Political Satire/Commentary -- Daily Updates at PoliSat.Com TM © since 1999

·support our troops, support Bush, support Cheney, support victory in Iraq, support victory in Afghanistan, Clinton Liebrary, http://PoliSat.Com , PoliSatDOTcom, Salute America's Heroes, Fallen Heroes Fund, oppose Gore's Global Warming theory, support milblogs, Michael Yon, Pat Dollard, BlackFive, MilBlogs, MilBlogging, Michael Yon, Mudville Gazette, HotAir.Com, JawaReport, PajamasMedia , VictoryCaucus , VetsForFreedom , FreedomsWatch , DayByDayCartoon , WrennCom.Com , Video , Political Satire, Politics, News, oppose MoveOn.Org, oppose Code Pink, oppose DailyKos, oppose ANSWER, support PoliSat.Com, support WrennCom.Com, ·

First Things First: Salute America's Heroes · Fallen Heroes Fund · Frequent-Flyer-Miles for Troops · Thanks to Troops · Military News ·· MilBlogs ·

Home · Posts: Current /Recent · Videos/Toons/Songs: Latest · Embed-Codes · Text Index · Images Index · Archives: Old · New · About · Contact · Syndication · Affiliates ·

News Sources/Papers/Magazines Pundits Blogs ThinkTanks What is "property"? Pantheopians Global Climate Asteroids/Comets Hitting Earth--Risks/Predictions Science GlobalWeb

Political Satire /Commentary* Daily Updates .™©·2003 ..··
*Where the satire is always commentary but the commentary isn't always satire.
Special Commentary: To Citizen Soldiers a Song to Explain How Proudly We Thank You for Deeds in Our Name.

Archives of Daily Updates for March 1 through 10, 2004, time period (appearing in reverse chronological order)

··

Mar. 10, 2004 : Poli Sat.Com's Political Satire/ Commentary* Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
*Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du0403-01--10.htm#20040310-01.)

(Google News index of recent Political Satire/Commentaries by PoliSat.Com: Click this link.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert.)·

Campaign Finance Reform is wrong vehicle for countering political ads by MoveOn.Org and similar organizations.·

A controversy is arising about whether MoveOn.Org and similar organizations with whose political philosophy I strenuously disagree are violating the Campaign Finance "Reforms," which I find more objectionable than tolerating the objectionable propaganda by those organizations. Although one cannot out-stink a skunk, one can at least draw attention to the source of the odor and apply the counter-scent of a deodorizer. That's why sensible drivers almost risk life and limb to avoid running over a skunk because doing so makes the odor even worse. The solution to the odor of the political agenda of MoveOn.Org and like-thinking organizations and activists is not to engage in the futile, and counterproductive, effort to "run-over" it with the infamous McCain/Feingold Sedan; rather, the solution is to apply the counter-scent of a deodorizer. What's the deodorizer? Superior marketing of superior ideas and superior marketing of explanations of why their ideas are so bad.

That many otherwise sensible people supported (and still support) McCain/Feingold is ample testimony to the capacity of smart people to advocate stupid ideas. (I realize people can be stupid but not ideas, but please forgive the lapse.) Paradoxically, the wrong-headedness of McCain/Feingold is not always self-evident to even those who risked life and limb to protect freedom including the freedom of speech despite the fact that the fundamental concept of McCain/Feingold is at war with freedom of speech.

Even genuine war heroes, such as John Kerry and John McCain (to pick but two of many politically prominent examples), who have the right instinct and sufficient courage to confront the dangers and challenges of combat, sometimes exhibit a lack of comparable qualifications for political leadership. Their well-intentioned but wrong-headed support for the McCain/Feingold Campaign Finance "Reform" is a manifestation of the fact that genuine war heroes, just like ordinary mortals, sometimes propose, support or advocate terrible ideas. Bush's having signed, rather than vetoing, McCain/Feingold is likewise a manifestation of the fact that leaders with strategically brilliant vision on some issues (such as combating terror) can be equally wrong-headed on other issues.

I yield to no one in distaste for most of, if not almost all of, the political agendas promoted by MoveOn.Org and like-minded organizations, groups and individuals, but I also yield to no one in stubbornly retaining the opinion that McCain/Feingold is patently unconstitutional-- notwithstanding the recent but thankfully less-than-definitive pronouncement on the subject by the U.S. Supreme Court ostensibly (and wrongly) bestowing the mantle of "constitutionality" on it. If I were to have sufficient funds to express my views in flagrant violation of McCain/Feingold, I would surely do so in the hope that at some point the Supreme Court will, in a properly framed case, come to grips with the reality that McCain/Feingold is nothing more than an attempt to ration political speech in flagrant violation of our First Amendment rights of Free Speech. What part of "the government shall make no law" do they not understand in the context of political speech, the lifeblood of a democratic republic?.

Braking for Skunks·

Though skunks on the roads in the land
spread odors too pungent to "stand,"
a driver who's wise
risks danger to drive
around such a skunk if he can.

And likewise, when odors command
political roads in the land,
the tactic most dumb
is "aim for the skunk"
in Campaign-Reformer Sedans.

