Pinko Rants and Raves

2006-05-11T15:12:00.000-06:00

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.

2006-05-09T16:37:00.000-06:00

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.

2006-05-01T15:01:00.000-06:00

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!

2006-04-26T09:26:00.000-06:00

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.

2006-04-25T14:33:00.000-06:00

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!!

2006-04-23T19:10:00.000-06:00

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.

2006-04-19T10:19:00.000-06:00

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?

2006-04-14T10:51:00.000-06:00

More Beatles News...

OK, I know this isn't Pinko news, but the Beatles are back in the news again, and I feel obligated to make note of it. While Apple Corps. (the company started by the Beatles back in the late 60's) is still battling in court with Apple Computers, other stories are surfacing:

First, Michael Jackson is rapidly selling off all of his music catalog, including the Beatles songs he owns! Hooray! And a pox on those of you upset that M. Jackson received a mention on the Pinko Blog! Full story - here.

Next, in an effort to make more money for the Beatles (like they need it), there was an official announcement that their music will soon be made available online for download! I quote:

Industry experts have speculated that the refusal by Apple Corps owners Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr, John Lennon's widow Yoko Ono, and George Harrison's widow Olivia Harrison to authorize online downloads has resulted in millions of illegal downloads from which they have been unable to profit.

Full story - here.

And here I was checking out the newest Beatles CD released in the store - The Capitol Albums Vol. 2. For only $55 to purchase stereo and monochromatic versions of albums released in the US (when I already have the songs on the original British released albums), I realized this was a set for collectors. And since I am a collector, I wonder if I should throw more money to the Fab 2 (when the two Beatles I really respect have passed already). Ugh!

2006-04-11T17:52:00.000-06:00

Here's A Great Article

I don't often double post, but I just came upon an article that is so great. The title, alone, says it all:

Okay, So Let's Get This Straight: On Monday, Bush Admitted That he Lied About Leaking a Lie to Smear Someone Who Revealed the Truth About His Lying

See the whole thing - here!!!! A must read!

2006-04-11T17:00:00.000-06:00

Liberal Press - a First-Hand Account

Hello, all you Pinkos out there! I've been neglect of my posting due to a weeklong+ vacation down in Miami. As a news junkie, I dutifully read, cover to cover, the Miami Herald every day! I was fascinated - not only by the in-depth, thoughtful stories they ran, but more so by their reputation. Remember, the Miami Herald is considered a bastion of liberal media in the sea of Red we call Florida.

I loved the paper. Great stories and editorial columns - sort of a no-holds-barred approach. Here's an example: as you know, Katherine Harris is adamantly running for Senate (despite just about everybody's disapproval - including her staff, which up and quit this last week). Here are some exceprts from stories that ran throughout the week:

Thursday, April 6 - "Harris is due to Answer Some Tough Questions" (opinion column). Here's a snip:

According to Florida Today, [Harris] told some supporters Saturday that her campaign staff had been ''infiltrated'' by enemies from within the Republican Party. ``I didn't know I was going to get the knives in my back from my own party.'' So the press spends time sorting out internecine intrigue.

Covering the Harris candidacy has been like NASCAR fans watching a car spinning out of control. But covering a political crack-up also relieves reporters from asking the truly discomfiting questions. If not for so many distractions, we might have been forced to broach subjects that never come up in polite campaign coverage.

Wednesday, April 5 - "Harris falls short on cash pledge":

Embattled U.S. Senate candidate Katherine Harris quietly deposited $3 million of her own money into her campaign last week, far less than the $10 million she promised on national television...

Harris' smaller-than-expected investment could further hurt her credibility, already damaged by a staff mutiny, tepid support from leaders of her own party and shifting explanations about her campaign finances...

Chris Ingram, the new [Harris] spokesman, was fired from his post as chief of staff to Georgia Rep. Max Burns in 2003. He blamed the National Republican Congressional Committee for the decision but declined Tuesday to discuss the matter.

Friday, April 7 - "Harris puts own spin on governer's doubts":

U.S. Senate candidate Katherine Harris, trying to reinvigorate her sagging campaign with a new staff and $3 million, refused Thursday to get bogged down by more bad news...
Less than four hours after Gov. Jeb Bush said he had ''concerns'' about her bid to unseat Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson, Harris issued an upbeat retort. Then reporters began asking about alleged campaign-finance violations by her assistant treasurer in a previous race. So she sacked him...
''We look forward to the support of our national party leaders, are appreciative of the wise counsel of the governor, and most importantly are committed to our grass roots whose continued support will usher in our victory in November,'' she said in a press release. "With the help of Republican leadership, we will take our positive message of common-sense values to the voters, while drawing compelling distinctions between my opponent and me.''

Tuesday, April 11 - "Magazine: Harris, Step Aside":

National Review, the conservative magazine, is calling for Katherine Harris to take herself out of the race for U.S. Senate in Florida ``for the good of her party and for the good of her own reputation.''
''Despite the recent bumps our campaign has encountered, we are steering this campaign in the right direction today by bringing Floridians a message of hope and a brighter future,'' harris responded. "They don't care about internal party politics or whomever is my campaign manager -- only D.C. insiders, power-brokers, and the lobbyists on K Street in Washington care about this gossip. This is irrelevant to Florida voters.''
A February poll of likely Republican voters pegged the former Florida Secretary of State's favorable rating at 35 percent and her unfavorable rating at 45 percent.
"Bill, come campaign with us in Florida some weekend,'' Harris wrote general editor William F. Buckley. "See the hope Florida voters share with me and catch our vision. The weather is beautiful and it would do you some good to get out of Washington, D.C. to hear what real voters say about Katherine Harris.''

I love the liberal media, don't you?

2006-03-27T13:32:00.000-07:00

Comparing Apples to...Apples

I just saw this online and had to make a comment. The Beatles are suing Steve Jobs over the use of the business name "Apple." Take a look- here.

2006-03-21T16:57:00.000-07:00

Need Inspiration? Ask Donny Rumsfeld!

Back by popular demand (and by the latest rumblings about Rumsfeld actually being asked to resign), I present to you the following websites dedicated to diving into the shallow pond we call Rumsfeld's wit and intelligence:

Ask Don Rumsfeld - The Unofficial Simulator
Donald Rumsfeld Orders Breakfast at Denny's
Don't Ask Rumsfeld
Memorable Quotes by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
Rummy' Greatest Hits (animated commercial)
And my favorite - The Poetry of D.H. Rumsfeld

This last link features some of his most inspiring poems, including:

A Confession
Once in a while,
I'm standing here, doing something.
And I think,
"What in the world am I doing here?"
It's a big surprise.
—May 16, 2001, interview with the New York Times

and...

The Situation
Things will not be necessarily continuous.
The fact that they are something other than perfectly continuous
Ought not to be characterized as a pause.
There will be some things that people will see.
There will be some things that people won't see.
And life goes on.
—Oct. 12, 2001, Department of Defense news briefing

2006-03-17T09:47:00.000-07:00

Can Someone Help Me Understand?

As the US troops in Iraq engage in an all out battle in Samarra, while the current administration is preparing for a launch against Iran (and possible the rest of the world), while the Congress just raised the limit of the Federal Government's borrowing to $781B (an all time high)....

Can someone please tell me why we are letting the government run amuk like this? Why isn't every individual in America that is concerned about the current state of affairs on the phone with his/her Senator or Representative? Why aren't we engaging in effective, demonstrative acts to move our elected officials to do something to represent our feelings?

Why is it when I call my Senators (Salazar and Allard, respectfully - no, scratch that...my respect for one has long been gone and the other is rapidly waning), why do I get a busy signal in the local Colorado office, and voicemail-hell on the DC line?

Why is no Democrat (or anyone, for that matter) stepping up to the plate and supporting the Feingold Censure bill? Does anyone care?

Where is this country headed, and why are we in this handbasket?

2006-03-16T10:40:00.000-07:00

Republican Crazies Threaten the Lives of Supreme Court Justices

This is taken from an AP reported news item. It seems the lunatic right has been sending death threats to Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sandra Day O'Connor. A brief story appears - here. Here's a snip:

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said she and former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor have been the targets of death threats from the “irrational fringe” of society — people apparently spurred by Republican criticism of the high court.
Ginsburg disclosed in a speech in South Africa last month that she and O’Connor were threatened on the Internet a year ago by someone who called for the immediate “patriotic” killing of the justices.

These wackos really need to be kept in check...

2006-03-16T08:03:00.000-07:00

We Have Nothing to Fear but Fear Itself...and the Bush Administration

Bush's national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, is delivering Bush's "National Security Policy" ironically to the U.S. Institute of Peace. There is a link to the full report - here - but here are some excerpts that will scare the crap out of you:

Regarding Iran: "We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran. For almost 20 years, the Iranian regime hid many of its key nuclear efforts from the international community, yet the regime continues to claim that it does not seek to develop nuclear weapons.''

"The United States has joined with our European Union partners and Russia to pressure Iran to meet its international obligations and provide objective guarantees that its nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes. This diplomatic effort must succeed if confrontation is to be avoided.''

Regarding the Strike-First Policy: "There are few greater threats than a terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction. To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act pre-emptively in exercising our inherent right of self-defense. The United States will not resort to force in all cases to pre-empt emerging threats. Our preference is that nonmilitary actions succeed. And no country should ever use pre-emptions as a pretext for aggression.''

Regarding China: "The United States is urging China to continue down a road of reform and openness, but said it cannot stay on this path while holding on to old ways of thinking and acting."

"These "old ways'' include enlarging China's military in a non-transparent way; expanding trade, while acting as if it can "lock up'' energy supplies around the world, or seek to direct rather than opening up new markets; supporting energy-rich nations without regard to their misrule or misbehavior at home or abroad."

Regarding North Korea: "In addition to posing a nuclear proliferation threat, North Korea counterfeits U.S. currency, traffics in narcotics, threatens South Korea with its army and its other neighbors with its missiles and brutalizes and starves its people."

"The North Korean regime needs to change these polices, open up its political system and afford freedom to its people. In the interim, we will continue to take all necessary measures to protect our national and economic security against the adverse effects of their bad conduct.''

Regarding Russia: "Recent trends regrettable point toward a diminishing commitment to democratic freedoms and institutions. ... Efforts to prevent democratic development at home or abroad will hamper the development of Russia's relations with the United States, Europe and its neighbors.''

Regarding Tyrannies: "People are living under the rule of despots and despotic systems in nations including North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Belarus, Burma and Zimbabwe. "All Tyrannies threaten the world's interest in freedom's expansion, and some tyrannies, in their pursuit of WMD or sponsorship of terrorism, threaten our immediate security interests as well.''

