March 6, 2006

The BuzzFlash Mailbag

The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. More reader opinion is at "Contributors." You can write to Mailbag at http://www.BuzzFlash.com/contact/mail.html. Guidelines for submissions are at BuzzFlash FAQ #18.

THIS IS PART 2 OF THE MARCH 6, 2006 BUZZFLASH MAILBAG. CLICK HERE FOR PART 1

Subject: The Profit Cycle

The war in Iraq is no longer tactical but logistical. It's the same sort of problem that the USSR had in Afghanistan. The occupation army sets up a series of bases. The bases need a steady supply of basic living needs, needs that cost money. Food, water, ammo, fuel, etc.

As such and such a base starts to run low, the army has to send a new convoy of these things from one base to another. The insurgency then attacks the convoy that gets sent out. The result is that the base gets more and more reluctant to go outside of the base to do offensive work. So they sit there on guard duty, and wait for an attack on the base that isn't going to come. At this point all the insurgency has to do is wait out the base, next convoy, next attack. Keep this up until the public of the occupying country gets mad about the increasing cost and loss of life, and eventually the army will leave in defeat.

In this case, the longer we wait, the more that Kellogg Brown and Root rake in. So they don't want anyone to look at the war this way.

We can't "win" for 2 reasons: A) the powers that brought us into this war don't want us to win. Why would Cheney kill the goose that laid the golden egg? and B) they never clearly defined what victory would be because of point A in the first place.

If they set up a timetable, KBR - Halliburton stock would go down because Wall St. would know that there would be an end to the growth period. The stock needs to go up, up, up at any and all costs.

We live in the age of robber barons.

SE

Subject: Re: People Canceling Their Subscriptions to "BuzzFlash"

To Whom It May Concern at BuzzFlash,

You write that certain people have been canceling their BuzzFlash subscriptions because they feel that BuzzFlash is too cynical and too harsh on the Bush administration. Well, in my opinion, either those people are only casually reading what BuzzFlash publishes or they are actually fanatics of the neocon lunacy who only subscribed to BuzzFlash to monitor BuzzFlash's efforts. They then try to dishearten or confuse BuzzFlash as they cancel their subscriptions.

The reason why I believe these people are either unfair or dishonest with their criticisms against BuzzFlash is because those criticisms don't take into account that BuzzFlash includes internet links to independent and often-nonpartisan sources which support BuzzFlash's editorial comments with verifiable data. If BuzzFlash seems too cynical or too harsh in the opinion of some people, maybe it's because BuzzFlash has been paying attention to the relevant issues and relevant information available to us all and, as a result of doing their civics homework, have come to the conclusion that this current crop of neocon officeholders are, at best, demonstrably incompetent to the point of impeachment and, at worst, legally criminal to the point of impeachment, and is frustrated that the hardworking people of mainstream America have not accepted the challenge of the neocon, power grabbing"con artists" to add the act of becoming a pro-active citizenry informed by objective, nonpartisan information to their already busy, stressful lives.

(All of the above is just my opinion; I am not associated with BuzzFlash in any way other than as a subscriber.)

To the staff of BuzzFlash I would just like to thank you for making such strong efforts to be intellectually honest in your publications. In any endeavor there is always room for improvement and I am confident that BuzzFlash will keep raising the bar on integrity so that corporate media outlets will be forced to fulfill their vital role in a healthy democracy.

Jesse

Subject: Hey CBS! Tillman Was Not a Pro-war Poster Boy!

To CBS Evening News,

I found your story last night regarding the developing criminal investigation of the tragic death of American hero Pat Tillman to be very interesting. I did notice, however, that you failed to identify Mr. Tillman’s well-documented anti-war views and his strong antipathy for the Bush administration. In fact, far from being the pro-war poster-boy that the administration tried to present him as (and that your report unfortunately suggested), he is reported by his family and friends as having been very vocal in his criticism of the war; its execution; and its motives. Moreover, he had been - at the time of his death - reportedly planning a meeting and media collaboration with Noam Chomsky.

Now, you guys will share with your viewers the first inkling of any suspicion against any previously anonymous husband whose wife might die in some titillating fashion; so why not point out the obvious whodunit scenario here? Rumsfeld et al. had Tillman killed to prevent a devastating public relations setback.

Okay, okay, I understand if you don’t want to go that far yet - if they can kill a high profile football/war hero, they can put a bullet in a talking head. But to misrepresent, the way you did, the explicit opinions of this altruistic fellow American is unconscionable and does grave dishonor to his sacrifice.

Ken Duerksen
Oxford, Ohio

Subject: The Letter of the Law

It is strictly enforced whenever the Bush administration’s agenda is threatened by it. It is simply ignored as if it wasn’t there when it is a force to stop Bush’s agenda.

And, as with pathological liars, who “would tell a lie when the truth would help,” those who have flocked around George W. Bush do so without shame; from large lies to the smallest.

Take the recent shooting accident involving Cheney and a wealthy Bush supporter, Harry Whittington, that occurred in Texas a few weeks ago. In spite of knowing that not reporting the incident would seem suspicious at best, and an acknowledgment of a special class of citizens exempt from the law, Cheney refused to be interviewed by police until a day after the event.

Just about every day there is some horror story of police exceeding their authority, beating up teens, shooting people they “thought” were armed with guns. Just a few years ago, before the 9/11 brouhaha (not the event, the aftermath) that created new police powers, a Chicago woman commuting from work was shot and killed for being on a cell phone when police pulled the driver over.

Just a month ago, a soldier home on leave from Iraq, was shot three times by a police officer for being a passenger in a car pulled over by the police.

These are serious consequences for doing something police decided was “against the law”; however, in this era of obsessive police control (we might be a terrorist), police politely wait at a gate for someone to come out and tell them that Cheney isn’t ready to be “interviewed” about someone being shot! No SWAT team, no breaking down doors, no throwing the suspect on the ground, no rounding up and arresting the hunting party - no, they graciously waited for Cheney to give him the information he chose to give out and then politely released it.

So we now have a double standard of judging behavior in our country that goes beyond anything we have previously seen; with, perhaps, the exception of the McCarthy era. And nothing tells us this more than what I read in a Washington, Post article dated March 4, 2006 written by Dan Eggen.

It seems that George W. Bush has decided to “limit leaks of classified documents” by targeting journalists and their “government sources.” Now, you would think that he was finally cleaning up the government mess that culminated in the treasonous act of releasing CIA covert agent Valerie Plame’s name, wouldn’t you?

But you are wrong. Bush still has no concern over CIA agent Plame’s “outing”; no, he is concerned over the “leaks”; which I prefer to call whistleblowing; of secret prisons, his torture and “rendition” program, the domestic warrantless wiretapping surveillance program, and any other information that oozes out of the Bush secret and shadow government that he doesn’t want known.

Bush calls the NSA leak “a shameful act” that helps “the enemy.” But his failure to uphold his pledge to fire those responsible for the releasing of Agent Plame’s name doesn’t seem to be “a shameful act” even though federal laws were broken and it gave “aid and comfort” to our enemies. In fact, the Bush government has not only praised the one government aid indicted so far, but members of Bush’s party have been collecting funds for that man’s defense.

We have his lies about Katrina, “No one could have predicted the levees breaking,” and we have the video tape that proves that he lied to us once again. He tells us that his personal vendetta against Iraq is “going well,” even though as many as 30 terrorist bombings occur daily. He huddles in his “bunker” and refuses to meet with anyone other than a selected few admirers but claims to have the support of the country.

And, even in the hallowed halls of our Capitol, during a state of the Union speech, this vile double standard came into sharp focus when a citizen who had lost her son in Bush’s Iraq war, a guest of a Congresswoman, was rudely and roughly removed from her seat and arrested. Not for what she did but because of who she was.

But when a CONGRESSMAN’S wife was asked to leave and she fought back and hurled insults at the security person trying to remove her, she was NOT arrested. In fact, her husband vented his rage on the floor of Congress, and it was reported that he had said the mother of the dead soldier deserved the treatment she received.

Our Constitution established no ruling class, no privileged few. Even though our citizens are poorer and our job opportunities fewer We the People still retain our position of power over our government. We can not let these lies continue, we can not let them stand as “facts.” We must not let them rewrite our history and make us the villains while their lies become noble endeavors. We have nothing to lose except our freedom, which seems to be fading away under the onslaught of contrived “facts” being “fixed” to blind us to the truth.

The Law is on our side and we must not allow it to be manipulated by those do not respect it.

