« A Long Way From Home | Main | Camp Democracy Is Less Than One Week Away »
What Next?
Will there be more get out of jail free cards being issued to Republican officials in the coming weeks, or will someone actually be held accountable in our criminal justice system?
This morning's perusal of of The New York Times delivers us this bit of information:
WASHINGTON, Aug. 29 — Richard L. Armitage, a former deputy secretary of state, has acknowledged that he was the person whose conversation with a columnist in 2003 prompted a long, politically laden criminal investigation in what became known as the C.I.A. leak case, a lawyer involved in the case said on Tuesday.
Mr. Armitage did not return calls for comment. But the lawyer and other associates of Mr. Armitage have said he has confirmed that he was the initial and primary source for the columnist, Robert D. Novak, whose column of July 14, 2003, identified Valerie Wilson as a Central Intelligence Agency officer.
The identification of Mr. Armitage as the original leaker to Mr. Novak ends what has been a tantalizing mystery. In recent months, however, Mr. Armitage’s role had become clear to many, and it was recently reported by Newsweek magazine and The Washington Post.
In the accounts by the lawyer and associates, Mr. Armitage disclosed casually to Mr. Novak that Ms. Wilson worked for the C.I.A. at the end of an interview in his State Department office. Mr. Armitage knew that, the accounts continue, because he had seen a written memorandum by Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman.
So Mr. Armitage, while serving in his role as Deputy Secretary of State and warmonger extraordinaire, leaked classified information about a CIA agent about her identity and her work, to a reporter.
Why isn't he under arrest?
He knew the information was classified. There is no indication that the President declassified the information with a wave of his mighty hand, prior to Mr. Armitage's conversation with Mr. Novak, as the President indicated when asked earlier about the classified status of Valerie Plame's identity with regard to Vice-President Cheney and Scooter Libby's leaking her name to any reporter who woould be willing to act as their stenographer.
This is disturbing, to say the least. But what I find equally disturbing, is the fact that CNN, MSGOP, et all are devoting any number of hours of coverage, not to the statutory violation under the Espionage Act by one of the top ranking officials in the country, but to the non-story of capturing a person who has no physical connection to a one person crime that happened a decade ago.
The media's lack of coverage of this story is a negligent abdication of their responsibilities that ought to be a crime.
My other concern, is that Dick Armitage retained his security status, well beyond when it was known that he had leaked the information.
Moreover, if the multi-verified reports are true, as it seems by a preponderance of the evidence they are, then Mr. Armitage appears to have committed a crime. Where the hell are the charges? Why is this obvious friend of OBL and enemy to the War on Terra, walking around free?
What does it take to get someone stripped of their security clearence in this White House? How are we supposed to expect the Bush Administration to protect us, when they can't even weed out the traitors in their midst (yeah, I'm looking at you Scooter, and you too Jimmy/Jeff Gannon)?
In summation, we know who the primary leaker was, we know who directed the political part of the operation, further criminalizing an already criminal act, and the Press Corpse remains asleep at the wheel (except for Kyra Phillips, who was busy gossiping with her skirt up and her mike open in the ladies room). White House infiltration of security via the Press Room and The State Department get ignored.
So now what? What happens next? Where the hell is the Rule of Law in America?
Where the hell is the Rule of Law in America?
Posted by Casey Morris at August 30, 2006 01:54 PM
It's at the end of an ex-coke addict... recovering alcoholic... born again evangelical Christians pen with each signing statement.
America: Throne Away
What else can I add?
Now what, pray-tell, could be happening this November?
Gas may be headed back near $2
Analyst sees prices 'closer to $2 than $3' by Thanksgiving, newspaper reports.
August 30 2006: 7:20 AM EDT
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The recent drop in prices at the pump could pick up steam, driving gasoline sharply lower in coming months, USA Today reported Wednesday.
'We'll be closer to $2 than $3 come Thanksgiving,' Fred Rozell, a gas analyst at at the Oil Price Information Service, told the newspaper.
http://money.cnn.com/2006/08/30/news/economy/gas_prices/index.htm?cnn=yes
It was an interesting day for dumb statements in interviews. George Bush admits that "the economy went into the tank" but he did catch a good baseball game:
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=202
Joe Lieberman thinks we shouldn't do naughty stuff like having primaries and voting against the incumbent:
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=201
From Ron's post...
Williams: The folks who say you should have asked for some sort of sacrifice from all of us after 9/11, do they have a case looking back on it?
Bush: "Americans are sacrificing. I mean, we are. You know, we pay a lot of taxes. America sacrificed when they, you know, when the economy went into the tank. Americans sacrificed when, you know, air travel was disrupted. American taxpayers have paid a lot to help this nation recover. I think Americans have sacrificed."
The dirtbag wouldn't know sacrifice if it smacked him in the head. Ask our "greatest generation" whether or not the sacrifices they made during WWII are equal to paying taxes.
What a DIPSHIT!
Great link about Armitage here:
http://tinyurl.com/n3v6c (Democratic Underground)
PBS set to ask if voting rights are 'under assault'
Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is set to air a segment posing the possibility that the voting rights of many Americans are under attack, RAW STORY has learned.
A nation-wide push for laws to target voter fraud is likely to disqualify many who are legally eligible to vote, the PBS program NOW will claim in a segment tomorrow night titled, "Your right to vote -- is it under assault?"
A Florida law that could have leveled enormous fines against non-partisan groups organizing voter registration drives, and a Georgia law requiring photo ID at the polls will be put under scrutiny by the program. These laws, NOW will explain, will often prevent legally eligible and registered voters from casting ballots in the upcoming elections--yet many have been approved by the Department of Justice.
Minorities, the poor, the elderly and disabled are expected to be hit especially hard.
"This is a concerted effort to make sure that certain people don't have the opportunity to vote, that they don't have the opportunity to participate in their own democracy," Georgia state representative Alisha Thomas Morgan will be seen telling the program.
NOW is also preparing to use the Internet to support the story. Tomorrow morning, features on the program's website will include a state-by-state overview of election rights, an exploration of the voting rights act, and a list of "the 11 worst places in America to vote."
The segment will run tomorrow, September 1, at 8:30 p.m. ( In Seattle, it will be Friday, 8:00, ch 9)
Related
In a 4 month old article, it was revealed that 43% of all new voter registrations in the state of California (those registering between Jan 1 and March 15) were rejected because California's new computerized Voter Registration Database (created by Diebold) requires that all data contained in the registrations match exactly that which is contained in the state's motor vehicle registration (DMV) database to which they are now auto-magically compared (WA State’s database is similarly strict, and is being challenged in court).
Salon.com states that vote suppression in these 6 states, Arizona, Indiana, California, Missouri, Ohio and Florida, could cause serious problems in 2006. "Salon's shameful six"
Another action for this week: Weigh in on Lt. Ehren Watada’s case. Fort Lewis’ Commanding General, Lieutenant General James Dubik makes the final decision on whether to proceed to court-martial on any or all charges. Please take a moment today to phone and write Lt. Gen. James Dubik and respectfully request “no court martial for Lt. Watada.”
Use your own words, but a suggested message would be:
"Along with tens of thousands, I support Lt. Ehren Watada’s right to refuse an illegal war. I ask that you not bring court martial proceedings against him. If there is a court-martial this fall, I look forward to visiting Ft. Lewis and letting you know how I feel in person."
Lt. Gen. Dubik can be reached via his aide Lt. Colonel Kamper at 253-967-0022, and/or call the Ft.Lewis switchboard at 253-967-1110. Or you can write to him at:
Commanding General
Fort Lewis and I Corps
Lt. Gen. James M. Dubik
Building 2025 Stop 1
Fort Lewis, WA 98433
Game over on the Plame leak? Maybe not
POSTED: 7:45 p.m. EDT, August 30, 2006
By Jeff Greenfield
CNN Senior Analysis
NEW YORK (CNN) -- There's a new twist to a controversy that has been roiling the political waters for more than three years.
This week numerous news organizations, including CNN, have identified former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage as the original source for Robert Novak's column that identified Valerie Plame as a CIA operative.
According to CNN's sources, Armitage revealed Plame's identity inadvertently to Novak, who then confirmed Plame's identity with White House adviser Karl Rove. (Full story)
It's a twist that has many on the Right saying, "we told you so" and some on the Left saying "not so fast."
The controversy began in July 2003, when former career diplomat Joseph Wilson wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times, debunking a key assertion by President Bush about Saddam's intentions.
In his 2003 State of the Union address, Bush had said: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
In his op-ed, Wilson wrote that he had been dispatched to Niger in 2002 by the CIA, and found no evidence of such an effort.
