BuzzFlash Mailbag for February 13, 2008

BUZZFLASH MAILBAG

Want to join the conversation? Share your thoughts with other Mailbag readers by clicking here. Remember, you also may send items to post. You can register and post articles yourself at BuzzFlash.net; or submit items to BuzzFlash.com at: http://www.buzzflash.com/contact/newstip.html.

Subject: RIP America

Rest In Peace, America. It's been nice knowing you and I am saddened that you have died. Over the past few weeks our so-called President and his administration have finally acknowledged what many of us suspected -- people have been subjected to water torture and now some of those same people are going to (finally) be tried in a "military commission" at Guantanamo.

Our officials say they can use any information they have against these people, gained by any means whatsoever, and they don't even need to make the defense aware of the evidence. Great, just great. We further have government officials at cross purposes with each other regarding whether or not water torture is even torture. A Supreme Court justice (Scalia) says torture is permitted by our US Constitution. "They" don't know if it's torture, but it would be if done to them.

Now, our supposed lawmakers, the members of the Senate have voted to allow increased wiretapping without benefit of warrants. A man, dressed as a polar bear, is arrested for peaceful assembly at the Department of the Interior. Civilian military contractors can commit unspeakable crimes, including rape and murder, and our government says they can't be responsible for their actions.

We have arrived at this disgraceful point because the decisions come from the top -- there are only a few people who truly are to be held responsible for this disgusting situation and that is the president -- the Delinquent-in-Chief; his enforcer, Darth Cheney; and the rest of his perverted and twisted sadistic hand-picked sychophants.

A thought crossed my mind this morning as I was listening to some commentators discussing Obama's stunning wins yesterday. All kinds of explanations have been proffered about what the demographics each candidate will appeal to. However, it appears, Obama is breaking the mold. Is the larger issue here that the people of this country -- be they white, black, latino, male, female, young or old -- using this opportunity -- the election of 2008 -- to say "screw you" to the government? Is Obama's overall theme of hope and positive expectations what is really drawing people in? Are the citizens, the voters of this country so disgusted (dare I say pissed off?) that they are rejecting any candidate who has any remote resemblance to the established norm?

I'm just speculating on the above, of course, but I think it could be something just this elemental that is fueling Obama's meteoric rise. We are witnessing history in the making yet again. We have witnessed the destruction of America over the last seven years courtesy of the Bushies and stolen elections, and we are now witnessing potentially either the first woman or the first "black" man (let's remember that Obama is, in fact, half caucasian).

One thing I know for sure -- more of the SSDD or the same-o, same-o, is not at all appealing to me. I'm on the down side of the hill of life (almost 60), have served my country as a soldier, and have reached a despair in my sadness for the death of America, and the birth of Amerika. Is it possible that America is on the verge of being "reborn" -- I certainly hope so. Amerika is pretty damned ugly and hateful.

Lisa Johnson
Tacoma, WA

---

Subject: Hillary Clinton -- FACING THE FACTS

The fact that Hillary Clinton is still in the running is testament to what a wonderful President she would be. Even though the old trumped up charges and new ones continue to haunt her, she still holds her head high.

Tens of millions of dollars and the best lawyers the Conservatives could buy, did not come up with anything. Nothing illegal could be found. Considering the intensity and the one sided mission of the attack dogs running the investigations, Hillary and Bill Clinton should be viewed as two of the most honest people in the United States.

Still the right-wing and their despicable pundits, many who are drug abusers, convicted felons and those who got pardons or immunity from prosecution, continue to repeat the same garbage over and over as if the partisan investigations never happened. She is accused of carrying bogus garbage by the ultimate garbage carriers.

All she has done most of her life is try to honorably serve her country. The Republican party has blindly supported two of the most polarizing people in our country, Cheney and Bush. Even though Hillary Clinton is constantly near or at the top of our country's most admired women, the right wing still works their jaded magic and repeatedly accuse her of being what they are, polarizing.

