OBAMA and HUCKABEE WIN IOWA
Obama's win is GREAT NEWS! It means we have embraced a more international candidate who has humility and substance. Obama is a U.S. constitutional scholar and a purist. He would be able to personally communicate with the most provocative nations in the middle east because he is a good listener, has sound principles and a name they can identify with. He would do more good for world peace by his open demeanor. Domestically, I think he'd carefully weigh each bill that came to him, untainted by special interests.
I am also happy that John Edwards came in second. But what happened to Kucinich, the other purist whom we love?
HERE'S WHAT HAPPENED! ABC is cutting Kucinich from it's debate tonight in New Hampshire.
KUCINICH SUES By Kevin Tillman, AlterNet.
This is madness. Judging by what I'm reading today, the primaries are all wrapped up. Apparently, 300,000 mostly white, largely rural Iowans will decide our choices for president.
And Ron Paul, with $20 million bucks raised in a quarter, 10 percent of the Iowa vote and a legion of loyal fans, isn't being allowed to debate on Fox News in New Hampshire. ABC is cutting Kucinich, Gravel and Repub Duncan Hunter from it's debate. But this might be the most annoying bit of BS out of all of it.
AP: Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, along with supporter Willie Nelson, have filed a lawsuit to get Kucinich on the ballot in Texas after they say the Texas Democratic Party rejected his application.
The civil lawsuit was delivered late Wednesday afternoon to U.S. District Court for the Western District of the United States, Kucinich spokesman Andy Juniewicz said late Wednesday evening.
The lawsuit says that Kucinich was informed by the Texas Democratic Party on Wednesday that his application was "defective" because he crossed out a loyalty oath in the application that said he would swear to support whoever the Democratic nominee for president might be.
_______________________________________________________
EDWARDS RECONSIDERED By Norman Solomon, AlterNet
John Edwards was the most improved presidential candidate of 2007. He sharpened his attacks on corporate power and honed his calls for economic justice. He laid down a clear position against nuclear power. He explicitly challenged the power of the insurance industry and the pharmaceutical giants.
And he improved his position on Iraq to the point that, in an interview with the New York Times a couple of days ago, he said: "The continued occupation of Iraq undermines everything America has to do to reestablish ourselves as a country that should be followed, that should be a leader." Later in the interview, Edwards added: "I would plan to have all combat troops out of Iraq at the end of nine to ten months, certainly within the first year."
Now, apparently, Edwards is one of three people with a chance to become the Democratic presidential nominee this year. If so, he would be the most progressive Democrat to top the national ticket in more than half a century.
The main causes of John Edwards' biggest problems with the media establishment have been tied in with his firm stands for economic justice instead of corporate power.
Weeks ago, when the Gannett-chain-owned Des Moines Register opted to endorse Hillary Clinton this time around, the newspaper's editorial threw down the corporate gauntlet: "Edwards was our pick for the 2004 nomination. But this is a different race, with different candidates. We too seldom saw the positive, optimistic campaign we found appealing in 2004. His harsh anti-corporate rhetoric would make it difficult to work with the business community to forge change."
Many in big media have soured on Edwards and his "harsh anti-corporate rhetoric." As a result, we're now in the midst of a classic conflict between corporate media sensibilities and grassroots left-leaning populism.
On Wednesday, Edwards launched a TV ad in New Hampshire with him saying at a rally: "Corporate greed has infiltrated everything that's happening in this democracy. It's time for us to say, 'We're not going to let our children's future be stolen by these people.' I have never taken a dime from a Washington lobbyist or a special interest PAC and I'm proud of that."
________________________________________________
We will be doing an analysis on our show this morning. If you live in Vegas you can tune in Live or go to our website and listen in the audio archives.
The Basham and Cornell Show broadcasts weekday mornings at 8 am Pacific (11 a.m. Eastern) on KLAV 1230 AM Radio live in Las Vegas. All shows are simulcast on the Internet (and archived) and can be listened to at Basham and Cornell Progressive Talk If you've missed our show, check out the audio archives. We have interviewed John & Elizabeth Edwards, Dennis & Elizabeth Kucinich, John Dean, Valerie Plame, Christine Pelosi, Dahr Jamail, Senator Mike Gravel; Pulitzer Prize winner Charlie Savage, Congressman Charlie Rangel, Senator Byron Dorgan; bestselling authors Greg Palast, Paul Krugman, Greg Anrig, Mikey Weinstein, Paul Krugman; Media Matters’ Eric Boehlert and Paul Waldman are regular guests. Upcoming: Obama and Hilary. If you missed any of these shows, check out the archives on our website.
WHAT OBAMA'S WIN MEANS
From Blogger Christopher:
Personally, what last night meant for me is the beginning of the end of the Bush nightmare and the beginning of a new America.
Think of it:
1. The first black president of the Harvard Law Review is poised to become the first black president of the United States
2. Barack Obama, defied the pundits and the polls who just last summer said Hillary Clinton was unstoppable
3. Barack Obama carried the youth vote (17 to 30) by 57%
4. the Iowa Caucus proves that retail politics are alive and well and vital in the USA
5. last night's Obama victory proved the desire for change -- real change, is greater than the desire for experience
7. the international media, from La Republicca, to the Sydney Morning Herald, to the Times of London, to the Times of India, is reporting the USA is again open for business as voters reject the path the Idiot Bush has taken us down these past 7 years
Now, onward to New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina!
clif said...
Obama carried the under 30 womens vote, which means Shillery doesn't resonate as well with them as she thought. It might be the next generational passing of the torch, like 1960 and 1992 were.
A post boomer president.
__________________________________
And LETTERMAN'S BACK!
My son's father is an Emmy Award-winning writer on the Late Show with David Letterman and we are so pleased that he is back at work. He is a brilliant comedy writer who wrote the Johnny Carson show, many films like the original "Bad Boys" and now writes Letterman's monologue, Top Ten List in collaboration with the other gifted scribes. Kudos to Letterman for standing up for the writers.
____________________________________
WALK THROUGH THE CAUCUS PROCESS: If you missed the Basham and Cornell show yesterday, check out our audio archives. Yesterday we had John Hunt, Chairman of the Clark County Democratic Party walking us through the caucus process. Nevada is third in line, on January 19, after New Hampshire. Hunt, a decorated veteran, has a son on his third tour of duty in Iraq.
Then at 8:30, we were joined by Jennifer Palmieri, the Senior Vice President for Communications at the Center for American Progress. Prior to joining the Center, she was the National Press Secretary for the 2004 Edwards for President campaign. She was the National Press Secretary for the DNC during the 2002 election cycle, and she's an eight year veteran of the Clinton White House.
The Basham and Cornell Show broadcasts weekday mornings at 8 am Pacific (11 a.m. Eastern) on KLAV 1230 AM Radio live in Las Vegas. All shows are simulcast on the Internet (and archived) and can be listened to at Basham and Cornell Progressive Talk
Hi Lydia & Guys!
ReplyDeleteGreat article Lydia! :)
Hey, I have an article on my blog and have had more than 18,000 hits on it since midnight and it's only 10:00 AM here... please feel free to comment and/or post on this article! I'm getting a lot of the Bush lovers on there... :)
Suzie that is incredible, I'll check out your blog now.
ReplyDeleteLove,
Lydia
Well, I assume you have a varmint problem SQ????
ReplyDeleteSince the Mighty Varmint Hunter and his BB gun are busy in Iowa allow me to offer my assistance :D
Lydia, the results should prove interesting indeed, as should Nevada.
ReplyDeleteLydia:
ReplyDeleteYou've had some wonderful people on your show. I'm looking forward to Obama and Hillary! ;)
Mike & Lydia:
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments on my blog too!
Happy New Year! :)
suzie-q I posted that list here a couple of days ago, and left this on your site.
ReplyDeleteFunny a couple clowns here still think drinking the Kool-aid is the path to Rove's alternate reality I bet they think Rovian Math is a real subject in some home schooled curriculum, (BTW I think he failed his test on November 7th 2006)
Too bad for them half of the crap they spread was MADE up by the Christian Right, and dishonestly promoted by reichwing psuedo-christian hucksters like Jerry the liar Falwell who is roasting his chestnuts in hell right now for his dishonest attacks on people, and of course his historic 9-11 quote which Pat the certifiable Robertsonat the time agreed with, and who bilks millions so he can fund his over seas money making operations, like in the end how he bilked those who donated to Christian Coalition.
No matter how much the gutless widdle chicken hawks of the 102nd chicken hawk brigade fight the War on terra from mommy's basement by attacking Bill Clinton and evil liberals, they can't ignore the fact that;
1. Bush (the worst president ever)WAS told Osama attacked the Cole right after he was inaugurated, because the FBI had just proved it and did absolutely NOTHING, unlike Bill Clinton who actually tried to kill Osama after the embassy bombings in 1998 ... and the press gives them a free pass on this one
2. In the summer of 2001 Bush, Cheney and Condi rice were told time and time again how Osama was planning something large against the US, sometimes by heads of state and ignored it because their precious tax cuts were MORE important then doing the JOB which they claim as the first priority they were sent to Washington to do;
Protect the country.
Of course the compliant MSM failes to report this.
No, tax cuts and attacking Iraq, which had NOTHING to do with 9-11, THAT has been proved in spades, even right after 9-11 itself, even though it has been proved Cheney and the republicans continue to lie about it. These two were the first priority when Bush ET AL came to Washington, and some new "pearl harbor" like an attack on the US was just what the PNAC had called for, who's members Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld,Paul Wolfowitz,Douglas Feith(the stupidest fucker on earth according to Tommy Franks), Robert B. Zoellick, Dov S. Zakheim, Randy Scheunemann, Peter W. Rodman, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Richard Perle, Zalmay Khalilzad, Francis Fukuyama, Francis Fukuyama, Seth Cropsey, Eliot A. Cohen, John R. Bolton, Richard Armitage, Elliott Abrams, all ended up in positions in the Bush Administration, and helped create the fiasco we now face in Iraq.
3. Bush and members of his administration refuse to tell the truth about the treasonous outing of a active CIA agent who was working on weapons of mass destruction proliferation, and how much real damage it did to national security. In fact even though one was convicted of FOUR felonies bush commutated his sentence so Irving Libby didn't have to go to jail.
4. Bush and his administration has disrupted justice for purely political reasons. attorneygate could end up being bush's watergate. It already cost Alberto Gonzales (the least qualified Attorney general ever) his job>, and in some ways he was even more corrupt, ie the firing of US attorneys, warrantless illegal spying on US citizens, then John Mitchell ever was. Hell Gonzo's legal incompetence and malfeasance stretched back to Texas. The blow back from this scandal has resulted in Monica Goodling to take the fifth before congress, and she3 was involved in this little tidbit;
On May 7, 2007, National Journal's "Inside Washington" column reported that it was Goodling who ordered drapes to be placed over the partially nude Art Deco statues (Spirit of Justice) in the Justice Department's Great Hall during Ashcroft's tenure as Attorney General. At the time, the department spent $8,000 on blue drapes to hide the two giant, aluminum statues, according to spokesman Shane Hix.
Which is the best illustration of the bush's administration of how it views the idea of justice, justice needs cover-ups for them to keep doing what they were doing. Kyle Sampson and Timothy Griffinalso had to resign because of this scandal. Griffin was also involved in an effort to target 70,000 voters - students, deployed military personnel and homeless people in predominantly African American and Democratic areas — for vote caging during the 2004 election.
Gonzo and Ashcrofts actions undermined the Justice Department's ability to actually do it's job, and protect the Constitutional rights for all Americans against government excess.
5. The scandal which looks most likely to really bite the members of the bush administration in the a$$ is torture tapegate. (currently developing in congress, the DOJ with a prosecutor looking into it, and the CIA.) However here is the time line;
Oops it is another TPM time line which for some reasons gets you gutless chicken hawks foaming at the mouth and ranting like georgie does when somebody takes his nintendo away.
enjoy.
BTW your pathetic list of lies and halftruths has been disproved time and time again.
Clif:
ReplyDeleteExcellent! :)
Yes, they are foaming at the mouth over this list! ROFLMAO
BTW I don't spend much time watching Iowa because the only candidate to both win Iowa and the White House was the chimperor himself;
ReplyDeleteCarter was beaten by the uncommitted delegates in 1976
Reagan lost to Bush Sr there in 1980,
Bill Clinton came in fourth behind Tom Harkin , uncommitted and Paul Tsongas there in 1992
but to give it it's due, John Kerry won in Iowa in 2004 to the detriment of beating Bush.
In fact the winners of the Iowa caucus in past years who did win their parties nomination,
Walter Mondale, Al Gore and John Kerry, on the democratic side, and bob Dole on the republican side, all lost.
Sitting presidents or vice presidents running for president do fare much better, but this year that is not the case.
Given it's history it is better to lose in Iowa it seems, especially if your a democrat....
WE should know how things shake out in Iowa in 3 hours.
ReplyDeleteIf JOHN ZOGBY is correct (and I emailed him to tell him I hope he is), the Democratic race will shake out as follows:
1. BARACK OBAMA
2. JOHN EDWARDS
3. The Ice Queen
I think this is an extraordinarily important and unique Iowa Caucus and has no relationship to Iowa Caucuses of the past.
For one thing, we have an African American and a woman running on the Democratic side. Amazing. It's only taken 230+ years for this to happen.
Also, with an Obama victory in Iowa, he can take the momentum (and ca$h) to New Hampshire, then Nevada and then South Carolina. All states Obama can easily win.
I think it will be very difficult for the Ice Queen to remain in the race if she loses Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. We could be witnessing the beginning of the end of Clinton's presidential hopes and finally, the last gasp of the Bush: Clinton: Clinton: Bush: Bush monarchy that has controlled the Presidency since 1988.
I'm so thrilled for Barack and I'm feeling really good about him becoming the Democratic nominee. Heck, if he is the candidate I may even return to the party.
Lydia
ReplyDeleteThose caucuses are a joke. The more I learn about them the more they become like the electoral college, archaic and harmful we the peoples vote. This is pretty interesting about cucuses 101 the Arcane caucuses
Suzie, I can't remember what ROFMLAO means.
ReplyDeleteI only know LOL.
What is that?
ROFMLAO
ReplyDeleteRolling On The Floor Laughing My Ass Off
Average Patriot: listen to our radio show this morning. John Hunt praises caucuses and walks us through the process.
ReplyDeleteBoth Doug and I were against caucuses until we heard what he had to say. He says it's the one chance for Democrats to get together in public and show their strength visibly! We have been muzzled in the press and no one knows there are so many others who feel the same way about changing the system. Caucuses are a chance to get together and and show physical support, solidarity (and to me, get out from behind their computers.)
It's like an infusion of adrenaline and inspiration.
ROTFLMAO
ReplyDeleteWhat we all were doing while tallltexas tried in vain to defend his welshing on a bet he made here.
Or after one of freedom fans juvenile dishonest rants.
On today's show we had Jennifer Palmieri from the Center for American Progress. She worked in the Clinton Whitehouse, and on the John Edwards 2004 campaign.
ReplyDeleteOops gen Betrayus, has just let the truth slip why the surge is really a failure;
ReplyDeleteA colosal failure for the Iraqi people;
The truth Gen Petraeus hid in his dishonest testimony to congress last fall
he doesn't want the refugees from baghdad back
' Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said that goal would be difficult to meet, and he predicted violence as homeowners and squatters battle over property. Petraeus warned that some people will have to resign themselves to never being able to reclaim their homes.
"That is not ideal, not right, not legal, not a lot of things, but it is reality," he said last week. "This is just going to remain a very, very tough issue for some time."
Coalition forces will offer some aid, but Petraeus said he didn't have ground forces capable of organizing returns, settling property debates and maintaining safety. Those solutions will have to come from Iraqis, he said. '
Baghdad is NOT calmer or quieter because of any US troops, it is quieter and less violent because the Shiites with US help have chased most of the Sunnis out and made refugees out of them.
When they return the lies of Petraeus and Bush will be laid bare, much to the detriment of the citizens of Baghdad and Iraq ...
Which is why Petraeus doesn't want them coming back before he cuts and runs from his (and bush's)failure.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLydia:
ReplyDeleteYep, Clif is right...
ROFLMAO
Rolling on floor laughing my ass off..
I do that a lot when I read some of those Bush lovers comments... hehe
About 32,000 hits on that article today and they're still hitting it! Unbelievable!
ReplyDeleteLOL
Fastest Growing WordPress.com blogs
ReplyDelete1. House MD Blog
2. Through a Glass, Darkly
3. The Official Yellow Harvest Website
4. Guppygirl
5. Karl Sigfrid
6. Suzie-Q
7. Strange Grey Cat's Weblog
Anther congressman who wants impeachment back on the table
ReplyDeleteRep. Mike Michaud Writes Strong Letter to Conyers Calling for Cheney Impeachment Hearings
Congressman Mike Michaud, a conservative and Blue Dog Democrat from Maine sent a letter over the holiday break to House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers calling for impeachment hearings of Vice President Dick Cheney.
Michaud is not among the 25 cosponsors of Rep. Dennis Kucinich's H Res 333 (also known as H Res 799), a resolution stipulating articles of impeachment against Cheney. Michaud is also not among a group of Judiciary Committee Members led by Rep. Robert Wexler who have called for hearings to begin, and who plan to send their own letter to Conyers this month. (Michaud is not on the committee.) But Michaud shares the position of congress members Wexler, Luis Gutierrez, and Anthony Weiner that hearings should be held first and articles drafted when and if called for by the evidence exposed. For reports on the progress of the various groups of congress members now pushing for impeachment of Cheney see: http://impeachcheney.org
Maine has been a hotbed of impeachment activism in recent months.
Efforts have been led by an activist coalition and a group of lawyers called Maine Lawyers for Democracy. Citizens have staged sit-ins in the offices of Rep. Michaud and also Rep. Tom Allen demanding support for impeachment. Those efforts may be paying off, and Michaud appears in the letter below to have grasped some of his constituents' main arguments for impeachment.
While known as a conservative, Michaud has turned against the occupation of Iraq and joined a small number of Congress Members in voting against further funding. Iraq is also the first issue Michaud mentions in his letter to Conyers.
While Conyers is widely understood to be obeying pressure from Nancy Pelosi in refusing to begin impeachment proceedings, Michaud has not written to Pelosi. Constituents of Subcommittee Chairman Jerrold Nadler were arrested in his Brooklyn office on Wednesday sitting-in to demand he begin impeachment hearings. Michaud has not written to Nadler. Like Wexler and his allies, Michaud has chosen to write to the Chair of the full committee, and the recognized expert on impeachment: John Conyers. Conyers has, of course, published a book documenting at length most of the abuses that Michaud refers to in his letter.
Here is the full text of the letter,.
Dear Chairman Conyers,
I write today to request that you include vigorous hearings into the abuses of power by this Administration and include impeachment hearings of Vice President Richard Cheney in the Judiciary Committee schedule for the second session of the 110th Congress.
As you are aware, the House of Representatives voted on November 7th to send a resolution of impeachment of Vice President Cheney to the Judiciary Committee. I urge you to commence these proceedings. There is no doubt that at the very least this Administration has dangerously expanded the scope of executive authority and flaunted the constitutionally defined separation of powers.
Serious allegations have been raised against the Vice President regarding his role in mischaracterizing information that led to the invasion of Iraq, in similarly mischaracterizing information about Iran's nuclear program, the outing of a CIA agent as political retaliation, the abuse of detainees in contravention of the Geneva Conventions, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens. As a recent poll indicates, 70% of the American public believes that the Vice President has abused his power.
This is not an attack on Vice President Cheney or any other member of this Administration. Impeachment investigations must not be about the man or his personal life; they must focus on whether the office of the Vice President has illegally expanded its power or abused the law. Expansions and potential abuses of power by this Administration become precedents for future ones, which lead to further erosions of our constitutional rights. That is why these investigations must be held with the utmost seriousness of purpose and must lay all the facts on the table. We do not know what the result of any investigation will be, but this is the only way to restore the faith of the American people in their government.
There must be no other purpose for these proceedings than to protect our Constitution and to hold individuals accountable if they have broken the law. Most importantly, we must act in a way that will heal the growing bitter divide within our country and end the disillusionment that many Americans feel toward their government.
Thank you for your consideration of this issue of such great importance. I look forward to working with you to strengthen our democracy and our nation.
Sincerely,
Michael H. Michaud
Member of Congress
Biden and Dodd dropped out, when is Richardson gonna do the same?
ReplyDeleteI', wondering if Edwards will drop out if he doesnt win New Hampshire, and/or if Obama will ask him to be his VP if he wins, as a Obama/Edwards team would certainly capture all the anti Hillary democrats who are looking for change.
