Precinct 333

Saturday, October 23, 2004

Voter Intimidation By Democrats In Florida!

A glitch in the Florida early voting law leaves voters without the protection of a "buffer zone" and freedom from intimidation at polling places.

And the Democrats are taking full advantage of it, in an attempt to disenfranchise as many GOP voters as possible.

Examples include
* blocked doors;
* anti-Bush rallies next to line outside the polling place;
* physical assault of voters;
* verbal abuse of suspected Republicans;
* terroristic threats against suspected Republicans("Where's my shotgun?");
* electioneering next to voting booths by individuals wearing Kerry stickers.

Republicans have signed affidavits about the intimidation, and have complained to both the Florida Secretary of State and the Florida Democrat Party.

The response of the Democrats?
"We have had incidents as well," said Christine Anderson, spokeswoman for the Kerry campaign. "We've had quite a few."

She said the party hasn't taken affidavits from voters and found it shocking the Republicans were so focused on the issue rather than working to make sure people can vote.

Ms. Anderson, Republicans ARE trying to make sure people can vote. Apparently for you, though, that means "working to make sure people can only vote Democrat."


And The Verdict Is...

Sinclair was reasonably balanced in its news special last night. Unless, of course, you are a political hack directly associated with the Kerry campaign.
After the program, Kerry spokesman Chad Clanton called it "a premeditated smear" that obscured "the plain truth -- John Kerry was a war hero who was decorated for bravery." Referring to Sinclair's top executives, he said: "It's not surprising that these guys who have given all this money to the Bush campaign did what they did."

But spokesmen for several liberal and public policy groups said in a conference call that the program was far better than they had been led to expect and that they saw no reason to support earlier Democratic demands for equal time. "In general, it appears Sinclair listened to the American people," said Gene Kimmelman, Washington director of Consumers Union. "Sinclair certainly was acting like a broadcaster should tonight."

I didn't get to see the broadcast, since I don't live in one of the markets where Sinclair broadcasts. But media reports indicate it was fair and balanced -- or at least as fair and balanced as CBS News or ABC News reports are. And I still wish that Sinclair would have broadcast the entire Sherwood documentary. It would have been equal time to all the biased "Kerry was a war hero and Bush was AWOL" nonsense put out by the mainstream media. Stolen Honor (SEE IT HERE)wouldn't have needed equal time -- it would have BEEN equal time.

I sent the following to both the FCC and the FEC this morning.
Amendment I

Congress shall make no... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press....

Dear Commissioners,

I open my letter with the above as a reminder of the Constitutional imperative at stake in the Sinclair Broadcasting Group controversy. Congress (and by extension its creations, such as the FCC and FEC) have no business restricting political or journalistic speech. In light of this clear directive of one of our founding documents, I urge you to reject any and all complaints leveled against Sinclair Broadcasting Group.

Let us examine the content of Sinclair's special, broadcast in each of their markets yesterday. It contained approximately 5 minutes of Stolen Honor, an anti-Kerry documentary made independently of the Bush campaign. But that was balanced by slightly less than 5 minutes of Going Upriver, a pro-Kerry documentary made by individuals associated with the Kerry campaign. Portions of the broadcast discussed journalistic ethics and disparate coverage of the Vietnam-era records of the two candidates. Sinclair offered the Kerry camp the opportunity to be represented by either the candidate or a surrogate, but that offer was declined. By any standard, SInclair met standards of objectivity -- even though the tradition of American journalism dating back to the founding of the Republic is for the press to be a partisan force (hence newspapers around the country named for various political parties -- Federalist, Whig, Democrat, Republican). What was broadcast by Sinclair was clearly a news program, and therefore beyond the reach of the FCC under the First Amendment.

Yet let us presume for a moment that the special fell outside the boundaries of news, and that it was actually an unpaid political speech requiring equal time. Such an analysis is equally flawed in a Constitutional sense. Americans are not required to give equal time to speech antithetical to their own beliefs. And in light of the continuing media attacks upon the President's Vietnam-era service record, and the focus on John Kerry's alleged "war hero" status, it can be reasonably argued that the Sinclair broadcast constituted "equal time" to balance off the conventional wisdom as propagated by the media. Even a broadcast of Stolen Honor in its unedited entirety would not have outweighed the last several months (or years, in the case of attacks on George Bush's service record) of coverage slanted to give advantage to the Democrats. There is no need to give equal time (as the Kerry campaign requests), as the Sinclair special IS equal time.

In closing, this American urges you to do your duty as government official, and to act to uphold the supreme law of the land -- the US Constitution. Any law, rule, regulation, administrative decision, or court opinion to the contrary is null and void if it is in conflict with the clear meaning of that charter which authorized and frames the federal government. Abide by the terms of your oaths of office, and reject each and every attempt to punish Sinclair Broadcasting Group and its stations for engaging in what the Founding Fathers would have unambiguously viewed as speech protected by the First Amendment.


No Respect For Our Troops

Michelle Malkin brings us a transcript of Kerry surogate Larry O'Donnell's recent McLaughlin Group appearance. Notice the great respect he demonstrates for our men and omen in the field. Given Kerry's betrayal of an earlier generation of fighting American soldiers, I can't help but believe that the comments represent the candidate's views as well.

MR. O'DONNELL: Look, it's not our job to lie about war to make troops feel good. And I don't care what they feel.

MR. BLANKLEY: I don't --

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Let me finish.

MR. O'DONNELL: I don't care what they feel about the truth of this war. If John Kerry thinks this war is a mistake and if the United States of America elects him president, the troops are going to have to live with that. And they know better than anyone else whether it was a mistake or not.

MR. BUCHANAN: The commander-in-chief should not undermine the troops --

MR. O'DONNELL: He's not undermining anything.

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you want to make a point here?

MR. BUCHANAN: He'd demoralize them.

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: All right, the human --

MR. O'DONNELL: I don't care if they're demoralized. They have to go to war and be prepared --

MR. BUCHANAN: The commander-in-chief does care.

MR. O'DONNELL: -- to live with the debate that goes on in the United States about whether it's right or wrong.

MR. BUCHANAN: But if you're going to be commander-in-chief, you cannot be demoralizing the troops in wartime, even if you think the war is a mistake.

See why we need more courageous folks like Sinclair Broadcasting to show even a little bit of Stolen Honor?


The Religious Question Unasked

Peter Steinfels of the New York Times approvingly cites a recent E. J. Dionne Jr. piece in his column.

By demonstrating political relevance, religion has finally gained a little respect. "Thus may some good come out of this often rancid campaign," the inveterately optimistic E. J. Dionne Jr. wrote this week in his syndicated Washington Post column. Noting the bumper sticker announcing that "God is NOT a Republican ... or a Democrat," Mr. Dionne welcomed the recognition that "religious people are not monolithic in their views." Likewise, "the myth that religion lives only on the political right is being exploded."

They are, of course, partially correct. As my old professor, Dr. Thomas Droleskey, once shouted at me in an exasperated voice, "Salvation comes through Christ and His Church, not the Republican Party." God isn't a member of any political organization, and we end up with abominations like Hezbollah (The Party of God) when people start thinking that He is.

But what Steinfels and Dionne really need to deal with is the answer to the unasked question -- Is GOD monolithic in HIS views?

And if God is monolithic in His views, doesn't that mean that (at least) one party is so wrong on the issues that no true Christian can cast a vote for its candidates?


Wednesday, October 20, 2004

Teresa Insults Laura -- And All Teachers

"Well, you know, I don't know Laura Bush. But she seems to be calm, and she has a sparkle in her eye, which is good," Heinz Kerry said. "But I don't know that she's ever had a real job — I mean, since she's been grown up. So her experience and her validation comes from important things, but different things."

Really? She taught school and worked as a school librarian for nine years, from the time she finished college in 1968 until she married the president in 1977. I'm a teacher, and I'll tell you right now that it is real work -- and sometimes very difficult work. That Heinz Kerry has so little respect for us and what we do is pretty disgusting. And we won't get into the question of whether or not being a full-time stay-at-home mom constitutes work.

I'm not aware of Teresa Heinz Kerry ever being employed. She grew up a child of colonialist privilege in Mozambique (where blacks were brutally suppressed by the Portuguese colonists -- such as her family). And I can't find any information about her ever having a job, "real" or otherwise. Her marriage to the heir to a billion dollar fortune and his subsequent death put her in the position to be a "philanthropist". And tax lawyers put her in a position to pay only 12.3% of her income in taxes, which is less than the percentage paid by most Americans who make significantly less. I guess rich liberals really ARE different.

Please be aware that AP has changed the story from when it was originally posted. It originally was headlined Heinz Kerry Separates Self From Mrs. Bush. The current headline is Heinz Kerry Sorry for Laura Bush Comment. The article contains an apology and an admission that she "forgot" about Laura Bush having worked in education for nine years. And Teresa claims to have been "full-time in workforce," but somehow the AP leaves out what she supposedly did full time. Must be signing grant papers, because I can't imagine her working full time while married to John Heinz.


What's Up With Chronically Biased?

Dan Patrick and the folks with KSEV-AM radio in Houston started Chronically Biased several months ago an antidote to the bias found in the Houston Chronicle.

Posting has been decreasing recently, and now there is a graphic announcing that "life as we know it" will be altered in six days.

Check it out -- and be sure to check it out in six days. Something big must be in the works.


Sunday, October 17, 2004

How Many Bills?

Bush says Kerry has passed five. Kerry says the number is 56. What is the correct answer? According to The answer lies somewhere in the middle.

There are eleven Kerry authored laws, if you include a couple that don't bear his name but came out of a House-Senate conference committee in a form substantively similar to the original Kerry bill passed by the Senate. Five are cited by the Bush campaign.
* S.791: Authorizes $53 million over four years to provide grants to woman-owned small businesses. (1999)
* S.1206: Names a federal building in Waltham, Massachusetts after Frederick C. Murphy, who was killed in action during World War II and awarded (posthumously) the Medal of Honor. (1994)
* S.1636: A save-the-dolphins measure aiming “to improve the program to reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations.” (1994)
* S.1563: Funding the National Sea Grant College Program, which supports university-based research, public education, and other projects “to promote better understanding, conservation and use of America’s coastal resources.” (1991)
* S.423: Granting a visa and admission to the U.S. as a permanent resident to Kil Joon Yu Callahan. (1987)

The Kerry camp offers two more.
* H.R.1900 (S.300): Awarded a congressional gold medal to Jackie Robinson (posthumously), and called for a national day of recognition. (2003)
* H.R.1860 (S.856): Increased the maximum research grants for small businesses from $500,000 to $750,000 under the Small Business Technology Transfer Program. (2001)

The Associated Press and find these as well, which while not technically bills have the force of law.
* S.J.Res.158: To make the week of Oct. 22 – Oct. 28, 1989 “World Population Awareness Week.” (1989)
* S.J.Res.160: To renew “World Population Awareness Week” for 1991. (1991)
* S.J.Res.318: To make Nov. 13, 1992 “Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day.” (1992)
* S.J.Res.337: To make Sept. 18, 1992 “National POW/MIA Recognition Day." (1992)

Nothing very substantive in that, is there? And that still only gets us up to eleven, which is far short of the 56 Kerry cited.

How does Kerry reach the higher number? Go look at the things he uses to pad his claim. There may be a total of 56 measures passed (less than three a year since he entered the Senate), but most do not even qualify as law. After all, does anyone really consider S.Res.123: To change the name of the Committee on Small Business to the "Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship." (2001)to be a significant legislative accomplishment?

Hat Tip to Blogs for Bush.


Scorching Sinclair Censors

Any writer who trusts in the literacy of his readers sufficiently to cite Anthony Burgess' A Clockwork Orange is likely to get a mention here. And in this case it is clear that such a citation is exactly why Thomas Mitchell of the Las Vegas Review-Journal excoriates those on the Left who want to censor Sinclair Broadcasting's upcoming news special on John Kerry.
Even though the Sinclair officials have invited Kerry to appear and discuss the film, Sen. Reid and his fellow government censors dismissed that out of hand as a ruse and mewled: "Equal time rules exist for a purpose -- to prevent the airing of one-sided political content without equal response time given to the opposing view or candidate. In this case, it is impossible to imagine how the equal time rules would be satisfied if this plan is allowed to go forward."

That is called prior restraint, senator, and has generally been much frowned upon by the courts. How does anyone know whether the broadcast will be unfair or one-sided until after it has taken place? Never mind that many of the 24 percent of the nation's households that can even access one of Sinclair's stations probably receive it via cable or satellite and not over the people's public airwaves.

That does raise an interesting question -- for those ho receive the signal via cable rather than the airwaves, how does this differ from the Sundance Channel's stream of anti-Bush propaganda. I don't hear any of the would-be censors of Sinclair calling for a stop to the broadcast of Uncovered: The Whole Truth About The Iraq War that is set for tonight, nor of any of the other items in their October anti-Bush film festival. Why does the Sinclair broadcast rankle so, but not the ongoing partisan pap from the left?

Mitchell goes on, making it clear how little faith these political commisars have in the American people.
[T]o listen to the apoplectic Democrats, you'd think every voter in America, like Burgess' Alex, was going to be doped up, strapped down, with eyelids clipped open and forced to watch "Stolen Honor" until they are so brainwashed that the very sight of John Kerry would induce physical revulsion. This does considerable damage to the First Amendment guarantees of free speech and press, while ignoring the concomitant concept that the informed voter is perfectly capable of sifting through the chaff of lies and distortions to find a grain of truth.

As I've pointed out elsewhere, no one will be forced to watch this broadcast. Granted there will be preemption of some regularly scheduled features, but that is a matter between Sinclair and the viewers of its various stations , and the networks with which they are affiliated. Unless, of course, these worth office holders think that Americans are too lazy to change the channel, too ignorant to know the difference between truth and falsehood, and too stupid to be allowed to govern themselves without guidance from their ideological "betters".

Check out his conclusion as well. If you stop and think about it, that might stop the censors in their tracks.


Protect Detroit Voting Rights!

We keep hearing that Republicans are out to disenfranchise black voters this year. Observers are being dispatched to protect African-Americans from nefarious GOP vote suppression plots.

Detroit News columnist Nolan Finley suggests that maybe someone needs to go observe in Detroit. But despite the foot-in-mouth comments by one GOP official, it isn't the Republicans who need watching.
Michigan runs clean, efficient elections; there's no recent history of voter disenfranchisement in the state.

Except in Detroit. Under City Clerk Jackie Curry, Detroit elections are always an adventure. The city has more spoiled ballots, longer lines at precincts, far more misdirected voters than any other state community.

Curry, a black Democrat, has disenfranchised more African-American voters than the worst of the Jim Crow poll thugs.

If state Democrats truly wanted to protect the voting rights of blacks, they'd dispatch their entire poll-watching army to spend Election Day patrolling Curry's office.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons License.