the-peoples-patriot, a political Blog

Thursday, August 26, 2004

From a friend on Kerry

"He who is willing to sacrifice freedom for safety deserves neither freedom nor safety." - Ben Franklin
&
"One useless man is called a disgrace; two useless men are called a law firm; and three or more useless men are a congress" - John Adams
&
Politicians and diapers should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons.

I'm Not sure how much of this is true, but something to consider........

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

Following is a brief background on Mrs. John Kerry . She hates being called that, by the way:

Maria Teresa Thiersten Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry. Married Senator Kerry in 1995. She only took his name eighteen months ago and she is an "interesting" paradox of conflicts.

If you thought John Kerry was scary, he doesn't hold a candle to his wife! Maria Teresa Thiersten Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry was born in Mozambique, the daughter of a Portuguese physician, was educated in Switzerland and South Africa. Fluent in five languages, she was working as a United Nations interpreter in Geneva in the mid-60's when she met a "handsome" young American, H. John Heinz, III, who worked at a bank in Geneva. He told her his family was "in the food business."

They were married in 1966 and returned to Pittsburgh where his family ran the giant H. J. Heinz food company. He was elected to the US House of Representatives in 1971, and in 1976 he was elected to the first of three terms in the United States Senate. A Republican, he wrote a burning diatribe against some of the causes backed by young House member John Kerry.)

Several years later, in 1991, he was killed when his plane collided with a Sun Oil Company helicopter over a Philadelphia suburb. The senator, his pilot and copilot, and both of Sun's helicopter pilots were killed. He was survived by his wife, Teresa, and their three young sons.
Four years later, having inherited Heinz's $500 million fortune, she married Senator John Forbes Kerry, the liberal then-junior senator from Massachusetts. She became a registered Democrat and the process of her radicalization was set in motion.

Heinz Kerry is not shy about telling people that she required Kerry to sign a prenuptial agreement before they were married. John Kerry may not have check writing privileges on the Heinz catsup and pickle fortune, but he is certainly a willing and uncomplaining beneficiary of it.

A lot of hard-earned money, made through many years of hawking catsup, mustard, and pickles has fallen into the hands of two people who despise successful entrepreneurship and who believe in the confiscatory redistribution of wealth.

So how does Mrs. Heinz Kerry spend John Heinz's money?

Just one example:
According to the G2 Bulletin, an online intelligence newsletter of WorldNetDaily, in the years between 1995-2001 she gave more than $4 million to an organization called the Tides Foundation. And what does the Tides Foundation do with John Heinz's money?

They support numerous antiwar groups, including Ramsey Clark's International Action Center. Clark has offered to defend Saddam Hussein when he's tried.

They support the Democratic Justice Fund, a joint venture of the Tides Foundation and billionaire hate-monger George Soros. The Democratic Justice Fund seeks to ease restrictions on Muslim immigration from "terrorist" states.

They support the Council for American-Islamic Relations, whose leaders are known to have close ties to the terrorist group, Hamas.

They support the National Lawyers Guild, organized as a communist front during the Cold War era. One of their attorneys, Lynne Stewart, has been arrested for helping a client, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, communicate with terror cells in Egypt. He is the convicted mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

They support the "Barrio Warriors," a radical Hispanic group whose primary goal is to return all of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas to Mexico.

These are but a few of the radical groups that benefit, through the anonymity provided by the Tides Foundation, from the generosity of our would-be first lady, the wealthy widow of Republican senator John Heinz, and now the wife of the Democratic senator who aspires to be the 44th President of the United States.

Aiding and supporting our enemies is not good for America, regardless of your political views.

If voters will open their eyes, educate themselves and see the real Teresa Heinz Kerry, they will not appreciate her position as ultra rich fairy godmother of the radical left. They will not want to imagine her laying her head on a pillow each night inches away from the President of the United States.

Hopefully they love this country enough to decide that the only way these two will ever be allowed into the White House is with an engraved invitation in hand.

Instead of deleting this, pass it on. Let everyone know these people are unfit to represent this great nation. The uninformed will never hear the truth from the press, who wants Kerry elected!

Those who buy the Kerry facade, beware what you vote for - - - you may regret that you got it!

MY ADVICE endeavors at keen.com. The number is 1-800-275-5336 (800-ask-keen) + ext. 0329063 for tech stuff, 0329117 for running a small business, and 0329144 on investing. Want to CHAT, I use Yahoo's IM as the_web_ster. View me in the Friends & Family part of webcamnow.com, just click on "view cams", then in the Java window click on WebcamNow Communities drop down arrow & select Friends & Family. Under the live webcams look for & click on me "the_webster".

send comments via Email to me,

Wednesday, August 25, 2004

MORE BUSH CONNECTIONS TO SMEAR ADS

While aides to President Bush continue to claim "we
weren't involved in any
way in these ads"[1] against Sen. John Kerry (D-MA)
by Swift boat vets, more
evidence emerged yesterday to disprove those
denials.

First, the Washington Post reports that a "top
lawyer in President Bush's
reelection campaign acknowledged that he has been
advising the veterans
group." Benjamin L. Ginsberg, the "chief outside
counsel to the Bush
campaign" admitted "I've done some work for" the
Swift Boat Veterans for
Truth.[2] Ginsberg has long been a top adviser to
Bush. The LA Times reports
he represented the Bush campaign in 2000 and became
a prominent figure
during the Florida recount. In the current
presidential campaign, his law
firm has been paid $256,635 for his services[3] by
the Bush campaign. That
figure does not include any cash Ginsberg made in
his work with the Swift
Boat Veterans.

Additionally, the Dallas Morning News yesterday
reported that the man
bankrolling the smear ads is hosting President
Bush's top political adviser
at a fundraiser in New York during the Republican
National Convention.
Robert Perry, the top Bush-Cheney fundraiser who is
financing the Swift Boat
Veterans for Truth ads, "is listed as the co-host"
of an event whose guest
list includes Karl Rove on September 1.[4]

This news follows revelations earlier this week
that one of the veterans
smearing Kerry in the ads is actually a member of
the Bush-Cheney
campaign.[5] It also follows news that the
Bush-Cheney campaign headquarters
in Florida is distributing fliers promoting the
group smearing Kerry.[6]

Sources:

1. "Press Gaggle by Scott McClellan,"
WhiteHouse.gov, 8/20/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=52004.
2. "Bush-Cheney Lawyer Advised Anti-Kerry Vets,"
Washington Post, 8/25/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=52005.
3. "Bush Lawyer Also Advises Anti-Kerry Veterans,"
LA Times, 8/25/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=52006.
4. "Kerry critic listed as fund-raiser's co-host,"
Dallas Morning News,
8/23/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=52007.
5. "Bush Misleads on Connection to Smear Campaign,"
Misleader.org, 8/23/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=52008.
6. "Swift Boat member skips rally over fliers at
Bush campaign office,"
Miami Herald, 8/22/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=52009.

send comments via Email to me,

Next week in New York, Republican politicians will try to make the case that their party represents mainstream American values. Don't be fooled.

