BushWatch-2003

[Ron Thorne]

I don't even have a specific issue/article (other than the obvious) at the moment, but wanted to re-institute this time-honored thread on the "new" JC board. Feel free to post items of widespread concern, from war issues to environmental, financial and humanitarian ones .

Gary Sisco's "Meanwhile, On The Bushist Front" is addressing a more specific topic, which I don't mean to confuse with this thread.

[lynn]

Ron thanks for bringing this one back on board.

So while we are at it, let's take a closer look at the compassionate/conservative agenda being delivered by our administration.

(NY Times Op-Ed 4/3/03)

Mugging the Needy
By BOB HERBERT

I had wanted today's column to be about the events in Tulia, Tex., where a criminal justice atrocity is at long last beginning to be corrected.

(For those who don't know, prosecutors are moving to overturn the convictions of everyone seized in an outlandish drug sting conducted by a single wacky undercover officer.)

But there is another issue crying out for immediate attention. With the eyes of most Americans focused on the war, the Bush administration and its allies in Congress are getting close to agreeing on a set of budget policies that will take an awful toll on the poor, the young, the elderly, the disabled and others in need of assistance and support from their government.

The budget passed by the House is particularly gruesome. It mugs the poor and the helpless while giving unstintingly to the rich. This blueprint for domestic disaster has even moderate Republicans running for cover.

The House plan offers the well-to-do $1.4 trillion in tax cuts, while demanding billions of dollars in cuts from programs that provide food stamps, school lunches, health care for the poor and the disabled, temporary assistance to needy families — even veterans' benefits and student loans.

An analysis of the House budget by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that its proposed cuts in child nutrition programs threaten to eliminate school lunches for 2.4 million low-income children.

Under the House plan, Congress would be required to cut $265 billion from entitlement programs over 10 years. About $165 billion would come from programs that assist low-income Americans.

This assault on society's weakest elements has been almost totally camouflaged by the war, which has an iron grip on the nation's attention.

The House budget does not dictate the specific cuts that Congress would be required to make. In its analysis, the center assumed (as did the House Budget Committee) that the various entitlement programs would be cut by roughly the same percentages. If one program were to be cut by a somewhat smaller percentage, another would have to be cut more.

The analysis found that in the year in which the budget sliced deepest:

¶"The cut in Medicaid, if achieved entirely by reducing the number of children covered, would lead to the elimination of health coverage for 13.6 million children."

¶"The cut in foster care and adoption programs, if achieved by reducing the number of children eligible for foster care assistance payments, would lead to the elimination of benefits for 65,000 abused and neglected children."

¶"The cut in the food stamp program, if achieved by lowering the maximum benefit, would lead to a reduction in the average benefit from an already lean 91 cents per meal to 84 cents."

When's the last time one of the plutocrats in Congress waded through a meal that cost 84 cents?

The Senate budget is not as egregious. It calls for a total of about $900 billion in tax cuts, and there is no demand for cuts in entitlement programs. But it is not a reasonable budget. In fact, there's something obscene about a millionaires' club like the Senate proposing close to a trillion dollars in tax cuts for the rich while the country is already cutting social programs, running up huge budget deficits and fighting a war in the Middle East.

At least in the House budget the first — if not the worst — of the cuts are in plain view. In the Senate plan the inevitable pain of the Bush budget policies remains concealed.

"There is a significant human toll in the Senate budget, but it's in the future," said Robert Greenstein, the center's executive director. "What I mean is that given the deficits we're already in, you can't keep doing tax cuts like this — you can't keep cutting your revenue base — without it inevitably leading to sharp budget cuts."

House and Senate conferees are now trying to resolve the differences in the two budget proposals. They will do all they can to minimize the public relations hit that is bound to come when you're handing trainloads of money to the rich while taking food off the tables of the poor. So you can expect some dismantling of the House proposal.

But no matter what they do, the day of reckoning is not far off. The budget cuts are coming. In voodoo economics, the transfer of wealth is from the poor and the working classes to the rich. It may not be pretty, but it's the law.

------------

It's depraved indifference bordering on criminal neglegence.

"Regime change starts at home!"

[BFrank]

... and how about the huge cut in veteran's benefits? GREAT timing.

[lynn]

Might as well get ready for the spin.

====================

April 5, 2003
Pushing an Agenda, Far From Iraq
By ADAM NAGOURNEY with RICHARD W. STEVENSON
NY Times

RAND RAPIDS, Mich., April 4 — The White House portrays Karl Rove, President Bush's most influential political adviser, as playing no role in military decisions that are shaping the Bush presidency.

But more than two weeks after the war began, Mr. Rove is busily working to shape perceptions of Mr. Bush as a wartime leader and to prepare for the re-election campaign that will start as soon as the war ends.

Tonight, Mr. Rove traveled here to tend to the Republican troops at the Texas Night fund-raising celebration of the Kent County Republican Committee.

"The president is leading the coalition of the willing, and is determined that Iraq will be disarmed of its weapons of mass destruction and that the cruel dictator's regime will be ended," Mr. Rove declared after taking the stage to chants of "U.S.A.!" in a cavernous hanger filled with the local party faithful wearing Texas-style cowboy boots, hats and bandanas.

Beyond courting Republicans at party events, Mr. Rove has in recent days been counseling Congressional Republicans and conservative groups on how to advance their domestic agenda even while attention is on Iraq.

This week, he held forth at a lunch with conservative commentators and journalists. Some participants had backed the administration on Iraq when it faced criticism that the war plan provided insufficient force and that it had been overly optimistic about Iraqi resistance.

With an eye to building public support for the president's agenda, Mr. Rove participated in a conference call about efforts to win resolutions from state legislatures backing the administration on nine issues, from tax cuts to judicial nominations. Mr. Rove briefed a group of conservative Catholics on the White House's plans for pushing legislation on abortion, cloning and other topics.

In his appearance here tonight, in a Midwestern state that will almost certainly be pivotal to Mr. Bush's re-election hopes next year, Mr. Rove spent far more time talking about domestic policy than about Iraq, promoting Mr. Bush's tax cut plan, for example, as the right remedy for the faltering economy. Indeed, Mr. Rove's remarks sounded as if he was road-testing themes for the president to use when the war is over and he embarks on the campaign trail.

Mr. Rove said in an e-mail message that he was so busy now that he did not have time to talk about what he was up to. "I am up to my eyeballs today and racing for the airport," he wrote before leaving Washington.

Arriving here tonight, he brushed past a visiting reporter and headed for the food line, saying with a smile, "You wasted your time, you wasted your time."

Mr. Rove has always mixed a deep interest in policy with hardball politics. Before flying to Michigan for the campaign-style appearance here, he attended a White House briefing with Mr. Bush on severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS, the contagious illness that has spread to North America from Asia.

Last year, in remarks that were assailed by Democrats as an effort to politicize the campaign against terrorism, he urged Republicans to "go to the country" on the issue of national security because voters "trust the Republican Party to do a better job of protecting and strengthening America's military might and thereby protecting America."

An adviser to the White House said of him these days: "He's not part of the war effort. He's the president's closest political adviser."

There is, certainly, a matter of calculation by this White House as it seeks to portray Mr. Rove as absent from the Iraq war room. He has always been wary of newspaper accounts that portrayed him as having a hand in foreign policy, his friends said.

