Friday, March 19, 2004

cuzins of buddy don:
innerducin cuzin zac

i dun been braggin bout my cuzin janet dagley dagley, witch she jes started that blog name of second day lede. but she aint thonly one i gut. the one i wonta innerduce to ye today is cuzin zac, witch hes a hole lot smartern mos of us n has dun made a success out of hisself. i respeck his privacy, so i wont go into no grate detail bout him. in sted, id lack to shar sum comments he rote to me in a email, witch as ye kin tell, hes a purty astoot pallitickull obsurver:

Buddy Don...

It seems to me the international scene is messy enough right now, and Bush foreign policy is muddled enough (other than being thematically mean-spirited), that Bush lacks much strategic edge over Kerry on foreign policy regardless of world events. As you pointed out today, there's no clear cut understanding for much of what is going on...other than it's scary and multi-faceted. But it's scary with deaths in the 10-200 folks at a time range. It's "over there" scary, not "scary here on my sofa" scary. Even 9/11 itself was somewhat remote to us out here in the hinterland. That's a change from the 1945-1985 period in which Republicans very effectively mined fear of the nuclear threat from the Soviets and China -- well defined enemies with big weapons pointed at every inch of U.S. soil. Today, short of a known nuclear bomb coming suddenly into the hands of bin Laden (and maybe even then), there's not enough foreign policy traction for Bush to win this election no matter what al Queda may or may not be up to.

Oops, my point...

We who oppose Bush (esp. you, cuz yer verr good at it) should keep hammering on domestic economic issues, particularly the deficit. I'd think every white male in this country who votes for Kerry is about 80% a swing vote...and white men are going to respond most to what you have already said about the consequences of deficits and tax cutting ('a tax deferred' was awesome).

Even more specifically, I liked what you wrote because it brought into better clarity the economic harm of runaway deficits on even the relatively well-off, not requiring any sympathy for the poor or unemployed or those who may need Social Security. The stupidity of squandering "surpluses as far as the eye can see" resonates with relatively well-to-do white people...even those who hated Clinton. Of course, deep down, shagging your intern and sticking it to Hillary resonates with some of em too, admit it or not.

Please keep hammering on the deficit, and the consequences to even the relatively well-off. After all, poor people and those concerned about our belligerent foreign policy are voting for Kerry already. The swing voters simply don't want mortgage rates back over 10%.

Just my 2 cents for today. No need to reply. Keep up the good work. Congrats on the anniversary.

Best, Zac

corse i half to add mitt nuthin gits to my haid quickern a lil praze, so let me start by sayin, thankee, cuz, fer them kind wurds.

i wood lack to thank bush is weak on the innernashnull frunt but ye kin do a lot with the huge spin machine them publicans is a'usin, witch that skeers me on a counta how they lack but no cumpunckshuns bout sayin black is white n specktin everbidy to go long with it. so i did a lil look roun at the papers today to see whuther three conceps -- fuzzy logick on the war, fuzzy math on the deficit, blatunt hipocracy bout tellin folks to do whut ye say, not whut ye do -- wuz lanked sumhow. heres sum quotes i found:

  • On April 23, 2003, Andrew S. Natsios, head of the U.S. Agency for International Development, laid out in a televised interview the costs to U.S. taxpayers of rebuilding Iraq. "The American part of this will be $1.7 billion," he said. "We have no plans for any further-on funding for this." (Off the Mark on Cost of War, Reception by Iraqis -- tiz free, but ye gut to register to read the washington post)

  • Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, in February 2003, dismissed reports that Pentagon budget specialists had put the cost of reconstruction at $60 billion to $95 billion during the first year -- in retrospect, relatively accurate forecasts. In testimony to Congress on March 27, 2003, Wolfowitz said Iraq "can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon." In fact, the administration has already sought more than $150 billion for the Iraq effort. (ibid)

  • In its predictions a year ago, the Bush administration similarly underestimated the resistance the United States would face in Iraq. "I really do believe we will be greeted as liberators," Vice President Cheney said in a March 16 interview. (ibid)

  • In a morning meeting on Wednesday, Mr. Bremer warned the Iraqi leaders that they risked isolating themselves and their country if they continued to snub the United Nations. (Iraq Council, Shifting Stance, Invites the U.N. to Aid Transfer -- agin, tiz free, but ye gut to register to read the new york times. thankee to politicull animul -- wuz calpundit -- fer pointin out this incredibull bit of hipocracy via spencer ackermans iraq'd in the new republic -- agin, thays more registrayshun stuff ye gutta do)

  • The president, as principal cheerleader for war, said on Sept. 25, 2002, "You can't distinguish between Al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." On Oct. 2, he said the issue "is a threat of unique urgency." On Oct. 7, he said, "facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof — the smoking gun — that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." On Oct. 10, the House approved the war resolution 296 to 133; the Senate approved it 77 to 23 the next day. (Bush's Distortions Misled Congress in Its War Vote by Edward M. Kennedy in the los angeles times -- more registrayshun)

  • Richard S. Foster, the government's chief analyst of Medicare costs who was threatened with firing last year if he disclosed too much information to Congress, said last night that he believes the White House participated in the decision to withhold analyses that Medicare legislation President Bush sought would be far more expensive than lawmakers knew. [thisns bout that medicare bill, witch the addministrayshun knew twood cost near $550 billyuns even tho they wuz a'claimin twood only be $400 billyuns but dint let the ackshuairy tell it to congress till after thay had voted -- oops! rong war! sorry bout that] (Foster: White House Had Role In Withholding Medicare Data)

seems to me lack a bidy could make a campane agin this addministrayshun jes by showin teevee clips of em tellin stories or even bein cunfrunted, witch ifn ye aint seen this innervue with donald rumsfeld, ye owe yerself a lil chuckle by followin this hear lank, witch thats whar ye kin find this here video of rumsfeld trine to splain hisself. [thankee to joshua micah marhsall fer lankin to thisn in his eggcellent blog, talking points memo]

finely, congrats to south knox bubba. i read his blog everday, but whut a nice sprize twuz whenever i wuz readin eric alterman's blog name of altercayshun n found this lede graf:

Since my hotel here in Santa Monica does not get CNBC, I remain among the category of the vast majority of my fellow countrymen and women who have never seen the Dennis Miller show.  So I don’t know how it looked to its miniscule audience.  There is a description here, however.

ifn ye foller the lank in the quote, ye mite be sprized yer ownself bout whar ye end up. also, ifn ye wonta see jes how bad ye kin be n still git on teevee, check bubbas lank to the clip from dennis millers lame innervue of eric alterman, witch eric wuz on far!

as ye kin see, cuzin zac gut me a lil fard up my ownself, witch i aint sayin im on eric altermans or south knox bubbas level, but i am a lil riled up by thangs thats a'goin on.

thankee, cuz!

No comments: