« Arrest Ann Coulter, Please | Main | Throw Yourself Like Seed »
The Custom in New Mexico
It has become the custom in New Mexico, by order of the Governor to fly the flag at half staff every time a soldier from here is killed.
photo credit: C Anderson
This time it flies for a soldier from my home county. Sgt. Clifton Yazzie was 23 years old, killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq. They'll bury him Saturday. As has also become the custom, the service will be at the Civic Center, so that everyone can attend.
He leaves a 21 year old widow, and 2 children ages 4 and 18 months. Sgt. Yazzie's mother said that he had always wanted to be a soldier. It is a proud tradition in the Navajo Nation, going back to the Code talkers in WWII.
Why bring this up? What is one more soldier when over 2000 have died? I bring it up because this Tuesday we have the chance to make our voices heard, and to make sure that we know just what this administration says it's going to do about the Sgt. Yazzies who are still over there.
It is time again for the State of the Union address. Just another speech by the President you say, can't stand to listen to him, I'll probably skip the whole thing. Don't skip it, for the sake of Sgt. Yazzie, and for the sake of the Union. It is so important that we note this speech, either by protest, or at the least by listening to it, and being ready to respond to what is said.
The history of this speech is rather interesting; you can learn more about it here. It hasn't always been a speech, but since Truman it has been used, less as an address to Congress, than as the President's chance to address all Americans.
We know where some of us will be that night, at the Reflecting Pool, giving voice to our objections to this current administration.
Where will you be? If you want company join us in the IRC, where the ready wit and wisdom of your fellow DCP'ers will make listening fun. What ever you do, make time to listen to this most important speech of the year.
Having sent the walkout-proposal of William Rivers Pitt to a bunch of friends, I got this response from my ex-husband. It's the best idea I've yet heard:
"As for walking out on the State of the Union speech, I tend to agree
with the offered opinion that it wouldn't send the needed message and
that yes, politics takes discipline and real work, not just showmanship.
But my own take is more of a hybrid opinion. As you know, I value
showmanship and I would agree that real work creates real change. So, I
would not say that the Dems should walk out. Rather, they should stand
with the first of what would ordinarily be many, many, standing
ovations. Stand, but not applaud, not walk out. And keep standing though
the entire speech, staring, watching, witnessing the half truths and
spin of this "president". It would be soooo awkward, as Bush continued
to drone on, to have all the Democrats staring at him in silence. And
when the speech was over, the Dems would proceed with the blistering, no
holds barred, rebuttal that our country needs to hear. And from that
point forward, engage the real work. Never walk out, confront, engage,
speak the truth."
I think my ex on the right track. Stand up and be counted-- that's it. It's time. JK's galvanizing call for a filibuster this week has the tone for truth-telling, and change. Go, Dems (and thinking independents and all friends of democracy), go!
Fixing the typos at the end (sorry . .). Here's the end again, with missing words restored:
I think that my ex is on the right track. Stand up and be counted-- that's it. It's time. JK's galvanizing call for a filibuster this week has set the tone for truth-telling, and change. Go, Dems (and thinking independents and all friends of democracy), go!
Posted by: mbk
Chuck in Doha for All:
Well, this may be off-topic, but as Oncall said ont the last thread the filibuster of Alito brings a lot of threads together. So, here is Senator Kerry's speech on why he will filibister:
http://recap.fednet.net/archive/Buildasx.asp?sProxy=80_sflr012706_018.wmv,80_sflr012706_019.wmv,80_sflr012706_020.wmv,80_sflr012706_021.wmv,80_sflr012706_022.wmv,80_sflr012706_023.wmv&sTime=00:00:18.0&eTime=00:03:05&duration=00:27:37.0&UserName=senclinton&sLocation=&sExpire=1
which is kind of long (you might be able to cut and paste into your Explorer address bar -- I'll give it a try after I post), or you can go to Pamela and Ron's website and read the transcript (or scroll down it) till you get to the link. Here is that blog:
http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=1774
Chuck in Doha
Chuck in Doha with an FYI....
Well, I copied the link and pasted it into my address bar in Explorer (Windows XP Home) and lo-and-behold, the video started. So it does work under some conditions.
Chuck in Doha
Posted by: mbk at January 28, 2006 10:28 AM
I absolutely agree. I was thinking along the same lines, about how great it would be for all Democrats to be stone cold silent during the whole speech. Be respectful of the office (not the man) by standing when the president enters & leaves, but then sit down and be silent for the rest of the speech. How much echo would there be in the chambers with only Republicans applauding...
The only problem is that I'll bet MSM will only pan those who are applauding. Best to watch it on CSPAN to see the truth....
Chuck in Doha on Framing:
You know, for the longest time I've been thinking "how do you frame 'unitary executive'?"
Then it struck me -- just use it and use it and maybe it will be something people will begin to focus on. If anyone wonders where it came from, mention Judge Alito and how he talked about it in a speech to the Federelaist Society around the time that the Supreme Court selected President Bush. Might just could be a conversation starter (or stopper, not sure).
Chuck in Doha
Posted by Claudia Anderson at January 28, 2006 09:29 AM
Good points, Claudia. Some of us should find out what kind of crap he'll come up with this year.
And hanging out in the IRC is a good idea... I'll think about watching/listening and joining you, as long as I've got a full bottle of gin handy...
There are still alot of people walking around blind.
57% polled favor a "hit" on Iran if certain conditions are met:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-fornpoll27jan27,0,5687
029.story?coll=la-home-headlines
& this local letter makes some good points - I think the filibuster needs to be tried & this writer doesn't, but she presents an interesting view & alot of people do need to "wake up":
It is time to give the American People what they've asked for, and let them pay the consequences for their actions. When more people vote for guys like Bush, this is what you get, it isn't about combat and who is a patriot and who isn't, it isn't about who you want to have a beer with, it isn't about who is more likeable than another, it is about our government, and who it is run for and by, with Geo you get by and for corporations. Now it is time to pay the cost for those actions.
I've long wondered why politician attempt to save people from themselves when it just isn't possible. They always try to alleviate the pain that the little folks feel because of their own actions. Well last election since 3 million more dimwits voted for Geo cause they dont want gay people to get married, the consequences happen to be women loosing protections from the constitution, and guess what some times people need to see the cold hard facts about what
happens when you act like bigotted knuckleheads. It is maddening and feels like we've stepped backward in time and no doubt we have, but there is nothing like the cold hard slap reality to for people to remember that the consequences are notjust that gay people can't get married and no one can burn the flag, but that we loose individual rights. Ahh consequences, they could help us enormously.
Our senators look foolish and disorganized and weak by trying this stuff at the last minute (filibuster). I think Alito is a nightmare, he loves corporate interests, he loves executive power, he doesnt believe women have protection under the constitution to make decision about their own bodies, I am sure he is scared of those gays getting married and having any kind of rights, but changes in Roe inevetibly will bury the Republican Party, so I say, lets go backward because that is what it is going to take to propel us forward. We are lucky here we are in a somewhat progressive state and our right to choose as women is protected. So now it is time for those women in the south and midwest to have some consequences for their actions. Just like children, they need consequences.
from the "nuke Iran" article, in which some felt it was "just bombing" as opposed to sending troops - this is just unbelieveable!!
The poll results suggest that the difficulties the United States has encountered in Iraq have not turned the public against the possibility of military actions elsewhere in the Middle East.
Support for a potential military confrontation with Iran was strongest among Republican respondents, among whom 76% endorsed the idea. But even among Democrats, who overwhelmingly oppose the war in Iraq, 49% supported such action.
The Dems already fail to applaud in many cases during the last few State of the Union addresses - there was a distinct difference between the two sides of the aisle. If I ever watch it's to see the body language of Ted Kennedy. Or will notice some jerk such as Chalabi sitting in the VIP section with Laura.
