A Man is Not Honest Just Because He Hasn't Had a Chance to Steal!

Sue:

This is probably not a constructive thing to say, but to quote Bob Dylan (of Minnesota):

"Steal a little and they throw you in jail,
"Steal a lot and they make you king."

Although I am pretty confident the sentiment did not originate with him.

Chuck in Baku.

PS: Johnny's in the basement mixing up medicine, I'm out on the sidewalk thinking about the government, look out kid don't matter what you did, don't know what it is but you're doing it again, the man in the coon-skin cap wants eleven dollar bills, and you only got ten....

Sorry, all. That Dylan stuff was uncalled for. Oh no, here it comes again, and this is totally gratuitious:

God said to Abraham "slay me a son." Abe said "God, you must be putting me on." God said: "Lo!" Abe said "What?" God said "you can do what you want to, but, next time you see me coming you'd better run." Abe said "where you want this killing done?" God said "down on Highway 61."

Bobby Zimmerman.

Respectfully Submitted by Chuck in Baku

(PS: Sorry, I couldn't help it.)

Chuck in Baku again:

This is a re-worked re-post from the last thread, but, here goes since it sort of relates to the topic of this thread. I am proud of this Oregon (I think) congressman, Representative Waxman, and his request to the Chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform to hold hearings:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021705W.shtml

I think these issues about the degree of candor with which members of the current administration testified under oath about the security failures in the Executive Branch that allowed the 9/11 attacks to occur go to the heart of what is wrong with politics as usual in the U.S. today.

So, Suz, in response to your question “Is such corruption by our public servants so commonplace that our officials and our media don't bat an eye?” Here’s my two-bits, following from the article at the end of the link posted above:

1) the current administration willfully ignored evidence pointing to a 9/11-type event

2) high-ranking officials in that administration misrepresented that fact, under oath, and

3) evidence that would support (1) and (2) was willfully supressed prior to both the presidential elections and the confirmation hearings in the Senate with respect to the appointment of an SOSUS under false pretenses of national security.

Chuck in Baku

PS: And there’s a woman, on my block, who just sits there, watching the hill, saying “who’s gonna take away his license to kill?”

Schieffer Brothers' New Jobs Won't Strain Bonds, They Say
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/18/business/media/18CBS.html?ei=5088&en=dc2c6a8cbf9f91d8&ex=1266469200&adxnnl=1&partner=rssnyt&adxnnlx=1108746871-yrkH0gxWWFi/T1b0DFzcrg

[Uh huh... And if you believe that, I have this wonderful bridge to sell you, complete with an historical provenance....]

12:31 PM

Nonny, the soft ball questions and subject choice to the values questions on the third debate had a lot to do with Bob Schieffer's long-term relationship. Although I still think Kerry scored on humanity, and Bush still looked beyond folksily clumsy. Tell me, too, another strain of credulity that Andrea Mitchell doesn't sugar coat the administration because of Greenspan. I blame him for bad economic choices underpinning for so much of what is wrong, deficits, and she's neutral when commenting on social security?

Why couldn't I get this thread by refreshing blog or main?

they reflect three principles which are essential to open and honest government--transparency, accountability, and limits.

Though strong laws may deter some Public Officials from violating their oath of office, there is little correlation between the strong laws and integrity. "If a public official wants to violate his trust, the laws do not stand in the way," states Terrance A. Norton, the BGA Executive Director. He extrapolates, "Perhaps what matters more than strong laws is a strong political economy--reporters, citizens groups, prosecutors, judges, religious leaders who are willing to speak out about the rampant corruption in our midst."
by suz
*****************************************

We are here to be the strong voices who hold our officials accountable. This is why it's so important to spread the word LOCALLY and make a big stink!

NO--it's NOT politics as usual and we will NOT accept an administration who reeks of corruption and not say a word. Nor will we accept Liars, cheaters, and stealers, like Rummy, Condi, Blackwell, GWB or JB any longer.

So gather your friends, go to other websites, grab a t'shirt and paint, make post it notes to distribute. WE WILL NOT LET THEM GET AWAY WITH THIS AND LAY DOWN AND PRETEND IT'S THE NORM. NO WAY!

