More right-wing hypocricy

How can anybody stand beside the track record of the GOP and conservative agendas? How can anybody not see the blatant and consistent hypocricy in their positions?

Yet again, the two-face right-wing ideology rears its ugly head.

Right-wingers hue and cry (ad nauseum) about the supremacy of "state's rights" and anti-federalism...until THEY want something.

Before the Supreme Court is the issue of medical marijuana. The key arguing point is whether a federal Controlled Substances Act can supercede California's Compassionate Use Act (which allows limited use of marijuana for medicinal purposes).

The back-up argument for the Bush administration is the right to stop medicinal marijuana because of interstate commerce laws. But doesn't the GOP preach against the gov't overusing the interstate commerce clause? Oops. Once again, the GOP doesn't let their own bullsh*t get in the way of furthering their own big-government agendas.

Whether or not marijuana actually can be used medicinally seems a secondary issue. I guess because--once again--science will prove the GOP a bunch of reactionary idiots. And we all know how much Dubya loves science. (He never lets science get in the way of promoting ignorance.)

And my money says that--somewhere behind the scenes--the fight against medical marijuana is funded/fueled by big pharmaceuticals. They've spent millions over decades conjuring up their ineffective but legal remedies. The last thing they want is for people to be able to grow their own treatments. That would be bad for profits.

And Bush never let science or humanity get in the way of profits, either.

It's getting embarassing...

Oboy. Looks like Imperious George isn't welcome in Canada, either.

No love in the south, none in the north, none east or west (except for Tony Blair and the Saudis). Hmmm. Methinks there's a pattern here.

Pics, pics, pics, and more pics.

Can you hear the tick-tick-tick of Ohio...?

There is a bomb about to go off, and you can’t blame anybody but the Republicans.

They caused this. Them and their scheming to steal elections.

This is no longer about whispered conspiracies amongst basement-dwellers wearing tin foil hats. Federal, state, and local governments are involved with the counting fiascos in key states, particularly Ohio and Florida. And it’s not a coincidence these two states have GOP governors and use similar voting machines--not to mention similar disenfranchisement schemes.

The official count will probably look markedly different than the election day tallies. A recount looks certain. And even the Government Accountability Office is taking a look.

Right now, everybody’s walking on egg shells. Nobody wants to revisit 2000. So they’re all talking in gentle tones about accuracy and systemic flaws. Nobody’s mentioning words like “fraud” or “overturn.”

But it’s too close to election to just talk about future elections. If this one can be fixed, it better well should be.

The GOP got away with it in 2000, and even 2002. This time it will be the Democrats’ fault if they get away with it again.

Gear up for more of your favorite “dimpled chad” discussions, and break out the “voter intent” arguments.

But just don’t forget: this is the Republicans' fault.

Killing presidents, for fun and profit

If you like tasteless fun, this is for you.

If you have an up-to-date PC and want to relive the joys of murdering a President, check out JFK Reloaded. (Here's a review.)

Supposedly, the Scottish game maker, Traffic, says the game is educational and intends to disprove conspiracy theories about the assassination. Yeah, right. And the sick thrill of being the shooter has nothing to do with it...

But for many gamers, sick thrills are best. And if you're a Republican, this should be a hoot (until Traffic releases the Old Yeller edition).

No word yet on the release of Crucifix Reloaded, where you get to nail Jesus to the cross. Y'know, some folks say nails through the hands and feet won't support a whole human body. I guess Traffic will put an end to that controversy, too!

'The truth is but a lie undiscovered'

Today is the 41st anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. So, news programs have trotted out guests to offer pro/con sound bites debating the possibility of a conspiracy.

What I find laughable is how easy it is for the con experts to dismiss the possibility out of hand. I have one fact for them: Oswald was murdered while in custody. That alone is the doorway to a conspiracy.

