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: Bush says what he means and means what he says.
So now, I hear the Pakistani President has said the trail has gone
cold on Osama. So much for gonna get him dead or alive. And as for the
anthrax terrorist attacking at the same 9-11 time...well, I guess Ashcroft
will spend the rest of his life in retirement draining backyard ponds
for that one. Bush as been the worst president we have ever had!
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: Sales down
Reported on the noon news: For the second straight month, retailers
have posted lousy sales.
Thanksgiving and weeks before Christmas have traditionally led to
higher sales for retailers. Supermarkets are the only stores in
which I see appreciable customers.
Hey, it looks like corporations can lead consumers to water, but
they can't make them drink! I wonder if Bush and his corporate buddies
will ever figure that out. Outsource some more jobs Bush cronies
and import more foreign goods...way to go! Maybe those foreign countries
can buy their own goods now.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subject: Pat Tillman
So now the military is changing its tune as to the death of Pat
Tillman. It seems that the initial reports were not quite accurate.
Gee, what a surprise. The military, the pentagon or Rumsfeld himself,
exaggerating or outright lying about a military operation. After
all, the public can't handle the truth about anything that might
make the military look bad, so let's only tell them good things.
As a product of the 60's (and YES I did serve) we learned that our
government was not always truthful with the people and started to
question what was going on within the administration. However, that
was a time when we had a free press that asked questions and investigated
until the truth was uncovered.
John Kerry's testimony when he returned from Vietnam was spun to
death and the media just blah, blah, blahed the republican talking
points so most people have no idea the context or accuracy of Kerry's
testimony. The shame of the whole gop spin is that the weak kneed
dems never pointed out that history shows Kerry was correct regarding
everything he said about Vietnam. Just ask Robert MacNamara.
I have all the respect in the world for Pat Tillman and grieve his
death as I do all who served. If the country had more Pat Tillmans,
we would all be better off. However, I wonder if the republican
attack machine will question the validity of Pat Tillman's silver
star as they did Kerry's. Somehow I think not.
Subject: Florida fraud
One aspect of the Florida vote fraud that Republican defenders say
justifies the current vote count anomalies is that the Dixiecrat
counties went for Bush in 2000 so why not go 75-25% for Bush in
2004 even if they are still 75% registered Dems now? (Why they wouldn't
change parties is beyond nearly everyone.)
Well maybe they didn't vote for Bush in 2000 either. Only 70% of
all counties in Florida ever recounted even once in 2000, never
mind lying Jim Baker's protestations to the contrary. And if they
weren't recounted then, perhaps it's because the same optical scanning
fraud equipment was used then. It isn't as though we KNOW anything
about what Jeb Bush and Catherine Harris were capable of especially
given the help of retired CIA officers and any number of other political
operatives whose lives depend on going along.
Evidence of fraud in the 2004 election, which is nearly incontrovertible,
is more likely to mean there was fraud in 2000 and elections past
than that it means the contrary, i.e., that there was no fraud then.
If possible, what it means is that previous vote counts should also
be reviewed, not that we should stop looking at this one.
Subject: We are not anything like the Republicans so why try
I see so many letters to you saying we should be like the Republicans
and fight dirty as they do, or pull the same stunts they do, but
There are so many people who feel all politicians are alike, they
all lie and don't care about the middle income people. And they
don't vote. I saw a lot of it this year. Perhaps Senator Kerry could
have won with their votes.
I do agree we need to speak up when they lie, we need to expose
them with no hesitation, but make sure we don't do what Dan Rather
did with that phony document that may have been invented by the
Republicans in the first place.
Remember the saying; When you lie down with dogs, you get up with
I don't know if you will print this in your mailbag, but I know
I'm right, and I'll bet someone there will agree with me. In that
case, feel free to borrow from my letter anything that suits you.
Subject: Senator Reid
As a native Nevadan reading the many comments about our Senator
Harry Reid I
figured it might be helpful to forward you the link to his website
so you can voice your outrage as I have (read below).
Harry is not exactly "ultra-conservative" and Nevada is
not exactly "ultra-conservative" (compare Utah, Idaho,
Wyoming, Arizona, et al.) since Kerry actually won this state this
time around (see exit polls). We are much more in line with California,
Oregon and Washington but have been branded a "red state"
because of election chicanery. We should be blue. In Nevada the
medicinal marijuana bill passed, for example. We tend to follow
California in social issues with the glaring exception of gay marriage.
So here's the link: http://reid.senate.gov/
and here's what I wrote:
Senator Reid: I'm aghast that you have been quoted as saying
you would support the nomination of Mr Scalia as Chief Justice.
Isn't he the bloke who recently said or wrote something to the
effect that the "separation of church and state" is
I realize you're an anti-abortion Mormon and when it comes to
many social issues I'm sure you must kowtow (think votes) to that
ultra-conservative group, but I don't think you're doing yourself
or the rest of us Nevadans any favors by even beginning to consider
Scalia. If you vote for him I will never again vote for you.
