Reason # 18,435 to hate Bush

[MTBME]

"NEW ORLEANS, Sept. 6, 2005 — In New Orleans, those in peril and those in power have pointed the finger squarely at the federal government for the delayed relief effort.

But experts say when natural disasters strike, it is the primary responsibility of state and local governments — not the federal government — to respond. "

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/HurricaneKatrina/story?id=1102467&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

[truckboy]

"NEW ORLEANS, Sept. 6, 2005 — In New Orleans, those in peril and those in power have pointed the finger squarely at the federal government for the delayed relief effort.

But experts say when natural disasters strike, it is the primary responsibility of state and local governments — not the federal government — to respond. "

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/HurricaneKatrina/story?id=1102467&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312



Same Article:

"If the city and the state are stumbling or in over their head, then it's FEMA's [Federal Emergency Management Agency's] responsibility to show some leadership," said Jerry Hauer, director of public health preparedness at the Department of Health and Human Services.

[kernel crash]

That's right. Lets face it. It would probably take about 24 hours to discover that the local authorities are in over their heads. That probably accounts for some of the delay from when the feds stepped in. Personally I though that Bush should have made his TV appearance / speach on Tuesday night not Wednesday. But the govenor had to make a call to Washington to ask for help. When did she do that? I'm sure that will all come out in the investigation in 2006 sometimes.

[TrailBate]

Yes, I'm sure the investigation will clear up everything. Just like it did for 9/11, Iraq, Abu Ghraib, and the current Plame investigation. ::)

There should be an investigation into why there has to be so many investigations.

[kernel crash]

Maybe this should be investigated.

"Fox News Channel's Major Garrett reported Wednesday that the Red Cross had "trucks with water, food, hygiene equipment, all sorts of things ready to go ... to the Superdome and Convention Center."

But the Louisiana Department of Homeland Security, Garrett said, "told them they could not go." "The Red Cross tells me that Louisiana's Department of Homeland Security said, 'Look, we do not want to create a magnet for more people to come to the Superdome or Convention Center, we want to get them out,'" he explained."

[TrailBate]

Just in case any of you were wondering where I was the other day.....

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Cheney_090805.wmv

They didn't rough me up too bad. They punch like a bunch of girls.

[truckboy]

Yeah, I heard something about that a couple days into the debacle but didn't catch who was ready and who kept them back, just that it happened.

[Rych]

Yes, I'm sure the investigation will clear up everything. Just like it did for 9/11, Iraq, Abu Ghraib, and the current Plame investigation. ::)

There should be an investigation into why there has to be so many investigations.


Does anyone really care about Abu Ghraib? The "torture" probably shouldn't have happened, but so what.

[Slider]

Yeah, I heard something about that a couple days into the debacle but didn't catch who was ready and who kept them back, just that it happened.


You still don't know. Remeber - this is Faux News. Mouthpiece and apologists for all the administration's crimes and mismangement.

Slider

[Slider]

Does anyone really care about Abu Ghraib? The "torture" probably shouldn't have happened, but so what.


Hmm, interesting approach. It works everywhere!

Does anyone really care about treason? It probably happened, but so what?
Does anyone really care about cutting funds for levees? So what?
Does anyone really care that the war is a disaster? So what?
The economy in a shambles? So what?

This is good. We no longer have to worry about anything. I feel better already.

Slider

[kernel crash]

"You still don't know. Remeber - this is Faux News. Mouthpiece and apologists for all the administration's crimes and mismangement."

Ah yes. I knew that was coming. Can you cite me any examples where Fox news was ever exposed for blatent lies and mis-information. You know, like Dan Rather and CBS news for example.

[Slider]

I don't have to go any further than the quote from the story. It said:

"The Red Cross tells me that Louisiana's Department of Homeland Security said, 'Look, we do not want to create a magnet for more people to come to the Superdome or Convention Center, we want to get them out,'" he explained."

Here's the problem. For this to be "Fair and Balanced". Faux would have to go directly to The Louisiana Dept. and get a quote from them. This is a fundamental journalistic principal, taught in any journalism course. Without info from the subject of the quote, the story is absolutely Unfair and Unbalanced. The other side of the story would literally balance it.

Slider

[TrailBate]

Bill O'really and Sean Hannjob lie every night. They are part of Fox news. The "regular" news just twists the facts, a la the "recruiters are exceeding the goals" story I had an argument on here about a week or so ago.

[kernel crash]

"Bill O'really and Sean Hannjob lie every night. "

That just might be the lamest thing you ever said here, and that's saying something.

[GeepNutt]

Type the word "failure" into the Google search engine and see what the first item to appear is.....

[TrailBate]

"Bill O'really and Sean Hannjob lie every night. "

That just might be the lamest thing you ever said here, and that's saying something.


because....?

[truckboy]

Type the word "failure" into the Google search engine and see what the first item to appear is.....


That's funny. I tried a few other words like criminal and disgusting but only Liar brought up anything similar. The #4 and #5 links for Liar are about Tony Blair and Bush, respectively.

[kernel crash]

"because....? "

You don't think that's a little over the top? They lie every night. You still can't cite me examples of where they have outright lied yet you say they lie EVERY night. You are so blinded at this point that you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you in the ass.

[TrailBate]

"because....? "

You don't think that's a little over the top? They lie every night. You still can't cite me examples of where they have outright lied yet you say they lie EVERY night. You are so blinded at this point that you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you in the ass.



yes, anytime I watch these bozo's, they lie. How about this one, it's one of my favorites: Fox news gave out the address of a family in California and said they had ties to the terrorist bombing in London. These poor people were harrassed, and had their homes vandalized. Turns out, Fox was wrong! Oops!

In one of these threads here, I listed almost every day a lie heard from O'really. Don't make me watch them again so I have to repeat myself.

[Slider]

The Faux news quote has other obvious problems, and is very representative of the quality of the journalism practiced there.

First, it is third hand info. "The Red Cross says Loiusiana says..." Any reputable news source would refuse to broacast this unverified rumor on that basis alone.

And he doesn't even cite name the third party source! The "Red Cross" is not a source. Who exactly at the Red Cross are we talking about? This kind of fake attribution itself would disqualify it for a "real" news organization, since it is an obvious cover for manufactured facts.

Slider

[kernel crash]

I will give Slider credit for being able to explain why he feels a certain way as opposed to just throwing out a bunch of over the top allegations.

[TrailBate]

I'm so jealous. :'(

[Mr_Cheeze]

You guys really ought to refrain from the constant attacks on Fox when you know, whether or not you would be willing to admit, that virtually the rest of the electronic media, save talk radio, is monopolized by those with leftist agendas. So I am not sure why those on the left have such a hardon for the fact that Fox is a news outlet for the right. Of course they are biased, but no more so than the New York Times, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, CNN, etc. The problem for Fox is because they are a conservative island in a sea of liberal media, they and their programs are easy targets. I don't know. Would you guys be happier if things went back to the way they used to be... an all encompassing left biased media? I'm glad for Rupert Murdoch! I don't care of Fox is mostly full of Bush rumpswabs... the biggest of which is that annoying little asswad, Hannity. They are at least trying to tip the media scales away from the left. If Fox is to be criticized of anything, it would have to be their unabashed sensationalism. But can you blame them?

Oh, I know that the lefties can... and do. No surprise there.

I think the most disturbing facet of the leftist agenda these days is that they seem to do nothing but bitch and moan and complain about Bush this, Republicans that, conservatives, yadda, yadda. Christ.

Yea... Christ too, for that matter.

While I sympathize with the left on the GW Bush score, because I agree that his Presidency has been pathetically inept; I tire greatly of their disdain for all things conservative. Most of these complainers have no solutions, just more criticism. George Bush got elected because the majority of the American swing vote was more turned off by the left's cynicism and negatism, which has been displayed by the very people with whom they are represented. John Kerry, Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy... don't you ever wonder why it is that most of America can't stand these people? They and their messages are shrill... just like the left and their constant griping.

Ah the irony. I gripe about the gripers. It just gets to me... all of this negativity. Rick Patino was correct, "... and it sucks!"

[TrailBate]

Even Ann Coulter proclaimed the conservatives "have the media now."

There is no Leftist media. Bush is a screw up. Period. Everytime the media goes after him, instead of blaming Bush, all the righty's blame the media. It's a load of dung. Bush is a liar and a criminal. Don't blame the media, blame Bush.

[truckboy]

Cheeze,
That's just so delusional. The Liberal Media is an invention of some right wing think tank and it's working wonderfully. It's ********. America is Left Leaning, at least according to the Constitution. How can people not see through this.

AAAAAAGGHHH!!!!!!

[Slider]

Of course they are biased, but no more so than the New York Times, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, CNN, etc.

All information, from any source, has bias. That's why things like first hand info and identification of sources are important in journalism - so the reader can place the news in proper perspective.

Faux ignores these priciples far more often that the media you cite. They don't present news, they present propaganda. At least NYTimes contains the info I need to qualify their stories. Faux relies on the gullibility of an uncritical audience to advance an agenda, ignoring all the rules of responsible journalism in doing so.

Remember the Jayson Blair thing at the Times? He lost his job, rightfully, due to his fabricatrions, and so did a respected and long-term editor at the paper. There were major revisions in editorial policy as well. At Faux, Bill O'Reilly regularly fabricates or misrepresents the truth, and he's their #1 boy. If you can't see the difference, then I can understand why you think the Times and Faux are in any way comparable.

Slider

[Mr_Cheeze]

And is it not further proof that the three predominant lefties who contribute here all believe that a) there is no media bias and b) FOX has the least integrity of them all. I guess Hillary was right... it's all a vast right wing conspiracy.