Watch the video I posted on the last section (hypothetical SOTU address) and you'll see a guy eating during it and at the end, Cheney can't quite tolerate the excitement! They also use footage frmo real addresses, so it's hilarious!
http://media.echoditto.com/SOTU.mov
real addresses, so it's hilarious!
http://media.echoditto.com/SOTU.mov
Posted by: DiAnne at January 28, 2006 12:57 PM
DiAnne--This IS hilarious! Thanks!
*ahem*
Not to risk dire and odious personal misfortunes by breaking the chain letter of hilarities here -- which is not to be confused with breaking the chain of Hillaryties, since that would indubitably be a kettle of fish of a different color ...
... But since this thread did start with a sort of generalized eulogy, it seems not entirely inappropriate to point you now to a more specific eulogy that I just came across, one that I found to be especially moving in these troubled, divisive times ...
... And I believe that you are likely to find it equally notable also. Said eulogy begins with these introductory words, and then you can follow up by reading the rest of it as posted at http://www.bestoftheblogs.com/ ...
==========
Why To This Liberal "Conservative" Isn't A Dirty Word
My father died last week. From Vietnam to George Bush our politics were polls apart. I am liberal, globe-trotting, cosmopolitan. He was conservative, a man who had found his place and didn't like to leave it, except for family reunions and trips with my mother or close family friends. This is the eulogy I wrote for the church bulletin used at his memorial service.
"Our father was a rock. My brother Dan says that to Pop everything was black and white —- and Pop was always absolutely sure that he knew which was which. My mother just called him hard-headed."
[snip]
==========
We should all of us only be so lucky to be able to count on the friendship and devotion of hard-headed men like Jim McCreery in the course of our lifetimes. His son John knows that... and once you read the rest of what John wrote in his father's memory, you'll know that too.
requiescat en pace Mr. McCreery,
Otter
FYI, as an aside...
The overly-long URL to a rather interesting article that DiAnne posted here at 12:34 pm today won't work because it is broken into two word-wrapped lines (something that frequently happens when one copies and pastes email messages into blog posts without vetting them prior to reposting).
In this particular case, I've converted that non-functional URL into a working one, and then taken advantage of the handy service provided by http://tinyurl.com to convert it into one that won't break this blog's page formatting by still being too wide for the comments column.
You can easily visit the linked article from that 12:34 pm post by clicking on the resulting TinyURL here:
http://tinyurl.com/bugzg
hope this helps,
Otter
In a number of recent threads, people have been posting comments and/or providing links to articles detailing the current leadership's absolutely shameless devotion and nearly sluttish dedication to needless pork-barrel spending practices.
I've been a frequent opponent of such gratuitous pork-barrel budget-packing myself, as many of you will recall. But what the heck *is* "pork-barrel spending", really, and what the heck are those pesky "earmarks" that people have started talking about in connection to it anyway?
MSNBC's website has a couple of current articles that discuss the subject of pork-barrel earmarking in some detail -- they can be found here http://tinyurl.com/b2efh and here http://tinyurl.com/9lxq3 respectively.
Many other MSM and news-related blog sites talk about pork-barrel spending and earmarks also. A simple Google search will help you find them. However, if some of the sites you want to access require registration in order to read the whole articles, you may find this link helpful: http://tinyurl.com/ytumn (bearing in mind, of course, that said information is not to be construed as advocacy of anything at all by this blogposter and/or the DCP, ahem).
In any case, here are a few information-wants-to-be-free Wikipedia articles that you might also find to be helpful and/or educational in this context -- the first explains more about pork-barrel spending and how/why it works, and the second & third explain more about the final paragraph of this post and how/why it works:
http://tinyurl.com/7d5gz and http://tinyurl.com/bg3r2 and http://tinyurl.com/c4e5o
Anyway that you look at it, gratuitous and unrestrained pork-barrel spending by this Republican-dominated legislature has reached historically-unheard of levels and must be reined in *immediately*, before the country that we love and live in is finally forced to declare complete bankruptcy.
Or, as the final paragraph of this post (as referenced to/in the second & third Wikipedia links above) would put it instead:
"Unyvey thet yuoo luuk et it, gretooeetuoos und unrestreeened purk-berrel spendeeng by thees Repoobleecun-dumeeneted legeesletoore-a hes reeched heesturicelly-unheerd ooff lefels und moost be-a reeened in *immedeeetely*, beffure-a zee cuoontry thet ve-a lufe-a und leefe-a in is feenelly furced tu declere-a cumplete-a bunkrooptcy."
bork bork bork, er, I mean, pork pork pork,
Otter
Watch the video I posted on the last section (hypothetical SOTU address) and you'll see a guy eating during it and at the end...
Posted by: DiAnne at January 28, 2006 12:57 PM
That "guy" is supposed to be Dennis Hastert, speaker of the house, as oncall & I noted in the previous thread when he posted the link to the video by YouTube. (They have a bunch of funny ones on their site, including Cheney as Scarface.)
http://youtube.com/w/State-of-the-Union-2006----Bush-Impression?v=upTUbqc5Pso
Bush defended his performance Thursday, pointing to an improved economy despite higher prices for gasoline, heating oil and natural gas. He said the November elections would be about "peace and prosperity."
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/26/bush.poll/index.html
I'm sorry, I just love reading that paragraph over and over again.
Let's dissect, shall we?
Pointing to an improved economy....
U.S. economy grows at slowest pace in 3 years
GDP advances at sluggish 1.1 percent rate as consumer spending wanes
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11057726/
...despite higher higher gasoline, heating oil, and natural gas prices...
Hmmmm. Really? How come? Who sent the world oil markets into a tizzy the last 5 years? Could it be, oh I don't know.... SATAN!
Finally, please do campaign on peace & prosperity, and should you find any, please let us know... although, I wouldn't believe it if you said so.
The Lyin' King
Oh, dear Monkey mine -- please don't forget "a return to normalcy" and "a chicken in every pot" while you're at it.
in shrubya's national-guard case it was more like some pot in every chicken,
Otter
Please do not compare the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the Leader of the Free World, to Satan, the Ruler of the Underworld.
That comparison is very unfair to one of the above individuals.
I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide which is which.
although satan doesn't have ann "the wicked witch of the wonks" coulter defending him on tv,
Otter
Great editorial in -- of all places -- the Fort Worth Star-Telegram...by Jim Zinn (any relation, do you suppose?)
It's time for America's game officials to throw flags
--snip--
And as has been pointed out, the Bush II people were supposed to be the pros, the mature business minds who would bring order and competence to the running of the country. Instead, we have a mismanaged Federal Emergency Management Agency, a mishandled peace in Iraq, the Abramoff scandal and a sputtering quest to capture al Qaeda's leader.
The NSA affront has brought a few conservative leaders -- people who put more value on their beliefs than on winning -- to question the direction, or misdirection, of the current ship of state. More will follow as they reflect that if Clinton had run roughshod over congressional mandates, House members would have drawn up the articles of impeachment and voted before noon. I like to think that I have sufficiently outgrown my teen football mentality to have supported such an action.
Yes, there are limits. And now it's time for the adults to come in and supervise. After all, the rulebook we are talking about is the Constitution of the United States.
Partisanship aside, this game is getting out of control. And somebody is going to get hurt.
Read the rest...
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/opinion/13735557.htm
Absolutely, totally off-topic, but 1) it's the weekend and 2) we do have to celebrate the good things in life too. Patti Smith sent out this email/poem (to me and a million others who are on her email distribution list -- just so you don't think I'm an elitist...)
We could all do to listen to her advice (and to "People have the Power")...
greetings
it's been a long time since i have written.
i am in paris and it is friday january 27.
i am lucky to attend the premier
of don giovanni on
mozart's 250th birthday.
a truly revolutionary fellow,
he wrote the overture
the night before it debuted.
he had to drink a few flasks
of wine but he did it.
a genius at making the establishment
shudder as he approached deadlines,
he played piano the opening night laughingly, shouting the proper notes
to his fellow musicians.
what a guy. please celebrate. you must have some mozart laying around.
i have the requiem. let's all play him together.
i send all good wishes. i am well and wearing fine black socks i bought
in rome near the vatican.
life is good and better with mozart,
patti smith
Monkey
Higher oil and gas prices! Yes! I paid over $30/tank (small Beetle tank) but I got my 15th tank at Citgo (Venezuelan owned).