To Dubya from PoliSat-Com:
Do NOT drive McCain/Feingold's "car"
at skunks in your way!
Throw bait to convey
the scent that they favor, by far.

To counter the scent of MoveOn
and odors by which they're adorned,
my bait is French cheese
so folks can perceive
the scent most preferred by MoveOn.

Those who would attempt to combat the agenda-promotion methodology of MoveOn.Org by seeking its classification as "illegal" or as a "violation" of McCain/Feingold would merely yield the free-speech high-ground to the skunk. Instead, such opponents should counter such propaganda by better speech funded by equally committed individuals regardless of how little, or how much, they contribute and regardless of how poor or rich they may be. I certainly strenuously disagree with the political agenda George Soros is funding with his great wealth, but I think that to attempt to characterize his doing so (or comparable activity some other equally wealthy person to support and promote an opposing political agenda) as "illegal" is simply unconstitutional.

In the land of the free and the home of the brave, a citizen ought not need to consult a lawyer to know whether expending his resources to support political speech with which he agrees (or oppose speech with which he disagrees) would be "legal" or a "violation" of limits on free speech enacted by the Federal Government in violation of the First Amendment. James Madison would roll-over in his grave at the thought of it being necessary in modern America for citizens to seek permission of lawyers to engage in political speech.

I hope opponents of the political agendas being promoted by Soros, MoveOn, etc. will take the higher free-speech ground by combating bad ideas with better ideas. I just hope there are opponents of Soros' political agendas with sufficient funds and guts to outspend him between now and November, 2004.

...

··

Mar. 9, 2004 : Poli Sat.Com's Political Satire/ Commentary* Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
*Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du0403-01--10.htm#20040309-01.)

(Google News index of recent Political Satire/Commentaries by PoliSat.Com: Click this link.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert.)·

·
John Kerry says many world leaders told him they want him to defeat Bush in Election 2004.

John Kerry says many world leaders have told him (on condition that he keep their names anonymous) they want him to defeat George Bush in the 2004 Election. Kerry thereby implies that in at least one context he understands secrecy to be a suitably vital element of communications with agents of foreign governments. Thus, Kerry impliedly asserts the equivalent of an "executive privilege" for communications between a presidential candidate and a foreign government's agent or official. The implications of such potential executive privilege warrant further analysis.

If one were to assume there to be at least a flimsy basis for claiming such privilege, its scope certainly could not be deemed greater than that of the long-recognized privilege pertaining to communications between a foreign government's agent and a sitting President (or his agents). Not only could the scope of the former not be deemed greater than that of the latter, it could not reasonably be deemed to be anything other than dramatically less than that of the latter. Furthermore, exceptions to the former would necessarily be broader and more numerous than to the latter.

The Constitution vests authority to conduct foreign policy in the President and not in the Senate or any individual Senator or even a Senator running for President or even a former-war-hero Senator running for President. Therefore, the Constitution imposes upon a Senator the moral obligation, if not a legal one, to convey to the President the gist of any communication between the Senator and any foreign power's agent or official (including the identity of same) pertaining to a foreign-policy issue.

Thus, with respect to communications Kerry received from any foreign government's agent or official asserting, or intimating, an intention to be less cooperative with the U.S. on a foreign policy issue while Bush remains President than would be the case if Kerry were to succeed him, Kerry had a moral obligation, if not a legal one, to convey the gist of such communication (and identification of the source) to Bush in confidence to enable him to give it due consideration in shaping our foreign policy in the interim. Instead, Kerry announced such information publicly while citing duties of confidentiality to such foreign agents in declining to identify them.

Kerry's self-serving description of such communications and attribution of them to foreign leaders desiring to remain anonymous not only adversely reflect on his judgment on foreign-policy issues but also conceal from Bush information alleged by Kerry which, if true, manifestly would be, or at the very least could be, be material to decisions by Bush in shaping foreign policy in the interim. One may argue, of course, that Bush ought to know which foreign leaders are the ones Kerry is purporting to quote anonymously-- i.e., Jacques Chirac, Gerhardt Schroeder and Tony Blair's wife, but Kerry's insistence on concealing the identities of such leaders disingenuously implies the contrary.

Given Kerry's assertions about such communications, one could reasonably wonder whether they may be the fruits of assurances, representations or statements of intent on the part of Kerry reasonably calculated to induce foreign governments to expect his foreign policy would be more beneficial to them and to therefore give them incentives to maintain the status quo of their current positions vis-à-vis Bush's foreign policy pending the outcome of the 2004 Election. Therefore, if today's Democratic Senators and/or Representatives were to apply to Kerry the same standards as those invoked by Democrat Rep. Henry Gonzales¹ (and supported by the Democratic House Leadership) in the 1980's to investigate preposterous allegations that during the 1980 election, Ronald Reagan and George Herbert W. Bush had treasonously engaged in secret communications with Iranian leaders calculated to encourage them to delay releasing the Americans held hostage in the U.S. Embassy in Tehran until after the 1980 Election, then today's Democratic Senators and/or Representatives would demand an investigation into whether Kerry's own public statements warrant investigation into whether he has engaged in communications with foreign leaders calculated to encourage them to avoid, limit or delay cooperation with, or assistance to, the U.S. on foreign-policy issues until after the 2004 election.

