ANIMATION: Is support for impeaching Bush more like Cliniton or Nixon?

Click to see animated version

FULL-SIZED STILL
(suitable for mailing your corporate boot-licking, lobbyist wannabee, supposed representatives in DC)

More details on sources

Bush impeachment polls more like Nixon than Clinton

In March 2006, the Wall Street Journal found that public support for impeaching President Bush was nearly twice the peak support for impeaching President Clinton. This was in spite of eight years of 24/7 scandal mongering and impeachment talk and an actual impeachment trial in Clinton's case, and a virtual news blackout on the grassroots movement to impeach Bush.

This got me wondering--what did Nixon's impeachment poll numbers look like when he resigned rather than face impeachment?



I searched the net a couple of times and couldn't find the relevant stats, so I had to go into the LA Times archives. It turns out that a day before Nixon resigned, his poll numbers were not that different from Bush's: 55% of Americans wanted him removed, and 64% thought there should at least be an impeachment trial in the Senate.

SOURCE: click to see full-sized

The earliest polls I could find nine months before that showed LESS support for impeaching Nixon than Bush. One poll showed the public divided on impeachment and the other solidly opposed. This was a week and a half after the "Saturday Night Massacre" when Nixon fired Justice Department officials until he found someone willing to fire the special prosecutor investigating Watergate, so the public had some idea of his wrong-doing.

click to see full-sized articles:

So how is it one president was impeached when most of the public didn't think it was necessary, one president ran out of office when a solid majority thought he should be impeached, but a third president with a similar majority in favor of impeachment remains untouched?

For a while, you could blame the media and Congress equally. The public clearly saw the laws, treaties, our constitution, and basic human decency being violated, but the media turned a blind eye or excused it, and Congress either ignored the crimes or retro-actively made them legal. The Democrats at least had the fig-leaf that they were not in control of Congress to hide behind for their inaction.

Now they do not.

Nor can they say that the media is entirely subservient to Bush since even a corporate boot-lick like Chris Matthews feels free to criticize Bush.

Even if the media were still entirely hostile, they would be obliged to cover impeachment proceedings, and when the offenses of the Bush administration were cataloged and described without Karl Rove or Fox News' spin support for impeachment would likely grow even greater.

The real issue of course is not whether impeachment will succeed or fail, or how popular it is, but whether Congress will represent us, whether we have a real democracy or just enough of a semblance of one to lull us to sleep, whether our most basic laws apply to all people including the most powerful, and whether this country belongs to all the American people or just the few that can afford to buy the friendship of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

And apparently, the friendship of most of our Congress, Democrat as well as Republican, is bought and paid for as well--and not by us.

Wear orange until Bush and Cheney are impeached

I went to the fabric store to buy three different kinds of orange fabrics to mess around with. The high school girl who cut it for me ask why so much of the same color and I told her the World Can't Wait has come up with this campaign to show national, public support for impeaching Bush & Cheney. She got excited and said she was going to get all her friends to do it too.

The campaign would like to get critical mass on this by Labor Day, and especially have people wearing orange on ORANGE FRIDAYS.



The choice of colors has a couple of advantages:

• It echoes the orange revolution in the Ukraine, which is a great irony since Bush criticized that government for rigging elections when the exit polls didn't match the vote.
  
  
• Orange is a bright, annoying color, most people don't wear in most situations.
  
  
• Enough construction workers wear orange that it will make it look like even more support the campaign.
  
  
• It is also the color of the jumpsuits of the prisoners at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib.
  
  
• Rush Limbaugh has been selling orange "Club Gitmo" wear for a while, so some dittoheads will unwittingly be participating in the campaign.
  
  

The World Can't Wait has bandanas and tees, but if you can't afford to buy anything from them, you could go to a thrift store and buy a couple of orange tee shirts, or a strip of fabric from a fabric store to make a bandana, scarf, or armband. You can also buy one of those rubber wristbands in orange.





Some variations you can do with this:

• Tie an orange ribbon to the antenna on your car or side mirrors.
  
  
• Send an orange postcard to your senators and reps with just the words IMPEACH NOW on it. (or maybe tell them you'll wear orange until they do their job and impeach, so every time they see the color they'll remember they aren't doing their job).
  
  
• Send that postcard to the White House too. What the hell. You know you're on the list already.
  
