Over the past few weeks, President Bush and VP Cheney have begun a consistent effort to answer back against the Kerry Campaign and those who would disparage the hard work of this administration. In a series of speeches and TV ads, the Bush Campaign has been taking the time to speak to its successes and to point out the contradictions of candidate Kerry… And it’s working! Here’s what a recent [url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-03-29-bush-ads_x.htm]Gallup survey found[/url]:

In a survey taken in mid-February, Kerry led Bush by 28 percentage points in [17 swing states where the ads are airing], 63% to 35%. Now Bush leads Kerry in them by six points, 51% to 45%.

In contrast, there has been much less volatility in states where the ads haven’t aired. Kerry held a four-point lead in them in February; Bush holds a two-point lead now.

But Kerry is rapidly catching up to the Bush Campaign in regards to the funds they are taking in and supposedly “independent” political action committees plan to spend millions more obscuring Kerry’s 19 years of anti-defense voting. Kerry’s voting record is even more liberal than Ted Kennedy’s record, and he knows that voters are just not going to elect a person who voted for higher gas taxes, lower defense funding, and against traditional marriage.

So, in order to continue to counter the Kerry spin machine, President Bush and Vice President Cheney need our continued support. Today is [url=http://blogsforbush.com/wictory.html]Wictory Wednesday[/url]. Every Wednesday, dozens of bloggers ask their readers to [url=http://www.georgewbush.com/SignUp]volunteer[/url] and/or [url=http://www.georgewbush.com/grassroots/]donate[/url] to the Bush 2004 campaign.

Please help us make a difference for the nation and the world. Support Bush/Cheney 2004!

David Flanagan
Viewpointjournal.com

The message below was posted today to [url=http://www.blogsforbush.com]BlogsForBush.com[/url]:

To view one industrious American’s self-made ad in support of the Bush campaign, [url=http://members.cox.net/macallan_the/GW/GWBush1_Start.htm]click here[/url] (well worth the click).

Bravo!

Hat tip, [url=http://www.nationalreview.com/thecorner/04_03_28_corner-archive.asp#028371]Jonah[/url].

I’ve got to say that the kerfuffle started by Richard Clark just two short weeks ago has me flip-flopping like a Kerry wannabee. There are just so many factors to consider, and an honest look at the issues should give any honest person significant pause.

On the one hand, the timing of Clarke’s book, his year of silence, and the ever-changing landscape of his story bring to mind the term “political hack” [One who undertakes unpleasant or distasteful tasks for money or reward; a hireling]. On the other hand, the guy did serve in no less than four different administrations [starting with Reagan] and likely has more experience in regards to this issue than nearly any other person in D.C.

Though I do believe Clarke has some ego issues, you have to take at least some of what he says seriously. Upon examination of his public testimony, there are quite a few points of agreement that I have with Clarke. For example:
>> Read more

Two summers ago, my wife and I had the opportunity to visit some good friends who had been stationed in beautiful southern Germany, the Bavaria region. The first and most lasting impression were the breathtaking mountains in every direction. For those of us who like to stay active, they just seemed to cry out to be climbed.

During the trip, our friends took us up one of the mountains near their home, it was cold and rainy at the time, but it was worth it. My friend, Rick and I, with his 6-year-old son decided to venture up a bit further and we left our wives and their 14-month-old daughter in a little chalet to drink some hot chocolate. Rick, Nick and I reached the top of the mountain and stepped out on a viewing area to see the country around us… Wow!

As we were admiring the view and chatting about various things, an older couple walked up as well. The gentleman heard us talking in English and walked right up to us. He looked to be somewhere between 65 and 75, but it was hard to tell because Germans tend to be more active than Americans and, in general, live healthier lives.

Anyway, the man walked right up to my friend, VERY close. I thought, “either he’s very happy or very angry with us.” He asked my friend, in German, if we were American, to which my friend replied that we were. He began to tell us about how, when he was a little boy, right after the end of the war, an American soldier gave him a candy bar. You see, he recognized that my friend was in the military and, in his way, he was saying thank you yet again for the kindness of this one soldier so long ago.