Advisers to the administration say the White House is so skittish about the image of Mr. Rove being part of the war council that he is often deliberately excluded from nearly all foreign policy discussions involving groups of advisers. Even so, his friend say they assume he addresses those questions during his extensive private time with Mr. Bush.

"They go the other way and keep Karl out of the room, where, absent the critique, you'd want Karl in the room," said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, a conservative group that works closely with Mr. Rove.

To the degree that Mr. Rove's foreign policy views are known within the administration, they are hawkish, particularly on Iraq, administration officials said. But his influence with Mr. Bush is more a function of his political instincts, building coalitions on domestic issues and acting as Mr. Bush's ambassador to the Republican right — particularly these days, as he prepares for the election ahead.

"He's not very involved in the policies that relate to the war," said Representative Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, who is close to the White House and who said he had heard often from Mr. Rove over the last week. "He's focused on the war as it relates to the president's schedule and the president's time and the president's commitment. His policy focus is domestic: taxes and Medicare reform."

Yet if Mr. Rove is keeping away from the battlefield, he is certainly helping to manage perceptions of Mr. Bush during the war. On Thursday, Mr. Rove accompanied Mr. Bush on Air Force One to Camp Lejeune, N.C., where the president spoke to cheering men and women in uniform, and then met privately with families of marines who have died in the war. Mr. Rove recounted that meeting to a hushed crowd tonight.

His decision to meet for lunch on Wednesday with a group of conservative journalists at the Oval Room, across Lafayette Park from the White House, was in itself not unusual. White House officials routinely have private meetings to press the administration's case with what they hope will be a sympathetic audience.

But this meeting took place while the Pentagon was under attack for its competence in running the war, and Mr. Bush's advisers had been complaining about what they described as unfair media coverage of the effort. The lunch was arranged by Kate O'Beirne, Washington editor of The National Review, White House officials said, and was described by some participants as one in a regular series of such gatherings.

Mr. Rove tonight quoted favorable remarks about Mr. Bush's domestic agenda written by two of the journalists at the lunch, Andrew Sullivan and Michael Barone.

[lynn]

Here we go. They are once again trying to influence the judges.

========================

Judges Question Bid to Stop Cheney Suit

(Picture)President Bush shakes hands with Vice President Cheney, left, as he leaves the White House, Wednesday, April 16, 2003, for a trip to his Crawford, Texas, ranch for Easter, with a stop in St. Louis, Mo.. Bush will speak on national security, Iraq and the U.S. economy to employees of a Boeing Co. factory that makes one of the fighter jets that flew missions during the conflict. Others in background are unidentified White House interns. (AP Photo/Ron Edmonds) [good thing he didn't stop here in Seattle where Boeing has laid off thousands, but we don't build fighter planes]


April 17, 2003 01:51 PM EDT


WASHINGTON - A federal appeals court Thursday questioned the Bush administration's request to stop a lawsuit delving into Vice President Dick Cheney's contacts with energy industry executives and lobbyists.

Appeals Judges Harry Edwards and David Tatel suggested the White House had no legal basis for asking them to block a lower court judge from letting the case proceed.

The Bush administration took the unusual step of coming to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the midst of the case.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan has ruled that the Sierra Club and Judicial Watch may be entitled to a limited amount of information about the meetings Cheney and his aides had with the energy industry in formulating the White House's energy plan.

The plan, adopted four months after President Bush took office, favored opening up public lands to oil and gas drilling and a wide range of other steps backed by industry.

Among the industry executives that the Cheney energy task force has acknowledged meeting with were former Enron Corp. chief executive Ken Lay.

Tatel, an appointee of President Clinton, said the administration has failed to show that it is suffering legal harm at the hands of the lower court. Edwards, a Carter-era appointee, told a government attorney flatly that "you have no authority" to ask the appeals court to intervene in the middle of the lawsuit.

The government is seeking "a modest extension" of a previous court ruling, responded Gregory Katsas, a deputy assistant attorney general.

The third member of the panel, Appeals Judge A. Raymond Randolph, expressed doubt that the Cheney task force is required to disclose information about its inner workings. However, Randolph, an appointee of Bush's father, also questioned whether the administration should be seeking appeals court intervention.

The Bush administration says it has demonstrated that the two private groups are not entitled to any information about the meetings between industry representatives and presidential aides, including the vice president.

The environmental group and the conservative group allege that participants from industry effectively became members of Cheney's task force in assembling the White House's energy policy.

[Ron Thorne]

I love the way Dubbya uses manufacturers of war machines and weaponry as a backdrop to advance his causes.



April 25, 2003

Bush Takes Tax Cut Battle on the Road

By ELISABETH BUMILLER




LIMA, Ohio, April 24 — President Bush raced across Ohio today to try to pressure the state's stubborn, deficit-hating senator, George V. Voinovich, to support what Mr. Bush called the administration's "robust" tax cut plan rather than the "little bitty" package favored by Mr. Voinovich.

The senator's allies said the daylong display of presidential prowess, from Canton to Dayton to an Army tank plant in Lima, would not sway a famously frugal man who has lived in the same house for 40 years and who is one of two mutinous Republican senators most responsible for a vote that could force Mr. Bush to nearly halve his tax cut, to $350 billion from $726 billion.

But the trip made for some compelling political theater as Mr. Voinovich agreed to shake the president's hand, but only in the last moment, at the foot of the steps of Air Force One.

Then Mr. Voinovich headed off to what Ari Fleischer, the White House press secretary, described as "previous plans" that precluded the senator from appearing in his home state with the president. He had a meeting with a newspaper editorial board in Dayton, it turned out.

Mr. Bush did not mention Mr. Voinovich's name in public during the day, but his reason for the trip became obvious after he got halfway through his first speech, in North Canton, at a research facility of the Timken Company, the nation's largest maker of ball bearings.

"Some in Congress say the plan is too big," Mr. Bush told local government officials and Timken employees, with the state's other Republican senator, Mike DeWine, seated in the front row next to the Republican governor, Bob Taft. "Well, it seems like to me they might have some explaining to do. If they agree that tax relief creates jobs, then why are they for a little bitty tax relief package?"

The crowd did not applaud.

"If they believe tax relief is important for job creation," Mr. Bush continued, "they ought to join us and join this administration and join many in Congress and have a robust package that creates enough work for the American people."

At that point, the crowd applauded.

Mr. Bush and Mr. Voinovich had their handshake at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, where they also smiled and patted each other on the arm in an encounter that lasted about 10 seconds. Afterward, Mr. Voinovich told reporters that Mr. Bush had asked him "How are you doing, Jorge?" using the Spanish for the senator's first name. Mr. Voinovich said that the president had said he was glad to be in town and that Mr. Bush had not tried to lobby him on his tax cut.

"I think he knows where I'm at," Mr. Voinovich said. "We're very, very good friends."

He added that there had been "too much focus" on his disagreements with Mr. Bush, and he repeated his position that he would be willing to back a tax cut largerthan $350 billion if the administration closed some tax loopholes or offset the cost of the tax package by cutting other parts of the budget.

