October 17, 2005

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: Not enough Bush luvvin'

I really found it amusing this morning watching Washington Journal on CSpan, when the commentator had to ask that former supporters of Bush not call in on the "Support Bush" line because they were expressing their disapproval of this administration. Then a few minutes later the commentator stated they were weak on calls on the "Support Bush" line. He went on to say the purpose of the show was to have opposing views and he needed Republicans to call in that still supported Bush. Things Don't Look Good for Bush and Co.

Joanne O'Neill
Collingswood, NJ

What's up with porky little Scotty McClellan. He's now picking on feisty little old ladies who have brains and courage of steel. Helen Thomas should slap the little porky twit and send him home to his momma, who I'm sure he still lives with, until he learns to respect his elders.

Jim
Uniontown, PA

Subject: Thomas Friedman's call for accountability

Mr. Friedman in his Friday op-ed does a lot of call for how US is doing with regards to testing against other countries. This is what I posted to the NY Times, which has lost the right to say anything about accountability.

I was reading Thomas Friedman's latest editorial about how the 12th graders are doing on tests compared to 12th graders around the world. This isn't surprising for the great lover of globalization. It would be like a national newspaper, that used to have a great reputation but is now in total shambles, hiring columnists who push for a war with another country (let's call it Iraq) over issues that turn out to be false(hey let's call them lies), and then this once prestigious paper lets everyone keep their jobs (a.k.a his friend Judy Miller that first amendment defender). So, I think that all the teachers who have kids that fail their high school tests should send their kids to work for the NY Times, there's absolutely no accountability there. One thing you could say about those kids that failed their tests is they've never helped to start a war that got other people's kids killed.

Gary Floyd
Medford, MA.

From Thursday's White House press briefing:

THOMAS It has nothing to do with -- Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

McCLELLAN: Well, you have a very different view of the war on terrorism, and I'M SURE you're opposed to the broader war on terrorism...

TERRY MORAN: On what basis do you say Helen is opposed to the broader war on terrorism?

McCLELLAN: Well, she certainly expressed her concerns about Afghanistan and Iraq and going into those two countries. I think I can go back and pull up her comments over the course of the past couple of years.

MORAN: And speak for her, which is odd.

McCLELLAN: No, I said SHE MAY BE, because certainly if you look at her comments over the course of the past couple of years, she's expressed her concerns --

THOMAS: I'm opposed to preemptive war, unprovoked preemptive war.

From "I'm sure you're opposed" to "she may be" in 15 seconds. Not bad. I guess he meant, "I'm sure", figuratively, and not literally. As in "I'm sure" when you're really not sure but you just say you're sure as a figure of speech even though you're the press secretary and this is on the record.

A reader in Canada

I remember thinking the death toll for our guys would be 1,000 by the end of the GOP convention last year and it happened I think the day after it ended.

1974 WOW! Nearly a thousand more in just a year. Will it be 2000 by Thanksgiving or Halloween? I think Saddam's trial is going to bring a lot more violence. They are trying to rush things up so much to save Dubya and the GOP's collective butts.

Karen Webb,
Moore, Ok.

"The fact of the matter is that when we were attacked on September 11, we had a choice to make. We could decide that the proximate cause was al Qaeda and the people who flew those planes into buildings and, therefore, we would go after al Qaeda … or we could take a bolder approach." -- Condoleezza Rice, on NBC's "Meet the Press", October 16, 2005

"We don't want the 'smoking gun' to be a mushroom cloud." -- Condoleezza Rice, speaking to CNN's Wolf Blitzer, September 8, 2002

So what if "a bolder approach" entailed a series of lies and innuendoes, distortions, disinformation, and outright deceit? Condi Rice was up to it. As were George and Dick, Rummy, Wolfie, and even the sainted Colin.

Anything to get that preemptive war on Iraq. Even if Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and Saddam had nothing to do with Osama.

By God, Little Georgie and Big Dick wanted war on Iraq in the worst way. And that's the way they got it.