If Lee Harvey Oswald did everything by himself, why would anyone give up their own life and freedom to kill a man already in custody and virtually assured conviction? Why shut him up, since he could implicate no one but himself? It makes absolutely no sense for Jack Ruby to kill Oswald in broad daylight in a police station with a hundred eyewitnesses--and then try to make a deal with prosecutors while in jail.

That’s just one single fact that points to the possibility, to the likelihood, that there’s more to this than “Oswald acted alone.”

The next suspicious facts are the many sudden and mysterious deaths of key witnesses, including Ruby. And these weren’t witnesses who agreed with the Warren Report. When the witnesses of one side (not both) start having deadly “accidents”, that’s a pretty solid clue.

I can’t say for certain whether Oswald was alone in the book depository (although there is evidence he wasn’t). In fact, a second shooter isn’t even necessary for a conspiracy. But everything AFTER that point screams cover-up. And no one would bother covering up evidence and testimony unless: (1) there was something to cover up, and (2) someone had something to lose if it wasn’t covered up.

And that is something the Warren Commission adamantly wasn’t interested in.

Back to the good ol' days, ja?

Legitimate leaders have stepped aside to let him assume power. He has consolidated/affirmed his power through fear and hate. He has purged government of independent thinkers and demanded loyalty oaths. He has taken the reigns off capitalism. He has made war his official policy and invaded a sovereign nation at peace. He dragged a nation into war of aggression to complete a previous unfinished campaign. And he has a nationwide propaganda apparatus to make it all sound so very necessary.

If this sounds like a notorious historical figure, it is. If it sounds like 1933, it is. But this man wears no Charlie Chaplain mustache. He wears an American flag lapel pin and his narrow eyes glisten with mad purpose. And he is making his history now.

George W. Bush has brought petite fascism to the White House, and God help America that they barely notice or care.

He is conducting a mad rush to liquidate all current resources into cash, leaving as little as possible for future generations. He is borrowing billions of dollars to pay for massive tax cuts for his rich friends, indebting future Americans for generations. But Bush and his cronies do not care. The profit is all theirs and the debts all ours.

Protecting the environment is now in full reverse. All Bush’s agencies are run by corporate employees. Pollution is in high gear, and the health of tomorrow’s generations is a laughable concept. Why should Bush care? To him, conservation is nothing but lost money. Money his kind is entitled to.

There is no question that Bush is a man of vision. The question is, what is that vision?

Only when all is lost, all good jobs gone, the national treasury filled with nothing but IOUs, all air, water, and soil poisoned, all our children fighting or dead in foreign lands, and any word of dissent is a capital crime will the 293 million fools (minus 55 million) who call themselves Americans stand up and say “hey, wait a minute.” But by then, it will be too late.

Bush’s vision is the knowledge that America is past its prime, and the fire sale is on. Liquidate everything. And get the hell out before the whole thing collapses.

A warm welcome for the Corporation In Chief...

I can't read Spanish, but I'm certain these Chileans are pissed.

Pics.
More pics.
And more pics.

And a story to explain it all.

Under the boot heels of Bush...

Billions of dollars of "intelligence" is about to get a whole lot MORE unreliable.

New CIA director Porter Goss said at the confirmation meetings earlier this year that there's no room for politicizing intelligence. How fitting that Goss mislead Congress about his beliefs. Now he's about to politicize the intelligence to the partisan extreme.

Goss has already told the agency via memorandum that they WILL be mouthpieces for the Bush agenda. No one will be allowed to tell the truth, unless it looks good for Bush.

Check out these quotes from the NY Times story (requires free registration)...

Goss told agency employees that their job is to "support the administration and its policies in our work...''

"As agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies..." Do not...support...opposition... Not even when those policies are to distort and lie about the information you worked so hard to uncover?

Isn't this how we got mislead into a war in Iraq? Wasn't Bush's willfull overlooking of counter-evidence the last straw that forced agents to leak all that counter information to the press? One guy filled a whole book with Bush's mistakes and distortions.

So what does Bush do? Well of course it's not to do a better job weighing the facts. Instead, his decision is to purge the government of truth-tellers, silence the rest, and compell them to put loyalty to the Party ahead of loyalty to the country.

Okay, so how long before they break out the brown shirts...?

Beware of false balance

The right-wing backlash against the academia and responsible journalism has been growing for decades. Since conservative positions have consistently been repudiated by actual facts, they have taken to attacking the source. If you can’t kill the message, kill the messenger.

Sadly, the mainstream media has actually helped the right-wing activists to undermine our usually reliable sources of fact. Decades of “liberal media” bashing has reputable networks acting timid. They want to be seen as reliable, so they take criticisms seriously. Unfortunately, too seriously. (The neglect of Bush’s background in 2000, the soft hand with Bush’s march to invade Iraq, and the lack of blaming Bush for just about anything these past four years show us just how cowardly they’ve been.)

Brow beating of the media isn’t their only tactic, however.

Another tactic to defeat the reliability of academics and journalists is to overwhelm any and every discussion with lots and lots of noise. This is shown clearly (if not briefly) in an article in the current Columbia Review Journal.

The gist is this. An evangelical anti-abortionist doctor invented the idea that abortions cause breast cancer (called the “ABC theory”). This allegation was then used as basis for an attempted Texas law to force doctors to warn patients about this hazard. However, there is no factual evidence to support this alleged link. It is not controversial. It’s wholly without merit.

But... in the attempt to be fair and open-minded, the National Cancer Institute gathered “the world’s experts” to discuss the ABC theory. No one (but the doctor) saw any validity to the alleged link.

Of course, that won’t end the doctor’s efforts. Right-wing media and GOP-activists everywhere will continue their tactics. They will hold this man up as an example of truth being quashed by the “biased liberal elites” who “control the media and academia”. This is the “red state” persecution complex that has been building for decades. And they will continue to push men like this doctor onto every show or panel possible, otherwise crying foul in the name of “fair and balanced” discussion.

But balance doesn’t necessarily mean giving every crackpot a microphone. In fact, this could be very dangerous to people’s health.

We all remember the tobacco industry’s “expert scientists” who argued for years that there was no proof that smoking caused cancer. And these companies were all the while sitting on their own research proving just the opposite. This is the nonsense that happens when science is distorted for financial, political, and/or religious gain.

This isn’t balance. It’s manipulation. And it’s time we stopped helping them do it to us.

Bush trying to gag democracy.

This is going too far. Already, and the second Bush term hasn’t even started yet. Nobody gave Bush a mandate to enshroud our heretofore open government in a cloak of secrecy.

Check it out here or here.

Forcing Homeland Security employees to sign nondisclosure agreements regarding non-classified material is just wrong. And trying to get Congressional aides to sign it is worse. It’s undemocratic, and possibly unconstitutional.

Bush supporters get upset when observers cast Bush in the light of the 1930s Nazi party. Well, how far does this have to go before those 60 million idiots, I mean voters, open their eyes? Using draconian measures to control information was a key early step for a fascist takeover.

To put it nicely, Bush is forgetting just who he works for. And he’s not living up to his obligation to serve and defend the Constitution.

Beware this administration. They’re up to no good.

Take a lesson from Greece and Rome, folks. Democracy can be lost. All it takes is to not pay attention.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...

Reports are creeping out that U.S. forces have been using chemical weapons in the recent battle in Falluja. Apparently the current news blackout in Falluja has the U.S. military thinking they can take the gloves off.

These claims aren’t coming out of left field. The U.S. military has already admitted that they used Napalm against Iraqis once before. According to one officer: “The generals love napalm. It has a big psychological effect.”

Good job, Dubya. Chemical weapons used to terrorize your enemies. This is a perfect bookend to the Abu Ghraib disaster.

Again, what was your reason for toppling Saddam...?

This makes one wonder, what’s it all look like to the Iraqis? When America cannot distinguish itself from Saddam and Osama militarily, and democracy in action looks like yet another form of imposed tyranny, there is little reason to ever believe that the invasion is about anything other than stealing their oil.

What does this say about Bush’s true motivations, when the only thing “free” in Iraq right now is the flowing of oil, and the only places secure are the oil wells?

Campaign “loyalty oaths” now imposed on CIA

Bush is purging the CIA of any and all workers who acknowledged he was doing a piss-poor job these past four years. These “disloyal” employees (i.e. “liberal Democrats”) are being given the boot. However, many have spent decades in the agency, working for Dems and GOPs alike.

The burr in Bush’s saddle is the leakage of his bungling to the press. Bush did such a horrible job handling the intelligence failures of 9/11, the WMD lies, and capturing Osama bin Laden that agent Michael Scheuer had to write a book, “Imperial Hubris”, to sort out all the incompetencies and deceits.

These career agents are accused of “obstructing the president’s agenda.” Translation: they didn’t swallow Bush’s bullshit--and openly said so. When Bush says Saddam did 9/11, then by God Saddam did 9/11! There’s simply no room for facts or truth, not when there’s oil to be looted.

(Buck up, folks. It's gonna be another four long years.)

Abandoning GOD for GOP

This election has made it clear, for anyone who wasn’t already convinced, that the church pulpits across America have thrown out the teachings of Jesus. When popular preachers like James Dobson use their radio pulpit to tell voters it’s a sin to not vote (apparently, against Democrats), they have thrown away Jesus and cast their lot for the Republican party.

Last time I looked, the Republican platform was not a copy of the Holy Bible. And no church can claim that any one political party encompasses in toto the Christian doctrine.

For one example, Jesus said not to kill. He did not equivocate about the details. Don’t kill. Period. Not in anger, not in self-defense, not for pre-emption or national security. So while the Democrats may (or may not, depending on one’s interpretation of science) violate that instruction due to defending abortion, it is CERTAIN that the Republicans violate that instruction in a whole host of ways.

The GOP staunchly defends the death penalty, widespread gun ownership and usage (for self-defense, etc.), and aggressive military policy (“pre-emption”). If it kills, it’s usually GOP-approved. They also fight hard against using public money in preventative policies such as workplace regulations, consumer protections, public health policies, and preventative health care--all of which can lead to death if left unaddressed. In fact, the ONLY life protected by “pro-lifers” is the unborn fetus. For everybody else, they’re on their own!

No “evangelical” I’ve talked with has yet resolved these massive discrepancies between the direct instruction of Jesus and the Republican agenda. (Some bring up Old Testament arguments, but the words of Jesus trumps all that.)

Jesus didn’t focus on gay marriage, but he did spend a lot of time condemning greed and materialism. So why are the preachers so worried about gays instead of the capitalist consumerism that is destroying America’s soul? Why don’t they put the same emphasis on Mammon that Jesus did?

Maybe it’s because Mammon is the true god of the Republican party.

Lunatic fringe, I know you’re out there.

Out goes one nut job, and in comes another. A day after John Ashcroft quit the Attorney General post, Bush named hispanic Alberto Gonzales as his replacement. If Puritan Ashcroft saw the Constitution and civil liberties as a nuisance, then Inquisitor Gonzales sees them as walls to knock down.

Gonzales was a Texas Supreme Court justice under Bush from 1995-2000 until following Bush to Washington to serve as a White House legal counsel.

Gonzales is a right-wing extremist, pure and simple. He concocted the legal basis for torturing prisoners at Abu Ghraib and referred to the Geneva Conventions as “quaint” and “obsolete.” He also wrote the short, oversimplified memos Bush relied on the decide who got executed while governor of Texas. Mitigating factors were frequently glossed over or ignored completely. (In true Bush tradition, never let facts get in the way of killin'.)

Gonzales has been mentioned as possible nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, but Republican leaders are concerned he might be too moderate. Ouch.

