Those who thought Gephardt would be tarred with the "Insider" label are seeing an insider on the brink of bringing down Bush.
In the end, Dean, Gephardt, Edwards, Clarke would likely be within striking distance of Bush. Each would have stood as viable alternatives to Bush. Each would have faced the Rovian juggernaut of lies and deceit. So, in one sense, Kerry is not as important as what he, or any other Democratic candidate embodies, a rational alternative to Bush.
But, John Kerry has risen to the occasion. John Kerry has stepped up. John Kerry has endured a massive assault on his courage and his convictions. John Kerry has had to watch as a Man-Child questioned his metal and his medals. Kerry has been on a relentless pace that must be physically and emotionally exhausting. Kerry is out there, pounded by nasty attacks and under a biased media microscope.
Kerry is fighting for us as much as we are for him. If he has to fall, he will fall fighting what may be the most disasterous presidency in history. Lets not, with perfect hindsight, critically deconstruct everything the man has done in the past three months. We deserve better than Bush and John Kerry deserves better than that.
Tragedy was averted yesterday when columnist Anne Coulter survived an attempted assassination.
Editors Note: Folks, this is unacceptable. Even Anne Coulter should not be assaulted. In fact, she really needs therapy more than our insults. This was not a class act. Grow-up and debunk her lunacy and leave the pies at home.
According to recent news reports, Pat Robertson, founder of the 700 Club warned President Bush there would be casualties in Iraq and that God was against the war. In response, the White House issued a statement assuring the American people that God had spoken to the President and had been for the Iraqi War. GOP officials have pounced on this controversy in the hopes of portraying God as a flip-flopper.
"Which is it?" asks Ed Gillespie, RNC Chairman. "God talks to both these men, both men are honest. It looks like God is trying to have it both ways."
"That's not the type of Diety we need," said Mitch McConnell (R-KY). "We need a man that is firm and resolute. You just can't trust this God."
McConnell is investigating possible sanctions against God for campaign finance law violations. "He's obviously on board with the Kerry campaign and that's something we'll have to look into." God is not registered as a 527.
Vice-President Cheney, on the campaign trail, has begun to openly criticize God's leadership. "He has a 12,765 year history of changing his positions. First, he wants to wipe us out in a flood, then he promises he will never do it again. He said he created the world in seven days, but not the Sun until the fourth day. How can you have days with no Sun? We're talking about a guy that had his own son executed."
God could not be reached for comment. A close friend did state that, "God would rather drive nails through his head than talk with either one of these twits."
Time for some culture.
1. Explain how the medium utilized by the artist helps to dictate the subject matter.
2. The primary subject is shielding his genitalia while the secondary subject is presenting him with an obvious phallic symbol. Explain what the artist wishes to convey. Does it work?
If an artist disassembled George Bush into basic geometric forms, would you want to see him reassembled?
Thursday, October 21, 2004
Ladies and Gentlemen, let me introduce to you, Justin Kelly's Blog Underground (and not just because LB in '04 is mentioned).
I think Justin has come up with a great idea. There are a lot of really good amateur blogs out there, doing really fine work (Steve, Jen, Bluegrass Roots and Timshel to name just a few). These folks are covering state and local politics better than many newspapers and television stations. They deserve an audience. Good Luck, Justin.
The following is one possible election night timeline for LB in '04 Editor Stockton. It is based upon a detailed analysis of the polling data and historical voting patterns as well as pure conjecture. This is only one possibility out of the many we will explore on In Search Of...
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2ND 2004
5:30 PM - Rush out to mall after forgetting today is Mrs. Stockton's birthday
5:38 PM - Chris Matthews calls Florida for Bush
6:00 PM - Electoral Vote Tally
Bush 19 (KY & IN)
Stockton lets cats out, returns to watching Seinfeld reruns
7:00PM - Electoral Vote Tally
Bush 55 (VA, SC, GA,)
Kerry 7 (VT, NH)
To Close To call - 27 (FL)
Carton of cigarettes depleted, run to store for smokes and coffee, let cats in, Matthews apologizes
7:22PM - Russert starts writing on cardboard, Stockton feeds cats and puts son to bed
7:30PM - Electoral Vote Tally
Bush 95 (NC, OH, WV)
Too Close to call 27 (FL)
Stockton curses OH, throws cat at television
7:39PM - Out of cigarettes and coffee, run to store.
8:00PM - Electoral Vote Tally
Bush 179 (TN,AL,MS,TX,OK,KS,MO)
Kerry 120 (ME, CT, MA,PA,MD,DC,NJ,MI,IL)
Breaths sigh of relief, calls vet to make appointment for cat
8:30PM - Electoral Vote Tally
Bush 185 (AR)
Stockton reviews Constitution to see if Arkansas can be kicked out of Union
Watch Seinfeld reruns, poke cat, cat still breathing
9:00PM - Electoral Vote Tally
Bush 224 (LA,SD,NE,WY,CO,AZ)
Kerry 180 (NY,RI,WI,MN,NM)
Breaths sigh of relief, wife pulls Stockton's head out of oven and points out we have electric stove, not gas
9:39PM - Ignore crying daughter
9:41PM - Ignore wife calling his name
9:42PM - Ignore wife calling him names
9:48PM - Reflect that IA and NV are populated with reasonable people who love their country.
9:51PM - Reflect that IA and NV hate America and Republicans will steal the election
10:00PM - Electoral Vote Tally
Bush 239 (ND, MT, ID, UT)
Kerry 192 (IA, NV)
Wakes up wife to say he promised God that if IA went to Kerry he'd move there.
10:01PM - Wife packs for him
11:00PM - Electoral Vote Tally
Kerry 269 (CA,OR,WA,HI)
11:01PM - Realizes it could be a tie, who votes in the House? New Congress, old Congress? Copy of Constitution already ripped up in disgust
12:00 -Electoral Vote Tally
Bush 242 (AK)
12:05AM - Watch Charlie's Angels reruns
1:10AM - Florida called for Bush, lock doors and look for passport. House will vote Bush in, Senate makes Edwards Vice-President.
In a stunning victory, Senator John F. Kerry (D-MA) easily defeated President George W. Bush in the race for the kids vote. Kerry received 57% to the President's 43%*. Kerry swept Bush in nearly every category of voter. Over one million kids voted.
Inside the Numbers
Among those who wanted a President smarterer than them:
Among those who like war heroes:
Among those who can pronounce nuclear correctly:
Among those who believe a unilateral approach in the war in Iraq is fundementally flawed, leaving the United States exposed to a greater extent than it was during the height of the Cold War (Particularly during Kruschev's tenure as Party Chairman)
Among those who prefer fudgcicles over ice cream:
Among those who pee their pants when scared:
Among those who hate poo-poo heads:
Height - 53% believe John Kerry is taller than President Bush
Education - 67% believed that Mrs. Kenney would take points off for the President's incomplete sentences
Attitude - 66% believe Mrs. Thompson would have given the President a time-out after the first debate
* can't find the percentages on Nickelodeon website. Saw result while watching Sponge Bob.
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
By Tweed (thought it would be Stockton, didn't you)
Holy Moly! It looks like we got a close one.
But maybe not. Early voting indicates that first time voters and independents are breaking heavily for Kerry. Could it be that disputed ballots in FL won't matter? NO! Because there will be dipsuted ballots in Ohio, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Oregon as well!
But perhaps not.
First, let's look at the
As readers of LB in 04' will know, the national polls have little bearing on the race compared to the sexual proclivities of the contestants. Nonetheless, the national polls tell us some things.
In 2000, Al Gore trailed Dubya leading up to the election:
Nov.1: Bush 46%, Gore 41%; Bush 48%, Gore 46% Bush 45%, Gore 38%; Bush 48%, Gore 43%; Bush 46.7%, Gore 41.4%
Nov. 2: Bush 45%, Gore 42%; Bush 46.8%, Gore 41.8%; Bush 45%, Gore 40%; Bush 44%, Gore 43%; Bush 47%, Gore 43%
Nov. 3: Bush 45%, Gore 42%; Bush 46.4%, Gore 42.5%; Bush 49%, Gore 45%; Bush 46%, Gore 39%; Bush 48%, Gore 42%
Nov. 4: Bush 46%, Gore 42%; Bush 48%, Gore 45%; Bush 46%, Gore 37%; Bush 43%, Gore 43% (Fox News, interestingly enough); Bush 47%, Gore 43%
Nov. 5 (Sunday before Election Day): Bush 48%, Gore 43%; Bush 49%, Gore 45%; Bush 48%, Gore 41.2%; Bush 46%, Gore 44%; Bush 47%, Gore 43%; Bush 48%, Gore 45%; Bush 47%, Gore 44%; Bush 46%, Gore 44%; Bush 46%, Gore 37%; Gore 44%, Bush 41%
Only one poll of these had Gore winning the national vote - which is what Gore did. This indicates that the national polls in 2000 (most within the margin of error) gave us a pretty good take on the election - if you assume they undercounted democratic votes.
