April 23, 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.

From The Economist:

By any reasonable definition, the fact that 19 terrorists could slaughter 3,000 people should count as a monumental failure of intelligence — the worst since Pearl Harbour. Besides, as one senior Bush adviser argues, "it is not as if there were not enough clues to be picked up for our $30 billion a year." The World Trade Centre was a known target; al-Qaeda people had plotted to fly aircraft into buildings before; a suspect had been picked up having flying lessons; and so on.

. . .

Moreover, Mr Tenet, who is said even by his detractors to be adept at covering his back, warned the Bush administration several times during the summer about the possibility of a bin Laden attack. Cynical spies point out that, had he been sacked, Mr Tenet might have contradicted the Bush administration's claim that it has always been more vigilant than its predecessor—something that does not seem to have been true before September 11th.

http://www.economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1087143

Of course, Representative McKinney's call for an inquiry into this "monumental failure," which greatly benefited Bush family interests, marks her as a lunatic conspiracy theorist.

--
bill

Dear BuzzFlash,

Much of the 4/22 Mailbag contained commentary about Bush's indifference toward the Canadians after the bombing incident in Afghanistan.

I liken Bush's silence surrounding the incident to the comment he made to a journalist, who was critical of him, in Philadelphia near the end of the campaign. "Who cares what you think." -- G.W. Bush.

Americans live on a steady diet of "Who cares what you think" from Bush each day that passes. Bush has extended this attitude around the world. The important thing for citizens of other nations to understand is that Bush is not the US, and the US is not Bush. Americans feel badly enough about the incident, but when they make it a point to apologize to other nations for actions and non-actions of their president, it is a sad, sad day for the United States.

~ Cathy

Dear Buzz,

Send this to all your conservative friends. Don't let it die.

50,996,582 Gore votes minus 50,456,062 Bush votes equals Gore winning by 540,520.

http://www.nara.gov/fedreg/elctcoll/2000popres.html#top

KMB

Dear BuzzFlash,

Ever notice how Ari and his goons always refer to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as "ANWAR"? The real name sounds too beautiful and conjures up in peoples minds pure white snow, majestic mountains and Caribou. By contrast, ANWAR sounds like Osama's childhood buddy. I'm 100% sure this is deliberate...

James F. Ryan

Buzz,

I cannot understand why Cynthia would be ostracized for asking for or thinking that likely we should have a deep digging investigation into the events of 9/11/01. There are likely millions of us who would love to see that happen...It has been almost eight months since that awful day, and I don't even think The Selected President is on the subject anymore. He swaggers to the podium every chance he gets, leans that left shoulder on it and acts like he is talking to a room full of buddies at an AA Meeting. He troubles me a lot! I am not kidding, folks! Personally, I think they are going to try to blame everything on the one person who really even hints at what they think is the "other terrorist" (No Bush Speak) Sorry! If allowed, maybe he can give us some idea of what really happened...but, as usual, it will likely be covered up like every other thing has in this administration. I wonder if he could possibly produce a navy blue dress...........nah, no such luck! Only, the best president of the US would be investigated for 8-10 years over a failed land deal and A few women who wanted to make money on his name. I will give Monica that, she hasn't done that yet, not like her "friend" Linda! Keep buzzin......

Shirley, St.Louis

[BuzzFlash Note: Not to diminish whatever feelings Monica may have for our last elected President, but the previous owner of the stained blue dress has done quite plenty to cash in on her infamy. As Stephen Colbert satirically mused on The Daily Show's review of a recent Lewinsky television appearance (paraphrasing): "If there's one sure way to tell the whole world that you want to be left alone, it's by doing a HBO Special."]

Hi, Buzz:

No, no, ms. harris! You've got it all wrong
(http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/harris_020419.html)!

You must see about having your hearing checked: Democrats do not "respect" you, they SUSPECT you!

Duh.

Liz Taylor
Houston

Dear BuzzFlash,

No one noticed that on Earth Day Mother Nature told us exactly what the Bush program is for air pollution -- A Snow Job (see news videos of Bush in upper NY).

H. M. Boruck
Bend, OR

[BuzzFlash Note: You should read Dana Milbank's story of the press junket: Mother Earth 1, Bush 0. It reads like a remake of "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World."]

Dear Buzz,

The Tina Brown Talk Magazine demise was no coincidence.

Bush and his cronies threatened anyone that supported the paper after she featured a fake depiction of the Bush drunks. More recently, Bush is on the attack of Oprah, O magazine, and the Oxygen channel, O has been "noted in the building." (There were articles today about how bad the O brand is doing lately.) Because she refused to be a party of this web of deception (mind you they would not guarantee her safety), Bush is set on making her "pay." I believe Oprah stopped the book club because she got word of an upcoming Republican backlash.