Because at the same time that Republicans claim they represent all of America, they're fielding candidates who have some pretty outrageous and radical views. Republican congressional candidate and eugenics supporter James Hart, for example, recently explained his campaign strategy to reporters: "Every person who opens the door — as long as they're white — I'll say, 'I'm James Hart. I'm running for Congress."[1]

We can't afford to let people like James Hart run our country. So today, we're highlighting five of the candidates who are going to take it back – folks running against far-right candidates in very close races. If we support all of them, we have a great chance of winning back control of the U.S. Senate.

Contribute to their races and watch our shocking new web video featuring more radical Republican quotes at:

https://www.moveonpac.org/give/04endorsed.html

Our video is comprised of actual quotes from Republican candidates and office holders, highlighting the truly extreme, hate-filled views of many of the Republican party's top officials and current candidates for public office. It's short, and definitely worth watching. Check it out at the link above.

The right wing's strategy for tightening its control over America and the world depends on convincing us that the Republican party is fundamentally moderate. But the fact is, Republican candidates hold a lot of views that sharply differ with those of ordinary Americans. And they try to gloss over these differences through spin — remember Bush's 2000 campaign theme of "compassionate" conservatism and his promise of a "humble" foreign policy?

We can't let Republicans get away with this bait-and-switch any longer. If we want to take back our country and defend the values that make it great, defeating President Bush is not enough. Even if Kerry wins, he won't be able to turn things around if Republican extremists still control the U.S. Senate.

We've got to win back the Senate, seat by seat.

Today, we urge you to support five Senate candidates who have a great chance of winning important races and knocking out the kind of extremists highlighted in our web video. They are: Ken Salazar in Colorado, Tony Knowles in Alaska, Erskine Bowles in North Carolina, Inez Tenenbaum in South Carolina, and Brad Carson in Oklahoma.

Each of these candidates is running in a state that has increasingly come under Republican control. Yet their races are still competitive. And with your help, we have a real chance to win these crucial Senate seats and an opportunity to take back the U.S. Senate.

These five candidates will be competing against some of the most right-wing Republicans in the country, all whom will be well funded. Pete Coors, beer magnate and leading donor to the conservative Heritage Foundation, is the GOP nominee in Colorado. In Oklahoma, the Republican Senate candidate is U.S. Representative Tom Coburn, who criticized Newt Gingrich for being too moderate and also said, "I favor the death penalty for abortionists and other people who take life."

And while each of these candidates has an opponent who has proven themselves to be far to the right of the mainstream, each of these five Democratic candidates has proven their ability to win, often against great odds.

Inez Tenenbaum, currently the Commissioner of Education in South Carolina, won more votes on the 2002 ballot than any other state-wide candidate in this increasingly conservative state. Tony Knowles, the Democrat who was twice elected Governor of Alaska, remains popular in Alaska, a solid Republican state. And Erskine Bowles, former Clinton Administration Chief of Staff, continues to lead in the North Carolina polls, despite the GOP's best efforts to undermine him.

Your gift of $25, $50, or $100 to each of these candidates can and will make a huge difference, for each of these candidates and for the country as a whole.

You can give to each of them in less than five minutes at:

https://www.moveonpac.org/give/04endorsed.html

With your help, we can take back control of the U.S. Senate and stop a new generation of extremist candidates before they get to Washington.

Sincerely,

--Eli Pariser & Hannah Pingree
MoveOn PAC
Wednesday, August 25th, 2004

Footnote:
1. Read more about James Hart at: http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040803_904.html

send comments via Email to me,

Study Contradicts Cheney-Bush Claim of Undue Limits on Western Oil, Gas Drilling

A new study of federal land records finds no evidence for the Bush administration's insistent claims that restrictions on access to U.S. public lands have hampered oil and gas development and led to greater dependence on foreign oil.

In a town meeting in Arkansas on August 3, Vice President Cheney asserted again that "[w]e've taken large chunks of the country and put it off limits to any kind of exploration or development...large parts of the Rocky Mountain West are off limits." Cheney blamed this alleged lack of access for the fact that "we aren't producing [oil and gas] here at home".

An extensive investigation by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) found Cheney's assertion to be little more than myth. "The west has been wide open to the oil and gas industry for the last 22 years," Dusty Horwitt, one of the lead authors, told BushGreenwatch. "The rhetoric" about lack of access, Horwitt said, "is just an attempt to open especially sensitive lands to friends of the administration."

The EWG study reports that oil and gas interests poured over $75 million into political campaigns, of which 79% went to Republicans. [1]

The study, "Who Owns the West?: Oil and Gas Leases," found that since 1982 the federal government has leased 229 million acres for drilling on public and private land in 12 western states -- an area equal to Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona combined.

Moreover, according to the federal government's own studies, the oil and gas industry already has access to a high percentage of land in the five western basins that contain "most of the natural gas and much of the oil under public ownership within the 48 contiguous states."

In these reserves, 88 percent of the natural gas and 85 percent of the oil is on land open to leasing.

Since 1982, U.S. dependence on foreign oil has doubled, and American reliance on foreign gas has tripled. At current rates of U.S. energy consumption, the reserves in the five richest western basins contain at most a 279-day supply of oil and an 8-year supply of natural gas.

Domestic energy production can do little to close America's yawning gap between production and consumption, or address the problem of increasing dependence. Despite the relatively small amounts of energy available in the West, the Bush administration has made a determined push to remove barriers for drilling on an additional 45 million acres. It has also reversed environmental protections on lands already open to development.

The Bush effort will do little to make the U.S. less vulnerable to foreign energy producers. But, noted Horwitt, it will line the pockets of the oil and gas industries.

