News Shredder

McChangeling - See Him Change...

2008-09-23T14:06:00.000-04:00

McChangeling

From the NY Daily News, Stanley Crouch slaughters John McCain and all of the other Republicans that are desperately running from their own failures:

Still dripping but fully awake, the Republican Party, which we thought would live or die as a bull under the flag of deregulation, is now sanctimoniously asserting the importance of the federal government stepping in to save the little big men of corporate America.

Have they suddenly become those traitorous agents of big government they usually dismiss as misleading populists, socialists or those willing to take us almost into the laps of the inept Marxists in Russia or China?

Of course not, says John McCain, who has become one of the most remarkable embodiments of change we have ever seen. But McCain's actual version of change is that he has become a changeling.
McCain is now deserving of the nickname McChange or McChangeling. But there is a bit of tragedy there. It is never a pleasant experience to see a man sell himself out in unimaginable ways because of the enticement of power.

The McChangeling - See him change in this rare behind the scenes McCain campaign footage with his high as a kite campaign entourage:

The McCain campaign has gotta be trippin' if they think we are buying anything they are saying anymore?

McCains Don't Pay Home Taxes For 4 Years

2008-06-29T17:55:00.002-04:00

Rich elitists don't have to pay taxes.

McCains Owed 4 Years of Taxes on Home
According to HuffPo and via ThinkProgress:

The article reports that the McCains had been delinquent in paying
taxes until Newsweek inquired about the matter. The McCains then paid off
$6,744.42 in back taxes, but still owe more. Newsweek writes:
When you’re poor, it can be hard to pay the bills. When you’re rich, it’s
hard to keep track of all the bills that need paying. It’s a lesson Cindy McCain
learned the hard way when NEWSWEEK raised questions about an overdue
property-tax bill on a La Jolla, Calif., property owned by a trust that she
oversees. […]
County officials say the trust still owes an additional $1,742 for
this year, an amount that is overdue and will go into default July 1.
Told of the outstanding $1,742, the aide said: “The trust has paid all bills
shown owing as of today and will pay all other bills
due.”

That settles that.

John McCain is
the epitome of a
modern day "GOP fiscal conservative."

Trust fund babies that can't balance their own checkbooks,
nevermind the budget of a country.

Any bets on whether McCains used the unpaid home taxes as writeoffs against their income? Both John and Cindy need to open up all of their books for public scrutiny.

Watch and Read

2007-11-07T15:48:00.000-05:00

Watch this Little Britain video to the end, which is only about a minute long:

Read this little blurb from the WaPo:

Staffers on Capitol Hill are howling over an e-mail sent from Sen. Larry Craig's office Friday about a watch found -- guess where -- in the men's room!

The e-mail, which is being forwarded pretty much all over the place on Capitol Hill, is from Pat Olsen, the embattled Idaho Republican's administrative director.

The e-mail announced that a watch was found in the men's room on the fifth floor of the Hart Senate Office Building, where Craig's office is located. On its face, the message suggests that a male staffer (possibly even Sen. Craig, the notorious men's room foot tapper) found the watch.

Cleaning the coffee of of the screen that I made the mistake of taking a sip of before reading that...

Typical College Republicans

2007-07-21T00:38:00.000-04:00

Is there any wonder why their party is in decline? Via Scarce at MLN:

Max Blumenthal's hilarious and thoroughly appalling "unauthorized" College Republican Convention Tour.
On July 13, 2007, I visited Section 60 of Arlington National Cemetery, where the bodies of American soldiers killed in Iraq were freshly interred. Afterwards, I headed across the street to the Sheraton National Hotel, owned by right-wing Korean cult leader Sun Myung-Moon, to meet some of the war's most fervent supporters at the College Republican National Convention.

In conversations with at least twenty College Republicans about the war in Iraq, I listened as they lip-synched discredited cant about "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here." Many of the young GOP cadres I met described the so-called "war on terror" as nothing less than the cause of their time. Huffington Post

View the video here...

And So The Bush Cover Up Of Treason Goes

2007-07-02T19:37:00.000-04:00

bush pardons a traitor that is trying to cover up a conspiracy to commit treason, and you still don't think these actions are necessary?

Get this Action Banner for your own web page

You are lying to yourselves if you think that anything less will stop these traitorous criminals in the White House.

GOP Cry-Babies on the Floor

2007-02-09T22:59:00.001-05:00

The GOP has done its best to make a scandal over the White House's policy of providing secure transport for the 2nd in line to replace the president, the Speaker of the House, since 9-11. They are trying to blame Pelosi for something she has little to do with.

Barny Frank drives home the fantasy of this non-existant "scandal" manufactured in the right wing MSM and childishly perpetuated by the GOP.

"The plane, Boss! The Plane!"

To make the point even more clear: Pelosi reportedly (on Faux news, of all places?) offered to take commercial flights rather than take the government flights.

They told me the first day that I was supposed to go that I couldn't make it across the country. And I said well, that's fine, I'm going commercial. ... I'm not asking to go on that plane. If you need to take me there for security purposes, you're going to have to get a plane that goes across the country, because I'm going home to my family. ... I'm happy to go commercial. But they want me to go on this plane, so the issue was distance, not size. And again, it's not about having a plane. It's about having transportation. These planes are used for other purposes in between trips, which are, you know, take place once or twice a week, going or coming. So, it isn't about that. But there are probably those in the Department of Defense who are not happy with my criticism of Secretary Rumsfeld, the war in Iraq, other waste, fraud and abuse in the Defense Department and I guess this is their way of making their voices heard. But it has nothing to do, as I say, with the president of the United States. He has encouraged my having the security I need.

(Via Josh Marshall)

Will this be enough to lay the right wingnut lie-fest to rest on this issue?

If the MSM's past record is any indication... I doubt it. They will just assign the propaganda to the next GOP mouthpiece in the GOP talking point echo chamber known as the MSM.

Campaign Financing, Vidoegame Violence, and WAR: The Hypocrisy that is Joe Lieberman

2007-01-11T08:45:00.000-05:00

As Joe Lieberman is jumping all over the bush "MORE WAR DOCTRINE" of escalation in Iraq consider the hypocrisy of Joe Lieberman's positions concerning campaign funding, video games, violence, and war.

According to ConnecticutBlog and MLN, this is the kindof people that Lieberman takes his campaign money from.

An analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan watchdog group, found that the Connecticut Democrat, who won re-election last month as an independent, received about $73,000 from a variety of industry sources over the past two years.

Among the donors were Linda McMahon, chief executive officer of Stamford-based WWE Entertainment. McMahon said in an e-mail that she gave money to Lieberman because "I make contributions to a variety of candidates whom I respect.

snip

"If you're going to portray yourself as a champion against sex and violence on TV and in video games, it certainly doesn't look like you're completely serious if one of your big contributors makes its money from sex and violence," said Massie Ritsch, spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics.
...
Asked why he accepted their money, Lieberman first joked, "I really don't get anything [contributions] from that industry.""

Now if that doesn't beat all? Joe is in the middle of a fight against video game violence and he takes money (and denies it!) from the ultimate in violent TV producers:

The WWE.

If you think it couldn't get any worse here well, YES! it can. Not only do they feature violence BUT violent sexual content as well:(warning!)

That was taken from WWE's Raw. And if that doesn't expose the ultimate in hypocrisy than how's about a video game version of all of this violent content, "WWE SmackDown! vs. RAW", where they tout such features as:

Spanking mini-game - in bra and panties matchups, a female wrestler could enter a "spanking" mini-game. The meter mechanic from the chop battles are retained, but the player must perfectly time the button press three consecutive times to win. If the player does so, a cut scene of the two female wrestlers kissing is played.
Also added to the game was the Clean/Dirty system, which influenced each wrestlers tactics. Players can choose if the wrestler is clean, dirty or neutral. A clean or dirty wrestler has a meter that can be filled up by performing special clean/dirty actions or moves. Clean wrestlers with a full meter can enable a temporary rush of invincibility while dirty wrestlers can perform an illegal move.

[update]More Courtesy of JoeJoeJoe at MLN

More on an hidden feature in WWE similar to the Grand Theft Auto feature that sent Phony Joe into convulsions:

WWE Raw 2 Cheats
"Hint: Nude Characters
Either create a female character, or edit one of the existing ones and give them all pure black clothes (0,0,0 for all 3 options). Then have a match in any PPV arena and on the Titantron they will appear naked."

Violence, cheating, violence against women, sexual content... These games have it all, mirroring the WWE's television productions.

Lieberman falsely claims to carry the banner in the fight against violent videogames and violence on TV... He is really only a perverted spokesman for hypocrisy in action.

Via Scarce at MLN and talking about video games, and how Joe Lieberman wants to regulate them for their violent content:

While Joe talks about this issue, Joe Lieberman has taken money from violent video game producers.

But here is one violent video game that Joe is desperate to get your kids to play:

F2C2
Welcome to the battlefield of the future!
F2C2 was created by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) to help explain the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program to soldiers in an interactive environment. The game depicts the 18 FCS systems, all connected via the FCS System of Systems Common Operating Environment, supporting the 21st century soldier.

Although F2C2 is best experienced when the player has a working knowledge of Army concepts and terminology, anyone can play! F2C2 may seem hard at first if you haven’t had Army training, but there are tutorials available. Prepare to be challenged!

You can download this video game, designed to train soldiers, for free at the official US Army webpage. Take a look at at how realistic this game is:

It's not just that Joe wants your kids to play this realistic game... It is that he also wants your kids to go to Iraq and do this for real.

And there is the hypocrisy that is Joe Lieberman.

Covering Up Rell's Moody Period

2006-12-19T01:28:00.000-05:00

Garfield only released part of the story:

Report: Top Rell Aide `Misled' Committee:
"Gov. M. Jodi Rell's chief of staff, M. Lisa Moody, 'misled' a legislative committee by giving sworn testimony that was 'not credible' regarding a Rell fundraiser last year, according to a draft copy of a new legislative report.

The report, obtained Wednesday by The Courant, also says that state elections enforcement chief Jeffrey Garfield should face 'some form of reprimand or censure' because he deleted important information from an investigative report and released the unedited version only after hearings were completed last spring."

Just in case you follow the FIC line of thought and didn't know, misled is another word for LIED, as for Rell's original reaction to her Moody Period:

Moody was suspended by Rell for two weeks after admitting that she handed out invitations to commissioners on state time. Her actions led to seven days of often-contentious legislative hearings in May. Sixteen of Rell's commissioners or deputies were fined $500 each to settle a case under a state law that prohibits those officials from soliciting campaign contributions from their subordinates.

The 14-page report quotes Moody as telling at least one senior staff member, "I am not twisting your arm, but I am," regarding the fundraiser.

The report also states that Moody told one deputy commissioner that "this meeting isn't happening" and another that "it's after 5" - meaning that the workday was officially over for state employees.

Also, we all know that "she testified at a legislative hearing that she did not fully read an ethics memo that it turned out she had edited." But I am betting there are alot more juicy details in the full unedited report that was released in a redacted (lying) version.

Go over and read it at the courant to see some of the reccommendations to stop this sort of waste of our government employees time. As for now I'll leave you with this last little snippet:

The report calls for Garfield's censure or reprimand because his investigation report deleted certain facts that the committee never knew about until after the hearings were closed. That included deleting the chief state's attorney's "interview notes" from two investigators who had spoken to Rell late last year, and deleting all references to DPUC Commissioner Anne George, "who kiddingly referred to Ms. Moody as `John Rowland.'" [...] Dan Moreland was said to have told investigators that when Moody handed George the fundraiser invitations, George responded, "Are you nuts?" George then told Moody, "OK, John Rowland" - a reference to the former governor who served a federal prison sentence on a corruption-related charge.

Goes to show that even the insiders know that Rowland politics are alive and kicking in the Governor Rell's office. As for Garfield, if he absorbs the bulk of the blame in the cover up of Rell's Moody period, wouldn't that make him the political equivalent of a used tampon? Time to trash him...

Let the Voting Fraud Begin!

2006-11-04T16:06:00.000-05:00

courant.com | Activist Denies Violating Ban On Ballot Work: "Prenzina Holloway was fined $10,000 in July 2005 and ordered not to distribute absentee ballot applications or to assist voters with the ballots for two years, after the State Elections Enforcement Commission found that she had forged a voter's signature in the 2004 election.

Holloway acknowledges working for Urban Voters and Associates, a company paid $17,550 by the Lieberman campaign since September to do 'field work.' But she said she isn't involved in the company's absentee ballot operations.

'That is just a no-no,' she said. 'And I know it is a no-no.'

But five people at a Vine Street housing complex for the elderly have told The Courant that Holloway and another person came to their doors to give them absentee ballot applications, and a security worker at another complex on Woodland Street said Holloway tried to get into the building to distribute applications there. Holloway was barred from the building after getting into a verbal altercation with the worker after he made supportive comments about Lieberman's main challenger, Ned Lamont.

Other sources at the building said she called back a week later to try to 'sweet talk' her way into the facility."

Joe Lieberman will do anything to win the election, regardless of the law, including hiring people that are barred from collecting absentee ballots and putting them out there to do just precisely that.

And Lieberman still hasn't answered where the money went in the $387,000 Petty Cash Scandal.

Keith Olbermann Goes All Muurow On Bush

2006-11-03T23:20:00.000-05:00

No further comment neccessary...

Republicans Stealing Votes Already?

2006-11-03T10:39:00.000-05:00

If you have electronic voting machines in your district check your votes carefully before you leave that voting booth:

CHECK YOUR VOTES VERY CAREFULLY!

Looking at the recent polls who woul've guessed they were that desperate? lol

Rell and Johnson's Dirty Little Secrets

2006-11-02T20:29:00.000-05:00

Nancy Johnson has some dirty little secrets she doesn't want you to know about:

Nothing like screwing over the soldiers for a few extra bucks...

Jodi Rell has a dirty little secret that BOTH she and Nancy Johnson share:

Johnson spoke frequently Monday about her similarities with the popular Rell, and never uttered the word Republican.

"We're both street ladies," Johnson said of herself and Rell. "Street ladies aren't governed by parties. I never ran a problem by a political party to find a solution."

Yep! They are both Republicans... Funny but "Street Ladies" wasn't the term I was thinking of considering they are selling themselves to lobbyists everywhere. The only problem here is that these two "ladies" get the lobbyists' money, the corporations get the lucrative government contracts, and we get screwed out of our tax dollars...

Also another dirty little secret: Johnson and Rell never really have offered any good solutions... They, and their GOP, only create more problems.

Voting For Joe = Vote For Insanity

2006-11-02T20:18:00.000-05:00

Ned Lamont drives the point home in a new add:

Vote for Ned Lamont!

Connecticut For Lieberman? Yeah right...

Joe Lieberman And His Republican Doh!

2006-10-31T19:46:00.000-05:00

$639,892 on Monday October 23

One day of "Pay To Play" with Joe costs you, the citizens of Connecticut, $639,892 worth of votes against your interests. $639,892 worth of influence to get votes that are only going to be in the interests of the BIG MONEY lobbyists, PACs and corporations that are bankrolling his campaign...

If you aren't outraged,
then you haven't been paying attention!

Ned Lamonts position on influence peddling?

He doesn't take money from Lobbyists or PACs. They can't buy him off and make him vote against our interests.

Ned believes that government must respect its citizens and tell them the truth. He will challenge the culture of “Inside the Beltway” corruption and demand that qualified people are appointed to critical government and public service positions.

The war, and Bush and Lieberman priorities, are cutting funds from programs that invest in our future. Student loans, Social Security, health care that everyone can afford – these are the issues that Ned will fight for, bringing a businessman’s ability to reach consensus without sacrificing the bottom line.

Ned will be a fresh voice in the Senate, working to build coalitions and accomplish change, and speaking out against the destructive Bush administration policies that directly threaten our moral and economic future, our civil liberties, and our nation’s security.

And now we get to the $387,000 question:

What does Lieberman do with all of his cash?

ILLEGAL THINGS, OF COURSE!

Lieberman’s FEC filings list over $387,000 in unexplained expenditures – listed only as “petty cash” – during just 12 days near the August 8th primary. These suspect, and unaccounted for payments, represent one out of every twelve dollars spent during the entire reporting period.

“These questions are critical for the people of Connecticut to know and that is why these laws exist and why we’re taking legal action,” Swan continued. “Only an 18 year career politician could dump almost $400,000 in cash into an election and try to call it petty cash.”

Under FEC regulation 11 CFR 102.11 a log must be kept of all petty cash expenditures. On Sunday, Lieberman Campaign Spokesperson Tammy Sun said she would attempt to locate the log by Monday. [New Haven Register, 10/22/06]

In sharp contrast to Lieberman’s massive, lobbyist funded slush fund, the Lamont Campaign only used $500 of petty cash. Lieberman has raised and spent millions over his career form lobbyists attempting to influence his votes. Lamont does not accept lobbyist, corporate or labor PAC money and has already vowed to disclose all meetings with lobbyists on his Senate web site.

Nuff said...

Grassroots Support For Ned Lamont

2006-10-31T19:33:00.000-05:00

The Democratic establishment in Washington isn't doing much for Ned Lamont:

Ned Lamont got little financial support from congressional Democrats - and none from Connecticut Sen. Christopher J. Dodd and key Senate veterans - in the crucial weeks after he won the party's Senate nomination Aug. 8, according to new campaign finance data.

Lamont has alot of money, money that he has ponied up on his own, and money from the grassroots. Lamont doesn't get much from the entrenched establishment because they are afraid of him. But having the largest base of grassroot support in Connecticut is a good thing if you are looking to fix what is broken on Capitol Hill. Lamont hasn't taken anything from corporate lobbyists, and nothing from any PACs.

Ned Lamont's support is people powered.

Joe Lieberman has alot of money. He had a HUGE war che$t. But where does all of that money come from? Lobbyists and PACs and from republican supporters that want to see the Connecticut-bush-clone "Stay the course!"

Joe Lieberman's support is the problem that needs to be fixed.

Face the facts... Influence for votes on Capitol Hill is a bought and sold commodity to the entrenched establishment. Lobbyists for special interests, PACs, and corporations are buying the old guard establishment on a daily basis, and we are the ones that are losing out.

Voting for Ned Lamont is one little step that can help stem the tide of corruption. It can help take back one of those votes in the Senate and make it ours. It can help make that one vote beholden to us Nutmeggers and NOT to the entrenched establishment that is afraid of what the Lamont campaign means to them.

Can we afford to miss this opportunity to take back that one Seanate vote for ourselves? Not if we truely want to fix what is wrong with our government.

Change the course!
Vote for Ned Lamont

Pelosi Kicks Hastert in the Nuts!

2006-10-29T15:09:00.000-05:00

Hastert Just can't seem to stop getting caught lying. Tuesday the man behind the Foley cover-up released a statement that was... Well? An outright lie. To put it mildly.

Democrat Leader Pelosi’s plan is to leave our borders open, grant blanket amnesty and provide Social Security benefits to illegal immigrants. Is THAT their plan? Democrat Leader Nancy Pelosi has NEVER visited the border. She claims to understand the needs of those on the front lines but has never visited those agents and offers no solutions.

How do we know it was another Hastert lie?

Here is a snippet from the Pelosi response:

“I visited the southern border in March with Congressman Silvestre Reyes, who had a distinguished career of leadership in the Border Patrol. I was able to see firsthand the Republicans’ record of failure on border security.

“This morning, the President plans to sign legislation authorizing a 700-mile border fence that his own Administration does not plan to build and for which the Republican Congress has not provided construction money.

“This fence that will not actually be built is a perfect symbol of the Republicans’ unwillingness to make controlling our borders a priority."

The Texas Congressman Reyes, after confirming Pelosi's visit to the border, had this to say about it all:

Perhaps that is why after six years of controlling the White House, the Senate, and the House, their ‘signature achievement’ on border security is a 700 mile fence along a 2,000 mile border. This fence doesn’t come close to solving our problem.

Unfortunately, no amount of photo-ops or signing ceremonies is going to take the place of real leadership on this vitally important issue.

I am certain the planned 12 foot high fence will increase the sales in Mexico of 13 foot ladders to get over it and shovels to dig under it, but I doubt it will stop many illegal border crossings. I also think that Hastert doesn't understand the real needs concerning securing our borders and hasn't offered any real solution at all.

Now that Hasterts latest lie has been exposed, I wonder how long it will be before he addresses his earlier lies about the Foley cover-up? Brian Ross at ABC news' The Blotter has an update on another Republican being investigated:

A source close to former House Clerk Jeff Trandahl told ABC News that Arizona Congressman Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) was one of a small number of "problem members"

...snip...

Kolbe was also asked by reporters to respond to reports that the U.S. Attorney in Phoenix has opened a preliminary inquiry into a 1996 camping trip Kolbe took with two high school boys, both former pages, following a report by MSNBC that one adult member of the trip was "creeped out" by "fawning, petting and touching" on the arms, shoulders and back of one of the teenagers by Kolbe.

"I know there are a number of inquiries underway, and we're cooperating fully with all those inquiries, and I'm sure at the end of the time it will show that we acted appropriately and did exactly the right thing," Kolbe said.

"A small number of "problem members""?
"A number of inquiries"?
"All those inquiries"?

IS ANYONE ELSE SEEING A LOT BIGGER PROBLEM HERE?

Just how many Republicans are being investigated? I am starting to think that I will have to keep my kids locked inside my home, at least until the elections are over, just in case a Republican comes to the neighborhood campaigning... Because you never know if they are one of the ones being investigated... Because Hastert and the rest of the GOP leadership covers up for all of them.

NANCY JOHNSON is WRONG

2006-10-29T14:39:00.000-05:00

Fuzzy Turtle pointed me to an online paper called The Corner Report:

Tuesday was a bad day for Republican Congresswoman Nancy Johnson.

First, the AFL-CIO issued a “report card” on the congresswoman’s record on working family issues during her 24 years as the Republican representative in the state’s Fifth Congressional District – a report card with a failing grade.

Next, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee distributed a list of Johnson’s record on health care, including the $739,000 she’s taken from pharmaceutical companies.

Then, signs began sprouting on trees on Rt. 7 and elsewhere in the Northwest Corner that say “Nancy Johnson is WRONG.” But the word “is” is written in such small letters that drivers passing by see only the words “Nancy Johnson WRONG.”

--- Read the rest at The Corner Report

Apparently there are alot of people that think NANCY JOHNSON is WRONG. Welcome to the club that seems to grow exponentially as the campaign season progresses towards

"NATIONAL KICK THE CORRUPT REPUBLICAN BUMS OUT DAY"

The Corner Report is a pretty good read. It has the look and feel of a typical Blog, but the writing style of a hometown paper. I couldn't help but stop and check out a few of the articles while I was there. Definately worth repeat visits.

The article also reminded me of a little sign problem we have in our town:

There is an empty house for sale a couple of streets over from where I live. I noticed a "Vote Johnson" sign up there a few times but it kept disappearing. There one day, gone the next. A couple of weeks ago I saw the people that used to live there and as I watched they removed the sign and tossed it in the garbage. The sign still keeps popping up on that empty for sale house.

And it keeps *POOF* vanishing.

It is obvious that someone keeps putting the sign there against the owners will in the hopes of "creating" a view of alot more local support for Johnson than there really is.

It's like Joe Lieberman's $387,000 illegal slush fund that was apparently used to pay for out of state people, from NJ and elsewheres, to campaign for him here because he doesn't have that sort of volunteer base in Connecticut like Ned Lamont does. Joe's support is strictly lobbyists' and other Republican money sources funneled through back-channels that pays for campign muscle. Some call them the "Liebergoons". lol

I guess Lieberman and Johnson are both pretty darn pathetic! That is what happens to career politicians when they sell their souls to corporate lobbyists and continue to cling to the failed policies of the Bush administration...

They lose touch with the people, and they lose all of their local support.

Certainly there are still some hardcore right-wing-nuts that will support any republican candidate regardless of their corruption and incompetence. But, thankfully, their numbers are obviously dwindling.

Bush and Lieberman: Cutting and Running From "Stay the course!"

2006-10-26T21:18:00.000-04:00

"Stay the course!"
That is all you will get from both Bush and Lieberman.

Despite President Bush's recent denials that "We've never been stay the course" and the NY Times' FALSE assertions to counter Ned Lamont's caqmpaign charges that Joe Lieberman has been a consistent cheerleader for Bush's failed "Stay the course!" policy, the fact remains that this is a bold face lie that exposes BOTH Bush and Lieberman's penchant for polticizing this war by telling people whatever they have to in order to cover their political asses and get more votes. It also doesn't say much about the researchers and writers at the "Post Judy Miller" NY Times.

In Bush's and Lieberman's own words:

BUSH: We will stay the course. [8/30/06]

LIEBERMAN: We have to stay the course in Iraq now and continue to build a stable, modernizing, democratizing country there. [01/04/04]

BUSH: We will stay the course, we will complete the job in Iraq. [8/4/05]

LIEBERMAN: We can do better. I will do better. I will make it international. I will stay the course, and I'll create a stable, democratizing, modernizing Iraq, which would be a tremendous step forward in the Middle East and the Islamic world and in our war against terrorism. [01/11/2004]

BUSH: We will stay the course until the job is done, Steve. And the temptation is to try to get the President or somebody to put a timetable on the definition of getting the job done. We’re just going to stay the course. [12/15/03

LIEBERMAN: Well, let's put it this way. What I'm most happy about is that he said that he will stay the course in Iraq until we finish the job, and the Iraqis are in control of their own destiny. [07/28/04]

BUSH: And my message today to those in Iraq is: We’ll stay the course. [4/13/04]

LIEBERMAN: We want to not only stay the course: we want to achieve victory. [04/26/04]

BUSH: And that’s why we’re going to stay the course in Iraq. And that’s why when we say something in Iraq, we’re going to do it. [4/16/04]

LIEBERMAN: "I thought the president gave the strongest case that I can remember him giving about why we went in and why we have to stay the course," Lieberman said, adding, "We've got to adopt a strategy of success. A defeat will create chaos in Iraq, chaos in the Middle East, and will embolden the terrorists in a way that will endanger our future and our children's future." [04/15/04]

Here is over 30 examples of Bush saying we must "Stay the course!" in some form or another. Media Matters has the goods on more of Lieberman's "Bush enabling" statements that mirror Bush administration talking points as perfectly as if they had come straight out of Karl Rove's mouth, even emulating the GOP talking point that defeat will create chaos "and will embolden the terrorists" that we have heard so often from every mouthpiece for the Bush administration.

