Tuesday, May 22, 2007

BUSH's ILLEGAL WAR IN IRAQ IS FINANCING DEATHS OF AMERICANS

RUN, RUSH, READ Keith Olbermann's riveting special commentary on Wednesday May 23. Bush , he says is the most shameful president in history, and he is "financing the deaths of Americans" in this illegal, heinous war. To paraphrase, Bush has manipulated Congress into thinking the troops will not get armor or protection, whereas a good president -- any honest leader, would never shame Congress and use the troops as barter. A good leader would cut Halliburton's profits — beg, borrow or steal from other "pork" projects before he'd cut troop funding. The American people have spoken, and Bush, in his arrogance has put Democrats between a rock and a hard place.

On the other hand, the Democrats must NOT BACK DOWN. We must end this war.

I received this disturbing news item from my friend Garth Bixxo:

This little known National Security Presidential Directive NDPD #51 of May 9th, essentially gives Bush the authority to take over the country --- like a dictator. I believe it has to be approved by Congress -- and pray that they quash it immediately.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/print/20070509-12.html

When the Cold War began in the 1950s, Directives were written and put into place in case of an atomic bomb attack on the government. These directives are still in effect---- meaning that #51 is not need, and is merely a power grab by Karl Rove and-or whoever directed it be written.

Here's how www.truthout.org states it:
Bush Anoints Himself as
Ensurer of Constitutional Government
in Emergency
Scary 'eh---sounds like we'd better impeach him before he implements NSPD#51.
Every concerned citizen should call, write their Congressperson and Senator to say STOP

Here's the Truthout.org write-up---by way of an Executive Summary which reads between the lines.

Bush Anoints Himself as the Ensurer of Constitutional Government in Emergency
By Matthew Rothschild

In a new National Security Presidential Directive, Bush lays out his plans for dealing with a "catastrophic emergency."
With scarcely a mention in the mainstream media, President Bush has ordered up a plan for responding to a catastrophic attack. Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility "for ensuring constitutional government."

He laid this all out in a document entitled "National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51" and "Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20." The White House released it on May 9.

Other than a discussion on Daily Kos led off by a posting by Leo Fender, and a pro-forma notice in a couple of mainstream newspapers, this document has gone unremarked upon.

The subject of the document is entitled "National Continuity Policy."

It defines a "catastrophic emergency" as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government function."

This could mean another 9/11, or another Katrina, or a major earthquake in California, I imagine, since it says it would include "localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies."

The document emphasizes the need to ensure "the continued function of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government," it states.

But it says flat out: "The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government."

The document waves at the need to work closely with the other two branches, saying there will be "a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government." But this effort will be "coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers."

Among the efforts coordinated by the President would ensuring the capability of the three branches of government to "provide for orderly succession" and "appropriate transition of leadership."

The document designates a National Continuity Coordinator, who would be the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.

The document gives the Vice President a role in implementing the provisions of the contingency plans.

Please check out http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/print/20070509-12.html

78 comments:

  1. Wow! Olbermann really laid into Bush didn't he?
    He is so on target though, he definitely has Bush on his radar!

    LOL

    ReplyDelete
  2. This little known National Security Presidential Directive NDPD #51 of May 9th, essentially gives Bush the authority to take over the country --- like a dictator. I believe it has to be approved by Congress -- and pray that they quash it immediately."

    Lydia et al............I read about this Sunday and was going to post about it but we got into discussing Gonzalez and Goodling instead.

    But i've been rigght about GWB and the Neo Cons from day one they are all about oil, money and power.........thats ALL iraq was EVER about.

    These evil men are following Hitler's blueprint to a tee...........give the masses a common enemy to hate and fear, give them a patriotic cause to rally around and change the laws to seize power................these evil megalomaniacs NEED to be stopped and the wothless marshmallos in Congress like Pelosi and Reed proved they are not up to the task and lack the spine and common sense to do what is right and what is needed to get our country back on the right path.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What on earth did Bush tell Reid and Pelosi to make them cave like this?

