|
Air
America Radio |
 |
|
|
|
|
Head-On
Radio Network |
 |
|
|
|
|
Search
dubyaD40.com |
 |
|
|
|
|
Ads by
The Google |
 |
|
|
|
Take
Action |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Recent
Posts |
 |
|
|
|
|
Archives |
 |
|
|
|
|
Today's
Reason To Drink |
 |
|
|
|
|
Want to
link to us? |
 |
It's easy to do. Right click on the image
below and choose "Copy." Then paste it on
your site.

|
|
| |
|
Blogroll |
 |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Today's
Topics |
 |
| |
|
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
|
The O'Reilly Fracture: Ratings Bad To The Bone
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
3:35 PM
Via News Corpse:
The O'Reilly Fracture: Ratings Bad To The Bone
Bill O'Reilly just got some more bad news (pdf). His hairline isn't the only thing that's receding. The February ratings show that he has the slowest growing program (11%) of all the cable news primetime programs in the 25-54 demographic. And he is clearly bringing down the Fox network because the same is true for their whole primetime block. This despite the fact that Greta Van Susteren had the 2nd highest growth (49%) after Keith Olbermann's Countdown (61%).
More
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
How do you know the Bush administration is worried about upcoming investigations?
posted by
Wally
3:02 PM
It fires qualified U.S. attorneys with sterling track records to make room for its political loyalists and to exert its last shred of control.
Ever since the Bush administration shocked the legal community by dismissing eight U.S. attorneys in December, Justice Department leaders have vigorously denied that the firings were politically motivated. "I would never, ever make a change in the United States attorney position for political reasons," Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said lied in Senate testimony in early January. In a Feb. 6 hearing, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty told lawmakers, "When I hear you talk about the politicizing of the Department of Justice, it's like a knife in my heart."
But at least three of the eight fired attorneys were told by a superior they were being forced to resign to make jobs available for other Bush appointees, according to a former senior Justice Department official knowledgeable about their cases. That stands in contradiction to administration claims that the firings were related either to job performance or policy differences.
(snip)
"It's hard not to think you did something wrong when you get a call like this, but that's not always the case." Two other U.S. attorneys in the group, upon seeking clarification from superiors in Washington, were told by a different top Justice Department official that they were being pushed out to give other Bush appointees their posts.
(snip)
"It's really remarkable to have a wholesale removal of an administration's own U.S. attorneys, particularly this deep into the term," said John Kroger, a federal prosecutor under Clinton and Bush who now teaches at Lewis & Clark Law School in Portland, Ore. "Clearly there was a concerted decision made to ask a bunch of them to leave. It suggests a desire to more tightly control policy. With the Democrats in control of Congress, perhaps it's because this is one of the few levers of government they have left." Stacking the Courts
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Bush: Protecting Corporations From Unions More Important Than Protecting Country From Terrorists
posted by
Wally
11:10 AM
Bush is making it abundantly clear that he would rather screw the American Working Class than catch Terrorists.President Bush and his Senate allies will kill a Sept. 11 antiterror bill if Congress sends it to the White House with a provision to let airport screeners unionize, the White House and 36 Republicans said Tuesday.
"As the legislation currently stands, the president's senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill," said White House spokesman Scott Stanzel. So he's going to veto an "anti-terror" bill, just to prevent security screeners from joining a Union. What he's saying is that protecting the country from terrorists is less important than protecting his corporate pals from making obscene profits by gouging their working class employees. This should surprise no one, especially when you consider that his only other veto in 6 years was a bill to allow stem-cell research to save lives and cure disease.
Republican Priorities On Parade
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Walter Reed patients told to keep quiet
posted by
Wally
10:36 AM
Soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center's Medical Hold Unit say they have been told they will wake up at 6 a.m. every morning and have their rooms ready for inspection at 7 a.m., and that they must not speak to the media.
"Some soldiers believe this is a form of punishment for the trouble soldiers caused by talking to the media," one Medical Hold Unit soldier said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
It is unusual for soldiers to have daily inspections after Basic Training. This is the respect, dignity and care the Pentagon gives to the men and women who have served our nation so valiantly.
Bush "certainly was aware" of conditions at Walter Reed. So what is he doing about it? Not a damn thing. Not even talking about it. Half a trillion spent on Iraq, and they can't afford to hire someone to patch the holes and clean up the mold and mouse-shit from our wounded soldiers' hospital rooms. Probably doesn't pay enough for Halliburton to be interested.
Supporting the Troops
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Savage Love!
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
9:48 AM
If you've never heard of Dan Savage and his weekly column "Savage Love," you're missing out. Mainly, it's a sex advice column so be forewarned. I mean, he is the guy who coined the term "Santorum." (warning: link is NSFW)
This week's "Savage Love":
I read your column faithfully every week in the Orlando Weekly. But I need to ask two things. What does the abbreviation GGG stand for? And what was the website that you mentioned a while ago for men to meet transsexuals? ~A Faithful Reader
GGG stands for "good, giving, and game," which is what we should all strive to be for our sex partners. Think "good in bed," "giving equal time and equal pleasure," and "game for anything-within reason." And that tranny website I mentioned was, I believe, http://www.freerepublic.com/. ~Savage
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
So much for Cheney's visit
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
9:29 AM
I'm speechless..
Pakistan makes a deal with the Taliban
KARACHI - The Pakistani establishment has made a deal with the Taliban through a leading Taliban commander that will extend Islamabad's influence into southwestern Afghanistan and significantly strengthen the resistance in its push to capture Kabul.
One-legged Mullah Dadullah will be Pakistan's strongman in a corridor running from the Afghan provinces of Zabul, Urzgan, Kandahar and Helmand across the border into Pakistan's Balochistan province, according to both Taliban and al-Qaeda contacts Asia Times Online spoke to. Using Pakistani territory and with Islamabad's support, the Taliban will be able safely to move men, weapons and supplies into southwestern Afghanistan.
The deal with Mullah Dadullah will serve Pakistan's interests in re- establishing a strong foothold in Afghanistan (the government in Kabul leans much more toward India), and it has resulted in a cooling of the Taliban's relations with al-Qaeda.
Despite their most successful spring offensive last year since being ousted in 2001, the Taliban realize they need the assistance of a state actor if they are to achieve "total victory". Al-Qaeda will have nothing to do with the Islamabad government, though, so the Taliban had to go it alone.
Linky
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
How Big of a Coward is Cheney?
posted by
Wally
7:41 AM
Even on his own plane, in front of the press, he's afraid to come out of hiding.
Is the second in command of the most powerful nation in the world really so much of a pussy that he won't even come out in the open on his own turf, speaking about his own diplomatic mission? You would think he would be itching to be able to explain, in his own words, in his own voice, the reasons for the trip. But for unexplained reasons, Cheney remained hidden in his undisclosed location - even while sitting in front of reporters.The rules were simple. The official who briefed reporters on Cheney's plane could be identified only as a senior administration official. But the high-ranking official wasn't very careful about concealing his identity as Cheney wrapped up his round-the-world trip with surprise stops in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pay attention to the pronouns - me and I - that the official uses in describing the vice president's mission.
"The reason the president wanted me to come, obviously, is because of the continuing threat that exists in this part of the world on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan border," the senior administration official said Tuesday.
"Let me just make one editorial comment here," the official said. "I've seen some press reporting says, 'Cheney went in to beat up on them, threaten them.' That's not the way I work. I don't know who writes that, or maybe somebody gets it from some source who doesn't know what I'm doing, or isn't involved in it. But the idea that I'd go in and threaten someone is an invalid misreading of the way I do business.
"I would describe my sessions both in Pakistan and Afghanistan as very productive. We've had notable successes in both places. I've often said before and I believe it's still true that we've captured and killed more al-Qaida in Pakistan than anyplace else. And I think we're making progress in Afghanistan." If your sessions were so productive, why are you afraid to come out of hiding and talk about them like a real man? If you are that much of a coward, Mr. Vice President, while you are perfectly representative of the current administration, you are not worthy of representing either the people or the spirit of the United States of America. Cheney's a Pussy
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:26 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit a caption 
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
|
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
|
The DOW takes a dump
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
2:21 PM
Let's keep borrowing more and more from China!
Wall Street hammered in global sell-off
NEW YORK - The Dow Jones industrial average plunged over 500 points Tuesday, with losses accelerating in the final hour of trading, as Wall Street joined a global stock decline sparked by growing concerns that the U.S. and Chinese economies are cooling and that U.S. stocks are embarking on a major correction.
A 9 percent slide in Chinese stocks earlier set the tone for U.S. trading, a day after investors sent Shanghai's benchmark index to a record high close.
Investors' confidence has been knocked down by a slew of data showing that the economy may be decelerating more than anticipated. A Commerce Department report that orders for durable goods in January dropped by the largest amount in three months exacerbated jitters about the direction of the U.S. economy, which were raised a day earlier when former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said the economy may be headed for a recession.
Soup Line
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
Dumb b*tch
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
11:11 AM
Proving once again how Laura Bush is as dumb as her husband's administration:
"And many parts of Iraq are stable now. But, of course, what we see on television is the one bombing a day that discourages everybody." ~Laura Bush on Larry King Live, 2/26/2007 Today:
18 Iraqi children killed by car bomb; The victims, all boys, were on soccer field in Ramadi
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
Olbermann's Special Comment on Secretary Rice
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
8:01 AM
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Time to start listening to the Democrats.
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
7:26 AM
So much for the surge....
Disapproval on Iraq Hits Record More Than Half Favor a Deadline for Withdrawal, Bush Suffers Longest Streak Without Majority Support Since Truman
Feb. 26, 2007 - A record number of Americans disapprove of the war in Iraq and a clear majority now favors the eventual withdrawal of U.S. forces even if civil order has not been restored there - potentially a tipping point in public attitudes on the war.
While solutions remain vexing, for the first time in ABC News/Washington Post polls a narrow majority of Americans supports setting a deadline for the withdrawal of U.S. forces. Two-thirds oppose George W. Bush's troop surge; most, strongly so.
It all makes for a continued hard slog for the president: Just 36 percent approve of his job performance overall, very near his career low 33 percent last month. Bush hasn't seen majority approval in more than two years - the longest run without majority support for any president since Harry Truman from 1950-53.
While rooted in Iraq, Bush's problems with credibility and confidence reach beyond it. Sixty-three percent of Americans don't trust the administration to convey intelligence reports on potential threats from other countries honestly and accurately. And 58 percent lack confidence, specifically, in its ability to handle current tensions with Iran.
ABC
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
|
Monday, February 26, 2007
|
When it's time to get out.....
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
1:02 PM
Bush's war is so bad we don't know who we're fighting anymore.....
U.S. Patrols Still Unable to Tell Friend From Foe
American military commanders in Iraq describe the security plan they began implementing in mid-February as a rising tide: a gradual influx of thousands of U.S. and Iraqi troops whose extended presence in the city's violent neighborhoods will drown the militants' ability to stage bombings and sectarian killings.
But U.S. troops, Iraqi soldiers and officials, and Baghdad residents say the plan is hampered because security forces cannot identify, let alone apprehend, the elusive perpetrators of the violence. Shiite militiamen in the capital say they are keeping a low profile to wait out the security plan. U.S. commanders have noted increased insurgent violence in the Sunni-dominated belt around Baghdad and are concerned that fighters are shifting their focus outside the city.
The first brigade of 2,700 American reinforcements is patrolling the capital, bringing the total U.S. troop presence in Baghdad to 40,000, and members of three additional Iraqi military brigades have entered the city, though not at full strength. Soldiers have opened 14 of the estimated 30 joint policing stations they will operate in the capital.
Military patrols frequently push into neighborhoods where they have been shot at or struck with improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, only to find no one to arrest.
"I don't know who I'm fighting most of the time," said Staff Sgt. Joseph Lopez, 39, a soldier based in the northern outskirts of the capital. "I don't know who is setting what IED."
Sitting Ducks
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
THE REDIRECTION - Is the Administration's new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?
posted by
Wally
8:14 AM
The video and article are long and detailed, but the allegations are damning, pointing at both a buildup for war with Iran, and with the office of the Vice President directly involved in covertly funneling money to terrorist groups. In short, we're trying, on the one hand, to support the Shiite majority in Iraq against the Sunni insurgents who are killing our soldiers, and on the other hand, we're pumping buttloads of cash to Sunni groups in Lebanon and elsewhere to fight the Shiite's who control Iran. New Yorker columnist Sy Hersh says the "single most explosive" element of his latest article involves an effort by the Bush administration to stem the growth of Shiite influence in the Middle East (specifically the Iranian government and Hezbollah in Lebanon) by funding violent Sunni groups.
Hersh says the U.S. has been "pumping money, a great deal of money, without congressional authority, without any congressional oversight" for covert operations in the Middle East where it wants to "stop the Shiite spread or the Shiite influence." Hersh says these funds have ended up in the hands of "three Sunni jihadist groups" who are "connected to al Qaeda" but "want to take on Hezbollah."
Hersh summed up his scoop in stark terms: "We are simply in a situation where this president is really taking his notion of executive privilege to the absolute limit here, running covert operations, using money that was not authorized by Congress, supporting groups indirectly that are involved with the same people that did 9/11."
Click here to read the full New Yorker article.
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:30 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit your caption. 
Permalink
::
6 comments
::
|
|
|
Sunday, February 25, 2007
|
Is there a mutiny afoot?
posted by
Clyde
7:42 AM
Disobeying the prez Will generals say no to risky Iran strike?
Many people listen to the White House these days and conclude that a U.S. attack on Iran is imminent: "To be quite honest, I'm a little concerned that it's Iraq again," as Senator John Rockefeller, the new chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said recently.
But if President Bush gives the order, then General Peter Pace, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will face a big decision.
Some senior U.S. soldiers were worried about the strategic wisdom and even the legality of invading Iraq, but nobody resigned over it. It was obvious that the U.S. would win the actual war quickly and cheaply, and almost nobody worried about the aftermath.
But an attack on Iran is different, even though it would not involve American ground troops (since all available U.S. combat troops are committed to Iraq), because any competent general knows that this is a war the U.S. cannot win.
One can only hope
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Booming economy alert
posted by
Clyde
7:38 AM
In US, record numbers are plunged into poverty: report
The gulf between rich and poor in the United States is yawning wider than ever, and the number of extremely impoverished is at a three-decade high, a report out Saturday found.
Based on the latest available US census data from 2005, the McClatchy Newspapers analysis found that almost 16 million Americans live in "deep or severe poverty" defined as a family of four with two children earning less than 9,903 dollars -- one half the federal poverty line figure.
For individuals the "deep poverty" threshold was an income under 5,080 dollars a year.
"The McClatchy analysis found that the number of severely poor Americans grew by 26 percent from 2000 to 2005," the US newspaper chain reported.
Way to go Georgie
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
|
Saturday, February 24, 2007
|
They love the troops but hate the Vets
posted by
Clyde
5:01 AM
Critics: Army holding down disability ratings
The Army is deliberately shortchanging troops on their disability retirement ratings to hold down costs, according to veterans' advocates, lawyers and service members.
"These people are being systematically underrated," said Ron Smith, deputy general counsel for Disabled American Veterans. "It's a bureaucratic game to preserve the budget, and it's having an adverse affect on service members."
The numbers of people approved for permanent or temporary disability retirement in the Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force have stayed relatively stable since 2001.
But in the Army - in the midst of a war - the number of soldiers approved for permanent disability retirement has plunged by more than two-thirds, from 642 in 2001 to 209 in 2005, according to a Government Accountability Office report last year. That decline has come even as the war in Iraq has intensified and the total number of soldiers wounded or injured there has soared above 15,000.
A national disgrace
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Oh really?
posted by
Clyde
4:57 AM
General says eliminating bin Laden not priority
The Army's highest-ranking officer and the former leader of the secretive world of Special Operations offered his thoughts on the importance of capturing or killing Osama bin Laden during a luncheon here Friday.
They're probably not what anyone expected.
"I don't know whether we'll find him," Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, said in a speech to the Rotary Club of Fort Worth. "I don't know that it's all that important, frankly."
Schoomaker, pulled out of retirement in 2003 to lead the Army, pointed to the capture of Saddam Hussein, the killings of his sons, Uday and Qusay, and the killing of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi as evidence that bin Laden's capture or death would have little effect on the threats to the United States.
Link
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
|
Friday, February 23, 2007
|
Birthday Wishes!
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
10:58 AM
Tomorrow is Sen. Joe Lie-berman's (CT-D?R?I?SUCKS!) birthday. Feel free to write him a birthday wish from the bottom of your heart here! For example, I wrote: "Happy Birthday F*cktard!"
Oh, and it's no surprise our beloved fence-sitting Senator shares the same birthday as Zell Miller.

Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Bush gets his ass kicked all over Manhattan
posted by
Wally
9:05 AM
Unfortunately, it was just performance art. New Yorkers got to kick President George W. Bush's butt on Thursday, sort of.
Performance artist Mark McGowan kicked off his bid to crawl for 72 hours across Manhattan dressed as the president, offering the opportunity to kick his backside.
