RSS feed for InstantSpot site Tracy's Blog

THAT SINKING FEELING.....

Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:13:22 GMT

Okay time for a quick rant. Does anybody else get the feeling that this election is NOT bringing changes? Look past all the hype and phony promises....whadya' see?

I see the status quo, waiting (stage left), with smiles and giggles about what is really going on. What is going on? Nothing of substance, that's what. The corporate interests are still going to own Washington. The emerging front runners represent the status quo at it's worst. I'm sure they are fine people, but they are not offering what people want. What do they want? REAL DEMOCRACY.

RANT / OFF

YOUR TURN!

A RARE THING NOWADAYS....(my opinion)

Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:41:22 GMT

Public displays of piety, as well as evangelism, are not something I promote or participate in.
Ben Stein just struck a nerve with that commentary. (below)
I could care less what religion people participate in, as long as SOMEONE is teaching our kids right from wrong.

I think Ben Stein too readily uses religion to make his point, or at least IMHO.

Rampant materialism, celebrity worship, electronic goodies out the wazoo (what's a wazoo?), a completely inflated sense of entitlement, these are a few things I see that bothers me with today's pop culture.

Nobody teaches many of our kids the things that used to keep families and communities together. Just the opposite. Look at what passes for "cool" these days. Shameful, much of it. And we've literally bought into this.

Submitted for your (dis)approval:

THE AMERICAN DREAM IS DESTROYING US!

Do we need 3 or 4 vehicles, as many TV's, cell phones, boats, toys toys toys, SUV's, DVD's, Iphones, unatural gadgets stuck in every ear, and cheap-ass plastic crap from China...EVERYWHERE! AAAAAARGH...WE'RE POISONING OUR KIDS (our future) FOR CHEAP PLASTIC SHIT FROM FOREIGN SHORES! (why don't we make our own cheap plastic crap?)

OK....feeling better now. My point is, our kids only value the wrong things. Cell phones, Facebook bullying, and video games are much more "cool" than having close, caring friends in todays pop culture. And pop culture has become a much stronger influence today through "media as baby-sitters".

I'm not advocating forced religion, just good parenting. ~Tracy~

GOD HATES FRED PHELPS

Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:28:25 GMT

Since the better half is doing volunteer work at the church, the dog and I get our lunch hour nap in silence. During today's nap, God contacted me and wanted me to let everybody know the truth.

She says that the truth has been written down for thousands of years, but fat Freddy Phelps is sick and going to a hell of his own creation. Okay, enough play by play from me. God says read this ultimate truth: Love.

1 Corinthians 13

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.

When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

And now these three remain: faith, hope and love.

But the greatest of these is love.

~GOD~

My thoughts for

Tue, 11 Sep 2007 18:11:40 GMT

Instead of just pasting another parable, I’ll actually comment on something meaningful to me personally. First, the Beatitudes:

THE EIGHT BEATITUDES OF JESUS

"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are they who mourn,
for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the meek,
for they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they shall be satisfied.
Blessed are the merciful,
for they shall obtain mercy.
Blessed are the pure of heart,
for they shall see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they shall be called children of God.
Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

Why is he telling us these strange things? The meek shall inherit the earth? Uh,….WHAT?

What he is actually doing is describing the "kingdom of heaven".

That’s right, it’s a description of the people who inhabit "his kingdom".

That’s what his kingdom is....people.

The people who actually live as described above.

The Temptation of Jesus

Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the desert, where for forty days he was tempted by the devil.

He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry.

The devil said to him, "If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread."

Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone."

The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to.

So if you worship me, it will all be yours."

Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Worship the Lord your God and serve him only."

The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down from here. For it is written:
" 'He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully;
they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone."

Jesus answered, "It says: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test."

When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.

Once again, why is he telling us these strange things?

It’s a narrative account being given to his disciples. Why?

Because they imagine the Messiah as a military power coming to rescue them from the Roman occupation.

What he is actually doing is describing the Messiah.

That’s right, it’s a description of the "Son of Man".

The true savior brings us out of our desires for wealth, power and eternal life.

TODAY'S TIMES

Fri, 07 Sep 2007 09:51:03 GMT

Hmmm....now lemmee see here. Reagan was an actor who played Prez. Now we have an actor who wants to play Reagan playing the Prez while he's playing the Prez. Confused yet? It's okay, you're sposabee. He couldn't be himself, it's so, ummm, errr, unappealing.

