 |
|||||
|
December 8, 2003 |
|||||
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 400. 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: Can you help me understand this? 1st---BuzzFlash rocks. As soon as I get my medical bills paid off in early 2004 (hopefully) I will be buying many premiums from you. BuzzFlash is the only source that, as Harry Truman said, "gives them Hell--but just tells the truth on 'em and they THINK it's Hell!". I was reading your BuzzFlash mailbag and Joyce McCloy introduced me to opensecrets.org. I looked up my idiot-boy Chuckie Grassley and was looking at the top contributors in Iowa when I noticed the State of Iowa and the University of Iowa. Why would my state government and a state-funded university be donating money to Chuckie "Zieg-heil"'s campaign? Am I just paranoid because of the impotency of leading Democrats (read Daschle)? I so desperately want another Democratic senator to join Tom Harkin in the Senate. Can you tell me who to ask if you can't help me. I understand that you are inundated with e-mail so if you can't write back, I'll understand. I also have one last question? Do you know of another precedent in U.S. History where a declaration of war has been signed with a crayon like the one in Iraq? Liberally yours, Laurie Lusinski Subj: Stuffing the Turkey Hi, You might be amused by "Stuffing the Turkey," on Bad Attitudes: http://badattitudes.com/MT/
Best, Jerry Subj: Darth Nader Dear BuzzFlash people: Thanks for the editorial on Ralph Nader. I'm a green leaning liberal, but I did not sign the petition I was offered in NC in '99 to get Nader on the ballot, and I proudly voted for Al Gore. I was appalled at the way Gore's candidacy was, and still is, talked about as a democratic failure. I can't understand for the life of me why having a president who is super intelligent and an "intellectual" would seem "bad" for some. After the personalities of Reagan , Clinton and Bush (43) we as a nation should have learned by now that people who have mass appeal and sexual charisma are not necessarily the best people for the job. (Yes, Clinton did have these qualities, but unlike Reagan and 43, he has quite an intellect). But like a bunch of schoolgirls, we keep getting seduced by personality and charm (or what some consider charm). We were so spoiled by the Clinton years that we felt we would just keep cruising forward with our social and environmental issues, and our democratic intellectual elitism blinded us to the fact that the right had not "gone away", as we have been discovering in one aftershock after another. I have two recommendations for anyone who considers voting green or independent in 2004. First, read "Crimes against Nature" by Robert Kennedy jr., and see what your naive idealism has wrought for the very creatures and places you were supposed to be trying to protect. Even THEY hate your guts now (the ones that are still alive and unsquandered, that is). Second, get a freaking television, turn on C-span, and watch our democratic representatives in Congress fighting the forces of evil on the house and senate floors every day of the week (and all night and all weekend sometimes, as with the medicare bill recently). After watching Nancy Pelosi and Charlie Rangel, among others, in the house, fighting their battles daily with the corrupt, lying Republican majority, and then watching Ted Kennedy, and Hilary Clinton, and Barbara Boxer, and Robert Byrd, and many, many more of our Senators try to stave off the encroachment of plutocracy that the right has been planning to implement for the last decade, you will wonder how you ever could have believed in there is no difference between the parties. Yes, the DLC is strangely similar in policy and attitude to the RNC, but that is just a faction of the Democratic Party, which took hold precisely because the more left leaning and progressive members jumped ship. Now it's time to jump back in the ship, before we lose the whole ocean. Thanks so much for your website, Sincerely, Kerry Wells Subj: Reply to BuzzFlash Editorial about Nader I want Nader to run because he will keep the democrats on their toes. The Democratic party has degenerated into a bunch of timid bureaucrats who try to disguise themselves as Republicans. That is one of the main reasons that Bush is in power. It is a myth that Nader was the major cause of the last defeat, and every thoughtful Democrat knows it. If Nader runs and is allowed to participate in debates, we can deal with the fundamental issues that divide Democrats from Republicans and how the Democrats have abandoned their progressivism over the years. They have allowed suburban Republicans to set the national agenda, so they still look like timid or corrupt bureaucrats to the average voter. Dean is not as bad as the rest. As for dirty tricks. Of course Rove will pour money into the Nader campaign in an effort to sabotage the Democrats. But, after the debates, Nader could resign and probably would. Besides we know that this next election will be a farce and it may very well be invalidated by martial law. The Republicans are organized crime. They will do anything. John Hanks,
Jr. Subj: Well, well Let me first say how gratified I am to read how much BuzzFlash admires my idealism as a Green, "cabbage-head" that I am. http://www.BuzzFlash.com/editorial/03/12/edi03007.html Now let me offer a deal, and it's to the Democrats. STOP demonizing Ralph! STOP blaming him for the failure of their own lackluster main-stream candidate! STOP marginalizing the party's liberal wing. The DEMS had been doing this long before Ralph offered himself as a candidate, and instead of learning the lesson about neglecting a powerful constituency, Democratic luminaries like Senator Clinton persist in their arrogance and political stupidity by swearing out a vendetta against him. I remain incensed by Democratic fear-mongering during 2000 , what with Gore's campaign insisting Nader votes would give W the victory and --HORROR OF HORRORS--President Bush would pack the Supreme court with justices "like Thomas and Scalia"--yeah, like SENATOR Gore did anything to protect our democracy from Thomas himself when his nomination was in the senate! If the Democratic candidate wants my vote, he'll have to LISTEN to Ralph, not treat him like the proverbial prophet in his own country, as BuzzFlash too often does. NADER IN '04 Cory Hinman Subj: Nader's little candidacy In 2000 Nader got lots of potential Gore votes but why do you assume that he will get the same votes in 2004? His candidacy this time is clearly driven by his and the greens' animus against the DP. His support will be down to a hard core of people who are quite frank about their desire to re-elect bush. In the absence of Nader they would vote for bush. Run Ralph, run. C.W. Jones Subj: Texas Education! Bush touts the educational programs in Texas, but now it appears that the deaths of teachers will be used to pay for teacher retirement....What a joke!!! http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2272164 Cary Subj: Rush Limbaugh response
