Us presidential election 2004

[Winters 1]

It's amazing how easily the voters of this country get distracted. I stole an apple from a fruit stand when i was 10 should i go and have my hands chopped off now?

[Schoeler 0]

Seriously, is this the worst the GOP can come up with? Kerry has much worse qualities and yet they settle for this?

I like the fact that the Bush Administration has NOTHING positive to talk about. They have no way of tooting their own horn. What can they claim as a victory?

Iraq?

The Economy?

Job Creation?

Education?

Afghanistan?

The Environment?

Homeland Security?

The National Debt?

Nothing has been achieved, abso-fucking-lutely nothing. We are all, much worse off than we were before the Supreme Court put them in office.

So all they have left is to run a negative campaign, and that means nitpicking and mudslinging and unfounded smear campaigns. Smoke and mirrors and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, because if you do, you will see how screwed up things really are.

That kind of campaigning can't be sustained for too long.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Standard Whitehouse/GOP reply.

Iraq?

We took hussein out of throne and we stabilized the nation.

Quote[/b] ]The Economy?

Comparing to the great depression of 29 this is far better

Quote[/b] ]Job Creation?

We created jobs despite lack luster economy

Quote[/b] ]Education?

We created new program - no child left behind, just the whole classmates.

Quote[/b] ]Afghanistan?

It's awfully quiet over there, so it is going ok

Quote[/b] ]The Environment?

Elks love those pipelines, and people can live in harmony with nature when we cut trees to make room for houses in forest.

Quote[/b] ]Homeland Security?

The absence of homeland attack is proof that this works. So we pry on your info for your sakes.

Quote[/b] ]The National Debt?

Just a small dent. We won't be around to worry about it.

 

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Hi all

I wonder if serving soldiers especialy in Iraq will be happy to see the lengths TBA and its cronies or supporters will go to smear one of their own. Especialy when they consider the same tactics may be used on them by members of the same Rich Mans clique of TBA and other neo conservatives.

Attacking a soldier like this will not enamour the millitary famlies to a bunch con artists like TBA. Pigs swim in the mud but so it seems does TBA and its piglets.

Kind Regards Walker

Welcome to Politics 101. Your history is open season.

I hope Bush wins so you can puke.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Good one Schoeler. Even though the train of thought of TBA works differently.

Quote[/b] ]Iraq?

Noone can denie that Saddam was a threat to the world. He definetly had those WMD in the past otherwise he would not have been able to gas his own people. The situation is critical in Iraq, but we told the american people that american soldier will die in the war against teror. It is the threat of the 21st century and we have to act.

Quote[/b] ]The Economy?

We implemented tax cuts that affect every american. We were forced to invest money into our defense since america is at war and our freedom is at stake. The economists, the business week and our central bankers have supported us in our views, that our measures taken help to rejuvinate the economy. We live in challenging times. since 911 we have to cope with a hostile athmosphere and the administration can no longer sit back and enjoy a boom like the during the 90ies.

Quote[/b] ]Job Creation?

The labour market has been improving, but it is still at a relatively early stage and, therefore, perhaps a bit fragile. We are cautiously optimistic that job growth will pick up further over the remainder of the year. Dont forget that our cuts in the social system have forced laid back people to get out of their homes and finally search for a job like the great majority of us hard working americans.

Quote[/b] ]Afghanistan?

We have brought those to justice that have kept a county hostage for decades, those who have raped children, surpressed and tortured women because of their sex. We have put our foot on the homeland of teror, instead of them steping into the US again and we wont take it out of there untill the americans feel safe. We have destroyed an entire network of terorists and those who support them. Having to sit in a cave hide from brave american soldiers makes it hard for the terorists to strike again. Not to speak about the fact that we now have control over a one of the biggest drug producing country in the world,  drugs which were stealing our sons and daughters and would continue to do so. And the american soldiers are highly motivated and convinced of their task in Afghanistan. So maybe you should start trusting those americans that are willing to risk their lives.

Quote[/b] ]The Environment?

First of all we have released ourselves from the pressure to go with the rules made by other western nations. Their intentions may be wise but their measures arent, especially not for the US. We have to find our own american way of protecting our beautiful country from this invisible threat. We are working on that.

Quote[/b] ]Homeland Security?

