Forgive Me. I Voted for George W. Bush.

Forgive Me. I Voted for George W. Bush.

A mea culpa to the people of America



Nothing prepared me for what has happened in America under George W.
Bush. In Texas, he was, politically, fairly moderate. Actually, he was
even, for one brief moment, courageous, and exhibited leadership. A
fiscal conservative streak ran through his policies, but not so much
that they deeply harmed Texas’ already austere social services. And when
the governor sent his messages to the right, they were armored with
logic, not vitriol. He was a man of obvious common sense, and charm.

As a result, I voted for George Walker Bush. And now I need forgiveness.

I bear some personal guilt for what is happening to our country.
Frankly, like a lot of Americans, I got had. George W. Bush’s policies
are so astoundingly radical, and his politics so amazingly cynical, that
he is not only harming our government for decades to come, he and Karl
Rove are robbing Americans of what little faith they had left in the
democratic process.

Reporting on Bush and Rove in Texas for a couple of decades, it was
simple to deconstruct their maneuvers, and hold them up to the light of
the Texas sun. Nonetheless, there was an underlying logic to many of
their strategies, which appealed to the public. After James Byrd was
dragged to death in East Texas, a legislative effort in Austin attempted
to pass a hate crimes bill. Bush and Rove stopped it cold with nothing
more than language. The governor said, "All crimes like murder are hate
crimes." Obviously, he was sending a message to the conservative right
that he didn't think gays or minorities needed special protection under
the law. Rove didn't want such legislation haunting Mr. Bush out on the
presidential trail. And this was the kind of Spartan, uncluttered
rationale that seduces Texans.

The governor even showed political vision. His first legislative
session, Mr. Bush attempted to deal with Texas property taxes. Texas has
the worst property taxes in the union because lawmakers here refuse to
pass an income tax to more evenly distribute revenue responsibilities
for funding schools. Business gets a pass while homeowners bear the
weight. Business, also, is in charge of the state’s politics. When the
governor took on the issue, he got handed his political guts in a
bucket. Karl Rove kept his distance from the task, knowing Bush would
learn a basic lesson. Mr. Bush told me later, "I'll never do anything
like that again unless there are tens of thousands of people standing on
the capitol grounds chanting at me." And he didn't .

None of this, though, offered any real clue as to what kind of a
president George W. Bush might be, unless this was a carefully
orchestrated charade. As the campaign wore on, and I stumbled in and out
of the Bush press plane for weeks on end, the only news I got about Al
Gore was on late night television, before fading off to sleep, or from
other reporters traveling with the vice president. On morning flights
between campaign stops, I read newspapers, trying to get more insight
into a Gore presidency. I was distanced from Mr. Gore by his
overwhelming angst, an almost craven desire to hold the office. His
politics, ultimately, appealed to me more than Mr. Bush’s. But Al Gore
just wanted the job too damned badly for me to get comfortable with him.
When I saw him render his life of public service into a caricature
during the televised debates, my decision was all but made. I knew Bush
better, and trusted his heart.

Boy howdy, did I screw up.

Bush and Rove are deploying a political style that transcends cynicism.
They have begun a new American campaign, where the only constituency of
merit is the gigantic corporation, which supplies the money for an
overwhelming marketing campaign. The president is now, more than ever in
our history, a product to be branded and sold. Unfortunately, there is
no lemon law governing the presidency. We can't get our money or our
votes back when we discover we’ve bought something defective. We’re
stuck until the next election.

This approach works because Mr. Rove relies on Americans to be too busy
with their daily lives to pay attention to the details. The president
can land on an aircraft carrier, and comport himself as a warrior leader
without fear of accusations of hypocrisy because the media has been
cowed, and the public has a short memory. George W. Bush avoided combat
in Vietnam by using family privilege, and connections, and then
disappeared from his champagne flight unit for the last two years of his
hitch. Had our soldiers in Iraq been as capricious about their
commitments to America, what might have happened? Yet he dared to stand
in their honored midst and suggest to us that he was one of their
number. Rove was right. We weren't listening.

Our troops now move around Iraq, their lives potentially jeopardized by
every person passing on the street, and the Bush White House quietly is
cutting both their combat pay and family separation allowance. A modest
monthly stipend of $150 was raised to $225 for "imminent danger" pay,
and is being reduced to its original level. The family separation
payment of $100 a month was raised to $250, an amount designed to help
families pay bills while their soldiers are off working for America. But
Mr. Bush is planning to cut that figure back to its original level.

