Liberal Woman

The complete hypocrisy of Sarah Palin

2008-10-09T10:56:00.000-07:00

Since last Saturday John McCain's slobbering lipsticked pit bull, Sarah Palin has attacked Sen. Barrack Obama as palling around with terrorists. We are now seeing the consequences of what happens when you incite rabid neo-cons like this. Does Sarah Palin...neo-con paragon of womanhood condemn this type of behavior?...not at all...she defends the fact she is inciting the rabid neo-cons.

What Sarah Palin and the Straight Talk Express is neglecting to tell everyone is that Sarah is not only palling around with but married to Toddy Palin an AIP domestic terrorist but she supports [see video] the terrorist organization, AIP a secessionist party. In fact the AIP chairman Lynnette Clark claimed on Sept. 3rd that Sarah Palin herself was a member [oops] however, the chairman retracted her statement a day later...[in other words another lying bitch].

So let's get this straight [neo-cons]...since Palin is palling around with members of the AIP and supports that domestic terrorist group it would be perfectly alright for voters to start shouting "off with her head!"????

Here are some facts to chew on:

Is Sen. Obama palling around with terrorist? No

Is Palin associated with a terrorist organization? Yes

Sandy aka Liberal Woman

The AIP motto: "We are Alaskans...We don't care how they do things outside!"

Time to dust off Liberal Woman...

2008-10-09T10:36:00.000-07:00

and get back in the swing of things. Actually I was just going to let LW fade off into the sunset but after reading, hearing and watching some of John McCain's and Sarah Palin's latest attacks against Sen. Barrack Obama I figured it was time to speak up.

What has Liberal Woman been doing lately? Well, I was a Hillary Clinton supporter who is now an Obama supporter. There is no way I could ever do anything else....after what bush has done to our world I cannot in good conscience allow another bush surrogate [McCain/Palin] do any more damage and not fight it with everything in me there is to fight with.

So sit back kids, it looks like it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Iraq for Sale Banned Excerpts

2007-05-16T07:04:00.001-07:00

Well, well, well why are we not surprised. Hate to be an I told you so.

Happy Springtime (Bush Is Over)

2007-04-24T13:36:00.001-07:00

I Agree With Al Sharpton and David Brock

2007-04-13T11:45:00.000-07:00

Now that the ever offensive Don Imus has been fired for using sexist and racist remarks it's time to go after all of the others who do the same.

The Rev. Al Sharpton applauded the Imus firings as a victory in the battle against abuse of the airwaves.

So let us all raise our voices together to stop those who use their terrible song lyrics to encourage the killing of police officers, the degradation of women and all of the different races be they black or be they white. Let us go after the media pundits who do the same.

Let us boycott every radio station who plays these types of songs or spews sexist, racist hate. Let us not buy this kind of music and let us no longer make those rich who use racism and sexism in their music or punditry. Let there no longer be a double standard in any of the races.

I hope everyone notices that the major media spewers of hate, sexism and racism are CONSERVATIVES.

David Brock CEO of Media Matters says it best...

In wake of CBS decision, David Brock calls for 'broader conversation' on bigotry and sexism in the media

Washington, DC - In the aftermath of CBS Radio's decision to cancel Don Imus' syndicated radio show Imus in the Morning, David Brock, President and CEO of Media Matters for America, released the following statement regarding the overall tone of talk radio and cable news today.

"I applaud CBS for listening to reason and canceling Imus in the Morning. Viewers and listeners sent the clear message that they would no longer tolerate bigotry on America's airwaves," said David Brock, President and CEO of Media Matters for America, the organization first to post on Don Imus' racist comments of April 4th. "It is our hope that this incident will begin a broader conversation about the responsibility that news corporations, journalists, and media figures have to the American public. This is an opportunity for the media to truly raise the bar to a higher standard and return to the fundamentals of journalism."

Examples of Bigoted Commentary Rife on the Cable Networks and Talk Radio

Below are just a few of the many examples of deplorable comments by media personalities that Media Matters for America has documented over the past several years:

Limbaugh: "The government's been taking care of [young blacks] their whole lives"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200702060001

On the February 1 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh responded to a Reuters report on a University of Chicago study that found that "a majority of young blacks feel alienated form today's government" by asserting: "Why would that be? The government's been taking care of them their whole lives."

Limbaugh handicapped races in new Survivor series, suggested "African-American tribe" worst swimmers, Hispanics "will do things other people won't do"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200608240003

On the August 23, 2006, broadcast of his radio program, Limbaugh suggested that the competition in the then-new season of CBS' reality TV program, Survivor, in which contestants were divided into competing "tribes" by ethnicity, "is not going to be fair if there's a lot of water events." In support of this assertion, he cited a March 2 HealthDay article reporting that "young blacks -- especially males -- are much more likely to drown in pools than whites."

O'Reilly said Virginia Beach mayor "should be baking pies, not running a major city"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200704100022

On the April 6 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly stated that Virginia Beach Mayor Meyera Oberndorf "should be baking pies, not running a major city." O'Reilly made the comment while discussing a March 30 automobile accident that resulted in the deaths of two teenage girls, reportedly at the hands of an illegal immigrant who said he had been drinking the night of the accident. O'Reilly blamed Oberndorf in part for the accident, saying that Virginia Beach's "sanctuary city policy" prevented police from detaining and deporting the driver, despite three previous alcohol-related convictions.

O'Reilly to Jewish caller: "[I]f you are really offended, you gotta go to Israel"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200412070004

O'Reilly responded to a Jewish caller to his radio show who objected to "Christmas going into schools" and explained that he "grew up with a resentment because I felt that people were trying to convert me to Christianity." O'Reilly told the caller that America is "a predominantly Christian nation" and that "if you are really offended, you gotta go to Israel." O'Reilly labeled the caller's concerns "an affront to the majority" and insisted that "the majority can be insulted, too." During his exchange with the caller, O'Reilly also mistakenly referred to "the seven candles" of Hanukkah.

O'Reilly: Abducted child "liked ... his circumstances," had "a lot more fun" than usual
http://mediamatters.org/items/200701170009

On the January 15 edition of his television show, O'Reilly said of Shawn Hornbeck -- who was abducted at the age of 11, held for four years, and recently found in Missouri -- that "there was an element here that this kid liked about his circumstances," adding that he "do[esn't] buy "the Stockholm syndrome thing." O'Reilly also said: "The situation here for this kid looks to me to be a lot more fun than what he had under his old parents. He didn't have to go to school. He could run around and do whatever he wanted." When fellow Fox News host Greta Van Susteren pointed out that "[s]ome kids like school," O'Reilly replied: "Well, I don't believe this kid did."

Boortz: Rep. McKinney "looks like a ghetto slut"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200603310005

On the March 31, 2006, broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio program, Neal Boortz said that Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) "looks like a ghetto slut." Boortz was commenting on a March 29 incident in which McKinney allegedly struck a police officer at a Capitol Hill security checkpoint. Boortz said that McKinney's "new hair-do" makes her look "like a ghetto slut," like "an explosion at a Brillo pad factory," like "Tina Turner peeing on an electric fence," and like "a shih tzu." McKinney is the first African-American woman elected to Congress from Georgia.

Predicting Media Matters would flag his Cindy Sheehan attacks, Boortz also declared Islam a religion of "violent, bloodthirsty cretins" and called Prophet Muhammad a "phony rag-picker"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200607200012

On the July 19, 2006, edition of this show, Boortz claimed that "at its core," Islam is a "violent, violent religion," called "this Muhammad guy [] just a phony rag-picker," and asserted that "[i]t is perfectly legitimate, perhaps even praiseworthy, to recognize Islam as a religion of vicious, violent, bloodthirsty cretins." Boortz also labeled Cindy Sheehan a "lunatic", a "moonbat", and a "crazy broad," adding, "I had to give Media Matters something to do."

Boortz suggested that Katrina victim turn to prostitution
http://mediamatters.org/items/200510240014

On the October 24, 2005, broadcast of his program, Boortz suggested that a victim of Hurricane Katrina, then-housed in an Atlanta hotel, consider prostitution. "If that's the only way she can take care of herself," Boortz posited, "it sure beats the hell out of sucking off the taxpayers." The woman was featured in an October 23, 2005, Atlanta Journal-Constitution article; Boortz repeated her first name on the air.

Boortz: Islam is a "deadly virus" and "we're going to wait far too long to develop a vaccine to find a way to fight this"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200610180005

On October 16, 2006, Boortz declared: "Islam is a virus. It is a deadly virus that is spreading throughout Europe and the Western world," adding that "we're going to wait far too long to develop a vaccine to find a way to fight this." Later in the broadcast, Boortz, who stated that he "would be willing to put money that Spain will be operating under Islamic law within 10 years," predicted "that Europe is doomed, and America's going to have a tough time surviving in anything close to its present form after America falls to Islam -- to the Muslim creeping virus." Boortz also characterized Islam as "not a very pleasant religion" and "a creeping mold infestation." He also said of Muslims: "[T]hese people are violent."

CNN's Beck to first-ever Muslim congressman: "[W]hat I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies' "
http://mediamatters.org/items/200611150004

On the November 14, 2006, edition of his CNN Headline News program, Glenn Beck interviewed then-Rep.-elect Keith Ellison (D-MN), who became the first Muslim ever elected to Congress on November 7, and asked Ellison if he could "have five minutes here where we're just politically incorrect and I play the cards up on the table." After Ellison agreed, Beck said: "I have been nervous about this interview with you, because what I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.' " Beck added: "I'm not accusing you of being an enemy, but that's the way I feel, and I think a lot of Americans will feel that way."

CNN's, ABC's Beck on Clinton: "[S]he's the stereotypical bitch"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200703150011

On the March 15 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Beck said: "Hillary Clinton cannot be elected president because ... there's something about her vocal range." He went on to say, "There's something about her voice that just drives me -- it's not what she says, it's how she says it," adding, "She is like the stereotypical -- excuse the expression, but this is the way to -- she's the stereotypical bitch, you know what I mean?" Beck also asked: "[A]fter four years, don't you think every man in America will go insane?" and pleaded, "I'm sorry for being such a pig. But please, America. Please. I don't think I could do it for four years. I mean, sure the country is going to go to hell in a handbasket, but could we make this about me for a second? I just don't think I could take it from her." He also said that "there is a range in women's voices that experts say is just the chalk, I mean, the fingernails on the blackboard."

Beck has a warning for Muslims "who have sat on [their] frickin' hands" and have not "lin[ed] up to shoot the bad Muslims in the head"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200608100016

On the August 10, 2006, broadcast of his radio program, Beck warned that "[t]he world is on the brink of World War III" and that "Muslims who have sat on your frickin' hands the whole time and have not been marching in the streets" will face dire consequences. Beck made his comments toward Muslims who he claimed "have not been saying, 'Hey, you know what? There are good Muslims and bad Muslims. We need to be the first ones in the recruitment office lining up to shoot the bad Muslims in the head.' "

Beck called Hurricane Katrina survivors in New Orleans "scumbags," said he "hates" 9-11 families
http://mediamatters.org/items/200509090003

On the September 9, 2005, edition of his radio show, Beck referred to survivors of Hurricane Katrina who remained in New Orleans as "scumbags." Also, after acknowledging that nobody "in their right mind is going to say this out loud," Beck attacked victims of the disaster in general and the families of victims of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, saying: "I didn't think I could hate victims faster than the 9-11 victims."

Coulter refers to Edwards as "faggot," has smeared Dems in similar fashion many times before
http://mediamatters.org/items/200703030002

In a March 2 speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), right-wing pundit Ann Coulter said she "can't really talk about" Democratic presidential candidate and former Sen. John Edwards (NC) because "you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot.' " The CPAC audience applauded her comment. Coulter's comments, which aired on CSPAN, were also documented by the weblog Think Progress. It was not the first time Coulter has smeared a prominent Democrat with a homophobic epithet, and it is not the first time that Coulter has ridiculed Edwards.

Plugging new book in latest solo Today appearance, Coulter attacked liberals, 9-11 widows
http://mediamatters.org/items/200606060006

On the June 6, 2006, edition of NBC's Today, Coulter criticized the widows of victims of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks for "speak[ing] out using the fact that they're widows" and "using their grief" and "the fact that you lost a husband" to make "a political point while preventing anyone from responding." She further argued that "the Left" exploits a "doctrine of infallibility," and that "[i]f they have a point to make about the 9-11 Commission, about how to fight the war on terrorism," they "put[] up Cindy Sheehan ... put[] out these widows." As a result, Coulter said, conservatives "always have to respond to someone who just had a family member die" and appear to be "questioning the authenticity of the grief."

Carlson referred to Canada as "retarded cousin"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200512160012
http://mediamatters.org/items/200609250002

MSNBC host Tucker Carlson twice referred to Canada as a "retarded cousin": First, on the December 15, 2005, edition of MSNBC's The Situation with Tucker Carlson (later renamed Tucker), he stated that "Canada is a sweet country. It is like your retarded cousin you see at Thanksgiving and sort of pat him on the head. You know, he's nice, but you don't take him seriously. That's Canada." Then, on the September 22, 2006, edition of the show, Tucker purported to point out the "incompetence of Canada," saying, "It's too easy, Willie. ... I feel like I'm beating up a retarded cousin almost." Geist hurriedly added: "I'm going to move on quickly. Maybe nobody will notice you said it."

Carlson: "[G]rouchy feminists with mustaches" control the Democratic Party
http://mediamatters.org/items/200411230009

On the November 22, 2004, edition of the now-defunct CNN's Crossfire, Carlson stated: "And that's about the era [the 1970s] that still defines the Democratic Party, the era of Our Bodies Ourselves [women's health book collective], of solar [power], not nukes. ... You know what I mean? ... A time when grouchy feminists with mustaches controlled the party, and they still do."

Savage: CNN's Blitzer and King "would have pushed Jewish children into the oven"; "curry favor with the turbanned hoodlums"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200608080010

On the August 7, 2006, edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage declared that CNN hosts Wolf Blitzer and Larry King "look like the type that would have pushed Jewish children into the oven to stay alive one more day to entertain the Nazis."

Atrocities In Vietnam And Iraq

2007-02-17T10:19:00.000-08:00

I remember during the 2004 Presidential campaign Rove put out the message that Sen. John Kerry a Vietnam war hero and George Bush's political opponent was a traitor because he exposed the atrocities of our troops in Vietnam. Unfortunately the slime that the slimy Karl Rove spewed worked to defeat John Kerry.

Isn't it interesting that now American troops fighting for George Bush in the Iraq war are committing atrocities against the very people they are supposed to be protecting. I wonder if whomever tattled on these troops will be branded a traitor or if anyone who agrees that these atrocities do in fact happen will be branded as such?

Today a little bit of justice was done in connection to these atrocities perpetrated against the innocent Iraqi people....

Soldier gets 90 years in Iraq rape case

By RYAN LENZ, Associated Press Writer Fri Nov 17, 6:49 AM ET

FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. - A soldier who was sentenced to 90 years in prison for conspiring to rape a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and kill her and her family said he knew his actions would harm support for the U.S. military's mission in Iraq.

[clip]

In his closing statement, Barker said stressful conditions in Iraq made him angry and violent.

"To live there, to survive there, I became angry and mean. The mean part of me made me strong on patrols. It made me brave in fire fights," he said. "I loved my friends, my fellow soldiers and my leaders, but I began to hate everyone else in Iraq."

Some of Barker's fellow soldiers testified on his behalf, describing weeks with little support and sleep while manning distant checkpoints.*

"The bottom line is they were not giving the soldiers the tools, were not giving the soldiers the combat stress treatment, were not giving them enough troops on the ground to fulfill their mission," defense attorney David Sheldon said after the sentencing.

Capt. William Fischbach, the lead prosecutor, told the court that such conditions were no excuse for Barker, who led the group to the family's house, and that no one deserved such unspeakable horrors.

"This burned-out corpse that used to be a 14-year-old girl never fired bullets or lobbed mortars," Fischbach said as he held pictures of the crime scene.

The defendants are accused of burning the girl's body to conceal the crime.

Sgt. Paul E. Cortez, 24, has deferred entering a plea, and Pfc. Jesse V. Spielman, 22, will be arraigned in December. Both are members of the 101st Airborne Division along with Barker and could face the death penalty if convicted.

Pfc. Bryan L. Howard, 19, also deferred entering a plea at his arraignment in October. He does not face the death penalty.

Steven Green, 21, pleaded not guilty last week to civilian charges including murder and sexual assault. The former private was discharged for a "personality disorder" before the allegations became known, and prosecutors have yet to say whether they will pursue the death penalty against him.

In earlier testimony, Barker described in detail how he raped Abeer Qassim al-Janabi with Cortez and Green before Green killed the girl, her younger sister and parents.

"Cortez pushed her to the ground. I went towards the top of her and kind of held her hands down while Cortez proceeded to lift her dress up," he said. "Around that time I heard shots coming from a room next door."

*Several people who have visited my blog have in essence called me out of touch because I've stated our troops do not get the support they need to fight this illegal war. Ive been told I am unfeeling and uncaring...cold-blooded about the Iraqi children and our troops. They claim I'm uninformed and that I need to go to Iraq to see just how well our troops have it.

I'll admit I did not go to Iraq and see with my own eyes that this atrocity was committed against the young Iraqi girl and her family or that the troops who committed it were not properly supported and under unbelievable pressure but apparently it did happened.

I will say that I did not nor do I support the Bush administration who has caused these terrible atrocities to happen. Can these visitors to my blog make the same claim?

IMPEACH BUSH

Savoring The Win

2006-11-17T08:40:00.000-08:00

I've been remiss in updating my blog since the Democratic win November 7th. So I'll take the time to congratulate the big winners now which of course are the American People. The Democrats defeated the corrupt neocons who are destroying our Constitution and the good name of our Country, proving that the People want a change and some balance returned to Washington. The Republican one party system has proven they cannot govern without corruption, their arrogance and partisan politics finally defeated them.

I would like to say I'm encouraged but from what we've been seeing and hearing the last few days the neocons are once again thumbing their nose at the will of the people. The Republicans have elected Rep. John Boehner as Minority leader of the House and Rep. Roy Blunt kept his post as Whip [Minority]. Trent Lott won a position as the Minority Whip of the Senate despite his racist scandal. Same-o same-o.

The neocons when in control of the House did not allow one Democratic bill on the floor for 12 years and now instead of working together the Minority Republicans are setting themselves up to try and stop everything the Majority Democrats will try to accomplish. As Trent Lott said in his acceptance speech...

"I'm honored to be a part of this leadership team to support Mitch McConnell and all of my colleagues to do a job that I've always really loved the most: count the votes. And all Mitch is going to want me to do is count the magic '60' or the magic '51,' and I'll do my very best in that effort," Lott said, referring to the number of votes needed to break a filibuster or to win a simple majority in the Senate.

We'll see if it works out for them as well as it did the Democrats for the last 12 years.

Anyway, congrats America and the Blogosphere and everyone who worked their butts off to see that America was once again returned to "We The People."

Should Torture Be An Issue?

2006-11-06T13:42:00.000-08:00

I took a visit to Andrew Sullivan's blog, The Daily Dish [time.blogs.com] today because he was on the PBS show NOW [www.pbs.org] yesterday and I found what he had to say very insightful. He is a life long Republican who is disgusted with the way the neocons have done away with the true ideals and core beliefs of the Republican party. He said that not only is this election a referendum on the Republican party but it is an intervention. Sullivan believes the Republican party needs to lose this election to save it.

While on his blog I came across a post called, Exibiting Torture [time.blogs.com] in which he has a video of a Fox News* reporter who underwent waterboarding to see if it could truly be considered torture. I highly recommend you go to his blog and watch the video. Please keep in mind this reporter knew he would not die and he was in noway under the same conditions as a suspected terrorist. Below is what Sullivan had to say about the exibition of waterboarding...

It's important to remember that psychologically, he's in a very different space than prisoners who have no autonomy, and who are not aware that they can stop this at any time. Even so, his conclusion is inescapable:"As far as torture goes, at least in this controlled experiment, to me this seemed like a pretty efficient mechanism."It is indeed a pretty efficient torture technique that triggers involuntary extreme panic and fear in order to get information - any information - in order to have it stopped. The legal definition of torture is the infliction of "severe mental or physical pain or suffering" to extract information. The reporter essentially cops to "severe mental suffering" at the very least. I am grateful to Fox for not mincing words. This is torture. That a prisoner can survive it with minimal outward signs of physical harm is one of its benefits for torturers, because they can repeat it endlessly until a human being is still alive but reduced to an empty shell. And that is why the Khmer Rouge used it. And the Soviets. And the Nazis. And George W. Bush.

This is also on the ballot next Tuesday. Do you believe America should torture its military detainees and terror suspects? Do you believe the president - and the president alone - should be able to arrest anyone at will, name him or her an "enemy combatant," deny him or her habeas corpus rights, and torture him or her? If you believe he should have that right, vote Republican.

Your vote tomorrow is about more than politics. It is indeed about values, American values. A vote for the Republicans is a vote for torture.

*I may have to change my views of Fox News because in this instance they truly are being fair and balanced in their reporting.

The GOP Dirty Tricks Begin

2006-11-06T10:46:00.000-08:00

From the last 3 elections we've seen that the GOP will stoop to any level to win an election. Apparently they are smart enough to realise they cannot win in a fair contest and this election is no different.

For weeks now GOP voter fraud has been detected, 11 in O.C. charged with voter registration fraud [www.latimes.com] Dozens of people who thought they were signing up to be Democrats ended up Republican. Those accused in the case are low-level, per-signature workers. These "low level" pre-signature workers are now facing jail time not the GOP big wigs who hired them.

Today we hear of deceptive GOP Robo calls bringing back memories of the GOP phone jamming scheme in the 2002 elections which resulted in jail time for those involved. As long as the corrupt GOP only gets a slap on the wrist for this type of voter corruption they will be allowed to get away with it.

POLITICS -- RIGHT WING RESORTS TO HARASSING ROBO-CALLS: In multiple states around the country, conservative groups have devised a way to suppress turnout and smear political opponents through push polling. (Push polling is "a campaign tactic that is often criticized as deceptive because it involves calling potential voters under the guise of measuring public opinion, while the real intent is to change opinions with questions that push people in one direction or the other.") The scheme involves making "repeated robo-calls to households late in the evening or early in the morning," when voters will be "sleeping and most annoyed by the calls." "When someone answers, they're led to believe the call is coming from" the conservative group's opponent. Those who end the call early believe the opponent's campaign is pestering them, and those who stay on the call receive misleading information. One Vermont resident said she received 21 of these calls since October 24. "They are very annoying," she said. A conservative group called Common Sense Ohio is funding the calls in that state. Pew Research Center pollster said the calling "smells like a push poll, it feels like a push poll, so I guess we have to call it a push poll." "The way they're sent is deceptive," one Pennsylvania voter told the Associated Press. "The number of calls is harassing. The way her stances are presented in these stories is deliberately misleading and deceptive."

When You Go To Vote Remember This...

2006-11-06T08:29:00.000-08:00

Sadly, many American's and our troops in Iraq have been brainwashed by the Bush administration into believing that Saddam was the main terrorist and only one responsible for 9/11. We were told that even though Iraq had been under severe sanctions for over 12 years they were developing WMDs. Common sense would have told most of us that the Iraqi's did not have the means to maintain a modern military machine much less WMDs because of those sanctions.

On September 13, 2001, just 2 days after 9/11 Bush still had the ability to be a great leader. He said the words every American and person of the free world wanted to hear...

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden." It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."-- George W. Bush 9-13-2001

Then, almost 1 year later Bush said these unbelievable words letting down his country and the world but then again he was making a case for war with Saddam and Iraq not Osama bin Laden...

"I don't know where he (bin Laden) is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."-- George W. Bush 3-13-2002

The Bush/Rove political machine and their neocon followers are trying to make these midterm elections about Saddam's guilty verdict as though it were some kind of coup for this do nothing Congress.

However, for many it just reminds us that after 5 years the real culprit, Osama bin Laden, of 9/11 is still free, taunting Americans with his very existence and that the Bush administration along with his neocon Congress have failed in their so called "war on terror" causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands, 3,000 of America's finest to die for nothing.

If you are as outraged as I am about the no plan "stay the course" failed tactics Bush has used in his "war on terror" then when you go to vote remember Bush's word's that I cite and the words of Cheney from September 10th 2006...

Asked by "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert whether the United States would have gone ahead with the invasion anyway if the CIA had reported that Saddam did not, in fact, have such weapons, Cheney said yes.

"He'd done it before," Cheney said. "He had produced chemical weapons before and used them. He had produced biological weapons. He had a robust nuclear program in '91."

The U.S. invasion "was the right thing to do, and if we had to do it again, we would do exactly the same thing," he said.

Remember friends, after knowing what they know now and after killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people the Bush Administration would commit this same sad illegal war all over again.

More than anything else this has colored the way I will vote. If the Bush administration cannot in truthfulness protect America and avoid war at all costs then I cannot depend on them to honor their pledge to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America.

In my eyes, this Administration is no better than the very terrorists who are out to destroy America.

Vote for peace.

Libby

Looking Worser And Worser For Denny Hastert

2006-10-28T11:09:00.000-07:00

Oct. 27, 2006 – 6:38 p.m.

Investigators Say Speaker’s Aide Hindered Inquiry of Hill Security Contracts
By Steven T. Dennis, CQ Staff

Two former House committee investigators who were examining Capitol Hill security upgrades said a senior aide to Speaker J. Dennis Hastert hindered their efforts before they were abruptly ordered to stop their probe last year.

The former Appropriations Committee investigators said Ted Van Der Meid, Hastert’s chief counsel, resisted from the start the inquiry, which began with concerns about mismanagement of a secret security office and later probed allegations of bid-rigging and kickbacks from contractors to a Defense Department employee.

Ronald Garant and a second Appropriations Committee investigator who asked not to be identified said Van Der Meid engaged in “screaming matches” with investigators and told at least one aide not to talk to them. Van Der Meid also prohibited investigators from visiting certain sites to check up on the effectiveness of the work, the investigators said.

Van Der Meid oversaw Capitol security upgrades for Hastert, R-Ill., and worked closely with the office that was charged with implementing them, the investigators said.

