(Pacific Time)

— 3:57 PM—
I am so nervous.
Should I make popcorn?

— 4:00 PM—
Damn - no popcorn in the pantry.

— 4:02 PM—-
FOX News just broke some news that 1500 Marines and Iraq security forces are moving into Samara(sp?) right now…

— 4:18 PM—-
Both Shepherd Smith and Brit Hume covered Draftgate - both noted most of the problems with the CBS story.

— 4:25 PM —
mmmmm…cornbread

— 4:26 PM —
Shepherd Smith is reporting on the draft scare and is making special note of the fact that it was Democrats that introduced the bills.

— 5:00 PM —
“If John Kerry does not win the debate this evening, he will lose the presidency,” or so says Mr. O’Reilly.

—Don’t forget about the Debate Facts feed —>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

— 5:07 PM —
Dan Quayle thinks both candidates tried to take a nap this afternoon and probably couldn’t. Tha hell he says - I bet Bush slept like a baby.

— 5:09 PM —
Newt Gingrich thinks giving people something to focus on, like say getting a manicure 4 hours before a debate, instead of on your answers to questions was a stupid idea. Well, duh.

— 5:18 PM —
O’Reilly talks of a mysterious event that could be affecting the Kerry campaign - my money is on “He was for the lights, before he was against them.” That could be the sound-bite for tonight folks. The Republicans threw out the first one and I think it is about to be repeated to an audience of about 2 million people. We’ll be right back, after the commercial break.

— 5:22 PM —
Damn. Nope. It was about the fact that New Jersey could very well go to Bush this year.

— 5:35 PM —
Turned to CNN - Jeff Greenfield says Kerry will help try to help the Amercian people see Kerry in the Oval Office. Turned to MSNBC and heard Tim Russert say almost exactly the same thing - all of 30 seconds apart on two different networks. Gee, think they were reading from the same talking points?

— 5:48 PM —-
Enter Laura Bush…she just came in to the auditorium and sat down.

— 6:00 PM —

Dear Lord, please help Dubya say ‘nü-klE-r the right way.

Also, please help Kerry sweat so his oompa-loompa tanning cream runs and stains his collar.

Thank you. Amen.

P.S. If Kerry could jump really high the first time he gets buzzed for being long-winded, that wouldn’t be bad either.

Let the games begin.

— 6:04 PM —
K e r r y i s t a l k i n g i n s l o w m o t i on comparedtohowheusuallytalks.

— 6:05 PM —
He sped up finally.

— 6:09 PM —
Would electing John Kerry increase the chance of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. He didn’t take the bait - “I don’t believe that’s going to happen. I believe I am going to win.” Good answer.

He just pulled off a word I don’t even know.

Kerry’s rebuttal - “I will hunt down and kill the terrorists…” Not bad.

— 6:11 PM —

Kerry just ran down a list of former military officials
that are supporting him.

Now he cracked a sarcastic answer to which “collosal errors in judgement” Bush made - “Where do i start, heh heh.?

— 6:20 PM —
Kerry is basically repeating every soundbite we have already heard. Bush is coming across firm and resolute, but a little unsure at times - this dual shot of Fox’s of both folks shows Kerry shaking his head in agreement every time Bush made a point of noting one of his changing positions - odd.

— 6:24 PM —
The first gotcha - Bush said the FBI had been reformed - Kerry noted the over 100K hours of taped telephone calls discovered this week.

— 6:33 PM —
To Kerry - “Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake?” - “No”
Bush - Missed a HUGE opportunity. He didn’t nail him on that.

— 6:45 PM —
I really wish Dubya was a better speaker. I will settle for him being the better man.
Boy, that Kerry sure doesn’t miss a chance to bring up Vietnam.

— 6:48 PM —
GOD - Kerry just plugged his web site.

— 6:50 —
Kerry just played to the looney left and went into “Michael Moore land” by insinutating we went into Iraq for the oil.

— 7:00 PM —
SHOW THE PATIENCE TO GO THROUGH ONE MORE ROUND OF REOLUTIONS? Bush nailed him on that one. “He had the ability to make weapons and he would have made weapons.”

— 7:06 PM —
Bush seems to have hit a stide, sorta. I will give Kerry this - he is a good debater. Too bad most of what he has to say is less than accurate, full of innuendo, demoralizing to our toops, our allies, and the Amercian people.

— 7:08 —
Kerry broke a rule - he started answering a question about whether he would send troops into Darfur by following up on the previous question. It went unnoticed.

AND here comes the DRAFT word - as in backdoor draft.

— 7:13 PM —
“I admire that he spent 20 years in the Senate, although, I don’t admire the record.” - Nice one. Bush was very generous in praising Keryr on being a good dad and also said he admired his service.

— 7:21 PM —
Bush killed Kerry on the subject of bilateral vs. 6-nation talks with North Korea. Kerry says he would go bilateral Bush said doing that would lose us the leverage of having China in on the talks. He was quite forceful and eloquent.