I'm also extremely disappointed by the lack of "fight"
in what is currently passing as a Democratic party in America.
Again, the election has been rigged and yet the sound coming from
Washington is extremely muted.
Where is the outrage? Why on earth are you not leading a fight
to have the election investigated in every state where serious
questions have been asked
about the exit poll data compared to the margin of victory for
I have come to believe that the majority of Democrats representing
Congress (you included) are sellouts and few of you any longer
represent the values I've held dear all my life. If there was
a viable progressive third party I would join and never again
vote for a Democrat. Democrats have become complicitous. It's
shameful. It's alarming and it is sounding the death knell for
democracy in America.
Give him a piece of your mind. I did.
Steve in Reno
Subject: It is very easy to write programming code that steals
I am not a software developer but I am a technical writer and I
can read "code" (programming languages) moderately well.
People who don't work in the software industry may not realize that
it is very easy to write programming code that does the following
kinds of things:
Every third time the voter selects Kerry, increment Bush Total
If voter selects Kerry, print receipt that says Kerry and increment
In fact, these are easy problems to solve in a first programming
course. Now, this kind of calculation is easy to detect when the
code is inspected--but since the code is proprietary, we don't get
to inspect it.
Furthermore, you don't necessarily have to write code such as this.
I read more than a year ago that Diebold's voting machine programs
are based on that well-known database application that is used by
small businesses, non-profits and individuals. I am not completely
certain that the notorious voting machines are based on this product.
However, the majority of counties and towns cannot afford to buy
an industrial-strength database management system, nor can they
afford to employ a database administrator, so I would not be surprised
to find out that this product is used in the voting machines.
I have worked a great deal on this type of database and, as far
as I know, its security is based on username/password maintenance,
which are optional features--you don't have to use the username/password
feature to use the program. Any elections supervisor who is determined
to change the vote totals in the database can do so regardless of
whether a username/password is used or not.
This is one way that you could have a certain number of registered
voters, on the one hand, and a total number of votes that exceeds
the number of registered voters by thousands. This kind of discrepancy
happened a great deal in numerous counties.
Subject: Maureen Farrell
The new GOP...The blind leading the Blind...The NOT SEE party...Unfortunately
it is already done...I hope I escape this "Christian Nation"
in time...I am thinking maybe Aruba...If there really is a GOD now
would be a good time to make its presence known...Remember, sHE
did allow for Hitler and many other fine young cannibalisms, torturers
etc....I guess God helps those what helps themselves or some such
blather...Bless you and yours...
I just wanted to share with your readers my latest letter to that
great paper the NYTimes who seemed to have just stumbled upon the
Ohio recount story.
Dear NY Times,
I'm actually happy to see that you finally caught up to the mess
that the vote was in Ohio and have reversed your prior stance
of making fun of the bloggers who wanted to investigate this story
because they have no confidence in what you do. Who cares that
you are only three to four weeks too late on the story? As my
parents use to say it is better late than never and I know if
I want to find out all the latest news from three weeks ago there
is no better source than the the NY Times.
P.S. I hear that the Red Sox have a strong pitching staff this
year and you might want to send somebody to look into this story
A propos to your leadership link today, did you know that Hitler
espoused the "Fuhrerprinzip" or Leadership principle?
This was his preferred style of governance!
Jay Hatheway, PhD
Associate Professor and Chair
Department of History
[BuzzFlash Note: More on this: http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Fuhrerprinzip;
Subject: How To Steal the Enchanted State of New Mexico
I hope that even the mainstream media will recognize the gravity
of this issue. The Chief magistrate, Mr. Bush, is slated to serve
8 years in an office he was never elected to. That will be his historical
legacy--and our shame. If mainstream journalists would look at the
data in New Mexico, they would get a glimpse of how Bush stole the
election. It's very simple.
The strong Kerry counties, all E-Voting jurisdictions, had bizarre
Examples 1) Cibola 55%, San Miguel 56%, McKinley 49%, and Rio Arriba
63%. In each county, the partisan shift moved dramatically - and
quite improbably - to Bush on the magnitude of 5-10% over 2000.
On the other side, the strong Bush counties often employed OP-SCAN
machines. There the turnout was turned into overdrive.
Examples: 1) De Baca 73%, Eddy 73%, Union 75%. Bush increased his
share of the vote in these counties by 9%, 7%, and 5% respectively.
These shenanigans allowed Bush to overturn a 50%-48% Kerry lead
in the exit polls. He "won" New Mexico 50%-49%.