Otter
Re Satan:
"The road to hell is not paved with good intentions but with ignorance justified."
(Blackfeet Indian sognwriter Phoenix)
Madame
Thank you for the patti smith
If you read French, read this - it also relates to Mozart (& the eloquent Dominique VeVillipin, courtesy Andree)
http://www.liberation.fr/page.php?Article=354870
Courtesy Otter - this link will now open.
http://tinyurl.com/bugzg
Read to see that according to this poll (not an internet poll) a majority of Americans want to, under certain conditions, "nuke Iran"
Shameful.
Polls Show Many Americans are Simply Dumber Than Bush
Blind Ignorance
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Two recent polls, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll and a New York Times/CBS News poll, indicate why Bush is getting away with impeachable offenses. Half of the US population is incapable of acquiring, processing and understanding information.
Much of the problem is the media itself, which serves as a disinformation agency for the Bush administration. Fox "News" and right-wing talk radio are the worst, but with propagandistic outlets setting the standard for truth and patriotism, all of the media is affected to some degree.
Despite the media's failure, about half the population has managed to discern that the US invasion of Iraq has not made them safer and that the Bush administration's assault on civil liberties is not a necessary component of the war on terror. The problem, thus, lies with the absence of due diligence on the part of the other half of the population.
more... http://www.counterpunch.com/roberts01292006.html
DiAnne:
Not only have I been buying Citgo gasoline exclusively for quite some time now... but your making such a big to-do about the source of same has hopped me to the fact that all the local Citgo distributors (and several other station chains in the area, ahem,) get all their product from the same non-global refinery... one that dates back to the original Pennzoil days and is located not too far from me in Warren, PA and therefore pays taxes in my jurisdiction also... which just gives me the warm iggly-squigglies every time I grab onto the handle and pump me some, ahem ahem...
:::ducking and running:::
Otter
Invitation to Freeway Blogging, your nearest overpass, 7:15 AM Monday morning
Be there or acknowledge the Unitary Executive.
Otter
I kind of know how it all works because I used to work for Shell Oil. The different oil companies even trade product when they get low. I was a billing clerk for jobbers who sell to dealers & I worked at a refinery in St Paul on the Mississippi. It was my lst job out of high school. US had not hit peak oil but was about to.
Posted by: chuck at January 28, 2006 11:23 AM
Excellent idea... But if people can't put it in an historical context and "get" how history is repeating itself with the rapid acceleration of the erosion of our civil rights - and any other kind of rights! - and torture and prison camps and the FULL import of what the "theory of the unitary executive" means (if it's been explained in Lamestream Media or discussed in historical context, I've missed it), it's just one of those topics that will get you a blank stare and a dismissal. Apathetic sheeple brainwashed by Lamestream Media are not curious enough to find out what it means or place it in historical context. Have you seen a sound byte in Lamestream Media showing Alito being asked about the theory of the unitary executive and his non-responsive answer? I haven't (but then, I've not been paying attention to them either).
If Alito is approved, the first thing that will happen is that the 'theory of unitary executive' will be executed very quickly in the next three years (I suspect The Cretin would try to force the more moderate justices to resign so he can stack the court with his lackeys, or they'd resign in disgust when you-know-who starts dictating how he wants them to rule...), and then we can kiss goodbye to a legal presidential election in '08, and long before '08 gets here we can kiss the rest of our Constitutional rights and privileges goodbye because we'll end up with a "legal" dictatorship, just like Germany before Hitler became the supreme executive.... There will be no one to stop The Cretin from making himself a dictator or invading other countries to control their oil and their economies (Iran, Venezuela - who else has been irritating The Cretin and his Criminal Cabal by telling the truth about them? - and I saw some dumb poll in the LA times quoting a huge majority of people favor invading Iran, and wondered how they skewed the poll) - and goodness knows, this country is broke and bankrupt already, all thanks to Georgie's current wars, and the draft will be reinstated by executive order (he does love those secret executive orders!) so he can by-pass Congressional approval and more people will be sent to die for the sake of corporate profits (Halliburton is doing quite well, I notice) - all based on the war powers and whatever other extraordinary powers he thinks he got from Congress after 9/11; internet communications will be monitored and censored all under the fuzzy notion he says he needs to protect us from ourselves, masses of people (not just foreign "enemies" suspected of "terrorist" acts) will be sent to places like Gitmo or flown somewhere else in secret to be tortured... and it's a greased slippery slope. Add your own script and a greased slippery slope to a worst-case scenario, and it WILL happen if SCOTUS is allowed to execute the "theory of the unitary executive."
Of that I am totally convinced..., and I do not have my tin foil hat on at this moment.
Lamestream Media will help him because they're nothing more than his propaganda tool already. Not one danged journalist persistently questions his "authority"! Congress certainly doesn't!!! Congress will not stop him from censoring web sites or blogs that are the lifeblood of people searching for sanity in an insane world and getting news "from the outside world" who can tell us what's going on outside the borders of our own locked-down country. Goodbye to our Bill of Rights and the Amendments, and the Constitution will be a dim memory.
Congress stop him? How??? The Cretin's actions and intentions have been patently obvious (to me) for five very long years (I wondered about it during the 2000 debates when I knew his intent was to invade Iraq and finish his daddy's war, and now I am watching all my fears being realized, and more than I ever anticipated, with the sense of dread and shock, watching a train wreck in slow-mo), and Congress has done nothing but give him every damned thing he wants or proposes and if he doesn't get what he wants, the silly sod throws a childish temper tantrum (aka rallies the masses at invitation-only meetings the press 'corpse' reruns endlessly to falsely show he has popular support) and then he proceeds with signing statement that put him above the laws of this nation, or he gets slavish lawyers to write tortured legal "opinions" that give him extraordinary powers never given to any president in the history of this country, or he makes another secret executive order that no one even knows about or questions if they do find out... so he thumbs his nose at Congress (and flips us off!) at EVERY turn!!! And NO ONE in Congress has seriously talked about impeachment! I find that appalling!!! The Cretin quite sincerely does not believe he has to follow the laws like everyone else in this country. Or the world, for that matter, since he has started one illegal, unjust, immoral, and unethical war already, and is ratcheting up the warmongering rhetoric to start another war... and another. Where does it stop if he has the power of a unitary executive to set himself up as the dictator of this nation with ambitions to rule the world (the plan is laid out on the PNAC web site)? Where?!? If the theory of the unitary executive is put in place, Congress will not be able to impeach The Cretin because he will make it illegal to impeach a dictator, and he'll have a spineless Supreme Court to back him up with tortured legal opinions that go against the Constitution, and no checks or balances from the legislative branch of our government.
Do you dare open those doors in your mind when you ask who's going to stop The Cretin if Congress doesn't?!?
As things stand right now, this instant, I see that we have a Clueless Congress who is unwilling or unable to stop this monster from trying to conquer the world and set himself up as supreme dictator. And where does that leave us, the people who elected them, if Congress bails out and does nothing to stop The Cretin and his Criminal Cabal??? Do you trust our legislators to sustain a filibuster to get *our* point across (and some honest discussion in Lamestream Media while they're at it, if they do filibuster)??? Right now, this instant, I don't. Congress has let the people of this nation down too many times in the last five years by giving Georgie the spoiled brat everything he wants, and allowed him to get by with illegal, immoral, and unethical actions at EVERY turn. He has more determination than the scared puppies in Congress who roll over and wet themselves every time he barks because he's willing to lay down on the floor and scream and hold his breath and kick the floor long enough to get his way so he doesn't embarrass the people who are supposed to stop this child who's making us all look like fools in the eyes of the rest of the world.
