 |
|||||
|
February 26, 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.
Re: Nader Label Hello "buzz", We've been having this ongoing discussion about Ralph Nader and his decision to run and your reaction to it, and today I had a thought: What would happen if the democratic nominee, whoever that ends up being, publicly committed himself to the idea of helping third-party structures after this election? We ALL agree that this election has to be won by anyone other than Bush, and my point has been that Ralph Nader - far from being a raging egomaniac - actually believes in the viability of third party politics while at the same time he also believes that both the Republicans and the Democrats are, on the huge accounting slip in the sky, "bad" for the American public. So why not commit every anti-Bush sentiment, both Democrat and independent and Green Party and everything else, why not commit them to ousting Bush by PUBLICLY accepting that third-party politics and third-party members and supporters have a VITAL role to play in the future of American politics, and that after 2004, just ONE of the policies put in place by the Democratic President will be to make it easier for people to run for office outside of the two-party system? There are many ways that could be done, from easing registration restrictions from State to State, to seriously dissecting the campaign finance regulations, there are many more and I'm sure Michael Moore could list them all for us (he takes local politics a lot more seriously than I can - I'm an English guy living in Canada watching American politics). But this public stand would bring all anti-Bush sentiment together AND AT THE SAME TIME would help to dismiss just a fraction of the disdain or ennui that most people, especially young people, have about the current two-party political system. It might energize a portion of them to vote Democrat, it may actually hand the Presidency to the Democrats, because it will appear to be the first selfless political act that I can ever remember an entire political party taking. Just a thought. Darren Raye A Third choice... Now we have a third choice next November....The Nader\Rove Ticket. Phil in Vermont Subj: Do Democrats Want to Lose? BuzzFlash - I've just finished reading Bernard Weiner's piece on "K, K, & E" -- i.e., Kerry, Kucinich, and Edwards. He cries for the fact that Kerry is a centrist and just a little bit left and a little bit right. Friends, fellow democrats had better wake up right now and realize that this is democracy's last chance. No kidding. The repugs are goose-stepping in lock-step, steamrolling everything in their path, and the democrats are writing pieces whining about how Kerry is not the "best" candidate? Get off the drugs and realize that democrats have one more chance in the 2004 election to get a non-fascist in office. If we lose 2004, well, all I can say is, you better line up a second country you'd choose to live in because the United States will never, ever be the same in our lifetime. The courts (because of life-time appointments, really the most powerful third of our government), will be packed with far-right-wing (nut-wing) ideologues a la Scalia & Thomas, Bush's powers will be expanded, and we all already know how (in)effectual Congress is, especially after the repugs finish with redistricting. Anybody who thinks that he or she can vote other than the democratic candidate for conscience sake and still maintain any semblance of democracy in the United States has, frankly, lost his/her mind. The United States has been in a constitutional crisis for some time now, and yet dems still choose to think they have the time to vacillate and wish upon a star and find that candidate that fits the glass slipper. Well, GET OVER IT! This country is in serious trouble. Dems either need to get with the program and vote for the candidate who will win and fight the finer points of democracy another time, or have the blood and spirit of America (and other countries and their citizens that Americans don't seem to particularly care about) on their hands and their childrens' and their grandchildrens' hands. That's the story, like it or not. Repugs will do anything, anything to win. Why don't the democrats get that yet? Osama is ready to be "captured", repug beneficiaries are pumping funds into the stock market to make it look like we're having a "recovery", and we have a proposed constitutional amendment, which, for one of the few times since prohibition, will actually take rights away from the American people. So, fellow dems, I love you all, but get with the program and forget about your concerns for the democrat's front-runner. There'll be plenty of time left in our lives to debate the finer points of democracy if (and that's a big "if" given the Diebold machines) we can just win this next election. Otherwise, democracy in the United States -- and again, I have to tell you this is no kidding -- is doomed for the rest of ours lives. Cynthia Hahn, Esq. Iraqi Shiite Leader Seyyid Ali Al-Sistani yesterday warned that he would call for an intifada (uprising) if American soldiers stayed in Iraq after the handover of power on June 30, 2004 The necessary posters reportedly have already been printed and are awaiting distribution to every corner of the country. http://www.zaman.com/?bl=international&alt=&hn=5613 