Just think this twit has more time to fight petty wars of those that do not support him while the Anthrax killer goes free, Osama's whereabouts change daily, the Mideast is in flames, more and more nations trying to distance themselves from us, and America is in a forever state of Yellow.

Why people aren't crying themselves asleep is beyond me..

PJones
Mesquite, TX

Dear BuzzFlash,

Is there nothing that can be done to remind the "Powers that Be" that only Congress can declare war? It's about time to get the media to understand that persistently telling the public that we're at war, as in the following, is misinforming the public:

From NYTimes "Today's Headlines"

POLITICS
Facing Wartime President, Democrats Focus on Home Front

After months of disarray over how to deal with a popular wartime president, Democratic leaders are beginning a partywide drive this week to refocus on their domestic agenda.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/22/politics/22DEMS.html

======

Paul T. Luebke

Buzz,

I read where President Clinton (last legitimate President) offered to go to the Mideast to help with peace making.....SUPER IDEA.

Let the BIG DOG go, and let Bush stay at home on the porch with the puppies!!!!!

Genie

Dear BuzzFlash,

President General Musharref of Pakistan is taking all the queues from the Bush Administration and RNC concerning the democratic process.

These noted items appeared in world newspapers:

• Talks to crowds of people filled with supporters (Bush)
• Tells the people he supports democracy and shuts down media outlets that criticize him (Bush Talk Magazine)
• Incorporates a media/internet campaign to promote his views and lies (Bush/whitehouse/RNC)
• Changes rules of the game to his liking (trials, presidential papers, etc.)
• Tell the country you will win you are loved over and over so that when you lose you throw away the count and declare yourself winner because of your fraudulent polls (election 2000)
• Place dissenters in jail (Cheney hecklers)
• INCORPORATE your appointed Supreme Court to validate your view (12/12/2000)
• Tell the media what they can and cannot report. (Terror War 2001)
• TELL THE WORLD your actions are legitimate and justified because YOU ARE ONLY COPYING THE DEMOCRATIC KINGS OF THE WORLD -- AMERICA.

This is democracy as we now know it.

Pjones

Dear BuzzFlash,

The quote you ought to highlight from the WashPost article whose link is now at the top of your page is this:

Bush spoke of his family's pride at owning a ranch. "For us, every day's Earth Day," he said. "If you own your own land, every day is Earth Day."

And if not?

- Amy Robertson

BuzzFlash,

I read Nancy N's letter to Roger Ailes in the 4/23 Mailbag and it was a good one.

Roger responded to Nancy with a one-liner, "You write long letters for someone who doesn't watch us."

Even though Nancy was surfing the TV and stopped momentarily to see if Faux was running true to form, the (FFF) Faux Fallacy Forces took it as watching their tripe. But back to the one-liners. When you can't address the points an individual makes, throw in a one-liner... it's as old as the hills. Since the name Ailes is on the correspondence, I suggest that we begin to refer to the writer as, "Roger the Dodger?"

~ Cathy

BuzzFlash:

Here's a letter I sent to the Washington Post in response to their editorial entitled Clearing the Air, which appeared Tuesday, April 23, 2002 at

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31506-2002Apr22.html

Dear Sirs:

Excuse me, but I can't help but notice that your editorial on Clearing the Air was preposterous, disingenuous, and just plain muddled.

It was clear that you agreed with environmentalists (and accepted science) and not with George Bush about the environment. It is obvious that you know, as do most thinking people, that George Bush is not a friend of the environment, no matter how much water he (reluctantly) drinks from an Adirondack stream. He rejects accepted science, rolls back improvements in environmental policy, absolves corporations from paying for pollution, and gives polluting industries a wink and a nod in their attempts to circumvent environmental laws and policies.

Yet, in spite of your agreement with environmentalists on the issues and in spite of George Bush's disagreements with them, who was the subject of your criticism in this piece? Not George Bush but Al Gore, who promotes and agrees with the very policies that you promote and agree with!

I must admit I'm confused. Perhaps you could explain.

Sincerely,

Anne Filiaci
Chapel Hill, NC

Dear Buzz,

Bush was uncomfortable with being in the same room as Castro and Castro was asked to leave. <long ponderous silent pause>......the leader of the free world was AFRAID of BEING IN THE SAME ROOM AS CASTRO.....I have nothing more to add.

God save us all..

P Jones

Dear Buzz,

RE: Bush aide Karen Hughes resigning (what's up with that?)

