Liberal Utopia: July 2004

Saturday, July 24, 2004

Wonder if Julia Thorne's going to be at the convention?

Cheering for her ex-husband Hanoi John and his richer wife?

espite the titles of her two books, A Change of Heart: Words of Experience and Hope for the Journey Through Divorce and You Are Not Alone: Words of Experience and Hope for the Journey Through Depression, al-Qerry's dumpee is normally a very happy person. At least she is now. Back when she was married to a certain longface losing liberal from Massoqueeretts, however, her life was a complete and utter hell.

It's all in her books. You don't need to get Senator Scratch-n-Scoot to release their divorce records the way Jeri Ryan and her senate-candidate husband's were against their mutual wishes. These excerpts sum up the whole sad, sordid truth of that living hell known as Wedded to the Waffler:

Effin Face (my pet name for him when we were married) told me he didn't like the color of our new limousine. I said it shouldn't matter what something looks like on the outside. It's what's inside that matters.
Of course, he wasn't going to listen to what I had to say. He never did. He blamed me for choosing the "wrong" color, for not finding a limousine that was "right for him." I tried to remind him that it was the exact same color he picked out for it just a few weeks before. But he said he wanted a new color before he didn't want it. Such was our life together.
If I had a nickel for every flip-flop he had like this one, I'd probably be rich enough that he'd still want to be married to me.

—A Change of Heart, p. 127.

It does rip your heart out to know that the man you thought you'd spend the rest of your life with decides one day that your bank account isn't as green as someone else's. There were times when I wanted to go into every grocery store I could, buy up its entire stock of ketchup, and empty each bottle into my swimming pool until it was filled up. Then I'd jump in, drowning myself in a liquid that matched the shade and consistency, if not the amount, of all the despair my heart was bleeding after he told me on that cold Winter's day, "Julia, dear, I've changed my mind" (again). That would show him and his new "queen."
But then I asked why give them the satisfaction? (Or the insurance payout?) He's not worth it. So I simply buy Del Monte ketchup now instead, and relish every bite of each squirming french fry I dunk into it.

—You Are Not Alone, p. 460.

I've learned from bitter experience that the best way to relieve frustration and stress over the two-faced, vow-breaking, double-talking connivings of some people is to take an object that closely resembles that person and to either smash it to bits or repeatedly throw darts into it. My friends are always complementing me on my forbearance, as I keep around my house several ceramic busts of my former husband. They believe it's a healthy sign that I have not only accepted what he did to me but have moved on to a feeling of generosity, well-wishing, and respect. They also ask me why those busts aren't the same ones they saw the last time they visited me. Now you (and they) know the answer. If they want to view what's left of the previous ones, they'll have to go digging through the local landfill.
Along those same lines, my friends believe I have a modern-art poster of my former husband in my game room. They ask who painted the original full-length portrait, and could they get a framed print of this artwork too? The most interesting aspect of that portrait, so my friends comment, is the artist's extensive use of the technique known as "pointillism." Until now, I haven't told them that the poster is simply a blown-up photograph and that the pointillist is yours truly (via my "dart brushes"). What puzzles them, however, is the overuse of that pointillism effect in the subject's crotch area.

—You Are Not Alone, p. 109.

I asked him not to throw his medals over that fence in front of the Capitol. He looked at me as if I were some kind of space alien.
Here was a man who was my own brother's best friend. A man I admired for all those scratches he got on the killing fields of Vietnam. Who had the courage to tell the Congress and the whole world that our troops were a bunch of ruthless, heartless baby killers.
Now, as I looked into those cold, calculating eyes, I saw things there I'd never seen before: disgust, anger, contempt, and more than a hint of madness. I shrunk back—almost as if he'd struck me with his closed fist. He turned his back on me before tossing every single medal and ribbon he had in his hand over that fence. But there was one additional heart, besides those on the three medals he was renouncing, that he also threw over it. That heart was mine.

—A Change of Heart, p. 382.

Judging by these excerpts, I doubt their divorce records could give a more thorough account of life with this Hanoi Hubby.

Update (for Google referrals)

Sunday, October 3, 2004, 11:59 PM. The preceding has been an unpaid noncommercial parody brought to you by John Farce Qerry, d'Inc. Any similarity to actual events and persons, married or divorced, is purely intentional.

1:50 PM

Thursday, July 22, 2004

John-John QarriedWarts' Advisor Apologizes

He's really, really sorry about his getting caught.

n a scandal enormously reminiscent of al-Qerry's last lying, cheating advisor Joseph C. Wilson IV, who leaked information about his CIA-undercover wife just so he could falsely accuse administration officials of doing it, and who publicly lied about his report showing that "Saddam [Hussein] had sought uranium from Niger," Hanoi John's latest "close, trusted advisor" has been caught on National Archives security cameras stuffing folded, highly-classified papers down the front of his pants and tucking a couple more into his socks. Now, in an exclusive interview with Liberal Utopia, the longtime friend of John-John, Bill al-Qlinton and his wife Hilldabeast, sits down to clear the air and empty his trousers over the entire mess.

LIBERAL UTOPIA: Thank you for joining us, Sandy Burglar, erstwhile high-ranking advisor to the Qerry campaign.

SANDY BURGLAR: Uh, that's "Berger."

LU: Whatever. Now, tell us. What possessed you to do such a thing as robbing the National Archives of scores of valuable, extremely sensitive documents? Are you insane?

SB: My attorney, who is here with me, advises me that I shouldn't answer that until the investigation into this matter had been completed. But I will say that it's not my fault!

LU: I don't understand. Are you saying that someone else robbed the archives—perhaps someone who bears an uncanny resemblance to you—and is trying to pin it on an innocent man? Or are your saying that—without your knowledge or awareness—some other person put those documents inside your pants and socks, like a reverse pickpocket?

SB: Well, as you know, a lot of strange things happen in this town [Washington, D.C.] every day, and there was a robbery a few decades back that got another presidential candidate into a lot of trouble later on, so it's not beyond the realm of possibility that something like you said could have happened. And, I don't know if you've ever been to London or places like that, but there are a lot of extremely skilled pickpockets over there who have been known to take a ring off a woman's finger and she wouldn't feel a thing or even know it. It's not hard to imagine, then, someone like that here who could accomplish the same thing but in reverse. I did feel a tingling sensation briefly while I was studying those documents in the archives room. Maybe that has something to do with how those papers wound up inside my pants, I don't know. There's still an ongoing investigation into what exactly happened.

LU: O.K. Was there anyone else there in that room with you?

