 |
||||
|
|
October 26, 2005The I-Wait Goes on, But There's Still the Miers MessWell, maybe not today....The word this morning spreading through media circles in Washington is that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's grand jury will vote on indictments today, and he will make an announcement tomorrow. Perhaps the indictments will be sealed; perhaps not. Perhaps the names of the indicted will leak; perhaps not. The waiting, as a poet once warbled, is the hardest part. Meanwhile, let's turn the channel to another show: the Miers mess. TomPaine.com today posted my latest "Loyal Opposition" column, in which I offer Senate Democrats an unconventional proposal for dealing with the Miers nomination. Make sure you do visit TomPaine.com from time to time. Here's my piece: Liberals And The Miers Dilemma A few days ago, a leading conservative legal activist--a pal of Robert Bork and Edwin Meese--who is part of the crusade against Harriet Miers asked me a question: Would "principled liberals" join the "principled conservatives" who oppose Miers in an effort to sink this terrible Supreme Court nomination. Don't progressives, he asked, agree that Miers was an awful pick and that she is not up to the job? Why not, he continued, make common cause in defense of standards and meritocracy? Save the court with us, he urged. Well, I told him, I am not an ambassador, spokesperson or powerbroker for liberals. Besides, I continued, many liberals might feel they were falling for a trap: Help Bork, Kristol, Will, Frum, Krauthammer and the rest defeat Miers, and that will hand these conservatives the opportunity to obtain a lifetime appointment for a Scalia-like, made-in-the-Federalist-Society jurist with the legal chops necessary to shape the court for decades. Heck, my conversation mate said, my conservative buddies and I didn't oppose Ruth Bader Ginsburg; we knew she'd be a consistent and smart vote against us, but we recognized her intelligence, legal talent and competence. Why won't liberals take a similar stance now and join with angry conservatives to give Miers the boot? He had a point. But I noted that since the Supreme Court has become involved in the critical issues of the day--often deciding important political and policy matters (remember Bush v. Gore ?)--perhaps it was time to toss aside the quaint notion that qualifications are the key factor in determining whether a nominee ought to be greenlighted. Why not fully acknowledge that a Supreme Court choice is a significant battle over politics and policy and treat it as such? It's reasonable for a senator to say that if the court has the power to decide whether abortion remains legal, he will oppose any nominee he believes would vote to end that right. This might be a shift in the tradition of advise and consent. But things change. Thus, decisions on nominees can be--and should be--subject to tactical and strategic concerns. Principled liberals, I told this conservative fellow, are not obligated to heed the call of meritocracy coming from Miers' foes on the right, if these liberals believe doing so would lead to an outcome that may be worse for the nation from a policy perspective. Having reached no consensus, we finished our beers. The next day the protest-too-much Bork pummeled Bush in the Wall Street Journal for selecting Miers: "With a single stroke...the president has damaged the prospects for reform of a left-leaning and imperialistic Supreme Court...and widened the fissures within the conservative movement. That's not a bad day of work--for liberals." So hold on. If Bork's anti-Miers campaign seeks to move the court to the right, why should liberals sign on? Yet if Miers is the enemy of liberal's enemies (such as Bork), does that make her a friend? The calculations are not that easy. Look at her friends these days. The social conservatives are pushing for Miers; James Dobson has blessed the nomination. And these conservatives must be heartened by the recent news that she contributed to a group opposing abortion rights and once declared her support for a constitutional amendment banning abortions. One major advocate for Miers is Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law & Justice, which was founded by Pat Robertson. In a recent commentary, he declared that Miers "knows precisely what President Bush is looking for, and that is someone that will understand their role as judge and not set social policy from the bench." But it's clear the social cons fancy her because she is opposed to abortion rights and they suspect she will change this particular social policy from the bench. And in a case like the one involving assisted suicide, which was recently argued before the Supreme Court, how is it possible for the justices not to set social policy? Either they will allow the assisted suicide law approved by the voters of Oregon to stand, or they will agree with the Bush administration position (developed initially by then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, after he failed as a U.S. senator to pass federal legislation banning assisted suicides) and declare the Oregon law unconstitutional. This will be a judgment call. There is nothing in the text of the Constitution that definitively decides this issue. Sekulow and the other social cons have throttled back on the she's-one-of-us (that is, an evangelical Christian) argument, but they still don't have much with which to prop up Miers. Sekulow, for one, proclaimed that her lack of judicial experience is an asset: Those that have spent their professional career as judges tend to forget the real implications of the decisions they make and the impact that they have on regular people. It will be refreshing to have someone that understands that a decision of the Supreme Court will have real and practical implications on business and in people's personal lives. Does he really believe that justices who have decided cases involving the detaining of U.S. citizens, affirmative action, abortion rights and the determination of a presidential election do not understand their actions have real-world implications? Back to the liberals and Democrats' quandary. Why saddle up with Bork and oppose Miers (even if columnist George Will claims the anti-Miers position is the "defense of mere excellence")? Why vote for the woman who has Sekulow and Dobson so excited? Opposing Miers will be striking a blow for standards, but also possibly opening the door to a worse outcome. Supporting Miers will mean endorsing mediocrity and lining up with the social cons, but perhaps preventing Bush from appointing a more frightening and capable conservative. It's intriguing that the anti-Miers right-wingers are neoconservatives, commentators and judicial activists seemingly driven by a desire to have on the court an intellectual powerhouse--someone like them!--who can dominate the process while voting the correct way, and the religious right-wingers appear to be motivated by the desire for specific results. It's a cultural divide on the right. Should liberals and Democrats choose sides in this shootout between the neocons/legal cons and the social cons? It could be that Miers withdraws either before the November confirmation hearings or after them (if they do not go well). My above-mentioned conservative friend reports that many GOP senators are privately saying that they wish the Miers nomination would disappear and that they do not want to vote for her. But such a wish may not come. And then Democrats--who are now generally standing to the side and enjoying the catfight on the right--will have to render a decision. Or will they? Here's an idea that I reserve the right to reject upon further reflection: Democrats in the Senate should vote "present" on the Miers nomination. It's not an aye, and it's not a nay. They could argue that they believe this is a sub-standard nomination that deserves no one's support but that they do not want to provide Bush the opportunity to satisfy those who are calling for a right-wing jurist who will decisively steer the court further in a conservative direction. Facing two awful options--both bad for the nation--Democrats can assert that they will be party neither to Bush's cronyism nor to Bork's crusade. Let the Republicans slug it out and bear responsibility for the consequences. Oh, some cranky think-tankers and commentators will call this a cop-out, a dereliction of constitutional duty. But why validate--or be used by--either side in the Republicans civil war? Once in a while, the correct response to a situation is, don't just do something, sit there. As the Miers mess continues to unfold--the Dallas Morning News reported this week that Miers' family was paid "18 times the assessed value for Dallas land needed for a freeway ramp" in a decision okayed by a panel that included a friend of Miers--new information may definitively tip the scales for liberals and Democrats. In the meantime, the Senate Democrats ought to consider taking a Hippocratic approach to the vote on Miers' nomination: First, do no harm. Posted by David Corn at October 26, 2005 11:34 AM |
|
|
"HUBRIS is a bold and provocative book that will quickly become an explosive part of the national debate on how we got involved in Iraq." --Tom Brokaw |
Comments
Mr. David Corn,
"Principled liberals, I told this conservative fellow, are not obligated to heed the call of meritocracy coming from Miers' foes on the right, if these liberals believe doing so would lead to an outcome that may be worse for the nation from a policy perspective."
