Thursday, January 27, 2005
THIS JUST IN: BUSH WORRIED ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE
BUSH WORRIED ABOUT "LIFE EXPECTANCY GAP"
Bush says that because black men don’t live as long as white men, they should support his social security plan.
Once again this is a brilliant use of misinformation. The first question to be asked is why do black men not live as long as white men? The reason is not what you may think.
The average life expectancy of a black man in America is 64 and the life expectancy of a white man in America is 72. This does not mean that black men are most likely to die at age 64 and white men are most likely to die at age 72. What it does point to is that there are systemic problems within the black community that drag the average age of death lower. For example infant mortality is higher in black communities than white ones, homicide rates are higher in black communities than white ones, and various other sociological reasons that drag the average age of death lower for blacks than whites.
What Bush is trying to argue, is that if you are black, you won’t live to see retirement, so you should invest in private social security accounts. The truth is that if you are black, and you live to 30, you are just as likely to live to see your retirement as a white man who lives to the age of thirty.
If Bush and his "compassionate conservative" friends were seriously concerned with the welfare of the black community and the "life expectancy gap," they should focus on the actual causes of the "life expectancy gap." Instead they have chosen to manipulate information to get support for their agenda.
For more information on why Bush's privatization plan sucks:
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/1104spriggs.html
Bush says that because black men don’t live as long as white men, they should support his social security plan.
Once again this is a brilliant use of misinformation. The first question to be asked is why do black men not live as long as white men? The reason is not what you may think.
The average life expectancy of a black man in America is 64 and the life expectancy of a white man in America is 72. This does not mean that black men are most likely to die at age 64 and white men are most likely to die at age 72. What it does point to is that there are systemic problems within the black community that drag the average age of death lower. For example infant mortality is higher in black communities than white ones, homicide rates are higher in black communities than white ones, and various other sociological reasons that drag the average age of death lower for blacks than whites.
What Bush is trying to argue, is that if you are black, you won’t live to see retirement, so you should invest in private social security accounts. The truth is that if you are black, and you live to 30, you are just as likely to live to see your retirement as a white man who lives to the age of thirty.
If Bush and his "compassionate conservative" friends were seriously concerned with the welfare of the black community and the "life expectancy gap," they should focus on the actual causes of the "life expectancy gap." Instead they have chosen to manipulate information to get support for their agenda.
For more information on why Bush's privatization plan sucks:
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/1104spriggs.html
BUSH ANNOUNCES THAT NOW THAT I’M ELECTED: PAYMENTS TO JOURNALIST TO PROMOTE MY AGENDA WILL STOP
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- After the revelation that another columnist who supported his administration's policies received government money, President Bush said Wednesday that he disapproved of the practice and wanted it to stop, now that he was Constitutionally barred from being able to run for President again.
"I expect my Cabinet secretaries to make sure that that practice doesn't go forward. There needs to be independence, now that I’m elected." Bush said at a press conference.
"All our Cabinet secretaries must realize that we will not be paying ... commentators to advance our agenda, now that I’m elected."
"Our agenda ought to be able to stand on its own two feet, now that Republicans control the White House, the Senate, the House, and the Judicial Branch."
Meanwhile, several Democratic lawmakers introduced a bill Wednesday designed to stop what they termed taxpayer-funded "covert propaganda campaigns" violating a provision included in annual appropriation acts since 1951.
Under the new bill, dubbed the Federal Propaganda Prohibition Act of 2005, the prohibition on propaganda would become a permanent part of federal law.
Federal agencies would also have to notify Congress about public relations, advertising and polling contracts, and the funding sources of all federally funded public relations materials would have to be disclosed.
Supporters of the effort include the two top Democrats in the House, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland.
The group also released a investigative report prepared by Democratic committee staff that found the Bush administration spent more than $88 million on contracts with public relations agencies in 2004, a 128 percent increase from 2000.
"While not all public relations spending is illegal or inappropriate, this rapid rise in public relations contracts at a time of growing budget deficits raises questions about the priorities of the administration," the report said.
The report found that more than 40 percent of public relations contracts issued in 2004 -- worth $37 million -- were awarded "without full and open competition," compared with less than 20 percent of such contracts during the last year of the Clinton administration.
The report found that over the past four years a single agency, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, spent more than $94 million on contracts with public relations agencies.
White House press secretary Trent Duffy dismissed the report as a "partisan exercise." He added, "Everyone knows that this administration has no use for facts."
"The president spoke directly at his press conference about inappropriate expenditures for journalists," Duffy said. "His words speak for themselves on that, now that we’ve taken advantage of this and gotten elected, we’re going to stop the practice."
Gallagher deal revealed
On Wednesday, Washington Post media critic and CNN host Howard Kurtz reported that in 2002 syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher "repeatedly defended President Bush's push for a $300 million initiative encouraging marriage as a way of strengthening families," without mentioning she "had a $21,500 contract with the Department of Health and Human Services to help promote the president's proposal."
Gallagher said in a statement published Wednesday that she was hired by HHS because of her "lifelong experience in marriage research, public education and advocacy, and because she was willing to sell out her opinions for taxpayer cash."
She was paid to prepare presentation on the benefits of marriage for HHS managers, to draft an essay on the topic for HHS Assistant Secretary Wade Horn and to prepare brochures on the topic, Gallagher wrote.
"I was not paid to promote marriage. I was paid to produce particular research and writing products ... which I produced," she wrote.
Gallagher, a frequent television guest on fair and balanced news programs like Hannity and colmes and other Fox News programs, and a former editor at the conservative National Review, is the author of three books on marriage and president of the new nonprofit organization, Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, based in Washington.
In retrospect, Gallagher said, she should have disclosed the contract to her readers when she later wrote in support of the Bush marriage initiative in her column.
"But the real truth is that it never occurred to me," she wrote. "I would have [disclosed the contract], if I had remembered it. But now that I’ve been caught, my apologies to my readers," Gallagher said.
Earlier this month, conservative commentator Armstrong Williams acknowledged that his company received $240,000 from a public relations agency hired by the Department of Education to promote Bush's No Child Left Behind education reform plan.
Both Williams and outgoing Education Secretary Rod Paige said the money was paid to Williams' company to produce and air ads supporting the measure, which they insisted was legal. But Paige asked the department's inspector general to investigate.
Bush said Wednesday the Education Department made a mistake by paying Williams and insisted the White House did not know about it even though Paige was a member of his Cabinet at the time payments were arranged and made to Williams.
In a separate incident of covert taxpayer funded Republican propaganda, also cited by the Democratic lawmakers Wednesday, the Government Accountability Office found last May that the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy and HHS hired a public relations firm to produce and distribute promotional materials designed to look like video news reports which were widely distributed and aired on many networks. Fox News Affiliates being the most likely to fall for these "fake news" stories.
"I expect my Cabinet secretaries to make sure that that practice doesn't go forward. There needs to be independence, now that I’m elected." Bush said at a press conference.
"All our Cabinet secretaries must realize that we will not be paying ... commentators to advance our agenda, now that I’m elected."
"Our agenda ought to be able to stand on its own two feet, now that Republicans control the White House, the Senate, the House, and the Judicial Branch."
Meanwhile, several Democratic lawmakers introduced a bill Wednesday designed to stop what they termed taxpayer-funded "covert propaganda campaigns" violating a provision included in annual appropriation acts since 1951.
Under the new bill, dubbed the Federal Propaganda Prohibition Act of 2005, the prohibition on propaganda would become a permanent part of federal law.
Federal agencies would also have to notify Congress about public relations, advertising and polling contracts, and the funding sources of all federally funded public relations materials would have to be disclosed.
Supporters of the effort include the two top Democrats in the House, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland.
The group also released a investigative report prepared by Democratic committee staff that found the Bush administration spent more than $88 million on contracts with public relations agencies in 2004, a 128 percent increase from 2000.
"While not all public relations spending is illegal or inappropriate, this rapid rise in public relations contracts at a time of growing budget deficits raises questions about the priorities of the administration," the report said.
The report found that more than 40 percent of public relations contracts issued in 2004 -- worth $37 million -- were awarded "without full and open competition," compared with less than 20 percent of such contracts during the last year of the Clinton administration.
The report found that over the past four years a single agency, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, spent more than $94 million on contracts with public relations agencies.
White House press secretary Trent Duffy dismissed the report as a "partisan exercise." He added, "Everyone knows that this administration has no use for facts."
