 |
|||||
|
February 3, 2004 |
|||||
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. If your letter includes hypertext links, please include the entire URL. 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: Prescription Drug Bill Question???? Dear BuzzFlash, Can a little publicized provision of the new Medicare bill be employed to help the current president gut Medicare? I refer to a section of the new Medicare Drug Bill and a quote from Henry J. Aaron at Washington's Brooking Institute which goes as follows: "The drug bill would declare the whole Medicare program to be in financial crisis if general revenues are projected to finance more than 45 percent of the total cost of the program for two of the next seven years. In that event, the president would be required to prepare plans to cut Medicare benefits or raise regressive payroll taxes, and Congress would have to vote on those plans. No such requirement would apply to the rest of the budget, where massive and growing deficits exist." This quote was taken from the 1-15-04 Washington Spectator. Would it be your opinion that this is an accurate portrayal of one of the bill's provisions? It just seems that with the Prescription Drug cost overrun rollout and the expenditure figures going well over predictions that this may come to pass. Has the Medicare General revenue funding ever come close or exceeded the 45 percent coverage in the past? How accurate would the 7 year projections be and would they be subject to independent nonpartisan review before triggering presidential action? What president would ever get payroll tax increases passed and so the alternative is the path of least resistance being Medicare cuts. Thanks for considering my question, May Belle Osborne Subj: 9/11 Commission Please ask your readers to contact their representatives in Washington to urge them to support an extension of the Kean Commission's May deadline. Unless our lawmakers hear from us in huge numbers, we may end up with another Warren Commission debacle. Janet Subj: Reparations plan for Iraqi and Afghan families Dear Buzz, I have come up with a plan on who should fit the bill for the reparations due to the families of civilian casualties of the Iraq and Afghan war. Halliburton Bechtel Former POTUS GWB Former VPOTUS RBC and any other evildoer that profited from both wars. I am sure you could name more perpetrators. And I don't think that catching UBL will help GWB in anyway in the upcoming elections. Fahrenheit 911 will squash that real quick. I would like to know how that movie is coming along also? Would like your feedback on this. Be safe! “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”(Edmund Burke) A Real Patriot Act.......VOTE 2004 Rod Subj: Grounded Flights Let's see, Newsweek comes out with a poll that shows Bush's job rating has slipped below 50% and that indicates, if the election were held today, Kerry would beat Bush. Suddenly, voila, several flights are grounded because of security concerns. Coincidence? a BuzzFlash devotee Subj: Crazy Lady from the National Review drops lies on CNN Might I suggest you post the transcript from Jan 31 Capital Gang (CNN). That woman from the National Review (who sits on the panel) tried to rewrite the history of the Viet Nam War...she suggested that John Kerry was lying when he said women and children were being killed and that Kerry actually slandered veterans when he testified in 197?. I don't give a hoot about Kerry, but this type of revisionism could only take place in Stalinist Russia. Andrew Smith Subj: NOVAK KNEW!!....lol Was watching the Capitol Report on CNN today and they showed tapes to prove it. Bob Novak said BEFORE we attacked Iraq that there were no additional WMDs in Iraq than there were in the past and he seemed to base that on the “insider”information he is privy to. Lp Hi BuzzFlash, If CNN's response to the caller is true, it's another unprecedented crushing move by this administration. Below is the most pertinent part of the call, not quite verbatim, but close. The most important part, the last ten lines, where she is talking to CNN, is verbatim. Hope this is helpful. I'm almost 100% certain that my vcr recording had started at 0, which would put this call, about 14 minutes into the beginning of Washington Journal, on Tues. 1/27/04. Thanks, Brian Kowalski