A week later, a column by Novak revealed that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a CIA employee. The point of the disclosure, apparently, was to suggest that Wilson's tip had been a nepotistic favor.
But another question quickly surfaced: What kind of employee? If she was a covert operative, who had worked in foreign countries undercover, "outing" her could destroy her career -- maybe even threaten her safety. Under some circumstances, such a disclosure would be criminal. So, was revealing her name a violation of the law? And if so, who did it?
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was named a special prosecutor to investigate; reporters were subpoenaed.
Then-New York Times reporter Judith Miller spent 85 days in jail after she refused to reveal her source. And speculation centered around key White House aide Karl Rove; who, his critics said, was part of an effort to punish Wilson for his comments.
Indeed, in May of this year, "Truthout" a liberal Web site, reported flatly that Rove had been indicted for perjury. But a month later, Rove received word that he would not be indicted. And the only official indicted so far, former Cheney Chief of Staff Lewis "Scooter" Libby, is charged not with leaking Plame's name, but with misleading investigators about who he talked to.
But now, in a new book, "Hubris," Newsweek's Michael Isikoff and The Nation's David Corn report that Novak's source was Armitage -- a longtime top aide to Colin Powell.
Far from being one of the Bush Administration "hawks," Armitage spent much of the Bush first term in bitter bureaucratic turf wars with Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. So the "leak" appeared much more as Novak said it was: A casual, off-hand factoid, rather than part of any strategy to punish Wilson and warn others of the dangers of crossing Team Bush.
To conservatives, this Armitage disclosure is proof that there never was any effort to smear Joseph Wilson, or to injure Valerie Plame. The Wall Street Journal editorial page Wednesday pointedly asked why Armitage never let Fitzgerald know of his role. The National Review says the whole controversy was much ado about nothing.
But does this put an end to the mater? Liberal bloggers say maybe not. Maybe others were out to punish Wilson and his wife even if Armitage's talk with Novak was wholly innocent.
And there is this curious report from a Washington Post piece of September 2003:
"Before the Novak column was published," the Post said, quoting a senior administration official, "two top white house officials contacted at least six reporters and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife." If that reporting is right, the questions remain.
At the least, though, this story suggests that passionate opposition to a policy or an administration is no guarantee that every suspicion will be borne out.
Conspiracy is a great plot device for TV shows like "24"; it's a much less reliable guide to what happens in Washington.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/30/greenfield.plame/index.html
Oh, boy, monkeyman, if you liked those then you're just gonna *love* this one...
--------------
BUSH TO LAUNCH SERIES OF SPEECHES ON WAR
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - President Bush is kicking off another series of speeches to counter opposition to the war in Iraq, impatience with the rising U.S. death toll and anxiety about possible terrorist attacks.
Bush delivers the first speech Thursday to the annual American Legion convention in Salt Lake City. The appearances will continue through the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks and culminate on Sept. 19 when Bush addresses the U.N. Security Council.
It is the third time in less than a year that Bush has made a series of speeches on Iraq and terrorism. They come two months before congressional elections and at a point when Bush's approval rate is at 33 percent in the August AP-Ipsos poll. His approval on handling of Iraq also was at 33 percent in the poll.
"They are not political speeches," Bush said outside a Little Rock restaurant where he made a campaign stop with Asa Hutchinson, a former congressman who is running for governor against Democrat Mike Beebe. "They're speeches about the future of this country and they're speeches to make it clear that if we retreat before the job is done, this nation will become even more in jeopardy.
"These are important times and I would seriously hope people wouldn't politicize these issues that I'm going to talk about," the president said. "We have a duty in this country to defeat terrorists. That's why we'll stay on the offensive to bring them to justice before they hurt us. And that's why we'll work to spread liberty in order to achieve the peace."
[snip]
--------------
O-*kay*, Shrubya, so how's all that liberty-spreadin' and peace-achievin' stuff workin' out for ya so far? Right. I thought so. Now pull on the other one for a little while, this one's getting tired.
*fnord*
(Oh, yeah... and did I happen to mention that Shrub is a doink?)
Posted by: Otter at August 30, 2006 08:48 PM
No, but that Asa Hutchinson is a Class A putz.
What do "putz" have to do with anything? This is sleazeweasel politics we're talking about here, not a golf tournament. Sheesh.
Posted by: Otter at August 30, 2006 09:29 PM
Four, Fathers!
Got Woods?
