Is Someone Listening?

As you probably have heard, USA Today as reported that the NSA has been secretly collecting phone numbers for 200 million Americans, in an effort to "analyze calling patterns." The phone companies that have provided numbers to the NSA include AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth. USA Today also reported that Qwest refused to co-operate because of concerns that the program was illegal.

Point of disclosure: Verizon is my cell phone carrier (the only phone I have). I do not have Qwest services at my house, but am now actively working to convert everything to Qwest (I never thought I'd utter those words in my life time).

And, once again, John Conyers came out in response:

"It is very disturbing that, on the same day we learn that the NSA has been secretly collecting the phone records of tens of millions of Americans, we also learn that the Department of Justice has abruptly cancelled its investigation into the agency's warrantless wiretapping programme," said John Conyers, the top Democrat on the House judiciary committee.

This is quoted from an article from MSNBC - you can read it here.

The administration is continuing to deny any wrong-doing, and also continuing not to disclose anything.

If someone is listening, they are not hearing the cry of the masses!!!! These guys need to be impeached.

Full Text or the Iran Letter

At the risk of being labelled an "extreme pinko" (boy, those Republicans are grasping at anything to help stop their sinking ship of a party), I want to present readers of this blog to read the entire text of Mahmood Ahmadi-Najad's correspondance with King George.

Although the media wants to portray the letter as an incoherent diatribe from some opposing dictator, it really isn't. In fact, some of the points hit home. For example:

Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ...feel obliged to respect human rights, present liberalism as a civilization model, announce one’s opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs... but at the same time, have countries attacked; the lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed.

And...

Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around one hundred thousand people killed, its water sources, agriculture and industry destroyed, close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, sanctity of private homes of citizens broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years.

And...

After 9.11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people – who had been immensely traumatised by the attacks – some Western media only intensified the climates of fear and insecurity – some constantly talked about the possibility of new terror attacks and kept the people in fear. Is that service to the American people?

And...

In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets. I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles.

And, more...

If billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns and troop movement were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to the victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states and distinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic and other conflicts were would the world be today?

Makes you think, huh? Want to read the full text - go here.

Absolute Power Corrupts...Absolutely

A reader of this blog forwarded an article about GW Bush today that surprised me. I know what you're thinking - "c'mon, he's done so much already, what can you be surprised about?"

But the title of the article really did surprise me - "Bush challenges hundreds of laws" Surely, he couldn't have challenged that many laws, I thought to myself. And then I read on:

President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution...

Legal scholars say the scope and aggression of Bush's assertions that he can bypass laws represent a concerted effort to expand his power at the expense of Congress, upsetting the balance between the branches of government.

Are we talking about the NSA scandal? Or how about the torture ban? Yes, yes, dear readers, and so much more. Although Bush Administration officials are quick to point out that ''the president will faithfully execute the law in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution."

It's the words ''in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution" that are the catch...because Bush is according himself the ultimate interpretation of the Constitution.

How can this happen? It all starts with the ability for the president to issue "signing statements" - official documents in which he lays out his legal interpretation of a bill for the federal bureaucracy to follow when implementing the new law.

In his signing statements, Bush has repeatedly asserted that the Constitution gives him the right to ignore numerous sections of the bills -- sometimes including provisions that were the subject of negotiations with Congress in order to get lawmakers to pass the bill. He has appended such statements to more than one of every 10 bills he has signed.

The article goes on to outline the numerous ways in which GW has been ignoring passed laws. I'll recap some:

March 9: Justice Department officials must give reports to Congress by certain dates on how the FBI is using the USA Patriot Act to search homes and secretly seize papers.
Bush's signing statement: The president can order Justice Department officials to withhold any information from Congress if he decides it could impair national security or executive branch operations.

Dec. 30, 2005: US interrogators cannot torture prisoners or otherwise subject them to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.
Bush's signing statement: The president, as commander in chief, can waive the torture ban if he decides that harsh interrogation techniques will assist in preventing terrorist attacks.

Dec. 30: When requested, scientific information ''prepared by government researchers and scientists shall be transmitted [to Congress] uncensored and without delay."
Bush's signing statement: The president can tell researchers to withhold any information from Congress if he decides its disclosure could impair foreign relations, national security, or the workings of the executive branch.