ReplyDeleteGreat post Lydia....and what week..Last night we watched Dave- Sooooo glad that he is back..we are huge fans...have been forever...( love the strike bears- but bless him- he did mention and focus on the strike...) And his show has always had great writing...
ReplyDeleteObama won- wow...holy cow....Yahooooo.....236,000 DEMS showed up in 9 degrees and Caucused for Change....wow....I was so moved by Edwards and Obama 's speeches...Change is Coming...it is already happening...
thank you for the great post and being part of promoting and inspiring Hope....namaste...
PS...( I don't know what is up- but I am with Suzy- I had alot of hits today...but that's fine with me....means the Natives are restless and stirring and reading;-)
What a night!
ReplyDeleteMy head is still spinning from last night's Iowa victory for Barack Obama!
Think of it:
1. the first black president of the Harvard Law Review is poised to become the first black president of the United States
2. Barack Obama, defied the pundits and the polls who just last summer said Hillary Clinton was unstoppable
3. Barack Obama carried the youth vote (17 to 30) by 57%
4. the Iowa Caucus proves that retail politics are alive and well and vital in the USA
5. last night's Obama victory proved the desire for change -- real change, is greater than the desire for experience
6. the Clinton era is at last DOA
7. the international media, from La Republicca, to the Sydney Morning Herald, to the Times of London, to the Times of India, is reporting the USA is again open for business as voters reject the path the Idiot Bush has taken us down these past 7 years
Now, onward to New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina!
Unemployment hit 5% in December, a month which usually sees a slight drop for christmas time temporary employment,
ReplyDeletenot good at all the recession is just starting, but signs are getting more focused about it.
and the stock market ain't gonna like that number, at all futures all down significantly, dow over 100points
dec non-farm payrolls up 15,000, people on CNBC are saying no growth and high inflation;
ReplyDeletewhich is a polite way of saying stagflation,
they just used the stagflation word....
heck of a economy georgie;
where O where are crusty and tallltexan to tell all us how wonderful the economy is now?
christopher one other stat from last nights caucus, Obama carried the under 30 womens vote, which means Shillery doesn't resonate as well with them as she thought.
ReplyDeleteIt might be the next generational passing of the torch, like 1960 and 1992 were.
A post boomer president, damn I feel old, LOL
Christopher - Obama's win is GREAT NEWS! It means we have embraced a more international candidate who has humility and substance. And he's a purist. He would be able to personally communicate with the most provocative nations in the middle east because he has sound principles and is a purist. And he has a name they can identify with.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing: Obama is a U.S. constitutional scholar.
He would do more good for world peace by his purist demeanor. I think he'd be a good listener and carefully weigh each bill that came to him, untainted by special interests.
I am also happy that John Edwards came in second.
We will be doing an analysis on our show this morning.
Lydia and Clif,
ReplyDeletePersonally, what last night meant for me is the beginning of the end of the Bush nightmare and the beginning of a new America.
The pollsters, pundits and racists who as recently as last summer said Barack Obama didn't have chance against the Ice Queen's machine were wrong.
Christopher and Clif: I posted your comments on the front page.
ReplyDeleteMentioned all your comments on the radio show. We are on live, right now.
ReplyDeleteI was thrilled to see that Obama won in Iowa. I truly think this country may have a chance after all.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Lydia.
ReplyDeletePerhaps we're about to see Camelot 2.0 in America?
2008 has been the WORST 3 day start to any year since 1932 at the height of the Great Depression................like Clif said where are Fascist Fan and Crusty the clown to crow how strong and robust the economy is???
ReplyDeleteCall me crazy, but usually unemployment doesnt spike like that during a record credit crunch and housing slump unless we are entering recession.
ReplyDeleteDidnt troll Tex say we have the strongest fastest growing economy in the world...............bwahahahahahaha
Bush is going yo own this recession just like the repugs are going to own the war come election time!
Lydia I didn't see your show on that so I didn't catch what John Hunt had to say but I saw and read so much on it that it seems like a parlor game to me. It seems like if you really care you can do the same thing and have it non binding.
ReplyDeleteIn regard to the caucuses No one has taken Obama seriously until now. He was a given to me. So wasn't the scenario. it will be mirrored in New Hampshire.
Huckabee was also a given in Iowa but he will be a distant third behind McCain. Giuliani, and Romney probably in the order. In the end they say The winner in Iowa rarely goes on to win the Presidency but he will this year if elections are held.
The Screen Actors Guild said Friday there appears to be unanimous agreement that nominated actors will not cross striking writers' picket lines to attend the Golden Globe Awards.
ReplyDeleteThe United States military could stay in Iraq for "maybe a hundred years" and that "would be fine with me," John McCain told two hundred or so people at a town hall meeting in Derry, New Hampshire, on Thursday evening. Toward the end of this session, which was being held shortly before the Iowa caucuses were to start, McCain was confronted by Dave Tiffany, who calls himself a "full-time antiwar activist." In a heated exchange, Tiffany told McCain that he had looked at McCain's campaign website and had found no indication of how long McCain was willing to keep U.S. troops in Iraq. Arguing that George W. Bush's escalation of troops has led to a decline in U.S. casualties, McCain noted that the United States still maintains troops in South Korea and Japan. He said he had no objection to U.S. soldiers staying in Iraq for decades."
ReplyDeleteThus the ramblings of a deranged old dragon.
Wall Street fell sharply Friday after the government's much-anticipated employment report showed weaker-than-expected job growth and a rise in the unemployment rate. The Nasdaq composite index, also pummeled by a downgrade of Intel Corp., skidded more than 3.5 percent, while the Dow Jones industrials fell more than 1.5 percent.
ReplyDeleteThus the results of a deranged old man ruining the U.S economy.
The Bush administration is imposing restrictions on the ability of states to expand eligibility for Medicaid, in an effort to prevent them from offering coverage to families of modest incomes who, the administration argues, may have access to private health insurance.
ReplyDeleteThe restrictions mirror those the administration placed on the State Children’s Health Insurance Program in August after states tried to broaden eligibility for it as well.
Until now, states had generally been free to set their own Medicaid eligibility criteria, and the Bush administration had not openly declared that it would apply the August directive to Medicaid. State officials in Louisiana, Ohio and Oklahoma said they had discovered the administration’s intent in negotiations with the federal government over the last few weeks.
Another result of that Republican Compassionate Conservatism.
Another Bush Success Story: Jobless Rate Surges, Recession Coming
ReplyDeleteBush's economy hits skids...Yahoo News, January 4th, 2008
Hiring practically stalled in December, driving the nation's unemployment rate up to a two-year high of 5 percent and fanning fears of a recession.
Employers last month added the fewest new jobs to their payrolls in more than four years, according to the employment report released Friday by the Labor Department. The report showed that employment conditions are deteriorating, strained by a housing slump and credit crunch that are sapping economic strength.
The unemployment rate jumped from 4.7 percent in November to 5 percent in December.
The December employment picture was much weaker than economists were expecting. They were forecasting the unemployment rate to bump up to 4.8 percent and for employers to add around 70,000 jobs to their payrolls.
The government added 31,000 jobs in December, while private employers actually cut payrolls by 13,000, underscoring the weakness.
To fend off the possibility of a recession, the Federal Reserve cut a key interest rate three times last year. Policymakers are expected to lower rates again when they later this month.
The Fed's job of keeping the economy expanding and inflation under control, however, is becoming more complicated.
Oil prices briefly marched past $100 a barrel this week. High energy prices are a double-edged sword and they can sap economic growth and also can spread inflation throughout the economy if they cause a rise in the price of other goods and services.
Problems in the economy have elevated fears about a recession. The housing and mortgage markets have melted down. Home foreclosures have soared to record highs and financial companies have wracked up billions of dollars worth of losses from bad mortgage investments. Credit problems have made it difficult for people to finance big-ticket purchases and for companies to expand operations and boost hiring.
Many analysts believe the economy slowed sharply in the final three months of this year to a pace of around 1.5 percent or less. Growth in the January-to-March period also is expected to be weak. Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, recently warned that the economy is "getting close to stall speed."
It's another result of the faltering Bush economy.
By Ezra Klein:
ReplyDeleteI've been blessed to hear many great orations. I was in the audience when Howard Dean gave his famous address challenging the Democratic Party to rediscover courage and return to principle. I have heard Bill Clinton speak of a place called Hope, and listened to John Edwards bravely channel the populism that American politics so often suppresses. Some of those politicians mirrored my beliefs better than Obama does. Some of their speeches were more declarative and immediate in their passion. But none achieve quite what Obama, at his best, creates.
Obama's finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don't even really inspire. They elevate. They enmesh you in a grander moment, as if history has stopped flowing passively by, and, just for an instant, contracted around you, made you aware of its presence, and your role in it. He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh, over color, over despair. The other great leaders I've heard guide us towards a better politics, but Obama is, at his best, able to call us back to our highest selves, to the place where America exists as a glittering ideal, and where we, its honored inhabitants, seem capable of achieving it, and thus of sharing in its meaning and transcendence.
In the days to come, just as in the days that have passed, I'll talk much more about Obama's policies. About his health care policy, and his foreign policy, and his social policy, and his economic policy. But so much as I like to speak of white papers and scored proposals, politics is not generally experienced in terms of policies. It's more often experienced in terms of self-interest, and broken promises, and base fears, and half-truths. But, very rarely, it's experienced as a call to create something better, bigger, grander, and more just than the world we have. When that happens, as it did with Robert F. Kennedy, the inspired remember those moments for the rest of their lives.
The tens of thousands of new voters Obama brought to the polls tonight came because he wrapped them in that experience, because he let them touch politics as it could be, rather than merely as it is. And for that, he deserved to win. And he deserves our thanks. The politician who gets the most votes merits our congratulations. But the politician who enlarges our politics and empowers more Americans to step forward into the public square deserves our gratitude. And we, in turn, deserve to permit ourselves to feel inspired, if only for a night.
There was no doubt about it. The message from Iowa last night was simple, but deafening:
ReplyDeleteIf you're a candidate for President, and you voted for the war, you lose. And if you voted and voted and voted for the war -- and never once showed any remorse -- you really lose.
In short, if you had something to do with keeping us in this war for four-plus years, you are not allowed to be the next president of the United States.
Over 70% of Iowan Democrats voted for candidates who either never voted for the invasion of Iraq (Obama, Richardson, Kucinich) or who have since admitted their mistake (Edwards, Biden, Dodd). I can't tell you how bad I feel for Senator Clinton. I don't believe she was ever really for this war. But she did -- and continued to do -- what she thought was the politically expedient thing to eventually get elected. And she was wrong. And last night she must have gone to sleep wondering what would have happened if she had voted her conscience instead of her calculator.
John Edwards was supposed to have come in third. He had been written off. He was outspent by the other front-runners six to one. But somewhere along the road he threw off the old politico hack jacket and turned into a real person, a fighter for the poor, for the uninsured, for peace. And for that, he came in a surprise second, ending up with just one less delegate than the man who was against the war from the beginning. But, as Joshua Holland of AlterNet pointed out earlier today, Edwards is still the only front-runner who will pull out all the troops and do it as quickly as possible. His speech last night was brilliant and moving.
What an amazing night, not just for Barack Obama, but for America. I know that Senator Obama is so much more than simply the color of his skin, but all of us must acknowledge -- and celebrate -- the fact that one of the whitest states in the U.S. just voted for a black man to be our next president. Thank you, Iowa, for this historic moment. Thank you for at least letting us believe that we are better than what we often seem to be. And to have so many young people come out and vote -- and vote for Obama -- this is a proud moment. It all began with the record youth turnout in 2004 -- the ONLY age group that Kerry won -- and they came back out last night en force. Good on every single one of you!
As the only top candidate who was anti-war before the war began, Barack Obama became the vessel through which the people of this Midwestern state were able to say loud and clear: "Bring 'Em Home!" Most pundits won't read the election this way because, well, most pundits merrily led us down the path to war. For them to call this vote a repudiation of the war -- and of Senator Clinton's four years' worth of votes for it -- might require the pundit class to remind their viewers and readers that they share some culpability in starting this war. And, like Hillary, damn few of them have offered us an apology.
With all due respect to Senator Obama's victory, the most important news out of the caucus this evening was the whopping, room-busting turnout of Democrats. 239,000 people showed up to vote Democratic last night (93% more than in '04, which was a record year), while only 115,000 showed up to vote Republican. And this is a red state! The Republican caucuses looked anemic. The looks on their faces were glum, tired. As the camera followed some of them into their caucus sites, they held their heads down or turned away, sorta like criminals on a perp walk. They know their days of power are over. They know their guy blew it. Their only hope was to vote for a man who has a direct line to heaven. Huckabee is their Hail Mary pass. But don't rule him out. He's got a sense of humor, he's downhome, and he said that if elected, he'd put me on a boat to Cuba. Hey, a free Caribbean vacation!
Bottom line: People have had it. Iowa will go blue (Happy Blue Year, Hawkeyes!). Whomever your candidate is on the Dem side, this was a good night. Get some sleep. The Republicans won't go down without a fight. Look what happened when Kerry tried to play nice. So Barack, you can talk all you want about "let's put the partisanship aside, let's all get along," but the other side has no intention of being anything but the bullies they are. Get your game face on now. And, if you can, tell me why you are now the second largest recipient of health industry payola after Hillary. You now take more money from the people committed to stopping universal health care than any of the Republican candidates.
Despite what your answer may be, I was proud to sit in my living room last night and see you and your family up on that stage. We became a bit better, and on that I will close by saying, sweet dreams -- and on to that other totally white state of New Hampshire!
Yours,
Michael Moore
An open letter to my Father, Mitt Romney
ReplyDeleteDear Dad;
I hope now you can see how Matt, Josh, Ben, Craig and king dick Tagg, have sold you down the river. Millions of dollars wasted. That's a lot more than the $424 you send me every month.
What do you think Tagg was doing in the Mittmobile? It wasn't getting you votes, maybe he was spending too much time trying to kill dogs or break my hands.
Dad, I love you. Do you remember when you said you loved me? And then when you said you didn't love me? And then when you said you now realize you love me and then when you said on second thought you don't love me? ANd then when you said you, in fact, genuinely love me? And then when you said you had time to think about it and you couldn't love me? Well, that hurt!
But now I see you are just all mixed up. Money can't buy you votes or love. But it could buy my love. Not because that money would buy my love, but if you gave me money it would show me you love me as much as those horse faced jerks known as my half brothers.
If you let me I will campaign for you in New Hampshire. I have spent all my money investing in Ron Paul's blimp, which turns out not to be an investment at all- I was duped into donating to him and now he's not even allowed into the Fox debate. I have had to take a lot of clonipin and percoset for my hands which Tagg had broken.
I await your response. Come home Dad.
Love Seth
Although I am certainly not an Obama fan, I love the idea of Killer Hillary coming in 3rd.
ReplyDeletePeace.
Human:
ReplyDeleteI personally like Edwards but watching Hillary try and act surreal was nice to see.
BAGHDAD -- The U.S. military Thursday reported the deaths of three soldiers, the first Americans killed in the new year. Two of the deaths were in turbulent Diyala province, where a third was wounded by small-arms fire. Another soldier was killed Wednesday in a roadside bombing in south Baghdad.
ReplyDeleteThe latest deaths bring to at least 3,907 the number of U.S. military members -- including 102 with Indiana ties -- who have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.
Iraqi officials also reported that six Iraqi soldiers were killed and two were wounded while conducting joint operations with U.S. forces against al-Qaida in the village of Abu Nakhal.
Did you party over this New Years news Bush?
oops this might just be the case that gets them all;
ReplyDeleteJose Padilla sues John Yoo for authorizing torture.
--David Kurtz
I wonder if Gonzo is next?
Wonder how fast Bush will put a stop to this?
ReplyDeleteHi Larry and Clif...about Padilla suing...I can not help but wonder if THE TAPES (torture) were destroyed so that THESE cases would not go forth.....and yes, I do think Gonzo is next ( good thing he already has a fundraising team and counsel)
ReplyDeleteON ANOTHER thread:
So has anyone else contemplated WHO Rove is working for ???
Rudy ?
Freddy?
or MITT?
hmmmmm, I wonder....
Hi Enigma,
ReplyDeleteI thing Rove is working for the slime Romney.
Romney is a favorite of old man Bush and has the money to fill Roves chubby pockets.
hmmm, that is what I was suspected, esp after "Willard " gave his "I got Religion Speech" Down in Texas with Daddy Bush looking on.....
ReplyDeleteSo I was over at Huff Post- and I saw the post about Dana Perino today- was asked if Bush watched the Caucus Results- HE DIDN'T BECAUSE. IT WAS PAST HIS BEDTIME...holy cow....he is bed before 9:30Pm..what is he a 4 year old ????
oh my...
So Bush met with his $$$$ people today...and then he came out and said the economy 'is fine"...while sitting slumped and sweaty in a chair.....and meanwhile the ticker on the screen showed the market dipping for the forth day stargiht ( Nas - dropped almost 4%- 98 points, and 270 on the down...)
HOW can anyone pretend we are not in a Recssion...we have been for over a year...???
Oh, I forgot to say this Lydia -I did a post on David Letterman I think you will appreciate- because it is really about the Writing, and what these scribes mean to our country....so please give it a read when you can....great post on Obama too..loved it...love the embracing of Hope and Change and Momentum...
ReplyDeleteand WE THE PEOPLE again.....sigh...the Best Night any of us have had in SO LONG...
269,000 DEMS showed up last night...a record...
( 120,000 in 2004...)
wow....still takes my breath away...
okay I am done babbling...
Enigma,
ReplyDeleteBush meeting with the money people must have been an Exxon board meeting since Bush and Exxon are making a killing from the oil prices.
So has anyone else contemplated WHO Rove is working for ???
ReplyDeletefreddy the Fraud was rove's first choice;
remember the MSM going gaga all over him last summer?
and Mary Matalin is working for him;
However the bets I can figger;
the neo-con reichwing is starting to think st Johnny the Delusional is their best hope now.
Especially since the second comin' of jebus in Iowa last night had them all crapping their depends, and screeching at the "fundis" on redstate and freepeville.
The implosion this time is even more delicious because it is slow motion and will last much longer then the psychotic shock of November 2006 did to the reichwing,
that and the fact when they actually had to put Reagan"s hypocritical 11th commandment to a real test;
there was NO heir apparent;
they are at each other's throat like the rabid foaming at the mouth insane clown posse they always have been.
BTW I say hypocritical because before Reagan achieved the top of the reichwing crap heap, he slimed and attack repubies with the best of them;
ONLY when he was on top was that verboten;
sort of like attacking the president was very good while bill Clinton was in the oval office;
it only became Heresy when the gutless dry drunk became foole in chief.
Hmm, just read over on Huffpost that the Swift Boat Crew is backing McCain ...lovely....so they will go after Huck and/or Obama ?....that is going to be interesting....I don;t think Obama or Edwards would handle them as badly as Kerry did....
ReplyDelete( Hillary would go all shrill)
I would think that the Repugs ( Rove) would give up on this as a tactic...but I guess some things never change...
ON a more positive note, the 100 Club for the DEMS in NH met tonight...and they showe all the speechs...it was amazing..Packed...over 3000 and they were so excited..for Obama....so loud...(that is not NW style to be loud and chanting.etc..) anyways if it is rerun on cspan...wow..
Both Bush and Edwards speechs are up over at C&L...wonderful , both of them...
Clif I just asked the same thing...and Larry thinks it is "Willard"....hmm, but Freddy is a good guess, but I also think that Rove and Fred wouldn't get along to well...and I have a feeling that Fred would not pay what Rove thinks he is worth...
ReplyDeleteSo you think that the GOP is scrambling ?
that is a nice vision....
I hope they are....
Enigma,
ReplyDeleteIf the Swiftboat bunch are working for the deranged one, then you can bet they will go after Obama so McNut can run against her.
I thought McCain wouldn't use Rove because Rove gutted him in 2000.
ReplyDeleteHowever since that gutting, the deranged old dragon has sucked on Bush's ear every chance he gets.
You may be right Clif.
Is there a subliminal message in Mitt Romney's recent attack (err... contrast) ad against Sen. John McCain?
ReplyDeleteAbout seven seconds into a spot criticizing the Arizona Republican for his stance on immigration reform, the screen quickly flashes the word "rat" in a lone white box against a predominantly blue background. The rodent reference, which appears just under and to the right of McCain's name, is a highlighted portion of the word "immigration" and disappears almost immediately.
The inclusion of the word, Romney's campaign asserted, was completely unintentional. Any interpretation otherwise was "positively ridiculous."
