The Education President


"Every single child in America must be educated, I mean every child. ... There's nothing more prejudiced than not educating a child." -- George W. Bush, presidential debate versus Vice President Al Gore, Oct. 11, 2000
Along with tax cuts, education was Bush's top priority when he entered the White House. He charmed lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in an effort to get his bill passed, a bill that combined greater accountability and testing with increased funding. Then, in what has become a trademark, he pulled the plug on the funding.
Members of Congress had good reason to believe Bush was being sincere. As governor of Texas, he had raised state education spending by 55 percent, tightened curriculum requirements and pushed for more accountability from the schools themselves. Even state test scores shot up -- although that was likely the result of the tendency to "teach to the test" rather than an actual increase in learning or knowledge. (The increase wasn't reflected in national standardized test scores.) Still, Bush was able to persuade the top two education Democrats in Congress, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), to work with him on the No Child Left Behind Act. And when the lawmakers objected to voucher provisions, Bush dropped the vouchers -- and toned down the testing measures to win Congress' approval.

But in his 2003 budget, Bush proposed funding levels far below what the legislation called for, requesting only $22.1 billion of the $29.2 billion that Congress authorized. For the largest program, Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which provides support to students in impoverished school districts, Bush asked for $11.35 billion out of the $18.5 billion authorized. His 2004 budget was more than $6 billion short of what Congress authorized. Furious, Kennedy called Bush's proposal a "tin cup budget" that "may provide the resources to test our children, but not enough to teach them."

The result: States already strapped by record deficits are being held responsible for the extra testing and administration mandated by law -- but aren't getting nearly enough money to pay for it. So the number of public schools likely to be labeled "failing" by the law is estimated to be as high as 85 percent. Failing triggers sanctions, from technical assistance to requiring public-school choice to "reconstitution" -- that is, firing the entire school's staff and hiring a new one. And Bush isn't doing much to help. The New Hampshire School Administrators Association calculated that Bush's plan imposed at least $575 per student in new obligations. His budget, however, provides just $77 per student. It's a revolution in education policy, all right, but No Child Left Behind was simply a lie.

Healthy Skepticism


"Our goal is a system in which all Americans have got a good insurance policy, in which all Americans can choose their own doctor, in which seniors and low-income citizens receive the help they need. ... Our Medicare system is a binding commitment of a caring society. We must renew that commitment by providing the seniors of today and tomorrow with preventive care and the new medicines that are transforming health care in our country." -- George W. Bush, Medicare address, March 4, 2003
The man simply has no shame. His program does none of this. What it does, simply, is to make dramatic cuts in the benefits for both the poor and the elderly.
Under the current Medicaid program, the federal government matches, on a sliding scale, the money that states put up. The state is required to cover some beneficiaries and services, although others are "optional." But "optional" services include many essential and life-saving treatments. And "optional" beneficiaries are seldom able to pay for private insurance. Bush's plan, in effect, would turn Medicaid into a block grant, capping the federal contribution. Because states are already hard-pressed to keep up with Medicaid costs, services to the poor will simply dwindle. As Leighton Ku, a health-policy analyst at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, notes, if under the current plan "you wanted to save that much money, you would have to specify which cuts to make, how to make the cuts. But it's much easier to cut the block grant because it's invisible; someone else has to make the decisions."

Bush claims to bring flexibility to Medicaid, and, in a sense, he's right. Under his plan states would have, as Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson put it, "carte blanche" in dealing with optional benefits and optional recipients. In other words, a mother making more than $9,000 a year would be fair game, as would an 8-year-old child who lives in a family with an income just above the poverty line, or a senior citizen or disabled person living on $7,200 a year.

And there's a whiff of coercion to the way in which the states are offered the option of switching to the Medicaid block grant. The states, which have already started cutting Medicaid on their own, are literally begging for federal fiscal assistance, and none is forthcoming. But if they consent to Bush's Medicaid plan, they'll get not only $3 billion in new federal money next year (a loan they would have to repay) but the ability to save money by trimming their Medicaid rolls. In other words, the president is making them an offer they can't refuse.

Bush relentlessly invokes a rhetoric of choice on Medicare. But the Republican proposal pushes seniors toward heavily managed private plans that offer partial drug benefits but limit choice of treatment and doctor. If you stayed with traditional Medicare (which does offer free choice of doctor and hospital), you'd only get minimal prescription-drug benefits. The plan would spend some $400 billion over 10 years, a sum that provides coverage worth 40 percent less than that enjoyed by members of Congress under the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program, which Bush repeatedly invokes as a model.

And while the plan allows House Republicans to avoid making politically unpopular cuts to Medicare, it requires Congress to cut $169 billion over 10 years from programs they oversee. So in the end, Medicare cuts may end up paying for prescription-drug benefits.

Despite rhetoric promising to increase other health spending, a close reading of the House Republican budget proposal shows $2.4 billion in cuts for programs -- such as the National Institutes of Health, Community Health Centers and the Ryan White AIDS program -- that Bush has pledged to support. Even though Bush vowed in his State of the Union address to spend $15 billion over the next five years to provide AIDS relief to Africa, much of that money won't be available until at least 2006. [See Garance Franke-Ruta, "The Fakeout," TAP, April 2003.]

A Paler Shade of Green


"Clear Skies legislation, when passed by Congress, will significantly reduce smog and mercury emissions, as well as stop acid rain. It will put more money directly into programs to reduce pollution, so as to meet firm national air-quality goals. ..." -- George W. Bush, Earth Day speech, April 22, 2002
Actually, the Clear Skies law doesn't do any of this. The act, in fact, delays required emission cuts by as much as 10 years, usurps the states' power to address interstate pollution problems and allows outdated industrial facilities to skirt costly pollution-control upgrades. The Environmental Protection Agency ensured that few people would notice this last regulation by announcing the change on the Friday before Thanksgiving and publishing it in the Federal Register on New Year's Eve. Still, nine northeastern states immediately filed suit against the administration; their case is pending. Meanwhile, Bush's commitment to clean water is just as murky. Despite saying last October that he wanted to "renew our commitment" to building on the Clean Water Act, he's instead decided to "update" it by removing protections for "isolated" waters and weakening sewage-overflow rules, which could significantly increase the potential for waterborne illnesses.
It's hardly surprising to learn that big business is behind a lot of these changes. The Washington Post recounted a meeting between Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) Administrator John Graham and industry lobbyists during which the latter were encouraged to identify particularly onerous rules -- and ultimately created a regulatory "hit list." "There is a stealth campaign that's going on behind closed doors to twist the anti-regulatory process into a pretzel so that the public will be unaware that they are bottling up these protections," says Wesley Warren, the National Resources Defense Council's senior fellow for environmental economics. A good chunk of the 57-item list fell under the EPA's jurisdiction. One by one these rules have been submitted to OIRA under the Paperwork Reduction Act for cost-benefit analysis, a regulatory accounting technique that often ends up justifying watered-down rules.

