July 15, 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 15, 2004 BUZZFLASH MAILBAG. CLICK HERE FOR PART 1.
Subject: Divorced From Reality
Santorum is Absolutely Right! Nothing is more important to the "ultimate security" of our country than heterosexual marriage!! Not war. Not invasion. Not deadly occupation. Not international relations, democracy, the AIDS crisis, media monopolies, nor megacorporate corruption. Nothing!
So, since the "future of our country hangs in the balance" of successful heterosexual marriage, we Must Must Must pass a constitutional amendment outlawing heterosexual divorce. And since "homeland security" is involved, we Must brand as "turrerist" anyone who's ever had a divorce and, as criminal punishment, force them to get undivorced! Feel safer yet?
Subject: Things you have to know . . .
Regarding the "Things you have to know to be a Republican" feature today--I'm a columnist for the Reno Gazette-Journal in Reno, Nev., and I didn't write it. But I did get a crude, 10-item version of it from a reader last year, and I REwrote it, cleaning it up and adding a few items of my own. It appeared in our paper in November and generated a lot of interest. For awhile it had more hits than anything in the history of our website, though it's been passed since.
It's taken on a life of its own since then. I get a copy or two a month (including one forwarded from BuzzFlash in December, I think) from readers who think it's the funniest (or most irritating) damn thing they ever saw. Some are my version and some are apparently later ones with further additions and changes. The one you used today is close to mine, abbreviated a little from my wordy style.... No complaints; I stole it in the first place.
Love the site, by the way....
[BuzzFlash Note: We also should point out other fun lists: "The Official Guide to Being a Good Republican - The Talking Points" and "Why I Am a Republican in 2003".]
Subject: A question of framing the context
Dear Thom Hartmann and Molly Ivins,
I am writing to you because you are two of my most favorite writers in these trying times, and I just wrote to BuzzFlash in absolute despair because two other writers I like, Joe Conason and Will Rivers Pitt, have been parroting the rightwing line of thought that if another terrorist attack happens before the election then Bush is a shoo-in.
I don't see this at all. All a terrorist attack accomplishes, in my entrenched view, is a faux context in which the lapdog corporate media can " explain" another electoral "victory"---aka "theft."
Therefore my question to you, savvy writers, is why not frame the entire debate in less misleading terms?
Call the terrorist attacks for what they are---massive security failures. Bush already presided over the biggest security failure in U.S. history. Therefore, why shouldn't the entire threat be placed squarely at Bush's door? Why shouldn't journalists frame the story as a caveat to Bush----that if he allows ANOTHER MASSIVE SECURITY FAILURE the American people will hand him his ass and kick him back to Texas?
PLEASE explain this to me, AND to your fellow journalists. Molly, especially, has been kicking journalists' butts recently. But you both are simply stellar thinkers and I would appreciate any explanation as to where my reasoning is off, if it is, which I cannot imagine. But when top journalists parrot the "mainstream" line of pseudo-thought I get extremely anxious. I have long thought that Bush would simply not give up power.
What I never expected was for the likes of "The Hunting of the President" journalists to provide the very fodder for the coming police state....move along, nothing to see here....of course Americans rallied around....what? The very moron who allowed conditions to so deteriorate?
What is going on here??
Robyn Su Miller Quincy, MA
Subject: Eye Opening Statistic
Tuesday evening CNN reported that the richest 1% of our country increased their income by a whopping 184% while the poorest only managed a 6% increase in income. It was an eye-opener, but you don't need CNN to know this. If you are making less than 60,000 dollars a year it comes as no surprise, you live it every day.
During the last four years you've had to change employment due to outsourcing or downsizing; you've seen your retirement evaporate; you lost your health insurance when you lost your job, or it's too expensive to afford on your own; and you are skimping to save something to help your kids pay for college.
John Edwards hit it right on the nose when he spoke of two Americas, one that has everything they need, and the other struggling to get by. The Kerry/Edwards ticket promises to raise the minimum wage so that every American can afford to make ends meet, not just the richest 1%.
I support Kerry and Edwards in their effort to give working Americans a fair wage they can actually live on. I just have one question, "Are you really better off now than you were 4 years ago?"
If the answer is "NO" I invite you to join me to help elect a President that will work for working class men and women throughout America, John Kerry. To get involved visit JohnKerry.com or cut and past the link below into your browser
Subject: "Postpone" the election? Till when? Till there are no more threats of terrorist attack?
By seeking options to "postpone" the presidential election, George W. Bush is saying the terrorists -- who he claims want John Kerry to win the election -- will, nevertheless, carry out a terrorist attack that would leave Bush in office. What convoluted reasoning!
If there is a terrorist attack and Bush "postpones" the election, Bush will remain in office.
If the terrorists do not attack and the election proceeds according to our Constitution, John Kerry could win and Bush could be out.
