|
The BuzzFlash Mailbag
Important Note: Because we can't always determine your intentions, we need to ask a favor of you when you send us email. If you DO NOT WANT YOUR EMAIL PUBLISHED in the Mailbag or in the Contributors section, please write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the Subject line or at the top of your email. That way we'll know it's just a comment to BuzzFlash. Additionally, if you submit a mailbag item and DO NOT WANT YOUR NAME associated with your submission, sign your email, "A BuzzFlash Reader." If you send email unsigned, we will post your name with your submission, or, if that's not available, your email name (not the full address, just what's on the left side of the email address). Please try and keep your word count under 500. We can only post a small percentage of what is sent to us. The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Thanks again for your email and your patience.
Subj: Selective editing decisions by the post to AP story
Dear BuzzFlash,
Ended up at the same AP story about GeeDubya's visit to Fort Hood today at two different sites. Striking difference between the editing in the Post and the version in the Guardian. The New York Times kept it in, at least.
Pity those in the beltway don’t get to read about the hesitancy/concern of the troops. (Edited portions in bold.)
Hope you can use this tidbit in some smart way.
Keep up the good work and hope to support all of you with $s when my fortunes change.
Michael Kusek
* * *
From the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-2292291,00.html
Bush: 'We Are Ready' for War if Needed
Friday January 3, 2003 7:40 PM
FORT HOOD, Texas (AP) - President Bush rallied U.S. troops at the nation's largest Army base Friday, telling soldiers who might see action against Iraq: "We are ready, we are prepared."
"You'll be fighting not to conquer anybody but to liberate people," should force be required in the Persian Gulf, Bush said. His voice swelling with emotion, the president quickly added that force remains a last choice.
"Wherever you serve or wherever you may be sent, you can know that America is grateful and your commander in chief is confident in your abilities and proud of your service," he told thousands of cheering troops.
Bush also sought, as he has done in the past, to draw a distinction between dealing with Iraq and dealing with North Korea, which has defiantly vowed to continue a nuclear program.
"In the case of North Korea, the world must continue to speak with one voice to turn that regime away from it's nuclear ambitions. In the case of Iraq, the world has already spoken with one voice," he said.
Bush addressed about 4,000 Army personnel, all clad in black berets. They sat, for the most part silently, through the segment of Bush's speech addressing the dangers posed by Iraq. But later, when the president spoke of the possibility the soldiers may have to serve in a war, the signature "hoo-ah" cry with which they had been peppering the remarks became a deafening roar.
Asserting that "some crucial hours may lie ahead," Bush sought to steel the troops for future action. "I know that every order I give can bring a cost," he said.
"I also know without a doubt that every order I give will be carried out with skill and unselfish courage," he added. "We know the challenges and the dangers we face. Yet this generation of Americans is ready. We accept the burden of leadership. We act in the cause of peace and freedom and in that cause we will prevail."
Spc. Eric Wilkerson, of Corpus Christi, Texas, acknowledged he was afraid but ready - in part because he knows his 1 year-old daughter would be cared for even if something happens to him.
"Anybody who said he is not nervous or scared is lying to himself," said Wilkerson, who is engaged to be married. But, he added: "I would not be afraid if I lost my life if it would not be vain."
Said Spc. Cody Newby, of Kellogg, Idaho: "I've always wanted to go to war but now that's it here, just the thought of getting killed makes me not want to go."
Sgt. Santos Martinez also admitted apprehension but said that is tempered by confidence in his training.
"I signed up. I volunteered to serve," said Martinez, of Big Springs, Texas. "If my country says it's worth it, then personal thoughts, aside, I say it's worth it."
Bush said the nation's armed services are already engaged in "the first war of the 21st Century," the battle against terrorism.
"The stakes are great. The terrorists have shown what they intend for us. And we're not going to forget," said Bush, who was wearing an Army green fatigue jacket.
The president arrived at Fort Hood, about 90 minutes from his Crawford, Texas, ranch, with an array of heavy-duty, sand-colored military hardware readied for his inspection. Along with troops in formation, Bush was given a demonstration of an Abrams tank, a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, a mobile command center, an Apache helicopter and a Paladin howitzer.
The installation is home to the 1st Cavalry Division, a highly mobile unit that relies on helicopters and tanks.
It is also the home of the 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized), which uses advanced digital systems to provide soldiers with a view of entire battlefields and who is on it, faster communication and more accurate firepower.
Fort Hood has more than 41,000 troops, but had little role in the war in Afghanistan. During the 1991 Gulf War, about 25,000 troops were deployed from there. While many soldiers have been sent to the Gulf region as part of the effort against terrorism, none has been sent there as part of the current buildup for possible war with Iraq, said Maj. Jay Woods, a base spokesman.
With an Iraq war decision looming, Bush told the troops that even now, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein "can end his defiance and dramatically change directions."
"He has that choice to make. We certainly prefer voluntary compliance by Iraq. You see, the use of military force is this nation's last option, it's last choice," the president said.
Bush's visit to the base came as he neared the end of a two-week holiday break at his central Texas ranch.
He said terrorists, including those behind the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, were on the run.
"They're nothing but a bunch of cold-blooded killers. And that's the way we're going to treat them ... The terrorists will not be stopped by mercy or by conscience. But they will be stopped. They will be stopped by the will and the might of the United States of America," he said.
Bush followed his speech with lunch with Army personnel.
* * *
AS REPORTED IN THE WASHINGTON POST
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5727-2003Jan3.html
Bush Rallies Troops at Texas Army Base
By Scott Lindlaw
The Associated Press
Friday, January 3, 2003; 12:25 PM
FORT HOOD, Texas –– President Bush rallied U.S. Troops at the nation's largest Army base Friday, telling soldiers who might see action against Iraq: "We are ready, we are prepared."
"You'll be fighting not to conquer anybody but to liberate people," should force be required in the Persian Gulf, Bush said. His voice swelling with emotion, the president quickly added that force remains a last choice.
"Wherever you serve or wherever you may be sent, you can know that America is grateful and your commander-in-chief is confident in your abilities and proud of your service," he told thousands of cheering troops.
Bush also sought, as he has done in the past, to draw a distinction between dealing with Iraq and dealing with North Korea, which has defiantly vowed to continue a nuclear program.