As the first shipload of soldiers was leaving from San Diego,
California, the administration was pulling a federal supplement from
local schools, which would harm education for the children of our
troops. Because the San Diego Independent School District cannot levy
taxes against federal property when students live on base, the
government provides a payment to help the school district fund the
education of the children of our servicemen and women. George Bush is
eliminating this money. Ultimately, this means not only do the children
of our military endure larger classes, less qualified teachers, and poor
curriculum, so does everyone else’s child.

Perhaps, Mr. Bush and Mr. Rove are finally getting our attention.

I find it disturbing when the president can stand in front of television
cameras, his crooked Texas smirk hiding his true character, and tell us
he is worried about people without jobs and his tax cut will help them
find employment. He says such things even as Nobel laureate economists
are pouring ridicule over his policies and financial behemoths like
Warren Buffet are scoffing. The photo-op presidency holds a news
conference to sign the "Leave No Child Behind Act" with Sen. Ted
Kennedy, and then guts $8 billion from its budget, after forcing federal
mandates on schools with no money to pay for implementation. Sen.
Kennedy, I’m afraid, got had, too.

There is neither time nor space to even begin to write of the Bush
administration’s hypocrisies and deceptions. History will, eventually,
conclude that his reckless taxation reduction and deficit increases, his
disingenuous campaigning and rhetoric, imperialist foreign policies, and
corporate greed moved America closer to its recessional from the grand
stage of true liberty and equality. The only way to stop this cascade of
wrongs is for voters to take their citizenship more seriously. Democracy
only works when the electorate is vigilant, and informed. Rove knows
we’re too busy worrying about jobs, mortgages, and lost retirement
funds, to closely monitor the president’s work. He’s right. And George
W. Bush is doing as he pleases, not as Americans prefer.

And because I voted for him, some of this is being done in my name.

Please forgive me.