K. Lee Blalack, a lawyer for Van Der Meid, said Friday that neither he nor Van Der Meid would comment on the matter.

John Scofield, a spokesman for the Appropriations Committee, said the former investigators were taken off of the investigation, but denied that it was terminated.

“Nothing has been closed down on this study,” Scofield said. “It is a pending study.”

Scofield said it was a case of “sour grapes” because the investigators’ contracts were not renewed. He also said the case was assigned to more senior staff, whom he declined to identify.

The inquiry began in late 2003 or early 2004 and was authorized by former Appropriations Chairman C.W. Bill Young, R-Fla., and the panel’s top Democrat, David R. Obey of Wisconsin.
The probe focused on the office entrusted with ensuring continuity of Congress in the event of a terrorist or other attack. That office had grown from a sleepy Cold War relic to one that was spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year on numerous security upgrades on and off Capitol Hill in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist strikes and anthrax attacks the following month.

The investigation was carried out by members of the Appropriations panel’s Surveys and Investigations team, which looks into charges of waste and abuse.

Robert Pearre, the team’s director, ordered the investigators to stop their work on the security contracts in the fall of 2005. Before that, the investigators said they were looking into allegations that security contractors had showered a Defense Department employee with kickbacks in the form of Redskins tickets, golf outings, a set of golf clubs and meals. The allegations of kickbacks did not implicate congressional aides.

The investigators also said they were looking into concerns expressed by contractors that some of the security upgrades would fail to work in the event of a terrorist attack.

The office in charge of the upgrades was funded through the Defense Department and overseen by the Capitol Police Board, but the Speaker’s office took a lead role because of Hastert’s status as third in line to the presidency, the investigators said.

According to the investigators, Van Der Meid sought to stop their investigation shortly after it began.

“We got called into his office,” said Garant, who served previously in the Defense Department’s Comptroller’s Office before becoming an investigator for the Appropriations Committee. Van Der Meid shouted at them, Garant said: “What the [expletive] are you looking at this for? . . . He wanted to shut the operation down right then and there.”

According to the investigators, Van Der Meid was reluctantly persuaded to allow the inquiry into the security upgrades to go forward but continually hindered the investigators’ work.

“They had resisted all along,” the other investigator said about the Speaker’s office. Nonetheless the investigator said he was “stunned” when the inquiry was shelved about a year ago. Pearre, a former FBI agent, had strongly backed the inquiry until shortly before he ordered them to stop their work on it.

The order was “get out of there by sundown,” Garant said, referring to the secure offices they had used for the probe because of its sensitive nature.

Garant said the investigators believed that the Speaker’s office had successfully pressured appropriators to stop their inquiry. “From our perspective it was obvious. . . . The only people who would give a [expletive] was the Speaker’s office because this was an organization very close to them.”

Scofield said that neither Van Der Meid nor the Speaker’s office had ordered that the investigation be shut down.

Rob Nabors, the committee Democratic staff director, declined through a spokeswoman to comment for this story.

Lisa C. Miller, a spokeswoman for Hastert’s office, would not comment directly on Van Der Meid’s role in the investigation. “What I can tell you is what John Scofield has told you is what I know to be true,” she said. “Beyond that, everything else is highly classified.”

The investigation was launched under Young, who had a rocky relationship with House leaders, after the secret continuity office failed to spend more than $100 million before the appropriations expired, prompting an urgent and tardy request to have the money re-appropriated just as another Defense spending bill was being finalized.

The committee and its staff had to scramble to find room in the budget, and launched its investigation of the office.

Young said he does not recall the details surrounding the start of the inquiry.

The former Appropriations chairman said that after the Sept. 11 attacks his panel initially oversaw improvements to the Capitol Hill campus, including protective coatings that were added to windows to reduce the potential damage from a truck bomb. At some point, oversight of upgrades was taken over by House leadership, Young said.

“We were in effect put out of the process by the leadership office,” Young said. “The last two years of my chairmanship they basically cut me out of the loop.”

By the time the investigators said they were ordered to drop their work, Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., had taken over as Appropriations chairman amid expectations by House GOP leaders that he would be more of a team player than Young.

Unsuccessful bidders were the source of some, but not all, of the allegations of problems with the security contracts.

One would-be vendor complained that bid requests drawn up by the Army Corps of Engineers were drafted in such a way that only one contractor would be eligible for the work, Garant said.

“You don’t know how much of it was sour grapes and how much of it was real, but there was enough of it that you started to think there was something here,” Garant said.
Investigators said that in addition to allegations of bid-rigging and kickbacks, they were looking into allegations that some security upgrades would fail to work.

“The word was that what they were trying to do was physically or technically impossible to do but that they were spending a heck of a lot of money trying to do it,” said Garant.

The other investigator said he was told that “people are going to die” because the upgrades would fail to do the job.

“That whole organization was very, very secret and very few people even knew that it existed, but it was a great dispenser of money,” said Garant, who was dismissed in March from his position as a contract investigator.

The Appropriations Committee’s investigation team, formed in 1943, has been in turmoil for several years. The upheaval culminated last week in Chairman Lewis’ decision to dismiss all 60 remaining contractors on the investigative staff, which included many retired investigators from the FBI, CIA and other government agencies. A permanent staff of 16 remains.

Scofield said last week that the contractors’ dismissals were part of a “bipartisan review” of the staff, and said the staff’s work recently “has not been that good.”

Committee Democrats have not commented on the dismissals.

How To Prevent Voter Fraud

2006-10-26T08:35:00.000-07:00

It has come to the attention of many that the only way BushCo will keep control of Congress is to steal another election. We the people cannot allow for this to happen once again.

Andy Ostroy recently had a discussion with Mark Crispin a professor of communications and media at New York University about voter fraud in the US. Mr. Crispin has been warning of voter fraud since the 2000 and 2004 elections.

Here are some of Mr. Crispin's suggestions as to what each and every voter should do to prevent another stolen election.

1-Vote, vote, vote...and get everyone you know to vote as well

2-Write your congressmen and senators and demand uniformity and federal standards for the election process. Demand an end to electronic voting machines unless there's a viable paper trail. Demand paper ballots instead. Ask that election day be declared a national holiday

3-Bombard the media with letters and calls that demand coverage of election fraud

4-Organize demonstrations

5-Go armed to the polls next month with 1-866-OUR-VOTE and call it immediately to report any fraudulent and/or suspicious activity

In parting, the most chilling thing Mark told me was his prediction of what the Republicans will do should Democrats win on Nov 7th, which he also expounded in American Spectator: "If the GOP should lose the House or Senate, its troops will mount a noisy propaganda drive accusing their opponents of election fraud. This is no mere speculation, according to a well-placed party operative who lately told talk radio host Thom Hartmann, off the record, that the game will be to shriek indignantly that those dark-hearted Democrats have fixed the race. We will hear endlessly of Democratic "voter fraud" through phantom ballots, rigged machines, intimidation tactics, and all the other tricks whereby the Bush regime has come to power. The regime will, in short, deploy the ultimate Swift Boat maneuver to turn around as many races as they need so as to nullify the will of the electorate."

Bob J. Perry, Money Man Behind Swift-Boating

2006-09-15T19:59:00.000-07:00

So my friend Robert J. Perry, the original swift-boating money man, has just plunked down the $5 million seed money to start up yet another front group entitled the Economic Freedom Fund.

The Republican donor who helped bankroll the Swift Boat attacks on Democratic Sen. John Kerry's war record has given $5 million to a new group targeting Democratic candidates.

Bob J. Perry, a Texas homebuilder with close ties to White House advisor Karl Rove and former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, recently made the hefty donations to the Economic Freedom Fund, a newly created California group.

The group is a so-called 527 that is not subject to conventional campaign finance restrictions and can spend unlimited amounts on election advocacy, similar to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. In the 2004 presidential race, the group of Vietnam veterans made unsubstantiated allegations challenging Kerry's record of wartime heroism.

So far, the new group which lists Perry as its sole donor has spent slightly more than $500,000 on television ads and mailings criticizing Democratic Reps. Jim Marshall of Georgia and Alan Mollohan of West Virginia, according to a disclosure form filed last week with the Federal Election Commission. ...

Swift Boat Ads Backer Funds New Group

Source: That Patriot Project

Tell ABC To Tell The Truth About 9/11

2006-09-05T19:43:00.000-07:00

On September 10 and 11, ABC Television is planning to run an inaccurate film depicting the events leading up to the 9/11 attacks. The film was written by an avowed conservative and it largely places the blame for failing to prevent the attacks on the Clinton administration while whitewashing the failures of the Bush administration.

Our review of the film shows it to be full of such inaccuracies. Its distorted version of history is inconsistent with the 9/11 Commission Report, upon which it claims to be based. The events leading up to September 11, 2001 are too important and too tragic to play politics with the facts.

Take Action Now: Tell ABC to tell the truth about 9/11

Can You Smell That Fear?

2006-08-11T08:08:00.000-07:00

The Democrats are saying they smell the stink of the rovian fear machine at work with the latest conveniently timed "terror alert." Sadly, we see from yesterday and today the neocons are spewing the same old tired worn out election time scaring tactics that have worked so well for them in the past. It's getting to where you can set your watch by them. Hopefully the American people will wake up to the fact the bush propagandist are using the publics' fears as a political tool.

In fact what this all boils down to is the terror the neocons are experiencing because they realize they have a great chance of losing both Houses to the Democrats come November. With the Lamont win over their neocon shill, Lieberman they are now in their "terror alert mode." That's all of they've got to work with, God knows they have absolutely no record to run on.

Sniff, sniff, smell that fear? It's called "neocon terror." ha ha ha ha

Thursday, August 10, 2006White House official gleeful that terrorists wanted to kill thousands of Americans on ten US airlines over the Atlantic by John in DC - 8/10/2006 06:19:00 PM

"Weeks before September 11th, this is going to play big," said another White House official, who also spoke on condition of not being named, adding that some Democratic candidates won't "look as appealing" under the circumstances. - AFP [news.yahoo.com], August 11, 2006

Well that didn't take long. The Republicans never did meet a threat of mortal injury to thousands of American lives that they didn't welcome as a political windfall.

This is a scathing piece from Agence France-Presse [news.yahoo.com], and a brilliant example of what real journalists do. They don't just parrot what the White House tells them, they actually investigate and report the facts. Our American brethren could learn a thing or two:US President George W. Bush seized on a foiled London airline bomb plot to hammer unnamed critics he accused of having all but forgotten the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Weighed down by the unpopular war in Iraq, Bush and his aides have tried to shift the national political debate from that conflict to the broader and more popular global war on terrorism ahead of November 7 congressional elections....

His remarks came a day after the White House orchestrated an exceptionally aggressive campaign to tar opposition Democrats as weak on terrorism, knowing what Democrats didn't: News of the plot could soon break....

Bush aides on Thursday fought the notion that they had exploited their knowledge of the coming British raid to hit Democrats, saying the trigger had been the defeat of Democratic Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut by an anti-war political novice....

Snow said Bush first learned in detail about the plot on Friday, and received two detailed briefings on it on Saturday and Sunday, as well as had two conversations about it with British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

But a senior White House official said that the British government had not launched its raid until well after Cheney held a highly unusual conference call with reporters to attack the Democrats as weak against terrorism....

On Wednesday, Cheney had suggested that Democrats believe "that somehow we can retreat behind our oceans and not be actively engaged in this conflict and be safe here at home, which clearly we know we won't, we can't, be," he said.

While some Democrats have opposed some steps in the war on terrorism, and more and more are calling for a withdrawal from Iraq, no major figures in the party have called for a wholesale retreat in the broader conflict.

But Bush's Republicans hoped the raid would yield political gains...."Weeks before September 11th, this is going to play big," said another White House official, who also spoke on condition of not being named, adding that some Democratic candidates won't "look as appealing" under the circumstances.

It's Official, The Democratic Party Is A Sham

2006-07-06T08:27:00.000-07:00

At a time when unity is called for within the DNC they are becoming a completely fractured political group. Sadly, they are allowing the republicon shill, Joe Lieberman destroy them from the inside out. When you have a political party going against themselves there is no hope of winning against one of the most corrupt administrations in history.

It's unconscionable that as David Sirota states on his blog...In an explosive story, the Rocky Mountain News reports that freshman Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO) has become the first Democrat to publicly say he will ignore the will of Connecticut Democratic primary voters and support Sen. Joe Lieberman even if Lieberman loses the primary, leaves the Democratic Party and runs as an independent. Before this, only Sens. Chuck Schumer and Chris Dodd indicated they might do this - now we have a Democratic U.S. Senator officially on record saying he will use his power to thwart both the Democratic Party and the small "d" democratic process, undermining his party and giving a big middle finger to voters.

And now we find out that not only Democrats, Salazar, Schumer and Dodd are going to support Liebernman even if he loses the Connecticut Democratic primary, Biden and Boxer are going to campaign for Liberman in the August 8th primary.

The Democrats winning the 2006 midterm elections were/are the only hope of the bush administration being held accountable for their war crimes and corruption against Americans, Iraqis and the Constitution. It is beginning to appear that even the Democrats are really republicans.

The only way I will vote Democrat is if Democratic Senators support and only support Democrats who win their primaries for the 2006 election.

Don't you know Rove and bush are laughing their asses off claiming that the DNC is doing their work for them. The bushites aren't even going to have to lift a finger in trying to discredit the Democrats all because the Dems are doing it on their own.

OMG, the world has gone mad.

If this causes you to be as outraged as I am, then may I suggest you hold the Democratic Senators to their promise of serving the voters who put them in office.

Find out who your Democratic Senator plans to support?

The Far Right Mis-Governs

2006-06-24T14:13:00.000-07:00

The far right has hijacked the Republican Party and poses the greatest danger to our nation in decades. Desperate to further their own agenda, the far right abuses power and does not play by the rules or follow the U.S. Constitution. They decide what they want to do and then pursue a win-at-any-cost strategy to achieve it.

The far-right's quest for power gained momentum in the 90's when they took control of Congress. They exercised their newly found powers by refusing to accept results of national elections and trying to force a twice-elected president to resign. They (1) engineered a series of fruitless investigations of the president (wasting $100 million), (2) misused our judicial system to entrap him, (3) forced his impeachment on an unwilling public in violation of the U.S. Constitution and (4) blackmailed House members to get the votes.

These abuses of power took place during a series of terrorist attacks. They diverted the nation, disrupted government and left us more vulnerable to attack.

With the emergence of the far-right Bush Administration, the nation began to suffer a number of reversals both in foreign and domestic policy, while incurring a soaring debt endangering future generations. Foremost among the reversals was a total mishandling of the war on terrorism:

(1) By subordinating terrorism to the far-right's agenda and missing several chances to prevent 9-11;

(2) By evading any responsibility for that disaster, trying to block even a review of what happened and then stonewalling the investigative commission;

(3) By diverting most of our military power from al-Qaeda, to an unneeded, costly and tragic war in Iraq;

(4) By pursuing a strategy for the war on terror that (a) increases rather than reduces the continuing threat to the United States and (b) is too limited in scope to protect us.

The far-right misjudgments during the Bush Administration went unchecked because Congress and the media did not do their job. Statesmanship in Congress is practically extinct and the media has lost much of its independence.

No extreme element in our society, whether to the far right or to the far left, should ever control even one branch of government. When an extreme faction controls two or more branches of government and exercises that control ruthlessly -- as the far right does today -- we lose the all-important check and balance and the will of the people is ignored.

Don't expect members of Congress or the media to help us take back our country. We will have to do it ourselves. In Congress the far right is creating a monopoly in the House by rearranging districts to their advantage. In the Senate they already have an edge that favors money and less populous states.

The only way to deal with this problem is for all of us to get "mad as hell" and drag our friends to the voting booth this November. We have the power, let's use it.

I found this on a blog, wish I'd a said it!

Heh Heh Oh Dear, Oh Dear

2006-06-03T20:34:00.000-07:00

FEC FINDS FRIST 2000 VIOLATED LAW

FEC Finds Frist Campaign Committee Violated Law by Failing to Disclose $1.44 Million Loan

Washington, DC – Earlier today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) received notice from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) indicating that in response to a complaint filed by CREW, the FEC found that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist’s 2000 Senate campaign committee, Frist 2000, Inc. violated federal campaign finance laws.

CREW’s complaint alleged -- and the FEC agreed -- that Frist 2000, Inc. failed to disclose a $1.44 million loan taken out jointly by Frist 2000, Inc. and by Frist’s 1994 campaign committee, Bill Frist for Senate, Inc. The result of the discrepancy was to make it appear that Frist 2000, Inc. had significantly more money that it actually had.

In June 2000, Senator Frist took $1 million of the money that had been contributed to his 2000 Senate campaign and invested it in the stock market, where it promptly began losing money. In November 2000, Senator Frist sought to collect $1.2 million he had lent his 1994 Senate campaign committee. As a result of the stock market losses, however, Frist 2000, Inc. did not have enough money to repay the loan. Senator Frist solved this problem by having the 1994 and the 2000 campaign committees jointly take out a $1.44 million bank loan at a cost of $10,000 a month interest. Frist 2000, Inc. did not report this debt on its FEC disclosure forms.

The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) requires full disclosure of any loans taken out by campaign committees. Yet only the 1994 campaign committee, which had been largely dormant, disclosed the loan.

In a conciliation agreement reached with Frist 2000, Inc. and the committee’s treasurer, the FEC stated that the campaign committee violated the law by failing to report the loan on the 2000 Year End Report and by failing to report the repayment of the loan on the 2001 Mid-Year Report. The FEC fined Frist 2000, Inc. $11,000, as required by statute.

Melanie Sloan, CREW’s executive director, said “it is gratifying to see that the FEC recognizes that Senator Frist’s campaign committee broke the law. Apparently, the FEC disagreed with Sen. Frist’s aide’s dismissal of the complaint as ‘incorrect’ and ‘politically driven.’”

***Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is a non-profit legal watchdog group dedicated to holding public officials accountable for their actions.

For more information, please visit www.citizensforethics.org or contact Naomi Seligman Steiner at 202.408.5565/press@citizensforethics.org.

Libby: This certainly isn't going to look very good on this potential Republican Presidential candidate's [cough] resume. tsk tsk

Am I The ONLY One Who Gets This?

2006-05-12T07:30:00.000-07:00

With King Bushes poll numbers at 29% and the latest revelations that Bushes NSA domestic spying is much worse than we were led to believe (didn't many in the blogosphere say it was worse than previously thought) the BIG question is, WHY aren't the Democrats doing something about it? Well, duh, the Repukes have been spying on the top Democrats and it is apparent that the Bushiviks are threatening to go public with the Dems dirt if anyone of them holds the King accountable for his crimes against Americans. Are there any honest politicians in either party anywhere? I don't think so. Shades of Watergate and the sad thing is this time around no one is honest or outraged enough to do anything about it.

WANTED: ONE HONEST DEMOCRAT TO GO AFTER BUSH AND HOLD HIM ACCOUNTABLE AND ONE HONEST REPORTER WHO WILL START REPORTING ABOUT THE COMPLETE CORRUPTION OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.

Btw, folks, King Bush wants to give the throne to the next in line..., Jebby, Twiddle Dumber (if that's possible). Be very afraid, America, be very afraid.

Well, I didn't vote for the bastard.

God save us because apparently no one else is!

Are Americans Finally Waking Up?

2006-05-11T23:27:00.000-07:00

29 %

A new public opinion poll shows President Bush's job approval rating is at its lowest level since he took office five years ago. In recent U.S. political history, only former presidents Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon had lower approval ratings.

WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- U.S. President George W. Bush`s job approval rating has fallen to 29 percent in a new Harris Interactive poll.

It is the lowest job approval rating of Bush`s presidency, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.

Of 1,003 U.S. adults surveyed by telephone, 29 percent said Bush was doing an 'excellent or pretty good' -- down from 35 percent in the Harris Interactive poll conducted in April. Bush`s job approval rating had been 43 percent in the Harris Interactive poll conducted in January.

About one-quarter of U.S. adults said 'things in the country are going in the right direction,' while 69 percent said 'things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track.' The trend has declined every month since January, when 33 percent said the nation was heading in the right direction, the Journal reported.

The Harris poll results came on the same day that The Washington Post reported on a Gallup poll that showed Republican support for the Bush administration has fallen by 13 percent in the past two weeks based on spending policies.

So Much Pisses Me Off Lately BUT....

2006-05-05T07:51:00.000-07:00

this really pisses me off. I found this on Gynocide (Carrie's Live Journal).

This is from a Planned Parenthood Newsletter...

An Indiana mother recently accompanied her daughter and her daughter's boyfriend to one of Indiana's Planned Parenthood clinics, but they unwittingly walked into a so-called "crisis pregnancy center" run by an anti-abortion group, one that shared a parking lot with the real Planned Parenthood clinic and was designed expressly to lure Planned Parenthood patients and deceive them.

The group took down the girl's confidential personal information and told her to come back for her appointment, which they said would be in their "other office" (the real Planned Parenthood office nearby). When she arrived for her appointment, not only did the Planned Parenthood staff have no record of her, but the police were there.

The "crisis pregnancy center" had called them, claiming that a minor was being forced to have an abortion against her will. The "crisis pregnancy center" staff then proceeded to wage a campaign of intimidation and harassment over the following days, showing up at the girl's home and calling her father's workplace. Our clinic director reports that the girl was "scared to death to leave her house."

They even went to her school and urged classmates to pressure her not to have an abortion. The anti-choice movement is setting up these "crisis pregnancy centers" across the country. Some of them have neutral-sounding names and run ads that falsely promise the full range of reproductive health services, but they dispense anti-choice propaganda and intimidation instead. And according to a recent article in The New York Times, there are currently more of these centers in the U.S. than there are actual abortion providers. What's more, these centers have received $60 million in government grants. They're being funded by our tax dollars.

A bill has just been introduced in Congress to stop the fraudulent practices of fake clinics, but it desperately needs more support. Tell your representative to take a stand: anti-choice extremists must not get away with this any longer!Go to:

http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/fakeclinics

This is the power that the neocons have given to the rightwingnutty bible-thumpers. OMG, they are so concerned about abortions but think nothing of BOMBING Planned Parenthood centers, KILLING Doctors, LYING and STEALING government money (as in OUR tax dollars) to fund their illegal practices. Oh and what about how they want and have cut social programs to help these babies once they are born.

Come on people let's hear your outrage. We have got to stop this!

The Liar For The Liar Has Gotten The Boot

2006-04-19T10:20:00.000-07:00

Well actually, he supposedly quit. [yeah right] What a big yawn and the other big yawn is that Rove is giving up some of his responsibilities. [yeah right] Looks like bush is appeasing the GOP just in time for the mid-term elections. It's no secret or surprise that the corrupt bush administration was going to hurt the GOP this time around so he had to do what any good crook would do...start naming fall guys. Not that Rove and Scottie aren't just as corrupt or as big a liars as bush and the rest of his cabal.

Scottie was overheard making a phone call to that other bastion of corruption, mommy dearest, Republican, I mean Independent...ahem, Carol Keeton Strayhorn, Texas Comptroller and running for Texas Governor against Perry the incumbent. Scottie was heard to say, mommy, that bad bush fired me, can I be an Independant too and work for you cuz you taught me real well, boy oh boy can I ever lie.

I'll wake up when bush is impeached along with the rest of the crooks in the White House.

cheney Directed Libby To Leak. Okay.

2006-04-14T14:25:00.000-07:00

The National Journal Group has reported that cheney did direct Libby to leak protions of classified information to the media, Judith Miller and Mathew Cooper. Okay, now tell us something we don't know...like WHO leaked classified information about Plame to Robert Novak? Rove? Okay class, let's see a show of hands.

ADMINISTRATION Cheney Authorized Leak Of CIA Report, Libby Says
By Murray Waas, National Journal© National Journal Group Inc.Friday, April 14, 2006

Vice President Dick Cheney directed his then-chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on July 12, 2003 to leak to the media portions of a then-highly classified CIA report that Cheney hoped would undermine the credibility of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, a critic of the Bush administration's Iraq policy, according to Libby's grand jury testimony in the CIA leak case and sources who have read the classified report.

There is a growing body of information showing that at the time Plame was outed the vice president was deeply involved in the effort to undermine her husband.

The March 2002 intelligence report was a debriefing of Wilson by the CIA's Directorate of Operations after Wilson returned from a CIA-sponsored mission to Niger to investigate claims, later proved to be unfounded, that Saddam Hussein had attempted to procure uranium from the African nation, according to government records.

The debriefing report made no mention of Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, then a covert CIA officer, or any role she may have played in her husband's selection by the CIA to go to Niger, according to two people who have read the report.

The previously unreported grand jury testimony is significant because only hours after Cheney reportedly instructed Libby to disclose information from the CIA report, Libby divulged to then-New York Times reporter Judith Miller and Time magazine correspondent Matthew Cooper that Plame was a CIA officer, and that she been involved in selecting her husband for the Niger mission.

Both Libby and Cheney have repeatedly insisted that the vice president never encouraged, directed, or authorized Libby to disclose Plame's identity. In a court filing on April 12, Libby's attorneys reiterated: "Consistent with his grand jury testimony, Mr. Libby does not contend that he was instructed to make any disclosures concerning Ms. Wilson [Plame] by President Bush, Vice President Cheney, or anyone else."

But the disclosure that Cheney instructed Libby to leak portions of a classified CIA report on Joseph Wilson adds to a growing body of information showing that at the time Plame was outed as a covert CIA officer the vice president was deeply involved in the White House effort to undermine her husband.

A spokesman for the vice president declined to comment.

Click here for previous coverage of pre-war intelligence and the CIA leak investigation

Immigration? Most Important Issue To Voters?

2006-04-12T19:28:00.000-07:00

Hum, really? I didn't know that. This weekend I heard several Republicans saying over and over again that immigration was the most important issue to the American voters and all I could do was yell at the TV and say...NO, IT ISN'T!

Once again the Republicans with the help of the MSM is controlling the message for the American voters. I'll be the first to admit immigration is a problem but there is just so much more important things we as Americans should be concerned about.

Let's see, how about these things...

A President who lies more than he tells the truth.
A war for absolutely no other reason other than oil for cheney/haliburton and bush.
Thousands of needless American and Iraqi deaths.
Pitiful National security.
An economy in the toilet.
Trillions of dollars in debt that our children's children will be paying for.
A President who wants to drop a nuclear bomb on another country.
A Congress who is as corrupt as it's President.