###

SOURCES:
[1] "Who Owns the West?: Oil and Gas Leases," EWG report, Aug. 25, 2004.

send comments via Email to me,

Tuesday, August 24, 2004

BUSH'S CIA NOMINEE TRIED TO GUT KEY INTELLIGENCE

President Bush has repeatedly criticized his
opponent[1] for joining with
Republicans to slightly reduce funding for
intelligence after the end of the
Cold War.[2] But a new report shows that the
President recently nominated a
CIA Director who tried to make far deeper cuts in
intelligence, even as
terrorist attacks against the United States
increased.

Despite the known threat of terrorism, Bush
nominated Rep. Porter Goss
(R-FL) to be the new CIA Director - a man who has
led the effort to cut the
very intelligence priorities that are most critical
to the fight against
terrorism. As the Washington Post reports, Goss
actually "sponsored
legislation that would have cut intelligence
personnel by 20 percent in the
late 1990s." Goss insisted on these cuts even after
the 1993 World Trade
Center attack when America became aware of the
serious terrorist threat. As
the story notes, the cuts Goss supported are far
larger than those proposed
by Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) and were specifically
targeted at "human
intelligence." That is the very same priority which
the 9/11 Commission and
other independent experts say was lacking in the
days and months leading up
to the 9/11 attacks.[3]

The revelations about Goss come only a few weeks
after similar evidence came
to light showing that Vice President Cheney has
also repeatedly tried to
stop intelligence reforms and cut critical defense
programs. For instance,
in 1992, Cheney led the effort to block the very
same intelligence reforms
the 9/11 Commission said would have made the United
States better prepared
to deal with the threat of al Qaeda. Similarly,
while the Bush-Cheney
campaign has attacked Kerry for supposedly reducing
defense spending,[4] it
was Cheney himself in 2000 who admitted that as
Defense Secretary, he "did
in fact significantly reduce the overall size of
the U.S. military."[5] And
in 1990, it was Cheney who went to Capitol Hill to
tout his effort to slash
defense, bragging about "programs that I have
recommended for
termination."[6]

Sources:

1. "Bush chides Kerry on intelligence cuts,"
Washington Times, 3/09/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51644.
2. "Bush Strains Facts Re: Kerry's Plan To Cut
Intelligence Funding in
'90's," FactCheck.org, 3/15/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51645.
3. "Goss Backed '95 Bill to Slash Intelligence,"
Washington Post, 8/24/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51646.
4. "Remarks by the Vice President at the Ronald
Reagan Presidential Library
and Museum," WhiteHouse.gov, 3/17/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51647.
5. "latimes.com: Cheney acknowledges defense cuts
began on his watch,"
CNN.com, 8/24/00,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51648.
6. Congressional Testimony, 2/01/90.

send comments via Email to me,

New Lawsuits Aim at Bush EPA Action Enabling Millions of Fish Kills

As reported by BushGreenwatch last February, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) opted to allow existing power plants and other industrial facilities to continue using cooling water systems which kill countless fish in American rivers every year--and to mitigate the damage by trying to restock the fish.

EPA issued this regulation despite a unanimous decision by the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which found that allowing massive destruction of wildlife in cooling systems, and then attempting to replace them in the ecosystem, did not fulfill the Clean Water Act requirement to use the "best technology available" to mitigate environmental damage.

Now, the Hudson River-based organization Riverkeeper is again leading a national coalition of environmental groups in suing EPA, charging the agency with violating the mandate of Congress under the Clean Water Act.

"Unfortunately, the agency has illegally rewritten the Clean Water Act to allow industry to avoid upgrading power plants that function as aquatic slaughterhouses," said Alex Matthiessen, executive director of Riverkeeper, in the organization's July announcement of the suit. [1]

While the Second Circuit's February decision applied specifically to a portion of EPA's rules called Phase I regulation, which applies to new facilities, Riverkeeper charges EPA with exceeding its authority in applying a different standard to existing facilities with the subsequent set of rules, called Phase II regulation. [2]

"EPA has caved in to the demands of the power industry, and completely abdicated responsibility under the Clean Water Act," Reed Super, Riverkeeper senior attorney and lead counsel in the suit, told BushGreenwatch. "We hope the court will vacate or remand some or all of the rule." [3]

Super tells BushGreenwatch that six state attorneys general—Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island—have also filed suit against EPA.

"The states, as well as environmental groups, recognize that EPA is dropping the ball. This will raise the level of importance of the case in the eyes of the judge," says Super.

Currently, the best cooling technology available is "closed cycle, " which re-circulates water repeatedly to cool a plant. This dramatically lessens water use, and reduces the kills of fish and other organisms by approximately 95% over the much older, more destructive—and less expensive--"once-through" systems.

These older systems pull in several billion gallons of water a day, leading to a massive mortality--trillions of fish, shellfish, and other organisms--every year.

In once-through systems, larger animals are killed by "impingement," or being trapped against water intake screens. Their eggs and larvae are killed by "entrainment," being drawn in to exchangers that transfer the plant's heat to the water, where they die from heat, toxicity, and physical stress.

Once-through cooling systems rival the fishing industry in the number of fish and shellfish killed every year. About 52% of power plants in the U.S. use once-through systems. [3]

Super vividly describes the impact this outmoded technology has on the Hudson River. "Just one plant--the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant--uses 2.4 billion gallons a day of cooling water," he says. "By comparison, nine million people use New York City's water supply, and they consume only 1.2 billion gallons a day.

"Indian Point is just one of five plants on the Hudson using once-through cooling systems. Altogether they are sucking nearly five billion gallons daily from the river."

###

SOURCES:
[1] Riverkeeper press release, Jul. 26, 2004.
[2] Riverkeeper fact sheet.
[3] Ibid.

send comments via Email to me,

Monday, August 23, 2004

BUSH MISLEADS ON CONNECTION TO SMEAR CAMPAIGN

President Bush has adamantly denied any connection
to discredited and unsubstantial attack ads, run by
the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT),
a group that aims to smear John Kerry's record of
honorable military service. On Friday, White House
Press Secretary Scott McClellan said that the White
House and the Bush/Cheney campaign "weren't
involved in any way in these [SBVT] ads."[1]

McClellan neglected to mention that Kenneth
Cordier, who appears prominently in the SBVT ads, was a
member of the Bush/Cheney veterans steering
committee.[2] According to the campaign website, members of
the veterans steering committee "serve as
messengers for the President's re-election campaign."[3]
After the Kerry campaign exposed Cordier's
involvement, a spokesman for Bush, Steve Schmidt, announced
Cordier would "no longer participate" in the
campaign.[4] According to Schmidt, the campaign had no idea
that Cordier was involved in the SBVT ads - which
have been a major issue in the campaign for weeks
and replayed repeatedly on national television.