You might not know, but the Germans were told all kinds of lies about Americans during WWII, and so, when our troops occupied Germany, most of them were absolutely terrified. Some German families committed suicide outright, poisoning themselves and their children, rather than face the wrath of the Americans.

But the American soldiers were not monsters. Instead, they were compassionate and friendly, and their honorable conduct shaped the Germans’ impression of America for that entire generation. Which is why this gentleman on the mountain with us wanted to come and tell an American soldier of another generation about the kindness that he had been shown as a young boy.

Are US forces trained to do this as kind of a passification technique? No. Our troops are, by nature, protectors of society, and when they see societies struggling, they want to help.

Which is exactly what is happening in Iraq today. Troops all across Iraq are seeing the devastation, not of war, for the war we waged against Saddam and his forces was brief and highly targeted, but of a brutal dictator who, for 35 years, cared not a whit for anyone but himself. And you can’t blame the poverty on UN sanctions either. The UN instituted the “Oil For Food” program to provide for the needs of the Iraqi people. Unfortunately, we now know that this program was corrupt and UN officials were taking kickbacks and allowing Saddam to divert the funds to his private bank accounts, from which he built a dozen or more plush palaces for his personal pleasure.

No, this poverty is the same poverty you always see in the wake of a brutal dictatorship. The government takes everything and the people scratch to survive. Parents watch their children starve, desperate to do something to help them, but cannot. US troops, seeing this devastation, began writing back to their friends and family, to their churches and communities, asking for help. And help is pouring forth to Iraq.

Which is why I’m asking that you please visit a site to which I’ve decided to personally promote and to personally support. The site is called [url=http://www.operationiraqichildren.org]Operartion Iraqi Children[/url] and it is a program created to send school supplies to children who have almost nothing to use in their classrooms.

As you know, education is the lifeblood of a free society. That is why I think this is such an essential program. [url=http://www.operationiraqichildren.org]Operartion Iraqi Children[/url] was started by actor Gary Sinise (Forrest Gump, Apollo 13, Ransom, etc.) and Laura Hillenbrand, the author of “Seabiscuit: An American Legend,” after a visit by Gary Sinise to the troops stationed in Iraq.

During Gary Sinise’s visit, he noticed that the troops had become very actively engaged in helping to repair and improve schools everywhere. On days off the troops were in the schools doing construction work, or helping out with the kids. And they were also delivering school supplies from their families, communities, and churches to donate as well.

Needless to say, the Iraqis have been overwhelmed at this outpouring of support and have gained hope from our committment to their future. Which is why I think the [url=http://www.operationiraqichildren.org]Operartion Iraqi Children[/url] program is worth supporting.

I hope you do too.

Thanks.

David Flanagan
Viewpointjournal.com

In early August, 2002, Fox News was present at a [url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115085,00.html]briefing before the media[/url] in which Richard Clark Defended the Bush Administration’s handling of the pre-9/11 terror situation. Fox News posted the transcript today on its Foxnews.com website.

Lets be clear here, everything said in this transcript not only flies in the face of Clarke’s claims from his book, but the claims Clinton Administration officials made JUST YESTERDAY in front of the 9/11 commission. This whole issue is going to hurt Democrats way more than it ever could have helped them.

Here is a piece of the transcript for your review with a link to the full transcript:

QUESTION: What is your response to the suggestion in the [Aug. 12, 2002] Time [magazine] article that the Bush administration was unwilling to take on board the suggestions made in the Clinton administration because of animus against the — general animus against the foreign policy?

CLARKE: I think if there was a general animus that clouded their vision, they might not have kept the same guy dealing with terrorism issue. This is the one issue where the National Security Council leadership decided continuity was important and kept the same guy around, the same team in place. That doesn’t sound like animus against uh the previous team to me.

JIM ANGLE: You’re saying that the Bush administration did not stop anything that the Clinton administration was doing while it was making these decisions, and by the end of the summer had increased money for covert action five-fold. Is that correct?

CLARKE: All of that’s correct.