A President who supports and uses torture, not to mention condones the rape and sodomizing of young boys by American troops.
A President who lies more than he tells the truth.
etc
etc

Please, people, do not let this corrupt administration dictate what is important to you. You know what it is and you must remember that when you vote.

On the issue of immigration, here's something to think about. Am I the only one that noticed how fast these demonstrations of supposedly illegal aliens got together and started these nation wide protest? Who orchestrated so many so fast? One day nothing and the next it was nation wide, everywhere. I believe this is a huge smokescreen. Bush gives one speech about immigration and BAM! it's everywhere. Every Mexican in the USA is protesting.

Don't be distracted from the important issues facing you and America today!

I'm Reminded Of THE Clinton Lie...

2006-04-07T11:00:00.000-07:00

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinski" while wagging his finger in our faces. Do you all remember it? Well, you should because the Mainstream Media played it over and over again everyday until Bush became resident of the White House. Most Republicans still like to whine about it and gloat that he was impeached because of it.

Now let's fast forward to 2006. Let's discuss just some of the lies Bush has told. I won't go into all of his lies concerning the war in Iraq, there are entirely too many and apparently no one cares anyway that he is needlessly killing thousands of Americans and innocent Iraqi for oil. Instead, let me remind you of the lies Mr. Bush has told concerning the Plamegate leak. I fully expect the MSM to run these lies over and over again everyday until bush is impeached. [yeah right!] Actually, I fully expect bush to fire himself, oh wait, he lied about firing anyone from his administration who was involved with the Plame leak too.

Big thank you to The Raw Story

President Bush, 9/30/03:

"I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action."

President Bush, 9/30/03:

"If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of. . . . I have told our administration, people in my administration to be fully cooperative. I want to know the truth. If anybody has got any information inside our administration or outside our administration, it would be helpful if they came forward with the information so we can find out whether or not these allegations are true and get on about the business."

President Bush, 10/28/03:

"I'd like to know if somebody in my White House did leak sensitive information."

President Bush, 6/10/04:

Reporter: "Do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?"
President Bush: "Yes. And that's up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts."

President Bush, 10/28/03:

"I want to know the truth. ... I have no idea whether we'll find out who the leaker is, partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers."

President Bush, 7/18/05 issue of USA Today:
"If someone committed crime, they will no longer work in my administration."

White House Press Secretary, 9/29/03:

"The President has set high standards, the highest of standards for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration."

White House Press Secretary, 10/7/03:

"Let me answer what the President has said. I speak for the President and I'll talk to you about what he wants . . .If someone leaked classified information, the President wants to know. If someone in this administration leaked classified information, they will no longer be a part of this administration, because that's not the way this White House operates, that's not the way this President expects people in his administration to conduct their business."

While you're at it you might want to check out Bushes latest poll numbers. heh heh

Remember That Talk DeLay Had With Jesus?

2006-04-06T15:09:00.000-07:00

It didn't take or either Jesus has gone over to the dark side and is giving old Tom some really bad advice. According to sources here in Texas former U.S. Rep. Nick Lampson, the Democratic nominee hoping to succeed outgoing Republican Rep. Tom DeLay decided to hold a press conference this morning in Sugar Land. Tom DeLay's campaign manager and a member of the State Republican Executive Committee called for volunteers to meet on the first floor of the parking garage and "wreck" Lampson's press conference.

Here is part of the email Chris Homan, DeLay's campaign manager sent out...

We would meet tomorrow morning at 9:45 am on the first floor of the parking garage attached to the Marriott. Please get folks to call our campaign office 281.343.1333 and let us know they can do it – or e-mail Leonard Cash (in the cc field above) so that we can get some head count. Let’s give Lampson a parting shot that wrecks his press conference.

Now I guess that's all fine and good except the Republican protesters weren't exactly peaceful-like. Seems they roughed up an elderly 70 year old woman who came to support Lampson. She was slightly injured when she was assaulted by a DeLay protester. The male DeLay supporter first hit her in the face with a sign and then grabbed her hat and tried to pull it down over her eyes.

Marsha Rovai, the 70 year old retired CPS caseworker made this statement...

“I can’t believe my Congressman, Tom DeLay, would organize this type of assault,” Rovai said. “I was assaulted by two different people. One of the men hit me and another shoved his sign into my face, and then when I pushed his sign away he violently pulled my hat down over my eyes and pushed me. I’m considering filing an assault charge. This is just very upsetting and I’m so disappointed in Tom Delay for organizing this attack.”

Bob Dunn of FortBendNow reports...

Lampson Calls For Special Election As DeLay Faithful Hoot by Bob Dunn, Apr 6, 12:21 pm

In a Thursday press conference disrupted by protesters organized by Tom DeLay’s campaign, Democratic congressional candidate Nick Lampson called on Texas Gov. Rick Perry to clear the way for a special election to fill the remainder of DeLay’s term in the 22nd Congressional District.

DeLay, R-Sugar Land, announced Tuesday he will resign from office. However, DeLay has not named the date he will step down other than to say it will probably happen by mid-June. That date plays an important role in determining how his replacement is carried out.

In front of Sugar Land City Hall on Town Square, Lampson told a small crowd of about 40 people that DeLay should step down by Friday and allow Perry to call a special election for May 13. He called that “the only date which serves the people of this district by allowing them to keep a voice in Congress” without wasting money on a special election.

If Perry decides to hold a special election in November, as some have suggested, or not at all, then people in the district would go without representation in a time of war, and during hurricane season, Lampson said.

“This would be extremely irresponsible,” Lampson added. “You only have to look at the fight that Louisiana’s representatives have had to put up after Hurricane Katrina and Rita to know how serious the situation could be.”

After about three minutes, the crowd began to grow. Lampson was suddenly surrounded by about 30 sign-waving protesters, some shouting and one blasting an air horn. Protesters flanked Lampson on either side and stood close behind him, shouting and chanting.

Lampson supporters jostled for position, making their own signs visible. Lampson continued with his press conference, but the noise was so loud reporters were forced to stand face to face with the Democratic candidate to hear.

“You ask Tom DeLay’s people to do the right thing,” Lampson said, pointing a thumb at protesters shouting behind his head, “and this is what their answer is. It’s time the people of this district had a real congressman.”

Asked if Perry has any legal obligation to call a special election, Lampson replied, “Why do people need a legal obligation to do what’s right?”

He later said he believes Perry is under no legal obligation. However, he bristled at the suggestion the 22nd District could go without a congressional representative for half a year.
Lampson’s supports sported tea bags hanging from their shirt pockets, symbolizing the American Revolution slogan “no taxation without representation.”

Tempers flared as Lampson supporters tried to quiet the protesters. Arguments broke out, some minor pushing and shoving ensued and at least one woman was grazed in the head by a sign wielded by a DeLay supporter.

Marsha Rovai, 70, of Richmond, said one of the protesters hit her and another man shoved a sign in her face. She said that when she pushed the sign away, the man pulled her hat down over her face.

(On Thursday afternoon, Lampson’s campaign released a statement saying Rovai has asked the campaign to “help see if any of the television stations caught this incident on tape so she can consider filing an assault charge.”)

The press conference broke up, but heated arguments gained in intensity.

Sugar Land Police officers were called to the scene, but did not intercede. Officers in five or six cruisers stayed at a distance and watched the exchange, which subsided after 15 or 20 minutes.
DeLay campaign manager Chris Homan acknowledged organizing the protesters.
“Nick is Nancy Pelosi’s liberal lapdog from Beaumont, and he should get used to being confronted…for the next seven months,” Homan said.

After DeLay resigns and the campaign office is shut down, Homan said, “I think what you’re going to see is Republicans will rally behind a candidate and help get word out that Nick Lampson was one of the worst liberals the Texas delegation has ever seen.”

Theresa Raia, a state Republican Party executive committee member and precinct chair from Sugar Land, carried a sign and protested at the Lampson press conference along with her husband, Sam.

“We just didn’t like him coming in to Sugar Land,” Raia said. “He surely should have known he was going to get some opposition.”

“I just think it’s what you would expect of Tom DeLay and his supporters,” Lampson campaign manager Mike Malaise said of the protesters. “He is moving toward manipulating the process of picking his own successor, and this is the kind of strong-armed tactic that got him in trouble in the first place.”

Local Republican Party officials indicated Wednesday that they favor either waiting until November for a special election, or to do away with such an election altogether.
Speaking on the Rush Limbaugh Show Wednesday, DeLay made it clear he also does not favor a special election.

“No, there won’t be a special election,” DeLay told Limbaugh. “Texas has a law that there’s only two dates that you can have a special election, November and May, and this weekend the deadline for the May special election will have passed.”

Other political observers interpret portions of the Texas Election Code as giving Perry the authority to call an emergency election on a date of his choosing.

Folks, I'm sure you all well remember the 2000 Presidential election. This is the exact same stunt the Republicans pulled when the recount issue was being decided. It appears Republicans hate protesters except when they do it. This is just more evidence as to how disgraceful and unethicial Republicans are.

On a side note, Mr. Perry the Governor of Texas has stated that he will not call a special election unless DeLay resigns by friday [that's tomorrow, folks]. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that DeLay and Perry are terrified a Democrat will take the vacant District 22 seat so the corrupt bastards are going to do everything in their power to prevent that from happening. After all we wouldn't want all that corrupt work DeLay put into redrawing the District lines to go to waste, now would we?

April 6, 2006, 2:43PM Perry: No special election, unless DeLay resigns by FridayDemocrat says DeLay should leave office now so a vote can take place on the earliest date

By CLAY ROBISON, KRISTEN MACK and ERIC HANSON Houston Chronicle

AUSTIN - Gov. Rick Perry said today that he will not call an election to fill the congressional seat to be vacated by U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay before November if DeLay doesn't resign by Friday.

"The legal issue of when does that seat become vacant is when I get that (resignation) letter, and as far as I know I don't have a letter,'' Perry said.

"If I don't get it by close of business tomorrow, the election will be in November.''

DeLay Has A Talk With Jesus...

2006-04-04T12:07:00.000-07:00

and decides that it's best if he doesn't run for the District 22 seat in Texas. In the Times interview, DeLay claims that he and wife Christine, had been prepared to fight, but that he decided last Wednesday, after months of prayer and contemplation, to spare his suburban Houston district the mudfest to come.

Golly, Tommy, I was worried you might be giving up the run for your Congressional seat because your EX-aides are singing like little birds about your involvement with "your good friend," Abramoff and your corruption.

Well anyway, we know it's one of two things, heck, it could be two things, either you're worried you'd lose your election or you're afraid you'll be sitting in jail by November 2006.

I'm banking on both, just call me Schadenfreude [sigh]. The one thing that would make me happier would be if Christine DeLay went with her hubby to the BIG house.

Finally, America wins one. Next!

We'd hate for Bush to feel left out so here's an article by Dan Froomkin that you might enjoy reading...'Meet The Real Bush.'

Memo to Republicans...

2006-03-29T04:36:00.000-08:00

Jan van Lohuizen Republican pollster has sent Ken Mehlman [ew] head of the RNC a memo claiming that if the Republicans distance themselves from Mr. Bush in the upcoming 2006 midterm elections it will be akin to adding weight to an anchor.

Memorandum...

To: Ken MehlmanFrom: Jan van LohuizenDate: March 3, 2006Re: Bush -- Congressional Republicans

Per our conversation, we took another look at the way voters, Republicans specifically, link President Bush and Republicans in the House and the Senate. There are several points worth making:

1. President Bush continues to have the strong loyal support of Republican voters. Despite slippage in approval ratings among all voters, the President's job approval among Republicans continues to be very high. Most members will be elected with between 80% and 100% of their support coming from Republicans. I don't see that Republicans driving a wedge between themselves and the President is a good election strategy.

2. My read of the current environment is that our problem will be turnout. '06 could become an election like '82 or '84. In '82 Republicans showed up at relatively normal turnout rates, while Democrats, because they were angry, showed up at abnormally high turnout rates. In '94, Republican turnout was elevated, while Democratic turnout was depressed. We have every reason to believe '06 could become the inverse of '82. We don't see signs of a depressed Republican turnout yet, but we have every reason to believe Democrats will turn out in high numbers. Anything we do to depress turnout, by not running as a unified party for instance, could very well lead to serious consequences in November.

3. The President is seen universally as the face of the Republican Party. We are now brand W. Republicans. The following chart shows the extremely close correlation between the Presidentâ€™s image and overall ratings of the party.President Bush drives our image and will do so until we have real national front-runners for the '08 nomination. Attacking the President is counter productive for all Republicans, not just the candidates launching the attacks. If he drops, we all drop.

Source: Hotline on Call

I have a message for Mr. van Lohuizen and the RNC.

I couldn't agree with you more, if Bush drops, you all [Repubs] drop and you must not distance yourselves from him.

Doesn't it amaze all of you out there that Bushes arrogance, which has and is bringing America to her knees is the driving force behind the RNC and in their [Bushes] opinion must be supported at all cost. I like his thinking.

You have to wonder if they ever look at any polls not their own?

The George W. Bush Approval Map

2006-03-18T16:59:00.000-08:00

I want to encourage everyone to go here and see the pretty map turn from red to blue.

Looks like the states are turning the nicest color of blue. Even Texas...OMG.

DeLay's Primary Results From Texas

2006-03-08T05:38:00.000-08:00

With 62 percent of the vote in the 22nd Congressional District, Tom DeLay won out over three other Republican rivals. As promised free kool-aid was passed out at the precincts to any and all Republican Roaches who voted for him.

Tuesday Texas primary night found DeLay in Washington at a GOP fundraiser hosted by GOP lawmakers-turned-lobbyists [ooh surprise surprise] after casting votes Tuesday in the House, including the one to renew the modified USA Patriot Act.

As DeLay was leaving the fundraiser a reporter asked why he was in Washington. He said: "Do you know what the Patriot Act is? Have you heard of it? I just voted on it." [Oh, yeah you piece of crap, we know what the Patriot Act is, we've heard of it. It's that thingie that gives your partner in crime, Bush, Hitler like control over everyone including God.]

Regardless of the 62 percent of the votes DeLay received that means there are still nearly 40 percent of the Republican vote who bailed on him [heh heh]. In other words, it wasn't the same old slam dunk it usually is.

Source: Houston Chronicle

MSM Continues To Spew GOP BS

2006-03-07T07:09:00.000-08:00

This morning I read in the Washington Post that...

Democrats Struggle To Seize Opportunity
Amid GOP Troubles, No Unified Message

You mean I get to be the one to tell the GOP and the MSM that yes, the Democrats do have a unified message and it is...

The Democrats Are NOT the CORRUPT NeoConservative GOP

Bush Administration to Crack Down On Media Leaks

2006-03-06T07:50:00.000-08:00

The Bush Administration is going after reporters and government officials who are found to be leakers. There will be several FBI investigations, a polygrah investigation inside the CIA and it comes with a warning that reporters could be prosecuted under espionage laws.

Bush has been overheard saying in regards the NSA leak, "a shameful act" that was "helping the enemy," and said in December that he was hopeful the Justice Department would conduct a full investigation into the disclosure.

"We need to protect the right to free speech and the First Amendment, and the president is doing that," said White House spokesman Trent Duffy. "But, at the same time, we do need to protect classified information which helps fight the war on terror."

Now I know what you're thinking...that Bush is being hypocritical and is just pissed cuz he got caught doing something illegal but really, we should all be shouting, BRAVO!!!!!

No doubt now, Bush will get to the bottom of the Whie House leakers in the outing of covert CIA officer, Valerie Plame Wilson. You remember those inside White House leakers, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, Dick [bad shot] Cheney and their media mouthpieces, Chicago Sun-Times columnist, Robert Novak and investigative journalist for the New York Times, Judith Miller.

I can't wait to see them strapped to a polygraph machine.

Come on, everyone, let's hear a BIG Bravo for Bush. You know he'll get these White House leakers...first, right? One word of advice though, I wouldn't...

hold your breath!

Source: WaPo

Now THIS Is Interesting...

2006-02-25T08:45:00.000-08:00

Bob Woodward gave a speech to a crowd of 500 business and community leaders in San Antonio. He said some extremely interesting things in that speech. It is worth noting that for his lastest book he was allowed to interview Bush for 3 1/2 hours, the longest interview of any sitting President.

Btw, I hope they do run Cheney for President in 2008. [Libby]

Woodward warns of secrecy trend

Web Posted: 02/22/2006 12:00 AM CST
Tracy Idell HamiltonExpress-News Staff Writer

The greatest threat to America's democracy is not terrorism but governmental secrecy, said Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Bob Woodward, whose reporting almost 35 years ago pierced the veil of secrecy behind Richard Nixon's presidency.

Although a massive, coordinated attack on the country, making 9-11 look like a "footnote," is still possible, the nation faces a greater threat from the federal government's current secrecy drive, Woodward told an audience in San Antonio on Tuesday.

"Democracies die in darkness," Woodward told the 500-person crowd of mostly business and community leaders as part of Trinity University's policy maker breakfast series, a 25-year tradition.

The Bush administration, which gave Woodward remarkable access for his two books on the administration's war on terror, "Bush At War," in 2002 and "Plan of Attack," in 2004, has cloaked its decision-making in "an immense amount of secrecy," he said, "too much, in my view."

The administration says it needs to work in secret because of the nature of the Iraqi war and the surprise tactics terrorists rely on.

He also faulted a round-the-clock news cycle that emphasizes speed over accuracy and demands that journalists not just report but predict the future.

Having a year to work on his latest book, about Bush's decision to launch the Iraqi war, he said, allowed him to gather an immense amount of information from a variety of sources.

He then wrote a 21-page memo to the president, outlining what he had learned.

Jokes aside about whether the president reads 21-page memos, Woodward said he was given 31/2 hours to interview the president. He called it the longest interview a sitting president has ever granted.

The resulting book, "Plan of Attack," tries to offer "understanding and perspective, not to condemn, or endorse, but to explain" what happened during the 16 months he said it took Bush to decide to go to war.

"And make no mistake, it was Bush's decision," he said, although he called Vice President Dick Cheney "a steam rolling force" in the process.

At the beginning of his talk, Woodward asked for a show of hands from those who voted for Bush in 2004.

Most in the crowd raised their hands.

But fewer hands were raised when he asked if attendees believed in Bush's tax cuts, and whether they agreed with Bush's decision to launch a secret wiretap program to listen in an unknown number of domestic communications to overseas telephones without court-issued warrants.

When he asked the crowd if it believed, with the benefit of hindsight, if going to war was "necessary and wise," fewer than half the room's hands went up.

After noting that the results of the last question of his unscientific poll could spell trouble for the administration, he told the crowd that all the questions were really just tricks, to see how many "rich nosy warmongering Republicans" were in the room.

"A lot, I see," he said, drawing laughs. "And very proud of it, I can see."

But it is not just governments that keep secrets; Trinity declined to say how much it paid Woodward.

A report by the Toronto Sun estimated his fee at between $20,000 and $30,000.

By comparison, Tour de France cyclist Lance Armstrong, golfer Arnold Palmer and former President George Bush make about $100,000 per engagement.

Woodward said the possibility of "the Mideast imploding," cannot be dismissed, and that his darkest fear, shared by some in the intelligence community, is that terrorists are waiting until "multiple, high-stakes attacks" can be launched on U.S. cities and targets.

He said, "9-11 will be a footnote, but it could happen, and if it does, we will become a police state."

Even as he scolded the media's tendency to prophesy the future, Woodward offered his prediction for the 2008 presidential race.

By all indications, he said, Democrat Hillary Clinton is running.

He noted that Republicans have a long track record of nominating "old war horses."

Given that, and depending on how things in Iraq proceed, "You're going to think I'm crazy, but you heard it here first. I think they could nominate Dick Cheney."

You Know You Are Still A Republican If...

2006-02-24T21:59:00.000-08:00

A BUZZFLASH READER CONTRIBUTION by Jimmy Lohman

You are more upset about Brokeback Mountain than Abu Ghraib.

You can’t stand Hilary Clinton’s hair but you have no problem with Tom DeLay’s.

You think Global Warming is no big deal but environmentalists are a major problem.

You support the "war on drugs" but think Rush Limbaugh is being prosecuted unfairly.

You think professional athletes make too much money but Sam Walton’s kids deserve
everything they have.

You like the way George Bush walks.

You think Al Gore is "wooden" and Donald Rumsfeld has charisma.

You think CNN is biased but Fox News is neutral.

You like the sound of Newt Gingrich’s voice.

You are sure the United States has the best education and health care systems in the world.

You think Dick Cheney is a straight shooter.

You think Michael Chertoff’s beard makes him look distinguished.

You think the problem with our health care system is lawyers.

You think it was more important to locate Monica Lewinsky’s blue dress than to locate weapons of mass destruction.

You don’t believe "terrorism" has made Rudy Giuliani an incredibly rich man.

You believe freedom of speech covers everything Pat Robertson says and does, but burning a flag should be illegal.

You can be in the same room with Brit Hume.

You have yourself convinced that the country and world are better off now than 5 years ago.

Jimmy Lohman is a musician and human rights lawyer in Austin, Texas, and an occasional contributor to Buzzflash.

Hell Has Officially Frozen Over

2006-02-23T07:51:00.000-08:00

Whenever you hear that Denny Hastert and Frist are agreeing with anyone on the Left side of the aisle then you know it's starting to get much colder in hell and is an extremely bad sign for Bush/Cheney/Rove. Hopefully Bushes approval and defending of turning over some US ports to terrorists [Dubai] will bite him in the ass, at least I hope it will.

We'll see if the Republicans can stay outraged at Bush this time for being "weak on security." You know, that lovely little catch phrase the Bush Administration has used so well against Democrats. Ah yes, Bush putting business before American security. Now who's living in the pre 9/11 days?

Sadly we see what Bush really cares about...BIG moolah. Of course this is what happens when you put "big business" in the White House. Those of you who voted for Bush & Co can't say you didn't know.

Dan Froomkin has a great piece in the Washington Post about Bush and his ever "trust me" just doesn't hack it anymore.

Hold his feet to the fire, repukes, you're the only ones who can.

Bush Giving Terrorists Control Of US Ports

2006-02-22T08:18:00.000-08:00

I'm sure most of you are aware the Bush Administration is handing over control of some of the US ports to the country who sponsors and supports terrorists. In fact, Dubai has closer ties to bin Laden and the bin Laden family than Iraq ever has.

The closer we look into this unbelievable act it just gets curiouser and curiouser. This morning I get up to read on MSNBC that Bush was unaware of the port deal until after approval. [Shades of Richard M. Nixon and uncle Ronnie, Reagan that is.]

[clip]

WASHINGTON - President Bush was unaware of the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates until the deal already had been approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday.

Defending the deal anew, the administration also said that it should have briefed Congress sooner about the transaction, which has triggered a major political backlash among both Republicans and Democrats.

[clip]

One must as ask oneself why exactly is Mr Bush so set on the deal and so set on it to the point of promising to veto any bill Congress might approve to block the agreement? Not only that but Bush is playing the "racial profiling card" to defend the Administration's actions by saying...

"I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a [British] company," Bush told reporters.

He said the transaction was thoroughly scrutinized by administration officials, who concluded that it poses no threat to national security. He praised the United Arab Emirates as a close ally against terrorism and warned of sending the wrong message to the world by condemning a business just because it is Arab-owned.

[Un freakin believable]

However, the ever wonderful Davis Sirota gets down to the real truth as to why Bush is really fighting for this port deal.

This by Sirota...

The more you read about the UAE port security scandal, the more it becomes patently obvious this is about far more than just one deal with one company or one country. The harsh reaction from the Bush administration to the proposal to rescind the deal should be a red flag. This administration is unquestionably the most corporate-controlled administration in recent history, meaning its reactions are usually tied directly to the reactions of Corporate America. And the fact that the White House is ignoring its own security experts and reacting so negatively to Congress's opposition to the deal means this cuts to the much deeper issue of global trade policy - an issue that trumps all others for Big Money interests, even post-9/11 security.

In a previous post, I noted how the Bush administration is simultaneously negotiating a "free" trade agreement with the UAE - the country tied to the terrorists who attacked America on 9/11. The administration was negotiating this deal at the very same time it tried to quietly slip this port security deal under the radar. It's not surprising few in the media or the political system have mentioned that simple fact - as I note in my upcoming book Hostile Takeover, the political/media Establishment's devotion to "free" trade orthodoxy is well documented, and the Establishment's desire in this current scandal to make sure a discussion of trade policy never happens is obvious.

But as the coverage continues, the true motives of Bush's position are starting to slip out, almost inadvertently.

Look at the comment of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. Remember, he is the guy whose only job is to protect America. He's not supposed to be thinking about anything else. Yet, just a few days ago, he said about the UAE deal that "We have to balance the paramount urgency of security against the fact that we still want to have a robust global trading system." Technically, of course, he's right - but the fact that the Homeland Security secretary is publicly lecturing Congress about the need to protect the "global trading system" and defending the UAE deal tells us a lot about how devoted to prioritizating the corporate agenda our government really is - even the government agencies whose only responsibilities are securing America.

Similarly, the New York Times today quotes a corporate consultant in London who says that Congress's concerns about a country tied to the 9/11 terrorists managing U.S. port security are "totally illogical." Why? Because, he says, "The location of the headquarters of a company in the age of globalism is irrelevant."

There it is in all its glory: the Establishment publicly pushing the idea that absolutely nothing should matter - not even security concerns - other than preserving the mobility of capital. And that is ultimately what "free" trade is really all about - allowing capital to move freely all over the world, without regard to any labor, human rights, environmental and - yes - security concerns. It was GE CEO Jack Welch, the well-known "free" trader, who famously said, "Ideally you'd have every plant you own on a barge."

And so any attempt to stop the UAE port security deal fundamentally threatens the Tom-Friedman-style "free" trade orthodoxy that says we must eliminate all barriers to trade - even those that protect national security. When you realize that, President Bush's threat to use the first veto of his presidency on the UAE port security issue suddenly becomes not so surprising. He is proudly defending what Jeff Faux calls "The Party of Davos" or John Perkins calls the "corporatocracy" - that is, the multinational interests who have bankrolled Bush's entire political career, and who desperately rely on the American government preserving a "free" trade system that subverts all other concerns to the corporate profit motive.