poor rush, he can dish it, he just can't take it. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Ralph Nader for 2004 12/5/03 I have supported you financially, albeit, a small $ amount. But the democrats including Daschle have sold out, & you know it. The Democratic party needs to be reconstituted, us Northerners and the West Coasters vs. the lousy Southern & small state Western bastards, namely Breaux, Landrieu, Nelson (NE, FL) Lincoln (AK) etc. Look at Miller of Georgia......... Perverts. There is a serious constitutional problem in this country, eg, small state voting power in the Senate, direct elections for presidency, 3rd party representation like the Greens like that in Europe, etc. The only way to change the corporate politics of today is to break up the iceberg, the unholy alliance of southern Democrats & Republicans. Who better than Ralph. Once the Democrats see defeat facing them in the eye for eons, the Democratic Party will break up and offer only progressive candidates and then the Reformation will come slowly....... Let us be prepared though for Fascism for the next 20 years. kares jhangiani Subj: The tragic irony of it all We can't afford to provide adequate protective gear for our troops in Iraq and elsewhere; We can't afford decent medical care for the returning wounded; We can't afford appropriate veteran benefits; BUT We can afford to pay for a highly secretive flight for the pResident's Thanksgiving boondoggle to Iraq for a re-election photo op. I, for one, would like to know how much this little escapade cost the American taxpayer! Linda Ward Subj: Green registration down dramatically Hi Buzz -- thanks for your Ralph Nader editorial, "Take the Deal": and I say, "Amen!" One added note: here in Mendocino County, a stronghold for Nader in the last Presidential election, Green Party registration was up to 14.5 percent of voters in 2000. According to a volunteer with a local campaign in 2002, Green Party registrations had already fallen down to only 5 percent of registered voters by last fall. (And that was long before Greens like myself began thinking about re-registering to support Howard Dean in the Democratic primary.) Does this tendency hold true in other areas? I suspect it must -- although I'd like to see some corroboration from somewhere else. I think the Green Party's "leaders" -- let alone Ralph Nader -- really need to listen to their own grassroots -- we've already decided that the real-world consequences of another Green Party Presidential run outweigh our ideological purity. Jennifer
Poole P.S.: I've emailed these sentiments to Nader's exploratory committee -- have you published that email address yet? Here it is: info@naderexplore04.org. Subj: Thanks Buzz Dear BuzzFlash, Thank you for posting the truth about how Bush doesn't want anyone to see Clark testify against Milosevic. Security reasons. Bull. I don't agree with absolutely everything Clark has ever said or done, but I support him and I would never have known about him had it not been for BuzzFlash. Boy, the media kept it quiet about him. I have many Albanian students who know what Clark did for them. He is really sincere and to know him, it is even worse to see Bush do this. I sometimes wish I never had met Clark because when you meet Clark you realize he is such a kind soul. This makes me sick. a BuzzFlash fan In reply to the idea of Reagan instead of Roosevelt on a dime, the answer of 'why' is obvious. The repugs are in desperate need of a republican hero. One who espoused their right wing views. Reagan is the only guy they have. They've carefully crafted his image over the years, never mentioning Iran Contra, his sleeping through most of his tenure, the hoards of mental patients who became the new homeless when he opened the gates; nor the real homeless who became the face of America during the 1980's. Teddy Roosevelt has been the only Republican that has actually done anything good for America and he's practically a Democrat; plus his face is already on Mt. Rushmore. They must get Ronnie somewhere else to complete the fabrication that his administration mattered. Rep. Vicki Walker Subj: Ivins gets it wrong I usually agree with Molly Ivins, but I have to say that when she dismisses Wesley Clark's presidential candidacy by saying "I have never thought anyone should start in politics at the top," She doesn't know what she's talking about. Clark did not start "at the top." He started at the bottom of the Army's officer corps as a West Point cadet in 1962 and worked his way up, serving with distinction as a captain in Vietnam and rising to become Supreme Commander of NATO. He led military negotiations that preceded the Dayton Peace Accords, which in turn ended the bloodshed in Bosnia. He led NATO in a successful campaign to stop ethnic "cleansing" in Kosovo, saving more than 1 million Kosovar Albanians from genocide -- without the loss of a single American life. Clark has more real-world experience in international diplomacy and national-security issues than all of the other Democratic candidates -- and President Bush -- combined. If this is "starting at the top," then I say, more power to him. Steve Shender Subj: Rush Rush, apparently, is calling the investigations into his "alleged" illegal drug buying, money laundering, and "doctor shopping" activities politically motivated. How can that be? Rush is just an entertainer! Turk Subj: Take the Deal, Ralph I'm not sure you understand how ballot access works, understand the dynamic of state election law, or the unwillingness of the Democratic Party to offer a "deal" to the Green Party. Federal Law, created by Democrats and Republicans, require that a Party's presidential candidate get 5% of the vote to receive funds for the party. The Democrats on the Federal level have not attempted to change that law so the Green Party can find another way to get those funds without running a candidate for president. Many state laws made by Democrats and Republicans require that a party run a presidential candidate and pass a threshold of either a percentage or number of votes to gain or maintain ballot status. Democrats in those state legislatures could create an alternative means to gain or maintain ballot status. Without that ballot status, the Green Party often can't run viable LOCAL races. California is one state that allows a party to get ballot status by enrolling voters rather than run candidates. Note that in the San Francisco mayoral race you mention, the Democrats continue to attack the enrolled Green candidate (who changed his party affiliation from Democratic in 2000). Ironically that Green candidate for Mayor is also the President of the Board of Supervisors and was elected to that position by the Democrats on the Board. That enrolled Green Candidate (Matt Gonzalez) is now in a statistical "dead heat" (50% -48% in his favor) despite only a 3% Green Party enrollment. It's rank and file DEMOCRATS who support Matt. In that race there IS NO CHANCE for a SPLIT vote. NO REPUBLICAN candidate (except the enrolled Democratic candidate who donated $500 to the REPUBLICANS in 2000!). Yet several Democratic elected officials claim a win by Matt will HURT THE DEMOCRATS NATIONALLY. I suspect that the approximately 200 elected Greens work with Democratic elected officials and constituents. They must do so to function effectively. Many Greens support many progressive Democrats in races all around the country. In return Democrats continue to attack local Green candidates, exclude them from forums etc.. Maybe the DEMOCRATS should offer a "deal." It's the those local Green candidates who actually have access to volunteers, petitioners, campaign workers. I'd suspect many of those would love to work on viable local races, reaching out to Democratic constituents. The Democratic Party leader and elected antagonize them instead. The Democrats could support Instant Runoff Voting initiatives that permit voters to make a second choice. In San Francisco, when the voters (predominately DEMOCRATIC enrollees) voted for and passed such a measure the Democratic Party officials