Loonies.

[TrailBate]

If there were media bias, you'd still be hearing about the Plame case, lack of WMD's, the Downing Street Memo, or why Bush, Cheney, Rice all continued their vacations for 4 days (more in Cheney's case) after the hurricane hit.

When Clinton was president, it was Lewinski, 24/7

I watched some of Hannjob and Colmes last night. Hannjob had a fill-in. He said the state of Louisiana deliberately prevented food deliveries to New Orleans because they wanted to starve the people out.

He then said how hypocritical liberals were because they didn't get upset that it took nearly a week to get help to the tsunami victims, but they're now enraged that it took "only a few days" to get help to New Orleans. He then said that during the great quake in San Francisco a hundred years ago, it took a week to get aid to them. He then blamed the media, saying that if there were cable news in 1900, everyone would have gotten pissed at the government over the lack of the San Fran response.

[kernel crash]

"He said the state of Louisiana deliberately prevented food deliveries to New Orleans"

Actually that refers to the same comment I made on this post a few days ago, that the governors office, stopped food etc, from going to the superdome and the convention center because they wanted to get the people out of there.

Some on this forum discounted that statement because it was alleged to be heresay and from Fox news. I have since heard that same report, on several other news channels. In one example there was a round table discussion, with Democrats and Republicans, making references to that same information, that nobody at the table disputed. I got the idea that nobody was disputing that that really happened. So chalk one up for Fox news for being out front on that story.

[Slider]

And is it not further proof that the three predominant lefties who contribute here all believe that a) there is no media bias and b) FOX has the least integrity of them all. I guess Hillary was right... it's all a vast right wing conspiracy.

Loonies.


And you get this despite my saying that ALL information is biased?

Nice dance around the point, which was the way the information is delivered is more important than the content. I'll say it again: Use of proper citation, verification and quotation is the only way to report anything, since that allows the audience to qualify the content.

Without those things, we're left with the likes of Matt Drudge and Fox for delivery if info.

Slider

[Slider]

"He said the state of Louisiana deliberately prevented food deliveries to New Orleans"

Actually that refers to the same comment I made on this post a few days ago, that the governors office, stopped food etc, from going to the superdome and the convention center because they wanted to get the people out of there.

Some on this forum discounted that statement because it was alleged to be heresay and from Fox news. I have since heard that same report, on several other news channels. In one example there was a round table discussion, with Democrats and Republicans, making references to that same information, that nobody at the table disputed. I got the idea that nobody was disputing that that really happened. So chalk one up for Fox news for being out front on that story.


You see, Kernel, we still don't have the info to make that judgement. Got a quote from the Governor's office, or the local Homeland office showing who said it? For all we know, your round table was a bunch of morons who didn't bother to authenticate the facts in the first place. There's no substutution for accurtate citation, no matter who is failing to provide it. So far, we have rumor based on rumor.

I am not saying it didn't happen, just that we don't have anything reliable to go on yet.

Slider

[TrailBate]

Kernel also omitted the last part of the quote. How convenient.

[truckboy]

I didn't say it was hearsay, just that I didn't catch the Players' names. It's now being reported on that most fair of outlets, NPR.


Look, I'm not a Lefty (well actually I am, but which hand I write with has nothing to do with this! besides, it makes me "right brained"). It just sickens me to read the stuff that gets regurgitated on these threads. It's not a conspiracy. Nobody's meeting in dark alleys. But for God's sake can't you see what they do? It's so obvious.

They repeat the same **** over and over and over again until Joe Shmoe has no choice but to think it must have some merit. Now they have their foot in the door and somebody has to dispute it. Suddenly it's a valid point of view. That's how the term "Liberal Media" came into existence in the first place. That's how Gore got labeled a liar, Kerry and Clinton wafflers. And they do it with such conviction and repetition, and they all say the same things, use the same buzzwords until the real media HAVE to address it or risk looking like they're out of the loop. Now we have reputable news orgs trying to be truly balanced, and they have to give equal coverage to the truth, and to the made-up crap, and if they debunk it, they're Liberal (which, by the same process has become a bad word). It's the most dirty and disgusting thing I have ever witnessed and it enrages me to watch it happen and have these arguments with erstwhile intelligent, thoughtful people. It is weakening this country as much as all the poorly run social programs, fast food, drugs, teen pregnancy, violence on TV, video games, guns AND freriders combined. When the news becomes propaganda, how far away are "work" camps?

Cheeze, you're the loony. They've got the wool pulled over your eyes. They're peddeling a powerful drug and you're hooked. You're like an addict, defending and fighting for his junk. Take the "easy answer from Fox" needle out and smell the reality.

That was Fun!

[Mr_Cheeze]

I don't know. Did we or did we not all imagine the various scandals that emerged last year from CBS and Newsweek? Do you really think that Dan Rather was just the exception? That CBS News has always been forthright in their sincere attempt to present the news right down the proverbial middle? Sure they have. And Newsweek wasn't so willing to find something... ANYTHING they could to discredit Bush that they screwed up, not once, but twice with bogus reports?

Those must only be two extreme examples of liberal media bias. The New York Times (parent complany of the Boston Globe, et. al), considered THE premier newspaper of record in the US. You want to tell me that they aren't biased, truckboy? They define media bias. And let's not forget that their so-called integrity has been brought into serious question over the last few years with some shoddy reporting.

My point is the same as before. Fox is out there alone and an easy target. Using your own login, truckboy, you could say the same about the media, constantly denying they have a left leaning agenda. They say it enough, people will start to believe it, especially the liberals!

I guess it all depends what color glassed you are looking though. Try a neutral lens one of these days.

[kernel crash]

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin

"How do resources get stacked up outside the city of New Orleans and they don’t make their way in? How do you not bring one piece of ice?"

Eventually we'll know who was responsible for this but there shouldn't be much doubt that this happened.


And speaking of the Boston Globe and their zeal to get Bush, let us not forget the photos published of American GI's raping Iraqi women that turned out to be quite fake. I bet they did a lot of checking before they went to press on that one.

[truckboy]

I thought we already knew that it was the state government that kept supplies out. I never disputed that it happened. In fact I wanted to use it as evidence that FEMA F'd up, but wasn't sure it was them, so I kept quiet until I heard more.

Cheeze,
The difference between all those pieces of evidence of an Anti-Bush bias (which, by the way is NOT the same as the "Liberal Media" myth) is that those news people made mistakes in reporting, and the Fox people don't report anything. It's all opinion, made to look like and labeled news.

They don't look for evidence of corruption or ineptitude, they just say "The Emperor's clothes are beautiful", "His opponent is constipated" seven times in a half hour "news" show. Then Ann coulter picks up on it and writes about the Constipation Conflagration, then Rush Limbozo screams it across the airwaves to the hungry addicts over the course of a week and it becomes something that has to be defended against, or on the opposite end it becomes a valid defense for W, or Cheney, or Rove.

It is the duty of the news media to keep the politicians on their toes, not to defend one side and vilify the other. I'm sure that if you wanted to you could come up with as many pieces of evidence of what I call "real" media outlets reporting on Clinton scandals and getting it wrong in their zeal for a story.

[FriedRys]

I'm kinda of the mind that media is not made up of "Left" or "Right" bias so much as every reporter out there wants their own Watergate. When Clinton was in, the media was happy to rip him up given half a chance. Reporters used to be happy to be the guy who got the story first, now they want to be the story. Self-perpetuating Celebrity Whores, my new name for the media.

[Mr_Cheeze]

Except that most of media still loved Clinton, for all of his indescretions. His scandal involved sex, and what sells bigger than that? Their zeal in chasing the Lewinski story was the classic, "Hey, nothing personal Bubba, but we'z gotta do what we'z gotta do." With Bush, it's personal. Ever since that 2000 election. I'm telling you that they and the lefties still cannot get over it.

Personally, I am almost coming fully around to the anti-Bush side of the argument, seeing Bush for the bad president, or worse, that he is. I wouldn't be disappointed to see some impeachment hearings take place.

[Slider]

Personally, I am almost coming fully around to the anti-Bush side of the argument, seeing Bush for the bad president, or worse, that he is. I wouldn't be disappointed to see some impeachment hearings take place.


If the "liberal media" has been trashing Bush out of bias, and you now admit he sucks, wasn't that bias really insight all along?

Slider

[TrailBate]

Sean Hannity just said Bush has spent more money on the New Orleans levees than any other president. I'd LOVE to see where he got that from. Actually, I don't really want to see his ass...

anyway...

Liberal media bias is a load of crap. We have an administration that pre-packages news stories, then hands them off for free to television networks, who then air them without telling you it's government fabricated news. ie, propaganda. Then Bush holds fake town hall meetings, deliberately keeps out democrats, keeps protestors as far away from any public appearance as possible. Then the Right hand out their talking points that all the bush-bots repeat verbatim. Anyone who goes against any of this is "liberally biased."

I heard more about the Swift Vote liars for Truth, than I heard about just about any other topic during the last election. Gore was accused of claiming he invented the internet, which he never claimed.

Face it, bush has created the worst federal deficit ever, he started a war based, at best, on extremely flimsy evidence, he has no idea how to get out of Iraq, the whole Schiavo thing was stupid, he ignored 9/11 warnings, he ignored the Katrina disaster, we have the downing street memos, the list goes on.

There is no media bias, Bush is just a complete screw up and a criminal.

[Mr_Cheeze]

Read it and weep. Everything you guys supposedly like, lots of neat data to back up assertions. Have fun trying to pick this one apart. http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/welcome.asp

[Slider]

Despite all the grand phrasing and use of data, nothing in the story shows bias in coverage. How someone votes, or aligns themselves politically does not indicate bias in coverage by that person. Polls of the US readership can't show bias. Not even polls of journalists can show bias. In fact, if there is bias, a poll should show otherwise, since that bias would have colored the reader's opinion, right?

