PatriotActs


Blog For Free!

Archives
Home
2005 January
2004 December
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July
2004 June
2004 May
2004 April
2004 March

My Links
The Nation
CounterPunch
The American Prospect
Winston Smith's Daily Journal
Sam Adams' CounterPoint

tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images


Sponsored
Blog
... Hard to argue with the reality in 'Fahrenheit 9/11' ...
07.31.04 (8:54 am)   [edit]
Fahrenheit 9/11 is an embarrassing movie. Or it should be. It should be embarrassing to the Cheney/Bush Gang, but those people are beyond embarrassment.

It should be embarrassing to the spineless Democrats in the U.S. Senate, not one of whom had the moral courage to co-sign a bill of particulars prepared by African-American members of Congress and others protesting the disenfranchisement of black voters in Florida, a blatant act that enabled Bush, with the help of his brother, Jeb, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris and five members of the U.S. Supreme Court to steal the presidency.

It should be embarrassing to the national media -- print and electronic -- who lacked the intellectual courage to show us what Michael Moore shows us in this movie.

And it should be especially embarrassing to the millions of Americans who fail to or refuse to see Bush for what he is: an inarticulate puppet for a corrupt, cynical band of neo-conservative opportunists led by Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Wolfowitz.

The sweet singers of the far right and their followers have tried to make much of perceived errors in Fahrenheit. I say perceived, because in some cases they are the only ones who see them. Example: Moore supposedly claims in the film that members of the bin Laden family in the United States were allowed to fly home to Saudi Arabia after 9/11 before the ban on commercials flights out of the country was lifted. But the film does not make that claim. And the Saudis went out on private planes, not commercial flights.

Moore does question the wisdom of allowing relatives of the man who masterminded the attacks to leave the country so soon after the event. But then when you look at the close ties, especially the money ties, that bind the Bushes and the Saudi establishment, including the bin Ladens, you understand the preferential treatment.

Without this movie we would not have known about Bush's bewildering behavior on the morning of the attack. We had the official and of course bogus White House version put out by Dick (Undisclosed Location) Cheney about Air Force One being targeted by the terrorists and a cool and collected Bush taking command of the situation.

That was not the Bush we saw in the videotape made in the Florida kindergarten classroom that terrible morning. Bush, we now know, was told of the first airliner's crash into the North Tower before he entered the classroom. Still he strolled in, sat down and opened a copy of My Pet Goat as the teacher read aloud. Minutes later, one of his aides came to him and whispered in his ear that a second airliner had struck the South Tower and that America was under attack.

For the next seven minutes Bush sat there, seemingly dumbstruck, wondering what to do next. The self-proclaimed leader of the free world wasn't just drawing a blank, he was a blank.

And who can blame him? This wasn't in his job description. This was not what he'd signed on for. For the first eight months of his nominal presidency life had been good: Early to bed, early to rise, a quick briefing on what Dick and Rummy and Condi figured he needed to know, which wasn't too much, a bit of exercise, a video-game break, then lunch and a nap. His nanny Dick would take care of the heavy lifting.

As The Washington Post reported at the time, 42 percent of Bush's first eight months in office had been spent on vacation. But all that changed on Sept. 11, 2001, or so we've been told by the people who did not tell us what Moore is telling us.

Up until that fateful day, some in the press had been derisive of Bush's disengaged demeanor. But 48 hours later, more than a few of these same people had transformed him into a latter-day Churchill, praising his strong leadership in a time of national crisis, but conveniently not providing a single example of that strong leadership, unless you want to count the tough cowboy talk about tracking bin Laden down, smoking him out and bringing him back dead or alive. Yippee!

You can argue over whether Fahrenheit is a documentary, a polemic or a Democratic campaign ad. But it's hard to argue with the disturbing reality it lays bare. - http://www.pressconnects.com/...
 
... 'GOP has reason to be nervous' ...
07.31.04 (8:52 am)   [edit]
A couple of weeks back, The Washington Post ran an article describing President Bush's novel campaign strategy. Rather than tacking toward the middle to garner the support of swing voters, the president's campaign is focusing its energy on consolidating and energizing its conservative base.

As the Post put it, "Although not discounting swing voters, Bush is placing unusual emphasis so far on rallying the faithful."

But is this truly a novel strategy? Not really. It's actually a strategy as old as presidential politics itself -- one so well-known that there's even a name reserved for presidents who use it as a reelection strategy ... one-termers.

Democrats may see red when Bush tries to whip up the gay-marriage issue by calling for a constitutional ban, or going after John Kerry's war record, or getting surrogates to dish out red meat in the new Sandy Berger classified-documents dustup. But these are really signs of a campaign that is increasingly pessimistic about its chances of turning undecided voters to its cause and trying to find some way to change the political lay of the land.

An incumbent campaign with the wind at its back tries to keep its candidate above the political fray and focused on appeals to the political middle. The game plan is always to appear above politics -- on the model of Ronald Reagan in 1984 and Bill Clinton in 1996.

It's the losers who oscillate between nailing down the base and swinging for the fences with desperate gambits. Think of the example of the elder George Bush with his screechy, culture-war Houston convention aimed at mollifying restive right-wingers, followed by antic jabs at Clinton over the character issue.

If you're three months out from a presidential election and Candidate A is working the base and Candidate B is courting independents, it's a good bet that Candidate B is going to be the next president -- no matter how newfangled a strategy Candidate A's advisers say he's pursuing.

Some of the difficulties of the Bush campaign have been obscured by the near deadlock in public-opinion polls. Kerry has led in the majority of polls in recent weeks, but usually right within the margin of error.

Yet even that data can be deceiving. As veteran Washington-watcher Charlie Cook noted last week, even a stable, dead-even race is pretty bad news for an incumbent like Bush, because undecided voters tend to break heavily in favor of the challenger.

An incumbent president gets about what his numbers are in the head-to-head match-ups. It's the challenger who scoops up most of the remaining undecideds.

As Cook put it, "this race has settled into a place that is not at all good for an incumbent, is remarkably stable, and one that is terrifying many Republican lawmakers, operatives and activists."

The one bright spot on the horizon for the Bush administration has been the undeniable fact that the economy has moved into a brisker phase of recovery since the beginning of 2004, even if the effects for voters are still to be felt in many parts of the electorate. Yet even that bright spot may be dimmer than expected. At a meeting of the Republican Governors Association 10 days ago, GOP strategist Bill McInturff new unveiled polling data showing that voters remain skeptical about Republican claims of a rebounding economy.

All the caveats apply, of course. The nation is still divided along deeply etched ideological lines. Many swing states remain too close to call. Unpredictable events overseas could still play a decisive role. But if you see Republicans acting panicked and nervous in the next couple of months, remember: They have good reason. - http://www.smirkingchimp.com/...
 
U.S. Veteran: "'Why this really is the most important election of our lifetime'" ...
07.31.04 (8:24 am)   [edit]
[b]Veterans For Peace [/b]just concluded its 2004 National Convention, held in Boston at the same time as the Democratic Party's Convention. Attenders heard Daniel Ellsberg and Howard Zinn both warn of an escalating danger of fascist-like repression if we have another four years under the current administration.

I would like to commend to you Senator Robert Byrd's new book, Losing America. Byrd, you will recall, accused his Senate colleagues of "sleepwalking through history" for their failure to resist George Bush's spurious rush to war against Iraq. Now he expresses the bleak conviction that we are on the verge of losing our democracy, just as Rome slipped from republic to autocratic empire through an inert populace, a supine legislature, and an ambitious and arrogant executive.

To my mind, we are repeating our own historical experience. The Jacksonian era saw the extension of the vote to the working class and mitigated the overweening power of the wealthy in the 1820s and 30s; the Progressive era led to the extension of the vote to women and to some limitations on the power of the monopolistic corporations and trusts in the 1890-1920 period, and the modern Civil Rights era re-enfranchised African Americans and sought to better the condition of America's poor.

Conversely, the conservative triumph over Jacksonianism of 1840 led to the Civil War by its unwillingness to deal with slavery in any serious way. The repugnant excesses of the Gilded Age brought about the labor wars of the end of the 19th century, and the anti-Communist fanatics, the intransigence of the segregationists, and those who belittle women led to the struggles of the 1960s and 70s.

The Civil Rights movement of the 60s and 70s paralleled to Civil War. The Affirmative Action period paralleled Reconstruction, and the present Right-Wing ascendancy promises a return to the Jim Crow era.

Once again the right aims to reestablish the complete dominance of the wealthy through a language of rightwing populism with its rhetoric of religion, stoking hatred for minorities and foreign enemies, and by fomenting nationalist and imperialist fantasies.

In his address to the VFP Convention, Vietnam Veterans of America founder Bobby Muller defined our next mission in what I consider to be precisely the right terms. He urged that we must create the "political space" in our home communities that will encourage John Kerry to adopt more progressive policies than those he is espousing now. We must, he said, steer our country's leadership away from disaster and toward policies truly suited to producing peace and stability in the world.

Very well said, but his comments take as a presumption that John Kerry is the linchpin around which our efforts should take place, and we are not yet, unfortunately, united in that view.

VFP past president Barry Riesch said: "We want [John Kerry] to show the same courage he showed when he came home from Vietnam and spoke out against the war. I'll vote for him, but some of our members are on the fence." (My emphasis.)

Another friend says, "I could never vote for a candidate who promotes or votes for war." Until Kerry's nomination acceptance speech, my wife felt the same. There are too many others who feel that way.

Many of us do not yet believe that, as Kerry said in his acceptance speech, "this is the most important election of our lifetime.

I, however, believe that Kerry is right for precisely the points made by Daniel Ellsberg, Howard Zinn and Robert Byrd. If we do not step back from the verge now, it may be to late to have any hope at all for salvaging our already deeply damaged democracy, much less a democracy with progressive leanings.

Those of us who feel that there is no substantive difference between Bush and Kerry--those who hope that four more years of Bush will open the possibility of a real and broad-based turn to the left--are dreaming. Our nation has always been more susceptible to the blandishments of the right than to the left. For some idea as to why, I commend to you John Leland's New York Times article, "Why America Sees the Silver Lining" (Week in Review, June 13, 2004). Meantime, and having participated in the American electoral process since 1963, I believe that this is "the most important election of our lifetime," and the most dismaying.

For those of us in safe states, there may still be room to vote Nader or Green as a message to Kerry. But, as I go off to a not-so-safe state to work for a Kerry presidency, let me urge my friends on the left to consider the possibility that four more years of George Bush may lead us down a very dark path indeed, while a vote for Kerry may give us, as Bobby Muller says, some space in which to maneuver.

[b]Peter D. Molan, Ph.D., a member of Veterans for Peace, Baltimore, is a retired Middle East analyst for the US Department of Defense[/b]. - http://www.smirkingchimp.com/...
 
U.S. Veteran: "'Why this really is the most important election of our lifetime'" ...
07.31.04 (8:22 am)   [edit]
[b]Veterans For Peace [/b]just concluded its 2004 National Convention, held in Boston at the same time as the Democratic Party's Convention. Attenders heard Daniel Ellsberg and Howard Zinn both warn of an escalating danger of fascist-like repression if we have another four years under the current administration.

I would like to commend to you Senator Robert Byrd's new book, Losing America. Byrd, you will recall, accused his Senate colleagues of "sleepwalking through history" for their failure to resist George Bush's spurious rush to war against Iraq. Now he expresses the bleak conviction that we are on the verge of losing our democracy, just as Rome slipped from republic to autocratic empire through an inert populace, a supine legislature, and an ambitious and arrogant executive.

To my mind, we are repeating our own historical experience. The Jacksonian era saw the extension of the vote to the working class and mitigated the overweening power of the wealthy in the 1820s and 30s; the Progressive era led to the extension of the vote to women and to some limitations on the power of the monopolistic corporations and trusts in the 1890-1920 period, and the modern Civil Rights era re-enfranchised African Americans and sought to better the condition of America's poor.

Conversely, the conservative triumph over Jacksonianism of 1840 led to the Civil War by its unwillingness to deal with slavery in any serious way. The repugnant excesses of the Gilded Age brought about the labor wars of the end of the 19th century, and the anti-Communist fanatics, the intransigence of the segregationists, and those who belittle women led to the struggles of the 1960s and 70s.

The Civil Rights movement of the 60s and 70s paralleled to Civil War. The Affirmative Action period paralleled Reconstruction, and the present Right-Wing ascendancy promises a return to the Jim Crow era.

Once again the right aims to reestablish the complete dominance of the wealthy through a language of rightwing populism with its rhetoric of religion, stoking hatred for minorities and foreign enemies, and by fomenting nationalist and imperialist fantasies.

In his address to the VFP Convention, Vietnam Veterans of America founder Bobby Muller defined our next mission in what I consider to be precisely the right terms. He urged that we must create the "political space" in our home communities that will encourage John Kerry to adopt more progressive policies than those he is espousing now. We must, he said, steer our country's leadership away from disaster and toward policies truly suited to producing peace and stability in the world.

Very well said, but his comments take as a presumption that John Kerry is the linchpin around which our efforts should take place, and we are not yet, unfortunately, united in that view.

VFP past president Barry Riesch said: "We want [John Kerry] to show the same courage he showed when he came home from Vietnam and spoke out against the war. I'll vote for him, but some of our members are on the fence." (My emphasis.)

Another friend says, "I could never vote for a candidate who promotes or votes for war." Until Kerry's nomination acceptance speech, my wife felt the same. There are too many others who feel that way.

Many of us do not yet believe that, as Kerry said in his acceptance speech, "this is the most important election of our lifetime.

I, however, believe that Kerry is right for precisely the points made by Daniel Ellsberg, Howard Zinn and Robert Byrd. If we do not step back from the verge now, it may be to late to have any hope at all for salvaging our already deeply damaged democracy, much less a democracy with progressive leanings.

Those of us who feel that there is no substantive difference between Bush and Kerry--those who hope that four more years of Bush will open the possibility of a real and broad-based turn to the left--are dreaming. Our nation has always been more susceptible to the blandishments of the right than to the left. For some idea as to why, I commend to you John Leland's New York Times article, "Why America Sees the Silver Lining" (Week in Review, June 13, 2004). Meantime, and having participated in the American electoral process since 1963, I believe that this is "the most important election of our lifetime," and the most dismaying.

For those of us in safe states, there may still be room to vote Nader or Green as a message to Kerry. But, as I go off to a not-so-safe state to work for a Kerry presidency, let me urge my friends on the left to consider the possibility that four more years of George Bush may lead us down a very dark path indeed, while a vote for Kerry may give us, as Bobby Muller says, some space in which to maneuver.

[b]Peter D. Molan, Ph.D., a member of Veterans for Peace, Baltimore, is a retired Middle East analyst for the US Department of Defense[/b]. - http://www.smirkingchimp.com/...
 
U.S. Veteran: "'Why this really is the most important election of our lifetime'" ...
07.31.04 (8:20 am)   [edit]
[b]Veterans For Peace [/b]just concluded its 2004 National Convention, held in Boston at the same time as the Democratic Party's Convention. Attenders heard Daniel Ellsberg and Howard Zinn both warn of an escalating danger of fascist-like repression if we have another four years under the current administration.

I would like to commend to you Senator Robert Byrd's new book, Losing America. Byrd, you will recall, accused his Senate colleagues of "sleepwalking through history" for their failure to resist George Bush's spurious rush to war against Iraq. Now he expresses the bleak conviction that we are on the verge of losing our democracy, just as Rome slipped from republic to autocratic empire through an inert populace, a supine legislature, and an ambitious and arrogant executive.

To my mind, we are repeating our own historical experience. The Jacksonian era saw the extension of the vote to the working class and mitigated the overweening power of the wealthy in the 1820s and 30s; the Progressive era led to the extension of the vote to women and to some limitations on the power of the monopolistic corporations and trusts in the 1890-1920 period, and the modern Civil Rights era re-enfranchised African Americans and sought to better the condition of America's poor.

Conversely, the conservative triumph over Jacksonianism of 1840 led to the Civil War by its unwillingness to deal with slavery in any serious way. The repugnant excesses of the Gilded Age brought about the labor wars of the end of the 19th century, and the anti-Communist fanatics, the intransigence of the segregationists, and those who belittle women led to the struggles of the 1960s and 70s.

The Civil Rights movement of the 60s and 70s paralleled to Civil War. The Affirmative Action period paralleled Reconstruction, and the present Right-Wing ascendancy promises a return to the Jim Crow era.

Once again the right aims to reestablish the complete dominance of the wealthy through a language of rightwing populism with its rhetoric of religion, stoking hatred for minorities and foreign enemies, and by fomenting nationalist and imperialist fantasies.

In his address to the VFP Convention, Vietnam Veterans of America founder Bobby Muller defined our next mission in what I consider to be precisely the right terms. He urged that we must create the "political space" in our home communities that will encourage John Kerry to adopt more progressive policies than those he is espousing now. We must, he said, steer our country's leadership away from disaster and toward policies truly suited to producing peace and stability in the world.

Very well said, but his comments take as a presumption that John Kerry is the linchpin around which our efforts should take place, and we are not yet, unfortunately, united in that view.

VFP past president Barry Riesch said: "We want [John Kerry] to show the same courage he showed when he came home from Vietnam and spoke out against the war. I'll vote for him, but some of our members are on the fence." (My emphasis.)

Another friend says, "I could never vote for a candidate who promotes or votes for war." Until Kerry's nomination acceptance speech, my wife felt the same. There are too many others who feel that way.

Many of us do not yet believe that, as Kerry said in his acceptance speech, "this is the most important election of our lifetime.

I, however, believe that Kerry is right for precisely the points made by Daniel Ellsberg, Howard Zinn and Robert Byrd. If we do not step back from the verge now, it may be to late to have any hope at all for salvaging our already deeply damaged democracy, much less a democracy with progressive leanings.

Those of us who feel that there is no substantive difference between Bush and Kerry--those who hope that four more years of Bush will open the possibility of a real and broad-based turn to the left--are dreaming. Our nation has always been more susceptible to the blandishments of the right than to the left. For some idea as to why, I commend to you John Leland's New York Times article, "Why America Sees the Silver Lining" (Week in Review, June 13, 2004). Meantime, and having participated in the American electoral process since 1963, I believe that this is "the most important election of our lifetime," and the most dismaying.

For those of us in safe states, there may still be room to vote Nader or Green as a message to Kerry. But, as I go off to a not-so-safe state to work for a Kerry presidency, let me urge my friends on the left to consider the possibility that four more years of George Bush may lead us down a very dark path indeed, while a vote for Kerry may give us, as Bobby Muller says, some space in which to maneuver.

[b]Peter D. Molan, Ph.D., a member of Veterans for Peace, Baltimore, is a retired Middle East analyst for the US Department of Defense[/b]. - http://www.smirkingchimp.com/...
 
... MORE NEO-CON LIES: Kerry Statement Distorted to Push Flip-Flop Claim
07.31.04 (8:13 am)   [edit]
In their desperate efforts to paint Senator John Kerry (D-MA) as a serial flip-flopper, President Bush's reelection campaign has resorted to gross distortions of his public statements. The campaign is now trumpeting the fact that Kerry, after voting to authorize the use of force in Iraq, described himself "as an anti-war candidate."1 The claim is based on a clip of Kerry's 1/6/04 appearance on Hardball with Chris Mathews, which is featured in a new 12 minute "documentary" on Kerry produced by the Republican National Committee. This is how the RNC presents the interview:2

MSNBC'S CHRIS MATTHEWS: "Are you one of the anti-war candidates?"

KERRY: "I am - Yeah."

The real transcript of the interview reveals that the clip was doctored. Kerry was not trying to shift his position but actually reiterating his belief that President Bush made a mistake in the way he went to war. Here is the actual transcript:3

MATTHEWS: Do you think you belong to that category of candidates who more or less are unhappy with this war, the way it's been fought...Are you one of the anti-war candidates?

KERRY: I am -- Yes, in the sense that I don't believe the president took us to war as he should have, yes, absolutely.

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1. "Extreme Makeover Day 4 Fact Sheet: Setting the Record Straight", BushCheney04.com, 7/29/04.
2. "RNC Ad Backgrounder",DemsExtreme Makeover.com, 7/28/04.
3. Hardball, Nexis-Lexis Transcript, 1/6/04
 
... MORE NEO-CON LIES: Kerry Statement Distorted to Push Flip-Flop Claim
07.31.04 (8:10 am)   [edit]
In their desperate efforts to paint Senator John Kerry (D-MA) as a serial flip-flopper, President Bush's reelection campaign has resorted to gross distortions of his public statements. The campaign is now trumpeting the fact that Kerry, after voting to authorize the use of force in Iraq, described himself "as an anti-war candidate."1 The claim is based on a clip of Kerry's 1/6/04 appearance on Hardball with Chris Mathews, which is featured in a new 12 minute "documentary" on Kerry produced by the Republican National Committee. This is how the RNC presents the interview:2

MSNBC'S CHRIS MATTHEWS: "Are you one of the anti-war candidates?"

KERRY: "I am - Yeah."

The real transcript of the interview reveals that the clip was doctored. Kerry was not trying to shift his position but actually reiterating his belief that President Bush made a mistake in the way he went to war. Here is the actual transcript:3

MATTHEWS: Do you think you belong to that category of candidates who more or less are unhappy with this war, the way it's been fought...Are you one of the anti-war candidates?

KERRY: I am -- Yes, in the sense that I don't believe the president took us to war as he should have, yes, absolutely.

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1. "Extreme Makeover Day 4 Fact Sheet: Setting the Record Straight", BushCheney04.com, 7/29/04.
2. "RNC Ad Backgrounder",DemsExtreme Makeover.com, 7/28/04.
3. Hardball, Nexis-Lexis Transcript, 1/6/04
 
Zogby Poll: The Ground Shifts Away From Bush/Cheney In Favor Of Kerry/Edwards ...
07.30.04 (5:42 pm)   [edit]
[b]While Democrats Rally in Boston, Kerry-Edwards Leads By Five Points Over Bush-Cheney (48%-43%), New Zogby America Poll Reveals[/b]

While the Democratic Party rallies in Boston at the Democratic National Convention, the presidential ticket of Massachusetts Senator John Kerry and North Carolina Senator John Edwards holds a five point lead over President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney (48%-43%), according to a new Zogby America poll. The telephone poll of 1001 likely voters was conducted from Monday through Thursday (July 26-29, 2004). Overall results have a margin of sampling error of +/-3.2.

Presidential Ticket % / July 27-29 / July 6-7

Kerry-Edwards / 48 / 48

Bush-Cheney / 43 / 46

Undecided / 8 / 5

In other words, the ground is shifting away from Bush/Cheney and are now in the undecided column ...

Zogby International conducted telephone interviews of 1001 likely voters chosen at random nationwide. All calls were made from Zogby International headquarters in Utica, N.Y., from Monday, July 26 through Thursday, July 29. The margin of error is +/3.2 percentage points. Slight weights were added to region, party, age, race, religion, gender and presidential voter to more accurately reflect the voting population. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups. - http://www.zogby.com/news/Rea...
 
John F. Kerry Gave A Great Speech & It Is Driving The Right-Wing Neo-Cons Crazy!!! LOL!!!
07.30.04 (7:41 am)   [edit]
[b]Full text: John Kerry speech

The full text of Senator John Kerry's speech to the Democratic National Convention, accepting the party's nomination to challenge George Bush for the US presidency: [/b]

[u]I'm John Kerry and I'm reporting for duty[/u].

We are here tonight because we love our country.

We are proud of what America is and what it can become.

My fellow Americans: we are here tonight united in one simple purpose: to make America stronger at home and respected in the world.

A great American novelist wrote that you can't go home again. He could not have imagined this evening. Tonight, I am home. Home where my public life began and those who made it possible live. Home where our nation's history was written in blood, idealism, and hope. Home where my parents showed me the values of family, faith, and country.

Thank you, all of you, for a welcome home I will never forget.

I wish my parents could share this moment. They went to their rest in the last few years, but their example, their inspiration, their gift of open eyes, open mind, and endless world are bigger and more lasting than any words.

I was born in Colorado, in Fitzsimmons Army Hospital, when my dad was a pilot in World War II. Now, I'm not one to read into things, but guess which wing of the hospital the maternity ward was in? I'm not making this up. I was born in the West Wing!

My mother was the rock of our family as so many mothers are. She stayed up late to help me do my homework. She sat by my bed when I was sick, and she answered the questions of a child who, like all children, found the world full of wonders and mysteries.

She was my den mother when I was a Cub Scout and she was so proud of her fifty year pin as a Girl Scout leader. She gave me her passion for the environment. She taught me to see trees as the cathedrals of nature. And by the power of her example, she showed me that we can and must finish the march toward full equality for all women in our country.

My dad did the things that a boy remembers. He gave me my first model airplane, my first baseball mitt and my first bicycle. He also taught me that we are here for something bigger than ourselves; he lived out the responsibilities and sacrifices of the greatest generation to whom we owe so much.

When I was a young man, he was in the State Department, stationed in Berlin when it and the world were divided between democracy and communism. I have unforgettable memories of being a kid mesmerized by the British, French, and American troops, each of them guarding their own part of the city, and Russians standing guard on the stark line separating East from West. On one occasion, I rode my bike into Soviet East Berlin. And when I proudly told my dad, he promptly grounded me.

But what I learned has stayed with me for a lifetime. I saw how different life was on different sides of the same city. I saw the fear in the eyes of people who were not free. I saw the gratitude of people toward the United States for all that we had done. I felt goose bumps as I got off a military train and heard the Army band strike up "Stars and Stripes Forever." I learned what it meant to be America at our best. I learned the pride of our freedom. And I am determined now to restore that pride to all who look to America.

Mine were greatest generation parents. And as I thank them, we all join together to thank that whole generation for making America strong, for winning World War II, winning the Cold War, and for the great gift of service which brought America fifty years of peace and prosperity.

My parents inspired me to serve, and when I was a junior in high school, John Kennedy called my generation to service. It was the beginning of a great journey, a time to march for civil rights, for voting rights, for the environment, for women, and for peace. We believed we could change the world. And you know what? We did.

But we're not finished. The journey isn't complete. The march isn't over. The promise isn't perfected. Tonight, we're setting out again. And together, we're going to write the next great chapter of America's story.

We have it in our power to change the world again. But only if we're true to our ideals and that starts by telling the truth to the American people. That is my first pledge to you tonight. As President, I will restore trust and credibility to the White House.

I ask you to judge me by my record: As a young prosecutor, I fought for victim's rights and made prosecuting violence against women a priority. When I came to the Senate, I broke with many in my own party to vote for a balanced budget, because I thought it was the right thing to do. I fought to put a 100,000 cops on the street.

And then I reached across the aisle to work with John McCain, to find the truth about our POW's and missing in action, and to finally make peace with Vietnam.

I will be a commander in chief who will never mislead us into war. I will have a Vice President who will not conduct secret meetings with polluters to rewrite our environmental laws. I will have a Secretary of Defence who will listen to the best advice of our military leaders. And I will appoint an Attorney General who actually upholds the Constitution of the United States.

My fellow Americans, this is the most important election of our lifetime. The stakes are high. We are a nation at war ¿ a global war on terror against an enemy unlike any we have ever known before. And here at home, wages are falling, health care costs are rising, and our great middle class is shrinking. People are working weekends; they're working two jobs, three jobs, and they're still not getting ahead.

We're told that outsourcing jobs is good for America. We're told that new jobs that pay $9,000 less than the jobs that have been lost is the best we can do. They say this is the best economy we've ever had. And they say that anyone who thinks otherwise is a pessimist. Well, here is our answer: There is nothing more pessimistic than saying America can't do better.

We can do better and we will. We're the optimists. For us, this is a country of the future. We're the can do people. And let's not forget what we did in the 1990s. We balanced the budget. We paid down the debt. We created 23 million new jobs. We lifted millions out of poverty and we lifted the standard of living for the middle class. We just need to believe in ourselves and we can do it again.

So tonight, in the city where America's freedom began, only a few blocks from where the sons and daughters of liberty gave birth to our nation here tonight, on behalf of a new birth of freedom on behalf of the middle class who deserve a champion, and those struggling to join it who deserve a fair shot for the brave men and women in uniform who risk their lives every day and the families who pray for their return for all those who believe our best days are ahead of us for all of you with great faith in the American people, I accept your nomination for President of the United States.

I am proud that at my side will be a running mate whose life is the story of the American dream and who's worked every day to make that dream real for all Americans Senator John Edwards of North Carolina. And his wonderful wife Elizabeth and their family. This son of a mill worker is ready to lead and next January, Americans will be proud to have a fighter for the middle class to succeed Dick Cheney as Vice President of the United States.

And what can I say about Teresa? She has the strongest moral compass of anyone I know. She's down to earth, nurturing, courageous, wise and smart. She speaks her mind and she speaks the truth, and I love her for that, too. And that's why America will embrace her as the next First Lady of the United States.

For Teresa and me, no matter what the future holds or the past has given us, nothing will ever mean as much as our children. We love them not just for who they are and what they've become, but for being themselves, making us laugh, holding our feet to the fire, and never letting me get away with anything. Thank you, Andre, Alex, Chris, Vanessa, and John.

And in this journey, I am accompanied by an extraordinary band of brothers led by that American hero, a patriot named Max Cleland. Our band of brothers doesn't march together because of who we are as veterans, but because of what we learned as soldiers. We fought for this nation because we loved it and we came back with the deep belief that every day is extra. We may be a little older now, we may be a little greyer, but we still know how to fight for our country.

And standing with us in that fight are those who shared with me the long season of the primary campaign: Carol Moseley Braun, General Wesley Clark, Howard Dean, Dick Gephardt, Bob Graham, Dennis Kucinich, Joe Lieberman and Al Sharpton.

To all of you, I say thank you for teaching me and testing me but mostly, we say thank you for standing up for our country and giving us the unity to move America forward.

My fellow Americans, the world tonight is very different from the world of four years ago. But I believe the American people are more than equal to the challenge.

Remember the hours after September 11th, when we came together as one to answer the attack against our homeland. We drew strength when our firefighters ran up the stairs and risked their lives, so that others might live. When rescuers rushed into smoke and fire at the Pentagon. When the men and women of Flight 93 sacrificed themselves to save our nation's Capitol. When flags were hanging from front porches all across America, and strangers became friends. It was the worst day we have ever seen, but it brought out the best in all of us.

I am proud that after September 11th all our people rallied to President Bush's call for unity to meet the danger. There were no Democrats. There were no Republicans. There were only Americans. How we wish it had stayed that way.

Now I know there are those who criticize me for seeing complexities and I do because some issues just aren't all that simple. Saying there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq doesn't make it so. Saying we can fight a war on the cheap doesn't make it so. And proclaiming mission accomplished certainly doesn't make it so.

