lowercase d democrat

Weary

2009-11-14T07:44:00.002-06:00

Just so weary of Congress and Democrats and Republicans and Joe Lieberman.

Weary of all the lying bullshit.

Weary of the corporate MSM.

Weary of it all.

Bleeh!

2007-11-08T14:05:00.001-06:00

That's all. Just bleeh!

Senate Again Fails District Residents

2007-09-18T17:40:00.000-05:00

More than 600,000 residents of the District of Columbia have no representation in Congress and the Senate obviously prefers it that way. Had the measure passed, President Bush would have vetoed it anyway, and the lackluster Democrats are powerless to do anything about it.

This is America?

WASHINGTON -- The drive to give the 600,000 residents of the District of Columbia a vote in Congress failed in the Senate today, falling three votes short of the 60 needed to begin debate.

But backers of the bill, which included a representative for largely Democratic D.C. and a new one for largely Republican Utah, pledged to try again, if not in this session than in a new Congress where Democratic gains could spell the difference.

"I feel strongly about D.C. voting rights," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). Noting that there are "a lot of other things crying for attention" in the Senate, he said he chose to bring the issue to the floor because D.C. residents were fighting and dying in Iraq without a voice in Congress.

"This is fairness," Reid said. "It's the right thing to do."

Although the bill passed the House, President Bush had threatened to veto it.

Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) strongly opposed the measure, calling it "clearly and unambiguously unconstitutional" and saying the remedy for disenfranchisement of the district's residents is to amend the Constitution to make D.C. a state.

Yes, Frank, They Will and Have

2007-09-16T09:37:00.000-05:00

The title to this post is the answer to a questioned posed in the title of Frank Rich's latest column in The New York Times: Will the Democrats Betray Us?

Where were the tough questions of Petraeus and Crocker during the hearings? Why were they not required to swear to tell the truth?

Where is the leadership from the opposition party?

The Democrats continue to do what they do best: roll over in the face of adversity and offer their exposed bellies.

As a party, the Democrats are impotent.

Homeland Security Failures

2007-09-10T10:27:00.000-05:00

The Department of Homeland Security has failed to produce a comprehensive plan in the event the United States suffers another major terror attack or natural disaster. What else do we expect from this government?

The agency has proved far better at developing security plans than at implementing them. Even so, it has yet to meet Congress’s demand for a comprehensive, national plan to respond to another major terrorist attack or Katrina-size disaster. Critical barriers remain in such basic areas as emergency communications, computer integration, border defense and an effective program for information sharing among the various intelligence-gathering agencies.

These failings were at the heart of the 9/11 disaster. And there’s no reassurance to hear Homeland Security officials defend their slow progress, arguing that there has been no similar attack since. As another grim anniversary approaches, the G.A.O. assessment is an urgent reminder of how much more still needs to be done.

The Fattest Rebels

2007-08-28T18:28:00.000-05:00

Our cousins to the south - Mississippi - have been dubbed the fattest in the land.

JACKSON, Miss. - Experts say Mississippians need to skip the gravy, say no to the fried pickles and start taking brisk walks to fight an epidemic of obesity.

According to a new study, this Deep South state is the fattest in the nation. The Trust for America's Health, a research group that focuses on disease prevention, says Mississippi is the first state where more than 30 percent of adults are considered obese.

Aside from making Mississippi the butt of late-night talk show jokes, the obesity epidemic has serious implications for public policy.

If current trends hold, the state could face enormous increases in the already significant costs of treating diabetes, heart disease and other ailments caused by the extra poundage.

"We've got a long way to go. We love fried chicken and fried anything and all the grease and fatback we can get in Mississippi," said Democratic state Rep. Steve Holland, chairman of the Public Health Committee.

Poverty and obesity often go hand in hand, doctors say, because poor families stretch their budgets by buying cheaper, processed foods that have higher fat content and lower nutritional value.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee — a self-described "recovering foodaholic" who lost 110 pounds several years ago — explained during a Southern Governors' Association meeting in Biloxi last weekend that there are historical reasons poor people often fry their foods: It's an inexpensive way to increase the calories and feed a family.

Mississippi is one of the poorest states in the nation, and the Delta is the poorest region of Mississippi.

Dr. Marshall Bouldin, director of the diabetes and metabolism center at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, told the Southern governors that if the Delta counties were excluded, "Mississippi would wind up being about 30th in diabetes problems in the United States."

Mississippi's public schools already are taking steps to prevent obesity.

NY Times: Prosecute or Impeach Gonzales

2007-07-29T09:15:00.000-05:00

An editorial in The New York Times calls for the Justice Department to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the apparent lies and/or truth twisting of the incompetent Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. If Solicitor General Paul Clement fails in his duty, says the Times, Congress should impeach Gonzales.

Asking the impotent Democrats in Congress to take any kind of action, let alone impeachment, is like asking the leopard to change its spots - it can't be done.

Time and again the Democrats have backed down from the important fight. Why should anyone think they will start doing their job now?

White House Bans Tourists

2007-07-28T06:58:00.000-05:00

Not really. You just can't look like a tourist when you visit because of the new dress code.

Here is the list of banned apparel:

Jeans
Sneakers
Mini-skirts
T-shirts
Tank tops
Flip flops

Now, does the White House staff tell this to people waiting in line for a tour? Apparently not. They have to wait until they get to the door before being turned away.

So, remember, kiddies, if you want to visit the Bush White House (and why would you?), you have to dress like you are going to Sunday School.

I'm sure there's no truth to the rumor I just made up that God told George W. Bush to institute the dress code.

Doctors to look for George W. Bush's Head

2007-07-20T14:38:00.000-05:00

The good news is that the White House reports that doctors will attempt to locate President George W. Bush's head during a routine colonoscopy on Saturday. The bad news is the Dick will be in charge.

Reuters:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush will undergo what aides described as a routine colonoscopy on Saturday at the Camp David presidential retreat.

During the time Bush, 61, is under anesthesia, he would delegate power to Vice President Dick Cheney, White House spokesman Tony Snow said.

A colonoscopy allows doctors to look inside the large intestine for possible tumors. A small camera is threaded into the colon and usually is equipped to remove any suspicious-looking lesions on the spot.

Snow said the procedure will be a follow-up to a test Bush had in 2002. Bush had small growths called polyps removed prior to becoming president, although none was found in 2002.

In Lieu of Pay Raise House Should Cut Expenses

2007-06-28T15:31:00.000-05:00

How disappointing that the U.S. House has decided to give itself a cost of living raise when millions of average Americans have to cut back in the face of higher gasoline and food prices.

Here's an idea: instead of increasing their salaries, why don't congressmen cut their expenses? They claim that it costs too much to maintain homes in Washington and their home districts. Why not just put up a cot in their offices. They have everything they need at their disposal dining rooms and gyms, for example.

Look at the money they could save. Why, they could probably cut their salaries and still make a decent living.

White House abusing law

2007-06-19T11:37:00.000-05:00

Why are we not surprised about White House officials breaking the law? That's the only thing they know.

From a report at Capitol Hill Blue:

The Bush Administration knowingly and openly violated the law by deleting email records for 51 White officials who had email accounts with the Republican National Committee.

A report issued Monday by the House Oversight Committee says the White House eliminated the email records to thwart a Congressional investigation into overt political activity by the White House.

The House investigation also found the White House lied about the number of staff members with the illegal RNC email accounts and deliberately concealed details on usage of the accounts.

The actions, the report concluded, are "extensive violations" of the federal law that requires preservation of White House records.

Prosecutor: Jail Libby Now

2007-06-12T14:43:00.000-05:00

The prosecutor in the conviction of Scooter Libby wants the convicted felon behind bars now.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald urged a federal judge Tuesday not to delay former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's 2 1/2-year prison sentence in the CIA leak case.

Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, has argued that he has a good chance of winning an appeal and should be allowed to remain free until that challenge has run its course.

U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, who sentenced Libby to prison for lying to authorities and obstructing the investigation into the 2003 leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson's identity, has said he sees no reason to grant Libby's request.

Cindy takes a hike

2007-05-30T10:52:00.001-05:00

From Ravel Babel:

Who can blame Cindy Sheehan for giving up on the so-called Peace Movement and the Democratic Party? While the peaceniks are fractured into different cliques who often won't talk with each other, the Democrats have done what Democrats do - caved in to a toothless tiger.

Democratic Betrayal

2007-05-24T10:08:00.000-05:00

As many have predicted, the Democratic "leadership" in Congress has betrayed the American people. Is there no one with the cojones to what is right?

Check out Keith Olbermann's Special Comment The entire government has failed us on Iraq.

It appears more obvious everyday that the only hope for this country is a third party that will do what the American people elects them to do.

Who didn't see this coming

2007-05-22T12:52:00.001-05:00

We have to agree with A. Alexander's assessment about the cowards in the Democratic congressional leadership.

It would be nice to be able to say, "We never saw this coming," but that would be a lie. Deep down inside everyone knew that the Democrats would eventually cower before Bush's Iraq war belligerence. These Democrats are after all, more or less, the same spineless crew that rolled over and voted for Mister Bush to invade Iraq in the first place. And don't let them rewrite history...Democrats knew the basis for the Iraq war was a pack of lies, they just didn't have the courage to stand and be counted.

Cowards!

Impeach the AG

2007-05-14T15:42:00.000-05:00

Hal Brown over at Capitol Hill Blue seems to think the only way to get rid of the worthless, criminal occupying the attorney general's office is through impeachment. We say that's a good start.

Gonzales is not a Broadway actor who reads with dismay his damning reviews after the premier of a Broadway show destined to close by the Sunday matinee.

He is a Bush actor following a Bush script playing the lead in a Bush show that doesn't depend on reviews and word of mouth to keeping playing, even if it's to an empty theater.

So of course Bush won't fire him. It would be like firing himself.

Bush has done more to dismantle the Constitution than any other American president. Congressional Republicans who are marching lockstep under his leadership aren't about to call for his impeachment.

But they ought to at least do what they can easily do. They should join Democrats in impeaching the attorney who has done more to corrupt the Constitution than any other attorney general.

Blog Highlighted for Intolerance

2007-05-08T12:20:00.000-05:00

Little Green Footballs, the rabidly right-wing blog, is seen as a hot bed of intolerance.

Check it out at Ravel Babel.

Bush this week's hypocrite

2007-05-04T11:56:00.000-05:00

President George W. Bush has won the honor of being this the Hypocrite of the Week.

And well deserved, we must say. Not bad for "The Commander Guy."

Murtha chumps out on impeachment

2007-05-01T13:00:00.000-05:00

John Murtha had a spokesman cover his ass over his impeachment remarks.

From RavelBabel.com:

Murtha Says No Impeachment at this Time

We had a nagging suspicion it was too good to be true. Regardless of whether Bush and Cheney can be removed from office, the American people deserve to know the truth. At this stage the only way to get to the truth is through impeachment hearings.

McCain Wants to Bomb Jon Stewart

2007-04-25T11:11:00.000-05:00

We hope Sen. John McCain was only kidding about placing a bomb under Jon Stewart's desk, but these days, we never know.

