SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (53969)10/21/2004 11:27:53 AM
From: ChinuSFORespond to of 81568
 
Tonight, it is going to be a cliffhanger, I hope. LA Russa is a good coach. But Clemens still has the fire in him and I believe he wants to pitch against his former team BoSox (or for that matter even Yankees would have been fine for him).

Furthermore, He has also pitched against La Russa's former team several times. So he has every reason to rekindle the fire in him.

Go ASTROs



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (53969)10/21/2004 9:48:59 PM
From: stockman_scottRespond to of 81568
 
Jenna & Barbara Bush Welcome You to: SPRING BREAK FALLUJAH 2005!

enjoythedraft.com

"The draft --­ which will include both boys and girls this time around ­-- is a no-brainer in '05 and '06." - Col. David Hackworth (ret.), Military.com, 10/4/04

"I made it very plain. We will not have an all-volunteer army." - George W. Bush, 10/16/04

"We may need a bigger army." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Time, 12/21/03

"Re-electing Bush might very well lead to a draft in the near future." - Minnesota Daily (U. of Minn.), 9/23/04

"If we continue the way we're going, there's simply no way we can get by without a draft." - The Capital Times, 10/15/04

"The government is taking the first steps toward a targeted military draft of Americans with special skills in computers and foreign languages." - Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 3/13/04

"Because of the President's military adventurism, our Armed Forces are under enormous pressure. The only place to go for more troops is a draft." - Howard Dean quoted in Myrtle Beach Sun News, 9/22/04



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (53969)10/22/2004 12:45:29 AM
From: stockman_scottRespond to of 81568
 
Wakefield gets the call for Game 1

usatoday.com

<<...Francona said DH David Ortiz, the MVP of the American League Championship Series, will play first base when the World Series moves to the National League park, where the designated hitter is not used.

"I don't want that bat out of the lineup," Francona said. "It's difficult to sit Ortiz against anybody."

Ortiz hit .387 with three home runs and 11 RBI vs. the New York Yankees. He put the Red Sox ahead in three of the four games. His 12th-inning home run won Game 4, and his single in the 14th inning won Game 5. He also hit a home run in Game 7.

Wakefield was scheduled to pitch Game 4 of the ALCS but lost his rotation spot when he volunteered to pitch in relief to help Boston's thin bullpen.

Francona said that he was proud to manage a player with that attitude and hoped that there would be another chance to start Wakefield, who was 12-10 with a 4.87 ERA during the regular season.

Doug Mirabelli will catch Game 1 in place of Jason Varitek.

Curt Schilling will pitch Game 2 and will be followed by Pedro Martinez and Derek Lowe. The odd man out of the rotation is Bronson Arroyo, who pitched Game 3 of the Division Series but struggled in the ALCS vs. New York.

The setup will keep Schilling, who has torn tendons in his right ankle, from having to bat when the DH is not used...>>



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (53969)10/22/2004 10:38:19 AM
From: stockman_scottRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 81568
 
A FORMER REPUBLICAN SENATOR FOR KERRY

__________________________________

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

'Frightened to death' of Bush

I shall cast my vote for John Kerry come Nov 2.

I have been, and will continue to be, a Republican. But when we as a party send the wrong person to the White House, then it is our responsibility to send him home if our nation suffers as a result of his actions. I fall in the category of good conservative thinkers, like George F. Will, for instance, who wrote: "This administration cannot be trusted to govern if it cannot be counted on to think and having thought, to have second thoughts."

I say, well done George Will, or, even better, from the mouth of the numero uno of conservatives, William F. Buckley Jr.: "If I knew then what I know now about what kind of situation we would be in, I would have opposed the war."

First, let's talk about George Bush's moral standards.

In 2000, to defeat Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. — a man who was shot down in Vietnam and imprisoned for over five years — they used Carl Rove's "East Texas special." They started the rumor that he was gay, saying he had spent too much time in the Hanoi Hilton. They said he was crazy. They said his wife was on drugs. Then, to top it off, they spread pictures of his adopted daughter, who was born in Bangladesh and thus dark skinned, to the sons and daughters of the Confederacy in rural South Carolina.