A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Senate Introduces Draft Bill Did you guys at BuzzFlash realize that a bill has been introduced into Congress that reinstates the draft? It is S89. Here is the link: http://thomas.loc.gov/ (type "S89" for bill number and hit "Search") Its here..we need to fight this with everything we've got! Thank You, Erin Bidleman Subj: Gay Marriage Hey Buzz, I have yet to hear the reason against gay marriage other than one based on one's Biblical interpretations. How in the hell is the legal marriage of a gay couple going to affect the sanctity of my marriage, or anyone else's for that matter!! I want to hear the Pugs explain it. I also want to hear a candidate for President say that they support the rights of every individual in this country to marry anyone they choose in our FREE country without explaining that they (the candidate), themselves, don't personally believe in it ("NOT THAT THERE IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT"). I want to see some back bone out there. I think we are all ready to hear someone tell the truth without apologizing for it. I may not agree with everything a candidate like that would have to say, but they would get my respect and my vote. I find myself cringing when Kerry replies to questions about legalizing gay marriage. I will support Kerry if he is the candidate (ABB). I have a good feeling about Edwards, tho. I love BuzzFlash. A loyal fan and reader (5 times a day)!!!! Subj: The Silver Fox Speaks February 24, 2004
An open letter to Barbara Bush, You aren't trying to tell us you have the mind of a genius, are you, as in the movie "A Beautiful Mind"? We wouldn't want to ruin a war, your family past-time. It is pretty damned relevant to the 540 plus mothers whose sons have been killed by the reckless abandon of your son and his worst-case scenario writers of fiction. I think you need to send your relevant grand-offspring to die. The Bushes have had a problem with begetting enough patriotism to actually fight, as well as start wars. The lack of concern about the sufferings of families that aren't related to you is astounding. From this day forward, I shall carry a sign to war protests that says, "Your sacrifice is irrelevant to George W. Bush and his mother, blessedly oblivious to the suffering of the victims of their greed". Anyone have this old bitty's e-mail address. I shall send it to the White House Karen Webb, Moore, Ok. Subj: John Podhoretz on Daily Show Even as I speak Jon Stewart is interviewing John Podhoretz, who is busy spouting the usual right-wing smuggery and boilerplate Bush brown-nosing. But looking and listening to this pompous neocon shill is very enlightening: the man is the absolute reincarnation of chubby, whiny Joe Besser, whom my fellow baby-boomers out there will remember as one of the Three Stooges and as an overgrown, spoiled child named Stinky on the Abbott & Costello TV series. The resemblance is entirely appropriate, since the rhetoric he's handing out is on the same knuckleheaded level. -Joe Subj: Dear Buzz. From Chicago RE: Bush's DD214's I read B. Blake's info in your mailbag. I shared it with a vet who wants to see a copy of the actual DD214's. I've been googling all night trying to find the data w/o success. Buzz, can you please add this to your mailbag with my email address so someone can contact me if they have a link or photo. I'd really appreciate it. Thanks for all you do-- mailto:Dootyfree1@aol.com * * *
Subj: Hypocrisy X2 Buzz, Here in Caul-eefonia, Gov. Gropenator has come out against gay marriage. This is the same man who, gropes women without their consent (a crime),bragged of orgies and gangbangs at the gym, and has smoked pot with a self satisfied smile on camera (also a crime). However two people who want to make a commitment to one another is UNACCEPTABLE!!! In the land of our king, boy george has railed against gays saying they will endanger the institution of marriage. Marriage is only for a man and a woman to commit themselves to each other...........KIND OF LIKE YOUR BROTHER...EH GEORGIE?? Oops I forgot.........He's a bush..the rules don't apply!! People who live in glass Castles..... Phil Rowland Subj: Gay Marriage Hey Buzz, So how can anyone who has been divorced take a high moral position on the sacredness of marriage? And how can anyone who has been married by a Justice of the Peace or in a civil ceremony take a stand on the sacredness of marriage? As far as marriage as a time honored institution, didn't Solomon have many wives? Also, throughout history it has been a way to transfer wealth from male to male and is still that in many third world countries. What's sacred about that? Clearly the Repo talking points are to compare Gay Marriage with bigamy and polygamy. Once we let marriage be between anything other than one man and one woman we are sliding down a slippery slope that will lead to harems and roaming crowds of married lesbian amazons. What bullshit! I got married last year (female to male) and I cannot for the life of me figure out how anyone else's marriage can effect the strength or weakness of ours. Are there really people out there that have just given up on their marriage now that gay couple can take part? Today I heard a Repo congressman talk about how much it will cost Social Security if they have to start giving benefits to gay married folks partners. I knew it had to be about money. What bastards. Personally, every time a Repo complains about Gay Marriage I intend to bring up Neil Bush. Keep Buzzin' Leslie Crabtree Subj: March 20, National Impeach Bush Day March 20 should be IMPEACH BUSH DAY as it is the anniversary of the neo-con's illegal and immoral invasion into Iraq based upon Bush's LIES. This would be a great day to email, phone or fax your congressmen and senators, asking that they impeach the Shrub. Also a great day to send out the "Bush Lied Soldiers Died" BuzzFlash premium postcards. Actually, send them a few days ahead of time, to remind everyone to mark March 20 on their calendar! regards; Your loyal reader and anti shrub Subj: Calling all Deaniacs!!! Remember when Howard Dean reminded us all to not go for a third party candidate. I sort of started with Howard, and I will stay! I will obey him willingly...would rather he would have stayed in this race...but it ain't gonna happen!! Anyway, I will still vote for the Democratic candidate, whomever that is....but, I will always remember his words....he is watching!!!!!!!!!!!! I will always value very much, my Howard Dean Button...my bumper stickers and my Howard Dean T-shirt! It is all too strange the way that happened...does anyone know who takes charge of the delegates he had? He had more than Edwards at the time of his unwilling demise... Remember him...always...he was the candidate who turned us back to real democrats...I for one will never forget! Shirley...........St.Louis Re:Bush's speech at Republican Governor's Association One thing stands out from Bush's speech, excerpts of which can be found at www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/politics/administration/whbriefing/. Here's one of the more egregious remarks:
This is quite a mouthful coming from an administration that has given itself the power to arrest American citizens and strip them of their citizenship at the stroke of the president's pen; tried to subpoena records of meetings at a university simply to stifle dissent; wrote and enacted the USA PATRIOT Act and portions of its successor which make it easier for government agents (1) to enter your home and remove whatever they want without leaving a record, (2) tap, not only your home phone, but any phone to which you might have access without probable cause and without going through a court, (3) obtain, through CARNIVORE, records from you internet service provider without you having the right to know these records were requested, (4) demand listings of books you've taken out at the library and arrest the librarian if s/he tells you they've been there. How much more control over income can the govt have than to do away with good paying jobs here and endorse the outsourcing of the same jobs to concerns overseas? Or how about this: tout some really great programs that everyone believes government should be responsible for and then underfund them so that people are forced to pay more at the state and local level just to ensure that the quality of their kids' education remains the same. The most insidious plan is to give vouchers to people so that private schools can benefit at the expense of quality public education. Retirement? What retirement? Alan Greenspan acknowledges that the retirement age should be pushed up to 70. That's right, 70 years of age. Hell, with all the productivity the system's been getting from this present crop of workers, we don't plan on ever letting them retire, so it won't matter if we spend the Social Security surplus on more elaborate defense systems to fight this "war we didn't choose." Bush's idea of the ideal retirement plan was exemplified by what his buddy Kenny Boy Lay engineered at Enron - loot the pension system and then hang the blame on someone else. After all, that's the Bush way. Let's see, health care. Right. The right to be herded into HMOs that contain more exclusions than ever before, at higher and higher co-pays. The right to be fleeced by pharmaceutical companies with absolutely no watchdogs in Congress to ensure that the drugs being pushed out of the pipeline are safe. Most unbelievable of all is the current push by "General" Ashcroft to obtain the records of women who've had abortions to make sure that all procedures were followed. Then there's the MSEPHA, Model State's Emergency Public Health Act, the act that gives the government the right to order people into quarantine, to arrest parents who refuse vaccinations for their children, to forcibly inject people with vaccines and to charge those who refuse with a Federal felony. Add to that the law that was signed by Bush last year that relieves vaccine makers of liabilities from faulty vaccines and what you have is a ready pool of research subjects. Any guess which neighborhoods or groups of people will be targeted for the test vaccines? And that's where the scare tactic of telling people that a government bureaucrat will have increased power over your life is perhaps the most dishonest part of this speech. What Bush is really saying, in code which everyone at the meeting understood, is that these decisions should not be left up to someone who actually has a duty to do the right thing. No, these decisions should devolve to the private corporations