Again, the fact that this isn't being reported should not shock anyone. Both parties have pushed this "free" trade nonsense over the last two decades, and both have been rewarded with huge piles of corporate cash. Similarly, the major media in America are all owned by huge corporations with an interest in preserving the "free" trade system. But don't let the Establishment's silence distract you. In America's corporate-owned political system, the truth is often found where things are quietest.

So there you have it folks, in a nutshell. Doesn't it scare the hell out of you to know these folks are running our country? It certainly does me.

Your Help Is Needed

2006-02-17T11:53:00.000-08:00

I realize many of us have given and given to causes that our country at one time took care of such as equipment for our troops, hurricane victims, tsunami victims, earthquake victims, victims from terrorist attacks etc etc. American's are very giving people especially when it's for a good cause and this is for a good cause.

There is a state of the art, world class rehab center being built to provide further help to our military as they try to cope with getting on with their lives. Many of those being treated are multiple amputees and badly burned. The website: http://www.fallenheroesfund.org/fallenheroes/index.php

This website will answer questions you may have but the important thing is that every single cent goes to the building, equipping and care of the wounded and their families. No administrative costs.

This is neither Democratic or Republican or whether you agree or disagree with the war. It's America's responsibility to take care of these people. As of yesterday, the fund is $3 million short of its fundraising goal of $35 million. Can you help? Every dollar counts.

Whatever you can give will be greatly appreciated.

Thank you

Libby

Getting Our Priorities Straight

2006-02-16T06:33:00.000-08:00

If I read anymore speculation about the ever incompetent, Vice President Dick Cheney I'm going to puke. The shooting accident story has been going on now for four days, six days since it took place and the Democrats can do nothing but harp on it. For God's sake, there is so much more that Liberal bloggers and MSM should be talking about than what a bumbling hunter Cheney is. Okay, you wanted him to talk to the MSM about the accident and he has,
Cheney Says Shooting Was His Fault, But He Stands By Decisions On Disclosure. Move along folks there's nothing to see.

Let me see if I can find something for you folks to be outraged about...

Look at the picture of Bush/Cheney and repeat after me, these are the men who stood before the world and started a war based on lies and deception, causing the deaths of hundreds of thousand of people, nearly 3,000 of our own [so far].

Not outraged enough? Try this...

Look at their picture and repeat after me, these are the leaders of the greatest country on earth and they advocate barbaric torture practices against prisoners, basically spitting on the Geneva Conventions yet all the while lying to the world that, America doesn't use torture.

Still not outraged enough? Look at the newest pictures of America not torturing prisoners.

How about this outrage...The Bush 2006 Budget. I dare you to go to this site and see if you're outraged at what Bushes budget is going to cut from your state.

Then there's the outrage over the illegal spying I posted about yesterday.

America is being distracted from what this corrupt administration is really doing. If America is more outraged by Cheney accidently shooting his "good friend" than what I have presented here, then I'm afraid America is in extremely serious trouble. Instead of being outraged about the lies and deception of the Cheney shooting [are you honestly surprised?] the focus needs to stay on the complete corruption of the Bush Administration.

The Democrats who keep harping about the Cheney shooting BS are no better than the rightwingnuts who crucified Clinton[and still are] over a blowjob. Just because the idiot rightwingnuts do it doesn't mean we should also jump off of the cliff. We have to keep to the business [bush corruption] at hand and not be destracted or let up on it for one minute.

Disclaimer: Yes I know, I also have a post about the Cheney shooting but that's all. For me, it's time to move on.

My God, people, get your priorties straight!

And So It Goes...

2006-02-15T08:07:00.000-08:00

Once again it looks like the totally corrupt King George will get away with more corruption. Through closed meetings with Rrepublicans only the Bush/Cheney team have once again convinced their corrupt sheep to drop any and all possible investigations into the Bush NSA criminal activity.

Congressional Probe of NSA Spying Is in Doubt
White House Sways Some GOP Lawmakers

[clip]

Congress appeared ready to launch an investigation into the Bush administration's warrantless domestic surveillance program last week, but an all-out White House lobbying campaign has dramatically slowed the effort and may kill it, key Republican and Democratic sources said yesterday.

Lawmakers cite senators such as Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) to illustrate the administration's success in cooling congressional zeal for an investigation. On Dec. 20, she was among two Republicans and two Democrats who signed a letter expressing "our profound concern about recent revelations that the United States Government may have engaged in domestic electronic surveillance without appropriate legal authority." The letter urged the Senate's intelligence and judiciary committees to "jointly undertake an inquiry into the facts and law surrounding these allegations."

In an interview yesterday, Snowe said, "I'm not sure it's going to be essential or necessary" to conduct an inquiry "if we can address the legislative standpoint" that would provide oversight of the surveillance program. "We're learning a lot and we're going to learn more," she said.

She cited last week's briefings before the full House and Senate intelligence committees by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and former NSA director Michael V. Hayden.

"The administration has obviously gotten the message that they need to be more forthcoming," Snowe said. [Oh yeah, Snowe, King George has gotten the message, sure he has. As if.]

[clip]

One wonders what it will take for the Democrats to stand up and demand that this corrupt Bush Administration be held accountable for their out and out crimes against the American people?

May I recommend we vote into office a new group of Liberal Democrats who are not Republicans in Democrat's clothing. This has got to stop and now. It appears the Democrats in Congress are as corrupt as the Republicans and have no desire to serve the American people.

The power is truly in the hands of the American people and the sooner they realize that the sooner we can do something about the corruption in Washington.

In the seventies (the Nixon days) we had a saying...

POWER TO THE PEOPLE

Wake up people and realize, you have the power. It's called...voting.

Well, This Is A Whole Nuther Covey Of Quail

2006-02-14T11:29:00.000-08:00

Vice President Dick Cheney, who usually comes to the White House with the blaring sirens of his motorcade, arrived through a back gate without sirens today.

Contrary to earlier reports that Whittington, the gentelman whom Mr. Cheney shot while quail hunting, was not critical, it would appear now however, according to the Corpus Christi Caller-Times he was much more seriously injured than previously thought.

Katherine Armstrong owner of the ranch and witness to the shooting claimed on Feb. 12th that “It broke the skin,” she said of the shotgun pellets. “It knocked him silly. But he was fine. He was talking. His eyes were open. It didn’t get in his eyes or anything like that.”

As of today, Feb. 14th, Whittington had a heart attack and was rushed into emergency surgery to remove birdshot from his heart. The Houston Chronicle is reporting...

[clip]

Peter Banko, the hospital administrator at Christus Spohn Hospital Corpus Christi-Memorial, said Harry Whittington had the heart attack early today while being evaluated.

He said there was an irregularity in the heartbeat caused by a pellet, and doctors performed a cardiac catheterization. Whittington expressed a desire to leave the hospital, but Banko said he would probably stay for another week.

[clip]

In the case that Whittington should die the Texas Penal Code states:

§ 19.01. TYPES OF CRIMINAL HOMICIDE.

(a) A person commits criminal homicide if he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence causes the death of an individual.

(b) Criminal homicide is murder, capital murder, manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide.

The White House has chosen to use humor in regard to Cheney's committing near murder.

My God, can you imagine if Clinton or Al Gore had committed a shooting like this? The Republican's would be calling for their hanging.

Infantry Team Leader In Iraq To Poet

2006-02-13T06:51:00.000-08:00

Brian Turner an infantry team leader while in Iraq has written a book of poems, "Here, Bullet," about his experiences while in Iraq.

One of the poems in his book is entitled "Eulogy" which memorializes a friend who committed suicide while on duty in Iraq and is the centerpiece of his book.

"Eulogy" from "Here, Bullet."

It happens on a Monday, at 11:20 A.M.,
as tower guards eat sandwiche
sand seagulls drift by on the Tigris River.
Prisoners tilt their heads to the west
though burlap sacks and duct tape blind them.
The sound reverberates down concertina coils
the way piano wire thrums when given slack.
And it happens like this, on a blue day of sun,
when Private Miller pulls the trigger
to take brass and fire into his mouth:
the sound lifts the birds up off the water,
a mongoose pauses under the orange trees,
and nothing can stop it now, no matter what
blur of motion surrounds him, no matter what voices
crackle over the radio in static confusion,
because if only for this moment the earth is stilled,
and Private Miller has found what low hush there is
down in the eucalyptus shade, there by the river.

PFC B. MILLER
(1980 - March 22, 2003)

Source: Jennifer Liss, WireTap

Congress Makes Edits To Wikipedia

2006-02-09T06:20:00.000-08:00

Wikipedia is the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit [oh boy, I could see this one coming]. The online encyclopedia is produced by readers who add entries and can edit any page at will at anytime.

Apparently US Congress staff have been making partisan changes to political biographies. After computers were traced back to Congress an inquirey was made into what exactly was going on.

Chief of staff, Erich Mische for Senator Coleman stated... ,

"They've got an edit provision on there for the sake of editing when things are not accurate," Mr Mische told the Associated Press.

"I presume that if they did not want people to edit, they wouldn't allow you to edit."

Now, Wikipedia is concerned whether it is ethical for those with a vested interest should be allowed to make edits to the entries.

In the last six months Congressional computers have been blocked from making edits due to "inappropriate entries."

Bush Editing Block [What's the chances]

The article on President Bush has been edited so much that Wikipedia monitors have had to put a block from further "editing."

What this proves is you cannot trust Congress with an edit button. heh heh

Source: BBC News

I Wouldn't Put Too Much Stock In This

2006-02-06T08:05:00.000-08:00

How many of you remember during the campaign leading up to the 2004 Presidential election how most news sources were saying Kerry was ahead in the polls and exit polls and that he was leading the race? Well surprise surprise it turned out not to be true and with the help and promise of Diebold, Bush won.

Now this morning I get up to read in the WaPo that a Handful of Races May Tip Control of Congress. I personally will not pay too much attention to that because anytime something supposedly positive for the Democrats shows up in the media you can bet your money it has been planted, approved and allowed by Rove.

It's a fact the Democratic voters become complacement whenever they think they're ahead in the polls or there's a chance they might win. Rove always plays this game tactic with the Dems so they'll think there's a chance they may win an election. Don't you know he is laughing up his sleeve at you people for falling for his lies...again.

My suggestion to the Democratic voters is don't pay too much attention to the media but get out there and work to turn Congress back over to the Democrats so they can clean up the NeoCon corruption running our country and for God's sake...

VOTE !!!!

This Must NOT Be Allowed To Happen

2006-02-03T20:26:00.000-08:00

Found this article on: The Smirking Chimp

Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman, The Columbus Free Press Ohio's GOP-controlled legislature has passed a repressive new law that will gut free elections here and is already surfacing elsewhere around the US. The bill will continue the process of installing the GOP as America's permanent ruling party.

Coming with the swearing in of right-wing extremist Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, it marks another dark day for what remains of American democracy.

Called HB3, the law now demands discriminatory voter ID, severely cripples the possibility of statewide recounts and actually ends the process of state-based challenges to federal elections---most importantly for president---held within the state.

In other words, the type of legal challenge mounted to the theft of Ohio's electoral votes in the 2004 election will now be all but impossible in the future.

Section 35-05.18 of HB3 requires restrictive identification requirements for anyone trying to vote in an Ohio election. Photo ID, a utility bill, a bank statement, a government check or other government document showing the name and current address of the voter will be required.

This requirement is perfectly designed to slow down the voting process in inner city precincts. It allows Republican "challengers" to intimidate anyone who turns up to vote in heavily Democratic precincts. It virtually eliminates the homeless, elderly and impoverished from the voting rolls. Election protection advocates estimate this requirement will erase 100,000 to 200,000 voters in a typical statewide election. By way of reference, George W. Bush allegedly carried Ohio---and the presidency---by less than 119,000 votes in 2004.

The ID requirement is the direct result of intervention by two high-powered Republican attorneys with ties to the White House and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.). Congressman Bob Ney allowed the Bush-Cheney re-election national counsel Mark "Thor" Hearne to testify last March as a so-called "voting rights advocate." Hearne, whose resume shows no connection to voting rights organizations, was responsible for advising the Bush-Cheney campaign on national litigation and election law strategy during the 2004 election. See here and here.

Hearne, with the help of Republican attorney Alex Vogel, concocted a story that the problem with the 2004 elections in Ohio was the NAACP paying people with crack cocaine to register voters. Vogel's front group, the Free Enterprise Coalition, even indemnified a local Republican operative, Mark Rubrick, to file an Ohio corrupt practices act suit against the NAACP, the AFL-CIO, ACT-Ohio and ACORN, The suit was later quietly withdrawn after discovery showed that the operatives behind it were linked to the top levels of the Republican Party.

Ironically, the Republican Party engaged in racist and massive voter repression in Ohio and are now institutionalizing that very Jim Crow-style repression and selling it as an election reform bill.

HB3 also ends the ability of the public to conduct meaningful audits of voting machines. Election protection activists recently forced the adoption of an auditable paper trail into the Ohio election process. In a state where virtually all ballots are cast and/or counted on electronic equipment, this cuts to the core of the ability to monitor an election's outcome. The new provision in HB3 will make the paper trail virtually meaningless.

HB3 further imposes a huge jump in the cost of forcing a recount. In 2004, the charge was $10 per precinct, with some 11,366 precincts in the state. Thus the Green and Libertarian Parties, which paid for it, had to pay somewhat more than $113,660. Now the charge will be $50 per precinct, jumping the charge to some $568,300.

Finally, and perhaps most astonishingly, HB3 eliminates the state statutes that have allowed citizens to challenge the outcome of federal elections within the state. After the 2004 election, election protection advocates filed a challenge to Bush's victory. Their attorneys were attacked with an official attempt to levy sanctions, and then were thwarted from an effective suit when GOP Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell locked up the state's voter records.

But HB3 would now entirely eliminate any possibility of a state-based legal challenge. The only alleged recourse for those wishing to officially question the vote count in a presidential, US Senate or US Congressional race in Ohio would be at the United States Congress. There is now no recourse whatsoever on the state level.

Despite grassroots protests and bitter opposition from Common Cause, the League of Women Voters and other pro-democracy groups, HB3 passed with only one Republican vote against it (all Ohio Democratic Senators and Representatives voted against).

So the Ohio GOP has taken another giant step toward ending the possibility of any other party ever taking power in the Buckeye State. When combined with new campaign finance laws that allow huge chunks of private and corporate money to flow virtually unregulated into GOP coffers, HB3 may have all but ended free elections in Ohio---at least until election protection forces can somehow reverse the trend. .

Since the Civil War, only one presidential candidate---John F. Kennedy in 1960---has won the White House without carrying Ohio. This and the other repressive legislation passed by the Ohio GOP will make it virtually impossible for anyone but a Republican to carry the Buckeye State in future statewide and federal elections.

Bills like HB3 are also being lined up to flow through Republican-controlled legislatures throughout the US, including a very similar one in Georgia. "This comes straight from Karl Rove," says Cliff Arnebeck, one of Ohio's leading election protection attorneys. "This legislation originates with a demand that one-party rule by made permanent throughout the United States.

"With today's passage of Ohio HB3, along with the seating of Justice Alito, the GOP grip on the American throat has very significantly tightened.

Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman are co-authors of HOW THE GOP STOLE AMERICA'S 2004 ELECTION & IS RIGGING 2008, available at http://www.freepress.org/. They are co-editors, with Steve Rosenfeld, of WHAT HAPPENED IN OHIO? forthcoming from the New Press.� 2006 The

Columbus Free PressSource: The Columbus Free

Presshttp://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2006/1754

Folks we cannot allow this to happen. I don't care if every Judge on the USSC is a Conservative, in the final analysis "we the people" have the final say on what happens to our country.

The neocons cannot continue to disenfranchise voters so their corrupt party will forever be in control of the United States.

We must take action now!

Bloggers Beware

2006-02-01T13:49:00.000-08:00

US plans to 'fight the net' revealed

By Adam Brookes BBC Pentagon correspondent

A newly declassified document gives a fascinating glimpse into the US military's plans for "information operations" - from psychological operations, to attacks on hostile computer networks.

The document says information is "critical to military success"

Bloggers beware.

As the world turns networked, the Pentagon is calculating the military opportunities that computer networks, wireless technologies and the modern media offer.

From influencing public opinion through new media to designing "computer network attack" weapons, the US military is learning to fight an electronic war.

The declassified document is called "Information Operations Roadmap". It was obtained by the National Security Archive at George Washington University using the Freedom of Information Act.

Officials in the Pentagon wrote it in 2003. The Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, signed it.
Information Operations Roadmap

Most computers will open PDF documents automatically, but you may need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader. Download the reader here

The "roadmap" calls for a far-reaching overhaul of the military's ability to conduct information operations and electronic warfare. And, in some detail, it makes recommendations for how the US armed forces should think about this new, virtual warfare.

The document says that information is "critical to military success". Computer and telecommunications networks are of vital operational importance.

Propaganda

The operations described in the document include a surprising range of military activities: public affairs officers who brief journalists, psychological operations troops who try to manipulate the thoughts and beliefs of an enemy, computer network attack specialists who seek to destroy enemy networks.

All these are engaged in information operations.

The wide-reaching document was signed off by Donald Rumsfeld

Perhaps the most startling aspect of the roadmap is its acknowledgement that information put out as part of the military's psychological operations, or Psyops, is finding its way onto the computer and television screens of ordinary Americans.

"Information intended for foreign audiences, including public diplomacy and Psyops, is increasingly consumed by our domestic audience," it reads.

"Psyops messages will often be replayed by the news media for much larger audiences, including the American public," it goes on.

The document's authors acknowledge that American news media should not unwittingly broadcast military propaganda. "Specific boundaries should be established," they write. But they don't seem to explain how.

"In this day and age it is impossible to prevent stories that are fed abroad as part of psychological operations propaganda from blowing back into the United States - even though they were directed abroad," says Kristin Adair of the National Security Archive.

Credibility problem

Public awareness of the US military's information operations is low, but it's growing - thanks to some operational clumsiness.

When it describes plans for electronic warfare, or EW, the document takes on an extraordinary tone. It seems to see the internet as being equivalent to an enemy weapons system

Late last year, it emerged that the Pentagon had paid a private company, the Lincoln Group, to plant hundreds of stories in Iraqi newspapers. The stories - all supportive of US policy - were written by military personnel and then placed in Iraqi publications.

And websites that appeared to be information sites on the politics of Africa and the Balkans were found to be run by the Pentagon.

But the true extent of the Pentagon's information operations, how they work, who they're aimed at, and at what point they turn from informing the public to influencing populations, is far from clear.

The roadmap, however, gives a flavour of what the US military is up to - and the grand scale on which it's thinking.

It reveals that Psyops personnel "support" the American government's international broadcasting. It singles out TV Marti - a station which broadcasts to Cuba - as receiving such support.

It recommends that a global website be established that supports America's strategic objectives.

But no American diplomats here, thank you. The website would use content from "third parties with greater credibility to foreign audiences than US officials".

It also recommends that Psyops personnel should consider a range of technologies to disseminate propaganda in enemy territory: unmanned aerial vehicles, "miniaturized, scatterable public address systems", wireless devices, cellular phones and the internet.

'Fight the net'

When it describes plans for electronic warfare, or EW, the document takes on an extraordinary tone.

It seems to see the internet as being equivalent to an enemy weapons system.

"Strategy should be based on the premise that the Department [of Defense] will 'fight the net' as it would an enemy weapons system," it reads.

The slogan "fight the net" appears several times throughout the roadmap.

The authors warn that US networks are very vulnerable to attack by hackers, enemies seeking to disable them, or spies looking for intelligence.

"Networks are growing faster than we can defend them... Attack sophistication is increasing... Number of events is increasing."

US digital ambition

And, in a grand finale, the document recommends that the United States should seek the ability to "provide maximum control of the entire electromagnetic spectrum".

US forces should be able to "disrupt or destroy the full spectrum of globally emerging communications systems, sensors, and weapons systems dependent on the electromagnetic spectrum".

Consider that for a moment.

The US military seeks the capability to knock out every telephone, every networked computer, every radar system on the planet.

Are these plans the pipe dreams of self-aggrandising bureaucrats? Or are they real?

The fact that the "Information Operations Roadmap" is approved by the Secretary of Defense suggests that these plans are taken very seriously indeed in the Pentagon.

And that the scale and grandeur of the digital revolution is matched only by the US military's ambitions for it.

State Of The Union

2006-01-31T20:53:00.000-08:00

King George addressed his subjects tonight reassuring them their country is doing better than ever under his reign.

Concerning the war in Iraq he said, "And we are on the offensive in Iraq, with a clear plan for victory." [really your HighASS and what might that be?]

I found this to be especially interesting...

In recent years, America has become a more hopeful Nation.

Violent crime rates have fallen to their lowest levels since the 1970s. Welfare cases have dropped by more than half over the past decade. Drug use among youth is down 19 percent since 2001. There are fewer abortions in America than at any point in the last three decades, and the number of children born to teenage mothers has been falling for a dozen years in a row.

These gains are evidence of a quiet transformation – a revolution of conscience, in which a rising generation is finding that a life of personal responsibility is a life of fulfillment. Government has played a role. Wise policies such as welfare reform, drug education, and support for abstinence and adoption have made a difference in the character of our country.

[cough]

If you believe this folks I have some mountain land in Florida I'd like to sell ya. Needless to say, the majority of what Bush said tonight was lies and more lies, just more of the same.

Here is a rundown as to certain words Bush said and how often he said them. I thought I'd take the SOTU speech down to the lowest common denominator.

Freedom: 17
Economy: 14
Iran: 11
Competitive: 9
Billions: 8
Military: 8
Terrorists: 7
Democracy: 6
Iraq: 6
AIDS: 6
Energy: 5
Oil: 3
Budget: 3
Terrorism: 3
War: 2
Troops: 2
WMD: 2
Evil: 2
Health care: 2
Bin Laden: 2
September 11th: 2

There you have it, do you see the pattern? It's easy to see where the priorities are.

If you missed HRH G W Bushes lies...um, speech, you can read the full text here.

Cherrio

Cue The Sharks

2006-01-30T11:13:00.000-08:00

With Tommy [damned the bad luck] Delay's political blood seeping out into the Capitol Hill waters, his good frien... um ex... ah bad, ooookay, sharks, Reps. Jim Kolbe (Ariz.), Charles Bass (N.H.), Paul Ryan (Wis.) and Tom Feeney (Fla.) wrote in a letter to their colleagues, imploring them to vote for change. "We must realize that the Majority we have all worked so hard for is in jeopardy." Seems this Republican corruption thingie has them worried about the Grand Old Party.

The sharks joining in on the feeding frenzy and vying for DeLay's job are...

Reps. John A. Boehner (R-Ohio)
John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) as they try to derail the front-runner --
Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), [my my, Mr Blunt, is that shark bites on your behind?]
Eric I. Cantor (R-Va.)

Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.), a Boehner supporter was over heard saying in regards the BIG and BROADENING problem of the Republican scandals, "And at the end of the day, I don't think the Republican Party should say, 'It is so big we've decided to promote everybody."

Source: WaPo

Palace Peasants Revolt Against King George

2006-01-30T08:46:00.000-08:00

With the cracks in the Palace walls getting wider and wider the flow of what has really been going on in that place is starting to ooze out.

I will not add my own analysis to this well written and important article other than to say it is a must read and it's about bloody time the world gets a look at what the thugs in the White House are doing to the peasants.

A Newsweek investigation: Palace Revolt by Daniel Klaidman, Stuart Taylor Jr. and Evan Thomas

Republicans Still Out Of Touch With Reality

2006-01-29T06:58:00.000-08:00

As many of us (Liberals) know there has been a hue and cry by the American people (Liberals) for the Senate Democrats to filibuster Alito. We've gone to Senator John Kerry and reminded him of the promise he made to the American people back in June 2003 ["I am prepared to filibuster, if necessary, any Supreme Court nominee who would turn back the clock on a woman's right to choose or the constitutional right to privacy, on civil rights and individual liberties and on the laws protecting workers and the environment," Kerry said in remarks via satellite at a meeting of Democratic party officials in St. Paul, Minn. ] and demanded that he uphold his promise. We have written to the eight Democratic Senators who refuse to support the Alito filibuster, demanding they fight the Alito nomination for the USSC or they will be out of a job.

Thankfully Senator Kerry came through on his promise ....

[clip]

Sen. John F. Kerry cut short a European trip yesterday and returned to Washington, where he was greeted with praise from liberal groups and ridicule from Republicans [ you notice this part?] for his role in postponing a confirmation vote for Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr.

[clip]

and...

[clip]

Republicans mocked Kerry's role in extending the debate from Europe on Thursday, and they continued their sarcasm yesterday. The filibuster strategy "was apparently hatched in Davos, Switzerland, where Senator Kerry now is with those masters of the universe that are out there trying to figure our world economy out," Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said in a Senate speech, even though Kerry was back in Washington by then.

[clip]

and this from White House press secretary, Scottie [neocon mouthpiece] McClellan...

[clip]

White House press secretary Scott McClellan told reporters, "Even for a senator, it takes some pretty serious yodeling to call for a filibuster from a five-star ski resort in the Swiss Alps."

[clip]

Let me be the first to apprise the Republicans and Scottie Mc Clellan that Senator Kerry is not doing this because he necessarily wanted to filibuster the Alito nomination, he did it because the blogosphere and Americans demanded it of him.

Scottie is right about one thing, there was some very serious yodeling being done and btw, Scottie, unlike your President who goes on vacation more than any other sitting President in history [and during a time of war, I might add] some servants of the American people actually work for them.

To be perfectly honest Republicans are not out of touch with reality, they are trying to change reality. Well, good luck with that.

Bush Declares Presidential Prerogative

2006-01-27T05:43:00.000-08:00

Yesterday Bush said he will assert presidential prerogatives on issues such as domestic eavesdropping and congressional inquiries into Hurricane Katrina.

Mr. Bush also told reporters that he refused to release White House photos of himself and the corrupt lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, stating, " Having my picture taken with someone doesn't mean that I'm a friend with him or know him very well." [Then why not release the photos, Mr. Bush?] The White House has also refused to detail meetings between Abramoff and top White House aides.