  
• Put an orange banner or background on your blog.
  
  
• You might also send a nice orange tie or scarf to your favorite White House press corps reporter and say you would be honored if they wore it at press conferences, especially when they're with Bush himself. (Whether or not you tell the reporter the significance of the color is up to you). Hell, Helen Thomas might wear it even if you tell her what it's for.
  
  
• Even better, when Cheney goes hunting, he will be supporting impeaching himself.
  
  

Will you participate in this campaign?

Impeaching only Cheney good on principle AND politics

It is fairly obvious that the only reason the Democrats are holding back on impeachment is they are afraid it will hurt their political chances in 2008, whether they remove Bush or not.

The Democrats want Bush and Cheney in place so 2008 will be a referendum on their corrupt, destructive government. If they are removed, they will be history, and for Americans, history is anything that isn't in the current news cycle, and only a handful of eggheads care about history.

They also mistakenly believe the rest of us are so stupid we can't tell the difference between the politically motivated impeachment of Bill Clinton and trying to remove the most dangerous, reckless, and corrupt president in our history.

However, if they impeached Bush & Cheney and they was NOT removed, they would not only still be in place, but the media would be forced to cover the hearings and a lot of the public would be hearing about their impeachable offenses. That would make the anti-republican tsunami even greater in '08.

But it would also make the Bush & Cheney offenses so obvious, enough republicans would vote to impeach,just to get the albatross off their neck, and they would be removed.

While I would prefer to see both removed, and sent to prison here or sent to the Hague, impeaching just Cheney could meet the needs of our constitutional system for accountability, and still leave an emasculated Bush in place as the political punching bag they want. With Cheney gone, half of Bush's brain would be gone.

And impeaching just Cheney is exactly what Dennis Kucinich proposed in his bill.

The objection to this is it may give Bush a chance to give one of the GOP candidates for president some prestige by appointing them as VP, and possibly catapult some seeming moderate to the GOP nomination who might otherwise not have made it through the gauntlet of American Taliban voters (if Bush appointed a far righty, that would be the best of all possible worlds since the guy would have the same pedestal, but be doomed in the general election no matter what). A 'moderate' VP would have a real problem as long as Bush was in office though--he would have to defend the corruption, destruction, and failure of his boss, so his appointment would only be a gift if Bush resigned or was impeached himself.

I doubt that Bush would do something as selfless as resign just to help the party.

Impeachment: the next election vs. history

If impeachment proceedings are started, Republicans might be relieved and vote quickly to impeach for exactly the reason Pelosi is holding back: once Bush and Cheney are out of office, they will be out of mind, exactly the way Nixon and Agnew were after they resigned. 1976 between Carter and Ford was a squeaker when it should have been a landslide in the face of Nixon's crimes and foot-dragging on ending the Vietnam War. Nixon might have been in the minds of those who read and discussed politics, but not the broad masses of people.

Another unfortunately parallel is LBJ in 1968. Though he won in a landslide in 1964, Vietnam forced him to step aside in 1968. Since he was still in office election day, what people disliked about him wasn't an abstract memory but something as immediate as that night's evening news (back when it was still worth watching). Even though Humphrey moved to an anti-war position, Nixon not only wiped him out, but an even further right candidate, George Wallace, got a big chunk of the vote.

Both the Democrats and Republicans in Congress are older than me and remember these pieces of history.

While this analysis is accurate as far as determining the outcome of the next election, if it gives Bush and Cheney a pass on impeachment, the damage to our constitutional system may be permanent, and their sins will be swept under the carpet, and history rewritten that much more easily.

Most Americans are still only vaguely aware of the impeachable offenses of Bush and Cheney given the page A14 treatment they get in newspapers and near blackout on TV news. Those same outlets could elevate him to at least an average president over time if not the near deity status of Reagan.

By contrast, if he is impeached, fifty to a hundred years from now, Bush and Cheney will be members of a very small historical club that includes Clinton, Nixon, and Andrew Johnson. When grade school kids look at the list of charges against Bush and Cheney in their history books, they will wonder what all the fuss was about the other three, and when a future president takes more than half a step in the same anti-democratic, militarily aggressive direction, people will remember that grade school text and pull back on his leash hard.

