BuzzFlash Mailbag for March 27, 2007

Submitted by BuzzFlash on Tue, 03/27/2007 - 2:52pm.

BuzzFlash Mailbag

BUZZFLASH MAILBAG

Want to join the conversation? Share your thoughts with other Mailbag readers by clicking here.

Subject: Will Impeachment Save the Republican Party?

I'm glad to see Republican Senator Chuck Hagel bring up the idea that Bush should be impeached if Bush presses ahead with his failed policy on Iraq. Republicans might have to take a leadership position on impeachment getting rid of Bush before Bush gets rid of the Republican Party. In 2006 the Republicans lost the House and the Senate because of Bush's failures. Two more years of Bush could be the end of the Republicans. Perhaps that's why the Democrats have taken impeachment off the table because they know that Bush is dragging them down with him.

Bush is like a cancer in the Republican Party and I think in two years it's going to be fatal. Republicans are going to have to choose if they are going to stick with Bush and go down with the ship, or save themselves while they still can. It makes me wonder if Senator Hagel is the only Republican who understands this.

Marc Perkel
San Bruno, CA

Subject: Gonzales Aide To Invoke Fifth Amendment - Politics - MSNBC.com

"But in this case it looks like that authority was delegated down through (former White House counsel) Harriet Miers, Karl Rove, Judge Gonzales and all the way down to a bunch of 35-year-old kids who got in a room together and tried to decide who was most loyal to the president," Cummins said.

Perfect summation of the entirety of the Worst Presidency ... Ever.

John L. Johnson
Laingsburg , Michigan

Subject: Fifth Amendment

Will Congress impose immunity on Monica Goodling? If there is no legal risk, the Fifth Amendment doesn't apply. A subpoena and immunity might get a lot of interesting information.

D. Miller
Lawrence, KS

[BuzzFlash Note: Don't miss Dan Froomkin's analysis of her taking the fifth -- a must-read: Bush's Monica Problem (Washington Post).]

Subject: Katie Couric: Unfair to the Edwardses

Thank you Linda Milazzo for your views on Katie Couric.

Linda Milazzo: The King, The Jester, and The Fool -- A BuzzFlash Guest Contribution

My husband and I watched it and we both thought as you did. Ka tic Couric was downright rude to both of them. As well as counting Elizabeth out with no hope at all.

We both agree with Linda in everything she said, even about the sudden death of the Edwardses' son.

I know of at least several people, one is my sister, who was told as Elizabeth was about their cancer. Today they are living productive lives, and the cancer has showed reduction and some gone altogether, done with a certain treatment that was right for each of them.

Elizabeth looked so beautiful, and Katie look like the face of doom.

Elizabeth will be there as a wonderful First Lady. John Edwards was our pick as President from the beginning.

As Elizabeth Edwards said, "We all have to die one day. It's all about what you do with the life you have."

Angela
Phila.

Subject: The Real Cover-Up Continues To Be That Pat Tillman Was Non-Religious

He was probably an atheist. That aspect of his life never gets mentioned because the Christians and right-wing in this country get so angry and unnerved whenever an atheist is reported to be brave, unselfish, law-abiding, patriotic, and that they fought for their country to preserve our unique forms of freedom. It messes with their heads.

Non-religious people are by-the-way good, brave, unselfish, law-abiding, and patriotic - just like Pat Tillman.

It happens hypocritically all the time that the Christian religion of a hero gets examined, hyped, and indulged in per pundit commentary upon their death. But the personal guide of carefully arrived at beliefs for an atheist in a foxhole who fights and dies bravely for the cherished freedom of belief for all people, that still remains unmentionable.

J. Scott
Everett, WA

Subject: Mailbag.....Genie

Thanks for the concern....and it is really a hard one to work out...It has gotten almost impossible since the election of 2006...and he is vicious. He has started surfing the internet to find e-mails I have sent to and about Joe Lieberman....tells me I am crazy. This, I did not realize...got out of hand after the 2006 election...I couldn't figure out why he and the other brother were so mean...and then I realized, he told my other sister...she was a liar because she thought a man who went to the airport to greet incoming soldiers from Iraq...was doing a heroic thing. He said she could not possibly feel that way if she did not believe in the war. You cannot win with this imbecile...sorry...he was once my brother...but, he is making the world a crazy place now.