"It felt real good to kick Bush," said Casmirr Sharp, 52, of New York's Queens borough. "He really deserves more than a kick." If only it were real
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Chimps using spears to hunt Bushbabies
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
8:05 AM
Okay, I know this has nothing to do with politics, but I chuckled. I guess it's better than using shotguns on old men.

DES MOINES, Iowa -- Researchers have witnessed a chimpanzee skewering a lemur-like creature for supper, but it's unclear whether the spectacle was a bit of luck or an indication that chimps have a more advanced ability to hunt than was thought.
A team led by Iowa State University anthropology professor Jill Pruetz witnessed the spearing of a bushbaby in Fongoli, Senegal, during an observation of chimpanzees from March 2005 to July 2006. In a study being released Thursday in the online version of the journal Current Biology, Pruetz documents 22 cases of chimps using spear-like tools to hunt bushbabies - a small primate that lives in hollow branches or tree trunks.
"It's not uncommon to have chimps use tools. But to use them in the context of hunting" is nearly unheard of, she said.
McChimp In Chief
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Tough talk from the Dems, but do they have the spine and competence to actually "do" it?
posted by
Wally
7:42 AM
Senate Democrats Draft Plan To Take Back War Authority
Four years ago, Congress passed legislation authorizing President Bush to go to war in Iraq. Now Senate Democrats want to take it back.
Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., intends to present the proposal to fellow Democrats next week, and he is expected to try to add the measure to anti-terrorism legislation scheduled to be debated later this month. Officials who described the strategy spoke only on condition of anonymity, noting that rank-and-file senators had not yet been briefed on the details.
Republicans recently thwarted two Democratic attempts to pass a nonbinding measure through the Senate that was critical of Bush's decision to deploy an additional 21,500 combat troops.
After failing on his second attempt last Saturday, Reid said he would turn his attention to passing binding legislation. Maybe the Republicans should have gone with the "non-binding" resolution instead of waiting for real legislation - particularly that added to an anti-terrorism bill. Go ahead GOP, vote against this one. We're all watching.
Only Congress Can Declare War
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:35 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit your caption 
Permalink
::
15 comments
::
|
|
|
Thursday, February 22, 2007
|
F*cking do it already.
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
3:28 PM
I'm so sick of this S.O.B.! "Become" a Republican?
Lieberman to Dems: Cut off funding and I'll become a Republican

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut told the Politico Thursday that he has no immediate plans to switch parties, but suggested Democratic opposition to funding the war in Iraq might change his mind.
Lieberman, a registered independent who caucuses with Democrats, has been among the strongest supporters of the war and President Bush's plan to send another 21,500 combat troops into Iraq to help quell the violence there.
Sucks!
Permalink
::
3 comments
::
|
|
While Britney was cutting off her hair, Bush was giving the Wal-mart family 32.7 Billion in tax cuts, and cutting 28 Billion from Medicaid
posted by
Wally
2:51 PM
I'm not one of those curmudgeons who freaks out every time that Bradgelina moves the war off the front page of the Post, or Katie Couric decides to usher in a whole new era of network news with photos of the imbecile demon-spawn of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. I understand that we live in a demand-based economy and that there is far more demand for brainless celebrity bullshit than there is, say, for the fine print of the Health and Human Services budget.
(snip)
On the same day that Britney was shaving her head, a guy I know who works in the office of Senator Bernie Sanders sent me an email. He was trying very hard to get news organizations interested in some research his office had done about George Bush's proposed 2008 budget, which was unveiled two weeks ago and received relatively little press, mainly because of the controversy over the Iraq war resolution. All the same, the Bush budget is an amazing document. It would be hard to imagine a document that more clearly articulates the priorities of our current political elite.
(snip)
Not only does it make many of Bush's tax cuts permanent, but it envisions a complete repeal of the Estate Tax, which mainly affects only those who are in the top two-tenths of the top one percent of the richest people in this country. The proposed savings from the cuts over the next decade are about $442 billion, or just slightly less than the amount of the annual defense budget (minus Iraq war expenses). But what's interesting about these cuts are how Bush plans to pay for them.
(snip)
That's not only bad government, it's bad capitalism. It makes legalized bribery and political connections more important factors than performance and competition in the corporate marketplace. Beyond that, it's just plain fucking offensive to ordinary people. It's one thing to complain about paying taxes when those taxes are buying a bag of groceries once a month for some struggling single mom in eastern Kentucky. But when your taxes are buying a yacht for some asshole who hires African eight year-olds to pick cocoa beans for two cents an hour ... I sure don't remember reading an excuse for that anywhere in the Federalist Papers.
Alternet
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Isn't it ironic?
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
1:50 PM
Yes Virginia, history does repeat itself.......
White House Brings in Nixon-Era Counsel
WASHINGTON -- In his first job as a White House lawyer, Fred Fielding, barely in his 30s, broke the news to President Nixon about the Watergate break-in.
Fielding was born in Philadelphia and grew up on a farm in Bucks County, Pa. His father died when he was 11. He attended public schools, played football, fished and worked on neighborhood farms in the summers. He attended Gettysburg College and the University of Virginia School of Law on scholarships.
After law school, he worked with a Philadelphia law firm, and in 1970 became deputy to former White House Counsel John Dean. As news of the break-in at the Democratic national headquarters broke over the capital, Fielding remembers trying to convince Dean, who was on his way back from a trip to the Philippines, that he should return to Washington at once instead of staying over in California to rest.
Impeach
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Judges put Bush one step closer to his dream of being Dictator
posted by
Wally
8:21 AM
Judges agree that Bush can ignore Habeas Corpus protections
In a victory for the White House, a U.S. appeals court Tuesday threw out the legal claims brought on behalf of the hundreds of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay and ruled that they do not have a right to plead their innocence in an American court.
The ruling sets the stage for a historic showdown in the Supreme Court over whether the White House and Congress can deny habeas corpus -- the right to go before a judge and ask to be released -- to some people who are held for years without charges.
"This decision empowers the president to do whatever he wishes to prisoners without any legal limitation, so long as he does it offshore. (It) encourages such notorious practices as extraordinary rendition and contempt for international human rights law," said Shayana Kadidal, an attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York.LINK The Bush administration claims that the so called "war on terror" gives him extraordinary powers to sidestep the Constitution and ignore the Bill of Rights. To that I say bullshit. There have been far more urgent and dangerous threats to this and other nations than religious whackjobs with box cutters in the 792 years since the Magna Carta was issued, or the 328 years since the Habeas Corpus act was codified in England, or even the 216 years since a little document called the Bill of Rights was ratified.
While it is certain that this ruling will be appealed to the Supreme Court, it is of some concern that a court as high as a Federal Circuit Court of Appeals would allow to stand such a blatant affront to the basic liberties outlined in the Constitution. It is also worrying that this will reach the Supreme Court that has been stacked by Bush with right-wing idealogues who promote the doctrine of Unitary Executive powers (discussed further here).
If the Supreme Court sides with Bush on this, he will have indeed taken several large strides toward dictatorship. As President, he will be above the law - able to do whatever he wants to whoever he wants. The courts will have not only undercut the power of Congress to "balance" the power of the President, they will also have given away their own authority to do the same. What's worse, they will have given credence to Nixon's words "Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal."
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
The Government Wouldn't Scare Us By Lieing About Terror Investigations and Prosecutions, Would They?
posted by
Wally
8:02 AM
Of Course They Would!
Federal prosecutors and the FBI have significantly overstated the number of terrorism-related investigations and prosecutions they pursue, according to a highly critical report released Tuesday by a Justice Department watchdog.
The study by Inspector General Glenn Fine concluded that the overstatements occurred in large part because authorities counted offenses such as document and marriage fraud and immigration violations as terrorism-related even when there was no discernible tie to terror. "Marriage fraud"? I wonder if I'm on the list for that speeding ticket I got a couple years ago. I'd better slow down - another ticket and I might bump the terror alert level up to Ernie.
Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
|
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
|
Great Progress: The Iraq Effect - War Has Increased Terrorism Sevenfold Worldwide
posted by
Wally
11:32 AM

Has the war in Iraq increased jihadist terrorism? The Bush administration has offered two responses: First, the moths-to-aflame argument, which says that Iraq draws terrorists who would otherwise "be plotting and killing Americans across the world and within our own borders," as President Bush put it in 2005. Second, the hard-to-say position: "Are more terrorists being created in the world?" then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld asked at a press conference in September 2006. "We don't know. The world doesn't know. There are not good metrics to determine how many people are being trained in a radical madrasa school in some country."
In fact, as Rumsfeld knew well, there are plenty of publicly available figures on the incidence and gravity of jihadist attacks. But until now, no one has done a serious statistical analysis of whether an "Iraq effect" does exist. We have undertaken such a study, drawing on data in the mipt-rand Terrorism database (terrorismknowledgebase.org), widely considered the best unclassified database on terrorism incidents.