Posted by: Chazman at February 18, 2005 12:25 PM

Chaz:

This administration appears to have more than its fair share of corruption. I strongly urge all of us to not only bombart people with the wrong doing of this administration, but that we take it a step farther. Corruption does not hold the monopoly in one party more than another; yet we need to point out that USUALLY the NeoCONS have bigger corruption than others.

Yes, we need to identify specific people, we need to WATCH their actions and keep a track record, and we need to inspire people to look beyond the "they're all liars..." to the specifics: This lie was said by _________ and the truth was said by _______________.

Hope that makes sense!

Hey guys,

I like this post. It i so true. You would think that Bush and his administration do not represent the people. ANywho I just wanted to stop in and say hi. I will post again soon.

February 18, 2005
EDITORIAL
What Does Alan Greenspan Want?

t was inevitable that Alan Greenspan would make news when he testified before the Senate Banking Committee on Wednesday that he supported private accounts in Social Security. "So if you're going to move to private accounts, which I approve of," he said, "I think you have to do it in a cautious, gradual way."

But Mr. Greenspan said so much more that, by any measure of logical consistency, could hardly be read as approval.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/18/opinion/18fri1.html?

As Ira and Marjorie said yesterday - Greenspan speaks with forked tongue.

**********************
Three-Card Maestro
By PAUL KRUGMAN

Alan Greenspan just did it again.

Four years ago, the Fed chairman lent crucial political support to the Bush tax cuts. He didn't specifically endorse the administration's plan, and if you read his testimony carefully, it contained caveats and cautions. But that didn't matter; the headlines trumpeted Mr. Greenspan's support, and legislation whose prospects had previously seemed dubious sailed through Congress.

On Wednesday Mr. Greenspan endorsed Social Security privatization. But there's a difference between 2001 and 2005. In 2001, Mr. Greenspan offered a convoluted, implausible justification for supporting everything the Bush administration wanted. This time, he offered no justification at all.

snip

Mr. Greenspan went on to concede that the opponents of privatization are right to worry about the huge borrowing that Bush-style privatization would entail.

Privatizers claim that financial markets won't be disturbed by all that borrowing because the Bush plan prescribes offsetting cuts in guaranteed benefits for the workers who open private accounts. Mr. Greenspan, who does know a thing or two about markets, put his finger on the reason why those prospective future benefit cuts wouldn't offset current borrowing in the eyes of investors: "Well, the problem is that you cannot commit future Congresses to stay with that."

Yet the chairman managed to avoid admitting the obvious - that borrowing on the scale the Bush plan requires would substantially increase the risk of a financial crisis. And the headlines didn't emphasize his concession that crucial critiques of the Bush plan are right. As he surely intended, the headlines emphasized his support for privatization.

One last point: a disturbing thing about Wednesday's hearing was the deference with which Democratic senators treated Mr. Greenspan. They acted as if he were still playing his proper role, acting as a nonpartisan source of economic advice. After the hearing, rather than challenging Mr. Greenspan's testimony, they tried to spin it in their favor.

But Mr. Greenspan is no longer entitled to such deference. By repeatedly shilling for whatever the Bush administration wants, he has betrayed the trust placed in Fed chairmen, and deserves to be treated as just another partisan hack.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/18/opinion/18krugman.html

Ron and Sandy have been putting up some good info over at the LUTD blog:

http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp

Bush's Record on Job Creation
18 February 2005
Bush did not do very well during his first term with regards to job creation. This data is from a publication which is definately not biased against Bush--the Wall Street Journal. They also have multiple other tables which analyze this with different data. This is the first of their tables, all of which show poor results for Bush. Going by annual payroll data, Bush comes out even worse with a negative 0.2% change.
http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=396

Move America Into the Middle Class
18 February 2005
John Edwards continues his fight to shine the light on those in poverty in America. Add your voice to the One America Blog and don't miss JE on "This Week", Sunday, Feb 20.
Email:
Dear Friend,
This past week, I traveled to South Carolina and Georgia and met with low-income families who are doing everything they can to move into the middle class. As I heard from them and listened to their struggles, I was reminded that this White House has been putting their interests last. […]
http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=395