Bush claimed he was also skeptical of a proposed law imposing new oversights on his use of the NSA to listen in on electronic communications. He said he is concerned the law could force the government to provide details and clues about top-secret programs used to hunt down terrorists.

In regards Bush not using FISA to spy on Americans, he reassured reporters that "There's no doubt in my mind it is legal." Also Bush said, "But it's important for people to understand that this program is so sensitive and so important that if information gets out to how we run it or how we operate it, it'll help the enemy." Why tell the enemy what we're doing?"

Source: WaPo

My my how things have changed since Clinton was President. I remember he damned well better work with investigators, providing any and all information in regards accusations against him. The Republicans are nothing if not hypocrites.

Aw, Limbaugh Is Jealous Of Matthews

2006-01-26T07:02:00.000-08:00

It appears that Rush [bigliarmouth drugaddict] Limpbaugh is jealous of the fact Chrissy [Republicon shill bigliarmouth] Matthews has a whole website devoted to him [Open Letter To Chris Matthews] because he likes to compare Americans against the Iraq war to Osama bin Laden.

So Limpbaugh has jumped on the bandwagon and joined in with the latest chorus of the NeoConvict spin, every Democrat on the face of the earth loves Osama bin Laden, blah blah blah.

Media Matters has this to say:

On his January 23 rd radio show, Rush Limbaugh characterized Osama bin Laden's recently released audiotape as an echo of Democratic criticisms of President Bush, saying that Democrats would "eat ... up" bin Laden's message. Limbaugh said, "[H]ere comes bin Laden actually suggesting a truce," adding: "Well, the Democrats will eat that up because, while they can't trust George W. Bush, they can trust Osama bin Laden." He also claimed that the bin Laden "videotape that came out right before the election last year [2004] ... could've been a [Sen.] John Kerry [D-MA] speech. You know, 75 percent of it." Limbaugh's comments repeat claims made by other members of the media who have also used the bin Laden tape to denounce critics of the Bush administration's conduct of the Iraq war. As Media Matters for America previously noted, since the release of the tape, Fox News' Sean Hannity and MSNBC's Chris Matthews -- among others -- have made allegations similar to Limbaugh's.

Actually Bush and his good buddy Osama are working together. What other reason could there be for Mr. Bush not getting Osama bin Laden [ dead or alive] as he promised. Btw, where is bin Laden?

Hang in there, Limpbaugh, no doubt you'll be getting a website dedicated to your lies just any day now.

This Has GOT To Be Stopped

2006-01-23T17:36:00.000-08:00

If this information doesn't prove to you that the Bush Administration needs to be stopped I cannot think of what it will take for Americans to do something to stop it. Call for Bushes IMPEACHMENT.

Democrats Denounce Bush's Human Pesticide Testing Plan

t r u t h o u t Press Release

Monday 23 January 2006

Washington, DC - Today, Senator Barbara Boxer, Rep. Henry A. Waxman, and Rep. Hilda L. Solis criticized a Bush Administration plan to promote pesticide experimentation upon humans. The plan, contained in a final draft rule, was leaked to the legislators by a concerned Administration official who requested that the original copy of the plan not be duplicated in its entirety and widely distributed out of concern for anonymity. According to the EPA's communications plan, the Administration will officially announce the pesticide experimentation plan later this week as a final regulation.

In August 2005, Congress enacted a moratorium upon EPA using human pesticide experiments until strict ethical standards were established. Senator Boxer championed the moratorium in the US Senate. Representative Solis pushed the moratorium through the US House of Representatives.

"The Administration plan is inconsistent with the law passed by Congress with bipartisan support. The loopholes which allow continued testing on pregnant women, infants and children are contrary to law and widely accepted ethical guidelines, including the Nuremberg code. The fact that EPA allows pesticide testing of any kind on the most vulnerable, including abused and neglected children, is simply astonishing," said Senator Boxer.

"The regulation is an open invitation to test pesticides on humans, which is the exact opposite of what Congress intended," said Rep. Waxman. "The Administration predicts that over 30 pesticide experiments will be submitted to EPA each year under the new rule. That's an enormous step in the wrong direction."

"This is yet another example of the Bush Administration choosing to ignore the letter of the law and going its own way. Congress passed legislation to curb the practice of unethical pesticide testing on humans, but with this rule the Bush Administration is authorizing systematic testing of pesticides on humans which not only fails to meet its congressional mandate but which will increase the number of unethical studies," said Congresswoman Solis. "Americans should be concerned about just how far the Bush Administration will go to allow pesticide testing on pregnant women and children and, the ease at which it chooses to ignore the law. The Bush Administration must revise this rule to meet its Congressional mandate and give Americans a policy which is moral, ethical, and safe."

"This rule has not been signed by EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson yet. It's within his power to fix this regulation, and we are calling on him to do so," said Senator Boxer.

If the rule is finalized as currently drafted, it would apply to studies in which humans are intentionally dosed with pesticides, as well as "observational" studies. Some of the serious flaws of the plan include the following:

The Administration plan is inconsistent with federal law.

Congress required that EPA ensure that pesticides are never tested upon pregnant women and children. But the final rule would allow manufacturers to conduct testing of pesticides upon both pregnant women and children so long as there is no "intent" at the outset of the study to submit the results to EPA. Additionally, the plan would allow pesticides to be tested upon pregnant women and children in studies intended for submission at exposure levels up to the current legal limits - even though the National Academy of Sciences found that in some cases this level of exposure could present acute risks to children.

The Administration plan is inconsistent with the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences.

Congress required that EPA establish a Human Subjects Review Board (HSRB) as recommended by the National Academy of Sciences. The Academy urged that this Board review research protocols prior to consideration by an Independent Review Board (IRB). The Academy expected that the HSRB would have ethical and pesticide expertise that IRBs typically lack. This approach would allow an IRB to block unethical research or require modifications suggested by the Human Subjects Review Board prior to the initiation of a study. However, the Administration plan would establish a powerless Human Subjects Review Board that would consider research protocols after an IRB and EPA staff had already approved a study. Under the Administration plan, the HSRB would not have any authority to block or require modifications to unethical research.

The Administration plan would establish loopholes that could legally allow unethical experiments.

The Administration plan introduces new loopholes that will allow for ethical abuse. While the plan would require researchers to document their ethical compliance in the United States when the plan applies to them, it waives overseas researchers from having to prove a study was ethically conducted - even when the researcher intends to submit the study to EPA.
Also, the plan would commendably subject EPA observational studies to the Common Rule.
However, observational studies conducted by the pesticide industry would be bound by no specific ethical requirements. These loopholes were never suggested or even contemplated by Congress.

January 23 Press Gaggle By Scottie McClellan

2006-01-23T14:37:00.000-08:00

Just listen to Scottie bob and weave about the pictures of Bush and Abramoff. I can't wait for more to come out about Bushes relationship with Abramoff. Poor poor Scottie.

Q On the Abramoff pictures. You had said last week that if we had something specific, that you would then explain further about the connections between the President and the White House and Mr. Abramoff. Can you talk about the specific circumstances surrounding these pictures, and exactly the range of contacts that Mr. Abrmaoff had?

MR. McCLELLAN: I can talk -- let me repeat some of what I have said previously. First of all, the Department of Justice is holding Mr. Abramoff and others to account for the wrongdoing they engaged in. The wrongdoing they engaged in was outrageous, and they should be held to account. And that's what the administration's Department of Justice is doing. They're also continuing to investigate whether others were involved, as well, as they should. And they will continue to pursue it to the fullest.
Now in terms of the reports about some of these pictures, as we have previously indicated, the President did not have a personal relationship with Mr. Abramoff. But we also indicated that it should not be surprising that he might have taken some pictures with him at some of the widely attended events that we know both attended. What I indicated previously was, if you've got some specific issue that you need to bring to my attention, fine. But what we're not going to do is engage in a fishing expedition that has nothing to do with the investigation.

Q Why not -- why are you guys resistant to open this here? What is there to hide, or why not just say, here are the contacts he had, here are the issues he talked about when he came to the White House, here are the people --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I did do a check, and I indicated to you exactly what I just told you. I indicated to you that there were a few staff-level meetings that he attended at least -- he attended two holiday receptions, in 2001 and 2002. There are some 400 to 500 people at each of those gatherings. And of course there's a photo line at those holiday receptions. The President has participated in tens upon thousands of photo lines or pictures in photo lines over the course of the last five years. He's taken pictures with many of you. But like I said, we're just not going to get into a fishing expedition that has nothing to do with the investigation. Though we have been very straightforward about that, when asked about it.

Q I understand that. But why not just say, and just get it over with -- say, here are the issues that he talked about -- he came to the White House to talk about, here's who he met with, and then move on. Why not --

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not aware of anything that has anything to do wit the investigation. I know that there's some Democrats that want to try to make this -- try to engage in partisan attacks. But what we do know from media reports is that Mr. Abramoff gave directly or indirectly to Democrats and Republicans. Trying to say there's more to it than the President taking a picture in a photo line is just absurd.

Gasp! Bush Does Know Jack Abramoff

2006-01-22T20:05:00.000-08:00

Say it ain't so.

Mr. Bush and Scotty McClellan have both claimed that the President doesn't know Jack Abramoff but uh oh, pictures have turned up of Bush and Abramoff together. Damn! the bad luck.

According to reports aides are feverishly hunting for any and all photos that might show George and Jack together. Oopsey looks like some have been found.

Shades of Kenny Lay, Batman. Bush didn't remember being good buddies with him either.

They say drugs and booze fry the brain and I guess that's so cuz Bush can't remember being buds with any of these crooks.

IMPEACH

I Called This One

2006-01-21T06:54:00.000-08:00

On January 11th Alternet ran an article titled, 2006: The Year Of Oil Collapse by James Howard Kunstler, Kunstler.com. For a small taste of what the article is about...

Editor's note: This is one of three perspectives AlterNet has assembled on the prospect of peak oil and its implications for modern society and the global economy. The other two are from World Watch: Christopher Flavin writes that while we can't know exactly when oil production will start declining, we must focus on alternatives to petroleum now; and Robert K. Kaufman describes the role the market and government should play in helping to make the transition from a petroleum-dependent society.

This is my response to the article...

What these experts say may be true... Posted by: Libbie on Jan 11, 2006 8:30 AM

and because of what happened with the oil "shortages" in the 70's, we should have already developed alternative energy sources. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out eventually the oil will run out.

Now, call me skeptical but after living through the 70's oil shortages and finding out it was OPEC behind it, punishing America for their relationship with Israel, I can't help but think this is the underlying problem again. Only this time we are going to be punished for Bushes little war against the Axis of Evil who just happens to own most of the oil in the world. Of course the oil company in the White House will make tons of money (when is enough enough?) if there really is an oil shortage.

Maybe this is what it will take for the gluttonous oil consumers to wake up and demand the developement of alternative energy sources and tell the White House oil company and OPEC to kiss our ass.We shouldn't wait until we run out of oil to do something about it.

Oh and as far as that housing bubble blah blah blah. I have friends in construction and I'm here to tell you that the housing bubble popped the day Bush was given the White House the first time.

Libby of Liberal Woman

Bear with me for a moment while make my point.

How many of you noticed the big tumble the stock market took yesterday? In this article from MSNBC...

Dow gives back gains for year as stocks tumble

Closely-watched market index sees biggest one-day fall since March 2003

[clip]

At Friday’s close the Dow was down 213.32 points, or 1.96 percent, giving back all of the 325 points it had gained this year.

[clip]

The situation in Iran and new threats of terrorist attacks on the United States pushed the energy market sharply higher Friday. A barrel of light crude surged $1.29 to settle at $68.48 on the New York Mercantile Exchange, where natural gas also bounced off recent lows to add 37.5 cents to $9.28 per 1,000 cubic feet.

[clip]

Now, once again let me state, it doen't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Iran [part of the "axis of evil"] is going to hurt America and "the coalition" for making threats against them and the possibility of UN sanctions by cutting the flow of oil to them.

Oil prices surge back above $68 a barrel

Oil prices zoomed to a four-and-a-half month high above $68 a barrel Friday, rallying on supply fears tied to Iran’s tense diplomatic standoff with the West over its nuclear ambitions. • FULL STORY

Of course there are other factors too but mark my words, the underlying problem in the stock market drop and rising oil prices is due to our little petty tyrant's threats against Iran. After Bush's occupation of Iraq and threats against the "axis of evil," it only makes sense that Iran would arm themselve with nuclear weapons.

I don't believe Bush will be able to walk in and ocuppy Iran as easily as he did Iraq. They have not had years of UN sanctions against them, weakening their oil production and economy the way Iraq's was. I believe Bush will make a terrible mistake if he underestimates Iran.

As an added note, in my comment to Alternet's article you'll notice I also made a statement about the housing bubble and construction. Well...

Home construction falls sharply in December
Data signals that the nation’s long housing boom could be cooling off

The housing boom has been stone cold since Bush was given office. I'm not saying big homes aren't being built but that it's the rich elite SUV Neocons who get all the tax breaks that is building them, not us poor little guys who'd love to have a new home but can't take the risk of building one.

IMPEACH

Uh Oh, Chris Matthews Went Too Far This Time

2006-01-20T22:03:00.000-08:00

I personally never watch Chris Matthews of Hardball. He is bordering on the likes of Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly and I just don't have the stomach to listen to their lies and spin about Liberals.

The blogosphere is buzzing because it seems Chris Matthew's said..."Osama bin Laden sounds like Michael Moore." [shame on you Chrissy, you really stepped in it this time.]

Here's what it's all about...

Daou Report

by Peter Daou

UPDATE: John Kerry blogs on Daily Kos, Chris Matthews offers a half-hearted acknowledgement that he was "misunderstood." Nearly 20,000 people visit An Open Letter to Chris Matthews.

DEMAND AN APOLOGY: "Bin Laden sounds like Clint Eastwood" -- "Bin Laden sounds like Ron Silver" -- "Bin Laden sounds like Rush Limbaugh" -- "Bin Laden sounds like Bill O'Reilly"-- "Bin Laden sounds like Mel Gibson" -- "Bin Laden sounds like Bruce Willis" -- "Bin Laden sounds like Michelle Malkin"... Imagine the outrage on the right and in the press (but I repeat myself) if a major media figure spat out those words. Well, on Hardball, Chris Matthews just blurted out that Bin Laden sounds like Michael Moore. Simple: Matthews should apologize. On the air. This has NOTHING to do with Michael Moore and everything to do with how far media figures can go slandering the left.

And last I checked, Michael Moore didn't massacre thousands of innocent Americans. (The indispensable Crooks and Liars has the clip) And here's John Kerry's blistering statement on the Hardball scandal and Bin Laden's reappearance:"You'd think the only focus tonight would be on destroying Osama Bin Laden, not comparing him to an American who opposes the war whether you like him or not. You want a real debate that America needs? Here goes: If the administration had done the job right in Tora Bora we might not be having discussions on Hardball about a new Bin Laden tape. How dare Scott McClellan tell America that this Administration puts terrorists out of business when had they put Osama Bin Laden out of business in Afghanistan when our troops wanted to, we wouldn't have to hear this barbarian's voice on tape. That's what we should be talking about in America." -- John Kerry

MATTHEWS SCANDAL BLOG ROUNDUP

+++ Atrios: "Wanker of the Day: Chris Matthews" +++ Huffington Post: "Equating a prominent conservative activist to a murderous terrorist would bring the wrath of the rightwing machine on Matthews' head. But in today's political environment, Dems and liberals are fair game, either through insidious pro-Bush narratives like 'Bush is firm' and 'Dems are muddled,' or through blatant and vile comments like the one Matthews so glibly foisted on us." +++ Digby (who offers readers contact information to MSNBC): "This is ridiculous. This man is either working overtime to kiss right wing ass for some reason or he's been paid off to do full-on GOP character assassination. This is exactly what the Republicans did to Tom Daschle and Max Cleland." +++ Matt Stoller: "It is outrageous that Chris Matthews can slander the left, and take the threat of terrorism so lightly. I'd like to see a Democrat step up to the mike on this one." +++ Aravosis: "Pitiful. And terribly embarrassing for NBC and all of its namesakes." +++ More from Jane, Daily Kos, Seeing the Forest, The Green Knight, and The Left Coaster +++ Remember: This is not just about Chris Matthews or Michael Moore or Osama Bin Laden, it's about the willingness of a prominent media figure to slander an opponent of the war. +++

UPDATE: Markos adds: "The blowhards like Chris Matthews are orgasmic in their denunciations of liberals these days in the wake of the latest Osama Bin Laden tape. But let's remember -- it's not liberal who are in power. It's been George Bush and his neocon pals. It is THEY who have failed to capture or kill Bin Laden. It is they who have made our country less safe, and created a world in which terrorist attacks have increased. It is they who are making a mess out of the war in Iraq, failing to provide our troops with basic necessities like body and vehicle armor."

And don't forget to read An Open Letter to Chris Matthews

When Will The MSM Stop Giving Bush A Free Ride?

2006-01-19T15:23:00.000-08:00

I remember during the Clinton Presidency the MSM wouldn't let Clinton take a piss without reporting about it, yet time after time they under report any scandals concerning Bush if they report on him at all. The White House Press corp lets Scott McClellan lie to them time after time and hardly if ever call him on it.

What's so bad is that when the MSM does report about the scandals in the Bush White House they make claims the Democrats are involved and it's their problems. [what liars] I believe this pretty much shows which party controls the media in this country.

It's time we held the Media's feet to the fire and let them know we expect them to report both sides to the story and for them to do some damn research before they spout nothing but lies.

How long will the media let Bush hide the Abramoff meetings?
by Joe in DC - 1/18/2006 12:36:00 PM

Atrios makes a great point, as usual:

Look, back during the Clinton administration this kind of thing would've dominated cable news every night. Howell Raines would've been writing thunderous editorials demanding that we knew every detail of Abramoff's White House connections. Tweety would be cranking out spittle at a record rate, screeching about the "culture of corruption" in the White House. Nightline would've put up a little "X days since White House refused to disclose information about Abramoff contacts with the president" graphic on its show.

Everyone who attended a coffee at the White House during the Clinton Administration had their name printed in the Washington Post and New York Times. The press DEMANDED that information. But, we know the Bush White House repeatedly welcomed Jack Abramoff -- who is both a major GOP fundraiser (a Bush Pioneer, no less) and a convicted felon in part because of his GOP-related shenanigans -- yet, the Bush White House doesn't have to provide details. Is the traditional media really that weak? If they ask too many questions or push too hard, maybe they won't get a Presidential nickname...that would really suck for them.

There's a history to Scotty and the crew stonewalling about their more notorious allies. Remember, they never fully explained how that man-whore Jeff Gannon managed all that repeat business at the White House either.

Did Clinton Violate FISA?

2006-01-18T06:33:00.000-08:00

It has been brought to our attention the Bush Administration has been making the claim that Clinton's use of physical searches also violated FISA. Is this true or is it another lie put out by the Bush Administration?

Let's see...

Scott McClellan at the January 17th Press Breifing...

Q You kept saying "lawful." It's true the President -- there is a law that permits the President to get a warrant and wiretap. But he has not been doing that; he's been breaking the law. Al Gore said he broke the law. The ACLU is filing a suit. Why does he break the law? I mean, he has the means and the tools to do what --

MR. McCLELLAN: I reject that wholeheartedly, Helen. The legal justification has been spelled out by the Department of Justice.

In terms of Al Gore's comments, I think his hypocrisy knows no bounds. It was the Clinton administration that used warrantless physical searches. An example is what they did in the case of Aldrich Ames. And it was the Deputy Attorney General under the Clinton administration that testified before Congress and said, "First, the Department of Justice believes and the case law supports that the President has inherent authority" -- inherent authority -- "to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes and that the President may, as has been done, delegate this authority to the Attorney General." This is testimony, public testimony before the House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

I would also point out that a former associate Attorney General under the Clinton administration said that every President since FISA's passage has asserted that he retained inherent power to go beyond the Act's terms -- under President Clinton -- and he pointed to the Deputy Attorney General's comments that I just referenced. So --

January 16th on CNN's Larry King Live, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales claimed...

KING: General, Al Gore said today that President Bush repeatedly and persistently broke the law with the NSA domestic spying program and he wants a special counsel named to investigate. What are your thoughts?

ALBERT GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, I didn't see the speech of the former vice president. What I can say is that this program from its inception has been carefully reviewed by lawyers throughout the administration, people who are experienced in this area of the law, experienced regarding this technology and we believe the president does have legal authorities to authorize this program.

I would say that with respect to comments by the former vice president it's my understanding that during the Clinton administration there was activity regarding the physical searches without warrants, Aldrich Ames as an example.

I can also say that it's my understanding that the deputy attorney general testified before Congress that the president does have the inherent authority under the Constitution to engage in physical searches without a warrant and so those would certainly seem to be inconsistent with what the former vice president was saying today.

These are in fact untrue statements by both, Scottie and Albert.

MediaMatters has provided this information as proof that Clinton did not violate FISA...

At the time of the Ames investigation, FISA did require warrants for wiretaps -- as it does now -- and there is ample evidence that the Clinton administration complied with those requirements. In a 2002 speech, U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth, who previously served on the FISA Court, noted the "key role" the court played in that case to "authorize physical entries to plant eavesdropping devices":

LAMBERTH: I'm sure all of you recall the Aldrich Ames case, the CIA officer who was a Russian spy, and the key role the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court played in his case. The attorney general had also authorized physical searches of Ames's home, not pursuant to court order, that turned out to be very productive. Had Ames gone to trial, that would have been a hotly litigated issue. The president and the Congress wisely reacted by amending the statute to now require that physical searches for national security reasons also be authorized by the court.

The court had authority all along to authorize physical entries to plant eavesdropping devices, but the court had never authorized physical searches for information.

The Clinton administration's compliance with the FISA requirements regarding electronic surveillance was further substantiated by Mark M. Richard, a former deputy assistant attorney general. According to a Department of Justice (DOJ) review -- conducted by then-assistant U.S. attorney Randy I. Bellows -- of the Los Alamos National Laboratory investigation, Richard established in 1999 that, during the Ames investigation, "the Attorney General was asked to sign as many as nine certifications to the FISA Court in support of applications for FISA surveillance."

During his conversation with Toensing, Blitzer asked twice if the DOJ went to the FISA court after the fact, a reference to FISA's "emergency" provision, which allows the government to obtain a warrant up to 72 hours after starting some surveillance or searches. But his question missed the central falsehood in Toensing's argument. FISA did not apply to physical searches at the time of the Ames investigation or the Gorelick testimony, a point that Blitzer did not raise despite Toobin's having made it minutes before. Prior to Toensing's apparently unexpected commentary on The Situation Room, Toobin had clearly affirmed that "physical searches were not covered by the FISA law" at the time of Gorelick's 1994 testimony and that the Clinton administration never "went ahead and wiretapped American citizens without informing or using the FISA court."

From the December 21 edition of CNN's The Situation Room (4 p.m. ET hour):

BLITZER: Here's the point that Senator [John] Cornyn [R-TX] and many other Republican supporters of the administration make in Gorelick's own words, when she said that the president has, quote, "inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes." That's the direct quote that she made. And what they argue, the Republicans, Senator Cornyn included, is physical searches are no different, in effect are the same as wiretapping.

TOOBIN: Well the statement, as I understand it, and here we're getting into some real details. In 1994, when Jamie Gorelick made that statement, physical searches were not covered by the FISA law. And that was changed in 1995. But I think the general point you're making is right.

Jamie Gorelick at least appeared to say there were certain inherent powers in the presidency that went beyond what FISA provided for. The Clinton administration always asserted they never went beyond those powers, but there does appear to be a statement of -- claiming inherent authority. The Bush administration now appears both to be claiming that authority and perhaps using it in this very controversial program that we've been talking about since last week.

BLITZER: But there's no evidence that the Clinton administration actually went ahead and wiretapped American citizens without informing or using the FISA court?

TOOBIN: Absolutely not. In fact, what the Clinton administration has said and did was that they followed the FISA law, and the FISA law prohibited wiretaps of Americans without a court order.

Supreme Court Upholds Oregon Suicide Law

2006-01-17T08:14:00.000-08:00

On a vote of 6-3 the Supreme Court upheld the physician-assisted suicide law, rejecting a Bush administration attempt to punish doctors who help terminally ill patients die.

Can anyone guess who one of the 3 dissenting votes was from? That's right, Bush yes man, John Roberts. Let it not be said he doesn't know which side his bread is buttered on.

This article from WaPo and it is certainly worth a read.

A Wise Republican

2006-01-16T17:41:00.000-08:00

Every now and then a Republican surprises us and is honest enough to admit that maybe a Republican President has broken the law and should be held accountable. The Republican I speak of is Senator Arlen Specter.

Sunday, Senator Specter told George Stephanopoulos that "Bush in theory could face impeachment charges if found to have violated the law by authorizing the program [the illegal spying of Americans without a court order from FISA], but he did not endorse that approach and had heard no serious talk of it."

He also said "we're not going to give him a blank check, and just because we're of the same party doesn't mean we're not going to look at this very closely. We're going to explore it in depth," Specter said on ABC television's "This Week With George Stephanopoulos."

The judiciary committee has scheduled hearings on the issue and U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has said he will testify on the administration's legal justification. The operation includes eavesdropping on U.S. phone calls and reading e-mails. The hearings are expected next month.

I personally will be watching these hearings very closely, how about you?

More Good News

2006-01-14T22:42:00.000-08:00

Zogby Poll: Americans Support Impeaching Bush for
Wiretapping

Submitted by Bob Fertik on January 13, 2006 - 11:34pm.Impeachment

New Zogby Poll Shows Majority of Americans Support Impeaching Bush for Wiretapping

By a margin of 52% to 43%, Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he wiretapped American citizens without a judge's approval, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, a grassroots coalition that supports a Congressional investigation of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

The poll was conducted by Zogby International, the highly-regarded non-partisan polling company. The poll interviewed 1,216 U.S. adults from January 9-12.

The poll found that 52% agreed with the statement:

"If President Bush wiretapped American citizens without the approval of a judge, do you agree or disagree that Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment."

43% disagreed, and 6% said they didn't know or declined to answer. The poll has a +/- 2.9% margin of error.

