Media in Trouble: All the news thats UNfit to print!: October 2004

"The information of the people at large can alone make them safe, as they are the sole depositary of our political and religious freedom." --Thomas Jefferson 1810

Sunday, October 31, 2004

Why Real Republicans Shouldn't Vote for Bush

The Republican party stands for freedom and lack of interference from the government. They believe on market forces running the economy. They think that the more money in people's hands the better, because they can make their own choices with their money. They believe in fiscal responsibility.

They also believe in smaller government and reduced government spending.

It amazes me how this has been distorted by the president and his administration.

The Heritage Foundation has put for the following in their report at the end of 2003:

"The 2003 fiscal year mercifully concluded on September 30. Reckless spending by Congress and the President made it a year in which:

  • Government spending exceeded $20,000 per household for the first time since World War II
  • The federal budget expanded by $353 billion over its 1998 level
  • Defense and the attacks on September 11, 2001, accounted for less than half of all new spending since 2001
  • Mandatory spending reached its highest level in history
  • Spending increased despite net interest costs plummeting by $110 billion."

Meanwhile, they are cutting taxes. I hate taxes, I hate paying them especially when I don't agree with where they are being allocated. However, I see this just as a CEO would. If you are spending more, then you need to somehow find a way to earn more money.

So what we have here is an increase in spending and a reduction in income tax earnings for the government. The Bush administration is the first in the history of civilization to raise taxes during war time.

As for allowing market forces to run the economy. How is giving no-bid contracts to Halliburton and others in Iraq allowing market forces to take place.

How is removing Medicare's buying power allowing market forces to help the economy.

Forget the moralistic aspect of the party because morals don't belong in government according to the real Republican agenda. Freedom does not mean you or the government gets to impose your morals on me.

How is squandering a $5.3 trillion projected surplus (which was going to be used to fund social security) being fiscally responsible?

How is going to war to profit government lobbyists a reduction in government corruption?

How is not taking responsibility for your mistakes a reflection of an "ownership society"?

Republicans when you go to the polls this Tuesday you need to ask yourselves one question.

Is President Bush really a Republican?


Friday, October 29, 2004

When Piety Becomes Priority - How God Is Running Our Country

I am starting to understand why this country propped up Saddam in the first place. He was a secularist, he killed those damned Kurds and suppressed the Shiites and the Sunni's. He WAS our stronghold in the Middle East. If we would have left him there the Muslims would have eventually all gotten gassed.

I mean lets keep it straight here. God is a Republican right?

God hates people who have abortions, yet he lets Bush wage war in another part of the world and send our sons and daughters to death.

God hated Chris Reeve, obviously he was promoting more killing of babies. I mean the embryos we are talking about are just frozen waiting to be destroyed anyway. So maybe God doesn't like those embryos.

God must have a sneaky plan in place for the Supreme Court because he gave the Cheif Justice Cancer even though he is a conservative. Maybe he his funneling a message to Bush to put an even MORE conservative judge on the court.

God must also be a Curt Schilling fan since he said it was the hand of God that helped him win Game 6 against the Yankees. He has even found miracle doctors. Besides God gets lots of publicity from baseball with all this God Bless America stuff everyday being played out in front of millions of people.

God however, must not be a fan of the over 3000 people who died on September 11. Where was god during Nuremberg? Where was he in Madrid when the trains blew up? Where was God when Saddam gassed the Kurds?

More importantly God must not be a fan of accountability. At least not in this country. I am sick of Bush getting all this clout for not allowing another terrorist attack. If I recall, it was Bush that was in office when the bombing occurred. Yet the National Security advisor Condoleeza Rice is on the campaign trail with the President instead of doing her job of handling the intelligence that can possibly point to another attack before election day (according to the president).

In his interview with Sean Hannity he admitted he was reading. The President said he was reading Oswald Chambers' "My Utmost to the Highest." Yet he has constantly admitted to not reading the newspapers.

More and more incompetence gets thrown by the waist side, spinning into the black hole of punditry. Bush has gotten away with more crimes than any American president in History. More blunders have occurred in Iraq than the Red Sox have had since 1918. Bill Buchner could have done a better job at guarding the explosives that the 101st somehow missed.

Over 380 tons of high test explosives have disappeared sometime between January and May of 2003. The 101st airborne division of the army stopped at the site that the IAEA checked out and sealed only 30 miles from Baghdad. They just stopped but didn't fully inspect it. They didn't have orders to inspect the site. That means that generals somewhere didn't think that a munitions site that the IAEA site wasn't important enough to check out.

These bombs are powerful. Just one pound is enough to bring a plane down a plane. Which God wasn't watching that day in Lockerbie either.

For months I have been asking myself, "Where are these insurgents getting these bombs?" I mean most of these guys are poor unemployed Iraqis. Well now we may know that when our cameras were busy filming the looting of Baghdad palaces, they should have been filming the looting of munitions yards.

I am sure God wont be around when these explosives will be used against us.


Ohio, Wisconsin and other Undecided Voters

For the elusive undecided voters who mainly believe the following statement:

“I hate Bush but I can’t trust Kerry”

I understand your logic. By using the word hate to describe your feelings about Bush you are conflicted. You think this country is not on the right track. You may be watching the polls and are confused about voting for the winner of the election.

On the other hand John Kerry is widely viewed as a flip flopper or a waffler. Something the Bush campaign along with the media has been truly exceptional about. However, in not stating that you hate John Kerry you may still hope.

The operative words here are hate and trust.

Since hate is a strong feeling, and when you hate someone it is usually for various reasons that are hard to convince you of changing your mind. When someone makes it to the hate column it is hard to bring that someone back into the realm of like.

So let’s concentrate on the word trust. Trust is a stronger feeling still. It demands that someone earns that trust. John Kerry may not have done that in your hearts just yet. He has wavered on a few issues. He has changed his mind and been conflicted many times during his public life. He has protested the Vietnam War, voted against the first Iraq war and voted for giving the president authorization to go to war this time around. He then voted (in protest) against having millions of American tax payers pay for the $87 billion in further appropriations for the war.

However, during his Senate career he has voted for bans on assault weapons and studies have shown that violence linked to such arms has indeed gone down since that ban has been put in place. He also voted for balanced budgets.

Can he be trusted? Well as in any election you have to weigh the alternatives. As much as I am against the alienation of Ralph Nader in the media, in respect to the length of this post I will just say that Ralph Nader and John Kerry are very similar in their stances on most issues. Nader is a lot more liberal and more against big corporations than John Kerry is however, this is a product of a two party system. I shall reserve that column for another day.

You the undecided voter are conflicted between the two major candidates and trust is your main concern.

I submit that George W. Bush is less trust worthy by far than John Kerry.

George W. Bush and his administration has repeatedly offered distortions, exaggerations, and downright lies to the American people regarding almost every policy decision he has made. I have cataloged many on this blog however I shall catalog a few more for you in this post.
Bush says John Kerry had the same intelligence that he had when the senate was voting to give the President the authorization to confront Iraq. This is not true. The CIA, FBI, National Security Advisor, and Secretary of State all had access to much more complete information. John Kerry had the same intelligence that the Bush administration presented to the United Nations.

The United Nations didn’t believe that intelligence because they knew that their weapons inspectors had not found any such weapons of mass destruction.

