July 7, 2004
The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Read the BuzzFlash FAQ for info on submitting to the Mailbag.
THIS IS PART 2 OF THE JULY 7, 2004 BUZZFLASH MAILBAG. CLICK HERE FOR PART 1.
We know the corporate owned media and the republicans are going to get mean, nasty and cut throat, the media will try to do to Kerry/Edwards what they did to Al Gore. We can't let them this time! The democrats have to fight back like a pack of pit bulls! Don't let the media get away with allowing lies and just acting like referees!
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: Will Cheney Tell John Edwards to Go "F*** Himself"?
Hey, Buzz Flash Readers:
After reading about John Edwards being selected for Kerry's VP, I had an amazing thought when he and Dick Cheney appear for their VP-Debates.
If Edwards challenges Cheney on his lies, his Halliburton ties and etc., if Cheney doesn't have a comeback, will he tell Edwards to "Go F*** yourself"? If he does, Edwards should respond with "Now the Whole World Knows of your Contempt for this country. When you tell me to go "F*** yourself" you just told all of the whole free world the same thing."
The Christian Liberal is wondering, and looking forward to their debates, LOL.
Subject: Vast Differences in Websites!
Check out the two candidate's websites and notice the immediate difference. Kerry's website is all positive and forward-looking, and not one mention of Bush: http://www.johnkerry.com
On the other hand, the Bush website is very negative, with most of the material on it talking about Kerry!: http://www.georgewbush.com
This tells me the Bush camp is running VERY scared, and even more now because Edwards is on the ticket...the moment they were afraid of. This is the nail in the coffin for TeamShrub! It also confirms that Bush has nothing positive TO put on their site, so in desperation, they attack Kerry-Edwards.
I fully believe in the saying: "If you're not appalled, you're not paying attention!"
Subject: More GOP Newsspeak
Re: Yahoo also Labels BuzzFlash Mail as Spam
To Don: Keep pushing that "Not Spam" button. After I did it a few dozen times, Buzz is now regularly delivered to my Inbox.
Subject: CNN Bias
The Edwards announcement Monday, July 6, was handled by CNN in an unprofessional manner. I say this as a retired newspaper editor. The CNN reporter interviewed a black Kerry supporter - I didn't catch his name - and peppered him with hostile questions. Aren't you mad because there are no minorities on the ticket? Aren't you scared because Edwards is a trial lawyer? Aren't you worried about the "inside the beltway" image with two senators on the ticket? Aren't you worried because Edwards looks better than Kerry and could upstage him? The Democrat was given only enough time for short answers, and was often interrupted.
This hostile treatment, in itself, would not have been so bad - if both sides had received it. But when the Republican, Ken Melman, came on next, what followed was a love-in. CNN’s reporter gave him a series of friendly questions designed around GOP talking points - trial lawyer, "philosophy of pessimism," "way out of mainstream" with Cheney portrayed as "an incredible leader."
Melman was given time for long-winded comments about "elitist" Kerry and Edwards waging "class warfare" and "imposing their will" on hard-working Americans. To put the icing on this big GOP lovecake, Melman joked about the fortunate timing for his interview, juxtaposed against Edwards' arrival in Pennsylvania shown in the adjacent window.
"We planned this perfectly," the Republican strategist said to the CNN reporter. He meant it as a joke, but, sadly, it appeared to be true.
As a CNN viewer, I am disturbed at the bias and the double standard that was at work during this major news announcement. Of course it's CNN’s choice whether to ask soft or hard questions, but both sides should receive roughly the same treatment. It was obvious to me that CNN strongly slanted these interviews in favor of Republicans, getting tough on Edwards and giving Cheney no scrutiny whatsoever. The news sounded like a GOP political ad.
The "Bush Lied-Soldiers Died" cards are great!! The West Coast Democratic Response org. sends these cards to those who deserve them. We would like BuzzFlash to design some cards with Ronald Reagan's picture on a card, that would list all his crimes and stupidity on it, from closing mentally hospitals as governor, to war mongering in Central America to deciding that catsup was a vegetable, ---
WE KEEP HEARING PEOPLE ON TV SAY KERRY AND EDWARDS ARE TWO RICH WHITE GUYS. WELL I'M NOT THE SHARPEST RAZOR IN THE BOX BUT AREN'T BUSH AND CHENEY RICH WHITE GUYS TOO?
Subject: Just Disgusting!
Republicans seem to love all these million dollar corporate lawyers who save their crooked asses but hate trial lawyers who fight for the little guy. What's wrong with trial lawyers making as much as corporate lawyers? it cost a lot of money for these lawyers to fight these big companies with their high dollar lawyers! these big companies don't want the poor people to have access to the best lawyers!
Subject: Anything But a Lie
According to Nicholas Kristof ("Calling Bush a Liar" NYT, 6/30), the President talked the country into war by "exaggerating," "stretching the truth," "misleading," never telling "blatant" lies and "claiming wrongly" while "confused." But to go further and actually call Bush a liar is just too "polarizing," too hateful; can't we all get together and agree he's simply a serial exaggerator, a misleader, a cunning deceiver and a frequently confused truth-stretching wrong-claimer? Can you feel the love now? If not, it's probably because, unlike Mr. Kristof , you grasp the obvious: that it isn't labeling Bush a liar but being presented with undeniable evidence that the label applies that shocks, disappoints and angers.
