Introducing The Biggest Waffle Of 'Em All - PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

The following is excerpted from an email sent by Ken
Ahonen to the USDemocrat
Yahoo! Group a couple of weeks ago. I would've
posted this sooner, but I got this on the same night the power supply in
PC blew a gasket or something (basically it KICKED THE BUCKET).

Anyhow....Feel free to chew on this for awhile as it's
tonight's REAL DEAL. CONSERVATIVES WELCOME. FLIP FLOP AS YOU
WILL. BUT FLAMES NOT ALLLOWED. :-)

George W. Bush is right
about one thing, the credibility of the president is

a very important issue.





On 10/11/00, then-Gov.
Bush said: "I think credibility is important. It is

going to be important
for the president to be credible with Congress,

important for the president
to be credible with foreign nations."





Let's examine how credible
Bush is on the issues....

1. Social Security Surplus

BUSH PLEDGES NOT TO TOUCH
SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS.



"We're going to keep the
promise of Social Security and keep the government

from raiding the Social
Security surplus." [President Bush, 3/3/01]

.less than one year later.

BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY
SURPLUS.

The NY Times reported
that "the president's new budget uses Social Security

surpluses to pay for
other programs every year through 2013, ultimately

diverting more than $1.4
trillion in Social Security funds to other

purposes." [The New York
Times, 2/6/02]

2. Patient's Right to
Sue

GOVERNOR BUSH VETOES PATIENTS'
RIGHT TO SUE.

"Despite his campaign
rhetoric in favor of a patients' bill of rights, Bush

fought such a bill tooth
and nail as Texas governor, vetoing a bill

coauthored by Republican
state Rep. John Smithee in 1995." [Salon, 2/7/01]





.about 5 years later.



CANDIDATE BUSH PRAISES
TEXAS PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE.



"We're one of the first
states that said you can sue an HMO for denying you

proper coverage... It's
time for our nation to come together and do what's

right for the people.
And I think this is right for the people. You know, I

support a national patients'
bill of rights, Mr. Vice President." [Candidate

Bush, during a debate
with Vice President Gore 10/17/00]

.less than 4 years later.

PRESIDENT BUSH'S ADMINISTRATION
ARGUES AGAINST RIGHT TO SUE.

"To let two Texas consumers,
Juan Davila and Ruby R. Calad, sue their

managed-care companies
for wrongful denials of medical benefits 'would be to

completely undermine'
federal law regulating employee benefits, Assistant

Solicitor General James
A. Feldman said at oral argument March 23. Moreover,

the administration's
brief attacked the policy rationale for Texas's law,

which is similar to statutes
on the books in nine other states." [Washington

Post, 4/5/04]





3. Medical Records

Bush says medical records
must remain private.

"I believe that we must
protect.the right of every American to have

confidence that his or
her personal medical records will remain private."

[President Bush, 4/12/01]





.3 years later..

Bush Administration says
patients' histories are not confidential.

The Justice Department
asserts that patients "no longer possess a reasonable

expectation that their
histories will remain completely confidential."

[BusinessWeek, 4/30/04]





4. Department of Homeland
Security

BUSH OPPOSES CREATION
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELANDSECURITY.

"So, creating a Cabinet
office doesn't solve the problem. You still will

have agencies within
the federal government that have to be coordinated. So

the answer is that creating
a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White

House spokesman Ari Fleischer,
3/19/02]

.less than 3 months later.

BUSH SUPPORTS CREATING
A DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY.

"So tonight, I ask the
Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent

department with an overriding
and urgent mission: securing the homeland of

America and protecting
the American people." [President Bush, Address to the

Nation, 6/6/02]

5. Weapons of Mass Destruction

BUSH DECLARES WE FOUND
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

"We found the weapons
of mass destruction. We found biological

laboratories...for those
who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing

devices or banned weapons,
they're wrong, WE FOUND THEM." [President Bush,

Interview in Poland,
5/29/03]





.8 months later.



BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

"David Kay has found the
capacity to produce weapons. And when David Kay

goes in and says we haven't
found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to

where the weapons went.
They could have been destroyed during the war.

Saddam and his henchmen
could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq.

They could be hidden.
They could have been transported to another country,

and we'll find out."
[President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]



6. Saddam / al Qaeda Link

BUSH SAYS YOU CAN'T DISTINGUISH
BETWEEEN AL QAEDA AND SADDAM.

"You can't distinguish
between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the

war on terror." [President
Bush, 9/25/02]

.one year later.

BUSH SAYS SADDAM HAD NO
ROLE IN AL QAEDA PLOT.

"We've had no evidence
that Saddam Hussein was involved in Sept. 11."

[President Bush, 9/17/03]





7. Osama Bin Laden

BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD
OR ALIVE.

"I want justice. And
there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says,

'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'"
[President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]





.6 months later.



BUSH SAYS HE IS NOT CONCERNED
ABOUT OSAMA.

"I don't know where he
is.You know, I just don't spend that much time on

him. I truly am not that
concerned about him."[President Bush, Press

Conference, 3/13/02]

8. Timelines For Dictators

Bush sets timeline for
Saddam.

"If Iraq does not accept
the terms within a week of passage or fails to

disclose required information
within 30 days, the resolution authorizes 'all

necessary means' to force
compliance--in other words, a military attack."

[LA Times, 10/3/02]

.less than 2 years later.