Opponents of Bush and supporters of Kerry cannot reasonably condemn the tortured reasoning of this argument without also condemning the far more tortuous reasoning invoked by the Democratic Leadership in the 1980's as explained in footnote 1. One can expect to quickly hear their condemnation of the former but cannot safely hold one's breath to hear their condemnation of the latter. However, even if they were to concede the tortured reasoning of both arguments, that would not end rational analysis of whether Kerry had an obligation to confidentially disclose to Bush the entirety of such "confidential" communications with foreign-government leaders as well as their identities rather than to describe such communications publicly while invoking a duty of confidentiality in declining to identify the leaders.

Kerry is demanding that President Bush completely and unconditionally waive the long-recognized, well-establish Presidential executive privilege with respect to whatever may be the nature and quantity of questions that any 9- Commission members may desire to propound to him in a closed session (ostensibly on the theory that the closed-session nature of such questioning would adequately assure preservation of the confidential nature of such communications). Therefore, Kerry should waive his novel, theoretical, heretofore unrecognized theory for a potential executive privilege by voluntarily submitting to questions by Bush in confidence seeking to elicit all information pertaining to the confidential communications Kerry claims to have received from foreign governments' officials to enable Bush to know which foreign leaders intend to withhold, or delay, cooperation with, and/or assistance to, the United States in Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere pending the outcome of the 2004 election.

Does the President have a lesser need to know intentions of foreign leaders communicated to presidential candidates on issues involving foreign policy than the 9-11 Commission's purported need to know the content of confidential information provided to the President from foreign sources expecting confidentiality? Is Kerry's decision to decline to identify his sources even to the President in confidence not predicated upon Kerry's belief that if such foreign leaders were not to have been able to assume he would not disclose their identities to Bush even in confidence, they would have been unwilling to furnish such information to him? Thus, is not the premise upon which Kerry asserts the non-existent potential executive privilege for presidential candidates the same as the one upon which rests the long-recognized executive privilege for incumbent (and former) Presidents with respect to communications to the President from agents or leaders of foreign countries and/or intelligence sources unwilling to furnish such information absent assurances of strict confidentiality?

Jacque's Apprentice.

I'm Jacques, the PM of the Frenchies,
whose proud I've covertly invented
a back-channel link
to teach what I think
to Yanks who would be my apprentice.

The Yank I most easily find
as having the most open mind
adores vacillation
to make cogitation
as slow as the ketchup from Heinz.

Notwithstanding this convoluted analysis, do we not know as a virtual certainty, that the foreign leaders from whom Kerry received such communications were Jacques Chirac, Gerhardt Schroeder and Tony Blair's wife? If that were to be incorrect, who would be left? The leaders of China, Russia, Syria, and North Korea? Former Haitian President Aristide? Fidel Castro?

The final and most important question is: What should Bush do in response to these statements by Kerry? Obviously, he should prepare a brand new commercial boasting that leaders of foreign countries opposing our policies in the war on terror favor election of Kerry. Perhaps the commercial should inspire a contest for voters to guess the true identify of such foreign leaders among the following: Jacques Chirac of France, Gerhardt Schroeder of Germany, Kim Jung Il of North Korea, Bashar Assad of Syria, or Ayatollah Ali Khamenei of Iran.

Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com

¹·The Democrats' theory, proposed by Gonzales as grounds for articles of impeachment, rested upon allegations by former Iranian officials that they had secretly engaged in such communications with George Herbert W. Bush in France in the Fall of 1980, despite the fact that Bush's undisputed calendar for the entire time period made it self-evident that Bush could not have attended any such meeting in France except by secretly traveling there and back on the Blackbird, our ultra-sonic spy plane then in service.

...
For the Daily Update immediately preceding the one above, click here.

··

Mar. 8, 2004 : Poli Sat.Com's Political Satire/ Commentary* Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
*Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du0403-01--10.htm#20040308-01.)

(Google News index of recent Political Satire/Commentaries by PoliSat.Com: Click this link.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert.)·

·
No update for March 8, 2004 -- Jim Wrenn suffering severe case of flu.

...

··

Mar. 7, 2004 : Poli Sat.Com's Political Satire/ Commentary* Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
*Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du0403-01--10.htm#20040307-01.)

(Google News index of recent Political Satire/Commentaries by PoliSat.Com: Click this link.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert.)·

No update for Sunday, March 7, 2004.·

...

··

Mar. 6, 2004 : Poli Sat.Com's Political Satire/ Commentary* Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
*Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du0403-01--10.htm#20040306-01.)

(Google News index of recent Political Satire/Commentaries by PoliSat.Com: Click this link.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert.)·

Martha Stewart convictions spawn additional offenses in the form of virtually criminal punmanship inspiring worldwide Martha Stewart Pun Contest at www.PoliSat.Com/mspc.htm.

Focusing on the convictions of Martha Stewart today on four counts of lying to investigators about, conspiring to obstruct, and obstructing an investigation into whether she had engaged in insider trading is to focus on the hole in the doughnut rather than the dough-nut in the hole. Some expect her conviction and sentence to have a catastrophic effect on her company, but not only will they not destroy her company, they will also spawn entire new businesses.