Wow - I heard part of a kind of radio debate between guys from right (American Heritage) and left (American Progress) think tanks - the rightwing guy used the term "Islamofascist" and said we need to go to war with Iran, and the leftwing guy said that sanctions might be a excuse to go to war with Iran - W could say sanctions failed.
Also heard how US is no longer making much effort to help with schools & getting children to them, rebuilding them etc. in Iraq. When is the last time we heard much about schools & their improvement - whether in Iraq or New Orleans? Not lately? I didn't think so.
Also heard how Walmart is starting to have shopping carts in which toddlers watch cartoons while riding - so they don't interact with their parents, they don't learn about their environment, & they get conditioned to feel anxious or depressed when in front of a screen. Pathetic.
Please no more "progress"
Did anybody catch Obermann's commentary on Countdown tonight? It was phenomenol. Here is a transcript.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/
I've been bogged down in some local "nutty" issues (that I may be able to divulge more about later this week) & only peripherally heard some of the crap Rumsfeld slung at the American Legion speech he made. From the little bits I do know, I can tell that Olbermann hit it out of the park.
Feeling morally, intellectually confused?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12131617/
Please check it out. And a tip of the hat to Ellen of the Tenth for finding it.
http://ellenofthetenth.blogspot.com/
What Next? It is really hard to know when a "Democrat" is running as a Republican. My feelings about Lieberman haven't changed one bit. I don't think he should be allowed to caucus with the Dems. The Dems should make that clear now. I am aware of the potential ramifications of such a statement, but for once the Dems have to stand for something. If they can't stand up for their own party, then what are they good for?
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=201
Posted by: Ron Chusid at August 30, 2006 06:56 PM
Posted by: madame defarge at August 30, 2006 10:02 PM
Madame,
I think you were reading my mind.
IRC'ed are we...
Monkey...you chim...PANZEE!
OC...Madam....
Don't mind me...just passin' through...
=P
Posted by: oncall at August 30, 2006 10:00 PM
Posted by: madame defarge at August 30, 2006 10:02 PM
Posted by: oncall at August 30, 2006 10:12 PM
Madame,
At least you did not mispell phenomenal like I did. :-)
At least you did not mispell phenomenal like I did. :-)
Posted by: oncall at August 30, 2006 10:15 PM
Is that a new drug?
Chuck in Houston for All:
Notice that the NYT quote on the header of this thread contains gross speculation masquerading as fact (or perhaps received truth):
"[Armitage] has acknowledged that he was the person whose conversation with a columnist in 2003 prompted a long, politically laden criminal investigation in what became known as the C.I.A. leak case, a lawyer involved in the case said on Tuesday."
Armitage may have become privy to some gossip, and may have devulged it, in a gross lapse of judgement from a national security perspective, to Novak and Woodward. This in no way addresses the issue of (1) why such information was floating around the national security establisment of the USA, (2) why Cheneny, Rove and Libby were going to great lengths to get this bit of gossip out into the public domain, and (3) why Rove and Libby, under oath, testified to untruths about their roles in getting that gossip out.
This issue should not be over by a long shot.
Chuck in Houston
Oops, left out the main thing: one the basis of what I posted above, I cannot conceive that the statement that Armitage alone or even in the main "prompted" this crime is in any way supported by any facts in the public domain or by any logical inferences about motivations.
Chuck in Houston
Here's what's next, and it is happening now:
San Diego Superior Court Judge Yuri Hofmann rendered his decision in the election challenge in California’s 50th Congressional District. He dismissed the request for a recount and for discovery of the facts of the Busby-Bilbray election stating specifically that "Once the House asserts exclusive jurisdiction and selects a candidate, the court no longer has jurisdiction" (emphasis added). The judge argued that the June 13 swearing in alone was sufficient to establish Bilbray’s “election.” The event had the power to take away any and all citizen rights and immediately rescind authority over their own elections.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0608/S00372.htm
lest we forget
http://www.theocracywatch.org/
The party of Lincoln has become the theocracy
DiAnne:
How are things comimg in Washington State? Are people up for the coming elections? It's still dog-days here in Texas. I need to get in gear for November.
Chuck in Houston
PS: My email server is down
Posted by: oncall at August 30, 2006 11:59 PM
O.M.G...
Hastert the Basturd
I havent seen anything about this on here but the whole country needs to get a copy of this with their morning coffee.