Mr. Bush's trip here today, to the only producer of the Abrams M1-A1 and M1-A2 tanks, the main battle tanks that American forces used in Iraq, was one of the first in a series to capitalize on his wartime popularity to try to sell an enormous tax cut directly to Americans, over the heads of skeptical lawmakers worried about deficits and war costs. Democrats and some Republicans have also attacked the plan as skewed to the rich.

Given the political realities, the House earlier this month forced Mr. Bush to scale back his original 10-year, $726 billion plan to $550 billion. But White House officials concede that the final deal could be closer to a $350 billion limit set by the Senate.

"Cutting taxes at a time of war is a hard thing to understand, particularly in the context of tax cuts that benefit a narrowly focused group," said Senator Jon Corzine of New Jersey, a former co-chairman of the Goldman Sachs investment banking firm who was part of a Democratic assault today on Mr. Bush's plan. "This is full- force political pressure by the president. I'm hopeful that that those who have been concerned about the rising deficit's impact on the ability to fund transportation, education and other issues will hold the line, keep their backbone and stand up for fiscal sanity."

Democrats pointed to Bureau of Labor Statistics data that showed that Ohio has lost 167,800 jobs, or more than 3 percent of its total work force, since Mr. Bush took office. They also directed reporters to government data released today that reported another rise in new claims for unemployment insurance.

Mr. Bush's argument, disputed by some members of his own party, is that the tax cut will stimulate the economy and provide more jobs. Today he said his plan to eliminate the tax that individual investors pay on dividends, which administration officials are now considering scaling back, would help retirees who depend on the income, and not just the rich "investor class" that Democrats say the president favors.

"So when you hear politicians say the tax cut is only for the rich, they're talking about you," Mr. Bush told the Timken employees.

Whatever the economic arguments for or against the tax cut, Republican strategists say it would be political suicide for the president to ignore the shaky economy after weeks in which his attentions have been focused on Baghdad.

Propelling him forward are two powerful forces: Karl Rove, his political adviser, and the specter of the first President Bush, who lost the White House after his victory in the 1991 Persian Gulf war in large part because voters viewed him as weak on the economy.

Today Mr. Bush pivoted in one paragraph from the war against Saddam Hussein to the American economy, by way of the Abrams tank.

"The tanks built right here in Lima, Ohio, charged through elements of the dictator's Republican Guards, led the forces of a liberation into the heart of Iraq, and rolled all the way into downtown Baghdad," Mr. Bush said as plant workers applauded. "Throughout the campaign, our enemy learned that when Abrams tanks are on the battlefield, America means business."

Mr. Bush said that during the battles, word came back from Iraq to Lima that tank commanders needed better ways to protect the Abrams exhaust systems from enemy fire. Within a week, he said, plant workers, drawing from "the American spirit of enterprise," had a new part designed, built and shipped to Iraq.

[graypencil]

Originally posted by Ron Thorne
I love the way Dubbya uses manufacturers of war machines and weaponry as a backdrop to advance his causes.


(snip )

Mr. Bush did not mention Mr. Voinovich's name in public during the day, but his reason for the trip became obvious after he got halfway through his first speech, in North Canton, at a research facility of the Timken Company, the nation's largest maker of ball bearings.

"Some in Congress say the plan is too big," Mr. Bush told local government officials and Timken employees, with the state's other Republican senator, Mike DeWine, seated in the front row next to the Republican governor, Bob Taft. "Well, it seems like to me they might have some explaining to do. If they agree that tax relief creates jobs, then why are they for a little bitty tax relief package?"

The crowd did not applaud.

I thought the venue looked familiar during that spech ..My dad worked there before his retirement..

trickle trickle my ass ...

[lynn]

That was a tough crowd - and they weren't buying his tax cut crap. I was almost encouraged. As the speech progressed he got more and more excited in an effort to whip them up. It didn't work.

His biggest mistake was to blame the deficit on the recent war expenditures. They didn't buy that either.

They were polite but not at all enthusiastic. Made me giggle.

[patricia]

I saw that speech and was also struck by the paucity of the applause in the expected places.
I am always dismayed when virtually all Mr Bush's speeches are delivered to schoolchildren, military bases and companies which would be most likely to be friendly toward his goofy ideas about the tax-cut that is, to put it mildly, unwise, as it stands now. With a deficit in the trillions, unemployment growing like crab-grass and a war going on, I am amazed that he can even present the reduced amount [proposed over 700 BILLION, looks like he'll get around 400 BILLION] with a straight face. This, at a time when some, if not most of the people in the audience may very well be facing a situation in which they could have the choice of paying the rent, OR paying the bills, OR purchasing food or other frivolities.
I too felt somewhat heartened by the sometimes luke-warm response to this speech, despite his pep-club delivery.

[Ron Thorne]

This commentary is intriguing and revealing, to say the least.


I Miss America
Even Dick Nixon looks good to me now

by Alan Bisbort - April 3, 2003



Nixon explains good government to Indira Gandhi.


The World This Week -

I miss Richard Nixon. What I mean is, I miss the days of Richard Nixon when, even while the Trickster and Spiro Agnew were abusing power, a loyal opposition resided in Washington, D.C. I miss the days when a loyal opposition was bipartisan, well-spoken and independent-minded, when it included people like Daniel Moynihan, who died this week, and Lowell Weicker, then a Republican Senator from this great state. I miss the time when the Republican Party had smart people in it, even if you disagreed with them, people like Mark Hatfield, Barry Goldwater, John Chaffee. I miss the time when even so- called "doves" like William Fulbright, Mike Mansfield, George McGovern and Morris Udall were admired by those who voted differently from them. I miss the checks and balances that were built into our Constitution and worked so well for this nation up until November 2000.

I miss America.

I miss the fact that Nixon was something of an evil genius and Spiro Agnew a sort of idiot savant, and that, in tandem, they made for excellent public spectacles. I miss how easy it was to kick Dick Nixon around and how comically predictable was the bombast of Agnew (written by now eminent pundits Pat Buchanan and William Safire).

I miss the fact that, even in his darkest hours, Nixon conducted regular, unscripted press conferences, his upper lip and enormous forehead beading with sweat as he fielded one tough question after another from unsycophantic (even openly hostile) journalists. I miss Nixon's ability to speak in complete sentences and foment strategies that, even if you disagreed with them, were consistent. I miss Nixon's occasional forays into moderation and even shockingly prescient policy (e.g., opening the door to China, creating the Environmental Protection Agency).

I miss the stiff-necked desperation of the nerdy Nixon to be liked by others, a wish forever denied him. I miss how, even after he left office in disgrace, Nixon had the wherewithal and intellect to reinvent himself yet again-a hallmark of his entire political career-and how he would make sincere but ultimately wrongheaded gestures toward reconnecting with the cheering public he so achingly missed.

There are so many things that I don't miss about Richard Nixon, of course, that it would take another column to list them. Mostly I don't miss his deceit, his paranoia, his cheap kneejerk appeal to mob hatreds when he was smart enough to know better. I don't miss his evil assistant, Henry Kissinger, nor do I miss their expansion of the air war in Southeast Asia. I don't miss Nixon's beady-eyed Attorney General John Mitchell, who was a pussycat next to John Ashcroft. (I do, however, miss Martha Mitchell, his un- Stepford wife who smelled the feces of corruption before anyone else).

