David Corn Online
 

February 01, 2006

Bush's Simple State of the Union--and the World

I posted this in my "Capital Games" column at www.thenation.com. If you've seen it already, please check out other recent postings below.

Simple works.

For George W. Bush, at least. In this year's State of the Union address, Bush led with his weakness--the Iraq war--and stuck to the un-nuanced and bold (if misleading) assertions he has used to justify the war and to argue for staying the course, his course.

After speaking of the death of Coretta Scott King (in which he endorsed the notion of heaven by speaking of her "reunion" with her husband), calling for preserving a "civil tone" in the "tough debates" of Washington (this from the man who during the 2002 campaign claimed the Democrats "were not interested in the security of the American people"), and referring to September 11 (suggesting that it was the lack of democracy in Afghanistan that brought "murder and destruction to our country"), Bush launched into his standard comic-book defense of the war on Iraq. To protect America, he explained, the United States must fight for freedom and democracy in Iraq and elsewhere. (WMDs in Iraq? Whoever said anything about WMDs in Iraq?) "We do not forget," Bush said, the people who live in undemocratic "Syria, Burma, Zimbabwe, North Korea and Iran." He did not include China in this list. And in Iraq, he continued, "terrorists like bin Laden...aim to seize power" and use Iraq as a "safe have to launch attacks against America and the world." He added, "A sudden withdrawal of our forces from Iraq would abandon our Iraqi allies to death and prison....put men like bin Laden and Zarqawi in charge of a strategic country."

This is--to be polite--an absurd analysis. The insurgency, as even Bush has noted in other speeches, is mainly made up of rejectionists and Baathist remnants. Islamic terrorists are a fraction. They are fighting the United States more than they are fighting to take over Iraq. Moreover, these foreign jihadists are hardly in a position to "seize power" in Iraq. The dominant (Iran-backed) Shiite theocrats now in control are unlikely to let that happen, and they have militias of their own. But Bush depicted the mess in Iraq as an us-against-al Qaeda clash. That is disingenuous and ignores the harsh realities and policy dilemmas created by the rise in sectarian violence in Iraq.

After laying out a false white-hat/black-turban dichotomy, Bush turned into a cheerleader. "We love our freedom, and we will fight to keep it," he intoned. There can be no "retreating within our borders....There is no peace in retreat. And there is no honor in retreat....The United States will not retreat from the world, and we will never surrender to evil." Get the picture? And, interestingly, he equated disengagement in Iraq with "isolationism" several times in the speech. (Did a new memo come in from the pollsters?)

After rallying the public with his Americans-don't-retreat cry, he vowed he had a "clear plan for victory." He did not say when the clarity of that victory will become apparent. But he claimed, "we are winning." He did not--to borrow a term fancied by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld--offer any "metrics" for supporting this claim. Then came the inevitable we-must-support-the-troops rationale for sticking with the war. And Bush pointed out the parents and widow of Marine Staff Sergeant Dan Clay, who was killed last month in Fallujah. They were sitting behind Laura Bush in the balcony. A bipartisan, standing ovation ensued. Was this a moment of genuine respect for the family of a fallen soldier? Was it a moment of exploitation, in which Bush was using their tragic, heart-wrenching sacrifice to prop up his war (which will produce other grieving parents and spouses)? The line between the two was thin.

When it came time to address his authorization of warrantless wiretaps, Bush was unapologetic and in-your-face. Staring at the members of the House and Senate before him--his voice rising--Bush defiantly defended what he called his "terrorist surveillance program." He suggested that if such a program had existed before 9/11 (when his administration was proceeding slowly in devising a plan for dealing with al Qaeda), perhaps the attack could have been prevented. (Prior to 9/11, the CIA and the FBI did have a bead on two of the hijackers, without having resorted to the use of warrantless eavesdropping, and failed to act until it was too late.) Becoming louder, Bush proclaimed, "If there are people inside our country who are talking with al Qaeda, we want to know about it--because we will not sit back and wait to be hit again." Republicans jumped to their feet. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton smiled, perhaps in amazement at or appreciation of Bush's brazenness. In a classic Rove-ian maneuver, Bush was daring Democrats to come after him on this point. The not-too-hidden message: Go ahead, make my day; I'll shove this down your throats in the coming elections. As GOPers shouted their approval, that long-ago-banished smirk seemed to flash on Bush's face for an instant.

Bush does this sort of speechifying well. The sentiments and arguments are stark--easy to convey. But his defense of Iraq was nothing new. It's hard to imagine this rhetoric having much, if any, impact on public attitudes here or abroad. After nearly three years of war in Iraq, Bush's words matter little. The mess there will remain once the speech is done.

In his 2002 and 2003 State of the Union speeches, Bush telegraphed the invasion of Iraq. This time, even as he promoted a global crusade for democracy, he was less bellicose. (There's nothing like having an overextended and stretched-to-its-max military to moderate tough talk.) On Iran, Bush and his speechwriters (who went through 30 drafts of this not-so-monumental speech) showed they can learn from past mistakes. Unlike the 2003 State of the Union address--in which Bush presented the unconfirmed charge that Iraq had been uranium-shopping in Africa--Bush this time was more circumspect in decrying a foe. He said that the "Iranian government is defying the world with its nuclear ambitions"--"ambitions" being a somewhat vague term. And he stayed clear of any details. He also told Iranians, "We respect your right to choose your own future and win your own freedom." Could that be read as a pledge that he will not use military force to export freedom to Iran? (I hope a reporter asks Scott McClellan about this.)

The domestic stuff was mostly the same-old/same-old. Make the tax cuts permanent. (Don't worry about the massive and structural deficit that is growing.) Cut programs. (No need to note that federal spending has ballooned under the gaze of Bush and congressional Republicans.) On health care, he pushed Health Savings Account, an initiative that insurance companies support and that mainly addresses the needs of people who already can afford to buy health insurance. He declared America "is addicted to oil," urged a boost in nuclear energy, and proposed a series of fine-sounding initiatives regarding alternative energy. (Look for the inevitable statements from alternative energy experts that will show that Bush's proposals are on the slim side.) He called for training 70,000 new teachers for advanced-placement courses in math and science in high schools--but said nothing about college education. (He certainly did not boast about the recent cuts in college funding.) When Bush turned to Social Security--a focus of last year's address--he essentially hoisted a white flag. "Congress did not act last year on my proposal to save Social Security," he said, and Democrats began applauding and hooting. This was the closest the US Congress gets to question time in the British Parliament. Bush trudged on and called for creating a bipartisan commission to deal with the long-term fiscal challenges posed by Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. On the economy--no shocker--he said all was swell and pointed out that in the last two-and-a-half years, America has created 4.6 million new jobs. (His speechwriters left out this factoid: to keep up with population growth, the U.S. economy needed to add between 4.5 and 5 million jobs in this period.)

Bush twice referred to Jackgate--the congressional corruption scandal tied to felonious GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff. First, he equated public concern "about unethical conduct by public officials" with worries about "activist courts that try to redefine marriage." Seriously, he did, suggesting a moral equivalency between sleazy and criminal lawmakers and judges who decide that state constitutions require states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Moments later, Bush offered the most benign comments on Jackgate a speechwriter could concoct: "A hopeful society expects elected officials to uphold the public trust. Honorable people in both parties are working on reforms to strengthen the ethical standards of Washington--and I support your efforts."

Commentators often complain when a SOTU comes across as a laundry list of overly hyped proposals meant to cover every area of policy known to Washington wonks. Bush certainly did not go overboard in this manner. Here is a partial list of subjects he did not have anything to say about: global warming, wage levels, missile defense, a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, genocide in Sudan, torture, the mission to Mars (he promoted in SOTU 2004), the campaign against steroids (he promoted in SOTU 2004), Michael Brown and FEMA, and corporate responsibility.

At the end, Bush attempted a soaring-rhetoric finale. He equated his mission to change the world with the work of Lincoln and Martin Luther King, stating,

We have entered a great ideological conflict we did nothing to invite....[E]very great movement of history comes to a point of choosing. Lincoln could have accepted peace at the cost of disunity and continued slavery. Martin Luther King could have stopped at Birmingham or at Selma, and achieved only half a victory over segregation. The United States could have accepted the permanent division of Europe, and been complicit in the oppression of others. Today, having come far in our own historical journey, we must decide: Will we turn back, or finish well?

Such rhetoric sounds good. But does it have any real meaning? There was no way for King to have achieved "half a victory over segregation." What would that have looked like? Integrated buses, but segregated lunch counters? And, as critics of Yalta grouse, the United States did accept the division of Europe, at least for decades. (The alternative was probably war, perhaps nuclear war.) And the United States has been complicit in the "oppression of others" by supporting repressive regimes and brutal armies in such nations as Chile, South America, El Salvador, the Philippines, Argentina, Iran and Iraq.

"Before history is written down in books, it is written in courage," Bush declared. "Like Americans before us, we will show that courage and we will finish well." Written in courage--it's a nice notion. But can Bush persuade Americans to stick with him in Iraq (and elsewhere) by tossing out well-crafted and dramatic lines that seem suitable for a Mel Gibson historical epic and that are designed to appeal to cliche-driven sentiments? It is a simple plan--and perhaps the best he's got.