If defeat will create chaos then we must be losing pretty badly since those terrorists are getting pretty emboldened according to defeatist Republican Senator Lindsey Graham:

"We're on the verge of chaos, and the current plan is not working," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said in an Associated Press interview. U.S. and Iraqi officials should be held accountable for the lack of progress, said Graham, a Republican who is a frequent critic of the administration's policies.

Asked who in particular should be held accountable Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, perhaps, or the generals leading the war Graham said: "All of them. It's their job to come up with a game plan" to end the violence

Bush and Liberman clearly say stay the course over and over. Because you never know who you might embolden in defeat. Now BOTH Bush and Lieberman are trying to hide from their mutual love of staying the course. It's almost like they are freaking flip-flopping clones.

This is why Ned Lamont is correct in attacking Lieberman's support of the failed Bush policy of staying the course. And Lieberman hates that.

And Senator Graham is right in laying alot of blame on Donald Rumsfeld. Here is what Rumsfeld has to say about Bush cutting and running from his "Stay the course!" policy:

Rumsfeld called media reports about Bush’s reversal “nonsense,” and said “of course” Bush is “not backing away from staying the course.”
---CLICK HERE TO LISTEN

The ever-incompetent Rumsfeld says that "Stay the course!" is still the Bush plan, regardless of the Bush "cut and run" posturing.

Lieberman and Bush are both in some hot water over their attempts to hide from their "Stay the course!" whitewash. If you vote for Joe Lieberman you are clearly voting for more of the same CHAOS. And all of the Bush backpeddling and NY Times' lies can't hide Lieberman from his own public record of support for the failed "Stay the course" Bush policy.

Vote For the Democratic candidate Ned Lamont, because he will work to "CHANGE THE COURSE!" of Lieberman's and the Bush administration's failed policies.

blog post test...

2006-10-26T20:46:00.000-04:00

So you can be an informed voter:

Info on Ned Lamont:

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - Official Campaign Website

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - Ned Lamont, the Political Entrepreneur

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "Democrats Back Lamont; Lieberman Files Independent Run" (F0x)

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - Unofficial Ned Lamont Resource

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - Unofficial Lamont Blog

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "The Democrats Mean Business" (WSJ)

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "Ned Lamont vs. Joe Lieberman" (The Nation)

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "Lieberman Loses Debate With Challenger Ned Lamont"

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "Lamont: Lieberman Sounded Like Cheney"

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "Lamont Fires Up Naples" (New Haven Independent)

Info on Joe Lieberman:

Joe Lieberman - "Seasonal Memory Lapses" by Paul Bass (Hartford Courant)

Joe Lieberman - "Truth About Joe"

Joe Lieberman - "Lieberman Wins Republican Friends, Democratic Enemies..." (WaPo)

Joe Lieberman - "Joe Lieberman is a Big Oil Republican" (LamontBlog)

Joe Lieberman - "Kerry Calls Lieberman the New Cheney" (ABC)

Joe Lieberman - "Joe Lieberman Doesn't Care About Handicapped People" (Wonkette)

Joe Lieberman - "Joe Lieberman is Running With a Bad Crowd" (Firedoglake)

Joe Lieberman - "116 Reasons Not to Vote for Joe Lieberman"

Joe Lieberman - "How Joe Lieberman Tried to Kill Rock 'N Roll" (Huffington Post)

Info on Alan Schlesinger:

Alan Schlesinger and Joe Lieberman

Info on races across the nation:

--AZ-Sen: Jon Kyl

--AZ-01: Rick Renzi

--AZ-05: J.D. Hayworth

--CA-04: John Doolittle

--CA-11: Richard Pombo

--CA-50: Brian Bilbray

--CO-04: Marilyn Musgrave

--CO-05: Doug Lamborn

--CO-07: Rick O'Donnell

--CT-04: Christopher Shays

--FL-13: Vernon Buchanan

--FL-16: Joe Negron

--FL-22: Clay Shaw

--ID-01: Bill Sali

--IL-06: Peter Roskam

--IL-10: Mark Kirk

--IL-14: Dennis Hastert

--IN-02: Chris Chocola

--IN-08: John Hostettler

--IA-01: Mike Whalen

--KS-02: Jim Ryun

--KY-03: Anne Northup

--KY-04: Geoff Davis

--MD-Sen: Michael Steele

--MN-01: Gil Gutknecht

--MN-06: Michele Bachmann

--MO-Sen: Jim Talent

--MT-Sen: Conrad Burns

--NV-03: Jon Porter

--NH-02: Charlie Bass

--NJ-07: Mike Ferguson

--NM-01: Heather Wilson

--NY-03: Peter King

--NY-20: John Sweeney

--NY-26: Tom Reynolds

--NY-29: Randy Kuhl

--NC-08: Robin Hayes

--NC-11: Charles Taylor

--OH-01: Steve Chabot

--OH-02: Jean Schmidt

--OH-15: Deborah Pryce

--OH-18: Joy Padgett

--PA-04: Melissa Hart

--PA-07: Curt Weldon

--PA-08: Mike Fitzpatrick

--PA-10: Don Sherwood

--RI-Sen: Lincoln Chafee

--TN-Sen: Bob Corker

--VA-Sen: George Allen

--VA-10: Frank Wolf

--WA-Sen: Mike McGavick

--WA-08: Dave Reichert

CT Blogs-

Bye Bye Rob [Simmons]-

Caffeinated Geek Girl-

Drinking Liberally, New Milford-

Hat City Blog- Joe Lieberman's Blog-

Joementum-

Lamont Campaign Blog (official)-

LamontBlog (unofficial)-

Liebermania-

NH Independent-

No More Nancy (CT-05)-

CT Campaigns-

Chris Murphy (CT-05)-

Joe Courtney (CT-02)-

Diane Farrell (CT-04)-

John DeStefano (Gov)-

Dan Malloy (Gov)

CT Sites-

Caucus of CT Dems-

Clean Up CT-

CT Citizen Action Group-

CT For Lieberman-

DeStefano for Gov-

Dump Joe-

Judith Blei Government Relations-

Lamont Resource (unofficial)

Mike Fitzpatrick

Ned Lamont Joe Lieberman Nancy Johnson Chris Shays Rob Simmons Connecticut post Dianne Farell Chris Murphy Joe Courtney CT Races Elections CT-04 CT-05 CT-02 CT-Gov Governor Jodi Rell CT Campaigns Ned Lamont (Sen) Chris Murphy (CT-05) Joe Courtney (CT-02) Diane Farrell (CT-04) John DeStefano (Gov) George W Bush Dick Cheney Mark Foley Denis Hastert GOP republican democrat independent polls local hartord courant danbury new milford town news-times spectrum my left nutmeg stamford advocate washington times WaPo NY Times Greenwhich times

How Many Ways Does Johnson Suck?

2006-10-25T14:19:00.000-04:00

Let CT Progressive at No More Nancy! count the ways:

In the race, Ms. Johnson has used fearmongering commercials that try to paint Mr. Murphy as soft on terrorism and, most curiously of all, a big spender. It is unconvincing. Ms. Johnson is the senior member of an important committee. She has served longer in the House than any other Connecticut representative. Yet she has not been able to change significantly the House GOP leaders' reckless fiscal policy or its radical agenda.

Mr. Murphy, a lawyer, is impressive. He has spent eight years in the Connecticut House and Senate. He pushed for the state to adopt a system of campaign finance reform when he first entered the House, long before this was considered an important issue. He helped pass legislation that made it easier for uninsured to obtain health insurance. He wants to work on the same issue in Congress.

...snip...

Mr. Murphy would be a strong candidate in any race, and even against a seasoned incumbent, is impressive. He would make a superb addition to Congress. We strongly endorse his candidacy.

--- NY Times

OK! So CT PROGRESSIVE just cut and pasted from the NY Times endorsemnet of Murphy. At least the Times can still count, even though they employed Judy Miller at one time and have yet to find one her Iraqi WMDs.

But let us not forget Johnson's signature legislation:

Medicare D(isaster)

Johnson was counting on you to remember that for the election!

It sucks to be anything GOP these days... Even the right wing corporate owned media is "cutting and running" from anything GOP.

Information on campaigns across Connecticut and the nation

2006-10-24T17:40:00.000-04:00

So you can be an informed voter:

Info on Ned Lamont:

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - Official Campaign Website

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - Ned Lamont, the Political Entrepreneur

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "Democrats Back Lamont; Lieberman Files Independent Run" (F0x)

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - Unofficial Ned Lamont Resource

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - Unofficial Lamont Blog

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "The Democrats Mean Business" (WSJ)

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "Ned Lamont vs. Joe Lieberman" (The Nation)

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "Lieberman Loses Debate With Challenger Ned Lamont"

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "Lamont: Lieberman Sounded Like Cheney"

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman - "Lamont Fires Up Naples" (New Haven Independent)

Info on Joe Lieberman:

Joe Lieberman - "Seasonal Memory Lapses" by Paul Bass (Hartford Courant)

Joe Lieberman - "Truth About Joe"

Joe Lieberman - "Lieberman Wins Republican Friends, Democratic Enemies..." (WaPo)

Joe Lieberman - "Joe Lieberman is a Big Oil Republican" (LamontBlog)

Joe Lieberman - "Kerry Calls Lieberman the New Cheney" (ABC)

Joe Lieberman - "Joe Lieberman Doesn't Care About Handicapped People" (Wonkette)

Joe Lieberman - "Joe Lieberman is Running With a Bad Crowd" (Firedoglake)

Joe Lieberman - "116 Reasons Not to Vote for Joe Lieberman"

Joe Lieberman - "How Joe Lieberman Tried to Kill Rock 'N Roll" (Huffington Post)

Info on Alan Schlesinger:

Alan Schlesinger and Joe Lieberman

CT Blogs-

Bye Bye Rob [Simmons]-

Caffeinated Geek Girl-

Drinking Liberally, New Milford-

Hat City Blog- Joe Lieberman's Blog-

Joementum-

Lamont Campaign Blog (official)-

LamontBlog (unofficial)-

Liebermania-

NH Independent-

No More Nancy (CT-05)-

CT Campaigns-

Chris Murphy (CT-05)-

Joe Courtney (CT-02)-

Diane Farrell (CT-04)-

John DeStefano (Gov)-

Dan Malloy (Gov)

CT Sites-

Caucus of CT Dems-

Clean Up CT-

CT Citizen Action Group-

CT For Lieberman-

DeStefano for Gov-

Dump Joe-

Judith Blei Government Relations-

Lamont Resource (unofficial)

Ned Lamont Joe Lieberman Nancy Johnson Chris Shays Rob Simmons Connecticut post Dianne Farell Chris Murphy Joe Courtney CT Races Elections CT-04 CT-05 CT-02 CT-Gov Governor Jodi Rell CT Campaigns Ned Lamont (Sen) Chris Murphy (CT-05) Joe Courtney (CT-02) Diane Farrell (CT-04) John DeStefano (Gov) George W Bush Dick Cheney Mark Foley Denis Hastert GOP republican democrat independent polls local hartord courant danbury new milford town news-times spectrum my left nutmeg stamford advocate washington times WaPo NY Times Greenwhich times

20% of Republicans Want To Impeach Bush

2006-10-23T00:50:00.000-04:00

In the "WTF?" file:

According to Newsweek 5% Of Republicans think impeaching Bush should be a TOP priority for the Dems when they take over. 15% of Republicans think it should be a lower priority.

That is 20% of REPUBLICANS that think it should be a priority for the Dems when they take over the House Nov. 7th. (With numbers like that, maybe the Senate as well?)

Other parts of a potential Democratic agenda receive less support, especially calls to impeach Bush: 47 percent of Democrats say that should be a “top priority,” but only 28 percent of all Americans say it should be, 23 percent say it should be a lower priority and nearly half, 44 percent, say it should not be done. (Five percent of Republicans say it should be a top priority and 15 percent of Republicans say it should be a lower priority; 78 percent oppose impeachment.)

--- Newsweek

The other BIG number that might jump out at you up there?

51% of Americans think that impeaching Bush should be a priority.

Numbers like these spell doom for all Republican candidates across the nation.

If 20% of Republicans AND 51% of Americans think impeaching Bush should be a Dem priority when they take the House... Who do you think all of these people will be voting for this election?

Heh

Big Time Freeway Blogging

2006-10-21T14:25:00.000-04:00

Not your typical "Freeway Bloggers"... Think big!

Think BILLBOARD BIG!

Lifted from a dKos diary by DelicateMonster

"A group of religious activists has purchased a giant billboard on the interstate for a massive ad accusing four Connecticut incumbents of voting for torture. The Associated Press reports that the group, Reclaiming the Prophetic Voice, bought the space to target Senator Joe Lieberman and and GOP Reps. Chris Shays, Nancy Johnson and Rob Simmons. According to the AP piece all four voted for the controversial Military Commissions Act of 2006, which allows the President to "authorize aggressive interrogation methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts." In other words, torture, as well as the suspension of habeas corpus, of course."

They have a picture of the actual billboard up at the I Wage Peace website, a group that is working with Reclaiming the Prophetic Voice to get this message out, if you want to see it.

Rell: Selling Out CT to Big Apple Buyers

2006-10-15T21:51:00.000-04:00

It is bad enough when you see the list of companies that have contracts with the State of Connecticut that are also MAJOR donors to the Rell campaign, something Rell claims she has never done... But today we see that Rell was selling out Connecticut to Big Apple buyers intent on gaining more influence on our States business than she will ever give to regular Nutmeggers.

About 75 people attended the $1,000-per-person reception Thursday evening, said Rell's campaign spokesman, Rich Harris.

Like many of Rell's other fundraising breakfasts, luncheons and receptions, the event was closed to the press. The reception was also not mentioned on Rell's campaign website.

Republican Rell influence peddling? Oh no! Never!

What do you have to hide, Jodi, that you can't let the press into these buyouts of our State?

For a full understanding of influence peddling see Republican criminal/super-lobbyist Jack Abrahmoff, criminal Republican Randy "Duke" Cunningham, criminal Republican Bob Ney, or likely criminal Republican Curt Weldon.

OR, of course, you could just look at Rell's mentor, disgraced Republican and former Governor Rowland to know how that scam works:

Her showing at the Garde Arts Center in New London won't hurt her with voters relieved that this steady-as-she-goes matron is not John G. Rowland, her glib predecessor and former political teammate whose greediness landed him in jail.

But a few gaffes in an otherwise OK performance are what viewers are talking about.

Late in the debate, Mrs. Rell pulled a George W. Bush when considering whether she made any mistakes in office. She didn't name any - though surely she could have wished, for just one thing, that the state Department of Transportation had kept an eye on the contractor who installed hundreds of faulty drains on I-84.

"I'm Jodi Rell, and I am perfect BUT please ignore the skeletons in my closet!"

Good lord!

Rell = GOP + Bush + Rowland + $$$ wasted + incompetent

That is basic math for republican politics...

Info on the CT Senate Race:

2006-10-05T01:47:00.000-04:00

So you can be an informed voter:

Info on Ned Lamont:

Ned Lamont - Official Campaign Website

Ned Lamont - Ned Lamont, the Political Entrepreneur

Ned Lamont - "Democrats Back Lamont; Lieberman Files Independent Run" (F0x)

Ned Lamont - Unofficial Ned Lamont Resource

Ned Lamont - Unofficial Lamont Blog

Ned Lamont - "The Democrats Mean Business" (WSJ)

Ned Lamont - "Ned Lamont vs. Joe Lieberman" (The Nation)

Ned Lamont - "Lieberman Loses Debate With Challenger Ned Lamont"

Ned Lamont - "Lamont: Lieberman Sounded Like Cheney"

Ned Lamont - "Lamont Fires Up Naples" (New Haven Independent)

Info on Joe Lieberman:

Joe Lieberman - "Seasonal Memory Lapses" by Paul Bass (Hartford Courant)

Joe Lieberman - "Truth About Joe"

Joe Lieberman - "Lieberman Wins Republican Friends, Democratic Enemies..." (WaPo)

Joe Lieberman - "Joe Lieberman is a Big Oil Republican" (LamontBlog)

Joe Lieberman - "Kerry Calls Lieberman the New Cheney" (ABC)

Joe Lieberman - "Joe Lieberman Doesn't Care About Handicapped People" (Wonkette)

Joe Lieberman - "Joe Lieberman is Running With a Bad Crowd" (Firedoglake)

Joe Lieberman - "116 Reasons Not to Vote for Joe Lieberman"

Joe Lieberman - "How Joe Lieberman Tried to Kill Rock 'N Roll" (Huffington Post)

Info on Alan who?
Nevermind... heh

12 Days of Justice - Day 5

2005-12-21T10:05:00.000-05:00

So far in the 12 Days of Justice daily series you have learned that:

Judge Samuel Alito does not respect the primary role of the Legislative branch of our government.
By Tampopo

Judge Alito will threaten the fundamental rights and basic legal protections for working Americans of all ages.
By AP

Judge Alito has violated the laws and ethical codes that govern the conduct of federal judges and was a member of the radical and discriminatory group CAP.
By Steven D

Judge Alito's view of discrimination against persons with disability is so restrictive that "few if any...cases would survive summary judgment."
By susanhu

Todays diary for Day 5 will be a short and to the point explanation of Judge Alito's views concerning women and abortion rights. It will deal with his radical and demeaning views from the perspective of his positions revealed in certain abortion cases, memos, applications, and discussions of Roe v Wade.

[Updated]: to reflect many edits! Please check the bottom to cross-post easily.

Join me in the back alley to get a clear view of Alito.

In 1985 Alito made crystal clear his position concerning Roe v Wade.

Alito's name does not appear on any briefs the Reagan Solicitor General's office filed in abortion-related cases. However, just a few months before Alito wrote his DOJ application letter touting his contribution to cases in which the government argued that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion," the Solicitor General's office had filed a brief in Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists on that very subject. The brief urged that "this Court should overrule" Roe v. Wade. The Court rejected the Solicitor General's arguments, with only two justices agreeing that Roe should be overturned.

T. R. Goldman at law.com Offers this opinion of the upcoming battle:

If Alito's jurisprudential views match those on the Thornburgh brief -- and at least in 1985, Alito indicated that they do -- then the job application provides the Judiciary Committee with the type of window into a future justice's thinking that, since the failed nomination of Robert Bork, has become almost nonexistent.

This is a nomination demanding to be "Borked" into nonexistence. But this still does not give a clear picture of his views on women's rights. Please consider taking and using any or all parts of the following letter and using it to contact your Senators concerning this nomination. Feel free to adapt and edit this letter, or you can just say how you feel about this in your own words. All we ask is that you take action before it is too late.

What does Samuel Alito think about women and abortion rights?

In Judge Alito's 1992 dissent in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, Alito argued that a law requiring a woman in certain circumstances to notify her spouse before seeking an abortion did not pose an undue burden on a woman's right to choose. Alito asserted that if parental notification requirements were constitutional, as the Supreme Court had previously held, then spousal notification requirements must be permissible as well. (Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 947 F.2d 682 (3d Cir. 1991), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 505 U.S. 833 (1992).)

Alito's colleagues on the Third Circuit and a 5-4 Supreme Court majority disagreed. Writing for that Supreme Court majority, Sandra Day O'Connor firmly rejected Alito's troubling logic:

"A State may not give to a man the kind of dominion over his wife that parents exercise over their children."

(Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) at 898.)

Sandra Day O'Connor was correct in rejecting Alito's view of women as subservient to men and less than equal in the eyes of the law.

In a 1985 memo Alito had advised the Reagan Administration that it should attempt to undermine Roe v. Wade. Alito urged the administration to file a friend-of-the-court brief in Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and argued that this brief could promote "the goals of bringing about the eventual overturning of Roe v. Wade, and in the meantime, of mitigating its effects."

Alito wanted the administration to "make clear" that it "disagree[d] with Roe v. Wade," but argued that the most effective long-term strategy of persuading the Supreme Court to overturn this groundbreaking precedent was to chip away at it slowly through extremely restrictive state laws. Overturning Roe v Wade would most certainly result in a return to the days of dangerous "illegal" abortions.

Is this the kind of nomination that sounds like a moderate? This candidate is not representative of my views, nor of mainstream America.

Alito clearly has no problem with forcing his radical ideals on women.

I strongly urge you to vote against this horrible nomination because no woman should be forced by anyone to have to resort to using a coat hanger to perform a back alley abortion. When you consider that Alito's warped views would be replacing the moderate voice of Sandra Day O'Connor there should be no doubt that Alito's nomination must be stopped.

Signed,

Some suggested contacts and petitions:

Your senators

The Judiciary Committee

Your representatives

Congress.org

Campus Progress "Stop Alito's America"

PFAW "Save the Court"

Planned Parenthood Anti-Alito Petition

Naral Anti-Alito Petition

Rolling Justice

Plan B Petition

Sending a FAX via the Web (For those of us that don't have a fax machine at home.)

Again, feel free to copy and paste any and all of the information or images you will see put up over the next couple of weeks by the Anti-Alito Brigade into Blogs and letters as we hold Alito's feet to the fire. Even if you only participate on a few of the days it can help make a difference. There are so many issues where Samuel Alito's views and allegiances are just flat out wrong for a SCOTUS nomination.

Watch for Alice's diaries on the "separation of church and state/religious freedom" for days 6 and 7... On two different days because we want to keep them twice as separated!

Actions for: Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4

12 Days of Justice

2005-12-14T14:38:00.000-05:00

There are many reasons to be wary of the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

Over the next 12 days the Anti-Alito Brigade will be bringing you many of those reasons, and also some actions that you might consider to help stop this horrible nomination.

The main intention of this nomination is to try and tip the balance of power away from the legislative branch and towards the President.

Alito is an activist judge that will legislate from the bench on many of the issues that all progressives hold dear to their heart.

Our intention is that everyone across the Left Blogosphere participates in this any way that they can. Write a few letters, send Emails, send Faxes, and make some phonecalls to your Senators and Reps. (I know Reps don't vote on this, BUT they can provide more pressure on this issue to those that do vote on Alito! Besides, it is fun to piss them off... lol)

Taken from Tampopo's BooTrib diary:

December 12, 2005

You should be very wary of Judge Samuel Alito. Perhaps afraid is more accurate.

Judge Samuel Alito does not respect the primary role of the Legislative branch of our government. Therefore, he should not be considered acceptable to any member of Congress, particularly true Conservatives, regardless of his opinions on other matters held dear.

Judge Alito is a threat to your role in the structure of our government. You practice the art of politicking, balancing constituents' concerns and needs with those of our society as a whole. Legislation is challenged in court, as it should be when the interpretation of a law is in question. Judge Alito's record suggests he is not a "strict constructionist" of the Constitution.

Norm Ornstein, of the prestigious American Enterprise Institute, has recognized the danger Judge Alito represents. In his article, "Judge Alito Doesn't Show Congress Enough Deference," Ornstein states:
[Supreme Court Justice John] Roberts respects Congress and its constitutional primacy; Alito shows serious signs that he does not...
...Roberts is a very conservative guy, and a strict constructionist -- one who means it. He understands that Congress is the branch the framers set up in Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution. It is not coincidence that Article 1 is twice as long as Article II, which created the executive branch, and almost four times as long as Article III, which established the judiciary. Judges should bend over doubly and triply backward before overturning a Congressional statute, especially if it is clear that Congress acted carefully and deliberatively...

The court case that has Mr. Ornstein turning such a critical eye on Judge Alito is from 1996, "United States v Rybar." This case involved a challenge to Congress's right to regulate the possession or transfer of machine guns.

From Mr. Ornstein,
Congress had passed the law in a reasonable and deliberate fashion. A genuine practitioner of judicial restraint would have allowed them a wide enough berth to do so. Alito's colleagues did just that. But Alito used his own logic to call for its overturn, arguing that the possession of machine guns by private individuals had no economic activity associated with it, and that no real evidence existed that private possession of guns increased crime in a way that affected commerce -- and thus Congress had no right to regulate it. That kind of judicial reasoning often is referred to as reflecting the "Constitution in Exile."
Whatever it is, it's not judicial restraint.

In response to Alito's opinion, the majority said, "Nothing in Lopez (an earlier Supreme Court case) requires either Congress or the Executive to play Show and Tell with the federal courts at the peril of invalidation of a Congressional statute."

Mr. Ornstein's final sentence is a caution to you,
Whatever else it does with Judge Alito at the confirmation hearings, the Senate needs to hold his feet to the fire on this larger issue of deference to the legislative branch.

Don't let Judge Alito's opinions on single issues distract you from the danger he presents to our nation's Constitutional foundation. Reject his nomination and encourage your colleagues to do the same.

Three groups to contact:

Your senators

The Judiciary Committee

And your representatives

Feel free to lift the image here or any of the others over at Booman Tribune, and feel free to copy and paste any and all of the information you will see put up over the next couple of weeks into Blogs and letters as we hold Alito's feet to the fire.

Even if you only participate on a few of the days it can help make a difference. There are so many issues where Samuel Alito's views and allegiances are just flat out wrong for a SCOTUS nomination.

