Comments on Bush Wired: BULGE HISTORY... the story.

Help! I am lost. I was searching for computer help...

2005-10-04T14:47:00.000-07:00

Help! I am lost. I was searching for computer help and somehow ended up here. How that happened I don't know, however I do like your Blog a lot. Would you mind if I add your Blog to my favorites page so others can visit?

There is a very recent series of photos of Bush fr...

2004-11-20T20:39:00.000-08:00

There is a very recent series of photos of Bush from behind. I'm not that good at interpreting the Bulge pics, so I'm posting this link for others who might be interested in a closer look!
http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news?p=bush+secret+service&ei=UTF-8&c=news_photos

The only reason any of us saw the Bulge at all is ...

2004-11-15T18:32:00.000-08:00

The only reason any of us saw the Bulge at all is because FOX, (who provided the pool video of the debates) filmed the candidates from the rear. James Baker's debate rules specifically stipulated that there would be no shots from the rear. Thanks for FOX for not following the rules!

This is one of the first strange twists in the Bulge story, and perhaps one of the first reasons why some people began to wonder about the bulge. There are some other odd things in Baker's debate rules which have been the subject of much speculation, and in fact, help support the "wired" theory.

Kerry was looked at closely in footage of all 3 debates, he was never seen with an obvious bulge as Bush was... there have been numerous camera angles studied. However, there HAVE been reports that Kerry had a bulge as well...

I keep my offer open to post any photo of Kerry with the Bulge for fair and balanced coverage of this story, and for comparison. If you have seen a Kerry bulge send it to me or post a link! Despite several promises to send a Kerry Bulge nobody has followed through.

Icone

My guess why Cheney and probabily Kerry hasn't bee...

2004-11-15T17:38:00.000-08:00

My guess why Cheney and probabily Kerry hasn't been "seen" with a "bulge" is quite simply something known as "angle of view". Good photographers know all about it. Directors know about it, too. In the first debate there were a lot more back views of Bush than of Kerry. I don't recall any back views of Chaney. It's all a matter of perception.

Yeah, the Democrats losing their votes to "spoilag...

2004-11-15T17:17:00.000-08:00

Yeah, the Democrats losing their votes to "spoilage", etc, may have to do with the fact that a lot of them not having the ability to administer their vote properly. Proof was with the punch card ballots in Florida in 2000. Now they are blaming the new machines.
What next?

Someone earlier posed a question, would we still b...

2004-11-13T20:23:00.000-08:00

Someone earlier posed a question, would we still be after this story if Kerry had been elected? The answer is, yes! If for no other reason than to force the media to do their job. There is a story here, and it needs to be told. As for the exit polls, an MIT study this week, said that for the exit polls to be incorrect would be a 250 million to one shot. I also agree with the 6:14 poster, Brad is a red herring. I do believe all will be revealed.

Back to the "bulge" question. "What is the bulge?...

2004-11-13T19:28:00.000-08:00

Back to the "bulge" question. "What is the bulge?" is not the important question. What is important is the alleged behavior by Mr. Bush. If he cheated in the debates or is so controlled and/or incompetent that he needs to be prompted during some appearance then that rises to a tragically important issue. The physical means used is simply important evidence. The media seem fixated on the means and not the deeed. They fail to ask the straight-forward question: "was he assisted in any way during the debates or 9/11 testimony?"

Mr. Cheney has apparently never been seen with a similar device. I can't imagine this administration protecting him any less than Mr. Bush. That is a blow for any security explanations for the bulge.

Ok then answer this... Election 2000, who was Ka...

2004-11-13T18:33:00.000-08:00

Ok then answer this...

Election 2000, who was Katherine Harris?
Electon 2004, who is Ken Blackwell?

Both serve(d) as Secratary Of State in their homestates and are ultimately responsible for the election results. Both are very partisan republicans. Both have made some strange decisions about the vote counts, both have thrown out vast amounts of ballots that benefitted republicans.

The election commissions are not run by certain pa...