This probably holds true these days as well. In addition, Kerry has a few other factors turning his way: First, the democratic base is energized - they want to see Bush gone. Second, while a large portion of the republican base is energized (the moron wing), the socially moderate and fiscally conservative republicans (i.e. Ohians and New Hampshirites and Iowavites) probably could think of many other people they'd vote for over Bush. Third, democrats have beaten republicans in voter registration drives the last few years. (There are contrasting views on this point. A detailed NYT investigation showed the democrats had out registered republicans in Ohio and Florida by huge amounts. Today's Washington Post indicates democratic gains are not as strong as once thought.) Fourth, the independents will break for Kerry - it's tradition, and polling of early voters bears this out. Fifth, Kerry is taller than Bush. Sixth, new voters are breaking for Kerry. And finally, Bush has alienated some key constituencies from 2000.
But, as we know, a candidate can win the popular vote and lose the election (or, if you're Al Gore, win the popular vote, win the election, and watch helplessly as Antonin Scalia & Co., elevate the dimwit to the highest office in the world).
First, let's turn to
The Easy Ones
Even though this race is one of the closest we've seen in years, and the polling data is inconclusive, at best, there are some pretty easy picks:
The Heart of the Confederacy: SC (8), GA (15), AL (9) and MS (6) = 38 EVs
The Republic of Texas: TX (34) and OK (7) = 41 EVs (79)
The States of Grass: KS (6), NE (5), SD (3) and ND (3) = 17 EVs (96)
Mountain States (Where the Men are Men and the Sheep are Nervous): WY (3), MT (3), ID (4) and UT (5) = 15 EVs (111)
Alaska = 3 EVs (114)
Finally, Bush gets Intuckysee = 30EVs
So, Bush starts off with a no doubt, 144EVs
California: 55 EVs
Illinois: 21 EVs
The Northeast Corridor: DC (3), MD (10), DE (3), NY (33), CT (7), RI (4), MA (12) and VT (3)
So, Kerry starts off with a no doubt 153 EVs
"But Tweed," you may proclaim, "isn't Louisiana a no-brainer for Bush - and what about Oregon and Washington - don't they belong to Kerry." "Absolutely," I would reply, "but it's so much more fun to drag these things out a little."
So let's take a look at the
The South: NC (15), VA (13), WV (5) and LA (9) = 42 EVs
Arizona: 10 EVs
So, Bush gets another 52 EVs giving him a total of 196
The Northeast: ME (4) and NJ (15) = 19 EVs
The North: MI (17) and MN (10) = 27 EVs
The Northwest: WA (11) and OR (7) = 18 EVs
So, Kerry gets another 64 EVs giving him a total of 217
This leaves us with
The Battleground States:
NH (4): A traditionally republican state that probably would have given the election to Gore if it hadn't been for The One Who Must Not Be Named. Kerry led in the polls early and has seemed to have regained his lead over Bush, who is behind in 3 of the 5 most recent polls (which include 1 tie). Northeastern republicans are becoming an endangered species, and it is doubtful the republicans will be able to hold onto NH in 2004. Kerry 221
PA (21): Polls be damned. In 2000, Gore led consistently by about 2% in the polls in PA; he ended up winning 50.6% to 46.4% with Nader picking up most of the rest. Kerry is showing even greater strength than Gore, and has a Democratic governor and billionare wife in PA. Large voter turnout, which is likely, will favor Kerry. This is Kerry's state. Kerry 242
OH (20): Ohio is the midwestern version of NH. The republicans here are fiscally conservative and a bit squeemish when it comes to legislating morality. OH has been hit hard by the economic downturn, and Edwards' "two Americas" message rings true in OH. Polls indicate that this is a true battleground state, but Kerry has been doing well in October. In addition, massive voter registration drives by Democrats in OH have far surpassed Republican efforts. Bush beat Gore by about 3.5% - and Gore gave up on the state a couple of weeks before the election. OH could be the scene of poll access problems, vote fraud and any other number of "irregularities." Nonetheless, large voter turnout, with independents and first-time voters turning to Kerry result in a Kerry win here. Kerry 262
FL (27): Like OH, a true battleground. The polls here are miraculously close, giving neither candidate an edge. Kerry gets to battle two Bushes in FL; but the Bush boys have to battle the anger of lots of voters in FL who believe that their votes didn't count in 2000. FL will be ugly (and by current reports, it already is). I believe the forces of goodness and light will ride the backs of voters in a massive voter turnout that gives Kerry a very slight edge. Kerry 289
WI (10): Who'da'thunkit? WI a battleground. Don't be so sure. The lack of the Nader factor, and large turnout help Kerry here. He'll win with room to spare. The polls are pulling his way as well. Kerry 299
IA (7): Too close than it should be. IA is a battleground, like FL and OH. But with independents breaking against the incumbent, good turnout and the effects of pretty good registration efforts by the Democrats give Kerry a slight edge. Kerry 306
MO (11): MO is returning to its status as a bellweather state. Polls show this race closer than Bush should like, and Kerry's not even running there. Even a large Kerry effort won't pull away Bush's support here, though. Bush has polled above 50% plenty of times here (unlike in FL, OH, WI and IA), and Kerry has not. This red state stays red. Bush 207
AR (6): An effort by the big dog would have put AR over the edge for Kerry long ago. As it is, some polls put this one neck and neck. A large voter turnout will help Kerry here, and although it will be close, I think Bush hangs on. Bush 213
CO (9): CO is an odd place - almost a western version of NH. Salazar will help Kerry here, but I can't believe it will be enough to put him over the top. Only a few polls put Kerry close, and while a big turnout will help also, Bush keeps this state. Bush 222 (Don't ask about the apportionment issue.)
NM (5): I don't buy that this is as close as some polls are putting it. Kerry wins, but not too comfortably. Kerry 311
NV (5): Yucca Mountain; unions. Kerry squeeks by Bush on the backs of a big turnout and Bush voters not being all that excited. Kerry 316
Kerry wins the popular vote by >1.5 million.
Tweed drinks a bottle of $200 champaigne with his New Zealand neighbor.
Keeping up their attacks on Senator John Kerry, the Bush campaign, through prime mover Vice President Dick Cheney, has suggested that America may suffer God's wrath if Senator Kerry is elected. These comments follow closely on the heals of Mr. Cheney's allegations that should Senator Kerry be elected, we run the risk of a nuclear attack from terrorists.
Cheney During a Meet the Press Interview
"The presidency of Senator Kerry," intoned Cheney, "will result in the destruction of our world through the will of God."
But Cheney's comments came at a time when the campaign was sending mixed messages. While Cheney was warning of global destruction, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, shedding his warrior image, talked today a great deal about the peace that is slowly coming to Iraq. "We don't want to fight. We don't want to kill. We just want everyone to get along - that's our message to the world."
Rumsfeld Looking on the Brighter Side
The dual signals from the campaign marred Bush's efforts to thwart Senator Kerry's attacks on the president regarding social security and national security; and increasing concerns that Mr. Bush is simply not capable of handling the job. The president tried an end of the day press conference to smooth over an otherwise lackluster day. Seeking to reintroduce a martial spirit in the campaign, to remind voters of who was really in charge, he shunned his patented light blue tie and dark blue suit for a military uniform supplied by Rumsfeld.
Bush, Flanked by Cheney and Rumsfeld, During a Recent Press Conference
Six blood relatives of President Bush who support John F. Kerry's bid for the presidency have launched a website to publicize their sharp disagreements with Bush's policies.
The site, bushrelativesforkerry.com, consists of personal statements from a group of decidedly liberal second cousins of the president, none of whom knows him personally. All are grandchildren of Mary Bush House, the sister of Prescott Bush, a former US senator from Connecticut and the father and grandfather of the two Bush presidents.
The introduction to the site opens with the slogan, ''Because blood is thicker than oil!" and states: ''As the election approaches, we feel it is our responsibility to speak out about why we are voting for John Kerry, and to do our small part to help America heal from the sickness it has suffered since George Bush was appointed President in 2000. We invite you to read our stories, and please, don't vote for our cousin!"
In the third and final Presidential Debate in Tempe Arizona, Democrat John Kerry 'outted' Mary Cheney. Mary Cheney, a lesbian who runs BC-04's outreach program to the gay and lesbian community, is actually Vice-President Dick Cheney's daughter. Mary Cheney could not be reached for comment but some close friends did talk about the incident.
"She wasn't ready for people to know this," said longtime friend Bill Castano. "Everyone has embarrassing things in their lives and I don't think it was right for Kerry to mention it. People don't need to know Mary is the Vice-President's daughter."
"It was wrong," said high school chum, Mildred Pierce. "If you dig around in anyone's past you'll find something. She's just trying to live her life and now this albatross is slung around her neck."
"She's still a good person," said Phil Manners, a co-worker. "She took on the toughest job in the entire campaign. It's not easy to bring queers into the Bush - Cheney camp. It's a bit like a Jew leading other Jews to the trains. Who her father is should be a non-issue."
In an effort to bring more gays and lesbians into Republican politics, Ms. Cheney has organized a number of 'mixers' that allow longtime GOPer's and gays and lesbians to get to know one another. According to friends, Ms. Cheney's ultimate goal is to make it easier for gays and lesbians to become American citizens.
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
In the wake of masturbating over the phone with a vibrator, Fox's Bill O'Reilly has canceled a planned children's book tour.
O'Reilly apoligized to the book stores for the late cancellation.
