Another Reason Rumsfeld Must Go:
Pentagon Operating Secret Spy Branch

A powerful Repub is against Bush Soc Sec plan...

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1019834,00.html

from toughenough.org:

Buyer's remorse?
Or something darker?

Back once more to the Daily Rasmussen tracking poll to see how the newly inaugurated * is faring in the court of public opinion. As of today, he’s sporting a sleek 44% approval rating against a disapproval of 54%.

Since January 5, his approval ratings have ranged from 43% to 48%, while the disapproval range has been 50% to 55%. Rasmussen:

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Republicans give him their approval along with just 14% of Democrats and 37% of unaffiliated voters.

battlebob:

I am warning us not to trust ANY Repub who says he opposes any Bush bill including SS reforms. Remember the Prescription Drug bill, and how arms were twisted and votes changed at 4 a.m. We must learn from our mistakes.

What factcheck says about Bush and Soc SEc...
http://www.factcheck.org/article302m.html

This from one of our bloggers...

Gonzales and a Bush DUI?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6857224/site/newsweek/

About our economic problems..

http://www.alternet.org/story/21058/

[snip]
The Achilles heel of the American economy is certainly debt. It is generally assumed that increases in credit stimulate consumer demand. In the short run that is true, but the long run is another matter altogether. When debt levels are as high as those the U.S. is carrying today, further increases in debt created by credit expansion can come to act as a burden on demand. Signs of this are already in the air – or rather in what has been, by historic standards, only feeble economic growth in the U.S. economy over George Bush's first term in office

the other innaugeration marchs...

http://www.alternet.org/story/21051/

This is from the Al Gore blog..
What can Bush teach Iraq about an election..

BU$H has some valuable lessons for future Iraqi candidates on voting procedures....

1) Make sure you have a relative, preferrably a brother so you can participate in patriotic nepotism while that relative colludes the vote of a whole state or province...

2) Make sure your Legal Branch of government is packed with justices from your own party...That way if your opposition should happen to WIN by popular vote you can still run crying and whining to the courts that you supposedly "hate" and BEG them to stop votes from being counted and make you president...

3) You must have a gerry-mandering expert in you party to DELAY the vote of say a Shiite Majority by giving desert districts with two Loyal Kurds who will vote for YOU more power than a Shiite province with a million voters who would vote AGAINST you!

4) Of course you want to provide key disticts with electronic voting machines that won't leave a paper trail, and you want to confiscate ANY evidence that say you won by ridiculously LARGE margins(like more votes than voters)...or exit polls that say that you LOST!...then of course you want to brush off ANY challenge by the opposition by claiming they are "paranoid" and need medicated..it makes it easier to place them in internment camps that way...

5) Of course you need to put FEAR into your opponents by raising the terror level before election day! That way when a usually high turnout Shiite district has people running from car bombs...you can sneak TWO of your staffers in pretending to be voters and win the entire district while the carcasses of disenfranchised voters can burn in the street!...Then those TWO staffers can hold a "mock protest" if ANYONE requests a recount!

the unions need our help...

Dear Working Families e-Activist,

How can state and local union movements be strengthened? What should their top priorities be? Should local labor councils be merged into larger regional councils?

We need your opinions as part of the AFL-CIO's dialog with union members and allies on how we can strengthen America's union movement for the future. Please have your say by visiting:

http://www.unionvoice.org/ct/Y1q8FS51guXz/

Hundreds of you provided insightful, helpful comments over the past several weeks to the first in a series of surveys at our Strengthening Our Union Movement for the Future website. We just launched the second survey and hope you will give us the benefit of your thoughts. Click here:

http://www.unionvoice.org/ct/Y1q8FS51guXz/

Our union movement is the best hope for working families. But we face significant challenges. The AFL-CIO is leading a detailed examination of how our union movement must change and build on our strengths to be the most effective possible advocate for working families, today and in the future. As an activist, you have an important role in this dialog. Please share your ideas and opinions by visiting:

http://www.unionvoice.org/ct/Y1q8FS51guXz/

Thank you for your ongoing activism for working families.

In solidarity,

Working Families e-Activist Network
Jan. 24, 2005

P.S. In the fight for working families, no voice is more important than yours. Please join this discussion by visiting our website now.
--------------------------------------------------

Tell your friends to check out the new website on "Strengthening Our Union Movement." Invite them to be part of this important discussion by visiting:

www.aflcio.org/ourfuture

http://www.unionvoice.org/join-forward.html?domain=wfean&r=Jpq8FS51pc3M

If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for Working Families e-Activist Network at:

http://www.unionvoice.org/wfean/join.html?r=Jpq8FS51pc3ME

Bush has a 44% approval rating this soon after Inauguration?

Bush lost 3 debates?

He cheated in all 50 states - why not?!

Now he gets to do things like help warfare manufacturers send robotic soldiers to Iraq and multi-millionaires make money off this.

(It's in NY Times today - I don't have link & the article is long but I'm not kidding).

They're also working on robotic unmanned tanks & they already have unmanned drones. So they can attack without as many casualities but these things will still end up killing alot of civilians.

Dear Abby,

My husband has a long record of money problems. He runs up huge credit
card bills and at the end of the month, if I try to pay them off, he
shouts at me, saying I am stealing his money. He says pay the minimum
and lets our kids worry about the rest, but already we can hardly keep
up with the interest.

Also he has been so arrogant and abusive toward our neighbors that
most of them no longer speak to us. The few that do are an odd bunch,
to whom he has been giving a lot of expensive gifts, running up our
bills even more.

Also, he has gotten religious in a big way, although I don't quite
understand it. One week he hangs out with Catholics and the next with
people who say the Pope is the Anti-Christ.

And now he has been going to the gym an awful lot and is into wearing
uniforms and cowboy outfits, and I hate to think what that means.

Finally, the last straw. He's demanding that before anyone can be in
the same room with him, they must sign a loyalty oath.

It's just so horribly creepy!

Can you help?

Signed,

Lost in DC

Dear Lost:

Stop whining, Laura. You can divorce him any time you want. The
rest of us are stuck with the jerk for four more years!

This was emailed to me and has no link.
I apologize for the length, but not for the content.
The letter is from:
Dr. Robin Meyers
Oklahoma University Peace Rally
November 14, 2004
As some of you know, I am minister of Mayflower Congregational Church in Oklahoma City, an Open and Affirming, Peace and Justice church in northwest Oklahoma City, and professor of Rhetoric at Oklahoma City University.
But you would most likely have encountered me on the pages of the Oklahoma Gazette, where I have been a columnist for six years, and hold the record for the most number of angry letters to the editor.
Tonight, I join ranks of those who are angry, because I have watched as the faith I love has been taken over by fundamentalists who claim to speak for Jesus, but whose actions are anything but Christian.
We've heard a lot lately about so-called "moral values" as having swung the election to President Bush. Well, I'm a great believer in moral values, but we need to have a discussion, all over this country, about exactly what constitutes a moral value
-- I mean what are we talking about? Because we don't get to make them up as we go along, especially not if we are people of faith. We have an inherited tradition of what is right and wrong, and moral is as moral does. Let me give you just a few of the reasons why I take issue with those in power who claim moral values are on their side:

-- When you start a war on false pretenses, and then act as if your deceptions are justified because you are doing God's will, and that your critics are either unpatriotic or lacking in faith, there are some of us who have given our lives to teaching and preaching the faith who believe that this is not only not moral, but immoral.

-- When you live in a country that has established international rules for waging a just war, build the United Nations on your own soil to enforce them, and then arrogantly break the very rules you set down for the rest of the world, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you claim that Jesus is the Lord of your life, and yet fail to acknowledge that your policies ignore his essential teaching, or turn them on their head (you know, Sermon on the Mount stuff like that we must never return violence for violence and that those who live by the sword will die by the sword), you are doing something immoral.

