'We Can, We Must' Win Terror War

Kerry: 'We Can, We Must' Win Terror War

By Nedra Pickler, Associated Press Writer

NASHVILLE, Tenn. - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, seizing on President Bush's suggestion that victory in the war on terrorism might not be possible, declared Tuesday that "we can, we must and we will win the war on terror."

Kerry told about 1,000 people gathered at a late-night airport rally that he would fight a smarter, more effective war by bringing in help from allies who have been opposed to Bush's military leadership.

Kerry said he has not been watching the Republican National Convention on television this week, but he has been reading coverage of it in the newspaper.

"All they're talking about is the war on terror, which the president yesterday said he doesn't think we can win," Kerry said in his first campaign appearance since the beginning of the convention. "Well, ladies and gentlemen, let me tell you something: We can, we must and we will win the war on terror."

Bush said in an interview aired Monday on NBC's "Today" show that he didn't think the war on terror is winnable. On Tuesday, he told the American Legion that "we may never sit down at a peace table, but make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win."

Kerry was to address the American Legion, the nation's largest veterans organization, on Wednesday. He planned to use the speech to spell out what he sees as Bush's miscalculations on the war on terror and declare that he has the best plan to win, said Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart.
"When the president admits that he's not confident they can win the war on terror, that's what people in politics call a problem," Lockhart said.



Kerry Blogger "tennesseeanforkerry", who was at the late-night rally reported this on the Kerry Blog 1:23 AM:

"Great speech by Kerry this evening before 2000 people standing crammed into a hangar at the Nashville airport. It all began with the wonderful sight of the campaign plane pulling into view the wide open front doors of the hangar where people had been standing for 2 hours. Tremendous cheers came from the crowd as Kerry descended the onto the tarmac and walked into the hangar, greeting a score of local veterans along the way. "

"The stage was complete with the leaders of the Tennessee Democratic party starting with Governor Bredesen, Congressmen Cooper, Gordon, and Ford, and Mayor Purcell of Nashville. A surprise treat was the appearence of John Glenn who looked like he could still fly in a Mercury capsule. And just like Glenn, John Kerry proved that he too has "the right stuff"."

80 Questions for George W. Bush

On the eve of the Republican National Convention is New York City, a few Kerry Bloggers have posed the following questions for George W. Bush:

1. Why is it that you did not inform congress of the CBO's estimate that the Medicare bill was going to cost more than you promised even your own congress? (They had set a limit)
2. Why did you sign it months before you told anyone it would cost more?
3. Why did Cheney choose to fight to hold on to his energy meeting records, right up to the Supreme Court?
4. How many secrets of what you have done, are we going to discover after you have departed?
5. What joy have you brought to this world? Our people are booed at the Olympics-Powell could not even go there...The world despises us, the middle glass is mired in debt, there is more poverty, less education, less first responders, less security (except for you and congresses shelter) less of everything. You have almost succeeded in ripping the hope from the hopeful in America.
6. How much does a gallon of milk cost?
7. How many total deaths & casualties in Iraq war? (U.S.Coalition/Iraqi/Journalists/Workers)
8. If you knew then what you know now, would you have invaded Iraq?
9. Did you foresee the Iraq war costing 200 billion dollars and thousands of American soldier’s lives & limbs?
10. Do you know who exposed Valerie Plame as an undercover agent?
11. What is the percentage of earnings a working class family pays for housing? Food? Healthcare?
12. What is the effect of healthcare costs on the economy? Employment?
13. Would you advise your daughters and nephews to enlist for service in Iraq? Have you?
14. Now that you have liberated Iraq, will you support their desire for a Fundamentalist government?
15. Why did the lucrative school testing contracts, which are the main part funded from the "No Child Left Behind" bill, get passed along to your cronies?
16. Can you bring us up to date on the Enron investigation?
17. Can you bring us up to date on the Halliburton investigation?
18. Can you bring us up to date on the Harken investigation?
19. Recently, a Fox News reporter was fired for refusing to report a lie. She sued for wrongful termination, but on appeal, the courts held that the United States has no law that requires news to be true. Do you support this opinion?
20. Your father has had several skin lesions removed from his face. Why do you oppose environmental legislation that would reduce skin cancer rates?
21. Do you believe that certain parts of the Constitution are outdated?
22. How many convicted felons are currently serving in your administration?
23. In your State of the Union speech, you stated that the presence of "25,000 liters of anthrax ... 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin ... materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent ... upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents" posed an imminent threat to this nation.
24. Where are the WMD?
25. How did you get your position in the TANG considering your extremely low test score?
26. And to follow-up, how did you get an Honorable Discharge when you failed to complete your service?
27. Who short sold United and American right before 9-11?
28. After Andrew Card notified you on 9-11 that America was under attack, why did you spend almost 20 minutes reading a story about a pet goat?
29. How do you plan to balance the social services spending in Iraq vs. in the United States?
30. Your first round of tax cuts resulted in a loss of over 2 million jobs. You promise your next tax cut will create 1 million new jobs. Can you do the math?
31. Three times, you have stated that it would be easier if you were a dictator. Why do you think that's funny?
32. What possessed you to use the 9/11 national tragedy as a punch line in your 'Trifecta' joke? And to follow up, why did your partisan republican audiences laugh with you?
33. Why did you ask the president of Brazil if there are any blacks there?
34. Why did your administration lobby Tom Daschle to drop the investigation of 9-11?
35. Why haven't you let the public see the 800-page 9-11 investigation report?
36. Are you actually afraid of Helen Thomas?
37. When Florida was called for Gore, why did you insist that results were going to change?
38. How do you explain the worldwide animosity America now faces? Would you agree that the sentiment is more anti-Bush than anti-America?
39. Why didn't you take steps to protect the hospitals, museums and nuclear power plants in Iraq?
40. Where is Saddam Hussein?
41. Where is Osama bin Laden?
42. Why didn't you remove any doubt about your presidency by demanding a full recount of the Florida vote?
43. If universal healthcare is important for Iraq, why not here?
44. Will you take the tests that you require schoolchildren to pass?
45. Why did you tell the FBI to back off the bin Laden family?
46. You know that your National Security Advisor lied about the possibility of commercial aircraft being used as weapons. Why didn't you fire her?
47. How many federal employees were fired following the catastrophic intelligence failures on 9/11?
48. What will you do to make sure elections are properly audited in the next election?
49. Why did you and Secretary of State Colin Powell cite a forged document as evidence of Iraq's alleged nuclear program?
50. Can you explain why did NORAD deviated from Standard Operating Procedure on the morning of 9-11, failing to scramble jets? If not, can you tell us the status of that investigation?
51. Why did your spokesperson deny that you were drafting a second Domestic Security Enhancement bill (Patriot Act II)?
52. With Homeland Security initiatives like First Responders being under-funded, how do you reason that creating more foreign enemies is making us any safer?
53. Can you explain why $50 million allocated to investigate the Columbia Shuttle disaster, yet only $3 million was allocated to investigate 9-11?
54. Why has your Justice Department consistently refused to supply information to Congress on how the USA PATRIOT Act is being implemented, especially in light of the fact that passage of the act was conditional upon adequate oversight by Congress? 55. Why are you so obsessed with secrecy? Do you have something to hide?
56. Why did you renege on your campaign promise to support the Kyoto Treaty on global warming?
57. Why did you fail to fund your "Leave No Child Behind" initiative?
58. Where were you, Mr. Bush, between 1972 and 1973 when you were supposed to be in the national guard?
59. How do you justify the budget cuts for veterans benefits at precisely the time you are ramping up the military for permanent war?
60. Is it true that you are recruiting soldiers in Mexico?
61. Why did you and others in the White House start taking Cipro right after 9/11? What did you know that the rest of the American people didn't?
62. Would your administration be more concerned with finding the anthrax killer if republican senators and the Washington Times had been targeted?
63. Do you think anyone buys your 'cowboy' act? Isn't your 'ranch' a cynical campaign prop?
64. It has been reported that you said, "who cares what you think?" to a man that questioned your policies in Philadelphia. Is this 'compassionate conservatism' or simple contempt?
65. Mr. Bush*, do you still "not give a damn" where Osama Bin Laden is?
66. When was the last time you gave a speech before an audience that was not handpicked?
67. Do you believe that dissent is unpatriotic?
68. Why are people who would protest your appearances rounded up and arrested before the events, held without charges, and then released?
69. In 1989, you reportedly said that you are a media creation. Has anything changed?
70. Do you believe that the apocalypse is underway?
71. What is your role in the apocalypse?
72. When will Christ return? What are the signs?
73. How can you expect people to be excited about your “Ownership Society” when they cannot pay their bills and put food on the table?
74. How many people are really unemployed?
75. Why are there no unemployment extensions?
76. What are your real plans for Social Security?
77. How can you expand reforms to higher grades and junior colleges, stressing basic skills for the workforce of the future, when NCLB has not been successful?
78. Why did you cut funding for Mine Safety Enforcement by $15 Million?
79. What exactly does "catastrophic success” mean?
80. What does “Separation of Church and State” mean to you?

Kerry Supporters in the San Fernando Valley!

Out on the streets of the San Fernando Valley today there was a lot of Kerry action going on...

A trip to the Studio City Farmer's Market found a large crew manning the Kerry Table that has been there for well over a year now. I found the group to enthusiastic and well informed on Kerry's positions. Also down the way from the Kerry table was Studio City Neighbors for Peace & Justice who also had a wealth of anti-Bush material.



I was wearing my favorite "No More Bushit 2004" t-shirt, which always get's a wealth of postive commentary. I ran into Tony who was sporting a classic, "He's Not My President" t-shirt. We had a mini protest of our own going on!



After the Farmer's Market I headed over to the local Raplh's supermarket in NoHo (North Hollywood) and I was pleasantly surprised by this new addition to the local tabling effort...

They've Got the Whole World in Their Hands!

(AP Photo/Joe Cavaretta )


(REUTERS/Henny Ray Abrams)

Protesters carrying an inflatable globe join tens of thousands of others who showed their opposition to the policies of the Bush administration by marching in front of Madison Square Garden, site of this week's Republican National Convention, August 29, 2004.

United for Peace and Justice organized the march which gathered 360 groups to protest the policies of the current administration the day before the convention opened.

Elections Protest Slideshow

Hundreds of Thousands March Against Bush in NY

"Hey Ho, Hey Ho, Bush Has Got to Go."

Hundreds of thousands of demonstrators toting colorful banners and shouting "no more Bush" took to the streets of New York on Sunday, the day before the Republican convention was to open, to decry the U.S.-led war in Iraq and President Bush's policies.

Organizers for United for Peace and Justice coalition estimated 400,000 people marched for more than five hours in summer heat and humidity. Police declined to estimate the size of the crowd, but it stretched out more than a mile along two main avenues in central Manhattan.

"I am just burning with anger about what our country is doing," said protester Cornelius Boss, an ex-Marine from Columbus, Ohio, about Bush's foreign policy...


Hundreds of people lay on the grass in the park and formed a massive human peace sign...

In the march, people of all ages and demonstrating on a wide array of issues from the war, to health care, the environment and the economy, chanted, "Hey Ho, Hey Ho, Bush Has Got to Go."

"He (Bush) is ruining the country that I knew as a child growing up," said Joan Azulay, a retiree from Austin, Texas.

One group carried 1,000 coffins as a tribute to American soldiers dead in Iraq and to highlight what they see as the true cost of the war there.



UFPJ march organizer Leslie Cagan told Reuters that the event had gone "very, very well" and "people have come to protest the Bush administration on very many issues, but today we were united in speaking out against the Bush agenda."

Massive anti-Bush rally in New York

Tens of Thousands Protest Bush in NYC

No Major Violence Reported at NYC Protests

Hiding The Real Bush Views--At the Convention, And On The Blog

It is no surprise that the Republican National Convention will feature whatever moderates they can dig up and hide those with views more representative of the Bush Administration. The same principle just might explain why they don't allow comments on their blog.

The most common assumption is that they are afraid of liberal dissent, but in reality they have far more to fear what their own supporters would write about. This might spill the beans, and let the general public know how extreme the current Republican Party has become under George Bush.

Presumably, if Bush supporter were allowed to comment on the campaign's blog, we would see the same type of discussion as is present on other conservative boards, and what we often see from trolls on liberal blogs.

When discussing foreign policy, we would see Bush supporters excited about the prospect of a more interventionist foreign policy, with Bush supporters excited about going into countries such as Iran, and maybe even Saudi Arabia, in a second term. So much for pretending their foreign policy is based upon fighting terrorism.

Getting to domestic policy, we would see the excitement from Bush supporters over how Bush's proposals for Social Security and Medicare would finally kill off these programs as we know them. So much for compassionate conservatism.

Undoubtedly we would also see the argument going around in conservative circles that separation of church and state is a myth. Even some traditionalist conservatives, who respect the principles this country was founded upon, might become a bit nervous over some of the views which are commonplace among Bush's supporters, and key advisors.

Keeping Perspective

There's been quite a bit of negativity surrounding a couple of polls which now show Kerry behind Bush, but within the margin of error. The joke going around is "John Kerry read that this was his race to lose, and he's giving it his best shot." Some of the negativity this week reminds me of the feelings a couple of month before the Iowa caucus, when people had Kerry written off. What is important is what happens on voting day, and there is a lot more to come in this campaign.

This could be the high point of Bush's campaign (and could stretch through the immediate post-convention bounce.) Right now polls reflect all the negative impact of the Swift Boat Liars' attacks without yet reflecting his defense. All the articles from the last few days verifying Kerry's war record could help in the end, and there may yet be a backlash against Bush's negative campaign tactics.

Kerry's advertising campaign is also on a hiatus this month. Initially Kerry planned to refrain from any advertising in August to save the matching funds, but did ultimately have to respond to the Swift Boat ads. Full resumption of the ad campaign in September should also have an impact.

We must also look at the task each candidate has to face. The undecided voters believe Bush has done a poor job, but don't yet feel comfortable about Kerry.

Bush must convince people who already dislike him to vote for him. He's trying to do this by making Kerry seem even worse. Kerry just has to win over the people who don't know enough about him--they already dislike Bush.

Perhaps this election will also come down to whether people vote based upon the trivial arguments of the Bush ads, or look at the big picture.

If people decide on Bush's terms, then Bush will win based upon all the nonsense in the ads. The Republicans are masters of going negative and obfuscating the real issues.

If Kerry can get people to look at the big picture, as to what type of country and world we will have for the next decade, and ignore the nonsense attack ads, then he wins.

Right now the media, especially cable news, is concentrating on the type of arguments seen in the attack ads. In September and October, Kerry will further define the differences between himself and Bush, and further show where this country is going should we be faced with four more years (and perhaps four more wars).

This difference will also be seen in the debates as the two candidates get a chance to show the direction they want to take the country in. Kerry can present an alternative to Bush's future of a United States isolated in the world, with a government reduced to the point of doing little more than helping the super-wealthy.

When confronted with these differences, hopefully most Americans will want to be part of the world community, and understand that this is essential to waging an effective war on terrorism. Hopefully they will understand the need to preserve Social Security and Medicare, and to protect the air we breath and water we drink.

This reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw yesterday:

Save The World
Vote for Kerry

They Voted for Bush in 2000; Kerry in 2004

Now that Kerry has been hurt by negative advertising, there have been some suggestions that Kerry needs to go negative. There may be some need to hit Bush harder, and I suspect that Kerry plans to do so as we get closer to the election, but there are also risks to running negative ads. Here's my suggestion as to how to somewhat go negative while minimizing the risks of being perceived as negative.

I suggest a series of ads (if they would be willing to go along) of prominent people who have endorsed Kerry saying they supported Bush in 2000, but now are supporting John Kerry.

I'd start this with Lee Iococa, who did ads for Bush in 2000 but now supports Kerry, and have him talk about the economy.

I'd include the retired generals and national security experts who have endorsed Kerry, the Nobel Award winning scientists, the economists, and business leaders. This would highlight the major issue, and have people attack Bush for his failings, without Kerry appearing to be negative. Such a series could also generate some media buzz, and we've seen with recent ads how the media can greatly increase the impact of ads.

As long as I'm laying out my fantasy ad series, I'd conclude it just before the election with Donald Trump repeating what he has said in interviews, both that the economy does better under Democrats, and that he'd fire George Bush for his handling of Iraq.

O'Neill In Cambodia

We got lucky with the finding of the tape of O'Neill saying he was in Cambodia (per the previous posting here), contradicting his current statements. While there's been plenty of evidence backing Kerry's side on the other questions raised by the Swift Boat Liars, there has been no good evidence for either side on the Cambodia issue. Some articles have come out arguing that it was possible for Kerry's account to have been true, but no good evidence.

The Cambodia question came down to a question of Kerry's word versus O'Neill's word. All of us here (other than the trolls) were already willing to take Kerry's word over O'Neill's, especially considering the number of lies his group was already caught in.

Finding the tape of O'Neill's statement that he was in Cambodia clinched this issue for Kerry on two counts. It further tipped the balance, if this was necessary, as to who to believe if it should come down to Kerry's word versus O'Neill's word. It also makes Kerry's report of having been in Cambodia sound much more plausible now that we know that O'Neill was there.

I Was In Cambodia Before I Wasn't

Maybe that's not exactly what O'Neill said, but that sure sums it up.

The AP also sums it up with this headline:

Swift Boat Writer Lied on Cambodia Claim

Wed Aug 25, 7:17 PM ET

By ELIZABETH WOLFE, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The chief critic of John Kerry's military record told President Nixon in 1971 that he had been in Cambodia in a swift boat during the Vietnam War — a claim at odds with his recent statements that he was not.
"I was in Cambodia, sir. I worked along the border," said John E. O'Neill in a conversation that was taped by the former president's secret recording system. The tape is stored at the National Archives in College Park, Md.

In an interview with The Associated Press on Wednesday, O'Neill did not dispute what he said to Nixon, but insisted he was never actually in Cambodia.

"I think I made it very clear that I was on the border, which is exactly where I was for three months. I was about 100 yards from Cambodia," O'Neill said in clarifying the June 16, 1971, conversation with Nixon.

Chad Clanton, a spokesman for the Democratic presidential candidate, said the tape "is just the latest in a long line of lies and false statements from a group trying to smear John Kerry's military service. Again, they're being proven liars with their own words. It's time for President Bush to stand up and specifically condemn this smear."

O'Neill served in Vietnam from 1969-70 and says in a recent book that he took command of Kerry's swift boat after the future Massachusetts senator returned home from the war.

O'Neill has emerged as a leading figure in the attacks on Kerry's war record. He is co-author of "Unfit for Command," which accuses Kerry of lying about his record, and is a member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which has aired two television commercials harshly critical of Kerry.

In the book, O'Neill wrote that Kerry's accounts of having been in Cambodia on Christmas Eve of 1968 "are complete lies."

"... Kerry was never ordered into Cambodia by anyone and would have been court-martialed had he gone there," he wrote. O'Neill wrote that the Navy positioned its own craft along the border area to make sure no American vessels strayed across the border from Vietnam.

In an interview Sunday on ABC's "This Week" O'Neill said: "Our boats didn't go north of, only slightly north of Sedek," which he said was about 50 miles from the Cambodian border.

Kerry's campaign has acknowledged that he may not have been in Cambodia on Christmas Eve of 1968, as he has previously stated. The campaign says Kerry does recall being on patrol along the Cambodia-Vietnam border on that date, although it's unclear if he crossed into Cambodia.

Referring to the tape of the Oval Office meeting with Nixon, O'Neill criticized Kerry for making claims, including in the Senate, that he was in Cambodia.

"I've never represented on the floor of the Senate, or told people 50 times like John Kerry did that I was in Cambodia. That never happened. And I don't think he was ever there either," O'Neill said.

The snippet of taped conversation surfaced after more than a week of controversy surrounding claims that Kerry lied about his actions in a war in which he won five military medals. The Democrat and his allies have vigorously attacked such claims as a smear, laboring to undermine the charges as well as cast doubt on the men who are making them.

For his part, Kerry accused the swift boat group of being a "front group" that was doing Bush's dirty work.

The Bush campaign denies any involvement with Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

___

Associated Press writer Jennifer C. Kerr contributed to this report.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&u=/ap/20040825/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_critic_swift_boats_1&printer=1

Fight Back With The Facts; Kerry 2004 Reference Library Back Up And Running

The Kerry 2004 Reference Library now has almost 1000 articles providing the case for voting for John Kerry and refuting the attacks. As some of you found yesterday, the Kerry 2004 Reference Library was down most of yesterday, and frequently over the weekend, with server problems. These appear to have been fixed and the site is working fine today at:

http://kerrylibrary.forumflash.com

STARSHIP CAPTAINS FOR TRUTH ATTACK JON LUC PICARD

Former Enterprise Captain Jon Luc Picard has come under harsh attacks in his campaign for President of the Federation Council from a group calling itself Starship Captains for Truth. This group charges that Picard's claims for defeating the Borg following the battle at Wolf 359 have been exaggerated. They note that Picard had been assimilated by the Borg prior to the battle and could not have led the defenses, and also blame Picard for not acting soon enough to prevent the heavy casualties suffered at Wolf 359. Starship Captains for Truth also questioned the veracity of Picard's accounts of entering the Romulan neutral zone.

Picard's actions on the Enterprise have been defended by crewmen aboard the Enterprise, as well as by Star Fleet documentation and articles on numerous Star Trek fan sites. Investigations into Starship Captains for Truth reveal that several of them are actually Changlings from the Dominion impersonating starship captains. The group has also been found to be financed by a shadowy group receiving funding from the Romulan Star Empire.

In commenting on charges raised by former Captain James T. Kirk, Picard responded by saying, "Kirk died years ago. Is Shatner's ego so huge that Kirk continues to speak even after his death?

Stones From Glass Houses: Bush-Cheney's Intelligence and National Security Record

Now that the Swift Boat Liars' attacks have been refuted by multiple sources, it is time to return to the more serious questions of failings of the Bush Administration to provide an adequate defense against terrorist threats.

From the American Progress Action Fund:


National Security
Stones From Glass Houses:
Bush-Cheney's Intelligence and National Security Record

President Bush and Vice President Cheney have repeatedly accused their opponents of trying to slash intelligence, defense, and national security spending in the lead up to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In fact, the record shows that it is top members of the Bush administration who are guilty of the very charges they are now hurling.

CIA NOMINEE LED EFFORT TO GUT INTELLIGENCE: "President Bush's nominee to be the director of central intelligence, Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-FL), sponsored legislation that would have cut intelligence personnel by 20 percent in the late 1990s. Goss was one of six original co-sponsors of legislation in 1995 that called for cuts of at least 4 percent per year between 1996 and 2000 in the total number of people employed throughout the intelligence community... The cuts Goss supported are larger than those proposed by Kerry and specifically targeted the 'human intelligence' that has recently been found lacking." Goss proposed these major cuts well after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing made clear the United States faced a serious threat of terrorism. [Source: Washington Post, 8/24/04]

CHENEY LED EFFORT TO BLOCK KEY INTELLIGENCE REFORMS: The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) reported that in a March 1992 letter to Congress, then Defense Secretary Dick Cheney "defended the status quo and objected to proposed intelligence reform legislation, particularly the Director of National Intelligence position." In the letter, Cheney wrote that intelligence reforms proposed by Congress "would seriously impair the effectiveness" of government and specifically opposed empowering a director of national intelligence. Cheney wrote, "I would recommend that the President veto [the measure] if [it] were presented to him in its current form." FAS noted that as a result of Cheney's stance, "we now face many of the same problems, and the same proposed solutions, more than a decade later." [Sources: FAS, 8/5/04; Cheney letter, 3/17/92]

CHENEY LED EFFORT TO SLASH SIZE OF MILITARY: While the Bush-Cheney campaign has attacked its opponents for cutting the military, it was Cheney who admitted he led the effort to slash the size of the armed forces. In 2000, Cheney said that as defense secretary he "did in fact significantly reduce the overall size of the U.S. military." Specifically, The New York Times noted Cheney worked to "reduce active-duty troop strength" from 2.2 million to 1.6 million while making "deep cuts in the Reserves and National Guard." Those cuts have left the U.S. military stretched thin today. [Source: LA Times, 8/24/00; NY Times, 8/4/91]

CHENEY LED EFFORT TO ELIMINATE CRITICAL DEFENSE PROGRAMS: While the Bush-Cheney campaign has attacked its opponent for supposedly cutting defense spending during the 1990s, it was Cheney who repeatedly tried to cut defense spending at the very same time. In 1984, during the height of Cold War tensions, it was Cheney who said that if President Reagan "doesn't really cut defense, he becomes the No. 1 special pleader in town." Cheney urged Reagan "to reach out and take a whack at everything to be credible" and said "you've got to hit defense." Six years later, Cheney proudly told Congress, "since I became Secretary, we've been through a fairly major process of reducing the defense budget." He bragged that during the first year of his tenure, he "cut almost $65 billion out of the five-year defense program" and that subsequent proposals would "take another $167 billion out." While Cheney now claims his opponent "repeatedly voted against weapons systems for the military," like the Apache helicopter, it was Cheney in 1990 who bragged to Congress about weapons "programs that I have recommended for termination," including fighter jets, the Phoenix missile and "the Apache helicopter." [Sources: Washington Post, 12/16/84; Cheney testimony, 2/1/90; Cheney speech, 3/17/04]

BUSH ADMINISTRATION TOOK FOCUS OFF BIN LADEN: Reversing efforts in the fight against terrorism, a senior Bush administration official in April 2001 told CNN, "the U.S. government made a mistake in focusing so much energy on bin Laden." Similarly, AP reported in 2002 that the Bush administration's "national security leadership met formally nearly 100 times in the months prior to the Sept. 11 attacks yet terrorism was the topic during only two of those sessions." [Source: CNN, 4/30/01; AP, 6/29/02]

BUSH ADMINISTRATION TERMINATED PROGRAM THAT TRACKED AL QAEDA: "In the months before 9/11, the Justice Department curtailed a highly classified program called 'Catcher's Mitt' to monitor Al Qaeda suspects in the United States." [Source: Newsweek, 3/21/04]

BUSH ADMINISTRATION BEGAN EFFORT TO CUT COUNTERTERRORISM PROGRAMS: The New York Times reported that in its final 2003 budget request, the administration "called for spending increases in 68 programs, none of which directly involved counterterrorism...In his Sept. 10 submission to the budget office, Ashcroft did not endorse FBI requests for $58 million for 149 new counterterrorism field agents, 200 intelligence analysts and 54 additional translators. Ashcroft proposed a $65 million cut for a program that gives states and localities counterterrorism grants for equipment, including radios and decontamination suits and training." By comparison, "Under Janet Reno, the department's counterterrorism budget increased 13.6% in the fiscal year 1999, 7.1% in 2000 and 22.7% in 2001." The Washington Post reported that in its first budget, the White House left "gaps" between "what military commanders said they needed to combat terrorists and what they got." When Congress tried to fill those gaps, the administration threatened a veto. [Source: NY Times, 2/28/02; Washington Post, 1/20/02; Newsweek, 5/27/02]

Once the server problems with the Kerry 2004 Reference Library are resolved today, I'll start going thru the articles cited above and add them to the library. Check back later at: http://kerrylibrary.forumflash.com

Brothers in Arms

John Kerry's former crew mates vouch for his Vietnam war heroics in a documentary being released in the midst of a campaign debate about his actions as a swift boat skipper.

"Brothers in Arms," a first film by journalist Paul Alexander, features Kerry and four men who served with him on Patrol Craft 94, the last of three boats he commanded during the war and the one from which he won the Silver Star for chasing down and killing a combatant who threatened his crew with a rocket.

With testimony from crew mates who have campaigned by Kerry's side as a Senate candidate and now Democratic presidential nominee, the film is not the definitive word on what happened in the Mekong Delta. Kerry's critics are not interviewed in it.

A campaign ad sponsored by a group of swift boat veterans who did not serve directly under Kerry asserted his wartime injuries and combat actions had been exaggerated and that he did not deserve his Purple Hearts or Bronze and Silver stars.

President Bush, speaking after the ad that caused a great stir stopped running, said Monday that Kerry "served admirably and he ought to be proud of his record."

In "Brothers in Arms," opening at a New York theater on Friday just days before the Republican National Convention starts in the city, Kerry's mates relate the familiar story of their commander fearlessly ordering their boat to be beached in the thick of an enemy outpost, and hunting down a man who intended to fire a rocket at them. They also recount an ambush during which Kerry and his crew rescued survivors of another patrol boat that hit a mine.

Alexander's previous work includes a behind-the-scenes account of Kerry's run for the White House and biographies of Sen. John McCain and cultural icons James Dean and Sylvia Plath. He said he interviewed the crew over the last 18 months, beginning the project well before Kerry was a sure bet to become the presidential nominee.

In the film, Kerry and crew mates David Alston, Mike Medeiros, Del Sandusky and Gene Thorson talk about the bond they formed under fire and their lives since the war. "If anyone knows the truth of what happened to John Kerry in Vietnam, they do," he said. "Brothers in Arms" is their story."

Tests

This episode is a great test of how politics work in our country.

It is, first, a test of George W. Bush.

Bush claims that his highest priority is uniting the country in the war against terrorism. A president who would be a uniter and not a divider knows that cheap-shot politics can only further rend our nation and weaken his own ability to lead.

This is also a test for the media.

We see here a fascinating and ugly development in the politics of annihilation. A supposedly outside group raises money from close Bush supporters, staffs itself with political operatives close to Bush and the Republicans, and then puts up several hundred thousand dollars worth of television ads. This is, as one operative with years of experience in Republican campaigns put it, "a professional hit." Suddenly, questions about Kerry's service that were asked and answered months ago become big news again.

This is also a test of John McCain.

When he ran against Bush four years ago, McCain was smeared mercilessly. When McCain protested to Bush about the attacks at one of their debates during the 2000 primaries, Bush brushed him off. "John," Bush said, "it's politics."

McCain snapped back, "George, everything isn't politics."

McCain was right, and when he returns to the United States from a trip to Europe this week, he should stand up for that principle by suspending his campaigning for Bush's reelection until the smears against Kerry's Vietnam record stop. More than anyone, McCain is the person to make the case that slaughterhouse politics is particularly ill-suited to this moment in our history.

Questions about Bush's Guard Service Unanswered

At a time when Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has come under fire from a group of retired naval officers who say he lied about his combat record in Vietnam, questions about President Bush's 1968-73 stint in the Texas Air National Guard remain unresolved:

* Why did Bush, described by some of his fellow officers as a talented and enthusiastic pilot, stop flying fighter jets in the spring of 1972 and fail to take an annual physical exam required of all pilots?

* What explains the apparent gap in the president's Guard service in 1972-73, a period when commanders in Texas and Alabama say they never saw him report for duty and records show no pay to Bush when he was supposed to be on duty in Alabama?

* Did Bush receive preferential treatment in getting into the Guard and securing a coveted pilot slot despite poor qualifying scores and arrests, but no convictions, for stealing a Christmas wreath and rowdiness at a football game during his college years?

A Veteran For Truth

Letters to the editor - The Telluride Daily Planet

A veteran for truth

Dear Editor,

This letter is in response to the new attacks on John Kerry's war record by a group calling itself the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth." As for most veterans of any war and as people who know me will testify, it is not easy for me to talk about my experiences in Vietnam. However, because of these new ads and, I understand, a new book recently published by an old Charles Colson "Enemies List" hit man, I feel compelled to speak out. Unfortunately, the veterans featured in these attacks are being used by extreme right wing Bush supporters to spread their lies and malign John Kerry.

I feel that most of these veterans who are joining this attack are against Kerry for what he did after he was home from the war than for what he did in the war. If they are against him for his stance against the Vietnam War, that certainly is their right, but to spread lies and malicious innuendos about his time on the rivers of Vietnam is not morally right and does a disservice not only to Kerry, but to all those who served and were wounded or died in that war. The people who are using these veterans for their own means obviously do not care about that. They did the same thing to Senator John McCain and Congressman Max Cleland in 2000 with no remorse or care for the consequences.

To me what is worse is that by their silence, the current administration has not, with any real meaning, disavowed itself or distanced itself in anyway from any of these scurrilous attacks, past or present. I feel that this truly shows the Bush administration for what they really are and ultimately, who is truly responsible for these attacks.

Since I happened to be along on one of the "excursions" where the boats that we were on were attacked and after which Lt. Kerry was cited for valor, I thought it appropriate to give my recollection of that event. This happened on March 13, 1969. I was assigned as Psychological Operation Officer for the Swift Boat group out of An Thoi, Vietnam, from January 1969 to October 1969. As such, I was on No. 43 boat, skippered by Don Droz who was later that year killed by enemy fire. We were second in line while exiting the river and going through the opening in a fish trap when a mine blew up under the No. 3 boat directly in front of us and we started taking small arms fire from the beach. Almost immediately, another mine went off somewhere behind us. All boats, except the one hit, immediately wheeled toward the beach that most of the fire came from (a tactic devised by Lt. Kerry, I later learned) and commenced showering the beaches with so much lead, that it could probably be now mined there. The noise was of course, deafening.

Three things that are forever pictured in my mind since that day over 30 years ago are: (1) The No. 3, 50-foot long, Swift boat getting huge, huge air; John Kerry thought it was about two feet. (He was farther away from it than I). I think it was at least four feet and probably closer to six feet; (2) All the boats turning left and letting loose at the same time like a deadly, choreographed dance and; (3) A few minutes later, John Kerry bending over his boat picking up one of the rangers that we were ferrying from out of the water. All the time we were taking small arms fire from the beach; although because of our fusillade into the jungle, I don't think it was very accurate, thank God. Anyone who doesn't think that we were being fired upon must have been on a different river.

The picture I have in my mind of Kerry bending over from his boat picking some hapless guy out of the river while all hell was breaking loose around us, is a picture based on fact and it cannot be disputed or changed. It's a piece of history drawn in my mind that cannot be redrawn. Sorry, "Swift Boats Veterans for the Truth"- that is the truth.

To say that John Kerry or any of us were on that river to intentionally collect Purple Hearts really does every soldier and sailor, past and present, a disservice. We were going up those rivers (with an ongoing casualty rate of 86 percent at the time) on the orders of the same people who approved of Kerry's medals and who are now joining in the attacks against Kerry. Unbelievable.

I would hope that the American public sees these evil extreme right wing attacks for what they really are and also pray that the veterans being used by these unpatriotic right wing extremist political operatives will divorce themselves immediately from them and speak to the real issues as to why they oppose John Kerry. I just don't understand how anyone can align themselves with those who intentionally and gleefully painted a decorated triple amputee (Max Cleland) from Vietnam as unpatriotic. I think that this is the most disastrous, un-American thing that can be done to our servicemen and women, especially now with another unending war going on. Your ends cannot possibly justify these means. Come on!

Jim Russell

Vietnam veteran, USN (1966-71)

“George Bush. Denounce the smear. Get back to the issues.”