To show he was not just picking on Republicans, he went after Sen. Max Cleland from Georgia, a Democrat seeking re-election. Bush henchmen said he wasn't patriotic because Cleland did not agree 100 percent on how to handle homeland security. They published his picture along with Cuba's Castro, questioning Cleland's patriotism and commitment to America's security. Never mind that his Republican challenger was a Vietnam deferment case and Cleland, who had served in Vietnam, came home in a wheel chair having lost three limbs fighting for his country. Anyone who wants to win an election and control of the legislative body that badly has no moral character at all.

We know his father got him in the Texas Air National Guard so he would not have to go to Vietnam. The religious right can have him with those moral standards. We also have Vice President Dick Cheney, who deferred his way out of Vietnam because, as he says, he "had more important things to do."

I have just turned 78. During my lifetime, we have sent 31,377,741 Americans to war, not including whatever will be the final figures for the Iraq fiasco. Of those, 502,722 died and 928,980 came home without legs, arms or what have you.

Those wars were to defend freedom throughout the free world from communism, dictators and tyrants. Now Americans are the aggressors — we start the wars, we blow up all the infrastructure in those countries, and then turn around and spend tax dollars denying our nation an excellent education system, medical and drug programs, and the list goes on. ...

I hope you all have noticed the Bush administration's style in the campaign so far. All negative, trashing Sen. John Kerry, Sen. John Edwards and Democrats in general. Not once have they said what they have done right, what they have done wrong or what they have not done at all.

Lyndon Johnson said America could have guns and butter at the same time. This administration says you can have guns, butter and no taxes at the same time. God help us if we are not smart enough to know that is wrong, and we live by it to our peril. We in this nation have a serious problem. Its almost worse than terrorism: We are broke. Our government is borrowing a billion dollars a day. They are now borrowing from the government pension program, for apparently they have gotten as much out of the Social Security Trust as it can take. Our House and Senate announce weekly grants for every kind of favorite local programs to save legislative seats, and it's all borrowed money.

If you listened to the President confirming the value of our war with Iraq, you heard him say, "If no weapons of mass destruction were found, at least we know we have stopped his future distribution of same to terrorists." If that is his justification, then, if he is re-elected our next war will be against Iran and at the same time North Korea, for indeed they have weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons, which they have readily admitted. Those wars will require a draft of men and women. ...

I am not enamored with John Kerry, but I am frightened to death of George Bush. I fear a secret government. I abhor a government that refuses to supply the Congress with requested information. I am against a government that refuses to tell the country with whom the leaders of our country sat down and determined our energy policy, and to prove how much they want to keep that secret, they took it all the way to the Supreme Court.

Those of you who are fiscal conservatives and abhor our staggering debt, tell your conservative friends, "Vote for Kerry," because without Bush to control the Congress, the first thing lawmakers will demand Kerry do is balance the budget.

The wonderful thing about this country is its gift of citizenship, then it's freedom to register as one sees fit. For me, as a Republican, I feel that when my party gives me a dangerous leader who flouts the truth, takes the country into an undeclared war and then adds a war on terrorism to it without debate by the Congress, we have a duty to rid ourselves of those who are taking our country on a perilous ride in the wrong direction.

If we are indeed the party of Lincoln (I paraphrase his words), a president who deems to have the right to declare war at will without the consent of the Congress is a president who far exceeds his power under our Constitution.

I will take John Kerry for four years to put our country on the right path.

______________________________

The writer, a Republican formerly of Louisville, was Jefferson County judge from 1962-1968 and U.S. senator from Kentucky from 1968-1975.

courier-journal.com



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (53969)10/23/2004 12:54:18 PM
From: stockman_scottRespond to of 81568
 
Tora Bora: What Really Happened?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Peter Bergen [the award winning journalist*]

_________________

The Battle of Tora Bora: What Really Happened?

The question of whether the United Sates missed an opportunity to capture or kill Osama bin Laden during the battle of Tora Bora in eastern Afghanistan in December 2001 has become an issue in the razor-close campaign. During the October 8th presidential debate, Sen. John Kerry said of capturing bin Laden, "The right time was Tora Bora, when we had him cornered in the mountains." Writing in the New York Times this week, General Tommy Franks, a Bush supporter, and the overall commander of the Tora Bora operation, said that this charge "doesn't square with reality". Franks also stated, "We don't know to this day whether Mr. bin Laden was at Tora Bora," and that the US did not "outsource" the battle to Afghan warlords of questionable competence and loyalty, as Sen. Kerry has repeatedly charged. At a town hall meeting in Ohio on Tuesday, vice president Cheney said Kerry's criticisms of the Tora Bora campaign are "absolute garbage."

So: Was al Qeada's leader at Tora Bora? According to a widely-reported background briefing by Pentagon officials in mid-December 2001 there was "reasonable certainty" that bin Laden was indeed at Tora Bora, a judgment based on intercepted radio transmissions. Moreover, Luftullah Mashal, a senior official in Afghanistan's Interior Ministry, told me that based on conversations he had with a Saudi al Qaeda financier and bin Laden's chef, both of whom were at the battle, bin Laden was at Tora Bora. And Palestinian journalist, Abdel Bari Atwan, a consistently accurate source of information about al Qaeda, has reported that bin Laden was wounded in the shoulder at Tora Bora. Indeed, in an audiotape released on al Jazeera television last year bin Laden himself recounted his own memories of the battle. "We were about three hundred holy warriors. We dug one hundred trenches over an area of one square mile, so as to avoid the huge human losses from the bombardment." In short, there is plenty of evidence that bin Laden was at Tora Bora, and no evidence indicating that he was anywhere else at the time.

That being the case: Did the U.S. military screw up a golden opportunity to capture bin Laden, during the one moment in the past three years that his location was known? There is no debating the fact that US "outsourced" the Tora Bora operation to local Afghan warlords. According to Commander Muhammad Musa, who commanded six hundred Afghan soldiers on the Tora Bora frontline, while the American bombing campaign was very effective, US forces on the ground were small in number and ineffective: "There were six American soldiers with us. My personal view is if they had blocked the way out to Pakistan, al Qaeda would not have had a way to escape." And that's the key problem. There were only a relatively few American 'boots on the ground' at Tora Bora, enabling bin Laden and hundreds of other members of al Qaeda to melt away and fight another day.

Why did the United States military--the most powerful armed force in history-- not seal off the Tora Bora region, instead relying only on a handful of US Special Forces on the ground? Historians will no doubt be debating that question for many years, but part of the answer is that the US military was a victim of its own success. Scores of US Special Forces soldiers calling in air-strikes, in combination with thousands of Afghans on the ground, overthrew the Taliban in a few weeks of fighting; a textbook case of unconventional warfare. However, this approach was a failure at Tora Bora where large numbers of Americans on the ground were needed to throw up an effective cordon around al Qaeda's leaders.

Apologists for the US military failure at Tora Bora will no doubt provide several compelling reasons why this was the case, including a lack of airlift capabilities from the US base in neighboring Uzbekistan. However, such explanations are hard to square with the fact that hundreds of journalists managed to find their way to Tora Bora, a battle covered on live television by the world's leading news organizations. If Fox, CNN and NBC could arrange for their crews to cover Tora Bora it is puzzling that the US military could not put more boots on the ground to find the man who was the intellectual author of the 9/11 attacks. And in that sense, Sen. Kerry's charge that Tora Bora was a missed opportunity to bring bin Laden to justice isn't "garbage", but an accurate reflection of the historical record.

peterbergen.com

*Peter Bergen is a print and television journalist and author of Holy War, Inc.: Inside the Secret World of Osama bin Laden. He is CNN's terrorism analyst and has written for a variety of publications including the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, The New Republic, Vanity Fair, Foreign Affairs, The Washington Post, The Washington Times and the Washington Monthly. In the U.K. he has written for The Times, The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph. He is presently a fellow at the New America Foundation in Washington D.C. and is an Adjunct Professor at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (53969)10/23/2004 2:01:15 PM
From: stockman_scottRespond to of 81568
 