Also skipped over by McClellan: The primary
financial backer of the SBVT is Bob Perry - the top donor
to Republicans in the state of Texas.[5] Perry has
also been a friend of Karl Rove, Bush's top
political advisor, for nearly 20 years.[6] Perry ponied up
$46,000 for Bush's gubernatorial campaigns and
contributed generously to Bush's presidential races.[7]

Sources:
1. "Press Gaggle by Scott McClellan," The White
House, 08/20/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51520.
2. "Bush Campaign Drops Swift Boat Ad Figure," The
Washington Post, 8/22/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51521.
3. "U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons Announces Nevada Veterans
for Bush Leadership Team," GeorgeWBush.com,
8/20/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51522.
4. "Bush Campaign Drops Swift Boat Ad Figure,"
Washington Post, 8/22/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51521.
5. "Ad Wars: Behind an Attack on Kerry,"
International Herald Tribune, 8/20/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51523.
6. Ibid,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51523.
7. Ibid,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51523.

send comments via Email to me,

Edwards Hits Bush on Overtime Pay Rules

The Associated Press

RACINE, Wis. - John Edwards (news - web sites) chose the almost evenly divided state of Wisconsin to tout the Democratic presidential ticket's economic plans and criticize the Bush administration's new rules for overtime pay.

"Today, millions of workers will find out that instead of getting time-and-a-half, they're going to get a hard time from their government," the vice presidential nominee said in prepared remarks as the rules took effect Monday. "More than 60 years of protecting overtime work have been wiped out with the stroke of this president's pen."

The overhaul rewrites rules for awarding overtime pay for the first time in more than half a century. Employers sought the changes for decades, complaining that the regulations were too confusing and out of date.

The changes effect mostly white-collar workers, and the Labor Department (news - web sites) says manual laborers and other blue-collar workers won't be affected. The estimates of how many workers might see their pay change vary widely.

Edwards and presidential nominee John Kerry (news - web sites) predict the changes mean smaller paychecks for millions and predict workers like teachers and computer programers could see their pay shrink.

"Taking away the right to overtime pay and doing nothing while paychecks shrink and jobs go overseas makes sense only to someone who does not understand American values and does not respect what work means in this country," Edwards said.

The Bush-Cheney campaign said the Democrats have distorted the president's record and that the new rules will grant overtime pay to some workers not now eligible.

"This attack is another example of the Kerry campaign trying to mislead American workers," said spokesman Matt McDonald. "The only loser under this reform is the trial lawyers who have created an overtime lawsuit industry that costs our economy $2 billion per year."

Edwards amassed his personal fortune as a plaintiff's trial lawyer before winning election to the Senate from North Carolina in 1998.

Want more info on the new overtime laws, just search on "overtime" once your in the "news" section of Yahoo, or whoever you use.

send comments via Email to me,

Sunday, August 22, 2004

Vietnam Vet Says Has No Proof for Claim Kerry Lied

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A veteran who disputed Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites)'s Vietnam war record acknowledged on Sunday he had no proof to back his charge that Kerry fabricated the reports of enemy fire that won him two medals.

Speaking on "Fox News Sunday," Van Odell, a member of the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth that has spearheaded a campaign against Kerry's service record, said his was one of seven eyewitness accounts and he was not being directed by President Bush (news - web sites)'s campaign.

He has charged that then Navy Lt. Kerry, a Swift boat commander, fabricated the "after-action" report saying he faced enemy fire on March 13, 1969, for which he was awarded the Bronze Star and his third Purple Heart for being wounded while pulling a fellow soldier to safety.

"I do not have a single document," Odell said. "I have the fact that I wasn't wounded in that 5,000 meters of fire that he wrote about."

"There was no enemy fire from either bank," he added.

The assertion was another broadside in a debate that has been raging for weeks, and with at least one CBS poll showing the issue cutting into Kerry's support among veterans, the Massachusetts senator has accused the group of collaborating with the Bush campaign and demanded Bush repudiate the ads.

Odell said he had met with Republican strategist Merrie Spaeth, a public relations consultant to his group, and once bought a home from Bob Perry, a large Republican donor from Texas and close associate of Karl Rove, the president's chief political adviser.

DOLE JOINS KERRY CRITICS

Former Republican Sen. Bob Dole joined critics of Kerry, telling CNN's "Late Edition" Kerry should apologize for his testimony to Congress more than 30 years ago in which he quoted other veterans talking about alleged atrocities in Vietnam.

Dole also said Kerry had received only "superficial wounds" in Vietnam and had been taken out of combat as a result.

"I respect his record. But three Purple Hearts and he never bled, that I know of. I mean, they're all superficial wounds. Three Purple Hearts and you're out," said Dole who himself was badly wounded in World War II.

"Maybe he should apologize to the other 2.5 million veterans who served," said Dole. "He wasn't the only one who was in Vietnam."

Kerry still carries shrapnel in his thigh from one of his wounds in Vietnam.

Republican Sen. Pat Roberts (news, bio, voting record) of Kansas, chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, said while the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth group had "every right" to express their opinion, "we ought to get out of the character assassination business."

Kerry took a day off campaigning on Sunday, but his running mate, John Edwards (news - web sites), tied the attacks "directly to President Bush and his friends."

Campaigning in North Carolina, Edwards said: "Senator Kerry had a moment of truth in 1968 when he decided to volunteer and serve his country and put his life on the line for his country. This is a moment of truth for President Bush."

Kerry's Vietnam service has been central to his challenge to Bush. The two candidates have been running neck and neck in key polls.

The Bush campaign has denied any collaboration with Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and other such groups. Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman, on NBC's "Meet the Press," played down the connection between the group and the campaign, or Rove. "Karl Rove is friends with lots of different people," he said.

The Bush campaign has acknowledged that Ken Cordier, a Vietnam veteran who appeared in a Swift Boat Veterans for Truth commercial, had been working with the campaign but said he had resigned. (Additional reporting by Carol Giacomo and Adam Entous)

send comments via Email to me,

Saturday, August 21, 2004

Want to know how Bush got in or at lease one of the reasons

LINK TO THE WEBSITE THAT WELL GAVE YOU ONE IDEA

send comments via Email to me,

Friday, August 20, 2004

An Email from Senator Barbara Boxer

"U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer"
To: ********************************
Subject: Senator Boxer Asks Californians About Health Care
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 22:42:47 -0700

I thought you would be interested in the following
message. B

===================================================

Dear Friend:

It is hard to believe that 44 million Americans,
including 6.5
million Californians, are without any health
insurance
whatsoever. And for many who have health
insurance, it is
getting costlier all the time.