[url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115085,00.html]MORE…[/url]

John Kerry’s campaign has already raised a record-breaking $15 million over the Internet this month alone! And they’re currently raising a million dollars a day. In fact, Kerry may very well raise a record $100 million before he accepts his party’s nomination at the end of July.

The Bush campaign is already being outspent on the airwaves by shadowy liberal groups with hundreds of millions of dollars from limousine liberals like George Soros. Add Kerry’s resources and we can expect a formidable barrage of anti-Bush ads on TV for the next several months.

Only you can help fight back against this assault. You have the power to even out the odds and give the Bush campaign the resources it needs to prevent the most liberal senator in Washington today from becoming President.

Or maybe you’d prefer that President Kerry raise your taxes by a trillion dollars. He has already pledged to veto any attempt by Congress to extend the Bush tax cuts beyond their expiration date, which is all he needs to do to raise taxes across America. The Bush tax cuts give money back to everyone who pays taxes, so, you prepare your tax statements for the year, take note of how much less of a burden your government is on you because of President Bush’s efforts and remember that John Kerry believes that this money is his, not yours.

If you want to continue the fight for a less burdensome government and a safer world, then its time to support President Bush and Vice President Cheney in their efforts for reelection. Please [url=https://www.donationreport.com/init/controller/ProcessEntryCmd?key=O7O2Y6B0F3]donate[/url] to or [url=https://www.georgewbush.com/Secure/BushTeamLeaderSignUp.aspx?lid=13BA88BF]volunteer[/url] for the Bush/Cheney 2004 campaign.

This election does not belong to the billionaires, it belongs to the people. Lets make sure people like Soros understand this.

David Flanagan
Viewpointjournal.com

The most recent kerfuffle for the Bush Administration has been related to claims by Richard Clark in his new book, Against All Enemies, in which, among other things, Clarke has made the claim that the Bush Administration sought to link Al Qaeda and Iraq, despite what he claims is the complete lack of evidence.

Today, however, a Washington Post article dated January 23, 1999 has surfaced in which Richard Clarke does draw a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq. Here is the posted excerpt:

Clarke did provide new information in defense of Clinton’s decision to fire Tomahawk cruise missiles at the El Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan, in retaliation for bin Laden’s role in the Aug. 7 embassy bombings. While U.S. intelligence officials disclosed shortly after the missile attack that they had obtained a soil sample from the El Shifa site that contained a precursor of VX nerve gas, Clarke said that the U.S. government is “sure” that Iraqi nerve gas experts actually produced a powdered VX-like substance at the plant that, when mixed with bleach and water, would have become fully active VX nerve gas.
Clarke said U.S. intelligence does not know how much of the substance was produced at El Shifa or what happened to it. But he said that intelligence exists linking bin Laden to El Shifa’s current and past operators, the Iraqi nerve gas experts and the National Islamic Front in Sudan. [emphasis mine]

Given the evidence presented to the White House before the airstrike, Clarke said, the president “would have been derelict in his duties if he didn’t blow up the facility.”

Clarke said the U.S. does not believe that bin Laden has been able to acquire chemical agents, biological toxins or nuclear weapons. If evidence of such an acquisition existed, he said, “we would be in the process of doing something.”

(Excerpted from “Embassy Attacks Thwarted, U.S. Says; Official Cites Gains Against Bin Laden; Clinton Seeks $10 Billion to Fight Terrorism,” Vernon Loeb, Washington Post, A02, January 23, 1999.)

I think a key element to this story is the fact that it was Clarke himself who had convinced President Clinton to make the strike. So, in defending Clinton in 1999, he was actually defending himself.

So, did Clarke later learn that the intelligence linking Al Qaeda and Iraq was wrong? If so, why didn’t he point this out in his book and subsequent interviews? If he was wrong, then the people killed in the El Shifa factory were innocent civilians, killed because of his personal error. One way or another, the bombing of the El Shifa factory did significant damage (no pun intended) to US relations with the Middle East for some time afterward.

More to come.

David Flanagan
Viewpointjournal.com

Can you tell the political season is in full swing? Attacks on the President are now coming from nearly every direction , and a great portion of the mainstream media seems to be playing happily along.

