Austin, Texas... Politex's for LETTERS ...www.bushwatch.com

home... news... novel... gossip... 'toons... archives... site map... us... e-mail... previous letters...

Politex...

Thank you for a very informative and vitally important website. I have recommended "BushWatch" to people for months, and am a frequent visitor myself. Today I found a link to the article "None Dare Call It Treason", by Vince Bugliosi, who in my opinion is the finest legal mind of our time. Just another example of the excellent content to be found on your site. I'm halfway through J. H. Hatfield's "Fortunate Son" as I type this....It's a fine read, with lots of info, but most of it I'd already learned, thanks in great part to "BushWatch" and the sites it directs you to. I can't tell you the sick feeling I get when I see this clown on TV, playing "Mr. President" and lying straight to the nation's face. If it's possible, I believe he'll be a worse president than his daddy was. Thankfully, he will almost certainly be a one-termer, but dedicated people like yourself will have to keep up the fight all the way through 2004, as Bush has shown himself to be particularly adept at distorting facts and the records of his opponents. My personal wish (as an American and a Hoosier) is to see Senator Evan Bayh slashing Bush to bits in the next election, but honestly I'd settle for any qualified candidate, as long as he beats the stuffing out of Junior and sends him back to his rich buddies in West Texas, a broken liar. --Rick in Indiana, 3/30/01

I recently had occasion to visit with a number of European colleagues at a New York convention. I was interested in their reaction to our new fearless leader. To a one they expressed amazement at him being in office. My Parisian colleague said it was astounding to the French that someone who was widely viewed as "not very intelligent" should become President, as in France there might be political differences between candidates, but each was certain to be a man of obvious intellect. On the issue of Capital Punishment, all said that to elect a man who presided over SO MANY executions seemed barbaric to them, and raised questions as to his character... and the character of the American electorate (don't look at me, I didn't vote for him!). I rather got the impression that we will remain on a "watch list", as a people whose judgment is highly suspect, until we come to our senses and remove this administration. A parallel might be the welcoming back into the world community of Yugoslavia, after they ousted Milosovic... gosh, what an interesting parallel that is, come to think of it! Didn't that involve the peoples refusal to knuckle under after a blatant election fraud, which was verified by a branch of a corrupt Government? Oh wait, what a silly comparison, the Yugoslavs really don't understand democracy, whereas the Americans do, except for the GOP cabal and five members of the US Supreme Court. Perhaps those stalwarts should be made Honorary Citizens of Yugoslavia? What an honor for them! Certainly they appear to have brought no honor to America. Instead of support to our friends and confusion to our enemies, they have brought confusion and dismay to our friends and joy to our foes. Oh well done, you zany contrarians! What next prank will you pull? what next twist of the facts, what next part of the economy will you savage, in support of your cronies? Americans, and the world, can hardly wait to find out! But all joking aside, I believe we've finally found out what a "Compassionate Conservative" agenda is, haven't we?

COMPASSIONATE (to our) CONSERVATIVE (supporters)

You see... it is just an example of Government efficiency. They saved three whole words in that slogan! --Arthur, 3/29/01

Dear Editors of The Nation...

Re your 3/26/01 Editorial, "Name the President."

It's been done. It's over. Your contest to name the man who now lives in the White House is redundant. It was done by Bush Watch (www.bushwatch.com) in January and the results were published on January 20. It's all at http://www.bushwatch.com/name.htm. What follows is what we wrote: a summary of the results, along with a listing of nearly 100 names. The winner, by the way, was "Resident Bush." best wishes, jerry politex, Bush Watch

Politex...