Keith Olbermann Delivers One Hell Of a Commentary on Rumsfeld
By: Jamie Holly on Wednesday, August 30th, 2006 at 6:22 PM - PDT
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/08/30/keith-olbermann-delivers-one-hell-of-a-commentary-on-rumsfeld/
The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and
shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack.
Donald S. Rumsfeld is not a prophet.
Mr. Rumsfeld’s remarkable comments to the Veterans of Foreign Wars
yesterday demand the deep analysis - and the sober contemplation - of every
American.
* everyong please read this if you havent yet.
Posted by: April at August 31, 2006 07:28 AM
Good morning April.
Thanks for posting Keith Olbermann's commentary. Wow! He lays it on the line. It should become seen and heard in every school across this nation.
And I'm sure 5 years from now, when the fascists are driven out, we will be able to teach students how they stole elections, invaded our homes, took away our freedoms, stole our media, cried "Terror! Terror!" and then Bush and this current regime of Republicans will go down in history for the evil men they were.
But little by little, we see voices of both the Republicans and the Democrats cracking the wall of the media. And people painfully aware of how awful it is to live in our country under Republican rule. They are more open now to hearing about the fraud and the warcrimes and the Downing Street Minutes than they were two years ago.
And more and more, I hear, "John Kerry was right."
I was in the irc last night--in between cooking and stuff--and apparently I missed a few visitors popping into the irc while I was cooking. (And as always happens in the irc, I missed these visitors by one minute after they signed out!)
Maybe later I guess.
Bill in Portland Maine's "Cheers & Jeers: Thursday" edition at Daily Kos is a must read...He's got a great new plan for fighting terroists.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/8/31/82940/4363
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you, my dad (from yesterdays Palm Beach Post)...
Village's seniors task force chairman believes retirement a time for giving
By Laura Ammerman
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
For Howard Trager, retirement isn't just about having fun and relaxing. It's time for more work.
"There comes a certain time in life where you have to give back," he said.
more...
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/wellington/content/neighborhood/wellington/epaper/2006/08/30/npw_tragerpro_0830.html
I want you to see what kind of evil tactics they are using to try to get young kids into the military
open this link
http://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/gov/201058098.html
Chuck
re your question about WA - Laura Bush was here for breakfast yesterday, and we've had Bill Frist & even W - trying to unseat Cantwell in favor of McGavick & trying to keep out Darcy Burner who would dare to challenge Sheriff Reichert for Congress
There are still kayak protesters in the lake, just as there are in the Twin Cities (where Bush recently tried the same trick).
The local pollster to watch is Stuart Ellroy, but I haven't seen his latest. I hope that we can keep our matriarchy at the helm for the foreseeable future (Governor, both Senators plus more).
(My son just came back from Portland w/a Gretsch guitar, no taxes!)
WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats chastised Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld for questioning the historical grasp of those who criticize the Bush administration's handling of war, accusing him Wednesday of engaging in "dangerous business."
Several members of Congress had been urging Rumsfeld's to resign long before he asserted to the American Legion on Tuesday that war opponents displayed the kind of thinking that delayed military action against Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany.
Rumsfeld said the world faces "a new type of fascism." And he warned against repeating the pre-World War II mistake of appeasement.
His speech in Salt Lake City, in which he also said administration critics suffered from "moral confusion," prompted angry reactions from Democrats hoping to win back control of Congress.
"It is a dangerous business to accuse those who disagree with you of moral and intellectual confusion," said Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee. "Debate in our democracy is based upon respect, not vilification."
Said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.: "If Mr. Rumsfeld is so concerned with comparisons to World War II, he should explain why our troops have now been fighting in Iraq longer than it took our forces to defeat the Nazis in Europe."
Responding Wednesday, Pentagon press secretary Eric Ruff said, "Facts are facts. As the secretary said in his speech, America and the free world face a gathering threat of challenges from a vicious enemy that is serious, lethal and relentless. There are important lessons from history that we ought to be mindful of as we talk about how we are going to meet the challenges extremist terror organizations present."
In his speech, Rumsfeld said it "was apparent that many have still not learned history's lessons." Aides later said he was not accusing the administration's critics of trying to appease the terrorists but was cautioning against a repeat of errors made in earlier eras.
Nevertheless, many Democrats in Congress viewed Rumsfeld's remarks as fighting words.