Part of the problem is that the price of health
insurance has
undergone record increases. In 2001, the average
cost for
individual coverage was $2,650. By 2003, the cost
was $3,383.
For the same time period, the cost of family
coverage rose from
$7,073 to $9,068.

I am working to increase access to affordable
health care
insurance and prescription drugs, and I would like
to hear your
ideas. On my Senate website, I have made available
a survey
where you can register your ideas. You will find
the survey
feature on my Senate website at
http://boxer.senate.gov/contact/survey.cfm .

I encourage you to visit my website and reply to
the questions
posed in the survey. I have pledged to do all I
can to help
working Americans solve the problems they
experience with
health care insurance, and knowing your views will
be important
to me.

Because of federal election rules, I will not be
able to post
full results of the survey until November. I
invite you to
return then to see the views of your fellow
Californians.

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer
United States Senator

===================================================

For more information on Senator Boxer's record and
other
information, please go to:
http://www.boxer.senate.gov

If you would like to make a comment regarding this
or any other
federal matter, please feel free to do so at:
http://www.boxer.senate.gov/contact/webform.cfm

If this message reached you in error, or if you
would like to
cancel your subscription, please reply to this
message with
unsubscribe in the subject line.
END

send comments via Email to me,

BUSH FLIP FLOPS IN PANDER TO MIDWEST VOTERS

President Bush visited Michigan this week and said,
"We've got to use our resources wisely, like water.
It starts with keeping the Great Lakes water in the
Great Lakes Basin." He then attacked his political
opponents for supposedly equivocating on the issue,
and said, "My position is clear: We're never going
to allow diversion of Great Lakes water."[1] This
declaration, however, was a direct flip-flop from
statements the President made just three years ago.

According to The Associated Press in July of 2001,
"Bush said he wants to talk to Canadian Prime
Minister Jean Chretien about piping [Great Lakes] water
to parched states in the west and southwest."[2]
Though experts said, "diverting any water from the
Great Lakes region sets a bad precedent," the
President insisted, "A lot of people don't need [the
water], but when you head South and West, we do need
it."[3]

Sources:
1. "President's Remarks at Traverse City, Michigan
Rally," The White House, 08/16/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51424.
2. "Bush's talk of North American water pact upsets
environmentalists, politicians," The Associated
Press, July 19, 2001.
3. "Remarks by the President in Roundtable
Interview with Foreign Press," The White House, 07/17/01,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51425.

send comments via Email to me,

Thursday, August 19, 2004

Want to read the Intel report on Iraq

http://web.mit.edu/simsong/www/iraqreport2-textunder.pdf

send comments via Email to me,

BUSH "LIVING IN THE PAST" ON MISSILE DEFENSE

President Bush this week said that "those who
oppose ballistic missile
system[s] really don't understand the threats of
the 21st century. They're
living in the past." He then claimed, "We're going
to do what's necessary to
protect this country."[1] But a look at the
President's push for an unproven
defense system aimed at preventing a Cold War-style
attack while he
underfunds counterterrorism/homeland security shows
that he is the one whose
policies are wholly outdated. It also shows that,
in fact, he is not doing
everything necessary to protect America.

The missile defense system the President is pushing
is designed to shoot
down Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) -
a weapon experts agree
posed a far greater threat to America during the
Cold War. By contrast,
today the threat of 9/11-style terrorism is far
greater than that of an
ICBM. A missile defense system does nothing to
address that kind of
terrorism. Additionally, nonpartisan congressional
auditors this year found
that the missile defense system was wholly
unproven.[2]

Despite these facts, the President is pushing to
spend billions on the
system, while cutting funding for more pressing
national security programs.
Specifically, he is pushing a massive 9% cut to the
Nunn-Lugar program[3] -
the government's central effort to protect loose
nuclear material and
prevent that material from getting into the hands
of terrorists on the
international black market. He has also drastically
underfunded basic
homeland security programs, including grants to
first responders.[4]

To illustrate just how out of touch the President
has been on national
security issues, consider the summer before 9/11:
As the White House
received warnings of an imminent terrorist (not
ICBM) attack, the Bush
administration threatened to veto an urgent request
to shift $800 million
from missile defense into critical
counter-terrorism programs.[5]

Sources:

1. "President's Remarks in Ridley Park,
Pennsylvania ," The White House,
8/17/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51069.
2. "Missile defense called unproven," San Francisco
Chronicle, 4/24/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51070.
3. "Fact Sheet: GOP Budget and Homeland Security,"
HouseDemocrats.gov,
03/25/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51071.
4. "The Bush Record: Homeland Insecurity,"
Democrats.org,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51072.
5. "What Went Wrong.," Newsweek, 05/27/02,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=51073.

send comments via Email to me,

Well, at lease he WAS in Vietnam , Kerry that is. 4 months. I don't think I've ever hear him say that though.

It's what they don't say that makes me sad. All of them Kerry or Bush of any of them;

John Kerry's service in Vietnam lasted 4 months and 12 days, beginning in November 1968 when he reported to Cam Ranh Bay for a month of training. His abbreviated combat tour ended shortly after he requested a transfer out of Vietnam on March 17, 1969, citing Navy instruction 1300.39 permitting personnel with three Purple Hearts to request reassignment. So far as we are able to determine, Kerry was the only Swift sailor ever to leave Vietnam without completing the standard one-year tour of duty, other than those who were seriously wounded or killed.

It is clear that at least one of Kerry's Purple Heart awards was the result of his own negligence, not enemy fire, and that Kerry went to unusual lengths to obtain the award after being turned down by his own commanding officer.

John Kerry has long insisted that using the three-injury loophole to leave combat early was his own idea, but Kerry's fellow Swift officer Thomas Wright, who served on occasion as the OIC (Officer in Charge) of Kerry's boat group, contradicts that claim. Wright reports that he "had a lot of trouble getting Kerry to follow orders," and that those who worked with Kerry found him "oriented towards his personal, rather than unit goals and objectives." He therefore requested that Kerry be removed from his boat group. After John Kerry qualified for his third Purple Heart, Thomas Wright and two fellow officers informed him of the obscure regulation, and told him to go home. Wright concluded, "We knew how the system worked and we didn’t want him in Coastal Division 11."