"I saw that mentioned on some blog post and just chalked it up for exactly what it was: an over-imaginative scrutiny of a screenshot," Romney's spokesperson Kevin Madden told the Huffington Post when asked about the "rat" shot. "It's the same sort of reasoning that would argue that the 'gal' in the word 'illegal' is a subliminal appeal to female voters."
But some in the blogosphere have latched onto the word's appearance in the campaign spot because of the blatant historical parallels. In the 2000 presidential election, the Republican National Committee ran an advertisement against Al Gore's prescription drug plan that similarly included a brief screen shot of the word "RATS." In that instance the word was part of the phrase "BUREAUCRATS DECIDE."
The creator of the 2000 advertisement, Alex Castellanos, initially said there was nothing subliminal about the spot before later acknowledging that the word was included as "a visual drumbeat designed to make you look at the word bureaucrats." Castellanos currently serves as a high ranking media consultant for Romney's presidential campaign.
The Swiftboaters may have already started Enigma.
Larry...this is too funny..on Friday Nights I always read Huff post and Bill Moyers Blog- and too funny- that is where you have been tonight too..yeah the swiftboaters are in full mode....and you know I too thought that McSane would realize they went after him in 2000...does he really not remember????
ReplyDelete( and yeah the RAT THING again...just like they did to Gore....)
Enigma,
ReplyDeleteMcCain has sold what is left of his darkened soul so I doubt he cares who gutted him, as long as he gets his power grab in the end.
You're right I was Huffingtonpost and Bill Moyers.
Larry you should have provided the link to Seth's letter
ReplyDeleteWho knew in a drunken stupor one night in his bachelor period Willard M Romney started on his very own "second family"?
How Strom Thurmond of him, and like ole strom, he did it outside his Church approved world.
He really is a traditional mormon in spirit at least, but too bad like a modern repubies he tries to HIDE that which is embarrassing to him.
too bad the MSM is willing to HIDE this like they hide much for the reichwing which owns them
Clif...but if he did IT with another Mormon...does that mean it was still naughty ? I mean is it still a sin? really ?
ReplyDelete( clif...you know I am joking ...right?)
The MitteryRomniton-3000
ReplyDeletescary real scary,
but it does give BuyPartisan '08 a whole new meaning.
Dear Dad;
ReplyDeleteI hope now you can see how Matt, Josh, Ben, Craig and king dick Tagg, have sold you down the river. Millions of dollars wasted. That's a lot more than the $424 you send me every month.
What do you think Tagg was doing in the Mittmobile? It wasn't getting you votes, maybe he was spending too much time trying to kill dogs or break my hands.
Dad, I love you. Do you remember when you said you loved me? And then when you said you didn't love me? And then when you said you now realize you love me and then when you said on second thought you don't love me? ANd then when you said you, in fact, genuinely love me? And then when you said you had time to think about it and you couldn't love me? Well, that hurt!
But now I see you are just all mixed up. Money can't buy you votes or love. But it could buy my love. Not because that money would buy my love, but if you gave me money it would show me you love me as much as those horse faced jerks known as my half brothers.
If you let me I will campaign for you in New Hampshire. I have spent all my money investing in Ron Paul's blimp, which turns out not to be an investment at all- I was duped into donating to him and now he's not even allowed into the Fox debate. I have had to take a lot of clonipin and percoset for my hands which Tagg had broken.
I await your response. Come home Dad.
Love Seth
The Sixth Brother
I reposted the letter with a link Clif.
ReplyDeleteGood stuff from those "moral family values" people in the Republican Party.
That picture on your link is scary Clif.
ReplyDeleteE 4 E Willard, didn't follow church teachings, either by getting drunk, OR fathering a child who was outside the faith, especially one that is NOT a good Christian according the the Church of Later day saints.
ReplyDeleteRead some of the entries at the link, it shows a side of the Romney family that would have been good episodes for the if the comedy channel wanted to bring back that show with south park writers.
Even dogs hate Romney:
ReplyDeleteDogs Against Romney
Chris Bowers reports some of the statistics about the Iowa Caucuses from last night.
ReplyDeleteModerates: Democratic 88%--12% Republican
Independents: Democratic 75%--25% Republican
Suburban: Democratic 73%--27% Republican
Urban: Democratic 87%--13% Republican
Rural: Republican 53%--47% Democratic
Age 17-29: Democratic 80%--20% Republican
Age 30-44: Democratic 70%--30% Republican
Age 45-64: Democratic 62%--38% Republican
Age 65+: Democratic 61%--39% Republican
Men: Democratic 60%--40% Republican
Women: Democratic 72%--28% Republican
BTW, with all that, it is even better that the total turnout at the respective caucuses: Democratic: 239,000 Republican 122,500. shows a definite leaning to the democratic party and candidates.
Hope Rove still has his math, he's gonna need something new this year;
"like a real miracle"
Larry said...
ReplyDeleteEven dogs hate Romney:
Dogs Against Romney
Romney/Vick 08?
The Democrats walked over the Repugs in every bracket listed.
ReplyDeleteDamn the repubies have problems;
ReplyDeleteDown the hall, in the school cafeteria, Republicans from the 8th precinct were preparing to take their own straw vote.
“We’re for Mitt Romney, said Stan Wilcox.
“Ahem, no we’re not,” said his wife Geneva.
“Well, we’re a broken home,” he quipped. Their son had talked Geneva into supporting Paul. Mr. Wilcox had only decided for Romney in the last month. “I was for Fred,” he said. “But he doesn’t want to be president. And I don’t force anybody to do anything they don’t want to do.”
She won't vote for plastacene Mitt, ron basshit crazy paul looked viable in comparison to her.
He wants freddy the fraud, but freddy wants to sleep, so the plastacene candidate was the next best thingy.
like I said the repubies have problems this time, hope Rove is better at miracles then he is math ........
1am...
ReplyDeleteThe 100 Club at NH had their Dinner and Meeting tonight ( 3000?) ....and All the DEMS gave speechs..Richardson is on now- really really good...
and Kucinich is next....and then Obama...
and he did a great job....
( Now I only saw part of this earlier- I missed Edwards and Hill.....so I am trying to see it...I did see Richardson, Obama, and Kucinich...they were all really good)
( BTW ABC dropped Kucinich from the forum ? why ? write to them..)
Look like "family values" Republican style has filled the precinct with their typical venom.
ReplyDeleteEnigma,
ReplyDeleteKucinich filled a suit today against ABC for dropping him from the debate.
They also dropped Gravel and neocon Duncan Hunter.
the Obama speech is coming on....this is really weird..I could have sworn they cut Kucinich..Wt???
ReplyDelete( I thought he was right before Obama...)
and damn I missed Edwards again...
my last post about ABC came out wrong- I MEANT...."why did they drop him?" and yes we should definently write to them and give them some advice....I am really tempted to tell people to Boycott Desperate Housewives on Sunday...
ReplyDeleteI think there is a replay tomorrow but not sure of the time.
ReplyDeleteOn Coulter: A Disgusting Establishment Bigot
ReplyDeleteWritten by Jeff Koopersmith
Ann Coulter Dubs Kwanzaa a Holiday Sham by America’s “United Slaves”
Scarecrow Pundette Trying for Martyrdom to Sell More Books
Jan. 3, 2007 – Geneva (apj.us) – It is no wonder that Ann Coulter is rumored to travel with personal security guards.
She begins 2008 with one of her most bigoted attacks yet, a vicious Tourette's outburst that would land her in Hell if Satan wasn’t already appalled by her.
Her instant column is yet another miserable rewrite of her previous verbal vomit about a black American holiday. One can only ask why: why does Coulter continue to say hateful things about people and policy she knows absolutely nothing about?
And she calls herself a Christian.
This week she picks on all African Americans who choose to celebrate Kwanzaa - a holiday fro them which was the innovation of black radical Ron Karenga in the 1960s. She does not bother to mention that the same Americans celebrating Kwanzaa more often than not also celebrate Christmas – even Hanukah.
If she believes Kwanzaa is a fraud, what does she think about Christmas?
Coulter also claims – lying to you again – that the FBI invented Kwanzaa. In fact, the FBI certainly used and abused the founders of Kwanzaa to split apart Americans protesting racism, sometimes mortally. These were black, white, and purple citizens who were sick with grief over bigotry and government-endorsed near-slavery that continued until the middle 20th century and some say continues today.
It is worth a mention that Coulter is living proof that while we may have rid America of “institutionalized” racism in the 60s – “Racist Pigs” like her still continue living and flourishing.
A little history is in order: The FBI at that time was run by a madman homophobic gay bombaster.. He delighted in pitting people with similar goals against each – to weaken them in general and to make certain they murdered each other in one sense or another This tactic is and was used between 2003 and today by similarly sick American strategists in Iraq – taking advantage of the divisions between Sunni and Shia Islamics – taunting them to grind each other’s babies into the blood-spattered sand. We should be familiar and wary of it:
Coulter makes fun of the timing of Kwanzaa.
Coulter delights that she hears little about the holiday any longer and takes credit for this.
Coulter belittles President Bush for referring to Kwanzaa.
Coulter calls Ron Karenga, a once black radical and now a professor, an “FBI stooge” and then goes on to prove he wasn’t.
Coulter sneers at his adopted African name - Dr. Maulana Karenga.
Coulter lies and tells you that Kwanzaa is a White liberal holiday – not a black one. Gee I don’t know a single Liberal that celebrates Kwanzaa – but I do know many who respect the right of others to do so.
Coulter scoffs at African Americans who wear native dress or dashiki.
Coulter mocks children called “Jamal” because this is a popular African American name and she asks how many blacks named Jamal “currently sit on death row.”
How awful of her on that last point. How desperately ailing must be her mind.
In fact I couldn’t find a single inmate with the forename “Jamal” on death row save for a Hispanic prisoner in California who likes to call himself Jamal, but is actually named Pedro.
There are, however, a few Anns on death row!
There is, of course, Mumia Abu, last name Jamal – but many believe he was set up and will, in the end, not be executed. Again, Coulter doesn’t check her essentials – or her “suspicions.” There are many White Joes, Johns, Jims and Franks on death row though.
Coulter absurdly tells us that Mr. Karenga was some terrifying black Nationalist that hated Whites when she knows, in fact, that Karenga was merely a product of the times – an era that her type caused.
Coulter was sucking lollypops in the 1960s – what does she know? If any of us had been black in that era, we might have despised many Whites as well don’t you think?
She calls Karenga the ‘Father Gapon” of American life at that time but obviously has no idea who Gapon was – the heir to huge fortune, an anti-tsarist, and a man who used the Russian police as pawns – not as she tells you - the other way around.
She confuses Karenga’s move to give black Americans “something of their own” – their own holiday – with his “hatred” for Whites.
Coulter offers ‘proof’ of Karenga’s cooperation with federal law enforcement offering this ludicrous idea; that Karenga criticized those that said black radicals at the time were government supported.
Oh. I see – If you criticize someone or something you must therefore be guilty of it?
Where does that put Ann Coulter?
And here’s her biggest lie of all – Coulter refers to the “Us” Organization – which Karenga founded – as “United Slaves” yet this organization has never been called “United Slaves” except by its detractors – Coulter among them. I know. I was a there at the time.
Ms. Coulter most likely picked that up from mega-bigot David Horowitz or the silly William Bennetta who runs something called “The Textbook League” – a self serving group that rakes through schoolbooks looking for what they decide is untrue. Not a surprise, Bennetta is also best known for attacking Kwanzaa and Prentice Hall Publishing for including Kwanzaa in their textbooks. He also assails a text about African scientists and is also well known for violent opposition to teaching “intelligent design.”
Have you stopped laughing yet?
How can Coulter ape someone who is against intelligent design?
Coulter also implies that Prof. Karenga “served time” for shooting two black Panthers to death at UCLA. He did not serve time nor was he charged for that crime or any like it. Karenga did serve time for another crime many think was a part of the law enforcement set up that Coulter alludes to when she assails Karenga. The truth about this incident may never surface but Karenga spent four years in prison for allegedly keeping two women at his house that he testified were trying to poison him. The women testified that he “kidnapped” them and also tortured them with one of his friends.
Many in California believe Karenga was certainly a target for murder or poisoning.
Having snorted too much of “something” Coulter adds this ditty (sung to the tune of "Jingle Bells"):
Kwanzaa bells, dashikis sell
Whitey has to pay;
Burning, shooting, oh what fun
On this made-up holiday!
Ms. Coulter finally gets down to her prevaricating brass tacks though, and toward the end of her rant tells us what she’s truly about:
“A movement that started approximately 2,000 years before Kwanzaa leaps well beyond mere "unity" and "faith" to proclaim that we are all equal before God. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28). It was practitioners of that faith who were at the forefront of the abolitionist and civil rights movements.”
Of course she is incorrect on all points here. First, the religion she should have referred to started more than 5,000 years ago – Judaism. And Jews were the ones also who were at the forefront of the civil rights and died for the movement fighting against Coulter’s so-called Christians who constructed and nourished slavery and the slave trade for hundreds of years in the United States and abroad.
Jews, Ms. Coulter, are also not “all one in Christ Jesus” – You sick fraud.
okay...on a lighter Note...cuz I can't go to bed after thinking about Annie Coulter....New Word...let's start HOPEMONGERING....
ReplyDeleteObama's word from the speech...
Enigma, I love HOPEMONGERING.
ReplyDeleteLet's adopt that word from Obama.
I think from now on One Day a Week I am going to have HOPEMONGER Day....hmmm I have to think which day to make it....maybe Mondays..everyone needs Some Hope at the beginning of the Week....
ReplyDeleteand I don't think Obama would mind at all if we adopt it , do you ??
;-)
Oh Lydia...I wrote back aways- I have a new post up today for Dave Letterman and his writers- called " Bearded Men, Lost Scribes, and Sacred Clowns"....have a read- it is about how special they are ...and why we need them NOW more than ever ( Sacred Cows- sounds offensive -it is not- it an Native American Expression...) Anyways I wrote above , thank you for writing about Dave and it is good to have him and his writers back....we need them..
ReplyDeleteokay...I will stop rambling...thanks..
Ohhhhno...Fruedian Typo alert...that was supposed to say "Sacred CLOWNS"...Okay...I am going to bed with my dyslexic fingers....oye...
ReplyDelete(AP) -- An Iraqi soldier shot dead two American troops for "reasons that are as yet unknown" while they were patrolling together north of the capital, the U.S. military said Saturday. An Iraqi official said the suspect has links to militant groups.
ReplyDeleteThree other U.S. soldiers and a civilian interpreter were wounded in the Dec. 26 attack, the military said in a statement. The shooting occurred as American and Iraqi soldiers were trying to establish a combat outpost in Ninevah province in northern Iraq.
According to Brig. Mutaa Habib Jassim al-Khazrachi, commander of the Iraqi army's 2nd Division, an initial investigation has indicated that the Iraqi soldier has links to local militant groups.
Olympic gold medal skater Dorothy Hamill is being treated for breast cancer at Johns Hopkins' Kimmel Cancer Center.
ReplyDelete"I'm OK," Hamill said last night in a short telephone interview. "I'm still a little woozy. It's been kind of a hit in the head."
Hamill, 51, had to leave the starring role in the 19-stop national touring company of Broadway on Ice, but she said she would like to rejoin the cast later this month.
"I'll be up to normal things soon, but I've got to take it easy right now," she said.
Longtime friend Dean Moye, a production manager for Cirque du Soleil, said Hamill decided to go public with her treatment because she wanted to be honest about her absence from the show.
"She's been dealing with this for longer than she'd want anyone to know," Moye said. "She's got a good support team around her. It's still very early in the process. They're still doing tests to determine what steps to take next."
Hamill, who settled in Baltimore a decade ago with her daughter Alexandra, spent last fall on a promotional tour for her autobiography, A Skating Life: My Story.
The three-time U.S. figure skating champion won the Olympic gold medal in 1976 at age 19, then earned the world title a month later. She turned professional and later toured with the Ice Capades. Her distinctive "wedge" haircut and big smile made tens of thousands of young girls stumble bleary-eyed to their local rinks before dawn, determined to be the next Hamill.
In her book, she wrote frankly about her two divorces, bankruptcy and battles with depression and osteoarthritis, a degeneration of the cartilage surrounding the joints.
But in an interview last September with The Sun, Hamill said she felt "really blessed."
"I feel really lucky. Yes, I've had ups and downs, but I have my health and I have a great life, and I think it takes the downs to appreciate the ups," she said. "And I'm just so lucky that skating has always been there for me."
Last month, while the Broadway tour was on the West Coast, she joined Brian Boitano and Barry Manilow in a skating show at AT&T Park in San Francisco that was taped for the Style network and televised Christmas week. Hamill brought down the house with her interpretation of Manilow's hit, "Weekend in New England."
During her stay in the Bay Area, she and Boitano visited patients at the George Mark Children's House in San Leandro, a pediatric hospice, and donated part of the proceeds from the show to it.
She finished the year on the Broadway on Ice tour and returned to Baltimore for surgery earlier this week. Boitano is filling in for her this weekend in Sarasota, Fla., and the next two dates on the tour.
Hamill said she would like to return to the ice Jan. 16 in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and finish the final four dates of the season.
"That's just Dorothy," Moye said. "Whether she bangs her knee or bangs her head, she wants to get right back out there."
Thanks Larry: I love Dorothy Hamil. She has been through so much tragedy and is really an amazing spirit.
ReplyDeleteHey, can you guys believe what ABC is doing to Kucinich?
Can anyone make sense of this? Is it the Dem leadership trying to silence him or big media?
BREAKING
ReplyDeleteOBAMA OPENS 10 POINT LEAD IN NEW HAMPSHIRE
A major national pollster says that Hillary Clinton has fallen well far behind Barack Obama in New Hampshire after her third-place finish in Iowa.
Rasmussen Reports, in a telephone survey of 510 likely Democratic voters on Friday, found 37 percent backing Barack Obama, 27 percent for Clinton.
In Rasmussen’s last New Hampshire polling, before Christmas, Clinton led Obama by 3 percent.
It's time to stick a fork in Hillary and begin saying "President-Elect Barack Obama!"
I think Obama would make an excellent president. And I'm glad Huckabee took Iowa. He's the best candidate for driving a wedge between the different Republican camps.
ReplyDeleteWho Hijacked Our Country
Fox News host Bill O'Reilly got into a confrontation with an Obama aide after O'Reilly started screaming at him as he tried to get Barack Obama's attention following a rally here. O'Reilly eventually did chat briefly with Obama and asked him to be a guest on his show.
ReplyDeleteThe incident was triggered when O'Reilly--with a Fox News crew shooting--was screaming at Obama National Trip Director Marvin Nicholson "Move" so he could get Obama's attention, according to several eyewitnesses. "O'Reilly was yelling at him, yelling at his face," a photographer shooting the scene said.
O'Reilly grabbed Nicholson's arm and shoved him, another eyewitness said. Nicholson, who is 6'8, said O'Reilly called him "low class."
"He grabbed me with both his hands here," Nicholson said, gesturing to his left arm and O'Reilly "started shoving me." Nicholson said, " He was pretty upset. He was yelling at me."
Secret Service agents who were nearby flanked O 'Reilly after he pushed Nicholson. They told O'Reilly he needed to calm down and get behind the fence-like barricade that contained the press.
Obama had his back turned at this point and did not see any of this.
The California Nurses Association (CNA)/National Nurses Organizing Committee (NNOC) launched a national campaign today in favor of what the group has dubbed "CheneyCare" -- guaranteed, publicly-funded health care for all Americans.
ReplyDeleteThe campaign was inspired by the success of the group's Iowa ads declaring that Vice President Dick Cheney "would be dead" if he did not have publicly-funded health care. A new version of the Iowa ad asking Americans to sign a petition for "CheneyCare" will run today in eight New Hampshire papers before going national in the New York Times, Washington Post, and USA Today, as well as leading political blogs, on Monday.
"All Americans have the right to the quality of care that our Vice-President, President, and Congress already have," said Rose Ann DeMoro, Executive Director of CNA/NNOC and a vice-president of the AFL-CIO. "All the leading Democratic proposals fall well short of "CheneyCare," keeping insurance companies at the apex of power and allowing them to deny care that can save lives. The Republican proposals are even worse."
The ad uses recent headlines about Vice-President Dick Cheney's latest heart procedure to point out the difference between the government-funded health care that the nation's leading politicians enjoy and the precarious health care situation in which most Americans find themselves.
A news article about Cheney's recent treatment for heartbeat irregularities provides the context with the headline: "If he were anyone else, he'd probably be dead by now." The text highlights that factors such as the patient's history and prognosis would likely lead to a denial of private insurance claims for most Americans, assuming that they had coverage in the first place.