"The American people are not buying Bush's outrageous claim that he has the power to wiretap American citizens without a warrant. Americans believe terrorism can be fought without turning our own government into Big Brother," said AfterDowningStreet.org co-founder Bob Fertik.

Recently White House spokesman Scott McClellan cited a Rasmussen poll that found 64% believe the NSA "should be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects." Of course, that is exactly what Congress authorized when it created the FISA courts to issue special expedited secret warrants for terrorism suspects. But Bush defied the FISA law and authorized warrantless wiretaps of Americans, which has outraged Americans to the point that a majority believe Congress should consider Bush's impeachment.

"Bush admits he ordered illegal warantless wiretapping, but says it began in response to 9/11 and was limited to a small number of calls to or from Al Qaeda," Fertik said. "But recent reports suggest wiretapping affected a much larger number of Americans, and a report in Friday's Truthout says the wiretapping began before 9/11."

"The upcoming Senate hearings on White House wiretapping could be as dramatic as the Watergate hearings in 1973. A majority of Americans have already believe Congress should look into grounds for impeachment, yet we have only seen the tip of the iceberg in the Corporate Media. If Bush ordered warrantless wiretapping long before the terrorist attack on 9/11, then Americans will realize that George Bush came into office determined to shred the Constitution and take away our rights," Fertik said.

Impeachment Supported by Majorities of Many Groups

Responses to the Zogby poll varied by political party affiliation: 66% of Democrats favored impeachment, as did 59% of Independents, but only 23% of Republicans. By ideology, impeachment was supported by Progressives (90%), Libertarians (71%), Liberals (65%), and Moderates (58%), but not by Conservatives (33%) or Very Conservatives (28%).

Responses also varied by age, sex, race, and religion. 74% of those 18-29 favored impeachment, 47% of those 31-49, 49% of those 50-64, and 40% of those over 65. 55% of women favored impeachment, compared to 49% of men. Among African Americans, 75% favored impeachment, compared to 56% of Hispanics, and 47% of whites. Majorities of Catholics, Jews, and Others favored impeachment, while 44% of Protestants and 38% of Born Again Christians did so.

Majorities favored impeachment in the East (54%), South (53%) and West (52%), and Central states (50%). In large cities, 56% support impeachment; in small cities, 58%; in suburbs, 46%; in rural areas, 46%.

Support for Clinton Impeachment Was Much Lower

In August and September of 1998, 16 major polls asked about impeaching President Clinton (http://democrats.com/clinton-impeachment-polls). Only 36% supported hearings to consider impeachment, and only 26% supported actual impeachment and removal. Even so, the impeachment debate dominated the news for months, and the Republican Congress impeached Clinton despite overwhelming public opposition.

Passion for Impeachment is Major Unreported Story

The strong support for impeachment found in this poll is especially surprising because the views of impeachment supporters are entirely absent from the broadcast and print media, and can only be found on the Internet and in street protests. The lack of coverage of impeachment support is due in part to the fact that not a single Democrat in Congress has called for impeachment, despite considerable grassroots activism by groups like Democrats.com (http://democrats.com/impeach).

The passion of impeachment supporters is directly responsible for the four polls commissioned by After Downing Street. After the Zogby poll in June, activists led by Democrats.com urged all of the major polling organizations to include an impeachment question in their upcoming polls. But none of the polling organizations were willing to do so for free, so on September 30, AfterDowningStreet.org posted a request for donations to fund paid polls (http://afterdowningstreet.org/polling). People responded with small donations (on average $27) which quickly added up to over $10,000. After Downing Street has spent a portion of that money on the Ipsos Poll and the two Zogby Polls.

Footnotes:

1. AfterDowningStreet.org is a rapidly growing coalition of veterans' groups, peace groups, and political activist groups that was created on May 26, 2005, following the publication of the Downing Street Memo in London's Sunday Times on May 1. The coalition is urging Congress to begin a formal investigation into whether President Bush committed impeachable offenses in connection with the Iraq war.

2. The Ipsos Public Affairs poll and the new Zogby poll results cited above refer to surveys of U.S. adults. The June Zogby results are from a survey of likely voters. The new Zogby poll produced results for both adults and likely voters (see footnote 3).

3. Here are the complete data tables from all three polls.

January Zogby: Adults and Likely Voters
November Zogby: Adults and Likely Voters.
October Ipsos: Adults and definitions of regions.
June Zogby: Likely Voters.

Now For Some Really Good News

2006-01-14T22:27:00.000-08:00

Maybe Texans aren't quite as [ahem] ignorant as I gave them credit for. Seems they have wised up to their good ole boy Tommy [Mr. Corrupt] De Lay.

The Houston Chronicle is reporting that a poll finds only half of the Republicans who voted for DeLay in 2004 would do so again. This is not a good sign for Tommy and if he is indicted for his dealings wiith Abramoff his political career is pretty much over with.

You know what they say, Tommy, when you play, you pay.

The Main Problem With Alito Being Confirmed

2006-01-13T07:45:00.000-08:00

Imo, it is not his stance on abortion or what clubs he was affiliated with when in college but the fact that when it comes time to impeach Bush and try him for war crimes, Alito and Roberts will give him a free ride on it. Basically, Bush will be able to commit murder and get away with breaking some of the most important laws of the land. It's a well established fact Bush is a coward, tyrant, liar and one of the most corrupt Presidents in history, of course he is going to cover his sorry ass. Alito is a yes man to the Republicans, he has proven that with Reagan and he'll be a yes man for Bush. It would really be wonderful if he held to ethics but he has also proven he has none.

It seems to me the Democrats are working with Republicans. WTF is wrong with the DNC that they allow the repukes to have their way in everything. Who gives a crap if Ann Coulter, Lindsey Gramm or Arlen Specter bitch about the mean old Democrats. The bastards are going to say it no matter what the Democrats do. If the DNC continues to roll over for the Republicans as they have for years now, I say vote those bums out of office too.

The Republicans have proven time and again they do not care about the Constitution, Americans or what is just and right. They care only for the their party and their pockets.

How damn corrupt does a Political party and Administration have to be before the American people stand up and say, ENOUGH!?!?

IMPEACH

What Goes Around Comes Around...Again!

2006-01-11T09:45:00.000-08:00

I just love it when that happens to the holier than thou Republicans especially the totally corrupt Tommy DeLay.

How many of you remember when he was first indicted he made the claim, "it's not against the law to defeat the Democrats and that's all I did." As most of us know, he would and did do just about everything in his power short of murder to defeat Democrats or whoever stood in his way to reach his goal and I'm not so sure he didn't do that either.

Anyhoo, this morning the Austin American Statesman reports that there are several activists groups, Campaign for America's Future and Public Campaign Action Fund, who are going to run television commericals aimed at Tommy.

It seems Tommy doesn't like it when the Democrats do something to defeat a Republican. And damn the bad luck, Tommy, it looks like you are the Republican.

[clip]

Shannon Flaherty, a DeLay campaign spokeswoman, said the campaign has sent a letter to Houston television stations asking them not to run the ads.

"These ads, just like the groups that are sponsoring them, are purposefully misleading to attack conservative leaders like Tom DeLay," Flaherty said.

[clip]

This IS The Reality Of Bushes War

2006-01-09T18:54:00.000-08:00

This is an email a mother received from her son who is a soldier in Iraq. It touches me deeply because I also have a son who is of military age and it is not hard for me to imagine putting myself in this mother's place. My son lives here in the United States and whenever I talk to him, I ask him if he's eating well and taking care of himself just like this mother asked her son. How my heart would break to think he was only eating one meal a day and only bathing once a week if that. To think his life was being put in danger unnecessarily ever single day for a war based on lies and for a President not interested in ending this war but keeping it going.

Mommas don't let your babies grow up to be soldiers. OMG, this war must be stopped.

Military Families
Submitted by davidswanson on Mon, 2006-01-09 19:54. Media

From a friend of Cindy Sheehan's

**WARNING** FYI.....This is pretty graphic.....

I was thrilled yesterday to wake to an email from Micah. The last correspondence I had from him was the email on Dec. 26. Then 2 guys in his battalion were killed and one wounded on the 27th (the wounded soldier has since passed away from his injuries). All communications were shut down until notification of their deaths by the Army to their families....but still no word from Micah. I knew that he would contact us as soon as hecould...but that didn't make the waiting any easier. He emailed yesterday to reassure me that he was "fine"....which of course I was glad to hear. Then he called me later in the day.....

It was wonderful to hear his voice....be able to talk to him. I asked him about the incident that ended those 3 guys lives.....ages 26, 23, and 20. He said he hadn't planned on telling me about it, but then knew that I already knew about it...aware that I had received the email from the military explaining why we may not be hearing from our soldiers. I asked him if he knew what happened....he hesitantly told me....."Yes".....he was there when it happened! That....I wasn't prepared for. He wanted to spare me the details....but Micah and I can and do talk very frankly about everything.....I knew he needed to talk to someone about it....so I told him not to hold anything back. I told him I already know he is in harms way, I know there are horrible things going on there....things I can't even imagine.....but I wanted to know....and I wanted him to be able to talk about it with me.

He said it was their first mission since arriving in Baghdad. A group of them had to walk through a field to a "destination". He said just in front of him....about 100 yards was an explosion. Someone had stepped on a buried mine that exploded.....they were walking in a mine field! He said nothing was left....except an arm....a leg.....fingers..... They continued walking....then a second explosion.....the next two victims. They radioed for a helicopter that was not to come. So they were instructed to turn back and walk BACK thru the field......9 hours they walked......4 1/2 one way....4 1/2 back....nothing accomplished.....3 lives lost. The tension and fear that your next step, placement of your foot would be you.....your friend at any moment.....
This is our war..........

Why not take a high school class out on the edge of the expressway and have them run back and forth....who gets hit does...who's lucky enough not to....well is just lucky.

It was horrifying knowing he witnessed it, knowing he was filled with fear and images that will stay with him forever.

I asked him about the Iraqis.....the Iraqi soldiers he was with. "Their crazy" was his reply. He said that morning a dog was running down the street and an Iraqi man beat it to death with a shovel then threw it on theside of the road. He said, "That's normal here."

I immediately knew when I started talking to him that he had a cold.....he said, "Yeah, I do, but I'm ok." I asked if he was eating good....what did they have for them to eat?....American food....Iraqi food? He said they get ONE meal a day. A "meal" that is either a 6 inch cold pizza, or well, he had 5 cold chicken wings one day, oh and a hotdog one day....well a lone hotdog....no bun.

One meal a day!!! Prisoners in this country are required to receive 3 full meals a day in prison or it's infringing on their rights??!!! He said they have 2 microwave ovens that are broken and a toaster oven that doesn't work well....the government is apparently spoiling them! Our sons and daughters are in the U.S. military.....fighting for our country.....have committed no crimes and this is what they feed them???It's like the Twilight Zone or some parallel universe.....a bad dream that upon waking makes no real sense....

He took his first shower yesterday.....his first since Dec. 20. That was good he said.

The Army is wondering why no one wants to join??? Why no one wants to go back??? Are the American people really that dense to think that we are doing the right thing.....doing good? The government wants to spin this into that they're protecting us from terrorists.....payback for 9/11. Osama Bin Ladin is no where near Iraq! So is anyone on his trail?

I know they're in harms way.....thousands of miles away from home and family but can they for God's sake treat them better than a prisoner....than an animal? You mistreat an animal in this country and all kinds of organizations are on your back.....you go to jail. Our government is mistreating our soldiers and we stand back and watch......well not really because we don't see THIS on the news. We only see what they want us to see.

Most of the guys that joined were promised to be able to go to college....ont he government...and could start even while in the military. Micah was included in this group. He was met with....you don't have time for college you can go when you get out. But....our prisoners are receiving college degrees while serving their sentences! Is it me or is it just backwards?? Micah is already skinny as a rail.....how do they expect a 20 yr old boy to live on what they are feeding them? Guess it doesn't matter much....why waste food on people you make walk thru mine fields? Doesn't this sound alittle like the Holocaust?

So.....Micah says....he's "ok". I'm sorry to vent but THIS HAS TO STOP!!!!
PLEASE!!!!!!

Email, write, call your congressmen, state representatives....etc. Go to some of the websites I have listed below....read the stories of the people....one after another..... I will email the links again to find your state officials. EDUCATE YOURSELF!!

I don't want to wait over the next year for a knock at my door....and I don't want one more mother, wife, family member to either. These Iraqi people apparently have no regard for life.....theirs, their women and children, ours, even animals.

WHY ARE WE THERE??

And I voted for Bush.....TWICE! You don't see the Bush twins in Iraq.....no manicures or shopping sprees.

Don't want to ruin your day.....just want to get you thinking.....and MAD!!!

Send what you can to our troops....they definitely need it...apparently especially FOOD!!!

Please feel free to forward this email to anyone and everyone you can! I feel helpless.....I want to jump on a plane like that 16 yr old from Florida and grab my son and bring him home.....

PLEASE VISIT THESE WEBSITES:
www.bringthemhomenow.org
www.stopthelie.com
www.unitedforpeace.org

Gold Star Families for Peace: www.gsfp.org

Military Families Speak Out: www.mfso.org
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/iraq/casualties/facesofthefallen.htm

WHERE TO SEND PACKAGES TO OTHER SOLDIERS:
www.anysoldier.com
www.give2thetroops.org
www.treatanysoldier.com

IMPEACH BUSH NOW!!!

Alert! Contaminated Pet Food Has killed Dozens of Dogs

2006-01-09T13:17:00.000-08:00

Contaminated pet food kills dozens of dogs

Diamond Pet Foods recalled 19 varieties containing toxic chemical

MSNBC News Services
Updated: 11:35 a.m. ET Jan. 9, 2006

COLUMBIA, S.C. - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration reports that at least 76 dogs nationwide are believed to have died as a result of eating contaminated Diamond Pet Foods.

The company has recalled 19 varieties of dog and cat food because tests showed high levels of aflatoxin, a naturally occurring toxic chemical that comes from a fungus found on corn and other grains that causes severe liver damage in animals.

The company recalled products manufactured at its Gaston, S.C., plant from around September to November 2005. Based on sample testing, Diamond has narrowed down the exposure to food produced on Oct. 11, Brinkmann said Thursday.

The FDA and the South Carolina Department of Agriculture have launched investigations.
Customers who have purchased the recalled Diamond Pet Food manufactured in the South Carolina plant should immediately stop using it and return any remaining product to their retailer, according to the FDA.

The range of date codes being reviewed are "Best By 01-March-07" through Best By " 11-June-07".

FDA also has discovered that some of the recalled product was exported to at least 29 countries, including countries within the European Union. These countries have been notified.
Diamond officials say they are doing what they can to help affected pet owners.

“It’s going to take some time to take care of all these customers, and we’re going to do it,” said the company’s chief operating officer, Mark Brinkmann.

Diamond has promised to reimburse pet owners for vet bills and other costs associated with the aflatoxin poisoning, which officials now believe may include pets in Europe and other areas outside the country where the food is distributed.

Complete list of states and brands affected by recall

The company set up a call center staffed with veterinarians. The call volume peaked at about 2,000 calls a day last week, Brinkmann said.

Shanika Stewart has been caring for her ailing 9-year-old chow, force-feeding the animal with a syringe six times a day since suffering permanent liver damage after eating contaminated dog food.

“I haven’t had any time to do anything but take care of her,” said Stewart, a 19-year-old nursing student at the University of South Carolina. “She’s the No. 1 priority. ... I get maybe four hours of sleep before she wakes me up.”

Aflatoxin poisoning symptoms

Aflatoxin comes from a fungus found on corn and other crops and can cause severe liver damage in pets. If your pet shows any of these symptoms contact your veterinarian immediately.

— Sluggishness
— Loss of appetite
— Jaundice (yellow whites of the eyes, gums, belly)
— Severe, persistent vomiting combined with bloody diarrhea
— Fever

Source: Food and Drug AdministrationThrough relocations from Army bases in Georgia, Oklahoma, Washington and now South Carolina, Cocoa has been a constant companion for Stewart, whose father is serving in Iraq.

When her own daughter died last year, Stewart said Cocoa helped her through her grief. “It was like she understood,” Stewart said. “She was my best friend.”

Severe liver damageStewart’s other dog, a 2-year-old pit bull named Chulo, died last month just hours after being diagnosed with liver failure. It was only then that the family learned of the recall.

Stewart initially thought Cocoa had refused to eat because she was depressed about losing Chulo. After the recall, the family vet confirmed aflatoxin poisoning in Cocoa, Stewart said.

Steve Shrum, president of the South Carolina Association of Veterinarians, said vets around the state were confused when puppies began showing signs of liver problems usually seen in older dogs.

“It takes such a small amount, and there’s pretty much nothing you can do with the process that will inactivate that toxin once it gets in the food supply,” he said.
Stewart says she has not spoken with anyone at the company despite several calls. The family has filled out an online form explaining their situation.

“You don’t get anybody to talk to and tell your story,” she said. “It’s like they’re not concerned. To me, it’s like they’re saying, ’Oh well, we’ll get to it when we get to it.”’
Brinkmann was sympathetic.

“We’re going as fast as we can,” he said. “I grieve with her, and I’m going to do everything I can to make sure we can do right by her.”

Face Of Hypocrisy

2006-01-08T08:07:00.000-08:00

That's right folks...Newt Gingrich. Of course I could have put up anyone of a number of the NeoCon movement but today Mr. Gingrich will be the featured attraction.

As I write this article let us not lose sight of the fact Mr. Newt Gingrich is in the market to run as the 2008 Presidential Republican nominee and is desperate for people to forget what a corrupt creep...oops, politician he really is.

Now on to the hypocrisy of Newt Gingrich...

As David Sirota reminds us, while Newt is making mewling sounds of protestation in regards the corruption in Washington let us not forget he helped Jack Abramoff reach the pinnacle of where he now stands. He was bosom buddies [no offense to bosoms] with Abramoff as much as was Tommy DeLay.

With the help of David Sirota's fine research skills let us take, as Sirota says, a trip down memory lane...

GINGRICH STARTED THE K STREET PROJECT: "Starting in the mid-1990s, some Republicans, including then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and DeLay, have advocated tracking the political affiliation of lobbyists, as part of an effort to place more conservatives on K Street." [Source: Washington Post, 8/2/02]

GINGRICH RAKED IN CASH FROM THE K STREET PROJECT'S SHAKEDOWN OPERATION: "Their strategy, which Norquist dubbed the 'K Street Project,' was designed to transform Washington's business PACs and lobbies -- and the businesses they represented -- into loyal soldiers in the new Republican revolution. In exchange for legislative favors, Gingrich, DeLay, and other congressional leaders expected that the businesses would provide the funds to keep them in office. Meanwhile, Norquist's group, the Christian Coalition, and other Wednesday groups would be rewarded with generous 'educational' contracts from the Republican campaign committees. In 1996, Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform received a $ 4.6 million windfall from soft money contributions to the Republican National Committee. This new strategy worked admirably during Gingrich's first six months as speaker. While the Republican leadership introduced a spate of controversial bills gutting regulatory agencies, business contributions more than doubled from what they had been during a comparable period in 1993." [Source: American Prospect, 3/13/00]

GINGRICH OVERTLY USES LEGISLATIVE FAVORS TO GET LOBBYIST CONTRIBUTIONS: "The most famous and ominous warning came in 1998 from then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and then-Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.). The two leaders held up a vote on intellectual property legislation in protest of the Electronics Industry Association's plan to hire a Democrat to run the group." [Source: Washington Post, 6/26/03]

And not to be forgotten...

ABRAMOFF KNOWN TO BE CLOSEST TO GINGRICH: "Few lobbyists in Washington are closer to House power brokers Newt Gingrich and Tom DeLay than Abramoff." [Source: Washingtonian, 12/98]

ABRAMOFF REGULARLY TOUTED HIS PROXIMITY TO GINGRICH & USED IT TO WIELD POWER: "In these capacities and through his work on political campaigns and grassroots efforts with organizations such as the Republican National Committee, the Christian Coalition, and the National Jewish Coalition, Abramoff developed and maintains strong ties to Speaker Newt Gingrich, Majority Leader Dick Armey, Majority Whip Tom Delay and Republican Policy Committee Chairman Chris Cox and their staffs." [Source: Preston, Gates & Ellis Press Release, 12/30/94]

ABRAMOFF & GINGRICH WORKED CLOSELY ON THE K STREET PROJECT: "Jack Abramoff, a lobbyist here who is close to Mr. Gingrich, said House Republicans were watching very closely to see whether lobbyists were making more than a token effort to help Republicans stay in power." [Source: New York Times, 3/20/95]

K STREET SAW ABRAMOFF AS THEIR BRIDGE TO GINGRICH: "The GOP victories in 1994 transformed [Abramoff] into a valuable asset as law firms recruited activists with connections to the new Gingrich team." [Source: National Journal, 7/29/95]

Now kids for the really juicey part of Newt Gingrich's hypocrisy...

All the while Newt was calling for the impeachment of a President [On July 15, the party sent letters to House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, formally requesting that the "United States House begin Articles of Impeachment" against Clinton and Gore.] for lying about a consensual sexual relationship with one of his aids, he (Newt) himself was doing the exact same thing and one of the reasons he stepped down as Speaker of the House.

So when you hear Newt Gingrich bemoaning the recent corruption in Washington, please remember where and with whom it all started.

Thank you.

Impeach

Aw, Damn The Bad Luck, Tommy.

2006-01-07T12:15:00.000-08:00

Mr. DeLay has decided to step down as majority leader to the House of Representatives. Imo, this is the only decent thing he has ever done in his life.

In a letter to Republicans DeLay says he has “always acted in an ethical manner.” [yeah sure you have, Tommy] At the same time, “I cannot allow our adversaries to divide and distract our attention,” [you've done that all on your own, you arrogant jerk] the Texas Republican wrote.

In a seperate letter to Hastert Delay said he intends to seek re-election to his House seat in November [good luck with that, Tommy] claiming, “while I work to clear my name of the baseless charges [ha ha cough, right, Tommy, baseless.] leveled against me.”

Well, alls I got to say is, where is that big old smirk now you criminal jackass? May you rot in prison as well as hell along with yer good buddy and partner in crime, Jack Abramoff.

Word of advice, Tommy, don't drop the soap. hehehe

To read the full story go to MSNBC.

Take The Political Compass Test

2006-01-05T17:25:00.000-08:00

I thought some of you might enjoy taking the Political Compass Test to see where you stand in the political scheme of things.

My scores are:

Economic Left/Right: -6.63

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38

Here is an International Chart to give you an idea of where certain famous people are on the Political Compass.

DeLay/Republican Corruption and Hypocrisy

2006-01-04T16:11:00.000-08:00

This morning on the radio, I listened to ABC News' Brian Ross speak about DeLay and Jack Abramoff's relationship with Saipan. After you read this you will understand what I mean about Republican corruption and hypocrisy. This is just one aspect of it.

I hope these smirking jerks rot in jail.

____________________________________________________

Democracy Now!

Wednesday, January 4th, 2006

Forced Abortions & Sweatshops: A Look at Jack Abramoff's Ties to the South Pacific Island of Saipan & How Tom DeLay Became An Advocate for Sweatshop

We speak with ABC News' Brian Ross who exposed in 1998 the horrific labor conditions in the U.S. territory of Saipan. At the time, Jack Abramoff was Saipan's hired gun on K Street and Tom DeLay was one of the island's chief advocates on Capitol Hill. DeLay backed the sweatshop owners even though it was exposed that the factory was forcing women to have abortions and treated workers like indentured servants.

Controversy is nothing new to Jack Abramoff. The Los Angeles Times reports Abramoff’s first political scandal dates back to 1972 when he ran for student council president at the Hawthorne School, an elementary and middle school in Beverly Hills California. Abramoff was reportedly disqualified for exceeding the spending limit in the race. In college Abramoff teamed up with two students who would become household names in Washington to take over the College Republican National Committee. They were anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed, founder of the Christian Coalition. After college Abramoff’s resume was diverse, from his brief Hollywood career to his secret dealings with the South African apartheid regime.

A 1995 investigation by Newsday revealed that Abramoff helped run a think–tank called the International Freedom Foundation. The organization was set up in 1986 and its goal was to improve the white South African apartheid government’s image in the West while demonizing Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress as communist tools. The Newsday report also quoted sources saying that the South African military helped finance the 1988 movie "Red Scorpion" which Abramoff wrote and produced. The movie was a sympathetic portrayal of an anti-communist African guerrilla commander and loosely based on Jonas Savimbi, the Angolan rebel leader who was an ally of both South Africa’s apartheid government and the U.S government.

We turn now to Abramoff’s special relationship with the South Pacific island of Saipan and how it connects to his ties to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Saipan is an American territory in the South Pacific also known as the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. In the mid-1990s Abramoff was on the payroll of Saipan officials aiming to stop legislation that would crack down on sweat shop conditions, which run rampant on the island. In 1997, Abramoff arranged a lavish trip to the island of Saipan for Delay.

The Delay trip was originally reported by Brian Ross, Chief Investigative Correspondent for ABC News. We are going to play 2 excerpts from the report that aired on ABC’s 20/20 on March 13th, 1998. In this first excerpt, Ross interviews Allan Stayman, a Clinton administration official in the Department of Interior who was investigating labor conditions in Saipan. Brian also talks to a worker in one of the factories and ends with Eric Gregoire, a human rights worker. Most of the workers in these factories are from mainland China. {Thanks to WITNESS/Oxygen for providing addittional footage.)

We are joined on the phone by ABC News' Brian Ross.

Brian Ross, Chief Investigative Correspondent for ABC News

AMY GOODMAN: I'm going to play two excerpts from the report which aired on ABC’s 20/20 March 13, 1998. In this first excerpt Ross interviews Allan Stayman, a Clinton administration official in the Department of the Interior, who was investigating labor conditions in Saipan. And Brian Ross also takes a worker in one of the factories and ends with Eric Gregoire, a human rights worker with the Department of the Interior. Most of the workers in these factories are from mainland China.

BRIAN ROSS: In fact, American authorities have discovered many Chinese workers are forced to sign secret agreements, known as shadow contracts, before they leave China, severely and, in some ways, illegally restricting their activities while on American soil. For example, in this agreement translated into English by American authorities, workers are forbidden to participate in any religious or political activity or to ask for a salary increase or even to fall in love or get married, much as might be the case in mainland China.

