Rowe, Rove, only one letter

difference, and both words represent betrayal by government in one form or another. 

Women who believe in choice will see their rights digress and witness history go backwards.  CIA agents have already seen that they can't trust their government in a time of war.

Actually, Karl Rove has a very important job.  Because of him and the heat the administration has been taking because of his actions, Bush was forced to actually do his job and nominate a replacement for Justice O'Connor.  Very, very "hard work" before he spends the entire month of August in Crawford.

I think soon, though, y'all will see it didn't work.  Rove can't escape the heat that easily.  I believe you will find that Bush failed in getting the heat taken off of Rove, and he had to rush to do all that "hard work" for no reason at all!

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Dirty politics equals dirty water.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-rove13jun13,0,1520344,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines

From the Los Angeles Times

EPA Rule Loosened After Oil Chief's Letter to Rove

The White House says the executive's appeal had no role in changing a measure to protect groundwater. Critics call it a political payoff.

By Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten
Times Staff Writers

June 13, 2006

WASHINGTON — A rule designed by the Environmental Protection Agency to keep groundwater clean near oil drilling sites and other construction zones was loosened after White House officials rejected it amid complaints by energy companies that it was too restrictive and after a well-connected Texas oil executive appealed to White House senior advisor Karl Rove.

The new rule, which took effect Monday, came after years of intense industry pressure, including court battles and behind-the-scenes agency lobbying. But environmentalists vowed Monday that the fight was not over, distributing internal White House documents that they said portrayed the new rule as a political payoff to an industry long aligned with the Republican Party and President Bush.

In 2002, a Texas oilman and longtime Republican activist, Ernest Angelo, wrote a letter to Rove complaining that an early version of the rule was causing many in the oil industry to openly express doubt as to the merit of electing Republicans when we wind up with this type of stupidity.

Rove responded by forwarding the letter to top White House environmental advisors and scrawling a handwritten note directing an aide to talk to those advisors and get a response ASAP.

Rove later wrote to Angelo, assuring him that there was a keen awareness within the administration of addressing not only environmental issues but also the economic, energy and small business impacts of the rule.

Environmentalists pointed to the Rove correspondence as evidence that the Bush White House, more than others, has mixed politics with policy decisions that are traditionally left to scientists and career regulators. At the time, Rove oversaw the White House political office and was directing strategy for the 2002 midterm elections.

Angelo had been mayor of Midland, Texas, when Bush ran an oil firm there. He is also a longtime hunting partner of Rove's. The two men first worked together when Angelo managed Ronald Reagan's 1980 presidential campaign in Texas.

In an interview Monday, Angelo welcomed the new groundwater rule and said his letter might have made a difference in how it was written. But he waved off environmentalists' questions about Rove's involvement.

I'm sure that his forwarding my letter to people that were in charge of it might have had some impression on them, Angelo said. It seems to me that it was a totally proper thing to do. I can't see why anybody's upset about it, except of course that it was effective.

Asked why he wrote to Rove and not the Environmental Protection Agency or to some other official more directly associated with the matter, Angelo replied: Karl and I have been close friends for 25 years. So, why wouldn't I write to him? He's the guy I know best in the administration.

White House spokesmen said Monday that the rule was revised as part of the federal government's standard rule-making process. They said the EPA was simply directed by White House budget officials to make the rule comply with requirements laid out by Congress in a sweeping new energy law passed last year.

The issue has been a focus of lobbying by the oil and gas industry for years, ever since Clinton administration regulators first announced their intent to require special EPA permits for construction sites smaller than five acres, including oil and gas drilling sites, as a way to discourage water pollution.

Energy executives, who have long complained of being stifled by federal regulations limiting drilling and exploration, sought and received a delay in that permit requirement in 2003. Eventually, Congress granted a permanent exemption that was written into the 2005 energy legislation.

The EPA rule issued Monday adds fine print to that broad exception in ways that critics, including six members of the Senate, say exceeds what Congress intended.

For example, the new rule generally exempts sediment — pieces of dirt and other particles that can gum up otherwise clear streams — from regulations governing runoff that may flow from oil and gas production or construction sites.