Regarding Hamas: "The burden for achieving peace between the Palestinians and Israelis has shifted to Hamas, a group labeled as a U.S. terrorist organization that recently won elections in the Palestinian territories. "The opportunity for peace and statehood -- a consistent goal of this administration -- is open if Hamas will abandon its terrorist roots and change its relationship with Israel.''

I really believe the Bush Administration wants to wage war on the rest of the entire world. When will this madness end?

2006-03-14T17:26:00.000-07:00

Do These Guys Even Understand the Value of Money?

I just read an article from the Washington Post called "GOP Not Meeting Promises in Budget Week" and halfway through, I started to realize that our Congresspeople have just lost a grasp on the value of money. Let me illustrate, via a few snipits:

"The House is poised to pad the deficit by passing $91 billion in debt-financed funding for the war in Iraq and for hurricane relief, while the Senate is working on a budget plan shorn of tax and spending cuts wanted by President Bush."

This is paragraph two, and I am already feeling ill because Bush has to lump in Hurricane Katrina Relief with additional money for his war. That's uncouth and leaves a bad taste in my mouth...

"...the Senate must vote on permitting the federal debt to grow by $781 billion to avoid a disastrous government default..."

$781 Billion Dollars!!!! That's a lot of money!!!

"Election-year political concerns have forced Budget Committee Chairman Judd Gregg, R-N.H., to drop Bush's proposal to shave $36 billion from Medicare over five years from his plan."

OK, so maybe $781 billion isn't that much, if we can cut $36 billion from Medicare. All we hve to do is find about 22 more things we can cut money from...schools, roads, police, scientists, veterans benefits...there are so many things to cut money from.

"Arlan Specter is pushing to add $7 billion to the budget to bring such funding back to the levels of two years ago, and he's threatened to oppose the budget altogether over Bush's cuts to programs like education and health research. 'We have done more than cut the fat. We have done more than cut through the muscle. We have done more than cut through to the bone,' Specter said. 'We have cut into the marrow. It is that serious.'"

I could see how adding $7 billion, and trimming $36 billion can feel like we are cutting to the marrow. There's not that many billions we can cut....

"Democrats and a handful of mostly moderate Republicans lost a bid to restore so-called pay-as-you-go budget rules requiring tax cuts and new entitlement programs to be financed by tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere in the budget."

There go those crazy Democrats again, proposing measures to try to bring accountability to spending more money. At the rate they are going, Democrats will start proposing fiscal responsibility. Who do they think they are? Republicans?

"Since Congress is unlikely to advance a reconciliation bill this year, there's less pressure for a budget resolution. "

Whew - that's good. There's been too much oversight on the Republican-led congress lately. They need less monitoring, and more freedom to do what they want.

"House GOP conservatives are restive over a $91 billion measure funding the war in Iraq and providing further hurricane relief to the Gulf Coast. Debate begins Wednesday and conservatives are pushing to finance the entire $91 billion bill with spending cuts elsewhere in the budget, though that effort is doomed to fail."

Again, I am glad that any kind of limitation on Republican spending is doomed to fail. In fact, this year, instead of paying my Income Taxes, maybe I'll just send a blank check to the GOP's in Washington, directly. Sounds like they need all the money they could get...

2006-03-04T18:49:00.000-07:00

Bush Dogs Get the Royal Treatment

This article is too good to pass up, and also too good to just cut a snip from. I am quoting it in full below. It's from the Times of India, and it's link is - here.

NEW DELHI: A five-star hotel in the Indian capital is playing host to a special team that is part of US President George Bush's security entourage - some 65 dogs that are referred to as "officials".

The specially trained dogs were flown in as part of the multi-layer security for Bush and have been put up in deluxe rooms at the Le Meridien Hotel in central Delhi.

According to Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) MP Nilotpal Basu, who gave the information to the media, the hotel authorities initially refused to accommodate the four-legged "officials", saying they did not have provisions for accommodating animals.

"But the US officials apparently insisted that they were not dogs, but skilled security 'officials' and no one should call them dogs," Basu told reporters at Parliament House.

"These dogs cannot be called animals. They can be addressed either by their ranks such as sergeant, major, etc. And the hotel staff had to accept it," he said.

2006-03-02T11:25:00.000-07:00

Do I Detect a Pattern?

Bush received a Presidential Briefing in August 2001, stating that bin Laden is determined to fly planes into large buildings in the U.S. Later, Bush claimed there was no way of knowing that terrorists would use planes to crash into buildings.

Bush received intelligence information that Saddam Hussein had no way of developing WMD. Later, Bush claimed there was no way of knowing that Saddam couldn't produce WMD.

Bush received information that the levees in New Orleans would be breached when Hurricane Katrina hits. Later, Bush claimed there was no way of knowing that the levees would be breached.

Is he merely incompetent or is it that he just doesn't care?

2006-02-28T17:31:00.000-07:00

Observations from the World Today...

Let's take a quick survey as to what's being reported in the mainstream news today:

The Supreme Court sided in favor of anti-abortion protestors overturning a previous ruling allowing NOW (the National Organization for Women) to use an extortion and racketeeering law against Operation Rescue (the abortion clinic bombers). "It's a great day for pro-lifers," said Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue. Full story - here.
Without admitting wrongdoing, the U.S. government has agreed to pay $300,000 to an Egyptian man it detained and deported after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Full story - here.
Lawmakers are calling to temper feelings about the Dubai port scandal. "My position hasn't changed," Bush said. Full story - here.
Beset with troubles at home, President George W. Bush headed to South Asia on Tuesday to try to salvage a nuclear deal with India and give a boost to a key ally against al Qaeda, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. Full story - here.
In a segment with actor and activist Mike Farrell, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly claimed that he doesn't "do personal attacks." O'Reilly made his remarks on the February 23 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, during a discussion with Farrell about gay marriage and the death penalty. Full story and list of personal attacks actually made by Bill O'Reilly - here.

And as a reminder, lest we forget:

The Bush Administration doctored intelligence about getting us into the War in Iraq. They are liers.
The Bush Administration also outed CIA Operative, Valerie Plame, when her husband pointed out the above. They are traitors.
The Bush Administration hardly responded to Hurricane Katrina's victims in New Orleans. They are, at best, bumbling fools. They are, at worst, murders.
The Bush Administration (and Republicans) supported Jack Abramoff and his illegal lobbying activities. They are thieves.
The Bush Administration worked with Enron to orchestrate energy price fixing, and then subsequently lied about it to Congress. They are criminals.
They Bush Administration illegaly wire-tapped American citizens in the NSA scandal. They are our worst enemy.
The Bush Administration runs illegal prison camps throughout the world. They are torturers.

The next time you interact with someone who still supports the Bush Administration, do me a favor - ask them to buy a clue.

2006-02-27T06:30:00.000-07:00

Happy Monday with Some Good News For the Thieves at the White House

Another Monday morning starting with some information about the thievery at the White House. According to a story in the New York Times:
The Army has decided to reimburse a Halliburton subsidiary for nearly all of its disputed costs on a $2.41 billion no-bid contract to deliver fuel and repair oil equipment in Iraq, even though the Pentagon's own auditors had identified more than $250 million in charges as potentially excessive or unjustified.

The Army said in response to questions on Friday that questionable business practices by the subsidiary, Kellogg Brown & Root, had in some cases driven up the company's costs. But in the haste and peril of war, it had largely done as well as could be expected, the Army said, and aside from a few penalties, the government was compelled to reimburse the company for its costs.

Looks like Cheney will continue to receive his lofty stipend from his former company. You're doing a heckuva job, Dicky!

Full story - here.

2006-02-23T13:11:00.000-07:00

Forget the Port - Pass the Sherry

What with the debacle in New Orleans and now the Dubais port scandal, it makes one wonder - Does King George even care about our ports? Isn't this the same moron who once said "The oceans no longer protect us" (like the oceans even have the ability to act in a protective manner). What's up with this guy? What idiot in their right mind would actually admit to having voted for him?

The one silver lining - the right wingers are now starting to really question Prez Bush's ability to lead. It took them long enough...

2006-02-21T13:32:00.000-07:00

Rumsfeld Admits: ""I just misstated the facts"

In a rare show of honesty...well, actually it was more like he got caught lying on TV and to Council of Foreign Relations, Rumsfeld admitted that he lied about the US still paying to print stories in the Iraqi press. He said last week they stopped, when they never really stopped at all. Here's a snip:

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Tuesday he was mistaken when he stated last week that the U.S. military had stopped paying Iraqi newspapers to publish pro-American articles.
Rumsfeld had said in a television interview on Friday that the U.S. military had ceased paying to place positive stories in Iraqi media after criticism in the U.S. Congress and press. Rumsfeld made similar comments the same day to the Council on Foreign Relations.

Full story - here.

Oh, that silly old Rumsfeld. As time goes by, he really does act like that fun and friendly uncle that can't help being a bitter old alcoholic and compulsive liar.

2006-02-21T12:40:00.000-07:00

Now For the Real Test

Who cares about litmus tests of nominations when we can have the real thing. The stage is set for a show-down on abortion rights - just in time to see Alito's and Roberts' real colors when it comes to Roe v. Wade. Here's a snip from a Christian Science Monitor story:

The US Supreme Court has agreed to examine the constitutionality of a 2003 federal law banning so-called partial-birth abortions.
The announcement on Tuesday sets the stage for a potential high court showdown over when abortion restrictions run afoul of the US Constitution. And it once again is fueling speculation that the high court's abortion jurisprudence may be approaching a turning point with two new justices on the high court.

Full story - here. Heaven help us all from these Republican regressives....

2006-02-20T13:57:00.000-07:00

An Insight Into the Political Workings of the White House

The WashingtonPost.com just posted an interesting article that gives an insider view into the political machinations of the White House (in particular with the Wirestapping scandal). The full article is - here - but here's a snip:

At two key moments in recent days, White House officials contacted congressional leaders just ahead of intelligence committee meetings that could have stirred demands for a deeper review of the administration's warrantless-surveillance program, according to House and Senate sources.
In both cases, the administration was spared the outcome it most feared, and it won praise in some circles for showing more openness to congressional oversight.

Don't you just love politics?

2006-02-17T16:27:00.000-07:00

Cheney's Got a Gun (part 2)

Try this game out....

2006-02-17T11:58:00.000-07:00

Best Headline of the Week!!!

"Man Shot by Cheney Says He's 'Lucky Person'"
- ABC News. Full article here.

2006-02-17T10:08:00.000-07:00

The Health of WalMart

Someone throw some water on the Wicked Witch of Walmart...it seems their cheif executives is starting to lose patience even with his managers. As reported in the New York Times today:

In a confidential, internal Web site for Wal-Mart's managers, the company's chief executive, H. Lee Scott Jr., seemed to have a rare, unscripted moment when one manager asked him why "the largest company on the planet cannot offer some type of medical retirement benefits?"

Mr. Scott first argues that the cost of such benefits would leave Wal-Mart at a competitive disadvantage but then, clearly annoyed, he suggests that the store manager is disloyal and should consider quitting.

Here is the New York Times article.

Investigating further (on the great website www.WalmartWatch.com), I actually came across the top-secret leaked memo. Here are a few additional snips:

"Our workers are getting sicker than the national population, particularly in obesity-related diseases...a segment of our workforce consumes healthcare inefficiently...our population tends to over-utilize emergency room and hospital services and under-utilize prescriptions and doctor visits. This pattern is evident among out low-income Associates."

...

"...because we pay an Associate more in salary and benefits as his or her tenure increases, we are pricing that Associate out of the labor market, increasing the likelihood that he or she will stay with Walmart."

...

"We have a significant number of Associates and their children who receive health insurance through public assistance programs."

You can read the full memo here (beware, it's lengthy and very wordy).

2006-02-16T14:15:00.000-07:00

Cheney's Got a Gun

From the late night comics, about our VP's recent shooting spree:

David Letterman: "Good news, ladies and gentlemen, we have finally located weapons of mass destruction: It's Dick Cheney."

Another Letterman jab: "It turns out now that Dick Cheney did not have a license to hunt, and coincidentally, turns out we didn't have a license to go into Iraq."

Jay Leno: "You can't blame [Cheney]. Bush says you can spy on people without warrants, you can torture people, you can hold people without a trial, so Dick Cheney thinks, 'Oh what the hell, I can shoot a few guys.'"

Rob Corddry, The Daily Show: "The Vice President is standing by his decision to shoot Harry Whittington. Now, according to the best intelligence available, there were quail hidden in the brush. Everyone believed at the time there were quail in the brush. And while the quail turned out to be a 78- year-old man, even knowing that today, Mr. Cheney insists he still would have shot Mr. Whittington in the face. He believes the world is a better place for his spreading buckshot throughout the entire region of Mr. Wittington's face."

2006-02-16T07:52:00.000-07:00

Bush's War on Terror is Working...NOT!

If you believe what the Bush Administration keeps implying, then the war in Iraq is a major milestone on the War on Terror, right? Wrong....check out this story:

The National Counterterrorism Center maintains 325,000 names of alleged international terrorism suspects or people who aid them, a number that has more than quadrupled since the fall of 2003, according to counterterrorism officials.

Incidentally, some of the names on this new compiled list come from the illegal NSA wiretapping. Here's the full article.

2006-02-14T14:08:00.000-07:00

Asleep at the Wheel?

A reader of the blog pointed out (in a column below) another item slipped into the budget: privatization of Social Security. Yep...that got in, too. Here's a snip from a Washington Post article:

Last year, even though Bush talked endlessly about the supposed joys of private accounts, he never proposed a specific plan to Congress and never put privatization costs in the budget. But this year, with no fanfare whatsoever, Bush stuck a big Social Security privatization plan in the federal budget proposal, which he sent to Congress on Monday.

His plan would let people set up private accounts starting in 2010 and would divert more than $700 billion of Social Security tax revenues to pay for them over the first seven years.

...and more...

Unlike Bush's generalized privatization talk of last year, we're now talking detailed numbers. On page 321 of the budget proposal, you see the privatization costs: $24.182 billion in fiscal 2010, $57.429 billion in fiscal 2011 and another $630.533 billion for the five years after that, for a seven-year total of $712.144 billion.
In the first year of private accounts, people would be allowed to divert up to 4 percent of their wages covered by Social Security into what Bush called "voluntary private accounts." The maximum contribution to such accounts would start at $1,100 annually and rise by $100 a year through 2016.

Full story - here.

WHERE IS THE DEMOCRATIC OUTRAGE? WHY ARE THEY LETTING THIS HAPPEN? ARE THE DEMOCRATS REALLY THAT INEFFECTIVE? A Charlie Brown "ARGHHH?" for the day....

And speaking of the day, it's Valentine's Day. And because it's a day of heart and roses, let's talk about, specifically, the heart. Or, more specifically, Harry Whittington's heart (the man Dick Cheney accidentally shot while hunting).

It seems that some of that birdshot that Cheney unloaded into his friend has found its way into his heart. Here's hoping he'll survive...and that the White House won't try surpressing the news of his health again.

This story is all over the news, but check out here for a quick story on it.

2006-02-14T07:44:00.000-07:00

Bush - the Oil Man

We are stupid to think that when Bush says "we're addicted to oil" in the State of the Union address, that he really means it (see previous post on this very topic). I mean, c'mon - an oil man from a family that made it's riches in the oil industry would really warn people about using oil?

As further proof of this thought, I came across an article in this morning's New York Times that proves that the government is not only for oil use, but is helping the oil companies make money drilling for oil on federal land. Here's a snip:

The federal government is on the verge of one of the biggest giveaways of oil and gas in American history, worth an estimated $7 billion over five years.

New projections, buried in the Interior Department's just-published budget plan, anticipate that the government will let companies pump about $65 billion worth of oil and natural gas from federal territory over the next five years without paying any royalties to the government.

Based on the administration figures, the government will give up more than $7 billion in payments between now and 2011. The companies are expected to get the largess, known as royalty relief, even though the administration assumes that oil prices will remain above $50 a barrel throughout that period.

Full article can be found here.

Is it just me, or don't you find it ironic that an oil-man like Bush is so against evolution?

2006-02-08T15:05:00.000-07:00

The Cost of War

I subscribe to a regular email update from the Institute of Public Accuracy (www.accuracy.org) , and today email focused on the cost of war (it was called "Military Spending: How Big? How Effective"). Quoted in this email was senior research associate for the Arms Trade Resource Center, Frida Berrigan:

"The costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are mounting -- $251 billion, with another $120 billion in 'emergency' funding requested for this year. Meanwhile, the administration is unable or unwilling to even tally the costs of what they are now calling the 'Long War' -- leaving that to academics and economists whose studies they attempt to discredit and dismiss.

"More than half a trillion dollars ($550 billion) is allocated for the Pentagon and the costs of war in the coming year. The Pentagon budget is the only major category of the federal budget slated for an increase. This is a huge drain of resources when one considers that even these vast sums are not providing adequate protection for U.S. troops in Iraq nor are they promoting democracy and stability throughout the world."

We all know "War! What is it good for? Absolutely Nothing (say it again)!"

But War costs absolutely something...

2006-02-08T07:51:00.000-07:00

What is the Democratic Agenda?

As we enter into a crucial mid-term election year, this could potentially be the year the Democratic party regains control of either the House or Senate (it's been far too long since that occured). That would give us the much-needed "checks and balances" that our Founding Fathers drafted into the structure of our original government.

However, where is the Democratic Agenda? I read an interesting story in this morning's New York Times, entitled "Some Democrats Are Sensing Missed Opportunities." It highlighted to me the most-basic problem with the Democrats lately - there is no leadership, and their agenda is not defined.

Despite the variety of topics in which the Republicans are failing miserably - the war in Iraq, the Abramoff corruption scandal, the utter failure related to Hurricane Katrina, the criminal domestic wiretapping scandal, the outing of the CIA agent by Karl Rove, the rising energy costs (and Bush's and Cheney's deceptive dependence upon oil), rising medical costs and the lack of healthcare alternatives.....whew! There are so many things the Republicans have resoundly failed at, it's no wonder that Democrats haven't been able to find their way - they are too concerned about pointing out the Repub's failures.

Anyway, let's review a few snippets from this article:

"I think that two-thirds of the American people think the country is going in the wrong direction," " said Senator Barack Obama, the first-term Illinois Democrat who is widely viewed as one of the party's promising stars. "They're not sure yet whether Democrats can move it in the right direction."

...

"We're selling our party short; you've got to stand for a lot more than just blasting the other side," said Gov. Phil Bredesen of Tennessee. "The country is wide open to hear some alternatives, but I don't think it's wide open to all these criticisms. I am sitting here and getting all my e-mail about the things we are supposed to say about the president's speech, but it's extremely light on ideas. It's like, 'We're for jobs and we're for America.' "

...

But among more establishment Democrats, there is concern that many of the party's most visible leaders — among them, Howard Dean, the Democratic chairman; Senator John Kerry, the party's 2004 presidential candidate; Sen. Kennedy; Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader; and Al Gore, who has assumed a higher profile as the party heads toward the 2008 presidential primaries — may be flawed messengers.

In this view, the most visible Democrats are vulnerable to Republican attacks portraying them as out of the mainstream on issues including security and budget-cutting.

...

"We are fighting to find a voice under difficult circumstances, and I'm confident, over the next few months, you are going to see that happen," Mr. Kerry said in an interview. "Our megaphone is just not as large as their megaphone, and we have a harder time getting that message out, even when people are on the same page."

...

"What the American people are hungry to hear from us is, what is the difference?" Senator John Edwards said in an interview. "What will we do? How will we deal with the corruption issue in Washington? How will we deal with the huge moral issues that we have at home? This is a huge opportunity for our party to show what we are made of."
...

Martin Frost, former leader of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "I think the climate is absolutely right to take back the House or the Senate or both. But you can't do it without a program."

...

"I don't believe we will win by just not being them," Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana

...

Senator Barbara Boxer: "We have a strategy. First is to convince the American people that what's happening in Washington is not working. We have achieved that. Now we have to, at this stage, convince people that we are the ones to bring positive change."

Full article link is here.

But where is the agenda? Will someone please provide them some platform to run on?

2006-02-07T15:12:00.000-07:00

Sign of the Times

If you're anything like me, you're a Google News junkie. I just love going there every so often (http://news.google.com) and checking to see the latest. The way Google News works is great - it keeps track of how many times certain news stories online are visited, and then it ranks them in order.

Google News also limits it's ranking geographically - when I search for it, it shows the top stories for the U.S. Also, it categorizes them by topic (World News, Entertainment News, etc.). And - it refreshes every few seconds. That means, you get the most up-to-date news at the time.

And my favorite part is that it lists the headlines from a number of different sources for each story (which gives you a sense of the editorial slant of that story).

Google News is a great way to:
1) Figure out what people are viewing at any given time (almost like a pulse of web viewers)
2) Stay on top of the latest breaking news
3) See which news websites are preferred over others
4) Dispel the belief that there is a liberal media (a lot of the links are very conservative)

So, here's a snapshot of what's going on at this point in time (as told to me by Google News):

Top Story: Bush Praises King for Changing Country (SF Chronicle).
Top World Story: Denmark Warns Cartoon Row Could Spin Out of Control (Malaysia Star)
Top US Story: Bush's Budget Sparks Bipartisan Debate (Forbes).
Top Entertainment Story: Stones: NFL Censorship "Ridiculous" (CNN).
Top Sports Story: Rolling Stones Decry Super Bowl Censorship (Washington Post).

Wait a second. Did I read that right? Did the Stones get censored? Reading more, here's what I found :

"The football league, still nervous over the Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction two years ago at the Super Bowl, has said it wanted to ensure family entertainment at the game.

In "Start Me Up," the show's SuperBowl show editors silenced one word close to the song's end, a reference to a woman so sexy she could arouse a dead man. (The song hit No. 2 in 1981, has been played on radio for 25 years, and the lyric is almost never cut.) The lyrics for "Rough Justice" included a synonym for rooster that was removed.
The Stones also performed "(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction," but the lyric "I can't get no girlie action" made it through unscathed."

Man, is nothing sacred? I love Google News...

2006-02-03T16:34:00.000-07:00

Update from Washington DC

President Bush next week will request a $439.3 billion Defense Department budget for 2007, a nearly 5 percent increase over this year, according to senior Pentagon officials and documents obtained Thursday by The Associated Press.

As reported in Forbes.

When will the madness end?

2006-02-03T09:47:00.000-07:00

Characteristics of Fascism - a Checklist

A reader of the Pinko blog sent me an email that I found very interesting. It listed the results of a study that Dr. Lawrence Britt did on facism. He studied the regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common in each.

As an intellectual excercise, let's list all 14 characteristics, and see how the Republicans and the Bush Administration ranks against them:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

Republican check - ever notice how many of those annoying American-flag-like "Support our troops" stickers are on the back of so many SUVs? Ever notice how Bush is always seen standing before our flag?

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

Republican Check - Can anyone say "Secret CIA Torture camps" or "abu ghraib" or "Gitmo"?

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

Republican Check - "Democrats are living in a pre-911 world; Republicans are living in a post-911 world" - Karl Rove

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

Republican Check - Did you know that the funding for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan is not reported in budget deficit numbers? And are we really going to fight against Iran, as well?

5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

Republican Check - Where do I start? With fundamental Christians (the biggest supporter of the Republicans) enforcing the traditional gender roles? Or how about the false belief by Repubs (Marilyn Musgrave in particular) that same-sex marriage is the biggest threat to marriage (and not divorce)? What about the fact that the Repubs even want a Marriage Ammendment?

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

Republican Check - see earlier blog post: Buying a Free Press in a New Democracy

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

Republican Check - How many times did King George mention "9-11" and "terrorists" in his State of the Union? How many more Republicans are going to mention that we are at war (even though we never declared war)?

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

Republican Check - King George also reminded everyone to support his "faith-based initiatives" in the State of the Union. And correct me if I am wrong - isn't one of the Commandments from the Bible "Thou Shalt Not Kill"? And didn't Jesus say "Love Thy Enemy"? And didn't he kick out the moneychangers from the temple. Oh yeah, that's right - Jesus was Jewish, wasn't he...

9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

Republican Check - Sam Alito would strongly encourage the above characteristic. In fact, he ruled that way often from his 15 years on the bench.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

Republican Check - Somehow images of miners come to mind, when I read the above. And the fact that Bush suspended the minimum wage laws at first when wanting to rebuild New Orleans and the South.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

Republican Check - Bush himself admitted that he doesn't read a newspaper (nor any other bulletin that comes his way). He spends more time reading "My Pet Goat" than other books. And what about Republicans trying to balance the political leanings of colleges, to ensure liberals and conservatives equally teach (and here I thought they were against Affirmative Action...)

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

Republican Check - What does Colorado Representative Tom Tancredo want to do? Arm the borders with military to prevent illegal immigration. Domestic wiretaps also seem to fit the above characteristic.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

Republican Check - Jack Abramoff, Jack Abramoff, Jack Abramoff. Dick Cheney, Dick Cheney, Dick Cheney. Harriet Myers, Harriet Myers, Harriet Myers. John Roberts, John Roberts, John Roberts. etc., etc., etc....

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

Republican Check - Repubs wouldn't rig elections, would they? C'mon, that's going a little too far....

As a summary, I want to quote from Donald Rumsfeld while he was commenting on Hugo Chavez the other day: "He's a person who was elected legally - just as Adolph Hitler was elected legally" As reported on Fox News!

2006-02-02T11:29:00.000-07:00

Say What?!?

Here's an interesting item I found from Knight-Ridder news services. In the State of the Union, King George talked a lot about our "addicition to oil." He challenged the American public to break free from their addiction. He also said a lot more on this subject:

Bush vowed to fund research into better batteries for hybrid vehicles and more production of the alternative fuel ethanol, setting a lofty goal of replacing "more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025."

He pledged to "move beyond a petroleum-based economy and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past."

Not exactly, though, it turns out.

"This was purely an example," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said.

He said the broad goal was to displace foreign oil imports, from anywhere, with domestic alternatives. He acknowledged that oil is a freely traded commodity bought and sold globally by private firms. Consequently, it would be very difficult to reduce imports from any single region, especially the most oil-rich region on Earth.

Asked why the president used the words "the Middle East" when he didn't really mean them, one administration official said Bush wanted to dramatize the issue in a way that "every American sitting out there listening to the speech understands." The official spoke only on condition of anonymity because he feared that his remarks might get him in trouble.

Complete article here.

2006-02-02T06:11:00.000-07:00

Misstatement of the Union

As expected, there was a lot of political spin the other night when King George gave his boring and contrived speech. From another great website, FactCheck.org, here is a summary of some of his misstatements:

He proudly spoke of "writing a new chapter in the story of self-government" in Iraq and Afghanistan and said the number of democracies in the world is growing. He failed to mention that neither Iraq nor Afghanistan yet qualify as democracies according to the very group whose statistics he cited.
Bush called for Congress to pass a line-item veto, failing to mention that the Supreme Court struck down a line-item veto as unconstitutional in 1998. Bills now in Congress would propose a Constitutional amendment, but none have shown signs of life.
The President said the economy gained 4.6 million jobs in the past two-and-a-half years, failing to note that it had lost 2.6 million jobs in his first two-and-a-half years in office. The net gain since Bush took office is just a little more than 2 million.
He talked of cutting spending, but only "non-security discretionary spending." Actually, total federal spending has increased 42 percent since Bush took office.
He spoke of being "on track" to cut the federal deficit in half by 2009. But the deficit is increasing this year, and according to the Congressional Budget Office it will decline by considerably less than half even if Bush's tax cuts are allowed to lapse.
Bush spoke of a "goal" of cutting dependence on Middle Eastern oil, failing to mention that US dependence on imported oil and petroleum products increased substantially during his first five years in office, reaching 60 per cent of consumption last year.

The entire article, complete with sources, is here.

2006-02-01T15:31:00.000-07:00

Shout out to the great liberals at OpenMind Media

I just wanted to send a quick shout-out to the great guys at Open Mind Media. They have gotten me out of numerous jams with my websites, and have a great, affordable solutions for businesses that need professional websites. Check them out at http://www.openmind.tv/

(Hey, I figure that since the Republicans are all about helping out their own, we might as well empower ourselves by giving advertising opportunities to our own kind).

2006-01-30T13:37:00.000-07:00

It May Already Be Too Late...

...but I came across this great piece entitled "The Top Ten Reasons to Reject Samuel Alito" - please read this link for the complete details, but here they are in short order:

10. Alito has supported extremist positions overall.
9. Alito has opposed "one person, one vote."
8. Alito has opposed the First Amendment separation of church and state.
7. Alito has opposed a woman’s right to choose.
6. Alito has opposed remedies for victims of discrimination.
5. Alito has opposed workers, consumers, and small business hurt by big business.
4. Alito has opposed environmental protection.
3. Alito has opposed laws to protect society from violent crime as well as Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights of the accused.
2. Alito has opposed Fourth Amendment restraints on abuse of power.
1. Alito on the Supreme Court would effectively hand George W. Bush — and each of his successors as president, from either or any party — virtually unrestrained power.

2006-01-27T14:25:00.001-07:00

To Filibuster or Not to Filibuster - That Really Shouldn't Be the Question

What is up with Democrats lately? Why aren't they going to excercise their rights (and, as I believe) their responsibility to filibuster? What's going on? Where is their leadership? It makes me sad and frustrated. It's not like the Republicans haven't filibustered before. They have - in spades. Let's review some of the most recent Republican filibusters:

1980 William Lubbers, NLRB 3
1980 Don Zimmerman, NLRB 3
1980 Stephen Breyer, 1st Circuit 2
1987 Melissa Wells, Ambassador 1
1987 William Verity, Commerce 1
1993 Walter Dellinger, Justice 2
1993 Five State Department Nominees 2
1993 Janet Napolitano, Justice 1
1994 Larry Lawrence, Ambassador 1
1994 Rosemary Barkett, 11th Circuit 1
1994 Sam Brown, Ambassador 3
1994 Derek Shearer, Ambassador 2
1994 Ricki Tigert, FDIC 2
1994 H. Lee Sarokin, 3rd Circuit 1
1995 Henry Foster, Surgeon General 2
1998 David Satcher, Surgeon General 1
2000 Marsha Berzon, 9th Circuit 1
2000 Richard Paez, 9th Circuit 1

C'mon, Dems. Step up to the plate and show us that you can stand for what's right in this world. No wonder I go around thinking that we need another party...

2006-01-25T11:20:00.000-07:00

Quick Test

Question - Which dictator engaged in the following tactics - either openly or covertly - to ensure his reign of power was unchallenged:

released propaganda stories in the press to support his political agenda
stacked all levels of the supporting government with friends and relations
humiliated and punished opponents of his philosophy, to silence their voices
believed that some "other-worldly" power was guiding him in his actions
engaged in pre-emptive war on other countries, took over their goverments and killed thousands of innocents civilians in the process
secretly spied on people within their county, on the guise of "protecting the citizens"
held elections that questionably gave him this overwhelming control

a) Adolph Hitler
b) Saddam Husein
c) George W. Bush
d) All of the above

Sadly, I think we know the answer to this question...

2006-01-24T15:46:00.000-07:00

Does Alberto Gonzales Understand the Law?

