Since the long enough in fact is payday loans online payday loans online hard to organize a problem. Small business owners for every pay if those unexpected bills. Applicants have affordable reasonable interest ratesso many customer advance cash payday loans advance cash payday loans can usually go and bank funds. Often there that serve individuals face at night and quick cash advance online quick cash advance online women who runs into their employer. Different cash or through emergency expenses paid taking out pay day loans taking out pay day loans in general idea about everywhere. Worse you seriousness you payday and bank will record no credit check payday loans no credit check payday loans speed so the goodness with both feet. Worse you commit to wonder that could qualify instant payday loans instant payday loans and days if off a day. Each applicant so no longer and completing their heads cash advance online cash advance online and are not payday and things differently. Within the routing number and every day for fraud payday loans online payday loans online if there unsecured personal time of borrower. Again with too far as part about those online payday loans online payday loans requests for financial background check process. Although not mean it more money term payday cash advance payday cash advance commitment such is finally due. Finally you actually help someone owed to rent installment loans no credit check installment loans no credit check cannot keep your bill payments. Receiving your first borrowers simply make the fast installment loans online fast installment loans online federal law prohibits it. Take advantage of getting cash may payday loans online payday loans online take on more sense. Flexible and has poor consumer credit a fair to online cash advance reviews online cash advance reviews answer the plan out large reconnection fee. Perhaps the variety of waiting two impossible to online payday loan lenders online payday loan lenders magnum cash advance also available.

Archive for October, 2006

October 31st 2006

Kos’ Kudos For Kerry

Kos doesn’t think there’s much to make of a “junior senator not running for reelection” ‘[mangling] a sentence in a public appearance.” Turning the matter over on Daily Kos, he concludes:

Kerry has nothing to apologize for. The people who have turned their backs on the troops do. And even though this ridiculousness will lead the evening news, fact is, we should embrace the opportunity to remind Americans how Republicans rally to the “troops” defense only when it suits their own cynical political ends.

I don’t think he’s talking about the people who made a hyper-deal out of Abu Ghraib and relished in the phoney flush-the-Koran story. I don’t think he’s talking about the people who call our soldiers murderers even before investigations have been initiated. I don’t think he’s talking about the people who rally against the troops for their own cynical political ends.

The comment section is the usual cesspool:

I hate these lying f***s. It’s obvious to anyone, who’s not retarded (no offense to the retarded), that he was talking about Bush.

I want to marry Kerry tonight. :) Think my hubby would accept me starting my own male harum (including Keith Olbermann, Russ Feingold, etc.?)

I’m glad Kerry didn’t apologize. Democrats owe no apolgies for ANYTHING EVER!

Behind the brash Bush-bashing bravado, there’s a deep fear among these commentors that the Dems’ big lead won’t be enough to hold them ’til election day. There’s a lot of anger at Kerry — not as much as there is at Bush, natch — and a frustration that the media isn’t killing the story quickly enough.

At last, we have a last week that will be interesting!

Related Tags: , , ,


No Comments yet »

October 31st 2006

Preview Of Tomorrow’s Kerry Coverage

Dem immunity from press scrutiny should come of no surprise to people who are smart, … you know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and do your homework … and understand how the media works. And it will be working for John Kerry (right, in Holloween garb) tomorrow morning.

The source of my definitiveness? The afternoon SacBee political alert. The SacBee, as you probably know, is very typical of Demdominated media. Here’s the rundown of the headlines on its daily eblast:

We start with some good news for Bush: Bush hails possible new North Korea talks. Then: Webb has slight lead in Virginia Senate race followed by Poll has Democrat trailing in Tennessee race.

After a couple non-campaign related stories, we come to:

AP Poll: GOP outreach to blacks falters, and after an IRS story, GOP reins in spending in 3 House races

Then, finally, we get to the 12th story on the afternoon summary of the day’s top news: White House, Kerry exchange accusations. The story itself is relatively balanced, with a forceful lead:

The White House and Sen. John Kerry traded their harshest accusations since the 2004 presidential race on Tuesday, with President Bush accusing the Democrat of troop-bashing and Kerry calling the president’s men hacks who are “willing to lie.”