-- When you act as if the lives of Iraqi civilians are not as important as the lives of American soldiers, and refuse to even count them, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you find a way to avoid combat in Vietnam, and then question the patriotism of someone who volunteered to fight, and came home a hero, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you ignore the fundamental teachings of the gospel, which says that the way the strong treat the weak is the ultimate ethical test, by giving tax breaks to the wealthiest among us so the strong will get stronger and the weak will get weaker, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you wink at the torture of prisoners, and deprive so-called "enemy combatants" of the rules of the Geneva Convention, which your own country helped to establish and insists that other countries follow, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you claim that the world can be divided up into the good guys and the evil doers, slice up your own nation into those who are with you, or with the terrorists -- and then launch a war which enriches your own friends and seizes control of the oil to which we are addicted, instead of helping us to kick the habit, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you fail to veto a single spending bill, but ask us to pay for a war with no exit strategy and no end in sight, creating an enormous deficit that hangs like a great millstone around the necks of our children, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you cause most of the rest of the world to hate a country that was once the most loved country in the world, and act like it doesn't matter what others think of us, only what God thinks of you, you have done something immoral.

-- When you use hatred of homosexuals as a wedge issue to turn out record numbers of evangelical voters, and use the Constitution as a tool of discrimination, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you favor the death penalty, and yet claim to be a follower of Jesus, who said an eye for an eye was the old way, not the way of the kingdom, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you dismantle countless environmental laws designed to protect the earth which is God's gift to us all, so that the corporations that bought you and paid for your favors will make higher profits while our children breathe dirty air and live in a toxic world, you have done something immoral. THE EARTH BELONGS TO THE LORD, NOT HALLIBURTON.

-- When you claim that our God is bigger than their God, and that our killing is righteous, while theirs is evil, we have begun to resemble the enemy we claim to be fighting, and that is immoral.
We have met the enemy, and the enemy is us.

-- When you tell people that you intend to run and govern as a "compassionate conservative," using the word which is the essence of all religious faith - compassion, and then show no compassion for anyone who disagrees with you, and no patience with those who cry to you for help, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you talk about Jesus constantly, who was a healer of the sick, but do nothing to make sure that anyone who is sick can go to see a doctor, even if she doesn't have a penny in her pocket, you are doing something immoral.

-- When you put judges on the bench who are racist, and will set women back a hundred years, and when you surround yourself with preachers who say gays ought to be killed, you are doing something immoral.

I'm tired of people thinking that because I'm a Christian, I must be a supporter of President Bush, or that because I favor civil rights and gay rights I must not be a person of faith.

I'm tired of people saying that I can't support the troops but oppose the war -- I heard that when I was your age, when the Vietnam war was raging. We knew that that war was wrong, and you know that this war is wrong--the only question is how many people are going to die before these make-believe Christians are removed from power?

This country is bankrupt. The war is morally bankrupt. The claim of this administration to be Christian is bankrupt. And the only people who can turn things around are people like you--young people who are just beginning to wake up to what is happening to them.
It's your country to take back.
It's your faith to take back.
It's your future to take back.

Don't be afraid to speak out. Don't back down when your friends begin to tell you that the cause is righteous and that the flag should be wrapped around the cross, while the rest of us keep our mouths shut. Real Christians take chances for peace. So do real Jews, and real Muslims, and real Hindus, and real Buddhists--so do all the faith traditions of the world at their heart believe one thing: life is precious.
Every human being is precious.
Arrogance is the opposite of faith.
Greed is the opposite of charity.
And believing that one has never made a mistake is the mark of a deluded man, not a man of faith.
And war -- war is the greatest failure of the human race -- and thus the greatest failure of faith. There's an old rock and roll song, whose lyrics say it all: War, what is it good for? Absolutely > nothing.
And what is the dream of the prophets? That we should study war no more, that we should beat our swords into plowshares and our spears into pruning hooks.
Who would Jesus bomb, indeed?
How many wars does it take to know that too many people have died?
What if they gave a war and nobody came?
Maybe one day we will find out.

Seattle Times published this "Get Over It Kerry" Op-Ed and yesterday had a headline story about felons voting. This is NOT the best of our 2 papers. Write & chew them out!!

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002157410_pitts23.html

We are running out of Reserve troops..

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0124Reserves24-ON.html

The author of this LTE is a good friend of ours and works with my wife.

Procreation is poor basis for unions
Jan. 24, 2005 12:00 AM

My partner and I just returned from a month in Australia.

When we went to check in at the Los Angeles airport we were given separate seating. After seeing married couples and male/female couples seated together, I spoke up.

The tour accepted us immediately as a couple. One of the wonderful things we did was to interact with the Aborigines. We asked how they address homosexuality within their culture. The response was simple: people are people. The inside of a person is much more important than anything else, and all are to be treated fairly and equally.

Then I return home and am quickly reminded that my relationship is insignificant to a very vocal group of people.

If procreation is the measuring stick, a fertility test should be administered to everyone who applies for a marriage license - unable to conceive without assistance, then no marriage. Once married, children must be born. They should suffer severe penalty for divorce, or placing a child up for adoption.

Does this sound too severe? If so, walk in my shoes and feel how your voice sounds to me. Then notify the children who live in loving homes with homosexual parents that they have to leave now. -

A LTE requesting divine help...

A little divine help is needed here
Jan. 24, 2005 12:00 AM

Hello, God?
If you're listening, we really need your divine intervention right about now. You see there's this guy who's engaging in a global crusade to spread freedom and liberty in your name.

He's already invaded one country, and in the next four years (according to a speech he delivered last week) he plans to save the people of Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, Cuba, most of the African nations and anywhere else on the planet where tyranny exists, and allow them the freedom to become conservative Republicans. And he will do so whatever the cost in human lives or suffering.

The other problem is that half of the country agrees with every word this man says, no matter what he says. They, too, think that you have granted him a divine pass to do with the world as he wishes. Therefore, anyone with a varying opinion is ridiculed and labeled a traitor.

So you see our dilemma. I know this is wrong and so do you. So please, for our children and the future of humankind, make him stop before it's too late. Please?

Posted by: battlebob at January 24, 2005 11:29 AM

Beautifully said. We sang this song at a vigil I attended on Thursday (the same hymn we sang in church in the weeks following 9/11). It still brings tears to my eyes every time:

Finlandia

This is my song
Oh god of all the nations
A song of peace
For lands afar and mine

This is my home
The country where my heart is
Here are my hopes
My dreams my holy shrine

But other hearts
In other lands are beating
With hopes and dreams
As true and high as mine

My countries skies
Are bluer than the ocean
And sunlight beams
On clover leaf and pine

But other lands
Have sunlight too and clover
And skies are everywhere
As blue as mine

Oh hear my song
Oh god of all the nations
A song of peace
For their land and for mine

President's Actions Belie Talk of Freedom

January 24, 2005

President Bush has chosen to wrap his second term in the ideals and rhetoric of freedom. Yet, the invocations of freedom and democracy emanating from Bush mean little given his administration's record of weakening America's position as a respected and revered world leader. No administration in recent history has done more to shatter alliances with our allies, or undermine positive perceptions of America around the world, than this one. Talk is cheap. The president will have to do far more in the next four years to live up to the liberal ideals espoused in his second inaugural address.

President Bush's rhetoric about freedom will undercut U.S. credibility unless he is willing to confront nations that undermine liberty; abuse human rights; and thwart democratic reforms. Freedom, democracy, liberty, and human rights are not just nifty words to make a presidential address sound important. America has always stood up for these values at home and abroad. It is difficult to take the president at his word given his track record. Many of America's key allies in the war on terror, including Russia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, have failing grades when it comes to extending freedom. He must begin to hold them publicly accountable and reassert American leadership.