"In the case of North Korea, the world must continue to speak with one voice to turn that regime away from it's nuclear ambitions. In the case of Iraq, the world has already spoken with one voice," he said.
Bush addressed 4,000 Army personnel, all clad in black berets. They sat, for the most part silently, through the segment of Bush's speech addressing the dangers posed by Iraq. But later, when the president spoke of the possibility the soldiers may have to serve in a war, the signature "hoo-ah" cry with which they had been peppering the remarks became a deafening roar.
Asserting that "some crucial hours may lie ahead," Bush sought to steel the troops for future action. "I know that every order I give can bring a cost," he said.
"I also know without a doubt that every order I give will be carried out with skill and unselfish courage," he added. "We know the challenges and the dangers we face. Yet this generation of Americans is ready. We accept the burden of leadership. We act in the cause of peace and freedom and in that cause we will prevail."
Bush said the nation's armed services are already engaged in "the first war of the 21st Century," the battle against terrorism.
"The stakes are great. The terrorists have shown what they intend for us. And we're not going to forget," said Bush, who was wearing an Army green fatigue jacket.
The president arrived at Fort Hood, about 90 minutes from his Crawford, Texas, ranch, with an array of heavy-duty, sand-colored military hardware readied for his inspection. Along with troops in formation, Bush was given a demonstration of an Abrams tank, a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, a mobile command center, an Apache helicopter and a Paladin howitzer.
The installation, the country's largest military base, is home to the 1st Cavalry Division, a highly mobile unit that relies on helicopters and tanks.
It is also the home of the 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized), which uses advanced digital systems to provide soldiers with a view of entire battlefields and who is on it, faster communication and more accurate firepower.
Fort Hood has more than 41,000 troops, but had a little role in the war in Afghanistan. During the 1991 Gulf War, about 25,000 troops were deployed from there. While many soldiers have been sent to the Gulf region as part of the effort against terrorism, none has been sent there as part of the current buildup for possible war with Iraq, said Maj. Jay Woods, a base spokesman.
© 2003 The Associated Press
Subj: Interesting data on 'war on terror'
Dear BuzzFlash,
Found a fascinating tidbit, buried in a story about, of all things, the Rose Parade.
"All told, some 8,000 people, from security to float drivers to volunteers on motorcycles, helped put on Wednesday's parade.
That is more troops than the U.S. used to drive the Taliban from Afghanistan."
So the whole damn "war on terror" to this point has involved fewer troops on the ground than it takes it mount the Rose Parade! Some war. More proof that the Bush administration's ongoing jingoism is less about defeating a military opponent than cowing the public into submission.
See
the story on the L.A. Times' Web site at
http://www.calendarlive.com/family/la-me-parade2jan02.story
Keep up the real fight -- the fight for Americans' freedom in the face of a totalitarian, right-wing regime.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subj: Randi Rhodes Interview
Dear BuzzFlash,
Great interview with Randi Rhodes. It reminds me of an old Bill Cosby commercial in the late 1960's.
He was saying that the excuse for not hiring blacks was because you couldn't find a good one. He said to not accept that excuse anymore.
That is the same excuse that the Fox type people are using. That no one will listen. If you broadcast it they will come. Clear Channel owns most of the radio stations and that is the problem.
Mike
Dickenson
Richmond,
VA
Dear Buzz,
I think what this writer has to say is important:
"Subj: Rigged voting machines
Dear BuzzFlash,
Re: Democrats face crunch time for '04
As long as the subject of the rigged touch screen voting machines is not settled, no one the Democrats put up for Pres. will win.
Come on people, get your heads out of the sand and take some action on this.
Barbara Noble Key West, Fl."
Barbara is absolutely correct! The new touch screen voting machines don't produce any paper documentation of the voter's choice, and the only ones who have access and knowledge of the programming of those machines and the records of actual votes are the MANUFACTURERS of those machines.
As presently set up, there is no way that local election officials can do an unbiased recount of votes recorded on these machines. There is NO PAPER TRAIL that would ensure accountability and reliability of the tallies of the votes cast.
These touch screen machines should be banned until they provide a paper receipt for the voter to review and change if necessary, and give election officials the ability to access the voting machines' hard drive (etc.) to see if the machine itself was producing irregular and false votes--which CAN be accomplished through sophisticated programs, I.e., for every ten Democratic votes, throw two to the Republican candidate, or vise versa.
My solution to questionable voting practices is to do what we do up here in Maine (and in many other states). We provide cardboard ballots and marker pens, and the voter darkens the middle, blank, portion of the arrow to indicate his/her choice. If a voter finds they've mistakenly filled in the wrong arrow, they are allowed to take their ballot to one of the election supervisors, have it voided, and be handed a fresh ballot.
After completing their voting, the voter personally feeds their ballot into the counting machines.
We have some of the cleanest elections going in the country, and our elections operate without expensive voting machinery.
My theory: If you want to have clean elections, simplify the process. Get rid of punch cards and touch screens, and allow the voter to physically mark ballots and personally feed them into vote counting machines. (Of course, I suppose these could be rigged, too, but there's no evidence of that ever happening.) With a hard copy ballot, the voter can review their vote before casting it and know that they've filled in the arrows pointing to the candidates they've chosen, or to their yes or no answers on referendums.
Why hasn't the news media investigated more into the touch screen/corporate connection? And why haven't they looked into the fact that the Voter News Service, which was blamed in 2000 for inaccurate reports, was actually reporting what voters were saying when they left the voting booth. Most voters in certain counties in Florida THOUGHT they had voted for Gore, but the ballots were so confusing, that they'd actually voted for another candidate. Voter News Service predicted accurately the desired votes of the people of Florida. Gore won. What Voter News Service didn't know was that, because of confusing and faulty ballot design, voters who thought they'd voted for Gore, had actually voted for another candidate.
The Voter News Service was correct in their predictions of who actually got the most votes in many states, but they are getting the brunt from the corrupt politicians and parties, who undermined a fair election process, and with the Supreme Court's five conservative judges, effected a coup d'etat.
We won't have a fair national election in this country again unless all of us, the underdogs, get out there and fight against the Bush administration; seek and fight for Democratic leaders who have some guts--and right now I only see Al Gore and Howard Dean having any.
That Gephardt and Daschle, after two years of caving in to Bush/Republican policies, think they have a chance in hell of getting support from dedicated Democrats, they need to think again. Kerry's old news, too; John Edwards is too accommodating.
