February 19, 2002

Important Note: Because we can't always determine your intentions, we need to ask a favor of you when you send us email. If you DO NOT want your email published in the Mailbag or in the Contributors section, please write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the Subject line or at the top of your email. That way we'll know it's just a comment to BuzzFlash. Thank you.

The BuzzFlash Mailbag is updated on an ongoing basis, with the newest material and comments on top. Again, we can only post a small percentage of what is sent to us. The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Thanks again for your email and your patience.

Re: Bush Administration Protecting Anthrax Suspect

According to the article,

""We know that the FBI is looking at this person, and it's likely that he participated in the past in secret activities that the government would not like to see disclosed," Rosenberg said."

So, it's OK to keep so-called "suspected foreign terrorists" incarcerated for MONTHS without any information regarding their identities, charges, evidence, etc. being made public.

But this can't be done for a so-called "domestic terrorist"?

Am I missing something here?

Oh, wait a minute. That's right -- the only ones affected were Democrats ("liberals"), the news media ("liberals") and working stiffs ("liberals").

Nevermind.

Patricia S.
Las Vegas, NV

Dear BuzzFlash,

Subj: Ralph Reed 's morality includes selling the "faith community" to Enron.

After listening to Daniel Schorr's commentary (http://www.npr.org/ramfiles/atc/20020204.atc.03.ram) I had to read this for myself. I suppose I should not be surprised that Ralph Reed would prostitute himself and the religious right for Enron's cause. For the small sum of $380,000 Reed was "prepared to do whatever fits your strategic plan."

Read more at the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22380-2002Feb16.html

Dan Jones

Dear BuzzFlash,

Instead of "walk softly, carry a big stick", the current administration looks more like a "bull in a china shop." Plow ahead without thought to the consequences, breaking everything in the path. How many times can the "aides" repair the damage? When is it going to happen that it will be too late to repair the damage and we find ourselves in a dilemma that defies "damage control"? Misspeak here and misspeak there, doublespeak here, doublespeak there, any confidence in knowing what they are doing is now zilch!!!

Barbara (Atlanta)

Dear Buzz,

Plus, here's another interesting press release from the ACCF:

http://www.accf.org/NovDec00.htm

Besides Andrew Card, we also have Paul O'Neill as a former Director, and Larry Lindsey also very much involved with the group.

Regards,
BC

BC wrote:

> Dear Buzz--
>
> On today's BuzzFlash you posted an article from the Houston Chronicle
> about the Enron/Andersen connections to the tax reform committee, the
> American Council for Capital Formation (URL:
> http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/front/1260519)
>
> Not to brag "I scooped them", but over a month ago I sent you the email
> below, with basically the same story. The interesting part that the
> Chronicle left out was the Bush connection -- Andrew Card was a Director
> of this committee!!! That's why I called my email "A Veritable Rogue's
> Gallery".
>
> Keep on Buzzin'
>
> BC
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: A Veritble Rogue's Gallery
> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 15:03:07 -0800
> From: BC
> To: BuzzFlash@BuzzFlash.com
>
> http://www.accf.org/NovDec00.htm
>
> Fall 2000 -- David Duncan, managing partner at Andersen, is appointed a
> Director of the American Council for Capital Formation. He was just
> fired as being the person who ordered destruction of documents AFTER the
> government requested them. One of the other fired partners was D.
> Stephen Goddard, Jr., a Bush Pioneer and fund-raiser
>
> Also noted in article: A Director since 1997 was Andrew Card, Bush's
> chief of staff.
>
> On their current masthead as a Director -- none other than Ken Lay.
>
> Hmmmm. I'm sure there's much more here.... I think I'll have a pretzel!
>
> BC

Dear BuzzFlash,

I know this myth has been debunked elsewhere, but here is a link to the entire guest list of people who had stayed as overnight guests at the White House during Bill Clinton's entire two terms of office.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/02/25/clinton.money/list.html

Neither Ken nor Linda Lay are on that list.

The GOP is spreading the lie that Ken Lay spent a night in the Lincoln bedroom while Clinton was President. This should put a dent in that one if it's e-mailed to every opinion journalist in the national media who still has an ounce of integrity left in their bones.

--Hesiod

* * *

The Clintons released a supplemental list of overnight guests at the White House covering from July 1, 1999 to August 31, 2000.

Here's a link:

http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/09/22/jackson.guests/

You have to click the embedded Javascript on this page to view the actual list.

Still no Ken or Linda Lay.

There is still a gap that needs to be filled from about the middle of 1997, to the middle of 1999.

--Hesiod

Dear BuzzFlash,

So much of the current ideology hearkens back to a time in history that has been revealed as tragic! The government was able to do whatever was the whim at the time, the military became most powerful, citizens were encouraged to "report" any activity that was suspicious, a single country invaded countries in order to bring a "better" society, a race was obliterated because they were to be "feared", fear became the dominant factor. "Motherland" was the popular enduring patriotic phrase. Does any of this sound familiar? How close are we to history repeating itself?