Joseph seems to miss the point of my letter [see below] altogether, and I think it's crucial that my meaning be understood. I wrote white people have not known about [the Alabama] disenfranchisement of blacks and other people who look like they'd vote Democrat. And that's precisely what I mean. No, it has not been right before our eyes this whole time. Yes, there are many many white people who do care very much. Having learned of the situation, we do care. We may not all be as activist as one may wish, and I believe that's something that must change. But that doesn't mean we don't care, once we actually know what's going on. There have been many great lessons in this election. One very valuable lesson is that we all need to have the awareness that not everything that is important is reported by the mainstream media. If we want the world to know what is happening, we need to take the responsibility to get that information out to the public. We need to find a way to do this, by word of mouth or whatever means possible. Or, we can demand that people know what they haven't been told. Or, we can presume that they know and just don't care. Or, we can attack and insult them for not knowing. We can do that too. But then no one needs to defeat us, because we defeat ourselves. But once we start to make informing people our own responsibility, we can win. -- Maggie, 3/23/01

Huh? If blacks have been prevented from voting, and "we" didn't know it, then the blacks "needed to tell us"!? The bottom line is that "we" historically couldn't care less in someone else's rights were violated--especially if "we" "gain" by it. "Life isn't fair," is the mantra. Now, of course, "we" care because "we" are directly affected. Where was Maggie [see next letter] during the 1960s when disenfranchisement of blacks, and violence, including murder, was used to prevent them registering to vote, or attempting to vote? "We" were being told then. How many actually listened? Where was Maggie when history classes taught about that quite visible period in US history? Perhaps she should ask, "How many times must 'we' be told before we hear it, accept it, believe it?" How much of the record and reality must "we" be shown before "we" see it? Has Maggie not heard of Martin Luther King, Jr.? He began as and always remained at bottom a passionate advocate and activist for voter regis tration. And he was assassinated for being effective in that effort. Why is it someone else's responsibility to "tell us" what is right in front of our eyes day-in and day-out? I suggest Maggie read "The Right to Vote," by Keyssar. Perhaps that will help her catch up with the many who were paying attention even when the injustice "only" happened to others. --Joseph, 3/22/01

Regarding the letter about voting irregularities in Alabama, [below] I'm not sure which side is true, the first letter or the subsequent "never happens" letters. I don't want to fan flames if they really aren't there, so if it isn't true I do want to know that. However, personally this election is the first time I've even heard about efforts by Republicans to prevent Democrats from voting, which apparently has been going on at least since the 1970s. A black acquaintance didn't understand why anyone was surprised. Didn't everyone already know? The black community has known about it all along, he said. I told him, "You needed to be telling us, or how could we know?" I have no desire to create the illusion of a problem in Alabama if it isn't really there. But I would like to ask one thing. Do the people who are disputing the claims of irregularities live in neighborhoods that would be targeted for vote-obstructing efforts? Or could it be happening in other neighborhoods without their knowledge? Is Alabama truly a "Republican" state or one where enough Democrats don't get to vote that it makes it look Republican? --Maggie, 3/21/01

I'm a regular reader of your website and have written you on several occasions before. I was surprised to look on your site today and see something on Alabama. I was even more surprised to see what it was about. I live in Huntsville, AL, which is located in Madison county. I am very active in politics and a strong Democrat supporter (a lonely job in these parts). I dont know anything about ANY irregularities. Just to tell you about our area, Huntsville has the second highest per-capita income in the South, not to give the impression of a bunch of rich people, we just have a lot of high paying middle class jobs with a very low poverty population. We have had optical scanners for a very long time (at least 10 years or more). There was a strong turnout on Nov 7 but no reports of 5 hour lines. Of all the people I talked to no one took longer than an hour (and believe me I was asking around to get an idea on what the turnout was). As far as Alabama is "supposed to be a Gore state", that is absolutely untrue and it shouldnt be hard for anyone to find out. We have gone Republican in almost every election since '52, exceptions being Carter (from bordering state of Ga), George Wallace (he's gone now so please try to forget) and Johnson in '64. Huntsville is very different from the rest of the state, with the high income and college education. This area is conservative because of all the defense contractors, Army Missile Command and NASA. The rest of the state is Repug because of the ignorant Bubba vote. If you have any further doubts on the political leanings of the state let me just say: Senators Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby (as a Democrat resident of this state I have to keep a trash can nearby just to type those two names together) Sorry to be a windbag but I have high regard for your site and find it very informative. But living in Madison County I have to let you here about that, I'm sure you value credibility. Maybe your source just mis-quoted the county, but along with claiming its a Gore state I would consider him/her unreliable. --Steve, 3/20/00

