SILLY BILLY KNOWS YOUR BODY!

It's bad enough that Idaho is now #1 in support of Bushco. Now we have Bill Sali GOP candidate for Idaho's 1st Congressional District telling women about their bodies.

Lord help us all if he ever comes across the theory that an "active" (open to interpretation) sex life decreases the prospect of prostate cancer; he'll be trying to legislate times per week!

IDAHOANS: COME IN FROM THE FIELDS!

A warning for those whose eyes are Fox News logos shining out of their solid brick heads.

You are a group that marches in step. All Bushco has to do is hype an issue to set off every stiff-necked, righteous fool in the area.

Those of you writing in about illegal immigration, do you really have any idea what is going on in this country? Bushco has done far more to bankrupt your future than every Hispanic in North America ever could, legal or “illegal.”

How many of you so concerned about the law readily dismiss the rampant corruption of this administration? How many support the illegal wiretapping? Forgive media manipulation? Ignore the murder of soldiers (85% of whom think Saddam was involved in 9-11) and untold Iraqi citizens? Have you taken on the companies who hire illegals or is it only those to whom you feel superior who should answer for their crimes?

The illegal immigration issue sat in limbo until scandals called for another diversion. The biggest problem we face is that thanks to Bushco and laws written by corporations, you just might have to vie with an illegal immigrant for the chance to flip burgers or clean toilets while trying to survive on a bottomed-out dollar.

Mike Whitney recently wrote, “In just 6 years, Bush has taken the world’s strongest currency and chopped it into finely ground hash. By the time people rouse from their stupor, the greenback will be eye to eye with the peso.”

I suppose it will be poetic justice for those who march to Bush’s drummer to experience what George and corporate America have in store for them. It’s called the other end of the stick. Unfortunately, way too many innocents will be sharing the experience.

Sharon Metcalf
Gooding

I SPY!

What does an expert on the NSA have to say? (I'm a poet and just don't...)

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/05/15/aid_interview/

THINK!

Instead of the fury that should erupt when you find your government conducting an overall spying program on the average American, too many citizens are like cows, standing in the field, happy to chew their cuds while the world outside disintegrates.

Susan G at Daily Kos lists 10 items of note for those who support this type of program at http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/5/12/123644/35474. For those without computer access, I will paraphrase:

1. It doesn’t make sense to make the haystack bigger when looking for a needle.

2. Being mere citizens, we won’t ever know the cost of this program, but you can bet it’s not cheap.

3. You are being lulled into acceptance by a group who has repeatedly lied to America in order to get their way.

4. The president is not above the law. The program is illegal.

5. The information is available to all subcontractors in the program and there is no general oversight.

6. Do you really want the world to know how often you contact your healthcare providers? Picture being denied coverage in the future.

7. Bushco is in bed with big business. What’s to stop them from sharing info gleaned from records of an innovative new company.

8. This is the largest database in the world. We know this group. Very likely their database holds even more than has been revealed.

9. What’s to prevent an “innovative” NSA or subcontractor employee from watching the way this administration operates and deciding, “Wow, I could blackmail _____ with this!”

10. It’s unAmerican (the old America).

Remember this: If you don’t guard your basic rights, this administration certainly won’t!

Sharon Metcalf

WHY ARE THEY IGNORING THE LETTER FROM TEHRAN?

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_documents/ahmadinejad0509.pdf

Too bad they didn't know that Bush has elevated himself from mere "Christian" to the above.

Turns out the translation of Iran's letter must have been read by a number of citizens, many who had the same reaction I did. Why else would Dubya's response today that the letter said nothing about Iran ridding themselves of nuclear development?

Read it yourself from the link above. I am stunned that despite trustworthy sources reporting that this is NOT an emergent situation, Bushco continues with yet another push to bomb another mid Eastern country with oil resources.

THAT WASCALLY WABBIT HAS NOMINATED ELMER FUDD!

Just what we need. A member of the military to head the CIA AND a supporter of the illegal domestic wiretap program!

Hysterically funny!

Stephen Colbert's appearance at the White House Correspondent's dinner can be linked through Buzzflash.com. I laughed so hard (in between gasps at his amazing temerity to tell the truth) my jaws ache.

A side note: Considering the accusations of left-wing media perpetrated by the lying GOP over these past 6 years, watch and see how many in the audience refused to smile, laugh, or give anything but a smattering of applause.

Colbert is the best of heroes; nobody expected it!

What In The World is Wrong with You People?

Submitted to Times-News on 04/25/06

Lois, the mother on Malcolm in the Middle, typifies sheer outrage when she yells, “What in the world is wrong with you people?” Exactly my reaction when I saw Idaho approval for Bush up to 55% again in March.

Even the mainstream media are forced to mention Bushco scandals what with new ones unveiled almost every day. Don’t those glued to Fox News at least wonder why nationwide approval of the president is down to 32%?

Ask yourself why Dubya immediately orders investigations of ”leaks” that alert Americans to the extent of wrongdoing by this administration, but evidence of lies by Dubya and his gang are never investigated other than by their own appointees, and official inquiries are never answered.

Tyler Drumheller, CIA head of covert operations in Europe, appeared on 60 minutes on May 23 and revealed his knowledge of widespread administration cherry-picking of evidence for WMD and the push for war. But despite three interviews with the Robb-Silbermann Commission and two with the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (this one only after they released their report), Drumheller and his colleagues were stunned at how little of this information ended up in the reports.

If this rotten-from-the-core-out administration fails to completely destroy our civil rights in the next two years, (and they’re well on their way), eventually we will learn the whole truth hidden by their self-investigations, every last one of them, to include 911.

Aimee New
Gooding

Inspiration

Just when you think protesting Bushco in Idaho is futile (as his approval hits 55% once again), a Canadian comes to the rescue!

It's all too easy to become frustrated and heartsick watching this execrable excuse for leadership continue to destroy the world. Spittin' in the Snake has reached a saturation resulting in inability to issue letters of protest to the Times-News, and it's certainly not for a lack of subjects!

But as of May, our windows will be rattling with Neil Young's Living With War, in a background of computer keys clicking.

Steve Goldstein posts on the Living With War blog: "Starting April 28, fans can log onto Young's Web site, www.neilyoung.com, and listen to the 10-track collection in its entirety, free of charge, said Bill Bentley, a spokesman for Warner Music Group's Reprise Records."

America For Sale, The Cost of Republican Corruption

This excellent report by Rep. Louise Slaughter, was taken off Nancy Pelosi's site after Republican threats. However, I did copy it before that happened. If anyone wants me to e-mail them a copy, just leave your e-mail address in comments.

Founding Daughter

More Opinionhated

The following appeared in the Gooding County Leader on Thursday, April 6.

I've been put in my place

Well, gee whiz and shuckie darn! Was I ever put in my place by that letter from Aimee New. She has a distinct advantage over me being able to quote Emerson and all, when I barely remember who he is.

Although I did notice a slight paradox in the analog which, at first, I thought was supposed to be directed at me. The quote (Emerson's) loosely translated, as I humbly understand it, is that a person's character is defined by what one says or writes. And what did Ms. New do in the remainder of her letter? She, with her vitriolic rambling, defined her own character.

Unfortunately, she very publicly hoist by her own petard.

Kathy Rooney, Gooding


Response submitted to GCL on 04/06/2006


Oh come on, Rooney, for once answer the letter instead of playing Karl Rove’s assistant!

Just what is it that compels you to perpetuate the unethical pit bull attitude so successfully implemented by this destructive administration? Are you still defending Delay and Dubya? Or aren’t treason and persistent lawbreaking as bad as a group of progressives meeting on a Friday night?

If I follow your reasoning, and it is a ramble, Aimee New displayed her character in much the same way as you, merely by exposing you? On the contrary, I think it’s about time that people of good character learn to stand up against the destructive elements in our society who believe facts are a luxury.

If you had really been “put in your place,” we wouldn’t have to be reading your letters any more.

Sharon Metcalf

You mean painted like this?

Opinionhated

See blog We Have Failed Our Duty as Citizens, "I Can't Win With These People."

Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote, “People do not seem to realize that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character.” Kathy Rooney’s recent opinion of a letter by Diana Pauls certainly illustrates that point.

Diana Pauls has a history of supporting the Gooding community through various service organizations other than the progressive group. She is an intelligent, well-intentioned person who has much to offer our town and her letter was a sincere attempt to correct local misconceptions.

Yes, the “far left” does have a sense (not senses) of humor. Rooney should learn that cloaking unnecessary nastiness and even threats of lost business with witticisms a 10-year-old could relate to is not a sense of humor.

For someone who predicts that “nobody will care about the ‘Drinking Liberally’ group,” she has expended no little energy spouting off about it.

Rooney couldn’t resist an opportunity to accuse the “far left” of questionable practices honed to perfection by this administration. Besides, knowledge would take a little investigation on her part and turning off Fox. A good portion of the country is awakening to the danger we are in; others must think they will be “swept up” instead of “swept out” as Dubya has in mind for them.

Rooney’s statement that drinking conservatively “in my experience, definitely is not the case” was entirely unnecessary. I could have guessed.

Aimee New
Gooding

Permanent bases versus diversion

(Submitted to Times-News 03/17/2006)

On March 16 the house approved by voice vote an amendment of Representative Barbara Lee, declaring that no funds will be used to enter into military base agreements between the US and Iraq. This administration has repeatedly denied the reality of permanent bases in Iraq, although on March 15, General John Abazaid, told the House Defense Appropriations committee that we could in fact end up having permanent bases in Iraq. Abazaid is in charge of the US troops in Iraq.

But it was Operation Swarmer that inundated the cable news channels this week. A guest on CNN accused cable news channels of irresponsibility in their ramped-up coverage of such a non-event.

Now look for the disconnect here. Have you heard anything about permanent bases? Why not? And how newsworthy is it for 800 Iraqi and 700 American soldiers to sweep an area that only contains 1,500 people? How many “permanent” bases already exist?

Tom Engelhardt writes, “...these bases, with some of the most expensive and advanced communications systems on the planet, are like vast spaceships that have landed from another solar system. Representing a staggering investment of resources, effort, and geostrategic dreaming, they are the unlikeliest places for the Bush administration to hand over willingly to even the friendliest of Iraqi governments.”

Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski spoke about the Iraq debacle: “It is a failed occupation as a consequence of a decision-making process that compounds errors, that involves a very narrow group of true believers, and that evades responsibility and accountability – for errors and even crimes. No one responsible for wrong judgments has been fired. No one responsible for setting in motion a chain of events that produced extraordinarily embarrassing crimes has been put on trial.”

Every trembling, fear-filled American who has swallowed the lies of this administration needs to look at the reality that many other Bushco creations will likely impact their life before Bush’s bogeyman terrorist. Things like the poles melting and not reforming for two years; unprecedented economic imbalances; loss of U.S. manufacturing; unavailable clean water, the selling of America; loss of civil rights; the 1,500 foreign purchases in America, CFIUS approved..

We cannot just focus on the “disaster of the moment” with this group. It’s almost a given that the moment attention is diverted elsewhere, they get busy under the radar...and those elected who have failed to protect our rights should never be elected again.

Stan Metcalf
Gooding

Balance Dowd with new Coulter column

By BUCK TAYLOR
Filer

Thank you for printing the op-ed by Ann Coulter (Feb. 24).

I may be stating the obvious; however, it seems the majority of articles in this forum have a recurring theme. Liberal authors can pretty much discuss issues as they see them; conservative authors' viewpoints tend to be muted unless they oppose the current administration's policies.

In fairness to all readers, we should see as many of Ann's as we do of Maureen Dowd's.


Response from Founding Daughter to above.

Conservative authors face an uphill battle in proving their viewpoints; lack of facts supporting their claims and inability to request the death of those whose viewpoints they don't like (unlike Ann Coulter) for fear of being arrested for "terrorist threats."

As for balance, Dowd at least sometimes comes up with an original idea. Coulter simply makes outrageous statements that could be heard at many a bar in Idaho at closing time.

I suspect she is mainly read by men named "Buck" who own pitbulls. Wait until they hear she's a transsexual!

Someone said a president ages at roughly twice the norm

while in office. Then why do I feel 50 years older since 2001? Should we make it to a 2008 presidential election without having martial law imposed and if somehow the wide open GOP voting machines implode, maybe my vision of the future can be shelved.

Compare this:



with Bush critics (if they manage to stay out of detention centers).





with the 1% thanks to permanent tax reductions.



with the American work force in 2009.




with New Orleans in 2009.





with America, now a foreign country having been sold off by the Bush administration, now being invaded by his private Blackhawk force!




Happy 2009!

Thank you Presidents Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bushie

Jim Gooding, an organic dairy farmer in Wisconsin writes, “The U.S. Department of Agriculture predicts a drop of 23 percent in income for the farming sector this year, on the heels of last year's 12 percent drop.

Proposed cuts in farm subsidy payments will account for a significant portion of the decrease in income, a fact farmers will have to get used to in a globalized free trade economy.

While subsidy programs are at best a very poor solution to a very big problem (low farm income), the real beneficiary of the subsidy program has always been the corporate grain buyers and the dairy and livestock processors.”

But don’t worry farmers, every average American is in line to share in the results of traitorous decisions made by our elected leaders: President Reagan, GHW Bush for giving China most favored nation status, Clinton for North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and World Trade Organization (WTO) and, of course, Dubya for finishing the job!

At one time, America had tariffs which protected our manufacturing industry. If a U.S. worker made $10 an hour and foreign worker made $2 an hour to make the same product, a tariff was imposed to equal the $8 per hour paid for cheaper labor. Because our government became more loyal to multinational corporations than American citizens, the tariffs were removed, jobs went outside the U.S. and America was flooded with cheaper products (Wal-Mart, dollar stores, etc.).

We now have a $700 billion trade deficit, thanks to our thrill at purchasing cheap goods. What do other countries do with all of those American dollars? Why they spend them by buying any profitable companies left in the U.S. Then the profits from those profitable companies go back to the country owning it.

Amoco profits now go to England. Most of the profits from Chrysler, Random House and GTE/Sylvania go to Germany. Ralston Purina and Gerber profits go to Switzerland, and on, and on. Instead of being a wealthy nation known for production, we are now consumers living with unprecedented debt.

If you have any courage whatsoever, go to www.economyincrisis.com for the whole story. It’s ugly. If there is any hope of saving the future of America, we must band together and get rid of the elected officials who have betrayed America, start counting votes, and elect people who can help us get out of this mess.

Aimee New
Gooding

A triple tax whammy!

The Bushies crow about the unemployment rate as proof that their "trickle-down" tax cuts are fueling the economy (there's that word again -- fuel). But they don't count people who are unemployed for longer than six months. Contrast the U.S. Department of Labor rate of 4.9 percent to the rate estimated by economists able to decipher government press releases -- more than 8 percent.

Despite his promises, Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2002 did not create jobs. So he cut taxes again in 2003. He now claims 4 million jobs created since 2003, but 2.8 million of those jobs resulted directly from government spending. If this puny job growth is due to his tax cuts, then why the 18 million new jobs created in Clinton's first six years with a tax increase?

Since 2001, 70 percent of U.S. income growth has gone to corporate profits despite worker productivity increasing three times faster than wages. In the seven preceding business cycles, 77 percent of the income growth went to wages.

Updated Bureau of Labor Statistics job data from 2001 through 2006 analyzed by MBG Information Services shows:

We are more than 7 million jobs short of keeping up with population growth alone.

A loss of 2.9 million manufacturing jobs, close to 17 percent of this entire work force. Examples: communications equipment, down 43 percent; computers and electronics, down 30 percent; textile mills, down 43 percent; clothing manufacturing, down 50 percent.

All job growth has been in service-related areas -- credit, social assistance, waitresses, state and local government, etc.

But we are an "ownership society," remember? And you own lots more than you used to, thanks to housing values. It is a shame that many have had to borrow on this increase just to afford basics. Try to keep your greater wealth in mind while pumping black gold into your tank.

Of great interest, especially with obscene oil company profits, is the following from Daily Kos:

"New projections, buried in the Interior Department's just-published budget plan, anticipate that the government will let companies pump about $65 billion worth of oil and natural gas from federal territory over the next five years without paying any royalties to the government ... the government will give up more than $7 billion in payments between now and 2011 ... even though the administration assumes that oil prices will remain above $50 a barrel."

ADAM METCALF

Gooding



http://www.magicvalley.com/articles/2006/02/26/news_letters/opinion_letters.4.txt

Tax-cut criticisms ignore the real prosperity

In answer to Adam Metcalf's letter of Feb. 18, I would like to refute some of his misguided liberal letter. It is merely a re-hash of the same whining we have heard for the last five years.

In the first place, many of the so-called "tax cuts" were timed and only kicked in over several years. And even at the beginning, the tax cuts were supposed to be "revenue neutral." All this meant was that the IRS took from one and gave to another. Actually, however, I recently read that in 2005, the government collected more tax revenue than in any other year in history. So much for "tax cuts"!

Actually, the one tax cut that was unnoticed at first and one that has spurred one of the greatest economic boons in history was the little-noticed one that said that if you had lived in your home for more than two years and sold it for a gain, that gain was not taxable. At first, it was good only for a lifetime limit of $250,000 per person but later, this limitation was removed.

This tax cut has spurred that greatest boom that has reverberated throughout America. The couple that bought a home in California in 1975 for, say, $75,000, found that they could sell it for $500,000 and pay no tax. So they sold the place, came to Idaho perhaps, and found that they could buy or build a new place (maybe even larger than the old one) for $200,000 with $20,000 or less down. So they buy the new place and retire -- no tax.

There is only one way to treat taxes, and that is to expand the tax base and lower the rate. Also, get away from the Communist Manifesto-recommended income tax and put our system on a basis of spending rather than on income. There is no problem of definition when you spend something, but income can vary tremendously, depending on who is doing the definition.

DUARD LAWLEY

Twin Falls


http://www.magicvalley.com/articles/2006/03/05/news_letters/opinion_letters.3.txt

Duard Lawley’s defense of the “boom” produced by gain from sale of your home only tells half of the story. Those windfalls exist because all Americans are paying significantly more for basic housing. And face it, Duard, whether you or the talking heads want to blame the uproar on liberals, more and more conservatives of conscience are adding to the noise.

Most readers have already received the majority of their cuts from the 2001 legislation. However, 80 percent of the windfall for the wealthy is scheduled to come from tax changes that phase in after 2005. If the Bush tax reductions are still in place by 2010, we will see 52 percent of the cuts go to the richest one percent.

Lawley’s statement that “in 2005, the government collected more tax revenue than in any other year in history...so much for tax cuts!” inspires a hoot of derision. This increased tax revenue wasn’t enough to make up for the shortfalls which have developed since 2000.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports “much of the recent growth of (tax) revenues has occurred because of a boom in corporate tax receipts rather than in taxes on wages and salaries. This is consistent with the notion of increased income inequality, and is consistent with revenues exceeding expectations at the same time that overall economic growth has not.” Fifty billion dollars of that 2005 revenue came from expiration of a business tax at the end of 2004.

Former chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, N. Gregory Mankiw, author of an introductory economics text book, wrote that any economist who claims that tax cuts pay for themselves is a “snake oil salesman who is trying to sell a miracle cure.” But Rattlesnake George recently said, “...this tax relief not only has helped our economy, but it’s helped the federal budget...You cut taxes and the tax revenues increase.”

For several years now, consumer spending and the real estate market have helped maintain the economy. Unfortunately, most of this outlay came via new consumer debt; not because your average American is better off. Consumer debt is already unbearable and the real estate boom is slowing; what will take their place?

Mr. Lawley writes “income can vary tremendously, depending on who is doing the definition.” So can information on the economy “vary tremendously, depending on who is doing the definition.”

Sharon Metcalf
Gooding

Petty attacks on Bush are all liberals have

It's in ongoing saga, the hate for George W. Bush. One thing for the liberals, they get set on something, they stay with it, don't they?

After the 2000 election, their target was "get George Bush," and no amount of national tragedy or world trauma diverts them. In every situation, we see them -- national Democratic leaders and major media -- searching diligently for a chance to charge George Bush with some deviation from duty.

Barney, down in Hagerman, thinks he is a pea-brain, and a lady over in Gooding calls him a dumbbell, and they all fancy themselves ahead of the curve on insight about George Bush's presidential performance.

The truth is, they don't have a clue. It looks like he has stayed ahead of the game fairly well and could do a lot better if he would turn a deaf ear to all those folks who keep hammering him about needing to be more liberal-minded and condescending. If the country wanted to go more liberal, perhaps the voting the last two elections would have gone that direction. It was close, but we narrowly escaped major catastrophes both times. With the mind-set of both opponents, how would we have survived?

It's pretty clear that the hate for Bush overrides any positive direction for the nation in the liberal minds. I fear that it will take another national tragedy to shake them loose from that one goal to "get George Bush"! We can't win the war against the terrorists, for that would support George Bush. Somehow or other, he is at fault for every dreadful thing that comes along -- the hurricanes, terrorist attacks, including 9/11. now Vice President Cheney has accidentally shot a hunting companion. Surely, George Bush is somehow to blame and Cheney must have had some ulterior motive! Liberals scheme and connive like 3-year-olds in the sandbox.

As for the war, it's a war on terrorists and not a specific nation. It was true military strategy to invade Iraq, for one of the first tactics of a commander is to cut off the enemy's source of supply. That seedbed of terrorism was at least that, having already positioned itself in rebellion against United Nations decrees. An old proverb, I think, sums up the whole picture: "Wisdom is justified by her children."

GL
Twin Falls



Letter below appeared in The Times-News' edition of 03/04/06.

Stupidity, outrage, vanity, cruelty, iniquity, bad faith, falsehood—we fail to see the whole array when it is facing in the same direction as we.
Jean Rostand (1894–1977)

Come, come, Mr. Lawley. Surely you can do better than defend George by stating he has stayed ahead of the game. All he’s stayed ahead of is the law. As for him turning a deaf ear to liberal “hammering,” I can’t imagine you are speaking of the same president who hand-picks his audiences and even provides questions for them to ask–that is if any questions are allowed.

Isn’t it amazing, though, that after years of fear-mongering in order to get the American people to let him do anything he wants to ensure their “safety,” suddenly it’s okay to have the United Arab Emirates manage our ports? It couldn’t be that there are business benefits to any of the Bushes, could it? You know, like connections to The Carlyle Group or the UAE funding a Bush brother’s education software, or the $1 million donation to the Bush Library in Texas?

Philadelphia talk show host, Michael Smerconish, writes, “...a year after Bin Laden served formal notice of his intention to kill Americans anyhow, anywhere, the CIA appropriately tracked his whereabouts and was prepared to take him out, but was denied the opportunity because of the presence of high-level UAE officials who were socializing with the head of Al Qaeda. Worse, when the United States alerted the UAE of their displeasure with these contacts, the UAE’s response was to tip off Bin Ladin and further thwart our efforts to kill him.”

Mr. Lawley’s feeble excuse that this is a war on terrorists and not a specific nation only makes me wonder at his “ability to process information.” Wouldn’t it seem logical, since the hijackers were from the UAE and Saudi Arabia, that they would be invaded before Iraq? We already know there were no weapons of mass destruction, no 911 hijackers, and it took some time after that to think up the “spread democracy” lie.

I think it might be time for my immediate and extended family to stop attempting to inform the 55% of Idahoans who support Bush that their country is circling the drain. If they’re that stupid, they won’t even notice when we become a third world country.

Gene New
Gooding

U.S. picks a president as smart as its people

That this all-around incompetent president enjoys 40 percent approval of his deadly policies is incomprehensible. At least it was until I came across a recent article by Paul Craig Roberts, "Polls Show Many Americans are Simply Dumber Than Bush," in which he cites a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll and a New York Times/CBS News poll which reveal how Bush can operate without consequence or worry. While Roberts does blame the media for faithfully following the administration line free from any urge to scream, "What Bush *$!#" he adds that half of our population is actually unable to acquire, process or understand information. Maybe it should have been "No Adult Left Behind."

Roberts writes: "Americans need desperately to understand that 95 percent of all Muslim terrorists in the world were created in the past three years by Bush's invasion of Iraq.

Americans need desperately to comprehend that if Bush attacks Iran and Syria, as he intends, terrorism will explode and American civil liberties will disappear into a 30-year war that will bankrupt the United States.

The total lack of rationality and competence in the White House and the inability of half of the U.S. population to acquire and understand information are far larger threats to Americans than terrorism.

America has become a rogue nation, flying blind, guided only by ignorance and hubris. A terrible catastrophe awaits."

So if those "unable to process" among you (not that I really think you are reading this) were horrified at the new threat of human/animal hybrids revealed in Bush's State of the Union speech, this is merely animal testing in search of cures for human illnesses. Biology professor P.Z. Myers writes, "He's (Bush) trusting that everyone will think he is banning monstrous crimes against nature, but what he's really doing is targeting the weak and the ill, blocking useful avenues of research that are specifically designed to help us understand human afflictions."

As for my personal processing of information, I have a sickeningly clear conception of what is really going on in this country and the inevitable results; however, I will admit that the human/animal hybrid reference did bring an immediate picture of the chimp to my brain.

AN
Gooding