A BuzzFlash Reader

Subject: Canadian Injuries in Afghanistan

I understand that it is not due to you who read BuzzFlash, nor those who are against violence and war, BUT, if North Americans were not all lumped in together as the bad guy, maybe our NATO troops in Afghanistan would not present as targets for those who are angry at YOUR administration. I have a close relative and friends trying hard to make some sort of peace for the citizens in Afghanistan and yet, our NATO forces there are in grave danger because they are now in charge of a former US camp in Kandahar. We are NOT Americans; that is what defines us (strange but true). So, I don't want my relative killed before he returns, nor do I want any other Canadian killed. I do not want to see, nor hear of any single person killed anymore, anywhere, regardless of their faith, race, ethnicity or class. I want children to grow up and parents to see their children grow up. Stop the killing! What is it about blood and guts that so many Americans seem to so love? (I realize that it is not unique to your country, but it is far more overt there; gotta love your NRA, eh?) The United States has killed more people than Hussein ever has, more than Bin Laden ever has, so...stop wars, stop guns, stop murder by law, stop KILLING.

Canadian Soldier Wounded in Axe Attack in Afghanistan, CTV Says (Bloomberg.com)

Apart from the site that you, BuzzFlash, have provided, I am including Canadian sites that are just a tad more informative.

Canadian soldier wounded in bizarre Afghanistan axe-and-grenade attack (mytelus.com)

Ambush in Afghanistan (Toronto Star)

Sorry about the rant but I get really upset when your brainless, bloodthirsty administration strong arms the world to get their way. May the Bush administration fall quickly, deeply and forevermore. May they suffer karmic repercussions for twenty life cycles. As an aside to Ms. Blazyk (Barbara Lee: I love your posts and your sense of humour). Should you find your way out of GA, you have a place to stay on "The Island (BC)." I wish I had the money to pay your way but economics are harsh here too regardless of our single payer health care.

Marie-France Germain
Nanaimo, BC, Canada

Subject: Why Democrats Don't Win Elections

Why does the Democratic Party keep losing elections when they are on the right side of every issue that the public identifies with in the endless polls taken?

They have become, for the most part, craven cowards seemingly without the courage or principles or the conviction to fight for what is right. The minute Harry Reid invoked the rule to bring the Seenot to a screeching halt until we got answers on the intelligence about Iraq, and then caved utterly and broke his promise, the image of gutless, unprincipled Democrats was again reaffirmed, and it reinforced the belief that we are bumbling cowards, with no more integrity than Republicans. And if we are viewed to be the same as the sycophantic, morally corrupt, and morally bankrupt Republicans, take a wild guess which party is going to get its ass kicked again in 2006 and 2008.

This is, I know, a sweeping, generalized, and very harsh judgment, but it is deserved. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Hillary, Rahm, and others who want to be “nice” and go along to get along should look up the word nice. According to the Oxford English Dictionary (the definitive dictionary of the English language), the original meaning of the word “nice” was “idiot,” a perfect definition for a party that has lost the will, knowledge, courage, and conviction that makes people vote for a Democrat; they no longer know how to win elections.

We ARE on the right side of every issue, but we appear to be just “Republican Lite” because we don’t fight tooth and nail, no-holds-barred, Texas-style, fight to the finish with a nine month time limit to the 2006 elections.

Given the nature of the House of Unrepentant, its rules, and the fact that Democrats have been so beaten down and demoralized that they are just Hastert’s bi**h, there is no hope of accomplishing anything there. We look like idiots when we hold solitary hearings in a just-like-your-high school-cafeteria setting. People see it as the genuine sign of weakness it is and they are not going to vote for weak, impotent idiots.

The Seenot is a different matter altogether, but there is one glaring weakness on the part of Democrats, and it’s called “Unanimous Consent,” which allows for the smooth operation of the Seenot and fosters amity.

Amity will not win elections. Until the public sees the Democratic Party fighting vigorously and effectively against the most pernicious agenda of the most pernicious political party in American History we will continue to lose. Lose badly and repeatedly.

Harry should have kept his promise; we should refuse unanimous consent for anything, even what time a committee might meet, and especially when they are trying to push through their ruinous causes. Every time there is a party-line vote on a controversial issue, every democrat should change their vote to "abstain," so it is crystal clear which party is passing bad stuff. Until we return to our Democratic roots of being the champions and defenders of the people of this country we are doomed to be further relegated into obscurity.

