Wednesday, April 12, 2006

KingWatch Index - Don't Know Much About.......

There is alot King doesn't know much about. To be fair he could be feigning ignorance so that he can more forcefully push his lies.
King's lack of knowledge is a broad matter and here are some examples from the past 2 years of King Watch.

When the unpopular government of Spanish President Aznar who supported Bush's Iraq adventure lost in the 2004 elections, King called the Spanish "appeasers" to terrorists. Too bad King didn't get that it was far more complex than that... Don't Know Much About Spain

King was a big supporter of of the whole Iraq-WMD scam and attacked Hans Blix when he said that Iraq did not have WMD's and that evidence was falsified to justify a war. Since then we do know that evidence was manipulated... Don't Know Much About WMD's

King said Bush was complying with the 9/11 Commisson. The facts were quite different... Don't Know Much About the 9/11 Commission

King was saying that unemployment is lower under Bush than under Clinton.. Don't Know Much About Unemployment Numbers

King rattles off countries that support the Bush-Iraq War and mentions "Bavaria." Don't Know Much About Geography

King goes on the BBC to attack the "old Europe" that doesn't support the Bush-Iraq War. In his zeal to attack France as a "second rate nation," he says France doesn't even have an aircraft carrier... Don't Know Much About France

King spent some time defending Bush's weak response to Katrina... Don't Know Much About New Orleans

King chimed in about the 2005 Nassau County elections.. Don't Know Much About Election Results

King says a majority of americans support Bush... Don't Know Much About Poll Numbers


Anonymous said...

Here's an article from today's NY Post you might not see on the Pete King Watch.



April 14, 2006 -- IT LOOKS as if voters are starting to tilt toward get-tough Republicans on immigration - and those massive protest rallies by illegal aliens waving flags have backfired.

Republicans are now more trusted on immigration - 37 percent trust them on the issue, while just 31 percent trust Democrats, according to a national survey by the Rasmussen Reports Web site done April 8-9.

That marks a Democratic slide from 10 days earlier, when both parties were equally trusted on the hot issue. Thirty-eight percent said they trusted Republicans and 37 percent trusted Democrats.

"The Democrats lost ground," said pollster Scott

Rasmussen. "I suspect there's backlash against the rallies, and the Democrats appear to be against enforcement. People say before we talk about reforms, we ought to enforce the law."

Rasmussen - who accurately predicted the 2004 presidential election - notes that 57 percent of Americans want a barrier built along the Mexican border, even though only 42 percent think it would really cut illegal immigration.

So maybe the conventional and politically correct media wisdom is wrong, as usual, with its focus on Republican splits over immigration and the risk that get-tough Republicans will alienate Latinos.

In the short term, Dems could be running bigger risks heading into next fall's election - the risk that they'll look soft on national security in the post- 9/11 era by opposing tough border controls.

When Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada blocked a bipartisan immigration bill last week, a prime reason was that he
didn't want Democrats to have to take a stand on amendments for tougher border patrols and deporting aliens who commit crimes.

Republican Rep. Peter King (R-L.I.) - who backs get-tough laws against illegal immigration - says his phone calls are 99-1 favorable and he's getting even more calls on this issue than on the failed Dubai ports deal.

"When Democrats embrace [the protesters], that drives home to the people that Democrats support illegal immigration," King claims.

For many Republicans, immigration may turn out to be like the Dubai ports deal - a chance to take a tougher line on border security than President Bush, who favors a "guest worker" program that Republicans like King blast as "amnesty."

J said...

Since King is a proven liar the 99-1 number is in question.
How does this help King? He's weak on Homeland Security, weak on middle class issues, weak on the environment and weak on bringing money to the district.
One poll doesn't mean much. Where is the trend. If you look at the numbers, a 37% isn't that great. 37% - 31% also falls into the margin of error.
And FYI, it is members of his own party that want the immigration bill changed including Bush.

And for the anonymous poster, it is interesting that you cannot refute anything posted on the site.

Anonymous said...

That's right I can't refute anything b/c I don't have all day to check every fact you come up with. Its actually pretty scary the time you put into this. Maybe you should get out more often. I actually wonder if you would ever give King credit for anything. Even when it seems as though you agree with him, you cut him down by saying he's only voting that way during an election year or because it became public, which is such a cop out.

TimJ said...

Ahh the NY Joke, oh you said Post, well same thing.
And rasmussen, you mean the pollster who had bush up TEN just prior to the 2000 election, and the pollster who constantly has Bush's approval a good 5-7 points or so ABOVE EVERY OTHER POLLSTER. Rasmussen's polls are a joke.

Anonymous said...

C'mon, the guy who produces this web site uses stories from Newsday all the time and we all know that Newsday is very liberal, so why kill a story from the NY Post. And as far as polls go, every poll is biased. Didn't one poll say Kerry won on election day 2004?

TimJ said...


I will admit Newsday is liberal, but itts not nearly as far from the center as the NY Post is, and far more accurate.

As far as polls go, nothing is ever full proof, but generally their are good pollster (who are accurate most of the time) and bad pollsters (who well aren't) Rasmussen fits right into that bad pollster category, he had a pretty good 04, but was off in everything else (from the Gov races last year, to the 02 races, and the 2000 races which were an absolute disaster.

Keep in mind their is a difference between being off from the result by 3 points (which is about what the poll your referring to from 04 was) and being off BY MORE THAN TEN POINTS which rasmussen has done.