Bush let Osama Bin Laden escape. He trusted the capture of Osama Bin Laden in Tora Bora to local warriors and warlords in Afghanistan. Gen. Tommy Franks leading the operation was calling the shots from Tampa Florida.

Bush has lied about the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda, and 9/11. Bush has lied about not sending enough troops to Iraq. He lied about the treat Iraq posed calling it a mushroom cloud waiting to materialize.

Does Bush generate feelings of trust in you yet?

If you don’t trust Kerry more than Bush at this point you need to pick up the newspaper of your choice and look at the facts.

Or just Google "bush lies".


Thursday, October 28, 2004

They Don't call it Black Gold for Nothing

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM), the world's largest publicly traded oil company, on Thursday reported a 56 percent rise in quarterly profit, driven by soaring oil and gas prices.

Net income in the third quarter jumped to $5.68 billion, or 88 cents a share, compared with $3.65 billion, or 55 cents a share, in the year earlier period.

Excluding a $550 million charge related to a lawsuit, the company reported record earnings of $6.23 billion, or 96 cents a share. Wall Street expected 87 cents a share.

Revenues jumped to $76.38 billion in the quarter from $59.84 billion a year earlier.

Earnings from upstream operations shot up to $3.93 billion, reflecting record crude oil and natural gas prices in the quarter. Earnings at its downstream operations rose to $1.40 billion as improved refining conditions outweighed the pinch from continued weakness in marketing margins.

Oil prices, which have been on an upward march this year, have touched record levels in recent months due to fears of supply disruption in regions like Nigeria and Russia as well as strong demand from growing economies like China and India.

Oil and gas production in the quarter rose to 3.91 million barrels of oil equivalent a day from 3.87 million barrels in the year-earlier quarter.

That is the story today. Still think that Bush ain't helping big oil out?

Iraq has the capability to produce 2.4 million barrels per day. There are also estimates that Iraq has at least 112 billion barrels and 300 billion barrels in reserve (fact check). That amounts to about 25% of the world's oil.

Somehow I can't fathom a reason why Iraq can't pay for its own reconstruction and the war itself with all this oil revenue just waiting to be tapped. We the tax payer are paying upwards of 180 bilion dollars so far and Bush has a plan to upthat ante once he gets re-selected.

But how did Exxon make money with the recent spikes in Crude values? Simple, let's put it this way:

If you make pens for 50 cents and sell them for a dollar, that means you are making 50 cents on pens. This is a profit margin of 100%. Say the price of ink goes up to a dollar, so now the pens cost a dollar to make, you as a pen maker start selling them for 2 dollars. Your profit margin is still 100% but now you are making 1 dollar on every pen.

As Oil prices go up... Profit margins may not go up but the profits absolutely do go up.

This is how Exxon made all this money in one quarter.

So how can we tie this to Bush? Simple the war in Iraq is strangling its output. Other factors also weighed into the increase in oil including Norwegian strikes and increased demand from China. However, by strangling one of the largets supplies of oil in the world, that supply and demand curve goes nuts towards demand.

As with any commodity oil's value increases when the demand outweighs the supply.

Not that this is news but Exxon, congratulations you have friends inthe White house.


The Environment Non-Partisan?


Thanks to Anonymous, I came up with another issue I can parse for my readers.

The Environment. This is a non-partisan issue. I think clean air, water, and food is a right. I also believe that public lands and wildlife should be preserved as best as possible. I think everybody thinks that. "Americans paid $7.7 billion for bottled water in 2002, according to the consulting and research firm Beverage Marketing Corporation" (fact check).

So let us see where we are at in terms of the environment. So far the Bush administration has rolled back over 200 protections put in place thus far to protect the environment.

An article in Knight Ridder compiled 14 pollution-oriented indicators from government and university statistics.

"Nine of the 14 indicators showed a worsening trend, two showed improvements and three others zigzagged.
Statistics that have worsened:
-Superfund cleanups of toxic waste fell by 52 percent.
-Fish-consumption warnings for rivers doubled.
-Fish-consumption advisories for lakes increased 39 percent.
-The number of beach closings rose 26 percent.
-Civil citations issued to polluters fell 57 percent.
-Criminal pollution prosecutions dropped 17 percent.
-Asthma attacks increased by 6 percent.
-There were small increases in global temperatures and unhealthy air days. "

That is not all, Bush also reduced 12 indicators for public land use. Including 74% more oil drilling permits in public lands. Bush also wants to drill for Oil in Alaska's National Wildlife Refuge. He reversed the government's course on global warming, power plant emissions, roadless areas of national forests, environmental law enforcement and agricultural run-off.

Bush is against the Kyoto treaty which binds us to over 200 other countries including Russia (who recently signed fact check) to recognizing that Global Warming is real and a threat and that these countries will begin to put checks and balances to address the issue. Global Warming is real people, there is lots of science to back it up regardless of whether or not we were keeping weather data before a couple of hundred years ago. That hole in the ozone is getting bigger up there.

Bush has rolled back the Clean Air Act. Basically, the Clean Air Act said that companies had to get their act together by 2004. The EPA was allowed to act on state to state pollution. If a company in Pennsylvania was polluting Ohio, Ohio would have the EPA to stand up for them. Here is how Bush stood in favor of businesses again. The Clear Skies bill stopped the EPA from being able to do anything about these complaints until anywhere between 2009 - 2012. So basically the Clear Skies bill just bought more time for big business to give your kids more asthma. (read the article)

He also started the "Healthy forests Act" which lets people cut down trees that supposedly cause a nuisance to the forests. This was a great one. I didn't even need anyone to explain this one to me when I heard it one day on NPR. Bush found a way to get a cheer out of a crowd when he said he was going to allow more deforestation IN OUR PUBLIC LANDS no less. (read the article)

In short we are in deep CRAPSKIES. Security moms, are you worried about your uterus?
Guess what with all the Mercury that has been dumped by Industry in our streams and lakes, you probably either can't eat fish or should get checked out. Mercury levels in fish have come under alarm from the FDA?! They tell us not to eat Shark, Tilefish, Mackerel, Swordfish and you should avoid Albacore tuna.

Their is a laundry list of things that have gone awry with our environment since Bush has been president. I don't blame him. He does have to worry about fighting 2 wars and keeping the terrorists from attacking us while Condi Rice is on the trail with him.

It is tough work to keep watch on all these things going on at the same time. Bush's environmental policy was so bad that his first Director of the EPA Christie Todd Whitman (New Jerseyans know her well) actually quit.

She just up and resigned because Bush didn't want to hear about her reforms. Colin Powell called her the "wind dummy" of the administration.

If Christie quits that's bad news especially for Republicans.

You can click on the title of the post to go to an article by Robert F. Kenney, Jr. about Bush's environment.

So let us see what the other guys would like to do to improve things.

A huge environmentalist Nader has been a force in this arena just as he has in consumer advocacy. He is for cleaner energy, protection of our food, and changing the environment in poor neighborhoods with his economic policies. Nader would "make environmental protection a priority for our energy, trade, industrial, agricultural, transportation, development and land use policies, indeed protecting the environment must be weaved throughout our governance." For more visit

Wants to increase funding for public lands, reduce toxic waste in communities, and wants to bring back the Clean Air Act. Also a huge environmentalist he pledges to reverse the damage done by Bush and his cronies in Congress.

Stay the Course
Keep catering to corporations instead of our environment.

Kerry and Nader are basically the same on this issue as most politicians should be. Bush however, has claimed a war on the Environment apparently in between his war on Terror, Afghanistan, and Iraq.