A few threads back I compared the people of this nation to Harry Potter dangling by the leg from the grasp of the troll who was swinging a club at him, yelling at Ron to "Do Something! Anything!" Just prior to that scene in the movie Ron told Harry that the troll had to have help getting into Hogwarts because "trolls are really stupid." Well, Congress has allowed The Cretin (the troll) and his Criminal Cabal free access to the path to his headlong race for dictatorial control the world... but at this instant it doesn't look like Congress will play the part of Ron who will wave a magic wand and say the magic word to make the troll drop us so we can save ourselves from the troll. Today I still feel like Harry Potter dangling from the troll's grasp....
So, yes. I support a filibuster, I support Congressional members walking out on the SOTU speech (or staying silent or not applauding or whatever!), or doing ANYTHING that will symbolically bitch slap Lamestream Media and the comatose sheeples into consciousness long enough to stop drinking the kool-aid, take off their rosy blindfolds, and see that something evil is afoot in our nation's capitol and they need to pay attention!!! Our government is being stolen out from under our feet, we're already wading in quicksand, and if something is not done, we (not The Cretin and his Criminal Cabal) will pay the consequences for so many people willfully ignoring what's going on in our nation's capitol and wholeheartedly believing the administration's endless LIES (which they're still telling! - un-freaking-believable!). The half of this nation who voted for The Cretin deserves whatever evil he visits on them, but those of us who are aware of what's been happening and have never approved of any of this bull$h*t and have been urging our legislators to "do something" for all of these past five years do not deserve what he and his corporate fascists are dishing out - er, make that, stealing from us, our children, our grand-children, our great-grandchildren, and maybe our great-great-grandchildren.
So, at the risk of repeating myself, I'm reposting that section of the email I sent to Kerry and Kennedy, with the info about the theory of the unitary executive and why I do not think Alito should be approved (the other issues why not are just as important, but they are moot next to whether or not Congress sets up the conditions for one man to become a dictator of this nation). If you want to forward the links to your email list, go ahead, because I'm sure you've already studied it and know its import and talking points. It needs to be studied in depth by clueless people who don't know how the theory of the unitary executive will impact our daily lives if Alito (or anyone like him) is given rubber stamp approval by Congress to sit on the highest court in our land. If you wish, send it to your senators, too. Not all of them are lawyers or historians and appreciate what the theory of unitary executive means if they plan to approve of Alito's nomination. They, even more than those who remain willfully ignorant, need to grasp the significance (and horror) of the unitary executive and vote 'no' on the Alito nomination.
Meanwhile, our senators do not need to get approval from each other to filibuster. They have the approval of their constituents who have two gray cells to rub together (and we were the ones, after all, who voted them into office - they are supposed to work for *us* - not the corporate fascists or each other). So, come Monday morning, I will tune in to C-SPAN and see what happens. If I could meet any of the senators face to face this weekend or first thing Monday morning, this is what I would say to him/her: If you appreciate the impact of what a unitary executive would do to this nation if you approve Alito's nomination which would result in a Bu$h dictatorship.... "Go!!! Filibuster!!! DO Something!!! Anything!!! WHAT are you waiting for?!?!?"
Then (if I were there and if they do filibuster) I'd volunteer to bring them tea with honey and lemon in it to soothe their throats while they talk, and provide emails from disgruntled Americans who can cogently state all the reasons they disapprove of The Cretin and his Criminal Cabal and why they think the whole lot of 'em should be IMPEACHED, and let the senators read real opinions from ordinary Americans on the floor of the senate....
~~~~~~~~~~
If a Democrat or an Independent had put forth a Supreme Court nomination for a justice who believed in the theory of the unitary executive, I would also urge a 'no' vote for a Supreme Court nomination. Here's why:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11670.htm
The case against Alito
(third paragraph of a very short four-paragraph article by Nicole Johnson Email - nickijohnson @ sbcglobal.net)
"The fact is that the unitary executive theory was developed by Carl Schmitt, the Third Reich's legal expert, to advance the appearance of a lawful dictatorial takeover of Germany. Arguing that an exceptional situation, like the Reichstag fire (or 9/11 in our case), gave the executive the right to decide law for himself, Schmitt's philosophy ushered in a reign of vicious authoritarianism. Recently, Schmitt's legal theories have been applied ferociously in signing statements and executive orders by Bush's legal team to liberate them from quaint restrictions like international treaties and domestic law."
Copyright Nicole Johnson Email - nickijohnson @ sbcglobal.net
Carl Schmitt:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Schmitt
The procession for Sgt. Yazzie just passed by my house, maybe the longest procession I've ever seen here. The police had the sirens on, and along side the cars were most of the motorcycles in town.
It reminded me that there are so many issues before us, and the real need for focus.
Here is the link to the story in our local paper.
http://tinyurl.com/b3256
It seems Sgt. Yazzie was one of those "good kids" that you never hear about, except when he helped his high school team take state basketball championship a few years back.
We do what we do, in part out of conviction, but in part out of emotion as well. Sgt. Yazzie seems to sum that up for me.
Thanks for reminding us, Claudia, of what's important and what we need to stay focused on.
And I've said a prayer for Sgt. Yazzie's family... they're so young.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060128/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_us
Chavez Says He Will Jail U.S. Spies
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called the U.S. government an "immoral empire" and repeated accusations of spying Friday, threatening to arrest any American officials caught gathering intelligence on his military.
Chavez's warning came hours after his vice president, Jose Vicente Rangel, accused officials at the U.S. Embassy of involvement in a spying case involving several Venezuelan naval officers who allegedly passed sensitive information to the Pentagon.
Chavez focused his speech to thousands of activists on summoning a global "battle" to resist what he termed U.S. imperialism.
The frequent and vocal critic of U.S. global policy used especially harsh terms to describe the U.S. government, calling it a "perverse, murderous, genocidal, immoral empire."
He addressed the spying accusations for the first time since the allegations came to light earlier this week.
"We've just discovered a case, one more espionage case," Chavez told the audience of activists who are attending the World Social Forum in Caracas this week.
"I warn the U.S. government: the next time we detect a soldier or civilian official — but above all American soldiers — trying to obtain information about our armed forces, we're going to put them in prison."
[More on link.]
SaveTheCourt.org..
If you want to send faxes to Senators re Alitto go here
Lieberman Could Face Primary Challenge
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012806C.shtml
Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, who rose to national prominence as the 2000 Democratic vice presidential nominee, appears likely to face a serious primary challenge this year that could measure the depth of his party's discontent over the Iraq war.
Ronnie Dugger | Impeach or Indict Bush and Cheney
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012806Z.shtml
The Constitution is silent on whether a seated President and Vice President can be indicted, while in office, for crimes committed while they have held those offices. Constitutional lawyers are congenitally prone to announcing that this cannot be done because it would disrupt the ongoing business of the government. According to Ronnie Drugger it is time to do it, if necessary absent impeachment, for exactly that reason - to disrupt the continuation of THIS government.
Freeway Bloggers!
7:15 Monday morning, your nearest overpass
SIMPLE BANNERING ADVICE from Bill Moyers at http://www.backbonecampaign.org
Hold your banner--don't hang or attach it to an overpass, as thatcould be dangerous. It's more fun to be there anyway.
Big signs with simple messages are best. Holding banners is legal everywhere as far as we know, but call a lawyer ahead of timeif you intend to ignore any police requests to leave.
Consult http://www.Freewayblogger.com
We encourage people to banner whenever they can, but during Monday morning commute would be perfect.
Bring a recording device, in case you are hassled by police. If approached and asked to leave, you can either do so, OR lift audiorecorder to waist level and start recording. Say "Officer, Ibelieve this is a freedom of speech issue."
Be polite with police, but insist on receiving a ticket stating clearly in writing the exact law you are breaking. They'll be very uncomfortable writing down a law they can't defend to a judge.
The overpasses on our (Washington State) Interstates are under State Patrol jurisdiction. If this is true in your state,remind local police of this and ask them to call the State Patrol.
and ..