I like you voted for Bush to but you can bet it won't happen again.
"Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer" wrote
in message news:1cc23cd4ec27a6221fa301b78d8fbcbc@cypherpunks. to...
> Forgive Me. I Voted for George W. Bush.
>
> A mea culpa to the people of America
>
>
>
> Nothing prepared me for what has happened in America under George W.
> Bush. In Texas, he was, politically, fairly moderate. Actually, he was
> even, for one brief moment, courageous, and exhibited leadership. A
> fiscal conservative streak ran through his policies, but not so much
> that they deeply harmed Texas' already austere social services. And when
> the governor sent his messages to the right, they were armored with
> logic, not vitriol. He was a man of obvious common sense, and charm.
>
> As a result, I voted for George Walker Bush. And now I need forgiveness.
>
> I bear some personal guilt for what is happening to our country.
> Frankly, like a lot of Americans, I got had. George W. Bush's policies
> are so astoundingly radical, and his politics so amazingly cynical, that
> he is not only harming our government for decades to come, he and Karl
> Rove are robbing Americans of what little faith they had left in the
> democratic process.
>
> Reporting on Bush and Rove in Texas for a couple of decades, it was
> simple to deconstruct their maneuvers, and hold them up to the light of
> the Texas sun. Nonetheless, there was an underlying logic to many of
> their strategies, which appealed to the public. After James Byrd was
> dragged to death in East Texas, a legislative effort in Austin attempted
> to pass a hate crimes bill. Bush and Rove stopped it cold with nothing
> more than language. The governor said, "All crimes like murder are hate
> crimes." Obviously, he was sending a message to the conservative right
> that he didn't think gays or minorities needed special protection under
> the law. Rove didn't want such legislation haunting Mr. Bush out on the
> presidential trail. And this was the kind of Spartan, uncluttered
> rationale that seduces Texans.
>
> The governor even showed political vision. His first legislative
> session, Mr. Bush attempted to deal with Texas property taxes. Texas has
> the worst property taxes in the union because lawmakers here refuse to
> pass an income tax to more evenly distribute revenue responsibilities
> for funding schools. Business gets a pass while homeowners bear the
> weight. Business, also, is in charge of the state's politics. When the
> governor took on the issue, he got handed his political guts in a
> bucket. Karl Rove kept his distance from the task, knowing Bush would
> learn a basic lesson. Mr. Bush told me later, "I'll never do anything
> like that again unless there are tens of thousands of people standing on
> the capitol grounds chanting at me." And he didn't .
>
> None of this, though, offered any real clue as to what kind of a
> president George W. Bush might be, unless this was a carefully
> orchestrated charade. As the campaign wore on, and I stumbled in and out
> of the Bush press plane for weeks on end, the only news I got about Al
> Gore was on late night television, before fading off to sleep, or from
> other reporters traveling with the vice president. On morning flights
> between campaign stops, I read newspapers, trying to get more insight
> into a Gore presidency. I was distanced from Mr. Gore by his
> overwhelming angst, an almost craven desire to hold the office. His
> politics, ultimately, appealed to me more than Mr. Bush's. But Al Gore
> just wanted the job too damned badly for me to get comfortable with him.
> When I saw him render his life of public service into a caricature
> during the televised debates, my decision was all but made. I knew Bush
> better, and trusted his heart.
>
> Boy howdy, did I screw up.
>
> Bush and Rove are deploying a political style that transcends cynicism.
> They have begun a new American campaign, where the only constituency of
> merit is the gigantic corporation, which supplies the money for an
> overwhelming marketing campaign. The president is now, more than ever in
> our history, a product to be branded and sold. Unfortunately, there is
> no lemon law governing the presidency. We can't get our money or our
> votes back when we discover we've bought something defective. We're
> stuck until the next election.
>
> This approach works because Mr. Rove relies on Americans to be too busy
> with their daily lives to pay attention to the details. The president
> can land on an aircraft carrier, and comport himself as a warrior leader
> without fear of accusations of hypocrisy because the media has been
> cowed, and the public has a short memory. George W. Bush avoided combat
> in Vietnam by using family privilege, and connections, and then
> disappeared from his champagne flight unit for the last two years of his
> hitch. Had our soldiers in Iraq been as capricious about their
> commitments to America, what might have happened? Yet he dared to stand
> in their honored midst and suggest to us that he was one of their
> number. Rove was right. We weren't listening.
>
> Our troops now move around Iraq, their lives potentially jeopardized by
> every person passing on the street, and the Bush White House quietly is
> cutting both their combat pay and family separation allowance. A modest
> monthly stipend of $150 was raised to $225 for "imminent danger" pay,
> and is being reduced to its original level. The family separation
> payment of $100 a month was raised to $250, an amount designed to help
> families pay bills while their soldiers are off working for America. But
> Mr. Bush is planning to cut that figure back to its original level.
>
> As the first shipload of soldiers was leaving from San Diego,
> California, the administration was pulling a federal supplement from
> local schools, which would harm education for the children of our
> troops. Because the San Diego Independent School District cannot levy
> taxes against federal property when students live on base, the
> government provides a payment to help the school district fund the
> education of the children of our servicemen and women. George Bush is
> eliminating this money. Ultimately, this means not only do the children
> of our military endure larger classes, less qualified teachers, and poor
> curriculum, so does everyone else's child.
>
> Perhaps, Mr. Bush and Mr. Rove are finally getting our attention.
>
> I find it disturbing when the president can stand in front of television
> cameras, his crooked Texas smirk hiding his true character, and tell us
> he is worried about people without jobs and his tax cut will help them
> find employment. He says such things even as Nobel laureate economists
> are pouring ridicule over his policies and financial behemoths like
> Warren Buffet are scoffing. The photo-op presidency holds a news
> conference to sign the "Leave No Child Behind Act" with Sen. Ted
> Kennedy, and then guts $8 billion from its budget, after forcing federal
> mandates on schools with no money to pay for implementation. Sen.
> Kennedy, I'm afraid, got had, too.
>
> There is neither time nor space to even begin to write of the Bush
> administration's hypocrisies and deceptions. History will, eventually,
> conclude that his reckless taxation reduction and deficit increases, his
> disingenuous campaigning and rhetoric, imperialist foreign policies, and
> corporate greed moved America closer to its recessional from the grand
> stage of true liberty and equality. The only way to stop this cascade of
> wrongs is for voters to take their citizenship more seriously. Democracy
> only works when the electorate is vigilant, and informed. Rove knows
> we're too busy worrying about jobs, mortgages, and lost retirement
> funds, to closely monitor the president's work. He's right. And George
> W. Bush is doing as he pleases, not as Americans prefer.
>
> And because I voted for him, some of this is being done in my name.
>
> Please forgive me.
>

I didn't vote for him and I ain't gonna vote for him.
A good article. Well said. Should awaken some "follow blindly wherever he
goes folks", but some are stuck in the cow yard for life. Regards, herb
(added a little interesting topic)

washingtonpost.com
Rebuilding Iraq Likely to Top War's Cost


By ALAN FRAM
The Associated Press
Tuesday, August 12, 2003; 3:42 AM


WASHINGTON - The U.S. bill for rebuilding Iraq and maintaining security
there is widely expected to far exceed the war's price tag, and some private
analysts estimate it could reach as high as $600 billion.

The Bush administration is offering only hazy details so far, and that is
upsetting Republican as well as Democratic lawmakers.

The closest the administration has come to estimating America's postwar
burden was when L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator of occupied Iraq,
said last month that "getting the country up and running again" could cost
$100 billion and take three years.

He estimated that repairing Iraq's electrical grid alone will cost $13
billion and getting the water system in shape will require an additional $16
billion.

