Georgie Anne Geyer writes today in the Dallas Morning News about President Bush’s strange behavior during a recent meeting with “[f]riends of his from Texas.”
But by all reports, President Bush is more convinced than ever of his righteousness.
Friends of his from Texas were shocked recently to find him nearly wild-eyed, thumping himself on the chest three times while he repeated “I am the president!” He also made it clear he was setting Iraq up so his successor could not get out of “our country’s destiny.”
"Our country's destiny"? What does that mean?
Does it mean that George believes that he is doing God's will and trying to make sure that nobody who follows in his footsteps can sabotage that?
How can anybody not be scared out of their mind with this loose cannon sitting in the most powerful office in the world?
I am becoming ever more frustrated by this Democratic Congress. They need to put impeachment at the top of their agenda, or there may not be a country for them to take over by the time the next Presidential election comes around.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
I do not ever advocate making bomb threats but you cannot argue with this guys logic.
A former Wal-Mart cashier says he was fired for joking on his MySpace page that the average IQ would increase if a bomb were dropped on the company's stores.
I think that there is no dispute of the accuracy of this statement.
If you ever want to feel like the smartest guy in the room just head on over to Wal-Mart, where sweat pants and spandex are the uniform of choice, and the kids are always screaming about something.
Hey I just remembered that I once wrote a top ten list for Wal-Mart. Here it is:
Top Ten things that the make the Wal-Mart shopping experience like no other.
10. It is a great place to pick up parenting tips. If you are planning to raise heroin addict bent on suicide that is.
9. The giant DVD sales bin. Who hasn’t dug through this wire monstrosity trying to decide if “Turner and Hooch” is now finally cheap enough for you to justify adding it to your DVD collection. The last time I checked it was going for $5.00.
8. Wal-Mart offers the opportunity to buy cheap clothing lovingly sewn together by Indonesian children, working long hours, in horrible conditions. So in other words we are keeping these kids off of the streets and out of trouble.
7. Great place to watch for “Muffin tops”. (For those of you who are not up on the cool kid lingo, a “muffin top” is where a female wears a shirt too short and pants too low to keep that roll of fat from squeezing out to form a muffin top around her waist.)
6. Compared to the people working at Wal-Mart you feel like a freaking genius. (I once had a salesgirl tell one of my kids that she had taken a two hour class to learn why she should not look at the laser on the scanner that reads the barcodes. I guess just telling them not to look at the laser proved ineffective. True story.)
5. That one crying baby. I hear this same thing every time I go to Wal-Mart. I am not even sure it is a real baby. Maybe they just play it over the intercom because some marketing researcher believes it keeps people from loitering in the store.
4. Trying to look nonchalant in the middle of the women’s underwear department, while your kids are using the inconveniently placed changing rooms. Are there really women who believe that wearing size 16 tiger stripe panties makes them sexy? Because it kind of scares me a little.
3. Shopping at Wal-Mart is like visiting a foreign country. There are so many different nationalities working at Wal-Mart that it may be the one place in Anchorage where being a white male puts you in the minority.
2. Wal-Mart is the home of the lying smock. The employee’s smock says “How can I help you?” But nobody ever helps you! If you dare to ask them a question they look totally lost and then pretend to look for somebody to help you as they walk away. And then they just simply disappear! I have no idea where they go, but I have never seen one of them in the store again. Maybe there is a “Wal-Mart curse” which keeps these people locked in Wal-Mart and if a customer asks them a question it breaks the spell and they are allowed to leave.
And the number one thing that makes the Wal-Mart shoppingexperience like no other is…
1. The gray haired greeters at the door. I have nothing sarcastic to say about these people as they are my favorite part of the Wal-Mart experience. When I grow up that is what I am going to do for a living.
I think that there is no dispute of the accuracy of this statement.
If you ever want to feel like the smartest guy in the room just head on over to Wal-Mart, where sweat pants and spandex are the uniform of choice, and the kids are always screaming about something.
Hey I just remembered that I once wrote a top ten list for Wal-Mart. Here it is:
Top Ten things that the make the Wal-Mart shopping experience like no other.
10. It is a great place to pick up parenting tips. If you are planning to raise heroin addict bent on suicide that is.
9. The giant DVD sales bin. Who hasn’t dug through this wire monstrosity trying to decide if “Turner and Hooch” is now finally cheap enough for you to justify adding it to your DVD collection. The last time I checked it was going for $5.00.
8. Wal-Mart offers the opportunity to buy cheap clothing lovingly sewn together by Indonesian children, working long hours, in horrible conditions. So in other words we are keeping these kids off of the streets and out of trouble.
7. Great place to watch for “Muffin tops”. (For those of you who are not up on the cool kid lingo, a “muffin top” is where a female wears a shirt too short and pants too low to keep that roll of fat from squeezing out to form a muffin top around her waist.)
6. Compared to the people working at Wal-Mart you feel like a freaking genius. (I once had a salesgirl tell one of my kids that she had taken a two hour class to learn why she should not look at the laser on the scanner that reads the barcodes. I guess just telling them not to look at the laser proved ineffective. True story.)
5. That one crying baby. I hear this same thing every time I go to Wal-Mart. I am not even sure it is a real baby. Maybe they just play it over the intercom because some marketing researcher believes it keeps people from loitering in the store.
4. Trying to look nonchalant in the middle of the women’s underwear department, while your kids are using the inconveniently placed changing rooms. Are there really women who believe that wearing size 16 tiger stripe panties makes them sexy? Because it kind of scares me a little.
3. Shopping at Wal-Mart is like visiting a foreign country. There are so many different nationalities working at Wal-Mart that it may be the one place in Anchorage where being a white male puts you in the minority.
2. Wal-Mart is the home of the lying smock. The employee’s smock says “How can I help you?” But nobody ever helps you! If you dare to ask them a question they look totally lost and then pretend to look for somebody to help you as they walk away. And then they just simply disappear! I have no idea where they go, but I have never seen one of them in the store again. Maybe there is a “Wal-Mart curse” which keeps these people locked in Wal-Mart and if a customer asks them a question it breaks the spell and they are allowed to leave.
And the number one thing that makes the Wal-Mart shoppingexperience like no other is…
1. The gray haired greeters at the door. I have nothing sarcastic to say about these people as they are my favorite part of the Wal-Mart experience. When I grow up that is what I am going to do for a living.
I have been advocating this for years.
I think "adult recess" is an idea that just makes good sense.
I know that when I get to go outside and play with the kids I feel very relaxed and ready to get back to work.
Actually I would take this several steps farther. I would love to see playgrounds that were designed for adult sized users. Giant slides, twelve foot high monkey bars, and rings that are twenty feet off the ground.
I picture it looking kind of like the mazes from American Gladiator.
Now doesn't that sound like fun?
I know that when I get to go outside and play with the kids I feel very relaxed and ready to get back to work.
Actually I would take this several steps farther. I would love to see playgrounds that were designed for adult sized users. Giant slides, twelve foot high monkey bars, and rings that are twenty feet off the ground.
I picture it looking kind of like the mazes from American Gladiator.
Now doesn't that sound like fun?
Soldiers ask Lieberman "When are we going to get out of here?"
Spc. David Williams, 22, of Boston, Mass., had two note cards in his pocket Wednesday afternoon as he waited for Sen. Joseph Lieberman. Williams serves in the 82nd Airborne Division from Fort Bragg, N.C., the first of the five "surge" brigades to arrive in Iraq, and he was chosen to join the Independent from Connecticut for lunch at a U.S. field base in Baghdad
The night before, 30 other soldiers crowded around him with questions for the senator.
He wrote them all down. At the top of his note card was the question he got from nearly every one of his fellow soldiers:
"When are we going to get out of here?"
The rest was a laundry list. When would they have upgraded Humvees that could withstand the armor-penetrating weapons that U.S. officials claim are from Iran? When could they have body armor that was better in hot weather?
Williams missed six months of his girlfriend's pregnancy when he was given six days' notice to return to Iraq for his second tour. He also missed his baby boy's birth. Three weeks ago, he went home and saw his first child.
"He looks just like me," he said. "I didn't want to come back. . . . We're waiting to get blown up."
I just cannot fathom how these politicians can look into the faces of these brave Americans and just continue to treat them like cannon fodder whose lives are less important then admitting that they were wrong and this war is a mistake.
What kind of soulless monster can do such a thing?
The night before, 30 other soldiers crowded around him with questions for the senator.
He wrote them all down. At the top of his note card was the question he got from nearly every one of his fellow soldiers:
"When are we going to get out of here?"
The rest was a laundry list. When would they have upgraded Humvees that could withstand the armor-penetrating weapons that U.S. officials claim are from Iran? When could they have body armor that was better in hot weather?
Williams missed six months of his girlfriend's pregnancy when he was given six days' notice to return to Iraq for his second tour. He also missed his baby boy's birth. Three weeks ago, he went home and saw his first child.
"He looks just like me," he said. "I didn't want to come back. . . . We're waiting to get blown up."
I just cannot fathom how these politicians can look into the faces of these brave Americans and just continue to treat them like cannon fodder whose lives are less important then admitting that they were wrong and this war is a mistake.
What kind of soulless monster can do such a thing?
Instead of just complaining about high gas prices John Edwards would like to do something about them.
Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards says a wave of mergers in the oil industry should be investigated by the Justice Department to see what impact they have had on soaring gasoline prices.
During a planned campaign stop Thursday in Silicon Valley, Edwards planned to berate the oil industry for "anticompetitive actions" and outline an energy plan he says would reduce oil imports "and get us on a path to be virtually petroleum-free within a generation."
"Vertically integrated companies like Exxon Mobil own every step of the production process - from extraction to refining to sale at the pump, enabling them to foreclose competition," says an outline of Edward's energy plan provided to The Associated Press by his campaign.
Now we are talking! I would love to see some of these Presidential candidates talking tough about dealing with the obviously criminal activity of the oil companies.
We certainly will not get to the bottom of this with Bush and Cheney, two well known oil whores, in office.
Edwards goes on to lay out a fairly comprehensive plan for moving away from petroleum products and into alternate sources of fuel.
During a planned campaign stop Thursday in Silicon Valley, Edwards planned to berate the oil industry for "anticompetitive actions" and outline an energy plan he says would reduce oil imports "and get us on a path to be virtually petroleum-free within a generation."
"Vertically integrated companies like Exxon Mobil own every step of the production process - from extraction to refining to sale at the pump, enabling them to foreclose competition," says an outline of Edward's energy plan provided to The Associated Press by his campaign.
Now we are talking! I would love to see some of these Presidential candidates talking tough about dealing with the obviously criminal activity of the oil companies.
We certainly will not get to the bottom of this with Bush and Cheney, two well known oil whores, in office.
Edwards goes on to lay out a fairly comprehensive plan for moving away from petroleum products and into alternate sources of fuel.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
The Global Peace Index does not think that the United States is very peace loving.
The United States is among the least peaceful nations in the world, ranking 96th between Yemen and Iran, according to a new index released on Wednesday that evaluates 121 nations based on their peacefulness.According to the Global Peace Index, created by The Economist Intelligence Unit, Norway is the most peaceful nation in the world and Iraq is the least, just after Russia, Israel and Sudan.
Sadly this does not surprise me very much.
The index was compiled based on 24 indicators measuring peace inside and outside of a country. They included the number of wars a country was involved in the past five years, how many soldiers were killed overseas and how much money was made in arms sales.
Domestic indicators included the level of violent crimes, relations with neighboring countries and level of distrust in other citizens.
The results were then reviewed by a panel of international experts.
I wonder what our score would have been if Al Gore had won that 2000 election.
Sadly this does not surprise me very much.
The index was compiled based on 24 indicators measuring peace inside and outside of a country. They included the number of wars a country was involved in the past five years, how many soldiers were killed overseas and how much money was made in arms sales.
Domestic indicators included the level of violent crimes, relations with neighboring countries and level of distrust in other citizens.
The results were then reviewed by a panel of international experts.
I wonder what our score would have been if Al Gore had won that 2000 election.
Evangelicals love to talk about family values and the positive effect it has on their children. Oh really?
Evangelical teens are actually more likely to have lost their virginity than either mainline Protestants or Catholics. They tend to lose their virginity at a slightly younger age—16.3, compared with 16.7 for the other two faiths. And they are much more likely to have had three or more sexual partners by age 17: Regnerus reports that 13.7 percent of evangelicals have, compared with 8.9 percent for mainline Protestants.
I just love sticking a pin in these self righteous windbags.
I can personally attest to the fact that super religious girls are just as naughty, if not more naughty, then their secular peers. The only difference is that they feel guilty afterwards.
Fortunately for me I feel wonderful.
I just love sticking a pin in these self righteous windbags.
I can personally attest to the fact that super religious girls are just as naughty, if not more naughty, then their secular peers. The only difference is that they feel guilty afterwards.
Fortunately for me I feel wonderful.
There is a lot of gay out there.
Overall, the poll of 2,007 randomly selected adults conducted Dec. 12-Jan. 9, 2007 found that 41% say a close friend or member of their family is gay. Another 58% said they had no gay friends or family members while the remainder offered no opinion or declined to answer the question. Margin of sampling error for the overall results is plus or minus 3 percentage points.
According to the survey, considerably more women than men--47% versus 35%--say they have a close friend or family member who is gay. There is very little difference by age in the percentage of people who know gays well, except when it comes to those 65 and older, who are much less likely to say they have gay family members or close friends.
Percentages vary greatly by political orientation: Conservative Republicans are the least likely to say they have a close gay friend or family member (33%), while liberal Democrats are most likely to say so (59%). Race seems to have virtually no effect on whether a person knows gay people well.
When you read this survey you cannot help but come to certain realizations.
Number one, gay people are more likely to share their proclivities with a female friend or relative then a male one. And number two, NOBODY tells a Republican that they are gay!
I actually am very close to my gay family member and count them as my very best friend.
And I would not change a thing about them.
According to the survey, considerably more women than men--47% versus 35%--say they have a close friend or family member who is gay. There is very little difference by age in the percentage of people who know gays well, except when it comes to those 65 and older, who are much less likely to say they have gay family members or close friends.
Percentages vary greatly by political orientation: Conservative Republicans are the least likely to say they have a close gay friend or family member (33%), while liberal Democrats are most likely to say so (59%). Race seems to have virtually no effect on whether a person knows gay people well.
When you read this survey you cannot help but come to certain realizations.
Number one, gay people are more likely to share their proclivities with a female friend or relative then a male one. And number two, NOBODY tells a Republican that they are gay!