We find his comments about IEDs abhorrent, not to mention the dog.

Kucinich to file Impeachment Articles Agains Cheney

2007-04-24T10:52:00.000-05:00

Our question is what took so long?

From Common Dreams:

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) will hold a news conference tomorrow afternoon to announce the introduction of articles of impeachment relating to the Vice President of the United States Richard B. Cheney.

Where: Cannon Terrace (intersection of Independence Avenue and New Jersey Avenue)
When: Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Time: 12 p.m.

Why Rudy?

2007-04-09T10:39:00.000-05:00

Because he will make a great war president and has visited foreign countries.

Exerpt:

Rudy wants to be president so badly that not only is he telling America what he thinks they want to hear, he's claiming he's an expert on terrorism because he was the mayor of New York on September 11. His foreign policy credentials? He's traveled to lots of countries. Oh, yeah, he's also trying to tie Iran in with 9/11. He must follow the slime bag politicians credo: never let the facts get in the way of a campaign.

Kerry's Revenge

2007-03-29T11:16:00.000-05:00

There may be some justice in the world after all. But it comes a bit late.

From Capitol Hill Blue:

By SAM HANANEL

More than two years after losing his bid for the White House, Democratic Sen. John Kerry exacted a measure of revenge against his political foes Wednesday by helping derail the diplomatic nomination of a Republican fundraiser.

President Bush withdrew the nomination of St. Louis businessman Sam Fox to be ambassador to Belgium after Democrats denounced Fox for his 2004 donation to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

The group's TV ads, which claimed that Kerry, D-Mass., exaggerated his military record in Vietnam, were viewed as a major factor in Kerry losing the election.

Bush's action was announced quietly minutes before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was to have voted on the nomination.

"His nomination would not have passed today if the vote had been called up," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

During a confirmation hearing last month, Kerry grilled Fox about why he had given $50,000 to a group that was "smearing and spreading lies" about him. Kerry seemed to be seeking an apology but Fox didn't budge, saying he simply gave when asked.

"Sam Fox had every opportunity to disavow the politics of personal destruction and to embrace the truth," Kerry said Wednesday. "He chose not to. The White House made the right decision to withdraw the nomination. I hope this signals a new day in political discourse."

Fox, 77, is national chairman of the Jewish Republican Coalition and was deemed a "ranger" by Bush's 2004 campaign for raising at least $200,000. He is founder and chairman of the Clayton, Mo.-based Harbour Group, which specializes in the takeover of manufacturing companies.

Fox has donated millions of dollars to Republican candidates and causes since the 1990s.

The Rest

Cheney up to old tricks

2007-03-26T15:22:00.000-05:00

It getting tiresome to hear the the same old crap from Dick Cheney. He needs to go back to his undisclosed location.

Vice President Dick Cheney on Saturday accused the Democrat-led House of not supporting troops in Iraq and of sending a message to terrorists that America will retreat in the face danger.

"They're not supporting the troops. They're undermining them," Cheney told a gathering of the Republican Jewish Coalition at the oceanside Ritz-Carlton hotel in Manalapan, Fla., about 60 miles north of Miami.

Our Thoughts Are With You, Elizabeth

2007-03-22T15:26:00.000-05:00

Elizabeth Edwards' cancer has returned and although it's treatable, it's incurable.

Having lost a couple of battles with this horrible disease in our own family, we are still fighting another one.

Our thoughts are with you, Elizabeth and John, and our hearts.

What was Russert Thinking?

2007-03-19T11:09:00.000-05:00

When we saw Tom Delay on Meet the Press, we couldn't believe our eyes. But Doug Thompson at Capitol Hill Blue says it best:

I'm trying, and failing, to understand why Meet the Press gave an indicted former member of Congress, a corrupt politician who resigned in disgrace, a forum upon which to espouse hate and division Sunday as President George W. Bush's illegal and immoral Iraq war enters its fifth year.

Is Tim Russert so desperate for controversy that he has to book Tom DeLay, easily one of the most criminal political hacks in Washington, on the top-rated Sunday news talk show and let him call war protestors unpatriotic and claim that anyone who wants to end the Iraq war is "aiding and abetting the enemy?"

DeLay is political vermin, one step away from a jail cell for influence peddling and taking bribes and, yet, there he was on Meet the Press being treated with deference by lap-dog Russert.

Instead of pretending to any standard of journalism or decency, Russert let DeLay expound on why he thinks those who protest war are not patriots.

Mike Ferrell: Actor, Activist

2007-03-13T13:33:00.000-05:00

Found at AlterNet:

The following is an excerpt from Mike Farrell's memoir, Just Call Me Mike: A Journey from Actor to Activist (Akashic: 2007).

Preface

"So what do we call you, actor and activist?"

"Why don't you just call me Mike?"

It happens -- usually when I'm about to be interviewed on television or radio-because these days the discussion may not be only about M*A*S*H, or Providence, or Hollywood. Since we're as likely to talk about war, or peace, or human rights, or maybe even how I could possibly object to executing some fang-toothed, slobbering monster, they want to fit me into a category.

But I don't want to be put into somebody's category. I'd rather just talk and let whoever's listening take it in, see if it fits and figure out how they feel about it-and maybe even why. Pigeonholing does the public's thinking for them, and kind of insults them in the process.

I don't want to be part of that. Because it's been quite a trip, this journey of mine. So if someone wants to discuss -- or debate -- the issues, I'm happy to do that, but I'd rather not start off with a label that sets someone's teeth on edge.

Say I'm a "liberal" and some think they know my views on everything. They start dialing the phone or writing an angry letter without even knowing what I'll say. Or others think we agree, when we might not.

I've been around the block a few times now, and I think I've learned some things. A lot of these things have surprised me, and many have been painful, but mostly what I've learned is how lucky I am. This is some world we live in. I've been privileged to see a fair amount of it, and the more I experience, the more I realize the special place we inhabit in it.

Being an American, as I've discovered, is often a great privilege. Being a privileged person in today's world -- a world where much of what we take for granted here is unknown elsewhere -- makes you think. It's made me think about the invisible people who live a quiet life of misery -- and about those whose misery has made them unwilling to remain quiet.

THE REST

Sooner Thought Podcast - The Best

2007-03-11T13:46:00.000-05:00

For a bleeding-heart, union-loving, tree-hugging, Kennedy-worshipping Liberal, Alex is a pretty good guy. Check out his blog, Sooner Thought, and you'll see what we're talking about.

And to hear what we're talking about, take a listen to his Sooner Thought Podcast. Although we take issue with some his guests, like the bozo from RavelBabel, Alex runs an intelligent podcast, and almost makes you want to vote for the Capital D's. Almost, in our case, just almost.

Take a listen and hear what we're talking about.

Will Scooter Scoot?

2007-03-07T11:13:00.000-06:00

Now that I. Lewis Libby has been convicted the next question is when will Dubya issue a pardon. Will he have the nerve to pardon Scooter before he's formally sentenced?

Kinda doubt that. After all, "Cheney's Cheney" is free on his own recognisance, so there's no rush.

If he can stay out of jail for the rest of Bush's term, odds are that it will be late-December 2008 pardon, like the one's issued by Bill Clinton and just about every other president.

Have no doubt, the Bush perverted ideas on loyalty will win out over justice every time.

Scooter will scoot.

Who's playing into al-Qaeda's hands?

2007-03-01T16:30:00.000-06:00

Looks like Osama bin Forgotten can play the Bush team like an old drum.

Check this out from Consortium News:

Dick Cheney has accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of proposing a U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq that would "validate" al-Qaeda's strategy. But captured al-Qaeda documents and other evidence indicate that if anyone is playing into al-Qaeda's hands, it is Cheney and George W. Bush.

The chief motive behind the 9/11 attacks was to draw the United States into a clumsy overreaction that would alienate the Muslim world and rally a new generation of jihadists to al-Qaeda's banner. Today, that banner might well read, "Mission Accomplished."

Sign Up, Or Shut Up

2007-02-26T10:25:00.000-06:00

Take a look at this photo of President George W. Bush and his extended family and point out the people who are currently serving the cause of freedom in Iraq.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

Finished? How many did you find? None? That's absolutely correct-a-mundo.

Many in the blogosphere have pointed this out. Most recently, one of our favorites, BuzzFlash. Warning: the good folks at BuzzFlash pull no punches, so if you are ultraconservative, I mean, ultrasensitive, you might be offended, and are excused.

Now that the "ultras" are gone, here's what BuzzFlash had to say:

Bush and Cheney were cowards who avoided service in Vietnam, sending other men to die for them. Now, they've made elitist craven "warmongering" a family affair.

They are frauds who send off the children of other American families to die in one of their many delusional "fiascos." And then they mistreat the wounded veterans, after not giving them sufficient protective gear to begin with.

It's the treason borne of men who personally lack the courage of their convictions.

Now, those of you who have the great fortune to know me personally, know that for years I've maintained the following:

If you are pro-war, and have not volunteered to serve yourself, nor encouraged your like-minded relatives to do so, you have no business criticizing others for their opposition. In other words, shut the hell up.

Now wait, I can hear you saying, "It's our constitutional right of freedom of speech."

Sure it is. Just as it's my right to say you are hypocrites.

So, either put on a uniform and go serve the cowardly commander in chief, or shut up. It's that simple.

Conservative blogger misses the point

2007-02-25T12:03:00.000-06:00

Our good friend Diego, who now goes by D.A., over at Conservative-Majority once again misses the point.

He criticized Barak Obama for pointing out that the political process in the this country will not move forward as long as it keeps getting bogged down in petty spats.

Diego then attacks Obama's manhood:

I mean, c’mon the man needs to have much thicker skin if he IS to be the next President. Back during the summer months he was recorded telling reporter Maureen Dowd not to make fun of his ears because he was teased as a kid. With Obama coming out and saying this, I confidently say that Hillary is more of a man than what “clean”, “articulate” Obama will ever be.

Is Diego trying to be humorous and puposefully missing the point? Or is he just stupid?

We'll give him the benefit of the doubt, and suggest he keeps working on his comedy routine.

Michael Savage - Free speech at it's finest

2007-02-21T13:42:00.000-06:00

Below is a transcript of the Feb. 16 edition Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation. Michael Savage once again lives up to his adopted name. His real name is Michael Alan Weiner but he changed it when he figured out everyone already knew he is a dick.

Just remember as you read this, that he has the right under the U.S. Constitution to spout such garbage. But we also have the right to protest the shameful, vulgar rantings of a madman.

Thanks to Media Matter for America.

SAVAGE: Diane Sawyer took a trip to Iran where she kissed the feet of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Oh my gosh, she's disgusting.

See, in my world, Diane Sawyer would have had her passport seized upon coming back to America. And the smirk would have been driven off her face as she was booked, the handcuffs on the back of her hands, for aiding and abetting the enemy, the Hitler of our time. She would have been fingerprinted and booked for sedition. Then we would have seen if she was still smirking giving her little speech. OK?