Polls can indicate that some think there is bias, but only analysis of the content and reporting methodology itself can show whether a given story is biased. The only way to show bias is to take a given story and show where it fails to follow journalistic standards. That is very, very easy with most of the Fox stories I have bothered to follow.

Seems to me that the polls included show that journalists are simply smarter than most of us.

Slider

[TrailBate]

Have you guys checked out the home page of mediaresearch? Very revealing. The front page articles are all complaints about the "liberal media."

It's totally a right wing website.

excerpts from the front page articles:

"ABC's George Stephanopoulos blamed the Katrina relief action on the federal government, not local and state officials, and played the race-hustler, relaying the left-wing line that racism explains the spotty disaster response"

"After the storm and the slowness in getting relief to survivors, liberal journalists pointed an accusing finger at everything liberals griped about before Katrina: "

"Check out the most up-to-date information and examples of liberal media bias in the coverage of the Senate hearings for Supreme Court nominee John Roberts"

"In contrast, journalists showed no similar desire for neutrality in covering this disaster -- and many media critics praised the "activism" and "passion" of TV's Bush-bashing coverage. "



yeah, I'll believe a right wing website about left wing bias ::)

[TrailBate]

I don't know. Did we or did we not all imagine the various scandals that emerged last year from CBS and Newsweek? Do you really think that Dan Rather was just the exception? That CBS News has always been forthright in their sincere attempt to present the news right down the proverbial middle? Sure they have. And Newsweek wasn't so willing to find something... ANYTHING they could to discredit Bush that they screwed up, not once, but twice with bogus reports?

Those must only be two extreme examples of liberal media bias. The New York Times (parent complany of the Boston Globe, et. al), considered THE premier newspaper of record in the US. You want to tell me that they aren't biased, truckboy? They define media bias. And let's not forget that their so-called integrity has been brought into serious question over the last few years with some shoddy reporting.

My point is the same as before. Fox is out there alone and an easy target. Using your own login, truckboy, you could say the same about the media, constantly denying they have a left leaning agenda. They say it enough, people will start to believe it, especially the liberals!

I guess it all depends what color glassed you are looking though. Try a neutral lens one of these days.



Who has been caught in more lies? Bush, Fox, or CBS? Newsweek's story turned out to be true, btw....

[Mr_Cheeze]

yeah, I'll believe a right wing website about left wing bias ::)


And yet, how often have you relied upon this bastion of fair reporting? http://mediamatters.org/ I recall seeing references to material from this site on here on several occasions. If nothing else, they are a counterbalance to each other.

The thing is, I realized up front the bias of the website that posted that article. (I fully expected this reply, but their point is just. Ones political alliance is almost assuredly, at some point, going to skew ones judgement concerning what, where, when and how something is reported. Its human nature. Most telling are the quotes down towards the bottom by liberal media members who readily admit the lopsidedness of partisanship in their profession.

I'm not sure why you seem to be so taken aback by the allusion to the fact of media bias. It's there and has been for along time. You just happen to agree with most of it, so you defend it.

[Rych]

Does anyone know what happens to the expended batteries from hybrid cars?

[TrailBate]

yeah, I'll believe a right wing website about left wing bias ::)


And yet, how often have you relied upon this bastion of fair reporting? http://mediamatters.org/ I recall seeing references to material from this site on here on several occasions. If nothing else, they are a counterbalance to each other.

The thing is, I realized up front the bias of the website that posted that article. (I fully expected this reply, but their point is just. Ones political alliance is almost assuredly, at some point, going to skew ones judgement concerning what, where, when and how something is reported. Its human nature. Most telling are the quotes down towards the bottom by liberal media members who readily admit the lopsidedness of partisanship in their profession.

I'm not sure why you seem to be so taken aback by the allusion to the fact of media bias. It's there and has been for along time. You just happen to agree with most of it, so you defend it.



there are obvious single entities out there that are liberal bias. But to say that media, as a whole, is liberally biased, is just wrong. That's also not how the "liberal bias" label is used. It's used by righty's as an excuse for anything that does not fit their agenda.

They don't just say "oh, that NY Times is liberally biased", they say, "oh, everyone hates Bush because the media is liberally biased." "the war is unpopular because of the media bias", "Bush's social security plan is unpopular because of the liberal media."

The media is being used as the Right's excuse for anything that has gone wrong with this administration, which is everything.

[TrailBate]

Does anyone know what happens to the expended batteries from hybrid cars?


if you plant them, they grow into windmills?

[truckboy]

Except that most of media still loved Clinton, for all of his indescretions. His scandal involved sex, and what sells bigger than that? Their zeal in chasing the Lewinski story was the classic, "Hey, nothing personal Bubba, but we'z gotta do what we'z gotta do." With Bush, it's personal. Ever since that 2000 election. I'm telling you that they and the lefties still cannot get over it.

Personally, I am almost coming fully around to the anti-Bush side of the argument, seeing Bush for the bad president, or worse, that he is. I wouldn't be disappointed to see some impeachment hearings take place.


I'm speechless. Well, not really, but surprised to read THAT. What should Bush be impeached for? Can't get him for disallowing Black votes in Florida in 2000 - he wasn't Prez yet. How about lying about WMD's? Probably not that one specifically, 'cuz he can just say he was going with the info he had at the time. They'd have to prove that he had an agenda of invading Iraq before 9/11 and outright forced the CIA to give him the findings he needed to convince Congress to invade. So far he and his boys have been able to dodge every bullet.

I hate Bush. That bias makes it tough for me to see bias in the media orgs who go after him for stuff I think he should be held accountable for. It all looks legit to me. The way I see it, there are real illegal, dishonest and immoral behaviors being acted out by Bush and the GOP that are germane
(I had to look that one up...http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=germane)
to the presidency. Things like lying to the American public and Congress about WMD's, like illegally denying legit Black taxpayers to vote in key districts, like appointing campaign managers and advance people to FEMA posts, like not having a plan for the Peace in Iraq, like passing a tax break for the richest 2% of the country.

I think maybe the media does have a hardon for Bush, and rightly so. Because he's dirty. It's only due to his extremely wily Right-Wing propagandists and dirty fighting smearists that he's been able to avoid being pinned down and made to answer thus far, not due to any news organiztion making it up . They may have jumped the gun when they found something they thougt was legit, but they didn't make anything up. That's the difference between the 95% of the media which has been called "Liberal" and the 5% which is doing the smearing...I mean calling the 95% "Liberal".

Clinton on the other hand was accused of dirty dealings in whitewater - not germane to presidency - and getting a hummer in the Oval Office. No soldiers or civilians died because of that. No relations with other countries was damaged due to that. He did his job as president and represented the majority of us, not the richest 2%. He didn't use the office to rob from the poor to give to the rich. At least I don't recall any scandals as such.

[Rych]

Does anyone know what happens to the expended batteries from hybrid cars?


if you plant them, they grow into windmills?
The hybrid battery packs are designed to last for the lifetime of the vehicle, somewhere between 150,000 and 200,000 miles, probably a whole lot longer. The warranty covers the batteries for between eight and ten years, depending on the car maker.

Hybrids use NiMH batteries, not the environmentally problematic rechargeable nickel cadmium. "Nickel metal hydride batteries are benign. They can be fully recycled," says Ron Cogan, editor of the Green Car Journal. Toyota and Honda say that they will recycle dead batteries and that disposal will pose no toxic hazards. Toyota puts a phone number on each battery, and they pay a $200 "bounty" for each battery to help ensure that it will be properly recycled.

There's no definitive word on replacement costs because they are almost never replaced. According to Toyota, since the Prius first went on sale in 2000, they have not replaced a single battery for wear and tear.

[TrailBate]

That's good to hear. Where did you get that? Last I heard, those batteries were a big environmental problem.

[Rych]

That's good to hear. Where did you get that? Last I heard, those batteries were a big environmental problem.


http://www.hybridcars.com/faq.html

[truckboy]

Allright, I'd rather argue about Bush and the media, and this doesn't belong in the "I hate Bush" thread, but I have an interest in hybrids too.

I'd like to know how well the Highlander and Escape models did this year. I want a SUV hybrid, but was not willing to pay a huge amount of money for the first generation. Plus I don't think they did all that well in terms of mileage (bigger, heavier). And I resent paying 5 grand extra even with the tax breaks. I figure waiting at least one more year is best for me.

If anybody has a link to ratings on performance and satisfaction I'd be interested.

[catbbq]

I recently sold my car and was looking to go back to a SUV. I wanted a hybrid, but according the research (don't know exact sites, but started at cars.com) there isn't much benefit.

Also looked at diesel options, but again, not any good solutions. Jeep has a Liberty diesel, but it still only gets 26 mpg. I get that in the Honda Element I decided on.

I used to get 30+ mpg in my Geo Tracker, but not sure it that is still the case since Chevy took over. And it is smaller than most people want. But I could push snow with the grill, so it suited me.

[Mr_Cheeze]

Here is an excellent article by Brian Riedl of the Heritage Foundation, a real conservative group: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/wm839.cfm

Be sure to check out the various hyperlinks within the article outlining the specific areas of pork projects.

This is just further proof that there is not much difference between the two major parties anymore. This idea that Republicans are for lesser government and more personal freedom is a big, fat myth. All the more reason to seriously consider third party alternatives.

[TrailBate]

Plus the Republicans are blaming the Louisiana governor for not handing over the Guard to the Feds a while ago. That sounds like bigger government to me, too.