attacked it in courts. The Green Party, is a party in which the enrollees have the human resources and decision making ability to put a candidate on the ballot. What Democrat or what party of the Democratic Party infrastructure (DLC/DNC) is offering a "deal" to the ENROLLEES of the GREEN PARTY? It is THEIR PARTY not Ralph Nader's. The sad fact is that in any political race, independent committees can "support" a candidate without authorization. Democrats do this to split the vote in their own primaries. Do the Democrats want to change those laws? I'm a former Democrat, a former member of a Democratic Club, and had volunteer of both local and national Democratic campaigns. I had been Democrat for 20 years, since I was eligible to vote! I am now a Green. I would love to see Bush defeated. The Democrats have REFUSED to offer any kind of coalition building with Greens. Greens work with Democrats, enrollees and elected official all across the country. And all the Donkey does is KICK BACK at those who offer coalitions. Nader may or may not run but it is the petitioners and enrollees who put candidates on the ballot. Like any constituency one may ask a candidate, "what will you do for my vote." Most savvy politicians try to find common ground to win support. When an enrolled Green asks that question to a Democratic candidate they are offered NO DEAL on issues like IRV, Proportional Representation, easier ballot access, another way to get federal party funding. You say "Let the Green Party win more elective offices" yet the Democrats stop Greens every step of the way in local races. Actually they shouldn't "let" anyone win. The Democratic Party SHOULD OFFER fair ballot access and party funding. THEY DON'T! It's not about Nader, it's about US. So what "deal" are the Democrats going to offer? Craig Subj: The Raw Deal Dear BuzzFlash, With FDR we had the NEW DEAL. Truman gave us the FAIR DEAL. Now we get the RAW DEAL. http://radicalfringe.freeservers.com/ D. Hippauf, Lehman PA Subj: anti-Daschle rhetoric counterproductive, shrill Dear BuzzFlash, I occasionally check your site for headlines, and I think you have a very constructive, positive role to play in disseminating non-corporate, non-right-wing news. However, lately I've noticed a tendency that I find counterproductive: The shrill denunciation of Democrats who aren't pure enough to meet a certain set of standards that you, or persons on your editorial staff, impose upon them. In particular I have noticed this in regard to Senator Daschle (D-SD). I am a South Dakotan, a liberal Democrat, and in general a Daschle supporter. That said, there are many of Daschle's political stands that I do not agree with. However, despite not agreeing with him on some issues, I do not think it is productive to turn against him. I am dismayed to see you taking this tactic with Democrats who are still actually Democrats in most respects (unlike, say, Zell Miller of Georgia). This tactic is the suicidal "circular firing squad" approach, in which Democrats savage each other, to the evil glee of Karl Rove and his minions in the White House. I understand that you and many others are upset with Daschle's leadership. Fair enough. But let me ask you: If you cannot get exactly what you want all the time, would you prefer to have 75% of something, or 100% of nothing? Because if Daschle were to meet all of your criteria and take strong, outspoken, liberal stands on every issue, he would not get re-elected in South Dakota. And while you might think "good riddance," consider the alternative: If a moderate Democrat like Daschle is defeated in South Dakota, he is not going to be replaced with a liberal Democrat. Instead, you will end up with another right-wing Republican like Bill Janklow or John Thune. That's simply an electoral reality in South Dakota, and I'm sure similar situations exist in other "red" states that lean conservative. To viciously denounce those moderate Democrats -- whether or not they are indeed wrong on a given issue -- comes across as shrill and patronizing to those of us who have worked hard to elect Democrats in "red" states, and to keep much, much worse people (Republicans like John "Rove's Waterboy" Thune) out of office. In short, if you disagree with Daschle or any other Democrat, fine. Do so constructively. However, please do not hamstring our Democratic representatives who have won election from otherwise conservative districts. I regret that not every Democrat is as "pure" as many of us would like. However, the alternative is to have not even a moderate Democrat, but a right-wing Republican instead. Demonizing Democrats who are deemed "impure" might be therapeutic to Naderites or people who reside in deep-"blue" states, but it ultimately makes no electoral sense as a national strategy. As the old saying goes, it amounts to cutting off your nose to spite your face. Sincerely, Chris S. Subj: Why? Can somebody please explain to me why should we, the taxpayer, paid a moron for work that he is not doing representing us because he is too busy campaigning for his/her re-election? Even in the event that he is not campaigning they always manage to IGNORE our demands or request. We have to remind them that they are our EMPLOYEES and we should be the ones deciding their salaries, raises, vacations, travels, benefits, healthcare, pensions, etc. Unless we demand that the politicians should only be able to serve for a term not make a career out of their position, specially since they, with a few exceptions, totally disregard the will of us, the taxpayer, they will continue laughing in their way to their banks. A BuzzFlash Admirer Subj: Beware of the bias! Dear BuzzFlash, Let me begin by saying although I seldom write you, I ALWAYS read and thoroughly enjoy your great website filled with breaking news and feature stories. THANK YOU for providing this INVALUABLE service. Just wanted to (in case you didn't catch it) alert you to Wash. Post reporter Dana Milbank's outrageous appearance on MSNBC this morning. When the commentator asked him about the current "upswing" in the economy and its impact on the coming election, he said Bush had already won in 2004. "Why have an election?" he replied (this may not be an exact quote, but very close). I guess after the 2000 debacle and the role the press played as cheerleaders for Bush I should not be surprised, but somehow I am. Almost one year out from the election, the Wash. press crowd are already declaring Bush the victor, and no doubt plan to announce him as the inevitable winner at every opportunity (hoping in my opinion, to depress Dem turnout). Democrats MUST start fighting back. How? In my opinion 1) by writing to the newspapers and other media outlets to complain about this amazing bias; 2) by aggressively challenging Bush in all areas (especially on character issues, i.e. lies and manipulations), and 3) by continuing to develop their own media outlets to get their message across. If we Democrats believe for one moment the so-called mainstream media are going to give us a fair shake, we are in for a very rude awakening. I do not want to be overly dramatic, but the Dems have to win this one. It is not an exaggeration to say our democracy depends on it. Thanks for listening and for all your dedication to this vital cause. Sincerely, Dan Subj: AARP I recently sent a letter to AARP (before the Medicare vote in the Senate) expressing my dismay that they had helped craft and were endorsing the deeply flawed Medicare bill. Once Bush signs off on this bill, it will end up costing senior citizens lots and lots of money, while