SB: Well, there wasn't supposed to be, given the highly sensitive nature of the documents I was reviewing. But it is possible that someone else sneaked in while no one was looking and stayed hidden under a table or even behind a chair somewhere. I was concentrating on the documents, so I wasn't really paying attention to my surroundings all that much.

LU: Even you have to admit, however, that it's highly unlikely, wouldn't you say?

SB: On the advise of my counsel, I must admit that I don't admit it.

LU: All right. Moving on then. Why were you taking notes from those documents? Did you not know that doing so was in itself illegal?

SB: I don't recall seeing the law that says it was. I mean, if it was illegal wouldn't there be like a big sign in that room saying something like "No Note-Taking Allowed. It's Against the Law"? I don't remember seeing one. Of course, like I said, I was too busy concentrating on reading the documents so, even if there was one, I wouldn't have noticed it. Besides, everyone's assuming that I was taking notes from those documents. I could've just been doodling. I do do that a lot when I'm reading things, you know. Doodling, that is.

LU: Were you only doodling or were your taking notes?

SB: My attorney tells me I shouldn't answer that until the investigation is over. Sorry.

LU: Sure. Let's get back to your pants. Regardless how those papers got into them, what did you do once you got home and noticed what must have seemed a tighter waistline?

SB: Actually, I didn't think much of it. You know, I had a very big lunch that day. Oh, I could've just shrugged it off as simple overindulgence. You need to cut back on the appetizers, Sandy, I could've told myself. But, given my background as a trained investigator, I knew I should check them out to see if it could be anything else. And, lo and behold, right there in my pants were a whole bunch of papers. Well, you can just imagine my embarrassment. At first, I didn't know how they got in there. In my pants.

LU: What about your socks? Do your ankles normally swell up like that very often?

SB: Sometimes. Everyone's does as they get older, from what I understand. A good example is my friend Hillary. She apparently gets them really bad. Or maybe they're just like that all the time, I don't know. Anyway, I'm not taking medication for swollen ankles or anything, if that's what you're asking.

LU: No, it's about the papers that were in your socks. Forgetting for a moment how they got in there, or what else you thought could've contributed to your increased ankle size, what did you do once you discovered a bunch of papers stuffed inside them.

SB: First of all, there's one thing I have to clear up. Only one of my socks had what you might call an abnormal amount of papers stuffed into it. The other sock just had a few.

LU: How is that relevant, other than your admitting that you did in fact have papers inside them?

SB: Well, I just need to let people know that it wasn't as bad as it could've been. I mean, I could've had both socks filled up with papers, but I didn't. I only had one sock filled up.

LU: Ok, tell us what you did when you discovered that those papers had gotten inside your socks and into your pants somehow. Did you call the National Archives folks right away?

SB: No. Because at first I wasn't sure that those were the same papers I was looking at in that room. They could've been, you know, like entirely different papers. I didn't have time to check because I had to meet with the senator, whose presidential campaign, as you're aware, I've been advising on national security matters. And there just wasn't time to check.

LU: Did you wonder that they might be the same papers, the classified ones you were studying? And if so, didn't you think you should have found out first before doing anything else?

SB: Not really. As a matter of fact I kept the papers with me after I pulled them out of my socks and pants and while I went to go meet with the senator. It was only when I got back from his campaign headquarters, after I finally got a chance to actually look at them, that I noticed they were the classified documents.

LU: At the senator's presidential campaign headquarters, did anyone besides yourself see the papers or what was in them?

SB: You sound like the FBI agent who interviewed me after it happened. I'll give you the same answer I gave her. No, to the best of my recollection, no other person saw what was in all those papers. Some of the people there may have noticed that I was carrying some papers around, but I do that pretty much all the time. When I was meeting with the senator in his office he wanted to show me the tape of his newest campaign commercial down the hall in the mini-theater he has set up there. Well, I didn't want to lug around a bunch of papers with me, so I left them on the senator's desk in his office while we were looking at the commercial.

LU: Were the papers still on the senator's desk when you got back?

SB: Actually, they'd been moved to a table in the conference room across from the office. But I didn't find that out until after we'd been discussing the commercial for a while and noticed that my papers were missing. So I asked one of his secretaries what happened to them. He said they'd been moved to the conference room.

LU: Did the secretary give you a reason for why the papers were removed from the senator's office?

SB: No. I just assumed that they needed to clear the senator's desk for something and had figured those papers belonged in the conference room or something.

LU: Do you know whether anyone read what was in those top-secret papers, either while they were being moved to the conference room and after they were in it?

SB: No, I don't. But you have to remember, as my attorney has emphasized to investigators, that I didn't even know at that point they were the classified documents.

LU: The same documents that you found earlier that day stuffed in your pants and socks?

SB: Correct.

LU: When did you discover that the papers you'd brought to the senator's headquarters were the classified documents you were looking at in the National Archives reading room?

SB: Not until after I returned home from the senator's headquarters. On my answering machine was a message from the National Archives staff asking me to return their phone call. That it was urgent.

LU: Did you call them back right away?

SB: Yes. The section's director talked to me about papers missing from the reading room and asked me if I had them.

LU: What did you say?

SB: I told him I didn't think I did but that I would check and get back to him. So I looked in my folder. That's when I discovered that I had those classified documents in my possession. I called the director back and told him about it and he asked me to return the documents immediately.

LU: About what time was it then?

SB: Oh, I don't know. Probably late afternoon.

LU: Did you immediately return the documents?

SB: Certainly. He specifically warned me that having those papers outside the archives building without proper authorization was inappropriate. So I drove straight to the National Archives with the papers and gave them to the director in his office.

LU: Did he say anything to you at that point? Did he ask you why you took those papers out of the reading room?

SB: I can't recall exactly what he asked me. There was no one else in the room, by the way. He just seemed very concerned that some papers were missing and was most anxious to get them back where they belonged.

LU: That was it? You just left after that?

SB: Yes. I had an appointment to return two days later to review other documents. So I figured if he had any questions, he could ask me about it then.

LU: Did he? When you returned two days later?

SB: No, not that I can recall. I just went into the reading room and began reviewing the additional documents in preparation for my upcoming testimony before the 9/11 commission.

LU: Isn't it true that more papers went missing from the reading room after you left it that second time?

SB: Uh, yes. Some did. But not as many as that first time. Somehow, one or two more classified documents ended up in my leather folder. But I returned those too once I found out—once the National Archives people told me that they thought I might have taken out some more papers with me that last time.

LU: Did you return those second set of papers to the archives.

SB: No. I didn't get a chance. After I got off the phone with the archives people I received a call from the FBI. They told me to stay at my home and not leave until they arrived to collect the papers themselves.