2004-11-13T18:20:00.000-08:00

The election commissions are not run by certain parties, but by non-partisan committees composed of people from all parties. It is ridiculous to think that one party can control the way votes are recorded.
It's funny that the party doing the complainiing is the one always losing votes. The exit polls can be wrong, simply by who the pollsters target to interview.

Brad Menfil is a hoax. Brad has said he has insid...

2004-11-13T18:14:00.000-08:00

Brad Menfil is a hoax.

Brad has said he has inside info on may important topics and they all end nowhere. He must be Karl Rove or the head of the CIA or something to have access to all that info. He knows the secret to the bulge, the secret to election fraud, and probably knows the secret to the Kennedy assasination. He loves to tip off the world because he is "one of us" but his tips never help solve any issue.

dont be fooled -Dave

from: http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/111304...

2004-11-13T18:08:00.000-08:00

from: http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/111304.html

Yet, while it may be understandable for national journalists to go easy on the Bushes, that pattern over the years has eroded public confidence in the media’s fairness and integrity. Millions of Americans now flatly don’t trust the national news media to tell the truth when the Bushes are involved.
That perception, in turn, has led rank-and-file Americans to step forward via Web sites to lend whatever knowledge and expertise they have to investigate this powerful family. As amateurs, these Americans are sure to make mistakes or jump to conclusions that aren’t well supported by facts.
But the big media has no moral foundation upon which to criticize these shortcomings by common citizens. If the professional journalists focused more on doing their jobs, rather than protecting their careers, the American people would be far better served.

Either "Brad" is dreaming, or a fiction writer, or...

2004-11-13T17:54:00.000-08:00

Either "Brad" is dreaming, or a fiction writer, or just trying to pull everyone's leg. There is no way one program distributed nationally and under such security to be modified that many ways without being detected. Pure speculation.

they are recounting in ohio and peoples votes are ...

2004-11-13T17:48:00.000-08:00

they are recounting in ohio and peoples votes are being thrown out for stupid reasons. this is wrong. bush won but this is wrong. does anyone know what would happen if kerry actally won? isnt it too late?

Yes the fact that Democrats are the only ones havi...

2004-11-13T17:43:00.000-08:00

Yes the fact that Democrats are the only ones having problems with the election results in states where the election is run by Republicans DOES SAY SOMETHING! It says something is wrong. Why are all the exit polls and voting irregularities hurting the Democrats? Shouldnt the margins of error dictate that irregularities go BOTH ways? Why were the exit polls correct in states with a papertrail but so wrong in places without?

-dave

Well, one more, then I'm through. No, Theresa, I ...

2004-11-13T17:25:00.000-08:00

Well, one more, then I'm through. No, Theresa, I don't even watch Fox News, except maybe the local version at 10:00 on the local station, which is actually done by another network here. I generally watch CBS local and national news. Other than that, my information comes from all other sources combined, including talking among friends, coworkers, and family. During the 2000 election, the Supreme Court did not annoint President Bush. All through the recounts, Bush still held enough lead to win Florida and the election. Only after this was realized, did the Court have the recount discontinued. Besides, according to the Democrat story, it seems that only Democrats have had problems voting in both elections. Doesn't that tell you something?

Nuff said, I'm done now. Best wishes and goodbye.

Well said Icone. I usually don't agree with much ...

2004-11-13T17:20:00.000-08:00

Well said Icone. I usually don't agree with much that you put forward. I voted Bush but only because I hate Kerry, there wasn't much room for a real choice in this election.

Is it ok for a country to invade another for its own security? Is this a larger issue? I know the other side is going to bring up Iran and North Korea, but can't we all admit that Saddam's Iraq was a threat? WMDs or not, Iraq was not playing by the rules and not only attacked the US many times in no fly zones, but Saddam also tried to assasinate the first president Bush. These are FACTS and I think they support a threat to America. I agree that the WMD arguement was total bullshit, but still Saddam had to go.

I am moving the following comment posted elsewher...