If this current Democratic Party had been the same in the 30’s, no New Deal, work projects, Social Security; in the 40’s, the loss of W.W.II; the 50’s, loss of the Korean War, continuing McCarthyism, and communists being hunted endlessly; the 60’s, the civil rights movement crushed, equal rights for all denied, and segregation the norm; in the 90’s, no balanced budgets, no surpluses, no 22-million jobs created, and no 187% rise in the stock market.

Quick! Name three great things the Republicans have done that benefited the ordinary citizen during the 70’s & 80’s, and the end of the Cold War doesn’t count. Reagan simply outspent the Russians and drove them into bankruptcy trying to keep up. Any teenager with a limitless credit card backed by the treasury could have done that.

Watergate? Domestic spying? Enemies Lists? Iran-Contra? The largest expansion of government ever? The biggest deficits in history? And that doesn’t even cover what Bush has done to America in the first six years of the new century, which includes failing to protect us from 9/11; failing to catch Osama and diverting resources to Iraq; the Iraq attack that is the biggest strategic mistake ever made by America; the proliferation of nuclear weapons on their watch; the creation of thousands of new terrorists; the destruction of America’s reputation; treaties broken and ignored; enemy combatants held forever without charges, trials, attorneys; torture, secret prisons, kidnapping; tax cuts for the uber rich, no body armor or armored vehicles for the troops; poverty rampant, no health insurance for millions; food programs, education funding, child care funds, after school programs, child support enforcement programs all slashed; a doubling of the trade deficit, exploding budget deficits, more money spent in five years than in the preceding two hundred years; the collapse of diplomacy in favor of raw force; the breaking of our military from over extension and multiple tours of duty in a war zone; new domestic spying, the labeling of dissenters as traitors; a president that has assumed imperial powers, a “unitary executive” with plenary power that holds himself above the law; my god, the list is endless, it is vile, it is corrupt, it is amoral, and it has so distorted the world’s view of America that we may never again be respected or trusted.

And this is the party that wins election after election while our Democratic leaders give “unanimous consent” and foster amity in the Seenot instead of fighting with every fiber of their being, every ounce of willpower, and the vigor necessary to stop them in their tracks.

That, in a nutshell, is why I say that the Democratic Party has degenerated into a pack of craven cowards.

Voters respect those willing to fight for their beliefs. They will ignore labels like "partisan" and "obstructionist" as long as they believe Democrats are fighting for them and their rights and the issues they care about.

After all, is amity worth the destruction of the American way of life? So grow a pair and a spine, spit right into the eye of the Republicans, and find the heart and courage to fight the good fight, AND WIN. The alternative is too frightening to contemplate.

Respectfully,

Bill Arnett
Concord, CA

Subject: Right-wing Hatred

Check out this survey in the Sunday, March 5, 2005 Antelope Valley Press. This survey demonstrates the sickness that pervades in this country. These right-wing nuts only believe in hatred and cannot display rational thought. Go to editor@avpress.com to see the outcome of their survey for the favorite columnist of the readership. Ann Coulter was the overwhelming favorite, followed closely by Bill O'Reilly. Conversely, Helen Thomas came in as the most hated.

I came to this valley in 1997 to live closer to my wife's aging parents. The AV Press left their paper in my driveway for almost a year, despite my advising them that I did not want it. I realized early that they were simply a right-wing rag. More recently, I have purchased their Sunday paper to provide my wife with local advertisements. Lancaster, where I live, is about fifty miles due North of Los Angeles. It was a farming community for a number of years, but more recently it has become a bedroom community for Los Angeles. I could buy the LA Times, but as we all know, they will only commit to discussions favorable to the GOP. Following this survey, I will never again buy another AV Press paper.

Ken Evanger
Lancaster, CA

Subject: Intelligent Dissent Website

If you can’t laugh at the political and religious right, then the terrorists have won. With that in mind, please take a look at www.intelligentdissent.org.

A BuzzFlash Reader

Subject: David Gergen

So now David Gergen and other reporters are upset that the bush administration is threatening to go after reporters. Now they want to site the 1st amendment. Where was all their concern for constitutional rights these past five years as this Nazi regime was systematically stealing the constitutional rights of the American Populous? Gergen and others like him sat silent or worse yet rationalized the acts of bush and his group of liars, thieves and scoundrels thereby enabling them. There are 7 Articles and 27 Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, yet there was no outcry from these reporters about the rights of the people.

Cary
Cedar Park, Tx

Subject: CNN and Someone Getting Fired...