By lying to Congress and the American people. By creating a climate of fear. By imagining "mushroom clouds" sprouting across our land like scary nuclear flowers.

Thanks, Condi. Thanks, Dick. Thanks, George. Thanks for the war and the destruction of Iraq and the defamation of America throughout the world.

If Bill Clinton can get impeached for lies about a stain on a blue dress, why can't George W. Bush and Dick Cheney be impeached for lying to Congress and the American people about our reasons for going to war on Iraq?

Where's our sense of perspective, our sense of justice?

David Wyles
Playa Del Rey, CA

Subject: Put Bush on the stand

Buzzflash,
Bush states that Miers will vote exactly the way he would. But no one is allowed to pry that information out of Miers. So my suggestion is put Bush on the stand in place of Miers.

Larry,
Maryland

From NY TIMES:

-And when the prosecutor in the case asked her to explain how "Valerie Flame" appeared in the same notebook she used in interviewing Mr. Libby, Ms. Miller said she "didn't think" she heard it from him. "I said I believed the information came from another source, whom I could not recall," she wrote on Friday, recounting her testimony for an article that appears today.

Jimmy Olsen, your job is safe.

Mike Curtis
Greenbrier Ark

The question is, who does Judy Miller work for? I am not talking about writing false articles supporting bush and his thugs. I am asking who does Judy Miller really work for.

A BuzzFlash Reader

One thing I learned early in life: Folks who call themselves "conservative" aren't, and folks they call "liberal" (like the media) aren't either. The self-labeled "conservatives", are simply oligarchs and oligarchic bucket boys and girls.

The New York Times and the Washington Post (the favorite "Liberal" whipping boys of the "conservatives") are corporations. The owners and representatives of these corporations have one sole objective: to make as much money as they can, any way they can. Being truthful about this country's oligarchs or offending the oligarchs whose "corporations" advertise in their papers is the last thing on their minds. That goes ditto for CBS.

I subscribed to the Washington Post for seventeen years. I first subscribed because I thought "conservative" claims were true. I took me only a couple of weeks to recognize that the "conservative" claims were lies. I continued to subscribe, treating it like the Dallas Morning News: all "news" was suspect until proven true.

It was then that it dawned on me; anyone who disagreed with the "conservatives" were instantly labeled "liberal," and I had accepted that bunch of liars' labels! From that day on, I refused to be labeled "liberal." If I allow a label at all, now, it is "progressive." The New York Times is definitely not "progressive," nor has it ever been.

All this to say, whatever the New York Times corporate owners decide to finally say about Judith Miller, it will have one sole purpose: to make or conserve money for the corporate owners. Don't expect the truth from them. You won't get it.

A BuzzFlash Reader

Subject: NY Times/Judy Miller

UH -- Has anybody noticed that the mess at the Times has also not done a lot for our faith in the "media" out here in ordinary folks land??

Edith Conrad
Asheville, NC

BuzzFlash ran a hilarious editorial in the Lighter Side section about a mock contest to name Judy Miller's book. We asked our readers to come up with names for Judy Miller's new book. Following is a list of responses:

Subject: Judith Presstitute Miller's Book Suggestion for NYT Times scumbag Judith Miller's new book:

THANKS FOR ALL THE MONEY. SORRY ABOUT YOUR DEAD KID.

Judith Miller is a disgusting, soulless, treasonous piece of filth. The fact that this malignant presstitute is going to make even more money after her role in lying this nation into war is... well, it just makes me sick to my stomach.

I look forward to seeing her self-righteous, blindingly-deluded screed head directly to the remainder/sale book tables all across America. I cannot imagine anyone actually caring enough to pay $25 to hear the further ramblings of a sycophantic pathological liar. After all, we can get that garbage for free on TV.

Paying a single penny to read her self-serving prose is paying far too much. She is worthy of our scorn and disgust (not to mention a lengthy prison sentence for her role in lying to us about Iraq)... not our hard-earned money.

Todd Lavoie
San Francisco/CA

- "Cooking with WMDs"

-"Roots: NYT, CIA, PNAC" - Carolyn Hayes