Examples abound: Books will be written containing nothing other than the countless number of bad puns inspired by Martha's trouble with the law. An entire "free-Martha" industry will sprout. It will become chic to patronize her company's products as a way to "support" Martha. New industries will arise to market parody products. There will be a "biographical" TV mini-series, if not a silver-screen movie, about Martha. There will be at least one movie and/or television "sitcom" as a lampoon of Martha Stewart. There will be a Martha Stewart board game. Parody clothing will prosper as well. Martha Stewart dolls will become as ubiquitous as Barbie Dolls.

That Martha Stewart built such an empire is conclusive proof of her brilliance and business intuition. That she risked it all to avoid tens of thousands of dollars of paper losses does not run counter to such proof; rather, it's compelling evidence that she operated upon a belief-- not unique to her among those sharing her station in life (including many celebrities and high-performance athletes) -- that the rules that apply to everyone else just didn't (and that they shouldn't and wouldn't) apply to her. That she succumbed to such arrogance bred by power isn't shocking. What ought to be shocking, however, is the number of business commentators willing to carry water for such arrogance by suggesting that her vast wealth somehow rendered it trivial for the government to have seriously investigated, and considered prosecuting her for, trading on an inside tip to avoid a "mere" $40,000 of losses that she, rather than purchasers of stock she sold on the basis of such tip, would have sustained if she were to have honorably chosen not to "sell" until information prompting the tip were to have become public.

Dough-Nut in the Hole for Holes in the Doughnuts.·

Thus, her having become a "nut" for "dough" has put her "in the hole" by a vastly larger amount as a result of her effort to avoid enlarging the holes in her doughnuts. Of all white-collar criminals in my memory, none has even come close to Martha Stewart in inspiring (no, creating irresistible compulsions to engage in) virtually criminal punmanship about her predicament. I plead guilty.¹ If this limerick doesn't win the prize as the best series of puns about the "Domestic Diva," then I would say, to quote Martha, "There's no justice."

Conviction of Martha will spawn
more puns yielding chuckles and yawns,
so batten the hatch
or else you will catch
more puns until mad you have gone.

However, before you invest
in ear-plugs, I hope you'll attest:
Of all of the puns
about Martha done,
the following one is the best:

The "dough nut" is now in the hole
for lies to the Feds that she told
of pastry she sold
as jelly-filled rolls
she knew to be doughnuts with holes.

Now, if you agree that this lim'rick
in punning has broken the limits
on rhyming while punning
in language that's cunning,
then paste it in mail and then send it.

To whom should you send it? Your friends,
but that's not where mailing should end.
Tell Google and then
tell Yahoo and then
tell Russert and Drudge and Fox-Friends.

To whom should you send it? Your friends. Post it on your favorite blogs, bulletin boards, chat-rooms, forums (fora?). Recommend that search engines, news sites, news channels, etc. begin collecting puns about Martha Stewart, create contest rules, award prizes and declare winners. Here are email addresses for some of the top news/search sites: [Google] [Yahoo] [Drudge] [FoxNewsChannel] [FoxNewsOnLine] [Fox&Friends] [Tim Russert at Meet the Press] [ChatterboxAtSlate.Com]. If you want to send it to your own favorite news site, be sure to put this in the subject line: "MarthaStewartPunContest----See-www.PoliSat.Com/mspc.htm" (without the quotation marks). And don't forget to also send them your own puns! Help make PoliSat.Com be the one that started it all.

¹·Unlike Martha, I confess my crimes-- Here are my previous offenses:

June 3, 2003: PoliSat.Com's Political Satire/Commentary
Daily Update #20030603-01··™©·2003··
From Martha, the cookbook hereafter: "My Own Recipes for Disaster.".

To rumors a charge on a ruse
will end Martha's time on the loose,
her lawyers opine
her victimless crime
was merely to cook her own goose.

Inspired by reports from "reliable" sources that prosecutors offered Martha Stewart an opportunity to "turn herself in" rather than doing a "perp walk."

Oct. 22, 2002 PoliSat.Com's Political-Satire/Commentary
Daily Update #20021022-01.™©.2002.
A buy, sell or barter on books about Martha
or
From Martha, Some Tips You Can Use
On How You Can Cook Your Own Goose..·

According to publishers' news,
the galleys have now been approved
for Insider's Views
on Recipes Used
by Martha to Cook Her Own Goose.·

Aug. 27, 2002 PoliSat.Com's Political-Satire/Commentary
Daily Update #20020827-01.™©.2002.
And now Martha Stewart Divesting's the way
for listners to earn something new ev'ry day..

The lesson today is from Martha to you:
Be sure to divest when the sky isn't blue--
For some-tips old, some-tips new,
some-tips borrowed, some-tips blue,
just tune-in to Martha to learn what to do.

An August 27, 2002, Yahoo/Reuters report on a "Free Martha" campaign being waged by Martha Stewart "Fashionistas" inspired me to reprise my June 14, 2002, Daily Update about Martha Stewart.

June 26, 2002 PoliSat.Com's Political-Satire/Commentary Daily Update #20020626-01.™©.2002.
Is Martha investing in prison-house nesting?.

It's doubtful that agents will soon be arresting
that woman who owns Martha Stewart Divesting
'cause wardens are waiting
for programs updating
instructions from Martha for prison-house nesting.

While feminists leaders accuse her of turning
the clock-back so Ozzie's for Harriet yearning,
a market correction
is seeking protection
for corp'rate brassieres her divestments are burning.

And meanwhile traditional husbands express
disdain for the role she exemplifies best:
The gals who comprise
careerists as wives,
who care more for nesting than those in the nest.

January 16, 2002--PoliSat.Com's Political Satire
Daily Update #20020116-01 ™© 2002
Though K-Mart may lose Martha Stewart, for others the skies will get bluer.

In bankruptcy, K-Mart is skewered
and might even lose Martha Stewart.
Though skies becomes dark
when sales become sparse,
fear-not 'cause the skies will get bluer.

Though K-Mart, of course, is a loser
as dollars from sales become fewer,
it serves to suppress
Bazaar P-M-S:
Beguilement to Play Martha Stewart.

Inspired by a January 16, 2002, Yahoo/Reuters report that K-Mart's filing of Chapter-11 bankruptcy proceedings might lead Martha Stewart to sever her marketing relationship with K-Mart. However, like most husbands whose wives shop at K-Mart, I fear such news is too good to be true.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.

...

··

Mar. 5, 2004 : Poli Sat.Com's Political Satire/ Commentary* Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
*Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du0403-01--10.htm#20040305-01.)

(Google News index of recent Political Satire/Commentaries by PoliSat.Com: Click this link.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert.)·

Joe Lieberman urges John Kerry and George Bush to wage high-minded campaign for Election 2004.·

Joe Lieberman's speech in the Senate yesterday proved again why even though he's teasable and satirizeable, he's not mockable. He made an impassioned plea for a return to what was prevalent in our foreign policy until midway through the Vietnam War-- bipartisanship. There have been fleeting moments of bipartisanship during the intervening years, but such moments have proven to be the exception rather than the rule. Lieberman tries to practice it far more than most, and John Kerry seems to practice it next to the least. (I would rank Ted Kennedy as practicing it least.) Joe even tried to to be "bipartisan" in making his appeal for bipartisanship on foreign policy-- i.e., he purported to be directing his appeal to Bush as well as Kerry, but the logic of his argument falls most heavily on Kerry rather than Bush.

Kerry, Dean, et al, have tried to imply that Bush attacked them merely for expressing criticism of his foreign policy decisions. The record fails to support such contention. Rather, it was not "criticism" that spawned (and justified) counterattacks by Bush and his supporters, it was instead such blatantly partisan rhetoric accusing Bush not simply of failing to follow the best strategy but of actually trifling with the lives of American military personnel for such base motives as personal political gain and/or personal financial gain for his supporters and/or to promote the interests of his "buddies" in the "oil industry."

Kerry, like so many of the Hollywood left, seem baffled that when they accuse their opponents of callous indifference to the lives of military personnel for such base motives, people so accused construe such accusations as the equivalent of attacking their patriotism. Yet, when people express outrage at such comments, Kerry and the Hollywood left treat such expressions of outrage as attacks on their "patriotism." Kerry takes it even further by characterizing legitimate criticism of his voting record¹ as attacks on his "patriotism." Opponents of Kerry (and supporters of Bush) have characterized Kerry's voting record as evidence that he would favor a less-assertive foreign/military policy coupled with greater deference to international organizations such as the United Nations.

Unlike Kerry, Lieberman remained steadfast to the principled reasons for which he supported Operation Iraqi Freedom. One of the most cogent observations Lieberman made during his short-lived campaign for the nomination was that those describing Operation Iraqi Freedom as an "immoral" war would not know a just war if they saw one.

Un-Mockable Joe.·

Though Lieberman's easy to tease
and satirize gently with ease,
his word not un-lockable
makes Joe most un-mockable
among those with left-center creeds.

For Joe, the acid test will come when, during the course of the campaign, it becomes clear that Kerry, rather than Bush, is the one flouting the principles Joe articulated in his speech and unsuccessfully advanced in his unsuccessful campaign to bring the Democrats back to a form of Scoop Jackson/Sam Nunn bipartisanship on foreign policy. Lieberman has earned the respect of his thoughtful opponents while earning the contempt of the fundamentalist wing of the Democratic Party.

I watched with great admiration a number of times when Lieberman expressed what he considered a principled position before an audience overtly hostile to his position. I hope, but wonder whether, he will be able to maintain sufficient objectivity to do the same during this campaign.

Un-Mockable Joe.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.

¹·Even though Kerry might disagree with opponents' views of the effects or wisdom (or lack thereof) in such votes, it seems reasonably beyond dispute his record includes the following types of votes as typical manifestations of, rather than aberrant deviations from, his foreign-policy/military/intelligence philosophy: (a) in favor of constricting our intelligence service, (b) in favor of reducing the military (even more than even the "hawks" foolishly agreed to do as a "peace" dividend at the end of the Cold War), (c) in favor of unilateral nuclear freezes (when Reagan was playing a far superior strategy over the heads of, and beyond the vision of, the non-Scoop-Jackson/non-Sam-Nun liberals), (d) against many of the weapons systems that proved vital in the 1991 Gulf War as well as in Afghanistan and in Operation Iraqi Freedom, (e) against the 1991 Gulf War, and, most recently, (f) against funding to support the military operation in Iraq and reconstruction efforts vital to the success of the military operation (to name but a few).