Chutzpah at it's finest. ~ Tracy

For Thompson, Goal Is to Don Reagan Mantle

By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JO BECKER

Fred D. Thompson had one central strategic goal as he formally began his presidential campaign on Thursday: to win over conservatives who are disheartened at their current choice of Republican candidates by positioning himself as the ideological and stylistic heir of Ronald Reagan.

Mr. Thompson is certainly conservative, and has been throughout his public life — particularly on the question of federalism, the size of government, tax cuts and his unwavering support for the war in Iraq.

Biographically and stylistically, Mr. Thompson, another former actor trying to become president, recalls the easygoing manner that Reagan used to advocate conservative solutions to the nation’s challenges, as he made clear with his announcement speech in Des Moines on Thursday. He spoke of “common-sense conservative beliefs,” including the notion that “we still get our basic rights from God, not government.”

Yet in some notable ways, Mr. Thompson is different from Reagan, and he has at times deviated from the orthodox conservatism that Reagan, after his death and nearly two decades removed from his presidency, has come to represent.

Mr. Thompson, the former senator from Tennessee, has at times voted in support of affirmative action, at other times against it; Reagan’s Justice Department consistently championed efforts to eliminate it. Mr. Thompson, a former trial lawyer, has voted against efforts to impose federal caps on punitive damages and lawyers’ fees, a central part of the conservative agenda.

Although he consistently voted in favor of restrictions on abor-tion during his eight years in the Senate, his position has not always been as clear-cut, suggesting that he evolved on the issue much the way Reagan did. In questionnaires Mr. Thompson answered when first running for the Senate in 1994, he checked a box saying he believed abortion should be legal in the first three months of pregnancy.

Along with Senator John McCain of Arizona, Mr. Thompson was a sponsor of the campaign finance bill that was strongly opposed by conservatives and remains a target of their ire. He split his votes in the Senate on the articles of impeachment against President Bill Clinton.

“Thompson was never an ideological conservative,” said Lou Cannon, a biographer of Ronald Reagan who has also written about Mr. Thompson. “He’s a very mainstream Republican. Reagan was more conservative.”

Mr. Thompson’s announcement, in contrast to the announcement speeches by some of his rivals, made no mention of Reagan as he declared his candidacy on his Web site and in Des Moines on Thursday. One of his aides said there was no reason to force the comparison, since Mr. Thompson’s career and political positioning would lead analysts and journalists to make it on their own.

But just in case anyone might miss the point, the campaign introduced Mr. Thompson at a rally in Iowa on Thursday with a video that included a photo of him with Reagan.

Conservatives have yet to coalesce around any one of the Republican candidates. Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York, supports gay rights and abortion rights; Mitt Romney of Massachusetts has shifted his position on abortion over the past five years; and Mr. McCain is viewed with suspicion by conservatives for, among other reasons, his advocacy of campaign finance restrictions and his stance on immigration.

The qualms about the ideological credentials of the other candidates have given Mr. Thompson an opening. Since leaving the Senate, he has continued to burnish his conservative credentials by speaking out on issues of concern to the Republican base, like immigration, taxes and terrorism, through a Web column and a syndicated radio commentary.

Some Republicans said that electability in the general election, rather than adherence to a conservative line, might prove to be the most powerful factor in the selection of a nominee. And conservatives who spoke optimistically about Mr. Thompson were as likely to talk about his presentation, and compare it to that of Reagan, as they were to talk of his politics.

“It’s a fair comparison because Fred Thompson’s ability to communicate — his likability — just comes across, and that is what Ronald Reagan had,” said David N. Bossie, president of Citizens United, a conservative group.

Martin Anderson, a longtime associate and a biographer of Reagan, said he liked Mr. Thompson but was baffled by the comparisons to Reagan. When Reagan ran for the presidency, Mr. Anderson said, he laid out a clear agenda of what he intended to do, starting with systematic reductions in taxes.

“I don’t know where Thompson is on any of these things; I don’t know what he is going to do,” Mr. Anderson said. “Everyone says they are like Reagan. So far, the only way I’ve seen that Thompson is like Reagan is that he did some acting.”

Still, Mr. Thompson was generally viewed as a center-right conservative over eight years in the Senate. He repeatedly described himself as conservative in his remarks on Thursday, and aides said his appeal to that segment of the party electorate was critical to the success of his late-starting campaign.

Since he began exploring his candidacy, Mr. Thompson has criticized Republicans and Democrats alike for failing to rein in spending. Had he been in Washington, he said, he would have opposed the White House’s successful push to add a Medicare drug benefit. He has embraced conservative positions on immigration and gun control measures.

