October 6, 2004
The BuzzFlash Mailbag
The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Read the BuzzFlash FAQ for info on submitting to the Mailbag.
Subject: "Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire"
The Media Education Foundation just came out with this documentary in the past couple of weeks. I saw it for the first time last night on DVD. It is by far the most compelling, and comprehensive, film I've ever seen.
"Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear & the Selling of American Empire" examines how a radical fringe of the Republican Party has used the trauma of the 9/11 terror attacks to advance a pre-existing agenda to radically transform American foreign policy while rolling back civil liberties and social programs at home.
The documentary places the Bush Administration's false justifications for war in Iraq within the larger context of a two-decade struggle by neoconservatives to dramatically increase military spending in the wake of the Cold War, and to expand American power globally by means of force...
I cannot urge you strongly enough to get your hands on a copy and watch it before the election. This film will not receive wide distribution; I do not believe it is available in stores. This is the administration's dirty little secret that the media are reporting only in bits and pieces, and it is critically important that the American public is informed before it is too late. I am counting on you.
Sincerely,
Subject: Here Is Why Kerry Forgot Poland!!!!!!!!!!
Poland may reduce its commitment of forces to the war in Iraq by 40 percent by the end of 2005, and have all its troops out by the end of that year, Polish officials said Monday.
Sharon Andrews
Subject: all of us at work want to know
All of us at work are very curious about something. Maybe you know the answer.
Mr. Bush doesn't read newspapers or watch news, no one is allowed at his
campaign appearances unless they sign a loyalty oath. It seems to anger him
a great deal if anyone dare question him. So our question is: DOES HE EVEN
KNOW HE LOST THE DEBATE OR DO THEY JUST LET HIM THINK HE WON THE DEBATE?
Karen Massey
SC
Subject: Get Shorty on Tuesday Night
OK, we all know that Kerry won last night.
Here's another take: The thing that scared me the most was that after watching that debacle for Bush I listened to the commentators on CNN say that Bush did what he had to do. There was no criticism of a man who couldn't speak extemporaneously, who did nothing, absolutely nothing, to delineate his position aside from saying that he has never wavered from his position on Iraq.
He said nothing about his policies or the consequences of them for Iraq or for the American people. He said nothing about how he intended to end this war, he didn't do anything other than portray himself as someone who, once he makes up his mind, never changes it as conditions might dictate.In short, the media talking heads were prepared to show Bush as an effective debater while anyone watching this nonsense at home had to know better.
Those who got their info on the debates from Imus or Hannity (who I didn't listen to; I refuse to subject my "beautiful mind" as Barbara Bush would say about American casualties, to that asshole) or who read transcripts in the papers would believe that last night had been a true debate. It wasn't as we all know. But the "liberal media" refuse to tell the American people that the emperor has no clothes. They talk about his ability to stay on message even when that meant parroting old cliches, like listening to Rove's Greatest Hits from the past two years.
In the end it was nothing more than the tried and true Bush Family campaign tactic: attack the other guy personally, never make any promises that you can be tied down to, say you have a plan when none really exists, and make your opponent look like someone who can't make up his mind or who espouses something like, oh, I don't know, something radical like the separation of powers, or the progressive income tax, or a living wage, or universal health care, or increased veteran's benefits, or less children living in poverty in the richest country in the developed world, you know, things you'd want for yourself if you could afford it.
And, thanks to Grandpa Prescott's World War II liaisons, and the money from Reverend Moon and the murderers in Saudi Arabia, the Bushes can afford it.
The conventional wisdom crowd is getting ready to give this guy another play and I don't like it one bit. Although undecideds moved more towards Kerry after last night, Rove and his minions have time to remake Bush's image and the next debate will be markedly more confrontational. If Kerry doesn't adapt and come right for Bush's throat the first time he's attacked, I think last night's victory could be a moot point. Red meat Americans like it when the president appears to be mucho macho; it fits with their images of themselves.
Although I wonder how many of them would accept the fact that George Bush lied his way to the presidency (like his father and Reagan lied their ways there) and has continued to lie day after day after day while forcing these poor schmucks to pay for everything the rich are now reaping.
But, they also like a good crash during the NASCAR events, and maybe seeing Bush get bloodied by Kerry would buy Kerry some cojones credits with the great undecided white male vote.
The debate on Tuesday should prove interesting. If I were John Edwards, I'd break all the fucking rules, start attacking Cheney's ties to Halliburton and the bribery charges against the company in Nigeria which occurred while Cheney was CEO and I wouldn't stop...that's my advice.
