Monday, March 22, 2004
THE HISTORY OF THE RANT
Highlights of Intrepid Lickin' Bush reporter Tweed's year of rants:
February 21, 2003:
A congressional delegation to Columbia (which receives the third largest package of aid from the US, behind Israel and Egypt - oops, almost forgot about Turkey - for purposes of fighting the drug lords, who have now mingled with the various revolutionary forces there) has urged the administration to respond "in a very forceful way" to the shooting down of a Cessna carrying a number of US contracted workers and the subsequent killing of two occupants. The US contracted workers had been hired by State to help implement search technologies with respect to drug trafficking. US military involvement with Columbia has steadily increased over the past few years, under the auspices of the War on Drugs. Watch for this latest event to lift the restriction on US troop activities in Columbia (there are at least 600 US special forces in Columbia currently) and the War on Drugs to turn into a War on Terror. Congressional approval? - yeah, DeLay said it was OK.
The budget. For those of you not following this minor piece of legislation, the administration's budget proposal does not take into account the "possible" war with Iraq, the bribes paid to Turkey (and whoever else shows up down the line hat in hand) or increased funding for Afghanistan (which I won't get into). More tax cuts for people who don't need it. Greenspan is against it, as are over 400 economists - including 12 Nobel laureates. But they don't understand. You see, deficits are actually good - that's the premise of the budget. Don't be embarrassed, I didn't understand this either until Ari Fleischer explained it to me. When Bush said in his state of the union that we would not pass on our fiscal problems to future generations, he meant that we will pass on the cost of the Iraq war and his tax cuts for his buddies to our children. I'm not clear on the details, but I believe everything Dubya says, cause he's a guy people would like to have a beer with.
I used to think that Republicans were mean. I was wrong, they're really mean. Since the 2000 election, republicans have been working feverishly to exert control over everything - from my wife's womb to K Street. Not only have the republicans been making a list of "preferred" lobbying firms (those with republicans in charge), but they have been strong-arming lobbying groups to hire republicans. Recently, some Oxley staff members told a mutual fund lobbyist group that their hearing before his committee would go a lot more smoothly if they did not hire a democratic lobbyist and hired the "preferred" republican lobbyist instead. And here's a little something extra - buy the little lady somethin' nice with it. By the way, the White House does an even better job than Congressional republicans.
And is it just me, or has congress conceded all responsibility for everything to the executive?
March 6, 2003:
Far be it from me to question the motives of the current administration's desire to go to war. I leave that to . . . Robert Novak. Yes, that left-wing, commie sympathizer Robert Novak is reporting that this administrations desire to go to war is, in fact, based on a desire for a second term:
"A senior Bush official privately admits what his administration cannot declare publicly. The stagnant economy, a dagger aimed at the hear of George W. Bush's second term, will not immediately respond to the president's economic growth program. The economic engine will not be revived until the war against Saddam Hussein is launched and won.
Military victory is anticipated inside the Bush administration as the tonic that will prompt corporation officers and private investors to unleash the American economy's dormant power. Although it is impolitic to say so, the fact that the United States will be sitting on a new major oil supply will stimulate the domestic economy. That puts a high premium on quickly gaining control of Iraq's oil wells before they can be torched - a major uncertainty in an otherwise strictly scripted scenario."
Only Nixon could go to China, and, I suppose, Novak to report that Bush's war policy is actually a campaign scheme.
If they can impeach Clinton for fibbing about extra-marital sex, why can't we impeach Bush for putting Americans at risk of death for the sake of reelection?
You shouldn't be surprised. Remember those "the Honorable Karl Rove" mid-term election strategy discs found in Lafayette park indicating that republicans win when war is on the horizon? No one was talking about it during the mid-term election; and the democrat's poor strategy was an easier cause celeb than disgusting politics perpetrated by the greatest President since . . . ummmm. . . Grant.
Budget update: None of the costs of the military buildup around Iraq, and none of the anticipated costs of the war (which Ari tells us are far too unpredictable to estimate) are in the budget - which, incidentally, already creates the largest deficit ever. It sure is a good thing that those damn tax and spend liberals aren't in charge! But where did all the money go. Oh yeah, now I remember: Where's my second Mercedes! I wanted it eggshell, you idiot, not ecru! And where's the satellite dish?!?