Hillary Clinton would win the presidency by a record landslide if only the truth was reported by the majority of the prejudiced and corrupt media. Unfortunately even some of our honest reporters fall for the constant repetition of propaganda. The far right smut dealers are experts in mind-bending.

One such bogus claim stands out and it has caught on. "Hillary is unelectable." That sounds straight out of the mouth of Karl Rove or one of his clones. It was started long ago and repeated so often even Democrats who respected all that Hillary Clinton has done with her life started to fall for it.

Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth. The Right Wing modus operandi.

Recently we had reporting that defies all logic. It bordered on the obscene. Somehow all meaning and context was distorted in statements by the Clintons. Their statements were grossly and disgustingly distorted to somehow suggest racism. Two of the United States' most ardent and active champions of the fight for civil rights. Both with undeniable track records, somehow get accused of what they abhor. White and black leaders came to the Clintons' defense and said what is apparent. They were absolute fraudulent distortions. All one has to do is read the statements or watch the videos and it is obvious they were saying something entirely different than what was reported. Still the unconscionable right wing pundits continue the distortions as if they were facts.

That's the real fairy tale and there are still people who are falling for it and it certainly has had a profound effect on recent elections. It is shameful and reprehensible.

Whatever you may think of Mrs. Clinton, she is a very attractive person and an above average speaker. So what can the Clinton hating pundits do about that? Question her strengths, such as her speaking abilities. They have become unrelenting masters at that. Also come up with a funny comment, the Clinton cackle, and repeat it over and over even though Hillary has a very sweet and often robust laugh, but why should the truth matter? Repeat 'cackle' enough and it will catch on. This was started, by the way, by a "hardball" reporter who has a laugh that would scare a banshee.

When it comes to the debates, she has been a master. Almost every instant poll after the debates declares Hillary Clinton the winner. But after the same old Clinton hating reporters get through picking apart every little thing that was said, they make her look as though she lost. All the debaters made errors, much more than Hillary, but only her mistakes were put under the microscope. Real fair and balanced reporting.

Another plus for the muckrakers is attacking Bill Clinton, who for some reason, has decided to tone it down. Hillary's challengers, despite questionable rhetoric, continue on their merry way, attacking her, with very little scrutiny or criticism. One of Hillary's best assets is forced to watch what he says, even though he said absolutely nothing wrong and certainly did not erupt as was reported. Just watch the videos and read the transcripts. With just a little bit of effort, the truth about the biased reporting would become apparent.

America would be much better off if the muckrakers were required to report the facts.

Barack Obama claims if Hillary is nominated they would bring a dump load of dirt against her. Just what does he think is going to happen to him if he wins? The right wing has absolutely no conscience and there is no depth that they won't sink to. Most of the dirt against Hillary has been unequivocally disproved and still they repeat it. Her baggage is a right wing created myth.

What does Barack think is going to happen to him? They haven't even started yet. Look what they do to their own. John McCain, for example, when he could have been a threat to the thoroughly unqualified George W. Bush. Lies about his children and they attacked his wife and still they had to steal the election. Can we ever forget how they sunk to the lowest level possible to trash Max Cleland and the swift boating of John Kerry? They are pure gutter rats.

Another very important misnomer is the catchy slogan calling for "change". Think what that really means. The only change of importance is changing the present corrupt and illegitimate administration. There can be no question this administration will be remembered as the most destructive and divisive administration in history. Already this is being discussed and confirmed in very reputable quarters. Getting rid of Bush and all his corrupt followers should be the only major "change" of importance.

Why would anyone want to change the direction the very successful Clinton Administration was taking us? If Al Gore had not had the Presidency stolen from him by the unprecedented action of the Supreme Court, where would the country stand now, economically and globally? The whole world would be breathing easier and I mean that in a bunch of different ways. Also there wouldn't have been a bogus war where thousands of young American service men and service women were killed and many more wounded, based on a pack of lies to line the pockets of a few megalomaniacs.

When you think of "change," you should just think of Cheney, Bush and their disgraceful counterparts. There can be no doubt that the biased reporting is playing a major role in the primaries. Hillary has to start defending herself, loud and clear, against false accusations and start demanding equal treatment. It has nothing to do with race or gender. It has everything to do with equal treatment as guaranteed by our Constitution and everything to do with saving our great nation.

Mel Spiegel
Jupiter, Florida

---

Subject: Democrats bashing Democrats in the Mailbag

Buzzers -

What's going on here?

There is an increasing amount of vitriol expressed in Mailbag contributors.

Clinton partisans are accusing BuzzFlash of "Clinton bashing" and Obama supporters of preferring style over substance.

Elsewhere I read that there are Obama supporters who would never support Clinton. Even Paul Krugman, of all people, wrote in the NYTimes on Monday, "I won't try for fake evenhandedness here: most of the venom I see is coming from supporters of Mr. Obama, who want their hero or nobody. I'm not the first to point out that the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality. We've already had that from the Bush administration - remember Operation Flight Suit? We really don't want to go there again."

Threats here and there of refusing to vote at all or vote for McCain or a 3rd party candidate if the writer's preferred candidate is not the Democratic nominee.

Have people gone mad?

We need the Democrat to win the White House in November. That means that after the convention we put aside our current partisanship for Clinton or Obama and work like bloody hell to defeat McCain. We have to vote. We have to not waste our votes on 3rd party candidates. That's plain stupid. Think of the following Ross Perot once had. Probably most of those who voted for him would have preferred a Republican to a Democrat, but their votes ensured the election of Bill Clinton. Disgruntled conservatives and Republican base evangelicals who might refuse to vote rather than vote for McCain are also doing their own preferences no favor.

So let's not get carried away. Let's not beat each other up. It's good to discuss the issues and to hope that the qualities and policies we prefer in our candidate will be carried by the other if she or he is the candidate.

Let's keep our eye on the real goal - winning the White House in November. Won't we all be thrilled to see Bush and Cheney retire? A year from now we can start up again, holding the new president's feet to the fire to work for progressive economic policies, really tackle the health care financing mess, ban torture, clean up the Justice Dept., rachet down the militaristic rhetoric and start to pull out of Iraq etc etc.

Colleen Clark
Cambridge, MA

---

Subject: [Forwarded by a BuzzFlash Reader]

Letters-to-the-Editor
The Los Angeles Times

Benjamin Franklin in his speech accepting the U.S. Constitution warned us, "I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, - if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people, if well administered; and I believe, farther, that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government being incapable of any other."

The Senate's vote to approve clearly unconstitutional presidential wiretapping proves Franklin's prediction correct (grants retroactive immunity to corporations that cooperated with the White House in illegal wiretapping ).

The president now has the authority to wiretap, to arrest anyone anywhere, to torture him, to try him before military commissions outside the country, and to execute him.

These are the despotic powers about which Franklin warned us.

Liberty died today on the floor of the US Senate, and the American people went shopping at the mall.

Sincerely,

Arch Miller
Arcadia

---

Subject: FYI

Today, more than 23,000 representatives of private industry are working quietly with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. The members of this rapidly growing group, called InfraGard, receive secret warnings of terrorist threats before the public does—and, at least on one occasion, before elected officials. In return, they provide information to the government, which alarms the ACLU. But there may be more to it than that. One business executive, who showed me his InfraGard card, told me they have permission to “shoot to kill” in the event of martial law.

http://www.progressive.org/mag_rothschild0308

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19338.htm

And ...

InfraGard is an information sharing and analysis effort serving the interests and combining the knowledge base of a wide range of members. At its most basic level, InfraGard is a partnership between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the private sector. ... dedicated to sharing information and intelligence to prevent hostile acts against the United States.

http://www.infragard.net/

A BuzzFlash Reader

---

Subject: Give me a break ... and BuzzFlash too!