I actually am very close to my gay family member and count them as my very best friend.
And I would not change a thing about them.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Cheney is having his visitor logs destroyed.
A lawyer for Vice President Dick Cheney told the Secret Service in September to eliminate data on who visited Cheney at his official residence, a newly disclosed letter states.
The Sept. 13, 2006, letter from Cheney's lawyer says logs for Cheney's residence on the grounds of the Naval Observatory are subject to the Presidential Records Act.
Such a designation prevents the public from learning who visited the vice president.
Well knowing that I can't know who visited the Vice President makes me really want to know now!
Well then I guess I will just have to imagine who visited the dark lord.
Hmm, let's see. Well it must include somebody that Cheney does not want us to know about or why bother having them deleted? So it stands to reason that whoever it was makes Cheney either look bad, or lead investigators to believe he may have broken the law. And since this is a man who has been caught making unsubstantiated statements about Iraq which turned out to be false, and shot his friend in the face, and just had his lesbian daughter give birth outside of wedlock, I just have to wonder what could embarrass a man like Dick Cheney?
So if I have to guess, and since the records are gone then what choice do I have, I would guess that the visitor that Cheney does not want us to know about was one or more of the D.C. Madam's stable of "masseuses". Oh yeah that is definitely something that Cheney would not want us to know about.
You are welcome to leave your guess in the comments section if you think you have a better idea.
The Sept. 13, 2006, letter from Cheney's lawyer says logs for Cheney's residence on the grounds of the Naval Observatory are subject to the Presidential Records Act.
Such a designation prevents the public from learning who visited the vice president.
Well knowing that I can't know who visited the Vice President makes me really want to know now!
Well then I guess I will just have to imagine who visited the dark lord.
Hmm, let's see. Well it must include somebody that Cheney does not want us to know about or why bother having them deleted? So it stands to reason that whoever it was makes Cheney either look bad, or lead investigators to believe he may have broken the law. And since this is a man who has been caught making unsubstantiated statements about Iraq which turned out to be false, and shot his friend in the face, and just had his lesbian daughter give birth outside of wedlock, I just have to wonder what could embarrass a man like Dick Cheney?
So if I have to guess, and since the records are gone then what choice do I have, I would guess that the visitor that Cheney does not want us to know about was one or more of the D.C. Madam's stable of "masseuses". Oh yeah that is definitely something that Cheney would not want us to know about.
You are welcome to leave your guess in the comments section if you think you have a better idea.
According to recently unclassified CIA documents, Valerie Plame was indeed a "covert" agent when she was outed by the Bush administration.
An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003.The unclassified summary of Plame's employment with the CIA at the time that syndicated columnist Robert Novak published her name on July 14, 2003 says, "Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States."
Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, "engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business." The report says, "she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times." When overseas Plame traveled undercover, "sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA."
I, and my fellow liberal bloggers, have made this point repeatedly over the last several years but those bloggers on the other side of the ideological aisle have constantly made the case that she was not covert.
Now when I have been mistaken I have owned up to my mistakes. I just have to wonder if those right wing bloggers will have that same sense of honor.
And what of the right wing pundits? I just heard Pat Buchanan less then two weeks ago say that Plame was not covert, and there are many more who have tossed this particular Republican lie into various conversations. Will they also come forward and admit that they were either misinformed or outright lying?
Well I will certainly not be holding my breath.
Impeachment! It's not just for blowjobs anymore!
The push to impeach President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney is gaining a hearing in some parts of the country, but not in Washington.
More than 70 cities and 14 state Democratic parties have urged impeachment or investigations that could lead to impeachment. The most common charge is that Bush manipulated intelligence to lead the country into the Iraq war. Other charges include spying on Americans and torturing suspected terrorists in violation of U.S. and international law.
Most recently, the Massachusetts Democratic Party voted to push impeachment of both men. The 2,500 state convention delegates voted almost unanimously against Cheney; the vote against Bush was closer.
Massachusetts’ Democratic Party thus joined 13 others on the investigate-or-impeach bandwagon, including: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.
Among the cities and towns, the largest and most recent is Detroit, where the city council voted 7-0 this month to urge Congress to impeach Bush and Cheney for “intentionally misleading Congress and the public regarding the threat from Iraq in order to justify the war.”
“There’s a lot growing in support,” said Tim Carpenter, the director of the liberal group Progressive Democrats of America. “Whether Congress will respond, that’s another question.”
These are our Congressmen and women and they are not listening to our demand for justice. We want to see this administration pay for their lies and the bullying that they have done to our people in an effort to get re-elected. Trotting out threats of terrorism to scare us into voting for them, tapping our phones to keep tabs on political enemies, breaking more laws then I could possibly name in one post, and destroying our credibility around the world.
If all of that is not enough to earn an impeachemnt then waht the hell is? Lying to get us into an illegal war? Oh wait, he did that one first!
If our politicians do not have the balls to take this President on then I may not have the balls to vote for them in the next election.
More than 70 cities and 14 state Democratic parties have urged impeachment or investigations that could lead to impeachment. The most common charge is that Bush manipulated intelligence to lead the country into the Iraq war. Other charges include spying on Americans and torturing suspected terrorists in violation of U.S. and international law.
Most recently, the Massachusetts Democratic Party voted to push impeachment of both men. The 2,500 state convention delegates voted almost unanimously against Cheney; the vote against Bush was closer.
Massachusetts’ Democratic Party thus joined 13 others on the investigate-or-impeach bandwagon, including: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.
Among the cities and towns, the largest and most recent is Detroit, where the city council voted 7-0 this month to urge Congress to impeach Bush and Cheney for “intentionally misleading Congress and the public regarding the threat from Iraq in order to justify the war.”
“There’s a lot growing in support,” said Tim Carpenter, the director of the liberal group Progressive Democrats of America. “Whether Congress will respond, that’s another question.”
These are our Congressmen and women and they are not listening to our demand for justice. We want to see this administration pay for their lies and the bullying that they have done to our people in an effort to get re-elected. Trotting out threats of terrorism to scare us into voting for them, tapping our phones to keep tabs on political enemies, breaking more laws then I could possibly name in one post, and destroying our credibility around the world.
If all of that is not enough to earn an impeachemnt then waht the hell is? Lying to get us into an illegal war? Oh wait, he did that one first!
If our politicians do not have the balls to take this President on then I may not have the balls to vote for them in the next election.
Books by atheist authors are flying off of the book shelves. Flying books? That sounds supernatural.
I wonder if this is just a passing fad or if people are really starting to question the prevailing belief system in this country.
Attorney General? We don't need no stinking Attorney General!
Two years ago, major Hispanic groups broke with other civil rights organizations and supported Alberto R. Gonzales's nomination for attorney general, primarily because he would become the highest-ranking Latino ever in a presidential Cabinet.
Now, these groups say they are suffering from buyer's remorse.
"I have to say we were in error when we supported him to begin with," said Brent Wilkes, executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens. Gonzales, Wilkes said, has not aggressively pursued hate crimes and cases of police profiling of Hispanics. "We hoped for better. Instead it looks like he's done the bidding of the White House."
Janet Murguia, president and chief executive of the National Council of La Raza, the nation's largest Hispanic rights group, called Gonzales "a follower, not a leader." In the Hispanic community, she said, "people are conflicted. They are excited that a Latino had a chance to serve as the attorney general." But, she added, "I think we've been disappointed with his record so far."
You have to feel sorry for the Hispanic community. I mean they really thought they had arrived when one of their own was appointed to such a high office in this administration. I mean who else do they have to look up to in government, except for Bill Richardson who spends almost as much time patting himself on the back as Joe Biden.
So perhaps the Hispanic community thought that by having one of their own so close to the President they would get some reflected benefit, or at least a positive role model for the kids. But that was not the case.
Instead they saw Alberto Gonzales serving as some poor man's versions of Sancho Panza following his own Don Quixote as he chases imaginary dragons and struggles to create his own version of reality.
Now, these groups say they are suffering from buyer's remorse.
"I have to say we were in error when we supported him to begin with," said Brent Wilkes, executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens. Gonzales, Wilkes said, has not aggressively pursued hate crimes and cases of police profiling of Hispanics. "We hoped for better. Instead it looks like he's done the bidding of the White House."
Janet Murguia, president and chief executive of the National Council of La Raza, the nation's largest Hispanic rights group, called Gonzales "a follower, not a leader." In the Hispanic community, she said, "people are conflicted. They are excited that a Latino had a chance to serve as the attorney general." But, she added, "I think we've been disappointed with his record so far."
You have to feel sorry for the Hispanic community. I mean they really thought they had arrived when one of their own was appointed to such a high office in this administration. I mean who else do they have to look up to in government, except for Bill Richardson who spends almost as much time patting himself on the back as Joe Biden.
So perhaps the Hispanic community thought that by having one of their own so close to the President they would get some reflected benefit, or at least a positive role model for the kids. But that was not the case.
Instead they saw Alberto Gonzales serving as some poor man's versions of Sancho Panza following his own Don Quixote as he chases imaginary dragons and struggles to create his own version of reality.
Monday, May 28, 2007
Maybe the 9-11 conspiracy theorists are not so crazy after all.
In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.
I have rejected the idea that 9-11 was orchestrated by our government, not so much because I do not believe this administration capable of anything so horrific (The things that I know they have done are frightening enough), but mostly because Osama Bin Laden did not deny his culpability.
I cannot imagine that a man like Bin Laden would allow our government to scapegoat him and his organization like that. But other then that I am not at all positive that this administration would not have gone to the extremist of actions to get the war that they clearly wanted all along.
But it is more likely that if our government had planned the attack they would have made sure that the hijackers were identified as Saddam Hussein's men and not Bin Laden's.
But this report should give everyone pause and make them really wonder just how many lies and deceptions our government has fed us over the years.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.
I have rejected the idea that 9-11 was orchestrated by our government, not so much because I do not believe this administration capable of anything so horrific (The things that I know they have done are frightening enough), but mostly because Osama Bin Laden did not deny his culpability.
I cannot imagine that a man like Bin Laden would allow our government to scapegoat him and his organization like that. But other then that I am not at all positive that this administration would not have gone to the extremist of actions to get the war that they clearly wanted all along.
But it is more likely that if our government had planned the attack they would have made sure that the hijackers were identified as Saddam Hussein's men and not Bin Laden's.
But this report should give everyone pause and make them really wonder just how many lies and deceptions our government has fed us over the years.
Homeland Security is not focused on terrorism. Then why do we have it?
Of the 814,073 people charged by DHS in immigration courts during the past three years, 12 faced charges of terrorism, TRAC said.
Those 12 cases represent 0.0015 percent of the total number of cases filed.
"The DHS claims it is focused on terrorism. Well that's just not true," said David Burnham, a TRAC spokesman. "Either there's no terrorism, or they're terrible at catching them. Either way it's bad for all of us."
The TRAC analysis also found that DHS filed a minuscule number of what are called "national security" charges against people in the immigration courts. The report stated that 114, or 0.014 percent of the total of roughly 800,000 individuals charged were charged with national security violations.
The real focus of Homeland Security is to monitor people that this administration finds threatening, not threatening to the country, but rather threatening to their administration.
So they tap all of our phones, and frisk us before we can board a plane to see Grandma, but they are really not going to catch the terrorists. Because there aren't any to catch.
But when there are some you can bet these guys will not even see them coming.
Those 12 cases represent 0.0015 percent of the total number of cases filed.
"The DHS claims it is focused on terrorism. Well that's just not true," said David Burnham, a TRAC spokesman. "Either there's no terrorism, or they're terrible at catching them. Either way it's bad for all of us."
The TRAC analysis also found that DHS filed a minuscule number of what are called "national security" charges against people in the immigration courts. The report stated that 114, or 0.014 percent of the total of roughly 800,000 individuals charged were charged with national security violations.
The real focus of Homeland Security is to monitor people that this administration finds threatening, not threatening to the country, but rather threatening to their administration.
So they tap all of our phones, and frisk us before we can board a plane to see Grandma, but they are really not going to catch the terrorists. Because there aren't any to catch.
But when there are some you can bet these guys will not even see them coming.
If you go to Alabama rest assured that they are keeping close tabs on all of those gay terrorists.
The Alabama Department of Homeland Security has taken down a Web site it operated that included gay rights and anti-war organizations in a list of groups that could include terrorists.
The Web site identified different types of terrorists, and included a list of groups it believed could spawn terrorists. The list also included environmentalists, animal rights advocates and abortion opponents.
Nice to see all of that Homeland Security money being spent so wisely.
Morons!
The Web site identified different types of terrorists, and included a list of groups it believed could spawn terrorists. The list also included environmentalists, animal rights advocates and abortion opponents.
Nice to see all of that Homeland Security money being spent so wisely.
Morons!
Sunday, May 27, 2007
The next time you hear the President say that we are better off with Saddam Hussein out of power in Iraq, ask yourself if the Iraqis feel that way.
Iraqis are clamoring to get out of Iraq. Two million have fled so far and nearly two million more have been displaced within the country. (That’s a total of some 15 percent of the population.) Save the Children reported this month that Iraq’s child-survival rate is falling faster than any other nation’s. One Iraqi in eight is killed by illness or violence by the age of 5. Yet for all the words President Bush has lavished on Darfur and AIDS in Africa, there has been a deadly silence from him about what’s happening in the country he gave “God’s gift of freedom.”
It’s easy to see why. To admit that Iraqis are voting with their feet is to concede that American policy is in ruins. A “secure” Iraq is a mirage, and, worse, those who can afford to leave are the very professionals who might have helped build one. Thus the president says nothing about Iraq’s humanitarian crisis, the worst in the Middle East since 1948, much as he tried to hide the American death toll in Iraq by keeping the troops’ coffins off-camera and staying away from military funerals.
Never believe anything this administration tells you. Most of the money they have spent on propaganda has not been directed at the Iraqis, it has been directed at us.
It’s easy to see why. To admit that Iraqis are voting with their feet is to concede that American policy is in ruins. A “secure” Iraq is a mirage, and, worse, those who can afford to leave are the very professionals who might have helped build one. Thus the president says nothing about Iraq’s humanitarian crisis, the worst in the Middle East since 1948, much as he tried to hide the American death toll in Iraq by keeping the troops’ coffins off-camera and staying away from military funerals.
Never believe anything this administration tells you. Most of the money they have spent on propaganda has not been directed at the Iraqis, it has been directed at us.
More and more American troops in Iraq are doubting their mission.
