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.
THIS IS PART 2 OF THE FEBRUARY 3, 2004 BUZZFLASH MAILBAG. CLICK HERE FOR PART 1.
Subj: Urge the networks to interview the anti's
The admin's current assertion is that no one knew that Saddam didn't have WMD's.
There were a couple of dissenting voices I can think of off the top of my head:
1) Scott Ritter
2) Hans Blix
Why can't we hear their side of the story. You might recall some other good sources.
Let's go get 'um. They had Ritter on once already.
Subj: Dean Scream!
FIGHT BACK, I have E-mailed CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS And told them, I liked the scream, I hope Dean keeps on screaming, I hope Howard Dean screams all the way to the White House!
Subj: Be Bold Arizonans! Vote for Lieberman!!!
it's not a primary - it's a 'preference'
This past Wednesday, the Arizona Republic [aka Arizona Republican] newspaper urged Arizona Democrats to "be bold!" - vote for Lieberman! in Tuesday's primary [they got that wrong, too - Tuesday is the Democratic 'preference' - the primary isn't until September]. Yes, the "bold" Arizona Republican endorsed Jokin'Joe even after, as the SacBee reported, "In a poll taken by the Arizona Republic newspaper before Tuesday's New Hampshire primary, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts was running slightly ahead of retired Gen. Wesley Clark, with North Carolina Sen. John Edwards in third place and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean running fourth." Yes, the Republican issued it's endorsement After its own poll resulted in Jokin'Joe being a total no-show. Bold, for sure.
And now the Chicago Sun Times reports that "Lieberman plans to pull the plug on his presidential campaign on Feb. 3, the day of voting. So now, what are "bold" Arizonans to do?
Confused in Phoenix
Subj: Diane Sawyer Apologizes to Howard Dean
Diane Sawyer did a "mea culpa" to the Dean campaign for helping to almost destroy his unique, grass roots campaign. The media aired the "Dean Scream" at least 700 times. Here, she airs the "ACTUAL" footage ONE time. Wow! God Bless America!
The video that ABC "found", as they say, was "found" after a few hard-working Dean supporters did everything but cram it down the media's throat. We'll probably never know who actually broke into ABC's attention span long enough to get them to view the footage. But, after nearly a week, SOMEBODY in the media (Diane Sawyer, and ABC) actually put it on the AIR.
So much for "closing the barn door after the horse is gone". Whoever first realized that the footage of Dr. Dean that they had, would hurt the Dean campaign immensely, must have also realized that, once the damage was done; it would take at least a week for the truthful footage to find it's way to national TV (if ANYBODY actually bothered to air it, by then).
So, there's your lesson in 22nd Century Civics 101, kiddies. The truth fairs no better in the media than Bush's lies do (probably even worse, actually).
Hit the (blue) link. That will take you to an ABC page. Then hit the little grey "Video Watch It Now" link.
Subj: In the end
Remember the old Texas saying [Shoot first, ask questions later?] That saying has surfaced in living color. The senate investigations on intelligence failures proves that Bush applied the old shoot first theory to Saddam and Iraq. How unpresidential! On second thought... how can a illegitimate president be unpresidential?!!! In the end all will be exposed. Don't look now Bushie, but your rear end is now becoming exposed and it ain't pretty!
Sent to: email@example.com:
Subj: Why is ABC News Not reporting Bush's documented AWOL?
To: ABC NEWS
Why is Peter Jennings not reporting the facts of Bush's AWOL from military service ?
And why does ABC News fail to act in a responsible news reporting manner to report the facts of Bush's long time missing from military duty during a time of war? Has ABC been threatened to not report Mr Bush AWOL?
Or has ABC News only interested in covering-up the truth - that a Republican President was a deserter in wartime? I use that term "deserter" as does the Uniform Code of Military Justice Articles 85 and 86 for a long time absence such as that of a one - George W. Bush. Study the documents UCMJ Articles No. 85 "Desertion" and No.86 "Absent Without Leave". see - http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl85.htm?once=true& http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl86.htm?once=true&
Why is it that the foreign press have had little difficulty finding the military documents and records of fact -- facts in regard to Mr. Bush's Absent Without Leave military records, yet ABC News and Peter Jennings have not so far done so?
Since prior to the election 2000 the foreign press and some even in the USA have reported on GWBush's desertion. The Boston Globe had no problem finding and reporting on Mr Bush's AWOL.
What is wrong with ABCNews? Can not ABC bother to do some research on Mr Bush's missing military duty?
Has the White House pressured ABC not to report the facts? Has the White House threatened ABC not to report the facts?