Decreased Support for War Despite Misconceptions
18 February 2005
There are lots of published explanations as to why Bush won the election, with the post-election polls suggesting that national security was the key concern. Maybe the problem was just that the election was a bit too early. A new Harris Poll shows opinion turning further against Bush on Iraq and National Security issues, which conceivably could have affected their votes. Unfortunately, the polls show that a large number of Americans continue to have significant misconceptions about Iraq.
http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=394

Resolute:

CNBC, not exactly a left wing station said yesterday that had Greenspan been in Congress in 1937 that in their opinion he would have voted with the rest of the Republican party against the legislation creating SS. Its a long time ago but it would be interesting to read transcripts from Republicans during the 1937 Congressional debate. I am sure they called it socialism and worse.

This is on-topic -- a California dem has prompted an actual investigation of the sweetheart deal Wal-Mart got from DoL over child labor violations:

Feds Investigating Wal-Mart Settlement
By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Federal investigators will review a $135,540 settlement the government reached with Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's biggest retailer, over accusations that the company violated child labor laws.

The investigation was sought by Rep. George Miller. The California Democrat had criticized the deal made public Feb. 12 because it provided that Wal-Mart would receive 15 days notice in most cases before the Labor Department investigated employee complaints of wage and hour violations.

MORE:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050218/ap_on_re_us/wal_mart_child_labor_5

The Prisoner Torture Nightmare Spirals:

US Army destroyed photographs of mock executions.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=511104

NEW YORK Feb 18, 2005 — Pictures of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan posing with hooded and bound detainees during mock executions were destroyed after the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq to avoid another public outrage, Army documents released Friday by the American Civil Liberties Union show.

The results of an Army probe of the photographs were among hundreds of pages of documents released after the ACLU obtained a federal court order in Manhattan to let it see documents about U.S. treatment of detainees around the world.

---

This is shocking! We must be calling our representatives, Democrats AND Republicans, to protest this outrageous abuse of power. This is a COVERUP that has been going on for over a year now, in terms of documented abuse, and is part of a conspiracy to commit torture that has been ongoing since 9/11. Why are we letting the actions of our government and military drag our national identity down to the level of thugs and terrorists? Have they no shame for what they are doing to America?

Shame?

Are you kidding? The entire CONCEPT of shame is the TRUE foreign policy of this administration... as in, it's completely foreign to them.

I second that LUTD has some good postings. http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp

Honesty and Rove, what a stretch.

Elsewhere links said outed Jeff Gannon knew about Iraq invasion and Mary Mapes/CBS Rather memo before mainstream media, and others. While bloggers were commended for breaking potential fake CBS document of a truthful opinion and facts of an errant Bush, that blogger was a GOP Texas operative finding it hours after posting.

The whole thing smells of Rove and Texas. As do the inflated popular vote and the swifties.

Still wonder about the Osama tape showing up in United Arab Emirates, just before the election.

~~On topic
an op/ed from TVnewslies, about bu$hcheneyInc and mass media:

A lie told often enough becomes truth

They lied by commission and they lied by omission.

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/the_liars__den.html

A quote on the subject of Bush lies from a TIME interview with anti-capital-punishment activist helen Prejean

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1027484,00.html

Monday, Feb. 14, 2005 (hard-copy=Feb 21 issue)
10 Questions For Helen Prejean
By HELEN PREJEAN; AMANDA RIPLEY

.. "Honestly, it's hard to look
at [Bush's] face on television because everything he says is so untruthful. .. "

THE PRESIDENT WHO DOES NOT LIE!
How the American media use euphemisms, substitutions, and muted language to re-define and soft-pedal the word LIE!

TvNewsLies.org editorial.