Matt
Subject: Fox feed coverage of debate
Why has there not been any story or recognition of outrage regarding the way Fox News filmed the debate? At first I thought they had just raised Bush and his podium up in order to make him look equal in height. I figured they could rationalize that by wanting to fill the screen. But on closer look, they actually zoomed in more on Bush than Kerry, making Bush's stature appear larger. Additionally, they adjusted the colors to make Kerry appear grayer and his flesh tones greener, and Bush's flesh tone appeared rosier and his hair less gray. You can tell by the difference in the blue to purplish blue of the background.
This reminded me of the first interview Kerry and Edwards did with Fox after Kerry selected Edwards as his running mate. The lighting they used on the two men could not have been more unflattering. I have never in my life seen such an unflattering light used in any interview on any set at any time! And then they adjusted it to make it worse. It was obviously way beyond what would have been accident bad lighting.
Why are these people allowed to get away with something like that? Why do the rest of the media allow it?
Elke
Subject: Bush's Ear piece
Hey Buzzers,
I have a suggestion for President Kerry next time he debates Bush (I hope someone from the Kerry administration is reading this!). After the debate is over and Kerry graciously walks over to shake George's hand, President Kerry should oh-so-amicably put his arm around Bush's shoulder and gently pat-pat-pat that little ear-piece receiver Bush will be wearing under his jacket. This will "send a message" to Bush that not only did President Kerry win the debate with his knowledge of the issues, his confident delivery and his very obvious Presidential manner, but he BEAT Bush with the equivalent of one hand tied behind his back! It will also serve to psyche out the little cheater, who MAY, just maybe, lose a little sleep that night (doubtful).
elaine in Petaluma
Subject: Looking Forward to VP Debate
I think the Vice Presidential debate Tuesday evening will be even more of an interesting contest than the Bush - Kerry debate. The incumbent, Vice President Cheney, is a seasoned politician who has had a lifelong career in government and as CEO of Halliburton. In the 2000 VP debate Cheney stomped Senator Joe Lieberman into the ground. His opponent, John Edwards, has less political experience. But he has come from nowhere to national contender in record time. Edwards is considered a legendary trial lawyer. He has won cases for victims where no lawyer has won before. To be a lawyer of that caliber, you have to be very sharp - think fast - and be able to get the jury to vote your way. This is a match up of a reigning champion against a highly talented hotshot newcomer and I think it will be a much more exciting event to watch than the presidential debate was, where one party was clearly smarter than the other. The presidential debate might be more important - but I think the VP debate will be more interesting. I'm looking forward to watching it. I'm Marc Perkel - And I approved this message!
Marc Perkel
San Francisco, CA
Subject: URGENT! Louisiana overseas voters - required fax form
Dear BuzzFlash,
Please warn overseas voters from Louisiana that if they decide to fax their voted ballot back, the instructions in the Voting Assistance Guide appear to be incorrect, so they may need to check with their election registrar's office first.
I rang my parish voting registrar's office to make sure I had their correct fax number to put on the fax transmittal sheet (from Appendix C of the Voter Assistance Guide, downloaded from www.fvap.gov.). I was told that I must fax a Louisiana form as well as the transmittal sheet from the Voter Assistance Guide. The Louisiana form isn't included in the Guide or mentioned in the instructions. (I was also told to mail the original ballot after faxing it, which isn't clear in the Guide instructions.)
Both forms apparently ask for the same information - mainly that I acknowledge that by faxing my ballot, I am waiving my right to a secret ballot. I explained that the transmittal sheet from the Guide already has that statement, along with a place for a signature and date, but the officer didn't know what would happen if I didn't include the Louisiana form as well.
I asked if a ballot would be counted if a person followed the instructions as given in the voting guide, without phoning first, and therefore not knowing about the Louisiana form. The reply was that it would be up to the board of election supervisors to decide. So better safe than sorry - Louisiana overseas voters should make sure they have all the required forms before faxing their ballot back.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: Bush uses an earpiece
Bush has been caught using an earpiece before, but no one has thought it to be a big deal. It should be during the debates. Do a Google on "Bush earpiece" and take a look at the websites and also the entries in "Groups." I found the following at: http://theleftist.blog-city.com/
The Bush Earpiece (The Leftist)
I'm wondering if any one else caught this, President Bush met with French president Jacques Chirac around the second of June. Both men were in France at podiums in front of a large press core. Bush had an earpiece in, I thought nothing of this since Bush has not yet mastered English, him knowing any French is a long shot. Soon after turning on CNN, I noticed that some one else was carefully dictating Mr. Bush's exact words before he actually said them. At first I thought this simply must be a tech problem, like an echo of some sort, but that was not the case. I could distinctly discern that these were two separate voices. The voice was different, as was the annunciation. Okay, I thought, this is just weird, so I flipped it to MSNBC, same deal, Faux News (maja props to skunx), amazingly the same, but the first voice was much lower in volume on Fox.