Here's Diane Sawyer goes to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and does not once say to him, "How could you deny the Holocaust? Here are the pictures of the 6 or 7 million Jews that Hitler killed. How dare you do this to the world?" So Dianne Sawyer, in essence, is agreeing that the Holocaust didn't occur. This is what ABC has become.

Listen to clip 13:

SAWYER: I understand that it's confusing sometimes what we do and why we're there, but even --

SAVAGE: Oh, shut up! Get the hag off! Oh, shut up! Get that hag off my show.

We're not confused by what you do, you witch. You witch, you. You think that you're better than all of us, that's what it is, Diane. You think we're confused by what we do and why we're there? We're not confused by the fact that you're a low-life witch who would do anything for ratings, including going over to the Hitler of our time.

You rotten, stinking witch -- I pray to God, I pray to God that one day, one day, you come to understand how low you have become, Diane Sawyer, what a low-life vermin you really are. Play that again, I want to hear the whole thing.

SAWYER: I understand that it's confusing sometimes what we do and why we're there, but even, even your adversaries have their own point of view, and how can you tackle this part of the world if you don't understand why they say --

SAVAGE: You lying whore.

SAWYER: -- they're doing what they're doing. Even --

SAVAGE: You lying whore.

SAWYER: -- can teach you something about why they are doing what they're doing.

SAVAGE: You lying whore, you.

SAWYER: And we are trying to bring back real information in this critical time for these people who live in that part of the world. It is so complicated.

SAVAGE: You're full of crap. Who do you think you're fooling? You're a liar, and the reason you gave this interview about that interview is because you realized what you have done. You're being told that the people hate your guts.

I don't know how this goes on in this country, that a witch, a whore like Diane Sawyer -- and I'm going to stick to those words -- to me she's a whore, she's a whore for selling out her intellect like this, whoring herself for ratings. She goes and visits the Hitler of our time, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, does not challenge him on one of his statements, not one, and she does it just for ratings. And she has the nerve to come back here and pretend that it's confusing on what we do and why we're there. Who do you think you're talking to? Even your adversaries have their own point of view.

So let's see if I can follow this. It's 1940, and you go visit Adolf Hitler, and people are already being assassinated and executed and worked to death in Nazi Germany, and you say that even your adversaries have their own point of view? And how can you tackle Germany if you don't even understand why they say what they're doing and why they're doing it?

Diane, all I can say to you is you're probably the lowest creature in American journalistic history. You're probably the lowest creature in the history of American journalism. Did you hear me, Diane Sawyer? I hope to God this gets to you because this is one man's opinion. But let me tell you, it's not only one man's opinion, it's tens of millions of Americans know that you're the lowest whore in the United States of America.

I stand by those words, and if you don't like it, sue me. Take me to a court of law for calling you a whore, because you are an intellectual prostitute for what you have done for ratings. You're lower than Anna Nicole Smith on her worst day. You're dumber than Paris Hilton. You're more shallow than Lindsay Lohan.

[...]

SAVAGE: I don't suppose Diane might have a Jewish friend or two in New York that would stand up to her. Anyone in New York City in the media who knows Diane Sawyer who may be of the Jewish faith, who might have an opportunity to say to her, "You've become lower than the lowest whore outside the Holland Tunnel in fishnet stockings at 3 in the morning, that you stink, lady"? And if ABC had a scintilla of decency, they'd fire her for what she just did.

Remember how we got into Iraq?

2007-02-21T13:29:00.000-06:00

We've been maintaining all along that the Bush war on the Iraqi people is illegal and based on lies. It is a corporate war for not only the Iraqi oil but for billions in no-bid contracts for Cheneyburton, er, Haliburton.

As A. Alexander writes in The Progressive Daily Beacon we must always remember this.

"Regardless of how we got into Iraq," Mister Bush's apologists and supporters say, "we have an obligation now, to stay until the 'job is done'." That is a false argument designed to prevent an honest and rational analysis and debate regarding the war. It is like a father saying to his daughter, "Regardless of how you became pregnant, you are now with child and must marry your rapist."

Of course, George W. Bush and the Republicans would prefer the American people forgive the rapist, so to speak, because it absolves them of any responsibility for the dishonest and deceitful manner in which they led the nation to war. It releases Mister Bush and Cheney of any guilt in the death -- according to scientifically sound analysis -- of some 650,000 Iraqis and 30,000 dead and wounded US military personnel. Mostly, however, the false argument allows the President and Republicans to continue their failed war forever.

Will the American people get the justice they deserve from Congress now controlled by the Democratic Party?

You got to be kidding.

Any talk of impeachment is "off the table," according to comments attributed to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Besides, there is not enough time, and unless Dick Cheney is included, nothing will change.

Just remember, folks, that Bush and Cheney started the war based on lies and they continue to lie and will forever lie, because that's all they know.

Senate needs to grow up

2007-02-18T07:12:00.000-06:00

Yesterday the U.S. Senate once again failed to get enough votes to pass a nonbinding resolution critical of President Bush's plan to send additional troops to Iraq -- the so-called "surge."

The good news for Democrats is that this time around more Republicans joined with them, emboldening the Democrats.

From The New York Times:

“We will be relentless,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, the third-ranking Democrat. “There will be resolution after resolution, amendment after amendment, all forcing this body to do what it has not done in the previous three years: debate and discuss Iraq.”

Not to be outdone, this from the Republicans:

“We want a debate about Iraq that includes funding for the troops,” said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader. “They’ve denounced the surge. The question is, are they going to fund the troops?”

And this:

“The majority cannot tell the minority what we are going to have one vote on, take it or leave it,” said Senator Jim Bunning, Republican of Kentucky, defending his party’s stance as senators squared off at noon.

Both sides sound like a group of preschoolers squabbling at recess. Grow up kids, and show the American public you can do what they sent you to Washington to do in the first place - govern.

Is anyone surprised by this?

2007-02-12T08:35:00.000-06:00

From AlterNet:

The escalation of US military planning on Iran is only the latest chess move in a six-year push within the Bush Administration to attack that country. While Iran was named a part of President George W. Bush's "axis of evil" in 2002, efforts to ignite a confrontation with Iran date back long before the post-9/11 war on terror.

Presently, the Administration is trumpeting claims that Iran is closer to a nuclear weapon than the CIA's own analysis shows and positing Iranian influence in Iraq's insurgency, but efforts to destabilize Iran have been conducted covertly for years, often using members of Congress or non-government actors in a way reminiscent of the 1980s Iran-Contra scandal.

What is wrong with this administration? The American people don't want war.

Stop the madness!

More on Pelosi

2007-02-09T12:30:00.000-06:00

Yesterday, we posted the Republican take on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the use of military aircraft. Of course the Minority Party is going to spin it against the Speaker, to do otherwise would be nearly impossible for them, as it was for the Democrats when former Speaker Dennis Hastert began the practice following the events of September 11, 2001.

As with everything political there are two sides (sometimes more).

Jim Kuhnhenn at Capitol Hill Blue points out Pelosi would be happy to fly commercial.

Pelosi said she would be happy to fly on commercial airliners but said the House sergeant-at-arms office urged her to continue Hastert’s practice of using Air Force transport. She said she was informed on her first trip home that her plane would not make it across the country.

“I said well, that’s fine, I’m going commercial,” she told Fox News Channel’s Greta Van Susteren. “I’m not asking to go on that plane. If you need to take me there for security purposes, you’re going to have to get a plane that goes across the country, because I’m going home to my family.”

So what do Republicans have to say about that?

Rep. Adam Putnam of Florida, the No. 3 Republican leader, called Pelosi’s desire for a large transport plane “an extravagance of power that the taxpayers won’t swallow.”

“It’s important we see what the specific request was,” Putnam said.

But how about the White House?

“This is a silly story and I think it’s been unfair to the speaker,” White House spokesman Tony Snow said.

Did you feel that? The earth stopping spinning and reverse course. Miracles do happen.

Speaker Under Fire

2007-02-08T15:36:00.000-06:00

This is from the Republican National Committee, so take it with as many grains of salt as necessary. You might also want to pay attention to the citations, mainly The Washington Times, FOX News, and Tucker Carlson (is he still wearing bow ties?)

"Non-Stop" Nancy Seeks Flight Of Fancy

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Wants Non-Stop Military Aircraft For Herself, Staff, Family, And Other Members In California Delegation:

"The Office Of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Is Pressing The Bush Administration For Routine Access To Military Aircraft For Domestic Flights, Such As Trips Back To Her San Francisco District, According To Sources Familiar With The Discussions." (Rowan Scarborough, "Speaker Pursues Military Flights," The Washington Times, 2/1/07)

"The Sources, Who Include Those In Congress And In The Administration, Said The Democrat Is Seeking Regular Military Flights Not Only For Herself And Her Staff, But Also For Relatives And For Other Members Of The California Delegation." (Rowan Scarborough, "Speaker Pursues Military Flights," The Washington Times, 2/1/07)

"A Knowledgeable Source Called The Request 'Carte Blanche For An Aircraft Any Time.'" (Rowan Scarborough, "Speaker Pursues Military Flights," The Washington Times, 2/1/07)

Fox News' Brit Hume: "[P]elosi is said by military sources to be interested in more, a larger plane capable of carrying more people non-stop to the West Coast ..." (Fox News' "Special Report," 2/5/07)

Speaker Pelosi: "We want an aircraft that can reach California." (Jim Kuhnhenn, "GOP Bristles At Pelosi Plane Request," The Associated Press, 2/8/07)

Pelosi Plane Includes Private Bed, Entertainment Center, And Costs $22,000 Per Hour To Operate:

"The Craft She Has Reportedly Requested, The Air Force's C-32, Seats An Entourage Of 42, Business Class, With A State Room, Entertainment Center, Private Bed And A Fully Operational Communications Center." (Editorial, "Pelosi's Hard Landing," The Washington Times, 2/8/07)

"It Costs Taxpayers $22,000 An Hour To Operate, According To Military And Congressional Sources." (Niles Lathem, "Air-Ogant Nancy," New York Post, 2/8/07)

Pelosi Request Goes Beyond What Prior Speakers Requested:

"Sources Said Mrs. Pelosi's Request Goes Beyond What Mr. Hastert Received." (Rowan Scarborough, "Speaker Pursues Military Flights," The Washington Times, 2/1/07)

"For Comparison, The Jet Mr. Hastert Settled For Is Much Smaller -- It Seats 16 ..." (Editorial,"Pelosi's Hard Landing," The Washington Times, 2/8/07)

And Plane Rep. Hastert Used Could Fly Coast To Coast Non-Stop. "Critics wondered why Pelosi couldn't use the planes her predecessor, Republican Dennis Hastert, had used, the smaller C-37A or C-20. Both planes are capable of flying coast to coast without refueling under optimal conditions." (CNN's "The Situation Room," 2/7/07)

Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) Hints Of Cuts In Pentagon Funding Over Plane Flap:

"Murtha Said He Is Convinced The Pentagon Has Been Leaking Information About The Possibility That Pelosi Would Use Large Military Planes To Make Her Look Bad." (Edward Epstein, "GOP Makes Much Ado About The Size Of Pelosi's Plane," San Francisco Chronicle, 2/8/07)

Rep. Murtha: "They're making a mistake when they leak it because she decides on allocations for them." (Edward Epstein, "GOP Makes Much Ado About The Size Of Pelosi's Plane," San Francisco Chronicle, 2/8/07)

MSNBC's Tucker Carlson Said Murtha's Action Was "Skirting The Edge Of Appropriate." Tucker Carlson: "[A]pparently Jack Murtha, the guy who's in control of the military budget, called over to the White House and said Nancy Pelosi wants a bigger plane. Now it seems to me that's skirting the edge of appropriate, having the guy in charge of the military budget demand a military aircraft for one of his closest political allies. Don't they have anything better to do?" (MSNBC's "Tucker," 2/7/07)

Mitt Romney's Flip-Flops

2007-02-08T15:23:00.000-06:00

The Democratic National Committee has issued a news release detailing what they term "turnarounds" in views expressed by Republican presidential wannabe Mitt Romney.
Of course, we all know them as "flip-flops," but the Dems wouldn't be caught dead using that term after what happened to John Kerry.