LU: Did you stay at your home like they asked?

SB: Yes. They mentioned it was, in their words, a national security breach, and I was under strict obligation, according to my oath, to do as they ordered until the matter was resolved.

LU: Oath?

SB: Yes, the oath I took, which is still in effect, that I not divulge or cause to be divulged any classified or sensitive material that I may have access to.

LU: What happens if you violate that oath?

SB: I could go to jail, of course. But that's not what happened, because I never had any intention—any willful intention of violating it.

LU: Can you still go to jail even if you didn't intentionally violate your oath?

SB: Uh, my counsel tells me that it's possible but highly unlikely. Besides, it's not like I sold the information in those documents to anybody or anything. Just found out that I accidentally had them inside my pants and socks and my folder and forgot that they were there, that's all. And I immediately returned the documents after I was asked to do so.

LU: Did you return all the documents?

SB: I believed I had. But according to National Archives officials, some are still missing. I don't know what happened to those. If I recall, the ones they say are missing they already have copies of elsewhere. So it's not like anything is entirely missing. Just a few copies of what they still have.

LU: Hasn't the National Archives stated there are some original documents missing, too? Documents that no one was allowed to make any copies of because they were so sensitive, and that they were supposed to stay inside the archives building?

SB: Uh, I can't answer that. You'll have to ask them if that's the case.

LU: O.K. Getting back to the FBI. When they arrived at your home to collect the documents, what happened?

SB: Well, they had a search warrant. Not just for my home but for my office.

LU: And it was after they executed those search warrants that they discovered not only that you had the classified documents but that others were missing?

SB: They did recover everything I had, to the best of my knowledge. I told them that I might have accidentally thrown a couple of them away, not realizing what they were. But I couldn't confirm that was the case one way or the other. They thoroughly searched my home and, from what I understand, my office too. So if they didn't find any missing documents, either I didn't have them to begin with or there really aren't any missing.

LU: You're saying that the National Archives might have made a mistake and somehow misplaced highly secret documents?

SB: I suppose that's for the investigators to determine. They haven't told me what their findings are so far.

LU: Have you lost your security clearance as a result of this?

SB: I've been told that it has been suspended pending the investigation. However, I have every reason to believe that I will be exonerated of any wrongdoing.

LU: Why do you say that?

SB: Because, as I said before, it wasn't my fault. What I did was inadvertent, an accident. Nothing more. I can't recall how those documents and notes got into my pants and socks. It was such a long time ago. I figure that the country is really ready to move on now to more important matters, like why Mr. Bush lied about Iraq and things like that.

LU: Is the FBI going to just "move on" too?

SB: That's up to them. But you should ask them if they're ready to waste the American people's money on investigating what is clearly a unfortunate accident. No one got hurt. No information was divulged, as far as I can tell. At least ninety percent of the papers have been returned. So where's the harm?

LU: What about those papers that weren't returned. Can you tell us what was in them?

SB: [Giggles.] Even if I knew, which I'm not admitting that I do, I couldn't tell you. I've heard some people say that those are the most sensitive of the documents I saw. I simply have no knowledge about these so-called missing documents.

LU: Do you think you should apologize to, say, the American people for removing highly secret documents from their secure location?

SB: I will apologize on behalf of our government for its putting them through this ridiculous episode of wasting their hard-earned tax dollars on such a flimsy but obviously partisan-motivated investigation into absolutely nothing. I did not steal papers from that place, the National Archives.

LU: I'm sure they appreciate that apology. Thank you, Mr. Burglar, for taking some time out of your schedule and those papers out of your pants. It was nice of you to share your thoughts with us today about this matter.

SB: Ugh! It's "Berger."

5:52 PM

Wednesday, July 21, 2004

Unfair? or Unbalanced?

When it comes to radical extremists such as Hanoi John F'in' al-Qerry's favorite shadow Democrat-party co-campaigners at ~~MoveOn.org~~ MooOink.ogre, neither choice is wrong.

Jul 19, 5:59 PM EDT

~~Advocacy Groups~~ Frothing-at-the-Mouth Radical Nutjobs Challenge Fox News Slogan

By JAKE COYLE
~~Associated~~ Assinined Press Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Fox News' use of the slogan "Fair and Balanced" constitutes deceptive advertising, two political advocacy groups claimed Monday in a petition filed with the Federal Trade Commission.
Liberal MoveOn.org and historically nonpartisan Common Cause

"Historically nonpartisan," my Asshaturated Press. Historic ally of Dhimmicrats is more like it.

Commie Cause's (or, as Harvard Law School likes to brag, HLC Cause's) national governing board members include: Barbara R. Arnwine, executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which sued Florida and several of its counties in 2002 because Gorebot wasn't declared al-Presidente (talk about not MovingOn!); Rebecca Avila, assistant dean of USC's Annenberg School for Communication and board member of Democracy 21 Education Fund (which is funded by George Soros' Open Society Institute); chairperson Derek Bok, former Harvard University president, whose book The Shape of the River says racial preferences are good for universities (something with which Harvard Cheater-Emeritus Teddy "I Killed Mary Jo 35 Years Ago" al-Qennedy wholeheartedly agrees); Margery Bronster, Hawaii's former Attorney General and endorser of Desperats; Michele Demers, president of Tattersall Consulting and former committee director at Human Rights Watch (also funded by George Soros who is a member of its Americas Advisory Committee); Paul Duke, the former host of P[ropaganda]B[ull]S[**t]'s Washing Week in Review and current honorary chairman of Forum 2004 who "called the Bush administration 'the most radical administration we've had in Washington in my lifetime.'" (yeah, real "nonpartisan" there); Thaddeus 'Tad' Foote II, University of Miami's former president (before al-Qlinton's former HHS secretary Donna Shalala took over as its "intellectual guardian") and "a Democrat from Coral Gables"; Margaret Fung, executive director of Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (which gave its "Justice in Action Award" to George Soros' Open Society Institute for being the "logical choice for AALDEF and the APA community."); Jim Goodmon, Capitol Broadcasting Company's president and CEO, friend of fatcat anti-tobacco trial ~~lawyers~~ bandits, and someone who "chipped in $2,000 in 2003 and another $1,000 two years earlier" to the al-Qerrwarts Campaign; Fred Harris, former US Senator from Oklahoma and endorser of Screamin' Deanmon; Charles Kolb, president and CEO of Committee for Economic Development (which "played a major role in getting campaign finance reform passed" including its 60-day pre-election free-speech blackout—gee, thanks), and the author of White House Daze (which condemns the Bush 41 administration for not being a bunch of Social Engineers™) who believes our budget deficit will be "approximately $700 billion every year for the next 75 years" (despite the facts); William Kraus, Citizens Communications' director, described as "the liberal left's favorite Republican"; Jocelyn Larkin, plaintiffs' attorney in "the largest civil rights class action ever certified against a private employer" (now I know why Wal-Mart's prices are higher and John-John's fellow fatcat trial lawyers are much fatter); Eric Liu, former al-Qlinton policy advisor; Harold McDougall, former national legislative director of the NAACP (aka Asshatiation of Bush Booers™); Spencer "Personal Agenda" Overton, law professor and frequent speaker at Hilldabeast's beloved American Constitution Society; William H. Parsons, of Denver's Parsons & Funnell LLP, the same firm that, in
League of Women Voters of Colorado v. Davidson (DOC file), tried to stifle the free-speech rights of the conservative, non-profit corporation Centennial Spirit (wanna place bets that had it been Soros Spirit instead, this firm never would've taken the case?); Robert "Absent-Borders" Pastor, a former al-Qarter NSC director and current militant leftist who "has long been associated with the Institute for Policy Studies, a think tank with close ties to the Soviet KGB and Castro's DGI" (whadda guy!); Richard North Patterson, author of the good(Dhimms)-vs.-evil(Republicans) ~~legal thriller~~ moonbat fantasy Protect and Defend who, along with Tedboat al-Qennedy, wrote a sickeningly glowing review of Bedwarts' book Four ~~Trials~~ Million: My Cut of the Punitive Damages; Bradley S. Phillips, another John-John pal trial lawyer who made sure we have that 60-day pre-election free-speech blackout (stiffling free speech—at least any exercised by conservatives—seems to be the ongoing theme throughout these lawyers' cases, doesn't it?); Martha Phillips, Concord Coalition's former executive director and former Drearycrat staff director of the House Budget Committee; Chellie Pingree, Drivelcrat Leader of Maine's senate; Wendy Marcus Raymont, former program coordinator of Transparency International USA, the group George Soros called "innovative" in the New York Slimes (DOC file); Nancy Rhodes, Rhode Island's Common Cause former president (another arch conservative Republican, no doubt); Phillip R. Rotner, general counsel of Deloitte & Touche LLP (the firm that weighed in on the pro-reverse discrimination side in the University of Michigan Grutter v. Bollinger case which the ~~NAACP~~ Professional BushBooers, Tedmarine al-Qennedy, and Qennedy's pal Chief Judge Boyce Martin of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit—who presided over the case—ensured would go their extremist radical way after they worked together with obstructionists in the Senate to filabuster against filling the deciding-vote vacancy on that appeals court); John Shattuck, former high-level Qlinton administration appointee; Donald M. Stewart, the Spew Pork Rinds Co. board of directors member (a company that just loooooves FOX, by the way) who gave Hilldabeast a medal on her 50th birthday; Daniel Tokaji, California ACLU lawyer who, along with al-Qlinton/al-Bore's pal Laurence Tribe and other radical extremists, tried to delay Governor Gray "Skies" Davis' recall; and Adam Werbach, former president of the Sierra Club who "nonpartisanly" said, "Here we have the most anti-environmental president in history going up against the senate leader on the environment."

How Jake the Journalist can say with a straight face that this Pathetic Left-Wing Conspiracy is nonpartisan, defies even A-Pee's limited brand of reason.

...assert that Fox News' reports are "deliberately and consistently distorted and twisted to promote the Republican Party of the U.S. and an extreme right-wing viewpoint."

As opposed to al-Qerry's twisted promoters at ABCCBSNBCNPRMSNBC®? Just because they actually allow a Republican to speak and not get interrupted and shouted down by four or five barking moonbats at the same time, that's hardly "promotion." It's called "fair and balanced."

Alleging consumer fraud, the complaint calls for the FTC to order Fox News, consistently the highest-rated cable news network, to cease and desist from using the slogan.

Ve vilt orter yuuz tooz beez goots leetle leeb'ral subjeectz. Ja.

Sieg Heil!

Irena Briganti, a Fox News spokeswoman, told The ~~Associated~~ Asswipewhiney Press that "while this is clearly a transparent publicity stunt, we recognize all forms of free speech and wish them well."

The "w" on that last word was supposed to be "h" preceded by "to go to" but the APe man quoted her wrong.

James Kaminski, a former FTC lawyer currently practicing advertising law with Arent Fox Attorneys, sees little chance for the petition, noting that the FTC does not wade in political waters.
"Whether (Fox is) biased or not ... it's a freedom of speech issue," he said.

Freedom? Since when do Radically Raving Extremist MooreOns of the Nth Dimension™ care about freedom? Especially when it involves non-RREMND speech?

But

Persuant to the official Alwaysconstipated Press Style Manual (New York: Marx & Lennin, 2004 edition), "Without exception, every quote that supports a nonliberal radical viewpoint on any issue shall be followed by the word 'But' and at least two quotes refuting it."

...Chellie Pingree, president of Common Cause, said the legal actions were consistent with the First Amendment. "Fox has no obligation under the law to be fair and balanced, just not to market itself as fair and balanced," he said.

(There's quote #1.)

Even when it is in fact "fair and balanced."

After a press conference announcing the petition, members of MoveOn.org and Common Cause ~~marched~~ goose-stepped to the Fox News Headquarters to hand out DVDs of the recent documentary "Outfoxed," which alleges a pattern of right-wing biases in the network's reporting, citing statements by former Fox employees and internal memos.

Disgruntled former employees, and swiped internal memos saying "we won't be unfair or unbalanced like those biased reporters at AP et al. Please adhere to this policy unless you want to become a disgruntled former employee. Thanks."

The documentary is "Exhibit A" in the FTC petition.
At the press conference, Common Cause's Pingree said the petition was consistent with the 34-year old citizen advocacy group's history

Of activities that are deliberately and consistently distorted and twisted to promote the Demoonbatic Party of the U.S. and an extreme left-wing viewpoint.

..., and a response to the "growing firestorm about what's going on with the media."

(There's quote #2. Jake's now in compliance with his company's style manual. He can stop with the refutational quotes. Although he probably won't....)

The Federal Trade Commission, which hears all consumer complaints, will now judge whether the complaint has merit, a process that could take months.

On or after November 3, 2004. Should've filed earlier, you "nonpartisan" Dorkorats. Or at least read Democratic Underpants more often. The barking moonies over there came up with this idea right after FOX became a bright, sharp contrast to the biasly spun bilge coming out your beloved lamestream media.