By Bush's logic, the terrorists will attack only if they want Bush to remain in office.
This is nothing more than Bush's attempt to install himself as a president for life -- a dictator. If, indeed, we are in an endless war with terrorism, which could go on for decades, when will the day come that there will not be the threat of a terrorist attack? If Bush succeeds in "postponing" this election, there may never be another election -- and we could be living in a dictatorship. This must not be allowed to happen.
There is an historical point to remember: During the American Civil War and during World War II, neither President Lincoln nor President Roosevelt postponed the presidential elections. Six hundred thousand Americans died during the Civil War and hundreds of thousands more died during WWII, but the elections were held on time, as required by our Constitution.
What is shocking to me is how blasé some media people are about the executive branch of our government taking it upon itself to decide when or if we will have our presidential election.
Does it not occur to anyone that if the Bushites can find reasons to "postpone" the Nov. 2 election, there is nothing to stop them from "postponing" every election date they set? The so-called terrorist threats are not going to cease, and the Bushites' claims that there will be terrorist attacks will not cease. Their claims of impending attack could go one indefinitely. Forever.
Right-wingers bring up the recent election in Spain, hoping to prove something. There is no parallel; there is no proof the Madrid bombings altered people's minds about whom to vote for in the Spanish election. Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar lied to the Spanish people and that is why they voted him out of office. Furthermore, the winning candidate in Spain said he would pull Spain's troops out of Iraq. John Kerry has said repeatedly he will NOT pull America's troops out of Iraq; he would leave them in Iraq and seek more international involvement. There is no relevance to the Spanish election -- except that the incumbent was defeated, and the Bushites are terrified they will be booted out as well.
The Homeland Security department has asked the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel to prepare a legal memo, indicating the Bushites' options for "postponing" the election. This is the same "Justice's Office of Legal Counsel" that advised Bush he could condone the torture of prisoners and no court in America or the world could ever touch him. Do you think this "Justice's Office of Legal Counsel" will advise Bush that we have a Constitution that must be complied with? Not on your life.
- - - - - - - - - - -- - - -
A Loyal BuzzFlash reader
Is Matt Drudge gay? No way! I'm gay. My partner is gay. Matt Drudge is a homosexual. Being gay denotes self respect and pride of which Drudge exhibits none. Please stop demeaning us by using the label 'gay' to describe the scum, Drudge.
To the Editor:
"Just like the Liberals"--that's what many Bush supporters said in the spring of 2001 when some of us on the Left began publicly criticizing George Bush's actions, policies, and utterances. Some said that such criticisms were unfair because Bush was still new at the job of being president. How dare we attack him so soon after the inauguration? It did not matter to them that, very early on, two years before the invasion of Iraq, Bush's policies were disturbing a great many Americans, as well as people around the world.
Yet, literally within minutes of John Edwards being chosen by John Kerry as his running-mate, the Republican Party attacked Edwards in a long, detailed document, while Dick Cheney blasted him in the course of his campaign swings--all this before the Democratic convention has met, before Edwards has been nominated, and before he has been chosen by the Democratic delegates, let alone before he is in office.
I am sure that rabid critics on the Right, who so zealously defended their beloved leader from criticism back then and who continue to do so now will, however, view the GOP's anti-Edwards barrage as definitely OK. This is precisely the trouble with ideologues: inflexible partisanship gradually drains them of even the semblance of objectivity.
The country is more divided under this president than under any other man since Richard Nixon. Most of the problem lies with George Bush's troubling policies, his inability to admit his mistakes, his frequent arrogant posture and statements, etc. --it's a long, long list. However, much of the divisiveness has also resulted from the uncritical and dangerous worship on the part of too many of his fans, who. like the Tories of old, invariably regard any criticism of King George as tantamount to treason.
Well, it's a long way to Election Day. As the immortal Bette Davis might say, were she still with us, "Fasten your seat belts, folks; it's going to be a bumpy ride."
Subject: Riggs Bank
I notice that neither the NY Times nor the Washington Post stories (7/15/04) about the Riggs Bank scandal mention the Bush family connection. If the connection were to a prominent Democratic politician, they would have it in headlines and mention it several times throughout the articles.
R. M. Johnson
Subject: Dan Sullivan Prediction
I have often pondered about how many of the reports I have heard and read about national security and ways that we are vulnerable to terrorism may just be really good suggestions for terrorists to attack. Dan Sullivan's article which suggested that the Republicans could delay the November elections and seemed outlandish was, to me, a hot tip for the Republicans! In any case we must ask on a daily basis 'WHO ARE THE TERRORISTS?'
Subject: The FMA
This makes me sick. Read the article. Bush is the one who's changed his tone and the New York Times and Republicans have the gall to accuse Kerry of flip flopping!
A Loyal BuzzFlash Reader
I don't think gay people like the use of the phrase "a gay."
You should say "a gay man" or "a gay woman."
