Lightbulbs are for liberals

Make a New Post

A joke is being circulated these days about the Bush White House:

How many members of the administration does it take to change a lightbulb?

None, because "there's nothing wrong with that lightbulb. It has served us honorably. When you say it's burned out, you're giving encouragement to the forces of darkness. Once we install a lightbulb, we never, ever change it. Real men don't need artificial light."

The emperor has no clothes

Make a New Post

Bush channels a higher power

Make a New Post

And that higher power appears to be Karl Rove. I have no idea of the suspicions are true, but this sure looks bad. This isn't entirely implausible if you look at the evidence.

"Was President Bush literally channeling Karl Rove in his first debate with John Kerry? That's the latest rumor flooding the Internet, unleashed last week in the wake of an image caught by a television camera during the Miami debate. The image shows a large solid object between Bush's shoulder blades as he leans over the lectern and faces moderator Jim Lehrer" - Salon "Bush's mystery bulge"

Now we know why Bush acted so strangely in the debate!! Check this out-

On several occasions, the president simply stopped speaking for an uncomfortably long time and stared ahead with an odd expression on his face. Was he listening to someone helping him with his response to a question? Even weirder was the president's strange outburst. In a peeved rejoinder to Kerry, he said, "As the politics change, his positions change. And that's not how a commander in chief acts. I, I, uh -- Let me finish -- The intelligence I looked at was the same intelligence my opponent looked at." It must be said that Bush pointed toward Lehrer as he declared "Let me finish." The green warning light was lit, signaling he had 30 seconds to, well, finish. - Salon

There is other evidence that even suggests that Bush has been using a device like this all throughout his Presidency! This would make sense since teleprompters weren't working in the beginning of his term because of his dyslexia. Anyone notice how at some point all of a sudden, Bush stopped fumbling important lines in his speeches?

"Suggestions that Bush may have using this technique stem from a D-day event in France, when a CNN broadcast appeared to pick up -- and broadcast to surprised viewers -- the sound of another voice seemingly reading Bush his lines, after which Bush repeated them. Danny Schechter, who operates the news site MediaChannel.org, and who has been doing some investigating into the wired-Bush rumors himself, said the Bush campaign has been worried of late about others picking up their radio frequencies -- notably during the Republican Convention on the day of Bush's appearance. 'They had a frequency specialist stop me and ask about the frequency of my camera,' Schechter said. 'The Democrats weren't doing that at their convention.'" - Salon

Looks like the remake of Manchurian Candidate came just in time! ...... scary

Cheney Drops a Dot-Bomb

Make a New Post

I know people over the age of 50 aren't supposed to know the difference between .com and .org, but you'd think his advisors would have better prepared him.

Anyone who heeded Cheney's advice and clicked on "factcheck.com" on Wednesday morning was redirected to the site of anti-Bush billionaire investor George Soros that had a banner message saying "Why we must not reelect President Bush." - Reuters "Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site"

Still you can't fault him for the mistake, but I seriously question Cheney's judgement pointing people to what he meant to say, factchack.org, because it deals in things that Cheney isn't too concerned about, facts. The owners of factcheck.org weren't pleased and had many serious critiques of the so called "facts" that Cheney used in the debate.

Factcheck.org, run by the Annenberg Center of the University of Pennsylvania, said on its site on Wednesday that Cheney not only got the domain name confused, he had mischaracterized its fact-finding.

"Cheney ... wrongly implied that we had rebutted allegations Edwards was making about what Cheney had done as chief executive officer of Halliburton," the site said on Wednesday.

"In fact we did post an article pointing out that Cheney hasn't profited personally while in office from Halliburton's Iraq contracts, as falsely implied by a Kerry TV ad. But Edwards was talking about Cheney's responsibility for earlier Halliburton troubles. And in fact, Edwards was mostly right." - Reuters

Cheney has never met Edwards... riiight.

Make a New Post

David vs Goliath, winner unclear?

Make a New Post

Well now, this is strange. Going into this debate we knew that Cheney has amazing depth of experience and Edwards is pretty new at this. Both men traded pot-shots frequently, Cheney was stronger and harsher, but he was at the risk of decreasing his already low likability.

Removed from the specific issues they discussed, strictly based on personality, Edwards won hands down. Strictly focused on issues, it is a bit more unclear. Cheney, although harsher in his rhetoric, much more easily contradicted his own statements, obviously misstated several facts, and completely avoided 4 separate questions asked of him. Sure you could blame Edwards for not taking Cheney to task for that, but he would have risked his strongest point, his likability. Specifically, when Cheney avoided the question of gay marriage completely, Edwards could have criticized that, but because Cheney thanked Edwards for his kind words about his daughter, Edwards on the attack would have looked like a real jerk.

Also, something interesting emerged from this debate that clearly doesn't help the Bush ticket. Cheney only mentioned Bush a couple times, whereas Edwards sold Kerry every chance he got, even when he wasn't supposed to. This clearly will reinforce voter's view that Cheney is the real President and Bush is just a friendly face put on top.

In the end, Edwards did very well holding his own against Cheney's pitbull style attacks and clearly reinforced the likability of the Kerry Edwards ticket over the serious and unfriendly Cheney and the desperate and the simpleminded Bush.

Also, preliminary polls showed that Edwards clearly won over Cheney among undecided voters and among everyone else, it was a draw.

Now who's the flip floppers?

Make a New Post

Owning Up to Deceptions on the Iraq War

Rumsfeld: No 'Hard Evidence' of Iraq-Al Qaeda Link

Top Ten Bush Flip Flops

Clearly the pot has been calling the kettle black many times over in this presidential race.

Rumsfeld pre-Iraq war:

September 2002: Rumsfeld said he had five or six sentences of "bulletproof" evidence that "demonstrate that there are in fact Al Qaeda in Iraq."
When a reporter asked if there are linkages between Al Qaeda and Iraq, Rumsfeld answered, "Yes." Asked "Is there any intelligence that Saddam Hussein has any ties to Sept. 11?" Rumsfeld left the question wide open, saying, "you have to recognize that the evidence piles up."
Asked to name senior Al Qaeda members who were in Baghdad, Rumsfeld said, "I could, but I won't." - Veterans for Peace "Owning Up to Deceptions on the Iraq War"

Rumsfeld now:

"To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links [Saddam and Al Queda]" - Reuters "Rumsfeld: No 'Hard Evidence' of Iraq-Al Qaeda Link"

Amazing. Kerry needs to make a commercial pointing out these flip flops in order to counter the GOP's obsession with that term. There are plenty of examples to work with here. Anyone want to share more examples of Bush flip flops? Drop a line in comments. :)