Why the Yankees' loss to the Red Sox could be bad news for George W. Bush

_____________________________________

WEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
By Jonathan Alter
Newsweek
Updated: 12:07 p.m. ET Oct. 23, 2004

I know, I know. Baseball does not determine the individual destiny of fans, be they ditch-diggers or candidates for high office. Baseball is supposed to be a break from politics, not another poll. Baseball, for all its intense rivalries, remains unsullied by the partisanship of the other fall classic, the presidential election.

I also know that if they were forced to chose, some astronomical percentage of Boston Red Sox fans would say they prefer winning the pennant to their home-state senator and fellow fan John Kerry winning the White House.

But what if one is connected to the other?

I’d argue that the Red Sox come-from-behind victory over George Steinbrenner’s Yankees is an omen of what will (OK, might) happen on Election Day.

The real struggle is already over. Even if the Red Sox lose the World Series, they have already fought the power—and won.

And make no mistake: Bush-Cheney ’04 is the power—the team with the home-field advantage, the team that represents continuity, the team that the smart money is still betting on.

The team that choked?

Yes, some Yankees players (and many fans) are Democrats, and plenty of Red Sox players and fans are Republicans. But aesthetically, the Yankees are a Republican team, even if their color is blue, and not just because owner George Steinbrenner almost went to jail for shenanigans he pulled with Richard Nixon. And the Red Sox are a Democratic team, even if their color is red, and not just because a part-owner of the franchise, Tom Werner, is a Democrat.

The Yankees have the biggest payroll in baseball history; George W. Bush has the biggest campaign war chest in history. The Yankees wear corporate pinstripes and believe God wants them to win; the Bushies wear corporate pinstripes and believe God wants them to win. The Yankees didn’t have the manpower to finish the job in the Bronx; the Bushies don’t have the manpower to finish the job in Iraq.

The baseball team and the White House actually got together after September 11 and cooperated on an HBO movie, “Nine Innings From Ground Zero,” that featured Bush throwing a perfect strike from the mound before a World Series game. Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani worked overtime selling the idea that supporting the Yankees, the president and the country after September 11 are all part of the same patriotic package.

The underlying idea was to create a bandwagon effect. Karl Rove believes that voters like a winner, in the same way that some fans like going with proven success. If the candidate or team looks unstoppable, the theory says, a bunch of other fair-weather fans jump aboard in October.

The Red Sox victory makes the Bush-is-inevitable line harder to pursue. A last-minute come-from-behind win by Kerry suddenly seems more plausible, which in turn will rally Democrats to work harder on Election Day. If Kerry goes in to the final weekend down by five points, well, the Red Sox won, for the first time ever, when they were down by three games.

Bush’s basic argument is that electing Kerry would upset the natural order of things, where grownups like Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld—no matter how incompetent at the plate—keep us safe at home. Now the natural order of baseball—where the Yankees beat the Red Sox every year—has been upended, making it suddenly more plausible to throw out the incumbent in Washington, too. In the showdown series, change beat the status quo.

The only thing Americans like more than a winner is an underdog who upsets a winner, especially a scraggly bunch sticking it to the uptown trust-fund crowd. When the Sox were losing and he wasn’t hitting, Johnny Damon looked like one of those longhaired Vietnam War protesters that Kerry used to hang out with. (While the Yankees’ Kevin Brown appeared like a well-scrubbed spokesmen for the Republican National Committee). But after he drove in six runs in Game 7, Damon’s hippie look is cool again—and Bush’s attack on Kerry as a dangerous Northeastern liberal is sounding a bit tinny.

The whole subtext of the Bush campaign is to make “Massachusetts” into a code word for un-American values. That’s harder now, in Red Sox Nation.

And if this election goes into extra innings, like Campaign 2000, remember this: the Red Sox battled back and won this time. It could happen again, in November.

© 2004 Newsweek, Inc.

URL: msnbc.msn.com