Of course, you don't get much bigger than the Terri Schiavo case......



In other news:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/09/15/iran.nuclear/index.html


So, we invaded Iraq to prevent the spread of nukes (which they didn't have (that may be news to Bush supporters)), yet N Korea, Pakistan, and so far, Iran, are spreading it like a hooker with VD.

"Not on my watch"

George W, about the spread of nuclear technology.

[Skeg]

Plus the Republicans are blaming the Louisiana governor for not handing over the Guard to the Feds a while ago.

It seems to me like the governor took responsibility:

"We all know that there were failures at every level of government: state, federal and local. At the state level, we must take a careful look at what went wrong and make sure it never happens again. The buck stops here, and as your governor, I take full responsibility," Blanco told lawmakers in a special meeting of the Louisiana Legislature.

here's the link, just copy and paste it.

ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBK1FAAMDE.html

Check me out, I even included a link, you love that don't you. ;D

[TrailBate]

what?! I have to COPY and PASTE?!

[TrailBate]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/15/bush.ranch.ap/index.html

It's after the fact, so it doesn't really matter too much. But it's just another step for the Right in banning any anti-Bush sentiment.

[Slider]

Does that trump Bush's previous admission of responsibility?

Just tryng to sort things out here. Lessee....

Bush: I'm the one responsible!!!
Blanco: No, I am responsible. No Republican can out responsible me on this one.
Bush: Well, I AM the president. I see your responsible and raise one incompetence.
Blanco: Yeah???? I see that incompetence, and now I am playing the race card!!!!
Bush: You can't play the race card. I ALREADY played the race card. You're cheating!
Blanco: Am not.
Bush: Are too. Besides, I'm tired of this. I'm going on vacation, and sending the rest of the National Guard to Iraq. Just try and stop me.

Slider

[Skeg]

that's good stuff there Slider, you got me to laugh out loud at work. 8)

[truckboy]

Mister Cheeze you are correct. The Bush Admin. hides behind "tax and Spend Democrat" and increases deficit spending. Who knows how poorly Gore or Kerry would be doing if they managed to scare people out of voting for Bush? No better I suspect. Still, I mistrust them less. I figure they'd be effing up as much, but not lying quite as much.

[TrailBate]

Hmmm, wasn't it Democrats that left Bush W with a budget SURPLUS?

this "tax and spend" label no longer applies to democrats.

Now you have the "spend and spend" Republicans.

[Mr_Cheeze]

this "tax and spend" label no longer applies to democrats.




Sure it does. Democrat legislators across the board still feel that disproportionate taxing of the rich is justified, even if unconstitutional. Need more money for education? health care? drugs for the elderly? tuition subsidies? Lots of other wasteful stuff? Tax the rich! Socialists.

Our government is so full of waste. It has been for a long, long time. These politicians perpetuate their own perceptions of necessity. I believe our government could run on a mere fraction of the revenue they steal from us now.

[Rych]

Just fix it.


http://www.fairtax.org/

[TrailBate]

this "tax and spend" label no longer applies to democrats.




Sure it does. Democrat legislators across the board still feel that disproportionate taxing of the rich is justified, even if unconstitutional. Need more money for education? health care? drugs for the elderly? tuition subsidies? Lots of other wasteful stuff? Tax the rich! Socialists.

Our government is so full of waste. It has been for a long, long time. These politicians perpetuate their own perceptions of necessity. I believe our government could run on a mere fraction of the revenue they steal from us now.






as opposed to the Republicans, who believe you Don't need health care, or an education, or an environment, but we need other wasteful spending and foreign invasions, and lead in your drinking water wont' kill you.

[truckboy]

They both suck. The problem is, a third party lends power to the established party it is least similar to, by taking votes away from the one it's closer to. What we need is another Pat Buchannan and Ross Perrot to steal votes from the Evil Empire, and Nader to take votes from the Limpdick Dems. Who knows, maybe 2008 will be the year that a 3rd party can gain a foothold. If Republican voters are disenchanted enough with Bush, Rove and the insane neocons, but not enough to vote Democrat, maybe a conservative reformer could make some headway.
I'm not holding my breath.

[Rych]

So if Bush is to blame for the deaths in N.O. then who so we blame for these deaths?

In the summer of 1995 there was a week-long heat wave in Chicago. Over 700 people died.


Who was the president at this time? He must be the one to blame.

[truckboy]

Man, you really dug deep for that one.

The first things that come to mind are:

Was a State of Emergency declared?
Was an evacuation order made?
Were any Federal agencies lax in their response if requested?
Did any appointed heads of such agencies resign after being removed from the site?

Just thinking out loud of the possible dissimilarities.

[kernel crash]

"Hmmm, wasn't it Democrats that left Bush W with a budget SURPLUS?"

Trailbait. I'll spell it out real slow so you can understand it. That surplus was before 9/11. Before Homeland Security. Before Afganistan. Before Iraq. Now well before Katrina. That surplus would be gone no matter who was president. Get It?

[Mr_Cheeze]

as opposed to the Republicans, who believe you Don't need health care, or an education, or an environment, but we need other wasteful spending and foreign invasions, and lead in your drinking water wont' kill you.


You are wrong again. These are the NEW Republicans. Big government, big spending, big military, big business. Why should they allow the pesky environment to get in their way?

Besides all of that, where is it the government's business to provide health care when most of the US population is as ignorant about their health as the Republicans are about the environment? Why should my taxes go towards people's bad habits causing them coronary, lung, and liver diease as well as diabetes? People should be given the incentive to stay healthy, not be lulled into ignorance knowing the government will take care of them when they have their first heart attack at 53.

[TrailBate]

I would think the "culture of life" would care about people, including children and infants, dying for lack of proper health care, just as much as they care about abortions.

but they don't. Why? Fixing health care costs money. Banning abortions doesn't. It's only the "culture of life" if it doesn't cost them money.

[Mr_Cheeze]

I would think the "culture of life" would care about people, including children and infants, dying for lack of proper health care, just as much as they care about abortions.

but they don't. Why? Fixing health care costs money. Banning abortions doesn't. It's only the "culture of life" if it doesn't cost them money.


Sure, but I still have big issue with this concept of national health care. In an ideal world where truly helpless people are in need of care and abuse is preventable, ok. But in today's culture, with today's wasteful government, it won't work... not by a longshot. Not until people are given the incentive to practice preventative health maintenance, and not indulge now, let my health insurance fix me later. This concept is another Democrat sounds-good-on-the-surface-but-doomed-to-fail socialist program that will surely raise the federal tax rate to new, grossly exorbitant heights. There are far more important issues facing this country.

You know why healthcare needs fixing? Because the pharmaceutical companies, doctors and insurance companies all have a symbiotic relationship where they feed off each other to keep the docs and ceo's nice and rich, living off of the lifestyles of the self indulgent, obese and unhealthy Americans (and illegal non-Americans to boot). Ever look at one of your doctor's bills that gets sent to the insurance company? That's all the explanation you need for why healthcare is broken.

[truckboy]

I don't think doctors are making out in the current setup. The HMOs and other insurance companies are seeing to that.

[TrailBate]

You know why healthcare needs fixing? Because the pharmaceutical companies, doctors and insurance companies all have a symbiotic relationship where they feed off each other to keep the docs and ceo's nice and rich, living off of the lifestyles of the self indulgent, obese and unhealthy Americans (and illegal non-Americans to boot). Ever look at one of your doctor's bills that gets sent to the insurance company? That's all the explanation you need for why healthcare is broken.



I agree. But isn't fixing this ALSO socialist? What is government for? Protecting corporations, or the little people?

[Mr_Cheeze]

Technically, there is no real socialism in the US. That would mean government ownership of the entities of production. The invocation of that term these days is used more or less as describing any program that relies upon tax revenue to produce social programs, such as welfare or medicare. That being said, it would not necessarily be socialist for the government to attempt to fix the fundamental problems with healthcare if they can do so without demanding more revenue. I think they need to step it up with public awareness campaigns, using science and medicine to show that there is a direct relationship between health and healthcare costs. But it is going to take a real political maverick to shun the gobs of money offered by the insurance and drug lobbyists to forward such a measure. And hence, we have the other half of the problem, politicians on the dole.

I mean, just look at Ted Kennedy.
http://www.federalobserver.com/content_images/article_fat_ted_feeding_tube.jpg11127175362708.jpg
Yes that is really him. Do you expect that glob of **** to fix healthcare?

[TrailBate]

He's not fat, he's big boned! (or 9 months pregnant with triplets)

Get that man a Bro! (or a man-ssiere)

[truckboy]

Politicians who ignore the gobs of money don't get very far, maverick or conventional. That's the root of the problem. Add to it the current Republican theme of attacking science when it suits them (evolution, global warming) (thank you NPR) and you see why I don't expect healthcare to be fixed any time soon. Meanwhile, we DO have the best hospitals in the world right here in NE's biggest city. Too bad we and our doctors have to stand on our heads to prove we need the care.

[Mr_Cheeze]

The funniest thing about that picture is the orange cone warning drivers of this road hazard that is fat teddy.

[Rych]

Nice tits Ted.

[truckboy]

Come on you Retards, start arguing!

[TrailBate]

Where was Rove when he needed him most?

[MissJean]

Hey, cut the guy some slack. He's so busy working hard at his hard work that he dosen't have time to rebutton.

[Rych]

Where was Rove when he needed him most?


At least his fly was up, unlike Slick Willie's

[TrailBate]

*yawn*

is that the best you can come up with? Bush has outed a CIA agent, lied to start a war, a war that has killed nearly 2,000 americans, stayed on vacation while New Orleans was being flooded, yet all you can still come up with is Clinton's bj?

