Chartwell

Kerry's Lies I

2004-10-07T18:06:00.000-07:00

Like Vice President Cheney I wonder where to start with this guy. Because really, just where do you start with someone whose every sentence on the stump contains multiple lies - and remember this is someone who can't ever keep it to one sentence at a time so by the time your head stops spinning at the size and scope of the lies in sentence one he has already droned three more sentences.

But I will start with the lie he told last week in the debate that had gone largely unnoticed but is one of the sleaziest and most craven lies a man can tell in any context. Hat tip to John O'Neill for pointing this out. Basically, Kerry asserted that he had lost troops in battle, but O'Neill has done the research and has put the lie to this whopper. No one under Kerry's command (thankfully) was killed in battle. That anyone would assert that they had lost men in battle for personal gain when it is untrue is atrocious, but when that man wants to be the Commander-In-Chief and would do such a thing for personal political gain is totally beyond the pale. But this is John Kerry. And this is just one more reason that he cannot become the President of the United States. We are a nation at war. Lives are at risk and the country cannot be entrusted to a country club liberal and an ambulance chaser.

The Party of Peace

2004-10-06T15:54:00.000-07:00

There have been a number of attacks on Bush-Cheney campaign offices around the country including in Orlando in Milwaukee. One would have to be of a rather, ummm, trusting mindset to think that these were not coordinated - particularly when one notes that the storming of the Orlando office was quarterbacked by our friends at the AFL-CIO. Oh, and they happened on the same day, and the brownshirts yelled the same slogans...

Take a look at National Review's Kerryspot for a roundup of the latest political violence from the party of peace. Is this acceptable now? Where are the howls of outrage? Voter intimidation - can you say DNC?

The sad fact is that the left, having rejected reason altogether as the domain of DWMs has given itself up to the passions. (See Hobbes) And without reason - or revelatory morality - to govern it the passions will pursue their ends with force and fraud. (Read: violence and lies) I thought couldn't be shocked anymore - just appalled - but I am truly shocked. The Left is showing its moral bankruptcy as it becomes more desperate. Kerry simply must denounce political violence and demand his supporters stand down immediately.

Talked At...

2004-10-01T15:23:00.000-07:00

Take a look at the transcript from last night's debate and you will find something that is very telling and could almost escape notice - the President spoke directly to the American people - Kerry talked about us. It struck me when watching it and then as I listened to some soundbites and reread parts of the transcript it became downright offensive. The President looked the camera in the eye - a surrogate for looking directly at every American - while Kerry spoke to Jim Lehrer about the American people. To be sure, both canditates spoke directly to Lehrer during the debate which is appropriate but there was more than one instance of Kerry telling Lehrer about the American people rather than addressing his response to us.

Kerry has lived in an ivory tower his entire life, he has been in the windiest building in DC for 20 years - you can hardly blame the guy - he has been conditioned to drone on and on about the little people - but that is not how you get elected President.

Give 'em enough rope...

2004-10-01T13:37:00.000-07:00

Here is a link John Podhoretz's excellent piece in today's NY Post. http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/29493.htm

He gets it. Everyone outside of the Metroliner world and the Bay Area gets it. Kerry tried to perfume a pig - but it's still a pig and America knows it. He was boring, tendentious and as fake as his laser-whitened teeth and store bought tan.

And now he is getting hammered for his global test. Check out www.hughhewitt.com who reports the President is slapping Kerry around in Allentown today.

Bush Won. Period.

2004-10-01T11:58:00.000-07:00

I think the MSM and even the right wing blogosphere watched a different debate last night. My wife and I watched the debate at Nixon's bar and restaurant in Phoenix. It was a standing room only crowd of decidedly mixed political affiliation. There were people sporting both Bush and Kerry paraphernalia. There was no event being sponsored, but it was clear almost everyone had come to watch the debate. In that room last night Kerry not only didn't help himself - he lost. When Kerry tried to talk tough - "I will kill the terrorists" - truly spontaneous laughter broke out because it was so phony. As the night wore on, many eyes rolled as Kerry told his whoppers and spouted empty platitudes. His, "I have a better plan for homeland security" was greeted with, okay - what is it? But that question was never answered. And by the end of the night no one even listened to him talk, but they focused on the screen when the President spoke.
This morning at the gym, some of my "independent" and "moderate" friends and acquaintances wondered aloud what debate the punditocracy has watched. Everyone I talked to today thought Bush won flat out and that Kerry was, well, Kerry - self-important, wandering, and phony beyond belief. No one believes that he "will kill the terrorists" everyone believes that he will have a summit - probably Maui or Sun Valley. And so I wonder - what debate did the scribblers watch that the rest of America missed?

I am link here to Fred Barnes and RealClearPolitics.com.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/707yhfwo.asp

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/blog_9_30_04_1235.html

Muzzling the Right

2004-09-24T13:33:00.000-07:00

Here is an interesting take on Rathergate. The basic premise is that it will perversely backfire on the Right by invigorating Leftist attempts to muzzle right-wing dominated media outlets, in particular talk radio. Rob Robb suggests that attempts to revive the Fairness Doctrine will gain renewed currency in Leftist circles and he notes that Kerry has endorsed same.