Next to the high crimes and low misdemeanors perpetrated by this Bush administration, Nixon's sins seem, well, if not quaint, then understandable within the context of the times. Even though he will forever bear the blame for the expansion of the Vietnam War with his bombings of Cambodia and Laos-and the terrible "blowback" they bred-it should be noted that Nixon inherited that war from two Democratic predecessors, that the largest troop escalations were done on Lyndon Johnson's watch.

Ironically, beyond these much more serious sins, the crimes that led to Nixon's impeachment hearings and resignation in August 1974 seem so, well, tame: he bugged the campaign headquarters of a Democratic opponent (George McGovern) whom all polls indicated he'd beat in a landslide in Nov. 1972 (he did). And, then, when the press discovered that this break-in led back to the White House, he covered it up. That's it. Sounds like standard, and unchallenged, presidential protocol these days.

Indeed, the crimes of George W. Bush ON A DAILY BASIS surpass the collective crimes of Richard Nixon's entire presidential career.

So, why aren't people more outraged by the current White House's abuse of power, unprecedented in American history?

What could be more criminal than to start a war by invading another country that poses no immediate threat? What could be more criminal than starting this war by using fictitious documents, photographs and threats of retaliation against countries, and longtime allies, that will not go along with this charade? What could be more criminal than to perpetrate, and escalate, this terrible bloodshed even as we speak? What could be more telling about this Little Caesar in the White House that, even as he needlessly puts our brave, dutiful soldiers in harm's way, he is cutting the benefits to veterans of previous wars? What could be more criminal than to loot the U.S. Treasury to conduct a blood-for-oil feud, then pass the cost on to generations unborn?

It seems the only thing that could restore the America I remember is another Watergate. There are so many more Watergates just sitting there, hidden in plain sight, and they are more widespread and galling than anything Nixon ever did.

I miss the America that stood up to Richard Nixon. Even Dick Nixon looks good to me now.

[bluenoter]

A friend of mine just recommended this site. Readers of this thread who don't know it may want to check it out.

http://www.bushwatch.com/

[Ron Thorne]

But wait, there's more! This isn't exactly "new", but it's interesting.



Moore Film To Claim Ties Between Bush, Bin Laden Clans

'Fahrenheit 911' To Be Financed Through Gibson's Company

UPDATED: 9:28 p.m. EST March 28, 2003

While he caused a big furor at the Oscars Sunday with his controversial remarks about President George W. Bush, documentary filmmaker Michael Moore is hardly finished with taking the commander in chief to task. According to Variety online, Moore is putting together a deal with actor Mel Gibson's production company to finance "Fahrenheit 911," a documentary that will trace the roots of terrorism against the United States. But perhaps most shockingly, Moore will also spell out alleged dealings between two generations of the Bush and bin Laden clans, according to Variety.

"The primary thrust of the new film is what has happened to the country since Sept. 11, and how the Bush administration used this tragic event to push its agenda," Moore said in the Variety report.

Moore said the film "certainly does deal with the Bush and bin Laden ties," and "asks a number of questions that I don't have the answers to yet, but which I intend to find out." The trade paper said Moore has done research for the film for a year. Described as a "circumstantial" tie, the Variety report said that the business relationship began with former President George Bush and Saudi construction magnate Mohammed bin Laden, the father of Osama -- a relationship that endured. "The senior Bush kept his ties with the bin Laden family up until two months after Sept. 11," Moore said. Moore plans to release "Fahrenheit 911" in time for France's Cannes Film Festival in 2004 -- a release timed to come before the presidential election that fall. Variety said that Gibson's Icon Productions acquired the rights to back Moore's film by laying out an eight-figure bid in upfront cash. Moore's recent Oscar-winning documentary about the American gun culture -- "Bowling for Columbine" -- was shot for $3 million and has earned nearly $40 million worldwide. The filmmaker received a standing ovation as he marched toward the podium for his "Columbine" win Sunday night in Hollywood, Calif. However, the atmosphere changed as Moore's defiant acceptance speech progressed. Moore, who invited his fellow documentary nominees onstage in a show of "solidarity," said, "We like nonfiction and we live in fictitious times. We live in a time when we have fictitious election results that elect fictitious presidents." The crowd half-cheered and half-jeered with his remarks, but the sounds turned to mostly boos as he went on: "We live in a time where we have a man sending us to war for fictitious reasons, whether it's the fiction of duct tape, or the fiction of orange alerts -- we are against this war Mr. Bush. Shame on you Mr. Bush, shame on you." The jeers drowned out the remainder of Moore's speech, as he said, "Any time you have the pope and the Dixie Chicks against you, your time is up!"

[Ron Thorne]

I feel like I'm on a roll, though I'm mindful that I could bottom out at any moment.

Was George W. Bush "Involved" in an Illegal Abortion??

Join the investigation -

On CNN's Crossfire on October 20, 2000, Larry Flynt exploded a bombshell: that he has evidence that George W. Bush was "involved in an abortion in Texas" in the early 1970's - when abortions were still illegal.

Here are the details, as reported by Bartcop:

In the winter of 1971 George W. Bush was dating a woman named Robin Lowman (now Robin Garner). Miss Lowman became pregnant by Smirk and he arranged for her to have an abortion - which in the great state of Texas in 1971 was very illegal! Not to mention that George W. is running as a pro-life candidate for the presidency.

The unnamed source of this story, was a friend of Robin Lowman's and the girlfriend of the man who arranged the abortion. His name is Robert Carl Chandler. Chandler is a Bush friend and supporter from way back and he made the arrangements for Miss Lowman's abortion at the Twelve Oaks Hospital in Houston, TX (now the Bayou City Medical Center). The source overheard the call by Mr. Chandler to arrange the abortion and the source visited Robin Lowman at the Twelve Oaks Hospital after the procedure.

The source meanwhile, is afraid of coming forward, saying that she was threatened by Chandler and another Bush friend and supporter named Jim Bath. Bath has longstanding intelligence connections, and played a role in the BCCI scandal. Robin Lowman (now Garner) is married to Jerry Lee Garner who is an FBI agent.

So, that's the story: an illegal back room abortion arranged by the Republican party Presidential candidate who is running on a pro-life ticket.

The CNN Coverup -

Amazingly, CNN scrubbed its own story!!!!

This has all the markings of a cover-up by CNN - just like the cover-ups of Bush's many other scandals, from going AWOL, to using illegal drugs, to corruption in Texas government, to lying under oath.

Here is the original transcript that was published by CNN, but has now been scrubbed.

[ROBERT] NOVAK: Mr. Flynt, never let it be said that we censor any of our guests here on CROSSFIRE, and you said you wanted to talk about the election. Tell me what you wanted to say.

FLYNT: Well, during the impeachment debacle, we did an investigation which resulted in the resignation of Bob Livingston and others and we have continued this investigation and for eight months we've been looking into George W. Bush's background. And we've found out in the early 1970s he was involved in an abortion in Texas, and I just think that it's sad that the mainstream media, who's aware of this story, won't ask him that question when they were able to ask him the drug question without any proof at all, and we've got all kinds of proof on this issue.

NOVAK: Well, you're...

FLYNT: You know, the guy admitted he was a drunk for 20 years, and if the abortion issue is true then that puts him lower on the morality scale than Bill Clinton.