Sen. Jack Reed, a member of the Armed Services Committee, said Rumsfeld has been "substituting sloganing for strategy" and delivered a "calculated political argument" to make people believe that to support a war against terror requires support of the administration's policies.
"I think the analogy is very, very weak," Reed, D-R.I., said of Rumsfeld's comparison of Iraq to World War II.
It is time Rumsfeld "should be departing" the Pentagon, Reed added. Reed, Pelosi and other Democrats have been calling for the defense secretary's resignation for more than a year.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York called Rumsfeld's portrayal of Democrats a "strawman" and said Americans need answers on how to deal with a looming civil war in Iraq.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., shot back, saying Democrats were not committed to winning the war on terror. If they were, he asked, "Why does (Schumer's) party attack the president over and over again for using all the tools necessary to identify, track down and stop those who want to do us harm?" Democrats have objected to aspects of the president's terrorist surveillance program.
Also Wednesday, a New York Democratic House candidate, Navy veteran Eric Massa, accused Rumsfeld of lying about progress in Iraq.
Massa, who is challenging one-term Republican Rep. Randy Kuhl, said he was outraged by Rumsfeld's comments and faulted him for blaming the media for his own misstatements and missteps. He said the Bush administration has no effective plan to secure the country.
"This thing has disintegrated," Tim Walz, a Minnessota Democrat running for a House seat, said of Iraq.
Tracey Schmitt, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said the Democratic candidates' strategy is to criticize Republican efforts to win the war on terror, while elected Democrats are "committed to a strategy that will weaken our ability to defend America and make us less safe at home and abroad."
http://www.rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fapnews.myway.com%2Farticle%2F20060830%2FD8JR04OO0.html
Posted by: April at August 31, 2006 07:28 AM
To anyone who watched Olbermann live last night, read the transcript on his blog, or caught the Crooks & Liars video... PLEASE consider writing letters to Olbermann & MSNBC executives expressing your gratitude for Olbermann's eloquent & courageous speech last night.
We are at a crossroads in our fragile democracy, much like we were when Edward Murrow dared to speak out. Olbermann is our generation's Edward Murrow. Let him & his bosses know we stand behind him & his inspiring & powerful commentary.
Here are email addresses:
KOlbermann@msnbc.com
viewerservices@msnbc.com
letters@msnbc.com
countdown@msnbc.com
dabrams@msnbc.com (Abrams is head of MSNBC)
Suggestion: Make sure the Subject title of your email says something like "Thanks & Praise for..." I have a feeling they will be receiving many emails & won't read them all. Help them tally the positive results quickly.
Monkey -- what a cool article about your dad. Sounds like he's found a whole new set of things to do and explore.
California takes on global warming
POSTED: 8:48 a.m. EDT, August 31, 2006
SACRAMENTO, California (AP) -- California will impose broad caps on its greenhouse-gas emissions under a landmark plan that marks a clear break with the federal government and which backers hope will become a national model.
more...
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/31/global.warming.ap/index.html
Did anyone else catch Rocky Anderson, Mayor of Salt Lake City, and his speech of yesterday?
http://kutv.com/video/?id=18850@kutv.dayport.com
It will make you feel better anyway.
Monkey,
Yes, a good looking dad and vital too!
Hope you are holding up and not soaked...
Casey,
GREAT post.
Posted by: monkey at August 31, 2006 08:50 AM
Like father, like son.
Very, very cool.
Posted by: madame defarge at August 31, 2006 11:17 AM
Thanks to all for the kinds comments... Dad's an all around good guy.
Vietnam veteran as well... U.S.A.F.
Just for the record (& hopefully to inspire others to write to Olbermann & MSNBC), here's my letter:
Mr. Olbermann:
Thank you, thank you, thank you. Your courageous & eloquent commentary on Aug. 30, 2006 regarding Rumsfeld's recent speech to the American Legion gives me hope in this very frightening period in our country & world. In a time when true journalism seems rare, it is encouraging to know that you & MSNBC have the moral courage to speak truth to power -- an ingredient often missing these days in political discourse in the media.
As you are proving to be the Edward Murrow of our times, I offer this quote from Margaret Chase Smith in gratitude and in an effort to urge MSNBC to continue to provide us with your inspiring & important commentaries:
"Moral cowardice that keeps us from speaking our minds is as dangerous to this country as irresponsible talk. The right way is not always the popular and easy way. Standing for right when it is unpopular is a true test of moral character."
- Margaret Chase Smith, June 1953