BuzzFlash:

I applaud the BuzzFlash site for being courageous enough to print the many disparaging and negative letters that are aimed at the Buzz editors. Most of the letters are from angry supporters of Hillary Clinton who are NOT happy that BuzzFlash is not promoting the Clintons. And ironically, most of the letters are signed: "A BuzzFlash Reader." They won't give their names, but Buzz prints their tirades anyway.

I am an Obama supporter, but I will support Hillary if she is the Democratic nominee. I really think that Obama is a more viable candidate and that he will be a great president. For those who are angry with Buzz and Obama ... give it a break ... don't take your marbles and go home because your candidate is NOT appealing to many of the masses and is currently losing in many states. It's NOT the fault of BuzzFlash that Obama is leading Hillary and has momentum. (Actually I don't believe that many of these letters come from Dems, surely they are from plants who are attempting to cause friction among Dems.

In my lifetime I want to see a female president and I want to see a Black one. Hopefully I will see one of them soon in November!

Dee Turner
Atlanta

---

Subject: Patriotic Song

I've written a song called, GO OUT AND VOTE.

PLEASE GIVE A LISTEN,

THANKS.

www.gooutandvote.com

John Portilla
Hendersonville, TN

---

Subject: Pieces of the legal puzzle

This article in the San Francisco Chronicle lays out in chilling detail the legal architecture that has been put into place for the imposition of an American police state, including granting the unconstitutional authority to the President to declare martial law unilaterally. Any thinking person that reads this should be afraid of this gang of criminals or of any administration having these powers. They will be most assuredly used by people of ill will.

No such extraordinary powers were granted in the Constitution to the President for a reason, as the founders knew such powers would eventually be used by a tyrant to destroy liberty and this country. How sad that we have degenerated as a country to this level where these things pass without a whimper from our glorious mass media which is besotted with Britney Spears, and doubly sad that they are heartily endorsed by people who consider themselves the governing intelligentsia of this country, all of whom couched their support for these laws as somehow necessary to "protect our security." Their reasoning I suppose is that they had to kill the constitution to save it.

Their opinion of themselves as worthy of governance, I submit, is grossly overrated since farmers, tradesmen and multitudes of other ordinary people who lived almost three hundred years ago, without the benefit of Ivy League degrees and reams of information at their electronic disposal understood basic principles of democracy preservation and the necessity of of erecting impregnable legal bulwarks to defend and advance human rights far better than people who today style themselves as our governing elite. I have infinitely more respect for those farmers and tradesmen as human beings and Americans than those alleged "leaders" of today who have imposed these wretched instruments of odious oppression upon us, since those people of centuries ago cared far more about protecting and preserving their human rights and those of future generations, and they were willing to sacrifice everything, including their lives, to defend and preserve them. We should be ashamed and repulsed by the level to which we have dishonored their sacrifice.

Rule by fear or rule by law? (sfgate.com)

I just wonder how close these concentration camps being built by Halliburton subsidiary, KBR, are to completion? And I wonder who is on the Counterterrorism Information Center list of 750,000 people? I know now how they must have felt in Germany in the 1930's.

"Never separate the lives that you lead from the words that you speak." -- Paul Wellstone

"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell

"But I venture the challenging statement that if American democracy ceases to move forward as a living force, seeking day and night by peaceful means to better the lot of our citizens, then Fascism and Communism, aided, unconsciously perhaps, by old-line Tory Republicanism, will grow in strength in our land." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt, November 4, 1938

Dan D.

---

Subject: Down With Any Candidate Who's For Staying The Course In Iraq &/or Attacking Iran

"But what if a candidate who's for staying the course (&/or attacking Iran) happens to be a woman, do we still oppose her?"

"We have to."

"Why?'

"Either we end the Iraq war or it'll be the end of us."

"And if a candidate who's for staying the course (&/or attacking Iran) is a man of African descent, do we oppose him too?"

"Yes, and for the same reason."

"But isn't it sexist or racist to oppose either or both of these candidates?"

"Only if one actually is a sexist or racist."

"Otherwise?"

"It's for the common good."