— 7:30 PM —
Kerry invokes his service in Vietnam in his closing statement all wrapped up in bullshit.

Bush more inspirational in his.

I don’t think this debate will change much. If I have to grade on style and speaking ability, obviously Kerry takes that one. On substance, Bush wins. We learned nothing new from each candidate - there were no glitches, no big gotcha moments, no big one liners.

This isn’t over. This debate changes nothing.

Have a nice evening folks - thanks for reading. More tomorrow! brassguy73 and I are going to grab something to eat. Good night!

The Federal Marriage Amendment won a slim majority in the house, but failed to garner the 2/3 majority necessary for passage.

Speaking for myself - a gay conservative American - I am overjoyed at its failure.

Well of course they are not. But one college professor has certainly put a lot of time and effort into proving that they are. There could be a potential problem on the horizon for Professor David E. Hailey - did he fake his analysis?

WOW! LFG reports how the Boston Globe seems to have aquired a time machine!

Tomorrow’s post-debate story is already written.

Bush and Kerry meet in first of three debates with Kerry needing to make up ground

I want one of those there time machine do-hickies!

Team Kerry seems to have had a bit of a spat with the Commission on Presidential Debates regarding the timer lights that will be used to signal the candidates that their time is up when answering questions.

Democratic candidate John Kerry’s campaign demanded Thursday that the lights signaling when a speaker’s time has expired during debates with President Bush be removed from the lecterns because they are distracting, but the commission hosting the debates refused.

An angry exchange between representatives of the Kerry campaign and the Commission on Presidential Debates took place just hours before the candidates were to meet at the University of Miami for the first of three debates, The Associated Press learned. Kerry’s team threatened to remove the lights when they visit the debate site with Kerry later in the day.

“We’ll bring a screwdriver,” said a Kerry aide familiar with what several people called an angry exchange. The commission did not return a call seeking comment.

Kerry wanted the lights removed because he can’t give a succinct answer to a question to save his life - having the lights there will likely cause a repeat of the convention speech where Kerry audibly rushed though his speech to meet the time deadline imposed by the broadcast networks.

All the King’s horses, all the King’s men and that damned screwdriver ain’t gonna put your broken campaign back together again pal.

KFMB-TV

UPDATE:

And now, from USA Today, the following from Kerry spokesman Tad Divine:

“We’ll do what we have to,” Kerry strategist Tad Devine said after his meeting with the commission. But he also suggested the dispute will pass once Kerry’s team makes its point. “We’ll beat them over the head a little bit, then we’ll see what happens.”

Nice…real mature attitude there Taddy.

Is there any denying these people will do anything to further their cause? Is there any denying that they would do the same to us given the chance? Is there any denying that radical Islam must be irradicated from this planet?

Pray for these families whose children were murdered in the name of Allah.

Baghdad Bombings Kill 35 Children

That is what Cameron Diaz said on Oprah yesterday. Is there a ballot initiative in some state that I missed? Maybe CBS News will want to cover the correlation between not voting and rape. Did Cameron issue a memo CBS could use?

Just one more example of the “say anything” mentality of these left-wing nutjobs.

Read more @ Drudge

We will (or I will until brassguy gets homes from work) be live blogging tonight’s debate starting at 5pm Pacific, 8pm Eastern (the debate starts at 9pm Eastern).

I will have the TV tuned to Fox News for debate coverage.

Please take notice of the Live Debate Fact feed on the right side-bar of the page. Every time Kerry says something that isn’t true, the Bush/Cheney folks will posting the actual facts using this live feed.

Please feel free to add your comments as the night progresses and here’s to making the oompa-loompa sweat!

I think we have conclusive proof that there must be some standard shared across all news divisions where truth is not necessarily relevant when reporting a story. Ok, maybe not conclusive, but I certainly think the producers of two stories (Mary Mapes, 60 Minutes II - Rathergate; Linda Kras, CBS Evening News - Draftgate) relying on faked documentation for their “news”, then both using the same excuse when confronted with the end result of their obvious bias is pretty damned close to conclusive.

INDC Journal interviewed the CBS Evening News crew regarding Draftgate . The idiocy of their responses pales in comparison to their arrogance in thinking that people with half a brain would buy this garbage. Here are some highlights:

INDC: “Probably the main concern with the story is that the e-mails that are shown in the piece are false; they’ve been debunked on various internet sites long ago …”

Schlesinger: “The fact is, they were going around. I know several people that got them, and it’s gotten people all riled up. Whether or not there’s any reality to there being a draft, is almost besides the point. Do I think there’s going to be a draft? No. But it’s an issue that people are talking about.”

It is incomprehensible to me how a journalist with a grain of ethical standard would think that it would not be important to tell the viewers of the story that the root cause of the concern they are reporting on was a fake email sent out to produce the exact reaction CBS News is reporting on. Some of these people are “all riled up” because of the fake email.