If this is Bush “reaching across the aisle”, he’s reaching over with a spiked club. So much for bipartisanship. Didn’t even last a week.

Gonzales may have been Bush’s source for the notion (while Texas governor) that any environmental law constituted “taking” under the U.S. Constitution. In simple terms, Bush was saying if a corporation couldn’t pollute a piece of land then the government had to cut them a check (as “just compensation”). I hope this isn’t the kind of legal distortions we can expect from our top cop.

Gonzales is expected to be approved fairly easily by the Senate. No one wants to be labeled a racist (lots of hispanic votes out there to lose), and the Democrats want to save their heavy fighting for the right-wing extremist nutcase Bush will nominate for the U.S. Supreme Court.

Falluja: winning the war politically, if not militarily

By giving advanced warning to Falluja that U.S. forces would be attacking, 200,000 residents were given time to evacuate so they won’t be killed. This also gave the insurgents time to pack up and leave as well. This sounds like a huge blunder. That the U.S. is letting the insurgents flee into the countryside.

On the contrary. This is precisely what Bush wants. A military victory isn’t Bush’s ultimate goal here. Bush desperately needs the word “Falluja” out of the headlines. Period.

Falluja has been a political dagger in the heart of Bush’s claims that Iraq is stabilizing and peaceful democracy is at hand. Every time Bush says “peace”, Falluja says “civil war.” But just because Bush hasn’t (can’t?) gain victory militarily doesn’t mean he can’t get a political victory. U.S. forces will take Falluja fairly easily. And the rebels will go elsewhere to continue their resistance. Some compare this tactic to similar failures in Vietnam. That future losses will greatly outweigh immediate gain.

Doesn’t matter. To understand the massive folly of Bush’s strategy requires broad and deep thinking, not to mention juggling a bunch of names and facts. None of which will fit neatly into a headline, so most of America will pay little attention. They’ll hear that Bush freed Falluja and “democracy is on the march.”

If the 2004 election taught us anything, it’s that facts don’t matter anymore.

Fixing the morality disconnect

Liberals and Democrats are beginning to see why they keep losing ground amongst middle America.

The vast sea of red states give the impression that the GOP owns the Mississippi basin lock, stock, and barrel. This isn’t quite true, however, because plenty of those red states are being won by relatively narrow margins. But why are those states tilting red?

The short answer is the “moral” issue. The GOP media machine has painted a very distorted and dishonest picture: that Dems/libs are all a bunch of hedonists who hate God and Country but love sin and communism. Pure nonsense, but it has traction because the Democrats haven’t countered it. (Note to Dems: Just because you think an accusation is stupid and unfounded doesn’t mean you don’t have to refute it. Your silence will be treated as proof that the accusation is true.)

The key strategy by the Republicans (with great help from Evangelicals, oddly enough) is to separate “morals” from the issues. Every poll this election cycle asked what people are most concerned about, and every time “morals” got its own entry. You had to choose: morals or Iraq, morals or terror, morals or the economy, morals or the environment.

These are trick questions. Because these issues ARE about morals. Iraq is a moral issue, how we fight terrorism is a moral issue, how we handle the economy is a moral issue, preserving the environment is a moral issue.

But the GOP media machine (with help by major media) has managed to keep these separated. The only issues allowed to be categorized as moral are those officially approved by the GOP as relating to religion. The GOP fights hard to limit the list of religious issues to gays, abortion, and public prayer.

Why? Because if the folks in the red states woke up and realized that Jesus told us to feed the poor (welfare), heal the sick (health care), render unto Caesar (pay your taxes), and be moderate (discourage greed and consumption), they’d start discussing morals the same way Dems/libs do. That there is more to morality than the limited list the GOP offers.

The GOP can’t afford Americans thinking (again, like they did decades ago) that valuing families means fighting the labor causes such as wages, health care, and reliable social security. And that crime rates go down when working people prosper.

If the Democrats want to win back the margin of victory in red states, they need to show the direct connection between morals and public policy issues.