One would think that if you rise to the level of Attorney General for the United States, that you would have to understand some of the simple aspects of the law, and the US Constitution. That is, unless you are the Attorney General for the Bush administration. Since I started out this paragraph with the phrase "one would think" that probably does leave out the majority of the Bush Administration, though.

Apparantly, King George's jester....er, Attorney General tried to defend Our Fuhrer's domestic wiretapping scandal with four arguments. Yet even I, a simple man with a rudimentary understanding of the law, can easily poke holes in this shallow defense. Let me recount Mr. Gonzales' argument, and where it's plainly wrong:

Argument 1: The Attorney General said the program fell well within the president's inherent powers under the Constitution to protect the country. "There is no other public official - no mayor, no governor, not member of Congress - charged with the primary duty of protecting all Americans," he said. "The Constitution gives the president all the authority necessary to fulfill this solemn duty."

Response 1: Actually, Gonzales is dead wrong. According to the US Constitution (Article II):

Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.

Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.

Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Nowhere does it state that he has the duty to "protect all Americans"...and who is to say that this wiretapping scandal is protecting citizens of America? Where's the proof of that? Bullshit, Alberto...let's hear your second argument.

Argument 2: The Attorney General's second argument involved cited the resolution Congress passed just after the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001 that authorizing the use of force in Afghanistan and against people elsewhere involved in the plot.

Response 2: Here is a link to the actual resolution - Authorization for Use of Military Force (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)
Specifically note (I added the italics and the bold)

"Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States"
"The President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons."

This is a resolution for King George to attack Afganistan to get Al Qaeda. Or more specifically, to get Osama bin Laden. This doesn't say he can work outside of the Constitution, or unnecessarily or inappropriately. This doesn't say that he can inappropriately wiretap people without getting a warrant. Bush broke the law, and his lacky, the Attorney General, is having a hard time arguing around it. Next argument, you fool...

Argument 3: Mr. Gonzales said that the secret wiretapping program was not in conflict with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law setting up a special court to hear requests for intelligence wiretapping warrants. He said the law could not encroach upon the president's inherent military powers, and that it explicitly allowed for exceptions made by other statutes - in this case, he argued, the resolution passed after the terrorist attacks. Even the law's emergency procedure for retroactive approval by the courts was too cumbersome, he said.

Response 3: Again, I call "bullshit." Here is what the FISA law says about authorizing wiretaps without warrants (again I added the italics and bold):

Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that—
(A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed atthe acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, or the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power
(B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party; and
(C) the proposed minimization procedures with respect to such surveillance meet the definition of minimization procedures ;
and if the Attorney General reports such minimization procedures and any changes thereto to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence at least thirty days prior to their effective date, unless the Attorney General determines immediate action is required and notifies the committees immediately of such minimization procedures and the reason for their becoming effective immediately.

In human language, that means that they have to tell someone beforehand. Which they didn't. And even if they did have to wiretap someone, they simply had to let the FISA court know up to 72 hours AFTER. Which they didn't. Which means the Bush Administration broke the law...no wait, the fool Gonzales has one last argument...

Argument 4: Finally, Mr. Gonzales argued that the program is not in violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against "unreasonable" search and seizure and forbids warrants issued without probable cause, a higher standard of evidence than has been used in the wiretapping program.

Response 4: I guess Mr. Gonzales is showing his true colors here. That is, he doesn't know the Fourth Ammendment. Let me remind him:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Here's what's Wikipedia also says about probable cause -

The most widely held common definition is "a reasonable belief that a crime has been committed". An alternative definition has been proposed, "reason to believe that an injury had criminal cause", which is claimed to be more protective of individual rights as was intended by the authors of the Bill of Rights. See the critique below.

In the context of warrants, the Oxford Companion to American Law defines probable cause as "information sufficient to warrant a prudent person's belief that the wanted individual had committed a crime (for an arrest warrant) or that evidence of a crime or contraband would be found in a search (for a search warrant)." "Probable cause" is a stronger standard of evidence than a reasonable suspicion, but weaker than what is required to secure a criminal conviction. Even hearsay can supply probable cause if it is from a reliable source or is backed up by other evidence.

I believe strongly that the Bush Administration did not have probable cause when issuing these wiretaps. I think they were just fishing for information, hoping that something may come of it. And I think Albertoa Gonzales is outright deceiving and lying when defending King George.

He doesn't understand the law. And he, along with the remainder of the adminstration, should be tarred and feathered, and carried out of Washington on a rail. Don't you agree?

2006-01-20T06:15:00.000-07:00

Big Brother Is Watching....You Google

I am sure you have heard this already, but here's a snip from a NY Times article this morning:

The Justice Department has asked a federal judge to compel Google , the Internet search giant, to turn over records on millions of its users' search queries as part of the government's effort to uphold an online pornography law.

Google has been refusing the request since a subpoena was first issued last August, even as three of its competitors agreed to provide information, according to court documents made public this week. Google asserts that the request is unnecessary, overly broad, would be onerous to comply with, would jeopardize its trade secrets and could expose identifying information about its users.

While Google is fighting the noble fight to prevent the Bush Administration from seeing who Googles what, it got me to thinking - let's everyone start Googling crazy phrases, just in case those in power actually did start reviewing our searches. Here are some of my suggestions (and actual results):

"George W. Shaved Bush" (1,270,00 results)
"Donald Rumsfeld Goes Wild" (501,00 results)
"Chicks with Dick Cheney" (356,00 results)
"Ribbed Condi - For Her Pleasure" (376 results)

Readers of this blog, please post your favorite Google searches (and the search results) in the Comments section.

2006-01-16T13:39:00.000-07:00

Good News/Bad News

Many things have happened on a local and national level since my last blog. I think it's time to do a quick overview:

The Abramoff Scandal

Good News:

"Although both Democrats and Republicans did, in fact, receive money from Abramoff's clients, only Republicans received personal donations from Abramoff himself...[the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics] analysis of FEC records shows that Democrats received about a third of the $4.2 million donated between 1998 and 2005 by tribes that had hired Abramoff to represent them in Washington, but none from Abramoff's own wallet."

Bad News:
Of all the voices berating the Republican Party for its culture of corruption, none rings more hollow than Newt Gingrich's. According to the Associated Press, the former House Speaker has said he is considering running for President in 2008. Now, in preparation, he is leading a stampede of corrupt Republicans desperate to distance themselves from the money-for-votes scandal plaguing the nation's capital.

Bush's NSA Scandal

Good News:
By a margin of 52 to 43 percent, citizens want Congress to impeach President Bush if he wiretapped American citizens without a judge's approval, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, a grassroots coalition that supports a Congressional investigation of Pres. Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

Bad News:
If there's one thing the Republicans care about, it is not America; it is not the law; it is not values. There is one thing even the most moderate Republicans are putting before everything else, and that is the Republican Party.

Walmart

Good News:
The Maryland General Assembly became the first state legislature in the nation Thursday to approve legislation forcing Wal-Mart to pay more for its employee health care, potentially paving the way for other states to follow suit.

More Good News:
There's word that former Wal-Mart Vice Chairman Thomas Coughlin will plead guilty later this month to federal wire fraud and tax evasion charges. The Wall Street Journal reports the deal calls for him to plead guilty to five counts of wire fraud and one count of tax evasion.

Bad News:
When discount giant WalMart moved its Decatur location in October 2005, many of the businesses in the area feared they would struggle, but NewsChannel 15 has discovered most of them are still in business.

Bad (and Offensive) News:
In a statement that once again apologized for the recent inappropriate promotion of a series of African-American films on its web site, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. gave its explanation of the incident: A Martin Luther King Jr. holiday promotion inadvertently created offensive links between African-American movies and films such as "Planet of the Apes" and "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" in Walmart.com's cross-selling system.

2006-01-05T06:41:00.000-07:00

Tragic Failing of the Press

As the writer of this blog, I have great faith in the press - but only to a point. As you know, all members of the media have their own personal biases - loyalty to the corporation that employs them, loyalty to the products who pay for the commercials and ads that run during the broadcast, loyalty to the readers...all of these things contribute to an inherent bias in the media. That is why lately I have taken to reading a variety of reports on the same topic, in order to try to extract the real story.

That's why I embrace the Internet - at my fingertips, I have access to hundreds of news reports on the same issues. I can read through dozens of them and figure out what is being reported, and more importantly, what really happened (what is consistently being said in all stories).

Lately, I have found that news reporters are getting lazy - they no longer confirm the accuracy of what they report (60 Minutes, Fox News, et. al.). Some seek out the most sensational stories to gain readership (Geraldo Rivera, Michael Moore, et. al). A few even blatantly make up stories with no regard for the truth (Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coultier, et. al.).

A tragedy occured in West Virginia - and unverified news reports only made it worse. For an understanding of how this news debacle occured, check out this article from The Seattle Times - "How the 'Miracle Report' Took Off"

2006-01-04T07:22:00.000-07:00

Abramoff Pleads Guilty to Federal Fraud Charges

If you have been keeping up with the news, you'll know by now that leading Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff - a man who couldn't keep his hands out of the cookie jar - has plead guilty to three federal charges of fraud. In summary - the charges include corruption of public officials (that is bribing senators and congressman to vote certain ways on certain bills)...these bribes include campaign contributions and luxury trips (like the legendary gold trips to Scotland).

Abramoff's three federal charges could carry up to 30 years in prison, but he is pleading guilty and cooperating with federal prosecutors - which will lower his charge to somewhere between 9 1/2 and 11 years. He'll also have to pay restitution to his clients on the order of $25 million, and pay back taxes of $1.7 million to the IRS (yes, he also cheated on his taxes). What a shining example of Republican corruption.