Impeachment postcard to send Congress

Articles of Impeachment at ImpeachBush.org

Text of Kucinich's impeach Cheney bill H Res 333






impeach impeachment postcard president george w bush dick cheney iraq war wmd terrorism oil congress osama bin laden representative habeas corpushurricane katrina 9/11 september 11 9/11 commission venezuela haiti corruption occupation halliburton coup nancy pelosi john conyers professor smartass iraq petitionletter propaganda corporation fascism democracyhr 333 war on terror muslim dennis kucinich opinion public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods terrorist worst president ever failure war criminal 1976 election 1968 election karl rove lyndon b johnson abu ghraib torture torture memo nazi smartass comments resistance censored news rebel

Hey Dumbass, Impeach Bush & Cheney NOW!

EXCERPT:

The survey by the American Research Group found that 45 percent support the US House of Representatives beginning impeachment proceedings against Bush, with 46 percent opposed, and a 54-40 split in favor when it comes to Cheney.

FULL TEXT

According to the Wall Street Journal, support for impeaching Clinton never broke 30% and was two to one AGAINST it even at the peak of 24/7 impeachment coverage (contrast that with the near blackout of impeachment talk about Bush).

How many average people does it take to cancel out the big business interests that like Bush's lax oversight, cronyism, and murder of Iraqis to give their oil to his corporate friends at ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco, or BP?

Please share this with Pelosi and other Democratic leadership. It would also be a good idea to send this screenshot to Republicans and ask them how many votes they think they are going to get if Bush & Cheney are still in office on election day 2008. Emails are good, but they essentially get scanned for the issue and counted. Better to FAX them. Some staffer has to physically handle it, and the congressman or senator might even see it if they are walking by or waiting for a fax on their golf itinerary from some pharma lobbyist.

Contact others in Congress

We need to make our government fear us more than CEOs and lobbyists, or they will continue to play us for suckers, use our tax dollars and military to seize assets for their corporate cronies, and funnel our kids into the meat grinder to feed the dogs of war.

POEM FOR DEM SURRENDER: Ballad of the Dry Powder

I wrote the poem below for some past democratic capitulation when they hadn't even bothered with the token resistance they put up this time.

It is no longer enough to email, write, or call your congressman and senators. You must GO to their LOCAL OFFICE.

Every congressman has an office in their district, and every senator has offices a spread around the state so constituents can go their to be patronized and ignored in person.

Don't make an appointment or dress up, just show up and ask a couple of questions:

• When will you end the war?

• When will you impeach Bush?

You don't have to yell or argue, but when the staffer finishes handing you a hatful of bullshit, simply say, "Do you believe that yourself?"

Our system is profoundly broken when we have to scream and stamp our feet to get our elected representatives to actually represent us. Before we can fix it, we need to make these steaming sacks of shit in neckties fear us more than Wall Street or the corporations whose boards they hope to sit on when they leave Congress.

Find their office and go.

FIND YOUR REPRESENTATIVE

FIND YOUR SENATOR

Ballad of the Dry Powder

When we fought King George, Colonel Harry Reid was sent to gaurd a mountain pass.
He had twenty men, the high ground, and a good view of all possible routes of attack,
but just one small keg of gunpowder for all their muskets blasts.

Each soldier would have powder to let just ten bullets fly.
General Washington gave thought to this when he bid them good-bye.
He said, "Take care boys, and keep your powder dry!"
He would soon regret those words for they led good men to die.

One night as Reid's boys were sitting around the campfire at their post up in the pass,
a grizzly bear got scent of them and into their camp crashed.
Johnny grabbed his musket and aimed at the bear's boulder of a head,
but before he squeezed the trigger, Col. Reid jumped up and said,
"Stand fast! Our bullets are for Redcoats, save our powder for them instead!"
Johnny held his fire and the bear tore out his throat.

As the bear began to eat him, the other soldiers grabbed their guns,
but Reid said, "Fight him if you must, but no bullets should let fly!
Washington has ordered we must keep our powder dry."

So they turned their muskets round and swatted with the butts,
they pulled their Bowie knives and they tried to slash his guts.
The bear just took the beating, but he would stand the cuts.
He turned on his attackers clawing flesh and chewing heads.
By the time that he was finished, half Reid's men were lying dead.

Reid thought it a victory for that keg was tight and dry.
Every bit of powder meant another Redcoat boy would die.