More than anything, he points to his long-standing conservative view of federalism as informing his views on issues like abortion and gay rights. The philosophical stance has often led him to stake out lonely positions: he voted against setting a 0.08 blood alcohol level as the national drunken-driving standard, as well as making it a federal crime to carry a gun in or a near a school.

“Thompson, like Reagan, has an acute understanding of federalism,” said Craig Shirley, a conservative consultant and the author of a book on Reagan. “I think the tell-tale vote for me and a lot of conservatives was when he was in the Senate and there was that vote on the D.U.I. limit.”

Still, Mr. Shirley said, it is a mistake to draw too much of a comparison between Reagan and Mr. Thompson, saying that the two men had vastly different relations with the conservative movement. That could prove significant as Mr. Thompson moves to win conservative support against a concerted appeal for the same voters from Mr. McCain, Mr. Romney and Mike Huckabee of Arkansas.

“Long before Reagan won the nomination, he had a 30-year investment in the conservative movement, and Thompson does not,” Mr. Shirley said. “Reagan had so much invested in the movement, and the movement had a lot invested in him. That’s one big difference.”

LAZY NEW EDITOR?

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 16:07:48 GMT

I do not know the new editor at the Parsons Sun. I don't remember where he came from or what his credentials are, but so far, escpecially in the editorial dept., I'm not impressed. I keep reading the paper hoping that maybe he would be different, you know, maybe actually grow some balls enough to address issues in a provacative way.

Submitted for your dissaproval: the following from the Sun.

This guy presents theoreticals without facts. What are the facts about the NOLA levies? Are they in fact a product of, and maintained by contract from the Corps?

Or.....does he leave that out because he really doesn't have anything to back up his opinion? People in Neosho county are my friends and neighbors, I wish them well. Tell us the whole story Mr. Editor. Sheesh!

FEMA should do what's right for citizens

During July's flooding, several levee districts in Neosho County received damage. Now the Federal Emergency Management Agency is saying it doesn't know if it will help with the cost of repairs.

The government needs to step forward and help these districts in need.

According to Ross Adkins, spokesman for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, if levees are not part of the Corps' inventory, they are "on their own." In order for a levee to be on the Corps' inventory, an agreement must be made to maintain the levees to specific standards. These particular levees were not maintained or inspected by the Corps. However, levees that were maintained and inspected by the Corps haven't held up much better in other places.

Take the city of New Orleans, for example. The city was inundated by floodwaters when the levees broke during Hurricane Katrina. FEMA couldn't wait to get in there and start rebuilding the levees. Is this all because the levees were on the Corps' inventory? Or is it because that was the city of New Orleans? If the latter is the reason then this is a terrible injustice to the citizens of Neosho County. If FEMA doesn't step up and help this is going to put another hardship on residents who have already suffered enough.

Neosho County Counselor Amy Kramer said the most likely option for paying for the repairs, if FEMA doesn't help, is a no-fund warrant. A no-fund warrant requires a county to get authority from the Kansas Board of Tax Appeals to get a loan. The loan would be repaid through taxes levied on property owners within the levee district. This would put an ever-greater burden on residents who are still trying to recover from the flood. However, the county's eligibility for aid has not been established so they are back to square one.

Square one is asking FEMA for assistance. And to date Neosho County officials have been filling out paperwork requesting that help. They have met extensively with FEMA officials, most recently last Thursday. During that meeting they were told to rebuild to FEMA contract guidelines in case funding comes through. Hopefully that is a good sign.

As with many residents who endure a natural disaster, the residents of Neosho County have suffered enough. FEMA needs to step up just like it did for the city of New Orleans and help with levee repairs. Set policy aside this time and do what is right for the citizens of Neosho County.

- Darren Werth

Editor and publisher

It's not just a good idea....IT'S THE LAW!

Tue, 21 Aug 2007 16:18:21 GMT

WOW!
I love everyone's response to this!
I AGREE 100%, when I saw this woman on the boob tube, and trying to be some saintly martyr, well,
peeee-uke!

And SHAME ON all the greedy bastards that employ these folks too.
I can neither afford to employ her, or COMPETE with her in the job market!

My view is that the law is the law.

OPEN BORDERS ARE NOT FAIR TO ANYONE!
The illegals, U.S. citizens, the kid, the law enforcement, EVERYONE!

I don't know 'bout ya'll, but I've gotten to like Lou Dobbs, and The Cafferty File!

And to think that on the other bloggie I was painted as an evil lib! HA!