Buzz F...

I think you are 'all wet' on this one, about someone getting fired at CNN for telling the truth. Haven't you noticed CNN in particular, have done a "U" turn re. Bush? When Dubai wanted Lou Dobbs muzzled, CNN said to Dubai "F....U, so Lou came out swinging ever more, and has been after Bush and the WH ever since on EVERYTHING.

Margaret Miller
Palm Beach, Florida

Subject:  How Did We Get From There To Here?

How did we get from there to here? We used to be the nation most admired in the world. The lady holding the torch in the harbor in New York represented a shining light of freedom. America stood proud.

We have let a bunch of incompetent nincompoops foul that image. When did what we believe become the excuse for what we do? We believed Iraq had MSD. I believe I should be tall, slim, young and rich. Doesn’t change the fact that I am short, fat, old and poor. Believing don’t make it so.

We have become a nation so mired in rhetoric and nationalistic slogans that it’s almost impossible to separate the noise from the truth or the image from an actual person.

That isn’t a problem for most Americans when it comes to voting. Nosirreebob. Just march off to the polls and vote for whatever person is in the right political party. Don’t worry that a candidate should be honest, competent, and have a genuine compassion.

Nope, we just vote for whoever has the right letter behind their name. We vote for a Democrat if we’re Democrats and a Republican if we’re Republicans. No need to bother to educate ourselves. Just follow the Party line. If our particular incumbent is of the correct party we don’t even bother to examine whether that person's voting record has helped their constituency. After all, we are Democrats or Republicans, not Americans who want what’s best for our country. We just want to win.

One reason given for voting for George W. Bush was that he was a regular guy. He was the kind of a person you would want to sit down and have a beer with. Gee, those are some really great qualifications for president. Not to mention that regular guys don’t usually have an ex-president for a father, or have owned a major league baseball team, went to Yale and Harvard or had a bank balance we can only dream about. Yup, just a regular guy. Bugs Bunny was right, “What a bunch of Maroons!”

Marjorie L. Swanson
Kenosha, WI

Subject: Just Latest Observations

...and it would be comic relief if it were not so efffing serious. Are we not all sick of the cable (corporate) news media programs whose sole purpose it seems is to present the 'Facts' and then turn them into issues that are DEBUNK-ABLE? O'Reilly and Matthews come right out and do the dirty work themselves while Blitzer suavely debunks through softball questions and ad libs to the GOP's and Rove's talking point. He thinks he is fooling us. Watch him closely and notice that when the Rove mouthpiece forgets his lines or leaves out a talking point "Ole Wolfy Baby" jumps right in and rescues him or her. He would have turned into a spin off of "kissin Joe" last Friday but John Warner was not in the studio and on a feed monitor discussing the Dubai ports deal. Wolf is apparently CNN's lead propagandist on getting this deal through despite what Lou Dobbs says and the American people want. Blitzer is now in UAE extolling the virtues of this great nation, its people and their support of the America and our way of life.

Democrats and republicans have been hugely successful in establishing a "breakwater" in Congress but Katrina may have Tsunami-ed their attempts to preserve the seats of at least a few of these complicitors. There should be several who go out with the tide on this tragic failure.

Then there's Bush trading nuclear technology for mangoes. I doubt he even knows what nuclear technology or mangoes are? He probably thinks they are of equal value or maybe we might actually come out ahead on this magnificent trade deal he made for America. I can see the Indians laughing all the way to the Taj Mahal which Bush avoided like the plague. Didn't want to piss off Robertson, Falwell or Dobson. You know they've got their spies, too.

Did Bush ever consider that another military coup might transpire while he was on the stage with Musharraf? Many Americans were hoping! Bush is fast on his feet and an intellectual giant but he might not have been able to talk his way out of that one.

PLEASE WAKE ME WHEN THIS IS OVER!

Lawton Watson
Springdale, AR

Subject: Maybe this?

After finishing Dennett's new book "Breaking the Spell," I pondered one of the subplots he laid out. Kleptocracy. Government by thieves.

Could this explain the slow-motion disintegration of all the civic virtues taught to us as kids? How else can we understand the nonstop illogical incomprehensible series of recent current events? The government of the USA has finally and irreversibly been taken over by people who owe allegiance to money. Not money in the form of some underpaid college professors' vague imagined dreams of sufficient income, not even in the self-satisfied (and oh so well deserved) comfort that a Meg in the bank and a couple of properties brings to technocrats; imagine if you can, an income that rivals the annual budget of most countries, the power and wealth to change history, make laws, work your will on the earth as you see fit.