Note: A letter from another Bush Watcher in Madison County agrees with Steve. --Politex

For a good laugh, look at the voting that went on in Alabama. An average of 5 hours [in line] for a voter in Madison county, many people bumped off of the voter lists, and many others counted as having already voted should be worthy of at least a mention of vile voting practices. After all, Alabama is supposed to be a Gore state and it went to Bush. Something stinks here. --RK, 3/19/01

Has anyone commented on the fact that the current epidemic of foot-and-mouth disease occurred only after George W. Bush became Presidunce of the United States? He has suffered from that disease for years, as shown by the huge number of times his foot has been in his own mouth. And the disease is very contagious, as demonstrated by its spread to Secretary of State Colin Powell, among others. It is true that Baby Bush's travels abroad as an adult have been very limited (visits to Epcot don't count), and that therefore his travels couldn't have communicated the virus to the U.K. But P.M. Tony Blair was a recent visitor, and Mr. Powell has traveled abroad recently (a recent CNN Web report states that cases of the disease have been found in Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E.). They could have spread this disease inadvertently. --Barry, 3/15/01

1) If one more person tells me that I am going to appreciate the fact that the selected Resident can't speak properly I'm going to pull the rest of my hair out. George Dubya is an idiot and he couldn't think his way out of a cellophane...er..paper baggie. I don't appreciate his simplicity, he embarrasses me.

2) I cannot for the life of me figure out why his duck and cover bullshit continues to fly. The mainstream press and the democratic party have set the bar so low for Bush if he doesn't fall out of freaking shoes he's credited for acting "presidential." He's only the president because of Frick and Frack, Rehnquist and Thomas, along with the other lunatic republican shills on the court picked him. He should be on his knees before the Supreme court thanking them every day for selecting to the highest office in the land.

3) If the Democratic party does not find its spine and stand up to this imbecile then they deserve to get everything that comes their way. I don't know what sweetheart deals they are cutting with the shrub, but I think they're going to need a large tube of vaseline if this continues. Bill, 3/8/01

Subject: Web site slow to the point of quitting

For the last 4 days your site has been so slow (700 bytes/second) that I can't read it. The problem could be anywhere, including my side. I think its some ad server, that's usually the case. I hope its because you have umpteen thousand hitters! --Ray, 3/7/01

Ray, I'm afraid it's because we have "umpteen thousand hitters." It's all because Salon called us "rabid W-haters," which, as you know, we're not. All we can say is there must be a lot of "rabid W-haters" out there to get such a response. Once our many first-time visitors get to Bush Watch and see that we're only presenting documented news and measured opinion, we would hope that they would be interested in a more rational approach to politics. If it then turns out that what we provide on a daily basis is what they want, we'll have to get an additional server to deal with the load. Meanwhile, when http://www.bushwatch.com/bush.htm is hard to get to, remember to try bush.htm. thanks and best wishes, jerry politex, 3/7/01

The Bush budget book shows a 14.2% raise for Defense, and a 4.6% raise for education in discretionary spending. That explains Bush's Freudian Slip, "Education is not my top priority." Worse yet, on Table S-2, which lists past statistics, Bush warps the budget increase that he gives education. The previous budget increases for Education are -3.4%, 2.1%, 35.7% for 1999, 2000, 2001. Bush follows up the ballooning 35.7% increase with a whomping 4.6% increase. He goes to say that the average increase per year is 10%, making it sound like Bush's increase had something to do with that. Rather, his pale 4.6% increase is less than 15% of the previous Clinton increase for 2001. Defense, on the other hand, has spending changes of 5.7%, 4.6%, 3.1% for 1999, 2000, and 2001. Bush follows this up with a 14.2% budget increase. That's kinda strange. Usually, your top priority, education, in this case, would get the greatest raise in the budget. Perhaps Bush was just kidding when he said he supported education. His actions speak louder than his meaningless words. --RH, 3/7/01