Bush says he's against
timelines.

"I don't think you give
timelines to dictators." [President Bush, 8/27/04]



9. WMD Commission and
the Intelligence Failure of the CIA

BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE
INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE.

"The White House immediately
turned aside the calls from Kay and many

Democrats for an immediate
outside investigation, seeking to head off any

new wide-ranging election-year
inquiry that might go beyond reports already

being assembled by congressional
committees and the Central Intelligence

Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]

.8 days later.

BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE
INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE.

"Today, by executive order,
I am creating an independent commission, chaired

by Governor and former
Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look

at American intelligence
capabilities, especially our intelligence about

weapons of mass destruction."
[President Bush, 2/6/04]

10. Creation of the 9/11
Commission

BUSH OPPOSES CREATION
OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION.





"President Bush took a
few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to

voice his opposition
to establishing a special commission to probe how the

government dealt with
terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]

.4 months later.

BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION
OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION.





"President Bush said today
he now supports establishing an independent

commission to investigate
the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News,

09/20/02]

11. Time Extension for
9/11 Commission

BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION
FOR 9/11 COMMISSION.





"President Bush and House
Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to

oppose granting more
time to an independent commission investigating the

Sept. 11, 2001, attacks."
[Washington Post, 1/19/04]

.2 weeks later.

BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION
FOR 9/11 COMMISSION.

"The White House announced
Wednesday its support for a request from the

commission investigating
the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to

complete its work." [CNN,
2/4/04]

12. Bush's 9/11 Commission
Testimony

BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY
IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR.

"President Bush and Vice
President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on

the private interviews
they will grant to the federal commission

investigating the Sept.
11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the

panel's top two officials
and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single

hour of questioning,
commission members said Wednesday." [NY Times, 2/26/04]

.2 weeks later.

BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT
FOR TESTIMONY.

"The president's going
to answer all of the questions they want to raise.

Nobody's watching the
clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan,

3/10/04]

13. Condoleeza Rice Testimony

BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE
WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'.

"Again, this is not her
personal preference; this goes back to a matter of

principle. There is a
separation of powers issue involved here.

Historically, White House
staffers do not testify before legislative bodies.

So it's a matter of principle,
not a matter of preference." [White House

Press Secretary Scott
McClellan, 3/9/04]





.just 3 weeks later.



BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY.

"Today I have informed
the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the

United States that my
National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will

provide public testimony."
[President Bush, 3/30/04]

14. Nation Building

CANDIDATE BUSH OPPOSES
NATION BUILDING.

"If we don't stop extending
our troops all around the world in nation

building missions, then
we're going to have a serious problem coming down

the road." [Gov. George
W. Bush, 10/3/00]

.3 years later as president.

BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING.

"We will be changing the
regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people."

[President Bush, 3/6/03]

15. Iraq Funding

BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES
NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004.

"We do not anticipate
requesting supplemental funding for 04" [White House

Budget Director Joshua
Bolton, 2/2/04]





.3 months later.



BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL
FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004.

"I am requesting that
Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve

fund for the coming fiscal
year to meet all commitments to our troops."

[President Bush's Statement,
5/5/04]



16. U.N. Resolution

BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A U.N.
VOTE NO MATTER WHAT.

"No matter what the whip
count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to

see people stand up and
say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and

the utility of the United
Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's

time for people to show
their cards, to let the world know where they stand

when it comes to Saddam."
[President Bush 3/6/03]





.only 12 days later.



BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST
FOR U.N. VOTE.

"At a National Security
Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55

a.m., Bush finalized
the decision to withdraw the resolution from

consideration and prepared
to deliver an address to the nation." [Washington

Post, 3/18/03]

17. North Korea

BUSH WILL NOT OFFER NORTH
KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM.

"We developed a bold approach
under which, if the North addressed our

long-standing concerns,
the United States was prepared to take important

steps that would have
significantly improved the lives of the North Korean

people. Now that North
Korea's covert nuclear weapons program has come to

light, we are unable
to pursue this approach." [President's Statement,

11/15/02]

.a year and a half later.

BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFERS
NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM.

"Well, we will work to
take steps to ease their political and economic

isolation. So there would
be -- what you would see would be some provisional

or temporary proposals
that would only lead to lasting benefit after North

Korea dismantles its
nuclear programs. So there would be some provisional or

temporary efforts of
that nature." [White House Press Secretary Scott

McClellan, 6/23/04]





18. OPEC

CANDIDATE BUSH WANTS TO
FORCE OPEC TO LOWER PRICES.

"What I think the president
ought to do [when gas prices spike] is he ought

to get on the phone with
the OPEC cartel and say we expect you to open your

spigots...and the President
of the United States must jawbone OPEC members

to lower the price."
[Governor Bush, 1/26/00]

.4 years later as president.

PRESIDENT BUSH REFUSES
TO LOBBY OPEC LEADERS.

With gas prices soaring
in the United States at the beginning of 2004, the

Miami Herald reported
the president refused to "personally lobby oil cartel

leaders to change their
minds." [Miami Herald, 4/1/04]









19. Involvement in the
Palestinian Conflict

BUSH OPPOSES SUMMITS.

"Well, we've tried summits
in the past, as you may remember. It wasn't all

that long ago where a
summit was called and nothing happened, and as a

result we had significant
intifada in the area." [President Bush, 04/05/02]

.about a year later.

BUSH SUPPORTS SUMMITS.

"If a meeting advances
progress toward two states living side by side in

peace, I will strongly
consider such a meeting. I'm committed to working

toward peace in the Middle
East." [President Bush, 5/23/03]

20. Gay Marriage

CANDIDATE BUSH SAYS GAY
MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE.

"The state can do what
they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's

issue like you're trying
to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay

Marriage, Larry King
Live, 2/15/00]

.4 years later as president.

BUSH SUPPORTS A FEDERAL
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE.

"Today I call upon the
Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states

for ratification, an
amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting

marriage as a union of
man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush,

2/24/04]

21. Science

CANDIDATE BUSH ADVOCATES
FOR STANDARDS BASED ON SCIENCE.

"I think we ought to have
high standards set by agencies that rely upon

science, not by what
may feel good or what sounds good." [Governor George W.

Bush, 1/15/00]

.4 years later as president.

BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS
IGNORE SCIENCE.

"60 leading scientists-including
Nobel laureates, leading medical experts,

former federal agency
directors and university chairs and presidents-issued

a statement calling for
regulatory and legislative action to restore

scientific integrity
to federal policy making. According to the scientists,

the Bush administration
has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted

scientific analysis from
federal agencies, and taken actions that have

undermined the quality
of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned

Scientists, 2/18/04]

22. The Environment

CANDIDATE BUSH SUPPORTS
REDUCING CARBON DIOXIDE.

"[If elected], Governor
Bush will work to establish mandatory reduction

targets for emissions
of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen

oxide, mercury and carbon
dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]

.2 ½ years later
as president.

BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY
CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE.

"I do not believe, however,
that the government should impose on power

plants mandatory emissions
reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a

'pollutant' under the
Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck

Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]





23. Tobacco Buyout

BUSH SUPPORTS CURRENT
TOBACCO FARMERS' QUOTA SYSTEM.



"They've got the quota
system in place, the allotment system, and I don't

think that needs to be
changed." [President Bush, 5/04]

.one month later.

BUSH ADMINISTRATION SUPPORTS
FEDERAL BUYOUT OF TOBACCO QUOTAS.

"The administration is
open to a buyout." [White House spokeswoman Jeanie

Mamo, 6/18/04]

24. Abortion

CITIZEN BUSH SUPPORTS
A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE.

"Bush said he favors leaving
up to a woman and her doctor the abortion

question." [The Nation,
6/15/00, quoting the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal,

5/78]

.more than 20 years later.

CANDIDATE BUSH OPPOSES
A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE.

"I am pro-life." [Governor
Bush, 10/3/00]





25. Campaign Finance

CANDIDATE BUSH OPPOSES
MCCAIN-FEINGOLD.

"George W. Bush opposes
McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free

expression." [Washington
Post, 3/28/2000]

.2 years later as president.

BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD
INTO LAW.

"[T]his bill improves
the current system of financing for Federal campaigns,

and therefore I have
signed it into law." [President Bush, at the

McCain-Feingold signing
ceremony, 03/27/02]

26. 527s

BUSH OPPOSES RESTRICTIONS
ON 527s.

"I also have reservations
about the constitutionality of the broad ban on

issue advertising, which
restrains the speech of a wide variety of groups on

issues of public import."
[President Bush, 3/27/02]

.2 years later.

BUSH SAYS 527s ARE BAD
FOR THE SYSTEM.

"I don't think we ought
to have 527s. I can't be more plain about it.I think

they're bad for the system.
That's why I signed the bill, McCain-Feingold."

[President Bush, 8/23/04]

27. Free Trade

BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE.

"I believe strongly that
if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it

will help workers on
both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru,

3/23/02]

.a year and a half later.

BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS
ON TRADE.

"In a decision largely
driven by his political advisers, President Bush set

aside his free-trade
principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on

imported steel to help
out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West

Virginia, two states
crucial for his re-election." (sic) [Washington Post,

9/19/03]





28. The Great Lakes

Bush wants to divert great
lakes.

"Even though experts say
'diverting any water from the Great Lakes region

sets a bad precedent,'
Bush said he wants 'to talk to Canadian Prime

Minister Jean Chrétien
about piping water to parched states in the west and

southwest." [AP,
7/19/01]

.3 years later.

Bush says he'll never
divert Great Lakes.

"We've got to use our
resources wisely, like water. It starts with keeping

the Great Lakes water
in the Great Lakes Basin...My position is clear: We're

never going to allow
diversion of Great Lakes water." [President Bush,

8/16/04]

29. Winning The War On
Terror

Bush claims he can win
the war on terror.

"One of the interesting
things people ask me, now that we're asking

questions, is, can you
ever win the war on terror? Of course, you can."

[President Bush, 4/13/04]

.just 4 months later.

Bush says war on terror
is unwinnable.

"I don't think you can
win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/30/04]

.the very next day.





Bush says he will win
the war on terror.

"Make no mistake about
it, we are winning and we will win [the war on

terror]." [President
Bush, 8/31/04]



Cheers for now :-)

Pat

A Call To Political Arms - Time To Do Some Pre-Convention House Cleaning

Could SADDAM HUSSEIN return to power???¿ Sadly,
my fellow Liberal brethren, there are some in our ranks who seem to think
this is possible.¿ And just when we think the¿ New
York Times¿ couldn't stoop any lower, they SOMEHOW
managed to find a way.¿ So get set folks and start your engines because
we are going to do some housecleaning.¿ NO tablod reporters
and ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY NO radical extremists allowed.

It seems as though some radical extremists
who merely call themselves "Liberal" seem to think that Saddam
Hussein can SOMEHOW be acquitted.¿ Not only that, but they also seem
to believe that he can SOMEHOW be "reincarnated" and returned to power.¿
My proof is this¿ Truthout.org
article by Marjorie Cohn which goes into SPECIFIC &
GRAPHICAL detail as to how this will be done.¿ It is written in such
a way, you would think this woman was either A).¿ Held captive by
Iraqi insurgents (there's no record of this that I'm aware of) or B). She
sat down to interview this deranged thug who has MURDERED THOUSANDS of
this fellow citizens.¿ It's also written in such a way that could
only expected in an Al Qaeda propaganda broadcast on¿ Al
Jazeera TV

Here is an excerpt from the article....

QUOTE: "I am Saddam Hussein, president of the Republic
of Iraq." So began the surreal public appearance of Saddam Hussein, his
first since being dragged out of a spider hole by the "coalition forces"
six months ago.

¿¿¿ The proud, defiant Saddam who
ruled Iraq with an iron hand for nearly 25 years was back with a vengeance.

¿¿¿ Describing himself as always
in the third person, he said Saddam "respected the will of the people that
decided to choose Saddam Hussein as the leader of the revolution. Therefore,
when I say president of the Republic of Iraq, it's not a formality or a
holding fast to a position, but rather to reiterate to the Iraqi people
that I respect its will."¿ - END QUOTE

Here's another excerpt....

QUOTE: "¿ Many Iraqis sympathize with Saddam.
"It's a humiliation, not just for Iraqis but for all Arab peoples," Aamer
Eliisa, a Shiite, told the Los Angeles Times. Eliisa said Saddam has become
"a symbol for all Iraqis." END QUOTE

SADDAM HUSSEIN - A SYMBOL FOR ALL IRAQIS??????????¿
This purported "professor" of law from the¿ Thomas
Jefferson School of Law MUST be either A). Half out of
her freakin' mind B). On freakin' CRACK or C). BOTH.

My fellow Democrats, IF WE EXPECT TO HAVE A CHANCE OF
GETTING BACK INTO THE WHITE HOUSE, we need to STOP this kind of extreme
radicalism NOW!!!¿ We need to ONCE AND FOR ALL tell these people
THEY ARE NOT Democrats.¿ They are NOT
Liberal.¿ They DO NOT think, speak, or even act like
a REAL Democrat does.¿ They are radical extremists and should
be treated as such.

That's not to say they don't have rights.¿ They do.¿
But if they think they can simply have their movement "ride piggyback"
with us and OUR movement as they spread their own brand of Anit-Bush hatred,
which has REPEATEDLY seen the front page of¿ The
New York Times , THEY ARE SADLY MISTAKEN.

The excerpts above are nothing but BULLSHIT.¿ And
we Liberals know it.

As you may or may not know, I mentioned on my new TV show
last week (June 26, 2004), Howard Dean was quoted in saying in his concession
speech in San Francisco earlier this year that there's NO ROOM for a third
party candidate in this year's election.¿ I disagree with that.¿
In fact, not only do I disagree with Howard's statement, but I think if
there was EVER an election which would put a third party candidate on the
political map, THIS WOULD BE IT.¿ Why do you think Ralph Nader is
still in the race?

The¿ Democratic
National Committee would have you believe otherwise if
you listened exclusively to them.

Add to this the fact that we're about to give the nomination
to a man who's ALREADY proven he's not electable in John Kerry, it would
be NO surprise to me if Ralph Nader DID get more votes in November than
Kerry.

Personally, I hope he DOES NOT get the nomination
at the¿ Democratic National
Convention later this month.¿ If he does, I'll vote
for him as the Democratic candidate, whoever it is (be it Kerry or someone else), is my choice come November.¿
But I won't hold my breath or act shocked if Bush beats Kerry in the election.¿
I won't like it, but that's the way the electoral cookie crumbles.

And if we DO lose the election, we'll have NO ONE but
the rank-in-file of¿ the
DNC ,¿ The New York Times
, and the thousands of radical extremists who are
FREELOADING on our left wing.

Now, I know some of you are probably asking just how¿
The New York Times somehow
fits into the equation.¿ I believe their current reputation speaks
for itself.¿ They take articles and other materials from sources such
as¿ Truthout.org AND
TREAT IS AS GOSPEL.

Now before you Conservative eggheads out there say "See?¿
We TOLD you there was a Liberal media bias", LET ME BE CLEAR ON THIS.¿
Simply because¿ The New York
Times has a Liberal bias DOES NOT mean
the bias is industry wide.¿ THERE IS STILL A **MASSIVE** CONSERVATIVE MEDIA
BIAS & YOU CONSERVATIVE EGGHEADS KNOW IT.

I'm not sure who the editor of¿ The
New York Times is, but one thing is for certain.¿
THAT EDITOR NEEDS TO BE FIRED!!!¿ Journalistic ethics clearly state
a newspaper, radio or TV station SHALL NOT have a bias on a particular
issue towards one side or another.¿ In other words, THE PRESS &
MEDIA ARE NEUTRAL to the issue.¿ That's the way it should be.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is today's REAL DEAL.¿
Be sure to check out THE PAT COOK SHOW on¿ Jeeper
One Television every Saturday Night at 8:00 PM ET and
on¿¿ Jeeper
One Radio every Wednesday Night at 8:00 PM ET (Radio
show not on the air yet.¿ Will post more info. later).

In the meantime...

Cheers for now¿ :-)

Pat

Remembering D-Day - 60 Years Later

As we take time out of our busy lives to remember the heroes of D-Day, let us also take time to remember how American History COULD have been written had it not been for these VERY BRAVE souls (as well as the countless thousands of others who perished throughout World War II).

All done WITHOUT the Liberal spin and NO CONSERVATISM ALLOWED.

It has long been said by many that when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, Japan could've just as easily made their way TO OUR OWN MAINLAND SHORES. What's even MORE FRIGHTENING is the thought that Japanese forces could've advanced as far east as Chicago before we knew what hit us.

The reason was that many in FDR's cabinet were over-confident in our own military capabilities and complacent to even CONSIDER addressing the issue of military preparedness in the event we were attacked.

In fact, if you saw the movie Pearl Harbor, this scene was played out with FDR complaining that we spent more time building refridgerators than we did war fighting machines.

Had we not responded the way we did, here's how I believe American History would've been recorded.

• Japanese forces would've come ashore and occupied the whole nation by Christmas 1941


• NONE of the now classic OTR (Old Time Radio) programs from that era would've seen the light of day as all three radio networks - NBC, CBS, and Mutual, would either be shut down or bombed.


• THE ONLY present America would be asking Santa Claus in Christmas 1941 would be FREEDOM

Moving forward...

• June 6, 1944 would just simply be another day under enemy occupation


• Hiroshima would've NEVER been nuked


• Japan & Germany would've eventually been at war with each other


• The FABULOUS FIFTIES would've been ANYTHING BUT as we would be fighting both Japan and Germany for our freedom


• We would NEVER have gone to Korea as we would be too busy struggling with OUR OWN Liberation to bother with anyone else's


• World War II wouldn't end until 1960


• JFK and Richard Nixon would've been campaigning to become our first President since our Liberation from Japan


• Television would still an experiment and under development


• Space exploration would only be a twinkling dream in our eye as we struggle to control disease and begin to remember life WITHOUT foreign occupation (or war)


• We would still be reeling from our Liberation from Japan and Germany to go to Vietnam


• The national goal of sending a man to the moon would be a goal to be accomplished during the 1970s or early 1980s at the earliest


• The Space Shuttle program wouldn't get started until the early 1990s

I'm sure I've probably left a few things out, but I'm sure you get the idea. :)

Do WE AMERICANS have reason to be thankful? YOU BET WE DO.

If it weren't for the BRAVE souls who gave their lives on D-Day 1944 (as well as all the other World War II veterans out there), much (if not all) of the things I indicated above would be happening today.

While words can't even begin to express our appreciation for what they did and the sacrifices they made, all I'm sure that needs to be said is THANKS. :)

With that said....THANKS TO ALL THE WORLD WAR II VETERANS OUT THERE & THEIR FAMILIES.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is Today's Real Deal.

Cheers for now :)

Pat

Ronald Reagan - A President For The People

It is with deep sadness and regret that I report the passing of a legend both on AND off screen. On the big screen AND the small screen. In Hollywood AND in Washington D.C.

MANY actors in Hollywood have played the role of the President, but only ONE actor can lay claim to BEING the President.

That actor is NONE OTHER than Ronald Reagan

Photo Courtesy of The White House

Reagan came in at a time when America was struggling to make ends meet. In MANY parts, lines of cars (some MILES long) were forming - JUST TO GET A GALLON OF GAS. Gas prices were soaring out of control, the economy had a bleak future, the Space Shuttle program was just getting started, and over 400 people were being held hostage in a country hardly ANYONE knew existed.

I vividly recall the plane that carried the hostages touching down on American soil the day after he was initially sworn into office. I was only a budding teenager then, but it was a piece of history I'll NEVER forget. He didn't even say a word (much less make an agreement), but the Arabs saw something in him that we Americans (both Democrats and Republicans alike) was just discovering.

He was a man of peace.

Not only was he a man of peace, he was also a man of his word. When he said he would get something done, by golly HE MEANT IT. Not only did he mean it, he also DID IT.

In this respect, he was also a DOer.

Come Election time in 1984, we Liberals were hard pressed to find ANY weaknesses in ANYTHING he did. Try as we did, we just couldn't do it. Even *I* voted for him (and I was a registered Democrat), even though I knew almost NOTHING about the political arena as a whole (I was only 18 at the time and was voting in my first election).

Some would say that it's because of him that the "trickle down economics" policy became a Republican standard. To that I say it was the shot in the arm this country needed back in 1980. He almost single-handedly (and quite LITERALLY) turned the economy of this country around. It was, in part, because of HIS work that made the '80s as memorable as they were.

He also introduced the political concept of NOT using mudslinging or name-calling during his campaigns. This, I believe, is what made him identifiable with the average Joe (or in our case, the average Pat :)).

He even got the attention of (then-communist) Russia and Germany. He was the driving force in their capitulation to diplomacy and democracy. This especially rang true in his famous "Tear Down These Walls" speech in 1987 which could only be compared to JFK's "I Am A Berliner" speech back in the 1960s.

In popularity, he was equal to JFK. Some hardcore conservatives would say he was BETTER, but in terms of overall popularity, both among americans AND foreigners alike, he was equal.

If I had describe Ronald Reagan in only a single sentence, it would be this....

He was A PRESIDENT FOR THE PEOPLE.

Not just Democrats or Republicans (or even Americans for that matter!). He was a President who represented ALL people. You could say he was a "People's Choice".

Unfortunately, this is something which has sadly become lost in today's political world. Now, it's about who has the most $$$. And it's NOT just Republicans. It's Democrats too.

And if EITHER party expects to have a chance of SHUTTING OUT people like Ralph Nader, we need to CLEAN OUT THE RUBBISH.

If that means GETTING RID OF BUSH, then SO BE IT.

It is MY hope that the death of this legend will serve as a WAKE UP CALL to those in Washington (and those running for office in the upcoming Election).

If the politicians don't listen TODAY, people aren't gonna care WHO is running for office TOMORROW because WE ALL will be FED UP with all the BULLSHIT that's called "politics".

R.I.P Ronald Reagan. You will be SORELY missed. :(

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is today's Real Deal.

Cheers for now :)

Pat

CONGRATULATIONS WASHINGTON: We're Now OFFICIALLY In Debt Up To Our Eyeballs

The Republicans got their way again by approving (as
well as browbeating us Liberals AGAIN ) King George's wish to have 2.4
TRILLION DOLLARS, most (if not all) of which will be used in the War in
Iraq, even though his majesty nor his henchmen will NEVER admit it.

Sure it still has to pass the Senate, but let's face it, given how corrupt
our government is, this is only a formality and merely symbolic.
I fully expect the bill to be on his majesty's desk by the end of next
month.

GOD I CAN'T WAIT TILL NOVEMBER!!!!

Those Republicans Sure LOVE Their Name-Calling, Don't They?

ello everyone....

Welcome to my little corner of the world where there's
just two simple rules...

1) The American Flag flies high in the sky

2). Name-calling Republicans aren't allowed

That said, it's time for today's Real Deal.

Just saw this posted on a (predominately) Conservative
group I'm in ( my so-called beloved Fox
& Friends Yahoo! Fan Club ) that just burns me up. Get a
load of THIS CRAPOLA


Said on Monday that the American Flag does not belong to Republicans. Yes the man that killed little children and raped women (well he just saw it). Is claiming the higher moral ground.

His slut daughter might be higher on something else.

You Conservatives out there must either be 1). INCREDIBLY
desperate to hang on to whatever credibility you still have left or B).
Have NO credibility whatsoever (because you lost in in the way you're handling
the War in Iraq), so you're NOW trying to use Kerry's daughter to TRUMP
UP some credibility to save what little face and dignity you have left.

You guys will stop at NOTHING will you?

Just because John Kerry is a self-admitted war criminal
DOES NOT make his daughter any less of an angel. Also, what PROOF
(since you guys on the aforementioned Fox & Friends Yahoo! Group seem
to thrive on this) do you have that CLEARLY NDICATES that John Kerry was
partisan to the raping of women? Where and when did he rape them?
How 'bout the Alleged killing of little children (which tbhis moron also
claims)? All I keep hearing about from the Kerry camp is the war crimes
(and even that is because he admits to 'em even though he's probably flipped
a few times since the 1970s). If you really wanna see ME stoop
to the level of intelligence level of the MORON who posted the above crap
in a Yahoo! forum. Let me ask you THIS....

How many people has your beloved George W. Bush (who has
proven himself to be THE sorriest excuse of a President since Nixon) killed
during HIS military days?

I probably bet you don't even wanna go ANYWHERE NEAR THAT,
do you?

All you idiots seem to care about is that he served his
country. Maybe THAT is why you have a prison abuse scandal in Iraq
right now, isn't it?

You might be able to cast me off as reacting to this as
if I were old man Kennedy, but accusations like (especially those WITH
NO MERIT WHATSOEVER) can't go unnoticed. Do you Conservatives have
ANY PROOF WHATSOEVER to support your claims? If not, if you Conservatives
Republicans really want to keep what little dignity you have left,
you had best better SHUT THE FUCK UP!!

Hmmmm....Why do I get the feeling that Kerry and Bush
won't be the only ones going toe-to-toe?

And THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is today's Real Deal.

Debut Of NEW "Real Deal" Fromat & Same Sex Marriages

Okay....Now that my head has FINALLY stopped spinning
from all the political chaos caused by the Republicans (namely the Bush
Administration) and other things in the news that doesn't make much sense,
I can now blog about it.

But before I do that, let me preface it by announcing that from here
on out that, beginning with this entry, my blog has been reformatted
to be modeled much like Joe's "Real Deal" on Scarborough
Country As needed, I'll mix it in with the format from the old radio
show Bill Stern's Sports Newsreel as well by labeling each take
I have in a particular blog entry Real Deal 1, Real Deal 2, Real Deal
3 etc....etc Sometimes I may only have one "Real Deal"
in one post while at others I may have more than one, hence the incorporation
of the aforementioned old radio show as part of the new format.

In other words, think of it as the Liberal version of Bill O'Reilly's
"Talking Points Memo" which you see so many Conservative bloggers try to
clone. Sorry Bill, I've tried swallowing your style, but it's just
lost it's flavor. :-(

That.being said, GET READY my fellow Liberal siblings as we're about
to give our obviously CLUELESS Conservative counterparts a ride down the
Information SuperHighway they'll NEVER forget because we're about
to go into today's Real Deal. NO PASSING GO.
NO COLLECTING $200. AND ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY **NO**
BAILING OUT ALLOWED!!!! :-)

Today's Real Deal- Same Sex Marriages

It is of little secret by now that President Bush wants to "preserve
the sanctity of marriage" which is now legally recognized as being between
one man and one woman. Even as the rest of the world, includeing
celebrities such as Rosie O' Donnell and Ellen DeGeneres choose to seek out relationships with other partners of the same sex and as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and other state and local governments and the courts remain divided over the issue, the church-going Republicans want to go so far as to BAN same-sex marriages. President Bush has even gone so far as to suggest that he would actually consider an ammendment to the U.S. Constitution which would enforce this ban.

This idea is ABSOLUTELY LUDICROUS. Moreover, I am SHOCKED that
the Democrats DO NOT see this as an issue WHICH THEY CAN WIN. In fact, Presidential candidate front-runner and Senator John Kerry would rather not even discuss it (even though he has openly said he doesn't think that same sex marriages aren't very proper).

I see an issue that has divided this country so much, you can practically
DRIVE A FLEET OF TRUCKS through it.

I happen to believe the so-called "Sanctity of marriage" shouldn't neccessarily
consist of just one man and one woman. But rather, it should consist
of TWO PEOPLE WHO ARE HAPPY. If that means one man and woman, then
SO BE IT. If it means two women the SO BE IT. If it means two
men then (again!) SO BE IT.

Some so-called "experts" have even brought up the notion that two men
or two women can't conceive children. OF COURSE NOT. If God
wanted men to become pregnant and give birth to children, he would have
given us organs to do so. If God wanted women to get pregnant and
give birth to children regardless of who their sex partner was, he would've
configured a woman's organs whereas she could just that. But I don't
think this is the real issue that Republicans, the clergy and many Americans
have.

It is THE IDEA of two men or two women adopting children and raising
them. Some of THE SAME so-called "experts" have even suggested that
a same sex marriage would somehow INCREASE the number of children placed
in the adoption system should there be a seperation or divorce. My
question is HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE IF TWO PEOPLE OF THE SAME SEX CANNOT _CONCEIVE_
A CHILD IN THE FIRST PLACE????

Ohh....But the mighty Republican have an answer to that one. THEY
DO NOT increase the number of children in the system. They just return
an old one. They FORGET that the one "sanctity of marriage" which
IS capable of children (the one they are so quick to cherish) and IS recognized
everywhere is the culprit as to why our social serices system is so bogged
down.

Conservatives....Need some some clues? Stop by your neareast
Human Services, Social Services or Adoption Agency today.

Need MORE clues, then tune into an episode or two of COPS or visit your Local Police Station today and take notice of the number of DOMESTIC DISTURBANCE
calls they get. Heck, why even bother going down to the Police station?
There are a bunch of Online Police Scanners filled with all kinds of police chatter you can listen
to.

Ohh but WAIT my fellow Liberal brethren as our CLUELESS Republican counterparts
have a way of countering THAT. Some of them have probably no doubt
said that if we don't reproduce offspring, this nation won't need a war
or a nuclear weapon to kill us. We'll all be dead soon anyway and
with NO ONE around to defend America, the rest of the world can do anything
they want to us because THERE WILL BE NO AMERICA TO DEFEND. To that
I say WAK UP AND SMELL THE FUCKIN' COFFEE!!!!

WE ARE ALREADY DYING OFF. One look at the streets of Los
Angeles or New York is proof of that.

Long and short of it simple. The recognition of same sex marriages
INCREASES a child's chances of being adopted by LOVING parents by AT LEAST
DOUBLE. The aforementioned Social Services and other related agencies
have case load after case load that the so-called "convential" sanctity
IS NOT always THE BEST environment for children. and the sooner the
Republicans get that through their THICK SKULLS, the better off we'll all
be.

And that, ladies and gentlemern, is the first edition of Pat's Real
Deal.

Finally, let me wrap up by disclosing that I am NOT either gay or lesbian.
I have met some gay people (and have no doubt crossed paths with a few
lesbians in my time as well). I will admit it felt kinda awkward
at first just talking to them. But once I got to know them,
I quickly found that, other than their sexual preference, they are JUST
AS NORMAL as any reasonably minded and rationale thinking "straight" person
like myself.

Somehow this is a misgnomer some people just don't understand, so instead
of trying to understand and comphrehend it, they ASSUME the worst and will
do ANYTHING to make the rest of the world just as paranoid as they are.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is a sad and tragic fact.

Just something to think about.

Cheers for now :-)

Pat

Why Wait For A Manned Trip To Mars?

I keep hearing how badly so many of my fellow Liberals
want to send President Bush to Mars when it becomes to do so.

Well....I just couldn't resist the temptation to post this (and a manned flight to Mars is such a *LONG* time to wait), so I have a better idea. *devilish grin*

We all know that the Bush clan started this whole mess with Iraq in the first place, right?