ensuring that drug companies make more millions. I will not reproduce my original letter, but I was not happy... This is the canned reply from AARP: ----- Original Message ----- From: member@aarp.org Dear Member, Your concerns are very important to AARP. However, we are unable to provide a personalized response to all email messages because of an increase in volume. For your convenience, we have provided a list of online options below to assist you in completing your inquiry. Get the latest Medicare Prescription Drug Legislation information at http://www.aarp.org/prescriptiondrugs. Review your benefits and Services information at http://www.aarp.org/benefits. Visit http://www.aarp.org/membership to update or change your account information. We apologize for the inconvenience and thank you for your understanding. Sincerely, AARP Member Service * * * Today, I am sending AARP a response: Dear AARP Member Services: I realize that you are unable to provide a personalized response to my correspondence. Since you have sold out senior citizens to Mr. Bush, you have proven that your individual customers are unimportant to you, unless, of course, we are buying a product or service from you—or perhaps contributing to an AARP lobby group… For your convenience, I have provided a list below to assist you in completing your perfidy (please select at least one): - The Corporate Welfare and Greed Machine is good and will continue to supply all our needs. (Sorry, this offer does not apply to private citizens in the US and its territories). - Respect for the lives, health, and welfare of American citizens is not my strong suit. - I have nothing to fear, Uncle Cowboy and his posse will keep the bastards down—both foreign and domestic! - I am concerned about how I will be able to slake my greed, once I have helped destroy the economy of middle/working class America. - I will do my utmost to continue to support Republican diplomacy like the strong-arm and bribery tactics perpetrated on Senator Rep. Nick Smith, R-Michigan—threatening his son if the Senator did not vote for our Medicare bill. - Private citizens can blow me—I am AARP! Thank you for your correspondence. You have certainly made clear the value you place on individuals—whether they are AARP members or not. I look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, AARP Non-Member * * * While I was in the process of writing this email this morning, I discovered an interesting online news story about Rep. Nick Smith being bribed on the House Floor during the vote on the Medicare bill. Please read the story. If it disturbs you---and it should—you can send a letter to your Representative, click on "Take Action! Demand an Investigation!". http://www.voice4change.org/stories/showstory.asp?file=031205~v4c.asp Peace, Tim Subj: Bush's Props Regarding the fake turkey that Bush was holding in the picture--sometime last fall he made a speech in a factory in Missouri (to the best of my memory). The boxes that were behind him said "Made in USA". That was a prop in back of the president. When they took the prop down, the actual boxes said "Made in China". The White House blamed it on an "over-zealous volunteer". Regime Change Begins at Home. Vote Democratic 2004. Donna Subj: Doin' the peoples' bidness
Find the specifics of this juicy gnarly legislation handout at: http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=1600 Walter Subj: EVERYTHING DUBYA DOES IS FAKE Dear Buzz, You've got to feel sorry for the Busheviks. Their desperate attempts at photo ops seems to be backfiring on them. First it was the 'mission accomplished' fiasco, which was staged with much care and detail, and we know how that turned out to be. Now they staged and orchestrated this so called secret trip to Iraq, and 'lo and behold they are stuck with a picture of a turkey carrying a fake turkey!! Everything this sorry lot in the white house says and does is either a lie or a big fake. I guess all the lies are finally catching up with them. I suppose they will never realize that if Georgie boy's policies were a success, and had he been honest with the nation, and not stooped to lies and deliberate misinformation, he could have run for (re)election, without staged photo ops, but on his credentials. SHAME ON THEM. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Bush in Iraq? Dear Buzz, Excuse me for asking, but how do we know that Bush went to Baghdad?! After all, it turns out that the so-called turkey he "served" was just decoration and that the British pilots never radioed Air Force One. There seems to be something funny about the time of day the Thanksgiving meal was served to the troops. Ah! But there were reporters aboard the flight! Surely they know if they went to Baghdad or not! But wait! How would they know where they went? They were AWOL with Bush flying blind. Who knows? Maybe ALL of it was a staged event that took place in Texas after hours of flying around in circles. Staged troops, staged turkey, staged British pilots, staged this and staged that. Staged presidency I say! A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Rumsfeld relates well to brutal Afghan warlord Dostum. Figures; it takes one to know one. Remember the Kunduz massacre wherein hundreds of Taliban died in shipping containers? I think BuzzFlash followed this story closely - didn't some filmmaker document those events to some extent? That was the work of Afghan warlord General Dostum. Once again, the U.S.(in this case Rummy) is buddying up with the worst kind of folks. Check out this story: http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,791840,00.html A couple choice quotes:
History repeats itself. Dave Dorsett Subj: We Owe the Bush Administration an Apology I have been one of those accusing the administration of appointing Max Cleland to the Export/Import Bank as a subtle way to obstruct justice. I must apologize for my ignorance. While the Bush administration benefits from his removal, the appointment was initiated by the Senate Democrats. While its nice to take care of one of your own, its amazing that this would happen in view of the importance of the 9-11 Commission and Cleland's key and crucial role in the investigation. Under pressure from Bush and Cheney personally the Joint Intelligence Committee investigation was limited in scope and there was no other investigation of the events of that specific day of infamy. Then after much delay a commission was appointed that requires the vote of at least one Republican to do many things, and whose Democrat Vice Chair is someone who tends to go along with the Republicans, as he did in the October Surprise investigation. The commission has been underfunded and operating under a time limit. Thus, as expected, it has been possible for Bush, Cheney and the White House to obstruct and delay the acquiring of documents and testimony. Now it appears that the Democrats in the Senate have once again undermined the investigation of 9-11. It remains to be seen whether or not someone of substance and courage will be appointed. Sen. Graham has often spoken of his desire to disclose things that have been kept from the public due to White House censoring and obstruction. Perhaps this would be an opportunity for him to reveal all the facts that he claims we have a right to know and that he so much wants to tell us. I just don't understand the Democrats. At every turn you seem to give the advantage to Bush and Cheney. You must have a death wish. They must have celebrated with champagne when you nominated Sen. Cleland, and laughed at your providing them an opportunity to weaken the commission. Robert E. Reynolds, Orange Park Fl
