mudcat.org: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration

Amos 13 Sep 03 - 01:34 PM
Ebbie 13 Sep 03 - 04:14 PM
Amergin 13 Sep 03 - 05:32 PM
katlaughing 13 Sep 03 - 06:36 PM
Ebbie 13 Sep 03 - 10:45 PM
Rapparee 13 Sep 03 - 11:52 PM
Amos 14 Sep 03 - 12:04 AM
Wilfried Schaum 14 Sep 03 - 05:09 AM
C-flat 14 Sep 03 - 05:36 AM
Alaska Mike 14 Sep 03 - 06:02 PM
Gareth 14 Sep 03 - 07:13 PM
TIA 15 Sep 03 - 10:46 AM
Amos 15 Sep 03 - 11:37 AM
Dave Bryant 15 Sep 03 - 11:46 AM
TIA 15 Sep 03 - 11:51 AM
Amos 15 Sep 03 - 12:01 PM
Ebbie 15 Sep 03 - 12:30 PM
Don Firth 15 Sep 03 - 01:04 PM
Bobert 15 Sep 03 - 01:30 PM
Don Firth 15 Sep 03 - 02:38 PM
Amos 15 Sep 03 - 06:34 PM
Alice 15 Sep 03 - 07:51 PM
NicoleC 15 Sep 03 - 11:01 PM
Amos 15 Sep 03 - 11:19 PM
curmudgeon 16 Sep 03 - 08:41 AM
Amos 16 Sep 03 - 08:46 AM
TIA 16 Sep 03 - 09:52 AM
Amos 16 Sep 03 - 10:43 AM
Greg F. 16 Sep 03 - 05:43 PM
Amos 16 Sep 03 - 07:10 PM
Reiver 2 16 Sep 03 - 07:21 PM
Greg F. 16 Sep 03 - 09:22 PM
Amos 16 Sep 03 - 09:41 PM
AliUK 16 Sep 03 - 09:44 PM
Greg F. 16 Sep 03 - 09:51 PM
Gareth 20 Sep 03 - 07:37 PM
Thomas the Rhymer 20 Sep 03 - 07:53 PM
toadfrog 20 Sep 03 - 09:31 PM
Thomas the Rhymer 21 Sep 03 - 09:07 PM
Amos 21 Sep 03 - 09:26 PM
Joe Offer 21 Sep 03 - 10:11 PM
The Fooles Troupe 21 Sep 03 - 10:49 PM
Amos 23 Dec 03 - 12:08 AM
Ebbie 23 Dec 03 - 01:39 AM
kendall 23 Dec 03 - 04:53 AM
Amos 23 Dec 03 - 10:43 AM
Amos 23 Dec 03 - 11:11 AM
Amos 13 Jan 04 - 07:07 PM
Wolfgang 14 Jan 04 - 03:46 AM
Amos 26 Jan 04 - 09:13 AM
Teribus 26 Jan 04 - 09:49 AM
Amos 26 Jan 04 - 11:16 AM
GUEST 26 Jan 04 - 11:31 AM
GUEST,The B-I-B-L-E Was Once The Book For Me... 26 Jan 04 - 12:33 PM
McGrath of Harlow 26 Jan 04 - 12:50 PM
Amos 26 Jan 04 - 01:12 PM
GUEST,The B-I-B-L-E Was Once The Book For Me... 26 Jan 04 - 01:20 PM
Amos 26 Jan 04 - 01:22 PM
GUEST 26 Jan 04 - 01:31 PM
GUEST,Frank Hamilton 26 Jan 04 - 02:53 PM
DougR 26 Jan 04 - 03:04 PM
McGrath of Harlow 26 Jan 04 - 04:14 PM
Amos 26 Jan 04 - 04:29 PM
Bobert 26 Jan 04 - 05:01 PM
McGrath of Harlow 26 Jan 04 - 07:19 PM
Walking Eagle 26 Jan 04 - 07:36 PM
Amos 28 Jan 04 - 07:39 PM
Amos 22 Feb 04 - 11:25 PM
Amos 22 Feb 04 - 11:27 PM
dianavan 23 Feb 04 - 12:08 AM
Amos 01 Mar 04 - 08:12 PM
Bobert 01 Mar 04 - 08:40 PM
Walking Eagle 02 Mar 04 - 02:50 AM
Amos 02 Mar 04 - 08:11 AM
GUEST 02 Mar 04 - 05:22 PM
Bobert 02 Mar 04 - 06:52 PM
Amos 02 Mar 04 - 10:30 PM
Amos 16 Mar 04 - 10:09 AM
Teribus 16 Mar 04 - 11:01 AM
Amos 16 Mar 04 - 11:08 AM
Teribus 16 Mar 04 - 11:51 AM
Amos 16 Mar 04 - 12:17 PM
Amos 16 Mar 04 - 12:19 PM
DougR 16 Mar 04 - 12:55 PM
Amos 16 Mar 04 - 01:02 PM
Deda 16 Mar 04 - 02:58 PM
Amos 16 Mar 04 - 03:19 PM
McGrath of Harlow 16 Mar 04 - 03:40 PM
Amos 16 Mar 04 - 05:32 PM
Amos 22 Mar 04 - 12:42 AM
DougR 22 Mar 04 - 05:57 PM
GUEST,guest from NW 22 Mar 04 - 06:42 PM
Amos 22 Mar 04 - 07:50 PM
GUEST,Clint Keller 23 Mar 04 - 04:02 AM
Amos 24 Mar 04 - 10:16 AM
DougR 24 Mar 04 - 05:42 PM
Peace 24 Mar 04 - 05:53 PM
Amos 24 Mar 04 - 05:59 PM
Amos 25 Mar 04 - 09:20 AM
el ted 25 Mar 04 - 11:52 AM
GUEST 25 Mar 04 - 02:50 PM
Amos 26 Mar 04 - 08:52 AM
Amos 26 Mar 04 - 11:23 AM
GUEST,guest from NW 26 Mar 04 - 07:47 PM
GUEST,guest from NW 28 Mar 04 - 01:24 AM
Amos 28 Mar 04 - 07:25 PM
Amos 28 Mar 04 - 07:58 PM
Amos 19 Apr 04 - 12:38 AM
Amos 19 Apr 04 - 12:41 AM
Amos 19 Apr 04 - 11:20 PM
Teribus 20 Apr 04 - 06:34 AM
Amos 20 Apr 04 - 09:15 AM
Teribus 20 Apr 04 - 10:22 AM
Amos 20 Apr 04 - 11:22 AM
Teribus 21 Apr 04 - 04:53 AM
Amos 21 Apr 04 - 03:21 PM
GUEST,Shlio 21 Apr 04 - 03:56 PM
Amos 21 Apr 04 - 04:42 PM
el ted 22 Apr 04 - 10:32 AM
Amos 24 Apr 04 - 11:29 AM
Amos 30 Apr 04 - 08:18 AM
robomatic 30 Apr 04 - 02:07 PM
GUEST,Clint Keller 30 Apr 04 - 02:19 PM
Amos 30 Apr 04 - 02:26 PM
Amos 01 May 04 - 01:54 PM
Amos 01 May 04 - 02:52 PM
Amos 10 May 04 - 11:04 AM
Amos 10 May 04 - 11:21 AM
Ebbie 10 May 04 - 12:56 PM
GUEST,noddy 11 May 04 - 11:43 AM
Amos 20 May 04 - 09:14 PM
dianavan 21 May 04 - 01:46 AM
Amos 23 May 04 - 01:20 PM
Amos 23 May 04 - 08:42 PM
Amos 24 May 04 - 08:45 PM
Amos 24 May 04 - 08:49 PM
dianavan 24 May 04 - 09:40 PM
Metchosin 25 May 04 - 01:33 AM
Amos 27 May 04 - 04:52 PM
Don Firth 27 May 04 - 05:18 PM
Amos 27 May 04 - 06:39 PM
Amos 09 Jun 04 - 10:35 AM
Ebbie 09 Jun 04 - 02:27 PM
Amos 09 Jun 04 - 04:07 PM
dianavan 09 Jun 04 - 09:46 PM
Amos 13 Jun 04 - 12:25 PM
dianavan 13 Jun 04 - 12:51 PM
Amos 13 Jun 04 - 01:22 PM
Amos 14 Jun 04 - 09:57 AM
Amos 17 Jun 04 - 11:56 PM
Amos 18 Jun 04 - 10:41 AM
Amos 20 Jun 04 - 02:24 PM
Don Firth 20 Jun 04 - 02:57 PM
Amos 20 Jun 04 - 08:19 PM
Amos 26 Jun 04 - 09:48 PM
Amos 27 Jun 04 - 10:18 AM
Metchosin 27 Jun 04 - 11:58 AM
Amos 29 Jun 04 - 11:47 PM
Amos 30 Jun 04 - 12:35 AM
Amos 06 Jul 04 - 07:00 PM
Amos 07 Jul 04 - 09:20 AM
Amos 07 Jul 04 - 06:44 PM
Amos 07 Jul 04 - 06:55 PM
jack halyard 08 Jul 04 - 05:07 PM
TIA 08 Jul 04 - 06:21 PM
Amos 08 Jul 04 - 06:53 PM
GUEST,TIA 09 Jul 04 - 07:29 AM
Amos 09 Jul 04 - 05:53 PM
GUEST,TIA 10 Jul 04 - 07:41 AM
Amos 10 Jul 04 - 10:44 AM
Amos 10 Jul 04 - 09:23 PM
Bobert 10 Jul 04 - 10:08 PM
Amos 11 Jul 04 - 12:44 PM
Terry Allan Hall 11 Jul 04 - 06:51 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 04 - 07:57 PM
Amos 12 Jul 04 - 01:02 PM
Amos 12 Jul 04 - 03:10 PM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 04 - 03:19 PM
Amos 12 Jul 04 - 04:23 PM
Peace 12 Jul 04 - 04:40 PM
Amos 12 Jul 04 - 04:43 PM
Amos 12 Jul 04 - 10:25 PM
Bobert 12 Jul 04 - 10:40 PM
Amos 12 Jul 04 - 11:09 PM
Bobert 12 Jul 04 - 11:17 PM
Amos 12 Jul 04 - 11:59 PM
GUEST 13 Jul 04 - 08:31 AM
beardedbruce 13 Jul 04 - 08:45 AM
Bobert 13 Jul 04 - 08:47 AM
Amos 13 Jul 04 - 08:54 AM
beardedbruce 13 Jul 04 - 08:54 AM
beardedbruce 13 Jul 04 - 09:01 AM
Bobert 13 Jul 04 - 09:10 AM
beardedbruce 13 Jul 04 - 09:17 AM
Bobert 13 Jul 04 - 10:20 AM
Chris Green 13 Jul 04 - 01:27 PM
Amos 13 Jul 04 - 01:32 PM
Amos 13 Jul 04 - 05:38 PM
Amos 13 Jul 04 - 08:09 PM
Bobert 13 Jul 04 - 09:51 PM
Fishpicker 14 Jul 04 - 03:38 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 04 - 05:34 PM
Fishpicker 14 Jul 04 - 07:32 PM
Don Firth 14 Jul 04 - 08:36 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 04 - 11:27 PM
Amos 16 Jul 04 - 01:33 PM
Amos 16 Jul 04 - 05:26 PM
Don Firth 16 Jul 04 - 07:20 PM
Don Firth 16 Jul 04 - 08:08 PM
Amos 17 Jul 04 - 11:11 AM
Amos 17 Jul 04 - 11:13 AM
Amos 19 Jul 04 - 03:40 PM
Amos 20 Jul 04 - 09:31 PM
Amos 20 Jul 04 - 10:12 PM
Bobert 20 Jul 04 - 11:09 PM
Amos 21 Jul 04 - 11:36 AM
Amos 25 Jul 04 - 01:24 AM
Amos 26 Jul 04 - 05:49 PM
Amos 26 Jul 04 - 10:24 PM
Amos 27 Jul 04 - 11:15 PM
GUEST 27 Jul 04 - 11:44 PM
Amos 28 Jul 04 - 12:05 AM
GUEST,Clint Keller 28 Jul 04 - 02:32 AM
Deda 31 Jul 04 - 02:47 PM
Amos 31 Jul 04 - 03:08 PM
Amos 31 Jul 04 - 03:35 PM
Amos 31 Jul 04 - 04:50 PM
Amos 01 Aug 04 - 12:54 AM
Amos 02 Aug 04 - 07:42 PM
Amos 02 Aug 04 - 07:51 PM
Amos 04 Aug 04 - 09:53 AM
Amos 04 Aug 04 - 12:59 PM
Amos 04 Aug 04 - 11:13 PM
Amos 05 Aug 04 - 03:15 PM
Amos 07 Aug 04 - 01:49 PM
Amos 09 Aug 04 - 07:06 PM
Amos 10 Aug 04 - 12:10 AM
Jim Dixon 10 Aug 04 - 04:12 PM
Amos 12 Aug 04 - 07:55 PM
Amos 15 Aug 04 - 09:56 PM
Amos 16 Aug 04 - 10:21 PM
Amos 17 Aug 04 - 11:36 PM
Amos 19 Aug 04 - 09:03 PM
Amos 25 Aug 04 - 02:42 PM
robomatic 25 Aug 04 - 10:45 PM
Amos 25 Aug 04 - 10:58 PM
GUEST,Clint Keller 26 Aug 04 - 08:58 PM
Amos 31 Aug 04 - 07:53 PM
Amos 31 Aug 04 - 08:06 PM
Amos 01 Sep 04 - 05:20 PM
Amos 01 Sep 04 - 09:40 PM
Amos 01 Sep 04 - 09:44 PM
freda underhill 02 Sep 04 - 05:23 PM
Amos 03 Sep 04 - 10:29 AM
GUEST 03 Sep 04 - 02:45 PM
Amos 03 Sep 04 - 06:54 PM
GUEST,GROK 04 Sep 04 - 06:35 PM
Amos 04 Sep 04 - 06:57 PM
GUEST,GROK 04 Sep 04 - 07:11 PM
Amos 07 Sep 04 - 06:55 PM
Amos 08 Sep 04 - 08:33 PM
Amos 08 Sep 04 - 09:03 PM
Ebbie 09 Sep 04 - 01:13 AM
Amos 09 Sep 04 - 08:53 AM
Amos 09 Sep 04 - 11:01 AM
Amos 16 Sep 04 - 11:02 PM
Amos 16 Sep 04 - 11:27 PM
Amos 17 Sep 04 - 06:36 PM
dianavan 17 Sep 04 - 10:02 PM
Amos 18 Sep 04 - 10:14 AM
Amos 19 Sep 04 - 09:01 PM
Amos 20 Sep 04 - 04:54 PM
Amos 20 Sep 04 - 08:42 PM
Amos 21 Sep 04 - 03:20 PM
freda underhill 21 Sep 04 - 09:46 PM
dianavan 21 Sep 04 - 11:22 PM
Amos 21 Sep 04 - 11:36 PM
Amos 22 Sep 04 - 09:19 AM
Amos 23 Sep 04 - 01:00 PM
Amos 23 Sep 04 - 03:32 PM
Amos 23 Sep 04 - 05:42 PM
Amos 25 Sep 04 - 01:07 AM
GUEST,Jaze 25 Sep 04 - 11:04 AM
Amos 25 Sep 04 - 11:52 AM
Amos 25 Sep 04 - 04:24 PM
GUEST 26 Sep 04 - 10:27 AM
Amos 26 Sep 04 - 11:41 AM
Amos 28 Sep 04 - 10:31 AM
GUEST,peedeecee 28 Sep 04 - 04:08 PM
Amos 28 Sep 04 - 07:44 PM
Amos 29 Sep 04 - 09:16 AM
Amos 29 Sep 04 - 04:39 PM
Amos 30 Sep 04 - 08:27 AM
Amos 30 Sep 04 - 11:29 PM
Amos 03 Oct 04 - 09:48 AM
Amos 03 Oct 04 - 06:49 PM
Ebbie 03 Oct 04 - 07:18 PM
Ebbie 03 Oct 04 - 07:20 PM
Leadfingers 03 Oct 04 - 08:06 PM
Leadfingers 03 Oct 04 - 08:07 PM
Amos 03 Oct 04 - 08:13 PM
Amos 04 Oct 04 - 12:35 AM
Amos 04 Oct 04 - 02:59 PM
Amos 05 Oct 04 - 08:22 AM
Amos 06 Oct 04 - 09:30 AM
Amos 06 Oct 04 - 01:39 PM
Amos 12 Oct 04 - 11:54 PM
Amos 13 Oct 04 - 12:34 AM
Amos 17 Oct 04 - 11:39 AM
GUEST,Iconoclast is in Clifton TX not Crawford. 17 Oct 04 - 12:34 PM
beardedbruce 17 Oct 04 - 01:10 PM
Amos 17 Oct 04 - 02:07 PM
Amos 17 Oct 04 - 02:59 PM
Amos 17 Oct 04 - 03:03 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 18 Oct 04 - 02:42 AM
dianavan 18 Oct 04 - 04:27 AM
Amos 18 Oct 04 - 04:22 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 19 Oct 04 - 09:26 AM
Amos 19 Oct 04 - 11:22 AM
Amos 20 Oct 04 - 11:18 AM
Amos 20 Oct 04 - 11:36 AM
Amos 20 Oct 04 - 03:16 PM
Amos 21 Oct 04 - 09:57 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 21 Oct 04 - 03:19 PM
Amos 21 Oct 04 - 04:47 PM
Amos 21 Oct 04 - 05:00 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 21 Oct 04 - 09:56 PM
Amos 21 Oct 04 - 11:13 PM
Amos 22 Oct 04 - 05:00 PM
Amos 22 Oct 04 - 05:02 PM
dianavan 22 Oct 04 - 08:24 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 23 Oct 04 - 12:02 AM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 01:26 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 23 Oct 04 - 01:39 AM
beardedbruce 23 Oct 04 - 01:39 AM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 01:55 AM
beardedbruce 23 Oct 04 - 02:01 AM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 02:13 AM
beardedbruce 23 Oct 04 - 02:31 AM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 02:37 AM
beardedbruce 23 Oct 04 - 02:49 AM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 03:03 AM
beardedbruce 23 Oct 04 - 03:09 AM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 09:21 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 23 Oct 04 - 02:02 PM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 03:24 PM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 03:58 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 23 Oct 04 - 04:24 PM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 07:17 PM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 07:44 PM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 07:53 PM
Old Guy 23 Oct 04 - 11:09 PM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 11:19 PM
Amos 23 Oct 04 - 11:47 PM
dianavan 24 Oct 04 - 12:00 AM
Old Guy 24 Oct 04 - 12:41 AM
GUEST,Clint Keller 24 Oct 04 - 12:47 AM
beardedbruce 24 Oct 04 - 12:59 AM
Ebbie 24 Oct 04 - 01:02 AM
Old Guy 24 Oct 04 - 01:15 AM
Old Guy 25 Oct 04 - 12:59 AM
Amos 25 Oct 04 - 01:10 AM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 09:10 AM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 09:21 AM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 09:28 AM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 10:25 AM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 10:33 AM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 12:43 PM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 01:07 PM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 01:58 PM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 02:13 PM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 04:33 PM
Amos 26 Oct 04 - 07:58 PM
GUEST,Amos JR 27 Oct 04 - 12:19 PM
Amos 27 Oct 04 - 12:25 PM
Amos 27 Oct 04 - 12:44 PM
Amos 27 Oct 04 - 08:28 PM
Amos 29 Oct 04 - 01:16 PM
GUEST,Amos JR 29 Oct 04 - 01:42 PM
Amos 29 Oct 04 - 01:46 PM
Amos 29 Oct 04 - 01:51 PM
GUEST,Johnjohn 29 Oct 04 - 02:37 PM
Amos 29 Oct 04 - 03:12 PM
GUEST,Johnjohn 29 Oct 04 - 03:37 PM
Amos 30 Oct 04 - 02:14 PM
Amos 30 Oct 04 - 02:29 PM
Amos 31 Oct 04 - 01:16 AM
GUEST,Johnjohn 31 Oct 04 - 09:27 AM
Amos 31 Oct 04 - 10:20 AM
Amos 31 Oct 04 - 10:52 AM
GUEST 31 Oct 04 - 10:56 AM
Amos 31 Oct 04 - 12:00 PM
Amos 31 Oct 04 - 05:27 PM
GUEST,Rosencranz & Guildenstern 31 Oct 04 - 05:42 PM
GUEST,Rosencranz & Guildenstern 31 Oct 04 - 07:07 PM
Amos 31 Oct 04 - 08:37 PM
Amos 31 Oct 04 - 09:47 PM
Paco Rabanne 01 Nov 04 - 09:50 AM
Paco Rabanne 03 Nov 04 - 05:31 AM
Paco Rabanne 03 Nov 04 - 05:32 AM
Amos 03 Nov 04 - 09:49 AM
Paco Rabanne 03 Nov 04 - 10:23 AM
GUEST,Captain America 05 Nov 04 - 10:58 PM
GUEST,Gumby 05 Nov 04 - 11:04 PM
Amos 06 Nov 04 - 12:17 PM
Amos 08 Nov 04 - 07:23 PM
GUEST,Calhoun 08 Nov 04 - 07:27 PM
Amos 08 Nov 04 - 08:21 PM
GUEST,Sancho 08 Nov 04 - 09:35 PM
Amos 08 Nov 04 - 11:19 PM
beardedbruce 08 Nov 04 - 11:35 PM
Amos 09 Nov 04 - 02:26 AM
GUEST,Johnjohn 09 Nov 04 - 09:28 AM
Amos 09 Nov 04 - 09:30 PM
Amos 09 Nov 04 - 10:20 PM
Amos 10 Nov 04 - 12:34 AM
Amos 10 Nov 04 - 12:48 AM
GUEST 10 Nov 04 - 11:32 PM
Amos 11 Nov 04 - 01:19 PM
GUEST 11 Nov 04 - 05:12 PM
Amos 11 Nov 04 - 06:35 PM
Amos 11 Nov 04 - 10:19 PM
Ellenpoly 12 Nov 04 - 04:45 AM
Amos 12 Nov 04 - 11:42 AM
GUEST,Harpo 12 Nov 04 - 10:06 PM
Amos 13 Nov 04 - 11:48 PM
Amos 14 Nov 04 - 12:29 AM
GUEST,Johnjohn 14 Nov 04 - 08:39 AM
GUEST,Opie 14 Nov 04 - 08:55 AM
Amos 14 Nov 04 - 09:58 AM
Amos 14 Nov 04 - 11:03 AM
Amos 14 Nov 04 - 11:56 AM
Amos 14 Nov 04 - 12:05 PM
Amos 14 Nov 04 - 12:53 PM
Amos 14 Nov 04 - 01:09 PM
GUEST,Harpo 15 Nov 04 - 02:21 AM
GUEST,Opie 15 Nov 04 - 02:25 AM
Amos 15 Nov 04 - 04:15 AM
Amos 15 Nov 04 - 07:54 PM
Amos 15 Nov 04 - 07:59 PM
GUEST 15 Nov 04 - 08:39 PM
Amos 15 Nov 04 - 09:06 PM
GUEST,Opie 15 Nov 04 - 09:14 PM
Once Famous 15 Nov 04 - 09:50 PM
Amos 16 Nov 04 - 12:03 AM
Amos 16 Nov 04 - 12:45 AM
The Fooles Troupe 16 Nov 04 - 12:46 AM
Amos 16 Nov 04 - 09:07 AM
GUEST 16 Nov 04 - 09:32 AM
GUEST,Siggy 16 Nov 04 - 10:02 AM
GUEST 16 Nov 04 - 11:31 AM
GUEST,Amos 16 Nov 04 - 02:16 PM
Once Famous 16 Nov 04 - 07:31 PM
Amos 16 Nov 04 - 07:51 PM
GUEST,Opie 16 Nov 04 - 08:00 PM
GUEST,Werner 16 Nov 04 - 08:48 PM
Amos 16 Nov 04 - 10:16 PM
Amos 16 Nov 04 - 10:48 PM
Amos 16 Nov 04 - 11:57 PM
RichM 17 Nov 04 - 04:46 PM
Amos 17 Nov 04 - 06:02 PM
Amos 17 Nov 04 - 06:05 PM
Amos 17 Nov 04 - 07:17 PM
Amos 17 Nov 04 - 08:16 PM
Amos 17 Nov 04 - 09:11 PM
Amos 18 Nov 04 - 12:43 AM
Amos 18 Nov 04 - 09:03 PM
Once Famous 18 Nov 04 - 09:12 PM
Once Famous 18 Nov 04 - 09:21 PM
Amos 18 Nov 04 - 11:18 PM
GUEST,Werner 18 Nov 04 - 11:29 PM
Ellenpoly 18 Nov 04 - 11:56 PM
Amos 19 Nov 04 - 12:04 AM
Amos 19 Nov 04 - 09:12 AM
Amos 19 Nov 04 - 09:20 AM
Amos 19 Nov 04 - 07:07 PM
Amos 19 Nov 04 - 07:31 PM
Amos 19 Nov 04 - 07:41 PM
Amos 19 Nov 04 - 11:38 PM
GUEST,Werner 19 Nov 04 - 11:45 PM
Amos 19 Nov 04 - 11:53 PM
GUEST,Armed and Dangerous 20 Nov 04 - 04:51 PM
Amos 20 Nov 04 - 04:57 PM
GUEST,Siggy 20 Nov 04 - 05:24 PM
Amos 21 Nov 04 - 08:02 AM
Amos 21 Nov 04 - 08:14 AM
Amos 21 Nov 04 - 08:19 AM
Amos 21 Nov 04 - 08:39 AM
Amos 21 Nov 04 - 01:42 PM
Once Famous 21 Nov 04 - 08:03 PM
Amos 21 Nov 04 - 11:00 PM
Amos 21 Nov 04 - 11:06 PM
Amos 21 Nov 04 - 11:13 PM
Amos 21 Nov 04 - 11:18 PM
Amos 21 Nov 04 - 11:23 PM
DougR 22 Nov 04 - 12:13 PM
GUEST,Werner 22 Nov 04 - 01:21 PM
GUEST,Johnjohn 22 Nov 04 - 03:56 PM
Amos 22 Nov 04 - 06:05 PM
Amos 22 Nov 04 - 06:21 PM
GUEST,Werner 22 Nov 04 - 06:31 PM
Amos 22 Nov 04 - 06:35 PM
Amos 22 Nov 04 - 07:39 PM
GUEST,Werner 22 Nov 04 - 08:19 PM
GUEST,Johnjohn 22 Nov 04 - 08:27 PM
Amos 22 Nov 04 - 08:28 PM
Amos 22 Nov 04 - 08:37 PM
Once Famous 22 Nov 04 - 10:00 PM
Once Famous 22 Nov 04 - 10:10 PM
GUEST,Zack 22 Nov 04 - 10:12 PM
Once Famous 22 Nov 04 - 10:22 PM
GUEST,Johnjohn 22 Nov 04 - 10:39 PM
Amos 22 Nov 04 - 11:13 PM
Amos 22 Nov 04 - 11:52 PM
GUEST,Johnjohn 23 Nov 04 - 12:23 AM
GUEST,Zack 23 Nov 04 - 12:29 AM
DougR 23 Nov 04 - 12:41 AM
Paco Rabanne 23 Nov 04 - 03:14 AM
GUEST,Boab 23 Nov 04 - 04:12 AM
Amos 23 Nov 04 - 08:15 AM
GUEST,Zack 23 Nov 04 - 12:06 PM
DougR 23 Nov 04 - 12:34 PM
Amos 23 Nov 04 - 06:07 PM
Amos 23 Nov 04 - 07:19 PM
Amos 23 Nov 04 - 07:24 PM
Amos 23 Nov 04 - 08:13 PM
GUEST,Zack 23 Nov 04 - 08:54 PM
GUEST,Zack 23 Nov 04 - 08:58 PM
GUEST,Poindexter 23 Nov 04 - 09:09 PM
Amos 23 Nov 04 - 09:16 PM
Amos 23 Nov 04 - 09:19 PM
Once Famous 23 Nov 04 - 09:31 PM
GUEST,Werner 23 Nov 04 - 09:31 PM
GUEST,Arnie 23 Nov 04 - 09:38 PM
GUEST,Johnjohn 23 Nov 04 - 09:47 PM
GUEST,Opie 23 Nov 04 - 10:05 PM
Amos 24 Nov 04 - 09:28 AM
GUEST,Harpo 24 Nov 04 - 11:25 AM
GUEST,Poindexter 24 Nov 04 - 12:08 PM
Amos 24 Nov 04 - 04:35 PM
GUEST,Homey 24 Nov 04 - 06:15 PM
Amos 24 Nov 04 - 07:31 PM
GUEST,Homey 24 Nov 04 - 08:29 PM
Amos 24 Nov 04 - 09:26 PM
Amos 24 Nov 04 - 09:37 PM
Paco Rabanne 25 Nov 04 - 03:34 AM
GUEST,Poindexter 25 Nov 04 - 08:02 AM
GUEST,Homey 25 Nov 04 - 08:10 AM
GUEST,Poindexter 25 Nov 04 - 08:15 AM
GUEST,Werner 25 Nov 04 - 08:22 AM
Amos 25 Nov 04 - 10:11 AM
Amos 25 Nov 04 - 10:42 AM
Amos 26 Nov 04 - 11:48 AM
DougR 26 Nov 04 - 01:46 PM
Once Famous 26 Nov 04 - 03:00 PM
Amos 26 Nov 04 - 03:02 PM
Amos 26 Nov 04 - 03:11 PM
Amos 26 Nov 04 - 03:22 PM
Amos 26 Nov 04 - 04:21 PM
DougR 26 Nov 04 - 07:11 PM
Amos 26 Nov 04 - 09:48 PM
Amos 26 Nov 04 - 10:19 PM
Amos 27 Nov 04 - 09:40 AM
Amos 27 Nov 04 - 09:58 AM
Amos 27 Nov 04 - 06:22 PM
Amos 27 Nov 04 - 08:00 PM
Amos 27 Nov 04 - 08:09 PM
GUEST 27 Nov 04 - 09:54 PM
GUEST 27 Nov 04 - 10:18 PM
Amos 27 Nov 04 - 11:06 PM
Amos 28 Nov 04 - 09:20 AM
Amos 28 Nov 04 - 10:13 AM
Amos 28 Nov 04 - 04:59 PM
Amos 28 Nov 04 - 05:16 PM
GUEST,Munchausen 28 Nov 04 - 09:07 PM
Amos 28 Nov 04 - 09:28 PM
Amos 28 Nov 04 - 11:06 PM
GUEST,Munchausen 28 Nov 04 - 11:17 PM
Amos 28 Nov 04 - 11:26 PM
Amos 29 Nov 04 - 05:53 PM
Amos 29 Nov 04 - 06:16 PM
GUEST,Siggy 29 Nov 04 - 06:18 PM
Amos 29 Nov 04 - 06:23 PM
Amos 29 Nov 04 - 06:26 PM
GUEST,Poindexter 29 Nov 04 - 06:58 PM
Amos 29 Nov 04 - 08:13 PM
Bobert 29 Nov 04 - 08:31 PM
DougR 30 Nov 04 - 01:09 AM
Amos 30 Nov 04 - 05:39 AM
Bobert 30 Nov 04 - 09:04 AM
GUEST,Poindexter 30 Nov 04 - 09:57 AM
Amos 30 Nov 04 - 06:19 PM
Bobert 30 Nov 04 - 06:32 PM
GUEST,Poindexter 30 Nov 04 - 07:39 PM
Amos 30 Nov 04 - 08:49 PM
Amos 30 Nov 04 - 09:05 PM
Amos 30 Nov 04 - 09:14 PM
Don Firth 30 Nov 04 - 09:52 PM
Amos 30 Nov 04 - 10:40 PM
GUEST,Opie 30 Nov 04 - 10:44 PM
Amos 30 Nov 04 - 10:48 PM
Bobert 30 Nov 04 - 10:53 PM
Amos 30 Nov 04 - 10:59 PM
GUEST,Calhoun 30 Nov 04 - 11:00 PM
GUEST,Andy 30 Nov 04 - 11:19 PM
Bobert 30 Nov 04 - 11:27 PM
GUEST,Werner 30 Nov 04 - 11:33 PM
Amos 01 Dec 04 - 12:11 AM
Ellenpoly 01 Dec 04 - 01:09 AM
Peace 01 Dec 04 - 01:17 AM
GUEST,Poindexter 01 Dec 04 - 08:22 AM
DougR 01 Dec 04 - 12:15 PM
Amos 01 Dec 04 - 04:16 PM
Amos 01 Dec 04 - 04:31 PM
Amos 01 Dec 04 - 06:44 PM
Amos 01 Dec 04 - 08:55 PM
Amos 01 Dec 04 - 09:40 PM
Bobert 01 Dec 04 - 09:53 PM
GUEST,Zack 01 Dec 04 - 10:24 PM
Bobert 01 Dec 04 - 10:32 PM
GUEST,Kingfish 01 Dec 04 - 10:55 PM
Amos 01 Dec 04 - 11:15 PM
GUEST,Lightnin' 01 Dec 04 - 11:52 PM
Amos 02 Dec 04 - 07:14 PM
Amos 02 Dec 04 - 07:30 PM
Amos 02 Dec 04 - 07:31 PM
Amos 02 Dec 04 - 07:32 PM
GUEST,Homey 03 Dec 04 - 01:26 AM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 07:25 AM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 07:28 AM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 07:30 AM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 07:34 AM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 07:39 AM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 08:22 AM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 08:25 AM
Ellenpoly 03 Dec 04 - 11:27 AM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 04:35 PM
DougR 03 Dec 04 - 05:48 PM
Bobert 03 Dec 04 - 06:36 PM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 07:05 PM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 07:09 PM
Amos 03 Dec 04 - 07:30 PM
GUEST,Kingfish 04 Dec 04 - 12:09 AM
GUEST,Siggy 04 Dec 04 - 12:37 AM
Amos 04 Dec 04 - 01:46 AM
freda underhill 04 Dec 04 - 07:40 AM
Amos 04 Dec 04 - 09:33 AM
Amos 04 Dec 04 - 09:39 AM
GUEST,Siggy 04 Dec 04 - 01:56 PM
Amos 04 Dec 04 - 02:04 PM
Amos 04 Dec 04 - 02:08 PM
DougR 04 Dec 04 - 02:20 PM
Amos 04 Dec 04 - 02:40 PM
Amos 04 Dec 04 - 09:06 PM
GUEST,Siggy 04 Dec 04 - 11:12 PM
Amos 05 Dec 04 - 10:10 AM
Amos 05 Dec 04 - 10:32 AM
Amos 05 Dec 04 - 05:06 PM
freda underhill 06 Dec 04 - 08:42 AM
Amos 06 Dec 04 - 09:15 AM
Amos 06 Dec 04 - 09:18 AM
Amos 06 Dec 04 - 06:31 PM
Amos 06 Dec 04 - 07:12 PM
Amos 06 Dec 04 - 07:18 PM
Amos 06 Dec 04 - 07:22 PM
GUEST,siggy 06 Dec 04 - 10:51 PM
Peace 06 Dec 04 - 10:55 PM
Amos 07 Dec 04 - 09:34 AM
Amos 07 Dec 04 - 09:40 AM
Amos 07 Dec 04 - 06:26 PM
Amos 07 Dec 04 - 06:29 PM
Amos 07 Dec 04 - 06:31 PM
GUEST,Johnjohn 07 Dec 04 - 11:50 PM
GUEST 07 Dec 04 - 11:59 PM
GUEST,Calhoun 08 Dec 04 - 12:14 AM
GUEST,Kingfish 08 Dec 04 - 12:23 AM
Amos 08 Dec 04 - 12:38 AM
Amos 08 Dec 04 - 04:57 PM
DougR 08 Dec 04 - 05:33 PM
GUEST,TIA 08 Dec 04 - 08:17 PM
Bobert 08 Dec 04 - 09:53 PM
GUEST,Jeb Shwarzeneggar 08 Dec 04 - 10:48 PM
Bobert 08 Dec 04 - 11:03 PM
Amos 08 Dec 04 - 11:09 PM
GUEST,Crawford Iconoclast 08 Dec 04 - 11:26 PM
Greg F. 08 Dec 04 - 11:29 PM
Amos 08 Dec 04 - 11:31 PM
Once Famous 08 Dec 04 - 11:40 PM
GUEST,Fat Albert 08 Dec 04 - 11:54 PM
Amos 09 Dec 04 - 12:43 AM
GUEST,Fat Albert 09 Dec 04 - 02:25 PM
Paco Rabanne 10 Dec 04 - 03:45 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 10 Dec 04 - 03:48 AM
Paco Rabanne 10 Dec 04 - 05:22 AM
Sttaw Legend 10 Dec 04 - 05:49 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 10 Dec 04 - 05:52 AM
Paco Rabanne 10 Dec 04 - 05:53 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 10 Dec 04 - 05:57 AM
Paco Rabanne 10 Dec 04 - 05:58 AM
Paco Rabanne 10 Dec 04 - 06:01 AM
Amos 12 Dec 04 - 06:12 PM
GUEST,Bunky 12 Dec 04 - 06:34 PM
Amos 12 Dec 04 - 07:09 PM
Bobert 12 Dec 04 - 07:52 PM
Amos 12 Dec 04 - 08:43 PM
Amos 13 Dec 04 - 08:59 AM
Amos 13 Dec 04 - 04:26 PM
Amos 13 Dec 04 - 04:51 PM
Amos 13 Dec 04 - 09:47 PM
GUEST,Truth Fairy 14 Dec 04 - 01:19 AM
GUEST,Tucker 14 Dec 04 - 02:04 AM
Amos 14 Dec 04 - 07:51 PM
Amos 14 Dec 04 - 07:52 PM
Amos 14 Dec 04 - 07:53 PM
Amos 15 Dec 04 - 07:44 PM
Amos 15 Dec 04 - 07:54 PM
Amos 16 Dec 04 - 08:10 AM
Amos 16 Dec 04 - 08:22 AM
Donuel 16 Dec 04 - 08:28 AM
Amos 16 Dec 04 - 05:59 PM
Amos 16 Dec 04 - 08:14 PM
Amos 16 Dec 04 - 08:17 PM
Amos 17 Dec 04 - 04:28 PM
Amos 17 Dec 04 - 04:29 PM
Bobert 17 Dec 04 - 06:41 PM
GUEST,Chongo Chimp 17 Dec 04 - 06:52 PM
Amos 17 Dec 04 - 07:30 PM
Amos 18 Dec 04 - 10:53 AM
Amos 18 Dec 04 - 12:26 PM
Amos 18 Dec 04 - 05:49 PM
Amos 19 Dec 04 - 10:15 AM
Amos 19 Dec 04 - 09:25 PM
Amos 20 Dec 04 - 08:56 PM
Amos 21 Dec 04 - 12:20 AM
Amos 21 Dec 04 - 08:00 PM
Amos 22 Dec 04 - 02:25 PM
Amos 28 Dec 04 - 08:20 AM
Amos 28 Dec 04 - 08:27 AM
DougR 28 Dec 04 - 04:43 PM
Amos 28 Dec 04 - 06:06 PM
Amos 28 Dec 04 - 07:29 PM
Bobert 28 Dec 04 - 08:15 PM
Amos 28 Dec 04 - 09:00 PM
DougR 28 Dec 04 - 11:44 PM
Amos 29 Dec 04 - 08:54 AM
Amos 31 Dec 04 - 01:56 PM
Amos 31 Dec 04 - 02:05 PM
Amos 31 Dec 04 - 04:03 PM
Amos 31 Dec 04 - 04:06 PM
DougR 31 Dec 04 - 07:30 PM
Bobert 31 Dec 04 - 08:05 PM
Don Firth 31 Dec 04 - 08:32 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 06:59 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 07:09 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 07:15 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 07:22 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 07:53 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 07:59 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 08:12 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 08:36 PM
Bobert 01 Jan 05 - 08:43 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 08:51 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 09:33 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 09:55 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 10:22 PM
Amos 01 Jan 05 - 10:35 PM
Amos 02 Jan 05 - 10:58 AM
DougR 03 Jan 05 - 12:18 AM
Metchosin 03 Jan 05 - 12:31 AM
Ellenpoly 03 Jan 05 - 05:32 AM
Amos 03 Jan 05 - 08:13 AM
Bobert 03 Jan 05 - 08:33 AM
DougR 03 Jan 05 - 01:22 PM
Metchosin 03 Jan 05 - 01:35 PM
GUEST,Clint Keller 03 Jan 05 - 01:46 PM
Amos 03 Jan 05 - 05:46 PM
Bobert 03 Jan 05 - 06:28 PM
Don Firth 03 Jan 05 - 08:00 PM
Amos 03 Jan 05 - 09:36 PM
Bobert 03 Jan 05 - 09:43 PM
Once Famous 03 Jan 05 - 10:04 PM
Bobert 03 Jan 05 - 10:28 PM
Amos 03 Jan 05 - 11:19 PM
Amos 03 Jan 05 - 11:31 PM
Amos 03 Jan 05 - 11:41 PM
Amos 03 Jan 05 - 11:44 PM
Amos 03 Jan 05 - 11:51 PM
Amos 04 Jan 05 - 12:04 AM
Amos 04 Jan 05 - 12:11 AM
Metchosin 04 Jan 05 - 12:17 AM
Amos 04 Jan 05 - 07:36 AM
Amos 04 Jan 05 - 05:56 PM
Amos 04 Jan 05 - 06:00 PM
Amos 04 Jan 05 - 06:03 PM
Amos 04 Jan 05 - 06:46 PM
Amos 04 Jan 05 - 07:05 PM
Amos 04 Jan 05 - 07:37 PM
Leadfingers 04 Jan 05 - 10:27 PM
Leadfingers 04 Jan 05 - 10:28 PM
Leadfingers 04 Jan 05 - 10:30 PM
Bobert 04 Jan 05 - 10:35 PM
DougR 04 Jan 05 - 10:37 PM
robomatic 04 Jan 05 - 10:56 PM
Amos 04 Jan 05 - 11:33 PM
robomatic 05 Jan 05 - 12:38 AM
Amos 05 Jan 05 - 08:11 AM
Amos 05 Jan 05 - 08:13 AM
Amos 05 Jan 05 - 08:19 AM
Amos 06 Jan 05 - 12:56 AM
Amos 06 Jan 05 - 01:14 AM
Little Hawk 06 Jan 05 - 01:17 AM
Amos 06 Jan 05 - 06:12 PM
Amos 06 Jan 05 - 06:16 PM
Amos 06 Jan 05 - 11:10 PM
DougR 07 Jan 05 - 01:34 PM
Amos 07 Jan 05 - 01:38 PM
Amos 07 Jan 05 - 02:36 PM
Amos 07 Jan 05 - 05:13 PM
Amos 07 Jan 05 - 05:18 PM
Amos 07 Jan 05 - 05:31 PM
Amos 07 Jan 05 - 05:33 PM
Amos 07 Jan 05 - 05:38 PM
Amos 08 Jan 05 - 10:32 AM
Amos 08 Jan 05 - 11:21 AM
Amos 08 Jan 05 - 11:24 AM
Stilly River Sage 08 Jan 05 - 01:01 PM
DougR 08 Jan 05 - 01:16 PM
Amos 08 Jan 05 - 02:29 PM
Amos 08 Jan 05 - 11:55 PM
Amos 09 Jan 05 - 12:07 AM
Amos 09 Jan 05 - 12:11 AM
Amos 09 Jan 05 - 11:06 AM
Amos 09 Jan 05 - 06:26 PM
Bobert 09 Jan 05 - 06:47 PM
GUEST 10 Jan 05 - 09:49 AM
GUEST,Amos 10 Jan 05 - 10:06 AM
GUEST,Isaac Peon de Tallywhacker 10 Jan 05 - 10:16 AM
DougR 10 Jan 05 - 01:03 PM
Bobert 10 Jan 05 - 07:24 PM
Amos 10 Jan 05 - 08:01 PM
Amos 10 Jan 05 - 08:08 PM
Amos 10 Jan 05 - 08:16 PM
Amos 10 Jan 05 - 09:01 PM
Rustic Rebel 11 Jan 05 - 02:33 AM
Amos 11 Jan 05 - 04:52 AM
Amos 11 Jan 05 - 09:02 AM
Amos 11 Jan 05 - 09:35 AM
Amos 11 Jan 05 - 09:40 AM
Amos 11 Jan 05 - 09:44 AM
Amos 11 Jan 05 - 09:49 AM
Amos 11 Jan 05 - 10:50 AM
Amos 11 Jan 05 - 04:41 PM
Amos 11 Jan 05 - 08:39 PM
Bobert 11 Jan 05 - 08:54 PM
Little Hawk 11 Jan 05 - 09:05 PM
DougR 11 Jan 05 - 11:14 PM
Bobert 11 Jan 05 - 11:21 PM
GUEST,Amos 12 Jan 05 - 09:05 AM
GUEST 12 Jan 05 - 09:16 AM
Little Hawk 12 Jan 05 - 03:30 PM
Amos 12 Jan 05 - 08:54 PM
Amos 12 Jan 05 - 08:58 PM
Amos 12 Jan 05 - 09:08 PM
Bobert 12 Jan 05 - 09:11 PM
Amos 13 Jan 05 - 07:07 PM
Amos 13 Jan 05 - 08:15 PM
Amos 13 Jan 05 - 10:44 PM
Bobert 13 Jan 05 - 10:58 PM
GUEST,Amos 14 Jan 05 - 09:39 AM
GUEST,Amos 14 Jan 05 - 09:44 AM
Amos 14 Jan 05 - 03:36 PM
Amos 14 Jan 05 - 04:12 PM
GUEST,Amos 14 Jan 05 - 06:39 PM
GUEST,Amos 14 Jan 05 - 06:55 PM
GUEST 14 Jan 05 - 07:01 PM
GUEST,AJ 15 Jan 05 - 09:42 AM
GUEST,Amos 15 Jan 05 - 09:48 AM
GUEST,Amos 15 Jan 05 - 10:25 AM
Amos 16 Jan 05 - 01:51 PM
Amos 16 Jan 05 - 03:19 PM
GUEST,Frank 16 Jan 05 - 06:55 PM
Amos 16 Jan 05 - 08:10 PM
Amos 16 Jan 05 - 09:42 PM
Amos 17 Jan 05 - 03:39 AM
Amos 17 Jan 05 - 07:51 PM
Amos 17 Jan 05 - 11:50 PM
Amos 17 Jan 05 - 11:53 PM
GUEST,Clint Keller 18 Jan 05 - 12:56 AM
Amos 18 Jan 05 - 11:51 AM
Amos 18 Jan 05 - 12:09 PM
Amos 18 Jan 05 - 12:12 PM
Amos 18 Jan 05 - 12:25 PM
Amos 18 Jan 05 - 06:19 PM
Amos 19 Jan 05 - 12:02 AM
Amos 19 Jan 05 - 05:44 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 19 Jan 05 - 05:50 AM
Amos 19 Jan 05 - 06:16 AM
Amos 19 Jan 05 - 10:00 AM
Amos 19 Jan 05 - 06:45 PM
Don Firth 19 Jan 05 - 07:34 PM
Little Hawk 19 Jan 05 - 08:04 PM
Amos 19 Jan 05 - 10:28 PM
Bobert 19 Jan 05 - 10:35 PM
Amos 19 Jan 05 - 11:17 PM
Amos 19 Jan 05 - 11:19 PM
Amos 19 Jan 05 - 11:28 PM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 03:09 AM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 03:14 AM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 03:40 AM
Ellenpoly 20 Jan 05 - 04:08 AM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 10:05 AM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 10:09 AM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 10:19 AM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 02:08 PM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 06:01 PM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 06:09 PM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 06:18 PM
GUEST,Com Seangan 20 Jan 05 - 07:44 PM
GUEST,Com SEangan 20 Jan 05 - 07:49 PM
Bobert 20 Jan 05 - 08:10 PM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 09:02 PM
CarolC 20 Jan 05 - 09:26 PM
Amos 20 Jan 05 - 09:41 PM
DougR 20 Jan 05 - 10:30 PM
Amos 21 Jan 05 - 01:00 AM
Amos 21 Jan 05 - 01:21 AM
Ellenpoly 21 Jan 05 - 03:34 AM
Amos 21 Jan 05 - 08:32 AM
Amos 21 Jan 05 - 11:36 AM
Amos 21 Jan 05 - 12:15 PM
Amos 21 Jan 05 - 12:46 PM
Amos 21 Jan 05 - 04:48 PM
Amos 21 Jan 05 - 04:54 PM
Amos 21 Jan 05 - 05:09 PM
Amos 21 Jan 05 - 05:19 PM
Amos 22 Jan 05 - 09:59 AM
Amos 22 Jan 05 - 10:20 AM
Amos 22 Jan 05 - 10:36 AM
Amos 22 Jan 05 - 11:00 AM
Amos 23 Jan 05 - 03:31 PM
Amos 23 Jan 05 - 03:34 PM
Amos 23 Jan 05 - 03:39 PM
Amos 23 Jan 05 - 03:53 PM
Don Firth 23 Jan 05 - 04:06 PM
Amos 23 Jan 05 - 05:11 PM
Amos 23 Jan 05 - 06:35 PM
Amos 23 Jan 05 - 06:38 PM
Amos 24 Jan 05 - 10:14 AM
Amos 24 Jan 05 - 10:37 AM
Amos 24 Jan 05 - 10:49 AM
Amos 24 Jan 05 - 01:06 PM
Amos 24 Jan 05 - 01:14 PM
Amos 25 Jan 05 - 01:08 AM
GUEST,Vivaldi 26 Jan 05 - 07:52 AM
GUEST,Haydn 26 Jan 05 - 08:19 AM
GUEST,Amos 26 Jan 05 - 08:44 AM
Amos 26 Jan 05 - 11:01 AM
DougR 26 Jan 05 - 12:45 PM
Amos 26 Jan 05 - 01:10 PM
Bobert 26 Jan 05 - 06:30 PM
GUEST 26 Jan 05 - 06:44 PM
GUEST,Clint Keller 26 Jan 05 - 06:47 PM
Little Hawk 26 Jan 05 - 07:12 PM