Barbara (Atlanta)

Dear Buzz,

I posted the following on the Salon Table Talk forum, but I felt I had to send it here, too, to be read by you and the discerning eyes of all who read your site (the first site I read every morning). Here it is:

WE who still believe in this democracy have to start an IMPEACH BUSH campaign.

Use Republican tactics in doing so--take moves from their Play Book. Get a chorus out there so loud that their orchestrated messages are drowned out. FORGET FAIR PLAY. Democrats always seem more inclined to fair play than hard, below the belt hits. Republicans don't seem to feel such compunction. So let's starting playing the game by THEIR rules. NOTHING IS BELOW THE BELT. Hit hard and often whenever opportunity strikes.

Forget this bipartisan bull that the Dems have adhered to since 9/11, but the Republicans haven't. The Repubs have been bald-faced in using this war to promote their own agenda. While Democrats gave concessions in this 'war effort,' the Repubs haven't conceded an inch toward the Democrats' priorities.

It's time for Democrats to start becoming as bold and aggressive as their adversaries. Bush's approval ratings, according to Zogby's latest poll, have dropped ten points in the last week, so chuck all fears of Shrub's high approval ratings and go on the offensive!

This so-called leader of our country wasn't even elected. He and his daddy's cold war minions are taking us into territory where war will be a constant--not in aide of the American people, but in aide of the defense industry contractors that his daddy's Carlyle group is so invested in.

THAT'S the connection that should be scrutinized right now. Enron is very bad, but the Bush family's interests in a group that is almost totally invested in defense industries should be the firecracker, hot button issue in everything the Shrub administration is doing right now in all its attempts to enlarge this war against terrorism. All of Junior's recent remarks can only inflame relations with Iran, North Korea and Iraq. The Son of a Bush WANTS war! Justified war or not. How else can his daddy's defense industry buddies survive? Think about it.

Like I said above, it's time for us Democrats to fight back and feel free to use the same tools and weapons the Republicans have unfairly used against us for the past ten years. Clinton may have had his amorous intrigue, but the Bushes have far more to account for in their immoral business intrigues that go back the G.W.'s grandfather, Preston Bush's, connections with the Nazi regime in W.W.II, where his bank was helping to fund the Nazi's. And if George W's father was being truthful when he said he was 'out of the loop' on Iran-Contra, then I'll declare myself to be the next Queen of England. This is a family who considers themselves a monarchy, even though monarchies should not exist in this country. The fact that the Supreme Court got bought off to declare one of the Bush sons President, when he obviously did NOT win the election should be proof of that.

Keep up the good work, Flash,
Jo Ann Simon
Camden, ME

[BuzzFlash Note: For more on the Bush/Nazi connection, read the BuzzFlash Interview with Douglas Kellner or, for a more in-depth version, there's a section on it in Fortunate Son, by J.H. Hatfield.]

Dear Buzz,

Subj: U.S. Companies File in Bermuda to Slash Tax Bills

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/18/business/18TAX.html

If these companies have moved off-shore then they absolutely can not donate to any US political campaigns. We have laws against it - only US citizens & US incorporated entities can donate to US campaigns otherwise it is treated as a foreigner trying to influence US politics. I remember reading a lot about this when the Repugs were trying to say the Chinese were influencing Clinton & trying to subvert our government.

So........... my question is - how do these companies get away with making political contributions? We know Enron had several thousand off-shore subsidiaries - did any political contribution ever come from any of them? If it did then it's illegal & the recipient should have know & questioned this as we were told when they were investigating Clinton & the Chinese subversion of our political process.

I am really ticked off about this. If the larger companies aren't going to pay their fair share of taxes then it will fall on us, the individual tax payers to take on their burden - just as we have taken on the burden from the richest tax payers. Just how much does Bush expect we are going to accept? You know the saddest part about this is that even when we protest we are sent to designated "first amendment zones" miles away from his highness.

I think we should start a movement. We should all start carrying a copy of the book 1984 with us everywhere - make sure that it's turned out so the title can be seen. Pretty soon millions of Americans would be carrying this book!

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Sound familiar?

Linda Kekumu

Dear Buzz,

With the recent campaign finance reform effort, we can see once again where the far right (aka Republicans) manipulates most of their constituents, treating them like the fools they often are. How so? The line of B.S. they've chosen in this case is to brainwash the "ditto-heads" that campaign finance reform = a ban on free speech. They know that phrasing the issue this way, or framing it this way, will strike a chord in the common man -- when in fact, campaign finance reform really just "harms" the fat cats, or the non-common man. But, your typical man/woman-in-the-street conservative never gets this, never sees how they're being played for fools. The far right folks (Bush, Rush, etc.) did something similar with the tax cuts, convincing many less-than-rich conservatives that Bush was cutting taxes for THEM -- when in fact he really wasn't (he was cutting taxes mostly for the rich and corporations). They just don't get it! They're being used, taken for a bunch of idiots by supposedly the leaders they respect and vote for!! You can find this over and over on many issues... Right to bear arms is another, where the far right frames it as a constitutional freedom issue, when really it's all about the NRA giving tons of campaign $$ to get certain people elected. The politicians accept these $$ and thus vote against gun control. It really has very little to do about guns but nearly everything to do about a corrupt political system. What's the difference between big $$ coming in from the milk lobby to control milk prices or big $$ coming in from the NRA to vote down gun control laws..?? There is no real difference because it's simply money buying votes, whether it be about milk or guns -- or whatever.