Subj: Mailbags 1/30 Rosamond, thank you so much for the link to the real "Howard Dean" scream....it was great, and now I have heard the real thing...I am surprised that a media person would actually show this to us....must have been a lot of complaints...at least, I hope so! And, I agree with you, Donald Schneider: Paul Krugman is the greatest!! 'Scuse me! Sorry, I am back. The television in the other room was having a Bush speech..at some high end fund raiser....and I have a low gag threshold today, had to turn it off! When I entered the room, I saw Bill Frist first...and, is it just me, or does anyone else detest that man? I mean to the point of Yuk? See, I know a little more about the man from having relatives in Nashville, where he is mostly known for Medicare fraud!!! Howard Dean is on now...what a refreshing sound. I am convinced with my teeny conspiratorial mind, that someone decided to get rid of him..no one will change my mind now. To all of you out there who have expressed appreciation and and kindness to me and my letters.....I thank you so much, not many people I know, have anything kind to say to me, especially about politics...It is a surprise to me, and since I love you all, too, this is the only place I come for news and mail....thank you all and thank BuzzFlash!! We have a real job ahead of us...I have said before and I reiterate....whomever the democrat is that wins this nomination....I will vote for him...(No, Lieberman or Sharpton) and unfortunately, either of them would likely be better than the beast we have in the White House....but, you cannot cut off your nose to spite your face!! I do hope Howard Dean does stay until the bitter end. I read today that Lieberman will drop out after Feb. 3rd, if he does not get more votes, Good idea, Joe!!! Many democrats and some republicans, I read in the St. Louis paper today, have started a rallying cry to insist that Scalia recuse himself from the hearings on the energy commission. I really do not even believe that...After what they did all of the 90's, it is impossible to think that this congress and senate would allow such impeachable offenses in this administration. I really do not think I can live through another Bush administration! Shirley......St. Louis Subj: Wow. I thought unemployment figures came from those who APPLIED for unemployment "Self-Employment May Mask U.S. Job Growth" Every employment figure for the last couple years has come with the caveat: The numbers do not include the people who stopped looking for jobs. So I assumed that unemployment numbers, as relayed by the government, are the people who APPLIED for unemployment. How else would they come up with unemployment figures? The government, as of yet, does not have an all-pervasive surveillance system that adds you to the employment numbers magically once you are fired, or laid-off, or even you quit. Are the spinmeisters of the Bush administration really trying to say that self-employed people, as a matter of habitual gold-mining, APPLY for unemployment? If so then we, as a country, have fallen to the lowest of the low. I was laid-off, back in November. My boss still gave me a Christmas bonus so I decided not to apply for unemployment (I respect him because it was obvious he respects me. In Louisiana, your employer pays your unemployment benefits). The government doesn't know I am one of the unemployed. The thing to understand is unemployment figures have always been determined the same way: by the people who apply for unemployment. If unemployment is higher now than usual, it means that the number of people who apply for unemployment is higher than usual. If those people are attempting to earn money with other means, by selling some of their belongings (you could consider selling your TV and sound system as being a brokerage firm), or making things and selling them (becoming an artist), chasing a dream (whatever it may be) or finding an opportunity and exploiting it (it is the American Way, right?), they are in the tradition of people who started Microsoft (I guarantee you, although Bill Gates would have been considered unemployed by government records had he filed for unemployment after he quit college, he never applied for it) or Madonna or anyone else who has found themselves unemployed from time to time and tried to figure out a way to make money when not employed. If they (the spinmeisters) are really trying to say that we have an even greater entreurpreneurship that is succeeding at the moment better than other moments in our history, I have this question: how do you know? And another: how do you judge if someone is successful enough to make enough to make a good enough living? I mean, if I made $40,000 last year employed last year in an architecture firm, and this year I make $5,000 making lamps I sell on Ebay, does that mean I am no longer considered unemployed? Bert Subj: McGovern and the present election cycle Dear BuzzFlash, This is the first campaign since George McGovern's that has called me to get involved beyond voting for my candidate. Watching the horrendous bloodshed on the evening news convinced many that the war in Vietnam was a disaster, and I felt an urgent need to DO something. I was a young mother recently moved to a new part