Wednesday, September 29, 2004

The terrorists would vote for Bush

All the conservatives are running around saying that the terrorists want Kerry for president because they think they'll beat Kerry in war. Despite Harry Truman, et al, they argue that the Democrats do not use force. It's amazing that they get away with comments like that. It just goes to show that they have no idea what the terrorists are thinking. I'm of the opinion that you have to know your enemy in order to defeat them.

How do I know this? The mainstream press has failed to report the FACTUAL evidence that terrorists are in favor of Bush remaining president.

Because he's foolish.

As Media Matters for America noted on May 2, Reuters reported in March that an apparent Al Qaeda letter stated that the group supports President George W. Bush's reelection: "The statement said it supported President Bush in his reelection campaign, and would prefer him to win in November rather than the Democratic candidate John Kerry, as it was not possible to find a leader 'more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom.' ... [The letter added,] 'Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilization. ... Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected.'"

Wow, a Republican is putting principles above absolute power

Eisenhower's son reveals his principled father's legacy: Why

"...Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. " From Eisenhower's Military-Industrial Complex speech, 1961.

Tuesday, September 28, 2004

Bush supporters mix trust with ignorance.

My Kerry supporter friend in Missouri had a Bush supporter friend tell her, "it's a bad idea to mix politics and friendship."

Wow, they say don't mix politics and friendship, don't mix dissent with patriotism, don't mix debate with freedom, don't mix intelligence with Americanism, but they stand by while Republicans mix fanatical religion with government, capitalism with monopolies, no-bid industries with militarism, fascism with democracy, killing tens of thousands of innocents with a war on terrorism, and trust with ignorance.

Kerry HAS to win this election. I keep hearing good things through the grapevine, and I think its good if Bush appears to stay ahead in the poles (perhaps we'll have an election that isn't postponed). I actually believe people are telling pollsters that they'll vote for Bush when they won't (because they are afraid to say otherwise). My patriotic husband and I are off to Phoenix, AZ on Sat/Sun to register voters there.

See and voting information.

Monday, September 27, 2004

King Bush's Dark Wizard

Joshua Marshall comments on an Atlantic Monthly article that illuminates Karl Rove's dirty campaign methods. They are unethical, dishonest, disgusting and cruel. There must be a special place in hell reserved for him, and those who hire him. If you ever hear anyone saying something disgusting about a candidate that Karl Rove has worked against, don't you believe it. I've heard a nasty rumor about John McCain that I doubt is true, but it was told to me by a debutant military kid that's in the know, and was probably spread during the 2000 primary. I can see how this technique would successfully work its way through universities and the military.

I've heard similar rumors about the right from the left too, but just from TEXAS. I once heard from a leftist political couple of assholes (they agreed to share in a yardsale, then left after they brought their unpriced stuff) that the Bush's are drug runners who have actually murdered competitors. Sounds like a Rove-inspired lie, but I've wanted to believe it. I still believe what they told me about Bush Sr. having had many affairs, but that's been confirmed by others and his run against Clinton where both candidates made a peaceful bargain not to pursue the women of the past as a character issue...ugh. No wonder Clinton thought that he had a free pass.

Do all fake memos come from Karl Rove?

Dear CBS and 60 Minutes,

It is my understanding that you were going to air the Niger memo story but then you bumped it for the false memo story. First, the easily recognizable false memos appearing when they did is very suspicious (it looks as if they appeared to discredit the legitimate interview you had on that show). Now it appears that those fake memos also led to the bumping of a much more damning story about war-justifying-fake-memos. It makes me wonder if all the world's fake memos come from Karl Rove. Please assure me that you are not a tool of the right wing and please report to America what you've learned about the Niger memos. Be the first among the main stream press to report the truth again. We're hungry for it.

Thank you


President Bush based his famous and false claim that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger on a set of crudely forged documents. For the last two years, no one has uncovered who falsified these documents, which lie at the heart of Bush's case for war.