The ad asks readers to go to http://www.CheneyCare.org and sign a petition in support of CheneyCare for all Americans. The blog ads cut to the chase, with the tagline "CheneyCare for all."
AdvertisementThe campaign plans to continue running ads in all the early primary states. Once the presidential candidates are chosen, the petition will be delivered to the both the Democratic and Republican nominees' state campaign offices around the country.
CNA/NNOC has been critical of "universal health care" proposals by top Democratic presidential hopefuls Senator Hillary Clinton, Senator Barack Obama and John Edwards, which continue to rely upon the wasteful inclusion of private insurance companies.
Earlier in the campaign season, CNA/NNOC teamed up with Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) to air television ads during Democratic presidential debates in Iowa and New Hampshire. The three "Speechless" ads featured regular Americans describing the costs, burdens and financial pressures that the current health care system is putting on them to one of the leading democratic candidates. They then ask the candidate what she or he is doing about it. The camera then cut to a cardboard cut-out of candidates Clinton, Obama or Edwards, with a voice-over that says, "The longer nobody
talks about single payer, guaranteed health care for everyone, the longer we are going to wait to get it."
If your tax dollars can provide Blowhard Cheney with the best healthcare coverage in America, why can't those same tax dollars get the same for you?
Hopes that the economy could shake off the sub-prime mortgage mess and dodge recession grew fainter Friday as the Labor Department reported that U.S. employers last month added the smallest number of new jobs in more than four years -- driving the unemployment rate to a two-year high of 5%.
ReplyDeleteWord that payrolls grew by only 18,000 jobs in December extended a string of negative economic news in recent weeks. Oil briefly touched $100 a barrel. Auto sales slipped to their lowest annual count in a decade. And an influential survey of U.S. manufacturing posted its weakest results in nearly five years.
Even exports, which are supposed to be one of the country's economic bright spots, stumbled. Sales of new homes and orders for big-ticket items fell short of analysts' expectations. Business equipment spending declined. And jobless benefit claims have been on the rise.
Obviously Bush cares nothing about the recession filled economy he has created.
Tom Harper said...
ReplyDeleteI think Obama would make an excellent president. And I'm glad Huckabee took Iowa. He's the best candidate for driving a wedge between the different Republican camps.
Who Hijacked Our Country"
I thought the same thing Tom!
O hope Obama and Edwards make Hillary look bitter and cold in the debate tonight.
ReplyDeleteDid you hear Rudy the Fascist blather that if everyone just forked over $15,000 for a health care policy we wouldnt have a health care crisis.....................so i guess all the people working 2 jobs to feed their kids should just quit eating and paying their mortgage to buy $15,000 health care policies like the elitist repugs say....................oops I guess that horse allready left the barn and people DID stop paying their mortgage its called the subprime mortgage crisis because of corruption and lack of regulation after 7 years of fascist cronnies being in power!
ReplyDeleteGuiliani is an old blowhard that could care less if everyone had insurance or not.
ReplyDeleteLarry said...
ReplyDeleteO hope Obama and Edwards make Hillary look bitter and cold in the debate tonight."
Dont they always Larry...........I think Iowa make it perfectly clear that America is choosing hope and a new direction over war mongering and fear momgering.......this is evidenced By Rudy and Hillar's campaigns flopping.
Check out this post on McCain by Jolly Roger. The wording is classic Jolly Roger style:
ReplyDeleteReconstitution
Larry said...
ReplyDeleteHopes that the economy could shake off the sub-prime mortgage mess and dodge recession grew fainter Friday as the Labor Department reported that U.S. employers last month added the smallest number of new jobs in more than four years -- driving the unemployment rate to a two-year high of 5%.
Word that payrolls grew by only 18,000 jobs in December extended a string of negative economic news in recent weeks. Oil briefly touched $100 a barrel. Auto sales slipped to their lowest annual count in a decade. And an influential survey of U.S. manufacturing posted its weakest results in nearly five years.
Even exports, which are supposed to be one of the country's economic bright spots, stumbled. Sales of new homes and orders for big-ticket items fell short of analysts' expectations. Business equipment spending declined. And jobless benefit claims have been on the rise.
Obviously Bush cares nothing about the recession filled economy he has created."
This recession is gonna be a REAL nasty one Larry and Bush is gonna own it.
The Swiftboaters are working for the righteous McCain so look for them to try and destroy Obama.
ReplyDeleteIs Fred Thompson the dumbest dried up old scare crow you ever saw!
ReplyDeleteYou got that right about Thompson Mike and he still is in the race even though it interferes with his nap.
ReplyDeleteTomgram: How Bush Took Us to the Dark Side
ReplyDeleteJourney to the Dark Side
The Bush Legacy (Take One)
By Tom Engelhardt
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
-- Emma Lazarus, 1883
If you don't mind thinking about the Bush legacy a year early, there are worse places to begin than with the case of Erla Ósk Arnardóttir Lilliendahl. Admittedly, she isn't an ideal "tempest-tost" candidate for Emma Lazarus' famous lines engraved on a bronze plaque inside the Statue of Liberty. After all, she flew to New York City with her girlfriends, first class, from her native Iceland, to partake of "the Christmas spirit." She was drinking white wine en route and, as she put it, "look[ing] forward to go shopping, eat good food, and enjoy life." On an earlier vacation trip, back in 1995, she had overstayed her visa by three weeks, a modest enough infraction, and had even returned the following year without incident.
This time -- with the President's Global War on Terror in full swing -- she was pulled aside at passport control at JFK Airport, questioned about those extra three weeks 12 years ago, and soon found herself, as she put it, "handcuffed and chained, denied the chance to sleep… without food and drink and… confined to a place without anyone knowing my whereabouts, imprisoned." It was "the greatest humiliation to which I have ever been subjected."
By her account, she was photographed, fingerprinted, asked rude questions -- "by men anxious to demonstrate their power. Small kings with megalomania" -- confined to a tiny room for hours, then chained, marched through the airport, and driven to a jail in New Jersey where, for another nine hours, she found herself "in a small, dirty cell." On being prepared for the return trip to JFK and deportation, approximately 24 hours after first debarking, she was, despite her pleas, despite her tears, again handcuffed and put in leg chains, all, as she put it, "because I had taken a longer vacation than allowed under the law."
On returning to her country, she wrote a blog about her unnerving experience and the Icelandic Foreign Minister Ingibjörg Sólrún GÃsladóttir met with U.S. Ambassador Carol van Voorst to demand an apology. Just as when egregious American acts in Iraq or Afghanistan won't go away, the Department of Homeland Security announced an "investigation," a "review of its work procedures" and expressed "regrets." But an admission of error or an actual apology? Uh, what era do you imagine we're living in?
Erla Ósk will undoubtedly think twice before taking another fun-filled holiday in the U.S., but her experience was no aberration among Icelanders visiting the U.S. In fact, it's a relatively humdrum one these days, especially if you appear to be of Middle Eastern background.
Take, for instance, 20-year veteran of the National Guard Zakariya Muhammad Reed (born Edward Eugene Reed, Jr.), who, for the last 11 years, has worked as a firefighter in Toledo, Ohio. Regularly crossing the Canadian border to visit his wife's family, he has been stopped so many times -- "I was put up against the wall and thoroughly frisked, any more thoroughly and I would have asked for flowers…" -- that he is a connoisseur of detention. He's been stopped five times in the last seven months and now chooses his crossing place based on the size of the detention waiting room he knows he'll end up in. It took several such incidents, during which no explanations were offered, before he discovered that he was being stopped in part because of his name and in part because of a letter he wrote to the Toledo Blade criticizing Bush administration policies on Israel and Iraq.
The first time, he was detained in a small room with two armed guards, while his wife and children were left in a larger common room. While he was grilled, she was denied permission to return to their car even to get a change of diapers for their youngest child. When finally released, Reed found his car had been "trashed." ("My son's portable DVD player was broken, and I have a decorative Koran on the dashboard that was thrown on the floor.") During another episode of detention, an interrogator evidently attempted to intimidate him by putting his pistol on the table at which they were seated. ("He takes the clip out of his weapon, looks at the ammunition, puts the clip back in, and puts it back in his holster.") His first four border-crossing detentions were well covered by Matthew Rothschild in a post at the Progressive Magazine's website. During his latest one, he was questioned about Rothschild's coverage of his case.
The essence of his experience is perhaps caught best in a comment by Customs and Border Protection agent made in his presence: "We should treat them like we do in the desert. We should put a bag over their heads and zip tie their hands together."
Or take Nabil Al Yousuf, not exactly a top-ten candidate for the "huddled masses" category; nor an obvious terror suspect (unless, of course, you believe yourself at war with Islam or the Arab world). According to the Washington Post's Ellen Knickmeyer, Yousuf, who is "a senior aide to the ruler of the Persian Gulf state of Dubai," always has the same "galling" experience on entering the country:
"A U.S. airport immigration official typically takes Yousuf's passport, places it in a yellow envelope and beckons. Yousuf tells his oldest son and other family members not to worry. And Yousuf -- who goes by 'Your Excellency' at home -- disappears inside a shabby back room. He waits alongside the likes of 'a man who had forged his visa and a woman who had drugs in her tummy'… He is questioned, fingerprinted and photographed."
Despite his own fond memories of attending universities in Arizona and Georgia, Yousuf has decided to send his son to college… in Australia. Knickmeyer adds:
"A generation of Arab men who once attended college in the United States, and returned home to become leaders in the Middle East, increasingly is sending the next generation to schools elsewhere. This year, Australia overtook the United States as the top choice of citizens of the United Arab Emirates heading abroad for college, according to government figures here."
This is what "homeland security" means in the United States today. It means putting your country in full lockdown mode. It means the snarl at the border, the nasty comment in the waiting room, the dirty cell, the handcuffs, even the chains. It means being humiliated. It means a thorough lack of modulation or moderation. Arriving here now always threatens to be a "tempest-tost" experience whether you are a citizen, a semi-official visitor, or a foreign tourist. (After all, even Sen. Ted Kennedy found himself repeatedly on a no-fly list without adequate explanation.) Think of these three cases as snapshots from the borders of a country in which the presumption of innocence is slowly being drained of all meaning.
News from Nowhere
So far, of course, we've only been talking about the lucky ones. After all, Erla Ósk, Zakariya Muhammad Reed, and Nabil Al Yousuf all made it home relatively quickly. In the final weeks of 2007, a little flood of press reports tracked more extreme versions of the global lockdown the Bush administration launched in late 2001, cases in which, after the snarl, the door clanged shut and home became the barest of hopes.
Take, for example, a December 1st Washington Post piece in which reporter Craig Whitlock revealed one more small part of the CIA's global network of secret imprisonment. We already knew, among other things, that the CIA had set up and run its own secret prisons in Eastern Europe and probably in Thailand; that it had a network of secret sites in Afghanistan like "the Salt Pit" near Kabul; that it may have used the "British" island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, as well as American ships, naval and possibly commercial, to hold prisoners beyond the purview of any authority or even the visits of the International Red Cross; that it ran an air fleet of leased executive jets (including some from Jeppesen Dataplan, a subsidiary of Boeing, which made it back into the news in December because of a lawsuit launched by the ACLU); that these were used to transport terror suspects it snatched up off city streets or battlefields anywhere on the planet to its own "black sites" or which it "rendered" in "extraordinary" manner to the jails and torture chambers of Syria, Egypt, Uzbekistan, and other lands whose agents had no qualms about torturing and abusing prisoners.
Whitlock, however, added a new piece to the CIA's incarceration puzzle: an "imposing building" on the outskirts of Amman, Jordan. This turns out to be the headquarters of the General Intelligence Department, Jordan's powerful spy and security agency (and the CIA's closest Arab ally in the Middle East). Known as a place where torture is freely applied, it has been a way-station for "CIA prisoners captured in other countries." The first terror suspects kidnapped by Agency operatives were, it seems, flown to Jordan and housed in that building before Guantanamo was up and running or the Agency had been able to set up its own secret prisons elsewhere. There, the prisoners were hidden, even from the International Red Cross. To cite but one case Whitlock mentions:
"Jamil Qasim Saeed Mohammed, a Yemeni microbiology student, was captured in a U.S.-Pakistani operation in Karachi a few weeks after 9/11 on suspicion of helping to finance al-Qaeda operations. Witnesses reported seeing masked men take him aboard a Gulfstream V jet at the Karachi airport Oct. 24, 2001. Records show that the plane was chartered by a CIA front company and that it flew directly to Amman. Mohammed has not been seen since. Amnesty International said it has asked the Jordanian government for information on his whereabouts but has not received an answer."
Also in December, because of that lawsuit against Jeppesen, we got our first insider's account of the CIA "black sites" (and, thanks to Salon.com, even architectural plans for a few of the interrogation rooms and prison cells at those sites, all of which seem to have cameras in them). It was here that "high-value targets" were incarcerated, isolated, and subjected to various "enhanced interrogation techniques."
Mohamed Farag Ahmad Bashmilah, a Yemeni, was picked up by the Jordanians in Amman in 2003 and tortured into signing a "full confession" (to acts he had not committed). He was then turned over to the CIA and flown to Kabul (and possibly Eastern Europe as well) where he was imprisoned. He has offered in-depth accounts that give a sense of what those "enhanced interrogation techniques" the Bush administration sponsors so enthusiastically are all about at a personal level. In the end, while in CIA custody, Bashmilah was driven to several suicide attempts, including one in which, using a bit of metal, he slashed his wrist and wrote, "I am innocent," on a cell wall in his own blood.
Here is just part of a description he offered Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! of being prepared for transport by CIA air taxi into black-site hell:
"And then they put… like little plugs inside the ears, plastic. And then they put gauze on that, on the ears. And then they taped that with very strong adhesive tape. And then they put a hood over my head. And then, on top of that, they put a headphone. This is as far as the top of my body was. And then they handcuffed me with a chain, and also they chained my ankles. Then they put a belt above the pants, and then they tied the hands and the ankles to that belt. This was after being slapped and kicked until I almost fainted."
In his cell in a secret prison in Afghanistan, "[i]n the beginning, it was totally dark. It was as if you were inside a tomb. Then, after that, they would turn a light on. Above the door, there was a camera. And there was constant loud music." From then on, neither the lights, nor the music went off. As Mark Benjamin of Salon.com wrote, "His leg shackles were chained to the wall. The guards would not let him sleep, forcing Bashmilah to raise his hand every half hour to prove he was still awake… Guards wore black pants with pockets, long-sleeved black shirts, rubber gloves or black gloves, and masks that covered the head and neck. The masks had tinted yellow plastic over the eyes. 'I never heard the guards speak to each other and they never spoke to me,' Bashmilah wrote in his declaration…
"After 19 months of imprisonment and torment at the hands of the CIA, the agency released him [in Yemen] with no explanation, just as he had been imprisoned in the first place. He faced no terrorism charges. He was given no lawyer. He saw no judge. He was simply released, his life shattered."
No charges, no lawyers, no judge. This is increasingly the norm of -- and a legacy of -- George Bush's world. In this way, the snarl at the borders melds with the screams of terror in cells worldwide.
Embedded Reports from the Dark Side
A new Pentagon term came into use in the Bush era. With the invasion of Iraq, reporters were said to be "embedded" in U.S. military units. That term -- so close in sound to "in bed with" -- should have wider uses. You could, for instance, say that Americans have, since September 2001, been "embedded," largely willingly, in a new lockdown universe defined by a general acceptance of widespread acts of torture and abuse, as well as of the right to kidnap (known as "extraordinary rendition"), and the creation and expansion of an offshore Bermuda Triangle of injustice, all based on the principle that a human being is guilty unless proven (sometimes even if proven) innocent. What might originally have seemed like emergency measures in a moment of crisis is now an institutionalized way of life. Whether we like it or not, these methods increasingly define what it means to be an American. In this manner, despite the "freedom" rhetoric of the Bush administration, the phrase "the price of freedom" has been superseded by the price of what passes for "safety" and "security."
Media coverage of such subjects reflects this. The cases above, all reported in December, barely scratch the surface of this universe. Just a glance at other December stories -- some barely attended to, or dealt with by minor outlets or in humdrum ways, but many well covered in major papers and still causing little consternation -- indicates just how normalized all this has become.
A legacy can often be framed in words. So here's a little rundown of just some areas in which, when it came to torture, kidnapping, and offshore imprisonment, 2007 ended in a deluge, not a trickle:
Destroyed Tapes: One issue connected to torture -- sorry, "enhanced interrogation techniques" -- did get major coverage last month, the revelation on the front page of the December 6th New York Times of the destruction, in 2005, of hundreds of hours of CIA videotapes of the first two major interrogations, including waterboardings, of al-Qaeda operatives -- in this case, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. In the weeks that followed, responsibility for the decision to destroy those tapes has been creeping ever higher, with four key lawyers connected to the White House and the Vice President's office brought into the mix in mid-December, and reports that the chief of the CIA's National Clandestine Service, Jose A. Rodriguez, who ordered their destruction, may soon testify before Congress under immunity and implicate as yet unnamed higher-ups.
As with all such cover-up stories, this one can only get worse. It has already been reported in the Wall Street Journal that the faces of more senior CIA officials, not just low-level interrogators, may have been caught on those tapes from the administration's secret torture chambers. We are sure to learn that these were hardly the only interrogations taped by the Agency. As yet, by the way, almost all attention has gone to the destruction of the tapes, little to why they were made in the first place. As December ended, however, Scott Shane of the New York Times wrote a piece, "Tapes by CIA Lived and Died to Save Image," with this telling line from the CIA's then number three official, A. B. Krongard: "You want interrogators in training to watch the tapes." Think about that a moment. The Justice Department, which, along with the CIA's Inspector General, launched an investigation of the tape destruction under pressure, also attempted to shut down congressional investigations of the same -- unsuccessfully.
Kidnapping Is the Law: According to the British Sunday Times, "A senior lawyer for the American government has told the Court of Appeal in London that kidnapping foreign citizens is permissible under American law because the U.S. Supreme Court has sanctioned it." According to that lawyer, the precedent "goes back to bounty hunting days in the 1860s." This applies, it seems, not just to terror suspects in extraordinary rendition cases, but to white businessmen wanted for, say, fraud. "The American government has for the first time made it clear in a British court that the law applies to anyone, British or otherwise, suspected of a crime by Washington." International human rights lawyer Scott Horton writes at his No Comment blog:
"This is not U.S. law, it is a Bush Administration hallucination as to U.S. law… The sort of nightmare which refuses to recognize the sovereignty of foreign states or the solemn commitments of U.S. governments over the last two centuries in treaties and conventions. The sort of nightmare that refuses to recognize the 'law of nations' referred to by the Founding Fathers and incorporated into the Constitution."
Innocence at Guantanamo: New military and court documents were released in December, thanks to a suit by lawyers representing Murat Kurnaz, that further illuminated the case of the 19-year old German citizen who "chose a bad time to travel." Kurnaz was captured by the U.S. Army in Pakistan in 2002 and transported to Guantanamo. There, within months, according to the Washington Post's Carol D. Leonnig, "his American captors concluded that he was not a terrorist." This was the consensus of intelligence officials. He was nonetheless declared a "dangerous al-Qaeda ally" by successive military tribunals at the prison and was not released until August 2006 when he was flown to freedom in Germany "goggled, masked and bound, as he had been when he was flown to Guantanamo Bay."
Evidence from Waterboarding: According to Josh White of the Washington Post, Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Hartmann, "[t]he top legal adviser for the military trials of Guantanamo Bay detainees told Congress… that he cannot rule out the use of evidence derived from the CIA's aggressive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding." He even refused to say that waterboarding would be illegal if used by the interrogators of another country on U.S. military personnel. In a confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, like his boss Attorney General Michael Mukasey, Mark Filip, the administration's nominee for second-in-command at the Justice Department, also refused to take a stand on waterboarding, even though he called it "repugnant."
Torture Veto: In December, President Bush threatened to "veto a House [of Representatives] bill that would explicitly ban a variety of abhorrent practices. The bill would require U.S. intelligence agencies to follow interrogation rules adopted by the armed forces last year."