Sen. James M. Jeffords (I-Vt.), who joined five Democrats in objecting to the rule, wrote in March that there was nothing in the energy law suggesting that such an exclusion of sediment had even entered the mind of any member of Congress as it considered the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Moreover, Jeffords wrote, the rule violated the intentions of Congress when it passed the Clean Water Act 19 years ago.

White House and administration officials disagreed.

At the EPA, Assistant Administrator Benjamin H. Grumbles said the rule responded directly to congressional action. He cited a letter from Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, endorsing it. He added that the rule still allows states to regulate pollution, and that it continues to regulate sediment that contains toxic ingredients.

Lisa Miller, a spokeswoman for another senior lawmaker, Rep. Joe L. Barton (R-Texas), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said Monday that the rule was designed to hold oil companies accountable for putting toxic substances in the soil, but not for dirt that results from storms.

When it rains, storm water gets muddy, regardless of whether there's an oil well in the neighborhood, Miller said. Congress told EPA to do this, and now they have. If there's oil in the water, a producer has to clean it up. If it's nature, they don't.

The change in the rule occurred last year when staffers in the White House Office of Management and Budget began editing an early version drafted by EPA technical staff. The Office of Management and Budget oversees another division, the Office of Information and Regulatory Policy, which critics complain has served as a central hub in the Bush White House for making government regulations more business-friendly.

A spokesman for the White House budget office, Scott Milburn, said Monday that the White House's involvement in making rules was intended to ensure that agencies issue regulations that follow the law.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino rejected the suggestion that Rove was involved in the rule change. Rove frequently receives requests, she said, and that he tries to reply and direct those requests to the appropriate people. She said that for environmentalists to accuse Rove of manipulating the EPA rule was a typical overreach by administration critics.

That is quite an overreach, when it was the United States Congress that passed the Energy Act in a bipartisan way to ask the EPA to undertake this rulemaking, she said.

In their March letter, Jeffords and his Democratic colleagues asked EPA officials whether the correspondence with Rove influenced the final rule.

A response written by Grumbles did not directly address the Rove question. But the Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmental groups assert that they know the answer.

We can't say that Karl Rove walked over to OMB and demanded these changes, said Sharon Buccino, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's land program. But it is clear that there was direction coming from the top of the White House, and this was a result of the thinking of the White House as opposed to environmental experts at EPA.

Buccino called the rule yet another example of the Bush administration rewarding their friends in the oil and gas industry at the expense of the environment and the public's health.

In his letter to Rove, Angelo did not hide his political feelings. He thanked Rove for all you do, and added words of encouragement on another topic: The president has the opposition on the run on the Iraq issue.

His letter appeared to gain notice at the highest levels of the administration. Three months after Angelo sent it, a top EPA official wrote to tell him that the agency had decided to impose the temporary delay on the construction permitting rule for oil and gas companies.

The letter was copied to Rove, White House environmental advisor James L. Connaughton and then-EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman.

So, Karl Rove is the one who outed Ms. Wilson.  He should be put in prison for years or better yet, let the people have him, let us tar and feather him..Definitely he needs to be brought up on charges.

Some of these people could actually witness Rove with a gun in his hand SHOOTING this lady and still defend his actions.  Their president can do no wrong, and whatever you do, do NOT confuse them with FACTS.  They are a scary bunch.

    Sunday 28 August 2005

Negative attacks have often been at the center of Karl Rove’s strategies. (Photo: Reuters)

    After all, Plame's identity was revealed in a Robert Novak column on July 14, 2003, just eight days after her husband, Joseph Wilson, had embarrassed Bush over his Iraq war rationale. And Rove had talked with Novak on July 9.

    As John Roberts, the Supreme Court nominee and federal appeals court judge, wrote last month in another context, the fact that sometimes dogs do eat homework is no reason to ignore more-logical explanations.

    Rove's record has been consistent. Over 35 years, he has been a master of dirty tricks, divisiveness, innuendo, manipulation, character assassination, and roiling partisanship.