But, it requires intelligence to see this clearly, and that's something this country is running out of faster than gasoline or clean air!! Most people no longer approach each issue intelligently with a clean non-partisan slate. For most, they claim they simply don't have the time to think it through (thus, they depend on Rush to do it for them). Rather, many people have long ago picked a side (Repub. or Dem.) and then just stick to that side no matter the issue or circumstances. For the "Clinton haters," in his eight years as president, Clinton could NEVER do anything that they liked, not one thing. Why? Because he wasn't on "their side," simple as that. It was never the issues that mattered, but rather simply the personality. If Clinton was in office right now, the far right would be hounding him about the fact that Bin Laden is still alive, despite all the bombs and "dead or alive" rhetoric. However, because it's a different person in office, someone who is on their team, so to speak, they don't deliver such criticism. In fact, with their guy in office, we are all but FORBIDDEN to criticize him about anything (else be regarded as unpatriotic!)!

Just a sad, pathetic joke much of this country has become... truly sad.

Ed

Dear Buzzflash,

My dislike of the GHP goes way back to Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr., etc. And it is increasing exponentially. They continue to be the most hate-filled, nasty, and whiny group. The Democrats also annoy me because only a few are willing to stand up for what is right.

I would like to hear from other former and current Peace Corps volunteers as to what they think of Smirk's latest push for the Peace Corps. My feeling is that it can't be good. First, he appoints Gaddi H. Vasquez as the director (please put up the website address for a criticism of Vasquez---http://peacecorpswriters.org. Select the site index. Scroll
to the letter "V: Vasquez, Gaddi is listed first and the first article under his name is titled, "The case against the nomination.")

Then, he wants to encourage more volunteers, especially within the Muslim world. (Is this transparent or what?) Back in the 60s, we used to laugh about who among us might be a CIA agent. And, I bet now---that won't be just a joke! Or is he just trying to gut it?

Lastly, would you consider an interview with Ralph Nader and/or offering his latest book, Crash!ing the Party? In that book he talks about trying to work within the Democratic party and with Gore. He was/is right about the corporations. For those of you who still harbor ill feelings toward Nader, I suggest an alternate website: www.citizenworks.org They discuss ways for citizens to get involved!

Thanks, Buzzflash, for all you do!

IrmaS
Lincoln, NE

Dear BuzzFlash,

Subj: Gore's Presence Today

It is crystal clear that Al Gore understands and sees the bigger picture when it comes to facing down the terrorist threat that has erupted so violently. Instead of using incendiary remarks such as "evil axis," Gore sees the underlying reasons of abject poverty, hunger, disease and environmental disorder as the cause of the far greater evil in this world. Before the George W. Bush administration took hold, we as a nation were engaged in world concerns, and in one year have isolated ourselves on so many fronts. The backing out of the Kyoto Protocol, the ABM Missile Treaty, being voted off the human rights panel in the United Nations and a hands-off approach when it came to the Middle East and Northern Ireland. While I do not condone terrorism, we Americans live in a bubble and have no idea what it is like growing up in nations that must face this far greater evil on a day-to-day basis. There is an old saying that, "War is failure." War happens when there is a total breakdown on many diplomatic fronts. I am glad that Gore has reentered the political dialogue. After all, he has had over two decades of solid foreign relations experience. We as Americans deserve experience over incendiary remarks. If he should choose to run again in 2004, he will still have my support.

Mary MacElveen
Sound Beach

Dear Buzz,

I went to do my taxes on the Turbo tax site and three pages into it I got the following Bush propaganda that you might find interesting.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 2001, the President signed into law the largest tax cut in 20 years. As a result, taxpayers will save over $1 trillion over the next 10 years.

While preparing your taxes, look for screens titled "Tax Law Advisor" for more information about the new tax law. The Tax Law Advisor will explain how the new tax law will affect your tax situation and explain what you need to do to take advantage of the tax law changes.

Austin Adams

[BuzzFlash Note: It's the kind of thing that causes one a short burst of loud, wide-eyed, nervous laughter, the kind that causes others to stop talking and look at your strangely, because what you've just read/heard is as laughable for it's ludicrousness as it is frightening for its reality.]

Dear BuzzFlash,

Cover up and hiding info is the byword for this administration. I find it hilarious that questions are being asked about Bush's papers being scurried off to his father's library. Why weren't these same questions asked over the National Guard records, what happened in Alabama that no one can remember his even being there? We have a man in the highest office in this land who has no background. The press has failed to report on anything about Bush prior to his unsuccessful run for Congress in Texas, and very little since then. Mums the word. Just tell the public as little as possible. Perhaps that's the story, he did as little as possible while governor, he did as little as possible while in the National Guard, and I think we can only hope he will do as little as possible while pretending to be president.

Barbara (Atlanta)