You know, this is a difficult topic, we wouldnt know whether what we did was or was not effective untill after a terorist attack. But we are currently defending our homeland security in Iraq and Afghanistan. We are not hiding but tackle teror where it is born, in other words at the root.

Our patriotic act as well as the new registry system of outside people coming into the US is giving us a transparent and up-to-date view of any potential threat. Those terorists can still access the country. But they wont have the time anymore to exercise flying planes into buildings and kill innocent americans. Their chance of success has been diminished to nearly zero percent. And kill over three thousand people, that shall never happen again.

Quote[/b] ]The National Debt?

The american people and the senat have agreed with our view that defending our country and the american people is worth the investment, it is worth more than just money. Dont forget that the debt is not money that is wasted, it has been invested. Even the amount that we put into the military will in the future help us to streamline our forces and invest more wisely into programms that certainly do succeed.

:

[Balschoiw 0]

How low can you go ?

Bush's Approval Rating at All-Time Low -Poll

Quote[/b] ]President Bush (news - web sites)'s approval rating is at an all-time low and fewer than half of Americans now believe invading Iraq (news - web sites) was the right thing to do, according to a CBS/New York Times poll released on Wednesday.

The poll found that if the presidential election due in November was held today, 46 percent of Americans would vote for Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites) and 44 percent would vote for Bush -- if independent Ralph Nader (news - web sites) stayed out of the race.

The poll, with a sampling error of 3 percentage points, was conducted among 1,042 adults nationwide from Friday to Tuesday during a spate of fierce fighting in Iraq. More than 115 U.S. soldiers have been killed in combat this month.

"Just 32 percent, the lowest number ever, say Iraq was a threat that required immediate military action a year ago," the poll reported.

"Less than half, 47 percent, now say the United States did the right thing taking military action in Iraq, the lowest support recorded in CBS News/New York Times polls since the war began."

The poll said the Iraq war appeared to have hurt assessments of Bush -- his overall approval rating (46 percent), his rating on handling Iraq (41 percent) and his rating on handling foreign policy (40 percent) "are at the lowest points ever in this administration."

"His approval rating has dropped five points from early March, before the start of intense new fighting in Iraq. Immediately after the fall of Baghdad a year ago, 67 percent of Americans approved of the job Bush was doing as president," the poll said.

Finally the US population seems to get the truth about this man.

[billybob2002 0]

Good news for Bush.

http://news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl....economy

Quote[/b] ]

WASHINGTON - The economy grew at an annual rate of 4.2 percent in the opening quarter of 2004, a solid showing and fresh evidence that the business recovery is solidly on track. But the performance wasn't the blowout that some analysts wanted.

Quote[/b] ]

GDP (news - web sites) measures the value of goods and services produced within the United States and is considered the most important barometer of the economy's health.

Quote[/b] ]

Economic growth in the first quarter was bolstered by spending by consumers, business and the federal government, especially on defense.

Quote[/b] ]

"Looking forward, the prospects for sustaining solid economic growth in the period ahead are good," Federal Reserve (news - web sites) Chairman Alan Greenspan (news - web sites) told Congress last week.

Expectations for such solid economic growth raise hope that the jobs market — the one part of the economy where a full recovery has yet to take place — will continue to show improvements in the months ahead.

Quote[/b] ]

An inflation gauge tied to GDP and favored by Greenspan showed that "core" prices — excluding food and energy — rose by 2 percent in the first quarter, up from a 1.2 percent rise in the previous quarter.

Higher prices, though, didn't stop consumers.

[Schoeler 0]

Good news for Bush.

http://news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl....economy

Quote[/b] ]

WASHINGTON - The economy grew at an annual rate of 4.2 percent in the opening quarter of 2004, a solid showing and fresh evidence that the business recovery is solidly on track. But the performance wasn't the blowout that some analysts wanted.

If you consider "the economy" to be the NASDAQ index or the S&P 500, then yes, things are looking rosy. If you consider it to be real income and purchasing power or new jobs created, then no, things aren't too hot right now.

Quote[/b] ]

GDP (news - web sites) measures the value of goods and services produced within the United States and is considered the most important barometer of the economy's health.

I hate to burst your bubble, but GDP is no longer considered a reliable or accurate barometer of a country's true economic strength. PPP (purchasing power parity) is now a much better means of coparing ecomomies.

Quote[/b] ]

Economic growth in the first quarter was bolstered by spending by consumers, business and the federal government, especially on defense.

Paying for the war and increased retail sales are anomalous and not a good indicator of improvement. The increased spending in the retail sector happened with the first wave of income tax refunds. It should peter out.

Quote[/b] ]

"Looking forward, the prospects for sustaining solid economic growth in the period ahead are good," Federal Reserve (news - web sites) Chairman Alan Greenspan (news - web sites) told Congress last week.

Expectations for such solid economic growth raise hope that the jobs market — the one part of the economy where a full recovery has yet to take place — will continue to show improvements in the months ahead.

Did he also mention the interest rate is about to go sky high?

Job creation wasn't new job creation, it was mostly in hirebacks for laid off workers. Meanwhile, retail and fast food sector jobs are growing while higher paying jobs continue to be exported overseas.

Quote[/b] ]

An inflation gauge tied to GDP and favored by Greenspan showed that "core" prices — excluding food and energy — rose by 2 percent in the first quarter, up from a 1.2 percent rise in the previous quarter.

Higher prices, though, didn't stop consumers.

Food and energy prices are the two best indexes for evaluating real income and economic well-being. If you can't afford gas and milk in America, something is very, very wrong.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]I hate to burst your bubble, but GDP is no longer considered a reliable or accurate barometer of a country's true economic strength.  PPP (purchasing power parity) is now a much better means of coparing ecomomies.

Please inform the government about this.

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

Quote[/b] ]

Criticisms of PPP

Critics say it is wrong to assume that the prices of goods should be equal in all countries. People in different countries usually put different values on the same goods. What is a luxury goods in one country can be an ordinary daily goods in another country. PPP disregards this.

The exchange rate says how much you can buy in another country with one unit of your own currency. But the PPP exchange rate has nothing to do with how much you can buy.

Most sources do not state the goods used to measure the PPP, which can be statistically deceptive and be used to weight the PPP for or against a given country by careful choice of goods.

Quality of Life and PPP

Even if a correct PPP is used, GDP per capita is still a measure of the economic output of the whole economy, not a direct measure of the mean or median person's quality of life. Other factors such as the quality of homes and schools, access to public services, the extent of pollution, and strength of consumer protection laws are hard to quantify and generally not fully reflected in the GDP. Thus, even a PPP-adjusted measure of GDP per capita must be used with caution, as it is only one component of quality of life.

For example, in 2002, the GDP per capita for Japan was about US$40,000 and the PPP was estimated as $27,000, while in the US, GDP per capita ws about $27,500 and the PPP was $36,000. The US has higher crime rates and a greater extent of poverty and slums than Japan, while Japan has much less physical space per person and arguably less individual freedom. Ultimately, the quality of life will depend on subjective judgement and individual preferences.

Per capita income also does not take into account inequalities in wealth distribution

Quote[/b] ]Job creation wasn't new job creation, it was mostly in hirebacks for laid off workers.

linky, please?

Quote[/b] ]Food and energy prices are the two best indexes for evaluating real income and economic well-being.  If you can't afford gas and milk in America, something is very, very wrong.

Prices go up and people are still spenting...

Late for class.................

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Job creation wasn't new job creation, it was mostly in hirebacks for laid off workers.

Go look it up in your economy book, it is the logical spin off effect of an improvement of the economy. In order to survive a company has to adapt its production capacities to the current consumer demands. In a crisis there is logically less demand and a company needs to reduce fixed costs such as labour, which in many companies makes up at least 50% of the total monthly expenditures. A supermarket needs 3 people to fill the shelves, less customers, less sale, less need to refill. The first thing the manager does is to lay off an employee beacause of slow business. Now once the economy goes up again people will stream into the supermarket and the manager then decideds: "damn we need someone to refill the shelves. Call Tom and ask him if he would still like to work for us)

Statistically you could only measure this by examining the pay-roll sheets of all companies before the bust. And then compare it with the one of after the boom. If they are less or more equal, then the economy has just sucked up as much labour as they had laid off during the bad days.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Go look it up in your economy book, it is the logical spin off effect of an improvement of the economy. In order to survive a company has to adapt its production capacities to the current consumer demands. In a crisis there is logically less demand and a company needs to reduce fixed costs such as labour, which in many companies makes up at least 50% of the total monthly expenditures. A supermarket needs 3 people to fill the shelves, less customers, less sale, less need to refill. The first thing the manager does is to lay off an employee beacause of slow business. Now once the economy goes up again people will stream into the supermarket and the manager then decideds: "damn we need someone to refill the shelves. Call Tom and ask him if he would still like to work for us)

I only heard that the 40,000 supermarket union worker who protested were added on.

[denoir 0]

I hate to burst your bubble, but GDP is no longer considered a reliable or accurate barometer of a country's true economic strength.  PPP (purchasing power parity) is now a much better means of coparing ecomomies.

The PPP is a very strange way of comparing economies. Basically you compare some form of item and look at the relative price. There are several flaws in that theory. First of all it does not take into consideration the size of the local  production of a specific item. Second, it does not take into consideration relative values/market size for items locally. And third, it does not take into consideration macroeconomic factors such as inflation, interest rates etc

The Big Mac PPP index:

[bn880 5]

Well as you probably know, things are looking better and better of Kerry lately, but here is something else coming out of the current Conservatist leadership and the result of its war:

As everyone probably knows fuel prices are rising sharply, in North America as well. I heard on CNN this morning that there is a _suggestion_ that there may different prices for vehicles with different fuel demands.... I know you Eurpoeans are thinking,"well they will charge the gas guzzlers more for fuel, not so bad", however, it is suppost to go the other way around, more fuel efficient vehicle owners being charged more.

I seriously don't have any other info on this suggestion than that, CNN is the shittiest station when it comes to organized reporting, but watch for this, it may just be a "freelance" suggestion meaning nothing much, other than someones stupidity.

[walker 0]

Hi all

Rumours are circulating that George Bush Jnr. worked as Saleem Bin Laden's (Osama Bin Laden's Brother) investment counselor and that the information in George Bush Jnr.'s National Guard Records was altered to remove this before they were released to the public.

It is being seen as a White House cover-up that makes the Nixon watergate tapes small potatoes; as so many serving White House officials may be involved.

Some are accusing George Bush Jnr. of having his judgement on Al Qaida clouded by his overly close ties to the Bin Laden family and that this caused him to ignore the warnings on Al Qaida terrorism in the months running up to 9/11.

Shocked Walker

[Jinef 2]

Blah, Rumours.

I am going to start one that Margaret Thatcher is actually a crab person! Just making a post before i'm PRed in a different thread.

I really don't care who wins, noone running has any shared beliefs as me, they both don't give a shit about the enviroment and they both are against homosexual couples, let them burn in the fires of hell #2.

[brgnorway 0]

Yes, it doesn't change anything. The information on the bush's involvement with shady business arrangements like the Carlyle group etc have been around there for several years - yet the american voters don't seem to care  

Besides, I doubt junior Walker has the brains to pull off investment counseling    - in other words the rumours are not true  

[walker 0]

Hi all

The rumours have now surfaced in the press and been turned into direct accusations.

Quote[/b] ]A reporter for The New York Times was invited to a screening of the film last week. "Fahrenheit 9/11" focuses on longstanding ties between the Bush family, its associates and prominent Saudis and on whether those ties clouded the president's judgment in recognizing warning signs before the Sept. 11 attacks and hampered his response afterward.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004....sition=

Kind Regards Walker

[denoir 0]

The Bushes and the Bin Ladens: passionate anti-war film is a tale of two families [Guardian Review]

Quote[/b] ]

It was strident, passionate, sometimes outrageously manipulative and often bafflingly selective in its material, but Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 was a barnstorming anti-war/anti-Bush polemic tossed like an incendiary device into the crowded Cannes festival.

It included a full-scale denunciation of the links between the Bush and Bin Laden families, the petro-commercial association which allowed dozens of the Bin Laden family to leave the country for Saudi Arabia after 9/11 and which necessitated the Iraq war as a massive diversion.

Moore also has queasy new war zone footage of US soldiers humiliating their prisoners while others snap away with their digital cameras, although he is noticeably keen to demonise the politicians, not the military.

A documentary is highly unlikely to win the Golden Palm, but this was an exhilarating and even refreshing film, especially coming at a time when political commentators on either side of the Atlantic - progressives and ex-progressives alike - are apparently too worldly and sophisticated to be angry about the war.

