George W. Bush has lost more than one million American jobs since taking office. If the Bush economy keeps on going like it's going, George W. Bush will be the first man since Republican Herbert Hoover in 1933 under whose watch the total employment rolls in the country actually shrank. (Source: New York Times July 3, 2003)

The Voice of Experience cries "Horror!" Cele Keeper writes: "He's the worst President with the most dangerous administration in my memory and I'm 76 years old. There were a few lousy ones before my memory kicked in, but W takes the Horror Award".

Although he couldn't wait to spend hundreds of American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars to halt a fictitious WMD threat, George W. Bush took pains to prevent safer arsenic standards for our drinking water from being enacted. Bush's "radical" opponent in this instance? The National Academy of Sciences, which had endorsed the standards. (Source: The Nation September 25, 2003)

Oh, by golly! How could we forget Bush's reliance on slick, yet strangely ham-handed public relations professionals to mislead the American public about his trade policies? We're talking about BoxGate, that photo-opportunity at which Bush's aides slapped "Made in U.S.A." labels on boxes that were really stamped "Made in China", created a fake backdrop of more boxes, and relied on an audience of workers who were forced to attend the event by their bosses. How's that for honesty and honor in the White House? (Source: Washington Post January 29, 2003)

While presidential candidate Howard Dean gathered more than a hundred thousand Americans to participate in his neighborhood meetups, George W. Bush couldn't even muster enough grassroots support to get more than 12 Americans to sign up for a meetup on his birthday! Without popular support, how can Bush make decisions that are in line with the needs of everyday Americans?

We agree with Al Franken, and we know better than to believe Republicans' lies and the lying liars who tell them. That goes for Fox News as well, even if they sue us. There are so many of Bush's lies to document that we'll take the time to spell them out, one by one.

It's not just that Bush lies; it's what he lies about. Clinton's Lies were about consensual private sex; Bush Lies about consequential policy. Bush's lies are much more serious because he lies to get people to go along with his political agenda. When Bush lies, lives are at stake.

"He wasn't really elected -- he was appointed by the Supreme Court." These words sent in by a resident of central Florida sum up an oldie but a goodie. If you dig through the fine print of the corporate media, ignoring broad proclamations and admonishments that we should move on instead of sifting through real reporting of facts (silly things, those), you'll find this inescapable truth: If all votes had been counted, Gore would have not only won the popular vote -- he would have won Florida and hence the electoral vote, too. It's too late to cry over spilled chads, but it's not too late to make sure Bush doesn't slide into office again. (Source: Newsday November 15, 2001)

If we get rid of Bush, we get rid of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, and dozens more of his lousy appointees. Bonus!

It's worth it to get out and vote just so we won't have to look at his stupid little self-satisfied smirk on the news every night.

While we're at it, we won't have to put up with Rumsfeld's superior Ward-Cleaver-on-Acid smirk, either.

Couldn't we use a first lady with a backbone and a voice again? Theresa Heinz Kerry calls it like she sees it. Laura Bush remains largely silent and dresses like June Cleaver. Who's the better role model for American girls?

It's hasta la vista Bush or buenos dias police state--you decide Under Bush, terror "suspects" have been imprisoned indefinitely without due process of law. In 2004, let's show him that nobody is above the law.

Are you better off than you were four years ago? We didn't think so.

A president should help govern the country - not try to rule the world.

A vote against Bush will help the Dixie Chicks feel better about being from Texas.

A vote to dump Bush will let Americans travel in Europe again without fear of being snickered at.

A vote to get rid of Bush will help the French to visit America in the name of cultural exchange without fear of being pelted by rotten vegetables.

One term was good enough for the father, and it's good enough for the son.

In a democracy, the president derives power from the consent of the governed. When he lies to obtain that consent, Bush has stolen power from the people. Let's take that power back in 2004.

Moderates everywhere know that balance is a good thing in life and in politics. The American federal government is out of balance right now, with the legislative, judicial and executive branches dominated by right-wing extremists. We need someone in the White House to act as a check on the nuttiest elements of the Congress and Supreme Court.

As the likes of Fox News, MSNBC, the Wall Street Journal and US News and World Report use their corporate sponsors' deep pockets to promulgate their increasingly extremist bias in reporting, we need a moderate voice from the bully pulpit of the Oval Office to balance them out. Bush is not the man to do it.

We have to get rid of Bush before the French start referring to cowboy hats as "honest hats" and to Texas barbecue as "truth barbecue."

When Bush asked America's youth to put their lives on the line in Afghanistan and Iraq, he forgot to ask his own daughters Jenna and Barbara.

We need a president who will crack down on white collar criminals and corporate welfare bums, and Bush won't do it.

Should we be reduced to guessing whether a president is telling the truth this time?

Aside from two wars and a recession, what has Bush given us?

Wouldn't you just love to hear his concession speech?

Every man needs an episode of disappointment in his life to gain wisdom and empathy. George has been protected from the negative consequences of his actions by his parents, his party and the Supreme Court. Let's give George a disappointment they can't fix in 2004. It'll build character.

Because on the day that Hamas and Israel declared that the "road map to peace" was falling apart, Bush responded by immediately flying out to Washington State, where he took credit for improved salmon runs. (Source: Christian Science Monitor September 9, 2003)

'Cause all my exes live in Texas: ex-presidents, that is.

If you had an employee who agreed to take a few hundred dollars less in salary, then borrowed several thousand dollars that you would have to pay back, would you think that was a good deal? That's what Bush is doing with his tax cuts and record deficits, and it's a raw deal.

Because shaving and painful waxing procedures are not the only ways to get rid of Bush.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Because Dick Cheney still won't tell us who he met with in 2001 to discuss U.S. energy policy. Whoever it was, it didn't prevent thousands of shareholders from going broke in the Enron collapse, or millions of people from losing power in the worst blackout in decades. (Source: New York Times January 3, 2003)

Just after 9/11, the Bush administration pressured the EPA into declaring that the air in New York was safe. It wasn't. Then they tried to convince us that Iraq posed an imminent terrorist threat to the U.S. There's no evidence it did. First they lied and told us we were safe, then they lied and told us we were in danger. (Source: New York Newsday August 23, 2003)

Half the time Bush can't even read his cue cards without stumbling over the big words. This indicates an unfamiliarity with such words, and is a symptom of his lack of intellectual engagement. We cannot afford to have such a disengaged man in the seat of the presidency.

Bush's friends are already rich enough.

Somewhere out there, someone else is more honest, smarter, and cares more.

Bush is always trying to scare us about everything except himself and his creepy team of advisors.

Bush's environmental policy of preventing wildfires by cutting down our national forests makes about as much sense as toasting sobriety with a glass of champagne.

If we're winning the war on terrorism, why do we keep going up to orange alert?

Kicking off Iraq's program of reconstruction by blasting radioactive ammunition all over the place was a pretty dim idea.

"No child" has been "left behind," but their schools have been left without funding. $18 billion was scheduled in Mr. Bush's own legislation for the 2003-2004 fiscal year, but that year's budget only provided $12 billion. (Source: New York Times 8/26/03)

The Bush administration's habit of systematically distorting intelligence reports for selfish political reasons does not make us safer.

Just for the heck of it, let's try electing a smart president. We certainly can find a smarter one out there.

If Bush keeps invading countries at this rate, our armed forces will be occupying half a dozen conquered nations by the time he leaves office in 2009.

Nobody that calls himself "the education president" should take so much pride in his ignorance.

If Bush likes wars so much, why didn't he go to Vietnam?

The American people are not as arrogant and ignorant as Mr. Bush. Mr. Bush does not represent us in person, and he should not represent us politically.

Wasn't that whole thing with England a couple hundred years ago about overthrowing hereditary monarchy? Dethrone King George II!

It's time to restore integrity to the White House. High time.

As Jon Lovitz pointed out in 2000, George W. Bush hired Dick Cheney to find him the best vice president out there. Dick Cheney's report back to Bush: "I'm the best guy I could find." Bush bought it! Can we afford to have such a gullible president?

George W. Bush has authorized the American ruler of Iraq, Paul Bremer, to hire Saddam Hussein's Mukhabarat government agents. The Mukhabarat agents were infamous for their brutal repression of the Iraqi people during the rule of the Baath Party, administering a reign or terror that helped keep Saddam Hussein in power. Now, instead of prosecuting these goons as the criminals that they are, George W. Bush has hired them to help him put the people of Iraq in their place again. Can America trust a President who is willing to use the most cruel torturers available to keep himself in power? (That's a rhetorical question.) (Source: Reuters August 24, 2003)

George W. Bush's handlers never let him out in front of an audience without a script. Even in the handful of "news conferences" that Bush has mustered, the order and source of questions has been pre-determined by his advisors. The appearance of Bush's sponteneity, like most other aspects of Bush's presidential behavior, is micro-managed by others. Don't believe us on this: believe his own spokesman, Ari Fleischer, who admitted to setting out an assigned list of reporters for Bush. My momma calls someone like that a "puppet" -- when the strings fit.... (Source: White House Press Briefing March 7, 2003)

On the eve of war against the nation of Iraq, a war that has cost tens of thousands of lives, George W. Bush pumped his fist for the camera, smiled, and said "I Feel Good!". American news media edited this footage out. (Source: Chicago Tribune March 20, 2003)

Under Bush, the Republican Party continues to encourage its members to engage in plagiarism. The Republican National Committee has planted hundreds of letters in newspapers across the country that are actually written by staffers but are signed under the names of regular local folks, perpetuating the illusion that Bush has widespread grassroots support.

When George W. Bush entered office in 2001, he quickly moved to abandon Clinton's efforts at brokering peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Instead, the Bush Administration called for the bickering sides to sort things out "on their own." Fighting almost immediately escalated and has been going on ever since. (Source: New York Times 2/9/01)

While American soldiers put their lives on the line to purse the Bush-Rumsfeld policy of pre-emptive war, the Bush administration tried to cut those same soldiers' pay and benefits. (Source: Stars and Stripes August 23, 2003)

Bush has decided to allow thousands of the nation's dirtiest coal-belching industrial plants to renovate their facilities without upgrading to cleaner, more environmentally-friendly equipment, as previous EPA regulations require. (Source: Washington Post August 23, 2003)

George W. Bush said in 2000 that Jesus Christ is his favorite political philosopher. Last time we checked, Jesus said "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." That, and "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Earth." God, Earth, Peacemakers, the Meek. Little details like that. Apparently, W. doesn't read the Bible much.

Breaking the only promise to protect the environment he made during his 2000 campaign, Bush decided not to do anything to reduce the level of carbon dioxide emissions. Honor and integrity, indeed. (Source: The Independent March 15, 2001)

Month-long vacations for Bush at his dude ranch while millions endure indefinite vacations from the workforce? That's not just rude: it's wrong.

The man who sits in the Oval Office sets goals that just don't match with what's going on in the real world. In August 2003, Bush says that "We've got a year and a while during my first term to make the world a more peaceful place, and we'll do it." From a man who said his war would rid the world of Evildoers, this is not too surprising. But surprising or not, it betrays a dangerous lack of connection with reality. He's had his chance. He blew it. (Source: The Guardian August 25, 2003)

Hundreds of Americans die after George W. Bush says "Bring them on!" to Iraqi attacks against Americans. In the ensuing months, hundreds more follow a course to the grave. (Sources: Associated Press July 2, 2003 and Iraq War Casualty Count at

In Fall of 2002, George W. Bush says "I am not willing to risk one American life." By the end of August 2003, 136 Americans are dead. What kind of American life was he referring to? Apparently not the lives of soldiers. And as we all know now, that was just the beginning. (Source: Cincinnati Enquirer October 8, 2002 and and Iraq War Casualty Count at

George W. Bush continues to refuse to express any apology, regret, respect toward, or even mention of the tens of thousands of Iraqis who are not Saddam Hussein and who are yet, oddly enough, dead in the war in Iraq.

$1 Billion less for AIDS than promised. George W. Bush hugged AIDS babies in Africa in the Summer of 2003 and promised $3 billion a year for 5 years. Later that summer, his budget only asked for $2 billion (Source: New York Times, August 26, 2003).

Bush Trashes the National Parks. Nearly 130 members of Concerned National Park Service Retirees say "the founders of the Park Service must be turning in their graves at what is happening to the Service and the parks" under the watch of the Bush Administration. The group decries Bush's campaign of drilling, pollution and privatization. (Source: Campaign to Protect America's Lands).

Deficit Update! The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office's record-breaking deficit estimate for 2003: $401 Billion. (Source: New York Times August 26, 2003)

Deficit Update, Yet Again: The CBO's record-breaking deficit estimate for next year: nearly half a Trillion dollars. A hundred billion here on my kid's back, a hundred billion there on your kid's back, and gee, it all starts to add up. (Source: New York Times August 27, 2003)

George W. Bush is the head of the Republican Party. Absolutely none of the Republican members of the Senate or House of Representatives are Black. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. When was the last time you heard George W. Bush address this disturbing fact?

Forensic technicians have had to re-calibrate their lie-detectors to measure the magnitude of Bush's deceptions of the American people.

At the non-professional level, Bull Shit Detectors long employed by residents of Sunnyvale, Montana to ferret out cheating lovers, falsified report cards and unfortunate drinking habits will have to be completely thrown out and replaced, their sensors overwhelmed by White House fibs coming over the radio.

Just like in the stories our parents told us, we're no longer in the mood to listen to the boy who cried "Code Orange"!

We have no respect for an American President who is sending other Americans to fight and die in his place just in order to enhance his own tough-guy image.

In August 2003, 10,000 people took to the street to rally for a Bush alternative, Howard Dean, in New York City. Another 10,000 did the same in Seattle. Such large displays, previously unheard of more than a year before the election, demonstrate the depth of American discontent George W. Bush has inspired. (Source: New York Newsday August 28, 2003)

In August 2003, over at Howard Dean's website, they heard that George W. Bush had gathered another million dollars for his campaign hosting a dinner for 500 people who each gave the maximum legally allowed: $2,000. The Dean camp decided to try and match that $1,000,000. In order to raise the $1,003,620.00 the campaign had mustered two hours before their deadline ended, 17,115 people put in their donations. Doing the math, that means that the average donation was $58.64.

Dean motivated thirty-four times as many people into contributing as Bush did. This indicates that Dean's base of strong supporters was significantly wider than Bush's. And the sort of folks who supported Dean are middle-class folks: those who can spare a few bucks, but not those with money to burn. Had the 17,115 Dean donors been able to give their maximum of $2,000, Dean would have raised a whopping $34,230,000.

Bush isn't going for a large number of supporters like Dean did; Bush would rather have the backing of a few people with deep pockets. That perfectly illustrates the difference between Bush and the rest of us.

Potemkin Village, here we come. When George W. Bush travels out to see "The People," he makes sure that no people who oppose him are nearby. Bush's Secret Service agents search the crowd for dissenting signs and corral those individuals to "free speech zones" which are typically out of sight of the President, rendering the dissent purposeless. Members of the crowd who support the President get to stay. (Sources: St. Petersburg Times 10/13/2002, St. Petersburg Times 11/3/2002, Fort Worth Star-Telegram 8/18/2002)

In his administration, Bill Clinton prohibited the paying of cash bonuses to political appointees in the executive branch of the U.S. government. The Bush administration reinstated cash bonuses for political appointees. (Source: New York Times 12/4/2002).

Read my lips: No record deficits! There is an alternative to Bush's record-deficit ways. Actually, there are a number of alternatives, articulated by a number of Democratic presidential contenders. All of the major Democratic presidential contenders not only criticized Bush's debt-ridden ways, but also took the positive step of articulating plans to get out of this burgeoning mess. Bush's plan: do nothing and hope for the best.

Bush's idea of a "war on evil" is simplistic, naive, and downright apocalyptic.

Why boot Bush? So that government of Enron, by Halliburton, and for Bechtel shall not be established upon this earth.

My children haven't even been born yet, and already George Bush is borrowing money from them.

We'll never prevail against terrorists who hide in the shadows with a president who only sees the world in black and white.

If George Bush leaves Washington, D.C. at 9:30 am on a train to Crawford, Texas going at 50 miles per hour and never comes back, calculate just how cool that would be.

We need to win Florida by a substantial margin this time, so it doesn't have to change its state motto to "Florida: The Dangling Chad State."

All that drinking and drug abuse back in the 70's really seems to have put the zap on Bush's head.

If we're fighting a war against evil, why isn't Ken Lay being held at Guantanamo?

It's going to take years to get back the constitutional rights we've lost under Bush. The sooner we get started, the better.

While our soldiers went to Afghanistan and Iraq to fight for freedom, Bush is back here taking freedom away.

If wars, recessions and lies are your thing, by all means stay the course. Otherwise, isn't it time for a change?

I don't care what Bush or the Republican pundits say, if the Germans are reluctant to go to war, that's fine with me.

Corporate welfare erodes the moral fiber of the rich.

I'm "shocked and awed" at just how poorly "Operation Iraqi Freedom" is going.

Our foreign policy could do with a little more negotiation and a little less assassination.

I believe in the rich! They are intelligent, resourceful people who can make it without another Bush handout.

During Iraq War II, defense contractors fired journalist Peter Arnett for telling the truth on Iraqi television. But you'd better believe those same contractors will put up millions for Bush's re-election campaign, even though Bush lied on American television. (Source: The Guardian March 31, 2003)

While unsuccessfully trying to convince members of the United Nations Security Council to back a war with Iraq, the Bush Administration's National Security Agency bugged the phones of Security Council delegation offices. Amazingly enough, when word leaked out, Security Council nations got angry! Wonder why. (Source: The Observer 3/2/2003)

Because if I have to spend four more years listening to the man say "Nookyular," I'll probably tear my head off.

Frat boys already get to be presidents of their universities' student councils. Isn't that enough?

Intelligence agencies are investigating whether the Bush administration was duped by Iraqi defectors into believing bogus claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. We can't trust the Bush administration to tell the difference between truth and lies. (Source: Los Angeles Times August 28, 2003)

Nobody married to a librarian should be that stupid.

"Bring 'em on!" is not a line fit for a professed Christian (or President of the United States, for that matter)

If we give Bush the boot in 2004, perhaps in time Canadians and Europeans will want to visit our country again. Our tourism industry is suffering enough already -- who wants to pay money to see an ugly American in the White House?

Susan from Asheville, NC writes us with this reason: "Because Bush #2 is the worst President in the history of the United States, period." Susan can't be dismissed as a "left coast" Californite or "East Coast" effete. No, she's a resident of state that went for Bush, living in the mountains, surrounded by rural Southern towns. It's sad that Bush and his Republican Party flacks love to dismiss people because of where they're from. But Susan belies even that tired line. People from all over the country, even what Republicans call "real America," are getting just plain fed up with Bush's performance.

Because the Bushies are annoyingly self-satisfied while they wreak havoc on the Iraqis.

As the protest signs read across the world, there is a village in Texas missing an idiot. Let's help that village out and send him home. We can even give him directions. (Source: South Africa's News 24 June 10, 2003)

Bush has the ring and Frodo wants it back....

Carol Moseley Braun didn't grow up with a silver spoon in her mouth, but she has built successful careers in politics, academics and business. George W. Bush was born into the Lucky Sperm Club, has repeatedly been given the assistance of his daddy's name and the money of his daddy's pals, but still can't get it right, running multiple businesses and now the United States of America into the ground. Carol Moseley Braun would have made a better President than George W. Bush.

Dennis Kucinich has a plan to give every American access to medical care. George W. Bush has neither a plan nor a clue. Dennis Kucinich would make a better President than George W. Bush.

John Kerry has a plan to boost the AmeriCorps program, in which Americans engage in service projects to make this country even greater and its people stronger. John Kerry would make a better President than George W. Bush.

While we're on the subject, George W. Bush promised in his State of the Union address to increase the AmeriCorps budget. Then he cut it. Typical. (Source: Christian Science Monitor 8/11/03)

Bush can't even keep his lies straight. Bush once said: "I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go to war." Ha, ha! Problem is, Bush hasn't ever been to war (Source: Houston Chronicle 1/28/02).

We've got to stop Mad Cowboy Disease before it spreads out of control.

Because after pushing for a constitutional amendment to criminalize flag desecration, George W. Bush has repeatedly desecrated the flag himself. Whoopsie. (Source: Washington Post August 31, 2003)

Al Sharpton is running against George W. Bush and has developed a foreign policy strategy to end the slave trade in Sudan. George W. Bush hasn't done a thing about the Sudan slave trade. Yes, Al Sharpton would make a better President than George W. Bush.

Do you know what the W. in George W. Bush stands for? Well, then, I'll tell you. It stands for Walker, in honor of the last name of of George W. Bush's great-grandfather. This guy was a documented Nazi collaborator. That means he lent his support to Adolf Hitler. Not only did George W.'s grandparents choose to honor this Nazi sympathizer by making "Walker" one of the middle names of George Herbert Walker Bush, but the first President Bush decided to repeat this honor to the Nazis by naming his own son George Walker Bush. We think it's creepy that the President of the United States has support for the Nazis as his middle name. That's why we say America needs to dump George W. (Nazi Collaborator) Bush! (Hey, perhaps you don't believe us on this one. It does sound really far out there. That's why we've come prepared with a reference to this fact. We recommend that you go ahead and read the important book , which among other things, documents the link between the Bush family and the Nazis.) (Source: Fortunate Son by J.H. Hatfield)

Two years on the case, and in spite of John Ashcroft's super duper new powers to spy on the private lives of ordinary American citizens, the Bush Administration still has absolutely no clue who sent deadly anthrax spores to prominent American politicians and media personalities. What use are Bush's new government programs to spy on Americans if they don't help catch murderers in our midst? Dump that Bush! (Source: American Daily October 2, 2003)

Because the American Committee on Accuracy in Naming Things (A.C.A.N.T.) has unofficially changed George W. Bush's name for the war in Iraq, Operation Iraqi Freedom, into "Operation: A Rocky Freedom", in honor of the war's underwhelming results.

George W. Bush is a convicted drunk driver. Well, it's true. (Source: Dallas Morning News November 3, 2000)

For years, George W. Bush would not admit to the American people that he has been convicted of driving drunk. He kept this secret to himself even after he had been elected to public office as governor of Texas. Bush only acknowledged that he is a convicted drunk driver after investigative reporters found about his conviction on their own. (Source: Dallas Morning News November 3, 2000)

Billions of people all around the world want to get rid of Bush, but don't have the opportunity to vote against him. Get out there and cast your vote against him, for your country and your world.

The children of America, who will suffer most of the long-term effects of Bush's policies, aren't old enough to vote. Let's vote Bush out in their name.

Show me a guy who's out fighting "the enemies of civilization," and I'll show you a dangerous nut with delusions of grandeur. (Source: National Security Strategy of the United States of America, September 2002)

After two wars, a recession, record deficits, rollbacks of civil liberties, erosion of environmental protections, and lie upon lie upon lie, I'm not just tired. I'm Bushed!

Because the victims of the August 29 bombing of the Imam Ali Mosque in Iraq had asked the U.S. for protection and permission to arm 2000 guards. We provided neither. (Source: Washington Post September 1, 2003)

Even George Bush wants George Bush to go. Bush says we must get rid of evil. Bush lied. Lying is evil (especially if people die as a result). Therefore we must get rid of Bush.

Bush says of his "war on terror" that "we will continue until we have rid the world of evil." Well, if that's the case, we worry that Bush has a conflict of interest in executing this war.

Because Iraq is not Vietnam, it's just another oil company scam. Take a look at who is to benefit from war profiteering in Iraq and you'll see oil, oil, oil. Wait a minute, wasn't that the industry in which George W. Bush and Dick Cheney used to work? (Source: Washington Post October 9, 2003)

The war's not over in Afghanistan, either. Two American soldiers were killed fighting the Taliban on August 31, 2003--a year and a half after we invaded. On October 8, 2003, more than 60 Afghan soldiers were killed or wounded in battle. Dare we say quagmire? Or should that be plural - quagmires? We hope not, but if so we know who needs to be held to account. (Sources: Associated Press September 2, 2003 and Reuters October 9, 2003)

Because perpetual war abroad gives Bush an excuse to restrict freedom at home. A constant state of war also serves to distract us while Bush loots the treasury on behalf of his rich buddies. Let's put a stop to these shenanigans.

In the 1980's, we supported Manuel Noriega, Osama bin Laden, and Saddam Hussein. Nobody paid much attention. Then they turned on us, and we heard about them. What murderers is the United States cozying up to now? Well, there's the Mukhabarat. Can we trust them not to turn on us? Of course not. Is George W. Bush losing sleep over the possibility? Of course not. (Source: Reuters August 24, 2003)

George W. Bush is low-balling the cost of occupation and reconstruction in the Middle East (who'd have thought that $87 Billion a year would be low-balling?), making unreasonable assumptions that the world community will spring to his financial aid when so recently he rejected that community as irrelevant. (Boston Globe September 16, 2003)

Bush not only refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol; he refused to articulate any international alternative to it. The de facto Bush policy on the international environment has been to do nothing.

Bush has relentlessly pursued his intent to destroy our wildlife by bulldozing our forests and drilling in Alaska. The only thing standing in his way has been Democratic opposition. Can we afford to give Bush four more years to push his radical agenda through?

Appointing Christie Whitman as head of the EPA looked like one of the few moderate actions of George W. Bush back in 2001. But despite her somewhat reasonable environmental past, Whitman bent over backwards to let pro-dozer, anti-environmental extremists get their way in the Bush administration.

Ever notice that both he and his father used the same strategy of picking a running-mate that people would be terrified to see taking over as president (Quayle because he was such an obvious simpleton and Cheney because he had numerous heart attacks before he even took office)? Can we really trust a president who picks his V.P. as insurance against impeachment?

How many ways can you say it? Bush has closed-minded, sheltered, backward, anachronistic, religion-based, legally ignorant, prudish views towards homosexuals and same-sex marriage. On this issue, Bush represents the past, not the present, and not the future.

Because Bush and the Republican Party continue to oppose a minimum wage for workers right here in the United States.

George W. Bush says he thinks Arnold Schwarzenegger would make a great governor for California. What's next? A nomination of Bill O'Reilly for the Supreme Court? (Here's hoping Karl Rove doesn't get wind of that suggestion) (Source: Reuters August 20, 2003)

Bush is an embarrassment to the country. He can't even speak English properly, which is embarrassing not only to him, but to our country. It's hard to be taken seriously as a world power when the commander in chief says things like, "There are some concern about overstating a numbers, you know, invest in my company because the sky's the limit. We may not be cash flowing much, but the sky's the limit." George said it. (Source: White House News Releases February 20, 2003)

The aggravating idiocy of the Bush team is dangerous in a number of indirect ways. Listening to Bush mangle policy and the language at the same time can be dangerously distracting to drivers.

What does Bush think about when he goes to sleep at night? The nearly three million American jobs lost since he took office? The tens of thousands of dead in a war he started? Environmental regulation? Campaign finance? The next cabinet meeting? No, according to Bush, "Sometimes when I sleep at night I think of 'Hop on Pop.'" George said it! (Source: White House News Releases April 4, 2002)

Ron writes in: "Everytime I hear Bush's voice on the radio or see him on the tube, I feel myself losing IQ points. It is starting to concern me. Can a voice or an image really drain my intelligence, as I feel it is surely doing?"

Because Bush's unspoken campaign slogan seems to be "REPEAL THE NEW DEAL!"

This is a piece of love mail we just got from a Ms. Crickenberger. It's typical of correspondence from Bush supporters -- doesn't that say something?


Take this anti-american crap off the web.....If you are not supporting our president and our country then go live in Iran.

I back our president in going to war against Hussian. Saddam is/was a threat to humanity whether here in the United States or abroad.

If you are too Clinton stupid and blind to that fact then you do not deserve to live in "my" great and proud country, the USA.

So make me a bumper sticker that says "Bush all the way"

Put that in your turban.

Ms. America and damn proud of it."

When asked in August 2002 why George W. Bush was simultaneously complaining about Iraq as an imminent threat but saying he wouldn't have any suggestions for action until he returned from a month-long vacation in Texas, Bush's chief of staff Andrew Card replied: "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August." For those of us who think war shouldn't be marketed as a product, the Bush team is clearly not an option (Source: New York Times, September 7 2002).

Why dump Bush? Well, here's reason number one hundred and sixty-six: Both you and I can think of a hundred better ways to spend the more than EIGHTY BILLION DOLLARS that George W. Bush is asking for just the next year of his occupation of Iraq. How many years will the occupation take when in the first half-year, the situation has gone from bad to worse?

Reason number one hundred and sixty-seven: it's not just that George W. Bush is asking us to spend more than EIGHTY BILLION DOLLARS in the next year alone in Iraq. An argument can be made that in order to fix the country Bush so profoundly broke, it is the moral duty of all Americans to pour hundreds of billions of dollars into its pacification and reconstruction. The problem with George W. Bush is that his fool-hardy, impatient, evidence-free behavior not only got a whole lot of people killed, but committed us all to his new big government program. Whoever takes over for Bush in 2004 will have to spend a lot of money and effort setting everything aright.

As Bush might say, let's get perticuler: The latest wad of cash requested by George W. Bush is meant to plug up an ever-widening drain of death, destruction and disorganization in Iraq. The clean-up of Bush's Mess may be necessary now, but it wouldn't have been if we had followed a cautious, sensible course of diplomacy, inspection and creative intervention. Reason number one hundred and sixty-six comes straight from the Los Angeles Times (September 9, 2003): "The $87 billion that President Bush seeks to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan is more than the $78 billion that all 50 states would need to balance their budgets next year." It's too late to fix that now, but it's not too late to change the administration that put us in this pickle.

Adding the $87 Billion for Bush's War to the $79 Billion already appropriated by Congress in the spring of 2003, we get a price tag of $166 Billion for Bush's War... so far. Let's assume there's not a dollar more in expense (riiiiiight). Had Bush pursued diplomatic ends, we could have used all that money to give $20,000 scholarships for college education for for 8,300,000 kids turning 18 this year. Imagine how that would have changed the world. But, alas, it was not to be. Instead, we've got Iraqis without basic standards of living and Americans getting picked off in ones and twos.

For the hedonists among us: That $166 Billion sunk into the Iraq Quagmire could have been used buy each and every woman, man, child, baby, grandma and grandpa in this country a TV and DVD player.

For the hockey fans among us: That $166 Billion being used to bail us out of Bush's Folly could have bought 5 rinkside tickets to a Buffalo Sabres game for each and every citizen of the United States. That's assuming we didn't get any group discounts, mind you. Then we could have all seen the blood getting spattered everywhere over and over with the peace of mind that nobody got permanently hurt.

With that squandered $166 Billion, we could have bought 369 aspirin for each and every one of the six billion human beings on the planet, giving us all a year's respite from the headaches that follow from listening to Bush speak on a daily basis. But instead, he's just given us more headaches and stiffed us with the bill.

That $166 Billion could have obtained lead paint test kits with lab fees pre-paid for each of the 104,705,000 households in the United States. Assuming that 10% of those households tested positive for lead paint, we'd still have enough leftover funds to buy 40 gallons of paint for each of those households so that the lead paint would be covered and kids made safer. Just in case the paint didn't take care of the problem, we'd still have enough money leftover to test each of these at-risk households again one year and yet again ten years later. And for the nearly 400,000 children who have already suffered lead poisioning, we would still have had enough money to hire nearly 400,000 teachers specializing in learning disabilities for ten years at the livable wage of $40,000 per year. Yes, that's a student-teacher ratio of 1 to 1. That's what we could have done if Bush had held his horses.

With the $166,000,000,000 Bush has just spent on his war of choice so far, we could have bought a 2 Gigahertz computer for each of the 60 million or so people in the United States aged 10-25 years. But that's not all -- we could have bought them high speed internet access for five years. Imagine the learning our nation's youth could have engaged in with this kind of investment. Imagine the long-term productivity growth. Imagine all you want -- now that Bush has sent the money down the sinkhole, it ain't gonna happen.

With that $166 Billion of Bush's play money for his Iraq War, we could have hired 3,320,000 new public school teachers at the attractive pay rate of $50,000 a year. But now that the money's gone, it ain't gonna happen.

With the $166 Billion that we'll need just this year to bail Bush out of the consequences of his war of choice, we could have simply reduced Bush's record deficits by a sizeable chunk. As it is, our children and grandchildren will end up owing $166 Billion more -- plus a hefty load of interest to boot.

Instead of being elected the President of the United States, George W. Bush has only been selected as the Resident of the White House.

In addition to being the Resident of the White House, George W. Bush is the Military Dictator of Iraq and Afghanistan, and even with the power of a supreme dictator over those countries, he can't keep them under his control!

Before he invaded Iraq, George W. Bush promised to the American people in a nationally-televised speech that he would insist that the members of the United Nations Security Council "put their cards on the table" and force them to vote on a resolution explicitly authorizing an invasion of Iraq. Then, within a week, George W. Bush broke his promise to the American people and withdrew that resolution from the United Nations Security Council so that none of the member nations ever had the chance to "put their cards on the table". America doesn't need a Commander-In-Chief who's infamous across the world for talking tough, but then turning tail and running away when he can't back up his tough words with the tough-minded diplomacy it takes to really get things done.

Before he invaded and started the American occupation of Iraq, George W. Bush complained that there was no time to be patient with weapons inspectors because Iraq had huge stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction with which he could attack the United States at any time. Now, when those weapons of mass destruction cannot be found, and Bush's plan for a stable American dictatorship over Iraq has fallen apart, Bush begs the American people to be patient with him, saying "This will take time." A responsible leader encourages patience in the interests of peace, not as an excuse to prevent criticism of a reckless rush to war. (Source: ABC News September 8, 2003)

As he began his War Against Evil, George W. Bush peppered every speech with the name of Osama Bin Laden, telling the American people that the wars were necessary in order to capture the "eviloder." Now that he has failed to even find, much less get rid of Osama Bin Laden, George W. Bush refuses to mention his name in his speeches. America needs a President who doesn't try to restate the goals of his wars when things don't go his way.

Bush says that the continuing American military occupation of Iraq is "critical to our security". But he doesn't mention that Iraq only became a real threat to American security after the American invasion and occupation began. Oops. (White House Press Release September 12, 2003)

Bush says that "The terrorists thrive on the support of tyrants and the resentments of oppressed peoples." Um, there's still no democracy in Iraq, and the people of Iraq are feeling resentment at being oppressed by the American military dictatorship over their country, a dictatorship that routinely guns down unarmed civilians, including Iraqi children. By his own standard, hasn't Bush's invasion of Iraq actually helped terrorists to thrive? (Washington Times September 8, 2003)

Since George W. Bush began his supposed War On Terror, the number of terrorist attacks has increased, not decreased. The American voter has got to answer the question: "Is that working for you?" (Source: Iraq Coalition Casualties at

George W. Bush tells the American people that "the surest way to avoid attacks on our own people is to engage the enemy where he lives and plans." However, the plain fact is that in the decade before the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the American military, Iraqis were responsible for precisely zero killings of Americans. Now, in less than half a year since the beginning of Bush's war in Iraq, Iraqis have killed hundreds of Americans. Is this what Bush calls "the surest way to avoid attacks on our own people?" Now, for people outside the Bush White House, hundreds is a bigger amount than zero. Apparently, Bush himself disagrees with that calculation. Folks, we need a President who doesn't engage in this kind of dangerous fuzzy math. (Source: Denver Post September 8, 2003)

While he's messing up the task of rebuilding Iraq, Mr. Bush apparently doesn't have the time to rebuild the American economy that has fallen apart under his watch.

Under direction from the Bush Administration, the EPA announced on May 14, 2003 that it would further delay the implementation of smog requirements designed to make it easier for millions of Americans to breathe. (Source: San Jose Mercury-News May 14, 2003)

The Bush Administration announced this spring that it would restrict the implementation of wilderness protection over 6 million acres of federal lands. (Source: Salt Lake Tribune August 30, 2003)

The Bush Administration overturned rules keeping jack-hammer loud, pollution-spewing snowmobiles and their inconsiderate operators from ruining Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks for the rest of us (including the young Moose). To give you an idea of how bad the problem is, rangers have been wearing respirators and earplugs on the job to deal with the smoggy onslaught. But there's no hydrocarbon or hydrocarbon-based machine (or is that just hydrocarbon-based industry?) that George W. Bush won't fight for. Bush administration officials tried to make a field day out of claims that a new generation of snowmobiles would run cleaner and quieter -- but independent tests showed that the new generation of chuggers were actually more polluting and louder than older machines! (Source: Los Angeles Times September 4, 2003)

Because this is the sort of thing anonymous Bush supporters are writing in public: "Any complaints just keep them to yourself that [sic] called freedom of expression." If Bush attracts this kind of supporter, doesn't that give a hint as to the quality of the man himself? (Source: personal correspondence from Bush Supporter September 2003)

Bush Administration "Expert" on Iraq Paul Wolfowitz told Congress in the Spring that "We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon." Either Wolfowitz didn't know what he was talking about or he was misleading Congress. Neither of these is a good option. (Source: New York Times September 9, 2003)

Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, says that "I do think that this administration did a miserable job of planning in a post-Saddam Iraq." That a Republican Senator would say this speaks volumes. The Bush administration has pursued two gigantic policy initiatives: big tax cuts for the rich and war against Iraq. If the Bush administration can't get the details on one of its two major initiatives right, how can we trust it to do a competent job anywhere else? (Source: Arizona Republic September 6, 2003)

Bush let Microsoft get away with establishing a monopolistic control over the single greatest source of personal and systematic power in the coming decades: The computer. Just when the federal government was poised to gain victory in its ongoing anti-trust lawsuit against Microsoft, George W. Bush came to occupy the White House, and ordered the lawsuit to be abandoned. Microsoft was instead allowed to settle with the federal government, in a sweetheart deal. (Source: Money in Politics Alert September 6, 2001)

The administration of George W. Bush has systematically moved to destroy the balance of powers between the executive and judicial branches of the federal government, the balance that is established in the United States Constitution. Under Bush's watch, Attorney General John Ashcroft has moved to reduce the ability of judges to deliberate when sentencing individuals convicted of a crime. Judges are there to restrain the baser impulses of the executive branch -- and the Bush-Ashcroft team wants to take them out of the picture. (Source: Associated Press September 30, 2003)

Bush sold out the heart of America, the National Mall in Washington D. C., to be staging grounds for a giant and illegal commercial advertisement for corporate contributors to the Republican Party, with Britney Spears as its main spokesmodel. It's against the law for commercial activities to take place on the National Mall, but George W. Bush is willing to bend the law when big business contributes big money to the Bush campaign for re-election. In fact, George W. Bush took the time to relay a video message endorsing the Pepsi commercial event. The National Mall belongs to the American people, not to the President, and it's time we got someone back in the White House who understood the difference. (Source: US News and World Report September 10, 2003)

When he was selling his war against Iraq, Bush sent administration officials to Congress to dismiss worries about the cost of the occupation after the war by saying that revenues from Iraqi oil would pay for it all. Now, Bush is coming to American taxpayers with an 87 billion dollar bill just for the next year of the occupation. (Source: Boston Globe September 9, 2003)

Where's the oil revenue going from the Iraq occupation going?? To Halliburton, a multi-national corporation that just happened to have been run by Dick Cheney until he became Vice President. Just a coincidence, we're sure. Oh, and Mr. Bush, how is that oil revenue going to pay for the hundreds of American lives that have been lost during the occupation so far? The answer: it's not, of course: oil revenues -- after Halliburton takes its cut of the dough, of course -- will not even pay for the re-establishment of clean drinking water in Iraq. (Source: Philadelphia Inquirer August 31, 2003)

And now it comes out that Vice President Dick Cheney has been receiving payments from Halliburton since he came into office. But hey, we're sure that had nothing to do with Halliburton getting that gazillion-dollar no bid contract. Absolutely sure. (Source: Reuters September 16, 2003)

Before George W. Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq, Bush told the American people that the reason his arguments for war didn't seem to make sense was that he was in possession of "secret evidence" about Iraq's possession of vast quantities of weapons of mass destruction and links to Al Qaeda. Now, after Bush's war has killed hundreds of thousands of people and cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, we find out that the supposed "secret evidence" was just as flawed as the junk documents that the Bush Administration tried to pass by the American people in public. It appears that this "evidence" was kept secret in order to cover up its extremely poor quality, not in order to protect national security. We need to dump Bush in 2004 because America needs a President who is honest enough to give us the facts before our nation is sent off on a risky adventure.

To what tasks did the Bush Administration devote its attention in the Spring of 2003? Planning for war's aftermath? No. Instead, Air Force One's in-flight menu was revised to remove references to "French Toast" and to offer "Freedom Toast" instead. That'll show 'em! (Source: Reuters March 26, 2003)

When President Bush's mouthpieces can't deny the truth of the criticisms his opponents make, they whine about style. "This is political hate speech!" frothed Republican National Committee Ed Gillespie after Democrats had the temerity to criticize Bush's policies. "Political hate crime!" fumed Republican House Majority Leader Tom Delay when a Bush nominee was rejected by Democrats after the White House wouldn't let them see, of all things, the nominee's files. Whine, whine, whine. How annoying! More importantly, how insubstantial! I just can't stomach voting for a President who employs professional whiners. (Sources: Dallas Morning News September 10, 2003 and New York Times September 4, 2003)

Laws sure can be inconvenient. Bush and Cheney lied about where Cheney lived (he lived in Dallas and claimed the property tax exemption for it as his primary residence) so that Cheney could get on the ballot--the 12th Amendment to the United States Constitution specifies that both can't be from the same state (Source: Associated Press November 28, 2000).

George W. Bush is a typical reformed drunk in his moral worldview. Don't get us wrong; Bush should be admired for keeping apparently keeping his alcoholism under control for the past few years. What we have a problem with is typical for the reformed drunk: the conversion from hedonist to sermonizer. Now that he's managed to exert some modicum of self-control, he can't help but lord it over everybody else, telling them how to live their lives, be righteous, and defeat evil. Will someone tell this guy that the world isn't just black and white?

Another apparent lesson Bush took from his decades-long inability to control his appetites: since I couldn't trust myself, I can't trust anyone else, and therefore arrangements based on trust won't work. Bush's foreign policy schemes are based on the premise that you've got to exercise violent might in order to protect yourself. On the schoolyard, this is called bullying. On the world stage, it's called "might makes right" unilateralism, and it relies on constant warfare (or the threat thereof) for survival. Is this the kind of world we want our children to inherit?

With Bush in the White House, the looniest of Republican politicians in the Congress have been set free. And what are our Republican representatives doing with their time? Balancing the budget? No. Fully funding education programs they themselves passed? No. Figuring out how to get back the millions of American jobs that Bush has lost? No. Developing consistent mental health policy? Lord, no. The Republican-controlled Congress is spending its time renaming lunch items in the House Office Building cafeterias. That's right. With all the problems in our country that need to be addressed, Republican members of Congress have instead been spending their days and nights putting up signs, passing out leaflets, and calling news conferences declaring that "Freedom Fries" are now being served for lunch. Oh, that'll fix things! (Source: Associated Press March 11, 2003)

The bad news: According to a report by the inspector general at the Defense Department released in the year 2000, the Defense Department has completely lost track of one trillion and one hundred billion dollars of taxpayers' money. The even worse news: This number is only a rough estimate, because the Defense Department uses approximately 2,300 different accounting methods to keep track of its money, according to the United States General Accounting Office. The news gets worse: The Defense Department has continued to lose track of more money in the three years since the report was released. Worse, worse, news: Even though George W. Bush knows about the report, he has done nothing to recover the missing taxpayers' money or reform the accounting systems in the Defense Department. Worst of all: Knowing that a substantial percentage of money in the Defense Department's budget is lost every year, George W. Bush decided to give the Defense Department the largest budget increase since World War II (Source: Department of Defense Agency-Wide Financial Statements Audit Opinion).

The best argument in 2003 that Bush's minions could come up with against a John Kerry Presidency: "He Looks French." Zut alors! (Source: Boston Herald April 23, 2003)

They're at it again: now in 2004, Bush's Commerce Secretary Donald Evans has taken to observing that "John Kerry looks French." This is a statement worthy of an eighth grader, not a cabinet official responsible for international economic relations. For goodness' sake! (Source: Washington Post March 23, 2004)

In Oregon, those dying of an incurable and terminal disease can make the decision to spare themselves a final week of severe pain, if they are certified as terminally ill and mentally competent by two doctors. Bush's Attorney General, John Ashcroft, pushed to have any doctors acting under the Oregon law placed under arrest. (Source: Bloomberg News April 27, 2002)

George W. Bush talks all the time about how fiscally irresponsible Democrats are. But the facts are not on the Republican Party's side. In constant dollars:
Democratic Presidents Kennedy and Johnson contributed less to deficits than Republicans Nixon and Ford, both in total and on an average yearly basis.
Democratic President Carter borrowed less than Republican Presidents Reagan and Bush, both in total and on an average yearly basis.
It was Democratic President Bill Clinton who brought us out of deficit territory back to surpluses.
It is Republican George W. Bush who is surging back to record deficits.
We need to get a Democratic President back in the White House to get our fiscal situation back under control. (Source: Office of Management and Budget, Table 1.3: SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS; IN CURRENT DOLLARS, CONSTANT (FY 1996) DOLLARS, AND AS PERCENTAGES OF GDP: 1940-2008)

As the son of a millworker, John Edwards knows what it's like to work hard for a living. As the son of a President who repeatedly failed in life despite being handed ready-made, pre-funded businesses to him, George W. Bush hasn't a clue. With the experience of the American people in his blood, John Edwards would have made a better President than George W. Bush.

No matter how many times he poses in ratty jeans next to a stump somewhere outside Waco, George W. Bush and his band of Republican Radicals are not the outsiders they pretend to be. Bush and his cabinet are insiders, drawn from the corporate boardrooms and lobbyist backrooms of America. Does he think the American people are so stupid as not to notice?

Bush's drive to amass the greatest campaign warchest of money in the history of American presidential campaigns is based on the premise that votes can be bought. Howard Dean's drive to enlist the greatest number of people ever in meetups and other locally-organized grassroots campaigns is based on the premise that in a democracy, the activity of citizens is the best way to boost a candidate. George W. Bush's campaign exploits the worst of what our society currently is. Howard Dean's campaign enlists the best of what our society can be.

Beware a man who inhabits the Oval Office and who cannot bear to say that he was wrong, or that he is sorry.

Beware a Secretary of Defense who cannot bear to say that he was wrong, or that he is sorry.

Beware an Attorney General who cannot bear to say that he was wrong, or that he is sorry.

In their bizarre defense of Bush's lie to Congress in the State of the Union address, conservatives note that it was only 16 words. Funny, the previous inhabitant of the Oval Office was impeached for just 9 words: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." Do these conservative paragons of virtue really believe that the number of words uttered in a lie matter? Or is Bush the sort of man whose supporters will say anything to get their guy off the hook? Excuse me for a moment, my B.S. detector is ringing...

George W. Bush has squandered the goodwill of the world in the wake of September 11, 2001. Do you remember how, in the days following the attacks on the World Trade Center, they marched in the streets of nation after nation (including France and Germany) to demonstrate their solidarity with the United States? How they played the American national anthem and flew American flags? What could we have done to change the world for the better, to unite nations in a common positive purpose, had George W. Bush not soured it all with his flaccid bravado?

Under Bush, Republican politicians have swallowed the idea that in solving the world's problems, we just can't do any better than war. An increasing number of Democratic voices are saying yes, we can. Willingness to work hard for better solutions than the ones we have today is quintessentially American. Defeatism is not.

Bush wants to send America's best medical researchers to jail. I'm not kidding: George W. Bush wants to ban somatic cell nuclear transfer research, which would create medically precious stem cells by moving patients' own skin cells into the nucleii of donated eggs. This is not the cloning of babies we're talking about -- no Frankenbabies would be created in the process. It's simply the creation of stem cell lines tailored to each individual's genetic makeup, which could be used to help people walk again, recover from strokes, battle Parkinson's disease and lead healthier lives in ways we can't even yet imagine. But Bush will have none of that. If his policy is enacted, any researcher, health care provider or patient using such a treatment would have to fork over up to a million dollars and spend up to ten years in jail. How petty and backward-minded. (Sources: New York Times April 23, 2003 and New York Times May 2, 2003)

When Bush couldn't get his own U.S. Senate to go along with his plan to ban somatic cell nuclear transfer research, he pushed the United Nations to ban the research world-wide, regardless of the lack of agreement in the United States that this is a wise course of action. (Source: Reuters December 9, 2003)

In a show of hubris typical for members of the Bush administration, Donald Rumsfeld insisted for a time that as Defense Secretary he have final say in determining the shape of Iraq's occupation. Bush gave it to him, and look what happened. If the Bush team were in Kindergarten, their report card would read "does not share well with others." (Source: Washington Post September 14, 2003)

Would you like evidence that the administration had no clue what they were getting into in Iraq? Alright, then. In May 2003 Vice President Dick Cheney was asked by Tim Russert to react to the statement of a top Army general "that we would have to have several hundred thousand troops there for several years in order to maintain stability." Cheney responded: "I disagree. To suggest that we need several hundred thousand troops there after military operations cease, after the conflict ends, I don't think is accurate. I think that's an overstatement." (Source: Meet the Press May 16, 2003)

The Bush Administration uses doubletalk in its continuing effort to mislead the public into thinking there was a connection between Iraq and September 11 when there is no evidence even suggesting that was the case. Case in point: in a September 14, 2003 interview with Tim Russert, Vice President Dick Cheney said the following: "If we're successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it's not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it's not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." But there is no evidence that Iraq was ever a geographic base of the terrorists who had America under assault on 9/11. None, Zip, Zero. As Dick Cheney was forced to put it when directly asked by Russert in the same interview about an Iraq-9/11 connection, "we don't know." (Source: Meet the Press September 14, 2003)

Who needs three branches of government? Not George W. Bush. No, he seems to think judicial review of executive branch actions is needless. Bush's latest policy push is to allow members of his administration's Justice Department to issue subpoenas to seize citizens' records or compel their testimony WITHOUT the permission of a judge, based solely on the judgment of John Ashcroft or his underlings that the target is a danger to society. But wait, it gets better. If Bush's law gets passed, the citizen who has been slammed with an Ashcroft subpoena can't tell anyone but his or her lawyer that the subpoena even exists, under threat of a five-year prison term. If we value a free society (and it's clear Bush and Ashcroft don't), this sort of insanity has got to be stopped. (Source: Associated Press September 14, 2003)

...and here's the real rub. At the same time George Bush and John Ashcroft pushed for their subpoena without mercy measures or judicial review (see the point above), Ashcroft himself appealed to a judge with the argument that he doesn't himself need to respond to a subpoena laid down by that judge. According to his lawyer, a subpoena is an "extraordinary step" and unnecessary to the pursuit of justice. Oh, the hubris of it all! (Source: Associated Press September 13, 2003)

The justifications for any of the major Bush Administration policies resemble nothing more than one of those Mad Libs sheets I used to fill out on car trips when I was a kid. [Adjective] [Tyrant] is in possession of [Nifty Secret Weapon], so we need to bomb [Third-World Country]. We can't show you the evidence because that's just what [Adjective] [Tyrant] would want, you [Adjective] [non-patriotic Noun]. We need another tax cut to [Stimulate/Maintain/Rein In] the [Current Economic Condition], rescue [cute animal] from the clutches of the [not cute animals], and cure [nasty debilitating disease].

CBS News reports: "Former weapons inspectors now say, five months after the U.S. invasion, that what the U.S. alleged were "unaccountable" stockpiles may have been no more than paperwork glitches left behind when Iraq destroyed banned chemical and biological weapons years ago." Gee, just what the Iraqis said last year! What happened to the secret evidence that according to the Bush administration said otherwise? (Source: CBS News September 15, 2003)

Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer's "reminders to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do." reminds us instead of the Bush administration's disdain for the Bill of Rights. (Source: Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer September 26, 2001)

George W. Bush often justifies his domestic and foreign policy decisions with references to his faith in God and his beliefs about what course of action is most consistent with his understanding of God's standards. The problem is that faith by its very nature transcends logic and reason; if one can justify a policy path by means of logic combined with broad and deep knowledge of a problem, then faith is not required. In his reliance on faith, George W. Bush is asking us to trust his own trust that he has a good bead on God's existence and will. Given Bush's trustworthiness on other issues, we think we'll pass. (Source: Christianity Today May 2003, Newsweek March 10, 2003)

In 1999, George W. Bush revealed that "I believe God wants me to be President." We're highly dubious that if there's a supreme ruler of hundreds of billions of galaxies, each with hundreds of billions of stars, many with multiple planets, that this supreme ruler would be particularly interested in the outcome of a Presidential contest in one year for one of the hundreds of countries on one of those multiple planets around one of those hundreds of billions of stars in one of those hundreds of billions of galaxies. It sounds just a bit iffy. More importantly, it betrays by how much Bush inappropriately magnifies the sense of his own scale. (Source: Religious News Service February 12, 2003)

In September 2003, just as Bush's ratings in the polls slipped further, the Bush Administration issued a new warning: Al Qaeda is going to poison our food! Problem is, the FBI says there's actually no evidence that any such attack is imminent. We're sure that the terrorist warning and Bush's dip in the polls was a mere coincidence. Sure it was. (Source: CBS News September 12, 2003)

Have you ever noticed that when Bush is done winding his way through a moderately difficult sentence or has just noted a fact of any particularity, he does one of two things? Sometimes he smirks off to the side, as if to say to himself "Yeah, I made it!" Sometimes he bobs his head forward with a self-satisfied look, as if to say to his audience "See? See?" These personal mannerisms betray Bush's low standards for himself. We need someone in the Oval Office who shoots for, and surpasses, a higher bar.

Vice President Dick Cheney says "I am a deficit hawk... so is the President." If a multi-trillion dollar budget deficit over the next few years makes Dick Cheney a deficit hawk, then I guess my $2100 paycheck last week makes me a millionaire (Source: Meet the Press September 14, 2003).

Colin Powell suggests that the real reason that George W. Bush rushed an invasion of Iraq was a chemical weapons attack in the north of Iraq back in 1988. Oh, how I wish I were making this up, but no, I read it right in the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle on September 17,2003. Colin Powell says that a chemical weapons attack within Iraqi borders by the Iraqi government fifteen years ago is adequate proof there was an immediate danger of a chemical weapons attack against the United States this spring. Actually, American soldiers have found no evidence that Iraq has had any chemical weapons at all in recent years (Washington Post September 16, 2003).

Under Mr. Powell's logic, the fact that the United States dropped nuclear bombs on Japanese cities in the 1940s proves that there is the threat of an imminent American nuclear attack against Mexico, and justifies the violent overthrow of the American government and occupation of the United States by the Mexican military.I can't wait to hear what these guys are going to think of next.

Every month, we get a new "real reason" that we invaded Iraq. We're told with a straight face that no, this is the real reason now, not that other real reason we heard about last month, or the other really real reason they told us a month before that, or the other one the month before that. It's becoming increasingly obvious that the Bush administration wouldn't know reality if it stepped in front of them wearing a t-shirt that said "This is reality. Right here!" in foot-high letters.

Americans already have the Comedy Channel. We prefer that the material that comes out of the White House has more of a grounding in reality than The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Oh, I know we ask a lot.

George W. Bush says that trees cause forest fires, and that if we would just cut a lot of trees down, we wouldn't have as many forest fires. That's about as logical as saying that it's journalists who cause George W. Bush to lie, and if we just cut down on the number of journalists writing about the Bush White House, Bush would lie less often. Does Bush believe that one too?

We can see that Mr. Bush would have much better time applying his unusual management style to a Texas baseball team than he does sitting around the Oval Office. If he were mis-managing Texas sports teams again, instead of running up multi-trillion dollar budget deficits, Bush could just draft a new pitcher every now and then. Letting Bush follow his true passion would save us all a lot of pain. We may not be conservative, but we are compassionate. Let's extend Bush's month-long vacations and make them year-round.

The Bush-Cheney re-election team shows the same twisted moral compass as the Bush-Cheney policy team. At George W. Bush's official election web site, visitors are encouraged to appropriate text written by campaign staffers and pass it off as their own original letter to the editor at dozens of papers at a time. There's a word for this: plagiarism. And there's a word for that: unethical. (Source: Irregular Times at

"Mission Accomplished"? Not yet, bucko. As John Kerry put it, "Being flown to an aircraft carrier and saying mission accomplished doesn't end a war." (Source: Associated Press September 3, 2003)

The Bush team wasted taxpayer money keeping the USS Abraham Lincoln idling offshore so Bush could land on it in a fighter jet and a flight suit. Bush used an expensive fighter jet to land, claiming that the aircraft carrier was out of helicopter range. But, of course, that turned out to be a lie. (Source: CBS News May 8, 2003)

Diane of Texas writes: "Why oust Bush? Because single moms trying to get off welfare struggle enough without having child care assistance cut." It's a central conundrum for single parents of young children that in order to get a job, the kids have to go to child care. But often, child care costs more than any job that a single parent might find, or at least so much that it's not possible to pay for child care and rent and food. In 2001, George W. Bush tried to cut funding for low-income child care. While child care costs rose in 2002, George W. Bush proposed increasing the work hours required for single parents on welfare -- with no increase in the funds to help single parents find child care. (Sources: New York Times March 26, 2001 and USA Today April 8, 2002)

Bush's tough-on-the-Constitution Attorney General John Ashcroft has been publicly mocking librarians for their opposition to provisions of the Patriot Act. Substance aside, that's just plain stupid. Didn't Mr. Ashcroft learn anything in school? Unless you're itching for trouble you should never, ever, mock a librarian. (Source: New York Times September 15, 2003)

In its breathless rush to war in the fall of 2002, the Bush Administration asserted that Iraq had a fleet of unmanned "drone" aircraft designed to fly over cities and release chemical or biological weapons. Bush cabinet member Colin Powell even suggested that the tiny drones might somehow wind their way after multiple refuelings to the United States where they would attack us mercilessly. Horrors! Well, guess what? The drones exist! But wait: American scientists have determined that their range was highly limited and that they were incapable of carrying chemical or biological weapons. (Source: Associated Press August 25, 2003)

Got some aluminum pipes and a balsa-wood model airplane sitting around in your garage? That about all Saddam seems to have had. It turns out that intelligence sources were warning the Bush Administration last fall that the pilotless drones being droned about were harmless. But, surprise surprise, the Bush Administration ignored those warnings and went ahead with Operation Freak Out America. George W. Bush has never let the facts get in his way. (Source: Associated Press August 25, 2003)

"CCB" sends this one in:
Karl Rove is a despicable Machiavellian Svengali. He has left a trail of broken lives and ruined careers of honest people in his wake. He will do and/or say absolutely anything to gain and maintain power for Republicans and the billionaires who love them. This man, more than any other, is the single reason why the republican party has succeeded in controlling almost absolutely all branches of our government and is moving rapidly to further expand that power until it is all but untouchable. Karl Rove doesn't just promote his candidates, he spreads vicious lies and rumors about his opponents, starts phony investigations against them and anyone remotely connected with them, and even goes as far as destroying anyone he THINKS might someday conceivably be a threat to his candidates.

And now, unprecedented in U.S. history, this uber-creep political operative has an office at the right hand of President DimSon. This guy controls what gets to Smirky, and so controls the policy and direction of the country. Rove cares about and eats, sleeps, and breathes only one thing. Politics and how it can help Bush and Republicans. That's fine, but in his position, he controls the country (Bush is so easily led, it's not even funny.) So what is being done at the White House is completely controlled by political advantage and expedience, NOT, I repeat, NOT, by what is best for the nation or it's citizens.
Bush must go, but getting rid of Rove is almost as important.

When George W. Bush went to war, he was so desperate to create the appearance of a worldwide coalition that his ridiculously administration pumped up the numbers of nations entering as members of his coalition. The Bush administration published a list of supporting nations including the Solomon Islands. Solomon Islands Prime Minister Allan Kemakeza quickly retorted that his nation was not a member of any coalition and had not in fact offered any support to President Bush in its invasion of Iraq. Whoopsie. (Source: The New Zealand Herald March 27, 2003).

Among the powerhouse nations listed in the big big "Coalition of the Willing" supporting George W. Bush: the Micronesian Island of Palau. It's a pretty place. Palau provided moral support. That's George W. Bush's diplomatic power for you. (Source: San Diego Union-Tribune March 21, 2003).

George W. Bush's diplomacy leading up to his war against Iraq was so botched that 15 of the 45 nations numbered as providing support to Bush's invasion of Iraq actually weren't, um, listed by name. That's right, they were too embarrassed on the world stage to stand with George W. Bush. (Source: Ottawa Citizen March 26, 2003).

George W. Bush's powers of persuasion are so weak that of the 45 mostly small nations providing "support" to Bush's invasion of Iraq, only 3 sent troops to participate in the actual invasion. (Source: Ottawa Citizen March 26, 2003).

The Bush administration likes to toot its horn about how now, after the invasion, 26 nations have sent troops to Iraq. What a grand coalition! Well, not so grand, actually. As of September 2003, that set of 26 includes nations like Slovakia (sending a total of 82 troops) Albania (which has sent 70 troops), New Zealand (61 troops) and Kazakhstan (26 troops). Lithuania has sent 90 troops, but hey, they're thinking maybe of sending 50 more. Well, that will certainly fix things. Thanks for rallying the world to our side, George. Good work. (Source: Associated Press September 19, 2003)

Stephen writes in, "He lied to my mother and has her believing him, when everything he does undermines her ability to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. She is of the snookered middle class." Hey, nobody gets away with lying to our mothers!

Because if the Republican controlled House of Representatives chose to put the interests of the nation over the interests of the Party, he would be impeached.

Because if anything ever happened to Karl Rove the 25th Amendment would kick in (after all, without Rove Bush is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office) and Dick Cheney would be President. We don't need another Republican President named Dick.

On the job training hasn't worked, and we can't afford any more training time.

Because not even one person got so much as publicly reprimanded for the failures on September 11th.

Because every time there's an emergency Bush runs away and hides, from September 11th when he flew around the nation hiding at military bases to when he ran away to Camp David rather than face Hurricane Isabel. (Sources: Washington Times September 21, 2003 and the Daily Telegraph September 10, 2003)

Aboard the Aircraft Carrier on May 1, 2003 he said "In the battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed the Taliban, many terrorists, and the camps where they trained." Meanwhile, the Taliban keeps attacking our troops. (Source: National Review May 2, 2003)

Aboard the Aircraft Carrier on May 1, 2003 he shamelessly connected Iraq and the September 11th attacks to justify his war when he said "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 -- and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men -- the shock troops of a hateful ideology -- gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the 'beginning of the end of America.' By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have failed." Bush said this even though he knew the allegation of an allegiance between Iraq and Al Qaeda was baseless (Source: National Review May 2, 2003).

Because aboard the Aircraft Carrier on May 1, 2003 he shamelessly connected Iraq and the September 11th attacks to justify his war when he said the following: "The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda, and cut off a source of terrorist funding. And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more. In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused and deliberate and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th -- the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States. And war is what they got. Our war against terror is proceeding according to principles that I have made clear to all: Any person involved in committing or planning terrorist attacks against the American people becomes an enemy of this country, and a target of American justice." Bush said all this, even though he knew the claim of connection between September 11 and Iraq was false! (Source: National Review May 2, 2003)

Aboard the Aircraft Carrier on May 1, 2003 Bush declared, "Any person, organization, or government that supports, protects, or harbors terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent, and equally guilty of terrorist crimes." How odd that Bush looks the other way when it comes to the Saudi government and actually gives money to prop up the Pakistani government. (Source: National Review May 2, 2003)

So we can stop the stupid policy of attacking the neighbors of nations that directly supported the September 11th attackers and deal with those nations directly.

So we can stop our nasty, addictive habit of invading the poorest nations of the world.

Because we have 130,000 troops in Iraq. Because the plan is to have 110,000 troops in Iraq in September of '04. Because if we follow this mis-leader we will always have troops in Iraq. (Source: Wall Street Journal September 9, 2003)

Because the free Iraqi Council Bush had Bremer appoint just won't do as its told.

Because Bush has shown that he thinks so little of the American military that they can be used as cannon fodder.

Because while the rest of us have moved on to the Twenty-First century, George is somehow still living in the Dark Ages. Will someone tell him the Crusades are over?

Because Americans refuse to live in the perpetual state of fear he demands of us.

Because Dick Cheney needs to go cash in his chips over at Halliburton and Junior needs to go join his Dad on the Saudi speakers tour. Let's help them jump-start their revolving-door careers!

Because he makes Reagan look sane.

Because he's so inexperienced and inept that I find myself longing for the days his father was in office!

Because The Carlyle Group needs new Board Members so the Reaganites can retire.

So we don't have to listen to Cheney mis-speak any more.

So we don't have to listen to Rumsfeld mis-speak any more.

So we don't have to listen to Wolfowitz mis-speak any more.

So we don't have to listen to Powell mis-speak any more.

So we don't have to listen to Armitage mis-speak any more.

So we don't have to listen to Rice mis-speak any more.


Because I cannot find one completely honest, accurate statement the man has made. Well, let me be fair and take that back. Once he did say "Hello, my name is George W. Bush." That's true. But other than that, it's really hard to say.

Because Osama been forgotten.

Because Bush said: "One year ago today, the time for excuse-making has come to an end." Washington, D.C., Jan. 8, 2002. (Source: U.S. Department of State International Information Programs -- and a tip of the pen on this and the preceding 38 reasons to Dan of Mansfield, Massachusetts!)

Because it's under the Bush Administration that the American government has formally established ways to use its own agents to torture its enemies. No longer does the government just allow foreign countries to do its dirty work. American taxpayers are now directly funding training for American agents so that they can become career torturers. In fact, Mark Bowden, author of "The Dark Art of Interogation", has suggested in an interview with Atlantic Monthly that George W. Bush is presiding over a period of American history in which torture is becoming so common that it "will produce some of its own theory and practice" of torture. So, Bush is helping to define the standards of torture for generations to come - how about we not cast a vote for that? (Source: Atlantic Monthly September 2003)

George W. Bush has caused the people of Texas a lot of embarrassment, but the truth is that he's not a native Texan. No, as a matter of fact, George W. Bush was born and bred into a rich, socially-exclusive community in Connecticut. I feel pretty uncomfortable voting for an American who won't even be honest about which state he's from. I mean, that's not very patriotic of him, is it?

One should never vote for a son of a Bush.

In the summer of 2003, Bush's justice deputy, John Ashcroft, ordered all federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty whenever possible. Even if you believe in the death penalty, prosecutorial discretion about recommending its usage is one way for complexities of the circumstances surrounding a crime to be considered. Complexity is apparently too much for Ashcroft to handle. (Source: Washington Post September 22, 2003)

In the fall of 2003, John Ashcroft ordered federal prosecutors broadened his rigid pursuit of the death penalty to all federal criminal cases, ordering prosecutors to seek the maximum available penalty in all cases and avoid plea bargains if possible. This rigid approach not only insults the professional judgment of prosecutors, turning them into Ashcroft automatons, it also shoves cases into trial that may not belong there, costing the budget aplenty. (Source: Washington Post September 22, 2003)

According to a report by the Congressional Budget Office, of the $4 Billion a month being spent in 2003 for Bush's War in Iraq, $1.5 Billion cannot be accounted for (Source: Associated Press September 18, 2003).

In September 2003, Senator Edward Kennedy said the following regarding Bush's War in Iraq: "There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing was a fraud." He further noted of the $1.5 Billion in unaccountable spending, "my belief is this money is being shuffled all around to these political leaders in all parts of the world, bribing them to send in troops."

George W. Bush's did not respond on a factual basis to Senator Kennedy. He could have let us know where the mystery $1.5 Billion is going, but he didn't. Instead, he attacked Senator Kennedy's patriotism for questioning him: "I don't think we're serving our nation well by allowing the discourse to be come so uncivil that people say -- use words that they shouldn't be using."

It is dangerous to have a President in office who calls questions about hidden money and policies of war unamerican and uncivil. (Sources: Associated Press September 18, 2003 and Boston Globe September 22, 2003)

George W. Bush isn't just the king of a restored American monarchy, he's also the king of lamebrain ideas. Here's one idea that proves the legitimacy of Bush's claim to the lamebrain throne: He says America ought to train Iraqis to take over security for American soldiers, but then when those Iraqis are trained to provide security, he won't provide them any guns because he doesn't trust them. You know that car bomb that went off outside the United Nations headquarters in Iraq yesterday, killing an Iraqi security guard? Well, the Bush Dictatorship in Iraq refused to allow that security guard to have a gun. Source: San Francisco Chronicle, September 23. What can Iraqi security forces do to establish order in their country, if they're not entrusted with the ability to defend themselves?

Apparently, George W. Bush believes that Iraqis can end the chaos triggered by the American invasion through mere assertiveness. For example, here's a member of the Iraqi security force, trying to stop a guerilla attack through force of will alone: "Hey, guys? Um, stop that. No, I mean it. Wait! I really, really mean it now! Halt! Hey, put that bomb away, or else! I'll tell on you! Hey, the Americans say not to do that! No, I really, really, really mean it now! Hey, that's going to put someone's eye out! Ow! Ow! Augh!" It's by thinking that strategies like this are going to work that George W. Bush became the King of Lamebrain Ideas.

In his September 26, 2003 letter to Bush campaign supporters, Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie yet again demonstrates the willingness of the Republican Party leadership to engage in bald lies in order to defend Bush's missteps.

After referring to criticism of a President as "hate speech," Ed Gillespie lays down the mission of the recipients, conservative political activists called "GOP Team Leaders": "As Team Leaders, we are dependent upon you to make sure communities across this great nation get the FACTS." It's too bad that Gillespie's "FACTS" are not, in fact, factual.

In order to diffuse criticism of the mounting costs of Bush's War in Iraq, Gillespie says "Compared to similar conflicts the cost of fighting the war in Iraq is small. The cost for this war amounts to approximately 0.5% of Gross Domestic Product, compared with 130% for World War II and 15% for the Korean War."

Gillespie gets these estimates from an article entitled The Economic Consequences of a War with Iraq by Yale Economist William D. Nordhaus. Reading his Table 2 and surrounding text in which the figures for Korea and World War II are calculated, we find to arrive at this figure, the total cost of the war (no matter how long it takes) is divided by the average annual Gross Domestic Product during the war. This tells us how to make a parallel calculation.

So, is it true that the cost of Bush's War in Iraq is only 0.5% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)? In order to figure this out, we need to know what the Gross Domestic Product is. We can't know for 2003, since that year is still underway. A reasonable guess would be to go with the U.S. GDP for 2002, which was 10.4462 trillion dollars (source: Bureau of Economic Analysis at How much has Bush's War in Iraq cost so us so far? Let's be generous and not count the costs involved in long-term medical care for wounded American soldiers, or the cost of buying new bombs, missiles and bullets to replace the ones that are being used, or any other indirect costs. No, to be nice to Gillespie let's make an absurdly conservative calculation of costs and just focus on the costs of war having directly to do with Iraq: invasion, occupation and reconstruction. $79 Billion were appropriated by the U.S. Congress for Bush's War in Iraq in the spring of 2003. Bush has already asked for another $71 Billion just for Iraq (the $87 Billion figure is widely quoted, but includes continuing multibillion-dollar costs for Afghanistan). That makes for $150 Billion already, which is 1.5% of the last available annual U.S. GDP. That's three times Gillespie's figure, not including any indirect but real costs of the Iraq war. Ed Gillespie reads the newspapers. He knows these numbers. Ed Gillespie is lying.

Of course, the war in Iraq is, unfortunately, not over. A bipartisan group of U.S. Senators estimates that we'll be in Iraq for five years. Let's be extra nice and not only ignore the indirect costs of Bush's Iraq War but also assume that the cost of Bush's war will be cut in half each year, so that in year 2 we'll only need to fork out $35 Billion, then $17 Billion in year 3, then $8 Billion, then $4 Billion, and then nothing at all afterward (riiiight...). This brings the total cost of the war to $214 Billion, or 2% of annual U.S. GDP. That's four times Gillespie's figure, making the nicest of assumptions on Gillespie's behalf. Gillespie isn't a fool. Even to his own political shock troops, Gillespie is a liar.

(Sources: CNN September 17, 2003, Washington Times September 25, 2003, Reuters , Bureau of Economic Analysis, The Economic Consequences of a War with Iraq by William Nordhaus)

A sermon a day makes me want Bush to go away.

Jim Toy of Seaside, California contributes this humdinger:
The Bush Administration came up with a plan to "reform" Amtrak. His plan is to turn responsibility for funding Amtrak over to the states. Route planning, including interstate routes, would also become a state responsibility. Since most Amtrak routes cover several states, coordination and funding will become a logistical nightmare. Most interstate rail services will be eliminated as a result.

Bush's plan theoretically offers 50-50 matching funds to states for rail infrastructure improvements, but provides no source of funds for the federal portion (highways and airports receive 80% federal funding from dedicated trust funds).

In formulating this plan, the administration did not consult with either Amtrak or the states.

Add to all of this a dose of hypocrisy. When Bush was Governor of Texas he was asked to help fund Amtrak's Texas Eagle. At the time he refused and stated that "a national rail service was the responsibility of the federal government."
(Sources: Stateline September 10, 2003 and National Association of Rail Passengers Hotline May 9, 2003)

According to a disgruntled senior Bush administration figure, the Bush White House leaked the name of a secret CIA operative to the press in order to get back at that operative's husband, who had criticized Bush's plans for going to war in Iraq. The White House's actions not only jeopardized the safety of that CIA operative, but also the safety of the operative's helpful contacts in countries around the world. (Source: Washington Post September 28, 2003)

After the CIA requested an investigation into the above matter, the Bush Administration neglected to authorize such an investigation for two months until the public furor over the matter became undeniable. (Source: Associated Press September 29, 2003)

After conceding that any White House staff member involved in betraying the identity of a CIA operative would "at a minimum" deserve to be fired and also face criminal charges, White House Spokesman Scott McClellan noted that George W. Bush refuses to ask any of his White House staff whether they were the source of the leak. (Source: White House Press Briefing September 29, 2003)

When the heat finally got turned up enough for the Bush Administration to say they'd look into the possibility that an individual or individuals in their ranks had exposed the identity of a CIA agent, they initially refused to appoint an independent investigator. Instead, they assigned John Ashcroft. Given Ashcroft's approach to justice, this is more than a bit like asking a fox to guard the chicken house. (Source: Reuters September 29, 2003)

You haven't heard any updates on the Ashcroft investigation into the illegal White House leaks, have you? That's because there's been nothing but silence from the White House and the Justice Department for months. Can you say "buried"? Well, a senior White House official can. While refusing to be named, the official commented that ""We have let the earth-movers roll in over this one." (Source: Financial Times of London December 5, 2003)

How many ways can they try to spin the truth? The Bush Administration, in scrambling desperation, tried again to explain why it sent hundreds of thousands of young Americans off to kill and be killed in Iraq when it had no solid evidence that there was any need to do so:

Condoleeza Rice, George W. Bush's National Security Advisor, justified the invasion and occupation of Iraq by saying, "nothing pointed to a reversal of Saddam Hussein's very active efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction, to have very good programs in weapons of mass destruction."

