Frog's House of Infinite Wisdom

Wow, I could have used this service when I was an overindulgent college student. A mobile phone company in Australia has launched a service that allows the user to create temporary blocks on specific phone numbers until 6 a.m. the following morning. Nice...

...but to the proponents of embryonic stem cell research, this is an interesting development. According to South Korean researchers, a woman paralyzed for 20 years after damaging her spine was able to walk again. The twist? It was from using stem cells recovered from umbilical cord blood and not the highly promoted embryonic stem cells. If scientifically proven, this will no doubt bolster the right's fight against embryonic stem cell research funding.

Yes, I know it's Wednesday.. but I don't know if I'll be able to send this wish out tomorrow... so enjoy mounds of potatos, piles of turkey and a metric ton of delicious green been casserole. I certainly will!

Just when you thought humanity couldn't get any worse, here's this bitch who has been arrested for cutting off the arms of a baby. Oh MAN, this woman deserves some prison justice!

Hi! Coming to you live from Chicago, home of deep dish pizzas, the Bulls, and John Derringer. The girlfriend and I are on vacation and I've gotten a break from shopping and running around. We almost bought 1st Class ticket upgrades for the arrival because we had to deal with a kid at the gate who was completely loud and out of control. He truly was a little bastard. His mom was about 600 pounds and couldn't (and didn't) keep up with him as he ran around the Spirit Airlines gate shouting "Hey! It's an airplane!" as if he didn't expect to see one AT A FUCKING AIRPORT! And he said it over and over and over and over like some sort of overamplified skipping record. I wanted to hold him down and force him to drink Nyquil just to sedate him. But the city is cool so far. We've eaten and met up with my girlfriend's buddies and have done a great deal of shopping, walking and riding the trains. If anything else exciting comes up, I'll try to report it, although my access to the web is fleeting at best...

As usual, hyperactive Dems who are in denial about the Presential election are crying foul and making baseless claims of voter fraud. It's amazing to me that people would actually believe anecdotal assertions by a few of what they "saw" happening at the voting precincts. Well, truth be told, I saw John Edwards at my precinct and his shiny white smile blinded me and prevented me from voting. Do I have proof? No. Do I need proof? According to various claims such as ones that were on Michael Moore's website, absolutely not. He posted anything that supported his notion that people were "disenfranchised". I got news for you, people... no system is perfect. There were problems, naturally, because this is a human system, but for people to make the claim that there was an intended, pervasive attempt by Republicans to alter the vote is a bunch of crap. Take a look at this article from ABCNews.com. Or, if you don't have time, I'll post a quote that says it all.

Doug Chapin, a nonpartisan election analyst, finds the claims to be baseless. "There were no problems that would lead me to believe that there were stolen elections or widespread fraud," he said.

"There was no overwhelming reason to cast doubt on the outcome of this election," seconded Democratic strategist Donna Brazile, the campaign manager for Al Gore's 2000 campaign. "George Bush got more votes this time."

Nevertheless, many people have devised various theories, including stories of voters in largely Democratic counties in Florida whose votes were changed for Bush, phantom voters in Ohio and exit polls showing John Kerry in the lead that were truer than the final tally. Off the record, many Democratic strategists dismiss such allegations, but they also know such resentment can be channeled for political use in the future.

That last part is quite telling. The Democratic strategists are willing to allow these lies to go unhindered because it's good for their cause, regardless of the fact that they don't believe them. Simply disgusting.

Michael Moore, creator of the creatively edited "Fahrenheit 9/11", has finally ended his self-imposed silence and has released a statement on his website regarding the election. In addition to the standard "everything's going to be alright" platitudes seen on the countless other liberal websites, Moore has gone a step further (actually 17 steps) and has added a list of reasons not to "slit your wrists".

Michael Moore, instead of having some enlightened post on his site, has instead decided to post a picture of a President Bush mosiac made up of tiny portraits of soldiers killed in Iraq. I'm not sure if any of my readers frequented his site prior to today, but one of the more noble things he did on his site - and believe me, there were very few - was a place where you could click and find ways to assist soldiers overseas. To me, this would be a time for the democrats that feel dejected to focus their efforts and support the troops even more. Instead of keeping that link available to them, Moore has let his radicalism and shortsideness get the best of him. I would have put the link right next to the picture but he just prefers to make a statement that doesn't do anyone any good.

I guess Eminem didn't have as much of an impact on the election with that "powerful" video as everyone thought... BWAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAAA!

(Seriously... people really thought that it would...)

I discovered this post on DailyKos.com, one of the major liberal blogs on the "internets":

Second, gut any Bush hopes for legitimacy. Find the places in Florida and Ohio and every other state where a plausible argument for Republican vote fraud can be made. It doesn't matter whether it did happen or not. What matters is if it can be plausibly alleged to marginal Bush supporters and to the media. We also have to let the issue go where it's implausible. Hammering on voter fraud where it's not at least plausible on that level is only going to hurt our credibility. We have to sink our fangs into Republican ankles and hang onto them for dear life on the legitimacy issue. We have to make him "Bush the only American President who was never elected" whether it's true or not. (emphasis mine)

Now, I understand being upset after putting all of your emotions into an election. Believe me, I would have been inconsolable had Bush been defeated and was pretty pessimistic going into Tuesday, but this guy is promoting the notion that people should organize and essentially lie. People are starting to see through the claims of the "Bush Lied" crowd and they came to the polls in droves to vote against anything they stand for. This is also why the Democratic party lost so much this election: they've allowed nutcases like this guy and Michael Moore to be their biggest mouthpiece. Not only that, they ENDORSED them. It would have been smarter for the Dems to have a pow wow with Moore and tell him that they would have to verbally distance themselves from him so that they wouldn't seem to be in collusion. Instead, his grubby ass was a special invited guest at the Democratic National Convention. Big mistake.

All this talk of "outsourcing" by the Kerry camp is ironic. The Dems outsourced their "Get Out The Vote" drives to groups with extremist agendas and to celebrity groups and this ended up energizing the opposing forces to counter their efforts. The Republicans didn't need to be cajoled, prodded and begged to register and vote. They just did.

Democrats, get your party back before it splinters apart.

No one has seen hide nor hair of good old Michael Moore. He didn't show up for any election parties and calls to his office were rebuffed by Fox News. It certainly isn't like MM to dodge attention, is it?

Thanks, Broken News!:

Boston – As the Kerry team of lawyers, accountants, zookeepers and 'thugs' head to Ohio on a wing and a prayer, John Kerry turns his back to reality.

Kerry's running-mate John Edwards says this election is too close to be decided by uneducated and incompetent citizens and should be left to the wise and fair federal courts. "We feel this election is no more than a few lawsuits away from a Democratic victory."

Kerry has yet to comment, but members of his staff say he is taking his popular vote loss with "baby steps".

"He has already proclaimed a win in Kerrystan." Says campaign advisor Bill Stanley. "He started his morning with a speech to the 20 or so campaign workers in his home. Claiming each one a citizen of Kerrystan. Then continued to claim a victory is each surrounding location. Kerry announced with great enthusiasm wins in Hallwayton, Elevatoropolis and Downstairslobbyville."

Election officials compare this win to the Al Gore decision in 2000 as the ex-vice president announced a landslide victory in Goratopia.

Kerry plans on taking his newly created army of Kerrystanians and deploying troops to 'Starbucks' located down the street from Kerrystan.

"Kerry insists this not a war about coffee." Says Stanley. "Kerry feels his local Starbucks is an evil regime that cast a definite cloud over the safety and well being of his newly developed country."

Look for John Kerry to concede the election at 1pm e.s.t. Of course, this means nothing if the lawyers continue to sniff around on behalf of the Democratic Party, but it does take some wind out of their sails...