Wednesday, October 27, 2004

How does Bush affect my state?

How Bush affects your state in particular

Swing States and undecideds should really check this site out!!


Flutopia - Flu Shot Gone Wild

Did you get your flu shot?

You better not have unless you are demented, old, young, too young, too old, sick or on the way to being sick, have ED, have Heart Problems, or cancer, but if you are a healthy bastard with no health insurance. DON'T GET ONE!

How fitting, to distract one from the perrils in the rest of the world we finally found a way to get screwed by monopolies in this country. Republicans and Libertarians LISTEN UP! This one is for you.

Chiron gets shut down by the UK's version of the FDA. Great! So there is a mass confusion and upheaval that this occured, John Kerry went as far as blaming Bush. I wouldn't go that far. I would blame the constant consolidation of this great Pharmaceutical Industry for this one folks.

Once again if there is something I know a little about it is the Pharma Industry. Yes they help people, if it wasn't for them we would all die a lot earlier. However, it scares me to death to think that every year there seems to be some consolidation of two massive companies and now we are down to basically 4-6 massive corporations which supply the world's medicines.

Amazing how 4-6 people control the health or potential wellness of the world population.

The flu season was predicted to be mild this year (fact check). Last year Chiron only made $200 million dollars from the flu shot, selling only half of what it had intended. This year it was slated to make $400 million. Supply and Demand Folks, they had the supply last year but no demand. This year they nor the UK was going to let that happen again this year. The UK got involved and shut those bastards factory down.

From a Dr. Greene article:

"In the 2002-2003 flu season, where the flu shot numbers have been analyzed, only 57.6 million of the people who should have gotten the flu shot actually got it – not too different from the number who will get it this year. The difference is that in most years, only about 1/3 of the people for whom the shot is recommended actually bother to get it."

This year the UK stepped in and tipped the balance in favor of demand. Much like the oil industry has tipped the balance in the demand field. What this does is indeed increase the price of the commodity in question.

This year Chiron shall not fall to the waistside of selling flu shots. The demand has never been so high as people from all over are lining up to get shot up. Even Dick Cheney got one! Proof that he isn't a cyborg programed to destroy all of the middle east.

So what is one to make of this HOOPLAH over the Flu Shot. I will tell you. IT'S A SCAM. Conveniently Aventis has begun to bail out Chiron witha couple of million more doses. Market forces failed these companies last year on this one so with the power of consolidation and billions of dollars have now created a market. Of course the UK regulatory body had a little something to do with it all. Of course had they not stepped in we would have all had the chance to get a flu shot however, the likelyhood of it being contaminated would have been 2 fold since half of the US doses come from the factory in the UK.

This may sound like a conspiracy theory but if I am right don't forget what was written here on this blog today. Chiron and Aventis will merge. This is my prediction.

Once again we miss the lesson here. Corporations becomming ever more powerful at the cost of the American public. If these corporations would have succumned to market forces of the public, they would have to lower prices to affordable levels. There would be less room for consolidation and more power in the hands of more people.

If it wasn't for government regulating these companies they would be selling us damaged goods which would probably cause more harm than good.

So much for the government not checking up on Corporate theives.


Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Who Needs Polls When You Have a Crystal Ball?

Oh boy, the supernatural's have chimed in. Since El Presidente has been exposed as someone who believes he is somewhat God's personal marrionette (read Ron Suskind's article in the NyTimes Magazine last week). I instantly started scouring the internet to see if I could find anything in the realm of the supernatural that could justify the existence of this man.

I read everything from Nostradamus to Miss Cleo and come across the Hoghue Prophecy Archive.

I encourage all of you to read it since it clearly states that indeed John Kerry will loose this election.

According to the gods of Karma, there is nothing we can do except wait for catastrophe every 40 years. Somehow the powers above have decided that every 40 years you have a Karma backlash. Also, any president that runs during Jupiter and Saturn being in alignment is also damned to die in either his first or second term. Bush I am sorry dude, but it's not looking good for you.

However, Bush has a safe job for the next 4 years. Just think of it, 4 more years to rid the earth of God's nemisis the Muslims. There can be only one God and everybody knows that. So Ala, sorry dude it is your turn to step down and take all your people with you. Bush is at the helm and knows Judgement day is near so might as well go for broke.

Then Hillary will be the president. Now that is something to look forward to. America has the least women representatives of any democracy.

God really is on Bushes side and he may be right about being a messenger from God himself. However, if God is also right, he will strike Bush down as he did others before him. Apparently God and Jupiter and Saturn are all playing some kind of crazy Texas Hold'em game up there and every 20 or 40 years someone goes all in.

Pundits and pollsters are going crazy trying to figure out who will win this election. The polls are based on people who voted already and don't take into account the millions of new voters registered this year, the political climate in this country, nor the large demographic of young voters that are new registrants. These polls do not take into account all of these newly registered voters many of them spread accross battlegroud states that can turn the tide there.

The pundits pick appart anything and everything from duck hunts to lesbian daughters even speaking Spanish in New Mexico is starting to get a headline. Ignoring facts and yet more facts that are comming out. Including the fact that over 300 tons of high intensity explosives (one pound of this stuff caused the PanAm flight to crash over Lockerbie) have been nabbed out from under our soldiers' nose. Right around the time that Paul Bremmer has recently stated that we needed more troops to stop the LOOTING. You know when Rumsfeld said "they are a free country, there is going to be some looting."

So I was wrong all this time and Hogue was right. I am sorry for attempting to mislead you on this one folks. I really thought that we had free will and the choice to make our lives and those of the Iraqi people better.

I was wrong. It is all in the hands of the great almighty and his poker playing buddies and God's got pocket aces!

God hates John Kerry. Just like he hates gay people, and Muslims.


Monday, October 25, 2004

The People 1 - Sinclair Media 0

Congratulations people!

Democracy and Activism has won a small victory over corporate media partisan monsters.

All our letters and petitions have scored a small victory in our great land.

Quite a bit has happened in the short time span since Sinclair Media Group came out with their decision to utilize the public airwaves to take a herculean-45-minute-commercial-free smash on Kerry.

However, YOU (that's right little insignificant you) made a difference. Along with many others like you who wrote letters to the FCC, Sinclair Media, and major media outlets, Sinclair cut its program down substantially on what it was originally going to be.

As stated in a recent Washington Post article, "In general, it appears Sinclair listened to the American people," said Gene Kimmelman, Washington director of Consumers Union. "Sinclair certainly was acting like a broadcaster should tonight."

While Sinclair media group did air a one hour special one Kerry and his war record (chock full of inaccuracies, fact check), there were counter points offered including a small segment on Bush's service record and a 4 minute excerpt of a Pro-Kerry film called "Going Upriver."

While it isn't a complete victory over media bias by writing letters, boycotting their stock and taking action Americans came together to force an alternative plan on Sinclair Media Group.

It is a small victory for Democracy in action. Not to mention of course the power of the almighty dollar strangling corporations. Sinclair's stock dipped 15% since they announced they were going to show the anti-Kerry flick commercial free uncut.

This is the power we all have in this great country, no matter who is in charge it is still our country and as such we need to be active to counter injustices.

November 2nd is only 8 days away. If this country can band together one more time it will speak volumes to Washington. Don't forget, it isn't only the Presidency at stake but the Congress, and even the Supreme Court (Cheif Justice Rehnquist isn't doing so well these days).

