Mr. Marriott Goes to Washington
I am off tomorrow morning to Washington DC to attend the Reagan-Truman Freedom Awards reception at the Embassy of the Czech Republic for the Victims of Communism Memorial being built in the nation's capital. This memorial, which is one of the few "charities" I have supported over the years, will commemorate the deaths of the nearly 100 million victims of communism all over the world and serve as a reminder to freedom loving people everywhere of the evils of communism. Unlike the National Holocaust Museum in Washington DC, this effort has found scant support in congress and thus relies almost entirely on private funding to be completed. I hope everyone who can, will take the time to visit this organization's website, which I have linked on this blog, and decide whether or not this is a worthy value to donate time and/or money.
I'll be back Thursday afternoon.
Tuesday, November 30, 2004
Monday, November 08, 2004
Exit Polls Invalid on One Point, Valid on Another?
The exit polls conducted for all the networks during last weeks elections were discredited and thrown out as the night wore on and it became clear from the actual returns that they were very flawed and, indeed, very mistaken. When the first exit polls came out, they showed Kerry carrying nearly every swing state, winning the electoral college vote and the popular vote of the whole country. This was obviously not the case and yet these same exit polls have reemerged to explain Bush's victory. Because it was these same exit polls that put so called "moral values" as the number one issue for those voting for president. How can we discard these exit polls as not being in any way representative in terms of whom one voted for, yet representative of why one voted for whom one voted for?
The results of these exit polls were not only wrong in predicting the outcome of the vote, but are counter-intuitive in terms of why people voted. It is unlikely that with a campaign focused entirely around the War on Terrorism that the main issue for voters would be the nearly irrelevant side issues of moral values, which essentially means gay marriages, which were all invalidated by courts (except in MA) by the time election day actually occurred. How much of these issues does one actually remember from the debates? Aside from the two moments when Edwards and then Kerry made reference to one of the Vice-Presidents daughters, who also happens to be a lesbian.
The exit polls conducted for all the networks during last weeks elections were discredited and thrown out as the night wore on and it became clear from the actual returns that they were very flawed and, indeed, very mistaken. When the first exit polls came out, they showed Kerry carrying nearly every swing state, winning the electoral college vote and the popular vote of the whole country. This was obviously not the case and yet these same exit polls have reemerged to explain Bush's victory. Because it was these same exit polls that put so called "moral values" as the number one issue for those voting for president. How can we discard these exit polls as not being in any way representative in terms of whom one voted for, yet representative of why one voted for whom one voted for?
The results of these exit polls were not only wrong in predicting the outcome of the vote, but are counter-intuitive in terms of why people voted. It is unlikely that with a campaign focused entirely around the War on Terrorism that the main issue for voters would be the nearly irrelevant side issues of moral values, which essentially means gay marriages, which were all invalidated by courts (except in MA) by the time election day actually occurred. How much of these issues does one actually remember from the debates? Aside from the two moments when Edwards and then Kerry made reference to one of the Vice-Presidents daughters, who also happens to be a lesbian.
Thursday, November 04, 2004
Bush's Mandate
This election was about the war on terror and the continuing military response to the war Islamists around the world declared and waged against us. John Kerry stood for (and this is me guessing since he contradicted himself most of the time) doing nothing. Kerry said he would respond swiftly to any attack on America, failing to realize in the moment he said it that we've already been attacked many times and that to prevent further attacks we must rid ourselves of onerous state sponsors of terror. Bush let three debates take place and Kerry, to his credit, was able to make the race much closer, but in the end his own waffling and anti-American veneer cost him the election. He will now disappear back into Massachusetts politics, likely to only reappear if someone asks him to serve in a cabinet or something some day.
Bush's first press briefing/news conference tells us something about how he wants to spend his last term domestically and noticeably absent were religious inspired domestic ideas like faith-based initiatives. He talked more about quasi-privatization of social security and keeping his tax cuts in place. In foreign policy he talked about finishing off the terrorists in Iraq, and a full scale assault on Fallujah seems very imminent. Weaker elements in Bush's cabinet like Attorney General John Ashcroft and Secretary of State Colin Powell are likely to terminated. Perhaps Condoleeza Rice or Donald Rumsfeld will be transferred to State, but I think the ultimate goal is for Paul Wolfowitz, the man whose plan after 9/11 was to invade Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria simultaneously, to become Defense Secretary.
The election was about the War and very little else. Kerry represented Clintonian ambivalence and the voters showed that they at least remember 9/11 a little bit.
Bush will also set up what seems the very probable ascendancy of Rudy Giuliani (or if the constitution is changed, Arnold Schwarzenegger) to the nomination in 2008.
This election was about the war on terror and the continuing military response to the war Islamists around the world declared and waged against us. John Kerry stood for (and this is me guessing since he contradicted himself most of the time) doing nothing. Kerry said he would respond swiftly to any attack on America, failing to realize in the moment he said it that we've already been attacked many times and that to prevent further attacks we must rid ourselves of onerous state sponsors of terror. Bush let three debates take place and Kerry, to his credit, was able to make the race much closer, but in the end his own waffling and anti-American veneer cost him the election. He will now disappear back into Massachusetts politics, likely to only reappear if someone asks him to serve in a cabinet or something some day.
Bush's first press briefing/news conference tells us something about how he wants to spend his last term domestically and noticeably absent were religious inspired domestic ideas like faith-based initiatives. He talked more about quasi-privatization of social security and keeping his tax cuts in place. In foreign policy he talked about finishing off the terrorists in Iraq, and a full scale assault on Fallujah seems very imminent. Weaker elements in Bush's cabinet like Attorney General John Ashcroft and Secretary of State Colin Powell are likely to terminated. Perhaps Condoleeza Rice or Donald Rumsfeld will be transferred to State, but I think the ultimate goal is for Paul Wolfowitz, the man whose plan after 9/11 was to invade Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria simultaneously, to become Defense Secretary.
The election was about the War and very little else. Kerry represented Clintonian ambivalence and the voters showed that they at least remember 9/11 a little bit.
Bush will also set up what seems the very probable ascendancy of Rudy Giuliani (or if the constitution is changed, Arnold Schwarzenegger) to the nomination in 2008.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)