Our study yields one resounding finding: The rate of fatal terrorist attacks around the world by jihadist groups, and the number of people killed in those attacks, increased dramatically after the invasion of Iraq. Globally there was a 607 percent rise in the average yearly incidence of attacks (28.3 attacks per year before and 199.8 after) and a 237 percent rise in the fatality rate (from 501 to 1,689 deaths per year). A large part of this rise occurred in Iraq, the scene of almost half the global total of jihadist terrorist attacks. But even excluding Iraq and Afghanistan—the other current jihadist hot spot—there has been a 35 percent rise in the number of attacks, with a 12 percent rise in fatalities.
Read the complete report at Mother Jones
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
The Definition of a Quagmire by Dick Cheney in 1991
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
10:19 AM
Classic.
"The notion that we ought to now go to Baghdad and uh uhh somehow take control of the country strikes me as as an extremely uh serious one in terms of uh what we'd have to do once we got there. You'd probably have to put some new government in place. It's not clear what kind of government that would be, how long you'd have to stay. For the U.S. to get involved militarily in determining the outcome of uh the struggle over who's going to govern in Iraq uh strikes me as a uh classic definition of a quagmire."
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Olbermann's report on the shameful treatment of Iraq Vets.
posted by
Wally
9:36 AM
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:27 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit a caption 
Permalink
::
10 comments
::
|
|
|
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
|
Why did we invade Iraq again? 9/11? WMDs? Democracy? Or was it something else?
posted by
Wally
2:12 PM
New Iraq Oil Law To Open Iraq's Oil Reserves to Western Companies
Amy Goodman of Democracy Now talked to Raed Jarrar - the Iraq Project Director for Global Exchange, and Antonia Juhasz - who has written extensively about the economic side of the US occupation of Iraq and is the author of the book, "The Bush Agenda: Invading the World One Economy at a Time." about the new Iraq Oil Law - an unbelievably generous gift to the oil companies, and an unconcionable ripoff of the nation of Iraq (what's left of it) and the Iraqi people.
RAED JARRAR:There are three major points that I think we should talk about. Financially, it legalizes very unfair types of contracts that will put Iraq in very long-term contracts that can go up to thirty-five years and cause the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars from Iraqis for no cause.
And the second point is concerning Iraq's sovereignty. Iraq will not be capable of controlling the levels -- the limits of production, which means that Iraq cannot be a part of OPEC anymore. And Iraq will have this very complicated institution called the Federal Oil and Gas Council, that will have representatives from the foreign oil companies on the board of it, so representatives from, let's say, ExxonMobil and Shell and British Petroleum will be on the federal board of Iraq approving their own contracts.
And the third point is the point about keeping Iraq's unity. The law is seen by many Iraqi analysts as a separation for Iraq fund. The law will authorize all of the regional and small provinces' authorities. It will give them the final say to deal with the oil, instead of giving this final say to central federal government, so it will open the doors for splitting Iraq into three regions or even maybe three states in the very near future.
ANTONIA JUHASZ:Well, in my mind, the law certainly opens the door to US oil companies and the Bush administration winning a very large piece of their objective of going to war in Iraq, at least winning it on paper. The law does almost word for word what was laid out in the Baker-Hamilton recommendation, which I discussed previously on your show, which is, at the very basic level, to turn Iraq's nationalized oil system, the model that 90% of the world's oil is governed by, take its nationalized oil system and turn it into a commercial system fully open to foreign corporate investment on terms as of yet to be decided. So it leaves vague this very important question of what type of contracts will the Iraqi government use. But what it leaves clear is that basically every level of the oil industry will be open to private foreign companies.
The law definitely sets up a very dangerous setup for Iraq's future economic stability, economic development, and certainly sets the stage for a tremendous amount of increased hostility and violence to US soldiers positioned on the ground, as being seen as the implementers of this oil hijack. Read the full transcript, or listen or watch the interview at DemocracyNow.org
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Happy Mardi Gras
posted by
Wally
1:27 PM
Here's to the people and the future of the great city of New Orleans. 
May she rise from the water and wreckage better than ever (in spite of Bush and Brownie).
Permalink
::
4 comments
::
|
|
Supporting the Troops, Bush Style - Soldiers Face Neglect, Frustration At Army's Top Medical Facility
posted by
Wally
8:16 AM
In this series, the Washington Post reveals the care and respect our injured soldiers receive once they're carried back from the battle field.
Behind the door of Army Spec. Jeremy Duncan's room, part of the wall is torn and hangs in the air, weighted down with black mold. When the wounded combat engineer stands in his shower and looks up, he can see the bathtub on the floor above through a rotted hole. The entire building, constructed between the world wars, often smells like greasy carry-out. Signs of neglect are everywhere: mouse droppings, belly-up cockroaches, stained carpets, cheap mattresses.
This is the world of Building 18, not the kind of place where Duncan expected to recover when he was evacuated to Walter Reed Army Medical Center from Iraq last February with a broken neck and a shredded left ear, nearly dead from blood loss. But the old lodge, just outside the gates of the hospital and five miles up the road from the White House, has housed hundreds of maimed soldiers recuperating from injuries suffered in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wash Post
Inside Mologne House, the Survivors of War Wrestle With Military Bureaucracy and Personal Demons
Some soldiers and Marines have been here for 18 months or longer. Doctor's appointments and evaluations are routinely dragged out and difficult to get. A board of physicians must review hundreds of pages of medical records to determine whether a soldier is fit to return to duty. If not, the Physical Evaluation Board must decide whether to assign a rating for disability compensation. For many, this is the start of a new and bitter battle.
Months roll by and life becomes a blue-and-gold hotel room where the bathroom mirror shows the naked disfigurement of war's ravages. There are toys in the lobby of Mologne House because children live here. Domestic disputes occur because wives or girlfriends have moved here. Financial tensions are palpable. After her husband's traumatic injury insurance policy came in, one wife cleared out with the money. Older National Guard members worry about the jobs they can no longer perform back home. The Hotel Aftermath Bring them home. Bring them home safe. Bring them home in one peice. BRING THEM HOME NOW
Permalink
::
4 comments
::
|
|
Shock and Awe Part Deux: Mission Iran
posted by
Wally
8:16 AM
The Bush administration, while accusing Iran of providing weapons to the Iraqi resistance and threatening action if it doesn't stop, keeps insisting that there are "no plans to invade or attack Iran". On "Meet the Press" Tony Snow was asked about military options in Iran, and was quite emphatic that we have no plans to invade. "No," he said. "We are not planning to go across the border [into Iran]. But the president also is not going to rule out any alternatives. But for those who think we are beating the war drums, no [no plans to invade Iran]." Snow: No Plans To Invade Iran In an interview on NPR, Bush himself flat out denied any plans on Iran. Bush dismissed warnings from US lawmakers against attacking Iran, saying: "I don't know how anybody can then say, 'Well, protecting the troops means that we're going to invade Iran.'"
"I have no intent upon going into Iran," said the president. Bush: No Plans To Invade Iran If we have "no plans" to invade Iran, then what are these "plans to invade Iran" that the BBC is talking about? US contingency plans for air strikes on Iran extend beyond nuclear sites and include most of the country's military infrastructure, the BBC has learned. Not only are there indeed "plans" but there are now multiple "triggers" that can set off the attack. BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says the trigger for such an attack reportedly includes any confirmation that Iran was developing a nuclear weapon - which it denies.
Alternatively, our correspondent adds, a high-casualty attack on US forces in neighbouring Iraq could also trigger a bombing campaign if it were traced directly back to Tehran. Plans to Invade Iraq So, based on this, if King George thinks that Iran is planning on making nukes (just like he thought Iraq had WMD's), or if he links Iran to a "high-casualty" attack on our troops (just like he linked Saddam to 9/11), it's game on, shock and awe, war-president George landing on an aircraft carrier to claim "mission accomplished." How is "high casualty attack" defined by the administration? My guess - the first attack that happens after George decides he wants to play with his toy soldiers again.
No plans my ass.
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Welcome to reality Alabama!
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
8:14 AM
Gallup red-state, blue-state poll paints Alabama purple

MONTGOMERY - Might Alabama, long a red state in national elections and more recently in statewide races, be tracking a little more blue?
A recent Gallup Poll gives credence to that notion, reflecting an almost even split between Democrats and Republicans. In fact, the poll last year shows that more Alabamians identified themselves as Democrats, 49 percent of them, than Republicans, 46 percent.
That might surprise some in a state that has not voted for a Democratic Party candidate for president since Jimmy Carter in 1976.