In their efforts to refrain from calling a lie a lie, the media and the Bush/PNAC group have used more tactful terms to avoid the obvious. The following are among the most creative words used

exaggerate - As in exaggerate the threat that Iraq posed, as in Iraq was not quite the threat to the U.S. that we were led to believe. (This term is most common replacement for lie.)
misled - As in the president had deliberately misled this nation into war, as in the president lied about the reasons we went to war.
twist - As in twisted intelligence, as in lied about the conclusions of the intelligence reports so as not to represent truthfully the findings of the reports.
misstate- As in Bush made misstatements on Iraq WMDs, as in Bush made mistruths, as in Bush lied. (This one is my favorite!)
overstretch the fact - As in overstretching the fact about Iraq, as in overdoing it in trying to come up with another term for lying.
distort some evidence - As in distort some evidence so that the truth about the evidence is not disclosed
bluffed - As in Powell bluffed the UN, as in Powell lied to the UN.
manipulating - As in Ex-CIA Accuse Bush of Manipulating Iraq Evidence, as in manipulating/tampering with evidence is a crime in itself.
credibility gap - As Bush’s credibility gap. As in no credibility. As in the boy who cried wolf. As in the boy who lied about the wolf. As in the boy president who lied about Iraq, and about everything else. You will see this term all over. The phrases that will be uttered in conjunction when discussing the Bush/PNAC administration will be credibility gap, terror, axis of evil and WMDs. When I discuss them I will associate the phrases damn liars, war, unemployment, environmental disaster, anti-Americanism, and overall gloom!
overselling - As in overselling the facts. CNN has adopted this term.
facts overlooked - As in facts overlooked in lieu of lies told. This is getting silly!
misrepresented - As in misrepresented lies as truths.
claim had flawed origin - As in Bush Claim on Iraq Had Flawed Origin as in this one takes the cake!!!
overstated - As in Blair `overstated' Iraq claims as in Blair & `overstated' Iraq claims as in Blair and Bush lied about Iraq claims
overplaying - As in overplaying the threat of Iraqi weapons capabilities, as in even Tony Blair is Teflon when it comes to the term liar!
factual error - As in White House Admits Factual Error in State of Union Address, as in a when you are aware something is a factual error and you say it anyway you are lying!
goofed up - As in Bush goofed up on Iraq as in Bush lied about Iraq!
did not provide an accurate picture - As in Mr Thielmannn said yesterday: "I believe the Bush administration did not provide an accurate picture to the American people of the military threat posed by Iraq." As in Bush provided an inaccurate picture, as in Bush lied about the picture!
questionable claim - as in The President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board has concluded that the White House made a questionable claim in January's State of the Union address about Saddam Hussein's efforts to obtain nuclear materials because of its desperation to show that Hussein had an active program to develop nuclear weapons, according to a well-placed source familiar with the board's findings.
more~
http://tvnewslies.org/html/lying_redefined.html

Blame America? When Necessary, Yes

by Reggie Rivers February 18, 2005 Denver Post

Partisanship has denuded the political landscape of meaningful debate to the point that anyone who criticizes President Bush's policies is presumed to be a Democrat who is still angry about the outcome of the election.

However, as a critic of the president, I speak for a lot of people when I say that it's not simple partisanship that motivates us. Many of us believe that President Bush is doing great harm to the United States, and we're concerned about where our nation will stand four years from now.

As the Bush administration gears up for an invasion of Iran, Americans need to ask whether we can fight another pre-emptive war. To understand how wrong this doctrine really is, you need merely to reverse roles. Imagine that, in the face of all this saber-rattling, Iran decided to attack us pre-emptively. Would Americans shrug and say that it was legitimate for Iran to hit us first?
continue~
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0218-25.htm

Phony Journalist
Pimping for the White House

Editorial Published on Friday, February 18, 2005 by the Minneapolis Star Tribune (Minnesota)

~snip~
So the question becomes, just how did this character get White House press credentials, despite supposed post-Sept. 11 security requirements? Bruce Bartlett, a conservative columnist who worked in the Reagan and first Bush administrations, says that "if Gannon was using an alias, the White House staff had to be involved in maintaining his cover." In other words, the White House wanted him at those briefings and wanted him to ask his softball questions, most likely to divert attention when legitimate reporters were getting too pushy.

This is part of a pattern by Bush's minions to construct a phony reality in news coverage. Consider:

• To promote Bush's Medicare prescription bill, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) paid for phony "newscasts" that were distributed to television stations nationwide.

• Columnist Armstrong Williams was paid $240,000 by the Department of Education to promote Bush's No Child Left Behind Act.