Aug. 8: The Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and its contractors may not fire or otherwise punish an employee whistle-blower who tells Congress about possible wrongdoing.
Bush's signing statement: The president or his appointees will determine whether employees of the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can give information to Congress.

Dec. 23, 2004: Forbids US troops in Colombia from participating in any combat against rebels, except in cases of self-defense. Caps the number of US troops allowed in Colombia at 800.
Bush's signing statement: Only the president, as commander in chief, can place restrictions on the use of US armed forces, so the executive branch will construe the law ''as advisory in nature."

Dec. 17: The new national intelligence director shall recruit and train women and minorities to be spies, analysts, and translators in order to ensure diversity in the intelligence community.
Bush's signing statement: The executive branch shall construe the law in a manner consistent with a constitutional clause guaranteeing ''equal protection" for all. (In 2003, the Bush administration argued against race-conscious affirmative-action programs in a Supreme Court case. The court rejected Bush's view.)

Oct. 29: Defense Department personnel are prohibited from interfering with the ability of military lawyers to give independent legal advice to their commanders.
Bush's signing statement: All military attorneys are bound to follow legal conclusions reached by the administration's lawyers in the Justice Department and the Pentagon when giving advice to their commanders.

Aug. 5: The military cannot add to its files any illegally gathered intelligence, including information obtained about Americans in violation of the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches.
Bush's signing statement: Only the president, as commander in chief, can tell the military whether or not it can use any specific piece of intelligence.

Nov. 6, 2003: US officials in Iraq cannot prevent an inspector general for the Coalition Provisional Authority from carrying out any investigation. The inspector general must tell Congress if officials refuse to cooperate with his inquiries.
Bush's signing statement: The inspector general ''shall refrain" from investigating anything involving sensitive plans, intelligence, national security, or anything already being investigated by the Pentagon. The inspector cannot tell Congress anything if the president decides that disclosing the information would impair foreign relations, national security, or executive branch operations.

Nov. 5, 2002: Creates an Institute of Education Sciences whose director may conduct and publish research ''without the approval of the secretary [of education] or any other office of the department."
Bush's signing statement: The president has the power to control the actions of all executive branch officials, so ''the director of the Institute of Education Sciences shall [be] subject to the supervision and direction of the secretary of education."

Who said Bush isn't a clever SOB? Here we all thought he was a few fries short of a Happy Meal. Someone stop this crazy world - I want off!

Another Idle Threat From the Whitehouse

Our Prez, King George, likes to posture that he is a man of resolve...or in his terms "The Decider!" (we should let him know there's a great online "Decider" - check it out here...). But the American public should also see that he is a man of idle threats...namely, vetoing bills.

Being well-versed in my Schoolhouse Rock snippets, I know a lot about how bills are vetoed. In fact, it seems like an easy thing to do (that cartoon President in the song seemed to easily whip out his big "Veto" stamp whenever the wrong bill was presented).

But our President - possibly in an effort to further this scary concept of the "Republican Agenda" - has yet to veto any bill presented to him. Of course, he often threatens us with a possible veto.

Today, the BBC reports that he's at it again. King George is threatening to veto a bill related to Iraq War spending!!! I quote:

Mr Bush's bill for emergency spending requests an additional $92bn - two-thirds for spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a third to help rebuilding in southern states after Hurricane Katrina last year.

But senators are able to tack on additional spending provisions to such bills, and have done so. They have proposed extra spending worth a total of $14.5bn for border security, aid to farmers, measures to combat bird flu, and money to move a railway line.

"The final version of the legislation must remain focused on addressing urgent national priorities while maintaining fiscal discipline," a White House statement said.

"If the president is ultimately presented a bill that provides more than $92.2bn, exclusive of funding for the president's plan to address pandemic influenza, he will veto the bill."

Way to go, King George! Your idle threat is duly noted! Full story can be found - here.

What a Corny President...

King George gave a speech today in response to the enormous pressure he was receiving from the gas prices. Remember, it was his administration that promised the war in Iraq would LOWER gas prices. The actual quote was from Laurence Lindsey, Bush's senior economic advisor, who said in 2002 -

“It depends how the war goes...under every plausible scenario, the negative effect will be quite small relative to the economic benefits that would come from a successful prosecution of the war...the key issue is oil, and a regime change in Iraq would facilitate an increase in world oil, which would drive down oil prices, giving the U.S. economy an added boost."

A lie related to this actually was exposed on Hardball this past week - see link here.

Back to point - in today's speech, Bush finally discovered (after remaining silent on the issue for weeks) the solution to the rising gas prices. A new technology. One that an oil-man such as Bush couldn't fathom...until sometime overnight last night - ethanol!

What's ethanol, you ask? Is is some form of crazy cocktail that college kids are drinking at frat parties? Is it some form of salve that you apply to open wounds? How about something you rub on your chest when you have a cold?

No, no, kiddies - imagine this: ethanol is an alternative fuel source made from corn! It's true! If you haven't heard of it by now, you must be living under a rock...or be the President of the US. Check out some of GW's quotes from today's speech:

"Ethanol has got the largest potential for immediate growth. Most people may not know this, but today most of ethanol produced in America today is from corn. Most vehicles can use 10 percent ethanol in their automobiles.

"What's interesting that Americans don't realize, with a little bit of expenditure, we can convert a standard automobile to what's called a flex-fuel automobile. And that flex-fuel vehicle can use fuel that is 85 percent ethanol.

"Amazing, isn't it? Without much cost, your automobile can be converted to be able to burn fuel with 85 percent ethanol or a product made from corn grown right here in America."

I could just imagine the look in his face when he first discovered this new fuel. I imagine it's similar to the look he had on 9/11, while reading "Billy the Goat" to those kids. Here are some more great quotes:

"The way I like to put it would be -- it's a good thing when a president can sit there and say, 'Gosh, we've got a lot of corn. And that means we're less dependent on foreign sources of oil.'"

...and...

"Yet you've got to recognize there are limits to how much corn can be used for ethanol. I mean, after all, we got to eat some...and animals have got to eat."

(Allow me a brief editorial - What an IDIOT! What kind of MORON is running this country?!?!)

Did you know that more than 250 days ago, the Democrats proposed an alternative energy bill that proposed ethanol?!?! Of course, the bill was sorely lacking (see a full expose - here), but still...it's time for our Prez to wake up and smell the cornstalks!!

When are We (the U.S.) Going to Stop Acting Like Arrogant S.O.B.'s?

I am sick and tired of it. The Bush Administration is grand-standing daily about the threat of Iran to have any kind of nuclear capabilities. Heck, they are even entertaining thoughts about striking with nuclear weapons in Iran. Does that scare the crap out of you? No? Then how about this...

Widely unreported in mainstream news, the U.S. is actually planning on a nuclear test blast in Nevada. On June 2!!

That's right - we are testing nuclear weapons here in our own country. See full story - here. So does that scare the crap out of you? No - not yet?

OK, how about this....WE ARE ACTUALLY CALLING THE NUCLEAR BOMB THAT WE ARE TESTING "DIVINITY!!!"

There is only one thing I could say about this: "WTF?"



Be afraid...be very, very afraid.

Another Lier Bites the Dust

There goes another one. Lier extraordinaire, Scott McClellan has decided to step down today (see this link - here). Or was it that he was asked to leave? It's hard to speculate....no, I take that back. It's easy to speculate on it. It's still a wonder that he is leaving - what with his outstanding track-record of consistently deceiving the American public. Shall we recap? Just for fun? Here goes...

• Karl Rove lies
• Lies about Bush's "pull the plug" law in Texas
• McClellan's Lies about Extraordinary Rendition to Syria
• Lies about King George Supporting the Troops in Iraq
• The Scott McClellan Dictionary - common terms the way Scott uniquely interprets them
• Scott lies about Putting Korans in Toilets
• Lying about the NSA Scandal
• Lies about Lying

I guess I could spend all day researching for this retrospective of his lies, but I have better things to do.

Let's end this post with a link to a great post by Bill Robinson on the Huffington Post called - "Make Scott McClellan Your Bitch!" Can anyone help him get a new job?