that have been so solicitous of American's health since the days of Sinclair's The Jungle. Those corporate angels who walked away from toxic waste sites and now fight against continuing the Superfund Tax, those corporations that fight tooth and nail to get repetitive motion injuries classified as non-work related injuries, those corporations that overcharge the American taxpayer for every little service they provide and then fall back on the National Security dodge when people have the nerve to ask where the money went. About that little bit of who's paying the bills - the ad that CBS wouldn't air during the Super Bowl gave a good indication of who'll be paying the Bush bills. It's our kids. Bushes have no problem passing the buck as long as it isn't any of their bucks. The American taxpayer will still be paying for Daddy Bush's great give-away, the savings and loan bailout which helped enrich two of his sons, for the next six years, at least, at a cost of $32 billion dollars a year. So when "liberals" talk about the Bush deficit, it really is THE BUSH FAMILY DEFICIT, hoisted on the American people at the expense of a free press, a strong legislative branch, and a completely independent judiciary. Somewhere, Richard Nixon is smiling. Matt Carmody Subj: DESPERATE BUSH REGIME WILL STOP AT NOTHING Dear Buzz Since the GOP smear machine seems to be fond of going back years, (even to the time Bill Clinton was running for president) to find quotes from Sen. John Kerry, to make him look bad, don't you think it would be SO EASY for the democrats to go back only to the last 3+ years and find TONS upon TONS of lies said by the Bush regime? The whoppers before the Iraq war will be especially powerful. If there was anyone who can win the award for "saying one thing and doing another" it will by Dubya - he is a master of it. Unlike the 2000 elections, I think the democrats HAVE TO fight back and confront Karl Rove's gutter politics. We all know that Bush cannot run on his failing policies, he has achieved absolutely nothing for the good of the country, only his rich pals have become richer, and his misguided supporters do not realize that he has taken this country towards the wrong direction. The fact that they have started their campaign so early suggests that they are indeed worried and will resort to anything to win this election with their usual mean, filthy, underhand tactics. BE AWARE! A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Suicide and War Dear Buzz, I lived almost my whole life in the military and I know one thing about war. The separation and loss of income put a lot of stress into the family and then maybe the couple splits and then as a result of depression or loss the service member commits suicide. It is a built -in tragedy of war. This war has had more than its share. One reason war should be a last resort. But think of this and the 'we must defend marriage' group who will lie to get us into war because all they can see is profits and glory. They do not see the human suffering they cause with their hypocrisy. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: A BuzzFlash writer asked:"Can a Democrat save us?" BuzzFlash: Geoff Jones asks a question regarding Ralph Nader's presidential campaign: "do you really think that some Democrat is going to save us ?" He adequately answered his own inquiry by stating :" The current administration is dangerously out of control." No Democrat is going to " save us", but I don't think that a Democrat will consciously try to kill us by adding arsenic to our water supply or by sending troops (preemptively) to war . This administration cannot be trusted with another four years of power. By not dropping out of the race in 2000, Nader must share the blame for the disastrous environmental policies that Bush has embraced, the invasion of Iraq, and Bush's failed economic policies. D. Turner Dear BuzzFlash, Let's not worry so much about Nader getting in the race, let's worry about the people who may vote for him. Those are the people who could cost the Democrats the election. Why would anyone vote for Nader, knowing full well it could mean another four years of bush? That's where our problem lies. Anyone who would vote for Nader is not sincere in wanting to take back our country. They are just like Nader, more concerned about making a stand than correcting the wrongs of this administration. This just isn't the time to think about "me" this is the time to think about "us" (USA). pissed off patricia Subject: Nader's run Hi Buzz, The first thing I thought of when Nader was deciding whether to run was the 2000 election campaign and the theft of our Presidency. It naturally followed that I thought of the machine-gunlike fire of daily assaults and death blows the Bush administration has perpetrated on our rights, our environment, our democracy, our constitution and on the world. I don't think I'm the only one. As a matter of fact I think almost 100% of people thought the exact same thing. And I don't know that this is necessarily a bad thing. After all, the whole crux of the problem with our country in the last three years is based on simple awareness. How many thousands of times has the word 'asleep' been written or spoken in the last three years when informed people have bemoaned and decried the abysmal ignorance of most