Al Gore or Howard Dean are our only hope for salvation. Gore has been speaking his unfettered, unafraid mind lately, and Howard Dean is like a Jeffords--upfront, hard-working and as honest as they come. He was a very popular Vermont Democratic governor, is a physician, and says it like it is. He's also attractive and a good speaker. If Gore won't come back into the fold, then I'm voting for Dean.
Sorry for the long missive. Hope some have enjoyed.
Best,
Jo Ann Simon, Camden, ME
Subj: Marriage Grants
Dear Buzz,
On the subject of these marriage grants to promote marriage through the churches, Promoting marriage is not what they have in mind. What they really have in mind is upping the birth rate and lowering the abortion rate so they will have more workers than the economy can put to work. That way unemployment is up and wages are kept low. Under employed workers are more inclined to join the military and will therefore provide the cannon fodder that is always required when you are out to build an empire. Next look for a campaign to convince us that large families are more patriotic. Oops, Bill Bennett has already started that.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subj: Liberal Democrat Article
Dear BuzzFlash,
The author of the article about how the term Liberal has been propagandized by neo-conservatives to convey negative impressions about people who hold views and profess ideologies that reflect a liberal bias suggests that his political orientation today may best be served with a new title, i.e., Patriot Democrat.
I certainly recognize the author's strong feelings and have a great empathy for him and his concern. But, a refresher may be helpful here.
During the Revolutionary War those colonists favoring the authoritarianism of the monarch (another George) and opposed to the liberal expression of freedom and democracy held by those colonists fighting to remove British rule from America were called PATRIOTS. Colonists fighting for freedom and democracy were called REBELS. For me, I'd rather be known as a REBEL DEMOCRAT than a Patriot Democrat.
But, having been so disenchanted with today's WIMP DEMOCRATS, I now refer to myself as a REBEL INDEPENDENT. Just one way of trying to send a message to the rollover, bought-off Democrats who continually run scared.
I have no doubt that being called a REBEL will scare the hell out of the vast majority of complacent Americans, including the majority of Democrats who feel safe hugging a lackluster, losing centrist political position. However, in a revolution, hugging the middle ground is assured failure.
So, just in passing, BuzzFlash - you good folks Patriots or Rebels?
Holbrook Boruck
Bend,
OR
Dear BuzzFlash,
Gosh, I wonder where North Korea got the idea it could just walk away from a Treaty?
But seriously, failure of the U.S. to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty or adhere to the other principles and intents of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), which we have ratified provides both license and motive for disintegration of the NPT worldwide. This action predictably will lead to proliferation of nuclear weapons internationally, and create great difficulty in tracing the source of fission weapons delivered by ground or sea and exploded in American cities by terrorists.
Walking away from the ABM Treaty, triggering a new race in ballistic missiles and multiple reentry vehicles rachets up conventional threats as well.
A new round of fission weapons development in the U.S. and the specific threat of use of nuclear weapons against nations not now having these weapons both are violations of the NPT, ratified by the Senate, and Constitutionally the Supreme Law of the land.
Actions of the Bush administration in unilateral withdrawal from key treaties, failure to comply with terms of existing treaties, and escalation of threats, will lead to death and suffering for a great many. The silence and consent of Congress and the media on these actions constitute a stunning and ubiquitous forfeiture of responsibility to the American people.
John
Williford
Kirkland,
WA
Subj: Randi Rhodes and Jim Hightower
BuzzFlash,
Great interview with the brash liberal talk show host from Palm Beach, FL, Randi Rhodes. To add to her point about advertising controlling content of weak rated right wing radio hosts, I bet if you check with Jim Hightower that he can confirm the following:
Back in the early '90s or was it late '80s, Jim H had a talk show on ABC radio. It started off slowly, but started to get really rolling ratings wise. But Jim had a problem and then learned a personal lesson about corporate America that he already knew from what happened to others:
1. ABC told Hightower that he was going to be taken off the air because he could not find enough "advertisers" and if he did, he needed to get some that pay for the "going rate" of the time slot. He said he could get the AFL-CIO to sponsor time, but ABC said that since the AFL-CIO is an association of unions, that it did not meet the ABC standards of who can advertise. ABC likened the AFL-CIO to a group like the National Rifle Association or the National Organization for Women, saying it was an advocacy group. Hightower was displeased to say the least. He responded by essentially asking (I don't of course remember his exact words), "So Archer Daniels Midland sponsors a politically oriented news show that it likes, but because they grow grain for sale, that meets the ABC standards for advertisers? And the AFL-CIO, which has farmworkers working in various farms--and also producing food--they're just advocates like a political group--assuming even the distinction the standards draw makes sense?"
ABC wouldn't budge.
2. Shortly after this, Disney announced it was buying ABC. Jim made critical comments regarding the Mouse buying the venerable network. He discussed anti-trust, labor and other implications of the Disney acquisition. Within weeks of Jim's comments, Jim's contract with ABC was terminated--despite his posting the highest ratings in his time slot.
I tell this story whenever anyone tells me there isn't a structural bias against economically left talk show hosts--or that "nobody" wants to hear left wing versions of Rush, et al. This story, which I believe was written up in FAIR shortly after it occurred, never ceases to get people thinking and realizing the tilt that really exists in favor of corporate bias.
Keep up the great work, BuzzFlash! The Internet is starting to break down the barriers, though it still has a ways to go in terms of the influence on most people who limit themselves to cable talk shows.
Mitchell
J. Freedman
Newbury
Park, CA
Subj: Going to war? Bush 'gets' to decide...
Dear BuzzFlash,
Here's my own personal observation about Bush's recent "I'm the person who gets to decide [if the US goes to war], not you" comment: Aside from ignoring the fact that our Constitution gives that power to Congress, not the president, it's interesting that Bush says 'I *get* to decide,' not 'I *have* to decide.' Instead of looking at a decision to make war as an awesome, weighty responsibility, Bush sees it as privilege or a perk of office, something he 'gets' to do as if it were a trip to Disneyland. It amazes me to no end that the Democrats and the media (Mark Crispin Miller aside) continue to overlook Mr. "My job would be so much easier if I were dictator" Bush's choice of words and what they reveal about what's (to use some more of his own language) in his heart.