    Does anyone have any ideas?

    ReplyDelete
  4. They are obviously either scared of Bush or scared of Rove painting them as not supporting the troops............either way its riddiculous.

    They made the biggest tactical mistake the could have made.............giving Bush full funding with no strings takes ALL the pressure off of repugs that likely would have turned on GWB AND his war as the election got closer..........NOW theres NO issue to use as a wedge because the war is funded with NO accountability, benchmarks or strings to reign Bush in or end the war.

    The Dems HAD the power of the purse and they gave it up for NOTHING............bwcause they are afraid of being painted as unpatriotic and not supporting the troops............they have learned NOTHING over the past 5 years............BUSH uses the same nazi tactics and fear mongering as he used to push us into this illegal war and the Dems still cave in and fall for the same tired crap that Rove keeps regurgitating.........its pathetic!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Lydia Cornell said...
    What on earth did Bush tell Reid and Pelosi to make them cave like this?

    Does anyone have any ideas?


    Yea.


    "BOO"

    ReplyDelete
  6. They're spineless Lydia.

    Just face it.


    I know its hard. We want someone to believe in. But they're not the ones. They're pathetic spineless moral wimps.

    No commitment to doing whats right.

    Just commitment to doing what they think will get them reelected.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Only this time they thought wrong.


    They were reelected to end the war. As Olberman so aptly pointed out, we've defunded wars before.

    Just cut off funding.

    They have the power. But they're afraid to use it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mike said...


    Yeah tou called from the beginning Worf...............You said Pelosi and Reed were spineless.........I said lets give em a chance and see.

    CLEARLY YOU were dead on right


    :D

    Gee I love that kind of talk....

    ReplyDelete
  9. LoL.

    Just kidding.

    I was going to say something and then just decided not to. In fact I started to type something about how I had warned they were worthless, but I decided not to.

    Like I keep saying, I'm tired of being right. In fact, I would have LOVED to have been proven wrong on that one.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Its weird Mike its like you read my mind.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Exactly Worf they COULD HAVE stopped this war but they blew it............do they HONESTLY think that Bush would leave them sitting over there with no bullets or tanks or boms if the defunded it.

    I have MANY co-workers that have husbands, wives and sons over there that say Congress SHOULD have defunded it and nothing bad would have happened if they did...............think about that a minute these people have loved ones over there and are crying for defunding the war and the fools in Congress are worried that they will get painted as not supporting the troops and not get re-elected.

    They can no longer claim the repugs in congress no longer support the troops because they support the war when they have done likewise.

    They have turned their back on the American people that elected them because they wanted a change yet nothing has changed other than they have in a way made the repugs nazi talk of surrender come true in a way..............Congress didnt surrender to the Iraqis or the terrorists though, they surrendered to a president run amuk, they surrendered to GWB like a bunch of cowards.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Is there still a chance the whole thing could be withdrawn - the new bill I mean?

    I think Bush took them aside and scared them with new "CIA evidence about Bin Laden or something -- like he always does -- and they were coerced into saying yes.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Harry Reid is an example of the reason people who never served a day in uniform like Ann Coulter or Rush Limpballs get to call Liberals wimps. The American people see these tough talking bullies calling the democrats wimps, then they see democratic leaders like Harry Reid and they say "Yup. .. Wimps.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Lydia Cornell said...
    Is there still a chance the whole thing could be withdrawn - the new bill I mean?


    Well it still has to pass. Pelosi said she won't vote for it, even though she apparently agreed to it with the President in the room.

    Its also possible they're just going along with it because they plan on pulling a suprise impeachment vote in the House.

    But I wouldn't hold my breath.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Most people in the trenches want people of courage and conviction the know have their backs and that they can trust..........the Congress proved they have no courage or convictions.......they are not willing to fight for what is right.........they only care about whats in THEIR best interests not the countries.

