Yes, Victoria, Bush is a liar.

This is an open message to — well, let’s just call her Victoria. Victoria and I have been exchanging emails ever since she left a comment on one of my posts last week. The last reply I sent her got bounced back to me. Her email was no longer functional. Victoria, I’m so sorry you felt that you had to do something drastic like changing your email just so you could end our conversation. At least I hope that it was your decision and not your husband’s. You could have just asked me to stop replying to you. I would have respected your wishes.
I think it’s worth sharing with the wider world my experience in trying to maintain an email interaction with Victoria, a woman my age (I think she’s also white) but unlike me in just about every other aspect of our lives. All this comes out in our virtual interactions, which I document, here, in sequence.
Victoria left this October 12 comment on one of my posts:
WE LOVE BUSH. WE ARE VOTING FOR HIM, AND YOUR MONEY SOROS, IS NOT GOING TO HELP, NO MATTER HOW MUCH HATRED YOU SPREAD, BUSH WILL WIN!
I sent a test email out to Victoria to see if she left a real or bogus email address, since I’ve decided to exercise my right as perpetrator of this weblog to delete comments left with bogus emails.
Her October 14th reply:
WHO ARE YOU? AND WHY ARE YOU WRITING TO US? WHAT THE HELL IS A “TEST?” EITHER IDENTIFY YOURSELF, OR WE WILL REPORT YOU TO THE FBI.
THANK YOU.

Wow. A real person with a real email address. Ooops. I should have sent a message with more than just “test” in the subject line. Not very smart of me, but I was anticipating the usual bounce-back. I have to remember that people are really paranoid these days about the Internet.
So, I replied:
You left a comment on my weblog, and I was just testing to see if you had the courage to use a legitimate email or if you were one of many who don’t. I delete the comments of those who don’t have the courage of their convictions. Obviously, you do, so I did not delete your comment. I should have explained this in my original message. Sorry.
all the best
Elaine

And she responded:
YOU STILL ARE NOT IDENTIFYING YOURSELF. WHO ARE YOU. IF YOU DO NOT IDENTIFY YOURSELF WE ARE REPORTING YOU TO THE FBI. WE ARE KEEPING A RECORD OF YOUR EMAILS. YOU SAID A LOT OF THINGS, EXCEPT WHO YOU ARE. WHY SHOULD YOU BE TESTING US TO SEE IF I USE THE CORRECT EMAIL. WE WILL WAIT FOR YOU TO IDENTIFY YOURSELF, AND THEN, WE ARE CHANGING OUR EMAIL ADDRESS
THANK YOU.

Well, OK, I thought. She’s a little confused and probably doesn’t understand how weblogging works. So, I should have been more specific. I tried, again:
Relax. And please don’t go through the trouble of changing your email bacause of me. Take a deep breath and go to http://www.kalilily.net/weblog/04/10/12/105835.html, which is where you left your comment on my weblog. If you Google Kalilily or Elaine Frankonis, you will get lots of information about who I am. You made contact with me first. When someone leaves a comment on my weblog, I get notified. Then I check to see if the person who left the comment (as you will see you did when you go to the above url) left an actual or a bogus email address along with the comment. I have begun deleting all those comments left by those too cowardly. to identify themselves. As you will see, I am many things — but I’m not a coward.
I think that I will keep copies of your emails to me, too. The comment you left on my seb site is public information, and it includes the date you left it.
You should start keeping a log of where you leave your comments out there on the Internet. You’re getting paranoid for no reason.
all the best, again.

Then I got this reply from Victoria.
My husband and I are curious as to how you came to have our email
address. Thank you

I thought I had explained that, but I tried yet again:
When you left a comment on my weblog, you entered it in a box in the comment feature that requires an email address. If you go back to that entry and comment (http://www.kalilily.net/weblog/04/10/12/105835.html) and scroll down to your comment, you’ll see your name there, and if you click on your name, it will take you to an email box. I will not be doing anything with your email, believe me. If you want, I’ll see if I can go in and take out your name and email address so no one else can get it. Let me know. If you leave comments elsewhere, you might want to lie about your name and email. I tend to delete the comments of people who do that, but lots of other webloggers don’t.
Elaine

And Victoria responds:
Dear Elaine,
What we don’t understand is that we never wrote to you, because we have never known of your existence. We received an email from you, and that is when the whole thing started. Anyway, we still would like to know how you came to have our email address. Looks like you are a nice person with misplaced political philosophies, but you must be young. Winston Churchill said it best when he said, “IF YOU ARE TWENTY, AND YOU ARE NOT A LIBERAL, YOU DON’T HAVE A HEART, BUT IF YOU ARE FORTY, AND YOU ARE NOT CONSERVATIVE, YOU DON’T HAVE A BRAIN.” Now, tell us how you originally got our email address. I never left anything on your weblog, whatever that is. We received and email from you. Good luck

I had to respond to several things, so I did it in two separate emails:
Well, I tend not place too much stock in aphorisms, although I do like “too soon old, too late smart.” And, believe it or not, I’m a lot more fiscally conservative now than I was in my youth. Actually, I think that’s what your quote applies to.
My dad was a active Republican, but as he got older and saw how some of his party’s policies aided the already rich too much and generated more disadvantages for the already disadvantaged, he became a liberal Republican, championing health care, support for Medicare and Social Security etc. He believed that we, through our system of humane and democratic government, indeed, are our brothers’ (and sisters’) keepers. He was also a devout Christian and followed the teachings of that great man (Jesus) who advocated for peace, equal distribution of wealth, tolerance, and compassion. I am a non-Christian who follows those teachings as well. At age 64, I’ve had a life that spanned several wars and more than several presidents. I’ve seen what works and what doesn’t. I believe that what Bush is doing is ruining the heart of America. But, of course, you are welcome to your own opinion.
Now, as for how I got your email. Again, here it is::::
See way down in this message for what I copied directly from my weblog/online diary on the Internet, which, again is here: http://www.kalilily.net/weblog/04/10/12/105835.html — and if you go to that url, you will see that it is, indeed there, and that if you click on your name, a box will come up that will let you send an email to yourself.
I clicked on your name and sent a quick “test” email, fully expecting that it would be bounced back with a message telling me that the email address is bogus. But, lo and behold, your address was legit. I learned a lesson from that experience, and now when I send out a “test” for email address legitimacy, I include a message explaining that I’m responding to a comment left on my weblog by someone using that email address.
If you did not leave that comment, then someone else used your name and email. If you go to the url above and scroll down, you will see that someone else left a comment AFTER yours and left, instead of an email signature, a URL to which I linked and I saw it was legit.
Anyway, here is exactly what appears when you go to the url above and scroll down. As you will see, there are boxes for your name, your email address, your url if you have a website, and for your comments. If you didn’t leave that comment, than someone who has your email address did.
[I included in that email the whole post and the comment format with the comments.]
Then, I realized that there might be another possibility, and so I also wrote back:
You (or whoever) mentions “Soros” in your (or whoever’s) comment, which leaves me to believe that you (or whoever) thought you (or whoever) were leaving a comment on my post about Soros (which was one above the one that the comment with your name was actually on). Whoever left the comment probably found my site through Google, since Google picks up what I write.
Maybe that helps explains what happened??

And then a reply from Victoria responding to my efforts to explain where I’m coming from and to smooth things over:
As I said, I think you are a nice person who is misguided, but has good intentions. I think Stalin refer to people like that as “Useful Idiots. Where do you live? Good luck, good person
OK. We’re starting to have a conversation. And so I respond Twice:
I live in Albany, NY
Today I took my 88 year old mom, for whom I am caregiver, to a “welcome home from Iraq” party for my cousin’s soldier daughter and her soldier husband. Both had extended stays in Iraq; my cousin’s daughter, who is an Army Captain, was in charge of convoys that were bringing supplies into Baghdad and other dangerous areas. She has photos of beautiful landscapes and cities in Iraq before and after we destroyed them. Pre-emptive war is evil, and all that is required for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing. And so, for all of those soldiers who are dying so Halliburton and other of Bush’s associates can make more money, for all of those innocent women and children dying on the desert’s edge for our oil, for all of our grandchildren who will still be paying the costs of what we have done here and there, I do what I can to press for change in policy and priorities.
“Misguided with good intentions.” I guess that’s how I view conservative Republicans.
Next month I apply for Medicare and hope for the best.
Elaine

I love her next response. I’m getting to know this woman who thinks so differently from me. Maybe we’ll learn from each other. She replies:
So what the heck are you doing so far? You are applying for Medicare? Well, if you worked all your life like I did, you’ll do OK. We are the same age. You do sound like a very nice person, even if you are a Liberal. We all have reasons why we are what we are, and I’m sure you have yours. By the by, Kerry voted against the funds for what you are complaining about re the gear. I think that people like you are so hateful of Bush, that you are willing to destroy him, and take this flip flop. My husband is Hungarian, and so, he hates Soros, (a Hungarian Jew), for what he is doing. He wants the destruction of this society as we know it.
Do you ever come to California? Well, stop by and see us. As sorry as I feel for you, I think your intentions are good, misguided, but nevertheless, good. Be well, and thanks for telling me this story. Have you always been an activist? What did you study in college? Who did you associate with that led you down the slippery slope of life. Do you have a husband? Children? Good luck.
Oh! you thought I would put an email that was not my own? How do you
do that anyway?

Well now I’m getting really excited because she’s opening up a little, but I guess that my next response to her was over the top — because I haven’t heard from her since I sent it, and her email no longer works. I replied:
First of all, about John Kerry’s voting record about body armor etc. The following is from http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx@docID=177.html. which is Factcheck.org, the very site that Cheney suggested people look at during his debate with Edwards when he wanted to clarify something positive about Bush. According to its website, Factcheck.org is — — quote — a nonpartisan, nonprofit, “consumer advocate” for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews, and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding. — end quote —
This is on their website:
_____________begin quote________
Summary
Bush ads released April 26 recycle some distortions of Kerry’s voting record
on military hardware. We’ve de-bunked these half-truths before but the Bush
campaign persists.
The ads — many targeted to specific states — repeat the claim that Kerry
opposed a list of mainstream weapons including Bradley Fighting Vehicles and
Apache helicopters, and also repeat the claim that he voted against body
armor for frontline troops in Iraq. In fact, Kerry voted against a few large
Pentagon money bills, of which Bradleys, Apaches and body armor were small
parts, but not against those items specifically.
Analysis
On April 26 the Bush campaign released a total of 10 ads, all repeating
claims that Kerry opposed a list of mainstream military hardware “vital to
winning the war on terror.”
Misleading Claims
The claims are misleading, as we’ve pointed out before in articles we posted
on Feb. 26 and March 16. The Bush campaign bases its claim mainly on Kerry’s
votes against overall Pentagon money bills in 1990, 1995 and 1996, but these
were not votes against specific weapons. And in fact, Kerry voted for
Pentagon authorization bills in 16 of the 19 years he’s been in the Senate.
So even by the Bush campaign’s twisted logic, Kerry should — on balance —
be called a supporter of the “vital” weapons, more so than an opponent.
The claim that Kerry voted against body armor is based similarly on Kerry’s
vote last year against an $87 billion emergency supplemental appropriation
bill to finance military operations and reconstruction efforts in Iraq and
Afghanistan. It included $300 million for the latest, ceramic-plate type of
body armor for troops who had been sent to war without it. The body-armor
funds amounted to about 1/3 of one percent of the total.
Missing Context
It is true that when Kerry first ran for the Senate in 1984 he did call
specifically for canceling the AH-64 Apache helicopter, but once elected he
opposed mainly such strategic weapons as Trident nuclear missiles and
space-based anti-ballistic systems. And Richard Cheney himself, who is now
Vice President but who then was Secretary of Defense, also proposed
canceling the Apache helicopter program five years after Kerry did. As
Cheney told the House Armed Services Committee on Aug. 13, 1989:
Cheney: The Army, as I indicated in my earlier testimony, recommended to
me that we keep a robust Apache helicopter program going forward, AH-64; . .
. I forced the Army to make choices. I said, “You can’t have all three. We
don’t have the money for all three.” So I recommended that we cancel the
AH-64 program two years out. That would save $1.6 billion in procurement and
$200 million in spares over the next five years.
Two years later Cheney’s Pentagon budget also proposed elimination of
further production of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle as well. It was among 81
Pentagon programs targeted for termination, including the F-14 and F-16
aircraft. “Cheney decided the military already has enough of these weapons,”
the Boston Globe reported at the time.
Does that make Cheney an opponent of “weapons vital to winning the war on
terror?” Of course not. But by the Bush campaign’s logic, Cheney himself
would be vulnerable to just such a charge, and so would Bush’s father, who
was president at the time..
_________end quote_______________________
You might want to check factcheck.org periodically to find out what the latest distortions of the truth are — on both sides, of course.
Now, about me: Master’s Degree in English and Education — taught Junior High, worked for a Republican State Senate Majority Leader back in the 70s as a writer (got a really good education about how politicians distort; got the job through my Dad’s contacts) — worked for the NY State Education Department for 20 years and have a pension — plan to apply for Medicare next month. Was married. Have two kids, one grandson. Am of Polish extraction on both sides.
I guess it’s my life experiences that have brought me to my liberal politics — working with disadvantaged kids, becoming proficient in tracking down facts as opposed to propaganda, learning that it’s valuable to question authority.
I find that many women, because they love their husbands, just follow along with their husband’s politics and never do the research on their own to see if they’re on the right track. Be careful of that. Do a little research using non-partisan sources like Factcheck.org.
I guess that your husband has it against Hungarian Jews. I don’t have that bias. Neither am I biased against rich people. This is a capitalist society, and if people get rich by being smart and honest, and then share their wealth, I say all the more power to them. I’m not prejudiced against anyone — African Americans, Mid-Easterns, gays, Jews — even conservative Republicans. 🙂

Well, now that I read what I wrote, I can see why, if she wasn’t annoyed with me, her husband sure would be. Howver, once a liberal/feminist/teacher always…..
Finally, I figured maybe if she could see me as a real person trying to get people to think about what they’re doing in this country, I sent her the following email and photo. This one didn’t get through. Too much, too late, I guess:
Just for fun, I’ve attached a photo of me in my Vote or Die t-shirt as I’m about to leave to have lunch with some friends.
So tell me about yourself???? Kids? Grandkids? Do you use the computer to get information or just for email? What’s your background. I love getting to know and understand people who think differently from the way I do.
(And, if you do happen to change your mind about who you want to vote for, remember, your ballot is secret and no one will know but you.)

Elaine
2.JPG
Her email no longer works; either she or her husband decided to cancel it. I’ve got to learn to tone myself down.
P.S. At the party for my soldier cousin, I was standing chatting with a female relative, who — I know — is a fundamentalist and a Bush supporter, so I steered clear of politics. When she asked what my son was up to, I explained that he had a website that examines local political and government issues in the City of Portland, Oregon, etc. etc. She asked if he did that from a Democratic or Republican perspective. The truth is, I said, he does it simply from the perspective of analyzing the positions on the issues involved and how those positions will affect the community and its citizens. I’ve never seen him mention political parties at all in his analyses. But he is a liberal, as am I, I told her, in response to her asking. She turned away from me and avoided me for the rest of the afternoon. I can’t win.

3 thoughts on “Yes, Victoria, Bush is a liar.

  1. Oh I don’t know about that Elaine – I’d say you did win. You gave them so much to think about that they had to crawl back into their mental/ethical black holes just to keep their “sanity”, otherwise they would have debated and tried to convert you (kinda hard to do though when all you have is unsubstantive talking points and slogans.)

  2. How did this happen? Harris’s office told Database–a firm with strong Republican ties-to cast as wide a net as possible to get rid of these voters. Her minions instructed the company to include even people with “similar” names to those of the actual felons. They insisted Database check people with the same birth dates as known felons, or similar Social Security numbers; an 80 percent match of relevant information, the election office instructed, was sufficient for Database to add a voter to the ineligible list.

  3. Dear Elaine;

    My daughter and I googled her name(Victoria) and we came across this most interesting and entertaining exchange with the poor misguided and brainwashed Bush voter you attempted to engage in a reasonable discussion.

    Thanks for the entertainment! I live in Australia, and as my name is Bush, I usually am forced to follow any announcement of my name with ‘no relation’, although I admit, to my shame, that I was once bumped to first class on a United flight by claiming I was his ‘Aussie cousin’ 😉

    Anyway, thanks for the giggle!

Leave a Reply