The president talks of ending "division among free nations" but his administration is directly responsible for the fraying of America's alliances. President Bush should put his own values to work and take serious steps to repair our alliances with Europe and other nations badly frayed after the war in Iraq. America can not—nor should not—shoulder the entire burden for keeping the world free and the administration must put real time and resources into diplomatic efforts to present a unified front against global terrorism. The President, in light of the damaging abuses at Abu Ghraib, can begin by recommitting the United States to the Geneva Conventions and changing its approach to the International Criminal Court.

The president needs to do much more to live up to his admirable search for an "end to tyranny." American must lead the global war on terrorism from a position of moral authority and mutual respect. The administration's deeds over the last 4 years have eroded this authority and caused long term damage to America's leadership capacity. Over the next four years, the president must put as much effort into living up to America's values as it does into proclaiming them in flowery speeches.
Daily Talking Points is a product of the American Progress Action Fund.

Repub not united to trash SS

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=Hickey+Feb05

[snip]
The whole effort to block Bush will stand or fall on massive public education. That’s because the more people learn about privatization, the worse it looks. In Bush’s first term, Republicans were solidly united behind their president while Democrats were divided. Now, congressional Republicans are worried and splintered, uncertain whether walking the privatization plank will violate their conservative principles or undermine their chances for re-election. And so far, Democrats are pretty unified.

How the Middle East views Bush's coronation speech..

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/bushs_widening_credibility_gap.php

[snip]
President George W. Bush's inauguration speech Thursday left most people in the Middle East unimpressed and unmoved, and more concerned than ever about U.S. foreign policy directions.

An idea of how we win...Not all will agree with it..

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/09/on-powers.php

[snip]
What the left lacks is not a galvanizing messenger but a positive message, a set of energizing ideas and values. It’s not enough to oppose the invasion of Iraq or Bush’s plans for Social Security. That’s merely to react against someone else’s agenda. We must reverse the great (and startling) historical flip-flop in our political iconography. Forty years ago, the left represented the future — it crackled with pleasurable possibility — while the right symbolized the repressive past,

[snip]
For this to change, the left needs to do what the right did. It needs to define what it stands for.
1. It must reclaim virtue
2. It must reclaim freedom
3. It must reclaim pleasure
4. Finally, and above all, it must try to reclaim utopia.

Letter form Terry..

Do you believe that the amount of a person's Social Security check should be tied to the color of that person's skin? Of course not. But the Republican Party's point man on Social Security in the House is strongly recommending consideration of just such a step. On Meet the Press yesterday, Representative Bill Thomas (R-CA) raised the possibility of linking Social Security benefits to a person's race -- or even gender.

http://www.democrats.org/action/

about global warming...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/01/24/climate.change.ap/index.html

Posted by: battlebob at January 24, 2005 12:56 PM

I too saw that segment on Meet the Press. I didn't believe my ears. When Tim Russert didn't seem to question him about that statement, I thought maybe I was distracted and didn't hear it all.

I received an e-mail from DNC today. I signed my petition and in the comments section I asked: Does the benefit link with gender and race mean that black women will get a larger benefit?

Posted by: DiAnne at January 24, 2005 11:36 AM

DiAnne,

Here is my letter to the editor:

I didn't see you mention anything about Rossi in your one sided column.

You know that John Kerry's comments as they relate to unequal numbers of voting machines were absolutely true. You can't even deny them, but instead of trying to deny them you shoot the messenger. How low will you go? The way the voting booths were set up essentially created a poll tax on minority and lower income voters. Why don't you write about that?

I would like to know from you how it seems "obvious" that John Kerry's concerns are different than what he says. What makes it "obvious"? As you reminded everybody, John Kerry readily conceded the election when he felt he couldn't win. Is it "obvious" to you that a Secretary of State should not be the state chairman of a re-election campaign? You being from Florida, makes it obvious to me that you consider combining state functions and national re-election politics is just the way business is and should be done.

Posted by: oncall at January 24, 2005 01:50 PM

I don't get home from church until the AM pseudo news shows are over.

My letter was similar....

A link for that Meet the Press video (unbelievable). Didn't you used to the Russert was the greatest? Back before the election season? Now he's just like all the other sheep.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/

Carol, Russert gets to keep his job and his clout, and walks a right-friendlier tightrope than usual. Often wonder just how conflicted, eager, or fearful these journalists in front are, despite all their money, and maybe more fearful now. Can't be easy, but they must think it's a cycle they can pass through, if clever enough.

I've had call center people call me from places like New Jersey (I'm in Washington), such as for disabled police officers. I understand that the charity doesn't get much of the money but what I do is chat up the call center people & their supervisors (who are usually put on the line to talk to the wierdo who isn't following protocol).

Then I tell them how John Kerry would have been a much better candidate for whatever their cause is & that they had better work hard to keep their state blue & that we need to stick together. I get them to tell me their state by commenting on their accent & telling them I'm a speech therapist. They invariably will tell me & they usually are Kerry supporters or say they are if they want me to donate.

Since the charities usually don't get much of the money I may donate just ten bucks. it's worth it knowing they'll describe my call to their co-workers on their breaks when they discuss wierdos. (good wierdo, though)

When we solicit bids for work on our house, part of the interview is always political. We need to know how they voted and what their values are before we sign on. I selected a plumber who belonged to a Kerry-supporting union. I rejected a guy who was part of Dino Rossi's little mafia of builders. & I let them know why. Not answering the political questions is not an option or they don't even get to bid.

I also find out the politics of car dealers and car repairpersons. I am now boycotting all supermarkets except Costco and that's only for bulk purchases. It will be all Democrat party supporting ethnic groceries & they are much cheaper. Same goes for restaurants.

OnCall
Thanks for writing that letter - I've got to do that!

Marjorie
I can't stand people like Tim Russert - just another pundit. It's a matter of degree. I watched my first tv show since Nov. 3, the first one in 2005, in fact.
It was the Simpsons. Lisa was anorexic. Nelson the bully with the stripper mother bonded with Marge and she took him in. My son says they are going to reshow the one of Homer & Burns smuggling drugs from Canada and if so, I'll watch that.
I also like "King of the Hill" - I like shows that somewhat accurately reflect American stereotypes which are close to the truth. If I had cable I'd watch John Stewart, because his satire on the news is more accurate than the news. I used to like Saturday Night Live's new report too. It was better in the Balushi days, particularly with the Coneheads & the Wild & Crazy guys from Czechoslovakia.
Even in those days & as a kid I never watched much tv - The Flinstones & Jetsons as a kid, the Monkees in middle school & in high school I used to watch the Vietnam War on tv for real.

Bush Phones in Support for Pro-Life Protestesrs

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6861472/

Is this appropriate? He is supposed to be doing government business, not hobnobbing with protesters. He has to butter them up, then he has to do nothing, unless he wants to - keep it all symbolic. That's my son's explanation. Says they'll come up with new laws the courts may not uphold, they'll keep the Supreme Court just 5:4 divided. They have been used to get him into office but his real agenda is more corporate (aka "US interests". "He cares about rich people & making them richer" (Gabe)

He also says Dems spent too much time bashing Bush & not enough propping up their own candidate.

"Is this appropriate? He is supposed to be doing government business . . . ."
Posted by: DiAnne at January 24, 2005 04:14 PM

DiAnne,

He phoned the protesters while taking yet another break (at Camp David), so I guess he was, once again, "off duty".

I had to laugh at one quote from the story: Bush conceded that a society "where every child is welcome...may still be some way away." [I can't help but picture the Log Cabin Republicans saying, "Yeah, tell me about it!]