Staff Sgt. David Safstrom does not regret his previous tours in Iraq, not even a difficult second stint when two comrades were killed while trying to capture insurgents.
“In Mosul, in 2003, it felt like we were making the city a better place,” he said. “There was no sectarian violence, Saddam was gone, we were tracking down the bad guys. It felt awesome.”
But now on his third deployment in Iraq, he is no longer a believer in the mission. The pivotal moment came, he says, this past February when soldiers killed a man setting a roadside bomb.
When they searched the bomber’s body, they found identification showing him to be a sergeant in the Iraqi Army.
“I thought, ‘What are we doing here? Why are we still here?’ ” said Sergeant Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the First Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. “We’re helping guys that are trying to kill us. We help them in the day. They turn around at night and try to kill us.”
The military in Iraq are often so busy trying to stay alive that they give little if any thought to the politics or rational for their mission. They have a job and they simply concentrate on doing it.
But after so many trips home and then the re-deployment, the men have tome to see the war from a different angle and see how it is affecting their families, and loved ones.
And what is the result of that change in perspective?
“In 2003, 2004, 100 percent of the soldiers wanted to be here, to fight this war,” said Sgt. First Class David Moore, a self-described “conservative Texas Republican” and platoon sergeant who strongly advocates an American withdrawal. “Now, 95 percent of my platoon agrees with me.”
“In Mosul, in 2003, it felt like we were making the city a better place,” he said. “There was no sectarian violence, Saddam was gone, we were tracking down the bad guys. It felt awesome.”
But now on his third deployment in Iraq, he is no longer a believer in the mission. The pivotal moment came, he says, this past February when soldiers killed a man setting a roadside bomb.
When they searched the bomber’s body, they found identification showing him to be a sergeant in the Iraqi Army.
“I thought, ‘What are we doing here? Why are we still here?’ ” said Sergeant Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the First Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. “We’re helping guys that are trying to kill us. We help them in the day. They turn around at night and try to kill us.”
The military in Iraq are often so busy trying to stay alive that they give little if any thought to the politics or rational for their mission. They have a job and they simply concentrate on doing it.
But after so many trips home and then the re-deployment, the men have tome to see the war from a different angle and see how it is affecting their families, and loved ones.
And what is the result of that change in perspective?
“In 2003, 2004, 100 percent of the soldiers wanted to be here, to fight this war,” said Sgt. First Class David Moore, a self-described “conservative Texas Republican” and platoon sergeant who strongly advocates an American withdrawal. “Now, 95 percent of my platoon agrees with me.”
Are you tired of sending your children to the museum and having them come back acting all smarter then you? Well then this is the museum for you.
The Christian creators of the sprawling museum, unveiled on Saturday, hope to draw as many as half a million people each year to their state-of-the-art project, which depicts the Bible's first book, Genesis, as literal truth.
While the $27 million museum near Cincinnati has drawn snickers from media and condemnation from U.S. scientists, those who believe God created the heavens and the Earth in six days about 6,000 years ago say their views are finally being represented.
"What we've done here is to give people an opportunity to hear information that is not readily available ... to challenge them that really you can believe the Bible's history," said Ken Ham, president of the group Answers in Genesis that founded the museum.
Here exhibits show the Grand Canyon took just days to form during Noah's flood, dinosaurs coexisted with humans and had a place on Noah's Ark, and Cain married his sister to people the earth, among other Biblical wonders.
I think that I may have lost a few brain cells just reading the "information" above.
So I guess if you want your children to grow up just as ignorant and superstitious as you are then this is the place to send them.
But what can you expect from a religion that claims we are still being punished for Adam and Eve's original sin of seeking knowledge? Because as every fundamentalist Christian knows, learning is bad and believing is good.
While the $27 million museum near Cincinnati has drawn snickers from media and condemnation from U.S. scientists, those who believe God created the heavens and the Earth in six days about 6,000 years ago say their views are finally being represented.
"What we've done here is to give people an opportunity to hear information that is not readily available ... to challenge them that really you can believe the Bible's history," said Ken Ham, president of the group Answers in Genesis that founded the museum.
Here exhibits show the Grand Canyon took just days to form during Noah's flood, dinosaurs coexisted with humans and had a place on Noah's Ark, and Cain married his sister to people the earth, among other Biblical wonders.
I think that I may have lost a few brain cells just reading the "information" above.
So I guess if you want your children to grow up just as ignorant and superstitious as you are then this is the place to send them.
But what can you expect from a religion that claims we are still being punished for Adam and Eve's original sin of seeking knowledge? Because as every fundamentalist Christian knows, learning is bad and believing is good.
Alaskan astronaut, who was involved in the infamous Nasa love triangle, is fired.
The U.S. space agency has dismissed the male astronaut involved in a love triangle that led to a bizarre confrontation between a female astronaut and another woman in a Florida airport, a spokesman said on Friday.William Oefelein, 42, who admitted to an affair with fellow astronaut Lisa Nowak that began when both were married, is being sent back to the U.S. Navy effective June 1, a NASA Johnson Space Agency spokesman said. He was told Wednesday.
You know I feel bad that Mr. Oefelein has lost what must thave been a dream job for him, but what did he expect?
I mean he is an Alaskan man! It has been well established that Alaskan men are the most virile, attractive, and alluring men on the planet.
Hell we even have a magazine named after us!
So NASA should have known that putting a sexual magnet like Oefelein in the astronaut program would have caused some friction among the female staff. It is like throwing steak into kennel full of sled dogs. You just know it is not going to be pretty.
I mean these guys are scientists! Couldn't they have done some research?
All they would have had to do is talk to some of our sexually exhausted Alaskan females.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
This is all just smoke and mirrors.
The White House is reportedly working on what officials describe as several "concepts" for reducing the number of US combat troops in Iraq by as much as 50 percent next year.
Citing unnamed senior administration officials, The New York Times said the concepts could lower US troop levels in Iraq to roughly 100,000 by the time the 2008 US presidential election moves into high gear.
They would also greatly scale back the mission that President George W. Bush set for the US military when he ordered it in January to win back control of Baghdad and Anbar Province, the report said.
If you believe this for an instant then you have just not been paying attention.
Citing unnamed senior administration officials, The New York Times said the concepts could lower US troop levels in Iraq to roughly 100,000 by the time the 2008 US presidential election moves into high gear.
They would also greatly scale back the mission that President George W. Bush set for the US military when he ordered it in January to win back control of Baghdad and Anbar Province, the report said.
If you believe this for an instant then you have just not been paying attention.
The Iraq funding bill that the Democrats caved in to, not only does not have a date for withdrawal, it also virtually ensures that we will never leave
Thursday, May 24 the US Congress voted to continue the war on Iraq. They called it “supporting the troops.” I call it stealing Iraq’s oil-the second largest oil reserves in the world. The “benchmark” or goal the Bush administration has been working on furiously since the US invaded Iraq is the privatization of Iraqi oil. Now they have the US Congress blackmailing the Iraqi Parliament and Iraqi people: no privatization of Iraqi oil, no reconstruction funds.
This threat could not be clearer. If the Iraqi Parliament refuses to pass the privatization legislation, the US Congress will withhold US reconstruction funds promised to the Iraqis to rebuild what the United States has destroyed in Iraq. The privatization law, written by American oil company consultants hired by the Bush administration, would leave the control of only 17 of 80 known oil fields with the Iraq National Oil Company. The remainder (two-thirds) of known oil fields and all yet undiscovered oil fields would be up for grabs by the private oil companies of the world (but guess how many would go to the United States firms given to them by the compliant Iraqi government.)
A lot of us liberals made the case years ago that this war was all about oil, and the right wing called us conspiracy theorists. Yeah, well this pretty much removes any doubt about that fact now doesn't it?
What purpose would we have for taking control of the Iraqi oil, other then to make an obscene profit off of people whose country we bombed back into the stone age and whose people we have killed by the hundreds of thousands? It is literally like stealing the valuables off of a corpse. It is sub-human!
It also shows that the Republicans do not want the violence in Iraq to subside, if that were to happen and the Iraq government were able to get control of their country and no longer need America's help, then American oil companies could not get their hands on this black gold bubbling up out of the sands of Iraq. It just shows that nothing, and I mean nothing, matters as much to these bastards as lining their own pockets. Certainly not the lives of American service men and women or the lives of these Iraqis.
So whichever Democrats signed this bill have shown that they are no better then the Republicans who are so arrogant that they see nothing wrong with forcing their brand of democracy onto a different culture for the sole purpose of creating a profit for our country. And that makes them evil.
This threat could not be clearer. If the Iraqi Parliament refuses to pass the privatization legislation, the US Congress will withhold US reconstruction funds promised to the Iraqis to rebuild what the United States has destroyed in Iraq. The privatization law, written by American oil company consultants hired by the Bush administration, would leave the control of only 17 of 80 known oil fields with the Iraq National Oil Company. The remainder (two-thirds) of known oil fields and all yet undiscovered oil fields would be up for grabs by the private oil companies of the world (but guess how many would go to the United States firms given to them by the compliant Iraqi government.)
A lot of us liberals made the case years ago that this war was all about oil, and the right wing called us conspiracy theorists. Yeah, well this pretty much removes any doubt about that fact now doesn't it?
What purpose would we have for taking control of the Iraqi oil, other then to make an obscene profit off of people whose country we bombed back into the stone age and whose people we have killed by the hundreds of thousands? It is literally like stealing the valuables off of a corpse. It is sub-human!
It also shows that the Republicans do not want the violence in Iraq to subside, if that were to happen and the Iraq government were able to get control of their country and no longer need America's help, then American oil companies could not get their hands on this black gold bubbling up out of the sands of Iraq. It just shows that nothing, and I mean nothing, matters as much to these bastards as lining their own pockets. Certainly not the lives of American service men and women or the lives of these Iraqis.
So whichever Democrats signed this bill have shown that they are no better then the Republicans who are so arrogant that they see nothing wrong with forcing their brand of democracy onto a different culture for the sole purpose of creating a profit for our country. And that makes them evil.
Friday, May 25, 2007
1 in 3 people in America believe the Bible to be the literal word of God.
About one-third of the American adult population believes the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally word for word, a new Gallup poll reveals. This percentage is only slightly lower than several decades ago.
Gallup reports that the majority of those "who don't believe that the Bible is literally true believe that it is the inspired word of God but that not everything it in should be taken literally." Finally, about one in five Americans believe the Bible is merely an ancient book of "fables, legends, history, and moral precepts recorded by man."
This last group are my homies.
As long as this remains the case we will continue to find ourselves being left behind in the scientific arena by other countries.
I just find it so hard to fathom that there are so many people who insist upon living a life of superstition and ignorance. It makes me feel sorry for their children, and our country.
Gallup reports that the majority of those "who don't believe that the Bible is literally true believe that it is the inspired word of God but that not everything it in should be taken literally." Finally, about one in five Americans believe the Bible is merely an ancient book of "fables, legends, history, and moral precepts recorded by man."
This last group are my homies.
As long as this remains the case we will continue to find ourselves being left behind in the scientific arena by other countries.
I just find it so hard to fathom that there are so many people who insist upon living a life of superstition and ignorance. It makes me feel sorry for their children, and our country.
Bush had access to intelligence before the invasion of Iraq that the war would be a disaster.
Intelligence analysts predicted, in secret papers circulated within the government before the Iraq invasion, that al-Qaida would see U.S. military action as an opportunity to increase its operations and that Iran would try to shape a post-Saddam Iraq.
The top analysts in government also said that establishing a stable democracy in Iraq would be a "long, difficult and probably turbulent process."
Democrats said the newly declassified documents, part of a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation released Friday, make clear that the Bush administration was warned about the very challenges it now faces as it tries to stabilize Iraq.
"Sadly, the administration's refusal to heed these dire warnings - and worse, to plan for them - has led to tragic consequences for which our nation is paying a terrible price," said Senate Intelligence Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.
Among other conclusions, the analysts found:
- Establishing a stable democracy in Iraq would be a long, steep and probably turbulent challenge. They said that contributions could be made by 4 million Iraqi exiles and Iraq's impoverished, underemployed middle class. But they noted that opposition parties would need sustained economic, political and military support.
- Al-Qaida would see the invasion as a chance to accelerate its attacks, and the lines between al-Qaida and other terrorist groups "could become blurred." In a weak spot in the analysis, one paper said that the risk of terror attacks would spike after the invasion and slow over the next three to five years. However, the State Department recently found that attacks last year alone rose sharply.
- Groups in Iraq's deeply divided society would become violent, unless stopped by the occupying force. "Score settling would occur throughout Iraq between those associated with Saddam's regime and those who have suffered most under it," one report stated.
- Iraq's neighbors would jockey for influence and Iranian leaders would try to shape the post-Saddam era to demonstrate Tehran's importance in the region. The less Tehran felt threatened by U.S. actions, the analysts said, "the better the chance that they could cooperate in the postwar period."
- Postwar Iraq would face significant economic challenges, having few resources beyond oil. Analysts predicted that Iraq's large petroleum resources would make economic reconstruction easier, but they didn't anticipate that continued fighting and sabotage would drag down oil production.
- Military action to eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction would not cause other governments in the region to give up such programs.
As numerous investigations have found, the intelligence agencies of the United States and its allies were wrong about Iraq's supposed weapons programs.
I have long hated the oft repeated lie that the US had no idea that things would go this badly in Iraq. But of course they could have known just that if they were not cherry picking what information they wanted to read and were ignoring any information that did not support their hypothesis.
So now here is more proof that they did have all of the information they needed to not make this horrendous mistake, and yet they decided to make it anyway.
The top analysts in government also said that establishing a stable democracy in Iraq would be a "long, difficult and probably turbulent process."
Democrats said the newly declassified documents, part of a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation released Friday, make clear that the Bush administration was warned about the very challenges it now faces as it tries to stabilize Iraq.
"Sadly, the administration's refusal to heed these dire warnings - and worse, to plan for them - has led to tragic consequences for which our nation is paying a terrible price," said Senate Intelligence Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.
Among other conclusions, the analysts found:
- Establishing a stable democracy in Iraq would be a long, steep and probably turbulent challenge. They said that contributions could be made by 4 million Iraqi exiles and Iraq's impoverished, underemployed middle class. But they noted that opposition parties would need sustained economic, political and military support.
- Al-Qaida would see the invasion as a chance to accelerate its attacks, and the lines between al-Qaida and other terrorist groups "could become blurred." In a weak spot in the analysis, one paper said that the risk of terror attacks would spike after the invasion and slow over the next three to five years. However, the State Department recently found that attacks last year alone rose sharply.