Albert Clark, NY
Subject: YOU HEARD IT HEAR FIRST!
since cheney has all this foreign policy experience, could someone tell us what good he has done for our country with that experience? seems to me he has done more harm than good! how much foreign policy experience did bush have when he was appointed the job as president? by the way, LOOK FOR A JOHN EDWARDS/HAROLD FORD TICKET IN 2012!
SHORTY MEMPHIS TN
Subject: BuzzFlash on TOP today!
Kudos! Take that, reichwing spinmeisters! I've passed both links on...
Subject: Not experienced enough?
Wasn't a hallmark of Bush's campaign in 2000 that he was an outsider?
Also I have seen the media making hay of Kerry saying things about Edwards during the primaries; Didn't DUHbya say some horrible things about McCain? Didn't HW Bush call Reagan's trickle down VooDoo Economics?
Just a reminder
Subject: John McCain and support for Bush
It appears that Dick Cheney is about to be indicted in the Wilson affair. He will probably resign and John McCain will become the new running mate for V.P. Why else would McCain come out in strong support for Bush?
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: More McCain
I don't know if the rumored GWB campaign ad featuring McCain being the "first choice of Kerry" has yet emerged. If not, every effort should be made to head it off.
I believe the power of this website might be used to (privately --if necessary, publicly) encourage McCain to withdraw his support for the ad. The Bush people will have no choice but to shelve the ad if McCain threatens to make trouble.
I have written McCain with this suggestion.
I'm certain McCain has his "eye on the prize" in '08. He should be reminded that Liberals and Moderates would not forget his support of the Extreme Right in '04.
If this fails to discourage him, I suggest an all-out attack on this wolf in Moderate costume. I'm sure there is more in his closet than his S&L shame.
Subject: Media is MUTE about FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmunds
When is the so-called "news media" going to wake up and smell the real Bush " roses" that he is throwing at us?
If it were not for The Randi Rhodes show back on June 28th, when she interview Sibel Edmunds, I would never know about this outrageous, uncovered, unreported story, since the media does not do their job.
We "only" have a former FBI Translator named Sibel Edmunds, who had been hired in The Washington DC Field Office to translate highly sensitive documents. She complained to her boss about a potential spy within the translator department, the poor management and about the poor / slow translation. There were also certain counter-terrorism documents that were not translated. Great!!! She was then terminated.
The "spy" did not have a background check according to the interview, and was transcribing documents from the same country she came from. She was from, shall we say, a country that The White House has no problem with " getting in bed with". Gee, I wonder what country that could be?
Sounds like we have a National Security problem with this set-up by Bush Inc - AND - the media sleeps.
Meantime, Congress and the people have been gagged on this issue by Ashcroft, after he suddenly re-classified all of Edmund's documents two years, three months ago. Senators Leahy and Grassley are trying to " un-classify" them again, to no avail.
Leahy and Grassley had certain documents about Edmunds on their own websites, and when they were re-classified, they were suddenly removed from their websites by Ashcroft.
I suggest that you go on the web, do a search on "Sibel Edmunds" and get all the information that you can, before John Ashcroft has "Edmunds" purged from the web. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if he did just that.
I also suggest you get with it "news" media, and start covering the real stories for the papers and television. There is so much that this Administration is most likely hiding from all of us and you are letting them get away with it. There is a "new-fangled" thing called the Internet, where you can browse for news. Start using it, as that is the only place I can currently find real news.
Newspapers and Television sure as hell don't report it.
And if you're not a member of the press, contact them about this!!
* * *
Subject: Proper Pronunciation
The proper pronunciation is Ratpublican. Remember those swell subliminal commercials the Ratpubs made? Since then - they will always be Ratpublicans to me.
Subject: W says his kids are pains in ass, Drunkard takes swipe at clinton
SCROLL DOWN HALFWAY....
A BuzzFlash Reader
Sent to firstname.lastname@example.org:
Subject: Dear Mr. Lou Dobbs
Hi Mr. Dobbs,
I know this is purely a “pipe-dream”but I would bet anything I own that you cannot get an interview with Elaine Chao. You know our Secretary of Labor? The one married to Assistant Majority Leader of the United States Senate, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky? (but she “prickles”at even a tiny suggestion of any help whatsoever from her hubby. I doth think she protest much…)
If you could actually get an in depth interview with Ms. Chao I would also bet anything I own that it would be one of the most replayed interviews ever on cable news. She is probably the most evasive and secretive members of the President’s cabinet; and that is saying A LOT.
I am not sure how much you know about her but shouldn’t we know something about the thoughts and policy decisions of OUR Secretary of Labor. Your show is probably the premier show on air when it comes to financial and labor issues. I personally think we deserve to hear it from her and if she refuses we should be aware of that fact and why. She has consistently been EXTREMELY evasive on all of her policies and declarations. I personally think it is one of the most important underreported stories concerning the Department of Labor in modern history. It is obvious that the Congress and Executive branches are taking a pass on the whole thing. The judiciary may step in someday but by then the damage will be beyond repair. In my opinion, for whatever it is worth, the press is our last hope. Unfortunately when it comes to the press YOU may be the last hope.