    They turned their back on the country and threw in the towel and surrendered a fight they could have won had they showed tennacity and heart.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Think about how the troops see this.........they want to come home and are tired of being crapped on by Bush and Congress turned their backs on them.

    The Democrats could have had the military vote for generations.........but they just gave the repugs a chance at life.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Lydia Cornell said...


    I think Bush took them aside and scared them with new "CIA evidence about Bin Laden or something -- like he always does -- and they were coerced into saying yes


    He may have threatened them with martial law, or arrest. After all technically according to the President, we are at war.

    We're not actually. I mean, no ones attacking us anywhere. We're just in a violent occupation. But Congress like the idiots they are accepted the "we;re at war" bs so now Bush can use that to institute martial law.

    Course he probably wouldn't do that until he attacks Iran. Which is coming next I'm afraid.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Bush is clearly trying to egg Iran into starting a conflict.

    Why do you think they leaked the CIA so called "covert ops" about overthrowing the government of Iran?

    Remember, ABC said they had vetted the story with the CIA and they voice "no opposition" to their airing it.

    Clearly this was a story that they wanted to leaked.

    Why?

    To egg Iran into adopting a defensive posture of course.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Bush and the repuggies backs are against the wall and they know it.

    So time for Bush to resort to plan B.

    A serious war. Like Iran. Iran with their high tech weaponry and short range but highly effective navy, and their huge army of well equipped well trained troops, would be a serious war.

    And with that kind of war, then Bush might declare martial law, and freeze all elections and start arresting dissenters.

    Its been done before.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Bush would institute the draft at the point, because war with Iran would destabilize the entire region.

    Russia would most likely take an aggressive posture and considering their new military alliance with China, could prove to be a serious, serious threat.

    Its called escalation.

    ReplyDelete
  21. And with the weaponry of today, it could prove to be a planet killer.

    ReplyDelete
  22. That makes sense............I thought the same thing Bush doesnt know what to do so he's trying to pick a fight with Iran..........he's so simple minded he thinks the Iraq war got almost the entire nation to support him it will probably work again.........thats how stupid The Chimp is!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Whats eerily odd, is this is exactly how the Bible predicts the end of times, at least from a fundamentalist christian interprative view.


    In the end, its us and Israel, against the rest of the world.

    Then Jesus comes.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I can only hope the military would blow Bush off and disregard the fools orders.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Mike said...
    I can only hope the military would blow Bush off and disregard the fools orders.


    But if it came to that Mike, then we'd effectively have no government. The US would cease to exist as a country. We'd have a rogue military, and independent commonwealth and an exiled king.

    That would be a disaster.

    It would mean our democracy had failed.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Our democracy has allready failed it failed 6 years ago and after a glimmer of hope it failed again yesterday!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Wow, I just listened to Olberman on Sq's blog..........that was a POWERFUL speech!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Mike said...
    Our democracy has allready failed


    Well its faltering for sure, but when its failed, you and I will no longer be speaking publiclly like this.

    ReplyDelete
  29. If Bush is allowed to attack Iran, something it looks like he may try to do over the next few weeks, or even days now, it will get ugly.

    Something has to happen now.

    Somethings got to give. Even though Reid and Pelosi just gave Bush that blank check they swore last week they'd never give him, other democrats like Waxman and Leahey are putting together a case for impeachment I think. At least thats what I "hope".

    ReplyDelete
  30. A car bomb exploded at the funeral of a murdered local leader in the western Iraqi city of Fallujah on Thursday, killing 25 people, state television reported.

    "Surge" on Bush.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Two U.S soldiers were killed near Baghdad Thursday.

    "Surge" on Bush.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Unusually large swings in gasoline costs may compound the stress that record high prices at the pump are having on consumers, raising the risk of a spending pullback that crimps an economy already just limping along.