Thank you. Somebody needed to say it and you summed it up completely.
Who can argue with the truth?
Very good post, shows your insight (as always)
Kirk
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 11:49 AM
The I-Wait Goes on, But There's Still the Miers Mess
and when the I-Wait and the Miers Mess are resolved (or forgotten about just like the DSM), there will still be 911 to ignore
so I was right...false flags ARE made out of whole cloth
Posted by: James Ha at October 26, 2005 11:57 AM
My main interest is that the hearings occur. a) they'll be embarrassing, b) the recusal questions (assuming the D's don't take a dive) should be VERY interesing, and c) maybe somebody will have the guts to dive into the massive legal fees received by her law firm from the 1998 Bush Texas gubernatorial campaign, and the probable links to the Texas Air National Guard records story.
Posted by: drinkof at October 26, 2005 11:57 AM
What is the saying: "If your opponents are shooting each other do not get in the way"
Something like that. Lets the neocons shoot the other cons and so on. It is interesting to watch.
We only have to concern ourselves with those left standing after the dust settles. Maybe it will be the more realistic and moderate thinkers? The problems we face are because those left stand have been the most vicious and nefarious jerks who fight unencumbered by any ethics nor guided by any moral compass. Is that really the winners?
The GOP needs to find their heart and soul as a party. The crimes and smears have become ineffective and too obvious. I hear some of the old GOPhers contempt for the liars in power.
I refuse to be too hopeful but it is like a little ray of light.
I fear that even if these particular slugs were not in power the issues and actions of the government would be so much the same. *sigh*
If the problems are systemic and institutional changing the figureheads is just so much busy-work.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 12:06 PM
Maureen Dowd of the NY Times says that the word vice is appropriate for vice president cheney. cheney seems to be full of vice.
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 12:09 PM
More distraction from the economic tsunami headed our way, sure it will be fun to see those crooks in cuffs and doing the perp walk but in reality when you are broke and wondering how to house, clothe, and feed your family this will all seem to be petty and small by comparison. Deflation, job loss, depression are words that need to be uttered more and more but no one seems to be paying attention to that, after all it is the economy stupid isn't just a cliche. Whether or not these clowns go to jail, it isn't going to affect my income, but the economy will, and that is cause for concern.
Posted by: What the F**k at October 26, 2005 12:14 PM
More distraction from the economic tsunami headed our way, sure it will be fun to see those crooks in cuffs and doing the perp walk but in reality when you are broke and wondering how to house, clothe, and feed your family this will all seem to be petty and small by comparison. Deflation, job loss, depression are words that need to be uttered more and more but no one seems to be paying attention to that, after all it is the economy stupid isn't just a cliche. Whether or not these clowns go to jail, it isn't going to affect my income, but the economy will, and that is cause for concern.
Posted by: What the F**k at October 26, 2005 12:15 PM
The problem with principled conservatives is that they still wish to rip the rest of us off:
WOODY GUTHRIE:
Jesse James is a good picture --
'Course I have to wait till it gits down to the dime shows, but it's a good picture anyhow --
(After all, I reckon a dime is worth 40c to me... they must be awful scarce. I see where the Finance outfits are charging four bits for a dime.)
The Railroad Racketeers hired Hoodlums & Thugs to beat and cheat the farmers out of their farms -- and make em sell em for $1 an acre.
Frank & Jesse robbed the train to get even. They robbed it so often that the engineer was disappointed on days they coodent get there.
The Railroad President offered $25.00 for one of Jesse's own men to shoot him in the back. Robert Ford, a dirty coward, done the job...
Jesse's Tombstone read: Here Lies Jesse James, shot down by a dirty coward whose name is not worthy to appear here... No wonder folks likes to hear songs about the Outlaws -- they're wrong allright, but not as 1/2 as dirty and sneakin' as some of our so-called "higher-ups"...
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at October 26, 2005 12:20 PM
Pretty Boy Floyd
Woody Guthrie
If you'll gather 'round me children
A story I will tell
Of Pretty Boy Floyd an outlaw
Oklahoma knew him well.
It was in the town of Shawnee
It was Saturday afternoon
His wife beside him in his wagon
As into town they rode.
There a deputy sheriff approached him
In a manner rather rude
Using vulgar words of language
And his wife she overheard.
Pretty Boy grabbed a log chain
And the deputy grabbed a gun
And in the fight that followed
He laid that deputy down.
He took to the trees and timbers
And he lived a life of shame
Every crime in Oklahoma was added to his name
Yes, he took to the trees and timbers
On that Canadian River's shore
And Pretty Boy found a welcome
At a many a farmer's door.
There's a many a starving farmer
The same old story told
How this outlaw paid their mortgage
And saved their little home.
Others tell you 'bout a stranger
That come to beg a meal
And underneath his napkin
Left a thousand dollar bill.
It was in Oklahoma City
It was on a Christmas Day
There come a whole car load of groceries
With a letter that did say:
You say that I'm an outlaw
You say that I'm a thief
Here's a Christmas dinner
For the families on relief.
Now as through this world I ramble
I see lots of funny men
Some will rob you with a Six gun
And some with a fountain pen.
But as through your life you travel
As through your life you roam
You won't never see an outlaw
Drive a family from their home.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at October 26, 2005 12:33 PM
The Chinese have a prophetic curse: "May you live in interesting times."
We now have big-government, perjury-is-a-technicality, budget-busting Republicans on one side and war-approving, law-and-order, perjury-is-treason, budget-balancing Democrats on the other.
Strange times, indeed.
Posted by: Bill at October 26, 2005 12:34 PM
I would love to see Miers go to the floor of the Senate where those opposed to the nomination be forced to try a fillibuster. If Democrats did vote present it would remove any bipartisan cover for Republican votes for or against. Either an outright defeat or a threatened filibuster would be a loss for both the GOP and Bush. If she is confirmed solely by Republicans then the only fingerprints on this as far the the right-wing base is concerned are Republican ones. The "Present" option looks like a great idea to me.
Posted by: Retired Catholic at October 26, 2005 12:45 PM
Protecting the Presidential Seal. No Joke.
KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
You might have thought that the White House had enough on its plate late last month, what with its search for a new Supreme Court nominee, the continuing war in Iraq and the C.I.A. leak investigation. But it found time to add another item to its agenda - stopping The Onion, the satirical newspaper, from using the presidential seal.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at October 26, 2005 12:48 PM
No peace at the Pioneer Press
Casualty of War
by Paul Demko
October 26, 2005
On the last Saturday of September, Tim Mahoney, a part-time copy editor with the St. Paul Pioneer Press, attended a peace rally in Washington, D.C. He traveled on one of three buses organized by St. Joan of Arc Church, a Catholic parish in Minneapolis where he is an active member. The demonstration, which attracted upward of 100,000 people to the nation's capitol, was one of the largest such gatherings since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
"On our part it was a silent march," recalls Mahoney, who has worked at the Pioneer Press for five years, following similar stints at the San Francisco Chronicle and the Capitol Times in Madison, Wisconsin. "We just marched around the White House, period."
