George W Bush, Anti-Christ

Ok, now these people are really starting to scare me. When they start in with the Armageddon crap, while these sissy-hawks have the world's nukes at their fingertips, I start thinking survivalism...

My Life by Bill Clinton

While you're waiting for your copy of My Life by Bill Clinton, check out the Clinton Presidential Center. Unlike the right wing, I can love Bill Clinton for what he was, but not love everything he did. As I read more about his presidency, and I compare it to this one, Bill Clinton comes off looking pretty damn good.

Immigrants filling nearly 3 of 10 new U.S. jobs

Yeah, boy, big time job growth. Craptacular jobs, with little or no benefits, going to non-citizens.

The high proportion of new jobs going to recent immigrants may reflect the fact that the current recovery has thus far been different from most past upturns. In recent months, as overall job growth has begun to improve, most of the new jobs appear to have come in categories that require relatively low skills and pay relatively low wages — the kinds of jobs for which new immigrants are strong competitors. In the past, the early stages of economic recoveries have been marked by growth in industrial jobs that pay above-average wages.

Furthermore, wage growth is far below what one would expect at this point in a "recovery." Of course, in any argument with a ditto head or Cheney lover, you'll just be accused of whining when you bring this up. These right wing nuts have been so desperate for good news on the economy, that when you undercut it, they get really mad and say things like Mark Luther, the resident ditto head on Al Franken's show, said when Al said these were mostly crappy jobs: "That's the problem with you liberals, you love to whine." Up to that point he'd been arguing pretty well for a right winger. But his whole argument came down to how the economy is "roaring along." And when that argument gets cut down with facts like those from the Pew Hispanic Center Report today, it really pisses them off. So, get out there and piss off some right wingers!

"My father crapped bigger ones than George W. Bush."—Ron Reagan, Jr.

White House lies about Saudi flights after 9-11

This is HUGE! The lying bastards at the White House are going to have some explaining to do on this one. Seems Craig Unger, author of House of Bush, House of Saud, was right. And all you screaming asshole Republicans who have been calling him, me, Michael Moore, and others liars should all start apologizing now! And now the questions begin. Who were these guys. How many Bin Ladens. Who was the one with the same last name as a high-jacker? Why was the plane allowed to fly and who let it? Were these people questioned? By whom?

Here's the story from the St. Petersburg Times: TIA now verifies flight of Saudis, The government has long denied that two days after the 9/11 attacks, the three were allowed to fly.

A Tortured Definition of A Little Bit of Torture

Richard Cohen has a great column about torture in today's Washington Post.

Florida orders new purge of voter list

And a Little Something from the Egads! File

Thanks to my friend and client Cherie Attix of the Hale Hookipa Inn Maui bed & breakfast for sending me this Egads!

Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides

I hope Ronald Reagan finally finds the Cadillac driving welfare queen he, or any other Republican, could never find here on earth. Wherever he is, I hope he's having ketchup 3 meals a day, and I hope he's meeting some people who really fought in a war. I hope he has to sleep next to one of the homeless crazy people he kicked out of federally subsidized hospitals.

From Eric Alterman's Column in the Nation: Kerry's Dance

How can this be avoided? Quite easily, if Kerry could only admit to the entire country what he told me and a bunch of other reporters back in December in Al Franken's living room: Like so much of the country--and its elite media--he made a terrible mistake in trusting George W. Bush. He underestimated both the fanaticism and incompetence of the President and his advisers and their willingness to mislead the country into war. He thought George Tenet's CIA reports were on the level. He imagined Colin Powell was more than just window-dressing.

More Fun with Republicans

The following is an exchange I'm having with a Bush lover who is suffering from the same affliction as W himself. Can't defend your actions? Just attack the other guy....

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

SO, the way you defend Bush is to attack Democrats?

Well, buddy, I never said they weren't wrong too. As David Kay said, we were all wrong. That's why I'm really pissed that I have to vote for Kerry (except that he's good on the environment, which Bush is a nightmare on). Because he couldn't see what Wesley Clark and Howard Dean could, that this was all a big line of bullshit. That Chalabi and curveball were lying to get us to attack. That Scott Ritter (former arms inspector, Marine, and Republican) was right, that we had destroyed the weapons -- and he argued with Joe Biden and plenty of other Democrats who were also wrong.

As for the flip-flopping, geeze, do you really want me to list all the things Bush said he would do and didn't or vice versa? Steel Tariffs? Creating a 9-11 commission. Department of Homeland Security. Testifying to the 9-11 commission. Condoleezza testifying.