Every letter, every vote, every action by every citizen in this country can and will make a difference. Whoever you are voting for in 8 days, just remember the facts (which unfortunately are stacked against Bush).

Democracy is NOT a passive system of governing. It requires action of each of its participants. If you are living in this country and benefiting from the system in any way (which we all are) it is your civic duty to participate in the process. Even if you vote for nobody, it is still a vote for change.

After voting you must continue to be active and write letters against injustices that are taking place every day in this country.

The pundits are estimating 118 million voters to turn out. According to the Census bureau there should be 203 million eligible voters. If the pundits are right, that means that in this time when I think many people have politics on the brain still only slightly over 50% of the populous that is eligible to vote is going to vote.

It is on this statistic, above all else, that I would love to see the pundits be proven wrong.


Thursday, October 21, 2004

New Jersey E Voting ?!?!

It is spreading everywhere. Electronic voting machines once thought of as the "fix" to the electoral problems associated with the 2000 presidential elections have been on the march throughout the country.

These machines are simple, user friendly, and easy to use. Many of these machines even have little prompts to ease your voting process. Some may even have little cartoon figures assisting you throughout the process.

However, most of all they are easy to electronically crack, hack, and break into. That is right folks. electronic voting machines have been used already in last 4 years and have been proven to be extremely vulnerable to hackers and mildly competent computer geeks. (see the report released by Johns Hopkins University). Another investigation by the New Zealand Herald (read it its worth it) found out that indeed the makers of these voting machine's are contributors to the Republican National Committee. Walden O'Dell the CEO of Diebold (one of three voting machine manufacturers) has said he was "committed to helping Ohio to deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

After 2000 it is hard to think that an election can be once again skewed by a simple computer geek who happens to be an ideologue. It could void a whole counties or state's ballots if there are enough of them.

The thing that worries me most however, is that I MAY HAVE TO VOTE ON ONE (see nytimes article). As many more New Jerseyites will also have that possibility I urge you all to go to your county official and get an absentee ballot. It is the only way to guarantee that you have a paper trail of your vote.

Here is an example of why a paper trail would be important. A recent FDU poll in NJ says the big two are statistically tied up in the state. New Jersey is also a state that usually gives about 5% to the Indy candidates. Sounds familiar? New Jersey among other states can be the Florida of 2004.

Help is needed folks. If they want a recount and you HAVE a copy of your paper ballot (which I urge you all to make) you can send that in as proof of your vote. Those of use voting on the machines well guess what... no receipt for you.

Think of how bad it would be if VISA called you and said they wanted to charge you $500 for something you bought for only $100. Good thing you kept that receipt huh?

Fellow New Jersey residents please go to in order to contact your local election official and find out what kind of machine you will be voting on in 2 weeks. UPDATE: Hudson county IS using e-voting machines this election and they do NOT provide a paper trail. Click here to fill out an application for absentee ballot

If it is electronic I suggest voting absentee. In New Jersey you can get an absentee ballot in person up to November 1st. If you want them to mail it, you can get one within 7 days of the election.

It is your vote and unfortunately after the 2000 election we can't afford to trust our government with our vote anymore. It is up to you to get it right.


Wednesday, October 20, 2004

Need Help on the Issues!

OK Folks,
I appologize for my lack of posts. I figure we all need a break from all the punditry that has been going on (besides the ALCS has taken up too much of my time with all these extra inning games).

It has become more and more difficult to come up with insight on punditry since more and more they are parsing issues 50 ways from Sunday. I know I made a pledge to my readers that I would separate the candidates based on their stances on issues. For those of you who still haven't made up your mind I urge you o go to the candidates websites alone to find information on issues (you know... straight from the horses mouth). As most media outlets who have easy to read discretions usually lean one way or the other.

Those who think Senator Kerry is "the most liberal man in the Senate" has debunked that one just today. I urge you all to go there and check it out.

However, the field of issues is beginning to widen so that it is hard for me to focus. So I ask you the reader to leave comments on the issues that mean the most to you. I put a lot of work into this thing and I would rather be serving my audience than bowing to the pundits.

I wouldn't want to fall victim to what John Stewart was talking about on Crossfire last Friday (check out the clip).


Wednesday, October 13, 2004

ACT on the Anti-Kerry Sinclairgate

OK FOLKS. How can I have a blog called media in trouble without having a post about the latest conservative hijacking of public airwaves since Rush Limbaugh got syndicated.

Click Here for the Article

Sinclair Media Group's top officers have thrown thousands of dollars at the Republican Campaign. They are going to air an anti-Kerry movie on PUBLIC airwaves. That is they ordered ALL their TV stations across the country (including swing states) to air a movie attacking Kerry on the Vietnam War.

I thought this thing was done but the republicans are at it again. For those of you who think "well Michael Moore put his movie out and nobody stopped him."

Well they tried he had to dump it from Miramax because Disney's republican's were against being associated with that. HOWEVER, the distinction is that you have to pay to see Michael Moore's movie. This is being BROADCAST over the PUBLIC airwaves.

OK this is something the gun people will love. THE GOVERNMENT IS RUNNING THE AIRWAVES and trying to skew public opinion of John Kerry by running this 45 minute smear commercial WITHOUT commercials.

That is a donation in itself. LOOK folks I have done all the work for you. You can go to the following link to sign a petition:

Click Here to ACT ON THIS!

Here is a letter I wrote (don't worry it's not copywriten, I won't sue you if you want to use it) to the FCC. I have also included links to the FCC folks email addresses. Please get on this people.

This is going to air without any type of rebuttal or equal time for an anti-Bush movie.

Dear Sirs and Madam:

It is with great dismay that I am writing this letter. I am appalled by the unfairness of the Sinclair Broadcast Group to air on all 62 stations an Anti-Kerry film as a "news event" next week. This can in no way be deemed a "news event" and should be removed from the airwaves in accordance with the Equal Time Law. I believe in the fundamental right to free speech and a free press however, the Equal Time Law states that it is indeed required to have both sides of the story.

Sinclair executives have shown support for the Bush campaign. Sinclair CEO David Smith contributed the legal limit of $2,000 Bush-Cheney 2004, and vice president Frederick Smith gave $175,000 to the Republican National Committee and maxed out his Bush-Cheney contribution.

Federal Election Committee records show that two other top level Sinclair executives gave the maximum amount they could to Bush-Cheney.
Sinclair executives have given nearly $68,000 in political contributions, 97 percent of it going to Republicans, since the beginning of the year, according to the Los Angeles Times.
I urge you to stop this partisan media organization from attempting to skew the electorate by not showing an equal anti-bush movie. However, better yet I believe it would be fairest to not show any political propaganda on free television for all to see.

Please do not allow this to happen.

I thank you in advance for your time in reading this complaint and possibly taking action on this complaint.


Here are the contacts for the FCC:

Chairman Michael K. Powell:
Commissioner Kathleen Q. Abernathy:
Commissioner Michael J. Copps:
Commissioner Kevin J. Martin:
Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein:

You should also go to Media Matters For America (check the links section) to read more about this hijacking of our airwaves for propaganda.



Health Care ... Privatization

And furthermore...

I forgot to mention that Bush wants YOU to take control of your OWN healthcare money.

Ok people who think they are savy enough to do this. The government will let you save money in an account so that when the time comes you can have money in the bank to pay for your healthcare needs.