Posted by David Corn at February 1, 2006 12:44 AM

Comments

1

Mr. David Corn,

Thanks - Good commentary and now I know what I missed.


Thanks

Kirk

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 01:11 AM

2

The Real Danger of Presidential Spying

The most important issue is not, however, whether people feel comfortable talking on the phone or sending emails. The real danger is that electronic surveillance can be used to increase and solidify executive power. A president can collect private information not simply about "ordinary Americans," but extra-ordinary ones Ð political rivals, journalists, and activists Ð and use this information against them. After all, if a president is convinced he is right, he may well view those who disagree with him as dangerous and believe itÕs legitimate to use any means available to stop them.

Americans were treated to an extensive description of such abuse 30 years ago, in the aftermath of President NixonÕs harassment of political enemies. A Senate committee chaired by Senator Frank Church of Idaho focused on the activities of several administrations and revealed that officials spied to learn opponentsÕ plans and to stay a step ahead, to feed opponentsÕ private information to the press to discredit them, and to blackmail them.

The danger that information gathered through the Bush AdministrationÕs ongoing surveillance program could be used in this way was recently raised by former CIA analyst Ray McGovern in a recent Counterpunch article. Unfortunately, this danger has not yet become a part of our national discussion. It should be. McGovern asks, for example, whether the president could hypothetically use private information to blackmail Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) into deciding not to hold Judiciary Committee hearings to investigate presidential spying.

The danger is even more frightening, however, than McGovernÕs brief example suggests. LetÕs amplify his point and look at a few other scenarios showing how even a well-intentioned president, believing that heÕs acting in the national interest, could neutralize opponents:

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

Like all megalomaniacs Nixon was just going after those he thought were un-American - the Democrats. Who believes these magical powers would not be abused? That Busheney have the moral compass to use and never abuse such power? Jeeze they both lie about what they had for lunch.


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 01:19 AM

3

And Bush pointed out the parents and widow of Marine Staff Sergeant Dan Clay, who was killed last month in Fallujah. They were sitting behind Laura Bush in the balcony.

Did anybody see the Sgt's wife and mother put their hand on their heart, on cue, at the same time? That was sooooo transparent!

Posted by: Alan at February 1, 2006 01:21 AM

4

I don't see my last post so I will just say that Cindy Sheehan was arrested in her seat at the State of the Union tonight.

Raw Story had it, Michael Moore had it and four or five other hits on google.

The NY Time's site had nothing, nor did the Washington Post.

Hope this one sticks.

Posted by: titchaba at February 1, 2006 01:22 AM

5

My bad.

Cindy was invited by Lynn Woolsey (D California)

Posted by: titchaba at February 1, 2006 01:24 AM

6

Why We Fight

Why We Fight utilizes an impressive array of analysts РI would say "talking heads," but the phrase doesn't do them justice Рin order to make its case that a misguided war in Iraq was made possible by a systemic disorder of American democracy. Most striking is Chalmers Johnson, author of Blowback and The Sorrows of Empire, two of the most comprehensive recent studies of militarism and interventionism, whose analysis Рframed in a historical context and informed by a healthy skepticism of ostensibly idealistic motives Рtrips off his lips with impressive facility.

9/11, says Johnson, "provided a group of people deeply committed to the expansion of the American Empire the opportunity to implement plans they had been laying since 1992." This was, in short, a "grand plan" for nothing less than global hegemony:

"We are the New Rome. That's their strategy: on 9/11, they began to implement it."

Kristol, who, along with Perle, here represents the neocons, would politely demur, protesting that what he wants is "benevolent world hegemony," as he called it in a famous essay. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz is shown making the case for war with Iraq, while Perle chimes in with a bold declaration that American foreign policy after 9/11 rightly shifted in "a radical direction." He clearly believes that isn't a bad development. Well, yes, says Kristol, but it would have happened even without 9/11 Рand that really is a doubtful proposition. George W. Bush was elected to office promising a "humbler" foreign policy, and it is hard to imagine how he would have made the leap from humility to hubris quite so easily, if at all.

It was "a huge leap," as former Pentagon analyst and retired Air Force Col. Karen Kwiatkowski says in this film about the administration's post-9/11 focus on Iraq: "A manufactured leap, in order to implement a very calculated and pre-developed foreign policy."

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

A very good piece, the clip does not do justice.

capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 01:27 AM

7

Angry, skeptical Americans unimpressed with State of the Union speech


Americans reacted with skepticism and anger at President Bush's fifth State of the Union address Tuesday night, reflecting a national mood that reflects serious reservations about the controversial war in Iraq, revelations about the administration's secret domestic spying program, and missteps following Hurricane Katrina.

At an Uptown neighborhood bar in New Orleans, both Republicans and Democrats paused to watch with at least one common hope: Rebuilding the Gulf Coast will be a top issue for the federal government.

But neither Tom Short, 75, a Republican and a Korean War veteran, nor attorney Todd Hebert, 38, a Democrat, found much to cheer about in Bush's address.

After Bush mentioned the Gulf Coast in one or two sentences deep into his speech, Short exclaimed, "Did I miss something? I think that's a crying shame."

Hebert was just as dismayed. Throughout the speech, he had been looking at his watch to see how long it would take Bush to mention the wrecked area.

"We are some of the most devastated people in a country right now and we're really feeling left behind. And that speech did nothing to make us not feel left behind."

In Souwest Ohio, the president's description of the economy as "healthy, and vigorous, and growing" didn't sit well with one auto worker, where the financial troubles of General Motors Corp. and parts supplier Delphi Corp. have been keenly felt.

"As an auto worker, no, it's not going OK, because we're losing a lot of jobs," said 49-year-old Dave Shores as Bush's speech competed with classic rock and the crack of pool balls at the Upper Deck Tavern in this Dayton suburb.

Blue jeans and black leather jackets are the fashion of choice at a modest bar in Moraine, which has NASCAR posters on its walls, drifting cigarette smoke and sits in the shadow of a GM plant that cranks out SUVs.

Shores is a union member and registered Democrat who has worked for 30 years at auto parts supplier Delphi, which filed for bankruptcy last year. He said his plant employed 4,000 people a few years ago, but now has just 1,500.

"Can I blame that on George Bush? No, not all of it," he said, before noting that Bush's policies have made it easier for American companies to move jobs overseas.

"George Bush has helped open those gates to let them go," Shores said.

At a private home tucked in a quiet neighborhood in central Orange County, California, about two dozen people gathered to watch over tacos and potato chips.

Julie Carlson, 29-year-old social worker, said she felt "negative" about the overall state of the nation. She said her biggest concern was bringing home U.S. troops from Iraq and had grown more uneasy with the conflict as time passed.

"I don't understand the true reasons for why we're there and I feel like we were mislead. There doesn't seem to be any rational," said Carlson, a Democrat.

Carlson also said she was concerned about health care and Medicare reform because she works primarily with senior citizens. "There seems to be every week something that comes up, something I don't agree with or something that disheartens me," she said.

In Richmond, VA, Bush did nothing to calm the fears of Anne Jowaisas, a 38-year-old nanny who identified herself as an independent and voted for John Kerry in 2004.

"In terms of his speech, it was a good speech and he delivered it pretty strongly," said Jowaisas. "But I had a lot of skepticism what he had to say."

She said that Bush's plan to reduce the deficit by 2009 by cutting programs raised plenty of questions, asking, "how is all this going to balance out?"

Jowaisas said that despite the president's low approval ratings, the country "is going in a Bush direction" and believes the religious right has too much influence in Washington, D.C.

"It's not a democracy anymore. It's special interest groups," she said.

As a retired accountant and a World War II veteran, Joe Benavidez of Albuquerque, NM, has two big worries on his mind: the national budget and the war in Iraq.

"The nation is going broke. We get into debt every day with this war," said Benavidez, 84. "Veterans are not going to get what they want or what they need. They're going to cut veteran benefits. They're going to cut welfare, lots of things."

When it came to Bush talking about reducing the deficit by 2009, Benavidez gave a slight chuckle. He said he's heard that promise before by past presidents with no results.

"He wants to cut taxes and do good on the deficit? How do you do that? He'll cut a lot of programs -- programs people need. Talk is cheap," he said.

In St. Louis, MO, Diana Jenkins watched the speech in a downtown bar and wasn't impressed.

"The man is a crook," she said. "He belongs in jail, not the White House."

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

Bush and his crime family of liars and thugs should be in the cross-bar hotel and it seems everybody knows it (with the exception of the blind true believers) *sigh*

capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 01:33 AM

8

State of the Union Rapid Response

There's links there to some polls we should hit.

Posted by: Alan at February 1, 2006 01:36 AM

9

Here's msnbc's poll...

Did President Bush persuade you that he has the right plan for the country? * 34269 responses


Yes
32%

No
68%

Posted by: Alan at February 1, 2006 01:39 AM

10

last half of Howard Dean's email...

Tonight and tomorrow, Republicans will be out in full force, spinning, distracting, distorting and dividing. But don't be fooled. You know what you heard in Bush's speech -- and you know the reality.

When Republicans hurl insults and lies, we must be ready to stand up and speak the truth in response -- and to make sure our friends and neighbors are not afraid to do the same.

Please take the time to write a letter to the editor about what's wrong with the Republican priorities -- and what we'll do to put America on the right track:

http://www.democrats.org/sotu/rapidresponse

We cannot sit back and let them attack us. And we cannot sit back and let them attack the values and ideals we hold dear.

That's why we are investing millions of dollars and countless volunteer hours to build the Democratic Party everywhere. We're building a year-round, 50-state party capable of winning elections for every level of office.

Building our party everywhere isn't only about electing more Democrats. It's about bringing people back into the political process and ensuring that we have at least one political party representative of, and responsible to, the people.

These are not short-term investments, and we are not there yet. But we will only create lasting change if every single one of us takes responsibility for speaking out and organizing in our local community.

Over the next ten months, that's exactly what we're going to do.

Thank you.

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

Posted by: Alan at February 1, 2006 01:45 AM

11

David Corn wrote a great blog.

I do not trust Bush and his bait and switch tactics.

Our energy problems are solved. 1. We will collect dung - human and animal - to be caked for fuel. 2. Bottling the release of human noxious gases should also give us unlimited energy. The beauty of these noxious gases is that they are free. Everyone releases these noxious gases. Release of noxious gases keeps the internal body healthy.

Posted by: Gerald at February 1, 2006 01:56 AM

12

American Soldiers

More American soldiers are killed in the Middle East.

2,504 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan for Bush and his evil lies.

Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy. Henry Kissinger

G.K. Chesterton said, "Jesus speaks sanity to a world of lunatics."

Before you seek revenge, dig two graves. Confucius

Posted by: Gerald at February 1, 2006 02:02 AM

Posted by: Gerald at February 1, 2006 02:08 AM

Posted by: Gerald at February 1, 2006 02:12 AM

15

"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)

******

Even worse - they call this a "culture of life"

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 02:32 AM

16

Although I agree with most of your opinions, I am still debating whether you are a professional journalist or propaganda producer. In what school of literature would this be acceptable? "Bush and his speechwriters (who went through 30 drafts of this not-so-monumental speech)" -- Purely, simply, completely inappropriate, baseless, intentional degradation without any reasonable explanation; ad-hominem, if you will. It seems the focus of this article is, very simply, to degrade Bush's points at all possible cost. No, not to make logical points, not to present counter-viewpoints where appropriate -- this is, after all, the purpose of a blog, and I'm not arguing the presentation of personal viewpoints. Your article was instead focused on degrading the speech and the man at every possible opportunity, without logical rhyme or reason. The pure, unfettered bias seething through this article makes it intensely painful to read, and, I'm afraid, damages your credibility so badly, that no points within can be taken seriously. If you read this article and thought "Good article", you deserve to go back and re-examine your bias and ability to read and produce rational discussion on a given topic. While I have accused the Right of being hopelessly biased many times, I'm afraid this article falls under the exact same category: "Shameless Political Propaganda".

Posted by: MHJC at February 1, 2006 02:37 AM

17

Great article David! Another example of exposing the lies. Keep up the good work.

Posted by: Alan at February 1, 2006 02:47 AM

18

"Great spirits have always encountered opposition from mediocre minds. The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly." ~ Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), quoted in New York Times, March 13, 1940

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 03:01 AM

19


Sorry Dave, Im forever getting you mixed up with Oberman. I think you are both good guys, I guess thats why.

Oberman first mentioned Cindy's arrest, not Dave.

Posted by: titchaba at February 1, 2006 03:08 AM

Posted by: Alan at February 1, 2006 03:08 AM

21

To Howard Dean, Im sorry Howard, but Im a little ticked off that not every Democrat voted NO on Alito.

The Party has to work at unity. Why ANY Dem would have voted yes on this man is WAY WAY beyond me. I would like each of them to produce an answer to that question and publish it, soon.

But, it won't wash, Alito could not have Been more wrong for this place in time.

We just sold Manhattan for wampum.

As a Dem, Im at a very low ebb.

Posted by: titchaba at February 1, 2006 03:15 AM

22

Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax


Scholars for 9/11 Truth call for verification and publication by an international consortium.

Duluth, MN (PRWEB) January 30, 2006 -- A group of distinguished experts and scholars, including Robert M. Bowman, James H. Fetzer, Wayne Madsen, John McMurtry, Morgan Reynolds, and Andreas von Buelow, have concluded that senior government officials have covered up crucial facts about what really happened on 9/11.

They have joined with others in common cause as members of "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" (S9/11T), because they are convinced, based on their own research, that the administration has been deceiving the nation about critical events in New York and Washington, D.C.

These experts suggest these events may have been orchestrated by elements within the administration to manipulate Americans into supporting policies at home and abroad they would never have condoned absent "another Pearl Harbor."

They believe that this White House is incapable of investigating itself and hope the possibility that Congress might hold an unaccountable administration accountable is not merely naive or wishful thinking.

They are encouraging news services around the world to secure scientific advice by taking advantage of university resources to verify or to falsify their discoveries. Extraordinary situations, they believe, require extraordinary measures.

If this were done, they contend, one of the great hoaxes of history would stand naked before the eyes of the world and its perpetrators would be clearly exposed, which may be the only hope for saving this nation from ever greater abuse.

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

I do not think the valid questions are going away.


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 03:16 AM

23

12:22a ET - SHEEHAN FINALLY RELEASED! SAYS SHE WAS "ROUGHED UP"...According to Fertik who is in touch with David Swanson...

David reports Cindy has just been released. She was filmed by 3 networks and answered a few quick questions and mentioned she was "roughed up" - David said she looked tired and frustrated. She went off to sleep and will appear on the Today show in the morning.


12:44a ET- NBC reports the shirt in violation of the "law" read: "2,245 Dead Ñ How Many More??"

Posted by: Alan at February 1, 2006 03:22 AM

24

Bush Stretches to Defend Surveillance

The president's justification for his spy program has disputable roots, as do some of the facts and figures he put forth in his speech.

WASHINGTON Ñ President Bush received a roaring ovation Tuesday for his prime-time defense of wiretapping phone calls without warrants. But Bush's explanation relied on assumptions that have been widely questioned by experts who say the president offers a debatable interpretation of history.

Defending the surveillance program as crucial in a time of war, Bush said that "previous presidents have used the same constitutional authority" that he did. "And," he added, "federal courts have approved the use of that authority."

Bush did not name names, but was apparently reiterating the argument offered earlier this month by Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales, who invoked Presidents Lincoln, Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt for their use of executive authority.

However, warrantless surveillance within the United States for national security purposes was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972 Ñ long after Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt stopped issuing orders. That led to the 1978 passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that Bush essentially bypassed in authorizing the program after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Since the surveillance law was enacted, establishing secret courts to approve surveillance, "the Supreme Court has not touched this issue in the area of national security," said William Banks, a national security expert at Syracuse Law School.

"He might be speaking in the broadest possible sense about the president exercising his authority as commander-in-chief to conduct a war, which of course federal courts have upheld since the beginning of the nation," Banks said. "If he was talking more particularly about the use of warrantless surveillance, then he is wrong."

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

A good piece. Takes Bunnypants to task - point by point.


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 03:26 AM

Posted by: Alan at February 1, 2006 03:29 AM

26

52 percent say Bush's presidency a failure


WASHINGTON, Jan. 31 (UPI) -- More than half of the people asked in a recent poll said the term of U.S. President George W. Bush has been a failure.

During his State of the Union address, Bush needs to be convincing about his plans for Iraq, the economy, healthcare, immigration and corruption while staying the course on terrorism, The Gallup Organization said of its phone survey of 1,006 U.S. adults.

The 52 percent who consider Bush's presidency a failure contrasts to the more than 80 percent approval rating former President Bill Clinton received in January 1999 despite already being impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives.

The high-octane economy of the late 1990s was the main reason Clinton weathered the impeachment process so well, analysts said.

Bush still has relative strength in the areas of terrorism, caring and honesty, the poll concludes.

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

Funny, the same numbers as the Zogby poll. I guess Gallup is just another left wing radical polling service, eh?

Majority rules. I wonder how much of the 52% polled would say "miserable failure?"


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 03:35 AM

27

RE: Cindy's shirt

They had to hide the numbers from Bunnypants - the cocoon of "yes" persons around him have to protect him from reality because it conflicts with his beliefs.


Time for articles of impeachment. Enough damage has been done.


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 03:38 AM

28

from your linked article, Capt...

The president also seemed to ignore Supreme Court precedent when he called for Congress to give him the "line item veto." But Congress did that once, in 1996, and it was used once, by former President Clinton. But in 1998, a federal judge ruled that it was unconstitutional. That was affirmed by a 6-3 decision of the Supreme Court.

If that was a signal, a 'wink' to Alito 'n crew, what else do they have planned?!!

Posted by: Alan at February 1, 2006 03:40 AM

29

The "Terrorist Surveillance Program" was described tonight on the Sean Hannity radio show as "A winning strategy." He is definately IN your face about this issue.

Of course, calling it the T.S.P doesn't make it legal.

Posted by: Tuba Les at February 1, 2006 03:42 AM

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 03:49 AM

31

James, here's one I found for you.

March For Truth N.Y.C. '06

March for Truth N.Y.C. 2006 When? February 20th 2006 Where? "Ground Zero" New York City 10:00am -On February 20th 2006, 9/11 Truth activists will convene at "Ground Zero" former site of the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan New York City to march against the U.S. Government's mass murder of 2,986 Americans on September 11th 2001.

Posted by: Alan at February 1, 2006 04:00 AM

32

Micki, Thanks for the pointer to Mark Wilson's site on the previous thread. He looks like just the ticket for The Betrayed.

As far as I'm concerned, deciding who to vote for in the Democratic primary will be as easy as ABC (Anybody But Cantwell).

Posted by: Drewp at February 1, 2006 04:10 AM

33

"If there are people inside our country who are talking with al Qaeda, we want to know about it--because we will not sit back and wait to be hit again."

Now that's an interesting sentence. He's unwittingly acknowledging that he and Cheney did indeed sit back and wait for us to be hit during the 8 months he held office before 9/11.

He obviously didn't need to spy on Americans to prevent 9/11. All he needed to do was, say, make Cheney actually convene at least one meeting of the "terrorism task force" that he had appointed. Or shorten his record-long vacation a tad and remind Condi that, yes, as his National Security Adviser it was indeed her job to make sure that the airlines knew that Atta and the others were in the U.S.

By now we all know that Bush knew all he needed to know to stop 9/11. He simply failed to do anything.

Posted by: Drewp at February 1, 2006 04:30 AM

34

Bush's list of repressive regimes also omitted Saudi Arabia, but I guess that's because soon we will no longer depend on their oil!

Posted by: noellaurence at February 1, 2006 04:35 AM

35

Bush's list of repressive regimes also omitted Saudi Arabia, but I guess that's because soon we will no longer depend on their oil!

Posted by: noellaurence at February 1, 2006 04:37 AM

36

The state of the Union? We're still Trillions of dollars in debt. The Grand Ol' Squandering party had over a thousand earmarks (pure pork) in their last few budgets where only a few hundred had been included in all of the previous budgets combined. That's a lotta squandering.

We're stuck in a war in Iraq where the locals are talking shit about the Preznit:
Bush said in his address Tuesday that "a sudden withdrawal of our forces" would abandon "our Iraqi allies to death and prison." He said the United States had little option but to "keep our word, defeat our enemies and stand behind the American military in its vital mission."
"That did not sit well with those Iraqis who are weary of the continued violence and lack of basic services such as water and electricity, and believe things would get better if the Americans went home.
"Health Ministry employee Baqir Jaafar agreed. He complained that the Americans were more interested in securing Iraq's vast oil wealth than building a stable, democratic country.

Ungrateful MoFos. Almost 20,000 Americans dead or wounded in the war, thousands more suffereing from ptsd and they worry that we want their oil. Sheesh.

Seems a lot of folks don't get it:
President Bush acknowledged America's reliance on oil Tuesday night, but his proposals will do nothing to curb today's high energy costs and are likely to make only a modest dent on oil imports even in the long run.

Feingold gives expression to his inner-Frenchman (as Patriotboy would say).

Harry Reid boils the trouble with the Preznit down to a single word: Honor. The Reds have no honor. They lie. They steal. They waste taxpayer money. They favor the rich over the middle class or poor. They hate black folks. They tried to drown New Orleans. They violate every other stricture in the Constitution. They don't know how to run a war.

They sure know how to beat the hell out of a woman, though. All these strong, brave Reds who're too scared to go off to fight in Iraq, but are plenty brave enough to take on a woman. That explains a lot (like Borkito).

And the culture of corruption continues to drain the blood from the Grand Ol' Torturin' Party. Dumbasses. Gotta keep it clean, like Hellraisin' Harry.

Hey, Timiee! Did ya' find the transcript or the tape showing what the Preznit testified to so that we can tell if he's lying about WMD? It's hard to tell when they hide the truth, eh?

And Bubblenoze Bill goes on hiatus, while LBH is left to make a purebread ass of himself. How far the party has fallen to be defended by a couple of ignoramuses (and a yammering, dimwitted Moneyhound like Happy). Maybe someday, the Preznit will get something right that they can brag about. Like a majority of Americans, I won't hold my breath.

Time to make the Donuts.

Posted by: Pandemoniac at February 1, 2006 07:03 AM

37

What Really Happened at the State of the Union

by Cindy Sheehan for BuzzFlash

Posted by: flan at February 1, 2006 07:31 AM

38

The very Janus of theater...

One side of the face speaking proudly about death of the wife of one of our nation's most lauded "free speakers" while the other side drags out a woman who wears a t-shirt emabarassing to the p(r)esident...

But I'll bet Lee Greenwood's still proud.

I cannot say the same for myself today.

-T

Posted by: Hajji at February 1, 2006 07:51 AM

39

As usual you left wing dolts have made my morning. Theres nothing better then getting to work and reading the morning funnies as brought to you by Capt Kangaroo and Gerald the Nazi lover. I was a little dissapointed Gerald didn't throw out any nazi refrences, but alas the day is young, and we all know it takes a Nazi to call another person a Nazi. I also want to give kudos to the good Capt, feverishly typing away night after lonely night, all by himself in his govt subsidized apt whacking off to his paranoid delusional fantasies. Thanks again capt and heres to another 3 years.

Posted by: evil republican agenda at February 1, 2006 07:53 AM

40

Congrats to Cindy Sheehan, not everyone can turn there childs honorable death into a career move, im sure Casey is proud. Casey would be proud of his commy loving mom and all her friends like Hugo and Michael Moore.

Posted by: evil republican agenda at February 1, 2006 08:06 AM

41

MHJC,

Um, the original name of this Blog was "Bush Lies" Hmmmm, kind of puts in perspective doesn't it? And when Bush provides so much material - i.e. everything that comes out of his mouth is a lie - what else can David do but point them out?

Great article David!

Posted by: flan at February 1, 2006 08:31 AM

42

Alan, I can't understand why he would even want line item veto when he hasn't vetoed one single bill that has been put before him. If the only bills that get to the floor are ones put up by the lobbyists and the Republican machine that there is no point to veto.

Posted by: flan at February 1, 2006 08:34 AM

43

"I can't understand why he would even want line item veto when he hasn't vetoed one single bill "

To cut line items like children with fatal disease, food for the poor, etc.


just saying


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 08:42 AM

44

Dead Man Talking


State of the Union -- Bush's address laid it all out in the open: his presidency is finished.


George Bush is hanging by a thread. As he gamed his way through his fifth State of the Union Speech last night, it was clear that his is a presidency laying in ruin. Except for a reactionary judiciary that will be his continuing legacy -- pushed passed the too-little, too-late efforts of a limp Democratic Party -- Bush has no accomplishments he can look forward to in the next three years.

George is dead, spun-out of spin, yet like his zombie followers he just keeps on talking.

Gone was the swagger, the big ideas for shaping his corporatist "Ownership Society." As his party enters their Year of the Perp-walk, as many expect 2006 to play out, any semblance of a true politics of opposition will bring down the whole sordid experiment that he represents. We've come light years from the time when the White House's soft-peddle of compassionate conservatism could soothe public concern.

The roid-rage foreign policy that marked his earlier speeches -- focused on the the now infamous "Axis of Evil" -- was replaced last night with the tamer statement that military force could only go so far in the "War on Terra."


More HERE


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

The brain-dead zombies have made their coffin and they will lay in it. Clearly evidenced by a few zombies that post here.


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 08:54 AM

45

Think Progress on the SOTU


Point by pathetic lying point.

capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 09:17 AM

46

One con too many


To use those sports cliches that pundits like to deploy when talking about politics, President George W. Bush needed to hit a home run in his State of the Union speech Tuesday night to save his sagging, corrupt Presidency.

Instead, he fouled out.

Offering nothing but pathetic political platitudes, Bush fell back on his tired, overused con game of "trust me, IÕ­ your President." Problem is, America no longer trusts this man who has lied, abused the Constitution and misused the power of the Presidency to further his tarnished political goals.

In another sports analogy, Bush looked like a tired fighter, worn out, against the ropes, flailing wildly but seldom connecting.

The con man is out of cons. He has gone to that well once too often and no one is buying his snake oil.

"I thought that speech was tired," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, an Illinois Democrat. "I thought that speech said, 'if you liked the last six years, we're going to give you two more years of that.'"

While youդ expect a Democrat to find fault with Bushճ speech, the truth is the President looked, acted and sounded tired, like a runner out of breath, unable to muster enough strength to cross the finish line. While the Republican party leadership offered its usual collection of worn-out clich?s to try and support the Presidentճ speech, Americans across the country РRepublican and Democrat Рexpressed doubt, dismay and disbelief at what they heard.

In New Orleans, a 75-year-old Republican and Korean War veteran watched the State of the Union Speech and shook his head.

"Did I miss something? ThatÕ³ all he had to offer? I think thatÕ³ a crying shame," he said.

In interviews with Americans who watched the speech, reporters found skepticism and disappointment that crossed party lines and revealed an angry nation fed up with its President and his many failures.

They know the state of the union is bad and the nation is in trouble. They no longer buy the lies from the man responsible.

Bush offered another lame attempt to justify his illegal orders allowing the National Security Agency to spy on Americans, a claim that virtually every legal scholar РRepublicans included Рcall phony and an outright violation of the Constitution.

He served up his tired rhetoric that anyone who dares oppose his policies is aiding and abetting the enemy and repeated the often-discounted argument that his dictatorial policies have made America safer in this age of international terrorism.

In a dramatic, pitiful example of how repressive America has become under Bush, antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan was led from the House gallery in handcuffs because she committed the horrific crime of wearing a T-shirt protesting the Iraq war.

SheehanÕ³ t-shirt read: "2,245 Dead. How many more?" -- a reference to the number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq." Capitol Police ordered her to cover it up. She refused, citing her right of free speech. But free speech does not exist in George W. BushÕ³ America and Capitol police held her incommunicado for four hours so the TV cameras could never focus on her or her anti-Bush message.

In St. Louis, Republican Diane Jenkins, joined friends in a downtown bar to watch Bush and said she felt like getting drunk after the speech.

"The man is a crook," she said. "He belongs in jail, not the White House."

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

The last line really says it all!


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 09:52 AM

47

One way to succeed, is to keep absolutely quiet-

Write that on a rock, and sleep on it-

Posted by: James Ha at February 1, 2006 10:14 AM

48

The Wush's speech was as bad as to be expected, but the democratic response was just as disappointing, without a mention of the quagmire this administration has blundered us into.

Then today, on Washingtoon Journal Congresscritter Clyburn, the new Democratic caucus chair, defended the arrest of Cindy Sheehan.

It is time to send Mrs. Sheehan to Congress as a Senator...

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 1, 2006 10:27 AM

49

David, connecting the insurgents to the war in Iraq works somewhat 30 something percent have fallen for it. I must give you kudos for having the stomach to watch and listen to that liar, I can't even stand to see his face flash by on the TV! The only thing that will stop this insane bushco end run is when our country is finally bankrupt and Asia refuses to finance us anymore. Mr. "Helicopter" ben bernanke will see to that!

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 10:31 AM

50

Sheehan to replace Feinstein?

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 10:33 AM

51

I would love to see that primary fight here in California!

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 1, 2006 10:36 AM

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 1, 2006 10:43 AM

53

David:

Great analysis of Bush--one that any Bush supporter will hate because it delves beneath his empty rhetoric.

I would appreciate your musings on the Cindy Sheehan arrest. Before the SOU speech, one news service stated she was arrested for unraveling a banner in protest before the speech. This appears to be misinformation. It should frighten everyone, including hardcore Bush supporters, that a woman who wears a shirt with the number of dead on it is considered a protestor subject to arrest. What do we call the democratics who refused to clap for many of Bush's ideological positions?

It is a very sad state of affairs when the Country that declares itself the leader in the free world arrests someone for the statement on a T-shirt. If this happened in China, Syria, or Iran, it would be conclusive proof of an oppressive government. Here, it is considered merely enforcing orderly decorum.

This was purely content based discrimination in direct violation of the first amendment. Put your hand over your heart, wear a flag lapel pin or support your troops button and you are a patriot. Question the policies of your government and you are a criminal.

Criticize Ms. Sheehan for her viewpoints if you like, afterall that is your first amendment right. But to support her arrest does damage to your own right of dissent on any issue you feel important.

Your thoughts David--afterall it is a first amendment issue, or has the Bill of Rights become an irrelevant document?

Posted by: Scott at February 1, 2006 10:45 AM

54

China's veto power weighs heavy

BEIJING - China this week sided with the other four of the United Nations Security Council's five permanent members - the United States, Russia, Britain and France - to favor referral of Iran to the Security Council over its nuclear program. But whether Beijing uses its power of veto to block possible sanctions against Tehran is another issue.

The Iranian nuclear case is expected to be forwarded to the Security Council at a meeting on Thursday of the governing board of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna.

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki warned on Iranian television late Tuesday that a referral to the Security Council would result in Iran halting cooperation with the UN atomic agency as of February 4.

China, with its Security Council veto power and its seat on the board of the governors of the IAEA, plays a key role in how the world deals with Iran.

Should Iran avoid sanctions now, and be allowed to develop its nuclear program - and possibly a nuclear device - Beijing fears this would prompt North Korean leader Kim Jong-il to become even more obstructive in future talks over Pyongyang's nuclear program. This would endanger China's carefully crafted position of a peace broker on the Korean Peninsula and present the Chinese leadership with a real nuclear threat across its border.

Yet should China cave in to pressure from the United States and refrain from using its veto power on a resolution condemning Tehran's nuclear ambitions, that would most certainly jeopardize Beijing's stable and rising supply of oil from Iran.

China believes that to be a serious threat to the country's economic stability and growth, which its leaders consider a matter of national security. China became a net importer of oil in 1993 and imports since then have risen sharply, accelerating in recent years.

In 2004, it imported 2.46 million barrels per day, accounting for about 40% of demand. Currently the world's second-largest oil importer, China gets more than 12% of its oil imports from Iran and wants to step up imports of Iran's natural gas too.

Agreeing to UN sanctions would potentially destroy the value of many investments Beijing has made. In Iran, where US companies are prohibited from investing more than US$20 million annually, Chinese companies have signed long-term contracts valued at $200 billion, making China Iran's biggest oil and gas customer.

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

Always interesting to hear from a point of view from other parts of the planet.

capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 10:46 AM

55

Capt 26, isn't 52% what the facists call a "mandate?" HA!
Alan 31, I find that a somewhat curious remark. Are you saying that the march for truth is for some and not others? Do you still believe bushco is telling the truth about 9/11? That there is no need to pursue it any farther, even to force them to answer to the thousand obvious lies under oath, because we already know what happened? I am stunned. Truth shoud be the priority for everyone, ESPECIALLY where 9/11 is concerned.

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 10:47 AM

56

Cindy Sheehan May Challenge Calif. Senator

CARACAS, Venezuela - Cindy Sheehan, the peace activist who set up camp near President Bush's Texas ranch last summer, said Saturday she is considering running against Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record) to protest what she called the California lawmaker's support for the war in Iraq.

"She voted for the war. She continues to vote for the funding. She won't call for an immediate withdrawal of the troops," Sheehan told The Associated Press in an interview while attending the World Social Forum in Venezuela along with thousands of other anti-war and anti-globalization activists.

"I think our senator needs to be held accountable for her support of George Bush and his war policies," said Sheehan, whose 24-year-old soldier son Casey was killed in Iraq in 2004.

Feinstein's campaign manager, Kam Kuwata, said the senator "doesn't support George Bush and his war policies."

"She has stated publicly on numerous occasions that she felt she was misled by the administration at the time of the vote," Kuwata said by phone from California.

But with troops committed, Feinstein believes immediate withdrawal is not a responsible option, Kuwata said.

"Senator Feinstein's position is, let's work toward quickly turning over the defense of Iraq to Iraqis so that we can bring the troops home as soon as possible," he said.

Sheehan accused Feinstein of being out of touch with Californians on the issue.

She said she would decide whether to run after talking with her three other adult children. The Democratic primary will be held in June, and candidates must submit their statements for the voter guide by Feb. 14.

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

Maybe Cindy will give all Californians a Valentines day gift?


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 10:49 AM

57

With 80% of Iraqis wishing the U.S. would withdraw its forces, one is led to ask the question:

What part of Democracy doesn't this president get?

Then, considering how hard his legal team fought for his appointment in 2000, despite being clearly behind in the popular vote, one is forced to the conclusion:

All of it.

Of course, I know the Constitutional Republic rhetoric, and all that, but I'm jest sayin'...

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 1, 2006 11:04 AM

58

Robert, it's only undemocratic when the neocons LOSE!

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 11:06 AM

59

Here's something for YOU Alan! I am simply amazed that this has appeared at Daily Kos, are people FINALLY waking up???

20 reasons to question the official story of 9/11
by dailykoster
Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 07:16:42 AM PDT

There's a lot more than 20 reasons, but this a good start!

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 11:12 AM

60

Polls Left Alito Filibuster Wide Open to Democrats

One assumes the Democratic leadership has staff paid to look at numbers like I easily uncovered and to make recommendations like I would have made to their bosses, that they get out there, as publicly as possible, and make the case to the American people that Samuel Alito will tilt a judiciary that only a tiny percentage of the country believes is too liberal even farther in the opposite direction.
------------
For everyone who thinks I have poo-pooed the filibuster efforts, here is a short but sweet article that explains my feelings very well. While not giving up I sure don't have much faith, if it depends on the uninformed public that is more concerned about the Brad Pitt-Jennifer Aniston fiasco, and a dem leadership that couldn't care less.

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 11:21 AM

61

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates -- Iraqi money gambled away in the Philippines. Thousands spent on a swimming pool that was never used. An elevator repaired so poorly that it crashed, killing people.

A U.S. government audit found American-led occupation authorities squandered tens of millions of dollars that were supposed to be used to rebuild Iraq through undocumented spending and outright fraud.

In some cases, auditors recommend criminal charges be filed against the perpetrators. In others, it asks the U.S. ambassador to Iraq to recoup the money.

Dryly written audit reports describe the Coalition Provisional Authority's offices in the south-central city of Hillah being awash in bricks of $100 bills taken from a central vault without documentation.

It describes one agent who kept almost $700,000 in cash in an unlocked footlocker and mentions a U.S. soldier who gambled away as much as $60,000 in reconstruction funds in the Philippines.

"Tens of millions of dollars in cash had gone in and out of the South-Central Region vault without any tracking of who deposited or withdrew the money, and why it was taken out," says a report by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, which is in the midst of a series of audits for the Pentagon and State Department.

Much of the first audit reports deal with contracting in south-central Iraq, one of the country's least-hostile regions. Audits have yet to be released for the occupation authority's spending in the rest of Iraq.

The audits offer a window into the chaotic U.S.-led occupation of Iraq of 2003-04, when inexperienced American officials - including workers from President Bush's election campaign - organized a cash-intensive "hearts and minds" mission to rebuild Iraq's devastated economy.


But the corruption and incompetence documented in the reports reveal that much of the effort, however well-intentioned, was wasted.

The failure of the rebuilding effort has been borne out most vividly by the rise of a virulent anti-American insurgency that has claimed most of the 2,237 U.S. military lives lost since the war began.

In some cases, auditors could find no trace of cash, much of which came from Iraqi oil revenues overseen by the occupation authority.

"Those deficiencies were so significant that we were precluded from accomplishing our stated objectives," the auditors said of U.S. officials in Hillah being unable to account for $97 million of the $120 million in Iraqi oil revenues earmarked for rebuilding projects.

An October 2005 audit found documentation for the spending of just $8 million of that money.

Negligence proved deadly in at least one case. Three Iraqis plummeted to their deaths in an elevator in the Hillah General Hospital that was certified to have been replaced by a contractor who received $662,800.

Also in Hillah, occupation officials spent $108,140 to replace pumps and fix the city's Olympic swimming pool. But the contractor merely polished the old plumbing to make it look new and collected his money.

When the pool was filled, the water came out a murky brown and the pool's reopening had to be canceled. The reports did not identify the contractors involved.

Auditors have asked the U.S. ambassador to recover a total of $571,823 that the reports describe as overpaid funds.

In some cases, cash simply disappeared.
------------
Damn, if only a clinton were in charge of this clusterf**k, maybe something could be done!

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 11:27 AM

62

Brad and Jen?

OMG - what happened to Brad and Jen?

HA!


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 11:30 AM

63

The only thing worse than Emperor Bush's speech was Gov Kaines response. I played a little drinking game during the speech. I chugged a beer every time I heard "terror" or "freedom". About fifteen minutes into ths address I was pretty buzzed. I quickly lost interest as it became apparent that once again there was nothing but the repetition of the previously regurgitated talking points. Stay the course. Do the same dumb shit we have been doing. Repeat the same dumb shit we have been saying. Our soldiers will continue to die and be treated like crap by Halliburton. Any lemming who questions "the march of freedom" is a "defeatist". Blah blah blah...

I actually found myself missing Ronald Reagan.

I turned the channel and found that one of my favorite movies "They Live" by John Carpenter was on. That wierd B grade movie was a more accurate representation of our current reality than a Bush speech could ever be.

Posted by: corky at February 1, 2006 11:43 AM

64

US Senate Confirms Alito for Supreme Court
By Deborah Tate
Capitol Hill
31 January 2006

The U.S. Senate has confirmed Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court in a largely party-line vote. He is poised to become the 110th justice on the high court, succeeding Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Senator Ted Stevens, an Alaska Republican, announced the vote as he presided over the Senate.

STEVENS: "On this vote, the ayes are 58, the nays are 42. The president's nomination of Samuel A. Alito, Jr. of New Jersey to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States is confirmed."

The vote fell generally along party lines, with all but one of the Senate's majority Republicans voting in favor of Judge Samuel Alito. All but four of the Democrats voted against the nomination
------------
UH, what happened to the filibuster? What a f**king joke. Still wondering why I have lost faith? The two-party system is dead, long live the king.

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 11:45 AM

65

How to Tell if Bush is Serious about Ending US Dependence on Foreign Petroleum

The way you could tell Bush was serious would be if he ordered the Pentagon to use green sources of energy where possible. If a major US bureacracy spent even a few billions on things like solar power and electric vehicles, there would be technological breakthroughs and prices would plummet.

Or Bush could rescind some of his tax cuts for the super-rich and use the money as incentive for green energy.

But as long as Bush, who is as he keeps reminding us, the chief executive officer of the US government, doesn't even require his own employees to try to use less petroleum, then all he is doing is mouthing plattitudes he stole from Al Gore and John Kerry, without intending to do more than flap his lips.

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

I bet our Michigan bloggers would love to see Juan Cole run for office? He has really expanded his commentary lately. More to the point than he used to be and he is covering much more ground on more diverse issues.


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 11:47 AM

66

The State of the Union is not so stately.

Posted by: caroline at February 1, 2006 11:50 AM

67

Saladin,

We have a two party system, it is just that both parties listen to the same prophet, profit.

Both parties will do everything they can to stop a viable third choice and both parties offer some very good kabuki theater while giving themselves raises and passing any bill that is paid for in advanced. (by lobbyists)


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 11:51 AM

68

Capt, their agenda is the same. The arguments and left-right rhetoric is an act. If the actions don't say that loud and clear, nothing will. I will say it again, it is up to we the people to take the country back, but that won't happen either because half don't even know what's going on. I am seriously considering a move to Bora Bora!

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 11:58 AM

69

Era Ends: Western Union Stops Sending Telegrams

After 145 years, Western Union has quietly stopped sending telegrams.

On the company's web site, if you click on "Telegrams" in the left-side navigation bar, you're taken to a page that ends a technological era with about as little fanfare as possible:

"Effective January 27, 2006, Western Union will discontinue all Telegram and Commercial Messaging services. We regret any inconvenience this may cause you, and we thank you for your loyal patronage. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact a customer service representative."

The decline of telegram use goes back at least to the 1980s, when long-distance telephone service became cheap enough to offer a viable alternative in many if not most cases. Faxes didn't help. Email could be counted as the final nail in the coffin.

Western Union has not failed. It long ago refocused its main business to make money transfers for consumers and businesses. Revenues are now $3 billion annually. It's now called Western Union Financial Services, Inc. and is a subsidiary of First Data Corp.

The world's first telegram was sent on May 24, 1844 by inventor Samuel Morse. The message, "What hath God wrought," was transmitted from Washington to Baltimore. In a crude way, the telegraph was a precursor to the Internet in that it allowed rapid communication, for the first time, across great distances.

Western Union goes back to 1851 as the Mississippi Valley Printing Telegraph Company. In 1856 it became the Western Union Telegraph Company after acquisition of competing telegraph systems. By 1861, during the Civil War, it had created a coast-to-coast network of lines.

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

Time they are a changing.


capt

Posted by: capt at February 1, 2006 12:00 PM

70

George W. Bush had the chutzpah to speak with undue optimism and hubris regarding the "progress" of his War on Iraq. Cindy Sheehan is removed from the gallery; he uses a family as his political prop to "honor the sacrifice" in his War of Choice.

If the families of over 2,300 soldiers who've been killed in his unnecessary War of Choice had been sitting in the chamber, instead of just one Rovian hand-picked family, do you think the American people would have been able to hear bush's empty words over the pain and cries of grief?

bush is a coward.


Posted by: micki at February 1, 2006 12:10 PM

71

bush is nothing more than a puppet. He has nothing to say about anything. He is just a front man, and not a very good one, for the guys behind the curtain.

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 12:13 PM

72

Bill Clinton Member of Bush Family

Newsmax | January 31 2006

Related: Act Three, Scene Two: Clinton Criticizes Bush (Again)

President Bush said Sunday that ex-President Bill Clinton has worked so closely with his father on tsunami and Hurricane Katrina relief that he's like a member of the Bush family.

Referring to Clinton as "my new brother," Bush told CBS's "Face the Nation" that it was "fun" to watch his two predecessors interact when they all attended the funeral of Pope John Paul II.

"You know, there's a lot of shared experiences and so I can understand why ex-presidents are able to put aside old differences," he told "Face the Nation" host Bob Schieffer.

The president said that he, too, has grown closer to the man whom he once said had disgraced the Oval Office.

"I check in with Bill Clinton occasionally, just to see how he's doing," he admitted.

Bush says that their conversations "makes it obvious to me that we're kind of, you know, on the same wavelength with the job of the presidency."