Kerry tries to take nuanced positions on issues. Maybe if I was there looking at all the bullshit evidence, I would have been gung-ho too. Hell, Colin Powell almost had me convinced with his bullshit speech at the UN. So, I think even you could understand that Kerry is trying to say, yes, we should defend ourselves from tyrants who want to hurt us, but we had better be godamn sure about our facts, which W wasn't.

But beyond all that shit, I'd like to know where you right wingers get off just ignoring the fact that these Chicken Hawks are big on weapons systems but short on actually helping the troops. Why did they ever go in without the right body armor or Humvee armor? Why are they running short on ammo?

These guys don't give a shit about the troops. They care most about PRIVATIZING IRAQ, and privatizing a lot of the things the Armed Forces used to do for themselves. So now, instead of having an Army truck driver trained to drive in a protected convoy, we have a Halliburton truck driver making $125,000 a year doing it. Nice use of my tax dollars.

So, not party facts, just cold hard facts.

The fact is that you and your Republican Party friends can't defend Bush so you attack Kerry. Well, you're going to have to dig up more than shit like Kerry wanted to raise taxes on the rich before he voted for more money for Halliburton in Iraq to change most people's minds.

You guys always say you're providing facts that are some how better than ours. It's such a fox new fair and balanced thing. In fact, your facts are more tainted. And, you just ignore the point at hand. That if all these people were wrong about Iraq, then perhaps we should get rid of the ones -- the neo-cons -- who were most responsible for the bad information. And since the neo-cons are pretty much the entire administration, then Kerry is the only alternative.

The fact is, most of you people are supporting Bush because you hate Gays, you hate taxes (even if they're paying for body armor), you hate liberals, you hate environmentalists, and, well, you just hate.

Frankly, I'd like to say, thanks a fucking lot. Now you've taught me to hate too. I hate Bush with all my heart, and I'm learning to hate all you who can't even support him in an argument. Go ahead, defend him without attacking Kerry. I bet you can't.

My comments on each of these quotes come below each one, Joe. My comments are marked with a >>>

.............................

Try to Defend these "PUBLISHED" truths !!!
******************************************

Trying to decide who is telling the Truth..

Lets look at cold hard facts, just about the big issue on the table.. The IRAQ war..

The Democrats say, Trust them, they are right, Bush Lied.
Ok GUYS I believe you, BUT how can I trust you when you also said:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

>>> Which he did.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

>>> Which he did.

"Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

>>> Still is. North Korea. Ah, shucks, no oil there.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

>>> Since 1982, when Reagan gave them to him and helped him aim them at Iranians.

"[We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin,
Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

>>> Air and missile strikes. Not a $300 billion dollar invasion. I never understood why Republicans, who used to agree with Buchanan that we should be spending less money here, are so protective of spending more money there. If you're against government spending, then what the hell?

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

>>> Yep. But, what Nancy, and many others, didn’t mention is what Scott Ritter says: we found them all. And destroyed them. The other info coming in was from halabi and friends who stood to get rich if we would go in and overthrow Saddam.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

>>> Wow. Sounds like what Bush is doing.

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

>>> Yes, but how do you go about dealing with it. Do you keep waving the big stick and send in more inspectors? Or do you kill and maim thousands of people, piss off the rest of the world, and make your buddies in the oil business richer?

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

>>> Wow. He's just as wrong as Bush. How does this make Bush less culpable?

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

>>> Wrong, just like W. But I doubt if Gore would have wasted billions and over 800 American lives on this adventure. I bet Gore would have put this much into Afghanistan, you know, to find the people who really attacked us on 9-11...

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

>>> Again, wrong. Amazing, both sides of the heavily financed political spectrum were wrong. Again, how does that make W less culpable? You think Gore would have outed Valerie Plame when Joseph Wilson discovered the Niger uranium lie?

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

>>> And the inspectors were finding them and destroying them.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert! Byrd (D , WV), Oct. 3, 2002

>>> Completely false. Hans Blix was kicked out of Iraq in 2003, while he was still looking.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

>>> What the hell good are inspections if you don't have the use of force threat to back it up? And Kerry, or any of the others who voted for the resolution, were given no idea that Chalabi's evidence was so shaky, or that W would actually fuck this whole thing up so badly, all the while cutting veterans benefits and relying heavily on reserves and national guard people to kick in doors in Baghdad, which they're not really trained to do.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

>>> Again, wrong. Where do you get off with this shit? These people were all wrong! How does that make it OK?

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

>>> A lie. From a decent man who is trying to get to the bottom of Cheney's Halliburton bullshit. But, hey, nobody's perfect.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

>>> Of course, like W, she doesn't offer any proof. Hell, she was pretty much just repeating what the administration had just told her in committee meetings.