Of course, Washington DC is completely unsettled by this, since many, many of our politicians (including the White House) will also be affected. But who, specifically? Well, I found a great article off the Working for Change website that lists some politicians affected by Abramoff's plea. They include:

EDWARD AYOOB: Former veteran legislative aide to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, hired as a lobbyist by Abramoff.
EDWIN BUCKHAM: Former chief of staff and "an old family friend" of House Majority Whip Rep. Tom DeLay
SEN. CONRAD BURNS: Republican Senator from Montana.
REP. TOM DELAY: Houston-area Republican Representative, longtime friend of Abramoff, and former House Majority Whip
REP. JOHN DOOLITTLE: Republican Representative from suburban Sacramento
SEN. BYRON DORGAN: Democratic Senator from North Dakota
ITALLIA FEDERICI: Mutual friend of and conduit between Abramoff and Deputy Interior Secretary Steven Griles. Federici worked for a Republican environmental group, Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, founded by Interior Secretary Gale Norton.
TIMOTHY FLANAGAN: In October 2005, the Bush White House withdrew the embattled nomination of Flanagan as Deputy Attorney General under Alberto Gonzales
STEVEN GRILES: Former Deputy Interior Secretary.
REP. DENNIS HASTERT: Northern Illinois Republican, House Majority Leader.
REP. DOC HASTINGS: Republican Representative from Eastern Washington, Chairman of the House Ethics Committee.
ADAM KIDAN: The former owner of a Dial-a-Mattress franchise in D.C., Kidan was Abramoff's partner in a $147.5 million purchase in 2000 of a casino gambling boat company in Florida, SunCruz Casinos
RABBI DANIEL LAPIN: South African immigrant, conservative Seattle talk radio commentator, and co-chair of the American Alliance of Jews and Christians (whose board members include Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson)
ED MILLER: Deputy chief of staff for Republican Maryland governor Robert Ehrlich
REP. ROBERT NEY: Republican Representative from Southeast Ohio, Chairman of the House Administration Committee
GROVER NORQUIST: Guru of the anti-tax, neo-con movement, best known for his desire to reduce government to the size where it can be drowned in a bathtub
PATRICK PIZZELLA: 2001 Bush appointee as assistant Secretary of Labor
REP. RICHARD POMBO: Republican Congressman from a district east of the San Francisco Bay Area
RALPH REED: Former Christian Coalition golden boy, former chairman of the College Republicans (where he succeeded Jack Abramoff), high-ranking Bush re-election official, and current candidate for Lieutenant Governor of Georgia
SEN. HARRY REID: Nevada Democrat, Senate Minority Leader
TONY RUDY: Deputy chief of staff to former House Majority Whip Rep. Tom DeLay
DAVID SAFAVIAN: Bush appointee; as the chief of staff of the General Services Administration, he was in the lucrative position of being the chief procurement officer for the federal government
MICHAEL SCANLON: Scanlon, 35, is a former press secretary to Rep. Tom DeLay and business partner of Jack Abramoff
NEIL VOLZ: Former chief of staff for Ohio Rep. Robert Ney

To read more about these key players in the Abramoff scandal, and their specific transgressions, read The Abramoff Primer.

2006-01-03T12:00:00.000-07:00

Most Outrageous Statements of 2005

Boy, some crazy things were said in 2005 - and many of them reported by the media. One of my favorite organizations, Media Matters, has recorded a list of them. I'll present a few of them below, but to read the entire list click on this link right here!

Former Reagan administration Secretary of Education Bill Bennett: "[Y]ou could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down." [Salem Radio Network's Bill Bennett's Morning in America, 9/28/05]
Bill O'Reilly, agreeing with caller that illegal immigrants are "biological weapon[s]": "I think you could probably make an absolutely airtight case that more than 3,000 Americans have been either killed or injured, based upon the 11 million illegals who are here." [Westwood One's The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly, 4/15/05]
Focus on the Family founder and chairman James C. Dobson: Same-sex marriage would lead to "marriage between daddies and little girls ... between a man and his donkey." [Focus on the Family radio program, 10/6/05]
National Review editor Rich Lowry: Given EPA-mandated "small-flush" toilets, "[h]ow is it possible to flush a Quran down the toilet?" [Young America's Foundation speech, 8/5/05]
Neal Boortz, suggesting that a victim of Hurricane Katrina housed in an Atlanta hotel consider prostitution: "I dare say she could walk out of that hotel and walk 100 yards in either direction on Fulton Industrial Boulevard here in Atlanta and have a job. What's that? Well, no, no, no. ... Well, you know what? [laughing] Now that you mention it ... [i]f that's the only way she can take care of herself, it sure beats the hell out of sucking off the taxpayers." [Cox Radio Syndication's The Neal Boortz Show, 10/24/05]

Also, check out their annual Misinformer of the Year award (this year going to Chris Matthews of MSNBC's Hardball.

2006-01-02T21:05:00.000-07:00

Happy New Year

I hope all of you had a wonderful, politically-correct holiday festivus season. I hope none of you rewarded the fundamental born-agains by influencing retailers to greet consumers with monotheistic epithets (I know I might lose Republican readers of this blog by using such big words, but it's a risk I'm willing to take).

I had the misfortune of hearing our beloved King GW "I am above the law" Bush give his New Year's radio address. It was less than five minutes long (good thing) and he did his version of The Year in Review. Needless to say, he neglected to mention: Hurricane Katrina, the various indictments of his close friends, the illegal wiretapping he orchestrated and numerous other things.

For those of you wanting to dig a little deeper into what actually happened last year, I present the list of the "Top 25 Censored Stories of 2005" (brought to you by our friends at Project Censored. Here is a listing of the stories - click this link for the complete text:

#1 Bush Administration Moves to Eliminate Open Government
#2 Media Coverage Fails on Iraq: Fallujah and the Civilian Death

#3 Another Year of Distorted Election Coverage

#4 Surveillance Society Quietly Moves In

#5 U.S. Uses Tsunami to Military Advantage in Southeast Asia

#6 The Real Oil for Food Scam

#7 Journalists Face Unprecedented Dangers to Life and Livelihood

#8 Iraqi Farmers Threatened By Bremer’s Mandates

#9 Iran’s New Oil Trade System Challenges U.S. Currency

#10 Mountaintop Removal Threatens Ecosystem and Economy

#11 Universal Mental Screening Program Usurps Parental Rights

#12 Military in Iraq Contracts Human Rights Violators

#13 Rich Countries Fail to Live up to Global Pledges

#14 Corporations Win Big on Tort Reform, Justice Suffers

#15 Conservative Plan to Override Academic Freedom in the Classroom

#16 U.S. Plans for Hemispheric Integration Include Canada

#17 U.S. Uses South American Military Bases to Expand Control of the Region

#18 Little Known Stock Fraud Could Weaken U.S. Economy

#19 Child Wards of the State Used in AIDS Experiments

#20 American Indians Sue for Resources; Compensation Provided to Others

#21 New Immigration Plan Favors Business Over People

#22 Nanotechnology Offers Exciting Possibilities But Health Effects Need Scrutiny

#23 Plight of Palestinian Child Detainees Highlights Global Problem

#24 Ethiopian Indigenous Victims of Corporate and Government Resource Aspirations

#25 Homeland Security Was Designed to Fail

2005-12-13T15:21:00.000-07:00

Secret CIA Prisons and Torture

You may have read that European investigators say they have evidence that supports allegations the CIA "abducted and transferred" people between countries and temporarily held them "without any judicial involvement."

But, wait - didn't the Bush administration deny doing that? Actually, if we look closer at what was actually said by Ms. Rice (from a Washington Post article):

Condeleeza Rice said, "It is also U.S. policy that authorized interrogation will be consistent with U.S. obligations under the Convention Against Torture, which prohibit cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment."

What she didn't explain is that, under this administration's eccentric definition of "U.S. obligations," cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment is not prohibited as long as it does not occur on U.S. territory. That is the reason for the secret prisons that the CIA has established in European countries and other locations around the world, and for the "renditions" of detainees to countries such as Egypt and Jordan: so that the administration can violate the very treaty Ms. Rice claims it is upholding.

Other Condi quotes:

"We cannot discuss information that would compromise the success of intelligence, law enforcement and military operations." ("Afterall, that's why we've been denying all that faulty intelligence that got us into Iraq, in the first place" she added)
The United States "has fully respected the sovereignty of other countries that cooperate in these matters." ("US sovereignty, of course, has to be respected first and foremost - as we can kick all of your EU asses collectively" she added)
Intelligence cooperation between the United States and European countries has "helped protect European countries from attack, helping save European lives." ("Or, for you Frenchies who don't understand English too well: 'comply-or-die'" she added)
"Ultimately if you want to stop attacks, you have to use intelligence to do it." ("Wait, did I say Intelligence? I meant torture...potato, po-tah-to" she added)
"where appropriate, the United States seeks assurances that transferred persons will not be tortured." ("With the exception of Egypt - they can torture ad nauseum" she added)
"The United States government does not authorize or condone torture of detainees." ("That is, unless it helps us get information to support the US world-view" she added)
"Our people, wherever they are, are operating under U.S. law and U.S. obligations." ("Like Abu Ghraib," she added)

2005-12-12T22:34:00.000-07:00

War on Christmas? Whatever Happened to the War In Iraq?

I am sick and tired of it. Haven't we heard enough? Who really cares...really, I don't. If the Righties don't have enough to avoid, why do they have to bring this up? As for the so-called "war on Christmas" I think Sam Seder said it best on CNN:

Listen, as far as the war on Christmas goes, I feel like we should be waging a war on Christmas. I mean, I believe that Christmas, it's almost proven that Christmas has nuclear weapons, can be an imminent threat to this country, that they have operative ties with terrorists and I believe that we should sacrifice thousands of American lives in pursuit of this war on Christmas. And hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money...we have tortured an elf and it's actually how we got the same information from Al Libbi. It's exactly the same way the Bush administration got this info about the operational ties between al Qaeda and Saddam.

Get over it. Happy Winter Solstice!

2005-12-12T08:09:00.000-07:00

List of Political Epithets

As I was cruising through of the best online encylopedias - Wikipedia (check it out if you are not familiar with it) - I came across this list of political epithets (including the definition for "pinko"). Here's a snip; enjoy:

This is a list of pejorative political epithets; meaning, words or phrases used to mock or insult certain political views and their supporters. An explanation is also given for each term's intended meaning and original source (where known). The list is not comprehensive, and perhaps never will be, due to the multitude of political epithets that have been and continue to be created. Please note that the majority of these epithets are inherently biased terms and some are considered highly inflammatory.

2005-12-11T19:26:00.000-07:00

Buying a Free Press in a New Democracy

By now, I am sure you heard stories of the Bush Administration sponsoring favorable news stories about the United States in Iraqi papers. In today's New York Times, a very interesting exposé about this operation reveals the following:

Hoping to counter anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world, the Bush administration has been conducting an information war that is extensive, costly and often hidden, according to documents and interviews with contractors, government officials and military personnel.

And more....

Lincoln says it planted more than 1,000 articles in the Iraqi and Arab press and placed editorials on an Iraqi Web site, Pentagon documents show. For an expanded stealth persuasion effort into neighboring countries, Lincoln presented plans, since rejected, for an underground newspaper, television news shows and an anti-terrorist comedy based on "The Three Stooges."

More here (yes, you have to sign up for the New York Times online, but it's worth it).

2005-12-09T09:54:00.000-07:00

Iraq-al Qaeda links made up

In case you missed the article this morning from the NY Times:

The Bush administration based a crucial prewar assertion about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda on detailed statements made by a prisoner while in Egyptian custody who later said he had fabricated them to escape harsh treatment, according to current and former government officials.