As our friends at the People's Email Network (PEN) say,
"There is a political earthquake taking place right now, and the mainstream media and the political establishment are DESPERATELY trying to cover it up and deny it. The people of the United States are rising up in open democratic revolt to demand that their representatives actually listen to them and fight for their rights."
Here are three next steps:
1. Continue with faxes, phone calls and e-mails. Every local and fax number is included in this master list, as well as notes on where the Senators stand on filibuster: http://www.nocrony.com/master_senate_phones.txt
It won't be long until every voice mailbox is full. If that happens, send faxes instead. Click here http://www.savethecourt.org/siteapps/advocacy/index.aspx?c=mwK0JbNTJrF&b=1387741&action=5400&template=x.ascx to use the People for the American Way online fax service.
2. Get together with friends this weekend and make a freeway banner. Hold it over your local highway or overpass Monday during rush hour from about 7 a.m.-9 a.m.
Our banner simply says "FILIBUSTER ALITO." "Honk for a Filibuster " might be nice, but remember, people are driving and so the honking might be too much depending on your location. DO NOT ATTACH or DRAPE banners, as that really endangers drivers. Besides, 90% of the fun is holding the banner and getting the positive and negative feedback from passers-by. Democracy and driving are both serious business--SAFETY FIRST! See below for further info about bannering, as well as Freewayblogger.com http://freewayblogger.com/ for more tips.
3. Attend your local World Can't Wait http://www.worldcantwait.net/ event on Tuesday during the State of the Union. People of all political stripes must come together, regardless of differences, to rescue this country from Bush & Co. (and from other elected officials too spineless to stand up to them). Truly, the "World Can't Wait http://www.worldcantwait.net/ ."
Then let's all stay in touch for the next steps. (Maybe a "Call in Sick of Bush Day"?)
(Bill Moyer liked my banner idea: "Unitary Executive = Dictator")
Wayne Fields, a professor at Washington University in St. Louis who specializes on presidential rhetoric, said Bush is most effective as a public speaker in major addresses ``when he's got a speech that's clearly written out and practiced.''
Even in formal addresses like the State of the Union, he said, Bush ``too often relies on the idea that 'you should just trust me, you should just trust us.'''
That may have worked for him earlier in his administration, Fields said, ``but I think, over time, that becomes increasingly difficult to sustain.''
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,,-5577804,00.html
Deptartment of Interior Linked to Abramoff
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012806D.shtml
In e-mail exchanges that have been made public, Jack Abramoff mentioned having an inside track in Interior Secretary Gale Norton's Interior Department. He sought congressional help several times to lobby Norton for tribes, and his clients donated heavily to an environmental group Norton founded.
(Bill Moyer liked my banner idea: "Unitary Executive = Dictator")
Posted by: not my president at January 28, 2006 06:18 PM
YES!!!!!!!!!!
Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner!!!
Hunger Strikers Close to Death
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012806X.shtml
Despite force feeding by the American military, several hunger strikers at Guantanamo Bay may be close to death.
As some of you may have noticed by now, DiAnne's "bannering" post from 6:18 pm today contains an incorrect URL. Clicking on it will get you, quite literally, nowhere. After a little bit of rooting about, I've found the correct URL that I'm sure she must have intended to include in that post in the first place:
http://www.backbonecampaign.org/
hope this helps,
Otter
EPA's Latest Human Pesticide Testing Rule Called Illegal, Immoral
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/012706HC.shtml
Three US legislators are asking the EPA to withdraw a planned rule to permit pesticide experimentation on humans, including pregnant and nursing mothers and children. The EPA final draft rule introduces new loopholes that will allow for ethical abuse, the legislators warn.
a timely oped from Washington Post yesterday:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/26/AR2006012601478.html
Here are just the opening paragraphs. . the whole article is worth reading!
Using Our Fear
By Eugene Robinson
Friday, January 27, 2006; A23
Once upon a time we had a great wartime president who told Americans they had nothing to fear but fear itself. Now we have George W. Bush, who uses fear as a tool of executive power and as a political weapon against his opponents.
Franklin D. Roosevelt tried his best to allay his nation's fears in the midst of an epic struggle against fascism. Bush, as he leads the country in a war whose nature he is constantly redefining, keeps fear alive because it has been so useful. His political grand vizier, Karl Rove, was perfectly transparent the other day when he emerged from wherever he's been hiding the past few months -- consulting omens, reading entrails -- and gave the Republican National Committee its positioning statement for the fall elections: Vote for us or die. . .
see url for rest of article
GOP to force Federal Marriage Amendment vote in 2006
A Republican effort to ban gay marriage nationwide will be returned to the Senate floor in 2006, RAW STORY has learned.
The Marriage Protection Amendment was originally introduced by Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) in 2003, and leveraged as a wedge issue by the GOP during the 2004 election cycle as a way of mobilizing its base to vote against same-sex marriage.
Senator Wayne Allard (R-CO), a co-sponsor of the 2005 joint resolution, has confirmed that Senate Majority leader Bill Frist (R- TN) will attempt to bring the controversial legislation to the floor this year for a full vote.
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Republicans_will_try_to_bring_Federal_0127.html
Otter
Thanks - I would like to hire you as my assistant.
I will try to road-test my links in the future.
Oncall
Glad to announce that Washington State narrowly passed anti-discrimination legislation this week.
I read up on that Marilyn Musgrave and don't think the legislation to make a marriage between a man and a woman will help her meet men.
I don't know a thing about Marilyn Musgrave, but the Republicans diversionary tactics will change the debate from what has to be discussed, if the opposition and Bushco Propaganda allows them to get away with it. And we all know how reliable the Propaganda machine is for the Republicans.
Now for something totally different (this is my values argument):
Their levees vs. our levees
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0112-15.htm
When Republicans Loved a Filibuster:
Supporters of George W. Bush are lambasting Sen. John Kerry for a threatened filibuster against U.S. Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. But 15 years ago, their attitude was different as backers of George H.W. Bush wielded the filibuster to block a probe into Republican secret dealings with Iran that could have doomed the Bush Dynasty.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/012706.html
The Educational System Was Designed to Keep Us Uneducated and Docile:
In his 1905 dissertation for Columbia Teachers College, Elwood Cubberly—the future Dean of Education at Stanford—wrote that schools should be factories "in which raw products, children, are to be shaped and formed into finished products...manufactured like nails, and the specifications for manufacturing will come from government and industry."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11693.htm
BYU professor's group accuses U.S. officials of lying about 9/11:
Last fall, Brigham Young University physics professor Steven E. Jones made headlines when he charged that the World Trade Center collapsed because of "pre-positioned explosives." Now, along with a group that calls itself "Scholars for 9/11 Truth," he's upping the ante.
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635179751,00.html
Canada issues warning to US over Arctic passage:
Canada's Prime Minister- elect has issued a blunt "hands off" warning to the US over territorial rights in the Arctic - increasingly coveted now that global warming threatens to open up new waterways in the once solidly frozen far north.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article341518.ece
Cindy Sheehan to Dianne Feinstein: Fillibuster Alito or I’ll Challenge Your Senate Seat:
Gold star mother Cindy Sheehan has decided to run against California Senator Diane Feinstein if Feinstein does not filibuster the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel Alito.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/7241
Here is some information on Marilyn Musgrave, I wonder why Bush didn't nominate her for the supreme court? This is one scary woman.
http://www.issues2000.org/House/Marilyn_Musgrave.htm
If anybody has a copy of Fahrenheit 9/11, you have to watch the first seven and a half minutes to really understand why the Senators have to filibuster.
Cindy Sheehan to Dianne Feinstein: Fillibuster Alito or I’ll Challenge Your Senate Seat:
Way to go Cindy!!! Someone said last fall she'd probably go into politics (i.e. hold a public paid office).
OnCall
The scary part:
Marilyn Musgrave is a Moderate Libertarian Conservative.
So what is an Extreme Right Conservative like?!
WHY do I always have to find out important news from foreign presses?!?!?