With the Bush-Cheney campaign more intent on using its tired, old smear tactics than addressing the concerns of the American people, the Kerry-Edwards campaign Sunday unveiled a new television ad exposing the recycled Bush-Cheney attack campaign and urging the president to give the American people what they deserve – a discussion about the issues they face every day.

After four years of failed Bush policies, middle-class Americans are struggling. Good paying jobs have disappeared in record numbers. Health care costs have skyrocketed. American soldiers are fighting in Iraq, and America has failed to become as safe as we can be.

Yet even with so much work to do, the president is not talking about solutions. Instead, he and Karl Rove have flipped back to the well-worn smear page of their campaign playbook, last used against John McCain in 2000, and stood silent while their backers attack the service and honor of John Kerry and America’s veterans.

“This Bush backed smear is a case of Déjà vu for those who follow Rove and the president, but it is not what the American people deserve,” said Kerry-Edwards campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill. “John Kerry knows America can do better than lies and smear. That is why he and John Edwards have released a detailed plan to make America stronger at home and respected in the word. Their plan will strengthen the economy for middle-class families, create and keep good paying jobs in America, cut health care costs and make America stronger and more secure. That is what voters want to hear, not lies and smears, and it’s time the president realized that.”

In the 2000 Republican primary, then candidate Bush refused to disavow or condemn hateful and vicious attacks on McCain’s military record. The president is now doing the exact same thing – sitting silent while “Swift Boat Veterans for Bush” smear Kerry’s military service with proven lies.

Despite McCain calling the attacks on Kerry “dishonest and dishonorable,” Bush has yet to denounce them, just like he has yet to articulate his plan and vision for a second term.

Watch "ISSUES"!

Sign the Petition!

Thomas Oliphant Remembers John O'Neill

Smear by veterans may hurt Bush
By Thomas Oliphant, Globe Staff August 22, 2004

I HAVE VIVID memories of John E. O'Neill's first incarnation as an attack dog trained to go after John Kerry more than 33 years ago, using techniques that are quite familiar as he goes about the same task today. Like Kerry, he was a lot younger then, fresh from the war that still raged in Vietnam and still raged here as well. But then as now he was playing a carefully obscured role that made it nearly impossible to consider him an independent human being.

As The New York Times reported last week, O'Neill had been selected by Richard Nixon's White House to counter the profound impact that Vietnam Veterans Against the War were having on public opinion in the spring of 1971. As the Times also reported, Nixon's political henchman, Chuck Colson, had specifically recruited the Navy lieutenant, like Kerry a swift boat commander in the war, to debate the antiwar movement's freshest star on Dick Cavett's television program.

Those facts, however, only scratch the surface of a put-up-job that resonates today as President Bush tries to campaign against someone who has the military credentials and background he lacks. The more complete truth is that O'Neill was recruited to front for something the Nixon White House was experienced in creating out of thin air -- "citizens" groups that supported various embattled administration policies.

O'Neill was not just O'Neill. He was presented to a disbelieving press corps as the spokesman for something called Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace. In those days, Nixon was much too intelligent to set up a dummy operation of "veterans" in favor of the war; back then people were dying and killing on behalf of "peace with honor." Representing this letter-head operation, O'Neill was recruited not just for the Cavett show, but to debate Kerry in other forums and to make appearances on Nixon's behalf. He got pep talks directly from Nixon, who had a fixation with Kerry's appeal.

What gets short-shrift these days is that Nixon also wanted to bend heaven and earth to find some aspect of Kerry's Vietnam service -- anything -- that could be used to discredit him. In fact, much of what we call today the politics of personal destruction was pioneered by Nixon's White House. He had a firm control of a fearful government in those pre-Watergate days -- and he used it.

His navy secretary back then was an elegant fellow from Virginia, who today is the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. John Warner's people found nothing to whet Nixon's appetite in 1971, and Warner says today (in the spirit of a more outspokenly disdainful John McCain) that Kerry deserved his medals and that the process by which they were awarded was beyond reproach. That just happens to be the reason that the Nixon people put all their eggs in the basket of creating a political force (O'Neill) to try to counter Kerry's appeal.

Read all of Thomas Oliphant's column here:
http://kerrylibrary.forumflash.com/index.php?showtopic=7&view=findpost&p=872

Bush Health Care Plan Seems to Fall Short

Like so many of Bush's plans, his healthcare plan proves to be lacking...

If the Republican-controlled Congress enacted President Bush's entire health care agenda, as many as 10 million people who lack health insurance would be covered at a cost of $102 billion over the next decade, according to his campaign aides.

But when the Bush-Cheney team was asked to provide documentation, the hard data fell far short of the claims, a gap supported by several independent analyses.

Projections by the Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, academics and the campaign's Web site suggest that under the best circumstances, Bush's plans for health care would extend coverage to no more than 6 million people over the next decade and possibly as few as 2 million.

"There's little reason to expect that there would be any reduction in the overall numbers of Americans without health insurance," Brookings Institution health policy expert Henry J. Aaron said. "We're swimming against a rather swift current in our efforts to reduce the number of uninsured, and the power of President Bush's proposals to move against that current is, it seems to me, very, very limited."

Read the entire article here:
http://kerrylibrary.forumflash.com/index.php?showtopic=20&st=20&p=866&#entry866

Old Tricks

A front group for the Bush campaign called "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" is continuing to spread their lies about John Kerry's military record. Their statements have been contradicted by official Navy records, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Chicago Tribune and every man who served under John Kerry -- yet George Bush refuses to condemn their tactics. Through his silence, George Bush is approving their action. And Bush campaign officials in Florida are even promoting events for this front group.

Enough is enough. No matter what these Bush campaign shills now say, John Kerry's commanders remarked in 1969 that, "In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, LTJG Kerry was unsurpassed." In fact, all of John Kerry's performance reports (available on our website) display an absolutely heroic record of service.

View the Ad here: http://www.johnkerry.com/video/player.php?video=082104_old_tricks

Journalist & Former Swift Boat Commander Breaks 35 Year Silence

An American journalist who commanded a boat alongside John Kerry in Vietnam broke a 35-year silence Saturday and defended the Democratic presidential candidate against Republican critics of his military service.

The former commander's statements came a day after the Democratic nominee filed a complaint with federal officials that accused the president’s re-election campaign of breaking the law over a TV ad that denigrates Kerry's Vietnam war record.

Weighing in on what has become the most bitterly divisive issue of the 2004 campaign for the White House, William Rood of the Chicago Tribune said the tales told by Kerry's detractors are untrue.

"There were three swift boats on the river that day in Vietnam more than 35 years ago -- three officers and 15 crew members. Only two of those officers remain to talk about what happened on February 28, 1969," he wrote in a story that appeared on the newspaper's Web site Saturday.

"One is John Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate who won a Silver Star for what happened on that date. I am the other."

Before now, wanting to put memories of war and killing behind him, Rood had refused all requests for interviews on the subject, including from his own newspaper. "But Kerry's critics, armed with stories I know to be untrue, have charged that the accounts of what happened were overblown." he wrote.

"The critics have taken pains to say they're not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us."

"It's gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there," he added.

Swift boat skipper: Kerry critics wrong

FEB. 28, 1969: ON THE DONG CUNG RIVER
"This is what I saw that day", By William B. Rood

Oh No! Not Another Swift Boat Liar Post!

John Kerry’s Bronze Star Citation was awarded for his actions on March 13, 1969. It’s a really inspiring paragraph, even in the steely style of a military report. We are now in the rather strange position of seeing a decorated vet’s service called into question, especially given the poor military record of the election thief.

So, the allegations against John Kerry are being made by some Vietnam vets. The primary accuser is Larry Thurlow. He received his bronze star the same day, for the same action and now claims JK was not under fire. Therefore if Thurlow is telling the truth, he took a medal he didn’t deserve. Thurlow would have been lying in 1969 along with Kerry. If Thurlow is lying now, his credibility is obviously zero. Thurlow was lying then or he is lying now. The question is, has he been lying since 1969 or since 2004?

From I Like to Write.

U.S. Vets Make Case for Kerry in Vietnam

(AP Photo/Richard Vogel)

HANOI, Vietnam - Vietnam veterans supporting John Kerry for president made their case Friday in the heart of what was once enemy territory.

Calling President Bush a draft dodger, the veterans in Hanoi donned T-shirts emblazoned with "Americans Overseas for Kerry" and showing Bush's face with a line crossed through it.
They said they share a brotherhood with Kerry, who was wounded in Vietnam's southern Mekong Delta and received three Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star and a Silver Star.

The informal gathering came a day after Kerry denounced a television ad sponsored by a Republican-leaning group that featured Vietnam veterans accusing him of exaggerating his service record.

The veterans and other American businessmen in Vietnam have ordered 100 T-shirts to sell for $5 apiece with the proceeds going to support Kerry's campaign...


The men had nothing good to say about Bush, who served stateside in the Texas Air National Guard during the war.

"The guy doesn't deserve to be called a veteran or a patriot or anything else," said John Lancaster, of Hamburg, N.Y., who lost the use of his legs after being shot near Hue in 1968.

"It's pretty egregious to have taken that path and then try to wrap yourself in a flag to send American servicemen to a war to die and get wounded," added Andre Sauvageot, a career military man who spent nine years in Vietnam.

Volunteer Links Anti-Kerry Flier to GOP

A volunteer for John Kerry said Friday he picked up a flier in a Bush-Cheney campaign office in Gainesville, Fla., promoting Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group the Bush campaign has insisted for weeks it has no connection to.

The Kerry campaign e-mailed the flier to news organizations Friday, declaring that the Bush-Cheney campaign was "busted" for coordinating "in their smear campaign against John Kerry."...


The flier distributed at Alachua County Republican Party headquarters promotes a weekend rally sponsored by "Swift Boat Vets for Truth" and other groups...

Swift Boat Liars Tied to Bush Campaign

Damfa's Complete Proof. John Kerry's contention these people are tied to the Bush campaign is proven.

Yet Another Dishonest Attack Ad

The swiftboat liars against Kerry aren't giving up, despite the growing evidence of the dishonesty of their attacks. Today's ad continues to display their dishonest tactics, as they take statements from John Kerry out of context.

The following is from coverage of the latest attack ad from CNN:

The latest ad from the swift boat group selects quotes from Kerry's testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971 about fellow soldiers. He is seen saying, "They had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads," "randomly shot at civilians," and "razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Kahn."

Selected comments

Not shown on the ad is Kerry's preface to those comments, in which he said he is reporting what others said at a conference of Vietnam veterans in Detroit. Instead, a member of the Swift Boat group refers to the statements as "the accusations that John Kerry made against the veterans who served in Vietnam."

------------

While I respect Kerry for his courage in fighting an unjust war, others might disagree. However, they should at least show such disagreement by arguing with Kerry's actual statements, not by taking his statements out of context.

The above selection is from:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/20/kerry.swiftboat/index.html

Also check out the Kerry 2004 Reference Library for more information.

This, and additional articles, on Kerry protesting the Vietnam war are at:
http://kerrylibrary.forumflash.com/index.php?showtopic=6

Information on Kerry's Vietnam record, and debunking the recent attacks, is at:
http://kerrylibrary.forumflash.com/index.php?showtopic=7

The Power Behind a Button: Taking Senator Kerry’s Message on the Road

Over the past year or more, as an internet activist for the Kerry campaign, I have met many wonderful people. Mary MacElveen earned my life long respect in my early months campaigning for John Kerry on many of the Democratic Yahoo Groups. And so with respect, I share with you all this essay from Mary:

The Power Behind a Button: Taking Senator Kerry’s Message on the Road

By Mary MacElveen

August 16, 2004

Buttons worn on any person tell what they are all about. Buttons can represent our more humorous side, or what our beliefs are, to those that are derogatory in nature.

Knowing that my family and I were headed on vacation, I decided to wear my “Kerry for President” button to make a statement to those that saw it, which direction I wanted for our beloved country. While I have other buttons, which mock George W. Bush where a red line goes across his face as well as a red line going through the letter W, I chose not to wear those, but only to promote Senator Kerry’s positive message. I wanted my message to represent him in only the best light and be reflective of his acceptance speech at our convention. I wanted a conversation with my fellow Americans that we who do support Senator Kerry also have a love of country and are patriotic as well. After all, this is our country too and we all have the right to disagree with her present course.

We were headed out by car to Colorado where our starting point was New York. We would have to go through Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, and then our final stop Colorado. Some are battleground states where others are red and blue states. My mission was to treat every American that I met along the way with respect and heighten their awareness of what is happening now in Washington, D.C. under Bush’s misguided leadership.

Our first full stop was in Ohio, where we needed to eat breakfast, where I bumped into a man named John who was a big burly guy and also a truck driver. He saw my button and immediately stated that he too was a “Kerry fan” and thought that George W. Bush was “just plain stupid, just like his father was” There was no having to convince this man of anything, only to keep talking to others to vote for Senator Kerry. It was then back on the road to take Sen. Kerry’s message westward bound.

Our next stop was for lunch in a small restaurant called Wings America, where on the way out again, a member from the CMA (Christian Motorcycle Association) wanted to discuss politics with me. He said while independent, he could go either way. Ah, my way in. So, I discussed jobs being shipped overseas, the need for all Americans to have medical care and for seniors to get affordable drugs here in America, and he said, he loved Kerry’s message and was disappointed with Bush. Again, I said, to relay what Senator Kerry is about to others along his way and he said he would.

But, not all people were receptive to Senator Kerry and one woman in Nebraska described him as looking like Frankenstein and I thought to myself, is this really the way people select their leaders? I could have said back to her, “Bush looks like a chimp” but refrained from doing so. It was at that point, where I really zeroed in on her and said, while Bush lied about WMD, close to one thousand soldiers have died and he has not attended one of their funerals. I was not about to let her thinking stay as it was without it being answered back. I told her that I too love my country and that I wanted the respect of her restored immediately and that would not happen with Bush as our president. I told her I wanted a president that fights a true war on terrorism.

She then asked where was I on September 11th, and I said sixty miles from New York City and I was frightened that Long Island maybe the next target being that it was so close. I stated to her, “I wanted to know where the hell our president was” and “why was it we did not hear from him for hours?” I told her living in close range to a terrorist attack was quite different from where she lived close to one thousand miles away. I also stated some within my community were lost in the towers, and I am still angry that he ignored the warnings given him. I think the latter statement hit her. She could not react to that.

In Colorado, I met up with three people. Where two were from Iowa and one was from Massachusetts. All three of them were for Senator Kerry and one lady from Iowa even wanted a Kerry button. I had one to give her and she was very thankful. I told them to keep Kerry’s message going and going.

Also, in Rocky Mountain State Park, I met up with a man from Georgia who too said he was for Kerry, but felt his vote would not count since Georgia is a solid red state. I said to him, to keep pounding Kerry’s message into the hearts of his fellow Georgians. I also met three more from Colorado who were going for Kerry. Many that I spoke with in Colorado were voting for Kerry and were sick of Bush.

Again, in Iowa, a man said he might do a write in vote, that is when I told him of what Kerry was all about and what he wanted to do for our country, he liked what he heard and said that he would look into Kerry and I said to go to johnkerry.com to read up more. He thanked me.

In a truck stop in Elkhart, Indiana I met up with a young man working behind a counter who said, “I am all over Senator Kerry like a hawk and follow his speeches from the convention to any stop he makes” Very promising. I told him to keep Kerry’s message alive when he speaks with family and friends and he said, “No problem” Quite frankly, I thought this young man was going to jump over the counter or out of his skin with his enthusiasm for taking our country back. It was so good to see a young person this excited.

In Cedar Points, Ohio a young man said, “John K. all the way!” He loved Senator Kerry, but his aunt and uncle did not. But, at least I was able to say in front of them, why I too love Senator Kerry. Who knows a family discussion could have taken place after I said that. Also, in Cedar Points, Ohio, I met up with a former liberal Republican (Did not know one could be liberal and Republican at the same time) who was now a moderate Democrat. She was reading Bill Clinton’s book, “My Life.” She said that Bush is dangerous to women’s rights and fears he may “union bust” She is very frightened by him and is also talking to others to vote for Kerry.

It was then time to eat at the TGIFs in Cedar Points, where our waitress Heather said this after seeing my Kerry button, “If Bush gets back in, I am leaving this country.” On our check she wrote, “Dump Bush”! I am left to wonder what her boss said to that and laughed at reading it. It made me feel great. All around Cedar Points, Ohio while riding the many rides, I wore my button with pride and not one person made a negative remark to me and I got so many smiles as people saw it. Many people come to Cedar Points from all over this country and that was the perfect place to wear it.

While traveling through these many states, I saw more pro Kerry bumper stickers and only saw two Bush/Cheney 04 bumper stickers. One of my favorite bumper stickers was, “Be Patriotic, Vote Bush Out” and another one, “I Did Not Vote for the Son of a Bush”! Both had me laughing and realizing that perhaps Americans are getting it. In Colorado, I even saw one that said, “Climbers 4 Kerry.”

All in all, I had many great conversations with my fellow Americans staying on message, a positive one at that and where I hope that I made a difference. In all my travels, I did not see one Bush button. I wonder if those that still do support him are somewhat embarrassed to show it openly. Who really knows? All I do know that during my vacation, and especially after our convention, I felt the urgent need to keep Kerry’s message out there where hopefully and with hard work, he will become President John F. Kerry.

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth Credibility Sinking...

Military Records Counter a Kerry Critic
Fellow skipper's citation refers to enemy fire

Newly obtained military records of one of Sen. John F. Kerry's most vocal critics, who has accused the Democratic presidential candidate of lying about his wartime record to win medals, contradict his own version of events.