We have no such qualms, so here are Mitt's Flip-Flops as presented by the DNC.

On Campaign Finance Reform:
Old Mitt: Proposed "Taxing Political Contributions," "Publicly Funded Campaigns," "Spending Limits" And "Abolishing" PACS. During his 2002 gubernatorial campaign, Romney "proposed taxing political contributions to finance publicly funded campaigns," while during his 1994 Senate campaign Romney "publicly advocated placing spending limits on congressional campaigns and abolishing political action committees (PACs)." [The Hill, 2/8/07]
New Mitt: Campaign Finance Reform "One Of The Worst Things In My Lifetime." "While several Republicans who attended the Republican Study Committee (RSC) retreat greeted Romney's remarks on abortion with skepticism, his condemnation of changes to campaign-finance rules struck a positive chord with the entire audience. Romney specifically criticized the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act sponsored by his rival for the GOP presidential nomination, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). 'Referring to the bill, [Romney] called it 'one of the worst things in my lifetime,'' one conservative Republican said. Romney also has criticized McCain on campaign finance while stumping in South Carolina, where President Bush turned the tide against McCain in the 2000 GOP presidential primary." [The Hill, 2/8/07]

On Taxes:
Old Mitt: Romney Refused to Sign "No New Tax" Pledge. When he thought he needed to look more moderate to get elected governor in 2002, Romney's campaign mocked the pledge as "government by gimmickry." [Boston Globe, 1/5/07] As governor, Romney drastically raised fees and taxes.
New Mitt: Signs Pledge to Hide Tax Raising Record. This month, Romney signed the same "no new tax" pledge he refused to sign in 2002 to hide the fact that under his failed leadership, Bay Staters saw their tax burden increase by more than 5 percent, and Romney's cuts to local communities sent Massachusetts property taxes to their highest level in 25 years. [Massachusetts State-Local Tax Burden Compared to National Average (1970-2006), The Tax Foundation; Quincy Patriot Ledger, 12/16/05]

On the Bush Tax Cuts:
Old Mitt: Refuses to Publicly Endorse Bush Tax Cuts. Romney refused to endorse tax cuts at the heart of President Bush's economic program in 2003. Romney's spokesperson said that it's "just not a state matter." [Boston Globe, 4/11/03]
New Mitt: Brags About Support for Bush Tax Cuts. During a November 13, 2006 press conference held in Arizona, Romney outlined differences between himself and McCain. Romney said "he was quicker than McCain to endorse President Bush's tax cuts." [East Valley Sun, 11/14/06]

On Guns:
Old Mitt: Romney Bragged That His Views on Gun Control Were "Not Going to Make Me the Hero of the NRA." In 1994 and 2002, Romney supported the Brady Bill and the assault weapons ban, even bragging that his positions were "not going to make me the hero of the NRA." As governor, Romney signed a 2004 law making Massachusetts the first state to pass a permanent assault weapons ban. [Boston Globe, 1/14/06]
New Mitt: Emphasizing New Pro-Gun Stances, Misled The Voters About Whether He Himself Is A Gun-Owner. On January 12, Romney tried to highlight his newfound support for gun owners by heading to Orlando to tour one of the country's largest gun shows with Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association. On Wednesday he told the online The Glenn and Helen Show that states should "continue to ease regulations on gun owners" and claimed "I have a gun of my own." Later, Romney was forced to admit to reporters in Orlando that he in fact did not personally own any guns. [Boston Globe, 1/14/06]

On Abortion:
Old Mitt: Courted Endorsement From Pro-Choice Groups in 2002. During his 2002 campaign for governor, Romney reached out to Republican Majority for Choice to ask for its endorsement and later issued a press release highlighting that endorsement. Romney also completed a Planned Parenthood questionnaire in Apr '02, saying "yes" to a question about whether he supported "the substance of" Roe v. Wade, "yes" to "state funding of abortion services through Medicaid for low-income women" and "yes" to supporting "efforts to increase access to emergency contraception." Romney said on a NARAL questionnaire, "I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose." [Weekly Standard, 2/5/07].
New Mitt: Views Have "Evolved." "Romney says his anti-abortion views have 'evolved and deepened' since he took office, colored in part by the debate over embryonic stem cell research. 'In considering the issue of embryo cloning and embryo farming, I saw where the harsh logic of abortion can lead -- to the view of innocent new life as nothing more than research material or a commodity to be exploited,' Romney wrote in an opinion piece in Tuesday's Boston Globe.' He also said he believes each state should decide whether to allow abortion, rather than having the 'one size fits all' precedent of Roe v. Wade. [newsmax.com, 7/27/05, emphasis added]

On Gay Marriage:
Old Mitt: Opposed Federal Marriage Amendment, Promised to be Stronger Leader on Gay Rights Than Senator Ted Kennedy. Romney once opposed a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage and pledged to provide "more effective leadership" on establishing "full equality for America's gay and lesbian citizens" than Senator Ted Kennedy. [Boston Globe, 10/17/94]
New Mitt: Supports Constitutional Amendment, Even Worked to Block Same-Sex Couples From Adopting. Romney told the National Review Institute's Conservative Summit that he as "was unequivocal" on gay marriage, saying: "I opposed then, and do now, gay marriage and civil unions." [Newyorktimes.com, 1/28/07] Romney also now supports a constitutional amendment on marriage and tried to allow religious agencies to block adoptions to same-sex households. ["Transcript of Romney Address to Liberty Sunday," EvangelicalsforMitt.com, 10/16/06; Boston Globe, 3/16/06]

On His Political Heroes:
Old Mitt: Distanced Himself from Reagan in 1994 & 2002. Romney once claimed to be "an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush" who was "not trying to return to Reagan-Bush." [Boston Globe, 1/19/07]
New Mitt: Takes Every Opportunity to Call Himself a Reagan Republican. Romney now calls President Reagan his "hero" and praises "Ronald Reagan's brand of visionary and courageous leadership." [Boston Globe, 1/19/07] Romney even cited President Reagan in explaining his decision to flip-flop on abortion during a speech to the National Review Institute's Conservative Summit, saying: "On abortion, I wasn't always a Ronald Reagan conservative. Neither was Ronald Reagan, by the way." [Newyorktimes.com, 1/28/07]

Where have all the dollars gone?

2007-02-07T07:45:00.000-06:00

Billions in cash missing in Iraq. Is anyone really surprised. That's a lot of outsourcing.

When they find it (hah!) maybe the administration can use it to provide services to the poor and elderly they want to cut from this year's budget.

Oh wait. The poor and elderly rarely vote. Never mind.

Who will stop a Bush attack on Iran?

2007-02-02T10:10:00.000-06:00

As Marjorie Cohn points out, the warlords in the White House have been gearing up for an attack on Iran for the past four or five years.

She writes:

Congress has the responsibility to prevent Bush from attacking Iran. In view of congressional opposition to his war in Iraq, Bush will not likely ask permission to make war on Iran. We can expect Bush to provoke -- or even fabricate a la Tonkin Gulf -- an incident with Iran and then claim he's responding to Iranian aggression. Senior Pentagon officials reported in Wednesday's Los Angeles Times that Air Force and Navy fighter planes along the Iran-Iraq border may be used more aggressively. Bush will then try to bootstrap the September 2001 and October 2002 congressional authorizations for force in Afghanistan and Iraq respectively into consent to attack Iran.

Will Congress, with the Democrats holding the reins and with some recent Republican opposition to the Iraq fiasco, have the cojones to put a stop to Mad King George? Or will they continue to debate non-binding resolutions until he drags us all into the abyss?

Help defend the press

2007-01-30T10:35:00.000-06:00

Sarah Olson, an independent journalist and radio producer who lives and works in Oakland, CA, has been subpoenaed by the prosecution in the military trial of US Army 1st Lt. Ehren Watada. Watada is the highest ranking to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq.

What's wrong with this?

Sarah believes that journalists shouldn’t be asked to participate in government prosecutions, especially of political speech. To do so would erode the barrier between press and government, and turn reporters into the investigative arm of the government. It would stifle speech and control the free flow of information. Who would talk to Sarah again, knowing the government could force her into court to use their words against them? Once Sarah Olson takes the stand and starts to testify, she has diminished her ability to decline to answer questions that do intrude into unpublished work product.

Tell the U.S. Military to Dismiss the Subpoena of Journalist Sarah Olson

Are blog commenters entitled?

2007-01-16T13:42:00.000-06:00

Here's a couple of questions for you.

When you comment on a blog are you entitled to a response from the blog owner? If you do not respond to a comment does that make you less of a man?

Well, according to our old friend Diego (Yes, D.A., I figured out it was really you in another skin), a blog owner is required to respond to every comment on their blog regardless of whether the comment adds value or is just a physical manifestation of the commenter's mental masturbation.

Elsewhere on this site, D.A. (aka, diego from a previous life) made a comment on a post where he, hopefully purposefully, misunderstood the writer's intent. So, we chose to ignore the comment.

Not good enough for old D.A. (does that rhyme with Dumb Ass, by the way?). Oh, no, he had to come back and impugn our manhood; "be a man," he wrote. Tsk. Tsk.

Perhaps when he matures a bit and starts making sense, and making nice, we'll respond to his comments. Until then, we reserve the right not to respond to the rantings of a child.

Who is this Savage?

2007-01-10T13:51:00.000-06:00

We don't listen to right-wing rant radio shows so we had no idea who Michael Savage was until we saw this from Media Matters: Savage on Pelosi: "[Y]ou little weasel, you. You harridan, you"

Exerpt:

On the January 8 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage called Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) a "weasel," a "harridan," and a "lying little witch." Savage also asked of Pelosi: "How many different Botox treatments do you have to get till you realize that nobody believes you?" He then shifted his attention to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), suggesting that the reported "stink in New York" happened because "Barbara Boxer and her family had visited New York and opened up the bedroom door."

What makes people like this tick? Do they hate themselves so much that they have to spew their venom on others just so they can look at themselves in the mirror?

Do they really believe the crap they say, or is it all about pandering to the lowest common denominator for the sake of ratings?

We're sure he's a good Christian, too.

Anti-abortionists should put up or shut up

2007-01-06T08:28:00.000-06:00

The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to take up a bill next week that calls for federal funding of stem cell research. A similar measure, passed by Congress, died when the Republican-controlled House could not muster the necessary votes to override one of George Bush's rare vetoes.

Personally, we don't have a problem with anti-abortionists, even though we do not agree with their connection between stem cell research and abortion. America's a big country and has plenty of room for everyone's beliefs.

We do have a problem with with narrow-minded people who want to force their beliefs on everyone else without the courage to take personal action in support of their own causes.

Why are the anti-abortionists not standing in line ready to adopt the babies they so dearly want to protect? Why isn't there a national list of the so-called "Pro-Lifers" willing to take on the responsibility for the life for which the are so "pro."

If you are "pro-life" then be pro-life. Adopt an unwanted child. Show that you are not all talk and not action. Illustrate the courage of your convictions.

Until you do, you don't have a moral leg to stand on.

CNN confuses Obama with Osama

2007-01-02T10:38:00.000-06:00

From The Raw Story:

A Monday night broadcast of CNN's Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer confused America's "number one enemy" with one of America's most popular senators, RAW STORY has learned. CNN apologized for the error, which came after a series of incidents in recent months in which Illinois Democrat Senator Barack Obama was subtly or directly linked with militant Islamic personalities who have been hostile to the United States.

During a January 1st broadcast of Wolf Blitzer's nightly news program, a pre-commercial preview of the show's next segment included a story on the hunt for Al Qaeda's leadership. Over a photo of Osama Bin Laden and his second-in-command Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Blitzer stated, according to the transcript, "Plus, a new year, but the same mission. Will 2007 bring any new changes in the hunt for Osama bin Laden?"

But instead of asking "Where's Osama?" the graphic over the two Islamists read "Where's Obama?" referencing the surname of popular Illinois Democratic Senator Barack Obama.

A later segment of the show, which took up the topic of the 2008 presidential election, did discuss Senator Obama's political prospects if he chooses to run for president.

Blitzer apologized during this morning's coverage of the Gerald Ford funeral.

"I just want to make a correction, an apology, Soledad, for what we did yesterday. In 'The Situation Room,' we had a bad graphic," Blitzer said in a transcript delivered to RAW STORY by CNN's public relations staff. "We were doing a piece on the hunt for Osama Bin Laden in this new year 2007. Unfortunately, instead of saying "where is Osama," it said "where is Obama." I'm going to be calling Senator Barack Obama to make a personal apology."

Is Ford responsible for current mess?

2006-12-30T06:29:00.000-06:00

Admittedly, we never forgave Gerald Ford for his pardon of Richard Nixon which resulted in denying the United States closure for the Watergate era. Now that he has died, many are praising Ford for reuniting the country when in fact his actions had just the opposite effect over the long haul.

Robert Parry sums it up nicely:

Symbolically at least, Ford represented a repudiation of Nixon’s imperial excesses. Since Ford’s death on Dec. 26, that contrast between Nixon and Ford has been the theme of many eulogies, effusive praise for a common man of the Midwest who helped heal the nation’s bitter divisions from Watergate and Vietnam.

But in hindsight, Ford’s actions in the White House may have done more to salvage the idea of an imperial presidency than to shatter it. From the perspective of three decades later, the two-plus years of the Ford administration could be viewed more like a period of strategic retreat for the imperial presidency than a return to the traditional checks and balances envisioned by the Founders.

Indeed, given Ford’s appointment of Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and George H.W. Bush to key jobs, one could argue that the Ford administration served as an incubator for the imperial presidency’s rebirth – even if he personally opposed it.

Gerald Ford -- the "accidental president" who spawned the current crisis -- accidentally, we're sure.

Where are the real Republicans?

2006-12-29T08:03:00.000-06:00

A. Alexander has an interesting piece at the Progressive Daily Beacon entitled "Neocrazies and Their Delusions."

Here is his lede:

The right-wing zealots and radical Republicans, especially the Neocrazies, have a pretty sick and demented way of screaming talking points back and forth and over and again. They continue to engage in this manner until convincing their simple and weak minded followers and themselves that their own lies and delusions are facts. One of the more prominent cases of self-delusion involves the notion that we are mysteriously engaged in something like World War Three. At least that is what the certifiably insane Republican extremists from Glenn Beck to Newt Gingrich would like us to believe. Even worse than the delusions and illusions, is the fact that there is no way of convincing these extremists that their facts-challenged ideas aren't based in reality.

His rhetoric is a bit over the top for our tastes, but in spite of that minor flaw no rational person who has been paying attention for the past five years can argue with his point.

But the question is what happened to the real Republicans? You know, the sane ones. The Republicans that believe in less government, balanced federal budgets, diplomacy, etc.

Why have they let this happen to their party? Are they frightened of what the current party leadership will do to them if they speak out?

Is A. Alexander right and the Neo-Cons are really crazy? Are sensible Republicans worried that the Neo-Cons will stop at nothing to remain in power?

Please come back and resume control of your party. America needs you.

ABC Named Misinformer of 2006

2006-12-28T08:41:00.000-06:00

Each year MediaMatters names the misinformer of the year. This year it's an entire new network -- ABC.

Exerpt:

In October 24 appearances on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor and Hannity & Colmes, ABC News political director Mark Halperin claimed that the "old media" -- broadcast news outlets and major newspapers -- were "biased against conservatives; there's no doubt about it." He stated, "I think we've got a chance in these last two weeks [before the then-upcoming midterm elections] to prove to conservatives that we understand their grievances. We're going to try to do better." But if "try[ing] to do better" to not appear "biased against conservatives" meant offering viewers conservative misinformation, Halperin shouldn't have worried; a review of dozens of items by Media Matters for America identifying and correcting conservative misinformation from ABC suggests that Halperin's network was "try[ing] to do better" throughout 2006.

Our favorite magnet

2006-12-12T09:44:00.000-06:00

BuzzFlash is offering a 'fridge magnet that makes a great gift for all Republicans.

Dems not much better

2006-12-12T09:40:00.000-06:00

OK, diego, this one's for you:

From OpEdNews.com:

We Won't Get Fooled Again

By Timothy V. Gatto

I've been reading the different articles headlining OpEdNews.com and I read articles by people that believe that we have won a victory over the right. We have, but not a victory that's final, or even in place yet. If you are only saying that the Right Wing Conservatives are not in the majority, then yes, we have won. If you are saying we now have a Congress that can lead this country back to what it was twelve years ago, you are going to be very disappointed.

Of the Democrats that have stayed in Congress and haven't lost their seats, there aren't many there that are worth their salt. Most voted to fund this brainless idiots war, and not one of them have raised the point that campaign financing is being done almost entirely by corporate and special interest groups which is the prime reason that our elected officials don't have to count on the people to bankroll their political campaigns. They have a huge war chest that is given to them by people that never want campaign finance reform to come to pass.

Just to point out again how much it cost's to run a political party, the Unions gave the DNC 70 million dollars just to get out the vote. Think about that for a minute. 70 million dollars in contributions just to get out the vote! That was just money that only matched what the Republicans had. The Democrats had to promise the Unions that they would fight for unions that used to make up 33% of the American Workforce and now, because of the years the right wing conservatives have had Washington, only make up 8% of the workforce. The Democrats and the Unions haven't worked like this for years, but their common disgust with the Bush administration and its rubber-stamping Congress made them get together. That's the way that it always should have been. The Unions should be siding with the Democrats and the rich with the Republicans. Nowadays, you can't tell a Republican from a Democrat, you don't need too.

The rest ...

Mad King George

2006-12-08T09:35:00.000-06:00

Once again Doug Thompson at Capitol Hill Blue nails it:

At some point, someone somewhere will have to stop talking about what we should do in Iraq and, instead, just do it.

While the politicians, pundits and experts pondered the release Wednesday of the Iraq Study Group's long-awaited report, 11 more American soldiers died in that stupid war launched by a mentally-ill President under false pretenses.

The death toll for Americans stands at more than 2,900 and is closing in on 3,000. About the only thing any of us knows for sure is that many more will die before America extricates itself from a war it can't win and never should have launched.

And let's not forget the thousands upon thousands of Iraqi civilians who have died and continue to die. Some estimates put the civilian death toll at more than 100,000, a figure that the United States, of course, disputes. But the bottom line is that too many Americans and Iraqis have lost their lives because of George W. Bush's madness and the madness must stop.

The Rest>>>

What's the matter with George?

2006-12-04T06:17:00.000-06:00

Two separate writers, writing in very distinct styles, have come to the same conclusion: Our president seems to have misplaced reality.

Paul Craig Roberts is blunt and in you face. Is President Bush Sane? he asks.

Frank Rich on the other hand is more subtle, befitting of a writer of his stature. His piece is entitled, Has He Started Talking to the Walls?

The answer to Roberts' question is, "No, he is not sane."

The answer to Rich's question is, "We wouldn't be surprised."

NSA phone spying passes muster

2006-11-28T08:04:00.000-06:00

Seems that the electronic eavesdropping program by the National Security Agency has gotten rave reviews by an oversight board.

This from the Associated Press via startribune.com:

WASHINGTON -- After a delay of more than a year, a government board appointed to guard Americans' privacy and civil liberties during the war on terror has been told the inner workings of the government's electronic eavesdropping program.

Members say they were impressed by the protections.

The briefing for the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board had been delayed because President Bush was concerned — after several press leaks — about widening the circle of people who knew the exact details of the secret eavesdropping program.

The board, created by Congress but appointed by Bush, focused on other classified work since it was named in spring 2005 but it continued to press for a formal briefing by the National Security Agency.

A breakthrough was reached in recent days and the five members were briefed by senior officials during Thanksgiving week.

Board members told The Associated Press they were impressed by the safeguards the government has built into the NSA's monitoring of phone calls and computer transmissions and wished the administration could tell the public more about them to ease distrust.

"If the American public, especially civil libertarians like myself, could be more informed about how careful the government is to protect our privacy while still protecting us from attacks, we'd be more reassured," said Lanny Davis, a former Clinton White House lawyer who is the board's lone liberal Democrat.

But how can we trust them? The NSA briefed the board and they are certainly not without an agenda.

The current administration has lied to the American people so often that when they ever get around to telling the truth we'll have to duck all the flying pigs.

Sorry, folks, we don't buy it for a minute.

Bush Lies

2006-11-28T07:24:00.000-06:00

From Capitol Hill Blue:

Here at Capitol Hill Blue we have a simple test to determine whether or not President George W. Bush is lying: If his lips move he's lying.

OK, that's the smartass answer but in these troubled political times it is possible to be both a smartass and correct. Bush lies out his ass so much that an occasion when he actually told the truth would be front page news.

Koppel on Bush

2006-11-16T16:05:00.000-06:00

Ted Koppel had this to say about Dubya's trip to Vietnam this week:

Thirty-five years ago, he joined the Texas Air National Guard to stay out of Vietnam. And now, he's going to Vietnam to stay out of Washington.