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0127-04.htm
Published on Friday, January 27, 2006 by BBC
US Plans to 'Fight the Net' Revealed
by Adam Brookes
WASHINGTON - A newly declassified document gives a fascinating glimpse into the US military's plans for "information operations" - from psychological operations, to attacks on hostile computer networks.
Bloggers beware.
As the world turns networked, the Pentagon is calculating the military opportunities that computer networks, wireless technologies and the modern media offer.
From influencing public opinion through new media to designing "computer network attack" weapons, the US military is learning to fight an electronic war.
The declassified document is called "Information Operations Roadmap". It was obtained by the National Security Archive at George Washington University using the Freedom of Information Act.
Officials in the Pentagon wrote it in 2003. The Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, signed it.
The "roadmap" calls for a far-reaching overhaul of the military's ability to conduct information operations and electronic warfare. And, in some detail, it makes recommendations for how the US armed forces should think about this new, virtual warfare.
The document says that information is "critical to military success". Computer and telecommunications networks are of vital operational importance.
Propaganda
The operations described in the document include a surprising range of military activities: public affairs officers who brief journalists, psychological operations troops who try to manipulate the thoughts and beliefs of an enemy, computer network attack specialists who seek to destroy enemy networks.
All these are engaged in information operations.
Perhaps the most startling aspect of the roadmap is its acknowledgement that information put out as part of the military's psychological operations, or Psyops, is finding its way onto the computer and television screens of ordinary Americans.
"Information intended for foreign audiences, including public diplomacy and Psyops, is increasingly consumed by our domestic audience," it reads.
"Psyops messages will often be replayed by the news media for much larger audiences, including the American public," it goes on.
The document's authors acknowledge that American news media should not unwittingly broadcast military propaganda. "Specific boundaries should be established," they write. But they don't seem to explain how.
"In this day and age it is impossible to prevent stories that are fed abroad as part of psychological operations propaganda from blowing back into the United States - even though they were directed abroad," says Kristin Adair of the National Security Archive.
Credibility problem
{ More on link.... }
Helen Thomas | Bush: 'L'etat, C'est Moi'
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0127-20.htm
Dennis Kucinich | The Truth About the State of our Union
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0127-24.htm
ELECTION THEFT EMERGENCY
Terrence McNally, AlterNet
Mark Crispin Miller talks about how the right stole the 2004 presidential election -- and how they'll do it again unless we stop them.
http://www.alternet.org/story/31217/
[The blogger comments on this one are good, too! Check out the first one about Wellstone and who was allegedly supposed to be on the plane that day with him....]
"We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business," said Bush spokesman Scott McClellan. Jan 20, 2006
Exclusive: Direct Talks—U.S. Officials and Iraqi Insurgents
Newsweek
Feb. 6, 2006 issue - American officials in Iraq are in face-to-face talks with high-level Iraqi Sunni insurgents, NEWSWEEK has learned. Americans are sitting down with "senior members of the leadership" of the Iraqi insurgency, according to Americans and Iraqis with knowledge of the talks (who did not want to be identified when discussing a sensitive and ongoing matter). The talks are taking place at U.S. military bases in Anbar province, as well as in Jordan and Syria. "Now we have won over the Sunni political leadership," says U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad. "The next step is to win over the insurgents." The groups include Baathist cells and religious Islamic factions, as well as former Special Republican Guards and intelligence agents, according to a U.S. official with knowledge of the talks. Iraq's insurgent groups are reaching back. "We want things from the U.S. side, stopping misconduct by U.S. forces, preventing Iranian intervention," said one prominent insurgent leader from a group called the Army of the Mujahedin, who refused to be named because of the delicacy of the discussions. "We can't achieve that without actual meetings."
-snip-
Negotiations are risky for everyone—not least because tensions between Al Qaeda and Iraq's so-called patriotic resistance is higher than ever. Two weeks ago, assassins killed Sheik Nassir Qarim al-Fahdawi, a prominent Anbar sheik described by other Sunnis as a chief negotiator for the insurgency. "He was killed for talking to the Americans," says Zedan al-Awad, another leading Anbar sheik. Al Qaeda, meanwhile, continues to gain territory in the Sunni heartland, according to al-Awad: "Let me tell you: Zarqawi is in total control of Anbar. The Americans control nothing." Many, on both sides, are hoping that talks could change that.
more... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11079548/site/newsweek/
Bush to call for cuts in military reserves
Empty enrollment slots to be slashed, jet programs refinanced
The Associated Press
Jan. 29, 2006
President Bush will use his new budget to propose cutting the size of the Army Reserve to its lowest level in three decades and stripping as much as $4 billion from two fighter aircraft programs.
The proposals, likely to face opposition on Capitol Hill, come as the Defense Department struggles to trim personnel costs and other expenses to pay for the war in Iraq and a host of other pricey aircraft and high-tech programs. Bush will send his 2007 budget to Congress on Feb. 6.
-snip-
The Army sent a letter to members of Congress on Thursday outlining the plan. A copy was provided to the Associated Press.
Empty slots to be nixed
Under the plan, the authorized troop strength of the Army Reserve would drop from 205,000 -- the current number of slots it is allowed -- to 188,000, the actual number of soldiers it had at the end of 2005.
Because of recruiting and other problems, the Army Reserve has been unable to fill its ranks to its authorized level.
Army leaders have said they are taking a similar approach to shrinking the National Guard. They are proposing to cut that force from its authorized level of 350,000 soldiers to 333,000, the actual number now on the rolls.
Some in Congress have vowed to fight the National Guard cuts. Its soldiers and resources are controlled by state governors unless Guard units are mobilized by the president for federal duty, as Bush did after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
"I remain convinced that we do not have a large enough force," Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) said in a letter to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
Sorry, left out link for Bush call for CUTS in military reserves
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11080817/
Warming debate shifts to ‘tipping point’
Some scientists worry it’s too late to reverse climate change
By Juliet Eilperin
The Washington Post
Updated: 11:31 p.m. ET Jan. 28, 2006
Now that most scientists agree human activity is causing Earth to warm, the central debate has shifted to whether climate change is progressing so rapidly that, within decades, humans may be helpless to slow or reverse the trend.
This "tipping point" scenario has begun to consume many prominent researchers in the United States and abroad, because the answer could determine how drastically countries need to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions in the coming years. While scientists remain uncertain when such a point might occur, many say it is urgent that policymakers cut global carbon dioxide emissions in half over the next 50 years or risk the triggering of changes that would be irreversible.
-snip-
‘We've got to do something’
The debate has been intensifying because Earth is warming much faster than some researchers had predicted. James E. Hansen, who directs NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies, last week confirmed that 2005 was the warmest year on record, surpassing 1998. Earth's average temperature has risen nearly 1 degree Fahrenheit over the past 30 years, he noted, and another increase of about 4 degrees over the next century would "imply changes that constitute practically a different planet."
"It's not something you can adapt to," Hansen said in an interview. "We can't let it go on another 10 years like this. We've got to do something."
-snip-
Some scientists, including President Bush's chief science adviser, John H. Marburger III, emphasize there is still much uncertainty about when abrupt global warming might occur.
"There's no agreement on what it is that constitutes a dangerous climate change," said Marburger, adding that the U.S. government spends $2 billion a year on researching this and other climate change questions. "We know things like this are possible, but we don't have enough information to quantify the level of risk."
more... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11079935/
Palace Revolt
They were loyal conservatives, and Bush appointees. They fought a quiet battle to rein in the president's power in the war on terror. And they paid a price for it. A NEWSWEEK investigation.
By Daniel Klaidman, Stuart Taylor Jr. and Evan Thomas
Newsweek
Feb. 6, 2006 issue - James Comey, a lanky, 6-foot-8 former prosecutor who looks a little like Jimmy Stewart, resigned as deputy attorney general in the summer of 2005. The press and public hardly noticed. Comey's farewell speech, delivered in the Great Hall of the Justice Department, contained all the predictable, if heartfelt, appreciations. But mixed in among the platitudes was an unusual passage. Comey thanked "people who came to my office, or my home, or called my cell phone late at night, to quietly tell me when I was about to make a mistake; they were the people committed to getting it right—and to doing the right thing—whatever the price. These people," said Comey, "know who they are. Some of them did pay a price for their commitment to right, but they wouldn't have it any other way."