In newspaper interviews and a best-selling book, Larry Thurlow, who commanded a Navy Swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam, has strongly disputed Kerry's claim that the Massachusetts Democrat's boat came under fire during a mission in Viet Cong-controlled territory on March 13, 1969. Kerry won a Bronze Star for his actions that day.

But Thurlow's military records, portions of which were released yesterday to The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act, contain several references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at "all units" of the five-boat flotilla. Thurlow won his own Bronze Star that day, and the citation praises him for providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets flying about him."

more...

Republican Congressman Says Iraq War Was Mistake

Wish a few more of them would admit that Bush didn't need to start this war.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Breaking ranks with the White House and his Republican leaders in Congress, Rep. Doug Bereuter of Nebraska has said in a letter to constituents the U.S. military action in Iraq was a mistake.
The Iraq war was a "costly mess" with no quick way out, wrote Bereuter, vice chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and a senior member of the House International Relations Committee.

"I've reached the conclusion, retrospectively, now that the inadequate intelligence and faulty conclusions are being revealed, that all things being considered, it was a mistake to launch that military action especially without a broad and engaged international coalition," he said in the letter dated Aug. 6.

Republican leaders in Congress have supported President Bush's decision to invade Iraq on grounds that it had weapons of mass destruction that posed a danger to the United States. No stockpiles of such weapons have been found.

But Bereuter, who has resigned his seat in the House of Representatives to become president of the Asia Foundation, expressed dismay over the decision to go to war.

"The cost in casualties is already large and growing, and the immediate and long-term financial costs are incredible," he wrote, reflecting on his 2002 vote in favor of a resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq.

"Our country's reputation around the world has never been lower and our alliances are weakened," he added.

"Now we are immersed in a dangerous, costly mess and there is no easy and quick way to end our responsibilities in Iraq without creating bigger future problems in the region and, in general, in the Muslim world."

The White House had no comment on the letter.

Statement from Kerry National Security Advisor Rand Beers on Missile Defense

In response to President Bush's remarks in Pennsylvania today, Rand Beers, Kerry National Security advisor issued the following statement:

"Despite this administration's near obsession with missile defense, the greatest threat facing our homeland comes from terrorists who would do us harm. In the months preceding 9/11 George W. Bush and his closest advisors were preoccupied with missile defense and their misunderstanding about the threats we face continues to this day."

"John Kerry believes an effective missile defense is crucial to our national security strategy. But John Kerry also understands the importance of facing our most pressing national security threats while continuing to develop and deploy a national missile defense which we know will work."

Ex-Navy chief: Kerry earned Nam medals

BY JAMES GORDON MEEK
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON - The Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee said yesterday that John Kerry "deserved" his combat medals for heroism in Vietnam, which some vets have disputed.
Sen. John Warner, an ex-Navy secretary under President Richard Nixon, particularly defended the process by which Kerry won his highest honor, the Silver Star.

"I'd stand by the process that awarded that medal, and I think we best acknowledge that his heroism did gain that recognition," Warner (R-Va.) told CNN's "Late Edition."

Kerry was awarded a Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Hearts as a Navy Swift boat commander in the Mekong Delta in February and March 1969.

"We did extraordinary, careful checking on that type of medal [the Silver Star], a very high one, when it goes through the secretary," Warner said. "I feel that he deserved it." Like Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Nixon - both Navy vets of World War II whose war service was later questioned - Kerry has had to face recent allegations in TV ads from others serving near him in Vietnam claiming that he lied about his combat heroism.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a Vietnam prisoner of war, has condemned the ads - but President Bush has not.

Last week, Bush told CNN'S Larry King that Kerry served nobly in America's longest war, adding only that his Democrat opponent "is justifiably proud of his record in Vietnam and he should be."

Bush's strategy has been to portray himself as a "Sept. 12th" President who better understands the post-9/11 world than Kerry, who he implies would lead America with a Cold War, or "Sept. 10th," mentality.

Yesterday, Bush-Cheney counselor Mary Matalin became one of the highest-ranking campaign advisers to lend credence to the claims by Kerry's unhappy shipmates who believe he served dishonorably.

"Kerry ought to stop this. He's running his campaign predicated on four months of service 35 years ago in the middle of the Cold War," Matalin told "Fox News Sunday."

Originally published on August 16, 2004

Petty Politics in New York... Senate Candidate Airs "Boycott the Boss" Commercial

Leave it to a conservative to air a commercial like this:

Upset with Bruce Springsteen's effort to oust President Bush from the White House, the New York Conservative Party's candidate for the U.S. Senate is launching a "Boycott the Boss" television commercial.

"He thinks making millions with a song-and-dance routine allows him to tell you how to vote," Marilyn O'Grady says in the 30-second spot. "Here's my vote: Boycott the Boss. If you don't buy his politics, don't buy his music."

In a statement, O'Grady said Springsteen "has a right to say what he thinks, but we have an equal right to speak. Now that he's moved onto the political stage to bash my president, it is entirely fair to respond."

Springsteen was among more than 20 prominent musicians who announced on Aug. 4 that they would hold a series of anti-Bush fund-raising concerts under the "Vote for Change" banner in 28 cities in October.

"I feel this is one of the most critical elections in my lifetime," Springsteen told The Associated Press at the time.

Springsteen's "No Surrender" has become an anthem for Democratic Sen. John Kerry's presidential campaign.

A spokesman for O'Grady, Howard Lim, would not say how much the Long Island's ophthalmologist's campaign was spending on the commercial, in which she says, "I stand with President Bush and it's time to tame the liberal elite."


Read Bruce Springsteen's OP/ED published in August 5th's New York Times here.

BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN AND THE E STREET BAND TO TOUR IN SUPPORT OF VOTE FOR CHANGE

Bruce Springsteen is excited to announce his participation in the Vote for Change concert tour. Between October 1 and October 8, Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band will perform at five Vote for Change concerts, sharing the bill with R.E.M., and Bright Eyes with a special appearance by John Fogerty.

Did Bush's Iraq Question Backfire?

George Bush tried to get an advangtage over John Kerry over the IWR vote. While Kerry's position on Iraq has been consistent and makes perfect sense, I cannot argue with those who say Kerry has often struggled with explaining this point when forced to do so briefly. See my earlier blog entry on this question for background on Kerry's positon:

http://kerryblog.blogspot.com/2004/08/bush-gets-his-answer-then-changes.html

At first George Bush seemed to have won some debating ponts by misrepresenting Kerry's answer, claiming Kerry said he would have voted to go to war, when actually Kerry voted to authorize war as a last resort if we were proven to be endangered and diplomatic efforts to resolve the situation failed. With the short attention span of reporters, if not the public, it is no surprise that many prefered Bush's easier to say account rather than Kerry's actual answer.

Bush may have gained some points before his selectively chosen rally crowds, but it is not as clear that he has done so with the general public. What Bush fails to understand is that many voters have ambiguous and contradictory views of their own on the war, balancing the feelings that it was good to get rid of Saddam,and important to stand up to tyrants if they should threaten us with WMD, but questioning if Bush acted honestly or in the best way. While Bush has managed to fool many into believing Kerry is a flip flopper, in doing so he has reinforced the view that he is overly ideological and inflexible.

Note this view from Ron Brownstein of the LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-outlook16aug16,1,5024801.column?coll=la-news-a_section

WASHINGTON OUTLOOK
Pointing Out Kerry's Reluctance on Iraq May Spotlight Bush's Rigidity
Ronald Brownstein

August 16, 2004

There's something kamikaze about the past week's skirmishing between President Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry over Iraq.

By challenging Kerry to say whether he too would have invaded Iraq, Bush has targeted what may be Kerry's greatest weakness with voters: a reputation for vacillation and hairsplitting.

But Bush simultaneously may be spotlighting what many voters like least about him: a reluctance to change course even amid changing circumstances and a belief in his own decisions so unwavering that it straddles the line between confidence and arrogance.

Fareed Zakaria writes in the August 23 issue of Newsweek about Why Kerry Is Right on Iraq, available on line at:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5709288/site/newsweek

Zakaria doesn't entirely understand Kerry's position, but does understand the importance of nuance and looking at the underlying assumptions behind each positon as he writes:

Kerry's answer is that it was a worthwhile objective but was disastrously executed. For this "nuance" Kerry has been attacked from both the right and the left. But it happens to be the most defensible position on the subject.

The Kerry 2004 Reference Library

The Kerry 2004 Reference Library has been formed with over 600 articles to help promote the campaign, debunk attacks, and provide ammunition against Mad Cowboy Disease. The addition of considerable more information is planned. It is hoped this information will be especially helpful for people writing letters to the editor or debating the issues on line. If you're in the middle of a hot debate (or troll bashing) open a second browser window with the Reference Library and quickly get the facts to make your case.

The project grew out of the News section of the camapign's official forum, but has now been greatly expanded. Articles are divided by topics, and are also searchable at the site.

While concentrating on reference articles on the candidates' background and the issues, some of the more interesting daily news stories are also included. There's even a section on The Wisdom of George W. Bush with quotes from the President.

Besides news, the site includes a discussion section, and an area where members can post information on their web sites, Kerry stores, or whatever else they are involved in.

The Kerry 2004 Reference Library is at http://kerrylibrary.forumflash.com

Never A Hostile Question for Campaigning Bush

Well this title caught my eye... truth is no one is given the opportunity to ask anything that might be considered hostile or negative...

But would-be Bush hecklers face daunting obstacles: Loyalists handle giving out tickets to the event; home-made signs and banners are often forbidden; and in some cases access hinges on signing a loyalty oath.

"First priority goes to volunteers and supporters and then we reach out to people who are undecided and want to hear what the president has to say," according Bush campaign spokesman Scott Stanzel.

The result is a friendly crowd eager to see the candidate they hope will win the November 2 election, while authorities banish protesters to heavily policed sidewalks blocks away.

Bush, Kerry Set for Three Debates

The nonpartisan panel that regulates presidential debates has scheduled three rounds between President Bush and Sen. John Kerry, organizers announced.

The first debate will be held Sept. 30 at the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Fla., the Commission on Presidential Debates said Friday. The candidates will sit at a table with moderator Jim Lehrer, anchor of PBS' "NewsHour," and discuss domestic policy.

A town hall-style meeting will be the format for the second debate, which will be held Oct. 8 at Washington University in St. Louis. Undecided voters, picked by the Gallup Organization, will question the candidates. Charlie Gibson, co-anchor of ABC's "Good Morning America," will be the moderator.

Foreign policy will be the focus of the third and final debate, scheduled for Oct. 13 at Arizona State University in Tempe. Bush and Kerry will again sit around a table, and CBS "Face the Nation" host Bob Schieffer will be the moderator.

A single vice presidential debate at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland is planned for Oct. 5. This session, moderated by "NewsHour" correspondent Gwen Ifill, will feature Vice President Dick Cheney and his Democratic opponent, Sen. John Edwards, sitting around a table and discussing a wide range of topics. There also will be a question-and-answer period.

None of the debates will have opening statements, but each candidate will have two minutes for a closing statement.

Washington Post Editorial Round-Up

The Tax Cuts Re-Examined

THE DEBATE OVER the Bush administration's fiscal policy has been grinding on for three years, producing few concessions or apologies. Critics, including this page, say the tax cuts are not affordable; defenders retort that the president has a five-year plan to halve the deficit and that a combination of economic growth and entitlement reform can shore up the government's finances in the longer term.

To break out of this stalemate, we have taken a fresh look at these hopes for long-term salvation. We have assumed, for the sake of argument, that a second-term Bush administration could overcome the political obstacles to entitlement reform and pro-growth policies such as tort reform, and we have sought estimates for the impact of such reforms on government finances. For example, a jump in labor productivity like the one experienced in the 1990s would likely eliminate the deficit in 2014, which is otherwise projected to clock in at around 3.5 percent of gross domestic product, according to calculations by Alan J. Auerbach of the University of California at Berkeley and Peter R. Orszag and William G. Gale of the Brookings Institution. Or, to take another example, Medicare reform could theoretically cut the system's costs by 30 percent, according to Elliott S. Fisher of Dartmouth Medical School.


Volcanic Absurdity

WITH ALL THE heightened concerns about terrorism, you might think the Department of Homeland Security has something better to do with its time and energy than throw victims of natural disasters out of the United States. But that's because, like most Americans, you probably missed a recent notice in the Federal Register informing victims of a massive volcanic eruption on the Carribean island of Montserrat that they had to leave this country by February.


Bush's Two Albatrosses
By David S. Broder

The factors that make President Bush a vulnerable incumbent have almost nothing to do with his opponent, John F. Kerry. They stem directly from two closely linked, high-stakes policy gambles that Bush chose on his own. Neither has worked out as he hoped.

The first gamble was the decision to attack Iraq; the second, to avoid paying for the war. The rationale for the first decision was to remove the threat of a hostile dictator armed with weapons of mass destruction. The weapons were never found. The rationale for the second decision -- the determination to keep cutting taxes in the face of far higher spending for Iraq and the war on terrorism -- was to stimulate the American economy and end the drought of jobs. The deficits have accumulated, but the jobs have still not come back.

If Bush can win reelection despite the failure of his two most consequential -- and truly radical -- decisions, he will truly be a political miracle man. But as his own nominating convention approaches, the odds are against him.

Edwards Calls for Changes to Drug Plans

FARGO, N.D. - Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards called for changes to prescription drug programs ...

Continuing a push to court older voters, Edwards told an crowd of about 2,800 that he and Kerry would "stand up to these drug companies and stand up for the American people."

The North Carolina senator said that as president, Kerry would allow lower-cost prescription medications to be reimported from Canada and free the government to negotiate lower drug prices from drug companies.

He also said drug advertisements should include information about generic equivalents: "The American people need to know when there's a cheaper, equally good alternative."

Edwards Unveils Plan to Reduce Prescription Drug Costs and Boost Economy

Kerry Campaign Helping With Florida Recovery!

Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry does not plan to visit Florida in the aftermath of Hurricane Charley because he's concerned his campaign entourage could distract from recovery efforts, he said Saturday.

Kerry said he has instructed his Florida campaign staff to provide food, clothing, shelter or other assistance to people whose lives have been disrupted by the hurricane.

"For the moment, our focus is on all of the police and response personnel necessary not being diverted from a visitor and really focusing on the recovery itself," Kerry said.

"Teresa and I are really thinking about those folks and our prayers and our thoughts are with them in the next hours," he said. "And we hope very, very much that the recovery can proceed as rapidly as possible and lives can be put back together."

President Bush plans a Sunday tour of areas hit by the hurricane. Bush declared a state of emergency at the request of his brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, and Kerry said he supports their efforts.

Kerry, Wrapping Up Cross-Country Tour, Cheered by 60,000 in Pacific Northwest

Well, this is refreshing!

Yesterday the big media sources seemed to reticent to report the size of the crowd at the Kerry Campaign Portland, Oregon event. In reference to the many photos supplied by the press there were references to "large crowds", "very large crowds", "big crowds"...


PORTLAND, United States (AFP) - Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry wrapped up a two-week bus and train tour of the United States in the Pacific Northwest, cheered by tens of thousands at a star-studded rally.

This election is too important for people to sit out," declared screen star Leonardo di Caprio, who described himself as an ecologist.

"A cleaner environment doesn't sacrifice the economic growth," di Caprio, joined by rocker Jon Bon Jovi, told the crowd.

"John Kerry would reduce our dependency on oil."

Kerry and his family arrived at the biggest rally of his campaign thus far to a swaying ocean of placards proclaiming, "Hope Is On the Way," and "Believe In America."

"Are you ready to put common sense in the leadership of this country?" Kerry asked the crowd.

"Are you ready for a new leadership in the United States?

"Because if you're ready, John Edwards and I are ready, because help is on the way!"

Kerry promised to be "a president who actually believes in science, a president who fights as hard for your jobs as he fights for his own."

Jim Rassman, an Oregonian and Vietnam veteran whom Kerry rescued under fire long ago, said, " I wouldn't want my kids to serve under this commander-in-chief," meaning President George W. Bush, who was also in the Portland area Friday.

Kerry's campaign was scheduled for three-day weekend break at one of his family homes in Ketchum, Idaho, before resuming on Tuesday with another two-week tour, this one concentrating on the economy.

Kerry Has Guts to Stop Nuke Waste

Columnist Jeff German - Las Vegas Sun

If the presidential race for Nevada's five electoral votes comes down to Yucca Mountain, which it should, Sen. John Kerry already has won the race.

The difference between Kerry and President Bush on this issue was as clear this week as the bright Southern Nevada sky after a summer rainstorm.

While Kerry, the Democrat, spent Tuesday and Wednesday in Las Vegas hammering home his opposition to Yucca Mountain at public event after public event, Bush, the Republican, let it be known during a single campaign appearance Thursday that he was determined to ram nuclear waste down our throats.

With Gov. Kenny Guinn and other top Republicans at his side, Bush offered no reassurance in a televised speech that he would stop sending the deadliest substance known to man our way. Instead he attempted to poke holes in Kerry's voting record on Yucca Mountain which, any way you look at it, is a zillion times better than the president's. Bush had one vote in 2002 and that was to recommend the project to Congress.

Kerry, on the other hand, whether chatting with local officials at a small town hall meeting or preaching to an overflowing crowd of an estimated 15,000 supporters at the Thomas & Mack Center, stepped up his tough anti-Yucca Mountain talk. And he backed it up with specifics. He appeared much more knowledgeable about the dangers of the project than he did back in May when he first promised that Yucca Mountain would not happen on his watch.

What impressed me the most was not Kerry's campaign rhetoric, but the depth of his opposition, which came into focus during a news conference Wednesday with a half-dozen local journalists.