Of course we do. What if we were to MAKE IT CLEAR to the GOP that
a trip to Mars just isn't gonna happen soon enough. So instead, we'd
like to send THE ENTIRE BUSH CLAN on a ONE WAY trip - TO
IRAQ.

I mean think about the possibilities here.

* The whole clan can build and amintain a ranch somewhere on the outskirts
or Baghdad IN THE OPEN DESERT..

* George Sr. and Jr. can use their GPS receivers or other similar souvenier
gizmos they got for being President and seek out and destroy all the WEAPONS
OF MASS DESTRUCTION which are said to be in Iraq that used to belong
to Saddam Hussein, but has yet to be proven to exist. While they're
doing that, they can also TAP INTO THE IRAQI OIL RESERVES WHICH WILL
HELP REIMBURSE _OUR_ GOVERNMENT who almost had to fight this war
almost single-handedly (not to mention who could've just as single-handedly
toppled Saddam's regime in the first place!).

* Laura & Barbara Bush can have a schoolhouse built so they can
both teach all the Iraqi children their ABCs and 123s. And while
they're at it, they can also teach Iraq's adult population to "Just
Say NO" to Al Qaeda recruiters who are ALSO believed to be still in
the region.

* Jeb Bush (Remember HIM?) can be head of the hired help at the ranch.

Why do I mention Jeb Bush? Simple. At least we wouldn't
have to worry about HIM running for President in 2008 against Hilary and/or
Al (Gore not Sharpton)

DOES THIS MAKE $ENSE OR WHAT???

Comments anyone?

Cheers for now :-)

Pat

State Of The Union Address Reaction

Gee....What can I say about tonight's State
Of The Union Address? I was more or less expecting something like
a TWO TRILLION $$$ in proposed appropriations to cover the costs of a manned
space flight to Mars. But instead, I was left fumbling for words
and looking for weaknesses in his speech. Only to find there weren't
very many.

But fellow Liberal Kevin from Calpundit.com found some. He also had some advice
for the so-called "Democrats" in Washington.

However, as good as Kevin's advice is, I do have some issues with some
of the things he said about the SOTU itself. They are as follows......

6:44 — A standing O for increased support for community colleges?

Why not Kevin? A Community College is just as good as any other
college. Though I do agree with you (I assume you meant this point
even though you didn't say it in your blog) that support should be increased
across the board for all colleges and not just the "chosen
few" that "play by the rules of the GOP".

6:57 — Get rid of steroids in professional sports? What the heck
is that doing in the SOTU?

Uhh....Could it be that it's just as much of a drug problem for our
youth as it is for pro sports atheletes Kevin? Gee....I wonder.....

Okay, so I just found just those two issues (like I said, they were
minor). Now here are some things I'd like to emphasize myself......

6:48 — We can cut the deficit in half in five years, apparently by
limiting the growth in discretionary spending to 4%. This simply defies
all reason. That won't even come close to cutting the deficit in half

Add to this that President Bush wants to spend (or should I say $pend?)
THREE HUNDRED MILLION of YOUR taxpaying $$$ - FOR A PRISIONER TRANSITION
SYSTEM AS WELL AS the (reportedly) TWO TRILLION $$$ he wants for a
single
manned mission to Mars, President Bush will have become the
first
President to send America plummeting into BANKRUPTCY.

This is ON TOP OF the ONE HUNDRED TWENTY BILLION $$$ DEFICIT
we face NOW.

6:51 — Any attempt to take away Medicare prescription benefits will
"meet...my...veto." Huh? Who's proposing that? Especially given that Republicans
control both houses of Congress?

Not to mention the fact that it's been us Liberals who've been
fighting for Heath Care Reform for the last several years while
the Republicans were in a state of denial as they tried to convince (or
would the word INSULT be a better word?) Americans that Health Care didn't
need reforming. Isn't it funny how hypocritical Republicans
can be?

That being said though, I do agree with the President when he said that
"Government-Run Health Care" is the wrong prescription". Time to
get rid of the bean counter when it comes to Health Care IMO.

Overall impressions of the Democratic response — Jeez, that was just
horrible. I don't think they said a single memorable thing, their delivery
was stiff (though Daschle was better than Pelosi), they didn't really offer
any kind of competing vision, and I don't think they drew any blood at
all. What a missed opportunity.

I agree wholeheartedly Kevin. I mean WHAT WAS THAT?!?!?!?
There was NO taking the President to task. NO addrressing of the
manned mission to Marrs issue (as expected by MANY State Democratic Party
HQs INCLUDING the Colorado Democratic
Party which held an SOTU viewing party at the Denver
Press Club earlier tonight)

I was VERY disappointed in the so-called "leaderrs" of our party in
Washington. If there was a single word to describe it, that word
would be LAME LAME LAME.

NOW....MY PERSONAL MESSAGE TO PRESIDENT BUSH.....

Mr President.....With all due respect to the office you hold, I'm
afraid I'm going to have to ask you to leave and do so IMMEDIATELY.

President Bush said in 2000 that he wanted to bring back honor and dignity
to the White House. But he never mentioned anything about deception.

The saga continues......

Video blog on this tomorrow (Hopefully with official video of the SOTU
and Democratic Response). It's getting late and I'm tired....*yawn*.

Cheers for now :-)

Pat