Lack of evidence that a crime has not occurred is not the same thing as evidence that a crime has occurred. If there's a man who lives next door to me who has a history of embezzling money from work, would I be justified in having him arrested on suspicion of doing it again, just because I didn't have any evidence that he was not?

Of course not! This isn't the American way of doing things, although Bush and company would like us to forget it. Here in America, our legal and ethical traditions are based upon giving the benefit of the doubt, when there is a lack of evidence that we should do otherwise. If there is no evidence that a person or group of persons has committed a crime, we do not assume that there is a crime and start the punishment. That's just not the way Americans do things. (Source: Boston Globe September 29, 2003)

In 2002, the number of Americans lacking health insurance rose by 2.4 million, introducing not only personal danger into the lives of these citizens, but also high costs for society when these people get acutely sick after a lack of preventative care. Does Bush have a plan to get these people insured? What do you think? (Source: New York Times September 30, 2003)

The number of Americans living in poverty rose by 1.7 million in 2002. It seems Bush's first big tax cut didn't exactly work as planned. (Source: New York Times September 27, 2003)

In July of 2003, ABC News aired a story about soldiers opposed to the war in Iraq who were calling for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The Bush White House responded by letting it leak out that the reporter covering the story was "Gay" and "Canadian." Will someone tell Dubya he's not in middle school anymore? (Source: Toronto Star July 19, 2003)

Bush's notorious Attorney General John Ashcroft has directed executive agencies to obstruct, by all legal means possible, Freedom of Information requests by the public. Democratic President Bill Clinton, by contrast, had set in place a policy directing the same agencies to comply with, whenever legally possible, Freedom of Information requests about government activities. (Source: New York Times January 3, 2003)

In February of 2003, George W. Bush referred to an impending war against Iraq as a "game." That's sick. (Source: Toronto Star February 9, 2003)

While delivering his talking points on how great Bush's War in Iraq would be, Secretary of State Colin Powell depended on a blue curtain to obscure what really stood behind him: Pablo Picasso's Guernica. See, the painting showed images of war: dead people and stuff. That's a really pesky thing for people to see when you're trying to get them to invade a country. (Source: Toronto Star February 9, 2003)

When people tried to tell George W. Bush that his tax cuts would break the bank, he replied with indignance that those people didn't know what they were talking about, that "we can proceed with tax relief without fear of budget deficits, even if the economy softens." Well, the people were right, George was wrong to the tune of $500 Billion -- but of course it is the people who will have to pay the price. (Source: Washington Post July 2, 2002)

Lloyd Grove of the New York Daily News uncovered a "frequently asked questions" memo from the Bush-Cheney campaign to their fundraisers in New York City. Excerpted text follows:
Question: "Can I use my personal aircraft for campaign business?"

Answer: "No, you may not use your personal aircraft for campaign business. Corporate aircraft may be used, but only if each person boarding the plane pays the equivalent of a first-class airplane ticket."

Q: "Can I have a fund-raising cocktail party for my friends at a private club or hotel and pay for the party?"

A: "No. You may have them come to your house and treat them up to $1,000 in expenses per adult in the household without it counting against your $2,000 contribution limit."

Q: "Can I use my executive assistant to help with my fund-raising activities?"

A: "Any person can volunteer to help. Employees may volunteer a maximum of 1 (one) hour per week during working hours and an unlimited amount outside of the office."
(Source: New York Daily News September 30, 2003)

It doesn't take a weathervane to tell which way the wind is blowing. Just watch the Republicans. Prominent New Hampshire Republican Hilary Cleveland, who served in official capacities in the campaigns of both George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, will not be campaigning for George W. Bush this time around. Instead, she started a statewide Republicans for Dean movement that garnered significant support. Cleveland's move shows that you don't have to be a Democrat to find the Bush record unacceptable (Source: Associated Press September 26, 2003)

Bush makes the entire US population look like half-wits before the world when he stands at podiums challenging everyone with his patent lies. What must they think of us that we elected him? Wait, no, we didn't. But you know what I mean.

He's neither bright eyed nor Bushy-tailed -- but he is awfully squirrely when it comes to his past.

When a man points to air, and he says something's there, there is nothing to call him but strange.

It's tune time! Everybody sing along (to the tune of "Pistol Packin' Mama"): "Oh, lay that pistol down, George, lay that pistol down; Drunk-drivin' prep-school cowboy, lay that pistol down..."

(to the tune of "Have You Forgotten?"): "Have you forgotten about Vietnam, 'bout that two-year old girl crying, covered with napalm? Have you forgotten about My Lai, that sad day in the jungle, when we were the bad guy? I know we all are angry, and we're itching for a fight, but we just need to make damn sure what we're fighting for is right. (And Bush, we still ain't even caught bin Laden, have you forgotten?)"

As Drew Carey remarked after visiting Graceland, there's "nothing like getting ripped off by a dead hillbilly." Unless, of course, you get ripped off by some snotty prep-school idiot pretending to be a hillbilly.

A "shoot first and ask questions later" attitude isn't a sufficient basis for a decent character in a B-grade spaghetti western movie, let alone sound foreign policy for the United States.

Would you trust this guy to watch your kids while you ran out to the supermarket?

While we're at it, would you trust Dick Cheney to watch your kids while you ran out to the supermarket? Eeeeesh.

Ever wish you could work together with millions of other Americans to promote a healthy economy, better schools, peace on earth, constitutional rights, a cleaner environment, and domestic security all in one second? You've got your chance in 2004--vote Bush out. Punch out that chad for Bush's opponent. Punch it good and hard.

Heck, would you trust this guy to watch your dog while you went out of town for a week?

We can win. Look at it this way: If a good 30% of eligible voters are firmly opposed to Bush (recent polls suggest the number is much higher), and voter turnout is about 50% of eligible voters, that means that if every eligible voter who opposes Bush votes against him, 60% of the vote will go to his opponent.

Who needs the help of France, Russia, Germany and China to acheive their international objectives anyway? Um, we do. And Bush just keeps ticking them off.

Who profits when Bush goes to war? Oil companies and defense contractors who make big soft-money campaign contributions. Who loses when Bush goes to war? Kids from some small town or inner city who joined to army to try to scrape together enough money for college.

Why do we have to boot Bush? Because we can't just close our eyes and make him go away.

Because I just had this weird dream where it was just like twelve years ago, and George Bush was president again, and somebody blew up the World Trade Center, and then there were these letters with anthrax in them, but we never caught the guys behind any of it, so people were still afraid, then we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, but Saddam and Omar and bin Laden all got away, but our troops kept getting killed, like, every day almost, and the stock marked crashed and there were a bunch of corporate scandals but Bush just said we'd "let the market take care of it," and Bush gave rich people a big tax cut and the budget surplus was gone and we had huge deficits again, and lots of people were out of work, just like twelve years ago. Then I woke up and I was like, that was a weird dream, but then I realized I was still in the dream and I went around trying to convince people to vote Bush out of office so I could get out of the dream.

Ever have a dream like that?

Here's a riddle for you: Q: What do Hitler, Napoleon, Lyndon Johnson and George W. Bush have in common? A: They all tried to fight land wars in Asia. Ha ha. (Sorry, I wish it was funny, but it isn't really, is it? When will he ever learn? When will he ever learn?)

Here's another riddle for you: Q: How is George W. Bush different from Hitler, Napoleon, and Lyndon Johnson? A: Bush tried to fight two land wars in Asia. (I know, still not funny...)

The only reason I keep on laughing at George W. Bush is to keep from crying.

We're electing a U.S. president here, not an upper-class twit of the year.

Because every time I drive near Pennsylvania Avenue in DC, I get the urge to turn on my "hazard" lights.

Would you trust this guy to water your plants while you were out of town?

OK, so what does Condi Rice do, anyhow? I mean, I know she doesn't review intelligence reports and advise the president on the content of his speeches or anything, so what does she do? For instance, how come when 9/11 happened and everybody was running around saying "we should have somebody in the cabinet in charge of the security of the nation," she didn't pipe up and say, "Well, I am actually in charge of 'national security,' it's in my job title and everything," I mean, did she forget what her job was, or what? If we vote Bush out, Condi goes back to her old job as a college administrator, where she can continue to do absolutely nothing--for the students, faculty and staff of Stanford University.

Would you trust this guy just to feed your guppies while you were out of town?

If a free sample at the supermarket left as bad a taste in your mouth as the last three years, would you buy more of the product and take it home to your family?

Because in 2000, Bush ran against peace and prosperity. Now that he's made it abundantly clear where he stands on those issues, the choice is clear: yes to peace and prosperity, no to Bush.

If George W. Bush were a kid offering to mow your lawn, would you wince before you said "OK?" Would you even say "OK" at all? All right, then. Now imagine that YOU are the flower bed of shasta daisies...

Because the president is a role model for kids. You want millions of kids running around trying to be like Bush?

If you loaned this guy fifty bucks, would you count on getting it back?

I'm becoming convinced that getting this clown elected president was the ultimate fraternity prank. This prank ended up costing thousands of lives, millions of jobs, and trillions of dollars out of peoples' life savings. It's gone way too far. Couldn't they have just stolen a street sign or something?

America is a shining beacon of hope for the world. But when we lie and kill, or let a few corrupt people loot our treasury, the golden glow of that beacon is tarnished. Instead of holding forth hope for the world, we engender fear. It is not in our long term interest to be feared. Boot Bush in 2004, and help make the United States a country the world can look up to again.

From the October 11, 2000 Debate at Wake Forest University:

"Q: What is the role of the U.S. in the world?

Bush: I'm not sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say this is the way it's got to be.... I'm not sure where the vice president's coming from, but I think one way for us to end up being viewed as the ugly American is for us to go around the world saying, we do it this way, so should you. I think the United States must be humble and must be proud and confident of our values, but humble in how we treat nations that are figuring out how to chart their own course." ...

"Q: Should the people of the world fear us, or see us as a friend?

Bush: If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us.... If we're an arrogant nation, they'll view us that way, but if we're humble nation, they'll respect us."

We couldn't agree more. It is tragic that Bush has not followed his own advice.

The Bush Administration's interpretation of the Homeland Security Act is that model rocketry hobbyists must be fingerprinted. (Source: Quad Cities Times March 24, 2003)

Bush ran for President in 2000 on the apparent success of the Texas school system. He even appointed Houston School District Superintendent Rod Paige his Secretary of Education based on the supposed "Texas Miracle" in that city following from Bush's purportedly miraculous education policies in the state. But it turns out that the "Miracle" that Rod Paige produced in Houston was anything but miraculous. Paige set up a system in which school principles got bonuses for low dropout rates. Principles simply underreported dropouts to get their bonuses, creating the illusion of a Miracle that never actually existed. (Source: Palm Beach Post September 27, 2003)

People are getting so fed up with Bush's pattern of, er, misrepresentations that they're sending a flatbed truck around the country with a twelve foot-high flaming statue of the man, with the words "Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire." I kid you not. (Source: WCAX News October 1, 2003)

Tellingly, the response of Republican Politicians to charges that Bush is a liar is not to deny that he has been lying. No, instead they trot out phrases like this: "When you start throwing out words like lies and liars, i think that offends people." Well, yes, it does offend people. But not in the way that Bush partisans might like. (Source: WCAX News October 1, 2003)

George W. Bush says that the lesson of "September 11" is that there are bad guys and we have to make them pay. Also, George W. Bush says that "September 11" "changed everything", which seems to mean that he gets to do whatever he wants and the Constitution doesn't count any more. From the people in charge of the American government, the explanations of "September 11" don't get much deeper than that. We need a deeper appreciation of what has (and what has not) changed in this country since the attcks that took place on that day.

One of the most forgotten details of the American response in the weeks weeks after September 11, 2001 is that the government of Afghanistan offered to give in to George W. Bush's demands. The government of Afghanistan offered to hand Osama Bin Laden over to the American government, through Pakistan.

Why didn't George W. Bush take Afghanistan up on its offer? Oh, what an excellent question that is.

Bush refused to take Osama bin Laden into custody from Afghanistan because the Afghan government wanted to negotiate the way in which this transfer would take place. Bush said that he would not conduct any negotiations with the Afghan government, even if it meant that the American government could get Osama Bin Laden as a prisoner. Then, Bush said he'd had enough of talk with the Afghans.

Bush wanted to attack.

The government of Afghanistan pleaded with the Bush Administration, saying that it wanted to talk to him about handing over Osama bin Laden into American custody. Bush refused. Bush said he wouldn't talk about it. Bush wanted a war more than he wanted Osama bin Laden. Bush made a choice to let Osama bin Laden go.

America didn't have to invade Afghanistan. Bush made the choice that he wanted to fight for Osama bin Laden instead of negotiating for him. For Bush, fighting felt better. And that makes Bush a dangerous leader. (Source: Washington Post October 29, 2001)

If Afghanistan didn't get rid of Osama bin Laden, then at least it got rid of Al Qaida and the oppressive Taliban, right? Right? Wrong. Al-Qaida and the Taliban are still in Afghanistan. In fact, they still rule in parts of Afghanistan. In fact, they're still attacking and killing American soldiers.

Hamid Karzai, the American-appointed "President" of Afghanistan only really controls a small part of Afghanistan. Elsewhere, independent warlords rule, and some of those warlords seem more loyal to the Taliban than to the American occupation force. (Source: CBS News September 11, 2003)

OK, if Afghanistan didn't get rid of Osama bin Laden or Al Qaida or the Taliban, then at least women aren't oppressed in Afghanistan any more, right? Unfortunately, no. Amnesty International reports that in the two years since Bush invaded Afghanistan, conditions for women have barely improved at all, with forced marriages, rapes, domestic violence and the burka still dominating most women's lives. Bush promised a changed Afghanistan for women -- but then he got swept away by the next great war. (Source: Associated Press October 5, 2003)

Because Laura Bush married beneath her -- a librarian having a "non-curious" husband who doesn't read a single newspaper and gets his important information in 'sound bites' from staffers can only mean she missed her calling ... she should have gone into puppetry.

Because every time W says "we" he's talking to himself. His 'we' doesn't pertain to anyone I know -- we're not "his people," so we can be summarily dismissed. As were the many thousands of Americans who marched for peace, 'we' are just the worlds largest "special interest group" in his eyes.

Because since his first weeks in office, no matter how innocuous an announcement the Texas Bush makes, you can bet that it will reduce your safety, your opportunity, your freedom, or your welfare. His track record in reducing 'quality of life' for the average American is astounding.

In the spring of 2003, Sheriff Bush's loyal deputy Paul Wolfowitz testified before the United States Congress that "we are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon." But lo and behold, it turns out that well before the war, a secret task force (another one?) made a report determining that Iraq's oil infrastructure was in a decrepit state. Administration officials confirmed that Wolfowitz was aware of the task force's existence. So when he testified in front of Congress, did he lie, obfuscate the truth or just forget it? None of these options are acceptable. But neither is any of them, sadly, a surprise. (Source: New York Times October 5, 2003)

How far have we fallen? A contrast:
John F. Kennedy: Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.
George W. Bush: Big tax giveaway to the rich. Yum, yum!

Another contrast:
Franklin D. Roosevelt: We have nothing to fear but fear itself.
George W. Bush: Orange Alert! Orange Alert! Quick! Grab your duct tape and plastic sheeting! Orange Alert!

Still more contrast:
Abraham Lincoln: A nation of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from this Earth.
George W. Bush: Come to my fundraiser. It costs two thousand dollars per ticket.

Yet another contrast:
George Washington: I cannot tell a lie.
George W. Bush: What I said about there being an imminent threat of a nuclear attack from Iraq was technically correct.

Constitutional Contrast:
Patrick Henry: Give me liberty or give me death!
George W. Bush: There ought to be limits to freedom.

When George W. Bush said "There ought to be limits to freedom" on May 21, 1999, he was trying to justify his efforts to shut down a critical web site. Even before he assumed the presidency, Bush couldn't tolerate anyone making fun of him. (Source: Dallas Morning News May 22, 1999)

When George W. Bush couldn't get his pals to shut down the web site making fun of him, he had Karl Rove buy up dozens of internet domain names that included the word "Bush" with the idea of stemming the tide of anti-Bush web sites. Clearly, the idea didn't work. But it betrays the extent to which these "free market" Bushies just can't handle a free market of ideas. (Source: Dallas Morning News May 22, 1999)

In more evidence of where the wind is blowing, a Republican attracted attention for his blog, Republicans Against Dean, against the Bush administration and for his chief rival at the time, Howard Dean. He writes:

"I am a Republican Speaking out against a Regime which is sending our nation over a cliff, and has many reasonable Democrats using the word "Fascism...." The last time we had a Republican President who lied this much to the American people, we threw Dick Nixon's ass straight out of the White House. Bush has lied to you, he has lied to me, he has lied to our allies, and no one is talking about it. Republicans are walking around in a malaise, fearing that Abdul will blow up their mom's chess club meeting, because Bushy and Rummy want you to be afraid."

Although Howard Dean's candidacy has submerged, the writer continues to write in opposition to George W. Bush at The Moderate Republican.
Under George W. Bush's push to fund "faith-based intiatives" (translation: religious programs) with taxpayers' money, The Reverend Pat Robertson's Christian organization Operation Blessing received $500,000 from the federal government. This organization's mission statement declares that "We believe that the Holy Bible is the inspired, infallible, and authoritative source of Christian doctrine and precept... We believe that the only hope for man is to believe on Jesus Christ, the virgin-born Son of God, who died to take upon Himself the punishment for the sin of mankind and who rose from the dead so that by receiving Him as Lord, man is redeemed by His blood." This is the ministry your taxpayer funds have paid for. (Source: Washington Post October 3, 2002)

July 2003 brought news from the government that Al-Qaeda was planning to attempt more hijackings of airplanes within the United States this summer. How did George W. Bush reacted to this news? He announced that he would cut funds for the air marshals that protect American flights from terrorist attack. The reason? He said there's just not enough money to pay for them, so a large number of air marshals would just have to be fired, even as new air terror alerts were sounding. Where did all the money go? That's right, the money went into Bush's gigantic tax giveaway to the top richest one percent of Americans. (Source: CBS News July 31, 2003)

Because in two billion years, when alien lifeforms come to Earth and uncover the historical records of our extinct society, no one will be there to tell them "No, Bush the Second wasn't really elected by the popular vote." Flipping a few years forward through our records, these aliens will look at us with certain disgust if we re-elect (Oops, did we say re-elect? A typographical mistake.) this man.

Sgt. 1st Class Paul Ray Smith, killed in Bush's invasion of Iraq, April 4, 2003. His widow is quoted as asking, "What is the Medal of Honor? What is it to me? What is it to Paul? Maybe it's something to the kids, but it doesn't bring my husband back. It is nothing." (Source, Syracuse Post-Standard, October 5, 2003)

How could George W. Bush say with a straight face on March 17, 2003 that "the American people can know that every measure has been taken to avoid war?" In March of 2002 Bush remarked in a policy planning meeting: "Fuck Saddam. We're taking him out," and Dick Cheney remarked to a Senate Republican planning meeting also in March of 2002 that the question of a war with Iraq was no longer if but when. (Source: Time May 5, 2002)

Watching Carol Moseley Braun speak during the Democratic Presidential candidates' debates has reminded me just how low we have sunk under George W. Bush, and what great alternatives are available. Carol Moseley Braun frequently stops in mid-sentence in her speeches to add subordinate clauses strengthening her arguments, and manages through it all to retain grammatical sense. George W. Bush struggles to make utterances like this: "You've also got to measure in order to begin to effect change that's just more when there's more than talk, there's just actual paradigm shift." Say What? (Source: Bushisms at

In October 2003, after Israel bombed Syria after a Palestinian bombed 19 Israelis into oblivion after Israel killed innocent bystanders in a targeted assassination after...well, you get the idea, George W. Bush faced a choice: either condemn Israel's bombing of Syria and contradict his own policy of disregarding international law in conducting war, or support Israel's bombing of Syria and risk a new Mideast war. Bush was painted into this no-win corner by his own actions in pursuing a war of choice without international legitimation. Our world has become a more dangerous place as this trend spreads to other nations in their approach to conflict. (Source: New York Times October 7, 2004)

One of Bush's least sparkling criticisms of Al Gore in the fall of 2000 was that "He talks about numbers! I'm beginning to think not only did he invent the Internet, but he invented the calculator!" There's nothing wrong with numbers. Numbers are specific. Quoting numbers indicates a high confidence in their veracity, since numbers can be verified. Bush's disdain of specific knowledge leaves him vulnerable to being manipulated by others. (Source: ABC News October 3, 2000)

After promising to engage with the United Nations in the lead-up to war with Iraq, promising a vote, George W. Bush withdrew his resolution when it became clear a majority of the Security Council (indeed, a majority of the world) thought his resolution was bunk. Now in the aftermath of war, George W. Bush has done the same thing: promising to involve the United Nations in reconstruction of Iraq and then withdrawing his resolution when it became clear a majority of the Security Council thought his resolution was bunk. In case after case of early withdrawal, it has become clear that George W. Bush can't handle diplomacy. (Source: New York Times October 8, 2003)

An anonymous senior Bush Administration official's understanding of the meaning of multilateralism: "We don't want to play this game for a long, long time. This is as much a choice for the Council as it is for us. They can be multilateral and be part of it, or they can tell us to do it ourselves." The "It's Bush's Way or the Highway" Principle is not what multilateralism means. (Source: New York Times October 8, 2003)

Bush's failure of diplomacy in this instance (related to his inability to admit error) is not just a personal failure: it has dire consequences for Americans and Iraqis. If the Bush Administration can't successfully handle negotiations in the Security Council, the United States won't get much of any financial, logistical or military help in handling Bush's mess in Iraq. Americans will be stuck with the bill, the headache and the danger. Iraqis will be stuck with a quagmire. The world will be stuck with a terrorist breeding ground that Bush created but couldn't clean up. (Source: New York Times October 8, 2003)

Al Qaeda brought down two buildings, and thousands of people lay dead in the rubble. Bush brought down two nations, and millions of people still live in the rubble.

In February of 2002, Bush lectured the Japanese parliament about how the United States and Japan had been allies "for a century and a half", when in fact, the US and Japan have only been allied since after World War II, which ended just over 50 years ago. Little details like that matter. (Source: United States Embassy in Japan, Transcript of February 18, 2002)

We all remember how when he was campaigning to be President, Bush had no idea who the President of Pakistan was, even though the military coup in Pakistan had recently been in the news. Campaigning for President and not bothering to read the newspaper seems pretty boneheaded to me. Is this what Bush calls preparation? (Source: Financial Times of London November 6, 1999)

George W. Bush doesn't understand how the beliefs of his own church are different from the beliefs of other churches, even though he goes to church every week. In 1994, George W said, "The Episcopal Church is very ritualistic and it has a kind of repetition to the service. It's the same service, basically, over and over again. Different sermon, of course. The Methodist Church is lower key. We don't have the kneeling. And I'm sure there is some kind of heavy doctrinal difference as well, which I'm not sophisticated enough to explain to you." If he cannot understand how Methodist theology is different from Episcopal theology, how can he hope to understand the nuances of U.S. foreign policy? The years of the Bush Presidency have demonstrated that he cannot. (Sources: Houston Post 1994 and July 7, 2000)

George W. Bush said he appointed Thomas White to be Secretary of the Army because White had great business experience at Enron. Bush said he wanted Thomas White to run the Army like he ran his business. The problem is, White's former employees say that he was dishonest and helped to set up fake partnerships that eventually led to Enron's bankruptcy. White responded that he had no part in the illegal fraud because he wasn't really in touch with the operations of the division where he was supposed to be in charge. Which really happened? Was White a criminal or just grossly incompetent? Neither possibility merits confidence. (Sources: Houston Chronicle October 24, 2001, Houston Chronicle March 30, 2002, and New York Times September 17, 2002)

Bush's Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, decided in February of 2002 to disband a panel charged with addressing claims of sexual assault in the military. Since then, multiple stories of sexual assault mishandled by the military have emerged in the press. Clearly, the panel was desperately needed. (Source: New York Times March 2, 2003; Associated Press October 4, 2003)

In 1975 the Northern Mariana Islanders voted to join the United States, and since then residents have enjoyed U.S. citizenship and lived under U.S. law -- with two important exceptions. First, the importation of Asians as "guest workers" without citizenship rights has been permitted. Second, the U.S. minimum wage laws exclude this part of our country.

These two loopholes have led to dismal conditions in the islands. By 1999, more than 33,000 "guest workers" lived in the islands, a number greater than that of citizen residents. Their status is less one of "guest" and more one of wage slavery -- workers are required to pay up to $10,000 in "fees" for the privilege of leaving their jobs. These foreign workers live behind barbed-wire fences, eat infested food, sleep on cots in dormitories that they are forced to pay more "fees" for, work "off the clock" hours that they aren't paid for, all the while working in unsafe conditions for far less than the U.S. minimum wage. (Source: Jim Hightower, If the Gods Had Meant us to Vote, They Would Have Given us Candidates)

H.R. 965, sponsored by Democrat George Miller, would phase in the U.S. Minimum Wage, require good working conditions and wages as a condition for tariff forgiveness, and require U.S. standards of labor be met for the awarding of a "Made in the U.S.A." label. Sounds simple and decent, doesn't it? Unfortunately, this bill is struggling to stay alive. Why? The Republican Party is in control the Congress, and the Republican Party is blocking it.

Has George W. Bush spoken out on this issue? Has George W. Bush told Congressional Republicans to stop sweatshops in the USA, to support the bill? Of course not. George W. Bush is a Republican politician, too, and maintaining sweatshops is the sort of thing that Republican politics stands for.

How close is George W. Bush to the Enron debacle? Bush has a friendly nickname for Enron CEO Ken Lay: "Kenny Boy." (Source: The Daily Telegraph January 19, 2002)

How close is the Republican Party that Bush champions to the Enron swindle? Ed Gillespie, who in 2003 took over leadership of the Republican National Committee, was an Enron lobbyist before he took his current job. (Source: New York Times June 17, 2003)

Weeks after Senator Edward Kennedy was pilloried by Republicans for suggesting that George W. Bush was using billions of dollars to bribe other nations into sending troops to Iraq, imagine what happened. In October of 2003, Bush agreed to lend Turkey $8.5 Billion, but on the condition that Turkey send troops to Iraq. Sounds like a bribe to me. (Source: Associated Press October 8, 2003)

This should secure your trust: Elliott Abrams, the man George W. Bush appointed as National Security Council senior director, pleaded guilty to charges of lying to Congress in 1991. But that's OK, since George Bush Sr. pardoned him. Right? (Source: Reuters October 7, 2003)

In 2002, the Bush Administration began implementation of their Total Information Awareness project, which would collect citizens' personal information in a central database. According to the TIA website, this information includes financial, educational, communication, medical, travel, housing and yes, even VETERINARY records. Under the TIA plan, a computer will use this information to identify "dangerous" citizens and engage in "pre-emptive" action. When the public began to complain, the Bush Administration tried to keep TIA in place by renaming it "Terrorism Information Awareness." Thank goodness enough Americans read George Orwell to demand this nonsense be shut down. (Sources: Department of Defense Briefing November 20, 2002 and Washington Post September 26, 2003)

George W. Bush has proclaimed that "We've got a plan to reduce the deficit in half in five years." United States Comptroller General David M. Walker rejects that claim, stating outright that "the idea that this is manageable or that we are going to grow our way out of the problem is just flat false. Even if we repeal all the tax cuts, you are still going to have to make tough choices.... Our projected budget deficits are not manageable without significant changes in status quo programs, policies, processes and operations." (Sources: Remarks of the President August 22, 2003, Bloomberg News October 7, 2003 and Washington Post October 5, 2003)

It's medical diagnosis time! Imagine you are a doctor, and a man comes into your office complaining about neighbors developing weapons in secret to attack him. When you ask him how he knows about this activity, he refers to secret evidence he cannot show you. When you ask people in the neighborhood, no one can offer any evidence of that activity, either.

OK, now imagine you are George W. Bush's doctor...

Roger writes in, "If during the election George W. was receiving those National Security briefings that Presidential candidates supposedly get, he had to first have a background check. That means he needed to fill out background paperwork. On that paperwork he would have been required under threat of perjury to list any convictions or arrests, even DUIs. If he had not that can be a federal felony in and of itself. So I wonder if he lied on that paper work since his DUI surfaced to the public just a week before the election."

Knowing of General William G. Boykin's history of illegal use of military training facilities for religious purposes, and aware of Boykin's radical views about using America's military to fight a Christian Crusade against other religions, George W. Bush promoted Boykin to the position of Deputy Under-Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. In this position, Boykin is in frequent communication with senior White House officials, and even the President of the United States himself.

Now it comes to light that, preaching in his military uniform before a religious congregation, Boykin uncovered the real motivation for Bush's war. Apparently, "the enemy that has come against our nation is a spiritual enemy. His name is Satan. And if you do not believe that Satan is real, you are ignoring the same Bible that tells you about God." Boykin also revealed that the reason the terrorists are out to get us is -- get this -- "because we're a Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots are Judeo-Christians." Yeah, they just can't stand Christians! That's the ticket. And Boykin's motivation in battle against Muslims? "I knew my god was bigger than his. I knew that my god was a real god and his was an idol." This is the U.S. Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence speaking, which speaks volumes about the motivations of the Bush Administration in pursuing its course of war.

Of course, George W. Bush refuses to disparage Boykin's religiously fundamentalist war doctrine, which tells us a great deal about Bush's own allegiance to Boykin's dangerously unhinged vision of the world. (Source: Associated Press October 18, 2003)

George W. Bush's tolerance of William G. Boykin's intolerance is an older story than this. The Bush Administration has long been aware that Boykin used his position as leader of a military base within the United States to provide unique and unprecedented access to civilian Southern Baptist missionaries so that they would have the opportunity to convert Green Beret soldiers to their particular fundamentalist version of Christianity. Boykin even invited hundreds of Southern Baptist evangelists to attend a special Fort Bragg event for their organizational benefit.

Did George W. Bush ask Boykin to resign for his use of taxpayer funds in the name of conservative religious evangelism? Of course not. (Source: New York Times April 6, 2003)

An Army veteran with more than 20 years of experience anonymously relates his own reaction to Bush's war:

"I had one guy tell me all he wanted was to see his little daughter; she was born three days after the war started. He died in the sand holding my hand and crying because his daughter would never know him. Tell me that's fucking right. Where was George Bush when this kid was gasping for air and spitting his blood on foreign soil?... That asshole went AWOL and never showed up for duty and then he has the nerve to take us into two different wars that will be going on for years." (Source: Coalition for Free Thought in Media October 19, 2003)

The same soldier who must share his story anonymously to avoid prosecution by his superiors shares this glimpse of George W. Bush's war of choice:

"Let me tell you about the cluster bomb raid we saw wipe out a whole bunch of little kids. It looked like they had already lost their parents and were trying to salvage food from a destroyed Iraqi convoy by the side of the road we were on. The kids were way off to the side about half a mile away by then when we got the word that the Iraqi column was going to be hit with cluster bombs and we had to clear the area. We got on the radio and tried to get the air strike stopped but we were told it was too late to get it stopped.
We could see the body parts flying up into the air after the bombs hit. It was terrible and we could not do a damn thing but watch it happen and scream into the radio at the dumb shit pilot that was dropping the bombs. After the strike was over we went to see if there were any survivors and all we found was bits and pieces of little kids and here and there an arm or leg you could still identify." (Source: Coalition for Free Thought in Media October 19, 2003)

And what awaits veterans when they come home from dutifully carrying out the job George W. Bush sent them to do? The soldier who must remain anonymous continues his report:

"Well the first thing I would like to thank Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Congress for is that nice huge cut they made to Veterans Benefits as soon as the war started. I am in the Reserves after years of active duty and now I cannot get PTSD counseling or many medical benefits I used to take for granted. I knew I would have the benefits because I was laying my life down for my country. Now my benefits are cut by around 2/3 and I have to go to either group therapy or pay for a private counselor out of my own pocket. What happens when someone like me has been through enormous battle stress and combat fatigue and then comes home to no counseling?

I'll tell you what is going to happen, he will either kill himself or take a bunch of people with him. Some of the guys coming back are going to have gone through the worst time of their lives with their buddies dying and getting hurt, and then they'll find out they got screwed out of any counseling. It is the greatest disservice America is committing against soldiers who fought for this country and may come back wounded or horribly scarred. Medical services, school aid to dependents, school aid for the vets, all slashed to the bare bones; mental health and drug and alcohol counseling are being eliminated or the waiting lists will be years long for whatever services manage to survive.

That is one thing the American people still have not really caught on to is the fact that while they were screaming out 'Support Our Troops' the current regime makers were fucking the military and veterans out of almost every social program and non essential service that would make life easier." (Source: Coalition for Free Thought in Media October 19, 2003)

Last month has now officially been declared the hottest September on record. George W. Bush policy to combat increasingly undeniable global warming and the consequent catastrophes we face: do nothing. (Source: Associated Press October 18, 2003)

Even the money is talking against George W. Bush. Although the media is fond of fawning over the whopping $84.6 million Bush raised in the first three quarters of 2003, what's even whoppinger is the $98.6 million raised by the Democratic presidential candidates in the same period. (Source: Center for Responsive Politics at

George W. Bush's own dad is so upset at his administration's policies that he has given Bush's most vocal Senate critic, Edward Kennedy, the 2003 George Bush Award for Excellence in Public Service. (Source: Boston Globe October 18, 2003)

Barbara from British Columbia shares the perspective of our neighbors from north of the border (that's Canada, George): "extremely tired of his lies, deceptions and incredible disdain of other nations who opposed the war in Iraq... in other words, we are just plain Bushed."

The American people deserve to have a President who knows how to play in the major leagues with the rest of the world leaders - we cannot afford the "Bush-league" rudeness that inevitably comes back to bite us.

Little men who are unsure of themselves are the most dangerous -- they overcompensate by turning into tyrants. The world cannot stand four more years of a little man at the helm.

Hundreds upon hundreds of Americans have died in Iraq in the course of prosecuting George W. Bush's war of choice. In our country, one traditional way to honor the sacrifice slain soldiers has been the ceremonial reception of soldiers in their caskets upon their arrival. Since the days of Vietnam, such ceremonies have been televised as a way of allowing the nation to share in the reverential moment -- and as an indicator of the finality that war brings.

Now comes word that the administration of George W. Bush, which sent these soldiers to die halfway around the world, has not only banned these ceremonies, but has also banned media from covering the return of slain soldiers to our country.

Bill Clinton not only allowed these ceremonies to occur; he took it upon himself to personally attend these ceremonies as a way of honoring the soldiers' sacrifice for their country.

George W. Bush, on the other hand, would rather act by fiat to hide the painful consequences of his actions. (Source: Washington Post October 21, 2003)

George W. Bush and Republican politicians in Washington tried to force class action lawsuits, aiming to relieve the millions suffering the effects of pollution and corporate malfeasance, away from state courts and into federal courts, where the rules make it harder for victims to gain compensation for the harm done to them. You can always count on Bush to stand with corporations and against the people who are hurt by them.

By the way, the scheme of Bush and his Party failed, thanks to the Democrats in Congress who are finally standing up to him. (Source: Washington Post October 23, 2003)

Speaking of malfeasance, George W. Bush can't manage to pronounce the word right. He says "malFEEance." Repeated mispronunciation of words is a sign that someone doesn't read those words very much. (Source: White House press conference, Washington, D.C., Jul 8, 2002)

The move to stop class action lawsuits against corporate misconduct is not only another piece of evidence that Bush and the Republican Party stand with corporations and against people, it's also another piece of evidence that the "states' rights" excuse the GOP attaches to its most odious policies is a sham. When it's convenient to its corporate friends, the Bush team is all too happy to squash states' rights.

In yet another "who needs states' rights after all" move, the Bush Administration promised to issue an federal executive order exempting the Salvation Army from state and local laws against anti-gay discrimination. The Salvation Army, in turn, promised to give public support to George W. Bush and his policies. Sweetheart deals, rank hypocrisy, and smearing the queers all in one day -- how impressive. (Source: Washington Post July 12, 2001)

George W. Bush's very first official act as President was to block the funding of family planning organizations. Bush's first executive order, issued on the 28th Anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade decision, prohibits the funding of family planning organizations overseas if those organizations use their own privately raised funds to lobby their own governments in favor of less restrictive abortion laws. Although Bush justified his order by saying that "taxpayer funds should not be used to pay for abortions," taxpayer funds were not in fact being used for those purposes, since that's been illegal since 1975.

Further, the executive order places a gag on family planning organizations worldwide, keeping them from even discussing abortion issues if they want badly needed U.S. funds. Bush's first order was designed to curtail the use of contraception in the developing world, a change that only increases the suffering of poor families -- and back-alley abortions to boot. (Source: BBC News January 23, 2001)

George W. Bush's idea of personal sacrifice during his war against Iraq: a commitment to no sweets as long as soldiers are overseas risking their lives. Bush's follow-through on this commitment: lacking. He's taken to sucking on life savers. (Source: Washington Post October 26, 2003)

When George Bush Jr. visits his mom and dad, Dad reads the text of every story in the newspaper. When Dad frets over the contents of the news, Bush Jr. tells him to "forget it." When Bush Jr.'s turn with the paper comes, he quickly skims over the headlines, then puts the paper down. (Source: New York Times October 27, 2003)

The Bush Administration refused for month after month after month to turn over documents requested by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, a panel given full legal authorization by the U.S. Congress to collect and review information about the attacks of September 11, 2001. Commission head Thomas Kean (a Republican, mind you) became so frustrated with Bush's stonewalling that he made preparations in October 2003 to issue a subpoena of those documents. (Source: New York Times October 28, 2003)

MIT scientists reported in late October of 2003 that they had succeeded in growing cartilage, liver and neural tissue from stem cells. This development heralds the promise of new organs grown to restore the health of millions threatened by cancer, paralysis and degenerative disease. George W. Bush supports a ban on these life-saving therapies. Bush stands in the way of a cure. (Source: Boston Globe October 28, 2003)

In the wake of "Operation Enduring Freedom," it's an embarrassment that our nation's leader and his cabinet act so much like freedom is something to endure.

Now that his war of choice in Iraq isn't working out so well, George W. Bush is trying to dissociate himself from it in big and little ways. On Tuesday, October 28, Mr. Bush tried to claim that neither he nor his staff had anything to do with the "Mission Accomplished" banner flying behind him as he spoke on the Aircraft Carrier Abraham Lincoln on May 1. After journalists uncovered other banners with the same background and typeface placed behind Bush at other speeches, the Bush Administration backtracked and admitted that it did indeed make and place the banner. (Source: Army Times October 28, 2003)

If tales of Bush administration sleaze and consequent coverups continue to leak out like this, they'll have to rename it the Whitewash House.

Remember that No-Bid contract the Bush Administration handed to Halliburton, the corporation headed by Dick Cheney until he became Vice President? Well, guess what Halliburton's doing with the gift -- overbilling the U.S. Government for gasoline by more than a two and a half dollars per gallon. This is what happens when cronyism is allowed to creep into politics. (Source: New York Times December 10, 2003)

How did the Bush Administration react to Halliburton's crooked conduct? It decided to extend Halliburton's no-bid contract. (Source: Associated Press October 29, 2003)

Surprise, surprise: it turns out that Halliburton, Bechtel and the other companies that won no-bid contracts taking government money in Iraq were huge contributors to George W. Bush and the Republican Party. (Source: New York Times October 31, 2003)

On October 28, 2003, a reporter asked George W. Bush the following question: "Can you promise a year from now that you will have reduced the number of troops in Iraq?" George W. Bush refused to answer the question, referring to it as a "trick question." It's a simple question; perhaps the tricky part is getting out of a quagmire. (Source: White House Press Conference October 28, 2003)

George W. Bush serves as commander-in-chief of the Washington, DC National Guard, and so the traditional thing for him to do is to offer his condolences to any member of the DC National Guard who dies in combat. But he hasn't bothered to contact the family of fallen guardsman Darryl Dent. As Courtland Milloy reports: "We haven't heard from him or the White House, not a word," said Marion Bruce, Dent's aunt and family spokeswoman. "I don't want to speak for the whole family, but I am not pleased." (Source: Washington Post September 8, 2003)

When George W. Bush and John Ashcroft's Justice Department publicly released a study of racial discrimination in the Justice Department, they "redacted" (the polite word for censored) the considerable number of sections of the report that criticized the department's lack of tolerance for diversity. Did they think we wouldn't notice the big black marks where words should be? (Source: New York Times October 31, 2003)

How bad is it in Bush's Iraq? Sentries at the Rashid Hotel in Baghdad, where officials of the Provisional Authority live and eat, are placed with official orders to prevent reporters' entry unless they are chaperoned by a government press handler. (Source: New York Times November 2, 2003)

The Bush State Department came up with a report accurately predicting the chaos of post-war Iraq. The Bush Defense Department was feuding on a personal level with members of the Bush State Department and so ignored the report. George W. Bush's job as an administrator is to bring differing departments into the same room, regardless of squabbling and get them to work jointly for a common goal. George W. Bush's job as a leader is to synthesize information from various sources and create a sensible strategy for action. George W. Bush couldn't handle these essential presidential tasks. (Source: New York Times Magazine November 2, 2003)

George W. Bush has so alienated the world that the stiffly polite British are publicly burning him in effigy (Source: The Guardian November 3, 2003)

You've got to set a good example for your kids. If you've got kids and you're a parent worth your salt, you're trying to teach them to do the right thing and tell the truth. You're trying to teach them the difference between a little white lie and a serious lie. When is a lie serious? When it hurts somebody. The truth is simple enough for a child to understand: BUSH LIED, PEOPLE DIED.

Now, if you have kids, and you vote for Bush, what's the moral lesson? You're teaching your kids that it's OK to tell a serious lie sometimes--if you have the power. You're teaching them that you can somehow be "right" even if you are totally wrong. You've fallen off the slippery slope of moral relativism into the sea of absurdity, and that's where you're raising your kids.

Is it any of my business how you raise your kids? Well, as conservative moralists have argued, your kids are going to grow up and become a part of the society that I live in. And I don't want to live in a the kind of morally bankrupt society you are helping to create by raising your kids in a moral vacuum. So it's my responsibility to exhort you parents to set a good moral example for your children. So I came up with a little rhyme that you can use to teach your children right from wrong:

Bush lied
People died
When people die
It's no little white lie
I will tell everyone I can
Bush is a bad bad man

Hey, maybe Bill Bennett can put that in his next book (if he's not too busy gambling). Somehow, I think ol' B.B. won't be too keen on my little ditty. I'd like to see him explain why in a way that doesn't smack of "moral relativism."

Bin Laden killed thousands of people for no good reason. You'd vote against him if you had a chance, wouldn't you? Well, Bush has also killed thousands of people for no good reason--and you have a chance to vote him out of office.

Because united we STOOD, until Bush tried to drag us all to the right of Mussolini.

Because we can imagine a greater American epic than one that ends: "and the cowboy shot them all. The end."

The Bush Administration's Security and Exchange Commission is supposed to inspect mutual funds to ensure that brokers dealt on the straight and narrow. Instead, it turns out that huge swaths of the mutual funds brokerage houses gave sweetheart deals to large-scale investors that illegally allowed them to trade after-hours at the expense of small-scale investors. And Bush's poorly-funded SEC didn't carry out enough inspections to catch these evil-doers. Indeed, Bush's SEC didn't even follow up when a whistle-blower literally walked into its office with documentation and alerted them to the problem. New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, whose well-funded investigation (along with an investigation of the well-funded Massachussets Securities Division) uncovered the shenanigans, says that Bush's SEC engaged in "an outrageous betrayal of the public trust.... The regulators who were supposed to have been watching this industry were asleep at the switch." (Sources: Boston Globe October 24, 2003 and Rocky Mountain News November 1, 2003)

You probably aren't surprised by any of this, are you? Isn't that a shame? And doesn't it tell us something about the moral state of the Bush Adminstration?

George W. Bush has changed his tune. Now that weapons of mass destruction are not to be found in Iraq, Bush and his cronies croon that the real reason we went to war was to get rid of domestically evildoing Saddam Hussein. Let's for a moment attempt to take their claim seriously. We'll try... sorry, we just can't do it. How can we take this latest, newest justification seriously when in 2002 the Bush Administration gave half a billion dollars to Uzbekistan, the regime of which uses torture in interrogation and the president of which kills his opponents with boiling water? (Source: New York Times October 26, 2003)

In George W. Bush's America of 2002, 3.8 million families skipped meals because they couldn't afford them -- a 13.0% increase from 2000 and a 8.6% increase from the previous year alone. (Source: Associated Press November 1, 2003)

George W. Bush is becoming so unpopular that his own campaign is releasing estimates that Bush will fall very far behind Democratic candidates in the polls during the Spring of 2004. This is so that in the event that Bush falls moderately behind, the Bush campaign can claim he is doing better than "expected." (Source: Associated Press November 3, 2003)

Reading so many reasons to boot Bush in 2004 must make you tired and thirsty. So go ahead, take a break. Head over to your kitchen, get a glass of tap water, and drink it down. Aaaaahhhh... refreshing, no? Well, enjoy it while you can. Bush's EPA (the P is supposed to stand for "Protection") is loosening sewage-treatment regulations to allow for more untreated sh..stuff in your drinking water. The Bush EPA euphemistically refers to this as "blending." Mmmm! (Source: USA Today November 3, 2003)

For those looking for an alternative to George W. Bush's pre-packaged McCampaign, one need look no further than the website of John Kerry. Kerry offers approach a useful contrast in ethics and assumptions about the intelligence of followers:
George W. Bush's campaign website provides pre-written text for followers to cut and paste into computer-generated "letters to the editor."
John Kerry's campaign website encourages supporters to write letters to the editors of their local newspapers, but instead of supplying ready-written letters encourages supporters to read John Kerry's platform before composing their own thoughts.

John Kerry's high-road approach is a demonstration in action that he would make a better President than George W. Bush.

George H.W. Bush wrote in his book A World Transformed: "To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant, into a latter-day Arab hero... assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an unwinnable urban guerrilla war, it could only plunge that part of the world into ever greater instability." George W. Bush should have listened to his dad. (Source: A World Transformed, quoted in the New York Times March 8, 2003)

Colin Powell once wrote, "Occupying Baghdad comes at an unpardonable expense in terms of money, lives lost and ruined regional relationships." George W. Bush should have listened to his Secretary of State. (Source: Foreign Affairs, 1992, quoted in the New York Times March 8, 2003)

Well, George W. Bush is a Republican, you know. His presence on the national stage strengthens the hands of reactionary ghouls like Tom Delay and Trent Lott.

How out of touch is the Bush Administration? When a reporter asked Donald Rumsfeld whether he had lost his "mojo," Rumsfeld responded that "I don't know what it means... in 1926 or something, it had to do with jazz music." (Source: Reuters October 31, 2003)

Even Republican politicians are admitting in public that George W. Bush has been a royal idiot about Iraq. Recently, Representative Jim Leach of Iowa told a group of reporters that Bush's optimistic outlook about the war in Iraq is "one of the most misguided assumptions in the history of United States strategic thinking". Geez. If that's what a professional Republican has to say about Bush's performance as Commander-In-Chief, then things have got to be going very sour in the Bush White House. (Source: Washington Post, November 5, 2003)

It has been revealed that in the days before the American invasion of Iraq, the Iraqi government sent a message to the Bush Administration repeating its claim to have no weapons of mass destruction and offering to allow American soldiers to search throughout Iraq in order to verify this claim.

George W. Bush and his top aides rejected the offer.

I'm not making this up, folks. If you don't believe me, go ahead and read the article from the Associated Press, printed in the Times Daily of Northeast Alabama - hardly a bastion of liberal media bias.

Pentagon officials have confirmed that this message was received and rejected.

The upshot is this: George W. Bush had the chance to send American soldiers to search Iraq for the weapons of mass destruction he thought were there, but which turned out not to be there.

Bush didn't need to send American soldiers to war. The Iraqi government was willing to allow them in peacefully.

Bush turned this offer down because he wanted to send American soldiers to war, not because American soldiers had to go to war.

What's particularly despicable is that George W. Bush never even had the courage to tell the American people about this offer. He kept it secret. He lied when he told us that there was no other way but war to disarm Iraq. He not only betrayed the American soldiers he sent to die, he betrayed the entire American nation.

You want another 4 years of that? (Sources: Associated Press November 6, 2003 and New York Times November 6, 2003)

Under Vice President Dick Cheney's instruction, Bush's EPA (Emitting Pollution Accelerated) has dropped investigation of 50 power plants for violations of the Clean Air Act. The Bush Administration explains that it would simply have been too expensive for the power plants to obey the law. (Source: New York Times November 6, 2003)

Scott M. writes in, "While George Bush drank and snorted his way out of his National Guard obligation, he has no compunction about sending young men and women into harm's way in his 51st State of Iraq. How many Americans in the Guard who went awol do you think would have escaped jail? Certainly not this pampered buffoon - this one ends up in the White House...what a shame on America."

"We believe that 2 million people would even borrow $100 for the pleasure of sending this man back to Crawford, Texas." So said Howard Dean in his November 8, 2003 announcement of a strategy to build a campaign based on $100 contributions from regular people, rather than $2,000.00 contributions from the very rich. Howard Dean's strategy took power away from the exclusive grasp of the very rich and distributes it back to a larger number of regular people. Howard Dean had a richer appreciation of populist civic politics than George W. Bush ever will.

With all the bizarre shenanigans George W. Bush is engaged in, sometimes I have to doublecheck my newspaper to make sure I didn't pick up a copy of the Weekly World News.

Private Jessica Lynch, in her own words, when the Pentagon isn't speaking for her:

"...they used me as a way to symbolize all this stuff. Yeah, it's wrong."

"It hurt in a way that people would make up stories that they had no truth about. Only I would have been able to know that, because the other four people on my vehicle aren't here to tell the story. So I would have been the only one able to say, yeah, I went down shooting. But I didn't."

When Private Lynch was captured in the middle of the American invasion of Iraq, the Bush Administration claimed that Private Lynch was dramatically rescued from torturers during the course of a gun battle. They also claimed that Private Lynch had fiercely resisted capture. It turns out that the Bush Administration just made it all up, exaggerating the struggle of Private Lynch in order to score public relations points.

Lying about a captured, injured, and often unconscious soldier to look good - way to "support the troops", Mr. Bush!

It's just downright shady that a man who says things are "fabulous!" so often would be so callously indifferent to discrimination against gay, lesbian and bisexual people. (Source: Betty Bowers, "Is Bush Gay?")

Made-in-the-USA textile businesses are infuriated at the Bush Administration for failing to address the economic fallout of cheap, sweatshop-produced clothing flooding into this country from China. Says John Emrich of Guilford Mills, "So far, we have not been able to get our message across to anyone in this administration. They have dragged their feet on every issue and patted our heads as if we are the sort of people who don't get it." When even corporations start getting angry at a Republican President, you just know he's doing an awful job. (Source: Associated Press November 7, 2003)

The Bush Administration whines that its ultra-conservative judicial nominees are being blocked by Senate Democrats. There are two problems with this story. First, the Senate is majority Republican. Second, the Senate has confirmed 168 of Bush's judicial nominees and rejected only 4. This makes for a higher success rate than in the Clinton presidency. Whining does not become a presidency. (Source: New York Times November 10, 2003)

"No amount of money can truly compensate these brave men and women for the suffering that they went through" -- so says Bush Administration spokesman Scott McClellan. The Bush Administration really means "no amount of money." After a group of American soldiers tortured by Saddam Hussein won a court settlement for compensation of their suffering in time of war, the Bush Administration took away the pool of money from which the compensation was to come. Why will these soldiers never see a dime? The money is needed for the prosecution of Bush's new war of choice in Iraq. (Source: New York Times November 10, 2003)

In the face of a huge error, a humbler Secretary of Defense would own up to his mistakes and learn from them. But when asked by journalists about his assertion that the Iraqi public would welcome Americans after the invasion, Bush's Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld denied the truth, sharply commenting "Never said that. "Never did. You may remember it well, but you're thinking of somebody else. You can't find, anywhere, me saying anything like either of those two things you just said I said." Of course, Donald Rumsfeld said exactly that on national televion on February 20, 2003. But Rumsfeld is in denial -- and we are paying the price. (Source: Ocala Star-Banner November 9, 2003)

How vulnerable are we at home with the Bush administration fighting two wars? For Veterans Day 2003, parades across the country were scrapped because there weren't enough troops left back home to march in them. The most important role a military can play, defense, is being sorely neglected by Bush and company. (Source: Washington Post November 10, 2003)

In his November 10, 2003 remarks at the Convention Center in Little Rock, Arkansas, George W. Bush said, "I appreciate the grass roots folks who are here, the people making this party work." It cost $2,000.00 a person for these "grass roots folks" to make it in the door. Those are some pretty richly fertilized "grass roots." I'd like to see the grass.

Jennifer H. of Maine writes in, "With Bush in office the song we ought to be humming is 'Fail Did the Chief.'"

In its desperate bid to hide the deadly outcome of its war of choice, the Bush Administration has taken to renaming body bags "transfer tubes." (Source: Chicago Sun-Times November 11, 2003)

Let us consider family values!

Yesterday, I glanced at the USA Today newspaper in the library, and my eye was caught by by one of those little charts they've always put down in the corner of the front page. According to this chart, the number one reason that most American families do not sit down together for an evening meal is that one or more of the parents is forced to work long hours that bring them home long after dinnertime is over!

What!?!? You mean Hollywood isn't to blame? You mean it isn't the "Gay Agenda"? How could it be that the lack of mandatory prayer in school was not to blame? I'm shocked! Shocked!

No, it looks like the reason that American families can't even sit down to dinner together anymore is that they're having to work longer and longer hours just to make ends meet.

Now, I find this to be kind of interesting, considering that one of the Republican Party's current missions is to ABOLISH OVERTIME PAY. No, really, it's true! George W. Bush himself spent months this year pushing a bill through Congress that would have made millions of American workers exempt from overtime pay. So, under the Bush plan, American workers ought to work overtime, taken away from their family evening meals, but then get no overtime pay for it. That's actually what the Bush bill said!

Folks, that's not family values. That's corporate values. That's Republican elite values.

The Republicans are the anti-family values party, and America needs to wake up before Bush and the Republicans do further damage to the American working family. (Source: USA Today November 11, 2003)

Four more years of the performance of George W. Bush will strain the capacity of our mental health care system as Americans deal with the negative repercussions of stress, anxiety, depression and a loss of contact with reality.

The looming certainty of four more years of Bush-induced damage to our security, our liberties, our environment and our grammar would induce a crippling December 2004 brain drain as some of our smartest, most capable citizens moved to saner places like Canada. We cannot afford to let this happen!

We can't take another four years of this guy. If he's re-elected, somebody's going to have to have oral sex with him so we can get him impeached. Please don't let it come to that!

Are you thirty-something? Remember the '80's? The big hair? The neon spandex? Swatches? That crazy music? Good times.

Remember when Reagan was president, and he decided to balloon the nuclear arsenal until it could kill tens of thousands of dozens of millions of people, and the Soviets offered to sign a treaty stipulating that neither side would use nuclear weapons first, and Reagan refused to sign it? Good times.

Remember when you started understanding what nuclear weapons could do, and you got really scared, and you found out how close you were to the nearest city or military base or power plant, and figured out whether you'd get swallowed up in the fireball, or get caught in the shock wave, or take a heavy dose of radiation that would punch millions of little holes through your body and die in a few weeks of the infections you got when your intestinal fluids leaked into your abdominal cavity, or whether you'd have the chance to try to survive for a few months or years in whatever was left of the world? Good times.

Remember that night when you were eleven and you had that nuclear nightmare, and you woke up around 2:30 in the morning and walked downstairs and looked around and saw all the telephone poles still standing and slowly realized that you weren't the only person left alive or a ghost, but you were still scared, and you finally went back to bed and got to sleep around 4:00. Then suddenly there was this blast of light and you threw your arm over your eyes and jumped out of bed groping for a place to brace for the shock wave, until it gradually dawned on you that it was morning and that light was the sun? Good times.

What's all this got to do with Bush? Read on. REMEMBER THE THING THAT SCARED YOU THE MOST? WHAT IF SOME CRAZY WORLD LEADER DECIDED TO START A WAR FOR NO GOOD REASON? And what if it turned out you had voted for the guy? Was that what made you decide not to care anymore--not to vote anymore? Well, 2004 is the year to turn it all around, because GEORGE W. BUSH HAS STARTED A WAR FOR NO GOOD REASON! We can not, even through inaction, allow this man who has proven he will start a major war for no good reason to keep his finger on the button for another four years.

Retired General Wesley Clark knows what war is. George W. Bush has only played war games. This voice of experience, leadership, character and courage could outwit and outmatch George W. Bush any day. Wesley Clark made an outstanding candidate for President of the United States in 2004. Compared to Clark, George W. Bush is a mediocre choice.

"Barron" contributes this reason:
Bush got into Yale on a type of affirmative action that helps the rich and well connected but he denies any help to those who started a mile behind the starting line and have made huge steps to catch up. Affirmative action is right for those who through no fault of their own went to bad schools and have made huge strides to catch up. Bush would reserve affirmative action for the rich who went to private schools but snorted too much cocaine with their parents' money to get into school on their own merit.
The Bush Administration's stupendous idea for protecting American freedom: Operation TIPS, in which American citizens were encouraged to volunteer as spies on their fellow citizens, calling in legal but "suspicious" behavior to the FBI. They tried it this way in East Germany, and it would have been done in the USA too if Democratic lawmakers hadn't called a halt to the Bush-Ashcroft plan. (Source: New York Times November 16, 2003)

Even without Operation TIPS, the fearmongering of George W. Bush and John Ashcroft has the effect of provoking some portions of our citizenry into acts of dangerous paranoia. Bush-supporting tipsters alerted Secret Service agents that A.J. Brown of Durham, NC had material threatening the President. The agents visited Brown for an interview, to find only a poster stating opposition to Bush's implementation of the death penalty in Texas. Quel overreaction. (Source: CBS News May 16, 2002)

Under Bush's administration, the FBI is investigating bumper sticker makers! Srini Kumar got a visit from the FBI for operating a website,, that sells bumper stickers saying "Darn the gov't" and "fuck the republican party." Is that criminal? (Source: CBS News May 16, 2002)

The campaign to re-elect George W. Bush is at it again.

In an e-mail to the Bush faithful, the Bush-Cheney team writes of George Soros that "the Wall
Street Journal says that he sees 'America as the gravest threat to world freedom.'"

Wow! George Soros sees America as the gravest threat to world freedom? Wow. I mean, it's a quote, right?

No. The unnamed authors of this hack-email pull a fast one here. See, the quotes around "America as the gravest threat to world freedom" refer to the Wall Street Journal, not to George Soros. The Wall Street Journal of November 10, 2003 reads as follows:

More recently, since September 11, Mr. Soros has made it his goal to burst what he has called "the bubble of America supremacy." He has said that having helped to liberate Communist countries, he now views America as the gravest threat to world freedom. In the Financial Times in March, he wrote that Mr. [Bush] "deliberately fosters fear because it helps to keep the nation lined up behind the president."

See, the Wall Street Journal doesn't quote George Soros as stating the phrase "America as the gravest threat to world freedom." But the Bush-Cheney campaign uses the quotes to make it appear that George Soros said it. The thing is, I cannot find a single reference to George Soros referring to "America as the gravest threat to world freedom" on Google, Google News or the entire Lexis-Nexis archive of news transcripts, world news, U.S. newspapers, magazines, or abstracts.

That's because, of course, George Soros didn't say these words. The Wall Street Journal Editorial staff said them.

And now conservative stooges like Michael Costello continue to spread this piece of falsehood, embellishing it even further in posts like these:

George Soros, currency trader and destroyer of nations, has chosen his man - Howard Dean - as the best candidate to advance his cause of bursting "the bubble of American supremacy."

He believes that America represents the " the gravest threat to world freedom."

Michael Costello's concoction is further distanced from reality, making no reference to the Wall Street Journal but instead generating a sentence that can only be interpreted as a false reference to the direct words of George Soros.

So hey, conservatives, if you are going to insult George Soros, who is neither a friend nor an acquaintance of mine, at least bother to look up the original source before you do. This makes you look really ignorant, and I'm inclined to disbelieve the rest of what you write.

But wait! There's more!
I could stop there. But there's more to bother about in this whole affair. There's the whole "bubble of American supremacy" quote.

Does George Soros really want to burst "the bubble of American Supremacy?"

Gosh, the Wall Street Journal sure makes it look like he does. But the handily anonymous editorial staff doesn't include the verb "burst" in their quote, do they? The quote is the title of an editorial Soros wrote for The Korea Herald, the text of which closely follows an editorial Soros wrote for the Financial Times (that's the editorial the Wall Street Journal refers to in the quote [of the WSJ! Not Soros!] above).

What does Soros say in these editorials? Well, follow that link and read his words yourself. He worries about the possibility that George W. Bush is, in his hyperbolic approach, inflating a bubble of false expectations that will inevitably burst, causing great harm as a result. Let me, you know, directly quote Soros:

"In a boom-bust process, passing an early test tends to reinforce the misconception that has given rise to it. That could happen here.

It is not too late to prevent the boom-bust process from getting out of hand." (Source: Financial Times of London March 13, 2003)

See? Soros said he wants to prevent the whole boom-bust thing. The Wall Street Journal editorial staff is twisting and spinning like a hyperkinetic D.J. to make it appear that the opposite is true.

So let's review:
The quoted words of George Soros? Soros didn't say them.
In teeny tiny words, Soros no want bust bubble. Soros want bubble not bust!
Oooga! Booga! Ug Mug! (perhaps the conservative blogosphere will understand this phrasing.)

Am I surprised that the campaign of George W. Bush and its ally in the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board would stoop to misrepresenting the truth? Of course not. And that's another reason to boot Bush in 2004. (Source: e-mail from, November 14, 2003)

Bush's National Security Adviser, Condoleeza Rice, either lied or was completely ignorant of intelligence in the national security apparatus under her supervision when she said of the Niger Nuke Forgery, "no one in our circles knew that there were doubts and suspicions that this might be a forgery". Neither possibility inspires confidence.(Source: Associated Press July 23, 2003)

George W. Bush talks tough when he's surrounded by supporters, but he can't face the heat of opposition. Bush pulled out of a speech to the British Parliament at the last minute after his advisers told him he might be heckled by members of Parliament. Instead, he will give a speech at Buckingham Palace to an invitation-only audience. (Source: The Mirror November 17, 2003)

When I see the headline "Roadside bomb kills 2 U.S. Soldiers in Iraq," my first reaction is no longer surprise. Instead I think to myself, "Are those the same roadside bombing deaths they reported yesterday, or are these new ones?" We've become accustomed to death under the Bush Administration.

When George W. Bush said, "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised," he should have inserted the words "in my own misinformed, non-reading, adviser-surrounded, power-drunk mind" after the words "no doubt." (Source: Presidential Address to the Nation March 17, 2003)

"There are a lot of other things that are more important than that," writes Republican Tom Delay, referring to a Democratic proposal to include working families earning up to $26,625 in the $400 child tax credit given to better-off families. At the last minute, Republican Party operatives removed children of the working poor from the tax credit plan.

What, empirically speaking, is "more important" in the Republican Party tax package than including children of the working poor in a child tax credit plan? Dividend benefits for millionaires?

Can we permit George W. Bush and his Republican Party to continue to devalue kids from the wrong side of the tracks like this? (Source: New York Times June 4, 2003)

While we're at it, what kind of cruel jerk thinks it's a cool political maneuver to offer Americans a $400 child tax "credit" that they have to pay back? Yeah, that's right - when you paid your taxes in 2004, you had it pay that "credit" all back so that George W. Bush has enough money to pay for a tax cut to the rich. You don't see George W. Bush asking all those billionaires to pay back their tax cuts, so how come he makes middle-class and working class Americans pay back a tax credit for their children? That's just mean.

After the Bush administration spent more than two years drafting an energy bill in secret and hoarding records of meetings regarding the bill, the text of the bill was finally released on Saturday, November 15, giving Democrats and the public only 48 hours to read it before voting was scheduled to begin. Politicians like Bush only use secretive tactics like this when they have something to hide. (Source: New York Times November 16, 2003)

Bryan writes in with this one: Evicting a doubtlessly disappointed Bush Jr. from the White House just may help put unemployed cocaine dealers and bartenders back to work. Sure, one man may suffer, but it's worth it for the economic health of the country. Hey, that's the Bush Ethic, isn't it?

George W. Bush has so offended the Brits that they've taken to posting signs that say "Special Relationship? I Want a Divorce!" George W. Bush has tarnished not only his reputation, but the long-standing relationship between Britain and the United States. (Source: National Public Radio November 19, 2003)

In his address to an invitation-only crowd at the royal Whitehall Palace in the United Kingdom, George W. Bush said without apparent irony that "duty sometimes requires the violent restraint of violent men." Under this moral principlem, what does that make the men who pursue violent restraint? Who shall in turn "restrain" them? (Source: George W. Bush, Address of November 19, 2003)

In his palatial speech, Bush continued that "the measured use of force is all that protects us from a chaotic world ruled by force." Not only does Mr. Bush's assessment of foreign policy neglect the power of diplomacy, the enabling force of institution-building and the stabilizing effect of economic interdependence, it also clarifies Bush's distinction between good and evil: ordered violence versus chaotic violence. Anyone who has lived under a totalitarian regime will tell you that ordered violence still is violative in nature. Someone, please, slip Mr. Bush a copy of 1984, especially the part about Oceania always being at war...

Harriet Elaine Johnson of Cope, S. C., the mother of slain U.S. Army Specialist Darius T. Jennings, says of Bush's war in Iraq, "it doesn't seem like the American leaders are listening.... Let us not use our babies at the expense of the country to try to prove some kind of power struggle.... I feel quite sure if they had some kids over there, they would have already come up with a plan." (Source: The Wilmington Journal November 20, 2003)

Where in the world is the front in the "War on Terror"? George W. Bush's stated standard: "anywhere the terrorists think they can strike is a front." That kind of dangerous thinking makes the world a battlefield and turns the "War on Terror" into a War on Terra. (Source: Washington Post November 22, 2003)

Typical Bush diplomacy: Queen Elizabeth is furious at George W. Bush for allowing his staff to trample exotic plants and damage shrubs and trees dating back to the reign of Queen Victoria on the grounds of Buckingham Palace. (Source: Sunday Mirror November 23, 2003)

In the fall of 2002, White House economic advisor Lawrence B. Lindsey estimated that a war against Iraq would cost between $100 Billion and $200 Billion. Instead of listening to Lindsey, the Bush Administration quickly put out word that Lindsey was wildly overestimating. Then the Bush Administration fired him. (Source: Los Angeles Times February 26, 2003)

Captain John Teal, of Mechanicsville, killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq. (Source: Washington Post, October 25, 2003)

Donald Rumsfeld's continuing manner of belittling those who question him only builds resentment toward the Bush Administration. Rumsfeld's inability to control his temper is counterproductive and, in a crisis situation, potentially dangerous.

George W. Bush's blog does not permit comments.

The "Students for Bush!" rally at the University of Michigan on Saturday, November 22 gathered together to take a picture for the historical record. In that picture, there are only 37 people out of attended out of 24,517 students endrolled in the fall of 2003. That's a big ol' 0.15% (or 1.5 out of every thousand students) attendance! If this kind of picture merits headline inclusion on Bush's Blog, then what does that say about the depth of his support?

All of the individuals in that picture were white.

In the fall of 2003, conservatives liked to say that Howard Dean was destined to be this generation's George McGovern. Well, gee, that would have made George W. Bush this generation's Richard Nixon.

George W. Bush's campaign blog, the one that does not permit comments, reports that "The Seniors Coalition" has endorsed George W. Bush's medicare bill. TSC says it has "Four Million Supporters." Wow, what a movement! That's more than 3% of the U.S. population.

It turns out that "The Seniors Coalition" is not a movement of four million after all -- the AARP found that as of 2001 TSC didn't list any revenue from membership dues on its tax return (Source: AARP Bulletin February 2003). TSC is a lobbying organization whose latest calendar of activities is limited to the Washington, DC area. In the most recent year for which data is available from the Better Business Bureau, 2001, 65% of "The Seniors Coalition" funds are themselves spent on fundraising appeals, and a futher 16% of expenses are incurred in direct lobbying of officials.

TSC, investigated by Congress in 1992 for mail fraud, is funded by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (source: Minneapolis Star-Tribune November 16, 2003). Indeed, in a campaign contribution made June 12, 2003, Thomas Moore identifies himself as the "Director of Federal Affairs" for PhRMA, but is identified as "Director of Operations" for "The Seniors Coalition" on TSC's website. Moore also attended a press conference of Wisconsin Governor Scott McCallum as a representative of PhRMA on January 31, 2002. I'm sure it's all just a coincidence!

If the Bush administration has to rely on "endorsements" from McMovements like "The Seniors Coalition," support from outside the Beltway must be flagging indeed.

George W. Bush and his Republican Party politicians have control of the White House, the House of Representatives, and the Senate. Yet they cannot manage to accomplish the simplest, most basic tasks necessary for the proper running of the government. As of November 26, 2003, for instance, Bush and the Republicans were two months late in passing an omnibus budget bill, with no date for passage in sight. (Source: National Public Radio Day to Day November 26, 2003)

When the media followed George W. Bush on his visit to Fort Carson, the Army and White House passed out 10 ground rules to the media for them to follow. Rule #3 for the "free press": do not talk to any soldiers or any soldiers' families. (Source: Denver Post November 25, 2003)

More "free press" First Amendment fun: Ground Rule #9 for all media covering George W. Bush's visit to Fort Carson on November 24 instructed that journalists must "Write positive stories about Ft. Carson and the U.S. Army." (Source: Denver Post November 25, 2003)

Even more "free press" fun: Ground Rule #6 for all media at Fort Carson instructed that "no roaming" was to be allowed. After all, journalists might actually end up interviewing someone. Apparently, the Bush Administration does not trust members of the military to follow the Bush party line. (Source: Denver Post November 25, 2003)

Three budget seasons into his four-year term, and Bush has yet to veto a single spending bill. That's just one sign of Bush's fiscal irresponsibility, and the big government spending of the Washington D.C. Republican elite. (Source: CBS News, November 29, 2003)

Republicans are coming out of the woodwork to oppose George W. Bush. Fu's Fume is a series of critical articles written by a man who describes himself as having "been a Republican longer than Rush Limbaugh...Seriously." When members of Bush's own party start deserting him in droves, you know something serious is wrong with him.

Key Bush military adviser Richard Perle laid it on the line in November of 2003 when he said of the invasion of Iraq, "I think in this case international law stood in the way of doing the right thing." Perle further clarified that international law "would have required us to leave Saddam Hussein alone." Beware an administration that considers law to be an obstacle. (Source: The Guardian November 20, 2003)

George W. Bush sure seems to enjoy dressing up in military uniforms, doesn't he? What other world leaders do you know of in history who enjoyed doing the same?

The Republican Party that George W. Bush heads is trying to hire a luxury cruise liner so that its delegates and "special guests" won't have to, you know, STAY in New York City during Bush's coronating convention in 2004. Instead, they'll have the best of amenities and avoid the riff-raff. (Source: New York Times December 1, 2003)

Bush's Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was awarded the Foot in Mouth 2003 Award for uttering the following:

"Reports that say something hasn't happened are interesting to me, because as we know, there are known unknowns; there things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

Therein lies the crux of the Bush administration's problems. While they thought they knew what they knew, they actually didn't know what they knew, and they didn't know they didn't know it. Yet they told the world they knew what they didn't know, and the world didn't know that the administration didn't know that they didn't know what they knew. You know? (Source: Reuters December 1, 2003)

As if putting more arsenic and human sewage in Americans' drinking water isn't enough, George W. Bush and his White House aides have come up with a new poison to let loose, into the air this time: Mercury.
It's a fact: George W. Bush and new EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt have acknowledged that they plan to let their friends in big energy corporations pump more mercury into the air that drifts through American neighborhoods in small towns, cities and even the countryside.

Frank O'Donnell, executive director of the Clean Air Trust, says "It shows that [EPA Administrator Michael] Leavitt is taking orders from the White House, which is influenced by the power companies that want to gut the mercury requirements."

(Source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution, December 3, 2003)

What's ironic about Bush's policy decision is that mercury poisoning can cause abortion. Yes, that's right, abortion of unborn children. You see, when pregnant mothers are exposed to dangerous levels of mercury, the brains of the children growing within their wombs fail to develop. Put a lot of mercury into the air, as Bush is proposing to do, and you'll have otherwise healthy babies being born dead and deformed. If Bush really cared about the unborn, and not just about restricting women's choices, he would make the elimination of mercury not just a policy priority but a moral imperative.

When his Medicare bill seemed in doubt in the Congress, George W. Bush's team pulled out the big guns, offering a $100,000 campaign bribe to Representative Nick Smith for him to change his vote from No to Yes. When Rep. Smith refused to change his vote, his son (who is running to replace him in office) was threatened: Rep. Smith was told that campaign contributors would send extra funds to his son's competitors if he were to vote No. Rep. Smith stood his ground and voted No. After the vote, a number of Republican members of Congress (including perpetual twerp Randy Cunningham) approached Rep. Smith and let him know his son's candidacy was effectively over.

This is the "honor and integrity" that Bush promised to restore to Washington? (Source: Chicago Sun-Times November 27, 2003)

The Washington Post (December 4, 2003) reports that the pretty picture of George W. Bush holding a turkey on a platter to serve the troops on Thanksgiving Day was... a fake. That makes for two fake plastic turkeys in one picture.