When the dead were buried, and the night lightened to day,
The watch saw Indians approaching with warpaint and sharpened blades.
Bob whispered to Reid, "They are fighting for the crown."
"That may be so," said Reid, "but when Redcoats come around,
we need every bit of powder to shoot each soldier down."

Bob was going to answer when a bullet hit his lung.
The Indians weren't as stingy with their own powder drum.
Harry took the powder and he began to run.
Half his men were killed again,
just five left from when he had begun.

"Now we can fight," he said.
"We have plenty for each gun."

As the day was fading and they lay up there in wait,
a half dozen Redcoats approached them, lined up perfect in their sights.

Tom pulled back his hammer and almost fired a shot,
but Harry grabbed his barrel and said this squad need not be fought.
"A bigger army's coming, and no powder can be lost."

"But if we all are dead, then who will fire the shot?"
Tom tried to wrest rifle, but in the struggle it went off.
The Redcoats were upon them, and then all five were caught.

While he tied their hands, the British sargeant asked why they hadn't fired a shot.
Harry Reid said nice and loudly, "I cannot tell a lie,
Gen. Washington himself told me to keep my powder dry."

"But if you shot the bear, your men would have lived to fight.
And if you shot the Indians, and put a bullet in my eye,
you could have stole our powder and have more to be kept dry."

The soldier took his bayonet, and Harry had to die.
Then he killed the others,but man he told to fly,
and take with him the powder keg
with Reid's head in it to keep the powder dry.

harry reid vichy dem oil president george w bush dlc democratic leadership council corruption occupation colonialism white mans burden professor smartass democratlies peak oil corporation fascism impeach impeachment withdrawal democracy worst president ever failure war criminal idiot iraq appropriation bill smartass comments resistance censored news

Iraqi scholars & pols say REJECT hydrocarbon law

The guy at Hands off Iraqi oil makes it a lot easier for me to find this stuff.

Scholars, politicians, and oil technocrats got together at a conference and were pretty unified in their opposition to the Hydrocarbon Law the Bushies shoved down the Iraqis throats. Some snippets of their comments are the excerpts below.

For some reason, this isn't in the American news feeds, even though its from Dow Jones Newswires.

As always the question is, if there is even the perception that we might be screwing the Iraqis out of their oil wealth, how real is this "War on Terror" since this will only incite more hatred of the United States?

KEY EXCERPTS:

Some Iraqi Politicians Urge Rejection Of Draft Oil Law

Released : Saturday, March 10, 2007 7:07 AM

Mar 10, 2007 (Dow Jones Commodities News Select via Comtex) --By Hassan Hafidh

Of Dow Jones Newswires

"This critical draft law would revive foreign companies' control on Iraqi oil wealth that Iraq had gotten rid of years ago," Faidhi said.

The nationalization of the oil industry in the early 1970s under Saddam Hussein was a hugely popular move, and many Iraqis worry about foreigners exploiting their fields.

Saleh al-Mutlak, head of the National Dialogue, a Sunni party represented in the Iraqi parliament, echoed Faidhi's remarks.

"Iraqis are suspicious that if the law is passed at this critical time that Iraq is passing through, they would think it would be passed in order to serve the interest of foreign companies," he said.

"This law would also further divide the Iraqi people because most of them would oppose it," Mutlak told Dow Jones Newswires on the sideline of the conference which was attended by parliamentarians representing three blocs at the Iraqi parliament.

Issam al-Chalabi, former Iraqi oil minister during the government of Saddam Hussein, and a veteran Iraqi oil expert, criticized the draft oil law, saying prominent Iraqi oil experts weren't allowed to take part in discussions of the legislation and that it wasn't published in the media in order that the Iraqi people could see it.

"We are with issuing a hydrocarbon law that would regulate Iraq's oil industry, but enough time should be given to draft the law before submitting it to the parliament for approval," he said.

FULL TEXT:
http://www.macroworld.net/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=245184201

MORE ON IRAQI REACTION TO OIL LAW

What Iraqi oil workers think of the deal

More Iraqi reaction

OIL MOTIVE for Iraq War resources
http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2006/09/iraq-oil-war-resources.html



iraq war privatization jim mcdermott oil psa production sharing agreement president george w bush oil companies shell bpExxonMobil ChevronTexaco ConocoPhillips republican antonia juhasz greg palast GOP conservative corruption occupation colonialism hydrocarbon law grover norquist jay garner professor smartass iraq peak oil propaganda corporation democracy war on terror public relations worst president ever failure war criminal smartass comments resistance censored news

OIL TOO CHEAP if no Iraq War says Oil & Gas Journal in 2002

The BBC's Greg Palast ran a story a year ago about a former top CIA oil analyst, who he names, telling him the Iraq War was in part to keep Iraq from producing too much oil and driving the price down.