"We're disappointed," said Lee Ashton, owner of 'Take a Walk on the Wild Side', a New York City book store. "We already ordered hundreds of 'Whose Looking Out for Me vibrators'. What the hell are we supposed to do now?"
"Bill called me personally," said Tamara Wilks, owner of Porn to Be Wild, a Cleveland book store, "which was very nice. But I couldn't hear him to well. He was all out of breath and there was a buzzing sound in the background."
The book tour has not been rescheduled.
Tucker Carlson, co-host of CNN's Crossfire, appears to embrace being John Stewart's bitch. Not content with being made a fool of, Carlson is going back for more.
The bow-tie wearing submissive hopes the fued continues because, "I've been a naughty, naughty boy. I need John to punish me again!"
Rarely is the question asked, where does the Presidential Race stand on October 19, 2004? It's lucky you tuned in to LB in '04 because we have the answer.
As of today, John Kerry needs 270 Electoral Votes to be President of the United States. Coincidentally, George Bush needs the same number of Electoral Votes. That must have taken years of planning.
The Popular Vote
Polls indicate the popular vote is a dead heat. Kerry up by 2, Bush up by 3, tied, Kerry down 1. With margins of error in the 4.5% range, these are relatively meaningless. Add to that the fact that there is tremendous interest in this election and voter registration is up, the national polls become even more meaningless. Don't get too excited if Kerry's up or too despondent when Kerry's down.
Further, the presidential race is not a national race; it's 50 state races. In theory, a candidate could win the White House by getting one more vote in 17 or 18 states than the other candidate while getting no votes in the remaining states. We exaggerate to make a point. This is math. That's all it is, with 270 being the magic number.
What Has to Happen for the Forces of Good to Prevail?
We're glad you asked. Lets start with the proposition that Kerry has the Gore States and Bush the Bush states. Kerry needs to scrape up 10 more EC's. The most obvious strategy is to fight for Florida and Ohio. A win in one will put him over the top.
But wait! Kerry, you say, hasn't pinned down all the Gore states. Battlegrounds include WI, MN, NM, IA. First of all, if you really think Bush can take MN, you should go home now. There is no way that Kerry is going to win FL and/or OH and not take MN.
Now, take a deep breath and relax. The states Kerry will carry (and you can bank this) are:
ME, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY,MD, DC, DE, IL, WA, OR, HI, CA =175 ECV's
That's my extremely conservative prognosis. I say that because I have no doubt that Kerry will win the four states that follow. However, lets be cautious. Kerry will very likely win the following:
PA, MN, NJ, MI =238 ECV's
So, the magic number is 32. Just where do we find these elusive 32 Electoral College votes. Unlike Republicans, we can't steal them so we'll have to earn them. The obvious place to mine these votes is OH and FL. Duh! Taking both OH and FL puts Kerry well over the top (286 ECV's). But we can't count on Kerry taking all the biggest states (minus TX) in such a supposedly close election.
If Kerry takes FL, he'll have 265 ECV's, 5 shy of our magic number. Taking FL is the best scenerio because any number of states will put him over the top; WI, IA, NM, NV, WV.
If Kerry loses FL and takes OH, he'll be at 259 ECV's. Realistically, he'll need two more states. WI + any state (IA, NM, NV, WV) or IA + any state (WI, NM, NV, WV).
But what happens if Kerry loses OH and FL? Is it over? Realistically, yes. If that happens, it's Hail Mary time. Kerry supporters will have to hope for WI, IA, NM, NV, WV. That's a lot of hoping in such a close contest. And lets be realistic: WV is going for Bush. Therefore, Kerry must carry FL or OH.
The Most Important State
This brings us to what I consider the most important state: NH. Little New Hampshire with four Electoral Votes. Why is it so important? Because of ME. Under these scenerios, we have Kerry winning when he wins certain states. If those combinations of states add up to 270, Kerry may still lose. One of Maine's ECV's may go to Bush due to the way ME divides ECV's. So, if your just using the EC map and looking at states, two things become apparent. If you're giving Kerry all of ME's 4 ECV's and coming up with 270 ECV's, he will lose if Bush splits the ME vote. It's not certain that Bush will gain that single ECV, but it's something to look for.
NH becomes important if Kerry wins FL but loses IA and WI. If that happens, he'll need to win either NV or NM, both real possibilities. Still, that only gets him to 269 votes (subtracting 1 vote from ME). NH can be the trump card, giving him 273 ECV's.
If Kerry wins OH and WI, NH puts him over the top. If Kerry wins OH and IA, NH + either NV or NM puts him over the top. These are all realistic scenerios.