Hey, DiAnne -

I watched about 5 minutes of the Today Show on Friday - first time for any network news since before the election. My husband even asked me why I was breaking my boycott! I only had it on because I was watching the local news for the weather, and saw a teaser for a story on SpongeBob being gay, and thought I'd watch that story.

Another let down. Matt was interviewing Nile Rogers, because his org. We are Family Foundation has a website (http://www.wearefamilyfoundation.org/index.asp) featuring various cartoon/muppet characters promoting tolerance, that is being attacked by the religious right as promoting acceptance of homosexuality.

You should have heard Matt's tone. It was almost implying that if the organization was indeed promoting acceptance of homosexuality, that that would be a crime against humanity.

Just reinforced why I haven't been watching. Jon Stewart and Olberman are it for me.

Posted by: Bob Evans at January 24, 2005 04:30 PM

From the same article...

“The strong have a duty to protect the weak,” Bush said.

So if abortion clinics are burned, doctors killed and patients hurt, in BushCo world that is ok....

More money for Iraq,
...I wonder how much goes to protect the troops?
...I wonder how much is used to rebuild Iraq?
...I wonder how much winds up in the pockets of BushBuddies?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6862777/

This is from this topic story.

The Strategic Support Branch was established with "reprogrammed" funds and without explicit authority from the U.S. Congress, the newspaper reported, quoting unnamed Pentagon officials.”

Isn't this similar to the Iran Contra scandel?

Anybody know about his health care introduction today. As usual, all I see is Kerry-bashing stories. Why must they still do this? Could Kerry have gotten away with a critical, strutting (a statesman-like strut) campaign to convince better of our policies, which we did have, and his leadership, BTW?

I swear, we'd have a 50-state strategy by simply having equal access to the airwaves.

John Kerry will be on Meet the press next sunday, first time since Nov 2nd. I can well imagine how JK will get treated on this show by this Has Been Rightie TV pundit.

Anyone see this on CNN.com, main story on main page.... this is BUSHIT!!!!!

Democrats charged in Election Day tire-slashing in Wisconsin

http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/24/tires.slashed.ap/index.html

This from ProgressforAz..
Anybody see this?
Sabato's stuff was posted on the old blog. I googled him and couldn't find the article. What kerry site are they talking about..
------------------------------------------------
Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, said it's the leadership's right to whip members into shape. "They are doing what leaders do, they make sure [committee chairmen] serve them well, for their interests and for the interests of the party," he said. "For those who think [chairmen] are there to serve only in the interests of the American people - get real."

Source: Fox News excerpt posted on Kerry 2008 group site.

Who would’ve thunk it? John

He also says Dems spent too much time bashing Bush & not enough propping up their own candidate.

Posted by: DiAnne at January 24, 2005 04:14 PM

RIGHT ON!! And dems spend way too much time shooting each other down.

LEAD by example--UNITE--and stick to it. AND don't vote to approve Condi Rice And Gonzalez when they represent 2/4ths of what is wrong in this administration!!!That's what i say to the dems in office.

Received another letter from Harry Reid today with email to sign the Democratic Agenda for senate democrats. Here is the link:

Become a citizen Cosponsor of the Democratic Agenda by visiting:

http://democrats.senate.gov/cosponsor-form.html

Our ten bills cover a wide variety of subjects, but each one is an important part of keeping America’s promise.

It is the promise of opportunity so that every American can get the education they need to compete in the 21st century; live in an economy with good paying jobs and high quality health care; and participate in our democracy. Keeping the promise of America also means meeting our responsibilities both to future and past generations by providing our seniors what they have spent a lifetime work for; acting responsibly with taxpayer’s dollars and with our children’s future by restoring fiscal discipline.

It is the promise of security, that the American way of life and our freedom will be protected by using all the tools to take the fight to the terrorists and standing with those who have served. It is these values that will continue to guide the Democratic agenda as this Congress moves forward.

Please join us, learn more about the Democratic Agenda and become a �Citizen Cosponsor� by visiting:

http://democrats.senate.gov/cosponsor-form.html

Thank you,

Harry Reid

Posted by: Marjorie G at January 24, 2005 06:06 PM

Who's bashing Kerry and where - the cable channels? DU?

Resolute
Kerry bashing - rightwing newspapers & rightwing columnists in regular newspapers such as Seattle Times today (a Miami columnist - I posted the link earlier). I don't monitor cable news or DU (others do)

battlebob,
I wish I could have had a copy of Dr. Meyers letter before the election. I think it may have swayed some of my Christian one issue voting friends to have seen a wider view. I'll show them now in hopes that they will understand what they have done by voting for Bush.

Carol,
My church also sings Finlandia often and I always cry. If only our leaders could embrace the message of the song...
I also couldn't sing We Shall Overcome on Dr. King Sunday without bitter tears and unkind thoughts of Bush.

If Bush believes in the strong protecting the weak, how does he justify the innocent children killed in Iraq & Afghanistan, the kids dying of disease in tsunami stricken areas as we pull out our help or fail to deliver what we promised, or the fact that our infant mortality statistics in the US are worse than Cuba's? I work with children & he protects nothing but his own interests.

Last week, more than 70,000 concerned citizens like you came together to sign my petition and demand the truth from Condoleezza Rice. Your support emboldened me during Dr. Rice's confirmation hearings to ask the tough questions that Americans deserve to have answered. I can't thank you enough, and America can't thank you enough.

Perhaps even more importantly, the groundswell of support you created forced the Republican Senate leadership to give us what we wanted -- not a rubber stamp of Dr. Rice's nomination by voice vote last Thursday before the Republicans dashed off to Inaugural parties, but nine full hours of debate on the floor of the United States Senate.

With your support, our voices are being heard -- in the halls of Congress, in the White House, and across the country. So today I ask for your support once more:

Help me add thousands more signatures to our petition to hold Condoleezza Rice accountable. Tell your friends, family, neighbors, and colleagues to sign our petition, so that when I stand up on the Senate floor Tuesday and Wednesday, I'm speaking with the power of tens of thousands of Americans behind me.

White House Chief of Staff Andy Card has attacked me as "small" for seeking the truth. But I won't allow this Administration to try to sweep the facts about our failures in Iraq and the war on terrorism under the rug. I'm taking the "advice and consent" role, granted to the Senate in the U.S. Constitution, seriously.

During the full Senate debate over Condoleezza Rice's nomination tomorrow, I intend to take the floor, joined by many other of my Democratic colleagues, to express my frustration about Dr. Rice's lack of candor during the confirmation hearings -- her unwillingness to level with the American people about the misleading statements she made about aluminum tubes, mushroom clouds, and connections between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda to try to justify the war in Iraq.

Condoleezza Rice refused to come clean about the actual number of trained Iraqi forces on the ground. And perhaps even more disturbingly, she refused to tell us why she personally intervened to kill an anti-torture provision in a recent intelligence bill.

I refuse to let these misstatements, misjudgments, and poor decisions go unanswered. So I ask you one last time, before the Senate debate Tuesday and final vote on Wednesday, to tell everyone you know about our petition. Help me find thousands more Americans who are willing to sign our petition and stand with us.

I can't thank you enough for everything you've done over this past week. Now, in these final 48 hours before the vote on Dr. Rice's nomination, I ask for your help once more. Join me as we continue to fight for what's right -- because the process of democracy is as important as the outcome.

In Friendship,

Barbara Boxer
U.S. Senator

P.S. After forwarding our petition to everyone you know, be sure to call or email your Senators and encourage them to join us in Tuesday's debate. Americans deserve a full and open debate about Dr. Rice's confirmation, as well as the important issues like Iraq, the war on terrorism, and the use of torture that underlie her nomination.