From a political perspective he is probably correct - the Left will seize on anything to muzzle its critics on the Right. And it would be particularly delicious to muzzle those annoying people who out them when they forge documents. I think this attempt would fail precisely because it would be exposed to sunlight. What is troubling though is this Supreme Court's narrow definition of political speech. Their decision on McCain-Feingold was troubling to many and one wonders how many of the Justices know much about talk radio, the internet, let alone the blogosphere. Portions of the majoirty decision seem to evidence a belief that actual townhall meetings are a commonplace in 21st century America. It is here again that we see the need to be free of judicial tyranny and the need to elect a Republican Senate that will approve the President's judges.

www.johnthune.com

This wasn't supposed to be a Thune post, but if not now, when?

Don't Compare Kerry to Chamberlain

2004-09-23T16:53:00.000-07:00

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6081783/

Just when I thought I couldn't be shocked Flip Flop himself criticizes Iraqi PM Allawi for inconsistency and being in "cahoots" (see everybody - that's a word the little people use isn't it, huh, huh??) with the President. Like many I found Chamberlain a useful simile for Kerry but that does Chamberlain a great disservice. Chamberlain was misguided and naive but when the chips were down he supported Churchill. If by being in cahoots he means working together to forge a better, freer, democratic future for Iraq then I guess he is right. Criticizing Allawi, an heroic man who faces assassination everyday to make his country free, is small and desperate.

And here is Kerry on terrorists in Iraq (endorsing the idea that there are more than a few there):

'I think the prime minister is, obviously, contradicting his own statement of a few days ago, where he said the terrorists are pouring into the country, Kerry said. '

But I thought that Iraq was a distraction in the war on terror...

Helprin on How to Win the War

2004-09-23T16:45:00.000-07:00

The indispensable Mark Helprin has written a must read piece for The Claremont Review of Books on how to win the war. There is a valid critique of the Administration's policy to be made from the Right and this a good enunciation of it. One need not agree with all of the particulars to agree that this is a debate serious people should have.

http://www.claremont.org/writings/crb/fall2004/helprin.html

Thanks to our friends in Claremont. Also, see link to the CRB to the right (of course).

MoDo Still Doesn't Get It

2004-09-23T14:39:00.000-07:00

It is amazing to me that after all this time the Left still misses an important point about Iraq - we are better off confronting radical Islamists in Baghdad than in Baltimore. And MoDo finds this totally incomprehensible. Here she is in high dudgeon:

"When Mr. Kerry says it was the way the president went about challenging Saddam that was wrong, rather than the fact that he challenged Saddam, he's sidestepping the central moral issue.
It was wrong for the president to take on Saddam as a response to 9/11, to pretend the dictator was a threat to our national security, to drum up a fake case on weapons and a faux link to Al Qaeda, and to divert our energy, emotions and matéreal from the real enemy to an old enemy whose address we knew."

Where do I start with this? And by the way, the Left loves to have it both ways - (flip) Iraq is a basketcase because there are radicals flooding in from around the Middle East to fight Americans and (flop) Iraq is a diversion from the War on Terror.

I will leave it to you to digest MoDo - pretend Saddam was a threat to our security (no, never), fake case for WMD (let's ignore the chemical weapons we have found - they were old anyway), a faux link to Al Qaeda (read Steve Hayward on this at www.weeklystandard.com), an old enemy whose address we knew (I think she means bin Laden - what was that address again?)...

Want the Senate to Approve Some Judges?

2004-09-23T10:01:00.000-07:00

While the President is doing very well and seems to be pulling ahead in many battleground states, let's not forget that he - we - need more votes in the Senate. Defeating Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle and electing John Thune is a twofer. Here is a link to Thune's site - support him with a donation today. http://www.johnthune.com/

Intolerance is as intolerance does...

2004-09-22T22:57:00.000-07:00

Lawrence Auster adds meaningfully to the debate with his recent piece on liberal (leftist) intolerance. He knows his audience and gently tutors readers to put forward the conservative argument - based on liberty - rather than getting mired in pointing out the many inconsistencies of the Left. Read it for yourself.

Now, for it...

2004-09-22T21:32:00.000-07:00

Good evening all. Or, more likely, I am talking to myself. This is Chartwell's first post. It is as much an experiment in the mechanics of posting as it is a declaration of our goals. In short we are interested in religion and politics - the things we're not supposed to talk about in polite company. I would also like to add, for the benefit of skeptics of the blogosphere that I am not posting in pajamas.

If anyone reads this - thanks - and bear with us while we learn the software and develop comfortable style.

Before I post I want to add the following link to the godfather of many bloggers out there, Hugh Hewitt: http://www.hughhewitt.com Thanks Hugh.