...

··

Mar. 4, 2004 : Poli Sat.Com's Political Satire/ Commentary* Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
*Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du0403-01--10.htm#20040304-01.)

(Google News index of recent Political Satire/Commentaries by PoliSat.Com: Click this link.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert.)·

Scientifically Political Association of Physicists (SLAP) discovers time-warp glimpse of FDR's 1944 campaign ad with Pearl Harbor images like 9-11 images in Bush's 2004 ad.·

A hush descended over startled media representatives from around the world in the high-tech auditorium in New York City's Al Bertein Stein Center for the Scientific Study of Political Relativity as the spokesman, Steve Enhaw King methodically explained how the study of a super-string wormhole led the Scientifically Political Association of Physicists (SLAP) to the startling discovery of a retroactive, time-warp alteration of the 1944 campaign for President as a result of the massive electronic overload of the internet on the day after Super Bowl Sunday caused by 4.8 billion people simultaneously asking search engines to find anything about "Janet Jackson." This freak event opened a super-string time portal transmitting 21st century broadcasting technology 60 years backwards in time.

The hush was momentarily broken when science reporters from ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, NPR, the BBC, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post tried to shout-down King with complaints that they had been lured to the event by internet reports that SLAP would present conclusive proof that while George H. Walker Bush (Bush 41) was President, he had flown the Blackbird through a time-warp to corner the market for The Carlysle Group (and their extra-terrestrial collaborators) on military applications for aerosolized Viagra designed to keep an enemy too busy to fight. Angry about having relied upon internet reports promising proof of their theories, that group of reporters indignantly walked out en masse and hurried to cover a Concerned Scientists press-conference explaining how Global Warming caused record snowfalls this winter and may be on the verge of triggering a new Ice Age as a prelude to an intensification of Global Warming.

As the hush returned to the auditorium, the growing sound of an electronic hum filled the room as SLAP's version of the famed "Way Back Machine" began opening a time-portal visible on a giant screen spanning the width of the stage. Soon, reporters found themselves viewing the closing credits on the popular 1944 television program, "Green Hornet" on the 20th Century Fox Television Network. A the end of the credits, a live, fifteen-second stock-market news brief identified the date as March 4, 1944, followed by station-break commercials. The first commercial was an advertisement for a popular laxative.

The second advertisement was a campaign commercial promoting reelection of Franklin Roosevelt. Beginning with images of the bombing of Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, it faded to moving excerpts from Roosevelt's famous "Day of Infamy" speech, after which it briefly showed rowdy demonstrators characterizing the failure to capture Hitler or invade France or Germany as proof of the ineffectiveness of Roosevelt's war strategy. The commercial then faded to excerpts from a fireside interview in which Roosevelt confidently predicted the invasion of Europe and toppling of Hitler would occur "soon."

As the next program began, there was an interruption for "breaking news" about the final few minutes of a just-concluded "off the record" fireside press conference by Roosevelt. The "breaking-news" segment showed the final moments of the fireside press conference. A reporter from the Vichy France Times indignantly asked Roosevelt whether it wasn't an example of gross insensitivity and crass, offensive manipulation of tragic deaths for political purposes for his campaign commercial for his reelection to display footage of the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Before Roosevelt could even begin to answer the question, the rest of the press corps loudly booed the reporter and hurled so many insults and invectives toward him that he let the premises rather than awaiting an answer. Roosevelt then said to the reporters, "He didn't wait for me to answer since all of you already answered it for him." At the end of the news break, the regularly scheduled program, "Bob Hope, On the Road," resumed.

PoliSat.Com's Washington Bureau Drawer News Chief, a charter member of SLAP, was able to reenter the time-warm to retrieve excerpts of the FDR campaign ad:

Time Warps & Political Wormholes.·

Remember December the Seventh
when too many souls went to Heaven
before 'twas their time
for crossing that line
long after December the Seventh.

Though some are impatient and weary
that news of the War is so dreary,
there's virtue perforce
in staying the course
'til vict'ry is more than a theory.

Although Nineteen Forty and Four
arrived without end to the War,
be sure to remember
to vote in November
for me 'cause I need your support.

En route back to the future, our WBD News Chief paused occasionally to view political advertisements invoking incidents of senseless homicide to advocate increasing restrictions on firearms. Just before returning to the present, one more series of images emerged from the time-warp wormhole: A Ted Kennedy speech suggesting Bush "hatched" the plan "in Crawford, Texas" for war in Iraq to waste the lives of American military personnel to serve the interests of his financial supporters and oil interests supporting him.·

...

··

Mar. 3, 2004 : Poli Sat.Com's Political Satire/ Commentary* Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
*Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du0403-01--10.htm#20040303-01.)(but see Editor's Note)

(Google News index of recent Political Satire/Commentaries by PoliSat.Com: Click this link.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert.)·

Editor's Note: Due to a glitch, the original version of this update timely posted on Mar. 3 failed to appear in Google News,
so PoliSat.Com posted a revised version on Mar. 4. Here's the permanent link to the revised March 4, 2004 version:

http://polisat.com/PSDuRevdu20y04m03d04-00-Rev03B.htm.