Resolute
Kerry bashing - rightwing newspapers & rightwing columnists in regular newspapers such as Seattle Times today (a Miami columnist - I posted the link earlier). I don't monitor cable news or DU (others do)

Posted by: DiAnne at January 24, 2005 07:52 PM

Personally, I think that's a good thing - obviously they are threatened by him - I'm sure he gets under Bush's skin.

The louder the right wing shouts - the more impact we're having. They're like little children having a temper tantrum when they don't get their way.

Another think Lakoff points out is that when the right wingers start using Orwellian language - or start jumping up and down - think about why - what are we doing that gets that response. Does that mean they are vulnerable? I think so.

Perhaps we should reprogram Rumsfeld for a new career?

Posted by Barry Schwartz at January 24, 2005 12:50 AM

He could go to a community college!!!
Aren't community colleges running programs for people who have lost their jobs and need reprogramming? Where did I hear that?

Gotta love Coach Chaney!
_____
Mixing politics, sports

Maybe if Sen. John Kerry had the fire of Temple basketball coach John Chaney, he would have been the one being sworn in last week.

In Cincinnati for a game Saturday against Xavier, Chaney offered sharp political commentary in reference to Ohio's 20 electoral votes that sealed President Bush's re-election win.

``I hope they stay out of jobs out here if they've got the nerve to put that guy back in office,'' Chaney told the Cincinnati Enquirer. ``I hate everything out here. It's not the people I hate, it's what they did that I hate.''

Xavier fans had signs, such as: ``John Chaney loser, Dick Cheney winner.''

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/10719170.htm?1c

Cute pic of Alex Kerry at Sundance. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050123/482/ssf30801231936

McCain Expects Hearings On Defense Intelligence Unit

Pentagon Disputes Some of Post Report

Monday, January 24, 2005; Page A02

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said the Senate Armed Services Committee will hold hearings on a Washington Post report that the Defense Department is reinterpreting U.S. law to give the secretary broad authority over clandestine operations abroad.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has created a new espionage unit called the Strategic Support Branch, according to the news report, but McCain, speaking on CBS's "Face the Nation," said he doubts Rumsfeld has broken any laws.

"I'm always sorry to read about things in The Washington Post when they affect a committee that I am a member of," McCain said.

Pentagon spokesman Lawrence T. DiRita issued a carefully worded statement yesterday that appears to dispute parts of the Post article.

"There is no unit that is directly reportable to the secretary of defense for clandestine operations as is described in the Washington Post," he said. In addition, DiRita said, "the Department is not attempting to 'bend' statutes to fit desired activities, as is suggested in this article."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30713-2005Jan23.html

FYI - AirAmerica is on this story too. Randi was having a real rant about it this evening.

http://www.airamericaradio.com

Maybe if Sen. John Kerry had the fire of Temple basketball coach John Chaney, he would have been the one being sworn in last week.

***************

That is such an obnoxious and erroneous statement. Whatever issues I have with the mechanics of the campaign - Kerry campaigned his heart out. I've never seen anyone work so hard to become President.

Comments like that are simply laziness and cheap shots - just like Stewart's jab at Kerry last week regarding the Rice hearing. Stewart totally twisted Kerry's statement to Rice about his being deeply concerned about her record but that she most likely would be confirmed by the Senate. Stewart rolled his eyes and did the "he's at it again - trying to be on both sides of an issue " shtick while the audience laughed. What TDS cut off was Kerry's next sentence which was "But I don't think I will be voting to confirm."

It's so easy to tap into the Republicans noise machine to get a laugh or score an easy point. Shame on Stewart and shame on the journalist who wrote the article about Coach Chaney.

Put me down as one that thinks the fact the media is still bashing Kerry is a good thing. Eventually they'll have to give up the bashing and pay at least a little attention to what he's really doing.

I hope JK continues to do exactly what he thinks is right, and to hell with what the media says, to hell with what we say. He is on a mission to improve health care for American children, to solve the Iraq problem and get our kids home, and I'm sure he has a list of other issues he plans to address. It doesn't surprise me at all that Kerry is one of the few Dems who has the respect of Robert Kennedy Jr - they're both champions of environmental protection.

The Republicans are trying to sidetrack everyone from our economic suicide and the immoral invasion of Iraq, by selling Social Security as a "crisis" that needs to be dealt with immediately.

I hope the Dems, JK included, hammer away at the real issues.

I just read Terry's letter about the race/gender discussion re SS.

Now, I'm left handed. And just yesterday I read a well-researched article that says that left handed people live nine year less on average than right handed people. This of course is not new information, but there's no denying it now. It's a fact.

I can't wait to stick out my tongue at my husband and waggle my fingers, thumbs in ears, about this one. If we follow the Bill Thomas plan, and take all factors into consideration, I'll be getting more Social Security than my husband! Can't wait. (He's always made waaaaay more money than I do.)

I wonder if Billy-T is right handed? Hmmmm.... perhaps we should adjust all the government pensions too, based on how long people from their states live, on average. Adjusted for race and gender and handedness, too, of course.

You know, the more I think about it, the madder I get. The Republicans never cease to find a way to appeal to the selfish side of us. This whole SS thing is all about being ticked off because someone else might get a dollar or two more than you do. That's what it is!! "I'm giving this much and I only get that much back! Waaaaa!"

The Republicans are trying to institutionalize selfishness and turn greed into a Christian value and a patriotic duty.

Talk about values? Hell, yes, let's talk about values. That minister's speech upthread really inspired me. I'm going to have 1,000 copies printed and distribute them outside churches on sunday with my husband and two friends.

Gosh, I'm finally going back to church. My mother would be proud of me.

Kerry bashing - rightwing newspapers & rightwing columnists in regular newspapers such as Seattle Times today (a Miami columnist - I posted the link earlier). I don't monitor cable news or DU (others do)

Posted by: DiAnne at January 24, 2005 07:52 PM

Good, he's ruffling some feathers. They see him as some threat.

Posted by: resolute at January 24, 2005 08:42 PM

Thank you! It makes me feel good to hear that there are others who believe, as you said: "I've never seen anyone work so hard to become President." =)

As for Jon Stewart... i love him, but I was also quite annoyed by his "jokes" on Kerry. You're right- there are so many other things about Condi in the hearings that he could have made fun of, and for God's sake: Kerry voted NOT to confirm her!!

...but yes, as others were saying, its nice to know repugs still see Kerry as a threat! No surrender, right? ;-)

Those Republicans, they just can't STAND that we Democrats like to share! It grates on them!!

They can't handle that we don't mind if we give a penny or two more than we get. It drives them crazy that we find it more rewarding to give than to receive. They go bonkers when we reach out to our fellow Americans who have had hardship, and say "Don't worry, I'll help."

How in the WORLD was it allowed to happen that greed because the virtue and generosity the sin? How? What twisted logic gave Republican greed the moral high ground?

Posted by: Amy at January 24, 2005 09:23 PM

because = became

Anybody know about his health care introduction today. As usual, all I see is Kerry-bashing stories. Why must they still do this?

Posted by Marjorie G at January 24, 2005 06:06 PM

And they don't put the pressure on weak-spined, jellyfish senators that sit and vote yes to confirm lawless cabinet officials for a four year reign of REAL terror? (That was a pass to collect billions and pass go.)

Kerry is being a class act. I don't think he is
posturing. He is there for US.

Stewart is selling out for the ratings. Shame on him.

A funny post from DU:

First they came for Bert and Ernie
Posted by geniph
Added to homepage Mon Jan 24th 2005, 05:21 PM ET

...and I said nothing because I was not a Muppet.

Then they came for Tinky Winky, and I said nothing, because I was not a Teletubby.

Then they came for Sponge Bob and Patrick, and I said nothing, because I was not an asexual cartoon sea creature.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2999888

since we were talking the other day about how to deal with the abortion issue...