I am hoping so much that the Gonzales thing gets taken care of...I did not realize that they had done all this firing and, to attorneys who were working on...what the White House wanted them to work on....taking care of business with the other side. No wonder my brother likes Bush so much...he is just like him.

Shirley ... St. Louis

Subject: Katie Couric

This is in reference to Linda Milazzo's "Open Letter to Katie Couric: You Were Unfair to the Edwards." It seems to me that Katie Couric has been "perky" while interviewing Republicans, but judgmental and harsh toward Democrats for a long time. I'll never forget how she didn't even smile once when she interviewed Al Gore on the Today Show when he was running for president. Ever since then, I've not watched television any time she has been on. The other night, at the beginning of the Colbert Report, it was announced that she would be the person interviewed. I immediately switched channels.

R. M. Johnson
New Jersey

[BuzzFlash Note: On "Colbert," she went with perky.]

Subject: If the Word Got Out

... That we're going to end the Iraq war and precipitously so, could the transmission of said good news, by itself, cold-turkey stop the bloodshed?

A BuzzFlash Reader

Subject: Fredo

As far as the godfather analogy goes, Bush is definitely a Fredo. Gonzales is too slimy and too much of a butt licker to play Hagen, he doesn't have Duvall's class.

I see Bush and the boys in "the gang that couldn't shoot straight." There are no Corleones in Bush's gang, just a bunch of second rate crooks. to tell you the truth, I see Bush starring as "il Duce." Mussolini was the original little bombastic fascist, who could start but couldn't win any war. And we all know what happened to il Duce.

Tom Coombs
Kaslo BC Canada

Subject: If Only

What a great country we could be if only those spending every waking moment debunking global warming had spent five seconds wondering about the intelligence (I still laugh writing that word) that put us in Iraq.

But, no, we must never question a president in a time of war, forgetting the fact that Iraq never was involved in Sept. 11, 2001. Such a minor detail.

But no, they tell us, global warming advocates want to destroy the United States. Not exactly sure why. But let's humor them. They were wrong on Iraq. So hundreds of thousands are dead, and we will be bankrupt any day now. Evil Empires don't last forever.

Say the advocates of global warming are wrong. We would have less pollution. Spend less on gas. And maybe live longer because you walked to the store instead of loading up the Hummer to drive five blocks.

God, that would be awful.

Ken Swanborn
Calumet City, IL

Subject: Why the Rage About Global Warming?

Why are right wingers in such denial about Global Warming? The Oil Companies and their representative whores like Senator James M. Inhofe are outraged because of the money honey. So long as the world is addicted, oil companies get richer. Greed knows no bounds and little fish like Inhofe will prostitute their souls for a bit of the moola. But why are some ordinary people so outraged over the very idea?

Our oil addiction enriches countries and governments that are opposed to all we hold dear. Yet people like Senator Inhofe do nothing to keep oil money from flowing into those pockets. Senator Inhofe, conservative, homophobic gasbag gets a lot of that oil money.

What if out of some misguided sense of national unity we decided to work together to detoxify ourselves from oil addiction? What if Americans, who were once among the most innovative people on the planet, all worked together to get rid of the infernal combustion engine?

What if the moribund American auto industry gave Americans the chance to buy electric cars that ran on batteries and did not pollute the very air we breathe? What if we could buy cars that could be plugged into an outlet in our garage to recharge? Where is the downside?

Smart voters, who want to get this country off oil and onto a way of life where we control our own destiny, know that Windbags like Senator Inhofe hold America back. The good people of Oklahoma, descendants of pioneers, need to kick this phony out of the Senate. He should be working for the voters in Oklahoma, not the oil industry.

If you believe in Global Warming, then alternative fuels are right up your alley. If you don’t believe in global warming but the end result is alternative fuels, cleaner air, creating jobs at home, and closing down the relentless march of our dollars into the oil company profits, where is the downside? How does America lose? We know what crooks like Inhofe lose.

Marjorie Swanson
Kenosha, WI

Subject: And Once Again, the Heart of the Country Atrophies While its Punditry Checks its Hair and Makeup

Dear Media Punditry;

I really could care less about the U.S. Attorney firings. I'm really a lot more concerned about hiring of their replacements. The more I read about this issue, the more I see this part of the problem fading into the background.