Sound good?

Why don't you ask yourselves how much money you have saved up. Now let me put forth that the average heart attack that requires some type of surgery costs well over $38,500 (fact check). If we know capitalism there isn't any legal cap that is gonna take care of that price. If anything that price is gonna go higher.

So do you have 38,500 dollars lying around?

I don't because I did what President Bush told me to do. I spent money to stimulate the economy. I have a nice blue MINI cooper S and I am saving up to buy a house. I wasn't thinking about healthcare until I switched jobs. Ski season is coming up and I hope to GOD I don't hit a tree before New Year's.

People can't save and spend at the same time in this economy. This reminds me of that scene in the movie "Raising Arizona" when the John Goodman and his brother are robbing the bank and they say "FREEZE, OK NOW EVERYBODY LIE DOWN ON THE GROUND!"

What these rich republicans aren't figuring out is that most of the people in this country are having a hard time keeping up with all their other expenses. NOT EVERYONE IS RICH WASHINGTON!

So while if Dick Cheney has a heart attack I am sure he can dig into his Halliburton savings account and pluck $38,500 from there if he has to, I mean he has had to about 4 times.

Listen people Privatization OF ANYTHING is only good for rich people. Middle and Lower class guess what, we have to save for our mortgage or for Christmas gifts for the kids.




Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Health Care

Back to the issues...


I work in the field so I know a little bit about this.

Unless you are the poorest of the poor and are lucky enough to know about welfare and Medicaid you are paying for health insurance.

Some of you who are not in the 45,000,000 (that's million) who don't have health insurance may have noticed that your premiums (in whatever shape or form they come) have gone up.

This is a compilation of many many things that weigh down the healthcare industry and make it more expensive. The costs of drugs are so high because of regulations that have been imposed to protect patient safety. The costs of procedures and doctors visits are up because of health insurance companies making a profit from raising your premiums, and paying out less than what they are charged for the procedures. Loose loose for the doctors right?

Another thing is the litigation and malpractice suits that occur. However, this is a minimal influence on the total cost of health care. Despite what Bush will tell you. (fact check) By capping the malpractice suits' rewards the jury is still out as to how much of an effect if at all it will have on total health care costs. But there is at least one study which says it can save 5-9% of total health care costs (in the tens or into 100 billion dollars).

Now for those of you who think that a lawyer can't fix the legal system, or that lawyers don't belong in Washington and certainly not in the White House, guess what. Over 80% of the people in congress and in the Bush administration are lawyers.

Lawyers understand the law and that is why they should be the people writing the law.

I digress. Health Care is a huge problem in this capitalist society but it is the nature of the beast. This country with all its lobbies will probably never have Socialized medicine. Even though if all other things were the same except instead of paying the health insurance companies your premium you would pay the premiums to the government, you would have the most successful social health care program in the world.

Governments don't need to be involved in your decisions with your doctor just because they are running the program. They just write the checks and as long as those checks are going toward clinically proven practices they should be paid.

One thing that will never change is this. No lawyer can ever dictate what a doctor does. The American Medical Association, and entities like it are the ones governing the practice of medicine. If a doctor does something wrong by mistake that is one thing, but a doctor will never prescribe a drug or perform a procedure without it having a clinical study to prove itself to that doctor.

The candidates plans on this are easy to put forth:

  • Socialized medicine like I described above. That just means that your taxes will go up a bit (probably around 15% I am estimating) but you wont be paying a health insurance company if you don't want to.
  • However, everyone in America will have health care.

  • A bit more conservative all he wants to do is expand Medicare coverage to include about 27 million more people. No cost to anybody except the top 2 tax brackets. They will have to roll back to the level of paying taxes that they were when Clinton was in office. Don't worry if you are making $200,000 can easily afford another 3.5 percent.
  • Kerry plans to put caps on medical malpractice suits to lower their influence (he claims it is less than 1% of the total cost but I didn't find a good fact check on that).
  • He also wants to give small businesses a tax cut if they cover more of the costs of health care premiums for their workers.
  • He also wants to reimport the same drugs from Canada that were shipped there from American companies. These drugs are cheaper and the same in terms or safety. However, he also has legislation that checks the safety of these drugs (make the labels third-world-country-proof).
  • Kerry also wants to put the buying power (and this is something any republican can understand) back into Medicare. They can buy in bulk and as such can force the prices down.

  • Stay the course. Hasn't done anything so far in fact 5 million people lost their health care insurance during his term.
  • He has not put forth a plan to help drop down the costs except maybe cap malpractice suits. Which Kerry also proposes.
  • OK, he gave a prescription drug coverage to seniors. However, this plan increased the cost out of pockets and forced Seniors to join HMO's for the same amount of coverage. Of course by taking Medicare's size out of the equation you increase the costs of drugs.

So there is where the candidate's stand. Even if you have health care, you should be caring about the time when you might not have health care.


Wednesday, October 06, 2004

Fact Checking the VP Debate

Interestingly enough I switched from CSPAN to MSNBC as soon as the debates were over thinking that Chris Mathews was gonna give us a pretty good assessment about the debates.

In awe I saw him and Joe Scarborough practically take Edwards and throw him off a cliff. Saying nothing short of he got has ass handed to him.

I noticed a different debate but after watching MSNBC I actually felt like well maybe its just my bias. I thought the debate was fantastic and it really got to a lot of substance on both sides. I thought Edwards handled himself extremely well, with anecdotes and taking a bold stand on the Gay Marriage issue. I was proud that he made very bold statement on this issue. Democrats are notorious for following polls and whimpering over issues, balancing or choosing words to describe their position when in the end we find they really have no position.

John Kerry is a victim of his own fate on this alone. However, Edwards sat there and said:

"But we also believe that gay and lesbians and gay and lesbian couples, those who have been in long-term relationships, deserve to be treated respectfully, they deserve to have benefits.
For example, a gay couple now has a very difficult time, one, visiting the other when they're in the hospital, or, for example, if, heaven forbid, one of them were to pass away, they have trouble even arranging the funeral."

Granted he also said that marriage is between a man and a woman. But gays just want rights, not religious rights. The same rights our government gives our man and woman married couples, tax breaks, next of kin privileges, adoption benefits... etc.

Anyway, I wanted to make this post short because I think the NY Times did a fine job of fact checking this whole thing.

Fact Check by the NY Times

One major blunder by Cheney was when he was confronted with the Halliburton claims. He stated that everyone should go to which is George Soros' website (a multi-billion dollar liberal).

Funny. Either way both had their share of distortions of fact however, Cheney had most of them.

This debate was loaded with real issue debate. Cheney was stern and looked presidential (how fitting since he is the guy running the country and hiding intelligence from the UN), Edwards looked and acted down to earth, homely, and had a command of the facts and policy matters.

Which is maybe what the pundits missed. People are always talking about how Kerry is too smart too intellectual, doesn't connect with the people. Edwards last night was deliberately playing to those people who don't understand Kerry. He is the communicator that may be lacking in Kerry. He is the antithesis of Bush on the Kerry team.

Let us not forget that Edwards was indeed the second leading guy during the primaries. He has great ideas on policy in this country. Together with Kerry they are not bad guys to lead the country. Cheney's last words were filled with what he does best, fear, terror.

Maybe Bush can scare his way into the White House like he scared his way into Iraq.


Tuesday, October 05, 2004

Back to the Issues... Economy

Ok folks I promised that I would parse the issues and I realize I haven't done so since Iraq.