Kerry will not win AR, CO, VA, AZ. If those states play in your conception of a Kerry win, you're hanging on a wing and a prayer. I also believe, no matter how close MO seems, ultimately it will tip to Bush.
If, on election night, you see NH going to Kerry (which I believe will happen), he's very much in the game. If he takes FL or OH, he's looking good. If he takes both, run outside and howl at the moon (something I usually do but will now have a reason for doing).
If Kerry loses NH, OH, FL, only the Kool-Aid drinkers will believe the long national nightmare could still be ending. Could Kerry lose all three and still win? Yes. Anything is possible. Little George Bush's might fly out of my ass tomorrow, but I'm not betting on it.
Personally, I'd watch NH and OH. I have a hard time believing that Kerry will win NH and OH and lose IA and Wisconsin.
In a move we at LB in 04' whole-heartedly endorese, the US Navy is now making skirts optional for its female members. In addition, new Naval regulations will require pink bottoms for all female enlistees:
And female Naval officers will be required to wear a more streamlined pant-suit, in either black or white, modeled here by Ensigns Niva and Brandi:
For men, an array of options are available (facial hair optional):
Monday, October 18, 2004
The traitors over at DogFight04 have highlighted an important piece by Ron Suskind. I urge you to read it, memorize it and then eat the evidence. If you choose to accept this mission and are captured, we will disavow all knowledge of your activities. Also, while you're over there, give DF04 a shot. It's damn fine and we wish it had been around long before it appeared.
The Editors of LB in '04 urge our readers to find a safe place to take cover. The Rightwing seems to be imploding (or maybe exploding, it's hard to tell).
Where to start. Lets begin with the easy stuff.
The God Fearing Party has once again nominated, at the very least, an ex-junkie for President and a two-time (at least) DWI offender for Vice-President. But, this is too easy. We all know about these two guys.
There's one of our all-time favorites, failed Illinois Senate Candidate, Jack Ryan. Mr. Ryan wanted to have sex with his wife (good) in front of other people (bad). They replaced him with Alan Keyes, a Marylander, who accused Mrs. Clinton of being a Carpetbagger.
The GOP also nominated James L. Hart for Congress in the Tennessee 8th. Mr. Hart is an interesting man.
Lets not forget about Coburn, the GOP Senate candidate in Oklohoma. He's worried about all three lesbians in Oklahoma running loose in the schools.
Pete Coors, running for Senate in Colorado is a proud conservative, against gay marriage but for ...the Black & Blue 2004 Festival in Montreal, a weeklong gay benefit"--that begins tonight-- that attracts up to 80,000 people to events such as the Leather Rail, Raunch Fetish Night and a male nude revue. ...Coors Light is one of two free beers that will be served at the official launch cocktail party.
He's also concerned about North Dakota for some reason.
MR. COORS: This is a war on terror. And this is a--we can say "weapons of mass destruction," "no weapons of mass destruction"; clearly, we should be more worried today, actually, about Iran and North Dakota
Then, there's Senator Bunning of Kentucky. Increasingly, he's acting like everyone's favorite uncle. The one you hide in the attic when you have company.
One of the Right's biggest douchebags is a junkie and the other likes to sexually harass employees.
Finally, two oldies but goodies. If you Yahoo "Santorum" & "bestiality", you'll receive over 4,000 hits (by comparison, if you Yahoo "Tweed" + "Bestiality" you only get 2,221 hits). And what was it with Senator Cornyn and those damn box turtles.
Ladies and Gentlemen: Your Family Values Party!
Friday, October 15, 2004
TV personality Bill O'Reilly, host of Faux News' "The Factor," is seeking the republican nomination for the Illinois senate.
"Mr. O Reilly is announcing that he is seeking the republican nomination for the Illinois Senate," said O'Reilly spokesperson Honey Chile. "He's very excited about this race, and is ready to pick up where Jack Ryan left off."
O'Reilly Spokeswoman Just Before the Announcement
The announcement set off a series of accusations, attacks and comments from all quarters. "I can't believe the impertinence of this man," said current republican candidate Alan Keyes, "the good people of Chicago and Springfield and Gary don't need no carpetbagger from the east coast as their candidate!"
Keyes Upon Hearing the Announcement
For his part, O'Reilly tried to calm the waters: "Look; it's not like I don't like the guy - I do. I think he's an honorable man. But he's polling - what - like, negative 10%. I'm what the Illinois republican party is after." O'Reilly related his candidacy directly to Jack Ryan's failed candidacy: "I'm gonna pick up where he left off - but I promise, my sexual escapades will be limited, exclusively to Illinois - except for the phone sex. I know this girl in mid-town - well anyway I'll be in Illinois. And I'm proud to have members of Ryan's staff joining me in my bid."