While Mahoney was on the bus trip, a Pioneer Press editor called his home to find out if he was available to work that weekend. Hurricane Rita had just touched down on the Texas-Louisiana border and extra bodies were needed on the copy desk.
Upon learning that Mahoney had participated in the Washington peace march, some unnamed editor in the Pi Press chain of command launched an internal investigation to determine whether such activities constituted a breach of the paper's ethics policy. Mahoney was interviewed about the trip by his immediate supervisor. "It was kind of a friendly interview, so I thought they would drop it," he says. "It didn't seem like much of a case to me."
Last week, however, Mahoney learned the outcome of the investigation: He was suspended from work for three days without pay. In addition, Mahoney was informed that he would no longer be allowed to edit any stories about the invasion and occupation of Iraq. It was also made clear, in a letter written by senior editor Mike Bulger, that participation in any similar political activities would result in his termination. [...]
******************
I thinks Mr. Bulger should get an earful from folks across this land. Anybody wants to join me? letters@pioneerpress.com
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at October 26, 2005 01:20 PM
I love the post. There is so much conviction in that stand. I mean it. By just voting present, the Democrats would be refusing to be part of the stupidity.
The Democrats would be saying "You break it, you own it." In my opinion, the supreme court does not work if it is not moderate. The Republican party can deal with the anger that they will generate by making the supreme court so conservative. Why should the Democrats be part of that?
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 01:25 PM
Thank you Robert,
This is why I dropped my subcription to that rag. (fair and balenced- oh yeah) You bet they're going to get a letter from me.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 01:29 PM
David, Your neo-con "friend" (real or fictional, I wonder?) was functioning on a typical conservative principle: The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
I for one have never thought this was a wise course, either in foreign policy or in approving Associate Justices for the Supreme Court. I agree with your basic point: the left should not defeat Miers at any cost, especially if the cost is to put someone forward who is far scarier.
I also agree that there is some sort of double standard going on. It's clear that some of the Miers opposition on the right--Pat Buchanan, for example--oppose her because they are not confident that she thinks as they do on "the abortion question." It's the elephant in the middle of the drawing room. Clearly, people on both sides of the question want someone who will vote their way, but it's somehow not kosher to ask about it--especially if you oppose changing Roe v. Wade. The double-standard is that the right can scream that her conservative bona fides aren't substantial enough, and the White House can wink and assure everyone that she's an evangelical Christian, but the left is not allowed to ask what she thinks about abortion, gay rights, or other hot-button issues.
The Bush White House is deft and sneaky. What's really going on here? Is Meiers much more right-wing than she appears? Is she a sacrificial lamb--is there some thinking that, having offered her up and having her go down in flames, they can put forward someone more to Bork's liking with less opposition? I don't trust the Bush White House, and I wonder what the real agenda is in the Meiers nomination.
Posted by: DavidS at October 26, 2005 01:36 PM
Bush has no desire to have Roe overturned. His "religion" is tax cuts and periodic wars. He and all right wing conservatives need the religious right to win elections, and the best way to keep the Jesus freaks on board is to dangle Roe (along with school prayer, Intelligent Design, etc.) just beyond their grasps. The proof is in the pudding: 5 of the last 7 US presidencies have beed filled by conservative Republicans and yet Roe still stands untouched, we still don't pray in public schools, and all of those Republican presidents still evolved from apes.
Posted by: Tim at October 26, 2005 01:37 PM
Clinton Calls for Week Off
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 01:42 PM
Bush Video
Let me say a few words about important values we must demonstrate while all of us serve in government. First, we must always maintain the highest ethical standards. We must always ask ourselves not only what is legal, but what is right. There is no goal of government worth accomplishing if it cannot be accomplished with integrity.
Second, I want us to set an example of humility. As you work for the federal government there is no excuse for arrogance, and thereÕ³ never a reason to show disrespect for others. A new tone in Washington must begin with decency and fairness. I want everyone who represents our government to be known for these values.
-----------------
Yes George, I agree. Now, ask yourself - was it legal? Is it decent? If you want to represent the goverment that is known for its values then why is Karl Rove still working for you?
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 01:59 PM
The timing of your trip to Arkansas is interesting. If they didn't want to let you speak in Spring, they REALLY don't want you to be there now. I am sure you will get a very welcome response from the students and faculty.
The Bush Lies are certainly going to be a topic of the day. Funny how things turn out.
Posted by: Tuba Les at October 26, 2005 02:00 PM
GREAT POSTS!
All of them, you guys ROCK!
Of course I will join you Robert (Jeanne & others I hope) we must never let that kind of thing go.
The "present" stand would be the right thing to do so I doubt it will happen. I am a cynic after all.
The presidential seal on the Onion? OMG!
On Roe v. Wade? Again, if they are stealing elections they have nothing to lose, if they are not stealing elections they will NEVER want to lose the wedge issue(s).
I fear they are stealing our voice as the corporate interests have taken our place at the table (votes or no votes). That spells "stolen elections" to me as business has no intrinsic morality. Time will tell but I imagine a nightmarish possibility of a landslide for the neo-creeps in Õ06.
If they can steal a super-majority they might just overturn Roe v. and outlaw gay marriage (among other things) and say that is the reason they can defy all logic and exit polls with their apparent popularity. (see the people have spoken by a landslide of stuffed black-box lies)
A staggering endorsement and a real mandate for more and bigger wars, less and fewer rights and the creation of an industrial form of Kkkristo-fascism that would render Orwellian hyperbole a gross understatement. *perish the thought*
Thanks to all and high fiveÕs all around!
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 02:08 PM
Who in the world would ever believe that fascist pig, Bush?
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 02:15 PM
lewrockwell.com has some great articles. Please check them out - Our Lunatic War, The Bad Guys Will Still Be in Charge, and Why I Am Not a Conservative (this is a lengthy article).
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 02:25 PM
My advice is for anyone that thinks the truth is dying please visit www.oper
ationtruth.com ....... That is OPERATION
TRUTH ( one word ) Please consider giving them some money ( why not ????? ) And please consider thanking a soldier on a day other than Veterans Day, or Memorial Day . O.K. I will shut up now.
Timothy Petition
www.warisaracket.org
PS Rumsfeld's no soldier.
Posted by: Timothy Petition at October 26, 2005 02:27 PM
Military's Advice
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 02:29 PM
Bush Promises More
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 02:33 PM
The article, Our Lunatic War, is a must read!
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 02:40 PM
I hope this blog is right. I hope. I hope. I hope.
------
Aides To Be Indicted, Probe to Continue
By Richard Sale, longtime Intelligence Correspondent for UPI
This comes to us courtesy of Pat Lang at turcopolier.typepad.com. I've found Richard to always be on target in my experience. -- Larry Johnson
Two top White House aides are expected to be indicted today on various charges related to the probe of CIA operative Valerie Plame whose classified identity was publicly breached in retaliation after her husband, Joe Wilson, challenged the administration's claim that Saddam Hussein had sought to buy enriched uranium from Niger, acording to federal law enforcement and senior U.S. intelligence officials.