March 12, 2003:
OK. I made a mistake: the Bushies are geniuses. Unless you've been living under a rock you know that current governors are unhappy with our governor President. Particularly, they've been upset with the amount of Federal funding states will get as they face their own budget issues. Well, Dubya set them straight. In an amazing move, Shrub has solved the problem. The solution is so simple, I'm certain we'll see it again and again applied to different budget issues. The solution: Stop publishing the "Budget Information for States" - the primary Federal document showing how much states get each year from each Federal program.
Shrub also lied to the governors at their recent National Governors Association meeting, telling them that his budget proposes $400 billion in grants to the states - "that's a 9 percent increase. . that's a bigger increase than 4 percent" which is the proposed growth in overall spending, Bush said, impressing all with his mastery of complex mathematical formulae. It's a lie. It's actually a 3.8 percent increase - but that's according to the actual budget, not Shrub hisself. Oh yeah, if you take into account the automatic increases under Medicaid, the increase is actually just 2.4 percent.
We are on the verge of war. Young American men and women are days away from war, possible chemical and biological weapons attacks and all of the other "routine" horrors of war. They will be fighting in some of the hottest temperatures on earth. I, for one, am proud that Republican Congressman Ney has taken the courageous step of renaming the French Fries in the Congressional Cafeteria as "Freedom Fries". Congressman Ney stands hand in hand with our troops, fighting not the terrorists and purveyors of WMDs, but Frankish treason. Congressman Ney's actions are the type needed in today's dangerous world. But must it end with Freedom Fries?
Where is the outrage at French Toast, French Dressing, French Maids and French Bread? How can we allow those poor souls to suffer living in New Orleans - particularly in the "Freedom" Quarter - New Rochelle, and St. Louis? How can we allow one of our great sovereign states to suffer under the yoke of such a name as "Louisiana"? And how, fellow patriots, can we allow our President to look out of his window into Lafayette Park.
We demand further action! It is one thing to suffer the slings and arrows of terrorists and war mongers, but quite another to suffer under the deprivation of living with anything "French". Hell no, escargot! While our brave young men and women protect us abroad, do your part at home; join the winning team: Freedom kiss your significant other (as long as that person is of the opposite sex)! Order Liberty Pastries and Fraternity Toast! Send that statue back to those traitors! Where are the parental warnings before Pepe la Pew cartoons? Why can I walk into any bookstore and buy that sedition passing for some silly girl living in a nunnery? Be rude to anyone you think is French! It's time for some payback! We saved their butts twice in the last century! It's time to kick!
March 25, 2003:
Congress (what was Madison thinking?), in its infinite wisdom, all but passed a deficit creating budget not that long ago. And when I say "deficit creating" I mean "historically large deficit creating". (Saying and writing things in code is something I learned from the President - remember that "no nation building" and "humility in foreign policy" and "we won't pass on our financial problems to our children" stuff?) Yes, ladies and gentlemen, George the Younger has evidently decided that the reason Daddy didn't get re-elected was because he didn't give people enough tax cuts. So, Dubya's decided to have his own Iraq war, his own recession and his own tax plan to see if he can get it right (why didn't we call "no do overs" in 2000?).
But there is a catch to this budget. As I mentioned in the past, it had no provision for spending for the Iraq War (preparations and the war itself). Of, course, last week, according to the White House and Rummy, the administration could not engage in speculation as to how much the war would cost. Five days into the war, however, that number is now knowable with precision - $74.4 Billion. So, where is this additional money going to come from? Well, it won't come from the rich - they're getting a huge tax cut! And so are their kids! If you were lucky enough to be born into a family with enough money to have to worry about estate taxes, this is the administration for you! Oh yes, and if you are in the higher income tax brackets generally - don't worry. Indeed, Dubya is fond of noting that, on average tax payers will receive $X thousand in savings from his tax plan. Of course, this does not mean that the average tax payer will receive $X thousand in savings. It means that a few of us will receive $10X thousand and more in savings and most of us will receive enough to take 1/2 of our family to a Yankee game.