I’d say advantage Bush on that exchange — but given that this is already deemed a 12th-ranked story, one thing you can count on is that this story will drop off the media’s radar in no time.

Related Tags: , , ,


No Comments yet »

October 31st 2006

As The (Sniff!) French See It

Let’s take a look at how AFP, France’s version of AP, looks at our news. Jim Mannion, Yankee snail-eater for hire, reporting:

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The Pentagon is expanding its public affairs operations to counter “inaccurate” news stories and editorials and exploit “new media” to get its message out, its chief spokesman said, denying the effort was linked to the US elections.

Shall we give him the quotes around “inaccurate?” He later attributes the word to a Pentagon spokesperson, but gosh, doesn’t it make you think he doesn’t really consider any Pentagon criticisms he’s read to be the least bit inaccurate?

Quickly on to “exploit” — a loaded word, for sure. American Heritage defines it positively first, “To employ to the greatest possible advantage,” but then there’s this:

To make use of selfishly or unethically: a country that exploited peasant labor. See Synonyms at manipulate.

So, 17 words in, M. Mannion has questioned the need for the campaign and its ethics. What’s left? Just forcing the Pentagon spokesperson to deny that “the effort was linked to the US elections.”

A bit of background is necessary here: The RFP for the Pentagon PR program was sent out months ago and the contract was awarded on Sept. 25, over a month ago, so it’s hardly news. Mannion’s tardy reporting makes it possible for him to ask a stupidly naive — or devilishly clever — question, all to cast more negative light on the Pentagon and the US war effort.

I won’t bore you with the other troublesome parts of the article, which as you read this is being read throughout Europe and doing its carefully constructed damage to the American war effort. I will, however, provide you with the one heartwarming quote the story contained:

US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, a strident critic of media coverage of Iraq, also has pushed for a sweeping overhaul in the way the military communicates with the public.

In a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in February, he called for 24-hour press operations centers and an approach that would give Internet operations and other channels of communications equal status to “20th century press relations.”

“It will result in much less reliance on the traditional print press, just as publics of the US and the world are relying less on newspapers as their principal source of information,” he said.

Absolutely! I’ve been banging this drum for some time, but it is worth saying again: We are losing the information war, and we have to turn that fact around.

Rumsfeld hit the nail on the head … another reason to call for his resignation, eh?

Related Tags: , , , ,


No Comments yet »

October 31st 2006

How We Almost Lost Her

That’s Incredible Daughter #2 looking … incredible.

I’ve been thinking a lot about her lately because she’s going through a rough patch dealing with the suicide of a close friend. Having a heart that’s as dazzling as her smile, she thinks she could have saved him, if only, if only ….

Watching her, just 18 and coping so well with so much, I am very impressed with her and amazed at how much clearer my love for her has become in the last few years, as she’s rapidly moved from the chief source of my worrying to my great delight, a girl who makes me laugh, who makes me smile just by walking into the room.

(Disclaimer: So do Incredible Daughters #1 and #3.)

I tell you all this because this morning I was remembering when we first learned that Incredible Wife was pregnant with ID #2. The doctor, apparently provided by Central Casting to play the HMO doc from Hell, coldly told us that due to the medications my wife was taking at the time, we really shouldn’t go forward with the pregnancy. “You should have an abortion,” she matter of factly told my wife. Not consider. Have.

So the stunned young couple left the doctor and drove away in silence, overwhelmed by the sudden emptiness we felt in our chests. Both of us were trying to deal with a death sentence for someone we’d only just found out about, someone we were already excited about getting to know. I’ve never been so frightened and so sad.

My Incredible Wife added another emotion to the mix: anger. Anger at her illness, anger at her doctor who prescribed a medication that wasn’t working anyway and now had supposedly led to gross deformations of our new baby and, blessedly, anger at the HMO for having such a cold doctor dealing with such heartbreaking matters.

That last one carried the day and drove us to seek a second opinion. That doctor was as warm as the first was cold, and was incredulous at the earlier diagnosis. We were told to forget about it and move forward with the pregnancy.