In regards to the media attack on the President, Peggy Noonan, syndicated columnists and author, [url=http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110004799]noted recently[/url]:

The media this year are to an unusual degree–even for them–keen to give Mr. Bush a hard time and Mr. Kerry a boost. The daily anti-GOP pounding is taking a toll.

We all know the reasons the press is doing what it’s doing–its biases, its need for a horse race. But this year the press is also taking it on itself to make up for the disparity in war chests. They don’t think Mr. Kerry is going to catch up with the president in terms of money, and they’re trying to even the score.

>> Read more

This article from [url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/17/eveningnews/main607029.shtml]CBSnews.com[/url] explains how China’s booming economy is translating into jobs for Americans, both here in the US and abroad:
>> Read more

I just want to put this out in a short a simple manner. When terrorists attacked America, they got far more than they bargained for. When they attacked Spain, they likely got more than they hoped for.

Not only did the strong anti-terror government get voted out of office en masse today in Spain, citizens of Spain openly admitted that their vote reflected their anger that their government made them a target for terror by supporting the US in its anti-terror activities. Unfortunately for the world, this example will only encourage Al Qaeda and every other terrorist organization in the world to try the same tactic in other nations in hopes of gaining the same results.

If you think about it, this is the likely result that Al Qaeda was hoping for when it attacked the US. They wanted to damage the credibility of our government and force the US to withdraw from its active role across the world. Perhaps in attacking us in so brutal a manner, Al Qaeda hoped that our government would descend into utter chaos.

As we all know, what happened was exactly the opposite. But now, I think we in the US should brace for a massive attack about a week before the 2004 elections. Thanks to the reaction of Spanish citizens, terrorists in Spain now have a government in power that is far more likely to let them continue to operate, while terrorists across the world have a reason to try the same thing in every nation.

I hope I’m wrong. I believe that I’m right.

David Flanagan
Viewpointjournal.com

Today, the Associated Press reported that:

A former journalist and ex-congressional press secretary was arrested Thursday on charges she acted as an Iraqi spy before and after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, accepting $10,000 for her work, prosecutors said Thursday.

Susan Lindauer, 41 years old, was arrested in her hometown of Takoma Park, Md., and was to appear in court later Thursday in Baltimore, authorities in New York said.

Takoma Park, Md., is an area I drive by every day on my way to work, but that is not the most interesting angle of this story for me. One of the most interesting facts of Ms. Lindauer’s arrest is her connection with certain peace groups in America.

So, whats the big deal? Consider the fact that many of the anti-war groups who marched in support of Iraqi’s former dictator, Saddam Hussein, were helping to keep the murderous dictator in power. Conservatives, of course, have claimed this for years. What may be different in Ms. Lindauer’s case, however, is that if the charges are upheld in court, we will see evidence for the first time of people on Saddam’s payroll actively involved in the peace movement here in America.

The one current link found is Ms. Lindauer’s [url=http://www.scn.org/wwfor/peacepledgesigners.html#lll]signature on a peace pledge[/url] in 2002, which states:

PEACE PLEDGE: TO STOP SPREAD OF ANTI-TERRORIST WAR TO IRAQ

Phase III of the Campaign of Conscience for the Iraqi People

Fellowship of Reconciliation, Voices in the Wilderness, American Friends Service Committee, Episcopal Peace Fellowship, Lutheran Peace Fellowship, Education for Peace in Iraq Center, Interfaith Network of Concern for the People of Iraq, Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, and others are collecting signatures of those who say:

“I support peace for Iraq. I grant permission to use my name and city publicly as an opponent of the ongoing economic and bombing war on Iraq, and of any escalation of that war.”

[url=http://www.scn.org/wwfor/coc-peacepledge.html#intro]introductory letter from Western Washington Fellowship of Reconciliation Organizer, Mike Yarrow[/url]

Even more interesting, if you go to the introductory letter page written by Mike Yarrow, you will see that he asks the question, Are we to wait for this escalation to happen and then hold up our well-worn “Stop the Bombing” signs — or can we take pro-active steps to prevent the escalation?