Re The Dem Who Says He Doesn't Want A Circular Firing Squad (See 3/1 below)...Cry me a river. It is time for those who label themselves as "Democrats" to decide once and for all whether they are true "Liberals" or true "Democrats". Why, you ask? Because for all intents and purposes, the two are becoming mutually exclusive. Calling the Democratic party "Liberal" would be like calling a Camaro a "sports car". Sure, it might look the part and sound the part, but when it comes down to business, it doesn't come close to performing like one. As far as the "circular firing squad" goes, I say to Liberals...fire away! After all, the "Democrats" betrayed us, not the other way around. So, choose your sides, folks. Are you a Liberal...OR...a "Democrat"? Do you need a rifle or a blindfold? Lock and load... --AB, 3/3/01

In a later campaign stop (oh, sorry, speech on his tax proposal) President Busch introduced the Gotrocks family, Mr. Tycoon Gotrocks, his lovely wife "Shopper," and his perky children Debenture and Coupon. President Busch told the crowd that the Gotrocks family paid a "disproportionate amount" of their yearly income of twelve million dollars in taxes each year, and that their tax savings "would amount to real money for this family". Mr. Busch estimated that under his tax plan, the Gotrocks family would be able to keep an additional $720,000 each year. Mr. Gotrocks then stepped to the podium to tell the crowd that he was keenly looking forward to having that "extra bit" of additional income each year, as it would allow him to afford another "really classy" mistress. "Shopper" Gotrocks then spoke movingly of several items of jewelry that she believed could come her way, to compensate her for the mistress. The children looked bored, but really, what can one expect from kids who pretty much get anything and everything they ask for already? No, on balance, it was a deeply moving illustration of just the kind of average American family who will really stand to gain from President Busch's tax plan! --AL, 3/2/01

Re Yesterday's Letter...Super idea, let's form a circular firing squad and go after Democrats, spending all of our time, money and energy turning on each other so the organized, lock-step, top-down Republican extremists can win even more seats Congress in 2002. We might even recruit Ralph Nader to help. Then we'd be sure to kick the Republicans' asses just like we did last year. With brilliant tactical thinking like that from the left, I am shocked -- shocked -- that the Republicans now control the White House, both houses of Congress, the Federal Courts, and a majority of governorships. Give me a freakin' break. --DK, 3/1/01

This is an outrage beyond belief....that the little fraud gave a State of His Doofus address!! I lay this directly at the feet of our wimp Dem politicians. They have to go. Does anybody know of a website where someone is working on ousting their own Dem wimp politician? If not, we should think about putting one up, or at least a page that can link to other pages about specific politicians. What made me think of this is that I got another letter --why do I open them? she always pisses me off!--from Dianne Feinstein. This was in response to my bitch-o-gram about her vote to confirm Norton. Understand, Californians are, for the most part, strongly pro-environment. And our farce of a senator, Feinstein, votes to confirm Norton! Our beautiful coastline is what makes our state, Bush is just champing at the bit to sell it off to his oily cronies, and Norton will be nothing but a rubber-stamp. You'll love Feinstein's excuse: because she believes "a president has the right to the cabinet of his choice."