of the country, who baked casseroles for party workers and made phone calls to get people to the polls -- a small contribution -- but I had the satisfaction of knowing that I was doing what I could to help my country. This time the situation is much more serious. Not only are our young people dying unnecessarily, but our very democracy is at stake. I have literally been brought to tears trying to explain "free speech zones". How can such a challenge to free speech rights be tolerated? How can "good" Republicans (and yes, I am convinced there ARE some) defend this situation? How can bills which the House and Senate voted down be reinserted sneakily into huge omnibus spending bills and voted into law when most who voted HAD NO IDEA?? (e.g., allowing a higher percentage of domination by a single media giant in local markets). I am a retired grandmother in Florida, and I'm mad as hell about a whole list of things, not the least of which is the "stolen" election of 2000. I find myself stunned anew every time I think about the Supreme Court "picking" the president. WE MUST NEVER LET AN ELECTION BE STOLEN AGAIN, but that will be difficult, especially since the company who "purged" the Florida voter rolls of felons ("accidentally" purging many thousands of legitimate voters, mostly in the African American community) has been hired to do the same in other states. We must also be vigilant about electronic voting, insisting that our states and counties provide a printed paper trail for recounts (something Jeb Bush refuses to do). We must realize that sitting at home reading BuzzFlash is not going to ensure a Democratic victory in November. Writing emails to people in power and forwarding information which is important for our cause is needed work. But anyone who is serious about taking back our country from these out of control right wingers is going to have to put your money where your mouth is, and be just as willing to donate time as money. Campaigns can always use your money, especially with Bush's HUGE $200 million plus pile of money set aside to spread Karl Rove's vicious lies about whoever our chosen candidate is. However, unless we are willing to do whatever it takes --- joining the Democratic Party in your town, working on voter registration, setting up forums on voter issues, volunteering to drive people to the polls, writing strong letters to the local newspapers, talking frankly with family and friends, telling our representatives in Washington to get off their duffs and FIGHT BACK --- unless you are willing to take personal responsibility to do the right thing, you will have no right to complain when George Bush is elected (NOT re-elected, please!). If we work together, WE CAN DO THIS!! Our country is depending on us. Sue in Florida I have been living and working in SE Asia for nearly 12 years now. Years ago, shortly after moving here, I came to realize through my expatriate experiences that back home in America most people (not the BuzzFlash kinda people mind you) are not privy to the "real news". All that is available to Americans living at home is very well scripted propaganda machine that is designed to misinform them, distract them and control what they think they may know about current world events. As a recent survey has clearly pointed out Americans are the least informed nation on this planet when it comes to the rest of the world and what goes on in it. Our scope as a nation is one based on a selfish and arrogant stance that forbids us to be introspective or to consider the fact that we are not alone and that the rest of the world is not here to serve us or suffer our indulgences (or pollution for that matter). I can turn on my television here and choose from news broadcasts from not only America but Japan, all three Chinas, India, Malaysia, Thailand, France, Italy, Russia, Germany, Spain and England. All of it in English. I am then able to compare the different perspectives presented and arrive at my own conclusions that are based on many points of view of the same subject. When the tragedy of 9/11 occurred I received a phone call after the first plane hit the WTC from someone back in the States. I was then sitting in front of my TV here when the second plane did the same and for the next three days I was glued to the tube. Like everyone else in the world I was shocked over what had happened. But over those three days I also became even more shocked and appalled at the views being expressed by those people at home who were being asked to comment on the tragedy. One interview sticks in my mind to this day. A woman was being interviewed while standing in front of her 4 X 4 vehicle, displaying her assault rifle and all of her other survival gear. She said that she had come to the conclusion that "there are people