Torturers speak out: In December, two figures connected with U.S. torture practices spoke out. John Kiriakou, a CIA agent involved in capturing top al-Qaeda operatives, gave interviews to ABC and NBC News in which he called waterboarding "torture," regretted its use ("we Americans are better than that"), and also insisted that "[t]his was a policy made at the White House, with concurrence from the National Security Council and justice department." In the meantime, Damien Corsetti, a former private in the U.S. Army who served as an interrogator in Kabul, Afghanistan (and was nicknamed the "king of torture" and "the monster" by his colleagues at Bagram prison), gave an interview to the Spanish paper El Mundo, describing the beatings and torture techniques used there. ("They tell them they are going to kill their children, rape their wives. And you see on their faces, in their eyes, the terror that that causes them. Because, of course, we know all about those people. We know the names of their children, where they live -- we show them satellite photos of their houses. It is worse than any torture.") He also claimed that 98% of the prisoners, as far as he could tell, had nothing to do with either al-Qaeda or the Taliban, and observed, "In Abu-Ghurayb and Bagram they were tortured to make them suffer, not to get information out of them." Both men denied themselves torturing or mistreating anyone.
Justice Moves Fast: The Justice Department, which dragged its feet on those destroyed CIA videotapes (and then tried to submarine a congressional investigation of the same), nonetheless reacted strongly to the horrors of torture in another context. Its officials moved swiftly to investigate whether former agent John Kiriakou, in giving that interview about waterboarding to ABC News, had "illegally disclosed classified information in describing the capture and waterboarding of an al-Qaeda terrorism suspect." Consider that a message about priorities from the powers that be.
Iraqis in American Jails: Latest estimates are that up to 30,000 Iraqis are now held in American prisons in Iraq. While this figure falls 10,000 short of the number of Iraqis American commander Gen. David Petraeus believed might be arrested during the "surge" months in Baghdad and elsewhere, it does add up, as Juan Cole points out at his Informed Comment website, to 0.1% of what's left of the Iraqi population, or approximately one out of every 1,000 Iraqis.
Think of these eight stories as themselves only the tip of December's melting iceberg of news on such topics. You could no less easily write about lawyer Andrew Williams, a JAG officer with the Naval Reserves, who resigned his commission in response to the unwillingness of Gen. Hartmann "to call the hypothetical waterboarding of an American pilot by the Iranian military torture." In a letter to The Peninsula Gateway of Gig Harbor, Washington, Williams wrote in part:
"Thank you, General Hartmann, for finally admitting the United States is now part of a long tradition of torturers going back to the Inquisition…. Waterboarding was used by the Nazi Gestapo and the feared Japanese Kempeitai… Waterboarding was practiced by the Khmer Rouge at the infamous Tuol Sleng prison. Most recently, the U.S. Army court martialed a soldier for the practice in 1968 during the Vietnam conflict.
"General Hartmann, following orders was not an excuse for anyone put on trial in Nuremberg, and it will not be an excuse for you or your superiors, either. Despite the CIA and the administration attempting to cover up the practice by destroying interrogation tapes, in direct violation of a court order, and congressional requests, the truth about torture, illegal spying on Americans and secret renditions is coming out."
Or you could mention the news that the "Australian Taliban," David Hicks, the sole person actually convicted on terrorism charges at Guantanamo, was released after serving a nine-month sentence in Australia (and five years of non-sentence time in Cuba); or the first reports on the Internet of speculation in Washington that George Bush himself might have viewed parts of those CIA interrogation tapes, or the Washington Post report that, in 2002, four key Congressional figures, including Nancy Pelosi, had been given "a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk," including waterboarding, without objections being raised. Or… but the list is almost unending.
The Bush Legacy
As a people, we Americans have not faintly come to grips with how centrally the Bush administration has planted certain practices in our midst -- at the very heart of governmental practice, of the news, of everyday life. Many of these practices were not in themselves creations of this administration. For instance, the practice of kidnapping abroad -- "rendition" -- began at least in the Clinton era, if not earlier. Waterboarding, a medieval torture, was first practiced by American troops in the Philippine insurrection at the dawn of the previous century. (It was then known as "the water cure.")
Torture of various sorts was widely used in CIA interrogation centers in Vietnam in the 1960s. Back in that era, the CIA also ran its own airline, Air America, rather than just leasing planes from various corporate entities through front businesses. Abu Ghraib-style torture and abuse, pioneered by the CIA in the 1950s and 1960s, was taught and used by American military, CIA, and police officials in Latin America from the 1960s into the 1980s. If you doubt any of this, just check out Alfred McCoy's still shocking book, A Question of Torture. Even offshore secret CIA prisons aren't a unique creation of the Bush administration. According to Tim Weiner in his new history of the Central Intelligence Agency, Legacy of Ashes, in the 1950s the Agency had three of them -- in Japan, Germany, and the Panama Canal Zone -- where they brought double agents of questionable loyalty for "secret experiments" in harsh interrogation, "using techniques on the edge of torture, drug-induced mind control, and brainwashing."
And yet, don't for a second think that nothing has changed. Part of the Bush legacy lies in a new ethos in this country. In my childhood in the 1950s, for example, we knew just who the torturers were. We saw them in the movies. They were the sadistic Japanese in their prison camps, the Gestapo in their prisons, and the Soviet Secret police, the KGB, in their gulags (even if that name hadn't yet entered our world). As the President now says at every opportunity, and as we then knew, Americans did not torture.
Today, and it's a measure of our changing American world, a child turning on the TV serial "24" or heading for the nearest hot, new action flick at the local multiplex knows that Americans do torture and that torture, once the cultural province of our most evil enemies, is now a practice that is 100% all-American and perfectly justifiable (normally by the ticking-bomb scenario). And few even blink. In lockdown America, it computes. The snarl at the border fits well enough with what our Vice President has termed a "no-brainer," a "dunk in the water" in the torture chamber. There is no deniability left in the movies -- and little enough of it in real life.
American presidents of the Vietnam and Latin American war years operated in a realm of deniability when it came to torture and other such practices. No American could then have imagined a Vice President heading for Capitol Hill to lobby openly for a torture bill or a President publicly threatening to veto congressional legislation banning torture techniques. Call it the end of an era of American hypocrisy, if you will, but the Bush legacy will be, in part, simply the routinization of the practice of torture, abuse, kidnapping, and illegal imprisonment.
George W. Bush didn't invent the world he inhabits. He, his top officials, and all their lawyers who wrote those bizarre "torture memos" that will be hallmarks of his era chose from existing strains of thought, from urges and tendencies already in American culture. But their record on this has, nonetheless, been remarkable. In just about every case, they chose to bring out the worst in us; in just about every case, they took us on as direct a journey as possible to the dark side.
It's not necessary to romanticize the American past in any way to consider the legacy of these last years grim indeed. Let no one tell you that the institution of a global network of secret prisons and borrowed torture chambers, along with those "enhanced interrogation techniques," was primarily done for information or even security. The urge to resort to such tactics is invariably more primal than that.
Words matter more than one would think. In the Bush era, certain words have simply been sidelined. Sovereignty, for instance. If, in principle, you can kidnap anyone, anywhere, and transport that person into a ghost existence anywhere else, then national sovereignty essentially no longer has significance. This is one meaning of "globalization" in the twenty-first century. On Planet Bush, only one nation remains "sovereign," and that's the United States of America.
If you want to test this proposition, just take any case mentioned above, from Erla Ósk's landing in New York on, and try to reverse it. Make an American the central victim and another country of your choice the perpetrator and imagine the reaction of the Bush administration, no less the American media and the public (no matter what Gen. Hartmann may be unwilling to say about the waterboarding of an American serviceman).
Or consider another word that once had great resonance in American culture, not to speak of its legal system: innocence. Americans prided themselves on their "innocence" -- even when mocked as "innocents abroad" -- and took pride as well in a system based on the phrase, "innocent until proven guilty."
Despite their repeated, thoroughly worn denials about torture, the top officials of this administration remade themselves, in the wake of the attacks of 9/11, as a Torture, Inc. And their actions since then have gone a long way toward turning us, by association and tacit acquiescence, into a nation of torturers, willing to accept, in case after case, that a "war" against "terror" supposed to last for generations justifies just about any act imaginable, including the continued mistreatment and incarceration of people who remain somehow guilty even, in certain cases, after being proven innocent.
This is the American welcome wagon of the twenty-first century. If you really want to catch the spirit of the Bush legacy one year early, try to imagine the poem an Emma Lazarus of this moment might write, something appropriate for a gigantic statue in New York harbor of a guard from Mohamed Bashmilah's living nightmare -- dressed all in black, a black mask covering his head and neck, tinted yellow plastic over the eyes, a man, hands sheathed in rubber gloves, holding up not a torch but a video camera and dragging chains.
The North American Union and the Bigger Plan
ReplyDeleteby Dr. Dennis L. Cuddy
In order to bring about a North American Union (NAU), the public first has to be conditioned to think of themselves as North Americans. In that regard, Thomas Donohue (president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce) on June 16, 2006 remarked that "for CEOs, North America is already a single market, and business decisions are no longer made with a Mexico strategy---or a Canada strategy---but, rather, with a North American strategy....I think it's pretty clear now that it no longer makes sense to talk about U.S. competitiveness and Mexican competitiveness---or, for that matter, about the competitiveness of Canada. We are all in this together---we, as North Americans."
Also relevant to this process is the publication of the NORTH AMERICAN INTEGRATION MONITOR since 2002 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Very soon, CSIS also will publish their final document on their "North American Future 2025 Project." The Project has "an emphasis on regional integration," and the year 2025 A.D. was selected "on the basis of the data presently available on overall global projections." Seven closed-door roundtable sessions have been looking at the methodology of global and North American projections, as well as labor mobility, energy, the environment, security, competitiveness, and border infrastructure and logistics.
Zbigniew Brzezinski has been a CSIS counselor, and at Mikhail Gorbachev's first State of the World Forum in 1995, Brzezinski revealed: "We cannot leap into world government through one quick step....The precondition for eventual and genuine globalization is progressive regionalization because by that we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units." This is why the CSIS Project has "an emphasis on regional integration." (Brzezinski also described the regions that would be formed, that Israel and the Palestinians would be part of a Middle Eastern region, how Communist China would be brought into an Asian region, and that Iran would be part of a Central Asian region which would have important oil and gas pipelines constructed.)
At this point, it is worth remembering that in Stalin's January 1913 address in Vienna, he advocated national loyalties becoming subservient to regions. And 3 years later, Lenin in 1916 proclaimed: "The aim of socialism is not only to abolish the present division of mankind into smaller states and all-national isolation, not only to bring the nations closer to each other, but also to merge them."
You may recall that in Brzezinski's BETWEEN TWO AGES (1970), he praised Marxism, and he claimed that "the nation-state is gradually yielding its sovereignty." One aspect of American sovereignty that is being yielded is ownership of American companies by Americans. In the first 9 months of 2007, 69 companies in New England alone have been sold to foreign buyers. Nationally, the French company Alcatel bought Lucent Technologies in the U.S. last year, and in September 2007 announced it will be cutting thousands of jobs.
Relevant to this, Alan Tonelson (research fellow at the U.S. Business and Industry Council) said foreign companies are "acquiring control over the most dynamic pieces of the American economy, and they're acquiring control over America's future." Also relevant to this was the assessment by Donald Klepper-Smith (chief economist at DataCore Partners) regarding decisions made overseas and how they would effect American workers. He opined: "It raises some red flags and some real questions about our independence."
Part of the conditioning process to cause Americans to accept a NAU is the role of past and present government officials explaining the alleged economic benefits of such a union. For example, Harry Roegner in a letter titled "An economic union would be beneficial" in THE GREENVILLE (South Carolina) SUN (October 15, 2007) pointed out the large oil reserves of both Canada and Mexico that would be useful to the U.S., as well as Mexico's excess manpower who, as immigrants, would help support U.S. and Canadian economic growth. Roegner was an adviser on foreign trade issues to the U.S. Department of Commerce from 1984 to 1994, and in his letter said: "A North American economic union would provide the free flow of capital and labor across national borders needed to address many of the (aforementioned) imbalances."
Often regional economic integration into some type of union is argued on the basis of free trade. However, John Fonte (who had an office next to mine at the U.S. Department of Education) of the Hudson Institute has explained that the concept of regional economic arrangements or trading blocs actually is contrary to free trade to an extent. For example, in a NAU, there would be trading arrangements among the 3 nations which would limit the ability of the U.S. to trade freely with nations outside the NAU trading bloc.
But hasn't President Bush recently said all this talk about a NAU is nonsense? On August 21, 2007 at the concluding press conference for the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) in Montebello, Quebec, Fox News reporter Bret Baier asked if the SPP is a prelude to a NAU similar to the European Union (EU), and if there are plans to build some kind of superhighway connecting all 3 countries. President Bush replied: "If you've been in politics as long as I have, you get used to that kind of technique where you lay out a conspiracy and then force people to try to prove it doesn't exist."
The truth, of course, is that the U.S., Canada and Mexico are being connected by 4 Trade Corridors. On November 20, 2007, Lt. Governor John Harvard of Manitoba delivered a "Speech From The Throne," in which he revealed: "Manitoba has been working with the Canadian government and state governments in the U.S. to protect and enhance our access to key trade markets. In response to U.S. border and security measures, Manitoba will begin offering an enhanced driver's license as an affordable and secure form of identification for travelers. The new license will be available in the Fall of 2008. Manitoba is also taking a major role in the development of a Mid-Continent Trade Corridor, connecting our northern Port of Churchill with trade markets throughout the central United States and Mexico. To advance the concept, an alliance has been built with business leaders and state and city governments spanning the entire length of the Corridor. When fully developed, the trade route will incorporate an 'in-land port' in Winnipeg with pre-clearance for international shipping."
The SPP is also an important part of the power elite's plan for a techno-feudal fascist world government because it is a "partnership." For years, the American people and their leaders have been conditioned to accept educational and other partnerships as solutions to their problems. For example, city governments strapped for funds are approached by corporations or their related private foundations with plans and funds to improve education, which the city leaders are only too glad to accept. This conditions the people eventually to accept government/corporate rule. This is a form of Socialism known as fascism, and it will be the type of world government the power elite plans ultimately to bring about and control. In this government, the power elite will control politicians who will become government leaders who will promulgate laws, rules and regulations favorable to certain transnational corporations (controlled by the power elite) and unfavorable to any possible competition to those select corporations.
So why did President Bush ridicule Bret Baier's question, especially since there are already 47 Mexican Consulates across the U.S.? Lou Dobbs in his CNN commentary "Beware the Lame Duck" (October 17, 2007) wrote: "Although many conservatives refuse to accept the reality, George W. Bush is a one-world neo-liberal who drove budget and trade deficits to record heights....President Bush has pressed hard for the Security and Prosperity Partnership, the first step toward a North American Union that will threaten our sovereignty. The administration has permitted American businesses to hire illegal aliens, encouraged the invasion of 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens and has given Mexico and corporate America dominion over our borders and our immigration policy....The assault on our national sovereignty continues....The president is urging the Senate to act favorably on our accession to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea....The treaty will submit the United States to international tribunals largely adverse to our interests, and dispute resolution mechanisms are stacked against the United States....The treaty would undermine our national sovereignty and act as a back door for global environmental activists to direct U.S. policy." Fortunately, in Congress, House Concurrent Resolution 40 states: "Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada."
If I could have followed up Bret Baier's question with one of my own, here's what I would have asked: "So, President Bush, will the massive 10-lane toll road TransTexas Corridor funded by Cintra of Spain and to be built by Zachry Construction of Texas come to a screeching halt at Oklahoma's border?" What are all the vehicles supposed to do---merge all of a sudden into a small road? I don't think so ! And by the way, Cintra is legally represented in Texas by leading Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani's law firm Bracewell & Giuliani, which also just happens to have an office in Dubai (remember Dubai Ports was about to take over operation of a number of America's largest ports) ! Perhaps before President Bush was too critical of people warning about a NAU, he should have read what Mexico's President Vicente Fox said May 16, 2002 at Club 21 in Madrid: "Eventually, our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, but also with Canada, our other regional partner, an ensemble of connections and institutions similar to those created by the European Union" (or as Gorbachev refers to the EU, the "European Soviet").
I would also have asked President Bush at the press conference why on September 6, 2007 at 9pm did he open all U.S. highways to Mexican trucks? Earlier in the day, U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio said President Bush was "_ _ _ _ bent" on getting Mexican trucks in the U.S. by stealth. Currently, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration website lists 10 Mexican carriers that are approved to transport goods throughout the U.S., and nearly 40 more Mexican carriers will soon join them on the list.
Will all Mexican truck drivers be stopped at the border to see if they can read road signs in English, if they have criminal backgrounds, and how long they already have been driving that day (U.S. law prohibits more than 10 consecutive hours)? I doubt it, since no more than 2% of Mexican trucks entering the U.S. today are inspected ! Many of these trucks will be a danger to Americans' safety, and could be used for smuggling drugs, illegal aliens, and terrorists into the U.S.
Many countries deliberately release their criminal elements into the U.S., often coming across the Mexican border. And if the criminals are caught, our federal government releases them into American society if their own countries refuse to take them back. Our government knows how to solve this problem (e.g., stop issuing visas to people from those countries), but has refused to take such action most of the time. Ask yourself why our government would release murderers, rapists, arsonists, and other criminals into our society to commit violent crimes against us. Think about it !
Returning to Bret Baier's question to President Bush about the SPP being a prelude to a NAU similar to the EU, what would we get if we became like the EU, which has certain characteristics of fascism? Mrs. Kitty Werthmann (a survivor of Hitler's reign and Soviet rule afterward) recently returned to Europe and interviewed many senior citizens. They informed her they were told conversion to the Euro would bring prosperity via free trade, lower prices for goods, etc. In reality, though, their money was devalued greatly, and they're now living on welfare and food stamps. Unemployment in Europe is high while guest workers are brought in, and the people are angry.
In terms of what is planned for Americans relevant to the EU and the Euro, Vicente Fox on CNN's "Larry King Live" show October 8, 2007 explained that what he and President Bush agreed to "is a trade union for all the Americas," and he suggested that eventually there would be a regional currency. He made similar comments on the "Daily Show" the same day. Earlier in 2007, Bolivian President Evo Morales proposed a single currency for all South American nations.
Concerning North American nations, in June 1991, Dallas Federal Reserve publication no. 9115, "Free Trade and the Peso" by Darryl McLeod and John Welch, analyzed the potential for a single North American currency. In 1999, former Canadian parliament member Herbert Grubel published "The Case for the Amero: The Economics and Politics of a North American Union," giving 2010 as the possible date for introducing the "amero" as the new North American currency. And in the Atlanta Federal Reserve's ECONOMIC REVIEW (4th quarter, 2000), Michael Chriszt (director of the Reserve's Latin America Research Group) wrote "Perspectives on a Potential North American Monetary Union" in which one reads that "the idea of a single currency for NAFTA is on the table." In July 2000, Vicente Fox had already proposed a North American common market with a continental monetary policy.
More recently, David Dodge, Governor of the Bank of Canada, in May 2007 said that a common currency with the U.S. is definitely possible. What will happen is the power elite will cause the dollar to be devalued to the point where Americans reluctantly will accept the amero. As Bob Chapman in his December 2006 newsletter, INTERNATIONAL FORECASTER, said: "(The amero) will be presented to the American public as the administration's solution for dollar recovery."
On June 14, 2007 BankIntroductions.com told their clients that in the next 10-20 years, as the global economy moves toward regional trading blocs, the amero or "North American Monetary Unit" (NAMU) will be introduced. The power elite's plan is to form regional unions with their own currencies and then link them into a world government with one global currency. Relevant to this, Reuters reporter Emmanuel Jarry on October 23, 2007 wrote "Sarkozy (French President) Calls for Mediterranean Union Launch in 2008." And the African Union's African Central Bank plans to mint the "Gold Mandela" as a single African currency by 2010 (the date the NAU is supposed to form).
If you look at the top of the website for the Single Global Currency Association (SGCA), there is a quote by former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, saying: "A global economy requires a global currency." The SGCA "is dedicated to the goal of implementing a single global currency by 2025...managed by a single international central bank." I have already indicated that on the cover of THE ECONOMIST (June 9, 1988) is a picture of "The Phoenix," a global currency suggested for implementation in 2018.
Whatever the date of the global currency's introduction, it will be advertised as facilitating world trade, which the power elite will control. This will be like in the days of Solomon when he fortified Gezer, Hazor and Megiddo (the Har, or Mount, of Megiddo would be called Armageddon). Through this fortification, he controlled the Via Maris and world trade, thereby controlling the world of his day. The power elite today plans to do likewise, but in a Biblical sense their plan will lead to the Battle of Armageddon.
Bush's North American Union/New World Order is coming soon!
News Alert: Obama Says First Act as President Would Be to End Iraq Occupation
ReplyDeleteIn an 11-minute interview with hometown Chicago radio broadcaster and journalist, Roland Martin, Barack Obama revealed that his first act, if elected president, would be to pull our troops out of Iraq as quickly as possible.