Democracy in jeopardy: Another rigged election.

Just like in 2000, a critical state in the presidential election has serious voting reliability problems. Ohio is this year’s Florida, and the facts are now trickling out. The illegal and unethical Florida behavior was so successful in 2000 that it was exported to Ohio and elsewhere this year.

Two great starting points are Thom Hartmann’s recent column or Greg Palast’s column. And more sources can be found from there.

It’s not an accident that these “irregularities” are in Republican states that narrowly went for the Republican candidate.

There’s no doubt that GOP supporters will reject this, for purely partisan reasons. But there is no room for turning a blind eye here. If this is the new acceptable behavior, then you can bet your butt the Democrats will follow suit.

This is the “fair and balanced” democracy we can look forward to if it doesn’t get fixed NOW.

Dems have a PR problem, not a policy problem.

The buzz among Democrats right now is figuring out why they lost to the worst presidential incumbent in American history.

Exit polls suggest voters chose Bush because of his values. True, to those who don’t watch FoxNews, this is laughable. Bush governs “of, by, and for” the corporations. His every policy is a punishment on those who work hard for a living. But that’s not what his supporters believe. And it’s those beliefs, not the empirical facts, that the Democrats keep losing to.

The Dems are finally waking up to the fact that economic arguments must be phrased in moral terms. And when it’s appropriate, to explain these morals in Christian terms.

Welfare is a moral issue, even if there are deadbeats abusing the system. When faced with letting them all starve or giving them food, it is moral to feed them. It would be a moral crisis if the richest nation in history tossed its poor to the four winds. Jesus was unconditional when he told us to feed the poor. Same for healing the sick. Nation-wide health care is a moral and Christian imperative. So is restraining greed and rewarding work.

If the Democrats ever want a majority again, they need to start wearing their religion on their sleeves once in a while. Too many Christian voters equate religious silence with being non-religious. They want their politicians to give a nod to God once in a while. Is this too much to ask?

By not linking social programs to religious values, the Dems have let the GOP twist and spin all the Progressive, New Deal, and Great Society advancements into some kind of subversive anti-American communist agenda. How far would their argument get if it also meant arguing Jesus was a communist?

This new approach requires no change in policy, no shift in beliefs. It simply brings to the table the moral and Christian basis already inherent in the socially conscious philosophy of the Democratic Party.

The voters are clearly concerned about morality. It’s time to remind them which party best represents those morals.

It’s all over but the dyin’

John Kerry conceded. The referendum on Neocon fascist imperialism has officially passed. The anti-Christ has been re-elected. Perpetual war has been approved.

But how did this happen? Once the dust settles and the tear ducts are dry, the Democrats will wake up and realize the bitter truth. This election was not about issues, not about character. It was about style.

One candidate spoke to the voter as if each of them were smart. The other candidate spoke to the voter as if each of them were stupid.

Guess who won?

Simplicity won the day for the Republicans. Bush got his message across because he spoke on a sixth grade level. Kerry, much like Gore before him, asked the voter to listen and think in depth. Lesson learned. Don’t ask voters to think, or they’ll just start thinking about the other guy.

Pundits will ponder the failure of the Democrats to unseat America’s worst presidency. If they’re honest with themselves, they will conclude that shifting farther to the right will never get them back in power. They need to become liberals again, and simplify their message. America hates to think, and they’ll punish anyone who tries to make them. The Dems are now forewarned.

If "intelligent discontent is the mainspring of civilization" (Eugene Debs), then America is teetering at the edge of decline.

American politics is about to get a whole lot dumber.

Go vote, and take no guff

Everyone should go out and vote. Don't let others make the decisions for you. Jump in and have your say.

And if anyone gives you any guff while at the polls, hang in there and get that vote cast. And then rush to any media you can find. Tell them your story. The more instances that get reported, the more validity the basic complaint will hold later. Don't keep it to yourself, or wait a few weeks to speak up.