    More of the Bush economy.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Washington Post:

    BAGHDAD, May 23—More than three months into a U.S.-Iraqi security offensive designed to curtail sectarian violence in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq, Health Ministry statistics show that such killings are rising again.

    From the beginning of May until Tuesday, 321 unidentified corpses, many dumped and showing signs of torture and execution, have been found across the Iraqi capital, according to morgue data provided by a Health Ministry official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release the information. The data showed that the same number of bodies were found in all of January, the month before the launch of the Baghdad security plan.

    Such killings are a signature practice of Shiite militias, although Sunni insurgents are also known to execute victims. The number of found bodies is a key indicator of the level of sectarian violence, but the statistics also include some who died from causes unrelated to the political situation.

    "Surge" + Bush = Deaths.

    ReplyDelete
  34. When Articles Of Impeachment weren't the first "things on the table" in January, my euphoria from November soon changed to that sinking feeling in my stomach.

    At the very least, congressional investigations into this (oh so obvious) crime syndicate should have been initiated.

    Third party time BIG TIME!

    ReplyDelete
  35. Special counsel finds GSA chief violated Hatch ActBy Daniel Pulliam dpulliam@govexec.com May 23, 2007 A report from the federal agency that investigates allegations of illegal political activity in the government has concluded that Lurita Doan, the head of the General Services Administration, violated the Hatch Act.

    The 21-page report from Scott Bloch, the head of the Office of Special Counsel, has not been made public, but the independent agency sent Doan a copy for her review on Friday, according to sources with knowledge of the investigation who spoke on condition of anonymity.

    The facts gathered by OSC investigators "establish that Administrator Doan violated the Hatch Act," by inducing "her subordinates to engage in the type of political brainstorming session that is prohibited from occurring while the political appointees are on duty or in a federal workplace," the May 18 report, obtained by Government Executive Wednesday, stated.

    "I have determined that you violated the Hatch Act's prohibition against using your official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election when you solicited over 30 subordinate employees to engage in political activity," Bloch wrote in a cover letter to the report.

    In a statement Wednesday, Doan said she disagreed with the report's preliminary findings, calling it a "staff-drafted report."

    "I have concerns with the leaps in logic and the many inaccuracies contained in it, such as an error as simple as citing a nonexistent employee in my office," Doan said. "I have an opportunity, which I will take, to work with the Office of Special Counsel to correct the many inaccuracies before the final report is issued."

    Doan later revised her statement, excluding the remark about the nonexistent employee in her office, but reiterating that she disagrees with the report's preliminary findings.
    OSC will not comment on the report until Doan has submitted a response, a spokesman said. "We believe she should be given that opportunity," he said.

    Doan has until June 1 to respond. OSC investigators will review her comments and deliver a final report to President Bush, since she is a presidential appointee confirmed by the Senate.

    A White House spokeswoman said that since they have not seen the report, they cannot comment.
    The Hatch Act limits political activity in government agencies. OSC's investigation focused on Doan's role in a Jan. 26 meeting at GSA headquarters where Scott Jennings, special assistant to the president and a deputy of Karl Rove, showed a 28-slide PowerPoint presentation to more than 30 GSA political appointees that analyzed the results of the 2006 midterm election.

    Several of the political appointees who attended the meeting testified that during a question-and-answer period following the presentation, Doan asked how the agency could help Republican candidates. The exact words Doan used differ among the witnesses according to the OSC report, but the investigators said in the report that this did not prevent them from determining her intent.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Cheney Attempting to Constrain Bush's Choices on Iran Conflict: Staff Engaged in Insubordination Against President Bush

    There is a race currently underway between different flanks of the administration to determine the future course of US-Iran policy.

    On one flank are the diplomats, and on the other is Vice President Cheney's team and acolytes -- who populate quite a wide swath throughout the American national security bureaucracy.