If no action is taken today, it will take place on Friday, these sources said.
I. Scooter Libby, the chief of staff of Vice President Richard Cheney, and chief presidential advisor Karl Rove are expected to be named in indictments this morning by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.
Others are to be named as well, these sources said. According to U.S. officials close to the case, a bill of indictment has been in existence before October 17 which named five people. Various names have surfaced such as National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, yet only one source would confirm that Hadley was on the list. Hadley could not be reached for comment.
But letters from Fitzgerald, notifying various White House officiials that they are targets of the investigation, went out late last week, a former senior U.S. intelligence official said.
Most press accounts emphasized that Fitzgerald was likely to concentrate on attempts by Libby, Rove and others to cover up wrongdoing by means of perjury before the grand jury, lying to federal officials, conspiring to obstruct justice, etc. But federal law enforcement officials told this reporter that Fitzgerald was likely to charge the people indicted with violating Joe Wilson's civil rights, smearing his name in an attempt to destroy his ability to earn a living in Washington as a consultant.
The civil rights charge is said to include "the conspiracy was committed using U.S. government offices, buildings, personnel and funds," one federal law enforcement official said.
Other charges could include possible violations of U.S. espionage laws, including the mishandling of U.S. classified information, these sources said.
That Vice President Cheney is at the center of the controversy comes as no surprise. Last Friday, Fitzgerald investigators were talking to Cheney's attorneys, and detailied questionnaires, designed to pin down in meticulous sequence what Cheney knew, when he knew it, and what he told his aides, were delivered to the White House on Monday, these sources said.
The probe is far from being at an end. According to this reporter's sources, Fitzgerald approached the judge in charge of the case and asked that a new grand jury be empaneled. The old grand jury, which has been sitting for two years, will expire on October 28.
Thanks to a letter of February, 2004 in which Fitzgerald asked for and obtained expanded authority, the Special Prosecutor is now in possession of an Italian parliament nvestigation into the forged Niger documents alleging Iraq's interest in purchasing Niger uranium, sources said.
They said that Fitzgerald is looking into such individuals as former CIA agent, Duane Claridge, military consultant to the Iraqi National Congress, Gen. Wayne Downing, another military consultant for INC, and Francis Brooke, head of INC's Washingfton office in an effort to determine if they played any role in the forgeriese or their dissiemination. Also included in this group is long-time neoconservative Michael Ledeen, these federal sources said.
On the Hill, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), democratic whip, are asking for public hearings to lay bare the forgeries and how their false allegations ended up in President George Bush's State of the Union speech.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 02:43 PM
I think the reason Miers was chosen is because she would do as she's told. She THINKS Bunnypants is the most brilliant man she has ever met? Those are not the words of a good judge of anything. Sounds more like idol (idle) worship from an easily duped dupe.
She would be willing to make decisions based on a wink and a nod from the most brilliant man she ever met. She has made that much clear.
Not even sneaky, at least to me, very obvious.
If she is confirmed we might as well have Bunnypants himself on the court.
She will do as he tells her. What use is a sycophant otherwise?
"All the leaders of groups tend to be frauds. If they were not, it would be impossible for them to retain the allegiance of their dupes..." ~ Henry Louis Mencken (1880-1956) U. S. Editor and Critic
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 02:43 PM
Background to Betrayal
Justin, Justin, he's our man. If he can't do it, no one can!
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 02:49 PM
Welcome to the bustling economy. I bet they find a lot of Republican voters in this district.
I love it. The Bush Adminstration wants to eliminate Social Security. I wonder how much the freaking CEO of Delphi is making.
----------
Delphi's demand: Take $9 an hour Health care, pension trims also planned
BY JASON ROBERSON and MICHAEL ELLIS
FREE PRESS BUSINESS WRITERS
If Delphi Corp. has its way, workers for the nation's largest auto parts supplier would be paid as little as $9 per hour under 65% wage cuts, and be hit with a tenfold increase in health-care costs, no dental and vision care and other sharp reductions in benefits, according to a proposal revealed on the Web site of a UAW local.
The document shows for the first time the severity of the cuts the bankrupt company has told the union it needs to survive....
...Moreover, Delphi wants to freeze its pension plan and said it does not want to accept new pension plan participants after Jan. 1.
Out-of-pocket costs for health care would increase to a maximum $5,000 a year for a family or $2,500 annually for an individual. That would compare to the $500 per family and $250 per person workers currently contribute to the company's traditional health care plan.
Additionally, vision and dental benefits would be eliminated. The company said it also would discontinue "current health care options" but may offer other affordable plans in the future.
The new wages could put a strain on households dependent on a single breadwinner. At $9 per hour, some Delphi workers would make $18,720 a year under the new proposal. That's more than $600 below the federal poverty line for a family of four, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 02:57 PM
Here's another article to go with the Delphi article. This one is about the CEO's salery.
Delphi Corp. executive pay slashed CEO Miller reduces his salary to $1 per year amid criticism over proposed wage cuts.
By Brett Clanton The Detroit News
DETROIT -- Delphi Corp. Chairman and CEO Robert S. "Steve" Miller will reduce his salary to $1 per year and other executives will take pay cuts until the bankrupt auto supplier emerges from Chapter 11, the company said today.
The moves come amid intense criticism that Delphi is enriching executives at a time when it is demanding drastic pay and benefit cuts from its blue-collar workers.
In addition to giving up his $1.5 million annual salary, Miller said Delphi officers who were with the company when he took over in July have volunteered to give up 10 percent of their base pay. President and Chief Operating Officer Rodney O'Neal will waive 20 percent of his salary.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 03:02 PM
Did I read the name that Mary Matalin may be indicted? She wasn't with the viceman long but she may be in big trouble!
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 03:04 PM
#30
Gerald, that is a great article.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 03:05 PM
what i'd like to hear brought up is this. news reports refer to Miers as a "corporate attorney". she's apparently spent her entire career representing the rich and powerful. my question is, has she ever represented poor people? has she ever defended an average joe wrongly accused of a crime? has she ever sued on behalf of an evicted family? has she ever gone to bat for a consumer defrauded by big business? or a woman illegally strip-searched by police? imho a lawyer who has spent a career representing the causes of one side of society is unlikely to show a balanced perspective when on the court.
Posted by: scalene at October 26, 2005 03:06 PM
Indictments would ignite battles internecine
With or without the Oval Office blessing.
When Fitz makes announcements
He'll trigger pronouncements
But will we be rid of the traitorous quisling?
Posted by: micki at October 26, 2005 03:18 PM
Gerald, I think James Carville is the source who told George Stephanopolous (sp?) that this possibly goes into the office of the veep, maybe even the president.
James knows that his wife, Mary Matalin, is in deep doo-doo. Maybe he thought he was helping her out by spreading the blame to the BIG guys. Maybe she is cooperating with Fitzgerald. She has kids to take care of -- and that's hard to do when mommy's in jail.
Posted by: micki at October 26, 2005 03:51 PM
"Those that have spent their professional career as judges tend to forget the real implications of the decisions they make and the impact that they have on regular people."
Says who? Qualified judges live in this world just as much as(maybe even more than) people who have spent their professional lives as part of Bush's crony circle.