-Joe
Subj: Social Security
Buzz,
This is a copy of an e-mail I sent to AARP and have forwarded to EVERY single senator. I can't believe Bush can get by with these things and nobody calls him down on it. I don't hear any complaints about the 1.4% cost of living increase for Soc. Sec. from anyone. If we don't fight, Bush wins.
Gigi
* * *
I joined AARP because I thought you would be my voice in government. I can't afford to travel, so your travel perks do nothing for me. George Bush has cut the Social Security cost of living increase to 1.4%, which is an increase of $9 for me. Now he is proposing changes to Medicare, which I know will not benefit the elderly. There is money for massive tax cuts for the upper 1% and corporate America. He is proposing more tax cuts for the rich in his forthcoming "economic stimulus package". George Bush is the president for the rich only. He continues cutbacks in social programs, education, medicare, social security, etc. "If it doesn't favor the rich, cut it", is Bush's motto.
Bush's policies, while shocking, are not a complete surprise, considering the Republican Party's platform. As Paul O'Neill. the ex-Sec. of the Treasury, said, "People should save for their old age." He believed social security should be eliminated, and George Bush is working towards that end by dipping into the budget surplus. He will deplete the money for Social Security by his tax cuts for the rich, his "Star Wars" missile defense system and his massive military budget increase. This will, of course, benefit the defense contractors, who so generously donated to his campaign, not to mention Bush, Sr.'s Carlyle Corp.
I am so disappointed in AARP that they have not come out and criticized the cutback in the cost of living increase for Social Security. Aren't you supposed to be fighting for senior citizens? You have a strong voice, if you use it. Seniors vote and politicians know this.
AARP Member
Subj: Frist saves white killer, ignores injured black officer
Dear BuzzFlash,
Links to story on bartcopnation and original CNN story. This is really hot stuff. In 1998 Frist helped save the Capitol Hill killer (white) and accompanied him to the hospital, while ignoring the injured black officer on the floor and the other officer (white I assume), and both died soon after. But thanks to Frist, the killer lived ...
http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/24/dc.shooting.03/
Sue
Subj: Draft me, before I bust my ass again
Dear BuzzFlash,
What a day! I just got finished watching the "Greatest Wipeouts" edition of MAXIMUM EXPOSURE, which featured bunches of testosterone laden, potential organ donors, tumbling like rag dolls through the ether as they all vied for the title of "Best Argument for Birth Control".
Needless to say, I had my wince factor set to stun during this entire debacle. Man, it was ugly.
Now, I'm not that prudish or even a boring stick-in-the-mud, as to think that "There otta be a law" to prevent these thrill-addicted, adrenaline mainliners from splattering themselves all over the sidewalks and mountainsides of our great land.
But, they're taking up my precious politics spectatorin' time! And it's gotta stop!
I look at it this way; if you're intent on continually videotaping yourselves challenging gravity, while employing nothing more than a pair of expensive skis or a scratched-up skateboard, and at the end of a spectacular pratfall find yourself at a loss of a few precious liters of Red Bull... uh, blood and a few broken bones, it's all well and fine. This is Ahmerika, gosh durnitt!! It's your God-given right!
Besides, I could've saved them the all that trouble by telling them that gravity will win every time, but who am I?
But, as I sat in my comfy chair, I couldn't help but notice that all these freaks had something in common. No, it wasn't the fact that they were all either rich white boys, suburban slackers or po' purpled trash. Or even their so-called friends were more interested in getting a reaction shot, rather than put the camera down for a moment to find out why "Biff" was moaning like a stuck pig and writhing in pain as he grasped at a shattered limb.
No, my friends, what I noticed was this: All these idiots obviously have too much time on their hands... And something, yes something has to be done about it.
Then the blinding light of an answer hit me, like a bolt from the blue after I read this BuzzFlash link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3398-2003Jan2.html
Yes, the answer is so simple... DRAFT THEIR SILLY ASSES! Yeah, draft em' good.
Now, I'm currently serving a 20-plus year stint in your UNITED STATES AIR FORCE, and I gotta tell you, if you're in the service, busily keeping the Constitution safe from all enemies, foreign and domestic, you won't have any time making a JACKASS (tm) of yourself on national television.
And just think of the benefits to you, The Average Citizen:
While their boys and gals are in the service, some upper echelon Mommies and Daddies may consider taking time away from raping the American Citizen while in the employ of HaliWorldEnCom and Associates or whatever and pick up a protest sign or two, asking George why their Biff or Betty has to shed blood in defense of some gilded Nimrod's stock portfolios.
Or that political prostitute (just pick one), that got his ass elected on a platform of "God and Country" and "Family Values" can really put his progeny where his mouth is and prove to you... the American Electorate, that he's not that much of a war-mongering, chicken-hawkin' hypocrite when he votes to send our boys off to war to "keep the peace", as George like to put it. (That would be really hard for a Republican, but miracles have been known to happen)
Think of all the soap and water that would be saved as all dem damned thrill junkies would be kept from bloodying up your streets as they experience the genuine thrills of bullet-dodging and bomb-dropping. WOOHAH!!
Republicans should be backing this draft too. If they're intent on following George's pied pipes as he happily seeks to "fight terra anywhere in the world", they're going to need some serious cannon fodder to back him up.
A draft will provide that cannon fodder.
True, they don't recognize it as cannon fodder, just yet. But given time and several bloody protests on the National Mall, it will become oh so very clear.
When our boys get home after stint with Uncle Sugar, they would have gotten all of that silly thrill seeking out of their system. Did anybody ever see a Vietnam vet try to slide down a handrail on a custom-made skateboard and end up as a jigsaw puzzle on the sidewalk? Of course not. Those guys were smart enough to take the direct route to the sidewalk after being abandoned by the Veteran's Administration.
Common sense, that's what these human crash tests dummies need. Time in the service will instill that in them.
There are so many other benefits to a new draft, but bringing them out would just be like beating a dead chicken-hawk.
So in conclusion, I want to point out that, with a new national draft, we as the American viewing public can be spared a weekly hour of chronic wincing and the shame of watching our sons and daughters making complete fools of themselves on television.
And as a result of this, there can be more room to watch the real fools of this world on our TV sets... fools like George and his warmongering, crony infested junta.
We need to keep a closer eye on these guys, don't you think?