I Reckon
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
No surprise here...
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
8:11 AM
NY Man Charged With Trying To Fund Terror-Republican Party Ties
Terrorism charges brought Friday against the administrator of a loan investment program claimed that he secretly tried to send $152,000 to the Middle East to buy equipment such as night vision goggles for a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan.
Abdul Tawala Ibn Ali Alishtari, 53, of Ardsley, N.Y., pleaded not guilty in U.S. District Court in Manhattan to an indictment accusing him of terrorism financing, material support of terrorism and other charges. The charges carried a potential penalty of 95 years in prison.
Alishtari, also known as Michael Mixon, was detained pending a court appearance next week after Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan S. Kolodner said Alishtari was a danger to the community and a risk to flee. He was arrested on Thursday in Manhattan, prosecutors said.
(snip)
CBS News has confirmed that Alishtari is a donor to the Republican Party, as he claims on his curriculum vitae. Alishtari gave $15,500 to the National Republican Campaign Committee between 2002 and 2004, according to Federal Election Commission records. That amount includes $13,000 in 2003, a year when he claims to have been named NRCC New York State Businessman of the Year.
CBS
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
|
Monday, February 19, 2007
|
Freeper quote of the day!
posted by
Clyde
10:48 AM
Oh, the mental midgets over at Free Republic have their panties in a wad at the thought of Bill Clinton taking over for Hillary in the Senate.
To: stm
Clinton doesn't want to be just another leftist minion. He wants to be Satan himself. Bill wants world domination. His target is the beast having seven heads and ten horns - the U.N.
31 posted on 02/19/2007 8:42:59 AM PST by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
This is Hugh!!1!
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:40 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit a caption 
Permalink
::
6 comments
::
|
|
|
Sunday, February 18, 2007
|
Happy Chinese New Year
posted by
Wally
7:15 AM
Dick Cheney's Chinese New Year Menu - Welcome to the Year of the Pig
To celebrate the occasion, and to welcome in the Year of the Pig an an appropriate and honorable manner, we've put together a vice-presidential New Years Day menu specifically with Dick Cheney in mind.
Hors d'ourves: Pork rinds with bacon buttermilk ranch dipping sauce
Appetizer Pork Rhumaki (bacon wrapped liver with water chestnuts, pan fried in bacon grease)
Entree 5 pounds of pork butt 1 lb pork sausage 1 lb bacon 1 lb colby cheese (shredded) hollandaise sauce
Slice open pork but and stuff with sausage. Wrap the whole thing in bacon. Deep fry in lard. Smother with hollandaise sauce and top with cheese. Serve with french fries (deep fried in lard, of course) smothered in sausage gravy.
Dessert Torte Varazdin (click link for the full recipe)
Beverage Pour him a Red Bull and Vodka to wash it all down with. And maybe a Shot of Wild Turkey as an apertif.
And don't forget to hide the defibrillator.
Special thanks to Mrs. Wally and Chescher (my chef friend) for help with the "cardiac special" recipes.
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
|
Saturday, February 17, 2007
|
New threat to the nation - Sex Toys? (welcome to Alabama and Texas)
posted by
Wally
9:06 AM
Now that they've solved all the other problems in the state - because now that the Katrina mess has been completely and thoroughly cleaned up, everyone knows that Alabama doesn't suffer from any ills such as poverty or racism or poor healthcare or lack of education or lack of shoes or lack of teeth - legislators in the state have taken the bold and necessary move to protect Alabama citizens against the hazards of sex toys. A federal appeals court issued a Valentine's Day ruling upholding an Alabama law banning the sale of sex toys. But the devices won't disappear from store shelves immediately.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Alabama's sex toy ban is constitutional because "the state's interest in preserving and promoting public morality provides a rational basis for the challenged statue."
(snip)
Alabama's solicitor general, Kevin Newsom, said he was pleased the 11th Circuit rejected the plaintiffs' argument that public morality was an insufficient basis for the legislation.
"In rejecting that view, which necessarily would have invalidated traditional prohibitions on, for instance, incest, polygamy, and prostitution, the 11th Circuit recognized and reiterated that 'the law is constantly based on notions of morality,'" Newsom said. Use your hand, or your little sister Who do you trust with protecting and defending "morality" more than a bunch of fat white men wearing sheets dancing around a burning cross?
In other news, Texas lawmakers have also taken steps to address these threats to our national security. To hell with port security, somebody please protect us from Doc Johnson! See what Molly Ivins had to say about that:
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Dick Cheney's Dangerous Son in Law - Making Sure Our Chemical Faciliities Have No Security
posted by
Wally
9:00 AM
Philip Perry, a former member of the powerful Latham and Watkins law firm in Washington, DC, left the law firm in 2000 to become part of the transition team of his father-in-law, Dick Cheney. He then became the third-highest ranking official in John Ashcroft's Justice Department before serving as General Counsel to the White House Office of Management and Budget.
When the post-September 11 Environmental Protection Agency made an attempt to regulate the security at chemical industry facilities, Perry used his position at the OMB to block the attempt. According to Art Levine, writing for Washington Monthly, Perry told executive branch officials, "If you send up this legislation, it will be dead on arrival on the Hill."
Mother Jones
Full report at Washington Monthly
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Tony Snow is as delusional as his boss: "I'm Not Sure Anything Went Wrong In Iraq"
posted by
Wally
7:51 AM
The incompetence of this administration is stunning. White House Press Secretary Tony Snow was asked about this today at the daily briefing, following the release of military documents from 2002 that revealed that the U.S. expected that by now a token American force of 5,000 would be able to keep things under control in Iraq -- and the occupation would require only a two or three month "stabilization" period. "What went wrong?" the reporter reasonably asked. Snow replied: "I'm not sure anything went wrong." Even FoxNews fans and ditto-heads have to be shaking their heads at this flagrant denial of reality. He may as well be standing at the podium denying his own existence. "I'm sorry but I'm not here to answer your questions right now." Actually, looking at his mental state and his view of reality, that might be the more accurate statement.
Reality is for Liberals
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
|
Friday, February 16, 2007
|
House passes the slap on the wrist...
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
2:33 PM
House OKs Measure Opposing Troop Surge
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Democratic-controlled House issued a symbolic rejection of President Bush's plan to deploy more troops to Iraq on Friday, opening an epic confrontation between Congress and commander in chief over an unpopular war that has taken the lives of more than 3,100 U.S. troops.
The vote on the non-binding measure was 246-182.
"The stakes in Iraq are too high to recycle proposals that have little prospect for success," said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, leader of Democrats who gained power last fall in elections framed by public opposition to the war.
"The passage of this legislation will signal a change in direction in Iraq that will end the fighting and bring our troops home," she vowed.
Bad Monkey!
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Friday Humor
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
9:00 AM
I wish this were true.....
Republicans choose Guantanamo for 2008 Presidential Convention
 The Republican party has recently announced its decision to hold its 2008 convention at the prison facilities in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, currently being used to detain terror suspects. The unexpected choice of location beat out other contenders such as Chicago, Phoenix and Houston.
In a press conference Thursday afternoon, GOP spokesman Hal Atosis announced the decision handed down by senior Republican party members, including the Leader himself. "It has been decided that the 2008 convention will be held at Guantanamo Bay, in order to show our support for the War on Terror, as well as accomodate any Republican delegates who might also be serving time concurrently."
Indeed, the decision has been described as "brilliant" and "visionary" by cable news pundits such as Bill O'Reilly. The decision to use the Guantanamo facility "provides a boost to the Republicans strong anti-terror stance, and will provide lodging for all the incarcerated Republican lawmakers who are in federal detention facilities," said Republican activist Stew Pidasse. "We thought this might be an ideal situation, as the speakers could address both delegates and inmates at the same time."
RepubliCONS
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
AK Rep Don Young Called for Dems' Execution
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
8:35 AM
With phoney Abraham Lincoln quote:
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:47 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit your caption 
Permalink
::
4 comments
::
|
|
|
Thursday, February 15, 2007
|
'Delusional' Iraq plans envisaged only 5,000 troops by now, group says. That's 5,000 total, not 5,000 more
posted by
Wally
2:39 PM
According to Plan A, way back in 2003, when they were too busy trying to "sell" us the war to actually "plan" for it, they came up with some rather rosy assumptions. Aside from telling us that it would "last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that." (Rummy 11/14/02), or that it would practically pay for itself, costing just a few billion dollars. And according to a story today on CNN.COM:Some of the planning by Gen. Tommy Franks and other top military officials before the 2003 invasion of Iraq envisioned that as few as 5,000 U.S. troops would remain in Iraq by December 2006, according to documents obtained by a private research organization.
Slides obtained by the National Security Archive under the Freedom of Information Act contain a PowerPoint presentation of what planners projected to be a stable, pro-American and democratic Iraq after the ouster of Saddam Hussein.
"Completely unrealistic assumptions about a post-Saddam Iraq permeate these war plans," said National Security Archive Executive Director Thomas Blanton in a statement posted on the organization's Web site along with copies of some charts used in the PowerPoint presentation. (Read the documents on the National Security Archive Web site)
"First, they assumed that a provisional government would be in place by 'D-Day', then that the Iraqis would stay in their garrisons and be reliable partners, and finally that the post-hostilities phase would be a matter of mere 'months'. All of these were delusions." But it's all us "crazy liberals" who are undermining the war effort. It has nothing to do with the morans who forgot to plan past the next election cycle. These guys grabbed the country and dragged it kicking and screaming out the door of an airplane at 30,000 feet. Now they're saying it's the liberals' fault that the ground is coming up awful fast, and saying we'd all be fine if only we'd stop pointing out what dumbasses they are for not listening when we told them to bring a parachute.
Maybe we'll get lucky and land on Hastert's and limbaugh's fat asses to cushion the landing.
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
With us or against us?
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
1:59 PM
I bet Lieberman (?-SUCKS!) shows his Republican side......
Senate Dems To Force Up Or Down Vote On Bush's War Plan
Developing...Senate Democrats will force an up or down vote Saturday on the resolution opposing President Bush's troop increase, under debate in Congress.
Congress opened debate on the measure on Tuesday and is expected to vote by Friday. Read the Resolution here.
HuffPo
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Newsflash: Bush Finally Tells The Truth
posted by
Wally
10:21 AM
The words don't sync up with the video so well, but this is from Bush's Valentine's Day press conference.
"Money trumps Peace" 'Nuff said.
Read the transcript
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Bush called out exaggerating Iran's involvement in Iraq - pulls weasel maneuver
posted by
Wally
8:35 AM
Bush has been saying for some time that the Iranian government "at the highest levels" have been giving the orders to provide weapons to the Iraqi resistance. On January 10, in his address to the nation - his "surge" speech - Bush said: "These two regimes (Irand and Syria) are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq," he said in that address. "Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq." San Diego Union-Tribune Last week they were still making this claim.The aid is being channeled to Iraqi groups by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' al-Quds force, a covert military branch of the Iranian military that reports directly to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the officials said.
"This is coming from the highest level of the Iranian government," said a senior intelligence analyst, who briefed reporters along with a senior U.S. defense official and an explosives expert on condition that they not be identified. Kansas.com My what a difference 3 days makes. Yesterday, Bush started backpedalling away from his claims."What we don't know is whether or not the head leaders of Iran ordered the Quds Force to do what they did. Either they knew or didn't know. What matters is that (the weapons) are there," Mr Bush told a White House press conference. The Australian Notice that he doesn't deny them or admit that he may have made a mistake, but when even his top generals are crying "bullshit" to his claims even George knows he's not going to be able to sell us another bundle of lies like he did in Iraq. At least not as easily as last time.
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Taking Power Back - Trying to Restore the Balance (it's a start anyway)
posted by
Wally
7:46 AM
Senate Democrats, led by Chris Dodd (D-CT) introduced legislation that would restore and protect Habeas Corpus, and would take away the president's self proclaimed kingly powers to declare who (individually or as a group) is an "enemy combatant". No more "off with his head - to Gitmo!" for the boy-king.The bill, titled the "Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007," strikes at the core of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 by giving detainees access to U.S. courts. It was introduced by Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (Conn.), a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination.
The bill would also prevent the executive branch from making blanket determinations about who is an enemy combatant and would restrict the president's authority to interpret when certain human rights standards apply to detainees. The legislation would limit the label "enemy combatant" to a person "who directly participates in hostilities in a zone of active combat against the United States" or who took part in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
The bill would also restore to the detainees numerous rights they lost under the Military Commissions Act, including the right, under a habeas corpus petition, to challenge their detention in federal court.
"I take a backseat to no one when it comes to protecting the country from terrorists," Dodd said in an e-mail statement yesterday. "But there is a right way to do this and a wrong way to do this....In taking away their legal rights, the rights first codified in our country's Constitution, we're taking away our own moral compass, as well." Restoring the Constitution. I like that.
Rule of Law
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
|
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
|
Aren't we supposed to "fight them over there?"
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
11:09 AM
Make sure they check their IED's at the gate.....
Bush to allow 7,000 Iraqi refugees to immigrate to US
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration plans to allow about 7,000 Iraqi refugees to settle in the United States over the next year, a huge expansion at a time of mounting international pressure to help those who have fled in the nearly four-year-old war.
The United States has allowed only 463 Iraq refugees into the country since the war began, even though some 3.8 million have left. A senior State Department official described the expanded program on condition of anonymity ahead of a formal announcement later Wednesday.
The administration also plans to pledge $18 million for a worldwide resettlement and relief program. The United Nations has asked for $60 million from nations around the world.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met Wednesday with U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres to outline the expanded U.S. program. The 7,000 would be resettled from nations outside Iraq where they have fled. The U.S. proposal also includes plans to offer special treatment for Iraqis still in the country whose cooperation with the U.S. government puts them at risk from sectarian reprisal.
Green card
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Bush Shows His Support For Troops by Cutting VA Benefits
posted by
Wally
10:32 AM
Bush is trying to balance the budget on the backs of the men and women in uniform. How can he say he supports the troops at the same time he is simultaneously sending more of them off to war to get killed and wounded, and cutting medical benefits for those who come back wounded? How can he call those who want to bring our troops home safe, sound, and sane "unpatriotic" and "demoralizing" to the military? While his friends at Exxon and Halliburton enjoy record profits and continued tax breaks and subsidies (paid for by Joe Sixpack's hard earned tax dollars), Bush is again trying to cut funding for the medical and mental health care for veterans. According to Military.com:WASHINGTON - The Bush administration's budget assumes cuts to funding for veterans' health care two years from now - even as badly wounded troops returning from Iraq could overwhelm the system.
Bush is using the cuts, critics say, to help fulfill his pledge to balance the budget by 2012. But even administration allies say the numbers are not real and are being used to make the overall budget picture look better.
After an increase sought for next year, the Bush budget would turn current trends on their head. Even though the cost of providing medical care to veterans has been growing rapidly - by more than 10 percent in many years - White House budget documents assume consecutive cutbacks in 2009 and 2010 and a freeze thereafter. And he says that it's the Liberals who are hurting the troops? But wait, there's more to the story.In fact, even the White House doesn't seem serious about the numbers. It says the long-term budget numbers don't represent actual administration policies. Similar cuts assumed in earlier budgets have been reversed.
The veterans cuts, said White House budget office spokesman Sean Kevelighan, "don't reflect any policy decisions. We'll revisit them when we do the (future) budgets." Oh, now I understand. Bush KNOWS the cuts won't go through, because no sane or humane person would let them go through. He just put them in there so that he can claim that he's proposing a balanced budget so he can give more tax-breaks to his buddies at Exxon and Halliburton. He's not "really" cutting their benefits, he's just using the troops for politics and profit. I guess that makes it okay.
Support the Troops
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:29 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit your caption 
Permalink
::
6 comments
::
|
|
Happy Valentine's Day - the Cheneys send their love
posted by
Wally
7:22 AM
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
|
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
|
Scooter and Shooter take a pass
posted by
Clyde
2:13 PM
Libby, Cheney avoid stand in leak trial
Neither Vice President Dick Cheney nor former aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby will testify at Libby's perjury and obstruction trial in the CIA leak case, Libby's lawyer said Tuesday.
Defense attorney Theodore Wells said he advised Cheney's lawyer over lunch that his testimony would not be needed. Wells also said he planned to rest his case without calling Libby.
In December, Wells announced that he would call Cheney as a defense witness. Historians said that it would have been the first time that a sitting vice president would have sat as a witness in a criminal case.
Libby is accused of lying and obstructing the investigation into the 2003 leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity. Plame is married to prominent war critic Joseph Wilson.
Pussies
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Deja Vu in North Korea.
posted by
Wally
9:30 AM
NewsFlash: North Korea agrees to Nuclear Disarmament in exchange for energy assistance. Reason for celebration. We can all breathe a sigh of relief. The year? 1994.
Don't be fooled when Bush and the Republicans start claiming success in negotiating a deal with North Korea to give up their nucyoolar weapons program. While we can't dismiss the good news that the deal - any deal - was made to begin to relieve tensions on the Peninsula, it's old news. 12 years old.