    He started early. In 1970, when he was 19 and active as a college Republican -- though he didn't graduate from college -- Rove pretended to volunteer for a Democratic candidate in Illinois, stole some campaign stationery, and used it to disrupt a campaign event. Later, in Texas, he gave testimony in court that was embarrassing to an opponent of one of Rove's clients, even though it was not true, according to the book Bush's Brain, by two veteran Texas newsmen, James Moore and Wayne Slater.

    Negative attacks have often been the center of Rove's strategies. In a race between Texas Governor Mark White and his Republican opponent, Bill Clements, Rove wrote in a memo: Anti-White messages are more important than positive Clements messages.

    Often Rove has skated on the edge of being identified with certainty as the author of dirty tricks. In 1986, the discovery of a planted listening device in Rove's own office was widely publicized, damaging the Democrats. Many suspect that the source was Rove himself. This was never proven, but Moore and Slater say, Karl Rove remains a prime suspect. In 1989, Texas populist Jim Hightower was damaged by grand jury leaks for which, Moore and Slater say, Rove remains the most likely source.

    Again, most of the personal slurs against candidates who had the temerity to run against Rove's clients have not been pinned on Rove personally, but they follow a pattern. George W. Bush ousted Ann Richards from the Texas governor's office in 1994 after a whisper campaign focused on a small number of Richards appointees who were lesbians and even suggested that Richards was gay. Bush himself stoked the fire, saying some Richards appointees had agendas that may have been personal in nature.

    In 1990, Hightower's integrity was smeared. A federal investigation of his expenses produced news stories, but no charge, despite Rove's telling Washington reporters that Hightower and several aides face the possibility of indictment.

    In South Carolina in 2000, rumors circulated that John McCain was gay, had a black child, had a Vietnamese child, and got special treatment while a POW in Vietnam. In 2004, a direct link was established between the Bush campaign -- of which Rove was the architect, in Bush's words -- and the libels against John Kerry from the swift boat veterans. With such a history, is it possible that Rove encouraged the Catholic bishops who questioned Kerry's fitness to take Communion?

    Earlier this year, he none-too-subtly bestrode the church-state amalgam that helped elect Bush, telling a sympathetic and enthusiastic audience in Washington that conservatism is the dominant political creed in America. Always on the attack, Rove said just this June that liberals want to prepare indictments and offer therapy to terrorists.

    According to Moore and Slater, the strategy of attack has been constant throughout his career. Rove didn't just want to win; he wanted the opponents destroyed.

    Rove's connection to the Valerie Plame story was the center of attention in mid-July but cooled fast after Bush nominated Roberts to the Supreme Court on July 19. A LexisNexis search reveals 1,944 stories mentioning Rove in the week prior to the nomination, dropping to 1,111 during the week after. Now, with Bush in Crawford for a prolonged vacation, the story has nearly disappeared -- only 169 references in a late-August week.

    Still, more is likely to come out after Labor Day. A special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, is expected to finish his two-year investigation this fall. His goal was to find the person who leaked Plame's identity as an undercover CIA agent -- a serious offense in the view of Bush's father. He and many other commentators have deplored the idea that the leaker may have been seeking political retribution at the expense of national security.

    So attention will inevitably turn back again to Karl Rove, who did talk with Novak and other reporters who wrote the story but who is now being portrayed by some as a neutral researcher in the Valerie Plame case. Yes, and sometimes dogs do eat homework.

From the Christian Science monitor online-- an interesting commentary on the Rove issue. 

(I note per the Conservative board that Mr. Wilson is now being vilified.)

 Am worried about Roe v Wade, but not about Rove. He is not worry-worthy - way too much effort. I AM concerned that nothing will happen to any of them that are involved in Plamegate unless it is some third-string low-on-the-totem-pole flunkie who will be completely blindsided when he gets blamed/fired/arrested. This shadow administration is far more evolved than the Nixon guys. I predict nothing will happen to them but what is worse, we have been lied to so often for the last 4+ years that most of us  won't even care. They are going to do what they are going to do...the end.  Here in Florida we voted last election for smaller class sizes and not to build a bullet-train between Tampa and Orlando. Jeb just changed both of those things. We are building the train set up and class sizes stay the same. I wonder why we vote on these amendments at all. What difference does it make? And so it is with D.C. It has not mattered for so long what a great number of us have felt about Iraq and all the lies surrounding it. They just do what they want. And before anyone says "we elected him" as a plausible argument, 51% is not a mandate. One half of this country is on the other side. Our country does not deserve the autocratic theocratic government that has been forced upon us.  When the shoe is inevitably on the other foot I suspect you won't like it either.

