New Bin Laden Tape Airs

The new Bin Laden tape discusses the election and warns America of future attacks and says, "We decided to destroy towers in America". It is most likely the terrorists wanted to carry out a terrorist attack before the election. This may be good news because it may have been the only way Bin Laden and his terrorists could try to effect the election because they may not have been able to pull off an attack. The election has been about the war on terrorism and in the remaining days will be the most important issue.

Kerry Bashes the Military Again

John Kerry followed the lead of CBS and the NY Times to bash the military and George Bush over a story about missing weapons that was not true. Kerry blamed the military and Bush for allowing 380 tons of weapons from getting away in Iraq and claiming the weapons were used to kill American kids and blowing their legs off. The reference to kids was meant to mean soldiers fighting in Iraq. The story was first discredited when it became clear there were no weapons missing in Iraq in recent weeks. The NY Times didn't say when they were supposedly missing leaving the impression it was a new event. CBS wanted to run the story two days before the election on 60 Minutes in another attempt to destroy Bush's re-election chances. Just weeks earlier CBS tried to destroy Bush by running another phony story using forged papers. This was another attempt by CBS and the NY Times to defeat Bush with either missleading stories or completely untrue stories. The NYTimes first ran the false story about missing weapons that was given to them by a member of the UN that is against America and has dealings with arch enemy Iran. The NY Times didn't ask the US military before running their story that now has been discredited. Those in the military that were in charge of destroying Saddam's weapons have stated clearly they did their job and destroyed over 200 tons of weapons at the facility in question as well as 7,000 tons of weapons in the area. The US military has destroyed near 400,000 tons of weapons but the story of just 380 tons was an attempt to claim incompetency of the President just before the election. Those that served in Iraq were outraged by the false story that questioned their competence. For the story to be true it would have taken many large trucks going in and out of the facility traveling many miles on roads mostly used by the US military after loading tons of weapons all when the US military was operating at the facility and around it. Saddam was also in hiding then and most Iraqi military was fleeing. Even though it was near impossible, Kerry jumped on the story to bash Bush and discredit the US military like he has done many times in the past when he accused those serving in Vietnam of horrible crimes.

THE LIBERALS ARE STEALING OUR REPUBLIC

The news we heard, watched and read on Monday and Tuesday, October 25 and 26, 2004, has resulted in my being not only extremely angry at the slanted and manipulated coverage we receive in the U.S., but also has created the necessity of following up my earlier blog, "THE UNBALANCED STATE OF FREE SPEECH IN AMERICA" with this one.
First things being first, prompts me to outline that which elicits my statement, "slanted news coverage". Early Monday, October 25, 2004, the New York Times published an article about the "nearly 400 tons" of explosives that had disappeared from the Al-Qaqaa facility in Bagdad, which "was supposed to be under American military control but is now a no man’s land, still picked over by looters as recently as Sunday." That article also reported that "White House and Pentagon officials acknowledge that the explosives vanished sometime after the American-led invasion."
The NYT article was reported not only by all major media sources in the U.S., but in all corners of the world. I was able to gather links to news sources from Austria to New Zealand, Canada to South America, Turkey, Bagdad, and to numerous Internet sites. By "googling" the phrase, "missing explosives", you will find more than 1,000 sources from which to read similar content.
Almost immediately, the Bush administration downplayed the NY Times article and its statement that the "White House and Pentagon officials acknowledge that the explosives vanished sometime after the American-led invasion". In my research to determine the truth of the article, I was able to easily confirm that the article’s content was old news, having originally been reported in early 2003, and the discovery was actually made by U.N. inspectors BEFORE the U.S. troops arrived in Bagdad. Furthermore, as early as Monday afternoon, the Times Leader, a news source in northeastern Pennsylvania, had published a timeline of events surrounding the missing explosives.
As the day progressed, Kerry began making the "missing explosives" an issue in his campaign speeches, stating that the missing explosives illustrated Bush’s failures in Iraq, and specifically alleging that "the discovery proved one of the great blunders of Iraq, one of the great blunders of this administration". Also, about the same time, an AP article appeared in the Times Leader entitled, "Embedded Reporter Saw No Explosives Search", wherein reporter Lai Ling Jew stated, "... as far as we could tell, there was no move to secure the weapons, nothing to keep looters away." Then, on the evening news of the CBS Channel 2, in New York, while it was reporting "Tons Of Explosives Missing In Iraq", and announcing that 60 Minutes would air a program on the subject Sunday evening before the Presidential election on Tuesday, the NBC affiliates were countering that information with news that the NYT article was inaccurate, was old news, and that any "missing explosives" took place prior to the U.S. entering Bagdad.
Tuesday, October 26, 2004, brought more campaign rhetoric from Kerry, as well as from Edwards, regarding Bush’s inadequacies on locating these explosives. Tuesday’s news also brought sufficient identification from U.N. sources to categorize the explosives as "WMDs". Then, in total disregard of the facts being reported by various news sources, the DNC began releasing campaign ads showing Kerry blaming Bush for the missing explosives, absent any mention that such explosives could well have been the "WMDs" that sent us to Iraq in the first place. Even more disturbing than Kerry’s escalated criticism, was a report in the Washington Times that the "Terrorists hope to defeat Bush through Iraq violence." That report included the statement that "Resistance leader Abu Jalal boasted that the mounting violence had already hurt Mr. Bush's chances, that the "American elections and Iraq are linked tightly together," and that the resistance was working "... to change the election, and we've done so. With our strikes, we've dragged Bush into the mud." Therefore, the press in this country has now become associated with the terrorists in attempting to deny President Bush four more years in the White House.
Conversely, at the same time Kerry and the DNC were using the misinformation from the New York Times to their advantage in campaigning against Bush, there appeared two articles relating to Kerry’s ties with the Viet Cong during his association with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. The first article I read was written by Art Moore, for WorldNetDaily, and appears at http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41106. The second was written by Thomas Lipscomb, for The New York Sun, and appears at http://www.nysun.com/article/3756. The document referred to in these articles is found at http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=vccircular, and both confirm Kerry’s link to our enemies. It goes without saying that, if this was properly covered by the media, it would undoubtedly have an effect on the success Kerry has in the present presidential campaign. Astonishingly, neither article has appeared in any major news media source.
It has become so apparent to me that the news we receive in this country, where the press DEMANDS its freedoms, is SO heavily weighted toward the liberals’ agenda that we have no chance of receiving unbiased news without constant search on the Internet and perusal of sources outside the U.S. Why is this happening in a country that, by virtue of our Constitution, guarantees equality in every aspect of our daily lives? Are we doing to allow the media to choose our elected officials? Please, everyone, wake up – the liberals ARE stealing our country. If we don’t wake up and fight the good fight NOW, it may be too late.

PROOF CONTINUES TO MOUNT THAT KERRY IS UNQUALIFIED TO SERVE IN THE WHITE HOUSE

Aside from the flip-flopping, the lies, the lack of representation to his constituents in almost 20 years in the Senate, and the Senator’s own history of cavorting with our enemies, should anyone need additional proof that this man is ill-equipped to serve as President of this great nation? If so, please consider the article published in the New York Times today, alleging that approximately 380 tons "of powerful conventional explosives are now missing" from one of Iraq's more sensitive former military installations.
It is one thing for the NYT to have published that article, but quite different to have Senator Kerry, who should have been briefed on such information, to use it in his campaign speeches. Just hours after the New York Times article was on the streets, Kerry was blasting the current administration for its failure to "guard those stockpiles", adding, "This is one of the great blunders of Iraq, one of the great blunders of this administration."
I find it not only disturbing that Senator Kerry has such little knowledge of what has occurred in Iraq, as well as the many successes our troops have had in that country, but speculate how his lack of attention to such important details and events would affect this country were he walking in the President’s shoes. The more one knows about this man, the more one studies his campaign rhetoric, and the more one independently obtains the facts, the stronger the evidence we need to eliminate any chance Senator Kerry ever becomes included in the list of U.S. Presidents.
I hope it becomes as evident to other voters, as it has to me, that the liberals are attempting to sell us a bag empty of substance, but full of tricks.

MIXED SIGNALS FROM THE ARAB WORLD

In my daily read of news from all corners of the world, an article in the Arab news, entitled "How ‘Ugly Americans’ Forced Muslims Into a Wrong War", caught my eye. The writing focuses on the distribution of the television series, "The Road to Kabul", offered to networks in the Arab world. This series is said to "humanize the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan", "portray the American as evil incarnate", and "in a roundabout way", send the message that "Americans have only themselves to blame for the Sept. 11 attacks against New York and Washington". The author then describes several segments of the series relating to "an American conspiracy to divert attention from ... the war to liberate Palestine, presumably by wiping Israel off the map" as the "view .. . hammered ... throughout" the series. In assessing the impact this series has had on Arab television viewers, it is the author’s judgment that they "love the series" because of their "deep-rooted belief that the only issue that deserves their sympathy is Palestine".

By the way, the Qatari television station, for whom the series was made, has now "decided to cancel" the screening and has "informed other channels that had bought the series ... they would not receive the remaining 30 episodes" of the 38 that were produced. It is reported that this decision has "triggered threats of lawsuits" and "produced an avalanche of rumors about the reasons for the cancellation", including one that "Condoleezza Rice ... phoned the Qatari leaders to ask them not to air the series." Looks like some in the Middle East may try their luck in fulfilling personal agendas through litigation.

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=9§ion=0&article=53315&d=23&m=10&y=2004

Then, in strange contrast to the "Ugly American" article, I came across an editorial relating to the United Nations’ role in the oil-for-food scam in Iraq. The author reported the probe into the scheme by Paul Volcker, and acknowledged the involvement of UN officials, well known people in over 30 countries, as well as companies from over two dozen countries. This writing correctly outlines the limitations to the Volcker investigation, and identifies the reasons this probe is insufficient as 1) the lack of subpoena power, and 2) the inability of the investigators to bring criminal charges against any involved in the scheme.

In conclusion, the author states, "Only a proper judicial inquiry, held in public, by the United States, which is the UN’s host country, preferably in conjunction with the European Union and, of course, Iraq, could reveal the whole truth and bring the thieves to justice."

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=53312&d=23&m=10&y=2004

Talk about confusing signals, messages, and opinions. On the one hand, we "Ugly Americans" have caused the problems in the Middle East, yet are said to be the only sovereignty that can provide "proper judicial inquiry" and bring the "thieves" in the oil-for-food scam "to justice".

kERRY can RUN, but he can't HIDE------ Free copy of Stolen Honor...WOUNDS THAT NEVER HEAL

The whole 42:09 Stolen Honor online FREE right now! E-mail it NOW!

Stolen Honor nails Kerry and the VVAW
and how they lied at Winter Soldier.
And how Kerry lied to the US Senate in 1971
And how Kerry and his pack of liars caused our POW's to suffer!

Kerry and the DNC cannot stop EVERYONE on the internet from seeing this if you help....

Click here and scroll down for the download of Stolen Honor..... and don't forget to read the the text and other links on the page...... there is even a link to the free download of the epilogue to 'Unfit for Command' the newly added final chapter.

As of this posting there have been 8281 downloads of the movie online.

THE UNBALANCED STATE OF FREE SPEECH IN AMERICA

We have spent the months since January 2004 taking in the "news" that the media airs and publishes and have heard all the indignation by that very media to our calls for objectivity, truth and fact. While the media heralded Michael Moore’s "Farenheit 9/11", they ignored the Swift Boat vets and their ads, until it became apparent those very ads were having an effect on Kerry’s standing in the polls. Then, in an attempt to offset the negativity to Kerry’s campaign, the media goes to Asia to interview former Communist activists to validate Mr. Kerry.
During this period of time, there have been films and news available from those supporting our President. Those films have been attacked at every turn by the media, and are now being challenged in the judicial system. It has come to the point where those who have a difference of opinion with the Democrats are either being silenced by the very media that is touted as a "free press", or denied "equal time" by the very courts that were designed to guarantee everyone a "fair judicial process".
The icing on "my cake" appeared last evening in a local talk show program. A Kerry supporter called in to complain that the talk show host had no right to "invade" an upcoming Michael Moore event in one of the universities to challenge Mr. Moore’s speech and his documentary, "Farenheit 9/11". Further, the caller voiced her displeasure with Condi Rice campaigning in the "swing states" for President Bush, stating, "Ms. Rice is our National Security Adviser and should have her attention on our national security, not a Presidential campaign." Upon further conversation, this caller divulged she felt President Bush and Vice President Cheney should likewise "not be out campaigning, but attending to the business in Washington." The talk show host immediately stated, "Then, in the interest of fairness, you would also want Kerry and Edwards to go back to the Senate and tend to their responsibilities in Congress to their respective constituents". However, the caller strongly denied she wanted the Democrat’s candidates to stop campaigning, and continued to give reasons why our President and his staff should stay in Washington and NOT campaign.
I post these observations to urge ALL conservatives to get busy and share ideas, make suggestions, and design ways for our segment of the population to ensure we get equal time and similar coverage as that being given our opposition. If we fail to properly challenge the present atmosphere of misinformation and unbalanced reporting, we will no longer be living in a republic, but a form of government similar to that formerly known as the U.S.S.R. What we are seeing now is all part of a larger plan and that plan is obviously not designed to fit the requirements of our present Constitution. Let us start organizing NOW, before it is too late.

Support Our President

From time to time we ask among ourselves, "Why isn’t President Bush, or Dick Cheney, responding to the many accusations and allegations of their opposition?" Well, maybe that is saved for the many who DO support Bush and Cheney.

For instance, Kerry proposes to cut taxes for 98 percent of taxpayers, yet President Bush’s tax relief cut taxes for 100 percent of those who pay income tax. Further, Kerry continues to tout the reduction of health care costs to employers by giving tax credits, as well as insisting he would allow the purchase of U.S.-made prescription drugs from other countries. On the other hand, it was President Bush who signed the bill giving tax credit for those workers displaced by trade, and the Medicare prescription drug law that also allows for importation of those drugs certified as “safe”. In addition, it is President Bush who proposes refundable tax credits for families purchasing individual health insurance.

I would hope that each one of us who supports President Bush would educate themselves as to the issues being raised by the Democrats, and have a factual and understandable response for those who are open to a rational discussion of their choices in this election. Our work to gather support for our President does not stop until November 2, 2004.

I Just Don't Get It!!

It seems funny to me that the democrat nominee is painted in the press as a moderate. I just don't get it. Why is it that a man who so vehemently opposed his own country in a major war is this close to running it? And why do so many people believe that such a man could win any war now?

I guess I just don't understand the liberal mentality. Bush is bad? Why? The arguments I have heard are specious at best. Here are a few of them, sadly.....: HE COMMITTED TROOPS FOR LIE? I don't think any president, given the same intelligence, would have done otherwise. Especially after the attacks of 9-11. To not react swiftly would have been irresponsible. WAR FOR OIL?? I guess that one is over. I just paid 2.35 a gallon to fill my truck...It's a mini truck with a 10 gallon tank, so I have not taken a loan...yet. WAR FOR HALIBURTON? Just name any other company with half of the resources, training and experience in the oil and construction industry. Then ask them to get to Iraq within 6 months with trained personnel and equipment. Then ask them to operate in a war zone, under fire and threat of sabotage. It can't be done by any other company. This is what they do. They are good at it; and nobody can get close to their record or experience in these matters. NO BID CONTRACTS? Haliburton has been a contractor for the U.S. government in the middle east for decades, and...Presidents. They are the only company with the necessary resources. SADDAM WAS NOT LINKED TO 9-11? I almost feel bad about trying to explain this one. NO KIDDING!!, there are no direct links to Saddam and 9-11. The war on terror is much larger than Saddam and Iraq. Clearly, Saddam was linked to many terrorist organizations. He paid the families of suicide bombers $25,000 for gosh sakes!! TERRORISTS ARE POURING INTO IRAQ AS A RESULT OF U.S. ACTION? Of course they are!!!!!! Jeese, the idea that this is a bad thing escapes me. The terrorists are focused on Iraq, like moths to a bug light. We kill them in Iraq and they are unable to attack my family here? Sounds good to me!!

If you ask me, Americans should be damn proud of our response to terrorism and our choice of contractors in the theatre. The best is the best for a reason. We are the best, and that causes some people discomfort. Well, get over it! And thank God we are as benevolent as we are. Though our power is great, we do not seek domination,.....only peace. We do not seek resources,....only free markets. We do not seek anything more than what we so proudly stand for,...equality. Those who don't get it.....just don't GET IT!!

Congress Approves Bill to Fight Anti-Semitism

US Jewish organizations have hailed final congressional approval of a bill that compels the State Department to create a special office to monitor anti-Semitic abuses around the world and compile annual reports rating countries on their treatment of Jews.

BANG!!!!!! Mark Steyn has Edwards' number

Mark Steyn gives an insightul analysis of the vp debate and John Edwards
summarizing.....

The strongest force in international affairs is inertia. It's everywhere: a continuous pressure from the U.N., the EU, the Chinese, the Arab League, the State Department and half the federal bureaucracy to do nothing about anything -- do nothing about the Sudanese genocide until everyone's dead, do nothing about Iran's nuclear program until it's complete and the silos are loaded, do nothing about anything except hold meetings and issue statements of concern. To resist the allure of inertia will require enormous will, not just from the president but from the American people. After the vice presidential debate, it was said by many on the right that Dick Cheney came over as the grown-up and John Edwards as the callow youth. But that goes for the audience too. Cheney treated the American people as grown-ups, Edwards condescended to the electorate as a nation of coatless girls. He's wrong, I hope.

Read the full article...Edwards has a little growing up to do
October 10, 2004

Washington Post v. New York Times on Social Security - Jack Kemp

By Jack Kemp

The recent middleweight title match between reigning champ Bernard Hopkins and the "Golden Boy" Oscar De La Hoya was billed as an historical event, one for the ages, like Hagler-Leonard circa 1987. Unfortunately for boxing fans the event didn't meet expectations. In the political world the opposite has occurred, a little billed, and even less noticed, bout between two print-media heavyweights the Washington Post and New York Times is taking place. In that fight these two media titans that have taken just about opposite corners on one of the most pressing domestic issues of our time -- Social Security reform.

In the red corner stands the Washington Post. Its editorial page has historically leaned liberal-left, but they have also taken decidedly principled and nuanced positions on issues such as school choice, international trade and, now, Social Security reform. Recently the Post editorialized that, "Mr. Bush's sympathizers are right that Social Security privatization could reduce long-term deficits, and right that the nation should not be deterred by the transition costs." It's a shame Kerry's campaign didn't "read the memo" before they put him on the line for higher payroll taxes.

The Washington Post also discarded the class-warfare mantra that has consumed Democratic candidates and party loyalists reasoning that: "Privatization could also stimulate economic growth, boosting tax revenues and so strengthening the nation's fiscal prospects via a second route." They continued, "Private accounts would boost national savings" thus "savings would become more plentiful," which, in turn, would "stimulate extra corporate investment and growth." Not bad, eh? A "semi-supply-side" position.

In the blue corner stands the reigning, but aging, champ, the New York Times. The Times editorial page is the most read and one of the most liberal pages in print today. It has stood with liberal orthodoxy regardless of the facts -- or regardless of a "preponderance of evidence" as Dan Rather and CBS might say (read this)

THE PRESIDENT IS BACK

BY DICK MORRIS
October 9, 2004

The president finally showed the guts, determination and focus that earned him victories in the three debates with Al Gore. He finally did his homework. He focused on his briefing points and mobilized his rhetoric to win the second debate.


It was Reagan-Mondale all over again. In the first debate of 1984, Walter Mondale soundly defeated Ronald Reagan, and in the process raised questions about the elderly president's metal acuity. In the first debate of 2004, Kerry's victory raised worries about President Bush's mental acuity. But in the second debate of his re-election year, Reagan rebounded through his humor to reassure the doubters. Twenty years later, Bush recovered through his aggressiveness to make clear that he is still the president, still the man.


Bush won even in the domestic-policy part of the debate ?a victory that was as unlikely as John Kerry's win in last week's confrontation on foreign issues. By explaining his tax-cut policies and hanging John Edwards' trial-lawyer record around Kerry's neck, he rebutted the Democratic attacks and made his own record visible and showcased it compellingly. (rest of article at NewYork Post)

The Report That Nails Saddam

October 9, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
The Report That Nails Saddam
By DAVID BROOKS

Saddam Hussein saw his life as an unfolding epic narrative, with retreats and advances, but always the same ending. He would go down in history as the glorious Arab leader, as the Saladin of his day. One thousand years from now, schoolchildren would look back and marvel at the life of The Struggler, the great leader whose life was one of incessant strife, but who restored the greatness of the Arab nation.

They would look back and see the man who lived by his saying: "We will never lower our heads as long as we live, even if we have to destroy everybody." Charles Duelfer opened his report on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction with those words. For a humiliated people, Saddam would restore pride by any means.

Saddam knew the tools he would need to reshape history and establish his glory: weapons of mass destruction. These weapons had what Duelfer and his team called a "totemic" importance to him. With these weapons, Saddam had defeated the evil Persians. With these weapons he had crushed his internal opponents. With these weapons he would deter what he called the "Zionist octopus" in both Israel and America.

But in the 1990's, the world was arrayed against him to deprive him of these weapons. So Saddam, the clever one, The Struggler, undertook a tactical retreat. He would destroy the weapons while preserving his capacities to make them later. He would foil the inspectors and divide the international community. He would induce it to end the sanctions it had imposed to pen him in. Then, when the sanctions were lifted, he would reconstitute his weapons and emerge greater and mightier than before.

The world lacked what Saddam had: the long perspective. Saddam understood that what others see as a defeat or a setback can really be a glorious victory if it is seen in the context of the longer epic.

Saddam worked patiently to undermine the sanctions. He stored the corpses of babies in great piles, and then unveiled them all at once in great processions to illustrate the great humanitarian horrors of the sanctions.(rest of the story)

American success story of historic proportions - Afghanistan

Afghan President Hamid Karzai is expected to win the first election in Afghanistan on Saturday capping a successful victory over terrorists and the Taliban by US military and allies including many Afghanies. This can be viewed only as a great success for President Bush, our armed forces and America. The liberal media will have a hard time spinning this against the President or denying the well deserved kudos. The liberal media won't want to cover it. Did they send their top reporters? Will Rather, Brokaw and Jennings be in Afghanistan to witness this historic event? We will see. The Afghan election is something all Americans should celebrate. We were successful and President Bush should gain the political windfall from it. Not often do we see historic events that are a direct result of the hard work and brave efforts of our military. All those involved that sacrificed, some even gave their lives, need to be honored for their accomplishment. It's a shame the liberal media will play it down in it's significance. But it's their shame. This display of democracy helps dearly in the war on terror and shows the entire world the greatness of America liberating and helping an entire country gain the freedom they deserve.