"These U.S. attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President," one idiot after another says. One side produces data like "between 1981 and 2006, only five of the 486 U.S. attorneys failed to finish their four-year terms," a fact that actually makes it sound relatively common (and are singled out for praise by their editor for having done so). Five in 25 years? That's over one per president! So Bush pushed it a little further. Yawn ...

The entire point of this US Attorney scandal is that the Republican-controlled Congress in 2006 stuck a provision in the Patriot Act Reauthorization Bill that allows these attorneys to be appointed indefinitely without Senate confirmation. This is why this is important. This is why it is illegal. This is why it is political. The administration wanted to replace these attorneys without Senate confirmation. In the dark, essentially.

The morons in the MSM talk about this issue, and they consult their legal experts, and even they don't have a clue:

COOPER: You know, it's not my job to take sides on this, so let me just ask the obvious question, which I guess Republicans would ask, in particular, is, why was it OK for President Clinton to fire all of these attorneys, and for this Republican president to get in trouble for just firing selectively?

TOOBIN: Because U.S. attorneys are traditionally replaced by a new president. What Clinton did was, he replaced them all immediately. U.S. attorneys are always replaced by a new administration. They usually just let each person's term end, and then replace it.

COOPER: So if -- as I guess was discussed -- if, at the beginning of President Bush's second term, he just decided to fire them all, that would have been OK?

TOOBIN: I think that certainly wouldn't have created the political problem that they had here now. I mean, it would have been very disruptive to the judicial system. It's never been done in the middle of a president's term. The issue here is not that he fired people. It's why he fired people -- you know, to get Karl Rove's assistant to be the U.S. attorney in Arkansas. ... That's not a very good reason. If he thinks ... a U.S. attorney is not enforcing immigration laws correctly, that seems like a legitimate reason. ...

Toobin: Not telling straight story a big part of firestorm (CNN)

A BuzzFlash Reader

Subject: Matthews Obsession with Hillary Rides Again

I watch "Hardball" with Chris Matthews every night because I am a political Junkie and can’t help myself. I watch the "Chris Matthews Show" on Sunday mornings too. Does not this surfeit of Matthews make me nauseous or put me in danger of losing I.Q. points? I keep Rolaids close by for the nausea and I.Q. points are a concern for many reasons at my age.

On his Sunday program Matthews once again likened Hillary Clinton to Madam DeFarge. For those not familiar with Dickens’ Tale of Two Cities, Madam DeFarge is the principal villain of the tale. Is this appropriate? Agree with Senator Clinton or not, I seldom do, much of Matthews verbiage is not appropriate. However his words did seem to amuse Norah O’Donnell and Gloria Borger who giggled girlishly. Which is certainly to be preferred to O’Donnell’s usual laugh which would damage eardrums several blocks away.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madame_Defarge

Once again in the race to Supreme Tackiness Chris Matthews was in his 3-point stance on Monday night. Matthews' perpetual attacks on Hillary Clinton have become such a part of his routine he appears ever more unhinged. Guests frequently look askance as Matthews rants.

Matthews' vicious attack on Tom and Christie Vilsack after Vilsack announced he would not run for President was particularly sleazy. Tweety screeched his outrage not that Vilsack was withdrawing but that he was endorsing Hillary. How dare Governor Vilsack support she who must be bashed? And Tweety might want to not mention Hillary’s screechy voice again after his performance on Monday night.

Monday night he seemed to realize that perhaps he had gone a little over the top with Christie Vilsack and reminded her that it was “Hardball.” Ms. Vilsack assured him that she could handle it and then gave a glowing report on Hillary who is a personal friend. Tweety might want to try some fiber; he looked constipated after Ms. Vilsack slapped the “Hardball” deftly back into his court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Vilsack

Marjorie Swanson
Kenosha, WI

Subject: You've Got To Be Kidding!

Just read the article you entitled (roughly) that the GOP is turning to a 30s something boy genius to "save" the GOP.

Well, I clicked on the link you provided and up popped this story: I at first thought it had to be some kind of a joke or an early April Fool's Day trick.