Attack your opponents strong points.  Read many posts below that ham-handedly attempt to use this tactic.  Throw in a cup of "sour grapes" and NOW your cookin'.  Go Ron Paul!  Split the vote!

for those too busy posting inaccurate opinions to look things up.

working furiously with a ventiloquist as late as yesterday afternoon.

WASHINGTON - The White House is suddenly facing damaging evidence that it misled the public by insisting for two years that presidential adviser Karl Rove wasn't involved in leaking the identity of a female CIA officer. President Bush, at an Oval Office photo opportunity Tuesday, was asked directly whether he would fire Rove -- in keeping with a pledge in June, 2004, to dismiss any leakers in the case. The president did not respond. For the second day, White House press secretary Scott McClellan refused to answer questions about Rove.

_______________

This article says that the White House may have misled the public.  And, they apparently pledged to fire anyone who had leaked this information.  This has become interesting, hope it doesn't fade right away from the public view.

x

I saw it briefly this morning and then it disappeared.  It said that Rove himself found out about Plame's undercover status from Novak, not the other way around!  The article made it sound like this affair was resolved, Rove was the good guy that we all know him to be, ha-ha. 

Well, I suppose I can just wait to see if it reappears.  Seemed surprising, but stranger things have happened.

I checked that "other" board to see if they were crowing about it yet but na-da, nothing so far.  Maybe I misinterpreted it.

Hilariously shows how the hipocrasy knows no bounds: 

http://www.indecision2008.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086

This above is a link to the Daily Show with John Stewart.  I love his show, and Stephen Colbert's.  I'm not a political junkie (yet) so I need a *lot* of comic relief with my politics in order to stomach it. 

Both sides are hypocrites, it's true.  But I swear, the Republicans are so much funnier.  The mental gymnastics they're having to go through in order to claim SP has "experience" alone is a sight to see.  (Watch the clip above if you don't believe me.  Oh, and you can see S. Palin making a good point near the end of it for all of you who are fans of hers.)  In fact, Jon Stewart said he's putting "county first" in supporting Obama, because McCain being the pres. would make his job (as a comedian) so much easier...

Oh, and have no fear, anyone.  I balance out the political comedy with a healthy dose of serious political coverage too.  The most serious I can find lately is the stuff on PBS.  You know, the calm, old-style journalism type, free of the crawl at the bottom of the screen, free of all the hype and wild graphics at the bottom of the screen, free of people shouting because they actually take turns letting each other talk.  Anybody else miss that kind of reporting, where it's kinda boring to watch and you have to actually listen and pay attention to more than sound bites?  Ah, well.  I'm rambling...

Yep, he has refused to show for yet another subpoena, this time because Bush seemingly wrote a letter 4 days before leaving office saying he didn't have to show up?  Give me a break!  This guy is such a crook and needs to be put under the jail.  I hope they fry him.  I wonder what would happen to any of us who refused to show up for a subpoena.....about 3 or 4 times, that is.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/182240/?gt1=43002

they keep the pressure on, because IF our govt has behaved irresponsibly we need to know.

about to come to an end soon?

I think October is going to be a very interesting month.

CIA Agents Letter to US Senate and House

18 July 2005

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, if you are given this story DO NOT REENLIST!

From: aaronb
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 10:42 PM
To: soldiers@michaelmoore.com
Subject: army con artist

Mr. Moore,

I would like to start by saying that I think what you are doing for the troops is probably the most supportive thing any one human being could do during this troubled time. I would like to tell you my story, and I hope that it can help other soldiers in my position.

I am a specialist in the US Army, I have served four years on active duty, and I am separating from the service later this month. Earlier this year my wife and I had a baby girl. Unfortunately, she was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, which is a genetic disease which affects the lungs. Her life expectancy is about 30 years old. When she was born she required surgery which kept her in the hospital for about a month. As you can probably imagine, this was quite expensive. I wasn't worried about paying for it because I assumed military insurance (TRICARE) would cover it. I went along with that assumption for the next few months, but about 2 weeks before I was scheduled to ETS, I made a routine trip to the tricare office at the base hospital. When I arrived there and showed them an outstanding bill from the hospital where my daughter had the surgery, which showed an outstanding balance of 127,000 dollars, I was informed that that bill must be paid by me personally because I was required to pay 20% of any medical bill from any hospital or clinic not in the military system. When I asked the clerk what my options were for payment, she informed me that I either pay the bill in full, or reenlist and the bill would be paid for by the army. I couldn't believe what I was hearing, so I left the office without saying another word, went home, and called the 1 800 number for tricare. The representative assured me that the clerks statements were entirely false and that my insurance policy had a catastrophic cap of 1000 dollars. While I have no proof, I believe that the clerk from the office at the hospital (who was a civilian) was receiving some type of payment to try and con soldiers with exceptional family members into reenlisting. I am considering obtaining legal counsel on this matter, but I doubt I have a case. I just wanted to write this to make sure it never happens to anyone else. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, if you are given this story DO NOT REENLIST! Contact the tricare hotline before doing anything based on what you are told. I hope that this has not happened to anyone else, but I fear that is not true.

Thank you for your help,
A soldier for peace

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Mr. President:

Are you proud of your accomplishments as president?  I have highlighted just a few for you below.  You and those you surround yourself with have:

• KILLED over 3600 AMERICAN TROOPS. 
• MAIMED over 25,000 AMERICAN TROOPS.
• KILLED nearly 70,000 IRAQI CIVILIANS and 650,000 IRAQIS TOTAL have died as a result of US INVASION. 
• Orchestrated WAR on IRAQ when the 9/11 TERRORISTS were MOSTLY SAUDI. 
• Allowed NO-BID CONTRACTS for IRAQ war reconstruction and MONEY UNACCOUNTED FOR.
• DESTABILIZED MIDDLE EAST, now wanting TO SELL WEAPONS to Arab “allies.”
• Incurred the LARGEST NATIONAL DEBT IN OUR HISTORY, nearing 9 TRILLION.
• Shown INCOMPETENCE and INEFFECTIVENESS in response to HURRICANE KATRINA.
• Shown DISRESPECT FOR MILITARY PERSONNEL, initially attempting to reduce veterans’ benefits for those who put their lives at risk for this country in the past and leaving those who serve in Iraq without needed supplies.
• Done nothing about NEARLY 50 MILLION AMERICANS UNINSURED.
• CUT EDUCATION LOANS and REDUCED PELL GRANTS.
• Shown DISREGARD for THE CONSTITUTION of the United States of America with the so-called Patriot Act. 
• Shown DISREGARD for the SAFETY and HEALTH of our ENVIRONMENT, for example, withdrawing the US from the Kyoto Protocol agreement and opening public land for oil drilling. 
• Shown HYPOCRISY and FAVORITISM by COMMUTING SCOOTER LIBBY’S SENTENCE.  July 19, 2005, Washington Post: “PRESIDENT BUSH SAID yesterday that he will fire anyone in the administration found to have committed a crime in the leaking of a CIA operative's name.”   
• ALLOWED Attorney General ROBERTO GONZALEZ, a representative of truth and justice, TO REMAIN in government office AFTER HE LIED about his presence at a meeting regarding the questionably-timed firings of eight US attorneys.

Past presidents during my lifetime have not always behaved admirably, but your behavior and record in office reveal a decidedly un-Christian lack of ethics and morality exceeding that of any except perhaps Richard Nixon. Where did you leave your oft-professed Christianity?  I pray the nation survives your destructive administration, and I pray you begin to live a truly honorable life from this day on.

Sincerely,

Here is an email I received from my cousin.  Thought it interesting enough to put up here.  It is a letter written by a soldier in Afghanistan.

Sunday, August 31st, 2008

Dear God,

The other night, the Rev. James Dobson's ministry asked all believers to pray for a storm on Thursday night so that the Obama acceptance speech outdoors in Denver would have to be cancelled.

I see that You have answered Rev. Dobson's prayers -- except the storm You have sent to earth is not over Denver, but on its way to New Orleans! In fact, You have scheduled it to hit Louisiana at exactly the moment that George W. Bush is to deliver his speech at the Republican National Convention.

Now, heavenly Father, we all know You have a great sense of humor and impeccable timing. To send a hurricane on the third anniversary of the Katrina disaster AND right at the beginning of the Republican Convention was, at first blush, a stroke of divine irony. I don't blame You, I know You're angry that the Republicans tried to blame YOU for Katrina by calling it an "Act of God" -- when the truth was that the hurricane itself caused few casualties in New Orleans. Over a thousand people died because of the mistakes and neglect caused by humans, not You.

Some of us tried to help after Katrina hit, while Bush ate cake with McCain and twiddled his thumbs. I closed my office in New York and sent my entire staff down to New Orleans to help. I asked people on my website to contribute to the relief effort I organized -- and I ended up sending over two million dollars in donations, food, water, and supplies (collected from thousands of fans) to New Orleans while Bush's FEMA ice trucks were still driving around Maine three weeks later.

But this past Thursday night, the Washington Post reported that the Republicans had begun making plans to possibly postpone the convention. The AP had reported that there were no shelters set up in New Orleans for this storm, and that the levee repairs have not been adequate. In other words, as the great Ronald Reagan would say, "There you go again!"

So the last thing John McCain and the Republicans needed was to have a split-screen on TVs across America: one side with Bush and McCain partying in St. Paul, and on the other side of the screen, live footage of their Republican administration screwing up once again while New Orleans drowns.

So, yes, You have scared the Jesus, Mary and Joseph out of them, and more than a few million of your followers tip their hats to You.

But now it appears that You haven't been having just a little fun with Bush & Co. It appears that Hurricane Gustav is truly heading to New Orleans and the Gulf coast. We hear You, O Lord, loud and clear, just as we did when Rev. Falwell said You made 9/11 happen because of all those gays and abortions. We beseech You, O Merciful One, not to punish us again as Pat Robertson said You did by giving us Katrina because of America's "wholesale slaughter of unborn children." His sentiments were echoed by other Republicans in 2005.

So this is my plea to you: Don't do this to Louisiana again. The Republicans got your message. They are scrambling and doing the best they can to get planes, trains and buses to New Orleans so that everyone can get out. They haven't sent the entire Louisiana National Guard to Iraq this time -- they are already patrolling the city streets. And, in a nod to I don't know what, Bush's head of FEMA has named a man to help manage the federal government's response. His name is W. Michael Moore. I kid you not, heavenly Father. They have sent a man with both my name AND W's to help save the Gulf Coast.

So please God, let the storm die out at sea. It's done enough damage already. If you do this one favor for me, I promise not to invoke your name again. I'll leave that to the followers of Rev. Dobson and to those gathering this week in St. Paul.

Your faithful servant and former seminarian,

Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=11061

Don't know if this is true (but hope it is) received in an email:

This is one of the greatest responses to the requests for bailout
money I have seen thus far. As a supplier for the Big 3 this man
received a letter from the President of GM North America requesting
support for the bail out program. His response is classic, and has to
make you proud of a local guy who tells it like it is.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dear Employees & Suppliers,

Congress and the current Administration will soon determine whether to
provide immediate support to the domestic auto industry to help it
through one of the most difficult economic times in our nation's
history. Your elected officials must hear from all of us now on why
this support is critical to our continuing the progress we began prior
to the global financial crisis......................As an employee or
supplier, you have a lot at stake and continue to be one of our most
effective and passionate voices. I know GM can count on you to have
your voice heard.

Thank you for your urgent action and ongoing support.

Troy Clarke

President General Motors North America

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++





Response from:

Gregory Knox, Pres. Check out this guy's website via Google

Knox Machinery Company

Franklin, Ohio

http://www.knoxmachinery.com/leadership.html



Gentlemen:

In response to your request to contact legislators and ask for a
bailout for the Big Three automakers please consider the following,
and please pass my thoughts on to Troy Clark, President of General
Motors North America.