Americans? But with Nader running, the media will again and again talk about him being a spoiler and about the Democrats being angry at him, and the subject of the 2000 theft will be so front and center that only true idiots will be able to keep it out of their awareness. Like most Democrats I don't wish for Nader to run, but perhaps this too will backfire on the Rove machine. After all, their biggest bragging points have all been kicking Republican butt pretty well lately. I don't think that's going away this time. Somehow a people's revolution has been happening mostly on and because of the internet, and thanks to devoted sites like BuzzFlash. Whatever happens, Mr. Nader has just added some real extreme and volatile emotion to this Presidential campaign. For anyone who wanted to see a real down and dirty fight for our future, I think Mr. Nader is the catalyst for it. Without a doubt, this year promises to be a very bumpy rollercoaster adventure (or misadventure) the likes which haven't been seen in most of our lifetimes. The die is cast. Now we're stuck with it, and we better hang on tight. Judith Foster, Subj: major bush hypocrisy alert... To Liberal Bloggers Everywhere: The whole issue of whether George Bush used drugs in the context of his National Guard services just became EXTREMELY relevant. See the attached story from The Des Moines Register ---
Jeff Burnham Subj: Thanks, George W. Here's a great hack! The reelect-Bush camp has developed a rather sophisticated online tool the Faithful can use to send letters to the editor en masse. Just type in your zip code, click on which papers in your community you'd like it to go to (here in Minneapolis, there's a broad range, from the dailies and altweeklies, to the Jewish press, the African American paper and suburban weeklies), and send. Not a bad way to send progressive-themed emails to every paper in town, all on the Republicans' dime. Read about it here: http://billmon.org/archives/001106.html Use the tool here: https://www.georgewbush.com/GetActive/WriteNewspapers.aspx?aid=109 Paul Subj: Dick Morris suggests scaring us to bring Bush's poll numbers up Dick Morris is actually suggesting that Bush highlight the terrorist threat against this country in an effort to raise his poll numbers. I haven't been moved to action like this before, but after reading this article on Fox news I was completely floored and needed to raise the issue with someone that might actually point it out for what it is, DOMESTIC TERRORISM!! The FBI defines terrorism as follows: 'the unlawful use of force against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population or any segment thereof, in the furtherance of political or social objectives". This definition includes three elements: (1) Terrorist activities are illegal and involve the use of force. (2) The actions are intended to intimidate or coerce. (3) The actions are committed in support of political or social objective Scaring the US population to believe we are under more of a terrorist threat to raise his poll numbers and secure the presidency hits at least 2 of the criteria listed above!! Here's the link http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,112379,00.html#top Rich Subj: re: Was senate ricin story a hoax and.... Of course it is a smog screen. Just as the anthrax deal was. Explain how it is that all evidence leads where it does without charges having been laid if not for a cover-up in the case of the anthrax mailings. Please do. As for this Ricin.. Or even for that matter, the anthrax deal, just how the hell did it get to be where it was and yet nowhere else? Anybody else but me ever ask that question? Sure would like a good "reasonable" explanation to that one. Such as, why didn't it show up in the "pick-up bag"?? Hmmm.?? Any takers? Yours truly, BuzzFlash readers from as much a non-believer as there ever could be. Drew Subj: campaign speechmaking hi, buzz, if i were the speechwriter for john kerry or other high-visibility dems, i would repeatedly insert the generic statement:"mr. bush, you probably don't know this, but while you were X, Y happened". X could be:"out fundraising" or "vacationing at your ranch" Y would be "your vice president was making huge profits as our servicepeople were dying in iraq" or "your attorney general was arresting people who sold pills to track athletes" or "another 50,000 people got laid off" such a punch line, repeated over and over, would drive home the truth that this guy is an empty suit, a puppet, who is only a cheerleader, a frivolous piece of window dressing for the real bastards who are running this country into the ground. by pointing out the fact that he is out of touch and clueless will impress voters much more than the assertion that this good ole boy could be responsible for all the bad things that are happening to us. a BuzzFlash reader re: They Might Have Him If anyone was concerned with an "October Surprise" regarding Osama bin Laden, Tenet made sure that the Code Level will stay elevated for awhile by saying that capturing Osama wouldn't end the threat. Is he trying to make nice after all his talk about the CIA not being at fault for the Iraqi intelligence before the war by giving the president's war on terror a new shot in the arm? Just wondering. Matt Subj: Is Alan Greenspan sabotaging the Bush campaign?