2004-11-13T16:45:00.000-08:00

I am moving the following comment posted elsewhere on Bush Wired to this thread. Its from "Brad Menfil", who some of you may remember from the earlier days of the Bulge. His posts on the Portland Indymedia site were the subject of heated debate. Some questioned if Brad menfil was a hoax, others took his comments more seriously. Some of what he said added up, some did not. His story and the subsequent coverage of his comments are quite interesting. But like the bulge nothing was ever conclusively figured out. We all await "Brad Menfil" to post some concrete info that can be checked out, and explain why he is privvy to such important information. -Icone/Bush Wired
___________
___________
Posted by: Brad Menfil
Brad Menfil is not my real name. I work for the RNC. I fear reprisals if I'm found out.

The truth about this election is this: Florida and Ohio had to go for Bush in order for him to "win" the election. In reality he lost both states. In fact, he did not even win the popular vote. He lost the national popular vote by at least 1,750,000. This shows you the scale of the fraud.

The exit polls were not wrong. Kerry was the clear winner, but victory was snatched from him.

Florida first. The 200,000+ margin of victory for Bush made this state uncontestable. Everybody assumes that even with some fraud, Kerry could never have made up the difference in a recount. But Kerry actually won by about 750,000 votes. The numbers were changed by a computer program (in both electronic and scan-tron voting systems) called "KerryLite." "KerryLite" of course is not actual name of the program. The actual name is 11-5-18-18 etc. For additional encryption, the numbers were jumbled but I'm not sure in which order. The numbers replace the letters of the alphabet. For example, K is the eleventh letter of the alphabet.

So the if-then statement goes something like this: "if total true Kerry>total true Bush, Bush x 1.04x (.04 is a random number)(total true Kerry), total true Bush". The second part of the equation takes the total number of votes cast and subtracts the new Bush total, subtracts the third party totals and leaves the rest for Kerry.

Sometimes the program would also reduce third party votes and award them to Bush. And even where Bush legitimately won, he was still awarded additional votes. The big Democratic counties (Broward for example) went to Kerry because it had to appear that everything was on the up and up. It's interesting to see this unfold. Does anybody wonder why the Republican counties were mostly counted after the Democratic counties? You should wonder, and also know that this was no accident. The Bush team had to make up the votes as the night went on.

In Ohio, computer voting fraud, vote tossing and voter suppression were the main methods. Vote tossing was simply the removal of Kerry votes and some third party votes. In some areas, the Bush vs. Kerry votes were absurd. Nine to one, eight to two.

Voter suppression took the form of making voters stand in four hour long lines. This of course took place in Democratic areas. The simplest thing to do was to have too few voting machines. Sometimes that's all it takes. People eventually lose patience and leave without casting a vote.

In other states such as New Mexico, Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire, Kerry's leads evaporated very quickly once the polls were shut down. Kerry only won New Hampshire, but barely. As it turned out, the lead was 6% for Kerry in that state and not enough fraudulant activity took place to flip the state to Bush.

So this will all come out and be known to everyone. Nothing this massive can be kept a secret. You're already beginning to see these "irregularities" and the wisper will become a roar.

Hang in there!

To the above poster: Well said, excellent commen...

2004-11-13T16:10:00.000-08:00

To the above poster:

Well said, excellent comment. Yes, I AM guilty as charged I have repeated some of my arguements several times... but its my blog, and I like to sum-up and consolidate the issues from time to time. I think I have brought forth reasonably fair coverage of this story. I have discussed not only allegations of cheating and other theories, but also less sinister bulge explanations. If you read the blog thoroughly, there is very little mention of partisan politics, Republicans/Democrats, or blatant Bush-bashing. Nowhere will you find me commenting that this issue should be used as election fodder. My intention in creating this site was not to disrespect the President, but to simply ask, "WHAT IS THE BULGE?".

Perhaps repeating myself, if the Bulge was not anything questionable, why wouldn't the White House, the Campaign, and other "official" sources simply ANSWER THE QUESTION? Why have we all been subjected to numerous, ludicrous explanations, baltant untruths, and official backpeddaling? Most of my ire has also revolved around questioning the media for not demanding a REAL answer to the question. A simple answer would have put this topic to bed long ago.