FOIA-ACQUIRED DOCUMENTS OF THE BUSH RECORD -- List of and links to the following documents: http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/document.htm
Document: "Signed acknowledgment of advisory about bad attendance" (penalty of being assigned to active duty aka being deployed to Vietnam for fighting the enemy up close and personal).
Document: "Suspension/Grounded from flying for missed medical exam" (this has never appeared on American TV or one syllable uttered about it by reporters/pundits during "Mission Accomplished" featuring Bush's "Top Gun" costuming and cocky strutting).
Document: "Notice of Missing or Correction of Officer".
Document: "Annual Officer Report - not observed".
Document: "Not available for administrative reasons".
May 23, 2000 Boston Globe investigative report "One-Year Gap in Bush's National Guard Duty - No Record of Airman at Drills from 1972-73" by Walter V. Robinson, which broke the story on the Bush record. http://www.boston.com/news/politics/campaign2000/news/
From TOMPAINE.com: Martin Heldt's report of his own investigation of the FOIA documents of the Bush record. http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/3671
U.S. MAINSTREAM JOURNALISM SUPPRESSION OF STORY
Editor Bob Somerby's Spinning Bush series May 3-8, 2003 on The Daily Howler website (go to 2003 Archives and click on the preceding May 2003 dates). http://www.dailyhowler.com/archives-2003.shtml Includes print and TV journalists/pundits, including mentions by ABC's George Stephanopoulus, NBC's Tim Russert and Chris Matthews, and others. Analyses also present shortcomings of New York Times report by Jo Thomas, a supposed " exoneration".
From TOMPAINE.com: Article by Executive Editor David Case: "More Questions Than Answers: Bush's Military Record Under Scrutiny". http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/3778
From The Nation: Article by Editor David Corn: "Capital Games: Bush's Top Gun Photo-Op".. http://www.thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=633
BBC TELEVISION'S ABILITY TO REPORT STORY
BBC Television managed to recently televise in-depth investigative reporting on the AWOL/Desertion of GW Bush. Working with American investigative reporter, Greg Palast http://www.gregpalast.com/, BBC Television presented evidence that George HW Bush obtained favors to get his son out of the war and into the National Guard. Also featured was an on-air interview with Lt. Colonel Bill Burkett, formerly of the Texas Air National Guard, who personally learned of the pre-2000 campaign purging of the GW Bush records revealing not-so-honorable behavior. Bill Burkett has never appeared on American television, so this homework assignment hereby provides ABC a "scoop" and jump ahead on competitors to get Burkett on TV along with benefactor former Texas Lt. Governor Ben Barnes and the juicy story of a $23 million dollar payoff. See: "President Top Gun: Affirmatively Missing in Action" http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=240&row=4 and read more about the $23 million dollar wheeling and dealing at "George Wins the Lottery". http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=233&row=1
Greg Palast appears to be one heck of an investigative reporter who is also endowed with a sense of humor. He is likely good and even fun to work with - and he's American! ABC News should at least consider hiring him as a consultant.
Please do not hide the ugly truth about Mr Bush's desertion. It is un-American to be part of a cover-up of a president who deserted the military during time of war. Ask anyone of our brave soldiers in Iraq what would happen it they dared do what George W. Bush did.
In November 2000, United States Senators Daniel Inouye, Max Cleland and Bob Kerrey (wounded and decorated combat veterans of WWII and Vietnam, respectively), called for an official investigation into the allegations of AWOL/Desertion of presidential candidate GW Bush.
Doesn't good journalism include follow-up reporting?
Why has ABC not acted and embarked on a long-overdue follow-up story with Senator/war heroes Inouye, Cleland, and Kerrey.
What happened to the questions they raised and the investigation they called for?
American news consumers, including a lot of Vietnam-era veterans, are entitled to some truthful answers.
Go ahead. Start by asking any US soldier in Iraq if they could just walk way from their military duty for months and months? George W Bush is documented to have done just that.
The whole administration used the so-called weapons of mass destruction as the legal justification for the attack against Iraq. No WMDs -- no legal justification, which makes the US guilty of naked aggression and war crimes. Simple as that. And as Harry S. Truman stated when he ordered the use of nuclear weapons against Japan, "The buck stops here!"
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subj: Judy Dean
Again Shirley from St. Louis hits a home run with her comments on Judy Dean. If you're a Democratic President or candidate's wife, you're damned if you do and damned if if you don't. They say Judy Dean is not political enough to dress up for a white house state dinner and campaign like a Stepford Wife, while Hillary Clinton and Roselyn Carter were too political, trying to run their husbands presidency (but not Nancy Reagan). All this stupid sniping while this country's going to hell in a handbasket.