There's a very serious problem in our elections. Political parties are screwing with the system through machine manipulations, voter roll manipulations, registration scandals, voter intimidation, and schemes yet uncovered. It's a crisis already, and the sooner everything gets exposed the sooner we can get it fixed.

It's bad enough to see your prefered candidate lose, but to see the loss caused by illegal and unethical means is enough to destroy faith in the system. And that's the worst thing that can happen to a democracy.

Fighting The Tide officially endorses John Kerry for President.

And here’s the short list why.

IRAQ--Kerry would not have exploited the war on terrorism to start an unnecessary war based on flimsy information. Kerry would have kept the pressure in Afghanistan and on Al Qaida. He would have let the inspectors finish their job, so there wouldn’t be a need for an invasion. If that invasion force had been in Afghanistan and Pakistan, there’d be no Al Qaida left in the region.

SADDAM--Sure Saddam might still be in power. But the Deulfer report shows us sanctions and inspections were working. Saddam was neutered and in control of little of his country. Whatever political oppression the Iraqis endured, the current devastation is worse and a civil war would make far worse. And every indication is that we are trading a secular tyranny for a democratically chosen theocratic tyranny (just like the experts said would happen). It wasn’t in America’s interest to open this can of worms yet.

TERRORISM--Reducing the threat by Al Qaida requires an international effort. The U.S. cannot go it alone. The sensible approach (which is Kerry’s approach) is to turn Al Qaida friends into U.S. friends, thereby limiting the places they can go for resources and shelter. The only way Bush’s plan can win is if we invade and occupy every nation in the Middle East. That, we cannot do.

TAXES--It’s not a real tax cut if you have to take out loans to make up for it. Bush’s “cuts” were actually tax deferments. What you didn’t pay under Bush, you will have to pay later under somebody else--with interest. This reckless deficit spending is made worse by the fact that Bush is taking out loans in the names of middle class families and giving most of it to his rich buddies. No thanks.

CRONYISM--Bush has put lobbyists and CEOs at the head of virtually every agency. This is like hiring the Godfather as Chief of Police. We need a better government than THAT.

ENVIRONMENT--Continuing his policies from his governor days, Bush has extended his policy of immediate liquidation of all natural resources to the national scene. If the legacy of a man is what he leaves to the next generation, this is Bush at his worst.

HEALTH CARE--Bush has sided with the profiteers every single time. His health care plan does nothing to help those in need. And denying access to cheap Canadian drugs is simply indefensible.

SOCIAL SECURITY--Kerry may not have much of a fix, but Bush's plan to allow investments would cripple it. The first rule of problem solving is to not make it worse.

LEADERSHIP--Admittedly, this question is out on Kerry. But the facts are in with Bush, and he’s miserable. Certain people think Bush is a “good leader” only because they’re told over and over that he’s a good leader. But a cursory check of the facts show he is anything but. The only people following Bush are corporations, GOP sycophants and Tony Blair. The rest of the world ain’t buying his message. At every opportunity, Bush has shown poor judgment and made the wrong choice. We shouldn't reward him for it.

CHARACTER--Kerry spent his 20s and 30s fighting drugs, Bush spent his 20s and 30s taking drugs (and being a drunk). Kerry had the courage to speak out against Viet Nam, Bush had the courage to skip guard duty. Kerry keeps his religion private, Bush wears his on his sleeve. Kerry can change his mind when presented new facts, Bush refuses to regardless of the facts. Kerry has a history of standing against corruption in government, Bush has a history of facilitating it. And Kerry speaks to me as if we both have a brain, Bush speaks to me as if we’re both imbeciles.

I could take every category and break it down into dozens of instances to prove my point. But that would be a book. And there are dozens of those published already. Suffice to say, the authors of the majority of anti-Bush books have been written by policy experts such as Richard Clark and Peter G. Peterson, while the majority of pro-Bush books have been written by hack pundits such as Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter.

‘Nuff said.