Sorry but with heads of state comming out about the Iraq mishap... well, there is just so much going on in these last couple of days and there is more comming.

The Economy.

Let it be known that although I am not an economist I know a few things about business. A few basic things for example. Can a company survive if it spends more than it earns?

Let's check it out? Enron was spending more than it earned, granted it was spending it on the top level people of the company and lying about how much it actually earned hmmm sounds like Halliburton.

Anyway it seems common sense that it just doesn't work that way. Over the last 4 years, the government started out and I applaud Bush for this cutting taxes. However, if we delve deeper into the tax cut we see that the top tax brackets got a bigger tax cut than the lower brackets.

Using data from the Congressional Budget Office, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (an independent government watchdog organization) put forth a great study about the Bush tax cuts in this time of increased spending (Read this)

Here is what they had to say about who got the money:

Those in the bottom fifth of households, with average incomes of just $16,600, will receive an average tax cut of $230 in 2004.

The fifth of households in the middle of the income spectrum, with average incomes of $57,400, will receive an average tax cut of $980.

By contrast, the top fifth of households, with average incomes of $203,700, will receive tax cuts averaging $4,890.

And the top one percent of households – with average incomes of $1,171,000 – will receive an average tax cut of $40,990.

This is more than 40 times the size of the average tax cut going to the middle fifth of households. Not to mention more than TWICE the ammount of income the lower fifth gets on average when they are WORKING for it.

But hey everybody hates taxes right? right. Even I hate paying taxes. Nobody I ever met liked to pay taxes. However, the Republican party boasts about its claim of being fiscally responsible.

The other thing about spending more money than you earn (through taxes in this case) is that evenutally you have to borrow money from other countries to pay off the debt you have created by spending all the money you don't have.

This causes the dollar to go down, this increases the price of importing goods and lowers the prices of exporting goods to other countries. So everybody looses if we start raising the debt.

Before I loose all the Homeland Security nuts. If the debt is too high, it means we have to borrow money. Who do we borrow money from? China, Japan, Saudi Arabia. Sounding dangerous yet?

China happens to be one of our largest trading partners. Trade is now unfair. You know, things are cheaper over seas so companies make stuff overseas and that makes them cheaper for the company, but it looses jobs here in the US. However trade agreements need to be inforced so that they can be fair. How can you make trade policy with your largest banker? The Chinese have the power over our economy.

That don't sound like we are in control.

OK jobs at home. There is also data in there about how the Bush presidency predicted about 5.5 million new jobs would be created between July 2003 and December 2004.

Not only have they been extremely wrong. They have been CONSISTENTLY WRONG. Again from the CBPP Almost every month (with the exception of March and April of 2004) the job numbers have come in GROSSLY under the estimate of the Bush Administration.

Let us not forget on Bush's watch we are at an overall deficit of jobs in this country. This is slated to be the first presidency to have lost jobs after Hoover (and he had to deal with the great depression).

Another thing Bush touts is that small businesses are helped out by the tax cut. However, only 1% of small businesses benefit from the tax cuts (fact check). Also the estate tax that was cut will only benefit a miniscule of small businesses.

Finally, for those who measure the economy (like I really do) by how the stock market does. So far in the last 4 years here is the scenario:

DOW Jones: down 570 points. Roughly 5%

NASDAQ: down 1400 points. Roughly 42%

S&P 500: down 186 points. Roughly 15%

No matter how they try and paint the picture various groups and the facts themselves have proven Bush wrong on the economy.

A couple of other articles about Greenspan and Bush's economy:

New Yorker article published by John Cassidy 9-6-04

NY Times Paul Krugman June 4, 2004 on Greenspan

Why Trickle Down Economics Doesn't Work

Let's see what the Candidates say about the Economy and their plans:


  • Corporate tax contributions as a percent of the overall federal revenue stream have been declining for fifty years and now stand at 7.4% despite massive record profits. A fundamental reappraisal of our tax laws should start with a principle that taxes should apply first to behavior and conditions we favor least and pinch basic necessities least such as the clearly addictive industries (alcohol and tobacco), pollution, speculation, gambling, extreme luxuries, taxing work or instead of the 5% to 7% sales tax food, furniture, clothing or books.
  • Tiny taxes (a fraction of the conventional retail sales percentage) on stock, bond, and derivative transactions.
  • Revamp the estate tax because unearned income should be taxed higher than earned income.
  • End the subsidized wasteful Military Industrial Complex in order to better fund social programs every American can benefit from including health care, education, and environment.
  • By requiring equitable trade, investing in urgently needed local labor-intensive public works (infrastructure improvements), creating a new renewable energy efficiency policy; by fully funding education and redirecting large bureaucratic and fraudulent health expenditures toward preventive health care we can reverse this trend and create millions of new jobs.


  • Cut taxes on businesses that create taxes here in the USA. Kerry also plans on enforcing fair trade agreements already in place.
  • Cut middle-class taxes 98% of Americans and 99% of small businesses will get a tax cut. (in recent news Bush signed a middle class tax but in front of new mothers holding babies in Idaho, besides it being about the first time I ever saw a President sign legislation outside of the White House... This tax cut is also a sham (fact check).
  • Families in the middle of the income scale — those in the middle 20 percent of the income distribution — will receive an average tax cut of $162 in 2005 from this legislation. By contrast, those in the top fifth will get an average tax cut of $1,317, and those in the $200,000 - $500,000 income range will get an average tax cut of $2,390.More than two-thirds of the tax cut — 70 percent of it — will go to those in the top fifth. Some 47 percent of the tax cut will go to those in the top tenth of the income spectrum. But families in the middle 20 percent of the income scale will get only 9 percent of the bill’s tax cuts, a peculiar result for a bill promoted as a middle-class tax relief package.
  • Enforce the budget in Washington so that wasteful spending is kept under control. Kerry will half the deficit in his first 4 years.
  • Invest in new high-technology jobs, high-paying jobs to help americans attain the elusive "American Dream."


  • Keep taxes low for the rich in hopes of trickle down Reaganomics working for the working class.
  • Do nothing about jobs being imported.
  • Spend more than you make. (it is no wonder he didn't make it in the business world).
  • Screw the deficit, we can borrow from the Chinese.
  • So what if the dollar is weak. Not in this country it ain't (ain't it?)


We Know Bush Doesn't Read the Papers... But Does the Media?

MUST SEE LINK: How the White House Embraced Disputed Arms Intelligence

If there is ONE article you need to read it is the one I have linked above.

Here is a brief synopsis:

The intelligence that the President acted on for going to war in Iraq was based on 2 major things:

Saddam had bought some 60,000 aluminum tubes. These were high grade tubes that could possibly be used in centrifuges to enrich uranium and thus possibly build a NUCYALAR bomb.

Yellow cake (uranium) was being sought by Saddam Hussein from Niger.

This article used high level sources to tell the whole story about the flurry in Washington after the tube intelligence was put forth.

The first analyst who reported the tube stuff, named Joe said they could be used in a 1950 centrifuge, but ironically the tubes Saddam bought were anodized (so they could be protected from weather) which was contrary to tubes used in the so called 1950's centrifuge.

Dick Cheney took this tube stuff and ran with it saying that "we now know that Saddam has restarted his nuclear weapons program." This was before letting another commission made up of the US's top scientists on nuclear centrifuges as well as nuclear weapons in general got a look at Joe's report. By the way... this commission included the inventor and engineer that made the 1950 centrifuge.