Another letter sited John Kerry's vote for the war. He keeps saying he voted for the war and is now disappointed the gwb didn't do the right thing. During the last debate Clark stated that it was common knowledge around Washington a full 2 weeks before the vote that Bush was full steam ahead to Iraq after the vote. We knew that, and questioned why so many in congress were voting for the war. I remember seeing Dean on Meet the Press a year ago talking about this very issue. That's when I commented to a friend that Dean was my guy for speaking out loud when none of us felt we had a voice.
Thanks BuzzFlash for being there. I understand Shirley when she says she only has 6 Democrat friends to talk to. I have 1 local Democrat I can talk to. But unless people read BuzzFlash or some other alternative news, some Democrats believe the media lies. I tried to talk to a couple of Democratic friends about who they were voting for (Edwards). When I told them I liked Dean they responded, "he's too angry". I told them they must be watching Faux News. But in the end we all agreed ABB!
Travis from Collinsville
Subj: DOES GWB HAVE HIS OWN PHOTOGRAPHERS?
When the heat is on, the glamour shots can't be far behind. This time it's not the halo, or standing below the crucifix or a painting of Jesus...it's the all-American dome, to make him appear all-American (innocent).
Subj: arnold couldn't care less if poor people get no help...he ain't poor
I hope this poor sap is not one of those who elected the goobernator...but DONT WORRY, because that is what Arnold said when he took office...he would find errors and fix us...I hope this poor guy LIVES long enough to see Arnold's help...and Arnold's BIG solution to the $...take out a loan...what a jerk...HELP US...California is sinking and our gov "will be back!"
PLEASE CARRY THIS STORY IN YOUR MEDIA...we need to know that someone is watching
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subj: Imminent Threat
So the Bushies are now claiming that they never said that Saddam Hussein was an "imminent threat". So why did we invade?
Subj: Message for Intelligence Report
In the February 1 Parade magazine, the Intelligence Report features "Laura Bush's Healthy Advice." The article concludes with the quote:
"I'd like everyone to see a doctor to assess their risk [of heart attacks]," Mrs. Bush added. "Make an appointment. Then you have committed yourself."
Mrs. Bush is as out-of-touch as her husband. There are now 43 million Americans without health insurance, 3 million of them added to this unfortunate group on her husband's watch. Does she have any idea how much a doctor's visit costs when paid out if pocket? It's at least $65 in our area, and more in other parts of the country. And her suggested doctor visit would probably have to add the cost of an EKG, if not more tests.
"Let them eat cake."
The real investigation should be to determine if this administration lied to the nation about the so-called WMDs in Iraq, and whether the war was illegal and unjustified. Then let the truth come out about everything. It can't just be a cover-up blamed on bad intelligence.
In an apparent political move, Bush will have more control over a full-blown investigation which primarily concerns his administration.
We have witnessed enough stonewalling, stalling, and sweeping issues under the rug by this administration, including the Anthrax investigation, and the federal crime of releasing a CIA Agent's name to the media, reportedly by someone close to or in the White House.
Even in the National Intelligence Estimate, which was declassified in October 2002, the State Department said it could not find a compelling case that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons.
Also, Senate Republicans have stated it will be impossible for any commission to finish its investigation before the elections in November. Another attempt to stall an extremely important matter until after the election. If the commission can't finish its investigation long before November, it would definitely be a Republican attempt to stall, and should convince the American people this administration has to be voted out of office.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subj: Time to call a Senator
This afternoon bush called for an "Independent" investigation of Iraq Intelligence. Unfortunately, for his first attempt at an "Independent" commission (the 9/11 Commission), he tried to appoint Henry Kissinger to lead it. Since backing off and appointing Republican Gov. Kean, the white house has stonewalled - refused to hand over documents, etc.
The ONLY investigation must come from a Democratic Senate. PLEASE call your senators - especially Republican ones - and urge them to leave the GOP and go Independent - handing control to the Democrats. Two need to switch. PLEASE contact friends who live in states with GOP senators & urge them to call/write/email. Top priority is given to voters within their constituent states. Especially target Lincoln Chaffee (RI), the two Senators from Maine, Arlyn Spector (PA), Richard Shelby (AL), John Warner (VA), Ben Campbell (CO). Please pass this along to those you know in these states. Thanks. The link below lists the US Senators.
Sorted by Party:
Finally, we may get our in dependant investigation into how the pre-war intelligence was put together. Among the many viable candidates to head this inquiry are:
1. Henry Kissinger - he just missed out on the 9/11 Commission, and his conflicts with the Saudi's should no longer be a problem.
2. Lord Hutton - being fresh off of the total exoneration of Tony Blair, and finding the BBC culpable to boot, here is a guy who knows how to get things done.