Note: Tommorrow's actions and reason's are still being worked on today. Feel free to check it out at Booman Tribune (Just look for the "Justice" diaries) and any help or participation of any kind you can provide will be greatly appreciated. This is another action brought to you by the group that brought you "Operation Yellow Feather" which was a very successful cross blog protest. These actions are designed to help bring the "Left Blogosphere Think Tank" together on our many shared issues.

X-posted at My Left Wing, Booman Tribune , My Left Nutmeg, Political Cortex

And also Front Paged or posted by Cedwyn at: Dembloggers, ePluribus Media, MyDD, and TPM Cafe reader Blogs as well as by shermanesqe at Street Prophets and C&J

Nancy Johnson's Junk in the Trunk

2005-12-09T12:49:00.000-05:00

It seems that Nancy Johnson's political career has a lot of junk in the trunk...

Deroy Murdock on Medicare on National Review Online:

"This fiscal malpractice has not bought the White House even political dividends. An August 25-26, 2003 Gallup poll found 40 percent of adults approved of the president's handling of Medicare while 48 percent disapproved. After the benefit's adoption, a March 26-28, 2004 Gallup survey saw 35 percent approve of Bush on Medicare, while disapproval climbed to 55 percent. What a bargain: Each one-point drop in Bush's Medicare approval rating cost Americans $44.5 billion.

The GOP Congress should dump the drug benefit. They should spare taxpayers this absurdly expensive new project whose true costs were concealed by an administration that sacrificed integrity and fiscal responsibility on an altar of blind ambition.

Instead, Republicans should develop a modest plan for poor seniors who lack coverage, rather than any American over 65, including multimillionaires and those who already have drug insurance.

The Medicare drug benefit has metastasized from bad policy to bad politics and now to scandal and possible criminality. This law begs to be euthanized. The GOP should pulls its plug. As for the perpetrators of this colossal public fraud, the Justice Department should fit them for orange jumpsuits."

And this is the legislation she was was so proud of and pinning her 2006 re-election hopes on? Well now, If that ain't an elephant passing some serious gas on to the voters?

Careful now!

Never stand behind an elephant that is full of it... You never know when it is going to take its next dump on YOU!

Chris Murphy flushes Johnson's Crap

So... What does Democrat hopeful Chris Murphy have to say about all of this?

Drug Benefit will be a problem for Johnson in 2006

Nancy Johnson's biggest legislative effort in years - the drug benefit bill - seems to be falling drastically short of doing what it promised - helping seniors afford their perscriptions. The NY Times explains why this bill will be an albatross around the necks of Republicans in 2006, Johnson in particular.

Already, many Democratic strategists argue that the new program - because of its complicated structure and gaps in coverage - could be much more of a problem than an asset for Republicans next year. Some Democratic challengers are already using the issue on the campaign trail, like Christopher S. Murphy, who hopes to unseat Representative Nancy L. Johnson of Connecticut, a senior Republican who played an important role in writing the law.

"Seniors, frustrated with the complexity of the drug benefit, are realizing that it was constructed to help the insurance industry and the drug industry," said Mr. Murphy, a state senator, in a common Democratic refrain. "It's more helpful to those industries than to a lot of seniors."

Read the rest of the story here.

Anyone that has tried to wade through Johnson's "signature legislation", either for themselves or a relative in need of medication, understands what a pile of hooey it is, and they are also begining to realize just how much more it is going to cost the people in need as well as all other taxpayers more than Johnson lied, err, said it would.

Johnson's rolling in it...
Dirty money that is!

Not only does she take drug industry money out the ying-yang in order to finance her campaign efforts, but Johnson also takes dirty money from Tom Delay.

You can feel free to stand behind Johnson if you want to... But don't say I didn't warn you.

She is full of it!

Operation Flying Monkees

2005-11-15T17:13:00.000-05:00

Crooks and Liars has the latest on the presidents speech to rally the flying monkees:

TDS on the Speech

Stewart started Monday off with a look back at President Bush's speech to our troops on V-Day.

Click to see video at C&L...

You knew there had to be a talking head montage thrown in for good measure. Jon offers President Bush a simpler name to call the radicals since he gets so tongue tied. The end clip that TDS uses highlights the fact that Bush really makes about as much sense as Bert Lahr.

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

2005-11-10T16:16:00.000-05:00

If a picture is worth a thousand words...

THAN THIS ONE SPEAKS VOLUMES!

CLICK ON THE PIC!

Bush's Crash and Burn Policy on Iraq

2005-09-29T01:14:00.000-04:00

Recently the Saudi foreign minister, Prince Saud al-faisal, has been heard pushing a message of the imminent failures in Iraq in the hopes that the bush admin. will hear what they are saying. Saudi worries are evidenced by al-faisal's recent quote in the NY Times:

"There is no dynamic now pulling the nation together," he said in a meeting with reporters at the Saudi Embassy here. "All the dynamics are pulling the country apart."

It is pretty darn obvious that the Saudies are concerned with the "seemingly" incompetent actions taken by the bush admin, and the influence that Iran is gaining over Iraq as a result of the incompetence.

But is this not a direct result of the real neocon agenda that is succeeding at ripping apart Iraq through Civil War?

It just happens that some of the parts that may break off are gaining strong Iranian influences.

Taken from the Timesonline:

Tougher language is being heard in the Arab world, where Iran has been a foe from the time of the Persians. Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi Foreign Minister, said: "We fought a war together to keep Iran out of Iraq after Iraq was driven out of Kuwait. Now we are handing the whole country over to Iran without reason."

Snip

Under the provisions of Iraq's federal constitution, which will go before a referendum on October 15, provinces will be allowed to create regional authorities. That has given rise to fears that the Shias in the south, with the support of Iran, will seek to create a mini Shia Islamic state, as Mr al-Hakim has already stated he wants.

I think the reasoning behind their message to the bush admin. becomes pretty darn clear when you read what the Saudi Foreign minister says up there.

They are freaking about Iranian influence that has resulted from the tensions created by the US.

Taken from the Timesonline:

CROSS-BORDER INFLUENCE

Badr Brigades

A Shia militia force of 12,000 trained by Iran's Revolutionary Guards and blamed for a spate of recent killings of Sunni Muslims. Thought to control several cities in southern Iraq

Islamic Dawaa Party

Shia party that has strong links to Iran. Its leader, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the present Prime Minister, has vowed to improve ties between the two neighbours

Mahdi Army

Received arms and volunteers from Iran during its battle against US and British troops last year. Ahmed al-Fartusi, its commander in Basra, was arrested by British forces last weekend

Mujahidin for Islamic Revolution in Iraq

Tehran-backed militia blamed for the murder of six British Royal Military Police soldiers in Majar el-Kabir in 2003

Thar Allah (Vengeance of God)

Iranian-backed terror group blamed for killing former members of the ruling Baath party and enforcing strict Islamic law

Jamaat al-Fudalah (Group of the Virtuous)

Paramilitary group that imposes Islamic rules on Shia areas; attacks shops selling alcohol and music

Al-Fadilah (Morality)

Secret political movement financed by Iran. Thought to have many members among provincial officials

Al-Quawaid al-Islamiya (Islamic Bases)

Iranian-backed Islamic movement that uses force to impose Islamic law

From a Saudi perspective... Things aren't quite what they'd hoped for, huh?

Never mind that it is civil war, and likely what the bushies were trying for.

This only magnifies that point:

AlJazeera

The western media has laboured hard in portraying the "Sunni community" as the major source of delay in the drafting process. The Bush administration has habitually presented events in Iraq as sectarian and ethnically biased; this presentation is not arbitrary or due to "misunderstanding" as some have claimed.

More truthfully, differing visions of Iraq are what delayed and essentially prevented the constitutional process from achieving consensual support. On the one hand we have an American-endorsed vision that proposes dividing Iraq up and we have the view of the opposition, which accepts nothing less than a unified Iraq.

In the autumn of 2004 the RAND Corporation, an American research company, published a research brief for the United States Navy arguing "cleavages within the Muslim world pose challenges and opportunities ... for US interests and strategy".

"I am making an appeal to all Iraqi citizens. Please do not divide yourselves anymore than you already have, and by dividing you empower the occupation and their agendas for your natural resources."

The RAND study highlights current divisions in the Muslim world between the Sunni and Shia, as well as between Arabs and non-Arabs as crucial to US interests.

The ethnic and sectarian federalism that has been proposed in Iraq fits well into this divisive framework. This insight into the strategic thinking of US thinktanks provides a contextual background to any assessment of US involvement in the Arab and Muslim world.

Here is a link to Rand's article U.S. Strategy in the Muslim World After 9/11 (the one refered to in the Al Jazeera article).

In the entire Rand article there is one little sentence that sums up "what might happen?"

Beyond these long-term factors, certain catalytic events have shifted the political environment in the Muslim world toward radicalism. Major events include the Iranian revolution, the Afghan war with the Soviets, the Gulf War of 1991, and the global war on terrorism after September 11. The Iraq war and the removal of Saddam Hussein have surely had an effect on the Muslim world, but the long-term implications remain to be seen. A stable, pluralistic, and democratic Iraq would challenge anti-Western views in the Middle East and would undermine extremist arguments. On the other hand, if Iraq reverts to authoritarianism or fragments into ethnic enclaves, then U.S. credibility would diminish and radical groups would have greater opportunities to take hold.

And, golly gee... Is it ever happening.

But what if that was the bushies intention all along?

You can read almost any of Dahr Jamail's "Iraqi Dispatches" to get the true sense of how they are constantly creating more problems amongst the different Iraqi groups. At times it is almost like they are doing it all on purpose:

The failed siege of Fallujah

Thus, rather than improving security and stability in Fallujah and Iraq, the siege of Fallujah has accomplished nothing more than devastating the city and spreading the Iraqi resistance into other cities, such as Qaim, Beji, Baquba, Mosul, Ramadi, Latifiya and many areas of Baghdad.

It could easily be argued now that the siege of Fallujah accomplished the exact opposite of its stated goals - rather than bringing increased security and stability, it has inflamed tempers, deepened sectarian rifts and spurred the Iraqi resistance into levels of attack rarely seen prior to the siege.

---------------------

U.S. Claims Over Siege Challenged

He said continuing violations by U.S. soldiers had provoked people into confronting the occupying forces. He said troops had been raiding homes, sending women into the streets without their hijabs and entering areas where women sleep.

"The fighters are just local people who refuse to be treated like dogs," he said. "Nobody wants the Americans here."

---------------------

This is our Guernica

Two US attempts were made to destroy this symbol of defiance last year. The first, in April, fizzled out after Iraqi politicians, including many who supported the invasion of their country, condemned the use of air strikes to terrorise an entire city.

snip

One thing is certain: the attack on Falluja has done nothing to still the insurgency against the US-British occupation nor produced the death of al-Zarqawi - any more than the invasion of Afghanistan achieved the capture or death of Osama bin Laden. Thousands of bereaved and homeless Falluja families have a new reason to hate the US and its allies.

snip

This decade's unforgettable monument to brutality and overkill is Falluja, a text-book case of how not to handle an insurgency, and a reminder that unpopular occupations will always degenerate into desperation and atrocity.

---------------------

Sects and Solidarity in Iraq

The spokesman's point is clear: After decades of repression, now is the time for the Shiites to have power, no matter the price. "Most of the Sunnis are accepted by us, but there are those among them who don't want the Shia in the government, nor the Kurds. Some Sunnis will either kill us or make us slaves. We accept these elections now," says Asadi, pulling the abaya close over his shoulders. "But many Shias and Kurds believe dividing the country is the only real solution."

snip

With Shiite domination in the National Assembly, they will have much power in writing Iraq's new constitution. Will this lopsided dynamic provoke a violent reaction from the Sunni-dominated insurgency? If it does, will the Shiite militias, like the Badr Organization, the armed wing of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), strike back, igniting a civil war?

snip

When examining the statements of some political and religious leaders from both communities, one gets the sense that civil war is indeed imminent. Sheik Asadi's venom toward the Sunni is matched by that of some of his Sunni counterparts toward the Shiites. But Western media outlets, focusing on the sensational, have played up the potential for civil war, muting the voices of Sunni and Shiite leaders who are skeptical of such predictions and united against partition.

---------------------

Etc., Etc., Etc.! Dahr Jamail has these comments littered throughout many of his reports.

That last part in bold is the kicker... The media is "playing up the potential for civil war" and bushies policies only inflame the situation.

We see this every day as one seemingly incompetent decision follows another.

It makes it all pretty darn clear what the Saudies see as a problem.

The bush admin. wants to divide the country up and, per usual, the media is only helping them along. Neocons want Iraq to descend into civil war which will, theoretically, make each part more manageable for America.

Either that or they are completely incompetent and clueless as to how much the US forces presence there, and their actions based on bush policies, are the cause of most of the problems in Iraq.

We have all seen the resulting chaos from neocon theory thus far. It isn't pretty. It has failed miserably in every aspect and every step of the way.

Just ignore the thousands that had to die to create their chaos. And ignore the fact that it leaves Iranians with more influence in the region.

I have heard suggestions that, perhaps, Saudies are sending a message to their own people that they need to become more involved in this Iranian/Iraqi situation...

Booman Tribune ~ Debunking Katrina: With the Consent of the Governed

2005-09-10T01:09:00.000-04:00

Here is the truth:

Debunking Katrina: With the Consent of the Governed

by DuctapeFatwa
Fri Sep 9th, 2005 at 09:31:11 PM EDT

We must be fair and balanced. The first debunking efforts were undertaken under the most inauspicious conditions. Officials were only accorded one side of a TV screen to explain to Americans that the live feeds taking place on the other side of the screen showed not truth but rumors, reports unconfirmed by authorities.

We must understand that at this time, the only news coming from the theatre came from people on the ground in scratchy breaky phone calls, a handful of bloggers, and reporters operating without benefit of embedding or vetting.

So if there were those who may have believed those rumors regarding conditions and crimes in the shelter pits into which crowded those New Orleanians politically naive enough to believe that they and their families would be safer than on the roof, if there were those who may have lent credence to rumors of slow responses from various government agencies, before they are denounced as un American consider the difficulties under which their leaders were operating at the moment.

Things have turned the corner now, and only a handful of dead enders and the people who survived the experience believe these rumors now.

Loyal Americans understand that while conditions in dome and center may not have been luxurious, nor on the expressway, things were not all that bad, and of course there were no crimes, no one was prevented from escape, people were not really dying of heat stroke or thirst or lack of medicine. Those are just rumors. Like the rumors of the 1927 replay of the canal strategy that flooded the city's poor area to save the fine homes in the Garden District and the historic French Quarter, both seen as keepers by those who are already hard at work planning the new and improved New Orleans. All the old world charm without the pesky poor.

And after a few territorial squabbles, federal, state and local officials are at last on the same page, and working together to craft a reasonable death toll that while tragic, will not prove too disturbing to more sensitive viewers.

One of the most comforting steps taken in recent days is the President's vow to personally oversee an investigation into any possible glitches that may have taken place in the response to the disaster.

His advisors, including the formidable Mr. Rove, wasted no time in developing a strategy to reassure the more skittish segment of the American public that their government had things firmly in hand, and would keep it that way.

That, coming on the heels of not one, but two Presidential flyovers of the area, and even one touchdown visit to console local politicians.

The egalitarian nature of the nation, and the President's concern for the humblest of his subjects cannot be more clearly illustrated than these flyovers. The Presidential aircraft could be seen by those fortunate enough to have successfully made an opening in their roofs, those on the expressways, those outside the shelterpits, and we can only imagine how much the sight must have meant to them, as they sat there, gasping. For many it will have been the last sight they saw.

Is it any wonder that not even Kim Jung Il enjoys deeper affection from his people?

So the corner is turned, but there is still much hard work ahead. Popular pundit Michelle Malkin, thoughtful as usual, expressed the hope that potentially troublesome eyewitnesses would be excluded from any investigation, which should, she declared, be a private affair, unburdened by any media who might not have recovered completely from the rumors and unconfirmed reports they thought they saw.

The survivor diaspora will be most helpful in avoiding such an eventuality, as well as the tragic but inevitable passing of many of them, if not from effects of the original rumors, from the second wave of rumors of West Nile, hepatitis, and the kinder gentler cholera promised by corporate charity mavens.

After having written checks to the Red Cross to help their executives maintain the lifestyle to which they are accustomed, and thus proving their compassion to their poor brethren in need, and a few hours of volunteer work down at the shelter, where too often, Lord and Lady Bountiful are horrified and repulsed to learn that the less fortunate are not sufficiently schooled in the soft skills to demonstrate appropriate gratitude for having been allowed to escape with their lives, if not their health, or all their family members, right thinking Americans will soon be free to return their focus on the positive:

US gunmen continue to occupy and reduce the population in two countries openly, and the public can rest assured that covert operations are also taking place elsewhere, and on the storm front, now that the rumors have been debunked, yes, there was a hurricane, and quite a bit of property damage, but the good news is that both Halliburton and Bechtel, among others, will be putting their expertise to work to make it right, and Halliburton will be raising all its prices in October, good news for investors!

And God, speaking as he does, through Bush, as revealed by Bush himself, has issued an executive order empowering these fine wealth builders to shake off the burden of oppressive laws requiring the paying of prevailing wages, meaning that survivors who are still at large in the area will be able to obtain work which will provide them with dignity, and possibly up to a dollar or two above the minimum wage.

So all in all, yes there was a little wind, and sadly, a few lost their lives. But rumors of devastation and catastrophe, of genocide and slaveship hells, of rape and murder and mutilation, of thousands gasping their last on the asphalt of I-10, were just that- rumors, probably started by a certain element with an agenda.

Just a little wind, but everything is being made right now, with the consent of the governed.

Sad... But true.

Drinking Liberally in New Milford: Booman Tribune ~ Boo!

2005-08-24T01:04:00.000-04:00

OK... So Roberts has a few problems... And, of course, those people, the kind that are rabid about ruining the Constitution by inserting religion into politics, are running around New Milford now with TWO FLAGS on their car because ONE FLAG hasn't been patriotic enough to gloss over their lies, corruption, and flat out anti-patriotic stupidity as they do idiotic things like run over memorials to fallen soldiers at Camp Casey.

Thank God there are many soldiers that are supporting the efforts of Cindy Sheehan! Count me as one, and my brother in-law, who leaves for Iraq in a month or so for his second tour, would be two.

Cindy had this to say about their move to a piece of property that will be a little bit safer than the ditch bush's secret service originally forced them into.

We are moving to a place that doesn't have much shade and I put out an appeal for tarps and a soldier from Ft. Hood brought some to us that he "borrowed" from Ft. Hood for us to use. I have had a lot of soldiers from Ft. Hood come out and tell me to keep it up and that I am doing a good thing. We are doing this to honor Casey and the other fallen heroes in their memories. But we are doing it FOR the people of Iraq and the other soldiers who are in harm's way right now. Right after we heard about the crosses last night, a Camp Casey volunteer found out that a pen pal she had in Iraq was KIA on August 12th. This has to stop, now. We will stop it.

As noble as Cindy Sheehan's cause is, that isn't what this blog is about. Susanhu has a little info on Roberts that might be worth knowing:

Why Didn't Judge Roberts Recuse Himself?

by susanhu
Thu Aug 18th, 2005 at 10:30:27 PM EDT

"Roberts was part of a three-judge panel that handed President Bush an important victory the week before he announced Roberts' nomination to the bench," reports Democracy Now!.
"The appeals court ruled in the Hamdan V. Rumsfeld case that the military tribunals of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, could proceed. The decision also found that Bush could deny terrorism captives prisoner-of-war status as outlined by the Geneva Conventions." Said Georgetown law professor David Luban today in today's DN! interview:

[Roberts] knew that he was on the three-judge panel as early as last December. The case was argued, the oral argument was April 7. Six days before ... he had an interview with Att'y Gen. Gonzales. [W]hile the case was deliberated, there's a gap between April 7, when the oral argument took place, and July 15, when the court issued the decision. He had numerous other interviews for the Supreme Court judgeship. [T]hat's the period of time in which he is deliberating and presumably discussing with the other judges on the panel what the ruling should be in the case.

Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights (see the blogroll on the left), said:

[M]y reaction [is] utter amazement ... [O]n April 1, a week before the argument, [Roberts met] with Gonzales, the Attorney General who was the architect of the entire policy that the Geneva Conventions shouldn't apply to [Guantanamo detainees], that they should use military commissions, and he’s meeting with this guy at the same time that he is sitting on a case that's going to determine whether or not the Geneva Conventions apply.
[A]t a minimum, as David's article clearly says in Slate, his impartiality might reasonably have been questioned [and Judge Roberts] should have disqualified himself. There's not any issue about it.
I would go further. It reminds me of a case when Ellsberg [Pentagon Papers] was on trial for espionage. During the trial President Nixon, briefly, but other people in his office, Ehrlichman and others, met with the trial judge to offer him to be the head of the F.B.I. [T]he outcry [was] huge. ...

Listen/watch/read all. Goodman also asks both men about the missing documents. Emphases mine.

I know this has to be just a bit of a conflict of interest here... But I have morals and values, so I don't count political CYA by bush as a good thing when it comes to crimes against humanity. If bush really wanted to cover his ass all he had to do was ask the White House GOP prostitute Jeff Gannon, or if he was in this town he could ask Jay Lewyn... Same diff...

I really ought to go and see what "4 on the floor 4 bush" Jay and all of his "GOP talking point brigade" have to say about all of this at "Jay Lewyn - For the love of God CENSOR ME!"... But I have already read the GOP talking points, so why waste my time, huh?

Nevermind the fact that if Jay isn't feeling gay enough about what he says in this town, well, he just goes back and tries to change the wording of the town records... Can't afford to look too stupid...

How many flags for you and your GOP buddies Jay?
One or two?
DOH!

A nod to the realities of the soldiers plight.

2005-08-14T18:22:00.000-04:00

THE BRAD BLOG:

"In a departure from the norm in Kentucky -- one of the reddest of red states -- some of Comley's relatives, including a few sitting in the front pews, have spoken out strongly against the Bush administration and the war that took the 21-year-old Marine's life.
...
On Friday, Comley's grandmother, 80-year-old Geraldine Comley of Versailles, described herself in an interview as a former Republican stalwart who is "on a rampage" against the president and the war.

She said she would like nothing better than to join Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a fallen soldier who has been holding a peace vigil outside President Bush's ranch in Texas.

"When someone gets up and says 'My son died for our freedom,' or I get a sympathy card that says that, I can hardly bear it," Geraldine Comley said.

She said her view, developed before her grandson's death, is that Bush pushed for war because Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had tried to assassinate the first President Bush, and to get control of Mideast oil.

"And it irritates me no small amount that Dick Cheney, in the Vietnam War, said he had 'other priorities,'" Geraldine Comley said. "He didn't mind sending my grandson over there" to Iraq.""
Written by: Winter Patriot

My deepest and sincerest condolences to the Comley family in the loss of their son, and my thanks to Cindy Sheehan for faithfully representing the many who demand better leadership in this country.

Fearing backlash, Pentagon moves to block new Abu Ghraib photos - Yahoo! News

2005-08-14T14:07:00.000-04:00

Is there even one idiot on this earth that will believe this BS line coming from the pentagon and the White House?

Fearing backlash, Pentagon moves to block new Abu Ghraib photos - Yahoo! News:
Sat Aug 13, 3:50 PM ET

"WASHINGTON (AFP) - The
Pentagon has moved forcefully to block the release of new video evidence of prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, arguing it would help recruit new Islamist insurgents and endanger American lives."

Too late morons... The insurgents already know the truth about the torture the corrupt bush administration and the incompetent Petagon officials sanctioned.

THEY HAD TO SUFFER THROUGH IT!

Just who is it you are trying to protect there?

He further states that should the pictures become public, they will "endanger the lives and physical safety of the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines in the United States Armed Forces presently serving in Iraq and
Afghanistan."

Americans aren't that stupid. We already know that the insurgents are quite aware of the torture.

WHEN IDIOTS LIKE BUSH, GONZALES, AND RUMSFELD, ETC., GAVE THE GREEN LIGHT ON TORTURE THEY ENDANGERED EVERY SOLDIER IN THE MILITARY AS WELL AS EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN AND ANY OTHER COUNTRY THAT IS IN IRAQ HELPING THE US.

We already know who you are trying to protect and who is really to blame.

Meanwhile, ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero insists the real reason the Pentagon is fighting the release of the new evidence is because it demonstrates "the failure of American leaders who placed our young men and women in compromising situations and are now seeking to blame them for it."

Typical Republican Answer...

2005-08-12T00:22:00.000-04:00

These are exactly the kind of false patriots that wrap themselves in the flag or slap ribbons on their SUVs... And do nothing else to support the troops.

Parent-trap snares recruiters:

"Staff Sgt. Jason Rivera, 26, a Marine recruiter in Pittsburgh, went to the home of a high school student who had expressed interest in joining the Marine Reserve to talk to his parents.

It was a large home in a well-to-do suburb north of the city. Two American flags adorned the yard. The prospect's mom greeted him wearing an American flag T-shirt.

'I want you to know we support you,' she gushed.

Rivera soon reached the limits of her support.

'Military service isn't for our son. It isn't for our kind of people,' she told him"

"IT ISN'T FOR OUR KIND OF PEOPLE"

WTF???

Your kind of people should be bitch slapped all the way to hell. (These days, that would be the average Iraqi neighborhood..)

"Go bush! Go war! See my faded flag? Kill, kill, KILL! But we don't do that sort of lowly job ourselves... That is for the hired help. Our patriotic duty is just to vote for this. Oh yeah! And to slap a bumpersticker on our SUV."

Your kind sickens me.

Airman suspect in anti-Bush case

2005-08-11T18:06:00.000-04:00

This anti-bush soldier might be in a little bit of trouble, huh?

BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Airman suspect in anti-Bush case:

A US air force reserve colonel may face charges of defacing cars bearing bumper stickers in support of President Bush.

Lieutenant Colonel Alexis Fecteau is suspected of painting obscenities on 12 parked cars at Denver International Airport over a six-month period.

Police allege he blacked out the stickers and then spray-painted expletives on the vehicles.

Allegedly, Lieutenant Colonel Fecteau is suspected of vandalising 12 cars at the airport.

Most of the soldiers I talk to don't like or appreciate the fake support of those little ribbons and bumper stickers, but I think this guy may have gone a little bit over the line legally.

Kudos to him for finding some way to vent his frustration on the idiot bumper sticker warriors of the GOP.

Like the stain the sticker leaves on your car will ever compare to the stain of a soldiers blood on the desert sands?

False patriots...
Every stinking hypocritical one of you!

With the disposable way some of you treat soldiers just to fill a tank of gas, can you blame a soldier for getting mad at you?

Rove's Treason, and the GOP Liars...

2005-08-11T13:12:00.000-04:00

For those of you that keep sending me all of those "GOP talking point" lies in my Email (Are you listening Darrel?) and don't even have the decency to reply to my responses that tear up your lies line by line, instead trying to change the subject to another of your losing arguments...Well, here is a little post that deals with some of the BS you send out daily:

CLAIM: White House Can’t Comment While Investigation Is Ongoing
McClellan: “While that investigation is ongoing, the White House is not going to comment on it.”

FACT: White House Has Repeatedly Commented During the Ongoing Investigation
McClellan had previously cited that same investigation and then gone on to answer the questions as they pertained to Rove. For example, on October 1, 2003, he said, “There’s an investigation going on … you brought up Karl’s name. Let’s be very clear. I thought — I said it was a ridiculous suggestion, I said it’s simply not true that he was involved in leaking classified information, and — nor, did he condone that kind of activity.” Similarly, on October 10, 2003, McClellan said, “I think it’s important to keep in mind that this is an ongoing investigation.” But he then added with regard to a question about Rove’s involvement, “I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this.”

CLAIM: Rove Didn’t Leak The Name So He’s Not Guilty
Rove: “I didn’t know her name and didn’t leak her name.” Rove attorney Robert Luskin said “he did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.”

FACT: National Security Law Says Identifying Covert Agent Is Illegal
Rove at the very least identified Plame as “Wilson’s wife.” Under section 421 of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, the disclosure of “any information identifying [a] covert agent” is illegal.

CLAIM: White House Didn’t Push The Story
Rove’s lawyer Robert Luskin claims Cooper manipulated what Rove said to him “in a pretty ugly fashion to make it seem like people in the White House were affirmatively reaching out to reporters to try to get them to report negative information about Plame.”

FACT: There Was An Organized Campaign To Push Leak Info
First, Robert Novak admitted: “I didn’t dig it out [Plame’s identity], it was given to me…. They [the White House] thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it.” Second, Rove told Chris Matthews that Plame’s identity was “fair game.” Third, Time magazine reported the orchestrated campaign against Wilson in October 2003: “In the days after Wilson’s essay appeared, government officials began to steer reporters away from Wilson’s conclusions.”

CLAIM: Conversation Was About Welfare Reform, So Rove Didn’t Do Anything Wrong
National Review’s Byron York: “According to Luskin, the fact that Rove did not call Cooper; that the original purpose of the call, as Cooper told Rove, was welfare reform.”

FACT: What They Spoke About Was Irrelevant
The original purpose of the conversation between Rove and Cooper is irrelevant. It has no bearing on the fact that Rove did identify a covert agent during that conversation.

CLAIM: Plame Wasn’t An Undercover Agent
Ed Rogers, former official under Reagan/Bush: “I think it is now a matter of established fact that Mrs. Plame was not a protected covert agent, and I don’t think there’s any meaningful investigation about that.”

FACT: Former CIA Officer Who Worked With Plame Verified She Was Undercover
Larry Johnson, former CIA officer: “Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover–in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies. We had official cover.”

CLAIM: Rove Was Trying To Correct A False Story
Rove attorney Luskin added, “What Karl was trying to do … was to warn Time away from publishing things that were going to be established as false.”

FACT: Wilson Was Right, Bush Was Wrong
Bloomberg recently reported, “Two-year old assertions by former ambassador Joseph Wilson regarding Iraq and uranium, which lie at the heart of the controversy over who at the White House identified a covert U.S. operative, have held up in the face of attacks by supporters of presidential adviser Karl Rove.”

CLAIM: Wilson Lied About His Trip To Niger
Former Rove deputy Ken Mehlman: “What Joe Wilson alleged was that the vice president, then he said the CIA director sent him to Niger.” [CNN, 7/12/05]

FACT: Wilson Never Said Cheney Personally Sent Him To Niger
Bloomberg reported, “Wilson never said that Cheney sent him, only that the vice president’s office had questions about an intelligence report that referred to the sale of uranium yellowcake to Iraq from Niger. Wilson, in his New York Times article, said CIA officials were informed of Cheney’s questions. ‘The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president’s office,’ Wilson wrote.”

Posted by Faiz July 14, 2005 6:09 pm
Permalink

Thanks to Faiz over at Think Progress for making this clear and concise post dealing with the BS.

As for you "GOP talking point" liars, well, if you continue to fill my inbox with your stupidity and lies than I will have no choice but to tear them up point-by-point right here on the Blog with your Email attached to your lies so everyone will know just how much of a liar, and just how stupid you truely are.

Anyone that has the nerve to call me "Sir" in an Email (a sign of respect) and fill out the rest of their Email with flat out lies taken straight from the "GOP talking points" hall of shame (showing a complete and utter disrespect to any person of logic) is a hypocrite and deserves all of the disrespect that is returned to them ten times over.

I don't play footsy under the table with the GOP like a Dem does... I am an independent, and for good reason... I will flat out call a spade a spade, and a liar a liar. (Got that Darrel?)

So, in the future, should you decide to send me lies and distorted facts as a response to something I write expect to become totally and completely embarrassed here in public.

I have absolutely no problem with being proven wrong in my opinions, BUT at least I show the proper courtesy of basing my opinions on facts.

Something that the "GOP talking point posters" avoid at all costs:

FACTS!
(OH yeah! And reality...)

Welcome to my world you semi-epsilon-moron-minus GOP talking point idiots. Ignore the khaki brown color of your posts? Why? Did the elephant crap all over you and your logic again?

Rep. Nancy Johnson's Scandal Plagued Legislation

2005-08-10T23:05:00.000-04:00

It seems that Nancy Johnson's political career has a lot of junk in the trunk...

Deroy Murdock on Medicare on National Review Online:
"This fiscal malpractice has not bought the White House even political dividends. An August 25-26, 2003 Gallup poll found 40 percent of adults approved of the president's handling of Medicare while 48 percent disapproved. After the benefit's adoption, a March 26-28, 2004 Gallup survey saw 35 percent approve of Bush on Medicare, while disapproval climbed to 55 percent. What a bargain: Each one-point drop in Bush's Medicare approval rating cost Americans $44.5 billion.

The GOP Congress should dump the drug benefit. They should spare taxpayers this absurdly expensive new project whose true costs were concealed by an administration that sacrificed integrity and fiscal responsibility on an altar of blind ambition.

Instead, Republicans should develop a modest plan for poor seniors who lack coverage, rather than any American over 65, including multimillionaires and those who already have drug insurance.

The Medicare drug benefit has metastasized from bad policy to bad politics and now to scandal and possible criminality. This law begs to be euthanized. The GOP should pulls its plug. As for the perpetrators of this colossal public fraud, the Justice Department should fit them for orange jumpsuits."

And this is the legislation she was was so proud of and pinning her re-election hopes on? Well now, If that ain't an elephant passing some serious gas on to the voters?

Careful now!
Never stand behind an elephant that is full of it...
You never know when it is going to take its next dump on YOU!

Pigs On The Wing

2005-08-08T23:38:00.000-04:00

While Juan Cole sets the record staright on the real issue of what is at the heart of the terror unleashed on London last week there is one very minor point he may have missed.

Salon.com News | "The time of revenge has come":

Blowback from Bush and Blair's incompetently pursued war on terror has hit London. When will the U.S. figure out how to fight smart?

By Juan Cole

July 8, 2005 | Credit for the horrific bombings of the London Underground and a double-decker bus on Thursday morning was immediately taken on a radical Muslim Web site by a 'secret group' of Qaida al-Jihad in Europe. By Thursday afternoon, as the casualty toll rose above 40 dead and 700 wounded, British Foreign Minister Jack Straw was saying, 'It has the hallmarks of an al-Qaida-related attack.' Although U.S. President George W. Bush maintains that al-Qaida strikes out at the industrialized democracies because of hatred for Western values, the statement said nothing of the sort. The attack, the terrorists proclaimed, was an act of sacred revenge for British 'massacres' in 'Afghanistan and Iraq,' and a punishment of the United Kingdom for its 'Zionism' (i.e., support of Israel). If they really are responsible, who is this group and what do they want?"

Don't you ever wonder where all of these web sites are coming from?

UK-based dissident denies link to website that carried al-Qaida claim

David Pallister - The Guardian
Saturday July 9, 2005

The claim of responsibility for the London attacks was first posted on one of the dozens of Islamic websites that are routinely monitored by western intelligence services.
The statement, under the name of the Secret Organisation of the al-Qaida Jihad in Europe, said: "The heroic mujahideen have carried out a blessed raid in London. Britain is now burning with fear, terror and panic in its northern, southern, eastern and western quarters."

...snip...

...two Israeli groups devoted to exposing the network of jihadist sites claim that it is connected to the London-based Saudi dissident Saad al-Faqih. Mr Faqih, who is based in Willesden, north-west London, and runs the Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia (Mira), was designated by the US treasury last December as a supporter of al-Qaida. The UK Treasury followed suit by freezing Mr Faqih's assets.

Speaking in December 2004 before the assets were frozen, Mr Faqih ridiculed any idea that "millions of dollars" would be frozen. "I have no assets in the US and all I have in the UK is a current account with a few hundred pounds."

Well? At least someone out there is doing something about all of this by trying to freeze the assets of people that are involved...

But could we do more? Maybe...

It was posted on an Arabic website, al-qal3ah.com, which is registered by Qalaah Qalaah in Abu Dhabi and hosted by a server in Houston, Texas.

One would hope that they will deal with this Houston companies involvement in promoting terror? Maybe freezing all of their assets too...

Maybe?

When pigs can fly!

The server in Houston has intriguing connections. Everyone's Internet was founded by brothers Robert and Roy Marsh in 1998 and by 2002 had an income of more than $30m (now about £17m).

...snip...
Roy Marsh counts among his friends President George Bush's former sister-in-law, Sharon Bush, and the president's navy secretary.

Everyone's Internet, which also hosts a number of pornographic sites, states: "We support the uncensored flow of information and ideas over the internet and do not actively monitor subscriber activity under normal circumstances."

I am sure that investigators will clear Roy of any wrongdoing AFTER they have completely gone through all of the porn on those houston servers owned by another bush family porn pal.

If you didn't care what happened to me,
And I didn't care for you
We would zig zag our way
Through the boredom and pain
Occasionally glancing up through the rain
Wondering which of the buggers to blame
And watching for pigs on the wing

Pink Floyd, Animals

Frist's Torturous Decision

2005-08-08T23:34:00.000-04:00

If there was ever any question about who is supporting the soldiers, well, the Army Times had no problems figuring this out. They point out how alarmed Dems are that republicans would rather pander to special interest groups like the NRA instead of making the important decisions while we are supposed to be a nation at war.

Army Times - News - More News: "By Rick Maze
Times staff writer

Senate Republican leaders decided Tuesday that a gun manufacturers’ liability bill is more important than next year’s $441.6 billion defense authorization bill.

With Democrats expressing amazement that there could be any higher legislative priority in a time of war than the annual defense bill that includes money for pay and benefits, operations and maintenance, and weapons’ purchases and research, Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee, the Senate Republican leader, decided Tuesday that a bill protecting gun manufacturers from lawsuits over the illegal use of firearms was a higher priority.

The decision came after Republican leaders failed to muster the 60 votes needed to prevent amendments not strictly related to the defense budget from being offered to the defense bill.

In a count of 50-48, seven Republicans joined Democrats in voting not to restrict debate, a move that Democratic leaders said would have prevented consideration of amendments to help veterans and survivors of deceased service members, along with other issues."

It is really important to understand that this effort to push back the bill is less about the funding for the war and more about getting more important rich elitist agendas to the floor quickly:

With Congress planning to leave town Friday for one-month break, debate on S 397, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, is expected to last two or three days, and then Senate leaders plan to take up an energy bill, an estate tax reform bill and an Interior Department funding bill

A hat tip to QWQ, who had this note about Frist's torturous decision to sidetrack this:

Also, several folks have noted in the comments that pandering to the NRA is not the only reason the Republicans wanted to delay the Defense Authorization bill -- the White House also wanted to avoid showdowns on detainee treatment and military base closings. The new AP story has that angle, as does this CBS edited version of the original AP story.

Oh, yeah... The bushies don't want to give up their right to torture innocent Iraqis that are held along with the few terrorists in captivity... Go figure, huh? Apparently the republican controlled Senate doesn't work any better in making us safer than torture does at getting useful intel.

Who Trains the Terrorists? Bush does...

2005-07-31T02:49:00.000-04:00

Not only is the corrupt, lying, disastrous bush admin. creating more terrorists around the world because of their illegal invasion of Iraq BUT:

The Rachel Maddow Show:

A group of London politicians has written to the US ambassador in Britain demanding that the US Department of Justice take an al Qaeda training manual off its website. The British police apparently found it, but the US government posted it online. And now the brits are understandably mad about it. The manual includes advice on how to go undetected on crowded public transport, how to communicate and avoid detection by security services, how to transport weapons, and how to stop explosives from deteriorating.

They are also making sure these terrorists have easy access to the training manuals they need... All online!

What a useless bunch of idiots that occupy the White House right now.

New Milford Times - News - 07/22/2005 - Soldier charged as a fugitive

2005-07-31T01:26:00.000-04:00

I know that many of you are good at getting messages out about this sort of stuff! Anyone care to help a stranger that is now in jail for going AWOL?

I don't know this person and I certainly do not have any knowledge of the circumstances for this man's decision to go AWOL (there are hundreds of reasons to not want to go to Iraq and I do not have to list them to you guys), but as a vet that luckily just got my "official honorable discharge" (the "2nd" honorable discharge you get from the IRR) last month, I feel a certain responsibility towards trying to figure out how to best help this young man that lives in my hometown.

New Milford Times - News - 07/22/2005 - Soldier charged as a fugitive:

"A New Milford man will likely face a court-martial for desertion from his Army National Guard Unit, following his arrest Tuesday by New Milford police as he allegedly left the scene of a minor car accident that occurred at 12:10 a.m.

(snip)

Assistant State's Attorney Jonathan Knight said his office contacted an Army investigator in New York who said that Mr. Johnston, a member of an Army National Guard unit based in Huntington, N.Y., was absent without leave (AWOL).

Mr. Knight said Mr. Johnston was arraigned in Bantam Superior Court Tuesday. He was then transported to a holding facility on Whalley Avenue in New Haven.

According to published reports, Mr. Johnson's unit, which is part of the 69th Mechanized Infantry Battalion, has been in Iraq for the past six months. There, it is attached to the 42nd Infantry Division, which had been deployed from Fort Benning, Ga."

I am going to try and contact a few of the Anti-war Veteran groups and see if they can help him, though I am not sure if any of them are already following this?

I would have enlisted for Afghanistan... BUT Iraq is a huge fuck-up! (To be blunt... And honest)

Schmidt and Her DOM in OHIO

2005-07-28T20:51:00.000-04:00

Conservatives get a behind the scenes view of what to expect from Schmidt if she wins...

Daily Kos :: Comments OH-2: The Commercial, The Poll, "Swift Boating" & the Pivot:

Yesterday, some of us who emailed the Schmidt campaign got mailbox full returns which pointed to campaign manager Joe Brauns real email address: deanofcorn@aol.com

Some of us did a google search on "deanofcorn" which returned 3 entries. The one in Canada is a mistype, it should have been "dean of com...merce", the M got spliced into a rn.

The only other 2 entries were for a "deanofcorn" user ID for the Scioto County, Ohio GOP and then this BDSM "deanofcorn" solicitation from Cincinnati "I am an experienced Dom seeking a sub for long term exploration and training."

Joe Braun (Schmidt's campaign manager) has the email address deanofcorn@aol.com, and the same deanofcorn user ID for the Cincinnati area GOP site. Its obvious that the BDSM deanofcorn in Cincinnati (the only other reference to deanofcorn on the net) is him. If any further evidence is needed, this article he authored in college puts him at the same age as the individual who likes to perform 'medical exams'.

by tomVA

Now the only thing left to see is if Braun and Schmidt will air some video of their backroom meetings where he "whips" her into shape for the election?

Is there little wonder that the republican party is bringing in another $750,000 from the national level to try and buy her out of this?

Yep... The GOP is a slave to their own hypocrisy!

Hackett is an honorable soldier that served his country. As a Vet, I can appreciate that.

Schmidt is just a subservient low-life that surrounds herself with SCUM.

And the GOP has the nerve to run another "swifty" campaign on Hackett?

Conservative voters of OHIO:

WAKE UP!

The Ohio GOP is as corrupt as any of the ones in Texas or DC. You know it, and the nation knows it.

I am an independent and even I would choose Hackett over that scumbucket Schmidt.

Prosecutor In CIA Leak Case Casting A Wide Net

2005-07-28T16:00:00.000-04:00

pontificator noted that "at least a half dozen CIA and State department officials have spoken with prosecutors. " Given the testimony of Bill Harlow, a CIA spokesman Novak used to try and confim Valerie Plame Wilson's status in the CIA, it is apparent that none of the GOP talking points about her status at the CIA make any sense at all. Harlow made it plainly clear that Novak had a CIA "NO-go!!" on the story not once, but even a second time after confirming Mrs. Wilson's status as an undercover operator.

Prosecutor In CIA Leak Case Casting A Wide Net: "Harlow, the former CIA spokesman, said in an interview yesterday that he testified last year before a grand jury about conversations he had with Novak at least three days before the column was published. He said he warned Novak, in the strongest terms he was permitted to use without revealing classified information, that Wilson's wife had not authorized the mission and that if he did write about it, her name should not be revealed.

Harlow said that after Novak's call, he checked Plame's status and confirmed that she was an undercover operative. He said he called Novak back to repeat that the story Novak had related to him was wrong and that Plame's name should not be used. But he did not tell Novak directly that she was undercover because that was classified.

In a column published Oct. 1, 2003, Novak wrote that the CIA official he spoke to 'asked me not to use her name, saying she probably never again will be given a foreign assignment but that exposure of her name might cause 'difficulties' if she travels abroad. He never suggested to me that Wilson's wife or anybody else would be endangered. If he had, I would not have used her name.'"

Since Novak certainly knew the CIA said NO to the story twice it is pretty apperent that Novak should have known what he was doing was illegal at that point.

I guess some people think they should be above the law when it comes to weakening our national security. I can only hope that, after their corpses are released from jail, rove, libby, novak, and any of the other conspirators, enjoy their trip straight to hell for their little "GOP campaign to smear Wilson and the CIA" treason against America.

Santorum: The Village Idiot

2005-07-27T12:30:00.000-04:00

Apparently some people in PA have a problem with the moral values Rick Santorum is teaching his kids, as well as the rest of America.

Letters to the editor: 7/21/05:
Not moral messages

As a teacher for the Diocese of Pittsburgh for 14 years, one important lesson I learned was that no matter what I said to the child, whatever the parents said superseded my message. What parents say and how they live sends a message stronger than any teacher's voice no matter what the issue.

Sen. Rick Santorum and his wife have taught their children a powerful lesson on civic responsibility by refusing to pay any tuition money to the Penn Hills School District for their children who attended the Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School ('Penn Hills Loses Bid to Charge Santorum,' July 12). Released from that payment on a technicality shows that even an upstanding, moral gentleman like Sen. Santorum teaches his children the following lessons:

1) Take advantage of the system whenever you can.

2) The little guy pays while the rich and powerful guy gets away with it.

3) As a Catholic, you have no obligation to pay your share to the common good in spite of Catholic social doctrine.

Finally, I am shocked that our religious leaders who see Sen. Santorum as some sort of faith-and-morals hero have not spoken up on this issue at all.

SISTER LIGUORI ROSSNER
Sisters for Christian Community
Bloomfield"

Thank you for doing your part Sister Liguori, since we all know it takes a village to raise an idiot, and Lord knows Santorum is an idiot!

Something About Sharm El-Sheik?

2005-07-27T00:54:00.000-04:00

You know what? I have read about 15 different stories from various papers in the USA and around the world BUT there is one part of the story that all of them seem to leave out of it. Something I have personal experience with concerning Sharm El-Sheik.

If you click on the link (don't forget to watch the 20 second video there!) you might get an idea what I am talking about.

MFO Southcamp

Don't you think this is a MAJOR EFFIN PART OF THE STORY?

MFO Southcamp

The smaller South Camp, near Sharm el Sheikh on the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula, is situated on a bluff overlooking the Red Sea.� The camp contains all facilities normally required to support a reinforced battalion sized military unit.

I knew as soon as I started scrolling through one story after another that you would not find any of this reported.

US Contingent

The United States Army provides the single largest contingent to the MFO based at both North and South Camp.

The different activities provided by Task Force HQ, Support Battalion and US Battalion are described in the links above.

Why would the MSM care that there are always American soldiers stationed in Sharm?

Is this a part of the story that might of interested you?

Do you really think that tourists were the "only" targets?

I know, I know... A lot of very wealthy Europpean, American, and Middle East OIL magnates go there often. It is a resort town for the extremely FILTHY RICH... But do any of you think that maybe, just maybe, Gambling Saudi princes and tourists were not the only targets?

BTC News � Vermont GOP candidate: Impeach Bush

2005-07-25T22:26:00.000-04:00

Just when I was starting to think that there isn't even one honest republican left in this country BTCNEWS had to blow that theory out of the water:

BTC News � Vermont GOP candidate: Impeach Bush:
— weldon berger @ 12:33 pm
Permanent Link

Vermont Republican Dennis Morrisseau wants two things: To fill the House seat being vacated by long-time Congressman Bernie Sanders — Sanders is planning a run for the Senate — and to impeach George W. Bush."

It is pretty funny that there are so few real conservatives in the GOP that are patriotic enough to point out how messed up their party is right now.

The bush legacy of being the "Benedict Arnold administration" is a lock for the history books. Eventualy real conservatives will figure it out.

Morrisseau said he imagines there is a lot of soul-searching going on among the Republicans who continue to support Bush.

“If you’re an old and decent Republican and politics takes a 180 in your country, it sometimes takes a while to tell what you ought to do. It took me a while. I’ve been at this for years.”

Go on over and check out more on this story and others from BTCNEWS.

Ronald Reagan on Outing Spies

2005-07-20T17:27:00.000-04:00

It appears that Ronnie Raygun's words have come back to haunt the traitors that hero worship him:

Remarks on Signing the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982

Excerpt from the speech delivered by Ronald Reagan:

Whether you work in Langley or a faraway nation, whether your tasks are in operations or analysis sections, it is upon your intellect and integrity, your wit and intuition that the fate of freedom rests for millions of your countrymen and for many millions more all around the globe.…

Like those who are part of any silent service, your sacrifices are sometimes unappreciated; your work is sometimes misunderstood. Because you’re professionals, you understand and accept this. But because you’re human and because you deal daily in the dangers that confront this nation, you must sometimes question whether some of your countrymen appreciate the value of your accomplishments, the sacrifices you make, the dangers you confront, the importance of the warnings that you issue.

And that’s why I have come here today; first, to sign an important piece of legislation that bears directly on your work, an act of Congress whose overwhelming passage by the representatives of the American people is a symbol of their support for the job that you do every day. But even more than this, I’ve come here today to say to you what the vast majority of Americans would say if they had this opportunity to stand here before you. We’re grateful to you. We thank you. We’re proud of you.

If you support the treachery of rove and libby than I hold nothing but contempt for you. The potential dangers that these leakers have exposed networks of agents to, and the security risks they have caused for our nation is nothing less than an act of treason.

Yep! Treason...
Reagan is calling y'all on it from his grave there bushies.

But is there more?
Well, yes there is... Here ya go:

The Congress has carefully drafted this bill so that it focuses only on those who would transgress the bounds of decency; not those who would exercise their legitimate right of dissent. This carefully drawn act recognizes that the revelation of the names of secret agents adds nothing to legitimate public debate over intelligence policy. It is also a signal to the world that while we in this democratic nation remain tolerant and flexible, we also retain our good sense and our resolve to protect our own security and that of the brave men and women who serve us in difficult and dangerous intelligence assignments.

During the debate over this bill, some have suggested that our focus should be not on protecting our own intelligence agencies, but on the real or imagined abuses of the past. Well, I'm glad that counsel was rejected, for the days of such abuses are behind us. The Congress now shares the responsibility of guarding against any transgression, and I have named a new Intelligence Oversight Board and Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board to assist me in ensuring that the rule of law is maintained in areas which must remain secret and out of the normal realm of public scrutiny.

Beyond this, I have full confidence that you'll do your job vigorously and imaginatively while making sure that your activity is lawful, constitutional, and in keeping with the traditions of our way of life. And while you're at your job and while I'm President and while these Congressmen stand at watch, we'll work together to see to it that this powerful tool of government is used to advance, not abuse, the rights of free people.

"The Great Accumulator" (you know? All of that debt Reagan ran up, silly!) must have had his astrologer working overtime that day...