Even as EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman announced that global warming is a "real phenomenon," Bush refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions. His decision weakened the treaty's effectiveness because the United States produces 25 percent of all greenhouse-gas emissions.

The former Texas oilman, who made one environmental promise after another on the campaign trail, has slashed the EPA's budget by half a billion dollars over two years, cut 100 employees and rolled back regulations on a near-weekly basis. "There has never been anything to compare this to," says Greg Wetstone, director of advocacy at the National Resources Defense Council. "Even in the days of Reagan, there was never an administration so willfully and almost obsessively concerned with finding ways to really undermine the environmental infrastructure."

Whitman, the administration's supposed environmental champion, is also contributing to the weakening of protections. Although she said the administration was working to put in place a standard to "dramatically reduce" levels of arsenic in drinking water, she later tried to lower the existing regulation, saying that even the 10-part-per-billion federal benchmark was too tough. The EPA rolled back the standard until a report warning of health risks (and public outcry) forced the agency to reinstate the old limit.

Here's another classic Bush whopper. In his State of the Union address, the president proposed $1.2 billion in research funding to develop hydrogen-powered cars, in part to make the United States less reliant on foreign oil. What he didn't say is that the technology and infrastructure needed to mass produce such cars won't be available until at least 2020. If Bush truly cared about immediate relief, he might start by acknowledging existing hybrid vehicles or supporting more stringent Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards for light trucks and SUVs. Neither is likely to be part of a Republican energy package this year.

Democrats in the Senate dealt Bush a rare blow when they voted down his proposal to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in March, although House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) plans to bring the issue back. Still, many lawmakers, especially in the House, feel they can do little except try to fend off the administration's attacks on the environment. "There is an absolute hostility toward any positive strengthening of environmental law," says Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), a member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. "It is a wholesale turning over to corporate America the governing of this country."

Hypocrisy has been defined as the tribute that vice pays to virtue. George W. Bush lied about all these policies because the programs he pretends to favor are far more popular than the ones he puts into effect. But unless the voters and the press start paying attention, all the president's lies will have little political consequence -- except to certify that we have become something less than a democracy.

Drake Bennett and Heidi Pauken
Copyright © 2003 by The American Prospect, Inc. Preferred


These are just a few examples of how Bush has lied to the American Public..... he continues with this behaviour to this day..... this will be a large reason as to why he will lose come election day...... more and more people every day are beginning to see through the Bush facade..... he is consistently down in the polls..... and is catching heat from every side including from die hard Republicans.....

maybe he figures there's no point in raising smart, healthy kids, if he's letting them all die from pollution?

Bush opens up 10 point lead on Kerry!

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040618/nyf080_1.html

From that same article

"""
President Bush's June ratings suggest that the Presidential race is still wide open. His current ratings are better than the June ratings of recent presidents who were not re-elected (George H.W. Bush, Carter, Ford and Johnson) but worse than the June ratings of the three who were re-elected (Clinton, Reagan and Nixon). """

Notice they say "Wide open" which translates into noone knows who is going to win.... but I do.... Kerry will win...!!!

1. Bush: "We went into Russia, we said, 'Here's some IMF money,' and it ended up in Viktor Chernomyrdin's pocket and others."

Fact: "Bush appears to have tangled up whispers about possible wrongdoing by Chernomyrdin -- who co-chaired a commission with Gore on U.S.-Russian relations -- with other unrelated allegations concerning the diversion of International Monetary Fund money. While there has been speculation that Chernomyrdin profited from his relationship with Gazprom, a big Russian energy concern, there have been no allegations that he stole IMF money." Washingon Post, 10/12/00

2. Bush: "We got one [a hate crime law] in Texas, and guess what? The three men who murdered James Byrd, guess what's going to happen to them? They're going to be put to death ... It's going to be hard to punish them any worse after they get put to death....We're happy with our laws on our books."

Fact: "The three were convicted under Texas' capital murder statute...The state has a hate crime statute, but it is vague." LA Times, 10/12/00.
"The original Texas hate-crimes bill, signed into law by Democrat Ann Richards, boosted penalties for crimes motivated by bigotry. As Gore correctly noted, Bush maneuvered to make sure a new hate-crimes law related to the Byrd killing did not make it to his desk. The new bill would have included homosexuals among the groups covered, which would have been anathema to social conservatives in the state." Washington Post, 10/12/00

3. Bush: bragged that in Texas he was signing up children for the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) as "fast as any other state."

Fact: "As governor he fought to unsuccessfully to limit access to the program. He would have limited its coverage to children with family incomes up to 150 percent of the poverty level, though federal law permitted up to 200 percent. The practical effect of Bush's efforts would have been to exclude 200,000 of the 500,000 possible enrollees." Washington Post, 10/12/00

4. Bush: "He [Gore] is for registration of guns."

Fact: "Gore actually favors licensing for new handgun purchasers but nothing as vast as registering all guns." Salon, 10/12/00

5. Bush: Said he found Gore's tendency to exaggerate "an issue in trying to defend my tax relief package. There was some exaggeration about the numbers" in the first debate.

Fact: "No, there wasn't, and Bush himself acknowledged that the next day on ABC's Good Morning America when Charlie Gibson pinned him on it." Salon, 10/12/00

6. Bush: "I felt during his debate with Senator [Bill] Bradley saying he [Gore] authored the EITC [earned-income tax credit] when it didn't happen."

Fact: "Actually, Gore had claimed to have authored an 'expansion of the earned-income tax credit,' which he did in 1991." Salon, 10/12/00

7. Fact: Gore noted that Texas "ranks 49th out of the 50 states in healthcare in children with healthcare, 49th for women with healthcare and 50th for families with healthcare"

Bush: "You can quote all the numbers you want but I'm telling you we care about our people in Texas. We spent a lot of money to make sure people get healthcare in the state of Texas."

8. Fact: Gore said, "I'm no expert on the Texas procedures, but what my friends there tell me is that the governor opposed a measure put forward by Democrats in the Legislature to expand the number of children that would be covered ... And instead [he] directed the money toward a tax cut, a significant part of which went to wealthy interests."

Bush: "If he's trying to allege I'm a hardhearted person and don't care about children, he's absolutely wrong."

9. Bush: "The three men who murdered James Byrd, guess what's going to happen to them? They'll be put to death. A jury found them guilty."

Fact: Two of the three are being put to death. The other was given life. Bush Watch, 10/12/00

10. Bush: said he favored "equal" rights for gays and lesbians, but not "special" rights.

Fact: "Bush has supported a Texas law that allows the state to take adopted children from gay and lesbian couples to place the kids with straight couples." Salon, 10/12/00.
"Bush supports hate crime protections for other minorities! So Bush doesn't believe that gays should have the same 'special' rights in this regard as blacks, Jews, Wiccans and others. Employment discrimination? Again, Bush supports those rights for other Americans, but not gays. Military service? Bush again supports the right to military service for all qualified people--as long as they don't tell anyone they're gay. Marriage? How on earth is that a special right when every heterosexual in America already has it? But again, Bush thinks it should be out-of-bounds for gays. What else is there? The right to privacy? Nuh-huh. Bush supports a gays-only sodomy law in his own state that criminalizes consensual sex in private between two homosexuals." New Republic, 10/13/00

11. Bush. "We ought to do everything we can to end racial profiling."

Fact: The Texas Department of Public Safety has just this year begun keeping detailed information about the race and sex of all people stopped by its troopers, the sixth year Bush has been in office. Salon, 10/12/00

12. Bush got caught not giving the full story on Texas air pollution laws. He was correct in saying the 1999 utility deregulation bill he signed into law had mandatory emissions standards.

Fact: "What was missing, as Gore's campaign pointed out, was that many more non-utility industrial plants are not mandated to reduce air quality. The issue is an important one because Texas ranks near the bottom in air-quality standards. Bush instead approved a voluntary program allowing grandfathered oil, coal, and other industrial plants to cut down on pollution." Boston Globe, 10/12/00

13. Bush: About the Balkans, "I think it ought to be one of our priorities to work with our European friends to convince them to put troops on the ground."

Fact: "European forces already make up a large majority of the peacekeeping forces in Bosnia and Kosovo." Washington Post, 10/12/00

14. Bush: "One of the problems we have in the military is we're in a lot of places around the world" and cited Haiti as an example.

Fact: "Though approximately 20,000 U.S. troops went to Haiti in 1994, as of late August this year, there were only 109 U.S. troops in Haiti and most were rotating through as part of an exercise." Washington Post, 10/12/00

15. Bush: "I don't think we ought to be selling guns to people who shouldn't have them. That's why I support instant background checks at gun shows. One of the reasons we have an instant background check is so that we instantly know whether or not someone should have a gun or not."

Fact: "Bush overstates the effectiveness of instant background checks for people trying to buy guns ... The Los Angeles Times reported on Oct. 3 that during Bush's term as governor, Texas granted licenses for carrying concealed guns to hundreds of people with criminal records and histories of drug problems, violence or psychological disorders." Washington Post, 10/12/00
"He didn't mention that Texas failed to perform full background checks on 407 people who had prior criminal convictions but were granted concealed handgun licenses under a law he signed in 1995. Of those, 71 had convictions that should have excluded them from having a concealed gun permit, the Texas Department of Public Safety acknowledged." AP, 10/12/00

16. Bush:"Said the number of Texans without health insurance had declined while the number in the United States had risen."

Fact: " A new Census Bureau report says the number of uninsured Americans declined last year for the first time since statistics were kept in 1987. About 42.5 million people, or 15.5 percent of the population, lacked insurance in 1999, compared with 44.2 million, or 16.3 percent, in 1998, the agency reported. Texas ranked next-to-last in the nation last year with 23.3 percent of its residents uninsured. But that was an improvement from 1998, when it ranked 50th at 24.5 percent." AP, 10/12/00

17. Bush: "Some of the scientists, I believe, Mr. Vice President, haven't they been changing their opinion a little bit on global warming?"

Fact: "Bush's dismissive comments about global warming could bolster the charge that he and fellow oilman Dick Cheney are in the pocket of the oil industry, which likewise pooh-poohs the issue. [While] there is no consensus about the impact of global warming, ... most scientists agree that humans are contributing to the rising global temperature. 'Most climate experts are certain that global warming is real and that it threatens ecology and human prosperity, and a growing number say it is well under way,' wrote New York Times science writer Andrew Revkin." Salon, 10/13/00

18. Bush: When Jim Lehrer asked Bush if he approved of the U.S. intervention in Lebanon during the Reagan years, Bush answered a quick "yes" and moved on.

Fact: "Lebanon was a disaster in the history of American foreign affairs. Next to Iran-Contra, it was the Reagan administration's greatest overseas fiasco. Quoting from the Encyclopedia of the American Presidency: '[In 1983] Reagan stumbled into a disastrous intervention in the Middle East when he sent U.S. Marines into Lebanon on an ill-defined mission as part of an international peacekeeping force.' In December, according to Reagan biographer Edmund Morris, 'two days before Christmas, a Pentagon commission of inquiry into the Beirut barracks bombing humiliated [Secretary of State] Shultz [who had backed the intervention], and embarrassed Reagan, by concluding that the dead Marines had been victims of a myopic Middle Eastern policy.'" tompaine.com, 10/11/00

19. Bush: "I thought the president made the right decision in joining NATO and bombing Serbia. I supported him when they did so."

Fact: The bombing of Serbia began on March 24, 1999, and Bush did not express even measured support until April 8, 1999 -- nearly two weeks later. Prior to April 8, 1999, every comment by Bush about the bombing was non-committal. Finally, he offered a measured endorsement: "It's important for the United States to be slow to engage the military, but once the military is engaged, it must be engaged with one thing in mind, and that is victory," he said after being pressed by reporters. A Houston Chronicle story documented the Governor's statements on the crisis and reported that "Bush has been widely criticized for being slow to adopt a position on Kosovo and then for making vague statements on the subject." Houston Chronicle, 4/9/99

20. Bush: Discussing International Loans: "And there's some pretty egregious examples recently, one being Russia where we had IMF loans that ended up in the pockets of a lot of powerful people and didn't help the nation."

Fact: Bush's own vice presidential candidate, Dick Cheney, lobbied for U.S.-backed loan to Russia that helped his own company. "Halliburton Co. lobbied for and received $ 292 million in loan guarantees to develop one of the world's largest oil fields in Russia. Cheney said: 'This is exactly the type of project we should be encouraging if Russia is to succeed in reforming its economy ... We at Halliburton appreciate the support of the Export-Import Bank and look forward to beginning work on this important project.." PR Newswire 4/6/2000.
The State Department, armed with a CIA report detailing corruption by Halliburton's Russian partner, invoked a seldom-used prerogative and ordered suspension of the loan. The loan guarantee "ran counter to America's 'national interest," the State Department ruled. New Republic, 8/7/00

21. Bush "There's a lot of talk about trigger locks being on guns sold in the future. I support that."

Fact: When asked in 1999, if he was in support of mandatory safety locks, Bush said, " No, I'm not, I'm for voluntary safety locks on guns." In March of 2000, Bush said he would not push for trigger lock legislation, but would sign it if it passed [Washington Post, 3/3/00;ABC, Good Morning America, 5/10/99]. When Bush was asked, "when two bills were introduced in the Texas legislature to require the sale of child safety locks with newly purchased handguns, and you never addressed the issue with the legislature, and both bills died. If you support it, why did that happen?" Bush said, "Because those bills had no votes in committee." When asked again if he supported the bills, Bush said, "I wasn't even aware of those bills because they never even got out of committee." NBC, Today Show, 5/12/00

22. Bush: "Africa is important and we've got to do a lot of work in Africa to promote democracy and trade." Fact "While Africa may be important, it doesn't fit into the national strategic interests, as far as I can see them," Bush said earlier. When he was asked for his vision of the U.S. national interests, he named every continent except Africa. According to Time magazine, "[Bush] focused exclusively on big ticket issues ... Huge chunks of the globe -- Africa and Latin America, for example -- were not addressed at all." Time, 12/6/99; PBS News Hour, 2/16/00; Toronto Star, 2/16/00

23. Bush: "There's only been one governor ever elected to back-to-back four year terms and that was me."

Fact: The governors who served two consecutive four-year terms (meeting Bush's statement criteria are): Coke R. Stevenson (2 consecutive 4-year terms) August 4, 1941-January 21, 1947. Allan Shivers (2 consecutive four-year terms) July 11, 1949-January 15, 1957. Price Daniel (2 consecutive four-year terms) January 15, 1957-January 15, 1963. John Connally (2 consecutive four-year terms) January 15, 1963-January 21, 1969. Dolph Briscoe (2 consecutive four-year terms) January 16, 1973-January 16, 1979. George W. Bush (2 consecutive four-year terms) January 17, 1995 to present. Source: Texas State Libraries and Archives Commission.

24. Bush: "We spend $4.7 billion a year on the uninsured in the state of Texas."

Fact: The state of Texas came up with less than $1B for this purpose. $3.5 came from local governments, private providers, and charities, $198M from the federal government, and just less than $1B from Texas state agencies. Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts.

Just a little history of how Bush became the lying man he is now and why he always puts the mighty dollar ahead of your interests....


The Maha Manifesto:



The Loyalties of George W. Bush

There is a thread running through George W. Bush's biography that connects family to power to wealth. With no assets but his name and connections, Bush became a wealthy man, and a governor, and now a President. Without those connections, he'd be nothing.

Reporters finally are questioning the President's financial integrity. But there is one big, fat question nobody is asking: Is there a connection between Bush's financial interests and the September 11 attacks? This is the elephant in the living room that the pundits are quietly stepping around and which none will acknowledge.

I do not believe, as some do, that the President deliberately enabled the September 11 attacks for political gain. For one thing, the attacks clearly threw him off guard; he fluttered around the country in Air Force One like a startled pigeon for several hours before he got a grip on himself and returned to Washington. However, there is enormous circumstantial evidence that the Bush Administration willfully closed its eyes to clear signals that something terrible was about to happen. The question is, why?

An examination of Mr. Bush's life story reveals clearly that he considers himself and his business cronies to be above law and ethics and morality, and his first priority is always to help himself and his friends make money. Little matters like building a financially sound business as a CEO or looking out for the people of Texas while he was governor were way down his list. Bush's first loyalties are not to the People, his state, his country, his religion, or his principles; his first loyalties are to his connections.

And some of those connections are named bin Laden.

A close look at President Bush's time in the Oval Office before September 11 reveals he hadn't changed his priorities. And while Bush was focused on taking care of himself and his friends, Osama bin Laden was also very focused, indeed.

Lilies of the (Oil) Field

The account of how G.W. Bush made his fortune, absent from major news media during the 2000 campaign, is now under a spotlight. Anyone who is halfway paying attention knows this basic story:

In 1978 Bush incorporated an oil company, Arbusto Energy. The company did not make money and, apparently, did not find much oil, although it was a nifty tax shelter.

In 1982, Bush changed Arbusto's name to Bush Exploration Oil Co. The company continued to lose money. Even so, several wealthy benefactors bailed Bush out. One benefactor paid a million dollars for a share of the company that was worth less than half of that at the time, and he soon lost the entire million. (Molly Ivins gives a detailed account of this in her book, Shrub.)

In 1984, Bush Exploration merged with another oil company called Spectrum 7. GWB became CEO and was awarded with a substantial portion of the stock, but Spectrum 7 lost money, too.

In 1987, Spectrum 7 was acquired by Harken Energy. Harken assumed $3.1 million in debts and swapped $2.2 million of its stock for the hemorrhaging Spectrum 7. Harken gave Bush a seat on the Board of Directors, more than $300,000 of Harken stock with options to buy more, and a consulting contract that paid him as much as $120,000 a year.

Pretty good for a guy who has never been a success at anything in his life. But there's more ...

In 1989, Bush borrowed money to buy a 2 percent share of the Texas Rangers.

Also in 1989, Harken Energy sold 80 percent of a subsidiary, Aloha Petroleum, to a partnership called International Marketing & Resources. The catch is that IM&R was also Harken, as the partners were all Harken insiders. Further, $11 million of the $12 million sale was through a note held by Harken; $8 million the company entered in its books as a capital gain was actually vapor. It should be noted that Bush was on the company's audit committee at the time.

This takes us to 1990 and the juicy parts.

In January 1990, the government of Bahrain announced it had awarded exclusive offshore drilling rights to Harken. This astonished people in the oil industry, as Harken had never ventured out of the Texas-Louisiana area and had never drilled offshore at all.

On June 22, 1990, G.W. Bush sold his Harken stock for $4 a share.

On August 2, 1990, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, thus jeopardizing Harken's offshore drilling deal.

By August 22, 1990, Harken could no longer conceal it was losing money; its second quarter report was a disaster. Stocks fell to $2.37 a share. And, that fall the Securities and Exchange Commission discovered the Aloha sale scam and required Harken to restate its earnings.

In 1991, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Securities and Exchange Commission had not been notified of Bush's stock trade until eight months after the legal deadline. The SEC investigated but took no action.

In the meantime, Mr. Bush had used the Harken money to pay the Texas Rangers loan, and he commenced to use his baseball-owner status as a springboard for his political and financial ambitions.

Running through this narrative are a number of nearly incestuous relationships. For example, when the SEC was investigating Mr. Bush, the agency's general counsel was Bush's personal attorney who had helped him arrange the Texas Rangers deal. And the head of the SEC was a long-time, loyal supporter of Mr. Bush's father, who was President of the United States at the time.

Bonanza!

Thanks to a recent column by Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, we know how G.W. Bush made a 2400 percent profit on his Texas Rangers investment.

Mr. Bush and the other Rangers owners persuaded the city of Arlington, Texas, to raise taxes to build a $200 million stadium to be handed over to the Rangers. Even more incredible, Bush and his fellow owners got state and local government to confiscate land for their own enterprises. According to Eric Alterman (The Scandal No One Cares About, MSNBC) the state of Texas gave Arlington Sports Facilities Development Authority the power to expropriate private land on which to build the stadium. Several landowners --mostly homeowners and farmers -- refused to sell for what the Authority was offering. "The Authority condemned their land and expropriated it by force of law," wrote Alterman. "It did this with 270 acres of land, even though only about 17 acres were needed for the ballpark. The rest was used for commercial development that made Bush and his friends rich."

A Little Help for His Friends

The story of Bush in Texas could fill a book--several, in fact. These include Shrub: The Short but Happy Political Life of George W. Bush by Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose, and Paul Begala's Is Our Children Learning?

(And then there is James Hatfield's Fortunate Son: George W. Bush and the Making of an American President. This book was scheduled to come out during the 2000 presidential campaign, but the Bush campaign released information about the author's background that caused St. Martin's Press to delay the book's publication. Hatfield was later found dead in a motel room, allegedly from a drug overdose.)

A short essay can only provide a few highlights of events during Bush's two terms as governor of Texas. However, even a brief overview of the record reveals that as governor of Texas, Bush treated the Texas taxpayers' money as his own and generously repaid those who made him a success.

Ed Vulliamy of the London Observer ("Dark Heart of the American Dream, June 16, 2002") reported that George W. Bush sailed into the governor's mansion with $42 million collected for his two campaigns. Much of this money came from corporations that generate a lot of pollution, including Exxon, Shell, Amoco, Enron, and Alcoa. A gift of $348,500 came directly from Ken Lay of Enron.

Governor Bush rewarded his benefactors with legislation that allowed self-regulation of pollution. Companies could audit their own pollution records and enjoy protection from public disclosure. As a result, Texas enjoyed the highest air pollution volume in the nation.

Another Bush benefactor was a man named Tom Hicks, who bought Bush's shares of the Texas Rangers. Paul Krugman explained in his New York Times column of July 16, 2002, how Governor Bush was able to funnel University of Texas endowment money to Hicks and other cronies.

First, he changed the rules governing the endowment so that Texas officials no longer had to tell the public what they were doing with public money. Then Mr. Bush privatized (his term) $9 billion in university assets, transferring them to a nonprofit corporation known as UTIMCO that could make investment decisions behind closed doors, Krugman said.

Next, Governor Bush made Tom Hicks the chairman of UTIMCO. Hicks saw to it that his friends and his political interests were well funded by Texas money. According to Krugman, at least $450 million went to funds managed by Hicks's business cronies and Republican Party donors. Such transactions were safe from public view, thanks to Governor Bush. An employee of UTIMCO who alerted auditors was fired.

Further, when Bush sold his shares of the Texas Rangers to Hicks, he was entitled to about $2.3 million from that sale, according to Paul Krugman. "But his partners voluntarily gave up some of their share, and Mr. Bush received 12 percent of the proceeds --$14.9 million. So a group of businessmen, presumably with some interest in government decisions, gave a sitting governor a $12 million gift."

And then there was "funeralgate," in which by all appearances Governor Bush and other politicos obstructed an investigation by the Texas Funeral Service Commission of the SCI funeral home chain, under suspicion of using improperly licensed embalmers. SCI gave $35,000 in campaign contributions to Bush, according the Austin Chronicle (Robert Bryce, Funeralgate Hits Texas, Vol. 18, No. 45).

While campaigning for President, Governor Bush often bragged about how he had cut taxes in Texas and still left a budget surplus. Too bad it wasn't true.

As governor of Texas, Bush pushed through massive tax cuts for the wealthy. Once upon a time the state had a budget surplus, but when Bush left the governor's mansion to become President, Texas was enjoying record cost overruns. This is well chronicled on BushWatch.com.

What Bush did was push for ways to bring his 1999 tax cut up to an even $2 billion, even attempting to take money from workmen's compensation and kindergarten funds at one point. Although he had to settle for $1.7 billion, $1 billion of which was taken from the so-called state surplus, the point was to use the tax cut as political leverage on the presidential campaign trail. This, of course, was done at the expense of the average Texan, and could very well threaten what has been set aside for programs such as health care and education. Not only did Bush's wealthy friends get an unfair share of the tax cut through oil subsidies and property tax write-offs, but the average citizen is now being asked to pay for Bush's political ambitions. (Politex, Bush Watch, 7/14/00)

Cracks in the state budget were plainly visible by the summer of 2000, while Bush was running for president. In typical Bush style, the candidate brushed off questions about Texas financial problems with a flip answer: "I hope I'm not here to deal with it. I'm seeking another office." R.G. Ratcliffe wrote in the Houston Chronicle,

As Texas governor, Bush pushed a combined total of $3 billion in state property, consumer and business tax cuts through in 1997 and 1999.

But now lawmakers are finding that unexpected costs of Medicaid health care for the poor and health insurance for retired teachers and state employees have pushed the state toward the red. Some say Texas ' red ink might only be pink if Bush's tax cuts had been spent on state services instead.

It's landed in our lap, and now the guy who started it is in Washington, said state Sen. Mario Gallegos, D-Houston. They've barely left here and now it's our problem.

But despite the fact that Bush increased state spending on public schools by $3 billion a year since 1995, local school property taxes continued to rise and the tax cuts were enjoyed by few Texans. (State's Budget Crunch Haunting Bush, February 18, 2001)

According to the Houston Chronicle article cited above, the Texas tax cuts caused a decrease in state funds to local governments, which meant local governments had to raise property taxes to make up the difference. Further, in 1999 the state legislature decided to fund Medicaid for 23 months of the next 24, so that $110 million would be available to make the budget balance. The imbalance was passed on to the 2001 budget.

On the other hand, Richard Rainwater enjoyed a $1 million tax break. Texas billionaire Rainwater, a former co-owner of the Texas Rangers, is another Bush benefactor who has done well by investing in Bush's political career. Rainwater was able to buy several buildings from the Texas teachers retirement system without bidding, at a $70 million loss to the teachers. Also, according to Bush Watch, Tom Hicks invested $9 million of UTIMCO money in one of Rainwaters equity funds.

As Paul Krugman pointed out in his July 16 column, Bush's record as a businessman and a governor reveal three characteristic traits. First, he likes to work in secret, as if the people have no right to know what their chief executive is doing on their behalf. Second, he freely appropriates public monies and institutions to reward his friends and reinforce his political power. And third, he is utterly indifferent to conflicts of interest.

More of the truth.... Remember these are all FACTS_____ No Conspiracy Theories... no made up mumbo jumbo... no convoluted BS---- ALL FACTS Told as they are....

Follow the Money

The captains of several American industries did not want Al Gore to be elected president.

Clinton was bad enough, they thought. Clinton had faced down the timber industry, the automobile industry, major utilities, coal, and Big Oil itself by decreeing anti-pollution measures that cut into profits. Yes, Clinton was bad enough. But Al "Earth in the Balance" Gore promised to be even worse.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, industry put its money on Bush, not Gore.

Contributions to Presidential Candidates, Selected Industries



Auto

Banking
Insurance
Oil & Gas
Drugs

Securities
Real Estate


Bush


$1,272,497


$1,327,131


$1,644,662


$1,888,206


$427,333


$3,962,277


$4,364,136




Gore


$114,790


$287,600


$328,975


$139,514


$108,100


$1,424,916


$1,560,686



Data: Center for Responsive Politics, opensecrets.org

After some of the most outrageous electoral shenanigans in American history, George W. Bush was named president-elect. As Inauguration Day approached, California's energy shortage was reaching crisis proportions. The cost of power had shot up 1000 percent, and still the state was plagued with rolling blackouts. Many in the state believed that out-of-state suppliers, such as the Texas-based Enron Corporation, were manipulating the supply and gouging consumers.

In the meantime, President-elect Bush had named Enron CEO Ken Lay to advise his presidential transition team. (According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Bush named 474 people who had collectively donated about $5.3 million to Republican candidates and the GOP in the previous two years to be transition team advisers.) Bush flew to his inauguration on an Enron jet.

On the day of his inauguration as the 43d President of the United States, George W. Bush directed his chief of staff, Andrew Card, to announce a plan to put on hold a number of regulations ordered by the Clinton Administration. These ranged from health insurance guidelines and meat safety standards to the designation of historical monuments. Inevitably, with Bush as President, the interests and well being of workers, the environment, and consumers were sacrificed in favor of industry, and money.

The infamous, cabinet-level Energy Task Force, headed by Vice President and former oil company CEO Dick Cheney, met for the first time January 29, 2001. The Task Force met nine times, in secret, and presented their recommendations to the President on May 16. Breathlessly titled Reliable, Affordable, and Environmentally Sound Energy for Americas Future, provisions of the policy include:

Building 1,300 to 1,900 new electric plants over the next 20 years
Relaxing environmental restrictions so that existing coal-fired power plants and oil refineries can expand without having to buy up-to-date antipollution equipment
A review by the Justice Department of pending Clinton Administration lawsuits against energy companies for lack of compliance with environmental regulations, with the objective of dropping the cases whenever possible
Allowing petroleum companies to drill for oil and natural gas on parts of the 23-million acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska
Lindsay Sobel wrote in The American Prospector:


You might think it was a sizable oversight that President Bush released his 163-page energy plan for America without including a single provision that would tackle skyrocketing energy prices in the short term. But Bush was way ahead of us on that. At a news conference just before he released his energy plan, he pronounced, "The best way to make sure that people are able to deal with high energy prices is to cut taxes, is to get people more of their own money so they can meet the bills, so they can meet the high energy prices." (Fueling an Epidemic, May 18, 2001)

Never mind that Bush's tax cuts were intended to benefit the very rich, not the very poor. If the people are cold, let them eat cake!

But, some may ask, the Task Force recommended strengthening the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program to $1.7 billion, which is $300 million more than budgeted for 2001. That sounds like a good break for the poor! The catch is that in 2000 the Program received $2 billion; Bush's figure to be strengthened represented a big cut.

Sobel points out that not only are Bush and Cheney ex-oil company CEOs; National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice was on the board of directors of Chevron; Secretary of Commerce Don Evans was chairman of an oil and gas company (Tom Brown, Inc.).

"With the Bush Administration filled with friends of energy companies," Sobel wrote, "you'd think that the president could use that advantage to turn up the heat on companies raking in the profits while Americans suffer blackouts, squeezed bank accounts, and threats of an economic nosedive. Instead, it appears, the Powerpuff Girls and Boys are drubbing the poorest of the poor to benefit their friends." (Emphasis added.)

While the Energy Task Force was secretly thinking of many ways to enrich energy corporations, Enron was cleaning up big time in California. David Lazarus of the San Francisco Chronicle wrote,


As California's utilities drew closer to financial ruin, Houston energy giant Enron Corp. was whistling all the way to the bank yesterday, after reporting a 34 percent increase in quarterly profit.

The company has had at least several lawyers and representatives at recent meetings of the California Public Utilities Commission and has been a vocal participant in talks this month on rescuing Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison from the brink of bankruptcy.

Enron refuses to break out its performance in California from the rest of its balance sheet.

"If you could break out the returns so you could see California only, you'd see that their profits here are way above the norm," said Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network in San Francisco. "They don't want you to see it."

What can be seen is that Enron's wholesale services division, which includes energy trading and services, saw its quarterly revenue almost quadruple to $39.2 billion. Profit before taxes nearly tripled, rising to $777 million. (Enron Reports 34% Increase in Its Profits, January 23, 2001)


California's pleas for federal help fell on deaf ears in the Bush Administration. "We're prepared to do those things that we can to help, but the basic problem in California was caused by Californians," Vice President Cheney said. Bush's economic advisor, Larry Lindsey, was more blunt. "They should expect no more help from the White House," he said. (San Francisco Chronicle, Cheney Calls Energy Woes State's Mess, January 21, 2001)

And, as one more obvious payback to his supporters, in March 2001 Bush refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 designed to reduce the greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere that cause global warming.

Behind Closed Doors

The National Energy Policy was created in total secrecy. The public was not permitted to know the names of the people who met with the task force; the names of staff members assigned to the task force; or the names of outside people consulted by the task force.

The report created by the task force was remarkably tilted in favor of increased fossil fuel production. So tilted, in fact, that many suspected the report had been written by insiders in the oil and coal industries looking for big contracts for themselves.

Two Democratic legislators, Representatives John Dingell of Michigan and Henry Waxman of California, asked the General Accounting Office to investigate. The GAO asked Cheney for full and complete access to records relating to the development of the administration's national energy policy. The Vice President refused the request.

"We are acting 100 percent within the law, and the GAO does not have the authority to make this request," said Cheney spokeswoman Juleanna Glover-Weiss. "It's not appropriate to set a new precedent as to what the GAO can request from a president." (Major Garrett, CNN, Cheney Wont Turn Over Energy Task Force Records, July 19, 2001)

(Meanwhile, back at Enron--in spite of the big profits in California, the company as a whole was in big trouble. Although the company was making money by trading derivatives in natural gas and power, it had branched out into many other enterprises that were not doing so well. Enron was losing billions on such investments as a power plant in India, telecommunications, Internet stocks, and broadband. The company hid the debt through creative bookkeeping. Eventually the scam unraveled; when Enron filed for bankruptcy in December 2001, the filings showed $13.1 billion in debt for the parent company and an additional $18.1 billion for affiliates.)

In January 2002, the GAO threatened to sue for the task force documents. "This is about the right of the Congress to oversee the executive branch, the right of the GAO to assist Congress," said GAO Comptroller General David Walker. "Our concern is that never before have we had a situation where an administration has refused to provide this kind of information, whether it be a Democratic or Republican administration."

The President became a co-stonewaller. "In order for me to be able to get good, sound opinions, those who offer me opinions, or offer the vice president opinions, must know that every word they say is not going to be put into the public record," Bush said, ignoring the fact that the GAO was not asking for minutes, just names.

The GAO made good its threat to file suit to obtain the Enron records on February 22, 2002. A spokesperson for the Vice President said the White House would fight the case in court." The president and the vice president are committed to defending this important constitutional principle," the spokesperson, Jennifer Millerwise, said. She did not elaborate on what constitutional principle allows the executive branch of government to be unaccountable to the people.

The Senate Governmental Affairs committee, seeking records of White House contacts with Enron, voted on May 22 to issue the first congressional subpoenas on the Bush administration. Hours later, the White House acknowledged more extensive contacts with Enron executives in 2001 than previously disclosed.

At about the same time, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) received 13,000 pages of documents by the Energy Department (DOE) after winning a lawsuit filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The documents revealed that energy industry lobbyists had enjoyed extraordinary access to the task force.


The data shows that industry representatives had 714 direct contacts between January 2001 and September 2001, while non-industry representatives had only 29. The NRDC could not definitively categorize another 105 direct contacts.

"A year ago the Cheney task force issued recommendations that read like a wish list for energy companies," said NRDC senior attorney Sharon Buccino. "When it came to developing the administration's environmentally and fiscally reckless energy policy, it was all industry all the time."

The representatives tallying the most direct contacts with the energy task force were from some of the nation's largest and most influential energy companies and trade associations industries that stood to benefit from the president's policies to boost domestic energy production. Some of them also are major donors to President Bush and Republican congressional candidates.

For example, the Nuclear Energy Institute had contact with the task force 19 times. This group contributed $437,404 to Republican candidates and the Republican Party from 1999 to 2002. Energy giant Southern Company, a group that contributed $1,626,507 to Republican candidates and the GOP from 1999 to 2002, had contact with the task force seven times. (Cat Lazaroff, Energy Task Force Documents Show Industry Influence, Environment News Service, May 22, 2002)


A convoluted tale, but what does it tell us? It tells us where George W. Bush's loyalties lie. There is no question he and the Vice President conspired to allow Republican donors and business cohorts to enrich themselves at the expense of the American people. Even the infamous financial scandals of the past, such as Teapot Dome or Crédit Mobilier, did not involve the President of the United States himself.

As of this writing the records of the Energy Task Force are still secret.

It never ends.... the lies are piled up so high it is a wonder anyone can keep track of them...


"""National Insecurity

Let's rewind to the beginning of 2001. On January 31, just a few days after Bush's inauguration, the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century issued a report in which seven Republicans and seven Democrats unanimously approved 50 recommendations to combat terrorism. Co-chaired by Senators Gary Hart and Warren Rudman, the Commission had been chartered in 1998 by President Clinton. Its final report, Road Map for National Security: Imperative for Change, represented two years of hard work and had strong bipartisan support in Congress.


The combination of unconventional weapons proliferation with the persistence of international terrorism will end the relative invulnerability of the U.S. homeland to catastrophic attack. A direct attack against American citizens on American soil is likely over the next quarter century. The risk is not only death and destruction but also a demoralization that could undermine U.S. global leadership. In the face of this threat, our nation has no coherent or integrated governmental structures. (Road Map for National Security, Part I, Securing the National Homeland)

The Hart-Rudman Commission recommended the formation of a cabinet-level agency to combat terrorism, called for better intelligence gathering and sharing between agencies, and urged that steps be implemented right away. In March 2001, Representative Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, introduced the National Homeland Security Agency Act. Other members of Congress, including Representatives Wayne Gilchrest, R-Maryland; John Kyl, R-Arizona; and Dianne Feinstein, D-California, began drafting legislation based on the Commission's recommendations.

But in May, President Bush shot it all down by announcing that he would turn the issue of national security over to Vice President Cheney, who would come up with a new plan. "Bush announced his plan almost as if the Hart-Rudman Commission never existed, as if it hadn't spent millions of dollars, 'consulting with experts, visiting 25 countries worldwide, really deliberating long and hard,' as Hart describes it," Jake Tapper wrote in Salon (We Predicted It, September 12, 2001) In particular, Bush resisted the idea of creating a cabinet-level national security agency. Once Cheney came up with a plan, implementation could be handled by FEMA. No problem.

Well, excuse me, but why? It's not as if Mr. Cheney needed something to do to keep busy; he had lots of meetings scheduled with the corporate heads of the oil and coal industry to write energy policy, after all. And it's not as if Republicans were opposed to the Hart-Rudman proposals. Republicans as well as Democrats were following up on the proposals to write law.

The simplest and most obvious explanation for Mr. Bush's behavior is sheer arrogance. The homeland security committee had been commissioned by (organ glissando, B minor) Bill Clinton. Therefore, it was wrong. Toss it out and start over.

There are other explanations, however.

In 1984, the FEMA contact in the National Security Agency was Colonel Oliver North. North collaborated with FEMA director Louis Giuffrida on legislation to allow the president to impose censorship, seize means of production, and outlaw anti-government strikes during times of national emergency. North and Giuffrida also wrote an executive order that would allow FEMA to take over all government operations and detain enemy aliens.

Bill Molson wrote in Online Journal,


North also planned FEMA-Pentagon war game scenarios that contemplated the imposition of martial law and the suspension of key constitutional guarantees, such as freedom of speech and due process. The Pentagon confirmed that the simulations, code named Rex 84 Alpha and Night Train 84, took place April 513, 1984. Interestingly, the Miami Herald also reported that Giuffrida attempted to steer FEMA into areas beyond civil defense, specifically counter-terrorism. (September 11: The Circumstantial Case, Part 3, April 24, 2002)

Yes, that was several years ago. However, a remarkable number of Reagan Administration insiders are now inside the Bush Administration, including several Iran-Contra conspirators; e.g., John Poindexter, Elliott Abrams, Otto Reich, and John Negroponte. These men are now, respectively, head of the Information Awareness Office (and what is THAT, pray tell?), on the National Security Council staff, an Assistant Secretary of State, and ambassador to the United Nations.

Its circumstantial, yes, but it bears watching.

There is one more possibility, even more disturbing. Did the Bush Administration kill the Hart-Rudman proposals to cover its own duplicities?

Bush's less-secret national security plan is the National Missile Defense. Although there is no agreement the NMD would be effective, or even work, Bush is determined to throw money at it to make it happen. Why? Here's a clue: According to the Center for Responsive Politics, for the 2000 elections the defense industries gave more than four times more in campaign contributions to Bush than to Gore ($190,725 to $43,750). And the Bush Administration has other, more lucrative connections to the defense sector.

The Carlyle Connection

On September 11, 2001, members of the Carlyle Group were holding their annual investor conference in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Washington, DC. Those in attendance included former Reagan Administration secretary of defense Frank Carlucci, former Reagan Administration chief of staff and secretary of state James Baker III, and representatives of the bin Laden family, including one of Osama bin Ladens brothers, Shafig bin Laden.

The Carlyle Group calls itself "a private global investment firm that originates, structures and acts as lead equity investor in management-led buyouts, strategic minority equity investments, equity private placements, consolidations and buildups, and growth capital financings. ... As of March 31, 2002, the firm had more than $13.5 billion of committed capital under management."

Very basically, Carlyle buys and sells privately held companies and divisions of publicly owned companies for big profits. Unlike other private-equity groups, Carlyle concentrates on companies funded by the government, or those affected by government regulation, such as telecommunications firms, and then hires people with relevant government experience, Melanie Warner explained in Fortune.


The revolving door has long been a fact of life in Washington, but Carlyle has given it a new spin. Instead of toiling away for a trade organization or consulting firm for a measly $250,000 a year, former government officials can rake in serious cash by getting equity cuts on corporate deals. Several of the onetime government officials who have hooked up with Carlyle--Carlucci, Baker, and [Richard] Darman, in particular--have made millions. ("The Big Guys Work for the Carlyle Group," Fortune, March 18, 2002)

(So, ironically, after September 11 Shafig bin Laden was well positioned to make a killing --financially--on a war being waged on his brother Osama. However, Carlyle reports that it gave the bin Ladens their money back a few weeks after September 11.)

Frank Carlucci is the Chairman of the Carlyle Group. Chairman of Carlyle-Europe is former British Prime Minister John Major. Former President George H.W. Bush does consulting work for Carlyle, often in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. (Saudi ties to the Bush family go deep; Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdul Aziz gave $1 million to the Bush Presidential Library in College Station, Texas.)

The current President Bush was on the board of Caterair, a Carlyle subsidiary, for five years. While he was governor of Texas, the board of directors of the Texas teachers' pension fund--the infamous UTIMCO, previously discussed--voted to invest $100 million with the Carlyle Group.

(Connect the dots. Defense and aerospace firms make up a large part of Carlyle's portfolio. These firms depend on getting contracts from the U.S. government. The head of the U.S. government is ... ?)

In 1995, the bin Laden family invested $2 million in Carlyle Partners II Fund, which raised $1.3 billion overall. According to the Wall Street Journal,


The fund has purchased several aerospace companies among 29 deals. "So far, the family has received $1.3 million back in completed investments and should ultimately realize a 40% annualized rate of return," the Carlyle executive said.

But a foreign financier with ties to the bin Laden family says the family's overall investment with Carlyle is considerably larger. He called the $2 million merely an initial contribution. "It's like plowing a field," this person said. "You seed it once. You plow it, and then you reseed it again." ("Bin Laden Family Could Profit from a Jump in Defense Spending Due to Ties to U.S. Bank," Wall Street Journal Online, September 27, 2001)


United Defense Industries is one of Carlyle's firms. UDI makes a land-based weapon called the Crusader, which can fire ten rounds of 100-lb. shells per minute over a distance of 25 miles. In 1997 a Pentagon advisory panel rejected the Crusader program, calling it inappropriate for modern warfare -- a relic of the Cold War.

However, two weeks after September 11, 2001, the Army signed a $665 million contract with UDI to complete development of the Crusader. On December 13, Congress approved the program. The next day, Carlyle took UDI public and made a fast $237 million. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld pulled the plug on the program in May 2002 (news of which was considerately leaked to Carlyle by the Pentagon), but thanks to Crusader, Carlyle's investment in UDI brought a $315 million profit. (And the Crusader program may yet be resurrected, as many influential members of Congress receive campaign contributions from Carlyle.)

More troubling is Carlyle's connection to several wealthy Saudis, including the family of Osama bin Laden.


At the same time that the elder Bush counsels his son on the ongoing war on terrorism, the former president remains a senior adviser to the Washington D.C.-based Carlyle Group. That influential investment bank has deep connections to the Saudi royal family as well as financial interests in U.S. defense firms hired by the kingdom to equip and train the Saudi military. (Maggie Mulvihill, Jack Meyers, and Jonathan Wells, "Bush Advisers Cashed in on Saudi Gravy Train," Boston Herald, December 11, 2001)

The Carlyle Group served as paid advisers to the Saudi royal family on the so-called ``Economic Offset Program,'' which required U.S. arms manufacturers selling weapons to Saudi Arabia to give back a portion of their revenues in the form of contracts to Saudi businesses, most of which are connected to the royal family. The program was terminated some time in 2001.

Before becoming head of Carlyle, Carlucci spend most of the 1990s as head of B.D.M., a large defense contractor in which Carlyle had a controlling interest (B.D.M. was sold to TRW International in 1998). During its Carlucci years, B.D.M. had multimillion-dollar contracts to train and manage the Saudi National Guard and the Saudi Air Force.

There may be other connections between George W. Bush and the Saudis. For example, back in 1978 when Bush set up his first oil company, one of the partners was James Bath. Bath was financial representative in Houston for Salem bin Laden, an older brother of Osama. Although Bath says the money he put into Arbusto was his own, it has long been speculated the money came from Salem bin Laden. In "Questionable Ties: Tracking bin Laden's Money Flow Leads Back to Midland, Texas" (In These Times, The Institute of Public Affairs, undated article) Wayne Madsen describes extensive financial ties between the Bush and bin Laden families going back several years. See also this graphic from Bush Watch.

Although Shalem bin Laden may not be making money on the War on Terror, Vice President Dick Cheney's old company, Halliburton, is doing quite well. Very recently, Halliburton was awarded a $9.7 million contract to build an additional 204-cell detention camp at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to hold additional suspected al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners, according to Reuters.

In November 2001, Halliburton was awarded a $140 million contract to develop an oil field in Saudi Arabia by the kingdom's state-owned petroleum firm, Saudi Aramco, and a Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg Brown & Root, along with two Japanese firms, was hired by the Saudis to build a $40 million ethylene plant, according to the Boston Herald (Maggie Mulvihill, Jack Meyers and Jonathan Wells, "Bush Advisers Cashed in on Saudi Gravy Train," December 11, 2001).

Other members of President Bush's inner circle have business connections to the Saudis. Condoleeza Rice, national security adviser, is a former longtime member of the board of directors of Chevron. Through its subsidiary Saudi Chevron Philips, the company has many investments and interests in Saudi Arabia.