Victory, The Insult Comic Cat,
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subj: Home of the Brave: Senators who withheld "blank check" on Oil Wars
Dear BuzzFlash,
Home of the Brave: make no doubt, a vote against the bush "blank check war resolution" is, in wake of jingoistic response to terror attacks, a brave dissent from the herd-mentality of media, public (and r-w) demands for revenge.
Wisconsin Russell Feingold (D): No
West Virginia Robert Byrd (D): No
Washington Patty Murray (D): No
Vermont James Jeffords (I): No Patrick Leahy (D): No
Rhode Island Lincoln Chafee (R): No Jack Reed (D): No
Oregon Ron Wyden (D): No
North Dakota Kent Conrad (D): No
New Mexico Jeff Bingaman (D): No
New Jersey Jon Corzine (D): No
Massachusetts Edward Kennedy (D): No
Michigan Debbie Stabenow (D): No Carl Levin (D): No
Minnesota Mark Dayton (D): No Paul Wellstone (D): No
Maryland Barbara Mikulski (D): No Paul Sarbanes (D): No
Illinois Richard Durbin (D): No
Hawaii Daniel Akaka (D): No Daniel Inouye (D): No
Florida Bob Graham (D): No
California Barbara Boxer (D): No
Hall of Shame: (partial list of Dems. who voted "yes" for blank-check war)
Connecticut Joseph Lieberman (D): Yes
Christopher Dodd (D): Yes
Massachusetts John Kerry (D): Yes
South Dakota Thomas Daschle (D): Yes
Tim Johnson (D): Yes
California Dianne Feinstein (D): Yes
Delaware Joseph Biden (D): Yes Thomas Carper (D): Yes
Florida Bill Nelson (D): Yes
Georgia Max Cleland (D): Yes Zell Miller (D): Yes
Indiana Evan Bayh (D): Yes
Iowa Tom Harkin (D): Yes
Louisiana John Breaux (D): Yes Mary Landrieu (D): Yes
Missouri Jean Carnahan (D): Yes
New Jersey Robert Torricelli (D): Yes
New York Hillary Clinton (D): Yes Charles Schumer (D): Yes
North Carolina John Edwards (D): Yes
LJBK
Hi,
I have a bit of news about the Drudge Report that I think deserves mention somewhere but don't quite know what to do with or who to forward it to.
This morning, before the bombing in Tel Aviv bombing, the headline on Drudge was "CHINESE JET MISSES HONOLULU HIGH-RISE BY 30 FEET!" with a link to a story on the near miss of a China Airlines jet in Hawaii. Here is the link below.
However, this title was changed to "JUMBO JET MISSES HONOLULU HIGH-RISE BY 30 FEET..." when the story was placed in the news heading column after the Tel Aviv bombing story became the headline story. Why did this happen? Well, for one thing, "China Airlines" is actually operated out of Taiwan (72 percent owned by the Taiwanese government), our staunch ally off the coast of China proper. The national carrier for China is actually called "Air China". Hmm, could Drudge have made a mistake in his hasty initial bid for a sensational headline confirming the danger of Chinese Jets freely roaming the skies of our great democratic nation? I guess someone eventually pointed out to him that China Airlines was actually Taiwanese but it seems "TAIWANESE JET MISSES HONOLULU HIGH-RISE BY 30 FEET!" doesn't quite have the same ominous (and correct political) implications that Drudge's right wing backers would appreciate. Why isn't this at all surprising? Can this possibly be a case of Media Whoritis?
Regards,
Andrew
Subj: BuzzFlash students learn good lessons
Dear BuzzFlash,
Does the Washington Post read the BuzzFlash Mailbag?
Gee, I hope so! Strange how a Jan. 5 Washington Post article mirrored the Jan. 3rd Mailbag post "Repuglicans demonstrate fear of John Edwards" Yep, the Washington Post was two days behind the BuzzFlash Mailbag -- as usual. Yep, ya heard it here first! We students of BuzzFlash learn our lessons well. That's because we have an excellent and informative teacher -- The BuzzFlash School of Higher Learning!
* * *
BuzzFlash Mailbag post appearing on Jan. 3, 2003.
Subj: Repuglicans demonstrate fear of John Edwards
Dear BuzzFlash,
On the Jan. 3 CNN Crossfire Bob Novak and Paul Begala began to discuss John Edward's announcement to explore a run for the presidency.
I gained a multitude of information from their discussion. Novak began to put Edwards down immediately with baseless attacks. Wicked Bob was in true form, saying that Edwards had no experience, was a mere senator and a millionaire lawyer and accused Edwards of being part of the problem in the US. He lashed out saying that lawyers are the problem in this country and Edwards was one of them. Novak proceeded to try to level Edwards by insinuating he was an ambulance chaser. We all know that was a lie, but what else can we expect from Novak. He is there to lead the charge against the democratic candidate who the administration most fears.
Next, democrat and republican strategists joined the discussion. Ed Rogers, the republican strategist, picked up where Novak left off in the attack. Both Novak and Rogers tipped their hands when they mustered up a little praise for John Kerry and a few other democrats who have announced their run for the democratic nomination. Then came breaking news that Gephart would be announcing his bid. More praise was mustered up for Gephart by Novak and Rogers. Their phony praise told me that they want anyone but Edwards to run against Bush. It stuck out like a sore thumb. The republicans fear Edwards! They are trying to pick the democratic nominee through propaganda and Edwards scares the hell out of them. Edwards cuts into the republican south. He claims to be for the little guys just as he was when he was an active lawyer. He has begun by projecting sound ideas. He is young and handsome and has little kids just like John Fitzgerald Kennedy, our last president who came from the senate.
Is the Bush Regime scared? You bet! Who would want to run against a candidate mindful of John Kennedy?
~ Cathy
******************************
Now look at the Washington Post article that appeared two days later:
Sunday, January 05, 2003
To view the entire article, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11079-2003Jan4.html
GOP Attacks Edwards
By Juliet Eilperin
The Republican National Committee wasted no time responding to Sen. John Edwards' announcement Thursday that he would seek the presidency.
"Who is John Edwards?" an RNC press release Friday asked about the North Carolina Democrat. "An Unaccomplished Liberal In Moderate Clothing And A Friend To His Fellow Personal Injury Trial Lawyers."
