marcosolo, 18. Februar 2004 um 20:45:03 MEZ

Ed Garvey: Bush, administration may pay price for arrogance

We go to the polls today to select the next president. We have wonderful choices. Their campaigns have ignited a spark, but we must also thank the Bush boys for providing fuel.

Historians will judge the Bush administration as the most arrogant administration in our history. Almost the day after it stole the election in 2000, the unrepentant gang began plans to invade Iraq.

They didn't need United Nations approval. They were in charge. They had both houses of Congress, the presidency and the courts. A perfect trifecta. And the Fourth Estate would soon make it clear they would give Bush a pass.

They had such complete control that Vice President Dick Cheney could secretly meet with oil and gas companies and coal producers to work out plans to dismantle environmental protection. Who would find out? Interpretation of freedom of information would, after all, be done by Justice Antonin Scalia's Supreme Court.

The Environmental Protection Agency would be crippled by executive order before the Sierra Club and others got their computers turned on. So cocky were these guys that they would actually fly Justice Scalia on Air Force 2 with Dick Cheney to hunt ducks on the manse of one of those oilmen who probably attended the Cheney secret summit.

Would Scalia recuse himself in the Cheney case before the Supreme Court? When asked he said, and I'm not kidding, "Quack, quack."

The news came that they had planned the invasion of Iraq from day one. To justify it, they made up "evidence" and foisted it upon the world.

Face it - they are too smart to have believed that Iraq was a threat. The Democrats were, with notable exceptions, quiet. The electronic media seemed positively agog over "shock and awe." Would they find weapons of mass destruction? Of course not. But they would find other compelling reasons, such as a foothold in the Middle East and "eliminating the brutal dictator."

The plan was, in retrospect, too obvious. Knowing they wouldn't find WMDs, they immediately started uncovering mass graves to prove how bad Saddam was, as if that had been unknown. Then they tried to kill Saddam and hold his advisers in secret locations. Congress would be told that the intelligence upon which they justified this awful war is "top secret." In other words, no one was allowed to tell the American people.

They had it all. The tail not only wagged the dog, it became the dog. Bush was at 80 percent approval, the EPA was being dismantled, Halliburton had its contracts, Social Security and Medicare were on the chopping block, and the wartime president would be re-elected handily.

But there is a price to pay for hubris. They got sloppy. Perhaps because they had no one to challenge them, they began believing their own pronouncements.

They thought they could sneak $87 billion for the war in Iraq past a quiescent public by demanding, with flags fluttering, that people "support the troops." They thought no one would ask how things were going in Kabul. And that the people of Iraq would have no choice but to support the American plans long enough to hold elections. And after our elections, who would really care in the Bush house if Iraq slides into civil war?

It began to unravel when the British began raising hell about Tony Blair and demanding to know more about his intelligence claim that Saddam could launch WMDs within 45 minutes.

Other questions were raised. It gathered steam when Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich began running for president on the theme that the war was a tragic mistake, and the message began sticking. Suddenly Howard Dean from tiny Vermont was the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination and many rallied to Kucinich's call: "U.N. in and U.S. out."

How did this happen? I think it was, in part, the unusual pre-primary debate formats where all nine Democratic candidates had a chance to speak to the American people 25 times. All were more articulate than Bush or Cheney. All soon began to criticize the invasion, and all nine began to pick up on the populist themes of Kucinich and John Edwards.

One suspects the Bush gang assumed the Democrats would tear themselves apart and the last person standing would be filled with lead. But something went wrong. The issues are so large that the small fights went unnoticed. Bush began falling in the polls and soon he was shown losing in head-to-head contests with various Democratic challengers.

The Bush gang panicked. They decided they must get the president back on the front pages and as the lead story on network news. Why not a softball session with Tim Russert where Bush would show his command of the facts? He would surprise all of us just as he did in the debates with Al Gore.

Remember? Gore was supposed to kill Bush in debates, but with low expectations, Bush actually won support as a result of the debates. He would do the same with Russert, or so they thought.

But were they ever wrong.

The "Meet the Press" interview shocked even the right-wingers, not because Russert was so tough but because Bush was pathetic. Peggy Noonan, the Reagan speechwriter, said Bush looked tired and confused. Bill O'Reilly apologized on Fox for supporting the president's claim of WMDs. And the National Guard issue came up again. And again. And again.

So how did the Bush boys respond? Another bold stroke. Release all the documents even though they would not answer the question posed by Michael Moore: "Was the president AWOL in Alabama?" On Sunday, CNN reported their weekend poll results. To the question "Did the president clear up the National Guard issue?" an amazing 84 percent said no.

Bush has lost credibility and once lost, it is hard to recover. We can only hope he will give more one-on-one interviews. Lou Dobbs or Paul Krugman perhaps?

Ed Garvey, the Democratic nominee for governor in 1998, is a Madison lawyer and the editor of the fightingbob.com Web site. E-mail: comments@fightingbob.com

 

... Link

marcosolo, 17. Februar 2004 um 22:36:46 MEZ

Dead Woman Who Accused George W. Bush of Rape

11/12/2003 16:37

Margie Schoedinger dies as a result of a gunshot wound to the head

Margie Schoedinger, the woman who allegedly filed a lawsuit against George W. Bush in December 2002, claiming that she had been raped, has died of a gunshot wound to the head, registered officially as "suicide".

The allegations were serious: the law suit apparently filed against George W. Bush in the County Civil Court in Fort Bend County, Texas, on 2nd December 2002, claimed that George Bush, the former Governor or Texas and current President of the United States of America, had committed "individual sex crimes" against her and her husband.

Margie Schoedinger further stated that after the claim, she had been harassed, that her bank account had been interfered with, that she had been threatened and beaten. She claimed 1 million USD in actual damages plus 49 million USD in punitive damages and emotional stress caused by the alleged incidents.

Court documents filed on December 4th 2002 mention Bush, giving him 20 days to respond or appear in a court in Fort Bend. These papers were initialed by Fort Bend County Deputy Clerk, Becky Kasper. However, due to the ambiguous nature of the claims, which have never been substantiated, it is unclear whether the President of the USA was served with the suit.

Whatever the case, Margie Schoedinger is dead. At 38 years of age, she died on Monday 22nd September 2003. The Harris Country Examiner's Office states "gunshot wound to the head" and "suicide".

John ASHTEAD PRAVDA.Ru

ms: dear George I am afraid this is the end my friend, game over, I would not try to challenge Kerry on women affairs anymore you would even lose in this league....

bushcase (application/pdf, 226 KB) pdf flle of official documents.

 

... Link

marcosolo, 17. Februar 2004 um 20:45:16 MEZ

1972 Bush Zahnbild aus der AWOL Zeit

Hier der Beweis des Schwarzen Hauses, dass ihr Präsident kein AWOL sei. Wen wunderts da noch, dass sie die Bildung nicht mehr finanzieren wollen. Intelligente Leute scheinen in den USA von heute nicht mehr gefragt zu sein.

Wer glaubts, dagegen war die Mondlandung schon beinahe ein Meisterstück.......

gefunden auf: michaelmoore.com

 

... Link