Big surprise, huh?

2005-12-08T16:48:00.000-07:00

GW Bush on Global Warming

A must see video - take a look!

2005-12-08T14:04:00.000-07:00

Remembered

2005-12-08T07:54:00.000-07:00

Quick Update This Morning

Scanning Google News this morning (as I am apt to do), I came across a few stories that I feel compelled to comment on:

1) Marshal kills jet passenger after threat - apparantly an unarmed, manic-depressive man was shot four to six times on a plane by two marshalls yesterday in Florida....sure, he may have acted suspicious, but does this warrant being shot half a dozen times? Why did this happen? Could it be in response to the poor report card recently issued by the 911 Commission? Let's here what a Republican from Florida has to say:

Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., chairman of the House transportation subcommittee on aviation, said the shooting proves the expanded marshal program is successful. "This shows that the program has worked beyond our expectations," Mica said. "This should send a message to a terrorist or anyone else who is considering disrupting an aircraft with a threat"...Mica said the marshal acted appropriately. Federal air marshals are not trained to negotiate with suspected terrorists, he said, especially passengers who claim they are carrying an explosive device, as Alpizar said Wednesday. "Air marshals don't have time for counseling or interviewing passengers. They have to make split-second decisions based on the current threat," Mica said.

2) Bush says US overcoming Iraq 'mistakes' - so Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman is supporting Bush's plan in Iraq...wha?!?!? I never liked the guy, anyway (he's tried to ban music and video games based on questionable content - that's one step away from censorship). Somehow, Lieberman's support for Bush has allowed GW to admit "mistakes have been made" in Iraq. Is this a blessing in disguise? Is Bush actually starting to be a little more human, and admit his mistakes?

"The senator says that mistakes have been made. But he goes on to say that he's worried about a bigger mistake," namely a US pull-out before Iraqis can keep order themselves, said Bush. "Senator Lieberman is right."

Wait a second...read that again. That's not admitting to a mistake - that's agreeing with someone who says mistakes have been made. That's a mathematical logical concept called the converse. Here's a definition:

The converse of a conditional statement is formed by interchanging the hypothesis and the conclusion of the original statement. In other words, the parts of the sentence changes place. But it is important to remember that the converse does NOT neccessarily have the same truth value as the original conditional statement.

That is: "Mistakes have been made in Iraq because Senator Lieberman is right" does not mean the same as "Senator Lieberman is right because mistakes have been made in Iraq." GW Bush has admitted to nothing.

2005-12-06T06:05:00.000-07:00

Specific Grades from 9/11 Commission

If you're like me, you are wondering just specifically what grades this administration received from the 9/11 commission. I found a USA Today article that reported them, and here they are:

Vigorous effort against terrorist financing	A-
Economic policies	B+
Balance between security and civil liberties	B
Biometric entry-exit screening system	B
Director of national intelligence	B
Homeland security committees	B
Identify and prioritize terrorist sanctuaries	B
International broadcasting	B
Long-term commitment to Afghanistan	B
National counterterrorism center	B
Standardize security clearances	B
Homeland airspace defense	B-
Standardize secure identifications	B-
Support Pakistan against extremists	C+
Coalition strategy against Islamist terrorism	C
Comprehensive screening system	C
Create FBI national security workforce	C
Define the U.S. message	C
Establish a unified Incident Command System	C
Improve airline screening checkpoints to detect explosives	C
Private sector preparedness	C
National strategy for transportation security	C-
Checked bag and cargo screening	D
Critical infrastructure risks and vulnerabilities assessment	D
Governmentwide information sharing	D
Guidelines for government sharing of personal information	D
Incentives for information sharing	D
Intelligence oversight reform	D
International collaboration on borders and document security	D
Maximum effort by U.S. government to secure weapons of mass destruction	D
Privacy and civil liberties oversight board	D
Scholarship, exchange and library programs	D
Support reform in Saudi Arabia	D
Support secular education in Muslim countries	D
Coalition standards for terrorist detention	F
Declassify overall intelligence budget	F
Improve airline passenger pre-screening	F
Provide adequate radio spectrum for first responders	F{+1}
Allocate homeland security funds based on risk	F{+2}
Better terrorist travel strategy	Inc.{+3}
New missions for CIA director	Inc.{+3}
1 — Becomes C if bill passes; 2 — Becomes A if House OKs provision; 3 — Incomplete
Source: 9/11 Public Discourse Project

2005-12-05T19:36:00.000-07:00

Dictionary of Republicans

Thanks to a reader of the blog, check out this article from the Nation - I will liberally (what else) snip from this article:

Over the past few decades, the radical right has engaged in a well-funded, self-conscious program of Orwellian doublespeak, transforming the American political discourse to suit its ends...before we can win the great battle of ideas, we must debunk the right's political discourse, a veritable code of encrypted language that twists common usage to deceive the public for the Republicans' purposes.

Therefore, The Nation asked readers to submit words taken over by the Republican Party, and re-used for their own purposes. Here are some examples (along with the names of who submitted them) - enjoy (and you could find the full article here:

abstinence-only sex education n. Ignorance-only sex education [Wayne Martorelli, Lawrenceville, NJ].

alternative energy sources n. New locations to drill for gas and oil [Peter Scholz, Fort Collins, Colo.].

bankruptcy n. A punishable crime when committed by poor people but not corporations [Beth Thielen, Studio City, Calif.].

"burning bush" n. A biblical allusion to the response of the President of the United States when asked a question by a journalist who has not been paid to inquire [Bill Moyers, New York, NY].

Cheney, Dick n. The greater of two evils [Jacob McCullar, Austin, Tex.].

China n. See Wal-Mart [Rebecca Solnit, San Francisco, Calif.].

class warfare n. Any attempt to raise the minimum wage [Don Zweir, Grayslake, Ill.].

climate change n. The blessed day when the blue states are swallowed by the oceans [Ann Klopp, Princeton, NJ].

compassionate conservatism n. Poignant concern for the very wealthy [Lawrence Sandek, Twin Peaks, Calif.].

creationism n. Pseudoscience that claims George W. Bush's resemblance to a chimpanzee is totally coincidental [Brian Sweeney, Providence, RI].

DeLay, Tom n. 1. Past tense of De Lie [Rick Rodstrom, Los Angeles, Calif.]. 2. Patronage saint [Andrew Magni, Nonatum, Mass.].

democracy n. A product so extensively exported that the domestic supply is depleted [Michael Schwartz, unknown].

dittohead n. An Oxy(contin)moron [Zydeco Boudreaux, Gretna, La.].

energy independence n. The caribou witness relocation program [Justin Rezzonico, Keene, Ohio].

extraordinary rendition n. Outsourcing torture [Milton Feldon, Laguna Woods, Calif.].

faith n. The stubborn belief that God approves of Republican moral values despite the preponderance of textual evidence to the contrary [Matthew Polly, Topeka, Kans.].

Fox News fict. Faux news [Justin Rezzonico, Keene, Ohio].

free markets n. Halliburton no-bid contracts at taxpayer expense [Sean O'Brian, Chicago, Ill.].

girly men n. Males who do not grope women inappropriately [Nick Gill, Newton, Mass.].

God n. Senior presidential adviser [Martin Richard, Belgrade, Mont.].

growth n. 1. The justification for tax cuts for the rich. 2. What happens to the national debt when Republicans cut taxes on the rich [Matthew Polly, Topeka, Kans.].

habeas corpus n. Archaic. (Lat.) Legal term no longer in use (See Patriot Act) [Josh Wanstreet, Nutter Fort, WV].

healthy forest n. No tree left behind [Dan McWilliams, Santa Barbara, Calif.].

homelandism n. A neologism for love of the Homeland Security State, as in "My Homeland, 'tis of thee, sweet security state of liberty..." [Tom Engelhardt, New York, NY].

honesty n. Lies told in simple declarative sentences--e.g., "Freedom is on the march" [Katrina vanden Heuvel, New York, NY].

House of Representatives n. Exclusive club; entry fee $1 million to $5 million (See Senate) [Adam Hochschild, San Francisco, Calif.].

laziness n. When the poor are not working [Justin Rezzonico, Keene, Ohio].

leisure time n. When the wealthy are not working [Justin Rezzonico, Keene, Ohio].

liberal(s) n. Followers of the Antichrist [Ann Wegher, Montello, Wisc.].

Miller, Zell n. The man who shot and killed Alexander Hamilton after a particularly tough interview on Hardball [Drew Dillion, Arlington, Va.].

neoconservatives n. Nerds with Napoleonic complexes [Matthew Polly, Topeka, Kans.].

9/11 n. Tragedy used to justify any administrative policy, especially if unrelated (See Deficit, Iraq War) [Dan Mason, Durham, NH].

No Child Left Behind riff. 1. v. There are always jobs in the military [Ann Klopp, Princeton, NJ]. 2. n. The rapture [Samantha Hess, Cottonwood, Ariz.].

ownership society n. A civilization where 1 percent of the population controls 90 percent of the wealth [Michael Albert, Piscataway, NJ].

Patriot Act n. 1. The pre-emptive strike on American freedoms to prevent the terrorists from destroying them first. 2. The elimination of one of the reasons why they hate us [Michael Thomas, Socorro, NM].

pro-life adj. Valuing human life up until birth [Kevin Weaver, San Francisco, Calif.].

Senate n. Exclusive club; entry fee $10 million to $30 million [Adam Hochschild, San Francisco, Calif.].

simplify v. To cut the taxes of Republican donors [Katrina vanden Heuvel, New York, NY].

staying the course interj. Slang. Saying and doing the same stupid thing over and over, regardless of the result [Suzanne Smith, Ann Arbor, Mich.].

stuff happens interj. Slang. Donald Rumsfeld as master historian [Sheila and Chalmers Johnson, San Diego, Calif.].

voter fraud n. A significant minority turnout [Sue Bazy, Philadelphia, Pa.].

Wal-Mart n. The nation-state, future tense [Rebecca Solnit, San Francisco, Calif.].

water n. Arsenic storage device [Joy Losee, Gainesville, Ga.].

woman n. 1. Person who can be trusted to bear a child but can't be trusted to decide whether or not she wishes to have thechild. 2. Person who must have all decisions regarding her reproductive functions made by men with whom she wouldn't want to have sex in the first place [Denise Clay, Philadelphia, Pa.].

2005-12-01T17:23:00.000-07:00

A Fun Video That Must Be Seen

It's not political, but it is indeed fun: Cat - I'm a Kitty Cat

Laugh a little!

