 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home |
Credits |
Cast |
1 |
2 |
3 |
End |
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home |
Credits |
Cast |
1 |
2 |
3 |
End |
Reviews |
|
|
;void(0)) . . . see "POLITICS" for related links I supported a Bush victory...for no other reason than for denying comfort to Islamist terrorists. [...] I realize the Moral Majority elected Bush, and they may be of the opinion that people like me belong in hell. I am not happy with that, but I prefer to side with people who think I belong in Hell rather than people who will take the trouble to send me there. --"ahriman", http://blogusalem.blogspot.com/2004_11_01_blogusalem_archive. html#109950257395591914 - ...AS WE HURTLE TOWARD November 2, our country is divided by a deep and passionate opposition between parties, as bitter as the factional divisions of Cavalier and Puritan so powerfully presented by Macaulay: The effect of violent animosities between parties has always been an indifference to the general welfare and honor of the state. A politician, where factions run high, is interested, not for the whole people, but for his own section of it. The rest are, in his view, strangers, enemies, or rather pirates. The strongest aversion which he can feel to any foreign power is the ardor of friendship, compared to the loathing which he entertains toward those domestic foes with whom he is cooped up in a narrow space, with whom he lives in a constant interchange of petty injuries and insults . . . Strong words. But this election more than anything else is about the conquest of two foreign lands, and the humbling of enemy potentates, a project still messy in many ways, but nevertheless an American success, so far, a victory--even in Iraq. Yet it is detested by George W. Bush's opponents to the bottom of their souls. So violent are our animosities at this moment that Bush's staggering achievement in Afghanistan is never debated as we approach the vote. It is reminiscent of the postwar debate over "Who lost China?" The passionate partisans who raised this cry in frenzied accusation never reflected: We were debating who lost China only because we had gained Japan, South Korea, Germany, Italy, France, and so forth. There seems to be some flaw in our national character, some self- hatred whereby we respond to the complexity of the real world by trying to exorcise the devil within ourselves. And the devil within ourselves we locate soon enough in our neighbor, in the other faction. Rather than rending our national fabric with self-reproach, Election Day is a moment to take mature satisfaction in our country's real triumphs. In Afghanistan, four short years ago, murders were plotted for the World Trade Center and the Pentagon under the protection of the Afghan government. This year, the plotters and those who protected them have been driven from the country or into remote fastnesses, while vast hordes of Afghans turned out to pay homage to our ideals in a free election. As you part the curtains of your voting booth, remember them. --Charles H. Fairbanks Jr., "Afghanistan Reborn", _The Weekly Standard_, 11/01/2004, Charles H. Fairbanks Jr. is a research professor of international relations at Johns Hopkins/SAIS and director of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute. - All of the biggest guns in the left’s arsenal - Hollywood, the trial lawyers, the unions, the New York Times, CBS, newly-minted strident liberal talk radio, bombastic and inaccurate “documentaries,” all of the skewed members of the MSM...all of them brought their A-game, threw themselves into this fight… and lost to the blogs, talk radio, alternative media, conservative religious groups, and a well-organized GOP ground game. It’s over. None of the left’s old tools works anymore. They have to scrap it and start over, and that’s why you see the weeping and the wailing and the hair being pulled out. --Jim Geraghtry, http://www.nationalreview.com/kerry/kerry200411041453.asp - When Ralph Nader mentions that 116 Italian members of parliament wrote to him asking him to withdraw his candidacy, he does so with a scornful laugh. When The Guardian newspaper had the idea of encouraging its British readers to write to Ohio voters to encourage them to defeat President George W. Bush, “Operation Clark County” as it was called was submerged in a backlash of hostile messages from across the Atlantic. “Real Americans aren't interested in your pansy-ass, tea-sipping opinions,” came one of many animated responses. “If you want to save the world, begin with your own worthless corner of it.” Another read: “We don't need weenie-spined Limeys meddling in our presidential election.” Overseas visitors to the Bush-Cheney campaign website in the past 10 days have been greeted with a simple message: You are not authorised to view this page. The 2004 election may have been, above all, about American foreign policy. Many commentators outside the US have said that the outcome tomorrow is a matter of concern for the entire world. But foreigners are mistaken if they think they have any say in the proceedings. “Butt Out” was the New York Daily News' response to Osama bin Laden's Act V entrance in the campaign at the weekend. In a lengthier piece of reporting, The New York Times yesterday suggested voters in the battleground states were giving the al-Qaeda leader equally short shrift. --James Harding, Foreign meddling unites American voters, "Financial Times" http://news.ft.com/cms/s/949c4d1a-2b93-11d9-92d4-00000e2511c8.html - But in an American election, there are no losers, because whether or not our candidates are successful, the next morning we all wake up as Americans. And that -- that is the greatest privilege and the most remarkable good fortune that can come to us on earth. --Sen. John Kerry, concession speech [3 November 2004] http://www.johnkerry.com/ - I had a bet with myself this week: How soon after election night would it be before the Bush-the-chimp-faced-moron stuff started up again? 48 hours? A week? I was wrong. Bush Derangement Syndrome is moving to a whole new level. On the morning of Nov. 2, the condescending left were convinced that Bush was an idiot. By the evening of Nov. 2, they were convinced that the electorate was. Or as London's Daily Mirror put it in its front page: "How Can 59,054,087 People Be So DUMB?" Well, they're British lefties: They can do without Americans. Whether an American political party can do without Americans is more doubtful. --Mark Steyn, "Condescending Dems still don't get it", _The Chicago Sun-Times_ [7 November 2004] http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn07.html  . . see "JOURNALISM" for related links In the process of debating the merits of publishing, and now continually hyping, the Abu Ghraib photos, I keep hearing that it is contrary to the American journalistic tradition to let patriotism or concern about the negative effects of bad news interfere with coverage. I have no idea where this idea comes from. Take Ernie Pyle, perhaps the most universally revered of America's war correspondents. The Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist was not the sort of objective chronicler of the facts the Columbia Journalism School churns out today. No, he was the sort of ink- stained wretch who proudly put on a military uniform and wrote glowing tributes to "our" brave boys at the front for whom he used his column to agitate for higher pay. As Michelle Malkin wrote a few years ago, "The writing that earned Ernie Pyle a Pulitzer Prize in 1944 would have gotten him fired today." Indeed, most of the press in World War II donned military uniforms - and proudly. They agreed to considerable censorship, which Walter Cronkite insists was fair and reasonable. Ask yourself how that squares with, say, today's press corps which, after 9/11, agonized over the ethical quandary of whether it was appropriate to wear a tiny American flag on their lapels? [...] Maybe the press was right to show restraint. Maybe it was wrong. But at least journalists didn't think their best work was work that treated America as a hostile power. The Ernie Pyle Journalism Award, for example, recognizes journalists who show "unwavering support and loyalty to the United States of America in the pursuit of fair and accurate reporting." Fox News offers a lesson here. I know the network's detractors think it's a right-wing propaganda factory. And, I certainly agree that much of Fox's programming is conservative (though liberals' sudden concern with ideologically loaded coverage is ironic). But at least one of the things that has made Fox News successful isn't that it's right-wing, it is that it's populist. This is an important distinction. From the beginning, Fox anchors weren't ashamed to wear American flags on their lapels. They aren't afraid to refer to American troops as "our brave fighting men and women" or some such. They aren't terrified that they will lose their objectivity merit badges if they sound like they hope America wins. If Fox goes overboard sometimes, it's only compared to a new standard Ernie Pyle wouldn't recognize. --Jonah Goldberg (1969?- ) American conservative commentator and author, "Patriotism & the Press," http://nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg200405280814.asp end page | ABORTION - ARABS | ANTI-AMERICANISM | ANTI-SEMITISM | BALI - BUSH | CAPITAL PUNISHMENT - CLINTON (HILLARY) | ELECTION [AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL - 2004] & FOX NEWS | GLOBAL WARMING & GUANTANAMO | GUN CONTROL & GUNS | HEALTH CARE (CANADIAN) - HOMOSEXUALS | HURRICANE KATRINA | IRAN | IRAQ 1 | IRAQ 2 | ISLAM - ISRAEL v. PALESTINE | LEFTISTS | MEDIA (THE) & MEDIA BIAS | MOORE (MICHAEL) & NEW YORK TIMES | NORTH KOREA - PATRIOT ACT | RADICAL THOUGHT | RAP MUSIC | STEM CELL RESEARCH | TERRORISM 1 | TERRORISM 2 | TERRORISM 3 | TERRORISM 4 | TERRORISM (PREVENTING) | UNITED NATIONS | | Return Home | The Credits | The Cast | Act 1 | Act 2 | Act 3 | The End | The Reviews | Photos | |
||