Oh, EXCUSE ME!?! Bush's right to have a rubber-stamp jocky to help him defile our coastline with oil supercedes Feinsteins' constituents' rights to protect our environment? I wrote her back and told her that it was clear that she was serving Bush first and her constituents second, and when a senator does that it's time for her to look for another job. I'm going to contact our state Dem organization to start prodding them to get another candidate to take Feinstein's place. In fact, I may look into starting a recall. Anyway, I'm sure I'm not the only Democrat who wants to get rid of a wimp who represents them, so if anybody hears of a web-ring, website, etc. to centralize our efforts, please let me know. --fuming in Arroyo Grande, 2/28/01

This story probably hasn't received much attention down there, but something weird happened when the Canadian Prime Minister visited Resident Bush earlier this month. Our PM came away from the meeting with the impression that the US would back down on NMD if China, Russia, and the NATO allies were against it. Then he went off on a scheduled trade mission to China, and told the Chinese about this. This past week, the British Prime Minister came to town. Mr. Blair's people were kind of perplexed, because they had heard from the U.S. Defense Secretary that the US would go ahead regardless. Well, it looks like Rumsfeld wasn't overstepping his bounds -- on Friday our PM retracted his earlier statement.

Three possibilities that I can think of: first, our guy may have misheard Mr. Bush. Could have happened. But the PM's been in international relations for a couple of decades now, and in politics almost twice that long. I would hope he'd be smart enough to check on these things before making official statements, especially to foreign governments. Second -- Mr. Bush said one thing when he actually meant another. Everybody blanks or gets the wrong word occasionally, and there's ample evidence that Mr. Bush is prone to this kind of thing. (Last summer, Michael Moore sent out a letter warning people that a President who makes verbal slips was an international crisis waiting to happen.) Third -- and this one is just as scary -- the Bush Consortium was having a little fun with our PM. It's an open secret that Jean Chretien and the rest of the Canadian government supported Gore in the election. The PM and President Clinton are golfing buddies and pretty close friends. Well, Mr. Chretien's predecessor Brian Mulroney sucked up to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush big-time, and then Mr. Chretien's Liberals stomped Mulroney's political party into near-extinction (imagine the Republicans being reduced to 2 seats in the House of Representatives), then investigated him for corruption. So the Bushes don't like Jean very much! ...Bush Daddy and Mulroney must be laughing themselves sick right now. --Lisa, 2/27/01

Re the media's "scrutiny" of W's grammar: Will children taking standardized tests that determine whether their schools will have funding removed be required to know pronouns, articles, and syntax? If so, what do we tell the children when their own president can't meet the same standards they are required to meet? --SZ, 2/26/01

Bush aide Mary Matalin says American's don't care about Bush's shortcomings with the English language. She is wrong on that point... Should we be concerned that George W. thinks the Rose Garden is a National Park? Hell yes we should care....It isn't all right for the President of the United States not to know the difference between a regimen and a regime. I never thought I'd live to see the day when I could say with total conviction that I'm smarter than the President of the United States, but on January 20th, 2001 my confidence in government was totally shattered by the reality that our President bore a striking intellectual resemblance to a guy I dated in the 10th grade. Personally, I think we should follow the lead of the English who always respond to the troubling behavior of a monarch by saying "God save the Queen/King." I guess our prayer should be "God help the Resident Redneck Cowboy." --Carolyn, 2/26/01

The bumbling Democratic Party is whining because they haven't been able to meet "President" Bush with one coherent message. How dumb can one political party be?...... How's this for a message: More American workers are losing their jobs each day, thanks to the idiot in the White House who keeps saying we're headed for a recession. This way he has an excuse to shove his obscene tax cut up our collective ass, so his rich friends can cash $46,000 checks, courtesy of the little Shrub!.........In fact, this is what I heard from my boss a couple of weeks ago (TRUE STORY!):

Boss: "I'm sorry, but we're downsizing and must terminate your employment with us effective March 7th."
Me: "But why?......Last month you told me I was doing a great job."
Boss: "You have been doing a great job, but things have changed."
Me: "How have things changed?"
Boss: "The President keeps saying the country is going into a recession. We've decided we have to act now to cut our expenses."