One thing about the president, he takes Harry Truman's statement to heart--Bush certainly knows how to stay out of the kitchen.

Lincoln Chafee not sure what he is

2006-11-10T10:01:00.000-06:00

Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee, a moderate Republican defeated in a reelection bid, may be considering leaving the Red party, unsure of where he fits.

Chafee lost to Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse in a race seen as a referendum on President Bush and the GOP. On Thursday, he was asked whether he would stick with the Republican Party or become an independent or Democrat.

“I haven’t made any decisions. I just haven’t even thought about where my place is,” Chafee said at a news conference. When pressed on whether his comments indicated he might leave the GOP, he replied: “That’s fair.”

Too bad, the crazies took over his party and he got caught in the crossfire.

Perhaps if he had stood up to the zealots of the far right he would still have his job.

Advice to Cap D Leaders

2006-11-09T13:44:00.000-06:00

Doug Thompson over at Capitol Hill Blue has some pretty good advice for the leadership of the Capital D's:

A recommendation for incoming Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid: Don't fall for Dubya's act. He's a venomous political snake who will turn and bite at the first opportunity because that's what snakes do.

Don't turn your backs on him, don't trust him for a nanosecond and don't believe for an instant that he serves any interest but his own.

Will Things Really Change with Dems in Charge?

2006-11-08T12:20:00.000-06:00

Started to write a post about how things will not change a whole lot with the Democrats in charge, but I found myself wandering through a dark forest and the more I wrote the more depressed I became.

So, to hell with it.

Things won't change. Only the players. The rest of us just have to suck it up and try to survive.

Bush shoulda taken a vacation

2006-11-06T11:55:00.000-06:00

Robert "I'll-out-any-CIA-agent-they-tell-me-to" Novak had this to say in his The Washington Post column yesterday:

A prominent Republican who asked me not to use his name said the last effective play by the White House came at the end of the summer when it defended its war policy. Then, in all seriousness, he proposed this course of action should have been taken by Bush: "The president should go on a 2 1/2 -week vacation, and when he gets back, go right into the hospital for minor surgery. In other words, he should have disappeared."

Why stop at 2 1/2 weeks? We say he ought to go on a 2 1/2-year vacation.

But then his handlers would miss him.

Let's take the idea just a bit further and send all politicians in DC on an extended vacation. Hell, they sure haven't done much in the past six years except strip citizen rights and make the corporations richer.

Pickin' and Choosin'

2006-11-03T09:25:00.000-06:00

Our Dear Leader is very careful about what states he campaigns in this time around.

But who can blame him?

With an extremely low approval rating, responsibily for the deaths of thousands (some say hundreds of thousands), and other crimes against humanity, why would he go somewhere he isn't welcome?

Some are fearful that if the Dems gain a majority in one or both houses of Congress, they will begin to investigate the Liar-in-Chief, which could lead to impeachment proceedings. The would-be Dem leader, Nancy Pelosi has already said she would not allow that, so they really have nothing to worry about. Unless, they think she's lying.

We don't think impeachment should be considered, either. Let's save him, and the rest of his administration, for an international war crimes trial.

Best Wishes to Alex, Stephanie

2006-11-02T10:33:00.000-06:00

Our pal Alex, over at SoonerThought is taking a couple of weeks off for his honeymoon with his new bride Stephanie.

We send the couple our most heartfelt best wishes for a long, happy and prosperous life together.

The wedding's not until this weekend, but what the hell, he won't see this for a while.

Dems won't change Iraq policy

2006-10-31T11:28:00.000-06:00

As Capitol Hill Blue points out, there will be no big change in the U.S. Iraq policy if the Capital D's gain control of Congress.

Hell, they can't agree on anything else, what makes anyone think they'll agree on the Iraq quagmire.

Drug Testing Librarians

2006-10-26T09:16:00.000-05:00

Check this out from Bill Maher:

They can't have very nice lives - librarians. It's like being a teacher, only without the opportunities for dating, because the only kids you meet are the nerds. So the last thing America's shsssshing minority needs is the indignity of a urine test. But that's just what we're doing. I'm not sure this is the best use of our time.

The last time a librarian did something really stupid and reckless on drugs was when Laura married George.

Last year, Florida's Levy County introduced drug testing for library volunteers. Whose average age is between 60 and 85. The volunteers were required to drive to another city - Gainesville - and urinate in a cup "within hearing distance" of a laboratory monitor. That'll teach 'em for offering to work for free. "Okay, grandma, now get pissing. And I'd better hear a nice even unbroken stream."

Read the rest of the story.

No change a comin'

2006-10-23T10:22:00.000-05:00

Republicans are getting scared they might just lose control of Congress.

Democrats are wanting to make sure the right-wing hanky-panky from recent past elections wil lnot continue this time.

But will things really change if control of Congress goes to the Dems?

What assurances will they make that they won't fall into the same old habits that brought about the 1994 Republican Rebellion?

What assurances have the Republicans made that they will change their ways if they retain control?

It's all bullshit, folks, no matter who's in charge.

Until we, the people, decide we have had enough, nothing will change.

We have the government we deserve.

What fools we are.

The NY Times may be on Bush's List

2006-10-19T14:24:00.000-05:00

Although The New York Times says the latest Bush Law (Mililtary Tribunal Commissions Act) does not apply to American citizens, they better mind their P's and Q's.

Read Robert Parry's article at ConsortiumNews.com.

Exerpt:

The Times also might want to take note of the curious provision in the law that would jail “any person” who “collects or attempts to collect information by clandestine means or while acting under false pretenses, for the purpose of conveying such information to an enemy of the United States.”

Since the Bush administration and its political allies often have accused the New York Times of collecting and publishing information, from confidential sources, that is helpful to U.S. enemies – for instance, the stories about Bush’s secret wiretapping program – this provision arguably could apply to Times reporters and editors.

Who doesn't think certain Times reporters and editors wouldn't be the first to go?

Is this the end for Keith Olbermann?

2006-10-19T12:42:00.000-05:00

Last night Keith Olbermann spent the last 10 minutes of his program, Countdown, dressing down George Bush for his continual attacks on the American people and the U.S. Constitution.

Exerpt:

We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who has said it is unacceptable to compare anything this country has ever done to anything the terrorists have ever done.

We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who has insisted again that “the United States does not torture. It’s against our laws and it’s against our values” and who has said it with a straight face while the pictures from Abu Ghraib Prison and the stories of Waterboarding figuratively fade in and out, around him.

We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who may now, if he so decides, declare not merely any non-American citizens “unlawful enemy combatants” and ship them somewhere—anywhere -- but may now, if he so decides, declare you an “unlawful enemy combatant” and ship you somewhere - anywhere.

And if you think this hyperbole or hysteria, ask the newspaper editors when John Adams was president or the pacifists when Woodrow Wilson was president or the Japanese at Manzanar when Franklin Roosevelt was president.

And if you somehow think habeas corpus has not been suspended for American citizens but only for everybody else, ask yourself this: If you are pulled off the street tomorrow, and they call you an alien or an undocumented immigrant or an “unlawful enemy combatant”—exactly how are you going to convince them to give you a court hearing to prove you are not? Do you think this attorney general is going to help you?

Today comes word that NBC Universal is planning a massive cost-saving measure including a reduction of 5 percent of its workforce. The last paragraph of The Washington Post article reads:

NBC's cost-saving plan involves laying off people from the company's 11 news divisions, including on-air talent [emphasis added].

Will this give the suits at General Electric an excuse to silence Mr. Olbermann?

Here's the content of an e-mail we just sent to the folks at Countdown:

We've just heard about the impending layoffs at NBC Universal and are wondering about future of the best damn news show and the best damn news anchor on television.

Mr. Olbermann was the first newsman to state the obvious about the condition in which we find our country and to criticize the current administration for their lies and criminal behavior.

If Countdown is cancelled and Mr. Olbermann fired for speaking the truth, that may well be the proverbial straw ...

Can you give us any reassurance that Countdown and Mr. Olbermann will survive the purge, or do we continue our plans for a massive consumer boycot of NBC and all products produced by General Electric?

Anyone care to join the Movement?

Is Cheney Insane?

2006-10-18T09:04:00.000-05:00

Dead-Eye Dick had this to say to Rush Limbaugh's robots the other day:

Well, I think there's some natural level of concern out there because in fact, you know, it wasn't over instantaneously. It's been a little over three years now since we went into Iraq, so I don't think it's surprising that people are concerned.

On the other hand, this government has only been in office about five months, five or six months now. They're off to a good start. It is difficult, no question about it, but we've now got over 300,000 Iraqis trained and equipped as part of their security forces. They've had three national elections with higher turnout than we have here in the United States. If you look at the general overall situation, they're doing remarkably well.

It's still very, very difficult, very tough. Nobody should underestimate the extent to which we're engaged there with this sort of, at present, the "major front" of the war on terror. That's what Osama bin Laden says, and he's right.

Now he's quoting Osama bin Laden and saying "he's right."

Let's not forget, Creepy Dick, that Iraq was only a minor player in your "War on Terra" until you fools unlawfully invaded that country.

Your criminal behavior has plunged this country into debt, killed and maimed thousands of our citizens, caused thousand of deaths on innocent Iraqi men, women and children and you have the gall to say things are "doing remarkably well?"

You are obviously insane or completely evil, or both!

It's way past time for you and your puppet, George W. Bush, the Republican Congress and their Democratic enablers to go.

How about a long vacation in one of those secret detention centers you are having built ...

Note: If there are no other posts to this blog, tell my wife and kids that I love them very much.

Why is Foley waiting to name alleged abuser?

2006-10-18T07:34:00.000-05:00

We find it very curious that disgraced former Florida Congressman Mark Foley kept silent about his alleged sexual abuse by a Catholic priest 30 years ago until he was caught with his hands in the congressional page cookie jar.

Admittedly, we have no direct experience as sexual abuse victims and do not know the pain and torment they must endure. However, we do find it just a bit convenient that this information comes out now.

To our minds, it's a great disservice to the many true abuse victims if Foley is merely playing a public relations game in a misguided attempt to deflect from his own perversions. And if it is true, why not just come right out and name the abuser instead of stringing it out with cryptic news conferences by his attorney?

If there is another pervert out there, name him and get him away from other children.

