Here is the url for a good blog with some genuine research on Bush's use of the White House web site (publicly funded, or "paid for by taxpayers" in usual parlance):

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00000815.htm

I have not been in touch with bradblog and do not know the author.  Today's entry was posted at www.buzzflash.com.

The blog is a good example of what can be accomplished with what used to be called "follow-up," as in the words not  heard at presidential press conferences nowadays, "I have a follow-up question."  In sports, like golf for example, it would be called "follow-through."  The author takes one topic, White House manipulation of its official web site to change or edit the past, and follows through.  Regrettably, the Bush White House is providing ample material.

I have a additional points to make, re Bush executive orders.  Take Executive Order 13315, August 29, 2003, for example, which the White House has not yet taken down:  http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/08/20030829-1.html

What this Order does is legitimize the looting of Iraq.  See the Asia Times article at http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EI24Ak03.html  The Order transferred Iraqi assets to US control, under which it could go to US contractors in Iraq among others, with the decisions to be made in part through a "Development Fund for Iraq" under L. Paul Bremer of the Coalitional Provisional Authority.  (Bremer was previously an executive in Marsh and McLennan, now under investigation in New York state for bid-rigging.  Bremer subordinate Michael Braham in Marsh Crisis Consulting -- a security division -- now heads a northern Virginia security company among those in the portfolio of an investment firm headed by Marvin P. Bush, George W. Bush's youngest brother.)

Another point.  Although major media outlets paid little attention to this Order, there was some criticism from several sources (including me).  Also, The looting of priceless cultural artifacts from Baghdad's museum aroused international indignation, putting looting in bad smell.  Hence, GWBush issued a new order July 29, 2004:  http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/07/20040729-2.html

The order extends and intensifies the previous Order BUT does prohibit looting Baghdad's museum, sort of:  "Sec. 4. Unless licensed or otherwise authorized pursuant to this order or otherwise consistent with U.S. law, the trade in or transfer of ownership or possession of Iraqi cultural property or other items of archeological, historical, cultural, rare scientific, and religious importance that were illegally removed, or for which a reasonable suspicion exists that they were illegally removed, from the Iraq National Museum, the National Library, and other locations in Iraq since August 6, 1990, is prohibited."

The rest of the Order is so disgraceful, and so opaquely worded, that I recommend reading it.  By the way, both this Order and 13315 came with an "Annex" of Iraqi persons whose assets are confiscated.  The newer Order has a different Annex, superceding the earlier.  Neither Annex is posted with the Order it accompanies.