THE ARMY WINS - and no comment from the Kerry camp at all

IN a remarkable display of skill, elements of the U.S. Army's 1st Infantry Division and newly trained Iraqi national forces drove the terrorists from the city of Samarra last week. Killing over 100 of freedom's enemies and capturing many more, our troops lost a single soldier.

Last week, in a superb lightning operation, Maj.-Gen. John R. S. Batiste and his Big Red One gave the Iraqi people and America a significant win.

IN a remarkable display of skill, elements of the U.S. Army's 1st Infantry Division and newly trained Iraqi national forces drove the terrorists from the city of Samarra last week. Killing over 100 of freedom's enemies and capturing many more, our troops lost a single soldier.

Wouldn't it be lovely if Kerry could summon up the decency to thank them?

Ralph Peters - New York Post

Prepare Yourself For the VP Debate - Take Action

This was sent to me from Ken Mehlman, BushCheney campaign manager......

The debate tonight presents a tremendous opportunity for the campaign to attract undecided voters, but people's perceptions are shaped as much by their conversations around the water cooler as by the debates themselves.

The Vice President's goal is to do what he's been doing throughout this election: explain to the American people why the President's policies are right for America and the world we live in today - in fighting the war on terror, in keeping our economy growing and in responding to the new challenges of the 21st century.

After last week's debate, the Kerry campaign spin machine managed to mask their candidate's flip-flops on the war in Iraq, imposition of a "global test" for protecting America, and repeated denigration of our troops and allies.

If we plan to win the election, we must fight back against their spin and make sure our friends and neighbors get the truth.

We need your help tonight!

• Visit www.GeorgeWBush.com/DebateFacts tonight during the debate so you will have the facts. Print and share them with your friends.
• Immediately after the debate, visit online polls, chat rooms, and discussion boards and make your voice heard. The major news networks will all have internet polls after the debate. Make sure you vote in polls on:
  MSNBC.com
  FoxNews.com
  ABCNews.com
  CNN.com
  and even CBS.
  
• Make sure swing state voters know why you support the President by sharing your thoughts on message boards in target states.
• Call Talk Radio shows in your area.
• Write letters to the editors of your local papers.
• Visit Chat rooms on AOL, MSN, and Yahoo!
• Send this message to 5 friends.
• Beyond tonight, you should return to these forums in the coming days and make your voice heard and your support for the President known.

If someone asks you a question about the President, direct them to the campaign's website, http://www.georgewbush.com/. It has lots of information on the President's Agenda for America (www.GeorgeWBush.com/Agenda) and the President's record of accomplishment (www.GeorgeWBush.com/Record).

We have said before, there is no better messenger for this campaign than you. There is also no more powerful medium for political discussion. As one of our online activists, you realize that.
Make your voice heard by completing the actions above.

Sincerely,

Ken Mehlman

P.S. If we plan to win the election, we must fight back against the Kerry campaign's spin and make sure our friends and neighbors get the truth after tonight's debate. We need you to complete the actions above and send this message to five friends. Will you help us beat the Kerry spin machine?

Bush made it clear he is against a draft

In what is becoming a disaster for Kerry and Democrats, Bush clearly stated he is against the draft as long as he is President gaining a winning issue over kerry he might not have had. Kerry tried to claim Bush was for a draft as a desperation attempt to scare young voters. Democrats are known to want a draft so they can increase the number of young people opposed to the war on terror. If the Democrats can push through a draft they will increase the number of anti-war activists like the Vietnam days when people burned their draft cards and notices. Two Democrats in congress, Rangle and Senator Hollings have bills to reinstate the draft after a Republican President ended it in 1973. Republicans, conservatives and President Bush are against the draft because a volunteer armed forces is best for moral with only those that want to serve join and the liberals who are often anti-military would not be part of the service and won't be able to harm moral. It's clear to all informed people that it's Kerry and Democrats that are for the draft for political reasons and not Republicans and President Bush. The draft issue raised by Kerry will cost him many votes.

Tell Me Again...... No WMD's or Terrorist Ties?????

Exclusive: Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties
By Scott Wheeler
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
October 04, 2004

(CNSNews.com) - Iraqi intelligence documents, confiscated by U.S. forces and obtained by CNSNews.com, show numerous efforts by Saddam Hussein's regime to work with some of the world's most notorious terror organizations, including al Qaeda, to target Americans. They demonstrate that Saddam's government possessed mustard gas and anthrax, both considered weapons of mass destruction, in the summer of 2000, during the period in which United Nations weapons inspectors were not present in Iraq. And the papers show that Iraq trained dozens of terrorists inside its borders. Full Story


Journalistic Methodology Used to Report Details of Saddam's Terror Ties
By David Thibault
CNSNews.com Information Services
October 04, 2004

Forty-two pages of photocopied official Iraqi Intelligence Service documents, some hand-written and some typed in 1993, serve as the basis for Scott Wheeler's article, entitled, "Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties." The memos reflect communication between the Iraqi Intelligence Service and Saddam Hussein, by way of his top assistant, the secretary to the president. Tables indicating the Iraqi regime's possession of mustard gas and anthrax in the summer of 2000 are included in the documents, as is a list of 92 individuals believed to have been trained inside Iraq for terrorism operations. rest of the story

Air goes out of the Kerry campaign

Kerry supporters had hoped that Kerry would regain lost ground from the debate, but a new poll shows the reality that Kerry failed to make gains. The Rasmussen poll shows Bush leads in the 3 day poll, but what is sure to be complete discouragement for the Kerry followers, Rasmussen reports, "As a result, just over one-third of the interviews were conducted following Thursday night's Presidential Debate. Results from last night's sample were similar to the preceding nights." Viewed by most that Kerry needed a strong showing in the debate to get back in it, this poll shows Kerry failed to break through.

President Bush and Kerry debate

Most impartial observers said the debate was a draw. Those that watched and based their reactions on style said Kerry won. But the same people said Bush was more credible, believable and showed a greater ability to lead. Looking at substance, Bush clearly won. Kerry had many misstatements. Kerry claimed he never called Bush a liar but he had used that word. Kerry falsely said the NY subway was closed during the Republican convention but it wasn't closed, and he said he looked at KGB records in "Treblinka Square" in a visit to Russia but Treblinka was a Nazi death camp. There were many other statements by Kerry that contradicted past statements he made reaffirming the flip-flip issue. Bush answered the questions with emotion and very heartfelt. Kerry tried to sound like a war hawk which will be a surprise to many of his supporters who want Kerry to pull troops out of Iraq. Kerry continued to mock our allies and again falsely claimed we were going it alone. Bush pointed out that Kerry can't get allies to support us when he is mocking them and saying the war was a mistake and a diversion. On North Korea, Kerry took a completely different position he takes on the war on terror(flip-flop). While Kerry demands coalitions, he said we should negotiate alone with North Korea. Bush pointed out we have many countries in the coalition in the war on terror and 5 countries around North Korea working with us against North Korea and their attempt to gain nuclear weapons. Bush made the point Kerry changes positions and that is no way to lead.

FOXNEWS BLOWOUT ON DEBATE NIGHT

FOXNEWS PEAK HITS RECORD LEVELS: 6.9 RATING -- 9,561,000 VIEWERS FOR DEBATE; CNN MAX 4,364,000; MSNBC TOPS OUT AT 1,851,000 source Drudge Report

The decline of the liberal biased media continues.