Funny, that's not how Edwards described himself Thursday, when he announced his candidacy: "I run for president to be a champion of regular people."
A mere 24 hours after Edwards declared and more than a year before the first primaries, the opposition party issued a 10-page, footnoted release that avers the first-term senator's utter inadequacy for the job, with headlines such as: "UNACCOMPLISHED AND NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME" and "PROFESSES TO BE A SOUTHERN MODERATE, BUT VOTES LIKE A NORTHEASTERN LIBERAL."
The barrage seemed a bit intense for a guy who had been a candidate for only a day. And the GOP has yet to send out similar takedowns of the other Democrats running for the presidential nomination next year. Privately, Republican officials have said that they find Edwards' candidacy particularly threatening because he is undefined. The RNC memo itself noted that Edwards is "AT ODDS WITH FELLOW DEMOCRATS."
Edwards spokesman David Ginsberg said it is a sign that President Bush and his party fear Edwards. "The White House clearly recognizes that they have a problem," he said. Not so, said RNC spokesman Jim Dyke. Similar documents on the other Democrats will come out as they are finished. "It's a Christmas delay as opposed to Edwards being distinct from the others," he said.
Losers Tell Story About Winners
By focusing on the losers last fall, a report issued by U.S. PIRG details how the size of a campaign war chest influences elections. According to the study, 93.4 percent of the House and Senate candidates who outraised their opponents won. It also looks at 50 congressional candidates who were locked out of contention because of financial constraints.
"This report examines the flip side of that coin -- all average Americans who are shut out of the process by big money," said Adam Lioz, the report's author. "Unfortunately, we might as well hang a sign on the U.S. Capitol that says only the rich -- or those that will serve them -- need apply. Not many ordinary Americans are willing to put their hats in the ring any more."
Staff writer Dana Milbank contributed to this report.
**************************************************
I rest my case.
~ Cathy
Subj: Just a note in comment regarding bashing of Edwards
Dear Buzz-
Not only is Edwards getting the standard RNC treatment but Kerry is now the subject of an attack that is circulating via the Internet. Below, you will find a copy of a recent message that was sent to me by a right-winger who is trying to proselytize me - his misdirected left winger friend that he is trying to straighten out. Just thought you would like to see this one complete with accusations from George Patton III questioning Kerry's patriotism. Amazing that the writer is so concerned regarding one of Kerry's relatives benefiting from a trade deal that he says Kerry lobbied for. Of course, there was no mention of any of the deals that both Bush 's family benefits from and nothing about the conflicts of interest in the recent West Coast Longshoremen's Union lockout with not only Scalia, but Elain Chau and husband KY Senator Mitch McConnell.
A BuzzFlash Reader
* * *
JOHN KERRY'S WAR RECORD
As Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, considers a bid for the White House, Americans should know a few things about him that he might prefer go unmentioned -- and I don't mean his $75 haircuts. When Mr. Kerry pontificated at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial on Veterans Day, a group of veterans turned their backs on him and walked away. They remembered Mr. Kerry as the antiwar activist who testified before Congress during the war, accusing veterans of being war criminals.
The dust jacket of Mr. Kerry's pro-Hanoi book, "The New Soldier," features a photograph of his ragged band of radicals mocking the US Marine Corps Memorial, which depicts the flag-raising on Iwo Jima, with an upside-down American flag.
Retired Gen. George S. Patton III charged that Mr. Kerry's actions as an antiwar activist had "given aid and comfort to the enemy," as had the actions of Ramsey Clark and Jane Fonda. Also, Mr. Kerry lied when he threw what he claimed were his war medals over the White House fence; he later admitted they weren't his. Now they are displayed on his office wall.
Long after he changed sides in congressional hearings, Mr. Kerry lobbied for renewed trade relations with Hanoi. At the same time, his cousin C. Stewart Forbes, chief executive for Colliers International, assisted in brokering a $905 million deal to develop a deep-sea port at Vung Tau, Vietnam - an odd coincidence.
As noted in the Inside Politics column of Nov. 14 (Nation), historian Douglas Brinkley is writing Mr. Kerry's biography. Hopefully, he'll include the senator's latest ignominious feat: preventing the Vietnam Human Rights Act (HR 2833) from coming to a vote in the Senate, claiming human rights would deteriorate as a result. His actions sent a clear signal to Hanoi that Congress cares little about the human rights for which so many Americans fought and died.
The State Department ranked Vietnam among the 10 regimes worldwide least tolerant of religious freedom. Recently, 354 churches of the Montagnards, a Christian ethnic minority, were forcibly disbanded, and by mid-October, more than 50 Christian pastors and elders had been arrested in Dak Lak province alone. On Oct. 29, the secret police executed three Montagnards by lethal injection simply for protesting religious repression. The communists are conducting a program against the Montagnards, forcing Christians to drink a mixture of goat's blood and alcohol and renounce Christianity. Thousands have been killed or imprisoned or have just "disappeared." The Montagnards lost one-half of their adult male population fighting for the United States, and without them, there might be thousands more American names on that somber black granite wall at the Vietnam memorial.
As Mr. Kerry contemplates a run for the presidency, people must remember that he has fought harder for Hanoi as an antiwar activist and a senator than he did against the Vietnamese communists while serving in the Navy in Vietnam.
MICHAEL BENGE
Foreign Service officer and former Vietnam POW (1968 to 1973)
Washington
Subj: Class warfare? Not on Bush's watch!
Dear Buzz,
Well...the right-wing has found its new buzz phrase and the Prez officially anointed it last Friday while taking a moment out of his busy brush-clearing schedule down on the ranch. Responding to criticism that his newest economic stimulus package would be weighted toward the wealthy, he firmly stated that, "some would like to turn this into class warfare. That's not how I think."
Aside from the obvious question of how does the Mr. Bush think, it's interesting to watch the slow evolution of the phrase class warfare as it is being used by conservatives like capitalist tool Larry Kudlow and capitalist fool David Limbaugh.
Emails promoting the use of the term class warfare must have been really flying through the conservative wasteland these past few months because in the AP article that appeared in my newspaper -- besides Bush -- no less than two other quotes are included from conservative spokesmen who promote its use prominently.
"Stephen Moore, president of the Club for Growth, said his group would be very disappointed if Bush decides not to accelerate reductions in all tax rates, including the top rate paid by people earning on average more than $1 million.