Politicians and Management of the Big 3 are both infected with the
same entitlement mentality that has spread like cancerous germs in UAW
halls for the last countless decades, and whose plague is now sweeping
this nation, awaiting our new "messiah", Pres-elect Obama, to wave his
magic wand and make all our problems go away, while at the same time
allowing our once great nation to keep "living the dream"… Believe me
folks, The dream is over!

This dream where we can ignore the consumer for years while management
myopically focuses on its personal rewards packages at the same time
that our factories have been filled with the worlds most overpaid,
arrogant, ignorant and laziest entitlement minded "laborers" without
paying the price for these atrocities…this dream where you still think
the masses will line up to buy our products for ever and ever.

Don't even think about telling me I'm wrong. Don't accuse me of not
knowing of what I speak. I have called on Ford, GM, Chrysler, TRW,
Delphi, Kelsey Hayes, American Axle and countless other automotive
OEM's throughout the Midwest during the past 30 years and what I've
seen over those years in these union shops can only be described as
disgusting.

Troy Clarke, President of General Motors North America, states: "There
is widespread sentiment throughout this country, and our government,
and especially via the news media, that the current crisis is
completely the result of bad management which it certainly is not."

You're right Mr. Clarke, it's not JUST management…how about the
electricians who walk around the plants like lords in feudal times,
making people wait on them for countless hours while they drag a$$…so
they can come in on the weekend and make double and triple time…for a
job they easily could have done within their normal 40 hour work week.
 How about the line workers who threaten newbies with all kinds of
scare tactics…for putting out too many parts on a shift…and for being
too productive

(We certainly must not expose those lazy bums who have been getting
overpaid for decades for their horrific underproduction, must we?!?)

Do you folks really not know about this stuff?!? How about this great
sentiment abridged from Mr. Clarke's sad plea: "over the last few
years …we have closed the quality and efficiency gaps with our
competitors." What the he11 has Detroit been doing for the last 40
years?!? Did we really JUST wake up to the gaps in quality and
efficiency between us and them? The K car vs. the Accord? The Pinto
vs. the Civic?!? Do I need to go on? What a joke!

We are living through the inevitable outcome of the actions of the
United States auto industry for decades. It's time to pay for your
sins, Detroit .

I attended an economic summit last week where brilliant economist,
Alan Beaulieu, from the Institute of Trend Research , surprised the
crowd when he said he would not have given the banks a penny of
"bailout money".. "Yes, he said, this would cause short term
problems," but despite what people like politicians and corporate
magnates would have us believe, the sun would in fact rise the next
day… and the following very important thing would happen…where there
had been greedy and sloppy banks, new efficient ones would pop up…that
is how a free market system works…it does work…if we would only let it
work…"

But for some nondescript reason we are now deciding that the rest of
the world is right and that capitalism doesn't work - that we need the
government to step in and "save us"…Save us my a$$, He11 - we're
nationalizing…and unfortunately too many of our once fine nation's
citizens don't even have a clue that this is what is really
happening…But, they sure can tell you the stats on their favorite
sports teams…yeah - THAT'S really important, isn't it…

Does it ever occur to ANYONE that the "competition" has been producing
vehicles, EXTREMELY PROFITABLY, for decades in this country?... How
can that be??? Let's see… Fuel efficient… Listening to customers…
Investing in the proper tooling and automation for the long haul…

Not being too complacent or arrogant to listen to Dr. W. Edwards
Deming four decades ago when he taught that by adopting appropriate
principles of management, organizations could increase quality and
simultaneously reduce costs. Ever increased productivity through
quality and intelligent planning… Treating vendors like strategic
partners, rather than like "the enemy"… Efficient front and back
offices… Non union environment…

Again, I could go on and on, but I really wouldn't be telling anyone
anything they really don't already know down deep in their hearts.

I have six children, so I am not unfamiliar with the concept of
wanting someone to bail you out of a mess that you have gotten
yourself into - my children do this on a weekly, if not daily basis,
as I did when I was their age. I do for them what my parents did for
me (one of their greatest gifts, by the way) - I make them stand on
their own two feet and accept the consequences of their actions and
work through it. Radical concept, huh… Am I there for them in the
wings? Of course - but only until such time as they need to be fully
on their own as adults.