Mitch Katz of the FTC's Office of Public Affairs would not comment directly on the petition, but did acknowledge that a label like "fair and balanced" may be inherently subjective.

Which, legally speaking, means that "inherent subjectivity" has absolutely no bearing on the merits (i.e., lack thereof) of the MootOn-Commie Cause's petition one way or the other. Else he wouldn't have given you that ex-parte comment.

Fox has sought to trademark its "Fair and Balanced" motto, which also has been met with legal action.
Independent Media Institute, a not-for-profit promoter of independent journalism, filed a petition last December with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office challenging Fox's trademark request.
The IMI's petition claims that the term "fair and balanced" is so prevalent as to be generic, and is "entirely mis-descriptive" when it comes to Fox News.

What does a trademark application have to do with these loony consumer fraud allegations? A non sequitur if there ever was one.

FOX's application is made in good faith. The only decision before the U.S. trademark office is whether the phrase is unique enough (like Velcro®, Pledge®, Jolly Green Giant®, or "I'd walk a mile for a Camel"™) to warrant that exclusive-use status. Not whether it accurately describes the producer or its brands.

Last summer, Fox News Channel tried to block publication of liberal humorist Al Franken's book, "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right," saying it made unauthorized use of Fox's "fair and balanced" slogan.

Didn't you just say "Fox has sought to trademark" its motto? That would imply it hasn't been officially trademarked yet. No wonder al-Frankenstein could get away with using it. Just like I could title this blog "Put a Tiger in Your Tank" with an image of a friendly-looking corpulent tiger right next to it and not get sued, had Exxon just applied for but not yet received registration of that trademark.

Just because you work for AP, Jake, doesn't mean you have to get all your facts wrong.

...Ok, so maybe it does.

The judge dismissed Fox's case, saying it was "wholly without merit,"

Because their motto hasn't been officially registered yet. Fox has only "sought" to register it, remember?

...and the trademark "Fair and Balanced," registered by Fox in 1998,

Which is it, Jake? Are they seeking to trademark it or is it actually registered? With flip-flops like these, you need to be reassigned to covering al-Qerry.

...was weak. He also said the network was "trying to undermine the First Amendment."

FOX can't "undermine the First Amendment" but Commie Cause can, is that it?

When are you radical extremist liberals ever going to figure out that sensible people are fed up with your trying to always have it both ways. That's the "growing firestorm" you're seeing.

As far as your consumer fraud case, I'd have more luck filing one against MoveOn.not for consistently and miserably failing to do anything that can be reasonably described in even the remotest sense as "moving on," or against Commie Cause for never "holding power accountable" when it comes to radical left extremists like itself and others belonging to or closely associated with the Desperatic Party.

3:06 PM

Tuesday, July 20, 2004

Sandy Berger gives new meaning to the word 'briefcase'

“B

erger, a top John Kerry advisor, claims stealing the documents was inadvertent,” reports Insight in "Clinton Spook Sandy Berger is Caught Destroying Terror Evidence." He just likes pushing papers down his pants and into his socks. Does it all the time. Like everyone does it. Let's move on. Top one percent. For the children. Every vote should count. @&%!^#- [fatal error - Reboot.]

12:48 PM

Sunday, July 18, 2004

Why al-Qerry will lose


Add this banner to your Web log or site.

No sitting senator has ever been elected president when running against the incumbent. Moreover, in every war no challenger has ever been elected president (Americans "don't switch horses in midstream").

e the People would have to change who we are before we go against the hard-earned wisdom we've ingrained in ourselves over ten generations. Just as we elect no sitting vice president to our nation's highest office unless he's serving under a legendary president like Andrew Jackson or Ronald Reagan, our tradition and custom of re-electing incumbent presidents whenever they're challenged by sitting senators is an inalienable part of that destiny which Americans themselves have invariably chosen for this nation since her birth.

To show this fact, the offices held by presidential candidates who received electoral votes after ratification of the Twelfth Amendment (which requires distinct ballots for president and vice president) are listed below.

Columns: Year - presidential election year (italicized if during a war and the incumbent was running for re-election), EVs - electoral votes (total), W - winner, L - loser, Vot - votes received (click number to see candidate's biography). Explanation of abbreviations and colors appear at the bottom of the table.

Year EVs: W Vot; L Vot, L Vot, L Vot, L Vot. ---- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ 2000 538: G 271; V 266, x 001. 1996 538: P 379; S 159. 1992 538: G 370; P 168. 1988 538: V 426; G 111, S 001.* 1984 538: P 525; V 013. 1980 538: G 489; P 049. 1976 538: G 297; P 240, G 001. 1972 538: P 520; S 017, C 001. 1968 538: V 301; V 191, G 046. 1964 538: P 486; S 052. 1960 537: S 303; V 219, S 015. 1956 531: P 457; G 073, L 001. 1952 531: M 442; G 089. 1948 531: P 303; G 189, G 039. 1944 531: P 432; G 099. 1940 531: P 449; C 082. 1936 531: P 523; G 008. 1932 531: G 472; P 059. 1928 531: A 444; G 087. 1924 531: P 382; A 136, S 013. 1920 531: S 404; G 127. 1916 531: P 277; J 254. 1912 531: G 435; P 088, P 008. 1908 483: A 321; M 162. 1904 476: P 336; L 140. 1900 447: P 292; M 155. 1896 447: G 271; R 176.* 1892 444: P 277; P 145, R 022. 1888 401: S 233; P 168.* 1884 401: G 219; A 182. 1880 369: R 214; M 155. 1876 369: G 185; G 184.* 1872 352: P 286; G 042, G 018, G 002, J 001. 1868 294: A 214; G 080.* 1864 233: P 212; M 021. 1860 303: L 180; V 072, S 039, S 012. 1856 296: A 174; S 114, P 008. 1852 296: M 254; M 042. 1848 290: M 163; S 127. 1844 275: G 170; S 105. 1840 294: L 234; P 060. 1836 294: V 170; L 073, S 026, S 014, S 011. 1832 286: P 219; S 049, G 011, A 007, x 002. 1828 261: S 178; P 083.* 1824 261: A 084; S 099, A 041, R 037.* 1820 235: P 231; A 001, x 003.* 1816 217: A 183; S 034. 1812 217: P 128; L 089. 1808 175: A 122; A 047, A 006.* 1804 176: P 162; A 014.

