The Hemmer-Beaumont Family Blog

Ok, One more and then I have to be done. This is just too funny. Remember the article that said that 39 papers who had previously supported President Bush had changed? Well, here's one that 'ol W got on his side - the Denver Post. Here are some highlights:

"...Are we, as Coloradans, better off today than we were four years ago?

In a word, no. Since 2001, Colorado has lost more jobs than we've gained, and the ones we've gained pay less than the ones we've lost. We pay less in taxes, but our household and medical expenses have skyrocketed. Ninety thousand of us have lost our health coverage. Washington is ringing up record deficits and sticking the next generation with the bill. In Iraq, Colorado-based military units and reserves are deployed in a hostile environment for questionable purpose and uncertain result."

"...Two glaring sore spots are his obsession to cut taxes even while piling up record deficits, and his mishandling of all things Iraq. He squandered global good will by taking a "my way or the highway" approach to matters of global warming, international law, Iraq weapons inspections and ultimately the Iraq invasion. He bows to corporate preference in matters of energy and environment, and his education funding levels leave far too many children behind."

"...Our support for Bush is tempered by unease over the poor choices and results of his first term. "

Wow! With friends like this...

DenverPost.com - ENDORSEMENTS

Thank you, Richard Cohen, for stating exactly how I feel.

When the 2000 elections were held, I resigned myself to having a President in whom I did not have complete confidence lead our country. I honestly thought that the Republicans won the battle of having better lawyers. Putting aside as much bitterness as I could, I went forward trying to give the new President the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps his Compassionate Conserativism was not just politics, but something he truly believed.

After 9/11 I found myself thinking that while I didn't agree with Bush on social issues (already the Compassionate Conservative thing was history) I was confident that he would handle this conflict in a more aggressive manner than Gore would have. And at that time, that's what I wanted - aggressive action. I wanted to kick someone's ass desperately; I wanted to lash out at the world for the heinous wrong that had been done to us. I think many of us felt that way & Bush was able to sense this mood in the American People. He used it to go after the Taliban in Afghanistan. But he wouldn't leave it at that. No, sir. W was on a crusade now.

Enter Iraq, stage left. While I felt that action in Iraq was probably misguided, Bush put together a string of 'facts' that were compelling. Items that were able to play on our fears just enough to get us to commit to an action that was fundamentally wrong.

-Begin Sidebar-

Yes, I just said that the war in Iraq was wrong. That is not to say that I thought Saddam was a great guy - he obviously was not. He treated his people very poorly, and his enemies even worse. Should we have finished this job way back during the first Gulf War? Yes, absolutely. It was a massive failure of GW Sr. to fall back before removing Saddam from power. Were we going to have to face Saddam as an adversary again in the future? Probably. My point is that the rationale for invading a country has to be based on more than trumped up charges. If we are to have any credibility on the world stage, we must have empirical and uncontestable evidence before acting. We are held to a higher standard, and rightly so. We did not live up to that standard in our invasion of Iraq and we as a country as weaker both realistically and perceptually because of that.

-End Sidebar-

So, the 'evidence' that poor, misguided Powell presents to the UN is just enough to turn the tide of public opinion in favor of invading. At this point, one would think that there was a plan in place for doing so - but as we've seen, there was no plan for after the successful invasion. The President was simply not prepared or was unwilling to recognize the fact that the people of Iraq may not have wanted us as an Occupying force (and that's what we are - we are Occupying Iraq - period).

So, here we are, over 1,000 dead Americans later, with no end in sight. George Bush has betrayed the trust of the American people. He has betrayed the trust of the soldiers and their families by sending them to a war of choice rather than necessity. He has turned our economy upside down, taking the surplus of the 90s and turning it into a new deficit for the new millennium, all to finance his rich cronies.

When someone doesn't do well at their job, they get fired. That should be true for the President of the United States as well.

Hold Bush Accountable (washingtonpost.com)

Administrative officials contend that this is a rehash of an earlier complaint that has conveniently been brought up again one week prior to the election. Maybe it is. On the other hand, perhaps this is just what it seems: a legitimate investigation into something which has consistently looked fishy from Day One. I can't think of a single person I've spoken with who didn't feel that Halliburton didn't get some preferential treatment from this Administration because of its ties to Cheney. Heck, if I was President & this came to my desk, I would have gone out of my way to prove that there was no unfair advantage given to the company, just to cover my backside. But no, this Administration in its arrogance decided that a no-bid contract was appropriate...this folks, is the result of that hubris.

FBI Widens Probe of Halliburton (washingtonpost.com)

Does anyone really care about newspaper endorsements anymore? I don't think that in the information age that people look to the papers to help them make their decision in this way. Instead, we are happier when we get our facts from these sources and then make up our own minds.

In any case, what I find interesting about this is not that more papers that previously backed Bush have now backed Kerry, but instead what this says about the race overall. While the press is painted widely as being overtly liberal, there are several papers here that are considered very Conservative that have decided to back Kerry or not back anyone at all. There are a few papers such as the New York Post and the Washington Times that are no brainers for the President, of course, but it is surprising how many papers have decided that Bush has betrayed the faith given to him in 2000. This is the result of four years of our President, who as we all remember, is a "Uniter and not a Divider".


- W Stands for Wrong -

36 Papers Abandon Bush for Kerry (washingtonpost.com)

More evidence that Bush needs to go. Now I understand that politicians duck questions they don't want to answer. Heck, there have been more than a few times I've been angry with Kerry or Edwards for ducking a question in favor of some trite political platitude. However, this is indicative of more than just election year politicking. Our president is actually unable to admit to making a mistake. Perhaps this is because he has spent his entire life not having to be responsible. After all, his Dad got him into the Air National Guard & then got him off the hook when he went AWOL. W has had more than one brush with the law that had been swept under the rug for him rather than having him take responsibility for his actions. Now, when confronted with mounting casualties in Iraq and economic problems at home, our President, our Commander-and Chief, the leader of the...well you get the point, says ' made some mistakes in appointing people, but I'm not going to name them. I don't want to hurt their feelings on national TV.' In other words, it's not his fault. Bush's new campaign slogan: The Buck Doesn't Stop Here.
. . . And Bush's Telling Non-Answer (washingtonpost.com)