[kernel crash]

"lied to start a war,"

I guess that means Hillary and John Kerry also lied about the WMD's. After all, they were right there with the president on that issue.

[TrailBate]

"lied to start a war,"

I guess that means Hillary and John Kerry also lied about the WMD's. After all, they were right there with the president on that issue.




Where were they getting their intelligence info from?

[kernel crash]

Wasn't Kerry on the Senate Intellegence Committee???

[Mr_Cheeze]

The real question is, what really happened to the former spouses of Carol and Mike Brady? Did they die? Were they (say it isn't so) divorced?

Here is another. Mike was the bread winner as an architect. Alice did pretty much everything in the house, from cooking to cleaning to scrubbing the skid marks off of lots of tighty whities. (I'm assuming they all took craps, though you never saw a single toilet. ) Carol did not work, so.... what did she do exactly? You know, I cannot seem to remember her doing anything except just being there lying in bed next to her hubby. So basically she was just a whore?

[Slider]

This only came out several years later, and I can now tell the story without fear of being charged for treason.

Alice was an undercover CIA agent, responsible for a network of spies working in Betty Crocker factories throughout the US. At the time, there was a rumor that Betty Crocker was an operative for the very young Saddam Hussain, and that the factories were actually producing yellow cake uranium, cleverly packaged in baking mixes. These were being distributed to Muslims throughout the US, who were to assemble several dirty bombs, and detonate them at many locations around the country. Note that this was many years before we learned that all Muslims are evil, and deserve to be tortured.

George senior was the head of the investigation team, and he gave Alice the role of uranium tester. She would open thousands of boxes in her never-ending search for the deadly powder. Sad to say, she died not long after the show was taken off the air, reportedly of cancer, but you never really know.

George senior, as we now know, went on to head the CIA and later became president. No one knows where he got the wild idea that Betty Crocker was producing weapons of mass destruction, but everyone does know that the cakes all tasted just a little weird, and that cancer is now rampant in the US.

Coincidence or conspiracy? You decide.

Slider

[TrailBate]

Yeah, and you all know that guy at the butcher shop was a total commie spy.

[catbbq]

Carol did not work, so.... what did she do exactly?


I heard she was doing Greg.

[Mr_Cheeze]

This from bradyworld.com:

Q. What ever happened to Mike and Carol's first spouses, the children's other biological parents?
A. We learn in the first episode that Mike's wife passed away. However, the absence of Carol's first husband remains a mystery. Sherwood Schwartz, the creator of the show, wanted her to be divorced. The network wanted her to be a widow, thought being divorced was too risque for the times. The compromise was that it was never addressed one way or the other.


Reading between the lines... Carol was a whore. I f'n knew it.




This thread hi-jack has been brought to you by Bacardi Rum. Drink Bacardi with cola. Get laid.

[truckboy]

I checked out Slider's story on my favorite hoax buster website and there's nothing on it. That lends credence to the story. I think it's taken on urban myth status at this point, because our sworn enemy was the Soviet Union at that time. I think Trailbait hit upon the hidden nugget of truth; that Sam the Butcher was a commie. Alice and her legion of maidspies were counter intelligence to Sam's KAOS like network, which, by the way used the "bone of silence" and "steakphones" No relation to Maxwell Smart's cone or shoe.

[TrailBate]

I'm going to re-hijack the hijacked thread for a moment

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/09/19/iraq.corruption.reut/index.html

Your tax dollars at work....somewhere....


Back to the original hijack.

What happened to that new kid with the glasses? Cousin somebody? Was that a young Rush Limbaugh, before he discovered painkillers?

[Slider]

How much you want to bet that some of that $$ went to Haliburton. They've been hanging around long enough, and you KNOW the US has been at least aware of what was going on.

If we were out of the loop, it is yet another example of miserable war management by this administration.

So if they knew they were in on the grab, and if not, they're incompetent.

How many more ways can Bush and his henchmen possibly suck?

Slider

[Slider]

Wait, I can answer my own question: LOTS more.

Slider



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

September 20, 2005
Ex-White House Aide Charged in Corruption Case
By PHILIP SHENON and ANNE E. KORNBLUT
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 - A senior White House budget official who resigned abruptly last week was arrested Monday on charges of lying to investigators and obstructing a federal inquiry involving Jack Abramoff, the Republican lobbyist who has been under scrutiny by the Justice Department for more than a year.

The arrest of the official, David H. Safavian, head of procurement policy at the Office of Management and Budget, was the first to result from the wide-ranging corruption investigation of Mr. Abramoff, once among the most powerful and best-paid lobbyists in Washington and a close friend of Representative Tom DeLay, the House majority leader.

According to court papers, Mr. Safavian, 38, is accused of lying about assistance that he gave Mr. Abramoff in his earlier work at the General Services Administration, where he was chief of staff from 2002 to 2004, and about an expensive golf trip he took with the lobbyist to Scotland in August 2002.

Mr. Abramoff, a former lobbying partner of Mr. Safavian, was indicted last month in Florida on unrelated federal fraud charges. He is not identified by name in the court papers involving Mr. Safavian's arrest. But "Lobbyist A" in an F.B.I. affidavit could only be Mr. Abramoff based on descriptive details in the documents filed in the Federal District Court here.

The Justice Department said Mr. Safavian had been specifically charged with making false statements to investigators about his efforts at the General Services Administration in 2002 to help Mr. Abramoff acquire two large pieces of government-owned property in the Washington area, including the historic Old Post Office Building on Pennsylvania Avenue.

The department said Mr. Safavian had also lied to ethics officials at the agency, which manages federal property, when he sought approval to accept free transportation from Mr. Abramoff for the golf trip to Scotland that summer. According to court documents, Mr. Safavian told the ethics office that Mr. Abramoff had no business with the agency at the time, an assertion that was repeated in a separate interview this May with the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Mr. DeLay, who has asked the House ethics committee to review his ties to Mr. Abramoff, has come under criticism from Congressional Democrats and ethics watchdog groups for taking a similar golf trip to Scotland with Mr. Abramoff in 2000, including rounds of golf on the fabled course at St. Andrews.

The Justice Department made no accusation in its court papers of any tie between Mr. DeLay and Mr. Safavian nor of any involvement by Mr. DeLay in Mr. Abramoff's effort to buy government property. A spokesman for Mr. Abramoff had no comment on the arrest of Mr. Safavian. Phone calls to Mr. Safavian's home in the Virginia suburbs of Washington were not returned.

The White House said in a statement that Mr. Safavian had resigned on Friday and that "we, of course, will cooperate fully with the Justice Department in this investigation." A spokesman said the White House would have no further comment on the arrest.

Mr. Safavian had recently been working on developing contracting policies for the multibillion-dollar relief effort after Hurricane Katrina.

The Justice Department did not reveal details of Mr. Safavian's arrest, including where it occurred. The department also did not say why the criminal charges were brought directly by prosecutors, rather than by the Washington grand jury investigating Mr. Abramoff. The Justice Department often bypasses a grand jury when a criminal case is brought together hurriedly or when there is fear that a defendant may try to flee.

The F.B.I. affidavit, which was dated Friday and made public on Monday, said that Mr. Safavian had provided extensive, secret assistance to Mr. Abramoff in 2002, when the lobbyist wanted help on behalf of a client to arrange a lease on favorable terms for the Old Post Office Building, which was controlled by the General Services Administration. The affidavit said the client was one of several Indian tribes that Mr. Abramoff has represented.

The court papers said Mr. Abramoff had also sought Mr. Safavian's help in buying 40 acres at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in the Maryland suburbs of Washington to be the new home of a Jewish children's school that Mr. Abramoff had founded. That property was also under the control of the General Services Administration.

Local real estate records suggest that neither property was acquired by Mr. Abramoff or his clients, despite his repeated requests for help in e-mail messages sent to a private account maintained by Mr. Safavian.

The Justice Department affidavit said that even as Mr. Safavian was trying to help Mr. Abramoff in acquiring the government property in 2002, he was eagerly planning his summer golf trip with the lobbyist to Scotland. The F.B.I. affidavit also suggested Mr. Abramoff's motivation in inviting Mr. Safavian was clear. In an e-mail message, a lobbyist colleagues asked: "Why dave? I like him but didn't know u did as much. Business angle?"

According to the court papers, Mr. Abramoff replied with another e-mail message: "Total business angle. He is new COS of GSA."

Like Mr. Abramoff, Mr. Safavian, a former Congressional aide, has extensive ties to prominent Republicans on Capitol Hill, throughout the executive branch and among the city's lobbying firms.

He helped start Janus-Merritt Strategies, a consulting firm, with Grover G. Norquist, the head of the conservative advocacy group Americans for Tax Reform and a close political ally of the Bush administration.

Mr. Safavian worked with Mr. Abramoff in the Washington lobbying offices of Preston Gates & Ellis, a Seattle-based firm. According to lobbying records, Mr. Safavian shared at least one client with Mr. Abramoff, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, and also represented Microsoft, the Port of Seattle and the Dredging Contractors of America.

His wife, Jennifer Safavian, is chief counsel for oversight and investigations on the House Government Reform Committee, which is responsible for overseeing government procurement and is, among other things, expected to conduct the Congressional investigation into missteps after Hurricane Katrina.

Both Mr. Safavian and his wife graduated from Detroit College of Law at Michigan State University. They have a daughter.

According to his former colleagues in the Bush administration and interviews he gave, Mr. Safavian considered encouraging "competitive sourcing" or outsourcing government work to private contractors to be a primary goal in his job at the Office of Management and Budget.