THOUGHTS ON DEMOCRACY

Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:13:28 GMT

Democracy is like a new pair of shoes. First of all, you should be from a culture that actually wants shoes. Second, you should put them on and walk around for a while to see how they feel. Shoes should fit. All feet are different. If they fit and feel good, wear them for a while. Hell, keep them, if they give you a lift and make your life better, repair or replace them when they become worn and painful.

But, if your neighbors don't wear shoes, and don't want to wear shoes, for God's sake, don't run around trying to nail them to their feet!

Let's say I break into your house

Tue, 24 Jul 2007 09:54:33 GMT

Certain people are angry that the US might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely.
Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests.

Hmmm….

Okay, say I break into your house. When you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors. I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard working and honest (except for when I broke into your house).

According to the liberal plans:
You are required to let me stay in your house.
You are required to add me to your family's insurance plan.
You are required to educate my kids.
You are required to provide other benefits to me & to my family.

By the way, my friend will do all of your yard work because he is also hard working and honest, except for that breaking in thingy. Can we just forget about that?

I know,….why don’t we call the break-in an "unconventional job search"?

If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your
house carrying signs that proclaim my RIGHT to be here.
It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm a hard working and honest, person, except for well, you know, the unconventional job search thingy.

And what a deal it is for me! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of cold, uncaring, selfish, prejudiced, and bigoted behavior.

You don’t want to be a bigoted racist do you?

No? Good.

I’ll finish the dishes while my friend weed-eats.

After that, I’ll need a break to drop my kids off at Public School #123, and then go to the DMV to renew my driver’s license.

THE BOTTOM LINE FOR PEACE

Wed, 16 May 2007 16:26:57 GMT

THE REAL ROADMAP TO PEACE ~ (CONDENSED VERSION)

Real lobbyist reform. There will always be war while corporations run our government(s).
Let Iraq govern themselves as they see fit.
Give the Palestinians an unhindered, viable state.
Move the bulk of our troops back to Afghanistan, the real terrorists will come to us.
Persuade our corporations to invest more in poor Islamic countries, Indonesia will do.
Sponsor worldwide "micro-banking", empowering the people to create better conditions.
Give the Kurds in northern Iraq their own state. Rather, recognize the one that already exists.

8. IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN YOU NEED….SHARE.

THE REAL INDICATOR IN IRAQ

Fri, 11 May 2007 20:48:54 GMT

I was all for the war in Afghanistan, I still am.

Whenever Bush gives a speech like last night, I start to have doubts about my opposition to the Iraq war, for a minute or two at least. He makes some scary points about the aftermath of leaving, which is inevitable anyway. What really is scary, is the fact that he refuses to plan for the event. Kind of saying that such planning would admit defeat.

WHAT? That's just stew-pud!!

Would you enter ANY foreign country without a plan on how to get home? Even if just on vacation? Certainly not.

But....right to the BOTTOM LINE.

THE REAL INDICATOR of the Iraqi's intentions, and therefore any notion of progress is....

the Iraqi congress intending to take a two month break. Two months is almost exactly the amount of time that the congress here is willing to wait to see some (political) progress.

I have said all along, even in moments of doubt, that the Shia led government has never had any intentions of actually cooperating with the USA, unless we call the rampant graft and corruption cooperation.

There, I said it.

ABOUT FEMA

Mon, 07 May 2007 16:08:06 GMT

One quick note about FEMA.
Unless you are a business owner, or someone who is fairly wealthy, with valuable properties and good insurance, STEER CLEAR of FEMA.
Or if you are employed as a sinecure, and have ALL your time to devote to navigating the beaurocracy,
Forget it.
Not worth you time.
Nuff said?

I THOUGHT THE WINNERS GET TO WRITE HISTORY?

Mon, 07 May 2007 12:32:40 GMT

Is REALITY so revolting that conservatives must write their own reality? Puh-leeeze!

But they do have one redeeming thing,

Bible quote of the day!

http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page

CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP

Thu, 03 May 2007 20:04:16 GMT

Loyal NASCAR Fans vote too!

In a recent survey of NASCAR fans across the country, race fans were asked to identify which, from a list of hypothetical sponsors, were completely inappropriate as a sponsor of a Winston Cup car.

Ranking dead last, below the sins of "Condoms", "Penthouse Magazine", "Absolut Vodka", and "Mitsubishi televisions" was "Politicians" with as much as 83% ranking them as completely inappropriate NASCAR sponsors.

Not to say that NASCAR fans are not supportive of their sponsors. To the contrary, NASCAR fans provide one of the highest levels of brand loyalty and sponsorship support of any one of the hundred or so sports events tested.

In a recent study, where over 1,000 nationwide, random NASCAR fans were interviewed,

over one-half (57%) indicated that they had a higher trust in products offered by NASCAR sponsors.