• Columnists Michael McManus and Maggie Gallagher were paid to "advise HHS on the Bush administration's marriage policies."

• Every Bush "town hall" forum during last fall's campaign was carefully limited to supporters who would ask fawning questions. No demonstrators -- indeed, no one wearing an offensive lapel pin -- were allowed in.

• The Bush Pentagon launched an Office of Strategic Influence to provide "news" to foreign media. When it became known, it was shut down in embarrassment.

The pattern is clear: This administration will do pretty much anything to shape reality to fit its agenda.

Another powerful tool in its arsenal is intimidation. This is by far the most vindictive administration since Richard Nixon's. Ask the wrong question or write something the White House doesn't like, and your access is cut off. Unfortunately, too many of the real journalists have gone along meekly. As columnist Michael Kinsley observed, if this White House said two plus two equaled five, there would be no shortage "of media to report both sides of the question."

Once it was fairly easy to distinguish real reporters from hacks and charlatans, objective news from partisan rant. That has become increasingly difficult, thanks in part to a Bush White House that finds the confusion useful, to its everlasting dishonor.
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0218-24.htm

~~well, I would say, they got what they voted for:: more Bu$hlies:

Farmers Who Backed Bush Upset with Budget

By John Seewer The Associated Press
17 February 2005

Farmers who backed President Bush in November now feel a little betrayed following his proposal for deep cuts in agriculture programs and payments to farmers.

Toledo, Ohio - Some farmers from battleground election states who campaigned and voted for President Bush say they are not happy about proposed cuts in federal farm subsidies and other agriculture programs.

"We wouldn't call it a double-cross or anything like that, but I don't think this is going to sit real well," said Harold Bateson, whose family's grain farm covers 2,300 acres in northwest Ohio near Bowling Green.
more~
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021805M.shtml

"We wouldn't call it a double-cross or anything like that, but I don't think this is going to sit real well," said Harold Bateson

So what WOULD you call it, Harold????

Look up the word PANDERING, Harold... it's a concept you might want to familiarize yourself with next election cycle.

~~my heart hurts tonight. I want to avoid reading such brutal things, but if I refuse to look, then I feel I condone the awful reality that is taking place, and that I cannot do. This MUST stop!!

Files Suggest U.S. Troops Tried to Hide Abuses
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021805Y.shtml

Papers Reveal Bagram Abuse
Prisoners subjected to 'mock executions'; photographs of detainees being sexually humiliated.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021805B.shtml

Our Friends, the Torturers
The administration is trying to have it both ways in its so-called war on terror. It claims to be fighting for freedom, democracy and the rule of law, and it condemns barbaric behavior whenever it is committed by someone else. At the same time, it is engaged in its own barbaric behavior, while going out of its way to keep that behavior concealed from the American public and the world at large.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021805J.shtml

on.to...

It is hypocrisy at it's most insidious level. These abuse atrocities are almost as sickening to view as the pictures from concentration camps in WWII.

This is NOT the America I used to know, and in no way, shape, or form, can such activities be justified.

Shame on you, Red America! Allowing this to go on without holding your so-called leaders accountable makes those who support your so-called leaders nothing more than accomplices to unspeakable crimes.

Lemme put it in terms those who support this administration might understand a little better... you are either with us, or against us.

Capiche?

DiAnne-
You asked on the last thread if it was true Dean said during his most recent press conference that he would no longer answer questions that are unsourced. Well, yes he did. It was in response to "Some Dems say they are concerned about you becoming party chair." I thought Dean's response was very smart move on his part.

oh the hypocrisy!
After all the Republican effort to ridicule the UN,
Flip-flop, now Bu$hInc wants the UN's help to rebuild Iraq!

New U.S. Spy Chief Asks UN to Help Rebuild Iraq

Fri Feb 18, Top Stories - Reuters
By Evelyn Leopold

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - John Negroponte, just nominated as the first U.S. intelligence chief, asked U.N. members on Friday to "take another look" at what they could do to help Iraq, including training the military.
http://tinyurl.com/5ay3g

Real Americans Don't Need Capiche...

To Arms! To Arms!!!

And raised fists and voices!

We shall not go quietly...

We shall not sin by silence...

We are not Red, nor are we Blue...

We are Americans...Proud Americans...

The children of all nations...

And we are ANGRY! >=[

Bust a move...or a Neocon before fascism becomes an insatiable pest devouring the rights of all.

Got Insectacide?

This Week
On Sunday, February 20, 2005, John Edwards will appear on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" from North Carolina to discuss his work at UNC's new Center on Poverty, Work, and Opportunity.

I am reaching a tipping point here...

PBS feels heat of indecency debate, bleeps Iraq war piece Friday, February 18, 2005 - Page updated at 12:00 a.m. PBS feels heat of indecency debate, bleeps Iraq war piece

By Kay McFadden
Seattle Times TV critic

War is hell. Just ask PBS.

The raging battle over what's indecent on TV claimed another hostage yesterday: "Frontline," the award-winning public-news program whose story about a group of soldiers in Iraq has caused a ruckus even before it airs next Tuesday.

The 90-minute piece was filmed in November and is titled "A Company of Soldiers." It follows members of the 1st Battalion of the Army's 8th Cavalry, whose dangerous job was to protect bodyguards assigned to senior officers in south Baghdad.

Many of the scenes are vivid, as one might expect from men and women under fire. So is the language — and that's the problem.

Executives for the strapped PBS system have cited cost as the main reason for caution. Many observers, however, think the problem is increased pressure from conservatives within the White House and Congress to reformulate public television's programming.

The Department of Education last month threatened to yank its financing for the animated children's television series "Postcards from Buster" if an episode featuring a visit to children with lesbian parents were to air.

PBS removed that episode and a wave of strong criticism from liberal supporters ensued, although WGBH bypassed public television and made the episode available to interested stations, including KCTS. On Monday, PBS President Pat Mitchell announced she will not seek to renew her contract when it expires in 2006.

More:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002183

Ready for Dubya Dubya Three?

America would back Israel attack on Iran

By Francis Harris in Washington
(Filed: 18/02/2005)

President George W Bush added a new twist to the international tension over Iran's nuclear programme last night by pledging to support Israel if it tries to destroy the Islamic regime's capacity to make an atomic bomb.

...

"Clearly, if I was the leader of Israel and I'd listened to some of the statements by the Iranian ayatollahs that regarded the security of my country, I'd be concerned about Iran having a nuclear weapon as well. And in that Israel is our ally, and in that we've made a very strong commitment to support Israel, we will support Israel if her security is threatened."

His comments appeared to be a departure from the administration's line that there are no plans to attack at present and that Washington backs European diplomatic efforts. The remarks may have reflected Mr Bush's personal thinking on an issue causing deep concern in Washington.

...

A senior Russian nuclear official said he would go to Iran next week to sign a protocol agreeing the return of spent nuclear fuel, the last remaining obstacle to Bushehr's functioning. This will allow deliveries of Russian nuclear fuel.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/20...

Will Pitt FYI: Experts See Military Draft as Inevitable

http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/2/18/9166/09308

Moral values?

This is 1 in 9!

The Rev. John J. Connolly, who oversees the abuse-prevention office at the Boston archdiocese, told The Boston Globe that prevention efforts there include annual criminal background checks on more than 60,000 priests, employees and volunteers.

Last year, the bishops released an unprecedented statistical review that found 4,392 priests had been accused of molesting minors in 10,667 cases between 1950 and 2002.

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050218122209990001

If you don't hear from ACT, find website of America Coming Together - they are organizing all over for voter reform. This is one of many issues where we have to be unified, proactive and quick!

Passionate ACT volunteers are at work across the country, strengthening local grassroots networks and preparing for the work ahead. As we look towards the future, the fight for fair and open elections looms on all of our minds. For us, today is a big day.

Reconnect with ACTivists in your area at an ACT Town Hall Meeting.

~is Gannon ....Rove the connection to CBS / TANG memos?

Rove-Gannon Connection?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/18/opinion/lynch/main675050.shtml

DailyKos on the story
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/18/122051/247

Here is an example of conscious REFRAMING:

Donate today to NARAL Pro-Choice Washington to KEEP YOUR PRIVATE LIFE PRIVATE.

What is the abortion debate of the 21st century really about? 

Not choice.  Not life.  Not values. 

Sex.

It's such a small word but, boy, it packs a wallop!  It's everywhere - magazines, entertainment, music, even video games are sexy.  We think about it.  We read about it.  Let's face it - we miss it when it's gone and sometimes take it for granted when it's there.

And it's what the abortion argument all boils down to...the right to have sex.  I'm not talking about promiscuity.  I'm talking about educated, responsible people having sex for any reason other than making babies. 

NARAL Pro-Choice Washington is determined to expose the truth. Your donation of $25, $50 or even $100 will help us reveal the anti-choice argument for what it really is.

Anti-choice factions are attacking everything that actually prevents unplanned pregnancies and, therefore, lowers the abortion rate - birth control, emergency contraception, medically accurate sex-ed, family planning funding.  If it allows women to exercise any amount of sexual freedom they're against it.

The only real "common ground" we can agree on is that people aren't going to stop having sex.  The question for the 21st century then becomes: would you rather decrease STDs, unplanned pregnancies, and abortions while protecting the health of men and women or do you want to punish people for having sex?

Because, in the end, that's exactly what anti-choice policies and restrictions do. 

MY NAME IS DIANNE & I APPROVE THIS MESSAGE. It is obvious this is a good tack to take with young people. We need to call the shots!! This is the best I've heard this explained in a long time.

Afghan Abuse Photos:

What constituted a "bad photograph?" investigators asked. (ie. one that the Pentagon would destroy)

"One where the public would be outraged," he (big shot from Pentagon) said.

~why should US taxpayers foot any of the bill for this?

Limbaugh to visit Afghanistan with US aid official
18 Feb 2005 01:40:10 GMT

Source: Reuters

WASHINGTON, Feb 17 (Reuters) - Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh is expected to visit Afghanistan with the top U.S. aid official to spotlight America's aid work there, officials said on Thursday.

Political commentator Mary Matalin, a former White House aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, will also be on the trip. She said she was not being paid to go and would pay her own way to Dubai but she believed the U.S. government would cover the cost of her visit to Afghanistan from there.
continue~
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N17299126.htm

Posted by: florida dem at February 18, 2005 08:52 PM

I agree - very smart move on Dean's part. The "journalist" might be taking one comment out of context, spinning it into a vague question, and however Dean answered the "journalist" could spin it as disagreeing with someone in the Dem party. Dean needs to know who said what, in what context, and how it was originally meant before he walks into a trap set by Rovian-type journalists trying to stir up trouble and division within the Democratic party.... Very good move on Dean's part.....

Screw the Children

By Molly Ivins, AlterNet. Posted February 17, 2005.

What's really sad about the budget is that all this damage is being done to real, living children – to save what is, in Washington terms, pennies.

Budgets are the guts of government. That's where you find the answer to the first of the three important questions about who runs a society: Who's getting screwed? Who's doing the screwing? And what the hell will they do to us next?
snip~
With President Bush's proposed budget, may it die in committee, no pause is necessary. Read any overview of the proposal, and you can see exactly who's getting screwed: children.

Good Lord, what a nasty document. The cuts are in health care, childcare, Head Start, nutrition programs, food stamps and foster care. Because budgets are such abstract things – add a little here, cut some there, all produced by the Department of Great Big Numbers – it's hard to see what they actually mean to real people's lives.

In fact, that's something I've long noticed about George W. Bush: He really doesn't see any connection between government programs and helping people.
more~
http://www.alternet.org/story/21294/

Shelter Under the Anti-war Umbrella

By David Solnit, AlterNet. Posted February 18, 2005.

A call to the U.S. anti-war movement: it is possible for us to promote a people power strategic framework that makes our various efforts and campaigns complementary and cumulative.

As the atrocities of the occupation of Iraq continue to mount, at the same time, the war at home has been taking billions from schools, healthcare, Social Security, wages and benefits and our communities and transferring them to corporations, the wealthy and war. But where are the outraged thousands in the streets? Where did all of us anti-warriors go? What will it take?
continue~
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/21298/

Supplemental Insecurity
The revelations buried in Bush's latest supplemental budget request.