Republicans turn to 32-year-old to "turn the lights back on in the idea factory" 3/26

Seriously, Adam Putnam? He's only slightly above the intelligence level of the goofball from NC, Patrick McHenry. He's the one who seemingly seriously asked, in one of the House of Representatives hearings, "What is an earmark?" Good grief. This is the future of the Republican Party?

Let's be honest here: We, the People are fed up with the so-called Neoconservative social mores, foreign policy ideas, and the rest of their filthy, disgusting, and corrupt values. They are the very antithesis of all they say out of one side of their mouth that they espouse.

Adam Putnam? Bring 'im on. He will be a sure road to Democratic "power" for years to come if he is the best the GOP can come up with.

L M (Johnson) Tschudy
Tacoma, WA

Subject: Blair's "Different Phase"

Doesn't this smell like the Tonkin Gulf?

I visualize this conversation: Hey, Tony, you know there's no way I can take out Iran given all the hysteria here about friggin' Iraq. If we're gonna get that Iranian oil, YOU'RE gonna have to do this one.

OK, George, but have Karl and his people come up with a "triggering incident" that will let me go in there.

Question: Wouldn't Ahmadinejad have to be certifiably nuts to take on U.K. while U.S. and U.N. are breathing down his neck?

Rich L.
Boulder, CO

Subject: Gonzales Aide Taking the 5th

I read Josh Marshall's piece on this that was in the morning Buzz Top Five Headlines and I have another theory.

The so-called "perjury trap" was set for Bill Clinton. He was called in to talk about apples (Whitewater) and was then asked about oranges (Monica). Here, we're looking at the top aide to the Attorney General. What they're afraid of is that she's being called to testify about apples (prosecutor firings) and might also be asked about oranges (torture, wiretapping, a whole laundry list of ills). Makes sense to me.

But what the committee needs to do now is subpoena her, make her come in, swear her in and make her take the 5th publicly, on camera, on the record, in front of everybody.

Caren West

Subject: Katie Couric and the Edwardses

Dear "60 Minutes":

CBS Evening News Ratings have plummeted because of one person. Katie Couric. When an anchor of a prime time news program and a stalwart news show such as 60 minutes asks question form the proverbial straw man “some,” ratings tend to plummet. Unless of course, CBS wants ratings to emulate those of FOX Noise Channel (less viewers, but more right-wing whack-jobs) than that of a legitimate news organization.

“Some have suggested” is not journalism.

“Some people say” is not journalism.

From the first minute Katie touched President Bush’s knee (several times) during her first week on the air as anchor of the CBS Evening News, giggling and cackling like a school yard [girl] trying to impress the mean spirited, dumb jock followed by Rush Limbaugh’s segment as if he were a legitimate voice of the people in a display only a partisan sociopath could have thought of in the first place, I vowed never to watch her or CBS Evening News again.

Unfortunately, 60 minutes found her room to destroy their news organization even further in their own broadcast, but with 60 Minutes, I simply turned it off whenever Ms. Couric had a piece on.

When John & Elizabeth Edwards were going to be on, I made the mistake of watching despite the fact that my instincts knew better.

The Edwardses were brilliant. Despite the fact that some people didn’t approve of their decision (Rush Limbaugh was the only some people at the time of the interview) they got through the inept, unprofessional and highly judgmental inquiry by a woman whom if I had to venture to guess, is either f***ing Rush Limbaugh or seriously thinking about it.

I refuse to watch CBS Evening News despite the fact I was once excited about the fact a woman was finally being given the helm at a major news anchor-ship, but I promise I will never watch 60 minutes again if Katie Couric is ever given another assignment. Ever again.

Joshua Epstein
New York, New York

Subject: Katie Couric

I don't understand why CBS is still pimping "Couric at Night"? The numbers don't lie, she is a disaster for CBSNews and now they release her to ruin "60 Minutes," too. She worked fairly well on the fluff and stuff morning format, but it should be obvious she can't handle the heavy lifting of serious news or journalistic integrity.

Does CBS have a morning program? She chums it up with comedian "Flushed Limpballs" and then tries to pull off an attack expose on the Edwardses. I guess it's just that darn liberal mainstream drive-by media at it again. By the way, there really is such a thing as bad publicity...how much can CBS take?