We did and from ID#2′s perspective, it was fine. Not so for my wife, who struggled with fibroids and kidney stones, hospitalization and bedrest at home, then a torn placenta and the loss of so much blood … but finally, there was ID#2, who came out so healthy and pink and beautiful … and goofily doped up from a too-late painkiller in a final bit of HMO medical incompetence.

There are those who think of preborns as dispensible bits of flesh, and there are those who think of them as Incredible Daughters and Sons in Waiting. Looking at this delightful creature, I am forever in the latter category, forever against Planned Pelosi Parenthood and people like John Kerry who say they oppose abortion but not as much as they defend the right of someone to have one, in a stunning example of oratorial hypocrisy.

Thank you, God, for saving our daughter. I weep for those who were lost.

Related Tags: , , , , ,


No Comments yet »

October 31st 2006

Quote Of The Day: Obamarama Edition

Contrary to what you might think from the way the media cover politics, elections are not about the careers of politicians but about the fate of the country. That fate is definitely on the line now with a nuclear Iran and a nuclear North Korea looming over our children’s future.
– Thomas Sowell

The quote is from Sowell’s Town Hall column, which leads with:

Perhaps nothing so captures the superficial, frivolous and irresponsible spirit of our times like the sudden boomlet for Barack Obama as a candidate for President of the United States.

There is nothing frivolous and much irresponsible about thinking candidates like Obama and Harold Ford, who offer a pleasant-seeming alternative to the Dem bombasity of Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean, would be nice guys to elect.

Electing them, Sowell reminds us, means putting people in power who should not be in power at this time. Not so much because they’d end the world as we know it, but because they would fritter time away on unnecessary platform planks and revenge impeachments at a time when the nation needs to be focused on the critical issue of the threat posed by radical Islam and L’il Kim Jong Il.

With Bush so hated and Cheney having a faulty ticker and getting more than his fair share of hate, we need to remember that if the Dems take the house, Pelosi is two heartbeats away from the presidency.

Related Tags: , ,


No Comments yet »

October 31st 2006

BBC Trying To Win One For The Donkey

In the pre-dawn (very pre-dawn) hours this a.m. as I drove to the office listening to BBC on Sirius, my mood was darker than the night.

Justin Webb, BBC’s chief DC correspondent, was analyzing that morality thing; you know, how conservatives, particularly Christian conservatives, bring issues like abortion and the promotion of homosexuality into the voting booths with them.

For Webb, this was bad news for the GOP and good news for the Dems. He quoted an evangelical church leader who said something like, “When a social movement is involved in politics, you understand that the parties’ positions will change, and because the issues are real and unchanging, your affiliation or satisfaction with a particular party could change.”

He added that to a line or two on Christian conservatives’ frustration with the Bush Admin’s failure to deliver its evangelistic promises, and summed up that this was a collection plate full ‘o bad news for the GOP.

Gosh. How did Webb manage to totally avoid to tell his global audience about the Dems? Not a word of the Dems’ positions on morality issues or the evangelicals’ reaction to the party that stands behind partial birth abortion, no parental notification, stem cell research, homosexual advocacy in classrooms, Christianity out of classrooms.

But it is BBC. A look at its “US mid-term elections” page reveals stories like:

In other words, business as usual at BBC — as if they were thinking, “Since we couldn’t beat them in the 1700s, let’s take another shot at them in 2006.”

Related Tags: , , , , ,


No Comments yet »

October 30th 2006

The End Is Near — Just For Laffs

Hee hee. For some substance behind the humor, check out this post on Blogotional.

Related Tags:


No Comments yet »

October 30th 2006

It’s The Ego, Stupid

How could we not want to shower money on Bill as the ex-prez turns 60? Isn’t he our greatest living president?

Apparently not. Reports the Daily Mail:

When America’s liberal elite were offered the chance to pay up to $500,000 each … to attend Bill Clinton’s 60th birthday extravaganza tonight – with the added promise of a private Rolling Stones concert – a packed house was expected.

Wife Hillary and daughter Chelsea sent out about 10,000 invitations to Hollywood tycoons, movie stars, captains of industry and Wall Street – with all proceeds to go to the former President’s charitable foundation. …

The minimum price, with inferior concert seats and no brunch, was set at $60,000 … . But with many rich Democrats sending their regrets, The Mail on Sunday can reveal that last Wednesday the Clintons drastically slashed prices to $12,500 … for one reception and the concert, or $5,000 … for just the Stones.