'If Bush did put out a plan that surrendered to the class war critics, he would lose many in his conservative base,'Moore said. "
Even more indignant was yet another wingnut economist from the Heritage Foundation.
"Daniel Mitchell, an economist at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said his group was also worried that the administration would trim back too much on tax incentives.
'There is no question that the left will try to drag out the pagan god of class warfare and say this is just a sop to the president's rich friends,' Mitchell said. 'The purpose of making these changes is to get more investment into the economy and create more jobs. That's what really matters.'"
Hmmm. Pagan god. It's wonderful how conservatives can always somehow relate religion and money. In God We Trust!
The inimitable Molly Ivins pointed her considerable wit and wisdom at the inanities of the right in her column from last August called, If you want to talk about class warfare ...
So now we have the President calling critics of his enrich-the-rich economic policies class warriors. This isn't so different than calling those who oppose his war in Iraq America "haters," or those who are against his security policies "traitors."
What name calling like this does is make it easier for shallow-thinkers to pigeonhole people into neat little categories of US vs. THEM.
So now when Rush or O'Reilly or Novak or any of the dozens of other right-wing pundits uses the term class warfare, the legions of of dittoheads and Fox befuddled will know exactly what scoundrels they are talking about.
Class warfare?
Where do I enlist?
Michael
LaMartina (Musings & Meanderings)
mauiloa.blogspot.com
Subj: Frist's best qualification for reforming Medicare
Dear Buzz,
Over the weekend I read in my local state paper where GW Bush and the Republicans think the GOP Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist is the best qualified to handle the Republican proposal to "reform" our Medicare program, because Bill Frist is a "doctor".
Gee, considering the GOP's definition of "reform", I would think that Frist's experience with his family's defrauding Medicare for their own personal wealth enrichment would make him the most able to "destroy" one of our better social programs, not because he is a "doctor"!
I wonder why the Tennessean and other news media fail to mention this?
Nancy Lynn Nagy (TN)
Subj: Washington Post editorial on John Edwards
Buzz:
Here is a letter I sent to the Washington Post about their Edwards' editorial:
* * *
Dear Sir/Madam:
This is in response to your editorial on the "lack of experience" of John Edwards, posted on Sunday, January 5, 2003. In the editorial, you said:
While there have been other presidents who entered the Oval Office with little foreign policy experience, those hailing from statehouses -- Carter, Reagan, Clinton and the current Bush -- did come with years of experience tussling with domestic issues and politics.
I would like to take issue with this statement in terms of your characterization of George Bush's experience. George Bush did not hold political office until 1994, when he became the governor of a state with a weak executive. By my calculations, that makes his political experience, domestic or foreign, roughly equivalent to that of John Edwards. Unless, of course, you consider the fact that he was a "legacy" president, just as he was a "legacy" student at Yale.
Thank you for listening.
A Washington Post reader.
your damned right it is CLASS WARFARE AND BUSH DECLARED IT ON US! THE DEMOCRATS JUST EXPOSED IT! the democrats don't need to run from the term! bush has declared class warfare on his own country and we have to fight back!
diane
anderson
miami
fl
Subj: Communicating the Truth About Bush's Economic Plan
To All Progressive, Centrist and Democratic Opinion Leaders:
The Republican Right already has begun carpet-bombing the public with misinformation and spin to further their regressive, unpopular and harmful economic agenda. They will continue up until the State of the Union Address, when Bush gives his official snake-oil sales pitch.
Although Bush's plans --like all his economic policy to date-- will disproportionately benefit the rich at the expense of low and middle-income Americans, The Right and their media allies will conceal this fact from the public. And should a critic mention this fact (or the economic damage caused by similar policies the past 2 years), he will instantly be accused of "class warfare." The Right used this tactic throughout Election 2000, and Dubya himself did so last week when a reporter raised the issue.
It is an effective tactic, since many people have negative associations with "class warfare," and its use instantly changes the subject from the regressive economic policy itself to the motives of the person criticizing it. I'll bet dollars-to-donuts that Dubya uses it again during his State of the Union speech.
The best tactic we can use to neutralize the Right's use of the "class warfare" tag is to use it first. Instead of simply saying that Bush's economic plan "favors the rich" we need to describe it as:
- "class warfare that favors the rich" or
- "Republican class warfare that benefits the rich at the expense of everyone else" or
- "nothing more than class warfare against low and middle income Americans" or
- "Bush already tried the same class warfare and look what it's done to the economy" or
- "I don't understand why Bush can't do anything but this same old Republican class warfare"
In every letter to the editor, radio show call-in, web posting, media interview, e-mail to congress, or public presentation, we must describe Bush's economic plans with the words "class warfare," which is in truth, what they are. If we do this enough, the general public will associate "estate tax cut" with "class warfare," "tax cut on dividends" with "class warfare" and "George W. Bush" with "class warfare."
If we do not place this label on Bush's economic plans first, The Right will stick it mercilessly on us in order to silence all dissent and debate. In a very short time, any legitimate critics will be instantly dismissed for promoting "class warfare," just as foreign policy critics now are dismissed as "unpatriotic" or "anti-American."
We have the truth and the facts on our side -- but they control the media. We must work harder and smarter to communicate the truth to our fellow Americans!
Your ally in The Good Fight,
~ Frank Campagna
Dear Buzz:
If you can get a transcript of Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) as interviewed on NPR news this evening it would be worth a wider audience. Best would be audio, inflection and cadence say a whole lot too.
Asked if issue of segregation now party issue, Grassley said if only Lott had "kept his mouth shut"....: would have been better if Lott not say anything "about that" then it wouldn't have to be discussed now. That it is best now that Republicans just stick with their "agenda"...
K.C.
Dear BuzzFlash,
Every year at this time those who have left us and passed away are recalled and remembered, mostly in a fond way. Channel 2 , Sunday morning did a nice job of remembering famous folk who bid us adieu, Except they left out Paul Wellstone and I kept waiting until he was at least mentioned, he never was. On Aaron Brown Friday he mentioned his name but barely in passing and I almost missed it, of course there was no story just a name.
It was hurtful enough when the accident happened but it was almost just as hurtful to have his life and death totally ignored by both cable and the mainstream media. His memorial service certainly received beaucoup attention in an unflattering way, how interesting is that????