NOVAK: Mr. Flynt, you said if it's true and you have no proof of that. I gather you are a very strong...

FLYNT: The hell we don't have proof.

NOVAK: Sir, I gather you're a very strong Gore supporter. Is that correct?

FLYNT: I'll vote for the lesser of the two evils. I don't like either one of them.

[BILL] PRESS: All Right, Larry Flynt, a man who speaks his word, but we remind you they are Larry Flynt's words and not ours. Larry Flynt, thank you very, very much for joining us.

This was followed by an online chat, in which Flynt went into greater detail:

CNN - Mr. Flynt, I would like to know how you plan to protect yourself from a law suit by claiming to have the goods on GWBush.

Flynt: Because we have them and the truth is an absolute defense.

CNN; When and where are you going to publish information about George W. Bush?

Flynt: When I said that we had the proof, I am referring to knowing who the girl was, knowing who the doctor was that pereformed the abortion, evidence from girlfriends of hers at the time, who knew about the romance and the subsequent abortion. The young lady does not want to go public, and without her willingness, we don't feel that we're on solid enough legal ground to go with the story, because should she say it never happened, then we've got a potential libel suit. But we know we have enough evidence that we believe completely. One of the things that interested us was that this abortion took place before Roe Vs. Wade in 1970, which made it a crime at the time. I'd just like the national media to ask him if abortion is okay for him and his family, but not for the rest of America. We're not looking at it as a big issue, we're looking at it as a situation of people not being told the truth. I think the American people have a right to know everything there is to know about someone running for President.

Why is this story important?

1. Because George W. Bush says he is "pro-life," which means he regards abortion as murder. If he was "involved" in an abortion, then in his own heart he is a murderer.

2. Because George W. Bush supports a "Human Life Amendment" to the Constitution, which would overturn Roe v. Wade. This would subject 1.3 MILLION women each year - and their doctors - to criminal prosecution.

3. Because George W. Bush points to the two most anti-abortion Justices of the Supreme Court - Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia - as his models for Supreme Court appointees. And he may get to appoint a Supreme Court Justice soon.

4. Because George W. Bush has a solid record of opposing abortion as Governor of Texas, where he signed 18 anti-abortion laws, and President [sic].

5. Because George W. Bush ran on "restoring honor and integrity to the White House," and therefore should be expected to tell the truth.

George W. Bush must state clearly whether or not he was involved in an illegal abortion in Texas.

And the media must tell the American people!

Bush Campaign Statements

WJLA-TV (ABC) I-Team 10/19/00: "Mr. Flynt is not a credible source on any issue and we're not aware of these allegations."

Matt Drudge Attacks Larry Flynt

DRUDGE EXCLUSIVE: FLYNT TOLD TO 'PUT UP OR SHUT UP' ON BUSH 'ABORTION'; WOMAN DENIES PORN KING'S ALLEGATION... - note the complete absence of any identified sources. Can anyone spell "fiction"?

Who is More Credible?
Flynt vs. Drudge

Flynt was Right
Drudge was Wrong

Bob Livingston cheating on his wife
Sid Blumenthal beating his wife

Bob Barr's secret abortion
Clinton fathering the black baby

Dan Burton's out-of-wedlock child
Secret Service catching Clinton

Henry Hyde breaking up his mistress's marriage
Anti-Clinton books he guaranteed "would bust Washington DC wide open"

Newt Gingrich's secret girlfriend

Media Coverage

The smut monger's scoop, Harley Sorensen, San Francisco Examiner, 10/30/00

Did George W. Bush arrange an abortion for a girlfriend he got pregnant in 1970? We may never know, thanks to the press's reluctance to deal with anything controversial involving a Republican candidate for president this close to election day.

WKGO-AM 10/24/00 Bernie Ward interviews Larry Flynt Listener summary

"Bernie Ward, KGO radio, called Larry Flynt and asked him about what happened when he was on Crossfire and what does Flynt know and what can he prove. This is what Flynt had to say: Flynt said he could hear them screaming in his ear piece "there is nothing we can do about it, we are live." After the show Flynt went on to another interview I think in So. Calif. He then heard that the powers that be said no tape was to be released, no transcripts to be let out. He learned that CNN deleted the transcripts and then they decided that didn't look good so they deleted everything. Flynt said his 3 investigators had been investigating for 8 months. In 1970 George W. Bush was working for his father in his campaign in Texas. He got a girl pregnant and he got her an abortion. His fathers campaign manager arranged for the abortion. Four of her friends knew about the affair, knew about the pregnancy and knew about the abortion. The only thing Flynt is lacking is the girl to say yes to telling her story. He has affidavits from the 4 girls. Flynt said he went to the mainstream media and said you do not have to ask about the story just ask if it happened. They won't touch it. The girlfriend says she does not have anything bad to say about George W.Bush. When she was asked if she was mad because George did not come to the hospital she got upset and cried. Abortions were not legal then, it was before Roe VS. Wade. Flynt's question is "how is it ok for George W. Bush and not everyone else." Bernie asked him about Bob Livingston and was it true he had more information on him then he gave to the press. He said he had lots on Livingston that he never told, but his wife called Flynt and asked him to not tell the details. Flynt agreed since Livingston resigned. Flynt said he talked to the BBC today and they are considering going with the story, they know all about it. They are not under the same constraints they say. London Times knows about the story also. He said the mainstream media is scared to death of the story. Flynt wondered why people are concerned about Al Gore's credibility, but they will not turn the tables on Bush. He said Bushes spin machine in Texas makes Clintons look antiquated. Bush is going to be on Larry King next week, so Bernie wondered if Flynt would call King and have him ask Bush some questions. Flynt didn't know Bush was going to be on the show but he would try to call King."

Online Journal 10/22/00

WJLA-TV (ABC) I-Team 10/19/00: Del Waters interviews Larry Flynt

[lynn]

"Ficus for President"

(an inside joke for all you Mchael Moore fans) :-)

[Ron Thorne]

Long post alert!

This is some very interesting, in-depth reading, to say the least.

May 6, 2003

MAUREEN FARRELL ARCHIVES

America's Fishiest First Family

by Maureen Farrell

"These people are overly reaching, overly aggressive, overly secretive, and just plain corrupt. I don't trust these people." - Ronald Reagan Jr., on the current Bush administration
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/04/14/
ron_reagan/index_np.html

Sometimes, one simple assertion triggers an avalanche. The above statement, for example, after prompting an obligatory, "Wasn't Iran- Contra aggressive, secretive and corrupt?" conjures a cascade of murkier questions.

Ever since Prescott Bush was penalized for trading with the Nazis and the words "George Bush of the CIA" surfaced on a 1963 FBI report on the JFK assassination, the Bush family has been tied to speculation. But given that the GOP wasted more than $50 million of our tax dollars investigating a failed land deal and a president's sex life, who's in the mood to dwell on boogiemen in the closet? Isn't this administration frightening enough without fueling fears with yesterday's news?

Yes and no. Because, though we can always join fellow citizens in Weekly Standard-fed, denial-drenched chirpiness (for reference, see Annette Benning's American Beauty character), some sinister undercurrents run deeper than Dick Cheney's new bunker. Reagan's 'I don't trust these people" is a sentiment that goes beyond the here and now and recalls weird and notorious moments in our first family's history -- moments far more consequential to America's future than Whitewater or Monica.