Later, the Downing Street Minutes of Bush & Blair's planning for the war seemed to confirm this when Bush sent assurances to Russia's Vladimir Putin that a successful invasion would NOT result in lower oil prices.

PALAST & DSM STORIES

I stumbled across further confirmation in Oil & Gas Journal, the primary publication of the oil industry, while looking for something else. They seem very concerned that without the war, which would begin in four months, the price of oil per barrel would drop.

Unmentioned is that this would mean lower prices for us at the pump. So in effect, we went to war for the right to pay more for gas.

How long do you think we'd have to wait for the war to end and Bush and Cheney to be impeached if the Democrats investigated this and said it everyday?

If they are serious about getting these bastards out of the driver's seat, this is what it will take.

Most people call it honesty.

Democrats should try it instead of just telling nicer lies than the Republicans.

KEY EXCERPTS:




Market hotline: OPEC faces bigger challenge without Iraq war
Bob Williams. Oil & Gas Journal.
Dec 2, 2002

OPEC price threat

Absent a war, says CGES [Centre for Global Energy Studies], the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries will need to make substantial output cuts to keep oil prices from falling below the floor of its $22-28/bbl official target price range (for a basket of OPEC crudes).

Noting that the price of oil had fallen by $6/bbl from mid-October to mid-November, the London-based think tank said that the OPEC 10 (excluding Iraq) had opted for boosting production in October. With Iraq doubling oil exports to 1.7 million b/d in October, that hiked total OPEC output by 1 million b/d that month. "Unless Iraq's oil exports collapse again, the rest of OPEC needs to begin curtailing overproduction to prevent further falls in the price in the coming months," CGES said.

***

This could be achieved without changing quotas, for OPEC 10 production would need to fall to 22.6 million b/d, still almost 1 million b/d over the current 21.7 million bid group quota. Without such restraint, oil prices would start to drift down towards the lower end of the OPEC price band by yearend, says CGES. Failure to act immediately, the think tank warns, would then require a cut of 1.5 million bld in second quarter 2003 just to keep Brent crude at $18.50-20.50/bbl next year.

"OPEC cannot afford to wait for a disruption to Iraq's oil exports to bring the oil market back into balance," CGES said. "The threat of war will linger until Iraq is given a clean bill of health by the UN's weapons inspectors.

"In the meantime, there is too much oil in the market for OPEC to achieve its price target unless, in an uncharacteristic burst of altruism, OPEC accepts that the global economy needs cheaper oil."

LINK TO FULL TEXT ARTICLE
(requires subscription. If you find a free link to this, let me know).

OIL MOTIVE for Iraq War resources
http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2006/09/iraq-oil-war-resources.html



iraq war privatization jim mcdermott oil psa production sharing agreement president george w bush oil companies shell bpExxonMobil ChevronTexaco ConocoPhillips republican antonia juhasz greg palast GOP conservative corruption occupation colonialism hydrocarbon law grover norquist jay garner professor smartass iraq peak oil propaganda corporation democracy war on terror public relations worst president ever failure war criminal smartass comments resistance censored news

ZOGBY POLL: 52% say impeach Bush for wiretaps (and past impeachment polls)

The question:

"If President Bush wiretapped American citizens without the approval of a judge, do you agree or disagree that Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment."

The answer:


The poll, commissioned by afterdowningstreet.org, mirrors the results of earlier polls by mainstream pollsters Zogby and IPSOS on whether Bush should be impeached if he lied about the reasons for going to war in Iraq.