out there who do not like us". She was dismayed and befuddled over this realization. My question is, where has this woman been getting her news all of her life to finally come up with that conclusion? Anyone who has ever been outside of America can tell you that a lot of folks around the world have "not liked us" for a very long time. It may have something to do with our foreign policy, the way we meddle in international affairs and keep jumping from one "friendly" regime to another, as it suits us at the time, and then abandoning them when we no longer need their services or support. When I first came to live in the country that I am now in most of the time I was treated respectfully and cordially by any one that I would meet, no matter which country they came from. Now when people hear me speaking my American English I am more times than not looked upon with disgust and frowns and assailed with questions and comments about our current agenda. If I do become engaged in a conversation with these people they are usually surprised to hear my point of view. They like most folks around the world tend to lump the different nationalities into stereotypes. Another interesting thing about 9/11 for me personally is this. I called my Mother in Vermont on 9/12 to ask how my brother who lives in New York City was. Her very first comment was this: "They are going to use this event to dismantle the Constitution. People keep saying this is like Pearl Harbor or the invasion of Poland. I lived through both of those events and this is not like either of them. This is the 21st Century." Funny how some folks view circumstances as opposed to others. You see, my Mother watches C-Span and listens to NPR and SHE READS. A lot of other folks are only glued to Murdoch feeds and CNN. Even if they were good and accurate, they are only one side of the story. Americans lack world perspective. Americans need to become more knowledgeable and aware of the world around them. Then they may better understand what is happening at home. Realize that what they have is valuable and fragile. Then maybe they will really start to know what to care about again. Best Regards, "A BuzzFlash Reader" Dear BuzzFlash: I'm an occasional visitor to your site, but think you are great. Keep it up. I do visit a pretty sedate forum where politics are discussed as well as other subjects. This was posted yesterday - I don't know the validity, but the person who wrote it seems pretty genuine. Thought I would pass it on - you perhaps might know channels where someone can investigate further. Would not want to get this young man into trouble for talking though. A BuzzFlash Reader
Subj: Limbaugh Probe -- Email to Support Please post this email address on your site -- it is the address to contact Palm Beach State Attorney Barry Krischer. He is being hit with pro-Limbaugh mail that we ought to counter. Thank you! StateAttorney@sa15.state.fl.us Daniel Subj: "He never even tried." Condi Rice said. January 30, 2004 Yesterday, I taped Condi Rice on the Today Show. I have finished transcribing it and while trying to find something else I came upon some particularly pertinent quotes. They seem to think that no one has a VCR or Internet access, that the minute they say something it disappears forever.
Obviously he must have "even tried" or George W. Bush was being abused by intelligence, misleading the American people or bearing false witness, which is one of the 3 commandments, but he wasn't under oath and he had his fingers crossed.
You have to to wonder why he would have even tried at all.
They under-estimated Osama bin Ladin even after the Clinton administration told them how bad he was and gave them ideas on how to get him, but she does blame Clinton for information about WMDs and the Bush Administration's own over-estimation of those. We can only guess what the estimate now is about Iran, but we know that we armed Iran and Iraq at various times, in my lifetime, and we helped both countries by helping with regime change and both countries suffered for it. We put Osama in Afghanistan to fight the Russians and armed him. We put the Shah in and Marcos. But we can't understand why they might not trust us to give them a good leader this time. By the way who will we be giving all that Libyan stuff to or will we use it ourselves. I don't pretend to be a soothsayer or prophet, but mark my words when we find out the secrets of the Bush's very secretive regime we will find most of the answers. We will find out exactly the reasons we attacked Iraq just as soon as someone pries the records of the Bush/Cheney energy team out of their secretive little hands. They won't destroy them because the Compassionately Conservative companies involved are going to collect come hell, high-water or thousands of dead