The only way to Ban the Bomb is to Ban the Bush

Stephen Cleghorn, 54, is an executive at a D.C. nonprofit group. With his stepson in the U.S. Army in Iraq, Cleghorn talks about his son's military mission in the following way. "I believe he's a conscientious young man who went into the service to defend his country. I just think he's been put on the wrong mission." (Source: Washington Post, October 24, 2003) We agree with Mr. Cleghorn. We also believe that if you want to support the troops, the best way to do that now is to join the campaign to get a new President, so that American soldiers will not continue to be put in harm's way for unnecessary missions.

David Cline, national president of Veterans for Peace says he sees some "eerie parallels to what we went through 30 years ago." He ought to know. Like John Kerry, he went to Vietnam. Although he was of age, George W. Bush did not. (Source: Canadian Press, October 24, 2003)

Hey, for the record, we don't think that its our place to make negative judgments about choices people made about the military draft over 30 years ago. We do very well believe that it is proper and necessary to evaluate the present day actions of politicians according to those politicians' past behavior. We think that it's reprehensible that so many people who decided not to go to war themselves are now pushing other people's children into unnecessary combat.

On NPR's The Connection, December 5, 2003, Dick Gorden asked the stupidest question I've heard in a long time: Why can't the Democrats come up with a new idea around which the Party can be organized?

This is a question right out of the Republican playbook, and it's a trick. The real answer is that the Democratic Party doesn't need to come up with a new organizing principle. The Democrats have an old one that does just fine. On The Connection, Mario Cuomo identifies it as "we're all in this together."

That's a nice phrase, and it's true, but what it comes down to is much simpler: The Democratic Party stands for the Golden Rule: Do Unto Others as You Would Have Them Do Unto You.

The Golden Rule makes sense not only because it is nice, but because when others (whether they are individuals or nations) are treated with respect they tend to become respect-worthy. When others are treated with fairness, they tend to act fairly. When others are treated with accountability they tend to take responsibility. The Golden Rule works to build more stable, more prosperous, more tightly interwoven and more just societies.

Meanwhile, the Republican Party stands for the Rotten Rule: Do Unto Others Whatever You Can Get Away With.

The Rotten Rule erodes trust, encourages venality, fosters violence, encourages fear, ignores justice, and wastes our energies on destructive gambits.

Bush and the Republicans are Rotten. The alternative is Golden. That's the only reason you need to give Bush the boot. (Of course, we're happy to provide you with many more.)

Who is a citizen of the United States? The current rule is pretty simple when you get down to it: if you were born in this country, you're a citizen. If you weren't born in this country, you must apply for citizenship. This idea about citizenship is so fundamental that it is formally enshrined in the United States Constitution.

Republican Party operatives are trying to change this rule so that you can be born in this country but not be a citizen. Republican Representatives Ron Paul and Nathan Deal are trying to pass laws (H.J. Res 42 and H.R. 1567, respectively) that would deny citizenship to some babies born in the United States. Their bills, introduced in April and May of 2003, have gained the support of a dozen fellow representatives, all of whom are also Republicans.

This is the sort of dangerous nonsense that the Republican Party stands for, and it is why the man at the head of the Republican Party, George W. Bush, deserves to be booted from office.

Bush is fucking up Iraq, he told his aides that he was going to "fuck Saddam," and what does his White House spend its time doing? Criticizing John Kerry for using the word "fuck" when he said, "Did I expect George Bush to f..k it up as badly as he did? I don't think anybody did."

In the Bush moral universe, reckless foreign policies that end up killing thousands and wasting hundreds of billions of dollars are acceptable. But saying "fuck?" Man, that's just beyond the pale. (Source: Reuters December 7, 2003)

Let's put this one in the "what the hell were they thinking?!?" pile:
Reuters has reported that the Bush Administration is asking for advice from Israel about how to use military units to quash Arab insurgents.

Hm. All right, put aside for a moment your moral opinions about Israel's military campaigns against the Palenstinians and ask this basic operational question:

Has Israeli actually quashed their own Arab insurgents?

The obvious answer is: um, gosh, NO.

For some reason, the Bush Administration and Ariel Sharon's government seem to have overlooked this basic fact. Get this quote from an Israeli security agent, talking about how Israel is giving advice to the Bush Administration on how to run the war in Iraq: "Israel has been providing advice on how to shift from a reliance on heavy, armored occupation troops to mobile forces that are more effective in quelling urban resistance and cause less friction with the general populace."

(Source, Reuters, December 9, 2004)

See, the little problem with this latest plan is that Israel's military campaigns against Palestinian insurgents have not quelled urban resistance. They've increased it. And, as for reducing friction with the general populace, Palestinian anger at Israel has grown, not lessened, as a result of Israel's military raids. To anyone who doesn't have an ideological reason to favor building closer ties with the Israeli government, the military campaigns are an obvious failure. Unfortunately, George W. Bush and his top aides do have an ideologically-based pro-Israel stance that blinds them to the real problems in the military strategy employed by Israel.

Ask almost any American whether they want American troops to get involved in the kind of endless urban warfare that the Israeli military has been stuck in for generations, and the answer you will get is: um, gosh, NO. For some reason, the answer George W. Bush gives to that question is: um, gosh, YES, and how soon can we start?

George W. Bush asking the Israelis for advice on how to deal with the insurgents in Iraq is as profoundly stupid as it would be for Howard Dean to call up Michael Dukakis and ask him how to run a presidential campaign.

Howard Dean is smart enough not to ask miserable failures for advice, but Mr. Bush doesn't appear to have summoned enough brain cells to figure out this basic principle of life.

Making failed military strategy on the basis of political ideology: Yet another reason to give Bush the boot in 2004.

The Bush Administration has announced that in contracts for the rebuilding of Iraq, companies of French, German, Russian and Canadian (yes, Canadian!) nationality need not apply because to do business with them in this way would be against "the essential security interests of the United States." That's no way to treat three long-time allies and one fledgling ally of the United States simply because they (along with the vast majority of countries of the world) opposed a single policy decision of a particular American President. (Source: New York Times December 10, 2003)

But wait, there's more! Matters of justice aside, the Bush administration announced its exclusion of companies from France, Germany, Russia and Canada from bidding for rebuilding contracts just hours before asking those same countries' governments to forgive Iraqi debts. This would all be silly if it didn't matter so much to the people getting ground down and picked off in Iraq. When George W. Bush exercises his diplomatic incompetence, he makes the world a more dangerous place. (Source: New York Times December 11, 2003)

George W. Bush's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia: Texas oil industry lobbyist James Oberwetter. What interests do you think Oberwetter will better represent, those of the American people, or those of big American oil and energy corporations. (Source: Reuters November 18, 2003)

Rush Limbaugh has been down on his luck lately. Could it be that the strain of defending George W. Bush's ridiculous policies helped push him into drug addiction? If you'd like to help Rush help himself, take Bush out of the picture in 2004 and give Limbaugh a break from breaking with reality.

George W. Bush looked deep into the eyes of Russian leader Vladmir Putin and saw a companion soul. The problem? Putin, a former KGB agent, has been working systematically to undermine democracy in Russia. There's a creepy parallel with what Bush has been doing here in America. Bush wants to do to America what Putin has done to Russia.

Oh, some Republicans will say that it's unpatriotic to even mention this fact, but here goes: In 2003, 15 Afghan children were killed by the American military in just one week. (Source: Washington Post, December 10, 2003)

George W. Bush declared victory in Afghanistan over a year and a half ago, so we find it odd that the war is still going on.

Bush promised the Afghan people that America would rebuild their country. Instead, Bush's attention moved on to Iraq, leaving behind only enough soldiers to do a half-baked job of stabilizing Afghanistan. As a result, warlords are still running most of the country, the Taliban are still fighting, and children are still being slaughtered in the name of Bush's War on Evil.

Yes, we think that it matters. No, we don't think it's unpatriotic to talk about what the American government is doing. We do think that it's downright undemocratic of the Republicans to try to bully Bush's critics into keeping their mouths shut. Oh, but that's another reason to boot Bush, isn't it? It's so damn hard to keep them all straight!

If you try to visit the "grassroots" section of the Bush/Cheney re-election web site, you'll get redirected to the Bush Campaigns "Donate" page, which asks for your credit card information. It seems that Mr. Bush has missed the lesson that the working people of America are good for more than just serving as a source of financial income.

Section 9528 of the No Child Left Behind Act that George W. Bush got passed gives the Pentagon access public schools' directories for students' addresses and home phone numbers. Before this act was passed, one third of public schools declined to share student information with recruiters. This was a local government decision reflecting the will of these communities. George W. Bush has removed this modicum of local control. When it comes to the war-making side of government, Bush is for big government mandates all the way. (Source: Alternet December 9, 2002)

When Bush was (more or less) elected in the year 2000, what did the people who voted for him expect him to DO? Think about it. The guy openly confessed he was not a "policy wonk." He didn't really seem too interested in the details of government. He had a long history as a lazy party boy. He was elected to DO NOTHING!

I know that seems strange, but think back to the year 2000. The economy's going great, we're at peace. For a lot of people, it's good times. As the old saying goes, "running a country is like cooking a small fish." Don't keep poking at it, just let it cook. The man was elected to be lazy, get nothing done, and leave well enough alone.

And so it would have been, were it not for the shady entourage. You know the crew--Cheney, Ashcroft, Wolfowitz, Dumbsfeld... And the shady companies that donated big money and wanted something back regardless of the consequences to the country--Enron, Halliburton... They all got their claws into America and screwed it up. They sent our young men and women to die in the sand based on bogus intelligence. They gouged big chunks out of the bill of rights. They detained people indefinitely with no due process, like totalitarian thugs. They messed up our environment, bled our schools dry, and screwed up our tax code. Bush sucked our budget surplus dry and got us into a deficit spiral again.

The man has let us down on everything--even his implicit promise to the American people to slack off and do nothing once he was elected. Unfortunately for us, he and his creepy crew have done a lot. We would have been better off if Bush had done nothing at all.

Bush seems to like his last name so much, he puts the "sh" sound in words that don't have an "sh." For BuSH, the bill has to be signed by CongreSH. Dangerous policies are described as in our intereSHts. How SHelf-absorbed! We thing it's ridiculouSH!

The "At least he isn't Bill Clinton" excuse was old a long time ago.

You can see it in their eyes when they show up on TV -- truly conservative Republican politicians are getting tired of defending free-wheeling, big-spending, bank-busting Bush budget after budget. Put them out of their misery by putting Bush out of power.

George W. Bush had the gall to say to a reporter, televised, in front of the whole country: "one of the things, David, I think you've seen about our foreign policy is that I'm reluctant to use military power." This is the man who, in response to members of his administration inquiring about the progress of negotiation, said "Fuck Saddam, we're taking him out" -- a full year before going to war against Iraq. (Source: Presidential Press Conference December 15, 2003)

In George Orwell's 1984, a totalitarian regime governs under a series of slogans, including this one: "who controls the past, controls the future." The Ministry of Truth in Orwell's novel employs agents to scan the historical record for facts that would embarassing to the Party, then delete them from the record to avoid such embarassment. The totalitarian Soviet Union employed this tactic often, airbrushing "purged" officials out of old photos.

Taking a page from Orwell and the Soviets, the White House has rewritten its posting of George W. Bush's speech of May 1, 2003, changing the phrase "President Bush Announces Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended," to the ever-so-much-more convenient "President Bush Announces Major Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended." (Source: Washington Post December 18, 2003)

More Soviet-style truth management: The Bush Administration has eliminated all reference to comments made by United States Agency for International Development administrator Andrew S. Natsios. Natsios aided the pro-war pep rally of the Bush Administration by announcing in an interview with Ted Koppel on ABC that the reconstruction of Iraq would only require an investment of $1.7 Billion on the part of the United States, with all other costs to be paid for by other countries. A transcript of this interview was prominently placed on the USAID website during the summer, but now all reference to it has been eliminated. (Source: Washington Post December 18, 2003)

When confronted with evidence of the elimination of this information from the government database, a USAID spokeswoman requested time to investigate, and then reported back that the information was removed because ABC would have required payment for the government to continue to post it. The trouble with this story is that ABC says not only that nobody from ABC requested payment or the removal of the information, but also that as a matter of policy it would never charge the government for such information. George W. Bush and his apparatchiks just can't handle the truth. (Source: Washington Post December 18, 2003)

Question: Who made this statement?

"In recent years there's such an emphasis on getting there fast with a story that oftentimes after goes out the window. People don't check the facts, people will pick up a story, or allegations that aren't true, if they'd check they'd know they aren't true, but they never bother to check."

Answer: Dick Cheney (absolutely not talking about the weapons of mass destruction fiasco!) (Source: Washington Post December 19, 2003)

Pat writes in: "I have come to the conclusion that our Republican representatives on the hill are like ostriches. Between Washington's Orca whales population, Yellowstone snowmobiles, Alaska drilling, and drilling in the Rockies, their actions betray heads buried in the sand in regard to the long-term health of our planet. Is short-term profit all that matters to Bush's GOP? How short-sighted."

"Yankee" contributes the following reason to boot Bush: "In early November of 2003, President Bush signed the partial-birth abortion ban, going against the principle that we have no right to shove our laws inside a woman's uterus."

Marlana suggests, "Bush is so stupid he supposedly believes that tuna fishers will self-regulate themselves with his administration's softening the requirements for using the "dolphin safe" label on tuna fish, allowing the label to be used even if the tuna is caught by encircling dolphins in mile-long nets." This kind of homeland security roundup approach to dolphin safety proves that we'd be better off with Flipper in the White House than we would be letting George W. Bush continue his occupation of the Oval Office. (Source: Associated Press January 1, 2003)

The Republican Party that Bush heads is the party of apes like Strom Thurmond, who loudly rallied for racial segregation while hiding his black daughter.

All these orange alerts are making Halloween creepier than ever. They make me wonder, does John Ashcroft plan on searching my jack-o-lanterns for suspicious items?

Would you lend George W. Bush your credit card and tell him to use it however he saw fit? Well, guess what: The Republicans in Congress are letting Bush spend like there's no tomorrow. Still, they tell us not to worry. We won't have to pay anything until, um, tomorrow.

B.K. Prince of Columbus, Ohio writes in: "By supporting the "Defense of Marriage Act", our "president-chosen" Bush is validating the uniquely Christian view that marriage is solely between a man and a woman. The problem is that not all Americans are religious, and not all religious Americans are Christians (Buddhism, for instance, allows gay 'marriage'). Besides, I believe that there's a little section of the US Constitution that says the government shall make no laws establishing a religion. As president-chosen, Bush is supposed to uphold the Constitution, not ram his personal Christian beliefs down everybody's throats. On the basis of his religion, and in defiance of the Constitution, George W. Bush is trying to deny what the US Supreme court called "A basic human liberty" to one-tenth of the United States."

The conservative reactionaries who support George W. Bush try to tell us that gay marriage is against Christian religious tradition, but the plain facts contradict this claim. It's not just non-Christian religion that accepts gay marriage.

Many Christian churches have religious ceremonies consecrating weddings for homosexual couples. The Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, the Unity Fellowship Church, the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches, the United Church of Christ, the United Church of Canada, and Reconciling congregations of the United Methodist Churches include gay marriage within their set of religious rituals. So, when George W. Bush and his Republican supporters say that they want to use the power of government to forbid gay marriage, they are taking sides in a struggle between religious groups, supporting conservative religious beliefs and opposing liberal religious beliefs.

The federal government has no place stepping into the middle of a battle about theology and telling Americans which religious beliefs are right and which ones are wrong. On that basis alone, the effort of George W. Bush and his Republican elite extremists to restrict the authority of churches from practicing marriage ceremonies for gay couples is an unconstitutional and illegal blunder. (Source: Human Rights Campaign)

There's enough sand, in enough countries with leaders Bush doesn't like, to soak up the blood of every one of our young men and women. We need to stop Bush from spilling more.

If you hired a servant who started acting like a king, would you rehire him after his contract was up? George Bush is supposed to be our servant (thus the term "public servant"), not our king.

Our troops have got the right stuff, but they've been sent on the wrong mission, at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons, by the wrong President.

You know, it's just a matter of time before some reporter slips and calls the secretary of defense "Mr. Dumbsfeld." We've dodged a bullet so far, but is it worth running the risk for four more years?

Ronald Dumbsfeld's condescending attitude when talking to the American people through the press, besides being just plain annoying, points to a fundamental problem with the Bush administration--they have forgotten they work for us. Remind them in 2004, by firing their sorry asses.

Little did they know it, but the people who cast ballots for Bush in 2000 weren't just voting for the president of the United States. They were also voting for the military dictator of Afghanistan and Iraq. Thinking about voting for Bush in 2004? Think again. You may be voting for the military dictator of Syria or Sudan.

Because our armed forces have a responsibility to the American people: to carry out any mission the government assigns them without question or complaint. They're doing an outstanding job. It's our responsibility as voters to elect a government that will send them on missions for honest reasons, with clear objectives and reasonable expectations for stable outcomes. We let them down in 2000 by allowing Bush to become president. Do right by the troops in 2004. Boot Bush!

Despite putting out the call on their national blog well in advance, the Bush-Cheney campaign only managed to draw a few more than 100 to a pro-Bush rally in Louisiana on January 4 -- outside the jam-packed Sugar Bowl! If this is a groundswell, I'm Patsy Cline. (Source: Bush-Cheney News Release January 5, 2004)

Conservative televangelist Pat Robertson has been telling his listeners that God told him Bush will win in a "blowout election in 2004." Let's make it clear to that blowhard Pat Robertson and his followers that he doesn't have a direct line to God by giving Bush a blowout election loss. (Source: Associated Press January 2, 2004)

Anti-Dean advertisements on the air in Iowa make the damning criticism that Howard Dean drives a Volvo! Eeeeeeeeek! Well, actually, he drives a Ford Explorer. But even in this inaccuracy, pro-Bush campaigners show that they are dividers, not uniters.(Sources: Washington Times January 5, 2004 and Detroit Free Press October 20, 2003)

Another anti-Dean criticism in the Iowa advertisement: members of his campaign read a newspaper! Apparently, the pro-Bush campaigners consider literacy and knowledge to be dangerous. (Source: Washington Times January 5, 2004)

Yet another anti-Dean criticism in that Iowa advertisement: his campaign team eats sushi! We all know who eats sushi: Slanty-eyed furriners, the kids of slanty-eyed furriners and the nefarious sort of person who associates with slanty-eyed furriners! Bush supporters will have none of this furriner business. (Source: Washington Times January 5, 2004)

Still another anti-Dean criticism in that Iowa advertisment: his campaign team drinks lattes! The pro-Bush campaign betrays its lack of substantive heft when it stoops to criticizing what opponents put in their coffee. Besides, doesn't the Bush campaign realize that latte drinks are now sold at gas stations all across America? Geez, if we can't even drink gas station coffee without being criticized by Republicans, I don't see why we should we vote for a Republican for President. (Source: Washington Times January 5, 2004)

How strained has the Bush Administration left our national defenses? In order to maintain enough soldiers to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan while defending U.S. borders from attack, the U.S. Army has been forced to order thousands of troops to remain on duty in Iraq even after their term of service has ended. So many soldiers in the Army are planning to leave active duty that the Army has had to increase its re-enlistment bonus to up to $10,000. Thanks to the overstretching offense ordered the Bush administration, the armed forces are having to labor mightily to maintain national defense. (Source: New York Times January 6, 2004)

Dick Cheney's 2003 Christmas card included this quotation: "And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?" Beware a Vice President who thinks God is his ally. (Source: New York Times January 7, 2004)

The whole "empire" reference in the card is a bit troubling, too. The job of the President and Vice President is to run the country, not rule the world.

The most troubling thing about that Christmas card is that Dick Cheney felt comfortable sending out hundreds of Christmas cards with the message that God was his Imperial ally. To root out the moral rot at the base of this hubris, we need to remove the current occupants of the White House.

Between March 16, 2003 and January 7, 2004, 8,848 injured Americans in the U.S. Army alonehad to be evacuated from Iraq. Before he obtained this information, journalist Daniel Zwerdling was bounced from Pentagon office to Pentagon office (and back) for weeks by Bush administration bureaucrats who said they didn't have the information. (Source: NPR All Things Considered January 7, 2004)

There are consequences to the Bush Administration decision to do nothing about global warming. A team of 19 scientists studying 1,103 native species in Mexico, Australia, Brazil, South Africa and Europe conclude that one third of these species could disappear or approach extinction by 2050 if greenhouse gas emissions are not curbed. This isn't crackpot science: results are being published in the prestigious journal Nature.(Sources: Associated Press October 18, 2003 and Associated Press January 7, 2004)

In the time since George W. Bush was elected to office, there's been a fundamental change of direction in American society, one that I haven't heard any economist, social scientist or professional commentator mention. In the last three years, the meaning of Americans' work has undergone a 180 degree reversal.

Just think back to the days when Bill Clinton was in office. Back then, the defining idea about work was that ordinary Americans had finally found the power to make their work their own. Americans were beginning to make free choices about their work, including where, when and to what ends they would work. Record numbers of Americans in the 1990s began to work for themselves, ending their wage enslavement to the whims of bosses.

What's happened since Bush began his occupation of the White House? America has gone back to the days when bosses were kings, ruling the lives of their employees like hungry feudal lords. We're told when to work, how to work, and we're told to like it or else. Under Bush, the bosses have regained the power to cut wages, increase hours and wither down the health care packages workers earn. We're bludgeoned with the hammer of OR ELSE, told that a cruel job is better than no job at all. So, we get busy working at someone else's job, for someone else's interests.

What about the independence we workers gained in the 1990s? The Republicans now tell us that our independence was a dream, a manifestation of workers' "irrational exuberance". The Republicans tell us to get back in our place, under their heels.

Are you going to vote four more years of that?

In his entire term in office, George W. Bush has only met with the Congressional Black Caucus once, snubbing all other requests for a meeting. (Source: St. Louis American January 1, 2004)

Bush's record on the environment is so shoddy that fellow Republicans are coming out of the woodwork to criticize him on it. Prominent Republican politician Pete McCloskey writes regarding the Endangered Species Act, "The administration has stopped designating "critical habitat" for listed species except under court order. It has stopped adding to the list of threatened and endangered species unless ordered to do so by a judge. It has moved to exempt the Forest Service from abiding by the law on the pretext of fire prevention. It is working to weaken the requirement that endangered species be protected from pesticides. And that list barely scratches the surface. The assault on the law is widespread and relentless. The administration and its comrades in arms argue that the law is ineffective, expensive and in need of drastic overhaul. In truth, they are acting as agents for the timber industry, the mining industry, land developers, big agriculture and other economic interests that sometimes find their profits slightly decreased in the short run by the need to obey this law." (Source: Los Angeles Times January 2, 2004)

"We know for a fact that there are weapons there." White House spokesman Ari Fleischer told us, less than three months before the American invasion of Iraq belong. Now, we know for a fact that the supposed weapons of mass destruction were not there. Now, America has to wonder what other facts the Bush Administration claimed to have, when they really didn't at all. Undermining Americans' trust in authority is a serious offense that it not to be rewarded. Get tough! Don't coddle the amoral relativism of the Bush Administration! (Source: White House Press Briefing January 9, 2003)

George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and John Ashcroft have got Americans so scared of their own shadows that people are overreacting. How much, you ask? This much: in Salem, Massachussets (yes, that Salem), a woman inquiring about a copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator software for her 10-year old son led the staff at the Staples superstore to report her to the police. How do we know? The state trooper shining a flashlight through a glass door at her home (looking for terrorists of all things) shared the story. (Source: The Register of London August 1, 2004)

Here's the real kicker to that story. It turns out that the Staples store manager who reported this woman to the police said staff was just following the authorities' advice. It seems the FBI had asked for citizens to be on the lookout for people with reference materials, or "drivers with maps." What phrase best describes a nation in which drivers with maps or customers asking about software at stores that sell software become criminal suspects? "Police State" comes to mind. Thanks so much for fanning the flames of fear, George. (Source: The Register of London August 1, 2004)

"Ohollem" writes in: If we give Bush the boot, we won't have to go to the trouble of revising Webster's dictionary to include "misunderestimate," "subliminable," and "suicider."

What is the quality of George W. Bush's presidency? Listen to the judgments of the members of Bush's administration themselves. John J. DiIulio was the highly touted leader of Bush's office of faith-based initiatives. Nonetheless, DiIulio said of the Bush White House that "there is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus. . . . What you've got is everything -- and I mean everything -- being run by the political arm. It's the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis." (Source: Associated Press January 10, 2004)

How about the man Bush chose to be his Treasury Secretary, Paul O'Neill? O'Neill says that Bush led cabinet meetings "like a blind man in a room full of deaf people." (Source: Associated Press January 10, 2004)

O'Neill says that when he tried to engage Bush in a dialogue on economic policy, Bush just sat there and said nothing: "As I recall, it was mostly a monologue." That pretty much sums up Bush's approach to the economy. We desperately need a do-something President. (Source: Associated Press January 10, 2004)

Remember all those stories about how Iraq moved its supposed weapons of mass destruction to Syria, and that was why Iraq's weapons of mass destruction couldn't be found? Well, gee, now it turns out that the United States does not have and never had any credible evidence at all to support that conveniently spun yarn. (Source: Associated Press January 9, 2004)

Nathan writes in, "There's gotta be a reason nobody ever compared Clinton to Hitler." Well, Nathan, one good reason we can think of is that, unlike Bush, Bill Clinton did not engage in a systematic attempt to undermine people's basic freedoms in order to establish a central order of law enforcement and domestic espionage used to quash dissent. See, it is possible to lead a nation and not send governmental secret agents out to harass its law-abiding citizens. It's too bad George W. Bush and Adolph Hitler never learned that lesson.

Because if it hadn't been for concerted opposition by progressives, George W. Bush and John Ashcroft would have foisted an expansion of the Patriot Act (dubbed "Patriot Act II") on American citizens. (Source: Alternet January 1, 2004)

Bush's attacks on the environment just come 2 fast and 2 furious 2 follow. As if allowing more sewage and arsenic into drinking water weren't enough, Bush now wants to give the green light to polluting watersheds right at the source.

See, up to now there's been this pesky little regulation that prevented coal miners from disturbing land within 100 feet of a stream unless they could prove it wouldn't harm the water quality or reduce the flow of water. But the mining industry wants that regulation overturned so it can do something called "mountaintop mining": blasting away the top of a mountain ridge to reveal a coal deposit, then dumping the waste into mountain streams. And George W. Bush is going to bat for them.

Did an overwhelming flood of letters from ordinary Americans begging to have their pure alpine brooks turned into heaps of mining waste convince Bush that he just had to act? Or is he taking his cue from the National Mining Association lobbyists?

Bush's plan to bomb the tops off America's mountains is downright unpatriotic. Those aren't just big heaps of rock we're talking about. Bush wants to blow up America's purple mountains' majesty! What's next? Will Bush create a plan to fill up our fruited plains with strip malls?

Congratulations, NMA. The way the administration's towing your line, you may as well be the EPA. I can only plead with you, as I would plead with a monarch, to have mercy on the environment.

And listen up, Bush. You are not my king. And your fatcat lobbyist friends are not my lords. You've got one more year to be their puppet, then we vote you out of office. (Source: The Guardian, Jan. 7, 2004)

Under the administration of George W. Bush, the Pentagon auditors designated to ferret out military waste have been caught in their own cover-up of inconvenient practices. If you think George W. Bush is the man to put a stop to these shenanigans, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. (Source: Associated Press January 10, 2004)

Paul O'Neill, who served in the Cabinet as Treasury Secretary under George W. Bush, says that in the first few months of the Bush Administration in 2001, the Bush White House was already drawing up plans to invade Iraq using American troops. O'Neill's account is corroborated by members of the dissident Iraqi National Congress, who say that officials representing the Bush White House contacted them in early 2001 to include them in planning for an American invasion of Iraq. (Source: CBS News January 10, 2004)

O'Neill on the supposed evidence for weapons of mass destruction: "In the 23 months I was there, I never saw anything that I would characterize as evidence of weapons of mass destruction. There were allegations and assertions by people. But I've been around a hell of a long time, and I know the difference between evidence and assertions and illusions or allusions and conclusions that one could draw from a set of assumptions. To me there is a difference between real evidence and everything else. And I never saw anything in the intelligence that I would characterize as real evidence." (Source: Time Magazine January 10, 2004)
Part of the early 2001 planning for an invasion of Iraq was the drafting of official planning documents. One of these documents, authored by the Pentagon, is entitled "Foreign Suitors For Iraqi Oilfield Contracts" and describes areas of the country that are suitable for oil exploration. A war for oil? No, of course not. (Source: CBS News January 10, 2004)

The White House is trying to control political damage from the revelations of Paul O'Neill by sending out anonymous "senior administration officials" to say that Paul O'Neill is an incompetent economist and therefore can't be trusted to speak competently about the goings-on in the White House when he was there. If such accusations are false, they indicate that the Bush White House is willing to engage in baseless slander to protect itself. If such accusations are true, they mean that George W. Bush put an incompetent man in charge of the U.S. Treasury for two years. Neither possibility inspires confidence in the quality of the Bush administration. (Source: CBS News January 10, 2004)

A little afterthought: With what Bush Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill has told us, we now know that George W. Bush had over two years to plan for the occupation of Iraq - and still he got it wrong.

Just in case you were wondering, now another administration official has corroborated O'Neill's story about Bush's early Iraq planning, adding that senior Bush Administration officials started planning for the use of ground forces to invade Iraq long before September 11, 2001. This corroborating official won't let ABC News identify him -- she/he doesn't want to be tarred and feathered like O'Neill. (Source: ABC News January 14, 2004)

According to The Guardian (Jan. 3, 2004), American troops smashed up an Iraqi mosque on New Year's Day, 2004. They roughed up the people they found there, threw copies of the Koran onto the floor, busted open the collection box and took the money. Al-Jazeera satellite television network showed pictures of the damaged Korans. Some weapons were found, though that's par for the course in Iraq, where people have to provide their own security in the absence of an organized, legitimate government.

Imagine the shoe on the other foot. Iraqi soldiers occupying the U.S. in defiance of global sentiment and international law trash your church. They fling Bibles onto the floor, punch your priest, smash your collection box and leave with the money. Would you feel like supporting their "reconstruction" effort, or would you feel humiliated and pissed off?

We all want to see peace and justice restored to Iraq, but if we want the Iraqis to respect us and help with the reconstruction, we need to respect them in return. We need a president who realizes how important it is to show respect for other cultures and religions. We need a president who will clearly articulate: search the mosque if you must, but for Pete Pity's sake don't desecrate it! Bush has not articulated a conscientious plan for law enforcement in Iraq in the past, and we can't count on him to do it in the future.

Back in early 2003, when conservatives told me to shut up and stop criticizing Bush, I told them, "If you want to live under a military dictatorship, go move to Iraq." Now, in 2004, I tell them, "If you want to live under a military dictatorship, go move to Iraq."

Think opposing Bush dishonors the troops? Think again. Bush dishonored the troops by sending them to die and kill based on lies. SUPPORTING Bush dishonors the troops.

Because it ain't morning in America. It's one of our darkest hours. It's time to start a new day.

Come to think of it. Under George W. Bush, it's mourning in America.

Remember in 2001, when people got letters in the mail saying we'd get a check for our tax rebate, then a few weeks later we got a check? I got $300. Thanks, but I would've taken the check and the letter together to save us all some postage. OK, now remember last year when Bush asked for $87,000,000,000 extra for the Iraq war and other stuff he called parts of the war on terror? My share of that works out to around $300 or so too. Now how come I didn't get letter saying I was going to get a bill for $300, or a nice little certificate saying "a debt of $300 has been incurred in your name, which you will not have the option to pay off until it has accrued a whopping great pile of interest"? Why not? Because George Bush is a huckster who's waving cash in our faces with one hand and picking our pockets with the other.

Because sea otters, polar bears, caribou and dolphins don't get to vote, but they have to live with the results or our elections. Along with us humans, Bush has been giving animals the shaft too. If you won't do it for yourself or America, cast an anti-Bush ballot on behalf of our furry friends.

"Deficits don't matter." This was the advice of Vice President Dick Cheney to Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill. Saying that deficits don't matter is as outrageous as saying that credit cards don't matter. I worry about the credit card debts that Dick Cheney must be running up. Does his wife know? Let's get Dick Cheney out of the White House, so that he has some time to attend credit counseling seminars. (Source: Reuters January 11, 2004)

When Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill suggested that the White House tackle corporate crime more aggressively , George W. Bush said that he couldn't do it because of opposition from "the corporate crowd." That's our no-backbone, soft-on-crime Bush! (Source: Reuters January 11, 2004)

Amy M. writes in: "(Bush's) Hot Air is not a viable alternative energy source. Although Bush tried to appear concerned with the environment by coming out with a plan to fund research into alternative energy sources, namely hydrogen fuel, that plan went up in smoke, so to speak. The money Bush assigned to this research was, apparently, already earmarked for other Energy Department projects. Although not one of his moneyed elite friends (so perhaps I don't understand how The System works), I am perplexed. How can one claim to be funding research with money that is already slated for other projects? Is this another case of shifting money from one account to the other to make the books look good? Oh, wait. I'm getting the Bush administration confused with Enron. Just Hot Air or Green Bush. You decide."

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has released a report warning that thanks to the policies of the Bush Administration, the United States is generating an "unprecedented level of external debt for a large industrial country." The report not only points out that record U.S. budget deficits under Bush threaten the Social Security and Medicare programs, but also that they are poised to raise interest rates around the world, making it harder for working people everywhere to get by. (Source: New York Times January 12, 2004)

Speaking of studies, the Army War College has just released a doozy of a study of its own. It says "the global war on terrorism as currently defined and waged is dangerously indiscriminate,... is strategically unfocused, promises more than it can deliver, and threatens to dissipate U.S. military resources in an endless and hopeless search for absolute security." It concludes that the war against Iraq was unnecessary to protect American security and unnecessarily costly in dollars and American lives. I suppose this means that, by Bush Administration standards, the Army War College is just an unpatriotic and America-hating institution with a liberal bias. (Source: Washington Post January 12, 2004)

George W. Bush has the ignorant audacity to say "no President has ever done more for human rights than I have." Read your history books, George. There have been plenty. (Source: New York Daily News January 11, 2004)

When George W. Bush openly expresses doubt that the leaker who exposed undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame will ever be found, he betrays a lack of control over his own staff. If he really were in charge and everyone were working for him, he could order his staff to 'fess up or resign. The fact that he cannot find a ne'er-do-well in his employ indicates that the White House is an anarchic place. (Source: Washington Post January 6, 2004)

On the other hand, maybe George W. Bush doesn't care about felons on his staff. Read the words of Bush spokesman Scott McClellan carefully: "Certainly no one wants to get to the bottom of this more than he does." No one, as a non-existent person, would have no interest in getting to the bottom of the leak. McClellan clearly means that Bush cares less about the matter than a non-existent person. You see? You see? Bwahahahaha! (Source: Washington Post January 6, 2004)

With George W. Bush out of office, we'll all sleep a little better. In the mornings we'll be less cranky with our kids, we'll be nicer to our dogs, we'll walk with a spring in our step and we'll slowly be able to wean ourselves from that nasty caffeine-cocaine-nicotene cocktail on which we've grown dependent.

Camilla S. writes in: "all that drinking and drug abuse as a privileged young man on the spot meant learning to lie, evade, manipulate, cover up and let the money buy the truth."

Laura Bush has had no job for years but to support her husband in his work. George W. Bush says he's proud of his wife's support. Judith Steinberg Dean, on the other hand, not only has kept her full-time job as a physician but says she will continue her work when her husband is in office. Howard Dean says he respects and supports his wife's choice to embrace her own career path. What a great role model for modern American marriages, and for millions of girls with aspirations of their own, a Dean Presidency would have offered! What an oddly anachronistic and lopsided example the Bush marriage offers by comparison. (Source: New York Times January 13, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Colorado: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 35% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. Bush's plan for economic recovery seems to be to pay Colorado's workers less for the same amount of work. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Susan P. writes in: "Why boot Bush? So we can get a President who will sign the Kyoto Protocol. Considering that we make up only 5 percent of the world's population but account for 25 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, it seems only fair that we start doing our share."

Susan's contribution makes it clear that beyond the damage that Bush has actively done, he's caused a great deal of harm by passively refusing to act. For instance, the Bush administration has offered no major policy initiative to combat the shameful condition of America's homelessness.

The Bush administration has also offered no major policy initiative to improve highway safety, although 14 times more people died in motor vehicle accidents in the year 2000 than died in the attacks of September 11, 2001. Wait for Bush apologists to remark that such a suggestion trivializes the deaths on September 11. Respond that not doing anything about highway safety trivializes the deaths of the equivalent of fourteen September 11s -- EVERY YEAR. When will Bush get off his ass and do something?

Sometimes dealing with the Bush Administration feels just like... dealing with the Bush Administration. As Mike M-O points out, it's Deja Vu all over again as the son follows in his father's footsteps. Daddy lies to us and tells us we're going to the moon, then Junior does the same. Is that what they mean by the Texas two-step?

Mike M-O writes in: "His support of NAFTA/FTAA is costing Americans their jobs and their futures. While other countries continue their protectionist policies this president has abandoned all support for Americans middle class. He says we have to compete with foreign workers, where they are paid $5/day US. How in the world can we compete with that? End FTAA/NAFTA and BOOT BUSH!!"

More from Mike: "George Bush is working to end overtime pay for a huge number of Americans. He claims that it will increase the number of people that are eligible but his own General Accounting Office study shows that almost 3/4 of a million people will lose overtime pay. Further that, according to the Economic Policy Institute, 8 million Americans will no longer be eligible. Why would ANYONE ever want him to be president?" Ending overtime pay for millions of Americans seems like a very good reason to boot Bush. (Source: Economic Policy Institute March 31, 2003 and June 26, 2003)

Mike continues: "When did it become acceptable for a leader, regardless of position, to stop listening to the people he served? And why do we as a nation continue to vote for people who don't listen and don't care?"

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in New Mexico: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 23% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. It's downright disrespectful for Bush to celebrate an economy that pays New Mexico workers less money for the same good work they've always done. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Clayton writes in with a doozy: "President Bush has said he will propose legislation to overhaul the USPS based on the commission's recommendations. A Republican President with a Republican Senate and a Republican House has an excellent chance of passing his legislation.

If Bush passes legislation changing the scope of representation postal unions presently have, postal workers will undoubtedly be faced with massive changes in pay, benefits and working conditions. The legislation would very likely seek to mirror what is currently available to other federal employees through their unions, and reduce the number of issues postal workers can grieve.

Postal workers' contractual rights would be gutted, and unions would have jurisdiction over a very limited scope of issues. Very few disputes would be eligible for settlement through the grievance/arbitration system. Postal workers would undoubtedly have to take a deep cut in pay, in addition to the reduction of contractual rights." Don't our hardworking mail carriers deserve better treatment than this? Come on, George, get it together! (See APWU News Service December 9, 2003 and the APWU legislative factsheet)

A lot of Americans do not realize that the Bush Administration has overseen the closure of the Statue of Liberty for over two years.

Now we're told that the Statue of Liberty will only be re-opened after extensive renovations that will increase security at the national treasure. Among other things, Americans won't be allowed inside the statue in the way that they were before. You never know, say the custodians of the statue, a terrorist attack to destroy the Statue of Liberty could take place at any time, so it's just not safe to allow Americans to have access any more.

It's kind of symbolic, I think, that the Statue of Liberty, the symbol of American freedom, has been shut down for almost the entire time George W. Bush has been in office. This act reflects Bush's priorities: Americans only get to enjoy freedoms when they don't interfere with a paranoid obsession with security.

You know, my car could be broken into and used in a crime at any time. It happens! In fact, cars are broken into, stolen, and used to commit criminal acts far more often than prominent American landmarks are destroyed in terrorist attacks. Does that mean that, for the sake of security, my freedom to drive my own car should be taken away? That's the kind of logic Bush and his friends are using to attack Americans' freedoms, and I just don't buy it.

Are Americans really such cowards that they are afraid to climb the Statue of Liberty out of fear that they'll die in a terrorist attack? Aren't we brave enough to carry on with our lives as normal? George W. Bush is encouraging fear and forbidding us to live in the bravery of freedom. That's hardly strong leadership.

How soon will it be before the Bush Administration erects a giant Statue of Security in New York Harbor?

Yes, it bothers me that under the leadership of George W. Bush, liberty has been officially recognized as unsafe. It bothers me enought to boot Bush in 2004. (Source: New York Newsday, January 16, 2004)

Boot Bush because he says he wants to build a colony on the Moon, but won't put enough money in the budget to do the job right. He says that NASA ought to do the job on the cheap. That's President Moonbeam for you. Let's call this one the Marooned On The Moon Act of 2004.

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Arizona: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 29% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. A 29% pay cut for Arizona workers under Bush's watch makes another four years under his reign as pleasant as a jog between Flagstaff to Phoenix on a sunny day in August. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

My wife and I want to have another baby, and I don't want to raise a child under a government that regards a frightened citizenry as a positive thing. Please, don't make us wait another four years.

The Bush Administration now says that it is willing to do extensive replanning of the process of turning over the sovereignty of Iraq to Iraqis, given the popular Iraqi rejection of its current plan. Yet, George W. Bush insists that he will not alter the timetable for the transfer of sovereignty. Look, the transfer of sovereignty is essential, and it's essential that the transfer be done right, so that the civil situation in Iraq doesn't go from bad to worse. This is not the kind of job that should be rushed. When circumstances change, the timetable for the transfer of sovereignty needs to be changed. Otherwise, Iraq will end up with nothing but the facade of democracy. George W. Bush and his advisers seem to value the political necessities of an election year more than the welfare of the Iraqi people. Those kinds of priorities will be strengthened if rewarded through re-election. (Source: Reuters, January 16, 2004)

On the same day that it was announced that the criminal probe against oil corporation Halliburton's overcharging the American taxpayers for its services in Iraq would be widened, the Bush Administration awarded a new 1.2 billion dollar contract for Halliburton in Iraq. The Bush Administration coddles corporate criminals when it awards new contracts to corporations under investigation for cheating the American people. Bush and Cheney's special favors to Halliburton reeks of corruption. (Sources: Reuters, January 16, 2004; The Associated Press, January 16, 2004)

Right after visiting the grave of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., George W. Bush appointed Charles W. Pickering to the federal appeals court. Pickering has a long history as an advocate of racial segregation, and an opponent to voting rights legislation. This betrayal reminds us that we need to watch what Bush does, not what the photo opportunities say he's going to do.

Oh, and keep your eyes on this: Bush appointed Pickering while Congress was out of session, thus depriving the American people of their right to approve the appointment through the Senate confirmation process. The Senate had failed to confirm Pickering, deciding that Pickering's segregationist past made him a poor choice for a federal appeals judgeship. By appointing Pickering in this back-handed manner, Bush not only flouted the will of the United States Senate, he also snubbed the very civil rights activists he met with on Dr. King's birthday.

George W. Bush refuses to lead the Republican Party beyond its segregationist leanings. That's another good reason to give him the boot on Election Day. (Source, San Francisco Chronicle, January 16, 2004)

In order to score political points by funding his promise to send people on a mission to the Moon (Haven't we been there before?), George W. Bush has ordered the Hubble Space Telescope program to be ended prematurely. Destroying important scientific missions in order to fund Buck Rogers whiz bang space adventures is just one more reason to boot Bush. (Source: New York Times, January 17 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Utah: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 17% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

When New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who has been loudly and repeatedly supporting Bush Administration foreign policy for years, refers to Bush's Israeli-Palestinian policy as "insane," you know something bad's going down. (Source: New York Times January 18, 2004)

A video playing at the Lincoln memorial that reviews the history of the memorial and the National Mall included shots of various protest marches, including gay rights marches, abortion rights marches and -- gasp -- civil rights marches. This sort of historical document is too much for the Bush Administration, which has pressured our Park Service to um, "revise" the footage. Like it or not, such marches did occur, and continue to occur, on the National Mall with some regularity, and as such are a part of history. This sort of silencing tactic would politely be called "revisionist." (Source: New York Times January 18, 2004)

Jonathon K. admonishes that in our identification of all these reasons to boot Bush we are "rude, and intolerant." It is not our intention to be rude, although we freely admit we cannot tolerate George W. Bush's behavior. But perhaps we ARE rude. What then? Rudeness is a tone of discourse. Words do not in themselves kill, or cripple, or pollute, or corrupt. But Mr. Bush has actually acted in a destructive fashion. Rudeness versus Destructiveness: which is the worse sin? Which would you rather have inflicted upon you?

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Washington: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 30% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

George W. Bush speaking about Saddam Hussein on October 14, 2002: "This is a man who, in my judgment, would like to use al-Qaida as a forward army." But it didn't happen. What does that say about trusting George W. Bush's judgment? (Source: New York Newsday September 23, 2003)

George W. Bush on September 12, 2002: "Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons." No, they weren't. (Source: George W. Bush's speech to the United Nations September 12, 2002)

Colin Powell on February 5, 2003: "We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction." The evidence now shows that at the time of Powell's speech he didn't have any. (Source: Colin Powell's speech to the United Nations Security Council February 5, 2003)

The Bush administration and its subordinate military commanders have proved too eager to push away doubts: "There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction... As this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them." -- General Tommy Franks, March 22, 2003. The problem is that less than a year later there is a huge amount of doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein was in possession of weapons of mass destruction at the time that Franks, Powell, Bush and company were trumpeting their lack of doubt. We cannot afford to have such an intellectually inflexible administration in place. (Source: Washington Post March 23, 2003)

Pentagon Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman, March 23, 2003: "I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction." There's that lack-of-doubt problem again. The Bush administration is full of it. What else do they have "no doubt" about that they should be doubting? (Source: Washington Post March 23, 2003)

Vice President Dick Cheney August 26, 2002: "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction; there is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies and against us." There's that "no doubt" again! From where did all these people get their lack of doubt? It is becoming clear that the Bush Administration is filled with people whose powers of estimation are lacking and whose willingness to elevate hunches into certainties is downright dangerous. (Source: New York Times August 27, 2002)

Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke on March 22, 2003: "Clearly one of our top priorities, one of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites. I won't go into details which ones they are, where they are." Unfortunately, we never found out the details about where those elusive WMDs were. Perhaps Clarke can inform us and we can end the whole no-WMD problem right now. Or perhaps Clarke was engaged in just another Bush Administration bluff. (Source: Washington Post March 23, 2003)

Donald Rumsfeld on the location of weapons of mass destruction, in an interview on March 30, 2003: "We know where they are are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad, and east, west, south and north somewhat." The No-Doubt, We-Know Bush Administration drove the country into a panic with these WMD claims. But the panic turned out to be unsupported by the facts. As George Bush Sr. might say, the rhetoric of panic wasn't prudent. (Source: The Age of Melbourne July 27, 2003)

Ari Fleischer, December 5, 2002: "The president of the United States and the secretary of defense would not assert as plainly and bluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it were not true, and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it." So said the President's Press Secretary. But it was not true. What does that mean? (Source: FOX News December 5, 2002)

Ari Fleischer, April 10, 2003: "We've always said that we have information that they have weapons of mass destruction.... What we have always said is that we know that they have it and they are expert at hiding it.... we've always said we know they have it, they are expert at hiding it. I can't discuss all intelligence information. And this is something that Secretary Powell talked about when he went to the United Nations and talked about their abilities to hide. But make no mistake, we maintain high confidence that they have it and it will be found.... But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found." This is another indication that when the Bush Administration says it is confident of the "facts," we shouldn't be very confident at all. When you just can't trust an administration to tell the unvarnished truth, it's time for that administration to go.

While we're at it, check out that reminder from Mr. Fleischer that, as far as the Bush Administration was concerned, WMD was "what this war was about and it is about." Bush and his underlings are spending a lot of energy trying to get us to forget that central fact. It is incumbent upon us to remember and to remind. (Source: White House Press Briefing April 10, 2003)

In an impromptu news conference on May 4, 2003, the following exchange occurred:

"QUESTION: Sir, the rationale to go to war was to find weapons of mass destruction. We have not found them yet.



QUESTION: Do you think that the rationale has changed?

SECRETARY POWELL: The rationale was the same. There was the weapons of mass destruction. Let's be clear.... And I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now."

With this level of clarity, you can't even say that this is yet another piece in a puzzle, because it's not a puzzle at all. Numerous members of the Bush Administration have reiterated that the rationale for going to war was the supposed existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Numerous members of the Bush Administration, including Bush himself, expressed certainty that the weapons were there. As it becomes ever-more clear that weapons of mass destruction are not in Iraq, both the rationale for war and our confidence in the competence of the Bush Administration disintegrates. (Source: Department of State Transcript of Remarks with Reporters After NBC Interview of May 4, 2003)

The same Kenneth Adelman, member of George W. Bush's Pentagon's Defense Advisory Board, who said "I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction," now says that because no weapons of mass destruction have been found, "the foreign policy blow-back is pretty serious," as nations around the world are showing a diminishing inclination to believe that what the Bush White House says is credible. (Source: Washington Post January 19, 2004)

Mr. Bush made the same point himself in his 2004 State of the Union address: "For diplomacy to be effective, words must be credible." While he continues that "no one can now doubt the word of America," many in the world community must be disagreeing in the wake of Bush's WMD deceptions.

As the case for George W. Bush's war in Iraq disintegrates, apologists for the war have tried to connect support for Bush's war to support for the U.S. military. But a group called Military Families Speak Out shows that it's possible to be in support of the soldiers carrying out Bush's orders and still be firmly opposed to the orders that Bush is giving. As Bush gave his State of the Union address on January 20, 2004, military families and veterans gathered for a candlelight vigil along Washington, D.C.'s National Mall with the theme of "Remembering Lives Lost to a Lie."

What is the intention behind George W. Bush's plan to allow foreigners to come into the United States to work on a temporary basis before being deported? A hint comes from the behavior of the Bush Administration back in 2001 and 2002. Every year, the "Adverse Effect Wage Rate" is published by the government to establish the lowest wage payable to those engaged in the current "guest worker" program. Every year, this rate must be adjusted to keep pace with inflation. Traditionally, the new rate is published every February. But the Bush Administration refused to publish a new rate for guest workers in February of 2001 and 2002. In both years, the Administration had to be threatened with legal action before the new rate was published -- 6 months and and 3 months late, respectively. The big Agribusinesses that employ "guest workers" loved this delay, because it meant that they could pay lower real wages to their workers as inflation marched on. Of course, this was unfair to guest workers, but that wasn't relevant enough to the Bush Administration to move them to act. (Source: Slate July 11, 2003)

Under George W. Bush, the Department of Labor removed a graph showing the notable decline in the real value of the minimum wage during the Bush years. If they look bad, the Bush Administration just shoves facts under the carpet. (Source: Slate July 11, 2003)

First the Bush Administration dragged its feet in giving testimony and documents to the commission investigating the lead-up to the attacks of September 11, 2001. Then the Bush Administration rejected a request for more time for the commission to get its work done, even as it continued to drag its feet on complying with commission requests. What is the Bush Administration's priority here? (Source: Washington Post January 19, 2004)

In his 2004 State of the Union address, what major domestic policy initiative did George W. Bush announce? He's going to ask NFL coaches to keep their players off steroids. Well, that'll fix things! (Source: State of the Union address, January 20 2004)

D.O. Ray, writing from overseas, says that "Steel" is "one word with a lot of meaning." George W. Bush imposed steep tariffs on imports of steel, angering many other nations. Then Bush reversed course, angering domestic steel producers. The result is that both domestic and international steel producers are dealing with increased uncertainty, and both are upset at U.S. economic policy. This is just another indication that George W. Bush can't handle diplomacy. (Sources: BBC News March 6, 2002; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette January 21, 2004)

One line from George W. Bush's State of the Union address of January 20, 2004 really stuck in my craw:

"Our greatest responsibility is the active defense of the American people."

Since this was an address to a joint meeting of the House and Senate, I assume Mr. Bush was referring to his duty as President, the duties of Senators and the duties of Representatives. Members of the Supreme Court were there, too: to be fair, let's include them as well.

Let's actually look at the job descriptions of the President, Senators, Representatives and Members of the Supreme Court as described in two places: the U.S. Constitution and the oaths of office taken by each of these officeholders.

In the U.S. Constitution, the Preamble tells us what the government should be for:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Look in there: "provide for the common defense" is just one of six priorities, and it's stuck in the middle there, like the middling actor in a movie who gets neither the top billing nor the coveted final "and featuring..." spot. Surely (surely!) George W. Bush has read the Constitution. Why, then, does he neglect Union, Justice, Tranquility, Welfare and Liberty?

Moving on through the Constitution to Article I, Section 8 enumerates the responsibilities of the House and Senate in a set of 18 clauses. By my reading, these include
imposing taxes
paying debts
securing common defense
promoting general welfare
borrowing money
regulating foreign and domestic commerce
regulating citizenship
coining money
governing the post office
building roads
promoting scientific and artistic progress
instituting intellectual property
maintaining a court system
supporting international law
declaring war
maintaining an Army
maintaining a Navy
instituting domestic law enforcement
governing the District of Columbia
writing laws to accomplish all of the above.
In Article V, amending the Constitution is also mentioned as a legislative responsibility. Here too, the whole "defense of the American people" thingy is only one of many duties of the Congress. Is Bush ignorant of these, or does he actively choose to ignore them?

In Article II, Sections 2-3 of the Constitution, the responsibilities of the President are enumerated:
serving as commander in chief of the armed forces
administrating of the departments of the executive branch
granting reprieves and pardons
making treaties
appointing ambassadors, administrators and judges
filling vacancies when Congress is not in session
Yet again, multiple responsibilities are named, most of which are not directly related to military engagement.

In Article III of the Constitution, the responsibilities of the Judiciary are enumerated, and all of them are related to upholding a system of laws. No responsibilities related to military engagement are named.

Finally, Article VI of the Constitution states that "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." (That whole "no religious Test" thing is another story). The oaths of office for all three branches of the U.S. Government are not to engage in "the active defense of the American people," but rather to uphold the Constitution.

The Oath of Office for the President is specifically laid out in Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." The oath of the Constitution makes it perfectly clear what the primary responsibility of the President is. It is not to defend economic security. It is not to defend the people. It is to defend the Constitution of the United States.

The Constitution that the President of the United States is sworn to preserve, protect and defend contains a Bill of Rights. These include:
the prevention of the establishment of religion (which Bush proposed doing by providing material governmental support to certain religious groups)
freedom of speech (which Bush's spokesman attacked by admonishing Americans to "watch what they say, watch what they do")
freedom of the press (which Bush does not bother to read)
freedom of peacable assembly for purposes of protest (which Bush undermines in his appearances by keeping opponents out of his line of sight and in distant "free speech zones," outside of which words of protest are forbidden)
a right to bear arms (which Bush is OK with)
a right to refuse search and seizure without probable cause (undermined by involuntary data mining operations, unregulated surveillance of law-abiding citizens without notification, and random roadside searches)
a right to a trial (taken away for those Bush designates as "enemy combatants")

The Bill of Rights does not include a right to national security, or to personal safety. It prescribes liberty and admonishes government leaders including the President to protect that liberty. It requires the President to swear to uphold those liberties by protecting, upholding and defending not the American People, but the American Constitution.

Is Mr. Bush ignorant of his Constitutional duties? Has he forgotten his oath of office? Or is he acting in knowledgeable disregard of them?

None of these possibilities is reassuring. Fortunately, in cases of presidential ignorance and/or active contravention of duty, the Constitution reserves to the people the right to remove a sitting (and this one definitely is sitting) President from office.

Dereliction of Constitutional duty: another reason to boot Bush in 2004.

In the fall of 2002, George W. Bush and members of his administration stated unequivocably that Iraq "possessed weapons of mass destruction." By April 2003, the Bush Administration retreated to accusing Iraq of maintaining "weapons of mass destruction programs." By the 2004 State of the Union address, George W. Bush was reduced to asserting the existence of "weapons of mass destruction-related program activities." At this rate, by summer, they'll be accusing Iraq of harboring "weapons of mass destruction-related statements about program activities." Sheesh! (Sources: January 20, 2004 State of the Union address, New York Times April 25, 2003, New York Times August 27, 2002)

The last words of George W. Bush's 2004 State of the Union Address: "May God Continue to Bless America." Beware a President who thinks he can read the thoughts of the Supreme Ruler of the Universe.

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Oregon: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 27% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Jason A. writes in: "Everything is Bigger in Texas." That means bigger hearts and bigger hopes in some cases. But unfortunately, in the case of Bush that means a bigger liar, a bigger fool, and a bigger idiot with a bigger head. We need quality, not quantity, in 2004.

Guess who was behind George W. Bush's bypassing Congress to get former segregationist Charles Pickering appointed to the federal appeals bench? None other than fellow "former" racist Trent Lott. Here's what Trent had to say about the sneaky recess appointment of Pickering:

"While temporary recess appointments certainly are not a preferred means of getting quality judges on the bench, in this exceptional case, Judge Pickering's record deems this recess appointment fully appropriate." (Source: CNN January 16, 2004)

Well, come on Trent. What exactly about Pickering's record makes this appropriate? Does it have anything to do with the reason why, had Strom Thurmond been elected president, we wouldn't have all these problems we have now? Out with it.

Will somebody please tell these guys Jim Crow has left the house? Isn't it time we had somebody in the White House with enough backbone to tell these arch-segregationists to keep their show back in the last century where it belongs?

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in California: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 40% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

According to Bush's 2004 State of the Union speech, there is evidence Iraq had "weapons of mass-destruction-related program activities."

A slick piece of verbal packaging, this. It's carefully crafted to lull the casual listener into concluding that weapons of mass destruction were found after all. It sounds like a kinda fancy way of saying we found Saddam's WMD. But look a little closer, and you'll discover the fancy phrasing obscures Bush's claim, rather than making it clearer. It's supposed to sound like weapons-inspector technicalese, but it's actually cover-your-ass legalese.

It's like the wording on those cans of bogus cheese in the supermarket. Take a close look at the fine print under the word "Cheez" (note the change in spelling--we never claimed it was cheese)--it'll say something like "processed cheez product." Why split hairs, you nutty left-wing deconstructionist? What's the difference between "processed cheez product" and cheese? Well, to put it bluntly, "processed cheez product" ain't cheese. It's just slick packaging designed to cover the company's ass while deceiving the consumer.

The phrase "weapons of mass-destruction-related program activities" is just too vague to be meaningful. For instance, we know Saddam had gas masks ready to distribute to at least some of his troops during the war. At the time, the U.S. claimed it was because he had poison gas and was planning to use it on our troops. Iraqis said it was because they feared the U.S. would release chemical weapons and claim the Iraqis had done it. Who knows what the truth is? Simple fact is, a gas mask is a fairly standard piece of military equipment--that the Iraqis would have some just doesn't prove much. Now, is the stockpiling of gas masks an "activity" "related" to a "weapons of mass destruction" "program." Absolutely. The "activity" of stockpiling and distributing gas masks was undertaken as part of a "program" to protect Iraqi soldiers from (protection from constitutes a "relation"ship to) "weapons of mass destruction." So there we have it: "weapons of mass-destruction-related program activities." By the same logic, if you bought plastic sheeting and duct tape during last year's Terrorist Scare, you too were engaged in "weapons of mass-destruction-related program activities."

By now, those of you that are still reading are probably pretty sick of me splitting too many verbal hairs. I mean, come on. I'm stretching word analysis to the point that words just become meaningless, right? Well, yeah. But I didn't start the word games. Bush and his crew started them, by trying to pull the wool over my eyes with this slick little phrase.

This especially annoys me because of Bush's carefully cultivated public image as a straight-talking rural Texan. But he ain't. What if two ranchers from Texas were talking, and one asked: "So, do you have any cattle up on that ranch?" And the other one answered: "We have bovine quadruped-related program activities." The first guy's going to say, "Hell, man, do you have cows or not?" The reason rural Texans, by and large, don't speak intentionally obfuscatory legalese is because they don't have a full-time staff of advisors team-writing for them.

But, of course, Bush ain't a rural Texan. He's just a slickly packaged "processed Texaz product." alerts us to the following discrepancy: In an interview in January of 2004, Dick Cheney was asked whether the claim that Iraq had a serious connection to Al Qaeda was legitimate. Cheney's responded that the claim was legitimate, and cited this source: "One place you ought to go look is an article that Stephen Hayes did in the Weekly Standard here a few weeks ago, that goes through and lays out in some detail, based on an assessment that was done by the Department of Defense and forwarded to the Senate Intelligence Committee some weeks ago. That's your best source of information."

The problem is that the piece written by Stephen Hayes in the Weekly Standard, based on leaks of an annex of reports, was condemned by the Department of Defense in Media Release 851-03: "News reports that the Defense Department recently confirmed new information with respect to contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq in a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee are inaccurate.... The classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, and it drew no conclusions. Individuals who leak or purport to leak classified information are doing serious harm to national security; such activity is deplorable and may be illegal."

Why is Dick Cheney making continued reference to an article that his own administration says is inaccurate? Why does he refer to the article as regarding an "assessment" when his own administration reports no assessments were involved at all? And why does Dick Cheney draw reporters' attention to a leaked report when his own administration has stated that such leakage is inappropriate at best and illegal at worst? Where have Dick Cheney's loudly trumpeted standards of ethics gone? (Sources: United States Department of Defense News Release #851-03 November 15, 2003; Rocky Mountain News January 9, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Alaska: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 38% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

When Dick Cheney met with the Pope recently, he brought the Pope a gift of a crystal dove. This is a perfect symbol for the fragile state of world peace under the watch of Cheney and company. (Source: Reuters January 27, 2004)

Even David Kay, the weapons inspector tapped by George W. Bush himself to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, concludes that "that there were not large stockpiles of newly produced weapons of mass destruction. We don't find the people, the documents or the physical plants that you would expect to find if the production was going on.... I don't think they existed. I think there were stockpiles at the end of the first Gulf War and those were a combination of U.N. inspectors and unilateral Iraqi action got rid of them." (Sources: New York Times January 26, 2004; Reuters January 23, 2004)

David Kay's replacement as chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq is Charles Duelfer, who has said that Saddam Hussein did not pose the immediate threat that the Bush administration implied. (Source: Washington Post January 24, 2004)

On July 14, 2003 George W. Bush said "The larger point is, and the fundamental question is, did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power, along with other nations, so as to make sure he was not a threat to the United States and our friends and allies in the region. I firmly believe the decisions we made will make America more secure and the world more peaceful."

Read that again, slowly. I know, there are lots of errors in that one paragraph, but can you pick the whopper?

Yes, George W. Bush said that the reason we went to war was that Saddam Hussein wouldn't let weapons inspectors in.

You and I and the New York Times and the Washington Post and the Associated Press and every other big and small newspaper, newsmagazine and TV anchorman -- know that not only did Saddam Hussein agree to let weapons inspectors in the country, but they actually went in and were doing their job!

No, the reason we went to war was that George W. Bush said the weapons inspectors weren't finding the missing WMDs that were really there and didn't know what they were doing.

George W. Bush's historical ignorance apparently extends to major events involving him during his own presidency. (Sources: January 27, 2004 and White House Press Release July 14, 2003)

Lest you think we're making too much of this, George W. Bush said it again January 26, 2004: "He chose defiance. It was his choice to make, and he did not let us in." No, no, no: again, the historical record shows that inspectors were let in. (Sources: January 27, 2004)

George W. Bush made these bizarre counterfactual statements in question-and-answer sessions with the White House Press Corps. Do you think the White House Press Corps questioned him on it during the sessions? Oh, no, of course not. Do you think these statements became major news stories the next day? What do you think? The "liberal" New York Times didn't mention them at all in their newspaper reports the next day in either case.

When the press abdicates its duty to report completely and objectively on a sitting American President, democracy has lost one of its great protectors. It is up to us to protect democracy in November 2004.

More recently on the same theme, when Karl Rove can call the White House Press Corps "Weenies" to their face and get away with it, it means either that the current Administration is too powerful or that the current press corps does not question the Bush Administration strongly enough. In either case, a change of administrations would do the press and the public that depends on them a world of good. (Source: Washington Post January 27, 2004)

"I want the American people to know that I, too, want to know the facts." So says George W. Bush about the lack of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The problem is, the Bush Administration said they had the facts a year ago, and they took us to war based on those supposed facts. Where did those facts go, Mr. Bush? If you didn't have them, what in the name of sanity were you doing calling for war?

President Moonbeam's Medicare boondoggle, the White House acknowledges after the bill is passed, will cost 34% more than they told the U.S. Congress and the American people it would cost. Is the Bush Administration clueless when it comes to the basics of health care economics, or is it practiced in deception? (Source: Washington Post January 31, 2004)

Whoopsie! Now it turns out that the Bush Administration knew well before its Medicare boondoggle passed the U.S. Congress that the cost estimates it had supplied to legislators and the American people were wildly inaccurate. (Source: Washington Post January 31, 2004)

In the past, Michael E. Toner has served as legal counsel for the Republican National Committee and the Bush-Cheney 2000 campaign. Thanks to George W. Bush, what's his current title? Federal Elections Commissioner. Talk about foxes guarding the chicken coop! (Source: Washington Post January 31, 2004)

Karl F. writes in: "Business people need a country to do business in and consumers with enough money to do business with. Four more years of this Bushwhacking will do away with both."

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Hawaii: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 6% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Michael M-O notes that while millions of Americans go without jobs, while millions more try to make it without health insurance, while American soldiers are getting picked off in Iraq, the White House has promised that its administration will pursue policy remedies to prevent Janet Jackson's boob from falling out of her shirt again on television. Priorities, people!(Source: White House Press Briefing February 2, 2004)

If we really want to prevent boobs from being exposed on national television, George W. Bush is going to have to go.

While we're at it, watch as Laura Bush trots herself out in front of the American people to distract us from the breaking crisis of confidence we're having with the her husband. But don't be distracted, says Michael: "Bush is putting together an independent commission? How can it is be independent when he is picking the members? You ain't fooling no one but yourself, Bush!"

Michael has his facts right: George W. Bush is picking the members of the commission that will investigate his administration. That's not tradition: usually, members of both parties in the Congress appoint commission members. Not this time. What does George W. Bush have to hide? (Source: New York Times February 2, 2004)

Michael continues, "Didn't Bush run as a fiscal conservative? But now his budget for 2005 has the biggest deficit in history! Even his conservative buddies are dumping him. Why aren't you?"

The Bush Administration and its allies in Congress want to make it seem like there's a whole lotta oil that just can't be accessed because it's trapped in wildlife refuges. The truth is that there are 1,806 active oil and gas wells on 36 different wildlife refuges throughout the United States. The real problem is that these oil and gas wells are dramatically under-regulated. The General Accounting Office recently recommended a tightening of governmental oversight on activities related to oil and gas wells currently pumping within wildlife refuges in order to make sure that the refuges are not being harmed. What did George W. Bush do with this report? Why, he did the same thing he does with most reports - he ignored it. Under the Bush plan, there would be more oil and gas drilling within wildlife refuges, with less oversight. Way to ignore the experts, G.W.! (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

George W. Bush has insisted that his handpicked commission to investigate his own administration's untruthful declarations to the American people must delay issuing a report until after November 2004.

The problem is that elections are the tool by which people can hold their leaders accountable. If we do not know how and why the Bush administration misled Americans into supporting a war until after the November election, how can the elections serve their designated purpose?

George W. Bush does not want to be held accountable. George W. Bush cannot handle accountability. George W. Bush is running pell-mell from accountability. And that is all the more reason to hold him to account in the elections this year. (Source: New York Times February 2, 2004)

Now that George W. Bush has single-handedly appointed his so-called "independent" commission to investigate the failures of U.S. government intelligence under his command, it's clear that the commission is rigged to fall in line and give the kind of limited, politically safe findings that Bush is looking for. A case in point: Commission member Laurence Silberman has been exposed as a hard-right ideologue who has been involved in Republican conspiracies to produce propaganda for years. Silberman and his wife were primary sources of misinformation used to smear Anita Hill's personal character after she testified about Clarence Thomas's history of sexual harassment. Silberman was also instrumental in the orchestration of the failed attempt to depose President Bill Clinton through the politically-designed sexual investigations of Ken Starr and impeachment by Newt Gingrich.

Laurence Silberman is not the kind of person who can be trusted to give an unbiased contribution to a commission to investigate an issue as politically charged as the complete failure of the Bush Administration to anticipate the absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. George W. Bush knows of Silberman's history as a political fixer. Why else would Bush appoint a man known for distorting the truth for political purposes unless he intends for the commission to help him distort the truth? (Source: Blinded By the Right, David Brock)

In 2003, Bush appointee Gale Norton, the Secretary of the Interior, ordered the Bureau of Land Management to stop all attempts to keep track of land with good potential protection as public wilderness. Thus, the Bush Administration effectively ordered all offices of the federal government to stop even thinking about preserving any vulnerable wilderness not already protected as public land. This kind of attitude of purposeful avoiding looking for problems in order to pretend that the problems do not exist should be a source of shame, but the Bush Administration adopts it with pride. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

George W. Bush has destroyed the efforts of President Bill Clinton to support the development of ever-more fuel efficient hybrid electric/gasoline automobiles in the present, and replaced those efforts with pie-in-the-sky, theoretical plans to start a hydrogen fuel cell cars over 25 years from now. The Bush plans have been completely discredited by two recent reports, one by the National Academy of Sciences, and another by Joseph J. Romm, the former chief Energy Department official in charge of conservation and alternative energy. ""Fuel-cell cars will not be environmentally desirable for decades," says Romm. America can't afford to wait 25 years to start to address the real crisis in air pollution and climate change. Unfortunately, the Bush family and its corporate friends can't afford to let anyone interfere with their big oil profits. (Source: New York Times, February 6, 2004)

Um, what's the point of establishing a commission that is limited to investigating the failures of the intelligence community within the Bush Administration, when it was the Bush Cabinet and the political arm of the Bush White House that actually put faulty intelligence into action?

I'm so confused! The Bush Administration is blaming the CIA for the failures of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, and other top Bush Administration officials to acknowledge that there was never any solid evidence for weapons of mass destruction programs in Iraq. Yet, there is clear evidence that has already been uncovered that officials at all levels of the Bush White House willfully ignored the intelligence reports that they had already been supplied with, and knowingly made claims that could not be supported by any existing intelligence report.

Let's quote the Washington Post on this one: "In its fall 2002 campaign to win congressional support for a war against Iraq, President Bush and his top advisers ignored many of the caveats and qualifiers included in the classified report on Saddam Hussein's weapons that CIA Director George J. Tenet defended Thursday. In fact, they made some of their most unequivocal assertions about unconventional weapons before the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) was completed."

What America needs is a truly independent commission to investigate the Bush White House's lies and exaggerations about the non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. What George W. Bush is giving us is a whitewash. (Source: Washington Post, February 7, 2004)

George W. Bush does not even come close to measuring up to his father's environmental record, which was itself far from perfect. President Bush the First designated 4 million acres of land as protected wilderness. President Bush the Second has designated only one eighth that amount. President Clinton designated 9.5 million acres, and President Carter designated 66.3 million. Looks like George W. Bush is more associated with suburban sprawl than responsible environmental stewardship. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April, 2004)

A fundamentalist Muslim nation ruled by a military dictatorship spreads nuclear weapons technology around the world! Iraq? No. Iran? No. It's Pakistan, folks. And what has George W. Bush done? He calls Pakistan an "ally" in the "war on terror". This kind of twisted logic has no place in the White House. It's time to take the blinders off and get this guy back to his dude ranch, where he can't hurt anything but prairie dogs. (Source: Financial Times, February 7, 2004)

The Bush Administration converted an important study into a piece of propaganda when it edited a report from a group of scientists at the Department of Health and Human Services on disparities in the American health care system to eliminate portions that were incompatible with Republican policies to limit health care reform. A group of Congressional Representatives, led by Henry Waxman of California, uncovered the following changes to the report:
The final version of the report contained none of the scientists' conclusions that were present the original draft that described social differences in healthcare treatment as "national problems" that were "pervasive" in the system.
The draft summary defined "disparity" as "the condition or fact of being unequal, as in age, rank or degree" but the definition was deleted from the final summary.
The word "disparity" was used more than 30 times in the key findings section of the draft, but 28 of these instances of the word disparity were deleted by the Bush Administration
The final version crafted by the Bush Administration deleted draft language about social costs of disparities but replaces that section of a listing of "successes" achieved in eliminating disparities.
It's shameful for a bunch of filthy rich Republicans try to minimize the problems of average Americans who are unable to get adequate health care. For leading this effort to hide the truth, George W. Bush deserves to be given a permanent political vacation in 2004. (Source: United Press International, January 15, 2004)

George W. Bush, who says that he's the man for homeland security (and security for the United States of America too, apparently), has actually proposed to eliminate the funding for a research program designed to establish methods to decontaminate buildings that have been exposed to biological or chemical weapons.

In his budget proposal, Bush actually admits that the end of funding he suggests "represents the complete elimination of homeland security building decontamination research."

The Environmental Protection Agency says that eliminating the research will "force it to disband the technical and engineering expertise that will be needed to address known and emerging biological and chemical threats in the future."

Why does Bush want to eliminate this essential security program? He wants more tax cuts for the rich, and he has to pay for his ongoing adventure in Iraq. What priorities! (Source: Associated Press, February 7, 2004)

Just think of all the work that the team from Queer Eye for the Straight Guy would have to slog through trying to get the White House back in shape. No one should have to go through that. Let's spare them, and vote George W. Bush out of office before they can make their way down Pennsylvania Avenue.

It's not just extremist environmentalists who are bothered by the Bush Administration's compassionless disregard for America's natural heritage. Hunters and fishermen are increasingly turning against George W. Bush, as a result of Bush's attacks on the natural American environment.