Now, CBS' 60 Minutes program has uncovered new and important revelations about the Bush administration's reliance on the documents. But, in an unprecedented and astonishing move, CBS bumped the report back until after the election, saying it would be "inappropriate" to air the piece when it might interfere with the political season.

It's outrageous that a major TV news outlet would censor an important piece of news for political reasons. Especially since this report has met CBS' standards for accuracy -- it's true. One can only assume that CBS is buckling under pressure from the right -- and that's just plain wrong.

Call CBS and its parent company, Viacom, now, at:

Sumner Redstone, Chairman, Viacom
(212) 258-6000

Les Moonves, Chairman of CBS; co-President & co-CEO, Viacom
(323) 575-2345

Andrew Heyward, President, CBS News
(212) 975-3247 or
(212) 975-4321

If you don't get through, you can write to CBS at:

Sunday, September 26, 2004

Bush's Short Term Nuclear Renewal Programs

It is unbelievable and irresponsible that this has not been in the news. Everyone, please tell your friends that this is Bush's next plan: New Nuclear Weapons.

How many people are aware that Bush wants to create more nuclear weapons? Most Americans support the U.S. having about 50 nuclear weapons--we currently have over 1,000 nuclear weapons situated on subs all over the world. Saddam wasn't creating new Weapons of Mass Destruction WE ARE. As my husband has said, we are saying, "Do as I say, not as I do."

Republicans argue that Reagan's nuclear build-up brought an end to the Cold War, it looks to me like Gorbechev's unilateral, anti-nuclear philosophy had more weight...HE is for long term peace. Bush is for short term destruction.

Wednesday, September 22, 2004

The Values of our House of Representatives

Republicans control the House of Representatives.

Republicans control the Senate.

Today, I'm watching C-Span and the House is debating the Pledge of Allegience to the Flag. I have to check this but I think they are trying to override a Supreme Court Decision, or an impending one, that allows "under God" to be taken out of the pledge.

They care about symbols more than people.

They care about what kids say in schools, rather than the enormous gulf that exists between kids that live in poor neighborhoods and kids that live in rich ones. Poor kids get crappy schools, undertrained teachers. Rich kids get the best lives, and the best education. Poor kids get a double whammy.

This is real, this isn't a symbol, helping bridge this gulf would be meaningful and could help our society be more educated, wealthier, healthier, and less violent.

Saying "under God" or not, doesn't change the economics of the situation in the least.

And Bush today implies that Kerry wants to control people's lives, the same day that his House is trying to control people's spirituality.

What a pathetic joke this Repulican agenda is, at the expense of finding solutions for schools that would actually resonate.

We need to hold our politicians accountable.

Tuesday, September 21, 2004

Choice hypocrisy in Bush's speech to the U.N.

Choice hypocrisy in Bush's speech to the U.N. taken from:
NY Times [Why do I feel like I'm reading a high school essay when I read his speeches? They are SO average and uninspiring, so can mine be but I'm not the commander-in-chief.]

[A commentator on airamericaradio points out that Dan Rather apologizes for believing fake documents, but Bush can't even mention Abu Ghraib to the world during his U.N. speech--no responsibility taken, no apology made about the American scandal that rocked the world. He's so far from a noble statesman that it's an unfunny joke.]

Here's the hypocrisy:

"Wise governments also stand for these principles for very practical and
realistic reasons. We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace."

Here he is implying that we are a dictatorship. Let me remind you of his famous line, "If this were a dictatorship things would be a heck of a lot easier, 'specially if I was the dictator"

"Both the American Declaration of Independence and the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights proclaim the equal value and dignity of every human life.
That dignity is honored by the rule of law, limits on the power of the
, respect for women, protection of private property, free speech, equal justice and religious tolerance. That dignity is dishonored by oppression, corruption, tyranny, bigotry, terrorism and all violence against the innocent."

Amazing, need I say more than the Patriot Act, arresting a couple for wearing anti-Bush T-shirts, extrajudicial non-combatant incarceration, Dick Cheney; Karl Rove, giving the finger to the NAACP, 20,000 dead Iraqis.

"Eventually there is no safety in looking away, seeking the quiet life by
ignoring the struggles and oppression of others."

How about denying the oppression of Iraqis altogether?

"...democracy simply means good government rooted in responsibility,
transparency and accountability."

Bush has the most secret administration since Nixon and hasn't accounted for a single mistake!!

"History will honor the high ideals of this organization."

Wow, what a passive complement! His supporters must be saying, "Yeah, we hate the U.N. now, but maybe history will honor it."

"This commitment to democratic reform is essential to resolving the
Arab-Israeli conflict. Peace will not be achieved by Palestinian rulers who
intimidate opposition, tolerate corruption and maintain ties to terrorist

Hmm, I certainly feel that my open society patriotism is intimidated by my nationalistic, fascist-advocating opposition every day and almost every American is tolerating corruption in our government.

Either this is good news that shows that the neocons are secular, or he's lying:

The long-suffering Palestinian people deserve better. They deserve true
leaders capable of creating and governing a free and peaceful Palestinian
state. Goodwill and hard effort can achieve the promise of the road map to
peace. Those who would lead a new Palestinian state should adopt peaceful
means to achieve the rights of their people and create the reformed
institutions of a stable democracy.

Arab states should end incitement in their own media, cut off public and
private funding for terrorism, and establish normal relations with Israel.
Israel should impose a settlement freeze, dismantle unauthorized outposts,
end the daily humiliation of the Palestinian people and avoid any actions
that prejudice final negotiations. And world leaders should withdraw all
favor and support from any Palestinian ruler who fails his people and
betrays their cause.

Oh, he is lying:
"The administration, however, is negotiating with Mr. Sharon's government to
allow for some growth of populations within settlement areas as part of its

Israel has also said that it is trying to dismantle settlement outposts but
is facing legal constraints and that it will ease conditions of Palestinians
when it finishes constructing a barrier between Palestinian and Israeli
communities. The administration has basically supported this approach, which
is condemned by the Palestinians."

Oh, a little grease...

"Because I believe the advance of liberty is the path to both a safer and
better world, today I propose establishing a democracy fund within the
United Nations. This is a great calling for this great organization. The
fund would help countries lay the foundations of democracy by instituting
the rule of law and independent courts, a free press, political parties and
trade unions.

Money from the fund would also help set up voter precincts in polling places
and support the work of election monitors. To show our commitment to the new
democracy fund, the United States will make an initial contribution. I urge all other nations to contribute as well."

Iran, so easy

Paul Harvey announced that today we have sold Israel smart bombs and bunker busters so that they can dismantle Iran's nuclear capabilities, with our blessing.

Israel did that in Iraq, which is why they were no nuclear threat to anyone.

If Israel will take it upon herself to solve our problem with Iran, the true nuclear threat, why have we gone to war in Iraq?

The only moral justifications I see now are:

Saddam Hussein's funding of suicide-bombers (why not Saudi Arabia, etc.?)
Saddam Hussein's torture (why not other dictators, et al?)

The real justifications seem to be:

An inflated belief that we could democratize the nation easily.
A vendeta against Saddam.

None of these were the original reasons that congress authorized force.

Lies have travel...

I keep listening to AM Radio and this is their approach: Lie about what Kerry said, as in the untruth, "He said he'd rather have that brutal dictator Saddam in power right now!" and keep talking incessently about fake memos instead of Iraq, which were quite likely planted by Karl Rove (he supplied fake "Bush practice-debate tapes" to Gore's campaign).

I figured out why conservatives usually don't argue their positions--they are not told the truth so every time they take on a liberal, the better informed liberal says, "That's not true, blah, blah, blah." The conservative feels foolish, it happens a second time, then the conservative either converts, or becomes the ultimate narcissist in a fantasy world, or turns inward and never speaks about his opinions again.

We have to get the truth out there, but it's hard to combat every lie, there's so many...yesterday I heard a conservative quote someone who said that a lie can travel the world 7 times before the truth comes out. He said that about Michael Moore. I'd never heard that expression before, they know it, and they use it.

Monday, September 20, 2004


I hear Hannity and the other ditto heads calling for Dan Rather to take full responsibility for being mislead. Funny how they think the buck stops with him now, but the buck stopped with the CIA when Bush was, allegedly, duped. The Emperor reigns without responsiblity for bad intelligence, but off with Rather's head for falling for bad memos that have had no affect on anything?

Having perspective is not a trait of reactionaries.

Friday, September 17, 2004

Narcissistic bullies never admit that they make mistakes

Many conservatives argue that it is weak to admit mistakes. They think that the U.S. should hide our failures, especially in Iraq, so that we continue to be seen as the powerful enemy of terrrorism. These people are imagining a fantasy world--they have disconnected from reality.

First, our enemy is intelligent and generally knows when we are weak and when we are strong. Our enemy can observe that we have lost control in Iraq. They probably conjectured that we would on the day Bush fired the General that advised him to use half a million troops. While flooding into Iraq to fight us, they have also seen how we left Afghanistan before we were finished, and how it is now controlled by a weak governor that we appointed, yet is spiralling into drug cartels and chaos again.

The White House says that admitting failure would embolden our enemy. I dare say that hiding the truth emboldens our enemy much more,"Deny this catastrophic event!" they say. We don't have to admit anything for our enemy to know that we're failing.

For anyone to think that it makes sense for a leader to keep saying and acting as if things are getting better when it's obvious to everyone, including our enemy, that things are getting worse, does not make the leader stronger. It makes him a fool. For our leader to bluff and say things are better, and then suddenly withdraw from Iraq, makes more sense, but is irresponsible, too.

No one has to sugarcoat what's happening in order to deal with it responsibly--to deploy and recruit more troops with a clarified plan to enforce peace. Bush needs to tell us, and his troops, the truth.

The world will follow and come to the aid of someone who has the courage of his convictions.

The world is currently distancing itself from the narcissistic emperor with no brain.

Wednesday, September 15, 2004


I just got an e-mail from a conservative friend who does not wish to receive any information from me about Bush. She says she trusts him and "not the other guy." And that is all she'll say about it. She also notes that she's not paying attention, too busy with kids and work and house.

It occurred to me that her reasons for trusting Bush are probably indefensible. I was torn between my loyalty toward our 25 year friendship and our stark value differences (loyalty not being one of our differences). I decided that I value our friendship much more than our differences. Some friendships are just more painful than others.


Smart Money and Power

Smart no money

The liberal smart people in this country go into teaching, librarianship, the arts, non-profits, nursing, and other service-oriented careers. They don't make a lot of money, in fact, money is much less of a priority than a good life and a satisfying career. I've been married to two liberals in my life, like me (artist, IQ was 127 according to my mum), who have made evenings and weekends at home a priority. Both could have been work-a-holics in a heartbeat, but we each chose life over paid work. Most of my liberal friends teach and/or live in apartments.

Smart with money

There is an enormous imbalance of wealth. Most wealth dwells among the more individualistic and conservative smart people. They find so many ways to hold on to money, avoid taxes, earn money, avoid taxes, spend money, go into debt, money, money, money...

This hit me twice today. Once when I saw the numbers on fund raising for the Bush/Gore recount. It's nuts: Gore only raised $3 million with unlimited contributions, Bush raised $14 million with LIMITED contributions ($5,000 each contribution). Now the Republican-controlled Congress has passed a law that only allows limited contributions to a recount fundraising. Gee, who does that so clearly benefit?!

The other hit was finding out on AM radio that the UCLA college Republicans raised over $30,000 from an appeal to AM radio listeners. This is more money than any other group on campus (probably 20 or 30 times any other group on canvas from my own experience with student group budgets). The Republican AM announcer set out Republican values: Liberty and freedom for individuals and the world (roll your eyes if you're a woman, gay, or Iraqi), the ability to hold on to more of their money, while balancing that to keep schools working.

I was dubious about the last value, it seemed like a token to keep people from thinking Republicans are too obsessed with money. That is really there only value. They are obsessed with wealth, and keeping it! The people we know who are voting Republican, half of whom are not rich, because they think they'll save money and taxes (I think the middle-class Republicans are mistaken--taxes are the same for most no matter who is president, but with a Republican, the really rich and wealthy gated communities get bigger breaks, the poor and crazy people are put out on the street in greater numbers, and everyone pays more in every other sector of spending as in health, school, banking and insurance).

Money = Power

Republicans have more than enough money to buy votes, suppress votes, suppress the media, and manipulate recounts.

The next time I hear a conservative talking about liberty and freedom I'd like them to be asked how that works for the typical citizen who receives the same useless and limited information from every news source they read or see on TV (except PBS, which few people watch, thereby giving trash TV more money, more power).

I am praying for an honest American election.

As stinky as it was that Florida's Republican machine got Nader on the ballot against a court ruling, his appearance on the ballot is democracy (believe me, I loath Nader for helping George W. Bush in Florida).

This is a lesson in state power--who is in charge MATTERS. Do we want people who want power for it's own sake, or people who want to govern? Democrats know how to govern. Republicans have shown us that they take, and take and take (health premiums, gas prices, college costs, war costs, corporate deals, middle class money, American and Iraqi lives, at home with meaner assault weapons, and abroad) while preserving their own thrones.

We have become an imperialistic, hated nation. And Bush and his neocon buddies don't give a damn. We should, it's not smart or secure to be the world's bully. It may feel good to rednecks, but even testosterone-driven men and women (like Tammy Bruce) should care about what happened when the world ganged up on Rome, Napoleon, Russia, and Germany.

Don't think we're hated? Even Tony Blair won't endorse Bush, he's remaining neutral, but everyone around him has said he'd rather work with Kerry to make the world a safer place. Turkey's conservative Islamic party is becoming more powerful--we need respect and real leadership in the world to help Turkey and other countries fight radicalism--not this incompetant, imperialistic Bush trail of errors!! The candidate who wouldn't participate in "nation-building"! He's so ridiculous making vague promises to people to take care of healthcare (his Medicare for drug companies) and to give our troops 30-days callup notice--he's a bate-and-switch guy--he's a liar! When will we learn that? Why doesn't our press hold him accountable for that? Why don't troops have 30-day advance notice now?

He will fool us twice if we actually elect him this time.

As a nation, we can do ourselves a favor by pulling our heads out of our arrogant asses. We need transparency and responsibility in government. Bush has pulled the curtain off of our nationalist, imperialistic nature, and placed it opaquely over our government's actions and responsibilities to the people.

Wake up, America!!!

Monday, September 13, 2004

50 Rounds

National Rifle Association executives are arguing that there's "not a dime's worth of difference" between the guns that were banned and the guns that are now legal.

The NRA argument irresponsibly ignores the 10-round maximum for clips that has also just expired (sick that even that many could exist in civilian guns).

Now anyone purchases a gun, or even those who have illegal guns, can purchase 50 round artillary clips.

Great for taking out as many school children, McDonald's customers, cops, ex-employers, as is physically possible without a bomb. Hell, it's much more accurate and probably covers more ground than a bomb.

What a blessed day for criminals and crazy people.

Of course, these guns are great for the rest who are always driven by our rational natures.

The Republican controlled Congress and Bush World is certainly full of blessed contradictions.

Peace, peace, peace.

Friday, September 10, 2004

Weapons, no debate

The Republican controlled Congress is allowing the Assault Weapons Ban to lapse, they are not even giving the American people the decency of bringing the issue to a debate.

They are in the grip of the NRA.

They are willing to let violent crime and deaths increase.

They are willing to let terrorists in this country have easier access to guns, really good and fast killing guns, even.

Randi Rhodes notes that the Art of War includes dviding and conquering the enemy.

The American people our obviously one of the Republicans' and the NRA gun lobby's enemies.

Affirmative Action is okay for the rich?

Even if the Killian memos are fake, King George II got select passes out of combat during a war that killed thousands of poor kids. Whether he was campaigning for his dad, hanging out in Alabama, or getting into business school (on yet another pass) he was cruising on his family's connections.

Why is it okay for rich kids to get a pass (or ten) through life, yet people think it's unfair for a poor kid to get a hand up into college?

Is that family values? Maybe all that means is that Republicans are for valuable families, literally. Believe me, I'd rather fix our educational imbalances before kids hit their freshman year, but few funds are invested in fixing that. All the while, rich kids with Cs can get into Yale.

The brutal hypocrisy in this country is stunning.

Thanks to Randi Rhodes for bring this concept to the surface.

World War IV

How are you feeling about this election? I'm sick with worry about another Bush administration. Bush and his people think we're in World War IV, but the U.S. is sustaining it all (funds, soldiers, deaths) alone (Britain doesn't count for much). I think Kerry can get the world on our side again.

Not one of the conservative radio/TV people I hear care that we're doing this alone--and they think any suggestion that we should think about the world is un-American.

We're not leading the world, we're doing it alone. What do you think?

Tuesday, September 07, 2004

Cheney is a bully that has no shame

It is beyond un-American to threaten voters to elect someone or face terror. This is a tactic that dictators and fascists use to retain power through fear. The press and the President should hold Cheney accountable and have him explain his ridiculous and disgusting claim. He seems to be implying that the Bush administration would not cooperate with a new administration--that would be shameful and anti-American.

Monday, September 06, 2004

Public School Hype

Conservative paranoia below. This is a "poem" that you can find posted all over the net on prayer and Christian websites, even in a letter to the President on It is currently circulating among Christian church groups via e-mail.

There appears to be a concerted effort among right wing extremists to eliminate public schools and to portray them as out-of-control orgies and drug fests. I think they believe rich kids will (continue) to go to private schools, and others will, I don't know, work in factories? I heard Bill O'Reilly on the radio accusing public schools of harboring what this poem outlines--violent kids, piercings, pregnancy, etc. A parent from North Carolina called in to differ with him saying that her public school had enforced dress codes and did not allow piercings. She also said children were sent to the principle and home if they misbehaved. He didn't want his listeners to think that that was the norm, yet he offered no counter example--not one single school that illustrated his point. He simply wants to, and I'm getting tired of restating this Republican technique, discredit public schools.

Appearing to aid this effort, the "poem" below is reportedly penned by a student in Arizona--why his/her name is witheld is suspicious and tempts me to think this was written by someone with a more grown-up agenda against the left. I'm looking into it...turns out it keeps being manipulated: New Prayer Hoax New Prayer Satire

Actually, most on the left believe in G_d and support the fact that kids today can and do pray silently in schools. I'm fairly sure G_d is allowed to be said in school without Federal intervention. It looks like whoever wrote this propagandistic poem based it on one atheist parent's courtcase (which also amounted to a bitter and horrible divorce fight to control his daughter's world view).

The separation between church and state is easy to ridicule I guess. I'm sad at how this poem portrays teenagers as violent, body piercing, sex driven witches. It would be great if we could provide teenagers with more constructive and better choices all around.

And all in all, I think most people, if they thought about it, would rather churches and parents teach religion, rather than public school teachers. I think ethics (based on Judeo-Christian values anyway) and tools to create healthy relationships would be more appropriate and society-changing subjects to teach in our public schools.

I would entitle this strange "poem" Choose Jesus or Death because that appears to be its underlying message to people. Note: I do believe that Jesus was an amazing man and Rabbi, I just don't believe that he was the son of G_d.