Tuesday, June 29, 2004

RNC Convention Anyone?

I am planning on attending this year's Republican National Convention?

Are there any others out there planning on attending as well?

Now on to the news.......

The Associated Press is reporting that the US Government is planning to hand over Saddam Hussein and eleven (11) other top officials to the new Iraq government on Wednesday June 30th 2004.

Will the killing of American and foreign citizens stop as a result?

Monday, June 28, 2004

Farenheit 9/11

Well bloggers I tried my best to see Michael Moore's film. Everyone I went I could not find a seat. Everything is sold out.

I couldn't find the bootleg version on the corner either!!! If anyone can tell me any corner in Washington, DC or the suburbs where I can support inner city economic revitalization. I will purchase a bootleg copy.

Until tomorrow bloggers.....

Friday, June 25, 2004

Fareinheit 9/11

With all the hoopla and marketing blitz regarding Michael Moore's new film. I have decided to go see the movie this weekend. I am open minded, I enjoy all types of filsm, artsy ones, comedic ones, love story's, sciene fiction and a few other genre's of movies.

Normally, I don't like documentaries, but since I got the Sundance channel, I have learned to enjoy a few "artsy" films.

The Washington Post is reporting today that Farenheit 9/11 will change the election in November. (There goes that liberal media again.)

I plan to see the movie and comment about it on Monday. Also, to me it is just a movie. As much as I love The Godfather (trilogy) and Scarface, I don't believe that all Italians or Cubans are criminals.

Michael Moore's film is just that a film. All the hoopla and controversy and helping one thing. Ticket sales! The Weinstein brothers and Mr. Moore will profit from the controversy and walk away much richer than they were prior to the film's release.

I would urge conservative groups to ignore this movie and stop feeding the media frenzy.

Today I heard a report (Howard Stern Show) that Mr. Moore is receiving death threats. All of this marketing hoopla, fuels sales and money.

I have attached the POST's article on this issue.

I will expand and give my "unbiased" opinion on the movie on Monday.

Have a great weekend!

Buzz Around Moore's Movie May Be Able to Shake the Election

By Terry M. Neal
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Friday, June 25, 2004; 7:16 AM

The booze was flowing and the room was buzzing at the swanky new Leftbank restaurant in Washington's Adams Morgan neighborhood Wednesday night. The cause for celebration was the D.C. premiere of "Fahrenheit 9/11," and director Michael Moore's pals picked up the tab.

They could afford it. Harvey and Bob Weinstein, the brothers who donate big money to Democrats and who bought the rights to the controversial new film, are already rich. But their decision to distribute the movie after Disney, Moore's original distributor, refused, will make them that much richer -- and possibly influence a presidential election.

The question that started every conversation at the party was, "What did you think?" To be certain, most of the crowd consisted of Democrats and left-leaning activists and journalists. So you know what they think. But a good number of moderate and conservative types attended the premiere too, if only out of curiosity. And many of them came out agreeing that the film is powerful and entertaining.

During the screening at the Uptown Theatre, I sat next to a newspaper reporter who was raised in an activist Republican party family, whose sister worked previously for the Bush White House and who considers herself moderate. She cried through the second half of the movie, which featured graphic images of injured and killed Iraqi civilians and U.S. soldiers and focused on the U.S. military's efforts to recruit minorities and poor whites.

She and others who don't hew to Moore's hardcore lefty vision of the world gave him credit for, if nothing else, presenting an incredibly cohesive and emotionally stirring piece of work.

"There's no way people are not going to come out of this hating Bush," she said. Which, of course, is exactly what the GOP fears. Conservative opposition is not based on the belief that this is just some commie-pinko rant that'll be ignored by the masses.

The White House, furious about the Bush-bashing, anti-war movie, has wisely decided to take a low-key approach, allowing surrogates to do most of the work – and they've done it with zeal. One California-based organization, Move America Forward, has orchestrated a letter-writing campaign to theaters around the country, demanding that they refuse to show Moore's movie. Conservative talk radio and television hosts have filled their segments with rants against it. And the president's father called Moore a "slimeball."

The conservative group Citizens United announced Thursday that its president, David N. Bossie, had filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, asserting that television ads for the movie are restricted under some of the new campaign finance rules created by the McCain-Feingold legislation.

The announcement was originally scheduled for Tuesday, and, at Wednesday night's party, Chris Lehane, the former spokesman for Al Gore's presidential campaign and new media strategist for Moore, seemed almost disappointed.

"We wanted to thank them for sending people to the movie," he said, flashing a broad smile at Moore.

I caught up with Moore at the party just after midnight as he was leaning on a booth, daintily picking at a small plate of sliced tenderloin. Lehane was nestled up to the ear of his new client -- no doubt planning their defense against the conservative assault on the movie that opens Friday in 900 theaters nationwide. That's nine times as many theaters than carried his last film, the anti-NRA "Bowling for Columbine."

Moore was animated when talking about his critics.

"That's the difference between our side and their side. Even when we disagree, we're respectful of freedom of speech," he said. "But when they disagree, they try to shut you down. Well, it's un-American. And it's wrong, and people are not going to stand for it. People in this country don't like to be told they can't watch something or see something."

Moore said his movie is "two hours of irrefutable facts."

The movie breaks little news. What it does, however, is string together old news in a way that fits Moore's ideological perspective.

Is it propaganda? Of course it is. Moore makes it no secret that he wants Bush out of the White House, and this is his case for why that should happen. Echoing the common view among liberals that the mainstream media has been soft on Bush and lazy in general, he said his movie is simply a bridge to span the void.

