November 03, 2004

UNVEILING

My icing skills have definitely improved since the last cake -- it helps when you read the instructions and you make frosting instead of drizzle -- so this one is actually legible.

rulesdrools.jpg

I decided to make a pro-Bush instead of an anti-Kerry cake when I saw how quickly Kerry conceded. I respect him for not dragging it out, and I actually feel sorry for him. He was a man who geared his whole life towards running for president one day, and I feel sorry for him that his dream never materialized. I'm relieved he's not our President, but I feel and respect his disappointment.

Arafat's fair game though.

Posted by: Sarah at 03:05 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 110 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I'm afraid I don't feel the least bit sorry for Kerry. All his life, he wanted to be President -- that's true. But he didn't want to be President because he loved America as it is... he wanted to be President because he thought he had the right to change it into something he thought it should be. Thankfully, enough people saw through his media-aided sidestepping of every issue that was important to them, and rejected him.

Posted by: CavalierX at November 03, 2004 06:38 PM (sA6XT)

2 That's a pretty noble sentiment, Sarah. I can also agree with you on another point: while I can understand Kerry's disappointment, I really can't wait for Arafat to meet his maker.

Posted by: S at November 03, 2004 07:46 PM (swRUK)

3 Ironically enough - the re-election of Bush and the death off Arafat will likely mean a Palestinian state before Bush leaves office. How about this for icing on Sarah's cake? A democratic government in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the establishment of permanent peace between Israel and Palestinians resulting in a Nobel Peace Prize for W! Eat your heart out Clinton! LOL! :-)

Posted by: Tanker Schreiber at November 03, 2004 08:44 PM (tMBPA)

4 Can we not get past the bickering now?? It is going to take both sides reaching out which I feel both candidates did today. There are 48% of the votes who felt Kerry had what it took. It is obvious that many who come here do not feel that way. But as a once Kerry supporter, I will now support this President in the next 4 years. But please let's don't start the Kerry bashing again. Kerry did not drag this election out but conceded to Bush. If Bush can do everything he said over the campaign then many will be happy.

Posted by: ME at November 03, 2004 10:13 PM (W5nSP)

5 Better reason not to be anti-Kerry: He's old news. Let's move on, we have a war to win!

Posted by: David Boxenhorn at November 04, 2004 05:43 AM (BPc6m)

6 Whats the deal with both sides reaching out? Forgettaboutit! GW tried that the first time and was skewered by the Democrats. I'd say the loser needs to do the reaching out as long as the winner is gracious about it. I see no signs of the losers doing this. They already are saying that GW did not win the election with a mandate. They are still saying Bush is stooopid. I say it's time for the Republicans to ram thru as much as they can while they have the opportunity because that's exactly what the Democrats would do if the situation were reversed. BTW - today is the official DAY OF GLOATING for Republicans. We get one day to do this and then it's get to work.

Posted by: Toni at November 04, 2004 09:00 AM (SHqVu)

7 Toni is right. Dubya did lots of reaching out and had his hand slapped. Time for the other side to try reaching out. I just hope they wipe their hands, first.

Posted by: Mike at November 04, 2004 09:56 AM (MqNKC)

8 I'd say the center has shifted towards the republicans. The dems only hope is to follow the center, as Clinton did. If they do not, the reps will rule for quite a while.

Posted by: John at November 04, 2004 01:14 PM (+Ysxp)

9 The title of your blog belies your level of intelligence. Change the title of your blog or grow some intelligence. Your husband was in Iraq and you still voted for Bush...what sort of idiot are you?

Posted by: Dave Buster at November 04, 2004 02:31 PM (xa1gV)

10 Dave, grow up. Sarah is both well-informed and intelligent. She knows exactly what's important. That's why she voted for Bush.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at November 04, 2004 02:56 PM (+S1Ft)

11 Buster, Your assumptions about Sarah's intelligence only serve to point out that you have assumed something, not that what you have assumed is true.

Posted by: John at November 04, 2004 03:53 PM (+Ysxp)

12 Dave - Many of us are willing to make sacrifices if we are doing something that we believe is important. I voted for W, even though I'm in the military and it would mean being away from my family and friends - even dying. I know you find it hard to believe, but I do believe in what we are doing in Iraq. And I would thank you not to make any comments like Michael Moore regarding the "stupid, trigger-pullers forced into the military." I'm a former National Merit scholar, college graduate and VOLUNTEER in the US military.

Posted by: S at November 04, 2004 07:40 PM (swRUK)

13 You can be intelligent, well-informed, and still wrong. Those qualities are not mutually exclusive. "While our troops go out to defend our country, it is incumbent upon us to make the country worth defending." Which includes removing idiots from power.

Posted by: dave buster at November 05, 2004 03:52 PM (xa1gV)

14 "..removing idiots from power." Which is why we didn't vote Kerry into office. So, are you now saying that Sarah is intelligent, well-informed, and wrong? Please cite examples.

Posted by: John at November 08, 2004 02:20 AM (crTpS)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
46kb generated in CPU 0.09, elapsed 0.3104 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.2547 seconds, 157 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.