Roland Martin: If you are elected what is the very first thing that you focus on as Commander in Chief of this country?
Barack Obama: Well, we will call in the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I will give them a new assignment and that is to bring our troops home in a careful, responsible way, but to end this occupation in Iraq. I will call in my Secretary of State and initiate the diplomacy that's needed to make sure that exit is accompanied by negotiations between the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds.
Obama responds to a number of revealing questions, including discussing how he would stop the tax breaks for the wealthy.
As far as the claim that he lacks experience, Obama pointed out that if he lacks experience how is he out organizing political campaigns that have been running for years.
A good point indeed.
Obama also discusses the echoing of Lincoln and MLK in his speeches.
But his first step as president would be to take the steps necessary to bring our troops home from Iraq.
Why doesn't Hillary say this?
A poll during the debate showed that less than 9% of Americans care about immigration...........by far the smallest of any category.
ReplyDeleteI've said all along that immigration is a BS boondoggle designed to distract from the REAL issues people care about like the economy, the war, health care, energy, the environment, defending the Constitution and personal privavy from the fascist police state the repugs want to implement etc.......
Heres my take on the repug debate, McCaine, Thompson and Rudy didnt help themselves at all with McCaine particularly looking like a snotty little repug, Thompson looked like a dumb as dirt dried up old scarecrow, and Rudy looked like a fascist with 9/11 turrets as usual.
ReplyDeleteRon Paul looked reasonable and made sense as usual, Rommney came under heavy attack but i think he defended him self fairly well in fact much better than usual, and Huckabee helped his position and came off as fairly reasonable for a repug.
Did you see Hillary attacking Obama but when Edwards went after her she was offended?
ReplyDeleteNow For the Democrats...........Hillary Clinton tried to glom onto to everything her handlers told her the public wants to hear like being a change candidate and defending the middle class over the special interests but flashed rage and self destructed in typical arrogant haughty fassion when taken to task and put in her place by Edwards and Obama.
ReplyDeleteRichardson did nothing to better his position and sounded redundent and like a one trick pony somewhat like Rudy the fascist although he was humerous at times.
Edwards and Obama were great and bettered their positions while pushing Hillary's buttons causing her to self destruct and looking reasonable and on point while doing so.
Richardson has the same tired old lines when in truth he has many skeletons in his background, based in the West coast and Hillary cannot claim change when she openly supports the same Bush forever war.
ReplyDeleteShe does that ALL THE TIME Larry, crying about being attacked while attacking her opponents......she is a hippocrite who will say ANYTHING to get elected and she is seen as neither credible, nor an agent of change, nor a defender of the middle class.
ReplyDeleteI'm no fan of Mitt RommNey and I dont agree with most of what he has to say.............but in all honesty Rommney had a better debate than Hillary.........at least Rommney didnt hurt himself in the debate.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand how she can claim all this experience. He is a one term Senator as is Obama and Edwards.
ReplyDeleteHaving tea with womens groups around the world for 8 years is no experience.
Romney is slick like a shady door to door salesman.
ReplyDeleteI still think he will be the Repugs nominee.
McCain is a deranged old man.
Consider this if Edwards or Obama, most likely Edwards were to drop out and endorse the other candidate.........I think that would put a stake through Hillarys heart as that candidate would clearly have the majority of the vote.
ReplyDeleteI hope Hillary gets third again maybe that will bring her down.
ReplyDeleteHillary talking about all she has done for 35 years, what has she done?
Larry said...
ReplyDeleteI don't understand how she can claim all this experience. He is a one term Senator as is Obama and Edwards.
Having tea with womens groups around the world for 8 years is no experience."
Thats like saying if you are the wife of a Neuro surgeon, computer programmer, or lawyer you could just jump in and do their job well merely BECAUSE you were married to someone who did.
She contradicts her self...........one minute she is saying how vital and crucial experience is the next she is marginalizing that experience by "CLAIMING" being married to a man who did the job is the same as doing it.
The more I see Hillary the more I see another Bush only in plaid tones.
ReplyDeleteI dont know that Hillary will get third in New Hampshire........although that is what I would like to see.......she could very well win states like New Hampshire, New York and Florida.........but hopefully Obama or Edwards will keep gaining mommentum.
ReplyDeleteWell Hillary would be a breath of fresh air after Bush, but she is clearly a repug lite and in the pocket of corporate America.
ReplyDeleteIf Edwards could hold on a few more primaries and Hillary finish third the next two ro three it surely will finish her.
ReplyDeleteHillary wants everyone to think she will be just like her husband, but her husband pushed NAFTA through after old man Bush negotiated it.
ReplyDeleteShe does try to act like she is just like him or pretend she was him.............but Bill is Twice the person and politician she is, he wasnt perfect but he was a good president.
ReplyDeleteEdwards makes sense on jobs and the economy. Hillary hasn't a clue what is is like to worry about losing your job.
ReplyDeleteBill was a good President for the most part, but Hillary has too many ties with corporate Republicans.
ReplyDeleteDemocratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich won’t accept his exclusion from ABC’s debates on Saturday without a fight. Kucinich filed a complaint with the FCC Friday, claiming ABC is denying him equal time and noting that parent company Disney has made campaign contributions to the four invited Democrats.
ReplyDeleteHillary has a lot of Money, i think she is in this for the long haul unless she gets humiliated and completely crushed in the big states.
ReplyDeleteYeah i cant believe Kucinich was shut out but Richardson was allowed to come..........what reason did ABC give.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid Hillary is in it till the end. If Edwards got half the coverage as Hillary or Obama he would be on solid footing.
ReplyDeleteABC refused to give Kucinich a reason and they excluded Gravel and neocon Duncan Hunter.
ReplyDeleteKucinich tried to get an answer but they refused to comment.
Did you see how snotty and smugly arrogant McCaine and Shillery looked?
ReplyDeleteBoth looked arrogant and sickening. I can't stand McCain but people like Tweety praise his every feeble move.
ReplyDeleteMusharraf Blames Bhutto for Her Death
ReplyDeleteBy Randall Mikkelsen,Reuters
Posted: 2008-01-05 19:25:03
Filed Under: World News
WASHINGTON (Jan. 5) - Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf conceded that a gunman may have shot Benazir Bhutto but said the opposition leader exposed herself to danger and bore responsibility for her death, CBS News said on Saturday.
Musharraf was also quoted as telling the CBS "60 Minutes" program to be broadcast on Sunday that his government did everything it could to provide security for Bhutto, who was killed last week in a gun and suicide-bomb attack after a political rally.
Pakistan Reels
After Bhutto's Death1 of 13 Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, seen here addressing his nation on Jan. 2, blames Benazir Bhutto for her own death, saying she should not have stood up outside of her car. The opposition leader was shot and attacked by a suicide bomber on Dec. 27.
"For standing up outside the car, I think it was she to blame alone. Nobody else. Responsibility is hers," Musharraf said in the interview taped on Saturday morning.
Pakistan's government has said Bhutto died when she struck her head on a handle on her vehicle's sunroof -- a contention widely derided in Pakistan where many people suspect Musharraf's government of complicity. The government has also blamed al Qaeda for the attack.
Musharraf was asked by CBS, which provided excerpts of the interview, whether a gunshot could have caused Bhutto's head injury. He replied, "Yes, yes."
The questioner asked, "So she may have been shot?" and Musharraf said, "Yes, absolutely, yes. Possibility."
Bhutto's widower called on Saturday for a U.N. investigation of the killing.
In an opinion article in the Washington Post, Asif Ali Zardari urged that a caretaker government be named to oversee national elections that were postponed until next month and he outlined other standards for assessing their legitimacy.
Watch Video: Bhutto's Last Moments
"Democracy in Pakistan can be saved, and extremism and fanaticism contained, only if the elections, when they are held, are free, fair and credible," he wrote.
Zardari is the new co-chairman of Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party, alongside their son Bilawal.
Musharraf, a U.S. ally in its battle against terrorism, postponed the general election from January 8 to February 18, and the PPP is expected to benefit from a wave of sympathy for Bhutto.
Musharraf, whose re-election as president in October is still disputed by the opposition, will need support in the next parliament and looks likely to have to renew efforts to reach an understanding with the Bhutto's party, analysts say.
CARETAKER GOVERNMENT
Zardari has said the PPP would take part in the vote. But the elections, he said in the Post, must be conducted under a "new, neutral caretaker government, free of cronies from Musharraf's party."
He also called for an independent election commission, monitoring by trained international observers with access polling stations and an ability to conduct exit polls, press freedom and an independent judiciary.
He urged that the United States and Britain join the push for a U.N. probe. Britain has sent a team from Scotland Yard to help the government of nuclear-armed Pakistan investigate the killing, and Washington has endorsed the step.
However, Zardari said, "an investigation conducted by the government of Pakistan will have no credibility, in my country or anywhere else."
Bhutto had complained to an acquaintance shortly before she died that the Pakistani government was not meeting her security pleas.
CBS asked Musharraf whether he believed the government did everything possible for her security. "Absolutely," he said. "She was given more security than any other person."
Wow, those silly fascist dictators dont want to take responsibility for ANYTHING...........by that flawed and twisted logic MLK and JFK were responsible for there own deaths as well.................Bush/Rove and there cronnies like Mushareff would do Orwell proud!
ReplyDeleteMusharraf and Bush are responsible for her death as they didn't want her knocking Musharraf out of his lapdog position on Bush's knee.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like Rove and the slimy Neo Cons are desperate enough to jump behind McCAin and have given up on Freddy the dried up scarecrow!
ReplyDeleteI think Mary Matalin was the one behind the scarecrow as he was Cheney's boy.
ReplyDeleteRove is either helping Romney or McCain, probably McCain since he now has the Swiftboaters with him.
I guess no one else watched the debates tonight?
ReplyDeleteI don't know since it is Saturday night maybe they took the night off.
ReplyDeleteNorth American Union Integration Accelerates
ReplyDeleteIn a time when immigration and border security are one of many concerns on the minds of Americans, the North American Development Bank (NADbank) has spent more than $2 Billion on border infrastructure enhancement projects with Mexico. NADbank was developed under the auspices of NAFTA.
Launched in January 2001, Nadbank initially looked like a good thing for the residents of SW Texas, S. Arizona, S. New Mexico and S. California. The main goal at the time was to bring the residents of these areas up to the living standards of the rest of the US.
By signing agreement after agreement with local governments throughout the Southwest United States, NADbank has developed an extensive network of wastewater treatment facilities at taxpayers expense.This seemingly good initiative quickly turned into something far more sinister, of which NADbank doesn’t want you to know about.
Immediately following the September 11th attacks on the world trade towers, Nadbank stepped up their development schedule. Agreements were being signed so fast that nobody paid any attention to the overall ideology being set in place.
The fact that these agreements included a boundary limit some 186 miles into Mexico, was slid right under the rug at a time when most Americans were still in shock over 9/11.
In December of 2001 the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) joined with NADbank on the Mexican Rio Conchos Watershed Project. This is Canada’s first appearance on the US-Mexican border infrastructure program.What does Canada have to do with US-Mexico relations?
More important, why does Mexico and Canada have anything to do with wastewater treatment projects developed to enhance the lives of US citizens?
More than $160 million was funneled into the border program during 2001, most within 6 weeks after 9/11.
In May 2002 NADbank and the Mexican company Industrial Papelera Solar (Grupo Solar) signed a US$8.59 million loan agreement for the construction of a paper recycling facility and wastewater treatment plant in Región CincoManantiales, Coahuila.
Quote:“This loan is the second one to be signed with a private company in Mexico,” commented Raúl RodrÃguez, NADbank Managing Director. “It is a good indication that we are also working hard to finance a larger number of environmental infrastructure projects through private companies interested in investing in the environmental sector.”
The $20.98 million project contemplates integrating a paper production process using cardboard waste as the principal raw material instead of virgin wood resources.After this agreement with Grupo Solar the projects in Mexico accelerate rapidly into the 186 mile boundary zone. Tijuana, Sonora, Coahuila, Chihuahua, and Tamaulipus are just a few of the Mexican territories covered by these border projects.
Now is when the violence among Mexican drug cartel members and NADbank project workers escalates. Kidnappings and murder are the daily norm. Mexico soon sends in their army to curb the violence and insure progress of NADbank projects.
In October of 2002 the Multilateral Development Bank hosts the 5th annual Environmental Business Opportunities Seminar. More than 100 seminar participants from the United States, Mexico, and Canada met with representatives from the North American Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, the U.S. Trade and Development Agency, and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.
The seminar represented an important opportunity to meet with several multilateral banks and agencies in one session to explore opportunities for business in Mexico, Latin America and Asia.
Quote:“There are extraordinary opportunities for United States companies to participate in projects and do business with the multilateral development banks,” said Holland. “Private sector economic growth and development is best facilitated in partnership between the U.S. and foreign firms. The development of emerging economies is of critical importance to both those economies and the U.S. economy.”
We are now almost completely removed from the original purpose NADbank was formed. Wastewater and treatment facility projects for US border citizens has turned into “opportunity” within Mexico.
Throughout 2003 the wastewater projects continue to mount. Water distribution and air quality projects are launched in Mexico using NADbank funding. The citizens of the SW United States continue to foot the bill for these projects under the guise of enhancing their own lives. An additional $160 million is funneled into projects during the first 9 months of 2003.
In June 2004 the North American Development Bank signed separate financing agreements with the water utilities in Mexicali and Tijuana, Baja California totalling over $30 million. Things are starting to slow down a bit as some projects near completion and new ones are set to begin.
August 2005 The State of Baja California and NADbank signed financing agreements totaling $9.3 million to continue construction of water and wastewater projects in the cities of Mexicali and Tecate. NADbank also announced the approval of grant funding to carry out studies for the development of future environmental projects in the state.
June 2006 the Board of Directors of the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and NADbank met in San Antonio to approve the certification of eight new border infrastructure projects, and the financing of a total of 12 projects aimed at improving environmental quality in the U.S.-Mexico border region.
This was the first meeting of the newly established, single board of directors for both institutions. The role of the BECC is to assist communities and project sponsors in project planning, and to certify projects in order to be eligible for financing by NADbank.
Quote:“Today we took an important step in implementing the reform agenda agreed to by Presidents Bush and Fox in 2002. The single Board of Directors of the BECC and NADB met for the first time today. Among our decisions, we’ve approved loans today that more than double the approved lending of NADB to date” stated Board Chairman Kenneth Peel, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury for International Development Finance and Debt. “We hope our work today has put BECC and NADB on a firmer footing going forward” he added.
October 2007 $5.6 million in funding for two environmental infrastructure projects benefiting Playas de Rosarito and Tijuana is authorized by Nadbank.NADB funding consists of a US$3.04 million grant from the Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF), funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as a US$1.52 million loan.
In addition, Tijuana was awarded a US$500,000 grant from NADbank’s Solid Waste Environment Program (SWEP) for the purchase of solid waste collection equipment. This project, which was certified in June, had already received a US$2.27 million loan from the Bank.
With the certification of the Rosarito project, there are now nine projects in Baja California that are receiving Bank funding. These projects represent a total investment of more than $720 million in environmental improvements with the Bank contributing $145.7 million in grants and loans.
What started out as enhancing the quality of life for the Southwest United States, has almost exclusively turned into Mexican border town infrastructure projects. Road paving, environmental projects and a vast network of what appears to be an extension of United States infrastructure, is headed into areas never thought of by the citizens with the signing of that first agreement.Kind of reminds me of what the US government has and is doing to the Native American Indians.
Incrementally, US institutions are integrating the United States and Mexico. Canada and the US are another story entirely but they are well on their way to full integration into the North American Union as well.
This is why the Bush administration will not close the border with Mexico but instead offers a “Smart Border” program, which opens the border to further integration into the Union. One thing I’ve learned over the years, “If it has smart in the title, it ain’t.”
The war on terror is obvious to most as being a front for stealing Middle East oil reserves. The North American Development Bank is only one of many fronts for the North American Union Agenda.
To date more the $2 billion has been spent on border infrastructure enhancement projects with Mexico, and the proposed border fence is still covered in red tape.
It’s time for people to understand that what we face between now and 2012 in the United States of America is more than a loss of national and cultural sovereignty. We are starring down both barrels of the fascism shotgun, on a scale never dreamed of by Adolph Hitler and his Nazi Regime.
www.naureport.com
Hey Larry....are you still there? I watched the debates....and then Obamas speech from today on Cspan1....just finished...anyone here?
ReplyDeleteHi Enigma,
ReplyDeleteI watched the debates and liked how Obama looked calm under Hillary's attacks and how Edwards sprang to his defense.
Of course Hillary had to whine about that.
Obama and Edwards were both calm under pressure....I think Obama was even calmer...Hill looked off...thrown off her game...did you know in events of the last three weeks, she has been refusing to do Question and Answer Periods ? ( NH journalist explained this on cspan this am).....
ReplyDeleteif you go to her webisite Iraq is not even a listed issue....this is very concerning...
Anyways....pretty amazing debate..and very different than the repug part...strange..
The Huffingtonpost headlines was excellent on Hillary.
ReplyDeleteCrooks and Liars also has great highlights of the debates..also Cspan did a really good interview with Kucicnich today and it is on their website....
ReplyDelete(really good...I missed him at the debate...)
Kucinich is filing a suit against ABC for excluding him. They refused to give him a reason why.
ReplyDeletehe did a great job on cspan...he is right his rights were violated- but so were ours...we should have been allowed to hear him and what he has to say....
ReplyDelete( I think the thing is Rob Paul is extreme and he was allowed for the repugs..so it makes no sense that Kucinich was not...none...)
E4E, Paul has too much money to be messed with, he could really cause heartaches for the repubies if they try to exclude him, but if they allow him in and then attack his every word, they hope that will cut his support, hasn't worked so far, but then again he gets around 10% in the campaign, and bush gets 25% in the polls, so the repubies probably know to allow him to play, but marginalize him at every chance.
ReplyDeleteEnigma, I thought the Dem debate was great. What you said about HIlary not mentioning the Iraq war is disturbing -- you're right. Do you have any ideas about this, other than our normal suspicions?
ReplyDeleteThe Repug debate was hilarious -- the way Romney and Huckabee were competing on which one supported the surge first! All of them (except for Ron Paul) actually bragged that he supported Bush on the war at the beginning... as if this war is a good thing.
Unbelievable.
2 election workers get 18 months for rigging presidential recount:
ReplyDeleteA judge suspicious of more corruption pressed two former election board workers to tell what they know and then sentenced them today to the maximum 18 months in prison for rigging the 2004 presidential election recount to make their job easier.
They should offer, them a free pass for 2 years service in Iraq or Afghanistan like they used to do during Vietnam
After all they helped keep us there.
Damn son can't ya let go of the reichwing LIES of the 90's?
ReplyDeleteOh right that would mean giving up your delusional world view,
Well any way hope your holidays were good.
BTW dolt, hows that anemic blog of yours, er I mean echo chamber......
ReplyDeleteecho much?
They shut down the process BEFORE the rest of the state got a recount, and the rest of the ballots were already destroyed BEFORE this verdict
ReplyDeleteso NO lie son, just the truth that they KEPT any recount from happening which would have given time for the rest of the state to question the shenanigans which went on elsewhere.
so dolty boy cherry pick while IGNORING the whole story of the state as usual.
seems your either insane, dishonest, intellectually lazy or some combination.
seems your either insane, dishonest, intellectually lazy or some combination personally I think all three as you have proved here time and time again,
ReplyDeleteBTW ever get to Iraq like YOU claimed to be trying to do way back in the late winter 2006?
or was that as big a lie as your claim to have a son?
and of course three showers a day?
NO FOOLE the entire STATE recount never happened JUST like in Florida, where Gore would have won if it had, and most suspect Kerry would have won if the totals Ken Blackwell sent thru the RNC servers got thrown out as the official count.
ReplyDeleteBoth elections needed shenanigans like this for a Bush victory. and that is why the Rove anti gay tactics were so important in 2004 along with the color code terror threats until the election was over, where are they now?
Dropped like a bad habit after the shrub had another election won by dirty tricks and fear mongering.
On Jan. 5, 1914, Henry Ford, head of the Ford Motor Company, introduced a minimum wage scale of $5 per day.
ReplyDeleteEven henry was FOR the minimum wage, because he knew his workers couldn't buy his product unless they had enough discretionary income after food and housing to afford it.
Too bad the modern day reichwingers have forgotten this BASIC theorem of economics, if the workers can't earn enough to spend part of their income on discretionary items the economy can not grow.
and debt especially unsustainable debt which places an enlarging burden on both the middle class and economy is NOT the answer.
The answer is making sure the middle class is earning a good living, like FDR did which then grows a middle class and the economy along with it.
Milton Freidman was just a modern day snake oil salesman for the reichwing on economic policy, like the neo-cons are in foreign policy
CLIFF: I loved the news you put up- the ARRESTED workers- were they OHIO? just curious...
ReplyDeleteLydia:
(1) On Hillarys' website she has Issues Posted, so I went and visited, and IRAQ is not one of the nine issues listed- and has NEVER been. She does list VET care- which I find disturbing- she mentions the VETS- but not why they NEED care.....
(2) Her Healthcare plan on her site MANDATES care for all - that ALL people must buy care. ( if you read all of it and the details, she is missing the point that Healthcare and Insurance is not accessible or available or affordable to all , and even returning Guard from Iraq- they only have care for the first 24 monthes home- and then they are dropped). Her "plan" orders that everyone go and get care??? And to help with the costs- she offers "tax credits"???
NOW MY Hill Story:
I have written to her Campaign people over and over about THESE TWO MAIN ISSUES, ( Iraq and Healthcare) and also offered to volunteer to do Policy Research on Health issues. I offered this Pro Bono Service to ALL of the Candidates quite a while ago, in the early days of the race....and Most responded in some way to the Offer, and some were more gracious than others. HER campaign was the ONLY one that NEVER even answered the emails....at all. Two days ago After she lost the Primary..I finally heard from Her People....and it was a form letter asking for money to run ads in NH.
( Just for the record, Dodd , Kucinich, and Edwards and Obama were all very polite and responsive. And Obamas people were really amazing, and still are. They are responsive and very hands on.)
As a Woman, and since we keep hearing that she "appeals to the Women"......well, I did not think it was a very appealing part of her Campaign.
I was dissappointed, because as a woman, you want to be atleast proud of her efforts, and feel welcomed....I felt more disenfranchised than I normally do ( which under Bush, to a degree we all feel left behind the Bus).
Anyways Lydia when you have time stop by Watergate Summer, I have some great posts up about Obama and Edwards and also the writers and What they Mean...and about Hope...
Keep up the great work and writing over here all- Lydia, Cliff, Larry and Mike...and anyone I forgot..
Have Hope...
as Obama said at a speech today:
"We have plenty of heat in DC, what we need is more Light"...
BREAKING NEWS ,BREAKING NEWS 4AM SUNDAY......
ReplyDeleteOBAMA LEADS OVER HILLARY BY TEN POINTS..TEN POINTS...
( RASMUSSEN POLL, AND I THINK THAT WAS TAKEN BEFORE THE DEBATE IF I READ RIGHT...SORRY WAS REALLY GIDDY...BUT GO TO "FROM THE LEFT" TO READ.....)
Christopher: I went over to say thanks for nice comments on Watergate Summer....and that is when I saw this poll....wow....
stunning...
Spread the Hope....wow..
Want to see how a "redstater" distorts both History and Iraq?
ReplyDeleteWell for starters, we don't by Brandozilla
(Nice name, but why do all right wingers pick either cartoon characters or fantasy figures for their monikers? Some insecurity issues here, but that is one large underlying characteristic of any right winger isn’t it. Insecurity, so they want the big bad government they all love to hate, to protect them from the boogie man.)
Well for starters, we don't have troops in Iraq to oppress them; they are there to free them. Sort of like how the French were here to help us become free from our oppressor.
The idea that we are telling them how to live is flat out false. Saddam told them how to live. We gave them elections, their democratically elected representatives wrote their constitution, they approved the constitution. The Iraqi's are choosing their path, frankly if we were telling them how to live, things would go a lot smoother over there(not that I am advocating that).
The Bathists are the oppressors, the islamofacists are oppressors, we are the liberators.
Sounds all nice and convincing just like freedom fan, tallltexan, and voltron used to here;
(Moo Moo never, but that is another story all by itself)
Too Bad like their less then honest and incorrect historical rendition of the facts, this right winger is off also;
Well for starters, we don't have troops in Iraq to oppress them,
Really?
Kicking in doors, arresting tens of thousands of people some for months or years at a time, based on a hunch, whim, or simply the fact they are MALE and with in reach?
Forcing OUR version of government and then blocking candidates who the Bush-Cheney administration disagree with?
Allowing L Paul Bremer to DICTATE the conditions of their subservience to us from April 2003 until June 2004?
Then having L Paul Bremer dictate who was going to run thee country and who was allowed to participate in the writing of the constitution, which BTW HAD to contain the "oil Law" which is a precondition of the US accepting a final resolution of our occupation?
I guess he thinks that all that was just what the Iraqi people were asking for when they asked the US to attack their country.
They are there to free them.
RIGHT, and we were in Vietnam to free the people, and we used our CIA to free the Chileans from their democracy in 1973, and Kermit Roosevelt freed the Iranians in 1953 as he forced a democratically elected government to abdicate in favor of a US hand picked and sponsored Shah, which was a dictator, he thinks these are good examples of the US spreading democracy?
Based on what principles were we "right". International law says NO, because we have no right to interfere in the internal affairs of a foreign country, and nothing the US congress can pass trumps international agreements.
The UN gave no legitimacy to the invasion, in fact they were against the invasion, and wanted more time for the inspections. But that was not allowed to happen, whether because of Roves re-election time line, or fear that the inspections would show Saddam was telling the truth, I'm not sure, but Bush ET Al were definitely in a hurry in the early spring of 2003.
I fail to see where we got the right for our forces to free anybody in Iraq, since there was not call from either a legitimate Iraqi revolutionary group or the UN itself to do so, just the demand by some PNAC neo-cons forced on the US Government‘s foreign policy. Nothing the US congress can do can give the US actions international legitimacy, and since US Congress’s demands by legislation stops at our borders, UNLESS we have either a declared war against the US, or request from foreign country or United Nations. Congress can give Bush authority to use US Military forces anywhere in the world, but it does not mean it is legitimate under the UN or Laws we as a country agreed to follow by both treaty and our signing the UN Charter.
Sort of like how the French were here to help us become free from our oppressor.
This is the very heart of his deception, it all rests here;
1. We started our own revolution, by ourselves, with NO outside help in 1775-1776, the Iraqi's NOT SO MUCH, in fact they didn't have anything which we could call a revolution UNTIL the Shock and Awe phase was over and April 8th dissolution of the Iraqi government when Baghdad fell to US troops ONLY No indigenous Iraqi forces were involved in any of the operations NONE.
2. We just came into Iraq like the French came into the colonies when the people who started the War against English continued domination asked them to. There was no long term military blockade of certain parts of Iraq, we weren't bombing Iraq for years before the Iraqi delegation showed up in Washington asking for our help.
3. The Iraqi revolutionaries, all by themselves attacked Saddam. They had a group of internal military operations lead by a domestic hero who was leading the revolutionaries in a grand struggle against the anti democratic Saddam.
BTW Chalibi who was every where BUT Iraq in the 1980-2003 periods doesn't count.
To be totally historically correct the Shiites did once rise up near Basra, but G H W Bush refused US help in 1991. (But that is another story also, and another war.)
The dishonest way he glosses over the total differences in the genesis of both Wars is simply astounding to the history we all learn about our revolution.
There was NO George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Paul Revere, James Madison, Patrick Henry ET Al, in Iraq before April 2003. The closest option that existed Motaqa al Sadr, is hated and reviled by the US and our forces have attacked him and his forces time and time again.
Thus his words sound nice but the history doesn't back up his statement.
The idea that we are telling them how to live is flat out false.
Let’s try this one again;
Kicking in doors, arresting Tens of thousands of people based on a hunch, whim, or simply the fact they are MALE and with in reach?
Forcing OUR version of government and then blocking candidates who the Bush-Cheney administration disagree with?
Allowing L Paul Bremer to DICTATE the conditions of their subservience to us from April 2003 until June 2004?
Then having L Paul Bremer dictate who was going to run thee country and who was allowed to participate in the writing of the constitution, which BTW HAD to contain the "oil Law" which is a precondition of the US accepting a final resolution of our occupation?
Add to that, we are the lead agent on all operations, have prevented them from acquiring an air force of their own, decided where large ghetto creating walls would be built in Baghdad OVER the protests of both the civilians living there and even the Maliki government at times.
We decide when and where reconstruction happens and WHO gets the contracts, including where moneys seized from Saddam here and other places is spent. We place our corporations’ needs before those of the Iraqi people.
We also hire mercenaries, and Give them immunity from the Iraqi government, which has the effect to allow the mercenary forces to trample on the Iraqi people even kill then with no fear of accountability or criminal prosecution when the killing is not legally or militarily justified.
Saddam told them how to live.
Yes from 1979-1990 with US support, weapons aid intelligence and even some chemical weapons stocks. But then again Saddam did rise to power in the style of government we and the British decided Iraq needed decades before. He arose in the system, and was welcomed as a head of state by Ronald Reagan and George H W Bush, even with a trip by Donald Rumsfeld to forge a common strategy circa Iran and sell a few weapons to benefit the US defense industry, (just don't tell Saddam, Reagan ET Al, were selling Iran weapons thru the covert back door at the same time)...
In fact until Saddam angry over the result of his cooperation with the US and Arab Gulf states being the front line war machine against Iran and his attack on Kuwait did the Bush Sr and the republican party figure out he really was a bad guy.
We gave them elections,
Oops, he just let a little truth slip;
This line runs entirely counter to this line
The idea that we are telling them how to live is flat out false.
So which is it, we do not interfere in their country, it is all them, OR we gave it to them?
This contradiction lays bare another problem with his argument, he can't see that we have NO right to "give then" anything by our use of force.
Democracy is not something that can be given; it is something which they must make.
An election, even one with purple fingers is not an election, hell Saddam held elections when he wanted to legitimize his claim on power. We are just following his example by forcing them to do it our way.
their democratically elected representatives wrote their constitution,
Based on Rules written by L Paul Bremer, and with people L Paul Brememr chose to lead that exercise in US domination in creating the system of government we want to set up somebody we find acceptable to U the Bush Administration, especially Cheney and Rumsfeld.
They did it to fulfill requirements Bush ET Al placed on the Iraqi people, as a condition we might leave someday.
They were given a timetable by the CPA controlled by L Paul Bremer.
But this commenter is trying to get us to believe this was all an Iraqi idea.
they approved the constitution.
We gave them no choice.
Oh and BTW the constitution is NOT finalized, but has quite a bit of disagreement as to what the final version should say especially between the Sunnis and Shiites, but even the Kurds want something different then the central government and US do.
The constitution is not followed especially sine the vast majority of elected government officials live outside Iraq most in London, Jordan Syria or Iran.
The constitution does not guarantee the civilians any rights like the US constitution did, only how a government would be set up, and even then the US placed it's finger on the scales by forcing one possible candidate out of the running because we would not support him becoming prime minister.
The Iraqi's are choosing their path,
Really?
Then pray tell me why when the parliament has called for US troops to leave Iraq are US troops still in Iraq?
Why when Maliki and the Iraqi Parliament demanded Blackwater exit Iraq, why did the US state department step in and force both to back down and allow Blackwater to stay?
Why does the US still control the security operations, training of Iraqi forces, reconstruction efforts, and access to the country, including even the security for the government itself?
Why does the Iraqi person have NO say as to where and when US forces go, whether it is kicking in their doors, blocking their movements, imprisoning their husbands, fathers, brothers, children, friends and neighbors?
Why are the Iraqi people still subjected to US military requirements which supersede the Iraqi people wishes?
Why have so many been forced out of their home, neighborhoods and forced into either internal or even external exile in a foreign country?
Why don’t the Iraqi people know when they are getting their country back from American forces?
frankly if we were telling them how to live, things would go a lot smoother over there
Right, since that worked out so well in Vietnam, or is working so well in Afghanistan, and it worked real well for the British in Iraq in 1920’s, or India and Pakistan in the late 1940’s.
BTW how did the Soviets do telling the Afghanis how to live work out in the 1980’s?
Did the Japanese have a easy time telling the Chinese, Filipinos, Koreans Vietnamese, how to live?
How well did the French message to do it the French way work in Vietnam or Algeria?
And most of all HOW WELL would this person accept orders from a foreign military power that has invaded the USA and occupied it for years?
(not that I am advocating that).
No not at all, your advocating we IGNORE we are already doing just that.
This brings us all to the political meme he wants everyone to believe in;
The Bathists are the oppressors, the islamofacists are oppressors, we are the liberators.
The baathists and islamofacists are bad guys; we are good guys, typical juvenile right wing fantasies.
It has all the right wing post 9-11 political correctness, and little tidbits of truthiness which they want to be true.
This is so they can continue in their alternate to reality world view, and justifications for the war crimes being committed by the Bush administration.
SUNDAY TALK…..gee they managed to slip in two democrats. How’d that happen? And don’t you wonder how Keith Olbermann can sit next to Tweety and not just bitch slap him right on the air? Oh how I wish he would……..
ReplyDeleteTP: from NH; Sen. John McCain (R-AZ); Dem strategist Steve McMahon and GOP strategist Mike Murphy on caucus results & NH primary & debates
FTN: Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)
This Week: Mitt Romney (R-MA); Mike Huckabee (R-AR); John Edwards (D-NC); roundtable of Cokie Roberts, Sam Donaldson, Donna Brazile and George Will
FNS: Mitt Romney (R-MA); Mike Huckabee (R-AR)
Late Edition: Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX); Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM); Mike Huckabee (R-AR); Pakistani Amb. Mahmud Durrani; roundtable of Gloria Borger, John King and Jeffrey Toobin
A suicide bomber targeting Iraqi soldiers and civilians commemorating Iraq’s Army Day killed at least eight people and injuring a dozen in central Baghdad on Sunday, police said.
ReplyDeleteAmong the dead were four police officers, three Iraqi soldiers and one civilian, a police officer said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media. At least 12 other people were injured in the attack, which took place around 12:30 p.m. local time.
Another typical day in Bush's war for oil dominance.
Over the last three years, the group of organized, well-financed liars ironically named the “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth,” have come to be synonymous with vicious smears and mendacity. Most honorable people, who have any decency at all, look back at the group’s bogus attacks with disgust and disappointment. These clowns smeared a war hero to help a couple of draft-dodgers, and the Republican Party cheered them on.
ReplyDeleteThat, of course, was nearly four years ago. Can we leave this malicious moment in the past? Actually, no. Chris Hayes has a tremendous piece in the new issue of The Nation noting that the Swift Boat Liars’ financiers aren’t just lingering, they’re as active as ever.
Research by The Nation into Federal Election Commission records of the group’s top twenty donors reveals that they’ve been remarkably active in this cycle, contributing and bundling nearly $200,000 to presidential candidates. This does not bode well. During the last presidential campaign, the wealthy backers of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth — now rebranded as Swift Vets and POWs for Truth — didn’t do their real dirty work until the general election, where as a tax-exempt 527 group they operated outside the restraints of direct campaign contributions. We may wish we were done with the Swift Boaters, but they aren’t done with us.
In 2004 the top twenty donors all gave (with one exception) at least $50,000 to the group. The top three — Houston home builder Bob Perry, Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens and billionaire drugstore impresario and investor Harold Simmons — gave a combined $9.5 million ($4.45 million, $3 million and $2 million, respectively). Calculating the influence of these and the slightly less wealthy Swift Boat donors during this cycle is a touch more complicated than simply adding up their contributions. Each one exerts far more influence as a bundler, given the federal restrictions on individual giving, which limit donors to a maximum of $4,600 per cycle. So The Nation looked not only at the contributions of the donors themselves but also at those of their family members and employees.
In 2004, Swifties were closely tied to the Bush administration, particularly Karl Rove. Care to guess who these guys are rallying behind now? John McCain.
These are the same people that McCain criticized when they said Kerry was a fraud. Looks like he is still selling his dark soul to the devil.
Ann Coulter Dubs Kwanzaa a Holiday Sham by America’s “United Slaves”
ReplyDeleteScarecrow Pundette Trying for Martyrdom to Sell More Books
Jan. 3, 2007 – Geneva (apj.us) – It is no wonder that Ann Coulter is rumored to travel with personal security guards.
She begins 2008 with one of her most bigoted attacks yet, a vicious Tourette's outburst that would land her in Hell if Satan wasn’t already appalled by her.
Her instant column is yet another miserable rewrite of her previous verbal vomit about a black American holiday. One can only ask why: why does Coulter continue to say hateful things about people and policy she knows absolutely nothing about?
And she calls herself a Christian.
This week she picks on all African Americans who choose to celebrate Kwanzaa - a holiday fro them which was the innovation of black radical Ron Karenga in the 1960s. She does not bother to mention that the same Americans celebrating Kwanzaa more often than not also celebrate Christmas – even Hanukah.
If she believes Kwanzaa is a fraud, what does she think about Christmas?
Coulter also claims – lying to you again – that the FBI invented Kwanzaa. In fact, the FBI certainly used and abused the founders of Kwanzaa to split apart Americans protesting racism, sometimes mortally. These were black, white, and purple citizens who were sick with grief over bigotry and government-endorsed near-slavery that continued until the middle 20th century and some say continues today.
It is worth a mention that Coulter is living proof that while we may have rid America of “institutionalized” racism in the 60s – “Racist Pigs” like her still continue living and flourishing.
A little historyis in order: The FBI at that time was run by a madman homophobic gay bombaster.. He delighted in pitting people with similar goals against each – to weaken them in general and to make certain they murdered each other in one sense or another This tactic is and was used between 2003 and today by similarly sick American strategists in Iraq – taking advantage of the divisions between Sunni and Shia Islamics – taunting them to grind each other’s babies into the blood-spattered sand. We should be familiar and wary of it:
Coulter makes fun of the timing of Kwanzaa.
Coulter delights that she hears little about the holiday any longer and takes credit for this.
Coulter belittles President Bush for referring to Kwanzaa.
Coulter calls Ron Karenga, a once black radical and now a professor, an “FBI stooge” and then goes on to prove he wasn’t.
Coulter sneers at his adopted African name - Dr. Maulana Karenga.
Coulter lies and tells you that Kwanzaa is a White liberal holiday – not a black one. Gee I don’t know a single Liberal that celebrates Kwanzaa – but I do know many who respect the right of others to do so.
Coulter scoffs at African Americans who wear native dress or dashiki.
Coulter mocks children called “Jamal” because this is a popular African American name and she asks how many blacks named Jamal “currently sit on death row.”
How awful of her on that last point. How desperately ailing must be her mind.
This flea infested witch will never slither away.
Bill Bradley, a former presidential hopeful and senator, planned to endorse Barack Obama for president on Sunday aides said.
ReplyDeleteBradley, a hall of fame professional basketball player, will campaign on Monday for Obama, Obama aides told The Associated Press.
A House Resolution to impeach U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney, Dennis Kucinich's H.R. 333, is gathering more support. The national impeachment continues to grow and generate increasing interest since being referred to the House Judiciary Committee last month, a Kucinich spokesperson said.
ReplyDeleteAs a member of that committee, Representative Robert Wexler and two other committee members, Luis Gutierrez and Tammy Baldwin, have joined together in demanding that the legal action against Cheney moves forward.
Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida is just one elected official who says the charges are too serious to ignore.
"There is credible evidence that the Vice President abused the power of his office, and not only brought us into an unnecessary war but violated the civil liberties and privacy of American citizens. It is the constitutional duty of Congress to hold impeachment hearings"
He went on to say that he believes Vice President Dick Cheney and the Bush Administration have demonstrated a consistent pattern of abusing the law and misleading Congress and the American people.
"We see the consequences of these actions abroad in Iraq and at home through the violations of our civil liberties,” Wexler said.
Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, stated in August that published reports identify, "the Vice-President’s willful and repeated disregard for the rule of law, international treaties, environmental protections, and the common good."
Wexler and Baldwin joined Congressman Luis Gutierrez in penning an Op-Ed that calls for committee hearings on a bill to impeach Dick Cheney on a variety of charges that include allegations of manipulating intelligence to boost the case for the war with Iraq, a very serious charge.
The Op-Ed that ran in the Philadelphia Enquirer December 27th (Impeach Cheney now- The allegations that he abused power are credible.) states, "The issues at hand are too serious to ignore, including credible allegations of abuse of power that if proven may well constitute high crimes and misdemeanors under our constitution."
"The charges against Vice President Cheney relate to his deceptive actions leading up to the Iraq war, the revelation of the identity of a covert agent for political retaliation, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens."
House leaders and the leading Democratic presidential candidates don't support impeachment. One thing they point to is the timeframe and expense that surrounded the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton, citing how the business of politics in the U.S. ground to a near standstill as the nation's attention was diverted by the effort to expose the President over a sex act with a White House intern. Gutierrez saying hearings, "need not tie up Congress for a year and shut down the nation."