...still up for review. I'm up watching Fox News and they've projected Ohio as going to President Bush, which means that he needs New Mexico and Alaska to take the 270 electoral votes. Which is a complete surprise to me. Another surprise is the "Rock the Vote" drive, which I thought would be a huge support to the Kerry camp, as much of their promotion went towards the bogus argument of a military draft. Exit polls have concluded that one in ten voters at the polls fit within the Rock the Vote demographic, which is the same as 2000. Overall, there were more young voters, but the number of overall voters increased as well and counteracted the affect of their subsequent "rocking". I can't help but think that a great number of older americans voted in droves because they resented the MoveOn.org-celebrity-Mtv anti-Bush movement. I know I did. So, as some of the other bloggers are already doing this, here's my list of losers in this elections:

• Michael Moore - Big time. His propagandist film "Fahrenheit 9/11" did a great job of making arguments that were easily refutable by anyone with an internet account and a few minutes. Some were turned off by his arrogance and ignored the movie altogether. I watched a "borrowed" copy, forced myself to watch it, and then did my own research! I also watched the rebuttal movie "Fahrenhype 9/11" which featured some of the major figures in Moore's movie that were angry over the way they were depicted in the movie.
• Dixie Chicks - Embarassed that the President is from Texas, eh? You should be more embarrased that after all your ranting and raving, you couldn't convince enough people to agree with you about Bush. You might have lost some fans in the process.
• Janeane Garafalo - Truly one of the funniest comediannes around -- and if you don't believe me, watch her stand-up act BEFORE 2000 - decided to all but abandon comedy so she could show people how much of a policy wonk she is. Now, she's a talk show host for Air America, the fledgling liberal radio network, and she's effectively irritated a large segment of the population.
• Al Franken - Same as Janeane Garafalo, except Franken's not funny.
• MoveOn.org, Artists Coming Together (ACT) - Great job. You staked your reputation on young people. Great strategy. Unfortunately, you couldn't get enough of them to put down the bong and wait in line to vote. Or register. Looks like it's time for MoveOn.org to move on. Dot org.

I'll post more losers as they come to me...

I would LOVE to see the Spurrier resume submitted for this one. Also, if you look at the bottom of the page, it says: EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER MINORITIES AND WOMEN ENCOURAGED TO APPLY. Hmm... what minority women do I know that love football...?

From OpinionJournal.com

The Bush Record
How much leadership do the voters want?

Monday, November 1, 2004 12:01 a.m.

Of our handful of meetings with George W. Bush, the one that lingers as a harbinger of his Presidency is lunch in Austin, Texas, in late 1999. One of us asked the then-Governor what lesson he had learned from his father's White House experience. Without missing a beat, Mr. Bush replied that he'd learned that if you have political capital, you should spend it.

In his four turbulent years, he certainly has. Among the many ironies of this year's election campaign is that the challenger, John Kerry, has been running as the candidate of caution and old ideas. The incumbent says he has much more to do. If Mr. Bush loses his bid for re-election tomorrow, it won't be because he has tried to achieve too little. The reason may be that many Americans, nostalgic for the illusory calm of the 1990s, want to take a breather from Mr. Bush's habit of accelerating history.

In a sense, Mr. Bush was granted Bill Clinton's wish to live in "interesting times," as the Chinese curse has it. Instead of inheriting an economic recovery as Mr. Clinton did, Mr. Bush began his term facing the end of the 1990s investment bubble and a looming recession. And instead of inheriting a placid post-Cold War world, he was presented with September 11. In both cases, the two largest issues of his Presidency, Mr. Bush's choice was not to play it safe but to spend his political capital to set a new policy direction.