Constructing a complete picture of Kerry's service is difficult due to gaps in the Naval records provided by the Kerry campaign. These gaps include missing and incomplete fitness reports, missing medical records and missing records related to his medal awards.

For this reason we call upon Senator Kerry to authorize complete access to all his military records by filing a standard Form 180, a simple two-page release form.

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is in the process of researching John Kerry's time in Vietnam by conducting interviews with eyewitnesses to his activities, and we plan to add material to this section over the next several weeks as it becomes available. We will report the true circumstances of Kerry's medal awards and injuries, describe other controversial missions, and provide in-depth analysis of his fitness reports.

.
Kerry's Medals

1st Purple Heart: December 2, 1968

2nd Purple Heart: February 20, 1969

Silver Star: February 28, 1969

Bronze Star / 3rd Purple Heart: March 13, 1969

.
Other Missions

Christmas in Cambodia: December 25, 1968

Sampan Incident: January 20, 1969.

.
Fitness Reports

Analysis of John Kerry's Fitness Reports

send comments via Email to me,

BUSH "LIVING IN THE PAST" ON MISSILE DEFENSE

send comments via Email to me,

Wednesday, August 18, 2004

REPORT SHOWS BUSH IGNORING CHEMICAL SECURITY

President Bush this week said, "We're going to do
what's necessary to protect this country."[1] But
according to a comprehensive new report, the Bush
administration has not only failed to safeguard
vulnerable terrorist targets at home, it has actively
blocked government initiatives to safeguard the most
dangerous materials that could be used in a
terrorist attack.

According to the nonpartisan Working Group on
Community Right-to-Know, the Bush administration has
blocked an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
initiative to impose security measures for extremely
hazardous chemicals stored at power plants across the
country. As a result, some 3.5 million people
living near these non-nuclear power plants continue to
face the danger that a terrorist attack could send a
cloud of toxic and lethal gas into their
neighborhoods. The report also details how opposition from
chemical manufacturers has derailed a bill in
Congress, the Chemical Security Act, which would have
required facilities using the most dangerous chemicals
to consider safer technologies and use them where
practicable.[2]

Since 2000, the chemical industry has donated more
than $17 million to President Bush and Republican
congressional candidates.[3] These companies have
also given more than $6 million in soft money to the
Republican National Committee.[4]

See the full report here,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50995.

Sources:

1. "President's Remarks in Ridley Park,
Pennsylvania ," The White House, 8/17/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50996.
2. "Unnecessary Dangers: Emergency Chemical Release
Hazards at Power Plants," Working Group on
Community Right-to-Know, July, 2004,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50995.
3. "Chemical & Related Manufacturing: Long-Term
Contribution Trends ," Center for Responsive Politics,
07/5/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50997.
4. "Soft Money for Misc Business in 2002,"
OpenSecrets.Org,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50998.

send comments via Email to me,

Yes, Kerry Did Skip Three-Quarters of Senate Intel Committee's Public Hearings

By FactCheck.org
Aug 18, 2004, 06:52

A Bush-Cheney '04 ad released Aug. 13 accuses Kerry of being absent for 76% of the Senate Intelligence Committee's public hearings during the time he served there. The Kerry campaign calls the ad "misleading," so we checked, and Bush is right.
Official records show Kerry not present for at least 76% of public hearings held during his eight years on the panel, and possibly 78% (the record of one hearing is ambiguous).

Kerry points out that most meetings of the Intelligence Committee are closed and attendance records of those meetings aren't public, hinting that his attendance might have been better at the non-public proceedings. But Kerry could ask that his attendance records be made public, and hasn't.

Aides also claimed repeatedly that Kerry had been vice chairman of the intelligence committee, but that was Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, not John Kerry.

Analysis
Kerry often touts his eight years on the Senate Intelligence Committee as a prime qualification for office. The Bush ad takes that on, describing Kerry as a no-show for most of the committee's public meetings. If anything, the ad understates Kerry's lack of attendance.

Public Hearings

The Bush ad shows Kerry promising to "immediately reform the intelligence system," then counters with an announcer saying "as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee Kerry was absent for 76 percent of the committee's public hearings." As support for that statement, the Bush campaign states that Kerry is listed as present at only 11 of the 49 public meetings of the committee while he was a member, from 1993 through January, 2001, when Kerry left the committee.

FactCheck.org examined the official, published records of those hearings. And indeed, Kerry is listed as attending only 11 of those hearings.

Kerry's apparent absence from 38 of the hearings actually figures out to an absentee rate of 77.6%.

However, the Bush ad's lower figure plays it safe -- giving Kerry credit for attending one hearing for which the record is a bit ambiguous. The record of that hearing, on June 22, 1999, lacks the usual list of the senators and staff members who attended. We checked the full transcript for any sign that Kerry had been there, and found no record of Kerry speaking, or anyone else noting his presence. If Kerry is counted as absent from that hearing as well as the others, he missed nearly 78%. But if he attended and didn't speak, then he would have missed only 37 of the 49, for a no-show rate of 75.5%, which the ad properly rounds up to 76%.

In a rebuttal to the ad, the Kerry camp accused Bush of "fuzzy math and bad stats," saying "They rely only on whether Sen... Kerry made statements in one of a small number of open hearings." That's not true. Records list senators and staff members as being present whether or not they spoke, and -- to repeat -- the 76 percent figure actually gives Kerry credit for attending one hearing for which there's no evidence of his participation.

The rest of the story

send comments via Email to me,

Bush Blocking Safe Chemical Alternatives at Vulnerable Power Plants

"He who is willing to give up freedom for safety deserves neither freedom nor safety." - Ben Franklin
&
"One useless man is called a disgrace; two useless men are called a law firm; and three or more useless men are a congress" - John Adams

In the almost three years since September 11, the Bush administration has not only failed to safeguard vulnerable terrorist targets here at home, it has actively blocked an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) initiative to impose security measures for extremely hazardous chemicals stored at power plants across the country.

As a result, according to a new report by the Working Group on Community Right-to-Know, some 3.5 million people living near these non-nuclear power plants continue to face the danger that a terrorist attack could send a cloud of toxic and lethal gas into their neighborhoods.