* Election of 1988: Loser's VP running mate received 1 EV for president. 1896: The governor completed his term in January 1896. 1888: The former senator completed his term in 1887. 1876: Because the votes of 4 states were disputed, Congress resolved the matter through an electoral commission. 1868: Three votes for a deceased candidate not counted. 1828: The former senator resigned his seat in April 1825, after serving only two and a half years, and held no office at all between then and the election. 1824: President chosen by House of Representatives, with 13 state delegations voting for the first candidate, 7 for the second, and 3 for the third. 1820: Token opposition (challenger was current member of the incumbent's cabinet). 1808: Candidate elected VP also received 6 EVs for president.

Abbreviations and Colors:
Office held by candidate before election: P - president; V - vice president; A - ambassador or other executive officer (US); S - senator (US); R - representative (US); J - judge/justice (US); G - governor; L - lieutenant governor, state judge or legislator, local judge or other office holder; M - military officer (commissioned by the president); or C - citizen (never held office).
Letter is italicized if the candidate was not serving in that office less than a year before the election. Winning candidate's letter is underlined if he died in office or resigned before the end of his term.
Color of a candidate's letter indicates his party: Republican (Whig, 1836-1852; National-Republican, 1828-1832), Democratic (Democrat-People's, 1896-1900; Federalist, 1804-1816), Democrat-Republican, or other party or independent (Libertarian, 1972; American Independent, 1968; States' Rights Democrat, 1948; Progressive-Socialist, 1924; Progressive, 1912; People's, 1892; Democrat-Liberal Republican, 1872; Constitutional Union, 1860; American, 1856; ind., Antimasonic, 1832; coalition, ind., 1824; National-Republican, 1820).
Any votes not cast by the appointed electors are preceded by an x.

Sources: Electoral College Box Scores; Presidential Elections, 1789-2000; Presidents of the United States of America; USA Presidents; Unsuccessful Candidates for Presidents of U.S.

Our forefathers and mothers knew which candidate in a presidential election would best serve us, our nation and all her people. They realized that a sitting senator is no substitute for an experienced president; and their wisdom has kept us in good stead. Throughout the last century, the only times an incumbent president was not re-elected was when he faced a state's governor or former governor. That's because, as Christopher DeMuth puts it, "governors...are CEOs. Governors have submitted budgets, hired and fired subordinates, presided over public emergencies, called out the National Guard, negotiated public strikes, exercised discretion in the enforcement of criminal and other public laws, and endured a succession of victories and defeats large and small." A sitting senator, by contrast, doesn't run anything more than a committee (if that). Unless he was previously the governor of a state or president of the United States himself, he has no experience whatsoever running an executive branch of government.

In time of war and grave peril, that executive-branch experience is crucial to the survival of our nation. It is not the time for on-the-job training. The decision facing us now in this World War is the same our forebears faced when their freedoms and country's well being were in danger. If you believe our ancestors were not as wise or as smart as us when it came to making that decision, just look around you. We arrived where we are, with our freedoms not only intact but expanded, because of their decisions. Had their decisions not been so wise and smart, you would very well be living in a completely different land where you would likely not even have any choice in the matter of who will or who will not be your leaders.

Americans always pick incumbent presidents over sitting senators. That is our nature. Its core tells us that taking a chance on the latter is, no matter what the times, just too risky. Voters invariably choose the former because they know that that choice is most beneficial not only to each of themselves but to others and to their country.

Also on Liberal Utopia—

Issues

With Qerry & Qo. it's both sides fit all:


Wednesday, November 03, 2004, 10:24 AM | 34Kb
Qerry's Qoncession Speech: Since the qandidate himself is miserably failing to give it....
Monday, November 01, 2004, 4:27 AM | 33Kb
Terrorists 'know how high the stakes are in Iraq': [Qlueless Qerry just doesn't get it.]
Monday, November 01, 2004, 3:28 AM | 40Kb
What have you ever done, Qerry?: For the sake of our nation's freedom and security, this question deserves an answer from him before anyone casts his or her ballot tomorrow.
Friday, October 29, 2004, 5:27 PM | 35Kb
Botox shortage blamed on Qerry's facial needs: While "50 to 80 percent of the cost of most [flu] vaccines is liability insurance"—thanks again to Qerry's Band of TrialLawyers.
Friday, October 29, 2004, 3:07 AM | 66Kb
Bob Woodward's unanswered questions for al-Qerry: Fortunately, a high-ranking official at Liberal Utopia is once again fully prepared to step up to the plate to provide strong and compelling answers to this latest series of unanswered questions on behalf of Hanoi John F'in' al-Qerry.
Monday, October 25, 2004, 5:55 PM | 37Kb
This Election: The choice couldn't be more clear.
Monday, October 25, 2004, 3:30 AM | 38Kb
President Bush abolished gender apartheid in Afghanistan: What has Junior Senator John Qerry ever done for women's rights that can even begin to compare?
Saturday, October 23, 2004, 1:00 AM | 36Kb
al-Qerry's 'Two Wars': The one he's for and the one he's against. [By remarkable coincidence, they both happen to be the same war.]
Wednesday, October 20, 2004, 4:42 PM | 33Kb
Heinz-Qerry: Teaching Is Not A 'Real Job': Public school teachers and librarians, al-Qerry's second wife believes you don't really work.
Tuesday, October 19, 2004, 2:28 PM | 33Kb
John Qerry's Best Friend: The Extortionist Litigator: As a trial lawyer himself, Hanoi John F'in' al-Qerry loves the fact that his pals in the Trial Lawyer Industry™ (the largest block of contributors to his campaign, by the way) are able to pad their pockets by filing harassing lawsuits against the businesses where you work and to do everything they can to wreck our economy at the same time.
Sunday, October 17, 2004, 9:51 PM AM | 40Kb
Dhimm in the Mirror: Hanoi John F'in' al-Qerry blames President Bush. Tomstuctionist Daschole blames the Republicans. Al-Sharptongue blames now-murdered "Joooo Interlopers." Dhimmicrats blame America. Without even a sidelong glance, they've all passed through the looking glass.
Saturday, October 16, 2004, 1:13 AM | 55Kb
Qerry the do-nothing senator: Even when al-Qerry wasn't playing hooky from the job the people of Massachusetts hired him for, he still didn't really get much done.
Thursday, October 14, 2004, 9:30 PM | 37Kb
Qerry's Qondescending Tone: "I could care less about the tone in Washington."—Dhimmoonbatic National Chairman Terrorence McAwful
Wednesday, October 13, 2004, 10:51 AM | 52Kb
1944 Presidential Debate: Tune in tonight for a very special episode of Quantum Leap where President George W. Bush leaps into FDR, Hanoi John F'in' al-Qerry into Thomas Dewey, and Jim Lehrer into Edward R. Murrow—just in time for their mid-WWII presidential election-year debate!
Tuesday, October 12, 2004, 7:23 PM | 35Kb
Qerry thinks he's Christ: Qerry's hairmate, Qerrwarts, says he'll make the lame walk!
Tuesday, October 12, 2004, 5:14 PM | 32Kb
Free speech for me but none for thee: Qerry Qampaign top official Dimpled-Chad Clanton, erstwhile Gorebot2000 staffer, threatens AnybodyButQerry groups: "You better hope we don't win."
Monday, October 11, 2004, 1:17 PM | 32Kb
I know what Qerry's plan is now: It isn't just to lose, but to lose badly.
Saturday, October 09, 2004, 8:37 PM | 33Kb
Read My Plan. No Few Taxes.: Either visit al-Qerry's Web site...[or see his upcoming speech]
Friday, October 08, 2004, 11:10 PM | 33Kb
5.1 Trillion Dollar Budget Surplus?: Did Qerry just say that's how much the budget surplus was when President Bush took office? [Qerry's off by over a factor of forty!]
Thursday, October 07, 2004, 1:33 PM | 33Kb
Time to sack your entire campaign staff again, al-Qerry: Starting with Joe Look!no-heart.
Tuesday, October 05, 2004, 1:24 PM | 33Kb
Qerry's Hairmate Says You're 'Insane': Trial lawyer, mumbojumbo channeler, and now psycho~~logist~~.
Monday, October 04, 2004, 6:09 PM | 33Kb
John Qerry Is Against the Death Penalty for Convicted Terrorists: But favors the death penalty (with absolutely no appeal) for unborn babies—the most truly innocent, choiceless and voiceless among us.
Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 1:48 AM | 52Kb
Can you believe that our President gave THIS speech?: How much can one person mislead with just a single speech?
Tuesday, September 21, 2004, 7:36 AM | 57Kb
Qerry's 'Service' Record: Attempted deferment, a falsified scratch-n-scoot bugout, AWOL from Naval Reserves, maligning the very Vets he abandoned, private meetings with enemy officials—and that's just for starters.
Saturday, September 18, 2004, 5:03 PM | 36Kb
Qerry supporters assault small child: This is something I would never even consider making up. Truth, in this case, is more ugly, extreme and dangerous than any fiction.
Wednesday, September 15, 2004, 5:20 PM | 34Kb
CBS Clarifies: And John Qerry's campaign dies.
Tuesday, September 14, 2004, 1:02 AM | 34Kb
Qerry Advisor and Rather Denied Bail: Qerra^thery among liars. The tie that binds JFQ, the DNC and MSM.
Sunday, September 12, 2004, 1:08 PM | 34Kb
Rather Indicted For Murder: Of the mainstream media in particular, and of the tru^th in general. [Qerry Qampaign clearly involved.]
Thursday, September 09, 2004, 11:38 AM | 34KB
Demagoguerats, you don't want to go there: These are the shocking revelations from Hanoi John F'in' al-Qerry's selectively-released records and President George W. Bush's fully-released ones.
Monday, September 06, 2004, 1:00 PM | 34Kb
What's wrong with your campaign, Qerry?: Why all the skakeups?
Friday, September 03, 2004, 6:11 PM | 34Kb
Qerry wants us to spend $150 billion PER YEAR paying for everyone's health insurance: So much for his plan to cut the budget deficit.
Saturday, August 28, 2004, 1:31 PM | 38Kb
Quadrangulation: Mapping the al-Qerry campaign's expansion of a Qlintonesque strategy
Saturday, August 21, 2004, 1:36 AM | 44Kb
John Qerry's Quagmire: What started out as by the way has now become all there is.
Saturday, August 14, 2004, 12:39 AM | 71Kb
Qerryism: No experience. No message. No record showing any real achievement. Nothing but a bunch of words and promises.
Tuesday, July 20, 2004, 12:48 PM | 32Kb
Sandy Berger gives new meaning to the word 'briefcase': Or should that be "Sandy Burglar's briefs case"?
Thursday, July 15, 2004, 10:31 AM | 39Kb
Qerry's stands on any issue: While tucking in his little boy Johnny before untucking him, Flippin' Flopface told the vice-ambulance chaser a bedtime story.
Wednesday, July 14, 2004, 5:56 AM | 33Kb
Monday Morning Quarterback Party: Except it won't be a Monday, but a Wednesday morning its members will be doing it from with respect to themselves exactly sixteen weeks from today.
Friday, June 25, 2004, 12:40 AM | 35Kb
Peek-A-Boo Candidate: “You can't see me, my eyes are closed.”
Friday, June 18, 2004, 10:15 PM | 64Kb
Confessions of a former 'progressive': "If you're young and conservative, you have no heart. If you're older and still a liberal, you have no brain." [TeRAVEzah Heinz-Qerry's heartless-to-brainless story included.]
Wednesday, June 09, 2004, 5:27 AM | 98Kb
More Seedy and Sinister Sides of Sickocrats: ‘Anything to win, anyway we can’ means not just ‘anyone but Bush’ but ‘anytime's good for a Big Lie paid for by Big Money’ and—more ominously—‘anyplace is good for a pre-election terrorist attack.’
Friday, June 04, 2004, 7:28 AM | 38Kb
ABB crunching: AnyoneButBush is thrown into the trash heap of other lost campaigns along with the losing losers who engage in them.
Saturday, May 29, 2004, 11:27 PM | 39Kb
Liberal Football: Rule 1: Our team only has to reach the goal line to score a touchdown, but yours has to go past it, into the parking lot, down the road, onto the highway, into the next town, hop aboard a spaceship, land on the moon and reach the goal line inside an atmospheric-domed stadium that won't even be built for another thirty years, before we'll admit you scored one.
Thursday, May 27, 2004, 2:45 PM | 70Kb
AOL Spews: Qerry says Bush does have a plan: And he says "it sounds Grrrrrrrrreat!"
Monday, May 24, 2004, 1:15 AM | 43Kb
House Democrat Leader Unfairly Attacked for Innocently Quoting from al-Qaeda Magazine: Nancy Pelosi just thought we needed to know what all the terrorists have been saying all along, 'sall. Like, you know, as a public service and stuff.
Thursday, May 20, 2004, 5:45 AM | 69Kb
Depending on 'failed' failed: If I had a dime for each time Jerman-Frenchboy al-Qerry (the "al" stands for aloof) miserably failed to leave that word out of the interviews and speeches he's given since announcing his candidacy, I'd have more than enough to make this blog—plus a dozen others—completely ad-free.
Sunday, May 02, 2004, 2:25 PM | 35Kb
Part-time senator still gets full-time pay & bennies: Seems Hanoi John F'in' al-Qerry believes it's better to have practically no voting record at all than to give American taxpayers their money's worth.
Friday, April 30, 2004, 2:25 PM | 37Kb
Questionnaire for Qerry: Although George Will hasn't gotten around yet to posing another 28 questions to the ~~chairwarmer for Hildabeast~~ Demoswitch's presumed nominee for president, I've sent the Waffle House 2, or 4, maybe 5, no make that 6, all right 10 questions of my own. Here are the replies I got....
Tuesday, April 27, 2004, 9:10 AM | 33Kb
Take the ribbons from my hair: Qlueless al-Qerry's ribbons flying through the air 33 years ago did less flip-flopping than he's doing now.
Sunday, April 18, 2004, 9:56 PM | 35Kb
No Waffles on No Guns: One issue on which al-Qerry has never flip-flopped.
Saturday, April 10, 2004, 9:44 PM | 73Kb
Anti-America OnLine Loses Self-Control: Another only-liberal news outlet [quoting another al-Qerry lie] takes a crack at undermining the American people's resolve.
Wednesday, March 31, 2004, 11:14 AM | 47Kb
Serpents slithering through the gates: Also known as "a coalition of Democratic Party interest groups, armed with millions of dollars in soft money...rapidly constructing an unprecedented political operation designed to supplement the activities of Sen. John F. Kerry's campaign."
Wednesday, March 31, 2004, 1:08 AM | 55Kb
28 Queries for Qerry finally answered: These are the questions Washington Post columnist George F. Will posed to Hanoi "Secret-Service Agents R SOBs" John last month, but through some glaring oversights on the candidate's part have sat at the bottom of the Campaign HjQ's f-ing parakeet cage all this time.
Monday, March 29, 2004, 7:43 PM | 36Kb
Liberal Utopia Endorses al-Qerry: "A Realer Wheeler-n-Dealer Niler There Never Was"
Saturday, March 27, 2004, 1:24 AM | 39Kb
'Apology' not accepted: "Offered" by "'best friend' of al-Qerry Campaign official."
Tuesday, March 23, 2004, 8:12 AM | 36Kb
Qerry - the best politician Chinese military money can buy: "Newsweek reports that more than $28,000 in illegal contributions was funneled into the campaigns of Bill Clinton and John Kerry, and that 'the contributions came out of $300,000 in overseas wire transfers sent on orders from the chief of Chinese military intelligence - and routed through a Hong Kong bank account controlled by [China's People's Liberation Army Lt. Col. Liu Chaoying].'"
Monday, March 22, 2004, 3:26 PM | 41Kb
Bush is a uniter, Democrats are dividers: Add to that, "Kerry killed many civilians and admitted to committing war atrocities."
Tuesday, March 16, 2004, 1:46 AM | 35Kb
A debate a day: "President Bush could more than call Chairman 'I've Ruled There Ain't No Mo' POWs in Vietnam' Qerry's bluff by demanding that Hanoi John debate him every single day through Election Eve."
Sunday, March 14, 2004, 4:45 PM | 32Kb
Middle-Class Tax Cut Redux: "I still haven't gotten over the one Clinton gave us. Why do we need another?...promise, that is."
Friday, March 12, 2004, 5:16 AM | 32Kb
Who would Osama vote for?: "Hanoi John F'in' al-Qerry."