I can dream can’t I ?
Subject: The Grouchy Old Man
My daughter thinks John Edward's is as she said it "sooooooo sexy!"she also thinks he should start referring to Dick cheney as that grouchy old man :)
Subject: Thousandth soldier dies in War on Terror.
I don't think this will be mentioned on the mainstream news, but I figured I would point it out to you.
According to iCasualty.com -- which gets its casualty figures direct from U.S. military sources -- as of today a thousand U.S. servicemen and women have died in the War on Terror, with 871 dead in Operation Iraqi Freedom and 129 dead in Operation Enduring Freedom.
And that's all I have to say about that.
- Mark Kraft
Subject: Find the Bush in bullshit!
Have you ever noticed that if you take the first two letters in bull and the first two letters in shit, you come up with Bush. Is it a coincidence or the hand of fate working in some esoteric and unexplainable manner? We report, you decide. I've always thought Bush was full of bullshit. Now we see that bullshit has also got some Bush in it.
On a more serious note, I'm absolutely thrilled with Kerry's choice of John Edwards as his running mate. Until this election cycle, I've never looked forward to the vice presidential debates with such breathless anticipation. Now all that has changed and I can't wait. I think John Edwards will take Cheney to the cleaners over Halliburton. I wonder if the big Dick will get all pissed off and tell John to go F*** himself. I almost wish he would. Wouldn't it be great to watch the reptilian veep implode on national television? And who says politics can't be fun?
I always feel so much better after I've ranted on BuzzFlash. I tell everyone I know, "You just gotta love the Buzz!"
Subject: NY Times used Bush appointee to review 'Bush on the Couch'
I've sent this to the NY times ombudsman.
They used a Bush political appointee to write a June 29 review of "Bush on the Couch," a book that psychoanalyzed Bush and was critical of him.
Note: I've also placed the original NY Times essay below. You can find background on Dr. Sally Satel by Googling her name.
July 7, 2004
Dear Mr. Okrent,
The New York Times owes its readers a public explanation and apology.
On June 29, you published an essay in Science Times, "The Perils of Putting National Leaders on the Couch," which criticized Dr. Justin Frank's recent book, "Bush on the Couch."
The essay's author, Dr. Sally Satel, M.D., accused Dr. Frank of bias and of wrapping himself in "the mantle of scientific authority."
Neither the New York Times, nor Dr. Satel, disclosed to your readers the fact that Dr. Satel is a George W. Bush political appointee.
In 2002, Bush appointed her to the National Advisory Council of the U.S. Center for Mental Health Services.
She has been described as Bush's "point person" on mental health.
1. For Dr. Satel to review and criticize a book that psychoanalyzes her own boss is dishonest and unethical.
2. For the New York Times to even publish such an essay, full knowing her background (she is a past Times contributor), shows poor Editorial judgment.
3. For the New York Times not to disclose her relationship to President Bush is journalistically unethical.
I'd appreciate a response and a public acknowledgement of this mistake.
I'm copying this e-mail to several media watchdog organizations.
I sent this letter after reading the article at this link:
To the Editor,
At last - one of your discredited tribe has pointed out that American 'journalism' has no clothes - something many of us already knew. Have they started to heat the tar, yet? Taibbi should head for the border while he can. Truth will not be allowed to stand - that's just the way it is in Amerika, 2004.
I'm so ashamed of the press. You were to be our bulwark against the Tricksters among us, the early warning system, the DEW line. You are in a special class because this was your primary purpose. As this writer points out, it was more important to sell Fritos while yammering about 'Freedom' to distract the trusting and foolish among us. You've sold your souls and this country down the river - for a salary. We weren't worth much, were we?
Michael Moore is 'greedy', is he? Why? Because he makes money telling the world the story that you and your kind are too timid to tell? I'd pay twice as much for a movie ticket to get some little nugget of truth - that's how starved we all are for it.
But don't worry about it. We've found a way around you. Movies, books, the Internet, BuzzFlash, blogs, e-mail from the outside world. We've got the truth and you did not deliver it.
We will not forget this.
Concerning the artificially GOP raised issue of Catholic voters and the possible refusal of communion, I want to state that, as a Catholic voter, I measure a candidate by the entire spectrum of issues upon which the candidate takes a position. The one exception is religion. I don't vote for any candidate because they belong or don't belong to a particular religion. I interact with many other Catholics and we talk, as everyone does, extensively about politics. While there is a small minority which are single issue voters, I believe the vast majority take the same view as I do. The GOP, as well as any bishops and priests willing to try it, are foolish if they seriously believe they will sway voters in the pews with threats. On the contrary, history has shown again and again that when the church attempts to involve itself too deeply in politics, it ends up losing members.
Ever since Cheney hit Leahy with the F-bomb I've been putting up stickers that read:
DICK CHENEY SAYS: "GO F*CK YOURSELF!!"
Needless to say I agree wholeheartedly with the main point of your editorial.