Whoops, there it is!............Why can't Gephardt or Daschle get the megaphone and say "President Bush, by sounding alarms about a recession that doesn't exist, has forced consumers and businesses to cut back spending, thereby bringing us closer to the recession he so irresponsibly predicts. Meanwhile, he brings before the Congress of the United States a tax cut proposal that gives 43% of the benefits to the richest 1% of the country.......This is unconscionable!" ........Why haven't they thought of this one, or are they too busy blushing over the new nickname Shrubie gave them? --BD, 2/25/01

[Re Water Cooler] Well! Is Wizard Fitzwater saying eddi-kay-shun doesn't matter? That all the little bros in all the little ghettoes can grow up and be president? Oh yay! And they can just take the study of English out of the curriculum because that'll free up billions for immediate armament to save America's defenseless pilots who are being victimized by that nasty man of the mideast....Saturday Night Live will take a dive if Bush (and necessarily Daddy WarBush) drop those painful "press conferences" into his Weekly Planner frequently. Who needs the weekly SNL fix of Pinnochio on the Potomac, the Prince of Puppetland, when . . . there stands the real, the genuine Modern, Mutant, Mangling Muse of Remedial English I for Morons -- every day, forever more. Instant gratification and you know how poor pottage palls! NBC won't like it much though. This is one horrid, horror-comedy skit (and no stand-alone comic he!) airable only on the Sci-Fi channel. Quick, Jeeves! The Flit! --Ruth, 2/24/01

Your readers may be interested to hear that several years ago, a theatre company in Canada did a production of Moliere's "Tartuffe", modifying the protagonist to resemble Ronald Reagan. (Quick synopsis: Tartuffe is a man who claims to be moral and religious, but in reality is a cunning hypocrite. Under false pretenses, he insinuates his way into your house, and proceeds to lie, cheat, and steal everything in sight. Audiences cheer when he receives his comeuppance.) I think someone should have another go at this, now that there's an even more appropriate character around to lampoon. I'm so convinced it would work, I'm willing to pony up a week's salary (that's $100 US) to any school, community theatre group, or guerilla workshop company that rises to the challenge. --Lisa, kadonaga@uvic.ca, 2/23/01

Thanks for the great piece on the Bush tax cut plan. Why do we hear so little about the cost of the current national debt? From what I can tell, we have yet to reduce that at all. I have read estimates that 15% of every tax dollar go to servicing the debt, though this was a few years ago and expansion of the gross domestic product would reduce this percentage. In any event, the existence of a huge multi-trillion dollar debt makes Bush's plan even more disastrous, as we'll all remain burdened with that invisible tax, chiefly a legacy of the Reagan era when tax cuts were coupled with huge run ups in defense spending (including the goofy star wars program that Bush is trying to bring back from the death it so richly deserved). Why is no one educating us about the current national debt and its impact on tax policy? People seem to think that an annual surplus means that the debt has been eliminated. --RB, 2/21/01

You got it!!! Page 134 in Piven and Cloward's The New Class War: Reagan's Attack on the Welfare State and Its consequences: " The structural significance of the tax cuts is that , by sharply reducing revenue, they impose limits on future government expenditures, including expenditures in social programs and that is one intent. Thus the tax cuts narrow the parameters within which future political struggles will be fought, because the prospects of large annual deficits will make social expenditures seem impractical. Under these circumstances, fiscal austerity will not appear to be politics; it will appear to be the inevitable adaptation of a responsible government to the constraint imposed by limited resources. The tax cuts, then, are for the time being a genuine achievement for corporate mobilization." If only average Joes could understand what Reagan pulled off and what Bush is now trying to repeat. --AK, 2/20/01

A weird thing: my father died on the day BushWatch was born (2/15/98) - - and he would've highly approved of BushWatch, so maybe you came into existence to carry on his work! He was a true D(d)emocrat who hated the Bushes with a passion, hated all the Republican hypocrisy... Before the time of the Internet, he had the phone nos. of Washington Post, the White House, etc. programmed into his phone and he constantly called them to give them "what for". Thanks for giving me something to be happy about today. I needed it! --Barbara, 2/15/01