Senator Clinton Speaks of 'Common Ground' on Abortion
By PATRICK D. HEALY

Albany, Jan. 24 - Proposing new political language about abortion rights for the Democratic Party, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said today that friends and foes on the issue should come together on "common ground" to reduce the number of "unwanted pregnancies" and ultimately abortions, which she called a "sad, even tragic choice to many, many women."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/24/politics/25cnd-clinton.html?hp&ex=1106629200&en=76a8a5d8460cde43&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Here is what we were up against: (I don't have the actual link, but like the great sermon that was posted, I think this is something that all should read & make use of)

Bush: The Secret History of a Reelection
By Vincent Jauvert
Le Nouvel Observateur

Traps, marketing, and dirty tricks... Today one of his team's strategists confesses: "In July 2004, we thought we were done for." And yet, in spite of the Iraqi disaster, in spite of abysmal deficits and social breakdown, Bush turned the situation around. And beat Kerry by 3.5 million votes. Vincent Jauvert describes the underbelly of a campaign as incredibly sophisticated as it was devoid of any scruples.

That Wednesday, August 4, 2004, John Kerry believed he was protected from any low blow. He had just been nominated by the Democratic convention and all the polls gave him the advantage. He could breathe for a few days. Relax his attention. The opposing side would not attack before September - not in full midsummer. So he thought.

But Bush's men are extremely skillful killers. They chose to strike August 4 precisely because no one expected it. And to strike where it would do the most harm. The surprise attack was a series of advertisements, financed underhandedly by a rich Texas real estate developer, a close friend of "W." There one saw suppositious Kerry comrades-in-arms from Vietnam. They are full of hatred. They utter cries of rage. They assert that the Senator from Massachusetts didn't deserve the prestigious decorations he received in 1971, that he is not the war hero America had respected for thirty years, but a liar and a coward. To hear them, Kerry had not saved his comrades as he claimed. He had, on the contrary, abandoned and betrayed them.

All that is nothing but a barefaced lie, a put-up, a pitch. So gross that Kerry didn't react right away. He hemmed and hawed. He waited for the maneuver to turn against its instigators. But his silence instilled a doubtamong hesitant voters. The manipulators hit their mark. Their prey was wounded: mortally: in a few days, Kerry's odds fell. They never returned to their August 4 level. And Bush will remain at the head of America for four more years - to the despair of millions of Democrats and the rest of the planet.

Kerry went up against a remarkable political marketing team - the best in the history of the United States, they say in Washington. A team composed essentially of Texans, disciplined and welded together. Totally devoted to George Bush for more than ten years. A team without scruples and formidably organized. A few days before George Bush's swearing-in ceremony this January 20, we interviewed a few of the artisans of this reelection.

They told the behind the scenes story of "W.'s" campaign, a campaign unlike any other, secretly begun four years ago.

Jan van Lohuizen owns a polling institute in Houston, Texas, but has lived in Washington, near his boss George Bush, since 2001. With a round head and round eyeglasses, he is the public opinion polling specialist for the clan. It was along with him that Karl Rove, "W.'s" all-powerful political advisor, buffed the reelection strategy to a shine. Originally from the Netherlands, Jan van Lohuizen maintains a slight accent and the bearing of a pastor from his Batavian years. In his wood house on Capitol Hill, he relates: "We established our plan for 2004 four years ago, right after our near-failure with Gore. The observation was simple: in 2000, we believed that presidential campaigns were always won from the center. Consequently, we sought to appeal to hesitating Democrats. But they didn't join us, while part of the right dropped us. So to win in 2004, we had to change strategy and win back millions of abstaining Republicans." By any and all means.

From the day of his inauguration in January 2001, Bush subordinated every act of the new administration to a single goal: his reelection. Every proposed bill, every appointment, every trip had to serve this ultimate objective. "What's happening in the White House is unprecedented in modern history (...). Everything -I mean everything - is shaped by political marketing," revealed one of the rare initiates to have deserted the clan, John Dilulio, in 2003.

The master craftsman of this permanent electoral campaign is the friend of thirty years, the strategist, the guru: Karl Rove. At fifty, this brusque and jovial autodidact has the president's absolute trust. Never, say political scientists, has an advisor been so powerful. From his office on the ground floor of the White House, Rove, whom Bush nicknames "Turdblossom," terrorizes the apparatus of State. Every week, he convenes all the Cabinet members' chiefs of staff. He verifies that the least expenses are useful to the President's reelection. "He analyzes the electoral consequences of contemplated programs right down to the county level!" says political scientist Paul Light.

For four years, Rove - "architect" of the reelection, Bush will say the day after his victory - operates and maneuvers. He secretly talks to the most reactionary religious leaders every week. He takes great care of them. He has the very devil of a need for their support: the extreme Christian right massively abstained from voting in 2000. Especially white Evangelical Protestants. Four million of them didn't vote. They thought Bush was too left wing...

Richard Land is one of these much-courted religious leaders. He participates in the weekly telephone conferences with Rove. Land is imposing. Big, brown haired, square, this "sixth generation" Texan (he specifies) wears a signet ring, a black suit, and a red tie. Fifty-seven years old ("three months younger than George"), he directs the powerful Southern Baptist Convention. With 16 million members, it's the second largest American religious organization, behind the Catholic Church. Its headquarters is located in Nashville, in the Deep South. There, on the first floor of a brick building adjacent to famous country music bars, this doctor of philosophy swaggers: "Bush needs us, needs our strike force. That's what Karl organizes these phone calls for the last four years. We had contacts in the Reagan team, but nothing so regular, so formalized. With the Bush team, we talk all the time about everything: appointments to key posts, planned laws, coming elections..."

When necessary, the power shows itself ecumenical. It also cajoles Catholics, on account of ever more numerous Latinos. When he comes to Europe, Bush almost always makes a detour to the Vatican, to display himself with Jean-Paul II. He never misses an opportunity to remind people that his brother Jeb, governor of Florida, converted to "Papism" and married Columba, a devout Mexican. Since Bush's arrival in power, the White House even has a "liaison officer" for the Catholic community - with a part of it anyway. This intercessor is in permanent and discreet contact with several right wing (and even extreme right wing) Catholic figures.

He brings them together every week, far from prying eyes, listens to their complaints and their advice. Then he makes a report to Karl Rove, to Bush if necessary.

Editor-in-Chief of a fundamentalist journal, the go-between in question is Deal Hudson. He refuses to reveal the names of the participants in these meetings. He no doubt fears for the reputation of certain bishops whom he has succeeded in leading astray into politicians' politics. A strange sort of person, this Hudson. Nice face and signet ring, a graying fifty-year-old or thereabouts, you would say he came out of a sitcom for the elderly along the lines of "Fires of Love." Nevertheless, he talks like a female deck chair attendant. In his Washington office, he moans against the degradation of morals and sexual promiscuity. He curses Kerry, the Catholic, who - Can you imagine! - took communion in a black Methodist church, "a most serious sin."

However Hudson the bigot is also a marketing pro. Aside from his White House functions, he directs the campaign cell charged with mobilizing Catholics. To "sell" his nineteenth century ideas, he uses twenty-first century techniques. "GPS has radically changed the way we work," he tells me. "We had to distribute pro-Bush pamphlets in 6000 churches. 25,000 people volunteered. Which ones should we choose? With GPS and a special program, we were able to identify those whose homes were closest to the churches. They were the ones who did it. Incredible, isn't it?" Miraculous, even.