Dumbya has offered numerous explanations as to why tax cuts are appropriate. In fact, he's offered so many that I've lost count. I remember when the economy was good he said people deserved their money back, then the economy went south and he said we needed a stimulus, now the economy still stinks and we need dividend tax relief so that my grandmother in Florida (who owns no stock) will be better off. Makes perfect sense.
You know what, folks: we are at war. At this moment, young American, British and Australian men and women are experiencing why war is always a bad choice (even when its the best choice available). They are being killed, injured and forced to do horrible things. They are sacrificing their safety and lives. And the chickenhawks leading this administration think that they should dupe Congress (which is quite willing to be duped), by hiding the costs of the war, so that Dubya's friends can get a tax cut. I guess the youth of America sacrifice their safety and lives to show their patriotism, and the rich pay less taxes to show theirs. I think the whole thing is disgusting.
June 30, 2003:
Bush: "God told me to strike at Saddam, which I did..."
Stockton: "God told me to start this website, which I did..."
I always marvel at the level of God's involvement in our lives. This guy (or gal) must be something - one minute he's helping a basketball player win a game, the next he's advising the President of the United States; and he still has time to keep up his nightly correspondence with countless TV preachers. And that's just in the United States!
I do not mean to demean. In all seriousness, if God speaks to you, congratulations.
Divine communication, however, is not my idea of good government. Color me naive, but wasn't one of the reasons for our revolution (the one in the 1770s, not the one in 1994) to secure the right of self-government? No, I'm not naive, it was. Under the Constitution God has no right to govern us. I, for one, am unwilling to cede my political authority to any God - even the one who told me to create this website.
November 18, 2003:
Rush is Back! Yessiiiirrrreeeebob - all of you megadittoheads out there rejoice! The Rush-man is back slinging his specialized brand of truth. Don't worry; he assures us that his recent bout with drug addiction does not make him a hypocrite. Proof enough for this ultra-mega-super-dittohead!
But seriously, it is great to be a Republican these days. Why, might you ask? Simple: it is easy to get away with being hypocritical. Remember all that talk about honesty and integrity from His Most Royal Excellency and Right Honorable Protector of the Oil Industry during the 2000 election campaign? Do you remember how offended Dumbya became when McCain dared to equate the honesty of Bill Clinton with that of Dumbya himself? I remember all of that stuff, but that's because I'm not a republican. How else, after all, could the republicans "out" a CIA operative married to that evil former ambassador? How else could our CEO VP refuse to disclose basic information about energy legislation? And how else could the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence decide that there is "nothing to review" with respect to the collection, analysis and use of intelligence leading up to the war? Clearly, being a republican is a freeing experience.
There is another reason republicans are on my mind today. The Patriot Act (Democrats deserve a fair amount of blame here as well) provides the government with remarkable authority to, for example, search your house without a warrant, listen-in on conversations between defendants and their lawyers, monitor our reading habits and review our financial dealings. And there is more to come, if (I'm trying to think of the right title that does not come from Nazi Germany) Ashcroft has his way. But don't worry, we still have liberty. You see, suspected terrorists who legally buy guns in the United States are free from government intrusion in their life. That's right folks, your rights in you legally purchased gun are greater than your rights in your legally purchased home. Investigatory agencies are not allowed to find out recorded details (recorded thanks to the Brady Law) of consummated gun purchases of suspected terrorists. Ashcroft (the worst attorney general ever) has decided that investigators can't access this information, even though another government agency has it available. What happened to that overwhelming need for greater investigative powers? I suppose that its more important for the government to know that I prefer large size white Coolmax long-sleeve running shirts from nationalrunning.com to the blue variety sold at models.com than it is to find out where in the United States one of Osama bin Laden's minion is purchasing machine-guns. I'm so naive about intelligence work.
But let's get real, what self-respecting terrorist would actually legally purchase a gun? NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam says that it is "misguided for anyone to think that gang members or terrorists are somehow enmasse going through legal means to purchase their firearms." Makes sense! Except that an al Qaeda training manual recovered by US forces in Afghanistan included a chapter noting how easy it is to buy guns in the US and urged members to "obtain an assault rifle legally, preferably an AK-47 or variations, learn how to use it properly and go and practice in the areas allowed for such training."