Turdblossm is Wilting...

2005-07-18T18:06:00.000-04:00

Why is that mean man scowling? Maybe he just saw the latest post over at Escahaton by Atrios... Looks like turdblossom has willted in America's eyes, and while Atrios got the scoop, well, all bush has left is a heaping pile of poop:

ABC NEWS POLL: THE CIA LEAK INVESTIGATION – 7/17/05 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Monday, July 18, 2005 Many Doubt White House CooperationWith Federal Investigation of CIA LeakJust a quarter of Americans think the White House is fully cooperating in the federal investigation of the leak of a CIA operative's identity, a number that's declined sharply since the investigation began. And three-quarters say that if presidential adviser Karl Rove was responsible for leaking classified information, it should cost him his job.

Careful what you step in as you follow the treason of rove Atrios... You don't want to come out of it smelling like the Benedict Arnold administration in the White House right now... (If your cats are anything like my dog... There is always the chance of finding a bush turd on the living room floor the hard way! lol)

Help Make IWT Your News Source!

2005-07-16T19:26:00.000-04:00

Independent World Television

IWTnews is proud to present some brand new video content-- an interview with IWTnews Founding Committee member Mark Lloyd. A senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and a former NBC and CNN producer, Mr. Lloyd talks about the death of investigative TV news reporting, the need for greater diversity in media, and his hopes for building a better network. Watch the video now

Go ahead... I'll still be here for you...

This is a great opportunity for everyone here to help get a news source off the ground that has:

No corporate funding!

No corporate underwriting!

No government funding!

Just honest investigative reporting, business and political coverage, and other real news from around the world that is funded only by you! And responsible to no one else but you!

You know you want this... God knows, WE NEED THIS!

Check out the NEW Video...

Check out their intro video...

(If you missed it the first time around?)

Take the survey...

Poke around their Web site and see if it is all I am talking about. They really want to know what YOU think, and they really want your help in getting this going.

With the option of watching "news" from Fox or "Foxlite" (CNN) what do you really have to lose by just checking this out? The more sources we can get out there that undercut the corporate news networks... The more all stations will be forced to deal with news in a less biased way.

If you have gotten all the way down here and haven't checked the site out yet... What are you waiting for?

Click on the image damnit!

Fork You Rove!

2005-07-16T01:29:00.000-04:00

Here is the text... Read it all... There is no exception for disclosing classified info even if you only confirm a previous source. It is illegal. And they are "trained" to know this before they to get any security clearance.

They are so detailed in this training that even confirming classified info to a news source is a part of that training, and it is definately a no-no.

REP. HENRY A. WAXMAN
RANKING MINORITY MEMBER
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JULY 15, 2005

Fact Sheet
Karl Rove’s Nondisclosure Agreement

Today, news reports revealed that Karl Rove, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff and the President’s top political advisor, confirmed the identity of covert CIA official Valerie Plame Wilson with Robert Novak on July 8, 2003, six days before Mr. Novak published the information in a nationally syndicated column. These new disclosures have obvious relevance to the criminal investigation of Patrick Fitzgerald, the Special Counsel who is investigating whether Mr. Rove violated a criminal statute by revealing Ms. Wilson’s identity as a covert CIA official.

Independent of the relevance these new disclosures have to Mr. Fitzgerald’s investigation, they also have significant implications for: (1) whether Mr. Rove violated his obligations under his "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement" and (2) whether the White House violated its obligations under Executive Order 12958. Under the nondisclosure agreement and the executive order, Mr. Rove would be subject to the loss of his security clearance or dismissal even for "negligently" disclosing Ms. Wilson’s identity.

KARL ROVE’S NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT

Executive Order 12958 governs how federal employees are awarded security clearances in order to obtain access to classified information. It was last updated by President George W. Bush on March 25, 2003, although it has existed in some form since the Truman era. The executive order applies to any entity within the executive branch that comes into possession of classified information, including the White House. It requires employees to undergo a criminal background check, obtain training on how to protect classified information, and sign a "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement," also known as a SF-312, promising not to reveal classified information.1

The nondisclosure agreement signed by White House officials such as Mr. Rove states: "I will never divulge classified information to anyone" who is not authorized to receive it.2

THE PROHIBITION AGAINST "CONFIRMING" CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

Mr. Rove, through his attorney, has raised the implication that there is a distinction between classified information to someone not authorized to receive it and confirming classified information from someone not authorized to have it. In fact, there is no such distinction under the nondisclosure agreement Mr. Rove signed.

One of the most basic rules of safeguarding classified information is that an official who has signed a nondisclosure agreement cannot confirm classified information obtained by a reporter.

In fact, this obligation is highlighted in the "briefing booklet" that new security clearance recipients receive when they sign their nondisclosure agreements: Before … confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, … confirmation of its accuracy is also an unauthorized disclosure.3

THE INDEPENDENT DUTY TO VERIFY THE CLASSIFIED STATUS OF INFORMATION

Mr. Rove’s attorney has implied that if Mr. Rove learned Ms. Wilson’s identity and occupation from a reporter, this somehow makes a difference in what he can say about the information. This is inaccurate.

The executive order states: "Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information."4

Mr. Rove was not at liberty to repeat classified information he may have learned from a reporter Instead, he had an affirmative obligation to determine whether the information had been declassified before repeating it. The briefing booklet is explicit on this point: "before disseminating the information elsewhere … the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified."5

"NEGLIGENT" DISCLOSURE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

Mr. Rove’s attorney has also implied that Mr. Rove’s conduct should be at issue only if he intentionally or knowingly disclosed Ms. Wilson’s covert status. In fact, the nondisclosure agreement and the executive order require sanctions against security clearance holders who "knowingly, willfully, or negligently" disclose classified information.6 The sanctions for such a breach include "reprimand, suspension without pay, removal, termination of classification authority, loss or denial of access to classified information, or other sanctions."7

THE WHITE HOUSE OBLIGATIONS UNDER EXECUTIVE ORDER 12958

Under the executive order, the White House has an affirmative obligation to investigate and take remedial action separate and apart from any ongoing criminal investigation. The executive order specifically provides that when a breach occurs, each agency must "take appropriate and prompt corrective action."8

This includes a determination of whether individual employees improperly disseminated or obtained access to classified information The executive order further provides that sanctions for violations are not optional.

The executive order expressly provides: "Officers and employees of the United States Government … shall be subject to appropriate sanctions if they knowingly, willfully, or negligently … disclose to unauthorized persons information properly classified."9

There is no evidence that the White House complied with these requirements.

ENDNOTES

1 Executive Order No. 12958, Classified National Security Information (as amended), sec. 4.1(a) (Mar.28, 2003) (online at Web reference).

2 Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, Standard Form 312 (Prescribed by NARA/ISOO) (32 C.F.R. 2003, E.O. 12958) (online at Web reference).

3 Information Security Oversight Office, National Archives and Records Administration, Briefing

Booklet: Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement (Standard Form 312), at 73 (emphasis added)(online at Web reference ).

4 Executive Order No. 12958, sec. 1.1(b).

5 Briefing Booklet, supra note 3, at 73.

6 Executive Order No. 12958, sec. 5.5(b) (emphasis added).

7 Id. at 5.5(c).

8 Id. at 5.5(e)(1).

9 Id. at 5.5(b).

Stick a fork in rove...
YEP...
He is done.

Now what we need to know from cheney and bush?

What did you know AND when did you know it?

And while I am at it...
How friendly were you with Jeff Gannon?
Wink wink
(Hey, Gannon had to be screwing some guy in the White House?)

Keeping Up Appearances

2005-07-14T12:34:00.000-04:00

Oh, you can be darn certain that all of Britain will take note of this and not be too happy about it at all. What message does this send to our allies?

BBC NEWS | UK | US forces lift London travel ban:
RAF Lakenheath
RAF Lakenheath was one of the bases affected
The US military has rescinded an order to its personnel to avoid London in the aftermath of the bombings.

Personnel, most of them from US Air Force units at RAF Mildenhall and RAF Lakenheath, in Suffolk, were told last week not to go within the M25 motorway.

But there was criticism that it sent out the wrong signals at a time when the emphasis was on 'business as usual' in London after the attacks.

The US embassy said the order had been reviewed and had now been lifted."

Yep... They see clearly through the BS of bush policies. At crucial times in history it is always important to send strong clear messages to your enemies and your allies.

The message the US has sent under the incompetent bush regime?

"We will stand by you... Until it becomes dangerous! Then we will cut and run."

Would it have been dangerous for the US to be seen "keeping up appearances" iin London with the ongoing threat of bombings? Yes! Clearly it would have been dangerous. But it is more dangerous to send this clear message to the Brits that we are selfish chickens that will will desert our allies and hide from disaster.

Another clear sign from that echoes the actions of a chickenhawk preznit that flew off to hide in a bunker when the US needed a leader in the White House.

The Brittish people noticed this. You can bet the entire world will take notice of this. There is no longer even the slightest appearance of integrity coming out of the White House when it comes to their support of covert operatives AND allies.

Pigs On the Wing

2005-07-13T01:20:00.000-04:00

While Juan Cole sets the record staright on the real issue of what is at the heart of the terror unleashed on London last week there is one very minor point he may have missed.

Salon.com News "The time of revenge has come":

Blowback from Bush and Blair's incompetently pursued war on terror has hit London. When will the U.S. figure out how to fight smart?

By Juan Cole

July 8, 2005 Credit for the horrific bombings of the London Underground and a double-decker bus on Thursday morning was immediately taken on a radical Muslim Web site by a 'secret group' of Qaida al-Jihad in Europe. By Thursday afternoon, as the casualty toll rose above 40 dead and 700 wounded, British Foreign Minister Jack Straw was saying, 'It has the hallmarks of an al-Qaida-related attack.' Although U.S. President George W. Bush maintains that al-Qaida strikes out at the industrialized democracies because of hatred for Western values, the statement said nothing of the sort. The attack, the terrorists proclaimed, was an act of sacred revenge for British 'massacres' in 'Afghanistan and Iraq,' and a punishment of the United Kingdom for its 'Zionism' (i.e., support of Israel). If they really are responsible, who is this group and what do they want?"

Don't you ever wonder where all of these web sites are coming from?

UK-based dissident denies link to website that carried al-Qaida claim

David Pallister - The Guardian
Saturday July 9, 2005

The claim of responsibility for the London attacks was first posted on one of the dozens of Islamic websites that are routinely monitored by western intelligence services.
The statement, under the name of the Secret Organisation of the al-Qaida Jihad in Europe, said: "The heroic mujahideen have carried out a blessed raid in London. Britain is now burning with fear, terror and panic in its northern, southern, eastern and western quarters."

...snip...

...two Israeli groups devoted to exposing the network of jihadist sites claim that it is connected to the London-based Saudi dissident Saad al-Faqih. Mr Faqih, who is based in Willesden, north-west London, and runs the Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia (Mira), was designated by the US treasury last December as a supporter of al-Qaida. The UK Treasury followed suit by freezing Mr Faqih's assets.

Speaking in December 2004 before the assets were frozen, Mr Faqih ridiculed any idea that "millions of dollars" would be frozen. "I have no assets in the US and all I have in the UK is a current account with a few hundred pounds."

Well? At least someone out there is doing something about all of this by trying to freeze the assets of people that are involved...

But could we do more? Maybe...

It was posted on an Arabic website, al-qal3ah.com, which is registered by Qalaah Qalaah in Abu Dhabi and hosted by a server in Houston, Texas.

One would hope that they will deal with this Houston companies involvement in promoting terror? Maybe freezing all of their assets too...

Maybe?

When pigs can fly!

The server in Houston has intriguing connections. Everyone's Internet was founded by brothers Robert and Roy Marsh in 1998 and by 2002 had an income of more than $30m (now about £17m).

...snip...
Roy Marsh counts among his friends President George Bush's former sister-in-law, Sharon Bush, and the president's navy secretary.

Everyone's Internet, which also hosts a number of pornographic sites, states: "We support the uncensored flow of information and ideas over the internet and do not actively monitor subscriber activity under normal circumstances."

I am sure that investigators will clear Roy of any wrongdoing AFTER they have completely gone through all of the porn on those houston servers owned by another bush family porn pal.

If you didn't care what happened to me,
And I didn't care for you
We would zig zag our way
Through the boredom and pain
Occasionally glancing up through the rain
Wondering which of the buggers to blame
And watching for pigs on the wing

Pink Floyd, Animals

Iran and Iraq to sign military deal

2005-07-08T21:42:00.000-04:00

Well? I'll be interested in seeing how the right wingnut spinmonster tries get this mountain-sized boulder moving... Here you have the country they claim as a "New Democracy" that will be "American friendly" (You know, the Iraq that neocon wet dreams are made of) announcing they will be signing a military training deal and forming an alliance with Iran.

Yes...The same Iran that the bush pseudocons supporters would love to bomb the hell out of.

Aljazeera.Net - Iran and Iraq to sign military deal:
Thursday 07 July 2005, 13:10 Makka Time, 10:10 GMT

Former foes Iran and Iraq have said they will sign a military cooperation agreement that will include Iranian help in training Iraq's armed forces.

The agreement marks a considerable advance in relations between the two countries that fought a bitter 1980-1988 war and comes despite repeated US accusations that Iran has undermined security in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

'It's a new chapter in our relations with Iraq. We will start wide defence cooperation,' Iranian Defence Minister Admiral Ali Shamkhani told a joint news conference with visiting Iraqi counterpart Sadoun al-Dulaimi.

'We're going to form some committees which will be involved in mine clearance, identifying those missing from the war and also ... to help train, rebuild and modernise the Iraqi army,' Shamkhani added.

Iran last year offered to train Iraqi border guards, but Baghdad declined the offer.

Meddling accusation

US and Iraqi officials have often accused Iran of stirring up instability in Iraq. Tehran denies meddling in Iraq or helping, arming or letting foreign fighters cross its borders.

'Nobody can dictate to Iraq its relations with other countries'

Sadoun al-Dulaimi,
Iraqi defence minister
Asked about possible US opposition to Iran-Iraq military cooperation, Shamkhani said: 'No one can prevent us from reaching an agreement.'

Iraq's al-Dulaimi echoed Shamkhani's comments.

'Nobody can dictate to Iraq its relations with other countries,' he said."

Normally I would just sit back and laugh as the right wing spinmonster choked on the fumes of reality, BUT I think it really is a good time to say something in support of our troops:

PULL THE FUCKING TROOPS OUT NOW YOU MORON OF A PRESIDENT!

Media Reaction to Yesterday's HUGE News from Philadelphia

2005-07-08T20:39:00.000-04:00

For anyone that needs a good laugh I have yanked this off of a dailyKos poster. (With their pemision, of course)

Enjoy it... I did!

by BriVT
Tue Jul 5th, 2005 at 06:06:03 PDT
I am OUTRAGED by the media coverage of yesterday's big news out of Philadelphia. The Declaration of Independence is a really big deal, imo, but you can't even get a sense of what's in the document from the news coverage. Let's take a look at what I mean ...
First, here's the lede of a representative article from the Washington Post:

In a move termed a "last-ditch plea for relevance from a defeated insurgency"
by a British Army spokesman, the Continental Congress yesterday gave final
approval of a Declaration of Independence.
The document, signed by the
Congressmen, provides a brief introduction followed by a litany of what the
Congress terms "injuries and usurpations" by King George III.

"This really is the last gasp of a dying insurgency," said British Army
spokesman Larry DiRita. "With our fleets gathering outside New York to put the
final touches on their rag-tag 'Army,' the rebels decided to make one final plea
for attention."

The article goes on to give conflicting reports over the situation in New York.

The New York Times article by Adam Nagourney takes a slightly different tack, focusing on the authorship of The Declaration and exploring what it means. A snippet:

While [Massachusetts representative John] Adams was the head of the committee
charged with the writing of the document, credit has been flowing to Thomas
Jefferson. Some see evidence of a split in the leadership of the Congress over
this issue.

"Adams is just a jerk," one figure connected to the Congress asserts. "No
one wanted him to have anything to do with it." Some have even claimed that
Abigail Adams, John's wife, holds too much sway over the young lawyer,
bombarding him with a huge number of letters. Ms. Adams even so far forgets
herself in some of these letters that she comments on the actual political
situation in the colonies, some officials claim on condition of anonymity.

The AP runs a Nedra Pickler story, the basic thrust of which can be seen from this one line: "When the insurgents write, 'we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,' they fail to mention that most of the signers of the document are actually wealthy."

CNN picks up on the Adams-Jefferson angle from the Times, devoting their full political roundtable to speculating about this split. One commenter even goes after Abigail, saying, "Women like Hillary, um, Abigail really should remember their responsibilities at home." The rest of their news coverage is focused on the story of Chandra Schiavo, the young woman from the Vermont frontier that has been missing for two weeks. They speculate breathlessly that she was abducted by Native Americans.

MSNBC devoted one small piece to the entire story, ending with the anchor saying, "While one small group signed this letter of protest, the vast majority of colonists remain patriotic." They then went back to near constant coverage of Chandra Schiavo.

Fox News, of course, is the worst of the lot. Most of the coverage focuses on the "massive armada" under General Howe's command in New York. Here's a section of HANNITY & colmes:

HANNITY: King George is tough. I don't care what anyone else may think of him
or what these "continentals" list in their little document, the King will press
on with what he thinks is right. And I just don't see what that little rag-tag
group under Washington can do about it.

colmes: Gee, I think the Declaration is quite a nice piece of writing.

HANNITY: You would. But you gotta admit that it doesn't mean squat. King
George is gonna quash them like a bug.
colmes: Oh, yeah. Absolutely.

O'Reilly devoted most of his hour to the same topic of the British Army's strength and eventual victory. But at the very end, he at least had on someone in favor of the colonists, and I think his bookers made a bad choice. They tried to grab a young, inexperienced flunky for Bill to beat on, but I think fresh-faced James Madison did quite well ...

O'Reilly: Look, Madison, you and I both know that there's been no big march
to tyrrany here. Let's cut the crap: King George hasn't changed the
administration of the colonies much at all.

Madison: I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom
of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by
violent and sudden usurpations.

O'Reilly: Look, pal, you can leave the fancy language in the salons with
your other wealthy friends. I know you people have a big problem with the Stamp
Act and stuff like that, but let me tell you, the Mother Country saved our butts
from the French and we owe her.

Madison: If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the
guise of fighting a foreign enemy.

O'Reilly: Shut up! Shut up! Get off my set! Go back to giving a loofah
rub to your nubile, attractive, young ... uh, get out of here!

So far, the columnists haven't weighed in, although Bob Novak does have a column about the War. In it, he claims that a "Nathan Hale" is actually a spy working behind British lines in New York. This has caused a lot of speculation on where he got his information, with early rumors pointing to a General Arnold. Well, let's hope young Mr. Hale gets through this safe, anyway!

Finally, there are a couple of articles that take a more substantial look. Knight-Ridder newspapers run a story taking a closer look at the importance of the document:

In a document that has the potential to shake the foundations of the world's
conception of government, the Continental Congress took the radical step of
declaring the Colonies independence from Great Britain. This bold step
immediately transforms the conflict from a simple rebellion over taxes into a
revolution in human thought and governance.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to
secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just
powers from the consent of the governed," the document states. These radical
phrases completely reverse traditional views of government, replacing the view
that legitimacy of action comes from the King's consent with one where the
legitimacy of government flows from the people's consent.

And in the Washington Post, Walter Pincus writes on some alternative views on how this event effects the prospects of British victory.

A few middle-level staffers in the British colonial government warn that the
step taken yesterday great complicates the task faced by Britain.

"The people upstairs don't seem to realize this, but we are now faced
with a revolutionary people fighting for an ideal. This kind of idea can't be
defeated simply by a huge armada in Long Island Sound."

Other analysts point out the vast geography of the colonies and the relative lack of city-based infrastructure.

"Sure, we could take New York, and then we could take Philadelphia. I have no
doubt about that. But the Colonial Army could just melt away and hit us when
they want. They don't need the cities. And if they last long enough, they could
get French help, and then it's ... well, I just don't see this ending well."

The story ran on page A18.

So, there you have it. Except for a little bit by Pincus buried in the Post and a few Knight-Ridder newspapers sprinkled across the land, I doubt anyone got much of an idea about what really happened yesterday.
But I'm sure they all know about Chandra Schiavo's plight and the grief of her family.

Bush's Bike Crash ON VIDEO!

2005-07-08T03:38:00.000-04:00

Thanks to:
mopaul
(Via POAC)

Bobble-Heads vs Bubble Boy

2005-07-06T22:06:00.000-04:00

Just how far out of touch with reality is the most insulated bubble boy in the history of the USA?

Hill GOP eyes Social Security reform - The Washington Times

By James G. Lakely, July 6, 2005

Republicans leaders in Congress are taking the lead in crafting Social Security reform, saying President Bush was making little progress on the landmark reform proposal.

When congressional leaders met with Mr. Bush last week, they were surprised that the president didn't know how much trouble his plan was in, said a source close to the meeting who requested anonymity.

'The more he talked about it, the worse it got,' said the source, who worked in previous Republican administrations. 'This White House does not encourage negative feedback. You know that Bush's legislative affairs office is dysfunctional because they weren't bringing any of the warning signs back to the White House.' "

This just shocking news? It is simply unbelievable that republicans don't support the dysfunctional bush policies and their continued attempts to dismantle Social Security. I mean, bush has stayed on message consistantly and has even payed all the right pundits to say it is a great idea for everyone, so why aren't they doing their "GOP Bobble-Head" routine for this issue?

Oh yeah! Some of them are up for re-election, huh? Not that it will matter since many of them are going down in popularity even faster than the bubble boy. (POP!)

And as for substance in the bush stance on this issue?

Rep. E. Clay Shaw Jr., Florida Republican, said. "So far, there is no bill that you can call the president's bill that has been filed. You can draw your own conclusions from that."

Nope, no substance at all. Pretty darn conclusive there! But there is a question of how to sell these empty promises to Americans:

John C. Goodman, president of the National Center for Policy Analysis who has testified as an expert at White House Social Security rallies, said there was "a lot of behind-the-scenes arguing about what the message should be" in the White House and on Capitol Hill.

"Six months into the deal and Republicans still can't agree on what is the right message," Mr. Goodman said. "I've been to events where we've had three different messages."

What we see here is a clear example of the GOP attempting to do their best impression of Monty Hall: "Will you trade the nearest thing to financial security you poor Americans will ever know for what is in this (empty) box?"

They would make great car salesmen, eh? "Please buy this car, but DON"T LOOK UNDER THE HOOD!, Trust me, OK?" All the GOP Bobble-Head salesmen bobble in unison... Up, Down, Up, Down... (As rove steals the engine when you aren't looking...) "Nope! Nothing under here..." Yeah slick, you ain't kidding.

Sorry there Bobble-Heads... We have kicked the tires of bubble boy's SS clunker... We looked under the hood and know that (like everything that has to do with the GOP) it isn't running on all 8 cylinders. We ain't buying!

Well? Would you buy a used car from rove, cheney or bush?

Perhaps it is time for the bubble boy to pull his bubble head out of his bubble, BUT (POP!) I digress...

Speaking of having absolutely nothing under there... Anyone care to check out what is under this dress? (I bet everyone can think of some great captions for this one! lol)

Take the Fight to Karl!

2005-06-27T09:55:00.000-04:00

Take it to Karl

As a Vet, and one that does NOT support the stupidity they call policy coming out of the GOP controlled governments, I have a serious problem with recent statements made by Karl Rove, who is just another notable chickenhawk that refused to back up his dreams of empire with real support for the soldiers in the United States military. Here is a great place for other Vets to voice their opinions about Karl Rove, the chickenhawk elitist:

SOUND OFF, Soldiers!

Email to:
FightingLiberals@yahoo.com

Note: You must include NAME, STREET ADDRESS, RANK and UNIT INFO (OR OTHER VERIFIABLE MILITARY INFO) for verification purposes. I will not publish or disclose that information, but I also will not publish without seeing it. This is to keep this site honest as is possible in the "internets" age. The choice to publish your thoughts is yours.

NFRA: Arizona Republican Assembly Votes Unanimously to Censure Senator McCain

2005-06-22T17:34:00.000-04:00

Don't you just love it when the GOP eats it's own children?

If you had any doubts whatsoever about whether or not the GOP is interested in any kind of bi-partisan efforts look no further than the actions of their party when it comes to bi-partisan efforts.

NFRA: Arizona Republican Assembly Votes Unanimously to Censure Senator McCain: "The resolution reads as follows:

WHEREAS, Senator John McCain is presently co-sponsoring, together with his Democrat soul-mate, Senator Teddy Kennedy, a Bill to Reform the Immigration Policy of the United States promoting amnesty for illegal aliens and for their U.S. employers, thus ignoring the opinions of his constituents expressed in numerous polls and personal pleas; and

OMG! The horror! He is doing pretty much what bush has been doing and wanted to do all along... Did you think those little cards bush wanted to give illegal immigrants would have led to anything else?

WHEREAS, Senator McCain deserted the ranks of the Republican Party and the Leadership of the U.S. Senate on the issue of limiting the filibuster of judicial nominations, some of which have been on-hold for several years, thus stalling the President’s agenda for judicial reform; and

OMG! It's unthinkable! Can you believe that he supported a bi-partisan effort to keep the fillibuster in place when most Americans agree with the use of the fillibuster? Maybe most Americans really are not happy with the GOP, huh?