A BuzzFlash Reader

---

Subject: What Is It About Barack Obama?

Just what is it about Barack Obama that has everyone so awed? What am I missing?

I've been watching the debates. Reading the news coverage and everywhere I look everyone is touting Obama as this great candidate.

Yet I look at his website, I read the news, I watch the debates and all I hear from Barrack Obama is rhetoric. I never hear substantive answers.

"Hope" is a very nice thing but at the end of the day it's not enough to hope for change. For change to occur requires someone to take action.

I keep waiting to hear the specifics of how Senator Obama will deal with issues.

I'm not convinced that what I'm seeing is "Hope." I think I may only be seeing "Hype."

So far Senator Obama's campaign reminds me greatly of the 2000 Bush campaign. A campaign of rhetoric and "fuzzy math."

I'd like to see something more from him before I give him my support. For now I'm leaning towards Hillary Clinton. Right now I want someone who has a plan and gives detailed answers. Once our nation is on the right track again, then I can "Hope" for something more idealistic.

John Buck
Ogden, UT

---

Subject: Noise machine will play the race card

BuzzFlash,

As Steven Jonas said about a year ago, Coulter is an integral part of the noise machine. That she continues to get approving "laughs" from the Republicans proves that point.

Dr. J.'s BF Short Shot: The Significance of Ann Coulter (buzzflash.com)

But more specifically, her role is to try out the lowest forms of propaganda and determine how well they work. Test the waters for the more mainstream pundits such as David Brooks. Now she has pulled out the race card on Obama.

http://www.hillbillyreport.com/blog/2008/02/ann-coulter-bas.html

Hear any outcries of rage from the Noise Machine that she has stooped so low? I haven't. So you can be sure that the Noise Machine will embrace this tactic in the election if he wins the primary. They will keep deniability as with the Swiftboaters, but Rove will be at work behind the scenes. And Obama better not just ignore it as John Kerry did with the Swiftboaters.

The soft-on-torture liberal

---

Subject: U.S. accused of using 'kangaroo court' to try men accused of role in September 11 attacks 2/13

Why has civilization had an unaltered tradition of "fair and speedy" trials that banish emotion from reason? Why do we have "due process"? Why did Nazi war criminals have full court defenses over sixty years ago at Nurnburg while wrongly accused and indefinitely detained Afghanistani farmers have none today?

Can any rational person believe the credibility of tortured confessions--let alone procedural abridgment--as definitive of guilt no matter how egregious the actual crime? What would you have thought of Nurnburg today if Goering or Ribbentrop had been tortured into confession? And what would we have thought of the torturers sixty years later? What heroes, what martyrs they would be today instead of the villains they truly were?

And what value, what legacy would the resulting laws and rules on administrative responsibility during wartime have had? What altered precedent would the basis of subsequent legal jurisprudence and justice that has (until now) engendered itself in our Western culture have been? And, if so, what ugly form would it have taken?

It's not for the benefit of the accused, but for the benefit of the accuser and the righteousness of history that we have fair and speedy trial under due process of law.

The judicial black stain of the hypocrisy of these contemporary moments not only at Gitmo, but also throughout the appointment of the Federal Judiciary, the abrogation of the Bill of Rights and the defrauding of our political culture during the past eight years has utterly destroyed America's credibility as a nation under law. In the eyes of the rest of the world, we are an Evil Empire that the MSM has consistently and culpably blacked out, covered up and spun. And no amount of "change" (if it comes) will soon resurrect us without the fair and speedy prosecution and elimination of those neocon monsters and institutions that have led us here.

Will Wyche
Palm Springs, CA

---

Subject: There's a movement afoot to convince Hillary and Obama to run together as "The Dream Ticket."

I saw a cool music video promoting the idea of a Clinton/Obama Dream Ticket, which I think would be unbeatable, not to mention, very exciting. It's called The Dream Ticket Duet, and here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQFtRxubRyA

Thank you for your consideration,

Shawm Brydon

---

Subject: Where Do Obama And Clinton Stand On Signing Statements?