Charlene
Moran
Crystal
Lake, Illinois
Dear BuzzFlash,
Couple of things you missed, I think.
First, longtime Los Angeles liberal radio talk show host, Michael Jackson, lost his job at the end of 2002. Nothing personal, the station totally changed format to all music. He has a web site, where he posts a journal, and will post info re: when he returns to radio.
He has been broadcasting here in L.A. for over 30 years, working hard to stop the Rush et al spin heard on radio & TV. He is a class act, with unimpeachable liberal credentials.
http://www.radiojackson.com/index.htm
Here is an article written in local paper regarding Jackson:
Also, here is an article that appeared in the L.A. Times 2 weeks ago, wonderful article entitled "The Fall (and Potential Rise) of Liberalism," by Joshua Zeitz of Brown University, should be linked to from your page:
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/
Keep up the good work, thanks very much!!!!
Steve
Subj: condi rice caught in a flip flop on the policy of containment of saddam
Dear BuzzFlash,
Ironically, some of the officials now advocating war used to recognize that Saddam could not employ nuclear weapons for offensive purposes. In the January/February 2000 issue of Foreign Affairs, for example, National Security Advisor Rice described how the United States should react if Iraq acquired WMD. "The first line of defense," she wrote, "should be a clear and classical statement of deterrence—if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration." If she believed Iraq’s weapons would be unusable in 2000, why does she now think Saddam must be toppled before he gets them? For that matter, why does she now think a nuclear arsenal would enable Saddam to blackmail the entire international community, when she did not even mention this possibility in 2000?
http://www.foreignpolicy.com (scroll down to the link titled: An Unnecessary War)
In the magazine's content page, the editor describes the authors John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt as "two of the United States' most respected international affairs thinkers..."
Linda Johnson
Subj: An Invisible Aide Leaves Fingerprints
Dear BuzzFlash,
Josh Bolten is the White House aide you've never heard of who has his fingerprints all over President Bush's new $600 billion economic plan, the legislation creating the Department of Homeland Security and just about every other domestic policy concocted in his powerful little corner deep in the West Wing.
Still, Mr. Bolten can't hide his revealing title — White House deputy chief of staff for policy — and a growing reputation as the hub of the administration's domestic agenda, which is increasingly set by a small handful of West Wing aides under the command of Karl Rove, the president's chief political adviser, and Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff.
Chewgababy
Re: What if George W. Bush Were an African-American Woman?
Dear BuzzFlash,
I was just reading an old Arianna Hutchinson (SP?) column in Progressive Populist raising a similar interesting question. HUD now evicts from public housing any family with a member who is arrested for drug use (at home or anywhere else). Wouldn't this require Florida Governor Bush's eviction from his public housing?
Joy
Dear BuzzFlash,
Thought you guys might be interested in this article on car safety: http://enews.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/EETD-SUV-Safety.html
The quick summary: SUVs aren't any safer for their occupants than midsized cars or sedans. 4Runners, Blazers, and Explorers are actually more dangerous to drive than the humble Honda Civic (the chart accompanying the article speaks a thousand words...)
So, all those folks buying SUVs for their own safety (and screw the other guy!) are actually buying a very expensive myth, and exposing the rest of us to a very high level of risk to boot.
R
Subj: Saudis Close Ties
With mounting criticism from Congress over its record in the war on terror, Saudi Arabia is beefing up its forces -- in D.C. Newsweek has learned that to strengthen ties with the White House, the Saudis have retained the high-powered law firm of former Texas GOP congressman Tom Loeffler. Loeffler, whose firm will be paid about $720,000 a year, is one of President George W. Bush's top political moneymen.
http://news.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0-9900-1028-20778432-0.html?tag=ats
Chewgababy
Subj: "George Bush's war on nature"
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/01/06/nature/index.html
Glenn Scherer’s thoughtful essay "George Bush’s war on nature" is worthwhile reading for everyone. Though there is the tinge of the environmentalist message of "we’re going to destroy the earth", it does highlight the alignment between the fundamentalist Christians in the U.S. and the Republican party who is busy implementing the corporate agenda with regard to environmental protections. In a way, it was a little unfair to single out the fundamentalists, who in more cases are willing pawns for the Republican leadership rather than active participants. The secular middle and upper-middle classes (soccer moms and "bobos") are more culpable tools, even if they don't vote Republican. This is because they are more able to glimpse the unraveling of environmental, educational and foreign policies that may lead to disaster for human communities in the future. Yet they persist in driving SUVs, living in energy-inefficient houses, eating too much and buying too much stuff.
I encourage you to link to this. It would be nice if this message could generate some buzz in blog-space. Keep up the good work.
John Lowe
Kettering,
OH
Subj: "Southern by the Grace of God" What???????
Buzz,
Are you ready for this? I certainly am not. I couldn't believe when I was browsing MSN Groups that I would come across this one, front and center, under home/news & politics/politics/issues! Does anyone REALLY wonder what is wrong with this nation?
BuzzFlash reader
http://groups.msn.com/Browse?Catid=146
Southern by the Grace of God (79 members)
This group is dedicated to discussion of the principals that make Southern Americans a culturally unique race of people and to dispelling Yankee lies and myths that have been perpetrated about the South since the end of the War for Southern Independence. We are open to any intelligent discussion that relates to these topics and, while we may not agree with everything that is posted, we respect every individuals right to exercise his or her freedom of speech. Our only objections are to the posting of vulgar or profane remarks. Also, we will not hold him guiltless who taketh the Lord's name in vain. He won't either. So watch what you say when talking about our Lord.
WP: William M. Arkin (Dot.Mil) Leaves WP for LA Times (departing commentary)
Excerpt:
This is my last Dot.Mil column.
If anything has changed in four years, it is the nature of the interaction between journalists and military officials. The post Cold War shift from the nuclear arms race to a new era of conventional (and unconventional) war initially unburdened the military to engage in an open dialogue about the nature of warfare.
The current Bush administration started down a path of stifling dialogue and marginalizing the uniformed military long before the attacks on September 11. Initially Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld went to war against the uniformed leadership under the guise of transformation: The old generals were just too wed to their services and their old notions of warfare, the new administration asserted. But the war on terrorism has unleashed an even greater backwards lurch to the worst of Cold War behavior.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16417-2003Jan6.html
A BuzzFlash Reader