As President, I will ask hard questions and demand hard evidence. I will immediately reform the intelligence system so policy is guided by facts, and facts are never distorted by politics. And as President, I will bring back this nation's time-honoured tradition: the United States of America never goes to war because we want to, we only go to war because we have to.

I know what kids go through when they are carrying an M-16 in a dangerous place and they can't tell friend from foe. I know what they go through when they're out on patrol at night and they don't know what's coming around the next bend. I know what it's like to write letters home telling your family that everything's all right when you're not sure that's true.

As President, I will wage this war with the lessons I learned in war. Before you go to battle, you have to be able to look a parent in the eye and truthfully say: "I tried everything possible to avoid sending your son or daughter into harm's way. But we had no choice. We had to protect the American people, fundamental American values from a threat that was real and imminent." So lesson one, this is the only justification for going to war.

And on my first day in office, I will send a message to every man and woman in our armed forces: You will never be asked to fight a war without a plan to win the peace.

I know what we have to do in Iraq. We need a President who has the credibility to bring our allies to our side and share the burden, reduce the cost to American taxpayers, and reduce the risk to American soldiers. That's the right way to get the job done and bring our troops home.

Here is the reality: that won't happen until we have a president who restores America's respect and leadership -- so we don't have to go it alone in the world.

And we need to rebuild our alliances, so we can get the terrorists before they get us.

I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as President. Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response. I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security. And I will build a stronger American military.

We will add 40,000 active duty troops not in Iraq, but to strengthen American forces that are now overstretched, overextended, and under pressure. We will double our special forces to conduct anti-terrorist operations. We will provide our troops with the newest weapons and technology to save their lives and win the battle. And we will end the backdoor draft of National Guard and reservists.

To all who serve in our armed forces today, I say, help is on the way.

As President, I will fight a smarter, more effective war on terror. We will deploy every tool in our arsenal: our economic as well as our military might; our principles as well as our firepower.

In these dangerous days there is a right way and a wrong way to be strong. Strength is more than tough words. After decades of experience in national security, I know the reach of our power and I know the power of our ideals.

We need to make America once again a beacon in the world. We need to be looked up to and not just feared.

We need to lead a global effort against nuclear proliferation to keep the most dangerous weapons in the world out of the most dangerous hands in the world.

We need a strong military and we need to lead strong alliances. And then, with confidence and determination, we will be able to tell the terrorists: You will lose and we will win. The future doesn't belong to fear; it belongs to freedom.

And the front lines of this battle are not just far away they're right here on our shores, at our airports, and potentially in any town or city. Today, our national security begins with homeland security. The 9-11 Commission has given us a path to follow, endorsed by Democrats, Republicans, and the 9-11 families. As President, I will not evade or equivocate; I will immediately implement the recommendations of that commission. We shouldn't be letting ninety-five percent of container ships come into our ports without ever being physically inspected. We shouldn't be leaving our nuclear and chemical plants without enough protection. And we shouldn't be opening firehouses in Baghdad and closing them down in the United States of America.

And tonight, we have an important message for those who question the patriotism of Americans who offer a better direction for our country. Before wrapping themselves in the flag and shutting their eyes and ears to the truth, they should remember what America is really all about. They should remember the great idea of freedom for which so many have given their lives. Our purpose now is to reclaim democracy itself. We are here to affirm that when Americans stand up and speak their minds and say America can do better, that is not a challenge to patriotism; it is the heart and soul of patriotism.

You see that flag up there. We call her Old Glory. The stars and stripes forever. I fought under that flag, as did so many of you here and all across our country. That flag flew from the gun turret right behind my head. It was shot through and through and tattered, but it never ceased to wave in the wind. It draped the caskets of men I served with and friends I grew up with. For us, that flag is the most powerful symbol of who we are and what we believe in. Our strength. Our diversity. Our love of country. All that makes America both great and good.

That flag doesn't belong to any president. It doesn't belong to any ideology and it doesn't belong to any political party. It belongs to all the American people.

My fellow citizens, elections are about choices. And choices are about values. In the end, it's not just policies and programs that matter; the president who sits at that desk must be guided by principle.

For four years, we've heard a lot of talk about values. But values spoken without actions taken are just slogans. Values are not just words. They're what we live by. They're about the causes we champion and the people we fight for. And it is time for those who talk about family values to start valuing families.

You don't value families by kicking kids out of after school programs and taking cops off our streets, so that Enron can get another tax break.

We believe in the family value of caring for our children and protecting the neighbourhoods where they walk and play.

And that is the choice in this election.

You don't value families by denying real prescription drug coverage to seniors, so big drug companies can get another windfall.

We believe in the family value expressed in one of the oldest Commandments: "Honour thy father and thy mother." As President, I will not privatize Social Security. I will not cut benefits. And together, we will make sure that senior citizens never have to cut their pills in half because they can't afford life-saving medicine.

And that is the choice in this election.

You don't value families if you force them to take up a collection to buy body armour for a son or daughter in the service, if you deny veterans health care, or if you tell middle class families to wait for a tax cut, so that the wealthiest among us can get even more.

We believe in the value of doing what's right for everyone in the American family.

And that is the choice in this election.

We believe that what matters most is not narrow appeals masquerading as values, but the shared values that show the true face of America. Not narrow appeals that divide us, but shared values that unite us. Family and faith. Hard work and responsibility. Opportunity for all so that every child, every parent, every worker has an equal shot at living up to their God-given potential.

What does it mean in America today when Dave McCune, a steel worker I met in Canton, Ohio, saw his job sent overseas and the equipment in his factory literally unbolted, crated up, and shipped thousands of miles away along with that job? What does it mean when workers I've met had to train their foreign replacements?

America can do better. So tonight we say: help is on the way.

What does it mean when Mary Ann Knowles, a woman with breast cancer I met in New Hampshire, had to keep working day after day right through her chemotherapy, no matter how sick she felt, because she was terrified of losing her family's health insurance.

America can do better. And help is on the way.

What does it mean when Deborah Kromins from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania works and saves all her life only to find out that her pension has disappeared into thin air and the executive who looted it has bailed out on a golden parachute?

America can do better. And help is on the way.

What does it mean when twenty five percent of the children in Harlem have asthma because of air pollution?

America can do better. And help is on the way.

What does it mean when people are huddled in blankets in the cold, sleeping in Lafayette Park on the doorstep of the White House itself and the number of families living in poverty has risen by three million in the last four years?

America can do better. And help is on the way.

And so we come here tonight to ask: Where is the conscience of our country?

I'll tell you where it is: it's in rural and small town America; it's in urban neighbourhoods and suburban main streets; it's alive in the people I've met in every part of this land. It's bursting in the hearts of Americans who are determined to give our country back its values and its truth.

We value jobs that pay you more not less than you earned before. We value jobs where, when you put in a week's work, you can actually pay your bills, provide for your children, and lift up the quality of your life. We value an America where the middle class is not being squeezed, but doing better.

So here is our economic plan to build a stronger America:

First, new incentives to revitalize manufacturing.

Second, investment in technology and innovation that will create the good-paying jobs of the future.

Third, close the tax loopholes that reward companies for shipping our jobs overseas. Instead, we will reward companies that create and keep good paying jobs where they belong in the good old U.S.A.

We value an America that exports products, not jobs and we believe American workers should never have to subsidize the loss of their own job.

Next, we will trade and compete in the world. But our plan calls for a fair playing field because if you give the American worker a fair playing field, there's nobody in the world the American worker can't compete against.

And we're going to return to fiscal responsibility because it is the foundation of our economic strength. Our plan will cut the deficit in half in four years by ending tax giveaways that are nothing more than corporate welfare and will make government live by the rule that every family has to follow: pay as you go.

And let me tell you what we won't do: we won't raise taxes on the middle class. You've heard a lot of false charges about this in recent months. So let me say straight out what I will do as President: I will cut middle class taxes. I will reduce the tax burden on small business. And I will roll back the tax cuts for the wealthiest individuals who make over $200,000 a year, so we can invest in job creation, health care and education.

Our education plan for a stronger America sets high standards and demands accountability from parents, teachers, and schools. It provides for smaller class sizes and treats teachers like the professionals they are. And it gives a tax credit to families for each and every year of college.

When I was a prosecutor, I met young kids who were in trouble, abandoned by adults. And as President, I am determined that we stop being a nation content to spend $50,000 a year to keep a young person in prison for the rest of their life when we could invest $10,000 to give them Head Start, Early Start, Smart Start, the best possible start in life.

And we value health care that's affordable and accessible for all Americans.

Since 2000, four million people have lost their health insurance. Millions more are struggling to afford it.

You know what's happening. Your premiums, your co-payments, your deductibles have all gone through the roof.

Our health care plan for a stronger America cracks down on the waste, greed, and abuse in our health care system and will save families up to $1,000 a year on their premiums. You'll get to pick your own doctor and patients and doctors, not insurance company bureaucrats, will make medical decisions. Under our plan, Medicare will negotiate lower drug prices for seniors. And all Americans will be able to buy less expensive prescription drugs from countries like Canada.

The story of people struggling for health care is the story of so many Americans. But you know what, it's not the story of senators and members of Congress. Because we give ourselves great health care and you get the bill. Well, I'm here to say, your family's health care is just as important as any politician's in Washington, D.C.

And when I'm President, America will stop being the only advanced nation in the world which fails to understand that health care is not a privilege for the wealthy, the connected, and the elected it is a right for all Americans.

We value an America that controls its own destiny because it's finally and forever independent of Mideast oil. What does it mean for our economy and our national security when we only have three percent of the world's oil reserves, yet we rely on foreign countries for fifty-three percent of what we consume?

I want an America that relies on its own ingenuity and innovation not the Saudi royal family.

And our energy plan for a stronger America will invest in new technologies and alternative fuels and the cars of the future -- so that no young American in uniform will ever be held hostage to our dependence on oil from the Middle East.

I've told you about our plans for the economy, for education, for health care, for energy independence. I want you to know more about them. So now I'm going to say something that Franklin Roosevelt could never have said in his acceptance speech: go to johnkerry.com.

I want to address these next words directly to President George W. Bush: In the weeks ahead, let's be optimists, not just opponents. Let's build unity in the American family, not angry division. Let's honour this nation's diversity; let's respect one another; and let's never misuse for political purposes the most precious document in American history, the Constitution of the United States.

My friends, the high road may be harder, but it leads to a better place. And that's why Republicans and Democrats must make this election a contest of big ideas, not small-minded attacks. This is our time to reject the kind of politics calculated to divide race from race, group from group, region from region. Maybe some just see us divided into red states and blue states, but I see us as one America red, white, and blue. And when I am President, the government I lead will enlist people of talent, Republicans as well as Democrats, to find the common ground so that no one who has something to contribute will be left on the sidelines.

