Mr. President,
Next time just buy FOX it would be cheaper.
You are as popular as a fart in church while Rummy admits he is beaten by a couple of dead-enders. I don't get it?

You spent $1.62 billion year to date, YTD, on advertising, public relations and you still wound up with the lowest of rating of your presidency?

If you didn't fabricate the reasons for war, you could have saved all that money. Getting people to believe the truth is cheaper because the proof speaks for itself. Lies take more effort and tons of money, because there is no proof.

Rep George Miller from California said your propaganda effort is unprecedented and disturbing. Boy, is that an understatement.

A study from the Government Accountability Office, GAO, recently issued a report that examined your wild spending efforts to keep the media in you hip pocket.

Hundreds of contracts were handed out like candy to Iraqi children. Hungry right-wing media groups chirped for million-dollar contracts, like little baby birds.

These vultures would sell their mothers for the right price. They mixed fiction with non-fiction as they created pro-war Web sites, pro -war soldiers' sound bytes. Pro-war, pro-Bush news was cranked out routinely by the Lincoln group for the benefit of iraq citizens.

Wouldn't it have been cheaper to just buy FOX outright and create a FOX franchise in Iraq?

And yet Rummy says we still lost the media war to the insurgents?
The mighty U.S admits it lost the communications battle after spending $1.62 billion YTD on pro-war, pro-America, pro-Bush custom-tailored news?

Did you see the writing on the wall ? I see you backing away with your hands up in the air proclaiming "Saddam is at fault" for causing the civil war.

Grow a backbone junior, and get rid of Rummy.

You improved our borders, and worked out a manageable border program this week. APRIL FOOL!
You went to Cancun and all you got was a slight tan. You make a big sound for such a little man with so little power in the congress. Barring an impeachment and

perhaps jail, you will be lucky if you are allowed to waddle around the West Wing during your remaining years.

Mr. President,

That's the name the World Meteorological Organization assigned to this year's first tropical storm. Brace yourself America, last year's onslaught of hurricanes pretty much guaranteed we would have to open up our checkbooks.

This year's hurricane season will reopen the argument by some people that global warming has nothing to do with the intensity or frequency of hurricanes. But focus junior. Regardless of what is causing them, the immediate issue is that hurricanes will be more intense and the insurance companies are betting on it.

NOAA's National Weather Service said this hurricane season will be another good year for plywood and a bad year for insurance premiums.

NOAA is not alone. The weather models calculated by RMS, a world-leading provider of products and services for the "quantification and management of catastrophe risks," stated "U.S. Hurricane Activity Rates will increase 40% in Florida Gulf Coast, 25-30% in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast coastal regions." They expect these losses to persist for at least the next five years.

When major storms hit, people die, homes and crops are swept away, and hunger will prevail in hard hit countries. Billions of people are under threat of mother nature's wrath from the sea.

Australia has already been hit with two big storms. The most recent storm named Glenda, a category-four storm, made landfall on Western Australia just over a week after Cyclone Larry battered Queensland on the east coast with 180 mph winds. It wiped out farming towns, flattened banana and sugar cane plantations.

Financial institutions are ready this year. The World Bank said on Thursday "climate change is likely to significantly affect economies in the Asia-Pacific region, threatening the increasingly industrialized coastal belt and hurting the region's poor."

"Rising sea levels, more intense storms and greater extremes of droughts and floods will probably cause greater loss of life and threaten the livelihoods of millions; the Bank said in a report."

Insurance companies around the world including US companies like Berkshire Hathaway Inc. understand the risks as well. They were hit with almost $100 billion in insured losses over the past two years. Berkshire Hawthaway has boosted rates or dropped coverage after the hurricanes hit.

U.S. insurers have seen a 15-fold increase in insured losses from catastrophic weather events in the past 30 years. These humongous increases have far out-stripped growth in premiums, population and inflation over the same time period.

European companies such as Munich Re and Swiss Reinsurance Co., two of the world’s largest reinsurers, have long noted the increasing risks associated with climate change.

This is how I understand insurance companies work. Customers pay a premium for the privilege of betting on disasters taking place; while insurance companies take the yearly premiums and bet disasters won't happen. The premiums are based on the odds of the disaster occurring plus a handling charge of sorts.