On the economy, he compromised on his first tax cut to win 12 Democratic Senate votes, but it proved too Keynesian and too long-delayed to pack much punch. So Mr. Bush used his Senate victory in 2002 to double down on his tax cut bet. This time, however, he aimed the fiscal incentives more precisely on the problem of post-bubble investment weakness. Since that second tax cut passed in mid-2003, the economy has grown by more than 4%, and on Friday the third quarter was scored at 3.7%. That is a better recent record than nearly all of the world, China notably excepted.

Yes, the deficit has returned, and Mr. Bush could have done more to control spending. But when his opponents on the left attack him for "deficits," what they really mean is that Mr. Bush should have imitated his father and raised taxes. Then Democrats would have blamed him for the slower recovery. Without the boldness of his 2003 tax cut, in short, the economy would be weaker than it is today and Mr. Bush would be heading to almost certain defeat.

Mr. Bush's other great political bet has been in reordering American foreign policy. Any President would have had to pursue al Qaeda, though the success of Afghanistan allows Mr. Kerry and others to say they would have done it the same way. We doubt it. At the time, there were cries of "quagmire" and don't topple the Taliban or work with the unsavory Northern Alliance. Mr. Bush took the risk of doing both, and the recent Afghan elections mark a major strategic anti-terror victory.

The President further upset the security establishment with his strategy of "pre-emption," and pursuing the states that sponsor terror. This led him inevitably to Saddam Hussein, and the initial success followed by difficulty in Iraq. Mr. Bush now finds himself running for re-election when the costs in Iraq are more obvious to voters than the potential long-term benefits, which remain enormous if that country can follow the Afghan path. But no one can deny Mr. Bush's boldness in toppling a ruler that everyone (including Messrs. Clinton and Kerry) said was a threat but had refused to act against.

His critics would have us believe that Mr. Bush's Iraq invasion has made the Middle East more unstable, but what pre-war "stability" are they imagining? The Oil for Food scandal has shown why the containment of Saddam was unsustainable, and 9/11 proved that we can't sit out the civil war that al Qaeda has begun in the Muslim world. Mr. Bush's "forward strategy of freedom" in Iraq and the Mideast recognizes that reality. If Dick Holbrooke or Brent Scowcroft have an alternative beyond returning to the "realist" illusions that led us to 9/11, we haven't heard it.

With ambitions this large, Mr. Bush has suffered from his failures as a communicator. Especially amid the troubles in Iraq, Americans have yearned for a President who could better explain the dilemmas of acting or not in Fallujah, the mistakes of Abu Ghraib, and the nature of the insurgency. Mr. Bush did himself no favors with his reluctance to hold more press conferences, a lack of practice in making his case that showed during the first Presidential debate.

We also recognize that Mr. Bush has shown he is capable of some crass political retreats, notwithstanding his campaign theme as a leader who never bends a principle. Steel tariffs, McCain-Feingold, the farm bill, Medicare prescription drugs, and most recently his surrender on intelligence reform--these have not been profiles in political courage.

Yet in the larger arc of the Bush Presidency, all of these are also of secondary importance. A leader's first priorities are peace and prosperity, which in our time mean keeping the U.S. economy competitive amid the emerging challenge from India and China, and of course the battle against terrorism.

A frequent lament among journalists, and often voters, is that politicians always take the easy way out; they never risk their personal popularity or re-election chances for the sake of longer run gains in the national interest. In Iraq and the Middle East, Mr. Bush has done precisely that. We will find out on Tuesday how much Presidential leadership the voters really want in a dangerous world.

Copyright © 2004 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

...to vote. And VOTE BUSH! Seriously! Osama bin Laden does not want Bush to win, because he's prevented him from doing any further damage to the US and now he's relegated to doing videos telling people that he will go after individual states in the US that vote for Bush - the "red" states. Don't let bin Laden scare you into voting for the weaker candidate. Don't let people like Michael Moore determine the future of the US based his movie of lies. And don't let an underachieving US Senator who is weak on defense determine the security of our nation for the next four years.