WHEREAS, Senator McCain led the Democrat Party in “reforming” campaign finance, providing for a clear usurpation of 1 st Amendment free speech rights during the last 60 days of an election campaign, and leading to an orgy of spending in the 2004 elections;

OMG! The unspeakable! 60 more days of swift boat lies... Ok, maybe they are right there. lol

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Arizona Republican Assembly (ARA) officially and publicly censures Senator John McCain for dereliction of his duties and responsibilities as a representative of the citizens of Arizona; and "

Yep! The hypocritical GOP... The party that cries about a lack of bi-partisan effort from everyone else, but CENSURES their own members in a cannibalistic manner when they don't like the results of bi-partisan efforts! You are all a bunch of corrupt, lying, sleazy, pornographic, two-faced pieces of CRAP!

CRAP
(Christian Racist Armed Party)

Blue Note Bloggers: EFF: Homepage

2005-06-20T15:33:00.000-04:00

Not sure if what you are doing is legal? Not sure if you could get harrased for excersizing your right to freedom of speech? Confusled about how all of the new laws may effect you and your Blog?

Have I got a link for you!

EFF: Homepage: "EFF Announces its New Legal Guide for Bloggers
We are pleased to release a document that informs bloggers of their legal rights. EFF's 'Legal Guide for Bloggers' is a collection of frequently asked questions (FAQs) designed to educate bloggers about their legal rights in a number of areas, including libel law, copyright law, and political advocacy.
Full story, Legal Guide for Bloggers, More on Blogging
June 13, 2005"

EFF.org has been nice enough to put together some simple straight forward answers to many questions that you may have concerning most types of Blogs.

Thanks EFF.org!

This is what you did!

2005-06-14T09:52:00.000-04:00

Pollitical accountability, huh?

If you really want to find out who supported bush and the RNC with their money (A sure sign of who they voted for, right?) in the last election I have a link that will lead you to some of their supporters...

http://www.fundrace.org/neighbors.php

Fundrace Neighbor Search - ignore the lawn signs, see which candidates your neighbors really support

Click on the link, enter your zip, and presto!
A list of some local donors to political campaigns.

The list may not be complete, but it is a good starting point if you want to send a letter of reccomendation that THEY, OR SOMEONE IN THEIR FAMILY SHOULD ENLIST! I found about 8 people in my town that need to know they have yet been held accountable.

Yes, this is what you call accountability.

Atrios recently had a link a link to an interesting Blog by Driftglass (I think it is a crossposted Blog) in response to a Blog on the Downing Street Minutes (OK, so they refered to a memo, but I am fixing that mistake to be kind!)

An excellent read!

"Here's what you said,
and here's what you did.
You were wrong.
Apologize."

Well...
The mantra of this campaign could be:

"This what you did,
and this is what happened.
You were wrong.
ENLIST."

Heck... you could even request an infopack direct from the Army for them! Just fill in their name and address there, the Army will mail it to them. (Make sure you ask about 11x, 11b, 11m, etc., series work because that is Infantry)

Of course... You might want to do a letter in the name of George W. Bush! (Certainly anonomously, at the minimum) Let them know that bush needs THEM! Maybe even bush could get a letter suggesting his daughters enlist?

It' a "HATE CRIME", eh?

2005-06-08T16:28:00.000-04:00

It is nice to know that in Canada they call it what it is:

It's a hate crime, eh!

Should it be made illegal in the US? I don't think so.

Proving that he is just another in a long line of seriously screwed up anti-equality gay bashers, women's rights haters, Whatcott is just typical of where the hate comes from. There have been a lot of these lately. This is what happens when someone is taught to loath themselves by right wing fundementalist christian clerics.

CBC News: Police investigating Christian activist for hate crimes: "Police investigating Christian activist for hate crimes
Last Updated Wed, 08 Jun 2005 09:52:23 EDT
CBC News

Two thousand leaflets attacking gays and lesbians have put a Christian activist in western Canada under investigation by Edmonton police for hate crimes.

The flyers by Bill Whatcott of Regina refer to gay marriage as 'sodomite marriage' and use graphic language to describe the alleged sex practices of homosexuals.

The handouts also used derogatory terms to describe federal Defence Minister Bill Graham.

Whatcott stuffed his pamphlets into mailboxes in the riding of Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan, and some recipients complained to police.

'The material is offensive and it's an affront on the basic tenets of our society, which is about multiculturalism, tolerance and peaceful co-existence,' Const. Steve Camp, of the Edmonton police hate crimes unit, said.

The Pride Centre of Edmonton said it would take the case to the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission if no criminal charges arise from the police investigation.

Whatcott has led protests across Saskatchewan and Alberta against abortion and gays.

He says he was a gay prostitute until age 18 to pay for a drug habit, then became leader of a small group called the Christian Truth Activists.

You may or may not have noted that I call these radical fundementalist christians with a little "c"...

Why?

Because they are not really Christians at all. They are really just radical right wing hatemongers using Christianity as a tub to thump out hate messages.

Personally, I think freedom of speech helps to expose the public to all of the "who and what" that supports both the good and bad messages.

Given his previous work experience do you think there are any GOP talking point newsletters that would hire him and send him to cover the White House? Karl Rove sure misses the coverage provided by real GOP men like Jeff Gannon now that they have to deal with the Downing Street Minutes...

60,000 Iraqis 'Disappeared' into US Camps

2005-06-02T18:43:00.000-04:00

The real news about the latest operations in Iraq?

According to Dahr Jamail it is pretty much chaos purposefully caused by the US military with the intent of causing civil war.

60,000 Iraqis 'Disappeared' into US Camps:
by Dahr Jamail, 1 June 2005
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/JAM506B.html

Go to the article link and listen to what Dahr has to say in the telephone interview filed from Amman.

Independent journalist, Dahr Jamail, citing local humanitarian and other sources says the number of Iraqis detained by occupation forces is now well over 60,000 -far in excess of the commonly quoted official figure of 17,000.

Speaking exclusively to BreakForNews.com from Amman, Jordan on Monday night, Jamail said his sources included many doctors and the director of a humanitarian organization in Fallujah.
Broadcast - 05/30/05"

You have known from the begining that the inept bush regime has been operating this like they want complete and total chaos on the streets of Iraq... Guess what?

You were right. Sad but true...

The complete and total violation of the laws of war. Americans that support this in any way, shape, or form are so guilty of crimes against humanity. This completely disgusts me.

OHIO GOP CRIMINALS say "We're Sorry!"

2005-06-02T12:01:00.000-04:00

The sad truth is that they mean they are sorry they got caught. I know their apologies will make it all better. I think this sets a great example for kids everywhere.

The message the Ohio GOP is sending out about morality to kids across America:

It is Okay to take bribes if you return the money when, and only if, you get caught.

toledoblade.com:
Ohio GOP leaders vow to return funds given by coin dealer

Republican Sens. Mike DeWine, George Voinovich, and Gov. Bob Taft plan to refund money given to their campaigns by Tom Noe, who is under investigation.

By STEVE EDER, BLADE STAFF WRITER

COLUMBUS - President Bush's political advisers are 'looking into' what to do with more than $100,000 in campaign money raised by Tom Noe after Ohio's governor and U.S. senators announced yesterday that they would refund thousands of dollars contributed to their campaigns by the Toledo-area coin dealer.

'We are in the process of looking into the situation and we will take the appropriate legal action if the situation dictates that's what we need to do,' Brian Jones, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, said last night.

The White House has deferred all Noe fund-raising questions to the RNC.

Gov. Bob Taft, as well as U.S. Sens. George Voinovich and Mike DeWine, and a host of top Ohio Republican leaders, including three GOP gubernatorial candidates, yesterday said they would refund contributions from Mr. Noe, who is facing federal and state investigations.

The contributions likely will be donated to charitable organizations, which have not been announced - but the money will not be returned to Mr. Noe.

In a statement, Mr. Taft and Bob Bennett, chairman of the

Ohio Republican Party, said about $50,000 in contributions by Mr. Noe, mostly given to Republican leaders since the coin dealer started doing business with the state in 1998, would be placed in escrow - and then transferred to an 'appropriate entity.'

'We want to send a message loud and clear to the people of Ohio that Mr. Noe's actions will not be tolerated. Ohioans deserve bold and aggressive leadership in cleaning up this abuse of public trust, and we are committed to providing that leadership,' Mr. Taft and Mr. Bennett said.

Hey Taft, Bennet, and Voinovich:
"YOU ARE THE PROBLEM!"
What a great bunch of role model precedents the GOP is developing for our nation. The GOP is sending a message LOUD AND CLEAR that:

The GOP should never take responsibility for their actions.

Bribes and kickbacks are good, unless you get caught, BUT then returning the money is good enough to be forgiven. (Of course Awnold is still holding on to his $10,000 gift from Noe AND bush still has $100,000 that Noe gave him.)

War against the weak is good if there is oil involved.

Rich elitists need tax cuts, but the poor... What poor?

Torture is fine, but reporting the facts about it is taboo.

Killing a child is a horrible crime, until the child is old enough to have their parents let them enlist.

Soldiers need a pat on the back, not medical benefits and decent wages.

The list could go on and on...

The GOP sickens me. At every single level of government they are corrupt and have no moral values. I know this for a fact becuase I live in Corrupticut, (AKA: Connecticut), so named because it is the state with the second highest number of corrupt GOP members in the USA, as revealed over the last few years... We would be number one with a bullet except for Texans like Delay and, of course, bush and his oil cartel administration are the worst and most corrupt the USA has ever seen.

Perhaps, rather than vowing to return their corrupt fortunes, they would better serve America by quitting politics and taking a vow of chastity? It would mean, at the very least, one less child could be corrupted by their political schemes.

It's all Viagras fault!

2005-05-31T20:36:00.000-04:00

Recent reports of Viagra's and Cialis' possible blinding side effects has been a hotbed of political conspiracy amongst a very few people with time on their hands for one handed typing.

CNN.com - FDA probes blindness among Viagra users - May 27, 2005: "FDA probes blindness among Viagra users

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal health officials are examining rare reports of blindness among some men using the impotence drugs Viagra and Cialis, a disclosure that comes at a time when the drug industry can ill afford negative publicity about another class of blockbuster medicines.

The Food and Drug Administration still is investigating, but has no evidence yet that the drug is to blame, said spokeswoman Susan Cruzan.

This type of blindness is called NAION, or non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy. It can occur in men who are diabetic or have heart disease, the same conditions that can cause impotence and thus lead to Viagra use."

It is expected that Dobson will come out and blame Viagra leading to increased homosexual acts and sex with minors since the users may not be able to see where they are pointing that dangerous object.

Voting groups soon will be seeking injuctions to bar Viagara users from voting since it is already "hard enough for non-users of these powerful drugs to figure out most balloting systems when you aren't blind and horny" according to Bev Harris.

The White House has scheduled a news briefing to announce their support for any drugs that might induce more republican votes as welcome news after comparing staff notes in the Jeff Gannon room (one of the White House hallway closets) and coming to the realization that while they are just small members of the conservative party they certainly needed the support of Viagara to gain re-erection, err, re-election.

While the presidents position on viagra is often referred to as the "doggy style" there is much speculation that both Jeff Gannon and Karl Rove prefer bush on his back and legs in the air. More to come on this "HARD NEWS" story.

Yep, truth can be stranger than fiction...
BUT sometimes fiction is just stranger truth...

Galloway tongue-lashes Coleman; committee documents show Bush political friends and family paid Oil-for-Food kickbacks to Saddam Hussein

2005-05-25T09:37:00.000-04:00

Unlike our President that has turned a blind eye to American evidence in the Oil-for-Food scandal because of the trail of oily fingerprints, a media ignored part of the Dems minority report on the scandal isn't so kind. The Bayoil links to Enron and bush family members are revealed in the last few paragraphs of this article by Wayne Madsen. I encourage you to click on the article title and read it in full. It is a real eye opener for Americans and a black eye for bush.

Galloway tongue-lashes Coleman; committee documents show Bush political friends and family paid Oil-for-Food kickbacks to Saddam Hussein:

"Coleman and Levin wrote a February 8, 2005, letter to Rumsfeld asking about the operations of the Maritime Interdiction Force in the Gulf prior to the war. A similar letter was sent to the State Department inquiring about the illegal Khor al-Amaya oil shipments. To date, the committee has not received an answer from either Rumfeld or Rice.

Minority report documents indicate that one of the largest recipients of Bayoil Iraqi oil shipments was Enron, the bankrupt company that served as a virtual slush fund for the political campaigns of George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, and California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

At the same time Enron Chairman Kenneth ('Kenny Boy') Lay was involved in Vice President Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force secret dealings and when he was stuffing hundreds of thousands of dollars into the pockets of George W. Bush and Cheney's political campaign, he also managed to illegally stick $206, 757 into the pockets of Saddam Hussein and his cohorts.

The Iraqi Oil-for-Food scandal also involves one of the Bush children—Dorothy 'Doro' Bush Koch, sister of George W. Bush and married to Bobby Koch, reportedly a cousin in the oil industry Koch family, the owner of Koch Industries, which is also one of Bush's largest political donors. The minority committee report indicates that Koch Industries was also a major recipient of illegal Iraqi oil and a huge source of kickbacks to Saddam Hussein:

The total sum in kickbacks from George W. Bush's cousin-in-laws to Saddam's bank accounts: $1,294,620.

George Galloway was correct when he called the Coleman Committee the "mother of all smoke screens." Major political contributors and friends of Bush not only paid illegal kickbacks to Saddam Hussein but personally profited from sanctions-busting with Iraq. Those involved in the scheme included individuals who date back to the Reagan/Bush 41 "cluster bombs and biological and chemical weapons-for-oil" scandal of the 1980s. Galloway is correct when he stated that there is enough evidence on Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair and their neocon advisers to park them in prison cells in The Hague for an awfully long time.

Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based journalist and nationally distributed columnist.

Not only does this article reveal bush family and friends connections to the Oil-for-Food scandal, but it also shows ties to members of the bush sr. Saddam-Iran deals with rummy the dummy, Condi "Chevron" Rice, and Dick Cheney's energy task force.

Galloway was right in his statements directed at Coleman, and at this point there is only one question left to ask: "Are there any of these modern-day pseudoconservatives that were not dipping their hands in the Oil-for-Food barrel?" The trail of oily fingerprints makes a convincing case for Galloway's statements, and the hypocrisy of all of the bleating going on in the bush herd about UN Oil-for-Food scandals.

Why has nobody impeached this idiot in the White House yet? How much evidence of corruption and lying do you need? The Downing Street Memo and all of the supporting minutes of bush admin. meetings with the Blair admin. prove that bush lied to the Senate to start the Iraqi invasion. Now you have evidence that bush and his admin. are tied in to Saddam kickbacks. The media ignores these issues. Too many Americans sit on their hands saying to themselves that they are the little guy and can't do anything about it. These are sad times in our nation when good Americans won't get off their ass and do something about it!

www.impeachbush.org

Blue Note Bloggers

2005-05-20T16:45:00.000-04:00

Is Newsweek making fun of Scott McClellan and the White House in their latest headline "Consider the Source"? If they aren't, then I am...

MSNBC - Consider the Source
Consider the Source

The State Department says MEK is a terror group. Human Rights Watch says it’s a cult. For the White House, MEK is a source of intelligence on Iran.

By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek
Updated: 4:35 p.m. ET May 19, 2005

May 18 - A controversial exile movement cited by President George W. Bush as a source of information on Iran's nuclear ambitions is condemned for psychologically and physically abusing its own members in a new report by Human Rights Watch.

In a document scheduled for public release this week, Human Rights Watch alleges that the Iranian exile group known as Mujahedine Khalq (MEK) has a history of cultlike practices that include forcing members to divorce their spouses and to engage in extended self-criticism sessions.

More dramatically, the report states, former MEK members told Human Rights Watch that when they protested MEK policies or tried to leave the organization, they were arrested, in some cases violently abused and in other instances imprisoned. Two former recruits told the human-rights group that they were held in solitary confinement for years in a camp operated by MEK in Iraq under the protection of Saddam Hussein. MEK representatives in the United States and France, where MEK is headquartered, did not immediately respond to NEWSWEEK phone calls and an e-mail requesting comment.

MEK has long been controversial because of its history of violent attacks in Iran, its relationship with Saddam's regime and its background as a quasi-religious, quasi-Marxist radical resistance group founded in the era of the late Iranian shah. In 1997, the Clinton administration put MEK on the State Department's list of foreign terrorist groups. MEK's U.S. supporters, among whom at one point numbered dozens of members of Congress, charged that the Clinton administration only labeled MEK as a terrorist group as part of an ill-conceived attempt to improve relations with the ayatollahs who currently run Iran. However, the Bush administration added two alleged MEK front organizations to the State Department's terrorist list in 2003.

Despite the group's notoriety, Bush himself cited purported intelligence gathered by MEK as evidence of the Iranian regime's rapidly accelerating nuclear ambitions. At a March 16 press conference, Bush said Iran's hidden nuclear program had been discovered not because of international inspections but "because a dissident group pointed it out to the world." White House aides acknowledged later that the dissident group cited by the president is the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), one of the MEK front groups added to the State Department list two years ago.

In an appearance before a House International Relations Subcommittee a year ago, John Bolton, the controversial State Department undersecretary who Bush has nominated to become US ambassador to the United Nations, was questioned by a Congressman sympathetic to MEK about whether it was appropriate for the U.S. government to pay attention to allegations about Iran supplied by the group. Bolton said he believed that MEK "qualifies as a terrorist organization according to our criteria." But he added that he did not think the official label had "prohibited us from getting information from them. And I certainly don't have any inhibition about getting information about what's going on in Iran from whatever source we can find that we deem reliable."

However, current and former senior U.S. national-security officials, who asked not to be named because they are not supposed to talk about intelligence-gathering activities, say that all the major revelations MEK publicly claims to have made regarding nuclear advances in Iran were reported in classified form—and from other sources—to U.S. policymakers before MEK made them public. A Western diplomat familiar with the work of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations component that has been monitoring Iran's nuclear program, said that while the MEK has occasionally come up with accurate information about Iran's nukes, the group has come up with a similar number of other tips that have not checked out.

According to Human Rights Watch, several members of Congress, including both Republicans and Democrats, only last month attended a Washington meeting of a legal "MKO-backed" group called the National Convention for a Democratic, Secular Republic in Iran. In February, the group says, a think tank co-chaired by retired U.S. military officers called for MEK to be dropped from the State Department terrorist list and recommended that the U.S. government actively support MEK in its campaign to bring down the Iranian theocracy.

According to administration officials, some Pentagon officials want to recruit former MEK members as U.S. secret agents who would infiltrate Iran on intelligence missions. The Pentagon has emphatically insisted that it has no plans to work with the MEK or any of the group's members.

The new Human Rights Watch report offers no insight into the validity or inaccuracy of MEK information about Iranian's nuclear program but it does allege strange and sometimes brutal behavior by the group’s leaders and internal security apparatus. According to the report, MEK, formed in 1965 by three political activists, originally was an "urban guerilla group" which participated in the struggle against the shah that resulted in the 1979 Iranian revolution and produced the current theocratic regime in Tehran.

In an early schism following the revolution, the MEK and Abolhassan Bani Sadr, briefly Iran's president during the 1980 U.S. Embassy hostage crisis, split away from the main revolutionary movement led by Ayatollah Khomeini and went into exile. Later, Bani Sadr in turn split from MEK after a disagreement with Massoud Rajavi, who, with his wife, Maryam, subsequently became the movement's unchallenged leader. During the Iran-Iraq War, Saddam allowed MEK to set up several military camps in Iraq—with a headquarters encampment near Baghdad known as Camp Ashraf—and the group proceeded to conduct paramilitary operations against the Tehran regime, the largest of which was mounted—unsuccessfully—shortly after Iran agreed to a U.N.-brokered ceasefire in the Iran-Iraq War. MEK reportedly lost more than 1,000 fighters in this attack.

According to Human Rights Watch, following this 1988 military defeat, the Rajavi's leadership of MEK became increasingly authoritarian and cultlike. According to an MEK defector's memoir, Rajavi claimed to have a mystical relationship with a prophet known as Imam Zaman, who is Shia Islam's version of the long-awaited Messiah. In order to better cement their relationship with their leader, and hence ultimately their Messiah, Rajavi then instructed his followers to divorce their spouses. The group had already established a practice of "self criticism," under which members were asked to undergo their own personal "ideological revolution" by confessing personal inadequacies in cultlike confession sessions.

Paranoid about defectors and possible infiltrators from the Tehran regime's intelligence apparatus, in the l990s, according to Human Rights Watch, MEK leadership ordered a series of stringent "security clearances" in which "many" members were arrested by group organizers and interrogated and even imprisoned in special buildings inside the boundaries of MEK camps in Saddam-ruled Iraq. Human Rights Watch says the testimony of former MEK prisoners paints "a grim picture of how the organization treated its members, particularly those who held dissenting opinions or expressed an intent to leave the organization."

Witnesses contacted by Human Rights Watch reported two deaths during the course of MEK internal interrogations and other cases of lengthy imprisonment. One MEK detainee interviewed by Human Rights Watch, Mohammad Hussein Sobhani, claimed to have spent eight and a half years in solitary confinement in MEK detention facilities after he started raising questions about the leadership's policies. He said he was beaten on 11 occasions with wooden sticks and leather belts. Another former MEK member interviewed by Human Rights Watch, Farhad Javaheri-Yar, claimed to have been imprisoned in solitary confinement by the group for five years.

Other witnesses told Human Rights Watch claimed it was the practice of MEK interrogators to tie thick ropes around prisoners' necks and drag them along the ground. One witness told investigators: "Sometimes prisoners returned to the cell with extremely swollen necks—their head and neck as big as a pillow." In a statement accompanying its investigative report, Joe Stork, a Human Rights Watch expert on the Middle East, commented: "The Iranian government has a dreadful record on human rights. But it would be a mistake to promote an opposition group that is responsible for serious human rights abuses.”
© 2005 Newsweek, Inc.

© 2005 MSNBC.com

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7902719/site/newsweek/

OOPS! Someone forgot to tell the press secretary the news?

2005-05-17T22:37:00.000-04:00

People living in the bush fantasy world try and blame Newsweek for riots caused by the bush regimes policies, but "Bloggerman" Keith Olberman had some interesting remarks about the White House statements that resulted. As for Scott Mclellan, he can sit on this and rotate for a while...

Afghan Riots Not Tied to Report on Quran Handling, General Says, Army investigating allegations of mishandling at Guantanamo Bay facility

By Jacquelyn S. Porth
Washington File Staff Writer

Washington – The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff says a report from Afghanistan suggests that rioting in Jalalabad on May 11 was not necessarily connected to press reports that the Quran might have been desecrated in the presence of Muslim prisoners held in U.S. custody at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Air Force General Richard Myers told reporters at the Pentagon May 12 that he has been told that the Jalalabad, Afghanistan, rioting was related more to the ongoing political reconciliation process in Afghanistan than anything else.

According to initial reports, the situation in Jalalabad began on May 10 with peaceful student protests reacting to a report in Newsweek magazine that U.S. military interrogators questioning Muslim detainees at the Guantanamo detention center “had placed Quran s on toilets, and in at least one case flushed a holy book.” By the following day the protests in the city had turned violent with reports of several individuals killed, dozens wounded, and widespread looting of government, diplomatic and nongovernmental assets.

However, Myers said an after-action report provided by U.S. Army Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry, commander of the Combined Forces in Afghanistan, indicated that the political violence was not, in fact, connected to the magazine report.

Meanwhile, Myers said the U.S. military has assigned Army General Bantz Craddock to investigate allegations about the handling of the Quran at Guantanamo. Craddock brings the full weight of his responsibility as commander of the U.S. Southern Command to this effort.

Myers said the International Committee of the Red Cross has approved the edition of the Quran that has been distributed to Muslim detainees in Guantanamo. Craddock has been investigating the claim that proper respect was not given to the Koran. There are now some 550 enemy combatants at the military installation, which is designed to isolate individuals whom the military has identified as likely to have valuable intelligence about international terrorism.

Craddock and his team have examined the prisoner interrogation logs and Myers said “they cannot confirm yet” that there ever was a case of a U.S. interrogator flushing a Quran down the toilet. He did say there is another unconfirmed log reference to a guard report that a detainee tore pages from the Quran and flushed them in an attempt to flood the holding area as a form of protest.

Myers answered questions about the alleged Quran incident on the same day that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice addressed the issue during an appearance before the House International Relations Committee.

She said disrespect for the Quran will never be tolerated by the United States and such disrespect “is abhorrent to us all.” Pakistan has voiced its concerns about the alleged incident, and Rice said the United States understands and shares the concerns of its Muslim friends. She went on to voice this request: “I am asking that all our friends around the world reject incitement to violence by those who would mischaracterize our intentions.” (See related article.)

INSURGENCY SEEKS TO DISCREDIT NEW IRAQI CABINET, MYERS SAYS

At the Pentagon, Myers was also questioned closely about the increase in violence in Iraq in recent weeks. He acknowledged that there has been “a spike in violence in early May,” but he said this is to be expected given the “very violent insurgency” that is under way in that country.

The insurgency’s use of a variety of roadside and car bombs has been difficult to thwart, the general said. He also noted the difficulty of sealing Iraq’s borders against infiltrators. On this “we need cooperation from Iraq’s neighbors” -- an issue that is being pursued vigorously, Myers said.

Most insurgencies have a lifespan of three to nine years, Myers said, and addressing them militarily requires patience. In this case, the insurgents are out to discredit the newly formed Iraqi Cabinet, he said.

Myers made his remarks during an appearance with Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and other senior military and civilian officials to talk about the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure recommendations, which will be formally unveiled May 13.

Created:12 May 2005 Updated: 13 May 2005

Scott, where's Jeff Gannon to help you rotate on that when you need him most?

Senate Fishing Expedition... Galloway leaves them all wet.

2005-05-17T20:40:00.000-04:00

Well, I think I will let Galloway's words stand on their own other than adding that if you have read the senate committees report you would already know that they have nothing on Galloway unless they are hiding it, which would make absolutely no sense. If they could contradict him at all they would have right then and there after that onslaught of truth against the bush farce.