At Cannes this time last year, Franco-American relations were so bad and feelings so high that this movie could hardly have been shown without a riot. Now it was received in a mood of simmering, twitchy consensus. One American PR cracked: "It made me wanna burn my passport!"

There are fewer of the jokes and wacky stunts that entranced and enraged in his anti-gun documentary Bowling For Columbine; it is mostly a straight stitching together of clips and graphics with Moore's droll, faux-naif voiceover.

It does not have a big "showdown" moment, like Moore's encounter with Charlton Heston, although the director shouts out questions to the president he derisively calls Governor Bush and is rewarded by him with a snarling suggestion that he should get a real job, which takes some effrontery coming from the slacker fratboy head of state who makes Ronald Reagan's workload look Stakhanovite.

Fahrenheit 9/11 cheekily begins with "feed" footage of the major players - Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice and Paul Wolfowitz - smirking, and preening themselves as they prepare to go on TV. Wolfowitz even has a habit of licking his comb before running it through his hair, which got a deafening "eeeuuuuuwwwww" from the audience.

Here they are, is the implication, the whole corrupt gang who fixed the 2000 election, which began when Bush's cousin John Ellis, a Fox News executive, was instrumental in "calling it" for Bush/Cheney on election night and cowed the other networks into joining in.

From there, Moore sketches out the Texan-Saudi link through the Bin Ladens. This very much involves George Bush Sr, who far from being a retired old gentleman, is a vigorous player in the business and political scene, fully availing himself of the ex-presidential prerogative of receiving intelligence briefings.

Moore has a terrifying and funny sequence when he shows the rabbit-in-car-headlights expression on the president's face when he is told about the second plane hitting the towers while at a children's literacy event. A stopwatch appears in the corner of the screen, as the minutes tick by and the president keeps reading My Pet Goat, not knowing what to do without his advisers to tell him.

The Afghanistan war comes and goes without the capture of Osama bin Laden, although Moore stops short of saying the Bush administration doesn't want the embarrassment of catching him. Terrorism licences the big war on the diplomatically safe target of Iraq, in whose reconstruction the big companies have a vested interest, and Moore's overall narrative arc takes us to the homeland security issue, its concomitant politically profitable culture of fear, and the US military's recruiting grounds of blue collar America, getting poor blacks and whites to fight Mr Bush's war as the body count ratchets upwards.

Moore centres a big emotional moment on a bereaved military mom mourning her son outside the White House. This explains his reluctance to emphasise the issue of torture.

Moore's big omission is Tony Blair and the UK. He has a clever pastiche of the opening title-sequence of the old TV western Bonanza, with Bush and Blair mocked up to look like cowboys. But in a section about the ramshackle "coalition of the willing" which was supposed to lend international legitimacy to the invasion, there is no mention of the part played by this country. This can only be because of Moore's insistence on America's international isolation and arrogance. It's a strange, skewed perspective.

Meanwhile wrangling about corporate pressure on Moore goes on. The director claims that Mel Gibson, head of Icon films, was told "don't expect any more invitations from the White House if you fund this film". Gibson made a lot of money with The Passion of the Christ tapping into an international network of Christian cinemagoers. There are millions of anti-Bush people all over the world. The Passion of Michael Moore could yet be a hot ticket.

And a less impressed one from Reuters

Quote[/b] ]

By Kirk Honeycutt

CANNES (Hollywood Reporter) - In "Fahrenheit 9/11," Michael Moore drops any pretense that he is a documentarian to pull together from many sources an angry polemic against the president, the Bush family and the administration's foreign policy.

Where "Roger & Me" and "Bowling for Columbine" were personal quests for truth, looking at a subject from different angles and talking to people polls apart in their points of view, Moore stays "on message" here from first shot to last. There is no debate, no analysis of facts or search for historical context. Moore simply wants to blame one man and his family for the situation in Iraq the United States now finds itself in.

The film arrives, of course, amid recent revelations of Bush insiders Richard Clarke and Paul O'Neill, the turmoil over the 9/11 commission and the growing sense that the Iraq problem is not going away anytime soon. And the very public dust-up between Moore and the Walt Disney Co. CEO Michael Eisner, which has left Moore momentarily without a distributor, certainly raises the film's profile even further. So the film should reach a large enough audience; the question is: Will Moore be preaching to the choir?