In a relaxed mood, after addressing a group of friendly seniors in Henderson, Kerry said he's no longer even sure storing radioactive waste at a centralized location is the right way to go. That's a significant statement when you consider that some $20 billion in taxpayer money already has been poured into the still-unfinished Yucca Mountain project.

"The more I've looked at the issue and the more I've learned about it, the less comfortable I am with the concept of a repository," Kerry said.

It's why the Massachusetts senator said earlier during his visit that, as president, he would put the nation's scientists to work to once and for all find the best and safest way to deal with nuclear waste.

More than that, however, Kerry outlined how he would move to kill the dump.

He said he would start by finding an energy secretary and an interior secretary who share his anti-Yucca Mountain vision for nuclear waste. That sounded like an invitation for the likes of former Nevada governors Bob Miller and Richard Bryan, two of the fiercest Yucca Mountain critics, to update their resumes.

Then he said he would not only hold up the Yucca Mountain licensing process, but would also veto any anticipated congressional legislation aimed at lowering the safety standards for storing waste. The legislation is being contemplated by the pro-Yucca forces in Washington to circumvent a federal court decision that said the current standards by law are unsafe.

One thing that could interfere with Kerry's pledge to derail Yucca Mountain is pressure from the wealthy nuclear industry, which is desperate to move nuclear waste from power plants in 33 states. The industry has spread plenty of money around Capitol Hill, winning many friends.

But Kerry appeared undaunted.

When I asked him whether he was concerned about taking heat from the influential industry, he looked me in the eye and said in a confident voice, "I'm not worried about the pressure."

They are the words of a winner.

Oregon IS Kerry Country!!!

Make no mistake about it, John Kerry has made Oregon his own! From border to border, Kerry left no Oregonian behind.

First stop Medford, deep in southern Oregon conservative territory. A recent local poll has the southern part of the state dead even which is great news considering this area went to Bush easily in 2000. The rally drew a crowd of around 7,000 and had traffic backed up for two miles. What a sight!



Comments from the Mail-Tribune:

Volunteer Alex Grove of Ashland, who got an autograph from Kerry, said he now has a better measure of the man after meeting him in person and hearing his speech. "He’s just a real guy," he said.

Grants Pass resident Allen Primer, who received two Purple Hearts and a Silver Star for gallantry in action during Vietnam, criticized attempts to undermine Kerry’s war record as "sleazy and unprofessional."

Primer, who still has shrapnel in his hip and stomach, said the Republican-led charges against Kerry "don’t surprise me a bit. I expected it."

http://www.mailtribune.com/archive/2004/0813/local/stories/02local.htm

Next stop, Eugene. An overnight stay at Valley River Inn brought out lots of people hoping for a chance to see the future President. As one young voter put it, Kerry's missing out by not speaking in Eugene, he's got alot of support here. That is so true, maybe we'll get him next time. He did spend some time at a front porch event in Springfield, with the best Congressman in Oregon, Pete DeFazio. Springfield is another area that tends to lean Republican, more of a gun rights and local control sort of place. Glad to see Kerry go right in there and take his case directly to the people.

They met at the home of Jeff & Clair Kronser. Let's hope the visit convinced their neighbors, the Greens, to vote Kerry.

"I'm weeding because everyone else weeded," she laughed.

Details surrounding the presidential candidate's visit were already in place: The Kerry campaign had instructed Kronser not to talk to the press for security reasons; Green had been informed she won't be able to leave or enter her driveway for a four-hour period today; and a member of the Secret Service was expected to stand guard there Thursday night.

Green, 36, is a Democrat, and her husband is a Republican. She's still on the fence regarding Kerry, she said, and she hopes he will be persuasive."

http://www.registerguard.com/news/2004/08/13/a10.kerrysider.0813.html

Next stop... PORTLAND!!! What can I say. Reports are between 40,000 - 60,000!! I went to the Kerry/Dean rally in May and I thought it was huge with a little over 5,000 people. I can't even imagine what being in this crowd would have been like. Part of me is totally glad I didn't go and another part of me is kicking myself for not being there. But it was covered on every local channel, so I at least got to see the highlights and the full Kerry speech.



Leonardo DiCaprio and Jon Bon Jovi started things off and really got the crowd going. I saw a bit of Andre and Teresa speak. As usual, the crowd loved Teresa. Next was Jim Rassmann who gave a great introduction and said the same thing I always say; if war is necessary, there's nobody I would trust more with my child's life than John Kerry.

Then it was ALL KERRY! He was a bit hoarse from two weeks on the road, but he talked about all the things that matter to Oregonians. Education, jobs, environment, energy independence, health care. The biggest applause though, was when he talked about the need for habitat for people who love the outdoors, and then said the thing he's been looking forward to for the last 2 weeks is windsurfing on the Gorge. The crowd went wild. We love outdoorsmen (and women) in Oregon, and I don't mean cutting brush for photo-ops.

The local news switched back and forth between Bush's invitation only event in Beaverton, with around 1,000 people, and the crowd at Waterfront Park. Bush spoke about NCLB and the closing gap in education. Kerry talked about Oregon's school report yesterday which has 200 of our schools rated failing, mostly because of the unfair testing methods of NCLB. Bush spoke about international relations with Tony Blair while Kerry spoke of a new respect for leaders of all countries. Bush spoke about creating a million jobs while Kerry spoke of the 23 million jobs created under Clinton and the new jobs that will be created through new energy technologies, manufacturing credits and enforcing trade laws. Bush spoke of tax cuts improving the economy while Kerry spoke of the CBO report released today that shows the tax burden has been shifted to the middle class. There's no comparison between the two, just don't understand how people can be so duped by Bush. One woman even got up and praised Bush and thanked him for his dangerous Guard service. That was different.

Anyway, it was a great Kerry day in Oregon. I'm still in awe of that crowd. If you're looking for a big Dem party this weekend, I bet Portland is the place to be!

One more pic:

Congressional Budget Office Confirms Bush Tax Cuts Go to Richest 1%

Budget Office Says Biggest Tax Cuts Go to Richest 1%

By JACKIE CALMES
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
August 13, 2004; Page A6

WASHINGTON -- President Bush's three tax-cut laws will reduce this year's income taxes for the richest 1% of taxpayers by an average of $78,460, more than 70 times the average benefit for the middle 20% of taxpayers, congressional analysts found.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office today will release the government's first multiyear projection of the Bush tax cuts by income class. The report, made at the Democrats' request, confirms what the Democrats and their presidential nominee, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, have charged -- that the wealthy disproportionately benefit.

The CBO's release, along with Democrats' separate calculations based on CBO's data, are sure to elevate the tax cuts as an issue in the presidential race, with less than three months before Election Day.

Using CBO's findings, congressional Democratic staff calculated that the lowest 20% of taxpayers -- those with total annual income in 2001 dollars of $14,900 to $34,200 -- receive a tax cut of $250 on average for 2004. The next 20% of taxpayers, with income as much as $51,500, get an average tax cut of $800, and the middle fifth of taxpayers, which includes those earning as much as $75,600, receive an average $1,090 tax cut.

For the next-highest 20%, with income as much as $182,700, the average tax cut for 2004 is $1,770. And for the top fifth of taxpayers, whose annual income is above $182,700, the tax cut is $7,740 on average. The top 1% that get an average $78,460 tax cut includes taxpayers with more than $1 million in annual income.

Congressional Republicans countered that the richest 20% of taxpayers still will pay 63.5% of all income taxes for 2004, as they did in 2001. The CBO analysis doesn't account for reductions in estate taxes.

At Mr. Bush's campaign events, which are open only to supporters with tickets, the president often shares the stage with local taxpayers to publicize their tax breaks under his policies. Because most of them are parents, they receive the $1,000-a-child tax credit in addition to cuts in their income-tax rate. That results in a tax cut that is larger than the average for their income class. For example, while the average annual tax cut for the middle fifth of taxpayers is $1,090, someone with at least two children would receive more than double that figure.

Three of the most popular tax cuts -- the child credit, the lowest 10% tax rate and "marriage penalty" relief -- expire after this year. Extending them is a top priority for Mr. Bush and congressional Republicans, but internal disputes prevented a vote last month. Mr. Kerry and other Democrats also favor those tax cuts; it is the reductions for Americans with annual incomes of $200,000 or more that the Democratic senator wants to repeal, to pay for health care and other initiatives.

Environmental Watch: Bush Administration Pledges to Deepen Columbia River Channel

Conservationists React to Bush Administration's Pledge to Deepen Columbia River Channel

The Bush administration, in a reversal of its policy to rein in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers spending on new projects, is expected tomorrow to pledge $15 million to start the Columbia River channel deepening project, a controversial plan that will harm threatened and endangered salmon, and that has been plagued by unsound economic analyses and questionable claims of economic benefit, according to American Rivers.

The Army Corps' own team of expert economists raised serious questions about the Corps' analysis and claimed benefits. The panel questioned whether the region, or even any U.S. companies, would see any benefits from the project.

"Aside from the environmental impacts of the project-which are considerable-the economic case for the Columbia River dredging project has not been made," said David Moryc, Lower Columbia River Coordinator for American Rivers. "The Corps' own experts are concerned that 'benefits' of the project will flow only to foreign-owned shipping conglomerates with no guarantee of benefits for the Northwest."

Dredging and disposal operations will harm fish and wildlife habitat such as shallow water wetlands and tidelands critical to salmon listed under the Endangered Species Act, as well as crab and sturgeon. Twelve threatened and endangered salmon and steelhead populations use the lower Columbia at some point in their life history. Dredging the channel will also exacerbate existing water quality problems by revealing and re-suspending the pollutants into the water.

"The region has been working together to restore the Columbia River estuary for salmon and wildlife for years now," said Moryc. "We simply cannot roll back these efforts by destroying essential salmon habitat with an economically wasteful and environmentally harmful project."

The Columbia River estuary has lost 70 percent of its wetland and riparian habitat -- 50 percent since 1950 -- primarily due to dredging, hydropower operations and diking practices. Scientists and the federal government have identified restoration of estuary habitat as one of the highest priorities for salmon recovery of threatened and endangered salmon in the Columbia and Snake river basins.

Kerry Campaign Responds to Bush Appearance On Larry King Live

Kerry-Edwards Campaign Spokesperson Phil Singer issued the following statement in response to Bush's appearance on Larry King Live:

"The President spent an hour on TV and didn't talk about jobs or his plans to get the economy going. It's the latest proof that this President is completely out of touch with the priorities of this country, and has no plan for turn things around. It's time that we had a President like John Kerry who has a plan to make America stronger at home and respected in the world."

Chad Clanton, Kerry spokesperson:

"Tonight President Bush called Kerry's service in Vietnam 'noble.' But in the same breath refused to heed Senator McCain's call to condemn the dirty work being done by the 'Swift Boat Vets for Bush.' Once again, the President side-stepped responsibility and refused to do the right thing. His credibility is running out as fast as his time in the White House."

Bush on Larry King

George Bush was fortunate that his rare televised interview was a game of softball, and is unlikely to have much impact on the race. I had a bit of pleasure early in the show as Bush was forced to concede that John Kerry had an honorable millitary record, even if he wasn't willing to admit the impropriety and dishonesty of the recent attacks. Just as he avoided responsibility for the dishonest tone of the campaign, Bush later seemed to be trying to pass the buck, and place the blame for his failures in Iraq on the generals, especially Tommy Frank.

Bush got off easy with Larry King's questioning of his statements on the aircraft carrier below the Mission Accomplished banner. Bush downplayed his premature claims of success, and was never questioned about his clearly erroneous assessment that the major hostilities were over.

Bush's favorite word in discussing his foreign policy goals was "free." Unfortunately it came out in a more Orwellian sense of "freedom is slavery." While Bush claimed that freedom would solve all the problems, I can't help but wonder how much freedom he would really allow. The hard question of what we do about countries which would undoubtably elect governments hostile to the United States if given such freedom was never asked.

Laura Bush got away with her claims that "there's not a ban on stem cell research" by not having to face hard questions about the limitations imposed by George Bush which many scientists feel are as bad as a ban. Bush justified his policies by citing "ethicists who impress me" which translates to pandering to the religious right.

Bush said he wanted the people, not the courts, to decide on stem cell research. In that case, why didn't he allow the people, as opposed to the court, decide the 2000 election?

Bush made a quick mention of abolishing the "death tax," another Republican scheme to help the super-wealthy while pretending to help others such as the family farmer. Finding the family farmer who actually benefits from Republican policy is as difficult as finding Osama, or finding WMD in Iraq.

When talking about the race, Bush noted that "this is politics, people put words in your mouth." He knows what he speaks about. Tonight he put words in Kerry's mouth with false claims about his tax policy. Earlier in the week we saw Bush do the same as he misquoted Kerry's answer to the Iraq question.

All in all, it wasn't that Bush did all that badly (expecially with the soft questions). The real difference was that we didn't see the depth of knowledge present when John Kerry answers questions. George Bush earned a "gentleman's C" in contrast to the earlier interview where Kerry earned an A.

Economic Help Is On The Way

After being introduced by Congresswoman Juanita MacDonald, John Kerry's economic speech at Cal State, Dominguez Hills in Carson, CA started with some wit and humor. A few well-aimed jabs at current Governor Schwarzenegger were met with great delight by the crowd, especially after the tremendous standing ovation that former Governor Grey Davis met with when he entered the auditorium.



With the unemployment rate hovering at around 6.7% in Los Angeles County, a message of hope is sorely needed. While George W. Bush was preparing another big $$ fundraiser a few miles away in Santa Monica, John Kerry was stoking the fires of hope with a positive plan of building a stronger middle class. Kerry said today, "We believe a stronger America at home is built on a strong middle-class." In referring to the Bush administration claims that the economy is turning the corner, Kerry said that too many Americans, "feel like they’ve been backed into a corner by the policies of the last four years – rising unemployment…exploding deficits…falling wages….American jobs shipped overseas."

As I listened to Kerry's plan for economic relief, I thought of all the people I know who are directly affected by the miserable failure of the Bush administration on the economic front, including myself. As a small business owner and single mother, John Kerry spoke directly to me today with his plan for "tax cuts that will create jobs and provide relief for middle-class families struggling to make ends meet.”

The audience was a diverse one today. I recognized Kerry volunteers I had met over the past year, many of whom are self-employed like myself. I spoke with a few members of the local Teamsters on the way into the event and a group of members of the National Association of Letter Carriers were seated directly in front of me. As John Kerry laid out his economic plan, there were many rounds of cheers and applause and a few rounds of chanting "Help Is On The Way!"



After the event I was greeted by Tom Mullens, who recently made a cross-country trip by motorcycle to be in Boston when John Kerry received the nomination. It was a great treat to see Tom as I had first written about his plans for a cross-country motorcycle ride on the Kerry Blog back in May.



Hoping to catch one last glimpse of John Kerry or better yet grab a handshake, a group of supporters waited around for Kerry to leave. But, alas the Secret Service spirited him away... It was a great day with a promise of hope!

Read John Kerry's speech: “A Stronger America Begins at Home: The Path to Prosperity”.

Bush Flips, Cheney Flops

Yesterday we showed how Cheney's attack on Kerry for describing the IWR vote as a vote to authorize force as a last resort--not a vote to go to war--contradicts a statement from George Bush from October 2002 which agreed with Kerry's position.

Today Cheney is attacking Kerry for his statement that "I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side," mocking the use of the word "sensitive."

However, in March 2001, George Bush said that America must be "sensitive about expressing our power and influence."

I think it is time to send Dick Cheney back to that undisclosed location.

Four Years and Out--The Bush Family Legacy

Bush and Cheney continue to base their campaign on smears as opposed to discussing the record. This could seal their fate. Bush is determined to avoid the fate of his father, but by adopting the wrong tactics in the wrong year, he is doomed to continue the Bush family legacy of four years and out.

Most people are not going to vote based upon either candidate's war record--whether they fought, went AWOL, or protested.

They aren't even going to care about how someone voted before the war.

They are going to vote based upon whether they agree with how the war has been handled, or see it as a fiasco.

They are going to vote based upon who they think can keep American safer in the world--who can build a stronger America and restore America's standing in the world.

They are going to vote based upon whether they can afford health care, and find a good job.

As long as Bush leaves a vacuum with regards to discussing the real issues, more and more voters are going to vote for the candidate who is offering real solutions.

We see this year who is capturing the interest, and hopes, of America. We see which candidate is drawing in the big crowds at rallys. John Kerry's web site, based upon discussion of the issues and solutions for our problems, is among the highest rated of sites. Bush's site, based upon smears and attacks, gets much less attention.

It must be tough to be running for reelection and not have a record one can run on.

Best President Money Can Buy--Part 2

From today's Progress Report from the American Progress Action Fund:

COMPANIES FIGHTING REIMPORTATION GAVE BIG TO BUSH: The Kansas City Star reports that Eli Lilly, Glaxo SmithKline and Pfizer are at the forefront of the fight against reimportation, taking the ethically questionable step of restricting supplies of medicine to keep prices high. Pfizer, for instance, has restricted supplies of the cholesterol drug Lipitor because, as one industry spokesman said, the industry must "protect the huge investment they make developing new drugs." What he didn't say was that Lipitor and many other medicines now being held hostage were originally developed with billions of dollars of taxpayer money. The Bush administration, meanwhile, has done nothing, instead pocketing huge campaign contributions from these three companies. Pfizer's CEO is a Bush Pioneer (someone who has raised over $100,000), Pfizer executives have given the Bush campaign more than $110,000, and the company has given the RNC more than $2.5 million in soft money since 2000. Eli Lilly executives have given the Bush campaign more than $53,000, and the company has given the RNC more than $1.4 million in soft money since 2000. And Glaxo executives have given the Bush campaign more than $23,000, while the company has given the RNC more than $1.4 million in soft money since 2000.