3. Antonin Scalia - while on one of his hunting trips with Dick Cheney he could present a few piercing questions, thus introducing a cost savings benefit to the equation.
4. David Kay - since he has already fingered the poor intelligence given to George Bush, Kay too could help streamline the process.
5. Bill O'Reilly - who other than a guy looking out for you would you want to get to the bottom of this failure?
Stay Informed Special Alert –An Imminent Threat to the Truth
So I guess I’ll say right here and right now that Iraq is a diplomatic and strategic disaster. Saddam didn’t have WMDs and it’s becoming increasingly more and more apparent. So what does the White House have to say about this?
Well, presently they're trying to position the war as more of humanitarian effort and shifting the rhetoric away from WMDs. In fact, they're saying that they never said that the Iraq was an "imminent" threat.
Actually, here’s what White House spokesman Scott McClellan said on January 27th, "I think some in the media have chosen to use the word 'imminent.' Those were not words we used."
Oh yeah Scott? Then I guess your evil twin said the following?
"This is about imminent threat." - White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03
Or should I say your honest, trustworthy twin?
Wow. This new strategy reminds me of Clinton trying to redefine what the word "is" means. Of course, Willie’s Oval Office BJ didn’t cost us billions upon billions of dollars and the lives of over 500 soldiers and over 15,000 Iraqi citizens. Ahh, the good old days when Presidents lied to us trifles like oral sex.
Please don’t buy this "we didn’t actually say imminent threat so it’s okay" BS. The wheels are coming off the elephant cart and the time to spread the word is now. And don’t trust the Media to do it for you.
Below is a list of quotes compiled by a great web site, dailykos.com. Use it wisely.
* * *
" There's no question that Iraq was a threat to the people of the United States." - White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan, 8/26/03
"We ended the threat from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction." - President Bush, 7/17/03
Iraq was "the most dangerous threat of our time." - White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 7/17/03
"Saddam Hussein is no longer a threat to the United States because we removed him, but he was a threat...He was a threat. He's not a threat now." - President Bush, 7/2/03
"Absolutely." - White House spokesman Ari Fleischer answering whether Iraq was an "imminent threat," 5/7/03
"We gave our word that the threat from Iraq would be ended." - President Bush 4/24/03
"The threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction will be removed." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 3/25/03
"It is only a matter of time before the Iraqi regime is destroyed and its threat to the region and the world is ended." - Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke, 3/22/03
"The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder." - President Bush, 3/19/03
"The dictator of Iraq and his weapons of mass destruction are a threat to the security of free nations." - President Bush, 3/16/03
"This is about imminent threat." - White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03
Iraq is "a serious threat to our country, to our friends and to our allies." - Vice President Dick Cheney, 1/31/03
Iraq poses "terrible threats to the civilized world." - Vice President Dick Cheney, 1/30/03
Iraq "threatens the United States of America." - Vice President Cheney, 1/30/03
"Iraq poses a serious and mounting threat to our country. His regime has the design for a nuclear weapon, was working on several different methods of enriching uranium, and recently was discovered seeking significant quantities of uranium from Africa." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/29/03
"Saddam Hussein possesses chemical and biological weapons. Iraq poses a threat to the security of our people and to the stability of the world that is distinct from any other. It's a danger to its neighbors, to the United States, to the Middle East and to the international peace and stability. It's a danger we cannot ignore. Iraq and North Korea are both repressive dictatorships to be sure and both pose threats. But Iraq is unique. In both word and deed, Iraq has demonstrated that it is seeking the means to strike the United States and our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/20/03
"The Iraqi regime is a threat to any American. They not only have weapons of mass destruction, they used weapons of mass destruction...That's why I say Iraq is a threat, a real threat." - President Bush, 1/3/03
"The world is also uniting to answer the unique and urgent threat posed by Iraq whose dictator has already used weapons of mass destruction to kill thousands." - President Bush, 11/23/02
"I would look you in the eye and I would say, go back before September 11 and ask yourself this question: Was the attack that took place on September 11 an imminent threat the month before or two months before or three months before or six months before? When did the attack on September 11 become an imminent threat? Now, transport yourself forward a year, two years or a week or a month...So the question is, when is it such an immediate threat that you must do something?" - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 11/14/02
"Saddam Hussein is a threat to America." - President Bush, 11/3/02
"I see a significant threat to the security of the United States in Iraq." - President Bush, 11/1/02
"There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein." - President Bush, 10/28/02
"The Iraqi regime is a serious and growing threat to peace." - President Bush, 10/16/02
"There are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists." - President Bush, 10/7/02
"The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency." - President Bush, 10/2/02
"There's a grave threat in Iraq. There just is." - President Bush, 10/2/02
"This man poses a much graver threat than anybody could have possibly imagined." - President Bush, 9/26/02
"No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/19/02
"Some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent - that Saddam is at least 5-7 years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain. And we should be just as concerned about the immediate threat from biological weapons. Iraq has these weapons." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/18/02
"Iraq is busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and biological agents, and they continue to pursue an aggressive nuclear weapons program. These are offensive weapons for the purpose of inflicting death on a massive scale, developed so that Saddam Hussein can hold the threat over the head of any one he chooses. What we must not do in the face of this mortal threat is to give in to wishful thinking or to willful blindness." - Vice President Dick Cheney, 8/29/02
I was wondering if your site would mind replacing the term "President Bush" with KoKo. It seems fair since he was not elected and lies so often and without accountability about important things.