"Gay" is an adjective, not a noun. To use it as a noun is somewhat demeaning, as if it is the only characteristic defining a person.
Just a suggestion.
Subject: Whoopi vs. Dick Cheney
When Vice President disrespected the halls of Congress and a respected U.S. Senator, the news media seemed to find humor in this and after a couple of stories they let it drop. But now that Slimfast execs have pulled Whoopi Goldberg's endorsements because of jokes that she made about Bush & Cheney, let's watch how long the media runs with this story. They will probably continue with it and attempt to get Kerry into the mix! Slimfast gives you gas and doesn't work any damn way. Let's BOYCOTT Slimfast!!
Subject: Questioning Bush
Mr. War President...
Caring Americans would like to know your answer to the questions that Republican controlled media aren't allowed to ask you...
How many body-bags will it take to END “Your War?”
How many kick-back dollars do you receive from body-bag suppliers in the form of Republican Campaign Contributions?
Do you think that being reincarnated as a smirking gluttonous jackal with bloody jaws would be the most appropriate “mission accomplished”reincarnation for you?
A BuzzFlash Reader
Fw: obvious govt and media knew 9-11 script
Okay, so the secret service knew they were safe sitting tight at Booker Elementary until they could determine if all was going as planned.
As I sat there watching ABC, NBC and CBS I wondered what was happening in other large American cities. Were planes crashing into skyscrapers in Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta, Los Angeles, etc. The media did not inform me. They kept attention riveted on a script.
They did not wonder if other cities were being hit, because they knew what to say and it is obvious those that orchestrated 9-11 ran a ship too tight. Things that would have happened and should have happened did not happen.
9-11 was a huge screw up and so far history has to record that they got by with it.
Did their blowing the blowing up of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City prove to them that the media can cover up any size pile of crap they create? Americans paid for it and it was covered up or buried instead of investigated. Ditto WTC.
They use these events to fortify themselves against those they see as their enemy. I went through the White House when our enemies were the nuclear armed USSR and China and Americans stood on the sidewalk in front of the White House protesting government actions or inaction. Cartoons showed Russians subjected to guardhouses and searches Americans now take for granted. Before that the cartoons were of Germans dominated by the Nazis.
In case you did not know the sidewalk and even the street in front of the White House is gone. You cannot get near it much less take a tour of it.
The song used to go, “Don’t fence me in.”
The other day I was talking to a conservative Republican who bragged that soon they would have a chip in everyone, so everyone would have to behave. I asked him if he did not mean obey and he said yes that is what it would mean everyone would obey the government. Utopia?
Subject: Happy Anniversary
From a year ago today:
Seems the consensus these days is that the “intel”was fundamentally flawed as opposed to “darn good”which is borne out by the facts on the ground. “Fundamentally Flawed”should be the Bush/Cheney campaign slogan.
BTW, the chances that GWB will dump Cheney are the same as Lambchop dumping Sherry Lewis.
Subject: BuzzFlash mentioned on Senate Floor
FYI, Sen. Kit Bond (R-Missouri) mentioned BuzzFlash on the Senate Floor this morning. He referenced the interview with Joe Wilson and BuzzFlash referring to Ambassador Wilson refuting the administration's claims of Iraq seeking enriched uranium from Niger.
He was claiming Amb. Wilson was lying about the uranium, referencing several articles and documents. He also said that Amb. Wilson owes V.P. Cheney an apology. I did not hear the whole speech. I'll try to locate the whole speech and forward it to you.
Thanks for BuzzFlash.
Nance, San Antonio, TX
Subject: Senate hearings this morning
I never watch the senate hearings, but this morning I surfed over there, because there was a boring idiot on Washington Journal trying to explain away why the President would not speak at the NAACP meetings.
And, as luck would have it, i got to the senate in time to see my favorite senator, (Mo senator, Kit Bond, Rep.), ranting on and on about how everyone calls the president and vice president horrid names!!! The person he was into bashing this morning was Joe Wilson....he said many things, some true (i suppose), most untrue!
But, he was quoting Joe in different venues, different interviews.....and he said, "In a BuzzFlash interview, he said that the president had lied about the Niger incident"
So, not that Kit Bond has any credibility at all....he did not when he was in state politics, either......but, he did give us a plug nationwide!! teehee
Of course, I have never liked this man...I have heard of this man for years, he started out, much like Ashcroft. As a small state pol...then shoved and pushed his way to the top...those two are sort of cut from the same cloth! Of course, I am quite sure, Bush saw Ashcroft's predicament when he took him on as Att.Gen....he had, after all, lost his run for the senate to a dead man!
Funny people on the chatroom......all say...."No one ever told me that Ashcroft could sing!" and many on there say, "He can't!"
PS: You know, if it is any consolation, no matter where it comes from... Buzz gets a lot of credit from the right wing...I have heard them quote us/you before!