    The Pentagon and the intelligence establishment are providing support to add muscle and nuance to the diplomatic effort led by Condi Rice, her deputy John Negroponte, Under Secretary of State R. Nicholas Burns, and Legal Adviser John Bellinger. The support that Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and CIA Director Michael Hayden are providing Rice's efforts are a complete, 180 degree contrast to the dysfunction that characterized relations between these institutions before the recent reshuffle of top personnel.

    However, the Department of Defense and national intelligence sector are also preparing for hot conflict. They believe that they need to in order to convince Iran's various power centers that the military option does exist.

    But this is worrisome. The person in the Bush administration who most wants a hot conflict with Iran is Vice President Cheney. The person in Iran who most wants a conflict is Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iran's Revolutionary Guard Quds Force would be big winners in a conflict as well -- as the political support that both have inside Iran has been flagging.

    Multiple sources have reported that a senior aide on Vice President Cheney's national security team has been meeting with policy hands of the American Enterprise Institute, one other think tank, and more than one national security consulting house and explicitly stating that Vice President Cheney does not support President Bush's tack towards Condoleezza Rice's diplomatic efforts and fears that the President is taking diplomacy with Iran too seriously.

    This White House official has stated to several Washington insiders that Cheney is planning to deploy an "end run strategy" around the President if he and his team lose the policy argument.

    The thinking on Cheney's team is to collude with Israel, nudging Israel at some key moment in the ongoing standoff between Iran's nuclear activities and international frustration over this to mount a small-scale conventional strike against Natanz using cruise missiles (i.e., not ballistic missiles).

    This strategy would sidestep controversies over bomber aircraft and overflight rights over other Middle East nations and could be expected to trigger a sufficient Iranian counter-strike against US forces in the Gulf -- which just became significantly larger -- as to compel Bush to forgo the diplomatic track that the administration realists are advocating and engage in another war.

    There are many other components of the complex game plan that this Cheney official has been kicking around Washington. The official has offered this commentary to senior staff at AEI and in lunch and dinner gatherings which were to be considered strictly off-the-record, but there can be little doubt that the official actually hopes that hawkish conservatives and neoconservatives share this information and then rally to this point of view. This official is beating the brush and doing what Joshua Muravchik has previously suggested -- which is to help establish the policy and political pathway to bombing Iran.

    The zinger of this information is the admission by this Cheney aide that Cheney himself is frustrated with President Bush and believes, much like Richard Perle, that Bush is making a disastrous mistake by aligning himself with the policy course that Condoleezza Rice, Bob Gates, Michael Hayden and McConnell have sculpted.

    According to this official, Cheney believes that Bush can not be counted on to make the "right decision" when it comes to dealing with Iran and thus Cheney believes that he must tie the President's hands.

    On Tuesday evening, i spoke with a former top national intelligence official in this Bush administration who told me that what I was investigating and planned to report on regarding Cheney and the commentary of his aide was "potentially criminal insubordination" against the President. I don't believe that the White House would take official action against Cheney for this agenda-mongering around Washington -- but I do believe that the White House must either shut Cheney and his team down and give them all garden view offices so that they can spend their days staring out their windows with not much to do or expect some to begin to think that Bush has no control over his Vice President.

    It is not that Cheney wants to bomb Iran and Bush doesn't, it is that Cheney is saying that Bush is making a mistake and thus needs to have the choices before him narrowed.

    -- Steve Clemons

    ReplyDelete
  37. I wonder if this qualifies as TREASON?

    ReplyDelete
  38. BTW wanna bet the MSM never mentions this one at all?

    ReplyDelete
  39. TV update: Watch Al Gore on the Daily Show tonight

    ReplyDelete
  40. Rove, Fielding pay ‘mysterious’ visit to Capitol.


    “Senior White House aide Karl Rove and White House Council Fred Fielding were just spotted leaving a meeting room just off the Senate floor in the Capitol. But neither gave a reason for their trip to the Hill.

    Minutes later, Iraq War ‘Czar’ Lt. Gen Douglas Lute was also spotted leaving the Capitol. When asked what brought him down Pennsylvania Avenue, Rove remained mum, simply smiling and greeting the staffers who quickly surrounded him.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Al Gore is just so freaking smart.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Sorry, just watching Al Gore saying some of the most brilliant observations I've heard in years.


    As for the story I posted, thats from the Politico.

    I find it highly suspicious the day Congress caved to Bush, Karl Rove and Bush's new war Czar are seen leaving Congress.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Obi Wan Worfeus wrote: "Al Gore is just so freaking smart."

    I went to see Al Gore present "An Inconvenient Truth" live in Dallas last fall. He was tremendous! If THAT Al Gore had been running for President in 2000, he would have wiped GWB like a moist towlette on a baby's bum. Sadly, the Al Gore of the 2000 campaign was hamstrung by the nonsense surrounding the last years of Bill Clinton's presidency, essentially emasculating Gore's presidential bid. And the rest, as they say, is history.

    Al Gore should get back in the game. He's got what it takes.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Amen to that.


    Above all else right now we need someone smart and someone honest. There isn't a really smart and honest candidate in the crowd.

    GORE IN 08!

    ReplyDelete
  45. Gore knows exactly what we need right now to pull out of the tailspin Capt Bush has put us in.

    Gore can pull us out.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I hope Gore will run but I do like Edwards too! I just received an email:

    After tonight, one thing is now perfectly clear: No one else is going to end this war for us. Bush will not listen. Congress will not fight. There's no one left to lead the country now but we the people.

    Each of us has a duty and a responsibility to our troops and to each other to do all that we can to end this war. Under the Constitution of the United States of America, we the people are the sovereign and the ultimate deciders--and by all that I know is right we will succeed in bringing our troops home.

    Thank you for standing up.

    --John Edwards

    ReplyDelete
  47. Gore and Edwards :)

    ReplyDelete
  48. Yea, I could do a Gore\Edwards vote.

    ReplyDelete
  49. So I take it you are implying that the are plotting to manipulate another war by egging on Iran??????

    It sure looks like Bush and Cheney CRAVE a war with Iran.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Mike said...
    So I take it you are implying that the are plotting to manipulate another war by egging on Iran??????


    Well at this point Mike I'm not sure what Rove and Feilding were doing there.

    I seriously don't know.

    But whatever it was, I bet it was tied to todays overwhelming Senate majority that voted to give the President another blank check.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Mike what I got out of it was Cheney is trying to FORCE Bush into a shooting war with Iran with the Israeli's help.

    ReplyDelete
  52. OBI WAN WORFEUS said...
    Gore knows exactly what we need right now to pull out of the tailspin Capt Bush has put us in."

    Captain Bush?????????????????

    Dont you mean Col Klink..........Cause Gonzalez makes a perfect Sargent Schultz....

    Although I completely agree with you Gore is EXACTLY what we need right now.............Have you seen his new book.......it looks REALLY good!!

    What he's saying about foreign policy, freedoms and liberty, energy and global warming/environment REALLY dovetails perfectly with whats going on the world today.........IF Gore were to Run its almost a lock, it would be his race to lose.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Well Clif/Worf............the point i was getting at is Rove is a master manipulator and repug strategist..............what was he doing meeting with a war czar if it wasnt to manipulate us into a war with iran..............I think the repugs have their backs to the wall and they feel the only way out is to start a a big fight and try to consolidate power and salvage their agenda when the chaos ensues.

    Again I was wondering what Roves role is.......since I thought he was MORE loyal to Bush than Cheney?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Doesn't that pipeline need to go through Iran to be completed now? You know it started in Afghanistan, then went through Iraq..

    ReplyDelete
  55. S-Q that pipeline which was supposed to go from The former soviet republics to Europe around Russia is a moot point because most former soviet republics have signed on to working with Russia to sell their petroleum products together instead of competing with each other.

    A sort of former soviet Union style cartel for NG and oil products to Europe.