Subj: QVC selling "Aviator Bush" Doll I was shocked to see QVC selling the phony photo op Bush doll this morning. Maybe some of you would like to write to QVC and explain why they should not be promoting this "doll" after making the sailors stay out at sea and then blame them for hanging his "mission accomplished" banner for his photo op. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Matt Gonzalez Dear Buzz, Thanks for linking to the Gonzalez site. I first met Matt about ten years ago, when we both lived and worked in the same neighborhood (around 16th St. and Valencia). He's one of the most ethical, compassionate, and generous individuals I have ever known, and one of the smartest, too. I wish you could meet him. Matt's campaign is one of the few bright spots in a season of unrelenting bad news, local and international. He deserves our support! And so do you! Sincerely, John Smalley Subj: Letter to My Local Newspaper (and others) This Letter to the Editor is my latest contribution to the civic dialog. It appeared in today's Hattiesburg American and the Gulfport/Biloxi Sun Herald. They were edited somewhat differently, but they both retain the essence of my intent (I like this one from the Hattiesburg American; it's more nearly the way I wrote it.) A year ago President Bush and his administration claimed that Saddam Hussein posed a dire threat to U.S. security. He didn't. Today they describe the war in Iraq as a defense of the American homeland. It's not. Before Thanksgiving, Vice President Cheney said, "We are aggressively striking the terrorists in Iraq, defeating them there so we do not have to face them on the streets of our own cities." President Bush, during his campaign visit to Baghdad, told the troops, "You are defeating the terrorists in Iraq so we don't have to face them in our country." Such statements are fraudulent. Our men and women in uniform are not fighting against international terrorists in Iraq. The guerrillas launching mortars at our military bases, attacking our troops on patrol or hiding booby traps on Iraqi highways are almost entirely native Iraqis who are trying to remove American troops from their country. They do not attack us because they hate Americans. They do not attack us because they "hate freedom." They attack us because they hate Bush's invasion and occupation of their country. Bush continues to pretend otherwise, suggesting that al-Qaida-linked terrorists are pouring into Iraq from Syria, Iran and even Saudi Arabia to attack our troops. But U.S. generals in Iraq have repeatedly stated that they have seen little evidence of international involvement. What the Bush administration does not admit to the American people is that he has committed our military to fighting two different wars today against two very different enemies. The first war, against international terror, was brought to our shores by the attacks of Sept. 11, and we had no choice but to respond with all the power we could muster. The invasion of Afghanistan, the toppling of its Taliban government and the destruction of al-Qaida bases in that country were completely justified and necessary responses. The war against Iraq, on the other hand, was not thrust upon us; it is a war that Bush chose, a war of opportunity launched because the events of Sept. 11 gave him the cover to do so. Waged separately, either would take years to win. Tackling them simultaneously is megalomaniacal stupidity on a Napoleonic scale. Robert R.
Regl, Subj: Take the Deal, Ralph In your editorial, "Take the Deal, Ralph!", you offer Nader and the Greens essentially nothing that they don't already have. From their point of view, and from the view of this registered Democrat, why should they go for that? The Democrats have a lot to gain from Green cooperation in the next Presidential election and the whole world has a lot to lose if Bush is reelected. The Democrats must present a substantial offer to the Green Party, nothing less than an invitation to Congress. We Democrats should pledge to the Greens our support to push hard for proportional representation at the local, state, and national levels. Although Democrats may have to share some of our political power, our country will be much better off in the long run. To me, proportional representation is one of the four cornerstones for reclaiming democracy in the USA: 1. Revocation of corporate personhood. 2. Diversity of media ownership. 3. Public funding of political campaigns. 4. Proportional representation. Doesn't it make sense to offer the Greens something they are dying to get that will also benefit the country? Let's awaken the disenfranchised and run the cons out of office! Keep up the good work BuzzFlash, Scott Henderson Subj: Wrapping Iraqi towns in razor wire. "This fence is here for your protection. Do not approach or try to cross, or you will be shot." http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/07/international/middleeast/07TACT.html Mike Subj: Bush, the IRS Scandal and Special Interests Posted at economists for dean I was happy to see Paul Krugman mention the recent scandal about the IRS buckling under pressure to extend the synfuel credit, which I discussed last week in this post. I think that this is one of the most egregious examples of blatant corruption that has somehow escaped much scrutiny in the mainstream press and most of the blogworld as well. This tax break could be worth as much as $10 billion a year! In the whole political discussion about how to best attack Bush's irresponsible "looting" of the country, it is clear that tying Bush to the special interests that support him in each legislation is a must. As I noted in my earlier post, even Republican pollster Frank Luntz, (who several commentors said I shouldn't trust) has said that this strategy resonates with voters. Ordinary Americans being pitted against the interests of big business in the Bush administration was a theme that Gore laid out in his convention speech in 2000 and he has proved to be 100% on the mark. From Iraq, to the corporate scandals, to the mutual fund scandals, to the energy bill to the Medicare bill this is the underlying theme of the Bush Presidency. This might also be the way to attract the NASCAR dads. Lerxst Subj: Who Bribed Rep. Nick Smith? The Republicans have finally gone too far: http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/press-945.html If bribes can be offered on the floor of the House, our Democracy is doomed. The blogosphere forced Senator Trent Lott to step down as majority leader. Surely it can force an investigation of this obscenity! Please push this story!! Alfredo Subj: Pentagon Advisor Perle Faulted Over Boeing Role One might think this information is newsworthy, but "nary a word" about this appeared in my local paper. PBS did carry a story about the lease vs. buying of the Boeing tankers on a "NOW with Bill Moyers recently. Perhaps corruption at the highest levels of our government will be worthy of an investigative report on "60 Minutes", "Dateline", or another similar " news" show. I look forward to freedom of the press in this country. By that, I mean the press freeing themselves from the corporate interests sufficiently to honestly inform the public. Sales would probably increase. As ever, Neb http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1205-14.htm Subj: LOOKING FOR HELP K-MART LOOKING FOR PERSONNEL FOR LOST AND FOUND DEPARTMENT-----BUSH ADMINISTRATION NEED NOT APPLY! YOU CAN'T FIND THE LEAKER WHO OUTED AN AGENT. YOU