Here then, is a brief overview of some of the stranger stories hiding behind the Bushes:

Conventional Conniving

It seems Ronald Reagan Sr. didn't initially trust George Herbert Walker Bush, either. Oddly enough, with organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Trilateral Commission becoming "hot topics" during the 1980 presidential primaries, candidates for the Republican nomination (save George Bush and John Anderson), clamored to prove they weren't associated with either entity. According to the History Channel, not only did Reagan repeatedly express a distrust of these organizations, but promised that CFR and Trilateral Commission member George Bush would not be offered a position in his administration. (This concern didn't extend to others, it seems, because on the day he won the New Hampshire primary, Reagan replaced his campaign manager with CFR member and future CIA Director William J. Casey).

During the Republican Convention, Reagan broke his promise -- and tradition. Making a late night dash from his hotel room to the convention floor, following televised speculation on a Ronald Reagan/Gerald Ford "co-presidency," he said: "I know that I am breaking with precedent to come here tonight and I assure you at this late hour I'm not going to give you my acceptance address. But in watching the television at the hotel and seeing the rumors that were going around and the gossip that was talking place here. It is true that a number of Republican leaders . . . . felt that a proper ticket would have included the former president of the United States, Gerald Ford, as second place on the ticket. . . . I then believed that because of all the talk and how something might be growing throughout the night that it was time for me to advance the schedule a little bit. . . . I have asked and I am recommending to this convention that tomorrow when the session reconvenes that George Bush be nominated for vice president."

Though Bush denies meeting Iranian officials in Paris to delay the release of America's 52 hostages, the Iran hostage situation was miraculously resolved the day Reagan was sworn in. http://www.webcom.com/~lpease/collec...ctsurprise.htm

Two years later, following the Reagan assassination attempt, NBC's John Chancellor and the Houston Post's Arthur Wiese and Margaret Downing reportedly stunned their respective audiences with news that Scott Hinckley, brother of Reagan's would-be assassin, was scheduled to dine with Vice President Bush's son Neil the night of the shooting. And though the March 31, 1981 Houston Post ran the headline, "Bush's Son Was To Dine With Suspect's Brother," the April 13 Newsweek sandwiched the story among oddball theories under a banner that read, "for conspiracy buffs only."

'Contempt for Honesty'

In 2000, George H.W. Bush promised the New York Times that his son would "restore honor and integrity" to the White House. "On the subject of 'honor and integrity,' David Corn responded, "let's recall the Iran-contra affair."

Although Congress, responding to public will, made it illegal for the US to support "indirectly or indirectly military or paramilitary operations in Nicaragua," the Reagan/Bush administration bypassed democracy and funded the contras anyway. Selling weapons to the regime that once held Americans hostage to finance this subversion, they also engaged in "foreign policy bribery," lied shamelessly, and pardoned those involved.

Saying that Bush's last minute pardons proved that "powerful people with powerful allies can commit serious crimes in high office - deliberately abusing the public trust - without consequence," Iran-contra independent counsel Lawrence Walsh added that it was "hard to find an adjective strong enough to characterize a president who has such contempt for honesty." http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=9448

When George W. Bush littered his cabinet with recycled Iran/contra criminals, and proved to be a liar on several fronts, honor and integrity went AWOL, just like the president himself. http://www.awolbush.com/.

Numbskulls

By now, many people know that during WWII, President Bush's grandfather, Prescott Bush, and his maternal great-grandfather, Bert Walker, had assets seized under the Trading With the Enemy Act. "Huge sections of Prescott Bush's empire had been operated on behalf of Nazi Germany and had greatly assisted the German war effort" officials claimed (http:// www.villagevoice.com/issues/0228/ridgeway.php, scroll down).

But there are other skeletons in the closet. Literally. In an article entitled, "I Stole the Head of Prescott Bush! More Scary Skull and Bones Tales," New York Observer columnist Ron Rosenbaum addressed allegations that Prescott Bush stole Geronimo's skull for Yale's Skull and Bones secret society (to which both Presidents Bush also belonged). He wrote: "Here's where the Bush family involvement in the grave-robbing allegation begins. . . .The document is an account of a "mad expedition" by George W.'s grandfather Prescott Bush and two other Skull and Bones men to the grave of Geronimo 'to bring to the Tomb its most spectacular 'crook,' the skull of Geronimo, the Indian chief who had taken 49 white scalps. … [Prescott] Bush entered and started to dig. The skull was fairly clean, having only some flesh inside and a little hair."

Rosenbaum explored Senator John McCain's role in handling these accusations, and peppered his Skull and Bones tomb tour with asides on Nazi memorabilia. "The most shocking thing," one source reported, "and I say this because I do think it's sort of important-I mean President Bush does belong to Skull and Bones … there is like a little Nazi shrine inside. One room on the second floor has a bunch of swastikas, kind of an SS macho Nazi iconography. Somebody should ask President Bush about the swastikas in there." http://www.nyobserver.com/pages/story.asp?ID=2947

The Bushy Knoll: The Kennedy Years

In the same article, Rosenbaum also chronicled the link between Skull and Bones alumni and the Bay of Pigs fiasco. "One of the C.I.A.'s masterminds for the Bay of Pigs was a man named Richard Drain, Skull and Bones '43," he wrote, before listing other Skull and Bonesmen who also took part. Though George H. W. Bush's name wasn't on that list and Bush denies involvement with the CIA until being appointed head honcho in 1975, evidence suggests otherwise.

In a 1988 Nation article entitled, "The Man Who Wasn't There, 'George Bush,' C.I.A. Operative," Joseph McBride interviewed a former CIA agent who said that Bush's Zapata Offshore Oil Company was a front for CIA clandestine operations. "I know [Bush] was involved in the Caribbean," the operative said. (Interestingly enough, the Bay of Pigs disaster was called "Operation Zapata" and two of the boats used were named Houston and Barbara).

McBride also reported on an F.B.I. memorandum, dated November 29, 1963, with the subject head "Assassination of President John F. Kennedy November 22, 1963" in which Hoover reported that the FBI had briefed "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency" on the post-assassination reaction of Cuban exiles in Miami. (To view the document, http://www.internetpirate.com/bush.htm). The CIA uncharacteristically denied Bush's involvement, saying that the memo alluded to another employee, George William Bush. But according to McBride, George William only worked for the CIA for six months in 1963-64 and explained he was just a "lowly researcher and analyst" who had never been briefed by any government agency.

In another twist, Lee Harvey Oswald's unlikely friend, George DeMohrenschildt (who "committed suicide" before police could question him regarding Oswald), had "George H.W. (Poppy) 1412 Ohio also Zapata Petroleum Midland" listed in his address book.

Boys Will Be Boys

In a 1992 Mother Jones article entitled Bush Family Value$, Stephen Pizzo investigated George W. Bush's shady Harken deals, Jeb Bush's "help in facilitating the largest HMO Medicare fraud in U.S. history" and Neil Bush's "wheeling and dealing" that inevitably cost US taxpayers.