INDC: “Ok, another complaint regards the testimony from Beverly Cocco. Some people are pointing out that she’s a chapter president for an advocacy group called People Against the Draft, that seems to have a clearly anti-war position. How did you choose her?”

Schlesinger: “Long story short, she’s a Republican. When we put the story together, I went looking for a Republican. We worked backwards from the e-mail, that’s how we found her. She told me that she was going to vote for Bush, though she said she may flip-flop.”

Worked backwards from the email and that’s how you found her? Starting backward from a faked email and ending up with the chapter president of a group called People Against the Draft should be a huge red flag. But of course, telling your audience who this woman was and what her associations were would take all the “scare” out of the scare tactic.

Mr Schlesinger again emphasized that the non-partisan focus of the story didn’t rely on the veracity of the e-mails, because it was intended to profile the personal viewpoint of someone concerned with the Draft issue. He seemed eager to answer more questions, but had to end the interview due to previous obligations. He referred me to Sandra Genelius, a CBS Spokesperson with whom I spoke shortly thereafter.

INDC: “Ok, as you may know, the recent draft story has been getting heavily criticized on the internet. What was your motivation to run the story?”

Genelius: “The story was about one of the issues that people are concerned about. The idea of the series is to look at some of the campaign issues that people are concerned about. We’ve run more than 20 stories like this on a variety of issues.”

Until Kerry was asked the question in the last two weeks, this was not a campaign issue. It became an issue after Kerry insinuated Bush would bring back the draft, after the fake email went out to thousands of college students, and CBS News decided to feature the newfound concern using faked documentation and omission of facts that would take the make the story an UNIBIASED one! Collusion? You be the judge.

INDC: “There’s been some criticism that CBS didn’t reveal her affiliation with a politically active organization …”

Genelius: “We very clearly stated that both candidates would not support a reinstatement of the draft. Obviously the mechanisms are in place, but both candidates have said they would not support it.”

Did Kerry’s campaign staff write that answer because it sure as hell sounds like the type of non-answer Kerry would give to a direct question. This was a defensive answer - a cover-your-ass answer - a Dan Rather “partisans are questioning our story” answer.

Genelius: “We were trying to cover where the candidates stand and that is where we were going with that piece.”

At this point, Ms. Genelius refused further cooperation with the interview.

Ms. Genelius must have decided it was too hot in the kitchen.

To round out CBS’s perspective on the story, I then spoke to Linda Karas, the CBS News Producer that oversaw the creation of the segment.

INDC: “Why did you choose the story?”

Karas: “It’s an issue that voters are talking about.”

INDC: “Ok, the e-mails in the story have been criticized because they’ve been debunked online for some time, why did you use them?”

Karas: “The truth of the e-mails were absolutely irrelevant to the piece, because all the story said was that people were worried. It’s a story about human beings that are afraid of the draft. We did not say that this (e-mail) was true, it’s just circulating. We are not verifying the e-mail.”

The truth of the e-mails were absolutely irrelevant to the piece. Well, i beg to differ Linda. The truth of the e-mails should have been central in your decision to pursue the story. The truth of the e-mails and who they led you to after “working backwards from the e-mail” should have been facts you put in your story. Failing to do so makes it absolutely clear where your standards and ethics lay - in the trash bin behind the National Enquirer building. Failing to verify the email makes you guilty of the exact same violations of journalistic ethics that Mary Mapes (and possibly Dan Rather) are guilty of.

INDC: “But what about Ms. Cocco? What about her affiliation with this group, People Against the Draft, that has an explicit goal of enacting a ‘peaceful, rational foreign policy’ that wants to bring U.S. troops out of Iraq?”

Karas: “I know that she’s affiliated with the group, and what her views are on the draft, and that’s what I was interested in. I was looking for a character that has a personal story that might be affected by the issue. And to be honest, I was looking for a Republican. I e-mailed several groups that deal with this issue, and she was the woman who responded that fit the profile and was the most interesting voice, because this is a woman with two sons … and she is concerned about the issue. If I had some rampant leftist on there, what would you say?”

Well Linda, having a rampant leftist on there would only add one more piece to your lack-of-credibility puzzle. We already had plenty of other pieces that gave a clear impression of what you were attempting to do with this story.

A rampant leftist would have just been icing on the cake.

Complete Transcript

UPDATE:

The CBS Players

Richard Schlesinger - Correspondent
Linda Kras - CBS News Producer
Sandra Genelius - CBS Spokesperson

CBS alters online transcipt to cover their ass re failing to disclose Coco’s association with People Against the Daft Draft

Voice Your Displeasure with CBS News - Email all 200 Affiliates

Here it is folks, POW Wives Speak Out - the latest ad from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Did someone ever get ahold of the fat lady? She needs to start warming up those pipes…