Only recently did I fully jump on the "wired theory" bandwagon... everything seems to point towards this in my view. I was widely quoted earlier stating that I thought that the Bulge was actually a Secret Service device. It may be. It was the Presidents own explanation of the Bulge coupled with the NASA scientists analysis that made me decide that there was something VERY WRONG with the Bulge... thats just my opinion.

Concerning your comments... they ARE appreciated and welcome, I very much enjoy the dialogue with those on "the other side". We need more of this in America, we need to find common ground between our views, and we all need to MOVE FORWARD. Having a forum where only one view is expressed is self-serving and doesn't help anything in the bigger picture.

If it was up to me, I would hope that all posters to this site would try to look at the larger issues here, and get less tangled up in the minutia and details that will never be fully agreed upon.

Concerning the Bulge... is it not appropriate to ask "the question", especially with all the different explanations? Should the press ask these questions and demand answers? Who's job is it to look into these issues? Lets not forget that Watergte began with a humorous story about a botched burglary, it was the press that asked hard questions and ultimately did an important service for our country.

Concerning the election... Yes, it appears that Bush won. I doubt it will be officially contested, and I agree that there is a certain amount of "crying over spilled milk" here. However, there are some important inconsistencies with the election results that should not be overlooked. Perhaps its not a big Republican conspiracy, but we should all be committed to having a straight forward election process, and look at the existing problems and try to fix anything broken in the system. This would benefit EVERYONE, and is crucial to our democracy. Peoples votes deserve to be noted and counted in full. Our system is not perfect, we should always strive to improve it.

Concerning Iraq... (I know you didn't bring the topic up) Anyone wanting to jump into this discussion should be prepared for a heavy response regardless of your views. I visit many blogs of all political slants... what amazes me is that both sides continue to argue over "facts" without offering further information to back their views up, and people continue to bash each other out of spite. There is always a certain feeling of "if they did it, so can we". Two wrongs don't make a right.

This is a great place to post your links for supporting evidence on views... people will look at them, and perhaps somewhere along the line, these issues will be resolved.

The most important thing is that free speech is alive and well on the web. Everyone should be comitted to forming their own opinions, and respect others views... but continue to ask questions when thing dont add up.

Nuff said, and I hope you will continue to post.

Icone
Bush Wired

By public knowledge, you must be talking about FOX...

2004-11-13T15:23:00.000-08:00

By public knowledge, you must be talking about FOX News. Nuf said. As for the hanging chads, it was the Supreme Court who annointed the current president, not paper ballots. See ya, wouldn't want to be ya. Ignorance is bliss.

First of all, I want to thank the posters who supp...

2004-11-13T15:09:00.000-08:00

First of all, I want to thank the posters who supported the opposite views. Yes, I have repeated information from other posts. But it was in response to other repeated information. Icone, if anyone repeated information, it has been you. The post to which this comment is attached is just a repeat of information that has been discussed over and over for about six weeks. My responses were to your comments about the bulge and voter fraud. Since your views have been repeated so much, isn't it fair that the opposite view be repeated also. I did not bring up the topic of Iraq, the deficit, etc. I just responded to it. No, I do not know where the WMDs are now. But, I do know that they WERE there, because Saddam used them on his own people. Once the weapons may have been moved out of the country, they couldn't be used as evidence.

Bush won the election in 2000, and the Democrats blamed to on faulty punch card machines in Florida, so the punch card machines were eliminated. Bush won this election, and the Democrats again blame the new voting machines and possible tampering. It will never end. If there was real evidence of voter fraud, something would have been done before now.

About six weeks ago, you all put forth these accusations of "cheating" in the debates, which is absurd. You have tried to force it into the media to try to sway public opinion but the media didn't fall for these tactics. Michael Moore tried to sway public opinion with his movie of a bunch of lies. No network would broadcast his movie before the election, so where is he now? Nobody knows.

