| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
17 Aug 2004 06:40:52 PM |
| Object: |
Re : : You might not want to answer the door |
I'm sure glad there is no "Big Brother."
If the alarmists and conspiracy theorists were actually on to something,
we would be experiencing political harassment and intimidation such as
were seen during the McCarthy era. In this more enlightened age of
secure, alert citizens and high-tech media watchdogs such things aren't
likely to be going on.
Or are they?
An August 16th, 2004 article in CNN disclosed that the FBI has been very
busy in recent weeks, with activities ranging all over the country. What
have they been up to? One would assume, in this era of "The War on
Terror" that they are chasing terrorists, murderers, kidnappers or other
criminals threatening our society. Sadly, not even close. They are
busily chasing down people who organize anti-Republican, anti-Bush
demonstrations. FBI agents are visiting the homes of people who run web
sites featuring dissent against the current administration, or
organizers of protests at political rallies.
They aren't bringing warrants, or conducting searches, or making
arrests. They are just asking questions - questions about whether these
people are engaging in or planning any illegal activity, or if they know
of anyone who is planning such activity. Then they not-very-subtly
remind them that failing to report such knowledge is a federal crime.
They have succeeded in intimidating several activists to the point where
they cancelled trips to protest rallies they were trying to organize.
The Justice department, as usual, has no problem with this. The same
people who, as we recently learned, thought that it was "ok" to torture
prisoners in "The War on Terror" has decided that such investigations
"will not provide a chilling effect on first amendment rights to any
significant degree." How comforting.
Meanwhile in Florida, the bastion of fair voting standards, state police
officers have gone into the homes of elderly black voters in Orlando and
interrogated them as part of an odd "investigation" that has frightened
many voters, intimidated elderly volunteers and thrown a chill over
efforts to get out the black vote in November. As reported in an article
by Bob Herbert of the New York Times yesterday, this is all being done
under the ironic guise of investigating voter fraud.
---------------------
The officers, from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, which
reports to Gov. Jeb Bush, say they are investigating allegations of
voter fraud that came up during the Orlando mayoral election in March.
Officials refused to discuss details of the investigation, other
than to say that absentee ballots are involved. They said they had no
idea when the investigation might end, and acknowledged that it may
continue right through the presidential election.
"We did a preliminary inquiry into those allegations and then we
concluded that there was enough evidence to follow through with a full
criminal investigation," said Geo Morales, a spokesman for the
Department of Law Enforcement.
The state police officers, armed and in plain clothes, have
questioned dozens of voters in their homes. Some of those questioned
have been volunteers in get-out-the-vote campaigns.
I asked Mr. Morales in a telephone conversation to tell me what
criminal activity had taken place.
"I can't talk about that," he said.
I asked if all the people interrogated were black.
"Well, mainly it was a black neighborhood we were looking at -
yes,'' he said.
He also said, "Most of them were elderly."
When I asked why, he said, "That's just the people we selected out
of a random sample to interview."
-------------------------------
Many of the elderly black voters who found themselves face to face with
state police officers in Orlando are members of the Orlando League of
Voters, which has been very successful in mobilizing the city's black
vote. One person who received multiple "visits" by the police is 73 year
old Ezzie Thomas, the president of the Orlando League of Voters.
Apparently Ezzie has been causing trouble since the days of Martin
Luther King's marches by traveling around Florida every year trying to
get more blacks to register to vote.
Let's hope that after four decades of putting up with this nonsense that
Ezzie is wise enough to just slam the door in their faces.
.
|
|
| User: "Jésus Pépé" |
|
| Title: Kerry in the Dole-Drums |
17 Aug 2004 07:36:07 PM |
|
|
Kerry in the Dole-Drums
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/moran200405071254.asp
May 07, 2004, 12:54 p.m.
Kerry in the Dole-Drums
Bad sign for Democrats.
By Robert Moran
NBC News and the Wall Street Journal publish a poll produced by the
well-respected team of Bob Teeter (Republican) and Peter Hart
(Democrat).
It's May of a presidential election year.
The unemployment rate is 5.6 percent to 5.7 percent, and the economy
appeared to be improving.
The challenger is a sitting member of the U.S. Senate, and his public
statements and votes over a long career are being used against him.
The line in the press is that the challenger just doesn't connect with
voters. He needs to shake things up. Reintroduce himself...
After weathering a storm of negative television advertising, the
challenger's image is less than sterling. His opponent has already
gone a long way in defining him. The challenger has a positive image
from almost 40 percent of the voters and a negative image from almost
40 percent of the voters, a fact that makes it very difficult for him
to win.