John Kerry launches "VeePee Apprentice" as TV "reality" show to select Vice Presidential running mate modeled on Donald Trump's popular "reality" show "The Apprentice"-- Applications flood in from Hillary, Edwards, Nader, Sharpton, Lieberman, Gore, and more.·

PoliSat.Com has learned from anonymous but highly unreliable sources within John Kerry's campaign that Kerry is on the verge of initiating a bold, unprecedented method for selecting his Vice Presidential running mate: He will launch a new "reality" TV program to be called "VeePee Apprentice" emulating Donald Trump's popular "reality" program "The Apprentice." Applications are flooding into Kerry's campaign headquarters. Through political skullduggery, PoliSat.Com's Washington Bureau Drawer News Chief has obtained highly confidential information from those applications.

Click image below for a PoliSat.Com "Flashback" about Hillary:

Click image below for a PoliSat.Com "Flashback" about Edwards:

Click image below for a PoliSat.Com "Flashback" Sharpton bait/switch:

Click images below for PoliSat.Com "Flashbacks" about Clark:

Click images below for PoliSat.Com "Flashbacks" about Dean:

Click image below for a PoliSat.Com "Flashback" about Nader:

John Kerry presenting: "The VeePee Apprentice"·

Reality shows on TeeVee
show how I should pick my VeePee:
Like Trump, I'll select
the one that is best
on "VeePee Apprentice TeeVee."

Like Trump, I'll demand they compete
with all whom they'd hope to defeat
by showing they're best,
surpassing the rest,
at bowing and kissing my feet.

The one faring best as contriver
is whom I will name as survivor
entitled to be
my choice as VeePee
on low roads to serve as my driver.

Hillary·

I'm Hill'ry, the best in the field.
Though now like Achilles you feel,
to fail to pick me
to run as VeePee
would prove your Achilles-type heel.

The Prince of the two Carolinas,
believes he, not me, would be finer,
but monologue lines
to Cheney we'd find
are best to calm fears of anginas.

John Edwards·

For VeePee no choice could be finer
than Prince of the New Carolinas,
Though Hill'ry'd be fine
for monologue lines,
I'm better at soothing anginas.

Charisma and hairdo by Breck
will not make the voters forget
in childhood I divvied
my time on the privies
on land not below schooner decks.

Al Sharpton·

You told the AP on March Two,
you're sure you'd like Bill be construed
a virtual "black"
as POTUS¹ whose acts
reveal you as "black" number two.

If I'm not selected by you
as VeePee for running with you,
you'd thereby redact
your status as "black"
and merely become "number two."

Wesley Clark·

Because for success it's emphatic
that choice of VeePee be thematic,
the scope of my vision
for war-winning missions
makes me as your choice emblematic.

Choose me 'cause you know it's emphatic
to pick a VeePee skilled in tactics
opponents will deem
erratic when seen,
because most of all I'm erratic.

Howard Dean·

VeePees by tradition vent spleen
so they, not their boss, appear mean--
I'll limit my screams
as Doctor of Spleen
to show your best choice to be Dean.

P.S., I'm attempting to wean
myself from that actor named Sheen
'cause ev'ryone's seen
how list'ning to Sheen
drives even the saintly to scream.

Ralph Nader·

Though some think my name is Darth Nader,
and others have dubbed me Ralph Vader,
selection of me
by you for VeePee
would change me from raider to savior.

But if I'm not picked, do not worry,
Although I'll still run 'stead of scurry,
in polls if you rise,
"October surprise"
they'll name my endorsement of Kerry.

These are but a few of the applications that have flooded into Kerry's campaign headquarters since his Super-Tuesday victory yesterday. In the interest of the public's "right to know," our Washington Bureau Drawer News Chief will continue tirelessly studying the applications on a 24/7 basis to keep our readers abreast of new developments.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com on special assignment as PoliSat.Com's Washington Bureau Drawer News Chief.

¹·"POTUS" (pronounced poat-us) is the Secret Service acronym for President Of The United States.

...

··

Mar. 2, 2004 : Poli Sat.Com's Political Satire/ Commentary* Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
*Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du0403-01--10.htm#20040302-01.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert).

Super Tuesday polling shows Democrats going to the Johns; John Edwards proposes Two Johns for the Two Americas-- John Kerry's America and John Edwards' America.·

Two Johns for the Two Americas·

Early polling results this evening show the Democrats are going to the Johns, and John Edwards' failure to overtake John Kerry have motivated him to make an exception to his theme to end the "Two Americas" in order to embrace the them of the Two Johns for the Two Americas-- John Kerry's America and John Edwards' America. Groveling for the Vice Presidential slot while trying to appear not to be doing so, Edwards made a gracious victory speech for John Kerry.