"Yeah, I got the call yesterday," said Susan Spartman of Chicago. "I wouldn't go with Keyes - that whole moralizing thing - but when O'Reilly's people called, I knew he was my guy."
Spartman worked fory Ryan: Now She's on O'Reilly's Team
Other republicans weighed in as well, arguing that O'Reilly would bring the party back to its "traditional values" platform. "This party had its roots in the progressive movement," said Shirley Moore, the Deputy Chairperson of the state GOP Committee. "We need to return to that spirit and return to the direction Ryan had us moving in. We need to attract new members, teach them that being a republican can be fun, that being tied to a firm foundation, and suffering the abuse of a domineering partner can be amazingly liberating. I think his campaign should go by the All Thrust Zone."
Moore: "Can't Wait to Meet O'Reilly."
Some in the Keyes campaign argued that O'Reilly was a "Johnny Come Lately." O'Reilly's response: "Yeah I have."
"Look, the truth is, I'm gonna get the job done," said O'Reilly. "I have a plan that will get us where we need to be, and I had this diagram made up so that everyone can see it. Now no one can say I'm just a horny guy who's famous. Here - here's the diagram:"
Experts Are Unsure of the Dimensions of O'Reilly's Plan
"My experts assure me it will work," said O'Reilly.
LB editors were fortunate enough to interview Nina Santa Maria, one of the architects of O'Reilly's plan, who strongly defended O'Reilly's plan:
LB in 04: Ms. Santa Maria, can this plan work as a stimulus?
Santa Maria: Umphhhf mgrhrhr mfflle ahmmffufffmmm. Urrrh grrrrrr frfflllffff mmrrrrffhfffuf fhmm fhf mmfmmf.
LB in 04': Fascinating. But will it excite other members of congress?
Santa Maria: Mmmmmfffllf aaaahahahrrrrgg gguhmmm dffiifiifllm.
LB in 04': And in that way you help to defeat the flacidity?
Santa Maria: Yyyyhhhhhhffff!
O'Reilly's Expert Weighs In
Democrat, Barack Obama, the clear favorite in the race. Seemed unconcerned about his opponents. "Tell you what," said Obama. "Let them both run, multiply their results by 2, and add them together and I bet I still win."
Obama Reacts to the Announcement
Following in the footsteps of Dwight Eisenhower's son, Theodore Roosevelt's grandaughter, Edith Roosevelt Williams, has endorsed Senator John F. Kerry.
Republicanism runs in the blood of Edith Roosevelt Williams of Vashon Island. The granddaughter of President Theodore Roosevelt served as honorary chairwoman of Sen. John McCain's 2000 presidential campaign in Washington.
"Whoever is the conservationist candidate is my choice," Williams said by phone last week. "In the presidential race, that would appear to be Mr. Kerry."
However, not to be outdone, President Bush has collected his own endorsements from the scions of past Presidents.
"I whole-heartedly endorse George Bush for President. Mostly because he's making my grandfather look really good right about now." - Herbert Hoover III
"Ditto." - Dorothy Harding Stanton
"I didn't know Mary Cheney was a lesbian. How come I didn't know?" - Jeb Bush
Thursday, October 14, 2004
After watching President Bush lose three debates to Senator John Kerry, the Republican Party is finally ready to attack. Starting next Monday, the RNC plans to began an advertisement campaign that attacks Senator Kerry for being biased against President Bush and the Republican agenda.
"These debates have been a joke," said Ed Gillespie, the soon to be former Chair of the RNC. "Kerry is clearly a Democrat and his bias towards that party is unmistakable. He hasn't given the President any credit for anything. I'm sure they have disagreements, but Kerry is obviously in the pocket of the Democrats."
Other agreed. Rick Santorum (R-PA) said, "Kerry is so transparent. It's obvious he wants the President's job. Why doesn't he just admit it?"
Arlen Specter (R-PA) was less critical of Kerry but still disappointed. "The Senator from Massachusetts has been very good at explaining where he stands on the issues, but where's the balance. Why doesn't he talk about where the President wants to lead the country and the good things the President has done. He'd get much more respect if he was even-handed about these things."
A new poll reflects that the GOP might be on to something. In a recent Zogby poll, 63% of voters believed Kerry was biased against Bush. The remaining 35% said Kerry was only critical of Bush because the senator wanted to be President. Two percent of respondants told Zogby to fuck-off.
Bush gave a remarkable performance last night, and I'm voting for him. The only to keep me from voting for him would be if I found out he lied about never having said he wasn't concerned about bin Laden.