Iraqis or Americans. This whole thing was written about 12 years ago, just about the time they want you to begin looking into Saddam's dealings. They don't want you to look before that because it will implicate them more, not in 9/11 per se, but in what caused the angry mentality to create such a tragedy and to create the suicidal hopelessness we are seeing daily in Israel and Iraq. No one, and I mean no one, in this administration is looking out for the interests of the people of the United States, Palestine or Iraq. The Bush administration brings to mind many Bible versus, but a quote from Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" hits the nail on the head; Scrooge is talking to his nephew and says, "there is no such thing as rich enough, only poor enough." Karen Webb, Moore, Ok. Subj: White House/Intelligence http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?031027fa_fact Remember this article from Oct. 2003 - it describes , among other things, Rumsfeld and his little operation in the Pentagon where " After he became Secretary of Defense, a separate intelligence unit was set up in the Pentagon’s policy office, under the control of William Luti, a senior aide to Feith. This office, which circumvented the usual procedures of vetting and transparency, stovepiped many of its findings to the highest-ranking officials. " I'm surprised no one in the media is mentioning this "little operation" and its significance to collecting intelligence. Thought you might like to re-read and put it online for your readers. Natalie
Roth Subj: David KAY, Dishonorable Tool Why is David KAY being hoohawed all over the media as being "honorable" and "objective" when his history clearly shows he has always been slanted and unreliable? He was wrong in his previous certitude that WMD were to be found and he is shameless now in refusing to lay responsibility directly on Shrub (his handlers, this would be) for WANTING to create the Iraq attack and pressuring the rest to make things fit. Find a way to get it done, was the word from Shrub. John Garza *********QUOTE****** much more w/MANY links: http://baltimore.indymedia.org/newswire/display_any/4430 Like Bremer, Rice, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the cast of hardened corporate characters, David Kay is an overfed relic from a past rightwing hawk regime. Under Reagan, he was a chief scientist for the Pentagon (see revelation as to Kay's "scientific background" at) http://baltimore.indymedia.org/newswire/display/4522/index.php as well as serving as a section chief for the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Administration of the UN) from 1983 until 1991. During this time, Hans Blix - Kay's boss - who was a man of integrity, was continually pressured by first Reagan, then Bush I to come up with 'evidence' that oil-rich Iraq posed a sufficient nuclear threat for the US to invade (and thus to capture the oil). In fact, until Kay came along, most experts in most western nations believed there was no evidence for an extensive WMD program in Iraq. But after the war, when Bush I needed greater validation for his actions in the run up to the 1992 election, Kay was made chief nuclear inspector for the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) on Iraq. UNSCOM was created in response to the Bush claims that Iraq was a hotbed of WMD weaponry that had to be 'dismantled.' Kay's investigations turned up all sorts of 'evidence' -given the time lapse from the end of the war to Kay's mission, who knows how much of it was planted -possibly all of it. Certainly the contributions of some 'defectors' have been totally discredited. But UNSCOM produced the same sort of arrays of conveniently -in fact, unbelievably- detailed documents, all just left 'just laying around,' waiting to be found by Kay and company. The same evidence we hear reported ad infinitum and sans question on NBC, CNN, et al. Thanks to Kay's obliging efforts for Bush after Gulf War I, the stage was neatly set for Gulf War II. In fact, the entire invasion of Iraq was trumped up over the UN clause referring to WMDs. Whenever Kay makes the rounds of the Bush-controlled media these days, he is always introduced only as 'former UN chief weapons inspector' and 'senior fellow at the Potomac Institute for Policy Research.' In short, Kay skips over several years of his interim history. Why? Maybe because during the 'missing years,' he was Vice President of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), a company with extremely close ties to the Pentagon and to the Bush administration in particular. A company up to its armpits in post-war Iraqi business, not to mention secret contracts rumored to involve electronic spying. A company in which Kay is rumored to still hold a sizeable chunk of