The White House, in a statement, said Democrats were shirking responsibilities on issues such as childrens’ [sic] health insurance "and yet they find time to waste an afternoon on an impeachment vote against the vice president. … This is why Americans shake their head in wonder about the priorities of this Congress."
But Kucinich and Wexler and others in Congress say they won't be swayed as they utilize an existing arm of the Democratic system to see that impeachment proceedings are brought forward against the elected leader of out nation's second highest political office.
Looking at America
ReplyDeleteNY Times:
There are too many moments these days when we cannot recognize our country. Sunday was one of them, as we read the account in The Times of how men in some of the most trusted posts in the nation plotted to cover up the torture of prisoners by Central Intelligence Agency interrogators by destroying videotapes of their sickening behavior. It was impossible to see the founding principles of the greatest democracy in the contempt these men and their bosses showed for the Constitution, the rule of law and human decency.
It was not the first time in recent years we’ve felt this horror, this sorrowful sense of estrangement, not nearly. This sort of lawless behavior has become standard practice since Sept. 11, 2001.
The country and much of the world was rightly and profoundly frightened by the single-minded hatred and ingenuity displayed by this new enemy. But there is no excuse for how President Bush and his advisers panicked — how they forgot that it is their responsibility to protect American lives and American ideals, that there really is no safety for Americans or their country when those ideals are sacrificed.
Out of panic and ideology, President Bush squandered America’s position of moral and political leadership, swept aside international institutions and treaties, sullied America’s global image, and trampled on the constitutional pillars that have supported our democracy through the most terrifying and challenging times. These policies have fed the world’s anger and alienation and have not made any of us safer.
In the years since 9/11, we have seen American soldiers abuse, sexually humiliate, torment and murder prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq. A few have been punished, but their leaders have never been called to account. We have seen mercenaries gun down Iraqi civilians with no fear of prosecution. We have seen the president, sworn to defend the Constitution, turn his powers on his own citizens, authorizing the intelligence agencies to spy on Americans, wiretapping phones and intercepting international e-mail messages without a warrant.
We have read accounts of how the government’s top lawyers huddled in secret after the attacks in New York and Washington and plotted ways to circumvent the Geneva Conventions — and both American and international law — to hold anyone the president chose indefinitely without charges or judicial review.
Those same lawyers then twisted other laws beyond recognition to allow Mr. Bush to turn intelligence agents into torturers, to force doctors to abdicate their professional oaths and responsibilities to prepare prisoners for abuse, and then to monitor the torment to make sure it didn’t go just a bit too far and actually kill them.
The White House used the fear of terrorism and the sense of national unity to ram laws through Congress that gave law-enforcement agencies far more power than they truly needed to respond to the threat — and at the same time fulfilled the imperial fantasies of Vice President Dick Cheney and others determined to use the tragedy of 9/11 to arrogate as much power as they could.
Hundreds of men, swept up on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, were thrown into a prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, so that the White House could claim they were beyond the reach of American laws. Prisoners are held there with no hope of real justice, only the chance to face a kangaroo court where evidence and the names of their accusers are kept secret, and where they are not permitted to talk about the abuse they have suffered at the hands of American jailers.
In other foreign lands, the C.I.A. set up secret jails where “high-value detainees” were subjected to ever more barbaric acts, including simulated drowning. These crimes were videotaped, so that “experts” could watch them, and then the videotapes were destroyed, after consultation with the White House, in the hope that Americans would never know.
The C.I.A. contracted out its inhumanity to nations with no respect for life or law, sending prisoners — some of them innocents kidnapped on street corners and in airports — to be tortured into making false confessions, or until it was clear they had nothing to say and so were let go without any apology or hope of redress.
These are not the only shocking abuses of President Bush’s two terms in office, made in the name of fighting terrorism. There is much more — so much that the next president will have a full agenda simply discovering all the wrongs that have been done and then righting them.
We can only hope that this time, unlike 2004, American voters will have the wisdom to grant the awesome powers of the presidency to someone who has the integrity, principle and decency to use them honorably. Then when we look in the mirror as a nation, we will see, once again, the reflection of the United States of America.
clif said...
ReplyDeleteOn Jan. 5, 1914, Henry Ford, head of the Ford Motor Company, introduced a minimum wage scale of $5 per day.
Even henry was FOR the minimum wage, because he knew his workers couldn't buy his product unless they had enough discretionary income after food and housing to afford it.
Too bad the modern day reichwingers have forgotten this BASIC theorem of economics, if the workers can't earn enough to spend part of their income on discretionary items the economy can not grow.
and debt especially unsustainable debt which places an enlarging burden on both the middle class and economy is NOT the answer.
The answer is making sure the middle class is earning a good living, like FDR did which then grows a middle class and the economy along with it.
Milton Freidman was just a modern day snake oil salesman for the reichwing on economic policy, like the neo-cons are in foreign policy.
EXCELLENT post Clif, i couldnt agree more!
Food prices have risen more that any time during the last 17 years................................Milk is up 30% this year, Eggs up 38% Chicken 11%...........yet GWB and the Federal reserve "CLAIM" that the fundamentals of the economy are strong and inflation is low..............interesting that the Fed would be cutting rates if the economy were truly strong, also interesting that the dow would have the WORST 3 day start since the height of the Great Depression in 1932.
ReplyDeleteI think the Fed and our President have a credibility problem..............the only thing this economy has been good for is the super minority of wealthy elites that are gaining at the expense of the working class.
enigma4ever said...
ReplyDeleteObama and Edwards were both calm under pressure....I think Obama was even calmer...Hill looked off...thrown off her game...did you know in events of the last three weeks, she has been refusing to do Question and Answer Periods ? ( NH journalist explained this on cspan this am).....
if you go to her webisite Iraq is not even a listed issue....this is very concerning...
Anyways....pretty amazing debate..and very different than the repug part...strange.."
I thought the same thing Enigma, Obama and Edwards both handled themselves very well while Hillary'
s strategy of angry haughty attacks and holding your finger up to see which way the winds of change are blowing then insincerely trying to glom onto to what the public wants to here failed miserably........Hillary is imploding!
enigma4ever said...
ReplyDeleteCLIFF: I loved the news you put up- the ARRESTED workers- were they OHIO? just curious...
Lydia:
(1) On Hillarys' website she has Issues Posted, so I went and visited, and IRAQ is not one of the nine issues listed- and has NEVER been. She does list VET care- which I find disturbing- she mentions the VETS- but not why they NEED care.....
(2) Her Healthcare plan on her site MANDATES care for all - that ALL people must buy care. ( if you read all of it and the details, she is missing the point that Healthcare and Insurance is not accessible or available or affordable to all , and even returning Guard from Iraq- they only have care for the first 24 monthes home- and then they are dropped). Her "plan" orders that everyone go and get care??? And to help with the costs- she offers "tax credits"???
NOW MY Hill Story:
I have written to her Campaign people over and over about THESE TWO MAIN ISSUES, ( Iraq and Healthcare) and also offered to volunteer to do Policy Research on Health issues. I offered this Pro Bono Service to ALL of the Candidates quite a while ago, in the early days of the race....and Most responded in some way to the Offer, and some were more gracious than others. HER campaign was the ONLY one that NEVER even answered the emails....at all. Two days ago After she lost the Primary..I finally heard from Her People....and it was a form letter asking for money to run ads in NH."{
Enigma this is a very enlightening post..........unfortunately it does not come as a surprise (at least to me) Hillary is very arrogant she thought her campaign was inevitable now she is getting desperate and trying to glom onto the change she knows the American people want and when Edwards and Obama shot down her dishonest attempt to jump on the change bandwagon she flashed rage.
She is confused she wants to attack Obama and Edwards and slime them just like the repugs would but she knows it will continue to hurt her like it did last night...........BUT she feels obama and Edwards gaining momemtum as change candidates and middle class crusaders and doesnt want to passively do nothing as they gain strength. Just like the repugs Hillary is in a state of confusion.
Ahh Voltron...........I sensed in my bones that the debates would draw you out............I have to say that my feelings were hurt you didnt comment on my analysis of both debates..................instead you slimed the 3rd place Democrat............but then I guess your masters/employers didnt give you your NEW marching orders yet to attack the Democratic leaders.......just curious if you clowns will use rascism or the anti corporate anti estabishment route or some combination of both?
ReplyDeleteLydia said "And LETTERMAN'S BACK!
ReplyDeleteMy son's father is an Emmy Award-winning writer on the Late Show with David Letterman and we are so pleased that he is back at work. He is a brilliant comedy writer who wrote the Johnny Carson show, many films like the original "Bad Boys" and now writes Letterman's monologue, Top Ten List in collaboration with the other gifted scribes. Kudos to Letterman for standing up for the writers."
I'm glad the writers are back to work...........I like Letterman (but not the beard?????) btw I just watched Bad Boys like two weeks ago, that was a good movie, can you believe that was Sean Penn, he looked so different back then.
Ldia said "Obama's win is GREAT NEWS! It means we have embraced a more international candidate who has humility and substance. Obama is a U.S. constitutional scholar and a purist. He would be able to personally communicate with the most provocative nations in the middle east because he is a good listener, has sound principles and a name they can identify with. He would do more good for world peace by his open demeanor. Domestically, I think he'd carefully weigh each bill that came to him, untainted by special interests."
ReplyDeleteHe is a good package, I believe he will fight the special interests, defend the middle class and work for peace rather than war, and its nice that he is a Constitutional cholar rather than a thug who calls the Constitution "a goddamn piece of paper"..........hopefully he will repeal te "Patriot" Act, end the Unconstitutional spying and the Nazi like Executive orders saying the President can declare martial law and confiscate assets or imprison citizens on a whim.
I think Kucininch getting shut out of the debates is reprehensible..............howver i do hope some good comes out of it like much needed election reform..............we need to make ALL campaigns have public funding and the SAME amount of air time just like we need to get rid of the lobbyists and break up the media empires to insure truth in news and diversity of opinion.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I got out of the debate and iowa Caucus is that the majority of Democraticic support coalesced anong the TWO candidates that support change, peace and support the working class (which consists of the OVERWHELMING majority of Americans).............Now just like in the Highlander mythology "There Can Only Be One" Democratic nominee so even if Hillary wins some big victories the change candidate that no longers views themselves as viable will support the other one and if Iowa is any indication that candidate will have at least 60% of the vote.
ReplyDeleteLike Clif said this is a huge turning point in politics and Voter turnout of the young which usually doesnt turn out to vote in huge numbers will control our countrys destiny.
But as I said if Hillary starts gaining momentum that can be nullified by Obama and Edwards combining their base of support........which i think is highly likely.
I think we are witnessing a huge political change somewhere between the strength of the Reagan/Conservative revolution of 1980 when we were coming out of the similar oil shocks and stagflation of the 1970's and that of the FDR/Great Depression Liberal movement that swept repugs out of power for decades
ReplyDeleteEnigma you raised a a Great point that Hillary mandating that everyone should buy health insurance is a far cry from helping the poor be able to afford to pay for it for themselves and their families.
ReplyDeleteMike;
ReplyDeleteHillary has real problems...she has lost her humanity...she and the Media Package her as the "Clinton Machine"...that is a huge mistake....it means they have taken away what we need most right now...we have already been Disenfranchised for 7 years by Bush, treated like frys spilled on the floor at McDonalds...and now this is what they think we need ? Want ? A MACHINE????? We need Someone to Remember we have souls....and hearts...and that in many ways the Bushco Administration has left millions Broken Hearted....and to a degree Broken.
The LAST thing she should say going into an Event is " There is HARD WORK" ahead for you....She said that phrase at the 100 Club Dinner in NH on Friday Night....after everything people have been through...and she said THAT? How Many People have Lost jobs or are working 2 jobs under Bush.....
(btw she got BOOED at the Dinner twice, that was one of the moments- 3000 present at that Dinner)
And about Her Healthcare Program MANDATING HEALTHCARE....it would basically ORDER people to get Insurance- that is not the issue- People don't have healthcare- it is about affordability, accessiblity, and avialiability, People like Bill with Heart Trouble are being denied Insurance...or having to pay Incredible rates, or sell their homes for Needed Surgery....she has not a CLUE WHAT real Americans are going through.....
So when you said that Hill sees Obama and Edwards as Middle Class Crusaders- that is her problem...she has no one or anything to Crusade for...so her only crusade now is to attack them ?
Sadly I also don't think she learned anything from the years in DC with Bill- except maybe How to Fight People around her....it is sad really.
The Media thought with her Name- that it was a Done deal....so easy to package and sell us..well , she is not a Skin Cream or Hair Conditioner...
They don't see that Obama and Edwards too have reached out to people...are Approachable..that they CONNECT....( it is sad, because in a way, they are missing such an Amazing Moment in OUR History....)
Any of us that remember RFK,JFK, and MLK we can feel it....CHANGE...HOPE.....
Loved your comments Mike...( thought mine might have got lost up there under the news....but I always love the news Larry finds...I come and read it, and usually lurk..I have decided I need to lurk less....hope that is okay..)
MIKE:
ReplyDeleteI think the Great Depression Liberal Movement you mention is dead on...it is very accurate historically too....but my son said something the other night about that very issue- What Bush did not count on is that MANY of the Unemployed all these years are EDUCATED...so they have been reading and on the net and at the Library...they have had time to see there is ANOTHER WAY....THERE IS ROOM FOR CHANGE..THERE ARE SOLUTIONS...
Also much of Media tries to paint people that don't have Money, as not having a view, or desire to have Power....that is not the case..they want to be part of the Solution...and the Part of the Strength....
Both Obama and Edwards are embracing that Energy and Vision....
I couldnt agree MORE with your last post Enigma............it truly captutres and echoes the spirit of how i feel..........I ALSO see the similarities between Edwards and Obama and JFK and MLK.....they are truly the candidates of hope and change and its nice the nation seems to be aware of their sincereity as well!
ReplyDeleteMcCain: ‘I Dont Think Americans Are Concerned’ If We Stay In Iraq For ‘10,000 Years’
ReplyDeleteLast week, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said it “would be fine with” him if the U.S. military stayed in Iraq for “a hundred years” or even a “million years.”
Fifty-nine percent say the U.S. should “stick to a withdrawal timetable” instead of keeping “a significant number of troops in Iraq until the situation there gets better, even if that takes many years.”
But on CBS’s Face the Nation, McCain claimed that Americans would not be “concerned” if the U.S. spends “10,000 years” in Iraq:
That deranged nut doesn't speak for Americans.
Larry:
ReplyDeleteIt is worse than even that....McCain also dismissed the Iraqi's Deathes as PART of the Problem..really devastating to hear that kind of talk...( that will make more people love us abroad) ( the post about it is over on C&L)
...and he also this weekend is still peddling the" islamofacicsts extremist enemy threat"...
He is sick.....too old to see the Future....( I don;t mean that meanly, but he can not see Another way to go....Surge or Else...and People need to realize and SAY that he is still Peddling the Bush Agenda....)
Thanks Mike for what you said...and yes, we are on the Threshold of Something big..Bigger...
the Youtube Videos of Obama and Edwards with Crowds , how they speak, Listen and Connect....It is Amazing....
The Obama Miracle Continues
ReplyDeleteIn the first tracking poll taken since his win in Iowa, Barack Obama, has has moved into a significant lead over his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton.
The poll, taken on Jan. 5 and 6, shows Obama leading Clinton, 39 to 29 percent.
John Edwards has slipped to 16 percent from 20 percent, followed by Bill Richardson at 7 percent and Dennis Kucinich at 2 percent.
SOURCE: WMUR/CNN
The further along this gets the better Obama gets. I think only Obama can stop Obama unless something drastic happens.
ReplyDeleteChristopher...
ReplyDeleteFinallly the CNN People have to LOOK at that..
there is is also the Rasmussen, and one other over at Huffpost..that for the life of me I can not remember the name of it.....oh,...wait...I am an idiot..the Rasmussen Poll was on your website wasn't it???
thanks for Hopemongering ;-)
Okay....I found the THIRD Poll:
ReplyDelete( Publisher and Editor) American Research Group posted this poll , NEW
Obama 38%
Clinton26
Edwards 20
( Clinton dropped- and Edwards Came up too_ I think this was done after Iowa- but before the Debate)
So that is the 3rd poll, Rasumussen, CNN...and the Zogby should come out tonight- or by early AM- he was on Cspan this weekend, and wanted to make really clear that there are shifts going on- and the new polls should at latest be out by Mon. am
What I am curious is, is whether the latest Debate ( which is being re-aired on CNN) is really showing Clinton damaging herself by going in attack mode...it did not make her look "presidential"....
Also there are really amazing articles in many foriegn papers Africa, India, Australia, Scotland, Indonesia,UK, France were just some that I read this am.....( I can forward to Larry if you like...)
Later....gotta go see the Bowl Game/60 Minutes..
Mike this says it very well
ReplyDeleteI was wrong about Zogby- the latest one was Friday- but did not include the fallout of latest primary...the next one will be WED...sorry...
ReplyDeleteEnigma, I was astounded to read your post about Hilary and how she and her team totally ignored you.
ReplyDeleteWe are friendly with Terry McCauliff, and he promised Hill for our show, but so far I've heard she simply won't do any radio talk shows.
Doug also had horrendous problems with Obama's Nevada PR woman. But we haven't contacted his national PR person. The Nevada person is totally rude and doesn't even convey the message.
It's always good to do radio in Vegas. Obama's been in town 3 times, but his PR person is totally disinterested and doesn't seem to understand how important it is to do a morning drive show in a RED STATE. Nevada is a red state and it would help Obama to be heard here. At least in the months leading up to the primaries (before Iowa.)
Someone in Obama's camp is not on the ball.
John and Elizabeth Edwards, Kucinich have been on our show -- Biden and Dodd said yes, so we'd love to get Obama.
People in Vegas need to hear him because nothing is set in stone.
Enigma, I am so impressed with your offering to help out all the campaigns. That is what every citizen should do.
ReplyDeleteAnd the fact that Obama and Edwards both responded is really wonderful.
I can't believe Hilary thinks she can get away with ignoring THE PEOPLE!!
By the way, I didn't mean to get so upset with the Nevada woman. It's just that Air America is not allowed in Vegas, and we are the only Progressive radio show in town.
ReplyDeleteA large part of Hillery's problem is probably her main strategist, Mark Penn.
ReplyDeleteHe is definitely not a main stream democrat, and makes a good portion of his consulting money advising major corporations how to decrease or even break unions.
he doesn't tolerate off message at all, which is why every campaign he has had very much to do with has LOST;
Al Checchi, who in 1998 lost a primary campaign to none other then Gray Davis
Former Michigan Gov. Jim Blanchard, whom lost the 2002 democratic primary for Governor.
Andrew Cuomo, 2002 new York gubernatorial primary.
Joe Lieberman, 2006 Connecticut senatorial primary, he lost that to Ned lamont
Peter Deutsch, running in the Florida senatorial primary in 2004.
Maybe her "friend" Joe Lieberman suggested Penn to Hillery
He [Mark Penn]has been a key adviser to Bill Gates and Microsoft since the late 1990s. His present firm Burson-Marsteller has been linked to controversial security firm Blackwater and struggling subprime mortgage lender Countrywide.
ReplyDeleteNuff said ......
Clif - Wow, that's weird. Yes I heard Hilary had this guy working for her. Why on earth would she keep him if everyone he handles loses?
ReplyDeleteLydia, Penn worked for Bill in 1996 as a pollster, and his Administration 1997-2001, so she is probably comfortable with him.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting she won't reject her 2002 vote to attack Iraq and has a guy who gets money from Blackwater and worked hard to elect Joe Lie-berman in 2006 .......
He did help Tony Blair in England during his third term run.
But like you with the large call for change, I can't understand Hillery relying on the master of triangulation.
Wow..Lydia and Cliff- such good info....
ReplyDeleteI think the lesson here is that Candidates have Middle management people, and handlers, and if they are not hands on and part of the process things can get too big too fast...maybe?
Hillary concerns me more because I think she chose Mark Penn...and I don't understand why...I had heard on cspan that from a NH editor that they had had the same trouble trying to get interviews in the past few weeks...
I think to some degree, it just reminds me of Bush and the Cloak of Inaccessibility....
We need a Candidate that is Accessible...Open....Connected...Wants to reach the people...
The Touchable factor..
an that includes interviews...not scripted answers and questions too ( Hillary is still doing it at Events...or atleast it looks like it on cspan)
Lydia- you are right about Drive Time radio and needing to be heard....esp in a Red State...
Don't give up on Obama....( after looking at Crowd photos on Google images tonight it occurred to me they must be flooded with calls...)