Charting the American political scene during the past 3-1/2 years, Moore is forced to rely mostly on other people's material. The assertion that America's Saudi policy has been determined largely by financial ties between the Bush family and the Saudi royals -- including another Saudi clan, the bin Ladens -- comes largely from "House of Bush, House of Saud," by Craig Unger, whom he interviews.

The Bush White House's obsession with Iraq in the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11 despite overwhelming evidence that al-Qaida was behind the attacks comes from former counterterrorism czar Clarke in his book "Against All Enemies." Most of the film's interviews come from TV network news shows or CNN's Larry King.

The movie begins with the contested 2000 presidential election. Moore takes the usual anti-Bush view that the election was stolen. Moore then characterizes Bush as a country bumpkin in the initial months of his presidency, spending 42% of his time on vacation and falling rapidly in public opinion polls.

Then comes 9/11. Moore touchingly conveys this day of infamy with a montage of sounds and visuals that refrains from showing images of airplanes hitting buildings or the World Trade Center collapsing. Instead, we get noise of horror over a blank screen, then shots of crying, horrified people staring into a sky filling with smoke and debris.

Moore recounts the Afghanistan invasion, the "botched" search for Osama bin Laden and the administration's alleged fear-mongering through constantly upgraded, color-coded levels of the terrorist threat issued by the Homeland Security Department, all designed to make the public more willing to back the invasion of Iraq.

Even if one agrees with all of Moore's arguments, the film reduces decades of American foreign-policy failures to a black-and-white cartoon that lays the blame on one family. He ignores facts like the policy to arm and support Afghan rebels that began in the Carter administration. For that matter, the Clinton team never mounted a serious effort to go after al-Qaida even after the 1998 embassy bombings in East Africa.

The Iraq violence is more gruesome than what normally appears on American TV. One particular sequence follows an American patrol on Christmas Eve, but Moore never identifies who shot the footage. Because Moore is very good at jumping in front of a camera when he is around, one can only assume he shot none of the Iraq footage. But his editing is designed to emphasize Iraqi suffering and U.S. military personnel indifference or even hostility.  

The movie contains only one episode of Moore's patented "ambushes" of the famous. He collars congressmen leaving Capitol Hill and tries to persuade them to enlist their children to fight in Iraq. Not surprisingly, he has no takers.

When the movie devolves into problems of veteran benefits, harassment of peace groups or the grief of one family over a killed son, Moore simply loses his focus. These are worthy topics but have nothing to do with why the United States is in Iraq.

What Moore seems to be pioneering here is a reality film as an election-year device. The facts and arguments are no different than those one can glean from political commentary or recently published books on these subjects. Only the impact of film may prove greater than the printed word. So the real question is not how good a film is "Fahrenheit 9/11" -- it is undoubtedly Moore's weakest -- but will a film help to get a president fired?

[walker 0]

Hi all

Just a quick reminder that we in the UK can watch the film that won the top prize at Cannes but those of you in the US where the film was made cannot because Disney under fear of loosing their Florida tax breaks censored it.

You know Florida that bannana republic run by "Papa Doc" Jeb Bush rules. Where votes don't count and elections are fixed.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/awards/cannes/index.jsp

Bit silly realy for Disney to do that as George Bush Jnr.'s approval rating has already dropped into the low 40s a pit from which no incumbant recovers at this stage of the US election.

Republicans are so rattled that they fear loosing congress and the senate in the fallout from what has been without doubt the worst US presidency bar none.

Republican senators are wanting to distance them selves from the President and his cronies. So much so that they are turning out to be the executives worst enemies; as they seek to jump on the senate investigations bandwagon and question more rigourously than the democrats so they dont get caught in cesspitt that is the NeoCons.

The knives are out for archetect of The White House Loosers Dodgy Dick Cheyney too. With talk of investigating his business links http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,912426,00.html

And looking into links to big oil

Quote[/b] ]Congress' investigative arm says vice president refused to turn over key documents.

08/26/03: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Congressional investigators said Monday that Vice President Dick Cheney had stymied their investigation into his energy task force by refusing to turn over key documents.

The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, said it was impossible to tell how much energy companies or industry groups may have influenced the task force's 2001 report because the administration withheld important records.

