October 2007 archive

Rush Supports Children of Marines and Federal Law Enforcement

After Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wasted taxpayer’s money by attempting to smear a private citizen and to put unprecedented pressure on his employer, Rush took the personal attack in stride and found a way to turn the whole thing around in a way to support the children of fallen Marines and Federal Law Enforcement officers.

Check out the current bids:

Click on “View & Bid” to see the full details of the auction, as well as to see a high-resolution scan of the actual letter. Print out our own copy as a memento!

Whatever the high bid turns out to be Rush has committed to MATCHING IT and is challenging the 41 Senators who signed the letter to do so as well. Will they? How much do THEY support the Children of fallen Marines and Federal Law Enforcement?

And they say Republicans don’t care …

🙂

Seven Wars in Five Years

Things could be worse than they are right now.

Gen. Wesley Clark in his new book mentions two conversations he had with another general at the Pentagon two weeks after 9-11 and then six weeks after that:

the first one, two weeks after 9/11, yielded a bit of gossip from one of his fellow generals, who told him that the invasion of Iraq had already “basically” been decided on. The second visit, six weeks later, revealed more shocking news from the same source. Clark asked if the Iraq invasion plan was still on, and the answer he got was chilling:

“‘Oh, it’s worse than that,’ he said, holding up a memo on his desk.
‘Here’s the paper from the Office of the Secretary of Defense [then Donald Rumsfeld] outlining the strategy. We’re going to take out seven countries in five years.’ And he named them, starting with Iraq and Syria and ending with Iran.”

Video below.

Gore is Wrong

Crossposted at Daily Kos
“Gore is wrong”. That’s right. I stole that line. Because it’s true. Al Gore is wrong when he says that fighting Global Warming is a moral issue, not a political issue. It is the biggest political issue in the world today. More than any other, it cries out for a policitcal solution at the highest national and international level. Gore knows this. He can’t NOT know it. He’s gone as far as he can lobbying governement leaders and CEO’s. It’s time to lead, but he needs a movement to make his leadership unstoppable, and to maximize his unique and hard-earned credibility around the world. He’s clearly waiting for that movement to happen, to come forward. And it is. It’s happening. Even the media narrative on him is beginning to change. Now it’s all a matter of timing and momentum. And here’s why…

“What is ‘law’ anyway?”

Kagro X has a very important post up over at The Great Orange Satan.

What is “law,” anyway? Is it the stuff that Congress passes in public and that you can read in order to be able to obey it? Or is it just anything that can in practice frighten you into obeying? If you can be sent to jail, or immunized from suit, or whatever, based on a secret showing that you relied in “good faith” on a memo an “administration” official gives you (and literally nothing more — and perhaps even a lot less), you really have to ask yourself that question. What. Is. Law?

Down to the Crossroads

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Throughout the history of mankind, there have been many, many turning points, many times we have stood at the crossroads and decided where to go. In fact you could say what we read in our history books is a written record of those crossroads, or at least the record of the results of the decisions made there.

The two that leapt into my mind this morning were the election of Lincoln and Roosevelt, the right men at the right time….with no CLEAR indication of their greatness before they were elected. Where would we and the world be now if different men, lesser men, had been in their place?

And no this is not JUST about Al Gore!

Pony Party: Good morning america

I’m writing this to you from a room without a bed (its calling my name softly from down the hall) at four in the morning.  So chances I’ll be here when it publishes are slim, and worse yet, I’m forced to skimp on content.

The Power of Doing Something

—————–

Thanks for the available play on words for the title, Big A.

Real quick today, so much stuff to do.

We have a lot of fun in blogosphere land. This group here in particular has a good time.

This isn’t a guilt trip essay or anything, but I’ve been thinking I need to do more, to accomplish more, to see actual real progress on the issues that matter.

Leave it to Dennis! w/poll

Many Americans like to think back to an earlier less complicated time.  Indeed, when we look back, many still think of the 1950’s as a perfect time.  So, let’s go back and see a typical family stitting around the table and talking about things as they are today!

bleep, whirrrrr, zap, zoooom….

(note: sounds of our time machine working)

Balancing Outrage

Isn’t the title a bit of an oxymoron? I think so. But if that’s true, then we’ve just spent the last 6 years trying to find a way to live out an oxymoron. I wonder if others feel that way.

Here’s a couple of things that kicked off my outrage meter today, but you could probably choose any day in the last 6 years and find multiple events on each one that would serve the purpose.

The Power of Doing Nothing

There is a passage in today’s WaPo article on the Senate capitulation on FISA that demonstrates how little Democrats understand of the power of the Congress to do nothing:

An adroit Republican parliamentary maneuver ultimately sank the bill. GOP leaders offered a motion that would have sent it back to the House intelligence and Judiciary committees with a requirement that they add language specifying that nothing in the measure would apply to surveilling the communications of bin Laden, al-Qaeda or other foreign terrorist organizations.

Approval of the motion would have restarted the legislative process, effectively killing the measure by delay. Democratic leaders scrambled to persuade their members to oppose it, but with Republicans accusing Democrats of being weak on terrorism, a “no” vote proved too hard to sell, and so the bill was pulled from the floor.

Stacey Bernards, a spokeswoman for House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), called the Republican maneuver “a cheap shot, totally political.”

Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union, called it a “perfect storm” of progressive Democrats who did not think the bill protected basic constitutional rights and of Republicans who took advantage of the lack of unity. “It was too precipitous a process, and it ended up in a train wreck,” she said. “It was total meltdown.”

I love the ACLU and Caroline Frederickson in particular. They do great work. But from the perspective of a progressive and the ACLU, WHICH OPPOSED the House bill (because of the question of bypassing indivudualized warrants for surveillance, adopting instead a “basket” approach), the failure of this bill SHOULD BE great news.

Like Iraq funding, the FISA extension past the February date when the current capitulation bill expires, is a problem for the Bush administration, not the Congress. IF the Congress passes nothing, then the law will revert to the original FISA law that prevailed prior to this summer’s capitulation. There is nothing wrong with that, DESPITE the gnashing of teeth from the Bush administration. IF there were, they would not block THIS BILL.

If the Democrats, PARTICULARLY the Progressive Caucus, sticks to its guns, it will either get a good bill, or no bill at all. OF course the preference is a good bill. But after that, no bill at all is eminently preferable to a BAD bill. Frankly, the House bill was not a good bill imo. Nor was it a good bill in the ACLU’s opinion. Its demise is nothing to lament. So long as Democrats understand the power of doing nothing.

Pony Party, Are you America??

Colbert ’08

Stephen Colbert is running for President.

Docudharma Times Thursday Oct. 18

This is an Open Thread


From President Bush’s Press Conference yesterday

Newsweek’s Richard Wolffe asked Bush exactly the question I would have asked:

Dan Froomkin Washington Post


“QUESTION: Thank you, sir. A simple question.


“BUSH: Yes?


“QUESTION: What’s your definition of —


“BUSH: It may require a simple answer.


“(LAUGHTER)


“QUESTION: What’s your definition of the word torture?


“BUSH: Of what?


“QUESTION: The word torture, what’s your definition?


“BUSH: That’s defined in U.S. law, and we don’t torture


Load more