Ironically, both polls show higher support for impeaching Bush without either party talking about it seriously than the peak of support for impeaching Clinton during the impeachment, which rarely broke 40% and the majority didn't even support hearings on Clinton's lying about sex.

http://www.pollingreport.com/scandal1.htm

Afterdowningstreet.org's links on their impeachment polls:

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/polling

The other element this story touches on is emerging evidence that Bush began this practice before 9/11, tearing away the other half of his figleaf for this, the first half being the lie that he needed to act fast to tap terrorists (American ones?) even though they have up to three days AFTER the tap is started to get the warrant.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011306Z.shtml

If the public wants something, the media ignores it, and Congress waits until the president admits to committing a crime (wiretapping) before investigating or exercising any oversight, what does that say about the quality of our democracy?

Whatever party your representatives are, you must hold their feet to the fire.

When people pay attention to politics and make noise, politicians wet their pants, which is why BOTH parties bend over backwards to be nice to old folks--they vote and notice when they get screwed (which is why Bush's prescription drug scam is going to hurt the GOP more than anything else).

KEY EXCERPTS:

Zogby Poll: Americans Support Impeaching Bush for Wiretapping
Submitted by Bob Fertik on January 13, 2006
For Release: January 16, 2006

By a margin of 52% to 43%, Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he wiretapped American citizens without a judge's approval, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, a grassroots coalition that supports a Congressional investigation of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

Recently White House spokesman Scott McClellan cited a Rasmussen poll that found 64% believe the NSA "should be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects." Of course, that is exactly what Congress authorized when it created the FISA courts to issue special expedited secret warrants for terrorism suspects. But Bush defied the FISA law and authorized warrantless wiretaps of Americans, which has outraged Americans to the point that a majority believe Congress should consider Bush's impeachment.

"Bush admits he ordered illegal warantless wiretapping, but says it began in response to 9/11 and was limited to a small number of calls to or from Al Qaeda," Fertik said. "But recent reports suggest wiretapping affected a much larger number of Americans, and a report in Friday's Truthout says the wiretapping began before 9/11."

The Truthout article
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011306Z.shtml

FULL TEXT:

http://www.democrats.com/bush-impeachment-poll-2


wiretap eavesdrop warrant poll impeach afterdowningstreet.org zogby truthout president george w bush republican GOP conservative professor smartass lies political opinion war on terror public opinion opinion worst president ever failure war criminal idiot retard closet gaynazi smartass comments resistance censored news rebel

Impeachment polls: Bush vs. Clinton

The republicans and even most democrats think the American people are pretty damn stupid, and with proper marketing could be sold a hat full of shit.

This is one of those things that prove them wrong.

After all the hounding and media attention given to Bill Clinton's personal failings and the conservative drumbeat to impeach him, only 36% of Americans wanted him to be impeached. People were being herded toward supporting something stupid and petty, and they didn't buy it.

With virtually NO discussion of the issue in mainstream media and very little even from Democrats, 50% think Bush should be impeached if he lied about the causes for war, which the Downing Street Minutes and statements already on the record by former administration officials clearly prove.

The other great thing about this poll is that it was grassroots funded. Despite Bush's low job approval numbers, no mainstream polling organization was asking about impeachment, so Afterdowningstreet.org collected the money and commissioned one.


KEY EXCERPTS:

According to a poll by the Zogby organization, just released by the group Afterdowningstreet.org, 50 percent of the American public now would like to see the House impeach Bush if it were found that he had lied about the reasons for going to war in Iraq (if?).

Compare that to December 17, 1998, only days before Clinton's impeachment by the House of Representatives, when an AP poll found that only 36 percent of the American public wanted to see the president impeached.

Clearly Americans view the flawed invasion of Iraq and other actions by the Bush administration, like the placing of business cronies in high places, the bankrupting of the federal government, and the failure to come to the rescue of an American city as far more serious than Clinton's sex romp and the lying about it that followed. And there's plenty more bad news to come for Bush, beginning with likely indictments in the Plame outing affair.

FULL TEXT:

http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff10122005.html







iraq war wmd terrorism oil cindy sheehan president george w bush osama bin laden real reasons peak oil, corporation cartoon editorial cartoon dlc democratic leadership council republican GOPconservative corruption failure, occupation corruption halliburton bill clinton colonialism white mans burden professor smartass iraq democrat lies peak oil propaganda corporation fascism democracy political opinion agent provocateur george w bush, war on terror, impeachment, public opinion, opinion, public relations, foreign policy, al qaeda photo op worst president ever northwoods terrorist karen hughes, george w bush, war on terror, muslim, public opinion, opinion, propaganda, foreign policy closet gay