    ReplyDelete
  56. The other pipeline was supposed to run through Afghanistan and Western Pakistan to the Indian Ocean, from near the Caspian sea fields, that one I'm not sure how well it is doing, but until the Taliban quits blowing things up in Afghanistan, building it seems counter productive.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Its starting to get serious now folks. Bush is growing more hostile. His back is against the wall and he's taking an aggressive posture, and swinging back.

    His dementia is beginning to set in now, and he is more dangerous than ever.

    There is nothing more dangerous than a wounded animal.

    ReplyDelete
  58. That bird shitting on Bush during his foul press conference where he all but threatened two reporters kids, was the universe telling Bush what's coming down the pike.

    A big pile of shit.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Olberman is on fire. Matthews is enraged. Scarborough is bewildered.

    Its really starting to hit the fan.

    Watch.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Worf said "That bird shitting on Bush during his foul press conference where he all but threatened two reporters kids,"

    WHAT did Bush say??????????

    ReplyDelete
  61. Clif:

    Dang it, I had a good response typed to you and then blogger crashed on me...I should learn to save my typing.. when on blogger.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Well, he was selling his fear bullshit, and he told David Gregory and one other reporter that "If we don't fight them in Iraq, then they'll come over here. And they're a danger to your kids, David".

    He specifically was personalizing it. And he condemned any other notion other than staying in Iraq.

    His dementia is taking over.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Here is an older article about oil and pipelines..and Iran.

    http://www.infoplease.com/spot/caspianoil1.html

    ReplyDelete
  64. S-Q anything more than a couple of sentences I type in MS Word then copy and paste, so I don't lose it to the google and it's bastard step child blogger.

    ReplyDelete
  65. That's probably what I will do from now on...

    Errrr.. blogger!

    ReplyDelete
  66. SQ, although Iran does have lots of oil..........I think Clifs right Russia and iran is more about natural gas, since Russia and Iran have the largest natural gas reserves in the world...........although I believe Quatar is the leading natural gas exporter and has partnered with the Oil companies to build LNG infra structure so they can export it to other countries.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Azerbaijan, are all former parts of ther soviet Union which Bush has scared enough they cooperate with each other under Putin instead of the looney Bush.

    ReplyDelete
  68. How could our country have elected that war mongering buffoon...............Shame on this country for allowing Bush and his pack of fools to steal the election and hijack our country...........SHAME ON US!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  69. That bird shitting on Bush during his foul press conference where he all but threatened two reporters kids, was the universe telling Bush what's coming down the pike.

    A big pile of shit.
    ----------------
    Worf:

    God sent him the bird and it wasn't a dove!

    LOL

    ReplyDelete
  70. Their in the early stages of forming an OPEC like cartel for natural gas..........particularly Qatar and Russia!

    ReplyDelete
  71. And that burns Cheney to no end!

    ReplyDelete
  72. Mike:

    Yes, you and Clif are right about that...I believe there are natural gas pipelines being built too.

    Well, I'm tired guys and upset with the way things have gone with Congress caving in to Bush..

    I just wanted to say hi :)

    Goodnight

    ReplyDelete
  73. Suzie-Q said...


    God sent him the bird and it wasn't a dove!



    It was a yellow-bellied warbler.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Hopefully Rove was on Capital Hill setting up Gonzo to get thrown under the BUS like he did scooter Libby in the Valerie Plame affair.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Poll: 76% of Americans Say War Going Badly



    New CBS News/NY Times Poll Shows Record Number Believe War a Mistake

    How is the war going?

    Well Badly
    23% 76%

    US right to go to war?

    Right Wrong
    35% 61%

    Direction of US?

    Right track Wrong track
    24% 72%

    Bush approval rating?

    Approve Disapprove
    30% 63%

    ReplyDelete
  76. I've never ever seen an administration so hell bent on war............Bush and Cheney crave a war with Iran!

    ReplyDelete