Titled Unnecessary Dangers:Emergency Chemical Release Hazards at Power Plants, the report describes how a sudden release of ammonia or chlorine from a power plant could kill and injure far more people than the tragedy of September 11.

Power plants burning coal or oil use ammonia in air pollution control equipment and chlorine in their cooling water systems. The report calls for power plants to shift to safer chemicals, which are available today and would all but eliminate the hazard. [1]

"Safer chemicals should be the option of first resort," Paul Orum, the author of Unnecessary Dangers told BushGreenwatch. "We know security systems will fail". The Working Group on Community Right-to-Know website contains excerpts from numerous media reports which have documented security breaches at facilities storing chemicals around the country. "Power plants are only one industry among many that pose chemicals emergency release hazards to communities," he added.

Unnecessary Dangers reports that EPA was making final preparations in June 2002 to announce new security requirements for power plants and other industries with stores of hazardous chemicals. The staff had already drafted a press release and talking points, when the White House suddenly stepped in and blocked the regulatory initiative.

The report also details how opposition from chemical manufacturers has derailed a bill in Congress, the Chemical Security Act, which would have required facilities using the most dangerous chemicals to consider safer technologies and use them where practicable.

The report makes it clear that a power company's choice of chemicals determines the danger to the surrounding community:

The choice of anhydrous ammonia by some 166 power plants endangers 21,000 people on average around each facility.

The choice of the far less dangerous aqueous ammonia by 69 power plants endangers an average of 205 people off-site.

The chlorine gas used at 40 power plants endangers on average 4,600 neighbors.
Orum says power plants can readily substitute safer chemicals that work just as well for pollution control and cooling systems. Urea can replace the extremely hazardous anhydrous ammonia, and chlorine bleach or bromine can replace chlorine gas. Unnecessary Dangers identifies the 225 power plants of concern and the specific chemicals used.

###

SOURCES:
[1] Unnecessary Dangers:Emergency Chemical Release Hazards at Power Plants, Working Group on Community Right-to-Know.

send comments via Email to me,

Tuesday, August 17, 2004

How do you spell Bush, I think you spell it HITLER

Rep. Porter Goss, President Bush’s nominee to head the CIA, recently introduced legislation that would give the president new authority to direct CIA agents to conduct law-enforcement operations inside the United States—including arresting American citizens.

The rest of the story

Call your Rep. and anyone else you can think of. This is now gone very very bad.

send comments via Email to me,

Report Shows How Bush Is Squeezing Middle Class

President Bush is now barnstorming the country
claiming his record shows that he cares about America's
middle class. On everything from taxes to health
care to workers wages, the President says he has
fought for average Americans. But a new comprehensive
report shows that in almost every key economic area,
he has actually gone to bat for his wealthiest
contributors, at everyone else's expense.

According to a cover story in this month's American
Prospect, Bush has pushed policies that benefit the
major special interests funding his campaign, while
rejecting commonsense, bipartisan proposals that
would help the middle class. On taxes, for instance,
Bush has claimed, "If you're struggling to get into
middle class and you feel like you're paying plenty
of taxes, take a look at my agenda."[1] Yet, as the
Prospect report points out, Bush's tax policies
have actually shifted more of the tax burden off of
the wealthy, and onto the middle class.[2] His
policies have also raised federal fees on the middle
class, and forced state and local governments to raise
middle class taxes to deal with the record federal
deficits.

On health care, Bush has said he is working "to
help more American families get health insurance."[3]
Yet, as the Prospect report shows, the only major
initiative Bush has offered is an industry-backed
proposal that experts say could further raise health
insurance premiums and deductibles for average
Americans. Similarly, Bush has refused to support real
legislation to lower the price of prescription
drugs in America.

On wages, Bush has said he wants to help Americans
earn better paychecks - but as the Prospect report
shows, he has simultaneously refused to support a
minimum wage increase while pushing to eliminate
overtime pay protections for millions of workers.

Read the full American Prospect report online here,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50799.

Sources:
1. "President Emphasizes Minority Entrepreneurship
at Urban League," The White House, 7/23/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50800.
2. "CBO Report: Bush Tax Cuts Tilted to Rich,"
Yahoo!News, 08/13/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50801.
3. "Remarks by the President at Traverse City,
Michigan Rally," The White House, 07/23/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50802.

send comments via Email to me,

Monday, August 16, 2004

BUSH MISLEADS ON DISTRIBUTION OF TAX CUTS

As a presidential candidate in 2000, George W. Bush
pledged his tax cut
proposals "are especially focused on low and
moderate income families."[1]
Those proposals became law - but a new study by the
non-partisan
Congressional Budget office reveals that Bush
mislead America about their
distribution.[2]

According to the CBO study, the wealthiest 1
percent of all taxpayers -
whose earnings average $1.2 million - are receiving
an average tax cut of
$78,420 this year.[3] Meanwhile, the middle 20
percent of taxpayers - whose
earnings average $51,000 - are getting only a
$1,090 cut.[4] Those in the
bottom 20% - averaging earnings of $16,620 - get
just a $250 cut.[5] The
result: "President Bush's tax cuts have shifted
federal tax payments from
the richest Americans to a wide swath of
middle-class families."[6]

Sources:

1. "A Tax Cut with a Purpose," GeorgeWBush.com,
archived from 11/2000,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50505.
2. "Effective Federal Tax Rates Under Current Law,
2001 to 2014,"
Congressional Budget Office, 08/2004,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50509.
3. "Report Finds Tax Cuts Heavily Favor the
Wealthy," New York Times,
08/13/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50506.
4. Ibid,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50506.
5. Ibid,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50506.
6. "Tax Burden Shifts to the Middle," Washington
Post, 08/13/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2460565&l=50507.

send comments via Email to me,

Administration Ignores Terrorist Potential in Its Own Backyard

The Bush administration, which has ventured thousands of miles away to pursue still unsubstantiated reports of weapons of mass destruction, continues to thwart efforts to eliminate the very real danger of catastrophic terrorist attacks right in the nation's own backyard.

The threat consists of chemical-laden railroad tank cars-- lethal cargoes which the US Department of Transportation characterizes as potential "Weapons of Mass Destruction."

A hair-raising photo taken last September shows the Capitol dome in the background with a loaded, clearly identified, extremely dangerous chlorine tank car passing in the foreground, on tracks just blocks away (dangerous cargoes carry this identification to assist firemen and emergency personnel responding to an accident).

"This photo is an indictment of non-homeland security," says Dr. Fred Millar, a rail security specialist who served as a consultant to Friends of the Earth on the issue of terrorism and dangerous rail cargoes. "The blindness on this is stunning," Millar told Bushgreenwatch.

The simple, effective solution-- opposed by the chemical industry, the railroads, and the Bush administration-- is to reroute hazardous cargoes away from cities ranked as major targets for terrorists, such as Washington, New York, Chicago, Houston, Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles.

A sudden release of chlorine from a 90-ton rail tank car could create a cloud 40 miles long and 4 miles wide and be fatal 8 to 10 miles downwind. [1] If terrorists ruptured a tank car on tracks near the Washington Mall during public events such as the Fourth of July or the Inauguration, the deadly cloud could kill 100,000 people in a half-hour, according to estimates from the U.S. Naval Research Laboratories. [2]

Dr. Millar, who also sits on DC's Local Emergency Planning Committee, has urged the DC City Council to enact a proposal to prevent the four most dangerous cargoes from passing through by rail or highway when practical alternative routes exist. "This seems a no-brainer," he told the council last October, "since re-routing would eliminate the attractiveness [to terrorists]." This could be done along the Eastern seaboard by shifting hazardous cargo to a rail route which runs largely through a rural corridor instead of major cities such as Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Newark. [3]

If anyone doubts how easy it would be to sabotage a rail car, all one need do is take a look at the rail cars passing the Capitol with graffiti sprayed all over them. That graffiti wasn't put there by any security police.

Although the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has conducted a study of the vulnerability of the Washington area's rail system to terrorist attack, it has repeatedly delayed the release. While awaiting this federal report, the DC Council has held back on the rerouting legislation.

On Capitol Hill, Representative Ed Markey (D-MA) proposed a bill that would mandate DHS to reroute dangerous chemical cargoes, but Congress failed to take up the measure before going on recess. When promulgating regulations on hazardous cargo security in March 2003, the Bush administration dropped any mention of routing from the final rule.

###

SOURCES:
[1] Chlorine Institute, Pamphlet 74.
[2] Testimony of Jay P. Borris, chief scientist at US Naval Research Laboratories before District of Columbia Council, Oct. 6, 2003.
[3] Testimony of Dr. Fred Millar on Bill 15-25 "Terrorism Prevention and Safety In Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 2003," Jan. 23, 2004.

send comments via Email to me,

If I asked you, "Have you seen "Outfoxed"? What would you say, "what's that"?

IT's a movie and it's a DVD like Fahrenheit 9/11 only on the news media in this country. I watch the BBC channel on my TV so I get "the news" and not "a message for Bush". And if you REALLY want to know what the rest of the world thinks of the United States watch the BBC (British Broadcast Corp.) channel.

Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (This is another area ware most just say that "I'm nuts". Well, looks like I'm not the only nut on the tree.)

Outfoxed" examines how media empires, led by Rupert Murdoch's Fox News, have been running a "race to the bottom" in television news. This film provides an in-depth look at Fox News and the dangers of ever-enlarging corporations taking control of the public's right to know. The film explores Murdoch's burgeoning kingdom and the impact on society when a broad swath of media is controlled by one person. Media experts, including Walter Cronkite, Jeff Cohen (FAIR) Bob McChesney (Free Press), Chellie Pingree (Common Cause), Jeff Chester (Center for Digital Democracy) and David Brock (Media Matters) provide context and guidance for the story of Fox News and its effect on society. This documentary also reveals the secrets of Former Fox news producers, reporters, bookers and writers who expose what it's like to work for Fox News. These former Fox employees talk about how they were forced to push a "right-wing" point of view or risk their jobs. Some have even chosen to remain anonymous in order to protect their current livelihoods. As one employee said "There's no sense of integrity as far as having a line that can't be crossed."

WE ARE SHOTING OURSELFS IN THE FOOT HERE. QUESTION MORE AND BELIEVE LESS OF WHAT THE "TALKING HEADS" SAY.

Glad you saw Fahrenheit 9/11? Or sorry you missed it? Want more info or want to know where the movie is showing, just do a search on "Outfoxed". The Internet, the empowering tool. Use it. Before you lose it.

IF you want to buy it, and that's my way because it on'y $8 to $10 online at overstock.com I plain to have people over to see it. Over 100,00 copies sold so far.

If you don't believe it after you'ver seen it fine, but at lease see it...

send comments via Email to me,

Some Gov website on your privacy

And go ahead a go to these site even if you don't live in CA., they don't ask. And then see if you can find a website like for that office in your state.

Caif. Depaart. of Consumer affairs, www.privacy.ca.gov

Senate Office of Research, www.sen.ca.gov/privacy/privacy.htm

Calif. State Attorney Gen. www.ag.ca.gov

Federal Trade Commission, www.ftc.gov

FirstGov for Comsumers, www.consumers.gov

Sunday, August 15, 2004

What's your IQ?

A popular bar in Middle America had a new robotic bartender installed.

A fellow came in for a drink and the robot asked him, 'What's your IQ?'

The man replied, '150.'

So the robot proceeded to make conversation about Quantum physics,

string theory, atomic chemistry, Baroque composers, 17th century

metaphysical poetry, the history of the director in theatre and so on.

The man listened intently and thought, 'This is really cool.'

The man decided to test the robot. He walked out of the bar, turned

around, and came back in for another drink.

Again, the robot asked him, 'What's your IQ?'

The man responded, '100.'

So the robot started talking about football, baseball, the latest action

film, TV talk shows, thrash rock music of the early 1980's, and so on.

The man thought to himself, 'Wow, this is amazing.'

The man went out and came back in a third time. As before, the robot

asked him, 'What's your IQ?'

The man replied, '50.'

The robot then said...

'So, you gonna vote for Bush again?'

Thursday, August 26, 2004

Wednesday, August 25, 2004

Tuesday, August 24, 2004

Monday, August 23, 2004

Sunday, August 22, 2004

Saturday, August 21, 2004

Friday, August 20, 2004

Thursday, August 19, 2004

Wednesday, August 18, 2004

Tuesday, August 17, 2004

Monday, August 16, 2004

Sunday, August 15, 2004

Agree or not, talking it over is better...

Saturday Night Live - Palin / Hillary Open

Live feed from my webcam via www.stickam.com

Blog Archive

Links

About Me

Other places you can find me or that I use.

Links

archives