Ridiqule and Joqes

Not laughing with them...:


Saturday, October 02, 2004, 1:02 PM | 37Kb
Qerry's Plan: Liberal use of Qetchup.
Saturday, September 18, 2004, 3:03 PM | 34Kb
Qerry Documents Faxed To CBS: CBS's 60 Minutes II received copies of JFQ's journal, all of which came from his own personal files. Whether they're authentic or not, the facts based on them raise quite a number of very serious questions.
Tuesday, September 14, 2004, 5:05 PM | 35Kb
Qerry Joqes: As much as I tried I couldn't make them as boring and stale as their subject.
Tuesday, August 31, 2004, 5:27 PM | 44Kb
Qerry Floppins: This ain't your father's Disney® movie.
Tuesday, August 17, 2004, 4:34 AM | 36Kb
Qerry's secret plan for Iraq: Thinking a blog called Liberal Utopia was among those with a "need to know," the al-Qerry campaign sent its owner all 4 pages of Senator Qhristmas-in-Qambodia's secretive plan.
Saturday, July 24, 2004, 4:34 AM | 167Kb
Mickey Moore walks into a Waffle House...: And he brought a bunch of ~~friends~~ radical extremist whacked-out liberals who tolerate him only because he's paying for all their waffles.
Saturday, July 24, 2004, 1:50 PM | 37Kb
Wonder if Julia Thorne's going to be at the convention?: Cheering for her ex-husband Hanoi John and his richer wife?
Thursday, July 22, 2004, 5:52 PM | 49Kb
John-John QarriedWarts' Advisor Apologizes: He's really, really sorry about his getting caught.
Tuesday, July 06, 2004, 8:56 AM | 31Kb
My impressions of Qerry's sidekick: Turns around, lifts collar up, turns back around....
Thursday, June 10, 2004, 9:17 AM | 34Kb
Liberal Navy: Inspired by Denny Wilson's USS Jimmy Carter.
Saturday, May 29, 2004, 6:04 AM | 36Kb
Unimaginative Waffling: First in a series of not so creative things you can do with your waffles.
Tuesday, May 25, 2004, 4:12 PM | 33Kb
'I decline the nomination before I accept it': Or will he? Al Qerry never says the same thing twice. That's called 'nuance.'
Sunday, May 02, 2004, 3:38 PM | 32Kb
French waffles again a favorite: al-Qerry's favorite main course for breakfast, lunch, snacks, dinner, supper,..., is now the first result again when searched for on Google.
Friday, March 19, 2004, 10:15 AM | 35Kb
California moves closer to secession: "John al-Qerry, senator of the state from which the terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center boarded the two planes that were used to kill nearly 3,000 people in those attacks, called Schwarzenegger to congratulate him...."

Bait-and-Switch Contingency

Sabotaging Hilldabeast's broomstick before it leaves the closet:


Friday, October 01, 2004, 8:14 AM | 47Kb
Real Reason Qerry's Face Was So ~~Orange~~ Yellow: Artificial tan or artificial wan?
Tuesday, September 14, 2004, 3:40 AM | 32Kb
RIH: WYA 4 HRQ
Thursday, March 25, 2004, 7:01 AM | 34Kb
Qerry to Qlinton - Dems' bait & switch contingency: "It's August. The polls are looking none too good for al-Qerry...."