Oops.
|
Highlights of Intrepid Lickin' Bush reporter Tweed's year of rants:
February 21, 2003:
A congressional delegation to Columbia (which receives the third largest package of aid from the US, behind Israel and Egypt - oops, almost forgot about Turkey - for purposes of fighting the drug lords, who have now mingled with the various revolutionary forces there) has urged the administration to respond "in a very forceful way" to the shooting down of a Cessna carrying a number of US contracted workers and the subsequent killing of two occupants. The US contracted workers had been hired by State to help implement search technologies with respect to drug trafficking. US military involvement with Columbia has steadily increased over the past few years, under the auspices of the War on Drugs. Watch for this latest event to lift the restriction on US troop activities in Columbia (there are at least 600 US special forces in Columbia currently) and the War on Drugs to turn into a War on Terror. Congressional approval? - yeah, DeLay said it was OK.
The budget. For those of you not following this minor piece of legislation, the administration's budget proposal does not take into account the "possible" war with Iraq, the bribes paid to Turkey (and whoever else shows up down the line hat in hand) or increased funding for Afghanistan (which I won't get into). More tax cuts for people who don't need it. Greenspan is against it, as are over 400 economists - including 12 Nobel laureates. But they don't understand. You see, deficits are actually good - that's the premise of the budget. Don't be embarrassed, I didn't understand this either until Ari Fleischer explained it to me. When Bush said in his state of the union that we would not pass on our fiscal problems to future generations, he meant that we will pass on the cost of the Iraq war and his tax cuts for his buddies to our children. I'm not clear on the details, but I believe everything Dubya says, cause he's a guy people would like to have a beer with.
I used to think that Republicans were mean. I was wrong, they're really mean. Since the 2000 election, republicans have been working feverishly to exert control over everything - from my wife's womb to K Street. Not only have the republicans been making a list of "preferred" lobbying firms (those with republicans in charge), but they have been strong-arming lobbying groups to hire republicans. Recently, some Oxley staff members told a mutual fund lobbyist group that their hearing before his committee would go a lot more smoothly if they did not hire a democratic lobbyist and hired the "preferred" republican lobbyist instead. And here's a little something extra - buy the little lady somethin' nice with it. By the way, the White House does an even better job than Congressional republicans.
And is it just me, or has congress conceded all responsibility for everything to the executive?
March 6, 2003:
Far be it from me to question the motives of the current administration's desire to go to war. I leave that to . . . Robert Novak. Yes, that left-wing, commie sympathizer Robert Novak is reporting that this administrations desire to go to war is, in fact, based on a desire for a second term:
"A senior Bush official privately admits what his administration cannot declare publicly. The stagnant economy, a dagger aimed at the hear of George W. Bush's second term, will not immediately respond to the president's economic growth program. The economic engine will not be revived until the war against Saddam Hussein is launched and won.
Military victory is anticipated inside the Bush administration as the tonic that will prompt corporation officers and private investors to unleash the American economy's dormant power. Although it is impolitic to say so, the fact that the United States will be sitting on a new major oil supply will stimulate the domestic economy. That puts a high premium on quickly gaining control of Iraq's oil wells before they can be torched - a major uncertainty in an otherwise strictly scripted scenario."
Only Nixon could go to China, and, I suppose, Novak to report that Bush's war policy is actually a campaign scheme.
If they can impeach Clinton for fibbing about extra-marital sex, why can't we impeach Bush for putting Americans at risk of death for the sake of reelection?
You shouldn't be surprised. Remember those "the Honorable Karl Rove" mid-term election strategy discs found in Lafayette park indicating that republicans win when war is on the horizon? No one was talking about it during the mid-term election; and the democrat's poor strategy was an easier cause celeb than disgusting politics perpetrated by the greatest President since . . . ummmm. . . Grant.
Budget update: None of the costs of the military buildup around Iraq, and none of the anticipated costs of the war (which Ari tells us are far too unpredictable to estimate) are in the budget - which, incidentally, already creates the largest deficit ever. It sure is a good thing that those damn tax and spend liberals aren't in charge! But where did all the money go. Oh yeah, now I remember: Where's my second Mercedes! I wanted it eggshell, you idiot, not ecru! And where's the satellite dish?!?