And let me say it plainly: in that cause, and in this campaign, we welcome people of faith. America is not us and them. I think of what Ron Reagan said of his father a few weeks ago, and I want to say this to you tonight: I don't wear my own faith on my sleeve. But faith has given me values and hope to live by, from Vietnam to this day, from Sunday to Sunday. I don't want to claim that God is on our side. As Abraham Lincoln told us, I want to pray humbly that we are on God's side. And whatever our faith, one belief should bind us all: The measure of our character is our willingness to give of ourselves for others and for our country.

These aren't Democratic values. These aren't Republican values. They're American values. We believe in them. They're who we are. And if we honour them, if we believe in ourselves, we can build an America that's stronger at home and respected in the world.

So much promise stretches before us. Americans have always reached for the impossible, looked to the next horizon, and asked: What if?

Two young bicycle mechanics from Dayton asked what if this airplane could take off at Kitty Hawk? It did that and changed the world forever. A young president asked what if we could go to the moon in ten years? And now we're exploring the solar system and the stars themselves. A young generation of entrepreneurs asked, what if we could take all the information in a library and put it on a little chip the size of a fingernail? We did and that too changed the world forever.

And now it's our time to ask: What if?

What if we find a breakthrough to cure Parkinson's, diabetes, Alzheimer's and Aids? What if we have a president who believes in science, so we can unleash the wonders of discovery like stem cell research to treat illness and save millions of lives?

What if we do what adults should do and make sure all our children are safe in the afternoons after school? And what if we have a leadership that's as good as the American dream so that bigotry and hatred never again steal the hope and future of any American?

I learned a lot about these values on that gunboat patrolling the Mekong Delta with young Americans who came from places as different as Iowa and Oregon, Arkansas, Florida and California. No one cared where we went to school. No one cared about our race or our backgrounds. We were literally all in the same boat. We looked out, one for the other and we still do.

That is the kind of America I will lead as President an America where we are all in the same boat.

Never has there been a more urgent moment for Americans to step up and define ourselves. I will work my heart out. But, my fellow citizens, the outcome is in your hands more than mine.

It is time to reach for the next dream. It is time to look to the next horizon. For America, the hope is there. The sun is rising. Our best days are still to come.

Goodnight, God bless you, and God bless America. - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/am...
 
------> New Stats Show Bush's Deficit Dishonesty
07.30.04 (7:34 am)   [edit]
President Bush and Vice President Cheney have repeatedly promised America that they would get their record-deficits under control. Last year, President Bush said "My Administration firmly believes in controlling the deficit and reducing it."1 Similarly, Vice President Cheney said "I am a deficit hawk. So is the president."2 But according to congressional sources, the government is soon expected to project a record federal budget deficit, even as President Bush demands more money for war in Iraq3 , and a $1 trillion proposal for more tax cuts.4

The Associated Press reports the government will project "that this year's federal deficit will exceed $420 billion" - a record5. The President last year tried to deflect blame for the deficit, claiming that "This nation has got a deficit because we have been through a war.6 " While it is true that the President has spent more than $166 billion on the war,7 the statistics show that his failed economic policies and massive tax cuts for the wealthy are the largest factors contributing to the fiscal demise8. Even the White House budget director essentially acknowledged the President's dishonesty about the cause of the deficit, saying "even if we had never been attacked, and incurred no costs of war or recovery from September 11th, and no tax relief had become law, we still would have gone into deficit9."

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1. "The President's Budget Proposal," New York Times,2/04/03.
2. Transcript of Meet the Press, 9/14/03.
3. "Bush asks for $25 billion more for Iraq, Afghanistan ," CNN.com, 5/06/04.
4. "Bush wants tax cuts to stay," Washington Times, 1/20/04.
5. "White House to project record deficit," Seattle Post Intelligencer, 7/28/04.
6. President Discusses Plan for Economic Growth in Ohio, Whitehouse.gov, 4/28/03.
7. "$166 Billion and Counting",Mercury News 9/15/03.
8. "Deficit Picture Even Grimmer Than New CBO Projections Suggest",Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 8/26/03.
9. Testimony of Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr. Director of Office of Management and Budget Before House Ways and Means, Whitehouse.gov, 2/4-5/03.
 
------> New Stats Show Bush's Deficit Dishonesty
07.30.04 (7:30 am)   [edit]
President Bush and Vice President Cheney have repeatedly promised America that they would get their record-deficits under control. Last year, President Bush said "My Administration firmly believes in controlling the deficit and reducing it."1 Similarly, Vice President Cheney said "I am a deficit hawk. So is the president."2 But according to congressional sources, the government is soon expected to project a record federal budget deficit, even as President Bush demands more money for war in Iraq3 , and a $1 trillion proposal for more tax cuts.4

The Associated Press reports the government will project "that this year's federal deficit will exceed $420 billion" - a record5. The President last year tried to deflect blame for the deficit, claiming that "This nation has got a deficit because we have been through a war.6 " While it is true that the President has spent more than $166 billion on the war,7 the statistics show that his failed economic policies and massive tax cuts for the wealthy are the largest factors contributing to the fiscal demise8. Even the White House budget director essentially acknowledged the President's dishonesty about the cause of the deficit, saying "even if we had never been attacked, and incurred no costs of war or recovery from September 11th, and no tax relief had become law, we still would have gone into deficit9."

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1. "The President's Budget Proposal," New York Times,2/04/03.
2. Transcript of Meet the Press, 9/14/03.
3. "Bush asks for $25 billion more for Iraq, Afghanistan ," CNN.com, 5/06/04.
4. "Bush wants tax cuts to stay," Washington Times, 1/20/04.
5. "White House to project record deficit," Seattle Post Intelligencer, 7/28/04.
6. President Discusses Plan for Economic Growth in Ohio, Whitehouse.gov, 4/28/03.
7. "$166 Billion and Counting",Mercury News 9/15/03.
8. "Deficit Picture Even Grimmer Than New CBO Projections Suggest",Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 8/26/03.
9. Testimony of Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr. Director of Office of Management and Budget Before House Ways and Means, Whitehouse.gov, 2/4-5/03.
 
------> Bush Administration Misleads About Afghanistan Too ...
07.30.04 (7:28 am)   [edit]
Vice President Dick Cheney claimed yesterday that under the President's leadership we "closed down the training camps [in Afghanistan] where terrorists trained to kill Americans."1 His comments are not only bold, but a look at the record shows they are deliberately misleading. Just two weeks ago the Bush administration essentially contradicted the claim, warning Americans of an imminent attack on the U.S. homeland from terrorists operating in Afghanistan.

As CNN reported on July 8, Bush administration officials are warning that "a plot to carry out a large-scale terror attack against the United States in the near future is being directed by Osama bin Laden and other top al Qaeda members." According to the administration, these terrorists are operating in the Afghan-Pakistan border region.2

Unfortunately, in 2002, the Bush administration shifted key special forces out of Afghanistan, effectively removing them from the hunt for al Qaeda. These troops were sent to prepare for an Iraq invasion.3 That leaves the U.S. with only about 15,000 troops in Afghanistan hunting down al Qaeda, whom they now say are plotting an imminent attack against the country.4 Meanwhile, the Pentagon has designed plans to add troops to the 140,000 already stationed in Iraq5 - a country that never had any collaborative relationship with al Qaeda6 or connection to the 9/11 terrorist attacks7 (even though the Bush administration has claimed both).8

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1. The Vice President Delivers Remarks at a Reception for Senatorial Candidate Bill Jones, WhiteHouse.Gov, 7/27/04.
2. "Officials: Bin Laden guiding plots against U.S", CNN.com 7/08/04.
3. "Shifts from bin Laden hunt evoke questions ," USA Today, 3/28/04.
4. "Afghanistan: 'Unrelenting Battle'," CBSNews.com, 5/26/04.
5. "U.S. force in Iraq to grow as Marine deployment pushed up," USA Today, 6/08/04.
6. "Administration Moves to Regain Initiative on 9/11 ", New York Times, 8/27/04.
7. "Bush rejects Saddam 9/11 link", BBC News, 9/18/03.
8. "Cheney Link of Iraq, 9/11 Challenged",The Boston Globe 9/16/03.
 
------> Bush Administration Misleads About Afghanistan Too ...
07.30.04 (7:24 am)   [edit]
Vice President Dick Cheney claimed yesterday that under the President's leadership we "closed down the training camps [in Afghanistan] where terrorists trained to kill Americans."1 His comments are not only bold, but a look at the record shows they are deliberately misleading. Just two weeks ago the Bush administration essentially contradicted the claim, warning Americans of an imminent attack on the U.S. homeland from terrorists operating in Afghanistan.

As CNN reported on July 8, Bush administration officials are warning that "a plot to carry out a large-scale terror attack against the United States in the near future is being directed by Osama bin Laden and other top al Qaeda members." According to the administration, these terrorists are operating in the Afghan-Pakistan border region.2

Unfortunately, in 2002, the Bush administration shifted key special forces out of Afghanistan, effectively removing them from the hunt for al Qaeda. These troops were sent to prepare for an Iraq invasion.3 That leaves the U.S. with only about 15,000 troops in Afghanistan hunting down al Qaeda, whom they now say are plotting an imminent attack against the country.4 Meanwhile, the Pentagon has designed plans to add troops to the 140,000 already stationed in Iraq5 - a country that never had any collaborative relationship with al Qaeda6 or connection to the 9/11 terrorist attacks7 (even though the Bush administration has claimed both).8

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1. The Vice President Delivers Remarks at a Reception for Senatorial Candidate Bill Jones, WhiteHouse.Gov, 7/27/04.
2. "Officials: Bin Laden guiding plots against U.S", CNN.com 7/08/04.
3. "Shifts from bin Laden hunt evoke questions ," USA Today, 3/28/04.
4. "Afghanistan: 'Unrelenting Battle'," CBSNews.com, 5/26/04.
5. "U.S. force in Iraq to grow as Marine deployment pushed up," USA Today, 6/08/04.
6. "Administration Moves to Regain Initiative on 9/11 ", New York Times, 8/27/04.
7. "Bush rejects Saddam 9/11 link", BBC News, 9/18/03.
8. "Cheney Link of Iraq, 9/11 Challenged",The Boston Globe 9/16/03.
 