For example, the membership of Ducks Unlimited is shifting away from support of George W. Bush's re-election to strong opposition of a second term in office for Bush and Cheney. Describing the effect of Bush's anti-environmental crusade on hunters and fishermen, Alan Wentz, the senior group manager for conservation at Ducks Unlimited (a hunters' organization) comments, "This is the worst case scenario. It represents a radical change of direction from 30 years of Clean Water Act implementation." (Source: National Wildlife, February/March 2004)

The dangers of global climate change are recognized by a strong majority of the American public, and yet George W. Bush and Dick Cheney continue to recklessly pretend that there is no problem. According to a recent poll conducted by Zogby International, 79 percent of Americans believe that the United States should curb its emissions of greenhouse gases. 67 percent of Americans believe that the threat of global warming can be addressed without harm to the economy. There is strong public support for governmental action against global climate change, yet the Bush Administration refuses to do anything. That's not just cruelly negligent. It's also just plain stupid. (Source: National Wildlife, February/March 2004)

George W. Bush and his advisors want to hand the keys of government over to a group of fundamentalist extremists who would take America back to the conditions of the mid-1800's, with an anti-science, pro-segregation, anti-freedom, coal-burning agenda that would place power-hungry priests and corrupt energy barons in positions of power, to dictate how the rest of us will be allowed to live: by the harsh rules of the Old Testament Bible, and by the dictates of profit.

Is this assessment going too far? Consider:
Segregationist Charles Pickering, appointed a federal judge without Senate confirmation
Secret energy committee meetings with modern day oil barons
Vice President Dick Cheney's Halliburton getting sweetheart deals to gouge taxpayers for Iraqi gasoline above the market price
The President of the United States sending generals into battle in the belief that they are fighting against Satan
A special office in the White House to help churches take over the responsibilities of government
John Ashcroft setting up civilian surveillance programs, planning computer systems to scour through private records, and putting wiretaps in the homes of American citizens who are not even suspected of crimes
Christian fundamentalist lobbyists appointed to government science panels

Personally, I prefer present-day life to the life of the 1800s, but not that's not how Bush's fundamentalist supporters see things. They're dragging America backwards, against all the progress we've made in 150 years. Just imagine what another 4 years of that dragging could do.

Under the approving watch of George W. Bush, Republicans are putting a record amount of pork barrel wasteful spending into the national budget. For example, Republican Senator Christopher Bond of Missouri is using Bush's position in the White House to help him push a 2.3 billion dollar project to build new locks on the Mississippi River, even though the Army Corps of Engineers has conducted a study that says that such locks are completely unjustified by the amount of barge traffic on the Mississippi River. This kind of wasteful use of taxpayer money is shameful, but George W. Bush keeps on signing it into law. (Source, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, January 20, 2004)

Just take a look at Bush's Cabinet. They're all the bad old guys who were in the White House back in the era of Richard Nixon. Is that what Bush thinks America should aspire to: the dirty tricks of Richard Nixon?

Not since the days of the Nixon White House has an administration so profoundly failed to see any distinction between personal political expediency and national security.

Is is just me, or does something about the Bush administration smell fishier than Whitewater?

If we had a real investigation that was aggressively out to find the truth, once they started issuing subpoenas and putting the fear of jail time into people left and right, what would they find?

A lot of loose ends have frayed out of this tangle of Middle East-oil-Iraq-power company shenanigans:

What energy people did Cheney meet with in 2001, and what did they tell him?

What's up with the administration covering Saudi Arabia's ass?

Was there pressure on intelligence agents to modify threat assessments? (Subpoena the agents, swear them in, then ask them.)

What kind of backroom dealings has this administration had with Ahmad Chalabi, and other Iraqi exiles? Who offered whom what, and how did that affect administration policy?

Who leaked the identity of a CIA agent to the press? (Subpoena members of the administration, swear them in, then ask them.)

What's up with Halliburton continuing to pay Cheney while he's vice president? Does this have to do with Cheney pushing hard for a war that has landed Halliburton huge no-bid contracts? (Subpoena reams of Halliburton memos that were never supposed to see the light of day, and get a staff going over them with a fine-tooth comb.)

The list goes on and on...

We need an investigation that will tug at these loose threads until they start to unravel. Is it a cleverly-spun web of deceit, or just a tangle of petty corruption and conflict of interest? I don't know, but I smell a rat.

How much do you want to bet Bush's hand-picked team of "investigators" won't dig into the connections between these loose ends? One good reason to boot Bush is that I don't feel at all reluctant in placing this kind of bet, and I am not a betting man.

Before the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, Bush said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. Saddam said he didn't have any. Looks like we were wrong and he was right. America now has credibility than a two-bit former dictator. Thanks, Bush.

Propaganda ministries in totalitarian nations around the world can point to what's happening now in America and say, "See? Democracy doesn't work after all. America's not really run by the people. It's run by a small group of corrupt, powerful individuals. Democracy is just an illusion created by the few to control the many."

Well they're wrong, because no matter how the corrupt few try to pull the wool over our eyes, at the end of the day, we all get to vote. Democracy does work, and 2004 is the year we show the world it works by throwing out the most corrupt president we've had in a generation.

For what we're spending on the Iraq war, we could go to a thousand of the poorest villages in the Middle East, Africa, and Central Asia--and build a million-dollar medical clinic, water-treatment plant, housing project, or road in each village, EVERY WEEK. Who would hate America then? Where would Al-Qaeda go to recruit?

The time and money Bush spent chasing after phantasmal weapons of mass destruction in Iraq could have been used to get rid of real live WMD in the former Soviet Union. The Nunn-Lugar program, which has helped destroy or secure thousands of actual WMD, has remained neglected, underfunded, and poorly administered under Bush. (Source: Union of Concerned Scientists January 22, 2003)

Wesley Clark has called the War in Iraq a "sideshow in the war on terror." Right on! It's also a sideshow in the struggle against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, a sideshow in the pursuit of peace in the Middle East... (Source: Meet the Press November 17, 2003)

Come to think of it, Bush's tax cuts are a sideshow in the creation of jobs and the pursuit of a healthy economy. Nice going, Sideshow George.

George W. Bush has so alienated conservatives with the combination of bloated spending and a bloated deficit that they have started up websites like, where one commentator writes: "As a fiscal conservative, I take the long-term view and note with rising concern George W. Bush's inability to do the same. As any parent would tell a wayward child, we must tell George W. Bush to stop spending money we do not have."

The Bush Jobs Legacy in Connecticut: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 33% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

It turns out that the Bush/Cheney energy policy is not an energy policy for all Americans. No, the Bush/Cheney energy policy is an energy policy specifically designed to provide big government financial rewards to industrial and energy corporations in Texas.

Bush and Cheney have proposed letting thousands of power plants, factories and other industrial sources of pollution get away with breaking the law, giving them a loophole to violate the Clean Air Act without having to the consequences.

Now where, oh, where, do you think that the majority of the dirty power plants that would profit from this new pro-pollution policy are located? That's right kids, they're in Texas - all 1,942 of them. (Source, Environmental Protection Agency, September 30, 2003)

It looks like if you're going to play in Texas, you've got to have a big wad of cash for Republican politicians like Bush and Cheney, along with a face mask on to breathe.

George W. Bush's special favor to allow 1,942 Texas polluters to keep on spewing dangerous filth into the air in violation of the Clean Air Act has consequences. Yes, we're hoping that there will be consequences for Bush himself, but in the meantime we're talking about more life-or-death consequences. Consider what will happen to the people downwind from Texas if George W. Bush lets the polluters from the lone star state keep on getting away with it.

Cancer. Heart disease. Asthma and other respiratory illnesses. Whatever the particular manifestation, it amounts to death and misery in 27 states from Maine all the way down to Florida to the south, and to the west in Oklahoma.

There are currently 64,000 deaths every year from diseases related to air pollution. Ignoring the gravity of this consequence is enough on its own to merit a big boot for Bush on Election Day.

As of January 2004, George W. Bush has avoided answering reporters' questions eleven times by accusing the reporters of using "trick questions". The use of this "trick questions" excuse is the sign of an immature mind. An intellectually mature president would easily be able to point out the false premises in a question and then explain how the issue ought to be framed. When Mr. Bush insults reporters with his "trick question" response, he appears to merely either not know the answer to the question, or to not want to admit what the real answer is. The American people deserve more honest leadership that that. (Source, Harper's Magazine, January 2004)

Michael Blaise and Brian Hazelgrove were killed in Iraq when their helicopter went down near the city of Mosul. They were both just 29 years old, starting to enter the prime of their lives. They were sent to Iraq to fight a war under false pretenses. They deserved better than that. (Source: Department of Defense)

Thanks again to Harper's Magazine, for providing a sharp insight into the messed up priorities of the Bush Administration. Harper's reports that the Bush Administration spends 18 times more on its misadventure in Iraq than it spends on fighting the spread of AIDS in other "developing countries". Of course, over the last ten years AIDS has killed many more people worldwide than Iraq has. The United States may be a wealthy nation, but we don't have enough luxury to shortchange the efforts to address the real threats in the world while combatting the imaginary dangers drawn out of the fantasies of obsessive presidents.(Source, Harper's Magazine, January 2004)

The Bush Jobs Legacy in Rhode Island: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 34% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

George W. Bush complains about the persecution of religious groups in the United States (for not getting full government funding for their private, theologically-based missionary programs!). Yet, when it comes to foreign countries, Mr. Bush doesn't seem to mind at all when governments imprison people because of their religion, as long as those governments are willing to provide support for Bush's War on Evil.

A case in point: George W. Bush calls Uzbekistan an ally in the War on Evil. In fact, Bush has provided Uzbekistan a 1,600 percent increase in military aid since he came to occupy the White House in 2001. Shockingly, the government of Uzbekistan is currently imprisoning an estimated 6,500 of its people solely for their religious or political beliefs. George W. Bush has done nothing to stop this persecution, and in fact appears to be rewarding it, and providing material support with it, through the dramatic increase in military aid. (Source, Harper's Magazine, January 2004)

While Mr. Bush and his fundamentalist supporters get all huffy about the Defense of Marriage Act, wouldn't we all be better off with a Defense of Sewage Act? I'm talking about some kind of act of government that would ensure Americans' right to clean drinking water. Well, we can expect Bush to get all hot and bothered, worked up into a moral pretzel about cleaning up the institution of marriage, but it doesn't look like Bush is willing to do a damn thing to defend the tradition of not drinking water that doesn't have crap and poisons in it. Because clean water comes before moral crusading in my list of priorities, I say we've got great reason to dump Bush on Election Day in 2004!

One day in early 2004, a bomb south of Baghdad killed at least 50 people, many of them American-trained policemen or new police recruits. This kind of event has been going on almost non-stop since the Bush Administration began its rule over Iraq.

No one expected an occupation of Iraq to be problem free. The plain truth, however, is that neither George W. Bush nor his advisors seemed to think that an ongoing rebellion killing hundreds of Iraqis and hundreds of Americans was a reasonable possibility. Bush aides even mocked those experts who predicted a difficult insurgency.

Now, the Bush Administration does not want to admit that there is a serious problem of out-of-control violence in Iraq. Over and over again, the people in the White House try to tell us that this sort of thing is to be expected. Bush goes so far as to suggest that yesterday's bombing is inconsequential to his "march to freedom" in Iraq.

When a new democracy is being formed, factional infighting is to be expected. Arguments about methods are to be expected. Power struggles over the construction of a constitution are to be expected.

Bombs that kill over 50 people at a time ripping a country apart? It's a sad sign of the poor leadership that Bush has brought to Iraq that people are beginning to see such violence as par for the course. (Source: Toronto Star, February 11, 2004)

Update: There was another blip on the "march to freedom" just one day after the bomb that killed 50 people south of Baghdad. A car bomb was set off at another recruiting station in Iraq, killing at least 36 people. 36 people killed at a pop, and again George W. Bush suggests that everything is going according to his plan. Let's hope that Bush doesn't try to start a "march to freedom" here in America. (Source: NPR, February 11, 2004)

The Bush Jobs Legacy in Maine: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs in the state were 25% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Just suppose it actually DID become necessary to take military action to counter a6¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§76„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥767671„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7673„1¤706¥730„3¨¬„1¤706¥730„3¨¬70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„676716¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì766¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„6767708serious, imminent threat to U.S. security. And suppose the threat were discovered through intelligence sources that, for whatever reason, had to remain undisclosed. George Bush would be the absolute worst president to have under those circumstances. He's lied so many times about Iraq that nobody would believe him. Congress wouldn't believe him; the press wouldn't believe him; our allies wouldn't believe him; even some of our own troops on the mission wouldn't believe him. I sure wouldn't believe him. Bush is like the little boy who cried wolf. If we elect him again, we could very well end up being the sheep who are left without credible protection.

The Bush Jobs Legacy in New Hampshire: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs in the state was 35% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

The Bush Administration is spending so much money on its wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that it is projected to completely devour its annual budget for the year by September, requiring the Pentagon to divert 19 billion dollars extra into the wars. That amount will then be made up through an increased defense budget for that amount.

So, you remember that 87 billion dollars for Iraq last year? Bush is now telling the American public that the 87 billion wasn't enough! Bush's campaign slogan seems to be: More Money for More War in 2004! (Source: Chicago Tribune, February 11, 2004)

On top of THAT, the Bush Administration is planning to ask for an additional $40 Billion or so for Iraq...after the November elections. We may well have to pay this money now that we're in this mess, but it's important to remember that it was Bush who unnecessarily pushed us into this war. What productive investments could we have made without Bush's destructive course of action? Why is Bush trying to hide from the consequences of his choices?

The Bush Jobs Legacy in Vermont: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs in the state was 29% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Gabriel Palacios and James Parker were killed in a mortar attack on an American military base near Baquouba, Iraq. They were both less than 25 years old. They didn't need to be in Iraq. There were no weapons of mass destruction there, but Bush sent them to fight and die there anyway, just to score political points. They deserved better. We can honor their loss by voting for a leader who won't play soldier at the drop of a hat. (Source: Department of Defense)

Bush made a big speech on February 12, 2004, covering the subject of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Take note that Bush's policy so far is to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction by invading and occupying countries that do not have any weapons of mass destruction. Hey, none of us get it right all the time, but we ought to expect that the President of the United States will have the wisdom to make speeches on those subjects about which he actually knows something (Source: ABC News, February 12, 2004)

News item courtesy of the Associated Press (February 15, 2004): The College Republicans of Roger Williams University have initiated a scholarship available to white students only, with an essay on white pride required.

This is George W. Bush's party. 'Nuff said.

The Bush Jobs Legacy in Massachusetts: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs in the state was 41% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Big oil and chemical companies are responsible for the majority of the dangerously polluted sites covered under Superfund legislation, and historically, this responsibility has been compensated for with a special tax on oil and chemical companies. It is through this tax that the cleanup of Superfund sites has taken place. Now that he has the power of the White House, George W. Bush is trying to end this system, and force ordinary taxpaying citizens to pay for Superfund directly. Even Bush's fellow Republicans think that this is a bad idea. Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island has introduced legislation that would continue the current payment system, so that polluting corporations, not individual American workers, will pay the price of keeping America clean. Bush refuses to support Chafee's legislation. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

Back in 2000, Republican Senator John McCain told America that George W. Bush "twists the truth". If it was true then, are we really supposed to believe that it's not true now? (Source, New York Times, February 17, 2004)

The Bush Administration once predicted that 5.5 million jobs would be created by the end of 2004. Well, so far the Bush Administration still hasn't made up the 3 million jobs it lost in the first three years it occupied the White House. Hey, the end of 2004 is still a few months away, and you never know what can happen, but creating 5.5 million jobs in less than a year does seem a bit farfetched. Making outlandish economic predictions is not a quality we need to see in a President of the United States. (Source: New York Times, February 16, 2004)

Within just one week this year, the Bush Administration claimed that it would create 2.6 million jobs this year, then tried to distance itself from that prediction, only vaguely saying that "there are some things we need to do." Oh, so this is Bush's plan to create jobs for America's workers: to "do" "some things". If this is the best that Bush can do with his Ivy League MBA, it looks like we're all in a bit of trouble. (Source: Boston Globe, February 19, 2004)

When George W. Bush tried to back off from the prediction of 2.6 million new jobs he put his signature to, his justification was that "I'm not a statistician." No, but presumably statisticians are on the President's Council of Economic Advisers, which drew up the report. And with a graduate-level degree in business that he supposedly earned, George W. Bush should be able to properly consume if not generate statistical reports. We're left with this unhappy set of alternatives again: either George W. Bush and the President's Council of Economic Advisers are incompetent, or they're inflating their prediction of job growth for political reasons. Neither alternative is a happy one for the nation. (Source: Sacramento Bee, March 5, 2004)

The Bush Jobs Legacy in New York: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 38% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

I keep hearing from Fox News about what a great guy George W. Bush is, but I know that as long as Bush is President, I don't have a chance of meeting him myself. Let's get Bush out of the Oval Office in 2004 so that we can all have the great pleasure of getting to know him in person, without a busy White House schedule to get in the way.

After Halliburton (the big oil corporation Dick Cheney led until he became Vice President) was caught overcharging the American military for oil in Iraq, George W. Bush promised that they would make sure that no further such corruption would take place. Count that as another broken promise. Now, Halliburton has been caught in "substantial overcharging" on millions of meals it has been hired to serve to American soldiers and other personnel. It looks like Vice President Dick Cheney created a pervasive culture of corruption when he led Halliburton. It also looks like George W. Bush is unwilling to crack down on this corruption when it takes place under his watch. (Source: Dow Jones Newswires, February 16, 2004)

Why dump Bush? Well, it's part of the great American tradition of literacy. You see, if our great forefathers had not sacrificed their energy to speak with correct grammar and elect coherent political leaders, we'd all be speaking gibberish right now, like George W. Bush. For the sake of this great tradition of trying not to sound like blabbering idiots, we must dump Bush!

The Bush Jobs Legacy in New Jersey: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 39% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

There are three hundred endangered and threatened species of wildlife living on land managed by the United States military. Yet, George W. Bush has created a new exemption of 25 million acres of that land that allows the military to completely ignore the habitat-protection provisions of the Endangered Species Act. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

George W. Bush has disrespected the federal system of balance of power and once again appointed a radical, controversial nominee to become a federal judge without confirmation by the U.S. Senate. This time, it's extremist conservative William Pryor, the judge from Alabama who has declared himself an opponent of homosexuality and reproductive choice.

In fiery political speeches before the Christian Coalition, Pryor joined with Roy Moore in defending, as in accordance with God's will, the display of the Bible's Ten Commandments in public courthouses and government buildings, giving special preference to Christianity and Judaism over all other religions in America. Pryor also sent a signed brief to the Supreme Court of the United States which compared homosexuality to "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography and even incest or pedophilia."

Senator John Edwards, a member of the Senate's Judiciary Committee, which has the constitutional right to approve all presidential nominations to the federal judiciary, explains that William Pryor "has a long record of vigorous efforts to deny Americans' basic rights under our laws." In fact, Judge Pryor has such a well-recognized history of opposition to the most basic principles of civil rights and the separation of church and state that the U.S. Senate has refused to approve his appointment, even though the Senate is currently controlled by Republicans.

George W. Bush ought to be ashamed of nominating such an undemocratic, divisive man as William Pryor for a federal judgeship. Bush puts our entire nation to shame when he waits for the U.S. Senate to be out of session in order to appoint such a demagogue without confirmation, or even so much as a review outside of the political offices of election strategist Karl Rove. (Source: Seattle Times, February 21, 2004)

To be fair, it's not just Republican federal judges who are racists. Many Republican state legislators are racists as well. With George W. Bush in the White House, Don Davis, a Republican state representative in North Carolina sent a letter to every member of the North Carolina House and Senate, containing the following passage: "Two things made this country great: White men & Christianity. The degree these two have diminished is in direct proportion to the corruption and fall of the nation. Every problem that has arisen (sic) can be directly traced back to our departure from God's Law and the disenfranchisement of White men." When we elect a Republican to the White House, we support a Republican Party that embraces opinions like this. (The Fayetteville Observer, August 22, 2001)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Pennsylvania: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 23% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

The Pentagon, of all organizations, has advised George W. Bush that climate change has the likely potential to create huge disasters for humanity. A Pentagon report, kept secret from the American people until uncovered by the British press, predicts that, as a result of climate change "Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life... Once again, warfare would define human life." This is the Pentagon speaking here, not some far-out group of environmentalist radicals. Mr. Bush has responded to this dire prediction by doing nothing. Four more years of this kind of nothing is four more years closer to disaster. No thanks. (Source: The Observer, February 22, 2004)

In the first three years of the Clinton Administration, 221 species were added to the list of endangered species. In his first three years in office, George W. Bush has only allowed 20 species to be added to the list, in spite of the fact that the rate of species extinction is increasing, not decreasing. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

So maybe you don't want to take the political advice of latte-sipping, Volvo-driving, body-piercing liberals. Okay, how about listening to conservative farmer Mike Cross, a farmer from Londonderry, New Hampshire. He says, "It seems like he's just taking care of his rich buddies now... I'm not a great fan of John Kerry, but I've had enough of President Bush." Gee, I guess Middle America doesn't support Bush after all. So much for the claims of the Club for Growth that Middle America only votes Republican. (Source: New York Times, February 22, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Ohio: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 29% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

I say we ought to boot Bush on Election Day because, in spite of all his ranting and raving about the threat of same-sex marriage to the institution of marriage, I've found that the institution of my marriage is doing just fine under the onslaught, thank you very much.

A simple fact: The Bush Administration lost American jobs in 24 out of the first 37 months it spent in office. This is not a track record we'd like to see continued for four more years. (Source: Boston Globe, February 19, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Indiana: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 27% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

A Republican judge in Beachwood, Ohio provides the following thoughts about George W. Bush to American voters: "I feel like a complete traitor, and if you'd asked me four months ago, the answer would have been different, but we are really disgusted. It's the lies, the war, the economy. We have very good friends who are staunch Republicans, who don't even want to hear the name George Bush anymore." When a Republican judge turns against Bush, you know that something's very wrong. (Source: New York Times, February 22, 2004)

Jeremy Symons, a prominent scientist at at the Environmental Protection Agency, has quit in protest of what he charges is a politically-motivated effort by the Bush Administration to suppress open discussion of the science-related issues that face the United States. Symons charges that the Bush Administration is "burying its head in the sand" and "ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil companies". Ouch. Does suppressing science have an official place on the Republican Party Platform? (Source: The Observer, February 22, 2004)

George W. Bush is doing such a bad job as President that he's even losing the loyalty of Republicans in Texas! Take the example of John Scarnado, a registered Republican who lives in Austin, Texas. He says, "I'm upset about Iraq and the vice president and his affiliation with Halliburton. I think the Bush administration is coming out to look like old boy politics, and I don't have a good feel about that." (Source: New York Times, February 22, 2004)

According to Jeff Ruch, the executive director of PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility), the Fish and Wildlife Service under the Bush Administration has begun the practice of reassigning members of its professional staff when they issue reports on environmental issues that do not favor the economic interests of industries that supported George W. Bush in the 2000 presidential campaign. He describes instances of "targeted political payback" orchestrated by the top officials at the Service, officials appointed by Bush. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Illinois: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 34% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Take this perspective from Congressional Representative Steny Hoyer, from Maryland: "The reality is that President Bush does not have a job-creation program beyond cheerleading at campaign events. But, of course, wishful thinking will never create the jobs that are necessary for American families to thrive. The President's advisers seem to believe that these happy-talk sessions on the economy demonstrate that he is engaged. In fact they do the President more harm than good because they show just how out of touch he really is." Representative Hoyer is right. America needs more than an economic plan based on mere wishful thinking. That's why America needs to vote for anybody but Bush in 2004. (Source: PRNewswire, February 19, 2004)

Bob Watson, the chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, calls the Bush Administration's denial of the reality of climate change, "hugely embarrassing". This is the game we're having to play with Bush in the White House: Guessing how many different ways Bush can embarrass America in the eyes of the international community. I want a president I don't have to be embarrassed of, and that's just one more reason to give Bush the boot. (Source: The Observer, February 22, 2004)

Bush is still pushing to open up oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, in spite of the fact that a majority of Americans oppose doing so for sound environmental reasons. Okay, let's pretend that we can put those environmental issues aside for a moment, and consider this: Bush's push for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge proves that he's an awful businessman. How so? Well, you see, because of global warming, the arctic tundra is becoming much softer on average as the permafrost melts and turns to a kind of mushy arctic marsh through the warmer parts of the year. The number of days in which the areas of the North Slope of Alaska already open to oil drilling are actually accessible to oil companies' vehicles has dropped in half. As this trend continues, oil drilling in far northern Alaska will become more and more expensive, driving oil prices up. A good businessman can see that it's just not worth the national investment that would be required, but Bush can't see this. Someone who can't grasp this kind of basic business dynamic has no business being the chief executive of the United States of America. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Michigan: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 26% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

The amateurish approach of the Bush Administration to the responsibilities of government is causing former Bush voters to cross over into the ranks of the opposition. Take, for example, the comments of Bill Flanagan, who voted for George W. Bush in 2004, but now says, "The combination of lies and boys coming home in body bags is just too awful... I could vote for Kerry. I could vote for any Democrat unless he's a real dummy." Mr. Flanagan's good advice is yet another reason to boot Bush on Election Day. (Source: New York Times, February 22, 2004)

Even David Gergen, conservative and former adviser to Republican Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan, admits that George W. Bush has an awful environmental record. Describing the Bush Administration, Gergen says, "On issues of the environment, I do not think we can take pride in what we've done." (Source: Salt Lake Tribune, February 21, 2004)

Since he came to occupy the White House in 2000, George W. Bush has managed a federal government that systematically intimidates scientists from presenting results of studies that do not support Bush's extremist conservative political policies. In just one example of manipulation of government-sponsored scientific research, after 10 years of research, a team of biologists studying the effect of water flow on endangered pallid sturgeons in the Missouri River was replaced with a new team when their their study's results appeared to recommend changes in shipping patterns that were stronger than those favored by the Bush Administration. So, a Bush appointee put a new research team in place, which, after just 45 days, released a new report that supported the plans of the Bush Administration. When a President fires scientists because they say things that he doesn't want to hear, he undermines the trust that Americans should be able to place in scientific research sponsored by the government. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Wisconsin: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 19% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

George W. Bush has lost the support of the founder of the American Military Museum. Although he supported Bush in 2000, Republican George Meagher now says, "Given the outcome and how dissatisfied I am with the administration, it's hard to think about now... People like me, we're all choking a bit at not supporting the president. But when I think about 500 people killed and what we've done to Iraq, and what we've done to our country, I mean, we're already $2 trillion in debt again." (Source: New York Times, February 22, 2004)

George W. Bush's National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice justified the need for war by arguing that UN weapons inspectors on the ground in Iraq had been given all the information they needed to succeed, but still weren't up to the job of keeping us safe. Her words on March 6, 2003: "United Nations inspectors have been briefed on every high or medium priority weapons of mass destruction, missile and U.A.V.-related site the U.S. intelligence community has identified."

You know what comes next, don't you? Now the Bush Administration has admitted that as a matter of fact, United Nations inspectors were not provided with information about a large number of alleged sites. How typical, and how disappointing. And in this case, how deadly. (Source: New York Times, February 21, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Minnesota: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 29% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

How do we know that they time to boot Bush has come? Even Green Party members and former hardcore Ralph Nader supporters are saying that they're going to vote for the Democratic candidate in order to make sure that George W. Bush doesn't have another 4 years to do his damage to America. (Source: Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, February 23, 2004)

Oh, how George W. Bush loves to talk about homeland security. It turns out that he's not very interested in keeping the actual land in the homeland secure, though. In fact, under Bush, American land is the least secure it's been in generations. For example, the EPA states that 1,172 streams are at high risk of pollution by the weed-killer atrazine. These streams run all through that "homeland" Bush keeps talking about, so you'd think he'd be concerned. Nope. It turns out that, under Bush's direction, the EPA is requiring only 3.4 percent of the streams that are at high risk of being poisoned by atrazine to actually be monitored. Under Bush's plan, the other 1,132 streams at high risk of this chemical attack will be left defenseless. George W. Bush's plan for homeland security requires communities along these waterways to fend for themselves and just hope that they aren't exposed to this poison. That's not just sloppy. It's not just careless. Bush is being negligent in protecting Americans from very real threats to their lives. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April, 2004)

I turned on CSPAN one morning to hear a conservative Republican from Tennessee preach about what it means to be a "real American", announcing that if Massachusetts and California want to let gay people get married, they don't belong in the United States anymore. It's a sign of how much the divisive politics of George W. Bush are breaking the country apart that the Republicans are encouraging interregional hatreds of a strength that have not been seen since the days of the Civil Rights struggle four decades ago. Through negative advertisements, like those of the Club for Growth, Bush's supporters are actually encouraging Americans to hate other Americans solely because of the region of the United States in which they live. This kind of division within America should not be sought for the sake of mere political gain. (Source: CSPAN, February 23, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Iowa: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 19% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Jim Rego is a marketing manager for Xerox, and a Republican. When asked for his opinion of George W. Bush, he says, "I won't be voting for Bush in the fall. I think he's destroyed the economy... I'm interested in anybody who actually will bring the deficit back down. I think George Bush has bungled the economy. I think Iraq was a mistake... I would vote for either one of the Democratic candidates right now." America has good reason to consider Jim Rego's advice. (Source: Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, February 23, 2004)

G.I. Joe is not a real American hero. G.I. Joe is a mass-marketed toy produced by a giant corporation in order to appeal to little boys' desire to play at war as if it is a game. We need a President who knows the difference.

John Kerry has seen the face of war. George W. Bush hasn't.

The Bush campaign issued a scathing indictment of John Kerry, noting that over the past decade and a half John Kerry had received campaign contributions from lobbyists at a rate of nearly $54,000 a year. Bad, bad, bad.

Problem is, Bush received $960,000 in payments from lobbyists in the last year alone. That's more than SEVENTEEN TIMES AS MUCH as Kerry.

This striking difference gives quantitative ground to what has been qualitatively obvious for some time now: George W. Bush is the lobbyist candidate. (Source: New York Times February 23, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Missouri: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 25% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

George W. Bush is using the power of the White House to punish states that did not vote for him in 2000, and are not likely to vote for him in 2004. A case in point: Bush has broken his promises to provide financial assistance to the state of California. During his campaign to become California's governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said that, as a Republican, he would be able to get more help from Bush. So what did Bush do? He reduced federal funds for California, making a patsy out of Arnold. Regional favoritism is no game for a President of the United States to be playing. (Source: Meet the Press, February 22, 2004)

Has George W. Bush been using the power of the federal government to pay back his campaign contributors in ways that harm the American people? Well, let's look at one example of Bush's mutual back-scratching strategies (We can't call it bribery, can we? Oh no, we musn't.) During the 2000 presidential campaign, the electric utility industry donated 4.8 million dollars to the Bush campaign and the Republican National Committee. Now, as president, George W. Bush has ordered 50 separate investigations of electrical power plants for violations of the Clean Air Act to be stopped. It is estimated that the electrical utility industry will save 10 billion dollars as a result. As the Church Lady might have asked, "Isn't that special?" (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

Dr. Sidney Drell, a professor emeritus of physics at Stanford and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution who has served both Democratic and Republican administrations as a national security advisor, gave the following warning about the Bush Administration's sacrifice of science for the sake of political advantage: "I am concerned that the scientific advice coming into this administration seems to me very narrow... The input from individuals whose views are not in the main line of their policy don6¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§76„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥767671„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7673„1¤706¥730„3¨¬„1¤706¥730„3¨¬70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„676716¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥76736¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì39t seem to be sought or welcomed." Stifling the open pursuit of knowledge for the sake of conservative cultural preferences reminds one of the Dark Ages. Would Bush have prosecuted Galileo? (Source: New York Times News Service, February 23, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in North Dakota: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 22% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Why is George W. Bush marshalling his administration's attention and resources to battling gay marriage of all things, when there are much more serious problems going on: millions of jobs lost, Americans getting shot at in foreign countries, nuclear proliferation going unaddressed, and global warming? Is banning gay marriage really so important compared to these things?

The night before George W. Bush announced he would push for the government to amend the constitution in order to keep gay people from getting married, he made the following statement about his opponents:
"They seem to be against every idea that gives Americans more authority and more choices and more control over their own lives. We'll hear them make a lot of promises over the next eight months -- and listen closely because there's a theme: Every promise will increase the power of politicians and bureaucrats over your income, over your retirement, over your health care, and over your life. It's that same old Washington mind-set -- they'll give the orders..."
Does he not see the dissonance here? Is he projecting his motivations on his opponents? Or in his universe do gay and lesbian people not count as people? I am truly mystified. (Source: Remarks by George W. Bush to the Republican Governors Association, February 23 2004)

Ad Dawson was planning on voting for George W. Bush, but no longer. Why? Read Ad's own words:
"For most of my life, I decided to remain neutral and not take sides in any political issue. My reason for this was due to my desire to not offend someone else's viewpoints and to be open to hearing all sides of any heated discussion or argument. I'm registered independent and have voted for both a Democratic candidate and a Republican candidate throughout the years. For the first few years of Bush's term, many of my friends looked down upon Bush while I remained neutral. Up until this issue arose, I was planning on voting for Bush as I was concerned that putting a new President in during the current state of our country could place our economical situation in even worse affairs. But, with this amendment proposal and Bush's backing, I have decided to finally come off the fence.

"I will not be voting for Bush in 2004 whereas just a few months ago, I was planning on supporting him. I will not back any President who wants to attempt to modify the United States Constitution created by our forefathers which was designed to protect ALL people's rights and not take them away or classify them for certain groups/people.

"It's a shame that religion is still defining our politics. It's an even bigger shame that the United States would invest its time and money on an issue to segregate the people of its country rather than unite us all.

"I consider myself spiritual and am open to a diverse nation. Whether you are gay, straight, black, white, latino, asian, male, female, christian, muslim, hindu, buddist, etc, etc, we all come from the same creator.

'One nation, under God...' How can this be true by adding laws that will segregate and classify groups of people?" (Source: Washington Post Forums February 24, 2004)
Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in South Dakota: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 26% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

In attempting to justify his push for a constitutional amendment to restrict the freedom of gays and lesbians, George W. Bush explained that "attempts to redefine marriage in a single state or city could have serious consequences throughout the country."

Serious consequences? What serious consequences might those be? Bush did not elaborate, unfortunately, so we'll have to work those out for ourselves. Will tadpoles fall from the sky and clog sewer drains? Will we all start fornicating with cattle? Will the fact that gay people are getting married in San Francisco lead people to start committing petty theft in Austin? I can think of no consequences any more serious than the shocking possibility that some awfully closed-minded people might take offense. That's an awfully low standard for amending the Constitution. Yet again, George W. Bush has managed to simultaneously embrace low standards and the lowest common denominator. (Source: Remarks by George W. Bush in the Roosevelt Room, February 24 2004)

Under the administration of George W. Bush, millions of taxpayer dollars are still being funnelled to the "Iraqi National Congress," a front group headed by Ahmed Chalabi that fed the Bush Administration a series of untrue and often fabricated stories in its push for war. Couldn't we do something better with those millions than pay for more tall tales? (Source: Duluth News-Tribune February 22, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Kansas: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 26% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

On February 24, the world was shocked to hear of the slaughter of 200 people in a refugee camp in Uganda, by a group of rebels, including child soldiers, who are fighting for a man who says he wants to create a national Ugandan government that is based upon the Ten Commandments. Without a moment to lose, George W. Bush made an announcement: He declared that he would help a nation besieged by immorality and lawlessness by amending the Constitution of the United States so that only those marriages that don't involve gay people can take place. (Source: Associated Press, February 24, 2004)

George W. Bush seems to feel that it's just too much of a pain in the neck to bother setting standards for public behavior in our society. That's especially true in relation to the behavior of big corporations, and when it comes to the environment. Let's compare: In the first three years of the Clinton Administration, there were 30 environmental standards set by the EPA. In the first three years of the new Bush Administration, there have only been 3 such environmental standards set, and 2 of those 3 were required by court order. Low standards seems to be Bush's way to govern. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Delaware: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 43% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

George W. Bush chose Rod Paige to be Secretary of Education. So how well does this choice reflect on Bush? Well, recently Rod Paige announced to a meeting of the nation's governors that "The NEA is a terrorist organization". For those of you who don't have kids in school, he was talking about the National Education Association, America's largest organization of school teachers. Apparently, Rod Paige believes that teachers are terrorists. Bush is the guy who appointed Mr. Paige, so you can imagine what Bush's opinion of teachers is. (Source: Associated Press, February 23, 2004)

Rod Paige's announcement that hundreds of thousands of American school teachers are in fact members of a "terrorist organization" has provoked at least one teacher's confession. Michael Sherwin, from Corvalis, Oregon, writes: "Since Secretary of Education Rod Paige has torn off the mask and exposed the National Education Association for what it is 6¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§76„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥767671„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7673„1¤706¥730„3¨¬„1¤706¥730„3¨¬70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„676716¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥76736¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì35 a terrorist organization, I can see the game is up. There's no use in dissembling anymore. I want to confess. For decades, I have been part of this terrorist organization. For decades, I have sent them material support disguised as union dues. For decades, I have spent countless hours participating in their nefarious plot to educate America's children. But no more. I have seen the light! I saw Sarah Good with the Devil! I saw Goody Osburn with the Devil! I saw... Oh, sorry ... wrong witch hunt." So what's the associated reason to boot Bush? Well, we are shocked that it took Bush three and a half years to summon the courage to confront this evil plot in our midst! (Source: Corvalis Gazette-Times, February 24, 2004)

Getting on to the more serious threats to America, let's talk about the assault of George W. Bush and the Republican Congress on our system of public lands. Back in the 20th Century, Republican President Theodore Roosevelt preserved 240 milllion acres of wild country as American public land. During the least three and a half years, George W. Bush has weakened the protection of 234 million acres of public land. That's America's natural heritage Bush is messing with. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Maryland: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 32% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

George W. Bush has led the Republican Party into a degraded attitude of amorality, in which Republican activists, and even Republican employees in Congress, are encouraged to do whatever is necessary, even to break the law, in order to defeat Democrats' attempts to bring balance back to American government. A case in point: Republican staffers in the U.S. Senate have been caught breaking into the computer systems used by Senators who belong to the Democratic Party. When Republican Senator Orrin Hatch dared to condemn this illegal act, powerful agents in the Republican Party attacked Senator Hatch for being disloyal, and President Bush has done nothing to reign these Republican attack dogs in! (Source: Slate, February 20, 2004)

George W. Bush has managed the federal government in such a way that anti-environmental officials have seized power over the very governmental agencies that are supposed to protect the environment. For example, Craig Manson, the official at the Interior Department who is supposed to oversee the Fish and Wildlife Service and enforce the Endangered Species Act, is on record as stating, "If we are saying that the loss of species is inherently bad, I don't think we know enough about how the world works to say that." Here we have the man who is supposed to make sure that endangered species are protected in accordance with the law, and he's saying that it doesn't much matter to him whether or not species go extinct. For keeping this man in office, Bush's presidency ought to go extinct. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in the District of Columbia: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 32% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Lynne Cheney, wife of Bush's Vice President Dick Cheney, has been not just a member, but a board member of the Independent Women's Forum, a radical anti-feminist group that opposes pay equity, blaming what it characterizes as women's biological differences for the lower pay that women receive in comparison to men. (Source: Blinded By The Right, David Brock)

If George W. Bush gets re-elected, it may be necessary to pass a constitutional amendment defining the Presidency as an office held by one man or woman who is not a blabbering idiot. We ought to be restrained in offering amendments to the Constitution, so I'd prefer that we just vote him out of office.

If you're a mountain climber, you ought to protect your favored activity by casting a vote against Bush. Many of the world's most popular mountain-climbing destinations, such as the Matterhorn and Mount Blanc, are disintegrating because of global warming, which increases the rate of avalanches and huge rockfalls by warming up mountains' ground temperatures and increasing evaporation from glaciers and snow pack during summertime. As a result, mountain climbing is becoming more dangerous, and many mountains are even being closed to climbers. Bush, of course, is doing nothing to address issues of climate change, other than to say that they don't exist. Bummer. (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Virginia: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 37% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

John Kerry says that as President, he would require companies to give their workers a three month warning before "outsourcing" their jobs to foreign countries. George W. Bush refuses to support such a move. Of course, Bush is a third-generation corporate executive, and wouldn't know a worker's interest if it was shaking a picket sign in his face. (Source: Financial Times, February 25, 2004)

It appears that, before the war against Iraq, as Bush and Blair were trying to get a United Nations resolution in favor of war passed, British agents were engaged in a prolonged mission to spy on United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, recording all his private conversations.

It has been known for some months that the Bush Administration requested the British government to spy on delegations to the United Nations Security Council, including Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Guinea, Mexico and Pakistan. A memo acknowledging this American request for espionage at the UN Headquarters in New York City was leaked to the press by a translator who felt ethically unable to be complicit in the spy mission.

Now, Clare Short, who was the Secretary of International Development in UK Prime Minister Tony Blair's government at the time of the buildup to war in Iraq, has revealed that the British spy mission included not just espionage against Security Council delegations, but also the break-in and bugging of the office of the Secretary General himself. Short reports having read transcripts of Kofi Annan's private, confidential conversations herself.

If, as it appears, this espionage was done at the request and with the knowledge of the Bush Administration, then President George W. Bush has committed a crime quite similar to the one at the center of the Watergate scandal that led Richard M. Nixon to resign: A break-in and spying effort in order to gain political advantage. It's important to keep in mind that the United Nations Headquarters is on American soil, in downtown Manhattan. There are no overseas exemptions to U.S. law there.

This would certainly be an impeachable offense, but let's not drag America through another impeachment. Instead, we need an independent investigation of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and the leaders of the American intelligence community. If a crime has been committed, the responsible parties in the Bush Administration, including the President, should resign. If Bush does not resign, our only alternative is to vote him out of office. (Source: CBS News, February 26, 2004)

Yes, it turns out that UN Weapons Inspector Hans Blix was bugged, too. He calls it "disgusting", and we agree. (Sources: The Guardian February 27, 2004, CBS News, March 1, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in West Virginia: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 33% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

George W. Bush can't seem to even take a glimpse of wilderness without wanting to fill it all up with industrial machinery. The Bush Administration has targeted the Red Desert of Wyoming for more than 12,000 oil and gas wells by the year 2010. Of course, this decision has nothing to do with the fact that both the Bush and Cheney families are up to their earlobes in the oil business, right? (Source: Sierra Magazine, March/April 2004)

It's important not just to look at what Halliburton is doing now, but how it fits into a pattern of behavior and allegiances over time. Time 1: As Secretary of Defense under George Bush Senior, Dick Cheney masterminds the turning over of military operations to private contractors. Halliburton is chosen to draw up the specific plans to do so. Time 2: When George Senior is kicked out of office, Dick Cheney is hired by Halliburton as its CEO. Time 3: While Cheney serves as Vice President under George Bush Junior, Halliburton is given a no-bid contract to administer various aspects of reconstruction in Iraq. Connect the dots. (Source: The Age, February 21 2004)

When Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton in the late 1990s, $180 Million in bribes were paid to Nigerian officials by four corporations including Halliburton, according to the Nigerian Economic and Financial Crimes Commission. (Source: The Age, February 21 2004)

Some people claim that even with all of Halliburton's nefarious doings in the late 1990s, perhaps Vice President Dick Cheney wasn't culpable. After all, even though he was CEO of Halliburton, he may not have known what his own corporation was doing. This is called the "asleep at the wheel" defense. Well, do we really want a Vice President in office with a record of being asleep at the wheel, especially when his boss is snoozing as well?

But fret not, at least not about Cheney dozing. No, fret instead about what he did while he was awake and clearly in charge at Halliburton. Current Halliburton CEO David Lesar has said in an interview that Cheney knew all about the questionable accounting practices going on at Halliburton. (Source: Newsweek July 15, 2002)

"Am I the evil genius in the corner that nobody ever sees come out of his hole? It's a nice way to operate, actually." So says Dick Cheney. Unfortunately, Mr. Cheney works in a public position and is supposed to be accountable to the American people. Shady backroom skulking does not a good administration make. (Source: The Age, February 21 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in North Carolina: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 11% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

What is the operational definition of injustice? Try the "military tribunals" at Guantanamo. Now the detainees, an increasing number of whom the Bush Administration now admits are not culpable, have been held for years without trials or even access to lawyers. The plan is for those being held to be put through "military tribunals" in which the traditional American standard of courtroom justice -- evidence, representation and all that silly stuff -- is not met.

But now comes the real kicker: Military officials now say that even if detainees are found not guilty in front of these "military tribunals," they may continue to be detained indefinitely anyway.

Yes, this is the Bush Administration's definition of justice. You may be lucky so far. But would you like it to happen to you? (Source: BBC February 26, 2004)

We don't weep for terrorists. But if it's clear the people being held at Guantanamo are terrorists, then why not put them on trial where the introduction of evidence will make it clear that they are terrorists? And if it's not clear that these are terrorists we're holding, then what is the justification for their indefinite detention?

Such is the logic of the American justice system. But the Bush Administration can't handle justice.

We used to say that other countries like the Soviet Union were "evil" because they conducted show trials in which the accused were denied access to evidence, denied access to lawyers and denied freedom even when found not guilty. What does it make the U.S.A. to be doing the same now? What does that make the man responsible, George W. Bush?

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in South Carolina: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 16% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

When even staunch Bush supporter Bill O'Reilly,under duress (in a fit of pique, saying "What do you want me to do? Go over and kiss the camera?"), admits that "I was wrong" about the existence of weapons of mass destruction and that "all Americans should be concerned"... well, you know the shit has hit the fan. (Source: BBC February 11, 2004)

The official biography of George W. Bush on the U.S. State Department website inaccurately inflates Bush's national guard service, crediting him with years more in flight than he actually mustered. This is just one more instance in which the Bush Administration prefers flights of fancy to messy reality. (Source: Boston Globe February 28, 2004)

George W. Bush created the President's Council on Bioethics in 2001 to address issues such as therapeutic stem cell research and treatment and suggest policy remediation, appointing various experts from the field. Now Bush has removed Dr. Elizabeth Blackburn and Dr. William May, two members of the council whose conclusions do not match with his own. It's no wonder that Bush has made such a mess of the federal government. Dissenting professional voices throughout the scientific community in Washington D.C. are being systematically silenced. What are experts for, anyway, if they aren't going to agree with you? (Source: Associated Press February 27, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Georgia: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 23% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

President Bill Clinton pledged that the United States would sign on to an international treaty banning the use of land mines (which have the unpleasant habit of killing and maiming countless innocent civilians every year) by 2006. His successor, George W. Bush, has decided not to honor that pledge, and to keep using land mines. What's a missing leg or a dead kid to you when you know your own are safe? (Source: The Charlotte Observer February 28, 2004)

The United States is being hit by a 5% penalty tariff from the World Trade Organization. Why? The Bush Administration and the U.S. Congress, all Republican-controlled, can't get their act together to pass legislation to bring the U.S. into WTO compliance. Bush and the G.O.P. told us that a Republican administration would be more efficient than a Democratic one. But we were prosperous under Clinton and the Democrats. Bush and the Republicans just keep bungling their simplest duties. (Source: Associated Press February 28, 2004)

Former Cuyahoga County GOP official John Farina has had it. In a letter to the chair of the Ohio county's Republican Party, Farina explains that George W. Bush's endorsement of a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage was the last straw. "It does nothing to strengthen marriage," he writes. "It is an obviously political move that will do nothing but divide the nation even further. So much for Mr. Bush being a uniter." (Source: February 26, 2004)

George W. Bush's media adviser, Mark McKinnon, says it himself: "You don't hear the president in the Oval Office railing against the special interests." (Source: New York Times February 23, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Florida: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 15% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

The Bush Administration's Treasury Department has issued a regulation making it illegal for Americans to translate or act as an editor for anything written by an Iranian citizen. So much for the freedom of information. (Source: New York Times February 28, 2004)

George W. Bush has led the charge in making the present day Republican Party the most fiscally irresponsible governing group in over a generation. A case in point in republican Congressional Representative James Walsh, who won the "Porker of the Month" award for February, 2004 from Citizens against Government Waste, for his recent outrageous acts of unnecessary and poorly-targeted big government spending. We need a President who is willing to set a better example for confused, weak-willed legislators like Walsh. (Source: Associated Press, February 28, 2004.)

It's not just San Francisco that's standing up to the religious fundamentalist agenda of the segregation of marriage rights. Same-sex weddings have been taking place all over America. As far east as the small Upstate New York village as New Paltz, city and town officials have been helping couples of the same sex get married. In the parking lot of the New Paltz Village Hall, Mayor Jason West legally married 21 couples, explaining, "I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. What we're witnessing in the village today is the flowering of the largest civil rights movement in a generation." It's a shame that George W. Bush is attacking the institution of marriage by trying to annul the weddings of these 21 small town couples. That's downright anti-family, that is. (Source: Poughkeepskie Journal, February 28 2004)

Presidential candidate John Kerry has a solid plan to hand over the responsibility for handling the political transition to sovereignty and democracy for Iraq to the authority of the United Nations, saying "We must offer the U.N. the lead role in assisting Iraq with the development of new political institutions." George W. Bush refuses to allow the United Nations to help the United States manage the political transition, even though Bush's own plan for the transition has almost completely fallen apart. (Source: Knight-Ridder Newspapers, February 28, 2004)

George W. Bush, when he heard of John Kerry's plan to get United Nations cooperation in bringing sovereignty and democracy to Iraq, moved quickly into action. He ordered two Republican senators, John Kyl of Arizona and Norm Coleman of Minnesota, to find new ways to criticize John Kerry's 20-year long record of experience with foreign policy issues. If Bush would only spend half of the energy he currently uses attacking more experienced leaders, we might not have the profound troubles in Iraq we're seeing today. (Source: Knight-Ridder Newspapers, February 28, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Kentucky: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 22% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Listen to the opinion of one Haitian about George W. Bush's long-term refusal to do anything serious to help Haiti resolve its violent crisis. "You tell George W. Bush he is a hypocrite and assassin because the terrorists are killing the Haitian people." So much for Bush's supposed moral clarity. (Source: Associated Press, February 28, 2004)

Why was George W. Bush unwilling to do anything to help Haiti for so long? Well, Bush Administration officials explained that they just couldn't do anything, because Bush has stretched the American military too thin, what with the war in Iraq and all, which was a very very necessary war because of, um, something. (Source: Associated Press, February 28, 2004)

More moral clarity from George W. Bush: When 500 Haitians took to the sea in rickety boats to try to escape the devastating violence in their country, Bush ordered the Coast Guard to pick them up and return them to Haiti, where they face attacks by both rebels and Aristide loyalists, all over again. Bush's excuse? He says it's not his problem. It is against international law to refuse to help refugees who are fleeing violence. I guess Bush's morality gets a bit fuzzy on matters like that, though. (Source: Associated Press, February 28, 2004)

Still more moral clarity from George W. Bush: according to U.S. officials, the groups that seized power in Haiti in February and March of 2004 are headed by the leaders of the old Haitian death squads and by convicted murderers. George W. Bush had the strange notion to suggest that the elected Aristide step down and allow these thugs to take power. (Sources: New York Times February 28, 2004 and Associated Press February 28, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Tennessee: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 14% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

On his "Republicans Against Bush" website, Brian Youmans of Boston, MA notes that "The Republican party used to be the party that kept America out of international entanglements. Until the Reagan years, the party had taken pride in the fact that all major wars in the last century had been entered into by Democrats (WW I, WW II, Korea, Vietnam). The peace treaty for WW I was signed under a Republican, Warren G. Harding, and Nixon had extracted the US from Vietnam. Why are the Republicans suddenly the party of war?"

Good question, Mr. Youmans. But Mr. Bush isn't answering. (Source: An Open Letter to All Republicans, December 2002)

We agree with Al Sharpton when he says, "The issue in 2004 is not if gays marry. The issue is not who you go to bed with. The issue is whether either of you have a job when you get up in the morning." (Source: CNN, February 26, 2004)

We're also with Sharpton when he suggests that, instead of having a constitutional amendment to deal with the non-emergency of gay marriage, "Let's make a constitutional amendment against presidents who lie!"

(Source: CNN, February 26, 2004)

How can we expect a man who can't handle his pretzels to handle the White House?

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Alabama: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 22% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

18,000 families will be ripped apart this year as more National Guard soldiers are prepared to be sent to Iraq, which still is not under control. Surely 18,000 family breakups merit notice as at least one more reason to boot Bush. (Source: Reuters, March 1, 2004)

Laura Bush says that she's tired of being known as the "First Lady". We'd like to help her with that problem. (Source, AP, February 29, 2004)

George W. Bush has approved programs that grant taxpayer money to the Catholic Church to teach children not to have sex. We think he's got it backwards. Shouldn't the government be promoting programs that teach the Catholic Church that its priests shouldn't have sex with children? (Source: St. Joseph News-Press, February 9, 2004)

For a couple years at least, now, George W. Bush has claimed that God is on his side. Still, I've received no memo from God about this. Have you? Has God gone on Larry King Live to announce that he's for George W. Bush? No. I think it may just be that George W. Bush has been hallucinating about this whole talking to God thing. Even worse, maybe he just made it all up! A crazy man or a big old liar. Why do I have to make up my mind about which one the President is? This is just not right, people!

Dan Keefe gives a pretty good reason for why he'll be voting to boot Bush in 2004. He writes, "I will never vote for another Republican in my life. I had a 19 year old fourth generation US Marine Grandson serving in Iraq. I am also a retired US Marine. My grandson was shot in the pelvis in mid-December and when patched up and shipped back to the states the marrow in his pelvis was no longer producing Red Blood Cells. If this cannot be fixed his life is ruined. He was planning to become an FBI agent like his older brother and they have told him that they will no longer consider him. The entire reason for our being in Iraq is based on a filthy lie by the President, Vice President, and Secretary of State as well as the conservatives running around the White House." We couldn't agree more, Mr. Keefe, and we hope your grandson is better soon. Even more than that, we hope that there won't be American grandsons and granddaughters getting shot up in Iraq for much longer. (Source: Conservatives for Kerry, March 1, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Mississippi: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 13% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

James Webb, a Vietnam combat veteran, and secretary of the Navy under Republican President Ronald Reagan, writes, "Bush arguably has committed the greatest strategic blunder in modern memory. To put it bluntly, he attacked the wrong target. While he boasts of removing Saddam Hussein from power, he did far more than that. He decapitated the government of a country that was not directly threatening the United States and, in so doing, bogged down a huge percentage of our military in a region that never has known peace. Our military is being forced to trade away its maneuverability in the wider war against terrorism while being placed on the defensive in a single country that never will fully accept its presence. There is no historical precedent for taking such action when our country was not being directly threatened. The reckless course that Bush and his advisers have set will affect the economic and military energy of our nation for decades. It is only the tactical competence of our military that, to this point, has protected him from the harsh judgment that he deserves. At the same time, those around Bush, many of whom came of age during Vietnam and almost none of whom served, have attempted to assassinate the character and insult the patriotism of anyone who disagrees with them. Some have impugned the culture, history and integrity of entire nations, particularly in Europe, that have been our country's great friends for generations and, in some cases, for centuries. Bush has yet to fire a single person responsible for this strategy. Nor has he reined in those who have made irresponsible comments while claiming to represent his administration. One only can conclude that he agrees with both their methods and their message." Mr. Webb is no liberal pacifist. When he condemns Bush's reckless military adventures, we ought to listen. (Source: USA Today, February 19, 2004)

Under the American military occupation of Afghanistan supervised by George W. Bush, Afghan opium production is at record levels. That means that heroin will be cheaper and easier to get on American streets, thanks to Mr. Bush's incompetence in governing Afghanistan. Isn't that trippy? (Source: CBS News, March 1, 2004)

Upon learning that American-occupied Afghanistan is a record-producer of opium, Bush's point man on narcotics in the State Department said that the current Afghan government should not be held responsible for the problem. That's George W. Bush for you, promoting a responsibility-free drug culture for America and the whole world. (Source: CBS News, March 1, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Arkansas: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 14% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

A series of bombs in the city of Karbala tore apart a crowd of people as they visited the Imam Musa al-Khadam shrine as a part of celebrations of a Shiite holy day. At least 143 people were killed, just a few less than were killed in the Oklahoma City bombing by Timothy McVeigh. This bombing, and the many others that have plagued Iraq in the last year, are a direct result of George W. Bush's incomplete and incompetent planning for the occupation of Iraq. Bush's plan? He'd just kill the bad guys, and then everything would be all liberated and wonderful. That kind of simplistic planning is dangerous when exercised by the most powerful man on Earth. You want another four years of that? Thanks, but I'll vote no. (Source: New York Times, March 2, 2004)

There has been another attack upon Shiites, this time in Pakistan, where military dictator General Pervez Musharraf has received Bush's support in spite of the Pakistani government's admitted efforts to provide nuclear weapons technology to countries like Libya. In this attack, at least 41 people were killed, and at least 150 wounded. George W. Bush's crusade against Islamic "evildoers" may have touched off a religious conflict that threatens to destroy not only Iraq, but a wide swath of territory from the Middle East through Central Asia. Bush's holy wars have brought about just the kind of instability that terrorists thrive upon. Smooth move, Mr. Bush. (Source: New York Times, March 2, 2004)

George W. Bush has been such a disaster in the White House that Americans are willing to vote for anybody but Bush. It's remarkable that so early in the campaign year, the defeat of George W. Bush has accumulated such intense focus. As one worker in New York City states, "Whoever comes as a Democrat, they have my vote. If it's Dean. If it's Kerry. It doesn't matter. Anybody." Such desperation is another sign that Bush is bad for America. (Source: New York Times, March 2, 2004)

Bush is apparently still living in a fantasy land in which America is threatened by massive biological and chemical weapons attacks from some enemy, somewhere, somehow. "Attack from a chemical or biological weapon is one of the gravest threats our country has ever faced," he says. But wait and think: the anthrax attacks of 2001 were incredibly inefficient, with large numbers of packages killing only 4 people. Besides, the attacks used a form of anthrax developed by the United States military. The threat isn't from an enemy of the United States, it's from within, as George W. Bush continues to push for the development of newer, ever more deadly weapons of mass destruction by the United States military! Folks, George W. Bush is one of the gravest threats our country has ever faced. (Source: USA Today, March 2, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Louisiana: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 33% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

George W. Bush says that workers at the Department of Homeland Security deserve "a gold star". No, they deserve a President who doesn't get the United States involved in unnecessary wars that trigger animosity against America. (Source: Associated Press, March 2, 2004)

What does "absolutely not" mean George W. Bush says it? It means "Yes, absolutely!" On October 11, 2000, in a debate with Vice President Al Gore, George W. Bush said "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building. . . . I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're going to have a kind of nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not." It turns out Bush was missing something. Since he's become President, George W. Bush has had little foreign policy other than invading other countries in order to try to rebuild them. In fact, in Iraq, nation-building is the only rationale for the unprovoked American invasion that Bush has left. All the other rationales turned out to be based on mistakes, lies and exaggerations. So, folks, when (if?) Bush debates the Democratic presidential candidate in the fall of 2004, listen for him to say that he will "absolutely not" do something, and it just might mean that Bush will do it! This kind of flip-flopping has been typical of Bush, who seems to have an uncanny ability to mismatch his policies with the challenges that face us. (Source: Boston Globe, March 2, 2004)

White House aides have been busy denying that George W. Bush has any responsibility for the armed revolution that has torn Haiti apart. However, as far back as his campaign in 2000, George W. Bush actively promoted a policy of neglect of Haiti by the United States. Back then, Bush criticized the Clinton Administration's efforts to stabilize Haiti, saying, "I wouldn't have sent troops to Haiti. I didn't think it was a mission worthwhile. It was a nation-building mission." So what did Bush do once he got into the White House to keep Haiti stable? He did exactly what he promised to do: Nothing. So, the Haitian people can give a big "Thanks for nothing" greeting card to George W. Bush, now that their nation is being ransacked by unelected gangs and drug dealers. (Source: Boston Globe, March 2, 2004)

Oh, my. Now that Jean-Bertrand Aristide has been forced out of Haiti against his will, and through American neglect at the very least, brutal former dictator Jean-Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier says he wants to return to the Caribbean nation. That's our Bush: Defending democracy and freedom around the globe - NOT! Duvalier says, "I'm ready to put myself at the disposal of the Haitian people." That's an unfortunate choice of words. (Source: San Francisco Chronicle, March 2, 2004)

George Soros knows money. He's made 7 billion dollars of it for himself. So, perhaps we ought to listen when Mr. Soros comments on George W. Bush's tax policy. Soros says, "The purpose of Bush's tax cuts was to reduce taxes on the rich, people like me. The linking of job cuts to taxes is deceptive. They weren't targeted at the middle class, and some don't kick in for five years. How does that create jobs in the short term?" Answer: It doesn't. It hasn't. Count ignoring the financial wisdom of George Soros as another reason to boot Bush. (Source: San Francisco Chronicle, March 2, 2004)

David Catania is a Republican city councilman in Washington, D.C. He started out as a big fundraiser for George W. Bush's re-election, raising 80,000 dollars. He's earned a place as a delegate to the Republican Presidential Convention this summer. Nonetheless, he's had second thoughts, and has stopped his fundraising efforts. Now, he says that he can't bring himself to vote for George W. Bush. Why? He's decided that George W. Bush is dangerously beholden to radical right-wing extremists, so much so that having Bush in the White House is endangering America's freedoms. He comments, "You know the concept of buyer's remorse? I've got it. I want my money back." We're with you, Mr. Catania. We want our country back. (Source: Newsweek, March 8, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Oklahoma: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 30% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

All across America, Republicans are abandoning the Bush re-election effort. Donald Capoccia, a real estate developer in New York, was a Bush appointee to the United States Commission of Fine Arts. Mr. Capoccia has become so disgusted with Bush's record as President that he has since resigned in protest and declared that he will not vote for Bush. When Republicans protest because they believe that George W. Bush has become too extreme, you know things have gotten very bad indeed. (Source: Newsweek, March 8, 2004)

Republican and former congressional representative Steve Gunderson expresses his worries that the extremism George W. Bush is dividing America. Referring to the impact of Bush's decision to support a constitutional amendment that would take away the freedom of same-sex couples to get married, Gunderson comments, "This country will be more polarized than we've been in decades." A vote to boot Bush is a vote to end the division, and start the healing. (Source: Newsweek, March 8, 2004)

George W. Bush's decision to push for an amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America in order to take away the freedom to get married from same-sex couples has alienated him from moderates within the Republican Party, who can't understand why Bush doesn't spend as much time working on creating jobs as he does making speeches about who he thinks ought to get married. For example, Janet Creighton, the Republican mayor of Canton, Ohio, complains, "I frankly don't care about what goes on in anybody's bedroom. What we need to focus on is economic progress in this city." As Mayor Creighton points out, sacrificing the economy to go off tilting at gay marriage windmills is just plain wrong for America. (Source: Newsweek, March 8, 2004)

John Kerry has a plan to make America independent of oil from the Middle East within 10 years, through what he refers to as the Manhattan Project of alternative energy, focusing on automobile efficiency and a series of alternative fuels, starting with ethanol, that we can use right now. George W. Bush's plan focuses on making changes starting 20 years from now. That's too little, too late. Kerry's plan isn't perfect, but it's a heck of a lot better than Bush's. (Source:

John Kerry has a plan to promote "Clean and Green Communities" throughout America by coordinating federal transportation policies, federal housing incentives, federal employment opportunities and the use of federal dollars to acquire parks and open space. Does George W. Bush have a plan to promote truly livable communities? Nope. Bush seems to think it's fine to just let our cities sprawl all over the landscape. I think that America can do better than strip malls from coast to coast, and that's why I'll vote to give Bush the boot. (Source:

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Texas: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 35% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

George W. Bush's 2005 Budget cuts back on professional development funds for school teachers, making it more difficult for teachers to keep their classroom techniques up to date. It's typical Bush to hold teachers accountable for performance even as he undercuts their ability to perform. (Source: United Federation of Teachers, February 2004)

We agree with The Progressive magazine when it states, "Bush contended that marriage is the foundation of our society. But he's wrong. Justice is the foundation of our society." Justice, in and out of marriage, is the core of our values, even if it's not something that Bush values. We're sick of hearing Bush's supporters cram their family values through everybody else's front door. We want to return to an America in which individual rights are respected as much as the rights of social institutions of authority, such as marriage. (Source: The Progressive, February 25, 2004)

We also take note when Republican Patrick Guerriero says, "As conservative Republicans, we are outraged that any Republican--particularly the leader of our party and this nation--would support any effort to use our sacred United States Constitution as a way of scoring points in an election year." Hey, I'm not sure the Constitution is actually sacred, but it is essential to keeping American democracy alive, and it's really rotten that George W. Bush is toying around with it for political purposes. We're glad to see that Republicans feel this way too. (Source: The Progressive, February 25, 2004)

According to an official from the Clinton Administration, George W. Bush knew about North Korea's uranium enrichment program as soon as he took office in January 2001, even though Bush has claimed that he only learned about the program in 2002. The Bush Administration did nothing in the meantime to stop or even slow down the North Korean program, creating an international crisis through its lazy neglect. (Source: Bloomberg, February 19, 2004)

If John Kerry is elected in 2004, you know that the morning of his inauguration some right-wing newspaper will blame him for something bad that happened that day. It'll be red meat for fringe Bush supporters, but the rest of us will get a giggle. Giggles are good. Dump Bush.

In 2004, for the third consecutive year, George W. Bush has underfunded his own No Child Left Behind Act. This year, Bush has underfunded the initiative by $9.4 Billion. Over three years, $27 Billion has gone missing from funds to implement No Child Left Behind. Not million. Billion. What happened to keeping your commitments? It's time to start calling this the Hundreds Of Thousands Of Children Left Behind Act. (Source: Charlotte Observer, March 2, 2004)

Dollars mean something real, especially when they add up to the billions. Because George W. Bush has underfunded his own act, more than 53,000 children in North Carolina alone who have been promised tutoring in reading and math won't get their help. That's a profoundly wrongheaded choice: when children gain reading and math skills early in life, their increased productivity will lead to many social contributions. George W. Bush just isn't that farsighted. (Source: Charlotte Observer, March 2, 2004)

Also cut in the 2005 Bush budget: drop-out prevention efforts. What's Bush's logic here? George W. Bush has dropped out of many things in life, and it didn't hurt him. Maybe that's his inspiration. (Source: Charlotte Observer, March 2, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Montana: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 29% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

The effect of the Bush deficits is real. How real? Your personal share of the national debt is $24,000. Each and every American is going to have to pay that off, or push off the debt onto their kids. What a rotten choice to make. Thanks for nothing, George. (Sources: U.S. Treasury Department and Census Bureau)

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the president of the Waterkeepers Alliance and senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, writes in his new book (Crime Against Nature) that, "George W. Bush will go down in history as America's worst environmental president. In a ferocious three-year attack, the Bush Administration has initiated more than 200 major rollbacks of America's environmental laws, weakening the protection of our country's air, water, public lands and wildlife." We vote no to continuing this onslaught on America's natural heritage. (Source: Sierra Atlantic, Spring 2004)

In 2000, George W. Bush sailed to a party coronation with competitors shoved off the stage. In 2004, John Kerry is winning the nomination the old-fashioned way: by working for votes against a rich slate of competitors. Democracy is good: look at what the lack of it brought us.

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Alabama lost 48,900 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Under the approving eye of the Bush Administration, the mayor of New Paltz, New York has been arrested. His crime? Marrying people who pledge to love, honor and cherish one another. (Source: Associated Press March 2, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Idaho: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 13% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Arkansas lost 14,500 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Thanks to the Bush Administration for ushering the democratically, constitutionally-elected Aristide out of Haiti while leaving a political and military vacuum. What's the result? The next day, drug trafficker Guy Phillipe declares "I am the Chief... The country is in my hands." After his speech, Phillipe's men begin the public smashing and burning of artwork. (Sources: Cox News Service March 3, 2004; New York Times February 29, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, California lost 270,700 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Looking for a sign that George W. Bush is dividing the nation? Look to Tallahassee, Florida, where 2,000 people turned out March 2nd in opposition to Bush, chanting "enough is enough!" (Source: Tallahassee Democrat, March 3, 2004)

Former chief weapons inspector David Kay has criticized the Bush Administration for not being upfront about what it knew and didn't know about weapons of mass destruction. In an interview with the Guardian, Kay says "It's about confronting and coming clean with the American people, not just slipping a phrase into the state of the union speech. He should say: 'We were mistaken and I am determined to find out why'.... When you don't say you got it wrong, it leads to the general belief that you manipulated the intelligence and so you did it for some other purpose.... And the other thing is it makes it very difficult for relations with allies. I think we lost the credibility of our intelligence. The next time you have to go and shout there's fire in the theatre people are going to doubt it." (Source: The Guardian, March 3, 2004)

Americans are waking up to the fact that, thanks to George W. Bush, the USA is a black sheep in the international community. In a new Gallup poll in February, 55% of Americans agreed that the the United States "rates unfavorably" in the world community. Only 24% of Americans agreed with that statement as George W. Bush began his term in office. (Source: The Gallup Poll February 2004 and February 2001)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Colorado lost 90,300 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

When even Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger says that a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage is a step too far, you know that George W. Bush has really joined the fringe. (Source: New York Times March 3, 2004)

Bush's Low-Wage Jobs Legacy in Wyoming: from November 2001 to November 2003, the average wage in industries adding jobs there was 40% lower than the average wage in industries losing jobs there. (Source: Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, January 21, 2004)

Because Bush supporters routinely send us anonymous e-mails like this:
"The Number One Reason We Want to Boot Bush: 1. Because we Liberals want a Communist Regime in Washington Go Commies, Let's all wear red tommorrow to symbolize out leftist philosophy."
Democrats, Independents and Moderate Republicans not only know this isn't true, but their doubts about the Bush Administration are growing daily. The core constituents of George W. Bush are people like the one who wrote this message, people who have lost touch with the past two decades of American political and social history.

Thanks to a decision by the Bush Administration, significant areas of wetlands across New York State have lost their federal protection and are now open to complete destruction. The wetlands of New York State are one of its greatest natural resources, protecting New Yorkers from floods, providing them with areas for hunting and fishing, and increasing the quality of drinking water used by municipalities like Albany and New York City that rely on surface supplies of water. For Bush, the freedom of big business to push urban and suburban sprawl appears to be more important than the quality of life for all New Yorkers. (Source: Sierra Atlantic, spring 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Connecticut lost 46,700 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Why boot Bush? Because momentum matters. Individually, people can be very smart, but collectively we can act like cattle, moving in a direction just because other people are. It's a sad aspect of human nature, but true. This is how George W. Bush managed to yank the country rightward despite losing the popular (and possibly the electoral) vote in 2000.

Now the momentum is shifting, because Democrats, Independents and moderate Republicans have had enough of being pushed. We're pushing back, and the country is noticing. Perhaps you've noticed, too: it's little things such as few people daring any more to call you unpatriotic just for criticizing George W. Bush.

If we want to return the United States to sanity, however, we've got to keep the momentum headed in the right direction. That means we've got to have a reasonable person in the White House who isn't pushing against the national grain. George W. Bush has got to go.

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, even tiny Delaware lost 7,000 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

George W. Bush's rosy scenario for the economy predicted that in 2004, 2.6 million new jobs would be added to the economy. At that rate, 216,666 new jobs should have been added in January 2004. Less than half that number were added in reality. (Source: Knight-Ridder Newspapers March 5, 2004)

Bob McIlvaine of Oreland, Pennsylvania reacts to George W. Bush's decision to air campaign commercials exploiting images of dead bodies in the rubble of the World Trade Center:

"My son was murdered on September 11. To argue that using footage of the wreckage of the towers to further someone's political career is tasteful really needs to be rejected outright and I condemn it." (Source: Trenton Times, March 6, 2004)

Bush's advertisements using images of the aftermath of September 11 are flooded with video of firefighters and others slogging through debris, working hard in both rescue and recovery efforts. None of them signed up to be part of a Bush campaign commercial; they signed up to help their fellow Americans. Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, hit the nail on the head when it comes to George W. Bush: "We're not going to stand for him to put his arm around one of our members on top of a pile of rubble at Ground Zero during a tragedy and then stand by and watch him cut money for first responders." (Source: Associated Press, March 4, 2004)

The Bush campaign had promised it would not use images of the September 11, 2001 attacks for political gain. Specifically, in January 2003 George W. Bush said he had "no ambition whatsoever to use this as a political issue." This is yet another broken promise. So much for honor and integrity. (Sources: Associated Press, March 4, 2004; New York Times March 5, 2004)

While Bush uses images of the bodies of the 9/11/01 dead in his campaign commercials, he continues to forbid cameras to film bodies of the Iraq War dead as they are returned home. (Sources: Star-Telegram March 5, 2004; USA Today December 30, 2003)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Illinois, the once-bustling center of the Midwest, lost 182,800 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

The Bush Administration has issued a new legal opinion through the justice department that doctor-patient confidentiality will no longer be recognized by the federal government, and that patients "no longer possess a reasonable expectation that their histories will remain completely confidential." This is just another piece of evidence that the B in Bush stands for Big government. (Source: New York Times, March 6, 2004)

According to the International Association of Chiefs of Police, hundreds of cops will have to be laid off next year if George W. Bush's proposed budget cuts to cops go through. (Source: USA Today, March 3, 2004)

The problem is not just George W. Bush's cuts in policing efforts in general. The specific police budget cuts Bush has put in place have undermined America's security. Since 2001, George W. Bush has made significant cuts in the federal Community Oriented Policing program (COPS), and he wants to make even more cuts next year. This program brings police out from behind the wheels of their squad cars and back out onto the beat, on foot and on bicycles, and sets up community policing centers that are more accessible to people than traditional police stations. Community policing increases security by keeping police in touch with what's going on in our neighborhoods in a friendly way, without violating anyone's constitutional freedoms. When Bush cuts these programs in order to fund special tax giveaways for the richest Americans, it shows that he is soft on security. (Source: Boston Globe, March 13, 2004)

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President of the Waterkeeper's Alliance, explains why so many Republicans are deciding not to support George W. Bush in 2004. He writes that, "The fishermen I represent are traditionally Republican. But, without exception, they see this administration as the largest threat not just to their livelihoods but to their values and their idea of what it means to be American." Attacking traditional American values of stewardship over land and water is another reason to boot Bush. (Source: Sierra Atlantic, spring 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Indiana lost 88,800 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

You know the saying "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me?" Well, George W. Bush has now been fooled by Ahmad Chalabi twice, each time in a big way. In the leadup to war, Bush bought hook, line and sinker a series of "reports" by Chalabi about Hussein's Iraq that just weren't true. After the war, Chalabi assured the Bush Administration he would support an interim Iraqi constitution... then backed out at the last minute. If the United States of America is going to depend on hucksters in developing its foreign policy, then at least... no, no, the lesson is that the United States of America should not depend on hucksters in developing its foreign policy. How many times must he be fooled until Mr. Bush learns his lesson? (Source: Knight-Ridder Newspapers, March 5, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, hard-working Iowa has fallen on hard luck, losing 32,000 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Eva writes to us from Germany with an international perspective: "Germans tend to think that Americans are arrogant and ignorant and believe themselves to be the kings of the world. George W. does nothing to contradict that; he even confirms it."