Who are these people who run the world? The British royal family? The other members of the British aristocracy? The Saudi royal family? The royal family of Abu Dhabi? Rupert Murdoch? Bill Gates? Sam Walton's kids? Stockholders of The Carlyle Group? E) all of the above.

Please let me play the conspiracy theory game just a little bit. The people who are really in charge are the people you never hear about. The reason why the Democrats are unable or unwilling to mount a serious opposition to current outrages is simple. They don't have the resources. Do you remember what THEY did to Jimmy Carter? Gasoline shortages. 20% mortgage rates. The Iranian Embassy hostages.

The Dems know that if by some stroke of fate they should find themselves in charge, they would have to deal with the money-lords, the people who decide. And they know that they could not win that face-off. And so they preserve themselves.

So you'd better start to look for that seat on the economic lifeboat if you know what's good for you and yours. Like the hacker's tag on the 'owned' web sites said: "All your economy are belong to us!"

Steve Kramer
Brewster, Ohio

Subject: The Politics of Hating Each Other

It should concern us that so few African Americans sit in the United States Senate. It should concern us because many do not feel that the Government represents them. It should also concern us that politics so divides us by race, religion and color.

No African American should want an African American Senator just because that man or woman is African American. That is every bit as bigoted as the white racist who would never vote for an African American simply because of their race. It’s sheer stupidity. It isn’t any smarter to believe that the color of a person's skin or their religion will mean that they speak to your beliefs or values.

Does being Irish American mean that another Irish American like Bill O'Reilly would get my vote should he decide to run for public office? Blowhards like O'Reilly are a blot on the nation and the idea that a mean-spirited, lying, piece of trash like O'Reilly could speak for me just because we share the same heritage is ludicrous. And nauseating.

Supposedly Hispanics were delighted that Alberto Gonzales was appointed Attorney General. Really? The first Hispanic to hold that office is dirtied with the taint of torture. Something to be proud of? There are innumerable Hispanics who would hold this office with decency and honor. Why would Hispanics want a piece of trash like this to represent them?

An elected official should be doing whatever is the best for this nation. An elected official should be doing their best for every man, woman and child in this country. That we are all citizens is all that should matter.

Smart strategists divide us by our race and religion. Anyone with the I.Q. of a piece of toast knows that they spin us. Anyone who is any smarter than a pet rock should know that anything that divides us is bad. Anyone with any decency wants all Americans of every race and religion to live in this country in freedom and safety. If all these things are not true, then our oft touted claims of freedom and liberty are just more empty rhetoric.

Marjorie L. Swanson
Kenosha, WI

Subject: Threats to the Empire

Good grief! What next? Bonobos?

First, it was a Teletubbies carrying a purse.

Then, it was Spongebob Squarepants because he hung out with a male companion.

Now, it's a pair of male penguins at a zoo who were trying to "hatch an egg" and be parents.

Will bonobos, who are known as the "hippie chimps" because they resolve their conflicts by having sex, be next on the list of threats to the empire (as determined by right-wing religious nuts?)

I must be having bad flashbacks. This has to be a nightmare.

Lisa J.
Milwaukee, WI

Subject: Academy Awards

Hey Buzzers,

We watched the Oscars with a group of friends and were so proud to be liberals.

The choice of Jon Stewart to host was brilliant. In a year with progressive and thought provoking films we got a subversive and thought-provoking host who was discreet but made the most of having a huge audience to set subtle digs at the Bushies, like the comment that pulling down the giant Oscar statue could bring democracy to Hollywood.

Instead of shying away from Hollywood's liberal reputation, the Oscar broadcast embraced it by (among other things) showing a montage of movies that challenged the social perceptions of their times like Grapes of Wrath, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner and To Kill a Mockingbird. We loved George Clooney's acceptance speech about being proud out of step if that meant giving an Oscar to Hattie McDaniel in 1931 when blacks still had to sit at the back of theaters.

Many of the nominated films this year had a social conscience. "Good Night and Good Luck", "Brokeback Mountain," "Crash," "Capote," "Munich,"  "The Constant Gardener"and "Syriana" are brave films that awakened us, educated us and entertained us.

We laughed and we cheered.