Bobert 26 Jan 05 - 07:42 PM
Little Hawk 26 Jan 05 - 07:55 PM
Bobert 26 Jan 05 - 08:08 PM
Little Hawk 26 Jan 05 - 08:11 PM
Amos 26 Jan 05 - 10:16 PM
Once Famous 26 Jan 05 - 10:53 PM
Amos 26 Jan 05 - 11:00 PM
Bobert 26 Jan 05 - 11:01 PM
Amos 26 Jan 05 - 11:02 PM
Amos 26 Jan 05 - 11:06 PM
Bobert 26 Jan 05 - 11:15 PM
Amos 26 Jan 05 - 11:16 PM
GUEST,Amos at Dawn 27 Jan 05 - 08:39 AM
GUEST,Amos 27 Jan 05 - 09:21 AM
GUEST,Amos 27 Jan 05 - 11:36 AM
GUEST 27 Jan 05 - 11:40 AM
GUEST,Amos 27 Jan 05 - 11:51 AM
GUEST,Amos 27 Jan 05 - 12:06 PM
GUEST 27 Jan 05 - 12:07 PM
Amos 27 Jan 05 - 02:30 PM
Amos 27 Jan 05 - 02:35 PM
Bobert 27 Jan 05 - 05:50 PM
Bobert 27 Jan 05 - 07:39 PM
Amos 27 Jan 05 - 09:50 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 05:05 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 05:08 PM
Bobert 28 Jan 05 - 07:32 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 10:43 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 10:43 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 10:44 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 10:46 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 10:52 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 10:53 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 10:54 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 10:56 PM
Bobert 28 Jan 05 - 10:57 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 10:58 PM
Bobert 28 Jan 05 - 10:58 PM
Bobert 28 Jan 05 - 11:00 PM
Amos 28 Jan 05 - 11:01 PM
Bobert 28 Jan 05 - 11:20 PM
DougR 29 Jan 05 - 01:31 AM
Bobert 29 Jan 05 - 08:57 AM
Amos 29 Jan 05 - 10:20 AM
Little Hawk 29 Jan 05 - 11:27 AM
Amos 29 Jan 05 - 11:37 AM
Bobert 29 Jan 05 - 11:38 AM
Amos 03 Feb 05 - 01:49 PM
Amos 04 Feb 05 - 07:49 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 05 Feb 05 - 04:03 PM
Amos 06 Feb 05 - 10:33 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 06 Feb 05 - 01:00 PM
Don Firth 06 Feb 05 - 01:46 PM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 07 Feb 05 - 12:26 PM
Amos 07 Feb 05 - 02:56 PM
Amos 07 Feb 05 - 06:03 PM
Amos 08 Feb 05 - 12:32 PM
GUEST,Amos 09 Feb 05 - 02:43 PM
GUEST 09 Feb 05 - 02:49 PM
GUEST,Amos 09 Feb 05 - 03:05 PM
DougR 09 Feb 05 - 09:41 PM
Bobert 09 Feb 05 - 09:55 PM
Amos 09 Feb 05 - 10:54 PM
Amos 10 Feb 05 - 12:51 PM
Amos 10 Feb 05 - 11:32 PM
Amos 10 Feb 05 - 11:36 PM
Amos 11 Feb 05 - 12:05 AM
Teresa 11 Feb 05 - 02:05 AM
Amos 12 Feb 05 - 07:07 PM
GUEST 13 Feb 05 - 10:37 AM
Amos 14 Feb 05 - 10:05 AM
Amos 14 Feb 05 - 10:28 AM
GUEST,donuel 14 Feb 05 - 10:36 AM
Amos 14 Feb 05 - 11:18 AM
Amos 14 Feb 05 - 10:37 PM
Amos 15 Feb 05 - 10:03 AM
GUEST 16 Feb 05 - 12:19 PM
GUEST 16 Feb 05 - 12:27 PM
Amos 16 Feb 05 - 11:28 PM
GUEST 17 Feb 05 - 12:45 PM
GUEST,Amos 17 Feb 05 - 12:51 PM
GUEST,Amos 17 Feb 05 - 01:55 PM
DougR 18 Feb 05 - 01:41 PM
Amos 19 Feb 05 - 01:12 PM
Amos 19 Feb 05 - 01:16 PM
GUEST 20 Feb 05 - 01:41 PM
GUEST,Amos 20 Feb 05 - 03:17 PM
Amos 21 Feb 05 - 09:15 AM
Amos 22 Feb 05 - 09:41 AM
Amos 22 Feb 05 - 09:43 AM
Amos 22 Feb 05 - 09:47 AM
Amos 22 Feb 05 - 09:53 AM
Amos 22 Feb 05 - 10:53 AM
Bobert 22 Feb 05 - 05:02 PM
Amos 22 Feb 05 - 08:52 PM
Amos 22 Feb 05 - 08:59 PM
Amos 25 Feb 05 - 12:06 PM
Amos 25 Feb 05 - 04:10 PM
Amos 25 Feb 05 - 05:40 PM
Amos 26 Feb 05 - 01:05 PM
freda underhill 27 Feb 05 - 07:01 AM
GUEST,Amos 27 Feb 05 - 12:07 PM
Amos 28 Feb 05 - 07:08 PM
DougR 28 Feb 05 - 07:48 PM
Amos 28 Feb 05 - 07:56 PM
Bobert 28 Feb 05 - 08:03 PM
Amos 01 Mar 05 - 06:57 AM
Amos 01 Mar 05 - 10:28 AM
Amos 01 Mar 05 - 01:11 PM
DougR 03 Mar 05 - 12:39 AM
Amos 03 Mar 05 - 08:21 AM
Amos 03 Mar 05 - 03:28 PM
Amos 03 Mar 05 - 03:31 PM
Amos 03 Mar 05 - 03:40 PM
Amos 04 Mar 05 - 12:30 PM
GUEST,TIA 04 Mar 05 - 05:09 PM
Amos 04 Mar 05 - 05:47 PM
Amos 05 Mar 05 - 08:36 AM
Amos 05 Mar 05 - 03:02 PM
Donuel 05 Mar 05 - 03:29 PM
Amos 07 Mar 05 - 09:55 AM
GUEST,TIA 07 Mar 05 - 10:11 PM
GUEST,Amos 08 Mar 05 - 08:15 AM
GUEST,Amos 08 Mar 05 - 08:20 AM
Amos 09 Mar 05 - 10:16 AM
Bobert 09 Mar 05 - 08:19 PM
DougR 19 Mar 05 - 01:29 AM
Amos 20 Mar 05 - 08:20 PM
Bobert 20 Mar 05 - 08:34 PM
Amos 23 Mar 05 - 12:50 PM
Amos 25 Mar 05 - 08:32 PM
Bobert 25 Mar 05 - 08:48 PM
GUEST,Amos 26 Mar 05 - 04:03 PM
Amos 27 Mar 05 - 09:16 AM
Bobert 27 Mar 05 - 09:34 AM
Leadfingers 27 Mar 05 - 09:54 AM
Leadfingers 27 Mar 05 - 09:56 AM
GUEST 28 Mar 05 - 11:23 AM
Amos 31 Mar 05 - 01:56 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 02 Apr 05 - 09:57 PM
Amos 02 Apr 05 - 10:06 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 05 Apr 05 - 10:27 AM
DougR 05 Apr 05 - 02:41 PM
Amos 08 Apr 05 - 09:40 PM
Amos 08 Apr 05 - 09:57 PM
Amos 08 Apr 05 - 10:09 PM
Bobert 08 Apr 05 - 10:18 PM
Amos 08 Apr 05 - 11:11 PM
Amos 08 Apr 05 - 11:21 PM
Amos 08 Apr 05 - 11:27 PM
Amos 09 Apr 05 - 12:17 AM
Amos 09 Apr 05 - 02:39 AM
Amos 09 Apr 05 - 06:05 PM
Amos 10 Apr 05 - 12:56 AM
Amos 12 Apr 05 - 09:11 AM
Amos 14 Apr 05 - 12:53 PM
Amos 15 Apr 05 - 07:14 PM
Amos 15 Apr 05 - 07:16 PM
Amos 17 Apr 05 - 10:19 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 18 Apr 05 - 07:33 AM
Bobert 18 Apr 05 - 07:59 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 18 Apr 05 - 08:00 AM
Amos 18 Apr 05 - 08:07 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 18 Apr 05 - 08:25 AM
Amos 18 Apr 05 - 08:45 AM
Amos 18 Apr 05 - 01:59 PM
Amos 18 Apr 05 - 03:03 PM
Amos 18 Apr 05 - 03:37 PM
Amos 21 Apr 05 - 08:34 PM
Bobert 21 Apr 05 - 09:54 PM
Amos 22 Apr 05 - 10:43 AM
Amos 25 Apr 05 - 06:39 PM
Amos 25 Apr 05 - 11:29 PM
Amos 25 Apr 05 - 11:35 PM
Amos 26 Apr 05 - 11:00 PM
Amos 26 Apr 05 - 11:04 PM
GUEST,Amos 28 Apr 05 - 01:15 AM
Bobert 28 Apr 05 - 11:15 PM
Amos 29 Apr 05 - 10:51 AM
Amos 29 Apr 05 - 11:57 AM
Ebbie 29 Apr 05 - 01:45 PM
Amos 29 Apr 05 - 02:45 PM
Bobert 29 Apr 05 - 06:50 PM
Amos 01 May 05 - 08:48 AM
Amos 01 May 05 - 03:28 PM
Bobert 01 May 05 - 08:11 PM
GUEST 03 May 05 - 02:14 PM
Bobert 03 May 05 - 07:01 PM
GUEST 03 May 05 - 11:35 PM
Bobert 04 May 05 - 10:33 PM
Peace 04 May 05 - 11:12 PM
Amos 05 May 05 - 12:28 AM
Amos 07 May 05 - 10:00 AM
Bobert 07 May 05 - 08:47 PM
Amos 07 May 05 - 09:00 PM
Amos 10 May 05 - 08:58 AM
Amos 10 May 05 - 08:23 PM
Amos 11 May 05 - 08:19 PM
Amos 11 May 05 - 08:59 PM
Amos 16 May 05 - 01:47 AM
GUEST,Amos 16 May 05 - 11:07 PM
Bobert 18 May 05 - 09:14 PM
GUEST,freda 22 May 05 - 09:46 AM
Amos 22 May 05 - 05:43 PM
Amos 23 May 05 - 01:03 AM
Amos 23 May 05 - 01:05 AM
Amos 23 May 05 - 01:09 AM
Amos 23 May 05 - 11:35 AM
Amos 24 May 05 - 09:09 PM
GUEST,Amos 25 May 05 - 09:11 PM
Bobert 26 May 05 - 09:08 PM
Amos 27 May 05 - 12:20 AM
DougR 27 May 05 - 02:41 PM
Amos 28 May 05 - 12:12 AM
DougR 28 May 05 - 01:30 PM
Amos 28 May 05 - 03:40 PM
Bobert 28 May 05 - 11:06 PM
Amos 29 May 05 - 10:33 AM
Amos 30 May 05 - 12:30 AM
freda underhill 30 May 05 - 06:12 AM
Amos 30 May 05 - 11:46 AM
Amos 30 May 05 - 11:48 AM
Amos 30 May 05 - 05:21 PM
dianavan 30 May 05 - 11:47 PM
Amos 03 Jun 05 - 02:05 AM
Amos 15 Jun 05 - 09:56 PM
Amos 16 Jun 05 - 10:50 PM
Amos 16 Jun 05 - 10:57 PM
Amos 16 Jun 05 - 11:03 PM
Amos 16 Jun 05 - 11:33 PM
Amos 17 Jun 05 - 06:54 PM
Amos 17 Jun 05 - 07:44 PM
Amos 20 Jun 05 - 09:26 AM
Amos 20 Jun 05 - 09:42 AM
freda underhill 21 Jun 05 - 07:45 AM
Amos 21 Jun 05 - 08:58 AM
GUEST 24 Jun 05 - 11:54 AM
Amos 24 Jun 05 - 11:38 PM
Amos 25 Jun 05 - 01:05 AM
Amos 25 Jun 05 - 11:31 AM
Amos 26 Jun 05 - 12:38 AM
Amos 26 Jun 05 - 12:40 AM
GUEST,Amos 30 Jun 05 - 01:25 PM
GUEST 30 Jun 05 - 04:21 PM
GUEST,Amos 01 Jul 05 - 12:51 AM
Amos 03 Jul 05 - 12:49 AM
Ebbie 03 Jul 05 - 12:37 PM
Amos 03 Jul 05 - 01:20 PM
Ebbie 03 Jul 05 - 03:30 PM
Amos 03 Jul 05 - 05:04 PM
DougR 03 Jul 05 - 05:44 PM
Ebbie 03 Jul 05 - 05:49 PM
Amos 03 Jul 05 - 05:52 PM
Amos 03 Jul 05 - 06:00 PM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 05 - 06:01 PM
Ebbie 03 Jul 05 - 07:43 PM
beardedbruce 04 Jul 05 - 02:56 PM
GUEST, Ebbie 04 Jul 05 - 02:59 PM
Amos 06 Jul 05 - 08:27 PM
Amos 06 Jul 05 - 08:38 PM
Amos 07 Jul 05 - 11:57 PM
Amos 08 Jul 05 - 02:27 AM
Amos 10 Jul 05 - 05:48 PM
Amos 11 Jul 05 - 09:37 AM
dianavan 11 Jul 05 - 02:23 PM
Amos 14 Jul 05 - 11:38 PM
Amos 17 Jul 05 - 10:08 AM
Amos 17 Jul 05 - 10:12 AM
Amos 22 Jul 05 - 06:57 PM
DougR 22 Jul 05 - 07:55 PM
Amos 25 Jul 05 - 08:37 PM
Amos 29 Jul 05 - 12:09 AM
Amos 29 Jul 05 - 12:10 AM
Amos 02 Aug 05 - 12:48 AM
DougR 02 Aug 05 - 03:11 PM
Amos 02 Aug 05 - 03:20 PM
GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River 02 Aug 05 - 06:43 PM
Amos 02 Aug 05 - 06:59 PM
GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River 02 Aug 05 - 07:03 PM
Amos 02 Aug 05 - 10:59 PM
Amos 02 Aug 05 - 11:03 PM
Amos 03 Aug 05 - 12:31 AM
Amos 05 Aug 05 - 08:16 PM
Amos 06 Aug 05 - 06:01 PM
Amos 08 Aug 05 - 05:02 PM
Amos 11 Aug 05 - 01:36 PM
Amos 12 Aug 05 - 10:51 PM
Amos 15 Aug 05 - 10:25 AM
Bobert 15 Aug 05 - 10:06 PM
Amos 15 Aug 05 - 10:43 PM
Amos 17 Aug 05 - 05:34 PM
Amos 19 Aug 05 - 01:01 PM
Amos 23 Aug 05 - 11:42 PM
Little Hawk 24 Aug 05 - 12:16 AM
Bill D 24 Aug 05 - 09:18 PM
Amos 25 Aug 05 - 05:33 PM
Paul Burke 26 Aug 05 - 06:05 AM
beardedbruce 26 Aug 05 - 09:03 PM
Amos 26 Aug 05 - 09:13 PM
Amos 26 Aug 05 - 09:17 PM
Amos 26 Aug 05 - 09:36 PM
freda underhill 28 Aug 05 - 05:36 AM
freda underhill 28 Aug 05 - 06:34 AM
Amos 29 Aug 05 - 04:34 PM
Amos 29 Aug 05 - 04:37 PM
Amos 29 Aug 05 - 04:50 PM
Amos 04 Sep 05 - 10:55 AM
Amos 06 Sep 05 - 10:22 PM
Amos 08 Sep 05 - 09:23 AM
Amos 08 Sep 05 - 10:28 PM
*Laura* 09 Sep 05 - 07:04 AM
Amos 12 Sep 05 - 10:01 AM
Amos 12 Sep 05 - 08:44 PM
GUEST,G 12 Sep 05 - 09:35 PM
Amos 13 Sep 05 - 04:39 PM
Amos 13 Sep 05 - 06:30 PM
Amos 13 Sep 05 - 07:56 PM
Bobert 13 Sep 05 - 09:07 PM
Amos 15 Sep 05 - 10:57 PM
Amos 16 Sep 05 - 10:49 AM
Donuel 16 Sep 05 - 11:01 AM
Paco Rabanne 16 Sep 05 - 11:10 AM
Donuel 17 Sep 05 - 10:30 AM
Amos 18 Sep 05 - 09:34 AM
Amos 26 Sep 05 - 06:46 PM
Amos 26 Sep 05 - 11:02 PM
Amos 27 Sep 05 - 09:53 AM
Teribus 27 Sep 05 - 10:02 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 30 Sep 05 - 10:23 PM
Amos 30 Sep 05 - 10:42 PM
Bobert 30 Sep 05 - 10:44 PM
Amos 30 Sep 05 - 10:55 PM
Amos 01 Oct 05 - 10:32 PM
Amos 03 Oct 05 - 10:24 PM
JennyO 04 Oct 05 - 01:31 AM
Amos 06 Oct 05 - 01:47 PM
Amos 07 Oct 05 - 07:54 AM
Amos 07 Oct 05 - 08:56 AM
GUEST,Molotov 07 Oct 05 - 12:48 PM
Amos 07 Oct 05 - 04:22 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 09 Oct 05 - 12:01 AM
Amos 09 Oct 05 - 12:12 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 09 Oct 05 - 10:57 AM
Amos 09 Oct 05 - 11:31 PM
Paco Rabanne 10 Oct 05 - 11:11 AM
Paco Rabanne 10 Oct 05 - 11:12 AM
Amos 10 Oct 05 - 03:03 PM
Amos 12 Oct 05 - 06:33 PM
GUEST 17 Oct 05 - 10:07 PM
Bobert 17 Oct 05 - 10:29 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 17 Oct 05 - 11:00 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 18 Oct 05 - 12:48 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 19 Oct 05 - 03:26 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 19 Oct 05 - 11:17 PM
Amos 20 Oct 05 - 02:02 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 21 Oct 05 - 03:14 PM
Bobert 21 Oct 05 - 07:55 PM
Amos 21 Oct 05 - 08:40 PM
Bobert 21 Oct 05 - 10:07 PM
Bobert 22 Oct 05 - 08:24 PM
Stilly River Sage 22 Oct 05 - 11:36 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 23 Oct 05 - 01:36 AM
GUEST,Xenu 23 Oct 05 - 08:52 AM
Amos 23 Oct 05 - 10:05 AM
Stilly River Sage 23 Oct 05 - 10:41 AM
Amos 23 Oct 05 - 11:38 AM
Amos 23 Oct 05 - 11:52 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 23 Oct 05 - 12:28 PM
Amos 23 Oct 05 - 01:27 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 23 Oct 05 - 03:09 PM
Amos 23 Oct 05 - 06:29 PM
Bobert 23 Oct 05 - 09:03 PM
Bobert 24 Oct 05 - 07:50 PM
GUEST,TIA 24 Oct 05 - 08:13 PM
Don Firth 24 Oct 05 - 08:57 PM
GUEST,a 25 Oct 05 - 09:28 AM
Amos 25 Oct 05 - 09:51 AM
Donuel 25 Oct 05 - 10:47 AM
GUEST,a 25 Oct 05 - 10:47 AM
Amos 25 Oct 05 - 11:12 AM
Amos 25 Oct 05 - 01:11 PM
Amos 25 Oct 05 - 03:34 PM
Amos 25 Oct 05 - 08:18 PM
Amos 25 Oct 05 - 08:22 PM
Amos 25 Oct 05 - 08:32 PM
Bobert 25 Oct 05 - 08:45 PM
GUEST,A 26 Oct 05 - 01:18 PM
Bobert 26 Oct 05 - 07:49 PM
GUEST,A 27 Oct 05 - 08:49 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 27 Oct 05 - 09:10 AM
Amos 27 Oct 05 - 02:17 PM
Amos 27 Oct 05 - 05:26 PM
Bobert 27 Oct 05 - 09:40 PM
Amos 27 Oct 05 - 09:57 PM
Bobert 27 Oct 05 - 10:42 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 28 Oct 05 - 12:52 AM
Amos 28 Oct 05 - 11:10 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 28 Oct 05 - 01:22 PM
Don Firth 28 Oct 05 - 01:30 PM
Amos 28 Oct 05 - 01:44 PM
Don Firth 28 Oct 05 - 02:15 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 28 Oct 05 - 02:32 PM
Don Firth 28 Oct 05 - 02:38 PM
GUEST,A 28 Oct 05 - 03:16 PM
Amos 28 Oct 05 - 04:23 PM
Donuel 28 Oct 05 - 04:38 PM
Bobert 28 Oct 05 - 05:39 PM
Bobert 28 Oct 05 - 07:50 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 28 Oct 05 - 09:21 PM
Bobert 28 Oct 05 - 09:36 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 28 Oct 05 - 10:13 PM
Bobert 28 Oct 05 - 10:28 PM
Don Firth 28 Oct 05 - 11:05 PM
Amos 29 Oct 05 - 03:58 AM
GUEST,A 29 Oct 05 - 04:51 AM
Bobert 29 Oct 05 - 08:43 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 29 Oct 05 - 08:47 AM
Amos 29 Oct 05 - 12:41 PM
freda underhill 29 Oct 05 - 01:06 PM
GUEST 29 Oct 05 - 06:40 PM
Bobert 29 Oct 05 - 09:10 PM
Bobert 29 Oct 05 - 09:57 PM
Bobert 29 Oct 05 - 10:02 PM
Amos 29 Oct 05 - 10:18 PM
Amos 30 Oct 05 - 12:06 PM
Amos 30 Oct 05 - 12:23 PM
Amos 30 Oct 05 - 12:30 PM
Amos 30 Oct 05 - 12:47 PM
Don Firth 30 Oct 05 - 01:18 PM
Amos 30 Oct 05 - 02:07 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 30 Oct 05 - 04:33 PM
Bobert 30 Oct 05 - 06:23 PM
Don Firth 30 Oct 05 - 07:43 PM
Amos 30 Oct 05 - 08:38 PM
Bobert 30 Oct 05 - 08:49 PM
Amos 30 Oct 05 - 10:58 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 30 Oct 05 - 11:24 PM
GUEST 31 Oct 05 - 06:54 AM
Bobert 31 Oct 05 - 07:19 AM
Amos 31 Oct 05 - 12:26 PM
Amos 31 Oct 05 - 01:51 PM
Amos 31 Oct 05 - 02:52 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 31 Oct 05 - 03:16 PM
Amos 31 Oct 05 - 05:39 PM
Don Firth 31 Oct 05 - 05:55 PM
Bobert 31 Oct 05 - 06:45 PM
Bobert 31 Oct 05 - 07:47 PM
Bobert 31 Oct 05 - 07:51 PM
Bobert 31 Oct 05 - 07:56 PM
Don Firth 31 Oct 05 - 08:20 PM
Amos 31 Oct 05 - 08:29 PM
Amos 31 Oct 05 - 08:31 PM
Bobert 31 Oct 05 - 09:25 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 31 Oct 05 - 10:24 PM
Amos 31 Oct 05 - 11:24 PM
Bobert 01 Nov 05 - 07:38 AM
Amos 01 Nov 05 - 03:12 PM
Amos 01 Nov 05 - 05:22 PM
GUEST 01 Nov 05 - 06:08 PM
Bobert 01 Nov 05 - 08:22 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 02 Nov 05 - 11:58 AM
Don Firth 02 Nov 05 - 12:20 PM
Amos 02 Nov 05 - 12:24 PM
Amos 02 Nov 05 - 02:49 PM
Amos 02 Nov 05 - 03:13 PM
Bobert 02 Nov 05 - 07:11 PM
Amos 02 Nov 05 - 08:47 PM
Bobert 02 Nov 05 - 09:53 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 03 Nov 05 - 08:28 AM
Bobert 03 Nov 05 - 09:29 AM
Amos 03 Nov 05 - 09:03 PM
Amos 03 Nov 05 - 09:26 PM
GUEST,Arne Langsetmo 03 Nov 05 - 09:33 PM
Amos 03 Nov 05 - 09:37 PM
Bobert 03 Nov 05 - 09:58 PM
Amos 03 Nov 05 - 10:47 PM
Amos 03 Nov 05 - 10:48 PM
Amos 03 Nov 05 - 11:22 PM
GUEST,Arne Langsetmo 04 Nov 05 - 12:49 AM
Amos 04 Nov 05 - 03:18 AM
Bobert 04 Nov 05 - 08:15 AM
Amos 04 Nov 05 - 08:34 AM
GUEST,A 04 Nov 05 - 08:38 AM
Stilly River Sage 04 Nov 05 - 10:02 AM
GUEST,A 04 Nov 05 - 10:33 AM
GUEST,Amos 04 Nov 05 - 10:36 AM
Don Firth 04 Nov 05 - 03:36 PM
Amos 04 Nov 05 - 03:50 PM
GUEST,Arne Langsermo 04 Nov 05 - 04:46 PM
Bobert 04 Nov 05 - 07:53 PM
Amos 04 Nov 05 - 07:59 PM
GUEST,A 04 Nov 05 - 08:23 PM
Bobert 04 Nov 05 - 08:47 PM
Don Firth 04 Nov 05 - 10:19 PM
Bobert 04 Nov 05 - 10:33 PM
freda underhill 05 Nov 05 - 07:18 AM
GUEST 05 Nov 05 - 07:40 AM
freda underhill 05 Nov 05 - 07:43 AM
Amos 05 Nov 05 - 01:00 PM
GUEST,Arne Langsetmo 05 Nov 05 - 06:08 PM
Bobert 05 Nov 05 - 08:00 PM
GUEST 06 Nov 05 - 11:38 PM
GUEST 07 Nov 05 - 12:01 AM
GUEST 07 Nov 05 - 12:24 AM
GUEST,Arne Langsetmo 07 Nov 05 - 05:10 PM
GUEST 07 Nov 05 - 06:21 PM
Don Firth 07 Nov 05 - 07:23 PM
GUEST 07 Nov 05 - 07:34 PM
Bobert 07 Nov 05 - 07:51 PM
GUEST 07 Nov 05 - 08:03 PM
GUEST 07 Nov 05 - 08:11 PM
GUEST 07 Nov 05 - 08:12 PM
Amos 07 Nov 05 - 08:26 PM
Bobert 07 Nov 05 - 08:37 PM
GUEST 07 Nov 05 - 08:44 PM
GUEST,A 07 Nov 05 - 09:55 PM
Bobert 07 Nov 05 - 10:07 PM
Amos 07 Nov 05 - 10:33 PM
Amos 08 Nov 05 - 12:05 AM
Amos 08 Nov 05 - 12:07 AM
Paco Rabanne 08 Nov 05 - 04:05 AM
GUEST 08 Nov 05 - 06:56 AM
Bobert 08 Nov 05 - 08:20 AM
Amos 08 Nov 05 - 08:33 AM
GUEST 08 Nov 05 - 03:12 PM
Don Firth 08 Nov 05 - 03:32 PM
GUEST,Dr. Evil 08 Nov 05 - 03:58 PM
Amos 08 Nov 05 - 04:22 PM
Amos 08 Nov 05 - 05:11 PM
Bobert 08 Nov 05 - 08:59 PM
Amos 09 Nov 05 - 03:14 PM
Amos 09 Nov 05 - 06:43 PM
GUEST,David Cresswell 09 Nov 05 - 07:25 PM
Bobert 09 Nov 05 - 07:25 PM
Amos 09 Nov 05 - 08:19 PM
Bobert 09 Nov 05 - 08:33 PM
GUEST,A 09 Nov 05 - 10:02 PM
Bobert 09 Nov 05 - 10:24 PM
GUEST 09 Nov 05 - 10:24 PM
GUEST 09 Nov 05 - 10:33 PM
GUEST 09 Nov 05 - 10:52 PM
Amos 09 Nov 05 - 11:20 PM
GUEST 10 Nov 05 - 07:50 AM
Amos 10 Nov 05 - 09:51 AM
GUEST 10 Nov 05 - 10:04 AM
Amos 10 Nov 05 - 10:07 AM
GUEST,Arne Langsetmo 10 Nov 05 - 06:04 PM
Bobert 10 Nov 05 - 06:29 PM
Amos 10 Nov 05 - 06:32 PM
GUEST,A 10 Nov 05 - 08:34 PM
Bobert 10 Nov 05 - 09:36 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 10 Nov 05 - 10:07 PM
Amos 10 Nov 05 - 10:47 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 11 Nov 05 - 08:40 AM
Amos 11 Nov 05 - 09:37 AM
GUEST,Arne Langsetmo 11 Nov 05 - 02:12 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 11 Nov 05 - 05:20 PM
GUEST,Arne Langsetmo 11 Nov 05 - 07:22 PM
Bobert 11 Nov 05 - 07:30 PM
Amos 11 Nov 05 - 07:52 PM
Amos 11 Nov 05 - 08:04 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 11 Nov 05 - 10:00 PM
Bobert 11 Nov 05 - 10:16 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 11 Nov 05 - 10:48 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 11 Nov 05 - 11:48 PM
Bobert 12 Nov 05 - 12:11 AM
Amos 12 Nov 05 - 10:13 AM
GUEST,Arne Langsetmo 12 Nov 05 - 11:04 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 13 Nov 05 - 01:58 AM
Amos 13 Nov 05 - 10:14 AM
Bobert 13 Nov 05 - 10:19 AM
Amos 14 Nov 05 - 08:12 AM
Don Firth 14 Nov 05 - 01:43 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 15 Nov 05 - 07:19 AM
Amos 15 Nov 05 - 10:09 AM
Amos 15 Nov 05 - 01:59 PM
Amos 15 Nov 05 - 03:54 PM
Amos 15 Nov 05 - 07:21 PM
Bobert 15 Nov 05 - 08:02 PM
Amos 15 Nov 05 - 11:40 PM
Amos 16 Nov 05 - 10:24 AM
Amos 16 Nov 05 - 12:35 PM
Amos 16 Nov 05 - 02:26 PM
Amos 16 Nov 05 - 08:42 PM
Bobert 16 Nov 05 - 10:32 PM
Amos 16 Nov 05 - 10:33 PM
Donuel 17 Nov 05 - 05:37 AM
Amos 17 Nov 05 - 08:32 AM
Amos 17 Nov 05 - 09:43 AM
Amos 18 Nov 05 - 09:52 AM
Amos 18 Nov 05 - 10:39 AM
Amos 18 Nov 05 - 11:14 AM
Amos 18 Nov 05 - 01:03 PM
Stilly River Sage 18 Nov 05 - 03:26 PM
Amos 18 Nov 05 - 05:09 PM
Bobert 18 Nov 05 - 08:03 PM
Amos 18 Nov 05 - 09:16 PM
Amos 18 Nov 05 - 10:33 PM
Amos 19 Nov 05 - 09:25 PM
Bobert 19 Nov 05 - 09:42 PM
Amos 20 Nov 05 - 08:50 AM
Amos 20 Nov 05 - 09:14 AM
Amos 20 Nov 05 - 09:34 AM
Amos 20 Nov 05 - 01:23 PM
Bobert 20 Nov 05 - 07:30 PM
Amos 21 Nov 05 - 09:19 AM
Amos 21 Nov 05 - 10:36 PM
Amos 23 Nov 05 - 10:57 PM
Bobert 23 Nov 05 - 11:18 PM
Amos 24 Nov 05 - 11:39 AM
Amos 24 Nov 05 - 01:27 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 24 Nov 05 - 09:37 PM
Amos 24 Nov 05 - 10:55 PM
Bobert 25 Nov 05 - 06:26 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 26 Nov 05 - 02:21 AM
freda underhill 26 Nov 05 - 04:41 AM
freda underhill 26 Nov 05 - 04:44 AM
Bobert 26 Nov 05 - 07:54 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 26 Nov 05 - 11:13 PM
Bobert 26 Nov 05 - 11:34 PM
Leadfingers 27 Nov 05 - 07:29 PM
Leadfingers 27 Nov 05 - 07:35 PM
Paco Rabanne 28 Nov 05 - 03:57 AM
Don Firth 28 Nov 05 - 07:26 PM
GUEST,Wanderer 28 Nov 05 - 11:40 PM
Stilly River Sage 29 Nov 05 - 03:03 PM
Don Firth 30 Nov 05 - 12:34 PM
Donuel 30 Nov 05 - 02:23 PM
Amos 02 Dec 05 - 01:19 PM
Amos 03 Dec 05 - 02:08 PM
Amos 04 Dec 05 - 09:28 AM
Amos 04 Dec 05 - 10:07 AM
Amos 04 Dec 05 - 09:22 PM
Amos 04 Dec 05 - 10:42 PM
Amos 05 Dec 05 - 01:09 PM
Amos 05 Dec 05 - 03:57 PM
Amos 12 Dec 05 - 11:50 PM
Amos 14 Dec 05 - 12:44 PM
Bobert 16 Dec 05 - 10:05 PM
freda underhill 17 Dec 05 - 06:47 AM
Amos 17 Dec 05 - 12:31 PM
Amos 20 Dec 05 - 01:34 PM
Bobert 20 Dec 05 - 08:32 PM
Amos 20 Dec 05 - 08:49 PM
Amos 21 Dec 05 - 11:26 AM
Amos 24 Dec 05 - 09:00 AM
Amos 24 Dec 05 - 09:12 AM
GUEST,A 24 Dec 05 - 09:14 AM
Amos 24 Dec 05 - 10:49 AM
Amos 27 Dec 05 - 07:47 PM
Amos 27 Dec 05 - 08:06 PM
Amos 28 Dec 05 - 11:40 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 28 Dec 05 - 11:51 PM
Peace 29 Dec 05 - 12:25 AM
Amos 29 Dec 05 - 08:34 PM
Amos 30 Dec 05 - 11:40 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 30 Dec 05 - 12:42 PM
Amos 30 Dec 05 - 01:26 PM
Amos 30 Dec 05 - 05:13 PM
Amos 30 Dec 05 - 08:22 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 30 Dec 05 - 08:42 PM
Bobert 30 Dec 05 - 08:59 PM
GUEST,Woody 30 Dec 05 - 09:07 PM
Bobert 30 Dec 05 - 09:24 PM
Amos 31 Dec 05 - 12:13 PM
Amos 01 Jan 06 - 12:13 AM
Amos 01 Jan 06 - 12:45 AM
Amos 01 Jan 06 - 12:56 AM
GUEST,Jack 01 Jan 06 - 02:09 AM
GUEST,Woody 01 Jan 06 - 11:03 PM
GUEST,Woody 01 Jan 06 - 11:33 PM
Amos 01 Jan 06 - 11:36 PM
GUEST,Woody 02 Jan 06 - 12:04 PM
Amos 02 Jan 06 - 03:08 PM
Amos 03 Jan 06 - 10:20 PM
Amos 04 Jan 06 - 01:48 PM
Bobert 04 Jan 06 - 08:36 PM
Amos 05 Jan 06 - 10:43 AM
Amos 07 Jan 06 - 10:22 AM
Amos 08 Jan 06 - 11:48 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 08 Jan 06 - 12:15 PM
Amos 08 Jan 06 - 02:31 PM
Bobert 08 Jan 06 - 09:46 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 09 Jan 06 - 01:34 AM
Amos 09 Jan 06 - 03:10 PM
Amos 09 Jan 06 - 10:33 PM
Amos 09 Jan 06 - 11:19 PM
Amos 09 Jan 06 - 11:38 PM
Amos 10 Jan 06 - 09:50 AM
GUEST,Woody 10 Jan 06 - 09:58 AM
Amos 10 Jan 06 - 10:37 AM
GUEST,Al 10 Jan 06 - 10:44 AM
Amos 10 Jan 06 - 11:29 AM
GUEST,Bligh 10 Jan 06 - 08:39 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 10 Jan 06 - 10:09 PM
Bobert 10 Jan 06 - 10:42 PM
Amos 10 Jan 06 - 11:18 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 11 Jan 06 - 12:19 AM
Amos 11 Jan 06 - 04:36 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 11 Jan 06 - 04:06 PM
Amos 11 Jan 06 - 05:00 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 11 Jan 06 - 05:57 PM
Amos 11 Jan 06 - 06:03 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 12 Jan 06 - 12:13 AM
Amos 12 Jan 06 - 07:58 AM
Amos 12 Jan 06 - 08:19 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 12 Jan 06 - 09:38 AM
Amos 12 Jan 06 - 10:28 AM
GUEST,G 12 Jan 06 - 11:02 AM
Amos 12 Jan 06 - 07:22 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 12 Jan 06 - 08:20 PM
Amos 12 Jan 06 - 08:41 PM
GUEST,old guy 12 Jan 06 - 10:16 PM
Bobert 12 Jan 06 - 11:10 PM
GUEST,Old Guy 13 Jan 06 - 01:26 AM
Amos 13 Jan 06 - 09:41 AM
Paco Rabanne 13 Jan 06 - 09:44 AM
GUEST,Old Guy 13 Jan 06 - 02:38 PM
Amos 13 Jan 06 - 04:36 PM
Amos 13 Jan 06 - 05:48 PM
Old Guy 13 Jan 06 - 08:07 PM
GUEST,Condi 13 Jan 06 - 11:28 PM
Amos 14 Jan 06 - 12:49 AM
GUEST,G 14 Jan 06 - 08:39 AM
Bobert 14 Jan 06 - 08:59 PM
GUEST 14 Jan 06 - 09:10 PM
Old Guy 14 Jan 06 - 09:30 PM
GUEST 14 Jan 06 - 09:40 PM
GUEST 14 Jan 06 - 10:15 PM
Amos 15 Jan 06 - 11:49 AM
Old Guy 15 Jan 06 - 01:48 PM
Peace 15 Jan 06 - 02:01 PM
Amos 15 Jan 06 - 02:12 PM
Amos 15 Jan 06 - 07:41 PM
Peace 15 Jan 06 - 07:49 PM
Old Guy 15 Jan 06 - 08:15 PM
Amos 15 Jan 06 - 10:23 PM
GUEST,AR282 15 Jan 06 - 10:32 PM
Amos 15 Jan 06 - 10:34 PM
GUEST,AR282 15 Jan 06 - 11:33 PM
Amos 16 Jan 06 - 12:21 AM
Amos 16 Jan 06 - 12:41 AM
Amos 16 Jan 06 - 10:30 AM
Amos 16 Jan 06 - 08:36 PM
Amos 16 Jan 06 - 08:42 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 09:01 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 09:08 PM
Bobert 16 Jan 06 - 09:11 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 09:16 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 09:30 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 09:36 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 09:40 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 09:55 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 10:00 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 10:05 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 10:14 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 10:27 PM
Bobert 16 Jan 06 - 10:40 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 10:47 PM
Bobert 16 Jan 06 - 10:49 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 10:52 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 11:12 PM
Amos 16 Jan 06 - 11:22 PM
Amos 16 Jan 06 - 11:28 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 11:31 PM
Amos 16 Jan 06 - 11:36 PM
GUEST 16 Jan 06 - 11:52 PM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 12:01 AM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 12:37 AM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 10:12 AM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 11:56 AM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 12:09 PM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 12:12 PM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 12:23 PM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 01:15 PM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 06:54 PM
Old Guy 17 Jan 06 - 10:29 PM
Bobert 17 Jan 06 - 10:46 PM
Old Guy 17 Jan 06 - 11:05 PM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 11:32 PM
Amos 17 Jan 06 - 11:39 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jan 06 - 07:46 AM
Amos 18 Jan 06 - 12:10 PM
Old Guy 18 Jan 06 - 02:35 PM
Amos 18 Jan 06 - 03:09 PM
Old Guy 18 Jan 06 - 03:21 PM
Amos 18 Jan 06 - 10:33 PM
Amos 18 Jan 06 - 10:36 PM
Amos 18 Jan 06 - 11:03 PM
Old Guy 18 Jan 06 - 11:21 PM
Amos 18 Jan 06 - 11:38 PM
Old Guy 19 Jan 06 - 12:37 AM
GUEST 19 Jan 06 - 06:46 AM
GUEST 19 Jan 06 - 07:14 AM
GUEST 19 Jan 06 - 07:22 AM
GUEST 19 Jan 06 - 09:24 AM
Amos 19 Jan 06 - 09:25 AM
GUEST 19 Jan 06 - 09:39 AM
GUEST 19 Jan 06 - 09:51 AM
GUEST 19 Jan 06 - 10:15 AM
GUEST 19 Jan 06 - 10:44 AM
Amos 19 Jan 06 - 11:29 AM
GUEST 19 Jan 06 - 12:13 PM
Amos 19 Jan 06 - 02:18 PM
Amos 19 Jan 06 - 05:56 PM
Amos 19 Jan 06 - 06:52 PM
Amos 19 Jan 06 - 07:20 PM
GUEST 19 Jan 06 - 09:31 PM
Old Guy 19 Jan 06 - 09:55 PM
Old Guy 19 Jan 06 - 10:42 PM
Amos 19 Jan 06 - 10:44 PM
Old Guy 19 Jan 06 - 11:07 PM
Amos 19 Jan 06 - 11:17 PM
Amos 19 Jan 06 - 11:26 PM
Deda 19 Jan 06 - 11:59 PM
Amos 20 Jan 06 - 02:27 PM
Old Guy 20 Jan 06 - 03:12 PM
Amos 20 Jan 06 - 03:21 PM
Amos 20 Jan 06 - 04:03 PM
Bobert 20 Jan 06 - 09:15 PM
Amos 21 Jan 06 - 12:44 AM
Old Guy 21 Jan 06 - 02:26 AM
Old Guy 21 Jan 06 - 02:34 AM
Old Guy 21 Jan 06 - 02:42 AM
.Woody 21 Jan 06 - 10:21 AM
Amos 21 Jan 06 - 10:58 AM
Arne 21 Jan 06 - 03:38 PM
Arne 21 Jan 06 - 09:41 PM
Bobert 21 Jan 06 - 10:16 PM
GUEST 22 Jan 06 - 12:42 AM
GUEST 22 Jan 06 - 12:57 AM
Arne 22 Jan 06 - 01:38 AM
Amos 22 Jan 06 - 01:56 AM
Bobert 22 Jan 06 - 09:35 AM
Amos 22 Jan 06 - 11:56 AM
GUEST 22 Jan 06 - 11:58 AM
Amos 22 Jan 06 - 08:20 PM
GUEST,Fwank 22 Jan 06 - 11:50 PM
Old Guy 23 Jan 06 - 01:20 AM
Old Guy 23 Jan 06 - 01:42 AM
Amos 23 Jan 06 - 08:15 AM
Bobert 23 Jan 06 - 09:06 AM
Amos 23 Jan 06 - 09:11 AM
Amos 23 Jan 06 - 09:59 AM
Amos 23 Jan 06 - 03:31 PM
Bobert 23 Jan 06 - 04:53 PM
Amos 23 Jan 06 - 08:48 PM
Amos 25 Jan 06 - 11:07 AM
Amos 25 Jan 06 - 08:19 PM
Amos 25 Jan 06 - 09:24 PM
Amos 25 Jan 06 - 10:54 PM
Amos 26 Jan 06 - 10:42 AM
Amos 26 Jan 06 - 06:54 PM
GUEST,T. Herg 27 Jan 06 - 02:32 PM
Amos 27 Jan 06 - 03:20 PM
Old Guy 27 Jan 06 - 06:21 PM
Amos 28 Jan 06 - 03:41 PM
Amos 29 Jan 06 - 12:59 PM
Amos 29 Jan 06 - 02:53 PM
Amos 29 Jan 06 - 03:54 PM
Amos 29 Jan 06 - 04:01 PM
Amos 30 Jan 06 - 02:08 PM
Amos 03 Feb 06 - 12:10 AM
Amos 03 Feb 06 - 12:12 AM
Amos 03 Feb 06 - 12:16 AM
Amos 03 Feb 06 - 12:20 AM
Amos 03 Feb 06 - 12:53 PM
Amos 03 Feb 06 - 10:44 PM
Amos 03 Feb 06 - 10:45 PM
Amos 04 Feb 06 - 03:19 PM
Amos 05 Feb 06 - 02:33 AM
Amos 05 Feb 06 - 07:39 PM
Amos 05 Feb 06 - 11:04 PM
Amos 06 Feb 06 - 02:50 PM
Amos 07 Feb 06 - 10:19 AM
Amos 07 Feb 06 - 04:34 PM
Amos 08 Feb 06 - 04:10 PM
Amos 08 Feb 06 - 10:09 PM
Amos 08 Feb 06 - 10:20 PM
Amos 09 Feb 06 - 12:16 AM
Amos 09 Feb 06 - 10:52 PM
Amos 09 Feb 06 - 11:44 PM
Amos 10 Feb 06 - 02:38 PM
Amos 10 Feb 06 - 07:16 PM
Amos 11 Feb 06 - 11:25 AM
Amos 11 Feb 06 - 11:44 AM
Amos 11 Feb 06 - 01:06 PM
Amos 15 Feb 06 - 02:43 PM
Amos 16 Feb 06 - 12:36 PM
number 6 16 Feb 06 - 12:46 PM
Bobert 16 Feb 06 - 01:03 PM
Amos 16 Feb 06 - 01:16 PM
Amos 18 Feb 06 - 12:55 PM
Bobert 18 Feb 06 - 01:17 PM
Amos 18 Feb 06 - 04:28 PM
Amos 18 Feb 06 - 05:47 PM
Amos 18 Feb 06 - 06:02 PM
Amos 19 Feb 06 - 08:25 AM
Bobert 19 Feb 06 - 08:31 AM
Amos 20 Feb 06 - 03:10 PM
Amos 20 Feb 06 - 04:55 PM
Amos 22 Feb 06 - 12:00 AM
Amos 22 Feb 06 - 12:03 AM
Amos 23 Feb 06 - 08:37 PM
Amos 23 Feb 06 - 08:42 PM
Amos 24 Feb 06 - 07:07 PM
Amos 25 Feb 06 - 12:58 PM
Amos 25 Feb 06 - 04:42 PM
Amos 27 Feb 06 - 10:06 AM
Amos 28 Feb 06 - 09:45 AM
Amos 04 Mar 06 - 02:37 PM
Amos 09 Mar 06 - 05:33 PM
Amos 09 Mar 06 - 05:38 PM
Bobert 09 Mar 06 - 07:46 PM
Amos 09 Mar 06 - 11:18 PM
Amos 13 Mar 06 - 08:46 PM
Bobert 13 Mar 06 - 08:49 PM
Amos 19 Mar 06 - 10:44 AM
Amos 23 Mar 06 - 07:09 PM
GUEST,rarelamb 23 Mar 06 - 07:24 PM
Amos 23 Mar 06 - 07:40 PM
Amos 23 Mar 06 - 08:07 PM
Amos 24 Mar 06 - 04:23 PM
Amos 27 Mar 06 - 11:07 AM
Amos 06 Apr 06 - 08:14 PM
Bobert 20 Apr 06 - 01:29 PM
Amos 20 Apr 06 - 03:34 PM
Amos 21 Apr 06 - 03:36 PM
Elmer Fudd 21 Apr 06 - 11:48 PM
Amos 22 Apr 06 - 03:48 PM
GUEST,Rufus 29 Apr 06 - 09:55 AM
Amos 29 Apr 06 - 01:22 PM
Amos 29 Apr 06 - 04:07 PM
Donuel 30 Apr 06 - 08:56 AM
Bobert 30 Apr 06 - 09:24 AM
Donuel 30 Apr 06 - 10:16 AM
Amos 01 May 06 - 08:41 PM
Amos 02 May 06 - 09:51 PM
Amos 02 May 06 - 11:08 PM
number 6 02 May 06 - 11:14 PM
Bobert 03 May 06 - 07:30 AM
Amos 11 May 06 - 07:35 PM
Amos 15 May 06 - 06:41 PM
Amos 16 May 06 - 12:53 AM
Amos 17 May 06 - 08:02 PM
Amos 18 May 06 - 11:30 PM
Amos 24 May 06 - 08:05 PM
Wavery 31 May 06 - 08:45 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:









Subject: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 13 Sep 03 - 01:34 PM

Finally, a candidate who can explain the Bush administration's positions on civil liberties in the original German." -- Bill Maher, on Schwarzenegger running for Governor.

"President Bush is supporting Arnold but a lot of Republicans are not, because he is actually quite liberal. Karl Rove said if his father wasn't a Nazi, he wouldn't have any credibility with conservatives at all." -- Bill Maher

"They're saying Arnold will get 95% of the vote. At least according to his brother, Jeb Schwarzenegger." -- Craig Kilborn

"President Bush has been silent on Schwarzenegger. Of course, he can't pronounce Schwarzenegger." -- David Letterman

"Here's how bad California looks to the rest of the country. People in Florida are laughing at us." -- Jay Leno

"Well, we're all excited because President Bush has started his
35-day vacation. He's down there in Crawford, Texas and on the first day of his vacation he went fishing. He didn't find any fish but he believes they're there and that his intelligence is accurate." -- David Letterman

"President Bush held his first full press conference in over 5 months this week. He announced that the war on terrorism is continuing, much, much more work needs to be done on the economy, and Saddam Hussein has not yet been captured. And then he said, 'I'm going on vacation for a month.'" -- Jay Leno

"President Bush is leaving to go to Crawford, Texas, for a 35-day working vacation. This should go over big with all the people taking a can't-get-work vacation." -- David Letterman

"The White House says that the vacation in Texas will give President Bush the chance to unwind. My question is, when does the guy wind?" -- David Letterman

"President Bush's economic team is now on their jobs and growth bus tour all across America. I think the only job they created so far is for the guy driving the bus." -- Jay Leno

"President Bush has refused to declassify portions of the congressional 9/11 reports about the Saudis, because he says it will help the enemy. Not Al Qaeda, the Democrats." -- Jay Leno

"The United States is putting together a Constitution now for Iraq. Why don't we just give them ours? It's served us well for 200 years, and we don't appear to be using it anymore, so what the hell?" -- Jay Leno


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 Sep 03 - 04:14 PM

Thanks, Amos. I once read that when a leader becomes a laughingstock he's on his way out. I only wish.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amergin
Date: 13 Sep 03 - 05:32 PM

the problem with bush he was never anything more than a laughingstock.....but then he never was a leader either....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: katlaughing
Date: 13 Sep 03 - 06:36 PM

Ebbie, let's make it so..I've decided I am going to make a bumper sticker that says Just say NO to 4 More Years!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 Sep 03 - 10:45 PM

Good one, kat. And maybe we could come up with one of his own 'wise sayings'? Like 'Make the pie higher'! You don't suppose they're copywrited, do you?! In today's climate I can imagine being cited for something or another.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Sep 03 - 11:52 PM

How about a bumpersticker that says "No more years!"?

You CAN laugh him out of office. Laughing AT someone can ruin them politically. They all take themselves SOOOOOOOOO seriously.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 12:04 AM

Just say no to Thugs!!

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Wilfried Schaum
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 05:09 AM

"Well, we're all excited because President Bush has started his 35-day vacation. He's down there in Crawford, Texas and on the first day of his vacation he went fishing. He didn't find any fish but he believes they're there and that his intelligence is accurate." -- David Letterman

Intelligence in the meaning od mental capabilites or reports of CIA?
Both fit well from this side of the pond.

Wilfried


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: C-flat
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 05:36 AM

This may have been doing the rounds for some time, if so I apologise, but I've just found it and it cracked me up so, whatever.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Alaska Mike
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 06:02 PM

Hopefully, enough of the non-voting majority will get off their patoots and away from their boob-tubes long enough to cast their ballots in 2004. The current president didn't even get 25% of the registered voter's support. He sure got lots of support from big business though. And they certainly got a good return on their investment.

Mike


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Gareth
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 07:13 PM

Yet again - don't weep, organize !!!!

Its the nity grity of politics, making sure your people are registered, that they know when and where to vote, that they know where your candidate is on the ballot paper, or computer screen, getting them to the polls, and checking that the count is fair and square.

Its sitting in the smoky back room, writing, and printing leaflets, addressing envelopes, filling in data bases, telephoning the undecided. Its standing in the rain outside a supermarket, or school handing out leaflets, and watching half of them go straight on to the floor.

It's missing a folk festival, or a weekends sailing, because XYZ want's an area lefleted that week end and it's "Gareth, can you produce one of your specials, please"

It poring over printouts trying to allocate scarce resourses. It's trying to raise the money for the next batch of ink and paper. It's driving a loudspeaker van, with the Tintinitus roaring in your ear knowing that you can't stop and give it up.

Its when your girl/boy friend gives you an ultimatum, the party or me.

Its walking out of the count, having taken a hammering and still smileing.

Hands up all those 'Catters who have taken part in that.

And a small bet says some of the more vocal Bush/Blair critics won't have bothered to give up thier time or get thier hands dirty.

Gareth - A qualified Election Agent.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: TIA
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 10:46 AM

Let's make it a very large bet, shall we?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 11:37 AM

On another facet of the popular acceptance of GWB:

SEPTEMBER 12--North Carolina cops are searching for a guy who successfully passed a $200 bill bearing George W. Bush's portrait and a drawing of the White House complete with lawn signs reading "We like ice cream" and "USA deserves a tax cut." The phony Bush bill--a copy of which you'll find below--was presented to a cashier at a Food Lion in Roanoke Rapids on September 6 by an unidentified male who was seeking to pay for $150 in groceries. Remarkably, the cashier accepted the counterfeit note and gave the man $50 change. In a separate incident involving a different perp, Roanoke Rapids cops Tuesday arrested Michael Harris, 24, for attempting last month to pass an identical $200 Bush bill at a convenience store.

For a picture of the bill that was passed see http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/bushbill1.html.

Regards,

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 11:46 AM

Aren't the terms "Popular" and "Views of the Bush Administration" a bit of a contradiction ?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: TIA
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 11:51 AM

To the great disgust of many, no.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 12:01 PM

The great shame of this nation is not so much that Bush's machinery managed to railroad the election, but that almost half the people in the country thought he was eligible material, and a lesser, but still highly significant number, have supported him in his insanities since then.

There are significant numbers of people who call him the leader of the free world, no less; and attribute high moral qualities to him including courage and integrity.

All of which strikes me as shamefully backwards-minded.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 12:30 PM

Yesterday I had an interesting two-hour conversation with a middle-aged, self-proclaimed conservative couple from Colorado. The name 'Bush' was never mentioned but it was implied in every facet of the conversation.

Their take on it:

The war should perhaps not have been begun "We'll never know", but now that we're there we must complete the process. We should "send the Iraqis back to the camel age". We should ("politically incorrect as it seems") obliterate North Korea NOW, so as to avoid inevitable war later. "China and South Korea are being blackmailed into sending millions of dollars in aid to North Korea." (Neither of them had a good answer as to why China would not instead send a vast army into North Korea NOW before North Korea has a working nuclear capability, rather than allowing itself to be extorted for years.)

"Why should we support those who don't work?" (Because, I quoted: A nation is judged by its treatment of the least among them.)

Lots more. They are a couple with a small business, and they seemed well informed on a great many issues. The conversation remained cordial throughout, but I'm beginning to understand why Bush's approval rating remains high, or at least where it's coming from.

I despair.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Don Firth
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 01:04 PM

Well, lemme see. . . .

If these "significant numbers of people" are right, and Bush is truly the "leader of the free world" and actually does have "high moral qualities to him including courage and integrity," then I'm forced to the inevitable conclusion that God has a really atrocious sense of humor. . . .

It's gotta be some great, cosmic joke.

My first response to Amos's quote of Bill Maher's remark about Schwarzenegger running for California governor, "Finally, a candidate who can explain the Bush administration's positions on civil liberties in the original German." was to snicker and mutter "Right on!" My second response was "Uh-oh!" and a cold shudder. Too close.

I keep hearing about how popular Bush is in the polls (although lately, he seems to be slipping), and yet I don't actually know anybody who likes him or thinks he's doing a good job with much of anything. And not all the people I know are liberals. Where are all these people who think he's such a great president?

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 01:30 PM

Well, fir those of you who think there isn't some serious grassroots organizing going on, one just need to look at what Howard Dean has done in a very short time with no real big money backers in his corner. Yeah, though I haven't beat on any doors for a Dem since McCarthey (no, not Joe)/Kennedy/Humphry in '68, I and many of my Green friends, are concerned enough about the dangerous folks who have highjacked the country that many of us are willing to do what it takes to get them out. And get America back from the Bushwackers... After that, we'll get back to pesterin' the Dems....

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Don Firth
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 02:38 PM

Good move, Bobert. I think that's the way to go, and I'm laible to join you once the job is done.

First priority: stop the country from circling the drain.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 06:34 PM

"From a pure-science point of view, embryonic stem cells are more powerful than the genome project," says Johns Hopkins pediatric oncologist Curt Civin. "They could tell us what each and every gene actually does. And they could be used to cure cancers, Parkinson's disease, diabetes." You name it. But by and large, American researchers must stop there—at the hopeful act of recognizing the potential. Their ability to study actual stem cells is hobbled by the federal regulation triggered in 2001 by President Bush's famously faux-Solomonic—tear the baby in half!—decision to limit the cells a federally funded researcher can study to those coming from the 78 cell lines cultured prior to the date of the regulation. In practice, though, only 11 approved lines have been made available to researchers. It's like handing an oceanographer a cup of salt water and saying, "Study only this."

In contrast, the sensible British have got it right, says Civin. Under strict regulation, and culling from IVF throwaways, doctors are allowed to create their own embryonic stem cell lines. "We're going to be trumped," says Civin. "I'd like to figure out everything there is about blood stem cells, but in all, the discovery is going to be slower, and as an American, I'm not going to be a part of it."

From a PopSci article on stem cell researcher's travails...

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Alice
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 07:51 PM

Have you ever read www.bushwatch.com?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: NicoleC
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 11:01 PM

Well, Don, a lady I work with has a picture of GWB where most people keep family pictures. (And yes, she has a husband and several kids. No pictures of them.) She practically worships the guy. On the other hand, when pressed she doesn't much seem to agree with him on much of anything -- it's perplexing. But don't insult HER president! He's FLAWLESS!

Truth is, many people will worship almost anyone elevated to a leadership position regardless of merit or ability or what they actually do. And I'm not just talking about politics. (Many of the others will hate anyone elevated to a leadership position etc., etc. Any conversation about Bill Gates will troll up people who rapidly hate him, without having any good reasons why.) It's human mob mentality.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 11:19 PM

From a friend:

"It was recently mentioned that the Presidential Prayer Team is
currently urging us to: "Pray for the President as he seeks wisdom on
how to legally codify the definition of marriage. Pray that it will be
according to Biblical principles. With many forces insisting on variant
definitions of marriage, pray that God's Word and His standards will be
honored by our government."

I'm sure any good religious person believes prayer should be balanced
by action. So here, in support of the Prayer Team's admirable goals, is
a proposed Constitutional Amendment codifying marriage entirely on
biblical principles:

A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between one
man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5.) Marriage
shall not impede a man's right to take concubines in addition to his
wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)

B. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin.
If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed.(Deut 22:13-21)
Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen
24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

C. Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the
constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be
construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

D. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the
widow. If he refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does
not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe and be otherwise
punished in a manner to be determined by law. (Gen. 38:6-10; Deut
25:5-10)

Yes, it is time to PRAY for divine intervention with our president...."

Big sigh...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: curmudgeon
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 08:41 AM

For a different take on the Resident's campaign of mis-information, look here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 08:46 AM

And also here...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: TIA
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 09:52 AM

And here....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 10:43 AM

That boy has generated an awful lot of fertilizer, considering he isn't going to reap more than a whirlwind, hasn't he?


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 05:43 PM

AND HERE


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 07:10 PM

That last one is really grim...the track record of interference with science.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Reiver 2
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 07:21 PM

Thanks for those Amos. Have you checked out the Bushisms on http://home.twcny.rr.com/felicity/bushisms.htm

The Bush Dyslexicon by Mark Crispin Miller, subtitle: Observations on a National Disorder, is good too.

Absolutely the worst president in the history of the U.S. You might enjoy some of the posts I've made on my blog site:
http://news-opinion.blog-city.com

Reiver 2


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 09:22 PM

Well, Amos, when you've got fundamentalist "Christianity"[sic] to explain everything for you, and to obviate the necessity of rational thought, who needs science? Not just Dumbya, but his whole crew.

THAT'S grim.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 09:41 PM

I read and recommended the Bush Dyslexicon earlier but let me repeat here that it is highly worth reading.

Greg -- I believe that people will grab any information in a storm as long as it will hold things still for a bit -- a religion, an authority, or some other conclusion, rational or not, as long as it fends off confusion. Perfectly workable as long as you don't mix it up with truth, eh?

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: AliUK
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 09:44 PM

Here in Brazil they were a little bemused that Arnie was going in as a candidate for the Governership of California...they were under the impression that he was already the President of the US of A.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Sep 03 - 09:51 PM

Depends what you mean by "workable" I suppose. ;>)

Queen of Fools, turn around, life will be your folly
Wave your wand at those who will waste away and worry
Play them for the fools they are, make their steps up for them
A clock that's shaken hard enough, it cannot stay in rhythm.
Pat Sky The Dance of Death


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Gareth
Date: 20 Sep 03 - 07:37 PM

And not one word on the practicalities !!!!!!!!

Gareth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 20 Sep 03 - 07:53 PM

These both made me laugh so hard, that that I broke my 'bummed out' 'lost it' card...


Finally, a candidate who can explain the Bush administration's positions on civil liberties in the original German." -- Bill Maher, on Schwarzenegger running for Governor...


"The United States is putting together a Constitution now for Iraq. Why don't we just give them ours? It's served us well for 200 years, and we don't appear to be using it anymore, so what the hell?" -- Jay Leno ...
Thanks!, Amos


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: toadfrog
Date: 20 Sep 03 - 09:31 PM

With all due respect, guys, there were a lot of Clinton jokes too. The only nationally known politician I can remember that there were no jokes about was Benson, the guy who was not elected Vice President in 1988. Who remembers Benson?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 21 Sep 03 - 09:07 PM

"...I knew Jack Kennedy, he was a friend of mine... and let me tell you, Mr Quale... You're no Jack Kennedy..."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Sep 03 - 09:26 PM

That one line nearly immortalized Benson in my mind. Benson signature is also still found on a lot of dollar bills out there. I thought he would have made an excellent VP...

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Joe Offer
Date: 21 Sep 03 - 10:11 PM

My brother sent me this:

Bumper Sticker ideas for the GOP for 2004:
Bush/Cheney '04: Four More Wars!
Bush/Cheney '04: Assimilate. Resistance is Futile.
Bush/Cheney '04: Apocalypse Now!
Bush/Cheney '04: Because the truth just isn't good enough.
Bush/Cheney '04: Compassionate Colonialism
Bush/Cheney '04: Deja-voodoo all over again!
Bush/Cheney '04: Don't Change Whores in Midstream
Bush/Cheney '04: Get used to it!
Bush/Cheney '04: In your heart, you know they're technically correct.
Bush/Cheney '04: Leave no billionaire behind
Bush/Cheney '04: Less CIA -- More CYA
Bush/Cheney '04: Lies and videotape but no sex!
Bush/Cheney '04: Making the world a better place, one country at a
time.
Bush/Cheney '04: Or else.
Bush/Cheney '04: Over a billion Whoppers served.
Bush/Cheney '04: Putting the "con" in conservatism
Bush/Cheney '04: Thanks for not paying attention.
Bush/Cheney '04: The economy's stupid!
Bush/Cheney '04: The last vote you'll ever have to cast.
Bush/Cheney '04: This time, elect us!
Bush/Cheney '04: We're Gooder!
Bush/Cheney: Asses of Evil
Don't think. Vote Bush!
George W. Bush: A brainwave away from the presidency
George W. Bush: It takes a village idiot
George W. Bush: Leadership without a doubt
George W. Bush: The buck stops Over There
God Save the King!
Let them eat yellowcake! Vote Bush!
Peace & Prosperity Suck -- Big-Time
Vote Bush in '04: "Because every vote counts -- for me!"
Vote Bush in '04: "Because I'm the President, that's why!"
Vote Bush in '04: Because dictatorship is easier
Vote Bush in '04: It's a no-brainer!
Vote for Bush & You Get Dick!
Who would Jesus Bomb?
Vote Bush in '04: "I Has Incumbentory Advantitude"

My favorite is:
BU__SH__!

In summary, I can't stand the guy. I agree with what the Dixie Chicks said before they were forced into a retraction.
But most people I know think he's wonderful.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Sep 03 - 10:49 PM

U S   U N D E R   A T T A C K

       WASHINGTON OBSERVED
       Blind fury that sparks bloodlust
       Sep 14 2001
       Peter Hartcher

Nine out of 10 Americans support armed retaliation against the forces that struck New York and Washington this week, even if it means getting into a war.

And a quarter of this group endorses launching military strikes immediately - without waiting to find out who is actually responsible.

In the absence of a known enemy, whom and where would the US attack? Should it be random, with a pin on a map directing a hail of missiles? Or should it be racially based?

Surely only an infuriated minority of rednecks would propose such blind bloodlust? Not at all.

Democratic Senator Robert Torricelli has an idea for dealing with the
absence of a known perpetrator. He proposed yesterday that Congress
authorise the President to open "general hostilities" and assault 10
terrorist organisations around the world immediately.

"Given the enormity of the attack against our country, I think we're
entitled to take action against each of them," he said.

This is despite the lessons of history.

The last time the US launched massive and hasty missile strikes against a terrorist, Osama bin Laden, in 1998, "all we managed to do was bounce some rubble around in Afghanistan and raise the level of anti-Americanism", in the words of Milt Bearden, a former CIA agent who worked in Afghanistan.

The missiles apparently killed six children, but missed bin Laden, who survived to become the prime suspect in this week's atrocities.

For many in the US, the fury is so deep that it is blind and irrational.

For most Americans, it is beyond the reach of civilised restraint. The Gallup poll found that 66 per cent of the US public favours armed action "even if it means that innocent people are killed".

For the US at war, this fury is normal. "Once wars begin, a significant element of American public opinion supports waging them at the highest possible level of intensity," writes the US scholar Walter Russell Mead in the journal The National Interest.

And the key to understanding this war frenzy, he argues, is the same key to grasping other aspects of the American popular psyche, such as the national fetish for guns.

And that key is Jacksonianism - the tradition named after the sixth US president. Andrew Jackson was a Scots-Irish immigrant who was orphaned on the frontier, fought in wars against American Indians and the British, and suffered as a prisoner of war - all by the age of 15.

He was an intense hater, with crazy blue eyes, fearless in battle and "mad upon his enemy", said his biographer Robert Remini.

He was poorly educated, but a brilliant strategist. At the Battle of New Orleans he shattered an invading British army of 5,000 men, dealing them a staggering 2,000 casualties, with the loss of only a dozen or so of his own troops.

Nicknamed Old Hickory for his wiry toughness and known by the Indians as Sharp Knife for his tactics, Jackson had no control over his temper.

One of his contemporaries, Thomas Jefferson, said of him: "When I was
president of the Senate, he was Senator, and he could never speak on
account of the rashness of his feelings. I have seen him attempt it
repeatedly, and as often choke with rage... He is a dangerous man." But as the country's foremost war hero, he could not be denied the presidency.

Jacksonianism is a populist folk culture that has its roots in the sense of identity among the Scots-Irish who settled much of the American West.

It distrusts elites, favours rugged individualism, loves guns, loathes multilateralism and prizes courage.

Ronald Reagan tapped it more successfully than any modern president.

Understanding Jacksonianism is to understand the American attitude to war. According to Mead, "the first Jacksonian rule of war is that wars must be fought with all available force. The use of limited force is deeply repugnant."

This school also draws sharp distinction between honourable and
dishonourable enemies. In the case of dishonourable enemies, "all rules are off". This was the fate of the Japanese. Jacksonian America had no compunction about using the atomic bomb against civilians.

Jackson's cultural heirs believe that the chief object of warfare was
breaking an enemy's spirit. "It was not enough to defeat a tribe in battle; one had to pacify the tribe.

"For this to happen, the war had to go to the enemy's home. The villages had to be burned, food supplies destroyed, civilians had to be killed. From the tiniest child to the most revered of the elderly sages, everyone in the enemy nation had to understand that further armed resistance to the will of the American people... was simply not an option."

Mead argues that this strand of public opinion determines how America
fights and wins wars, or, if it is denied, how it makes and breaks the presidents who defy it.

Truman, Johnson and George Bush senior all defied the Jacksonian code by trying to wage limited war, and none survived the decision.

The choking rage of Jacksonianism, now fully roused by a dishonourable enemy, will demand the ferocious and unrestrained prosecution of this next American war.

And George W. Bush will defy it at his peril.

As one of Jackson's intellectual heirs, General Curtis Le May, the man who dropped the atomic bomb, once said: "I'll tell you what war is. You've got to kill people, and when you've killed enough, they stop fighting."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Dec 03 - 12:08 AM

Here's a wonderful sport for those who have some time on their hands: sign in and review this colorful series of 30-second quick messages by a wide span of artistic talent found at "Bush in 30 Seconds". They are a puredee hoot.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Dec 03 - 01:39 AM

Today I saw a bumper sticker on a parked car: RE-DEFEAT BUSH! Made me feel like hunting up the driver to make his/her acquaintance.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: kendall
Date: 23 Dec 03 - 04:53 AM

Re elect Gore in 2004.

What scares me is that so many people now believe that it's ok to pull a "first strike" on a POTENTIAL enemy! And, they don't see the similarity between Iraq and Pearl Harbor.\They destroyed the towers, so, we get to destroy their whole country. The problem with that "logic" is; THEY didn't destroy the towers!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Dec 03 - 10:43 AM

Here's a scary story from the Times documenting Rumsfeld's special envoy duties visiting Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war and letting him know we were against chem warfare in general but we weren't mad at him and didn't want to compromise our relationship, yadda yadda...the implication of which is that it was Bush Senior and Bush Junior between them, who managed things in such a way as to necessitate the Iraq war and all the deaths concomitant thereunto.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/23/international/middleeast/23RUMS.html

WASHINGTON, Dec. 22 — As a special envoy for the Reagan administration in 1984, Donald H. Rumsfeld, now the defense secretary, traveled to Iraq to persuade officials there that the United States was eager to improve ties with President Saddam Hussein despite his use of chemical weapons, newly declassified documents show.