In a recent interview on CNBC's "Capital Report," Bremer said of rebuilding
costs: "It's probably well above $50 billion, $60 billion, maybe $100
billion. It's a lot of money."

President Bush and other administration officials have refused to provide
projections, saying too much is unpredictable. That has angered lawmakers of
both parties, who are writing the budget for the coming election year even
as federal deficits approach $500 billion.

"I think they're fearful of having Congress say, 'Oh, my God, this thing is
going to be very costly,'" said Rep. Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz., chairman of the
House Appropriations subcommittee that controls foreign aid.

More than three months after Bush declared an end to major combat operations
in Iraq, even the cost of the ongoing U.S. military campaign remains clouded
in confusing numbers.

Defense Department officials have said U.S. operations are costing about
$3.9 billion monthly. But that figure excludes indirect expenses like
replacing damaged equipment and munitions expended in combat.

Dov Zakheim, the Pentagon's top budget official, has said that when all the
costs are combined, he expects U.S. military activities in Iraq to total $58
billion for the nine months from last January through September. That
includes part of the buildup, the six weeks of heaviest combat that began
March 20, and the aftermath.

That sum, however, is what Congress provided this year for Defense
Department activities not only in Iraq but also against terrorism
worldwide - including Afghanistan, where U.S. military costs are running
about $1 billion a month, according to officials.

In a report last month, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office
projected that Pentagon costs in Afghanistan and Iraq plus other U.S.
military efforts against terrorism around the globe could reach $59 billion
next year.

"What is necessary is to achieve an overall strategy and whatever it takes
to achieve the strategy, this administration is committed to," Bush told
reporters Friday, adding that accurate cost projections would come "next
year at the appropriate time."

Lawmakers, meanwhile, are girding for a White House request for another $40
billion to $50 billion for 2004.

While acknowledging the difficulty of predicting Iraq costs, even White
House allies find political factors behind the administration's reluctance
to discuss dollars.

"They've got one eye on the deficit and they're trying to make sure the
conservatives stay with them," said James Dyer, Republican chief of staff
for the House Appropriations Committee. "Having said that, we have to pay
these bills whether there's a deficit or not."

Kolbe, who is traveling with other members of Congress to Iraq and
Afghanistan later this month, said the administration's reticence is
"undermining the credibility that might exist" for the U.S. reconstruction
of Iraq. "We've got to get on with it here and start acknowledging what some
of these costs are going to be."

Private groups have produced their own estimates on postwar costs in Iraq.

Brookings Institution fellows Lael Brainard and Michael O'Hanlon said in a
Financial Times article this month that military and reconstruction costs
could be from $300 billion to $450 billion.

Taxpayers for Common Sense said postwar costs over the next decade could
range from $114 billion to $465 billion. The American Academy of Arts and
Sciences projected 10-year expenses from $106 billion to $615 billion.

Whatever the costs, administration officials have resisted making estimates
on how much of them will be shouldered by U.S. taxpayers. They cite several
uncertainties: the future numbers and missions of U.S. troops, contributions
by allies, and revenue from the hobbled Iraqi oil industry and seized Iraqi
assets.

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 20:00:18 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous via the
Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer wrote something
wonderfully witty:

>Forgive Me. I Voted for George W. Bush.
>
>A mea culpa to the people of America
>
And what where your other options? Where do you think we would be had
the other leading candidate won? Regardless of what the press says,
there really isn't that big of a problem right now. We are regaining
our "face" in the global community. All we need to do now is quit
bailing out the UN and only pay our shares of it's bills. Let's see
if Joe Third World Country will start picking up his part of the tab
while still bad mouthing us.
>
>

--

ZombyWoof

The wages of sin are death, but after taxes are taken out,
it's just a tired feeling.

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 20:00:18 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous via the
Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer wrote:

>Forgive Me. I Voted for George W. Bush.
>
>A mea culpa to the people of America

>Nothing prepared me for what has happened in America under George W.
>Bush...
*********** ********
Yeah, you were obviously misled by a former President who
hankered after Blue Dresses and pudgy Interns and others instead
of protecting the United States by going after those who sought
its destruction and turned a blind eye to promoting and
encouraging nuclear power and reining in some of the more obvious
abuses of the unions who supported his antics.
You probably thought you would have a President who "shared the
pain" of terrorists engaged in mass murder of thousands in
attacking the World Trade Center.
You probably thought there would be a President willing to allow
a "Fearless Leader" in Iraq to continue torturing his people,
robbing the country's wealth, raping the women, etc., etc.
And, given that you have to so desperately hide behind your
little Anonymous ReMailer, it's O.K., that explains quite a lot
about your character.
---Mac