CAN'T FIND THE ANTHRAX TERRORIST. YOU CAN'T FIND OSAMA. YOU CAN'T FIND SADDAM. YOU CAN'T FIND BUSH'S MILITARY RECORDS. YOU ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO WORK AT K-MART! The more you trash Ralph Nader, the more you make Greens determined that we are our own party. We do not owe anything to the Democrats. If they lose, they do it by themselves and we are not responsible. Did anyone treat Ross Perot or other third party candidates this way? You think you can push the Green Party into being a lap dog for the Democrats, but it only makes us stronger. Real Greens will not vote for Democrats as the lesser of the evil. We are building a party, so get off our backs. Beverly Polokoff Subj: G. W. Bush wants the moon. The story is that G.W.Bush wants to renew our trips to the moon. And they say that this man cannot plan ahead. Can you think of a better place for the George W. Bush Family and Friends Library? You want to see what the Bush Gang is hiding? To the Moon buddy! JG Subj: Bush's Records as Gov. of Texas Mr. Bush had sought to store his papers in his father's presidential library, where they would have stayed secret for a half-century. But an outcry prompted a ruling from the Texas attorney general to move the papers. Now, they can be viewed at the state archive, though the current governor and the attorney general may exempt some memorandums and legal correspondence. "I'm sure that when Dr. Dean learns that President Bush's public papers as governor are now unsealed, he will be good to his word and unseal the papers of his governorship, as well," Mr. Gillespie, the Republican chairman, said in the prepared text of remarks that he was delivering in Essex Junction, Vt. "As everyone in this room surely knows," the text continued, "your former governor would never say one thing and do another." Dean Says He’s Now Considering The Memory Hole > George W. Bush Buzz, The hypocrisy of the GOP never ceases to amaze me. George Bush's records as gov. were shipped to his father's library to avoid scrutiny by the public. They were not released during his campaign, but now they're demanding Howard Dean to release his. And do we really think Bush's records, now that they are at the state archive (only after a lawsuit), will not be fully censored for anything incriminating, particularly his dealings with Ken Lay and Enron? "Now, they can be viewed at the state archive, though the current governor and the attorney general may exempt some memorandums and legal correspondence." Gigi Subj: What Have We Become???
Killing nine innocent children based upon mere suspicion of another individual would NEVER be acceptable in this country. Can we deny that this particular incident is mere dust compared to the real innocent casualties of our neo-con's war. Can we continue to accept such realities as examples of what we have become? The answer lies within each one of us. My answer,...NO!!! Miss Leslee Subj: Saturday Night Live cancellation Dear BuzzFlash, This morning I woke up expecting to watch SNL that I recorded last night. Instead there was a repeat from 1991. At the end of the news, just prior to SNL, they said "Due to equal time laws, the show scheduled with Al Sharpton and Pink will not be seen." Did this happen all over the country or just here in Fresno, CA on KSEE 24? I am so angry I don't know what to do. Is this censorship by NBC? They knew for a long time Al Sharpton was going to be hosting. Maybe there will be something in the paper this morning, but if not, will you please look into it. Thank you, Debbie Eiman Subj: Bury the Lead "Wal-Mart Invades, and Mexico Gladly Surrenders" The NYT could have bypassed most of this article and led with the last paragraph.
A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: difference between george and hillary iraq visits It's interesting that she goes in, investigates, assesses, reports. He goes in and poses with a fake turkey. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Nominee's Pledge I just finished watching CSPAN's coverage of the Florida Democratic Convention speeches by the leading candidates, and I have to say, they were on fire. Wesley Clark really threw down the gauntlet in the face of the administration, Howard Dean tore the roof off the place, and Dennis Kucinich was the conscience of the race. However, it will all come down to one person. So I am asking for the candidates to all take the following pledge: Candidate's Pledge:
Please help get this message to the candidates. Stephen
Anderson Subj: Quote I thought would interest you ... From the NY Times:
Sounds like a Viet Nam-like quote, something along the lines of "We had to destroy the village to save it". Keep up the great work! Richard Subj: Rush Limbaugh is "special" Would someone kindly remind Mr. Limbawl that if, evidence permitting, Noelle Bush, daughter of Governor Jeb Bush, can be charged & indicted for prescription fraud -- why can't he? A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Westar Coverup The DOJ finally indicted former Westar executives David Wittig and Donald Lake for looting Westar: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37291-2003Dec4.html The 23-page, 40-count indictment largely tracks the Special Report prepared by an outside law firm hired by Westar, except in one important respect - NEITHER WITTIG NOR LAKE WERE INDICTED FOR MASSIVE CAMPAIGN FINANCE VIOLATONS INVOLVING CORPORATE CONTRIBUTIONS TO REPS. DELAY, TAUZIN, ETC.!!! The e-mails released with the Special Report last May provided enough evidence for an indictment. They showed that Wittig and Lake sought to buy a "seat at the table" at the energy bill conference by, among other things, contributing $25,000 to Tom DeLay's Texans for a Republican Majority. So why no indictment? Maybe it's because the same e-mails implicated another former Westar executive, Carl Koupal, who HAPPENS TO BE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S FORMER CAMPAIGN MANAGER!! Alfredo Subj: Dem Candidates & Audit-less Voting Machines Shouldn't we be encouraging all Dem candidates to speak out on those Audit-Less Voting Machines? They're going to a lot of hard work doing all that campaigning just to have the election stolen from them. BuzzFlash, how about asking all your readers to contact those candidates and urge them to start hammering the issue home to the public? They have the exposure and can be heard and might get some real action going in that area. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: ad in today's Stars and Stripes on Brown and Root There is no URL, but this is how it's laid out:
at the website there is a NY Times article on Halliburton: http://www.joshuafriedmanesq.com/press/Halliburton_Subsidiary.htm A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Are We An Apathetic Nation? Dear Buzz I am not ashamed to be American, but I am sometimes ashamed of the attitudes of the American people. Children were killed in Afghanistan yesterday, supposedly a mistake, and I still have to hear any kind of remorse, regret or apology from the Bush white house, the media or any American. We have become a nation of disconnected people, and seem to feel no pain when it comes to the lives of people from other nations. I can imagine the outrage and how media like faux news would cover this terrible tragedy if these had been American lives. A BuzzFlash Reader. Subj: For What it's Worth Dear Buzz, I sent the follow e-mail to Giving@Drew.edu. Others may also wish to express their dismay at a University President covering up critical knowledge the American people deserve.