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

>>> Capacity. Yeah. And those mobile labs were helium trucks.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation .. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

>>> Disarm. Not regime change.


I'm not even going to bother with the rest of this, because if you know anything about how the senate works, you'd know that Senators often switch their votes on things, in order to change them into something they like. They often vote against something only when they know it's going to win, so it plays better at home. And all kinds of basic politics like that. But for Bush lovers to be saying Kerry's a flip-flopper, when anti nation building Bush is spending my grandchildren's tax dollars on Iraqi pipelines and electric grids and schools, while ours are falling apart, well, it's just the height of hypocrisy. Kerry wanted to increase taxes on rich people to pay for this fiasco! Bush wants to borrow the money and pay it back with interest, so it's even more expensive in the long run. You want to tell me, like Cheney did, that "deficits don't matter"? Ah, how quickly Republicans will throw out their long-held beliefs to make a buck....

Typical. You just assume I'm some kind of party hack. I'm just as pissed at most of these Democrats, including Kerry. But I believe Kerry has a history of working in a bipartisan manner like he has with McCain. And I think the fact that he thinks about things before rushing in is a good thing, especially when so many lives are on the line.

"If the cause be not good, the King himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs, and arms, and heads, chopped off in a battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all, 'We died at such a place.'"—Shakespeare, Henry V

Great President

Ah, the Republican google bombers, showing solidarity with their right-wing bomber friends who killed so many in Oklahoma City, have been busy trying to make Michael Moore show up for miserable failure, and W show up for great president. Now, the link to great president should go to FDR, who's lasting legacy is under a full attack from these right-wing destruction addicts.

Waffles

George Bush protects the troops, then he doesn't. Hell he doesn't even protect them BEFORE the war (no body armor, no Humvee Armor, no exit strategy), what the hell makes anybody but a Chickenhawk think he's going to do anything for the mostly poor minorities once they get back?

Bush's Secret FY 2006 Budget Will Cut $17 Million for the Nearly 500,000 Veterans in Wisconsin. The Washington Post reported that the White House Office of Management and Budget sent a memo to its agencies advising them of spending cuts to be expected for FY 2006. In this secret budget memo, George Bush instructed the Veterans Administration that they will need to cut over $900 million from their budget.

Waffles

Wow. The whacked out right wing is so confident Bush is going to win (Diebold cheating already factored in), that they're wasting time making google bombs to make Kerry's site show up first for a search for waffles. Of course, idiots that they are, they missed waffle, waffler, and wafflest. How convenient to forget that Bush was against the Homeland Security department, then for it. He was against the 9/11 commission, then for it. He wasn't going to testify, then he was (without being under oath, while holding Dicky's hand). He wasn't gong to let Condoleeza testify, then he was. He was against "nation building" then for it big time. The list goes on and on. And yet, these morons continue to attack Kerry as a waffler, hoping their definition of this man who actually THINKS about both sides on an issue will take root. Obviously, they have nothing positive of their own to run on, So they trash Kerry and chant "four more wars...." Not to mention Cheney's waffling, like he had no interest in helping Halliburton, but there's new e-mail proving that he did. Time to throw these wafflers out on their greedy asses.

The Washington Post Does Its Job

The Washington Post got hold of some juicy documents that show all kinds of cuts if Bush re-takes the oval office, their next step in drowning Government in a bath-tub. Of course, in a land where the government is the people, Grover Norquist is suggesting that he and his neo-con tax zealots want to shrink and drown us. Not surprising, given their disdain for unions, working people, health care (instead of the sick care they get rich from), and any kind of social program whatsoever--flushing the last of FDR right down the aging sewer. They even want to put Reagan on the dime, facing right.

Best to just let the numbers speak for themselves. For the 2006 budget, the Bushies have suggested (as taken from the Bush budget plan eyes cuts for schools, veterans):

--Domestic security at the Homeland Security Department and other agencies would go from $30.6 billion in 2005 to $29.6 billion in 2006, a 3 percent drop.

--The Education Department would go from $57.3 billion in 2005 to $55.9 billion in 2006, 2.4 percent less.

--The Veterans Affairs Department would fall 3.4 percent from $29.7 billion in 2005 to $28.7 billion.

--The Environmental Protection Agency would drop from $7.8 billion in 2005 to $7.6 billion, or 2.6 percent.

--The National Institutes of Health, which finances biomedical research and had its budget doubled over a recent five-year period, would fall from $28.6 billion to $28 billion, or 2.1 percent.