It was surreal, Bush was being fed his lines through an earpiece, I could come to no other logical conclusion. We all well know that Mr. Bush is not the best speaker, but if he can not even read his own speech, then he is not qualified to be a member in AA, let alone the president of the United States.
It did not end here however, Bush was going to take a few questions from the press, everyone always notes how well the president is with names, well the voice in the earpiece is much better with names, because he told Mr. Bush who to call by name, and without fail the earpiece had all the answers to the reporters' questions as well. I was just in awe at this point, some clever techy in France had exposed one of Bush's puppet masters. This would be all over the press in no time. I was ecstatic. The next day president Reagan died, all other news stopped.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!
On your 4 million September smash!!! You may have never thought it could happen....but I did!
Shirley.....St. Louis
[BuzzFlash Note: And thanks for your part!]
Subject: That attempted robbery in Ohio HAS been stopped
Just so you know... Blackwell has reluctantly accepted all types of paper now. My registration went through after a fair delay. It should be noted that he tried desperately to get into the Bush administration in 2000 and is apparently doing his best to get in now... but any paper is cool now.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: Nader PA petition
I am a volunteer for the Nader petition hearing.
Today, the RNC has sent attorneys to help the Nader folks.
If you would like to see this for yourself, the hearings begin again at 9:30 tomorrow morning [Tuesday] at Columbus Blvd and Spring Garden Street in Philadelphia.
Fred Glick
Subject: "The Unauthorized Biography of Dick Cheney"
Hi !
That's on Canadian Broadcasting Company (public funded).
If you can, catch it on cable in the U.S.
Bonne journee!
SEASON PREMIERE: THE UNAUTHORIZED BIOGRAPHY OF DICK CHENEY
Wednesday October 6, 2004 at 9 p.m.American Vice-President Dick Cheney has walked the corridors of world power for three decades. His use of intelligence and his access to the key players in government and industry have made him one of the most powerful men in the world.
This is the story of Dick Cheney's vision of America. But he has selective vision.
Cheney's remarkable life story involves the relentless accumulation of power in every form. He's been uniquely involved in a large share of U.S. policy and strategy over the past two decades, and regardless of the outcome of this fall's election, he will continue to be one of the most powerful and well-connected men in the world. The fifth estate will show how he accomplished this, what it involved in terms of costs for others, and what history's judgment could be.
CBC-TV: Wednesdays at 9:00 p.m.
CBC Newsworld: Sundays at 3:00 a.m. & 7:00 p.m. ET, Tuesdays at 10:00 p.m., ET/PT
Marc Renaud
Kingsbury, Quebec
Canada
Subject: When is a Bribe Not a Bribe?
For the life of me I had always assumed that if a Congressman was offered a BRIBE to vote for any legislation that this would be considered a criminal offense. Guess this doesn't apply to Republicans when you consider that yesterday on Meet the Press, the right wing loony running for the Oklahoma Senate seat stated very clearly on two occasions that he was offered a BRIBE by a Congressional committee. And now a day later and not one peep from Fox news about a bribe...what gives?
I was then offered a bribe by the committee to vote for the bill, I could have $15 million to spend wherever I wanted to. I don't believe that's the kind of government we want. ... And, in fact, when the bill came through, I did vote against it, but I made sure that every bit of that money went to Oklahoma, including the $15 million bribe.
Cary L.
Subject: Condi and her Sunday Lies
Dear Buzz,
As usual, Condisleaza Lies was sent out to do damage control on Sunday. Her boss was a miserable failure against Senator Kerry at the debates, and she was lying through her teeth. For instance, in response to a newspaper article that stated that the Bush administration had known (a year before) that those aluminum tubes were supposed to be for regular artillery weapons and NOT for nuclear weapons, she said that she had been aware that they were being debated. My question is if something so vitally important had to be debated, then you cannot mislead the nation saying that they were meant for nuclear weapons. At least the nation and the world should know that there was some doubt about it.
As for the statement she made that the president had shown the people that he was a strong leader during the debates - what a laugh! All I saw during the first debate was a strong, intelligent, presidential looking leader, JOHN KERRY, and a blathering, irritated moron, who kept whining that being a president was hard work.
We need to send this idiot back to that village in Texas!
Roseanne
Subject: Gallup
Buzz,
When Gallup, which always favors Bush, has the polls at a "tie," you know Kerry is creaming Bush.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: Jesus God!
I have never seen anything like it! Dick Cheney and Condi Rice are like the little boy who kicks his puppy right in front of you -- then denies he kicked the puppy right in front of you and continues on to tell you there is no puppy there in the first place and you are the crazy one!