Eva from Germany continues: "Chancellor Schroeder was among the first to offer help after 9/11. Bush's conception of friendship seems to be: do what I want, or get lost!"

An increasing number of Americans will react to Eva's thoughts by dismissing them: after all, they'll say, she's a German, not an American, so who cares what she thinks anyway? This xenophobic way of thinking has only been encouraged by the bull-in-a-China-shop tactics of George W. Bush.

Under the direction of the Bush Administration, the National Cancer Institute posted a claim on its web site that there is a connection between having an abortion and getting breast cancer. The claim stayed on the web site for 5 months, in spite of the fact that claims of this connection have been definitively disproved for quite some time. Allowing the announcements of scientific organizations to be determined by fundamentalist Christian religious agendas is not the kind of behavior we should expect from an American President in the 21st century. (Source: CBS News, March 11, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Kansas lost 3,700 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

George W. Bush has refused to endorse the creation of the International Criminal Court, since Americans could be tried in it -- along with citizens of any other nation. Bush says he'll endorse the International Criminal Court if citizens of other nations can be tried, just so long as Americans are exempt from standing trial. Bush continues to display contempt for the idea of equal protection under law.

George W. Bush's 2005 Budget cuts funding for clean-water projects by $492 million. (Source: Reuters, February 2, 2004)

Under George W. Bush, fewer Superfund toxic waste sites are being cleaned up per year than during Bill Clinton's years in office. (Source: Reuters, February 2, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Kentucky lost 52,300 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

George W. Bush's rosy scenario for the economy predicted that in 2004, 2.6 million new jobs would be added to the economy. At that rate, 216,666 new jobs should have been added in February 2004. Less than a tenth that number were added in reality. An amazing ninety percent of the jobs that Bush promised for Americans were never created at all. Imagine, now, if a big new company came into your home town and promised that it would create three hundred for local residents. Then, on opening day, the company opened its doors and only gave jobs to 30 people and told everyone else to go away. That kind of betrayal is what George W. Bush has perpetrated against American workers month after month after month. Enough with Bush's broken promises. We give him the boot, so he can go back to his daddy and ask for a job of his own. (Sources: Houston Chronicle, March 13, 2004; Knight-Ridder Newspapers March 5, 2004)

In order to make it look like America isn't losing so many manufacturing jobs, the Bush Administration is considering reclassifying work in a fast-food joint as "manufacturing." (Source: New York Times, February 20, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Louisiana lost 29,600 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

"5.6 percent unemployment is a good national number." So says George W. Bush in one of his latest promotional speeches. Well, tell that to those out there looking for a job. Or tell that to the people out there who've just stopped looking -- Yes, that's one of the main reasons the unemployment rate has gone down. To be listed as "unemployed" you have to be looking for work. Increasing numbers of people have just given up and even stopped looking. (Sources: Remarks by the President to the National Governors Association, February 23, 2004; Dallas Morning News, March 8, 2004)

Arnie writes in to ask: If George W. Bush saying "Bring 'Em On" from the safety of American soil is tough, why did he have to slip into Iraq secretly? Why wasn't he tough enough to stand at a streetcorner in Iraq and say "Bring 'Em On" there? Or did he just mean that the Iraqi opposition should attack American soldiers, but not him?

Arnie continues: What kind of logic is it for George W. Bush to ignore the U.N. to show Saddam Hussein that the U.N. cannot be ignored?

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Maine lost 6,100 jobs. Ay-ya. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

George W. Bush invited nine of his campaign's biggest donors to stay overnight in the White House and at Camp David. The is the same George W. Bush who said in the 2000 campaign that such behavior is unethical and inappropriate. (Source: Associated Press March 10, 2004)

In another sign that members of George W. Bush's own party are disenchanted with his presidency, Arizona Senator John McCain said, "John Kerry is a close friend of mine... Obviously I would entertain it," when asked whether he'd consider being Kerry's presidential running mate. Kerry is a uniter. Bush is a divider. (Source: Good Morning America March 10, 2004)

At the beginning of 2004, CIA Director George Tenet had to take Vice President Dick Cheney aside to tell him that his public statements about weapons of mass destruction did not match the available facts. (Source: Knight-Ridder Newspapers March 10, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Maryland lost 2,800 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Do you need another sign that Bush is a divider, not a uniter? Look no further than Bush's own Republican Party. Gay Republican organizations have not only announced their intention to oppose Mr. Bush, but have also gone as far as to introduce their own advertisements against his policies. If Bush can't unite his own party, how can he ever hope to bring all Americans together again? (Source: Washington Post March 10, 2004)

Dick flip-flops. Cheney on gay marriage during the 2000 campaign: "People should be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to enter into.... That matter is regulated by the states. I think different states are likely to come to different conclusions, and that's appropriate. I don't think there should necessarily be a federal policy in this area."

Cheney on gay marriage during the 2004 campaign: "I support the president."

Let's ease Mr. Cheney out of office in 2004 so he can find his backbone again. (Source: Washington Post March 10, 2004)

Speaking of Dick Cheney, he only agreed to offer one hour of testimony to the official commission investigating the attacks of September 11, 2001. Why won't he give more than an hour of his time to this critical fact-finding mission? (Source: Washington Post March 10, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Massachusetts lost 186,000 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

When, after months of refusing to do so, George W. Bush finally gets around to testifying before the official commission investigating the attacks of September 11, 2001... wait, it turns out he won't after all. Bush has agreed only to allow two members of the commission to speak with him, leaving the remainder of the commission behind. And Bush has refused to be sworn in for this testimony. Why is he unwilling to testify under oath? (Sources: Washington Post March 10, 2004; National Public Radio March 10, 2004>

George W. Bush's administration is so incompetent, his attack dogs can't even manage to get their facts straight. After they accused John Kerry of voting to cut $300 million a year from the Intelligence budget in the early 1990s, it emerged that Kerry has supported increases in Intelligence funding averaging more than $2 Billion a year over the five most recent years for which estimates are available. That's a strong record of support for intelligence, making Kerry a good choice for those who want to keep America safe. (Source: Center for Defense Information, "Intelligence Funding and the War on Terror," February 26, 2002)

After George W. Bush's campaign released memo criticizing John Kerry for supporting a bill to cut the intelligence budget by $300 million a year over five years, it turned up that Kerry was a cosponsor on that effort with two Republican legislators: Arlen Specter and Richard Shelby. So let's get this straight: the Republican Party is criticizing Kerry for supporting a bill that's 2/3 Republican in its sponsorship. How bizarre. (Source: Washington Post, March 12, 2004)

And, oh, yes, we should mention that these cuts were passed by the Republican-controlled Congress, after it increased the size of the cuts to $3.8 Billion. By the Bush standard, this means that the Republicans are weaker on supporting Intelligence than Kerry. (Source: Washington Post, March 12, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Michigan lost 202,500 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

How fat with cash is George W. Bush's political machine? They're swimming in so much dough from their billionaire contributors that they've gone to the extreme of building and deploying "Reggie the Registration Rig." You heard me right. "Reggie" is a 56 foot-long, 80,000 pound, 18-wheeler decked out with luxuries like Xbox machines to lure people aboard and an "E-shot" multimedia center which allows entrants to pose with a fictional, pretend make-up of George W. Bush.

This is the kind of high-cost toy that the Republicans think will get people to vote for George W. Bush. If only Bush and his staff would devote such lavish attentions to actually crafting policies that make America a better place, he wouldn't need an opulent multimedia extravaganza to try and win voters back. (Source: "Reggie is Rolling" e-mail from RNC Chair Ed Gillespie, March 5 2004)

How low has George W. Bush sunk in the regard of the world community? Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has taken to calling him an "asshole" in public. (Source: Reuters February 29, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Minnesota lost 56,500 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

"Where are all the weapons of Mass Destruction? Where are the stockpiles of Chemical and Biological weapons?" wrote Richard Dvorin in a letter to George W. Bush last month, after his son was killed by a roadside bomb. Bush hasn't answered those questions. (Source: Washington Post March 11, 2004)

Cherise Johnson, whose husband was killed in Iraq, reports "I'd love to say I back [Bush] 100 percent, but I can't.... How many more people are going to die because he can't say, 'I'm sorry, I made a terrible mistake'?" (Source: Washington Post March 11, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Mississippi lost 12,800 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

In another indication that even Bush's fellow Republicans have begun to withdraw their support, John Bugay has started a website entitled Republicans For Kerry in which he explains his switch from support for Bush to opposition to Bush:
"The Bush administration set aside some of the foundational principles of this nation 6¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§76„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥767671„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7673„1¤706¥730„3¨¬„1¤706¥730„3¨¬70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„676716¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥76736¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì34 principles outlined in the Constitution 6¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§76„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥767671„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7673„1¤706¥730„3¨¬„1¤706¥730„3¨¬70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„676716¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥76736¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì34 to make a war it didn't need to make, a war which was not "a last resort," not a "just war" (according to the Judeo-Christian tradition it claims to follow), and for which there were adequate alternatives, even on March 19, 2003, that could have avoided that particular conflict while still effectively waging the "war on terror," spared my family and the families of thousands of other Reservists the need to make a terrible "sacrifice," and still have achieved the goal of forcing Saddam Hussein (who was in a "death spiral" according to the oft-quoted David Kay) out of power."
George W. Bush has referred to John Kerry as the "enemy of job creation." Well, that's kind of like the pot calling the kettle black, isn't it? Or is it that it takes one to know one? I mean, George W. Bush has actually presided over historic job losses, and he's saying that John Kerry is the problem? Bush's credibility on this issue is less than zero, which is another reason we why need to boot Bush out of the White House this year. (Source: Chicago Tribune March 11, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Missouri lost 70,400 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Which is the party of fiscal responsibility? The Democrats, with help from only a small number of fiscally responsible Republicans, have passed a bill that would require a supermajority of 60 for any spending increase over the next five years. Who objected? George W. Bush and the Republicans. (Source: New York Times, March 10 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Nebraska lost 5,100 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

George W. Bush on the role of his own beautiful self in American democracy: "I'm the commander - see, I don't need to explain - I don't need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the President. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation." (Source: Washington Post, November 19, 2002)

"I don't understand how poor people think." -- George W. Bush, stating the obvious. For the record, George, we don't understand how you think either. (Source: New York Times, August 26, 2003)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, New Hampshire lost 15,700 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

It took six whole months for the Bush Administration to name its nominee for a post dedicated to retaining manufacturing jobs in America. La dee da dee da. What's six months to a guy who's never had to worry about losing a job his entire life? (Source: United Press International, March 11, 2004)

Oh, this is rich -- literally. It turns out that the guy George W. Bush has finally got around to appointing to the task of keeping manufacturing jobs from drifting overseas, Anthony Raimondo, laid off a sixth of his American employees in 2002 -- and opened a new factory in China. Bush has since been forced to withdraw Raimondo from consideration for the position. (Sources: United Press International, March 11, 2004 and Bloomberg News, March 13, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, New York lost 280,400 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Hundreds of Arizonans have signed on to a letter asking George W. Bush not to come out to the University of Arizona to speak at commencement, saying they'd rather not be associated with him. This is yet another sign that George W. Bush has taken on the presence of that annoying, embarrassing person at the party that everyone is hoping will just leave. (Source: Associated Press March 11, 2004)

Under pressure, the Bush Admininstration said it would carry out a study to determine whether or not drug importation from Canada would be a good idea. Then the Bush Administration chose Mark McClellan, who has already publicly concluded that drug importation from Canada would be a bad idea, to lead the study. This is the Bush Admininstration's version of impartiality, and that's pretty telling. (Source: New York Times, February 26, 2004)

Bush Administration official and former health-industry lobbyist Thomas Scully forbade the top U.S. Medicare cost expert, Richard Foster, from telling legislators that the cost of Bush's Medicare bill would be over $100 Billion more than the Bush Administration was letting on. Scully told Foster he'd be fired if he told the Congress this fact. Scully's explanation for his action? Telling the Congress about the actual cost would have caused a political disruption in the passage of the bill. (Source: Miami Herald, March 12, 2004)

When word leaked out that Foster had been told by the Bush Administration to clam up and not inform the Congress of the actual cost of the Medicare Bill, incensed members of Congress called Scully's supervisor in the Bush Administration, Tommy Thompson, to task. Thompson promised the following: "I can assure you that from now [on], the remaining days that I am secretary, you will have as much access as you want to anybody or anything in the department. All you have to do is call me."

So members of Congress asked Thompson to provide a copy of Richard Foster's cost estimates for Medicare. As the weeks passed, that information continued to be withheld. And Richard Foster's superiors continue to forbid him to be interviewed by news organizations picking up the story. (Source: Miami Herald, March 12, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, North Carolina lost 115,700 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

The Republican Party is working with the Bush campaign to silence anti-Bush voices, enaging in tactics like writing 250 television stations and asking them not to air advertisements that criticize Bush. What country do these people think they live in? (Source: San Jose Mercury-News, March 6, 2004)

Usually, it's a president who has to restrain the Congress from passing a budget that spends too much. But with George W. Bush in office, this pattern is turned on its head: the Senate had to cut Bush's proposed spending by Billions of dollars in order to reach a level they considered acceptable. This is just one more sign that when it comes to the United States budget, George W. Bush is out of control. (Source: Washington Post, March 12, 2004)

George W. Bush has called for making the tax cuts for the rich he promised would be temporary permanent instead. In a demonstration of how stupid that idea is, Senate Republicans led the way in passing a budget measure in March of 2004 that refuses to make those tax cuts for the rich permanent. When Republicans repudiate Bush, you know he's extreme. (Source: Washington Post, March 12, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Ohio lost 249,000 jobs. This state with Hi! in the middle is saying a long, hard goodbye to a working living. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

On March 11, 2004, George W. Bush gave his stump speech, in English of course, to a crowd especially brought in for the speech, a crowd that cheered for the campaign cameras. Journalists going into the crowd after the speech found out that it was comprised of people who only spoke Spanish. (Source: Newsday, March 12, 2004)

As of March 2004, more than 250 American cities have passed resolutions stating opposition to George W. Bush's "USA Patriot Act." (Source: Fort Worth Star-Telegram March 12, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Oklahoma lost 34,200 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Why boot Bush? Because it's high time we paid some attention to the man behind the curtain.

Remember all those fantastic scientific breakthroughs that came pouring out of the Soviet Union during the Cold War? No? Could it be because there weren't any to speak of? And could THAT in turn be because Soviet scientists were hobbled by an inflexible set of ideologically-based constraints? George Bush's ideologically based pressure on fields of study ranging from stem-cell research to environmental science is just one facet of the way he is turning today's America into yesterday's Soviet Union. You've got to vote against that.

The Japanese are justifiably proud of their constitution, which specifies that the Japanese armed forces shall only be used in a defensive role. Who has pressured them into violating their constitution? Why, Bush, of course. Japanese troops are now part of the "coalition of the willing" (more like coalition of the bribed, cajoled, and pressured) that is occupying post-invasion Iraq. Encouraging Japan to occupy invaded countries! Mr. Bush, have you no sense of history?

French people often express dismay at someone else's stupidity by expelling a quick puff of air. If we re-elect Bush, the cumulative effect of tens of millions of French people simultaneously puffing could disrupt weather patterns for weeks.

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Oregon lost 53,700 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

The International Association of Fire Fighters, including the members of the New York City Fire Department that the Bush Administration cites as "heroes" of September 11, 2001, has endorsed John Kerry as its candidate for President in 2004. (Source: Newsweek, March 15, 2004)

So all of a sudden gay marriage is the number one threat to America? Is it really going to destroy traditional marriage, morality, and society? Does Bush have any evidence to back that up, or is it, y'know, secret? Come off it. This is a tired old Bush formula: hype up unfounded claims of a threat, then offer to protect us all.

Let's call Bush's proposed amendment against gay marriage what it is: An attack on freedom of religion. An attack on families. An attack on states' rights. An attack on marriage as a religious institution. A constitutional amendment proposed to settle a theological debate. An attempt to swell the American bureaucracy until it governs sacred ritual. You want to vote for that?

Who will go out and stop gay marriages after Bush makes them unconstitutional? How about the ATF? We could rename it the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Gay Marriage--or the ATFGM. I know I'd feel safer with THEM prowling my neighborhood.

Think about it. If we make gay marriage illegal, there are thousands of liberal ritual officiants out there who would go to jail. Think about it in terms of the cost to society: a travesty of justice, an ocean of unnecessary suffering. Now think about it from the perspective of the private prison industry lobby: Mo' money! Mo' money! Hm. Which perspective do you think Bush takes?

Attacking marriage in an election year: Bush, you fox! Are you going to vote for someone that stupid?

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Pennsylvania lost 78,100 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

All those claims about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, over five hundred American soldiers and thousands of Iraqis dead, tens of billions of dollars wasted, and not a single Iraqi WMD found. Yet none dare call it scandal. Screw that. Scandal! Scandal! Scandal! You want to vote for a scandal-ridden president?

Bush's grasp on the truth is awful slippery. Maybe all that blood on his hands is messing up his grip.

This whole "pax Americana" thing is nice and all, but some of us would prefer to have, like, a job.

A second Bush term would be a last hurrah for the pack of Nixon/Reaganite neoconservatives pulling the strings now. Who's going to succeed W? Cheney? Come on! You think they're looting the treasury for their rich friends now? Just wait 'till you see them in action in a final term, with nobody to impress and nothing to lose.

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, South Carolina lost 69,900 jobs. Living in a "red state" doesn't get you any relief in Bush's America. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

"We are at a critical juncture in the course of history. What is needed now is not criticism, but the people's cooperation." Bush makes this kind of appeal all the time. What's wrong with it? Well, nothing. If you like Communist propaganda, that is.

"Those who are not with us are against us." You hear that coming from the Bush administration all the time. What do I have against it? Nothing but a distaste for the crasser aspects of radical Marxist-Leninist ideology.

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Tennessee lost 51,000 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Up until a couple of months ago, that king of obfuscatory speciousness Ronald Dumbsfeld was telling us that our failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq didn't prove they didn't exist. After all, we hadn't found Hussein. Did that mean he didn't exist? Well, Dummy, now that we have found Hussein, how does that argument go?

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Texas lost 72,500 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Why boot Bush? Because sooner or later, as global warming accelerates, we're going to have to seriously reduce our consumption of fossil fuels, and make other major adjustments to the way we live. We can either start now, and phase in changes in ways that minimize the impact on our economy and society, or we can react at the last minute, when serious environmental problems force our hand. Bush has done absolutely nothing to address the problem of global warming. Four more years of doing nothing may just make the difference between measured, reasonable anti-global warming policy and disastrous last-minute panicky scrambling.

There's way more impeachable dirt on Bush than there ever was on Clinton. If we re-elect Bush and Congress goes to the Democrats, there's more than a good chance the government will be tied up with scandal investigations and impeachment hearings for the next four years. Why chance it?

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Utah lost 13,600 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

The Bush Administration is trying to expand its powers to wiretap your broadband internet connection. Putting those wee privacy concerns aside, another problem is that such efforts will be very expensive. The Bush Administration's solution? You get to pay for it! (Source: Washington Post, March 13, 2004)

The word is that Bush Administration officials are finding it hard to get their policy work done given their campaign duties in their unusually early 2004 start. Notice which duties take priority here. (Source: Washington Post, March 13, 2004)

Recent research indicates that children can suffer from brain damage even when they are exposed to lead levels that are lower than the currently recommended levels. So, what has George W. Bush done? He put three people with ties to the lead and paint industry on the Center for Disease Control's Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention. One of those people advocates raising lead levels to 2.5 times the amount that was permissible in the 1970s! Valuing industry over children's health is as crass as it gets. (Source: CBS News, March 11, 2004)

The demands of being President of the United States require extreme creativity and flexibility. Some people refer to these qualities as being able to "think outside the box". Well, the problem with George W. Bush is that he is only capable of thinking inside the box, locked with a deadbolt, rusted shut, inside a lead vault, encased in stainless steel, resting in a thick layer of mud at the bottom of the sea.

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Vermont lost 1.900 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

George W. Bush has a really nasty habit of trying to put extremist, right-wing activist judges into federal judicial positions. For example, Bush has nominated Terrence Boyle, a former aide to racist Senator Jesse Helms, to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Boyle has a long history of conservative judicial activism in attempts to undermine civil rights legislation. George W. Bush seems to think that this kind of approach is just what America needs. That attitude in itself is frightening enough to make me want to boot Bush in 2004. (Source: People for the American Way, February 2004)

What's even more frightening than Bush's extremist nomination attempts is that he usually succeeds. George W. Bush nominated Deborah Cook to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. In her years as a judge in Ohio, Judge Cook has become infamous for opposing civil rights. Ohio Citizen Action writes that Judge Cook's opinions "reveal a callousness toward the rights of ordinary citizens which offends any reasonable sense of justice." Bush was successful in pushing Deborah Cook through the U.S. Senate, thanks to the majority of Republicans in that house of Congress. (Source: People for the American Way, February 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Virginia lost 1,500 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Do you remember how George W. Bush promised during his campaign in 2000 that he would not base his decisions on focus groups? Well, it turns out that was a big lie. The Bush Administration has made extensive use of focus groups throughout its time in office. A recent example is George W. Bush's first televised campaign advertisement, which was carefully tested through the use of focus groups. Bush tells America that he's a straight-talker, but it looks like he's not willing to let anyone actually hear him talk until he's had a bunch of people test his straight talk to make sure that it's okay. (Source: Newsweek, March 15, 2004)

It's not that there's anything wrong in itself with using focus groups for the purpose of honing political messages, but you've got to wonder at a President who can sign off on an ill-conceived political advertisement, with no more support than a bunch of focus groups. The problem with focus groups is that they measure reaction in a social setting, but political decisions, including reactions to political advertisements, are often made on an individual basis. When Bush's first advertisement used footage of the September 11 attacks, including images of dead victims, it passed the social focus group tests because social pressure pushes people towards the "United We Stand" reaction. Bush and his political team failed to imagine that as individuals, Americans would take offense at the political partisan exploitation of an American tragedy. A shocking lack of skill in the use of political research is another good reason to give Bush the boot on Election Day. (Source: Newsweek, March 15, 2004)

One final item about that ill-conceived advertisement from the Bush Administration: The fire fighters that appeared in the advertisement were actors wearing fake fireman costumes. It appears that the Bush/Cheney Re-election team was unable to find any real New York City firefighters who actually support their campaign. A spokesperson for an association of fire fighters says that jokes have been spreading through fire houses across America that the supposed fire helmets worn by the actors in the Bush advertisement looked like toy plastic fireman hats "from a birthday party". So what does the Bush campaign say about why it had to use actors instead of real fire fighters? A Bush media advisor says, "It's cheaper and quicker." That pretty much sums up the way the Bush Administration has treated fire fighters. (Source: Newsweek, March 15, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Washington lost 54,600 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

Let us speak of Miguel Estrada. He's a lawyer in Washington D.C. with no judicial experience. Yet, as a member of the far right-wing Federalist Society, he's gained friends in powerful Republican circles, so in spite of his lack of qualifications, George W. Bush has nominated him to join the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals. Well known for his radical conservative legal opinions, Estrada was described by one of his supervisors as lacking in judgment and being "too much of an idealogue to be an appeals court judge." Additionally, Estrada refused to answer many important questions asked by senators during his confirmation hearing, and the Bush Administration has refused to hand over memos reflecting his legal views to the Senate. Asking the Senate to approve the nomination of such a candidate under such circumstances is insulting to the Senate, and to the Americans who would have to submit to Estrada's power as a circuit court judge. (Source: People for the America Way, February 2004)

What is it with George W. Bush and all these conservative judicial nominations? Here's another one: Carolyn Kuhn. Judge Kuhn, like Miguel Estrada, is a member of the ultra-conservative Federalist Society. Also like Miguel Estrada, Judge Kuhn has a long history of attacking civil rights. In particular, Judge Kuhn has shown a propensity for supporting racial segregationists. During her time serving Ronald Reagan in the Justice Department, for example, Judge Kuhn pushed to get tax-exempt status for Bob Jones University, which will not allow its students of different racial groups even to date each other. The Supreme Court afterwards found, in a 8-1 vote, that Bob Jones was not eligible for tax-exempt status because of its racial discriminatory policies. George W. Bush seems to want to support these same policies of racial discrimination by supporting judges like Carolyn Kuhn, and that's a mighty good reason for us to withdraw our support when he runs for re-election in 2004. (Source: People for the American Way, February 2004)

99.9 percent of the world's scientists agree that the science behind claims of global climate change are strong. However, George W. Bush, who has no scientific training, has declared that the science of global warming is inconclusive. Bush's pattern of ignoring the experts is another good reason to boot Bush on Election Day. (Source: CBS News, March 11, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, West Virginia lost 13,300 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

When George W. Bush abandoned the new source review policy that required old power plants to upgrade and clean up with new anti-pollution devices, he also abandoned a promise he made to the people of Upstate New York. In spring 2002, Bush flew up to the Adirondacks, the beautiful range of mountains New York protects as a state park, and promised Upstate residents that "We will do more to reduce power plant emissions than ever before in our national history." Another broken promise is another reason to boot Bush. (Source: Sierra Atlantic, Spring 2004)

Speaking of the Adirondacks, the Bush Administration has decided to assault the Adirondack Park with more than just the smog from coal-burning power plants. No, the Bush Administration has decided to replicate its attack on the peace of Yellowstone National Park in the Northeast's greatest public park by insisting that the Adirondacks be opened to the pollution, noise, erosion and other threats to wildlife of snowmobile trails crisscrossing public lands. Consider that snowmobile exhaust is so toxic that U.S. Park Rangers using snowmobiles are required to wear gas masks for protection. The Adirondack Committee has stated that the best way to protect the wild forest character of the Adirondacks is to prohibit snowmobiles altogether, but Bush's Department of Environmental Conservation recommends more snowmobile traffic through the establishment of new trails specifically for snowmobiles. (Source: Sierra Atlantic, Spring 2004)

Just think: If he had lived in George W. Bush's America, Robert Frost could have written, "Two roads diverged in yellow wood, bruuummmmmbumbumbumbum, and were crossed by snowmobile trails running through the trees, bruuuuumbruumbumbumbruuuummmbum, and I chose the one with the thinnest blue clouds of exhaust."

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Wisconsin lost 70,400 jobs. We wish you luck, Wisconsin. The Bush Presidency sure isn't giving you much help. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

George W. Bush justified his decision to outlaw the use of new stem cell lines by scientific researchers using federal funds by stating that there were already 60 stem cell lines in existence that could be used for ongoing research. The problem with Bush's justification: It just wasn't true. As of September 2203, there were only 12 stem cell lines that could really be used for the kinds of research being discussed. This kind of huge mistake explains why the Bush Administration has lost its credibility in the scientific community. (Source: CBS News, March 11, 2004)

Among the corporations that have outsourced the most American jobs, George W. Bush seems to be the candidate of choice. As of early 2004, the Bush/Cheney re-election campaign had received more than four hundred and forty thousand dollars from these corporations. The Republican Party had received over three million, six hundred thousand dollars from these corporations. Quid pro quo? Keep in mind that the Bush Administration is actually campaigning on promoting outsourcing of American jobs to overseas locations. (Source: MoveOn, March 10, 2004)

From the beginning of the Bush Administration through December of 2003, Wyoming lost 7,600 jobs. (Source: Democratic State of the Union Response Center, January 2004)

In a glowing, yes we mean literally glowing, report on the Bush Administration's environmental record, BushGreenWatch reports that the Bush Administration is pushing to have certain categories of radioactive waste reclassified so that it can be dumped in ordinary landfills. If the Bush Administration has its way with this effort, we could all soon be glowing. (Source: BushGreenWatch, March 12, 2004)

Back in 1999, George W. Bush criticized Bill Clinton's war in Kosovo by saying, "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." So come on, Mr. President, explain what your exit strategy from Iraq and Afghanistan is. So far, it appears that the exit strategy simply does not exist! Bush was too busy taking month-long vacations at his dude ranch in Texas to come up with one. (Source: Houston Chronicle, April 9, 1999)

A cost analysis of the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change shows that its curbs on the greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change would cost each American household less than six cents per day. George W. Bush refuses to support the act, saying that it's too expensive. Well, people who are born rich have weird ideas about money. (Source: Steve Cochran, Director of Strategic Communications at Environmental Defense)

We hate to see a beautiful mind go to waste. Therefore, our attention was grabbed when Barbara Bush, George W. Bush's mother, made the following comment just before the invasion of Iraq began: "Why should we hear about body bags and deaths and how many, what day it's gonna happen? It's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?" It's disgusting that a member of a family that has made its political power out of demanding that we "support the troops" would say such a thing. We're ashamed to see that the arrogance of the mother has been passed down to the son, who appears to have an equal disregard for American lives. (Source: Common Dreams, April 16, 2003)

Harold Schaitberger, General President of the International Association of Fire Fighters, points out that President Bush proposes cutting Homeland Security Department funding for first responders by $700 million in 2005. We think that it's appalling the way Bush weakens true security programs while pushing for the renewal of the Patriot Act, which does nothing to increase security, but undermines every American's civil liberties. (Source: U.S. Newswire, March 10, 2004)

We think that John Kerry was right when he criticized the Republican attack squads, saying "These guys are the most crooked, lying group I've ever seen." And yes, we do think that includes Bush. (Source: Cybercast News Service, March 11, 2004)

The Toronto Globe and Mail reports the reason why the Canadian government refused to join George W. Bush's war coalition as it had done during the past. It turns out that Jean Chretien had asked the United States to share the secret intelligence it claimed it had showing that weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq. Although the U.S. has shared such evidence with Canada in the past when the need for a coalition existed, George W. Bush refused to show Canada his evidence this time. Canadian officials say they understand why now: "They didn't have any evidence." (Source: Toronto Globe and Mail March 12, 2004)

John Kerry has challenged George W. Bush to a series of monthly debates. Kerry says, "Surely, if the attack ads can start now, at least we can agree to start a real discussion about America's future." We say surely, if George W. Bush is in the right on the issues that matter for America, he should have nothing to be afraid of. But George W. Bush has refused to agree. Telling. (Source: Associated Press March 13, 2004)

In another indication that the Bush Administration cannot manage to hold together an international coalition, the government of Spain has announced that it will recall its 1,300 troops home from Iraq, ending participation in the post-war effort and increasing the burden on American troops (Source: Associated Press March 15, 2004)

It has emerged that the Bush Administration has distributed videos to local news outlets across the country for inclusion in their nightly news programs. In these segments, "reporters" explain the virtues of Bush's Medicare policy, lending the aura of considered legitimacy. The problem is, those "reporters" are not reporters at all. They're hired actors. The General Accounting Office has judged these fake "reports" to be illegal, noting that under federal law this activity qualifies as "covert propaganda." (Sources: New York Times March 15, 2004; New York Times May 20, 2004)

The Bush Admininstration was stymied in its attempts to foist Total Information Awareness, a program putting your public and private information on a centralized government computer so the government can observe you for patterns in your behavior, on the American people. This you know.

What you may not know is that since Total Information Awareness was sidelined, a new program started with financial support from the Bush Administration has taken its place. This new program also collects public and private information about you in a computer database so the government can observe you for patterns in your behavior.

Guess what it's called? That's right -- the Matrix. (Source: New York Times March 15, 2004)

What hath Bush wrought? In the wake of his endorsement of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, ministers have been arrested for performing marriages between same-sex couples. Neither the couples nor the ministers signed civil licenses, but instead simply performed a ceremony.

As long as no legal documents are signed, isn't it ministers' and couples' own business what they do in their churches? Apparently not.

When George W. Bush tries to use government power to enforce religious doctrine, the use of government power to arrest religious officials for carrying out legally non-binding marriages should be no surprise. (Source: Associated Press, March 15, 2004)

Martha K. writes in to point out some heavy contradictions in George W. Bush's trade policy:

"Importing prescription drugs from Canada is unsafe, but exporting our personal and proprietary information and intellectual property to India, China and Russia is not unsafe?

"Dependency on foreign oil is unsafe, but dependency on foreign manufacturing of everything from A to Z is not unsafe?"

Good questions, Martha. But I don't think George W. Bush is going to answer them.

CNN Late Edition, March 14, 2004:
WOLF BLITZER: "If the intelligence was wrong, looking back, was it a mistake to go to war at that time instead of giving the U.N. more time to continue their own inspections?

DONALD RUMSFELD: Well, the U.N. inspectors were not in there. The U.N. inspectors were out."
CBS News, February 20, 2003:
"Inside Iraq, U.N. arms inspectors are privately complaining about the quality of U.S. intelligence and accusing the United States of sending them on wild-goose chases.

CBS News Correspondent Mark Phillips reports the U.N. has been taking a precise inventory of Iraq's al-Samoud 2 missile arsenal, determining how many there are and where they are."
Does Rumsfeld think we're that stupid, or is Rumsfeld himself profoundly ignorant? In either case, we should worry that such a man occupies the office of Secretary of Defense.

...which brings us back to the CBS News report of February 20, 2003. The report continues:
The inspectors have become so frustrated trying to chase down unspecific or ambiguous U.S. leads that they've begun to express that anger privately in no uncertain terms.

U.N. sources have told CBS News that American tips have lead to one dead end after another.

Example: satellite photographs purporting to show new research buildings at Iraqi nuclear sites. When the U.N. went into the new buildings they found "nothing."

Example: Saddam's presidential palaces, where the inspectors went with specific coordinates supplied by the U.S. on where to look for incriminating evidence. Again, they found "nothing."

Example: Interviews with scientists about the aluminum tubes the U.S. says Iraq has imported for enriching uranium, but which the Iraqis say are for making rockets. Given the size and specification of the tubes, the U.N. calls the "Iraqi alibi air tight."
When someone in the Bush Administration even comes close to admitting that there are no WMDs in Iraq, they'll cry that nobody could have guessed that before the war. Such proclamations ignore the millions of individuals, including professional UN weapons inspectors, whose bullshit detectors went off in advance.

How dare the Bush Admininstration engage in such historical revisionism? Worse, how dare the Bush Admininstration not exercise all due diligence before reporting a false case for war?

Parce que les Francais avaient raison.

Because Bush would need a translator to figure out what the previous sentence meant. John Kerry wouldn't. Bush's most extreme supporters would say that was a reason not to vote for Kerry. But putting xenophobia aside, that sort of difference in skill is important, giving John Kerry a diplomatic edge George W. Bush will never have.

In another indication of the Bush Admininstration's lack of skill in maintaining an international coalition, Honduras announced it would withdraw its troops from Iraq. (Source: Associated Press, March 16, 2004)

In still another indication of the Bush Admininstration's inability to maintain an international coalition, Nicaragua decided not to replace its troops departing from Iraq. (Source: Associated Press, March 16, 2004)

Congressman Henry Waxman commissioned a report which examined the statements of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice. The report includes a searchable database of two hundred and thirty-seven (237!) misleading statements about the threat from Iraq. Two hundred and thirty seven. Two hundred and thirty seven. (Source: Henry Waxman, "Iraq on the Record: The Bush Administration's Public Statements on Iraq." Online at

How extreme a conservative is Dick Cheney? Well, most Americans can agree that Newt Gingrich is the all-time top expert on radical right-wing Republican politics in America, and here's what Gingrich has had to say about Dick Cheney: "Cheney's voting record was slightly more conservative than mine." (Source: Washington Times, July 25, 2000)

George W. Bush has proposed cutting staff from the Veterans Administration dedicated to processing disability claims -- this at a time when a backlog of hundreds of thousands of claims has built up. (Source: Washington Post, March 3, 2004)

Under the budget George W. Bush submitted to the Congress, Veterans' copayments for prescription drugs are set to double. Way to support our troops, Mr. Bush. (Source: Washington Post, March 3, 2004)

George W. Bush' onslaught of campaign commercials includes a video image of a swarthy, thick-browed Arab actor counterposed with the word "terrorist." Aren't you sick and tired of this kind of hate-mongering? (Source: The Detroit News, March 14, 2004)

Bush's supporters in Congress are pulling out the red paint again in their efforts to tar Kerry's supporters as communists. Republican Representatives Mario Diaz-Balart and Mark Foley tried to suggest, without any factual basis, that Kerry had sought and obtained the political support of evil Spaniard socialists and Fidel Castro.

Last time I checked, the Cold War was over. But it seems that the Bush campaign is living in the distant past. (Source: The Miami Herald, March 17, 2004)

George W. Bush's budget for 2005 cuts the budget for sewage cleanup by 37 percent. More shit for you. (Source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution, February 4, 2004)

If George W. Bush is such a big fan of small businesses in America, why did he try to cut $79 million in funds from the Small Business Administration in his budget for 2005? (Source: Arkansas News Bureau, March 11, 2004)

When Natural History magazine asked the Bush and Kerry campaigns to send them answers to ten questions related to science and the environment, the Kerry campaign prepared and sent off answers to all ten. The Bush campaign, on the other hand, declined to respond to the magazine, instead telling the editors of Natural History to go look it up in the papers themselves. That symbolizes the different approaches to government-public relations of Bush and Kerry. While Kerry is happy to oblige, providing information as needed, Bush refuses to respond as often as possible, leaving it up to the public to scrape together whatever information it can find from the margins. The government is supposed to by of, by and for the people -- didn't Bush hear Lincoln's words? Well, thank goodness we have Kerry as an alternative. (Source: Natural History Magazine October 2004)

George W. Bush says that "when we make decisions, we want to make sure we do so on sound science -- not what sounds good, but what is real." But Bush didn't nominate a presidential science advisor for his administration until six months into his first term. John Kerry has publicly pledged, if he is elected, to get a presidential science advisor quickly on the job. (Sources: White House Press Release June 25, 2001; Natural History Magazine October 2004)

John Kerry can handle moral thinking in the gray areas between black and white. While he supports stem cell research, he is also aware of the hazards of establishing a precedent of creating human blastocysts strictly for purposes of research. As a solution, Kerry supports using the human blastocysts already created and discarded after fertility treatments for research, leaving the door open for innovative new treatments that would allow subsequent treatment of patients using material cloned from their own bodies.

Can you imagine George W. Bush coming up with such a carefully nuanced policy? No, I didn't think so. This is just one more reason that a Kerry presidency would be better for America than four more years of Bush. (Source: Natural History Magazine October 2004)

George W. Bush's space policy is focused on the whiz-bang entertainment value of putting people into space, on the Moon, and on Mars. John Kerry's space policy is focused on increasing science funding so that we can learn more about space in an efficient manner that will lead not only to an increase in accumulated basic knowledge, but the possibility of realistic economic application as well. (Source: Natural History Magazine October 2004)

Reasons #1001-2004:
The problem with Iraq is not simply that we went to war against the country. It's also that Bush pushed us into a war the American military was not yet equipped to fight. As John Kerry says, "The president made the decision as to when to send our troops to war, no one else. He decided the date. He decided that diplomacy was over. He decided to go forward. And on the date that they went into Iraq, they didn't have the armament on the Humvees, the armored doors, they didn't have the equipment they needed in some regards, and they didn't have the state-of-the-art body armor."

Had Bush cooled his heels for a month, life-saving equipment could have arrived in time. But no -- Bush had to have it when he wanted it, reality be damned. And Americans are dead because of it.

(Source: Boston Globe March 17, 2004)

In Kansas, there were 7,500 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Have you ever noticed that George W. Bush seems most comfortable at his dude ranch in Crawford? Let's show him we care for his comfort by sending him there for good.

Bush said it! "The true strength of America is found in the hearts and souls of people like Travis, people who are willing to love their neighbor, just like they would like to love themselves." (Source: Remarks by George W. Bush in Springfield, Missouri, February 9, 2004)

George W. Bush in July 2003: "The United States will not waver from its commitment to the cause of democracy and human rights in Burma."

George W. Bush in March 2004: the official Bush campaign website sells clothing made in Burma, where child labor and sexual slavery are rampant and textile laborers earn 7 cents an hour.

In case you were wondering the official Kerry campaign website only sells goods made in the USA. (Source: Washington Post March 20, 2004)

In the 2000 campgaign, Bush ridiculed Al Gore for suggesting that it was time to replace the internal combustion engine, and suggested that such a position was anti-business. Bush was too short-sighted to realize that in replacing the internal combusion engine with new technology, new businesses would be spawned. These new technologies would rely less on traditional fuels, providing further economic benefit to American businesses who are now stuck with the rising cost of fossil fuels. (Sources: USA Today April 3, 2000; Washington Post March 20, 2004)

In Connecticut, there were 1,700 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. Perhaps if Saddam Hussein had taken their jobs, Bush might have done something about it. But as it is he has stood by and simply watched this deterioration take place. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

The President of Poland is the latest world leader to come out publicly and say that he was misled by George W. Bush into going to war. As Aleksander Kwasniewski said, "That they deceived us about the weapons of mass destruction, that's true. We were taken for a ride." Decieving other world leaders is no way for the United States to conduct itself, and no way for the United States to strengthen its global leadership. Thanks for another mess, George. (Source: The Times of London, March 18, 2004)

Bush Administration Special Counsel Scott Bloch has changed interpretation of the U.S. legal code so that all gay and lesbian federal workers have lost their protection against workplace discrimination. According to Bloch, government workers may be demoted or fired for being gay and lesbian. (Source: News Service, March 17, 2004)

Bush said it! "The illiteracy level of our children are appalling." (Source: Remarks by George W. Bush in Washington, D.C., January 23, 2004)

In Florida, there were 35,500 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. That's many times more than the vote margin Bush paid such close attention to four years ago. If only he would devote his attention to Florida's problems now. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Only George W. Bush would be so callous as to appoint James L. Connaughton, lobbyist for power companies and corporate polluters, to be the White House's senior environmental adviser. (Source: Mother Jones September 2003)

In the 2000 campaign, George W. Bush said that Al Gore would have to explain his stances in the book he wrote, Earth in the Balance. Then Bush had to admit he'd never read Earth in the Balance. We've since learned the hazards of a presidency with policies based on unopened books. (Source: USA Today April 3, 2000)

Bush said it! "Why don't you mentor a child how to read?" (Source: Remarks by George W. Bush in St. Louis, Missouri, January 5, 2004)

In Missouri, there were 14,600 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. It's a cliche, but it's true: Missouri is in misery, and Bush isn't lifting a finger to get those families out of poverty. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Americans for the Arts, a non-profit organization charged with advancing the state of the humanities and arts in the United States, has praised John Kerry for his consistent support of the arts over the years during his time in the Senate, giving him a 100% rating. (Source: Americans for the Arts)

Former chief of UN weapons inpection Hans Blix says that in his estimation George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq has increased, not decreased, the threat from terrorists. (Source: Reuters March 19, 2004)

Mark Rey, appointed by George W. Bush to the position of Undersecretary for Natural Resources and Environment in the Department of Agriculture, spent the decades before his appointment acting as a lobbyist for the timber industry, paid by timber corporations to advocate expanded logging. Talk about foxes guarding the chicken coop...! (Source: Mother Jones September 2003)

In Maine, there were 4,000 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. That may not sound like much, but keep in mind that there aren't too many families in Maine to begin with. Maine is known for its stark beauty, but under Bush the living is getting starker, too. Don't worry, though: the Bushes' compound in Kennebunkport will always be secure. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

In the month after the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Bush Administration cut a request for counter-terrorism funds from the FBI by two-thirds. (Source: Washington Post March 22, 2004)

Bush said it! "I want to remind you all that in order to fight and win the war, it requires an expenditure of money that is commiserate with keeping a promise to our troops to make sure that they're well paid, well trained, well equipped." We've suspected for some time that George W. Bush doesn't know the true meaning of commiseration, but this clinches it. (Source: George W. Bush's Press Conference of December 15, 2003)

Inept use of vocabulary aside, Bush's statement is substantively galling, given the massive problems in getting troops the pay they deserve. General Accounting Office Report GAO-04-89 of November 2003 (released a month before Bush's press conference) found that 93.5% of the members of six Army National Guard units mobilized to Iraq encountered problems getting paid. Of course, George W. Bush didn't mention that in his press conference. It's just one more example of how Bush's pushy agenda ends up leaving important details behind.

In Georgia, there were 27,300 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. Georgia can't say it's better off than it was four years ago. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Thomas Sansonetti, appointed by George W. Bush to the position of Assistant Attorney General for Environment and Natural Resources, has presided over the settlement of lawsuits that have generously allowed corporate access to our nationally-treasured wilderness for a variety purposes including mining. Surprise, surprise: Sansonetti's previous job was as a lobbyist for corporate mining interests. Isn't it time we said "enough is enough" to these corporate cronies in our government, and to the administration that put them there? (Source: Mother Jones September 2003)

Bush said it! "Reading is the basics for all learning." (Source: San Diego Union-Tribune September 14, 2000)

Bush's attack dogs at the Republican National Committee have dug up what they think is the ultimate dirt on John Kerry: he has a cousin who is... French! Do Bush and his cronies really want to argue that a man is unfit for the Presidency because of his family's ethnic heritage? Apparently, yes. (Source: Republican National Committee Briefing, "International Man of Mystery, March 8, 2004)

Why is it time to give Bush the boot? Because rather than allow the documentation of what Bill Clinton accomplished in office, the Bush Administration has chosen to simply delete references to Clinton from the website of the White House. Down the memory hole! (Source:

In Michigan, there were 27,900 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. I imagine Mr. Bush is hoping those newly poor families don't get out to vote in November 2004. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Bush said it! "We need an energy bill that encourages consumption." Bwah-huh? (Source: Remarks of George W. Bush in Trenton, New Jersey, September 23 2002)

Richard Clarke, a Reagan appointee and registered Republican who worked for the past four presidents, has reported that George W. Bush pressured him and other intelligence officials to create an official report linking Iraq and Al Qaeda. When Clarke's report clearly stated that Iraq had no relationship with Al Qaeda, he was told that his report had the "wrong answer" and that he should come back with a new report. Clarke says that all the intelligence Bush had told him that Iraq "did nothing to threaten us." Yet, Bush chose to ignore this intelligence. (Source: Richard Clarke, Against All Enemies)

Richard Clarke served as a first hand witness to the plans of George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld to invade Iraq, even without any reason to believe that Iraq posed any significant threat to the United States. According to Clarke, "The crisis was manufactured, and Bush political adviser Karl Rove was telling Republicans to 'run on the war." Apparently, the day after September 11, 2001, when it was already clear that Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks, Donald Rumsfeld proposed bombing Iraq instead of Afghanistan simply because Iraq had more targets that would be easy to bomb. Rumsfeld, supported by Bush, continued to push for an invasion of Iraq in spite of information from the CIA, FBI and Richard Clarke himself that Iraq had done nothing to contribute to any attacks against America. (Source: Richard Clarke, Against All Enemies)

A serious problem with the world view of the likes of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld is that they cannot distinguish between different sorts of threats in proximate parts of the world. Because of their simplistic way of thinking about the Middle East or the Muslim World as a singular entity, they took one threat from the Al Qaeda of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia (three religiously authoritarian regimes), another threat from Hussein of Iraq (a secular authoritarian regime), and assumed that the threats must somehow be linked. Because they could allow themselves to think of the world in a nuanced-enough way to allow for distinct levels and motivations of threat, they were unable to craft a nuanced foreign policy -- and disaster has resulted. Do we want to allow an overly simplistic administration to blunder its way into disaster again?

Richard Clarke's assessment of George W. Bush's record on national security? He says that George W. Bush "has made us less safe" and that "I think he's done a terrible job on the war on terrorism." (Source: Richard Clarke, Against All Enemies)

If you take careful notice, you'll discover that while the Bush Administration has dedicated great energy to the task of denigrating Richard Clarke's character, they have not demonstrated that what he is saying is false. That's Bush Administration policy: if you can't deny the message, shoot the messenger. (Source: White House Press Briefings: March 17 through March 24, 2004)

In Hawaii, there were 2,500 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. That's trouble in paradise. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

The folks at the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania were diligent enough to root out the following:

Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman, Bush campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt, and Commerce Secretary Donald Evans have been sent out to the press to say things like "Senator Kerry . . . supported 350 tax increases over the course of his career" (Mehlman, on CNN March 12 2004), "This is a senator who has voted 350 times to raise taxes during the course of his career" (Mehlman, on CNN March 16 2004), "[Kerry] has voted to increase taxes some 350 times" (Evans, on CNN March 10 2004), and "John Kerry has voted for higher taxes 350 times" (Schmidt, quoted on MSNBC and FOX March 11 2004). George W. Bush himself is quoted as saying that Kerry "voted for tax increases 350 times" by the Associated Press.

At least they are all saying the same thing -- exactly the same thing, as a matter of fact. Or is it fact? It turns out that this list of "350 tax increases" includes votes against tax cuts on cigarettes, votes against tax cuts on polluters, and votes for tax cuts that were smaller tax cuts than what some other politicians had pushed for.

If these, in Bush World, count as "tax increases," then it's clear that Bush doesn't live in the same world as the rest of us. It's time to put an end to the unreality. (Source: "Bush campaign falsely accuses Kerry of voting 350 times for tax increases. Bush's own words mislead reporters.",, March 23, 2004)

George W. Bush said it himself: "This foreign policy stuff is a little frustrating." Well, if you can't handle it then step aside, man. Step aside. (Source: New York Daily News April 23, 2002)

PACs, or Political Action Committees, are the classic method by which special-interest money is funneled to a candidate. George W. Bush has raised 25 times as much from from PACs than John Kerry. John Kerry's fundraising is 99.8% PAC-free. (Sources: Federal Election Commission Data and the Center for Responsive Politics)

While America's farmers continue to struggle to make ends meet, they are looking for a viable alternative to the economically shaky leadership of the Bush Administration. According to the National Farmers Union, a group representing more than a quarter of a million farmers and ranchers from across the country, farmers need look no further than John Kerry. The NFU recognized Kerry for supporting farmers' issues in 90% of his relevant votes in 2002, 91% of the time in 2000, and 100% of the time in 1998. John Kerry has been a consistent friend to farmers; George W. Bush has been a persistent danger. (Source: National Farmers Union Voting Scorecards, 1998, 2000, 2002)

In Idaho, there were 9,800 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. The American ideal is that we should be better off as time goes by, but in Idaho more and more people are slipping beneath minimal standards of living. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Bush spokesman Terry Holt's reaction to John Kerry's military service? "I went to Vietnam, yadda, yadda, yadda..." (Source: Washington Post March 23, 2004)

Bush said it! "You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test." (Source: Remarks by George W. Bush in Townsend, Tennessee)

In the Spring of 2004, George W. Bush moved his campaign of "astroturf" (an unethical practice in which canned text is sent off to multiple newspapers under different names, none of which is the original author's) to new heights. As of March 24, 2004, the official Bush campaign website contained seven separate canned letters, each of which Bush encourages his followers to send on to a computerized, ready-made list of newspapers with the follower's name attached as author. This level of presidentially-sponsored plagiarism is historically unprecedented.

In case you were wondering, as of March 24, 2004 John Kerry's campaign website encourages followers to write letters to the editor, but instead of setting up an automated astroturf machine encourages people to read articles in the newspaper and craft original letters that specifically respond to the content of those articles.

That's the ethical difference between John Kerry and George W. Bush. George W. Bush will do whatever it takes to win. John Kerry makes sure it's done right. (Sources: Official campaign websites of John Kerry and George W. Bush, March 24, 2004)

In case you were wondering, among the seven canned letters George W. Bush asks his followers to send with their names as authors, there's one with a subject of the environment. But even that canned letter, written by the Bush campaign, cannot manage to mention even one environmentally-friendly Bush administration policy by name. The astroturf letter on the environment is the shortest of all seven by far, and that's pretty telling. (Source: Official campaign website of George W. Bush, March 24, 2004)

The Bush Administration spent over a hundred thousand dollars of taxpayers' money to hire a public relations firm to convince said taxpayers (that's us) that triple-logging the forests of the Sierra Nevada would be good for the forests of the Sierra Nevada. What a waste, to use citizens' own money to try to fool them. (Source: Associated Press March 10, 2004)

When the Bush Administration hired that public relations firm, two further goals were specified: to counter "an apparent atmosphere of mistrust and cynicism about the government's real intentions," and to counter the notion that the Bush Administration was acting "due to some hidden politically motivated agenda."

Problem is, when rumors started circulating about the Bush Administration's hiring of a public relations firm, the Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign filed a Freedom of Information Act claim to find out whether this was true.

And the Bush Administration denied it.

And that's why we have our current "atmosphere of mistrust and cynicism about the government's real intentions." (Source: Associated Press March 10, 2004)

In Indiana, there were 5,900 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. Is this what Bush means when he talks about "taking care of business?" (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Bush said it! "I, in the state of Texas, had heard a lot of discussion about a faith-based initiative eroding the important bridge between church and state." The truth leaks out in funny ways when the mike is turned on. (Source: Question and Answer Session with George W. Bush on January 29, 2001)

Before George W. Bush came to office, members of the military complained that they were being overdeployed, being stretched too thin. Since George W. Bush has taken office, the military has been stretched even thinner, to the point that many currently enlisted members of the military say they will not re-enlist for another term of service. As a consequence, the remaining members of the military can look forward to harder deployments as military resources are stretched even more thinly across the globe in Bush policy pursuits. (Source: Washington Post March 28, 2004)

How lame was the intelligence circus used to generate "evidence" for WMDs in Iraq? An investigation by the Los Angeles Times traced back the "evidence" for a supposed large array of trucks and railroad cars within which biological agents were supposedly produced. Ahmad Chalabi, who looked forward to entering post-Hussein leadership in Iraq, was asked to find evidence of such trucks and cars. Chalabi produced a "witness." The "witness" was the brother of one of Chalabi's aides. The evidence turned out, of course, to be bogus.

And this is why we went to war. Haven't we had enough of this kind of Three Stooges politics? (Source: Los Angeles Times March 28, 2004)

The Bush administration is not only itself divorced from reality: it's trying to shove a wedge between the rest of us and reality, too. In a February 20, 2004 memo to the National Park Service, the Bush Administration commands National Park Service employees not to refer to reduced services as being the consequence of budget cuts. Rather, the National Park Serice employees are to use the phrase "service level adjustment."

Bush's America: the land of "service level adjustment." (Source: Philadelphia Inquirer March 28, 2004)

In each year of George W. Bush's presidency, the number of personal bankruptcies broke previous records to new highs. You could say that George W. Bush is the personal bankruptcy president. (Source: American Bankrupcy Institute Data from 2001-2003)

Colin Powell calls the supposed existence of mobile biological weapons labs in Iraq "the most dramatic" piece of supposed evidence in his February 5, 2003 speech to the United Nations making a case for war. But now he says that supposed evidence was based on bad information. Wasn't it the duty of the Bush Administration to figure out whether its information was good or bad before dragging everyone off to war? (Source: Washington Post April 3, 2004)

Richard Clarke had the class to publicly apologize to the families of victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks for not having done enough to prevent their deaths. Bush Administration officials say Clarke's public apology is "political bullshit."

What happened to the idea of personal accountability in the Bush Administration? (Source: Time Magazine March 28, 2004)

Bush Administration Solicitor Theodore Olson's contention: "The courts have no jurisdiction to evaluate or second-guess the conduct of the president and the military." Well, so much for checks and balances. (Source: The Seattle Times January 21, 2004)

When George W. Bush finally agreed to testify before the commission investigating the attacks of September 11, 2001, he agreed to go only if he didn't have to testify under oath, only if it wasn't in public, and -- here's the kicker -- only if he could bring his Vice President Dick Cheney along.

As Nancy Pelosi says, "I think it speaks to the lack of confidence that the administration has in the president going forth alone, period. It's embarrassing to the president of the United States that they won't let him go in without holding the hand of the vice president of the United States." (Source: Associated Press April 2, 2004)

Until they brought their complaint into the light of day and embarrassed the Bush Administration into relenting, the commission investigating the attacks of September 11, 2001 was stonewalled by the Bush Administration on their request for thousands of documents from the Clinton White House. The Bush Administration refused again and again to allow the commission to review these documents. What are they afraid of? Why won't they aid the commission? Is it not a top priority for the Bush Administration? (Source: New York Times April 3, 2004)

The Bush administration, which likes to portray itself as an administration of decisive action, was the slowest administration in forty years to fill the 520 top positions of its administration. (Source: New York Times April 3, 2004)

When David Letterman showed footage of a 13-year-old boy yawning while George W. Bush gave a speech, CNN told viewers the White House that the incident never occurred and the boy had been spliced into the video using artificial methods. Of course, it turns out that the video was genuine. Now the White House is controlling access to the 13-year-old boy. Is George W. Bush this thin-skinned? Is this sort of baloney press management what White House spends the day doing? (Source: Washington Post April 2, 2004)

In the first week of April 2004, American troops were getting killed in a fierce battle against both Sunni and Shiite Iraqis as those Iraqis occupied towns and mosques. George W. Bush, on the other hand, went to Charlotte, NC for a campaign fundraiser, then headed home to his dude ranch for a week. As the week ground on, dozens more American soldiers lost their lives. George W. Bush continued to relax at his ranch during the week, taking a break from his vacation to grant an interview with Ladies' Home Journal. (Sources: Chicago Tribune April 4, 2004; Associated Press April 8, 2004)

In yet another indication of the Bush Admininstration's lack of skill in maintaining an international coalition, Guatemala backed out of its promise to George W. Bush to send troops to Iraq. (Source: Associated Press April 5, 2004)

In still another indication of the fallout from the Bush Administration's use of blunt-force-injury diplomatic tactics, South Korea has announced it will not send the 1,300 troops to Iraq that it had previously committed to. Why? Because the Bush Administration changed the agreement, pushing for South Korea to engage in "offensive operations." Those troops were going to relieve the burden on American soldiers. Now they won't. We desperately need someone who can handle international relations in the White House. (Source: USA Today April 5, 2004)

Now that things are getting really sticky, the latest smear target of the Bush Administration is the 9/11 Commission. After Condoleeza Rice testified in private and not under oath in front of the 9/11 Commission in March of 2004, the White House complained that "only five members showed up." What they didn't mention was that the White House had sent a letter to the 9/11 Commission stipulating that only three members would be allowed to attend Rice's testimony. That means two members had to elbow their way in to the proceedings. That doesn't reflect poorly on the 9/11 commission -- it reflects awfully on the shut-it-down, whatever-it-takes, cover-it-up Bush Administration. (Source: USA Today April 6, 2004)

The General Accounting Office reports that more than 60% of U.S. corporations didn't pay any federal taxes in recent years.

I pay taxes. You pay taxes. Why don't corporations? And why hasn't George W. Bush done a single thing in his years in office to address this inequitable state of affairs? (Source: GAO Report to Congressional Requestors, Comparison of the Reported Tax Liabilities of Foreign- and U.S.-Controlled Corporations, 1996-2000, February 2004)

On March 29, 2004:
One American soldier is killed and another injured when a roadside bomb explodes under their vehicle.
George W. Bush remarked to a reporter, "Don't tell anybody, but I'll be fishing tomorrow!" as he boarded a plane to his ranch for a week-long vacation.
(Sources: Agence France-Presse March 29, 2004; United States Central Command News Release March 29, 2004)

George W. Bush's record-setting vacations in Crawford are just the beginning. If he wins another term, he plans to spend even more time on vacation there. (Source: U.S. News and World Report September 6, 2004)

The Bush administration must think we're all stupid to try this one: in a publicity campaign to try to convince Americans that logging the forests of the Sierra Nevada is the best way to save the forests of the Sierra Nevada, the Bush Administration has released a brochure that juxtaposes a photograph of Sierra Nevada forests in 1909 with Sierra Nevada forests in 1989. The goal: to show how the Sierra Nevada forest has become increasingly unhealthy.

Except that the photo in 1909 is of Montana. And the forest in that photo has just been logged. (Source: Associated Press April 13, 2004)

Why dump Bush? Because in the spring of 2004 the Children's Environmental Health Network gave George W. Bush an "F" on its report card for failing to protect children from environmental toxins. (Source: United Press International April 13, 2004)

George W. Bush's Attorney General, John Ashcroft, spent $8,000.00 in taxpayer money -- and to what end? To cover the chest of an aluminum statue in his press room so that when he was being interviewed by the press, no boobs would appear in newspaper photographs. We hate to break it to him, but there's one boob still uncovered... (Source: BBC News January 29, 2004)

In his April 13, 2004 prime-time news conference (only the third of his presidency!), George W. Bush said "Nobody likes to see dead people on their television screens. I don't." For George W. Bush, the horror of the war in Iraq is all about him and what he has to see on his TV screen. It didn't occur to Mr. Bush that the horror of war is about something other than what's on TV. And that's dangerous. (Source: April 13, 2004 news conference)

Despite being offered the opportunity a handful of times, George W. Bush refused to admit making any mistakes in his presidency. This is the sort of arrogance that gets a nation in deep trouble. (Source: April 13, 2004 news conference)

Despite being offered the opportunity a handful of times, George W. Bush refused to apologize to the American people for the failings of his administration. American presidents used to say "The Buck Stops Here." Clearly, under George W. Bush the Buck ends up somewhere else. (Source: April 13, 2004 news conference)

When asked to describe his biggest mistake as president since September 11, 2001, George W. Bush paused for a number of moments, stammered, looked at the ceiling, looked at the floor, and then said "I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, all the pressure of trying to come up with an answer. But it hasn't yet." Everybody knew George W. Bush was going to be asked this sort of question. And yet Mr. Bush didn't have an answer ready. At the very least, to come to such an important news conference unprepared shows a shocking lack of diligence that the nation cannot afford. (Source: April 13, 2004 news conference)

Another problem with George W. Bush's inability to describe a single failing in a nearly three-year period of his presidency is that it betrays a profound lack of self-reflection. Surely any president who was not profoundly shallow would have long, dark nights of the soul in which he reviewed his actions to date, tallied his mistakes and considered how to rectify them in the future. Most people report losing sleep in contemplation of a single hard day at their office jobs, yet George W. Bush has not been able to identify a single mistake of a two-war, job-loss presidency over the course of years? Inconceivable! A president who does not consider his mistakes cannot learn from them. George W. Bush has a lot to learn, but it doesn't look like he's doing the hard work necessary to even begin that process. (Source: April 13, 2004 news conference)

Bush's former counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke testified before Congress that, prior to 9/11, the president ignored Clark's pleas to take Al Qaeda seriously. Dick "Dick" Cheney defended Bush by claiming that Clarke "wasn't in the loop." (Source: AFP, 3/23/04)

Well, in retrospect, it looks like it was kinda stupid to keep your counterterrorism coordinator out of the loop on issues of, like, counterterrorism. Can we afford four more years of hilarious slapstick protection from these Keystone Cops?

John Dean, former White House Counsel to Richard Nixon, has called the Bush administration "more vicious than Tricky Dick." He ought to know. (Source:, 3/3/04)

I don't know about you, but I already run into enough incompetent, arrogant little twits in the course of a day. I don't need to get home, turn on the news, and watch another one run my country into the ground.

Because the guy's not even a good liar. He's always got this dumbass smirk on his face when he's, wait a minute, he's got that smirk on his face all the time...but he's lying all the time...oh, holy hell!

So we don't have to page Kennebunkport with the message: "Mr. and Mrs. Bush, your son George has wandered into the White House and started fiddling with the federal government. Please come take him home before he makes a mess of America's future."

Speaking of Kennebunkport, on June 14, 2003, George W. Bush exulted "Good morning, everybody!" before a nice relaxing day playing golf with his dad. Then they went fishing. The next day, an American soldier died in Iraq. George W. Bush says he didn't have time to attend that funeral -- he says he was just too busy. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count; Associated Press June 14, 2003)

Why boot Bush? Because I'm just laughing too hard when I hear George W. Bush make the joke: "Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be here somewhere." Ha, ha! Hey, how about "The credibility of the United States in the eyes of the international community must be around here somewhere." Hee, hee! Or, "Now where'd that dang Bill of Rights go?" Heh, heh! Or maybe, "I could have sworn the honor and dignity of the White House were right here...Nope, not here." Bwa haw haw! "My my, whatever have I done with that clean air and water we used to have?" Tee, hee, hee! "Say, whatever has become of all those uncounted dangling chads?" Guffaw, guffaw, eep! Stop it George, you're killing me!

1. Bush says "the consequences of failure in Iraq would be unthinkable" (Source: AFP, 4/14/04). Well, the guy's not much of a thinker, so how about this to chew on: Hubris that fails to consider the possibility of anything but an ideal outcome in any given situation does not make for good leadership.

In April of 2003, Bush told us that Iraq was on the fast track to peace, stability and Democracy. The Iraqis would welcome us as liberators, he said, and Iraq would be paying for its own reconstruction in no time. Anything else, for Bush, was unthinkable. He was wrong. Dead wrong.

Good leadership takes numerous contingencies into account, and includes backups plans for worst-case scenarios. Bush blew it on Iraq, big time.

Admittedly, there's something appealing about tenaciously optimistic people. But when their naively rosy scenarios end up costing me seven hundred of my countrymen (and women), they get less cute fast. Don't we need a president who can think more clearly, and for whom fewer things are "unthinkable"?

In the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush told us that he was "a uniter, not a divider." Well, turns out he was right. As we speak, Sunnis and Shiites are uniting in Iraq to kill Americans. Now that we know what he meant, let's not make the mistake of voting for it a second time.

We might not have gained a lot of hearts and minds in Iraq, but there sure are plenty of brains and guts all over the place.

George W. Bush has told the American people that "I plan on telling the American people that I've got a plan to win the war on terror." (Source: Reuters, 4/13/04) Whoa! Stop the presses. We have no less here than the execution of a plan to tell the American people that he plans to tell the American people that he has a plan to fight terrorism! That's all we get two and a half years after 9/11? Can't we do better than that?

The war in Iraq was supposed to make the Middle East safe for Americans. But a year after the war, the Bush Administration issued a warning telling Americans to leave Saudi Arabia for their own safety. (Source: Associated Press April 15, 2004)

On June 17, 2003 George W. Bush attended a fundraiser in Washington, D.C. with special guest Ken Starr, gathering $3.5 million for his re-election campaign. On the same day, two American soldiers died in Iraq. Mr. Bush didn't have the time to attend their funerals. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

The commission on the attacks of September 11, 2001 reports: "Rice and Hadley told us that, before 9/11, they did not feel they had the job of handling domestic security." Condoleeza Rice is George W. Bush's National Security Adviser; Hadley is the Deputy National Security Adviser to the president. For the National Security Adviser and her deputy to assert that their jobs did not include concerns of national security simply boggles the mind. (Source: Chicago Sun-Times April 13, 2004)

An April 9, 2004 press release from the United States Department of the Treasury includes the following assertion in boldface type: "America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's policies are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation."

Citizens around the country complained that this kind of partisan campaign statement should not be released using taxpayer dollars. And they were right: it is in fact against the law for taxpayer dollars and government employees to be used for such a purpose. The Hatch Act forbids such activities.

When it was suggested to Treasury Department spokesman Rob Nichols that making such a statement was an improperly partisan action, Nichols responded, "That is nonsense, baseless and groundless."

Then a visitor to turned up a press release from the Republican National Committee, dated April 2, 2004. The press release includes the following assertion in boldface type: "America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's polices are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation."

So not only is the Bush Administration breaking the law to get their guy re-elected, they're lying to cover it up, too. We've seen this sort of "whatever it takes" ethics before. Come November 2004, we need not see it again. (Sources: U.S. Department of the Treasury April 9, 2004 press release; Republican National Committee April 2, 2004 press release; Associated Press April 10, 2004)

On June 20, 2003 George W. Bush attended a fundraiser on a Georgia plantation, raking in $2.25 million for his re-election campaign. The day before, an American soldier was killed by a rocket-propelled grenade. Mr. Bush had the time to hobnob with campaign contributors, but he didn't have the time to attend this soldier's funeral. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

On December 28, 2001, George W. Bush stood in front of a gaggle of reporters and told the American people that he had called together his top aides and generals -- Major General Gene Renuart, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and CIA Director George Tenet -- to talk about the ongoing war in Afghanistan.

Now it has come out that the actual focus of the meeting was a briefing on plans for a war against Iraq.

Why does George W. Bush seem incapable of telling the American people the truth? (Source: Associated Press April 17, 2004)

It's so embarrassing to watch Republicans say things like: "No, really, Bush didn't lie! It was more like deception, I think. After all, technically a lot of bullets put together could collectively be a weapon of mass destruction, right? And when he said there was "no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised," he didn't technically say weapons of mass destruction. And "no doubt" could exist under the conditions that "someone has no doubt somewhere about this." So, see, Bush didn't lie -- really!"

Help end the embarrassment for the Republican party. Boot Bush in 2004.

How poor is George W. Bush's diplomatic acumen? His administration has been unable to convince Norway to keep its troops in Iraq, despite pleading with the Norwegians to do so. The Norwegian government has instead announced that it will withdraw its troops from Iraq in June 2004. As more and more nations pull out of Iraq, the fig leaf of "coalition" does a worse job of providing legitimacy to what is an American occupation. The more the occupation becomes Americanized, the harder it will be for the whole Iraq escapade to have a positive outcome. The Bush Administration's diplomatic ineptness plays a significant role in creating an Iraq quagmire. (Source: Reuters April 26, 2004)

On June 23, 2003, George W. Bush went to New York City for a fundraiser with a twist: if you could hand over $20,000 to Bush's re-election campaign, you'd get to have your picture taken with him. The next day, seven American soldiers were killed in Iraq. Mr. Bush had the time to pose with contributor after contributor, but he didn't take the time to attend a single one of these soldiers' funerals. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

David B. writes in with this reason to boot Bush: "I don't want Dick Cheney (oops, I meant George Bush) getting a chance to select the next justice of the United States Supreme Court."

It's worse than that, David: with four justices above the age of 70, it's not just one justice that the next president may have the opportunity to appoint; it's enough to wildly swing the Supreme Court. That power is too much to put in George W. Bush's hands.

"Once you've got Baghdad, it's not clear what you do with it. It's not clear what kind of government you would put in place of the one that is currently there. ... How much credibility is that government going to have if it's set up by the United States military when it's there? ... I think to have American military forces engaged in a civil war inside Iraq would fit the definition of quagmire, and we have absolutely no desire to get bogged down in that fashion."

-- Dick Cheney, April 1991

(Source: United Press International, April 15 2004)

On June 27, 2003, George W. Bush attended not one but TWO fundraisers for his. Meanwhile in Iraq, an American soldier was killed by a rocket-propelled grenade. Mr. Bush had the time to hop off to two fundraisers that day, but he didn't take the time to attend that soldier's funeral. Bush's actions make his priorities clear. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

It turns out that the executive director of Dick Cheney's official task force on energy policy, who met with representatives of the energy industry(the names of whom are curiously being witheld from the public) behind closed doors, gained employment as a lobbyist months after leaving his government office.

Guess for whom he gained employment working as a lobbyist? That's right, for the energy industry. He was given over $300,000.00 in payments in 2003 alone for his pro-energy advocacy.