President Bush, when asked by a reporter to comment on Greenspan's testimony, said he thought that cuts to Social Security benefits should be off-limits to those at or near retirement age. "My position on Social Security benefits is this: Those benefits should not be changed for people at or near retirement," he said. Congress is unlikely to take up the controversial issue of cutting Social Security in an election year. * * *
Subj: The Bush admin..."Why, they're the dirtiest guys in any town...." A timeless quote from a great American author...
------------------------------------------------------ Yes, its the current right-wing Republicons who bashed France. Even though every other country in the world was also against the Bush Regime's lust for war, of course excluding those counties bought-off by Bush. Its the Ann Coulters, the Rush Limbaughs, the Ashcrofts silencing dissent, the "quack, quack" Supreme Court InJustices, the Cheney corporate war profiteers who hide from federal taxes in offshore countries such as The Cayman Islands, the Enrons ripping off American energy consumers by billions and billions while the President & VP tells America 'that its just market forces at work'. The Chickenhawk Bush administration - Cheney, Perle, Wolfowitz, GWBush the AWOL, who hold its ok to shirk your own military duty and then to send others off to fight and die in a war that never needed to be fought. It is the Republican's illegal purging of 10s of thousands of minority voters in Florida 2000. It is the Supreme Court's stopping counting of votes cast so the right-wing can to install their candidate over the will of the American voters. Its the Bush administration allowing mercury to poison our water by coal-fired power plants' pollution by relaxing monitoring, and then dare call it 'pollution reduction' Like Steinbeck asked - "What kind of guys are they?", "Why, they're the dirtiest guys in any town" A BuzzFlash Reader RE: CUTTING SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS UM, I THOUGHT CHENEY SAID DEFICITS DIDN'T MATTER. GUESS HE WAS RIGHT IF YOU ARE RICH! RANDI AND ROOMIES ps, that billion a week going to iraq would have been mighty helpful, not to mention those huge tax cuts for bush and cheney! how many people will andrea mitchell and her husband hire with their big tax cuts? Subj: George Soros interview Dear BuzzFlash, Thanks for the Soros interview. Your interviews are fantastic and informative. Unlike the Bush Administration's slavish adherence to its flawed Preemption Doctrine, the Open Society concept advocated by Mr. Soros offers a sublime, yet pragmatic, approach to the world's --and this nation's -- most intractable problems. As Mr. Soros states, "Most of the poverty and misery in the world is due to bad government, lack of democracy, weak states, internal strife, and so on. We do need to intervene, to improve political and economic conditions inside countries that have bad governments, where people are suffering. One way of doing this, without violating sovereignty, is through constructive actions -- reinforcements and incentives for countries that are moving in the right direction, toward an open society, a market economy, et cetera." In stark contrast, the Bush Administration elevates corporate sovereignty over national and individual sovereignty to apply the Soros method of voluntary incentives to the U.S. energy sector, the defense industry, the pharmaceutical industry, et al. Does the White House appreciate the irony inherent in the dichotomy between its "voluntary incentives" approach to domestic regulation of American industry and its interventionist, "Do as we say, not as we do" prescription for everyone and everything else? Heather
Gay CLICK HERE FOR PART 2 OF THE FEBRUARY 26, 2004 BUZZFLASH MAILBAG. |
|||||
 |
||||
| DAILY BUZZ | ||||
| INTERVIEWS | ||||
| ANALYSIS | ||||
| MEDIA LINKS | ||||
|
Unless
otherwise noted, all original |
 |
|||