My guess is that she is sorely needed back in Texas to bolster republican campaigns for the House of Representatives and Senate candidates. Say what? According to what we have been reading, republicans are not looking so good to Texans. So my guess is, if there is any threat of democrats taking republican seats in the next TX congressional election, it would be viewed as a negative reflection on Bush... losing his own state. It's just stra-ter-egy... send in a heavyweight conniver who has a track record for propaganda, dirty tricks and arm twisting, etc. And after "mission accomplished," Hughes can always return to the White House and pick up where she left off. Yep, she can change her mind. After all, her boss does it all the time!

~ Cathy

Dear BuzzFlash,

The Washington Post keeps saying that Bush's numbers are largely unchanged because he is at 78% but in their own poll the "strong" support for him has gone from 76% in October to 47% now (the rest is "somewhat" approve) and they would not even comment on that! A 30% slippage in strong support in 6 mos is not such a small thing!

Please write an editorial about that -- it needs to see the light of day. These are significant numbers and they are hidden in the overall approvals, half of which now are but lukewarm!

Clare Knight

Dear BUZZFLASH:

While I was uncomfortable with the religious bent of the new administration from its beginning, now I am utterly enraged by its condescending attitude. We have Tom Delay openly declaring that he was put on earth by God to spread his message to us heathens, John Ashcroft attempting to trample states' rights (Oregon's right to die with dignity statute) and women's federal rights (Roe v. Wade) in order to force-feed his personal religious principles on the entire country, and we have a president (lowercase by design) who blatantly evangelizes in speeches and radio addresses and initiates legislation to fund faith-based charities that are attempting to care for the rapidly increasing numbers of former welfare recipients who have been forced off the rolls as the most reliable alternative to government-funded welfare, only one example, which is merely welfare cloaked in another name. Evidently, W feels by not calling it welfare, it will be more palatable to the far-right that is not noted to be all that giving.

My position to now has been, What has happened to our founders' principle of separation of church and state? What gives these demented/tormented souls, and others just like them in this administration, the right to abridge our basic constitutional freedoms in such an egregious fashion?

Phew, I am not alone. There appear to be a number of religious leaders that agree with my "radical" ideas:

"Mr. Bush's belief that religion has a place in government has long troubled secularists and some religious leaders, even those who have praised him for reaching out to Muslims after Sept. 11. 'He went from a kind of post-Sept. 11 pluralism to presidential evangelism today,' said the Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. 'This man now seems to have an enormous difficulty separating his personal religious commitment from his public policy positions.'

"Mr. Lynn added that Mr. Bush's evangelical cadences appeal mightily to a core constituency, Christian conservatives, particularly in a midterm election year. 'It just seems very calculated,' he said."

And:

"Other religious leaders also say they are concerned about the president's language. 'I think it's very dangerous,' said the Rev. Arthur Caliandro, senior minister of Marble Collegiate Church in Manhattan and co-chairman of the Partnership of Faith, a coalition of leading clergy members in New York."

However:

"'George W. Bush has played a critical role in the evolution of the Republican Party's conservative message because he put a smiling and compassionate face on a message that all too often in the past took the form of a finger of judgment pointed at others,' said Ralph Reed, former director of the Christian Coalition and now chairman of the Georgia Republican Party, who said that Mr. Bush's language opens some doors into Hispanic and black churches as well."

Hmm, Ralph Reed? The Ralph Reed who worked at Enron?

Oh, well, as the hypocrites like to say, "that was only business." As if that's different, eh.

Sincerely,

Sharon Andrews

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/22/national/22LETT.html

A BuzzFlash Letter to Katherine Harris:

Click here: ABCNEWS.com: Harris Touts Bipartisan Respect

Ms. Harris:

I am a Democrat. Most of my friends are Democrats or Independents -- a few are Republicans. But we ALL agree that we have less respect for you than for most other common thieves or criminals. Your crimes were of much greater consequence to our country.

Your complicity in the 2000 election fraud should make you ineligible to vote, let alone run for public office! When the history books are written, your only claim to fame (infamy) will be your unlawful and shameful behavior as Florida's Secretary of State, in corrupting our once democratic custom of holding fair and honest elections.

Your absolutely unbelievable arrogance in having any political ambitions at all, after being intimately involved in one of the most disgraceful chapters in our history, is a sad joke to most Americans who still believe in Democracy.

The mainstream media suggests that you're election is a "sure thing" in your hugely Republican district, but I nevertheless wonder how those Republican voters really feel about having someone with your lack of integrity and obvious contempt for the law representing their interests? I suspect you're not quite the sure thing we're being led to believe.

Sincerely,
(Name withheld)
A Florida Voter