Tomorrow¹ Edwards will officially withdraw from the race. This takes pressure off Kerry but intensifies the pressure on Hillary. Thus, Kerry will, of course, remain coy on his preference for the Vice Presidential slot, while Hillary works behind the scenes to maximize pressure on Kerry to make her his first choice as running mate so she can accept the offer if Bush were to then appear vulnerable or gracefully decline (in order to "honor" the remaining two years of her Senatorial commitment to New Yorkers) if Bush were to appear likely to win. Kerry may need Hillary to prevent left-flank erosion to Naderites and Greenies.

In the meantime, PoliSat.Com's Washington Bureau Drawer Chief has gained access to highly unreliable sources inside the Edwards campaign describing what will be the essence of John Edwards' speech tomorrow to officially withdraw from the race, endorse John Kerry, grovel for the Vice Presidential nomination, and make it clear why he, rather than Hillary, would be a better running mate.

Two Johns for Every Household·

I'm Edwards, though losing, I long
to soon be selected by John
to run as his mate
on platforms to state
"We'll give ev'ry household two Johns."

Though Hill'ry would fling such a fit
if she were not first to be picked,
a platform to spawn
for households two Johns
needs two who can stand, not just sit.

Of course we can count on Bill Clinton to begin overtly and covertly promoting Hillary as the best choice for VeePee in order to maximize her opportunities to continue "graciously" reiterating her statement that her greater duty is to complete her term as Senator for New York. Our ever-inquisitive Washington Bureau Drawer Chief has also managed to gain access to how Bubba plans to respond to the opening salvo of Edwards' campaign for the VeePee spot.

Not only a man for VeePee can stand·

I'm Bill telling Kerry in picking
a mate, I think Hill'ry's more fitting.
She'd show for VeePee
how good she can be
at standing as well as at sitting.

Thus, Edwards' real strategy is for 2008 because he surely understands that if the Hillary Clinton wing of the party allows Kerry to pick Edwards (or anyone else), it will be because they expect Kerry to lose. Therefore, if not picked as Kerry's running mate, Edwards will be a loyal and tireless "positive" campaigner for Kerry.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.

¹·Early in the evening tonight Fox News reported that Edwards has decided to formally withdraw from the race tomorrow and announce his support for Kerry.

...

··

Mar. 1, 2004 : PoliSat .Com's Political Satire/ Commentary* Daily Update # 01·· ™©·2004·(Home)·
*Where the satire is always commentary, but the commentary isn't always satire (but you'll know the difference)·
(Permanent, direct link to this Daily Update: http://polisat.com/du2004/du0403-01--10.htm#20040301-01.)
(Keep abreast of PoliSat.Com's Daily Political Satire/Commentary via Google's News Alert).

John Edwards contrasts his impoverished childhood to John Kerry's occasional bad day at the Regatta.·

In the wake of the debate yesterday among the Democratic candidates John Kerry, John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich and Al Sharpton a new controversy arose over the multi-millionaire-statuses of John Kerry and John Edwards. This controversy has spawned an escalating public-relations battle over who is rendered more, or less, worthy of the Presidency by the quantities of millions and/or how such quantities were amassed.

Castigating Kerry for having been born into a well-to-do family, John Edward insisted he earned his millions "the old fashioned way" by chasing ambulances. Responding in kind to Edwards' insinuation that Kerry had "inherited" his millions, Kerry intoned scratchy, New England sound of certitude in his voice in saying, "I earned most of my millions in the old, 'old-fashioned way'-- by chasing skirts."

Not to be outdone, the Edwards camp rushed onto the airways a new commercial contrasting his boyish good looks, Breck hair, and the charm of his smooth, but man-of-the-people-sounding, North Carolina accent in stressing his childhood poverty in contrast to the scratchy but slow New England Kerry has adopted to mask his Bostonian accent learned to speak as a young man with a silver spoon in his mouth.

Bedecked Breck Versus Heinz Whines·

I'm Edwards, and though I reflect
charisma and hairdos by Breck,
in childhood I divvied
my time on the privies,
and therefore deserve your respect.

But Kerry's aristocrat lines
of money and culture defined
as meaning of "privies"
"contractual privies"
instead of a place for behinds.

The lack of such solitude times
impaired how he makes-up his mind
in reaching conclusions
by mental extrusions
as slow as the Ketchup by Heinz.·

PoliSat.Com's highly unreliable sources inside the Kerry campaign say Kerry "will punch back" against such "negative advertising" by Edwards. Some of Kerry's closest advisors are urging Kerry to use the "T-word"¹ against Edwards, but other advisors insist that to do so would be even more damaging than Howard Dean's infamous effort to appeal to southerners "driving pickup trucks" sporting Confederate flags. Fortunately for the Kerry campaign, a top advisor reputed to have uncanny insight into the culture of the New South vetoed using the term "Tar Heel" to describe Edwards. That advisor, who must remain anonymous, explained In his eloquent-sounding New-England/New-South drawl: "To use the New South 'T-word' against Edwards, we must produce a commercial depicting him as a "Tar Baby." Nodding in agreement, the production team headed to the studio.

¹·The New England "T-word" for senators from North Carolina is "Tarheel."

...

...
For the Daily Update immediately preceding the one above, click here.

Other sites that feature PoliSat.Com's Political Satire/Commentary-- Click here to view our Affiliates page.