Hell No, We Won't Go!

Maybe they don't care to spend junior year abroad in Iraq, or maybe they just want to be able to get a job when they graduate. Whatever their reasons, the Washington Post notes that Bush is doing poorly among the young:

Surveys suggest that Bush's popularity has plummeted among 18- to 29-year-olds in the past four months, posing a new obstacle to the president's bid to win reelection and an immediate challenge to Republicans seeking to win over impressionable and lightly committed young people during their upcoming convention.

Four years ago, network exit polls found that Bush and Democrat Al Gore split the vote of 18- to 29-year-olds, with Gore claiming 48 percent and Bush getting 46 percent -- the best showing by a Republican presidential candidate in more than a decade.

But that was then. In the latest Post-ABC News poll taken immediately after the Democratic convention, Kerry led Bush 2-1 among registered voters younger than 30. Among older voters, the race was virtually tied.

George Bush--The Best President Money Can Buy

The Washington Post reports what should be no surprise--the latest attack ad is also financed by those who benefit financially from keeping Bush in office:

Group Runs Anti-Kerry Ads on Black Radio Stations

By Thomas B. Edsall
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 12, 2004; Page A01

A group financed by a major Republican contributor has begun running radio ads in about a dozen cities, many in battleground states, attacking Sen. John F. Kerry as "rich, white and wishy-washy" and mocking his wife for boasting of her African roots.

The D.C.-based group, People of Color United, has substantial financial backing from J. Patrick Rooney, the former chairman of Golden Rule Insurance Co. and the founder of a new firm, Medical Savings Insurance Co. Both firms specialize in medical savings accounts, created by Republican-backed 1996 legislation, and health savings accounts, which were created by President Bush's 2003 Medicare prescription drug legislation.

Cheney and Bush Not on Same Page on Iraq

Dick Cheney, in his comments distorting John Kerry's position on Iraq, is clearly unaware of what George Bush has said on the same subject.

From the New York Times:

On Wednesday, Vice President Cheney did his best to worsen Mr. Kerry's troubles. He issued a statement noting that Mr. Kerry "voted for the war" but turned against it "when it was politically expedient" and now has his aides "saying that his vote to authorize force wasn't really a vote to go to war."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/12/politics/campaign/12memo.html?pagewanted=2

Excuse me, Mr. Cheney, but it appears that Kerry is just saying the same thing as George Bush:

Such a resolution, Bush said, should not suggest that military action is "imminent or unavoidable," only that the United States was speaking with "one voice." October 8, 2002
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/08/bush.iraq/

Judge Rips into Bush Official Over "Dolphin-Safe" Tuna Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL WATCH: In a case that would have effected not only the environment, but what you eat...


U.S. District Judge Thelton Henderson found that Commerce Secretary Donald Evans not only failed to conduct the scientific research required to relax existing tuna-labeling laws, but engaged in “a pattern of delay and inattention” to build support for his position.

“The record is replete with evidence that the secretary was influenced by policy concerns unrelated to the best available scientific evidence,” Henderson wrote in a strongly worded 51-page opinion. “This court has never, in its 24 years, reviewed a record of agency action that contained such a compelling portrait of political meddling.”

What was proposed
The Commerce Department wanted to rewrite the 1990 law to allow tuna caught with nets to be labeled dolphin-safe if observers certified that no dolphins were killed or seriously injured in the process. Dolphins commonly swim with schools of tuna, and fisheries in Mexico and South America encircle the popular mammals with nets to hone in on their prey...

“Judge Henderson’s ruling exposes the Bush administration’s deceit in ignoring its own scientists and caving into Mexican demands to allow dolphin-deadly tuna back into the U.S. with a phony label,” said Earth Island Institute director David Phillips, whose group was one of the plaintiffs in the suit against Evans.

Read more...

Time after time the Bush administration has wrecked havoc with environmental laws and protections. With John Kerry in the White House we will have an environmental champion who will preserve the environment and protect public health.

John Kerry is Ranking Member of the Senate Subcommittee on Oceans, Fisheries, and Coast Guard. During his career in the Senate, Kerry has fought to protect the fishing industry as well as save the Marine Eco-system.

- John Kerry was a lead cosponsor of the Coral Reef Conservation Act, legislation to create a national program to preserve, sustain, and restore the condition of coral reef ecosystems. The bill was signed into law by President Clinton.

- John Kerry cosponsored legislation to encourage the restoration of estuary habitat through more efficient project financing and enhanced coordination of federal and non-federal restoration programs. The bill was sponsored by the late Senator John Chafee of Rhode Island, and it was signed into law by Clinton.

- When the Bush Administration signaled that it may overturn longstanding policy prohibiting oil and gas drilling off the coast of New England and especially in the fishing ground of Georges Bank, John Kerry moved to strengthen that prohibition. The Senator amended the law preventing drilling to ensure New England’s coast had the same protections are other federal waters. His provision became law in 2001.

- John Kerry was the lead cosponsor of the National Marine Sanctuaries Reauthorization Act of 2000 which increases funding levels for this national ocean program, including Stellwagen National Marine Sanctuary off the coast of Massachusetts. The Stellwagen is an important habitat for whales and other species central to the Massachusetts environment. The bill was signed into law by President Clinton.

Reality Check on IWR

So now Bush is trying to say the IWR was, in fact, a vote for war. Funny thing, that's not what he said at the time. Flip-flopper or just flat out liar?

"What I've told others, including President Fox, is we have no imminent plans to use military operations," Bush said in Monterrey after meeting with Mexican President Vicente Fox. March 22, 2002
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/03/25/world/main504515.shtml

"The president discussed Iraq in a general sense, because the president has not made a decision about the use of military action vis-a-vis Iraq," the Bush spokesman said. August 27, 2002
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/08/27/bush.saudi.prince/

Such a resolution, Bush said, should not suggest that military action is "imminent or unavoidable," only that the United States was speaking with "one voice." October 8, 2002
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/08/bush.iraq/

John Kerry has been consistent on his vote, it was a vote to hold Saddam accountable to disarm according to UN resolutions. This means total open disclosure of not only any weapons, but also plans, scientists, anything related to past or future weapons production. It's a total process that Saddam needed to be accountable to.

John Kerry has also always said that Bush bungled everything in the process of holding Saddam accountable, from what he told the American people to exhausting all diplomatic remedies to the execution of the war itself. He repeats his words again today:

``I read somewhere that the Bush folks were trying to say that we changed positions, this that,'' Kerry said. ``I've been consistent all along and I thought that the United States needed to stand up to Saddam Hussein and I voted to stand up to Saddam Hussein, but I thought we should do it right.''

``I thought we ought to reach out to other countries, we ought to build an international coalition, we ought to exhaust the remedies available to us.''
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/politics/politics-campaign-kerry.html

This isn't so complicated, except for those who fail to remember what Bush actually said in 2002 or those who conspire with the Republicans to help Americans to forget.

Don't be fooled. Bush said he had no plans to go to war in 2002. We now know from Bob Woodward's book that he, in fact, had plans on the table in November 2001. He has misled this country and the world at every turn. Bush is worse than a flip-flopper; he's a lying, conniving bully.

Alliance of Retired Americans Endorses John Kerry

HENDERSON, Nev., Aug. 11 /U.S. Newswire/ -- John Kerry was today formally pledged the political clout of 3 million retirees when he received the endorsement of the Alliance for Retired Americans at a seniors' town hall meeting in Nevada.

Alliance President George J. Kourpias praised Kerry's leadership on behalf of seniors and the issues important to older Americans, and pledged that seniors across the country will work to elect Kerry president "because their lives depend on it."

The Alliance for Retired Americans, which lobbied against passage of the 2003 Medicare law, is a nationwide, grassroots organization that advocates on behalf of seniors. Kerry accepted the Alliance endorsement in Henderson, NV, at a town hall meeting of Alliance members.

"It's time America's seniors have a president who cares about them and fights to protect and preserve programs important to them," said Kourpias, who noted that Kerry received a 100 percent Lifetime Voting Record from the Alliance. "We need a leader who understands our needs and will protect the rights seniors worked a lifetime to earn."

"John Kerry stands with seniors and will be a 'people over profits' President. He has earned our respect and support and we will pull out all the stops to elect him the next President of the United States."

Kourpias said that the Alliance's state chapters are all geared to mobilizing their membership and will be implementing full-court election strategies that include voter registration, member education and GOTV tactics. In key senior battleground states such as Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Arizona and Nevada, the Alliance has on-the-ground field staff coordinating its education and mobilization plans. Kourpias noted that roughly 7 million Americans over 65 live in these five states; the same states total 83 electoral votes.

"Seniors are a formidable political force and will decide who is the next President of the United States," said Kourpias. "Not only are more seniors registered to vote than any other voting group, but they vote in greater numbers than any other of the voting-age populations."

"Seniors cast one out of every four votes cast for president in 2000. Alliance members are a powerful voting bloc to reckon with and plan to flex our political muscle come November 2. George Bush had better watch out."

Kourpias said that Bush's flawed Medicare drug benefit and the skyrocketing cost of prescription drugs are energizing Alliance members and seniors throughout the U.S. this election season. He said older Americans believe Bush cares more about the needs and wants of drug companies and special interests than he does about the struggles facing middle class seniors. Older Americans know they got a raw deal from George Bush and it's their turn to give it back, he said.

"Seniors don't have a lot of time to waste and know that four more years of George Bush would be a disaster for them as well as for the future of their children and their grandchildren," Kourpias said. "We are focused, we are energized and we will put the Kerry-Edwards team in the White House."

See an interview conducted by the Alliance of Retired Americans in the comments section.

AFGE Responds to Bush Ad Entitled "Ownership"

John Gage, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees slams the latest Bush Campaign Ad...

In a newly released campaign ad, President Bush claims that in a reform agenda, "government must stand with people," and that people must be encouraged "to own something."

"I'd like to remind the president that a government that stands with its people requires a leader who understands that it's the people who own the government,"said John Gage, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE). "George W. Bush treats the resources of the U.S. Government as if they were his to sell off to corporations and consultants.

"When the president says that people should be encouraged to 'own their own health plan, or a piece of their retirement,' we can read the code. What he's really saying is, 'trust us as we turn Social Security (news - web sites) into a Wall Street crap shoot,' or, 'why would you possibly need affordable health insurance if we give you a little tax-free savings account?'

"In his ad, the Mr. Bush asserts that those who 'own something,' have 'a vital stake in the future of America.' In truth, all Americans own something; through our taxes, we're all shareholders in the government of the United States. We're well aware of the vital stake we hold in America's future."

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) is the largest federal employee union, representing 600,000 workers in the federal government and the government of the District of Columbia.

To view the Bush ad in question, visit http://www.georgewbush.com/Default.aspx?toparea=video

Seniors Line Up With Kerry On Prescription Drugs

Poll: Seniors favor drug imports

Elderly strongly support access to cheaper prescriptions

The Associated Press released this story today about seniors who favor Kerry's plan prescription drugs and healthcare. In a conversation about this issue today, a friend told me that his mother, a lifelong Republican was finally throwing in the towel and would be supporting Kerry. He cited the lack of support from the Bush administration for seniors, for his mother's change of heart and vote!

WASHINGTON - Older and disabled Americans strongly support proposals, also backed by the Kerry presidential campaign, to permit prescription drug imports and allow the government to negotiate prices of medicines, said a poll released Tuesday.

Both ideas would give Americans access to cheaper prescription drugs, most of those polled, all Medicare recipients, said. Four-fifths of those questioned in the Kaiser Family Foundation poll said they support both proposals, dismissing misgivings about the safety of imported drugs.

By contrast, nearly half the people questioned said they have an unfavorable impression of the new prescription drug law passed last year by the Republican-led Congress and signed by President Bush. Among major complaints, the law does not do enough to bring down prices, is too complicated and rewards drug makers and insurers. A quarter of those surveyed said they like the law.

The criticisms are similar to those put forward by Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry and other opponents of last year’s Medicare overhaul. The poll suggests an election-year advantage for the Democrats on the issue.

“So far, it doesn’t look like passage of the drug bill has been a positive for the president and Republicans,” said Drew Altman, Kaiser’s president and chief executive.

Read more.

Also of note on MSNBC where I found this article was this comparison of Bush and Kerry on Health:

BUSH

Medicare
Signed legislation to take effect in 2006 to make prescription drug coverage available to more seniors and disabled through Medicare, created a voluntary Medicare drug benefit for seniors to reduce out-of-pocket drug spending, as well as allowing for prescription drug discount cards with monthly premiums.

Malpractice premiums
Adopt minimum standards in the medical liability system.

Coverage
Allow individuals and small businesses to put money in Health Savings Accounts to cover out-of-pocket expenses until coverage kicks in at a higher deductible to help moderate premiums, expand reach of community health centers by funding 1,200 new or expanded sites over five years, help states develop new approaches to expand coverage and avoid reductions in Medicaid programs, provide a health coverage tax credit to certain displaced workers.

Efficiency
Use technology to reduce preventable medical errors and reduce costs, double funding to achieve broader adoption of health IT systems to $100 million under FY’05 budget, allow most Americans to have personal electronic records within the next 10 years.

KERRY

Medicare
Create a prescription drug benefit that is run by Medicare instead of private insurance companies.

Prescription drugs
Require Secretary of heath and Human Services to negotiate better prices, allow importation of FDA-approved drugs from Canada and other countries to take advantages of discounts, require businesses that work with the federal government to reveal profits from the drug industry, help states to provide discounts by granting incentives for more efficient contracting in order to get better drug rates.

Long-term care
Ensure that nursing homes have adequate inspection and better worker training, give seniors more flexibility to use their coverage for alternative care options so more could continue to live at home, provide more support for caregivers.

Coverage
Extend state-based programs in order to pick up the full cost of covering 20 million children enrolled in Medicaid, as well as expanding coverage for families up to 200 percent of poverty and childless adults up to 100 percent of poverty, cut premiums by up to $1000 per year for families by stepping in on certain high-cost cases.

Malpractice premiums
Require qualified specialist to certify merits of a case before it can move forward, work with states to make non-binding mediation available in all cases before trial, punishing lawyers who file frivolous cases with sanctions, oppose punitive damages unless intentional misconduct, gross negligence or reckless indifference is established, prevent insurance companies from fixing prices and increasing premiums.

Patient Bill of Rights
Access to specialists, emergency protections, appeals process for HMO decisions, ability to sue HMOs, whistleblower protections for health workers.

Efficiency
Ensure privacy for medical records, provide technology bonuses to health providers to streamline paperwork, require that private insurers use systems that make transactions less costly as a condition for doing business with the federal government.

Bush Gets His Answer, Then Changes Question on Iraq

John Kerry voted to authorize war as a last resort if we were proven to be endangered and diplomatic efforts failed. There's a big difference between this and George Bush's claim that John Kerry voted to authorize the war.

George Bush asked for a yes or no answer as to whether Kerry would have still voted for the IWR (Iraq War Resolution) knowing that there is no WMD. Kerry replied yesterday by saying, "I'll answer it directly. Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it is the right authority for a president to have but I would have used that authority effectively." Bush proceeded to spin this today with false claims that Kerry is saying he would have voted to go to war. He is counting on the fact that many people do not understand what the IWR actually said and why Kerry voted for it.

Kerry voted for the IWR in order to force George Bush to return to the United Nations, and to put leverage on Saddam to allow the inspectors back in. Kerry believed that the President (any President) should have the authority to use military force as a last resort if we are proven to be endangered. The principle doesn't change based upon the particular circumstances, and therefore Kerry would still support authorization of force as a last resort if we are endangered. The difference is that in the absence of WMD, Bush was not justified in going to war as he did, and misused that authorization. One more reason why Bush is unfit to remain as President.

At the time of the IWR vote, Kerry warned that we should not go into Iraq unilaterally. He warned about the long term consequences of occupying an Arab country, and of going to war without a plan to win the peace. Most importantly, he argued that we should only go to war as a last resort if we were proven to be endangered, and that Bush failed to provide the evidence that we were endangered or that military force was justified.

Bush accuses Kerry of flip flopping, but this is just something Bush says every time he runs against someone since he isn't capable of talking about the actual issues, and sure can't run on his record. Looking back at Kerry's statements on Iraq shows that he has been consistent, and had a number of warnings which Bush should have heeded. I'll post a longer selection from Kerry's floor speech at the time of the IWR vote in the comments section, but this shows that neither Bush or Kerry were calling a yes vote a vote to go to war at the time of the vote:

"As the President made clear earlier this week, 'Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable." It means that "America speaks with one voice."

Walter Shapiro reviewed Kerry's position in his book, One Car Caravan, with this quote from Kerry from October 2002, showing that Kerry is doing exactly what he said he would do from the beginning when he now criticizes Bush's handling of the war:

"My vote was cast in a way that made it very clear, Mr. President, I'm voting for you to do what you said you're going to do, which is to go through the U.N. and do this through an international process. If you go unilaterally, without having exhausted these remedies, I'm not supporting you. And if you decide that this is just a matter of straight pre-emptive doctrine for regime-change purposes without regard to the imminence of the threat, I'm not going to support you."

Once war began, Kerry called for regime change at home in opposition to Bush going to war without exhausting diplomatic solutions. Following the war Kerry gave a number of interviews on his position. In December 2003 Kerry was interviewed by William Rivers Pitt:

PITT: Do you feel a kinship with the peace movement that exploded around this Iraq invasion, given your background? Or do you feel alienated from them because of that vote?