-snip-
These Justice Department lawyers, backed by their intrepid boss Comey, had stood up to the hard-liners, centered in the office of the vice president, who wanted to give the president virtually unlimited powers in the war on terror. Demanding that the White House stop using what they saw as farfetched rationales for riding rough-shod over the law and the Constitution, Goldsmith and the others fought to bring government spying and interrogation methods within the law. They did so at their peril; ostracized, some were denied promotions, while others left for more comfortable climes in private law firms and academia. Some went so far as to line up private lawyers in 2004, anticipating that the president's eavesdropping program would draw scrutiny from Congress, if not prosecutors. These government attorneys did not always succeed, but their efforts went a long way toward vindicating the principle of a nation of laws and not men.
The rebels were not whistle-blowers in the traditional sense. They did not want—indeed avoided—publicity. (Goldsmith confirmed public facts about himself but otherwise declined to comment. Comey also declined to comment.) They were not downtrodden career civil servants. Rather, they were conservative political appointees who had been friends and close colleagues of some of the true believers they were fighting against. They did not see the struggle in terms of black and white but in shades of gray—as painfully close calls with unavoidable pitfalls. They worried deeply about whether their principles might put Americans at home and abroad at risk. Their story has been obscured behind legalisms and the veil of secrecy over the White House. But it is a quietly dramatic profile in courage. (For its part the White House denies any internal strife. "The proposition of internal division in our fight against terrorism isn't based in fact," says Lea Anne McBride, a spokeswoman for Vice President Dick Cheney. "This administration is united in its commitment to protect Americans, defeat terrorism and grow democracy.")
more... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11079547/site/newsweek/
Jonathan Alter/Newsweek's article on truth is a good way to start your Sunday morning...
The Political Power of Truth
In recent years, failure and incompetence have been trounced by fear at the ballot box. But reality may be making a comeback.
Feb. 6, 2006 issue - Strangely enough, we may look back on Thursday, Jan. 26, 2006, as the day America found its moral compass, long buried at the bottom of the national dirty-linen bag. To win the midterm elections in November, the Democrats, whose motto might as well be "So Lame for So Long," will need to make sure the country focuses on that compass. By "moral" I'm not talking just about the "culture of corruption" in Washington. I'm talking about restoring a reasonable respect for at least minimum standards of truth.
--snip--
Until Thursday. Something happened in that studio that went beyond "good TV." Such is the power of Oprah that her moment of truth seemed to shame the American public into more respect for the actual facts of a situation. As if to prove the synchronicity, there was even some truth breaking out in the White House press room at the very moment Oprah was airing live in the Midwest. Reporters were pressing President Bush hard. James Gerstenzang of the Los Angeles Times asked Bush if he subscribed to President Nixon's notion that "when the president does it, it's not illegal." This was, indeed, the essence—the truth—of the president's position on the National Security Agency's warrantless eavesdropping, which violates a 1978 law. Instead of the issue being framed in Karl Rove's phony and demagogic terms—where anyone who opposes the president's power grab doesn't want to protect us from Al Qaeda—we were edging our way toward a more accurate depiction of the controversy.
Read the rest here ==>
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11078876/site/newsweek/
Hey, not *all* journalists are cowards. Not even all perfectly-groomed MSM talking-head anchorpersons are armchair chickenhawks, as this breaking news story from http://tinyurl.com/8o3z6 indicates:
===========
January 29, 2006 - ABC News anchor Bob Woodruff has apparently suffered head injuries and is undergoing surgery after an explosion while he was doing some reporting from Iraq.
The reports of Woodruff's injuries first came during ABC's Sunday edition of Good Morning America.
Woodruff was apparently taping a report with cameraman Doug Vogt about the Iraqi military from inside one of their mechanized military vehicles near the town of Taji. They were embedded with the 4th Infantry Division, traveling with an Iraqi Army unit in an Iraqi mechanized vehicle. It encountered an improvised explosive device.
Some small arms fire followed, according to reports on Good Morning America.
Woodruff and Vogt both suffered head injuries and are being treated. They are listed in serious condition after being flown to the Balad Air Base, which is about a 15 minute flight.
Officials have told ABC News that Woodruff and Vogt were wearing body armor, ballistic glasses and helmets in an effort to protect themselves.
===========
may She bless them all and keep them all safe,
Otter
A great op-ed in today's NYT...
Spies, Lies and Wiretaps
A bit over a week ago, President Bush and his men promised to provide the legal, constitutional and moral justifications for the sort of warrantless spying on Americans that has been illegal for nearly 30 years. Instead, we got the familiar mix of political spin, clumsy historical misinformation, contemptuous dismissals of civil liberties concerns, cynical attempts to paint dissents as anti-American and pro-terrorist, and a couple of big, dangerous lies.
The first was that the domestic spying program is carefully aimed only at people who are actively working with Al Qaeda, when actually it has violated the rights of countless innocent Americans. And the second was that the Bush team could have prevented the 9/11 attacks if only they had thought of eavesdropping without a warrant.
Read the rest at
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/opinion/29sun1.html?pagewanted=2&th&emc=th
to find the truth & counter-arguments to these points:
- Sept. 11 could have been prevented.
- Only bad guys are spied on.
- The spying is legal.
- Just trust us.
- The rules needed to be changed.
- War changes everything.
- Other presidents did it.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is about to start hearings on the domestic spying. Congress has failed, tragically, on several occasions in the last five years to rein in Mr. Bush and restore the checks and balances that are the genius of American constitutional democracy. It is critical that it not betray the public once again on this score.
2:46
Nonny, just caught your reference to the article mentioning that Ted Kennedy was to be on the Wellstone plane that fateful day. In Bush's Brain, there was reference to Rove's early embrace of the GOP and fanatical hatred of Ted Kennedy, all Kennedys. Personal. Just like the early affront of someone Jewish to Hitler as a young boy, starting a whole willingness to annihilate and use that group to gain power.
If true, an interesting aside to the conspiracy theory.
Posted by: madame defarge at January 29, 2006 09:02 AM
The editorial makes good points, all valid, but they missed one salient fact in the opening paragraphs of the analysis: If the Pinhead-in-Chief had actually read his Aug. PDB when he was on vacation, that 'might' also have prevented 9/11!!!
True, I'm making assumptions where I shouldn't. I'm assuming he can read and not have to be read to....
Posted by: Marjorie G at January 29, 2006 10:31 AM
That's not the first time I've read that theory either. And, there are theories about how and why the towers... and a third one that wasn't even hit... came down so fast, things that melted at much higher temps than what jet fuel would have caused... etc. Some days when my tin foil hat stays on, I kinda wonder if the reason the dimwit sat with a book in his hand so long was because he was relishing the success of the events, savoring the moment he knew he could gain complete dictatorial powers over this country by playing on people's fears.... I dunno. It's just a stray thought that comes to my brain after watching F-9/11....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/28/AR2006012800833.html
Pentagon Can Now Fund Foreign Militaries
Defense Secretary Pushed for New Powers to Better Deal With Emergencies
Excerpts:
The final version -- Section 1206 of the authorization act -- says the Pentagon can provide training, equipment and supplies "to build the capacity" of foreign militaries to conduct counterterrorist operations or join with U.S. forces in stability operations. But the section also stipulates that orders for such aid must originate with the president, and it requires the Pentagon to work closely with the State Department in formulating and implementing the assistance.
This new authority cannot be used to provide any assistance banned by other U.S. laws, the provision adds. Further, the measure grants less money than initially requested -- $200 million instead of $750 million. And it expires after two years, far short of the open-ended mandate that Rumsfeld had sought.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Having gained this much, the Pentagon and State Department are now setting their sights on a more ambitious overhaul of foreign assistance rules.