The odds are calculated along the same lines Vegas bookmakers use to set up the odds on sporting events.

The last few years the insurance companies have been on the wrong side of that bet.

They bet on "no significant storm damage" and they lost big. The premiums they collected were insufficient to pay for the huge weather-related pay-outs.

This year they are hedging their bets by either increasing insurance premiums or refusing to insure high risk areas.

Mother nature may not get the best of them again, but we will all pay to hedge their bets.

Gasoline, natural gas, real estate taxes, education, mortgage rates, food, and now insurance premiums are all up. Everything seems to be up except the average middle-income American's ability to pay for it all.

Let the good times roll!


Everyone is waiting for the other shoe to drop. Who will be the next person to leave for personal reasons?

Replacing Andrew Card with Joshua Bolton's was really a non-move, since they are almost clones of each other.

Speculation is running amok, but I'm betting there will be a Snow removal.


I did not receive the normal thank you for writing auto-response from the White House.

Mr. President,
It's Canada's fault for not keeping the globe colder.

You have so many people to blame for your failures how do you decide? Who decides how big a stretch it can be?

Today you blamed Saddam Heussein for the Iraq civil war while rejecting any possibility that the United States' 2003 invasion and continued military presence is the underlying reason for sectarian violence. You can blame Clinton for not having a larger surplus to absorb your free-wheeling spending and causing the debt to be so high today.

Tomorrow you can blame President Vincente Fox for the immigrant issue. Friday, you can blame Canada's Prime Minister Harper for his inability to keep the world cold.


Better hold off on the blame game with your neighbors for now. Your meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Stephan Harper and Mexico's President Vincente Fox in Cancun this week will be more contentious than many expect. Some are calling it the meeting of the three amigos; ah, if it waas only true and yet you may get a "pass the immigrants" with Fox and a "praise the lord" with Harper.

You repeatedly screwed Tony Blair, and you consistently left him with nothing in return for his support. Why would you think these leaders will trust you?
Mexico's presidential elections are on July 2, and you are bad news for Vincente Fox. Remember him, he's the guy you once promised a guest immigration program back in 2001.

Fox's political party's opponent, left-leaning Andres Lopez Obrador's is leading in the polls so far and his numbers have been boosted by the immigration protest marches across the U.S.
Just like republicans up for re-election have learned, you're radioactive junior. Everyone near you is poisoned by your mere presence.

Don't try to speak your pigeon Spanish, you sound stupid. Your visit will probably remind Mexicans of anglo prejudice, your broken promises and Fox's inability to establish a reasonable guest-worker program. Militiamen patrols and talk about erecting a wall between the two countries has only added fuel to the fire.
You are apt to be another nail in the coffin of Fox's pro-American Mexican candidate and a boon for perhaps another Chavez-influenced Latin American leader.

Relations with Canada are complicated by several issues.


Harper wants you to adhere to the recent NAFTA ruling on Canadian softwood lumber. He wants the U.S. tariff on Canadian lumber lifted and $4 billion of duties refunded.


Canadians are pissed at you because you, closed the borders to Canadian beef, taxed their lumber unfairly and you want to introduce passports for any cross-border Canadian visitors.

You pushed them to accept your anti-missle systems while they reject any use of Canadian land for this project.

Canada's status as a net exporter of energy should enter your noggin as you talk with them.
Prime Minister Harper has a tenuous hold on Parliament. He does not have a mandate so can't afford to look like your "lap dog."

The cost of oil has given both Mexico and Canada higher status in the world, and the people from their countries dislike you so much, their leaders can afford to be uncooperative.

It's a shame you have almost nothing to give them without a fight from your own republican-led congress.

Bottom line; you will probably get support for a guest program from Fox and more Canadian troops for Afghanistan but it is going to cost you.

From: comments@whitehouse.gov
Date: March 30, 2006 1:54:14 PM CST
To: guzmatom@mac.com

On behalf of President Bush, thank you for your correspondence.
We appreciate hearing your views and welcome your suggestions.
Due to the large volume of e-mail received, the White House is
unable to respond to every message, and therefore this response
is an autoreply.

Thank you again for taking the time to write.