With the Bush team, fishing for votes is no longer an art; it's a state-of-the-art technique. Jan van Lohuizen, recounts: "In the swing states, we succeeded in reaching millions of Republican sympathizers, one by one, in a personalized way." How? The operation, which mobilized all the best programmers, is unique in American political history. "In America," he explains, "there are companies that specialize in collecting and selling information about individuals. It's entirely legal. They can supply an incredible amount of data about each person: the brand of their car, their income, their level of education, their favorite magazines, their favorite television programs, whether the person is a home owner or a renter, the number of telephone calls made abroad, the church a person goes to, their children's schools... Big firms like Visa constantly use this information for their advertising operations." But no one had used it yet to get a president elected. "We bought all the data about everyone (!) registered to vote," Van Lohuizen explains. One important point: some citizens' party affiliation was known from these lists. We crunched all this information in our computers. That allowed us to identify about thirty different types of voter and then to imagine the most convincing arguments for each one of those types. Then all we had to do was classify each individual within those categories and send that person the corresponding message."

Useless, for example, to contact a Volvo driver who does yoga: the probability is 90% he/she is a Democrat. A BMW owner and hunter is certainly Republican. We have to write to him. But what? That depends on other factors. If he makes many long distance phone calls, he probably votes less often than the average person. And if he goes to church regularly, he's certain to oppose abortion. "So the computer will send him several letters explaining that if Kerry is elected, there will be more abortions. And that he absolutely must vote to prevent these massacres." But if he's a Latino, he will surely go to the polls (statistically, abstention is rare among Hispanics). Rather than trying to mobilize him, the automatic message will ask him to campaign in his neighborhood.

Bush's men target their messages with an unheard of precision. Even billboards. County by county, their computers indicate the typical route "Republican sympathizers" take from home to work. All they have to do is reserve the billboards along the way. The same for the small screen. Buying big blocks of television time is now out of the question. They want everything tailored. They know which are the favorite programs of each category of electors. With some surprises sometimes. White House advertisers nearly fainted when they discovered that women "moderately sympathetic to the Republican Party" adore a gay TV series. But they got over it quickly and conceived some commercials specifically for that audience, carefully
avoiding, naturally, any reference to Bush's frankly homophobic discourse (that specifically intended for white Protestant men who drive 4x4s and read "Hunting Magazine").

The Bush team segments its message with perfect cynicism. An example: "We made lots of radio commercials for rural areas, but we made sure that the radio stations in question were not broadcast in the cities," explains Paul Curcio, one of the most frequently seen advertising specialists in Republican circles. Why take such precautions? "Because rural people on the right are very very right wing," he explains. "So we speak to them in very muscular tones. Urban dwellers, generally more moderate, mustn't hear it. They would be frightened."

One theme, skillfully chosen, federates, mobilizes, and enrages rural people and the entire traditionalist right: homosexual marriage. Pro-Bush activists asserted that if Kerry were elected, legalization of these unions would be inevitable (even though the Democratic candidate had said and repeated that he was not in favor of them). To inflame the passions, referendums on the subject were opportunely organized in a dozen key states on the same day as the presidential election. The goal: to attract even more Evangelicals and right wing Catholics to the polls, the ones who intended to abstain from the presidential election, betting that if they went out to vote in the referendum, they would also vote for the supreme payload -Bush obviously.

Give unto Caesar...The idea of focusing the campaign on gay marriage was not Karl Rove's. Richard Land, the Southern Baptist, was the one who "sold" it to him. The doctor of philosophy (graduate of Oxford, no less!) tells how, in his own words: "It was the end of January 2004. The mayor of San Francisco had just married 3000 gay couples and the Massachusetts Supreme Court had determined that such a union was possible. I called Karl and told him he had to jump on the opportunity, that that subject would move mountains. He wasn't too hot about it as a theme for a national campaign; he was afraid of alienating moderate Republicans. But I told him that our base was enraged, that there was a chance they'd abstain again.

So then he gave in. And 78% of white Evangelical Protestants voted for Bush!" Thank-you, Reverend Land.

The other big theme of the campaign, its veritable leitmotiv, was, of course, the "war against terrorism." The catch-all expression doesn't make much strategic sense, but it allows the Republicans to keep public opinion under pressure. Bush and Rove had sniffed out its electoral potential immediately after September 11. In January 2002, four months after the attacks, Rove already declared to Republican Party leaders meeting in a closed door session: "The war against terrorism is a subject that can make us win. Americans trust Republicans better than Democrats to protect them."

Was the Iraq invasion part of the reelection plan? Nothing proves it. But if that were the case, what a blooper! For the bogging down of the conflict in Baghdad very nearly cost Bush his second term. "In the last months of the campaign," says Jan van Lohuizen, "our problem was the war in Iraq. It could easily have cost us the election. Our goal was to distract the voters' attention." Towards what? The "terrorist menace," by gum! To make the country forget the disaster in Baghdad, it was necessary to scare the heartland so it would throw itself intro the arms of the courageous and inflexible president. Just before the election, Bush's publicists concocted a terrifying ad: ravenous wolves (the terrorists, you understand) ready to devour innocents (the Americans, of course). "That paid off, paid off a lot, even," confides Jan van Lohuizen with a smile.

And the famous Bin Laden tape, broadcast the weekend before the vote, was that also a last minute maneuver? "Of course not," he says. "We didn't have anything to do with it. But we researched to see whether it had an impact." The answer: "No." Whatever.

Anticipate the opponent's moves and draw him out onto the terrain they've chosen: that's the Bush men's credo. March 15, 2004, the Massachusetts Senator had just won the primaries and was getting ready to give an important foreign policy speech. "W.'s" team decides to lay a trap. That same morning, it broadcast a spot conceived the day before: a serious voice asks Kerry whether he voted for or against funding the war in Iraq; they would like to know. The Democratic candidate wants to give an up to the minute answer. But he hadn't prepared anything and his case is complicated. Yes, he wants to vote for the funding, but on one condition: that Congress first adopt an amendment to the law reducing rich people's taxes.
Consequently he voted in favor of that amendment, then, when it was rejected, he voted against the military funding. But he gets unnerved; he gets muddled up and says: "Yes, I voted for the 87 billion dollars before... voting against it." Bingo! He fell right into the trap. In this phrase, Kerry suggests he is hesitant, indecisive, fickle - in English, a flip-flopper. Exactly what the Bush team was waiting for to define their adversary, largely unknown to the general public that March 15, 2004. They would pick up this shambolic phrase in a fantastic ad campaign (100 million dollars) starting the following week. And Kerry would be definitively catalogued as a flip-flopper: a weather vane. An image that would stick with him until November 2.

DiAnne:
Here is a link to that artlce. Thank you for posting it.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_05/012405H.shtml

Those Republicans, they just can't STAND that we Democrats like to share! It grates on them!!

They can't handle that we don't mind if we give a penny or two more than we get. It drives them crazy that we find it more rewarding to give than to receive. They go bonkers when we reach out to our fellow Americans who have had hardship, and say "Don't worry, I'll help."

How in the WORLD was it allowed to happen that greed because the virtue and generosity the sin? How? What twisted logic gave Republican greed the moral high ground?

Posted by: Amy at January 24, 2005 09:23 PM

THE COVERT ENEMY WITHIN

Okay, so the way I understand it, greedy men are pulling the strings of Bush and the Evangelicals, using them as pawns in their power play for world domination. What would you call that? Imperialism, or a crusade for Theocracy? I don't see them as one. I see them as two distinctly separate entities, with the former
using the latter to help fulfill it's covert purpose.

Much blame and anger is directed toward the religious right, and because of their delight in newfound perceived "power" and their desire to force their theology on others, alot of the anger toward them is deserved. I don't, however,
think they have any idea what they are playing into. I don't think they would stand for it if they did.

My concern is that if the enemy of freedom and democracy is seen to be one entity called, say, The Republican Religious Right, the focus remains there, while the corporate pillagers remain covertly doing their deeds in stealth while being "covered in the holiness of "christian" values". The Religious Right makes a convenient scapegoat and they feel blessed while doing it.