John Westermann, author of Exit Wounds, High Crimes, The Honor Farm, Sweet Deal, Ladies Of The Night. http://www.johnwestermann.com Subj: Repugs worship Reagan Hi BuzzFlash, Because it's the only thing they can do. Fantasy, fakery, falsehood, lies,etc. They had no one,ever, in that party that was worth a bucket of warm spit. So they do what they think they are good at. They play let's pretend, with their mean little hearts. (they block out Reagan was once a democrat) Add a little Ambien and they can sleep and dream what a wonderful world they created, and Reagan is their God. BuzzFlash Readers Subj: drive it home: another attack on U.S. soil would be the fault of the Bush Administration Hi Buzz, I sent the following to the DNC, Wesley Clark and Howard Dean's campaigns, and wanted to spread the word. I wanted to point out something I've noticed as I interview women about their feelings on the Iraq war for a journalism class. One woman's comment summed up much of what I'm hearing:
If there is some kind of attack against America near the election, this is what would be on people's minds, and swing voters might be likely to vote for Bush. It's important that the Democrats point out how Bush has actually hindered our security through many of his lapses and hesitations, and emphasize, well before the election, that if there is an attack IT IS BECAUSE OF THESE LAPSES. This is what people have got to be thinking about so that they associate any attack against us AS BUSH'S FAULT. I don't trust the Republicans-- they might actually stage something to get people thinking about security and so you guys need to head them off at the pass. --A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: In your face ad from Fox Buzz: I couldn't believe my eyes.....an ad for Fox TV programming in the middle of a Crossfire segment on CNN. Is this something new? Maybe it isn't and I had missed it because except for Crossfire, I no longer watch CNN. This is because CNN has become a lesser version of Faux News: a cheering section for Bush,Inc. I had not witnessed this type of "in your face" advertising before! I doubt if Fox would allow a CNN ad on its network. Dee Turner Subj: News from the north Hi Buzz, Thought you might be interested in a little news from Maine (home to one of the presidential palaces in Kennebunkport). I found this gem in this mornings Portland Press Herald. "Michaud now in GOP's cross hairs" It seems that even rural, sparsely populated, northern Maine isn't immune from the long arm reach of the GOP. A Patriotic, Democracy-Loving, Faithful BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Thought for the day "GOP wants to kick FDR off the dime" - Washington Times FDR is on the dime because of the MARCH OF DIMES. Putting Reagan on the dime is probably appropriate, because his administration reminds us of the phrase "Brother, can you spare a dime." Mika Subj: Saturday night live Hi Buzz, The AP is reporting on Al Sharpton's appearance on SNL. "Al Sharpton shows off moves on 'SNL'. Here is a paragraph:
Well it wasn't seen in southern Maine either (bush country and home to a presidential palace in Kennebunkport). Oh, Al Sharpton WAS on SNL last night here in Maine.......with Chevy Chase! A Patriotic, Democracy-Loving, Faithful BuzzFlash Reader Re: Take the Deal, Ralph! A Message to Ralph Nader, Stay Out. A Written Response by Mary MacElveen December 5, 2003 There is an old saying that goes like this, "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me" That is the message I want to send out to every single Green Party member who would even think of supporting Ralph Nader's bid for a 2004 presidential race and to Ralph Nader himself. I still remember when he stated that there was no difference between Bush and Gore. Well, Ralph there is and now we are living a nightmare. But, while we cannot go back only forwards we must remember this lesson if we are to even have a future as a democracy. I would also like to remind, Ralph what he said concerning the Iraq war where he stated this concerning Bush's actions, "The invasion of Iraq was illegal, unconstitutional and an impeachable offense" He then went onto say, "The alleged weapons of mass destruction, connection of Saddam Hussein to Sept. 11 and the depiction of Saddam as a threat to United States were all part of that deception" I would like to remind Ralph, that Al Gore was against this war from the very start. Still no difference, Ralph? When it comes to a woman's right to choose, Ralph Nader had to say this, "that even if Roe v. Wade was overturned, the issue "would just revert to the states." Well, after both houses of congress passed the ban on partial birth abortion and where Bush signed it into law (which is presently be challenged right now), isn't this country heading in that direction? His stance was very dismissive of a woman's right to choose. Still no difference, Ralph? After the 2000 presidential election, I do not see a difference between Nader and Bush. Both are complicit in the erosion of this democracy. The two have melded into one in my opinion. My message to Ralph Nader is to stay out of politics period. You have done enough damage already. Source Links: "Ralph Nader Says Bush Impeachable on Iraq War" Subj: Sad story about the US in Iraq
A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: BuzzFlash Editorial The only fault I find with your editorial regarding a Nader candidacy is that it is too mild and polite. This man has to be seen for what he truly is, a gigantic hypocrite and egomaniac. I won’t go so far as to say that he is quite knowingly in the pay of the Republican party, but he may as well be should he choose to bless us again with his holier-than-thou presence. Certainly, as your editorial states, "Anyone who thinks that Rove and the RNC won’t be doing everything that they can to support Nader either has a cabbage for a brain or is so blinded by idealism they have become naïve puppets." This is the man who declared in 2000 he would not run in marginal states, but he did, so dismaying some of his top staff they quit in disgust. He represents a strange kind of elitism, as suggested by supporters of his who stupidly and arrogantly say that (1) there is no difference between the parties and (2) if things get bad enough, then we, the Greens or Independents