Subj: Removing Bush From Power
I don't know about the rest of you, but this husband and father of two young girls is getting scared. Scared that, come November, I'm going to have to behold that nauseating Bush smirk for another four years. I read BuzzFlash and I feel hopeful that, with Bush committing so many blunders and even impeachable acts, surely he'll be out of office come next January, if not sooner. But then I click over to the mainstream news sites and find no such coverage. Most people really have no clue what is going on. And Bush just keeps getting away with it.
Something has to be done. I propose that the readers of BuzzFlash do the following:
1. Email the BuzzFlash address link to every single person in your address book.
2. Include a short note telling them you found a great site for reading real, uncensored news. Ask them to give it a try.
3. Ask them to please forward the message to everyone in their address book as well.
4. All the while keep in mind that wonderful Margaret Mead quote: "Never doubt that a small group of concerned people, working together, can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
Beyond this, don't give his cartel a moment's rest. Write your representatives, phone in to talk radio, write letters to the editor, dog Bush & Co. wherever they go. Make him scared and, please, for God's sake, let's get that smirk off his face.
A BuzzFlash reader
Bush blocks the investigation into 9/11 (no surprise there)...blocks the investigation into the CIA outing...(no surprise there)and now he is reported as saying he "welcomes" any investigation into the pre-war intelligence bruhaha....I guess practice makes perfect.........
Mary in Indiana
Subj: Slippery slope...getting closer to the draft
Wow! After dismissing the need for more troops earlier, Rummy suddenly sneaks in an increase in his usual democratic way. Don't be surprised when he asks for a draft *after* the election and don't think that they will send their sons and daughters.
Subj: Dead Democracy Walking
BuzzFlash . . .
I understand and believe in what you are saying when you are talking about, "Vote for the Democratic Candidate (whoever that may be) or vote for the end of democracy."
It's those words of yours, Buzz, that prompted these thoughts in my mind: One scary development that I see for the 2004 election process is the same scenario of past elections, and that is that we Democrats have been losing and losing and losing elections except for the election of President Clinton. If we can't get this Party together, then even if we have a Democratic President without a Democratic Congress, we will still be dead in the water.
This Party will be nothing more than a Clone for the Republican Party. A Dead Democracy Walking . . . following in the footsteps of the Republican Party. Sound familiar??? Just take a look at the votes our Democratic Congress participated in during these Bush years. Not all bad, but the Democrats were the only Party that could be accused of being bipartisan, which I am against until the Republican Party -- the one we used to know and was considered to be the Conservatives that gave balance to our political system -- reappears in this Country.
This troubling factor, aside from the constant assault from the media, is the fact that our own Democratic Leadership (DLC) have been carrying Bush's baggage through Congress for the last three years and if that wasn't enough to please Bush, they ran ads during the last election stating how much they always agreed with Bush. Bush, a resident among presidents who should be answering charges of impeachment, instead, wink -- wink, we get these warnings that Bush will be hard to beat.
We must remember that a dead man beat Ashcroft, so anything is possible. But, if we, the Democrats in this society . . . this Nation, do not take our Party back from the pseudo Democratic leadership and the pseudo Republican leadership . . . then we are heading for a road less traveled by Democrats and heavily traveled by Criminal Corporate Republicans. We will have a one Party system in this Country.
How do we keep our Democracy alive? By killing the disease that has gripped it, causing this catatonic seizure that has effected Americans and citizens around the world. You might wonder by now, what disease am I referring to . . . yeah . . . the isms disease. And, the good news is that it has a very simple cure.
We have been struck down in this Nation with a disease that attacks the mind, body, soul and then alienates neighbors, friends, and in this particular case, the whole world. Corporatism, Fundamentalism, Cronyism, Barbarism, Militarism, and Republicanism just to name a few, are the symptoms of this disease that is killing Democracy.