March 12, 2003:
OK. I made a mistake: the Bushies are geniuses. Unless you've been living under a rock you know that current governors are unhappy with our governor President. Particularly, they've been upset with the amount of Federal funding states will get as they face their own budget issues. Well, Dubya set them straight. In an amazing move, Shrub has solved the problem. The solution is so simple, I'm certain we'll see it again and again applied to different budget issues. The solution: Stop publishing the "Budget Information for States" - the primary Federal document showing how much states get each year from each Federal program.
Shrub also lied to the governors at their recent National Governors Association meeting, telling them that his budget proposes $400 billion in grants to the states - "that's a 9 percent increase. . that's a bigger increase than 4 percent" which is the proposed growth in overall spending, Bush said, impressing all with his mastery of complex mathematical formulae. It's a lie. It's actually a 3.8 percent increase - but that's according to the actual budget, not Shrub hisself. Oh yeah, if you take into account the automatic increases under Medicaid, the increase is actually just 2.4 percent.
We are on the verge of war. Young American men and women are days away from war, possible chemical and biological weapons attacks and all of the other "routine" horrors of war. They will be fighting in some of the hottest temperatures on earth. I, for one, am proud that Republican Congressman Ney has taken the courageous step of renaming the French Fries in the Congressional Cafeteria as "Freedom Fries". Congressman Ney stands hand in hand with our troops, fighting not the terrorists and purveyors of WMDs, but Frankish treason. Congressman Ney's actions are the type needed in today's dangerous world. But must it end with Freedom Fries?
Where is the outrage at French Toast, French Dressing, French Maids and French Bread? How can we allow those poor souls to suffer living in New Orleans - particularly in the "Freedom" Quarter - New Rochelle, and St. Louis? How can we allow one of our great sovereign states to suffer under the yoke of such a name as "Louisiana"? And how, fellow patriots, can we allow our President to look out of his window into Lafayette Park.
We demand further action! It is one thing to suffer the slings and arrows of terrorists and war mongers, but quite another to suffer under the deprivation of living with anything "French". Hell no, escargot! While our brave young men and women protect us abroad, do your part at home; join the winning team: Freedom kiss your significant other (as long as that person is of the opposite sex)! Order Liberty Pastries and Fraternity Toast! Send that statue back to those traitors! Where are the parental warnings before Pepe la Pew cartoons? Why can I walk into any bookstore and buy that sedition passing for some silly girl living in a nunnery? Be rude to anyone you think is French! It's time for some payback! We saved their butts twice in the last century! It's time to kick!
March 25, 2003:
Congress (what was Madison thinking?), in its infinite wisdom, all but passed a deficit creating budget not that long ago. And when I say "deficit creating" I mean "historically large deficit creating". (Saying and writing things in code is something I learned from the President - remember that "no nation building" and "humility in foreign policy" and "we won't pass on our financial problems to our children" stuff?) Yes, ladies and gentlemen, George the Younger has evidently decided that the reason Daddy didn't get re-elected was because he didn't give people enough tax cuts. So, Dubya's decided to have his own Iraq war, his own recession and his own tax plan to see if he can get it right (why didn't we call "no do overs" in 2000?).
But there is a catch to this budget. As I mentioned in the past, it had no provision for spending for the Iraq War (preparations and the war itself). Of, course, last week, according to the White House and Rummy, the administration could not engage in speculation as to how much the war would cost. Five days into the war, however, that number is now knowable with precision - $74.4 Billion. So, where is this additional money going to come from? Well, it won't come from the rich - they're getting a huge tax cut! And so are their kids! If you were lucky enough to be born into a family with enough money to have to worry about estate taxes, this is the administration for you! Oh yes, and if you are in the higher income tax brackets generally - don't worry. Indeed, Dubya is fond of noting that, on average tax payers will receive $X thousand in savings from his tax plan. Of course, this does not mean that the average tax payer will receive $X thousand in savings. It means that a few of us will receive $10X thousand and more in savings and most of us will receive enough to take 1/2 of our family to a Yankee game.