... New Stats Show Bush's Deficit Dishonesty
07.29.04 (8:01 am)   [edit]
President Bush and Vice President Cheney have repeatedly promised America that they would get their record-deficits under control. Last year, President Bush said "My Administration firmly believes in controlling the deficit and reducing it."1 Similarly, Vice President Cheney said "I am a deficit hawk. So is the president."2 But according to congressional sources, the government is soon expected to project a record federal budget deficit, even as President Bush demands more money for war in Iraq3 , and a $1 trillion proposal for more tax cuts.4

The Associated Press reports the government will project "that this year's federal deficit will exceed $420 billion" - a record5. The President last year tried to deflect blame for the deficit, claiming that "This nation has got a deficit because we have been through a war.6 " While it is true that the President has spent more than $166 billion on the war,7 the statistics show that his failed economic policies and massive tax cuts for the wealthy are the largest factors contributing to the fiscal demise8. Even the White House budget director essentially acknowledged the President's dishonesty about the cause of the deficit, saying "even if we had never been attacked, and incurred no costs of war or recovery from September 11th, and no tax relief had become law, we still would have gone into deficit9."

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1. "The President's Budget Proposal," New York Times,2/04/03.
2. Transcript of Meet the Press, 9/14/03.
3. "Bush asks for $25 billion more for Iraq, Afghanistan ," CNN.com, 5/06/04.
4. "Bush wants tax cuts to stay," Washington Times, 1/20/04.
5. "White House to project record deficit," Seattle Post Intelligencer, 7/28/04.
6. President Discusses Plan for Economic Growth in Ohio, Whitehouse.gov, 4/28/03.
7. "$166 Billion and Counting",Mercury News 9/15/03.
8. "Deficit Picture Even Grimmer Than New CBO Projections Suggest",Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 8/26/03.
9. Testimony of Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr. Director of Office of Management and Budget Before House Ways and Means, Whitehouse.gov, 2/4-5/03.
 
------> New Stats Show Bush's Deficit Dishonesty ------>
07.29.04 (8:00 am)   [edit]
President Bush and Vice President Cheney have repeatedly promised America that they would get their record-deficits under control. Last year, President Bush said "My Administration firmly believes in controlling the deficit and reducing it."1 Similarly, Vice President Cheney said "I am a deficit hawk. So is the president."2 But according to congressional sources, the government is soon expected to project a record federal budget deficit, even as President Bush demands more money for war in Iraq3 , and a $1 trillion proposal for more tax cuts.4

The Associated Press reports the government will project "that this year's federal deficit will exceed $420 billion" - a record5. The President last year tried to deflect blame for the deficit, claiming that "This nation has got a deficit because we have been through a war.6 " While it is true that the President has spent more than $166 billion on the war,7 the statistics show that his failed economic policies and massive tax cuts for the wealthy are the largest factors contributing to the fiscal demise8. Even the White House budget director essentially acknowledged the President's dishonesty about the cause of the deficit, saying "even if we had never been attacked, and incurred no costs of war or recovery from September 11th, and no tax relief had become law, we still would have gone into deficit9."

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1. "The President's Budget Proposal," New York Times,2/04/03.
2. Transcript of Meet the Press, 9/14/03.
3. "Bush asks for $25 billion more for Iraq, Afghanistan ," CNN.com, 5/06/04.
4. "Bush wants tax cuts to stay," Washington Times, 1/20/04.
5. "White House to project record deficit," Seattle Post Intelligencer, 7/28/04.
6. President Discusses Plan for Economic Growth in Ohio, Whitehouse.gov, 4/28/03.
7. "$166 Billion and Counting",Mercury News 9/15/03.
8. "Deficit Picture Even Grimmer Than New CBO Projections Suggest",Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 8/26/03.
9. Testimony of Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr. Director of Office of Management and Budget Before House Ways and Means, Whitehouse.gov, 2/4-5/03.
 
The Un-Patriot Act and You ...
07.29.04 (7:55 am)   [edit]
=http://img33.photobucket.com/...

[u][b]Mother Jones[/b][/u], http://www.motherjones.com/ne...

[b]The corrupt Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] Un-American Patriot Act http://www.tblog.com/template... is a heinous violation of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights ...[/b] The traitorous Bush regime is systematically dismantling our Republic and their unprecedented secrecy is alarmingly dangerous and extremely destructive to our way of life ...

[u]Bush Administration Documents on Secrecy Policy ... c/o The Federation of American Scientists[/u]: http://www.tblog.com/template...

[u]A History of Refusing to Release Documents[/u]: http://www.tblog.com/template...

[b]9/11 Commission Report Takes on Patriot Act, Government Secrecy; ACLU Outlines Civil Liberties Problems With Cabinet-Level Spymaster[/b] - http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFr...

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

[b]Contact:[/b] Media@dcaclu.org ( mailto:Media@dcaclu.org )

[b]WASHINGTON - The official 9/11 Commission report, released today, takes aim at the USA Patriot Act and the excessive amount of official secrecy in the Bush administration.[/b]

"Regarding civil liberties, the 9/11 Commission report essentially says that the Justice Department and White House have not made a compelling case for either[b] the administration’s[i] obsession [/i]with secrecy or its Patriot Act[/b]," said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director. "This bipartisan report should serve as a wake-up call for Congress that it must maintain the sunsets in the Patriot Act."

[b]As the report states on page 394, "The burden of proof for retaining a particular governmental power should be on the executive, to explain (a) that the power actually materially enhances security and (b) that there is adequate supervision of the executive’s use of the powers to ensure protection of civil liberties. If the power is granted, there must be adequate guidelines and oversight to properly confine its use."[/b]

The long-awaited report, which contains the official findings of the independent commission investigating the 9/11 terrorism attacks, contains significant recommendations germane to the debate over civil liberties that has raged for more than two-and-a-half years now.

The report echoes criticisms by the ACLU and others that the Justice Department has so far failed to demonstrate why the expanded surveillance and investigative powers in the Patriot Act are needed to fight terrorism. The commission’s findings, the ACLU said, strongly confirm the need to maintain the Patriot Act sunsets.

The sunset provisions - which apply to some of the Patriot Act’s most controversial provisions - would require Congress to reconsider about a tenth of the law in December 2005. Provisions that sunset include the infamous "library records" provision, which reduces judicial review when counter-intelligence agents seek secret court orders for the production of a wide array of personal information, including library, business, genetic, medical and even gun purchase records.

[b]Notably, the commission does not recommend that any sunseted provisions should be made permanent.[/b]

In addition, the commission’s report contains a list of 10 separate missed "operational" opportunities to foil the attacks. While the report stops short of calling the attacks preventable, it clearly shows that the intelligence and law enforcement communities were not using their existing counter-terrorism powers to their fullest potential.

"The administration has yet to explain why it didn’t use its already expansive power to the fullest before 9/11," said Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "The commission’s report suggests that the White House claim that the worst parts of the Patriot Act are needed to stop terrorism is dubious, to say the least."

[b]The report also cites both excessive government secrecy and overclassification as threats to open government and, more notably, as threats to national security.[/b] The ACLU pointed to the finding as evidence that the government should stop stonewalling the series of Freedom of Information Act requests submitted by the ACLU and other civil liberties groups on the Patriot Act, the Abu Ghraib scandal and other matters of public interest.

Characterizing the current Congressional intelligence watchdog system as "dysfunctional," the commission’s strongest recommendation is the need for more aggressive Congressional oversight of the intelligence community, including making the intelligence budget public. The ACLU applauded the move but emphasized that the structure of the committee would be less important than whether its operation was in turn open to public scrutiny.

[b]As the report stated: "Secrecy stifles oversight, accountability and information sharing. Unfortunately, all the current organizational incentives encourage over-classification. This balance should change; and as a start, open information should be provided about the overall size of agency intelligence budgets."[/b]

Contrary to earlier reports, the commission explicitly rejects - in part, for civil liberties reasons - the creation of a domestic intelligence agency modeled after Britain’s MI-5. The ACLU, a critic of any domestic intelligence activity that is not linked to law enforcement, applauded the move.

Unfortunately, there are some recommendations that raise civil liberties concerns; two of the most salient are calls for the backdoor creation of national ID cards in the form of a standardized drivers licenses and a cabinet-level intelligence czar.

"A Senate-confirmed intelligence director sitting in the White House would be in the hip pocket of the president," Romero added.

The ACLU questioned whether pitting the FBI’s culture of case-oriented law enforcement against the CIA’s culture of covert, subversive operations, under one chief, would result in a further weakening of civil liberties protections in the FBI’s intelligence work. Similarly, if the new director were to have operational control over both domestic and foreign intelligence work - that is, real authority over both the FBI and the CIA - he or she could blur the lines between the agencies’ two very different missions.

[b]Finally, the ACLU expressed concern that if the director of national intelligence ends up controlling the purse strings of the entire intelligence community, there are very few contingencies that could keep the director from exercising specific, operational control over both domestic and foreign intelligence[/b].

[b]The 9-11 Commission's report can be found at: http://www.9-11commission.gov...

For more information, see: http://www.aclu.org/safeandfr...[/b]

[b]Courtesy of WinstonSmith http://winstonsmith.tblog.com... [/b]

 
9/11 Commission Report Takes on Bush/Cheney's Un-American Patriot Act ...
07.29.04 (7:53 am)   [edit]
[b]The corrupt Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] Un-American Patriot Act http://www.tblog.com/template... is a heinous violation of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights ...[/b] The traitorous Bush regime is systematically dismantling our Republic and their unprecedented secrecy is alarmingly dangerous and extremely destructive to our way of life ...

[u]Bush Administration Documents on Secrecy Policy ... c/o The Federation of American Scientists[/u]: http://www.tblog.com/template...

[u]A History of Refusing to Release Documents[/u]: http://www.tblog.com/template...

[b]9/11 Commission Report Takes on Patriot Act, Government Secrecy; ACLU Outlines Civil Liberties Problems With Cabinet-Level Spymaster[/b] - http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFr...

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

[b]Contact:[/b] Media@dcaclu.org ( mailto:Media@dcaclu.org )

[b]WASHINGTON - The official 9/11 Commission report, released today, takes aim at the USA Patriot Act and the excessive amount of official secrecy in the Bush administration.[/b]

"Regarding civil liberties, the 9/11 Commission report essentially says that the Justice Department and White House have not made a compelling case for either[b] the administration’s[i] obsession [/i]with secrecy or its Patriot Act[/b]," said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director. "This bipartisan report should serve as a wake-up call for Congress that it must maintain the sunsets in the Patriot Act."

