Texas Rainmaker
April 28th, 2004 12:00 am

The Race Card: Don’t Leave Home Without It

The article

Elton John, a guest judge this month on the U.S. talent hunt TV series “American Idol,” said on Tuesday that he found the voting by the national viewing audience “incredibly racist.”

Weird….Ruben Studdard looked black…. Color me confused. I mean, he won, despite not selling as many records as the second-place finisher, Howdy Doody. And that Justin kid, in the first season, must’ve just had a killer tan, I suppose.

So once again when something doesn’t go right for someone of color, it’s time to start dealing cards. Don’t get me wrong, I think the three girls who showed up at the bottom of the list, including Jennifer Hudson, who was voted off, are among the most talented of the lot….. but hey, they are leaving it up to a nationwide vote, so why complain? If it is turning out to be a problem, perhaps the premise of the show ought to be simply a couple of has-beens choose their favorite from a bunch of mediocre talent…. you know the way the business is usually run. But that wouldn’t garner the television revenue that the format of the show generates, so maybe the folks ought to decide what their priority really is.

Wait, I know, somehow the GOP, Bush administration and a collection of gun-toting, bible-thumping Republicans systematically prevented blacks from picking up the phone and voting. Maybe there were one too many roadblocks in urban areas designed to intimidate minorities from dialing the phone and casting their vote. Where is Gore, we need a recount! Let’s recount this baby until sweeps weeks!

“The three people I was really impressed with, and they just happened to be black, young female singers, and they all seem to be landing in the bottom three,” said John, commenting on the tally in which the lowest vote-getter is eliminated. … I find it incredibly racist.”

Well, they’re also straight, should we call the voting public homophobic too? Wait, I don’t think there’s a jew in the final 10, bunch of anti-semites. The top 10 aren’t disabled either, I demand an investigation! Equality and justice for all Ameriican Idol participants…. this is a travesty!

The results moved show host Ryan Seacrest to remind viewers that the series was a talent hunt and not a popularity contest.

“America, don’t forget you have to vote for the talent,” Seacrest said before closing the show. “You cannot let talent like this slip through the cracks.”

Well if that were true, the industry experts would be picking a winner, wouldn’t they? They wouldn’t be leaving it up to a bunch of pre-teen, braces-laden kids hopped up on sweettarts and bubble yum. But again, there’s no money in a show where Simon Cowell can tell us week after week who sucks and who doesn’t, only to end up picking is own choice.

So here’s the deal, guys, you’ve created and profited heavily from the monster… now deal with its ugly side and accept the voice of the people. Maybe folks are just longing for a new generation, Sinatra-like crooner again….

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
April 26th, 2004 2:53 am

It depends on the meaning of the word “medals”

the full story

Asked about the anti-war veterans who threw their medals away, Kerry said “they decided to give them back to their country. I gave back, I can’t remember, 6, 7, 8, 9 medals

When asked if he gave back the Bronze Star, Silver Star and three Purple Hearts he was awarded for combat duty as a Navy lieutenant in Vietnam. “Well, and above that, [I] gave back the others,” he said.

[b]JOHN KERRY, 2004[/b]
In an interview with the Los Angeles Times last Friday, John Kerry said, “I never ever implied that I did it, ” responding to the question of whether he threw away his medals in protest.

“I’m proud of my medals. I always was proud of them,” he told Jennings in December, adding that he had only thrown away his “ribbons” and the medals of two other veterans who could not attend the protest.

Even funnier is that I went to JohnKerry.com this weekend and captured the screen from his blog that specificallly states he threw his “ribbons” (and they italicized it for emphasis), but they’ve since updated the page to make it look more in line with what he said in 1971…. someone’s busted….

here are the two captures side by side, notice the dates:


Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
April 25th, 2004 11:19 am

Women’s Rights Marchers Gather in D.C.

So reads the headline…. Yes, they’re at it again, marching for the rights of women to treat unborn children as useless body parts in the name of career-advancement.

Hillary Clinton said, “This administration is filled with people who disparage sexual harassment laws…

Yeah, why don’t more guys in the Bush administration grope, molest and fondle more subordinate interns?

“[this administration is filled with people] who claim the pay gap between women and men is phony…”

Continued the multimillion-dollar-book-deal-author. In fact, she’s so sure women work for less money in America, that it will lead to mass male layoffs, so “cheap labor conservative executives” can exploit the gap in favor of profits. Afterall, she also claims that “republican” executives outsource jobs to cheap labor to line their pocket books, so either the mass layoffs are coming, or she’s again taking both sides of the argument depending on who she’s pandering to….

…but then again, only a liberal can tie a pay gap argument into an argument advocating the killing of children.

Tens of thousands of women gathered for an abortion-rights rally Sunday as Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton told several hundred of them the issue is about women gaining full equality.

The people whose “full equality” conflicts with these women and their career goals are unavailable for comment…..

Now imagine a world where abortion was legal 56 years ago and Dorothy Rodham had “exercised her rights of full equality.”

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
April 20th, 2004 8:30 am

Kerry campaign hires new Communications Director

While affectionately referring to him as “Minister”, the Kerry campaign has introduced a familiar face to its campaign in the hope of bringing a fresh perspective to the campaign trail. Kerry said of the new director, “We brought him on board for his uncanny ability to convince the world of facts that do no exist, circumstances that are totally opposite of reality and his knack for understanding that his side can never lose, even if they do.”

You may recognize some of his more famous quotes:

“Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don’t even control themselves!”

“The Americans, they always depend on a method what I call … stupid, silly. All I ask is check yourself. Do not in fact repeat their lies.”

“They’re coming to surrender or be burned in their tanks.”

“There are no American infidels in Baghdad. Never!”

Without further ado, may we introduce the new Director of Communications for the Kerry Campaign:

“Minister of Information, Baghdad Bob”

“There are no Republican infidels in the White House, ” Bob said, “”the American press is all about lies! All they tell is lies, lies and more lies! We are in control. They are in a state of hysteria. Losers, they think that by winning elections and trying to do the will of the people they will win. I think they will not win, those bastards. God will roast their stomachs in hell.”

Hey, at least he’s going to elevate the dialogue of the Kerry campaign.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
April 18th, 2004 11:43 am

It’s all about the oil?

I’ve had a question on my mind for quite sometime now, and today’s actions in Israel drove the point home for me. I keep hearing liberals claim the Bush administration is motivated by oil. They say he and Cheney are so tied to “big oil” that they’re willing to take us to war over it. This idea is reinforced by the arab nations who dislike America.

Here’s the problem with that theory. If we were so motivated by oil, why do we continue our support of Israel? I mean, our support of Israel is the single biggest factor in the hatred of the U.S. in the middle east. (Just look at how quick the Palestinians claimed Bush was behind the authorization of today’s assassination of Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi, the Hamas Leader - source) So it would appear we could resolve our differences with the arab nations all over the middle east if we simply dropped our support and protection of Israel. Afterall, Israel is such an insignificant country in the middle east in terms of oil (they don’t even appear in the top 20 producers in the world and the U.S. produces more). Yet we continue our support of this country leading to a hatred of us and a continued battle with terrorists who claim our support of Israel is one of the primary reasons for attacking our interests.

So it just doesn’t make sense that this is all about oil, because if that were true - our easiest avenue would be to drop our support of Israel and become “friends” with the arab nations. Then we’d have all the oil we’d need and the “big oil” companies would blow out wall street profit expectations in record time….

Something just doesn’t add up.

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
April 16th, 2004 8:52 pm

In case you didn’t know…. Kerry served in Vietnam

On Feb. 27, 1992, Kerry defended then presidential candidate Bill Clinton against an attack by his Democratic rival Sen. Bob Kerrey who peppered Clinton with uncomfortable questions about whether the Arkansan had evaded the draft. Kerry hit back at his Senate colleague, saying: �I am saddened by the fact that Vietnam has yet again been inserted into the campaign….” Again, in October, 1992, Kerry said to George H.W. Bush, “You and I know that if service or non-service in the war is to become a test of qualification for high office, you would not have a vice president, nor would you have a secretary of defense, and our nation would never recover from the divisions created by that war.� source

Of course, this was before Kerry was the presumptive Democrat nominee. Now you can’t listen to even a 10 second soundbite without John Kerry reminding you of his service. The ironic thing is Democrats are hanging on to every referral to war medals and clinging to every pronouncement of Kerry’s qualifications for the Presidency, simply because he went to Vietnam and George W. Bush didn’t. It’s now become a litmus test for the Democrats, when 12 and 8 years ago military service didn’t matter, and in fact defense of a man who illegally avoided the draft and expressed in writing his “loathing for the military” was applauded.

But don’t take my word for it, listen to what Howard Dean said about it. �Before he became a political candidate for president, John Kerry clearly believed that military service should not be used for political gain,� said Jay Carson, a spokesman for Dean, the former governor of Vermont. �And he was right about that,� Carson added. �Unfortunately, now John Kerry and his campaign have a strategy to use that record to further his political career.� source

Now Kerry’s playing the role of the victim. The Democrats love the victim mentality. Kerry’s travelling the nation whining about how the Republicans are hurting his feelings. How they’re saying mean things about him. To make it worse, he’s set up the strawman argument saying Republicans are “questioning his patriotism” so he can make them look like evil nazis. source

There’s just one problem with that…. it’s not true.

Sure, Republicans have questioned Kerry’s voting record in Congress on issues dealing with military, defense and homeland security. Of course Republicans are assailing his constant ability to flip-flop for political expediency, always trying to adapt to the latest polling data. He claims that’s “questioning his patriotism” simply so he can go back to his standard mantra of reminding us all he served in Vietnam - a political tactic he deplored others for doing in the past.

No, John Kerry, we’re not attacking your patriotism, we’re questioning your record. We’re analyzing how your past inconsistent political actions can predict your future as President. And we don’t like what we see.

So instead of this continuous whine about people hurting your feelings by calling you a hypocrite for saying Vietnam shouldn’t be used for political gain, then turning around and making it your campaign centerpiece….. instead of pretending people are questioning your patriotism because they want to know why you vote so inconcistently on issues (when you bother to show up and vote, that is)….. instead of moaning about all the tough questions you’re facing….

just take your own words and see if they mean anything….

“They don’t think twice about trying to pretend to America that I somehow don’t care about the defense of our nation,” Kerry said, paraphrasing wording in the Star Spangled Banner…. [while] he recalled his service under the U.S. flag and seeing flag-draped coffins of friends returning from Vietnam. “When I look up, that flag is still there and it belongs to all Americans,” he said, pointing to a flag near the stage. “Not to them, not to a party. It belongs to us.” Kerry told the crowd of more than 5,000 that “asking questions about the direction of our country is patriotism.”

For once, you’re exactly right, Mr. Kerry…. and that’s just what Republicans are doing - they’re “asking questions about the direction of our country.” Pretty patriotic, don’t ya think?

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
April 15th, 2004 12:46 pm

The Heinz Campaign

John Kerry called on his political opponents to fully disclose their tax returns. Now his wife, Teresa Heinz-Kerry, is saying, �This is my life, my business, not John’s, I think it is very important to keep the privacy zone. There is a tradition of this� in response to calls for her full disclosure of tax returns.

You might say her information should be kept separate from his, but there�s a problem with that. In December, 2003, Kerry announced that he had given his campaign $850,000 from a $6.4 Million mortgage of a Boston home he jointly owns with his wife.

This loan carries an annual interest payment of $200,000, records show, more than Kerry’s $158,000 Senate salary. Not to mention, according to Kerry’s own 1994 senate personal financial disclosure (signed May, 15, 1995), Kerry’s own personal net worth was somewhere between a negative $130,000 to positive $34,995. Did Senator Kerry�s Senate salary pay for a house that has no mortgage, but is valuable enough to elicit a $6 million + loan? But maybe the house was hers before they got married, and Teresa made John sign a prenuptial, so if they divorced, the house would presumably go to her. To say nothing of the notion that if the bank saw trouble in the repayment of the loan, where would they look?

So this property must be receiving money from someone other than John Kerry, and since it was the source of the mortgage that made the large �donation� to Kerry�s Presidential campaign, it must be part of his �full disclosure.�

Under the campaign finance rules, Kerry can spend his own money from the fortune he shares with his wife, heiress Teresa Heinz Kerry, who inherited around $500 million from her first husband, the late Sen. John Heinz, the heir to the Heinz ketchup fortune. But if he is, then her tax returns ought to be fair game under “full disclosure”. If the Heinz fortune is being used to pay for Kerry�s campaign, the American people have a right to know� If her tax returns are not covered under full disclosure, then we have to assume John Kerry is not using comingled assets for his campaign, and as such, any money donated to his campaign from the mortgage of the Beacon Hill estate must’ve come from Teresa’s separate funds, thus violating her $2,000 campaign donation limit.

To summarize:
1. If John Kerry is using resources from the fortune he shares with his wife, Teresa Heinz-Kerry, then her tax returns ought to be covered under the “full disclosure” he’s requested of others…

2. If John Kerry is NOT using resources from the fortune he shares, then donations like the one made from the mortgage of the Beacon Hill estate must be considered independent donations of Teresa Heinz-Kerry, in violation of the $2,000 individual donation limit.

So which is it?

In his 1990 Senate race, Kerry said:

�I think people want to know whether someone they possibly might send to Washington to represent them in the Senate is someone who pays their fair share of taxes, why is James Rappaport hiding his tax returns? Why is it some people can live up to that standard and he can’t? It seems to me that he ought to be able to release those returns and clear the air… Why doesn’t he just release them? What is he hiding?�

So Mr. and Mrs. Kerry, what are YOU hiding?

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
April 14th, 2004 10:13 am

New Liberal Policies Take Effect

In light of the Left’s stance that the Bush administration failed to act on a gathering threat in Afghanistan and allowed 9/11 to happen, yet acted too soon on a gathering threat in Iraq to prevent another 9/11 from happening….

….Democrats have begun implementing their policies on a local level in hopes the groundswell of their policies reaches Washington.

If you have any questions or comments about their policies, please visit their office to voice your concerns…

Well, maybe they’re finally showing some honesty….

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
April 13th, 2004 10:01 am

Who is for America? Who is against Americans?

It’s a sad day on the Left….

Senator Ted Kennedy spoke at the Brookings Institution Monday, April 5, 2004:

Tragically, in making the decision to go to war, the Bush Administration allowed its own stubborn ideology to trump the cold hard evidence that Iraq posed no immediate threat. They misled Congress and the American people because the Administration knew that it could not obtain the consent of Congress for the war if all the facts were known.

By going to war in Iraq on false pretenses and neglecting the real war on terrorism…


Interesting, Senator Kennedy, since on September 27, 2002 “warned that a war with Iraq could trigger Baghdad’s use of weapons of mass destruction, and possibly start a wider, destabilizing conflict in the Middle East. ” source

Oh, but are you claiming Bush’s lies prompted you to think Iraq had WMDs? Then how do you explain saying, “There is clearly a threat from Iraq, and there is clearly a danger, but the Administration has not made a convincing case that we face such an imminent threat to our national security that a unilateral, pre-emptive American strike and an immediate war are necessary, ” on the same day? source

And your followup was classic, “No one disputes that America has lasting and important interests in the Persian Gulf, or that Iraq poses a significant challenge to U.S. interests. There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.”

And your own website has your statement that contains, “Let me say it plainly: I not only concede, but I am convinced that President Bush believes genuinely in the course he urges upon us.” source

All this, and you still say Bush lied to get us into a war that was concocted years before. Color me confused.

Maybe your position can be better explained by other Democrats. Let’s look at the St. Petersburg, Florida Democrat Club (a group chartered by the Florida Democrat Party) advocating the murder of Donald Rumsfeld…
click here to see their charter from the Florida Democrat Party)

“And then there’s Rumsfeld who said of Iraq, “We have our good days and our bad days.” We should put this S.O.B. up againist a wall and say “This is one of our bad days” and pull the trigger.

Well, that doesn’t seem to help you. Maybe we can just simply ask the ‘man on the street’….

Anti-war protest April 10th, in U.N. Plaza and along Market Street in San Francisco

How about the Berkeley student at the same rally, who said:

“In light of that, you know, the occupation is a source of tremendous violence against Iraqis. I think we’ve got to support the resistance; we’ve got to say that we support attacks against the occupying forces. So I mean — and you can imagine what kind of an inspiring thing that is for people in Palestine, for people in Bolivia, for people in Argentina, Colombia, all over the world, facing down the barrel of a US-supplied gun. Seeing the people of Iraq fight back, that’s what we need.”


or the Berkeley Lecturer, Hatem Bazian, who said:

“Are you angry? [Yeah!] Are you angry? [Yeah!] Are you angry? [Yeah!] Well, we’ve been watching intifada in Palestine, we’ve been watching an uprising in Iraq, and the question is that what are we doing? How come we don’t have an intifada in this country? Because it seem[s] to me, that we are comfortable in where we are, watching CNN, ABC, NBC, Fox, and all these mainstream… giving us a window to the world while the world is being managed from Washington, from New York, from every other place in here in San Francisco: Chevron, Bechtel, [Carlyle?] Group, Halliburton; every one of those lying, cheating, stealing, deceiving individuals are in our country and we’re sitting here and watching the world pass by, people being bombed, and it’s about time that we have an intifada in this country that change[s] fundamentally the political dynamics in here. And we know every– They’re gonna say some Palestinian being too radical — well, you haven’t seen radicalism yet!”


So let’s review:

1. Ted Kennedy accuses Bush of lying and misleading everyone, yet he previously said that “we all knew of the threat” he’s claiming Bush manufactured,

2. The St. Petersburg, Florida Democrat Group, chartered by the Florida Democrat Party has placed a newspaper advertisement soliciting donations to the Kerry campaign and calling Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld an S.O.B. that ought to be “put up against the wall… and pull the trigger”,

3. Anti-war protestors accuse Bush of lying and happily show their support for enemy insurgents and terrorists to kill our soldiers and win the war against the coalition (including U.S. military).

4. A Berkeley Lecturer advocating an intifada in the U.S. (translation “suicide bombers”)

It’s shameful. Imagine what these people will do when “we the people” re-elect George W. Bush. Hold on tight, folks, the “peaceful” Left is starting to show its true colors…..

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments
April 12th, 2004 2:03 pm

John Kerry Misery Index

From the world of �Here we go again�, John Kerry�s campaign is pulling stuff out of its butt to make a case to Americans that the sky is falling on the Bush administration, and therefore needs him to save us. There�s just one problem. It lacks intellectual honesty.

From JohnKerry.com
Record Deterioration in the Middle-Class Misery Index
Among the Largest Increases in Health, Tuition, and Gasoline Prices in Decades

April 12, 2004

For Immediate Release
This report describes and analyzes a new measure of the pressures faced by American families � the Middle-class Misery Index. The Middle-class Misery Index combines seven different indicators: median family income, college tuition, health costs, gasoline cost, bankruptcies, the homeownership rate, and private-sector job growth. The data used to compute the Middle-class Misery Index are available from 1976 through 2003.

You see, Kerry is running around college campuses this week touting the �Misery Index� as proof of a bad economy. The �Misery Index�, as the name suggests, is designed to measure the amount of misery felt by ordinary people in the economy. Since fear of unemployment and loss of purchasing power through inflation have pervasive effects in the lives of ordinary Americans, the misery index is simply the unemployment rate added to the inflation rate. Unemployment is based on the (recently neglected) household survey of employment, compiled by the Labor Department. And the inflation rate is based on the annual change in the Consumer Price Index.

The misery index is defined as �An index combining the unemployment rate and inflation rate. The index is used to measure the political significance of the condition of the economy, as well as consumer confidence by InvestorWords.com. source

But John Kerry�s campaign has replaced the two factors (unemployment and inflation rate) with seven of its own factors.

Perhaps this is why they�re changing the definition of the index:

The ranking for the average misery index for given periods in descending order are as follows:
- George Herbert Walker’s average misery index is a massively large 10.7 percent.
- The Post WWII period’s average is a rather large 9.5 percent.
- The average for Clinton’s first term weighs in at a moderate 8.8 percent.
- George W.’s current misery index is 7.6 percent.

Further proof that Kerry�s campaign is out of touch with reality. They have to go so far as manufacture their own �misery index� to support their claim our economy is in shambles. It�s pathetic.

An ironic side note, one of the �new� factors Kerry has added is the price of gasoline. What the Kerry campaign fails to note in its findings is that John Kerry voted for a 50 cent tax increase on gasoline.

Wait a second! Maybe that�s it….

In a twist of ironic fate, the newly released �Kerry Misery Index� really is just that�. an indication of the misery we�ll feel if Kerry became President.

Now it all makes sense!

Posted by TexasRainmaker | (0) Comments

Texas Rainmaker is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
Graphics by: Margolis Media Works | Style by: Lisa Sabin - E.Webscapes

Copyright © 2003-2006

Users Online



    • HuckPac.com

    • sidediv

    • sidediv


    Fatal error: Call to undefined function wswwpx_fold_category_list() in /home/texasrai/public_html/wp-content/themes/rainmaker/sidebar.php on line 62