I only started coming here because it was mentioned for one day on the Netscape homepage and I thought it might be interesting. Once here, I saw how ridiculous it was, and come back just to see how far you all will go.
I really do not have time to waste on extensive research on such a useless cause. I have better things to do with my life. My comments have been based on public knowledge, and not special research. So, since it is seemingly unwanted, I may not be posting here again. You all can carry this thing for as long as you want, but it won't do any good, and will only breed contempt amoung the Democrats who take it serious. But, remember, there are two sides to every story.

What liberal media are YOU talking about? If the m...

2004-11-13T10:28:00.000-08:00

What liberal media are YOU talking about? If the media printed all it knows about President Bush, his father and grandfather, it would make even the most right wing conservative shudder. A Tennesee judge is asked by the DOJ (talk about the fox guarding the hen house) to help rebuild Iraq's judicial system. He finds a list of 600 people of Hussein's, Osama is on it, the article also says, "it does not prove they engaged together in ANY act of terrorism against the U.S.". By the way, I am sure on that list was George H.W. Bush. Saddam knows him too, Bush "loaned" Saddam a lot of money. Did this poster also go down to the link on the same google page? Doubt it. On the health & energy link, there is a story that shows that Reagan/Bush gave Osama his "seed" money to start the Taliban. It also mentions the billions to Iraq, and George HW good friend Noriega, they used to work together at the CIA.
George is wired, because he has an IQ of 91( I won't mention which primate has the same IQ) and he can't put more than 3-5 words together at one time, he has admitted he doesn't read, and he has a poor memory, he can't even remember when he said, Osama bin Laden? I don't even think about him, he doesn't concern me very much. He was at one of his few and far between press conferences.

To the above poster You begin making an almost va...

2004-11-13T05:11:00.000-08:00

To the above poster

You begin making an almost valid point (yes, the truth is NOBODY knows, you included). We could all be wrong. After reading the post and seeing the pictures I cant believe you wouldn't wonder whats up with the bulge. But you go out with a fully refuted, proven, incorrect statement... and then mention the liberal media HA! You watch too much Fox news. It sounds so ignorant.

I voted for Bush and I love this site. eveyone in ...

2004-11-13T04:04:00.000-08:00

I voted for Bush and I love this site. eveyone in my office voted for bush and we all laugh about this site everyday. we might be bored but you guys are losers with nothing better to do. thats the funnyest joke of all. to answer the questions yes its important. yes the second is important. no my mind would not change. the problem with your story is that you have nothing except for fuzzy pictures and nameless people giving you a dumb conspiracy theory. show me the real evidence and i might change my mind. its a vest and who cares if the white house doesnt want to tell you about it.

i thought the iraq posts were good and worth more to debate than the bulge. Saddam and Osama did work together, google it and you will see. dont be fooled by the liberal media.

back on topic. found at the boston herald forum. ...

2004-11-13T03:43:00.000-08:00

back on topic. found at the boston herald forum. republican bulge-haters jumped all over a poster for posting the bulge story. since there seems to be a mix of political views here i wanted to post this.

Let me pose these questions to conservatives:

- If ANY President wore a "coaching" device in the debates, is this a serious issue?
- If ANY President wore such a device during congressional testimony is THAT an important issue?
- Would your view change if we were specifically referring to George Bush?

After my rather lengthy rebuttal to the anonymous ...

2004-11-13T03:26:00.000-08:00

After my rather lengthy rebuttal to the anonymous poster writing about Iraq and other issues, I received an e-mail from a reader admonishing me for using a nasty tone.

Let me be clear, ANY comments to this site are cheerfully accepted and welcome. I did not mean to give the impression that differing viewpoints would not be accepted here.

In my own defense, I had read one of the posts previously, not only on Bush Wired, but on another site. I simply wanted this person to make relevant posts, and not to write short dissertations on his(?) views and post them on all "liberal" blogs regardless of topic.

nuff said.
Icone