This kind of faux-intellectual crap is what is poisoning the discourse in this country
"It will be refreshing to have someone that understands that a decision of the Supreme Court will have real and practical implications on business and in people's personal lives."
Yeah, it was real refreshing not to have some know-it-all "expert" in charge of FEMA when Katrina hit. It's been just a breath of fresh air having these unqualified neo-cons executing an endless quagmire in Iraq.
We on the left have become so afraid of being labelled "elitists" that we lie down while BUsh & Co. stuff our govt. with unqualified hacks. But hey, at least the illiterate moron x-tians in the bible belt arent being given a complex
Posted by: scott at October 26, 2005 03:56 PM
Micki,
I saw James Carville on one of the morning shows. His jet propelled personality seemed to be down about 1000 notches. I have the feeling he told his wife to cooperate (complete with finger pointing and steely eyes). I wonder how much he knew and when he knew it. How much did she tell him?
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 03:57 PM
Richard Sale, a long-time Intelligence correspondent, was the first to tip me last year to the developing Larry Franklin spy scandal, which proved to be right. I've found Richard to always be on target in my experience.
-Larry C. Johnson
By Richard Sale
ÊÊÊÊ
ÊÊÊÊ"...If no action is taken today, it will take place on Friday, according to these sources.
ÊÊÊÊI. Scooter Libby, the chief of staff of Vice President Richard Cheney, and chief presidential advisor Karl Rove are expected to be named in indictments this morning by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.
ÊÊÊÊOthers are to be named as well, these sources said. According to US officials close to the case, a bill of indictment that named five people has been in existence since before October 17...
ÊÊÊÊBut letters from Fitzgerald notifying various White House officials that they are targets of the investigation, went out late last week, a former senior US intelligence official said...
ÊÊÊÊ
ÊÊÊÊOther charges could include possible violations of US espionage laws, including the mishandling of US classified information, these sources said.
ÊÊÊÊThat Vice President Cheney is at the center of the controversy comes as no surprise....
ÊÊÊÊThe probe is far from being at an end. According to this reporter's sources, Fitzgerald approached the judge in charge of the case and asked that a new grand jury be impaneled...
ÊÊÊ
ÊÊÊÊThey said that Fitzgerald is looking into such individuals as former CIA agent Duane Claridge, military consultant to the Iraqi National Congress Gen. Wayne Downing, another military consultant for INC, and Francis Brooke, head of INC's Washington office in an effort to determine if they played any role in the forgeries or their dissemination. Also included in this group is long-time neoconservative Michael Ledeen, these federal sources said...."
Posted by: anon at October 26, 2005 04:05 PM
Miers' pro bono cases lack big issues
October 18, 2005
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers looked close to home, or the office, in choosing the free legal cases to take on as a private lawyer. No sweeping constitutional matters for her -- or very contentious ones.
She helped a garage attendant for her firm's building complete an adoption. She won a case for a Nigerian woman who was fighting a deportation order. She lost when representing an indigent single mother who was denied disability benefits.
"She handled small matters," said lawyer Jerry Clements, who has worked with Miss Miers. "Somebody needed a divorce, somebody needed an adoption."
As head of the State Bar of Texas, she urged lawyers to take on more pro bono, or unpaid, cases for the poor, but she resisted proposals to make such work mandatory.
"The real issue is how to provide more services of better quality to the poor who need them," she said.
Her Dallas law firm, Locke Liddell & Sapp LLP, didn't keep track of how many free cases she accepted or how many hours she devoted to them, and associates are not aware of her doing so on a frequent basis.
In any event, her pro bono cases were strikingly more private or limited in legal precedent than those taken on by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. when he worked as a lawyer at the Washington law firm of Hogan & Hartson for about 13 years.
In her pro bono work, as in other aspects of her career, Miss Miers left a light mark on matters of great controversy.
*****end of clip*****
This might be the mid of thing you are looking for with regard to Miers work for the little guy.
Nothing elitist about asking the hard questions.
Sorry the source is a Washington Times. Now I must go wash my hands.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 04:05 PM
Scott,
"We on the left have become so afraid of being labelled "elitists" that we lie down while BUsh & Co. stuff our govt. with unqualified hacks."
WE?
Just who do you include in your WE?
You can include me out of that group and I can only say if YOU are included in that group only YOU can change it.
"Those that have spent their professional career as judges tend to forget the real implications of the decisions they make and the impact that they have on regular people."
A very real concern for the real people.
A valid statement as I have one judge, three lawyers and a professor of law in my immediate family.
I am not sure what kind of a point you tried to make but I am sure I disagree with a tongue lashing from parts unknown and unknowing.
Physician, Heal Thyself
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 04:14 PM
Dont forget... Hatch reccomended Ginsburg AND Breyer to Clinton. Please note Bork is STILL Borking himself
Posted by: Paul O'Curry at October 26, 2005 04:35 PM
#34 Jeanne, Justin Raimondo does a good job of informing readers.
#37 micki, I have listened to Matalin defend the snakes and vipers for years. She makes me sick. Maybe 2 years away from her children will bring some humility to head and her children may be better off because she would not be feeding them that the repugnants walk on water.
Even though I lean toward the Democrats, I would be on them like junkyard dogs if they did the same crap that the repugnants are pulling off. A person must live by certain principles. I will not goosestep into hell for anyone.
Maybe the snakes are selling out Matalin because she is expendable. Who is Matalin away? The world will go on with her in prison.
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 04:36 PM
I recommend subscribing to the antiwar.com newsletter.
One of my daily favorites. WAY better than ANY MSM source.
IMHO
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 04:45 PM
I wondered why the Democrats did not want Bork for the Supreme Court. After listening to him I had the feeling that he would overturn the US Constitution if he had his way. He was on television a few years back. The American Nazis want to do away with the Constitution.
Fundamentalists and the evangelicals are not religious groups. They are like Islam, a political idealogue. Religion is a big money-maker for people who prey on people who are not discerning. These so-called religions push their nonsense and people throw money at them. Money will not buy you heaven. Good deeds and love of neighbor are stronger guidelines for heaven.
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 04:48 PM
Being candid, I admit that one of the reasons I am against Harriet Miers sitting on SCOTUS is because George W. Bush is for her. Simple as that.
But, upon further reflection, I believe that she doesn't have what it takes to be a disciplined, fair-minded member of the Supreme Court. Her supporters point to her "firsts" as though they are qualifications for the court. They aren't.
Repub$ often think corporate lawyer$ are the be$t and the smarte$t lawyer$ becau$e they make the mo$t money. Many talented lawyers have spent years as public defenders or as legal counselors, representing clients who would otherwise have little or no access to the courts. However, not one member of the current Supreme Court fits that description.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has done work on womenÕs issues, but other than that, none of the sitting justices has represented individuals or classes of people with grievances against the established order (that I know of).
Miers, to me, has no record to prove she has a sound analytical mind. She has not demonstrated that she can apply lessons of life's experiences (and their legal interpretations) to common-sense applications of the law.
But, at the end of the day, she may be *better* than whoever might be the replacement nominee if she's either not confirmed or withdraws. And that's pathetic!
Posted by: micki at October 26, 2005 04:51 PM
#45 capt is right about antiwar.com.
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 04:52 PM
"Who is Matalin away?"