This revolving-door cronyism is sadly emblematic of the ethical rot at the core of the Bush Administration. It's time to root the rot out. (Source: Boston Globe April 25, 2004)

When determining whether wild salmon are worthy of federal protection, the Bush administration has decided to count fish raised in concrete-pool hatcheries as if they are wild. That's like counting stray dogs as part of the grey wolf population. (Source: Washington Post April 29, 2004)

On June 30, 2003, George W. Bush attended two fundraisers in Florida while Dick Cheney attended two fundraisers of his own. Bush and Cheney received $3.9 million for their campaigns in exchange for the privilege of visiting with them. Over the next six days, six soldiers would lose their lives in Iraq. Neither Bush nor Cheney attended any of their funerals. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

The Bush administration has assigned five times more Office of Foreign Assets Control agents to track down Cuban embargo violations than the number agents it has assigned to track down Osama bin Laden's terrorist financing. (Source: Associated Press April 29, 2004)

On July 3, 2003, George W. Bush enjoyed a full 18-hole round of golf. On the same day, as well over a hundred thousand American soldiers put their lives on the line, two Americans soldiers lost their lives. What with his golf game and all, he couldn't manage to fit those soldiers' funerals into his schedule. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, Press Gaggle with Ari Fleischer on Air Force One July 4, 2003,

On July 7, 2003, Dick Cheney traveled to Rumson, New Jersey for the purpose of gathering more campaign cash, $900,000 in all. The top fifteen donors present that night in Rumson earned a special roundtable session with Mr. Cheney. The same day, two American soldiers died serving their country in Iraq. Dick Cheney found the time to visit New Jersey for his top contributors, but he couldn't find the time to go to these soldiers' funerals. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

In yet another in a long string of broken promises, the Bush Administration broke its promise to troops in Iraq that no soldier would serve there for longer than a year. This is after the Bush Administration broke their promise to soldiers in Iraq that they would be able to go home at the end of the summer in 2003. The Bush Administration would be well-advised to stop making promises it cannot keep (Source: Associated Press April 20, 2004)

How diplomatically inept is George W. Bush? Even stalwart ally Australia has more than halved its troop strength in Iraq, despite Bush's pleas to do the contrary. George W. Bush is learning the hard way that when you lose your credibility, people stop listening. (Souce: Time Magazine, May 3, 2004)

On July 18, 2003, George W. Bush took time off to collect $4 million and rub shoulders with contributors at a campaign fundraiser in Dallas, Texas. That day, two American soldiers in Iraq lost their lives. Mr. Bush apparently didn't have the time to fit their funerals into his busy fundraising schedule. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

How out of touch is George W. Bush with his "foreign policy" (can you call war a policy?)? When asked in a news conference how many American soldiers were in Afghanistan, he replied that there were "a couple thousand troops involved in Afghanistan." The actual count as of March 2004 is approximately 13,500, with 2,000 more set to arrive in the next month. Either George W. Bush doesn't want the American people to know the truth about the extent of United States military deployment to Afghanistan, or he doesn't know about that extent himself. Neither possibility inspires confidence in Bush's presidency. (Sources: George W. Bush's press conference of March 23, 2004 and Washington Post March 14, 2004; USA Today April 16, 2004)

Doug Bandow of the Cato Institute outlines the libertarian logic for voting Kerry and other Democrats into office. Historically speaking, when one party controls Congress and the Presidency, there's no counter-force to stop unnecessary spending and unwise borrowing. The result: economy-sapping national debt. The answer: get a Democrat into the White House (and more Democrats into the Congress) to balance out the current Republican dominance. The result: a return to the healthy competition of ideas and aims, reducing pork-barrel spending and uncontrolled debt-fishing. (Source: Fortune Magazine May 3, 2004)

On July 19, 2003, George W. Bush took time off to socialize with fatcat contributors to his campaign in Houston, Texas. Contributors ponied up $3 million to Mr. Bush for the privilege of hanging out with him. That same day, an American soldier in Baghdad was killed in a volley of hostile fire. Apparently, that soldier's sacrifice wasn't a big enough contribution to merit Mr. Bush's attendance at his funeral. Or perhaps Mr. Bush had a hair appointment that day. Whatever the reason, Mr. Bush chose not to attend that soldier's funeral. He had other things to do. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

George W. Bush's sanctimony would be charming if it weren't accompanied by hypocrisy. In the fall of 2001, George W. Bush asserted that "We can't have leaks of classified information. It's not in our nation's interest." But in the same season, Bush brought two reporters into the Oval Office and repeatedly gave them classified information during an interview. Perhaps Mr. Bush should ask that he be investigated. (Sources: White House News Conference October 10, 2001 and Providence Journal April 10, 2002)

When it turned out that Ken Lay of Enron was not only a lying, thieving fraud, George W. Bush tried to distance himself from his big-time contributor, claiming that Lay "was a supporter of Ann Richards in my run in 1994." It only took a quick search of campaign records by a group called Texans for Public Justice to find that while Ann Richards received $12,500 from Lay and Enron in the 1994 race, George W. Bush raked in $146,500 from Lay and Enron. If George W. Bush can't even lie with competence, how can we expect him to execute the legitimate duties of the presidency with competence? (Source: Houston Chronicle January 11, 2002)

On the night of July 24, 2004, George W. Bush and his contributors shared a fine dinner at a campaign fundraiser in Dearborn, Michigan. Also in the news that day: four more American soldiers died in Iraq. Did George W. Bush take the time out of his busy fundraising parties to attend their funerals? What do you think? (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

A vital part of the Bush Administration's faith-based initiatives policy is the taxpayer-funded Compassion Capital Fund, which is designed to "help faith-based and community organizations increase their effectiveness." Indeed, it is the only Bush Administration effort that has specifically disclosed the recipients of faith-based funding. Although Jewish, Muslim, and other non-Christian religious organizations applied for Compassion Capital Fund funds from the Bush Administration, none were granted funding as of April 2004. (Sources: United States Department of Health and Human Services' Administration for Children and Families website, Frontline, "The Jesus Factor," April 2004)

The Council on American-Islamic Relations reported a 70% jump in reports of anti-Muslim discrimination between 2002 and 2003. George W. Bush's Us-Them mentality, combined with his prosecution of wars against Muslim nations couched in the language of "crusade," have trickled down in a way that poisons open-mindedness and civility here at home (Source: Washington Post May 3, 2004)

It turns out that corporate contractors were giving orders to the soldiers who tortured Iraqi prisoners. Three corporate contractors are implicated in torture of Iraqi prisoners themselves, but cannot be prosecuted because they are subject to neither the Uniform Code of Military Justice nor the Iraqi legal code. Paul Bremer ensured the latter with an decree of his own. (Source: Los Angeles Times May 4, 2004)

This episode with corporate contractors illustrates the core problem with privatization efforts: when you give corporations lots of money to do what governments are supposed to do, and lessen the accountability under which they do it, you're going to get the worst a corporate contractor can get away with. George W. Bush and the Republicans are pushing this model of money for corporations without accountability on American soil -- and we can't let them get away with it.

On August 8, 2003, George W. Bush went fishing. The same, two American soldiers died in Iraq. What with his busy schedule of fishing, he never got around to attending those soldiers' funerals. (Source: Iraq Coalition Body Count; Remarks by the President and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in Press Availability, August 8, 2003)

On August 9, 2004, George W. Bush welcomed individuals who had raised at least $50,000 for his campaign to his ranch for a barbeque and social hour. The same day, two American soldiers died in Iraq. Bush didn't manage to attend their funerals. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

George W. Bush just can't handle unvarnished reality. Need evidence? Look no further than a "town hall meeting" he set up with residents of Niles, Michigan. The phrase "town hall meeting" suggests people who live in a town getting together in a hall to have a meeting. But George W. Bush only let pre-selected people who benefitted from his regressive tax policies, and who conveniently support his candidacy, speak. Is Bush of such a little mind that he cannot handle a real diversity of opinion? (Source: Associated Press May 3, 2004)

Fifty-three former United States diplomats have signed a letter sharply criticizing George W. Bush's Mideast policy as dangerously unbalanced, asserting that Bush has "placed US diplomats, civilians and military doing their jobs overseas in an untenable and even dangerous position." (Source: The Guardian May 4, 2004)

On August 11, 2004, George W. Bush took the day to travel to Denver and speak to an assembled crowd of well-off campaign contributors. That night, Mr. Bush raked in $1 million for his effort. The next day, four American sodliers died in Iraq. Bush didn't take the time to attend their funerals. Every life has its choices. It's clear where Mr. Bush's priorities lie. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

How downright nutty is a Republican Congress left unchecked by a Democratic President? Twenty-six Republican members of the House of Representatives have introduced a bill, H.R. 3920, entitled "To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme Court." Read the text of the bill, and you'll see that's exactly what the bill is trying to do:

The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a judgment of the United States Supreme Court--

(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the enactment of this Act; and

(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the constitutionality of an Act of Congress.


The procedure for reversing a judgment under section 2 shall be, as near as may be and consistent with the authority of each House of Congress to adopt its own rules of proceeding, the same as that used for considering whether or not to override a veto of legislation by the President."
What happens if the Congress is able to decide that a law is Constitutional if it says it is? Well, then, the Congress can pass any law it wants to, regardless of whether it actually follows the Constitution or not.

This dangerous attempt at subverting constitutional government betrays the Republican Party's lack of faith in the U.S. Constitution as a guiding set of principles of liberty and democracy. Those who would subvert the Constitution must be checked, and George W. Bush is not the man to do it. It's time to get a Democrat back in the White House. (Source: Library of Congress, House Resolution 3920)

At the last minute, George W. Bush had to rename his bus tour in the first week of May from the "Winning the War on Terror Tour" to the "Yes, America Can Tour". That's the Bush presidency in a nutshell: backtracking from certainties to possibilities... then, sadly, to nothing at all. (Source: Los Angeles Times May 4, 2004)

By the way, that "Bus Tour" common-man business is a prop as well. Bush actually took airplane flights between his stops. (Source: Associated Press May 4, 2004)

On August 14, 2003, George W. Bush visited San Diego, where just a few months before he had declared that fighting was over in Iraq and paraded in a military suit in front of a "Mission Accomplished" banner. Bush didn't visit the troops there, however. He had taken the day to visit with campaign contributors who were waiting with a million dollars for him. An American soldier died in the heat of Iraq that day while Bush partied. And Bush never bothered to go to that soldier's funeral. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

Timothy H. writes in: "Bush's ignorance of basic grammar and history is especially galling considering how much opportunity he had to educate himself. He attended Phillips Academy in Andover and Yale University where he majored in history. Bush's father was liaison to China and President of the United States. That George W. Bush was able to emerged from this highly enriched environment with an appalling ignorance of world affairs and an inability to express himself speaks volumes about the limited abilities of the man himself."

On August 19, 2003, George W. Bush played golf. The next day, two American soldiers were killed. George W. Bush says he didn't have time to attend their funerals, what with his busy schedule and all. (Source: Iraq Coalition Body Count; CNN August 19, 2003)

How lukewarm is George W. Bush's commitment to volunteering in the United States? The individual he chose in March 2004 to head Bush's volunteering oversight program (a coordinating council for the Peace Corps, Citizen Corps, AmeriCorps and Senior Corps) has some government experience -- as Laura Bush's, then George W. Bush's, correspondence director. At least she can write a great letter. (Source: USA Freedom Corps' Network of Service Newsletter, March 2004)

George W. Bush has mandated $50,000,000,000 in spending over the next five years to put an anti-missile system in remote Alaska to protect us against that ICBM-wielding superpower enemy of ours named..., named...

oh, right, there isn't one. But at any rate, $50,000,000,000 in spending it is, because George W. Bush says it must be important. What else could we have done with that $50,000,000,000? Well, $50,000,000,000 could have:
bought a brand-new Dell Laptop for every man, woman and child in Iraq, with $500 per person left over to spare;
done the same for every family in the USA;
built five hundred brand-spanking-new state-of-the-art $100 million schools across the United States;
paid a year's salary at the generous level of $48,000 for an additional teacher for every 20 students aged 5-9, helping a generation to get a head start in school.
The list could go on and on, but you get the idea. Who knows why George W. Bush is such a wasteful spender on unnecessary big-ticket projects; perhaps it's because he's never had to worry about money himself. Because such a careless man occupies the Oval Office, we're all the worse off for it, and we have to foot the bill. (Source: New York Times May 4, 2004)

By the way, it's been found that the $50,000,000,000 anti-missile system doesn't even work. (Source: Reuters May 13, 2004)

On August 21, 2003, George W. Bush visited Portland, Oregon for yet another of his fundraisers. As thousands of protesters rallied outside, Bush engaged in the genteel activity of accepting money for the privilege of meeting with him. Bush's take that day: $1 million. Two American soldiers died in Iraq that day. Bush never went to those soldiers' funerals. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

George W. Bush did not watch Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld testify before Congress on May 7, 2004. Nevertheless, after Rumsfeld was done, Bush called him to tell him he had done a "really good job." We need a president who knows what he's talking about, who actually depends on knowledge of others' actions when coming to a conclusion about them. (Source: New York Times May 7, 2004)

On May 9, 2004, Reuters reported that hundreds of photos and live-action videos of the torture and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners exist and were being reviewed by the White House. If there are hundreds of pictures, imagine the number of undocumented "isolated incidents."

According to Reuters, the Pentagon doesn't want to release these photos to the public. (Source: Reuters May 9, 2004)

According to the same Reuters article, Dick Cheney says of Donald Rumsfeld that it's time to "get off his case."

Sorry, no. Some things, like stopping torture in America's name, are more important than not giving Donald Rumsfeld a hard time. If Dick Cheney can't recognize that, then he does not deserve to be Vice President. (Source: Reuters May 9, 2004)

Why give Bush the boot? Because now for every one ends-justify-the-means American who says "How can the Arabs criticize us, when they run their own torture rooms," there are ten Arabs who say "How can the Americans criticize us?" Once the moral high ground is lost, it cannot be regained without incredible sacrifice. This is another piece of the Bush Legacy.

On August 22, 2003, George W. Bush visited Seattle, Washington to take in an invitation-only pep rally to his psychological and monetary benefit. Bush's raked in $1.7 million that day. The next day, three events occurred. First, Dick Cheney charged $2,000 per person for the privilege of posing with him for a photograph. Second, two American soldiers died in Iraq. What with their busy fundraising schedules and all, neither Bush nor Cheney ever managed to make it to those soldiers' funerals. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale),

In the Bush Administration, incompetence is actually official: Bush's Assistant Secretary of Defense Charles Abell's masters degree is from "Columbus College," an institution known as a "diploma mill" for its practice of giving out degrees for money. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Patricia Walker's bachelor's degree is from "Pacific Western," another diploma mill. George W. Bush put people with phony credentials in charge of military policy, and the world weeps. (Source: CBS News May 10, 2004)

How bogus is George W. Bush's commitment to intellectual excellence? Jennifer Carroll, member of Bush's Commission on Presidential Scholars, had to resign after it became apparent that she "graduated" from "Kensington University," another phony diploma mill operation. For Pete's sake! (Source: CBS News May 10, 2004)

According to Vice President Dick Cheney, "Don Rumsfeld is the best secretary of defense the United States has ever had." Given the debacles of Iraq, bin Laden and Guantanamo Bay, we can only react in fear that such a deluded individual is a heartbeat away from the presidency. The best way to keep Cheney from assuming the presidency is to kick George W. Bush out of the Oval Office. (Source: Reuters May 9, 2004)

On August 26, 2003, George W. Bush visited St. Paul, Minnesota to meet in person with his largest cash contributors before collecting $1,400,000 more in contributions to his campaign. The same day, an American soldier was killed in Iraq. George W. Bush didn't take the time to attend that soldier's funeral. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

While Bush is in office, men like James Inhofe of Oklahoma are in charge of the U.S. Senate. Men like James Inhofe of Oklahoma are using the Senate to defend the Bush Administration in the wake of the use of systematic torture in Iraq. How does a Bush partisan like Inhofe respond when he learns about the torture of Iraqis under an American administration? Where is Inhofe's outrage directed?

"I'm probably not the only one up at this table that is more outraged by the outrage than we are by the treatment."

"I'm also outraged by the press."

"I am also outraged that we have so many humanitarian do-gooders right now crawling all over these prisons, looking for human rights violations."

The outrage of Senator James Inhofe -- made powerful by the presidency of George W. Bush -- is directed toward the people who uncovered acts of torture, toward the press that let the American people see images of that torture, and toward the outrage that the American people feel against acts of torture. Take a good look at those remarks, because if George W. Bush and his Republican allies stay in power, they're a vision of America to come. If we want to see a different America, these men of power must be replaced. (Source: Transcript of Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing of May 11, 2004)

What a shame that our country has fallen so far. The latest sign: George W. Bush's defenders are resorting to pointing out that at least we're better than Saddam Hussein. Can't we aspire to a higher standard than that?

On September 5, 2003, George W. Bush traveled to Indianapolis, Indiana for a gala $1,600,000 fundraiser and social session with some of the richest, most comfortable people in the United States. Over the previous five days, five American soldiers had lost their lives in Iraq. Taking a day off to go to a fundraiser was a priority; attending those soldiers' funerals wasn't on Bush's list of priorities. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

Why give Bush the boot in 2004? Because while Iraq disintegrates, the deficit mushrooms, scandals erupt, foreign leaders maintain their distance and citizens' confidence in American government withers, George W. Bush continues to sit in the Oval Office and do very little foreign or domestic policy work.

It is as if Bush is expecting things to work out as they did in his younger days, when his failing businesses would be bailed out by one of his daddy's rich pals. This time, people's lives are the cost being paid for Bush's folly.

When the Bush Administration announced in the spring of 2004 that it had provided $11.6 million for states to buy life-saving heart defibrilators, it neglected to mention that it had proposed cutting that money down to $2 million. Thanks to forward-thinking members of Congress, the defibrilators for heart-attack victims were preserved. If Bush is re-elected, we might not all be so lucky the next time he tries to push a dangerously callous budget through. (Source: New York Times May 19, 2004)

On May 13, 2004, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz conceded that the Bush Administration's rules of interrogation violated international law -- specifically, the Geneva Convention. (Source: Reuters May 13, 2004)

When George W. Bush's Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz brought a request for an additional $25 Billion in funds for the Iraq debacle, he neglected to include a provision for congressional oversight of the funds' use. That is, by the way, the Congress' constitutional mandate. When members of Congress pointed this out, Wolfowitz said he'd bring the proposal back to Bush for reworking. This begs the question: was the Bush Administration so incompetent as to not include provisions of Congressional oversight of their multi-billion-dollar spending, or were they simply dismissive of Congressional authority? Neither alternative is heartening. (Source: Reuters May 14, 2004)

On September 9, 2003, George W. Bush made time in his schedule for not one but two fundraisers in Fort Lauderdale and Jacksonvile, Florida. Bush spent the day hobnobbing with the rich and powerful while pocketing $3,000,000 for his benefit. That same day, an American soldier was killed in Iraq. George W. Bush didn't bother attending that soldier's funeral. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

The Catholic Bishop of Colorado Springs has decreed that in order for Catholics to continue to receive Communion, they cannot vote for John Kerry or any other candidate for office who supports stem-cell research or abortion rights. Don't you hate getting pushed around by puffed-up holier-than-thou zealots? November 2004 provides an opportunity to show you that you won't be bullied in the voting booth. (Source: Denver Post May 14, 2004)

The Republican Party Platform of 2000 read, "Our powerful economy gives America a unique chance to confront persistent challenges." They're right, it did. But they certainly won't be able to include that line in the Republican Party Platform of 2004. Bush had his chance to employ a powerful economy to positive ends, and he blew it. It's time for him to step off the national stage. (Source: 2000 Republican Party Platform)

The Republican Party Platform of 2000 read, "The rule of law, the very foundation for a free society, has been under assault, not only by criminals from the ground up, but also from the top down. An administration that lives by evasion, coverup, stonewalling, and duplicity has given us a totally discredited Department of Justice. The credibility of those who now manage the nation„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„676716¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì766¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„67676716¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„676736¥71¡è70„1¤760„673„1¤706¥73¡§0…16¥71¡è70„1¤760„673„1¤706¥73¡§0…1766¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§76„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥767671„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7673„1¤706¥730„3¨¬„1¤706¥730„3¨¬70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„676716¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì766¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„6767676716¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§76„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥767671„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7673„1¤706¥730„3¨¬„1¤706¥730„3¨¬70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„676716¥71¡è70„1¤760„6730„3¡ì0„3¡ì766¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„67676736¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„67673„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7673„1¤706¥730„3¨¬6¥71¡è700„30…216¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7671„1¤706¥73¡§¡§70„1¤760„6710„3¨¨766¥71¡è70„1¤760„67673„1¤760„6710„3¨¨706¥71¡è76„1¤706¥7673„1¤706¥730„3¨¬6¥71¡è700„30…217s top law enforcement agency is tragically eroded." We couldn't agree more. Just cross out "2000," put in "2004," and they've got it about right. (Source: 2000 Republican Party Platform)

On September 15, 2003, George W. Bush dedicated his time to raising more money for himself and socializing with his patrons in Philadelphia. Bush gathered $1,400,000 for himself that day. That same day, two American soldiers died in Iraq. George W. Bush didn't dedicate any time to attending their funerals. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

In their 2000 platform, the Republican Party pledged that should George W. Bush be elected, "We will reopen Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House as a symbolic expression of our confidence in the restoration of the rule of law." Pennsylvania Avenue was never reopened. How confident can we be about the rule of law in the United States of America? (Source: 2000 Republican Party Platform)

"The duties of our day are different. But the values of our nation do not change. Let us reject the blinders of isolationism, just as we refuse the crown of empire. Let us not dominate others with our power or betray them with our indifference. And let us have an American foreign policy that reflects American character. The modesty of true strength. The humility of real greatness. This is the strong heart of America. And this will be the spirit of my administration." So said George W. Bush in a Simi Valley speech on November 19, 1999. It didn't quite work out that way, did it? (Source: George W. Bush, "A Distinctly American Internationalism," Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, Simi Valley, California, November 19, 1999)

"The arrogance, inconsistency, and unreliability of the administration's diplomacy have undermined American alliances, alienated friends, and emboldened our adversaries." That's what the Republican Party says in their party platform. Sure, they said it in 2000, but they were right. They just didn't know they were making a prediction. (Source: 2000 Republican Party Platform)

On September 30, 2003, George W. Bush spent his day attending two gala fundraisers -- for charity? for international peacekeeping? Of course not. The fundraisers George W. Bush attended, one in Chicago and one in Cincinnati, were for himself. And what a goodie bag Bush got to take home with him from those events: a warchest stashed with $5.3 million for himself. That same day, an American soldier lost his life in Iraq. The next day, three more died. Although George W. Bush had no problem taking a day off from the presidency to collect money from wealthy, beaming admireres at fancy functions, he decided he didn't have a few hours to spare to attend the funerals of these soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice for his failed foreign policy. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

In May 2004, George W. Bush's Justice Department announced to great fanfare that they would allocate $47 million for a program to hiring of police officers at the local level. This money was already in the 2004 budget, and so of course it would be spent. What the Bush Administration didn't mention was that its new budget for 2005 proposed CUTTING that same program for hiring police officers by 87 PERCENT. (Source: New York Times May 19, 2004)

The International Brotherhood of Police Officers, which endorsed George W. Bush in the 2000 election, is endorsing John Kerry in the 2004 election. "After three and a half years of disappointing leadership under George Bush, we need to change course in November and elect a president with a real record of supporting police officers and a lifetime of standing with law enforcement," said David Holway, President of the Brotherhood of Police Offices. (Source: Associated Press May 14, 2004)

George W. Bush has helpfully explained why he doesn't read newspapers or even watch the nightly news on television: "I like to have a clear outlook. It can be a frustrating experience to pay attention to somebody's false opinion or somebody's characterisation, which simply isn't true." Yes, exposure to other points of view can pose a pesky problem for one's clarity. It might even change one's mind. Thank goodness Mr. Bush avoids that problem. (Source: Washington Times May 11, 2004)

Speaking of clarity, we do need to clarify the unfairly broad statement that George W. Bush doesn't read newspapers. You see, says White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, "He does not dwell on the newspaper, but he reads the sports page every day." The sports pages! Oh, well then. That's different. Thank goodness we have a president who's familiar with earned run averages in the American AND National Leagues. (Source: Washington Times May 11, 2004)

On October 15, 2003, George W. Bush travelled to California to collect more money -- $1,750,000 of it -- for himself at two separate events. The next day, an American soldier was killed in Iraq. That soldier sacrificed his life for George W. Bush's war, but George W. Bush couldn't be bothered to sacrifice a few hours to spare to his funeral. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

Although George W. Bush does not read articles in the newspaper, Laura Bush does. Good for you, Mrs. Bush! She tells her husband all about her opinion on the stories she thinks are important. "Frequently," says White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, "I find that his reaction kind of reflects Laura Bush's take." Do we have an independent thinker as a president? Er, nope. Feeling comfortable yet? (Source: Washington Times May 11, 2004)

Now Donald Rumsfeld has trotted himself out in front of the cameras to declare "I've stopped reading the newspapers." Exactly who in this White House exposes himself or herself to outside information and opposing viewpoints any more? OK, besides Laura Bush... (Source: Los Angeles Times May 13, 2004)

In an interview with the New York Times on January 14, 2001, George W. Bush claimed to know the reason for the California power crisis: "The California crunch really is the result of not enough power-generating plants and then not enough power to power the power of generating plants." Sure, Dubya tripped over his tongue when trying to get his sound bite out there. But he also was dead wrong. Enron was causing the crisis by restricting California's access to otherwise readily-available power.

Why did Bush make this claim when he obviously had no clue what he was talking about? By spouting the Enron line, Bush helped energy corporations extend their sham of a scam, costing energy consumers countless dollars in unnecessarily higher utility bills. (Sources: New York Times January 14, 2001; CBS News June 1, 2004)

White House legal counsel Alberto Gonzales wrote the following in a memo on the Geneva Convention in the light of Bush's War On Terror: "In my judgment, this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions."

When the lawyer in the White House suggests international law is obsolete, you know there's moral rot in the administration. (Source: Associated Press May 17, 2004)

On October 24, 2003, George W. Bush visited sunny Hawaii to get more money for himself. The scheme: if you give George W. Bush $20,000.00, you can pose for a photo with him. That day, three American soldiers were killed in Iraq. In George W. Bush's ethical universe, not one of those soldiers merited his attendance at their funeral. Mr. Bush had other priorities. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

Bush said it in a White House press conference on October 28: "Right now, I'm -- yes, no question, I'm going out to our friends and supporters and saying, would you mind contributing to the campaign for the year '04? To me, that's -- and that's a part of politics, no question about it. And as you know, these are open forums, you're able to come and listen to what I have to say."

If charging a large contribution as an admission ticket for a set of people who already support George W. Bush to gather in a room together so they can listen to what he has to say qualifies as an open forum, then I qualify as a monkey's uncle.

It's statements like these that make it clear: Bush wouldn't know democracy if it ran up to him with bells on and slapped him upside the head with a ballot box.

Secretary of State Colin Powell has revealed that "all the Principals" in the Bush Administration knew about the abuses in Abu Ghraib prison -- in the fall of 2003. The Administration just sat on the story. (Source: Associated Press May 17, 2004)

Pentagon officials have confirmed that the United States is planning to reduce its troop strength on the Korean peninsula by more than 10% so it can move soldiers to the active war zone of Iraq. Thanks to George W. Bush, important projects of military defense are taking a backseat to his war of choice, leaving millions more less safe from the nuclear North. (Source: Associated Press May 17, 2004)

In April of 2003, George W. Bush travelled to Canton, Ohio's Timken Co. to give a speech touting the benefits of his tax-cutting plan for companies like Timken.

In May of 2004, Timken Co. announced it would close three of its plants in Canton and lay off 1,300 workers. (Source: Cleveland Plain Dealer May 15, 2004)

On October 30, 2003, George W. Bush jetted around the country in pursuit of cash, visiting with only the richest, most giving citizens of Columbus, Ohio and San Antonio, Texas. On that day alone, Bush hauled in $2,650,000 for himself. The next day, another American soldier was killed in Iraq. Bush didn't bother himself with the duty of attending that soldier's funeral -- he says he just didn't have the time. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

How incapable is George W. Bush of accepting criticism? The one time in her life that his wife made a critical comment about one of his speeches, he drove his car into the wall of a garage. (Source: Reuters May 19, 2004)

Bush said it! "The legislature's job is to write law. It's the executive branch's job to interpret law." Sigh. (Source: New York Times November 23, 2000)

On April 9, 2004, George W. Bush invited the host of a fishing show on cable TV to go fishing with him on a pond in Crawford, Texas stocked full of fish just for him. This was the day seventeen American soldiers were killed in action in Iraq. Did Bush find time to go fishing? Yes, by all means. Did Bush find time for those soldiers' funerals? No, of course not. (Source: New York Times April 12, 2004)

On November 3, 2003, George W. Bush visited with his wealthiest supporters in Birmingham, Alabama, who sent him back to Washington, DC with $1,850,000 in campaign contributions. That same day, an American soldier died under hostile fire in Iraq. The day before, sixteen American soldiers were killed in Iraq. Did George W. Bush cease his fundraising activities to attend their funerals? Of course not. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

Why Boot Bush? Barb writes in: "Because Bush supporters think arrogance and bullying is a sign of strong leadership rather than sign of a weak character.

Bushies have no understanding that it takes more courage/character to know when to walk away from a fight than to engage in one. Give me a Kenny Rogers 'Coward of the County' over a Bush any day!"

Barb hit the nail on the head with that one. To go to war is the simple answer. To seek peaceful solutions to problems takes patience, creativity and hard work. George W. Bush was too much of a coward to confront that challenge -- so he took the way out that was easiest for him and hardest for others.

When George W. Bush's Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson announced in 2004 that his department would award $11.7 million to help states provide health-insurance for poor Americans, he neglected to mention that George W. Bush had tried for three years to completely eliminate that program. Fortunately, in each of those three years Bush failed in his efforts to cut health insurance, thanks to progressive members of Congress. But can we afford to give Bush another chance at his scheme? (Source: New York Times May 19, 2004)

In April of 2004, Secretary Thompson publicly trumpeted the release of millions of dollars from a congressionally-mandated grant program to improve health care in rural areas as evidence of George W. Bush's compassionate priorities. What Thompson forgot to say was that George W. Bush's proposed budget for 2005 would cut that same program by 72 percent. (Source: New York Times May 19, 2004)

Also in the Spring of 2004, Secretary Thompson praised $16 million in congressionally-mandated funds the Bush Administration was releasing for the training of Black and Hispanic medical professionals. Secretary Thompson conveniently left out the fact that in his 2005 budget, George W. Bush proposes eliminating these funds entirely. (Source: New York Times May 19, 2004)

On November 7, 2003, George W. Bush took the day to travel to Winston-Salem, North Carolina, where a room full of special friends threw him a party and sent him home with a goodie bag of $1,100,000 in cold, hard money. That same day, seven American soldiers died under hostile fire in Iraq. Bush didn't bother to attend their funerals -- that would have been too much work. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

Why Boot Bush? Because in the space of a year, he has taken the nation from asking questions like "Is pre-emptive war an ethical choice?" to questions like "Is that mud or shit covering the prisoner in that photo?"

George W. Bush likes to say he's on the side of small business owners. If that's true, why does his administration's 2006 budget proposal call for funding of the Small Business Administration to be cut? How exactly does that help small business owners? (Source: Washington Post May 27, 2004)

The Republican Party Platform of 2000 declared that "A new Republican administration will patiently rebuild an international coalition opposed to Saddam Hussein and committed to joint action." Um, yeah, right. Just strike the "patiently," "rebuild," "international," "coalition," and "joint" parts. (Source: 2000 Republican Party Platform)

On May 14, 2004, George W. Bush took time from his schedule of presidential duties to visit Bridgeton, Missouri for a fundraiser featuring Rolls-Royces on prominent display. To obtain the privilege of meeting with Bush, attendees were required to have funneled $25,000 to Bush, ensuring that only the most flush could get close to the president. The result: only 90 people in attendance brought $2.2 million in gift money for Bush. Bush was clearly pleased by this, exulting that "We have done extremely well with a few people. This is the way we like to do it in politics."

If this is not the way you like things to be done in politics, then George W. Bush is not your man. (Source: Washington Post May 15, 2004)

On the same day George W. Bush gathered his multi-million-dollar gifts from this Rolls-Royce crowd, four American soldiers lost their lives in Iraq. Mr. Bush is not planning on attending their funerals. (Source: Iraq Coalition Body Count)

George W. Bush keeps telling everybody he knows that character is important. So what kind of character does Bush have? When he was a kid, he put firecrackers in live frogs and blew them up for fun. (Source: New York Times May 21, 2000)

What's worse than abandoning your own daughter's college graduation to take a bike ride? Abandoning you daughter's college graduation to take a bike ride, and then falling off the bike. That's exactly what George W. Bush did on May 22, and we can take that as a metaphor for his entire Presidency. Mr. Bush, if you can't ride the bicycle, get off.(Source: Reuters, May 23, 2004)

In the meantime that day, another American soldier was killed in an attack on a tank in Iraq. Bush won't be attending that soldier's funeral. Perhaps he'll be on another recreational bike ride. (Sources: Associated Press May 22, 2004, Iraq Coalition Body Count)

Remember in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, when investigators found out that the bomb was made of ammonium nitrate fertilizer? And everybody was like, well, we should keep a tighter lid on ammonium nitrate and/or modify it chemically so it's harder to make a bomb out of. Surely after 9/11, this became an even more urgent priority. Right?

Bzzzz! Wrong, thanks for playing. While they've moved quickly to establish systems to usher me behind a curtain, feel me up and peek in my shoes every time I want to fly somewhere (and presumably no longer say "hey, you two known Al Qaeda associates and your friends have fun on that plane with your box cutters. Sorry there's no air marshal on board--be good!"), they have done absolutely nothing to prevent a few nuts from mixing up tons of ammonium nitrate and diesel fuel (which yields an explosive half as strong as dynamite) in a barn someplace, trucking it into a city, and blowing it up.

Why has Bush's so-called "war on terror" not involved taking any steps whatsoever to prevent a repeat of the second worst terrorist attack in American history? Well, partly because Bush and his Keystone Cop administration are, collectively, dumber than bricks. But that's not the whole story. Seems farmers and fertilizer industry lobbyists are against controlling ammonium nitrate, because limitations would be too much of a hassle. (Source: USA Today May 10, 2004)

So let's get this straight: the same administration that has sent 800 Americans to die on a wild goose chase after weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has done nothing to prevent someone from easily creating a massive bomb right here in the United States, because some lobbyist for the super-powerful fertilizer industry thinks it would be a hassle? Where I'm from, we call that kind of political fertilizer bullshit. How's about we elect ourselves a government that's more willing to hassle a lobbyist to prevent another major terrorist attack on American soil, and less willing to pour hundreds of young American lives into a quagmire that protects us from fabricated threats?

George W. Bush cannot handle the give and take of real diplomacy, because George W. Bush cannot bear to listen to others. George W. Bush's "meeting" on May 14, 2004 with the foreign ministers of eight large industrialized nations consisted of walking into the room, giving a speech for eight minutes, taking no questions, and walking out the door. (Source: New York Times May 24, 2004)

Bush said it! "They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some kind of federal program." Well, um, it is. (Source: Chicago Sun-Times November 06, 2000)

George W. Bush likes to refer to himself as the Education President, but he sure has a funny way of showing it. I think an Education President wouldn't cut the budget for the Department of Education by $1.5 Billion, but that's just what Bush's 2006 budget proposal calls for. (Source: Washington Post May 27, 2004)

On November 10, 2003, George W. Bush took the day to travel to two fundraisers in South Carolina and Arkansas, where he basked in the applause of wealthy supporters of his campaign. Those wealthy supporters showed their thanks for Mr. Bush's attention with $2,100,000 in cold, hard campaign contributions. The next day, two American soldiers were killed in Iraq. Bush didn't manage to attend their funerals. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

You know that George W. Bush must be doing an awful job when prominent Republican politicians are criticizing him in an election year. Senator Lincoln Chafee has come out of the shadow of Mr. Bush to say, "The president talked about being humble when he was running for office, but the opposite seems to be true." (Source: New York Times May 24, 2004)

Until George W. Bush became president, the White House released an annual report entitled "Equal Pay Matters" that tracked changes in the pay gap between women and men in the United States. George W. Bush put an end to that publication. (Source: The Village Voice March 12, 2003)

They say that people who mistreat animals as children grow up to become sadists as adults. Well, what about people who torment animals as adults?

It turns out that George W. Bush is one of those sadistic adults who derive pleasure from picking on animals. It's not just any animals that Bush bothers either. Bush gets his jollies from picking on endangered species.

In just the latest in a series of attacks against endangered species, George W. Bush is taking pot shots at the gray wolf, which once roamed almost the entire continental United States, but now is restricted to a few tiny scraps of land where small packs barely hang on. Now, after decades of decline, a tiny number of gray wolves might be returning from Canada to the great Northern Forest of New England.

Just as this small bit of progress is taking place, George W. Bush has introduced an administrative act called the Wolf Rule, which would remove protections from the endangered gray wolf. Under Bush's plan, gray wolves could be slaughtered all over again, and their habitat could be destroyed with impunity.

Picking on an endangered species of animal is like picking on the smallest kid in your class at school. It's just plain mean. I don't want someone this mean to be my president any longer.(Source, National Wildlife Federation, May, 2004)

Bush said it! "I am a person who recognizes the fallacy of humans." (Source: New York Daily News September 20, 2000)

On November 13, 2003, George W. Bush took a trip to sunny Florida, where he hobnobbed with the rich and conservative at two fundraisers. No, these weren't fundraisers for kids with AIDS or for inner-city libraries or for body armour for the under-supplied troops. These were fundraisers for George W. Bush himself, and he used the day to good effect for himself, walking away with $2,560,000. Also that day, two American soldiers died in Iraq. Bush didn't go to their funerals. He had other priorities. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

Don't just watch what Bush says. Watch what he does. George W. Bush likes to pretend that he's on the side of American soldiers. But his 2006 budget proposal calls for cuts of $910 Million from Veterans' services. How dare George W. Bush accuse other people of being unpatriotic when he tries shady maneuvers like this. (Source: Washington Post May 27, 2004)

George W. Bush likes to call himself "compassionate." How is it that a compassionate man would go about trying to cut the funding for the Women, Infants and Children nutrition program? That's just what his 2006 budget proposal calls for. WIC, as it's popularly called, helps make sure that nursing mothers and growing kids have enough food so that the next generation doesn't grow up stunted.

Heck, you don't even have to be compassionate to support this program; any fool can realize that every dollar invested in helping children grow up without developmental delays from improper nutrition will lead to hundreds if not thousands of dollars in increased adult productivity, and will prevent hundreds if not thousands of dollars from being spent on taking care of sick and stunted adults. Even George W. Bush must know this. Cutting the Women, Infants and Children nutrition? That's not "compassionate," and it's not smart. It's stupid and mean. Let George W. Bush go be stupid and mean to waiters in Kennebunkport, but it's just not called for in our White House. (Source: Washington Post May 27, 2004)

Even in George W. Bush's supposed area of strength, domestic security (sorry, I just can't bear to use the phrase "Homeland Security" -- it's so Reich-like), his actions belie his words. Mr. Bush's budget plans for 2006 are to cut domestic security funding by $1 Billion. (Source: Washington Post May 27, 2004)

On November 25, 2003, George W. Bush went out west for two fundraisers in Phoenix and Las Vegas, socializing with wealthy Republican party types in exchange for $3,000,000. The next day, an American soldier died in Iraq. Bush didn't go to his funeral to honor his sacrifice. He had other obligations to fulfill. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

When George W. Bush visited Baton Rouge, Louisiana on May 21, 2004, citizens of that city who were pro-Bush were permitted to stand on the curb and wave their supportive signs as Bush passed in his motorcade. Citizens of Baton Rouge who carried anti-Bush signs were roped off 100 feet away from the street behind an oak tree.

Ward Reilly, a veteran who attended that day, pointed out that security doesn't explain this action; any assassin with an IQ above 75 would simply carry a pro-Bush sign to the rally to get closer. So what is the reasonable explanation in this land of liberty? I'm still waiting to hear it. (Source: Baltimore Chronicle and Sentinel May 27, 2004)

Bush said it! "We don't believe in planners and deciders making the decisions on behalf of Americans." What does a presidential administration do, if not to plan and make decisions on behalf of Americans? We unfortunately got the answer to that question with the administration of George W. Bush. (Source: The Independent of London October 3, 2000)

Only under the administration of George W. Bush would a new prime minister of Iraq be selected who is best known for being funded by the CIA. (Source: New York Times May 28, 2004)

The Bush Administration delivered a multi-billion dollar contract for defense of our national borders to Accenture, a company called Andersen Consulting before its name was tarnished in ethics scandals. The irony: Accenture has used the leakiness of American borders to its advantage, relocating its corporate headquarters to Bermuda to avoid paying taxes in the United States.

Paying money to an ethically-challenged, tax-dodging megacorporation? All in a day's work for the Bush Administration. (Source: New York Times June 2, 2004)

On December 1, 2003, George W. Bush devoted his day to two fundraisers in two different states, devoting hours of travel time to spend yet more hours of face time, giving rich Americans the glow of meeting with him in exchange for $1,750,000. That day, an American soldier was killed in Iraq. Bush didn't devote a minute to attending that soldier's funeral. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

Even the mayor of Crawford, Texas thinks it's time for George W. Bush to go, saying "I don't see where I'm better off than I was four years ago. I don't see where the city is any better off." (Source: Dallas Morning News June 1, 2004)

Bush said it! "I do know I'm ready for the job. And, if not, that's just the way it goes." And that is just the way it went. (Source: Chicago Sun-Times August 22, 2000)

George W. Bush's campaign sent out an e-mail encouraging his supporters to use their religious congregations' infrastructure to distribute literature in support of Bush's re-election. But as part of the deal under which religious congregations don't have to pay any taxes, it is illegal for congregations to participate in partisan political activities. Law, schmaw? It's just another day in George W. Bush's America. (Source: New York Times June 3, 2004)

Whenever I flip on the television to watch a member of the Bush Administration responding to questions, I can't decide whether I'm being spoken to as if I am a dog ("Sit down. Shut Up. Good Dog. Here's a Biscuit.") or a child ("If you knew what we knew, you'd know that what we know to do is the right thing. You know? No, you don't. So sit down, shut up, and have a biscuit.").

Trust, trust, trust. The Bush Administration is always telling the American people to just trust them. As we've seen, when they're telling us to trust them we usually shouldn't.

Now the shoe is on the other foot. For years, Ahmad Chalabi beseeched the Bush Administration to trust him -- to trust his fake intelligence, to trust him with Saddam Hussein's secret files, to trust his confidence when being given secret information. Then it turned out that Chalabi was telling the United States lies while feeding intelligence to the Iranians. The Bush Administration, through its gullibility, allowed grevious damage to America's security to occur. (Source: St. Petersburg Times June 3, 2004)

On December 2, 2003, George W. Bush hopped on a plane to personally thank his benefactors for contributing $850,000.00 to his personal campaign for re-election. That day, three American soldiers lost their lives, paying the ultimate sacrifice for George W. Bush's vision of war in Iraq. Bush decided not to visit those funerals -- the deaths of these soldiers for Bush's sake didn't merit a trip. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

George W. Bush promised when he was running for president that he would fully fund a program called LIHEAP, a program to help poor people pay the cost of heating during the cold winter months. But George W. Bush's 2004 budget actually slashed funding for the LIHEAP program by 18 percent. By breaking this promise, Bush not only sacrificed his integrity, he changed policy to put poor people in danger during a bone-chillingly cold winter season. (Source: Boston Globe January 15, 2003)

In May of 2004, National Journal sought out the opinions of 12 economists known for their apolitical approach and distinguished in their fields. Asking them to grade George W. Bush for his approach to long-term fiscal policy, the economists gave Mr. Bush an average of D+, rating his performance as "somewhere between a catastrophe and a calamity." (Source: National Journal May 17, 2004)

In a speech on May 24, 2004, George W. Bush announced his solution for the problem of Americans torturing Iraqis in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison: he would demolish Abu Ghraib prison and build a new prison in its place. This "solution" is not a solution at all, for it assigns guilt to a building rather than to the behavior of people inside the building. The walls, bars and doors of Abu Ghraib did not engage torture: Americans sent there by George W. Bush did. Any real solution to the problem of Americans torturing Iraqis must address the behavior of individuals controlling the prison. Rather than tackle that politicially inconvenient issue, George W. Bush wants to knock down a few walls, put up new walls in their place, slap some paint on them, and call the issue resolved. (Source: Associated Press May 25, 2004)

If you think the Bush Administration's Orwellian Total Information Awareness program was cancelled, you're nominally correct. But substantively speaking, TIA has not only survived but proliferated under Bush's watch. The General Accounting Office has found that now more than one hundred programs exist in federal agencies to collect and analyze your personal information for pre-emptive purposes. (Source: New York Times May 27, 2004)

In a rare moment of lucidity, George W. Bush addressed his well-to-do audience at a dinner with the following words: "This is an impressive crowd: the haves and the have-mores. Some people call you the elite. I call you my base." (Source: Al Smith Memorial Dinner, October 19, 2000)

Yet another promise broken by George W. Bush: When campaigning for election in 2000, George W. Bush pledged to fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund at the level of $900 million a year mandated by the U.S. Congress. But George W. Bush's 2005 budget only provided $314 million. (Source: New York Times February 11, 2004)

On December 5, 2003, George W. Bush devoted his time to two fundraisers in two different states, spending a day he could have devoted to his official duties criss-crossing the country in order to personally thank a small number of rich Americans who had given him over a million dollars. Also that day, an American soldier was killed in Iraq. Bush didn't set aside any time to attend that soldier's funeral and give him the honor he was due. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

In 2000, George W. Bush promised to completely eliminate the $4.9 Billion backlog of maintenance orders at the National Park Service. In a declaration of National Park Week in April 2004, he still tauted that campaign promise. But in a report to Congress on September 27, 2003, the General Accounting Office estimates that the backlog of maintenance orders at the National Park Service has surpassed $5 Billion. (Sources: Presidential Proclamation of National Park Week, April 16, 2004; Statement of Barry T. Hill, Director Natural Resources and Environment, before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands, September 27, 2003)

In a report drafted for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in the final days before the invasion of Iraq, Bush Administration lawyers were tasked with developing justifications of the use of torture. The report rings with enabling passages such as "In order to respect the president's inherent constitutional authority to manage a military campaign . . . (the prohibition against torture) must be construed as inapplicable to interrogations undertaken pursuant to his commander-in chief authority." The parenthetical comment is in the original report.

Another bon mot in the Bush Administration document: "Sometimes the greater good for society will be accomplished by violating the literal language of the criminal law.... Without a clear statement otherwise, criminal statutes are not read as infringing on the president's ultimate authority." In other words, it's OK for the President to break the law.

Donald Rumsfeld classified the resulting document, which provided a specific list of defensible techniques, making the final version of the report unavailable to the American public until 2013.

Justify torture. Put the president above the law. Hide it from the public. Haven't we had enough of this sort of amoral leadership? (Source: Wall Street Journal June 7, 2004)

Even as we find more links in the chain going from the torture by Americans in Iraq, George W. Bush continues to say, "we followed the law". On the morning of June 12, 2004 we learn that Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez gave an order to allow American soldiers to abuse prisoners at Abu Ghraib whenever they wanted, using a list of techniques, even when prisoners were not suspected of any crime.

Where, oh where, did Sanchez get this list? Why, he got it from the prison at Guantanamo. Where, oh where, did the people in charge of prisoners at Guantanamo get the list? Why, they got it from the Bush Administration.

Few bad apples, my orchard! The decision to use torture came from Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and all the rest of that rotten crew. That's not following the law, Mr. Bush. The law clearly states that no one hired by the American government can use any kind of torture. Maybe it's time you spend time as a prisoner. (Source: Reuters June 12, 2004)

On December 11, 2003, George W. Bush spent time in Virginia rubbing elbows with the rich, powerful and conservative as they delivered another million dollars to his re-election campaign. Also that day, an American soldier was killed in Ramadi, Iraq by a car bomb. Bush had enough time to thank his fat-cat contributors for giving him money, but he apparently didn't have enough time to attend this soldier's funeral in thanks for his sacrifice. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

In yet more evidence that the Bush Administration can't handle the law, the General Accounting Office has concluded that the Bush Administration illegaly stretched definitions of a certain corporation's original contract in Iraq in order to award new funds to that corporation on a no-bid basis. That certain corporation: a subsidy of Dick Cheney's old firm, Halliburton. (Source: Reuters June 14, 2004)

A group of 26 former U.S. diplomats and military commanders, including both Republicans and Democrats, none of whom have prominently criticized George W. Bush before, have issued a joint statement calling for Bush to be removed from office in the November 2004 elections. According to these high-ranking officials, George W. Bush's term in office has endangered the United States, not protected it. (Source: Reuters June 14, 2004)

When the Bush Administration released its "Patterns of Global Terrorism" report on April 29, 2004, it made great political hay out of the report's conclusion that terrorist activity had declined in 2003 compared to 2002. The Bush Administration used the report's numbers to claim that it was progressing in the "War on Terror." The problem is, it turns out that terrorist activity actually increased from 2002 to 2003. The Bush Administration didn't get its count right in the first place.

If we can't trust the Bush Administration to keep account of trends in what it says is its number one policy priority, how can we trust the Bush Administration with anything? (Source: Los Angeles Times June 14, 2004)

On January 5, 2004 George W. Bush jetted to Missouri to spend time with the few, the proud, the filthy rich who managed to scrape together a whopping $2,800,000 for him. In the meantime that day, an American soldier died from injuries sustained under hostile fire in Iraq. George W. Bush didn't attend his funeral, because he says he just doesn't have the time. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

If America is safer from terrorists thanks to George W. Bush's war in Iraq, then why has Bush's Department of State recommended that for their safety, all Americans need to evacuate Saudi Arabia as quickly as possible? (Source: Associated Press June 14, 2004)

The number of people visiting food banks in Ohio has increased during each year of George W. Bush's administration. Also on the rise in Ohio is enrollment in the food stamp program. Eric Bost, tapped by George W. Bush to run federal food programs for the poor, says that the rise is "due to people taking the easy way out." Bost's attitude underlines the lack not only of compassion but of basic understanding in the Bush Administration of how hard it has become to get by. (Source: Associated Press June 6, 2004)

If the Bush Administration's war in Iraq is to successfully resolve itself into a world-sanctioned transition to real sovereignty, it is crucial that the military force in Iraq be expanded beyond the overwhelmingly American force currently in the country. After a year of unsuccessfully pursuing the "go-it-alone" strategy, George W. Bush tried his hand at persuading France and Germany to commit troops to Iraq during the G-8 summit in early June of 2004. But persuasion doesn't work when it follows blatant bullying, as Bush found out: France and Germany declined Bush's clumsy effort at diplomacy. The transition in Iraq will unfortunately be more dangerous as a result. We need a real diplomat in the White House, not someone who realizes its value too late. (Source: Bloomberg News June 15, 2004)

In a climate tolerant of authoritarian abuse, intelligence agents of the United States Army asserted the right (and succeeded in their effort earlier this year) to question students at the University of Texas who were asking "suspicious" questions at a conference there on Islamic law.

The response of any sane presidential administration would be to condemn such dangerous expansion of Army power into surveillance of and control over citizens' lives. Haven't there been enough brutal dictatorships to show us the folly of that path?

The Bush administration, of course, did not follow the path of sanity. Instead, it responded by slipping language into a Senate bill that would give Military Intelligence sweeping new authority to watch over and intervene in the lives of law-abiding citizens right here in the United States. (Source: Newsweek June 21, 2004)

How nuts is the Bush Administration? It has reclassified frozen french fries as "fresh vegetables" under the law. (Source: South Florida Sun-Sentinel June 15, 2004)

Bush said it! "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family." (Source: Ottawa Citizen March 9, 2000)

On January 8, 2004 George W. Bush crisscrossed the South in multiple fundraisers to pick up $2,500,000 in contributions to his campaign. While he gathered his dough, he stopped to smell the lettuce and spent some special time with those who give him so much money. While George W. Bush was having fun that day speaking to audiences made up of only those who like him already, collecting other people's money to use for his own benefit, nine members of the U.S. military were killed in Iraq. Although they died carrying out his wishes, George W. Bush has decided their sacrifice wasn't important enough to merit even a brief appearance at their funerals. His fatcat contributors, however, get loads of face time. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

John Kerry says that going to Mars (George W. Bush's underfunded big idea) is much less important than finding ways to affordably and reliably move payloads and people into low Earth orbit, where they can conduct inexpensive science, bolster communications infrastructure and build platforms for future exploration. And he's right. While Bush's space plan is largely symbolic and yields few long-term benefits, it requires a large budget. Kerry's space plan is focused on a number of achievable goals, each of which is budgetarily feasible and leads to the cumulation of knowledge and capability. While Bush has loudly proclaimed his intention to play space cowboy, John Kerry has quietly developed a solid and reasonable plan for making realistic progress. That's the kind of leadership we need both in space and on the ground. (Source: Space News June 16, 2004)

Mistakes are made during every presidency, although some presidents make more mistakes than others, as George W. Bush has so ineptly demonstrated. The key to America's growth has been the nation's courage to collectively recognize its own mistakes, learn from those mistakes, and commit to positive changes to ensure that such mistakes are prevented in the future.

George W. Bush might hypothetically be able to rescue the disaster of his presidency if he were to recognize the multitude of mistakes his administration has made by commission and omission and then dedicate himself to their rectification. But neither Bush nor any member of his administration (with the notably late exception of Colin Powell) has been willing to even take the first step of recognizing that mistakes have been made.

Yes, this is a personal failing of Bush and his cabinet members. But more importantly, it is a problem for the country. In order for us to move forward, we're going to have to come to terms with the gravity of our collective missteps. With their arrogant disconnection from reality, Bush and his advisors are holding us back in this regard. If they won't move beyond their own petty egos and take ownership of their problems, the least Bush and his advisors can do is step aside and get out of the way.

If you need more evidence that in the torture scandal, the rot went all the way to the top, mull over this:

It has now been revealed that Bush's Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, personally ordered a detainee to be hidden from visiting Red Cross inspectors investigating the treatment of prisoners, and to be taken off the official rolls.

Torture. Hide. Cover-up. Deny. Repeat. Aren't you tired of this kind of shell-game ethics? (Source: New York Times June 17, 2004)

When Bush Administration member Donald Rumsfeld admitted on June 17 that he had personally ordered a prisoner to be hidden from Red Cross inspectors, he in effect admitted that he had ordered an action that is in contravention of the Geneva Conventions, since such an action is a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.

However, Rumsfeld offered the following testimony in a side remark to a Defense Department Official before the Senate -- under oath -- on May 13, 2004: "Any instructions that have been issued or anything that's been authorized by the department was checked by the lawyers in your shop, in the department, in the office of the Secretary of Defense, and deemed to be consistent with the Geneva Conventions."

So there you have it, folks. There are two alternatives: either the Bush Administration has hired lawyers for the Defense Department that are so incredibly inept that they cannot spot a clear violation of the Geneva Convention, or Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has lied to Congress under oath. Neither alternative inspires confidence, to say the least. (Sources: New York Times June 17, 2004; Online Newshour with Jim Lehrer May 13, 2004)

On January 15, 2004 George W. Bush crisscrossed the South again, devoting an extended luncheon and an extended dinner to those who had given him so much -- $2,300,000, to be exact. Over the next two days, four servicemembers of the U.S. military died in Iraq, following Bush's orders of deployment. George W. Bush decided he had time for those ritzy fundraisers, but that he didn't have time to attend the funerals of those who had lost their lives in his name. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

The Bush Administration is so slipshod in its approach to finding quality candidates for the federal bench that it nominated a man for the federal appeals court who practiced law in Utah without a license for four years, and who before that practiced law in Washington, DC without a license for another three years. (Source: Washington Post June 21, 2004)

For years now, the Bush Administration has defended its use of extra-Constitutional methods of torture against prisoners at its Guantanamo Bay facility by characterizing its prisoners there as high-level detainees guilty of the most serious crimes -- "the worst of a very bad lot," according to Vice President Dick Cheney.

In interviews, however, leading officials in the military, intelligence and police spheres have reported that "none of the detainees at the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay ranked as leaders or senior operatives of Al Qaeda," and that at most no more that 4 percent of the detainees were members of Al Qaeda at all. (Source: New York Times June 21, 2004)

So, OK, George W. Bush's first justification of the war in Iraq -- that Hussein had big caches of Weapons of Mass Destruction -- turned out to be untrue. And so, OK, George W. Bush's second justification of the war in Iraq -- that Iraq and Al Qaeda were collaborators in a campaign of Terror -- also turned out to be untrue.

But hey, we still have George W. Bush's third justification of the war in Iraq -- that we'll turn Iraq into a shining example of Liberated Democracy and Human Rights for the rest of the Middle East to emulate -- right? Right?

Well, no. Bush's new puppet government in Iraq has announced that it is inclined to impose martial law and apply rules of a state of emergency in which the freedom of speech, the freedom of movement, the freedom of assembly and the freedom to engage in acts of peaceful dissent against the puppet government will be curtailed.

So now we'll have to wait to find out what George W. Bush's next justification for going to war will be. (Source: New York Times June 21, 2004)

George W. Bush claims that he has the support of the soldiers in Iraq. Why, then, were books by anti-Bush writer Michael Moore the most requested of all non-fiction titles through, a service that helps soldiers in Iraq get reading material? (Source: Washington Observer-Reporter April 13, 2004)

In order to feed George W. Bush's appetite for war, American soldiers are being siphoned away from places like Europe and the Korean Peninsula where they play an important and largely non-violent role as a deterrent force against invasion or destabilization.

On top of that, soldiers who were promised that they would be able to go home from Iraq after six months had that promise revoked and replaced with a pledge to send them home after a year. But even that wasn't enough to fill George W. Bush's appetite for war, so that new pledge was revoked, too. Now soldiers are facing indefinite tours of duty, making continued sacrifice for an increasingly questionable foreign policy.

And so it is with America's military forces stretched thin like never before, with America's soldiers overdeployed, undersupplied and exhausted, that the Bush Administration has kicked 2,882 servicemembers out of the military for the offense of...being gay.

Well, that'll fix things! (Source: Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military)

On January 29, 2004 George W. Bush took a jaunt over to Greenwich, Connecticut to personally thank his financial backers for delivering $1.1 million in campaign funds. Two soldiers died that day as well, but as their coffins slipped quietly back to their final resting place in the United States under a media blackout, Bush decided not to bother attending their funerals. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

A top U.S. intelligence official is releasing a pseudonymously authored new book this month in which he reports that Al Qaeda is stronger since 2001, not weaker. The blame for this development, he writes, falls on the shoulders of the Bush Administration, which has moved its emphasis from combatting Al Qaeda to propping up a wobbly Iraq. And so you have it from a guy who is in the know. (Source: The Guardian June 19, 2004)

48 Nobel Prize-winning scientists have banded together to endorse John Kerry over George W. Bush in the 2004 election season. These leading scientists argue that "unlike previous administrations, Republican and Democratic alike, the Bush administration has ignored unbiased scientific advice in the policy-making that is so important to our collective welfare." And so you have it from more experts in their field. (Source: Seattle Post-Intelligencer June 22, 2004)

George W. Bush's Attorney General John Ashcroft has such strong religious blinkers on that his treatment of security threats seems to be shaded by the religion of those engaged in the threat. Ashcroft has indefinitely detained one Muslim man without charges, access to a lawyer, or a right to a trial. This man, Jose Padilla, has been the subject of several high-profile news conferences declaring him to be a dangerous enough terrorist to deprive him of his consitutional rights as a citizen even though he had no destructive materials and not even a plan to figure out how to obtain any destructive materials.

Meanwhile, a conservative Christian white supremacist named William Joseph Krar was arrested in Noonday, Texas with 60 pipe bombs, other remote-controlled explosives and a cyanide bomb large enough "to kill everyone inside a 30,000 square foot building." Here's a terrorist with a plan and chemical weapons at the ready inside U.S. borders. Yet Ashcroft and his Justice Department have been mum about Krar, not uttering one public word about the case. And Krar kept his constitutional rights during his barely-covered trial.

What's with the double standard? (Sources: United Press International March 14, 2004; New York Times June 22, 2004)

Eight years is a long time. If George W. Bush's presidency is allowed to continue another four years, a significant portion of the American population won't be able to remember an America before the installation of Bush's Homeland. And that will make it much harder to repair the damage.

On February 26, 2004 George W. Bush headed to Louisville, Kentucky for a visit with the privileged few who scraped together $1.2 million as a tribute for Bush's re-election campaign. Two soldiers had been killed in Iraq the day before, but as their passing went unmarked by Mr. Bush as he declined to attend the funerals of these men who made a sacrifice beyond any valuation. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

The Bush Administration's Environmental Protection Agency has released public service television advertisements that mock the idea of using technology to make cars more fuel-efficient. (Source: New York Times June 25, 2004)

When Ronald Reagan died, George W. Bush declared a National Day of Mourning, a holiday in which all government services were shut down. Bush hasn't done the same for the hundreds and hundreds of American soldiers who have died carrying out his orders. Whose death matters more to George W. Bush? (Source: Presidential Proclamation of June 6, 2004)

When Ronald Reagan died, George W. Bush ordered all flags to be flown at half-staff for 30 days. 10 days more and the period would have assumed Biblical proportions. Yet as hundreds upon hundreds of American soldiers have died halfway around the world carrying out Mr. Bush's orders, he has issued no such gesture of respect for them. Whose death matters more to George W. Bush? (Source: Presidential Proclamation of June 6, 2004)

In the course of Ronald Reagan's funeral, his flag-draped casket was shuttled around the country so that as many people as possible could be invited to view the sight. Newsmagazines and newspapers were encouraged to prominently feature the image of Reagan's flag-draped coffin in their publications. Yet the Bush Administration not only won't accord returning soldiers' caskets the same honor, it has issued decrees to actively hide those caskets from the public's eyes. Whose death matters more to George W. Bush?

Lee Iacocca, the widely-respected former Chrysler Chief Executive Officer, appeared in television commercials supporting George W. Bush's bid for the White House in 2000. In the 1980s, he was a highly visible supporter of Ronald Reagan. In 2004, Lee Iacocca has announced the withdrawal of his support for George W. Bush, and the transfer of his support to John Kerry.

According to Iacocca, Kerry would make "one hell of a CEO." But Iacocca spent most of the time during his announcement criticizing the Bush Presidency: "The world is changing. Our country is changing. And we need a leader who understands that change that's taking place. And most important, we need a leader who will level with us about how we can adapt to that change and make things change for the better." (Source: Boston Globe June 25, 2004)

On March 3, 2004 George W. Bush jetted across the country to reach Los Angeles, California in time to eat lunch with the few and proud who managed to raise $800,000.00 for Bush's re-election campaign. The day before, an American soldier was killed in a grenade attack in Baghdad. That soldier, who at age 22 had a lifetime of joys taken from him in an instant, was not honored by Mr. Bush's presence at his funeral. As you can see, Mr. Bush had other priorities. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

Boot Bush because he's created an regime of fear that endangers soldiers in two ways. First, Bush puts soldiers in harm's way by sending them off in wars that are rushed and poorly planned. Then, Bush's pro-war propaganda creates an atmosphere of fear within the military, so that soldiers who oppose the war are afraid that they will be in danger if they reveal their opinions.

In one example of this double whammy of fear and danger that Bush exposes soldiers to, one soldier writes, "Two days ago one of my best friends lost both of his legs after an improvised explosive device (IED) hit his convoy. He got married right before he was deployed and did not even have time for a honeymoon. We are all sad after seeing him, and we all started asking ourselves again: How many more have to die? How many more have to lose limbs before we get out of this place?" The soldier concluded his letter by writing, "I will keep my name confidential for safety." No soldier should have to hide doubts about a war out of fear of reprisal, but that's what's happening under Commander-In-Chief Bush. (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again?, Michael Moore)

When was the last time you heard someone say "that's none of your business"? I imagine it's been a while. Since George W. Bush came to town, the concept of "none of your business" has faded away, replaced by the presumption that what you do is everybody's business, especially the business of the government. If you want the rest of this country to get their noses out of your business again, George W. Bush and his invasive administration have got to go.

Nabil al-Marabh, who was at one time #27 on the FBI Most Wanted Terrorists list, was held by U.S. authorities before Attorney General John Ashcroft ordered him deported to Syria after nearly two years of detention. Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, who is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, asked John Ashcroft to explain why al-Marabh was deported rather than charged with a crime or even tried in a military tribunal. But Ashcroft refused to provide answers to Leahy.

Which is worse: that Ashcroft deported an actual terrorist after holding him nearly two years without charges while chasing phantom terrorists, or that Ashcroft is refusing to answer to the very members of Congress whose job it is to provide oversight? (Source: Associated Press June 30, 2004)

Members of the Bush Administration keep exhorting us to focus on numbers other than how many people are being killed in Iraq. Tell the story about what else is happening on the ground in Iraq, they say! Alright, then: in 2003, the Bush Administration's promised to engage in 2,300 construction projects. As of June 30, 2004, only 140 of those 2,300 projects had commenced. (Source: New York Times June 30, 2004)

George W. Bush's representative in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer the Third, pledged in the spring of 2004 that 50,000 Iraqis would have jobs working on reconstruction projects by the date of transfer, June 30, 2004. As of that date, only 20,000 Iraqis had such jobs. (Source: New York Times June 30, 2004)

George W. Bush's administration in Iraq promised that the capacity for electricity would reach 6,000 megawatts by June 30, 2004. According to the General Accounting Office, electrical capacity had reached only 4,200 megawatts by June, and most regions had not yet even reached levels of electrical service enjoyed before the war began. (Source: General Accounting Office Report: Rebuilding Iraq, June 2004)

By September 2004, the entire nation of Iraq was plagued by electrical blackouts as insurgents put more of the country's fragile infrastructure out of commission. When Bush chose to go to war, he pledged that we would improve Iraq. This is not an improvement. (Source: Associated Press September 14, 2004)

On March 4, 2004 George W. Bush dropped in on a fundraiser across the street from an amusement park in Santa Clara, California, picking up $700,000 in exchange for a bit of socializing with donors. Mr. Bush will take repeated trips to pick up cash money for himself, but he couldn't be troubled to take the time to attend the funeral of the soldier who died taking part in Bush's Middle East military operations the next day. The former matters enough to Mr. Bush to merit his attention. The latter does not. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

According to George W. Bush, the invasion and occupation of Iraq was going to liberate Iraqis. However, according to the soldiers who are on the ground in Iraq, the war has driven the Iraqis into deep poverty. One soldier writes, "This war was initiated by the few who would profit from it and not for its people. We, as the Coalition Forces, did not liberate these people; we drove them deeper into poverty." For equating poverty with liberation, George W. Bush deserves to be liberated from the White House. (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again?, Michael Moore)

Republican DeForest B. Soaries, whom George W. Bush appointed to chair the Federal Election Assistance Commission, has publicly called for the government to draw up plans to cancel or reschedule elections in the event of a terrorist strike against the United States. That's so typical of a Bush appointee: prioritize fear over the constitution and democracy. (Source: Associated Press June 25, 2004)

Of course, not long after Soaries made his public calls for the rescheduling of elections, it came out that George W. Bush's Department of Homeland Security and Justice Department are working together to determine how to go about rescheduling elections in the event that a terrorist strike were to take place in the United States. This is, of course, beyond stupid: what better way to invite an attack, for Pete's sake, than to advertise that a successful attack will be rewarded with the postponing of American democracy! Beyond that, it now appears to be the official Bush Administration position to let the terrorists win by turning an attack by a few violent losers into the crumbling of a cornerstone of democracy. (Source: Reuters July 11, 2004)

Why boot Bush? Because if I had a dollar for every lie he and his creepy appointees told, I could buy my way into one of his $2000.00/a plate fundraisers. Then maybe I could get a juicy no-bid contract, and give sub-contracts to all my friends. Then THEY could sub-sub-contract out to someone else, and the money would all trickle down. Yee-haw! The American dream!

If there's such a thing as the American dream, George W. Bush is turning it into a nightmare.

George W. Bush appointed and then reappointed W. David Hager to the Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee of the FDA. This is a man who not only opposes the morning-after pill, who not only refuses to place IUD contraceptive devices in women, but who also opposes contraception for unmarried women. Bush's functionaries in government are that extreme. (Sources: Associated Press July 1, 2004; Time Magazine October 5, 2002)

You know the Humane Society: they're the people trying to make things just a bit easier for the animals who live alongside people on the planet. They're the ones who help homeless kittens and puppies find homes. And they've given a 100% rating to John Kerry for his work in the Senate on animal welfare issues. Given George W. Bush's record on blowing up bullfrogs for fun, he just doesn't measure up on this issue. (Source: The Humane Scorecard)

You hear it time and again from Bush and his pundit pals: Those darn Iraqis should be more grateful! They should be thanking the Americans. Thank you, America, for supporting Saddam in the 1980's, when a million people died in the Iran-Iraq war and Saddam gassed whole villages of his own people to death. We are eternally grateful that, in the aftermath of the first Gulf War, you encouraged the Iraqi people to overthrow Saddam, then stood by and watched as he slaughtered another hundred thousand Kurdish and Shiite rebels. Thank you, America, for those sanctions and bombings throughout the 1990's that killed another million Iraqis. Thanks a million, America, for bombing us every time one of your politicians got into hot water. We especially appreciate that "Operation Desert Fox" bombing campaign that Clinton launched two hours before his impeachment hearings were supposed to start. We're so grateful that you took out our electricity and sewage treatment plants, leaving us in the dark drinking filthy disease-infested water. Oh, and those missiles that said "Happy Ramandan"? Nice touch! How thoughtful. And last but not least, thank you for your ill-conceived post-invasion occupation that seems to be getting us nowhere. Thank you, America, from the bottom of our hearts! Bush wants the Iraqis to thank us for all this? The man's deluded!

On March 8, 2004 George W. Bush went to Texas for the purpose of attending not one but two extended fundraisers in one day. Bush was rewarded with $3 million in campaign contributions for devoting time to stroking the egos of his financial backers. An American soldier deployed in Bush's Iraq War died that day, but Bush didn't attend his funeral. There was, after all, no cash incentive. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

When Bush said that the attacks of September 11, 2001 "changed everything", he acknowledged bin Laden's power to destroy our way of life. No president should ever allow a terrorist to have so much power over America. We could have stood firm and refused to change our way of life. We could have refused to comply with bin Laden's plan. Instead, Bush "changed everything" and gave bin Laden exactly what he wanted.

Now George W. Bush can add "Spammer" to his list of titles. Yes, George W. Bush has asked his followers to go to their churches, obtain church membership lists and turn them over to his campaign for political use. Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam. Did I mention spam? (Source: Reuters July 1, 2004)

While George W. Bush stands against women's right to choose what to do with their own bodies, John Kerry has made a firm, consistent pro-choice stand in the U.S. Senate, earning a 100% rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America in 2003. John Kerry provides a positive alternative to George W. Bush on this issue. (Source: NARAL Pro-Choice America Voting Records, 2004)

The havoc George W. Bush has wrought on American soldiers by sending them off to his No Justifications War comes not only in the invisible stream of coffins arriving by plane under cover of news blackout. That havoc can also be seen in the large number of wounded (walking and not) coming home. According to the Department of Defense, between March 1, 2003 and June 12, 2004, more than five thousand soldiers were physically wounded in action. These soldiers' lives will be forever changed because George W. Bush couldn't wait.

The Bush Administration justified the unprovoked invasion and occupation of Iraq by saying that American soldiers would establish a shining new example of freedom in the Middle East that would the spread democratic ideals throughout the region. Nobody in the Bush Administration explained how soldiers could inspire Iraqis by killing them.

American soldiers were ordered to kill Iraqi civilians with the smallest excuse. One soldier in Bush's military quotes his platoon sergeant as telling him, "If you decide you want to kill a civilian that looks threatening, shoot him. I'd rather fill out paperwork than get one of my soldiers killed by some raghead."

For putting such a rotten version of a shining example on the ground in Iraq, George W. Bush deserves to lose his commission as Commander-In-Chief. (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again?)

Some wounds are not visible. According to a study carried out by the U.S. Army, one in five combat soldiers returning from Iraq suffers from a serious mental affliction. With over a hundred thousand soldiers in Iraq right now, you can do the math. (Source: Boston Globe June 30, 2004)

On March 11, 2004 George W. Bush entered a ritzy and exclusive hotel on Long Island to personally thank a small audience of donors who had put together a package of $1,600,000 for Bush to use in his campaign. On the same day that Mr. Bush and his benefactors enjoyed a nice meal and each other's company, two Americans were killed fighting Bush's war. Bush couldn't spare the time for their funerals. He had already expended his extra time attending to the needs of his campaign elite. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

Bush said it! "When I was coming up, it was a dangerous world, and you knew exactly who they were. It was us vs. them, and it was clear who them was. Today, we are not so sure who the they are, but we know they're there." That's George for you: always looking for a Them. (Source: Ottawa Citizen March 9, 2000)

Why boot George W. Bush? Because Bush is so dumb that when he looks at the Mideast "roadmap to peace," he thinks we're going in the right direction. It's a pity, but he doesn't realize he's holding it upside down.

On Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Bush and his crew just don't get the difference between "Sorry. We were wrong" and "Well, we thought we were right." Here's a hint: one is a genuine apology. The other is being an arrogant little twit. Don't we need a president with the class to give a genuine apology when it's called for?

You hear it all the time from Bush and his pundit buddies: we are in an ideologically-based war with fundamentalist Islam. Well, should we be?

In the mid-1990's, the greatest terrorist threat to the United States came from homegrown terrorists. From numerous abortion clinic bombings to the attack in Oklahoma City, we faced a string of terrorist attacks from extreme right-wing fanatics and fundamentalist Christians. People died then, too. But Clinton didn't declare an ideologically-based war against fundamentalist Christians or extreme right-wingers. Nor should he have.

Imagine for a moment that we had declared an ideological war on right-wingers and fundamentalist Christians in the United States. Would that have made things better? Or would we have unnecessarily alienated millions of people and plunged America into a spiral of violence with no end in sight?

The vast majority of Muslims, even those we call "fundamentalists," are not terrorists. Just like the vast majority of fundamentalist Christians are not terrorists. We need a president who will fight terrorism, not ideologies or religions. We need a president who knows the difference.

There's nothing worse than a rude Frenchman snickering at you... unless of course it's a rude Frenchman who's got a good point snickering at you.

When Bush invaded Iraq, he said it would become a model for the whole Middle East. A year later, Iraq is a violent, lawless hellhole. We can only hope it is NOT a model for the whole Middle East.

On March 25, 2004 George W. Bush visited the luxurious Park Plaza hotel in Boston, Massachussets for an exclusive meeting with donors to his campaign. The collective price of admission to this meeting with the president? $1.3 million. That same day, three Americans died in Iraq. Bush did not pay his respects at their funerals. You see, they hadn't contributed the required $2,000.00 to his campaign. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House for Sale)

On some accounts, one reason reverberates into many. We could give you hundreds of reasons to boot Bush: One for every American kid with a skinned knee and no one to kiss it and make it better, alone because a parent died in Iraq.

We could name a thousand reasons: One for every Iraqi home destroyed as American soldiers dig in for an urban seige.

Five thousand reasons: One for every American soldier's muddy boot print on the floor of an Iraqi mosque.

Ten thousand reasons: One for every young widow's tear at home and abroad.

A hundred thousand reasons: One for every drop of American blood spilled onto Iraqi soil.

Five hundred thousand reasons: One for every unheard cry of an orphaned Iraqi child.

A million reasons: One for every teenager who curls her lip and narrows her eyes at the word "politics."

Ten million reasons: One for every American who has learned to only count American deaths as tragic.

Fifty million reasons: One for every time the word "homeland" replaces "country" in conversation.

A hundred million reasons: One for every shattered dream of peace and goodwill on Earth.

George W. Bush's tragic mismanagement of the war in Iraq is leading many soldiers to hate their own country. One such soldier writes, "I hate my commander in chief. I hate the very ground he walks on, and I pray (and I know I shouldn't) that he burns in hell for what he is doing to our country and the lives of soldiers and airmen and the lives of the innocent Iraqis. Now, for three years I can look forward to serving my country with a heavy heart. I will no longer be proud to salute the flag, and I couldn't care less when the 'Star Spangled Banner' plays. I will always have respect for those who have laid down their lives for us. But right now I hate everything the flag stands for because America put this asshole in office and now half of America still thinks he is the same man they thought he was."

This kind of hate is dangerous, especially when it is in the hearts of Americans trained in lethal combat techniques. America needs to learn more patience and tolerance and compassion, but Bush has inspired hatred in its place. (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again?, Michael Moore)

If we got rid of W, we could begin to enact sensible policies to prevent global arming.

Why boot Bush? Because there's a better alternative. John Kerry is fluent in two languages, French and English, while George W. Bush is scarcely fluent in one. Fluency in multiple languages is indicative not only of a strong work ethic, but also of the ability to think in multiple modes. The latter is a capacity sorely lacking in George W. Bush. (Source: Washington Post March 23, 2004)

On March 31, 2004 George W. Bush dropped by the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel in Washington, D.C. for a fancy dinner with some of his biggest campaign donors, offering not only his personal thanks but God's blessing to those who had given him large sums of money. That same day, five Americans were killed in action in Malahma, Iraq. Bush did not bother offer either his respect or God's blessing at their funerals; he didn't even bother to attend them. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House News Release of March 31, 2004)

You know that video footage of people pulling down a statue of Saddam Hussein? The one Fox News ran for hours? The one that the White House crowed about, again and again and again? The one that they said showed the Iraqis were so happy to have us there?

Yeah, that one. Well, you know what? It turns out that an American Army Psychological Operations Team pulled down the statue, and some guy with a megaphone rounded up a handful of Iraqis to provide local color. (Source: Los Angeles Times July 3, 2004)

How lousy a job is George W. Bush doing? He's managed to raise the ire of old archconservative William F. Buckley! On the war, Buckley says that "Saddam Hussein wasn't the kind of extra-territorial menace that was assumed by the administration one year ago. If I knew then what I know now about what kind of situation we would be in, I would have opposed the war." And on the growth of big government interference in the lives of citizens during Bush's Administration? "It bothers me enormously. Should I growl?" (Source: New York Times June 29, 2004)

How desperately out of touch with the truth is George W. Bush? He authorized a campaign ad that criticizes John Kerry's book, "The New War," for never mentioning Al Qaeda or Osama bin Laden.

Well, gee, perhaps that had something to do with the fact that the book was written in 1997! (Source:, July 3, 2004)

On April 5, 2004 George W. Bush rearranged his schedule just so he could travel to Charlotte, North Carolina for lunch. You see, he'd meant to thank some big-shot donors to his campaign back in February, but he couldn't make it because of the snow. But that didn't stop Mr. Bush! No, visiting personally with his contributors was so important that he set aside time to make the trip again, even though all hell was breaking loose in Iraq at the time. The day before, twelve American soldiers were killed in Iraq. That day, eight American soldiers were killed, and the next day, another twelve American soldiers were killed. You'd think Mr. Bush would have cancelled the lunch so he could spend a little extra time addressing the mess he helped to create. But no, now that the weather allowed it, he needed the time to stroke the egos of his contributors. Of course, Mr. Bush didn't feel he needed to attend the funerals of the dozens of Americans who were killed carrying out his orders. Why was that? Perhaps Mr. Bush needed to get his hair done. (Sources: Iraq Coalition Body Count, White House News Release of April 5, 2004)

With a 100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign for his work on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues since 1995, John Kerry simply provides a better alternative than George W. Bush on this issue. (Source: Human Rights Campaign Voting Scorecard

When the position of Bush's apologists is, "He never lied to the American people! He just deceived us," you know we're in trouble.

Think four more years under Bush wouldn't be so bad? Did you think the last four years would be this bad?

Bush is turning America into Mordor.

A riddle for those of you who remember the Urban Cowboy:

Q: Why does Bush have brown stuff on his nose every time he's met with his top fundraisers?

A: Because he's looking for love in all the wrong places.

Why boot George W. Bush? Because all the people who say that Iraq is another Vietnam are just plain wrong. There is no government with sufficient authority, not even an enemy government, to take over were we to withdraw from Iraq. We are the only force standing between disorder and outright anarchy. That makes Iraq worse than Vietnam.

Another way in which Iraq is not Vietnam: Ronald Dumbsfeld has admitted that the war in Iraq is not going as he "would have predicted." Was he wrong? Oh, he wouldn't say he was wrong about anything, or failed to plan adequately, or anything like that, just that it's not going as he "would have predicted." McNamara was full of B.S., but he never tried to pull THIS kind of crap on the press.

Yet another way in which Iraq is not Vietnam: Lyndon Johnson may have exaggerated the threat of Vietnamese Communism to the United States, but it did actually exist. There were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The "Iraqi threat" was fabricated out of whole cloth.

Still another way in which Iraq is not Vietnam. Johnson didn't go into Vietnam, find out there was no Communism there after all, then try to play it off as some kind of joke.

Another way in which Iraq is not Vietnam. Millions of Americans did not protest the Vietnam War BEFORE it started. The Bush Administration had the opportunity to listen, but hubris got in the way.

Bush's disastrous war in Iraq has given birth to a whole new culture of corruption. One truck driver working for military contractor Kellogg Brown and Root blows the whistle on this corruption as he writes, "Since I started this job several months ago, 100% (that's right, not 99%) of the workers I am aware of are inflating the hours they claim on their time sheets." Months have passed, and George W. Bush has still been unable to crack down on this corruption, even if he has tried. (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again, Michael Moore)

The little differences can tell us a lot: John Kerry's campaign website uses open-source technology, brought together by a large number of people working in cooperation for the sake of an idea rather than in pursuit of greed. George W. Bush's campaign website, on the other hand, relies on technology provided by the exclusive corporate giant Microsoft, even though its products have a history of bugginess and leaky security. (Source: New York Times July 5, 2004)

In an interview with the Telegraph Herald of Dubuque, John Kerry affirmed the following: "I can't take my Catholic belief, my article of faith, and legislate it on a Protestant or a Jew or an atheist ...who doesn't share it. We have separation of church and state in the United States of America." In a time when George W. Bush has been trying to impose his religious ideas on the rest of the country, this has been a crucial statement for Kerry to make. (Source: New York Times July 5, 2004)

If you want to know which candidate will best support the education of our children, who better to ask than the hard-working teachers who are in the classroom every day? According to the National Education Association, the nation's largest organization of teachers, John Kerry supported education in 100% of his votes in 2003. It doesn't take a math teacher to tell you that you can't do better than 100%. But perhaps someone should tell George W. Bush, who the NEA says has been engaging in "accounting gimmicks," "distorting reading scores," and slipping in budget cuts to schools during his administration. (Sources: National Education Association Legislative Center; National Education Association Press Center)

Some groups you don't want the support of. These include "English First," an advocacy group that not only wants to institute English as the official language of the United States, but also wants to outlaw election ballots in languages other than English. Who gave them the idea that keeping some of our citizens from voting was a good thing? Well, we can rest easy knowing that none of John Kerry's votes satisfied these bigots. That makes him a good alternative to George W. Bush, whom English First tepidly supports. (Source: English First Official Website)

I haven't been this excited about two efficient, sparkling Johns on the job since the plumber finished his work at my place last August.

When the bipartisan 9/11 commission concluded that there was no working relationship between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, Dick Cheney disputed their finding by saying that he knew of just such a working relationship, and that he probably had more information than the commission did. So the 9/11 commission asked Cheney to supply that super-secret information if he had it. Cheney didn't because he couldn't. The 9/11 commission has now officially concluded that Cheney had no extra information to support his claim.

Why is our vice president playing "bullshit" with the American people? (Source: Reuters July 7, 2004)

Bush said it! "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?" (Source: Ottawa Citizen March 9, 2000)

When George W. Bush was passed a note by Condoleeza Rice informing him that the latest version of an Iraqi government had been installed, he scribbled back on top of that note the words "Let Freedom Reign."

"Let Freedom Reign." Where to begin? Well, first of all, the phrase is "Let Freedom Ring." If one had only heard the latter phrase, one might be forgiven for misinterpreting the words, but anyone who has read Dr. Martin Luther King's famous historic speeches (or who has even read a high-school American history textbook) should know otherwise. This is yet another piece of evidence for George W. Bush's aliteracy.

If, on the other hand, we assume that Bush really meant to write "Let Freedom Reign," then he must be a fool as well as ignorant. According to the American Heritage Dictionary, "reign" refers the dictatorial period of rule of a monarch, not to the period of governance of a free regime, which is referred to as a "term" or "government." Merriam-Webster tells us that a "reign" is "the time during which a king, queen, or emperor possesses the supreme authority," or as a verb, means "to have superior or uncontrolled dominion." So is Bush meaning to refer to the new version of an Iraqi government as imperial or monarchical? Or is he simply ignorant of the meaning of the words he uses?

The kicker is that "freedom" describes the state of an individual or a people who are not under the thumb of the dominion of a monarchy or other regime of supreme authority. So what is Bush saying here? Let non-reigniness reign? Let freedom exercise the limiting of freedom? Freedom is slavery? Bwah-huh? (Source: Reuters June 28, 2004)

Under George W. Bush's administration, the Centers for Disease for Control has been forced to require all federally-funded HIV prevention programs to state the "lack of effectiveness of condom use" for preventing the spread of AIDS. What's next: Purple is Green Month? Drink Drano to Your Health Day? (Source: LA Weekly June 25, 2004)

How does Dick Cheney, the man behind George W. Bush, regard the American people's appropriate role in the democratic process? When he was giving a speech in Pennsylvania, a sympathetic crowd of Republicans applauded at the end of one of his speech's rote lines. Cheney looked up from the text of the speech he had been doggedly reading, glowered, and then growled, "You guys want to hear this speech or not?" before moving back to reading his prepared text.

We can do better than this sit-down, shut-up, listen-to-us and do-as-you're-told administration. (Source: New York Times July 8, 2004)

Why vote for Kerry and Edwards over Bush and Cheney? Kerry's got a reason: "We've got a better sense of what's happening to America -- and we've got better hair." OK, so the second part of that reason is a joke. But the first part is both important and true. (Source: Raleigh News and Observer July 8, 2004)

On July 7, 2004, George W. Bush took a trip to the ritziest neighborhood of Raleigh, North Carolina (conveniently skipping poorer neighborhoods) for an exclusive fundraiser at the home of a wealthy supporter. He took home a whopping $2.35 million dollars, a large reward for spending some hours conversing with the people who matter to him. Also on that day, two American soldiers lost their lives in Iraq. Mr. Bush had no plans to attend their funerals; opening gifts of cash is much more fun. (Sources: Raleigh News and Observer July 8, 2004; Iraq Coalition Casualty Count)

While the U.S. Army struggled from May of 2003 through the Summer of 2004 to to maintain order within its own ranks as it was stretched thinner and thinner by the Bush Administration in its operations under fire in Afghanistan and Iraq, George W. Bush has neglected to appoint a new Secretary of the Army, finally getting around to a nomination in July 2004. (Source: Associated Press July 8, 2004)

Katrina N. writes in: "Bush's "No Child Left Behind" law, once enacted and enforced, severely diminished our schools' ability to teach with learning as the end result. Instead what we have is teaching to pass a test. Children don't go to school to pass a test; they go to learn. There is an important difference between the two."

It turns out that three months of George W. Bush's military records -- the exact three months during which nobody can be found who saw George W. Bush showing up to serve in the National Guard -- have been irrevocably destroyed. It was all an inadvertant "accident" on the military's part, the White House says. Whoopsie! (Source: New York Times July 9, 2004)

Now, there are two possibilities here. The first is that it wasn't an accident, but it was rather an action taken on purpose. This would not be a surprise given the Bush Administration's shenanigans to date. And that brings us to our second possibility: that it actually was an accidental destruction. In this case, broad swaths of the American citizenry are just not going to believe the president when he says it was an accident, because he's deceived us so many times in the past. If we've really gotten to such a poisoned point with the Bush Administration, then it's time to clear the decks and let someone with credibility take Bush's place.

Brad Hastings, a soldier in Iraq, used to be a Republican, but not anymore. He writes, "I grew up as a Republican, but I will not be voting for Bush, that is for sure. One of the last things my father told be a few months before he passed away was that we are going to witness one of the most corrupt and brutal presidents America has ever seen. That stuck with me even before I came to Iraq. I have never been so disappointed in someone." Now, some people would say that it's about time that young Republicans become disillusioned. However, if you're a Republican yourself, George W. Bush's internal destruction GOP would be a darned good reason to vote against him in 2004. (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again?, Michael Moore)

In a gesture of respect, George W. Bush was invited to speak to the annual convention of the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). Mr. Bush, in a gesture of disrespect sent through his spokespeople, declined the invitation, saying he had something more important to do that day. Bush is the first president since 1920 to miss a NAACP convention. What is George W. Bush's problem with black people? (Sources: Associated Press July 8, 2004; Bloomberg News July 9, 2004)

It's not just that George W. Bush is the first president since Herbert Hoover was in office not to speak to the NAACP convention. It's that, as Bush says in his own words, "I would describe my relationship with the current leadership as basically non-existent." Cozy relationship with Kenny-Boy. No relationship with the premier organization of black Americans. Hm. (Source: Chicago Tribune July 10, 2004)

George W. Bush's snub of the NAACP is particularly galling given the way that Bush depends upon huge numbers of African American soldiers to serve as moving targets in his war in Iraq. Bush insults not just the NAACP, but its many members who have been loyal Americans, like retired Air Force Major Robert Tormey, who says, "I was appalled to learn that PResident Bush refused to speak at the NAACP Convention this year. As a veteran, I find this sends a very disturbing message to the many minority soldiers in our military. The Pentagon estimates that Blacks make up about 20 percent of our forces. Many have already died in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting for our country. How must the families of these soliders feel when George W. Bush turns his back on one of our nation's leading civil rights organizations? Shame on you, Mr. President." George W. Bush demands that all of America "support the troops", but it looks like he's not interested in supporting them himself. (Source: The Crisis, September/October 2004.)

It would be bad enough that George W. Bush is the first president to maintain a non-existent relationship with the NAACP, but Bush also has managed during his years in office never to meet with the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights even one time. The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights is the pre-eminent lobbying organization for black Americans, with a history of establishing contact with legislators and presidents stretching back more than fifty years. What's Bush's problem here? (Source: Louisiana Weekly June 21, 2004)

George W. Bush has also never met, not even once, with the National Organization of Women (NOW). Yes, they're feminists, and we all know George W. Bush has trouble with feminists. But a large portion of the American population would call themselves feminist, and while he is in office George W. Bush is supposed to act not out of concern for his comfort zone, but as the president of all Americans. All of us. Even the ones who disagree with him. Instead, he's shut us out. If you're not with him, it seems you must be against him in his mind, and therefore not worthy of recognition. What small behavior for a man occupying such a large office. (Source: Louisiana Weekly June 21, 2004)

The Senate Intelligence Committee issued its first of two reports on the use of intelligence by the Bush Administration in the leadup to war on July 9, 2004. Senator Jay Rockefeller summarized its findings by laying blame squarely on the Bush administration's doorstep: "There is simply no question that mistakes leading up to the war in Iraq rank among the most devastating losses and intelligence failures in the history of the nation. The fact is that the administration at all levels... used bad information to bolster its case for war. And we in Congress would not have authorized that war -- we would not have authorized that war with 75 votes if we knew what we know now." This is just one more authoritative voice giving proper name to the Bush episode with Iraq: Debacle. (Source: Washington Post July 9, 2004)

Moving on from summarizing the report's findings to discussing its conclusions about the effects of Bush's Iraq Debacle on America's standing in the world, Rockefeller continued, "Our credibility is diminished. Our standing in the world has never been lower. We have fostered a deep hatred of Americans in the Muslim world, and that will grow. As a direct consequence, our nation is more vulnerable today than ever before." If this is what a commission from the historically cautious body of the Senate concludes, you know we're in trouble. What makes this all sadder is that it didn't have to be this way if we had only proceeded cautiously, with all due care and skepticism. But that was not to be, since "caution," "care," and "skepticism" are not words to be associated with the Bush White House. (Source: Washington Post July 9, 2004)

After the International Court of Justice ruled that the new barrier separating Israelis and Palestinians violates international law and must be removed, the White House dismissed that ruling as irrelevant. That's disappointing but not surprising given the Bush Administration's "international law, schminternational law" approach to world affairs. (Source: Reuters July 9, 2004)

The Bush Administration does some pretty disgusting stuff, but nothing was more disgusting than Bush's new rule for factory farms that allows corporate farmers to take huge mountains of untreated animal shit and dump them wherever they want to, even if the shit leaks into streams or rivers that feed into human water supplies. You think that's water you're drinking? No, that's a load of bull shit. (Source: National Resources Defense Council, December 16, 2002)

The Union of Concerned Scientists has uncovered extensive evidence of the Bush Administration interfering in scientific studies, mandating skewed administrative and research interventions in the scientific process to result in findings or actions of benefit to the industrial groups that are contributing to Mr. Bush's re-election campaign.

In one such instance, J. Stephen Griles (a political appointeee to the Bush Administration's Department of the Interior) mandated that scientists preparing an environmental impact statement on mountaintop-removal mining were to "focus on centralizing and streamlining coal-mining permitting," and to cease consideration of environmentally beneficial changes to the mining practice. (Source: Union of Concerned Scientists, Scientific Integrity in Policy Making, July 2004)

Another instance of political meddling in the scientific process occured as the Bush administration made it clear it wanted to lump together fishery-raised salmon and wild salmon for purposes of establishing whether salmon should be protected under the Endangered Species Act. However, the National Research Council-approved Salmon Recovery Science Review Panel documented that there was a solid scientific basis for concluding that fishery-raised salmon and wild salmon were genetically distinct, and therefore should be counted separately for purposes of Endangered Species Act protection. The scientists constituting the Review Panel say that Bush Administration officials told them either to remove that conclusion from the report or to find their report shelved. The conclusion was subsequently removed. (Sources: Union of Concerned Scientists, Scientific Integrity in Policy Making, July 2004; Los Angeles Times March 26, 2004)

Another instance of political meddling in the scientific process by the Bush Administration came as real estate interests pushed for permission to develop critical areas of the Florida panther's habitat. The Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) scientific review panel found that the Bush Administration's Department of the Interior mandated several faulty assumptions in order to inflate the apparent number of breeding pairs of Florida panthers in the wild. For example, every reported panther -- including the very young and very old -- was counted as a member of a breeding pair. Although the review panel informed Bush Administration officials of the problem and recommended a change in the practice, Bush Administration officials repeatedly declined to do so, to real estate developers' benefit. (Source: Union of Concerned Scientists, Scientific Integrity in Policy Making, July 2004)

Yet another skewing of the data for political purposes: In 2003, the Bush Administration was court-ordered to designate critical habitat protection for the bull trout of the Pacific Northwest. In a report associated with that plan, economists working for the Fish and Wildlife Service enumerated the financial costs of enacting habitat protection and the financial benefits of doing so. The section of the report detailing financial costs of enacting the protection was kept in the final version of the report released by the Bush Administration; the section of the report detailing the financial benefits of enacting that protection was deleted. Fish and Wildlife Service officials reported that "the removal was a policy decision made at the Washington level; it did not come out of Denver or Portland." (Sources: Union of Concerned Scientists, Scientific Integrity in Policy Making, July 2004; The Missoulian April 15, 2004)

When William R. Miller, professor of psychology at the University of New Mexico, was interviewed by the Bush Administration for a position as a scientific advisor to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, he was asked whether he had voted for George W. Bush in the 2000 elections. After his response, Miller's appointment was cancelled. In another interview for a position at the National Institute on Drug Abuse, Dr. Claire Stark was repeatedly asked by a staffer at the White House whether she had voted for George W. Bush. Dr. Stark repeatedly refused to answer, noting that the position she would take was scientific rather than political. But the White House interviewer continued to ask for Dr. Stark's confidential and irrelevant voting record. (Source: Union of Concerned Scientists, Scientific Integrity in Policy Making, July 2004)

When Nobel laureate in medicine Torsten Wiesel was nominated to serve on the advisory board of the Fogarty International Center at the NIH, Bush Administration officials reportedly rejected Wiesel because he had written too many letters to the New York Times that were criticial of George W. Bush. (Source: Union of Concerned Scientists, Scientific Integrity in Policy Making, July 2004)

In his eagerness to persuade the American people to support an unprovoked invasion of Iraq, George W. Bush created a dangerous propaganda machine that encouraged an attitude of ruthless violence among young Americans. One soldier, for example, admits that "I went to Iraq with thoughts of killing people who I thought were horrible. I was like, 'Fuck Iraq, fuck these people, I hope we kill thousands.' Why? I am not that kind of person. I believed my president." (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again?, Michael Moore)

George W. Bush loves to use pictures firefighters as props to hold up his flagging support. Everyone loves firefighters, the Bush team figures, so if Bush puts himself next to pictures of firefighters, maybe everyone will love him again, too. But what do real firefighters thing of George W. Bush?

The Florida Professional Firefighters organization has answered that question in its endorsement of John Kerry for president in 2004. The organization, which represents some nineteen thousand firefighters across the state of Florida, endorsed George W. Bush in 2000. But in 2004 these firefighters decided they'd had enough of a Bush presidency, and saw a better alternative in John Kerry.

What makes Kerry preferable to Bush? Listen to a firefighter himself. Bob Carver, president of the FPF, puts it like this: "There is no stronger voice on firefighter and Homeland Security issues than John Kerry, and we will work hard to help him win the state of Florida. Kerry has consistently championed legislation to provide our members with the right to collective bargaining and to improve funding and increase the number of America's firefighters, our training and to provide us with the equipment first responders need to serve the people of America in defense of our homeland in an emergency, natural disaster, or, God forbid, in the event of another terrorist attack." (Source: NewsMax July 14, 2004)

"Are you better off than you were four years ago?" is one important question to ask as you head off to the polls, but a more nuanced question to ask might be, "Who is better off than they were four years ago?" The answers to this question, and the lack of any plan to address the consequences of those answers, say a lot about the economic priorities of George W. Bush and his administration. So let's look at a series of occupations and (using publicly-available data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics) see how well or how poorly they've fared during the Bush years. We'll start from the highest-paid occupation on our list and move down to the economically lowliest. For each occupation, adjusting for inflation (since the value of a dollar in 2003 was only 93.6% the value of a dollar in 2000), we've listed the percent change in mean annual wages from the last full year of Bill Clinton's administration, 2000, to the last full year of George W. Bush's administration, 2003. Can you find the pattern?

Let's start off at the top. Chief executives' mean annual wages in 2003 were $140,580.00 (or $131,583 in the value of dollars from the year 2000). Even adjusting for inflation, those wages are 25.7% higher than in 2000. Of the thirty-three occupations for which we report wage changes, that's the greatest increase from 2000-2003. That the greatest increase in wages during the Bush years happened for the occupation already earning the largest wages to begin with tells us a lot about the ethics of this era.

In 2003, lawyers raked in the next-highest annual wage, at an average of $107,800. Adjusting for inflation, that makes a wage increase of 10.5% from 2000 to 2003.

From 2000-2003, marketing executives' mean annual wage increased from $75,320 to $92,190. Adjusted for inflation, that's a hefty increase of 14.5% during the Bush years.

In 2003, nuclear engineers earned a decent wage on average, at $85,520. Adjusting for inflation, however, nuclear engineers' salary only increased by 1.6%.

Moving back from a professional occupation to big business, advertising and promotions executives' mean annual wage increased by an inflation-adjusted 10.0% from 2000-2003. That's a very comfortable change.

Even taking inflation into account, the mean annual wage of public relations executives increased by 13.9% from 2000 to 2003.

As we move down the annual wage scale to middle-class annual wages, we should note that business executive occupations are no longer to be found. Instead, we have microbiologists making $57,190 in 2003, an inflation adjusted increase of just 0.9% from 2000. At least the microbiologists are doing a bit better in 2003 than in 2000, but not by a heckuva much.

Librarians, who earned an average of $45,520 in 2003, actually suffered a small decrease in wages of 0.3% during the Bush years when inflation is accounted for.

Electricians' annual wages, adjusted for inflation, declined by 2.2% from 2000-2003.

When inflation is accounted for, probation officers and other corrections treatment specialists lost 3.2% in annual wages from 2000-2003. As we move down the income scale, we're starting to see a lot of lines of work in which people are not better off than they were four years ago.

Kindergarten teachers, the ones who start our kids off on the right track, earned an average of $42,380 in 2003. That marks an inflation-adjusted decrease of 1.4% since 2000 -- and it's not as if the job got any easier.

Carpenters' annual wages, adjusted for inflation, declined by 1.5% from 2000 to 2003.

Mental health and substance-abuse social workers do the largely unnoticed job of helping people on the edge of despair keep their lives together. They don't earn much -- just $35,120 per year on average -- but they do an amazing job helping people heal and (not insigificantly) keeping them on the productive side of American society. Here's a rare ray of sunshine in this income range: from 2000 to 2003, the income of these social workers increased by 2.0%. But let's keep that in perspective: it's a pittance of an increase compared to the hefty new chunk taken home by already-rich business execs under Bush's watch.

Roofers' annual wages, adjusted for inflation, declined by 3.0% over the first three years of George W. Bush's administration.

Machinists annual wages, adjusted for inflation, actually rose between 2000 and 2003, but only by 0.4%. That's a $120 raise over a year: enough to go to the movies and get popcorn five times, but not enough to change a life significantly.

Home appliance repair workers, the ones who fix your fridge when the freon is on the fritz, saw their mean inflation-adjusted annual wage decline by 4.1% from 2000 to 2003. Ouch!

Locksmiths, who earned $30,540 on average in 2003, saw their annual average wage decline by 3.8% from 2000 to 2003.

Legislators at the national and state level, who only raked in an average of $31,490 during 2003 (oh, yes, the national legislators do MUCH better), bucked the trend and saw their wages increase by 6.6% from 2000-2003. It helps that most legislatures set their own pay.

Highway maintenance workers, who we may curse under our breath but who in the long run help us keep on truckin', found their wages increase, but only by 0.6%, from 2000-2003.

General construction laborers' annual inflation-adjusted wages decreased from 2000 to 2003 by 1.4%.

Butchers' inflation-adjusted wages declined by 1.0% from 2000 to 2003.

Upholsterers' inflation-adjusted wages have declined by 1.3% during the Bush years.

Bakers managed to eke out, on average, an annual inflation-adjusted wage increase of 0.5% from 2000-2003. That's better than losing wages, but it's nothing to bake a cake about.

Hairstylists' annual inflation-adjusted wages have gone down from 2000 to 2003 by 1.4%.

Groundskeepers did better trimming bushes than hairstylists did trimming bangs, with their wages going up over three years by 1.0% when inflation is accounted for. Bush supporters might pick this wage increase out as a successful example of trickle-down economics, since groundskeepers tend to work for people like corporate executives. But really, that 1.0% increase only amounts to a $16.41 pay increase per month. Compare that to the increase of $2,246.07 per month for the corporate executives who employ groundskeepers, and you'll see that there really isn't much trickling down at all... and groundskeepers are among those in the working class doing the best when it comes to wage change!

Bank tellers' wages, in the meantime, were stagnant, increasing by just 0.3% from 2000 to 2003 -- a whopping $4.98 per month.

Janitors' wages, at only $19,080 in 2000 to begin with, lost ground adjusting for inflation, grinding down to an average of $19,019 by 2003. Is that an economic success story?

Home health aides do dirty work and get paid dirt-cheap wages to do it: only an average of $18,110 per year in 2000. But those wages were worse by 2003, declining an average of 0.9% during those years of the Bush administration.

Cafeteria cooks really struck it rich from 2000 to 2003, getting an average inflation-adjusted raise of 0.3%, or $4.30 a month. Hey, that'll buy an extra cheeseburger now an then, but that's about it.

Child care workers took care of our kids while we rushed off to our jobs, but only got paid an average of $17,400 in 2003. That's an inflation-adjusted decrease of 0.4%.

Housekeepers clean up after the better-off who can stay in a hotel room or even hire a cleaner for their own house. But for all that messy work, they got paid just $16,399 per year on average. They did manage a 1.3% increase in wages, adjusting for inflation, over the years of 2000 to 2003 -- they got trickled on a bit, too. Let's hope that trend continues.

Waiters and waitresses' wages annual inflation-adjusted wages grew only by 0.1% from 2000 to 2003.

Finally, down at the bottom of our pay scale, are dishwashers, who in 2003 only made an average of $14,498. Their annual pay had declined since 2000 by 0.4%, making it even less rewarding to scrub off someone else's baked-on Alfredo.

So what's the overall picture here? Most wages stagnated or deteriorated from 2000 to 2003, with the lesser-paid occupations tending to fare worse and executive business types spectacularly bucking the trend with double-digit increases. Have you seen George W. Bush discuss this problem at great length? Where's the commission? Where's his outrage?

OK, so perhaps the wages of most regular, non-executive Americans have suffered during the first three Bush years, but surely they've done better during Bush's much-vaunted "recovery" -- right? Unfortunately, no. From 2003 to 2004, the income of non-supervisory workers in the United States rose by 1.7 percent in nominal dollars. But inflation roared at a faster pace; so, adjusted for inflation, in the past year the income of non-supervisory workers has actually fallen. (Source: New York Times July 6, 2004)

The Bush Administration is cutting by three-quarters the size of its delegation to the annual World AIDS scientific conference. As a result, a number of research reports will go unreleased and research training sessions will be cancelled. That's quite a way to go about fighting a global scourge and building cross-national ties. No, no, it's not. (Source: Washington Post, July 9, 2004)

George W. Bush keeps talking about "first responders" all the time in his speeches, hoping to get a positive vibe from the American people by association. We all deeply respect the people who save Americans' lives on a daily basis without fanfare or fuss, so it's understandable that Bush would like us to think that he has the support of such everyday heroes. But who do America's first responders really support? The International Association of EMTs and Paramedics has publicly declared its support for John Kerry in his run for president in 2004. (Source: CNN June 2, 2004)

How slipshod is the Bush Administration in its organization? It's missed another deadline -- this time for reporting on the size of the budget deficit. Such behavior is understandable on the part of a middle schooler doing a term-paper, but an administration with thousands upon thousands of employees should be able to do better than this. (Source: Reuters July 9, 2004)

In March of 2004, Edward Dalton returned to the United States after doing duty with the 101st Airborne Division in Iraq. He's seen the Middle East firsthand, and he's seen George W. Bush's handiwork up close too. How does he compare the two? "I am more afraid of my government than I am of the Middle East and their leaders," he says. Inspiring this kind of fear is a dangerous political ploy, and has no place in American government. (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again?, Michael Moore)

In 1999, George W. Bush asserted that "it makes no sense for assault weapons to be around our society," and promised to keep the current assault weapons ban in place. But with the ban expiring in only a few months' time, Bush has made no move to uphold the ban, and has instead sat by as Republican lawmakers maneuver to keep the assualt weapons ban from being extended. (Source: International Herald Tribune June 29, 2004)

With George W. Bush in the White House, we've had to revise a common phrase of inspiration to read, "Anyone who is the grandson of a Senator, the son of a President and who is born wealthy can grow up to be President!" Funny, that just doesn't roll off the tongue so well.

The man who has reaped such benefit from nepotism apparently thought it would be a good idea to spread that nepotism around a bit, giving aide and comfort to the families of his inner circle. Colin Powell's son? Bush gave him the chair of the Federal Communications Commission. Dick Cheney's son-in-law? Bush named him Deputy Attorney General. Mitch Daniels' sister? Bush named her Assistant Attorney General. Scott McClellan's brother? Bush named him to the Council of Economic Advisers. Ken Mehlman's brother? Bush named him to be Assistant Secretary of Commerce.

Keeping it all in the families is no stretch for George W. Bush. Rather, it reflects the attitude in which he has bathed for a half-century: the right people from good, loyal families are fit to rule. Everyone else's role is to stare from the outside, passively and adoringly. (Source: Hearst Newspapers August 17, 2001)

John Kerry was born to a family of money and privilege. George W. Bush was born to a family of money and privilege. Neither are to be blamed or commended for their lucky happenstance. But what did the two men do with their situation? George W. Bush spent decades with his eyes firmly fixed on his navel, drinking and bumbling about between jobs, depending time and again on his dad and his dad's friends to bail him out when he got in trouble. John Kerry, on the other hand, quickly came to understand that with privilege comes responsibility. From a young age through his entire life, he has devoted himself to using the advantages of his childhood privilege in public service: as a volunteer for service in Vietnam, in youthful yet stirring testimony before Congress, in his work as a public prosecutor, in his service to the Commonwealth of Massachussets, and then in his years before the Senate. John Kerry embraces responsibility, to our benefit. George W. Bush evades it, to our detriment.

George W. Bush: "We want to whip them in Iraq." That's a poor choice of words, isn't it, from a man whose legal team wrote memos condoning torture methods used in Abu Ghraib? (Source: Times-Shamrock July 10, 2004)

On July 10, 2004, George W. Bush took a trip out to Kutztown, Pennsylvania to participate in what he calls an "Ask The President Event." Sounds populist, doesn't it? Everyday citizens get to ask the President to talk about what they think is important! Glory be, that's democracy! What a democratic guy that George W. Bush is...

Except no, not really. You only got to "Ask The President" if you were a Bush supporter. Heck, you only got to see George W. Bush if you already supported him. When they found out one of the legitimate ticket-holders inside the event supported John Kerry, they even made her leave.

That's George W. Bush for you: the Potemkin President. He can only handle interacting with people who support what he's doing. No wonder he's so out of touch with reality. (Source: Times-Shamrock July 10, 2004)

Speaking of questions, when reporters dared to ask George W. Bush at a media briefing about his relationship to Ken "Kenny Boy" Lay of Enron fame, Mr. Bush stomped off the stage, ending the media briefing, rather than answer the questions. They're legitimate questions to ask, but Bush just can't handle being questioned. (Source: Daily Telegraph July 10, 2004)

It's not like the above-mentioned occurrence of ticket-ripping exclusion is an aberration, either. When Bush visited Springfield, Missouri in early August, a number of individuals had tickets to see him, the office-holder of the presidency, speak. Some with tickets supported Bush's candidacy. Some did not. Those who did not had their tickets torn up in their faces and were turned away at the door. In Bush's America, only his supporters have the right to hear him speak. All others are ineligible to receive the gift of his golden tongue. (Source: Springfield News-Leader August 3, 2004.)

If you wanted to hear Dick Cheney speak in New Mexico this summer, you had to sign the following statement first: "I, (full name) ... do herby endorse George W. Bush for re-election of the United States." If they're going to exclude dissenters from coming into view of their government servants, they might at least get the "hereby" part right! (Source: The New Yorker August 30, 2004)

In contrast to the Potemkin events above, John Kerry went out of his way to invite undecided voters and give them a forum to ask him questions about his candidacy. John Kerry can handle democracy. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney can't. (Source: August 17, 2004)

When John Edwards, running for Vice President on the ticket against George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, stopped in for dinner in Raleigh, North Carolina on July 10, 2004, he and his companions left an "extraordinary" large tip. George W. Bush, on the other hand, is pegged as having left rotten tips multiple times on the indispensable tipping database Bitter Waitress. They say the best window into one's character is the manner in which one treats those of less power or prestige than oneself. What does this say about the character of George W. Bush? What does it say about the character of John Edwards? (Sources: Raleigh News and Observer July 12, 2004;

Emily, who makes coffee drinks at an independent bookstore in Durham, North Carolina, reports that in South Dakota and Iowa, the places where she grew up, George W. Bush's rhetoric on terrorists infiltrating the "heartland" has gotten people scared beyond reasonable proportion. "I get frisked every time I fly out of Sioux Falls, and people boarding the planes keep talking about looking at other passengers and trying to figure out who might be a terrorist. They should know that the chance of a terrorist attack in South Dakota of all places is incredibly small. But Bush's speeches have them all riled up, to the point that people are getting edgy and bitter in their conversations with one another. I don't like the way that Bush's rhetoric is poisoning the way we see one another in the country."

The Republicans claim that it's necessary to vote for Bush in order to make the soldiers in Iraq feel supported, but even on this measure, George W. Bush fails. Soldiers are led to become disillusioned in their work when they see their fellow soldiers sent on a fool's errand, as they were with the invasion and occupation of Iraq. National Guardsman Brett Sholtis writes, "President Bush must be seen for what he is: someone who has taken a meritorious institution composed of people who have signed a contract to serve their country, and has employed them for his own pursuits. He should be seen as a traitor to the ideals of honor and integrity. He should be seen as a traitor to all soldiers who trusted that their sacrifice would be worth something to their families and loved ones, rather than a death to serve the financial and political pursuits of one man." (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again?, Michael Moore)

George W. Bush likes to say he's a man for small government. But if that's true, why is he using the government to interfere in Americans' lives? The Bush administration has ruled that Cuban-Americans may not visit their relatives in Cuba more than once every three years, and even then for only two weeks. Since when is it George W. Bush's business how Americans choose to visit members of their own family? (Source: Houston Chronicle July 10, 2004)

How poor are George W. Bush's diplomatic skills? Mr. Bush couldn't persuade the Philippines to keep its peacekeepers in Iraq; they have been withdrawn. George W. Bush's failure to persuade Filipino leaders to keep the troops in Iraq will make it that much more difficult for the American troops left holding the bag there. (Source: Associated Press July 19, 2004)

When George W. Bush carried out his war against Iraq, he promised the American people that it would make the world safer from terrorism. In one of many signs that this hasn't come to pass, the New York Times has instituted a new "Attacks and Abductions" section of its newspaper.

In his Senate votes in 2003, John Kerry voted in a manner that the ultra-right-wing Christian Coalition approved 0 percent of the time. This is the organization steered by Pat Robertson, who spent years curing people's hemmorhoids on television, who said that Florida hurricanes were the fault of the gays, and who said that September 11 was the fault of the atheists. Well, it's a good sign that John Kerry has drawn the ire of Robertson and his ilk -- if Robertson doesn't like Kerry, there must be a lot for reasonable people to like about the man. Meanwhile, George W. Bush regularly earns the congratulations of the Christian Coalition, and that's downright scary. (Source: Christian Coalition Pressroom)

Bush said it! "We want anybody who can find work to be able to find work." George W. Bush: he's the definitionally-true president. (Source: San Francisco Chronicle August 8, 2004)

The Bush Administration has made it a habit to spend its time publicly advocating for policy changes that almost nobody thinks has a chance of coming to pass. In the spring and summer of 2004, George W. Bush took the time almost every day remark on the importance of a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. But those who took the time to do a count on Capitol Hill knew that the votes weren't there to pass a constitutional amendment. George W. Bush speechifies about the keeping words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, but he knows that the arbiter of that decision is the Supreme Court, not the President of the United States.

Why, when the Bush Administration could be spending time working on issues over which it could actually exercise some change, is it wasting its time pontificating about issues over which it has no control?

One issue the Bush Administration should be expending a great deal of energy on, but just isn't, is the decline of democracy in Russia. As Vlad Putin shuts down opposition voices in the media and extends his control over various branches of the Russian economy, George W. Bush should be doing everything he can to encourage movement in the other direction. But democracy be darned: George W. Bush has looked Vlad Putin in the eye and decided that old Pootie-Poot (as Bush calls him) has a good "soul." So Bush allows Russia to continue its dangerous decline. (Source: BBC News May 23, 2002)

Even when a political horse is dead, George W. Bush won't stop beating it. When his constitutional amendment against marriages failed in the Senate, the amendment was assured failure. The sensible thing to do would be to move on to other policy priorities. But instead Bush asked the House to take out time from addressing substantive policy matters to engage in floor debate and voting on the amendment. George W. Bush seems to enjoy getting the government to waste its time rather than actually letting it do something productive. Only an entitled, pampered, and spoiled child of privilege would let government fritter away its energy on inconsequential rhetorical matters while serious problems line up around the block waiting to be addressed. (Source: Associated Press July 15, 2004)

On July 12, 2004, George W. Bush uttered the following defense of his war of choice against Iraq:
"We removed a declared enemy of America who had the capability of producing weapons of mass murder and could have passed that capability to terrorists bent on acquiring them."
Let's take that sentence apart. First of all, good grammar, Mr. President. It's nice to see you try on that account.

But more substantively, notice how far George W. Bush has come in one short year. It used to be that Bush claimed Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Then Bush claimed that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction programs. Then Bush claimed that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction related programs. Now Bush claims that Hussein had the capability of producing weapons of mass destruction.

The capability. Is that enough to go to war? Intelligence experts have now pretty much agreed that Hussein did not have the capability to produce nuclear weapons (as Bush claimed he did -- another slip of the truth), so we'll have to assume Bush meant that Hussein had the capability of producing chemical or biological weapons.

I hate to break it to Mr. Bush, but just about any country who employs a PhD-level microbiologist has the capability of producing biological weapons, as our own nation's domestic anthrax scare of 2001 demonstrated. And as the Sarin attacks in the Tokyo subway demonstrate, even an esoteric religious cult has the capability of producing chemical weapons.

So if the capability of producing chemical or biological weapons is the essential criterion for going to war against a country, then by Mr. Bush's standard we're going to be sending our troops to countless unfriendly nations around the globe for some time now.

Unless, that is, George W. Bush is not leveling with the American people. Hmmm. Could that be what's going on here? Hmmm. (Source: Associated Press July 12, 2004)

On July 12, 2004, George W. Bush declared his administration's intention to open up 58 million acres of wild, roadless land owned by the American people (one third of the remaining American wilderness) to private business development. Doesn't this man get the point that once our wilderness is gone, it's gone? Some things are worth protecting in the long term. But George W. Bush seems incapable of thinking in the long term. (Source: Associated Press July 12, 2004)

According to the New York Times (July 4, 2004), in early 2003 George W. Bush released prisoners from the detention center Guantanamo Bay as part of a deal to secure support of some of the involved nations for the looming war against Iraq.

If, as the Bush Administration claims, these are terrorists being held at Guantanamo Bay, then what is George W. Bush doing releasing terrorists to pursue his political agenda? The alternative, of course, is that a number of the detainees are not terrorists at all, but are rather political pawns being used in callous fashion by the Bush Administration. Neither alternative warms the heart.

In a July 2004 speech, George W. Bush spit out the following words: "The culture of America is changing from one that has said 'If it feels good, do it, and if you've got a problem, blame somebody else' to a culture in which each of us understands we are responsible for the decisions we make in life."

That is, of course, why George W. Bush has allowed the Central Intelligence Agency to take the blame for his factually-inaccurate push for war. That's also why he's refused to apologize for the mistakes of his war against Iraq. That must also be why he hasn't attended a single funeral of the hundreds upon hundreds of American soldiers who have died in his name.

George W. Bush's Secretary of State, Colin Powell, pales in comparison to his predecessors when it comes to visiting with other world leaders. Powell's three predecessors travelled on average 45 percent more than Powell. Bush's top diplomat just isn't making the rounds like he needs to, especially given the international blunders by his boss that he has to clean up after. This is another indication of the dangerously increasing isolation of the Bush Administration (and therefore, unfortunately, America) from the rest of the world. (Source: Washington Post July 14, 2004)

Well, what kind of a guy are we talking about when we discuss George W. Bush? When George W. Bush was president of his fraternity, brand-new pledges were branded with a blazing hot iron after being kicked for hours. The guy for whom this was tricksy fun grew up (or rather, didn't) to be president. Scary enough? (Sources: Associated Press July 14, 2004; Yale Alumni Magazine February 2001; New York Times April 7, 1999)

The American Foreign Service Association, the mission of which is to provide a professional community and look out for the interests of America's foreign diplomatic workers, rated John Kerry's votes as agreeing with its mission 88 percent of the time in the last year it rated , ranking Kerry as one of the top Senate supporters of the diplomatic corps. (Source: Wytheville Enterprise June 27, 2004)

Bush said it! "My job is to, like, think beyond the immediate." Yes, it is. We all wish he would, like, do that every once in a while. (Source: San Francisco Chronicle August 8, 2004)

As Commander-In-Chief, George W. Bush has proved to be such a pathetic leader that he has been identified by many soldiers as their prime enemy. Allison Duncan, who joined the Air Force and was a Republican before the Iraq war, realized that she had been duped, and wrote, "To vote for him would be to forswear the oath I took to uphold and defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. I find myself close to tears when I realize I voted for the man I now see as the Domestic Nemesis we now face." Bush has so poorly defined America's military enemies that much of the military now regards him as an enemy. (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again?, Michael Moore)

George W. Bush has played a shell game with middle class taxes by withdrawing federal support from states and local municipalities. The effect is that, because of Mr. Bush's policies, state taxes and property taxes are on the rise. Meanwhile, Bush's rich friends pay less and less. John Kerry will repeal the special tax giveaways to the rich while preserving the middle class tax cuts at the federal level. That's another reason to give Bush the boot and let John Kerry come in to clean up Bush's mess. (Source: Bloomberg News June 23, 2004)

John Kerry has the maturity that Mr. Bush lacks, and will use that maturity to repair the international relations that we have. Kerry won't just sit there and be passive, like Bush has. He'll use active diplomacy. That means that Kerry will talk with foreign leaders even when he doesn't need them to do something for him. Kerry will not resort to taunts and put-downs when things don't go his way. Instead, Kerry will offer the positive incentive of true partnership.

We can trust that John Kerry will keep his eye on the ball. When it comes to dealing with the likes of Saddam Hussein, John Kerry will have the intelligence not to sacrifice a thousand American lives (and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi lives) in the pursuit of someone who does not threaten the United States. When it comes to the likes of Osama Bin Laden, John Kerry will not abandon the hunt in order to wage wars elsewhere, as Bush did. This trust in John Kerry is based in a life-long record of consistency, one that Bush can't even come close to. Kerry has decades of public service, which means he knows how to follow through, stay the right course, and stop wasting time and energy on sideshow pursuits.

For his nominating convention, John Kerry is using unprecedented environmental standards, from the use of electricity from renewable sources to hybrid-technology transportation to locally-grown food to recycled paper and low-paper-use organizational systems right down to biodegradable balloons and confetti. When Kerry talks about the environment, his Boston convention shows he's also walking the walk. That's such a relief after nearly four years of a Bush who talks one way while walking the other. (Source: Associated Press July 8, 2004)

It was an odd location for George W. Bush to make his big announcement. No television cameras were present. Yet, as Mr. Bush walked into the offices of the Lapp Electric Service plant in Smoketown, Pennsylvania, he must have known that his words would be reported around the world.

There, waiting to talk to Mr. Bush, was a group of about 60 local Amish, one of whom had made a quilt for the visiting President. Mr. Bush shook a few hands, tried on a straw hat, and then made his announcement to the small crowd.

"God speaks through me," he said. (We're not making this up. This story was first reported in the local papers, including the Intelligencer Journal and the Lancaster New Era, on July 16, 2004.)

God speaks through George W. Bush? Gosh. That sounds crazy. That sounds like the President of the United States, the most powerful human being on the Earth, the man who commands the greatest stockpile of nuclear missiles and other weapons of mass destruction ever created, believes that he is a prophet chosen by God to represent all that is good and right in the Universe. When George W. Bush says, "God speaks through me," it sounds as if George W. Bush really believes that whatever words happen to come out of his mouth are the words of God himself.

It's official: George W. Bush will only take a two-week vacation in 2004, not the full-month vacation he took in 2001, again in 2002 and yet again in 2003. No, this year he pledges to be on the job for two weeks of the month.

What state of world or domestic affairs demands that George W. Bush work like he has never worked before, and limit his summer vacation from four weeks to two weeks? Is it some need for extra diplomacy? Is Mr. Bush going to work extra hard to help Americans generate new jobs? Is the man possibly going to work on reducing his record deficit?

Of course not. When we say that Bush pledges to stay on the job for two extra weeks of August 2004, we don't mean the job of being the President of the United States! Don't be silly! Bush is still going to take his vacation from that job. No, he'll be spending the extra time trying to get himself re-elected.

That's right: Bush hasn't bothered to cancel his annual vacation to deal with terrorists' threats, a crashing economy, record deficits, looming health-care disasters or any other problem that faces Americans. He only grudgingly cuts back his vacation time to look after his own personal fate.

The only thing that will get George W. Bush off his own ass is looking after his own ass. What a typical silver-spooned, blue-blooded, spoiled rich kid attitude! (Source: International Herald-Tribune July 19, 2004)

From his inauguration until August 9, 2001, George W. Bush vacationed 54 days in Crawford, 38 days at Camp David and 4 days at his parents' place at Kennebunkport. That makes for 42% of a presidency on vacation. And we all know what happened the following month. (Source: The Guardian of London August 9, 2001)

George W. Bush nominated, and his Republican-controlled Senate confirmed, J. Leon Holmes to a federal judgeship. Holmes has written that in marriage "the woman is to place herself under the authority of the man," and has also written that conceptions from rape occur "as often as it snows in Miami." Holmes is not only morally regressive, he's just plain wrong: approximately twenty thousand rape victims become pregnant in the United States every year. That Bush would nominate such an ignorant and odious man not only shows how morally bankrupt Bush is, but also demonstrates how little he cares for the well-being of the men and women who will find themselves under the controlling whim of J. Leon Holmes. (Source: Brattleboro Reformer July 20, 2004)

Energy Star is a program that encourages businesses to conserve energy and gives consumers information they need to buy more energy-efficient appliances, preserving environmental resources and saving billions of dollars that would have gone into wasteful energy use. And the cost of the billions of dollars of savings to the taxpayer only runs in the millions of dollars, meaning that the Energy Star program in effect more than pays for itself -- to the tune of $70 saved for every $1 spent. Wonderful!

You know what I'm going to say next, don't you? That's right: the Bush Administration cut funding to the program, resulting in the cancellation of Energy Star programs. (Source: Associated Press August 30, 2003)

John Ashcroft's Department of Justice is so desperate to make it appear that the Bush Administration is prevailing against terrorists that it has classified 35 criminal cases in Iowa as blows in the War on Terrorism. The problem: most of the defendents in these cases were charged with simple crimes like fraud (omitting mention of prior drug arrests on employment forms) or theft (of baby formula!), served a few months in jail, and then were released. Judges involved in the cases said they were not terrorist-related at all. (Source: Associated Press July 19, 2004)

How extreme is George W. Bush on degrading the environment? Russell E. Train, who headed the Environmental Protection Agency under two Republican administrations in the 1970s, and who organized to elect George H.W. Bush, has publicly stated his opposition to Bush's re-election. Says Train, "It's almost as if the motto of the administration in power today in Washington is not environmental protection, but polluter protection. I find this deeply disturbing." (Source: Associated Press July 20, 2004)

Because George W. Bush's war of choice has drawn members of the National Guard overseas, they are no longer at home to perform their traditional function of helping states cope with emergency situations. Republican Governor Dick Kempthorne of Idaho says that with so many members of the Idaho National Guard drawn overseas, he's worried about his state's capacity to fight wildfires this summer. Governor Ted Kulongoski of Oregon is worrying about the same thing. This is another way we're weakend on the home front because George W. Bush couldn't wait to run off and play war with other people's lives. (Source: New York Times July 20, 2004)

Soldiers wish that George W. Bush would himself join in the war that he started, but Bush refuses to do any actual fighting himself. One soldier with the Army's special forces complains, "Instead of grabbing an old war flag out of storage and taking it to the front lines to lead his men (I'm quite sure that the commander in chief could do that if he chose to) in this most important war, he stayed at home and sent a bunch of sons and daughters of the working class." The soldiers in Iraq know that George W. Bush is afraid to go where they go, and they resent him for it. Yet, George W. Bush whips up militaristic propaganda to support his political agenda. Bush is trying to have it both ways, pretending to be tough yet making decisions like a wimp, and his split personality is costing Americans life and limb. (Source: Will They Ever Trust Us Again?, Michael Moore)

George W. Bush loves to go on and on about how about how the Bible is his source of morality, and how it's important for Biblical standards of morality to be protected by the government. That is, after all, why Bush says he pushed so hard for an amendment to the Constitution to keep gay people from getting married. It's puzzling, then, why George W. Bush hasn't pushed for other moral standards clearly spelled out in the Bible to be enacted in law.

Let's take, for instance, usury: the lending of money at high rates. The Bible clearly states that usury is a major-league sin:
Leviticus 25: 35-36
And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea, though he be a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee. Take thou no usury of him, or increase: but fear thy God; that thy brother may live with thee. Thou shalt not give him thy money upon usury, nor lend him thy victuals for increase.

Ezekiel 18:5-8
But if a man be just, and do that which is lawful and right... And hath not oppressed any, but hath restored to the debtor his pledge, hath spoiled none by violence, hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment; He that hath not given forth upon usury, neither hath taken any increase, that hath withdrawn his hand from iniquity, hath executed true judgment between man and man, hath walked in my statutes, and hath kept my judgments, to deal truly; he is just, he sh all surely live, saith the Lord GOD.

Exodus 22: 25
If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury.

Deuteronomy 23:19
Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury.

Matthew 21: 12-13
And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, and said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.
In recent years, the United States has been beset by the proliferation of predatory lending operations that offer desperate people short-term "payday loans" to tide them over for a week or two, but that charge huge interest rates for the "favor."

Of course, George W. Bush being the upstanding Biblical man that he is, you'd think he'd be doing something to combat the sin of usury. But you'd be wrong. He's signed two proclamations declaring "National Consumer Protection Week," but those proclamations don't do anything but encourage Americans in words to be careful when they go about getting usurious loans. No new laws, no new bills, no executive orders, nothing. Outside of those two empty declarations naming a symbolic week, there's not even a single mention of "payday loan" operations in any speech, press conference or document coming from the White House.

Biblical sins that benefit rich corporations while crushing the lives of the dispossessed are not, apparently, George W. Bush's concern. The private acts of consenting adults must be regulated first. (Source:

It's not as though nothing can be done to end the scourge of usurious lending. John Kerry has developed a specific policy agenda for cracking down on predatory lending operations. This is just one more way in which John Kerry makes a better choice for president than George W. Bush (Source: Washington Post August 28, 2004)

The latest time-waster George W. Bush's Republican-controlled Congress is considering: another amendment to the Constitution, this time to ban the burning of American flags. Do you see anyone on your street corner burning flags? Is there some kind of rampant flag-burning movement sweeping across Wisconsin or something? I don't think so. But while Bush's Republicans are wasting their time playing amendment games (knowing all the while that there's no chance of the amendment being passed), Americans are going without jobs, without health care, without information about energy security, without full funding for education initiatives, and with another soldier dying in some foreign entanglement every day. Will Bush's Republicans address these matters? No, of course not -- they're too busy keeping people from burning flags!

When will Bush and the Republicans get real? When pigs fly? It's time to get somebody else in charge who is willing to do the heavy lifting needed to get our country back on track. (Source: Reuters July 20, 2004)

Well, guess what George W. Bush, the self-declared "war president," who prides himself on consistency and accuses his opponent of "flip-flopping," says now? "Nobody wants to be the 'war president,'" he says, "I want to be the 'peace president.'" (Source: Associated Press July 21, 2004)

Funny thing, but back when that mess he got us into in Iraq was still popular, he was pleased as punch to be the "war president."

Mr. Bush, you may have dodged serving in Vietnam, but you're no peacenik. And we're no fools.

Bush Appointee Michael Powell, head of the Federal Communications Commission, failed to appear in a hearing scheduled for him to listen to public concerns about the concentration of media in the United States. Powell cited a "scheduling conflict." Clearly, something matters more to this powerful member of the Bush Administration than attending his own meetings, or listening to the public. How sadly typical. (Source: Broadcasting and Cable July 21, 2004)

According to veteran Jim Rassmann, six men including himself served with John Kerry on his swift boat. One is dead. The other five support John Kerry's candidacy. There's a strong endorsement from men who know the candidate well.

As for the men who served with Bush in a war zone, ... oh, right. (Source: Associated Press August 5, 2004)

Bush said it! "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."

Finally, the man is honest with the nation. (Source: Associated Press August 5, 2004)

The Republican administration of New York City that is ushering George W. Bush and his conventioneers around the city are making special room, giving the approximately 50,000 Bush supporters free reign in Central Park. The National Organization of Women petitioned to use Central Park for a demonstration of 50,000 people against Bush's candidacy. They were turned down -- because 50,000 progressives would "hurt the grass."

Is this the America you cherish? Well, it's Bush's America now. (Source: July 28, 2004)

Republican Party officials have been requiring Americans to sign oaths of loyalty to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney before they are allowed to attend events at which Bush appears.

The President of the United States is supposed to serve all the people of this nation, not just Republicans. (Source: NPR, August 9, 2004)

The man George W. Bush picked to be the next head of the Central Intelligence Agency said publicly of himself "I couldn't get a job with CIA today. I am not qualified." That'll inspire confidence! (Source: Reuters August 11, 2004)

At the World Stupidity Awards of 2004, George W. Bush won the highest honor, the Stupidest Man of the Year Award. (Source: Canadian Press July 24, 2004)

To top it off, George W. Bush won in a second category as well: the Stupidity Award for Reckless Endangerment of the Planet. These people at the World Stupidity Awards certainly know stupidity when they see it. (Source: Canadian Press July 24, 2004)

But wait, there's more! In the category of Stupidity for Reckless Endangerment of the Planet, George W. Bush is a return winner, having won in 2003 as well. That's right, he's a returning champion of stupid-headedness!(Source: Canadian Press July 24, 2004)

That's not all, friends! George W. Bush's entire administration won accolades for having achieved the Stupidest Government of the Year. They couldn't have managed without working together as a team to mount the peak of stupidity and plant their hefty flag there. (Source: Canadian Press July 24, 2004)

And finally, in his record sweep of the World Stupidity Awards, George W. Bush beat out Britney Spears ("I Do") and Jessica Simpson ("Why Does Chicken of the Sea taste like tuna? Is it chicken or tuna?") to win the Stupidest Statement of the Year, for his most un-excellent turn of speech: "combat operations have ended in Iraq." (Source: Canadian Press July 24, 2004)

The sad thing is that Bush's triumph at the World Stupidity Awards may mark the only time in his presidency in which he has managed to unite the world in a common agreement on anything.

Creating an eerie pattern, the Bush Administration has exposed the identity of another person working secretly as an agent of the United States government. This time the Bush Administration identified a former Al Quaida agent who had been captured and turned and was working with Americans to gather information about the activities of the terrorist organization. The Bush Administration actually leaked the identity, and then confirmed to the media it a second time when asked.

Now that this agent's identity has been exposed to the entire world, he cannot be used to gather any more information about Al Quaida's plans to attack the United States or other countries. This bungle is yet another example of how George W. Bush's clumsy arrogance does more damage to America's efforts to thwart terrorist attacks than good. (Source: Reuters August 9, 2004)

Earlier this year, George W. Bush promised that millions and millions of new jobs would be created by Election Day 2004. So, how many jobs were created in, say, July 2004? 33,000. Multiply that by twelve, and you don't get millions and millions. In fact, you don't even get enough to keep pace with the number of people entering the workforce. In terms of the percent of people looking for work who are employed, there was a decrease in July. Another promise broken by Mr. Bush? We're no longer surprised. (Source: New York Times, August 7, 2004)

Gordon Skene, an audio archivist who has compiled records on an entire century of presidential history, says of George W. Bush, "This man is leading us completely straight to hell in a handbasket." For someone with such perspective to make a statement this strong, you know we're in trouble. (Source: Irregular Times, August 2004)

This year, under George W. Bush's supposed "tax relief", the richest one percent of Americans got an average giveaway of $78,460. The folks in the middle class got just $1,090. That means that the richest of the rich got 7,800 percent more than the hardworking American families that Bush claims to represent. This huge difference shows where Bush's true loyalties lie: In funneling money to the Republican elite. (Source: Congressional Budget Office, August 13, 2004)

How do economists describe the extra burden that George W. Bush is putting on working Americans? Well, William Gale, a tax analyst at the Brookings Institution, says, "It's not just that lower-income people are getting smaller benefits. It's also that these tax cuts will eventually have to be paid for with either spending cuts or tax increases, and those are likely to be less progressive than the taxes they are paying now." Bush's economic legacy: Higher taxes for working Americans, combined with reduced government services, all to pay for special subsidies to the rich. (Source: New York Times, August 13, 2004)

John Kerry would reverse Bush's corrupt big cash giveaways of taxpayers' money to the wealthiest fat cats in America. Kerry's plan is to roll back Bush's special giveaways for Americans who make over $200,000 per year. Given that Bush has also given the United States of America record budget deficits, this move is the most compassionate way to make America's economy truly strong again. (Source: New York Times, August 13, 2004)

How does John Kerry plan to use the savings that would come from eliminating Bush's special welfare programs for the rich? Some of it would be used to reduce the deficit, but the rest would be used to fund a new national health care plan. What's Bush's plan for national health care? You guessed it: Bush says we don't need any. (Source: New York Times, August 13, 2004)

The Bush Administration gets a big chunk of editorial support from a conservative newspaper called The Washington Times. In addition to declaring that George W. Bush is the best choice for President in 2004, The Washington Times recently held a special ceremony to proclaim "that Reverend Sun Myung Moon is none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent." We judge the Bush Administration by the kooky company it keeps. (Source: Sarasota Herald-Tribune, July 26, 2004)

Sometimes, the Bush Administration's attacks on the environment seem kind of abstract. The attacks take place through policies that encourage damage to the environment. Other times, however, the attacks by the Bush Administration upon the environment are quite literal. In 2002, the Bush Administration decided to allow a huge diversion of water in the Upper Klamath Basin in order to satisfy the interests of big commercial agriculture operations. As a result, 33,000 fish, including huge numbers of coho and chinook salmon, were killed. This was the largest fish kill in history, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service admits that the Bush Administration's decision was directly responsible for it. (Source: San Francisco Chronicle, November 19, 2003)

George W. Bush talks tough, but when it comes to really getting tough, Bush disintegrates into a confusing pattern of chest-beating and shameless begging. First, the Bush Administration kicks the United Nations in the shins, and later Bush comes back pleading for help. First, Bush says that his war on terror can be judged by whether Osama Bin Laden is captured or killed, then Bush pulls almost all of the resources away from the hunt for Bin Laden. First, Bush's top military advisers shout that the Shiite rebellion in Iraq will "absolutely not be tolerated", then engages in a series of negotiations alternating with gun battles that lasts for months on end. When it comes to making war, George W. Bush ain't nothing but a waffle.

How well is Bush's war in the Middle East going? Well, almost a year and a half after Bush declared "Mission Accomplished", he has announced that the United States will be withdrawing approximately 70,000 troops from elsewhere in the world so that he can send them to fight in his crusades in Iraq and Afghanistan, where war continues. It seems that Bush plans on the war going on for quite some time, but he is running out of soldiers to fight for him. Where will he search for new soldiers next? (New York Times, August 15, 2004)

In the week before George W. Bush's appearance at the Republican National Convention, his war in Afghanistan continued to unravel at the seams. Throughout Western Afghanistan, the Taliban fought against the American-appointed government, threatening national elections. US military leaders in Afghanistan said that they were "very concerned", but did not send any assistance to help fight the Taliban, choosing to watch and worry instead. (Source: USA Today, August 14, 2004)

George W. Bush's Vice President, Dick Cheney, mocked John Kerry for saying "I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror." In particular, Dick Cheney told his supporters that a "sensitive war on terror" was an awful idea.

But what does it mean to conduct policy in a "sensitive" fashion? To be sensitive means literally to use one's senses, to acutely perceive one's environment when deciding upon a course of action. The whole problem with the Bush Administration is that it dedicated so little energy and time to noticing what actually was going on, instead barrelling into a deadly quagmire with its eyes firmly shut. We know who paid the price. (Source: Washington Post August 20, 2004)

The Democrats in Congress have developed a "pay as you go" enforcement system for the federal government's budget. This system would require that tax cuts and spending items be paid fore without increasing the budget deficit. The Republicans in Congress have no such system, and have no plans to develop one. George W. Bush supports them in this lack of accountability, and even encourages them when he asks for big increases in spending and big revenue decreases at the same time. It almost seems that the Republicans are trying to bankrupt the United States of America. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

$8,800,000,000.00 in U.S. funds given to Iraqi authorities by Bush's Coalition Provisional Authority cannot be accounted for. That's $8.8 Billion. More sloppiness from a decidedly "insensitive" administration. (Source: Reuters August 19, 2004)

Even Republican representatives like Doug Bereuter now conclude that George W. Bush's decision to go to war against Iraq involved "a massive failure or misinterpretation of intelligence concerning the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs" in which "inadequate or questionable elements of intelligence and sources of intelligence were used to justify military action." Bereuter concludes that George W. Bush made a horrible mistake: "I believe that launching the preemptive military action was not justified... all things being considered, it was a mistake to launch that military action, especially without a broad and engaged international coalition. The cost in casualties is already large and growing, and the immediate and long-term financial costs are incredible. Our country's reputation around the world has never been lower and our alliances are weakened. From the beginning of the conflict it was doubtful that we for long would be seen as liberators, but instead increasingly as an occupying force. 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."

When even Bush's partisan allies are pronouncing Bush's major foreign policy action to be a gigantic blunder, you know something's gone very, very wrong. (Source: Remarks of U.S. Rep. Doug Bereuter, August 19, 2004)

As this year's Republican National Convention approaches, and Americans are being killed in Iraq almost every day, John Ashcroft has sent his FBI goons... to Missouri. Actually, FBI agents have been sent all over the country to intimidate anti-war protesters. Ashcroft won't speak on the subject himself, but he says that these people may be terrorists.

Is there any actualy evidence that they're terrorists? Well, no, other than the fact that they plan to take part in protests outside the Republican National Convention in New York City last week.

The FBI has sent its agents to follow anti-war activists for days. These FBI agents are then sent to the homes of peaceful anti-war, anti-Bush protesters and asked whether they intend to take part in violent acts against the Republicans. Then they're asked if they know of any peaceniks who are planning to commit violent acts against the Republicans. Then they're warned that lying to an FBI agent is against the law. Then the FBI agents leave.

Now see, if I were a terrorist, and an FBI agent asked me if I was planning an attack, I would say "NO!" John Ashcroft and his FBI henchmen know that this is the case too, of course. These kinds of questionings are used as a warning, not as a tool of true interrogation of suspects.

It sure looks like the FBI being used by the Bush Administration to stifle people who oppose the re-election of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. FBI spokesman Joe Parris denies that's what's happening, though, and justifies the harassment of anti-bush, anti-war activists by saying that, "Criminal behavior isn't covered by the First Amendment."

Criminal behavior? What criminal behavior has taken place? Well, none.

However, with the Patriot Act, John Askicroft and George W. Bush have taken the power to treat non-criminals as if they had committed a crime - based on the claim that even law-abiding citizens could commit serious crimes some time in the future. So, according to the Bush Administration, because everybody is a potential criminal, everybody can be treated like a criminal, and they're constitutional rights don't apply.

So, the very people who are planning protests against Bush's violence are identified by the FBI as potential terrorists who must bear the brunt of an official FBI investigation. So far, the FBI investigation includes infiltration of anti-Bush activist networks to find out private details about online organizing and fundraising.

Anti-Bush online organizing and fundraising are now signs of terrorist plots?

Heck, I've got a warning for the FBI! Interview me! You never know - I might lead a Martian invasion of New Mexico someday! (Source: New York Times August 15, 2004)

Bush said it! "The tactics of our -- as you know, we don't have relationships with Iran. I mean, that's -- ever since the late '70s, we have no contacts with them, and we've totally sanctioned them. In other words, there's no sanctions." (Source: Remarks of George W. Bush August 9, 2004, from

The Democrats in the United States Congress have a plan to restore small business loans and job training programs that were cut from the federal budget by George W. Bush and the Republicans in Congress. George W. Bush refuses to consider these efforts to help entrepreneurs and Americans eager to get back to work. As such, George W. Bush and the Republican elite are promoting a culture of laziness and business stagnation in America. John Kerry and the Democrats have a plan to get America back to work, and we say that it's worth a shot. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

The majority of Americans live within ten miles of polluted water. Boot Bush this Election Day because if our American water is so polluted, we'll never be able to wash off that dirty feeling that another four years under Bush. (Source: Sierra Club)

Under Bush's watch, how over-reaching and draconian have restrictions on Americans' freedom of movement become?

United States Senator Edward Kennedy has been denied permission to fly to his home state of Massachussets five times. The reason? A secret Bush administration document listed him as a potential terrorist.

Senator Kennedy had to use his personal clout to get Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge on the phone in order to gain clearance to travel. Then he had to call Ridge again. And again. It took three weeks before Kennedy's prohibition on travel was lifted by the Bush Administration.

If this is the experience of a powerful man at the hands of Bush's government, how can the rest of us expect to fare? When Bush is in the White House, fear your government. (Source: Associated Press August 19, 2004)

It's not just Senator Kennedy who has been denied permission to board a plane because a secret Bush Administration file lists him as a terrorist. The same happened to U.S. Representative John Lewis of Georgia -- thirty-five times. Other John Lewises across the country -- including a Dr. John Lewis of Camden, Maine -- have had the same experience. Isn't this ridiculous? Isn't this preposterous? Unfortunately, under George W. Bush one thing this isn't is surprising. (Washington Post August 21, 2004)

In May of 2004, George W. Bush pledged to deliver five major speeches, one a week, in which he would deliver a bold new outline for Iraq's future. Mr. Bush got around to making one, but none of the others followed. If this guy can't manage to maintain his commitment to make speeches, how can we expect him to maintain his commitment to actually do anything? (Source: The New Yorker August 30, 2004)

Retired U.S. Air Force General Merrill A. McPeak endorsed George W. Bush in his 2000 run for President. But this year, General McPeak has rejected Bush and is endorsing John Kerry instead. According to McPeak, Kerry "has the strength and common sense we need in a commander in chief. And, something more: a real strategy to make America safer." McPeak knows about national defense. McPeak endorses John Kerry. (Source: Associated Press August 20, 2004)

In Nevada, there were 12,600 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

George W. Bush has allowed the importation of cheaper prescription drugs from Canada to be blocked, protecting the record profits of pharmaceutical corporations. John Kerry has pledged to allow Americans to get their prescription drugs from Canada. Bush protects corporate interests, Kerry looks out for people's interests. Pretty clear choice there, no? (Source: New York Times August 12, 2004)

George W. Bush can't bring himself to condemn attacks on John Kerry's war heroism, even after the claims of the outfit behind the attacks has been thoroughly discredited. Insiders at the White House are saying they won't condemn the attacks because they think they work, meaning make Kerry look bad.

Isn't it time that we had a president more interested in the truth, and less interested in having his enemies look bad at the expense of the truth? (Source: Berkshire Eagle August 24, 2004)

To try to somehow make John Kerry's war heroism look like a bad thing, the Bush campaign is getting people like Bob Dole to go on television and say things like Kerry "never bled that I know of." Well, of course he wouldn't know. He wasn't there. Kerry's crewmate Del Sandusky was there, and he piped right back: "I was there when he got wounded. I saw the blood. I don't care what Dole said." (Source: Associated Press August 23, 2004)

Benjamin Ginsberg, George W. Bush's re-election campaign lawyer, has been advising the group called "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" that has been issuing scurrilous and unsupported allegations against John Kerry.

Campaign law clearly states that Bush's re-election campaign cannot coordinate in any way with groups like SBVFT. (Source: Associated Press August 24, 2004)

The largest convention protest in more than 30 years takes place in New York City, with roughly a quarter of a million people coming together to register their opposition to George W. Bush. While it's nice that so many people are coming together for something, it's telling that no presidency in the past 30 years has provoked such large-scale revulsion. (Source: USA Today August 22, 2004)

George W. Bush has dedicated his administration to the crucial task of renaming cabinet secretaries and reorganizing old agencies into new bureaucratic departments. Meanwhile, 64% of border agents say they aren't being given the tools, training and support they need to do their job correctly. (Source: Washington Post August 24, 2004)

In Mississippi, the poverty rate was 8.5 percent higher in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. But Bush doesn't seem to notice; perhaps he's too busy playing T-ball on the White House lawn. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Sheryl Crow, Crosby Stills and Nash, Bruce Springsteen, REM, Pearl Jam, Jackson Browne, Bonnie Raitt, Keb' Mo', the Dixie Chicks, Babyface, James Taylor, the Dave Matthews Band and John Mellencamp are among the musicians heading out on a national tour to help raise a message of opposition to George W. Bush.

The best the Bush campaign can muster, on the other hand, is the 70s band FogHat. Foghat. (Source: U.S. News and World Report August 30, 2004)

If John Kerry were President, he would work with the Democrats in Congress, who have already written a budget plan that would extend unemployment benefits for American workers who have been forced out of their jobs by the Republican economic disaster. George W. Bush refuses to cooperate. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

Bush said it! "Tribal sovereignty means that it's sovereign. You're a -- you've been given sovereignty and you're viewed as a sovereign entity." This is the man to whose brain we have entrusted the stewardship of the most powerful nation on the planet? Help! (Source: The New Yorker August 30, 2004)

In the District of Columbia the poverty rate was 12 percent larger in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. While George W. Bush focuses on pressing national policy demands like the use of steroids by professional athletes, our nation's capital is slipping quickly into deprivation. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

How out of the mainstream is George W. Bush? Even Dick Cheney has publicly concluded that George W. Bush is wrong to support a federal amendment to the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. But Bush blithely blunders on, heedless to voices of reason even from inside his own party. (Source: Reuters August 24, 2004)

If you sat down to play Monopoly with a member of the Bush Administration, you'd have to repeatedly slap their hands as they attempted to slide new "Chance" and "Community Chest" cards onto the board, trying to stack the deck in their favor.

If you sat down to play poker with any major figure in the Bush Administration, you'd win hands down. They're all so transparent when they're bluffing, aren't they? The problem is, we're not playing poker. We're playing international relations.

In New Mexico, the poverty rate was 3.2 percent higher in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. New Mexico can do better than a slow backtrack in well-being, but George W. Bush seems satisfied with the way things are. Are you satisfied? (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

For the entire spring and summer of 2004, George W. Bush has refused to engage in a series of monthly debates with John Kerry. As the summer came to a close, John Kerry tried to make up for Bush's lapse, inviting Bush to a series of weekly debates continuing up until the election. George W. Bush is refusing to attend.

If truth and justice are on your side, you should have nothing to lose from an airing of your positions. If you have something to hide or to be ashamed of, debates should be avoided at all costs. We know where George W. Bush lies. (Source: Associated Press August 26, 2004)

Do you enjoy the expansion of the English language under George W. Bush to accomodate such gems of his as "misunderestimate" and "subliminable"? Well, why leave it up to Mr. Bush alone? In the loose, imprecise spirit of the Bush Era, we can come up with new words of out very own. The language should expand to fit the new leadership values of the 21st Century: shitforbrainism, smirkingloserness, chickenhawkdeserterness, boozingmommasboyism, dumbasscoyboywannabeness, increcibleboneheadjerkism, spinelesscorporatewhoreness, and absolutelyworstpresidenteverness.