We can attack this disease in November by using this simple antidote . . . Exorcism. Cute, eh? I'm quite serious. For Democracy to live, we need an "X" on the ballot next fall. One vote for all. A Party Vote. Straight line and Yellow Dog.
We also need those people who have given up on our Country and our political system . . . you know, those who have been voters in the past, but have become angry and just quit voting; we need you!!! You voters who have never used your voting rights and who feel that you are powerless; we need you too!!! . . . we need you to register and use your "X," it is easier than giving blood, but please think of it as giving the life and blood back to the Country that we used to know and love.
If you do this, you non-voters, be prepared for a wonderful rush feeling as you use this right and as you leave the voting booth, be prepared to feel an exuberance that may even last for hours . . . knowing that you do have power and that you used it.
Now, some of you may be thinking why should I . . . take a look at the following:
Open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values; favorable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms; favoring maximum individual liberty in political and social reform . . . The New Oxford American Dictionary
If you believe the above, this overly simplified description, then you are taking a look at what a Liberal or Progressive person believes in as a Democrat and a Democracy.
I hope that next November, US citizens will not be satisfied until we have a Democratic President and a Democratic Majority in Congress that will lead to the beginning of a very long recuperation period for our Democracy that has been slowly poisoned by this administration, and that ring or toll we hear in the distance after this election will be that of the Liberty Bell instead of the Death Knell for our Democracy.
The persecution of Dean from media and their corporate friends - and why
Dear BuzzFlash, I might have kind of explanation - they are simply scared!
The presidential election ia gaining momentum now. But the media and their corporate funders have nearly all been chasing and hacking at Dean until his figures changed in Iowa.
Dean, however, is a threat to the rightwing media and their corporate funders, because his whole successful campaign have proven until now that you may have a chance of being US president without a moral nor economic debt in millions to one funder whom you will have to repay one way or the other in case you are elected president. thus having your hands closely tied.
Dean, however, has proven that it is possible to make large funds from ordinary people sending him and his homepage 1, 2, 5, 10 or maybe 100 dollars from his electorate. So he will not be in large debt and gratitude to millionaires or corporations - but merely his own electoral basis, the basis for a normal, social and democratic policy directed at the usual citizen - the people
And that's rather frightening, isn't it?
Subj: Death by Ridicule
"THE AWESOME DESTRUCTIVE POWER OF CORPORATE MEDIA"
Subj: The Big Dog!!! Clinton
Do we not miss him? I never, ever, after Bush stole the office of president...and the Barbara Olsons and the Ann Coulters...and all the pundits, Bill O'reilly....Sean Hannity (and everyone who just jumped on the bandwagon, harping on what a lowlife devil he was, I thought he would never again be allowed on Capitol Hill..much less surrounded by that many people who loved and respected him!
They actually want to talk to him....the candidates get in touch with him every day? Does that blow your mind, or what!?
Three short years ago, it seemed that no one wanted to even be associated with him, even dems....now they all, including naysayer, republicans...have to admit he is pretty good.
After Bush was placed in office, there was one thing that happened instantly...Bill O'reilly and Sean Hannity stopped calling Bill Clinton a draft dodger...it was almost funny.
And as time passed, their shows became less and less watched... But, they were jokes anyway. Colmes...of Hannity and....was a joke, a big one!!!
I remember one night, two years ago, on John Stewart's show...Pseudo newsman, John King was on and they were discussing the presidency..King praising Bush to the high heavens (right after 911) and he laughed goofy and said, "Yeah after the presidents we have had, Clinton (He was a joke)" Stewart sobered to an almost irritated look, ...staring at him, trying to figure out how to put him in his place.....and at last said, "Well, to some he may have been a joke, but he was a brilliant, and magnetic joke." King, just laughed Goofy like....and that was the end of the conversation.(John King never got it!!!!!)
Anyway, all newspeople are a little daffy, I have figured, and they will go along with whatever is being said....they want to always be the first.
Now, the ball is about to be in the democratic hands...and I actually heard someone say on television...that the Clintons are, and will always be the Democratic Power couple, in DC!
What a change from 2001.....when it rained on the Bush parade all day...I will never forget it! When the protesters were kept out of sight!....No more....they are allowed out now...and the media is at last starting to not want to be first with anything Bush! Of course, Bush is still very careful about where he speaks...does not want negativity!!
I never thought I would make it through that day...and at the hangar...the sign that the girl carried, that said, "it feels like its raining all over the world" And, folks that is how it turned out! Then the stories started, stolen china from Air Force One...Tony Snow was finally pushed into apologizing for that...all the stories about the damage done to the West Wing? All lies!! When Clinton wrote to the idiot press agent, three idiots ago, and told them to send him a list of things damaged and stolen..the story died..instantly!