Bill mocks rule of law

2006-10-18T05:31:00.000-05:00

Found this news release and thought it deserved to be printed in its entirety.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE OCTOBER 17, 2006 3:07 PM	CONTACT: Elizabeth Holtzman Stephen Kent for The Hon. Elizabeth Holtzman 845-758-0097, or skent@kentcom.com

Statement by Elizabeth Holtzman on Granting Immunity to President Bush Under the Military Tribunals Law

NEW YORK - October 17 - The following is a statement by The Hon. Elizabeth Holtzman about President Bush signing the military tribunals bill into law today. The new law not only guts detainee protections of the War Crimes Act and Geneva Conventions, but perhaps most significantly and least well known, grants a stealth pardon for President Bush and high cabinet officials by quietly conferring on them immunity from prosecution for detainee abuse crimes like the ones committed at Abu Ghraib, retroactive to 9/11/01. Holtzman is a former four-term Congresswoman from New York who served on the House Judiciary Committee during Nixon's impeachment. She co-authored the 1973 special prosecutor statute, and has co-written a new book (with Cynthia L. Cooper) analyzing illegal, unconstitutional and/or impeachable actions of the current administration, "The Impeachment of George W. Bush" ( http://www.impeachbushbook.com ). Her recent op-ed analyzing under the new military tribunals law grant of immunity to President Bush is posted here. ----- Statement by Elizabeth Holtzman on Granting Immunity to President Bush Under the Military Tribunals Law "Today will go down in the annals of infamy. By signing the military tribunals bill into law, President Bush has taken this country down a long dark road of shame. "The bill countenances abuse of detainees in defiance of the Geneva Conventions and the country's past moral values and it suspends habeas corpus in defiance of the constitution. As bad as these features is the bill's grant of a pardon to President Bush and his top Cabinet officials for any crimes they may have committed under the War Crimes Act of 1996. "When a president violates the country's criminal laws and then gets a secret grant of immunity for those crimes, he makes a mockery of the rule of law. Then all lawlessness is permissible. "This provision in the bill creates a culture of impunity for torture and abuse of detainees. It was slipped into the bill in secret, without hearings or debate. Most members of Congress, most reporters and most Americans have no idea that this has happened. "By doing this the President has stuck a horrific blow at our basic democratic values and our constitutional system. "Instead of pardoning himself with the complicity of Congress, the President should be making public what acts of prisoner abuse he authorized the CIA to undertake or what acts of theirs he ratified."

Reid caught with hand in the cookie jar

2006-10-17T08:56:00.000-05:00

Politicians are all the same regardless of political affiliation.

Take Harry Reid, the Democrats leader in the Senate. He fails to report transfer of property on which he eventually makes a bundle and uses campaign funds for personal expenses.

So, how does he deal with? By amending his ethics report and reimbursing the campaign for his personal expenses. As if this wipes the slate clean.

We've said it before and we'll say it again: Throw all the bums out.

Walton for Nobel Peace Prize?

2006-10-17T05:37:00.000-05:00

We live on too thin a margin to pay The New York Times for the "privilege" of reading John Tierney, but this blurb caught our eye:

I don't want to begrudge the Nobel Peace Prize won last week by the Grameen Bank and its founder, Muhammad Yunus. But has he done more good than Sam Walton?

Sam Walton for a Nobel Peace Prize? Could someone with more resources than sense please subscribe to TimesSelect and let us know if this is Tierney's argument.

Granted, most of the exploitation by Wal-Mart comes from his greedy heirs after Sam's death, but a Nobel?

Too much.

Corporations flexing anti-union muscles in China

2006-10-13T11:18:00.000-05:00

Not only have American corporations exported all the jobs, now they are exporting their hatred of paying workers decent wages.

We need a Jonathan E.

From The New York Times:

SHANGHAI, Oct. 12 — China is planning to adopt a new law that seeks to crack down on sweatshops and protect workers’ rights by giving labor unions real power for the first time since it introduced market forces in the 1980’s.

The move, which underscores the government’s growing concern about the widening income gap and threats of social unrest, is setting off a battle with American and other foreign corporations that have lobbied against it by hinting that they may build fewer factories here.

The proposed rules are being considered after the Chinese Communist Party endorsed a new doctrine that will put greater emphasis on tackling the severe side effects of the country’s remarkable growth.

Whether the foreign corporations will follow through on their warnings is unclear because of the many advantages of being in China — even with restrictions and higher costs that may stem from the new law. It could go into effect as early as next May.

It would apply to all companies in China, but its emphasis is on foreign-owned companies and the suppliers to those companies.

Impeach them all

2006-10-12T13:01:00.000-05:00

We received an e-mailed plea from impeachbush.org seeking donations to help them place an ad in The New York Times.

Would love to help them out, but we operate on such a thin margin there is nothing left after covering the basics.

Besides, we don't think Ramsey Clark and his group go far enough.

How about this: Impeach not only Bush, but Cheney and every member of Congress, too?

Doesn't matter if they are Republican, Democrat or Independent, our "representatives" have done nothing but drag this country closer to the brink of financial ruin.

How many of us can really say we are better off now than we were six years ago? What kind of future are our children going to have?

I can hear the Capitol D's whining, "We're the minority and the mean old Republicans won't let us get anything done."

Well , boo-freaking-hoo. We don't believe you.

You suck at the same corporate teat as the Republicans, and are too spineless to stand up for those that sent you to Washington in the first place. So you deserve the same fate.

The old guy greeting people at Wal-Mart can do a better job.

Toss them all out! Every last one of them.

Throw all the bums out

2006-10-11T09:48:00.000-05:00

We're with Doug on this one.

And I fear that Democrats, if they gain control of the House and/or the Senate will fall back into their old habits of catering to their brand of special interests and putting the perks of power above the needs of the country.

The system is corrupt and rotten to the core and it has taken a long time to get there. The moral decay comes from both political parties as well as an apathetic and self-centered populace that sat out too many elections and allowed the infection to spread.

An answer to America's ills may no longer be available at the ballot box or through the current system that controls our government, our lives and our destiny.

It may be too late to trust the system. It has let us down too many times.

How to bust the unions

2006-10-04T09:09:00.000-05:00

Seems the Republican-controlled National Labor Relations Board has figured out how to do away with unions once and for all--make everyone a supervisor.

From the Los Angeles Times:

Under federal law, employees defined as supervisors aren't entitled to legal protections ensuring their right to join unions.

The labor board's definition could be applied to other kinds of workers, particularly in the fast-growing service sector, where unions have made some gains in recent years even as overall union membership has declined nationally, labor experts said.

Even before the ruling, many employers had classified more of their workers as supervisors, in part to avoid paying them overtime. For example, many employees of restaurants, retailers and other businesses have been classified as "shift supervisors" even though most of their duties — such as waiting on tables or cashiering — are indistinguishable from those they supervise.

Yakov Smirnoff said it best: "What a country!"

What's wrong with those fools?

2006-09-29T09:33:00.000-05:00

Congress has passed the bill denying basic rights to suspected terrorists which makes it OK to torture prisoners and to use "evidence" from the horrible tactics against them.

Is it that far of a jump to think these fools won't decide to expand this travesty to include U.S. citizens who pose a political threat to their rule? We think not.

We remember a discussion we had with a die-hard Bushevik shortly after the passage of the first so-called Patriot Act. He asked us, "Just what right did you personally lose?"

Well, Bob, when the rights of some are taken away, all Americans lose.

We had better all come to our senses soon and wake up from this nightmare.

Just because you're paranoid ...

2006-09-27T10:00:00.000-05:00

From Capitol Hill Blue:

Some Americans are suspicious that recent steep declines in gasoline prices might be the result of political manipulation, since the savings at the gas pump come just weeks before critical midterm US elections.

Earlier this year, news of record oil profits led many US consumers to believe that energy companies had deliberately kept prices artificially high to improve their bottom line.

Now gas prices have fallen for several consecutive weeks, and recent polls show that consumers have a new suspicion -- that the price break is meant to give a boost to a US president and Republican Congress who had fallen out of favor with voters.

A Gallup poll last week found that two in five respondents believe administration has deliberately manipulated gas prices to coincide with the fall campaign season.

If true, no surprise

2006-09-22T12:36:00.000-05:00

Bill O'Reilly claims the FBI told him he was on an al Qaeda death list.

Of course, he is the only one to believe so, but that's never stopped him in the past.

And if it were true, would anyone be surprised?

Politicians and AD/HD

2006-09-22T09:50:00.000-05:00

It seems that politicians are among the groups "most likely to exhibit signs of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD)," according to a survey commissioned by the Attention Deficit Disorder Association.

While this goes a long way to explain why our elected officials don't seem to be listening to what the voters want, it does not shed any light on why politicians - right, left and in the middle - seem to lose their conscience once they take office.

You know what they say, "Money talks, conscience walks."

Molly on George

2006-09-20T10:13:00.000-05:00

Gotta love Molly Ivins. She has a way of saying what many of us are thinking. Take this exerpt from her latest piece on Bush's news conference last week:

Last Friday’s Rose Garden press conference seemed so awful I thought it worth wading through it again to see what set him off. Maybe if you saw it on television, it seemed better. Perhaps his banter with reporters works better on TV. But I left with the impression that this is a spoiled man whose frustration level when someone disagrees with him is that of a 3-year-old and that he’s the last person you want to see operating under a lot of stress because he doesn’t handle it well.

Amen, Molly, amen.

Yoo Who?

2006-09-18T05:26:00.000-05:00

John Yoo is a former assistant deputy attorney general during W's first term, so it is not surprising that he would be an apologist for the boy(like) king. His writing is typical of the thinking of the entire Bush administration: if you don't like history, rewrite it.

Check out Glenn Greenwald's response.

What the world has come to

2006-09-17T12:09:00.000-05:00

This from MSNBC:

MOGADISHU, Somalia - An Italian nun was shot dead at a hospital by Somali gunmen Sunday, hours after a leading Muslim cleric condemned Pope Benedict XVI for his remarks on Islam and violence.

The nun, who was not immediately identified, was shot in the back at S.O.S. Hospital in northern Mogadishu by two gunmen, said Mohamed Yusuf, a doctor at the facility, which serves mothers and children. The nun’s bodyguard and a hospital worker were also killed, doctors said.

O.K. Did anything in particular jump out at you?

How about "nun’s bodyguard"?

Why does a nun need a bodyguard? Why would you put yourself in a place where you would need a bodyguard to do your god's work?

This is one sick world.

Guess the October Surprise

2006-09-15T09:02:00.000-05:00

BuzzFlash is predicting that the capture of Osama bin Laden will be the "October Surprise" this year compliments of Karl Rove.

Voice your speculation.

Our opinion is that capturing bin Laden is not in the Republican playbook. They will need him in the run-up to the 2008 presidential election.

No, the October Surprise will not be a surprise at all. Our prediction is that the Capital D's will once again shoot themselves in the foot and the Repubs will continue to control both houses of Congress.

Time will tell.

Don't Legalize Torture

2006-09-14T11:46:00.000-05:00

human rights first is sponsoring a campaign to stop Congress from approving Bush's plans to legalize torture. The Bush proposal is wrong on so many fronts that it makes us dizzy just thinking about them.

Join the fight!

Boehner's Boner

2006-09-12T16:34:00.000-05:00

If it was the intention of House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, to inflame the Democrats and drive a deeper wedge between the parties, this quote form today's news conference will get the job done:

I wonder if they're more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people. They certainly don't want to take the terrorists on and defeat them.

Like most of his ilk, they have no redeeming social value and should be banned from public office for life.

Will the Capitol D's take him head on? Don't hold your breath.