"Senator, I am not now, nor have I ever been, an oil trader. and neither has anyone on my behalf. I have never seen a barrel of oil, owned one, bought one, sold one - and neither has anyone on my behalf.

"Now I know that standards have slipped in the last few years in Washington, but for a lawyer you are remarkably cavalier with any idea of justice. I am here today but last week you already found me guilty. You traduced my name around the world without ever having asked me a single question, without ever having contacted me, without ever written to me or telephoned me, without any attempt to contact me whatsoever. And you call that justice.

I told the world that Iraq, contrary to your claims did not have weapons of mass destruction.

I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to al-Qaeda.

I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to the atrocity on 9/11 2001.

I told the world, contrary to your claims, that the Iraqi people would resist a British and American invasion of their country and that the fall of Baghdad would not be the beginning of the end, but merely the end of the beginning.

Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people paid with their lives; 1600 of them American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies; 15,000 of them wounded, many of them disabled forever on a pack of lies.

"Now I want to deal with the pages that relate to me in this dossier and I want to point out areas where there are - let's be charitable and say errors. Then I want to put this in the context where I believe it ought to be. On the very first page of your document about me you assert that I have had 'many meetings' with Saddam Hussein. This is false.

"I have had two meetings with Saddam Hussein, once in 1994 and once in August of 2002. By no stretch of the English language can that be described as "many meetings" with Saddam Hussein.

"As a matter of fact, I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns. I met him to try and bring about an end to sanctions, suffering and war, and on the second of the two occasions, I met him to try and persuade him to let Dr Hans Blix and the United Nations weapons inspectors back into the country - a rather better use of two meetings with Saddam Hussein than your own Secretary of State for Defense made of his.

"I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein when British and Americans governments and businessmen were selling him guns and gas. I used to demonstrate outside the Iraqi embassy when British and American officials were going in and doing commerce.

"You will see from the official parliamentary record, Hansard, from the 15th March 1990 onwards, voluminous evidence that I have a rather better record of opposition to Saddam Hussein than you do and than any other member of the British or American governments do.

"Now you say in this document, you quote a source, you have the gall to quote a source, without ever having asked me whether the allegation from the source is true, that I am 'the owner of a company which has made substantial profits from trading in Iraqi oil'.

"Senator, I do not own any companies, beyond a small company whose entire purpose, whose sole purpose, is to receive the income from my journalistic earnings from my employer, Associated Newspapers, in London. I do not own a company that's been trading in Iraqi oil. And you have no business to carry a quotation, utterly unsubstantiated and false, implying otherwise.

"Now you have nothing on me, Senator, except my name on lists of names from Iraq, many of which have been drawn up after the installation of your puppet government in Baghdad. If you had any of the letters against me that you had against Zhirinovsky, and even Pasqua, they would have been up there in your slideshow for the members of your committee today.

"You have my name on lists provided to you by the Duelfer inquiry, provided to him by the convicted bank robber, and fraudster and conman Ahmed Chalabi who many people to their credit in your country now realize played a decisive role in leading your country into the disaster in Iraq.

"There were 270 names on that list originally. That's somehow been filleted down to the names you chose to deal with in this committee. Some of the names on that committee included the former secretary to his Holiness Pope John Paul II, the former head of the African National Congress Presidential office and many others who had one defining characteristic in common: they all stood against the policy of sanctions and war which you vociferously prosecuted and which has led us to this disaster.

"You quote Mr Dahar Yassein Ramadan. Well, you have something on me, I've never met Mr Dahar Yassein Ramadan. Your sub-committee apparently has. But I do know that he's your prisoner, I believe he's in Abu Ghraib prison. I believe he is facing war crimes charges, punishable by death. In these circumstances, knowing what the world knows about how you treat prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison, in Bagram Airbase, in Guantanamo Bay, including I may say, British citizens being held in those places.

"I'm not sure how much credibility anyone would put on anything you manage to get from a prisoner in those circumstances. But you quote 13 words from Dahar Yassein Ramadan whom I have never met. If he said what he said, then he is wrong.

"And if you had any evidence that I had ever engaged in any actual oil transaction, if you had any evidence that anybody ever gave me any money, it would be before the public and before this committee today because I agreed with your Mr Greenblatt [Mark Greenblatt, legal counsel on the committee].

"Your Mr Greenblatt was absolutely correct. What counts is not the names on the paper, what counts is where's the money. Senator? Who paid me hundreds of thousands of dollars of money? The answer to that is nobody. And if you had anybody who ever paid me a penny, you would have produced them today.

"Now you refer at length to a company names in these documents as Aredio Petroleum. I say to you under oath here today: I have never heard of this company, I have never met anyone from this company. This company has never paid a penny to me and I'll tell you something else: I can assure you that Aredio Petroleum has never paid a single penny to the Mariam Appeal Campaign. Not a thin dime. I don't know who Aredio Petroleum are, but I daresay if you were to ask them they would confirm that they have never met me or ever paid me a penny.

"Whilst I'm on that subject, who is this senior former regime official that you spoke to yesterday? Don't you think I have a right to know? Don't you think the Committee and the public have a right to know who this senior former regime official you were quoting against me interviewed yesterday actually is?

"Now, one of the most serious of the mistakes you have made in this set of documents is, to be frank, such a schoolboy howler as to make a fool of the efforts that you have made. You assert on page 19, not once but twice, that the documents that you are referring to cover a different period in time from the documents covered by The Daily Telegraph which were a subject of a libel action won by me in the High Court in England late last year.

"You state that The Daily Telegraph article cited documents from 1992 and 1993 whilst you are dealing with documents dating from 2001. Senator, The Daily Telegraph's documents date identically to the documents that you were dealing with in your report here. None of The Daily Telegraph's documents dealt with a period of 1992, 1993. I had never set foot in Iraq until late in 1993 - never in my life. There could possibly be no documents relating to Oil-for-Food matters in 1992, 1993, for the Oil-for-Food scheme did not exist at that time.

"And yet you've allocated a full section of this document to claiming that your documents are from a different era to the Daily Telegraph documents when the opposite is true. Your documents and the Daily Telegraph documents deal with exactly the same period.

"But perhaps you were confusing the Daily Telegraph action with the Christian Science Monitor. The Christian Science Monitor did indeed publish on its front pages a set of allegations against me very similar to the ones that your committee have made. They did indeed rely on documents which started in 1992, 1993. These documents were unmasked by the Christian Science Monitor themselves as forgeries.

"Now, the neo-con websites and newspapers in which you're such a hero, senator, were all absolutely cock-a-hoop at the publication of the Christian Science Monitor documents, they were all absolutely convinced of their authenticity. They were all absolutely convinced that these documents showed me receiving $10 million from the Saddam regime. And they were all lies.

"In the same week as the Daily Telegraph published their documents against me, the Christian Science Monitor published theirs which turned out to be forgeries and the British newspaper, Mail on Sunday, purchased a third set of documents which also upon forensic examination turned out to be forgeries. So there's nothing fanciful about this. Nothing at all fanciful about it.

"The existence of forged documents implicating me in commercial activities with the Iraqi regime is a proven fact. It's a proven fact that these forged documents existed and were being circulated amongst right-wing newspapers in Baghdad and around the world in the immediate aftermath of the fall of the Iraqi regime.

"Now, Senator, I gave my heart and soul to oppose the policy that you promoted. I gave my political life's blood to try to stop the mass killing of Iraqis by the sanctions on Iraq which killed one million Iraqis, most of them children, most of them died before they even knew that they were Iraqis, but they died for no other reason other than that they were Iraqis with the misfortune to born at that time. I gave my heart and soul to stop you committing the disaster that you did commit in invading Iraq. And I told the world that your case for the war was a pack of lies.

"I told the world that Iraq, contrary to your claims did not have weapons of mass destruction. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to al-Qaeda. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to the atrocity on 9/11 2001. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that the Iraqi people would resist a British and American invasion of their country and that the fall of Baghdad would not be the beginning of the end, but merely the end of the beginning.

"Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people paid with their lives; 1600 of them American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies; 15,000 of them wounded, many of them disabled forever on a pack of lies.

If the world had listened to Kofi Annan, whose dismissal you demanded, if the world had listened to President Chirac who you want to paint as some kind of corrupt traitor, if the world had listened to me and the anti-war movement in Britain, we would not be in the disaster that we are in today. Senator, this is the mother of all smokescreens. You are trying to divert attention from the crimes that you supported, from the theft of billions of dollars of Iraq's wealth.

"Have a look at the real Oil-for-Food scandal. Have a look at the 14 months you were in charge of Baghdad, the first 14 months when $8.8 billion of Iraq's wealth went missing on your watch. Have a look at Halliburton and other American corporations that stole not only Iraq's money, but the money of the American taxpayer.

"Have a look at the oil that you didn't even meter, that you were shipping out of the country and selling, the proceeds of which went who knows where? Have a look at the $800 million you gave to American military commanders to hand out around the country without even counting it or weighing it.

"Have a look at the real scandal breaking in the newspapers today, revealed in the earlier testimony in this committee. That the biggest sanctions busters were not me or Russian politicians or French politicians. The real sanctions busters were your own companies with the connivance of your own Government."

Can you say "fishing expedition"? I can't wait to hear the whoppers the GOP will tell tomorrow about "the one that got away!" LMAO

bush's GOP BOBBLE-HEAD DOLLS

2005-05-12T20:53:00.000-04:00

What are Voinovich and the rest of the GOP members of the committee really saying? It is perfectly obvious that they are simply making a scripted and rehearsed statement about the Democrats plan to fillibuster bush's radical activist judges. Nothing more, and nothing less.

Your GOP talking point fillibuster smears just won't jive.

While Americans overwhelmingly support the minority protections provided by the fillibuster, GOP committee members are shirking their responsibilities to the people while sitting there nodding their heads like bobble-head dolls in support of bush's reckless choice of candidates. Why do you think there are committees to look at candidates before they go to the floor for a vote Voinovich? What are you payed to do? By whom were you elected to do your job? The president OR the people?

GOP Senator Breaks Ranks, Attacks Bolton - Yahoo! News:

"'Mr. Chairman,' Voinovich said, 'I am not so arrogant to think that I should impose my judgment and perspective of the U.S. position in the world community on the rest of my colleagues. We owe it to the president to give Mr. Bolton an up-or-down vote on the floor of the U.S. Senate.'

The committee, he said, should move the nomination along — but without a recommendation to approve Bolton. 'Let the Senate work its will,' he said.

At day's end, Voinovich prevailed. By a 10-8 party-line vote, the committee followed his recommendation, and now it will be up to the Senate itself to decide.

Afterward, Voinovich said he would vote against Bolton on the floor, but he declined to predict the outcome in the Senate, where Republicans outnumber Democrats 55 to 44, with one independent.

Voinovich said he plans to lobby fellow senators on the matter, saying he intends to 'share my concerns about him with my colleagues in the Senate, hopefully to convince them to not just rubber-stamp this, but rather give this thoughtful consideration.'"

Sorry there bobble-head Voinovich. What your statement really means to Americans is that you and the GOP failed, yet again, to do your job of representing the people. You shouldn't be on the committee if you are incapable of voting against an incompetent choice, and instead invoke your purposefully scripted, and feigned, discomfort with the choice of Bolton.

You, Voinovich, and the rest of the GOP bobble-head committee members, have failed to do what the people pay you to do by putting one of the worst possible candidates for the job at the UN on to the floor for a vote. Your Job was to stop the Senate from wasting it's time voting on the wrong candidates. It was pretty arrogant of you to assume you are on the committee just to nod your head like a bobble-head doll. You owe it to Americans to do your job Voinovich. You, and the rest of the GOP bobble-heads, are all complete failures.

Pittsburgh's Proud Propagandist

2005-05-11T12:39:00.000-04:00

If you haven't visited Arianna Huffington's new blog, The Huffington Post, you might have missed a great story. Scott Baker, according to his bio at news channel 4, is very accustomed to Pittsburgh viewers referring to him as "that guy who's on with Sally and Michelle." You still don't know who Scott Baker is? Scott Baker is also the man behind the Teresa Heinze "Shove It" story.

The Huffington Post | The News Wire: "Scott Baker, News Anchor, WTAE-Pittsburgh
'I’m the Guy Who Taught Jeff Gannon Everything He Knows About Journalism.' | permalink

I’m the guy who taught Jeff Gannon everything he knows about journalism. Okay maybe not everything. I’m still not clear on (sorry all hyperlinks on this one freak me out) his evident self-description of “Position: Top.” Except that I now gather that it has endangered the nuptial bonds of Julia and Brad. But I suppose I bear some responsibility for having lectured at the two-day journalism seminar Gannon attended.

Just when it seemed like the Gannon/Guckert story was about to fade away for lack of interest (something slightly less than the interest in “Topic A with Tina Brown”), along comes the new Vanity Fair to re-energize the matter when Gannon himself couldn’t even pull an invite to the White House Correspondents Association dinner.

This is what I get for trying to teach a simple little seminar on media career strategies? Jeff Gannon as my star student? I had more modest goals. Most kids trying to dive into media careers fail miserably. So maybe I can nudge them with a few helpful ideas. Hoped for result: entry level job in, say, a small market television station. Not so hoped for: center square of odd journalism scandal.

The Vanity Fair article calls it a seminar for “aspiring right-wing journalists.” My mantra to the students involves getting rid of the “right-wing” and esteeming the value of solid day-to-day journalism. Good old-fashioned storytelling.

TV commercials for weight loss programs often have tiny disclaimers about the thin person in the ad. “Results not typical.” I’m kind of hoping this is like that. But with my luck Corey Clark will soon be claiming I’m the guru of his love life.

Posted May 9, 2005 03:03 PM"

Do you think that News channel 4 will be inserting these little tidbits from Bakers first Blog entry on The Huffington post into his bio? I highly doubt it.

It is also interesting to note that in Baker's bio News Channel 4 mentions that "For 10 years, he has taught career philosophy seminars for thousands of students interested in media careers." What Baker refers to as teaching "a simple little seminar on media career strategies" might seem much more inspirational if it were not for the fact that, as reported on by Will Bunch at Attytood, Baker is not simply teaching journalism philosophy seminars, but right wing journalism philosophy seminars.

But Baker has another job -- one that he doesn't list on his resume, although he does (sort of) 'fess up in his Huffington Post post. It turns out he teaches journalism to young conservatives at the Leadership Institute School of Broadcast Journalism, founded by Karl Rove associate and former national Young Republican director Morton Blackwell. And anchorman Baker is not just their star instructor -- he's also a graduate (scroll down).

Bunch also reports on the known fact that Morton Blackwell, a very good friend of Karl Rove, was also behind the "Purple Bandage" protest of John Kerry's Purple Hearts by the GOP before the election. Do you find any of these links disturbing? If you don't you haven't been paying attention to the fake media out there funded by our tax dollars and pushing the GOP agenda.

Scott Baker... Is he just another Jeff Gannon, Armstrong Williams, Maggie Gallagher, Mark McManus, or the most recently outed Tax dollar funded GOP journalist Dave Smith? It would be too convenient to blow this off as coincidence IMHO. I am sure that more will come of this in the Blogosphere, but I won't be holding my breath for this information to come out in the MSM. They won't even report on the biggest news of the last year: The leaked memo covered by the BBC that proves bush and Blair conspired to make us go to war with Iraq. Why would they care about telling us the truth? No profit in that...

Not your typical recall...

2005-05-09T22:24:00.000-04:00

What more needs to be said about this?

Marines Recall Combat Vests After Tests - Yahoo! News: "1 minute ago

WASHINGTON - The Marine Corps is recalling 5,277 combat vests issued to troops in
Iraq,
Afghanistan and Djibouti after a newspaper article raised concerns that they failed a test to determine whether they could stop a bullet.

The Marines said in a statement they are recalling the vests to alleviate any doubts caused by a Marine Corps Times article published Monday, but service officials insisted they do not believe the vests are faulty.

The armor in question is called the 'Outer Tactical Vest' and it is part of the Interceptor body armor package issued to troops in combat zones. The vest, when combined with protective plates, is designed to stop a rifle round.

Without the plates, the vest should still provide some protection against 9 mm pistol rounds and fragments from an explosion. But several vests manufactured by Point Blank Body Armor of Pompano Beach, Fla., fell short of the Marines' standards during testing in 2004, according to Capt. Jeff Landis, a Marine spokesman.

The Marine statement described an urgent need for the vests as Marines prepared to deploy.

Most Point Blank vests passed the tests, but the Marine liaison to Point Blank recommended the service reject the production lots of those that failed — numbering thousands of vests total, according to memos, dated in mid-2004, obtained by the Marine Corps Times and reproduced on the Internet.

The Marines then tested vests from those lots again at another test range, and they passed, Landis said. Marine officials then issued waivers allowing the vests to go to the troops, but decided to recall the vests from the field when they learned of the imminent article.

Overall, about 181,000 Kevlar vests have been issued to Marines. Each costs $525, Landis said.

In one memo obtained by the Times, James MacKiewicz, a Marine technical adviser, complained of "major performance and quality assurance problems" with Point Blank's products.

However, Landis said the Marines are satisfied with the company's performance and its vests.

"Point Blank stands by its products," said Ish Burks, a spokesman for Point Blank's parent company, DHB Industries. "The vests are performing in the only test that matters — live combat. There have been no reported failures in the field."

Landis said the recall was going out to commanders in the field. Troops will have to check tags on their vests to see if they are from the recalled lots. Then they can exchange their vests for new ones.

Well? Maybe we could ask who gave the OK to distribute these failed vests? It seems the people that decided to send out these faulty vests are more worried about "bad press" than they are about soldiers lives...

KR Washington Bureau | 05/05/2005 | British memo indicates Bush made intelligence fit Iraq policy

2005-05-09T14:29:00.000-04:00

It really pisses me off that this story has been out there since March and the MSM refuses to give it any serious coverage. If there was any doubt about a conservative biased media this is just another marker on the highway to the truth. The "Liberal-biased media" is a figment of the radical right wing's messed up imagination.

KR Washington Bureau | 05/05/2005 | British memo indicates Bush made intelligence fit Iraq policy: "Posted on Thu, May. 05, 2005

British memo indicates Bush made intelligence fit Iraq policy

By Warren P. Strobel and John Walcott

Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - A highly classified British memo, leaked in the midst of Britain's just-concluded election campaign, indicates that President Bush decided to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein by summer 2002 and was determined to ensure that U.S. intelligence data supported his policy.

The document, which summarizes a July 23, 2002, meeting of British Prime Minister Tony Blair with his top security advisers, reports on a visit to Washington by the head of Britain's MI-6 intelligence service.

The visit took place while the Bush administration was still declaring to the American public that no decision had been made to go to war.

'There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable,' the MI-6 chief said at the meeting, according to the memo. 'Bush wanted to remove Saddam through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD,' weapons of mass destruction.

The memo said 'the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.'

No weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq since the U.S. invasion in March 2003.

The White House has repeatedly denied accusations made by several top foreign officials that it manipulated intelligence estimates to justify an invasion of Iraq.

It has instead pointed to the conclusions of two studies, one by the Senate Intelligence Committee and one by a presidentially appointed panel, that cite serious failures by the CIA and other agencies in judging Saddam's weapons programs.

Click on the headline for the rest of the story...

I was going to skip writing on this. Since it was huge news all around the world I figured eventually it would have to saturate the American MSM... But HELL NO! They have chosen to ignore the incontrivertable evidence that bush lied to and/or misled congress which is an impeachable offense. Does that make the MSM as guilty of this as the bush admin.? I think it does...

Thanks for tanking the economy bush!

2005-05-08T22:36:00.000-04:00

Some more serious news for radical right wing bush supporters to ignore (as per usual...)

BBC NEWS | Business | GM and Ford downgraded to junk
GM and Ford downgraded to junk
Standard & Poor's (S&P) has cut the debt ratings of US carmakers General Motors and Ford to 'junk' status.

The US credit rating agency said its decision reflected tough global competition in the market and slower sales of both firms' leading vehicles.

The downgrades, affecting debt worth about $290bn (£152bn), are the largest cuts to junk in a single day.

A junk status rating suggests that a company is more likely to default on its debt.

Rising costs

With both GM and Ford facing difficult times, analysts had predicted cuts to junk status later this year.

But many were surprised at the speed of S&P's decision.

Last month, GM reported a net loss of $1.1bn in the first three months of 2005, largely due to flagging sales and the rising cost of employee healthcare.

Rival Ford also reported a 40% drop in first-quarter net profits, to $1.21bn, citing falling US sales and rising prices for raw materials.

S&P cut GM and General Motors Acceptance Corp's long-term credit ratings to 'BB', the second-highest junk rating.

S&P's outlook on the new rating is negative, which means another downgrade could be possible in the next 24 months.

Meanwhile, S&P cut Ford and Ford Motor Credit Co's long-term credit ratings to 'BB+', the highest junk rating. The outlook on the new rating is also negative.

GM and Ford, which are the world's number one and three carmakers respectively, said they were disappointed with the downgrades.

Both companies stressed they had ample cash reserves.

The economy is tanking, the market is tanking, inflation is rising, unemployment is sucking unless you want to call flipping burgers a career.

I wonder how happy the soon to be laid off auto workers will be knowing that GM and Ford have plenty of cash on hand? Do you think they are glad that bush is pushing for dismantling social security so they can try and scrape together enough of their oncoming unemployment checks for "investing" in the bush privatization scam?

The only thing worse than Reaganomics? Reaganomics in the incapabable hands of a warmongering fool...

Are you sure you want to read this blog?

2005-05-04T17:24:00.000-04:00

For the many computer users that never bother to use anti-virus, firewall, or Ad-Aware type softwares to protect their computer from spyware and viruses, here is just another reason for you not to worry.

BBC NEWS | Technology | Bogus blogs snare fresh victims

Cyber criminals are starting to use fake blogs to snare new victims.

The bogus web journals are being used as traps that infect visitor's machines with keylogging software or viruses.

Filtering firm Websense said it had found hundreds of bogus blogs baited with all kinds of malicious software to snare the unwary.

Websense warned that the baited blogs could get past traditional security measures that try to protect people from malicious programs.

Hidden harm

The company said blogs were being used because they inadvertently offered lots of help to computer criminals.

Blogs are free and simple to use, offer users lots of storage space, can be used anonymously and most do not scan stored files for viruses and other malicious programs.

Websense said it had seen examples of some computer criminals creating a legitimate looking weblog, loading it with keylogging software or viral code...

... viruses hosted on weblogs might be a danger because they get round the filtering systems many firms have created to ensure malicious programs do not reach employees.

Users were urged to keep anti-virus and patches up to date, regularly scan machines with anti-spyware products and exercise caution when reading unsolicited messages sent via e-mail or instant messenger.

You have to keep in mind that this is just a phishing scam variation, but instead of hoping you will enter user names and passwords at the site they are looking to take control of your computer. That, of course, can still lead to identity theft once they control your computer. Another important fact to remember is that malicious code has always been hidden everywhere on the web. Hiding it on a blog is no different than websites that hide it in pictures or in links they put on their pages.

There really is not much you can do to avoid "all" spyware and viruses. The best you can do is hope that the people at companies like McAfee, Norton, Spybot destroyer, Ad-Aware, and others that help protect most computers stay on top of these problems as they develop.

If you do not have any of the needed software to protect your computer are you sure you want to read blogs? Of course you do. It is no less safe than any other web page you may visist.

bush attacks Social Security from another angle...

2005-04-25T22:38:00.000-04:00

bush will do anything he can to take Social Security from Americans. Since he is failing in his effort to destroy it, it seems his next option is to try and take it away from people through other means, regardless of how much these people are likely to need it. Yes, they may be deadbeats as far as student loans, but there is more to it than that.

Yahoo! News - Court to Hear Dispute Over Student Loans:
"When Congress passed the HEA in 1991, it eliminated the 10-year time limit on the government's right to seek repayment on defaulted student loans by seizing payments to individuals.

However, the Debt Collection Act created an exception to that rule for Social Security payments. Congress eventually amended that law to allow the seizure of Social Security payments, but then left intact — either inadvertently or not — a separate provision that continued to set a 10-year time limit.

When the case is heard in the court's next term beginning in October, justices will decide what Congress ultimately intended when it made the series of revisions to the two laws.

Billions of dollars are at stake. There is nearly $7 billion in delinquent student loan debt, half of which is more than 10 years old, according to the Bush administration's Supreme Court filing. A 10-year time limit would substantially hinder government collection efforts, since most debtors don't receive Social Security until retirement age, it stated.

Lockhart's attorneys countered that a ruling for the government puts at risk the 'ability of some of the most impoverished Americans to meet their daily needs' through their Social Security nest egg.

The case is Lockhart v. U.S., 04-881."

Think about how this could be used if it were applied to the credit card industry? It may only be applicable for the government to chase overdue student loans for now, but could you envision bush slipping a law in to a bill that would extend this sort of attack on the poor that bush BIG GOVERNMENT enjoys on to BIG BUSINESS? After the last huge blow to Americans' interests that bush handed to credit card companies, I see this as the future of radical right wing GOP legislation...

Is DeLay's Policy Director Jumping Ship?

2005-04-25T21:58:00.000-04:00

A senior member of Tom DeLay's team is leaving his side at the same time that DeLay is getting hammered with investigations. Does anyone else see this as a rat scurrying off of a sinking ship?

Yahoo! News - DeLay: She'll Be Missed; Majority Leader's Policy Director Joins K-Street Firm:
"Sullivan had been with DeLay for over six years and was elevated to policy director for the Majority Leader at the beginning of 2003. Prior to that, she served as DeLay's senior appropriations adviser, developing and implementing the House leadership's appropriations and budget strategy as well as coalition strategies with grassroots groups and members of Congress. She was a key member of DeLay's leadership team throughout, as the point of contact between House leadership and Senate leadership while policy director and as the leadership contact for Republican members in the appropriations process during her stint as senior appropriations adviser."