Mr. Rumsfeld, who ran a pharmaceutical company at the time, was tapped by Secretary of State George P. Shultz to reinforce a message that a recent move to condemn Iraq's use of chemical weapons was strictly in principle and that America's priority was to prevent an Iranian victory in the Iran-Iraq war and to improve bilateral ties...


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Dec 03 - 11:11 AM

From Slate's "Today's Papers" site:

The Post's Style section profiles former Centcom commander General George Zinni, who endorsed Bush in 2000 and has become one of the fiercest critics of the invasion of Iraq. "I think the American people were conned into this," he says. "The more I saw, the more I thought that this was the product of the neocons who didn't understand the region and were going to create havoc there. These were dilettantes from Washington think tanks who never had an idea that worked on the ground." Zinni says that after he oversaw the bombing of Baghdad in 1998, he thought Saddam was on the verge of falling, so he drew up a detailed plan for occupying Iraq, called Desert Crossing. Concerned that his plan wasn't being properly considered, before the war Zinni called a Centcom general, asking, "Are you guys looking at Desert Crossing?" The general responded, "What's that?"




A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Ineptitude at the Top: Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 13 Jan 04 - 07:07 PM

From the N Y TIMES:

Former Official Describes Bush as ‘Disengaged’


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Wolfgang
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 03:46 AM

Ex-Treasury Chief Says He'll Probably Vote For Bush In '04

Not just the kind of witness a prosecutor would wish for.
But still the publication is quite damning at least for one aspect of the Bush government in my eyes. WMDs have never been the real motive for the war against Iraq. But at the time of the publication this didn't really come as a big surprise, but then, perhaps to some it did.

Wolfgang


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 09:13 AM

An interesting dissertation on "Bush As Ali Baba" can be found on this page which characterizes him as a thief.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 09:49 AM

Wait up a minute:

"...Zinni says that after he oversaw the bombing of Baghdad in 1998, he thought Saddam was on the verge of falling, so he drew up a detailed plan for occupying Iraq, called Desert Crossing."

So the "revelation" by Paul O'Neill that GWB had the invasion of Iraq on the table from day one (2000) is incorrect. Those plans, formulated by Centcom commander General George Zinni, had been made in 1998 while Bill Clinton was in office?

Hmmmmmmm as Bobert would say.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 11:16 AM

I think it is incumbent on us out of respect for the truth to see the whole descritpion by Zinni when he spoke out.

Here's an article that describes it.

Zinni's perspective is clearly that our resident Veep is just a liar, or a badly misled biped at best.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 11:31 AM

Thanks Amos.

Quoted from the above link:

[But Zinni vows that he has learned a lesson. Reminded that he endorsed Bush in 2000, he says, "I'm not going to do anything political again -- ever. I made that mistake one time." ]


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,The B-I-B-L-E Was Once The Book For Me...
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 12:33 PM

Amos:

Are those biblical verses you quoted above about marriage really in the bible (don't have one handy to check the authenticity of those verses. Maybe a Mudcat biblical scholar can verify those).

The B-I-B-L-E Was Once The Book For Me...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 12:50 PM

Here are some interesting comments about Bush and Co: "The US is now in the hands of a group of extremists" - by George Soros, who isn't exactly a lefty. The link is to "an edited extract" pubished in today's Guardian, from "The Bubble of American Supremacy",a book by Soros published this week.

"We have fallen into a trap. The suicide bombers' motivation seemed incomprehensible at the time of the attack; now a light begins to dawn: they wanted us to react the way we did. Perhaps they understood us better than we understand ourselves.

"And we have been deceived. When he stood for election in 2000, President Bush promised a humble foreign policy. I contend that the Bush administration has deliberately exploited September 11 to pursue policies that the American public would not have otherwise tolerated."


I especially agree with his judgement that what has happened since Seoptemer 11th has been precisely what the people who organised it and took part in it wanted to happen.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 01:12 PM

TBWOTFM:

I don't know. I don't consider it a reliable source of information.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,The B-I-B-L-E Was Once The Book For Me...
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 01:20 PM

"I don't consider it a reliable source of information"

Are you talking about your friends quote or the bible?

The B-I-B-L-E Was Once The Book For Me...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 01:22 PM

The Bible.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 01:31 PM

Thank you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 02:53 PM

Hi Teribus,

Your question,

"Those plans, formulated by Centcom commander General George Zinni, had been made in 1998 while Bill Clinton was in office?"

is easilly answered. Obviously if plans had been made, they were rejected by the Clinton Administration and revived by the
Bush Administration.

Frank


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: DougR
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 03:04 PM

"Popular."

"Popular" as defined by?

If the answer is liberals, I would say this thread is well named.

If the answer is the American people, I would say it is mis-titled. Fifty-four percent of Americans (according to the major polls) approve of the job the president is doing.

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 04:14 PM

Most people don't see it that way, Doug, even if maybe most people in the USA do.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 04:29 PM

The word popular in this sense means views held among the population at large; it includes conservative, liberal, illiberal and reactionary.

Most of the Bush camp holds views in the latter two catego9ries.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 05:01 PM

Well, Dougie, you know how I distrust polls but since you've gone and thrown yers out, what do you think of Kerry 49 Bush 46 with 5 undecided? And that was on Fox news at noon today...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 07:19 PM

But don't forget, they'll have a lot of electronic voting systems this time, which should make it easier getting the desired result, when it comes to counting anyway..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Walking Eagle
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 07:36 PM

Reading all of this puts me in mind of what my mom said during the 2000 elections. She said that she thought that Bush was likeable, someone you would like to go to a football game with. But in her mind, that was it. Not someone to be our president.

Keep in mind that Pres. Bush was not elected the first time, he was appointed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 07:39 PM

An urgent appeal to those who are in a position to do anything with it, from Daniel Ellsburg, who demonstrated his own kind of courage, can be found in this article in the Guardian entitled "Leak Against This War".

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 22 Feb 04 - 11:25 PM

From the New York Times:

Uses and Abuses of Science




Published: February 23, 2004


lthough the Bush administration is hardly the first to politicize science, no administration in recent memory has so shamelessly distorted scientific findings for policy reasons or suppressed them when they conflict with political goals. This is the nub of an indictment delivered last week by more than 60 prominent scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates. Their statement was accompanied by a report published by the Union of Concerned Scientists, listing cases where the administration has manipulated science on environmental and other issues.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 22 Feb 04 - 11:27 PM

Correction to the link -- the original article can be found on this page.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Feb 04 - 12:08 AM

Gareth - Its also going door to door in you neighborhood to see if anyone needs a ride to the polling station, especially the elderly or offering to babysit for the single mom so she can run out and vote.

Put those SUV's to work!

d


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 08:12 PM

A very interesting discussion on Bush's worldview by one of his college professors can be found on this page.

Regards,

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 08:40 PM

Well, gol danged, Amos! I thought I had a low opinion of the Bush administration. Geeze, compared to Bush's former Harvard professor, I'm closer to DougR.... Danged....

Jus' funnin...

But, boy oh boy...

McKinley/Rove? Well, ahhh, yeah. I was listening to this guy on NPR today who called in to talkabout his experiences in Haiti and what he described is what I fear will become of the US... It may be too late to turn it around now that Boss Hog is laying waste to the labor movement much like Sherman burned the South to the ground...

Just today the grocery workers out in your area settled on a "two tiered" program that will be a tamplate for other unions. In essence the "two tiered" program provides fir the current workers to be able to maintain their pay and health benefits (no increases) while allowing for new hires to work for less with less benefits... Think Social Security here. "We're not going to cut any current retirees or those getting ready to retire but................"

Now Boss Hog is going to drag out his anti-human, anti-God, anti-anti "Personal Responsibility" CRAP! Translated, "Personal Respnsibility" means "I'm rich and you ain't! Get over it!"...

Yeah, welcome to America. The world's next Third World nation with 1% controlling 99% of the wealth. Just like Haiti.

I wish some other country would just come and take Mr. Bush off to Africa so he could live out his days with the rest of the bad guys...

And take the rest of the ruling class wid him, thank you...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Walking Eagle
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 02:50 AM

I just know that Bush has started to piss off the hunting and fishing folks. That includes me. Everyone from the Izak Walton League to Trout and Ducks unlimited is starting to sqawk. Reason? Bushes hell bent for leather attempts to drill, mine, and log some of the nation's most productive breeding and spawning areas. In other words, places where the hunters and fishing folks go. Backwoods wilderness areas where hunting and fishing is allowed mostly because hunters and fishing folks have to backpack in for about two days before reaching these prime spots.

The heck with the second ammendment. Who is going to need hunting rifles if there is nothing to hunt.

Yeah, I'm a rifle totin' radically liberal Cherokee mama!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 08:11 AM

He has ruined more lives singlehanded than anyone since that AUstrian paperhanger fellow....Schickelgruber, I think it was. Anyway, it is high time someone stopped this fellow from messing things up even more.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 05:22 PM

Nice of you to include the "unbiased" comments of Bush's former college professor Amos.

Just tuned into this thread again to see if you folks were still having fun. Obviouvly you are! Does my old heart good.

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 06:52 PM

Well, Doug, we're doing it for you, pal... We hate to do it but we know how much it means to ya'....

Hey, put Cindy on the board to give us a progress (pun iintended) report...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 10:30 PM

Marriage history of public figures who feel that gays will destroy the
institution of Marriage

Food for thought:

*Ronald Reagan - divorced the mother of two of his children to marry Nancy
Reagan who bore him a daughter only 7 months after the marriage.

*Bob Dole - divorced the mother of his child, who had nursed him through the
long recovery from his war wounds.

*Newt Gingrich - divorced his wife who was dying of cancer.

*Dick Armey - House Majority Leader - divorced

*Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas - divorced

*Gov. John Engler of Michigan - divorced

*Gov. Pete Wilson of California - divorced

*George Will - divorced

*Sen. Lauch Faircloth - divorced

*Rush Limbaugh - Rush and his current wife Marta have six marriages and
four divorces between them.

*Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia - Barr, not yet 50 years old, has been married
three times. Barr had the audacity to author and push the "Defense of
Marriage Act." The current joke making the rounds on Capitol Hill is "Bob
Barr...WHICH marriage are you defending?!?

*Sen. Alfonse D'Amato of New York - divorced

*Sen. John Warner of Virginia - divorced (once married to Liz Taylor.)

*Gov. George Allen of Virginia - divorced

*Henry Kissinger - divorced

*Rep. Helen Chenoweth of Idaho - divorced

*Sen. John McCain of Arizonia - divorced

*Rep. John Kasich of Ohio - divorced

*Rep. Susan Molinari of New York - Republican National Convention Keynote
Speaker - divorced

Don't let homosexuals destroy the institution of marriage?!?! The
"Christian" "Do-as-I-say, not-as-I-do" Republicans are doing a fine job
without anyone's help!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 10:09 AM

I am pleased to see that the New York TImes, bastion of conservative thought, has begun to giove voice to critical thoughts about Bush and Co.

Today they offer a critique from Hans Blix on the duplicity behind the arms inspections.

It can be found here. Enjoy!

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 11:01 AM

Amos - 02 Mar 04 - 10:30 PM

Oh St. Amos - would that we could all be as perfect as you.

Give you a tip - introduction to Scotland's national poet Robert Burns - first poem to read - Holly Wullies Prayer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 11:08 AM

Teribus:

I think you're babbling.

What are you trying to say underneath all that sarcasm?

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 11:51 AM

OK Amos,

Do you know the personal circumstances involved in the break-up of the marriages you thought fit to have a cheap shot with?

Rhetorical question because I don't for one second believe that you do.

The reasons and circumstances probably are many and varied, in most the decision to divorce was probably arrived at by mutual arrangement for the best as viewed by both partners. But you don't seem to be that prepared to give people the benefit of the doubt, particularly if you can manage to get in a snide dig at the same time - grow up you're old enough!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 12:17 PM

Well, maybe you're right that listing all those divorces was inappropriate -- and in all humility, T., I don't know the details. It is perhaps arrogant and wrong-headed to take it on myself to meddle in the private affairs of people who probably were dealing with difficult situations as well as anyone else could; I should trust our own citizens to manage their own lives without my interference and niggling about it. I apologize for the cheap shots by listing their failures in public. I was meddling in their private lives. And that is wrong.

It is possible the same policies apply to any citizens regardless of their sexual grain, I would add.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 12:19 PM

In other news, an editorial lambasting the Bush administrations coverup, misrepresentation and plain deceit on Medicare issues can be found on this page.

Enjoy.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: DougR
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 12:55 PM

Amos: whatever would we do without your constantly posting articles from publications you discover on the Internet that support your POV? One would think we did not have access to the Internet, newspapers and none of us owned TV sets. I'm sure you don't believe such postings, particularly in publications that present views contrary to our own, will change minds do you?
:>)
DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 01:02 PM

In keeping with local policy I try to constrain myself to posting links and excerpts, Doug. Sure, I choose things that align with my POV -- why the hell would I do otherwise? But let me tell you what that point of view is. I think a lot of lies and manipulation have occurred under the direct or indirect control of the Bush machine; and I think by and large that those lies and manipulations have done more harm than good to the nation and the world. I think they have used perfectly sound ideals in false and hollow ways and done everything in their power to do what they want, rather than seek truth and right action. I am embarassed to be associated through citizenship with Rove, Bush, Cheny, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz.

So forgive me if I try to offset this little wave of evildoing in the world. We do what we can.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Deda
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 02:58 PM

Go, bro! Here are some reinforcements.
About truth and lies in the Pentagon. (Rather long but worth printing and reading.)
Lies about Medicare cost.

Actually, finding press report about Bush administration lies is like shooting fish in a barrel. There are so many, it's no sport at all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 03:19 PM

Further on the Bush Machine's Lies About Medicare front:

Washington Times story

New York Times Story with the following awesome introductory lines:

"An Orwellian taint is emerging in the Bush administration's big victory last year in wringing the Medicare prescription drug subsidy from a balky Congress. The plan is being sold to the public through propagandistic ads disguised as TV news reports, and it turns out the government's top Medicare actuary was muzzled by superiors during the debate about the program's price tag."

Lies may be easy to find, but they are a royal pain to combat.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 03:40 PM

Here's a link to Holy Willie's Prayer, and also to its sequel Holy Willie's Epitaph.

I can't see that there's anything out-of-line in pointing a contradiction between sounding off too loudly about the overriding importance of the institution of marriage, and yet being somewhat flexible about it in private life.

It's the kind of thing that was just up Holy Willie's street. The point being, when we expect other people to accept our own failings, we should be willing to accept theirs as well.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 05:32 PM

And another thread on another dimension of what can only be termed political fraud.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 22 Mar 04 - 12:42 AM

A presentation concerning the influence of Katherine Harris and the STate of FLorida shenanigans.

It would be highly entertaining except that it actually happened.

Maybe I am oldfashioned, but I believe sending one American to his death, or disenfranchising one human being unnecessarily, is anathema, hateful, to be avoided at all costs.. Mebbe that's just me.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: DougR
Date: 22 Mar 04 - 05:57 PM

Nope, Amos, I wouldn't accuse you of being "old fashioned." Liberal, yes, but not necessarily old fashioned.

A lie is only a lie when it is PROVEN to be one. To date, the lies Bush is accused of are only lies because the accuser believes them to be.

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,guest from NW
Date: 22 Mar 04 - 06:42 PM

"We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them."
Source: Interview of the President by TVP, Poland, White House (5/29/2003).

dougR, would you consider this annotated quote from GWB a lie? let me highlight the parts to especially consider...

..."We found the weapons of mass destruction"..."But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them."

waddaya think?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 22 Mar 04 - 07:50 PM

DougR:

I am sorry but I think a large number of lies have been proven. The first and foremost was the lies of the Florida election machine, and it declines from there.

Here is just one writeup out of many. Here's an excerpt:

"George W. Bush is a liar. He has lied large and small, directly and by omission. His Iraq lies have loomed largest. In the run-up to the invasion, Bush based his case for war on a variety of unfounded claims that extended far beyond his controversial uranium-from-Niger assertion. He maintained that Saddam Hussein possessed "a massive stockpile" of unconventional weapons and was directly "dealing" with Al Qaeda--two suppositions unsupported then (or now) by the available evidence. He said the International Atomic Energy Agency had produced a report in 1998 noting that Iraq was six months from developing a nuclear weapon; no such report existed (and the IAEA had actually reported then that there was no indication Iraq had the ability to produce weapons-grade material). Bush asserted that Iraq was "harboring a terrorist network, headed by a senior Al Qaeda terrorist planner"; US intelligence officials told reporters this terrorist was operating ouside of Al Qaeda control. And two days before launching the war, Bush said, "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." Yet former deputy CIA director Richard Kerr, who is conducting a review of the prewar intelligence, has said that intelligence was full of qualifiers and caveats, and based on circumstantial and inferential evidence. That is, it was not no-doubt stuff. And after the major fighting was done, Bush declared, "We found the weapons of mass destruction." But he could only point to two tractor-trailers that the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency had concluded were mobile bioweapons labs. Other experts--including the DIA's own engineering experts--disagreed with this finding. "

Thos os just a small scraping from his foul deposits. His history is a carpet of large and small lies woven together in a comfortable web of convenient deception.

He has the moral fiber of a ringworm.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 04:02 AM

"A lie is only a lie when it is PROVEN to be one."

Wrong. A lie is a lie when you knowingly say something false.

If it's not proven, it just means you got away with the lie.

When it's proven to be a lie is when you got caught.

The latest Republican morality, is it? - it's only a lie if you get caught?

clint


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 10:16 AM

Here an interesting analysis of why Bush's statements seem so out of touch with the facts over and over, by Wm Saletan writing for Salte magazine online.

From this perspective it is only a lie if you don't believe it!

It still adds up to "unqualified" in my opinion.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: DougR
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 05:42 PM

Amos: you offer David Corn and "The Nation" as proof that Bush is a liar? You're kidding, right?

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Peace
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 05:53 PM

Doug,

Your support of Bush is admirable. I wouldn't call him a liar; he simply has no commerce with truth as most people understand it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 05:59 PM

The article was " Bush's difficult relationship with reality" by William Saletan, Doug; and the magazine was of course Slate. As to the earlier post, I can't speak for the writer's background, but as he is expressing a popular view of Bush's credibility I thought it appropriate to include it here.   What is your problem with it exactly?

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 09:20 AM

I got this humorous bit from an avid Bush supporter:

You know, they've released John Hinckley from prison for unsupervised visits to his parents’ home on weekends. This is such a nice letter from the President:

THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON D.C.

Mr. John Hinckley
St. Elizabeth's Hospital
Washington, DC

Dear John:

Laura and I hope that you are continuing your excellent progress in recovery from your mental problems. We were pleased to hear that you are now able to have unsupervised visits with your parents. The staff at the hospital reports that you are doing fine.

I have decided to seek a second term in office as your president and I would appreciate your support and the support of your fine parents.

I would hope that if there is anything that you need at the hospital, you would let us know.

By the way, are you aware that John Kerry is screwing Jody Foster?!

Sincerely,

George W. Bush, President


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: el ted
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 11:52 AM

Brilliant! This is second 100th post today. Carry on with whatever it was you were talking about.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 02:50 PM

Doug - Is it your assertion that GWB has been entirely truthful throughout his campaign for, and occupation of, the Presidency?

____yes

____no


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 08:52 AM

On the embarassment of the Bushies by Clarke's apology, see "Democracy's Revenge".

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 11:23 AM

A short excerpt:

The commission is encouraging the country to consider questions the administration has never wanted asked. Why did these attacks happen on its watch? Could the government have done more to prevent them? Were intelligence warnings given short shrift? What was the administration thinking about on Sept. 10, 2001, and in the months before? And, yes, might the president not usefully express some remorse over any of these failures?

What's important is that the country is being pushed away from an empty debate over who is "tough" and who is "soft" to a substantive discussion of what our government might practically have done -- and can now do -- to stop terrorism.



A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,guest from NW
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 07:47 PM

hey, dougR, i cited an actual bush lie a few days ago. it's in print and on videotape. i stuck with just one lie to keep things simple. any comment on that?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,guest from NW
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 01:24 AM

dougR, i answered your query on the condi rice thread within hours. i cited a documented bush lie on march 22 after your statement on 22 Mar 04 - 05:57 PM and asked for your comment. does this staement count as a lie from your perspective? if not, why not?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 07:25 PM

The NEw York TImes is feeling the tug back from the brink of Neocon mania: see this article which is actually critical of the adminsitration's low regard ofr truth.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 07:58 PM

From Salon:

“We should have had orange or red-type of alert in June or July of 2001”


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 19 Apr 04 - 12:38 AM

A compelling description of the effect of Bushthink on the quality of life in Iraq can be found in this article from the New Statesman. Enjoy.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: George and the Amazing Technicolor Dream-Tie
From: Amos
Date: 19 Apr 04 - 12:41 AM

A refreshing and sharp-witted article concerning George's press conference


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: North Korean Intelligence Gets it Right for Once..
From: Amos
Date: 19 Apr 04 - 11:20 PM

It seems the North Korean Intell is a little quicker than our own this time.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Apr 04 - 06:34 AM

Thanks for the link Re: the North Korean Intell, that you find so believable Amos.

Does that include the following from that article?

Statement 1:
Pyongyang insists it will freeze its nuclear weapons drive only in return for rewards from the United States.

Statement 2:
North Korea "has no idea of dealing with the US any longer if the latter insists on the disgusting CVID (complete, verifiable, and irreversible dismantling)," he said.

Both indicate the extent of the "midget's turd" (KIJ's own description of himself by the way) threat posture to the world. Statement 1 summed up in one word - BLACKMAIL.

Everybody quite happy and content about that - I certainly wouldn't be - Statement 2 summed up in an old saying, "Pay the Danegeld, you never get rid of the Dane". What CVID, of our nuclear programme - don't be ridiculous! we might want to Blackmail you some more at some time in the future.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Apr 04 - 09:15 AM

T:

My remarks were limited to the observation about Cheney's mental state.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Apr 04 - 10:22 AM

That would tend to explain a great deal.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Apr 04 - 11:22 AM

But let me add thta many poeple would like to know more about their so-called President and often ask what he is really like. For those who really care, bo0rrowed from another thread and quoting Wm Shaxpere of ENgland, no less -- here is what he is really like, this aloof and secretive Mister Bush:

       MIster Bush is a knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; a
       base, proud, shallow, beggarly, three-suited,
       hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a
       lily-livered, action-taking knave, a whoreson,
       glass-gazing, super-serviceable finical rogue;
       one-trunk-inheriting slave; one that wouldst be a
       bawd, in way of good service, and is nothing but
       the composition of a knave, beggar, coward, pandar,
       and the son and heir of a mongrel bitch.

USually we just abbreviate the last element of that tirade.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Apr 04 - 04:53 AM

"Wm Shaxpere of ENgland"

Never heard of him or the place he come from.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Apr 04 - 03:21 PM

I am sorry -- but not surprised -- to hear as much, T. Unless you are just being snide about my typos.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Shlio
Date: 21 Apr 04 - 03:56 PM

Ouch - remind me never to get in an argument with you, Amos


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Apr 04 - 04:42 PM

Sorry, Shlio -- I just hate to see mass hypnosis succeed when it is for dubious ends.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: el ted
Date: 22 Apr 04 - 10:32 AM

Boring.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 24 Apr 04 - 11:29 AM

In other news, today's New York Times has an op-ed piece describing unintended consequences of our obsession with security since 9-11. The character of America is less than it was.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 30 Apr 04 - 08:18 AM

Twenty Nobel Prize winning scientists have joined a slew of others in condemning George Buish's anti-scientism. Scientific American covers the story in this article.

The man is a Ass.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: robomatic
Date: 30 Apr 04 - 02:07 PM

In Alaska I qualify as a liberal. Why? Because I only have three guns in the house, and one of them is an air rifle. All my friends in Alaska are gung ho for Bush. When I go back East it's the other way around. I'm the gun-loving ANWR desecratin' arch conservative. All my friends here are anti-war.

But I'm more tortured than that.

Herman Wouk wrote a novel "The Caine Mutiny" and a play called "The Caine Mutiny Courtmartial". The two were turned into a good 1954 war flick with Van Johnson, Fred McMurry, and a famous supporting role by Humphrey Bogart as Captain Queeg. The story was about a U.S. Navy minesweeper being captained by a fairly unsteady almost senile type, who impressed his crew as a chickenshit officer, a chickenshit being somebody who is both ineffective and domineering at the same time. During a tropical storm in which the ship is almost lost at sea, some officers take over the ship. In the resulting courtmartial they seem to be about to lose their case (which is potentially a capital one) when their lawyer, a slick one well aware of his own capabilities, puts their captain on the stand and leans on him so hard that some of his nervous traits appear (the famous ball bearings). The judges are swayed by his obvious instability to find the officers innocent.

That night the officers are celebrating their good fortune when their slick lawyer shows up having tied one on and very angry with everyone. He feels guilty as if he'd crucified Queeg. His message, and the author's, is: You guys had a choice. You knew you had a weak leader. But, you could have sucked it in and helped him as best you could, and played a part in the war effort against the real enemy. Instead you let pride and a poor knowledge of psychology lead you to create a dangerous legal mess and a drain on your country's resources. The lawyer felt sorry for the men because there was an additional character who had egged them into it, yet escaped being charged by the court.

George W. has his faults. He doesn't shine in debate, and he has a garbled way of expressing himself in public. I disagree with much of his domestic agenda and the folks he was working it. I personally think he does not have a deep background in foreign affairs.

But he is the leader of the U.S. and the free world at a time when we have a real enemy out there, and he deserves support no matter what we think of him personally. If our European allies out there were a bit less self-centered (and, yes, a bit more gutsy), they could have led us to a more cooperative effort that brought us under U.N. jurisdiction and it would have been better for everyone.

W is not a bad person. He is not a stupid person. He is no coward. He has a moral center. He is someone we can work with. That is the message that is not getting out, although I suspect that that could be Blair's perception of him and the situation, and the PM has been IMHO courageous and brilliant in putting the British into the fray on our side.

I think we will find out that France and Russia had their own more selfish Iraqi agendas. I think we are already finding out about major corruption in that paragon of ethics and upright standards, The United Nations.

The reality of the world is that it isn't just what you stand for but the way you stand. So the U.S. is up for justifiable criticism in how we have gone about what we've gone about. But the U.S. also deserves some help. Accusing W of being a worse menace than Osama or Hitler is just not on.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 30 Apr 04 - 02:19 PM

"You knew you had a weak leader. But, you could have sucked it in and helped him as best you could, and played a part in the war effort against the real enemy."

It seems like a false analogy to me. My belief is that Bush is not a weak leader, and not attacking the real enemy. Saddam and Iraq are not responsible for 911. But Mr Bush said some time ago that he didn't think about bin Laden very much any more.

Waist deep in the Big Muddy, as the folkies say.

clint


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 30 Apr 04 - 02:26 PM

Robo:

I appreciate your thoughtful argument.

I believe you give him too much credit, though. A moral center would surely flinch at falsifying major information; and surely would blanch at the needless deaths of American soldiers in pursuit of an enemy not clearly linked to the attack of 9-11. A moral center tends to generate more humility than arrogance. I don't see such a center at work in this man.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Bush a Dry Drunk?
From: Amos
Date: 01 May 04 - 01:54 PM

11 Hard Questions For Bush


Nush as Dry Drunk

Enjoy....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 01 May 04 - 02:52 PM

(If there's a clone out there who could change "Nush" to "Bush" in the above I would be grateful).

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 10 May 04 - 11:04 AM

From Slate

George W. Bush has governed, for the most part, the way any airhead might, undermining the fiscal condition of the nation, squandering the goodwill of the world after Sept. 11, and allowing huge problems (global warming, entitlement spending, AIDS) to metastasize toward catastrophe through a combination of ideology, incomprehension, and indifference. If Bush isn't exactly the moron he sounds, his synaptic misfirings offer a plausible proxy for the idiocy of his presidency.

Continued on this page...

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 10 May 04 - 11:21 AM

"See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction."—Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003

AN insensitivity to irony? This is a quote from W last October, leading a nation which possessed weapons of mass destruction and has used them to attack another nation, beginning war.

For a collection of Bush's best remarks see Bushisms.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 May 04 - 12:56 PM

Ah, you can't trust even the most conservative people not to eventually stab you in the back:

"Conservatives have become unusually restive. Last Tuesday, columnist George F. Will sharply criticized the administration's Iraq policy, writing: "This administration cannot be trusted to govern if it cannot be counted on to think and, having thought, to have second thoughts." Two days earlier, Robert Kagan, a neoconservative supporter of the Iraq war, wrote: "All but the most blindly devoted Bush supporters can see that Bush administration officials have no clue about what to do in Iraq tomorrow, much less a month from now."

I've lost the URL on this.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,noddy
Date: 11 May 04 - 11:43 AM

By now I thoght there was not a popular view of Bush possible.

well I know what I mean!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 May 04 - 09:14 PM

The system is crashing


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: dianavan
Date: 21 May 04 - 01:46 AM

Thanks, Amos - I wish I had written that!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 May 04 - 01:20 PM

In other news, the Guardian includes:

Terry Jones
Saturday May 22, 2004
The Guardian

Tony Blair tells us that we should do everything
we can to support America. And I agree. I think
we should repudiate those who inflict harm on
Americans, we should shun those who bring
America itself into disrepute and we should
denounce those who threaten the freedom and
democracy that are synonymous with being
American.

That is why Tony's recent announcement that he
wishes to stand shoulder to shoulder with George
Bush is so puzzling. It's difficult to think of
anyone who has inflicted more harm on Americans
than their current president.
...
If Tony Blair really were concerned about
helping Americans, he would surely be helping
them to reclaim their country and institutions
from this catastrophic presidency.
Terry Jones is a writer, film director, actor and Python

Full story at:

Guardian UK

Regards,

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 May 04 - 08:42 PM

President quietly toasts 2 graduations


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 24 May 04 - 08:45 PM

One sunny day in 2005 an old man approached the White House from
across Pennsylvania Avenue, where he'd been sitting on a park bench.
He spoke to the U.S. Marine standing guard and said, "I would like to
go in and meet with President Bush."

The Marine looked at the man and said, "Sir, Mr. Bush is no longer
president and no longer resides here."

The old man said, "Okay" and walked away.

The following day, the same man approached the White House and said
to the same Marine, "I would like to go in and meet with President
Bush." The Marine again told the man, "Sir, as I said yesterday, Mr.
Bush is no longer president and no longer resides here." The man
thanked him and, again, just walked away.

The third day, the same man approached the White House and spoke to
the very same U. S. Marine, saying "I would like to go in and meet
with President Bush."

The Marine, understandably agitated at this point, looked at the man
and said, "Sir, this is the third day in a row you have been here
asking to speak to Mr. Bush. I've told you already that Mr. Bush is
no longer the president and no longer resides here. Don't you
understand?"

The old man looked at the Marine and said, "Oh, I understand. I just
love hearing it."

The Marine snapped to attention, saluted, and said, "See you tomorrow."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 24 May 04 - 08:49 PM

May 12, 2004   (letter to the editor, as appeared in the Boston Globe)

THE BUSH administration seems to have a serious problem with reality. The most recent reality challenge is the policy of torture in both Iraq and Afghanistan, which the administration is frantically redefining as "abuse," "excesses," and "humiliation." We even have Secretary Rumsfeld describing footage of several American soldiers "having sex" with a female Iraqi prisoner. Let's have a little plain English here. "Having sex" with a prisoner is known as "rape." Systematic beatings are called "torture." Excesses that lead to death are called "murder." The hundreds of women and children in mass graves in Fallujah are the product of a "massacre." Taken together, all of these add up to "atrocities."

The dissemination of "incomplete information" from "imperfect intelligence" is called "lies." The billions of dollars that Halliburton and Bechtel have reaped in profits are called "war profiteering." The invasion of Iraq is called "illegal." The destruction of America's international standing is called "permanent." And Texaco/Phillips's high bid for Iraqi oil is called "why we are in Iraq."

ERICA VERRILLO Williamsburg



Did you notice when he spoke to the nation the slimeball had the nerve to say that the offenses committed at Abu Ghraib (which he could not pronounce) were the fault of "a few Americans who ignored American values" while sending troops in to blow up wedding parties, and unilateral invasions of foreign lands is obviosuly consistent with American values, I suppose? I spit!

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: dianavan
Date: 24 May 04 - 09:40 PM

Amos - It helps so much to know that there are still a few 'real' Americans left. Its so hard being in another country where the common belief is that most Americans support Bush. How will there ever be justice. Will the U.N. have the courage to push Bush out or will they wait until the reigns of power are transferred to the puppets.

And how will the American people ever redeem their reputation? I want America to be a beacon of hope for the world. How and when will Bush be held accountable? Will there ever be a way to try him for war crimes or crimes against humanity?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Metchosin
Date: 25 May 04 - 01:33 AM

The Devil Made Me Do It


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 27 May 04 - 04:52 PM

Yesterday, former Vice President Al Gore called for accountability for the Bush team in light of the fiasco in Iraq.   In the speech, Mr. Gore took on the Bush administration, arguing that the "abuse of the prisoners at Abu Ghraib flowed directly from the abuse of the truth that characterized the Administration's march to war and the abuse of the trust that had been placed in President Bush by the American people in the aftermath of September 11th." To sustained applause, he then called for the architects of the Bush foreign policy – Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, George Tenet, Paul Wolfowitz, and others -- to resign, arguing that "the current team is making things worse with each passing day."

You can read a full transcript of the speech and watch a great five-minute video of the highlights at:
this page

Mr. Gore began the speech by focusing on the policy of domination which pervades the Bush Administration:


"An American policy of dominance is as repugnant to the rest of the world as the ugly dominance of the helpless, naked Iraqi prisoners has been to the American people. Dominance is as dominance does."

"Dominance is not really a strategic policy or political philosophy at all. It is a seductive illusion that tempts the powerful to satiate their hunger for more power still by striking a Faustian bargain. And as always happens -- sooner or later -- to those who shake hands with the devil, they find out too late that what they have given up in the bargain is their soul."

This policy, he explained, is making us less safe as a country:


"The unpleasant truth is that President Bush's utter incompetence has made the world a far more dangerous place and dramatically increased the threat of terrorism against the United States. Just yesterday, the International Institute of Strategic Studies reported that the Iraq conflict " has arguable focused the energies and resources of Al Qaeda and its followers while diluting those of the global counterterrorism coalition." The ISS said that in the wake of the war in Iraq Al Qaeda now has more than 18,000 potential terrorists scattered around the world and the war in Iraq is swelling its ranks."

To sustained applause, he then called for the resignation of the Bush foreign policy team:

"One of the strengths of democracy is the ability of the people to regularly demand changes in leadership and to fire a failing leader and hire a new one with the promise of hopeful change. That is the real solution to America's quagmire in Iraq. But, I am keenly aware that we have seven months and twenty five days remaining in this president's current term of office and that represents a time of dangerous vulnerability for our country because of the demonstrated incompetence and recklessness of the current administration."

"It is therefore essential that even as we focus on the fateful choice, the voters must make this November that we simultaneously search for ways to sharply reduce the extraordinary danger that we face with the current leadership team in place. It is for that reason that I am calling today for Republicans as well as Democrats to join me in asking for the immediate resignations of those immediately below George Bush and Dick Cheney who are most responsible for creating the catastrophe that we are facing in Iraq."

"We desperately need a national security team with at least minimal competence because the current team is making things worse with each passing day. They are endangering the lives of our soldiers, and sharply increasing the danger faced by American citizens everywhere in the world, including here at home. They are enraging hundreds of millions of people and embittering an entire generation of anti-Americans whose rage is already near the boiling point."

"We simply cannot afford to further increase the risk to our country with more blunders by this team. Donald Rumsfeld, as the chief architect of the war plan, should resign today. His deputies Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith and his intelligence chief Stephen Cambone should also resign. The nation is especially at risk every single day that Rumsfeld remains as Secretary of Defense. Condoleezza Rice, who has badly mishandled the coordination of national security policy, should also resign immediately."

And, at the end, he called for us to hold Bush accountable in November:


"I want to speak on behalf of those Americans who feel that President Bush has betrayed our nation's trust, those who are horrified at what has been done in our name, and all those who want the rest of the world to know that we Americans see the abuses that occurred in the prisons of Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo and secret locations as yet undisclosed as completely out of keeping with the character and basic nature of the American people and at odds with the principles on which America stands."

"I believe we have a duty to hold President Bush accountable -- and I believe we will. As Lincoln said at our time of greatest trial, 'We -- even we here -- hold the power, and bear the responsibility.'"

To read the whole speech and watch video highlights of the best moments, go to:
http://www.moveonpac.org/gore/

Here are the first few paragraphs of a good write-up in the Washington Post:

GORE CALLS FOR TOP OFFICIALS TO RESIGN
DEMOCRAT ASSAILS BUSH'S WAR CABINET
By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 27, 2004; Page A03

Former vice president Al Gore accused President Bush's war cabinet of reckless incompetence yesterday and called for the resignations of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and CIA Director George J. Tenet.

"George W. Bush promised us a foreign policy with humility. Instead, he has brought us humiliation in the eyes of the world," Gore said at a speech in New York sponsored by the liberal MoveOn PAC. "We simply cannot afford to further increase the risk to our country with more blunders by this team."

Gore, jabbing his fingers and raising his voice to a shout, called the horrors of the Abu Ghraib prison "the predictable consequence of policy choices that flowed directly from this administration's contempt for the rule of law." His broad critique of that policy ranged from its aims to its vocabulary, and he complained about Bush aides' "frequent use of the word 'dominance' to describe their strategic goal."




Regards,

Amos


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 May 04 - 05:18 PM

Channel-surfing last night, I ran into the speech on CSPAN. Worst luck, I only heard part of it, but that was one helluva speech!! Who says Gore is "stiff and dull!???"

I wish Kerry would take a few vitamins and come on that strong!

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 27 May 04 - 06:39 PM

Extreme times bring out the extremes of character. Gore is suddenly exhibiting a capcity for articulate passion, while Bush is showing his for inarticulate destruction.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 10:35 AM

David Corn discusses Rumsfeld's falsifications about the Iraqi police status in this scathing article. These guys are such a bushel of crooks...I don't mean the Iraqis, be that as it may, but the fat Anglo warlords.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 02:27 PM

Thanks, Amos. I'm forwarding that article to a number of people.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 04:07 PM

Wired magazine summarizes how the Bush Administration has begun the process of undermining America's repute in scientific matters in this over view article examining the administration's policy on pseudoscience.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: dianavan
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 09:46 PM

Amos - Thanks again for the links. It is amazing to me that America and as a result, Americans have shrunk in stature in such a short space of time. Its like watching the fall of the Roman Empire.

I am wondering, however, if the propensity for forging ahead with new ideas without looking at previous examples, isn't happening everywhere in our fast paced world. It certainly happens alot in my career. I have taken part in many 'pilot projects' in education and have kept careful records of the results. I am almost never asked for the data or my conclusions. The next thing I know, someone has put the program in a glitzy package and is marketing the program world wide as the latest and greatest. Seems that everything is marketable with or without a rationale.

It is especially frightening when governments start messing with science to further their political agenda. Yes, Korea and China, too, will soon outflank the U.S. when it comes to scientific breakthroughs. Why? Because they are unencumbered by religious dogma. It is especially destructive when religious dogma and political conviction become a single force.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 13 Jun 04 - 12:25 PM

Documents recently obtained by the press reveal White House anxiety
about how to protect President George W. Bush and members of his cabinet from
going to prison
for ordering, authorizing or deliberately permitting
systematic torture of persons in their control, but technically outside
formal American legal jurisdiction. The question put to lawyers was how
the president and the others could commit war crimes and get away with
it.

This may be a much deeper scandal than originally thought. See this article from the International Herald Tribune.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: dianavan
Date: 13 Jun 04 - 12:51 PM

Amos - good link, thanks. Yes, if Bush gets away with this, it will change the face of America forever. The American people must see to it that he and his pals are punished or the scar on the face of America will remain. The question is, how will America redeem itself?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 13 Jun 04 - 01:22 PM

And for a lighter note, review ALL the Jon Styewart reports at Comedy Central. The man is a powerhouse!!

Thanks to Donuel for the original pointer!




A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 14 Jun 04 - 09:57 AM

From a recent column in Slate on the incompetence of Richard Feith of the Bush administration, a reader makes incisive comment:

Remarks from the Fray:

…The neoconservatives deliberately cherry-picked intelligence that would help them make a case for a war that they just assumed was necessary. They didn't care if any of the reasons they cited were true or not; only that they'd be believed.

They deliberately avoided submitting the Iraq problem to the United Nations Security Council out of fear that they might solve it, peacefully, without the need for an invasion.

Feith emphasized the WMD justification because he obviously thought that the Army would find SOMETHING connected to a WMD program that could then be used to justify the war retroactively.

After the war, when no weapons and no links to al-Qaida were found, the emphasis shifted to "building democracy," and all the good America was supposedly doing for the American people.

Was any of this actually thought out? No.

The Administration decided, for no clear reason, that it wanted to invade Iraq, and did so.

The failure to come up with a post-facto rational justification for an inherently irrational action isn't a sign of stupidity or brilliance.

It's just what happens when insanity paints you into a corner.

--Thrasymachus


Somehow I just have to love that last line.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: A Report Card for Wee Georgie...
From: Amos
Date: 17 Jun 04 - 11:56 PM

United States Grammar School Interim Report to Parents


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 18 Jun 04 - 10:41 AM

Bush behaving like Saddam, says Madonna


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jun 04 - 02:24 PM

Writing for the on-line edition of The Atlantic, Jack Beatty characterizes the Bush administration as the miserable failure it is. Click to read.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Jun 04 - 02:57 PM

Pretty damned depressing. But let's hope that there's a glimmer of intelligence somewhere amoung a sufficient number of voters. Otherwise, fasten your seatbelt and hold your breath, because it's going to be a messy ride as we head down the drain.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jun 04 - 08:19 PM

An excerpt from the above:


"The Founders feared that the republic would succumb to corruption without republican citizenship—without citizens who could transcend privatism and hold elected officials to account, demanding probity and competence, and judging their performance against both the clamorous necessities of the time and the mute claims of posterity. They made property a criterion for voting because it secured a measure of economic independence. Property-less wage laborers, they feared, would vote as their employers instructed them to. The extension of democracy to those who could not rise to the responsibilities of republican freedom would corrupt the republic—hasten its decay into oligarchy or mob rule.

For all their worldliness the Founders were naïve to regard property as a shield of incorruptibility or the property-less as inherently corruptible. Their core insight, however, remains valid. A republic can be corrupted at the top and bottom, by leaders and led. The re-election of George W. Bush would signal that a kind of corruption had set in among the led. Our miserable failure as republican citizens would match his as President."

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jun 04 - 09:48 PM

An interesting perspective distributed by "From the Wilderness", a commentary of the inside of Washington. It appears there may be some serious explosions over the plame expose, with serious legal impact on Bush and his core courtlings. An excerpt:

>The June 3rd issue of Capitol Hill Blue, the newspaper published for members
>of Congress, bore the headline "Bush Knew About Leak of CIA Operative's
>Name" .
>That article virtually guaranteed that the Plame investigation had enough to
>pursue Bush criminally. The story's lead sentence described a criminal,
>prosecutable offense: "Witnesses told a federal grand jury President George
>W. Bush knew about, and took no action to stop, the release of a covert CIA
>operative's name to a journalist in an attempt to discredit her husband, a
>critic of administration policy in Iraq."
>
>A day later, on June 4th Capitol Hill Blue took another hard shot at the
>administration. Titled "Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides"
> , the
>story's first four paragraphs say everything.
>
>President George W. Bush's increasingly erratic behavior and wide mood
>swings has the halls of the West Wing buzzing lately as aides privately
>express growing concern over their leader's state of mind.
>
>In meetings with top aides and administration officials, the President goes
>from quoting the Bible in one breath to obscene tantrums against the media,
>Democrats and others that he classifies as "enemies of the state."
>
>Worried White House aides paint a portrait of a man on the edge,
>increasingly wary of those who disagree with him and paranoid of a public
>that no longer trusts his policies in Iraq or at home.
>
>"It reminds me of the Nixon days," says a longtime GOP political consultant
>with contacts in the White House. "Everybody is an enemy; everybody is out
>to get him. That's the mood over there."
>
>The attacks have not stopped. On June 8th, the same paper followed with
>another story headlined, "Lawyers Told Bush He Could Order Suspects
>Tortured"
>.
>
>Journalist Wayne Madsen, a Washington veteran with excellent access to many
>sources has indicated for this story that the Neocons have few remaining
>friends anywhere. All of this is consistent with a CIA-led coup.
>

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: Suppression of Science by the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jun 04 - 10:18 AM

From the Times:

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration has ordered that government
scientists must be approved by a senior political appointee before they
can participate in meetings convened by the World Health Organization,
the leading international health and science agency.

A top official from the Health and Human Services Department in April
asked the WHO to begin routing requests for participation in its
meetings to the department's secretary for review, rather than directly
invite individual scientists, as has long been the case.

Officials at the WHO, based in Geneva, Switzerland, have refused to
implement the request thusfar, saying it could compromise the
independence of international scientific deliberations. Denis G.
Aitken, WHO assistant director-general, said Friday that he had been
negotiating with Washington in an effort to reach a compromise.

The request is the latest instance in which the Bush administration has
been accused of allowing politics to intrude into once-sacrosanct areas
of scientific deliberation. It has been criticized for replacing highly
regarded scientists with industry and political allies on advisory
panels. A biologist who was at odds with the administration's position
on stem-cell research was dismissed from a presidential advisory
commission. This year, 60 prominent scientists accused the
administration of "misrepresenting and suppressing scientific knowledge
for political purposes."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Metchosin
Date: 27 Jun 04 - 11:58 AM

Whoa, I was going to comment "Sieg Heil!", but that directive could have just as easily eminated from the former USSR.... odd thing about totalitarian orders.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 29 Jun 04 - 11:47 PM

If you want a brief overview of the blatant stupidity of the US "plan" in dealing with the settling of Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam's military, look over this historical recapby an NBC correspondent. It shows up how uncoordinated and short on thoughtfuil analysis we have been overall.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jun 04 - 12:35 AM

Iraq doubts keep Bush's popularity on the slide



George Bush's popularity fell to a new low yesterday in a poll which suggests that there is an increasing level of scepticism about the motives for the Iraq invasion and rising concern about its consequences.

Nearly 80% of the Americans questioned in the poll for the New York Times and CBS news thought he had been either "hiding something" or "mostly lying" in his statements on Iraq.

From The Guardian.

Regards,

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 06 Jul 04 - 07:00 PM

The OpEd page of the New York Times contains a scathing indictment, for two reasons.

One is the embarrassing things it says about the similarities between George today and the then-George of 1776 against whom the Declaration of Independence was written. It tries to be kind to our present George.

The other is because of the many direct things it pussyfoots around, as though it would be a shame to name his madness for what it is. And I am not referring to Hanover, here.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: Ashcroft Wins Villainy Award
From: Amos
Date: 07 Jul 04 - 09:20 AM

John Ashcroft has been named Villain of the month for yet further incursions into ordinary rights of privacy.

Somehow, his little face reminds me of certain 20-th century generals from Europe.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: Ashcroft As Fascist
From: Amos
Date: 07 Jul 04 - 06:44 PM

A New Angle onSuppressing Information: Do It Retroactively!


A.



WASHINGTON -- Sifting through old classified materials in the days after
the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, FBI translator Sibel Edmonds said, she made
an alarming discovery: Intercepts relevant to the terrorist plot,
including references to skyscrapers, had been overlooked because they
were badly translated into English.

Edmonds, 34, who is fluent in Turkish and Farsi, said she quickly
reported the mistake to an FBI superior. Five months later, after
flagging what she said were several other security lapses in her
division, she was fired. Now, after more than two years of
investigations and congressional inquiries, Edmonds is at the center of an
extraordinary storm over US classification rules that sheds new light on the secrecy
imperative supported by members of the Bush administration.

In a rare maneuver, Attorney General John Ashcroft has ordered that
information about the Edmonds case be retroactively classified, even
basic facts that have been posted on websites and discussed openly in
meetings with members of Congress for two years. The Department of
Justice also invoked the seldom-used ''state secrets" privilege to
silence Edmonds in court. She has been blocked from testifying in a
lawsuit brought by victims of the Sept. 11 attacks and was allowed to
speak to the panel investigating the Sept. 11 attacks only behind closed
doors.

Meanwhile, the FBI has yet to release its internal investigation into
her charges. And the Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees the bureau,
has been stymied in its attempt to get to the bottom of her allegations.
Now that the case has been retroactively classified, lawmakers are wary
of discussing the details, for fear of overstepping legal bounds.



See http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/07/05/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 07 Jul 04 - 06:55 PM

Further on the above case:

"There's a great deal more info on this at
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Sibel_Edmonds
including a link to a lengthy, detailed, and coherent interview
from July 1: http://antiwar.com/news/?articleid=2920

Some of this may sound fantastic but see
(http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/25/60minutes/main526954.shtml)


"She's credible," says Sen. Grassley. "And the reason I feel she's very
credible is because people within the FBI have corroborated a lot of
her story."

Regards,

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: jack halyard
Date: 08 Jul 04 - 05:07 PM

I just heard a news analysis of the military tribunal process being used to try David Hicks. It is the most Stalinist show trial since the end of the Soviet Union. Hicks has no chance of being cleared and no chance of liberty unless Bush and Howard agree on a pre-election act of mercy. Truth, Justice and the American way! I say Bush needs to be up before an international court himself. He's a bully, a thug and a proven liar.   Jack Halyard.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: TIA
Date: 08 Jul 04 - 06:21 PM

For this bunch, EVERYTHING is politics. The latest - the Bush Admin is pressuring Pakistan to kill or capture "high value targets" on July 26, 27, or 28 in order to upstage the Dem. convention.   Here is the story.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 08 Jul 04 - 06:53 PM

An excerpt:
PAKISTAN FOR BUSH.
July Surprise?
by John B. Judis, Spencer Ackerman & Massoud Ansari
Post date: 07.07.04
Issue date: 07.19.04

ate last month, President Bush lost his greatest advantage in his bid for reelection. A poll conducted by ABC News and The Washington Post discovered that challenger John Kerry was running even with the president on the critical question of whom voters trust to handle the war on terrorism. Largely as a result of the deteriorating occupation of Iraq, Bush lost what was, in April, a seemingly prohibitive 21-point advantage on his signature issue. But, even as the president's poll numbers were sliding, his administration was implementing a plan to insure the public's confidence in his hunt for Al Qaeda.


This spring, the administration significantly increased its pressure on Pakistan to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman Al Zawahiri, or the Taliban's Mullah Mohammed Omar, all of whom are believed to be hiding in the lawless tribal areas of Pakistan. A succession of high-level American officials--from outgoing CIA Director George Tenet to Secretary of State Colin Powell to Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca to State Department counterterrorism chief Cofer Black to a top CIA South Asia official--have visited Pakistan in recent months to urge General Pervez Musharraf's government to do more in the war on terrorism. In April, Zalmay Khalilzad, the American ambassador to Afghanistan, publicly chided the Pakistanis for providing a "sanctuary" for Al Qaeda and Taliban forces crossing the Afghan border. "The problem has not been solved and needs to be solved, the sooner the better," he said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 09 Jul 04 - 07:29 AM

and what follows Amos' excerpt is...

This public pressure would be appropriate, even laudable, had it not been accompanied by an unseemly private insistence that the Pakistanis deliver these high-value targets (HVTs) before Americans go to the polls in November. The Bush administration denies it has geared the war on terrorism to the electoral calendar. "Our attitude and actions have been the same since September 11 in terms of getting high-value targets off the street, and that doesn't change because of an election," says National Security Council spokesman Sean McCormack. But The New Republic has learned that Pakistani security officials have been told they must produce HVTs by the election. According to one source in Pakistan's powerful Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), "The Pakistani government is really desperate and wants to flush out bin Laden and his associates after the latest pressures from the U.S. administration to deliver before the [upcoming] U.S. elections." Introducing target dates for Al Qaeda captures is a new twist in U.S.-Pakistani counterterrorism relations--according to a recently departed intelligence official, "no timetable[s]" were discussed in 2002 or 2003--but the November election is apparently bringing a new deadline pressure to the hunt. Another official, this one from the Pakistani Interior Ministry, which is responsible for internal security, explains, "The Musharraf government has a history of rescuing the Bush administration. They now want Musharraf to bail them out when they are facing hard times in the coming elections." (These sources insisted on remaining anonymous. Under Pakistan's Official Secrets Act, an official leaking information to the press can be imprisoned for up to ten years.)

A third source, an official who works under ISI's director, Lieutenant General Ehsan ul-Haq, informed tnr that the Pakistanis "have been told at every level that apprehension or killing of HVTs before [the] election is [an] absolute must." What's more, this source claims that Bush administration officials have told their Pakistani counterparts they have a date in mind for announcing this achievement: "The last ten days of July deadline has been given repeatedly by visitors to Islamabad and during [ul-Haq's] meetings in Washington." Says McCormack: "I'm aware of no such comment." But according to this ISI official, a White House aide told ul-Haq last spring that "it would be best if the arrest or killing of [any] HVT were announced on twenty-six, twenty-seven, or twenty-eight July"--the first three days of the Democratic National Convention in Boston.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: More Ashcroft Crimes
From: Amos
Date: 09 Jul 04 - 05:53 PM

CHARLESTON, W.Va. - Two Corpus Christi residents were arrested during
President Bush's visit to the West Virginia Capitol to honor the
country's veterans and gather support for invading Iraq.

Nicole and Jeffery Rank were taken out from among the crowd of about
6,500 packed into the Capitol's north courtyard in restraints by
police.
They were issued citations for trespassing and released, said Jay
Smithers, acting director of the Capitol police force.

"We were told we couldn't be here because we were wearing these shirts
that said we were against Bush," Nicole Rank shouted as police rushed
her out.

Smithers said the pair had tickets to the event and wore clothing over
their anti-Bush T-shirts. Once through the security checkpoint, they
removed their outer layers and mingled in the crowd.

"We asked them to go out to the designated protest area but they
refused," Smithers said. "They told our people they would not leave and
sat down on their hands. We didn't have any choice."




How about it folks? An appropriate response by a well-managed Administration? Or an effort to suppress dissent, quell free speech, and create false impressions of unanamity in a manner akin top Saddam's "election"

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 10 Jul 04 - 07:41 AM

The latter, the latter...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jul 04 - 10:44 AM

The LA Times excoriates the Bush administrations long-term dedication to defrauding the US populace.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jul 04 - 09:23 PM

"WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush says legalizing gay marriage would redefine the most fundamental institution of civilization and that a constitutional amendment is needed to protect it.

A few activist judges and local officials have taken it on themselves to change the meaning of marriage, Bush said Saturday in his weekly radio address.

Leading the chorus of support for an amendment, Bush said, "If courts create their own arbitrary definition of marriage as a mere legal contract, and cut marriage off from its cultural, religious and natural roots, then the meaning of marriage is lost and the institution is weakened."

His remarks follow the opening of Senate debate Friday on a constitutional amendment effectively banning gay marriage.

Reflecting the election-year sensitivity of the issue, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said Republicans are using the constitutional amendment as a bulletin board for campaign sloganeering."


Has anyone pointed out to this lame-brained sack of sorry stupidity that the United States Consittiution is an ARCHITECTURE, and not a handbook of moral knee-jerk platitudes? Does he have any IDEA how he is degrading the most inspired social experiment ever designed, and dooming it to sorry desuetude by undermining it this way? He wants to take the moral value-judgements of a minority and make them boss by messing with the Consittution of the United States. The man is psychotic, I tell ya!!

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jul 04 - 10:08 PM

So, ahhhhh, what's new, Amos.....

Heck, when his lawyers and goon squads hyjacked the 2000 Election it was purdy danged apparent what these nazis had in mind...

And now you are surprised?

A few of us have been trying to tell folks what has gone down in America and it ain't too purdy...

BTW, great article by Robert Scheer in the LA Times...

And as fir the supposed 2004 Election? It's gonna take at least a 5% point win by Kerry to get rid of these crooks since the crooks have Diebold, the ballot counters on their side. Heck, make it 6%, maybe 7% just to win a friggin' election....

Like you said, these folks don't mind one bit messin' with the Constitution or any other law... fir that matter.

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 11 Jul 04 - 12:44 PM

From the Washington Post:

ALBUQUERQUE, July 10 -- President Bush has governed in a dishonest fashion, trampling values on every issue except fighting terrorism and leaving voters "clamoring for restoration of credibility and trust in the White House again," John F. Kerry and John Edwards said in an interview.






"The value of truth is one of the most central values in America, and this administration has violated" it, Kerry said in an interview with The Washington Post aboard the Democrats' campaign plane Friday. "Their values system is distorted and not based on truth."


The Democratic nominee and his running mate said it was that kind of anger toward the president that prompted entertainers at Thursday's Democratic fundraising concert in New York to attack Bush as a "cheap thug" and a killer. "Obviously some performers, in my judgment and John's, stepped over a line neither of us believes appropriate, but we can't control that," Kerry said. "On the other hand, we understand the anger, we understand the frustration."

Wow!! Even hearing a politician TALK about such a thing gets me all wet.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Terry Allan Hall
Date: 11 Jul 04 - 06:51 PM

Time to re-decorate the White House...throw out some bushes and install some johns...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jul 04 - 07:57 PM

I read that article, Amos, and I am warming up to Kerry one step at a time...

When he says that restoring honesty to the executive branch he's saying stuff that needs to be said. I'm glad he's steppin' to the plate.

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 01:02 PM

Give it back, George (Greg Palast GregPalast.com )

Give it back, George


Bush and Republicans should give up ill-gotten Lay loot that bought the White House


When the feds swoop down and cuff racketeers, they also load the vans with all the perp's ill-gotten gains: stacks of cash, BMWs, whatever. Their associates have to cough up the goodies too: lady friends must give up their diamond rocks. Under the racketeering law, RICO, even before a verdict, anything bought with the proceeds of the crime goes into the public treasury.

But there seems to be special treatment afforded those who loaded up on the 'bennies' of Ken Lay's crimes. If the G-men don't know where the tainted loot is cached, try this address: 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Ask for George or Dick.

Ken Lay and his Enron team are the ! Number One political career donors to George W. Bush. Mr. Lay and his Mrs., with no money to pay back bilked creditors, still managed to personally put up $100,000 for George's inaugural Ball plus $793,110 for personal donations to Republicans. Lay's Enron team dropped $4.2 million into the party that let Enron party.

OK now, Mr. President, give it back -- the millions stuffed in the pockets of the Republican campaign kitty stolen from Enron retirees. And what else did Ken Lay buy with the money stolen from California electricity customers? Answer: the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Just before George Bush moved to Washington, Kenny-Boy handed his hand-picked president-to-be the name of the man Ken wanted as Chairman of the commission charged with investigating Enron's thievery. In a heartbeat, George Bush appointed Ken's boy,! Pat Wood.

Think about that: the criminal gets to pick the police chief. Well, George, give it back. Dump Wood and end the de-criminalization of electricity price-gouging that you and Cheney and Wood laughably call "de-regulation." Give us back the government Lay bought with crime cash.

And while we're gathering up the ill-gotten loot, let's stop by Brother Jeb's. The Governor of Florida picked up a cool $2 million from a Houston fundraiser at the home of Enron's former president long AFTER the company went bankrupt. Enron, not incidentally, obtained half a billion of Florida state pension money -- which has now disappeared down the Enron rat-hole.

And Mr. Vice-President, don't you also have something to give back? In secret meetings with Dick Cheney in the Veep's bunker prior to the inauguration and after, you let Ken and his cohorts secretly draft the nation's energy plan -- taking a short break to eye oilfield maps of Iraq. Let us remember that the President's sticky-fingered brothers Neil and Marvin were on Enron's payroll, hired to sell pipelines to the Saudis. The Saudis didn't bite, but maybe a captive Iraq would be more pliant. So, Mr. Law and Order President, please follow the law and give up the Energy Plan that Mr. Lay bought with other people's money.

When I worked as a racketeering investigator for government, nothing was spared, including houses bought with purloined loot. Let there be no exception here. It's time to tape up the White House gate and hang the sign: "Crime Scene: Property to be Confiscated. Vacate Premises Immediately."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 03:10 PM

Subject: Please help right away -- we've got to stick together

Dear Mudcatter,

Congress is about to vote on amending the U.S. Constitution to deny marriage equality to same-sex couples.

Never before has our Constitution been amended to take away anyone's rights. Yet our Senators will vote on this amendment in the next 48 hours.

It's urgent that we speak up now. This hateful divisiveness has no place in America. Please join me in saying so, at:

http://www.moveon.org/unitednotdivided/

Equality in marriage is the civil rights issue of our generation. We can't let anyone, or any group, be singled out for discrimination based on who they are or who they love.

Thank you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 03:19 PM

Hear, hear.

There is no place in the Constitution for such an amendment. If there is a problem with the religious definition of marriage being threatened by same-sex unions, then the use of marriage by the US government (taxing status, for example)is an unlawful incursion of religion into state.

Bruce


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 04:23 PM

I'll be goddamned!! Bruce, a post after my own heart!!

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Peace
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 04:40 PM

When bad people are allowed to chip away at a cherished document, soon the words thereon will be perverted to other ends. The Constitution of the United States of America is looked up to world wide. I wish Canada had such a document. I think Americans should not allow this to happen. I hope they don't. The issue is NOT gay marriage. The issue is human freedom. Stop the bastards. Please.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 04:43 PM

Bobert:

From Wired News today:

Critics of electronic voting are suing Diebold under a whistleblower law, alleging that the company's shoddy balloting equipment exposed California elections to hackers and software bugs.

California's attorney general unsealed the lawsuit Friday. It was filed in November but sealed under a provision that keeps such actions secret until the government decides whether to join the plaintiffs.

Lawmakers from Maryland to California are expressing doubts about the integrity of paperless voting terminals made by several large manufacturers, which up to 50 million Americans will use in November.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 10:25 PM

Refraichir pour le Bobert....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 10:40 PM

Sorry, Amos, but I'm not too sure if I took French in college but if I did I was too stoned to remember any of it....

Hey, who kidnapped beardedbruce? The one who posted above obviously ain't the one postin' under that handle on them I-rack threads....

Ahhhhh, back to you, Amos.... Yeah, I know that there's lots of states who ain't all that happy with Diebold. It's obvious 'er Bush wouldn't even bother to pull this sleeze politcial crap about the Constituional Ammendment. They are desperate. The prize is in sight. Four more years and they'll not only turn back the clock to pre-Emancipation Proclaimation days but have the entire working class, back, white, red and green, picking Boss Hog's cotton...

Glory days....

I'm beginning to agree with Dreaded GUEST. Buy guns!!!...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 11:09 PM

World-Class Doublespeak

If you want a real world class example of doublespeak, read the release from the Gummint on changing the rules about logging. The Times' version is here. Requires a free subscription/cookie.

These guys flip flop and say their new policies are providing conservational guidelines as though this was an improvement. Look a little closer and lo!! Thousands of acres open to logging that were previously closed. So GLAD they're taking care of things,.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 11:17 PM

Shoot, all they are doing is creating more fuel for forest fires by cuttin' old growth timber and leavin' everything but the "log" to sit there jus' dryin' out and gettin' ready to burn, baby, burn...

Then, of course, they'll blame Clinton for the forest fire... Man, them cigars will get you in a heap o' trouble...

I am convinced that given truth over lieing they will pick the lie 101 times out of a 100...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 11:59 PM

It seems to be what they have the most practice at.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 08:31 AM

"Wow!! Even hearing a politician TALK about such a thing gets me all wet."

(Amos on a Washington Post article)

What a weird expression to use. Wet with what?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 08:45 AM

Bobert,

I happen to believe that the Constitution should be kept as it is- I object to liberals trying to remove the second amendment, and conservatives trying to weaken the separation of church and state.

I object to changing the Electoral College- the states have always had the right to make their Electoral College votes proportional to the votes recieved, but very few have. ANd that has been under the control of both parties, so no blaming the neocons there.

And I object to people here who deny that the Supreme Court is the deciding legal authority of the land. Face it, Bush was elected legally. You may not like it, and even I will admit it may have made better political sense to have a recount ( of the ENTIRE state, not just the ones where the Dems expected to pick up votes, which is what Gore asked for) in the 2000 election, but the Constitution allows the Supreme Court to make the decision it did.

If one allows changes to the bill of rights for trivial reasons, the intent of the founding fathers ( see the Federalist Papers) will not be preserved. So far, I think we can agree that that intent has stood the test of time.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 08:47 AM

So I hear this familiar voice last night on the news saying, "So I had a choice to make: either take the word of a madman or defend America. Given that choice I will defend America".

Well I was thinkin' there fir a second, "Hmmmm, why would the new choose to air someone talking that mean about Bush? I mean calling him a mad man, and all?"

So I look up to see who it is on the TV and it *IS* Bush... Imean, go figure???

Well, I think I'll take his advice and "defend America" against a "madman" by voting for someone other than Bush...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 08:54 AM

That was not an election, but an appointment.

In addition, it violated provisions of the Constitution concerning the authority of the Florida Supreme Court.

So it wasn't as perfectly legal as all that,. But we abided by the decision of the Supreme Court thinking that was the honorable thing to do. Despite all the appearances of impropriety within the Court itself.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 08:54 AM

Voting for the candidate that you feel will represent your views the best is the appropriate thing to do.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 09:01 AM

Amos,

"That was not an election, but an appointment."

This is a statement of your opinion. If you intend to present it as a statement of fact, please show me the legal rulings you are drawing upon. In MY opinion, the attempt by the Gore campaign to recount ontly the precincts that they felt would give them an advantage, and denial of both recounts and absentee ballots in areas where they expected to have Bush win was a blatent attempt to steal the election.
In my opinion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 09:10 AM

Fir all the un-Gorey details, Greg Palist's book, "The Best Denocracy Money Can Buy" has them all. Photocopies of documents, the connectin' of dots, and enough evidence to warrent 5 members of the Supreme Court, as well and Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris resiging from public office...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 09:17 AM

If it was evidence, why has there been no court case? Sounds like even the Dems do not think that they have a case.


I csn only go by the reports that I got during the election, from the radio and tv- that presented the press liasons of both campaigns. I HEARD the Dems asking that only the three districts that they thought should have had a higher vote for them be recounted, and that there was no reason to consider counting any others, especially those in the ( conservative) panhandle.



Anyway, by the SRS rule, No one needs to look at any evidence that you present from an obviously partisan source. Sorry.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 10:20 AM

First of all, the Dems are caught between a rock and hard place. If they cry "foul" then the "Repubs" jump up an down and cry "bad loosers".

Actually a case was brought in a Florida court by I believe the NAACP but the Repub. lawyers and Repub, appointed judges squashed it...

As fir partisanship, since you haven't been around here long, I have been a Green Party mamber going back since the Bush I, so I have no particular love for the Democratic Party...

Both the Repubs and Dems. are fully capable of stinking up the joint. With that said, I may (but may not) hold my nose and gvote for Kerry only to derail what even lots of us Greens see as a very, very dangerous Bush administartion...

This ain't partisanship. Just reality...

The checks and balances are way too out of wack and these current Repubs are making a push for complete and centralized control. Historically, this as been a bad combination and is one early warning that a system is ripe for implosion...

But back to the book...

I'll make you the same deal that I've made other Bushites. If you read Palist's book, I'll read any neo-con book you want me to. But I'm going to quiz you on it and expect the same from you...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Chris Green
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 01:27 PM

George Bush is an incompetent halfwit who isn't fit to run a knocking shop. Tony Blair is a marginally less incompetent halfwit who is probably just about fit to run a knocking shop but on being given the responsibility would instantly turn to George Bush for advice (or 'orders' as the rest of the world likes to call them).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 01:32 PM

George Bush is an incompetent halfwit who isn't fit to run a knocking shop.

I have no idea what gets done in a knocking shop, but I am sympathetic to the first half of your proposition.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: More Criminality From our Esteemed Congress
From: Amos
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 05:38 PM

---| From the Editor |--------------------------------------

    Last year, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) proposed an
    amendment that would criminalize war profiteering. The
    Republican leadership not only removed it, but raised
    the limit on no-bid contracts from $7.5 million to $200
    million. At home, pork spending has enjoyed a stunning
    renaissance, from the creation of a $225 million African
    rainforest in Iowa, to a subsidy, procured by Rep. Billy
    Tauzin (R-La.), to help build a Hooters restaurant. Tom
    Delay, meanwhile, browbeat a D.C. restaurant manager to
    let him smoke a cigar at his table. Told that federal
    this would be against the law of the federal government,
    DeLay thundered back, "I am the federal government!"
    The 108th Congress, writes Jack Hitt, has been one of
    the most profligate - and least principled - in nearly a
    century. No shortage of candidates, then, for this year's
    Diddly Awards, Mother Jones' tribute to the most
    pork-happy, prejudiced, and pigheaded members of Congress.
    Writes Hitt, "[E]ven as they have scoffed at the rules the
    rest of us plebs must live by and spent like drunken
    sailors," members of the 108th Congress "still found myriad
    opportunities to, once again, do diddly."
   
See >http://ga3.org/ct/Z1affE61iaGn/

    Julian Brookes
    Assistant Editor, MotherJones.com


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 08:09 PM

The corruption of Tom Delay and his connection with the Enron debacle is discussed in the NY Times Op Ed piece by Paul Krugman.

This administration is so tangled up with big company bucks it is shameful. Not because of the profit motive but because they have done it at the expense of people all over the country who weren't even aware they were being scammed.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jul 04 - 09:51 PM

The Wsahington Post also ran a story on the Delay scandal but its 12 pages long (printed off the pudder) and my lexdexia keeps kickin' in around page 6 'er seven...

Man, geeze o pete. This guy is not only a crook but he may end up sharin' a cell with his buddy, Ken Lay...

More later on this story as it prolly deserves its own thread...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Fishpicker
Date: 14 Jul 04 - 03:38 PM

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller

This is more timely today than ever before, just fill in the examples with contemporary ones.

                         FP


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Jul 04 - 05:34 PM

And will ya look at the ignoramouses waitin' in line to sign up for their brown shirts?!!!?... Dumbed down so called Christains who wouldn't know Jesus if He walked up to them across the water.... Being led by a heathenous group of thugs, liars, crooks and cheats.

Hmmmmm. Guest is right. It is time to start buying guns so when they do come for the progressives and moderates at least it won't be cake walk...

And sho nuff... they are coming... don't take a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows...

Non-violent Bobert
(but will defend myself and my family...)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Fishpicker
Date: 14 Jul 04 - 07:32 PM

Fighting for freedom are we? I wonder why our freedom is being systematically taken away from us if that is the case. The real *terror* is being slowly and surely ushered into a martial law police state with no protection from the high handed government neo-con overlords. This is one time I'm glad to be an old man! I truly am worried for what kind of future my kids will have in this country.

                         FP


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 Jul 04 - 08:36 PM

And Tom DeLay proudly proclaims himself to be a "Born Again Christian." Sheesh!!

Maybe that should be "convenience 'Christian.'"

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Jul 04 - 11:27 PM

Where's Tom DeLay's mama? He may think he's born again but his de*mean*or and actions show that he needs to be stuffed back in. He ain't half ready to be born again...

((((((((((((((((((((Judge thee not, Bobert!)))))))))))))))))))))

Nevermind, ol' Tom's got somethin' serious comin' down the road...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Jul 04 - 01:33 PM

This New York Times editorial apologizes for not having had more sense about the fraudulent claims concerning WMD and the drum-beating in favor of war which it did not do enough to analyze.

If a newspaper can take responsibility for its follies, surely a President should be able to.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Jul 04 - 05:26 PM

Whoopi Goldberg has defended her choice to attack US president George W Bush which led to her being dropped as a spokeswoman for diet aid company Slim-Fast.

Bosses at Slim-Fast dropped the star from their ad campaign, after admitting they were disappointed in her remarks at last Thursday's star-studded fundraiser for presidential hopeful John Kerry at Radio City Music Hall in New York.

Goldberg caused offence at the event, when, according to the New York Post she "fired off a stream of vulgar sexual wordplays on Bush's name in a riff about female genitalia".

An unrepentant Goldberg hit back in a written statement. "Just because I'm no longer in those (commercial) spots, it doesn't mean I will stop talking.

"While I can appreciate what the Slim-Fast people need to do in order to protect their business, I must also do what I need to do as an artist, as a writer and as an American - not to mention as a comic."

"I only wish that the Republican re-election committee would spend as much time working on the economy as they seem to be spending trying to harm my pocketbook."


Get it said, you San Diego gal, you!! Get it SAAIIIID!!! Yeehaw. Go, Whoopi.



A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Jul 04 - 07:20 PM

Guinan is centuries old and very wise. When those who cruise the gaxaly find themselves in a state of bewilderment, a few moments in 10-Forward chatting with Guinan usually puts them back on course.

Make it so.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Jul 04 - 08:08 PM

Man, do I have a dislexic keyboard! That should be "galaxy"!

(Maybe I'd better head for 10-Forward and have a snort of synthahol and a long chat with the bartender.)

Don (Sheesh!) Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 17 Jul 04 - 11:11 AM

The details on the snookering of law by the Republicans who used technical procedural manuvers to prevent the rollback of the Patriot Act are covered on this web page.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 17 Jul 04 - 11:13 AM

NEW YORK - Cartoonist Garry Trudeau, who has skewered politicians for
decades in his comic strip "Doonesbury," tells Rolling Stone magazine he
remembers Yale classmate George W. Bush as "just another sarcastic preppy
who gave people nicknames and arranged for keg deliveries."

Trudeau attended Yale University with Bush in the late 1960s and served with
him on a dormitory social committee.

"Even then he had clearly awesome social skills," Trudeau said. "He could
also make you feel extremely uncomfortable ... He was extremely skilled at
controlling people and outcomes in that way. Little bits of perfectly placed
humiliation."

Trudeau said he penned his very first cartoon to illustrate an article in
the Yale Daily News on Bush and allegations that his fraternity, DKE, had
hazed incoming pledges by branding them with an iron.

The article in the campus paper prompted The New York Times to interview
Bush, who was a senior that year. Trudeau recalled that Bush told the Times
"it was just a coat hanger, and ... it didn't hurt any more than a cigarette
burn."

"It does put one in mind of what his views on torture might be today,"
Trudeau said.

Having mocked presidents of both parties in the "Doonesbury" strip since
1971, Trudeau said Bush has been, "tragically, the best target" he's worked
with yet.

"Bush has created more harm to this country's standing and security than any
president in history," Trudeau said. "What a shame the world has to suffer
the consequences of Dubya not getting enough approval from Dad."

Rolling Stone was publishing the interview Friday.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 19 Jul 04 - 03:40 PM

Washington Post editorial stresses the need for accountability for the deaths of hundreds in Iraq, inter alia.

"The toll on America is all the more galling because of how the country went to war. We now know we were told a great many things that turned out to be untrue. Bush administration officials, relying on unfounded, distorted and exaggerated intelligence concerning weapons threats, took the country down a path that has led to a catastrophic waste of human lives as well as billions of dollars.

Let's consider just a few of the things that were conveyed as the gospel truth:

• "The Iraq regime is a threat of unique urgency. . . . [I]t has developed weapons of mass destruction." President Bush, Oct. 2, 2002.

• "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." Vice President Cheney, Aug. 26, 2002.

• "We said they had a nuclear program. That was never any debate." Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, July 13, 2003.

...

Martha Stewart was convicted for, among several offenses, lying to the government. What's the penalty when the government misleads the people?"



Regards,

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jul 04 - 09:31 PM

A popular downtown bar installed a robotic bartender.


One evening shortly after, a fellow came into the bar for a drink and
the robot asked him, "What's your IQ?"

The guy replied, "150."

The robot proceeded to make conversation about quantum physics,
string theory, atomic chemistry, and other esoteric topics.

The fellow listened intently and thought, "Hey, this is great!"




He decided to test the robot, so he walked out of the bar, turned
around, and came back in.

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

He responded, "100," and the robot held forth on about football,
baseball, and a variety of other sports.

Again, the customer thought, "Wow, this is really cool!"




He went out and came into the bar for a third time.

As before, the robot asked him, "What's your IQ?"

This time he replied, "50."

And the robot said, "So, you gonna vote for Bush again?"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jul 04 - 10:12 PM

As to what the candidates actually represent:

http://cdn.moveonpac.org/data/debate.mov

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Jul 04 - 11:09 PM

You try that blue clicky thing, Amos???.... Don't want load fir me....

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jul 04 - 11:36 AM

Try:

http://cdn.moveonpac.org/data/debate.mov

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: Rock Stars Say No More Bushwah
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 01:24 AM

Opinion-leaders in the rock-star constellation are joining forces to speak out with music against Bush in 2004 according to this article in the LA Times.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 05:49 PM

Saddam's People Are Winning the War
By Scott Ritter
International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/articles/530608.html


    Thursday 22 July 2004
Misunderstanding Iraq


Mister Ritter makes some telling points about the failure of the Bush administration among others to understand the real dynamics of the Iraq situation.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 10:24 PM

FEEL-GOOD SPEAK
Cheney this

BY CONGRESSMAN BARNEY FRANK, FOURTH DISTRICT, MASSACHUSETTS

With increasing pressure on the FCC to step up its role as censor, finding
language that appropriately communicates the depths of one's feeling
(especially when speaking on the record or within earshot of the press)
while remaining within the bounds of propriety has become difficult. As a
public-spirited move, I am recommending to my fellow elected officials - and
to others engaged in public controversies - a semantic solution to this
dilemma: use the word "Cheney" where discretion is required in the
expression of frustration, anger, or extreme derision.

Here are some examples of how this would work.

* Go Cheney yourself.

* How the Cheney would I know?

* Cheney you.

* I don't give a flying Cheney.

* Who the Cheney do you think you are?

In some cases, substitution of Cheney for its synonym would be particularly
appropriate. For example:

* George Bush sure has Cheneyed up the situation in Iraq.

* The Bush administration's position is that it is none of our Cheneying
business who helped formulate its pro-oil energy policy.

* In some cases, Halliburton seems to be Cheneying the American taxpayer.

Vice-President Cheney himself said after using the blunter word that it made
him feel better. It makes me feel better to suggest a way of expressing the
same sentiments while paying appropriate tribute to the vice-president's
role in our society.

(Recvd via email -- source not verified. A.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jul 04 - 11:15 PM

An Excuse-Spouting Bush Is Busted

 

July 27, 2004



Robert Scheer


Busted! Like a teenager whose beer bash is interrupted by his parents' early return home, President Bush's nearly three years of bragging about his "war on terror" credentials has been exposed by the bipartisan 9/11 commission as nothing more than empty posturing.


http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-scheer27jul27,1,7719764.column?coll=la-home-utilities


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 04 - 11:44 PM

Why don't we just rename this thread 'Amos's View of the Bush Administration'?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 28 Jul 04 - 12:05 AM

Because all of the reports in this thread are taken from amongst the population at large, not me. I do choose ones that I agree with. I can count on Bush' s Juggernaut machinery to take care of itself in a Fair and Balanced way.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 28 Jul 04 - 02:32 AM

it's ok, GUEST, if you want to stick in a view that you agree with. Honest.

clint


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Deda
Date: 31 Jul 04 - 02:47 PM

Amos, as everyone knows, is a very articulate and intelligent guy. If he wanted to maintain a thread about his own political judgments, he could do that. This thread is a service AFAIC, disseminating material from the general press that I would otherwise have missed. Thanks, bro!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 31 Jul 04 - 03:08 PM

Aw shucks...thanks, Deda!


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 31 Jul 04 - 03:35 PM

An interesting example of Republican misappropriation of public spaces (school auditoriums) paid for by common taxes. Tsk, tsk. Arrogance cometh before a fall...


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 31 Jul 04 - 04:50 PM

Teresa Hampton, writing for the "Capitol Hill Blue" Website, raises the possibility that Bush is on psychopharmaceuticals big time in this article.

How depressed is he? "One long-time GOP political consultant who - for obvious reasons -asked not to be identified said he is advising his Republican
Congressional candidates to keep their distance from Bush.

"We have to face the very real possibility that the President of the
United States is loony tunes," he says sadly. "That's not good for my
candidates, it's not good for the party and it's certainly not good
for the country.""

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 01 Aug 04 - 12:54 AM

Ron Reagan's son, writing in Esquire Magazine summarizes the case against Mister Bush and the barbarism he has sponsored.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 02 Aug 04 - 07:42 PM

Al Sharpton responds to Mister Bush's questions with vigor at the Democratic national Convention. Thanks, Al.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 02 Aug 04 - 07:51 PM

John Perry Barlow proposes a civil insurgency -- dancing in the streets as an act of civil protestation!

Ya gotta love this guy.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 04 - 09:53 AM

Eric Umanski of Slate magazine describing the Wall Street Journal of August 4, 2004:

"The Journal goes high with word the Kerry campaign's impending release of endorsements from 200 big businessmen. Many of them supported President Bush in 2000. "George is a really good guy personally," said one. "He had an opportunity to bring the country together--which was his MO in Texas. But for reasons only his psychiatrist would know, he's chosen to do just the opposite as president. He's turning out to be the worst president since Millard Fillmore--and that's probably an insult to Millard Fillmore."" (Emphasis added).

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 04 - 12:59 PM

Dr Howard Dean, addressing the charges against Tom Delay for rigging undue influence machinery in the sacrosanct halls of governmnet:

"Representative Tom DeLay of Texas needs to be stopped. He is at the
center of machine that launders corporate influence in our political
process. And now his machine is at the center of investigations by a
grand jury in Texas and the House Ethics Committee in Washington into
ethics violations and criminal activity.

But the DeLay racket reaches even into the Ethics Committee itself. We must act now to make sure the job gets done right.

The House Ethics Committee must appoint an outside counsel to lead the investigation. Add your name to the call for accountability:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/stoptomdelay

Four of the five Republicans on the House Ethics Committee, which will review the charges against DeLay next month, have received over $35,000 from an arm of the DeLay operation. They are in no position to conduct an independent investigation.

The examination of Tom DeLay's political money machine should be free
from the influence of that machine. That can only happen with an
independent, outside counsel leading the probe.

We will deliver your petition to the House Ethics Committee. And we will take your messages to Texas to give DeLay's constituents your thoughts about the man they will have the chance to vote out of office in November. Sign the petition now:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/stoptomdelay

The charges against DeLay filed in the Ethics Committee include trading favors for contributions, laundering illegal corporate contributions to influence Texas legislative races, and improperly directing the Department of Homeland Security to conduct a political witch hunt against Texas Democrats.

Tom DeLay has done more than any other person to construct a system
where our representatives sell the privilege of writing legislation to the highest bidder. His contempt for his opponents and win-at-all-costs approach pollute our political life -- and may have broken the law.

Join the call for a proper investigation of Tom DeLay:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/stoptomdelay

Please forward this message to your friends and spread the word -- we
are tired of business as usual and we demand a real investigation into the man who has been called the "chief enforcer of company contributions
to Republicans."

Thank you.

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

P.S. - Be sure to attend the DFA Meetup tonight at 7 PM in your
community: http://dfa.meetup.com


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 04 - 11:13 PM

The New York Times reviews an off-Broadway Bush-bashing dramatic piece of merit.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 04 - 03:15 PM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush told a roomful of top Pentagon brass on Thursday that his administration would never stop looking for ways to harm the United States.
The latest installment of misspeak from a president long known for his malapropisms came during a signing ceremony for a new $417 billion defense appropriations bill that includes $25 billion in emergency funding for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we," Bush said.

The Republican incumbent, who is in a tight race for reelection against Democrat John Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran, used the 11-minute presentation to underscore his commitment to U.S. troops.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: Dildos and the Constitution
From: Amos
Date: 07 Aug 04 - 01:49 PM

How deeply involved does the Federal Government need to be in individual lives and personal decisions?

Here's one article chastising excessive intrusive reach by the guvvy sector into civvy street.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 09 Aug 04 - 07:06 PM

An excerpt from a Mother Jones article excoriating the Bush administration ofr manufacturing false intell on Iraq intentionally:

"Kwiatkowski, 43, a now-retired Air Force officer who served in the Pentagon's Near East and South Asia (NESA) unit in the year before the invasion of Iraq, observed how the Pentagon's Iraq war-planning unit manufactured scare stories about Iraq's weapons and ties to terrorists. "It wasn't intelligence-it was propaganda," she says. "They'd take a little bit of intelligence, cherry-pick it, make it sound much more exciting, usually by taking it out of context, often by juxtaposition of two pieces of information that don't belong together." It was by turning such bogus intelligence into talking points for U.S. officials-including ominous lines in speeches by President Bush and Vice President Cheney, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell's testimony at the U.N. Security Council last February-that the administration pushed American public opinion into supporting an unnecessary war.


Until now, the story of how the Bush administration produced its wildly exaggerated estimates of the threat posed by Iraq has never been revealed in full. But, for the first time, a detailed investigation by Mother Jones, based on dozens of interviews-some on the record, some with officials who insisted on anonymity-exposes the workings of a secret Pentagon intelligence unit and of the Defense Department's war-planning task force, the Office of Special Plans. It's the story of a close-knit team of ideologues who spent a decade or more hammering out plans for an attack on Iraq and who used the events of September 11, 2001, to set it into motion.


SIX MONTHS AFTER THE END of major combat in Iraq, the United States had spent $300 million trying to find banned weapons in Iraq, and President Bush was seeking $600 million more to extend the search. Not found were Iraq's Scuds and other long-range missiles, thousands of barrels and tons of anthrax and botulism stock, sarin and VX nerve agents, mustard gas, biological and chemical munitions, mobile labs for producing biological weapons, and any and all evidence of a reconstituted nuclear-arms program, all of which had been repeatedly cited as justification for the war. Also missing was evidence of Iraqi collaboration with Al Qaeda.


The reports, virtually all false, of Iraqi weapons and terrorism ties emanated from an apparatus that began to gestate almost as soon as the Bush administration took power. In the very first meeting of the Bush national-security team, one day after President Bush took the oath of office in January 2001, the issue of invading Iraq was raised, according to one of the participants in the meeting-and officials all the way down the line started to get the message, long before 9/11. Indeed, the Bush team at the Pentagon hadn't even been formally installed before Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of Defense, and Douglas J. Feith, undersecretary of Defense for policy, began putting together what would become the vanguard for regime change in Iraq."

Rest of article can be found in the February 04 edition of Mother Jones: The Lie Factory

Regards,

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 10 Aug 04 - 12:10 AM

MoveOn PAC asked their members who voted for Bush in 2000 to talk about why they are voting for Kerry in 2004. Academy award-winning documentary film director Errol Morris interviewed these former Bush voters on camera, and cut seventeen ads that tell their stories. These stories of disaffection are powerful statements about the failed Bush presidency.

http://www.moveonpac.org/morris/

Go to the link above to vote on the ads you like the best. The highest-rated ads will be aired during the Republican convention


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 10 Aug 04 - 04:12 PM

This irony was pointed out by Maureen Dowd, a columnist for the New York Times, when she was being interviewed on The Al Franken Show: (She has a new book out: "Bushworld: Enter at Your Own Risk")

Bush #1 went to war to prove that you can't unilaterally invade another country.
Bush #2 went to war to prove that you CAN unilaterally invade another country.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 07:55 PM

Washington Post, August 12, 2004

Of course it would never happen like this, but it should: President Bush and political guru Karl Rove are enjoying a quiet evening together in the private quarters of the White House. Suddenly, Rove looks up in horror from his computer printouts and asks:

"George . . . where are the kids?"

Where, indeed. And we're not talking about Jenna Bush or her sister Barbara, but millions of other younger voters who supported Bush in 2000 but currently plan to vote for Democratic nominee John Kerry.

Surveys suggest that Bush's popularity has plummeted among 18- to 29-year-olds in the past four months, posing a new obstacle to the president's bid to win reelection and an immediate challenge to Republicans seeking to win over impressionable and lightly committed young people during their upcoming convention.

Four years ago, network exit polls found that Bush and Democrat Al Gore split the vote of 18- to 29-year-olds, with Gore claiming 48 percent and Bush getting 46 percent -- the best showing by a Republican presidential candidate in more than a decade.

But that was then. In the latest Post-ABC News poll taken immediately after the Democratic convention, Kerry led Bush 2-1 among registered voters younger than 30. Among older voters, the race was virtually tied.

Bush's problems with younger voters began months before the Democratic convention, Post-ABC polls suggest. The last time Bush and Kerry were tied among the under-30 crowd was back in April. In the five surveys conducted since then, Bush has trailed Kerry by an average of 18 percentage points.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 15 Aug 04 - 09:56 PM

WASHINGTON, D.C. (August 1, 2004) Praised by the members of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, Newt Gingrich's testimony yesterday was serious, thought-provoking, and entertaining.

Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, testified yesterday before the House Select Intelligence Committee, and blew away representatives of both political parties with his radical proposals for what to do about our systems of intelligence. Here's the video of that session (be sure to watch the Q&A that follows the testimony).


See the rest of this interesting article about radical restructuring of our Intel community on this page.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Aug 04 - 10:21 PM

Another stunning victory for secrecy and Ashcroft's New World:

On the 16th of August 2004, the 9th Circuit Court of   Appeals begins work on the Gilmore vs. Ashcroft case. At stake is nothing less   than the right of Americans to travel freely in their own country -- and the   exposure of 'secret law' for what it is: an abomination.   

The man who is fighting the good fight is named John   Gilmore. John made his fortune as a programmer and entrepreneur in the software   industry.   Whereas most people in his position would have moved to a tropical   island and lived a life of luxury, John chose to use his wealth to protect   and defend the US Constitution.   

On the 4th of July 2002, John Gilmore, American citizen,   decided to take a trip from one part of the United States of America to   another. At the airport, he was told he had to produce his ID if he wanted to travel.   He asked to see the law demanding he show his 'papers' and was told after a time that the law was secret and no, he   wouldn't be allowed to read it.    He hasn't flown in has own country since.   

http://www.gilmorevsashcroft.com   


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 04 - 11:36 PM

President Bush has unveiled his first campaign commercial, highlighting all of his accomplishments in office.  That's why it's a 60-second spot."
-- Jay Leno

"President Bush says he has just one question for the American voters,'Is the rich person you're working for better off now than they were four years ago?'"
-- Jay Leno

"The election is in full-swing.  Republicans have taken out round-the-clock ads promoting George Bush. Don't we already have that?   It's called Fox News."
-- Craig Kilborn

"Kerry is well on his way to reaching his magic number of 2,162. That's the total number of delegates he needs to win the Democratic nomination. See for President Bush it's different, his magic number is 5. That's the number of Supreme Court judges needed to win."
-- Jay Leno

"There was a scare inWashingtonwhen a man climbed over the White House wall and was arrested.  This marks the first time a person has gotten into the White House unlawfully since President Bush."
-- David Letterman

"A new poll says that if ! the election were held today, John Kerry would  beat President Bush by a double digit margin. The White House is so worried about this, they're now thinking of moving up the capture of Osama Bin Laden to next month."
-- Jay Leno

"The White House is now backtracking from its prediction that 2.6 million new jobs will be created in theU.S. this year.  They say
they were off by roughly 2.6 million jobs."
-- Jay Leno

"InLouisiana, President Bush met with over 15,000 National Guard troops.  Here's the weird part: nobody remembers seeing him there."
-- Craig Kilborn

"President Bush said he was 'troubled' by gay people getting married in  San Francisco.  He said on important issues like this the people should make the decision, not judges. Unl! ess of course we're choosing a president. Then  he prefers judges."
-- Jay Leno

"The White House has now released military documents that they say prove George Bush met his requirements for the National Guard.  Big deal. We've got documents that prove Al Gore won the election."
-- Jay Leno

"There was an embarrassing moment in the White House earlier today. They were looking around while searching for George Bush's military records.  They actually found some old Al Gore ballots."
-- David Letterman

"The big story now is that President Bush is coming under attack for his service in the National Guard.  The commanding officers can't remember seeing Bush between May and October of '72.  President Bush said, 'Remember me?  I was the drunk guy!'"
! -- Jay Leno

"On 'Meet the Press' yesterday President Bush was asked what he would do if he lost the election and Bush said, 'You mean like last time?''"
  -- Jay Leno

"This week, both John Kerry and Wesley Clark are making campaign appearance with the guys who saved their lives inVietnam.  Meanwhile President Bush is campaigning with a guy that once took a math test for him."
-- Conan O'Brien

"President Bush released his new $2.4 trillion federal budget.  It has two parts: smoke and mirrors."
-- Jay Leno

"Bush admitted that his pre-war intelligence wasn't what it should have been. But we knew that when we elected him!"
-- Jay Leno

"As you know President Bush gave his State of the Union Address, interrupted 70 times by applause and 45 times by really big words."
-- Jay Leno

"President Bush said that American workers will need new skills to get the new jobs in the 21st century.  Some of the skills they're going to need are Spanish, Chinese, Korean, because that's where the jobs went."
-- Jay Leno

The new Prime Minister ofSpainhas called the war inIraqa disaster, and plans to bring his troops home as soon as possible.  In
fact, President Bush is so upset atSpainthat he is now threatening to close down the border betweenSpainand theU.S.
-- Jay Leno

"The U.S. army confirmed that it gave a lucrative contract in Iraq to the firm once run by the Vice President Dick Cheney without
any competitive bidding.  When asked if this could be conceived as Cheney's friends profiting from the war, the spokesman said  "Yes.'"
-- Conan O'Brien


"Dick Cheney finally responded today to demands that he reveal the details of the Enron meetings.  This is what he said.  He met with unnamed people, from unspecified companies, for an indeterminate amount of time at an undisclosed location.  Thank God he cleared that up."
-- Jay Leno

"Plans are being discussed as to who will replace Dick Cheney if he has to resign for health reasons.  It's not easy for President Bush, he can't just name a replacement.  He would first have to be confirmed by the oil, gas and power companies"
-- Jay Leno

"President Bush spoke briefly to reporters before playing a round of golf in Crawford, Texas earlier today.  ...  This raises the question: Shouldn't the guy who is really running the country and who has had like 20 heart attacks be taking the vacation?"
-- Craig Kilborn


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 19 Aug 04 - 09:03 PM

Dahlia Lithwick -- a senior editor at Slate -- warns us against portraying Bush as a juvenile in this insightful piece in the NY Times. In doing so she manages to castigate his Administration for the right reasons en passant.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 02:42 PM

The chances are good that the Florida Presidential votye this year will be totally without credibility and tainted with multiple angles of corruption.

This article in Slate describes why.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: robomatic
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:45 PM

This thread is just so far into Bush hate that I think it is missing most of the important points that we need to pay attention to in the world of today, and yes, it harkens back to my point that if you want the world and the US to get better, you start with the leader you have.

Getting rid of Saddam was a good thing. If Iraq can be stabilized, that will be a good thing. I think Tony Blair has vocalized very well the reasons for prosecuting the war.

Bush may have many annoying characteristics. He is NOT a halfwit. I am aware of plenty of assertions that he and his administration lied. I am unaware of any proof. It's just like the Swift Boat veterans, a lot of accusation with no real tissue.

Bush may have connections to the religious right in the United States. He is not the same creature as a religious mullah who sends minions to their deaths with the assurance that they will be rewarded with virgins in heaven. If you want to assert parity here we aren't on the same planet.

This is not the Vietnam of a new decade. The strategic situation is different, the background is different, the weapons are different.

Things that are genuinely dangerous to the United States:

Not finishing what we start.

Government money being spent with no income increasing national debt.
Long term balance of trade against the U.S.
Heavy military expenditures which are mostly waste, such as missile defense system even now being installed in Alaska.
I agree with the observations above about flawed science policy.

We experienced terrorism under Democratic watch, and it proved no more effective than under this administration.

We have some real nuclear proliferationi problems with Pakistan, N. Korea, Iran. We NEED to solve these and we NEED to involve the world in solving it. I don't care who is leading the country, I want the problems addressed and a constant watch across party lines for this.

So go to town all you like on this thread, if it makes ya happy. But it's just like listening to Rush's twin brother on the left side of the dial.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:58 PM

Wel, Robo, you and I are a bit apart on a number of points.

I think GWB IS a half-wit and a murderous one at that. He had all the opportunity in the world to define and resolve the very issues you are speaking of with the world's blessing. Many of us here raised alarums about how he proceeded after 9-11 to disspate and ruin that good-will.

By not finishing what we start, what do you mean? Killing Iraqis in sufficient numbers?

Additionally, there are a lot of very specific charges of falsification which you seem to be dodging -- not that I blame you.

The simple fact in my view is that there are far too few people telling the truth about this jerk.

As for my going to town, I don't write these articles -- I just post links to them.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 08:58 PM

"Getting rid of Saddam was a good thing." Was it good enough to be worth killing your kids? Or just good enough to be worth killing Iraqi kids? Please don't explain to me that kind of thing always happens in war; I know it does. That's why I don't like war as a solution to anything.

But we finished what we started with Iraq. I saw the "Mission Accomplished" sign right behind our War President. That can't be a lie or Mr Bush wouldn't have participated in it.

clint


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 31 Aug 04 - 07:53 PM

Garrison Keillor reports his view of the Bsuh Administration in this telling piece called We're Not in Lake Wobegone Anymore, which I think is one of the funniest rebuttals of our current tragedy I have seen yet.
Garrison concludes:

"The Union is what needs defending this year. Government of Enron and by Halliburton and for the Southern Baptists is not the same as what Lincoln spoke of. This gang of Pithecanthropus Republicanii has humbugged us to death on terrorism and tax cuts for the comfy and school prayer and flag burning and claimed the right to know what books we read and to dump their sewage upstream from the town and clear-cut the forests and gut the IRS and mark up the constitution on behalf of intolerance and promote the corporate takeover of the public airwaves and to hell with anybody who opposes them.

This is a great country, and it wasn't made so by angry people. We have a sacred duty to bequeath it to our grandchildren in better shape than however we found it. We have a long way to go and we're not getting any younger.

Dante said that the hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who in time of crisis remain neutral, so I have spoken my piece, and thank you, dear reader. It's a beautiful world, rain or shine, and there is more to life than winning."

Get the vote out.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 31 Aug 04 - 08:06 PM

Charles Rangel, congressman from the 15th Congressional District of New York State, has introduced into Congress H.Res. 629 IH. "Resolved that Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense is impeached for High crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the Senate."

There are nine articles listed in this bill, and the last sentence of the last article reads, "Wherefore, Donald M. Rumsfeld, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification for any further office of profit or trust under the United States." This bill is currently in the subcommittee on the Constitution (under the House Judiciary Committee), and may be read here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery. (Use the search foirm to find H.Res.629.

It is co-sponsored by:

Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 7/21/2004
Rep Owens, Major R. [NY-11] - 7/9/2004
Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28] - 7/9/2004
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 6/18/2004


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 05:20 PM

A stunning description of the use of Secret Sevrice Agents to prevent members of the press from interviewing an author of unpopular material about Bush can be found on this page for Monday, August 30.

Sorry times indeed.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 09:40 PM

Zogby International reports on this web page that a surprisingly large number of New Yorkers believe the Administration had foreknowledge of 9-11 and failed to act.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 09:44 PM

On this page, Amelia Gruber comments on failing respect for Da Gov in the eyes of American citizens nationwide.

Poll finds government falling in public's esteem
By Amelia Gruber

The public views the federal government less favorably this year than
last, Gallup poll results published Tuesday indicate.

Slightly more than a third of respondents to an early August survey by
The Gallup Organization expressed a "positive" or "somewhat positive"
view of the government. This represents a drop of seven percentage
points from a year ago, when 41 percent of Americans surveyed said
they looked favorably upon the government.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: freda underhill
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 05:23 PM

i'm staying with my daughter and her husband to be in southern austria. during my stay i've met his extended family and friends from austria, the netherlands, and italy. on each occasion of having dinner with a bunch of people from a different country, they all raised the topic of how much they dislike george bush, his government, and the war in Iraq. today i spoke to a dutch man who told me his son is in Iraq. he and his wife are very distressed and are praying for a change of government in the US in november.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 10:29 AM

The Columbia School Of Journalism's Review pans the desperate complaisance of AMerican journalism in failing to report the truth about distortions pronounced at tthe RNC, in this article

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 02:45 PM

HE WAS RIGHT AFTER THE RUSSIAN CHILDREN
WHERE TAKEN INTO HELL

FIDDLE


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 06:54 PM

Articles of impeachment being promoted to remove the Bush Administration from office can be found at this web site.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,GROK
Date: 04 Sep 04 - 06:35 PM

Like law will remove Bush, Cheney and the most powerful military organization in the world.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 04 Sep 04 - 06:57 PM

The connection between the National Socialist Party of Germany in the 30's, which elevated Adolf Hitler to power, and George Bush Sr., Karl Rove, et alia, is discussed in this article in Counterpunch magazine. If you believed in power-structure conspiracies it would be enough to make you nervous.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,GROK
Date: 04 Sep 04 - 07:11 PM

Amos, I don't think there can be any doubt that a power structure is in place to control the world through economic means. MJ-12 and the secrecy to do with international banking demonstrate that 'money' is power. It can make or break whole countries, and with the USA nearing bankruptcy, the US government has to make its grab soon. IMO, we are looking at another decade, tops. The grab will have to occur before depleted oil supplies make it impossible--before debt makes it impossible. Hence the tremendous build up of the military. IMO, this has been in the works for at least a century now. Conspiracy?

Even paranoids have enemies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 06:55 PM

An organization called Texans for Truth has come forward with an indictment of George's attack against Kerry on service-related grounds, the advertisement of which can be seen on this page.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 08 Sep 04 - 08:33 PM

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
How to Watch the Watchers
By RICHARD BEN-VENISTE and LANCE COLE

The president's new civil liberties oversight board falls short of the
recommendations made by the 9/11 commission.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/07/opinion/07benveniste.html?th

--


"A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular."
    --Adlai Stevenson


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 08 Sep 04 - 09:03 PM

This article discusses the Bush administrations falsification, censoring and manipulation of science.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Sep 04 - 01:13 AM

Jimmy Carter wrote Zell Miller, keynote Democrat speaker at the GOP convention, ending it this way:

"Zell, I have known you for 42 years and have, in the past, respected you as a trustworthy political leader and a personal friend. But now, there are many of us loyal Democrats who feel uncomfortable in seeing that you have chosen the rich over the poor, unilateral pre-emptive war over a strong nation united with others for peace, lies and obfuscation over the truth, and the political technique of personal character assassination as a way to win elections or to garner a few moments of applause. These are not the characteristics of great Democrats whose legacy you and I have inherited."

    Sincerely, and with deepest regrets,
    Jimmy Carter

Read more at http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/090904C.shtml


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 09 Sep 04 - 08:53 AM

Internationally, a poll of 35000 people reveal a very strong   edge for Kerry -- in factm if the world could vote Kerry would win by a landslide.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 09 Sep 04 - 11:01 AM

The New Republic reports on the growing scandal of Bush' actual manuvering in the Air National Guard, and his failure to perform as he promised.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 11:02 PM

Sept. 16, 2004  |  "Bring them on!" President Bush challenged the early Iraqi insurgency in July of last year. Since then 812 American soldiers have been killed and 6,290 wounded, according to the Pentagon. Almost every day in campaign speeches, Bush speaks with bravado about how we are "winning" in Iraq. "Our strategy is succeeding," he boasted to the National Guard convention on Tuesday.

But according to the U.S. military's leading strategists and prominent retired generals, Bush's war is already lost.

Retired Gen. William Odom, former head of the National Security Agency, told me: "Bush hasn't found the WMD. Al-Qaida, it's worse -- he's lost on that front. That he's going to achieve a democracy there? That goal is lost, too. It's lost." He added: "Right now, the course we're on, we're achieving [Osama] bin Laden's ends."

(Excerpt from Salon.com, subscription required)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 16 Sep 04 - 11:27 PM

Maureen Down writes in A Dazzling Display to Mislead:

"...the administration has been so dazzling in misleading the public with audacious, mendacious malarkey that the Democrats fear the Bushies are capable of any level of deceit.

Iraq is a vision of hell, and the Republicans act as if it's a model kitchen. The president and vice president brag about liberating Iraqis and reassure us that they are stopping terrorist violence at its source and inspiring democracy in the region by bringing it to blood-drenched Iraq.

But what they haven't mentioned is that they have known since July that their rosy scenarios are as bogus as their WMD. That's when the president received a national intelligence estimate that spelled out "a dark assessment of prospects for Iraq" in the next 18 months, as Douglas Jehl wrote in yesterday's New York Times. Worst-case estimates include civil war or anarchy.


Unlike the president, the young men and women trying to stay alive in the unraveling chaos of Iraq can't count on their daddies to get them out of the line of fire."





I think she has summed up the Republican Zeitgeist in a single fell phrase: Go forth,and be audacious and mendacious.

The Great American Moral Code: Brass in all things and Lies when convenient. Sure saves a lot of thinking, doesn't it, George?


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 06:36 PM

Urgent: Please read George Bush's Plea for a Second Chance in which he finally comes clean while asking for your benevolent indulgence.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: dianavan
Date: 17 Sep 04 - 10:02 PM

That just about sums it up.

d


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 18 Sep 04 - 10:14 AM

The Guardian bemoans the complete mess the Bush administration has made of Iraq in this article.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 19 Sep 04 - 09:01 PM

This editorial discusses the poisonous impact of the Bush administration on democratic representative government.

"n a democracy -- a fully functioning one -- none of this would happen. We simply would not allow one man -- any man -- to diminish our country as we stood idly by. But we have. In large numbers we have fallen for Bush's hat trick. One by one, all across America, we have decided it was not important enough to find the truth, to vote for the good of us all.
"


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Sep 04 - 04:54 PM

The respected on-line science journal Nature accuses the Bush administration of distorting science.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Sep 04 - 08:42 PM

A detailed timeline of known facvts about the Bush AWOL timeline can be found in this chart.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: Doctorow Writes of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 03:20 PM

GUESTWORDS: By E.L. Doctorow

    The Unfeeling President

    September 9, 2004 - Easthampton Star

    I fault this president for not knowing what death is. He does not
suffer the death of our 21-year-olds who
    wanted to be what they could be. On the eve of D-Day in 1944 General
Eisenhower prayed to God for the lives
    of the young soldiers he knew were going to die. He knew what death
was. Even in a justifiable war, a war not
    of choice but of necessity, a war of survival, the cost was almost
more than Eisenhower could bear.

    But this president does not know what death is. He hasn't the mind
for it. You see him joking with the press,
    peering under the table for the weapons of mass destruction he can't
seem to find, you see him at rallies
    strutting up to the stage in shirt sleeves to the roar of the
carefully screened crowd, smiling and waving,
    triumphal, a he-man.

    He does not mourn. He doesn't understand why he should mourn. He is
satisfied during the course of a speech
    written for him to look solemn for a moment and speak of the brave
young Americans who made the ultimate
    sacrifice for their country.

    But you study him, you look into his eyes and know he dissembles an
emotion which he does not feel in the
    depths of his being because he has no capacity for it. He does not
feel a personal responsibility for the 1,000
    dead young men and women who wanted to be what they could be.

    They come to his desk not as youngsters with mothers and fathers or
wives and children who will suffer to
    the end of their days a terribly torn fabric of familial
relationships and the inconsolable remembrance of
    aborted life . . . they come to his desk as a political liability,
which is why the press is not permitted to
    photograph the arrival of their coffins from Iraq.

    How then can he mourn? To mourn is to express regret and he regrets
nothing. He does not regret that his
    reason for going to war was, as he knew, unsubstantiated by the
facts. He does not regret that his bungled
    plan for the war's aftermath has made of his mission-accomplished a
disaster. He does not regret that,
    rather than controlling terrorism, his war in Iraq has licensed it.
So he never mourns for the dead and crippled
    youngsters who have fought this war of his choice.

    He wanted to go to war and he did. He had not the mind to perceive
the costs of war, or to listen to those who
    knew those costs. He did not understand that you do not go to war
when it is one of the options but when it is
    the only option; you go not because you want to but because you have
to.

    Yet this president knew it would be difficult for Americans not to
cheer the overthrow of a foreign dictator.
    He knew that much. This president and his supporters would seem to
have a mind for only one thing -- to take
    power, to remain in power, and to use that power for the sake of
themselves and their friends.

    A war will do that as well as anything. You become a wartime leader.
The country gets behind you. Dissent
    becomes inappropriate. And so he does not drop to his knees, he is
not contrite, he does not sit in the church
    with the grieving parents and wives and children. He is the
president who does not feel. He does not feel for
    the families of the dead, he does not feel for the 35 million of us
who live in poverty, he does not feel for the
    40 percent who cannot afford health insurance, he does not feel for
the miners whose lungs are turning black
    or for the working people he has deprived of the chance to work
overtime at time-and-a-half to pay their bills
    - it is amazing for how many people in this country this president
does not feel.

    But he will dissemble feeling. He will say in all sincerity he is
relieving the wealthiest 1 percent of the
    population of their tax burden for the sake of the rest of us, and
that he is polluting the air we breathe for
    the sake of our economy, and that he is decreasing the quality of
air in coal mines to save the coal miners'
    jobs, and that he is depriving workers of their time-and-a-half
benefits for overtime because this is actually a
    way to honor them by raising them into the professional class.

    And this litany of lies he will versify with reverences for God and
the flag and democracy, when just what he
    and his party are doing to our democracy is choking the life out of
it.

    But there is one more terribly sad thing about all of this. I
remember the millions of people here and around
    the world who marched against the war. It was extraordinary, that
spontaneous aroused oversoul of alarm and
    protest that transcended national borders. Why did it happen? After
all, this was not the only war anyone had
    ever seen coming. There are little wars all over he world most of
the time.

    But the cry of protest was the appalled understanding of millions of
people that America was ceding its role as
    the last best hope of mankind. It was their perception that the
classic archetype of democracy was morphing
    into a rogue nation. The greatest democratic republic in history was
turning its back on the future, using its
    extraordinary power and standing not to advance the ideal of a
concordance of civilizations but to endorse the
    kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals, a
people, now extinct, who could imagine ensuring
    their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war.

    The president we get is the country we get. With each president the
nation is conformed spiritually. He is the
    artificer of our malleable national soul. He proposes not only the
laws but the kinds of lawlessness that govern
    our lives and invoke our responses. The people he appoints are cast
in his image. The trouble they get into and
    get us into, is his characteristic trouble.

    Finally, the media amplify his character into our moral weather
report. He becomes the face of our sky, the
    conditions that prevail. How can we sustain ourselves as the United
States of America given the stupid and
    ineffective warmaking, the constitutionally insensitive lawgiving,
and the monarchal economics of this
    president? He cannot mourn but is a figure of such moral vacancy as
to make us mourn for ourselves.

# # #


With warm thanks to Nancy for pointing this piece out to me.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: freda underhill
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 09:46 PM

RESUME : GEORGE W. BUSH

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20520

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE:
Law Enforcement:
I was arrested in Kennebunkport, Maine, in 1976 for driving under the
influence of alcohol. I pled guilty, paid a fine, and had my driver's
license suspended for 30 days. My Texas driving record has been "lost"
and
is not available.

Military:
I joined the Texas Air National Guard and went AWOL. I refused to take
a
drug test or answer any questions about my drug use. By joining the
Texas
Air National Guard, I was able to avoid combat duty in Vietnam.

College:
I graduated from Yale University with a low C average. I was a
cheerleader.

PAST WORK EXPERIENCE:
I ran for U.S. Congress and lost. I began my career in the oil business
in
Midland, Texas, in 1975. I bought an oil company, but couldn't find any
oil
in Texas. The company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock.
I
bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took
land
using taxpayer money. With the help of my father and our friends in the
oil
industry
(including Enron CEO Ken Lay), I was elected governor of Texas.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS GOVERNOR OF TEXAS:
- I changed Texas pollution laws to favor power and oil companies,
making
Texas the most polluted state in the Union. During my tenure, Houston
replaced Los Angeles as the most smog-ridden city in America.

- I cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas treasury to the tune of billions
in
borrowed money.

- I set the record for the most executions by any governor in American
history.

- With the help of my brother, the governor of Florida, and my father's
appointments to the Supreme Court, I became President after losing by
over
500,000 votes.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS PRESIDENT:
- I am the first President in U.S. history to enter office with a
criminal
record.

- I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over one
billion dollars per week.

- I spent the U.S. surplus and effectively bankrupted the U.S.
Treasury.

- I shattered the record for the largest annual deficit in U.S.
history.

- I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any
12-month period.

- I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period.

- I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the
U.S.
stock market. In my first year in office, over 2 million Americans lost
their jobs and that trend continues every month.

- I'm proud that the members of my cabinet are the richest of any
administration in U.S. history. My "poorest millionaire," Condoleeza
Rice,
has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.

- I set the record for most campaign fundraising trips by a U.S.
President.

- I am the all-time U.S. and world record-holder for receiving the most
corporate campaign donations.

- My largest lifetime campaign contributor, and one of my best friends,
Kenneth Lay, presided over the largest corporate bankruptcy fraud in
U.S.
History, Enron.

- My political party used Enron private jets and corporate attorneys to
assure my success with the U.S. Supreme Court during my election
decision.

- I have protected my friends at Enron and Halliburton against
investigation or prosecution. More time and money was spent
investigating
the Monica Lewinsky affair than has been spent investigating one of the
biggest corporate rip-offs in history. I presided over the biggest
energy
crisis in U.S. history and refused to intervene when corruption
involving
the oil industry was revealed.

- I presided over the highest gasoline prices in U.S. history.

- I changed the U.S. policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded
government contracts.

- I appointed more convicted criminals to administration than any
President
in U.S. history.

- I created the Ministry of Homeland Security, the largest bureaucracy
in
the history of the United States government.

- I've broken more international treaties than any President in U.S.
history.

- I am the first President in U.S. history to have the United Nations
remove the U.S. from the Human Rights Commission.

- I withdrew the U.S. from the World Court of Law.

- I refused to allow inspector's access to U.S. "prisoners of war"
detainees and thereby have refused to abide by the Geneva Convention.

- I am the first President in history to refuse United Nations election
inspectors (during the 2002 U.S. election).

- I set the record for fewest numbers of press conferences of any
President
since the advent of television.

- I set the all-time record for most days on vacation in any one-year
period. After taking off the entire month of August, I presided over
the
worst security failure in U.S. history.

- I garnered the most sympathy ever for the U.S. after the World Trade
Center attacks and less than a year later made the U.S. the most hated
country in the world, the largest failure of diplomacy in world
history.

- I have set the all-time record for most people worldwide to
simultaneously protest me in public venues (15 million people),
shattering
the record for protests against any person in the history of mankind.

- I am the first President in U.S. history to order an unprovoked,
preemptive attack and the military occupation of a sovereign nation. I
did
so against the will of the United Nations, the majority of U.S.
citizens,
and the world community.

- I have cut health care benefits for war veterans and support a cut in
duty benefits for active duty troops and their families in wartime.

- In my State of the Union Address, I lied about our reasons for
attacking
Iraq and then blamed the lies on our British friends.

- I am the first President in history to have a majority of Europeans
(71%)
view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and security.

- I am supporting development of a nuclear "Tactical Bunker Buster," a
WMD.

- I have so far failed to fulfill my pledge to bring Osama Bin Laden to
justice.

RECORDS AND REFERENCES:
-All records of my tenure as governor of Texas are now in my father's
library, sealed and unavailable for public view.

- All records of SEC investigations into my insider trading and my
bankrupt
companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.

- All records or minutes from meetings that I, or my Vice-president,
attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and
unavailable for public review.

PLEASE CONSIDER MY EXPERIENCE WHEN VOTING IN 2004!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 11:22 PM

Thank-you Freda - Absolutely to the point. Who can argue with this? Who can defend this criminal? Is there any justice or will he just walk away laughing?

d


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 11:36 PM

Regarding Rather's embarassment for CBS:

What Is Bush Hiding?


By E. J. Dionne Jr.

Tuesday, September 21, 2004; Page A21

It is to be welcomed that President Bush wants to clear up questions about
his National Guard service. He wants more details out there, and good for
him. This story should be laid to rest, and the one person who can do it is
named George W. Bush.

Up to now, Bush has been interested in a rather narrow aspect of the story.
He wanted Dan Rather and CBS News to come clean about whether they used fake
documents in reporting on the president's Guard service back in the 1970s.

"There are a lot of questions and they need to be answered," Bush told the
Union Leader in Manchester, N.H., last week. "I think what needs to happen
is people need to take a look at the documents, how they were created, and
let the truth come out."

I couldn't agree more. And apparently CBS came to the same view. CBS messed
up, and yesterday, Rather fessed up. He said the network could no longer
stand behind the documents. There will be much hand-wringing about the media
in the coming days, and properly so.

But what's good for Dan Rather, who is not running for president, ought to
be good for George Bush, who is. "There are a lot of questions and they need
to be answered." Surely that presidential sentiment applies as much to
Bush's Guard service as to Rather's journalistic methods.

The New York Times put the relevant questions on the table yesterday in a
lengthy review of Bush's life in 1972, "the year George W. Bush dropped off
the radar screen," as the Times called it. The issues about Bush's National
Guard service, the Times wrote, include "why he failed to take his pilot's
physical and whether he fulfilled his commitment to the guard."

Oh, I can hear the groaning: "But why are we still talking about Vietnam?"
A fair question that has several compelling answers.

First, except for John McCain, Republicans were conspicuously happy to have
a front group spread untruths about John Kerry's Vietnam service in August
and watch as the misleading claims were amplified by the supposedly liberal
media. The Vietnam era was relevant as long as it could be used to raise
character questions about Kerry. But as soon as the questioning turned to
Bush's character, we were supposed to call the whole thing off. Why? Because
the media were supposed to question Kerry's character but not Bush's.

And, please, none of this nonsense about how Kerry "opened the door" to the
assault on his Vietnam years by highlighting his service at the Democratic
National Convention. Nothing any candidate does should ever be seen as
"opening the door" to lies about his past. Besides, Vietnam veterans with
Republican ties were going after Kerry's war record long before the
Democratic convention.

But, most important, there is only one reason the story about Bush's
choices during the Vietnam years persists. It's because the president won't
give detailed answers to the direct questions posed by the Times story and
other responsible media organizations, including the Boston Globe. Their
questions never depended on the discredited CBS documents.

Bush could end this story now so we could get to the real issues of 2004.
It would require only that the president take an hour or so with reporters
to make clear what he did and did not do in the Guard. He may have had good
reasons for ducking that physical exam. Surely he can explain the gaps in
his service and tell us honestly whether any pull was used to get him into
the Guard.

But a guy who is supposed to be so frank and direct turns remarkably
Clintonian where the National Guard issue is concerned. "I met my
requirements and was honorably discharged" is Bush's stock answer, which
does old Bill proud. And am I the only person exasperated by a double
standard that treated everything Bill Clinton ever did in his life ("I
didn't inhale") as fair game but now insists that we shouldn't sully
ourselves with any inconvenient questions about Bush's past?

I'm as weary as you are that our politics veer away from what matters --
Iraq, terrorism, health care, jobs -- and get sidetracked into personal
issues manufactured by political consultants and ideological zealots. But
the Bush campaign has made clear it wants this election to focus on
character and leadership. If character is the issue, the president's life,
past and present, matters just as much as John Kerry's.

Dan Rather has answered his critics. Now it is Bush's turn.

postchat@aol.com

© 2004 The Washington Post Company


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 22 Sep 04 - 09:19 AM

Regarding Bush's latest address to the United Nations in defense of hius adventures in Iraq, the New York times concludes:

"Mr. Bush might have done better at wooing broader international support if he had spent less time on self-justification and scolding and more on praising the importance of international cooperation and a strengthened United Nations. Instead, his tone-deaf speechwriters achieved a perverse kind of alchemy, transforming a golden opportunity into a lead balloon."

This man is a fucking MAROOOON!

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Sep 04 - 01:00 PM

Bush Attacks Kerry While Cozying Up To Dictators


President Bush earlier this week attacked his opponent, saying "It's hard to imagine a candidate running for President prefers the stability of a dictatorship to the hope and security of democracy."1 Yet, it is President Bush who regularly declares his personal friendship and gratitude to some of the world's most oppressive dictators, often wining and dining them at his ranch in Texas.

In June of 2004, Bush referred to the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia as "my friend,"2 even though the Saudi Arabian government has been investigated for its financial ties to the 9/11 terrorists3 and is listed by the U.S. State Department as one of the world's most oppressive regimes on the planet.4

In April, he referred to the Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak as "my friend" and welcomed him to the Crawford ranch by saying "I always look forward to visiting with him."5 Bush gave this praise to a dictator, even though Human Rights Watch notes that government "torture in Egypt is widespread and systemic"6 and the State Department says Mubarak has passed a Constitution in which the electorate is barred from being "presented with a choice among competing presidential candidates."7

In 2002, it was Bush who said "I want to welcome the President of China to our ranch, and to Texas."8 Bush was inviting into his home a dictator who, according to the U.S. State Department, presides over a government that regularly engages in the "arbitrary or unlawful" murder of its own citizens, kidnappings of political dissidents, and repression of religious minorities.9

Footnoted sources listed on this page.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The Question Laura Bush Could Not Answer
From: Amos
Date: 23 Sep 04 - 03:32 PM

The Question Laura Bush Could Not Answer: When Are Yours Going to Serve?

This moment of confrontation, between George Bush's wife and the heart-broken mother of a dead Marine, deserves more national attention that this brief article. But even by itself, it is a heartbreaker and it shows something of the panic that must regn in the hearts of the Bushes, who ride the powder keg of hbottled up truth and hidden mismanagement every day of thier lives.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Sep 04 - 05:42 PM

Scores ofr Americans have expressed thoughtful views in Letters to George W. Bush on this website.

Most of them are disappointed in him. All of them are articulate and well worth reading.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 01:07 AM

London's Financial Times writes an analysis of the really bozo collapse of terrorism prosecutions in a number of ridiculous cases in this article.

The Bush administration in its anxiety and haste has been unable to obtain any convictions and has built cases on whimsy in several cases.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Jaze
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 11:04 AM

I find the flap over Dan Rather's story kind of amusing. But let's take it to another level. Did not George Bush launch and unprovoked attack against a sovereign nation based on informnation HE received and deemed reliable? Seems to me Bush should be most understanding of Rather's position. Yet we were all supposed to just accept that his information wasn't reliabe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 11:52 AM

Well, attacking a nation... with lead and bombs, killing civilians, destroying homes buildings and lives, snuffing out daughters and sons... is one thing -- but Rather, armed with merely false DOCUMENTS but correct facts, has been categorized as far more heinous an offender for attacking a reigning President for misconduct which he actually did commit!!

Bush has repeatedly demonstrated that logic is not part of this.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 Sep 04 - 04:24 PM

Michael Moore details and excoriates President Bush & Co.'s history of flipflopping on policy regarding the Middle East and Iraq.

Makes Kerry look a steady-on as Gibraltar.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Sep 04 - 10:27 AM

great stuff. Keep it coming!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Sep 04 - 11:41 AM

Maureen Dowd, the bright light lady warrior of the New York Times, makes some telling remarks about the recent press show by Bush and Alawi.

Whole article found at this page.



Dance of the Marionettes
By MAUREEN DOWD

Published: September 26, 2004



It's heartwarming, really.

President Bush has his own Mini-Me now, someone to echo his every word and mimic his every action.

For so long, Mr. Bush has put up with caricatures of a wee W. sitting in the vice president's lap, Charlie McCarthy style, as big Dick Cheney calls the shots. But now the president has his own puppet to play with.

All last week in New York and Washington, Prime Minister Ayad Allawi of Iraq parroted Mr. Bush's absurd claims that the fighting in Iraq was an essential part of the U.S. battle against terrorists that started on 9/11, that the neocons' utopian dream of turning Iraq into a modern democracy was going swimmingly, and that the worse things got over there, the better they really were.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 28 Sep 04 - 10:31 AM

From Today's Papers for September 28, 2004, concerning Iraq civilian security forces:

"Meanwhile, contrary to the president's statements about "nearly 100,000 fully trained and equipped" security forces, the military has acknowledged that only 8,200 have been fully trained. (Reuters flagged the discrepancy on Friday.) Finally, the Post mentions that a respected analyst released a report recently concluding that the number of security forces is actually dropping "in part because of desertions and purging of low-grade personnel." "

Mister Bush again discovers that what he says and what is real are sometimes leagues apart.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,peedeecee
Date: 28 Sep 04 - 04:08 PM

Here's a LOVELY bit of news that should be posted on various threads -- the newspaper in Crawford, Texas, which is Bush's home town, is coming out strongly in favour of Kerry. The editorial at the link is extremely good, especially considering that the Iconoclast (!) is a small, weekly newspaper.

The link below reports the story, but provides another link directly to the editorial.

CrawfordHatesBush


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 28 Sep 04 - 07:44 PM

The New York Times excoriates the sleazy extremes of the Bush campaign tactics as beyond the pale of decency. What else is new?

Story on this page .

Slimeballs.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 29 Sep 04 - 09:16 AM

The Washington Post provides an analysis that indicates the ground-truth situiation in Iraq is nearly FUBAR, and much worse off than President "Tell 'Em What They Want to Hear" Bush is indicating with his staged presentation by Alawi. Story on this page.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 29 Sep 04 - 04:39 PM

From the interesting link provided just below by Peedeecee, and excerpt from the editoria of the "Bush hometown paper":

"Four items trouble us the most about the Bush administration: his initiatives to disable the Social Security system, the deteriorating state of the American economy, a dangerous shift away from the basic freedoms established by our founding fathers, and his continuous mistakes regarding Iraq," the editorial said.


The Iconoclast, established in 2000, said it editorialized in support of the invasion of Iraq and publisher W. Leon Smith promoted Bush and the invasion in a BBC interview, believing Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.


"Instead we were duped into following yet another privileged agenda," the editorial said.


The newspaper praised Kerry for "30 years of experience looking out for the American people" and lauded his background as "a highly decorated Vietnam veteran

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 08:27 AM

The actual editorial from the Crawford, Texas Iconoclast is well worth reading.

Iconclast endorses Kerry.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 11:29 PM

Why We Must Not Re-elect President Bush
    By George Soros
    George Soros.com

Definitely worth the read. http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/093004D.shtml

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 09:48 AM

The New York Times discusses the President as Agent of God Almighty hypothesis which appears to be more wide-spread than just a few asylums, and also appears to agree with Bush's self-image.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 06:49 PM

In a fascinating article from tomorrow's New York Times, David Barstow analyzes false claims made by the Bush administration concerning nuclear capabilities in Iran:

An excerpt:

In 2002, at a crucial juncture on the path to war, senior members of
the Bush administration gave a series of speeches and interviews in which they asserted that Saddam Hussein was rebuilding his nuclear weapons program. In a speech to veterans that August, Vice President Dick Cheney said Mr.Hussein could have an atomic bomb "fairly soon." President Bush, addressing the United Nations the next month, said there was "little doubt" about Mr. Hussein's appetite for nuclear arms.

The United States intelligence community had not yet concluded that
Iraq was rebuilding its nuclear weapons program. But as the vice president told a group of Wyoming Republicans that September, the United States had "irrefutable evidence" - thousands of tubes made of high-strength aluminum, tubes that the Bush administration said were destined for clandestine Iraqi uranium centrifuges, before some were seized at the behest of the United States.

The tubes quickly became a critical exhibit in t he administration's
brief against Iraq. As the only physical evidence the United States of Mr. Hussein's revived nuclear ambitions, they gave credibility to the apocalyptic imagery invoked by President Bush and his advisers. The tubes were "only really suited for nuclear weapons programs," Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security adviser, asserted on CNN on Sept. 8, 2002. "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

But before Ms. Rice made those remarks, she was aware that the
government's foremost nuclear experts had concluded that the tubes were most likely not for nuclear weapons at all, an examination by The New York Times has found. As early as 2001, her staff had been told that these experts, at the Energy Department, believed the tubes were probably intended for small artillery rockets, according to four officials at the Central Intelligence Agency and a senior administration official, all of whom spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the information.

The article is on this page.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 07:18 PM

Dr. Rice Today


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 07:20 PM

Huzza! My first blicky.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Leadfingers
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 08:06 PM

Wish I could do Blickies !


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Leadfingers
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 08:07 PM

But I will do post 300 just to stop El Ted doing it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 08:13 PM

Terry:

How very disappointing.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 12:35 AM

In a well-written editorial, Bob Herbert of the New York Times discusses Mister Bush's problem connecting to reality, with specifics, and offers an explanation as to why he lost the first debate.



A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 02:59 PM

From the Editors of The New Republic, a subscription only magazine:

Fool Me Once
by the Editors



All politicians stretch truth to present accomplishments in the most appealing light. What President Bush has told the country over the past week about the deeply troubled Iraq occupation, however, is different. While an increasingly strong insurgency murdered 250 Iraqis last week, he portrayed the occupation as gliding to success. Last week, Bush told the Manchester Union-Leader, "I'm pleased with the progress." The template the administration is using for its portrayal of Iraq is the one the Johnson administration perfected during Vietnam: To win reelection, Bush is lying.

Not only has there been no recent progress in Iraq, there has been much backsliding over the past six months. Two weeks ago, a research team from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (csis) released the most comprehensive study about events on the ground. Originally invited to study Iraq at the behest of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, csis said, "In every sector we looked at, we saw backward movement in recent months." This is the opposite of "progress," and the administration knows it. In a July National Intelligence Estimate (nie), its own analysts reported that the best outcome in Iraq is a barely contained insurgency and tenuous stability. In other words, what last year was among the worst-case scenarios is now the best.

The president has a response to those who honestly depict the situation in Iraq: dismissal. "Just guessing," Bush shrugged at the NIE. The Iraqis "are defying the dire predictions of a lot of people by moving toward democracy," he said last week. In fact, the only predictions Iraqis have defied are his own. First they defied his prediction that they would accept instantaneous post-Saddam rule by expatriates. Then they defied his prediction that they would accept an open-ended occupation. Then they defied his prediction that they would accept an interim government chosen by convoluted caucuses. Then they defied his prediction that the U.S. military could rely on poorly trained Iraqi forces to combat the insurgency. Then they defied his prediction that the transfer of notional sovereignty to the interim government would destroy the insurgency's popular support.

And now it is dawning on observers that the latest prediction Iraqis will defy is that they are "moving toward democracy." "The Americans have created a series of fictional [election] dates and events in order to delude themselves," Ghassan Atiyya, director of the Iraq Foundation for Development and Democracy, recently told Newsweek. Even American ground commander Thomas Metz, commenting on the fact that most of Al Anbar Province is controlled by the insurgency, admitted, "I don't think today you could hold elections."

In response, the administration is telegraphing that, should it win reelection, it will insist on Iraqi elections nonetheless and call them legitimate, even if they are unfree and unfair. In a recent address to the National Press Club, Rumsfeld shrugged, "I've never seen an election anywhere that's perfect," as if Iraq were West Palm Beach. Iraqis are more honest. Interim President Ghazi Al Yawer declared last week, "We do not want to have elections for the sake of elections. It's the outcome of the elections that's most important." By which he surely means an outcome that will preserve his power. For that reason, the Association of Muslim Scholars, which represents about 3,000 Sunni mosques, has announced it will boycott the vote. Sheik Abdul Satar Abdul Jabbar of the Association told The New York Times, "If the election goes forward anyway, the body that will be elected will not represent the country." This decision virtually ensures that elections could move Iraq closer to civil war. With most Sunnis refusing to cast ballots, the new government would lack legitimacy and take on a sectarian character, fostering even greater factional conflict. As Atiyya recently warned, "Badly prepared elections, rather than healing wounds, will open them."

There are brave Republicans who understand how disastrous the Bush administration's Iraq policy has proved. Referring to Bush's predictions, the GOP chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Richard Lugar, remarked, "The nonsense of all that is apparent." But the nonsense has continued. Bush has enlisted Iyad Allawi to travel to Washington this week and claim the administration is delivering victory in Iraq. Unless more Republicans join Lugar and put truth above party, the lies will continue through Election Day and beyond.

the Editors


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 05 Oct 04 - 08:22 AM

This CapitolHill Blue article reports negatively on Rumsfeld for flip-flopping on the Al Quaeda-Iraq issue.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 06 Oct 04 - 09:30 AM

"The proliferation of war, of weapons of mass destruction, of divisive fundamentalism (east and west), of aggressive unilateralism as opposed to a binding multilateralism. The end game on this Grand Chessboard is not a Pax Americana (an American Empire) as envisioned first by Zbigniew Brzezinski and now by PNAC (the Project for the New American Century), but a world in shambles, pocked by pocket wars, decimated by regional and national poverty and disease, a world of haves and have-nots, walled in or walled out by mutual fear and disrespect. Rather than crossing the human divides, we are widening them, like so many tribes stranded on ice floes in a roiling ocean. If we are to survive as a species we need to reach a common higher ground. The right choice, like voting or not, like which candidate is the sane one to vote for, is ours, and at this point not just a privilege, but an existential necessity. "

Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer who resides in New York City. Contact him at gvmaz@verizon.net.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 06 Oct 04 - 01:39 PM

George Soros argues clearly why it is important to evict Bush from the White House in this article on his website.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 04 - 11:54 PM

One of the most interesting questions for this thread is what Saddam Hussein thought the Bush Administration and its predecessors were really doing.

An interesting compilation of what he thought and how he bluffed (and why it backfired on him) can be found in this article in the LA Times.

It is possible that much of what I have thought of as sheer malice on the part of Bush and his administration is actually attributable to the sad fact that no-one with enough edge was around to help them figure out what the hell was really going on with this guy.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 13 Oct 04 - 12:34 AM

Scientists on Bush's Policies


"Across a broad range of issues—from childhood lead poisoning and mercury emissions to climate change, reproductive health, and nuclear weapons—the administration is distorting and censoring scientific findings that contradict its policies; manipulating the underlying science to align results with predetermined political decisions; and undermining the independence of science advisory panels by subjecting panel nominees to political litmus tests that have little or no bearing on their expertise; nominating non-experts or underqualified individuals from outside the scientific mainstream or with industry ties; as well as disbanding science advisory committees altogether." - Union of Concerned Scientists, a group that includes 20 Nobel Prize laureates and 19 National Medal of Science honorees, in its statement "Scientific Integrity in Policymaking." [Union of Concerned Scientists]


"The administration plan would hurt public health and help big polluters by weakening, delaying and diluting cuts in power plants' sulfur, nitrogen and mercury pollution compared to timely enforcement of current law. The administration plan would roll back the current law's public health safeguards to protect local air quality, curb pollution from upwind states, and protect our national parks. Tens of millions of people would be denied clean air, even as late as 2020 and beyond." - The American Lung Association, in its "State of the Air 2004" report [American Lung Association]


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 11:39 AM

Excerpted from the NY Times editorial coming out in support of Kerry


John Kerry for President

Published: October 17, 2004



Senator John Kerry goes toward the election with a base that is built more on opposition to George W. Bush than loyalty to his own candidacy. But over the last year we have come to know Mr. Kerry as more than just an alternative to the status quo. We like what we've seen. He has qualities that could be the basis for a great chief executive, not just a modest improvement on the incumbent.

We have been impressed with Mr. Kerry's wide knowledge and clear thinking - something that became more apparent once he was reined in by that two-minute debate light. He is blessedly willing to re-evaluate decisions when conditions change. And while Mr. Kerry's service in Vietnam was first over-promoted and then over-pilloried, his entire life has been devoted to public service, from the war to a series of elected offices. He strikes us, above all, as a man with a strong moral core.



There is no denying that this race is mainly about Mr. Bush's disastrous tenure. Nearly four years ago, after the Supreme Court awarded him the presidency, Mr. Bush came into office amid popular expectation that he would acknowledge his lack of a mandate by sticking close to the center. Instead, he turned the government over to the radical right.

Mr. Bush installed John Ashcroft, a favorite of the far right with a history of insensitivity to civil liberties, as attorney general. He sent the Senate one ideological, activist judicial nominee after another. He moved quickly to implement a far-reaching anti-choice agenda including censorship of government Web sites and a clampdown on embryonic stem cell research. He threw the government's weight against efforts by the University of Michigan to give minority students an edge in admission, as it did for students from rural areas or the offspring of alumni.

When the nation fell into recession, the president remained fixated not on generating jobs but rather on fighting the right wing's war against taxing the wealthy. As a result, money that could have been used to strengthen Social Security evaporated, as did the chance to provide adequate funding for programs the president himself had backed. No Child Left Behind, his signature domestic program, imposed higher standards on local school systems without providing enough money to meet them.

If Mr. Bush had wanted to make a mark on an issue on which Republicans and Democrats have long made common cause, he could have picked the environment. Christie Whitman, the former New Jersey governor chosen to run the Environmental Protection Agency, came from that bipartisan tradition. Yet she left after three years of futile struggle against the ideologues and industry lobbyists Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had installed in every other important environmental post. The result has been a systematic weakening of regulatory safeguards across the entire spectrum of environmental issues, from clean air to wilderness protection.



The president who lost the popular vote got a real mandate on Sept. 11, 2001. With the grieving country united behind him, Mr. Bush had an unparalleled opportunity to ask for almost any shared sacrifice. The only limit was his imagination.

He asked for another tax cut and the war against Iraq.

The president's refusal to drop his tax-cutting agenda when the nation was gearing up for war is perhaps the most shocking example of his inability to change his priorities in the face of drastically altered circumstances. Mr. Bush did not just starve the government of the money it needed for his own education initiative or the Medicare drug bill. He also made tax cuts a higher priority than doing what was needed for America's security; 90 percent of the cargo unloaded every day in the nation's ports still goes uninspected.

Along with the invasion of Afghanistan, which had near unanimous international and domestic support, Mr. Bush and his attorney general put in place a strategy for a domestic antiterror war that had all the hallmarks of the administration's normal method of doing business: a Nixonian obsession with secrecy, disrespect for civil liberties and inept management.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Iconoclast is in Clifton TX not Crawford.
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 12:34 PM

The Lone Star Iconoclast, P.O. Box 420, Crawford, TX 76638

Has a po box in crawford so you woun't know that it is actually published by left wing extremists in Clifton Texas, in another county 25 miles away.

For inquiries, call (254) 675-3336 or write to:
The Clifton Record
P.O. Box 353
Clifton, TX 76634

http://www.cliftonrecord.com/about.asp

Hmmm. The Clifton paper has the same phone number as the Iconoclast:


The Lone Star Iconoclast
P.O. Box 420
Crawford, TX 76638
We accept money orders, checks or cash with mail-in orders.
YOU CAN ALSO CALL US
WITH YOUR CREDIT CARD AT
(254) 675-3336

http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/subscribe.htm

I smell the pungent aroma of male cow feces.

Kerry edwards wil lower the cost of health care?
"Edwards' [1997] campaign rhetoric included a vow not to accept money from lobbyists or PACs. However, 86 percent of his Senate campaign was ultimately funded by the nation's most powerful special-interest group: personal-injury lawyers."

"In spite of his vocal opposition to PAC money, Edwards himself established a PAC in 2001: the New American Optimists (NAO). Nearly 70 percent (more than $4.1 million) of the NAO PAC's receipts have come from trial lawyers."

"Tab Turner, a fellow trial lawyer, donated a total of $200,000 to Edwards' campaign and PAC. Some contributions allegedly were in the name of several clerks in his law office. However, when investigations were made into the donations, more than one clerk revealed that they had made contributions to Edwards' campaign after Turner himself had assured them that they would be reimbursed—a practice that is forbidden by federal law. As a result, Edwards had to return $10,000 to employees of Turner & Associates. In spite of his legal background, Turner claimed that he was not aware that reimbursing his employees for their contributions was illegal."

"One of the leading asbestos litigation firms in the country—New York City-based Weitz & Luxenberg—contributed $34,250 in questionably raised employee donations to Edwards' presidential campaign."
http://www.thetruthabouttriallawyers.com/courtroom_roots.asp

Edwards blames Bush for the vaccine shortage but:
"Liability law appears to be a critical factor behind the vaccine shortage:
    As legal liabilities have chased many vaccine-makers out of the market, there are fewer manufacturers. This means less overall ability to produce additional doses, and less investment on new, faster ways to make vaccines.

    In the US about 185m people risk serious flu-related illness each year.

    At one time the US had 20 flu vaccine manufacturers. Today there are just four: Aventis, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck and Wyeth.

    After the second world war the science of cell cultures led a boom in vaccine production. But gradually profit margins thinned on vaccines, as the government became a big buyer of them. Increasing legal liability drove many makers out of the vaccine business.

    Today smaller biotech companies have entered the game. But they lack the capacity and the distribution to solve near-term shortages, experts say.

    "One of the problems with vaccines is you put them in healthy people," says Louis Galambos, history professor at Johns Hopkins University and an expert on vaccine manufacturing. "Now we're in a situation where we have too few producers."

    Congress passed a law in 1986 to limit liability on vaccines for children. There are no such liability limits for adults, however.

    Pharmaceuticals companies are inhibited by the particular structure of the US vaccine market, experts say. The US government is a large buyer of vaccines, leaving relatively poor profit margins on vaccines."
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2003/12/liability_and_f.html


Do you agree Amos?

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 01:10 PM

OG,

you are supposed to let Amos be the voice of the Pop. The rest of us are all partisan extremists- HE has the only correct view of reality.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 02:07 PM

Maureen Dowd does her nation proud by calling a spade a spade vis-a-vis the hypocrisy of th4e Catholic church in politics.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 02:59 PM

In an article about Being Addicted to 9-11, columnist THomas Friedman says it like it is with regard to the Administrations bizarre mindset.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 03:03 PM

OG:

Thanks for the hads up. I will be alert for future misstatements by that scurrilous young charmer. And he had such a nice smile, too!

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 18 Oct 04 - 02:42 AM

Just as I thought 254 675 phome numbers are in Bosque County and Clifton Texas.

Crawford is in McLennan County and the phone numbers start with 254 486

So whoever says the Iconoclast newspaper is in Crawford is deceiving the American public with lies and distortions.

And my post above about the flu vaccine: that was written in 2003, long before Edwards blamed it on Bush

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Oct 04 - 04:27 AM

Old Guy - I'm not sure if he blamed Bush or not but I do know this...

Supply is not the problem. The problem is the FDA. We have the same drug regulations in Canada and should be able to sell our extra million doses to the U.S. Its hung up in the FDA.

Bush said he was workin' on it with Canada in the last debate. Maybe he should be workin on the FDA. Even if he starts workin' on it today it will take three weeks to ready the shipment for delivery.

Do you really think Bush cares about you old guy? I think he cares more about securing the middle east for exploitation and controlling the world's food supply through biotechnology. I hate to disappoint you but he doesn't really care about your health.

d


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 18 Oct 04 - 04:22 PM

Bill O'Reilly, one of the unofficial loudspoeakers for the militant right, had a few choice words to offer female staffer about his fantasies concerning the use of felafel in the shower.

Talk about a sordid bunch!


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 09:26 AM

O'Reily is guilty as charged. A BANG the gavel.

Now fork over the $60 million.

Next case please.

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 11:22 AM

HEy, hey, OG!! Now you're getting into the swing of it!! LOL!

The irony is that he has, himself, pilloried so many with such excoriating rhetoric, on so little evidence, so ruthlessly, that a dose of the same medicine is not inappropriate!!

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 11:18 AM

Summary of Bush accomplishments:

http://www.monkeydyne.com/bushresume/resume.html


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 11:36 AM

Earlier historical examples of Georgie's ravenous but underhanded duplicity -- wonder how the Mathes family feels about their ex-governor?

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 03:16 PM

TEHRAN, Iran

Axis member backs Bush

"Iran is endorsing President George W. Bush. The head of Iran's security council said Tuesday that Bush's re-election was in Tehran's best interests, despite the administration's "axis of evil" label, accusations that Iran harbors Al Qaeda terrorists and threats of sanctions over the country's nuclear ambitions.


Historically, Democrats have harmed Iran more than Republicans, said Hasan Rowhani, head of the Supreme National Security Council, Iran's top security decision-making body.


Though Iran generally does not publicly wade into U.S. presidential politics, it has a history of preferring Republicans over Democrats, who tend to press human rights issues."

http://www.freep.com/news/politics/pols20e_20041020.htm


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 09:57 AM

Richard Cohen of the Washington Post describes in wincing insight the fact that the Old Bush has vanished, and Kerry may well win the election. Full column here.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 03:19 PM

Youngstown's mayor endorses Bush
Amos 24x7

Tuesday, August 24, 2004
Associated Press

Youngstown, Ohio - The mayor of this Democratic stronghold known for its steel industry job losses endorsed President Bush's re-election on Monday.

"Although I have never publicly endorsed a presidential candidate, the significance of this election, an election which I view as the most important of my lifetime, has motivated me to acknowledge my support for President Bush," said Mayor George McKelvey, a Democrat in his second term.
http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1093344920264290.xml

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 04:47 PM

Great -- the Youngstown mayor and the PResident of the United States and the Prime Minister of Iran all agree on something.

Seven Florida newspapers come out for John Kerry

Major papers endorse John Kerry

28 More Papers Endorse Kerry for President

Gold-MEdalist Olympians ENdorse Kerry

Newspapers Across Country Endorse Kerry

Regards,

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 05:00 PM

Similar rejections of the Bush Administration's ham-handed charade can be found from the Boston Police, the Boston Globe, the Kansas City Star, Mrs. Christopher Reeves, the Navajo people's national Council, the New York Times, the Philadelphia Enquirer, the ex-Governor of Michigan, Milliken, the Saint-Louis Post-Dispatch,200 New Hampshire Republicans, the Oregonian, the Charlotte Observer, the Columbia Daily Tribune, John Eisenhower, (note spelling), Senator McCain's senior aide,and many others -- all referenced on this page for the day.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 09:56 PM

Amos:

You forgot the head honcho if the biggest country in the world, Pooty-poot Putin, endorses Bush. Was it Texas Barbeque, or Beslan?

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 11:13 PM

Premier Putin, The Master of Democratic Process? You sure that's a point for your side?

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 05:00 PM

Hunter S. Thompson's passion is almost metaphysically inspiring. Following excerpt is from this article in Rolling Stone.

Fear and Loathing, Campaign 2004



Dr. Hunter S. Thompson sounds off on the fun-hogs in the passing lane

By DR. HUNTER S. THOMPSON


Armageddon came early for George Bush this year, and he was not ready for it. His long-awaited showdowns with my man John Kerry turned into a series of horrible embarrassments that cracked his nerve and demoralized his closest campaign advisers. They knew he would never recover, no matter how many votes they could steal for him in Florida, where the presidential debates were closely watched and widely celebrated by millions of Kerry supporters who suddenly had reason to feel like winners.

Kerry came into October as a five-point underdog with almost no chance of winning three out of three rigged confrontations with a treacherous little freak like George Bush. But the debates are over now, and the victor was clearly John Kerry every time. He steamrollered Bush and left him for roadkill.


Did you see Bush on TV, trying to debate? Jesus, he talked like a donkey with no brains at all. The tide turned early, in Coral Gables, when Bush went belly up less than halfway through his first bout with Kerry, who hammered poor George into jelly. It was pitiful. . . . I almost felt sorry for him, until I heard someone call him "Mister President," and then I felt ashamed.


Karl Rove, the president's political wizard, felt even worse. There is angst in the heart of Texas today, and panic in the bowels of the White House. Rove has a nasty little problem, and its name is George Bush. The president failed miserably from the instant he got onstage with John Kerry. He looked weak and dumb. Kerry beat him like a gong in Coral Gables, then again in St. Louis and Tempe -- and that is Rove's problem: His candidate is a weak-minded frat boy who cracks under pressure in front of 60 million voters.


That is an unacceptable failure for hardballers like Rove and Dick Cheney. On the undercard in Cleveland against John Edwards, Cheney came across as the cruel and sinister uberboss of Halliburton. In his only honest moment during the entire debate, he vowed, "We have to make America the best place in the world to do business."


Bush signed his own death warrant in the opening round, when he finally had to speak without his TelePrompTer. It was a Cinderella story brought up to date in Florida that night -- except this time the false prince turned back into a frog.


Immediately after the first debate ended I called Muhammad Ali at his home in Michigan, but whoever answered said the champ was laughing so hard that he couldn't come to the phone. "The debate really cracked him up," he chuckled. "The champ loves a good ass-whuppin'. He says Bush looked so scared to fight, he finally just quit and laid down."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 05:02 PM

"War is an option whose time has passed. Peace is the only option for the future. At present we occupy a treacherous no-man's-land between peace and war, a time of growing fear that our military might has expanded beyond our capacity to control it and our political differences widened beyond our ability to bridge them. . . .


Short of changing human nature, therefore, the only way to achieve a practical, livable peace in a world of competing nations is to take the profit out of war.
--RICHARD M. NIXON, "REAL PEACE" (1983)



Richard Nixon looks like a flaming liberal today, compared to a golem like George Bush. Indeed. Where is Richard Nixon now that we finally need him?"

--Ibid


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: dianavan
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 08:24 PM

First time I heard Bush referred to as a Golem. Right you are!

d


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 12:02 AM

Amos:

Please strike anyone from a non democratic nation from the list of Kerry supporters, you know like N Vietnam. See here

"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged."
President Abraham Lincoln

You know him? The Republican that freed the slaves and people wer trying to oust him from office.

I'll opt for hanging.

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 01:26 AM

OG:

The Union side, of the Civil War, I have always been taught, was the just side, the enlightened side, and the necessary side.

Kerry understood from first-hand experience that the Vietnam War was not just, nor necessary, and certainly not enlightened, and he had the guts to stand up in the face of mass counter-opinion and say so.

Opt as you will, I don't much care. Your chauvinism and jingoism are not entertaining, and (in my own opinion) unhealthy. You can take the actions of a decent human being and slander them and falsify them until the day looks like night.   Good for you, and may you have the joy of it, somewhere.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 01:39 AM

Amos:

Which person do you claim I am slandering?

If you mean Lincoln, I am honoring him. His quotation should be taken to heart today. People are claiming it is patriotic to undermine the military in a time of war. I say they are saboteurs and should be hanged like Ol' Abe said.

He was on the just side and freed the slaves.

Most amazingly he was a Republican.

If you say I am slandering Kerry, I am only saying he is an arrogant asshole.

Maybe you should come over to the just side.

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 01:39 AM

Amos,

When you do not seem to be able to realize is, that to people who have opinions that are not the same as yours, you are equally guilty of what you accuse OG of. It is a pity that you are so absolutely sure of your opinion that you are incapable of realizing that others may not agree with you and still be well-meaning, thoughtful individuals.



"You can take the actions of a decent human being and slander them and falsify them until the day looks like night. "


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 01:55 AM

Al Gore describes the problem well in this speech.

"It appears to be an important element in Bush's ideology to never admit a mistake or even a doubt. It also has become common for Bush to rely on special interests for information about the policies important to them and he trusts what they tell him over any contrary view that emerges from public debate. He has, in effect, outsourced the truth. Most disturbing of all, his contempt for the rule of reason and his early successes in persuading the nation that his ideologically based views accurately described the world have tempted him to the hubristic and genuinely dangerous illusion that reality is itself a commodity that can be created with clever public relations and propaganda skills, and where specific controversies are concerned, simply purchased as a turnkey operation from the industries most affected.

George Orwell said, "The point is that we are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield." "

OG, BB -- John Kerry is not arrogant, or at least he is a lot less arrogant than our half-mad Resident. As for being an asshole, you are simply incorrect in your opinion. He is more of a gentleman, and a LOT more of a scholar, and a more experienced diplomat and a more skilled manager than W has ever dreamed of being. He's simply a better human being.

If you weren't completely locked in to the past and its serious errors, you could see it a lot more clearly. The merits on present time comparison of the two men and what they stand for are overwhelmingly in Kerry's favor.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 02:01 AM

Amos,

You are willing to accept Gore defining Bush as the definition of truth, but not Bush defining Kerry? It seems to me that you are showing an obvious bias. You make statements based on one-sided, partisan statements, and expect those who disagree with them to accept what you say as the Amos-given WORD. You do make valid comments, sometimes: BUT your use of obviously biased sources makes your general conclusion at least suspect, if not worthless.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 02:13 AM

I am biased, no question. I am not open minded and even handed about George Bush. You want to know why?

Because he has lied to me, lied to my representatives, mismanaged my nation, ruined our reputation abroad and wasted our treasure domestically. He has unleashed the forces of war unnecessarily and cost American lives and the slaughter of innocents in a wildly mis-estimated effort to act powerful. He has spilled innocent blood when he did not have to do so. He has consistently misrepresented the truth, and in the current campaign he has again and again misrepresented the efforts of others and the views of others, distorting them to serve his own interests by twisting their words. He has worsened my nation's economy and in every way displayed favoritism, arrogance, blatant and intentional illiteracy and ineptitude, a refusal to communicate openly, and an unrelenting willingness to suborn his office to the benefit of business associates.

Given this and his other offences, I am not even-minded about him. I have seen the deaths, and heard the testimony, and I don't think there is much room for appeal or redemption in this case.

Bummer.

The man is a danger to the nation. He should go home as quickly as possible before he kills again.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 02:31 AM

Amos,

"Because he has lied to me, lied to my representatives, mismanaged my nation, ruined our reputation abroad and wasted our treasure domestically. He has unleashed the forces of war unnecessarily and cost American lives and the slaughter of innocents in a wildly mis-estimated effort to act powerful. He has spilled innocent blood when he did not have to do so. He has consistently misrepresented the truth, and in the current campaign he has again and again misrepresented the efforts of others and the views of others, distorting them to serve his own interests by twisting their words. "



This is your opinion- given that, you are certainly entitled to your vote against him. But there are people out here who will say the same thing, with as much conviction and depth of feeling, about Clinton.



You are not entitled to make personnal attacks on those who hold other opinions. You can, and SHOULD, attack the facts presented when you feel them to be false: But to attack the person because they disagree with you makes you a worse type of person than you claim Bush is.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 02:37 AM

I attack lies, and I tend to be hard on liars. I have been on both sides of that street. You are backing a slimeball. That's your choice. I think less of you for exercising poor judgment in human affairs. That's mine. I do not attack you because you disagree with me, for goodness' sake!! That would really be dull. I just think you're making a sad mistake, and don't mind saying so.

The list of charges in my diatribe, above, which you so kindly excerpted, is not just my opinion, but an abstraction based on facts. We've been over this over nad over and over. The man is a liar, Brucie. You are back a forked-tongue liar who drove us into a lethal war we did not need, under false data. He's not a genuine guy, sorry.   

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 02:49 AM

Amos,

Bruce, not Brucie...

I read the British Report. I looked at the ongoing violations of UN resolutions by Iraq. I looked at the available information, and I have read the Russian warnings. IMO, in the post 9/11 situation, the Bush administration would have been negligent to NOT demand that the UN act, and when effective action was not forthcoming, take action on it's own. I do NOT say that the conduct of the was has been perfect- No was ever is. Do I wish that Saddam had complied, in November of 2001? YES- But he chose not to. I consider that the lives lost by the mistakes made are far fewer than the lives that would have been lost if the threat had been as it looked to be, and nothing effective was done. Should we have listened to the French, who were major violators of the UN sanctions with Iraq, or other nations that had a vested interest in seeing harm come to the US/ I do not think so.

I think that a reasonable person could see the need to eliminate Iraq as a potential source of WMD to terrorists. You seem to see something else. If I am wrong, thousands die- If you are wrong, millions. I pray to God that if your viewpoint prevails, you are willing to take the same blame for those millions that you place upon Bush for his thousands.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 03:03 AM

If I was right, Bruce, and the leader of the nation acted reasonably, no-one would have died, aside from those who fell to Saddam's continued aggressions against his own people. I am glad those lives were saved, sure, but they were saved in the most wasteful possible way.

The leader of the nation was unqualified. And he intended to target Saddam Hussein from the first days he was in office, long before 9-11.


I don't see the logic in that.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 03:09 AM

Amos,

You continue to make statements of YOUR opinion, and then act as if they are fact. When you do not see logic in a set of things that YOU have created, for whatever reason, perhaps it is because the person MAKING the statements is not logical...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 09:21 AM

I created Bush's poor qualifications? I suppose I did, but that's a metaphysic I would have not thought you capable of articulating so neatly!! Congratulations! I should stop contributing my energy to his being the conundrum that he is.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 02:02 PM

To Amos:

Amos in the morning Amos in the evening Amos at suppertime.
Be my little Amos And fight me all the time.


Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 03:24 PM

OG:

I am not fighting you.

I am fighting that insufferable asshole you are promoting. For one reason, really, only: he is damaging the nation and undermining the fiber of its pride and morale.

That's what I see. Call it opinion, call it viewpoint, call it intelligent extrapolation from data. It doesn't go away.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 03:58 PM

Viewpoints from hither and yon:

charles from shelbyville tn says "BUSH, IT THINK ITS TIME 4 U 2 LEAVE U HAVE BEEN PUTTING OUR TROOPS MORE IN DANGER I ALSO DONT THINK U SHOULD KEEP RAISING OUR TAXES ALSO WE NEED A LEADER 4 A PRESIDENT AND THAT WOULD BE PRESIDENT KERRY U R SO WORRIED ABOUT WATCHING IRAC THAT U NEED 2 PROTECT THE U.S THE LAST THING 2 SAY IS GOOOOOOOO KERRY U GOT MY VOTE" (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:51pm PDT)


Robert Brennan from Long Island NY says "Free America from King George! Elect Kerry!The Emperor Has no cloths! Bush Lies, America Dies! Stop the Bush Dynasty before it's too late. Remember Bush was never elected in the first place, dont let him steal this election from the people again." (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:50pm PDT)


diana from maryland says "Thanks for nothing!" (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:48pm PDT)


priscilla from miami says "bush sucks and i'd vote for any one other than him. he one his first election only because he cheated;he put road blocks oin societies that where mostly middle and low class so that they wouldn't be able to vote on election day." (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:47pm PDT)


Steve from New Zealand says "If Bush is re-elected the World is in big trouble. The man is a facist with no respect for human life at home or abroad." (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:44pm PDT)


Charlie from Dallas says "Because your a liar and a crook, and seeing you sit in that class room while america was under a terroist attack on 9/11 and sing 'old macdonald' was the scariest god damn thing ive ever seen. GEORGE BUSH MUST BE STOPPED." (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:44pm PDT)


Military Mother from USA says ""How do you think it feels for a grieving mother to hear Charles Duelfer, the top CIA weapons inspector for Iraq, state last week that Iraq destroyed its weapons of mass destruction years ago and had no ability to produce more, under sanctions? How do you think it feels to hear White House officials now admit that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11? I want to know: did Michael die for a lie?" asked Lila Lipscomb, the military mother from Flint, Michigan, who is featured in Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" reading from the last letter her son, Michael, sent home from Iraq before he died." (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:43pm PDT)



Henry from Canada says "A president is not a cowboy" (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:39pm PDT)


Mari Lippi from Michigan says "GW was not ready to lead this country the first time he was given this job by the Supreme Court and is not ready to lead it now. He's lost track of the economy, our respect in the world, and if he can't protect the citizens of this country against the flu, how can he protect us against a terrorist attack? Homeland Security does not even check the cargo in the largest port in the world in L.A. for W.M.D. Instead he rushes to the Middle East chasing a fairy tale of W.M.D. when they could be sitting in our backyard. I'm more afraid of GW in office than not. We're not protected in this country, our borders are open to anyone who can sneak in. GW will run and hide as he did on 9/11. John Kerry will stand up and fight like a man and protect this country with intelligence and strength. GW will only face what he is comfortable with, just as his campaign functions. No one is allowed into his protected world unless they are a registered Republican, what a coward!" (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:38pm PDT)


Mardi from Germany says "See ya Later, Bush, because a demagogue, liar and warmonger like you is simply unacceptable for our world!" (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:36pm PDT)


nanna from ca,san jose says "you've put so much people in jeopardy!" (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:35pm PDT)


Robert Hanshew from Las vegas says "the only thing that can save the world from president bush is for him to see welcome to washington, dc in his rear view mirror." (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:34pm PDT)

Tim from East Hartford, Ct says "I would vote for Bush, if I could invest in the National Debt. Go to http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ and see how rich he can make you." (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:31pm PDT)

Mos from California says "A lot of damage under your belt, King George. About time you got ousted hard, and let us get on with genuine principles instead of your brand of righteous fanaticism!" (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:29pm PDT)


Ken Nicholson, LTC USArmy (Ret) from Virginia says "Bush just gave $10 Billion to Big Tobacco! On Friday Bush signed a bill that provides a $10 Billion handout to tobacco farmers, using our tax money to prop up the most destructive,harmful, odious business in this country. I give the government a third of my income so that they can do that? This is as outrageous as causing 1200 young soldiers to die in Iraq because Saddam Hussein once threatened Bush's father. Bush could send his twins to serve in the Army over there and then he'd finally understand just what the cost of his war is to the thousands of families that have been devastated by his impulsive behavior - but we will never see that - it will always be other people's children, spouses and parents who will be sent - what does he care? He didn't go to war himself when so many were dying in Vietnam - Daddy pulled strings to get him out of it. This jerk wasn't even elected by most voters. Hopefully the vote this time will be so overwhelming that even the Bush cronies controlling the elections in Florida won't be able to thwart the will of the American voters like they did so unabashedly last time." (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:28pm PDT)


richard falco from new york says "so long bush.you homo" (Sat, Oct 23rd, 12:27pm PDT)

http://laterbush.com/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 04:24 PM

Amos:

This might sound flippant but I am fighting that insufferable asshole you are promoting.

Remeber I was the first to say Kerry is an arrogant asshole and someone pretending to be related to me started a counter thread later.

May the best asshole win.

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 07:17 PM

Seems to me, OG, that you are oblivious to the harm this man is doing.

But, as you say, may the best asshole win. *bg**

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 07:44 PM

From a dear friend:


GUESTWORDS: By E.L. Doctorow

    The Unfeeling President

    September 9, 2004 - Easthampton Star

    I fault this president for not knowing what death is. He does not
suffer the death of our 21-year-olds who
    wanted to be what they could be. On the eve of D-Day in 1944 General
Eisenhower prayed to God for the lives
    of the young soldiers he knew were going to die. He knew what death
was. Even in a justifiable war, a war not
    of choice but of necessity, a war of survival, the cost was almost
more than Eisenhower could bear.

    But this president does not know what death is. He hasn't the mind
for it. You see him joking with the press,
    peering under the table for the weapons of mass destruction he can't
seem to find, you see him at rallies
    strutting up to the stage in shirt sleeves to the roar of the
carefully screened crowd, smiling and waving,
    triumphal, a he-man.

    He does not mourn. He doesn't understand why he should mourn. He is
satisfied during the course of a speech
    written for him to look solemn for a moment and speak of the brave
young Americans who made the ultimate
    sacrifice for their country.

    But you study him, you look into his eyes and know he dissembles an
emotion which he does not feel in the
    depths of his being because he has no capacity for it. He does not
feel a personal responsibility for the 1,000
    dead young men and women who wanted to be what they could be.

    They come to his desk not as youngsters with mothers and fathers or
wives and children who will suffer to
    the end of their days a terribly torn fabric of familial
relationships and the inconsolable remembrance of
    aborted life . . . they come to his desk as a political liability,
which is why the press is not permitted to
    photograph the arrival of their coffins from Iraq.

    How then can he mourn? To mourn is to express regret and he regrets
nothing. He does not regret that his
    reason for going to war was, as he knew, unsubstantiated by the
facts. He does not regret that his bungled
    plan for the war's aftermath has made of his mission-accomplished a
disaster. He does not regret that,
    rather than controlling terrorism, his war in Iraq has licensed it.
So he never mourns for the dead and crippled
    youngsters who have fought this war of his choice.

    He wanted to go to war and he did. He had not the mind to perceive
the costs of war, or to listen to those who
    knew those costs. He did not understand that you do not go to war
when it is one of the options but when it is
    the only option; you go not because you want to but because you have
to.

    Yet this president knew it would be difficult for Americans not to
cheer the overthrow of a foreign dictator.
    He knew that much. This president and his supporters would seem to
have a mind for only one thing -- to take
    power, to remain in power, and to use that power for the sake of
themselves and their friends.

    A war will do that as well as anything. You become a wartime leader.
The country gets behind you. Dissent
    becomes inappropriate. And so he does not drop to his knees, he is
not contrite, he does not sit in the church
    with the grieving parents and wives and children. He is the
president who does not feel. He does not feel for
    the families of the dead, he does not feel for the 35 million of us
who live in poverty, he does not feel for the
    40 percent who cannot afford health insurance, he does not feel for
the miners whose lungs are turning black
    or for the working people he has deprived of the chance to work
overtime at time-and-a-half to pay their bills
    - it is amazing for how many people in this country this president
does not feel.

    But he will dissemble feeling. He will say in all sincerity he is
relieving the wealthiest 1 percent of the
    population of their tax burden for the sake of the rest of us, and
that he is polluting the air we breathe for
    the sake of our economy, and that he is decreasing the quality of
air in coal mines to save the coal miners'
    jobs, and that he is depriving workers of their time-and-a-half
benefits for overtime because this is actually a
    way to honor them by raising them into the professional class.

    And this litany of lies he will versify with reverences for God and
the flag and democracy, when just what he
    and his party are doing to our democracy is choking the life out of
it.

    But there is one more terribly sad thing about all of this. I
remember the millions of people here and around
    the world who marched against the war. It was extraordinary, that
spontaneous aroused oversoul of alarm and
    protest that transcended national borders. Why did it happen? After
all, this was not the only war anyone had
    ever seen coming. There are little wars all over he world most of
the time.

    But the cry of protest was the appalled understanding of millions of
people that America was ceding its role as
    the last best hope of mankind. It was their perception that the
classic archetype of democracy was morphing
    into a rogue nation. The greatest democratic republic in history was
turning its back on the future, using its
    extraordinary power and standing not to advance the ideal of a
concordance of civilizations but to endorse the
    kind of tribal combat that originated with the Neanderthals, a
people, now extinct, who could imagine ensuring
    their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war.

    The president we get is the country we get. With each president the
nation is conformed spiritually. He is the
    artificer of our malleable national soul. He proposes not only the
laws but the kinds of lawlessness that govern
    our lives and invoke our responses. The people he appoints are cast
in his image. The trouble they get into and
    get us into, is his characteristic trouble.

    Finally, the media amplify his character into our moral weather
report. He becomes the face of our sky, the
    conditions that prevail. How can we sustain ourselves as the United
States of America given the stupid and
    ineffective warmaking, the constitutionally insensitive lawgiving,
and the monarchal economics of this
    president? He cannot mourn but is a figure of such moral vacancy as
to make us mourn for ourselves.



Sums it up beautifully.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 07:53 PM

Quote for the day :

"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.

To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day"

Theodore Roosevelt, April 19, 1906


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Old Guy
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 11:09 PM

Amos Amos Amos:

Why didn't you name this thread "Popular views of the Amos"?

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 11:19 PM

I don't write these references, is why. I just thought it would be good to have a place where the suppressed and stifled voices of dissidence could be pointed out, because Bushie gets really hard on those who disagree with him. Never before in the history of this nation has any President felt obliged to resort to the use of barriered enclosures called "free speech areas" where dissidents must confine themselves, so the public news casts don't see them. Never before has so much suppression of information been imposed by so few on so many. The Bill of Rights has never been so vigorously constrained and attacked as under the current administration.

Orwell must be spinning in his damned grave.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 11:47 PM

America, A Country on the Brink of Destruction; a summary of the Bush presidency,
by Lonna Gooden VanHorn, can be found on this page.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: dianavan
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 12:00 AM

beardedbruce - I take exception to the remark, "Should we have listened to the French, who were major violators of the UN sanctions with Iraq, or other nations that had a vested interest in seeing harm come to the US/ I do not think so."

What did Canada have to gain?

And why didn't the U.S. let the U.N. inspectors finish their job?

d


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Old Guy
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 12:41 AM

Amos:

The democrats and thier supporters do all the spinning. Orwell is dead.

Who the hell is Lonna Gooden VanHorn? Is she a stiffled dissident?

Are you searching through a dumpster somewhere?


Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 12:47 AM

Orwell is dead, but Big Brother lives.

clint


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 12:59 AM

dianavan,

I have stated in past threads, which generated no end of ire that I dare have my own opinion, that the inspectors stated that they were not getting the required level of cooperation- for a number of years. IMHO, I feel that Saddam was given more than enough chances to comply, and continued to refuse. In the post 9/11 world , and with the information that was available at the time, to NOT take forceful action would have been to risk millions, or tens of millions of lives.

I still wonder why, in all the demonstrations against the US taking action against Iraq, NOONE ever just asked Saddam to comply. Not a single poster, placard, or sign. AT least, none that I know of, from any reports here or on the TV.

There had been a low level of actual fighting between the US and Iraq ever since 1991- but to most of the world it was business as usual, with numerous attempts to violate sanctions, and help Saddam misuse the Oil for Food money. WHy is it that noone ever asks HOW saddam had even the forces he dis, after the Gulf war and the sanctions? For country that the UN was preventing from rearming, Iraq had a lot of firepower....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 01:02 AM

The link that Amos gives on 21 October, 9:57, is essential reading, imo.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Old Guy
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 01:15 AM

Are the enlightened people here keeping abreast of the oil for food corruption investigation?

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Old Guy
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 12:59 AM

this thread is dying Anus I mean Amos.

Old guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 01:10 AM

I think I can see why, Old Guy.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 09:10 AM

The LA Times paints an accurate and deadly picture of the Bush Administrations Machiavellian philosophy, "Rovism" yclept. This editorial describes the Administration as "The Sopramos in the White House". Apt.

Click here for article

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 09:21 AM

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Bush administration has decided that some non-Iraqi prisoners captured by American forces in Iraq are not entitled to the protection of the Geneva Conventions, the New York Times reported Tuesday.

According to unnamed administration officials who spoke with the newspaper, the opinion reached in recent months holds that there are exceptions to previous U.S. assertions that the Geneva Conventions apply to all prisoners taken in the Iraq war.

Reuters article



How handy for the Bush Administration to have the power to set aside the Geneva Convention at will, re-define human rights in times of war, and claim freedom of speech and freedom of assembly is protected by providing "free speech areas" out back during political events.

These guys really are fascistic.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 09:28 AM

The London Financial Times endorses Kerry, stating among other things:

The bursting of the Bush bubble
The US presidential election is the most closely watched since at least
1980. Now as then, the choice is between two candidates with sharply
different governing philosophies and views on the exercise of American
power in the world. The outcome will determine whether the radical,
faith-based politics of President George W. Bush triumphs, or whether
Americans opt for the shift in course represented by Senator John
Kerry.

Mr Bush entered the White House in January 2001, having won a narrow
election victory, courtesy of the US Supreme Court. He pledged to be a
conciliator. He talked about uniting Democrats and Republicans at home.
He promised to pursue a humble foreign policy abroad. His record shows
that he has done neither. He has been a polariser, exploiting the War
on Terror to cow domestic opposition and divide the world into Them and
Us.




http://tinyurl.com/67wod


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 10:25 AM

The Washington Post describes the same ham-handed indifference to the Geneva Convention:

"While blaming the crimes at Abu Ghraib on a small group of low-ranking soldiers, the White House, the Pentagon and the CIA have fought to preserve the exceptional and sometimes secret policies that allow U.S. personnel to violate the Geneva Conventions and other laws governing the handling and interrogation of foreign detainees. Under those policies, practices at odds with basic American values continue--even if there are no sensational photos to document them."

What a team!! What a group!! We have a government fit to make Americans PROUD!!


I spit.


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 10:33 AM

The New York Times reports on NASA's feelings about Bushies bad attityudes on global warming and their failure to act thereon.

"Dr. Hansen stood by his assertions and said the administration risked disaster by discouraging scientists from discussing unwelcome findings."


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 12:43 PM

THe Washington Post examines the Bush adminitration's tepid series of accomplishments on nmuclear proliferation in this article. The Today's Papers summary:


In another impressive assessment, the Post looks at President Bush's record on counter-proliferation. The paper says Libya has been a success--albeit with a big assist by Britain--while the policies, or lack thereof, on North Korea and Iran have been disastrous. Iran has marked by paralyzing disputes within the administration, while the administration essentially put off Pyongyang, a policy one "participant" in decisions called "no carrot, no stick and no talk." The Post also says the U.S. had solid info about A.Q. Khan's order-nukes-by-mail business in early 2001 but waited a year and a half to deal, and then only after the strong urging of the British. "They made no attempt to get a handle on his activities abroad," said one former Bush assistant secretary of state.




It is interesting to note that Bush's fixation on Iraq may have been instrumental in allowing nuclear build up to occur in several more dangerous places.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 01:07 PM

A speech by Al Gore contained the following noteworthy phrases:

"The essential cruelty of Bush's game is that he takes an astonishingly selfish and greedy collection of economic and political proposals then cloaks it with a phony moral authority, thus misleading many Americans who have a deep and genuine desire to do good in the world. And in the process he convinces them to lend unquestioning support for proposals that actually hurt their families and their communities. Bush has stolen the symbolism and body language of religion and used it to disguise the most radical effort in American history to take what rightfully belongs to the citizenry of America and give as much as possible to the already wealthy and privileged, who look at his agenda and say, as Dick Cheney said to Paul O'Neill, "this is our due."

The central elements of Bush's political – as opposed to religious -- belief system are plain to see: The "public interest" is a dangerous myth according to Bush's ideology – a fiction created by the hated "liberals" who use the notion of "public interest" as an excuse to take away from the wealthy and powerful what they believe is their due. Therefore, government of by and for the people, is bad – except when government can help members of his coalition. Laws and regulations are therefore bad – again, except when they can be used to help members of his coalition.

Therefore, whenever laws must be enforced and regulations administered, it is important to assign those responsibilities to individuals who can be depended upon not to fall prey to this dangerous illusion that there is a public interest, and will instead reliably serve the narrow and specific interests of industries or interest groups. This is the reason, for example, that President Bush put the chairman of Enron, Ken Lay, in charge of vetting any appointees to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Enron had already helped the Bush team with such favors as ferrying their rent-a-mob to Florida in 2000 to permanently halt the counting of legally cast ballots. And then Enron went on to bilk the electric rate-payers of California, without the inconvenience of federal regulators protecting citizens against their criminal behavior. Or to take another example, this is why all of the important EPA positions have been filled by lawyers and lobbyists representing the worst polluters in their respective industries in order to make sure that they're not inconvenienced by the actual enforcement of the laws against excessive pollution. In Bush's ideology, there is an interweaving of the agendas of large corporations that support him and his own ostensibly public agenda for the government he leads. Their preferences become his policies, and his politics become their business
"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 01:58 PM

Paul Krugman writing for the New York Times provides an excoriating analysis of the Bush administrations "Culture of Coverups"

Excerpts:

"Although President Bush's campaign is based almost entirely on his self-proclaimed leadership in that war, his officials have thrown a shroud of secrecy over any information that might let voters assess his performance.

Yesterday we got two peeks under that shroud. One was The Times's report about what the International Atomic Energy Agency calls "the greatest explosives bonanza in history." Ignoring the agency's warnings, administration officials failed to secure the weapons site, Al Qaqaa, in Iraq, allowing 377 tons of deadly high explosives to be looted, presumably by insurgents.

The administration is trying to play down the importance of this loss, arguing that because Iraq was awash in munitions, a few hundred more tons don't make much difference. But aside from their potential use in nuclear weapons - the reason they were under seal before the war - these particular explosives, unlike standard munitions, are exactly what a terrorist needs.

Informed sources quoted by the influential Nelson Report say explosives from Al Qaqaa are the "primary source" of the roadside and car bombs that have killed and wounded so many U.S. soldiers. And thanks to the huge amount looted - "in a highly organized operation using heavy equipment" - the insurgents and whoever else have access to the Qaqaa material have enough explosives for tens of thousands of future bombs.

If the administration had had its way, the public would never have heard anything about this. Administration officials have known about the looting of Al Qaqaa for at least six months, and probably much longer. But they didn't let the I.A.E.A. inspect the site after the war, and pressured the Iraqis not to inform the agency about the loss. They now say that they didn't want our enemies - that is, the people who stole the stuff - to know it was missing. The real reason, obviously, was that they wanted the news kept under wraps until after Nov. 2.

The story of the looted explosives has overshadowed another report that Bush officials tried to suppress - this one about how the Bush administration let Abu Musab al-Zarqawi get away. An article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal confirmed and expanded on an "NBC Nightly News" report from March that asserted that before the Iraq war, administration officials called off a planned attack that might have killed Mr. Zarqawi, the terrorist now blamed for much of the mayhem in that country, in his camp.

Citing "military officials," the original NBC report explained that the failure to go after Mr. Zarqawi was based on domestic politics: "the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq" - a part of Iraq not controlled by Saddam Hussein - "could undermine its case for war against Saddam." The Journal doesn't comment on this explanation, but it does say that when NBC reported, correctly, that Mr. Zarqawi had been targeted before the war, administration officials denied it.

What other mistakes did the administration make? If partisan appointees like Mr. Goss continue to control the intelligence agencies, we may never know."




A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 02:13 PM

From the NY Times, again:

Making Things Worse

Published: October 26, 2004

President Bush's misbegotten invasion of Iraq appears to have achieved what Saddam Hussein did not: putting dangerous weapons in the hands of terrorists and creating an offshoot of Al Qaeda in Iraq.

The murder of dozens of Iraqi Army recruits over the weekend is being attributed to the forces of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who has been identified by the Bush administration as a leading terrorist and a supposed link between Iraq and Al Qaeda. That was not true before the war - as multiple investigations have shown. But the breakdown of order since the invasion has changed all that. This terrorist, who has claimed many attacks on occupation forces and the barbaric murder of hostages, recently swore allegiance to Osama bin Laden and renamed his group Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia.

The hideous murder of the recruits was a reminder of the Bush administration's dangerously inflated claims about training an Iraqi security force. The officials responsible for these inexperienced young men sent them home for leave without weapons or guards, at a time when police and army recruits are constantly attacked. The men who killed them wore Iraqi National Guard uniforms.

A particularly horrific case of irony involves weapons of mass destruction. It's been obvious for months that American forces were not going to find the chemical or biological armaments that Mr. Bush said were stockpiled in Iraq. What we didn't know is that while they were looking for weapons that did not exist, they lost weapons that did.

James Glanz, William J. Broad and David E. Sanger reported in The Times yesterday that some 380 tons of the kinds of powerful explosives used to destroy airplanes, demolish buildings, make missile warheads and trigger nuclear weapons have disappeared from one of the many places in Iraq that the United States failed to secure. The United Nations inspectors disdained by the Bush administration had managed to monitor the explosives for years. But they vanished soon after the United States took over the job. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was so bent on proving his theory of lightning warfare that he ignored the generals who said an understaffed and underarmed invasion force could rush to Baghdad, but couldn't hold the rest of the country, much less guard things like the ammunition dump.

Iraqi and American officials cannot explain how some 760,000 pounds of explosives were spirited away from a well-known site just 30 miles from Baghdad. But they were warned. Within weeks of the invasion, international weapons inspectors told Washington that the explosives depot was in danger and that terrorists could help themselves "to the greatest explosives bonanza in history."

The disastrous theft was revealed in a recent letter to an international agency in Vienna. It was signed by the general director of Iraq's Planning and Following Up Directorate. It's too bad the Bush administration doesn't have one of those.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 04:33 PM

From the New Yorker Magazine's assessment endorsing John Kerry for President of the United States:

As a variety of memoirs and journalistic accounts have made plain, Bush seldom entertains contrary opinion. He boasts that he listens to no outside advisers, and inside advisers who dare to express unwelcome views are met with anger or disdain. He lives and works within a self-created bubble of faith-based affirmation. Nowhere has his solipsism been more damaging than in the case of Iraq. The arguments and warnings of analysts in the State Department, in the Central Intelligence Agency, in the uniformed military services, and in the chanceries of sympathetic foreign governments had no more effect than the chants of millions of marchers.

The decision to invade and occupy Iraq was made on the basis of four assumptions: first, that Saddam's regime was on the verge of acquiring nuclear explosives and had already amassed stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons; second, that the regime had meaningful links with Al Qaeda and (as was repeatedly suggested by the Vice-President and others) might have had something to do with 9/11; third, that within Iraq the regime's fall would be followed by prolonged celebration and rapid and peaceful democratization; and, fourth, that a similar democratic transformation would be precipitated elsewhere in the region, accompanied by a new eagerness among Arab governments and publics to make peace between Israel and a presumptive Palestinian state. The first two of these assumptions have been shown to be entirely baseless. As for the second two, if the wishes behind them do someday come true, it may not be clear that the invasion of Iraq was a help rather than a hindrance.

In Bush's rhetoric, the Iraq war began on March 20, 2003, with precision bombings of government buildings in Baghdad, and ended exactly three weeks later, with the iconic statue pulldown. That military operation was indeed a success. But the cakewalk led over a cliff, to a succession of heedless and disastrous mistakes that leave one wondering, at the very least, how the Pentagon's civilian leadership remains intact and the President's sense of infallibility undisturbed.

The failure, against the advice of such leaders as General Eric Shinseki, then the Army chief of staff, to deploy an adequate protective force led to unchallenged looting of government buildings, hospitals, museums, and—most inexcusable of all—arms depots. ("Stuff happens," Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld explained, though no stuff happened to the oil ministry.) The Pentagon all but ignored the State Department's postwar plans, compiled by its Future of Iraq project, which warned not only of looting but also of the potential for insurgencies and the folly of relying on exiles such as Ahmad Chalabi; the project's head, Thomas Warrick, was sidelined. The White House counsel's disparagement of the Geneva Conventions and of prohibitions on torture as "quaint" opened the way to systematic and spectacular abuses at Abu Ghraib and other American-run prisons--a moral and political catastrophe for which, in a pattern characteristic of the Administration's management style, no one in a policymaking position has been held accountable.

And, no matter how Bush may cleave to his arguments about a grand coalition ("What's he say to Tony Blair?" "He forgot Poland!"), the coalition he assembled was anything but grand, and it has been steadily melting away in Iraq's cauldron of violence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 07:58 PM

Allawi charge is boost for Kerry
By Tim Reid in Washington and James Hider in Baghdad






IRAQ'S interim Prime Minister yesterday delivered another blow to President Bush just a week before the US election when he blamed American-led forces for failing to prevent last weekend's massacre of 49 Iraqi Army recruits.

Mr Allawi, who only last month lavished praise on Mr Bush during a White House visit, said that "gross negligence" on the part of the US and its coalition partners was to blame for the massacre of the recruits, 95 miles north of Baghdad.




Mr Kerry had already moved onto the attack against Mr Bush over Monday's news that hundreds of tons of explosives were stolen from an Iraqi military facility after the US-led invasion, and reports yesterday of an imminent White House request for another $70 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Amos JR
Date: 27 Oct 04 - 12:19 PM

Bush is both arrogant and an asshole. But that's enough of this.

AJ


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 27 Oct 04 - 12:25 PM

OG, I liked it better when you used your original handle instead of this sort of back-door insult. For an Old Guy you are acting immature.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 27 Oct 04 - 12:44 PM

From Richard Cohen writing in the Washiongton Post a week ago:

"Historians may someday say that the beginning of the end for Bush came last April when Time magazine's John Dickerson asked the president at a televised news conference, "What would your biggest mistake be . . . and what lessons have you learned from it?" Bush, who said the question took him by surprise, said he could not come up with one.

Essentially the same question was asked by Linda Grabel, an ordinary voter, at the St. Louis debate. This time, it could not have been a surprise. But this time, too, Bush could offer not a single substantive example. Aside from making "some mistakes in appointing people," everything had gone swimmingly.

This was a preposterous, dishonest answer. It was either the response of someone who is vastly deluded or sticking to a political strategy conceived by people who do not value truth. Either way, it harkens back to that "learning curve" Stewart mentioned and it demolishes Bush's pose as a regular guy, someone approachable -- someone you could like. It is not possible to like someone who cannot admit a mistake. Iraq is the crazy aunt in the attic that Bush will not acknowledge. When she throws the furniture, Bush says you're just hearing things. Yeah, sure."

Charming metaphor. But "conceived by people who do not value truth" is a ringing, categorical, recognizable and resonant condemnation of Bush's team, IMNSHO.



A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 27 Oct 04 - 08:28 PM

American Conservastive Magazine, endorsing Kerry mainly because Bush is too unacceptable for them to endorse:

" George W. Bush has come to embody a politics that is antithetical to
> almost any kind of thoughtful conservatism. His international
> policies have been based on the hopelessly naïve belief that foreign
> peoples are eager to be liberated by American armies-a notion more
> grounded in Leon Trotsky's concept of global revolution than any sort
> of conservative statecraft. His immigration policies-temporarily put
> on hold while he runs for re-election-are just as extreme. A
> re-elected President Bush would be committed to bringing in millions
> of low-wage immigrants to do jobs Americans "won't do." This election
> is all about George W. Bush, and those issues are enough to render
> him unworthy of any conservative support. "

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 01:16 PM

In Closing of the Presidential Mind Franklin Foer shows that while Conservatives have long distrusted experts, inside the Bush administration, that distrust has grown into a war against scientists, economists, intelligence analysts--and the very idea of objective truth.

In Power from the People , Jonathan Chait argues that President Bush isn't an aspiring dictator, and he's not planning to rig the election. But, with his love of secrecy, his penchant for misinformation, and his use of the machinery of government for partisan ends, he has made America less democratic.

In Hero Worship , Noam Scheiber writes that while President Bush styles himself as a man of deep principle, in fact, he switches principles all the time. What he abides by are story lines--especially ones that cast him as the hero.

ALl from the New Republic.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Amos JR
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 01:42 PM

The Crawford Iconoclast

AJ


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 01:46 PM

"Smith started the Iconoclast after Bush bought his ranch in Crawford. He began publishing the paper in late 2000, offering school news and plenty of pictures of Crawford Pirate sporting events. As the 2000 election's outcome was battled out in the courts, the new paper endorsed Bush.

But in the recent editorial, the Iconoclast said it supports Kerry and accused the president of having a "smoke-screened agenda" and leading the United States into a "quagmire" in Iraq on flimsy pretenses.

Smith, who co-wrote the editorial, said it gave a voice to a minority of Crawford residents who do not feel they can speak their minds without being "pounced upon."

"People are telling us that they read the editorial and that it reflects the way they feel," Smith said. "They felt like we had stepped out and done that in a very bold way right in the heart of where the problem is."

To many in Crawford, though, the editorial was a slap in the face on the same week as the town's biggest event of the year -- the annual Tonkawa Traditions Festival, which features a parade, a street dance and lawnmower races. "

(From the wise-guy link offered above. It demonstrates a certain interesting contrast in priorities, wouldn't you say?) (And just to set the record straight there is no such person as Amos Jr. except for some anonymous yahoo's impulse to commit identity theft.)


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 01:51 PM

TNR's description of the Medicare Flim-FLam:

"Last summer, President Bush and the Republican congressional leadership had a problem. The legislative linchpin of the president's reelection effort, a bill to add prescription-drug coverage to Medicare, lacked the votes in Congress, where conservative Republicans were chafing at the expense. GOP leaders finally secured a bare majority by consenting to the demands of 13 Republican House members, who agreed to vote yes if the cost would not exceed $400 billion over ten years. But that created another problem: The administration knew the bill would cost considerably more--$534 billion, to be exact.

The only non-loyalist who seems to have known the real number was Richard Foster, a 31-year veteran of the bureaucracy who was serving as chief actuary of the Department of Health and Human Services. The job of putting a lid on Foster fell to his boss, Thomas Scully, appointed by Bush to run Medicare. Scully instructed Foster not to reveal the number, or even to answer queries from Democrats, without his approval. Foster later said he understood Scully to be operating at the White House's direction. In one e-mail obtained by The Wall Street Journal, Foster asked Scully for permission to answer congressional queries that "strike me as straightforward requests for technical information." No, replied Scully's assistant, who then warned, "The consequences for insubordination are extremely severe." (Scully, by the way, later admitted to having negotiated a job with lobbying firms while he helped craft the bill, in which they had a massive interest.)

The Medicare bill was therefore widely understood to cost $400 billion when, at three o'clock in the morning on November 23, the House of Representatives assembled to vote on it. Surprisingly, a majority voted no. In response, the GOP leadership violated the customary time limit on votes, holding the vote open for nearly three hours and twisting enough arms to reverse the result shortly before dawn. (A hint as to their methods of persuasion came from retiring Republican Representative Nick Smith, who offhandedly revealed a few days later that certain "members and groups" had offered to contribute $100,000 to the congressional campaign of his son Brad, who was running for Smith's seat, if he voted yes.) When Democrats controlled Congress, they had extended a vote once, in 1987, for 15 minutes, after a member inadvertently caused a budget bill's defeat and then left town--provoking spasms of indignation from Republicans. The three-hour Medicare vote, congressional scholar Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute later wrote, was "the ugliest and most outrageous breach of standards in the modern history of the House." (...)

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040726&s=chait072604


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Johnjohn
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 02:37 PM

"The governments of France, Russia, China and Syria blocked U.S. efforts within the United Nations to stop Saddam Hussein from misusing the oil-for-food program, a State Department official told Congress yesterday.
    Patrick F. Kennedy, a State official who is a representative to the United Nations for management and reform, told a House hearing that other U.N. member states "resisted" U.S. efforts to end bribery and contracting corruption under the program aimed at providing humanitarian relief from anti-Saddam sanctions. ..
France, Russia, China and Syria were among the members of a special committee overseeing the oil-for-food program that opposed U.S. efforts to stop corruption that led to more than $10 billion being stolen by Saddam and his regime, Mr. Kennedy said."
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041006-012159-1086r.htm
JJ


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 03:12 PM

Johnjohn:

I think the Washington Times might be ummmmm....a somewhat slanted source of news. I am not sure what the facts (if they are facts) in your post have to do with the purpose of this thread.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Johnjohn
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 03:37 PM

"Saddam's U.N. Payroll
Oil for Food bribery means sanctions against Iraq were doomed to fail.

Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT

Out on the campaign trail, John Kerry continues to diminish our allies in Iraq and decry President Bush for "rushing" to war without U.N. Security Council approval. But we hope his would-be Secretaries of State, Biden and Holbrooke, are paying attention in private to revelations about the crumbling sanctions regime they would have had us continue and the related corruption in the U.N.'s Oil for Food program.

These folks are in for a rude awakening if they really think Old Europe will be rushing to help a President Kerry in Iraq, or that the United Nations is competent and trustworthy enough to manage their foreign policy projects.

The latest pieces of news are last week's data dump from Paul Volcker's U.N.-blessed investigation of Oil for Food, and U.S. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer's report to Congress earlier this month. Everybody is still digesting these massive documents. But the most important conclusion is already clear: Saddam Hussein exploited the program to run the largest bribery scheme in the history of the world.

Yes, we mean that literally. Total turnover between 1996 and 2003 was about $97 billion, or $64.2 billion in oil sales and $32.9 billion worth of food and other "humanitarian" goods. Crucially, Saddam was able to manipulate the program largely because U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan--who was given more or less complete discretion to design Oil for Food by the Security Council resolution that created it--allowed him to pick and choose the buyers of his oil and the sellers of the humanitarian goods.

This meant the Iraq dictator could reward his friends and political allies with oil at below market prices and goods contracts at inflated ones. In the middle of the program, he also started demanding kickbacks on the contracts to add to the stream of unmonitored revenue he was already getting from oil smuggling.

It can't be stressed enough that both the Duelfer and Volcker investigations confirm that this global web of corruption is no mere allegation trumped up by Ahmed Chalabi and "neoconservatives," as U.N. officials tried to pretend in January when Iraq's al Mada newspaper published a list of the oil voucher recipients.

Mr. Duelfer's list of recipients--which more or less confirms al Mada's--was compiled based on information from current and former Iraqi officials and lists maintained by former Iraqi Vice President Taha Yasin Ramadan (now in U.S. custody) and the former Iraqi Oil Minister. Mr. Volcker's lists--which include the 248 companies that bought Iraqi oil under the program and the 3,545 companies supplying humanitarian goods--are compiled from the U.N.'s own records and cross-checked against Iraqi and other sources, including the French bank BNP Paribas that administered program revenues.

High-level officials of Saddam's regime have told investigators that oil and goods contracts were always awarded with an eye to helping Saddam politically, particularly to promote the lifting of the sanctions. The Volcker data bears this out. Iraq's top customer was Russia, whose firms bought $19.2 billion worth of Iraq oil and exported $3.3 billion in humanitarian goods. Fellow Security Council member France was a distant but significant second, at $4.4 billion and $2.9 billion respectively. China is also high on the list.

Oil voucher recipients are alleged to include the Russian presidential office, former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua, and even former Oil for Food program director Benon Sevan of the U.N. Just this week our news side colleagues reported that French authorities have placed under formal investigation a top official of French oil giant Total, for possible misuse of funds including payment of the Iraqi kickbacks. Before the war Total was also openly courting Baghdad for the rights to develop two large Iraqi oil fields."

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005818

JJ


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 30 Oct 04 - 02:14 PM

JohnJohn:

What is the title of this thread?

A

Four Years of Lost Liberties
posted by Dan Gillmor 08:02 AM
http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor/archives/010960.shtml
(This is also my column today in the San Jose Mercury News.)

If you believe that political and social liberty go hand in hand
with economic freedom -- and that they form an underpinning of a
vibrant free market -- you should be worried about another four
years like the four we've just had.


Let's grant that George W. Bush plainly believes in a free
market, largely unconstrained by government intervention. But he
has made it clear that he doesn't have the same devotion to
other kinds of liberty.

He and his allies have used terrorism to launch a massive
assault on civil liberties. They are not just indifferent to
liberty, they are actively hostile to it.

Bush's first term has been a catalog of encroachments. He has
expanded surveillance -- electronic and otherwise -- without
adequate safeguards. He has had a mania for secrecy, shielding
more and more government information from public view. This
amounts to telling Americans they have no right in many cases to
know how our money is being used or what government is doing in
our names.

This president has curbed dissent through intimidation. His
attorney general practically labeled as traitors people who
questioned the outrageously named ``Patriot Act,'' for
example. More recently, the Bush forces have excluded anyone who
is not a declared supporter from being even in the vicinity of
campaign events, and have even fenced off protesters in
Orwellian ``free speech zones'' far from the scenes.

The Bush years have emboldened rights and privacy invaders
everywhere. A national ID card is making a back-door entrance
via a scheme by the state agencies that issue driver's licenses,
for example.

He has given corporate interests carte blanche to buy, sell,
massage and trade our most personal information -- mocking his
vows in the 2000 campaign to be a president who would protect
privacy.

The federal government now encourages (and buys) all kinds of
data collection and ways to manipulate it, and offers barely a
hint of safeguards. Do you imagine for even a second that the
radio-chip ID implants being sold to track patients inside
hospitals won't be used for much broader kinds of surveillance
someday? Ditto the radio tags the government says it wants to
put into our passports (and soon, no doubt, our driver's
licenses). Surveillance is big business now.

Insidiously, the Bush administration has turned the corporate
data mongers into partners in the dawning surveillance
state. Evading even the most trivial safeguards, including
federal laws protecting privacy, it buys or uses data collected
by private companies that are under no such restrictions.

An intrusive airline passenger screening system, relying on
commercial data and other information, was officially scrapped
after protests. But as the Washington Post reported earlier this
month, one of the former government officials behind that
project has launched a private company that will collect and
provide data for the project's new incarnation -- and
established the company offshore in Bermuda, ``outside the reach
of U.S. regulators.''

The most frightening assault on liberty has had nothing to do
with the Patriot Act, surveillance or privacy. Bush has
systematically ignored the law when it suited his purpose,
treating the Constitution as a suggestion box, not the bedrock
of liberty. He asserted the right to declare American citizens
as enemy combatants here at home and to jail them indefinitely,
with no right even to see a lawyer.

The Supreme Court, thankfully, rejected Bush's dictatorial views
in two pivotal decisions earlier this year. But presidents
nominate justices, and this one means to nominate the kind who
will let the government do pretty much what it pleases.

Early last week, William Rehnquist, chief justice of the
U.S. Supreme Court, had surgery for thyroid cancer. His
condition reminded people that whoever is president during the
next four years will probably nominate three or four justices to
the highest court.

A court with two, three or four judges of Bush's preference
would not be friendly, on balance, to our rights as
individuals. The president has made clear his intention to
appoint judges who would overturn abortion rights. That, too, is
a question of liberty.

Is John Kerry any better? He voted for the ``Patriot'' law,
after all.

But while Bush vows to expand that law's reach over our lives,
Kerry has said he would work to repeal some of the more odious
provisions, such as the one that lets government agents rifle
through our lives -- including what library books we read --
with few safeguards.

I believe that a free economy rests in large part on people's
willingness to feel free -- to take chances, to be different
from others. The surveillance state is a conformist state, where
a fog of fear deadens initiative and the willingness to take
risks.

No sane person wants to make law enforcement impotent. But risk
is part of a free culture, and the more we clamp down on things
that have any element of risk the more we clamp down on freedom
itself.

--
Robert J. Berger - Internet Bandwidth Development, LLC.
Voice: 408-882-4755 eFax: +1-408-490-2868
http://www.ibd.com


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 30 Oct 04 - 02:29 PM

HEADLINE: Public Opinion Poll Indicates Iraqis Favor Kerry over Bush in U.S. Presidential Race


INTRO: A new public opinion poll shows more Iraqis favor Democratic challenger John Kerry than President Bush, who launched the invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein. But as VOA's Greg Lamotte reports from Baghdad, more than half of the two-thousand peopled polled throughout Iraq don't care who wins the U.S. presidency in next week's election.


TEXT: The new survey of Iraqi public opinion was conducted last week by Iraq's Center for Research and Strategic Studies in Baghdad. The group, which has been operating in Iraq for about a year, says its latest survey indicates that among Iraqis with a preference, Mr. Kerry leads President Bush by six-and-a-half percentage points. The poll has a margin of error of four percent.

But the director of the center, former Iraqi exile Sadoun al-Dulame, says 58-percent of the respondents said they don't care who wins the U.S. presidential election.


(From the VOA website)

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: Amos
Date: 31 Oct 04 - 01:16 AM

Dan Gillmore posts a weblog editorial in the Silicon Valley Press concerning the reduction in liberty that has occurred int he last four years.

"Bush's first term has been a catalog of encroachments. He has
expanded surveillance -- electronic and otherwise -- without
adequate safeguards. He has had a mania for secrecy, shielding
more and more government information from public view. This
amounts to telling Americans they have no right in many cases to
know how our money is being used or what government is doing in
our names.

This president has curbed dissent through intimidation. His
attorney general practically labeled as traitors people who
questioned the outrageously named ``Patriot Act,'' for
example. More recently, the Bush forces have excluded anyone who
is not a declared supporter from being even in the vicinity of
campaign events, and have even fenced off protesters in
Orwellian ``free speech zones'' far from the scenes."

...

But while Bush vows to expand that law's reach over our lives,
Kerry has said he would work to repeal some of the more odious
provisions, such as the one that lets government agents rifle
through our lives -- including what library books we read --
with few safeguards.

I believe that a free economy rests in large part on people's
willingness to feel free -- to take chances, to be different
from others. The surveillance state is a conformist state, where
a fog of fear deadens initiative and the willingness to take
risks.

No sane person wants to make law enforcement impotent. But risk
is part of a free culture, and the more we clamp down on things
that have any element of risk the more we clamp down on freedom
itself.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views of the Bush Administration
From: GUEST,Johnjohn
Date: 31 O