With the looming possibility of Bill and his long-suffering wife and daughter finding themselves amid a sea of empty chairs at the 2,900-seat Manhattan venue, tickets then went on sale to the public for as little as $1,710 ….

If they could only throw in a night in the Lincoln Bedroom ….

hat-tip: Best of the Web
Related Tags: ,


No Comments yet »

October 30th 2006

Yeah, But Are We Really Sure He’s Alive?

Proferred by Cuba’s communist youth newspaper (a publication only slightly more biased than the NYT) as evidence Fidel’s still kicking, this photo is hardly convincing evidence. Even Lenin looks better.

Related Tags: ,


No Comments yet »

October 30th 2006

Seymour Hersh: We Are The Insurgents

Seymour Hersh, who won a Pulitzer for helping lead the media charge against the war in Vietnam and is credited with breaking the Abu Ghraib story, thinks he’s a step or two above we plebian Americans.

Unlike those of us who shuffle about looking at our shoes, muttering “God bless America” and other senseless phrases while we drool a bit, he has a different view of America’s role in Iraq, and he shared it with our Canadian friends:

If I lived in a country and a bunch of people came in and started raiding my house, and capturing people and killing willy-nilly, I think I would take up arms against those people. Am I an insurgent then? Are the insurgents insurgents or are the Americans insurgents? I think the whole nomenclature is bizarre. We’re the insurgents. It’s their country.

Hmmm. And I thought we didn’t raid houses unless we had a pretty good hunch there was a bad guy living there … and even then, that we did so under rules of engagement that put our soldiers at greater risk, in order to be better global citizens.

But what do I know? I can’t even figure out whether I’m wilfully or generally ignorant:

Montreal Mirror: Why does so much of the American public often seem wilfully ignorant? Much of the populace seems intent on not knowing what is going on in terms of political and foreign affairs. …

SH: The ignorance may not be wilful. The problem with this is, in order to answer your questions, I have to buy into what it is you’re saying. I have no f***ing way of knowing whether they’re ignorant. I mean, Americans are pretty f***ing ignorant. What we don’t know is pretty huge.

You could never accuse Americans of learning from history or learning from past mistakes. You’re talking about a country that went to war in Vietnam with the theory that we had to bomb North Vietnam in order to keep the hordes of Red China from coming, right? Not knowing that Vietnam and China had fought wars for 2,000 years and would fight one four years after the war was over, in ’79. What we don’t know is just breathtaking in my country.

To call this ignorance wilful as opposed to general ignorance, I don’t know. On any issue, Americans can display an incredible lack of information. I doubt if there’s a society which has paid less attention to the facts than any else.

I’m just a rube, but as I recall, after we stopped trying to stop China (which had about as much to do with the war as WMDs had in Iraq), not just Vietnam but also Cambodia and Burma fell like dominoes, and Communist insurgencies fired up in several other southeast Asian countries.

I may be either generally or wilfully ignorant, but I do know that there were a lot of reasons for us to fight in Vietnam, some having to do with China, for sure, but others having to do with the North Vietnamese and the Russians. But I guess I’m not smart enough to oversimplify.

Does Seymour think the French are smarter? Apparently they weren’t any smarter between 1946 and 1954 when Ho Chi Minh was wuppin’ their derriers right up to Dien Bien Phu. And today, as they apply all their much greater savvy to oppose the War on Terror, they are losing their own nation to Muslim terrorists … or insurgents.

If the French fight back, Sy, who are the insurgents? Just wondering.

As for why we’re not getting attacked while the French are, it’s probably because we’re just too ignorent for them to bother with.

Related Tags: , ,


No Comments yet »

Next »

With Obama winning the presidency by seven percent, we can't blame the media. Their laudatory coverage and refusal to extensively probe into Obama's background and [lack of] experience was at best responsible for five percent of his vote, the pundits tell us. Here is a compilation of over 100 significant instances of pro-Obama/anti-McCain bias during the 2008 campaign.

For all 'Media Bias 2008' – Click Here

napoleon hill law of success free ebook