I don't want to oversimplify a complex situation, but there certainly
are unmistakable parallels here between the proper role of parenting
and government. Detroit and the United States need to pay for their
sins. Bad news people - it's coming whether we like it or not. The
newly elected Messiah really doesn't have a magic wand big enough to
"make it all go away." I laughed as I heard Obama "reeling it back
in" almost immediately after the final vote count was tallied…"we
really might not do it in a year…or in four…" Where the He11 was that
kind of talk when he was RUNNING for office.

Stop trying to put off the inevitable folks … That house in Florida
really isn't worth $750,000… People who jump across a border really
don't deserve free health care benefits… That job driving that
forklift for the Big 3 really isn't worth $85,000 a year… We really
shouldn't allow Wal-Mart to stock their shelves with products acquired
from a country that unfairly manipulates their currency and has the
most atrocious human rights infractions on the face of the globe…

That couple whose combined income is less than $50,000 really
shouldn't be living in that $485,000 home… Let the market correct
itself folks - it will. Yes it will be painful, but it's gonna' be
painful either way, and the bright side of my proposal is that on the
other side of it all, is a nation that appreciates what it has…and
doesn't live beyond its means…and gets back to basics…and redevelops
the patriotic work ethic that made it the greatest nation in the
history of the world…and probably turns back to God.

Sorry - don't cut my head off, I'm just the messenger sharing with you
the "bad news". I hope you take it to heart.

Gregory J. Knox, President

Knox Machinery, Inc.

Franklin, Ohio 45005

President George W. Bush
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

The start of the new Congress brings us opportunities to work together on the critical issues confronting our country. No issue is more important than finding an end to the war in Iraq. December was the deadliest month of the war in over two years, pushing U.S. fatality figures over the 3,000 mark.

The American people demonstrated in the November elections that they do not believe your current Iraq policy will lead to success and that we need a change in direction for the sake of our troops and the Iraqi people. We understand that you are completing your post-election consultations on Iraq and are preparing to make a major address on your Iraq strategy to the American people next week.

Clearly this address presents you with another opportunity to make a long overdue course correction. Despite the fact that our troops have been pushed to the breaking point and, in many cases, have already served multiple tours in Iraq, news reports suggest that you believe the solution to the civil war in Iraq is to require additional sacrifices from our troops and are therefore prepared to proceed with a substantial U.S. troop increase.

Surging forces is a strategy that you have already tried and that has already failed. Like many current and former military leaders, we believe that trying again would be a serious mistake. They, like us, believe there is no purely military solution in Iraq. There is only a political solution. Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain. And it would undermine our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. We are well past the point of more troops for Iraq.

In a recent appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee, General John Abizaid, our top commander for Iraq and the region, said the following when asked about whether he thought more troops would contribute to our chances for success in Iraq:

I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps commander, General Dempsey. We all talked together. And I said, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no. And the reason is, because we want the Iraqis to do more. It's easy for the Iraqis to rely upon to us do this work. I believe that more American forces prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their own future.

Rather than deploy additional forces to Iraq, we believe the way forward is to begin t he phased redeployment of our forces in the next four to six months, while shifting the principal mission of our forces there from combat to training, logistics, force protection and counter-terror. A renewed diplomatic strategy, both within the region and beyond, is also required to help the Iraqis agree to a sustainable political settlement. In short, it is time to begin to move our forces out of Iraq and make the Iraqi political leadership aware that our commitment is not open ended, that we cannot resolve their sectarian problems, and that only they can find the political resolution required to stabilize Iraq.

Our troops and the American people have already sacrificed a great deal for the future of Iraq. After nearly four years of combat, tens of thousands of U.S. casualties, and over $300 billion dollars, it is time to bring the war to a close. We, therefore, strongly encourage you to reject any plans that call for our getting our troops any deeper into Iraq. We want to do everything we can to help Iraq succeed in the future but, like many of our senior military leaders, we do not believe that adding more U.S. combat troops contributes to success.

We appreciate you taking these views into consideration.

Sincerely,­­­­

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi