Mr. David Corn,

Yes, and you nailed it before by exposing the weakness and lack of strategy on the part of the opposition as a whole.

I think Byrd really throws a stick in the spokes. What kind of a hero is he?

Chirac's comments were laughable (if nukes were not so serious).

I dig your take on the tunnel. Makes me wonder (as always) why not legalize weed?

Thanks

Kirk

David:

Good morning on this gorgeous Friday here in Houston!

Anyone who follows the braod spectrum of news, not just Antique Media and Left-wing blogs, caught wind of Chirac's nuclear declaration of future wars! I was kinda wondering when the ruckus was going to start. Had Bush and Co. said something to that effect, well, you know what the reactions of the Left, and even moderates, would have!

As for Alito, your idea of a frontal assault based on total honesty (ideology) probably would have worked better but not necessarily a different result.

The dems BOTCHED it? HA, that's a laugh!! They didn't botch anything, they do what they're told. I'm still waiting for even one leading dem to make a stand against the outrageous diebold rigged voting scandal. The proof is irrefutable, yet not a word from any of them, not even kerry who got srewed out of the WH. Don't hold your breath waiting for those bought off assholes to prevent this handbasket from roaring straight into hell, it's already gone off the cliff!

This was my last post on the previous thread, didn't notice the new one in time.

Osama and the J. Edgar Hoover Memorial Vacuum Cleaner

Kurt Nimmo | January 26 2006

Osama, dead and buried, is the reason George Bush and the NSA are snooping your daughter's cell phone calls to her boyfriend, or reading your email, disregarding the Constitution, and turning America into an Orwellian police state. All of this is necessary because, who knows, your neighbor might be a member of a sleeper cell or a vegetarian.

Bush tells us the Bill of Rights must be sacrificed because Al-Qaeda has placed operatives inside of our country. They blend in with the civilian population. They get their orders from overseas. And then they emerge to strike from within. Never mind that since nine eleven not one Al-Qaeda terrorist has been apprehended and convicted of plotting against the United States.

None of this snooping has anything to do with terrorism. It has to do with American citizens opposed to the Bush administration and the mass murder schemes of the Straussian neocons. Over the last several months, it has been revealed that the FBI, the Pentagon and the National Security Agency have each set up apparently independent covert operations to monitor the constitutionally protected political activities of citizens opposed to the Bush, explains Joel Bleifuss. The FBI has issued tens of thousands of national security letters, extending the bureau's reach as never before into the telephone calls, correspondence and financial lives of ordinary Americans. Most of the U.S. residents and citizens whose records were screened, the FBI acknowledged, were not suspected of wrongdoing, the Washington Post reported.

According to information released under a FOIA request, the FBI's targets included people involved in a vegan community project in Indianapolis, the Catholic Worker movement and its semi-communistic ideology, Code Pink, the anti-war coalition United for Peace and Justice, Greenpeace and attendees of the Third National Organizing Conference on Iraq, which was held at Stanford University in May 2005. According to the documents, in some cases the FBI received information about those under surveillance from informers within the targeted groups. In other words, COINTELPRO is alive and well and sifting through your credit card and medical records.

It has nothing to do with the dead Osama bin Laden and everything to do with books written by people such as William Blum, books we are absurdly told are on Osama's reading list. Of course, most Americans don't care about such things and a startling large number of them believe there is nothing wrong with the government violating the Fourth Amendment. Obviously, millions of Americans have no use for the Constitution. In fact, millions of Americans believe the Bill of Rights is an excuse for terrorists to attack America. It took more than a hundred years to get the populace in this state of ignorance. Now they are beginning to pay for it.
----------
Newsflash to bill, they are breaking the law by violating the 4th amendment, if there even IS such a thing anymore. Osama is dead and AL-CIADA is a neocon fabrication used to keep gullible cowards like you under control.

The Nanny Press

This says it all!

Gen. Hayden: "4th Amendment and wrong"

Keith Olbermann posted this video clip of Gen. Hayden botching the fourth amendment- which Keith says:

OLBERMANN: To quote the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in its entirety, the one the general and the NSA folks are so familiar with and know is about reasonableness and not about probable cause, quote, "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 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."

Well, maybe they have a different Constitution over there at the NSA.

Video-WMP Video-QT (hat tip Arnie)

This also helped to open the door for Glenn Greenwald to expose them on FISA.

Glenn: "In other words, DeWine's bill, had it become law, would have eliminated the "probable cause" barrier (at least for non-U.S. persons) which the Administration is now pointing to as the reason why it had to circumvent FISA...read on"

*****end of clip*****

Keith nailed him! Glenn waxed 'em and taxed 'em!

capt

Jacques Chirac was probably just asserting his -- and, by extension, European -- independence from the United States of Bush. Chirac was "being French" -- and I believe that he was suggesting that France's nuclear force was, essentially, the European Union's nuclear force.

Chiarc's remark was no dumber than a lot of the bullying rhetoric that spews out of bush's mouth.

Capt, you are WAY too concerned with your "precious civil rights!!" Quote by timL

I usually reserve the "waxed and taxed" for Pande - I really liked the cat toying with a mouse metaphor!

I hope Pande always find a little time to share his POV and insights. I find it hard to believe any self-respecting troll would ever come back after a Pande waxing. But there are no self-respecting trolls - an oxymoronic statement without a doubt.

Thanks Pande! as always you RAWK!

capt

...and since we're on the topic of nuculur options (both weapons & filibusters)...

Someone needs to formulate a clear, concise, convincing message that because of the mistakes the busheviks have made with their Iraqi War, a direct result is that the United States' position in dealing with Iran has been severely weakened.

If that case is made, the neocons are OUT!

"Chirac's remark was no dumber than a lot of the bullying rhetoric that spews out of bush's mouth."

I think you are being too kind to Busheney!

Chirac would have to study at the university of dumbf**k many semesters to sound as dumber than Busheney.

I think you are right about the assertion.

IMHO

capt

Title: BY THE WAY AN AIRCRAFT FLEW INTO THE WORLD TRADE CENTRE
Source: Cooperative Research via Bella Ciao
URL Source: http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=10084
Published: Jan 26, 2006
Author: Cooperative Research

Excerpted from the groundbreaking research "An interesting day : President Bush's Movements and Actions on 9/11 http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/...

Cooperative Research .org has compiled a most extraordinary summary of post 9/11 White House Spin. One article they dug up from the "liberal" Washington Times 10/7/2 includes the following ditty : " Bush claims Andy Card told him the following : " Here's what you are going to be doing , you're going to meet so and so. BY THE WAY AN AIRCRAFT FLEW INTO THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. " (end quote) Isn't that the equivalent of asking Mrs. Lincoln , by the way, how was the play?

There are nine differing versions on how President Bush received the news that Flight 11 had smashed into the World Trade Center, the first of three fatal attacks taking place on 9/11.

1) Mr. Bush was notified while he was en route to Booker Elementary.

2) Navy Captain Deborah Lower notified him as he arrived at the school

3) The aforementioned "by the way" remark allegedly made by Andy Card.

4) Mr. Card tells the President upon arrival at Booker that it is urgent for him to speak to NSC advisor Condi Rice immediately. (5) Bush personal aide Blake Gottesman tells Bush "By the way Andy Card says an aircraft flew into the the World Trade Center."

6 ) Karl Rove greets Mr. Bush as he disembarks from his motorcade , leads him to a room in the school , tells him the horrible news whereby the President responds "What a terrible accident." !

7) Mr. Bush claims he saw the first plane hit the Tower (an impossibilty) from a TV set at Booker Elementary and said "That's one terrible pilot." 8) Realising that he has strayed from the party line , he immediately corrects himself by stating " I said it must have been a horrible accident. "
------------
You would think they would all get together to AGREE on a lie before turning that idiot puppet loose! Allowing him to hang out at the school was another stupid move. As Mike Rivero says, "the dog that didn't bark!"

Hawking Iran

President Bush's rhetoric toward Iran has been strikingly similar to his rhetoric in the run-up to war against Iraq. For example, in July 2004 he said"

"They're harboring Al Qaeda leadership there. And we've asked that they be turned over to their respective countries. Secondly, they've got a nuclear weapons program that they need to dismantle. We're working with other countries to encourage them to do so. Thirdly, they've got to stop funding terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah that create great dangers in parts of the world.

And don’t forget that Bush named Iran, along with Iraq and North Korea, as a member of the "axis of evil."

Certainly, the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran is unsettling and unwelcome. But even if Iran is able to build a few weapons in the near future, the mullahs in Tehran can no more ignore the reality of deterrence and the vast U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal than could the Soviet Union before, or North Korea now.

So, striking Iran would be as big of a mistake as invading Iraq. Attacking another Muslim country would only reinforce the claim that the U.S. war on terrorism is a wider war against the Muslim world. And while the Iranians would unlikely be able to retaliate militarily, they could chose to use their ties to terrorist groups as a response. Worse yet, the result could be to push the terrorist groups that Iran supports into an alliance with Al Qaeda and other radical Islamic groups against a common enemy: the United States. So attacking Iran—even limited air strikes against its nuclear facilities—would make the terrorist threat against America worse.

I think you are being too kind to Busheney!

...well, that certainly wasn't my intention! I can be "unkinder" if you'd like! ;-)

"to sound as dumber than Busheney"

That passed my proof read - Now I sound as dumber as Busheney! HA!

Sounded almost like I was intentionally making a funny. . . I wish! HA!

capt

US economy up at slowest pace in three years in fourth quarter

WASHINGTON, Jan. 27 (Xinhuanet) -- The U.S. economy increased at an annual rate of 1.1 percent in the last quarter of 2005, the slowest pace in three years, the Commerce Department reported on Friday.

The report also showed that U.S. economy registered respectable overall growth of 3.5 percent for all of 2005, compared with an increase of 4.2 percent in the previous year.

The sharp slowdown of the U.S. economy in the fourth quarter resulted mainly from the fact that consumers turned cautious as high energy prices and rising borrowing costs took their toll budgets. U.S. consumer spending increased by just 1.1 percent pace in the fourth quarter, the slowest since the second quarter of 2001 when the U.S.economy was suffering through a recession.

Most of the weakness came as consumers sharply cut back on purchases of durable goods including cars and appliances. Spending on durable goods dropped by a hefty 17.5 percent rate in the final quarter, the sharpest decline since the first quarter of 1987.

*****end of clip*****

I could have sworn I heard some very happy talk about the economy. Must have been the delusions of someone detacted from reality. No biggie.

capt

Capt, I thought that was on purpose! Sort of a jab at the chimp!

A Factual Appraisal Of The 'Holocaust' By The Red Cross

Kathleen, this could be one of the reasons the Iranian Pres. made such a bold comment regarding "a myth that has grown around the Holocaust." I have read several articles about the Red Cross and their findings while inspecting the concentration camps. Rather than starting a reactionary round of anti-semite accusations, I prefer to read these reports and look into both sides of the matter. People are being sent to prison over this and I want to know why. It is the only subject you aren't allowed to touch or question, it has become like a religion where the dogma is fathfully preached and no veering away is permitted. What the Red Cross has to say is very interesting.

I think it was before WW I that France talked about the Amagano (spell) Line to serve as a buffer to keep out the invading forces. Such line or a wall or a fence will not work for France and it will not work for the USA. Our government needs to work with governments so that the governments give their people hope for a better life. As long as people believe Nazi America is a paradise, they will try to get here somehow or some place.

The Democrats' threat of a filibuster is all for blowing and showing.

The Republican Party Has NO Conservative Roots
Al Benson Jr.

When the Republican Party ran its first presidential candidate, John C. Fremont, back in 1856, Fremont had the open backing of several men who were socialist refugees from the failed socialist revolts in Europe in 1848. One of the most well-known of these was Friedrich Hassaurek, an Austrian socialist, who stumped the Midwest in Fremont's behalf.

Although Fremont was beaten in 1856, the socialists and communists were nothing if not patient. In 1860 they found another candidate they could and did support--Abraham Lincoln. So Hassaurek, Carl Schurz, and a whole host of other Forty-Eighter socialists were all involved in the presidential campaign of 1860 supporting Mr. Lincoln. Carl Wittke, author of "Refugees of Revolution" has noted that: "Lincoln was fully aware of the political influence of the Forty-Eighters in the campaign of 1860, in presuading many of their countrymen to desert the Democratic alliegiance for the Republicans..." It would appear that the Forty-Eighters had quite a bit of influence in the Republican convention in 1860--even to helping to write parts of the party's platform.
---------
I love finding little historical nuggets like this! Republicans, the original American Communists. They have finally gotten back to their roots.

What about the timing of this judicial appointment by the busheviks?

Noel Hillman, the prosecutor heading up the Abramoff investigation, has been appointed by bush for a judgeship on the U.S. District Court in New Jersey. That means Hillman stepped down as prosector on the Jackoff Case.

This could be construed as tampering with an investigation, it seems to me.

But, I am not a lawyer (today).

The Maginot Line - from the Smithsonian Magazine

Gerald, here is an article you might find interesting.

"Faith in the ability of a leader is of slight service unless it be united with faith in his justice." ~ George Goethals (1858 - 1928)

"Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other." ~ John F. Kennedy (1917 - 1963), speech prepared for delivery in Dallas the day of his assassination, November 22, 1963

Quotationspage.com

Poll: Most think Bush is failing second term

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A majority of Americans are more likely to vote for a candidate in November's congressional elections who opposes President Bush, and 58 percent consider his second term a failure so far, according to a poll released Thursday.
_____________
Hellllllloooooooooo!!! Why are the Dems still afraid of their shadows??

Conservatives are not conservative, neocons are neo-liberals and trotskites.

Progressives are the only fiscal conservatives.

It only makes sense in our topsy-turvy crazy upside down bass ackward world!

"Don't let people drive you crazy when you know it's in walking distance." ~ Unknown

capt

Caroline,

I think the polls could be 99 to 1 and the two headed snake would still vacillate between two frauds.

Some thoughts from H L Mencken:

I believe that all government is evil, and that trying to improve it is largely a waste of time.

The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office.

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

The typical lawmaker of today is a man devoid of principle--a mere counter in a grotesque and knavish game. If the right pressure could be applied to him he would be cheerfully in favor of polygamy, astrology, or cannibalism.

Moral certainty is always a sign of cultural inferiority. The more uncivilized the man, the surer he is that he knows precisely what is right and what is wrong. All human progress, even in morals, has been the work of men who have doubted the current moral values, not of men who have whooped them up and tried to enforce them. The truly civilized man is always skeptical and tolerant, in this field as in all others. His culture is based on "I am not too sure."

The theory behind representative government is that superior men--or at all events, men not inferior to the average in ability and integrity--are chosen to manage the public business, and that they carry on this work with reasonable intelligence and honesty. There is little support for that theory in the known facts...

Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule--and both commonly succeed, and are right... The United States has never developed an aristocracy really disinterested or an intelligentsia really intelligent. Its history is simply a record of vacillations between two gangs of frauds.

****

And there you go!

capt

#23 micki, thank you for the spelling of Maginot. The article was an interesting read. Governments can better serve their citizens by working to improve the quality of life. Why has our animalistic nature taken over our humanistic nature?

Two more because they are so on point:

"The kind of man who wants the government to adopt and enforce his ideas is always the kind of man whose ideas are idiotic."

"The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression."

~ Henry Louis Mencken (1880-1956)
U. S. Editor and Critic.

*****

Hard to believe the guy passed 50 years ago.

Maybe everything is different in the same ways or the same in different ways. Sure seems like politicians and politics have not changed very much and not for the better.

capt

capt, that summarizes Nazi America and both political parties are gangs of fraud.

capt, the more things change, the more they remain the same.

Nazi America is so predictable. It is a garbage in and a horseshit out kind of nation.

Support a Filibuster of Samuel Alito

Senator John Kerry will join Senator Ted Kennedy in attempting to filibuster the confirmation vote of Samuel Alito. A lifetime appointment as crucial as this one deserves a throrough debate by the full Senate, and that's the goal of this effort.

For this to work, 41 senators must join the Democratic filibuster. Most Republicans and a few conservative Democrats have already pledged to vote for Alito, so getting to 41 won't be easy. Every single Democrat could end up casting the last crucial vote—°nd this is the moment for us to weigh in.

Tell your senator(s) to join the effort

*****end of clip*****

Hurry and send this one out. Time is getting short!

capt

I can't help but wonder how much leadership does Kerry have if he cannot lead 41 from the party he claims to lead?

Not to say he would be worse than Busheney just wondering if he would have been any better?

There would be some different considerations and some different priorities with regard to issues but overall? I think he might have actually pissed me off even more than Busheney - I would feel more duped.

Just sayin'

capt

Too late assholes!

Planted Articles May Be Violation

WASHINGTON — A secret U.S. military program that pays Iraqi newspapers to publish articles favorable to the American mission appears to violate a 2003 Pentagon directive, according to a newly declassified document released Thursday.

The information campaign run by U.S. troops in Baghdad and a Washington-based private contractor is the subject of a high-level military investigation. Last month, the top U.S. general in Iraq said a preliminary investigation into the program had found it did not violate U.S. law or Pentagon regulations.

"We concluded that we were operating within our authorities and the appropriate legal procedures. And so we have not suspended any of the processes up to now," Army Gen. George W. Casey told reporters then.

A secret directive on the Pentagon's information operations policy released Thursday, however, appears to prohibit U.S. troops from conducting psychological operations, or psy-ops, targeting the media.

"Psy-op is restricted by both DoD [Department of Defense] policy and executive order from targeting American audiences, our military personnel and news agencies or outlets," says the directive, dated Oct. 30, 2003, and signed by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

The document, titled "Information Operations Roadmap," was released by the National Security Archive, a research institution based at George Washington University that obtained it under the Freedom of Information Act.

A Pentagon spokesman did not return calls seeking comment.

But one senior Pentagon official said that based on the wording in the directive, the operation seemed to violate Pentagon policy.

*****end of clip*****

Jeeze, the shoes are dropping like raindrops from a desert cloudburst. Amazing to think the GOPhers could conduct a thousand investigations under Clinton but cannot address even a handful under Busheney?

capt

capt,

Unfortunately, it's not going to happen. The Senate is filled with cowards, Democratic and Republican alike. (I am glad to count one of my senators, Carl Levin, among filibuster supporters.) This had nothing to do with Alito's qualifications and everything to do with his judicial philosophy (especially his positions on the power of the executive branch and choice). That is all they had to say; my take is they had nothing to lose. And of course, you have the continued institutional humiliation of the Senate by the Bush administration in the NSA scandal.

In the essay I linked yesterday, Gore Vidal, quoting the message Tiberius sent to the craven Roman Senate, summed it up perfectly:

"How eager you are to be slaves."

"We've seen the head of the White House procurement office arrested. We've seen some of our most powerful leaders of both the House and the Senate under federal investigation. We've seen the number of registered lobbyists in Washington double since George Bush came into office. And of course, we've seen the indictment of Jack Abramoff.

Over the past few days, there have been suggestions by Republican operatives and commentators that this is somehow a bipartisan scandal.

But let's be clear - while the Democrats certainly are not without sin when it comes to money in politics, Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon and the K Street project - these are Republican sins, and Republican sins alone.

What is also true is that the offenses involved go beyond Jack Abramoff. They are bigger than golf junkets to Scotland and lavish gifts for lawmakers.

The recent scandals have shaken the very foundation of the American people's faith in a government that will look out for their interests and uphold their values.

Because they don't just lead to morally offensive conduct on the part of politicians. They lead to morally offensive legislation that hurts hardworking Americans."

~ Barack Obama from Meet the Press January 22

Yet a filibuster might rock the boat! HA! Even a filibuster of Alito is just more rearranging the chairs on the Titanic.

OFW

capt

How liberating to be a troll.

No reason to hold back and the flowers that spring from their ineloquent non-verbosity never need tending as they die on the lips of a fool and his folly.

Must be so very easy to just spew without regard to the potential reader. Never concerning ones self with cogency or substance.

Pigs do fly on the wings of foul mouthed trolls, they have snowballs and no balls to impede their flight of fancy and fantasy.

How self fulfilling to operate under the delusion that someone, anyone gives a flying flip what they spew.

Ignorance is truly bliss and I have identified the blissful.

capt

Here I am still dinking aroung with a G%*#& modem! Slopes are waitng.

I told my senator to support a John Kerry filibuster. I told John Kerry that I supported him launching a filibuster..It will probably not be successful, but it is good to see Kerry get loud, finally.

In my opinion the most appropiate talking point should be that the several investigations going on, including the outing of a CIA agent, S. Alito is privy to many and would not recuse himself if any should get to his desk.

But what the fu*# does it matter. I am not certain the human monkey race has the skills necessary for adapting to any of the things that are facing the earth, and the monkey usa government is certainly not going to advance any adaptable behaviors. It was just an illusion that it ever could.

later,
th

Capt,

I agree with you. I think Kerry is just blowing wind so that he looks better come time to make a run for president.

I think we have already been duped.

Here's the problem for the Democrats:.....

it might be time to look at the problem OF the democrats

TH,

Take a few turns for me!

Get out there! The modem is not going anywhere and they have to heal themselves anyway . . .

capt

Please tell me that Kerry isnt going to run for pres again? No vote from me, I am going to waste it and vote for anything that breathes and isn't a repug or dem. Damn they just never learn, why is it that our choices for president seem to always come from the same six hundred skull and bonesmen? Something not right about that?

I hope he doesn't run either, but it's really not up to us.

David

Do you think they made the people who used the tunnel take their shoes off first?

Hi all! anybody heard about when they are going to nuke Texas yet?

Re: Kerry

Go to:

http://www.democrats.com/

On the right column there is a poll. A very small sample but . . .

capt

It's nice to see others are not falling for Kerry's bullshit.

WHO RULES AMERICA

#5
Saladin,
Still wondering why no one reads the newspaper? Great line. They advertise newspapers for their ads and coupons. I find it very insulting when somebody tries to sell me a subscription not on the content of the newspaper but on the money I can save on a freaking coupon.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid admitted on Friday he and fellow Democrats lack the votes to block President George W. Bush's nomination of conservative appeals judge Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"Everyone knows there is not enough votes to support a filibuster," Reid said, referring to the procedural roadblock that some Democrats said should be used to put off a vote on Alito.

The Nevada Democrat said, however, he would vote for such a measure to at least send a message of opposition to the nominee. That vote will come on Monday with final confirmation set for Tuesday.

*****end of clip*****

Sounds like Harry is going to make them vote on the filibuster. That is a good thing because the slugs and DINO's will not be able to hide.

capt

#35
Capt,
Maybe they need Ken Starr to help them.

#47
Gore has my vote. The guy has the courage to tell it like it is.

What are these Democrats so afraid of? My God, they are fighting for their country. The people of the nation will stand behind them. Look at Harry Reid. I never heard of the guy 6 months ago and now I'm screaming "Go Harry!" when I see him on TV. Nobody on the Republican side has damaged his reputation, but he has punched a few holes in their facade.
GO HARRY!

From previous thread #196
Pande,
That video was great. So, so funny. I wish they had interviewed Gerald.
Gerald if you didn't watch it you should. They asked people why George Bush is awesome.

In fact, Gerald, you could be our spokesman. I wouldn't mind.

Say, ummm, yoo hooo. You guys in Congress...yeah you. Read this.

Study Finds Rich-Poor Income Gap Growing

ALBANY, N.Y. - The disparity between rich and poor is growing in America as the federal minimum wage has remained flat for years, union membership has declined and industries have faced global competition, according to a study released Thursday.

The report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Economic Policy Institute, both liberal-leaning think tanks, found the incomes of the poorest 20 percent of families nationally grew by an average of $2,660, or 19 percent, over the past 20 years. Meanwhile, the incomes of the richest fifth of families grew by $45,100, or nearly 59 percent, the study by the Washington-based groups said.

Families in the middle fifth saw their incomes rise 28 percent, or $10,218.

The figures, based on U.S. Census data, compare the average growth from 1980-82 to 2001-03, after adjusting for inflation.

The poorest one-fifth of families, the report said, had an average income of $16,780 from 2000-03, while the top fifth of families had an average income of $122,150 —†more than seven times as much. Middle-income families' average income was $46,875.
----------------------
This happened under your watch.

With all due respect to those here urging Harry onward...he could have kept his mouth shut about lacking the votes for a filibuster!!!!

Sheesh! That really helps to say, "gee whiz, we don't have enough strength for the fight, but we'll play the game to throw a bone to our constituents."

Great strategy. The fat lady DIDN'T sing yet, and he throws in the towel!! (Sorry for all the cliches...but I am pissed!)

I know what you're saying Micki. I don't really understand the logic in Congress. I think a lot of them need ADHD medication to help with their concentration.

Yeah way to rally the troopers! Don't bother voting for the filibuster guys because we are going to lose. But I'm going to vote anyway. I'll show those republicans.

Worse,

The Democrats are probably thinking Alito will make a few boneheaded decisions and they think their no vote can be used to show how right they could have been (if the actually filibustered).

SSDD

capt

Saladin ...you are so right. Anything to do with Israel is locked in the closet in the U.S.
One of the best books that I have read about the endless focus on JUST the Jews who died in that horrendous and gruesome war...instead of ALL WHO DIED IN THAT WAR...is the HOLOCAUST INDUSTRY...

All of the Kerry bashing. Did anyone watch him during the Rice or Bolton hearings?...Kerry was amazing, hit both of them hard with calm, clear, direct hard hitting questions and statements. He voted against both of them.

While I do not like everything about Kerry or Gore. They are both way better than anything we have to consider.

Feingold is on target on most issues....but he will get written off as too left. We will be hearing a great deal about Virginia's Governor...Mark Warner

Email Harry Reid at this address and GIVE HIM hell!!!!

harryreid@giveemhellharry.com

It will be a cold day in hell...well, you get the picture.

All of the Kerry bashing. Did anyone watch him during the Rice or Bolton hearings?...Kerry was amazing, hit both of them hard with calm, clear, direct hard hitting questions and statements. He voted against both of them.

While I do not like everything about Kerry or Gore. They are both way better than anything we have to consider.

Kathleen, yes I saw him and I agree with you. And I agree with you on your 2nd paragraph above, too. (surprised?)

I had the opportunity to see Kerry in person In Tacoma and participated in a few phone conferences with him during his campaign. He showed passion, strength, and leadership...but I guess he "looked too French" or something to too many sheeple. I dunno.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060127/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_leveraging_wives_2;_ylt=AhZ7vo5J7Grf660D_7V2PkFX6GMA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Documents Show Army Seized Wives As Tactic

The U.S. Army in Iraq has at least twice seized and jailed the wives of suspected insurgents in hopes of "leveraging" their husbands into surrender, U.S. military documents show.

In one case, a secretive task force locked up the young mother of a nursing baby, a U.S. intelligence officer reported. In the case of a second detainee, one American colonel suggested to another that they catch her husband by tacking a note to the family's door telling him "to come get his wife."

It would make me want to kill the bastards even more if they did that to my wife.

"but I guess he "looked too French" or something to too many sheeple. I dunno."

I am pretty convinced he won, Micki. The real dissapointment came when he did not pursue the matter in Ohio as he promised. As I recall, he said he had a team of lawyers ready to jump right on it. It was obvious almost immediately that something was amiss, and much more has come to light since that time. Same thing for Mr. Gore in 2000. I wonder why?

And the rich keep getting richer with their lobbied paid for tax cuts that also enriched our lobbied paid for congresspersons.

No Micki I am not surprised...it is not a requirement or very interesting to always be on the same page about all issues.

WAIT A MINUTE ISRAEL HAS BEEN ON THE U.S. WELFARE SYSTEM FOR OVER 50 YEARS WHY NOT THE PALESTINIANS......THE SETTLERS GET MORE THAN PEOPLE IN THE STATES ON WELFARE..

I HAVE ALSO READ THAT YOU CAN WRITE OFF ANY DONATIONS TO ISRAEL... OFF ON YOUR TAXES.

US set to review all aid to Palestinians
Fri Jan 27, 2006 01:31 PM ET
Printer Friendly | Email Article | Reprints | RSS

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States will review "all aspects" of its aid programs to the Palestinians if the militant group Hamas is in government after its victory in this week's elections, the State Department said on Friday.
"To be very clear, we do not provide money to terrorist organizations," said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack. Hamas is classified by the United States as a terrorist group.

"We will base our actions on our law and our policies," he added.

© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.

More Politics
Senate Democrat says can't block Alito
Top Democrat urges security funds for U.S. cities
Bush to discuss nuclear energy in State of Union
US warns it may cut aid to Palestinians
Bush nominates two finance experts for Fed

MORE

Reuters.com Help & Info. | Contact Us | Feedback | Advertise | Disclaimer | Copyright | Privacy | Corrections | Partner Newspapers
About Us | Products & Services | Customer Zone | Careers

I find that conservatives feel that a person is either (1)a conservative or (2)mistaken.

Liberals feel that a person is either (1)liberal or (2)evil. They can't ever just be wrong.

By the way, Cass Sunstein, one of the most liberal legal profs out there, believes President Bush and the NSA acted properly regarding warrantless wiretaps.
http://www.radioblogger.com/archives/december05.html#001248

And Hugh Hewitt completely eviscerates poor Jonathan Alter on the subject.

http://www.radioblogger.com/#001339

Now, I've read Glenn Greenwald and responded to him. Any of you legal eagles care to respond to Cass Sunstein or Hugh Hewitt?

Have any of you read the case law on this?

I know that facts get in the way of the emotions of you liberals, but try hard on this one.

Am I going to get a serious reply, or just another round of acerbic euphemisms?

Chirac's bid to join the World Chief Executives Loose Cannon Club received no coverage on Al-Bawaba (at least none that their own internal search engine would disclose). Al-Jazeera's English-language site only ran the Agence France-Presse story. I didn't check a third Arab news site because I would like to continue being able to fly on domestic airliners. Sometimes the leaders of France can display such a combination of arrogance and stupidity that you would think they were members of the Bush administration.

I wonder why?

I wonder, too, Robb. Many things come to mind.

One thing that has occurred to me, though it isn't a very satisfying answer is that we have always prided ourselves on a "peaceful transfer of power" in this nation and Gore and Kerry were trying to avoid triggering a military coup on the part of the cheney/rumsfeld/norquist/bush/et al gang.

Maybe that's why.

kathleen, you never disappoint.

I feel that a certain conservative's findings of what a liberal feels a conservatives perceptions are is just wrong

Hey Alan,

I sent that maze game to a bunch of people at work. One person screamed so loud a manager came over to see if she was ok. Need to put a warning on that one! I am in a little hot water with my boss. Oh well.

I am generally a Happy guy! More so when the week ends with:

1) Canada booting Liberals and goes w/Conservatives
2) The Fatah boys are sent to the woodshed
3) Chirac goes `Nuclear'
4) Kerry, well, being Kerry
5) Hillary's candle dims even more
6) FDA Approves Pfizer's Inhaled Insulin Exubera (I think one of you Corn lefties is a diabetic) and stock ought to pipe up Monday
7) The Markets worldwide are Happy

Addendum: Just think, in less than 2 years, Leaders of the Coalition have ALL been Re-elected while those UnCoalitionable "Men in Leotards" went down, down, down! Who would ever thunk!

Before I head off for a weekend of R&R to celebrate the week, I caught a drift of Dracula! Poor Sucker, can't survive in daylight and must use his precious nighttime to hunt crafty, nimble, brainy mouses who know just what to do, with the least amount of energy, to jerk his fangs. Us mouse come and go totally at will leaving few traces. Goodwill Hunting!

Sure have things to look forward to next week! Hopefully, starting with Samuel ole buddy!

I know that facts get in the way of the emotions of you liberals,...

ha ha. would it be too acerbic of me to wonder what facts you might be referring to? because I can think of a whole gang of facts regarding 911 that you have conveniently ignored.

Is the End Near?

Dear Cornposters:

My wife was watching television and she noticed all the problems around the world. She says to me that the world may be coming to an end.

I cannot prove or disprove her comment to me. I do sense that our world is in dire straits because the human population has turned their backs on God.

We see so much pain, suffering, hatred, murders, our inhumanity to each other, diseases and malignancies due to depleted uranium, and human trafficking to mention some problems. Unless we return to God and His love and mercy, the end is near. It does not matter if it happens in 10 years, 20 years, or more. If we do not return to God and we die, it will be over for us. An eternity in hell may be the placement.

I call upon the human population to return to God, love, and mercy. We have a free will and the choice is ours to make.

Sincerely,

Gerald

#56 Jeanne, my message is if you want peace, work for justice with such ingredients as love and mercy.

See Gerald,
That's why I chose you.

From the previous thread #196!

Very good information and keep those barrels loaded!

Pandemoniac and Jeanne, I do not read the trolls' posts and so I really do not make comments on them. I have so much to read from articles and Cornposters who want to see a better world on this website that keeps me very busy.

After 9/11 congress voted with a vengeance to grant the President the war powers act. The war powers act should only have applied to go after OBL in Afganistan. The Adminstration extended this war to Iraq with false innuendo connecting Osama to Sadam. With mores lies he can take this war powers act anywhere he wants. Congress should immediatly remove war declaration privileges from the president.

#66 and #72 Robb and Micki:

I think that possibility makes sense, but it is too frightening to contemplate. In fact, now that I think more about it, that's probably why.

#81 Gerald:

You are very wise to ignore trolls' posts. I have read here that you have a heart condition. Their posts are so obnoxious and mean, it could not be good for you. I do not read them any longer either.

Carol and Cornposters, I do not read the trolls' spewing because I have relatives who are trolls and listening to their crap, I have my fill.

Carol mentioned that she likes to hear about my neoconevans relatives. It's two months since the neoconevans had us over the day after Thanksgiving. I usually see them every 2 or 2 and one half years. That is about all I can stomach. If I saw them anymore, I would be upchucking in their homes. I try to save my upchucking for our home.

Caroline,
Actually, if you took all the troll posts and put them in a pit you could probably collect enough methane gas to light a large city like say...New York.
Now if you combined their posts with the Republican BS imagine the cost savings. Why, every American could hear their house for free.

Heat...I meant heat not hear.

Carol, if you read the trolls' posts, you will be reading the clone comments from my neoconevans relatives.

#83 caroline, that is another reason for scrolling past their posts. The trolls really do sound like my neoconevans relatives and I try to avoid as much of their nonsense as I can.

Posting in itself is stressful for me and to compound that stress with reading the trolls' post would be too much of a strain on my heart.

#85 Jeanne, I love it! Now if we collected all of their dung and caked it for fuel, we could keep all of the northern states warm and cozy for the winter.

What truly is amazing about the trolls is that they do not know the difference between right and wrong behavior or between good and bad policies for the common good. To be a moral person knowing the difference between right and wrong is a basic principle. Why even comment to trolls who do not know right from wrong in their lives?

The latest national survey does not bode well for New York Sen. Hillary
Clinton, should she seek the presidency in 2008.

A Gallup poll for CNN and USA Today reveals 51 percent of Americans say
they would absolutely not vote for Mrs. Clinton for president, with only
16 percent definitely backing her. Another 32 percent say they'd
consider voting for the Democrat.

Thus, committed anti-Hillary voters outnumber pro-Hillary voters by 3-1.

The figures are impacting talk radio today, as conservative host Rush
Limbaugh pointed out it is not inevitable that Mrs. Clinton will be
president.

"I don't think it's written in the clouds, written in stone, written in
the beach," said Limbaugh. "Hillary is not going to president. The
Republican nominee will be, and that is why, folks, we have to be
careful about who's nominated on our end."

He was responding to a concerned caller who said, "She is something to
be afraid of, and fear has to motivate people."

The senator is especially unpopular among men, according to the Gallup
poll, with 60 percent saying they'd definitely oppose Hillary for
president, with 62 percent opposition from men 50 and over.

Among women, 22 percent say they're solid in backing Clinton, but just
11 percent of men agree. Only 14 percent of white Americans are
committed supporters, with 28 percent of non-whites in the Democrat's fold.

Perhaps the worst harbinger is that even among self-proclaimed liberals,
only 33 percent say they'd definitely vote for her.

Just last week, a Diageo/Hotline survey showed Hillary losing to
Arizona. Sen. John McCain 52 to 36 percent in a hypothetical matchup.
*****end of clip*****

It looks like it's a lock for the GOP in 08! The democratic party is in serious trouble. Let me explain:

The base of the democratic party will not nominate a centrist or moderate democrat, only a liberal. A liberal has never won and never will win the presidency. So when the nominate a liberal in 2008, it will be a repeat of the 2004 election!

Gerald, if your relatives are like our trolls, I can see why you can't be around them. I have a cousin that lives in Southgate and we e-mail. She's a Bush lover, and MAN is it hard to write to her. I grit my teeth. I'm glad she's far away and I never have to be in the same room with her because someone would have to pry my hands from around her throat.

Kerry's Senate floor speech on Alito

"Mr. President, let me begin by congratulating the Senator from Minnesota for an absolutely superb presentation of the arguments that are at stake in this choice the Senate faces. I think he has done a terrific job of summarizing a great many of those issues in the broad scope of those issues, and I particularly appreciate the last comments he made about the absence of unanimity and the divisions in the Senate over their vote.

"None of us should forget the debate Harriet Miers met with a storm of criticism -- not from this side but from the other, from the right-wing. In fact, she became more unacceptable to the Republicans because she did not make clear which ideological direction she would take the Court, rather than for the very broad-based appeal she would pose to the country.

"So the reason we are here with this decision is not because of a choice we have made. It is because of a choice the President has made. It is because that’≥ the direction the President wants to move in. We have had countless opportunities in the Senate where we have had votes on nominees which have garnered 100 votes, 98 votes, 95, 90. Anyone who is watching this understands that the Senate is divided on this nominee. At this pivotal moment in our country's history with the issues we face, that is not the way to tip the balance of the Court or to move the Court in an ideological direction....

...."In 1984, for example, Judge Alito wrote a Justice Department memorandum concluding that the use of deadly force against a fleeing unarmed suspect did not violate the fourth amendment. The victim was a 15-year-old African American. He was 5 foot 4. He weighed 100 to 110 pounds. This unarmed eighth grader was attempting to jump a fence with a stolen purse containing $10 when he was shot in the back of the head in order to prevent escape. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals found the shooting unconstitutional because deadly force can only be used when there is 'probable cause that the suspect poses a threat to the safety of the officers or a danger to the community if left at large.' That is what we teach law enforcement officials.

“Çut Judge Alito disagreed. Judge Alito said: No, he believed the shooting was reasonable because 'The State is justified in using whatever force is necessary to enforce its laws' -even deadly force. That is his conclusion. That is the standard that is going to go to the Supreme Court if ratified. It is OK to shoot a 15-year-old, 110 pounds, a 5-foot-4-inch kid who is trying to get over a fence with a purse, shoot him in the back of the head.

"Otherwise, Judge Alito believed that any suspect could evade arrest by making the State choose between killing them or letting them escape. That is the conclusion. Think about that. Judge Alito believed that the State could use whatever force was necessary to enforce its laws regardless of whether the suspect was armed or dangerous. Does the Chair believe that? Do the other Senators believe that? I don't think so. Do mainstream Americans believe that?...

...."Perhaps Professor Liu of the Berkeley Law School put it best when he wrote this. He said:

Judge Alito's record envisions an America where police may shoot and kill an unarmed boy to stop him from running away with a stolen purse; where federal agents may point guns at ordinary citizens during a raid, even after no sign of resistance; where the FBI may install a camera where you sleep on the promise that they won't turn it on unless an informant is in the room; where a black man may be sentenced to death by an all-white jury for killing a white man, absent a multiple regression analysis showing discrimination; and where police may search what a warrant permits, and then some. This is not the America we know. Nor is it the America we aspire to be."
-------------------
Is this what America wants in a supreme court judge? Tell your Senators to vote NO!

Hurrah for Kerry. No self respecting senator should vote for Alito. He doesn't represent the people of this nation.

Senator Dayton's (MN) statement.

STATEMENT BY SENATOR MARK DAYTON ON JUDGE SAMUEL A. ALITO

.....As one illustration, while he served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Reagan Administration, Judge Alito recommended the use of interpretive Presidential "signing statements" – statements issued by the President when signing a bill not only to explain why the President signed it into law but also to provide his view of how the law should be interpreted.

The apparent purpose of such statements is to encourage the courts to pay as much attention to the President’s interpretation of a law as they do to the legislative branch and give the President the "last word on questions of interpretation." Judge Alito explained that such statements would "increase the power of the Executive to shape the law."

He also wrote in that memo: a "President’s understanding of a bill should be just as important as that of Congress." As a recent Los Angeles Times editorial stated, "On its face, the assertion threatens to undermine the fundamental constitutional principle that it is for Congress to write the laws and for the executive to, well, execute them."

President Bush has issued over 100 signing statements since 2001. The most notable was a signing statement a couple days after the President signed into law H.R. 2863, the "Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006," which contained the McCain amendment banning inhumane treatment of detainees by U.S. personnel. The President, in his signing statement, basically asserted he could ignore parts of the law he had just signed under his Constitutional authority.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say a President can ignore the parts of a law he doesn’t like.

Nowhere in the Constitution is there mention of "signing statements." The Constitution makes it very clear under Article I, Section 7 – what the President can do with legislation that Congress has enacted. He can sign it into law as it is written by Congress, or he can veto it. There is no other option.

For almost 190 years, our country’s first 39 Presidents followed this very clear language of the Constitution. Yet, then-Deputy Assistant Attorney General Alito in 1985 decided that he could ignore all those precedents and try to fabricate this ill-considered power for the President.

As yet, the Supreme Court has not been called upon to decide whether this unprecedented exaggeration of Presidential power is Constitutional. Can there be any doubt, however, how Judge Alito would vote in such a case?
--------------------
Why does this information not scare the members of the senate? Why are they voting for Alito.

capt,

I did just that under lift 8. You know the place, it was GR8!!!!

Later,th

th,

Too cool for school!

I am right there, oh yeah!

Thanks

capt

the current online poll at AOL's welcome page...

How would you rate the state of the union?
Poor 48%
Fair 20%
Good 19%
Excellent 13%
Total Votes: 55,857
---
How would you rate Bush's performance?
Poor 63%
Excellent 17%
Good 14%
Fair 7%
Total Votes: 56,709
---
What kind of priority should Bush and Congress give the situation in Iraq?
Highest priority 42%
High, but not the highest 39%
Lower priority 19%
Total Votes: 55,251
---
What kind of priority should Bush and Congress give the campaign against terror?
Highest priority 45%
High, but not the highest 42%
Lower priority 13%
Total Votes: 27,227
---
What kind of priority should Bush and Congress give the economy?
Highest priority 59%
High, but not the highest 37%
Lower priority 4%
Total Votes: 26,415
---
What kind of priority should Bush and Congress give taxes?
High, but not the highest 42%
Lower priority 38%
Highest priority 20%
Total Votes: 23,403
---
What kind of priority should Bush and Congress give reducing government spending?
Highest priority 53%
High, but not the highest 33%
Lower priority 14%
Total Votes: 22,023
---
What kind of priority should Bush and Congress give the federal budget deficit?
Highest priority 56%
High, but not the highest 32%
Lower priority 12%
Total Votes: 21,906

Flan said... "I am in a little hot water with my boss. Oh well."

*ooopz Sorry 'bout that! (haha)

Everybody see the "Bush never lied" Tee-shirt?

Or is it the "second coming of Bush" Kristo-fascist hooded sweatshirt?

Paging Ann Coutler?

HA!

capt

Alan,

Yeah, that's what I said to my boss!

I JUST HEARD THAT DIANNE FEINSTEIN NOW SUPPORTS THE FILIBUSTER

I hope my source is accurate....it's a good source!

Maybe ya'll have already heard this???

If that was the *&*%$ maze game?

Here is sad, I could not get my shaky hand to get past the second maze for the longest time. I gave up and only went back after you guys talked about getting scared!

HA! - Good one Alan!

capt

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world - no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men. ": Woodrow Wilson

=
"I, however, place economy among the first and most important republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared.": Thomas Jefferson - (1743-1826), US Founding Father, drafted the Declaration of Independence, 3rd US President - Source: letter to William

Plumer, July 21, 1816

=
"Today democracy is a facade of plutocracy. Because the peoples will not tolerate naked plutocracy, power is nominally turned over to them, while real power rests in the hands of the plutocrats. In democracies, whether republican or monarchical, the statesmen are marionettes, and the capitalists are the wire pullers: they dictate the political guidelines, they control the voters by buying public opinion, through business and social connections [they control] higher government officials ... The plutocracy of today is more powerful than the aristocracy of the past, because nothing stands above it except the state, which is its tool and helper.": Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, "Pan-european" publicist and political figure, in his book Praktischer Idealismus ("Practical Idealism"), Vienna, 1925.

=
"I would rather lose in a cause that will some day win, than win in a cause that will some day lose.

===

Thanks ICH Newsletter!

This skit is so much like Bush it's scary.

State of the Union 2006 -- Bush Impression

101

I JUST HEARD THAT DIANNE FEINSTEIN NOW SUPPORTS THE FILIBUSTER

I hope my source is accurate....it's a good source!

Maybe ya'll have already heard this???
__________
I hope this is true! Spines will grow exponentially!!!!

Wow! That Woodrow Wilson quote could have been signd George W. Bush. Fitting!

Tim L,

Liberals say that they scroll past conservative posters.

The fact is that they read our posts, but because our logic is so overwhelming and doesn't comport with their skewed view of the world, they are scared to death of us.

It was the same way the White man was scared of the Black man. Because he was scared, he tried to segregate himself in all white schools, all white neighborhoods.

Liberals are like that, afraid to engage in the arena of ideas, afraid to challenge their own pitiful belief systems. They, just like the crackers a hundred years ago, are safe in their own bigotry and prejudices.

And so the cowards come to "safe" sites like this one, where they feel they won't be confronted. Kind of like the Whitey retreating to his country club.

Ideas are to liberals what water was to the Wicked Witch of the West.

Stop Alito

Thank you very much for getting this fax to key senators, urging them to join John Kerry in his effort to filibuster the Alito nomination.

Get your friends, family and associates to send this fax now.

http://www.SaveTheCourt.org/AlitoFilibuster

Time is short. The stakes are high. This is our best, last chance to stop Alito from taking a seat on our Supreme Court.
Your message was sent to:

Senator Barack Obama
Senator Christopher Dodd
Senator Joseph Lieberman
Senator Joseph Biden
Senator Richard Durbin
Senator Evan Bayh
Senator Olympia Snowe
Senator Harry Reid
Senator Charles Schumer
Senator Hillary Clinton
Senator Lincoln Chafee
Senator Russell Feingold

Here is a copy of the message you sent:From: capt

Justice O'Connor said "War is not a blank check for the President" Alito would provide that blank check.

Samuel Alito’≥ record is clear, and so is the threat posed by his nomination: presidential power unchecked by judicial oversight; Congress stripped of much of its ability to protect the environment; Americans stripped of their right to privacy and subject to abuses of corporate and government power.

I understand that the filibuster is not a tool to be used trivially. Alito is not a trivial threat. Stand up for your Senate, stand up for the Constitution, and stand up for we, the people. I ask you to filibuster Samuel Alito’≥ nomination to the United States Supreme Court.

Sincerely,

*****end of clip*****

The first line is all mine!

Keyboard activism.

capt

Capt,
After reading Kerry and Dayton's speeches I don't know why anyone would vote for Alito. I have sent an email to Senator Coleman asking him how he is going to vote.

Oh, shut up. You're such an idiot.

That was for Bill and the stupid crap in his last post. Not you, Jeanne.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr.

It has a great ring to it, doesn't it?

Here's another one you people better get ready for.

Supreme Court Justice J. Michael Luttig.

He's coming next, and, as far as conservatives go, he makes Justice Alito look like Justice Ginsburg by comparison.

This is just great!!!

Carol,
It's just more waste for the methane pile. He's helping to light a city.

Impeach or Indict Bush and Cheney

The year 2006 will be historic for the nation, and probably for humanity. Texans Bush and Rove and their conspirators in the second Bush presidency have disgraced American democracy at home and in the world with debasements of our nation and our values that have now entered their climactic phase. What part will the rest of us Texans play in this decisive year?

As I have written in a review-essay that appears in the tenth-anniversary spring issue of Yes!, the quarterly of new solutions published in Washington state by David and Frances Korten (YesMagazine.org), we are living and working in the very days and nights of the American Emergency, the climactic American Crisis. Our elections are bought, and our government is run by and for the major transnational corporations. Bush announced in 2002 his illegal presidential policy that the United States can and will attack other nations first, waging war on them, when he so decides. He is now waging, as if he were doing it in our names, a bloody war of aggression against Iraq, which on the face of it is a crime against humanity under the Nuremberg principles that we and our allies established and enforced with hangings after World War II. The President, the Vice-President, and their factors sold this war to Congress with twistings and lies that were crafted to infuriate and terrorize us about Iraq’≥ alleged connections to Al Qaeda and mass-murder endangerments to us from Iraq itself, all of which literally did not exist. In polls now six of 10 Americans do not believe the president is honest. Yet he has three more years of dictatorial control over our nuclear and other arms and our Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps and seems now to be maneuvering to use that control to wage another aggressive war on Iran, with literally incalculable consequences.

We Texans are a major source of this deterioration into crisis. The leading Democrats of the state so dishonored the liberal traditions of their party that in the resulting political vacuum, Bush was elected Governor here, and from Austin he mounted the campaign that a 5-4 majority of the U.S. Supreme Court illegally decreed made him President. After that, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, from Sugar Land, crafted his scheme to use corporate money to widen the Republicans’†majority in the Texas delegation to Washington, D.C., battening down right-wing GOP control of the House and the Congress. The third President from Texas and his Republican Congress then waged aggressive war on Iraq, drove the nation into insolvency to further enrich the already rich, and just for good measure tore up the Constitution.

Read more HERE

*****end of clip*****

I say do both! Why one of the other?

capt

Of or or?

And here's another one on whom you better be doing opposition research, because he's going to be the next President of the United States.

The Hon. George Felix Allen, the good Senator from the great Commonwealth of Virginia.

This is a great country!!!

Bill said:

"Ideas are to liberals what water was to the Wicked Witch of the West."

You mean: Ideas & logic are to liberals what water was to the Wicked Witch of the West.

These people make the most intellectually indefensible and irrational statements known to man. It baffles my mind how these people think, i.e. accuse Bush of being behind the 9/11 attacks, but THEN in the same breath criticize him for not doing enough to prevent 9/11!!!

Yes Bill, I love George Allen! I can't stand McCain, but it ever comes down to Hillary Clinton vs. John McCain, I would be support him and be doing exactly what the liberals were doing in 2004, i.e. "Anybody But Bush".

"You guys are so clueless!! lol. Which arguement are the American people going to buy, Bush is violating our precious civil liberties, or Bush is protecting America against terrorists. Once again, you're on the wrong side of the issues."

Posted by: Tim L at January 26, 2006 11:44 AM

For all who may have missed this enlightening comment, here it is. Of all the detestable posts from all the trolls who have ever darkened Davids site, this is the worst I can recall. These are the words of a traitor to the constitution, a full blown Nazi who is willing to sacrifice the rights of us all in pursuit of his own personal idea of security, and fuck anybody who disagrees.
I am still seething over this, because I know there are many who feel the same way. For all those who would gladly trade in our "precious civil liberties", the one thing our founding fathers considered worthy of dying for, there is a place in Red China for, you don't belong in the US.

HEY...burn up the phone lines and the faxes and the emails this weekend!

Not only is Feinstein now supporting the filibuster, but Clinton and Reid are on-baord the filibuster express, too.

CONTACT YOUR SENATORS -- AGAIN!

REMEMBER BORK!!!!!!!

Capt 103, for God's sake, wilson is the one who did that!! He was a traitor as well as a psycho!

Call the Republican senators too and tell them how you feel! If they are concerned about this nation's civil liberties why would they vote for Alito?

Saladin,

One of the most liberal constitutional scholars in the country, Professor Cass Sunstein at the University of Chicago, thinks the NSA's warrantless eavesdropping was legal.

Now, what do you think he knows that you don't know?

Keep that good brain working. As Cole Porter so brilliantly intoned, "Use your mentality. Wake up to reality." (Although I don't have you under my skin, as the song title suggests.)

Jeanne, America is concerned with civil liberties, it is just way more concerned with national security.

If you aren't doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to fear.

#122 Jeanne...thank you for helping on this. Encourage everyone you know to call/email at least ten people about this important issue of civil liberties..and encourage them to call email ten people.

The fact that Feinstein has capitulated on the filibuster is HUGE -- if We, the people keep applying the pressure, good things can happen.

#123
Ick. You're revolting.

#124
Now I know why Gerald upchucks when his neocon relatives come over.

57% Americans support military action in Iran
By Greg Miller, Times Staff Writer
Published: January 27 2006 15:22 | Last updated: January 27 2006 15:22

WASHINGTON — Despite persistent disillusionment with the war in Iraq, a majority of Americans supports taking military action against Iran if that country continues to produce material that can be used to develop nuclear weapons, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found.

The poll, conducted Sunday through Wednesday, found that 57% of Americans favor military intervention if Iran’s Islamic government pursues a program that could enable it to build nuclear arms.

Support for military action against Tehran has increased over the last year, the poll found, even though public sentiment is running against the war in neighboring Iraq: 53% said they believe the situation there was not worth going to war.

The poll results suggest that the difficulties the United States has encountered in Iraq have not turned the public against the possibility of military actions elsewhere in the Middle East.Bush ratings sink in latest poll

Bush ratings sink in latest poll
Click here

Support for a potential military confrontation with Iran was strongest among Republican respondents, among whom 76% endorsed the idea. But even among Democrats, who overwhelmingly oppose the war in Iraq, 49% supported such action.

In follow-up interviews, some respondents said they believed Iran posed a more serious threat than Saddam Hussein’s Iraq did.

“I really don’t think Saddam had anything to do with terrorism, but Iran, I believe, does,” said Edward Wtulich, of Goshen, N.Y. He was among the 1,555 adults who participated in this week’s survey, which has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. “Iran has been a problem, I think, for years,” Wtulich said, “and we’ve known about it.”

Wtulich, a registered Democrat and retired manager for the New York City Housing Authority, said he supported taking a hard line with Iran despite the strain of the Iraq war on the U.S. military.

“It makes me scared,” he said, “but we may not have a choice.”

Experts said the public’s views on Iran appeared to have hardened in part because of the more aggressive anti-Western posture of Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Elected last year, he has riled the international community with remarks denying the Holocaust and with declarations that Iran will defy European and U.S. pressure and continue to pursue efforts to enrich uranium.

His comments have fostered an impression of him as “very reckless, a real rogue, as opposed to simply a populist,” said political science professor John Mueller of Ohio State University, who is an authority on wartime public opinion.

Mueller said that Americans’ rising support for confronting Iran was “impressive,” especially considering their misgivings about the war in Iraq, and that their support suggested “concerns about the new president.” But he added that poll respondents are often more inclined to voice support for military intervention when the question is framed broadly and the potential for casualties is unclear.

“You always get higher support for things like ‘military action,’ because that could just mean bombing, as opposed to sending troops or going to war,” Mueller said.

Poll respondents expressed a strong preference for the United States working with allies to fight international law violations or global aggression.

Iran has insisted its nuclear program is solely for energy production. But the United States and other Western governments suspect Iran’s program is aimed at developing weapons.

European nations that have negotiated with Iran over its program want the matter referred to the United Nations Security Council. Iran has indicated it might be open to a compromise in which Russia would provide enriched uranium to Iran, for use exclusively in energy reactors.

The American public’s position on Iran appears to have hardened over the last year, a period marked by an increasing international focus on Iran’s nuclear program. When a similar question was asked in a Times poll last January, 50% favored military action against Iran.

Regarding Iraq, the latest poll shows that although most Americans remain disenchanted with the war, opinions have stabilized, at least for now. The percentage saying they believe the situation in Iraq was not worth going to war over dipped slightly, to 53%, compared with 56% in a survey a year earlier.

When asked who was winning the war in Iraq, 33% said the United States, 7% said the insurgents, and 55% said neither side was winning.

Americans remain divided over how long U.S. forces should stay in Iraq: 40% believe the United States should remain in Iraq for “as long as it takes,” 36% want U.S. troops withdrawn within a year, and 14% support immediate withdrawal.

Respondents were also divided, largely along party lines, over whether the Iraq war is really part of Washington’s war on terrorism; 51% say it is, 46% say it is not. President Bush has repeatedly cast Iraq as the central front in the war on terrorism. But many of his administration’s prewar claims about Iraq’s ties to Al Qaeda have turned out to have been overstated or based on unreliable intelligence sources.

The poll also found that 32% of Americans believed that terrorism around the world had increased because of the Iraq situation, 17% believed it had decreased, and 47% believed the problem was about the same.

*****end of clip*****

I guess were going to bomb Iran!!! Now that would be something I'd support.

capt,

I sent the e-mail. I also sent Senator Stabenow an e-mail urging filibuster yesterday. As I said earlier, my other senator, Levin, is already aboard.

Hopefully, the Democrats will make the right decision and, as Atrios so quaintly puts it, drop a mighty turd in the punch bowl before Shrubby's SOTU.

The Truth About the State of our Union

In his 2004 and 2005 addresses, the President spent a considerable amount of time advocating policies that would roll back much of the social progress made since the New Deal. In 2004, the President touted a Medicare prescription drug bill that will fatten the pockets of the pharmaceutical industry, endangering the future finances of the entire Medicare program, while leaving seniors confused and empty handed as they try to fill their prescriptions under the new plan. In 2005, the President used his address to promote his plan strip seniors of the guaranteed promise of Social Security, and replace it with a risky scheme to gamble their future in the stock market.

What the President has in store for his message this year is not known yet. But, we do know the President Bush will speak in glowing terms about the state of our union. The truth is the state of our union is in great peril. This Administration is conducting a war with no end in Iraq, illegally spying on Americans at home, overseeing an economy that is increasingly leaving more and more Americans behind and abandoning Gulf in their hour of great need.

If recent history is any precedent, then next week we should see more of the same old dance around reality that has been the hallmark of President Bush's annual address.

Read more HERE

*****end of clip*****

I expect some catapulting of propaganda. I bet Busheney will make more that a couple of outright lies. Why should the SOTU be an exception?

capt

Don, filibuster Alito and make the Dems look even MORE out of touch?? You guys are the gift that keeps on giving!!

Micki,
The Democratic Senators have to stand up to this. At this point who cares who gets re-elected. The country's democracy is at stake. I say go for it.
Senator Dayton did a very noble thing. He decided not to run for re-election. That has given him the time to concentrate on issues and to stand up for what he believes in. I have a lot of respect for him.

Bill wrote:

One of the most liberal constitutional scholars in the country, Professor Cass Sunstein at the University of Chicago, thinks the NSA's warrantless eavesdropping was legal.

Now, what do you think he knows that you don't know?

But, in fact, a number of prominent Republicans, including Sen. John McCain of Arizona, have criticized Bush and the wiretapping without court warrants as a violation of the law and basic civil liberties. So have other well-known conservatives, including former Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia. Bruce Fein, a lawyer who worked in the Justice Department under President