stock, one where he maintains a rich network of inside connections. SAIC's recent history is interesting, to say the least. The company was commissioned by G. W. Bush in 2002 to construct a replica of a mobile WMD laboratory of the sort used by Saddam. This mock up, supposedly destined to be used to train teams searching for WMDs in Iraq, was designed by Stephen Hatfill, the WMD expert now being harangued into isolation and thus silence by Bush's FBI. Last spring, the Bush administration handed SAIC some of the biggest defense contract plums to be had -a billion-dollar chunk of the NexGen business and an unbelievably porky 10-year contract worth over $600 million. I bet Kay just danced a jig of joy over that one, with visions of overflowing stock returns. Just think how much gratitude a couple of billion dollars can buy. Maybe even enough to produce another round of "evidence," thus setting the stage for Gulf War III? But back to Gulf War I's aftermath. In 1992, Kay was fired from his UN position for trying to use underhanded methods (intriguing with the CIA and Iraqi thugs) to obtain 'informants' willing to feed him whatever information he needed (true or not). One such informant appears to be Khidir Hamza, whose 'evidence' was completely discredited by 1995. However, even in the aftermath of Kay's near-disgrace, Blix refused to bad-mouth him, as a matter of gentlemanly principles. "How did Kay repay Blix for defending him?" asks highly credentialed physicist James Gordon Prather, in a June 30, 2003 interview in the Worldnet Daily website. "He repeatedly testified before congressional committees in the months preceding Operation Iraqi Freedom as to the ineptness of Blix and the U.N. inspection regimes. Kay argued that Saddam certainly had "weapons of mass destruction" that the UN inspectors would never find and that it would ultimately be necessary to invade and occupy Iraq to find them." If you have smelled a rat by now, then you are on the right scent. To put it all together, here is a time line that shows how the David Kay-Bush-phony evidence story all stitches together. **********UNQUOTE******** Subj: Cooking with Matt on the Today Show. What happens when you put Rice in hot water and turn up the heat? She boils over. The show has never even gotten to medium heat on anyone in this administration, but boil over she did. If they scrapped all the egg off her face and put it in the mix they could almost have made Rice pubbing. Unfortunately there isn't enough sweetness in the Bush administration to sweeten a cup of tea, much less make pubbing. We went over to the VFW to hear Wesley Clark, this morning, and left the tape on because of a segment involving telephones. My husband is a telephone guy. We got Condi boiling like candy at the hard stage. There are auctioneers who talk slower and Matt could barely get a question in sideways. By the way, Clark was really good and answered all questions and all of them were pertinent and not one was written by Karl Rove. One even involved his short career as a lobbyist. "No one wants a closer investigation, no one wants the facts more than George W. Bush" Condi said. I think he could make that happen, but so far he doesn't want anyone to know what caused him to invade without all the facts in the first place. She says there was systematic looting of the sites. I am assuming this looting was after the invasion and when it's 112 degrees, your family has no food, safe water, electricity or air conditioning nothing sells faster, is easier to transport and store than tons of toxins and nuclear weapons. I hear the plaintive cry of George Tenet falling on his sword, again. He already looks like a pin cushion. The buck stops anywhere, but the oval office. He doesn't even read newspapers, so it isn't likely he will read reports. Why didn't Matt ask Condi about that lovely battle plan that Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney wrote at the end of the first Iraqi war? They followed it to the letter. She was tap dancing faster than Fred Astaire on speed. I am at the present making a copy to take down to the ODP and when I get back, I will do a transcript. I noticed Kevin Ogle (Channel 4) at the Democrat function last night, but he left right after Lieberman and so far the only thing he thinks any of us want to know is, "if going along with Bush on a pre-emptive war is going to hurt him in Oklahoma." Well Lieberman didn't even get a smattering of applause when he mentioned it, but the spokesmen for Edwards and Clark got applause and Kucinich got a standing ovation when he mentioned voting against the war and the patriot act. I was off the Lieberman bandwagon as soon as he said, in Stillwater, that his opponents and anyone who agrees with them don't know a "just" war when they see