You have to figure that things are not looking too good in the DeLay camp. His supporters deserting him, even the shills in the media that used to love him have a hard time not noticing the illegal and unethical things he has been doing doing, and just as the Department of Justice is stepping into the investigations a senior member of his team jumps ship for a Law firm. Maybe Sullivan thinks she and DeLay will need legal help in the near future?

DROP THE HAMMER ON DELAY!

He is not my Pope...

2005-04-22T22:37:00.000-04:00

Columnist Jose Rodriguez has a pretty reasonable take on all of the celebrating and name calling taking place surrounding the new Pope...

Calgary Sun Columnist - Jose Rodriguez: Defending the faith: "Defending the faith
By JOSE RODRIGUEZ -- Calgary Sun

I don't know which bothers me more. The newly romanticized non-Catholics falling over themselves to defend the new Pope or the equally un-Catholic busybodies bent on tearing him apart.

Seems there is no shortage of opinion when it comes to the newly appointed Benedict XVI.

The former cardinal and close confidant to the much-loved John Paul II has been called medieval, ultra-conservative, backwards and all sorts of other nasty names.

By others, the first German pope in 1,000 years has been labelled a great defender of classic Catholicism, a strict theologian and a champion of tradition.

There is probably some truth to both characterizations -- if it mattered.

You see, praise and pre-judgement from non-Catholics is as worthless as fresh underwear at a nudist colony."

This is some pretty good advice for those on the outside of the Pope's Catholic family. If he ever makes a decision that actually affects my life, personally, then I might decide to muster an opinion on their choice for him to lead. As it stands now, since he is not my Pope, I will gladly take that columnist's advice about remaining silent when it comes to Benedict's good and/or bad. As for underwear... Well, who needs them?

Power Line represents a backward, primitive way of looking at the world.

2005-04-20T21:05:00.000-04:00

Given how these radical right Power Line wingnuts claim that Dems are blocking extremist judges based on their faith, I find it interesting to see the typical hate towards religion, and Catholics in particular, that Power Line exhibits in its latest blog on science.

Power Line: Planet of the Apes:
"It's interesting, though, to contemplate the quest for insight into human nature via the apes in the context of news coverage of the selection of Pope Benedict. The conventional view is that religion in general, and Catholicism in particular, represents a backward, primitive way of looking at the world, and especially at human nature, compared to modern, progressive science."

It is plainly apparent that, aside from being the last ones to consult concerning "progressive science", these ridiculously hypocritical charges being tossed out there by Power Line like Maltov cocktails at all of the moderates that oppose the radical bush policies and tactics will eventully result in more self-destruction A LA Tom "the hummer" DeLay (he really sucks!), John "I support those who kill judges" Cronyn, and Condi "Skirts the Constitution" Rice, Jeff "get a BLOW job" Gannon, and John "Nuke the U.N." Bolton...

There is very little that is going right for the extremist bush lovers right now, even in their own little fantasy world, and it is our job to keep this "reality" ball rolling...

Yahoo! News - GOP Ethics Chair Trying to Snap Deadloc

2005-04-20T17:20:00.000-04:00

Well... It still isn't Democracy. The GOP still seems to think they can DICTATE what the terms of Democracy are. When will these PIGS look up from their coporate troughs long enough to take a breath? This is the second blink in the last little while by these republican thugs led by Hastert, yet they still don't seem to get it. Even those republicans on the the ethics committee are obviously ethically challenged.

Yahoo! News - GOP Ethics Chair Trying to Snap Deadlock
House Ethics Panel to Probe Tom DeLay
AP - 39 minutes ago
Retreating under pressure, Republicans on the House ethics committee said Wednesday they were ready to open an investigation into allegations of wrongdoing against Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

DeLay Continues Attacks on Federal Courts - AP via Yahoo! News (Apr 20, 2005)
DeLay Outlines Strategy Against Federal Judges - at The New York Times (reg. req'd) (Apr 20, 2005)
DeLay Letter Cites Democrats' 'Hate' - at The Los Angeles Times (reg. req'd) (Apr 19, 2005)
DeLay Mails Long Rebuttal to Voters Back in Texas - at The New York Times (reg. req'd) (Apr 19, 2005)
DeLay Issues Broad Denial Of Ethics Violations - at The Washington Post (reg. req'd) (Apr 19, 2005)
DeLay Mailing Says He Never Broke Law - AP via Yahoo! News (Apr 18, 2005)

Yahoo! News - LOOK FOR THE MEDIA LABELS

2005-04-19T10:56:00.000-04:00

I am a news junkie... I admit it! In the last few years I have witnessed an almost complete silencing of a left-leaning media as radical right wingnuts that spout pure opinion based on little fact have jumped into the forefront of American political commentary. The coulters, hannitys and o'reillys of US media are little more than "GOP talking point" billboards for the idiots of the world and a good example of Jeff Gannon mouthpieces prostituting themselves for the GOP.

Now, in the spirit of offering some balance in Internet media, I will devote an entire blog to that patriotic cartoonist Ted Rall. To be honest, I find that as a cartoonist his drawings are rather "child-like" in their presentation. That is irrelevant to Ted Rall being patriotic. What makes Ted Rall a patriotic cartoonist, in my humble opinion (OK, sometimes "over the top" opinion), is the written material and the commentary it provides on his view of the United States of America. It is the same thing that draws me to read his editorial views which are a good representation of many patriotic NYC residents I meet, as well as many of the patriots living in surrounding suburbs of NYC, and the blue state patriots that are within earshot of the ever present loud NYC voice.

Yahoo! News - LOOK FOR THE MEDIA LABELS: "What hits home hits hardest. I too have been victimized by the idiotic practice of repeat labeling. 'Controversial cartoonist Ted Rall' garners no fewer than 58 hits on Google. Care to guess the results for 'patriotic cartoonist Ted Rall'?"

Patriotic cartoonist Ted Rall... This "Google hit" is for you, and the millions of Americans you represent! If you are doing this search to prove Ted wrong on his theory please note that the only hit I came up with was his own editorial on the subject of Media labeling... This blog for patriots does not count since it was written after the fact.

ACSBlog: The Blog of the American Constitution Society: The Ball Is In Your Court, Rush Limbaugh

2005-04-19T00:37:00.000-04:00

File this one under "never gonna happen": Not that I wouldn't pay a few bucks to watch Yalies slap Oxy-rush around a bit. The reality is that my 12 year old daughter can see through his blundering, blubbering, slobbering, ranting, and raving routine for what it is. Is it really fair to put a doped-up fool against someone that is educated and capable at debating when the blimp can't even convince a naiive kid that he can make a sane point?

ACSBlog: The Blog of the American Constitution Society: The Ball Is In Your Court, Rush Limbaugh:
April 15, 2005 04:59 PM Posted By Ian Questions & comments 14
The Ball Is In Your Court, Rush Limbaugh

Last weekend, ACS' Yale Chapter hosted a conference entitled "The Constitution in 2020," which conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh found quite objectionable:

[S]ome people got together to rewrite the Constitution. A bunch of liberal elitists gathered up at Yale to have this little pretend new Constitution. What it should say, what it should be, what the principles and guidelines of the new Constitution ought to be. So while there are those of us who are devoted to defending the current US Constitution, there are a bunch of leftists and liberals out there that are toying around with the idea of rewriting and changing it. (interruption) Well, I don't know if they've banned me, I haven't read everything that everybody there posited or wrote. Let me get the piece at the next break and I'll share with you some things that people are saying.

ACS's Yale Chapter has not banned Rush Limbaugh. In fact they have formally invited him to speak at Yale. In a letter to Mr. Limbaugh, the Yale Chapter wrote:

We are flattered by your interest in our recent conference and would be honored to have you visit Yale as a guest speaker. As you discussed in your broadcast, over six hundred progressives -- practicing lawyers, policymakers, academics, students and others -- came together to discuss a progressive vision of the Constitution, just as the Reagan Justice Department got together in the mid-1980s to produce a conservative vision of "The Constitution in the year 2000." You mentioned the possibility that you might be banned from such events. To the contrary! We would welcome you to Yale and believe that an event featuring you would be well-attended by our members, other students at the law school, faculty members, and representatives of the university.

In your broadcast, you also refer to our "little pretend new Constitution." Enclosed please find our gift to you: a pocket-sized copy of the U.S. Constitution. Since the Founding, it has belonged to all of us. While it is "little," it is certainly not pretend. We hope that you will come to Yale to speak and take part in this very real dialogue.

The Australian: Reports undercut Iraq, al-Qaeda link [April 16, 2005]

2005-04-18T20:36:00.000-04:00

As if you really needed any further proof that everything about Iraq coming from the lying bush orgy taking place at the White House was all a load of cow pies? Well there is more proof anyways. Just another piece to add to the already conclusive pile of evidence that they were all lying from the moment the Towers fell...

The Australian: Reports undercut Iraq, al-Qaeda link [April 16, 2005]
Reports undercut Iraq, al-Qaeda link
From correspondents in Washington
16apr05

A TOP Democratic senator has released formerly classified documents that he says undercut top US officials' pre-Iraq war claims of a link between Saddam Hussein's regime and the al-Qaeda terrorist network.

"These documents are additional compelling evidence that the intelligence community did not believe there was a cooperative relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda, despite public comments by the highest ranking officials in our government to the contrary," Senator Carl Levin said today.

The declassified documents undermine the Bush administration's claims regarding Iraq's involvement in training al-Qaeda operatives and the likelihood of a meeting between September 11 hijacker Mohammed Atta and an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in April 2001, Senator Levin said in a statement.

In October 2002, Mr Bush said: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases."

But a June 2002 CIA report, titled Iraq and al-Qa'ida: Interpreting a Murky Relationship, said "the level and extent of this is assistance is not clear".

The report said that there were "many critical gaps" in the knowledge of Iraq-al-Qaeda links due to "limited reporting" and the "questionable reliability of many of our sources", according to excerpts cited by Senator Levin.

The October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's weapons programs said much of the information on Iraqi training and support for al-Qaeda was "second-hand" or from sources of "varying reliability".

And a January 2003 CIA report indicates some of the reports of training were based on "hearsay" while others were "simple declarative accusations of Iraqi-al-Qaeda complicity with no substantiating detail or other information that might help us corroborate them".

In December 2001, Vice-President Dick Cheney said Atta's meeting with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague was "pretty well confirmed".

But, according to Senator Levin, a June 2002 CIA report says: "Reporting is contradictory on hijacker Mohammed Atta's alleged trip to Prague and meeting with an Iraqi intelligence officer, and we have not verified his travels."

And a January 2003 CIA report says "the most reliable reporting to date casts doubt on this possibility".

Senator Levin requested the documents' declassification in April 2004 as part of his minority inquiry within the Senate Armed Services Committee into Iraq intelligence failures.

privacy terms © The Australian

Life sucks... Because of the radical NEO-TORY bushies.

The Seattle Times: Nation & World: Unrest surfaces in home district of DeLay

2005-04-18T18:01:00.000-04:00

Things are so bad in the MSM that even moderate republicans have to buy space to get a moderate opinion in their news papers... Sad, but true. Republican Patricia Baig paid $2776.00 to get an honest American opinion printed in her local Sugar Land, Texas, news paper to demand that Tom "the hummer" DeLay (he really sucks!) resign as house majority leader. Is a recall far off in some of the more radical GOP members' futures?

Drop the Hammer On Tom DeLay!

FOXNews.com - Politics - Critics Question Screening Tactics at Bush Events

2005-04-18T16:50:00.000-04:00

You know you are in it deep when your favorite propaganda machine turns on you and says your policy is un-American. The humor of faux news picking up this story only after half of bush's "Dismantle Social Security Tour" is over, and when people have been furious about being booted from these fake events since the very first scripted "townhall BS session" for bush's reckless privatization scam, and even further back when they were turned away from hearing a presidential candidate speak at GOP campaign rallies simply because they refused to sign the "Hypocrite Republican's Oath"... Sounds like something only a king-wanabe would demand AND something only a "tory" (the original American conservatives) would ever consider signing.

FOXNews.com - Politics - Critics Question Screening Tactics at Bush Events: "Critics say planners weed out those who disagree with Bush's policies and bar them from attending events"

bush won't even talk turkey with our patriotic soldiers unless they sign a waiver to promise loyalty to his reign of terror.

Yep, even the lowest of the low, the "Guckert/Gannon's" at faux news, look down on bush and his thug supporters now...

Power Line's "Modus Oprandi"

2005-04-18T13:06:00.000-04:00

It would be nice once in a while to see someone that claims to be conservative actually think like a conservative for a change. Unfortunately this does not happen too often lately. The reasoning most of the "faux" conservatives always seem to use these days are straight out of their "GOP talking points". If you cannot defend an idea declare the opposition socialist. If you cannot defend your policies declare all naysayers communist. If you cannot defend your behaviour declare your attacker a liberal.

Power Line
There is a familiar modus operandi at work in the accusation by Melody Townsel that John Bolton chased her through the halls of a Moscow hotel throwing objects and screaming threats at her in August 1994. New York Sun reporter Eli Lake has nailed most of the elements of the modus operandi in his article: "New Bolton accuser is a liberal from 'Mothers Opposing Bush.'" Lake reports:

It used to be conservative meant you would stop and think about something before you would speak about it. Now you have these radical right wingnuts that stop to check their "GOP talking points" regardless of how ignorant it makes them look. Instead of addressing the reality that bolton is a whack-job, Power Line chose the ignorant path of the wingnut.

Note to Power Line: Jeff Gannon is NOT the only prostitute that works as a "mouthpiece" for the GOP. (Tough fact to swallow, but this is you Power Line!)

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Iraq militias 'could beat rebels'

2005-04-18T08:55:00.000-04:00

So Iraq feels it can take care of the insurgents all on their own? Iraqis are ready to take over from American soldiers "Right away" according to Talabani. I guess that means bush can begin bringing all of our soldiers home.

Hey! It also means bush can pull the plug on the billions of dollars in contracts with cheny's Halliburton and KBR to build all of those permanent bases in Iraq. It might hurt a lot of corporations that depend on endless war, but it sure will help the American economy and, MORE IMPORTANTLY, save a lot of good soldiers lives. Bring the boys back home!

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Iraq militias 'could beat rebels'
Iraq militias 'could beat rebels'
By Jim Muir
BBC News, Baghdad

Iraq's new president has said the insurgency could be ended immediately if the authorities made use of Kurdish, Shia Muslim and other militias.

Jalal Talabani said this would be more effective than waiting for Iraqi forces to take over from the US-led coalition.

Mr Talabani, a Kurd, also told the BBC he would not sign a death warrant for captured former leader Saddam Hussein.

And he warned that any attempt to impose an Islamic government on Iraq would break up the country.

He said the Shia religious parties with whom the Kurds have struck a partnership to underpin the new government have agreed to a compromise whereby Islam will be one of several sources for Iraqi law.

'I won't sign'

If Saddam Hussein is to go to the gallows, as many of his erstwhile foes insist he must, his death sentence will have to be endorsed by the new Iraqi presidency.

We cannot wait for years and years of terrorist activity because we haven't enough government forces
Jalal Talabani
Iraqi President

But Mr Talabani, a lawyer and human rights advocate who has always opposed capital punishment, made it clear that his principles would not allow him to sign such a document, despite all the suffering the Baathist regime had inflicted on his Kurdish community.

"Personally, no, I won't sign," he said.

"But you know, the presidency of Iraq are three people. These three must decide. So I can be absent. I can go on holiday and let the two others [the vice-presidents] decide."

Mr Talabani said all other members of the new Iraqi leadership were in favour of a swift execution for the former Iraqi dictator.

"All of them are for sentencing Saddam Hussein to death before the court will even decide," he said.

"So I think I will be alone in this field, calling for a reprieve."

But President Talabani did not believe the execution of the former president - who has yet to go on trial - would undermine efforts to sap the insurgency by winning over elements of the former regime's Sunni Muslim constituency.

"I think if he'll be finished, many of his followers will give up their hope or their wishful thinking that one day he will come back," he said.

Militias

Mr Talabani said he favoured an amnesty for Iraqi insurgents who had taken up arms out of disenchantment with the new regime.

He also said he believed members of the former ruling Baath Party should be allowed to take up jobs in civil life and the administration - but not in the armed or security forces, unless they had a track record of secret opposition to Saddam Hussein.

But he made it clear that any such major decisions would have to be taken via a consensus involving the presidency, the cabinet and the parliament.

Asked how long it would take for Iraqi security forces to be in a position to replace the US-led coalition, President Talabani said the transition could take place straight away if a new strategy were adopted.

"In my opinion, Iraqi forces, the popular forces and government forces, are now ready to end the insurgency and end this terrorism," he said.

"But there is a kind of thinking inside the [outgoing interim] government that they must not use [them]."

The Kurds have in the past offered the use of their estimated 80,000 Peshmerga guerrillas for security tasks but have been turned down.

So, too, has the Iranian-influenced Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (Sciri) and its Badr brigade, another well-trained fighting force.

"We cannot wait for years and years of terrorist activity because we haven't enough government forces," the president said.

Role for religion

He envisaged taking up the offers of Sunni leaders who wanted to join the political process to ensure security in their own areas.

He admitted that the Americans remained opposed to the idea of a role for irregular forces.

"But we are independent now," he added.

Mr Talabani played down fears that the Kurds' senior partners in the coalition underpinning the yet-to-be-announced government, the Shia religious factions, might try to impose an Islamic government.

While Islam was generally agreed to be the religion of the state and should influence its laws, there could not be an Islamic government, he said.

"In Iraq, it is impossible, because you have Kurds, Arabs, Shia, Sunni, Christians - such a kind of mosaic society. It is not Iran, it cannot be an Islamic society. If anyone tried to impose it, Iraq would be divided."
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/4454985.stm

Published: 2005/04/18 00:34:48 GMT

© BBC MMV

Yahoo! News - GOP Lawmaker May Vote Against U.N. Nominee

2005-04-17T20:52:00.000-04:00

So Chuckie Hagel... You need even more proof that Bolton does not deserve the job. Just one more reason and then you have had it with him, huh? It is ok if there are dozens or more cites of Bolton's lunacy already publically known BUT just one more reason and you pull the plug on Bolton, huh? I am certain that someone will manage to find one more reason for you real soon. It is like looking at Tom "the hummer" DeLay's (he really sucks!) record and finding more proof of his being on the take and a huge hypocrite. As easy as shooting sardines in a can with a shotgun. You can bet they will find one more reason for you, Chuckie, but will you have the balls to do what you said you would when that time comes OR are you just grandstanding in an effort to "look bi-partisan" OR (more likely) are you trying to get a better bribe from DeLay et. al.?

Yahoo! News - GOP Lawmaker May Vote Against U.N. Nominee: "GOP Lawmaker May Vote Against U.N. Nominee
By SIOBHAN McDONOUGH, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - A top Senate Republican raised the possibility Sunday that he might vote against President Bush's nominee to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations if more accusations surface about John Bolton's alleged harassment of analysts who disagreed with his views

With a Senate Foreign Relations Committee vote expected Tuesday, Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record) of Nebraska was asked whether he would endorse Bolton. 'At this point, I will ... but I have been troubled with more and more allegations, revelations, coming about his style, his method of operation,' said Hagel, the committee's No. 2 Republican.

'We need a uniter,' he told CNN's 'Late Edition.' 'We need a builder. We need someone who will reach out to our friends and our allies at the United Nations.'

Bolton, who is now undersecretary of state, has been a vocal U.N. critic and rankled some lawmakers with his tough talk on foreign policy.

Democrats, who have accused Bolton of bullying subordinates, requested last week that a vote be delayed for further questioning of Bolton in writing and while they sought testimony by three U.S. officials on what lawmakers said were Bolton's efforts to remove dissenting analysts from their jobs.

Hagel said he was disturbed to learn of allegations that Bolton tried to intimidate an analyst — a State Department employee — who is now a temporary staffer in the senator's office.

Rexon Ryu did not initially tell Hagel about his encounter with Bolton until Ryu discovered the matter would become public.

Bolton and Ryu reportedly clashed in 2003 when Ryu allegedly failed to provide a document for Bolton's chief of staff. Bolton, allegedly accused Ryu of hiding information.

Hagel deemed the allegations "a disturbing pattern of things that have come out about Bolton's management style, this intimidation. We cannot have that at the United Nations. That should not be anywhere in our government."

Sen. Richard Lugar (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the committee, said he hopes to confirm Bolton on Tuesday, ending "not a pleasant set of hearings" on the contentious nominee.

The president "thinks Bolton is an agent of reform, has really the skills and the savvy and what have you, and maybe the combative nature, to bring about change," Lugar, R-Ind., told "Fox News Sunday."

But the committee's top Democrat said Bolton, a critic of the world body in the past, lacks credibility for the job, which could undermine U.S. influence.

"John Bolton's strong and in some areas very respected ideological view of foreign policy intelligence are admirable, but they're not admirable for someone running a Cabinet-level position, one of the largest embassies in the world, which is essentially, the embassy of the United States at the U.N.," Sen. Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record), D-Del. said.

"What happens when our ambassador has to stand up and make the case on intelligence relating to Iraq and North Korea?" Biden added. "Do you think John Bolton is going to be believed? ... I think it matters a great deal whether or not they have credibility as we move into these most dangerous moments with Korea and with Iran."

Last week, the second-ranking senator of the minority Democratic Party said he expected Bolton to be confirmed despite Democrat efforts to derail Bush's choice for U.N. ambassador.

"I think ultimately he will be confirmed, but I hope there will be a spirited debate before that happens," Sen. Dick Durbin, of Illinois, said. "

Life sucks... Too bad it doesn't swallow!

Bush gets low marks for sex appeal - Yahoo! UK & Ireland News

2005-04-15T20:19:00.000-04:00

If it isn't enough that the guy is hated by half of America, 90% of the rest of the world and even his dogs don't like him, not to mention that even his pre-election supporters are leaving his side? I am thinking that being a 2 out of 10 in the eyes of women is right up there with "I don't want to ruin our friendship" and "I will be busy washing my hair that night". On other websites it is being suggested that this article is proof of why there will never be a "Lewinski" scandal coming out of bush's closet. I, on the other hand, believe that it lends further creedence to the possibility that we may yet find Jeff Gannon's "blew stained dress" hanging in bush's closet.

Bush gets low marks for sex appeal - Yahoo! UK & Ireland News: "Friday April 15, 06:52 AM

Bush gets low marks for sex appeal

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - He may be leader of the free world and Time magazine's 'Person of the Year,' but a new international survey of women makes certain that U.S. President George W. Bush is far from being the sexiest man alive.

In a recent online poll conducted by Esquire magazine, 11,000 women in 15 countries were asked to rate Bush's sex appeal on a scale of one to 10, and America's commander-in-chief failed to register much more than a two.

Women in Australia, Germany and the Netherlands were the harshest judges of George W.'s sexual allure, giving him an average rating of 1.4 each, Esquire said in its survey released earlier this week.

By contrast, Indonesian women were the most generous, giving Bush an average score of 2.2; American women found their president slightly less appealing, rating him a 2.1

Other countries contributing to the survey included Austria, Brazil, Britain, Israel, Italy, the Philippines, Russia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.

Bush has fared far better in other recent magazine rankings, having been named Time's 'Person of the Year' in December and making that magazine's list of the world's 100 most influential people this week.

But Esquire magazine's 'Global Survey of the Female Species' was not confined to questions about Bush.

Eighty-three percent of Italian women said they preferred sex to cuddling, for instance, compared to 63 percent of American women.

And while American women said it takes an average of 5.5 dates with a man before having sex with him, Swedish women said they would sleep with a man after 4 dates, the survey showed."

Isn't it great that fluff pieces like this get reported daily, yet we see no REAL NEWS being reported in American media anymore?

Life sucks... Too bad it doesn't swallow!

bush, AOL and Censorship

2005-04-15T14:21:00.000-04:00

For over 10 years I have used AOL as an ISP or as my favorite place to post messages on their boards. I remember paying a nickel per minute for access in the early days. Did I ever run up some bills back then! Sadly, today was the last day that my former screen name "m16eib" posted on AOL. Why, you ask?

Well, it all started several months ago when AOL implemented a policy of deleting messages on boards that it deemed as disruptive to the boards. AOL has changed it's policy from simply deleting offensive posts (IE: racist posts, name calling, swearing, and other "Terms Of Service" (TOS) violations) to a policy of deleting any posts it wants to.
Post an anti-bush news story - DELETED.
Post your thoughts about the GOP - DELETED.
Post anything that challenged one's mind to think - DELETED.

The new position of the AOL "Community Action Team" (CAT) is constantly being challenged by the AOL clients that are MAD AS HECK from post deletions and/or getting kicked off of AOL for expressing their oppinions and trying to enjoy freedom of speech. Today I suffered that fate for the last time. This censorship by Corporate America against any and all views that are against them and the bush administration that supports them through billion dollar Corporate Welfare is a sad statement on American society and politics in particular. I will still keep in contact with my buddies on AOL, but I will no longer attempt to feed the AOL beast that bites my hand.

The people on all sides of the issues on AOL message boards are all aghast at the censorship that is taking place. There are moderates from the left and right that are suffering this fate. The only faction that seems to enjoy immunity from the post deletions and being kicked off of AOL are the hard right wing supporters of failed bush policies. Why is that? I wonder?

This will be a topic that I will return to occasionally, but it will not be the only topic I will post on. It is just the one that I am most pissed about right now. For the time being I will stick to less volatile issues, like politics... lol

Life sucks... Too bad it doesn't swallow!