ALLAN STAYMAN: To allow them to bring that on to U.S. soil is a very deep concern. We've now documented the facts that management coerces female workers who become pregnant into having abortions.

BRIAN ROSS: Several of the cases, the government says it has documented, were at this factory, the one with a contract to make Ralph Lauren Polo t-shirts. This Chinese woman, Tu Xiao Mei, made t-shirts and pants at the factory until she became pregnant.

TU XIAO MEI: When I told them I was pregnant, they told me to have an abortion.

BRIAN ROSS: Tu Xiao Mei says she refused to have the abortion and has now been barred from entering the factory.

BRIAN ROSS: And you're going to have your baby?

TU XIAO MEI: Yes.

BRIAN ROSS: Will you get your job back then?

TU XIAO MEI: Cannot.

BRIAN ROSS: Cannot get her job back, she says.

BRIAN ROSS: We want to ask you about the abortions, do you know about the complaints?

BRIAN ROSS: The bosses at the factory said they didn't want to talk about what they called ridiculous allegations. But human rights workers say it's common practice at this factory and others.

ERIC GREGOIRE: With 11,000 Chinese workers here, I have never seen a Chinese garment factory worker have a baby in my entire four years on Saipan.

BRIAN ROSS: There are no children in those barracks?

ERIC GREGOIRE: None. Inside that factory Chinese law applies, and Chinese law is supreme.

BRIAN ROSS: Even though it's the United States of America?

ERIC GREGOIRE: That’s right. The flag doesn't fly inside there.

AMY GOODMAN: And that was Eric Gregoire, a human rights worker who was talking to Brian Ross. This next excerpt also from Brian Ross's report on ABC's 20/20, which aired in 1998. This clip deals with Tom DeLay's connection to Saipan. Brian Ross again speaks with the human rights activist, Eric Gregoire.

BRIAN ROSS: Saipan has cultivated some powerful friends back in Washington, spending millions of dollars on lobbyists and free trips in the middle of the winter for members of Congress and their staff. Congressman Tom DeLay of Houston, the third-ranking Republican in the House, went as a guest of the Saipan government over the Christmas holiday, a trip that included a tour of several factories and barracks, with one that even Congressman DeLay had to concede was nothing to write home about.

TOM DeLAY: But, you know, this trip has been very beneficial.

BRIAN ROSS: Still, at a fancy New Year's Eve dinner thrown in his honor, DeLay praised the outgoing governor and vowed to fight efforts back in Washington to change Saipan's immigration and labor laws.

TOM DeLAY: Because you are a shining light for what is happening in the Republican Party, and you represent everything that is good about what we're trying to do in America, in leading the world in the free market system.

BRIAN ROSS: And DeLay is just one of more than 80 influential congressmen and congressional staff members who have been brought out to Saipan, most put up, as was DeLay, at the beachfront Hyatt Regency. About as far from the island sweatshops as it is possible to get on Saipan.

ERIC GREGOIRE: They're paying your way, so, of course, you're going to see what they want you to see.

BRIAN ROSS: They haven't seen the Saipan you’ve seen.

ERIC GREGOIRE: You can't see much from the Hyatt.

AMY GOODMAN: An excerpt of Brian Ross's piece in 1998, chief investigative correspondent for ABC News. Welcome to Democracy Now!, Brian Ross.

BRIAN ROSS: It’s good to be here this morning.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, you did that piece, what, some more than seven years ago. Your response now?

BRIAN ROSS: Well, it's interesting to watch this unfold because the man behind the scenes in every case was Jack Abramoff. In the footage we had on World News Tonight last night showing

DeLay arriving in Saipan. He’s wearing a funny-colored floral hat and is greeted by a man in a beard who's Jack Abramoff. Big bear hugs all around. And it was Abramoff then who shepherded him around the island, made sure he would see what he wanted him to see. And DeLay took his family along. It was New Year's Eve. Temperatures were very nice, much nicer than back in the States. And that's what Abramoff was able to achieve. DeLay then became active in blocking legislation that would have cracked down on some of those terrible labor practices in Saipan.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to go to the issue of forced abortion, which is astounding given Tom DeLay's stand on abortion. Can you talk about that?

BRIAN ROSS: Well, it's completely counter to anything that DeLay or most Republicans seem to espouse, that was, on that island there were forced abortions. And the workers there who are all young women, who often had to pay to get these jobs, knew the rules. And they were barred from having boyfriends and certainly barred from having children if they became pregnant. They knew where to go, and there were a few essential back-alley abortion mills on the island. And that's where these young Chinese women went in order to keep their jobs. And that was the deal. That's part of the situation that was essentially endorsed by DeLay when he fought the laws. The laws were established essentially exempting Saipan, although it is a U.S. territory, from U.S. labor laws.

AMY GOODMAN: So, of course, the clothing that is made there says “Made in the U.S.A.”

BRIAN ROSS: Exactly right. They have the exemptions made in the U.S.A. Ralph Lauren, Tommy Hilfiger, all the major brands have garment factories there, owned primarily by Chinese industrialists from Hong Kong who brought in Chinese material. And the Chinese workers who lived in something akin to -- I don't want to call it a labor camp, but it was surrounded by barbed wire. They were taken on the backs of trucks to these factories. They work 10, 12 hours a day, then brought back to their camps. An ugly scene there, one that was defended effectively by the garment manufacturers and by the government of Saipan at the time, with the expenditure of millions of dollars on Jack Abramoff.

AMY GOODMAN: You talk about how in a memo that ABC News got that Abramoff wrote to his law firm, Preston, Gates, Ellis (& Rouvelas, Meeds, at the time), that was paid $1.36 million by Saipan officials, said such congressional trips, talking about Tom DeLay, are one of the most effective ways to build permanent friends on the Hill.

BRIAN ROSS: Exactly what they did. And, of course, Abramoff has now admitted that he used these trips as ways essentially of providing favors to congressmen who in return would do favors for him on Capitol Hill. And it's not just Saipan. Of course, other trips to Scotland, to Moscow, to Paris, all around the world. Abramoff was a very friendly travel agent for members of Congress who wanted to go somewhere.

AMY GOODMAN:

BRIAN ROSS: Essentially what he accomplished was to stop legislation, which is easier to do than to get it through. He was able to block legislation that would have changed the labor and immigration laws in Saipan and made it illegal to have these kinds of contracts. You couldn't have a contract like that in Los Angeles or anyplace else of the United States where the flag flies. But you could in Saipan. That was the loophole they were trying to close under the Clinton administration.

And in fact, when people at the Department of Interior attempted to do that, DeLay actually tried to introduce a bill to cut off funding for that particular section of the Department of Interior, to stop them from essentially backing the workers’ claims. And it became an ugly situation on Capitol Hill. And DeLay and others, but DeLay in particular, were involved in blocking the legislation and making sure that that status quo continued on Saipan.

AMY GOODMAN: Brian Ross, I want to thank you very much for being with us, chief investigative correspondent for ABC News.

2006-01-01T15:46:00.000-08:00

HAPPY NEW YEAR, EVERYONE!

May you all have health, peace and happiness in 2006.

HAPPY IMPEACHMENT!

Love,

Libby

You've Got To Be Kidding

2005-12-31T07:57:00.000-08:00

Instead of an investigation into Bushes breaking the laws for spying on Americans, an impeachable offense, one is being launched to find out who tattled on his worship, THE King/Pope Bush.

[Clip]

The White House said overnight it had no role in the Justice Department's decision to investigate the leaking of classified information indicating that President George W. Bush authorised a secret government wiretap program

Trent Duffy, WH spokesman claims...

"The Justice Department undertook this action on its own, which is the way it should be." But he added: "The White House was informed of the decision, as was the president."

Mr Duffy stressed that "the leaking of classified information is a serious issue." And he defended the use of wiretaps, warning that "Al-Qaeda's playbook is not printed on page one, and when America's is, it has serious ramifications."

[Clip]

The White House had no role in the decision to investigate the leak...really? But wait a minute, didn't Bush urge...

[Clip]

Mr. Bush earlier this month urged a "full investigation" into who leaked information about the secret government wiretap program.

[Clip]

And it's important to note...

[Clip]

The president's call for a probe came after US media reported that Mr Bush had authorised the National Security Agency (NSA) to engage in an operation to monitor massive volumes of telephone and Internet communications.

[Clip]

So there you have it folks, it is the tattletales who are under investigation for leaking that Bush is a criminal and petty tyrant.

IMPEACH!

A Kinder, Gentler Bush In 2006?

2005-12-29T04:11:00.000-08:00

2005 has been a very bad year for the Bush Presidency. After the plethora of problems Mr. Bush has been faced with this last year, he is finding out his bullying tactics of the past are not serving him quite as well as they once did. Now, he has even, gasp! admitted to some mistakes he has made. [Whodda ever thunk it?] It seems some of Bushes younger aides are winning out over Rove's heavy handed campaign-style attacks and have convinced the President to go with candor for a change.

Nearly from the beginning of his re-election [hum, given?, taken?...again?] to his second term in office it's been all down hill. This time around even members of his own party seem to have grown a conscience [actually, the midterm elections are coming up and with Kiss of Death Bushes lagging, sagging poll numbers they prefer not to have him stand next to them] and are refusing to support him in some of his more obvious problems [cough] (lies) [cough]. No doubt this is also a factor in the softer, gentler, imperfect Bush we are beginning to see.

The 2005 year in review for Mr. Bush, let's see, where to start...[okay, damn me, that year end review is from jib-jab, heh heh] here is Froomkin's year in review for the second term of Mr. Bush and it is a must read.

Happy New Year!

To: Mr. Bush and the NeoCons, may 2006 be as terrible, ahem, good as 2005.

Great News! Troop Drawdown

2005-12-28T16:53:00.000-08:00

Or is it? I find it odd that Rep. Jack Murtha was called a coward for wanting a timeline for drawing down the troops or at the very least redeploying them to other areas besides Iraq. Democrats have been accused of hurting the war effots because they question Bushes manipulating prewar intelligence to justify the war with Iraq.

Now however, we hear from Rumsfeld there could be plans for a troop drawdown. Why now? Could this really be true or is it just a ploy to deflect attention away from Mr. Bushes illegal spying on American citizens? Or is it just to shut up the public and the Democrats from wanting Bush to end his occupation of Iraq? Or is it to help Bushes lagging poll numbers?

How many of us remember when Nixon appointed Henry Kissinger to negotiate peace talks with Vietnam? I believe it is worth remembering that Kissinger said, "Peace is at Hand" but what he really meant was just the opposite, it was a lie.

To remind you of what peace meant to Kissinger and Nixon during the Vietnam War please read the following. Also remember that the Nixon Administration just like the Bush Administration was being pressured by Americans to bring our troops home and to end a senseless war. Sadly, it would seem Bush is following in uncle Dickies footsteps. They can say they are bringing home the troops all they want but it certainly doesn't mean they are. It could mean this...

On October 26 Henry Kissinger announced that, after months of both secret and public negotiations, "Peace is at hand." It was an unbeatable last‑minute campaign slogan. A peace agreement, however, had not been signed; details needed to be worked out. In essence the agreement provided for a cease‑fire in place (the "leopard spot" arrangement), with North Vietnamese, South Vietnamese, and Viet Cong troops all holding what areas they had; President Thieu controlled about 75 percent of the territory in South Vietnam and 85 percent of the population. Arrangements for a U.S. troop pullout and POW return would be agreed upon, as would a Council of National Reconciliation, comprised of Vietnamese of all sides, which would decide where and when to hold elections. By and large, these were the conditions upon which the North Vietnamese had insisted since 1965.[§]

~~

On December 18 the Times ran Beecher's story, but by then it was no longer news because on the same date Hanoi radio—not the U.S. command and most certainly not the White House—announced the resumption of attacks against North Vietnam, including the dropping of mines in Haiphong Harbor, rocket attacks on Haiphong City, and the bombing of Hanoi; many people, said Hanoi, were killed and wounded and damage was heavy. On December 18 (U.S. time) the Nixon Administration acknowledged that it had resumed the full‑scale bombing and mining of North Vietnam: Operation Linebacker Two. Hundreds of planes, fighter‑bombers, and B‑52 stratofortresses carrying twenty‑four tons of bombs each, were conducting the heaviest raids of the war not only on Hanoi‑Haiphong but on targets not struck before. The fighter‑bombers were used for "pinpoint bombing"; the B‑52 raids were carpet bombing in a pattern half a mile wide and a mile and a half long. In the first two days twenty thousand tons of bombs were dropped on North Vietnam—the equal of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. After five days, one hundred thousand tons had been dropped. The attacks would continue, said the White House, until a settlement was reached.

Another thing to be remembered is that Nixon like Bush felt he was within his rights to spy on Americans and is why he had to step down as President. This is why FISA was set up in the first place, to protect the privacy of Americans.

Bush like every American, must abide by the laws of the land and be held accountable when he breaks those laws, he is not above the law.

Impeach Bush!

Santa Baby

2005-12-24T07:32:00.000-08:00

Santa Baby

Santa baby, slip a Bush or Cheney under the tree, for me
I've been an awful good girl

Santa baby, and hurry down the chimney tonight

Santa baby, Articles of Impeachment too, it won't make me blue
I'll wait up for you dear.

Santa baby, and hurry down the chimney tonight

Think of all the fun I've missed
Think of all the fellas whose phones have been tapped, that I haven't been able talk to

Next year I could be oh so good
If you'd check off my Christmas list

Boo doo bee doo

Santa honey, I wanna a new President and really that's
Not a lot
I've been an angel all year

Santa baby, and hurry down the chimney tonight

Santa cutie, there's one thing I really do need, the Articles of Impeachment

Santa cutie, and hurry down the chimney tonight

Santa baby, I'm filling my stocking with checks
Sign your 'X' on the line

Santa baby, and hurry down the chimney tonight

Come and trim my Christmas tree
With some decorations bought by Congress

I really do believe in you
Let's see if you believe in me

Boo doo bee doo

Santa baby, forgot to mention one little thing, a ring on an
untapped phone

Santa baby, and hurry down the chimney tonight

Hurry down the chimney tonight
Hurry down the chimney tonight

Happy Holidays Everyone!

MSM, Employed By The Bushivistas

2005-12-22T07:30:00.000-08:00

I don't know about anyone else but I'm pretty sick and tired of hearing the rightist whine about Liberal media bias. It's as if their screeching that lie out enough times will make it so. In my opinion, we cannot trut what the MSM (mainstream media) tells us and/or we must recognise that they fail to tell us about the Bush Administration's corruption. To me it's more than apparent the Bushivisatas control the media.

I have a Liberal friend who once worked as an editor and defends the Washington Post and the New York Times for not being forthcoming about the corruption in the Bush Administration. I told her I had cancelled my subscription to those papers and she claimed, "Have you ever sat in an editor's or producer's chair and had to decide what stories make the news, time each one to conincide with alotted space or time constraints? I have and it's not an easy job. Could be that they're waiting for some concrete facts to emerge rather than rush into print (or on air), only to later have to issue a retraction. Give it some time for them to develop a proper story. And BTW, blogs don't have to adhere to the same set of standards." [She said this about blogs because I told her if you want to hear the truth the blogs will provide it.]

Anyhoo, this morning Alternet, the greatst blog in the blogosphere, btw, has two really great articles about the Washington Post and the NYT failing to do their jobs. In case you missed them, here they are for your reading enjoyment...

Why the Times published the spy story now
Posted by Evan Derkacz at 8:32 AM on December 21, 2005.

Because, after 14 months, they'd finally gotten it together? Nope.

The disappointment continues, one after another after another at the New York Times. You have this incredible institution filled with bottomless talent, connections, history, and dedication, yet due to what looks suspiciously similar to institutional cowardice the paper insists on letting its reputation just hang in the breeze.

Not only did the paper of record cave in and neglect to record Bush's illegal spying (before the election no less) but its explanations are looking increasingly unconvincing.

Here's Times editor Bill Keller's explanation:

"the administration argued strongly that writing about this eavesdropping program would give terrorists clues about the vulnerability of their communications... Officials also assured senior editors of the Times that a variety of legal checks had been imposed..."

Gabriel Sherman disagrees, noting that the Times' own James Risen was due to release his book on the subject next month:

"Mr. Risen returned from his book leave in June of 2005. He soon began agitating to revive the wiretapping piece and get it into the paper, according to bureau sources."

"According to multiple Times sources, the decision to move forward with the story was accelerated by the forthcoming publication of Mr. Risen’s book, State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration."

Worried about getting scooped (again; see Judith Miller's incarceration and subsequent song singing), the paper decided to let Risen write the story for the paper. How generous.

Risen, Sherman reports, has been badgering the eds to abandon their ninny status on a number of issues over the years including, coincidentally enough, Judith Miller's wish-fulfillment reporting on WMD. If there's an award for fixing the system from the inside out, I nominate James Risen.

Call it the Microwaver? (OffTheRecord)

The 'I-word' is 'out there'
Posted by Evan Derkacz at 6:47 AM on December 22, 2005.

Impeachment files.

You can't unring a bell, or shove the 'iword' back into the box. No thanks to the Washington Post's boneheaded pollster, Impeachment talk is gaining momentum in the blogs, in polite discourse, and even in the media.

Jane Hamsher, with the assist from Media Matters, notes that the Post's pollster Richard Morin has a short memory. The Post's Deborah Howel wrote last month that: "The question many demanded that The Post ask [in its polls] is biased and would produce a misleading result, Morin said."

In an online "chat" Morin responded to readers' impeachment questions with remarkable restraint, considering their lack of editorial experience: "This question makes me mad... Getting madder... Madder still..." Later concluding: "[W]e do not ask about impeachment because it is not a serious option or a topic of considered discussion..."

Sure, lying to start a war and illegal wiretaps aren't serious, we realize that, but blowjobs... now you're talkin! Rewind to a Post poll from Jan. '98:

"If this affair did happen and if Clinton did not resign, is this something for which Clinton should be impeached, or not?"

"If Clinton lied by testifying under oath that he did not have an affair with the woman, and he did not resign, is this something for which Clinton should be impeached, or not?"

And yes, Morin was the editor then.

In the Post's less serious and totally separate cousin, the online Post, Dan Froomkin, who is most definitely not a print reporter wrote, via John Aravosis:

"The revelation that President Bush secretly authorized a domestic spying program has incited a handful of Congressional Democrats to discuss his possible impeachment. And while continued Republican control of Congress makes such a move extremely unlikely, the word is reemerging into mainstream political discourse."

John Conyers' resolutions for investigations and censures of Cheney and Bush are [HERE].
MSNBC's Howard Fineman via Prometheus 6: "The 'I-word' is out there, and, I predict, you are going to hear more of it next year — much more."

You may be skeered of who'll take the reins should Bush be impeached, but upholding the standards are, arguably, more important. Discuss. (Firedoglake, Americablog, Truthout, Prometheus 6)

This Just In...

2005-12-20T14:38:00.000-08:00

About damn time too.

December 20, 2005

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT

News from the Rep. Conyers' office:

Congressman John Conyers, Jr.Michigan, 14th District
Ranking Member, U.S. House Judiciary CommitteeDean, Congressional Black Caucus www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/

CONYERS RELEASES REPORT ON MISCONDUCT OF BUSH ADMINISTRATION CONCERNING IRAQ WAR

Calls for Censure of President Bush and Vice President Cheney

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Representative John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, released the following statement regarding today's release of a staff report entitled "The Constitution in Crisis: The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retributions and Cover-ups in the Iraq War." The Report is my best effort to examine all of the charges of misconduct by the Bush Administration concerning the Iraq War.
Conyers Report: http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/iraqrept.html

"In brief, we have found that there is substantial evidence the President, the Vice-President and other high ranking members of the Bush Administration misled Congress and the American people regarding the decision to go to war in Iraq; misstated and manipulated intelligence information regarding the justification for such war; countenanced torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in Iraq; and permitted inappropriate retaliation against critics of their Administration. There is at least a prima facie case that these actions that federal laws have been violated - from false statements to Congress to retaliating against Administration critics. In response to the Report, I have already taken several initial steps. First, I have introduced a resolution (H. Res. 635) creating a Select Committee with subpoena authority to investigate the misconduct of the Bush Administration with regard to the Iraq war and report on possible impeachable offenses. In addition, I have introduced Resolutions regarding both President Bush (H. Res. 636) and Vice-President Cheney (H. Res. 637) proposing that they be censured by Congress based on indisputable evidence of unaccounted for misstatements and abuse of power in the public record. There are a number of additional recommendations in the Report that I expect to be taking up in the coming weeks and months.

The Report rejects the frequent contention by the Bush Administration that there pre-war conduct has been reviewed and they have been exonerated. No entity has ever considered whether the Administration misled Americans about the decision to go to War, and the Senate Intelligence Committee has not yet conducted a review of pre-war intelligence information, while the Silberman-Robb report specifically cautioned, that intelligence manipulation "was not part of our inquiry." There has also not been any independent inquiry concerning torture and other legal violations in Iraq; nor has there been an independent review of the pattern of cover-ups and political retribution by the Bush Administration against its critics, other than the very narrow and still ongoing inquiry of Special Counsel Fitzgerald."

Abramoff Abramoff Abramoff Abramoff

2005-12-16T18:49:00.000-08:00

My my but it seems like all roads lead to Jack Abramoff the Washington lobbyist and good buddy to, oh, just about everyone in Washington from Delay on down. I'm sure most of you have heard of Abramoff, he's the superlobbyist who is under investigation by the Justice Department, the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, the IRS, the Department of the Interior, and the FBI. He has been indicted...

The indictment, returned by a grand jury in Fort Lauderdale, charges that Abramoff and an associate, 36-year-old New York businessman Adam Kidan, used a fake wire transfer to defraud two lenders out of some $60 million to finance the deal for SunCruz Casinos.

Abramoff and Kidan are charged with five counts of wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and mail fraud. Each count carries a penalty of up to 5 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta said Abramoff was in FBI custody in Los Angeles. Kidan's attorney in Florida, Martin Jaffe, said his client would surrender to authorities in Fort Lauderdale on Friday.

The partners bought SunCruz, which runs a fleet of gambling boats, from entrepreneur Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis for $147 million in 2000, but the deal soon fell apart. Amid bitter legal fighting over the sale, Boulis was shot to death five months later in 2001 what police called a hit. The Fort Lauderdale killing has never been solved. The indictment against Abramoff charges that he used income from SunCruz to finance political fund-raising activities, including events at private boxes at Washington-area sports venues such as the MCI Center and Oriole Park at Camden Yards.

The two lenders who were allegedly defrauded in the SunCruz deal were Foothill Capital Inc., a subsidiary of Wells Fargo, and Citadel Equity Fund Ltd., based in the Cayman Islands, according to court documents in a civil lawsuit. Abramoff is also under federal investigation in Washington by a grand jury investigating whether he and a lobbying partner overcharged Indian tribes by millions of dollars for their work.

To read about the growing list of those involved with Abramoff go to...

Jack In The House

Won't it be something if this brings down the neocon movement. All it takes is to catch just one corrupt person and then the domino effect goes in to action.

Bye Bye DeLay. Heh Heh

Are You Patriotic?

2005-12-14T05:25:00.000-08:00

Are You A Patriotic American?

Almost from the very beginning of the Iraq War, anyone questioning that war has been called unpatriotic by the NeoCon led Bush Administration. Even now, after 3 years of war, Democrats who supported Bush in his War of Choice but have started to question the reasoning, intelligence and planning of this war are being branded as unpatriotic.

Since I am totally against the Iraq War and have been from the very beginning, no doubt I'd be called unpatriotic.

I found a test to see if you are patriotic or not. I thought it might be interesting to take even though regardless of what this neocon administration has to say about patriotism, I know I am.

Here are my results: PatrioticYou scored: 68% US Philosophy, 39% American Pride, 80% Involvement, and 100% Citizen Status!

Just for giggles you may want to take it too, here it is...

The Are You a Patriotic American? Test

How Disgusting Is This?

2005-12-10T07:50:00.000-08:00

Well congratulations, sheeple, for once again supporting the corrupt piece of crap in the White House. Just goes to show how totally ignorant and lacking in morals that many of you are. Apparently you love being lied to, oh, but please let me qualify that you don't mind being lied to by Republicans, only Democrats.

Of course considering how Republicans control most of the MSM in this country you have to wonder how much of this is actually the truth.

Bush’s approval rating rises to 42 percent Ratings are at highest level since last summer

Updated: 3:54 p.m. ET Dec. 9, 2005

WASHINGTON - President Bush’s improved standing with whites, men, Catholics and other core supporters has been a key factor in pushing his job approval rating up to 42 percent. That’s the highest level since summer.

Shifting into campaign mode to reverse his slide in public opinion polls, Bush has boosted his support among key constituency groups — particularly in the Northeast and West — on his handling of Iraq and the economy, an AP-Ipsos poll found.

“Now it’s not a one-sided debate,” said Republican pollster Ed Goeas, citing Bush’s recent speeches on the health of the economy and the high stakes in Iraq. “You have a message getting out there in a much more positive way.”

Bush improved his job approval rating from 37 percent in November to 42 percent now, though his standing with the public remains relatively low. Fifty-seven percent still disapprove, down from 61.

Bush spent much of the year pushing for a Social Security plan that went nowhere, and he was put on the defensive in September and October after the slow government response to Hurricane Katrina.

Those factors combined with Iraq and the price of gasoline hitting $3 a gallon left the president with the lowest public support of his presidency from September through November.

Gas prices down, approval ratings upNow, gas prices have eased, and Bush has been barnstorming the country to tout a stronger economy and claim progress in Iraq.

A recent report noted that the nation added 215,000 jobs in November, and Bush declared on Monday that “the best days are yet to come for the American economy.”

On Iraq, he’s halfway through a series of four speeches outlining — in the words of a huge banner behind him at one event — the administration’s “Plan for Victory” in Iraq. He has been claiming new strength for both Iraq’s troops and economy, while acknowledging difficulties caused by continuing violence.

The most important goal of the Iraq speeches is to shore up intensity of support with his Republican base, said Gary Jacobson, a political scientist at the University of California-San Diego. “If he restores the strong support of Republicans, he can ride out the rest of the term and keep Republican politicians on his side as well,” Jacobson said.