If your question is sincere click HERE.
She is on BOTH DubyaÕs AND CheneyÕs staff.
One could assume if crimes are being committed she is in the thick of it or at minimum would be a handy conduit for all things nefarious and illegal or a primary player in any cover-up criminal or otherwise.
LotÕs of people in prison have kids. That is what visiting day is for.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 04:55 PM
Gerald, I wouldn't care if Mary Matalin was thrown into the hoosegow with Judas Miller as her cellmate! Oh...for good measure, stick Ann Coulter in there with them.
Posted by: micki at October 26, 2005 05:00 PM
What Reagan Started, Bush Is Finishing
By David Martin
10/26/05 "ICH" -- -- In recent weeks, every morningÕ³ newspaper seems to carry another headline documenting the accelerating tailspin of George BushÕ³ administration into disastrous fiasco. Political pundits may attribute the ongoing self-immolation of George Bush to the general ineptitude of the Mayberry Machiavellis with whom he has surrounded himself.
But there is another, more historically correct explanation for the current presidential unraveling: the disaster that is George Bush is the inevitable culmination of the "revolution" wrought by Ronald Reagan.
The Great Charlatan swept into office proclaiming that government was the problem. If only it got out of the way, the energy, creativity, and entrepreneurial spirit of the private sector would be unleashed and a golden economic age would dawn. A rising tide of affluence would lift all boats, and we would all sail off into a rosy sunset.
Now after eight years of the Gipper, four years of Bush I, eight years of Republican Lite under Clinton, and five years of Shrub, we see the truth of the Reagan Revolution. The gradual withering away of the welfare and regulatory state has not unleashed the American entrepreneurial spirit. Rather, it has set loose the predatory greed of the 19th century robber barons, the class cannibalism of Social Darwinism, and the winner-take-all rapacity of laissez faire capitalism.
*****end of clip*****
I believe this guy has about the same take on things as I do, I am not as able to express myself but have tried once or twice and WISH it came out more like the linked piece.
The clip is weak compared to the whole piece.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 05:02 PM
Oh, oh! It's pay back time! Sununu sinks the shiv.
Posted by: micki at October 26, 2005 05:13 PM
Mr. Corn:
I have never posted here before, and may not again, but believe some things need to be said.
I am not a Republican or a Democrat, but an Independent. It seems to me that it might be wise for all citizens concerned about the future of the country, given what we now think we know about the course of this (Plame) investigation.
The Meirs nomination may, in fact, be a moot point. We may see her nomination held up if there is any question about the role of the WH itself or her own role in "Plame", or if she participated in asking federal judges to quash the pending indictments (...am sure you all know how to find your way to that info).
And if some are correct, Fitzgerald may just be the breath of fresh air (and democracy) which it has been obvious the country needs for some time.
This particular issue has the potential of spiraling outwards into much larger arenas, depending on how far Fitzgerald wants to pursue it, and neither major party has much to recommend it to the citizenry in terms of probity, rectitude, or concern for the national interest. If it does expand, there will be serious political, international, and social consequences for us all, regardless of party affilition. "Liberals" and "Conservatives" both, and members of the Democrats would be well advised to examine their own conduct as it applies to the conduct of "business-as-usual" in Washington, and make some hard choices about what they want to do in the near- and mid-term future to help rectify the situation. Based on past performance, I am not overly optomistic...
BUT... for the individual citizen and family, Gerald (et.al.) got it right: "More distraction from the economic tsunami headed our way, sure it will be fun to see those crooks in cuffs and doing the perp walk but in reality when you are broke and wondering how to house, clothe, and feed your family this will all seem to be petty and small by comparison."
And ... thank you, also Gerald, for your mention of Veterans Day. I'm a disabled vet myself, and many of them (not me) receive way too little recognition for their service, beyond some glad-handing politician showing up when there's a camera handy, to shake hands vigorously and "Thank them for their service...", before they return to Washington to cut their benefits again.
You are correct, by the way, in your assertion..." PS Rumsfeld's no soldier."
Posted by: Et Tu Brute? at October 26, 2005 05:15 PM
Correction: I beg your pardon... didn't realize until I posted that the poster was at the bottom... Posted by: What the F**k was the source for the economic forecast... Timothy Petition for the snip about Rummy, and Veteran's Day. My Apologies...
Posted by: Et Tu Brute? at October 26, 2005 05:23 PM
#49 capt, Matalin must walk on water like her repugnant friends.
#50 micki picture Matalin. Miller, and Coulter in the same prison cell. Can you imagine what kind of bitch sessions they are having. Having Barbara Bush for a bunk mate would complete these tea sessions in that blood soaked tea bags are served at high tea time.
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 05:25 PM
Grand Jury in CIA Leak Case Adjourns
By PETE YOST and JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writers
31 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The federal grand jury investigating the leak of a CIA officer's identity met for three hours Wednesday with Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald and his deputies, adjourning for the day without announcing any action.
Fitzgerald is known to be putting the finishing touches on a two-year criminal probe that has ensnared President Bush's top political adviser Karl Rove and Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis Libby.
Away from the federal courthouse, FBI agents conducted a handful of last-minute interviews to check facts key to the case.
After the grand jury left for the day, federal prosecutors conferred for about an hour in the grand jury area of the federal courthouse.
There was no word on whether Fitzgerald planned to make any announcement or when the grand jury planned to meet again.
Fitzgerald and the grand jurors entered the courthouse around 9 a.m. EDT, with just three days left before the jury's term is set to expire. The timing on any decision is uncertain, however. It is possible for Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan to extend the life of the grand jury at Fitzgerald's request. Such a step would be taken in secret.
Lawyers representing key White House officials expected Fitzgerald to decide this week whether to charge Libby and Rove.
Rove and Libby joined other officials Wednesday at the daily White House senior staff meeting, as usual. Libby has been on crutches after breaking a bone in his foot.
Fitzgerald could charge one or more administration aides with violating a law prohibiting the intentional unmasking of an undercover CIA officer.
The prosecutor has also examined other possible crimes such as mishandling classified information, false statements and obstruction of justice.
Fitzgerald has been in Washington since Monday and over the last two days dispatched FBI agents to conduct some 11th-hour interviews, according to lawyers close to the investigation, who also spoke on condition of anonymity.
*****end of clip*****
More at the linked piece!
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 05:27 PM
Vampires
Here is another view of American Nazis and American Taliban.
I had a dream about the people who voted for bush. They were dipping cotton balls on the fresh blood of our soldiers and Iraqis who were killed. They wrapped these cotton balls in gauze and tied it with strings; they placed these blood soaked cotton balls in the refrigerator to be used as tea bags at some later tea hour with other vampires. I view bushÕ³ electorate as blood-sucking vampires.
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 05:29 PM
Chris Methews(great slip)seems to get it. I,ve grown used to in depth news from here and a few other blogs and the MSM is finally acting like they read the blogs(news). Huffpo and here and the links ya'all provide seem to be batting about 1000%. Hm? I can't really think of anything us libs have said that isn't being outed as correct. Hm? Kinda scary when the conspiracy whackos are right on almost all their premises. Could conclusions also be true if they are based on facts? Hi to all you cornbloggers. I've been around a while and now have arrived at a my blog id/ Dubendorf
Posted by: Dubendorf at October 26, 2005 05:36 PM
Lee Bailey Hutcninson belongs to the It gender. She's not male and she's not female.