one. Kucinich was great, as usual, and Max Sandlin of Texas speaking for Edwards was really good. Is anyone else more than a little tired of the Ogle family deciding what we need or don't need to know? You people who aren't from here, we have 3 Ogle brothers and they all work for TV stations. It's a dynasty. Karen Webb, Moore, Ok. Subj: EPA Mercury rules I wonder if anyone else read the article on page A4 of the Post today (Jan. 31) concerning new proposed mercury rules. A comparison of the proposed rules with a memoranda prepared by Latham & Watkins - one of Washington's premier corporate environmental law firms - shows at least a dozen paragraphs of the rules similar or identical to the memoranda. Jeffery Holmstead, head of the EPA air policy office, and his chief counsel Bill Wehrum both worked for Latham & Watkins before joining EPA. Holmstead was quoted as saying "neither Bill nor I had any idea this language came from Latham & Watkins". What a coincidence! Harold Martin Just like in the California Recall Election, the Colorado and Texas re-districting schemes, Bush Administration friends are now playing politics in Oregon. Grover Norquist and Dick Armey are vigorously supporting the defeat of Measure 30. They say Oregon will come up with the money some how without raising any new revenue. They seem to think that the laying off of HIghway Patrol, the early school closings last year, cutting 1000's from the Oregon Health Plan was a conspiracy to raise taxes. In reality, a lot of the trouble we are in is a result of the first round of Bush tax cuts. Ironic huh? Who is Grover Norquist? One of the founders of PNAC, a Conservative think tank plan to invade Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea and others to secure our world interests and resources. This was all written down long before 9/11. Mr. Norquist would also like to shrink the Federal Government so small he could flush it down the drain. Forget your Government backed Social Security or Medicare, this guy would privatize School Crossing Guards. Dick Armey is a retired Texas Congressman. Texas is in bad financial, ecological and educational shape thanks to the "Cut Taxes and Spend" philosophy of Governor Bush. Do we really need these two outsiders telling us what to do? A neighbor is on the Oregon Health Plan. The next time anyone is cut from the plan, he will be gone. His choice will be to keep his strong anti-psychotic medicines or pay his utility bills. He is very afraid. All Oregonians must vote yes on Measure 30. It is not a large burden. Republicans, Democrats and Independents unite. We can fix our problems and take care of own. We don't need your advice Mr. Norquist or Mr. Armey. Perhaps you should take a look at your own lives. Barry Ezell Subj: BUSH THREATENED BY AIRLINER ATTACK IN GENOA JULY 2001 With the stew rising about Bush not extending the 911 Commission it might be a good time to run this flashback on Bush foreknowledge of the US of airliners as a weapon in July 2001. I could only find a remnant and was not sure if purchasing the full article myself would do you any good; I can find a lot of references to the article on the net but not a mirror of the article itself (I plan to continue looking though). Also since this link is attached to my LA Times web sign-on I don't know if it will work for you but I've included the first two paragraphs shown on the link. . . the rest must be purchased from LAT.
A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Thanks BuzzFlash and. . . Hello BuzzFlash, After seeing the British commission "whitewash" Blair, it strikes me that there is a plan in the works to absolve Bush the same way before the election. Even though the CIA has been dropping hints for months that it is Bush's team and not them for once, it's nauseating to see all the backdoors that are being made for Bush Inc. right now. With singular focus, they have their eye on the election no matter what. Even today's "Republican Bowl" has been controlled by Republican money and power. The Patriot's quarterback appeared at the State of the Union to link Bush to the sport, Bush will give his little Jumbotron Papal blessing, and the ads throughout will be for military recruitment and for evil corporations that support Bush's agenda. It's a horror to see popular culture politicized so much with so many unaware. We have to stay on this with everything we have. Remember that Nixon got reelected after the Tet Offensive, Secret bombings in Cambodia, and Kent State. We cannot afford history to repeat itself. Thank you for all you do, Steve Dooner CLICK HERE FOR PART 2 OF THE FEBRUARY 3, 2004 BUZZFLASH MAILBAG. |
|||||
 |
||||
| DAILY BUZZ | ||||
| INTERVIEWS | ||||
| ANALYSIS | ||||
| MEDIA LINKS | ||||
|
Unless
otherwise noted, all original |
 |
|||
