Again, our beef is with the voters of W VA. It doesn’t matter where he lives. If Americans have a problem with Feinstein and Boxer, there beef is with me and mine. We’re the ones who put up such pathetic candidates to oppose them. You don’t like Byrd? Blame it on the ones who voted for him and the ones who didn’t put up a strong enough candidate to beat him.

“Now, forgive me, but that is right out of Nazi Germany. I don’t understand…why all of a sudden we are passing laws that sound as if they are right out of Nazi Germany.”
-Sen. Gramm, R-TX, September 5, 2002 (speaking in opposition to a Democratic tax plan)

“That, Mr. Speaker, is a modern-day equivalent of the Nazi prison guard saying ‘I was just following orders.’ It was all legal in Nazi Germany at the time.”
-Rep. King, R-IA, September 8, 2004 (speaking in opposition to a legal ruling on abortion)

“We certainly have all seen the rejections of Nazi Germany’s abuses of science. As a society and a nation, there ought to be some limit on what we can allow or should allow.”
-Sen. Sessions R-AL, October 11, 2004 (speaking in opposition to stem cell research)

“He also said that imposition of the Kyoto Protocol ‘would deal a powerful blow on the whole humanity similar to the one humanity experienced when Nazism and communism flourished.’ And that was the chief economic advisor to Russian President Putin. The world has certainly turned on its head that we Americans must look to Russians for speaking out strongly against irrational authoritarian ideologies.”
-Sen. Inhofe, R-OK, October 11, 2004 (speaking in opposition to the Kyoto Protocol)

The North Koreans posted their Memorandum of DPRK Foreign Ministry on 2 Mar 05, about why they insist on bilateral talks with the US.

Excerpt: “Senator Kerry, who ran for presidency on the Democratic ticket during the 2004 U.S. presidential election, when interviewed by the New York Times on Sept. 12 openly criticized the Bush administration, saying that it refused to directly negotiate with north Korea after its emergence, bringing a nuclear nightmare. Foreign Policy Focus, the organ of the U.S. institute for international policy studies, in an article dated Feb. 22, 2005, said that Bush has taken a very rough approach towards north Korea in military and diplomatic aspects since the outset of his office and this let it have access to nukes.
In an editorial dated Feb. 11, 2005 the New York Times said that north Korea declared its access to nuclear weapons because the Bush administration made an error while leading it to isolation. It justly criticized the Bush administration, saying that its reaction to north Korea till now has been unreasonable and, accordingly, there should be a radical switchover in its future engagement.

There’s almost 5,000 words of references to, and recited MSM/DNC talking points used by NK as their justification for “Bush is evil”
http://kcna.co.jp/item/2005/200503/news03/04.htm#1

It just doesn’t get any better than to have the enemy do the factchecking for us bloggers.

Again, Byrdbrain, Deaniac, sKerry, Jiminy (attack of the Wabid Wabbits) Carter, mAddledbrain Dimbright and every other anti-American needs to GO!! The sooner, the better for America’s homeland.

Again, it is preposterous to blame the Enron scandal on the Bush administration.

People are responsible for their personal actions. Or do you believe as Putin does that Bush has puppetmaster power over media & corporations? Again, look at the crime timeline. Enron/Anderson started what they did under the Clinton admin and it began falling apart even before the 2000 elections before collasping in bankruptcy in 2001.

According to your favorite MSM source, dated 12 Jan 2002:
Enron officials have acknowledged that the company has overstated its profits by more than $580 million since 1997.

In a six-week downward spiral last fall, Enron disclosed a stunning $638 million third-quarter loss, the Securities and Exchange Commission opened an investigation into the partnerships and the company’s main rival backed out of an $8.4 billion merger deal.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/01/12/enron.qanda.focus/

Repeat after me, 2 plus 2 equals 4, not 3, not 5.

As for political donations, Ken/Enron/Anderson/WorldCom and most other crooks wer equal opportunity donors. If there were more dems representing them, then the Dem share of the donation pie would have been porportionally larger.

Conclusion: faulty logic to assume politicians and crooks were in bed together for the purpose of looting the stock market or manipulating some scheme just because of the size of legal donations. On the otherhand, where there is the whiff of illegal donations, then there is typically a fire. If you can prove that Bush conspired to accept illegal donations from Ken lay, I’m all ears

Get real!!

Dean either doesn’t understand, is a Johnny-come-lately or is flat out wrong on War & Peace:
* One fear is that we will leave Afghanistan militarily successful, but without rebuilding that nation to ensure we aren’t leaving behind a nation harboring even larger numbers of American-hating terrorists. Defense is not just about building better bombs and intelligence capacity, although these are important. Good defense policy is also about long range vision, and that means engagement with the world. (Nov 2002)
REALITYCHECK: Afghan women hold political office from governor on down, economy growing etc.
* As commander in chief of the US military, I will never hesitate to send troops anywhere in the world to defend the US. But I will never send our sons and daughters to a foreign country in harm’s way without telling the truth to the American people about why they’re going there. And that judgment needs to be made first, not afterwards.(Sep 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Wait till he flip-flops
* I believed from the beginning that we should not go into Iraq without the UN as our partner. We cannot do this by ourselves. We have to have a reconstruction of Iraq with the United Nations, with NATO, and preferably with Muslim troops, particularly Arabic-speaking troops from our allies such as Egypt and Morocco.(Sep 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Umm, we seem to have a domino effect on SWA and now our critics want to jump in and be part of the reconstruction.
* I think Bush’s fundamental flaw in negotiating with North Korea is in fact his refusal to negotiate. The North Koreans in principal have suggested, in return for a non-aggression pact, they would give up nuclear weapons. That is something we should explore in bilateral negotiations.(Nov 2003)
REALITYCHECK: I know bilateral negotions never worked in the past so why try it again hoping for a different outcome? Multilateral negotians were never tred before, so how do we know it won’t work unless we try it???
* On NPR: The most interesting theory that I’ve heard so far — which is nothing more than a theory, I can’t think — it can’t be proved — is that [President Bush] was warned ahead of time [about the 9/11 attacks] by the Saudis. (Dec 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Spreading disinformation and unfounded conspiracy theories for partisan political purposes ???
* w/Ted Koppel: Questioned about whether it would ever be proper for a president to lie to the American people: Dean asked, “Under what circumstances?” Dean then said, “I can’t think of any circumstances, with the possible exception of some sort of national-security matter that would – if some piece of information were put out that would endanger American lives or some circumstance under which peoples’ lives would be in danger or something of that sort.” (Dec 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Flip-flopped
* I opposed the war in Iraq, and I’m against spending another $87 billion there. Our party and our country need new leadership.(Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: 59% of Iraqis can’t be wrong. Cost of freedom & democracy: Priceless
* US is less safe as a result of the Iraq invasion, military jets were escorting airlines “for the first time.”(Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: Jets have been flying since 9-11, we haven’t had an attack since 9-11 and just recently we have intercepted a message from Osama telling Zarqawi to forget about Iraq and focus on US attacks. So for the past 3 years +, Bush was right about protecting US directly by luring Al Quaida to fight & die in Iraq instead.
* Vote by Lieberman, Kerry, & Edwards sent 500 soldiers to die. (Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: I thot the donks were united-ly strong on defense??
* US is no safer with Saddam gone-we’re still losing troops. (Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: Bet ya didn’t see 8 million plus purple fingers coming, did ya?? Better the status quo, than to risk blood and treasure to support the march of freedom. Dean, you’re no JFK.

Dean either doesn’t understand, is a Johnny-come-lately or is flat out wrong on Foreign Policy:
* The greatest advance in American foreign policy in the last century was the Marshall Plan. Europe’s 1,000-year history of nearly continuous war is instead today dominated by an economic union, which would not have been possible without the investment of billions of American taxpayers dollars. We have been paid back many times over in trade dollars, and more importantly, in American lives which have not been lost to yet another European war. Our long range foreign policy ought to embrace nation building, not run from it. The most successful countries are those with democracies bolstered by a strong middle class that embraces the full political and economic participation of women. We need a solid game plan to [build] those countries that are not democratic, that treat women as second class citizens and that lack a strong middle class. (Nov 2002)
REALITYCHECK: Can we accuse Dean of plagarizing Bush’s SOTU 2002 & Bush Doctrine??
* International alliances and institutions are the backbone of a stable international order. The more that our destinies are intertwined, the greater the shared sense of purpose, the more we must work together successfully to address the difficult challenges ahead. We must fully integrate Russia and China into the international community as our partners. (Jun 2003)
REALITYCHECK: And what have we been doing all this time??
* I have as much foreign-policy experience as Bush did when he got into office. And Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter. The important part is to have very good people talking to me about foreign policy, and to use judgment and patience. (Oct 2003)
REALITYCHECK: And history will write what about each of them? So who is grounded in realities and who’s in fantasy land?
* I have a long-standing relationship with Canada. Repairing our relationship with Canada requires the same solution that repairing our relationships with the rest of the world requires, and that is the removal of a president whose arrogance and contemptuousness for others overrides the respect that is necessary between parties to conduct international relations. (Nov 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Given the current left hand not knowing what the right hand incoherence in Canada, which hand would Dean be talking to?
* I don’t think we have any choice. I supported the first Gulf War. I supported the Afghanistan war. Our people had been killed. We have a right to defend ourselves. But now we can’t just cut and run. We need to bring troops from Arabic-speaking nations in so this is an international reconstruction and not an American occupation. And I think, yes, the UN can do that. (Nov 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Still waiting on the UN. Altho given their sexual gratification tendencies, I doubt if Iraqis would prefer rapists over “occupiers”. At least I’m not hearing calls for the UN to step in from the Arab Street.
* When George W. Bush was running for president in 2000, he pledged a foreign policy based on humility. Instead, our foreign policy has ended up based on humiliation. After September 11, 2001, most of the world had such goodwill toward our country. It is amazing to me how that goodwill has been completely squandered in just two years. Increasing numbers of people in Europe, Asia, and in our own hemisphere cite America not as a pillar of freedom and democracy, but as a threat to peace. (Dec 2003)
REALITYCHECK: And after March 1, 2005, increasing numbers of people cite America as what?? A pillar of freedom & democracy? How on God’s green earth could that be? A frustrating reality-based world indeed for moonbats.
* 1st act as POTUS will be to visit international allies to undo damage. (Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: 11 months later, Bush visited international allies and critics begin introspective questioning that perhaps Bush Doctrine was right after all

Dean either doesn’t understand, is a Johnny-come-lately or is flat out wrong on Homeland Security
* I do have national security experience. Every single governor since September 11 has had to deal with security issues in homeland security. That’s why I don’t think the president is doing a particularly good job. (May 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Pretzel Logic. And every single president since September 11 has had to deal with security issues in homeland security.
* Shift $1B per year from missile defense to threat reduction. (Jul 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Threat reduction means what? A strong defense mitigates threats.
* Not reduce military spending but rather “redirect” it toward the development and implementation of renewable energy technology, homeland security measures to fund local first responders, inspect container ships and protect nuclear sites, and the purchase of old nuclear materials in Russia. (Aug 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Renewable energy as a form of defense?? IOW, reduce actual defense spending by focusing on other stuff that has nothing to do with maintaining a standing military. Ok genius boy.
* I believe [Americans] are ready for leadership that would strive not to divide the world into ‘us versus them,’ but rather to rally the world aroundÿ fundamental principles of decency, responsibility, freedom, and mutual respect. Our foreign and military policies must be about the notion of America leading the world, not America against the world. Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy built and strengthened international institutions, rather than dismissing and disparaging the concerns of allies. (Dec 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Duh!!! And when internationl institutions act like children and have dictators sitting on security & human rights committees??? Hello? Houston calling Space Cadet!!
* We need a concentrated attack on Al Qaeda and on Osama bin Laden. Saddam Hussein has been a distraction. (Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: Yeah! Right! Gotcha!

Conclusion: Dean is a joke and an embarassment to the medical profession. If he treated patients like he proposes to treat the US…

There are a list of other caveats, such as transparency, strength of local currency etc. Bottomline, comparing military expenditures is literally comparing apples to oranges, IOW varying degrees of bang for the buck. Military expenditure is an input measure. As such it is not directly related to the output of military activities, such as military capability. Some countries may pay a soldier $500/year while the US may pay $25,000/year.

Finally, what gets undercounted is the value of military “trade” in which technology & hardware are loaned or sold at massive discounts, sometimes on the order of 10 cents on the dollar. Usually this is done by the 10 largest economies to developing countries. We do this every year and altho solid numbers are hard to come by, I’d guess our giveaway amounts to about 10 Billion/year for stuff worth 30 to 50 billion on the open market.

A more realistic metric of Defense burderns would be to look at it as a % of GDP. Aside form the spike caused by WOT, our budget is about 3.5% of GDP, even when WOT supplementals are added it only comes to about 4.2% of GDP. Over half the countries in the world spend more, from 4% to 10%, some spend even more annually.

Subtract the WOT supplemental and our metric as measured by you would be about 35% of the world’s buget in raw numbers.

The Dean quote about “taking a different approach” dates back to April 2003. You can read an analysis of this quote at http://slate.msn.com/id/2088896/. Here is the real context. According to Time magazine, Dean “suggested that America should be planning for a time when it is not the world’s greatest superpower: ‘We have to take a different approach [to diplomacy]. We won’t always have the strongest military.’”

What is the problem here? Realizing that China has three times our population and a rapidly-growing economy, it’s plausible that in 40 or 50 years, China might have the world’s strongest military. I am not eager to see this happen, but isn’t it smart to solve problems diplomatically in any case, which would encourage other countries to also solve problems diplomatically, whether they are more or less powerful than us?

In any event, Dean did not say that he wanted to change America’s status as the world’s number one military power. He simply said that it would be prudent to plan for the possibility that we might not always be the world’s number one military power.

U.S. share of world military spending:

http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spending.asp

World military spending was $956 billion in 2003
For Fiscal Year 2003 the U.S. military fiscal request was $396.1 billion. Actual spending exceeds the request, because of supplemental funding.
396.1 / 956 = 41.4%.

Source: http://www.cdi.org/issues/wme/spendersFY03.html

A chart of Ken Lay’s campaign contributions can be found at
http://www.newsmeat.com/ceo_political_donations/Ken_Lay.php
The totals are:
Republican $159,950
Republican Soft Money $491,810
Democrat $61,960
special interest $62,150

Republican : Democrat ratio = 10.52 : 1

Again, it is preposterous to blame the Enron scandal on the Clinton administration.

Why are all of the union industries struggling for survival? Because the unions have seen their day in the sun and are being nippered on 4 sides by Federal regulations, non-competitive labor rates, right to work sentiment and automation, thus making them irrelevant about as useful as your mascot.