"The president spoke directly at his press conference about inappropriate expenditures for journalists," Duffy said. "His words speak for themselves on that, now that we’ve taken advantage of this and gotten elected, we’re going to stop the practice."
Gallagher deal revealed
On Wednesday, Washington Post media critic and CNN host Howard Kurtz reported that in 2002 syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher "repeatedly defended President Bush's push for a $300 million initiative encouraging marriage as a way of strengthening families," without mentioning she "had a $21,500 contract with the Department of Health and Human Services to help promote the president's proposal."
Gallagher said in a statement published Wednesday that she was hired by HHS because of her "lifelong experience in marriage research, public education and advocacy, and because she was willing to sell out her opinions for taxpayer cash."
She was paid to prepare presentation on the benefits of marriage for HHS managers, to draft an essay on the topic for HHS Assistant Secretary Wade Horn and to prepare brochures on the topic, Gallagher wrote.
"I was not paid to promote marriage. I was paid to produce particular research and writing products ... which I produced," she wrote.
Gallagher, a frequent television guest on fair and balanced news programs like Hannity and colmes and other Fox News programs, and a former editor at the conservative National Review, is the author of three books on marriage and president of the new nonprofit organization, Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, based in Washington.
In retrospect, Gallagher said, she should have disclosed the contract to her readers when she later wrote in support of the Bush marriage initiative in her column.
"But the real truth is that it never occurred to me," she wrote. "I would have [disclosed the contract], if I had remembered it. But now that I’ve been caught, my apologies to my readers," Gallagher said.
Earlier this month, conservative commentator Armstrong Williams acknowledged that his company received $240,000 from a public relations agency hired by the Department of Education to promote Bush's No Child Left Behind education reform plan.
Both Williams and outgoing Education Secretary Rod Paige said the money was paid to Williams' company to produce and air ads supporting the measure, which they insisted was legal. But Paige asked the department's inspector general to investigate.
Bush said Wednesday the Education Department made a mistake by paying Williams and insisted the White House did not know about it even though Paige was a member of his Cabinet at the time payments were arranged and made to Williams.
In a separate incident of covert taxpayer funded Republican propaganda, also cited by the Democratic lawmakers Wednesday, the Government Accountability Office found last May that the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy and HHS hired a public relations firm to produce and distribute promotional materials designed to look like video news reports which were widely distributed and aired on many networks. Fox News Affiliates being the most likely to fall for these "fake news" stories.
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Democracy Bush Style!
Is the Bush Administration Serious?
This week the Bush Administration and the Right Wing Talking Heads have been spending their time explaining to all of us how important the elections are in Iraq. They are preparing for the "success" of the elections and it appears that no matter what happens they will claim "mission accomplished."
A few of the interesting points to listen for:
1. The election will go smoothly in 14 of Iraq’s 18 provinces. Only 4 of the provinces will experience violence and problems. Only 4 provinces... this will be stressed repeatedly.
Wow! Only 4 provinces with problems! We really have got the country under control, don’t we! Yeah for America! They will conveniently omit the fact that 50% of the people in Iraq live in those 4 provinces. Misinformation at it’s finest.
2. Democracy will prevail in Iraq and people will be able to vote freely for the first time in 40 years.
First time in 40 years! Wow! Man those American’s are good people. Just think, you can vote freely for the first time in 40 years! (Well, those 50% of you who live in a "safe" area.)
However, one point they seem to gloss over and almost never mention is that most of the candidates names will not be listed on the ballot and as of three days before the elections the polling places have still not been identified.
Let’s see… I’m an Iraqi and I live in a "safe" area…. I’m going to vote for ______ and I’m going to vote on SUNDAY and I’m going to vote at ________.
Remember folks! This is going to be a success!
Democracy Bush Style!
This week the Bush Administration and the Right Wing Talking Heads have been spending their time explaining to all of us how important the elections are in Iraq. They are preparing for the "success" of the elections and it appears that no matter what happens they will claim "mission accomplished."
A few of the interesting points to listen for:
1. The election will go smoothly in 14 of Iraq’s 18 provinces. Only 4 of the provinces will experience violence and problems. Only 4 provinces... this will be stressed repeatedly.
Wow! Only 4 provinces with problems! We really have got the country under control, don’t we! Yeah for America! They will conveniently omit the fact that 50% of the people in Iraq live in those 4 provinces. Misinformation at it’s finest.