[b]As the report states on page 394, "The burden of proof for retaining a particular governmental power should be on the executive, to explain (a) that the power actually materially enhances security and (b) that there is adequate supervision of the executive’s use of the powers to ensure protection of civil liberties. If the power is granted, there must be adequate guidelines and oversight to properly confine its use."[/b]

The long-awaited report, which contains the official findings of the independent commission investigating the 9/11 terrorism attacks, contains significant recommendations germane to the debate over civil liberties that has raged for more than two-and-a-half years now.

The report echoes criticisms by the ACLU and others that the Justice Department has so far failed to demonstrate why the expanded surveillance and investigative powers in the Patriot Act are needed to fight terrorism. The commission’s findings, the ACLU said, strongly confirm the need to maintain the Patriot Act sunsets.

The sunset provisions - which apply to some of the Patriot Act’s most controversial provisions - would require Congress to reconsider about a tenth of the law in December 2005. Provisions that sunset include the infamous "library records" provision, which reduces judicial review when counter-intelligence agents seek secret court orders for the production of a wide array of personal information, including library, business, genetic, medical and even gun purchase records.

[b]Notably, the commission does not recommend that any sunseted provisions should be made permanent.[/b]

In addition, the commission’s report contains a list of 10 separate missed "operational" opportunities to foil the attacks. While the report stops short of calling the attacks preventable, it clearly shows that the intelligence and law enforcement communities were not using their existing counter-terrorism powers to their fullest potential.

"The administration has yet to explain why it didn’t use its already expansive power to the fullest before 9/11," said Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "The commission’s report suggests that the White House claim that the worst parts of the Patriot Act are needed to stop terrorism is dubious, to say the least."

[b]The report also cites both excessive government secrecy and overclassification as threats to open government and, more notably, as threats to national security.[/b] The ACLU pointed to the finding as evidence that the government should stop stonewalling the series of Freedom of Information Act requests submitted by the ACLU and other civil liberties groups on the Patriot Act, the Abu Ghraib scandal and other matters of public interest.

Characterizing the current Congressional intelligence watchdog system as "dysfunctional," the commission’s strongest recommendation is the need for more aggressive Congressional oversight of the intelligence community, including making the intelligence budget public. The ACLU applauded the move but emphasized that the structure of the committee would be less important than whether its operation was in turn open to public scrutiny.

[b]As the report stated: "Secrecy stifles oversight, accountability and information sharing. Unfortunately, all the current organizational incentives encourage over-classification. This balance should change; and as a start, open information should be provided about the overall size of agency intelligence budgets."[/b]

Contrary to earlier reports, the commission explicitly rejects - in part, for civil liberties reasons - the creation of a domestic intelligence agency modeled after Britain’s MI-5. The ACLU, a critic of any domestic intelligence activity that is not linked to law enforcement, applauded the move.

Unfortunately, there are some recommendations that raise civil liberties concerns; two of the most salient are calls for the backdoor creation of national ID cards in the form of a standardized drivers licenses and a cabinet-level intelligence czar.

"A Senate-confirmed intelligence director sitting in the White House would be in the hip pocket of the president," Romero added.

The ACLU questioned whether pitting the FBI’s culture of case-oriented law enforcement against the CIA’s culture of covert, subversive operations, under one chief, would result in a further weakening of civil liberties protections in the FBI’s intelligence work. Similarly, if the new director were to have operational control over both domestic and foreign intelligence work - that is, real authority over both the FBI and the CIA - he or she could blur the lines between the agencies’ two very different missions.

[b]Finally, the ACLU expressed concern that if the director of national intelligence ends up controlling the purse strings of the entire intelligence community, there are very few contingencies that could keep the director from exercising specific, operational control over both domestic and foreign intelligence[/b].

[b]The 9-11 Commission's report can be found at: http://www.9-11commission.gov...

For more information, see: http://www.aclu.org/safeandfr...[/b]

[b]Courtesy of WinstonSmith http://winstonsmith.tblog.com... [/b]

 
Beware: The Patriot Act and You!!!
07.29.04 (7:51 am)   [edit]
=http://img33.photobucket.com/...

[u][b]Mother Jones[/b][/u], http://www.motherjones.com/ne...
 
Beware: The Patriot Act and You!!!
07.29.04 (7:48 am)   [edit]
=http://img33.photobucket.com/...

[u][b]Mother Jones[/b][/u], http://www.motherjones.com/ne...
 
9/11 Commission Report Takes on Bush/Cheney's Un-American Patriot Act ...
07.29.04 (7:46 am)   [edit]
[b]The corrupt Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] Un-American Patriot Act http://www.tblog.com/template... is a heinous violation of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights ...[/b] The traitorous Bush regime is systematically dismantling our Republic and their unprecedented secrecy is alarmingly dangerous and extremely destructive to our way of life ...

[u]Bush Administration Documents on Secrecy Policy ... c/o The Federation of American Scientists[/u]: http://www.tblog.com/template...

[u]A History of Refusing to Release Documents[/u]: http://www.tblog.com/template...

[b]9/11 Commission Report Takes on Patriot Act, Government Secrecy; ACLU Outlines Civil Liberties Problems With Cabinet-Level Spymaster[/b] - http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFr...

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

[b]Contact:[/b] Media@dcaclu.org ( mailto:Media@dcaclu.org )

[b]WASHINGTON - The official 9/11 Commission report, released today, takes aim at the USA Patriot Act and the excessive amount of official secrecy in the Bush administration.[/b]

"Regarding civil liberties, the 9/11 Commission report essentially says that the Justice Department and White House have not made a compelling case for either[b] the administration’s[i] obsession [/i]with secrecy or its Patriot Act[/b]," said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director. "This bipartisan report should serve as a wake-up call for Congress that it must maintain the sunsets in the Patriot Act."

[b]As the report states on page 394, "The burden of proof for retaining a particular governmental power should be on the executive, to explain (a) that the power actually materially enhances security and (b) that there is adequate supervision of the executive’s use of the powers to ensure protection of civil liberties. If the power is granted, there must be adequate guidelines and oversight to properly confine its use."[/b]

The long-awaited report, which contains the official findings of the independent commission investigating the 9/11 terrorism attacks, contains significant recommendations germane to the debate over civil liberties that has raged for more than two-and-a-half years now.

The report echoes criticisms by the ACLU and others that the Justice Department has so far failed to demonstrate why the expanded surveillance and investigative powers in the Patriot Act are needed to fight terrorism. The commission’s findings, the ACLU said, strongly confirm the need to maintain the Patriot Act sunsets.

The sunset provisions - which apply to some of the Patriot Act’s most controversial provisions - would require Congress to reconsider about a tenth of the law in December 2005. Provisions that sunset include the infamous "library records" provision, which reduces judicial review when counter-intelligence agents seek secret court orders for the production of a wide array of personal information, including library, business, genetic, medical and even gun purchase records.

[b]Notably, the commission does not recommend that any sunseted provisions should be made permanent.[/b]

In addition, the commission’s report contains a list of 10 separate missed "operational" opportunities to foil the attacks. While the report stops short of calling the attacks preventable, it clearly shows that the intelligence and law enforcement communities were not using their existing counter-terrorism powers to their fullest potential.

"The administration has yet to explain why it didn’t use its already expansive power to the fullest before 9/11," said Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "The commission’s report suggests that the White House claim that the worst parts of the Patriot Act are needed to stop terrorism is dubious, to say the least."

[b]The report also cites both excessive government secrecy and overclassification as threats to open government and, more notably, as threats to national security.[/b] The ACLU pointed to the finding as evidence that the government should stop stonewalling the series of Freedom of Information Act requests submitted by the ACLU and other civil liberties groups on the Patriot Act, the Abu Ghraib scandal and other matters of public interest.

Characterizing the current Congressional intelligence watchdog system as "dysfunctional," the commission’s strongest recommendation is the need for more aggressive Congressional oversight of the intelligence community, including making the intelligence budget public. The ACLU applauded the move but emphasized that the structure of the committee would be less important than whether its operation was in turn open to public scrutiny.

[b]As the report stated: "Secrecy stifles oversight, accountability and information sharing. Unfortunately, all the current organizational incentives encourage over-classification. This balance should change; and as a start, open information should be provided about the overall size of agency intelligence budgets."[/b]

Contrary to earlier reports, the commission explicitly rejects - in part, for civil liberties reasons - the creation of a domestic intelligence agency modeled after Britain’s MI-5. The ACLU, a critic of any domestic intelligence activity that is not linked to law enforcement, applauded the move.

Unfortunately, there are some recommendations that raise civil liberties concerns; two of the most salient are calls for the backdoor creation of national ID cards in the form of a standardized drivers licenses and a cabinet-level intelligence czar.

"A Senate-confirmed intelligence director sitting in the White House would be in the hip pocket of the president," Romero added.

The ACLU questioned whether pitting the FBI’s culture of case-oriented law enforcement against the CIA’s culture of covert, subversive operations, under one chief, would result in a further weakening of civil liberties protections in the FBI’s intelligence work. Similarly, if the new director were to have operational control over both domestic and foreign intelligence work - that is, real authority over both the FBI and the CIA - he or she could blur the lines between the agencies’ two very different missions.

[b]Finally, the ACLU expressed concern that if the director of national intelligence ends up controlling the purse strings of the entire intelligence community, there are very few contingencies that could keep the director from exercising specific, operational control over both domestic and foreign intelligence[/b].

[b]The 9-11 Commission's report can be found at: http://www.9-11commission.gov...

For more information, see: http://www.aclu.org/safeandfr...[/b]

[b]Courtesy of WinstonSmith http://winstonsmith.tblog.com... [/b]

 
John F. Kerry Is A War Hero ... Those Who Malign Him Should Be Ashamed Of Themselves ...
07.28.04 (5:28 pm)   [edit]
[b]The Reverend David Alston served with John F. Kerry in Vietnam and spoke at the Democratic National Convention. Read his speech on http://www.tblog.com/template... . Also take time to check-out "Veterans for Kerry-Edwards" on http://www.johnkerry.com/comm... .[/b]

Read "Three Reasons Why John F. Kerry Will Be A Better Commander-in-Chief Than Bush" on http://www.tblog.com/template...

Reports have been published showing that Bush was AWOL http://www.awolbush.com while partying and avoiding service even though all he had to do was show-up to [i]his "Champagne Brigade" party-unit [/i]that never was intended to face battle or go to war, but instead was designed to protect the brats of rich plutocrats with no sense of patriotic duty to our nation.