Bush’s job approval among men has climbed from 39 percent in November to 47 percent now and among whites from 40 percent to 47 percent, according to the AP-Ipsos poll.
Catholics’ approval went from 32 percent to 41 percent. In the Northeast, Bush’s support grew from 27 to 41 percent, and in the West from 34 to 42 percent.

More satisfaction with economyOverall, approval of Bush’s handling of the economy was up to 42 percent in December from 37 percent last month, according to the poll of 1,002 adults taken Dec. 5-7 by Ipsos, an international polling firm. The survey had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

The poll found approval for Bush’s handling of Iraq also was up, from 37 percent last month to 41 percent now.

Those disapproving totaled 55 percent on the economy, 58 percent on Iraq, both down slightly from November.

“I think he’s doing what he has to do,” said Charl-Deane Almond, a Republican from Bishop, Calif. “I appreciate him standing strong with all the pressure he’s under.”

Still, many have mixed feelings.

Said Jonathan Schuler, an independent from Georgetown, a small city north of Austin, Texas: “If we stay in Iraq too much longer, it will be another Vietnam. If we pull out, the terrorists will look at it as a victory.”

The people who disapprove of Bush’s performance cite Iraq most often as the leading reason, AP-Ipsos polling found in the fall.

The administration can win support from the public by emphasizing the possibility of success, said political scientist Christopher Gelpi of Duke University.

Gelpi and his colleague and research partner at Duke, Peter Feaver, have concluded from their research that the public is more likely to tolerate some casualties and deaths if people can see that a military mission will be successful. As a special adviser on the National Security Council,
Feaver is helping shape administration strategy on winning public support for the war.

While it’s important for the president to talk about victory, Gelpi said, “words without deeds on the ground will ring pretty hollow.”

What Goes Around Comes Around

2005-12-10T07:00:00.000-08:00

I for one could not be happier. Bush and his Republican Administration have stood at the bully pulpit long enough. They've used it quite effectively in the past but now they're burning it up, trying to spin their lies into gospel.

I won't soon forget how Newt Gingrich sneered that, "everytime I get in front of a camera, I'm going to say "Monica Lewinsky," all the while he was having an affair with one of his own aides. I well remember Bush claiming during the 2000 Presidential election that he would bring "honor and integrity back to the White House" and that he would be a "uniter and not a divider."

Finally, we see that their lies catching up with them and as dear old dad used to say, "it's time to face the music." It's time for Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rice, Rumsfeld, DeLay, Frist, Libby and all of the low men on the totem pole to, "pay the piper."

The Times

December 10, 2005

Party that impeached Clinton gets taste of its own medicine By Gerard Baker

AMERICA’S online satirical newspaper of record, The Onion, captured the political mood rather well with a recent spoof headline: “Topeka Mayor is Now Nation’s Most Senior Unindicted Republican.”

For a party that likes to think of itself as the true protector of the Constitution and laws, the past few months have been a little awkward.

Consider the roll-call: Tom “The Hammer” DeLay had to step down as the Majority Leader of the House of Representatives two months ago after he was indicted on charges of breaking campaign finance laws. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Vice-President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff, has been charged with perjury and obstruction of justice.

Bill Frist, the Senate Majority Leader, is under investigation over allegations that he benefited from inside information for some share trades. Criminal inquiries continue that could yet result in legal trouble for Karl Rove, President Bush’s chief political adviser. Last month Randy “Duke” Cunningham, a gruff conservative congressman from California, pleaded guilty to charges of tax evasion and fraud. Other members of Congress are the focus of investigations into alleged corruption. What’s going on? A cynic might note that political conservatives start from a philosophical assumption that man is essentially fallen and conclude that they are just trying to prove it. But a number of explanations lie behind the spate of legal difficulties.

Most obviously, a high level of corruption pervades Washington’s politics. In the past ten years especially, money has sloshed around the capital like champagne cocktails in a Christmas punch bowl. Politicians need ever-increasing quantities of it to fight expensive re-election campaigns involving endless TV advertising.

At the same time public spending is surging, giving politicians access to vast government funds that they can distribute. Since Republicans have controlled Congress for most of the past ten years, they are the ones with best access to that money.

It is not all illegal, of course, but the temptations are considerable. It is unlikely that the soon-to-be-jailed Cunningham was the only one who steered huge defence contracts to his cronies and wealthy supporters over the past five years. A second factor is pure politics. Despite the separation of powers in the American Constitution, the judiciary is heavily politicised, with state judges and prosecutors often being elected positions.

Since it is hard to remove a member of Congress through the ballot box — more than 95 per cent win re-election (thanks in large part to their largesse with government funds) — opponents seek alternatives. Mr DeLay’s difficulties owe much to this factor: he is the target of a zealous Democratic prosecutor in Texas.

Republicans are also reaping that which they have sown. The impeachment of Bill Clinton in 1998 took judicial oversight of executive behaviour to new levels of eye-watering intensity.

Some of the same prosecutorial zeal is now making life extremely difficult at the White House in the CIA leak case. The political implications of all this are potentially large — as the party’s own success 11 years ago may demonstrate.

In 1994 the Republicans swept to power in Congress on a radical conservative platform under the leadership of Newt Gingrich. The triumph was owed in large part to the aura of sleaze that surrounded the Democrat-controlled Congress at the time. Scandals involving Jim Wright, the Speaker of the House, and Dan Rostenkowski, the Ways and Means Committee chairman (who later served prison time), disgusted voters who adopted a “throw the bums out” approach in the 1994 mid-term elections.

Could that happen to the Republicans next year? Voters are certainly in a sour mood. Iraq, of course, is the main concern, but a sense that Washington’s leaders are sinking deeper into a mire of corruption and lies is making it worse.

It will take a landslide to deprive the party of its House and Senate majorities. But this was the year the land started to shift, imperceptibly at first, then with more momentum as the legal problems piled on top of the political difficulties.

The White House is lying vulnerable in the path of any such landslide.

Speaking Of Rewriting History

2005-12-09T16:13:00.000-08:00

Actually it's more like lying but that's certainly nothing new for this administration or Rumsfeld.

Thanks to Think Progress for this article...

Rumsfeld Lies About Pre-War Predictions: “You Can Take That To The Bank”

Yesterday on PBS’ Newshour, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said no administration official made any predictions about the length or cost of the war in Iraq:

I was very careful. I never predicted any number of deaths or the cost or the length because I’ve looked at a lot of wars, and anyone who tries to do that is going to find themselves wrong, flat wrong…I don’t know anybody who had any reasonable expectations about the number or the length of the war or the cost of the war. I just don’t — no one I know went out and said these are how those three metrics ought to be considered. And you can take it to the bank.

The truth is, Rumsfeld and other top administration officials made predictions on all three metrics. You can take that to the bank –

Length:

Rumsfeld, 2/7/03: “It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.”

Cheney, 3/16/03: “I think it will go relatively quickly, . . . (in) weeks rather than months“

Cost:

Daniels, 12/30/02: “The administration’s top budget [Mitch Daniels] official estimated today that the cost of a war with Iraq could be in the range of $50 billion to $60 billion… Mr. Daniels declined to explain how budget officials had reached the $50 billion to $60 billion range for war costs…” [New York Times, 12/31/02]
Casualties:

Q: If your analysis is not correct, and we’re not treated as liberators, but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly, and bloody battle with significant American casualties?

Cheney: Well, I don’t think it’s likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe that we will be greeted as liberators. [Meet the Press, 3/16/03]

I'd Say This Is Impossible

2005-12-09T07:43:00.000-08:00

Giving a speech at UConn the other day, Ann Coulter the rightwingnut columnist and embarrassment to the GOP made the assinine statement, “I love to engage in repartee with people who are stupider than I am." FYI, Ann, that is impossible because there is no one stupider than you.

As per usual Ann's speech was cut short after a mere 15 minutes due to all of the boos and jeers from most of the 2,600 students in attendance. heh heh

In the way of a reminder, folks, let's remember that Bush is a liar and so we cannot fall for his lies about the rosie outcome of the Iraq War.

The Corruption Never Seems To End

2005-12-06T06:02:00.000-08:00

Deeper into the Wilkes/MZM scandals (Updated)

(Note: If you came here by way of LiePar Destin's excellent piece in Kos, you may want to read "Wilkes: The Invisible Empire" first. Also, I'm happy to report that this blockbuster piece on Wilkes in the San Diego Union Tribune strengthens the thesis presented here.)

The good news is that reporters working for the mainstream media have caught on -- in part. They understand that Randy "Duke" Cunningham is hardly the only Republican politician to receive economic "assistance" from Brent Wilkes, head of the Poway-based "defense" firm ADCS -- a.k.a. the Wilkes Corporation, a.k.a. Group W Advisors, a.k.a. lots of other names.

But they still treat this company as though it were something real. Not a single mainstream reporter has scrutinized those web sites and reported on the obvious signs of fakery.

No reporters -- and, for that matter, no procurement officers at the Pentagon -- bothered to do any checking at the patent office. If they had, they would have found that there are no patents covering the "proprietary" designs and innovative equipment advertised by the many ADCS subsidiary firms.

The truth: Wilkes was a mechanism by which public funds earmarked for national defense were funneled to G.O.P. candidates and causes.

Want proof?

Defense contracts are a matter of public record. A reader named John Dean (no, not the Watergate-related John Dean) has been going through some of the records related to Wilkes -- a job which ought to be done by congressional investigators. On one form, the given address does not relate to the massive Wilkes complex on Stowe Avenue in Poway. Instead, the address is 15092 Avenue of Science, San Diego CA 92128.

That, we are told, is the address of a defense firm called Mirror Labs, allegedly a leading firm in the field of testing military equipment. They are referenced in this edition of the Homeland Defense Journal. Their website, we are told, is www.mirrorlabs.com.

That URL goes nowhere. Google has no cache of anything ever being there.

However, this archive page reveals that they once did have a site up, from 2001 to early 2004, at which point the firm, such as it was, seems to have become defunct. The web pages speak of a company with branches in Virigina and Panama. But the only satisfied customers mentioned are a couple of small-ish private companies (real companies) who had some software beta-tested. Google presents no external evidence that a San Diego company named Mirror Labs has ever done anything related to defense, or that it had Virginia and Panama branches.

(Update: A background check on www.mirrorlabs.com shows that the URL address was registered by Group W Media, Wilkes' fake ad agency. The listed administrative contact is PerfectWave Techonologies, another fake company.)

I believe that, for all practical purposes, there is no Mirror Labs, although a firm by that name may well have performed an actual service at one time. So where did the money go? When that nice fat check filled with taxpayer dollars was sent to 15092 Avenue of Science, who opened it? And what did they do with the money?

Here is the organization that really has -- or had -- offices at that address: ADCS PAC. That's where the money went.

Apparently, Wilkes felt queasy about housing his PAC at the same address as ADCS proper, so he set up a small office in a San Diego business park. Someone must have put down the wrong address on one of the applications.

So which candidates got chunks of that taxpayer money earmarked for "defense"?

Henry Bonilla, Roy Brown, Rick Clayburgh, Duke Cunningham (of course!), John T. Doolittle, Maria Guadalupe Garcia, George W. Gekas, Lindsay Graham, Duncan Hunter, Darrell Issa, Samuel Johnson, Thaddeus G. McCotter, Constance Morella, Devin Nune, Steve Pearce, Bill Van de Weghe Jr., Jerry Weller.

All Republicans, of course. As the scandal unfolds, the pundits will try to convince us that "both sides do it." That simply is not true.

The donations amounted only to $5000 or so. But ADCS Pac was hardly the only mechanism by which Wilkes could distribute the Christmas candy. Remember, Perfect Wave Technologies, Pure Aqua Technologies, Group W. Advisors and other "subsidiaries" were also used as funding mechanisms.

By keeping the donations small, and by maintaining the illusion that the donors are numerous, the conspirators could line many a pocket with relative safety. Clever, eh?

Other recipients of Wilkes' largesse: President Bush, Katherine Harris, Tom Delay, Virgil Goode Jr. and Elizabeth Dole -- whose husband, as you may recall from yesterday's post, lent his name to Reverend Moon's "stamp out the cross" crusade. Talk about being on the Dole! Did all these pols understand the ultimate source of the funds? Perhaps not. However, we know that Duncan Hunter -- chairman of the House Armed Services Committee -- was a big ADCS pusher:

Since 1994, Wilkes and ADCS gave $40,700 in campaign contributions to Rep. Duncan Hunter, a San Diego Republican who now chairs the House Armed Services Committee. Hunter has acknowledged that he joined with Cunningham in 1999 to contact Pentagon officials who reversed a decision and gave ADCS one of its first big contracts, for nearly $10 million." (USA Today, 11/29/05)

And then there's Republican Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis, who ordered continued funding of ADCS even after the DOD raised objections.

Obviously, Hunter and Lewis must go under the microscope. Even so, you're missing the point if you waste much time castigating the above-named politicians for receiving the money. What is significant is the device itself -- using "false fronts" to translate IRS-collected revenues into Republican campaign commercials.

Much evidence indicates that Wilkes is but one of many villains involved with such schemes.

I rarely beg my readers, but in this case I must: Please get the word out. This type of investigative work should not be left to the likes of me (or John Dean, or Daniel Hopsicker). Someone in the major media -- or Congress, or the Justice Department -- must investigate.

This scandal could and should be bigger than Plamegate.

Who is the "inside man" in the Pentagon? I cannot believe that checks went to Wilkes based purely on the say-so of Duke Cunningham or the other bribed pols. Someone in the Pentagon's procurement offices must be signing off on these expenditures. If investigators identify the person or persons involved, then this conspiracy can be blown wide open.

John Dean found that each of the DOD contracts to ADCS and its related firms were prepared by "DOD_MIGRATOR" -- whoever or whatever that may mean. I'm hardly an expert on Defense Department procurement procedures, so I cannot tell if this nomenclature is standard or unusual. But since each award is numbered, it should not be difficult for an investigator to track down the real person behind DOD_MIGRATOR.

Another oddity: According to Dean, on each ADCS form -- whatever the year -- the company is listed as having 130 employees and annual revenues of "$13,345,9." (Yes, that is the figure given.) These numbers, I am told, never vary.

On the MZM front: Is the other company that bribed Cunningham real or fake? What, precisely, do they do?

Ah, there's the rub: We're dealing with black budget stuff. We're not supposed to know what they do. Alas, in such a world we cannot easily know if they do...anything.

MZM, run by Mitchell Wade -- a longtime member of the Wilkes/Cunningham "posse" -- began life in the early 1990s. Yet during most of the ensuing years, it made little impact on the world. As a "defense and intelligence" firm, it seems to have sprung from nothing in 2002, like a Rambo-ized Venus from the brow of Ares.

This page from (of all things) the Panama American Chamber of Commerce contains some interesting info about MZM: The address is 1523 New Hampshire Ave., N.W.; Washington, DC 20036, USA. The only email contact addresses go to Wade and a man named Joel Cornelison.

Their line of work? Surprisingly enough -- it's a law firm!

When the firm began life in 1993, Wade and Cornelison -- the only names connected with the place -- were "business consultants."

More recently, MZM originated a 501(c)3 nonprofit called the "Sure Foundation" -- allegedly an organization devoted to refugee aid -- which shares the same address. The address was also used by the front company which purchased Cunningham's home at an inflated price.

The Sure Foundation website (the contents of which are quoted here) used to refer to MZM as its "first corporate sponsor." MZM's line of work has changed once more: Now they provide "data warehousing and information technology consulting services to both governmental and non-governmental entities."

That description may be literally true, if we presume that they kept a few floppy disks or notebooks hanging around the office.

So far, I've seen no evidence that the Sure Foundation actually transferred monies to starving refugees. However, we do know that MZM did distribute funds to certain "needy" individuals: Republican politicians.

Wade, unlike Wilkes, kept the MZM Pac housed in the very same office. (We must presume that they didn't have a great deal of office space, since unrelated tenants are in the same building.) When we look at the data on MZM Pac and its activities in 2003-2004, we learn that the population of this company has grown by leaps and bounds.

The PAC now lists roughly 100 names. A close scan of the names indicates that wives and children were recruited to the cause -- the cause being, of course, donations to G.O.P. candidates. (One of the named donors is "Joe Dollar." That can't be real -- can it?)

Nearly all the donors are listed as employees of MZM Inc., and many have grandiose titles -- Chairman of this, VP of that.

MZM employees, we learn, were told they had to make the donations or be fired. I believe there are laws against that sort of thing.

Frankly, I'm not at all sure how MZM transformed itself from a two-man law office (I'm picturing a Republican version of Daredevil's Nelson and Murdoch) into a go-go defense and intelligence firm.

For that, it would seem, is the final incarnation of MZM. According to the Center for Public Integrity,

MZM Inc. is a high-tech national security firm based in Washington, D.C. The private firm provides intelligence gathering, technology and homeland security analysis and consulting for both international and domestic governments and private-sector clients. The firm also provides consulting on political and public message strategies. Its government clients include Congress, the White House, the Defense Department, the U.S. intelligence community, the Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force and state and local governments, according to the company's Web site. MZM refused to provide any information, however, about its corporate structure, including names of other principals.

In addition to its D.C. headquarters, MZM has field offices in Miami, Tampa, San Antonio, San Diego and Suffolk, Va. The company employs about 70 people.

Following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, MZM expanded its counterintelligence and national security efforts. It soon experienced an influx of government contracts. The company now predicts a growth rate of more than 35 percent in the 2003 fiscal year. Mitchell Wade, president and CEO, reportedly expects to increase sales from $25 million to $120 million and to hire 230 more employees over the next five years. Wade told the Richmond Times-Dispatch that recently the company has "come out of a flat period" with defense industry contracts.

In September 2003, MZM collaborated with 16 other organizations, called the General Dynamics team, as part of a five-year, $252 million contract to provide engineering and information warfare services to the Air Force Information Warfare Center at Lackland Airforce Base in Texas.

In November 2002, MZM opened a computer center in Charlottesville, Va., to house classified engineering intelligence in a digital mapping and architecture analysis system. Twelve employees in that office are developing the program for the Pentagon. It is designed to provide digital maps of thousands of buildings worldwide. The Richmond Times-Dispatch reported that the mapping system will help soldiers and planners know details of buildings -- even which way doors open and close.

At least we are given some indication of what the firm actually does. The data page goes on to name a number of individuals involved with this work -- intelligence analysts, generals, the kind of people whom we would expect to be involved with such an enterprise. Cornelison seems to have disappeared.

But how much of this data is on the level? One would think that so august a firm would have a web site. However, the listed URL -- www.mzinc.com -- is blank, as is Google's cache for that page. Interestingly, Dean found an MZM contract with the DOD dated February 13, 2003 in which MZM states that it has zero employees and zero revenue. The contract is for a mere $12,740,000.

However, we do know that they did open a fairly large facility in Martinsville, Virgina.

The Center for Public Integrity is trustworthy, but they can only relate what they've been told -- and at this point, who can be sure if a company like MZM is telling the truth? Obviously, Wade's creation (unlike many of the Wilkes pseudocompanies) does actual work for the military/intelligence complex; as we've seen, they've even provided office furniture for the White House. Even so, we must still ask: How and why did Wade's tiny firm suddenly grow like Topsy? Who is Mitchell Wade? Is he a lawyer, a businessman, a spook, or...what?

Which brings us to the larger question surrounding these out-of-nowhere defense firms: How much of this stuff is real?

This'll Make Republicans Proud

2005-12-05T04:34:00.000-08:00

Neil Bush Meets the Messiah
By John Gorenfeld, AlterNet. Posted December 5, 2005.

Why is the President's younger brother, Neil, touring with the leader of the Moonies?

"Those who stray from the heavenly way," the owner of the flagship Republican newspaper the Washington Times admonished an audience in Taipei on Friday, "will be punished."

This "heavenly way," the Rev. Sun Myung Moon explained, demands a 51-mile underwater highway spanning Alaska and Russia. Sitting in the front row: Neil Bush, the brother of the president of the United States.

Rev. Sun Myung Moon, the South Korean giant of the religious right who owns the Washington Times, is on a 100-city speaking tour to promote his $200 billion "Peace King Tunnel" dream.

As he describes it, the tunnel would be both a monument to his magnificence, and a totem to his prophecy of a unified Planet Earth. In this vision, the United Nations would be reinvented as an instrument of God's plan, and democracy and sexual freedom would crumble in the face of this faith-based glory.

The name Peace King Tunnel would allude to the title of authority to which Moon, 86, lays claim, and to which U.S. congressmen paid respect on Capitol Hill in last year's controversial "Crown of Peace" coronation ritual.

Moon's lobbying campaign is "ambitious and diffuse," as the D.C. newspaper The Hill reported last year, and the sheer range of guests revealed just how many Pacific Rim political leaders the Times owner has won over, including Filipino and Taiwanese politicians. And the head of the Arizona GOP attended a recent stop in San Francisco. But perhaps the most surprising VIP to tag along is Neil Bush, George H.W. Bush's youngest and most wayward son, who made both the Philippines and Taiwan legs of the journey, according to reports in newspapers from those countries and statements from Moon's Family Federation.

While Neil Bush and Moon's church couldn't be reached for comment on the tunnel or his speaking fees, a brochure from Moon's Family Federation underscores that the project is "God's fervent desire," dwarfing such past wonders as the Chunnel and heralding a "new era of automobile travel."

Moon, reviled in the 1980s as the leader of a group that separated young recruits from their families, says he is the Messiah. His far-flung business empire includes the UPI wire service, Washington, D.C. television studios, a gun factory, and enormous swaths of real estate, and he donates millions to conservative politics. In 1989, U.S. News & World Report linked his group to the Heritage Foundation and other conservative organizations. "Because almost all conservative organizations in Washington have some ties to [Moon's] church," wrote reporter John Judis, "conservatives ... fear repercussions if they expose the church's role."

The billionaire Moon has never been one to pander to the Sierra Club, having subsidized the anti-environmental "wise use" movement. Likewise, his group anticipates an anti-tunnel backlash by those who "demand the preservation of the polar region's ecosystem and the protection of polar bears and seals," and proposes an aggressive media strategy: "[P]ublic opinion polls must be carried out all over the world and it is absolutely essential that a public relations campaign to educate environmental groups, concerned organizations and residents near the proposed construction sites be carried out as well." (Moon has said in the past that Caucasians are descended from polar bears.)

In addition to the Taipei report, the Bush brother also surfaced in an article last week from the Manila Times, which placed him at a similar dinner in Manila attended by Washington Times president Dong Moon Joo and respected Filipino House Speaker Jose de Venecia. (It's unclear if Bush attended an intermediate stop in the Solomon Islands.) According to the Manila Times piece, Venecia proposed Moon's idea for a trans-religious council to President Bush in a 2003 meeting; President Bush was said to have called it "a brilliant idea."

The Taiwan paper similarly revealed high-powered support for Moon, describing Republic of China Vice President Annette Lu as listening "rapt" to his speech.

In the United States, Moon's end-of-democracy vision has been honored on the floor of Congress. According to the Congressional Record, on June 19, 2003, Democrat Danny K. Davis joined Republican Curt Weldon in recognizing Moon's "effort to create an international council of religious leaders ... this body will provide a direct link between international leaders and the various religious peoples in their constituencies," Davis said. "We are grateful to ... the Reverend and Mrs. Sun Myung [Moon] for promoting the vision of world peace, and we commend their work."

Davis later took part in Moon's March 23, 2004 Capitol Hill ceremony in which he was brought a gold crown and royal robe to coronate him Peace King. The sponsor of the event was the Virginia Republican Senator John Warner, who later told the Washington Post he'd been "deceived" into hosting the event, a charge that organizers rejected, saying the ritual was taken out of context.

While Moon's proposal has been deliberated by politicians around the world as a mere religious council, church promotional materials make clear that it's intended to forge "God's fatherland," and not just idle talk. A video from his group stresses that the U.N. will give way to a "Peace United Nations," as Moon terms it, with fantastical reverberations.

"Like a candle that burns down, sacrificing itself to give light to the world, the light of wisdom and hope will shine from the headquarters of world governance -- the "Peace United Nations" -- into all realms of life," a narrator says in a Family Federation video (available here via BitTorrent). "This light will radiate beyond the high barrier separating nations and will illuminate the road to peace, the path to the fulfillment of humanity's hopes -- and dreams ..."

Moon has frequently gone on the record against Western-style democracy and individualism, calling them results of the fall of Adam. "There are three guiding principles for the world to choose from: democracy, Communism and Godism," he said in a 1987 sermon. "It is clear that democracy as the United States knows and practices it cannot be the model for the world."

"Individualism," he also said at the speech -- entitled "I Will Follow With Gratitude And Obedience" -- "is what God hates most and what Satan likes best."

Neil isn't the only Bush to attend Moon events. In 1996, his father, President George H.W. Bush, traveled to Buenos Aires with the Reverend in one of several such fundraising expeditions. "The 41st president, who told Argentine president Carlos Menem that he had joined Moon in Buenos Aires for the money, had actually known the Korean reasonably well for decades," writes former top GOP strategist Kevin Phillips in his book "American Dynasty." "Their relationship went back to the overlap between Bush's one-year tenure as CIA director (1976) and the arrival in Washington of Moon, whose Unification Church was widely reported to be a front group for the South Korean Central Intelligence Agency." Moon and his aides have called such claims bogus, saying his accusers were controlled by "Satan" to distract from his campaign to destroy communism.

Reverend Moon is the latest in a line of unusual partners for Neil Bush in recent years, including the son of former Chinese President Jiang Zemin, and fugitive Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky, who has been promoting the younger Bush's educational software company, Ignite!, according to the Washington Post.

A messy divorce case in 2003 exposed his dalliances with prostitutes in Asia. Moon's group didn't return e-mails asking how this bore upon Neil Bush's contributions to last week's events, whose central theme was "Ideal Families."

[Libby: There are many reasons why the Republicans [I would say only Neocons but it seems even the run of the mill republicans are involved] are a danger to America but imo, this is why that party must be destroyed and not allowed to hold any kind of Governmantal or political positions in the United States. This article should send the Conservative Christians running and screaming but sadly, they are too stupid to think for themselves and will follow Bush and the Neocon movement to their deaths.]