2. Democracy will prevail in Iraq and people will be able to vote freely for the first time in 40 years.
First time in 40 years! Wow! Man those American’s are good people. Just think, you can vote freely for the first time in 40 years! (Well, those 50% of you who live in a "safe" area.)
However, one point they seem to gloss over and almost never mention is that most of the candidates names will not be listed on the ballot and as of three days before the elections the polling places have still not been identified.
Let’s see… I’m an Iraqi and I live in a "safe" area…. I’m going to vote for ______ and I’m going to vote on SUNDAY and I’m going to vote at ________.
Remember folks! This is going to be a success!
Democracy Bush Style!
The Aristocracy of Pull
How many more got paid? First we had Armstrong Williams getting paid by your tax dollars to promote the Bush Agenda.
Now we also have Maggie Gallagher being paid $40,000 of our Tax Dollars to push more of the Bush Agenda:
While she was being paid by HHS in 2002, Gallagher in her syndicated column dismissed the arguments against "President Bush's modest marriage initiative" as "nonsense," writing: "Bush plans to use a tiny fraction of surplus welfare dollars to fund marriage education services for at-risk couples."
In a column later that year that appeared in the Myrtle Beach (S.C.) Sun News, Gallagher said Bush's welfare-revision bill would, among other things, encourage "stable marriages," and that it was a "scandal" for Democrats to reject the president's plan and fail to offer an alternative.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36545-2005Jan25.html
And we also have William Kristol of the Weekly Standard and Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post going on Fox News during the inauguration to applaud Bush’s speech. Of course they failed to disclose that they helped write it….
http://mediamatters.org/items/200501240006
And then we have Shemp Hannity who regularly pimps his friends for his "news" show without disclosing his personal ties to their organizations….
http://mediamatters.org/items/200501240010
And in the "WHAT A DICK" Category:
NBC News Anchor Brian Williams thinks that FAT BASTARD {Rush "pill popper" Limbaugh} doesn’t get "the credit he deserves."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200501240007
So much for the "liberal media."
And Finally…
Dildo O’Reilly Lies some more…..
http://mediamatters.org/items/200501250001
Or maybe he’s just so fucking stupid he doesn’t know the difference between the word TROOPS and TRUTH.
Now we also have Maggie Gallagher being paid $40,000 of our Tax Dollars to push more of the Bush Agenda:
While she was being paid by HHS in 2002, Gallagher in her syndicated column dismissed the arguments against "President Bush's modest marriage initiative" as "nonsense," writing: "Bush plans to use a tiny fraction of surplus welfare dollars to fund marriage education services for at-risk couples."
In a column later that year that appeared in the Myrtle Beach (S.C.) Sun News, Gallagher said Bush's welfare-revision bill would, among other things, encourage "stable marriages," and that it was a "scandal" for Democrats to reject the president's plan and fail to offer an alternative.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36545-2005Jan25.html
And we also have William Kristol of the Weekly Standard and Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post going on Fox News during the inauguration to applaud Bush’s speech. Of course they failed to disclose that they helped write it….
http://mediamatters.org/items/200501240006
And then we have Shemp Hannity who regularly pimps his friends for his "news" show without disclosing his personal ties to their organizations….
http://mediamatters.org/items/200501240010
And in the "WHAT A DICK" Category:
NBC News Anchor Brian Williams thinks that FAT BASTARD {Rush "pill popper" Limbaugh} doesn’t get "the credit he deserves."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200501240007
So much for the "liberal media."
And Finally…
Dildo O’Reilly Lies some more…..
http://mediamatters.org/items/200501250001
Or maybe he’s just so fucking stupid he doesn’t know the difference between the word TROOPS and TRUTH.
"I Kill Women" an Iraqi Cab Driver's Confession
How bad is it in Iraq?
Read this story, about the Iraqi Cab Driver who brags to one of his passengers about how he "kills women" and even goes so far as to show his passengers the long bloody knife he uses to do it….
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6786282/
Once you’ve read it, ask yourself again… is this the "Freedom" that Bush promised?
Read this story, about the Iraqi Cab Driver who brags to one of his passengers about how he "kills women" and even goes so far as to show his passengers the long bloody knife he uses to do it….
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6786282/
Once you’ve read it, ask yourself again… is this the "Freedom" that Bush promised?