- Groups in Iraq's deeply divided society would become violent, unless stopped by the occupying force. "Score settling would occur throughout Iraq between those associated with Saddam's regime and those who have suffered most under it," one report stated.
- Iraq's neighbors would jockey for influence and Iranian leaders would try to shape the post-Saddam era to demonstrate Tehran's importance in the region. The less Tehran felt threatened by U.S. actions, the analysts said, "the better the chance that they could cooperate in the postwar period."
- Postwar Iraq would face significant economic challenges, having few resources beyond oil. Analysts predicted that Iraq's large petroleum resources would make economic reconstruction easier, but they didn't anticipate that continued fighting and sabotage would drag down oil production.
- Military action to eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction would not cause other governments in the region to give up such programs.
As numerous investigations have found, the intelligence agencies of the United States and its allies were wrong about Iraq's supposed weapons programs.
I have long hated the oft repeated lie that the US had no idea that things would go this badly in Iraq. But of course they could have known just that if they were not cherry picking what information they wanted to read and were ignoring any information that did not support their hypothesis.
So now here is more proof that they did have all of the information they needed to not make this horrendous mistake, and yet they decided to make it anyway.
Jon Stewart and the daily Show do an AMAZING job of demonstrating the absurdity of the US Attorneys scandal.
This is exactly what I tried to do in a recent post. But I just do not have the resources, or let's face it, the talent of Jon Stewart and his staff.
This is absolutely brilliant!
Well this will at least keep them in the race for the time being.
Courting the anti-war constituency, Democratic presidential rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama both voted against legislation that pays for the Iraq war but lacks a timeline for troop withdrawal.
"I fully support our troops" but the measure "fails to compel the president to give our troops a new strategy in Iraq," said Clinton, a New York senator.
"Enough is enough," Obama, an Illinois senator, declared, adding that President Bush should not get "a blank check to continue down this same, disastrous path."
If either one of them had voted for this blank check for Bush they would be kissing their Presidential aspirations goodbye. But I am still concerned that they seemed unsure in the beginning as to how they would vote. If you want to be the President you need to have unwavering convictions that are based in reality. And the reality about the Iraq war is that it is over and we lost.
"I fully support our troops" but the measure "fails to compel the president to give our troops a new strategy in Iraq," said Clinton, a New York senator.
"Enough is enough," Obama, an Illinois senator, declared, adding that President Bush should not get "a blank check to continue down this same, disastrous path."
If either one of them had voted for this blank check for Bush they would be kissing their Presidential aspirations goodbye. But I am still concerned that they seemed unsure in the beginning as to how they would vote. If you want to be the President you need to have unwavering convictions that are based in reality. And the reality about the Iraq war is that it is over and we lost.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
I was incorrect, the Goodling testamony did indeed reveal a smoking gun. Hell it may in fact be a smoking cannon!
This Monica revealed something hotter --- much hotter --- than a stained blue dress. In her opening testimony yesterday before the House Judiciary Committee, Monica Goodling, the blonde-ling underling to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Department of Justice Liaison to the White House, dropped The Big One....And the Committee members didn't even know it.
Goodling testified that Gonzales' Chief of Staff, Kyle Sampson, perjured himself, lying to the committee in earlier testimony. The lie: Sampson denied Monica had told him about Tim Griffin's "involvement in 'caging' voters" in 2004.
Yeah I was confused about what "caging" is as well, but fortunately smarter people then myself are on the case.
But what's 'caging' and why is it such a dreadful secret that lawyer Sampson put his license to practice and his freedom on the line to cover Tim Griffin's involvement in it? Because it's a felony. And a big one.
Here's how caging worked, and along with Griffin's thoughtful emails themselves you'll understand it all in no time.
The Bush-Cheney operatives sent hundreds of thousands of letters marked "Do not forward" to voters' homes. Letters returned ("caged") were used as evidence to block these voters' right to cast a ballot on grounds they were registered at phony addresses. Who were the evil fakers? Homeless men, students on vacation and --- you got to love this --- American soldiers. Oh yeah: most of them are Black voters.
Why weren't these African-American voters home when the Republican letters arrived? The homeless men were on park benches, the students were on vacation --- and the soldiers were overseas. Go to Baghdad, lose your vote. Mission Accomplished.
So what this is my friends is the evidence that Rove and his cronies stole the 2004 election, and how they did it. Is that a big enough smoking gun for you?
And what is more the reporter who broke this story, Greg Palast from the BBC, claims to have the 500 missing Rove e-mails! Holy shit!
So go and visit our best new friends at The Brad Blog because they have all of the details.
I cannot believe I did not think that this US Attorney story was going to be very interesting! I am an idiot.
Goodling testified that Gonzales' Chief of Staff, Kyle Sampson, perjured himself, lying to the committee in earlier testimony. The lie: Sampson denied Monica had told him about Tim Griffin's "involvement in 'caging' voters" in 2004.
Yeah I was confused about what "caging" is as well, but fortunately smarter people then myself are on the case.
But what's 'caging' and why is it such a dreadful secret that lawyer Sampson put his license to practice and his freedom on the line to cover Tim Griffin's involvement in it? Because it's a felony. And a big one.
Here's how caging worked, and along with Griffin's thoughtful emails themselves you'll understand it all in no time.
The Bush-Cheney operatives sent hundreds of thousands of letters marked "Do not forward" to voters' homes. Letters returned ("caged") were used as evidence to block these voters' right to cast a ballot on grounds they were registered at phony addresses. Who were the evil fakers? Homeless men, students on vacation and --- you got to love this --- American soldiers. Oh yeah: most of them are Black voters.
Why weren't these African-American voters home when the Republican letters arrived? The homeless men were on park benches, the students were on vacation --- and the soldiers were overseas. Go to Baghdad, lose your vote. Mission Accomplished.
So what this is my friends is the evidence that Rove and his cronies stole the 2004 election, and how they did it. Is that a big enough smoking gun for you?
And what is more the reporter who broke this story, Greg Palast from the BBC, claims to have the 500 missing Rove e-mails! Holy shit!
So go and visit our best new friends at The Brad Blog because they have all of the details.
I cannot believe I did not think that this US Attorney story was going to be very interesting! I am an idiot.
Bush threatens the children of reporters who are asking tough questions.
The article above does not have the most interesting information from this news conference.
At one point after David Gregory essentially asked him why we should trust anything he says about terrorists or Al-Qaeda anymore since he has been proven wrong so many times, Bush told Gregory that it was because he read the most current information from our intelligence and that he was trying to protect Mr. Gregory's children.
I rather doubt that David Gregory appreciates having his children drug into this debate.
Bush also made the claim that if we don't fight them over there then they will follow us over here. (Who does not love that old quote?) But then bizarrely Bush said that if the government of Iraq asked us to leave we would. I guess if he Iraq government wanted to put our children in danger, then Bush would support it as well. (By the way the Iraq government has asked us to leave a number of times.)
You know I want to say something about that ridiculous claim that Al-Qaeda is going to follow us over here when we leave Iraq.
Number one, most of Al-Qaeda is not even in Iraq. They could come over right now if they wanted to. The Iraq war is not keeping them from coming to America.
Number two, it has been reported repeatedly that our little conflict in Iraq has been an invaluable recruiting tool for Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. So essentially the longer we stay the more terrorists we may have to worry about in the future. Does the President really think that we can just stay there until we have killed every terrorist that Al-Qaeda can recruit? How is that a plan?
My bitch is that Bush just keeps using the same talking points over and over and over again and no reporter just stands up and says "Look do you have anything new? Anything that is not a lie? Anything that might make my being here in this press conference not a colossal waste of my time? Because if you don't I might as well stop coming to these and just recycle my old articles and send them to my editor."
If any reporter actually did that they would automatically become my favorite reporter of all time.
At one point after David Gregory essentially asked him why we should trust anything he says about terrorists or Al-Qaeda anymore since he has been proven wrong so many times, Bush told Gregory that it was because he read the most current information from our intelligence and that he was trying to protect Mr. Gregory's children.
I rather doubt that David Gregory appreciates having his children drug into this debate.
Bush also made the claim that if we don't fight them over there then they will follow us over here. (Who does not love that old quote?) But then bizarrely Bush said that if the government of Iraq asked us to leave we would. I guess if he Iraq government wanted to put our children in danger, then Bush would support it as well. (By the way the Iraq government has asked us to leave a number of times.)
You know I want to say something about that ridiculous claim that Al-Qaeda is going to follow us over here when we leave Iraq.
Number one, most of Al-Qaeda is not even in Iraq. They could come over right now if they wanted to. The Iraq war is not keeping them from coming to America.
Number two, it has been reported repeatedly that our little conflict in Iraq has been an invaluable recruiting tool for Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. So essentially the longer we stay the more terrorists we may have to worry about in the future. Does the President really think that we can just stay there until we have killed every terrorist that Al-Qaeda can recruit? How is that a plan?
My bitch is that Bush just keeps using the same talking points over and over and over again and no reporter just stands up and says "Look do you have anything new? Anything that is not a lie? Anything that might make my being here in this press conference not a colossal waste of my time? Because if you don't I might as well stop coming to these and just recycle my old articles and send them to my editor."
If any reporter actually did that they would automatically become my favorite reporter of all time.
My fear is that I would put this on and not notice any difference.
...if you're a cop, paramedic, or social worker who may someday need to deal with a person having a psychotic episode. At those times, empathy can be crucial.
That's where Virtual Hallucinations comes in. The training device, created by Janssen L.P., is a rig with earphones and goggles that plunges the wearer into the mind of a serious schizophrenic. The system offers two interactive scenarios. In one, you're riding a bus in which other riders appear and disappear, birds of prey claw at the windows, and voices hiss, "He's taking you back to the FBI!" The other features a trip to the drugstore, where the pharmacist seems to be handing you poison instead of pills, and hostile customers stare at you in disgust.
One of the many things that I used to ponder about when I was young was whether crazy people know they are crazy. Well I can now tell you with some authority that, no they do not!
They just think that other people are trying to control their lives and don't understand them because they are unique.
So how would you feel if you experimented with this and found it oddly comforting?
That's where Virtual Hallucinations comes in. The training device, created by Janssen L.P., is a rig with earphones and goggles that plunges the wearer into the mind of a serious schizophrenic. The system offers two interactive scenarios. In one, you're riding a bus in which other riders appear and disappear, birds of prey claw at the windows, and voices hiss, "He's taking you back to the FBI!" The other features a trip to the drugstore, where the pharmacist seems to be handing you poison instead of pills, and hostile customers stare at you in disgust.
One of the many things that I used to ponder about when I was young was whether crazy people know they are crazy. Well I can now tell you with some authority that, no they do not!
They just think that other people are trying to control their lives and don't understand them because they are unique.
So how would you feel if you experimented with this and found it oddly comforting?
58 Arabic speakers kicked out because they like dudes.
Lawmakers who say the military has kicked out 58 Arabic language experts because they were gay want the Pentagon to explain how it can afford to let the valuable specialists go.
Seizing on the latest discharge, involving three specialists, House members wrote the House Armed Services Committee chairman on Wednesday that the continued loss of such "capable, highly skilled Arabic linguists continues to compromise our national security during time of war."
So how many American deaths are worth it to keep the military "fag free"?
Do we really think that a soldier who is getting ready to raid a building in Baghdad, and desperately hoping that they got the proper intelligence, gives a shit whether the guy that translated the information is gay or not? I seriously doubt that he could give a rat's ass if that information would get him back home to his family in one piece.
This policy is ridiculous and it is obvious that it is going to be changed in the near future. Our attitudes about homosexuals has evolved in this country and it is past time that our military catch up.
Seizing on the latest discharge, involving three specialists, House members wrote the House Armed Services Committee chairman on Wednesday that the continued loss of such "capable, highly skilled Arabic linguists continues to compromise our national security during time of war."
So how many American deaths are worth it to keep the military "fag free"?
Do we really think that a soldier who is getting ready to raid a building in Baghdad, and desperately hoping that they got the proper intelligence, gives a shit whether the guy that translated the information is gay or not? I seriously doubt that he could give a rat's ass if that information would get him back home to his family in one piece.
This policy is ridiculous and it is obvious that it is going to be changed in the near future. Our attitudes about homosexuals has evolved in this country and it is past time that our military catch up.
Edwards calls war on terror a "bumper sticker".
The U.S.-led war on terrorism is "a bumper sticker, not a plan" that has weakened Washington's global standing, Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards said on Wednesday as he unveiled his defense policy plans.
In an address to the Council on Foreign Relations, Edwards urged the U.S. Congress to use its funding power to force an immediate pullout of up to 50,000 U.S. combat troops from Iraq, then a full withdrawal within a year.
Edwards, who was the Democratic Party's vice presidential candidate in 2004, said as president he would close the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, restore the ability of detainees to take legal action against unlawful imprisonment and ban torture.
"The war on terror is a slogan designed only for politics, not a strategy to make America safe. It's a bumper sticker, not a plan," Edwards said. "It has damaged our alliances and weakened our standing in the world."
"By framing this as a 'war,' we have walked straight into the trap that the terrorists have set -- that we are engaged in some kind of clash of civilizations and a war against Islam," said the former senator from North Carolina.
Finally some straight talk from Edwards about this war! I am hungry for some honest debate on what Bush and company have done to our country and how they have sold this bullshit war by playing on the damaged emotions of our population after 9-11.
I want Edwards, Feinstein, and Murtha to bring the fight to these Republicans and spineless Democrats and tell it like it really is.
America wants out of the war!
There is no debate about that.
And for the Democrats in the Senate and the House to be too worried about their political futures to make the hard choices is a betrayal to the voters that sent them there. They need to do whatever they have to to get us out! Now!
In an address to the Council on Foreign Relations, Edwards urged the U.S. Congress to use its funding power to force an immediate pullout of up to 50,000 U.S. combat troops from Iraq, then a full withdrawal within a year.
Edwards, who was the Democratic Party's vice presidential candidate in 2004, said as president he would close the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, restore the ability of detainees to take legal action against unlawful imprisonment and ban torture.
"The war on terror is a slogan designed only for politics, not a strategy to make America safe. It's a bumper sticker, not a plan," Edwards said. "It has damaged our alliances and weakened our standing in the world."
"By framing this as a 'war,' we have walked straight into the trap that the terrorists have set -- that we are engaged in some kind of clash of civilizations and a war against Islam," said the former senator from North Carolina.