Yarrow goes on to say many other things in his letter, none of which include the recommendation of becoming a spy for Saddam, but then, Ms. Lindauer was allegedly already in cahoots with Saddam by that time anyway. I do find it a particularly interesting coincidence that one of the [url=http://www.scn.org/wwfor/peacepledgesigners.html]signers of that pledge [/url]is none other than Susan Lindauer herself and that the same site also publishes activities, pledges, and information for other peace organizations, at least one of which was sending members to Palestine and Iraq as human shields.

Remember [url=http://www.rachelcorrie.org/]Rachel Corrie[/url]? She was one of those who was trying to protect the house of a Palestinian terrorist when she was accidentally crushed by a bulldozer. She too is linked to the peace movement through the same network of web sites.

Now, I’m not saying this is some kind of secret network of organizations designed to give aid and comfort to oppressive terrorist regimes. What I am saying is that this is, for the most part, a wide open network of organizations designed to give aid and comfort to oppressive terrorist regimes.

In their attempts to promote peace, often an honorable cause, they have resorted to doing exactly what Mr. Yarrow has suggested, that of taking “pro-active steps” to hinder international efforts to confront terrorist networks and regimes in the name of “peace.”

Ironically, Mr. Yarrow ends his introductory letter with the words, “No More Victims!” The problem I have with this “call to arms” is that some members of these “pro-active” organizations do exactly the opposite of what Mr. Yarrow intends. For example, they:

1) Hinder international efforts to end the victimization of innocent men, women, and children by oppressive regimes and terrorist organizations,
2) Threaten the lives of our service men and women who are even now acting to protect innocent civilians in Iraq, Palestine, Israel, Spain, and many other locations throughout the world.

I respect the fact that there are many in this country and throughout the world with a sincere desire for peace. However, we see with increasing clarity how some organizations, in their desire to promote peace, actually hinder the process.

Nuff said!

David Flanagan
Viewpointjournal.com

John Kerry, the leading Democratic presidential candidate is, once again, showing his contrarian nature. This time, however, its not just us ocean-locked conservatives who are wondering what this guy is thinking.

[url=http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110004742]Opinionjournal.com reports [/url]on a growing number of attacks from officials in the UK who are increasingly concerned over some of Kerry’s recent speeches:

There’s no word other than xenophobic to describe John Kerry’s campaign against international trade. Surprisingly enough, his antitrade position is a reversal, as the [url=http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pub&dt=040225&cat=news&st=newscampaignkerrydc]Associated Press [/url]notes in a dispatch from Toledo, Ohio:

Said David @ 2:25 am Comments/Trackbacks (0) | Permalink
Filed under: General   

This commentary was excerpted from Opinionjournal.com’s Friday edition of, [url=http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110004750]The Best of The Web Today[/url]:

By a vote of 254-163, the House yesterday approved the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, under which attacking a pregnant woman counts as two separate assaults, one on her and one on her unborn child. Opponents argue that this somehow undermines the right to abortion:

Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., said it would be the first time in federal law that a fetus would be recognized as having the same rights as the born. The bill “is not about shielding pregnant women,” she said. “It is and has always been about undermining freedom of choice.”

The House, said Kate Michelman, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, was “taking advantage of tragedy to promote the far-right agenda of trying to rob women of their right to choose.”

Nita Lowey and Kate Michelman, standing tall for a murderer’s right to choose. And in truth, they are the ones undermining the intellectual case for abortion rights. The pro-life argument has always been that abortion is murder; Lowey and Michelman’s view is that murder is abortion.

I think another interesting point to note which is not spelled out quite as well as I would like in the article is that the Unborn Victims of Violence Act supports choice rather than limits it. How so? Because this act helps protect women who have chosent to have a child. The problem then, that pro-abortion groups must have with this bill is that it supports the opposite choice of what NARAL and other groups would like to see women make.

I guess, for them, choice is only okay if its a choice for abortion. No big surprise there.

David Flanagan
[url=http://www.viewpointjournal.com]Viewpointjournal.com[/url]