During George W. Bush's first year in office, 2.4 million people in America lost their health insurance. George W. Bush's policy about this problem? Do nothing. (Source: The Independent September 3, 2004)

In 2003 alone, 1.4 million more people lost their health insurance under George W. Bush. George W. Bush isn't doing anything about it. And his response the day this news came out? Silence. (Source: Washington Post August 28, 2004)

Compared to the Democrats' federal budget plans, the Republican budget plan takes 9.8 billion dollars away from education and training programs. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

In 2003 alone, 1.3 million more Americans fell into poverty under George W. Bush. America is supposed to be a land in which every new generation is wealthier than the generation before. Under George W. Bush, that positive trend has reversed. George W. Bush isn't doing anything to stem this new wave of poverty. His response the day this news came out? Silence. (Source: Washington Post August 28, 2004)

What is the moral worldview of the Republican delegates who gathered in New York City to nominate George W. Bush as their champion? According to Leonardo Alcivar, spokesman for the Bush convention, "Our delegates understand the old adage, do unto others as they do unto you."

We'll take Alcivar's word for it that "do unto others as they do unto you" is an accurate representation of the ethical perspective of the central circle of Bush conventioneers. Unfortunately, that phrase is not an accurate quotation of the old adage known as the Golden Rule. The Golden Rule actually reads "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

The difference between the Golden Rule and the Republican Rule is not trivial. As Alcivar articulated it, human action in a society should be organized according to payback: if someone slaps you upside the head, you should slap them right back (lest you think this was a misquote or a slip of the tongue, Alcivar mentioned the Republican version of the adage as a way of letting reporters know that whatever anti-Bush demonstrators might dish out, conventioneers might be inclined to dish right back). The Golden Rule, on the other hand, asserts that if we act toward others not as they act toward us but as we wish they would act toward us, the standard of conduct in a society will come to resemble our wishes.

The Golden Rule is instructive, self-sacrificing, with a vision for the long term that offers a strategy for improvement in the way we deal with each other as individuals, groups and nations. The Republican Rule is vindictive, self-guarding, short-sighted and offers no hope for improvement in the way people, groups and nations interact with one another. George W. Bush stands for the Republican Rule, not the Golden Rule. And that's another reason to give Bush the Boot in 2004. (Source: New York Times August 31, 2004)

Alcivar's misconstrual of the Golden Rule establishes another troubling tendency among Bush's core of supporters at the convention: apparently, they enjoy referring to the Bible more than they enjoy reading it.

The Golden Rule is clearly enshrined in the New Testament of the Bible, in two places:
(Matthew 7:12 RSV) "So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets."

(Luke 6:31 RSV) "And as you wish that men would do to you, do so to them."
Do we have to quote the Bible to the ostentatious Bible-thumpers? Apparently we do. The Bush conventioneers that Alcivar refers to aren't nearly as Biblical as they say they are -- and we certainly don't need another four years of self-righteous ignorance masquerading as piety.

In Kentucky, the poverty rate was 6.1 percent higher in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. Apparently, being in a "red state" doesn't mean that you'll do well under Bush. Kentucky is slipping further into poverty and Bush isn't doing anything to stop it. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

The Bush Campaign arranged for Arnold Schwarzenegger to appear before Bush's nominating convention to utter the following profound sentiment: that "those critics who are pessimistic about our economy" are "girlie men."

Well first of all, they're called statisticians, not girlie men. And second of all, "girlie men" is at best a synonym for "men who are like women" and at worst "faggots."

So this is what the Bush-Cheney campaign has to offer? That people who worry about the economy are either men who are like women (apparently to the Republicans it is a problem to be like a woman) or faggots?

Spare us four more years of this "moral uplift." Boot Bush in 2004. (Source: Associated Press September 1, 2004)

A European who spent some time in the United States as a student and calls himself "a friend of all conscious Americans" writes in to us: "I cannot believe how torn the world is since some fanatic Crusaders have ruled your country. America lost most of its fans.

Have you ever thought about how many hospitals, schools, streets etc. in the poor countries of the third world could have been built with the money of just one bomb dropped over Iraq? The USA could have tried to act Christian and could have made friends instead of starting an unjustified war and making thousands of people either dead or enemies. Not only the US, but the whole world, is an unsafe and uncomfortably threatened place due to Bush and his administration. He is really dangerous. It's a pity that only Americans can make him lose his job because he is polluting the whole world."

The Bush Administration was only willing to allocate $3 million for the 9/11 commission to do its work, but was willing to allocate $50 million for the commission investigating the loss of the space shuttle Columbia. Priorities? (Source: The Independent September 3, 2004)

Under the Bush Administration's watch, both military and civilian branches of government are suffering from a shortage of translators of Arabic. Yet six translators of Arabic have been dismissed from the military because they were gay. Priorities? (Source: CBS News November 14, 2002)

George W. Bush yells, hollers, screams and pants up a storm about "Homeland Security." He went to war with a nation that was not a threat over "Homeland Security." His administration cuts civil liberties in the name of "Homeland Security." Yet George W. Bush allocated no money for port security in 2003. Priorities? (Source: The Independent September 3, 2004)

The Bush Administration plans to raise Medicare premiums by a whopping 17.5% in 2005. The cowards announced this plan in a news conference on the Friday afternoon before Labor Day, hoping that nobody would notice. (Source: Washington Post September 4, 2004)

In Alabama, there were 17,800 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. Bush's solution? Tax cuts for the rich. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

On September 5, 2004, George W. Bush took time off from campaigning (for which he's taking time off from his presidential duties) to take a nice, long bike ride. The same day, two American soldiers were killed by hostile fire in Iraq, and the next day, seven more were killed by a car bomb. Bush doesn't plan to take off any time to go to their funerals. (Sources: Associated Press September 5, 2004 and Associated Press September 6, 2004)

George W. Bush's faulty financial management of the federal government has resulted in a shortfall of over 3 billion dollars for funding of the Pell grant program that helps working Americans get the education they need to stay competitive in the Republican-inspired global labor market, in which jobs are outsourced overseas at the drop of a hat. Hey, maybe George W. Bush felt that a college education was nothing more than an excuse to get drunk, but for a lot of American kids who weren't born with big trust funds, a college education means an awful lot. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

It hasn't been widely covered by the press, but in August of 2002 George W. Bush's Attorney General, John Ashcroft, disclosed a Bush Administration plan in which United States citizens would be declared "enemy combatants," stripped of their constitutional rights, denied access to courts, and jailed indefinitely in special camps -- all without a trial, the right to dispute the Bush Administration's action, or even any charges.

The U.S. Constitution forbids such actions, of course, but that isn't stopping the Bush administration. And that's why we have to stop the Bush administration ourselves come this November. Now is the time to ask: when will they come for you? (Source: Los Angeles Times August 14, 2002)

In Alaska, there were 1,900 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. What happened to the compassion in compassionate conservatism? (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

It wasn't just immoral for the Bush Administration to condone interrogation techniques that have been characterized as torturous. It also just plain didn't work. Since media pressure forced the Bush Administration to end the use of "physical coercion" (a nice term for torture) in interrogation in Iraq, interrogators have gained 50% more high-value intelligence from interrogation than they did when they were using "coercion." (Source: New York Times September 7, 2004)

Before he landed on an aircraft carrier in the spring of 2003, prematurely declaring an end to combat under a "Mission Accomplished" banner, George W. Bush took pains to prepare for the landing, even going to the White House pool for survival training in case of a water landing.

George W. Bush takes great pains to safeguard his own personal safety and well-being. If only he had dedicated that much care to planning for the safety and well-being of American troops in Iraq, if only he had dedicated that much care to planning for economic contingencies when crafting his gigantic tax cuts, if only he had dedicated that much care to interpreting intelligence data with an unbiased eye, this country wouldn't be in such a pickle.(Source: New York Times September 7, 2004)

In Arizona, there were 15,400 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. What would it take for Bush to pay attention to these families in poverty? Would the parents in those families have to be gay? (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

In his speech at the Republican National Convention in 2004, George W. Bush said that "we must strengthen Social Security by allowing younger workers to save some of their taxes in a personal account, a nest egg you can call your own, and government can never take away."

As Harvard lecturer Joseph J. Stern points out, workers already have in Social Security a nest egg government can never take away. Social Security payments are guaranteed under our current system.

So what's George W. Bush saying? That he's going to take away traditional Social Security from American workers? That certainly seems to be the implication. (Source: New York Times September 7, 2004)

As much as the Republicans run around chanting "Support Our Troops" and wearing yellow ribbons, it's the Democrats who are really providing support to people who have served in the military. Over the next 5 years, the Democratic plan for the federal government budget provides 6.6 billion dollars more for veterans programs than the Republican plan does. Compared to the Democrats, George W. Bush and his Republican followers are sending young Americans out to risk their lives in battle, and then cutting them off at the knees when they come back home. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

What was George W. Bush doing while people like John Kerry were getting shot at in Vietnam? After a Senate campaign (one he got a job for as a favor from friends of his dad) ended in a loss, George W. Bush got drunk, pissed on a car and swore at police officers. This class act is your president. (Source: September 2, 2004)

In Colorado, there were 24,500 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. That's homeland insecurity for you, but Bush hasn't done anything to solve this problem. He's too busy taking trips on his bike. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

There's a new allegation out there that George W. Bush was snorting lines of cocaine at Camp David when his papa was president. Who knows if this story will turn out to be true, but after he says something like the following, you've got to wonder:

"Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country." (Sources: Boston Herald September 7, 2004 and Associated Press September 7, 2004)

On Saturday, September 4, George W. Bush finally let slip what his $87 Billion appropriation was for: "body parts and ammunition and fuel." For once, Bush got it right: body parts, bullet casings and oil are about all we're going to bring back from Iraq. (Source: Los Angeles Times September 7, 2004)

When it comes down to the numbers, what is the difference between George W. Bush and the Democratic opposition when it comes to the environment? Compared to the Democratic plan to protect the environment, George W. Bush and his Republican army of conservative politicians would rip out 17 billion dollars worth of environmental protection over the next five years. That's not just a blow to the environment, it's a blow to the economy as well, which benefits greatly from environmentally-friendly programs to increase efficiency. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

In Louisiana, there were 9,500 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. Bush accuses others of being pessimistic about the state of the economy, but with numbers like these it's hard to remain cheery. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Jean-Dominique Bunel, coordinator for non-governmental aid organizations in Iraq, has gone on record to announce that most of these aid organizations will leave Iraq in order to avoid the waves of killings and kidnappings plaguing Baghdad. It will be that much harder for Iraq to pull out of its current state of chaos with relief workers gone. This circumstance could have been avoided had the Bush Administration dedicated its energy to planning for the aftermath of a war against Iraq. It's too late now, but we can at least make sure that the Bush Administration isn't around for another four years of damage by neglect. (Source: Reuters September 8, 2004)

On September 7, 2004, two announcements were made. Not only did his ill-conceived Iraq War kill its 1,000th American soldier, but Bush proved that he could throw away taxpayers' money at a record pace too. According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office George W. Bush has given the United States the largest budget deficit ever in 2004: over 422 billion dollars.

That means that for 2004 alone, Bush's government spent 422 billion dollars more than it brought in.

There's a connection between Bush's loss of American dollars and American lives, of course - the same Iraq War that has killed over 1,000 Americans is also a major cause of this year's record budget deficit (although, to be fair, Bush's program of special tax giveaways to corporations and super-rich campaign contributors takes a lot of the blame too).

The really appalling thing is that Bush's political party controls all three branches of the federal government right now. So, if Bush really wanted to stop shoving his expenses off onto our nation's children, he could do it. Bush does want to avoid indebting our children, right? (Source: Associated Press September 8, 2004)

In his latest pledge, George W. Bush promised that if he were re-elected, he'd cut his record deficit in half in five years (remember when he promised there'd never be a deficit in the first place?). But the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has analyzed Bush's plan and has concluded that even if American troops are somehow miraculously no longer needed in either Afghanistan or Iraq, and even if Bush doesn't make his tax cuts for the rich permanent as he consistently says he is going to do, Bush will not be able to keep his promise to cut the deficit unless he drastically raised taxes or drastically slashed spending. Bush, of course, plans to do neither. So what's the secret plan involve, Mr. Bush: fairy dust? (Source: New York Times September 8, 2004)

If George W. Bush makes his tax cuts for the rich permanent as he says he wants to do, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says the national debt will rise by $3.6 trillion dollars. How can Bush hate our children and our children's children so much to give them this legacy of crushing debt? (Source: New York Times September 24, 2004)

In Massachusetts, there were 7,900 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Bush Administration Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's latest line of defense against criticism on torture at Abu Ghraib:

"Does it rank up there with chopping someone's head off on television? It doesn't."

Is that what America stands for now? At least we don't chop your head off? I think we can reach for a higher standard than this. (Source: Associated Press September 10, 2004)

With George W. Bush raising ire in widespread fashion, people are coming out of the woodwork to declare their opposition to the Bush Presidency. Or, in one case, coming out of the woods. I'm talking about Birders United to Defeat Bush.

It takes all kinds in this struggle, and as the group points out, if just a few hundred Republican bird watching enthusiasts had voted in accordance with their interests, George W. Bush would have been nothing but a footnote in history. When even the normally reserved birding community breaks out in anti-Bush organizing, it's time to sit up and listen to the call.

In Minnesota, there were 8,800 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

On September 11, 2004, Secretary of State Colin Powell admitted that the Bush Administration "failed" to acquire accurate intelligence about Iraq's military capabilities before ordering an invasion of Iraq. Yet, Secretary Powell says that invading Iraq when and how the Bush Administration did it was still "the right thing."

An administration that is willing to rush young Americans into battle without knowing what the enemy's capabilities are does not deserve a second chance to get it right. (Source: Bloomberg News, September 12, 2004)

The Democrats have put forward a plan to fully fund health coverage for disabled children under the Family Opportunity Act. George W. Bush refuses to cooperate, demanding that the Democrats stop trying to help the parents of children with disabilities. Can you get any meaner than that? (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

In 2000, George W. Bush promised to be "A uniter, not a divider." Well, we've talked about how Bush's current policies have divided Americans. Apparently, for someone as ambitious as Mr. Bush, such division is not enough.

By lying about his own Vietnam record even as he accuses John Kerry of not being enough of a Vietnam War hero, George W. Bush has purposefully opened up the old wounds of the Vietnam War for the sake of his own political benefit. It is certainly worth a quick examination of presidential candidates' war records, but to use these old records as the primary issue in a presidential campaign is irresponsible, and divisive. Vietnam matters, but we regard it as history. George W. Bush perceives the Vietnam War as part of current events. No wonder Bush has led Americans to become so divided.

In Nebraska, there were 7,700 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

One of the best reasons to vote to boot Bush out of office is to prove Ralph Nader wrong. Nader, the man who told the Green Party to shove it, then went back begging the Greens to be their candidate, then took huge Republican checks in order to run against John Kerry, says that the Nader for President campaign won't damage the effort to get Bush out of the White House because Kerry is "headed for defeat" anyway. Let's not be accomplices in Nader's kooky plan to change American politics by helping the progressive voice lose over and over again. It's time to put his nonsense to an end. (Source: Politics1, September 12, 2004)

The Bush Administration, famous for its bumbling failures in human intelligence, has most recently failed by sending FBI agents and police officers to investigate whether Quakers there were planning terrorist attacks against Republicans. The problem? Quakers are avowedly and consistently pacifists. They won't even fight legally in the US military, much less concoct terrorist plots. (Source: The New Standard, August 26, 2004)

Not only was the massive FBI harassment of peaceful protesters illegal, it was completely unnecessary. John Ashcroft and other Bush Administration officials claimed that the harassment was necessary because anti-war and anti-Republican activists could be planning "terrorist" attacks against the Republican National Convention. Well, over half a million people showed up in New York City to protest against the Republicans, and not one of those protesters attempted to engage in any terrorist attacks. The closest thing to terrorism was a big bicycle ride in Manhattan. The fact that George W. Bush is willing to send out FBI agents to prevent his opponents from riding bicycles shows that the Bush Administration is deeply out of touch with the real security needs of the American people.

It looks like the harassment of peaceful anti-Republican activists by FBI agents sent out across by John Ashcroft will continue in the future. When Sarah Bardwell, a Colorado Quaker, refused to answer FBI agents' questions about her plans to take part in legal protests, she was warned that the FBI would be "forced to take more intrusive efforts in the future".

Forced? What exactly is forcing the FBI to intrude more and more into the lives of law-abiding Americans? Well, more and more law-abiding Americans are becoming critical of the Bush Administration's radical social agenda, and they're speaking up. If George W. Bush gets another 4 years in office, you can look forward to an increase in "more intrusive efforts" by the FBI against ordinary Americans. (Source: The New Standard, August 26, 2004)

George W. Bush's unflinching support of John Ashcroft's crusade against progressive Americans is frighteningly reminiscent of the dark days of J. Edgar Hoover's iron-fisted administration of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, an organization dedicated to the protection of Americans' constitutional freedoms, says, "The FBI's intimidation and interrogation of peaceful protesters brings back eerie echoes of the days of J. Edgar Hoover. Resources and funds established to fight terrorism should not be misused to target innocent Americans who have done nothing more than engage in lawful protest and dissent." (Source: The New Standard, August 26, 2004)

The FBI agents that were sent to harass peaceful, law-abiding Americans could have been used for genuine security purposes, like investigating genuine terrorist threats. George W. Bush seems more interested in tilting at windmills than taking care of America's real needs. Using government resources for his personal political benefit instead of the common good is especially shameful in these unstable times.

George W. Bush and his cadre of conservative Republicans in the U.S. Congress are trying to let funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program expire, hoping that no one will notice that this vital health insurance program for America's kids will be getting a 1.15 billion dollar cut. Memo to Bush: We noticed, and we're not sitting still while you rip off America's kids in order to fund big tax favors for corporations and your wealthy political donors. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

In New Hampshire, there were 6,000 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

It isn't just the American nation that George W. Bush has divided along political lines. It seems that everywhere that Bush goes, he divides people into opposing groups. Crawford, Texas, for example, is where Bush decided to set up a special private dude ranch for himself in 1999. Robert Campbell, the mayor of Crawford, says that, "People's perception is that Crawford is very conservative, but the truth is before George Bush came down here, nobody worried about political affiliation." Now, people in Crawford are divided along political lines, and anti-Bush residents feel so persecuted that they're afraid to speak up. (Source: Fort Worth Weekly, August 25, 2004)

George W. Bush encourages Americans to follow his opinions without bothering to investigate the truth for themselves. One example of this dangerous embrace of ignorance comes from the town that hosts Bush's dude ranch: Crawford, Texas. Dorothy Spanos, a Crawford resident, proudly states, "If we don't respect our president, you can't expect other nations to respect him, either. That's why I didn't like the movie Fahrenheit 9/11, even though I didn't see it, because I heard it was very disrespectful of President Bush, and I feel like that is anti-American." Not liking things that we haven't even seen seems to be the Republican way. (Source: Fort Worth Weekly, August 25, 2004)

How radical is the hatred of peace activists among Bush supporters? When a group of local activists tried to donate food to needy people through churches in Crawford, Texas, some of the churches refused because they didn't want to be associated with Americans who oppose Bush's policies. Refusing help to people in need for the sake of Republican solidarity is just plain mean, but it's the kind of action that George W. Bush's term as President has inspired. (Source: Fort Worth Weekly, August 25, 2004)

In New Jersey, there were 19,400 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Bush's Defense Donald Rumsfeld and National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice knew about the use of torture by American soldiers in the prisons of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba in 2002, and were briefed again in 2003. (Source: Chain of Command: The Road From 9/11 to Abu Ghraib, by Seymour Hersh)

When Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleeza Rice found out about the use of torture by American soldiers in the prisons of Guantanamo Bay, they held meetings to discuss the matter, but then just let the issue drop, doing nothing to stop the torture. (Source: Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib, by Seymour Hersh)

When it became known that Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleeza Rice knew about the torture of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, and let it continue, George W. Bush did nothing to punish Rumsfeld and Rice. Instead, the Bush Administration decided to use the power of the Pentagon bureaucracy to attack the work of Seymour Hersh, the journalist who exposed Rumsfeld and Rice's role in the continuing torture. Blaming the messenger is not the kind of behavior that befits the President of the United States. (Source: Houston Chronicle, August 13, 2004)

Back when there were first concerns about the torture of prisoners by American soldiers at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, George W. Bush assured the American people that the prisoners were being treated humanely, even given periods of "recreation". What happened during some of those so-called recreation periods? Prisoners were put in straitjackets, with hoods over their heads, and left out in the tropical sun for long periods of time, to bake. That the Bush Administration calls this kind of thing "recreation" reveals a dangerously sadistic streak in George W. Bush's personality. (Source: Chain of Command: The Road From 9/11 to Abu Ghraib, by Seymour Hersh)

According a CIA analyst who issued a report to Rumsfeld and Condoleeza Rice, American soldiers refused to let prisoners in Guantanamo Bay out of their cages for such long periods of time that prisoners were found dazed, lying in their own shit. (Source: Chain of Command: The Road From 9/11 to Abu Ghraib, by Seymour Hersh)

George W. Bush himself signed off on the creation of a secret unit that the Bush Administration still refuses to acknowledge. Bush gave this secret unit the permission to capture, roughly interrogate, and kill people the Bush Administration identified as "high value" enemies. Secret assassination and torture squads are things we heard about in Pinochet's regime in Chile. That Bush is now associating such things with the United States of America should be a source of deep shame. (Source: Chain of Command: The Road From 9/11 to Abu Ghraib, by Seymour Hersh)

In New York, there were 7,400 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

George W. Bush came up with the idea of paying for special tax giveaways to wealthy Americans and big corporations by cutting over one billion dollars in funding for public health programs that help keep average working Americans from becoming seriously ill. The Democrats are trying to block Bush's big cut to public health, but they won't be able to succeed as long as Bush remains parked at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C. (That's the White House, for those of you who don't write letter to the President very often.) (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

George W. Bush is apparently so gung ho on the Republican Party's new gay-bashing platform that he thinks that anyone who doesn't want to go along is insane. When Republican Congressman Charles Bass asked Bush to stop pushing for a constitutional amendment to make same-sex marriage illegal, Bass says that Bush "looked at me like I was crazy." (Source: Houston Voice, September 10, 2004)

The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force cites George W. Bush's "across-the-board opposition to any form of legal equality for gay people" as their reason for naming Bush the "most anti-gay" President of the United States in history. (Source: Houston Voice, September 10, 2004)

In North Carolina, there were 35,500 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

In his new book, "Intelligence Matters", Senator Bob Graham states that the FBI had an informant who was in close contact with two of the September 11 hijackers, even renting out rooms to them. Yet, the Bush Administration refused to allow Congress to question this informant, preferring to keep the informant's information secret. There is no national security reason for keeping this information secret any longer, as the September 11, 2001 attacks have already taken place. This is just one example of George W. Bush using his power to interfere with the full investigation of the attacks. If he were an ordinary citizen, Bush would be charged with obstruction of justice. (Source: CounterPunch, September 11, 2004)

George W. Bush and the Republicans keep on screeching about how, unless everybody votes Republican, we're all gonna die as a result of attacks by evildoer terrorist squads. Why is it, then, that when compared to the Democrats' plan for national security, George W. Bush's budget cuts over 5 billion dollars in security funding over the next five years? Either there's a threat or there isn't. For creating the hype but then failing to follow through, George W. Bush deserves a special award for Washington wafflers, along with an all-expenses paid one way trip back to his dude ranch in Crawford, Texas. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

Donald Rumsfeld's nonchalant response to news of widespread looting in Iraq? "Stuff happens." This was the man in charge, for Pete's sake! If Rumsfeld had bothered to attend to that preventable situation at the time, the current state of the Iraq quagmire would not be so dire. (Source: CNN September 12, 2004)

In North Carolina, 153,600 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

On September 13, 2004 Vladimir Putin announced that Russia's regional governors would be appointed rather than elected, and that candidates could only run for election to the Duma (Russia's parliament) if they were affiliated with one of the national parties, which Putin controls. The latter move would prevent half of the current membership of the Duma from legally running for election.

In short, Putin announced the closing down of Russia's democratic experiment.

You'd think that a democracy-loving American government would have a problem with this development. But George W. Bush made no remarks whatsoever on the subject that day or the next. And when asked about developments in Russia on September 14, Dick Cheney declined to make any statement disparaging Russia's move away from democracy, other than to say that "President Putin and President Bush have a good relationship."

Our nation and the world deserve more than an administration that stands mutely by as democracy slips away. (Sources: New York Times September 14, 2004; Remarks of Vice President in Ottumwa, Iowa on September 14, 2004)

George W. Bush and his Republican followers keep on talking about how they're going to cut the federal budget deficit in half, but the plain fact is that they have no plan for actually doing it. Big talk and empty promises are all that Bush and the Republicans have to offer on the deficit. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

In Alabama, 50,000 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Pop quiz: How much of the 1 trillion Social Security lockbox that is projected from 2005 and 2009 are George W. Bush and the Republican elite planning on spending? Answer: They plan to spend all of it, leaving the next generation without any of the Social Security benefits that they have worked a lifetime for. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

George W. Bush has been such an awful president that even Republicans like Brady Van Matre have decided not to give Bush their votes. Van Matre says, "I voted for George Bush because I thought he would be good for the economy. He's been bad for the economy. I'm still a Republican, you know. I still don't think the Republican party is a bad party, but there is no way I'll vote for George Bush."(Source: The Daily Camera, September 10, 2004)

Lee Buttrill, a former Marine sergeant, believes that Bush betrayed him and other soldiers when Bush sent them off to fight for the sake of the financial interest of oil companies. "We were given these ideas that there were weapons of mass destruction. It was just a lie. That wasn't a proper use of American troops. It wasn't a proper use of my life, or my friends' lives, or the Marines who I've seen die around me."

Buttrill used to be a Republican, and voted for Bush in 2000. Since Bush sent him off to fight in Iraq, Buttrill decided to become a Democrat, and refuses to vote for Bush. "I want to reach out to people in the military and let them know that just because they are in the military, they don't have to vote Republican. They don't have to vote for the current president just because they are in the military," Buttrill says. (Source: The Daily Camera, September 10, 2004)

George W. Bush has gone so far to abandon American cities that even elected Republican officials like David Cantrill have had enough. "As an elected official of a major city, I have witnessed this administration's absolute indifference toward our cities and their populations, particularly the poor," he writes. "Next month will mark the seventh year since the federal government adjusted the minimum wage, which represents the second longest period in history without an adjustment. At the same time, the Bush administration has slashed the federal government's financial commitment to the Workforce Investment Act, which is intended to help the unemployed and underemployed access educational opportunities needed to obtain meaningful employment." When even Republican elected officials admit that Bush's treatment of America cities has been neglectful, you know that things are getting very bad. (Source: The Houston Voice, August 27, 2004)

In Ohio, there were 34,100 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

In response to George W. Bush's diplomatic efforts, Iran has decided to go ahead with its plans to enrich 37 tons of yellowcake uranium. That's enough uranium to create five nuclear weapon. This is just one more incident that proves that the Bush Administration is wholly incompetent when it comes to vital efforts at diplomacy. This failure makes the world a more dangerous place to live. Thanks for nothing, George. (Source: Reuters, September 13, 2004)

George W. Bush was more than happy to do a favor for the National Rifle Association when the NRA asked him to let the Assault Weapons Ban expire. What Bush didn't tell anyone is that Al Qaeda training manuals instructed Al Quaida members that they should go to the United States, where they would easily be able to get lots of assault weapons. Bush's decision to allow more assault weapons out on America's streets makes us more vulnerable to violent fanatic groups, both from within and without our borders. (Source: Voice of America, September 13, 2004)

Alan Greenspan, a conservative Republican, has noted that if George W. Bush had not made a program of special tax favors that go overwhelmingly to corporations and very wealthy Americans, Social Security and Medicare would have been financially secure for the next 75 years. Now, thanks to Bush's big gifts to big business and America's fat cat class, the Republicans are proposing big cuts to Medicare and Social Security. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

The opposition to George W. Bush is helping Americans to get out and meet their neighbors. Lynn Davidson, a volunteer with the League of Conservation Voters, explains the social benefits of working to boot Bush: "On a good night... I'll knock on maybe 75 doors, maybe I'll talk to 35 people." People meeting people: Good. Voting for Bush: Bad. (Source, League of Conservation Voters, September 14, 2004 )

In Ohio, 171,000 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

George W. Bush appears to have some strange preoccupations. One of Bush's obsessions is with caves, and people hiding in them. Bush thinks about caves and the people who hide in them so much that he has decided that it's a central part of his job to tell everyone about the cave hiding people. To a bunch of people in South Bend, Indiana, Bush said "They hide in caves. See, this is a different kind of war, and part of my responsibilities as your President is to remind people about the realities that we face in America. One of the realities is that these people hide in caves. (Source: Presidential Misspeak: The Very Curious Language of George W. Bush, 2004.)

A group called The Angry Left suggests that voting for the Bush/Cheney ticket would be a good alternative for people who find that Satan just isn't evil enough. Gosh, that's strong language, but yes, that would be a good reason to boot Bush. (Source: The Houston Voice, September 10, 2004)

A year and a half after the invasion of Iraq, American military spokespeople have stopped even trying to claim that we are "turning the corner" to the resolution of the conflict. The ongoing chaos is so great that in two days alone in September 2004, 130 Iraqis were killed, including a car bombing that killed 47 people in one blow. (Source: NPR News, September 14, 2004)

In Oklahoma, there were 12,300 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Boot Bush on Election Day because he has modeled his policies on the rule of Yertle the Turtle.

Even as the tax burden for working Americans goes up, George W. Bush is reducing government services. The Republican budget for 2005 provides ten and a half billion dollars less than the amount necessary to maintain the basic domestic government services that have existed in 2004 - and even those were poorly funded. What do you call it when you're asked to pay more and get less in return? I call it a rip-off. For ripping-off the American people, let's send George W. Bush a big boot along with our tax returns this year. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

Air conditioners make the air feel more soothing, but they're typically so inefficient that they also significantly contribute to air pollution by gobbling up electricity. Yet, almost as soon as George W. Bush took office back in 2001, he ordered the Energy Department to delay enforcing efficiency standards for air conditioners. Those standards had already been approved - Bush just ordered his folks in the Energy Department to give a green light to big businesses even when the standards were broken. (Source: Sierra, September/October 2004)

Delays, delays and more delays! In another purposeful bureaucratic delay taken just days after polluting air conditioning manufacturers were let off the hook, the Bush Administration announced that it would put wetlands protection from big mining and development interests on the shelf. (Source: Sierra, September/October 2004)

In Oklahoma, 21,000 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

I don't know if my vocal chords can take screaming "Aaaarrrgh!" for four more years.

The Bush Administration's obsession with harassing its political opponents filters down to small town Republicans across America. In Auburn, New York, at the annual TomatoFest, Republicans convinced festival organizers to try to force the Democratic Party booth and a booth rented by the Cayuga Coalition for Peace to stop criticizing President Bush. Was the problem political speech at a public festival? No, the Cayuga Coalition for Peace's booth was right next to a booth rented by the Republican Party, and another rented by the local Conservative Party, both of which were the focus of some quite severe liberal-bashing. At the urging of Republicans visiting TomatoFest, the peace activists and the Democrats were harassed by festival organizers, while the Republicans and Conservatives were left alone. This kind of tactic is inspired by Bush's own attempts to stifle dissent. (Source: Syracuse Post-Standard, September 12, 2004)

Mr. Bush ought to pay more attention to what he catches when he goes fishing. Bush likes to take a lot of time away from his duties as President to do some recreational fishing. Among the fish that he's caught is the striped bass.

Now, why is Mr. Bush able to catch a striped bass? He can catch the fish for fun because of the work of fishery observers, who make sure that big commercial fishing operations stop the practice of catching and then discarding huge amounts of striped bass in order to get a small number of the more financially lucrative cod, haddock and flounder. Just a few years ago, striped bass were at record low levels. Thanks to fishery observers and other conservation efforts, the striped bass have made a modest recovery in their population.

Although these fishery observers have ensured that pleasure boating folks like Bush have the opportunity to play at Old Man and the Sea and catch striped bass for fun, when Bush goes back to Washington D.C., he shows nothing but ingratitude. Bush has asked Congress to cut the funding for fishery observers in 2005. (Source: Splash, Summer 2004)

In Oregon, 42,200 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

At the end of 2001, George W. Bush declared, "All in all, it's been a fabulous year for Laura and me." I'm sure he meant to add, "...other than those big attacks that happened on September 11, just three months ago." How neglectful of him to mention that. (Source: Presidential Misspeak: The Very Curious Language of George W. Bush, 2004.)

George W. Bush wants to make abstinence-only sex education the standard for all schools in the United States, and to take away all teenage access to contraceptives. Bush helped to put such standards into place in Texas. How well have they worked there? Texas is tied with Mississippi for the highest rate of teenage pregnancy. (Source: Houston Voice, September 10, 2004)

What's the problem with the kind of abstinence-only sex education that George W. Bush loves so much? Why does it lead to higher rates of teenage pregnancy? Well, according to the Protect Our Kids Campaign, which is fighting against abstinence-only sex education in Texas, the textbooks used in Bush's kind of sex education classes include information that is just plain untrue. Texas physician Gordon Crofoot agrees, saying that the textbooks are "factually and scientifically incorrect".

When it comes to the education of America's teenagers, Bush doesn't seem to care about the details of facts and science. That's another reason for American parents to get smart and vote to boot Bush. (Source: Houston Voice, September 10, 2004)

In their efforts to quench the thirst of big corporations, Republicans are leaving America's community infrastructure high and dry. In the plan contained in the 2005 Republican federal budget, community and regional development programs are cut by 1.6 billion dollars over the next five years. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

In Pennsylvania, there were 13,100 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

The man who voted against a holiday to honor Martin Luther King is now our Vice President. (Source: Slate October 6, 2004)

In its first year in office alone, the Bush Administration ripped 500 million dollars out of the budget of the EPA, thus giving corporate polluters a helping hand in their efforts to evade the laws that keep America clean. (Source: Sierra, September/October, 2004)

It's not just backpacking secular liberals who oppose Bush Administration plans to allow corporations to fill the air with more pollutants under the ironically named "Clear Skies" initiative. On April 22, 2004, an open "Christian-to-Christian" letter was sent to George W. Bush by nearly 100 American religious leaders. The letter included the following language: "In a spirit of shared faith and respect, we feel called to express grave moral concern about your "Clear Skies" initiative - which we believe is the Administration's continuous effort to weaken critical environmental standards that protect God's creation... The private use of creation's bounty must serve the needs of all God's children. Yet we are concerned that powerful corporate interests have had disproportionate influence in shaping and reaping benefits from a clean air program which should serve the common good." (Source: Sierra, September/October, 2004)

Number of Americans who had their heads chopped off by Iraqis during the Clinton Administration: 0

Number of Americans who have had their heads chopped off by Iraqis during the new Bush Administration: heck, there have been so many I've lost count!

Bush says that invading Iraq made the world a more secure place. Well, so long as no one chops off your head, I guess.

In Pennsylvania, 121,600 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Republicans are not just distorting scientific findings to suit their political needs, they're also cutting funding for important scientific programs. Compared to the Democratic plan for investment in scientific research, the Republicans cut nearly 5 billion dollars of scientific studies, stifling the quest for knowledge and leaving the empty space open for inaccurate corporate public relations programs. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

By the fall of 2004, it had gotten so bad in Iraq that the Bush Administration sought to take $3.46 billion it had promised to spend on rebuilding Iraq's water, power and other infrastructure, and use it elsewhere. Extra money, according to the Bush Administration, was needed for security, so improved access to electricity and water for Iraqis would just have to wait.

Choices like this facing American policymakers in Iraq are difficult, with no alternative being good, but only some alternatives being slightly less worse. It's a shame that the United States is faced with such quandaries, and that Iraqis are faced with the negative outcomes of such quandaries. It's an outrage that such quandaries exist because an arrogant man in Washington decided he had to have a war, yet neglected to ensure that those pesky little things called details were attended to. Outcomes like this are the mark of a piss-poor administration. We can do better. (Source: Reuters September 13, 2004)

Bush administration quotes, July 2003:
"I don't do quagmires."
"There's no question but that in those regions where pockets of dead-enders are trying to reconstitute, General Franks and his team are rooting them out. In short, the coalition is making good progress."

Bush administration quotes, September 2004:
"This insurgency isn't going to go away."
"There will undoubtedly be violence up until the elections and probably even during the elections."

(Sources: Reuters September 13, 2004; Department of Defense Press Briefings July 2003)

In Rhode Island, 13,600 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

As a result of the Republicans' huge additions to the national debt, Americans will pay a total of 2.3 trillion dollars of taxes over the next five years that will go toward nothing but paying off the old Republican debts. By 2009, the burden will be 7 thousand dollars per year for a the typical American family of four. This money could otherwise have gone towards public education or health care, but instead it goes down the drain. That's the worst kind of government waste we can think of, and it's George W. Bush's fault. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

Five widows of men killed in the attacks of September 11, 2001 have taken the joint, public step of rejecting the candidacy of George W. Bush and endorsing John Kerry instead. They have committed to "speaking from the heart, and speaking from our conscience" their conclusion that John Kerry will make this nation safer than George W. Bush has. (Source: Associated Press September 13, 2004)

In August and September of 2004, George W. Bush was so distracted from his presidential duties that he neglected to put in a full day at the White House for 44 days straight. Whoopsie! (Source: Associated Press September 14, 2004)

George W. Bush's Republicans have consistently followed a plan to prevent minorities from voting from the 2000 election all the way up to the 2004 election. In 2003, for example, people in neighborhoods with large minority populations were met by Republican Party operatives when they tried to vote. The Republican operatives were dressed in suits with official insignia, carrying clip boards and wearing ear pieces, as if they were election officials. They were not election officials, but they told minority voters that they would have to meet extra identification requirements if they wanted to vote. As a result, large numbers of minority voters were turned away from the polls, and the Philadelphia district attorney's office got almost 100 complaints about the racist abuse. Such race-based harassment is what the Republican Party, and George W. Bush, stand for. (Source: The Crisis, September/October 2004)

In South Carolina, 70,000 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

George W. Bush: Foreign policy genius who has a clear plan for America's role in the world? Um, no. Less than three years before Vladmir Putin destroyed democracy in Russia and reinstalled a Soviet-style one-party dictatorship with himself at the top, George W. Bush predicted that Russia and the United States were "in the midst of a transformationed relationship that will yield peace and progress." Never mind Bush's garbled language. I want to know exactly what it is about Russia's new dictatorship that George W. Bush regards as "progress". Of course, one might be generous and conclude that Bush never had any clue about what Putin was up to in Russia. What a comforting thought. (Source: Presidential Misspeak: The Very Curious Language of George W. Bush, 2004.)

At the beginning of George W. Bush's occupation of the White House, the federal debt was projected to be almost eliminated by 2008. Now, with years of Republican budgets, the federal debt is projected to be 5.6 trillion dollars in 2008. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

Remember how the Bush Administration told us its medicare bill would cost $400 Billion, while it turned out that it was hiding the true cost of over $500 Billion from not only the American public but the United States Congress? Well, just wait -- it gets better.

Now it turns out that the Bush Administration has been hiding a finding that in 2006, a typical 65-year-old will be spending 37% of his or her Social Security income on Medicare -- a steep rise from this year's 20%. The Bush Administration not only can't handle the truth, it can't handle you knowing the truth. (Source: Washington Post September 15, 2004)

In South Dakota, 4,900 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

The vice president for conservation programs at Trout Unlimited reflects the anger among hunters and fishermen at the Bush Administration's negligent treatment of habitat needs when he says, "What's happening now on public lands is forcing sportsmen to organize... This is a constituency that is slow to anger, but the administration is starting to see a backlash. The "Sportsmen for Bush" bumper stickers... might be pretty scarce in 2004." (Source: Sierra, September/October, 2004)

After 20 years of government service, Christopher Buckheit, former director of the Environmental Protection Agency's air-enforcement division, resigned in at the end of 2003. Explaining why he did so, Buckheit says, "This administration has decided to put the economic interests of the coal-fired power plants ahead of the public interests in reducing air pollution... If we were still enforcing the Clean Air Act the way it should be enforced, I would still be there." (Source: Sierra, September/October, 2004)

More than two years ago, George W. Bush claimed victory over the Taliban in Afghanistan. Even now, the Taliban are still well organized and fighting hard in the war for control over Afghanistan. In just one recent four day period, there were nearly-successful assassination attempts against the American-installed president and vice-president of Afghanistan. (Source: Syracuse Post Standard, September 21, 2004)

In Tennessee, 36,400 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Under George W. Bush's economic leadership, America's industries have grown flacid. From January 1993 to January 2001, America's industrial production grew at a rate of 43 percent. In George W. Bush's time in office, industrial production in the United States has flatlined, with a tiny rise of just three tenths of one percent. These doldrums make George W. Bush the Lethargy President. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

Just two months before he began his invasion of Iraq, George W. Bush inadvertently revealed his public relations strategy when he asked, "How much time do we need to see clearly that he's not disarming?" The answer, of course, is that the American people could have seen very clearly that Saddam Hussein was not disarming - because he did not have any weapons of mass destruction at all - in just a few more weeks for the weapons inspectors to do their work. You see, you can't disarm if you don't have any arms. Given the lack of evidence the Bush Administration had for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, this problem must have worried them, so they chose to go ahead with their war before the American people could become aware of this little conundrum. (Source: Presidential Misspeak: The Very Curious Language of George W. Bush, 2004.)

Beer commercial synopsis of the Bush Administration: Less Working, Sleeps Great.

Chicken joke synopsis of the Bush Administration: Why did the chickenhawk increase our debt? To make our government smaller!

In Tennessee, there were 6,200 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Don't like our debt burden under Bush? Just wait -- there's more to come! Policy experts independent of both the Bush campaign and the Kerry campaign have estimated that George W. Bush's campaign proposals for tax cuts and spending in his second term will sap the U.S. Treasury an additional $3 Billion. Oh, excuse me, did I write $3 Billion? That's a typo, folks. The correct figure is $3 Trillion. That's $3,000,000,000,000.00. If that were a diner bill, we'd need to be leaving a $450 Billion tip. Bush and his family won't be the ones repaying that debt; they've got the tax cuts and the tax loopholes to avoid it. It'll be you and me and our kids who shoulder that burden. (Source: Washington Post September 14, 2004)

Why do Bush supporters like the current first family? According to Bush delegate Trudi Dickert, "Laura Bush is the most elegant first lady we've ever had... a Southern lady in many ways. She knows her place."

Four more years of a first lady who "knows her place?" The damage will be too great to a generation of girls and young women searching for a strong role model of powerful women who do more than smile and stand by their men. (Source: Reuters September 1, 2004)

In Texas, 266,000 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Do you remember that photo-op back in November 2003 when George W. Bush was photographed sharing a turkey with adoring soldiers? It turned out that turkey was plastic. But now a soldier shares the screening process for members of the military to get into the room with Bush. Soldiers had to fill out a questionnaire with the question "Do you support the president?" Soldiers who answered "yes" were granted entry, giving Bush a conveniently managed backdrop of strong support. Soldiers who answered "no" were denied entry and given meager MREs to eat on Thanksgiving Day. This is just one more dispatch from Potemkin America. (Source: Dr. Redwood Interviews, 2004)

Think that George W. Bush and the Republicans are good for business? Wrong. Although Bush spends a lot of time giving big favors to corporate executives, Bush's term in office has seen the withering of American business investment. During Clinton's terms in office, real business investment increased at an annual rate of 9.3 percent. During George W. Bush's time in office, real business investment has fallen at an annual rate of 2.2 percent. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

How thinly are our nation's defenses stretched? The nonpartisan General Accounting Office warns that even with involuntary mobilizations, the United States faces the prospect of running out of National Guard and Reserve troops. Is that a way to keep our country safe? We'd better hope that no actual threat comes along, because we're sapped by George W. Bush's war of choice. (Source: Agence France Presse September 16, 2004)

In Texas, there were 72,300 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Careful, cautious Kofi Annan has come out and said it: the US war against Iraq was illegal. (Source: BBC News September 16, 2004)

Bush supporters are such classy, informed morally upright, admirable people. Take, for instance, Sean Feeney in his letter to us:
Fucking democrats you suck. with your anti-gun laws it will be us, the assult wepon holders that save your ass if kerry gets elected and he invites every god damned sand nigger to come over here, but ill let them kill your sorry asses.

Clearly, Bush must be a great man to attract the likes of Sean Feeney to his camp.

Um, wait, excuse me, sorry, no. Actually, no.

In Utah, 17,400 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Loucia writes: "The Bush Administration moral compass declares itself to have an undeviating good-evil orientation. But then they respond with a Machiavellian logic in which even the means - no matter if they violate international law and ignore human rights - justifies the end." Sheesh: if they're going to be Machiavellian, at least they could be consistent about it!

The Paralyzed Veterans of America describes the negative impact of the Republican budget for 2005 as follows: "The budget resolution does not provide adequate funding for veterans' health care to meet the needs of sick and disabled veterans seeking care from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health system." (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

The American Veterans organization (AMVETS) calls George W. Bush's "chronic under-funding" of veterans' health care "intolerable". (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

Promotion of home ownership is a central part of Bush's standard campaign speech, but Bush actually has not provided funding to housing programs, and has cut voucher programs designed to help people become first time home owners. (Source: The Crisis, September/October 2004)

In Vermont, 7,000 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

George W. Bush says that he's pro-life, and that he wants to protect the life of all human beings. Yet, Bush is pushing policies that would increase the amount of coal that is burned to supply Americans with electricity. A moral discrepancy comes from the fact that the pollution from coal-burning power plants causes 24,000 premature deaths every year. So, when Bush says that he's pro-life, does he not include the lives of the Americans who have to breathe the polluted air that his pro-corporation policies create? (Source: Sierra, September/October, 2004)

Now here's a bizarre risk-benefit calculation for you: Four hundred thousand acres of public land could be affected by the Bush Administration's effort to open up Montana's Rocky Mountain Front to drilling for natural gas. Yet, the maximum amount of recoverable gas that could be obtained from these public lands would only fulfill 6.3 days of America's demand for energy. (Source: Sierra, September/October, 2004)

Utah Congressman Jim Matheson, whose father died of cancer as a result of above-ground nuclear testing in the American southwest, comments, "A moratorium on nuclear weapons testing was instituted in 1992. However, recent funding decisions made by Congress, including additional money for nuclear weapons test readiness, indicate that testing may resume in the future. Given the lengthy history of testing and the thousands of people in Utah and across the nation who died from radiation related cancers and illness, the possible resumption of testing should be an issue of national concern."

In 2003, under the leadership of George W. Bush, the Republicans in Congress repealed the ban on the research and development of new nuclear weapons. The Republicans also gave millions of dollars to efforts to research new ways to develop a new generation of nuclear weapons that would be even more efficient killing machines. The Republican legislation also provided funds to get a site in Nevada ready to host a new round of nuclear weapons detonations. Bush and the Republicans don't seem to think that the resumed explosion of nuclear weapons within the United States is a big deal. We do, and we're betting you do too. (Source:

Under the leadership of Utah Congressman Jim Matheson, Democrats in Congress have introduced the Safety for Americans from Nuclear Weapons Testing Act. If passed, this act would require thorough reviews of the environmental, safety and health impacts of nuclear testing before the Bush Administration would be allowed to explode nuclear weapons on American soil. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has directed the Republicans in Congress to block the Safety for Americans from Nuclear Weapons Testing Act, clearing the path for the detonation of nuclear weapons within American borders without congressional approval, and without input from the public. For resurrecting the insanity of the nuclear arms race, George W. Bush ought to be ashamed of himself. (Source:

In Virginia, 60,600 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

In February of 2004, Mike Leavitt, George W. Bush's head of the Environmental Protection Agency, ordered regulators to end rules against the most environmentally destructive method of cooling turbines in America's power plants. The order was given in defiance of the advice of the experts employed by the Environmental Protection Agency, who proposed a workable alternative. (Source: Environmental News Network, February 18, 2004)

When it comes to giving a hand to people who are having a hard time, George W. Bush angrily demands accountability. In this way, Bush uses the concept of accountability to excuse the government not taking care of its responsibilities. However, when Bush is asked to be accountable himself, he's nowhere to be seen. For example, Bush has demanded that climate change theories be backed up with evidence. However, whenever evidence for global climate change has been collected and presented to the White House, Bush has simply pretended that it doesn't exist. For this outrageous unaccountability alone, Bush deserves the boot.

What was Bush's reaction when it was discovered that he had been in possession of a secret report declaring Iraq to be sliding in the direction of civil war? "I'm pleased with the progress," Bush says. It's bad enough that Bush pretended that the Iraq war was going well when he knew he wasn't. It's even worse, now that Bush is still pretending that the Iraq war is going well, even though he knows that the American public knows differently since the National Intelligence Estimate was leaked. It's the difference between lying, and lying shamelessly. Bush is now clearly lying without any sense of shame. (Source: CNN, September 19, 2004)

Under the Republican plan for environmental protection, the federal government will spend less on environmental protection in 2009 than it spent in 2004, even as the impacts of global climate change increase. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

Mark Zandi, chief economist at, describes the economic situation of the United States by saying, "The economy has come close to a standstill." So, George W. Bush's special tax favors for the rich were supposed to get the economy moving again, and yet the economy is close to a standstill. It looks like those special favors Bush handed out were given for reasons other than the improvement of the economy. (Source: Associated Press, August 7, 2004)

In Washington State, 134,800 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

When speaking to campaign audiences, George W. Bush has made the claim more than ten times that Abu Nidal was the terrorist who hijacked the Achille Lauro and killed Leon Klinghoffer in the 1980s. Actually, no. Abu Nidal attacked a Jewish synagogue in Istanbul and airports in Rome and Vienna in the 1980s. It was Abul Abbas who hijacked the Achille Lauro and killed Leon Klinghoffer.

Abu, Abul, who cares? Details like that matter if you actually want to understand what's going on in the Middle East. These two were members of two distinctly different organizations doing different things. When George W. Bush not only slips up but makes the same mistake over ten times without checking his facts, it's just one more indication that we have a man in the oval office who has no idea what he's talking about. (Source: Associated Press September 21, 2004)

Michael Bishop, a voter from rural New York state, is right when he describes America under George W. Bush as follows: "It's as if power has been usurped, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." George W. Bush is closer than any other politician in history to achieving absolute power. The vastness of the resulting corruption is terrifying. (Source: Irregular Times interview, September 18, 2004)

Michael Bishop also says that Bush wins this election, he's going to "swear like a trooper for a day and a half." If you oppose obscene language, then you've got another reason to boot Bush. (Source: Irregular Times interview, September 18, 2004)

Another upstate New Yorker, Jennifer Wapinski-Mooradian, says that if Bush gets re-elected, she will "weep". Don't make Jennifer cry. Vote against Bush. (Source: Irregular Times interview, September 18, 2004)

In Lesotho, the people are facing a drought driven by climate change, bringing malnutrition and famine. Lesotho Chief Bernard Letsie describes the plight of his people, saying, "There is no water. I tell my people we must pray. Maybe God will give us rain." So far the prayer isn't working, but, then again, George W. Bush isn't doing anything about the problem, in spite of being the most powerful human being on Earth. (Source: Amnesty Now, Fall 2004)

In West Virginia, 15,500 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

In 2004, the Supreme Court had to force the Bush Administration to allow prisoners held and tortured at the American base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to merely petition the United States judicial system to consider whether their imprisonment is justified according to American law. As a result, the Bush Administration was forced to release several prisoners when it became clear that there was no real evidence that they were guilty of any crimes.

Despicably, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote an opinion insisting that the Bush Administration has the right to withhold the reach of American laws from its prisoners if it wants to. If just two more justices had voted with Justice Scalia, then there would be no one to stop the Bush Administration from imprisoning and torturing anyone it wanted, without any judicial supervision. With just two more votes, the totalitarian vision of Justice Scalia and George W. Bush would have won out. In the next four years, it is expected that two Supreme Court Justices at a minimum will resign and will have their vacancies filled. If George W. Bush wins re-election, he'll have the chance to put two more extremist judges like Justice Scalia on the Supreme Court bench - and America will change forever. (Source: People for the American Way)

When Americans were asked, "If more people around the world say they have been feeling worse about the United States, how much is this a problem for the US?" 70% said it was "a lot" or "somewhat" of a problem. And this 70% is right: when the rest of the world consider the United States in unfavorable terms, it will be much more difficult for the United States to get by.

So what's the score? How have citizens of other countries been feeling about the United States since George W. Bush took charge? Well, in Norway, 74% of those responding to a poll say that Bush's policies have made them feel worse about the United States. (Source: University of Maryland Program on International Policy Attitudes September 8, 2004)

Bush's Attorney General, John Ashcroft, says that holding corporations responsible for humans rights violations threatens America's "important foreign policy interests". If that's not cruel, I don't know what is. (Source: Asheville Global Report, May 19, 2003)

The problem of George W. Bush's use of depleted uranium ammunition in his wars is bad enough, but what's less known is that under Bush, the American military is using the even more radioactive non-depleted uranium in its weaponry. This was the finding of the Uranium Medical Research Center, and independent group of scientists from the United States and Canada. Such weaponry keeps on killing long after it has hit its initial target, killing over years and years through nuclear radiation. (Source: Syracuse New Times, September 15-22, 2004)

In Wisconsin, 77,200 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

George W. Bush goes on and on about how he wants to make the rest of America more like Texas. Well, the fact is that the majority of Texans live in areas that do not meet Federal standards for ozone pollution. Houston, Texas has the worst ozone pollution in the entire nation. So what, does that mean that Bush wants the rest of America to be inhaling more ozone? (Source: Texas Environmental Profiles, Texas Center for Policy Studies and Environmental Defense, 2004)

In the year that George W. Bush ended his time as governor, Texas (no, not California, and not New York) was the number one highest source of carbon dioxide air pollution in the entire United States of America. So, when George W. Bush suggests that he wants to make the rest of the United States of America, we can assume that he wants to make America dirty, dirty, dirty. I'm no clean freak, but Bush's standards of clean air are unacceptably low. (Source: Environmental Protection Agency Emissions Scorecard, 2001)

The air pollution in Texas is so bad that visitors to Big Bend National Park can no longer see the great views that the area was once known for. The air is just too filled with smog. What did George W. Bush do to stop the problem when he was governor of Texas? Precisely nothing. (Source: Texas Environmental Profiles, Texas Center for Policy Studies and Environmental Defense, 2004)

Another strange Texas success story from the land of George W. Bush: Texas is the number one top source of hazardous waste in the entire United States. Back in 1999, when George W. Bush was governor of Texas, his state produced almost 15,000 tons of hazardous waste. The next biggest producer of hazardous waste, Louisiana, didn't even produce one third that amount. When Bush talks about the "Texas Miracle", he almost never admits that his so-called miracle state produces more foul, poisonous substances than anywhere else in North America. If that's what Bush calls success, then I'd rather not go along with his plans for America. (Source: Environmental Protection Agency National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, June 2001)

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have done plenty as President and Vice President to foul America's drinking waters. What's less known is that their history of attacks goes back well before their occupation of the White House. When Dick Cheney was in up on Capitol Hill, he was one of just 21 in Congress to vote against the Safe Drinking Water Act. What is it that Bush and Cheney have against people drinking a nice, cool, clean glass of water? Is it a psychological condition? (Source: The Daily Mirror, October 8, 2004)

In Wisconsin, there were 25,200 more families in poverty in 2003 than when George W. Bush took office. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Think that there's no real difference between the Republicans and the Democrats? Look at what the two parties are doing with respect to providing clean drinking water for American families. The Democrats have proposed increasing support for the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds. The Republicans, on the other hand, are trying to cut these funds for clean drinking water by 822 million dollars. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

In Mexico, 78% of respondents say that on balance Bush's policies have made them feel worse about the United States. Our neighbor to the south has come to disdain us. (Source: University of Maryland Progam on International Policy Attitudes September 8, 2004)

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has declared that the freedoms that most Americans take for granted "go way beyond what the Constitution requires," and suggests that these freedoms should be taken away when they are inconvenient to the power of the President of the United States. Scalia promotes a new American order in which constitutional rights are "ratcheted right down to the constitutional minimum" until George W. Bush decides that the War on Terror is over. George W. Bush wants to place more conservative justices just like Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court, and if he gets another 4-year term in office, it's almost certain that he'll have the chance to do just that. (Source: People for the American Way)

Increasingly, it is becoming difficult for Republican moderates to abide by George W. Bush's reactionary insistence that climate change is a mere illusion that has been unproved by science. Republican Senator John McCain, for example, says, "The facts are there. We have to educate our fellow citizens about climate change and the danger it poses to the world."

Here we have a prominent, moderate Republican directly contradicting the leader of his own political party. George W. Bush threatens to split the Republican party in two, extremists against moderates. So, if you're a Republican, that's an awfully good reason to vote against George W. Bush. (Source: BusinessWeek, August 16, 2004)

In a very telling slip of the tongue, George W. Bush told an audience at the Whiteface Mountain Lodge in Wilmington, New York that, "Clear Skies legislation, when passed by Congress, will significantly reduce smog and mercury admissions." That's a telling slip, because the Clear Skies bill favored by George W. Bush would actually allow the nation's biggest polluters to pump even more poisons into the air, all the while claiming that doing so is part of an effort to protect clean air. When it comes to the environment, George W. Bush is all about reducing admissions. (Source: Presidential Misspeak: The Very Curious Language of George W. Bush, 2004.)

In Alaska, 11,100 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Global warming is already having an impact on New England's lobster industry. The lobster catch, which used to be huge along the coastlines of New York and Massachusetts, has collapses in those states, where increased water temperatures has caused acid to build up in local lobsters' blood, causing widespread disease and death. (Source: Sierra Atlantic, Fall 2004)

On September 24, 2004, George W. Bush declared that border relations between Canada and Mexico have never been better. Since that time, geographically-aware Americans have been asking Mr. Bush to show them what borders are shared by Canada and Mexico. So far, Bush has not taken up the challenge. No President of the United States should have such incredible fantasies about the shape of the world as those held by George W. Bush. (Source: Presidential Misspeak: The Very Curious Language of George W. Bush, 2004.)

Grover Norquist, one of the most powerful of this generation's extremist conservative activists, did not know that his voice was being recorded when he made the following comments about Republican governor of Ohio Bob Taft: "We have to hold Ohio. Okay, we have an idiot, stupid, corrupt, dumb, rotten, Republican governor in the state, who has been busy looting the state and raising taxes... and his state is the only state in the nation that's lost jobs and isn't recovering because he's been beating the economy to death in the state. But he is not on the ballot. George Bush is on the ballot... It's not helpful. He should be taken out and horsewhipped."

Gosh. When even a loyal Republican activist like Grover Norquist thinks that Ohio Governor Robert Taft is so worthless and corrupt, what are the rest of us to think?

It does not speak well of Bush's national Republican Party that the best Republican they can find to lead the state of Ohio is someone they admit to be a "rotten" "idiot". (Source: Politics1, September 17, 2004)

In Brazil, 66% of respondents say that on balance Bush's policies have made them feel worse about the United States. Brazil is a huge nation of more than 180 million people. What they think of us matters, whether we like it or not. (Source: University of Maryland Program on International Policy Attitudes September 8, 2004)

A staff attorney named Melissa Merkel chose to resign rather than to continue working under George W. Bush in the Environmental Protection Agency's enforcement division. Merkel specialized in the area of enforcing environmental standards on factory farms, but found that the Bush Administration was too reluctant to prosecute industrial farms who violated the law. She believes that this reluctance was due to an unusual influence of the livestock industry within the Bush Administration. (Source: Chicago Tribune, 5/16/2004)

Under George W. Bush, there are currently 136,000 confirmed but unaddressed cases in which leaking petroleum and MTBE are contaminating groundwater and drinking water supplies. Bush cut the budget of the program that is supposed to address these leaks and has no plans to restore funding. The Democratic budget would fully restore funding and take care of these leaks before more Americans get sick. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

In Arizona, 52,300 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

When it comes to schoolchildren, George W. Bush goes ballistic about "standards", and insists that everyone comply with his demands. However, when it comes to the corporate polluters who poison America's air with coal-burning power plants, Bush throws standards out the window. In fact, Bush wants to give special exemptions from pollution controls to each and every coal-fired power plant in the country. (Source: Sierra, September/October, 2004)

Earlier we noted that George W. Bush has a drunk driving conviction. What we did not mention is that Bush's choice for Vice President, Dick Cheney, has two. That's right: Dick Cheney has been arrested twice for driving drunk. (The Daily Mirror, October 8, 2004)

How seriously does George W. Bush consider the economic problems of working Americans? One indication of the callous disregard Bush has for working people is the comment he made about the economy in 2002, contrasting his own view with the economic analysis of Fed. Chairman Alan Greenspan: "He uses the word 'soft spot'. I use the word 'bumping along'." At the time of this statement, Bush's economic policies had caused millions of American jobs to be lost. That Bush can observe such a disaster and still say that the economy is "bumping along" is reason enough for American voters to give Bush the boot on Election Day. (Source: Presidential Misspeak: The Very Curious Language of George W. Bush, 2004.)

71% of respondents in the Netherlands say that on balance Bush's policies have made them feel worse about the United States. November 2004 is our opportunity to let the Dutch know Bush doesn't speak or act for us. (Source: University of Maryland Program on International Policy Attitudes September 8, 2004)

Under George W. Bush, the Environmental Protection Agency has been desperate to convince Americans that it is still getting tough on polluters. Thus, it was very proud of itself when it claimed that it increased its enforcement of environmental law. The only problem with this claim is that it was completely bogus. In order to inflate its enforcement statistics, Bush's EPA added narcotics busts and counter-terrorism efforts to the environmental enforcement rolls. Busting a pot smoker doesn't count as environmental enforcement, and neither does arresting Islamic radicals. In truth, the EPA's enforcement of environmental law has decreased while Bush has been in office. (Source: Sacramento Bee, July 16, 2003)

In Arkansas, 16,800 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Knock, knock.

Who's there?

Trustworthy Leader.

Trustworthy Leader Who?

That's what I've been asking myself for the last three and a half years.

The Republican Party led by George W. Bush has become the party of homogenization. They favor homogenization of milk? No, they favor the homogenization of the American people, seeking to use the power of government to compel all Americans to fit into the cultural standards of 1950s suburbia. Sterling Osgood, a voter from Marcellus, New York, complains of this Republican agenda of homogenization, saying "Thirty years ago, the Republican Party was the party of Teddy Roosevelt, favoring rugged individualism and keeping government out of our lives. Today, the party favors using government to homogenize our society across a broad range of social issues, and has hijacked the American people's desire to live and let live. (Source: Syracuse Post Standard, September 21, 2004)

The Democrats in Congress are trying to provide full funding to help states clean up and develop properties that are rendered useless by environmental contamination. George W. Bush and the Republicans in Congress are blocking their efforts. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

In California, 459,200 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

The NAACP has been following John Kerry's voting record since he came to the United States Senate in 1984. They've given Kerry an 'A' grade for his consistent support of civil rights legislation. That's the kind of President America needs, not one who coddles racists like Senator Trent Lott. (Source: The Crisis, September/October 2004)

George W. Bush is for open and equal access to government, he says. Is that why he appointed a lobbyist for the timber industry to take a key post in the United States Forest Service? That would be a generous interpretation. It looks more as if Bush is giving special preferential access to the large corporations that make money by destroying the forests on America's public lands. (Source: Sierra, September/October, 2004)

Sue Niederer didn't get any gold star when her son was killed as a soldier in Bush's war in Iraq. Instead, when the 55 year-old mother from Hopewell, New Jersey tried to talk to Laura Bush about her son's death, she got handcuffed and arrested. In George W. Bush's America, it's a crime for the families of dead soldiers to speak up and question whether the deaths of their loved ones were worth it. For hauling grieving mothers off to jail, Bush deserves to find a big boot in his bed the morning after Election Day. (Source: Syracuse Post Standard, September 21, 2004)

As bad as George W. Bush has been for the environment, America needs more than a President who will merely not make his bad mistakes. John Kerry is a real alternative to George W. Bush who not only will end Bush's mistakes, but has a strong record of promoting environmental progress. Thus, we know that we're not just giving up the certain problems of Bush for the uncertain problems of a new president. We know that if we boot Bush, we're going to get something much better, and just in time. (Source: Sierra Atlantic, Fall 2004)

In Colorado, 75,300 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

George W. Bush and Vladmir Putin seem to have the same basic idea for defeating terrorism: Bomb, shoot, and just plain blast anything or anyone who gets in the way. Unfortunately, that includes an awful lot of innocent bystanders. Bush agrees with Putin that all that's necessary to create peace is get get as tough as possible, however, if Bush would examine Russia's experience with terrorism under Putin, he might change his mind. Robert Albright, from Oswego, New York, makes this point when he says, "I would think the despicable school attack in Russia would prove that force alone will not defeat terrorism. The Russians and Mr. Putin have killed hundreds, maybe thousands of terrorists and innocent people in their attempt to stop terrorism and put down the insurgents in Chechnya, and they still have not made Russia safer." It frightens us that Bush seems to be heading down the same path by which Putin has brought Russia to disaster. It frightens us even more that Bush is unwilling to even consider re-examining his plans. (Source: Syracuse Post Standard, September 21, 2004)

67% of respondents in Spain say that on balance Bush's policies have made them feel worse about the United States. That's one more country turning its favor away from us, thanks to Bush's arrogance. (Source: University of Maryland Program on International Policy Attitudes September 8, 2004)

29 Republicans in the House of Representatives signed a letter opposing the cuts that George W. Bush made to Medicaid. George W. Bush refused to listen to the voice of reason from within his own political party. It's a shame that Bush doesn't have the same deaf ears when it comes to big favors for corporate executives. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

Stephen Roach, chief economist for financial services company Morgan Stanley, describes the Bush Administration's economic performance as follows: "There can be no mistaking the reality check of this summer's disappointing data. This recovery now looks more mythical than ever." Mr. Roach is no pointy-headed liberal. When he calls the economic recovery "mythical", it's worth listening. (Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, August 10, 2004)

In Connecticut, 51,100 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Lately, it seems I can't pass a newsstand without a magazine cover featuring George W. and Laura Bush. You've seen them: George W. is consistently dressed in a casual blue-collared shirt without a tie, and Laura's got a cotton outfit that covers her ankles and wrists with a nice set of pearls. They're sitting in a moderate-sized living room with nice but not expensive furniture, or they're standing in front of a split-rail fence with a red barn in the background and a field of lush green grass. Regular folks. Why, it looks like they might invite you over for a pot-luck or ask to borrow your waffle iron. And I sure bet that Laura's handy in the kitchen!

Of course, George W. and Laura Bush live lives nothing like this. They spend their days in pressed suits, with servants fixing their clothes, preparing their hair, making their food and changing their linens. They don't invite regular people over for pot-lucks; they go to high-rolling fundraising luncheons with America's wealthiest at exclusive clubs. And, hon, I've got to be frank: as much as the nice magazine picture makes it look as if it were so, they aren't going to ring your doorbell to ask to borrow your waffle iron. They've got trust funds for that sort of thing.

But let's be honest: they look so comfortable and at home in those photographs, not out of their league like when they're playing the part of president and first lady. So let's help them out by sending them from the White House so they can use their multi-million dollar funds to play down-home dress-up in retirement.

Evaluating the Bush Administration from an elemental level, it's clear that the Republicans occupying the White House are seriously out of balance. With George W. Bush, there isn't much earth, wind or water. It's all just fire, fire fire! For the sake of elemental balance, we need to boot Bush out of the White House on Election Day.

When Donna Lieberman, the executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, thinks about how to reduce crime, she's got a long term vision. "The criminal justice system is not where you reduce crime," she says. "You do that with schools, the economy, and social services." Think about this now: What areas do George W. Bush's policies undermine most harshly? That's right: Schools, the economy, and social services. It looks like, thanks to George W. Bush, we have a future of increased crime to look forward to. (Source: Time Out New York, August 5-12, 2004)

Even in tiny Delaware, 8,800 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

George W. Bush's Republican friends in Congress are trying to cut millions of dollars in funding from cardiovascular research programs, even though heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States. That makes Bush the Pro-Death President. (Source: Fact Sheets for House Consideration of the 2005 Budget, House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, March 23, 2004)

When asked to choose between Medicaid and subsidies to Halliburton, George W. Bush and the Republicans chose Halliburton. U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky comments, "The House Republican budget is indefensible. As they always do, Republicans followed the lead of President Bush and passed a budget that goes after the poor, the homeless, and the elderly. Republicans value more tax cuts for the rich over meeting the needs of senior citizens, working families, the unemployed and most Americans. Republicans slash Medicaid and Section 8 vouchers so they can pay for missile defense, subsidies to Halliburton and tax cuts for the wealthy." (Source: Office of Representative Jan Schakowsky, March 25, 2004)

George W. Bush and the Republicans invoke the attacks of September 11, 2001 at every chance they get, encouraging Americans not to ever stop thinking about the attacks. Bush the leadership of the Republican party insist that they are the best choice to keep America safe, and who can contradict them?

Well, there are plenty of people who contradict the Republican claim to ownership of the legacy of the attacks of September 11, 2001. Key among them is a group of women turned into widows by the attacks. Led by Kristen Breitweiser, this group says that George W. Bush has failed at the task of making America safer, and endorses John Kerry as Bush's replacement. Breitweiser explains, "I don't feel President Bush has done everything he could do to make us safer since 9-11. I've personally spent the last three years fighting to try to fix the problems that plague our intelligence apparatus, so we would not be so vulnerable to Al Quaeda. And during the three years, our largest adversary was the administration. Because of that, I can't in good conscience vote for President Bush. The second largest reason is the war in Iraq. We have lost more than a thousand soldiers in Iraq. Thousands have been woulded. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. The net result is that we are more vulnerable to terrorism." Why boot Bush? Because Kristen Breitweiser's insights have been hard earned. (Source: Newsweek, September 27, 2004)

A very personal reason to boot Bush: My wife is pregnant, and I don't want to have to think about George W. Bush's second term in office every time I think of my child's birthday.

In the District of Columbia, 10,000 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

George W. Bush claims that he's going to be able to lead the nation into a new generation of alternative energy. This claim looks suspiciously similar to the cow patties found on Bush's dude ranch when one considers that Texas is the biggest overall consumer of petroleum, natural gas, coal and electricity. Where's the alternative energy in that? It's just a tiny fraction of one percent, with oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear energy leading the path to the dirty, contaminated past. With Bush, all energy leads back to old ways of doing things. In Texas, it's not just the fuels that are fossils - the entire scheme of energy production is wickedly out of date as well. Bush seems to think that what's good for Texas is good for America, and that's a clear sign that what's good for Bush is bad for America. (Source: Environmental Protection Agency Emissions Scorecard, 2001)

George W. Bush's radical rejection of science is causing him to become alienated from even traditional Republican allies, such as the business community. Conservative magazine BusinessWeek writes, "The growing consensus among scientists and governments is that we can - and must - do something... Researchers... have pondered the evidence and concluded that the earth is warming, that humans are probably the cause, and that the threat is real enough to warrant an immediate response." If George W. Bush cannot even count on the business community to back up his policies, how can he be an effective executive for the United States? (Source: BusinessWeek, August 16, 2004)

On January 16, 2003, George W. Bush informed an audience in Scranton, Pennsylvania that, "...while one of us can't do everything to help heal the hurt of America, each of us can do something to help make somebody's life in your community a better place." When a President of the United States speaks, Americans ought to be able to understand what the heck he's trying to talk about. For wasting the time of the good people of Scranton with this kind of babble, we say that this Election Day is a good time to give Bush the boot. (Source: Presidential Misspeak: The Very Curious Language of George W. Bush, 2004.)

61% of respondents in Sweden say that on balance Bush's policies have made them feel worse about the United States. The more xenophobic amongst us may ask why we should care what the Swedes think of us. The more reflective amongst us may note that that's a hubristic attitude typical of a world power that isn't aware of its imminent decline. (Source: University of Maryland Program on International Policy Attitudes September 8, 2004)

In Florida, 181,900 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

In the last year of George W. Bush's administration atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, the primary greenhouse gas, have risen at record-breaking levels. (Source: Sierra Atlantic, Fall 2004)

Boot Bush because he presumes to speak for all evangelical Christians, when in fact, he does not. Chris Beers from Durham, North Carolina complains, "As an evangelical Christian, I am deeply disturbed by my fellow evangelicals' uncritical embrace of President Bush and the Republican Party... If we read Scripture without the help of right-wind ideology, we see that Jesus was much more concerned about caring for the poor than about banning gay marriage or abortion. In accepting an amputated Gospel that involves only our own personal relationship with God, we have compromised our ability to critique both political parties." Boot Bush because Bush encourages religious Americans to reject the sensible kind of balance offered by evangelicals like Chris Beers. (Source: Newsweek, September 27, 2004)

Prominent Oregonian Republican Politicians Clay Myers and Bill Rutherford, former Secretary of State and State Treasurer respectively, have announced that they cannot in good conscience vote to elect George W. Bush in 2004. As Myers puts it, "Mainstream Republicans believe in fiscal responsibility, internationalism, environmental protection, the rights of women, and putting middle-class families ahead of big business lobbyists. Moderate Republicans should not be asked to swallow the right-wing policies of George W. Bush." (Source: The Bend Bugle September 1, 2004)

In Georgia, 126,800 more people were unemployed in 2003 than in 2000. (Source: American Community Surveys of 2000 and 2003)

Since George W. Bush has taken office, it's become increasingly difficult for average working Americans to own their own homes. Home prices have risen 24 percent since 2001, far outstripping wages, which have actually fallen, when adjusted for inflation. (Source: Detroit Free Press, September 25, 2004)

In George W. Bush's America, the rich are getting richer even while the rest of America continues to struggle to make ends meet. Between 2003 and 2004, the number of billionaires in America jumped from 262 to 313. At the same time, income for average Americans fell, and the number of Americans who cannot find work in their fields increased. As President, Bush has helped the rich get even more money by forcing the rest of us to work harder or suffer in poverty. (Source: Associated Press, September 25, 2004)

George W. Bush's leadership relies on secrecy and decepti