By Fred Kaplan

Deeply buried in the Bush administration's 97-page supplemental budget request for $81.9 billion ($75 billion of it for the Pentagon), mainly to fund operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is one sentence that expresses—more succinctly and shockingly than any official statement to date—just how little progress we've made toward making Iraq a stable nation.

It's there in the section dealing with the $5.7 billion requested for the "Iraq Security Force Fund," which notes that the interim Iraqi government, with assistance from coalition nations, has already created a security force of 90 battalions, but then adds:

All but one of these 90 battalions, however, are lightly equipped and armed, and have very limited mobility and sustainment capabilities.

In other words, 89 of Iraq's 90 battalions essentially cannot fight.
more~
http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2113575&

~how big corporations took over America:

The People’s Business
Controlling corporations and restoring democracy
By Lee Drutman and Charlie Cray

One does not have to look far in Washington these days to find evidence that government policy is being crafted with America’s biggest corporations in mind.
continue~
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/1971/

~~my heart hurts tonight. I want to avoid reading such brutal things, but if I refuse to look, then I feel I condone the awful reality that is taking place, and that I cannot do. This MUST stop!!
Posted by: on.to.victory4Dems at February 18, 2005 07:52 PM
~~~~~~

I wholeheartedly agree and empathize. Years ago I finally had to give up reading about WWII and the concentration camps. It was horrifying and revolting beyond my comprehension. I finally understood the family story about my uncle who almost drank himself to death after his military unit helped liberate one of the concentration camps (he eventually recovered and lived a full life - but he would never, ever talk about it). The horrors he saw devastated him. Like you, I'm forcing myself to read about these things and looking at the pictures, and even cry about it at times.

Now America has gone to that dark place like the Nazis did in WWII with POW camps in Gitmo, Iraq, Afghanistan (and who knows where else, given the ultra-secrecy in this administration).... It makes me feel deeply ashamed to call myself an American, and I despise the BushCo administration - every last one of them - who take the hypocritical moral high ground when they talk about human rights abuses in other countries. What about the abuse and torture that were approved of with one of Bush's secret Executive Orders?!? Certainly he is culpable, and so are the rest of them who have known about the abuses before we did, and are now trying to cover them up. Every last one of them needs to be out of elected or appointed offices and held up as examples of bad human beings, and bad Americans.

What I do not fathom at all is why mainstream media isn't harping on this several times a day like the harped about Clinton's sexual indiscretions several times a day. Why are they not denouncing BushCo - all of them, from the PresiDunce down - daily, several times a day?!?!? Why are they not launching investigative reporters to dig up every last bloody detail about the horrors?!? For that kind of reporting, I'd say journalists should protect their sources to the limit. For that kind of reporting - starting with the worst horrors and continuing on with the rest of the crimes being committed by this administration - the reporters could protect their sources with pride (heck, I'd donate to help their families while they served jail terms for protecting their sources). I want to be proud of good, accurate, investigative reporters again.

Where is the outrage from red America with their "moral values" that embrace a PresiDunce who approves of torture?!?!?

I have had a mental image in my mind since November 3, 2004, of the Statue of Liberty crying tears of blood.....

Nonny...

I have had a similar image in my mind for some time of Lady Liberty with a hood over her head and jumper cables attached to her fingers while having her dress lifted for all the world to see.

Not a pretty picture... but pride is not a uniquely American concept, and I, like you, have very little of it left when claiming that I am an American.

Turnabout is fair play. It won't be long until we see an American serving in Iraq paraded in front of a video camera being humiliated in unspeakable terms... and then what?

Quite frankly, I think this administration is salivating at the thought, for it will give them just the ticket to whip the public into a frenzy to go at it with all we've got over there.

If we want our pride back, we have to TAKE it back, hook, line & sinker.

I'm tired of being preached to about morals while such things go on in the name of America... and I most certainly know that my morals are absolute, and never jibe with the notion that “the end justifies the means.”

The question as to "when will it all end" is starting to become quite a troubling hypothetical indeed.

Now look your children in the eye and decide what you are going to do about it.