Many already accuse Dick Cheyney of an atempt to hijack the US government

Quote[/b] ]Cheney's hawks ' hijacking policy'

By Ritt Goldstein

October 30, 2003 : (Sydney Morning Herald) A former Pentagon officer turned whistleblower says a group of hawks in the Bush Administration, including the Vice-President, Dick Cheney, is running a shadow foreign policy, contravening Washington's official line.

"What these people are doing now makes Iran-Contra [a Reagan administration national security scandal] look like amateur hour. . . it's worse than Iran-Contra, worse than what happened in Vietnam," said Karen Kwiatkowski, a former air force lieutenant-colonel.

"[President] George Bush isn't in control . . . the country's been hijacked," she said, describing how "key [governmental] areas of neoconservative concern were politically staffed".

Ms Kwiatkowski, who retired this year after 20 years service, was a Middle East specialist in the office of the Undersecretary of Defence for Policy, headed by Douglas Feith.

She described "a subversion of constitutional limits on executive power and a co-optation through deceit of a large segment of the Congress", adding that "in order to take that first step - Iraq - lies had to be told to Congress to bring them on board".

This is the NeoCon organisation that many blame for the mire of Iraq and US homeland defence failures that lead to 9/11.

Kind Regards Walker

[walker 0]

Hi all

George Bush Jnr.'s approval ratings continue to drop through the floor

Quote[/b] ]Forty-one percent approve of the job he is doing as president, while 52 percent disapprove — the lowest overall job rating of his presidency. Two weeks ago, 44 percent approved. A year ago, two-thirds did.

Sixty-one percent of Americans now disapprove of the way Mr. Bush is handling the situation in Iraq, while just 34 percent approve.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories....2.shtml

Not for nothing is it said that chalengers dont win elections incumbants loose them but none will do so badly as George Bush Jnr. set to give J. F. Kerry a landslide presedential win.

Kind Regards Walker

[Schoeler 0]

God I hope you are right Walker. I just spent the week entertaining a good friend from France. We talked incessantly about the corrupt administration here in America and about Franco-U.S. relations since the Bush Presidency. It's sad really that two nations who have been key friends for over two centuries have had their relationship strained by one simple bumpkin asshole.

I fear that this administration's abuse of power has set a precedent in subverting the Constitution that this country will never recover from. Historically, once the limits of power have been extended for the Executive branch, they have not been retracted. My strongest fear is that the United States is slipping into facism and dictatorship or only slightly less troubling, a totalitarian democracy. I fear that if the abuse of power and the corruption remain unchecked that civil war or revolution may remain the only option to restoring out government to its original function and intent.

The damage this administration has done will take generations to recover from.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]It's sad really that two nations who have been key friends for over two centuries have had their relationship strained by one simple bumpkin asshole.

Saw a great bumpersticker the other day..

"Somewhere in Texas.....a village is missing its idiot."

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]God I hope you are right Walker.  I just spent the week entertaining a good friend from France.  We talked incessantly about the corrupt administration here in America and about Franco-U.S. relations since the Bush Presidency.  It's sad really that two nations who have been key friends for over two centuries have had their relationship strained by one simple bumpkin asshole.

Spock, the Franco-U.S. relationship has not been always "peachy" or "perfect" throughout history. Some of France actions during the U.N. thingy was.....:crazy: (i.e. running to Africa to get the Africans to vote no and etc.).

[Schoeler 0]

Quote[/b] ]God I hope you are right Walker.  I just spent the week entertaining a good friend from France.  We talked incessantly about the corrupt administration here in America and about Franco-U.S. relations since the Bush Presidency.  It's sad really that two nations who have been key friends for over two centuries have had their relationship strained by one simple bumpkin asshole.

Spock, the Franco-U.S. relationship has not been always "peachy" or "perfect" throughout history. Some of France actions during the U.N. thingy was.....:crazy: (i.e. running to Africa to get the Africans to vote no and etc.).

I think you should further research the important role France played in our revolution and the important role the U.S. played in both European Wars with respect to France before you continue to embarass yourself with ignorant statements.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]I think you should further research the important role France played in our revolution and the important role the U.S. played in both European Wars with respect to France before you continue to embarass yourself with ignorant statements.

Was not talking about that. There were bumps in the road (i.e. Nato, establishment of China ties to early, nukes, Libya bombing, France not being apart in the US blockade of Cuba, suez canal, and etc.).

Note to self:

Should of not of used throughout but the last 50 years or so.