This president is now the joke...but an evil one who scares me silly!
If we are lucky, this man will be investigated and impeached....for a lie that killed so far 520 American soldiers...and has maimed at least 6000...I hear figures like maybe 30,000 Iraqis???? Is that a good president to be aligned with??? Especially just for the control of oil...that is what the Bushes want...Even the father!!!
Remember now....the lie that Clinton was associated with???? Everyone remember?? This will be the hardest thing they will have to admit....Did anyone die over Clinton's lie?
Did the right wing investigate him from 1990 until 2002 at least?? Huh??
The big mystery to me, is how does he still look so well? He did not sit around, I knew he would not! He travels the world, working with countries crippled by the Aids epedimic....he makes 150,000 a speech...much more than is paid to this president!
And, as I figured he would, he feels like he is blessed...so he does so many charitable things..this President(Bush) will never do. He is not curious enough to do the things that Bill Clinton does!
He'd rather drink a beer and eat a pretzel!!
There is still a kink in the rightwingnut armor.....the cutie that opened the museum up the road from the Beautiful Clinton Library....called the Clinton Lie-brary..cute huh?
It is not being taken so well...not getting much attention...No wonderfully Brave Bush to compare him to anymore....and LIES??? Oh please...would they dare???
Subj: Headline for Georgia State Official
Dear Buzz Folks,
As lifetime student of biology, I appreciate all forms of life on this planet. Because of my appreciation, I must protest your headline stating that "...this jerk may be living proof that some of us haven't evolved from Amoeba brains". Amoebas don't deserve the comparison...even without a brain or central nervous system, they are still more intelligent than all Right Wing Rethugnicans combined!
Galen Brinn...Loyal Daily Reader.
PS. To paraphrase Bart of Bartcop.com, "Keep the hammer swinging".
Subj: Bush, Iraqi Nukes and Accountability
So David Kay tells us there are no WMD in Iraq. He also tells us this was an “intelligence”failure. No argument there, but he also says that any qualifiers attached to WMD intelligence reports fell by the wayside the “higher they went up in the food chain.”In other words, the President is not responsible. The CIA is responsible. Interesting argument since, culturally, we expect top notch performance from our starting players, especially their coaches. Indeed, if the players screw up enough it’s the coach who gets fired, no? But let all that ride for the moment. Here’s a little comment uttered by Mr. Infallibility that’s been consistently overlooked for the past eighteen months:
“I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied —finally denied access, a report came out of the IAEA that they were six months away from developing a weapon. I don't know what more evidence we need.”
The IAEA is the International Atomic Energy Agency of the United Nations.
Please insert the word ‘nuclear’before the word ‘weapon’in the above quote. Bush said this on September 7th, 2002 standing shoulder to shoulder with British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Read the transcript. The U.S. State Department conveniently has it on their website at this address: http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/text/0907bshblr.htm. The title of the story is: “Bush, Blair Say International Community Must Act on Iraq, Leaders cite looming Iraqi nuclear threat.”
Now the Press was still giving the President a free pass all the way at the time, so this statement was duly reported, and widely, but not investigated for over two weeks. Finally, Washington Times reporter Joseph Curl called Vienna for a copy of that report. The title of the story, buried in the September 27th edition of the Times, reads: “Iraq Report Cited by Bush Does Not Exist: Agency Disavows Report on Iraq Arms.”The article is available at this address: http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/10.01B.no.report.htm.
Scott McClellan, then assistant press secretary, did his pitiful best to spin the President out of this rather serious ‘mistake’. He failed. What we need to know, and should demand from the White House, is how those words found their way into the President’s mouth. For the President of the United States to utter such a blatant fallacy loaded with such dire implications with no fallout, no accountability, not even a credible scapegoat is simply unacceptable. Who have we become that we allow such behavior in those who should represent the very best our nation has to offer?
Did the President knowingly lie? Was he deceived by those he trusts? The two are equivalent. The first would be bad enough. The second leads us to question exactly who is running our country.
It’s time to fire the coach.
Since when do we have a defendant in America pick his own jury?
BuzzFlash asks the above question incorrectly.
The question is, "Since when do we have a defendant in America pick his own prosecuting attorney?"
Subj: thank you - excellent!
Dear BuzzFlash people,
About your January 30th piece, "You will have a choice in November: Vote for the Democratic candidate (whoever that may be) or vote for the end of democracy."
absolutely! thank you for your great insight and clarity/clarifying.
well, except this part frustrated me:
"all get this sort of Karl Rovian attack treatment by the mainstream television media."
that's not really true. while Dean's /sanity!/ was being questioned - by a later arrogantly uncontrite, un-self-critical media - others were at least having their thoughts and ideas questioned.
thank you, and please keep on your excellent work.