Finally some straight talk from Edwards about this war! I am hungry for some honest debate on what Bush and company have done to our country and how they have sold this bullshit war by playing on the damaged emotions of our population after 9-11.
I want Edwards, Feinstein, and Murtha to bring the fight to these Republicans and spineless Democrats and tell it like it really is.
America wants out of the war!
There is no debate about that.
And for the Democrats in the Senate and the House to be too worried about their political futures to make the hard choices is a betrayal to the voters that sent them there. They need to do whatever they have to to get us out! Now!
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Keith Olbermann uses today's Special Comments to take the Democrats to task for caving on the war funding bill.
Few men or women elected in our history—whether executive or legislative, state or national—have been sent into office with a mandate more obvious, nor instructions more clear:
Get us out of Iraq.
Yet after six months of preparation and execution—half a year gathering the strands of public support; translating into action, the collective will of the nearly 70 percent of Americans who reject this War of Lies, the Democrats have managed only this:
The Democratic leadership has surrendered to a president—if not the worst president, then easily the most selfish, in our history—who happily blackmails his own people, and uses his own military personnel as hostages to his asinine demand, that the Democrats “give the troops their money”;
The Democratic leadership has agreed to finance the deaths of Americans in a war that has only reduced the security of Americans;
The Democratic leadership has given Mr. Bush all that he wanted, with the only caveat being, not merely meaningless symbolism about benchmarks for the Iraqi government, but optional meaningless symbolism about benchmarks for the Iraqi government.
The Democratic leadership has, in sum, claimed a compromise with the Administration, in which the only things truly compromised, are the trust of the voters, the ethics of the Democrats, and the lives of our brave, and doomed, friends, and family, in Iraq.
You, the men and women elected with the simplest of directions—Stop The War—have traded your strength, your bargaining position, and the uniform support of those who elected you… for a handful of magic beans. You may trot out every political cliché from the soft-soap, inside-the-beltway dictionary of boilerplate sound bites, about how this is the “beginning of the end” of Mr. Bush’s “carte blanche” in Iraq, about how this is a “first step.”Well, Senator Reid, the only end at its beginning... is our collective hope that you and your colleagues would do what is right, what is essential, what you were each elected and re-elected to do.Because this “first step”… is a step right off a cliff.
And this President!
How shameful it would be to watch an adult... hold his breath, and threaten to continue to do so, until he turned blue.But how horrifying it is… to watch a President hold his breath and threaten to continue to do so, until innocent and patriotic Americans in harm’s way, are bled white.
You lead this country, sir?
You claim to defend it?
And yet when faced with the prospect of someone calling you on your stubbornness—your stubbornness which has cost 3,431 Americans their lives and thousands more their limbs—you, Mr. Bush, imply that if the Democrats don’t give you the money and give it to you entirely on your terms, the troops in Iraq will be stranded, or forced to serve longer, or have to throw bullets at the enemy with their bare hands.
How transcendentally, how historically, pathetic.
Any other president from any other moment in the panorama of our history would have, at the outset of this tawdry game of political chicken, declared that no matter what the other political side did, he would insure personally—first, last and always—that the troops would not suffer.
A President, Mr. Bush, uses the carte blanche he has already, not to manipulate an overlap of arriving and departing Brigades into a ‘second surge,’ but to say in unequivocal terms that if it takes every last dime of the monies already allocated, if it takes reneging on government contracts with Halliburton, he will make sure the troops are safe—even if the only safety to be found, is in getting them the hell out of there.
Well, any true President would have done that, Sir.
You instead, used our troops as political pawns, then blamed the Democrats when you did so.
Not that these Democrats, who had this country’s support and sympathy up until 48 hours ago, have not since earned all the blame they can carry home.
“We seem to be very near the bleak choice between war and shame,” Winston Churchill wrote to Lord Moyne in the days after the British signed the Munich accords with Germany in 1938. “My feeling is that we shall choose shame, and then have war thrown in, a little later…”
That’s what this is for the Democrats, isn’t it?
Their “Neville Chamberlain moment” before the Second World War.All that’s missing is the landing at the airport, with the blinkered leader waving a piece of paper which he naively thought would guarantee “peace in our time,” but which his opponent would ignore with deceit.
The Democrats have merely streamlined the process. Their piece of paper already says Mr. Bush can ignore it, with impugnity.
And where are the Democratic presidential hopefuls this evening?See they not, that to which the Senate and House leadership has blinded itself?
Judging these candidates based on how they voted on the original Iraq authorization, or waiting for apologies for those votes, is ancient history now.
The Democratic nomination is likely to be decided... tomorrow. The talk of practical politics, the buying into of the President’s dishonest construction “fund-the-troops-or-they-will-be-in-jeopardy,” the promise of tougher action in September, is falling not on deaf ears, but rather falling on Americans who already told you what to do, and now perceive your ears as closed to practical politics.Those who seek the Democratic nomination need to—for their own political futures and, with a thousand times more solemnity and importance, for the individual futures of our troops—denounce this betrayal, vote against it, and, if need be, unseat Majority Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi if they continue down this path of guilty, fatal acquiescence to the tragically misguided will of a monomaniacal president.
For, ultimately, at this hour, the entire government has failed us.
They must now speak, and make plain how they view what has been given away to Mr. Bush, and what is yet to be given away tomorrow, and in the thousand tomorrows to come.
Because for the next fourteen months, the Democratic nominating process—indeed the whole of our political discourse until further notice—has, with the stroke of a cursed pen, become about one thing, and one thing alone.
The electorate figured this out, six months ago.
The President and the Republicans have not—doubtless will not.
The Democrats will figure it out, during the Memorial Day recess, when they go home and many of those who elected them will politely suggest they stay there—and permanently. Because, on the subject of Iraq...
The people have been ahead of the media....
Ahead of the government...
Ahead of the politicians...
For the last year, or two years, or maybe three.
Our politics... is now about the answer to one briefly-worded question.
Mr. Bush has failed.
Mr. Warner has failed.
Mr. Reid has failed.
So.
Who among us will stop this war—this War of Lies?
To he or she, fall the figurative keys to the nation.
To all the others—presidents and majority leaders and candidates and rank-and-file Congressmen and Senators of either party—there is only blame… for this shameful, and bi-partisan, betrayal.
Get us out of Iraq.
Yet after six months of preparation and execution—half a year gathering the strands of public support; translating into action, the collective will of the nearly 70 percent of Americans who reject this War of Lies, the Democrats have managed only this:
The Democratic leadership has surrendered to a president—if not the worst president, then easily the most selfish, in our history—who happily blackmails his own people, and uses his own military personnel as hostages to his asinine demand, that the Democrats “give the troops their money”;
The Democratic leadership has agreed to finance the deaths of Americans in a war that has only reduced the security of Americans;
The Democratic leadership has given Mr. Bush all that he wanted, with the only caveat being, not merely meaningless symbolism about benchmarks for the Iraqi government, but optional meaningless symbolism about benchmarks for the Iraqi government.
The Democratic leadership has, in sum, claimed a compromise with the Administration, in which the only things truly compromised, are the trust of the voters, the ethics of the Democrats, and the lives of our brave, and doomed, friends, and family, in Iraq.
You, the men and women elected with the simplest of directions—Stop The War—have traded your strength, your bargaining position, and the uniform support of those who elected you… for a handful of magic beans. You may trot out every political cliché from the soft-soap, inside-the-beltway dictionary of boilerplate sound bites, about how this is the “beginning of the end” of Mr. Bush’s “carte blanche” in Iraq, about how this is a “first step.”Well, Senator Reid, the only end at its beginning... is our collective hope that you and your colleagues would do what is right, what is essential, what you were each elected and re-elected to do.Because this “first step”… is a step right off a cliff.
And this President!
How shameful it would be to watch an adult... hold his breath, and threaten to continue to do so, until he turned blue.But how horrifying it is… to watch a President hold his breath and threaten to continue to do so, until innocent and patriotic Americans in harm’s way, are bled white.
You lead this country, sir?
You claim to defend it?
And yet when faced with the prospect of someone calling you on your stubbornness—your stubbornness which has cost 3,431 Americans their lives and thousands more their limbs—you, Mr. Bush, imply that if the Democrats don’t give you the money and give it to you entirely on your terms, the troops in Iraq will be stranded, or forced to serve longer, or have to throw bullets at the enemy with their bare hands.
How transcendentally, how historically, pathetic.
Any other president from any other moment in the panorama of our history would have, at the outset of this tawdry game of political chicken, declared that no matter what the other political side did, he would insure personally—first, last and always—that the troops would not suffer.
A President, Mr. Bush, uses the carte blanche he has already, not to manipulate an overlap of arriving and departing Brigades into a ‘second surge,’ but to say in unequivocal terms that if it takes every last dime of the monies already allocated, if it takes reneging on government contracts with Halliburton, he will make sure the troops are safe—even if the only safety to be found, is in getting them the hell out of there.
Well, any true President would have done that, Sir.
You instead, used our troops as political pawns, then blamed the Democrats when you did so.
Not that these Democrats, who had this country’s support and sympathy up until 48 hours ago, have not since earned all the blame they can carry home.
“We seem to be very near the bleak choice between war and shame,” Winston Churchill wrote to Lord Moyne in the days after the British signed the Munich accords with Germany in 1938. “My feeling is that we shall choose shame, and then have war thrown in, a little later…”
That’s what this is for the Democrats, isn’t it?
Their “Neville Chamberlain moment” before the Second World War.All that’s missing is the landing at the airport, with the blinkered leader waving a piece of paper which he naively thought would guarantee “peace in our time,” but which his opponent would ignore with deceit.
The Democrats have merely streamlined the process. Their piece of paper already says Mr. Bush can ignore it, with impugnity.
And where are the Democratic presidential hopefuls this evening?See they not, that to which the Senate and House leadership has blinded itself?
Judging these candidates based on how they voted on the original Iraq authorization, or waiting for apologies for those votes, is ancient history now.
The Democratic nomination is likely to be decided... tomorrow. The talk of practical politics, the buying into of the President’s dishonest construction “fund-the-troops-or-they-will-be-in-jeopardy,” the promise of tougher action in September, is falling not on deaf ears, but rather falling on Americans who already told you what to do, and now perceive your ears as closed to practical politics.Those who seek the Democratic nomination need to—for their own political futures and, with a thousand times more solemnity and importance, for the individual futures of our troops—denounce this betrayal, vote against it, and, if need be, unseat Majority Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi if they continue down this path of guilty, fatal acquiescence to the tragically misguided will of a monomaniacal president.
For, ultimately, at this hour, the entire government has failed us.
- Mr. Reid, Mr. Hoyer, and the other Democrats... have failed us.They negotiated away that which they did not own, but had only been entrusted by us to protect: our collective will as the citizens of this country, that this brazen War of Lies be ended as rapidly and safely as possible.
- Mr. Bush and his government... have failed us. They have behaved venomously and without dignity—of course. That is all at which Mr. Bush is gifted. We are the ones providing any element of surprise or shock here.
They must now speak, and make plain how they view what has been given away to Mr. Bush, and what is yet to be given away tomorrow, and in the thousand tomorrows to come.
Because for the next fourteen months, the Democratic nominating process—indeed the whole of our political discourse until further notice—has, with the stroke of a cursed pen, become about one thing, and one thing alone.
The electorate figured this out, six months ago.
The President and the Republicans have not—doubtless will not.
The Democrats will figure it out, during the Memorial Day recess, when they go home and many of those who elected them will politely suggest they stay there—and permanently. Because, on the subject of Iraq...
The people have been ahead of the media....
Ahead of the government...
Ahead of the politicians...
For the last year, or two years, or maybe three.
Our politics... is now about the answer to one briefly-worded question.
Mr. Bush has failed.
Mr. Warner has failed.
Mr. Reid has failed.
So.
Who among us will stop this war—this War of Lies?
To he or she, fall the figurative keys to the nation.
To all the others—presidents and majority leaders and candidates and rank-and-file Congressmen and Senators of either party—there is only blame… for this shameful, and bi-partisan, betrayal.
Monica Goodling testimony very disappointing.
Testifying under court-approved immunity, 33-year-old Monica Goodling acknowledged that she had given too much consideration to whether candidates for jobs as career prosecutors were Republicans or Democrats.
“You crossed the line on civil service laws, is that right?” asked Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va.
“I believe I crossed the line,” Goodling replied. “But I didn’t mean to.”
She said she had limited involvement in the firings and offered the panel’s Democrats nothing new in their probe of whether President Bush’s top political and legal aides chose which prosecutors to dismiss.
Goodling said she never talked to Karl Rove, Bush’s political adviser, nor Harriet Miers, then the president’s White House counsel, about the firings. She said Gonzales’ former chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, drew up the list of those to be dismissed but she didn’t know how names got on it.
There was, at least so far, no smoking gun. There was very little new information. She admitted to breaking the law by hiring people based on their political leanings but did not say if anybody asked her to do so.
But my question is this: If Monica Goodling did not make the list of US Attorneys to be fired, and Paul McNulty didn't, and Alberto Gonzales didn't, and apparently neither Karl Rove or Harriet Meir's did it either, then who the fuck did?
I mean how many other people could have decided who was to be fired? I am guessing nobody else.
Which means that somebody, or everybody, is lying. And Congress better get to the bottom of this and not let this administration dodge and lie their way out of yet another scandal. This is a very convoluted and bizarre situation and it needs to have the light of justice shined right in its damn eyes.
“You crossed the line on civil service laws, is that right?” asked Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va.
“I believe I crossed the line,” Goodling replied. “But I didn’t mean to.”
She said she had limited involvement in the firings and offered the panel’s Democrats nothing new in their probe of whether President Bush’s top political and legal aides chose which prosecutors to dismiss.
Goodling said she never talked to Karl Rove, Bush’s political adviser, nor Harriet Miers, then the president’s White House counsel, about the firings. She said Gonzales’ former chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, drew up the list of those to be dismissed but she didn’t know how names got on it.
There was, at least so far, no smoking gun. There was very little new information. She admitted to breaking the law by hiring people based on their political leanings but did not say if anybody asked her to do so.
But my question is this: If Monica Goodling did not make the list of US Attorneys to be fired, and Paul McNulty didn't, and Alberto Gonzales didn't, and apparently neither Karl Rove or Harriet Meir's did it either, then who the fuck did?
I mean how many other people could have decided who was to be fired? I am guessing nobody else.
Which means that somebody, or everybody, is lying. And Congress better get to the bottom of this and not let this administration dodge and lie their way out of yet another scandal. This is a very convoluted and bizarre situation and it needs to have the light of justice shined right in its damn eyes.
Bush is still desperately trying to facilitate the coming Armageddon.
The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.
The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a "nonlethal presidential finding" that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions.
"I can't confirm or deny whether such a program exists or whether the president signed it, but it would be consistent with an overall American approach trying to find ways to put pressure on the regime," said Bruce Riedel, a recently retired CIA senior official who dealt with Iran and other countries in the region.
So while we pretend to be opening diplomatic talks with Iran for the first time we are also trying to undermine their government, and we expect this to make them trust us?
Look the facts are that George W. Bush believes that he has been chosen by God to help bring about the second coming of Jesus Christ. He does not care about diplomacy, or global warming, or future political considerations because he is out of his freaking mind!
I know that this sounds a little crazy as well, and I thought so to the first time I heard it, but if you examine closely the things that Bush has focused on, like filling his cabinet with "born again" Christian's, and trying to expand the Executives power, and fanning the flames in the Middle East, I think you have to put your skepticism aside and consider that Bush may in fact be insane which is why impeachment really is the only hope our country and the world has left.
I know reading the above post may make you want to send me all of your unused tin foil for my new hat, but the more of these things I see the more I am convinced that Bush truly believes that the end times are just around the corner. If you have been hearing excerpts from Ronald Reagan's diary being read on television you may have become aware that Ronnie expected the end times to occur on his watch as well. But the difference is that Reagan did not seem to be dedicated to making it happen. I think that Reagan trusted that God would do it in his own time, but Bush does not like to wait for anything. He wants it now, and he is in a position to make it happen.
Scared yet? You should be.
The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a "nonlethal presidential finding" that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions.
"I can't confirm or deny whether such a program exists or whether the president signed it, but it would be consistent with an overall American approach trying to find ways to put pressure on the regime," said Bruce Riedel, a recently retired CIA senior official who dealt with Iran and other countries in the region.
So while we pretend to be opening diplomatic talks with Iran for the first time we are also trying to undermine their government, and we expect this to make them trust us?
Look the facts are that George W. Bush believes that he has been chosen by God to help bring about the second coming of Jesus Christ. He does not care about diplomacy, or global warming, or future political considerations because he is out of his freaking mind!
I know that this sounds a little crazy as well, and I thought so to the first time I heard it, but if you examine closely the things that Bush has focused on, like filling his cabinet with "born again" Christian's, and trying to expand the Executives power, and fanning the flames in the Middle East, I think you have to put your skepticism aside and consider that Bush may in fact be insane which is why impeachment really is the only hope our country and the world has left.
I know reading the above post may make you want to send me all of your unused tin foil for my new hat, but the more of these things I see the more I am convinced that Bush truly believes that the end times are just around the corner. If you have been hearing excerpts from Ronald Reagan's diary being read on television you may have become aware that Ronnie expected the end times to occur on his watch as well. But the difference is that Reagan did not seem to be dedicated to making it happen. I think that Reagan trusted that God would do it in his own time, but Bush does not like to wait for anything. He wants it now, and he is in a position to make it happen.
Scared yet? You should be.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
The Simpsons turn on their master by revealing how the Fox network gets money to the Republicans.
Answers a lot of questions for me.
This was completely off my radar but look who just showed up to help put pressure on the Bush administration.
The former executive assistant to White House political adviser Karl Rove is seeking immunity from prosecution before testifying about administration ties to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, a House investigative committee revealed Tuesday.
Susan Ralston, the aide who resigned last fall, told lawyers for the committee this month she would provide information if protected from prosecution.
In a sign that Congress' probe into the Abramoff matter is widening, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform also signaled plans to seek further documents and information about the former lobbyist's contacts with the Bush White House from "former and current White House and Administration officials who may have knowledge" about such communications.
In a memo to fellow committee members Tuesday, Chairman Henry A. Waxman, D-Calif., said lawyers for the panel deposed Ralston, Rove's former aide, on May 10. Ralston resigned her White House post in October following the committee's finding that she had extensive contacts with Abramoff and had accepted tickets to sporting events and concerts from him.
The panel's 2006 report also concluded that Abramoff and his associates "had 485 lobbying contacts with White House officials between January 2001 and March 2004," Waxman's memo noted. Ralston had worked for Abramoff before joining the White House in 2001.
Damn I forgot all about this chick! Oh yeah, now they bring the Abramoff scandal back from the way back burner and start turning up the heat to reveal the lies and corruption in that situation.
I know that many people think that Congress is wasting its time with these investigations, but damn it I want to know what happened! I want a light shown on every single thing this administration touched. And I do mean everything!
Susan Ralston, the aide who resigned last fall, told lawyers for the committee this month she would provide information if protected from prosecution.
In a sign that Congress' probe into the Abramoff matter is widening, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform also signaled plans to seek further documents and information about the former lobbyist's contacts with the Bush White House from "former and current White House and Administration officials who may have knowledge" about such communications.
In a memo to fellow committee members Tuesday, Chairman Henry A. Waxman, D-Calif., said lawyers for the panel deposed Ralston, Rove's former aide, on May 10. Ralston resigned her White House post in October following the committee's finding that she had extensive contacts with Abramoff and had accepted tickets to sporting events and concerts from him.
The panel's 2006 report also concluded that Abramoff and his associates "had 485 lobbying contacts with White House officials between January 2001 and March 2004," Waxman's memo noted. Ralston had worked for Abramoff before joining the White House in 2001.
Damn I forgot all about this chick! Oh yeah, now they bring the Abramoff scandal back from the way back burner and start turning up the heat to reveal the lies and corruption in that situation.
I know that many people think that Congress is wasting its time with these investigations, but damn it I want to know what happened! I want a light shown on every single thing this administration touched. And I do mean everything!
Liberty University student stopped from blowing up Falwell protestors with bombs.
Even in death, the Rev. Jerry Falwell rouses the most volatile of emotions.
A small group of protesters gathered near the funeral services to criticize the man who mobilized Christian evangelicals and made them a major force in American politics -- often by playing on social prejudices.
And Campbell County authorities arrested a Liberty University student for having several homemade bombs in his car.
The student, 19-year-old Mark D. Uhl of Amissville, Va., reportedly told authorities that he was making the bombs to stop protesters from disrupting the funeral service. The devices were made of a combination of gasoline and detergent, a law enforcement official told ABC News' Pierre Thomas. They were "slow burn," according to the official, and would not have been very destructive.
So perhaps we can get an idea of the type of education students receive at Liberty University by scrutinizing this one student.
A small group of protesters gathered near the funeral services to criticize the man who mobilized Christian evangelicals and made them a major force in American politics -- often by playing on social prejudices.
And Campbell County authorities arrested a Liberty University student for having several homemade bombs in his car.
The student, 19-year-old Mark D. Uhl of Amissville, Va., reportedly told authorities that he was making the bombs to stop protesters from disrupting the funeral service. The devices were made of a combination of gasoline and detergent, a law enforcement official told ABC News' Pierre Thomas. They were "slow burn," according to the official, and would not have been very destructive.
So perhaps we can get an idea of the type of education students receive at Liberty University by scrutinizing this one student.
- He certainly did not learn any debating skills because he tried to problem solve using violence.
- He obviously did not learn morality because he thinks it is okay to kill those that he does not agree with.
- He did not study psychology or else he might have realized that what he was doing was nuts.
- And finally he did not learn much about chemistry because his mixture would not have been effective.
Unfortunately for our country, and education in general, this herpes sore of a university will continue to churn out small minded, hate filled, Christian Nazis for at least a dozen years to come. That is definitely a bad thing.
George Bush, who is terminally unable to learn from his mistakes, figures that if one surge did not do the trick then surely a second one will.
The Bush administration is quietly on track to nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year, an analysis of Pentagon deployment orders showed Monday.
The little-noticed second surge, designed to reinforce U.S. troops in Iraq, is being executed by sending more combat brigades and extending tours of duty for troops already there.
The actions could boost the number of combat soldiers from 52,500 in early January to as many as 98,000 by the end of this year if the Pentagon overlaps arriving and departing combat brigades.
What did Einstein call the definition of insanity? "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Well I think that Einstein has defined George Bush and his administration far better then I could.
The little-noticed second surge, designed to reinforce U.S. troops in Iraq, is being executed by sending more combat brigades and extending tours of duty for troops already there.
The actions could boost the number of combat soldiers from 52,500 in early January to as many as 98,000 by the end of this year if the Pentagon overlaps arriving and departing combat brigades.
What did Einstein call the definition of insanity? "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Well I think that Einstein has defined George Bush and his administration far better then I could.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Laura Schlessinger, a truly horrible person, apparently has a truly horrible son, who is stationed in Afghanistan doing truly horrible things.
The soldier son of talk radio relationship counselor Laura Schlessinger is under investigation for a graphic personal Web page that one Army official has called "repulsive." The MySpace page, publicly available until Friday when it disappeared from the Internet, included cartoon depictions of rape, murder, torture and child molestation; photographs of soldiers with guns in their mouths; a photograph of a bound and blindfolded detainee captioned "My Sweet Little Habib"; accounts of illicit drug use; and a blog entry headlined by a series of obscenities and racial epithets.
The site is credited to and includes many photographs of Deryk Schlessinger, the 21-year-old son of the talk radio personality known simply as Dr. Laura. Broadcast locally on 570 KNRS, "Family Values Talk Radio," the former family counselor spends three hours daily taking calls and offering advice on morals, ethics and values. She broadcast a show from Fort Douglas, in Salt Lake City, last week.
Yes . . . F---ING Yes!!!" said one blog entry on the Schlessinger site. "I LOVE MY JOB, it takes everything reckless and deviant and heathenistic and just overall bad about me and hyper focuses these traits into my job of running around this horrid place doing nasty things to people that deserve it . . . and some that don't."
There is some question as to whether this is truly the site of Dr. Laura's son. For her sake I hope that it is not. But it would fit in with her dangerous morality to have raised a son who seems to be completely free of morality.
She is a black and white person trying to give people advice on how to solve their complex difficulties and it would not be surprising to see that her parenting approach created a monster. She herself has claimed, "We raised our son to be a warrior." Well what kind of upbringing creates a "warrior"? It is certainly not one that spends too much time concerned with the rights or feelings of potential enemies.
Carter backs off harsh Bush critique.
Former President Jimmy Carter on Monday said his comments over the weekend about the Bush administration were “careless.”
Interviewed on the TODAY Show about the comments, Carter said, "They were maybe careless or misinterpreted." He said he “certainly was not talking personally about any president.”
When pressed by NBC’s Meredith Vieira as to whether he was saying his remarks were careless or reckless, the former president said, “I think they were, yes, because they were interpreted as comparing this whole administration to all other administrations."
You know this is why Democrats get labeled as "weak" or "impotent", we make tough comments and then whither under the counter attack that comes after.
Republicans will say the most mean spirited, false, character assassinating comments we have ever heard! And rather then be ashamed, will crow about them to anybody who will listen.
Carter is right! He is not saying something false or even something that every intelligent person does not already know! And he needs to stand against the tide and stand up for his statements.
Yes, compared to EVERY other President in history, George W. Bush is the very WORST one!
There should be no debate on that fact! None!
It should be said with the same conviction that intelligent people use when referring to what is happening in Iraq as a civil war, those are the facts, not the spin or the wording that the Bush administration feeds to news outlets. We must not allow them to define our situation using their preferred sound bites. They lost the election we don't have to listen to their lies anymore!
It is time to start telling the truth in this country. And it needs to start with the Democrats. And it needs to start now!
Interviewed on the TODAY Show about the comments, Carter said, "They were maybe careless or misinterpreted." He said he “certainly was not talking personally about any president.”
When pressed by NBC’s Meredith Vieira as to whether he was saying his remarks were careless or reckless, the former president said, “I think they were, yes, because they were interpreted as comparing this whole administration to all other administrations."
You know this is why Democrats get labeled as "weak" or "impotent", we make tough comments and then whither under the counter attack that comes after.
Republicans will say the most mean spirited, false, character assassinating comments we have ever heard! And rather then be ashamed, will crow about them to anybody who will listen.
Carter is right! He is not saying something false or even something that every intelligent person does not already know! And he needs to stand against the tide and stand up for his statements.
Yes, compared to EVERY other President in history, George W. Bush is the very WORST one!
There should be no debate on that fact! None!
It should be said with the same conviction that intelligent people use when referring to what is happening in Iraq as a civil war, those are the facts, not the spin or the wording that the Bush administration feeds to news outlets. We must not allow them to define our situation using their preferred sound bites. They lost the election we don't have to listen to their lies anymore!
It is time to start telling the truth in this country. And it needs to start with the Democrats. And it needs to start now!
Here is the biggest story in my little corner of the world right now.
About two dozen fans of the zoo's African elephant, Maggie, gathered on a South Anchorage street corner Sunday to make a collective plea for the pachyderm:Move Maggie -- and take action soon, rather than wait for a scheduled review in August. About two dozen people showed up for the rally, many toting homemade signs that had messages like "Tell the zoo to let her go," and "Stop watching Maggie die."
"We just need to zoo to say 'OK, we'll let her go,' " said Peggy McFarland, at Sunday morning's protest. "They'd be respected a lot more in this community if they'd agree to do that."
Maggie has collapsed twice in one week's time. She is being tested and so far nothing has been revealed as the cause. But many in our community believe that Maggie is simply lonely and sad, and in the wrong place to ensure her health.
I know that their are a lot of animal lovers who visit this site, so I know where you will come down on the Move Maggie debate. And I am predisposed to agree with you. It is time for her to go live in a warmer climate with other elephants to keep her company.
Why are the Iraqis fighting the Americans so ferociously? Perhaps things like this helped to fan those flames.
The US Army tried to kill or capture Muqtada al-Sadr, the widely revered Shia cleric, after luring him to peace negotiations at a house in the holy city of Najaf, which it then attacked, according to a senior Iraqi government official.
The revelation of this extraordinary plot, which would probably have provoked an uprising by outraged Shia if it had succeeded, has left a legacy of bitter distrust in the mind of Mr Sadr for which the US and its allies in Iraq may still be paying. "I believe that particular incident made Muqtada lose any confidence or trust in the [US-led] coalition and made him really wild," the Iraqi National Security Adviser Dr Mowaffaq Rubai'e told The Independent in an interview. It is not known who gave the orders for the attempt on Mr Sadr but it is one of a series of ill-considered and politically explosive US actions in Iraq since the invasion. In January this year a US helicopter assault team tried to kidnap two senior Iranian security officials on an official visit to the Iraqi President. Earlier examples of highly provocative actions carried out by the US with little thought for the consequences include the dissolution of the Iraqi army and the Baath party.
The attempted assassination or abduction took place two-and-a-half years ago in August 2004 when Mr Sadr and his Mehdi Army militiamen were besieged by US Marines in Najaf, south of Baghdad.
To be fair I have no idea of the veracity of the above accusations. However in the past when we have received information from somebody, and the American military disagrees with it, then it has almost invariably been proven to be accurate.
Lets face it, our government lies to us. Not just occasionally, but constantly.
So with that fact in mind, and the knowledge of all of the tactical mistakes we have made in Iraq, I tend to believe that this probably did happen. And it can probably be blamed for why we will never gain control of Iraq. No matter how many lives we waste in the attempt.
The revelation of this extraordinary plot, which would probably have provoked an uprising by outraged Shia if it had succeeded, has left a legacy of bitter distrust in the mind of Mr Sadr for which the US and its allies in Iraq may still be paying. "I believe that particular incident made Muqtada lose any confidence or trust in the [US-led] coalition and made him really wild," the Iraqi National Security Adviser Dr Mowaffaq Rubai'e told The Independent in an interview. It is not known who gave the orders for the attempt on Mr Sadr but it is one of a series of ill-considered and politically explosive US actions in Iraq since the invasion. In January this year a US helicopter assault team tried to kidnap two senior Iranian security officials on an official visit to the Iraqi President. Earlier examples of highly provocative actions carried out by the US with little thought for the consequences include the dissolution of the Iraqi army and the Baath party.
The attempted assassination or abduction took place two-and-a-half years ago in August 2004 when Mr Sadr and his Mehdi Army militiamen were besieged by US Marines in Najaf, south of Baghdad.
To be fair I have no idea of the veracity of the above accusations. However in the past when we have received information from somebody, and the American military disagrees with it, then it has almost invariably been proven to be accurate.
Lets face it, our government lies to us. Not just occasionally, but constantly.
So with that fact in mind, and the knowledge of all of the tactical mistakes we have made in Iraq, I tend to believe that this probably did happen. And it can probably be blamed for why we will never gain control of Iraq. No matter how many lives we waste in the attempt.
Superstitious beliefs are still keeping ignorant people from getting the help they need.
Eva Marie Mauldin said Satan compelled her 19-year-old husband, Joshua Royce Mauldin, to microwave their daughter May 10 because the devil disapproved of Joshua's efforts to become a preacher.
"Satan saw my husband as a threat. Satan attacked him because he saw (Joshua) as a threat," Eva Mauldin told Houston television station KHOU-TV.
Eva Marie Mauldin, the girl's 20-year-old mother, told the television station that her husband is "not the monster people are making him out to be."
"That was not my husband; my husband is a wonderful father," she said. "Satan was working through his weaknesses."
Eva Maudlin described those weaknesses as an undisclosed mental disability, and that her efforts to get help for him have failed.
So here is a situation where a young man has a mental health issue and rather then seek psychiatric help he turns to religion which teaches him about demons and devils, and a child ends up being a casualty of his superstitious beliefs.
The idea that all problems can be solved through religion is archaic. This is the 21st century and science has moved well past the belief that mental illness is due to demonic possession or the workings of the devil. And yet the church continues to preach that message to the faithful. And look how that bullshit has injured this innocent child.
In my opinion if the church promoted the idea that this young man's problem had anything to do with the devil then they should be held accountable for the child's injuries. It is well past the time that the law should be turning a blind eye to the damage that some of these religions can do to the reasoning ability of their members. I think a little accountability would keep the church from being so careless about the primitive messages that it sends out to the masses.
"Satan saw my husband as a threat. Satan attacked him because he saw (Joshua) as a threat," Eva Mauldin told Houston television station KHOU-TV.
Eva Marie Mauldin, the girl's 20-year-old mother, told the television station that her husband is "not the monster people are making him out to be."
"That was not my husband; my husband is a wonderful father," she said. "Satan was working through his weaknesses."
Eva Maudlin described those weaknesses as an undisclosed mental disability, and that her efforts to get help for him have failed.
So here is a situation where a young man has a mental health issue and rather then seek psychiatric help he turns to religion which teaches him about demons and devils, and a child ends up being a casualty of his superstitious beliefs.
The idea that all problems can be solved through religion is archaic. This is the 21st century and science has moved well past the belief that mental illness is due to demonic possession or the workings of the devil. And yet the church continues to preach that message to the faithful. And look how that bullshit has injured this innocent child.
In my opinion if the church promoted the idea that this young man's problem had anything to do with the devil then they should be held accountable for the child's injuries. It is well past the time that the law should be turning a blind eye to the damage that some of these religions can do to the reasoning ability of their members. I think a little accountability would keep the church from being so careless about the primitive messages that it sends out to the masses.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Porn actress gets her personal life confused with her porn life. Has sex with on duty cop to get out of ticket, and he films it.
A Tennessee State Trooper is on paid leave after allegations surface about sex at a traffic stop.
The woman involved is apparently an adult video actress who lives in Knoxville. She has posted a vivid description of the incident on her personal website and blog.
Hmmm. So the moral of this story kids is if you are a porn star you can get away with anything. But if you are a cop you are going to get caught.
Yeah that ought to help the kids decide on a career path.
It has just been much too long since I posted a naughty post about anything. I really must think of the reputation.
P.S. Here is a video of the news story which is followed by the actual pictures taken by the cop and then video of her describing the incident. Beware this is very, very naughty.
The woman involved is apparently an adult video actress who lives in Knoxville. She has posted a vivid description of the incident on her personal website and blog.
Hmmm. So the moral of this story kids is if you are a porn star you can get away with anything. But if you are a cop you are going to get caught.
Yeah that ought to help the kids decide on a career path.
It has just been much too long since I posted a naughty post about anything. I really must think of the reputation.
P.S. Here is a video of the news story which is followed by the actual pictures taken by the cop and then video of her describing the incident. Beware this is very, very naughty.
Scott Adams the creator of "Dilbert" sums up those that support the surge rather nicely. I am a big Dilbert fan.
It’s easy to know who supports the troops more. Anyone who supports policies that would save the most troop lives, and/or reduce injuries, is the most supportive. That’s me!
For example, I think we should be doing a lot more to guarantee the soldiers have the right kind of armor and veteran hospital services, even if it means raising taxes or cutting expenses for other social benefits at home.
I also think we shouldn’t be fighting a war that most informed, unbiased military experts think we can’t win. I’m willing to change that view if my assumption is wrong. Active generals in Iraq obviously say they support the surge. Otherwise they’d get fired. So you can’t trust their opinions. I want to know the opinions of recently retired officers whose last assignment was in Iraq. I don’t recall seeing any polls of that type, but I’m guessing that group thinks the surge won’t work.
If such a poll of recently retired officers exists, and the majority supports the surge, then there’s a good argument that all Americans should support it too. No one doubts that a stable democracy in Iraq would be good for our national security. People simply doubt it’s achievable. I can be swayed by the weight of expert opinions.
Without those unbiased, expert military opinions, I can’t justify putting additional soldiers in harm’s way. You have to form opinions with the information you have, not the information you wish you had. And the information I have does not support risking the lives of more soldiers in Iraq. I’m willing to change that opinion if my information changes.
That’s why I support the troops more than you do.
I think we can all agree that Mr. Adams presents a very clear and measured assumption about the effectiveness of this Iraq war.
I enjoy finding the opinions of individuals that I respect, especially when they mirror mine so closely. It makes me feel that the members of the critical thinkers club has some fairly impressive members.
On the flip side I am always very upset to find that there is somebody who I once thought of as educated and informed who takes an opposing viewpoint, especially on Iraq and President Bush. I find it almost impossible to remain impressed by them.
For example, I think we should be doing a lot more to guarantee the soldiers have the right kind of armor and veteran hospital services, even if it means raising taxes or cutting expenses for other social benefits at home.
I also think we shouldn’t be fighting a war that most informed, unbiased military experts think we can’t win. I’m willing to change that view if my assumption is wrong. Active generals in Iraq obviously say they support the surge. Otherwise they’d get fired. So you can’t trust their opinions. I want to know the opinions of recently retired officers whose last assignment was in Iraq. I don’t recall seeing any polls of that type, but I’m guessing that group thinks the surge won’t work.
If such a poll of recently retired officers exists, and the majority supports the surge, then there’s a good argument that all Americans should support it too. No one doubts that a stable democracy in Iraq would be good for our national security. People simply doubt it’s achievable. I can be swayed by the weight of expert opinions.
Without those unbiased, expert military opinions, I can’t justify putting additional soldiers in harm’s way. You have to form opinions with the information you have, not the information you wish you had. And the information I have does not support risking the lives of more soldiers in Iraq. I’m willing to change that opinion if my information changes.
That’s why I support the troops more than you do.
I think we can all agree that Mr. Adams presents a very clear and measured assumption about the effectiveness of this Iraq war.
I enjoy finding the opinions of individuals that I respect, especially when they mirror mine so closely. It makes me feel that the members of the critical thinkers club has some fairly impressive members.
On the flip side I am always very upset to find that there is somebody who I once thought of as educated and informed who takes an opposing viewpoint, especially on Iraq and President Bush. I find it almost impossible to remain impressed by them.
I am not a Kucinich supporter, but you have to admit that he makes an interesting candidate. Especially if you include his hippie wife.
An Essex girl may be the first lady with a tongue stud to have set her sights on the White House. The wife of Dennis Kucinich, a left-wing Democratic congressman and 2008 presidential candidate, is a 29-year-old hippie chick from Upminster at the end of London Underground’s District line.It would almost be worth helping Kucinich get elected to see how the media deals with this
I have no idea what the attraction for her is, but you just know that Kucinich can hardly wait to get his knickers off and climb this willow tree.
She is a very beautiful woman and she at least make Kucinich seem a little more interesting. A little more.
Iraq war is serving as huge money maker for Al-Qaeda.
In one of the most troubling trends, U.S. officials said that Al Qaeda's command base in Pakistan is increasingly being funded by cash coming out of Iraq, where the terrorist network's operatives are raising substantial sums from donations to the anti-American insurgency as well as kidnappings of wealthy Iraqis and other criminal activity.
The influx of money has bolstered Al Qaeda's leadership ranks at a time when the core command is regrouping and reasserting influence over its far-flung network. The trend also signals a reversal in the traditional flow of Al Qaeda funds, with the network's leadership surviving to a large extent on money coming in from its most profitable franchise, rather than distributing funds from headquarters to distant cells.
Al Qaeda's efforts were aided, intelligence officials said, by Pakistan's withdrawal in September of tens of thousands of troops from the tribal areas along the Afghanistan border where Bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman Zawahiri, are believed to be hiding.
Little more than a year ago, Al Qaeda's core command was thought to be in a financial crunch. But U.S. officials said cash shipped from Iraq has eased those troubles.
"Iraq is a big moneymaker for them," said a senior U.S. counter-terrorism official.
I would love to see one of this wars apologists answer a question about this situation.
What most of these short sighted idiots fail to take into account is though we may be safe in the short run while Al-Qaeda is concentrating on the war, they are getting stronger and angrier, so that when they do decide to attack us in America again they will be far more powerful.
We are keeping our current population safer at the expense of our children and their children. As a parent it is an abomination to consider placing my daughter's safety second to my own.
The influx of money has bolstered Al Qaeda's leadership ranks at a time when the core command is regrouping and reasserting influence over its far-flung network. The trend also signals a reversal in the traditional flow of Al Qaeda funds, with the network's leadership surviving to a large extent on money coming in from its most profitable franchise, rather than distributing funds from headquarters to distant cells.
Al Qaeda's efforts were aided, intelligence officials said, by Pakistan's withdrawal in September of tens of thousands of troops from the tribal areas along the Afghanistan border where Bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman Zawahiri, are believed to be hiding.
Little more than a year ago, Al Qaeda's core command was thought to be in a financial crunch. But U.S. officials said cash shipped from Iraq has eased those troubles.
"Iraq is a big moneymaker for them," said a senior U.S. counter-terrorism official.
I would love to see one of this wars apologists answer a question about this situation.
What most of these short sighted idiots fail to take into account is though we may be safe in the short run while Al-Qaeda is concentrating on the war, they are getting stronger and angrier, so that when they do decide to attack us in America again they will be far more powerful.
We are keeping our current population safer at the expense of our children and their children. As a parent it is an abomination to consider placing my daughter's safety second to my own.
Saturday, May 19, 2007
Parents upset their kids were assaulted in the park, with religion. I am going to like this story.
A few days ago, former Minneapolis City Council President Jackie Cherryhomes went to the park near her north Minneapolis home to collect her 10-year-old daughter.
As she approached Farview Park at the end of the beautiful spring day, she noticed that several children, including her daughter, were in conversation with four adults she didn't recognize.
"Three geeky white guys and a lady," Cherryhomes said.
She said the conversation that ensued went something like this:
"Who are you?" she asked.
"We're from a church," one said.
"Which church?" she asked.
"Straitgate Church," one answered.
"Where's that?" she asked.
"Park and Franklin," she was told.
"That's the other side of town," Cherryhomes said.
"We do our evangelical outreach on the North Side," she was told. "We've brought a thousand souls to Jesus."Talking to kids in the park is just wrong," she said. "Talking to kids about religion is even worse."We've got permits from the state," was the response.
I had no idea you could even get a brainwashing permit!
This such a great story because it shows that some religious people are so pushy they actually scare other religious people.
As she approached Farview Park at the end of the beautiful spring day, she noticed that several children, including her daughter, were in conversation with four adults she didn't recognize.
"Three geeky white guys and a lady," Cherryhomes said.
She said the conversation that ensued went something like this:
"Who are you?" she asked.
"We're from a church," one said.
"Which church?" she asked.
"Straitgate Church," one answered.
"Where's that?" she asked.
"Park and Franklin," she was told.
"That's the other side of town," Cherryhomes said.
"We do our evangelical outreach on the North Side," she was told. "We've brought a thousand souls to Jesus."Talking to kids in the park is just wrong," she said. "Talking to kids about religion is even worse."We've got permits from the state," was the response.
I had no idea you could even get a brainwashing permit!
This such a great story because it shows that some religious people are so pushy they actually scare other religious people.
Jimmy Carter calls Bush administration the "worst in history". At this point isn't he just stating the obvious?
"I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history," Carter told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette in a story that appeared in the newspaper's Saturday editions. "The overt reversal of America's basic values as expressed by previous administrations, including those of George H.W. Bush and
Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon and others, has been the most disturbing to me."
Very good point. As is this one:
"We now have endorsed the concept of pre-emptive war where we go to war with another nation militarily, even though our own security is not directly threatened, if we want to change the regime there or if we fear that some time in the future our security might be endangered," he said. "But that's been a radical departure from all previous administration policies."
Carter takes aim many of this administrations most blatant abuses, like the so-called "faith based initiative".
"The policy from the White House has been to allocate funds to religious institutions, even those that channel those funds exclusively to their own particular group of believers in a particular religion," Carter said. "As a traditional Baptist, I've always believed in separation of church and state and honored that premise when I was president, and so have all other presidents, I might say, except this one."
All in all Carter does a very good job at pointing out most of the incredible abuses of power that we have seen with this administration.
I know that many Republicans believe that Carter's Presidency was the worst in history, but if they can compare what Bush has purposefully done to the unfortunate circumstances that occurred during Jimmy Carter's Presidency then they not only drink the Kool-aid they are probably the ones that mix the Kool-aid.
Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon and others, has been the most disturbing to me."
Very good point. As is this one:
"We now have endorsed the concept of pre-emptive war where we go to war with another nation militarily, even though our own security is not directly threatened, if we want to change the regime there or if we fear that some time in the future our security might be endangered," he said. "But that's been a radical departure from all previous administration policies."
Carter takes aim many of this administrations most blatant abuses, like the so-called "faith based initiative".
"The policy from the White House has been to allocate funds to religious institutions, even those that channel those funds exclusively to their own particular group of believers in a particular religion," Carter said. "As a traditional Baptist, I've always believed in separation of church and state and honored that premise when I was president, and so have all other presidents, I might say, except this one."
All in all Carter does a very good job at pointing out most of the incredible abuses of power that we have seen with this administration.
I know that many Republicans believe that Carter's Presidency was the worst in history, but if they can compare what Bush has purposefully done to the unfortunate circumstances that occurred during Jimmy Carter's Presidency then they not only drink the Kool-aid they are probably the ones that mix the Kool-aid.
There has been much of talk today of Al Gore's new book and if he is going to run for President. Whenever I hear that speculation I think of this.
This is one of my all time favorites!
The uncounted American casualties in Iraq.
Casualties among private contractors in Iraq have soared to record levels this year, setting a pace that seems certain to turn 2007 into the bloodiest year yet for the civilians who work alongside the American military in the war zone, according to new government numbers.
At least 146 contract workers were killed in Iraq in the first three months of the year, by far the highest number for any quarter since the war began in March 2003, according to the Labor Department, which processes death and injury claims for those working as United States government contractors in Iraq.
That brings the total number of contractors killed in Iraq to at least 917, along with more than 12,000 wounded in battle or injured on the job, according to government figures and dozens of interviews.
The numbers, which have not been previously reported, disclose the extent to which contractors — Americans, Iraqis and workers from more than three dozen other countries — are largely hidden casualties of the war, and now are facing increased risks alongside American soldiers and marines as President Bush’s plan to increase troop levels in Baghdad takes hold.
So as of today, according to this news site, we have 3,415 American soldier fatalities and when we add the 917 contractor deaths that brings our total of American losses to an astounding 4,3332.
I am not even going to get into the number of Americans wounded, whose numbers are actively being hidden by the military to keep the country from being completely horrified into demanding that we leave Iraq now. But if you check the news site posted above you can see for yourself.
The facts demonstrate that the Bush administration and the military have worked very hard to keep most of us in the dark because they fear that the truth will make even more of us refuse to support this conflict in Iraq. Though I just cannot imagine who is still on the fence with this issue.
I do not know about you, but I am just sick and tired of being lied to by this fraud of a President.
At least 146 contract workers were killed in Iraq in the first three months of the year, by far the highest number for any quarter since the war began in March 2003, according to the Labor Department, which processes death and injury claims for those working as United States government contractors in Iraq.
That brings the total number of contractors killed in Iraq to at least 917, along with more than 12,000 wounded in battle or injured on the job, according to government figures and dozens of interviews.
The numbers, which have not been previously reported, disclose the extent to which contractors — Americans, Iraqis and workers from more than three dozen other countries — are largely hidden casualties of the war, and now are facing increased risks alongside American soldiers and marines as President Bush’s plan to increase troop levels in Baghdad takes hold.
So as of today, according to this news site, we have 3,415 American soldier fatalities and when we add the 917 contractor deaths that brings our total of American losses to an astounding 4,3332.
I am not even going to get into the number of Americans wounded, whose numbers are actively being hidden by the military to keep the country from being completely horrified into demanding that we leave Iraq now. But if you check the news site posted above you can see for yourself.
The facts demonstrate that the Bush administration and the military have worked very hard to keep most of us in the dark because they fear that the truth will make even more of us refuse to support this conflict in Iraq. Though I just cannot imagine who is still on the fence with this issue.
I do not know about you, but I am just sick and tired of being lied to by this fraud of a President.
Friday, May 18, 2007
Historian Chalmers Johnson tells us that the damage that George Bush has done to our country may in fact be terminal.
George W. Bush has, of course, flagrantly violated his oath of office, which requires him "to protect and defend the constitution," and the opposition party has been remarkably reluctant to hold him to account. Among the "high crimes and misdemeanors" that, under other political circumstances, would surely constitute the Constitutional grounds for impeachment are these: the President and his top officials pressured the Central Intelligence Agency to put together a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq's nuclear weapons that both the administration and the Agency knew to be patently dishonest. They then used this false NIE to justify an American war of aggression. After launching an invasion of Iraq, the administration unilaterally reinterpreted international and domestic law to permit the torture of prisoners held at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, at Guant·namo Bay, Cuba, and at other secret locations around the world.
Nothing in the Constitution, least of all the commander-in-chief clause, allows the president to commit felonies. Nonetheless, within days after the 9/11 attacks, President Bush had signed a secret executive order authorizing a new policy of "extraordinary rendition," in which the CIA is allowed to kidnap terrorist suspects anywhere on Earth and transfer them to prisons in countries like Egypt, Syria, or Uzbekistan, where torture is a normal practice, or to secret CIA prisons outside the United States where Agency operatives themselves do the torturing.
On the home front, despite the post-9/11 congressional authorization of new surveillance powers to the administration, its officials chose to ignore these and, on its own initiative, undertook extensive spying on American citizens without obtaining the necessary judicial warrants and without reporting to Congress on this program. These actions are prima-facie violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (and subsequent revisions) and of Amendment IV of the Constitution.
I suggest that you read it carefully even though it will do little to comfort you about the future of America.
Nothing in the Constitution, least of all the commander-in-chief clause, allows the president to commit felonies. Nonetheless, within days after the 9/11 attacks, President Bush had signed a secret executive order authorizing a new policy of "extraordinary rendition," in which the CIA is allowed to kidnap terrorist suspects anywhere on Earth and transfer them to prisons in countries like Egypt, Syria, or Uzbekistan, where torture is a normal practice, or to secret CIA prisons outside the United States where Agency operatives themselves do the torturing.
On the home front, despite the post-9/11 congressional authorization of new surveillance powers to the administration, its officials chose to ignore these and, on its own initiative, undertook extensive spying on American citizens without obtaining the necessary judicial warrants and without reporting to Congress on this program. These actions are prima-facie violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (and subsequent revisions) and of Amendment IV of the Constitution.
I suggest that you read it carefully even though it will do little to comfort you about the future of America.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Wolfowitz is history!
World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz has resigned his post, effective June 30.
An internal panel tasked with investigating the lucrative pay and promotion package Wolfowitz arranged in 2005 for girlfriend Shaha Riza found him guilty of breaking bank rules.
The committee also found that he tried to hide the salary and promotion package from top ethics and legal officials within the bank. The report added that there is a "crisis in the leadership" at the World Bank.
Wolfowitz is the first World Bank president to ever leave the bank under a cloud of scandal.
Damn, I can barely keep up with the number of Bush appointees that are biting the dust! If I were a member of this administration I would constantly be checking myself for a bulls eye.
Gonzales must be on his way out of the door pretty soon and how much longer can Rove really hang in there with the villagers (Democrats) chasing him with torches and pitchforks all of the time?
An internal panel tasked with investigating the lucrative pay and promotion package Wolfowitz arranged in 2005 for girlfriend Shaha Riza found him guilty of breaking bank rules.
The committee also found that he tried to hide the salary and promotion package from top ethics and legal officials within the bank. The report added that there is a "crisis in the leadership" at the World Bank.
Wolfowitz is the first World Bank president to ever leave the bank under a cloud of scandal.
Damn, I can barely keep up with the number of Bush appointees that are biting the dust! If I were a member of this administration I would constantly be checking myself for a bulls eye.
Gonzales must be on his way out of the door pretty soon and how much longer can Rove really hang in there with the villagers (Democrats) chasing him with torches and pitchforks all of the time?
You know when I talk about religious persecution I am not talking about Christianity.
Wiccans worship the divine in nature. Some practice it privately in their homes, and others worship with large congregations. Most people do not grow up Wiccan but come to it from another religion.“It’s a very open religion,” said Helen A. Berger, a sociology professor at West Chester University of Pennsylvania. “Each person can do what they want, and they don’t have to belong to a group. They take things from a number of different sources, like Eastern religions, Celtic practices. You are the ultimate authority of your own experience.”
But its symbols and practices elicit suspicion from outsiders, Wiccans and religion scholars say.
Many Wiccans practice some form of magic or witchcraft, which they say is a way of affecting one’s destiny, but which many outsiders see as evil. The Wiccan pentacle, a five-pointed star inside a circle, is often confused with symbols of Satanism. (The five points of the star represent the elements of nature — earth, air, fire and water — and the spirit, within the eternal circle of life.)
Christianity is really to blame for the horrible connotations associated with Wicca and other pagan religions. The extremely aggressive campaign waged by this upstart religion in its infancy against the other established belief systems, which grew even more fierce as Christianity grew, is the very definition of "religious intolerance".
Christian missionaries went into countries with indigenous people who worshipped a different God or perhaps some form of animism or spirituality, and essentially told them they were worshipping the devil and were going to be punished for it. The devil is not a Wiccan concept. It is a Christian symbol used to label and denigrate the beliefs of other religions.
When Christians argue for religious tolerance you can bet your ass they are thinking only of their own belief system and would not lose a second of sleep over the religious persecution of an alternate religious belief.
In the secular world we call that hypocrisy.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Tinky Winky would like to weigh in on the passing of his nemesis Jerry Falwell.
"I'm not going to pretend I'm sadder than I am," he says. "There were late nights during the dark times when I wished to hear news like this. I'd be lying if I denied that. I don't feel that way anymore. I like to think I've grown over the years, gotten past all that pain.
"But at the end of the day, I'm not terribly sad, and I think a lot of people feel the same way. Jerry Falwell was a divisive person, a hateful person, and what I've tried to be all about, in the Teletubbies days and since then, has been love. I've got to keep it that way. I don't want anybody feeling good about it when it's my time for Tubby bye-bye."
I know I should not be laughing at this, but it is just too damn funny.
"But at the end of the day, I'm not terribly sad, and I think a lot of people feel the same way. Jerry Falwell was a divisive person, a hateful person, and what I've tried to be all about, in the Teletubbies days and since then, has been love. I've got to keep it that way. I don't want anybody feeling good about it when it's my time for Tubby bye-bye."
I know I should not be laughing at this, but it is just too damn funny.
Missionaries may have reached an impasse in converting the Chinese to Christianity. It seems they find the Bible "indecent" due to sexual content.
More than 800 Hong Kong residents have called on authorities to reclassify the Bible as "indecent" due to its sexual and violent content, following an uproar over a sex column in a university student journal.
The complaints follow the launch of an anonymous Web site -- www.truthbible.net -- which said the holy book "made one tremble" given its sexual and violent content, including rape and incest.
The Web site said the Bible's sexual content "far exceeds" that of a recent sex column published in the Chinese University's "Student Press" magazine, which had asked readers whether they'd ever fantasised about incest or bestiality.
That column was later deemed "indecent" by the Obscene Articles Tribunal, sparking a storm of debate about social morality and freedom of speech. Student editors of the journal defended it, saying open sexual debate was a basic right.
If the Bible is similarly classified as "indecent" by authorities, only those over 18 could buy the holy book and it would need to be sealed in a wrapper with a statutory warning notice.
I find the irony in this article to be oddly gratifying.
I forgot that the Bible had so much sex and violence in it. I may have to read that smutty book again. I wonder if it makes more sense in Chinese?
The complaints follow the launch of an anonymous Web site -- www.truthbible.net -- which said the holy book "made one tremble" given its sexual and violent content, including rape and incest.
The Web site said the Bible's sexual content "far exceeds" that of a recent sex column published in the Chinese University's "Student Press" magazine, which had asked readers whether they'd ever fantasised about incest or bestiality.
That column was later deemed "indecent" by the Obscene Articles Tribunal, sparking a storm of debate about social morality and freedom of speech. Student editors of the journal defended it, saying open sexual debate was a basic right.
If the Bible is similarly classified as "indecent" by authorities, only those over 18 could buy the holy book and it would need to be sealed in a wrapper with a statutory warning notice.
I find the irony in this article to be oddly gratifying.
I forgot that the Bible had so much sex and violence in it. I may have to read that smutty book again. I wonder if it makes more sense in Chinese?
Bush chooses scapegoat....er...War Czar. No I was right the first time.
President Bush has chosen Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, the Pentagon's director of operations, to oversee the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as a "war czar" after a long search for new leadership, administration officials said Tuesday.
In the newly created position, Lute would serve as an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser, and would also maintain his military status and rank as a three-star general, according to a Pentagon official.
Oh you poor stupid son-of-a-bitch!
I am guessing that Lt. Gen. Lute does not read the papers, or is just desperate to be humiliated in public. Perhaps he is just a closet masochist hoping to be punished.
Because, oh baby, you know he is going to be punished!
In the newly created position, Lute would serve as an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser, and would also maintain his military status and rank as a three-star general, according to a Pentagon official.
Oh you poor stupid son-of-a-bitch!
I am guessing that Lt. Gen. Lute does not read the papers, or is just desperate to be humiliated in public. Perhaps he is just a closet masochist hoping to be punished.
Because, oh baby, you know he is going to be punished!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)