Quiz question #1. What year is being described here?
Is it May 1996? Or, is it May 2004?
If you said "both," you'd be right.
Bob Dole's public image at this point in time in 1996 was 39-percent
positive and 38-percent negative. Kerry's public image, in the
just-released NBC/Wall Street Journal survey conducted by Hart/Teeter
is an eerily similar 38-percent positive to 38-percent negative.
That's right, Kerry is living the Dole nightmare.
As Yogi Bera would say, "It's déjà vu all over again."
I have already written about the Democracy Corps survey that showed
Kerry with a colder image (40 percent) than a warmer image (37
percent). This new NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey definitely
shows that the Bush team's advertising offensive against Kerry has
worked.
Taking a play from the Clinton '96 playbook, the Bush campaign went on
the offensive against the challenger and defined him before he could
define himself.
Just how bad has Kerry been shredded by the Bush campaign? A quick
review of the NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey shows that Kerry's
image dropped from 43-percent positive to 30-percent negative in March
2004 to 38-percent positive to 38-percent negative currently. In other
words, the Bush campaign, despite all the cheerleading for Kerry in
the press, was able to reduce Kerry's favorables by five points and
increase Kerry's negatives by eight points.
As I have pointed out before, this is awful news for John Kerry. You
can't beat something with nothing, and John Kerry is fast becoming
nothing.
In addition, this survey shows that Kerry has almost no intensity to
his favorables. In plain English this means that even the people that
say they like him, don't like him all that much. As an example of
this,
consider that 38 percent of American voters report having a positive
image of John Kerry. When this group is broken down between those who
have a "very positive" and a "somewhat positive" impression of Kerry,
only 12 percent say they have a "very positive" image of him. The
rest, 26 percent, have a somewhat positive image of Kerry. As a means
of comparison, George W. Bush has 30 percent that love him (very
positive) and 30 percent that hate him (very negative).
What makes matters worse for Kerry is that the Bush team has yet to
drive the ideological contrast, or even introduce Kerry's position on
the death penalty. In fact, the Bush team has yet to blow up Kerry's
contention in advertising that his vote for the historic Clinton tax
increases was a job creation measure.
Kerry's only hope is that voters turn on Bush and use him as a vessel
for their frustration. This could happen. The right direction - wrong
track numbers in this survey are problematic, the economy continues to
be a problem area in the polling, Iraq is a wildcard, and Bush faces a
heavily polarized electorate.
But, the Bush team knows this. And the data clearly suggests that the
best insurance policy against a Kerry presidency is giving the voters
more information about John Kerry.
This election cycle is shaping up to be the most negative in our
nation's recent history.
The Kerry campaign is stuck with a poor candidate. It can't sell its
own product, so it has to destroy the competing product.
The Bush campaign is stuck with economic anxiety and any number of
future adversities at home and abroad that are largely out of its
control. It can't control these wildcards. But it can control what it
does to John Kerry.
Quiz question #2.
On May 6, U.S. News's "Washington Whispers" reported that strategists
for the president believe the race will be "defined" this spring. They
believe an "early strike" will "lock in" their advantage. Sources at
the challenger's campaign "scoff" at the "pre-emptive strike
strategy."
Was this written on May 6, 1996, or May 6, 2004?
The answer is May 6, 1996, but it may as well be 2004.
- Robert Moran is a vice president at Republican polling firm
Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates. He is an NRO contributor.
-------
At first glance, it may seem odd or even perverse to suggest that
statutory controls on the private ownership of firearms are irrelevant
to the problem of armed crime; yet that is precisely what the evidence
shows.
Armed crime and violent crime generally are products of ethnic and
social factors unrelated to the availability of a particular type of
weapon, and the number of firearms required to satisfy the crime
market is small. Experience shows that these weapons are supplied no
matter what controls are instituted and in place at any given time."
Colin Greenwood
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Kerry in the Dole-Drums |
18 Aug 2004 11:43:07 AM |
|
|
In article <n295i09n5ic9pl7ga08avi1trfamg2n7u1@4ax.com>,
Jésus Pépé <jpepe@N0SPAM.C0M> wrote:
Kerry in the Dole-Drums
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/moran200405071254.asp
May 07, 2004, 12:54 p.m.
Kerry in the Dole-Drums
Bad sign for Democrats.
By Robert Moran
NBC News and the Wall Street Journal publish a poll produced by the
well-respected team of Bob Teeter (Republican) and Peter Hart
(Democrat).
It's May of a presidential election year.
The unemployment rate is 5.6 percent to 5.7 percent, and the economy
appeared to be improving.