Barry Baker
Albany. NY

Subject: Our Moronic Governor of Florida

Dear BF...

You won't believe what our new Moronic Governor of Florida did - he put a Cap on GOOD Insurance companies who operated here for yrs. and now MOST of them can't afford to operate in the Sunshine State any longer. No BIG insurance companies are writing policies so we are stuck with Citizens Insurance Co. ... owned and operated by the State of Fl. When my insurance company recently cancelled me for said reasons, I subsequently called "Citizens" Insurance - they are not only providing me with less coverage but charging me $2,000 more per yr. (than my previous company).

I hope you post this on your Web page. It's disgraceful - he will be a ONE termer, I'm quite sure of that.

Thanks.

Citizens insurance OK to compete (The News Press)

Colette Miller
Wellington, Florida

Subject: Check Out Bush Spokesman’s Cancer Has Returned - New York Times

Katie Couric should ask Tony Snow exactly the same "some people say" questions that she harassed John Edwards with on "60 Minutes."

A BuzzFlash Reader

[BuzzFlash Note: Tony Snow has colon cancer, as did Couric's late husband, of course. Katie's sister, Emily, a Democratic state senator in Virginia, died of pancreatic cancer in 2001. As the Associated Press obituary noted, although Emily dropped out of contention for the lieutenant governorship in 2000 due to health issues, she held onto her senate seat and served as co-chair of the state Democratic Party while undergoing cancer treatments.]

Buzz,

After reading "The case for teaching the Bible" in the Time Magazine, I was reminded of the following quote:

"It is no measure of good health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -- Jiddu Krishnamurti

The author of the article says that the Bible is the most influential book ever written. I think it can be safely said that a couple of billion Muslims would reject that statement. He also mentions that it is not possible to be educated and have not read the Bible. That's easily refuted - I have a Masters degree, and I have never read the Bible. One could go on about the article, but I am short on time, so let's leave it at this.

Akhil Bhardwaj
Phoenix,AZ

Subject: When People Argue That, After All, These Federal Prosecutors Are Political Appointees ...

... Let's be clear about a few things.

ONE: Clinton fired all the federal prosecutors when he first took office and, then, never fired another one.

TWO: Federal prosecutors are political appointees and they expect to leave when a new administration comes in, much as Cabinet officers expect to be replaced.

THREE: Ronald Reagan and Bush I also fired all the federal prosecutors when they took office, even though, in the case of Bush I, he was firing REPUBLICANS that Reagan had appointed.

FOUR: Bush II also got around to firing all the federal prosecutors Clinton had appointed.

FIVE: When people argue that, after all, these federal prosecutors are political appointees, so "why shouldn't we expect them to act in a partisan political way," they miss the point. Most judges are also political appointees (a few are elected, and one can argue which method is best), but I hardly think anyone would feel it was acceptable for a Republican judge to find all Democrats guilty and find all Republicans innocent. That is essentially what the Bush gang was asking of its federal prosecutors.

The Bush gang had SECRETLY inserted a provision into the Patriot Act permitting the Att. Gen. (Alberto Gonzales) to fill all prosecutor vacancies, and there would be NO senate scrutiny or need for senate approval -- Gonzales was primed to appoint true political hacks who clearly understood that their mandate was to prosecute Democrats and overlook the crimes of Republicans.

I hope that anyone who thinks it is no big deal that the Bush gang was using the offices and power of the federal prosecutors for partisan political gain never has to appear before a judge who feels the same way about WHY he was appointed and who he is supposed to find guilty for belonging to the "wrong" political party.

A BuzzFlash Reader

Subject: War with Iran Set to Start April 6 -- This Is an Outrage -- Bush Is an Outrage -- Besides a War Monger

I'm so upset about this. I've emailed my Senators and Representatives. With the way things are going, nothing will be done about it.

This was posted on MSN today:

U.S. launches show of force in Persian Gulf: Aircraft carriers, warplanes feature in maneuvers off the coast of Iran (MSBNC)

This was posted on the "surfing the apocalypse" message board:

http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=738

http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi-bin/forum.cgi

April 6 is the day or thereabouts for the full fledged attack on Iran.

A BuzzFlash Reader

[BuzzFlash Note: We can't confirm or validate the sources.]

BUZZFLASH MAILBAG