God help us all

2006-09-12T08:55:00.000-05:00

This from Doug Thompson at Capitol Hill Blue is scary stuff: The face of a madman

The end of the 'docudrama' controversy

2006-09-09T08:04:00.000-05:00

Read this from MediaMatters about ABC's The Path to 9/11 and you will not need to read anything further.

It is obviously a political ploy and everyone should beware.

What is Karl Rove doing that he doesn't want us to know about? What are the Neo-Cons planning now?

We don't trust any politicians, and the current administration and Republican-controlled Congress are at the top of our no-trust-o-meter.

Watch your backs.

Responsibility Equals Resignation

2006-08-30T09:11:00.000-05:00

I take full responsibility for the federal government's response, and
a year ago I made a pledge that we will learn the lessons of Katrina
and that we will do what it takes to help you recover.
- George W. Bush

OK, Mr. President, if you want the responsibility, then the honorable thing for you to do is resign.

Oh, and while you're at it, take the rest of you administration with you. It's the patriotic thing to do.

At least one judge has read the Constitution

2006-08-17T16:25:00.000-05:00

OK, we finally have a judge who has read the Constitution and has ruled that the Bush administration is breaking the law and violating the rights of us all.

The next big question is when the Congress will wake up and begin hearings that will lead to the end of this Neo-Con nightmare.

Short answer: probably never since they are the proverbial "unidicted co-conspirators." (Boy, that term takes us back.) Or at the very least they are enablers.

This country is going to hell in a handbasket, and out elected representatives and the Supreme Court are toting the wicker.

Is there any hope? The cynic in us says no; there is way too much money being made by too many people with the way things are now.

It will take a major revolution in this country and we don't believe the majority of Americans have the stomach for it, regardless of what's being done to them.

I'm not talking about an armed insurection; more of an evolution of the mind set of the masses. Electing people based on what they do, not on what they say. Voting on the ways things really are, not on the way the people are told they are.

Let's face it; we're all lazy and look for the easy way out. Don't rock the boat, someone may get wet.

Well, all of us are already getting a soaking.

We say, "Rock On, Brother!"

Capitol D's Have Chance to Prove their Mettle

2006-08-13T08:37:00.000-05:00

OK, Capitol D's, here's your big chance to gain the upper hand and actually show you have what it takes to be leaders.

William Greider had this to say at The Nation:

An evil symbiosis does exist between Muslim terrorists and American politicians, but it is not the one Republicans describe. The jihadists need George W. Bush to sustain their cause. His bloody crusade in the Middle East bolsters their accusation that America is out to destroy Islam. The president has unwittingly made himself the lead recruiter of willing young martyrs.

More to the point, it is equally true that Bush desperately needs the terrorists. They are his last frail hope for political survival. They divert public attention, at least momentarily, from his disastrous war in Iraq and his shameful abuses of the Constitution. The "news" of terror--whether real or fantasized--reduces American politics to its most primitive impulses, the realm of fear-and-smear where George Bush is at his best.

Are you going to let the Bushiters get away with this again? Are you going to show backbone for once in standing up to the lies and distortions? Or do we still need to find another way?

The ball's in your court, Capitol D's. Show us what you got.

Will Capitol D's Jump on the Bandwagon

2006-08-10T11:58:00.000-05:00

The United States dodged another terrorist bullet when the UK broke up the "Liquid Gang," but Bush says we're still at risk.

How long do you think it will be before the Capitol D's join with the Repugnacants in adding to the so-called Patriot Act and making the loss of freedom permanent?

Well at least they're on vacation, so we have a few more weeks to enjoy what little liberty we have left.

Who are these idiots?

2006-08-07T20:26:00.000-05:00

According to a new poll, nearly half of U.S. citizens believe Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

As reported in Common Dreams:

Half of America apparently still thinks so, a new poll finds, and experts see a raft of reasons why: a drumbeat of voices from talk radio to die-hard bloggers to the Oval Office, a surprise headline here or there, a rallying around a partisan flag, and a growing need for people, in their own minds, to justify the war in Iraq.

People tend to become "independent of reality" in these circumstances, says opinion analyst Steven Kull.

The reality in this case is that after a 16-month, $900-million-plus investigation, the U.S. weapons hunters known as the Iraq Survey Group declared that Iraq had dismantled its chemical, biological and nuclear arms programs in 1991 under U.N. oversight. That finding in 2004 reaffirmed the work of U.N. inspectors who in 2002-03 found no trace of banned arsenals in Iraq.

Despite this, a Harris Poll released July 21 found that a full 50 percent of U.S. respondents _ up from 36 percent last year _ said they believe Iraq did have the forbidden arms when U.S. troops invaded in March 2003, an attack whose stated purpose was elimination of supposed WMD. Other polls also have found an enduring American faith in the WMD story.

The stupidity of the American people never ceases to amaze us. The news report said the timing of the survey could play a part.

Two weeks before the survey, two Republican lawmakers, Pennsylvania's Sen. Rick Santorum and Michigan's Rep. Peter Hoekstra, released an intelligence report in Washington saying 500 chemical munitions had been collected in Iraq since the 2003 invasion.

No doubt about it; this country has the government it deserves. We started to write leadership, but that's something that's been lacking here, on both sides of the aisle, since the Supreme Court coronated King George.

Rightwing Speakers Profiled

2006-08-03T12:44:00.000-05:00

Having graduated high school nearly forty years ago, your editor may be excused for coming to this table a bit late, but we just discovered Campus Progress.

One of our favorite features of this Web site is Know Your Right-Wing Speakers. Here you will find profiles of such well-know blowhards such as Ann Coldfish, Rush Limberger, James Doughboy, Michelle Mannequin and David Whore O'witch.

OK. We made the names up in an attempt at humor, but you know who we mean.

Selected Exerpts:

Dr. Laura Schlessinger, by her account, “teaches, preaches, and nags about morals, values, and ethics” and has been doing so for thirty years. She condemns everything from homosexuality to working mothers to public education. In one of her more vitriolic columns, she wrote that her purpose is “to deal in truths and values about life, love, death, responsibilities, character, religion and general, everyday behavior.” Like a number of right-wing mouthpieces, Dr. Laura’s popularity seems more the result of her willingness to say things no one else will than any kind of real expertise in the subjects on which she moralizes.

Ted Nugent, The Motor City Madman, is an anomaly of colossal proportions. He’s managed to fuse a 38-year rock‘n’roll career with a zeal for hunting, extreme gun-nuttiness and a good-ol’-boy-on-speed approach to politics, patriotism, and women. The result: A self-righteous right-wing rock star who’s now better known for his dogmatic, offensive, and sometimes plainly comical commentary than for his sporadic success as a musician.

John Gibson is concerned about your children, and your children’s children. That is of course, unless your children, like half of all children under five years old, are minorities. In the midst of a heated national debate around immigration, the Fox News anchor was quick to point out the fact that America ’s Hispanic population has a higher birthrate than the white population and issue an urgent call to arms. To secure the future of the white majority, Gibson sees only one viable solution: “Make more babies.” And not in the sex, drugs and rock and roll way, but because, as Gibson explained on, “half of the kids in this country under five years old are minorities. By far, the greatest number are Hispanic. You know what that means? Twenty-five years and the majority of the population is Hispanic. Why is that? Well, Hispanics are having more kids than others. Notably, the ones Hispanics call ‘gabachos’ — white people — are having fewer.” God forbid we lose that white majority.

Check it out. It's well worth the drive.

Who really cares about Mel Gibson?

2006-08-02T17:02:00.000-05:00

We've had enough about Mel Gibson's DUI arrest and his drunken comments about Jews and women.

Just about every talking head on basic cable has put in their two-cents.

Maybe it's worth it to some people to have the distraction from soaring gasoline, electrical, food and medical bills, not to mention the constant killing of innocents in the Middle East.

Not to us, though.

Let's stay focused, people.

Prison scandal general allowed to resign without charges

2006-08-01T04:59:00.000-05:00

Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, who oversaw the prisons at Guantanamo and in Iraq, and who some say is responsible for the abusive treatment of prisoners, not only was allowed to retire, but also received one of the Army's highest awards, the Distinguished Service Medal.

It was under his watch that the torture of prisoners became policy. Some say, he not only sanctioned such activity, he designed it.

Oh, he could still be recalled to active duty to face a court martial, "[b]ut a senior Pentagon official said such a move was unlikely," according to published accounts in the New York Times.

Did we mention that he was a "teacher's pet." Yes, that's right. He was one of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's favorites, and was seen as a rising star by the NeoCon civillian pentagon officials.

So the Bushiters continue their policy of rewarding incompetence and immorality and criminality, and the Capitol D's remain silent.

The capacity of the American people for Bushit and the tacit approval of the same by others in the government continues to astound us.

Will this nation ever come to its senses?

Fed up with them all

2006-07-31T11:07:00.000-05:00

In their latest missive entitled Bush to Armageddon: "Bring It On!", BuzzFlash is again dissing the Busheviks.

Exerpt:

Okay, it's clear now that the Neo-con, Bush theory of creating maximum chaos has metastasized.

Only Dr. Strangelove wannabees believe that if you exponentially increase death, blood, disorder, conflict and profiteering, you somehow end up with peace.

Or maybe it's that they really just want permanent instability. The Republican Party can't win if there is peace. That is a simple truth.

They have nothing to offer domestically but bankruptcy, the dismantling of the American government and the U.S. Constitution, some wedge issues from the Victorian era, and unconscionable tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent of Americans.

That's a losing ticket, if they ever had to run on what they are really about. (Oh, did we forget to put chronic corruption and law breaking on the list?)

Nothing new here, of course. BuzzFlash is pretty focused about attacking the policies of the Bush administration, along with the Main Stream Media, as well they should.

What is missing, however, is any critical comments about the lack of any kind of statements from the Capitol D Democrats.

Let's be frank here. The NeoCons under Bush would not be enjoying the success they have if the Democratic (lack of) Leadership would continually hold them accountable.

Where's the outrage from the Capitol D's? Where's the leadership?

Oh, they're the minority party and no one listens to them anyway.

That's bull!

It's way past time for them to make noise, shine a light on the constant abuses, and make themselves noticed. Forget loyal opposition. There is not opposition, period.

Get with it, Capitol D's, or get the hell out.

We, the people, are not only tired of the craziness of the Bushiters, but we're fed up with the deafening silence from your corner, too.

Draft Moyers Now

2006-07-30T09:03:00.000-05:00

Molly Ivins, perhaps the most truthful, honest, down-to-earth columnist ever, has come up with a pretty good idea for the Democratic Party: Bill Moyers for President.

This is a notion picked up by John Nichols at The Nation.

We won't rehash what clearer thinkers and better writers have thought and said before, but we do encourage you to take a look at the logic behind a Draft Moyers movement and what it could mean to the political fabric.

Perhaps such a movement could accomplish a shift in the thinking of the Capitol D Democrats.

Wait a minute ...

Did we just use thinking and Capitol D Democrats in the same sentence?

What were we thinking?

Abandoned by the party

2006-07-19T05:23:00.000-05:00

I no longer consider myself a member of Democratic Party, but I remain a lowercase "d" democrat in that I retain a strong belief in democracy.