In addition, nearly three-fourths of the NASCAR audience (71%) reported that they "Almost always" or "Frequently" choose a product involved in NASCAR over one that is not, simply because of the sponsorship.

Okay, that being said, here’s my point.

Want to ask our politicians for some REAL lobbyist reform?

Here’s the plan.

Every campaigning politician should be made to wear the corporate logos of each and every corporation that is a contributor!

How long would any of them last if the sponsorship was right there on their politician’s sport jacket for the whole world to see? If we could get this done, we could see who we are REALLY voting for.

Who will I vote for?

Well this election, I’ll be voting for Smith & Wesson, Kool cigarettes, EXXON MOBIL, and Pfizer!

ANYBODY REMEMBER PAT'S MEMORY PILLS?

Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:20:16 GMT

Still Waiting for Answers

Surely no one beyond a handful of the most self-deluded Republicans in Congress was surprised at the disclosure by George Tenet, the former intelligence director, that there was never a serious debate in the Bush administration about whether Iraq actually posed a threat to the United States.

It has long been evident that President Bush decided to invade Iraq first, and constructed his ramshackle case for the war after the fact. So why, after all this time, are Americans still in the dark about the details of that campaign?

For that matter, why don’t Americans know the full truth about Mr. Bush’s illegal domestic spying program or his decisions on how to handle prisoners of the war on terror? And now there are new questions begging for answers — about the purge of United States attorneys and about campaign pep rallies in executive branch agencies that might well have violated federal law.

For six years, the Republican majority in Congress ignored the administration’s power grabs, misdeeds and incompetence or, worse, pushed through laws that gave legislative cover to some of Mr. Bush’s most outrageous abuses of power. Now that the Democrats control Congress, they have opened the doors of government in welcome ways. But the list of questions just seems to grow.

We hope Representative Henry Waxman, chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, enforces the subpoena of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to discuss prewar claims about Saddam Hussein’s long-gone weapons programs. Ms. Rice, who was national security adviser before the war, says she has answered every possible question. Actually, we don’t have room for all our questions.

Just a few: Did she vet the briefing Mr. Bush got from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s rogue intelligence shop on Iraq’s alleged efforts to acquire uranium? The Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department thought, correctly, that the report was false. So why did Ms. Rice permit the president to repeat it to the world? Or did Mr. Bush also know what he was claiming was wrong?

The same applies to other claims about Iraq, including a false report about the purchase of aluminum tubes for bomb building, talk of mushroom clouds and fairy tales about links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. When it became clear the intelligence was false, why didn’t Ms. Rice make sure the public found out? Before the war, Ms. Rice was not in a post requiring Senate confirmation, but she is now. If she refuses to testify, the House should hold her in contempt.

It is imperative for Senator John Rockefeller, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, to finish two remaining studies on prewar intelligence that his Republican predecessor, Senator Pat Roberts, had no intention of completing. The first, on the errors made by the intelligence agencies in predicting what would happen after the invasion of Iraq, is expected to be finished next month. The final piece of the report will compare what administration officials said about Iraq with the actual information they had. Both reports are essential for understanding how this country got into this mess. Mr. Rockefeller will have to make sure the White House does not drag out the declassification procedure.

And then there are the questions about the purge of federal prosecutors. There is mounting evidence that many of the eight fired United States attorneys were punished for refusing to prosecute Democrats on phony election-fraud charges. Who ran this purge? And is it true, as it now seems, that others were rewarded for bringing weak corruption cases timed to close races?

For the last six years, the White House has also conducted seminars in each election cycle that certainly seem like an effort to use government agencies to help G.O.P. candidates. Did they violate the law that forbids the use of federal offices for campaigning?

Karl Rove, Mr. Bush’s political “architect,” is at the center of both of these scandals. Congress needs to issue, and enforce, subpoenas to compel him and other top White House officials to testify.

Mr. Bush’s supporters are already arguing that Congress’s much-needed investigations are politically motivated and backward looking. Actually, the baldly political act was the Republicans’ refusing to do their constitutional duty of oversight for the last six years. Mr. Waxman said his panel issued four subpoenas to the Bush administration under Republican leadership. The same leadership issued more than 1,000 subpoenas to the Clinton administration.

As for looking back, Mr. Bush has hardly given up the habit of stonewalling Congress, or shown that he has learned the limits of his power. The war in Iraq not only continues, but Mr. Bush is escalating it and repeating many of the same myths about Saddam Hussein. The country does not need any more myths. It needs answers.