From Jim Gilliam's blog archives
Who loves ya, baby?
October 20, 2004 3:18 PM
For all of the right-wingers who like to point out that Hezbollah likes Michael Moore's movie, this AP headline is for you: "Bush wins election endorsement -- from Iran."
Who loves ya, baby?
Next Entry: Coming up short for the "all volunteer" Army (10.21.2004)
Previous Entry: Bill O'Reilly's "No Skin Zone" (10.20.2004)
Read the 12 comments.
Yeah, because like, um, they know Bush will be tougher on them and, uh, that's what they want because they like don't want to be in the Axis of Evil anymore and, um, are motivated by like Bush's powerful faith or whatever. You know, 'cause they feel like they can trust him or something.
Wed Oct 20 2004 4:37 PM
Iran is part of the liberal media bias!!
Wed Oct 20 2004 4:45 PM
Down with the liberal media!
Wed Oct 20 2004 5:43 PM
Wonder why the Toronto Red Star didn't print the "rest of the story".
"Kavoos Emami, another Iranian political analyst, praised Kerry for mentioning the need for dialogue with Iran, and said the Democrat would be better for Iran.
"Bush has insulted Iran more than any other U.S. administration. If Kerry is elected, a U.S. military attack against Iran will never happen or will be a very remote possibility," he said."
Thu Oct 21 2004 5:48 AM
Probably because what the head of the Iranian security council says is newsworthy, versus what the Iranian version of dhermesc's armchair political analysis might be.
Thu Oct 21 2004 8:12 AM
Looks more like a cut paste from an AP story. Left wing press corps still hard at work.
Thu Oct 21 2004 8:21 AM
Yasser Arafat Endorses Kerry
Arafat deputy and chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat: "The president [Arafat] is frustrated with Bush's policies," he said. "The president [Arafat] thinks Kerry will be much better for the Palestinian cause and for the establishment of a Palestinian state."
Terrorist agree, Kerry is good for business.
Thu Oct 21 2004 8:24 AM
I interpreted Jim's larger point to be that perhaps considering the endorsements of international extremists is silly.
Thu Oct 21 2004 8:29 AM
But bragging about your conversations with (unnamed) "world leaders" in a lame attempt to bolster your failing campaign - that's OK....
Thu Oct 21 2004 9:23 AM
I'm confused. How is being neck and neck in the polls an indication of a failing campaign? Wouldn't that mean Bush's campaign is failing?
Further more the Bush right wingers say that the opinions of the world should not matter one bit to us. That's why they went on and on with that Global Test business. So, why oh why should we give a crap about what Iran, Putin, Arafat or anybody else has to say. That's like saying "We don't are what the rest of the world has to say, unless they agree with us." Either you want input or you don't.
Thu Oct 21 2004 11:44 AM
Right Wing Robby:
The polls arent neck and neck. Bush is leading in the far majority of them.
Thu Oct 21 2004 12:13 PM
Not really. Margin of error, baby.
Plus, until one candidate averages more than 50%, I don't think it's a cake walk for anyone.
It still does not appear that one campaign is failing more than the other.
In the end the polls are getting less accurate, because there are a lot more folks like me who aren't being represented, those of us who are cell phone only.
Fri Oct 22 2004 7:50 AM