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 05:40 PM
"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population." Israel Koenig, "The Koenig Memorandum"
"One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail." -- Rabbi Yaacov Perrin, Feb. 27, 1994 [Source: N.Y. Times, Feb. 28, 1994, p. 1]
"We Jews, we are the destroyers and will remain the destroyers. Nothing you can do will meet our demands and needs. We will forever destroy because we want a world of our own." (You Gentiles, by Jewish Author Maurice Samuels, p. 155).
"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours... Everything we don't grab will go to them." Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998.
"We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves." Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983.
"The Palestinians" would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls." " Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988
Posted by: James Ha at October 26, 2005 05:48 PM
#50
Oh Micki,
My powers of imagination are way too strong for that image. I can't stop giggling.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 05:57 PM
#55
Stop Gerald. I can't stand it.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 06:05 PM
You guys got me started. Gales of laughter.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 06:10 PM
Implosion?
Bush's October Surprise
By Tom Engelhardt
Those in the anti-fascist struggle of the 1930s who went off to fight in the Spanish Civil War were later termed "premature antifascists." Perhaps, in the same spirit, I might be considered a premature Bush-administration implodist.
*****end of clip*****
Too good for a clip. The Tom Dispatch is always worth the cost of the ride!
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 06:13 PM
Workers Win Fair Wages as Bush Backs off Davis-Bacon Suspension
Oct. 26th - response to working families and their unions, as well as community and religious groups and some members of Congress, President George W. Bush on Oct. 26 rescinded his executive order that allowed contractors to pay substandard wages to construction workers rebuilding Gulf Coast areas devastated by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The order, which suspended the federal Davis-Bacon Act, now will expire Nov. 8.
Grassroots activists sent more than 350,000 e-mails and letters to their representatives demanding fair wages be reinstated for the Gulf Coast, where skilled, full-time workers average less than $20,000 a year in pay.
One of Bush's first acts after Hurricane Katrina hit was suspending Davis-Bacon. Enacted in 1931, Davis-Bacon ensures high-quality work standards and community prevailing wage requirements for federally funded rebuilding projects. A few days after suspending Davis-Bacon, Bush also suspended affirmative action rules for Katrina contractors.
"President Bush has done the right thing by reversing his decision to suspend prevailing wage but it is only the first step. He must now reinstate affirmative action requirements for contractors in the Gulf and end his attempts to slash programs for working families while adding new tax breaks for the rich," says AFL-CIO President John Sweeney.
Thirty-seven House Republicans urged the White House to reverse the suspension, and Rep. George Miller led unanimous opposition by Democrats to the presidentÕ³ suspension.
*****end of clip*****
More good news!
If pressure from the Plame investigation has contributed to this I think we all owe the criminals? I would never think that the outing of a CIA agent could end up forcing a reverse but there is no reason for suspension other than greed.
"Now he must reinstate affirmative action requirements for contractors in the Gulf and end his attempts to slash programs for working families while adding new tax breaks for the rich we will keep working on that and, of course, ask you to do your part." (from AFL-CIO "Working Families e-Activist email)
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 06:27 PM
"I have never posted here before, and may not again, but believe some things need to be said."
Et Tu, don't be such a stranger. I think you might have alot to share on here with like-minded bloggers. C'mon back now, ya hear?
Posted by: Alan at October 26, 2005 06:27 PM
Four sorrows ... are certain to be visited on the United States.
Their cumulative effect guarantees that the U.S. will cease to resemble the country outlined in the Constitution of 1787.
First, there will be a state of perpetual war, leading to more terrorism against Americans wherever they may be and a spreading reliance on nuclear weapons among smaller nations as they try to ward off the imperial juggernaut.
Second is a loss of democracy and Constitutional rights as the presidency eclipses Congress and is itself transformed from a co-equal 'executive branch' of government into a military junta.
Third is the replacement of truth by propaganda, disinformation, and the glorification of war, power, and the military legions.
Lastly, there is bankruptcy, as the United States pours its economic resources into ever more grandiose military projects and shortchanges the education, health, and safety of its citizens.": Chalmers Johnson, Sorrows of Empire
=
To read this newsletter online http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/ or http://snipurl.com/ayzc
*****
Thanks ICH!
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 07:05 PM
I've been reading, semi-lurking and skimming thru comments (not much time lately). Some really informative links and posts.
#65 is news that warms my heart.
Posted by: Andrea at October 26, 2005 07:12 PM
#62 Jeanne, in life we need some laughter. The repugnants just keep feeding us the comic material.
Lee Bailey Hutchinson makes a stupid comment on perjury and obstruction of justice and when people call her on her stupidity, she says that her statements were misconstrued. Lee Bailey Hutchinson is a low-life creature.
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 07:17 PM
As I am posting, I hear that the government is spending billions of dollars to protect us. The problem is how do we protect ourselves from each other. Unless hatred, killing, torture, and wars are removed from our mind set, we will always have that insecure feeling.
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 07:23 PM
Hatred, killing, torture, and wars beget hatred, killing, torture, and wars. They feed on each other and you cannot be positive with such a mind set.
Posted by: Gerald at October 26, 2005 07:26 PM
PEACE TAKES COURAGE
WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES - CAREFUL
Another head hangs lowly
Child is slowly taken
And the violence caused such silence
Who are we mistaken
But you see it's not me,
It's not my family
In your head, in your
head they are fighting
With their tanks and their bombs
And their bombs and their guns
In your head
In your head they are cryin'
In your head
Zombie
What's in your head, in your head
Zombie
Another mother's breakin'
Heart is taking over
When the violence causes silence
We must be mistaken
It's the same old theme since 1916
In your head,
In your head they're still fightin'
With their tanks
In your head they are dyin'
In your head, in your head
Zombie
What's in your head, in your head
Zombie
~ Cranberries "Zombie"
*****end of clip*****
A VERY moving flash. Nearly had me in tears.
Our local silent candlelight vigil to honor our fallen heroes will have us meeting up at 6:30.
If you are joining in the vigil in your area watch this before you go.
WE MUST DEMAND THE TRUTH!
This whole mess is no game and people have died. Our? Theirs? Thousands upon thousands and these deaths cannot be justified by any more lies.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 07:38 PM
Have some tissue handy.
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 07:45 PM
It is characteristic of the military mentality that nonhuman factors (atom bombs, strategic bases, weapons of all sorts, the possession of raw materials, etc) are held essential, while the human being, his desires, and thoughts - in short, the psychological factors - are considered as unimportant and secondary...The individual is degraded...to "human materiel".
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?
Mahatma Gandhi (1869 - 1948), "Non-Violence in Peace and War"
Any excuse will serve a tyrant.
Aesop (620 BC - 560 BC), The Wolf and the Lamb
American foreign policy must be more than the management of crisis. It must have a great and guiding goal: to turn this time of American influence into generations of democratic peace.
George W. Bush (1946 - ), speech, November 19, 1999
It's a time of sorrow and sadness when we lose a loss of life.
George W. Bush (1946 - ), Bushisms
See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.