All these experts agreed that the tubes were not to spec for any centrifuge (they were the wrong thickness, anodized, basically useless in a nuclear program).

The yellow cake story was also discredited when the send Joe Wilson the foreign American diplomat (in charge of the embassy in Iraq) to Niger to find out what he could know about the yellow cake stuff. He came back and told everybody he didn't find ANY evidence that Saddam had bought the stuff or was even looking to buy it. This is when Robert Novak (a conservative journalist... whom by the way did not get the same treatment Dan Rather got) exposed Joe Wilson's wife as a CIA operative. This was supposedly leaked to Bob Novak from a White House official.

Anyway, the New York Times this Sunday who also used White House Senior Officials, CIA, and other sources from Washington exposed the White House, specifically Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, President Bush and others as knowing all this stuff was phony baloney before trumpeting the case for war.

This is the people leading this country right now. Mind you most of the people who were making the case for war in the months leading up to the war were all ex OIL people.

The importance of the story published Sunday in the New York Times is the following:

Until now, this whole invading Iraq for Oil interests has been a conspiracy theory. We now have confirmation from high level Washington Insiders who saw the intelligence, and have come out to speak out against this administration and its WAR MONGERS.

People, all the blood spilled in Iraq was based on a fraud that was placed in front of the American people in the form of a war on terror, or a mushroom cloud looming over our heads.

Iraq was destroyed with the first gulf war and the resulting sanctions and constant weapons inspections. The inspectors found these tubes and they found them being used to make conventional anti-air rockets. Something that was not disputed under the UN resolutions. Iraq was allowed to make conventional weapons after Gulf War 1.

Saddam did not seek uranium from Niger or anywhere. He was not a smoking gun, we found out rather quickly that Iraq was in essence an UN-armed country.

This administration is responsible for leading our soldiers into war on false pretenses, which they knew full and well ahead of time AND THEY AREN'T GETTING IMPEACHED?

Bill Clinton got impeached for ORAL SEX?!

So it may be too late for impeachment. Vote for whoever you want folks. Go right ahead.


Those Who Served Our Country ... And Those Who Didn't

This is a quick post about people serving in office or not who served their country as soldiers and the like. Disclaimer, I did not vette this information. I do not know if it is true I got this in an email. So readers... don't pull a Rather on me.

I don't even have a press licence.

Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-'47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V Purple Hearts.
John Edwards: did not serve.
Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star, Vietnam.
Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-1953.> Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74. Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.
Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII, receiving the Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons. Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars, and Soldier's Medal. Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V. Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
Chuck Robb: Vietnam
Howell Heflin: Silver Star
George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but received 311.
Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and Air Medal with 18 Clusters.
Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul Wallenberg.
Wesley Clark: U.S. Army, 1966-2000, West Point, Vietnam, Purple Heart, Silver Star. Retired 4-star general.
John Dingell: WWII vet
John Conyers: Army 1950-57, Korea

Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
Tom Delay: did not serve.
House Whiip Roy Blunt: did not serve.
Bill Frist: did not serve.
Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
George Pataki: did not serve.
Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
Rick Santorum: did not serve.
Trent Lott: did not serve.
Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last by marriage.
John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business.
Jeb Bush: did not serve.
Karl Rove: did not serve.
Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked Max Cleland's patriotism.
Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
Vin Weber: did not serve.
Richard Perle: did not serve.
Douglas Feith: did not serve.
Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
Richard Shelby: did not serve.
Jon Kyl: did not serve.
Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
Christopher Cox: did not serve.
Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as aviator and flight instructor.
George W. Bush: six-year Nat'l Guard commitment (in four).
Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non-combat role making m
Gerald Ford: Navy, WWII
Phil Gramm: did not serve.
John McCain: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
Bob Dole: an honorable veteran.
Chuck Hagel: two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star, Vietnam.
Duke Cunningham: nominated for Medal of Honor, Navy Cross, Silver Stars, Air Medals, Purple Hearts.
Jeff Sessions: Army Reserves, 1973-1986
JC Watts: did not serve.
Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
G.H.W. Bush: Pilot in WWII. Shot down by the Japanese.
Tom Ridge: Bronze Star for Valor in Vietnam.
Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
Clarence Thomas: did not serve

Pundits & Preachers:
Sean Hannity: did not serve.
Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a 'pilonidal cyst.')
Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
Michael Savage: did not serve.
George Will: did not serve.
Chris Matthews: did not serve.
Paul Gigot: did not serve.
Bill Bennett: did not serve.
Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
Bill Kristol: did not serve.
Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
Michael Medved: did not serve.


Saturday, October 02, 2004

Equal Time? Not if your name is Ralph Nader

This is for the Naderites.

The United States of America has a federal law that states:

"If any licensee shall permit any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office to use a broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities to all other such candidates for that office in the use of such broadcasting station: Provided, That such licensee shall have no power of censorship over the material broadcast under the provisions of this section. No obligation is imposed under this subsection upon any licensee to allow the use of its station by any such candidate." (fact check)

How is it that in the Gubernatorial race for impeachment in California brought this law back into the forefront of American Media yet it is no longer valid for the presidential debate? Candidates for governor of California (numbering well into the hundreds) last year screamed and bitched and moaned about this law so that they too can have a chance at free media exposure.

The media itself was actually subdued by this, even impersonators made fun of this scenario in their comedy routines.

This is no laughing matter America, as corporations run the media you watch everyday (Rupert Murdoch owns 75% of the GLOBAL audience) including networks such as Fox News and in fairness Air America Radio pronounce completely conservative views and have pundits on the air without always giving the other opinion a chance to state their view on the air.

So here we have a public debate NOT sponsored by any media outlet in particular but run specifically by the Commission on Presidential Debates yet we only have 2 candidates. This is an outrage and an encroachment on this countries 1st amendment rights. If you are a legal candidate the LAW states you should be given equal time on the air. This includes PBS and CSPAN and any other network.

Air America's Randi Rhodes says we can't afford Ralph Nader. Sorry Randi. You are a great liberal voice, but not on this one. How can a liberal proclaim this statement? Honestly, this country needs a kick in the ass and apparrently it didn't work last time when Nader did give this country a kick in the electoral ass. We are still gonna have a bad election in florida thanks to paperless balots.

In an age of undecided voters vying over ever increasingly similar candidates, it is no wonder our democracy is at a stand still. People are having a hard time to decide between a war monger and a guy who sounds not so different from the war monger. However, there are other options and the only way this democracy can be saved is with more choices.

Elections are about choice. Yet the media has not allowed us to see who else is out there. Ralph Nader may very well spoil this election as the media would put it. Nader isn't the one who disenfranchised voters in Florida. Nader isn't the one who was apathetic about voters and their representatives on the Floor of the United States Senate.

The Democrats spoiled their own election last time and this time they are doing it again. They give is a candidate that has been pretty much hard to differentiate and draw contrast against the current president.

The media plays along by suppressing the other parties. I thought it was pretty interesting that in the pre-debate Hardball show, in the background you saw a Nader sign for the 1st 10 minutes or so of coverage. After that the Nader sign holder just disappeared. Maybe he didn't know he was on camera. Maybe he just had to go to the bathroom and couldn't get back to his spot. Maybe the producers said "holy shit what the fuck is a Nader sign doing back there, get him out" Somehow the same producer let a "Legalize it" poster to remain on the air throughout the Al Sharpton interview (for this I am greatful)

But that is speculation, and I would be committing the same terrible mistake the media makes if I continue on that route.