Here are two questions that I have not heard being put to any of our current presidential candidates: 1. "Do you repudiate the current administration's use of Signing Statements to avoid enforcing portions of laws passed by Congress with which the president disagrees?"

2. "Would you, under any circumstance - and especially facing a congress controlled by the opposition party - consider taking advantage of the precedent set by Mr. Bush and employ that practice?"

The use of signing statements has done more to destroy the Constitution's brilliant system of checks and balances than all the lies and deceptions the current administration has perpetrated over the past seven years. And so far, to my knowledge, no candidate has publicly challenged this nefarious practice.

At this pivotal point in our history, we deserve to know where Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton stand on this critical issue - and before the election.

Ben Bayol

---

Subject: Congressional Probe

If only congress would probe and the media would cover the criminal activities of our government as well as they do baseball steroid use.

Bob Lambert
Northridge, CA

---

Subject: The Obsession With Obama

I'm not sure I quite get this obsession with Obama from the mainstream media and now my liberal blogs. I'm not sure I get the mass hysteria. Every headline on your blog now is Obama how great he is, everyone endorses him etc. ... I never see any of the articles of who endorsed Hillary Clinton.

Lisa Jones
Los Angeles, CA

[BuzzFlash Note:Endorsements grab the headlines particularly when they're surprises, like the one for Obama from an ex-Clinton campaign manager. Sen. Clinton recently won John Glenn's and Gov. Ted Strickland's endorsements: Glenn Endorses Hillary 2/14.]

---

Subject: The Horse Race + The Popularity Contest = Gotcha, Sucker

"And what about whether or not one's favorite candidate might be a fun to be with drinking buddy at the local pub?"

"In the total scheme of things about as important as the cost of a candidate's haircut."

"What's important then?"

"Our choosing someone who's going to end the Iraq war plus turning things around here at home."

"Nothing else?"

"Nothing else."

A BuzzFlash Reader

---

Subject: Lobbyist Endorsements

Here's a fun Web page I stumbled on while searching for something unrelated. Roll Call, the newspaper of Capitol Hill, lists lobbyists who have publicly endorsed presidential candidates here:

http://www.rollcall.com/politics/kstendorsements.html

Interesting reading. You can also see lawmaker endorsements on the site.

Happy reading!

A BuzzFlash Reader

 

---

Subject: Reality: Obama vs McCain

Hey, everyone, get a grip! Dukakis was 16% points ahead of G.H.W. Bush toward the end of primaries in 1988; Democrats chose Kerry because he'd "do better than Dean" against Bush in 2004. The truth is that we have no idea what would happen between Obama and McCain because no one is thinking seriously about how that would actually work out.

Remember, for example, how Al Gore was trashed for being too aggressive and condescending toward George W. Bush in 2000 (sighing, pacing forwards and walking towards Bush, etc.). Once you get used to Obama he starts to look VERY aggressive and arrogant; he's used to debating tough candidates like the Dems. But how will his aggression look against the "patriotic hero" with war wounds? A guy who happens to be a respected white guy not a woman "with strong negatives"? Obama's going to have to tone it down, folks.

Mary Townsend
Skokie, IL

---

Subject: Three Promises That Will Elect Any Candidate!

1. Promise to immediately pull our troops out of an Illegal and immoral war.

2. Promise to prosecute all Bush war criminals and those who have broken the laws of the constitution.

3. Secure our borders and ports and allow only immigrants into the country who follow the laws and rules of our nation.

One question sticks in my mind and I can't find a satisfactory answer.

WHY WOULD I WANT TO REACH ACROSS THE AISLE AND WORK WITH THE WARMONGERING, THIEVING, AND MOST CORROUPT GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS EVER TO HOLD PUBLIC OFFICE?

Lawton Watson

The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. You can write to Mailbag at http://www.BuzzFlash.com/contact/mail.html. Guidelines for submissions are at BuzzFlash FAQ #18.

BUZZFLASH MAILBAG