We've come full circle, and ended up with a deal very similar to one signed in October 1994 - and then promptly de-funded by the newly Republican controlled Congress. By 2000, N. Korea was more than a little annoyed that the U.S. had failed to carry out its end of the deal, and by 2003, while we were distracted in Iraq, they pulled the seals off of their reactors, kicked the IAEA out, and started reprocessing uranium into weapons grade material.
Let's do a quick comparison of the current deal and the Agreed Framework Between the US and the DPRK signed on Oct 21, 1994 (here's the State Department document).
In the original deal, :
- DPRK's graphite-moderated nuclear power plants, which could easily produce weapons grade plutonium, would be replaced with light water reactor (LWR) power plants by a target date of 2003 (paid for by S.Korea and Japan)
- Oil for heating and electricity production would be provided while DPRK's reactors were shut down, until completion of the first LWR power unit. (starting within 3 months and increasing to 500,000 tons/year)
- The two sides would move toward full normalization of political and economic relations.
- The U.S. would provide formal assurances to the DPRK, against the threat or use of nuclear weapons by the U.S. (we promised not to "shock and awe" them)
- The DPRK would take steps to implement the Korean Peninsula Denuclearization Declaration.
- The DPRK would remain a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
IAEA ad hoc and routine inspections would resume for facilities not subject to the freeze. - Existing spent nuclear fuel stocks would be stored and ultimately disposed of without reprocessing in the DPRK.
- Before delivery of key LWR nuclear components, the DPRK would come into full compliance with its safeguards agreement with the IAEA.
In the current agreement (according to this story in the Guardian): - N.Korea will receive initial aid equal to 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil and eventually receive another 950,000 tons in aid
- N.Korea will shut down and seal its main nuclear reactor and related facilities at Yongbyon, north of the capital, within 60 days, to be confirmed by international inspectors.
- North Korea will state all its nuclear programs including plutonium already extracted
- North Korea and United States will embark on talks aimed at resolving disputes and restarting diplomatic relations
- The United States will also begin the process of removing North Korea from its designation as a terror-sponsoring state and also on ending U.S. trade sanctions
The biggest difference between the agreements is that now N.Korea actually has nuclear weapons. Hopefully this time Congress will provide funding and Bush will sign off on it so that the United States can live up to our part of the deal and give it a chance to work. One glance at the Iraq budget provides ample evidence that a little prevention like this is a whole lot cheaper than shocking and awing them. Besides, it has to be more effective.
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Bush shows "evidence" that Iran sending weapons to Iraq. World yawns and ignores him.
posted by
Wally
7:43 AM
Once again the Bush administration paraded out it's military officers to show "evidence" that Iran is evil and doing naughty things and should be punished. This time, nobody's paying much attention.
Three weeks after promising that it would show proof of Iranian meddling in Iraq, the Bush administration has laid out its evidence - and received in return a healthy dose of skepticism.
Asked for direct evidence linking Iran's leadership to the weapons, Tony Snow, the White House spokesman, said, "Let me put it this way. There's not a whole lot of freelancing in the Iranian government, especially when it comes to something like that." Int'l Herald Tribune If this sounds familiar, maybe it's because we've heard it all before, from Tony's predecessors, and it sounds an awful lot like "crying wolf". Even General Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is calling bullshit on this one.
"That does not translate that the Iranian government per se, for sure, is directly involved in doing this," Pace told reporters in the Indonesian capital, Jakarta. "What it does say is that things made in Iran are being used in Iraq to kill coalition soldiers."
His remarks might raise questions on the credibility of the claims of high-level Iranian involvement, especially following the faulty U.S. intelligence that was used to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Guardian We all see how well that invasion is working out. Forgive us if we're gunshy after being blatantly lied into a war that's cost us a half trillion dollars and 3120 soldiers lives, 23,000 soldiers injured, countless innocent Iraqi's maimed or killed, and the reputation of credibility and respect that our nation used to enjoy throughout the world. But Bush claims to be trying to avoid war, saying he has no plans to go to war.
Administration officials say their approach was carefully calibrated to focus on concerns that Iran is providing potent weapons that are used against U.S. troops in Iraq, not to ignite a wider war. Take note that this is the same kind of thing he was saying in the run up to his little misbegotten and ill-conceived adventure in Iraq. Even after Colin Powell presented his case to the U.N., Bush was still "claiming" to be trying to avoid war by using diplomacy. The Iraq War Resolution was signed by Congress not to declare war, but to give Bush "diplomatic" leverage in negotiating with Iraq - leverage, and diplomacy, which he never used - heading straight to the military solution.
So go ahead George, show us all the evidence you've got. Pull out the vials of white powder and the cartoon drawings of trucks and railroad cars and aluminum tubes and grainy satellite pictures of trucks at warehouses and claim they're building noocyoolar weapons and WMD's. Here's what we have to say to you, in your own words:
Permalink
::
3 comments
::
|
|
|
Monday, February 12, 2007
|
Novak spills the beans
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
3:15 PM
Time to go after Rove and Armitage.....
Novak Takes the Stand As Libby Trial Resumes
WASHINGTON After a long weekend off, the defense took the field this morning and attempted to hold the line against the prosecution in the perjury trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby in Washington, D.C. The witness list remains in flux, and could include Libby himself and Vice President Cheney -- or maybe not.
But by late morning, Bob Woodward and Walter Pincus of The Washington Post had taken the stand, followed by David Sanger of The New York Times. Pincus said that Libby did not leak Valerie Plame's identity -- but Ari Fleischer did. Then Robert Novak took the stand just after lunch. He named Karl Rove and Richard Armitage as the two sources for his famous "outing" column.
Novak said Armitage, a key State Dept. official, was his primary source and Rove only a "confirming" source. On July 8, 2003, Armitage referred to former Ambassador Joe Wilson's wife as "Valerie" and Novak then looked up his name in Who's Who to determine that he last name seemed to be Plame.
Plamegate
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Fitz is after bigger fish than Libby
posted by
Wally
10:15 AM
Every day, the Libby trial reveals some new and interesting little tidbits about the inner functioning (or dysfunctioning) of the White House. None of them are complimentary. It is our opinion (or speculation) that prosecutor Fitzgerald went after Scooter because 1) he was the only one he "knew" he could convict, and 2) he knew that in the course of the trial, things would be revealed that would allow him to pursue criminal cases against others in the administration as well. Revelations such as:A vice president fixated on finding ways to debunk a former diplomat's claims that Bush misled the U.S. people in going to war and his suggestion Cheney might have played a role in suppressing contrary intelligence.
Cheney told Libby to speak with selected reporters to counter bad news. He developed talking points on the matter for the White House press office. He helped draft a statement by then-CIA Director George Tenet. He moved to declassify some intelligence material to bolster the case against Wilson.
A former Cheney press aide, Cathie Martin, testified she proposed leaking some news exclusives but was kept partly in the dark when Cheney ordered Libby to leak part of a classified intelligence report. Later she arranged a luncheon for conservative columnists with Cheney to help bolster the administration's case.
"The details suggest Cheney was almost a deputy president with a shadow operation. He had his own source of advice. He had his own source of access. He was making his own decisions," Light said. Patrick Fitzgerald is not one to take chances on this kind of thing, and he knows what he's doing. If I was Cheney or Rove or even Bush, I'd be sweating. Maybe that's why Bush bought all that land in Paraquay.
Do they serve bacon in PMITA Federal Pen?
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Rohrabacher (Retard-CA): Global Warming Caused by Dinosaur Farts
posted by
Wally
9:05 AM
We wish we were funny enough to make this kind of stuff up. More importantly, we wish our congressmen weren't.
This week, Congress held its first hearing on the landmark IPCC report on climate change. That report concluded that global warming is "unequivocal" and human activity is the main driver, "very likely" causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950.
During the hearing, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) - one of the 87 percent of congressional Republicans who do not believe in man-made global warming - questioned the authors of the report about a period of dramatic climate change that occured 55 million years ago. "We don't know what those other cycles were caused by in the past. Could be dinosaur flatulence, you know, or who knows?"

Permalink
::
3 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:39 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit a comment 
Permalink
::
8 comments
::
|
|
|
Sunday, February 11, 2007
|
Happy Shotoberfest!
posted by
Wally
12:54 PM
Today is the one year anniversary of Dick Cheney's "Get Drunk And Shoot An Old Man In The Face" Day.
While we can't advocate "shooting an old man in the face", even if you're the vice president and thereby above the law, we see no reason why getting drunk and doing shots would be an inappropriate way to celebrate the occasion.
Suggestions for shots are welcome.