Bashing the Bush world of "well-to-do white boys who trade on family connections, welsh on loans, run with con men, and leave financial ruin in their wake as they line their own pockets," Pizzo asked, "What about grown men, with access to the most powerful public office in the land, who participate in scandal but show no remorse for any of it -- and who take no responsibility for the consequences of their own actions?" He then pointed out that, "The pattern of behavior by the president's three sons raises questions -- about them and their father." http://www.motherjones.com/news_wire/bushboys.html

Media Manipulation

Operation Mockingbird, the CIA's plan to infiltrate America's newsrooms, was such a success that former CIA director William Colby boasted, "The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any major significance in the major media." Carl Bernstein substantiated this, telling Rolling Stone that hundreds of journalists and news organizations were involved in this subversion. And though officials have been caught planting fabrications in the past (a PR firm concocted the "babies in incubators" story that swayed the Senate into supporting Bush #41's Gulf War), the current White House has perfected the art of propaganda.

"What's changed is that there's no shame anymore in doing it directly," media author and Harper's magazine publisher John MacArthur recently reported, alluding to the lies the Bush administration told regarding Iraq's weapons capabilities. "The concept of a self-governing American republic has been crippled by this propaganda," he mused. The whole idea that we can govern ourselves and have an intelligent debate, free of cant, free of disinformation, I think it's dead." http://http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml...toryID=2667151

America Since 9/11

Yet for those willing to dig, there's a wealth of information about Sept. 11 oddities. http:// http://www.failureisimpossible.com/n...th.htm#warning
But would digging be necessary had Sept. 11 occurred under Clinton's watch? What do you suppose would happen, if he, like Bush, had ties to the bin Ladens? What might Rush Limbaugh say if James Baker were a Clinton family friend, instead? Would Rush be ok with Baker's law firm representing the Saudis against Sept. 11 victims' families?http://alwatan4all.netfirms.com/article-e0031.htm

And what would happen if Clinton appointed someone with iffy ties to head the Sept. 11 commission? In "Five Degrees of Osama," Fortune Magazine explored Governor Kean's "bizarre link" to al Qaeda, exposing "dots" that connect the governor to Osama bin Ladens' brother-in-law, Khalid bin Mahfouz as well as to the Carlyle Group and BCCI. http:// http://www.fortune.com/fortune/artic...410237,00.html

George W. Bush has similar peculiar ties, too, of course. A recent article in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette discussed how Bin Mahfouz was scrutinized "for an alleged investment made in a Texas oil company owned by a young George W. Bush," and how BCCI was accused, in 1999, of "funneling millions to front organizations for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden." http://www.post-gazette.com/business...east0318p2.asp In 1991, the Wall Street Journal observed that "The number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken -- all since George W. Bush came on board -- raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son."

Moreover, if Bush were Clinton, how might talking heads react to him undercutting the 9/ 11 investigation? http://www.msnbc.com/news/907379.asp?0cv=KA01&cp1=1 http:// http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...437267,00.html

It would be "Scandal TV" -- every day, all day. And yet, for some reason, as the media rolls over and citizens snooze, few seem to notice reams of sleaze. Meanwhile, Bush family history and America's future become more deeply and irretrievably intertwined.


Maureen Farrell is a writer and media consultant who specializes in helping other writers get television and radio exposure.

© Copyright 2003, Maureen Farrell

[lynn]

JOIN ME IN THIS HUNGER STRIKE !!!!!!!!

WASHINGTON, DC—Against strenuous objections from his advisors, President Bush began a hunger strike Monday to protest human-rights abuses in Nepal, vowing to subsist solely on water and vitamin supplements until "the twin clouds of violence and oppression are lifted from the land."

"I can no longer stand idly by while the gentle, peace-loving Nepalese people are made to suffer," said Bush, a longtime admirer of Nepalese culture. "This hunger strike will send a strong message to the government of Nepal and the insurgent Maoist rebels that their suppression of freedom and subjugation of the innocent is not going unnoticed."

Since 1991, Nepal has been locked in a bloody struggle between its constitutional monarchy and the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN), a Maoist guerrilla group seeking to overthrow the oft-oppressive regime. Thousands of innocent civilians have lost their lives in the crossfire.

After years of human-rights abuses by both the government and the CPN, Bush felt it was necessary to take action.

"In recent months, there has been a sharp increase in the use of deadly force on both sides," said Bush, seated on a mat in the Rose Garden. "There have been numerous reports of civilians being killed as a reprisal for the death of military police or of CPN army personnel. Things are bad and they're only getting worse. Something had to be done."

Bush pushes legislation the will give U.S. voting rights to the people of Nepal

[lynn]

Man Ron, I just read your post. I knew some of that stuff but had no idea how old that stinking fish was!

I think it's time to investigate that whole family!

[clinthopson]

How much longer can the flim flam that is coming out of Shrub's administration sell?

It seems that a large percentage of the population has abandoned critical thinking in favor of flag waving and shouts of "victory."

OTOH, maybe a lot of them never indulged in critical thinking to start with.

[Tanager]

Originally posted by clinthopson
OTOH, maybe a lot of them never indulged in critical thinking to start with.

At the risk of being elitist...bingo.

[lynn]

Here's the low down on the Bush Theatrical Company

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 16, 2003
Keepers of Bush Image Lift Stagecraft to New Heights
By ELISABETH BUMILLER


WASHINGTON, May 15 — George W. Bush's "Top Gun" landing on the deck of the carrier Abraham Lincoln will be remembered as one of the most audacious moments of presidential theater in American history. But it was only the latest example of how the Bush administration, going far beyond the foundations in stagecraft set by the Reagan White House, is using the powers of television and technology to promote a presidency like never before.

Officials of past Democratic and Republican administrations marvel at how the White House does not seem to miss an opportunity to showcase Mr. Bush in dramatic and perfectly lighted settings. It is all by design: the White House has stocked its communications operation with people from network television who have expertise in lighting, camera angles and the importance of backdrops.

On Tuesday, at a speech promoting his economic plan in Indianapolis, White House aides went so far as to ask people in the crowd behind Mr. Bush to take off their ties, WISH-TV in Indianapolis reported, so they would look more like the ordinary folk the president said would benefit from his tax cut.

"They understand the visual as well as anybody ever has," said Michael K. Deaver, Ronald Reagan's chief image maker. "They watched what we did, they watched the mistakes of Bush I, they watched how Clinton kind of stumbled into it, and they've taken it to an art form."

The White House efforts have been ambitious — and costly. For the prime-time television address that Mr. Bush delivered to the nation on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, the White House rented three barges of giant Musco lights, the kind used to illuminate sports stadiums and rock concerts, sent them across New York Harbor, tethered them in the water around the base of the Statue of Liberty and then blasted them upward to illuminate all 305 feet of America's symbol of freedom. It was the ultimate patriotic backdrop for Mr. Bush, who spoke from Ellis Island.

For a speech that Mr. Bush delivered last summer at Mount Rushmore, the White House positioned the best platform for television crews off to one side, not head on as other White Houses have done, so that the cameras caught Mr. Bush in profile, his face perfectly aligned with the four presidents carved in stone.

And on Monday, for remarks the president made promoting his tax cut plan near Albuquerque, the White House unfurled a backdrop that proclaimed its message of the day, "Helping Small Business," over and over. The type was too small to be read by most in the audience, but just the right size for television viewers at home.

"I don't know who does it," Mr. Deaver said, "but somebody's got a good eye over there."

That somebody, White House officials and television executives say, is in fact three or four people. First among equals is Scott Sforza, a former ABC producer who was hired by the Bush campaign in Austin, Tex., and who now works for Dan Bartlett, the White House communications director. Mr. Sforza created the White House "message of the day" backdrops and helped design the $250,000 set at the United States Central Command forward headquarters in Doha, Qatar, during the Iraq war.

Mr. Sforza works closely with Bob DeServi, a former NBC cameraman whom the Bush White House hired after seeing his work in the 2000 campaign. Mr. DeServi, whose title is associate director of communications for production, is considered a master at lighting. "You want it, I'll heat it up and make a picture," he said early this week. Mr. DeServi helped produce one of Mr. Bush's largest events, a speech to a crowd in Revolution Square in Bucharest last November.

To stage the event, Mr. DeServi went so far as to rent Musco lights in Britain, which were then shipped across the English Channel and driven across Europe to Romania, where they lighted Mr. Bush and the giant stage across from the country's former Communist headquarters.

A third crucial player is Greg Jenkins, a former Fox News television producer in Washington who is now the director of presidential advance. Mr. Jenkins manages the small army of staff members and volunteers who move days ahead of Mr. Bush and his entourage to set up the staging of all White House events.

"We pay particular attention to not only what the president says but what the American people see," Mr. Bartlett said. "Americans are leading busy lives, and sometimes they don't have the opportunity to read a story or listen to an entire broadcast. But if they can have an instant understanding of what the president is talking about by seeing 60 seconds of television, you accomplish your goals as communicators. So we take it seriously."

The president's image makers, Mr. Bartlett said, work within a budget for White House travel and events allotted by Congress, which for fiscal 2003 was $3.7 million. He said he did not know the specific cost of staging Mr. Bush's Sept. 11 anniversary speech, or what the White House was charged for the lights. A spokeswoman at the headquarters of Musco Lighting in Oskaloosa, Iowa, said the company did not disclose the prices it charged clients.

White House communications operatives in previous administrations said many costs of presidential trips were paid for by whoever was deemed the official host of a trip — typically a federal agency, a city or a company. Trips deemed political are paid for by the parties.

"The total cost of a trip is ultimately shared across a wide spectrum of agencies and hosts," said Joshua King, who was director of production of presidential events in the Clinton administration. "To get to who really pays for presidential events would keep a team of accountants very busy."

The most elaborate — and criticized — White House event so far was Mr. Bush's speech aboard the Abraham Lincoln announcing the end of major combat in Iraq. White House officials say that a variety of people, including the president, came up with the idea, and that Mr. Sforza embedded himself on the carrier to make preparations days before Mr. Bush's landing in a flight suit and his early evening speech.

Media strategists noted afterward that Mr. Sforza and his aides had choreographed every aspect of the event, even down to the members of the Lincoln crew arrayed in coordinated shirt colors over Mr. Bush's right shoulder and the "Mission Accomplished" banner placed to perfectly capture the president and the celebratory two words in a single shot. The speech was specifically timed for what image makers call "magic hour light," which cast a golden glow on Mr. Bush.

"If you looked at the TV picture, you saw there was flattering light on his left cheek and slight shadowing on his right," Mr. King said. "It looked great."

The trip was attacked by Democrats as an expensive political stunt, but White House officials said that Democrats needed a better issue for taking on the president. A New York Times/CBS News nationwide poll conducted May 9-12 found that the White House may have been right: 59 percent of those polled said it was appropriate, and not an effort to make political gain, for Mr. Bush to dress in a flight suit and announce the end of combat operations on the aircraft carrier.

But even this White House makes mistakes. One of the more notable ones occurred in January, when Mr. Bush delivered a speech about his economic plan at a St. Louis trucking company. Volunteers for the White House covered "Made in China" stamps with white stickers on boxes arrayed on either side of the president. Behind Mr. Bush was a printed backdrop of faux boxes that read "Made in U.S.A.," the message the administration wanted to convey to the television audience.

The White House takes great pride in the backdrops, which are created by Mr. Sforza, and has gone so far as to help design them for universities where Mr. Bush travels to make commencement addresses. Last year, the White House helped design a large banner for Ohio State as part of the background for Mr. Bush; last week, the White House collaborated with the University of South Carolina to make Sforzian backdrops for a presidential commencement speech in the school's new Carolina Center.

"They really are good," said Russ McKinney, the school's director of public affairs, as he listened to the president.

Television camera crews, meanwhile, say they have rarely had such consistently attractive pictures to send back to editing rooms.

"They seem to approach an event site like it's a TV set," said Chris Carlson, an ABC cameraman who covers the White House. "They dress it up really nicely. It looks like a million bucks."

Even for standard-issue White House events, Mr. Bush's image makers watch every angle. Last week, when the president had a joint news conference with Prime Minister José Mariá Aznar of Spain, it was staged in the Grand Foyer of the White House, under grand marble columns, with the Blue Room and a huge cream-colored bouquet of flowers illuminated in the background. (Mr. Sforza and Mr. DeServi could be seen there conferring before the cameras began rolling.) The scene was lush and rich, filled with the beauty of the White House in real time.

"They understand they have to build a set, whether it's an aircraft carrier or the Rose Garden or the South Lawn," Mr. Deaver said. "They understand that putting depth into the picture makes the candidate or president look better."

Or as Mr. Deaver said he learned long ago with Mr. Reagan: "They understand that what's around the head is just as important as the head."

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company
===================================

"They understand that what's around the head is just as important as the head."

Definitely more important than what's in the head!

And did anyone stop to consider the fact that ultimately the tax payer and consumer are paying for all the fluff.

[Ron Thorne]

Originally posted by lynn
"They understand that what's around the head is just as important as the head."

Definitely more important than what's in the head!

And did anyone stop to consider the fact that ultimately the tax payer and consumer are paying for all the fluff.

Bingo and Bingo! Thanks, Lynn ... I think. :-)

[patricia]

More and more, watching Mr. Bush making his choreographed-to-the-nth-degree speeches, I feel as though I'm watching a puppet show, with a scarily familiar, limited script. However, there are many citizens who are under the impression that these are spontaneous and don't notice the artificiality of the setting. They also don't notice that Mr Bush doesn't answer questions, put at random, by reporters, or those who interview him.
The scary thing is, that it doesn't seem to matter.

[Monte Smith]

Hey Lynn, you forgot to post the photo that went with this story on the *front page* of the NYT.



Front page, ladies and gennlemen. Run any story you want so long as you run that photo on the front page.

[Ron Thorne]

The famous quote, wrongfully attributed to P.T. Barnum, keeps wafting through my mind right about now.

For those interested in a bit of circus sideshow history (such as we're witnessing in America), here's a link to a fascinating story.

http://www.historybuff.com/library/refbarnum.html

[Monte Smith]

[kedoane]

Oh goody, it was announced today that he is running for reelection.

Let's hope he keeps on running until he's outta here!

[lynn]

Monte, would you please shrink that picture down to actual size.

I get the Times electronically in the morning. No pictures thank god!