We are Proud Liberals!

Leslie Crabtree
Ashland, OR

Subject: Some More of That Compassionate Conservatism

Heard on Air America Radio that “Duke” Cunningham, the California Congressman who was convicted of taking millions of dollars in bribes will be allowed to collect his Congressional Pension.

Well ain’t that sweet. This guy sells out his country for millions of dollars and some antique toilets and he gets to collect [$40-$64,000.00] a year in a taxpayer funded pension. It’s a good thing the Republicans have gotten lined up to reform their ethics or we might think this news is a bit stinky.

Actually, it is stinky. It stinks to high heaven. This crook, this piece of trash who had a laundry list of favors he would do for “X” amount of dollars is going to collect his pension? Would that decent, honest citizens had a chance at such munificence.

Marjorie L. Swanson
Kenosha, WI

[BuzzFlash Note: Different amounts for the pension are given in different news outlets.]

Subject: More Than Simply Impeachment

I totally agree that there is ample evidence to impeach bush but this is more than simply an issue of impeachment. While there are numerous reasons to impeach for the many violations of American law the elephant in the room is war crimes.

U.N. Charter and International law makes a war of aggression a war crime and only allows for war in the case of self-defense, the war against Iraq was defiantly a war of aggression and can not be justified as self defense since Iraq did nothing against America and it was NOT Iraq that attacked us on September 11th. This makes the ENTIRE administration and EVERY member of Congress who voted for the war in Iraq war criminals. While I am in favor of indicting, prosecuting and hopefully convicting every person connected with this and the subsequent atrocities and additional war crimes committed during the course of this illegal and immoral war, issues of torture, killing of civilians, arbitrary long-term detentions, disappearances and special trial, the question is how do we proceed?

If the entire administration and most of Congress is under indictment for the war crimes they committed, who is in charge?

The line of Presidential succession can’t be used since every person in Presidential succession would be under indictment.

Do we appoint an acting President and an acting administration?

Do we hold a special election?

Where and who would hold the war crime trials? The obvious answer is the International Court of Justice in The Hague, but does the average American have the ethics, morals and principles to do the right thing any more?

Cary
Cedar Park, Tx

Subject: Brit Hume creates quite a fume and a stinky one at that

Dear BuzzFlash:

On this week’s Fox News Sunday, Brit Hume, one of the many self-appointed Bush apologists, tried to offer an explanation for another BUSH LIE by saying that Bush wasn't told the levees might "breach" but rather that the poor misunderstood pResident was told that the levees might "top."

Hume says that Bush didn't lie when he said on National TV that, "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees" because the word “breach” was never said to Bush.

Oh, poor George W. Bush, No one ever said the right word to him. Instead of saying “breach” they said “top” and he just couldn’t take one mental baby step forward and imagine the sort of catastrophe that was poised to strike the Gulf States.

Well maybe if George W. Bush would have asked even one damned question he might have “anticipated” a disaster, but instead he sat in his chair like a limp noodle doing brain doodles while the Gulf Coast was being targeted by the largest natural disaster in recorded history.

Like everything else that’s happened in the last 5 years, a George Bush snooze EQUALS we lose.

As for Brit Hume, I think his latest appearance on Fox News Sunday should receive this year's "It depends on what the definition of is, is" award, because no can top that putrid performance.

Carolyn in Tennessee

(For the record, National Geographic broadcast a special at least a year before Katrina predicting the very scenario New Orleans experienced. I know because I watched it!)

Subject: Buzz Editorial - Bush Wins Oscar?!

Hi, Buzz!!

While I like the idea of Bush as somebody who only "plays the part" of a President, the notion that he should get an Oscar is off the mark. He is, and has always been, a very bad actor, depending on exciting backdrops and special effects for his "success."

Back in the Dark Ages, when I was an undergraduate, I took a course in theater; in that class I learned the phrase "suspension of disbelief." People who go to movies or plays - or watch sitcoms on TV - know that what they're watching isn't real. But they put that knowledge aside and react to what they see as though it were real. This is suspension of disbelief, and it's vital to a successful performance. It also operates in the political realm; people want to believe in their government, and so they stifle their doubts.

What's happening now is that Bush's performance has been so bad for so long that we, the viewers, can no long suspend our disbelief. The play is a flop, and it's time Bush and the rest of his cast got off the stage.

Jane Hawes
Emporia, KS (red-state Democrat)