To explain the unexplainable, Rove made much of his boy's breakthrough
among Latinos (Kerry 53% - 44%). That myth has been partially exploded
by NBC News which, begrudgingly, admits that the Hispanic vote was
won by Kerry 58%-40% nationwide. In fact, they're still counting
too many "ghost Latino" votes.
There were no Bush gains among Latinos from '00 to '04 - according
to the Velasquez Foundation, which conducted an Exit poll of Hispanic
voters taken nationwide on 2 November. This means there was no Hispanic
surge in New Mexico - recorded to be 12% by the "adjusted"
NEP "exit poll." The "surge" is explained, in
part, by the anomalous election results in cherry-picked counties
The model in New Mexico was used all over the nation, including
in states Bush lost (Mich, Pa, Wisc, MI) and states he won easily
(OK, TX, Neb). Unlike '00, Bush wanted a majority of the vote (51%)
and a clear 3.5 million vote plurality. He got it, and now we're
stuck with him.
[BuzzFlash Note: NM turnout numbers are reported in Harding,
Los Alamos Had Highest Voter Turnout Rate (AP/Albuquerque
Subject: re Maureen
Farrell's 12/7 article on neo-conservatism
Thank you and thank Maureen for this enlightening and provocative
While many may be put-off by the shock of Maureen's title, references
to fascism, and the more confrontive side of this piece, Maureen's
excellent research and sources regarding neo-conservatism, its origin,
and its dangers to democracy need to be understood beyond the shock
value of comparison with its sister ideological pathology; fascist
In fact, Maureen's editorial and quoted sources raise the less emotive
question of whether neo-conservatism and fascism are not so close
in the nature of their ideological pathologies as to be essentially
indistinguishable--except by intuiting to them the unknowable distinctions
of intent, purpose and goal.
I find it instructive to view neo-conservatism and fascism as entirely
common in most externally observable and testable facets: They are
both ideological pathologies which attack and are of great danger
to any and all forms of democracy. They both amalgamate and misuse
the emotive powers of all three; religion, state, and corporate
economics. They both cynically deceive and use centralized authoritarian
powers, while preaching the 'values' of patriotism, nationalism,
religious faith, free markets, democracy and many other values that
the masses believe in. They both believe in and set-up hierarchical,
and anti-democratic elite power structures for their leaders, in
direct contradiction to the 'values' they ask the masses to worship.
Naturally, they both operate on entirely separate and secret levels
of core 'insider' knowledge/reality, while carefully controlling
popular fantasies of the values and actions of the 'outsider' masses
In fact, it might well be suggested that neo-conservatism could
have been designed, by Leo Strauss (because of his special sensitivity
toward the gathering dangers of fascism), either consciously or
sub-consciously, as a powerful antidote to fascist Nazism. Aware
of the power of the ideological pathology of Nazism, Strauss might
well have designed an equally powerful counter-force, a vaccine
if you will, that used many of the same traits as the Nazi disease
to potentially battle it. However, Strauss was wrong if he assumed
that it would take as virulent an ideological pathology to battle
fascism as fascism itself.
History proved that fascism was defeated by just the type of benign,
safe, middle-class popular democracy which Bush so often pays lip
service to (while actually attacking it with his neo-conservative
cabal). Fascism did not require an equally dangerous, secretive,
and mutatable ideological pathology to confront and successfully
battle it--it required healthy democracy.
Now, we are left with the strong, but unproven, drug invented by
Dr. Strauss (presumably to battle the awful threat of Nazism); a
dangerous ideological pathology which today has escaped the lab
and is being tested against the awful threat of 'terrorism.' But
the very concept of a dangerous, pathological antigen like neo-conservatism
(or under the Israeli prescription label, 'Likudism') to battle
terrorism seems to be proving so dangerous to the patient of democracy
that the phrase "we needed to destroy the city in order to
save it" might well be applied to democracy itself.
It seems that there are two great dangers in employing the untested
but powerful drug of neo-conservatism against the ideological pathology
of terrorism: the first is that neo-conservatism never proved its
efficacy against the last great battle with the disease of fascism,
and secondly, that the drug of neo-conservatism (regardless of its
designers' and prescribers' real intent) is not shared with the
Is neo-conservatism a strong drug with which to fight terrorism,
or is it an equally dangerous ideological pathology of its own;
that may well mutate into fascism itself (because it shares so many
of the same characteristics and genes)? There can be no independent
and popular democratic peer review, because the practitioners of
neo-conservative medicine operate in secrecy--they place themselves
in a secret cabal of elite beyond the review of popular debate.
And thus, the claimed benefits of this powerful, but unstable and
dangerous neo-conservative drug are suspiciously likely to metastasize
into a cure as bad as the disease on two scores: firstly, because
a safer and proven drug already exists in the form of democracy,
and second because, like Merck and the FDA in dealing with Vioxx,
those applying the tests have already conspired to lie, deceive
and hide dangerous results from their self-serving test regime.