He did not oversee specific contracts, but instead managed overall guidelines for government purchasing, associates said. In an interview in June with Federal Times, a newspaper that focuses on the workings of the federal government, Mr. Safavian described his work for the office and said that "the best advice I've gotten was from my grandfather and that advice is that you've got to have ethics and integrity in everything you do, especially here in D.C."

Robert Pear contributed reporting for this article.



Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections XML Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map Back to Top

[Mr_Cheeze]

What happened to that new kid with the glasses? Cousin somebody? Was that a young Rush Limbaugh, before he discovered painkillers?


Robbie Rist, played Oliver
Then and now
http://www.blast.net/hart/rist.jpghttp://www.ecto-web.org/~spookcentral/cast_crew_robbie_rist.jpg

Even has his own website!
http://www.robbierist.com/

Looks like a commie to me.

[truckboy]

Looks like that weird 70's musician Paul something.

[TrailBate]

Hmm, throw in WorldCom and Enron, and that's a lot of lost money!!!

[Slider]

Don't forget the $150billion we'll spend in New Orleans, having saved $15billion in levee improvements. Or all the Halliburton overcharges. Or the massive tax handouts to the rich. Or the incentives to the oil industry in the energy bill.

There will be more in tomorrow's news. Have no doubt.

Slider

[TrailBate]

At least the poor pieces of crap can't file bankruptcy anymore. That'll save us a few bucks.

Did you see last week the Democrats tried to introduce an amendment to the bankruptcy bill, that excluded victims of natural disasters? Republicans shot it down.

[Mr_Cheeze]

On th eheels of the largest budget ever passed with loads and loads of "highway project" pork barrel legislation included, its funny how nobody in Congress, on either side of the aisle, seems to be willing to come up with a comprehensive way to cut out any of that fat. All I have heard from anybody is a bunch of ******** about how this or that needs to be cut, how we are all going to have to make sacrifices, yadda, yadda. They could take half of that entire friggin budget and use it for disaster relief. What is more important?

[Slider]

There's a definite feeding frenzy going on right now, when we can least afford it. It is solely Republican led, and the Democrats are powerless to do anything about it. We are seriously overextended financially and militarily. And this is independent of the losses due to the administration's corruption. Add in those, and it is like saying to China: Whatever you want, it is yours.

We sucked up to North Korea to get the recent nuclear concessions. Why? Because we need put a cap on potential trouble since we can't afford to fight. We're losing whatever vestiges of influence we may have had prior to Bush, and it will only get worse before it gets better.

Imagine - a treason trial and impeachment are our BEST hopes. Unbelievable.

Slider

[TrailBate]

There's a definite feeding frenzy going on right now, when we can least afford it. It is solely Republican led, and the Democrats are powerless to do anything about it. We are seriously overextended financially and militarily. And this is independent of the losses due to the administration's corruption. Add in those, and it is like saying to China: Whatever you want, it is yours.

We sucked up to North Korea to get the recent nuclear concessions. Why? Because we need put a cap on potential trouble since we can't afford to fight. We're losing whatever vestiges of influence we may have had prior to Bush, and it will only get worse before it gets better.

Imagine - a treason trial and impeachment are our BEST hopes. Unbelievable.

Slider



But where ARE the democrats? I have heard nothing from them. They need to get off the arses and get vocal, fer chrissakes.

[Slider]

Whaddya mean? John McCain has a lot to say!

http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=NewsCenter.ViewPressRelease&C ontent_id=1608
(http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=NewsCenter.ViewPressRelease&C ontent_id=1608)

Oh, wait a minute...

Slider

[TrailBate]

Bill Clinton:
."..tax cuts are always popular, but about half of these tax cuts since 2001 have gone to people in my income group, the top 1 percent. I've gotten four tax cuts.
They're responsible for this big structural deficit, and they're not going away, the deficits aren't.
Now, what Americans need to understand is that that means every single day of the year, our government goes into the market and borrows money from other countries to finance Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina, and our tax cuts...
...Never in the history of our republic have we ever financed a conflict, military conflict, by borrowing money from somewhere else...
...We're pressing the Chinese now, a country not nearly rich as America per capita, to keep loaning us money with low interest to cover my tax cut, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Katrina.
And at the same time, to raise the value of their currency so their imports into our country will become more expensive, and our exports to them will become less expensive.
And by the way, we don't want to let them buy any oil companies or anything like that.
So what if they just got tired of buying our debt?
What if the Japanese got tired of doing it?
Japan's economy is beginning to grow again. Suppose they decided they wanted to keep some of their money at home and invest it in Japan, because they're starting to grow?
We depend on Japan, China, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, and Korea primarily to basically loan us money every day of the year to cover my tax cut and these conflicts and Katrina.
I don't think it makes any sense. I think it's wrong."

Barack Obama:

"You can't fight a war in Iraq that's costing upwards of $200 billion, and rebuild New Orleans, and respond to the aftermath of Katrina, and try to deal with all the other domestic needs that we have, and then cut taxes for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans.
I mean, there was talk right immediately after the hurricane that the Republicans in the Senate were still going to push forward with the repeal of the estate tax, which is mind-boggling...
...We need some adult supervision of the budget process"

[Rych]

*yawn*

is that the best you can come up with? Bush has outed a CIA agent, lied to start a war, a war that has killed nearly 2,000 americans, stayed on vacation while New Orleans was being flooded, yet all you can still come up with is Clinton's bj?

'
These guys must have been heavy smokers:

THE FOLLOWING BODYGUARDS DIED WITHIN A SHORT TIME AFTER LEAVING CLINTON'S SERVICE:

Major William S. Barkley Jr.
Captain Scott J. Reynolds
Sgt. Brian Hanley
Sgt. Tim Sabel
Major General William Robertson
Col. William Densberger
Col. Robert Kelly
Spec. Gary Rhodes
Steve Willis
Robert Williams
Conway LeBleu
Todd McKeehan


What could these guys have seen?

[TrailBate]

Good Lord! This thing again?

Stop believing every chain mail you get. Tell us how these people died.

[Slider]

It is interesting, though. Point out that Bush is both corrupt and incompetent, and you get back idiotic urban myth ****. No wonder the moron got re-elected.

Slider

Might as well throw in the snopes link. Rych, you really ought to read it closely.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/clinton.htm

[Rych]

Good Lord! This thing again?

Stop believing every chain mail you get. Tell us how these people died.

Don't forget BUDDY, the Presidential Dog, killed when he was struck by a car after having "escaped" his kennel.

[bdee]

Only 17824 more posts to go until you hit all 18,435 reasons ::)

[Slider]

Ought to happen any day now. ;D

Slider

[Rych]

Don't forget the $150billion we'll spend in New Orleans, having saved $15billion in levee improvements. Or all the Halliburton overcharges. Or the massive tax handouts to the rich. Or the incentives to the oil industry in the energy bill.

There will be more in tomorrow's news. Have no doubt.

Slider



Also don't forget how the Army Corp of Engineers were going to install flood gates that would have prevent much of the damage, but there efforts were blocked by that conservative group called the Serria Club.

Save the snails, screw the people; blame George Bush who was getting high in the '70s when these gates should have been built.

[Slider]

Really? What flood gates, where and when? You ought to know by now that semi-references and inaccurate citations don't fly. This is another of those Faux News type fabrications. Here's what the Sierra Club says:

"Then, from the reactionary right, comes the clincher: It was environmentalists that caused the disaster.
* First, a retired Army Corps official claimed that in the late 1970s wetlands advocates had blocked construction of a flood-control project on Lake Pontchartrain. The project in question was a predecessor to the "high-levee" proposal mentioned above. Environmentalists said that the high-levee plan would work better and do less environmental damage. The Corps agreed. It then failed to build the project that would have worked -- and now the reactionaries are lying and claiming that the reason that levee failed was because the unworkable project the Corps abandoned in 1982 had been opposed by environmentalists.

* Then, in case that dog wouldn't hunt, exploiters dredged up another lawsuit, this one by the Sierra Club, against a project that opposed the destruction of wetlands hundreds of miles upstream from New Orleans to build levees on that part of the river. Never mind that it is more wetlands that we need to protect from flooding. Never mind that the levees in question did not fail, and did not come close to failing, and if they had failed, would not have flooded the Gulf Coast at all. The clincher that shows the cynicism of this attack is that the Club never opposed the levees at all -- we just wanted them constructed with earth taken from some place other than vital, flood-diminishing wetlands. And the levees were built. "

But you need to understand a lot more before you buy the crap you are citing. The whole idea of opposing levees is about restoring the natural buffers the Mississippi's outflow creates. It is a long-term approach to planning, using natural barriers that are far more effective than levees. Long-term planning is something your boy Bush only advocates when he feather-beds his future by sucking up to Halliburton.

If the natural barriers are not allowed to form, you then have to build high levees. You can control the flow through them, getting protection AND natural buffers. Your citation is pure fabrication in an attemp by conservatives to misdirect the blame awayfrom the incompetent Bush administration.

Slider

[Rych]

Really? What flood gates, where and when? You ought to know by now that semi-references and inaccurate citations don't fly. This is another of those Faux News type fabrications. Here's what the Sierra Club says:

"Then, from the reactionary right, comes the clincher: It was environmentalists that caused the disaster.
* First, a retired Army Corps official claimed that in the late 1970s wetlands advocates had blocked construction of a flood-control project on Lake Pontchartrain. The project in question was a predecessor to the "high-levee" proposal mentioned above. Environmentalists said that the high-levee plan would work better and do less environmental damage. The Corps agreed. It then failed to build the project that would have worked -- and now the reactionaries are lying and claiming that the reason that levee failed was because the unworkable project the Corps abandoned in 1982 had been opposed by environmentalists.