When Schieffer reminded the president that Sen. Hillary Clinton was planning to succeed him, Bush interjected: "Yeah. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton."
-----------
Check the source. If this doesn't raise the hair on the back of your neck, nothing will.


Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 12:16 PM

73

In Washington State, we still have a mess to clean up at Hanford, a nuclear site. bush yammers about us being "addicted to oil" -- which is one of the few accurate things he said -- but he didn't say anything about scaling back demand for oil. (Did he?)

Helllllllllllllloooooooooooo! How about expanding public transportation? He yakked about hydrogen, but didn't elaborate that his plans for hydrogen fuel would require coal-fired power plants -- in other words, his "clean" energy would be made possible using a high pollution process.

More bullshit from the busheviks.

Posted by: micki at February 1, 2006 12:25 PM

74

Feds Want A Wiretap Backdoor In All Net Hardware and Software

Networking Pipeline | January 31 2006

Thinks the federal government is too intrusive? You ain't seen nothing yet. An FCC mandate will require that all hardware and software have a wiretap backdoor that allows the government to tap into all your communications.

The mandate expands the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), and requires that every piece of hardware and software sold include the backdoor.

The rule isn't yet final, but once it is, all vendors will have 18 months to comply. And in fact, says Brad Templeton, chairman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), some router makers already include such a backdoor. So your hardware may be vulnerable.

There are several problems with this rule. First is the obvious massive intrusion into all of our privacy. Second, says Templeton, is the way that the rule will stifle innovation. According to the Washington Post, he claims that the rule will "require that people get permission to innovate" would create "regulatory barriers to entry." He adds "The FBI gets veto on new companies."

The final problem is that if all hardware and software has a backdoor, it's an open invitation to hackers. So we may be faced with a double-whammy: The feds and hackers working their way into our systems.

The EFF, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), the COMPTEL association of communications service providers, and the American Civil Liberties Union filed a brief last week with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to try and stop the FCC. Here's hoping they win.
------------
It seems the goal is to completely shut down the only source of truth.

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 12:26 PM

75

BTW, I didn't watch the bastard. I read the transcript, which was painful enough.

Posted by: micki at February 1, 2006 12:26 PM

76

Saladin, I recall you said you had doctors' appointments earlier this week. I hope things went well.

You're back in your usual form, so I will take that as a good sign. ;-))

Posted by: micki at February 1, 2006 12:28 PM

77

micki, did you know that a plan to place offshore platforms utilizing solar energy in producing hydrogen was shut down by bushco? Whatever were they thinking? I guess we can't have any competing with oil companies until they've sucked out every last drop.

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 12:29 PM

78

I am seriously considering a move to Bora Bora!

by: Saladin

be sure BoraBora has internet connections; otherwise, I worry what will you do?

your admirer

Posted by: Fairwell to Salad at February 1, 2006 12:30 PM

79

I got this in my email this a.m.....


# When will we have a new strategy in Iraq that protects American lives? Violence is increasing, not decreasing there and the mismanagement of this war has cost the lives of Americans and billions of dollars in fraud. And when will we secure our ports and chemical and nuclear plants, which remain vulnerable?

# When will the Republican Party put its responsibility to the people before its greed and thirst for power? The Republican culture of corruption in the executive and legislative branches has violated the law and cost taxpayers billions.

# When will President Bush and the Republican Congress wake up to the economic crisis tens of millions of Americans face? Good jobs are leaving this country, and many of the jobs that remain exploit working families by denying them adequate benefits. Millionaires and corporations receive tax breaks while Americans can't afford to save, and the gap between rich and poor continues to widen to levels unseen since the 19th century.

# When will we finally do something for the 46 million Americans who lack health insurance? Many have had their lives ruined financially when the worst happened, and many more no longer seek the care they need because they cannot afford it.

# When will we make serious strides towards energy independence? We get a greater percentage of our oil from cartels and dictatorships now than we did in 2000.

# When will he take steps to further ensure retirement security for every American? Growing old with dignity is a right, not a privilege, and dismantling Social Security in favor of private accounts is the wrong direction for our society.

Posted by: caroline at February 1, 2006 12:31 PM

80

Thanks micki, but the appointment was for my husband who had major back surgery a month ago. He is on the mend. And I am on my usual tear!

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 12:34 PM

81

Tuesday, March 4, 2003 Posted: 9:52 PM EST (0252 GMT)

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- A lawyer was arrested late Monday and charged with trespassing at a public mall in the state of New York after refusing to take off a T-shirt advocating peace that he had just purchased at the mall.

According to the criminal complaint filed Monday, Stephen Downs was wearing a T-shirt bearing the words "Give Peace A Chance" that he had just purchased from a vendor inside the Crossgates Mall in Guilderland, New York, near Albany.

"I was in the food court with my son when I was confronted by two security guards and ordered to either take off the T-shirt or leave the mall," said Downs.

When Downs refused the security officers' orders, police from the town of Guilderland were called and he was arrested and taken away in handcuffs, charged with trespassing "in that he knowingly enter(ed) or remain(ed) unlawfully upon premises," the complaint read.

Downs said police tried to convince him he was wrong in his actions by refusing to remove the T-shirt because the mall "was like a private house and that I was acting poorly.

"I told them the analogy was not good and I was then hauled off to night court where I was arraigned after pleading not guilty and released on my own recognizance," Downs told Reuters in a telephone interview.

Downs is the director of the Albany Office of the state Commission on Judicial Conduct, which investigates complaints of misconduct against judges and can admonish, censure or remove judges found to have engaged in misconduct.

Calls to the Guilderland police and district attorney, Anthony Cardona and to officials at the mall were not returned for comment.
--------------
Does anyone remember this story? We are SO doomed.

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 12:42 PM

82

David , you certainly have covered the obvious contradictions in the Presidents "State of Denial" address.

I thought bringing up Coretta Scott King's passing at the very beginning illustrated the contradictions in the Bush administration loud and clear. For me it put the spolight directly on the Bush administration's failures in responding to the needs of the poor in New Orleans before and after the flooding, and how they are continuing to ignore the reconstruction there.

The list of critical issues "LEFT BEHIND" in the State of Denial is a long one. Of course he did not mention raising the minimum wage, the 32% of students who will not graduate from high school, no plan for the 47 million uninsured, and the outsourcing of jobs etc. etc.

While these issues were "LEFT BEHIND". President Bush did not leave behind his desire to see the tax cuts for the wealthy to become permanent... behind. Just another example of his truely compassionate conservative nature coming through.

I found it especially telling about the state of our union when the family who had lost a son in the war of choice in Iraq was being applauded. Cindy Sheehan who also lost her son in Iraq was being arrested...now that is the symbol for THE STATE OF OUR UNION.

You can really tell that Bush does not get out much in the real world when he said we live in a "hopeful society". This really made me wonder about his life in his "bubble".

I came away from the state of denial saying "SWITHGRASS" "SWITCHGRASS". TRying to say it 10 times in a row really fast and wondering had V.P Cheney switched some of his investments into the research of this grass that I had never heard of.

Posted by: kathleen at February 1, 2006 12:43 PM

83

oops "Switchgrass"

Posted by: kathleen at February 1, 2006 12:51 PM

84

kathleen, I thought it was odd, too, that bush would single out a particular grass. Maybe the republicons' favorite Big AG company holds the patent on a new "super-seed" (GMO) for switchgrass.

Did you know that "switchgrass" is from the genus Panicum (panic)?

Posted by: micki at February 1, 2006 01:13 PM

85

I just read a rumor that cheney is stepping down for health reasons. Has anyone heard this news?

Posted by: Saladin at February 1, 2006 01:22 PM

86

THE SCARIEST THING ABOUT THE SOTU SPEECH
by Bob in North Dakota


All of the pundits missed what, to me, is the scariest thing about the SOTU speech last night.

Bush made it loud and clear that HE doesn't want to hear ANY negative news about the situation in Iraq. He doesn't want "defeatism" to come from the lips of people in Congress...and he made it clear that he doesn't want to hear it from his Administration as well. Anything but happy happy news is unpatriotic, helping the terrorists, not supporting the troops, etc.

This is way scary. We have over 100,000 troops in a foreign land, and he only wants to hear the happy happy good news.


Bob in North Dakota


Posted by: Bob in North Dakota at February 1, 2006 01:27 PM

87

This really comes as no surprise. This has been indicated in the MSM. I had written about this on Corns site, because I had heard George Will say this several times over the last few months on Stephanopolous(sp?) program "This Week".

;LET US HOPE THAT FITZGERALD IS CLOSING IN ON HIM.

See there is a reason to listen and watch main stream news...they sometimes know know what is coming.

Posted by: kathleen at February 1, 2006 01:30 PM

88

Also, regarding switchgrass....a very unremarkable native grass. Produces biomass, not much different than wheat straw, corn stalks, or lawn clippings. I have a Ph.D. in Agronomy, and even did some research on switchgrass some 30 years ago. For the life of me, I cannot understand why the federal government has fixed its gaze on this most unremarkable grass. If you want biomass for cheap, harvest corn stalks.