KERRY: I felt enormous understanding, empathy, sympathy and respect for the voice they were articulating. I completely understood it. I came from there. I understood the confusion over why someone with my long history, why there was confusion over my position, why people were questioning it.

KERRY: But I felt my decision was absolutely consistent with the counter-proliferation efforts I have been making as a Senator for my entire career. I felt proliferation was a critical issue. I thought a President ought to get inspectors back into Iraq. I thought a President ought to hold Saddam Hussein accountable. But I knew how to do it right, and my regret is that this President proved he not only didn’t know how to do it right, but was prepared to go back on his promises, be deceptive, and mislead the nation. I regret that he did that, and I regret that I put any trust in him at all. I shouldn’t have, obviously.

KERRY: Put it this way: Given the circumstances we were in at the time, the decision was appropriate, but in retrospect I will never trust the man again. That’s why I am running against him. He deserves to be replaced with someone who is trustworthy.

Salon also asked Kerry about the IWR vote in an interview on May 28, 2004:

SALON: According to recent polls, more than 50 percent of the American public now believes that the war in Iraq has not been worth the cost. Do you agree with that assessment?

KERRY: I've always believed that the president went to war in a way that was mistaken, that he led us too rapidly into war, without sharing the cost, without sharing the risk, without building a true international coalition. He broke his promises about going as a last resort. I think that was a mistake. There was a right way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable and a wrong way. He chose the wrong way.

SALON: But you voted in October 2002 to give Bush the authority to use force in Iraq. Was that vote a mistake?

KERRY: No. My vote was the right vote. If I had been president, I would have wanted that authority to leverage the behavior that we needed. But I would have used it so differently than the way George Bush did.

SALON: Would there have been a war in Iraq if you had been president?

KERRY: I can't tell you that. If Saddam Hussein hadn't disarmed and all the world had decided that he was not living up to the standards, who knows? You can't answer that hypothetical. But I can tell you this. I would never have rushed the process in a way that undoes the meaning of going to war "as a last resort."

SALON: And that's what you thought you were authorizing -- war as a last resort?

KERRY: Absolutely. You know, we got a set of promises: We're going to build an international coalition, we're going to exhaust the remedies of the U.N., respect that process and go to war as a last resort. Well, we didn't.

KERRY: And not only [did we] not go to war as a last resort, they didn't even make the plans for winning the peace. They disregarded them. They disregarded [U.S. Army General Eric] Shinseki's advice, disregarded Colin Powell's advice, disregarded the State Department's plan. The arrogance of this administration has cost Americans billions of dollars and too many lives.

Kerry has been consistent in supporting authorization to go to war as a last resort if we are endangered, but did not vote to go to war. Understanding this difference will also show why Kerry was not flip flopping, but was consistent in his principles, when he voted against the first Gulf War. The first Gulf War resolution was a true vote to go to war, and Kerry did not support going to war without exhausting all other alternatives. The more recent IWR only authorized war if diplomatic efforts failed and we were endangered, allowing Kerry to cast a yes vote in the expectation that George Bush would abide by this resolution instead of rushing to war unnecessarily and without proper preparations.

Bush Flip Flop Alert

"[I want] to make sure that tax cheaters are found, make sure the IRS gets after those who don't pay taxes; make sure that the system is fair for those of us who do pay taxes. We want everybody paying their fair share."

- -George W. Bush, 4/15/04


"The really rich people figure out how to dodge taxes anyway."

-- George W. Bush, 8/9/04, criticizing John Kerry's plan to eliminate the tax cuts for the wealthy

People In Glass Houses

I'd contrast the military records of key members of the Bush Administration with that of John Kerry, if only I could find some information. David Halberstam looked at their records in the September issue of Vanity Fair:

"To the new superhawks, an America engaged in a worthy war of self-defense and a new imperial America engaged in a war that is a significant miscalculation of policy are the same thing." Halberstam adds, "Their new poster boy is the vice president himself, a man of great certitude, not just about Vietnam but about Iraq as well – his confidence and certitude hardly born of a life experience." Instead of going to war, "Richard Cheney received five – yes, five – deferments, a record that would make most men modest about speaking out on Vietnam and related subjects." And he's not even the Bush administration's deferment king: That (dis)honor goes to "that singular American patriot, Attorney General John Ashcroft, who got seven. Yes, seven."

The Guy Who Was Actually There Speaks Out for Kerry

Shame on the Swift Boat Veterans for Bush

By JIM RASSMANN
August 10, 2004; Page A10

I came to know Lt. John Kerry during the spring of 1969. He and his swift boat crew assisted in inserting our Special Forces team and our Chinese Nung soldiers into operational sites in the Cau Mau Peninsula of South Vietnam. I worked with him on many operations and saw firsthand his leadership, courage and decision-making ability under fire.

On March 13, 1969, John Kerry's courage and leadership saved my life.

While returning from a SEA LORDS operation along the Bay Hap River, a mine detonated under another swift boat. Machine-gun fire erupted from both banks of the river, and a second explosion followed moments later. The second blast blew me off John's swift boat, PCF-94, throwing me into the river. Fearing that the other boats would run me over, I swam to the bottom of the river and stayed there as long as I could hold my breath.

When I surfaced, all the swift boats had left, and I was alone taking fire from both banks. To avoid the incoming fire, I repeatedly swam under water as long as I could hold my breath, attempting to make it to the north bank of the river. I thought I would die right there. The odds were against me avoiding the incoming fire and, even if I made it out of the river, I thought I'd be captured and executed. Kerry must have seen me in the water and directed his driver, Del Sandusky, to turn the boat around. Kerry's boat ran up to me in the water, bow on, and I was able to climb up a cargo net to the lip of the deck. But, because I was nearly upside down, I couldn't make it over the edge of the deck. This left me hanging out in the open, a perfect target. John, already wounded by the explosion that threw me off his boat, came out onto the bow, exposing himself to the fire directed at us from the jungle, and pulled me aboard.

For his actions that day, I recommended John for the Silver Star, our country's third highest award for bravery under fire. I learned only this past January that the Navy awarded John the Bronze Star with Combat V for his valor. The citation for this award, signed by the Commander of U.S. Naval Forces, Vietnam, Vice Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, read, "Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry's calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service." To this day I am grateful to John Kerry for saving my life. And to this day I still believe that he deserved the Silver Star for his courage.

It has been many years since I served in Vietnam. I returned home, got married, and spent many years as a deputy sheriff for Los Angeles County. I retired in 1989 as a lieutenant. It has been a long time since I left Vietnam, but I think often of the men who did not come home with us.

I am neither a politician nor an organizer. I am a retired police officer with a passion for orchids. Until January of this year, the only public presentations I made were about my orchid hobby. But in this presidential election, I had to speak out; I had to tell the American people about John Kerry, about his wisdom and courage, about his vision and leadership. I would trust John Kerry with my life, and I would entrust John Kerry with the well-being of our country.

Nobody asked me to join John's campaign. Why would they? I am a Republican, and for more than 30 years I have largely voted for Republicans. I volunteered for his campaign because I have seen John Kerry in the worst of conditions. I know his character. I've witnessed his bravery and leadership under fire. And I truly know he will be a great commander in chief.

Now, 35 years after the fact, some Republican-financed Swift Boat Veterans for Bush are suddenly lying about John Kerry's service in Vietnam; they are calling him a traitor because he spoke out against the Nixon administration's failed policies in Vietnam. Some of these Republican-sponsored veterans are the same ones who spoke out against John at the behest of the Nixon administration in 1971. But this time their attacks are more vicious, their lies cut deep and are directed not just at John Kerry, but at me and each of his crewmates as well. This hate-filled ad asserts that I was not under fire; it questions my words and Navy records. This smear campaign has been launched by people without decency, people who don't understand the bond of those who serve in combat.

As John McCain noted, the television ad aired by these veterans is "dishonest and dishonorable." Sen. McCain called on President Bush to condemn the Swift Boat Veterans for Bush ad. Regrettably, the president has ignored Sen. McCain's advice.

Does this strategy of attacking combat Vietnam veterans sound familiar? In 2000, a similar Republican smear campaign was launched against Sen. McCain. In fact, the very same communications group, Spaeth Communications, that placed ads against John McCain in 2000 is involved in these vicious attacks against John Kerry. Texas Republican donors with close ties to George W. Bush and Karl Rove crafted this "dishonest and dishonorable" ad. Their new charges are false; their stories are fabricated, made up by people who did not serve with Kerry in Vietnam. They insult and defame all of us who served in Vietnam.

But when the noise and fog of their distortions and lies have cleared, a man who volunteered to serve his country, a man who showed up for duty when his country called, a man to whom the United States Navy awarded a Silver Star, a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts, will stand tall and proud. Ultimately, the American people will judge these Swift Boat Veterans for Bush and their accusations. Americans are tired of smear campaigns against those who volunteered to wear the uniform. Swift Boat Veterans for Bush should hang their heads in shame.

Mr. Rassmann, a retired lieutenant with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, served with the U.S. Army 5th Special Forces Group in Vietnam 1968-69.

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109209179651686933,00.html

Are All Bush Supporters This Gullible?

The week has seen a number of comments from Bush supporters which share one thing in common--the attacks are based upon information which the slightest bit of research would show they are completely untrue.

The Bush campaign realizes this but they don't care. They know that their supporters will accept what they say, and go on to repeat it, without doing the slightest bit of fact checking.

First there was the attack by GOP operatives falsely claiming to have served with John Kerry and making untrue claims about his military record. These were easily discredited by the military record, and by those who actually served with John Kerry and are supporting him. Sevaral stories on this have already been posted here. Besides the main stories, check the comments as many more reports are included. Even Republicans from John McCain to Rudy Gulliani have condemned these dirty attacks. We are still waiting for Bush to do the same.

Another blogger posted a claim that Kerry has not released his military records. The slightest bit of fact checking would show that Kerry released his records weeks ago, as soon as these charges were raised against him. This is in contrast to George Bush, who has yet to produce any records which disprove the arguments that he went AWOL from the National Guard. Kerry's military records are posted at
http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_records.html
We are still waiting to see Bush's military records.

Another comment claims that John and Teresa Kerry own tons of overseas plants, considering this a contradiction of Kerry's campaign comments on outsourcing. Again, the slightest attempt at researching the ownership of Heinz would show that neither John nor Teressa have any ownership of the company. Nor do they have anything to do with running the business, which typically supports Republicans. Teresa runs the Heinz Philanthropic Foundation, which has nothing to do with running the company. Not that it matters, but even Heinz's ownership of overseas plants is irrelevant to Kerry's comments on outsourcing. Heinz is a multinational corporation which both produces and sells products in many countries, and is not an example of outsourcing American jobs.

Hearing the same unfounded attacks repeatedly tells something significant about the opposition. John Kerry is running a positive campaign based upon what he plans to do when he takes office. George Bush cannot run on his record. Therefore he must try to obtain support by spreading unfounded accusations against his opponents. It's not only this year--the same was true in his previous races. We have the false attacks above, and many more like them. Even though George Bush has repeatedly flip flopped on issue after issue since taking office, and John Kerry has been very consistent on the issues, Bush repeats claims of flip flopping. Bush knows that his gullible supporters will believe whatever they hear, regardless of how absurd the accusation.

Truth or Dare: Time for Bush to Answer on Iraq

John Kerry has taken up George Bush's challenge on Iraq. Now its time for George Bush to answer some questions.

From the AP today: Taking up a challenge from President Bush , whom he will face in the Nov. 2 election, the Massachusetts senator said: "I'll answer it directly. Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it is the right authority for a president to have but I would have used that authority effectively."

John Kerry did not "vote for the war" as Bush supporters claim. John Kerry voted for authorization to use force as a last resort provided that certain conditions were met. Kerry gave many caveats as to how force should be used at the time of the Iraq War Resolution, and Bush made the wrong decision in every case.

Here's some questions I would love to see John Kerry press George Bush for an answer, based upon the warnings Kerry gave to Bush in his Senate floor speech, and other public statements around the time of the Iraq War Resolution:

Why did you abruptly stop the diplomatic processes and rush to war, without evidence of imminent danger to our vital interests?

Why did you go to war without first obtaining meaningful cooperation from other countries as your father did?

Why did you go to war without a plan to win the peace?

Why did you go to war without consideration of the long term consequences of occupying an Arab country, and take steps to minimize such consequences (such as better use of diplomacy, and having other countries, including other Arab countries, involved if war was necessary)?

JK would be too polite to ask, but I'll throw in two more questions:

Rather than debate based the real differences of opinion over handling Iraq, why did you instead resort to repeatedly distorting Kerry's position on Iraq?

Why did you repeatedly lie about reasons for going into Iraq, including claiming WMD as a reason without allowing for completion of the inspections to determine if there really were WMD, and why make the false claims of a connection to al Qaeda even after the 9/11 Commission disputed your claims?

Anybody think Bush will really answer any of these questions?

Bush Tax Cuts Fail To Create Jobs

The Economic Policy Institure has realeased data showing that the Bush tax cuts have failed to create jobs as promised. From their report:

Job growth stalls in last two months, underlining failure of tax cuts as job creation strategy

"Job growth has stalled in the last two months. Payroll jobs increased by only 78,000 in June and a meager 32,000 in July, after rising 295,000 a month the previous three months. The Bush Administration called the tax cut package, which was passed in May 2003 and took effect in July 2003, its "Jobs and Growth Plan." The president's economics staff, the Council of Economic Advisers , projected that the plan would result in the creation of 5.5 million jobs by the end of 2004—306,000 new jobs each month starting in July 2003. The CEA projected that the economy would generate 228,000 jobs a month without a tax cut and 306,000 jobs a month with the tax cut. Thus, it projected that 3,978,000 jobs would be created over the last 13 months. In reality, since the tax cuts took effect, there are 2,565,000 fewer jobs than the administration projected would be created by enactment of its tax cuts.."

Pay suffers as displaced worker rate climbs to highest on record

"The latest survey also found that almost two-thirds of displaced workers had taken another job at lower pay (30%) or remained jobless (35%). "

Greatest sustained job loss since the Great Depression

"Since the recession began 40 months ago in March 2001, 1.2 million jobs have disappeared, representing a 0.9% contraction. To put this performance in historical perspective, the Bureau of Labor Statistics began collecting monthly jobs data in 1939 (at the end of the Great Depression). In every previous episode of recession and job decline since 1939, the number of jobs had fully recovered to above the pre-recession peak within 31 months of the start of the recession. Today's labor market would have 6.2 million more jobs if employment had grown by the same 3.7% average that characterized the last three recession cycles."

Rhetoric vs. Reality: The Bush Record

We are certain to hear a lot of promises from George Bush with regards to plans for the next four years, and claims about his accomplishments. The American Progress Action Fund has compiled a chart comparing Bush promisies to his actual record. The table shows numerous broken promises, and can be found at
http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=137673

West Michigan Shows Support For John Kerry and US Coast Guard

Last Monday we saw tremendous support for John Kerry with record attendance for a political rally in Grand Rapids. Today was the day of the annual Coast Guard Parade in Grand Haven Michigan--Coast Guard City, USA. In a week in which John Kerry has pointed out George Bush's failures in defending the country from terrorist threats, and others tried to distort Kerry's military record, it was fitting that a replica of John Kerry's swift boat was included in the Coast Guard Parade.

We knew it was a going to be a good day when driving into Grand Haven, which sits in the midst of Republican West Michigan. We passed numerous cars with Kerry bumper stickers and gave each other thumbs up (and the opposite to the rare cars with Bush stickers). While actually at the parade, we saw many people wearing Kerry stickers and badges, but other than for the county Republican Party float, not a single Bush badge.

Does Bush's Deficit Matter?

Here's some opinions on budget deficits:

"Of course, the real burden of the national debt will be borne by our children and children's children. This is precisely why Americans once held a deeply ingrained moral taboo against deficit spending. Budget deficits are the ultimate form of what our nation was founded to protect against: taxation without representation."

"The runaway national debt has much the same impact on our nation's financial condition as termites do on the structure of a house."

"A basic ingredient to achieving the American Dream is thrift. . . By hijacking our savings, the government hijacks our opportunity to experience the American Dream."

"To be perfectly honest, we would love to keep playing Santa Claus. We could pretend the debt doesn't exist; pass out $1.6 trillion of government largesse each year, and let the next Congress deal with the rising sea of red ink. . . Regretably, this is precisely the approach the President has chosen with his most recent budget plan. In what we regard as a spectular abdication of leadership, the President's plan to deal with the debt is to do--nothing. . . We dub this the Democrat' 'party-on" strategy. That strategy is to keep spending and borrowing, and worry about the red ink tomorrow, or next week, or next year, or next decade."

"Whether a balanced budget amendment is approved this year or not, we regard the elimination of the deficit as our central mission. We recently asked Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan what he thought would be the impact of balancing the budget. He told us: 'I think real incomes would significantly improve. . .Americans would look forward to their children doing better than they.' In other words, it would be a major step toward restoring the American Dream."

"We acknowledge that the job of balancing the budget is going to be the most difficult job for Congress to accomplilsh in decades. But in partnership with the American people, it will get done. This commitment we owe not just to our children, but equally to the generations of Americans who came before us and helped build this free and prosperous nation."

"Isn't it time we pushed corporate American off the federal dole? Corporate subsudies and handouts have become pervasive in the federal budget."

Above quotes from Restoring the Dream, The Bold New Plan by House Republicans, copyright 1995 by the Republican National Committee. Similar views are present in the Contract with America.

Could the GOP view on deficits be a (pardon the f-word) flip-flop?

FactCheck.org Investigates Attacks on Kerry's Military Record

The attempts to distort John Kerry's war record have been a major news story for the last couple of day, but have most likely backfired against the Republicans who have bankrolled this attack. Rather than raising questions about John Kerry--clearly a legitimate war hero--the event is raising more questions about the ethics and validity of the Republican attack machine.