"In the longer run, we need to have our assistance structured in a way that will give us even broader flexibility," said Philip Zelikow, the State Department's counselor. "The president and his advisers must be able to devise a program that can allocate money as needed among whatever agencies have the skill sets to deliver the capabilities, whether State, Defense, Justice or other government agencies."
Click on link for full story.
{{{Question #1: WHY is it necessary for the US to fund foreign militaries? Question #2: What Emergency; where? Question #3: Which "foreign militaries"? Question #4: Does funding mercenaries working with DynCorp or KBR - both Halliburton subsidiaries - qualify as funding a "foreign military" as long as the mercenaries stay at Gitmo or Iraq, or at least not on continental US soil?!?!? This STINKS to high heaven of yet more manipulation and further convinces me that we have a Cluless Congress! How did they get to be so bloody naive?!?!? Have five years of Georgie's LIES taught them nothing?!?!? And, remember, under the Patriot Act, The Cretin wants to fund a uniformed guard of secret service personnel.... So, what this amounts to is that we have The Cretin and his Criminal Cabal and a Clueless Congress - and between all three, WE lose...!!!}}}
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/uclickcomics/20060128/cx_crwiz_uc/crwiz20060128
The Wizard of Id
In the Dough Department: So much for our much vaunted and failing 'edjukashunal' system!!! When poor people have nothing to spend, they have nothing to contribute to the coffers of the rich. It's that simple. Zero to spend means zero to spend. 0+0=0. 0-0=0. Even an average first-grade student could figure that one out!
Like... D-U-H...!!!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060128/bs_nm/davos_economy_dc
Poor funding of rich seen as unsustainable, risk
DAVOS, Switzerland (Reuters) - Massive flows of capital from the emerging to the developed world are unsustainable and risk damaging both poor and rich countries, some of the world's top finance officials said on Saturday.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet said that the current global investment pattern was "profoundly abnormal" and in no country's interest.
"It is not sustainable in the long run that the emerging world would finance the industrial world. It doesn't correspond to the interest of the emerging world, neither to the interest of the industrialised world," he said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The United States is currently seeing huge inflows of capital from the developing world, notably China, that are financing its current account deficit, bolstering the dollar and keeping long-term interest rates low through U.S. bond purchases.
The U.S. absorbs roughly 70 percent of excess global savings. The danger to the world economy is that when the inflows eventually slow or dry up, there could be sharp economic and market dislocations worldwide.
Click on link for full story.
So-o-o-o... lemme get this straight. The Cretin and his Criminal Cabal think it's legally and morally okay for the US to drop bombs from drones because drones don't kill any Americans, but the bombs they drop do kill innocent people and "maybe" al Qaida people who "might" be at the places the drones drop bombs, and if the US commits such a terrorist attack it can't be called a terrorist act because the US is going after the terrorists, but too bad about the innocent lives lost and those lives are only "collateral damage." But hey, they think it's a cool way to kill people and terrorize the ones who didn't die because the drones are high-tech killing machines. But it's not okay for anyone else to strap a bomb on themselves and/or load a car with bombs and/or make a roadside bomb that kills innocent people and the military invaders of their country because they're using such unsophisticated low-tech methods to kill people, and they're the "terrorists" The Cretin says he wants to protect us from by a pre-emptive invasion of a country that was not a threat to the US and had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11, even though the US did provide that country's dictator with WMD that he used to kill his own people in the first place, way back when a different Republican was president...??? Did I get that right?
And the difference is.... what?!?!? If a rose by any other name is still a rose, then a terrorist attack by any other name is still a terrorist attack. The only difference is high-tech vs low-tech....
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-predator29jan29,0,5819230.story
CIA Expands Use of Drones in Terror War
'Targeted killing' with missile-firing Predators is a way to hit Al Qaeda in remote areas, officials say. Host nations are not always given notice.
WASHINGTON — Despite protests from other countries, the United States is expanding a top-secret effort to kill suspected terrorists with drone-fired missiles as it pursues an increasingly decentralized Al Qaeda, U.S. officials say.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Little is known about the targeted-killing program. The Bush administration has refused to discuss how many strikes it has made, how many people have died, or how it chooses targets. No U.S. officials were willing to speak about it on the record because the program is classified.
Several U.S. officials confirmed at least 19 occasions since Sept. 11 on which Predators successfully fired Hellfire missiles on terrorist suspects overseas, including 10 in Iraq in one month last year. The Predator strikes have killed at least four senior Al Qaeda leaders, but also many civilians, and it is not known how many times they missed their targets.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Current and former intelligence officials said they could not disclose which countries could be subject to Predator strikes. But the presence of Al Qaeda or its affiliates has been documented in dozens of nations, including Somalia, Morocco and Indonesia.
High-ranking U.S. and allied counter-terrorism officials said the program's expansion was not merely geographic. They said it had grown from targeting a small number of senior Al Qaeda commanders after the Sept. 11 attacks to a more loosely defined effort to kill possibly scores of suspected terrorists, depending on where they were found and what they were doing.
"We have the plans in place to do them globally," said a former counter-terrorism official who worked at the CIA and State Department, which coordinates such efforts with other governments.
"In most cases, we need the approval of the host country to do them. However, there are a few countries where the president has decided that we can whack someone without the approval or knowledge of the host government."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now the Predator is an integral part of the military's counter-insurgency effort, especially in Iraq. But the CIA also runs a more secretive — and more controversial — Predator program that targets suspected terrorists outside combat zones.
The CIA does not even acknowledge that such a targeted-killing program exists, and some attacks have been explained away as car bombings or other incidents. It is not known how many militants or bystanders have been killed by Predator strikes, but anecdotal evidence suggests the number is significant.
In some cases, the destruction was so complete that it was impossible to establish who was killed, or even how many people.
Click on link for full story.
Well, I wondered when we'd find out the monies given to charities were not reaching the victims or being used to help people in dire straits... at least not without strings attached....
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/international/29charity.html
Poor Nations Complain Not All Charity Reaches Victims
The following numbers are current as of mid-January 2006 and, except for the first two itema in the list, are based on only partial information and/or best-guess estimates by informed experts and news organizations. Actual numbers are probably higher, in some cases much higher than those shown below. And needless to say, all these numbers are fluid and continue to grow larger with every passing day.
You do the math. Your mileage may vary. Contents may have settled during handling.
Any way you add it up, though... it is simply beyond reprehensible -- egregiously heinous, in fact -- that our current 'leaders' started this war of choice over three years ago and still continue to prosecute it today, despite all evidence of its failure and its ever-mounting human costs.
-----
Number of American military troops killed in Iraq war:
2242
Number of non-American coalition troops killed in Iraq war:
212
Number of Iraqi security forces killed in Iraq war:
4056
Number of non-Iraqi civilian contractors killed in Iraq war:
309
Estimated number of Iraqi civilians killed in Iraq war:
at least 30,000
Estimated number of Americans wounded in Iraq war:
16,420
Estimated number of Iraqis wounded in Iraq war:
at least 60,000
An end to the American-induced bloodshed in Iraq:
priceless
-----
'peacemaking' is an active not a passive verb,
Otter
Posted by: not my president at January 28, 2006 12:43 PM
Re the poll results and people favoring striking Iran if certain criteria are met.
I CAN'T BELIEVE IT (oh yes I can)....
They have been "campaigning" to go into Iran for the last year and a half. Longer, if you actually count all the times Bush and military officials have said "Spreading freedom and democracy across the world", "and any others who oppress their people", and many things have been *uh* slipped into speeches and broadcasts about going after evil doers wherever they may be.
I have said it before, and I'LL say it again. In fact, this time I'll yell it.
THIS IS A SYSTEMATIC, PLANNED SET OF ATTACKS ON COUNTRIES TO GUARANTEE OUR CONTROL OF THE OIL IN THAT AREA.
Besides, we built them up, we knock them down, and then we get to build them back up again. Ka-Ching!$$$
I am surprised that there isn't an uproar at the idea of spreading this freedom and democracy to yet another nation. What are we - BRAIN DEAD?