The core covert enemy of democracy and freedom and values needs to be exposed for "blessing itself with "holy" water mixed of human blood and stolen oil.

It will take alot longer to get the people in America to take a stand against "Christians" on native soil than it would take to get them to take a stand against the core enemy from within
once once education provides exposure.

My concern is this: At the rate this is progressing, will the adversaries of freedom be deeply entrenched by the time America wakes up to the identity of her core enemy?

One way to fight back (by now) - know too that many consumers in the UK are doing the same:

http://boycottbush.net

Consumer guide and brand list for the top 25 Republican Party donors with consumer brands

The information used to compile these tables has been derived from the Open Secrets
http://www.boycottbush.net
http://www.opensecrets.org website.

This US-based site publishes research relating to political donations in the USA since the 1980s. The table here only lists Republican donations calculated by Ethical Consumer magazine
http://www.ethicalconsumer.org. The figures are complex totals that include cash as well as donations in kind and individual contributions from directors.

Brand ownership can vary considerably between countries. For example, as of November 2003, Altria subsidiary Philip Morris was producing Shredded Wheat breakfast cereal in the USA, while Nestlé was manufacturing it for the UK market. Due to the complex nature of verifying brand ownership, we have only listed brands that are available in the USA and/or the UK, where most visitors to this site will come from.

Outside the USA or the UK, the brand names may not necessarily be used by the companies they are attached to here. However, the information should act as an alert to consumers seeing such brands in the shops. You may be able to confirm brand ownership in your country via the company's website. Alternatively, you can contact the companies listed below directly to find out which, if any, of their consumer brands are sold in your country. If you choose not to buy a company's products in order to make a political statement, we recommend that you let it know. That way it will in theory be in a position to change its policy or behaviour in response to your views.

The brand list features a selection of each company's most popular products but is not comprehensive.

All figures are in US dollars. $1million = approximately £600,000 or 850,000 euros.

Alternatives and Best Buys

Ethical Consumer magazine http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/ produces buyers' guides ">http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/magazine/buyers/buyguide.htm> that rate well-known consumer brands across a range of ethical criteria, such as environmental reporting, pollution, nuclear power, animal rights abuses such as factory farming and vivisection, workers' rights violations and presence in oppressive regimes and tax havens. In the list below we have recommended alternative brands for those wishing to avoid purchasing brands owned by companies that donate to the Republican Party. Brand names that appear in teal or as purple hyperlinks have previously been recommended as Best Buys by Ethical Consumer magazine. They generally have the lowest social and environmental impacts in their sector and/or are made by the companies with the cleanest ethical records.

Click here http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/magazine/buyers/buyguide.htm to read a sample buyers' guide.

Click here http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/magazine/buyers/categories.htm for more details about how we rate companies.

Also be aware of these sties:

http://www.adbusters.org
http://www.culturejammers.org
http://www.antipreneur.org
http://www.mediacarta.org
http://www.truecosteconomics.org
http://www.corporatespotlight.org
http://www.accessfoundation.org
http://www.corporatecrackdown.org
http://www.buyblue.org
http://www.choosetheblue.com
http://www.timedollar.org
http://www.pewandgatesforpeace.org

Truth Shall Prevail

I think the religious right was used just as a demographic bloc. The Republican administration was afraid they would "abstain" from voting again, believing Bush was "too far to the left." So they were catered to.

Now Bush is a "lame duck" and it was Land that sold Rove on the religious angle in the first place. Republicans are already planning for 2006 and 2008 so the religious fundamentalists will be angling for friends in the White House once W is gone.

I can't believe how cynical the Bush campaign was in terms of getting in. Kerry/Edwards had ethics - they wanted to help make the country a better place. They believed what they were saying. They tried to speak truth. Bush/Cheney would have done anything to win and I think they probably did things beyond what is cited in this article.

Pure power lust does not presuppose any sort of love, compassion, caring or any other people-oriented value. I believe that was and is the base from which they operate.

Truth, I'm not talking about the Christian right with that post. I'm talking about the Social Security issue - the Republicans are trying to sell it by saying that blacks should get more in monthly benefit payments because they don't live as long - in other words, they're playing to the "hey, I'm not getting my full share!" sentiment.

I agree that it's the corporate pillagers, or aggressors as I call them, because they are attacking America.

Senate Begins Rice Debate

On Tuesday morning the Senate takes up nine hours of floor debate on Pres. Bush's nomination of Condoleezza Rice to be the next Secretary of State.
TUES., C-SPAN2, 9:30AM ET
THE FULL CONF. HEARING

Diane and Amy,

My post was not directed to you specifically, either. Being a newbie, I am not sure what people see and know, but what I do see weighs heavily on me.

I feel so much better after you guys explained to me that you see it, too. So very much better. Not because I thought you were deceived and shallow, because I have never thought that, but because it gives me hope that many more too see it but don't speak of it here because it may be elementary to many.

I love reading your posts. So much information, so little time!!! You both have me busy every night learning and laughing.

Thank you.

Truth Shall Prevail

I was talking about the religious right but I'm starting to see that they were used. They are also trying to blackmail Bush & I think he himself is one of them but I don't think the neocons who control him give a rat's ass about Jesus (the neocons & corporate cronies, warmongers & government shrinkers).

Yes, I think & discuss things that I would not put in a public place. I am not quite to the point of being a conspiracy theorist but I am still ashamed to be associated with what is going on.

This may have already been posted but if you didn't catch it on the "unofficial Kerry blog" or Light up the Darkness... It made me happy to hear something we all knew about Kerry confirmed, but it also depressed me that this couldnt have been writen before the election:

The John Kerry I never knew
http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/24/shields.kerry/

DiAnne, do we have a site like ethicalconsumer.org here in the US? The site seems quite comprehensive compared to what I've seen elsewhere.

http://adbusters.org/metas/corpo/corporatecrackdown/home.php

Here's one for Truth Shall Prevail.

Pick the dirty dozen corporations, the worst offenders on the planet, and they'll work hard to knock them off so ethical businesses can prevail!

Posted by: Amy at January 24, 2005 11:46 PM

Amy

Here's a couple of U.S. links:

http://www.responsibleshopper.org/

http://www.ecomall.com/- eco friendly products

http://www.simpleliving.net/- I think you might enjoy this website also!

New Thread

Amy
You know who might be helpful re "ethical consumer" info - Ben Cohen, the Ben & Jerry Ice Cream guy, with the responsible investing, ethical telephone company & his website etc. He should have some ideas. AdBusters is sort of international. Lots of countries have head starts on this & are really into it & believe me, there is alot of boycotting of formerly cool & sought after American goods going on!

even Nader (shudder) - I don't trust him though.

interesting coronation coverage...

http://bushinauguration.blogspot.com/

Have you guys been to this site? http://democrats.senate.gov/

It's the Dem Senatorial Committee site. The Dems are finally getting a communications strategy and they will start doing the things we have been complaining about for months like getting more senators on news shows, and begin a rapid response plan. Also, this site is suppose to be a way for the the committee to communicate with the Dem blogs. FINALLY, some strategery. ;)

Also it seems like the Dem legislative agenda is being packaged as The American Promise. It's not as catchy as Contract With America, but it's a start. Yay!

Carol, sounds like you didn't watch Matt's interview of JK back in October. Lauer has become such a pompass ass I don't know why Katie stands for it. Why are you blogging at 4:34 a.m.? I like the Today Show but won't watch it, national news or talking heads as long as they continue to focus on the egos of Matthews and folks like Lauer and basically give Bush and everyone in his Admin a free ride.There are no more Kronkite type new folks anymore, its all about ratings, doing what they think 51% of the audience approves and their egos My personal boycott continues.Watching is a pure waste of time.

Cronkite