* Then, in case that dog wouldn't hunt, exploiters dredged up another lawsuit, this one by the Sierra Club, against a project that opposed the destruction of wetlands hundreds of miles upstream from New Orleans to build levees on that part of the river. Never mind that it is more wetlands that we need to protect from flooding. Never mind that the levees in question did not fail, and did not come close to failing, and if they had failed, would not have flooded the Gulf Coast at all. The clincher that shows the cynicism of this attack is that the Club never opposed the levees at all -- we just wanted them constructed with earth taken from some place other than vital, flood-diminishing wetlands. And the levees were built. "

But you need to understand a lot more before you buy the crap you are citing. The whole idea of opposing levees is about restoring the natural buffers the Mississippi's outflow creates. It is a long-term approach to planning, using natural barriers that are far more effective than levees. Long-term planning is something your boy Bush only advocates when he feather-beds his future by sucking up to Halliburton.

If the natural barriers are not allowed to form, you then have to build high levees. You can control the flow through them, getting protection AND natural buffers. Your citation is pure fabrication in an attemp by conservatives to misdirect the blame awayfrom the incompetent Bush administration.

Slider
Ok. Let assume that on day one of Bush’s first term, Bush said the number one priority is to build levees that will save New Orleans from disaster. Would they be built now? I doubt it, I’m sure they’d still be in the design stage, maybe just getting under way now. I think if you want to lay blame it has to fall to Clinton, Bush 41 and prior legislative sessions, and most of all to the local pols. That being said, why blame anyone? The Gulf gets hurricanes, we get blizzards, California gets, well everything.


On another note, I heard on radio yesterday that the uboat commander, Fatty Teddy is opposed to federalized $4800 school vouchers that would enable poor black kids to afford to go to private schools while their schools are being rebuilt. Why would he be against a superior education for these kids?

[Slider]

We’ll ignore for a moment that you seem to completely miss the point that long-term planning IS the problem here. Regardless of when the project would be completed, levee improvements are the solution to the problem, and Bush killed an in-progress program.

The project itself, called the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, or SELA, was ongoing, and had been in place since 1995. The Army Corps of Engineers had spent $430 million on shoring up levees and building pumping stations, plus they provided another $50 million in local aid.

This is from the Philadelphia Times-Picayune of August 31:

“Yet after 2003, the flow of federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle. The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars.

Newhouse News Service, in an article posted late Tuesday night at The Times-Picayune Web site, reported: "No one can say they didn't see it coming. ... Now in the wake of one of the worst storms ever, serious questions are being asked about the lack of preparation."

In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article, in New Orleans On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."

Also that June, with the 2004 hurricane season starting, the Corps' project manager Al Naomi went before a local agency, the East Jefferson Levee Authority, and essentially begged for $2 million for urgent work that Washington was now unable to pay for. From the June 18, 2004 Times-Picayune:

"The system is in great shape, but the levees are sinking. Everything is sinking, and if we don't get the money fast enough to raise them, then we can't stay ahead of the settlement," he said. "The problem that we have isn't that the levee is low, but that the federal funds have dried up so that we can't raise them."

The panel authorized that money, and on July 1, 2004, it had to pony up another $250,000 when it learned that stretches of the levee in Metairie had sunk by four feet. The agency had to pay for the work with higher property taxes. The levee board noted in October 2004 that the feds were also now not paying for a hoped-for $15 million project to better shore up the banks of Lake Pontchartrain.”

So, short version, the failure to complete the levee improvement is due to our overcommitment of resources due to the war, and complete Bush administration negligence when it completely failed to heed well-defined warnings from everyone involved in protecting New Orleans.

Slider

[Slider]

As for the Kennedy voucers - you'd need to cite a specific reference if you want any additional info. What vouchers, from what source, when, what opposition are you referring to, etc. Your citation, yet again, resembles Faux News rumor mongering more than anything else.

Slider

[TrailBate]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,170002,00.html

How many day's pay is one box of these?

[Rych]

As for the Kennedy voucers - you'd need to cite a specific reference if you want any additional info. What vouchers, from what source, when, what opposition are you referring to, etc. Your citation, yet again, resembles Faux News rumor mongering more than anything else.

Slider
Like I said I heard it on the radio, but...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/16/AR2005091601723.html

[Slider]

It seems the answer is in the story you cited. He's not opposed to aid, but to vouchers. So saying "Why would he be against a superior education for these kids?" misrepresents the issue completely.

Slider

[kernel crash]

I don't think the Sierra Club is as clean as Slider would like you to believe. It's just another case of spin. For every "fact" that Slider dredges up, you can find something on the web to contradict it. And I'm not talking about Fox News. I saw plenty of info on the web about law suits and theats of law suits that the Sierra Club was involved with. Spin. Spin. Spin. Both sides do it, it just that some see their spin as the gospel and dispell everything else. Clinton was cutting funding long before Bush was in office but you don't hear Slider mention that do you.

[TrailBate]

Clinton was cutting funding long before Bush was in office but you don't hear Slider mention that do you.



You don't hear anyone mention it, because it's not true.

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=344

I love FactCheck (or as John Stewart called them, "Fat Chicks.org)

[Slider]

Well, there's a key difference between citing a direct quote, and refuting it. If you have another source, cite it. If it stands up, great. If not, we'll both find out quickly.

Here's an example of a non-fact: "Clinton was cutting funding long before Bush was in office but you don't hear Slider mention that do you. "

What funding? When? I was specific. You should be too.

Slider

[MTBME]

This wasn't too hard to find. I'm surprised people are still giving Clinton a pass on this.

"A $120 million hurricane project, approved and financed annually from 1965 was killed by the Clinton administration after being approved by the Army Corps of Engineers. It was designed to protect more than 140,000 West Bank residents east of the Harvey Canal."


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46132

[Slider]

This wasn't too hard to find. I'm surprised people are still giving Clinton a pass on this.

"A $120 million hurricane project, approved and financed annually from 1965 was killed by the Clinton administration after being approved by the Army Corps of Engineers. It was designed to protect more than 140,000 West Bank residents east of the Harvey Canal."


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46132


The primary job of a politician is to get and allocate money. Deciding the details of a particular budget is about balance. I am sure you can find a source that accurately claims that Clinton cut funding for apple pie, too. It means nothing. You cut from one area, and fund another.

In the case of New Orleans, SELA was the funded project, and it got lots of money until Bush came along. After Bush, there was essentially NO money spent on protecting New Orleans. The main reason was that the war cost $100billion per year.

Slider

[kernel crash]

"The primary job of a politician is to get and allocate money. Deciding the details of a particular budget is about balance."

Well there it is in black and white. A complete pass on Clinton cutting funding for the levees, with a catchy explanation, and then a return to bashing Bush on the same issue.

[TrailBate]

So the year CLinton cut $120 billion, was the exact same year he started another project for more money? Sounds like a good deal to me.

and this is an interesting paragraph:

"On June 9, John Zirschky, the acting assistant secretary of the Army and the official who refused to forward the report to Congress, sent a memo to the corps, saying the recommendation for the project "is not consistent with the policies and budget priorities reflected in the President's Fiscal Year 1996 budget. Accordingly, I will not forward the report to the Office of Management and Budget for clearance."


What does this mean? Did Clinton know this project was being cut? It says the Assistant Secretary of the ARMY refused to forward the report to congress....??

[kernel crash]

Spin. Spin. Spin.

[Slider]

"The primary job of a politician is to get and allocate money. Deciding the details of a particular budget is about balance."

Well there it is in black and white. A complete pass on Clinton cutting funding for the levees, with a catchy explanation, and then a return to bashing Bush on the same issue.


Except that Clinton didn't cut funding for the levees. He cut one project, and funded another. Bush, on the other hand, cut nearly all the money from the sole project addressing the problem.

Spin would be trying to disguise that fact with partial truths.

Slider

[TrailBate]

Spin. Spin. Spin.


what spin? Let's take all articles posted here as fact. Clinton cut a $120 billion project. and in the same year, started a $400 billion dollar project.

Bush cut THAT project. Add to that all the missing equipment and manpower over in Iraq.

And my question about the Army secretary was a valid one. Can you answer it?

[Slider]

Well, sub in millions for billions. We only get to billion$$ when we're talking Bush waste. ;D

Slider

[kernel crash]

What article are you guys reading???

From the article I quoted:

"However, 10 years ago, the Clinton administration cut 98 flood control projects, including one in New Orleans,"

"A $120 million hurricane project, approved and financed annually from 1965 was killed by the Clinton administration after being approved by the Army Corps of Engineers."

"Likewise, in 1999, Congress and the Clinton administration agreed to spend only $47 million on New Orleans area hurricane flood control projects – half of what local officials had requested."

Hey TrailBait, where's the reference to the 400 billion dollar project Clinton started?

[TrailBate]

Like Slider said, substitute "billions" for "millions".

It's a few pages back. Selective memory?

[Slider]

Quoting my own quote here:

"Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project, or SELA, was ongoing, and had been in place since 1995. The Army Corps of Engineers had spent $430 million on shoring up levees and building pumping stations, plus they provided another $50 million in local aid."

That ended with Bush and Iraq.

Slider

[kernel crash]

It was never my intention to try to DEFEND Bush. I don't disagree that he made cuts. My point was that cuts were also made during previous administrations going back at least 12 years. Your selectively picking out 1 example to build your case around. It doesn't hold up.

[Slider]

Yes, it holds. Here's the sequence:

Money is being spent shoring up New Orleans.

Clinton kills some projects, and approves others, but the net is that $480 million is spent toward New Orleans protection from 1995 until 2003 or so.

Bush invades Iraq, lacks money, kills funding nearly entirely for New Orleans protection.

What part am I missing?

Slider

[TrailBate]

What part am I missing?

Slider



The part about Lewinsky, The Clinton Death List, and the Cocaine trafficking out of Little Rock.

[catbbq]

It's an awfully nice day. Why don't you guys go outside, get some fresh air?

[kernel crash]

I might get fired if I decided to get up, walk out, and get some fresh air.

BTW, I still don't see the $480 million you mentioned in the article.

[Slider]

$430million for Army Corps projects and $50million for local aid. Here's one link to the complete story, from some sort of compilation site:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001051313

My office has bogus ventilation, and the landlord does nothing about it. Bishop's Corner and West Hartford generally are booming, and my guess is they want to tear this dump down and build new. Easier to do that without tenants!

Slider

[TrailBate]

I might get fired if I decided to get up, walk out, and get some fresh air.

BTW, I still don't see the $480 million you mentioned in the article.


you can check the factcheck article I posted, too

[TrailBate]

Looks like Bill "she looks conscious to me" Frist sold quite a few shares of stock in a company 2 weeks before it announced poor earnings.

Perhaps he should ask Martha how the ankle bracelet works.

I only have left-wing blogs on this, so I won't annoy any bush-bots with a link....yet.....

[Rych]

Do you guys think Bush has gotten Cheney the racial break down of Rita's potential landfall areas? He has to be know who to save first.

[TrailBate]

I'm sure he'll do what they did last time: Let the rich (republican voters) evacuate, let the poor (democrats) stay and drown.

http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/k.html

[Slider]

Looks like Bill "she looks conscious to me" Frist sold quite a few shares of stock in a company 2 weeks before it announced poor earnings.

Perhaps he should ask Martha how the ankle bracelet works.

I only have left-wing blogs on this, so I won't annoy any bush-bots with a link....yet.....


Here you go, TB. It is hitting the major news outlets now, since there's a subpoena involved.

Seems there's slime under every Republican rock.

Slider


HCA subpoenaed, may involve Frist sales
By Jonathan M. Katz, Associated Press Writer | September 23, 2005

WASHINGTON --Hospital operator HCA Inc. said Friday that federal prosecutors have issued a subpoena for documents the company believes may be related to the sale of its stock by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist.

A release from the Nashville-based company said the subpoena came from the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.

The Securities and Exchange Commission also contacted Frist this week about the sales, said Frist spokesman Bob Stevenson.

"Not surprisingly, the Securities and Exchange Commission contacted Senator Frist's office after the story appeared in the press about the sale of his Hospital Corporation of America stock," Stevenson said. "The majority leader will provide the SEC any information that it needs with respect to this matter."

Frist traded using only public information, and only to eliminate the appearance of a conflict of interest, his spokesman added.

Stevenson couldn't immediately be reached for further comment. An HCA spokesman also wasn't immediately available for comment.

HCA, the nation's largest for-profit hospital company, was founded by Frist's father and his brother was formerly its CEO and chairman and remains on the board of directors.

Frist asked a trustee to sell all his HCA stock in June, near a 52-week stock price peak of $58.40 and at the same time HCA insiders were selling off shares. Reports to the Securities and Exchange Commission showed insiders sold about 2.3 million shares, worth about $112 million, from January through June, said Mark LoPresti of Thomson Financial.

The sale came about two weeks before the company issued a disappointing earnings forecast that drove its stock price down almost 16 percent by mid-July. They still have not recovered, closing Thursday at $45.90.

The value of Frist's stock at the time of the sale was not disclosed. Earlier this year, he reported holding blind trusts valued at $7 million to $35 million.

The sale of stock was first reported Monday by Congressional Quarterly. On Tuesday, the Associated Press reported that the stock was sold at or near its peak between June 13, when Frist asked the shares to be sold, and July 1, when he was told the sale was complete. On July 8 he was informed that his wife and children's shares had also been sold as per his request, his spokeswoman Amy Call said.

For years, Frist was criticized for holding HCA stock while directing legislation on Medicare reform and patient issues. His office has consistently deflected criticism by noting that his assets were in a blind trust and not under his active control.

Frist, a Tennessee Republican, is widely considered a potential presidential candidate in 2008.

HCA said the subpoena seeks the "production of documents," and said it plans to fully cooperate with the district attorney's investigation.

On Thursday, SEC spokesman John Nester would neither confirm nor deny that Frist or any officer or director of HCA is the subject of an investigation, citing the agency's policy.

Shares of HCA fell 20 cents to $45.70 in premarket trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

[TrailBate]

So, he is either:

A) a total and complete moron, liar, crook, etc. (we know from Schiavo that he is a liar)

or

B) He's totally innocent and made one hell of a great financial move.


Now, if only some source other than the Enquirer can confirm Bush is a drunk and drug addict........

[TrailBate]

A lot of talk is going aroung the left wing blogs about Bush's odd lower jaw movements at press conferences or when giving speeches. I have not noticed, since I rarely pay much attention to what the Dear Leader says. But here is one take:

"Not only are Bush's involuntary facial movements definitely on the increase in recent months, they are being talked about by a number of medical professionals I know who have strong clinical experience in psychopharmacology.

Now, take all of this with a grain of salt, since I'm not an MD myself...

First of all, what to call it? The leading clinical phraseology that might apply to Bush's jaw-thrusting behavior is "extraparamital involuntary movement symptom." Extraparamital movement disorders are usually a combination of movement problems, but you can have single presentations, of which jaw-thrusting is a very common one.

One doctor I know told me he saw 40 examples of these movements in one five-minute speech by Bush (I think it was the speech announcing Roberts for the Supreme Court, but I never saw that one myself so can't confirm). Bush's jaw-thrusting is outward and to one side, and sometimes it completely sends his jaw out, usually at the end of a sentence. The jaw movements are CNS (Central Nervous System) mediated, and probably dopominergically related. The movements are seen in individuals using or abusing drugs affecting the dopominergic system (neuroleptics, anti-psychotics, etc; neuroleptics are a kind of anti-psychotic).

Yes, it could be speed, as suggested in another thread. Indeed, the most dramatic and familiar presentation of these symptoms is when people are on Ecstasy (usually in the early crashing phase). But it could also be, and in one doctor's opinion is more likely to be, an indication Bush is using a prescription drug prescribed for individuals with primary mood regularity problems, a drug which Bush would be taking in addition to an antidepressant. Also, there are some newer drugs for substance abusers which often affect the dopaminergic system as well. (Bush's former abuse of drugs and alcohol almost certainly has not helped his current condition, though it can't necessarily be construed to have caused it.)

In short, no one knows what Bush is on, but he's on something, and something has changed in recent months. The docs may be tweaking his meds, trying to find the most effective cocktail. "I can't believe people aren't talking about it in the news," one doctor told me. (This guy is a well-regarded physician of referral with many years' experience in this area, so I trust him.)"


I think I copied that off DailyKos....but I could be wrong.

[TrailBate]

http://money.cnn.com/2005/09/23/news/midcaps/tyco_abramoff/index.htm?cnn=yes

What do Republicans do when they are not committing fraud and treason?

[Rych]

Finally, just in time for the mid term elections, George can invade Japan and drum up support for Republicans in the midterms.

“Since Katrina, Stevens has been in newspapers across the country where he was quoted in an Associated Press story as saying the Yakuza Mafia used a Russian-made electromagnetic generator to cause Hurricane Katrina in a bid to avenge the atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima. He was a guest on Coast to Coast, a late night radio show that conducts call-in discussions on everything from bizarre weather patterns to alien abductions. On Wednesday, Stevens was interviewed by Fox News firebrand Bill O'Reilly.”

http://www.journalnet.com/articles/2005/09/23/news/local/news05.txt

[Slider]

Interesting. I started a separate weather manipulation thread. I can't quite blame the weather on Bush yet. This fellow is working on it, though!

The fellow seems a little paranoid, but he presents some interesting stuff.

Slider

[MTBME]

"PARIS (AP) - Authorities fear that a suspected Islamic terror cell broken up in France was plotting attacks on the Paris subway, an airport and an intelligence agency's headquarters, newspapers said Tuesday. "


Well that's what they get for supporting George Bush and helping the coalition in Iraq to defeat the radical islamic scumbags. What. Wait a minute ??? Were talking about the French :o WTF! I guess looking the other way doesn't always work out does it. We'll be pulling their ass out of the pan in a few years. Again.


http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?flok=FF-APO-PLS&idq=/ff/story/0001/20050927/1127071617.htm

[TrailBate]

So I'm watching O'really last night on Fox. He does a little segment about how Air America radio is failing, politically and economically.

So I figure, this should be good. He should have someone from Air America radio on.

So, he's got himself, who HATES Air America, even begging the government to arrest them as traitors.

He's got one guest on, who also hates Air America.

Then he's got a third guest on also to talk about Air America. I'm thinking, this lady must be here to defend Air America. You know, the whole "fair and balanced" thing.

Nope. She also hates Air America.

So here we have 3 people, on a "fair and balanced" show, where the "spin stops". and it's a 10 minute hate-fest. They throw out claims like one of the DJ's was cheering on looters and applauding the criminals, Al Franken demanded a new studio that he's not going to use, etc.

It was pretty pathetic.

[TrailBate]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/09/28/delay.investigation.ap/index.html

If/when he goes to jail, somebody will have to ask him, "Isn't this fun? It's a lot like camping, isn't it?"

[TrailBate]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/09/28/delay.investigation.ap/index.html

Don't they know he's on a mission from God?!