Bob

Posted by: Bob in North Dakota at February 1, 2006 01:31 PM

89

Multimillion dollar Abramoff client, who gave readily to Republicans, got meetings with Bush, DeLay, Hastert, Lott and Burns John Byrne Published: February 1, 2006 Print This | Email This Fitial with President Bush in 2001Eleven million dollars can buy a lot of access in Washington. Especially if your lobbyist is Jack Abramoff. Take Beningo Fitial, the current governor of the Northern Marianas Islands, a U.S. territory in the Pacific. He and his company, along with their trade lobby and funds doled out by the islands at his prodding, spent $11.5 million dollars lobbying Washington between 1995 and 2002. FitialÑwho became Speaker of the Marianas House after a coup organized by AbramoffÕs associates and former aides of House Majority Leader Tom DeLayÑwas treated like a king. Advertisement In January 2001, Fitial enjoyed the inauguration of President George W. Bush. Three months later, in April, Fitial met Bush a second time. He also met Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS). Then he stopped in for visit with Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-IL). Fitial with Tom DeLay and Conrad BurnsIn other wordsÑAbramoff seems to have arranged for a non-head of state for a tiny island in the Pacific to meet with the three most powerful men in the United States of America. But thatÕs not all: Fitial also met with then-Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-TX) and Senate Interior Department Appropriations Chairman Conrad Burns (R-MT). Fitial appears in photographs with Burns and Delay -- enlarged from tiny thumbnails in his hometown paper -- at left. That, it seems -- along with a spate of legislative victories keeping the islands from U.S. jurisdiction -- is the value of $11 million dollars. Fitial, not surprisingly, has not been terribly critical of Abramoff since he pled guilty to myriad criminal charges, including fraud, tax evasion and bribing members of Congress. Six months after his visit to Capitol Hill, FitialÕs familyÕs companies donated $50,000 to the National Senatorial Campaign Committee. The following month, AbramoffÕs firm, at the direction of former press secretary to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) Michael Scanlon, doled out $50,000 to the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee. Fitial was also chaired the islands campaign to raise money for President BushÕs reelection in 2004. Another photo of Fitial and Bush, discovered by Raw StoryAsked about his meeting with Bush, Fitial told his local newspaper the Saipan Tribune, "This was a great opportunity to raise the CNMI's (Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands) concerns to the president directly. Indeed, when the President discussed our military's readiness, I made it clear to him that the people of the CNMI support the military's presence and exercises in the Northern Mariana Islands." ÒThe president,Ó Fitial added, Òsaid he was very pleased to know that the CNMI is supporting the military's presence in the islands." Fitial also said he was pleased most by the fact that Lott recalled their meeting in a previous year. He said, "I think our efforts in Washington will continue to pay off for the CNMI people.Ó And pay off they did: The MarianaÕs $11.5 million, channeled through Abramoff, crushed numerous attempts to impose minimum wage and labor laws on the island territory. The tropical hotspot where Tom DeLay spent New Years in 1998 playing golf remains a haven for U.S. garment manufacturersÑincluding Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger and GapÑwho enjoy the loosely enforced minimum wage of $3.05. But you wouldn't know that from the labels: all products made in the Commonwealth can be stamped Copyright © 2004-06 Raw Story Media, Inc. All rights reserved. | Site map |Privacy policy Site

Posted by: kathleen at February 1, 2006 01:39 PM

90

Has anyone heard about a repug senators wife being removed last night for wearing a pro war shirt?

Posted by: Paul at February 1, 2006 01:49 PM

91

LOU DOBBS WOULD LOVE THIS STORY Arlingon, Va.- KBR announced today that the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) component has awarded KBR an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contingency contract to support ICE facilities in the event of an emergency. KBR is the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton (NYSE:HAL). With a maximum total value of $385 million over a five-year term, consisting of a one-year based period and four one-year options, the competitively awarded contract will be executed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth District. KBR held the previous ICE contract from 2000 through 2005. "We are especially gratified to be awarded this contract because it builds on our extremely strong track record in the arena of emergency operations support," said Bruce Stanski, executive vice president, KBR Government and Infrastructure. "We look forward to continuing the good work we have been doing to support our customer whenever and wherever we are needed." The contract, which is effective immediately, provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs. The contingency support contract provides for planning and, if required, initiation of specific engineering, construction and logistics support tasks to establish, operate and maintain one or more expansion facilities. The contract may also provide migrant detention support to other U.S. Government organizations in the event of an immigration emergency, as well as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency, such as a natural disaster. In the event of a natural disaster, the contractor could be tasked with providing housing for ICE personnel performing law enforcement functions in support of relief efforts. ICE is one of three agencies that make up the Border and Transportation Security (BTS) Directorate of the DHS. The mission of the BTS Directorate is to secure the nation's air, land and sea borders. ICE, the largest investigative arm of the DHS, is responsible for identifying and shutting down vulnerabilities in the nation's border, economic, transportation and infrastructure security. KBR is a global engineering, construction, technology and services company. Whether designing an LNG facility, serving as a defense industry contractor, or providing small capital construction, KBR delivers world-class service and performance. KBR employs more than 60,000 people in 43 countries around the world. Halliburton, founded in 1919, is one of the world's largest providers of products and services to the petroleum and energy industries. The company serves its customers with a broad range of products and services through its Energy Services Group and KBR. Visit the company's World Wide Web site at www.halliburton.com. ------- Jump to today's TO Features: (In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) "Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links. Print This Story E-mail This Story |

Posted by: kathleen at February 1, 2006 01:53 PM

92

Its The End OF The World And We Know It. Its The End Of The World And We Know It. But I DON'T feel fine.

Dumbing down soes not come easily for me. Even with booze and weed.

The data mining that has been going on int this nation has been around at least 15 years. What do you think those bar codes on products are for???

A collegue and mentor of mine (also happened to be an ardent Mormon) wailed about that years ago. He was apocolyptic about it. The "666" as it were. I was still getting my footing so really didn't pursue the issue. Don't know if it would have done any good to do so.

But he advised then as I do now...Let's get back to an organic lifestyle. Whenever possible stay out of corporate stores, avoid mass produced bling-blings and keep your payments in cash.

Discuss strategy in politics in open, person to person forums frequently and with transparancy.

And if you should be disappeared as a result of warantless wiretaps, have lots of people to ask about you. Keeping frinds and family at your core is the most adaptive action one can have for survial.

Fuck the neocons. FUCK EM. Lets live our lives out loud.

Posted by: th at February 1, 2006 01:56 PM

93

You fucking lefty morons.

Lest you forget; 8 years of lobbing rockets at aspirin factories and ignoring other nation's requests to take Bin Laden and other top terrorists out was what predated 9-11, not 8 months of trying to make up for it.

Clinton, Gore, and (Remeber Waco?)Reno's total dessimation of the intellegnce infrastructure and denegrating and ignoring of Armed Forces' needs due to their hatred of America, combined with their malfeasance and pole-smoking-while-on-the-phone-with-world-leaders cavalier attitude toward protecting our porous borders is what made us weak enough to be attacked.

Posted by: fred at February 1, 2006 02:04 PM

94

Isolationism

Dear Cornposters:

I do not favor isolationism but I oppose everything that Bush stands for! I consider him dumb, stupid, and a turkey. I oppose his incessant lies and his bait and switch tactics. When the Coward in Crawford talks about isolationism and the fact that we should not be isolationists, he really is talking about expansionism and endless wars. These are the wars that are fought with the lives of poor and middle class sons and daughters to PROTECT the asses of the sons and daughters from the rich and powerful. I say horseshit to those ideas.

What our Nazi government must do is to talk to other governments about the enhancement of human lives in their countries and while our government is doing that she should enhance the lives of all Nazi Americans and not just the lives of the rich and powerful.

As I awoke this morning in a subconscious state, I thought briefly of the annual SOTU speech and that the day after this speech should be a Pukefest Day so we can puke our guts out with all the bullshit that flies at these SOTU speeches. Please remember the day after the SOTU speech should be our annual Pukefest Day.

Sincerely,

Gerald

Posted by: Gerald at February 1, 2006 02:04 PM

95

#62
Angela baby is in peril. She's not telling Brad the details. Jennifer is determined to have a baby. It's her birthday. It's getting hot and heavy with Vance or Vince.
I got all this information from the covers. Now if we could just juice up the news and put it on the covers of People, Star and In Touch we'd be in business.
"Cheney has artificial heart but does not need it to function."
"George Bush wants daughters to marry into the Robertson family to be 'closer to God'."

Posted by: Jeanne at February 1, 2006 02:10 PM

96

Oh, oh, Saladin. Haven't heard about cheney -- but does that mean it's time to put Condi in the co-pilot's seat?

Paul, yes, it was a rep's wife from Florida (C.W. Bill Young or something) -- her t-shirt slogan stated, "Support the Troops - Defending Our Freedom."

What a set-up deal.

Posted by: micki at February 1, 2006 02:16 PM

97

#73
Micki,
Republicans hate public transportation. The idea that they would have to sit with the teeming masses is more than they can stand.

Posted by: Jeanne at February 1, 2006 02:16 PM