Factcheck.org has issued a report on their investigations of these attacks. Here is how they summarized their findings:

"A group funded by the biggest Republican campaign donor in Texas began running an attack ad Aug. 5 in which former Swift Boat veterans claim Kerry lied to get one of his two decorations for bravery and two of his three purple hearts. However, one of the veterans who appears in the ad has already recanted his principal accusation against Kerry, in an interview with the Boston Globe .

"Some other veterans who accuse Kerry are contradicted by Kerry's former crewmen. One of the accusers says he was on another boat "a few yards" away during the incident which won Kerry the Bronze Star, but the former Army lieutenant whom Kerry plucked from the water that day backs Kerry's account."

The full report is available on their web site

Additional text from their report is in the comments section.

Kerry to Announce Energy Plan to Wean US Off Foreign Oil (USA TODAY)

Kerry to announce 10-year, $30 billion energy plan
By Jill Lawrence, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry visits a family farm near Kansas City, Mo., today to announce a 10-year, $30 billion plan to wean America off foreign oil.

The plan sets two national goals for 2020: that 20% of electricity and 20% of motor fuel come from alternative sources such as wind, solar, ethanol and biodiesel fuel.

"What we cannot afford is four more years of an energy policy that leaves our security and our prosperity in the hands of foreign governments who don't share our values," Kerry said in remarks prepared for delivery. He said his plan would help the country control its destiny, create jobs and make sure no U.S. soldier has to go to war over Middle East oil.

Kerry's plan would:

• Commit $5 billion over the 10-year program to a "clean fuels partnership" among government, agriculture and industry to encourage and conduct research into fuels made from corn, soybeans, agricultural waste and other sources. Another $5 billion would create jobs in clean energy technology.

• Devote $10 billion to research into non-polluting ways to burn coal and building such "clean coal" facilities.

• Provide $10 billion to help auto plants adapt to build high-tech "cars of the future" and give consumers a $5,000 tax incentive to buy energy-efficient vehicles.

Kerry aides said the costs would be offset by new fuel efficiency standards for federal buildings and vehicles, and reinstatement of a tax on oil companies to pay to clean up polluted sites.

Other Kerry proposals include streamlining 300 state and local regulations on gas prices and stabilizing the power grid. The grid failed in a spectacular blackout last Aug. 14; improvements have languished in an energy bill stalled by a provision to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. Kerry helped lead opposition to the drilling.

Full article in the comments

Are Terrorist Alerts Politically Motivated?

There's been widespread suspicion that George Bush has been using fear of terrorism to promote his Presidential campaign, as he hopes the voters do realize how poor a job he has done in defending the country against terrorism. One blogger prepared a chart comparing Bush's approval numbers to the timing of terrorist alerts. Here are his findings:

- Whenever his ratings dip, there's a new terror alert.

- Every terror alert is followed by a slight uptick of Bush approval ratings.

- Whenever there are many unfavorable headlines, there's another alert or announcement (distraction effect).

- As we approach the 2004 elections, the number and frequency of terror alerts keeps growing, to the point that they collapse in the graphic. At the same time, Bush ratings are lower than ever.

Bush Turns Wrong Corner On The Economy

Results do matter, and they aren't helping George Bush's reelection chances. Today's unemployment numbers provide further evidence of the failure of Bush's economic policies, as previous predictions have had to be scaled back.

Even the Wall Street Journal realizes how bad this is for Bush--note the last line of the first paragraph below. This is from the WSJ Online's Afternoon Report:

August 6, 2004 -- 12:43 p.m. EDT

U.S. Job Growth
Slows to a Crawl

By JOSEPH SCHUMAN
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE


Today's employment report from the U.S. Labor Department is bad news any way you look at it. The sharp deceleration of job growth in July is symptomatic of an economy that seems to have burned off the pent-up need for new workers that generated a hiring spree earlier this year, and it doesn't bode well for the consumer spending needed to fuel economic growth moving forward. It will also make it harder for President Bush to campaign on the notion that the U.S. economy has turned the corner.

Nonfarm business payrolls grew by just 32,000 last month, the government said. That's the smallest increase since December. It's well below the level of roughly 150,000 that many economists consider necessary for the work force to absorb new people entering the labor pool, let alone the more than one million who lost their jobs since the 2001 recession and haven't yet been rehired. Moreover, the government said June's weak job creation was more feeble than previously thought. It revised June payroll growth down to 78,000 from 112,000, and revised May job growth down to 208,000 from 235,000. The separate, less-regarded household survey showed a better picture: an unemployment rate that edged lower to 5.5% from 5.6% in June, and a labor-force participation rate that rose to 66.2% from 66%. But the household survey also found that the number of discouraged workers -- defined as those who aren't looking for a job because they believe none are available -- shot up to 504,000 from just 478,000 in June, near a 10-year high.

Fake Swift Vote Vet Attacks Discredited

The attacks on John Kerry's military record by the GOP-funded group of veterans have been further discredited now that Leiutenant Commander George Elliott has retracted the allegations that John Kerry did not deserve the Silver Star. The report from the Boston Globe is below. Also see the collection of articles on this smear campaign in the comments to the entry on McCain Condemns Anti-Kerry Ad.

Veteran retracts criticism of Kerry

By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | August 6, 2004

WASHINGTON -- A week after Senator John F. Kerry heralded his wartime experience by surrounding himself at the Democratic convention with his Vietnam ''Band of Brothers," a separate group of veterans has launched a television ad campaign and a book that questions the basis for some of Kerry's combat medals.

But yesterday, a key figure in the anti-Kerry campaign, Kerry's former commanding officer, backed off one of the key contentions. Lieutenant Commander George Elliott said in an interview that he had made a ''terrible mistake" in signing an affidavit that suggests Kerry did not deserve the Silver Star -- one of the main allegations in the book. The affidavit was given to The Boston Globe by the anti-Kerry group to justify assertions in their ad and book.

Elliott is quoted as saying that Kerry ''lied about what occurred in Vietnam . . . for example, in connection with his Silver Star, I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back."

The statement refers to an episode in which Kerry killed a Viet Cong soldier who had been carrying a rocket launcher, part of a chain of events that formed the basis of his Silver Star. Over time, some Kerry critics have questioned whether the soldier posed a danger to Kerry's crew. Crew members have said Kerry's actions saved their lives.

Yesterday, reached at his home, Elliott said he regretted signing the affidavit and said he still thinks Kerry deserved the Silver Star.

''I still don't think he shot the guy in the back," Elliott said. ''It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here."

Elliott said he was no under personal or political pressure to sign the statement, but he did feel ''time pressure" from those involved in the book. ''That's no excuse," Elliott said. ''I knew it was wrong . . . In a hurry I signed it and faxed it back. That was a mistake."

The affidavit also contradicted earlier statements by Elliott, who came to Boston during Kerry's 1996 Senate campaign to defend Kerry on similar charges, saying that Kerry acted properly and deserved the Silver Star.

The book, ''Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry," is to be published next week. Yesterday it reached number one on the bestseller list on Amazon.com, based on advance orders, in part because of publicity about it on the Drudge Report.

The full Boston Globe story is posted in the comments.

McCain Condemns Anti-Kerry Ad

McCain Condemns Anti-Kerry Ad

By RON FOURNIER, AP Political Writer

WASHINGTON - Republican Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), a former prisoner of war in Vietnam, called an ad criticizing John Kerry's military service "dishonest and dishonorable" and urged the White House on Thursday to condemn it as well.

The White House declined.

"It was the same kind of deal that was pulled on me," McCain said in an interview with The Associated Press, comparing the anti-Kerry ad to tactics in his bitter Republican primary fight with President Bush.

The 60-second ad features Vietnam veterans who accuse the Democratic presidential nominee of lying about his decorated Vietnam War record and betraying his fellow veterans by later opposing the conflict.

"When the chips were down, you could not count on John Kerry," one of the veterans, Larry Thurlow, says in the ad. Thurlow didn't serve on Kerry's swiftboat, but says he witnessed the events that led to Kerry winning a Bronze Star and the last of his three Purple Hearts. Kerry's crewmates support the candidate and call him a hero.

The ad, scheduled to air in a few markets in Ohio, West Virginia and Wisconsin, was produced by Stevens, Reed, Curcio and Potham, the same team that produced McCain's ads in 2000.

"I wish they hadn't done it," McCain said of his former advisers. "I don't know if they knew all the facts."

Asked if the White House knew about the ad or helped find financing for it, McCain said, "I hope not, but I don't know. But I think the Bush campaign should specifically condemn the ad."

McCain, chairman of Bush's campaign in Arizona, later said the Bush campaign has denied any involvement and added, "I can't believe the president would pull such a cheap stunt."

White House spokesman Scott McClellan declined to condemn the ad. He did denounce the proliferation of spending by independent groups, such as the anti-Kerry veterans organization, that are playing on both sides of the political fence.

"The president thought he got rid of this unregulated soft money when he signed the bipartisan campaign finance reform into law," McClellan said. A chief sponsor of that bill, which Bush initially opposed, was McCain.

In 2000, Bush's supporters sponsored a rumor campaign against McCain in the South Carolina primary, helping Bush win the primary and the nomination. McCain's supporters have never forgiven the Bush team.

McCain said that's all in the past to him, but he's speaking out against the anti-Kerry ad because "it reopens all the old wounds of the Vietnam War, which I spent the last 35 years trying to heal."

"I deplore this kind of politics," McCain said. "I think the ad is dishonest and dishonorable. As it is, none of these individuals served on the boat (Kerry) commanded. Many of his crew have testified to his courage under fire. I think John Kerry served honorably in Vietnam. I think George Bush served honorably in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War."

Retired Adm. Roy Hoffmann, head of the Swift Boat group, said they respected McCain's "right to express his opinion and we hope he extends to us the same respect and courtesy, particularly since we served with John Kerry, we knew him well and Sen. McCain did not."

McCain himself spent more than five years in a Vietnam prisoner of war camp. A bona fide war hero, McCain, like Kerry, used his war record as the foundation of his presidential campaign.

The Kerry campaign has denounced the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, saying none of the men in the ad served on the boat that Kerry commanded. Three veterans on Kerry's boat that day — Jim Rassmann, who says Kerry saved his life, Gene Thorson and Del Sandusky, the driver on Kerry's boat, said the group was lying.

They say Kerry was injured, and Rassmann called the group's account "pure fabrication."

The general counsel for the Kerry campaign and the Democratic National Committee (news - web sites) sent television stations a letter asking them not to run the ad because it is "an inflammatory, outrageous lie" by people purporting to have served with Kerry.

Hoffmann said none of the 13 veterans in the commercial served on Kerry's boat but rather were in other swiftboats within 50 yards of Kerry's. The group claims that there was no gunfire on the day Kerry pulled Rassmann from a muddy river in the Mekong Delta and that Kerry's arm was not wounded, as he has claimed.



See the comments for additional articles

Bush Reveals Real Agenda?

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

--George Bush at signing of defense bill, August 5, 2004

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=544&ncid=703&e=6&u=/ap/20040805/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bushism

WSJ Shows Bias in Report on Grand Rapids Town Hall Meeting

Leave it to the Walll Street Journal, well known for promoting the Republican agenda, to report inaccurately on the town hall meeting I attended in Grand Rapids on Monday:
(http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109166315030783420,00.html). While I pointed out that many doctors are asking about John Kerry's health care proposals and asked Senator Kerry to discuss this issue, the WSJ twists this to report that "At a recent town-hall meeting in Grand Rapids, Mich., a doctor told John Kerry that many physicians oppose the Democratic presidential candidate because they think he wouldn't curb costly medical-malpractice lawsuits." The article also does a poor job of reporting on Senator Kerry's response, which was strongly in support of resolving the malpractice problem, and goes on to repeat the usual GOP talking points. The question was clearly posed as coming from members of Doctors for Kerry, and not as a criticism of Kerry's positions, as claimed by the Wall Street Journal.

It took a bit of will power in my response to refrain from pointing out the inaccuracies in the article, believing that chances for publication would be better if I limited it to discussing physician support for John Kerry. In discussing this with campaign headquarters, it was pointed out that "even if the WSJ doesn't print your letter, you at least were able to raise the issue in a way that created a small ripple at the national level. I suspect Kerry and Edwards will be talking more about medical-malpractice reform as the fall goes on, since it's an important part of their health care plan."

Following is the letter I sent to the Wall Street Journal in response to this article:

Letters to the Editor
The Wall Street Journal
200 Liberty Street
New York, N.Y. 10281

August 5, 2004


To the editor:

I had the opportunity to ask Senator John Kerry about his proposals for malpractice reform at a town hall meeting in Grand Rapids, Michigan on Monday, as reported by Robert Greenberger in today's Wall Street Journal. While there are some doctors who oppose John Kerry due to misconceptions about John Edwards' record on malpractice, many physicians do realize that the health care proposals from Senators Kerry and Edwards are preferable to those of President Bush, including their proposals on malpractice reform.

When Democrats have voted against Republican proposals on malpractice reform, it has been because the proposals would be ineffective, and would unfairly penalize those who have suffered legitimate damages. The Congressional Budget Office has projected that the caps proposed by President Bush would reduce malpractice premiums by less than half of one percent (0.4%), which would not offer doctors any meaningful relief.

I was pleased that my question at the Grand Rapids town hall meeting gave Senator Kerry the opportunity to discuss his proposed solutions for the malpractice crisis. While President Bush's plans offer little help for physicians, I am for more impressed with John Kerry's proposals These include encouraging arbitration rather than use of the legal system, elimination of most punitive awards (which are responsible for many of the large malpractice settlements), and efforts to reduce frivolous suits. When a nonpartisan group evaluated the health care proposals of all Presidential candidates last year for The National Journal, John Kerry's proposals on malpractice reform out scored those of George Bush in terms of reducing the malpractice burden on physicians.

John Edwards has also been a strong proponent of malpractice reform while in public life, including proposing a "three strikes and you're out" policy to prevent attorneys from repeatedly filing frivolous suits. While political opponents have tried to use Edwards' career as a trial lawyer against him, reviews of his cases by medical experts have shown that he took care to only pursue cases with real and significant damages.

John Edwards has also pointed out the role of malpractice insurance carriers in the malpractice crisis, as premiums often rise independent of actual costs to defend suits and pay on claims. As John Kerry noted at the town hall meeting in Grand Rapids, John Edwards can be valuable in assisting Kerry in devising a fair and meaningful solution to the malpractice crisis. Just as only Nixon could go to China, perhaps John Edwards is in the best position to devise a fair solution which could be sold to both trial lawyers and physicians.

Republicans in Denial on Rally Attendance

The Republicans must be really afraid of the numbers of people turning out to see John Kerry on his Believe in America tour.

First they tired to give low estimates of attendance, but this failed when the news media verified initial predictions, such as with an AP report of up to 25,000 attending the rally in Grand Rapids on Monday:

“City spokeswoman Annette Guilfoyle said police estimated that 20,000 to 25,000 people attended the Kerry event, which would make it one of Grand Rapids’ largest political rallies in recent memory. Hundreds waved blue and white ‘Help is on the way’ signs. About 4,000 people turned out to see Bush, who spoke Friday only a few blocks away in a filled-to-capacity auditorium at the downtown community college.” [Associated Press, 8/2/04]

Their next attempt was to spread claims that people were being bussed in. (One example of this is seen in one of the comments to my post below, and the same attack has come up elsewhere. At least we must give the GOP credit for getting out their talking points).

When driving to Grand Rapids for the rally, I saw many cars with Kerry bumper stickers, and the area parking lots were packed with cars. . No busses were seen dropping people off. After the rally, I saw people heading off to their cars. Again, no busses were seen picking up those in attendance.

Kerry Breaks Records At Grand Rapids Rally

John and Teresa Kerry visited Grand Rapids, Michigan, home of Gerald Ford and a strong Republican area. By campaigning in such GOP strong holds, Kerry is showing his strength in going after previous GOP voters. Following the town hall meeting with fire fighters and other supporters, Kerry held a public rally in downtown Grand Rapids. Estimates of the crowd size were as high as 20,000 with many more people on nearby streets outside of the rally. For comparison, when George Bush came to Grand Rapids a few days ago, only around 4000 came to see him. Al Gore had about 10,000 come out to see him in Grand Rapids in 2000, suggesting increased interest in the Democratic candidate this year.

Besides discussing the proposals readers of this blog are most likely already familiar with, John Kerry announced today the publication of his new book detailing his proposals, "Our Plan for America: Stronger at home, Respected in the World."

Here's some pictures of the Grand Rapids Rally:

John Kerry Visits Grand Rapids Fire Station

John Kerry held a private town hall meeting at the Kalamazoo Street Fire Station in Grand Rapids, Michigan on Monday morning. Kerry discussed the importance of first responders, and the failure of George Bush to provide adequate funding in the war on terrorism. He later went on to discuss his other proposals. The question and answer session started out with a young girl asking John Kerry how he could help her mother, who was laid off after twenty-five years. This provided an excellent opportunity for Senator Kerry to show the importance of his economic proposals.

During the question and answer session, I had the opportunity, on the behalf of Doctors for Kerry, to ask about John Kerry's proposals for solving the malpractice crisis. John Kerry showed he understood the need to take action, and used the analogy of how "only Nixon could go to China" to show how John Edwards would be helpful. I happened to have used the same analogy in an interview in American Medical News also published today
(http://www.doctorsandnursesforkerry.org/edwards.htm).

Note followup post on how the Wall Street Journal distorted the news with regards to this event.