Karen Massey
SC
Subject: Bush: "Hard Work"
Dear BuzzFlash readers:
Awwwww....come on already. Don't you know what hard work all those fund-raisers are!!!!!!
Mary in Indiana
Subject: an honest question
Dear Buzz,
I'm not being facetious -- far from it. I have an honest and urgent question that was posed to me by a relative visiting from Europe: Who are the people who still support Bush in those damn polls here? I was not able to come up with any reasonable answer. So I polled around.
After an extended discussion, my immediate and not-so family has agreed that all Bush supporters must be patented morons. While I'm inclined to agree in general, I also doubt that a half or so of the American population is that dumb. In any case, this was not the answer to present to my relative, who, by the way, kept on asking: Is it some sort of a disease? Something in the water? Air? Soil? Your food? (All possible, given Bush's record on the environment.) Because it can't be the oft-repeated, nonsensical mantra on the leader's 'steady resolve' that has mesmerized people into such mindless obedience -- can it?
I don't know what to say. The relative is genuinely perplexed (as am I) and insists that someone like Bush would never have a chance to run for any office, even a municipal dog catcher's (much less dream about being re-'elected'), in his country. While I clearly see his point, I'm out of explanations to offer. Please help.
Your Faithful Buzzer
Subject: 8 nurses want to know
Eight curious nurses want to know.....
We were talking about gore getting a half million more votes than Bush in 2000 and started wondering if there is a list somewhere of all the countries in the world in which the guy with the most votes still may not win?
Shorty in Memphis
ps. :):) Laura Bush is not a medical expert and should not play one on tv. :):):)
Subject: questions
1. Matt Drudge is gay, how can he support Bush when even gay Republicans won't endorse him?
2. The first promise the Bush administration made in 2000 was that they would fix the problems with voting machines. Why hasn't anyone called them on their failure?
3. Why don't news shows call the Bush administration on all the economic predictions they forecasted that fell short? There is tons of footage of several Bush administration members on C-SPAN and the news talk shows predicting what would happen and on each prediction they either lied, held back info from the public or were just plain wrong. This is important information that Americans need to review before they vote. Why wont the press do their job?
4. Did everyone forget about Arthur Anderson and Enron? Cheney did an ad for Arthur Anderson about their accounting "techniques" and Enron funded Bush more than anyone else. Americans need to be reminded of all the Bush dealings from 2000 until now.
5. Did everyone forget about the list of strange things said by the Bush administration? Trust me, when you list them all together you get an accurate account of what this administration stands for. For instance, their sec. of education called the teachers union "terrorists." ...I wonder if any teachers died on 9/11? How can they get away with that? And that's only one quote from one administration official. There are 4 years of headlines to be uncovered that need to be shown to the American public to remind them what they are voting on.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: Deserving of a Pat on the Back . . .
BuzzFlash,
Bush, going from "being wired to being wired." After taking a look at the picture of Bush's back submitted by one of your readers . . . unless Bush is suffering from a large growth on his spine . . . it does appear that he was wearing something under his suit coat.
If it wasn't a water pack (snicker) on Bush's back . . . well, geez, I thought we had better equipment than that for wiring people today. Haven't the Republicans learned anything since the ole Nixon days of wiretapping . . .
If that big bulge on Bush's back is a wire-pack, what do we have to do to have a square-shooting, uninhibited, up front debate with Republican candidates . . . pat everyone down before the debates or just go for the "naked truth"?
Just askin . . . :)
Thanks BuzzFlash,
Shirley Smith
Subject: NY Times Article
Hey -- In an editorial on the Court being back in sessions, the Times offers these two concluding paragraphs:
The shadow of the court's ruling in Bush v. Gore hangs over the start of this term. Both campaigns in this year's election have already assembled legal teams, and if the vote is close, there may well be lawsuits over recount procedures, standards for deciding which provisional ballots count, problems with electronic voting and even whether Colorado can, through a referendum on the ballot next month, divide its electoral votes between the two candidates.
With four years' hindsight, Bush v. Gore remains deeply troubling because of its partisan 5-to-4 split, its reliance on legal principles that the court does not apply in other cases and the overall sense that the majority justices were intent on stopping all the votes from being counted. The decision's defenders argue that the court did the best it could given the pressure it was under to come up with a speedy resolution. The justices would be doing the nation a service if they began to think now about how they could do a job better this year if the presidential election once again ends up on their docket.
The First Monday in October (NY Times)
Jake
CLICK HERE FOR PART 2 OF THE OCTOBER 6, 2004 BUZZFLASH MAILBAG.