Bombs found in Kerry Headquarters

I was watching Greta and Wesley Clark, former presidental candidate, states the the materials that they think are missing were used in "nuclear devices" !!!!!!

I looked up some info on the issue and this is what I found. According to the published documents, there were 3 different materials in question. HMX, DMX and PETN. The amount of the material has been in questioned and according to this document, before the war, there was 194741 kg (214.7 tons) of HMX, 3080kg (3.4 tons) of RMX and 3500kg (3.9 tons) of PETN. That is 222 tons (short ton = 2,000 lbs) Where did the Demo-idiots get 380 tons? According to those documents, the RMX and the PETN was NOT in a sealed bunker. The HMX was in 9 sealed bunkers with a ventilation area that could have been used to remove the HMX without removing the seal.

According to globalsecurity.org, the HMX (High Melting Explosive) is "used exclusively for military purpose to implode fissionable material in nuclear devices" (Fat Man used imploding fission). Hmm, someone please correct me, but isn't a nuclear device a WMD???? So, Saddam had components of a nuclear bomb? Would this not be a justification for the war?? Yes, HMX could be used for a propellant and has other uses, but isn't this a violation of the UN resolutions?

I personally don't need anymore justification for the war. And no, Michael Moore, I would not send my child to Faluja, but I would support and be proud of him/her if they VOLUTEERED to go. No one "sends" their child to war.

ALSO,

Why is everyone saying that if we factor in people that use cell phones, the polls would favor Kerry? Where do they get that someone that uses cell phones are poor and will vote for Kerry. I am poor and I am voting for Bush. I don't blame Bush for my problems. I blame a company in Louisiana that made bad business decisions and I was down sized. I realize that Bush or Kerry can't "create" a job and I believe that Senator's and Representive's are much more influential in the "social" issues than the President. Therefore, the war, security and foreign relations are much more important than "domestic" issues in the choice of President.

So, does it make me more liberal that I have a cell phone? No, it is a feeble attempted, by the Democrats, to sway a few weak minded voters that can't make a decision. The sides are so polarized that it should be easy for the most moderate, undecided morons to decide. Yet some are on the fence because they ponder "do I give up my government cheese and vote for Bush or do I vote for Kerry and give up security and liberty?" Hmmm, tough choice.

Where was Mel Gibson when the Patriot Act was enacted?

Ok, I have researched the Patriot Act and I have found disturbing trends on both sides.

The lack of checks and balances is disturbing. But when you consider the liberal tendencies of the judges these days....maybe we should find another way to apply these checks.

On the other hand, who are the biggest voices against the PA? hmm, it seems that it is the Muslims and the ACLU....is this the kind of influences we want on policy making in our country? I mean, lets let them re-write it and see what you come up with. No thanks.

As most things, we will settle for something in the middle and both sides will feel like losers. That is my definition of Compromise, when both sides loose.

Does it need fixed? Yes, most definitely. The question is, who will fix it? If we let our elected officials do it, then we will most likely have it so watered down that it will do nobody any good. Left the way it is, then it could and would be abused. I think the President should create a truly independent panel to discuss it and come up with suggestions.

I would be glad to sit on this panel, providing they have at least one girl from the Olympic volleyball team, in their uniform there.

Really, we have one side that is paranoid (and just because your paranoid don't mean they are not really after you), and the other that is hoping that nobody reads it so they can spy on whomever they want. I will save the government time. 99.99999% of us use the net for porno, chatting, blogging, e-mail, homework and ebay. There, I should get something for that, like a couple of million bucks...or a 'get out of jail free' card...or something.

Sound bites

So far, the 2 presidential debates are not much more than 2 guys trading sound bites. I really don't think that it will change 90% of our mind. I also don't agree with Bill O'reilly's assessment is this is win or lose situation for Bush.

The bottom line is, Bush supporters will vote for Bush. Most Kerry supporters are not voting for him, but against Bush. Think about that.

Now, lets all watch the democrats claim victory, which they planned to do before it started.

I mean, who could vote for someone that says that he voted against the partial birth abortion ban because he didn't want a 16 year old that was made pregnant by her father, to be made to tell her parents...ok, that is what, about .1% of the cases and the other 99.9% suffer??? Not very logical.

Also, does Kerry not understand that if you raise taxes on business owners, it will not hurt the business owners. It will be passed down to his customers and his employees causing inflation and lower wages...good plan, Kerry. I can't wait to vote for you.

I can't wait for it to be over.

Bush could have done better

But Kerry spoke eloquently, but it is not how he said it, but what he said.

Kerry said "I believe President Bush and I both love our country equally." Not even close. Bush never went before the senate to trash our men in uniform. Also, if he loves it so much, why does he want to change it so much?

He then tried to segway the 90% blather the liberals have been touting the past month.

"I have a better plan...". His plan includes strengthening the military...really, that's new. Why is that a priority now, I mean look at his record and you will see that he has done nothing but vote against everything that would "strengthen" the military. Next, he would strengthen the intelligence. I again refer you to his dismal record in the senate. "By reaching out to the Muslim world..." I know not all Muslims are terrorist, since you don't know who is and who isn't, reaching out to any of them could be reaching out to a terrorist.

Then he inserts the left foot in his mouth. "I have a plan to have a summit..." Surely he knows that one is already scheduled.

Next, Lehrer ask a stupid question. If Kerry were President, would it increase our chance of another attack like 9/11? Kerry talked for 75 seconds and all I heard was "I will hunt down terrorist where ever the UN says its ok." Then he spouted his first blunder when he said that Bin Laden "escaped in the mountains of Tora Bora." It was never conclusive that he was there, although intelligence thinks he was. Kerry made it sound like he definitely was and we missed him.

Next, the "colossal misjudgment' question was another opportunity for him to bring up the 90% line. He also said that the cost of the war is $200 billion. Wrong. He included money from the Afghanistan front and US cities as well as money scheduled to be spent next year. Is this the math we can expect from him? The real figure is less than $120 billion according to FactCheck.com.

On the next question, Kerry's rebuttal went on about Humvees without armor and body armor for the soldiers...isn't this the same stuff Kerry voted AGAINST? He then said that there were "weapons of mass destruction crossing the border every single day, and they're blowing people up." Uh, I think you mean terrorist, no WMD's but if you didn't and you are right, where did the WMD's come from? If they are coming across the border, is it possible that they were there before and were take out just before the war?

more later.