Subj: Effort Underway to Recall Alaskan Governor
A recall effort to remove Republican Governor Frank Murkowski and Lt. Gov. Loren Leman has officially begun. Visit the website of "Alaskan to Recall Murkowski" at www.RecallMurkowski.com. This is a very serious statewide effort that officially started January 27th. There has been hardly any press on it in the "lower 48", even though it has been big news in Alaska.
Following public demonstrations of support for this recall action in Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Kenai, the group is now beginning their campaign. This grassroots organization consists of statewide activists, ex-legislators and Alaskan citizens, who share the common goal of restoring accountability to the highest elected office in Alaska. Their recall instrument sends a strong message that Alaskans expect honesty and integrity in the administration of their state's public business.
The recall volunteers have a successful track record working to support political campaigns and ballot initiatives throughout the state of Alaska. They also have expert legal representation and are prepared to defend their recall action in court. This group has the depth and experience to successfully accomplish their recall effort.
With Alaskan citizen's active support, there is a real possibility to recall their current administration. Dedicated Alaskans can restore integrity to the Governor’s office. We believe that Alaskan citizens will overwhelmingly support this effort. Alaskans to Recall Murkowski could change the political landscape on the last frontier.
Alaskans to Recall Murkowski
Sent to Maureen Dowd:
Subj: Condi Rice, B'ham & WMD
Dear Ms. Dowd --
I read with interest your analysis on Condi Rice and the whole "Cheney & Co." thing in today's NYT (02.01.04). You were, I believe, dead-on.
What I don't get is how you seem to think that bringing your column's spotlight to bear on the egregious lies and chicanery of the Bush Admin. needs to be "balanced" by your occasional diatribes against John Kerry's hair and Al Gore's wardrobe.
The point is that you, and many others in the Media Elite, seem to think that your journalistic integrity hinges on your alternating diatribes on the Parties, never mind that, on one hand, GOP (esp. Bush Admin) sliminess and hypocrisy is about to bring this country to its knees and, on the other hand, the "best" that can be brought forward against the Dems is Howard Dean's "scream", John Kerry's hair, or Wes Clark's sweaters. Gee . . .
If Clinton had lied us into a war, if Al Gore had fought tooth-and-nail to hide secret meetings with big-wigs who dictated policy, if any of the Democratic hopefuls had lied 525 soldiers into caskets, then, I admit, railing against them would be appropriate. But when you, and other columnists, try to act all "balanced" by holding out that mountains = molehills, then I've got to say, "Wha?"
Either behave like a responsible person, or go ahead and admit that you're a Media Wh*re.
P.S. -- How is Condi "No One Could Have Predicted" Rice still on the government payroll?
P.P.S. -- I'm from B'ham, too.
Subj: You may have missed Bush on Judicial Nomination at 'Congress of Tomorrow' GOPmtg
This from Washpost 2/01 by Mike Allen as Bush took questions from GOP at GOP Congressional retreat.
"Bush, greeted in Philadelphia with chants of "four more years," took questions for more than an hour, joking at one point that it took him longer to answer a question than to get a judge confirmed by the Senate. Lawmakers have become increasingly vocal about their dissatisfaction with his spending practices, and his remarks were aimed at salving their complaints."
I don't know whether this means that judicial nominations are not really a problem for him or whether he is really good at NOT answering questions in a timely manner.
I think the quote needs wider distribution. Please post it.
I agree. However, I will go the third party route if the Dems regain control and they do not do what you suggest, and prosecute these criminals to the full extent of the law.
I've been calling my "representatives" at least once a week to ask when the impeachment proceedings will start.
I keep it fairly brief and make it a point to be affable, unless a new outrage has surfaced at the time of the call. When that happens, ( a lot) I then allow myself a tone of controlled outrage-- though I am never abusive of the representative's staffers.
If all BuzzFlash readers would call their representative once a week and ask the same question," When can we expect the impeachment proceedings to begin", wouldn't that be a wonderful thing?
These "representatives are supposed to represent YOU, not Halliburton.
You can find your representative's contact information at www.congress.org.
Phone your senators today, and at least once a week. Ask that question. It is a very reasonable question. After all, Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about having sex with a consenting adult.
How many people died for Clinton's "high crime and misdemeanor?"
J. Fowler Firefighter/Paramedic retired
Subj: Isn't it GREAT? Bush agrees to an investigation... report in 2005.
Now WHAT would the Republicans have done and said if a Democrat had done this sort of slimy thing?? Impeach, impeach, impeach.... but it's a word Dems don't seem to have heard...
A BuzzFlash Reader
otherwise noted, all original