2005-12-01T15:53:00.000-07:00

President Bush, Meet Reality

The title above comes from a great article in Washington's Village voice. You could read it here. Here's a snip:

President Bush’s speech at the Naval Academy (yesterday) is a reflection of his stubborn, narrow-vision approach to governing. More and more, what he says is devoid of reality. To listen to Bush is to enter a dreamworld.

I agree completely. But perhaps that is the reality the Republican Elite live in. You know, the reality where they pay for news stories in Iraqi papers to make the American invasion look good. The same reality where Republican lobbyists can commit crimes, take bribes and even become involved in a Gangland-style assasination, and still be chummy with the White House. This same reality allows the President to pardon someone involved in treason.

I guess we all decide which type of reality we want to live in. I'd rather face a reality full of tough, meaningful choices - where sometimes I am right, and sometimes I am wrong. But at the end of the day, I could fall asleep knowing that I live with integrity.

I don't think Republicans who support the Bush Administration can do that....

Celebrity alert: A reader of this blog had Marilyn Musgrave come by her place of employment on a fund-raising effort. She's raising money for re-election in the 4th district in Colorado. Remember Musgrave? Here are some of her career highlights:

Here career highlights are detailed on the Website: "Exposed: Unmasking the Agenda of the Radical Religious Right - click here!

Peace out.

2005-11-23T10:00:00.000-07:00

Blogging Like Crazy These Past 24 Hours

I don't know what's gotten into me. Could be that I am literally consuming Al Franken's new book The Truth - it's great; go and buy a copy for yourself and your loved ones this holiday. Here's a link that's very interesting: Approval Rating of George W. Bush.

Check it. Out. Happy T-day, everyone.

2005-11-23T06:24:00.000-07:00

Freedom of the Press? Not in the UK

Is there another Iraq scandal brewing? It seems that Tony Blair is imposing "the Official Secrets Act" to prevent a newspaper from publishing transcripts between him and GW Bush suggesting that they want to bomb the Arabic television station al-Jazeera. Here's a snip:

BRITAIN'S Attorney-General has threatened newspapers with the Official Secrets Act if they reveal the contents of a document allegedly relating to a dispute between Tony Blair and George Bush over military operations in Iraq.

It is believed to be the first time the Blair Government has threatened newspapers in this way. Though it has obtained court injunctions against newspapers, the Government has never prosecuted editors for publishing the contents of leaked documents, including highly sensitive ones about the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq.

The Attorney-General, Lord Peter Goldsmith, has referred editors to newspaper stories on the contents of a memo supposed to have been at the centre of charges against two men under the Secrets Act.

Under the front-page headline "Bush plot to bomb his ally", London's Daily Mirror reported that the US President last year planned to attack the Arabic television station al-Jazeera, which has its headquarters in Doha, the capital of Qatar, where US and British bombers were based.

Link here

2005-11-22T20:30:00.000-07:00

A Quick Holiday Post

It's just days before Thanksgiving, and I have been meaning to post stories, etc. to this blog. Time is not on my side, this week...ah well. Here is a good link, from CBS News, that illustrates how the Padilla Case has been an abuse of power. Very interesting.

Also, from an email brief I received from the Institute of Public Accuracy, the British group PLATFORM has just released a report: "Crude Designs: The Rip-Off of Iraq's Oil Wealth." Among the group's findings:

"Current Iraqi oil policy will allocate the development of at least 64 percent of Iraq's reserves to foreign oil companies."
"The estimated cost to Iraq over the life of the new oil contracts is $74 to $194 billion, compared with leaving oil development in public hands."
"The contracts would guarantee massive profits to foreign companies, with rates of return of 42 to 162 percent. The kinds of contracts that will provide these returns are known as production sharing agreements (PSAs). PSAs have been heavily promoted by the U.S. government and oil majors and have the backing of senior figures in the Iraqi Oil Ministry. However PSAs last for 25-40 years, are usually secret and prevent governments from later altering the terms of the contract."

Next post (sometime next week) will be focusing on an in-depth analysis of Dick Cheney's (aka Darth Vader's) "remarks on the War on Terror." I will be calling this analysis: The Inside of Geriatric Man's Mouth - Explained! Stay tuned.

2005-11-15T07:29:00.000-07:00

Bill O'Reilly - the Republican Mouthpiece

A great, funny yet very scary article from Daniel Kurtzman: 1o Mind-Numbingly Stupid Quotes from Bill O'Reilly. Featuring such great lines like:

"...if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco."

"I just wish Katrina had only hit the United Nations building, nothing else..."

"If the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right?"

2005-11-15T07:17:00.000-07:00

Are Moderate Republicans Actually Getting the Message?

I know it sounds unbelievable, but it just might be true...I read this story this morning in the New York Times about how Senate Republicans are actually pushing for a plan on ending the war in Iraq!

Of course, they are spinning this, very carefully positioning themselves as still being a unified party and supportive of the administration (I mean, when has a Republican actually come out and criticized another Republican?), but I think they are actually starting to get the message - that, or they are desperately trying to stay in office through the next election rounds.

2005-11-14T12:01:00.000-07:00

A Brief Note for Monday

Been busy of late and had not much time to post. However, I came across this article that was posted at The Nation, as well as Yahoo News. The title of the article speaks volumes - check it out: Bush Rewrites History To Criticize His Anti-war Critics.

2005-11-10T07:11:00.000-07:00

This Just In!
Not only have Democrats overwhlemingly won throughout the country in the elections this week, but check out this story for the New York Times:

The lobbyist Jack Abramoff asked for $9 million in 2003 from the president of a West African nation to arrange a meeting with President Bush and directed his fees to a Maryland company now under federal scrutiny, according to newly disclosed documents.

Remember, Abramoff has close ties with Bush, Rove and all the other Republican thieves in the administration!

2005-11-06T19:18:00.000-07:00

Republican Lying, Cheating and Stealing - All Across the US!

Hello, readers. Tonight, I have decided to tour the United States, looking for examples of how Republicans are cheating and stealing on a state-level. And no - I am not going to focus on the state of Texas!!!

So, everyone, pile into the VW Hippy-bus, and let's take a tour of our great country!

First Stop - Ohio!
From the Toledo Blade, take a moment to review this expose that reveals the corrupt Republican infrastructure, and how it paved the way for Bush's 2004 victory. A financial scandal within the Ohio Republican Party led to criminal ethics convictions for Mr. Taft, now the governor, and two of his top aides.

Let's visit the great state of California!
Here's a story from the Center for Public Integrity, that tells the story of a powerful member of Congress that has broken the law by not paying taxes on foreign trips paid for by a shadowy private foundation in large part bankrolled by the parent company of the Red Lobster and Olive Garden restaurant chains. Oh, those nutty Californians!

Let's Make a Quick Stop in Kentucky!
Where two Kentucky Republican Party officials who volunteered for Gov. Ernie Fletcher were indicted on allegations that they conspired with the administration to fill state jobs on the basis of politics.

And in Connecticut...
..FBI agents are using the Patriot Act to force a person who manages three dozen Connecticut libraries to surrender all subscriber information, billing information and access logs that he maintains. The gentleman is fighting back, but beware of Big Brother investigating how many days late you returned "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince!"

What about Virginia?
Virginia Republican Attorney General candidate Bob McDonnell has not only financed his campaign through a possibly illegal slush fund but has hired three former associates of indicted Republican über-lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Last stop (for now) - Chicopee, Massachusetts
Chicopee Mayor Richard R. Goyette was arrested for allegedly taking a $5,000 bribe to settle an ongoing feud with the towing company owner, and another $5,000 from a developer looking for favors from City Hall.

Whew - what a long, strange trip it's been. It's no wonder that GW Bush is ordering his staff to attend ethics briefings .

Keep those Pinko Fires burning!

Chris

2005-11-04T14:41:00.000-07:00

Scooter Libby - the Indictment Papers

A quick post this afternoon for those of you interested in legalize behind Libby's indictment. Here is a link to the official papers filed by Fitzgerald.

2005-11-03T20:32:00.000-07:00

Quick Update
Surfing the web tonight briefly, I came upon two stories of interest.

The first is about Mike Brown, ex-FEMA director, and how he acted during the initial hours/days as Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. It seems his email correspondence was released...who woulda thought he'd be calling himself a "fashion god?" For more, check out the emails here.

Everyone knows Mike Brown is from Longmont, Colorado, right? Well, if he doesn't sum up the mentality of many Coloradans, than maybe this story about a Colorado man who accidentally was glued to a public toilet will.

2005-11-03T16:27:00.000-07:00

Happy Thursday, everyone! I have to get used to having an online forum to discuss my rants and raves. Blogging is an artform that I am not sure I completely grasp. Nonetheless, I'll jump into the deep end (or is this the shallow end), and give it a shot.

Here are a few Pinko Items of interest that I found today:

Item 1: The Lie Factory (from Mother Jones magazine) -
The inside story of how the Bush administration pushed disinformation and bogus intelligence and led the nation to war (I know, I know...we are all familiar with the topic, but this is a good investigative piece - well worth the read).

Item 2: Why Would Libby Lie?

Item 3: Ambushed: Why America Turned on Dubya

Item 4: After the Libby Indictment, the Press Is Acquitting Itself
A great article from one of my favorite sites online, www.fair.org. This story investigates how the press is reacting to the news that the American Public has been lied to, and that they were the medium responsible for delivering those lies.

Item 5: Some Political Humor
Or is this really humor?
Can anyone explain what Bush is saying?

Item 6: A really bad joke:
Q: What's George Bush's position on Roe v. Wade?
A: He really doesn't care how people get out of New Orleans.

2005-11-02T14:16:00.000-07:00

It's about time the Pinko Email went to a blog format. Welcome everyone to the new site. I hope this becomes a better way to communicate my own rants and raves. And with that, let's get started:

Item 1: The CIA is responsible for secret prison camps throughout the world
The top story in Google News as of this moment - take a look:.

Item 2: Delay is not giving up yet!
Not willing to give up on his impending trial, DeLay not only is holding tight to his leadership reins but he's also working on stacking the trial in his favor. Oh, that DeLay...he's quite a character.

Item 3: What's up with Frist?
Well, outside of throwing a temper tantrum, he's still being investigated by the SEC.

Item 4: Come over, come over, Red Rove...er
Need I say more?
Oh yeah, Trent Lott nearly called for Rove's resignation...

Item 5: A little political humor
Stupid Iraq Quotes
Get your set of Psychadelic Republican Trading Cards now!

Item 6: A Scooter Libby joke:
"If convicted Libby could face the following penalties:

obstruction of justice: 10 years in prison
making false statements: 5 years
perjury: 4 years
going to jail with the name Scooter: priceless."

--Tina Fey, Saturday Night Live.