What isn't speculation is the fact that Nader was not allowed to debate either of these guys. Granted the country needs to get rid of this current president. Granted that this country needs more parties. Granted this country is founded on the freedom of speech and equal time is protected by federal law.

Ralph Nader. This country doesn't need a guy fighting for our rights as consumers, fighting against the corporations that rob us of our retirement funds, fighting for safer airplanes 30 years before terrorists could have used them to destroy us. This country doesn't need a guy fighting for our freedoms our human rights, and the human rights of others around the world. This country doesn't need someone to fight for making the environment safer. This country doesn't need someone who fights for world peace, gun control, and the destruction of the IMF and World Bank. This country doesn't need someone who fights for global economic fairness and the destruction of corruption.

Ralph Nader it is not that this country doesn't need you. This country doesn't deserve you.


Bush Lies in the debate

Ok folks, this is a quick one, just wanted to highlight a couple of Bush's lies during the debate. Small but since they are a part of the Iraq conflict I thought it would be important to point them out.

One of Kerry's big plans for Iraq is training Iraq's own security forces.

During the debate Bush said that there were already 100 thousand of Iraq's security forces trained. That sounds pretty substantial since we have 130,000 troops there. So I said, well that is a great sign, that means they could practically keep the peace themselves right? It would be if Bush didn't lie.

FACT CHECK this is a must see link folks. As of September 21st, there are only 38,000 of Iraq's security forces trained. There are 49,000 that are on the force but not trained.

"The Iraqi police have at least enough weapons for each police officer to have a gun, but there are less than 6,000 police vehicles, about 25 percent of what is needed. Similarly, there are fewer than 14,000 radios, one-fifth of what is needed, and only 44,000 sets of body armor, according to the Pentagon's latest statistics on Iraqi security forces."

First response is almost non-existent. Sorry Bush you lied to us again.

Why the hell am I apologizing for this man? Well someone has to if he doesn't.

Another lie, he actually mentioned that the UN peace keepers were invited to the conflict in Iraq. REALLY? When was this, why didn't this make headlines? The UN pissed on us?

Try to google it yourself. You are sure to find what I found. Lots of articles stating that the US DID NOT invitee the UN and we were the ones who pissed on them.

So there you have it folks, a nice short post for ya to see how much your president cares about you.



Friday, October 01, 2004

Got Nukes?

This week Vice Foreign Minister of North Korea Choe Su Hon threatened the world anew with specific information regarding the extent of North Korea's nuclear weapons program (the story).

Let's talk WMD's who really has them? Funny how we are digging around in Iraq, so far every hole we think they may be in happens to be filled with dead Kurds. No weapons. But just like American's like it, conveniently, North Korea did the searching around for us, and they even told us they had them, how many of them there are and how many of them there will be if we don’t get directly involved in the conversation that has been going on with N. Korea, China, and Japan.

Let's hear what Choe Su Hon said:

"[North Korea] had no other option but to possess a nuclear deterrent because of U.S. policies were designed to eliminate North Korea and make it a target of pre-emptive nuclear strikes. Our deterrent is, in all its intents and purposes, the self-defensive means to cope with the ever increasing U.S. nuclear threats and further prevent a nuclear war in northeast Asia. North Korea is still ready to dismantle its nuclear program if Washington abandons its hostile policy and is prepared to peacefully coexist. However, the ever intensifying U.S. hostile policy and the clandestine nuclear-related experiments recently revealed in South Korea constitute big stumbling blocks and make it impossible for North Korea to participate in the continuation of six-nation talks on its nuclear program."

What is in your nukes?

"We have already made clear that we have already reprocessed 8,000 wasted fuel rods and transformed them into arms."

Yeah but everybody has some wasted fuel rods, why should we think you aren't just putting us on? Like it’s not like you weaponized this nuclear material right?

Choe said, "We declared that we weaponized this."


Well Bushy I think we found the WMD's for ya. They are on the other side of the world. You are way off. Sorry president Bush. You goofed.

At least Colin Powell and Tony Blair have come around. That's right the guy who went to the UN to make the case for ware, you know our Secretary of State. Colin Powell said this week that the situation in Iraq worsening. (fact check)

Our biggest ally going into the big blunder in Iraq, Prime Minister of Britain, Tony Blair stated "The evidence about Saddam having actual biological and chemical weapons, as opposed to the capability to develop them, has turned out to be wrong. I acknowledge that and accept it." (fact check)

So it seems the even our allies are coming around on the fact that the intelligence was wrong about Iraq. Much like most ex CIA analysts have said even to Bush before the war. S

o the first debate is under our belts and at first glance it seems that Kerry won the debate. Making Bush look dumbfounded, upset, wriggly, and lacking substance in his answers. That is what a good debater does. So Kerry is a good debater. Kerry brought up North Korea and nuclear proliferation as the biggest threat to our national security. Bush was stuck on his beat down of Kerry as a mixed message sender, or flip-flopper. Kerry was wise enough to state that it is one this to have conviction and it is another to admit that those convictions are wrong.

In the age of media spin and corporate opinions being pushed into our heads some things in that debate on foreign policy were not brought up.

How about Bush's failed Road Map to Peace between Israel and Palestine. How can this country be so arrogant as to completely ignore the Israeli Palestinian conflict in a debate on foreign policy?

I like Jim Lehrer, he runs one of the last fair and balanced news programs left in this country. However, it pains me that this issue was not brought up.

Here are a couple of facts for the average American to ingest:

The United States has supported Israel since its inception as a country in 1948.

In 1952 the US gave Israel its first monetary support with $65 million bucks. This was to help them take in Holocaust survivors. Within 3 years the population doubled with European refugees to a total of 1.25 million Jews in Israel.

Since its inception as a country Israel has received a total of 49+ billion dollars in military grants, and 30.5 billion in economic grants (free money). All other aid totals less than a billion dollars.

Every year since 1977 aid has totaled at least 2 billion, and this year alone it looks like at least 3 billion in aid will be granted to Israel. (fact check)

In 2003 the US gave a total of $15 billion in total foreign aid. That means almost 1/3 of United States foreign aid went directly to Israel. (fact check)


Perhaps the thing that the terrorists hate the most is any and all presence of a secular government or its ideals or its surrogates in an area that is deemed holy by the doctrine they believe.

I mean isn't die hard Christians that hate the notion of gay marriage? Isn't it the die hard Christians that hate the fact that they CAN'T display their 10 commandments in public places? Isn't it the die hard Christians our forefathers were trying to protect us from by drafting the Constitution of the United States of America?

Well it is the Die Hard Christians who will continue to send our sons and daughters Die Hard in Iraq, Afghanistan, and any other country this "Inspired by God" leader and his croneys will continue to invade, on false pretenses. Meanwhile, North Korea and other "rogue nations" continue to build up their defenses against our divine army.

How can our country promote peace while at war? How can our country defend against nuclear proliferation when we are the ones building and expanding our nuclear armament?

Bush said mixed messages a whole lot during the debate. Accusing Kerry of sending mixed messages. Looks to me that Bush is the one sending the mixed messages to the world.

Fighting for peace by waging war. Spreading freedom by occupying and invading other nations. Condemning nuclear proliferation while expanding our own nuclear armament. (fact check)