I hope all the letter writers who wrote in on the Ashcroft issue feel better now, having gotten that all of their chests. Look, I'm not happy a staunch conservative is the Attorney General, either. It would not have been my first choice, but tellingly, it was President Busch's choice. What a "unifying" choice! He sure knows how to get the American people behind him, doesn't he? I am reminded of James Baker's famous quote, on the subject of how big the GOP's tent should really be, "Fuck the Jews, they don't vote for us anyhow!". One can only hope, after the mischievous shenanigans of the election year putsch, that African-Americans, Jews, Latinos, labor sympathizers, Democrats, liberals, progressives, advocates of choice, people skeptical of "Son of Star Wars", Arab-Americans (after Bush nukes Iraq by accident), the educated, Green Party activists, gays and lesbians, the poor, moderate Republicans, those who believe in voters' rights and the Constitution, and all Americans of good will, will all band together to reject Busch's agenda, and forge a new consensus in time for the midterm elections.

That's what counts. Nothing else matters. Nothing. You can go into a closet and yell at the wall, but nothing you can say or do at this point means squat, unless there is concerted and targeted focus on wiping out the GOP majority in the House and Senate in 1992. Don't get mad, get even! Imagine the satisfaction we'd all feel, watching Busch try to gyrate around to pretend to be bi-partisan, when the only way he could get legislation passed was to cave in. Can anyone tell me which GOP Senators are up for reelection in 2002? No? well, we should all know these things, we should already be looking at who could be a viable candidate, and helping them get organized, not wasting time squabbling. In this election, the GOP's hard right showed us a model of how to get the job done. Was Busch their favorite candidate on the issues? Not by a long shot. Too vague, too moderate. Did he seem the most electible candidate who was even close to their core beliefs? Yes. Once they answered in the affirmative to that, they closed ranks and just went for it, knowing that none of them were going to get all they wanted, but out of the conviction that most of them would at least get more than they would from Gore. Busch was in some sense just the anti-Gore, and for many GOP voters that was a sufficient rationale for supporting him.

Forget Ashcroft. That is a sideshow. The prize is in 2002 and 2004. Nothing else matters. Respect your enemy, learn from them, improve on their game plan, learn from your own mistakes, correct them and be sure not to repeat them, be self-critical, and above all, be aware that this is nothing less than a crisis of America's democracy. We have never had a Presidential election that was decided by one partisan vote in a partisan Supreme Court. What a wonderful wakeup call for us! How great for us to see in such sharp relief what has been escaping notice in our heavily-sedated national media. Respect your enemy, for what you react against in him is of immeasurable value in helping you define yourself. Ashcroft is a PERFECT Attorney General, in that broader context. I think many will be able to better define who they are, and what their beliefs are, by the actions that Ashcroft takes in office, and by the company he keeps. Oh, he might dog it for a while, to let the heat die down, but a leopard can't change his spots, and he is just guaranteed to do something so whacky, and so obvious, that he further helps the majority of American people define themselves as deeply skeptical of Ashcroft and his core beliefs, which will translate into a profound unease with the man who appointed him. --AL, 2/3/01

So what happened? These pages and sites all over the web are filled with aging reports regarding Dubya's AWOL, alleged perjury in the SCI case and regarding his DUI, the Rainwater-Carlisle financial dealings, the Bush family's influence peddling in Asia and elsewhere, financial ties to arms dealers and so much more. Did the President-in-Thief ever produce the documents regarding his military service as he promised last May? Here in Arizona, a billboard demanding the impeachment of Clinton was put up on I-10 even before he was sworn in. Then, after an eight year 100 million dollar witch hunt (and it continues still), they finally found some stains on a dress. Bush is given a free ride the whole way and is even being described as a "remarkably energizing" force in Washington. Why shouldn't GWB have to answer for his crap, or is it that Republican dung don't stink? I'm sure it shouldn't take that long or even that much money to find "impeachable offenses" in George's sorry life. --HG, 2/12/01