--The Interior Department would fall 1.9 percent from $10.8 billion in 2005 to $10.6 billion.

--The Defense Department would grow 5.2 percent to $422.7 billion in 2006, and the Justice Department would increase 4.3 percent to $19.5 billion in 2006.

Contrast the truth and the fiction

When I do bother to ague with the idiots who love this "president," almost all of them accuse me of twisting the facts. Well, thanks to the Center for American Progress's database of Claim vs. Fact, now there's an easy way to look up who said what and when, and whether it's true or not. I really love the part where W et al say Iraq's oil would pay for the reconstruction. The great untapped anger about all this, no matter who you are, is WHY THE HELL ARE WE OVER THERE SPENDING BILLIONS FOR THESE PEOPLE WHEN WE NEED IT HERE?????

"Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the King that led them to it...."—Shakespeare, King Henry V, Act 4, Scene 1.

Love the War? Just Supporting Your Country?

All you war lovers who are "Just supporting my country," as my step-mother said to me as justification for supporting the war, should take a good long look at this page. When you're done, and you've read all the quotes from American GI's who we're all supposed to support, and you've carefully looked at all the pictures, let me know if you're still going to support your country. Let me know if you still love our war of "liberation." Let me know about the flowers they're throwing at our feet. Let me know how we're not doing the recruiting for Al Qaida as a result of our "just" war. Tell me how much Bush is going to spend on shrinks for all these young guys we sent over there to be baby killers. Tell me how the US isn't going to have problems from hundreds of thousands of men and women who've learned that force and murder is the best, and first, way to solve your problems. Let's talk about how many bullies, rapist, and murderers we've positively reinforced.

Yesterday at work one of the bosses who actually hates Bush said we should Napalm the whole fucking country of Iraq because they're all shooting at us. This is usually talk that I only hear from Limbaugh Republicans, which this guy would be if he weren't a union voter. I told him he was just wrong. Pissed him off, I think, but I don't know how an otherwise decent guy could think such things. It's really confusing. I'd get him to look at this page of American murder and war crimes, but he won't. He's too sure he's right. Like Bush. And we're supposed to think that this hard-headedness is a good trait, making Bush vote-worthy?

I've had it with anyone who supports this war. Even members of my own family. And people who say that because I don't support this war, I don't support the troops. The only troops I don't support are the ones committing war crimes. So, blanket statements like "Support the Troops" certainly lose meaning when some of the troops are war criminals. Support the Moral Troops would be a much better sticker.

I'll vote for Kerry because I think in the long run he has a better chance of internationalizing the Iraq occupation. And I think as a former soldier, he's more likely to think twice before sending our boys anywhere to kill children. He's also great on the environment. But I sure hope he's learned something from Howard Dean, who figured out Bush was lying about WMDs without being a Senator. Kerry should have figured it out too, and voted no on Bush's blank check.

Anti-war Americans are the ones who are truly supporting out country. We took an unpopular stance from the get-go. Now we're in the majority. I hope the rest of us figure it out before November Second.

The Rose and Kettle Restaurant

Enjoy fine dining in the Central Leatherstocking region at Robin's sister's restaurant in Cherry Valley, New York. This Cooperstown restaurant serves gourmet food that is fresh and locally grown and raised, often organic!

"The powers in charge keep us in a perpetual state of fear keep us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor with the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real."—General Douglas MacArthur

Watch the crazy Bush Christian who tried to run me over get reamed by Judge Joe Brown!

Monday, May 10, show # 1447

I see two shows that day, on KCAL 9 - one at 10 am and one at 10:30 am (pacific). I'm not sure which it is, but tune in or set your TIVO, because he really lets this crazy woman have it! And since I thought she might have been mad about my bumper stickers, he gave me a chance to say them out loud. I hope they air that!

Judge Joe Brown is the Memphis Judge who presided over the trial of James Earl Ray. A real no nonsense guy.

If You're Not Boycotting Disney Already...

As if Michael Moore's new movie, Fahrenheit 911, needed more publicity, Disney has decided to become a censor for Ashcroft and refuse to distribute it in the US. If Michael Eisner would take a second to pull his head out of his ass, he'd notice that when Moore's publisher initially tried to stop Stupid White Men from being published, it only raised the ire of librarians, who started a grass roots drive to make sure the book was published, without any pro-Bush rewrites. The fuss only fed the publicity. Or, maybe Eisner really wasn't worried about keeping his Florida tax breaks from Jeb. Maybe he's really a genius and is trying to create media bounce to actually boost box office for Fahrenheit 911.

Naaaa....