1,000,000 jobs lost under Bush, real wages down.
The challenger is a sitting member of the U.S. Senate, and his public
statements and votes over a long career are being used against him.
Bush doesn't want to start debating public statements.
The line in the press is that the challenger just doesn't connect with
voters. He needs to shake things up. Reintroduce himself...
After weathering a storm of negative television advertising, the
challenger's image is less than sterling. His opponent has already
gone a long way in defining him. The challenger has a positive image
from almost 40 percent of the voters and a negative image from almost
40 percent of the voters, a fact that makes it very difficult for him
to win.
Quiz question #1. What year is being described here?
Is it May 1996? Or, is it May 2004?
If you said "both," you'd be right.
Bob Dole's public image at this point in time in 1996 was 39-percent
positive and 38-percent negative. Kerry's public image, in the
just-released NBC/Wall Street Journal survey conducted by Hart/Teeter
is an eerily similar 38-percent positive to 38-percent negative.
That's right, Kerry is living the Dole nightmare.
As Yogi Bera would say, "It's déjà vu all over again."
I have already written about the Democracy Corps survey that showed
Kerry with a colder image (40 percent) than a warmer image (37
percent). This new NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey definitely
shows that the Bush team's advertising offensive against Kerry has
worked.
Taking a play from the Clinton '96 playbook, the Bush campaign went on
the offensive against the challenger and defined him before he could
define himself.
Just how bad has Kerry been shredded by the Bush campaign? A quick
review of the NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey shows that Kerry's
image dropped from 43-percent positive to 30-percent negative in March
2004 to 38-percent positive to 38-percent negative currently. In other
words, the Bush campaign, despite all the cheerleading for Kerry in
the press, was able to reduce Kerry's favorables by five points and
increase Kerry's negatives by eight points.
As I have pointed out before, this is awful news for John Kerry. You
can't beat something with nothing, and John Kerry is fast becoming
nothing.
In addition, this survey shows that Kerry has almost no intensity to
his favorables. In plain English this means that even the people that
say they like him, don't like him all that much. As an example of
this,
consider that 38 percent of American voters report having a positive
image of John Kerry. When this group is broken down between those who
have a "very positive" and a "somewhat positive" impression of Kerry,
only 12 percent say they have a "very positive" image of him. The
rest, 26 percent, have a somewhat positive image of Kerry. As a means
of comparison, George W. Bush has 30 percent that love him (very
positive) and 30 percent that hate him (very negative).
What makes matters worse for Kerry is that the Bush team has yet to
drive the ideological contrast, or even introduce Kerry's position on
the death penalty. In fact, the Bush team has yet to blow up Kerry's
contention in advertising that his vote for the historic Clinton tax
increases was a job creation measure.
Sounds like he did the right thing there. The economy boomed after that;
it's still languishing after Bush's tax cuts.
Kerry's only hope is that voters turn on Bush and use him as a vessel
for their frustration. This could happen. The right direction - wrong
track numbers in this survey are problematic, the economy continues to
be a problem area in the polling, Iraq is a wildcard, and Bush faces a
heavily polarized electorate.
But, the Bush team knows this. And the data clearly suggests that the
best insurance policy against a Kerry presidency is giving the voters
more information about John Kerry.
This election cycle is shaping up to be the most negative in our
nation's recent history.
The Kerry campaign is stuck with a poor candidate. It can't sell its
own product, so it has to destroy the competing product.
The Bush campaign is stuck with economic anxiety and any number of
future adversities at home and abroad that are largely out of its
control. It can't control these wildcards. But it can control what it
does to John Kerry.
Quiz question #2.
On May 6, U.S. News's "Washington Whispers" reported that strategists
for the president believe the race will be "defined" this spring. They
believe an "early strike" will "lock in" their advantage. Sources at
the challenger's campaign "scoff" at the "pre-emptive strike
strategy."
Was this written on May 6, 1996, or May 6, 2004?
The answer is May 6, 1996, but it may as well be 2004.
- Robert Moran is a vice president at Republican polling firm
Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates. He is an NRO contributor.
-------
At first glance, it may seem odd or even perverse to suggest that
statutory controls on the private ownership of firearms are irrelevant
to the problem of armed crime; yet that is precisely what the evidence
shows.
Armed crime and violent crime generally are products of ethnic and
social factors unrelated to the availability of a particular type of
weapon, and the number of firearms required to satisfy the crime
market is small. Experience shows that these weapons are supplied no
matter what controls are instituted and in place at any given time."
Colin Greenwood
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