[b]Read:[/b]

AWOL Drunkard Not-A-Hero Bush Update: New Records Indicate Gap in Bush Military Service, http://www.tblog.com/template...

'You can't be a war president one day, a peace president the next', http://www.tblog.com/template...

Missing Records Prove Bush Was AWOL For 5 Months In 1972!!!, http://www.tblog.com/template...
 
AWOL Drunkard Not-A-Hero Bush Update: New Records Indicate Gap in Bush Military Service
07.28.04 (12:57 pm)   [edit]
[b]New Records Indicate Gap in Bush Military Service [/b]

Earlier this year, the White House released documents it said proved President Bush fulfilled his National Guard service during the Vietnam War. White House spokesman Scott McClellan at the time said the documents "means he served" and that there was no longer any question about whether the President actually showed up to fulfill his duty. But according to new records released late last week, Bush did not accumulate any flying hours at all for several months during 1972.

According to [i]Bloomberg[/i] news service, newly released computerized records provide no record of Bush's whereabouts between July 1972 and September 1972 when he was supposed to be serving in the Alabama National Guard.1 Earlier this month, the Pentagon said those documents had been "inadvertently destroyed."2

[i]The Associated Press [/i]is currently suing for the release of copies of all the records, which are legally required to exist at the Texas state archives.3 However, President Bush has refused to authorize their release, forcing [i]AP[/i] to invoke the Freedom of Information Act.

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1. "Bush Records Show No Flight Service During July-September '72," Bloomberg.com, 07/23/04.
2. "Bush Military Records Destroyed," CBSNEWS.com, 07/09/04.
3. "AP Sues for Access to Bush Guard Records," SunHerald.com, 06/22/04.
 
One Smart Man You Won't See at the Republican 'Rich Cronies Only' Fest: RONALD REAGAN JR.!!!
07.28.04 (9:13 am)   [edit]
[b]Democrats' Reagan coup[/b]

RONALD Reagan Jr, the son of one of the Republican Party's great heroes, stood before the Democratic Party faithful yesterday and urged their presidential candidate, John Kerry, on to victory.

Angered by the Bush Administration's religiously based restrictions on stem-cell research that could cure Alzheimer's disease, which was afflicting his father when he died, Mr Reagan said voters faced a clear choice.

"We can choose between the future and the past, between reason and ignorance, between true compassion and mere ideology," he said.

"It does not follow that the theology of a few should be allowed to forestall the health and wellbeing of the many."

He spoke at the Democratic National Convention, where Mr Bush's divisive policies and Iraq and the damage it had done to America's reputation dominated, despite the theme being Senator Kerry's "lifetime of strength and service".

Senator Kerry's wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, said her husband, as president, would not "mistake stubbornness for strength" and would make America "shining, hopeful, and bright once again".

Senator Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran, is polling well behind President George W. Bush on the pivotal issue of fighting terrorism, so his wife offered reassurance.

"John is a fighter. He earned his medals the old-fashioned way: by putting his life on the line for his country. No one will defend this nation more vigorously than he will, and he will always be first in the line of fire," she said.

"But he also knows the importance of getting it right.

"For him, the names of too many friends inscribed in the cold stone of the Vietnam Memorial testify to the awful toll exacted by leaders who mistake stubbornness for strength," she said.

The surprise yesterday was a little-known Senate aspirant and rising star, Barack Obama, the son of an African goat herder, who electrified the room by calling for an end to the darkness of the Bush years.

"When we send our young men and women into harm's way, we have a solemn obligation not to fudge the numbers or shade the truth about why they're going," he said.

Party patriarch Senator Ted Kennedy tore into Mr Bush for invading Iraq and "squandering the enormous goodwill" America enjoyed after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

He said in his four decades in politics, no poll was more urgent and important or carried more profound consequences.

"The only thing we have to fear is four more years of George W. Bush," he said.

Some of the most raucous applause came for the party's youngest campaigner.

Ilana Wexler, 12, told cheering delegates that Vice-President Dick Cheney's language should earn him some schoolroom-style discipline.

"Recently, the Vice-President used a really bad word," Illana said, referring to a profanity Mr Cheney recently hurled at an opponent in the Senate. "If I said that word, I would be put in a timeout. I think he should be in a long timeout."

Illana gained attention after she founded KidsforKerry.org, an online organisation of young people who are trying to rally support for the Democratic presidential hopeful, even though they're too young to vote.

She is trying to spread the message that children count, and has so far raised several thousand dollars for the Massachusetts senator. - http://www.heraldsun.news.com...,5478,10274341%255E663,00 .html
 
"Great Dumb Remarks Of American History":-- Bush's 9/11 Farce ...
07.28.04 (9:04 am)   [edit]
[b]Bush's 9/11 Farce [/b]

Back before Jonas Salk developed his polio vaccine in 1952, summer could be a bad time for America's children. The fear of polio often kept them indoors, away from the beach or out of the pool. So it came as something of a surprise when the government somehow ran out of the vaccine and the secretary of health, education and welfare, Oveta Culp Hobby, uttered one of the great dumb remarks of American history: "No one could have foreseen the public demand for the vaccine."

The spirit of Mrs. Hobby lives on in George W. Bush. Almost three years after the events of Sept. 11, 2001 -- the biggest intelligence failure in U.S. history -- and after his own administration went to war for reasons that did not exist, the president has ordered his crack staff to see which of the Sept. 11 commission's recommendations can be implemented fast and without congressional approval. Bush, you will recall, opposed the creation of the commission in the first place.

"We will move on all fronts very aggressively in the coming days and weeks," a presidential aide told reporters down at the Bush ranch in Crawford, Tex. "We're going to focus on all the recommendations and determine which ones can be done through executive branch action. The president said he wants this on a fast track."

This is Hobbyism at its most egregious. She, too, was a wealthy Texan, and maybe there is a kind of softheadedness that afflicts that state's more affluent citizens. But it takes a New York kind of chutzpah for Bush to suddenly announce he will do what he has put off doing for lo these past three years. In that time the president steadfastly stood by his team of jolly incompetents who, rather than explain what had gone wrong, merely slapped Bush on the back and bonded with him in a manly fashion. George Tenet stayed at the head of the CIA even after he had assured Bush that it was a "slam-dunk" that Iraq retained weapons of mass destruction.

Why the sudden alacrity? It's because the chairman and vice chairman of the Sept. 11 commission, Republican Thomas Kean and Democrat Lee Hamilton, have been all over the airwaves warning that another terrorist attack could be imminent and that the nation's intelligence apparatus, so obviously broken, has yet to be fixed. They recommended a host of measures, some of which -- improved border and port security, an integrated "watch list," etc. -- you would have thought would have been implemented on Sept. 12, 2001. Insistently, the commissioners recommended speed. To paraphrase: Lives are in danger and little is being done.

So dire is the situation that even Congress is threatening action. It will actually hold hearings in August and then, if the past is prologue, do nothing more. Very often this is the very best thing Congress can do for a grateful nation, but not in this case. Some serious work needs to be done -- more serious than campaigning or taking a vacation or, as is happening here, downing the canapes so kindly supplied by lobbyists. In fact, there is something a bit wacky about the Democratic Party taking a week to mount a meaningless Mardi Gras when the terrorism clock supposedly ticks closer to midnight.

Still, it is the president who runs the government. Now he suddenly discovers he is expected to do something about national security. He cannot be serious -- and rest assured he is not. The many months of inactivity in this area offer eloquent testimony to Bush's firm belief that little needs to be fixed. In the same way he could not answer earlier this year what mistakes he had made as president, he cannot even say what mistakes his government made that might have led to Sept. 11 and the debacle in Iraq.

Now we are engaged in a great farce. Outside my hotel room, a good piece of the nation's political talent is engaged in a purposeless convention to nominate a man who has already been nominated. And down in Crawford, the White House staff is dutifully feeding the press accounts of Bush's newfound concern about what ails the intelligence community and even -- imagine! -- that Bush took the Sept. 11 commission's report with him. From somewhere, Oveta Culp Hobby smiles. She is finally off the hook. - http://www.washingtonpost.com...
 
---> New Records Indicate Gap in Bush Military Service ... (Dubya was AWOL)!!!
07.28.04 (8:59 am)   [edit]
Earlier this year, the White House released documents it said proved President Bush fulfilled his National Guard service during the Vietnam War. White House spokesman Scott McClellan at the time said the documents "means he served" and that there was no longer any question about whether the President actually showed up to fulfill his duty. But according to new records released late last week, Bush did not accumulate any flying hours at all for several months during 1972.

According to [i]Bloomberg[/i] news service, newly released computerized records provide no record of Bush's whereabouts between July 1972 and September 1972 when he was supposed to be serving in the Alabama National Guard.1 Earlier this month, the Pentagon said those documents had been "inadvertently destroyed."2

[i]The Associated Press [/i]is currently suing for the release of copies of all the records, which are legally required to exist at the Texas state archives.3 However, President Bush has refused to authorize their release, forcing [i]AP[/i] to invoke the Freedom of Information Act.

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1. "Bush Records Show No Flight Service During July-September '72," Bloomberg.com, 07/23/04.
2. "Bush Military Records Destroyed," CBSNEWS.com, 07/09/04.
3. "AP Sues for Access to Bush Guard Records," SunHerald.com, 06/22/04.
 
---> New Records Indicate Gap in Bush Military Service ... (Dubya was AWOL)!!!
07.28.04 (8:56 am)   [edit]
Earlier this year, the White House released documents it said proved President Bush fulfilled his National Guard service during the Vietnam War. White House spokesman Scott McClellan at the time said the documents "means he served" and that there was no longer any question about whether the President actually showed up to fulfill his duty. But according to new records released late last week, Bush did not accumulate any flying hours at all for several months during 1972.

According to [i]Bloomberg[/i] news service, newly released computerized records provide no record of Bush's whereabouts between July 1972 and September 1972 when he was supposed to be serving in the Alabama National Guard.1 Earlier this month, the Pentagon said those documents had been "inadvertently destroyed."2

[i]The Associated Press [/i]is currently suing for the release of copies of all the records, which are legally required to exist at the Texas state archives.3 However, President Bush has refused to authorize their release, forcing [i]AP[/i] to invoke the Freedom of Information Act.

[b]Sources:[/b] - http://www.misleader.org/dail...

1.