Dumbya has offered numerous explanations as to why tax cuts are appropriate. In fact, he's offered so many that I've lost count. I remember when the economy was good he said people deserved their money back, then the economy went south and he said we needed a stimulus, now the economy still stinks and we need dividend tax relief so that my grandmother in Florida (who owns no stock) will be better off. Makes perfect sense.
You know what, folks: we are at war. At this moment, young American, British and Australian men and women are experiencing why war is always a bad choice (even when its the best choice available). They are being killed, injured and forced to do horrible things. They are sacrificing their safety and lives. And the chickenhawks leading this administration think that they should dupe Congress (which is quite willing to be duped), by hiding the costs of the war, so that Dubya's friends can get a tax cut. I guess the youth of America sacrifice their safety and lives to show their patriotism, and the rich pay less taxes to show theirs. I think the whole thing is disgusting.
June 30, 2003:
Bush: "God told me to strike at Saddam, which I did..."
Stockton: "God told me to start this website, which I did..."
I always marvel at the level of God's involvement in our lives. This guy (or gal) must be something - one minute he's helping a basketball player win a game, the next he's advising the President of the United States; and he still has time to keep up his nightly correspondence with countless TV preachers. And that's just in the United States!
I do not mean to demean. In all seriousness, if God speaks to you, congratulations.
Divine communication, however, is not my idea of good government. Color me naive, but wasn't one of the reasons for our revolution (the one in the 1770s, not the one in 1994) to secure the right of self-government? No, I'm not naive, it was. Under the Constitution God has no right to govern us. I, for one, am unwilling to cede my political authority to any God - even the one who told me to create this website.
November 18, 2003:
Rush is Back! Yessiiiirrrreeeebob - all of you megadittoheads out there rejoice! The Rush-man is back slinging his specialized brand of truth. Don't worry; he assures us that his recent bout with drug addiction does not make him a hypocrite. Proof enough for this ultra-mega-super-dittohead!
But seriously, it is great to be a Republican these days. Why, might you ask? Simple: it is easy to get away with being hypocritical. Remember all that talk about honesty and integrity from His Most Royal Excellency and Right Honorable Protector of the Oil Industry during the 2000 election campaign? Do you remember how offended Dumbya became when McCain dared to equate the honesty of Bill Clinton with that of Dumbya himself? I remember all of that stuff, but that's because I'm not a republican. How else, after all, could the republicans "out" a CIA operative married to that evil former ambassador? How else could our CEO VP refuse to disclose basic information about energy legislation? And how else could the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence decide that there is "nothing to review" with respect to the collection, analysis and use of intelligence leading up to the war? Clearly, being a republican is a freeing experience.
There is another reason republicans are on my mind today. The Patriot Act (Democrats deserve a fair amount of blame here as well) provides the government with remarkable authority to, for example, search your house without a warrant, listen-in on conversations between defendants and their lawyers, monitor our reading habits and review our financial dealings. And there is more to come, if (I'm trying to think of the right title that does not come from Nazi Germany) Ashcroft has his way. But don't worry, we still have liberty. You see, suspected terrorists who legally buy guns in the United States are free from government intrusion in their life. That's right folks, your rights in you legally purchased gun are greater than your rights in your legally purchased home. Investigatory agencies are not allowed to find out recorded details (recorded thanks to the Brady Law) of consummated gun purchases of suspected terrorists. Ashcroft (the worst attorney general ever) has decided that investigators can't access this information, even though another government agency has it available. What happened to that overwhelming need for greater investigative powers? I suppose that its more important for the government to know that I prefer large size white Coolmax long-sleeve running shirts from nationalrunning.com to the blue variety sold at models.com than it is to find out where in the United States one of Osama bin Laden's minion is purchasing machine-guns. I'm so naive about intelligence work.
But let's get real, what self-respecting terrorist would actually legally purchase a gun? NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam says that it is "misguided for anyone to think that gang members or terrorists are somehow enmasse going through legal means to purchase their firearms." Makes sense! Except that an al Qaeda training manual recovered by US forces in Afghanistan included a chapter noting how easy it is to buy guns in the US and urged members to "obtain an assault rifle legally, preferably an AK-47 or variations, learn how to use it properly and go and practice in the areas allowed for such training."
Oops.