The only difference between Moore's movie and the opinions that conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh and Fox News's Bill O'Reilly spout every day on radio and TV is that it comes from the left and it's condensed to two hours rather than spread over hundreds of hours on the airwaves.

Democrats and liberals are so excited about Moore because they believe he is one of the rare polemicists on the left who manages to balance preachiness with entertainment.

The attacks from the right have only seemed to embolden Moore. Clearly he relishes the fight, which not only allows him to play the role of David to the GOP's Goliath, but helps drum up publicity for his film. Typically efforts to suppress free speech have the opposite effect. Just ask former Broward County, Fla., sheriff Nick Navarro, who famously propelled the talentless "rappers" 2 Live Crew to fame in the early 1990s by trying to put them out of business.

Critics, academics and others are predicting that the movie will become a cultural phenomenon, somewhere on the order of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ."

The film has shattered records at two New York City theaters where it has already opened. But of course, New York is not the entire country. The film seems unlikely to change minds that are set in stone. But judging by the reaction of the crowd in Washington, it does have the potential to move people off the fence.

If this year's presidential election is as close as the one in 2000, it won't have to move many to make a difference in the outcome.

Wednesday, June 23, 2004

Been So Long

Bloggers and supporters. Forgive me for staying away for a while. I needed a mental health break. I have been reading and watching all of the news, articles, emails, and discussions on other blog sites. I am back, I promise to post more often.


Now on to the new..........

Obama vs. Ryan

Getting ready for the November election's 12 round bout. Obama Barack (Dem) African American male vs. Jack Ryan (Republican) white male for the coveted US Senate Seat from IL.

The Washington Post today published the following article, detailing the news from the unsealed divorce case of Mr. Ryan and his ex wife.

The question I have for conservatives is simple? If the allegations are true, should we stand with Jack Ryan? Should our loyalty be to the African American Democrat Obama Barack?

Should we not weigh in on this issue?

I am curious as to how other "urban conservatives" feel on this issue.

I don't know enough about Obama's record to make a decision. However, there is a part of me, that would love to see more "diversity" in the US Senate.

Here is the post's article.

GOP Nominee Fights Calls to Exit Contest
Ex-Wife Alleges Coerced Sex in Public
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 23, 2004; Page A04

Republicans suffered a significant setback in their bid to hold on to the open Senate seat in Illinois as GOP nominee Jack Ryan yesterday tried to fight off calls to quit the race after allegations by his ex-wife that he had pressured her to perform sexually in front of other people.

The allegations were contained in documents from the couple's bitter custody battle four years ago were ordered unsealed by a California judge after the Chicago Tribune and WLS-TV sued to have them made public. Ryan, 44, denied the allegations and said he had no intention of dropping out of the race.

The GOP candidate, a millionaire former investment banker who left the business world to teach at a Roman Catholic school in the inner city of Chicago, already faced an uphill battle against Democratic state Sen. Barack Obama, with the most recent public poll showing Obama with a lead of about 20 percentage points.

The sensational allegations divided Republicans in Illinois and Washington. Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.) called for Ryan to drop out of the race to help Republicans maintain their slim majority in the U.S. Senate. "I think it becomes very difficult for Jack to win," LaHood said in a phone interview.

Sen. George Allen (R-Va.), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), gave Ryan his support. "Senator Allen talked to Jack this morning," said Dan Allen, NRSC communications director. "They had another good conversation. We're fully behind and fully supportive of Jack."

Ryan was married to television actress Jeri Lynn Ryan. In the documents released yesterday, she alleges that in the late 1990s, her then-husband took her to "bizarre clubs" in New York, New Orleans and Paris, where he asked her to have sex "and he specifically asked other people to watch."

Jack Ryan, in the documents, charged that his wife was trying to ruin his reputation with "ridiculous" allegations. Saying he had been "faithful and loyal" to his wife throughout their marriage, he said in the documents that he had arranged "romantic getaways" with her. He said they had gone to "one avant-garde club in Paris, which was more than either one of us felt comfortable with. We left and vowed never to return."

Some top Republicans in Illinois, including former governor Jim Edgar and the state chairman, Judy Baar Topinka, made clear through friends or advisers that they felt they were misled by Ryan, who had assured them in separate conversations there was nothing embarrassing in the court documents.

Edgar and Topinka declined to comment further yesterday as they and other GOP officials waited to see the fallout. House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) also declined to comment. Spokesman John Feehery said the speaker had not spoken to Ryan since the candidate held a news conference on Monday evening to answer the allegations.

Mike Lawrence, interim director of the Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University and former press secretary to Edgar, said the allegations would make it difficult for Ryan to wage a credible campaign against Obama for the Senate vacancy created by the retirement of Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-Ill.). "People are going to react instinctively to this, and I believe most of the reaction will be negative," he said.

Ryan's campaign spokesman said that, with the allegations public after months of rumors about what the documents contained, the candidate could begin to refocus his campaign on other issues and move forward.

"He's got the monkey off his back," Bill Pascoe said. "For months, there's been a whispering campaign about what's in the documents from political opponents. Now that the documents have been released, everybody can see: a, those rumors weren't true, and b, there's not an allegation that there was any marital infidelity, there's not even an allegation that he broke one of the Ten Commandments, there's not even an allegation that he broke the law."

Ryan said he had fought release of the documents to protect their young son. The Ryan campaign also issued a statement from his ex-wife in which she said, "Jack is a good man, a loving father and he shares a strong bond with our son." She added that he would make "an excellent senator."

Obama kept his distance from the controversy. Asked whether he believes the allegations are relevant to the campaign, he said in a phone interview, "I just think our campaign's going to focus on matters that are important to the voters and if we do, we'll do fine."