And all that stuff about being a Christian - I know you think it may be bunk, but I've got proof the President forgives and forgets:
How can you not feel safe:
As President Bush lost the third and final debate, critics speculated as to the cause of the President's incessant blinking during the bout. A wide range of theories have been voiced. Some suggest the President suffers from a type of dry-drunk dementia. Others suggest the leader of the free world suffers from a type of dry-junkie dementia. The theories, while intriguing, are wrong according to Commander Henry Perry of the USN Signalman Corp.
"He blinking code," said Commander Perry.
Perry inadvertently stumbled across his theory while watching the second debate. "My eyes began to glaze over whenever President Bush spoke. I tuned him out but was almost hypnotized by his rapid blinking."
Bush, seen here in debate prep, is not blinking
"I began to see a pattern form. I looked at my wife as said, 'Did he just say, Abort...Karl...Abort...Get...Me....Out...'? My wife said, 'No, he just said, working hard at the hard work'.
Perry ran to get a pen and some paper and began jotting down what the President was blinking. "Here it is," said Perry. "It's a bit freaky."
WHAT THE PRESIDENT WAS "BLINKING"
Republicans hope that Perry's theory lays to rest any lingering doubts as to the President's mental health. Others worry that the Presidential blinking will turn off undecided voters. "I wish we could go back to the days of Bush landing on Aircraft Carriers," said Sonny Williams, a long-time Bush aid. "Those were good days."
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Republicans are following up on a Karl Rove's warning of October surprises through a series of events aimed at taking down Senator John Kerry and bolstering the President's base.
First on the list is the forced television broadcast release of a hastily created film condemning Senator Kerry's anti-war activities after his service in Vietnam by Sinclair Broadcasting Group. Sinclair also intends to show Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will, non-stop during the week leading up to election day.
You may recall that this television company, Sinclair, is full of huge Bush fans, and really loyal LB in 04' readers will remember this April post:
"FACTS NOT IN PUBLIC INTEREST"
Presidential surrogate, Sinclair Broadcast Group, has decided not to air a Nightline program because it will disclose names and photographs of US soldiers killed in Iraq. The general counsel to Sinclair, whose executives are major financial backers of Bush, stated that disclosing such information is "not in the public interest. "Huh? Since when are facts not in the public interest?We're confused about Sinclair's position. Either Sinclair supports the President's policies and wants to hide the consequences of his policies, or they are ashamed of President Bush and want to hide the consequences of his policies. Please contact Sinclair and find out which:
Contact Sinclair by phone: 410/568-1500 or by fax: 410/568-1533 (fax). In any event, Sinclair does not want the American public to know the names and faces of those of us who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country.
But that's not all the republicans have going on. "We're going to get out the base," said republican strategist, Arch Stanton, "and we're going to have fun doing it at regional events we're calling "Octoberfest in Dixie."" Republicans are aiming these events at social conservatives in the hopes of energizing their participation in the 2004 election.
"We're planning on having some great activities - we're going to burn copies of Clinton's memoirs,
"Give speeches about how great we are,
"Have a parade
"And help get the youth vote out.
"We're very excited!"
After we received Jen's complaint about the hairstyle of the model we used to portray her in our tribute to our friends, we thought the whole thing would blow over.
She's friggin' sending us emails about this! And pictures of Jeniffer Garner - "hey, that's who I want to be me"!
So, rather than contend with Jen's . . . obsession with this, we decided to go with the picture she sent to us.
Unfortunately, a number of things hampered us in this project. First, we couldn't figure out how to cut and paste the picture into our site. Stockton suggest some computer mumbo jumbo, and Tweed wanted to use scissors and tape.
So we decided to find the picture some other way. No luck - can't find it anywhere else than from whence Jen emailed it to us. So now we've got to find another picture that will make Jen happy.
Stockton would have called Ms. Garner directly but is prohibited from doing so by a silly TRO (one man's wooing is another man's stalking).
You see, we figured we'd find another great pictures which we could use to portray Jen and at the same time, give you Reason #76 of Why We're Democrats. But we ran into problems.
First, we've got to find a picture of Ms. Garner with her hair up to Ms. Good Intention's standards. Think about this site for a minute. Do you really think we're equiped to know what good hair looks like?
Second, we've got to find a picture that conveys - at the same time, mind you - "want to have sex with her" and "too afraid she'd kill me if I tried to have sex with her."
Well, all of this got us going in circles and confused, and gave us headaches and heartburn, and made us feel like even bigger idiots than we normally feel like.
We finally came down to two pictures, and just couldn't decide which one worked the best. Nonetheless, we're pretty sure, we think, we've got the right pictures.
So, Jen, take your pick:
Here it is: Reason #76 Why We're Democrats and Jen All in One:
So Jen, choose wisely.