George W. Bush (1946 - ), http://www.whitehouse.gov
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 08:04 PM
There is one aspect about the Miers appointment that David does not mention, which is that Bush may have a deep ulterior (maybe not so ulterior) motive in nominating Miers: to wit, he feels certain that she would be uncompromising in upholding the powers of the Executive Branch in any case or decision that may affect the status of his office. He already enjoyes her fawning fealty. In less polite terms, in Miers he may be looking to enhance his imperial powers to the detriment of the other branches.
If this hypothesis is true, than the simple issue of strict constructionism as opposed to judicial activism is not enough to make a decision. We have to factor in the question of how much risk to we want to take placing on the court someone who may well have the swing vote in vastly expanding the powers of the Executive over the Legislative and Judicial Branches.
I personally believe Bush is trying to upset the checks and balances built into the Constution, and everthing he has done in office so far indicates an overriding interest in a Pax Bushiana. Simply put, he wants to be emperor. For this reason, on balance, as a liberal and a believer in the check and balances envisioned by the Constitution, I would oppose the nomination of Miers.
Posted by: oracle at October 26, 2005 08:32 PM
Robert,
I believe you're the one who likes Ann Coulter as much as I do. Here's an observation.
Killing America with Her Stiletto Heels
Enjoy.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 10:04 PM
http://www.overspun.com/images/Coulter.Alien.jpg
Posted by: capt at October 26, 2005 10:17 PM
John Conyers what the dude... he used "TraitorGate" and he also has a good way to build public opinion on "Beyond Bush" (BB) thinking... we can't just focus on the fall, but we need to focus on the reconstruction...
Sign his petition to George Bush to not do any pardons for traitorgate.
Posted by: yelnats at October 26, 2005 10:26 PM
Ann Coulter says poverty doesn't affect a community's crime. I know this is old, but Ann is in the news again.
I thought Bill Maher did a good job of driving to the point with Coulter. Is it genetics, that blacks cause crime? Ann: No. Is it because of poverty? Ann: No Then what is it Ann? Bill Maher editorialize that he can't help but think that repub conservatives are subconciously racists.
The one big reason that there are now many white republicans in the south when there once was a ton of white democrats is "race", or more precisely civil rights and the whole dixiecrat movement. When Truman said that interstate buses could not be segregated when traveling through southern states and when he said the army had to remove segregation... they went nuts and became dixiecrats until Goldwater woo'd them to be fiscally conservative repubs joining the northern industrialists and the big uniting of oppression by race and by money swung into action.
Posted by: yelnats at October 26, 2005 10:46 PM
Exibit A
Mier thinks "the president is the smartest man she ever met."
I rest my case.
Posted by: Damn_Em at October 26, 2005 10:53 PM
Ann Coulter is like a robot. There is just something really not right about her. She is almost mesmerizing in her freakiness.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 11:13 PM
#80
Yeah, I'm still reeling from that one too.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 11:14 PM
Headline at Rawstory--
Fitz rents more office space across the steat from his HQ. Wonder if he's hiring...
Posted by: ripple at October 26, 2005 11:36 PM
Raw Story is reporting that there are serious problems in the areas hit by Wilma. FEMA is fucking up again.
Raw reporter, in hurricane zone, says situation extremely dire
Posted by: Jeanne at October 26, 2005 11:41 PM
Coulter is right where she belongs as one of Stepford bunnies that work for Fox
Posted by: Damn_Em at October 27, 2005 12:06 AM
"repub conservatives are subconciously racists."
Many (if not most) are not so "sub".
Yelnats - Signed and sent!
Not being mean but look at Ann "the man" Coulters neck, below her chin that is an adams apple not a thyroid. , Here, Here or Here.
This one is a classic: Here.
She is a real piece of work.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 27, 2005 12:07 AM
ann coulter is a man
Posted by: James Ha at October 27, 2005 12:14 AM
http://www.blondesense.net/dollad.jpg
I am very uplifted!
When I signed up for the candlelight vigil only three others had signed up. There must have been nearly a hundred! Maybe more I was not counting just floored.
BTW - the reason it was a silent vigil is because it invited all sides so no signs or speeches. Just candles.
Seemed to me the whole bunch was very American and a strong showing of people in uniform and lots of "support the troops" ribbons. None had the requisite "W" bumper stickers of days gone by.
Bunnypants has lost his base in the ABQ.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 27, 2005 12:30 AM
I was a no show at the vigil, sad to say. My daughter volunteers on Wednesday and she was late.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 27, 2005 12:57 AM
Ann Coulter is a man?
Posted by: Jeanne at October 27, 2005 12:59 AM
#83
Here's the link.
New Information: First the Website, Now the New Office Space
Patrick Fitzgerald's intermediaries denied that there was any significance to the establishment of a new website, minimalist as it is, for the Office of the Special Counsel which is investigating the "outing" of Valerie Plame Wilson's covert CIA responsibilities to the media.
Fitzgerald's people said that the investigation coming to a close and the website going up was just coincidence.
Well, news has just reached TWN that Patrick Fitzgerald is expanding not only into a new website -- but also into more office space.
Fitzgerald's office is at 1400 New York Avenue, NW, 9th Floor in Washington.
What I have learned is that the Office of the Special Counsel has signed a lease this week for expanded office space across the street at 1401 New York Avenue, NW.
Another coincidence? More office space needed to shut down the operation?
I think not. Fitzgerald's operation is expanding.
-- Steve Clemons
Posted by: Jeanne at October 27, 2005 01:07 AM
#86
Regarding this "M"ann Coulter, the quote on your one classic pic reminds me of the quotes I hear from 'orthodox' christians criticizing the americanized form... "you make others die for your faith, we die for our faith".
Posted by: yelnats at October 27, 2005 01:23 AM
I had this same idea some weeks ago:
Posted by: Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) at October 27, 2005 04:40 AM
The difference is between Ginsberg and a conservative dedicated to overturning Roe V Wade is that the majority of Americans do not want to see Roe V Wade overturned. Thus, it is politically difficult for conservatives in swing states to oppose a qualified SCOTUS nominee based on Roe V Wade. However, selling a nominee who though otherwise qualified, is dedicated to overturning Roe V Wade is a difficult political sell because of the voter backlash it will create. The GOP has the problem of an ideological base deeply committed to a minority position. To please its base, the GOP has to cross the majority. They risk pissing off the all important independents who tend to be anti-government and against government interference in personal decisions and that includes abortion. Abortion as an issue only works for the GOP if they can use it to energize their base while finessing the independents with a wink and a nod that they really won't alter the status quo.
Posted by: bakho at October 27, 2005 11:17 AM
David, not much gets by you, and I apologize if you've gone over this.In attempting to minimize the damage done, and denigrate Fitzpatrick, hate radio and a host of talking heads keep saying nobody was indicted on the original charge,which was covered under the IIPA.The IIPA was NEVER mentioned in the AG's letter to Fitzpatrick to investigate "The unauthorized disclosure of a CIA agents identity, which could be prosecuted under a number of laws. The subsequent Feb. 2004 letter from the AG's office, clarified fuether, that Fitzpatrick could investigate and indict for perjury, obstruction of justice, and intimidating a witness.
Posted by: Jim at October 31, 2005 07:46 PM