or Whatevers, shall march in to set things right. The clinical word for this is bullshit. Ultimately this man, at best, if one can believe his proclamations, is a kind of benign ideologue, an oxymoron in much the same way "moderate Republican" is these days. He can proclaim all he wants that Al Gore ran a lousy campaign, that Al Gore lost his own state, and so on, but had Mr. Nader not run, as he had said he wouldn’t in marginal Florida, George W. Bush, our malevolent simian in chief would not now be president. And anyone who thinks there would have been no difference needs a brain transplant. Norman Weinstein Subj: Resign Dear Charles Krauthammer, You sir are a dissembling liar and your public humiliation is nigh. Your column "Delusional Dean" is but the latest example of your mastery of the editorial lie. You edit the truth and it becomes a lie, print the real unedited transcripts, apologize and resign. You can go to work for Murdoch and get a real close up of some delusional types. Of course when you work for Murdoch you must leave your self respect and honesty at the door, but you won't miss them much. RG Johnson PS...tell me great seer, why does the Administration oppose an investigation of 9-11? Subj: Vote Paper Trail Regards your story from Florida, And the mention about California requiring paper printouts by 2006, the problem is that Bush can steal the election again in 2004, and by 2006, there won't be much of a democracy to vote about. Bob Maginnis "Why is Rush Limbaugh the only person treated like this in America?", asked his lawyer, and ABC printed this dissembling prior to a recitation of the actual facts:
This is a crime, but the hypocritical Republican right will not criticize this man. Instead, all the ditto heads will simply enable the addict, thereby showing their "moral superiority" to to be expedient propaganda for use in dividing the classes, the races, and the religious groups into the compartments that they can brand as an enemy: "not one of US". Rush is one of "US", so his moral superiority and imperviousness to the "war" on drugs is assured. Imagine the punishment for a crime like this by a Nazi in 1930's Germany, as compared to that for a Jew. It's sort of like our hypocritical leaders in the Federal Government paying $700M per year to the butcher of Uzbekhistan as part of the "war" on terror. Because it is expedient and we need the corridor for the oil pipeline, he is coddled. Limbaugh is a coward who would have you believe he matters, in order to convince the party he should be spared. Chris McFarland Sent to: president@whitehouse.gov Subj: Season's Greetings, Mr. President! Dear Mr. President, Merry Christmas! I know you must be terribly busy this time of year, what with the push to prematurely pull out of Iraq in time for the 2004 elections, Mr. Perle's unfortunate dealings with those Boeing boys, all the daily killings in Iraq, and so on and so forth, but I just had to get in touch and briefly send you and yours a warm holiday welcome. This must be a hectic season for you, and I know the debacle of Iraq, Afghanistan and the rest of your war on terror must weigh heavily on your mind. After all, it isn't every President who can lay claim to the deaths of 10,000 civilians half a world away! But that's what makes you such a strong leader, isn't it? All these troubles could easily get you down during the whirlwind of the holidays, but don't let them. Sure, the Taliban and al Qaeda are still going strong. And yes, poppy production in Afghanistan has increased 3,600% since our boys went in there. And one could make the argument that with Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein all alive and kicking, American and other Coalition troops dying left and right, al Qaeda's plans for that "grande finale" attack on US soil, the recent USA Today poll that shows 70% of American's don't believe the war on terror has made us safer and the economy in the toilet, your chances come next November have, uh, slimmed down a bit. But heck, you can always just steal the election again! So don't worry so much. The snow is on the ground, the trees are decorated and song is in the air. Tip back a cup of nonalcoholic egg nog and rejoice in the season. I'm sure it's what the 444 dead American soldiers would have wanted. Sincerely, Jan Primus,
Editor Subj: Saudi's most wanted picture list Question: Do you think it includes a picture of Osama bin Laden?
Karen Subj: -THE DEMS DESERVE IT Tell Daschle and McAuliffe to get off their ass and prevent the theft of 04 in florida. If the don't do something now, I am not going to vote and I will encourage others to do likewise. What's the point if our votes are not going to be counted once again, or, worse still, deleted. Colette
Miller Re: For What It's Worth Kerry should have said: "The President has done with the Iraq war what his brother does to free Asian hookers." Fair enough? John Westermann, author of Exit Wounds, High Crimes, The Honor Farm, Sweet Deal, Ladies Of The Night, teaches at Stony Brook University. http://www.johnwestermann.com Subj: Kerry Profane? How bout Smirk Calling Reporter "@$$-hole" That was captured on tape, with Cheney agreeing "bigtime." Did Smirk ever apologize, as his handlers would like Kerry to do?? Kerry was describing a Bush action/policy, while Bush was calling a person NAMES!! That should be pointed out by SOMEBODY in the media. How quickly they PRETEND to forget. R. Subj: Why wait to puke? The latest outrage from our puke-inducing regime has just occurred. The White House is saying that Kerry should apologize for the verbal obscenity -"fuck" - he directed against Bush in his "Did I expect George Bush to f--- it up as badly as he did?" Can you believe the nerve of these people? This whole damn regime is best encapsulated in one four-letter mot, an ancient Anglo-Saxonism that starts with "s" and ends with "t". You can’t even accuse them of selective morality; theirs is non-morality, amorality, if you will, that does allow for shame or embarrassment. If they declare the sun will shine, run like hell for your raincoat and umbrella. For them to speak the truth is to commit a coincidence. They are in their very essence a collective obscenity. Apologize, indeed! Give me a break! Norman
Weinstein |
|||||
 |
||||
| DAILY BUZZ | ||||
| INTERVIEWS | ||||