Permalink
::
3 comments
::
|
|
Nothing new in the special interest cookie jar
posted by
Clyde
7:16 AM
Congress Finds Ways to Avoid Lobbyist Limits
The 110th Congress opened with the passage of new rules intended to curb the influence of lobbyists by prohibiting them from treating lawmakers to meals, trips, stadium box seats or the discounted use of private jets.
But it did not take long for lawmakers to find ways to keep having lobbyist-financed fun.
In just the last two months, lawmakers invited lobbyists to help pay for a catalog of outings: lavish birthday parties in a lawmaker's honor ($1,000 a lobbyist), martinis and margaritas at Washington restaurants (at least $1,000), a California wine-tasting tour (all donors welcome), hunting and fishing trips (typically $5,000), weekend golf tournaments ($2,500 and up), a Presidents' Day weekend at Disney World ($5,000), parties in South Beach in Miami ($5,000), concerts by the Who or Bob Seger ($2,500 for two seats), and even Broadway shows like "Mary Poppins" and "The Drowsy Chaperone" (also $2,500 for two).
The lobbyists and their employers typically end up paying for the events, but within the new rules.
Link
Permalink
::
7 comments
::
|
|
|
Saturday, February 10, 2007
|
Supporting the troops?
posted by
Clyde
7:09 AM
Many U.S. troops short on crucial gear
Hundreds of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have experienced shortages of key protective equipment including armored vehicles, roadside-bomb countermeasures and communications gear, a Pentagon survey released Tuesday shows.
The Defense Department Inspector General's Office polled roughly 1,100 service members and found they weren't always adequately equipped for their missions. The troops were interviewed in Iraq and Afghanistan last May and June.
Those surveyed reported shortcoming with vehicles outfitted with armor; "crew-served weapons," which are weapons it takes more than one person to handle, such as artillery or a large machine gun; electronic countermeasure devices, such as equipment designed to foil roadside bombs by interfering with cell-phone signals that may be used to detonate them; and communications equipment.
Link
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Recruiting gone bad
posted by
Clyde
6:50 AM
Reports show increase in gang-related crimes
Gang activity in the military is increasing, and the number of gang-related crimes involving soldiers and their families nearly tripled from fiscal 2005 to fiscal 2006, according to a pair of new reports.
Both studies note that gang members represent only a small fraction of the total force, but say that gangs have become a bigger presence - and a bigger concern - in just the last few years. "Gang-related activity in the military is increasing and poses a threat to law enforcement officials and national security," according to the FBI's National Gang Intelligence Center report, released in January.
"Members of nearly every major street gang have been identified on both domestic and international military installations."
Link
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
|
Friday, February 9, 2007
|
KKKarl comes clean
posted by
Clyde
11:25 AM
Not Our Kind of People
According to a congressman's wife who attended a Republican women's luncheon yesterday, Karl Rove explained the rationale behind the president's amnesty/open-borders proposal this way: "I don't want my 17-year-old son to have to pick tomatoes or make beds in Las Vegas."
There should be no need to explain why this is an obscene statement coming from a leader in the party that promotes the virtues of hard work, thrift, and sobriety, a party whose demi-god actually split fence rails as a young man, a party where "respectable Republican cloth coat" once actually meant something. But it does seem to be necessary to explain.
Racist
Permalink
::
3 comments
::
|
|
An Iraq Interrogator's Nightmare
posted by
Wally
11:16 AM
A man with no face stares at me from the corner of a room. He pleads for help, but I'm afraid to move. He begins to cry. It is a pitiful sound, and it sickens me. He screams, but as I awaken, I realize the screams are mine.
(snip)
American authorities continue to insist that the abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib was an isolated incident in an otherwise well-run detention system. That insistence, however, stands in sharp contrast to my own experiences as an interrogator in Iraq. I watched as detainees were forced to stand naked all night, shivering in their cold cells and pleading with their captors for help. Others were subjected to long periods of isolation in pitch-black rooms. Food and sleep deprivation were common, along with a variety of physical abuse, including punching and kicking. Aggressive, and in many ways abusive, techniques were used daily in Iraq, all in the name of acquiring the intelligence necessary to bring an end to the insurgency. The violence raging there today is evidence that those tactics never worked. My memories are evidence that those tactics were terribly wrong.
(snip)
Some may suggest there is no reason to revive the story of abuse in Iraq. Rehashing such mistakes will only harm our country, they will say. But history suggests we should examine such missteps carefully. Oppressive prison environments have created some of the most determined opponents. The British learned that lesson from Napoleon, the French from Ho Chi Minh, Europe from Hitler. The world is learning that lesson again from Ayman al-Zawahiri. What will be the legacy of abusive prisons in Iraq?
But Bush says we don't do torture
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Bush Family War Profiteering Continues
posted by
Wally
7:50 AM
One of President Bush's uncles, William H.T. Bush, was among directors of a defense contractor who reaped $6 million from what federal regulators say was an illegal scheme by two executives to manipulate the timing of stock option grants, documents show.
The uncle, known as "Bucky," is the youngest brother of former President George H.W. Bush. William H.T. Bush was an outside, nonexecutive director of Engineered Support Systems Inc., a defense contractor whose profits were bolstered because of the Iraq war.
(snip)
William H.T. Bush made about $450,000 in January 2005 by exercising his company stock options and selling shares, his filing with the SEC shows. When questioned by reporters about the sale at the time, he said he had not pulled any strings in Washington for ESSI.
Blood Money
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:19 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit your caption 
Permalink
::
9 comments
::
|
|
|
Thursday, February 8, 2007
|
Waxman to Bremer: Show Me the Money
posted by
Wally
10:16 AM
The CPA handed out planeloads of cash but no one knows where it went.
Which is why Henry Waxman's Committee on Government Reform convened to examine the Coalition Provisional Authority's handling of reconstruction funding in Iraq on Tuesday. Shipped to Iraq by the ton on C-130 cargo planes laden with bricks of U.S. tender, the funding in question, held in the Development Fund for Iraq and totaling some $8.8 billion, was doled out by the CPA to Iraq's fledgling government ministries between October 2003 and June 2004. Ostensibly, the cash went to pay for such things as salaries and overhead. Where it actually wound up is another story entirely.
(snip)
At one point, Diane Watson, the California Democrat, replayed comments David Oliver (once the CPA's director of management and budget) made to the BBC in November, in which he expresses indifference over how the reconstruction funds were spent. "I have no idea, I can't tell you whether or not the money went to the right things or didn't - nor do I actually think it is important," he says on the recording. "Billions of dollars of their money disappeared, yes I understand, I'm saying what difference does it make?" What difference does it make? What difference does it make whether it went to the right things (schools and roads) or didn't (instead going to things like IED's and RPG's)? You want to know what difference it makes? Ask a soldier what difference it makes. Ask a widow or orphan or parent of a soldier who never came home what difference it makes. Billions of Reasons to Investigate
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
GOP Hypocrisy Alert - Hastert private military jet was a necessary security precaution. Pelosi military jet is an extravagance.
posted by
Wally
7:22 AM
When the Republicans were in charge of Congress, Denny Hastert used a private military jet to haul his fat ass back and forth between D.C. and Illinois "for security reasons" (being Speaker of the House and all). Now that the Speaker is a Democrat, however, security is apparently not a big concern for Republicans in Congress. Now, all of a sudden, after 6 years, the jet is an "extravagance". When presented with that little factual tidbit, the whine turns to "but but but... she wants a BIGGER jet than Denny had." That's right bucko. She needs one big enough to make it from DC to California. Not only that, guess who's actually picking the plane she'll need? Bill Livingood, the House sergeant-at-arms whom Hastert appointed to the job in 1995, was negotiating with the Air Force about what plane from the government fleet of passenger jets should be made available when she needs it. The plane also would be used on other government missions.
"It has everything to do with security," Pelosi said. She added that Bush had personally told her that because the speaker is second in line of presidential succession, behind Vice President Dick Cheney, he was concerned about her security.
That concern apparently included the desire that Pelosi's plane not land for refueling. So Hastert's man is choosing the appropriate aircraft, with the blessing of Bush himself. Hey Republicans, STFU and GBTW and maybe someday you'll have something to talk about that's actually relevant and doesn't make you look like spoiled hypocritical brats.
Crybaby Republicans
Permalink
::
5 comments
::
|
|
|
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
|
Whamoooo!
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
3:10 PM
That's 8 people who said Libby lied....
Russert says he didn't give Libby agent's ID
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- NBC's Tim Russert, the last prosecution witness in Lewis "Scooter" Libby's perjury trial, testified Wednesday he did not inform Libby of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity, as Libby has claimed.
Libby, the former top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, told FBI investigators and a grand jury he first learned Wilson's identity from Russert during a conversation on July 10, 2003. He later recanted, saying a note he found had jogged his memory, and that he initially heard the name from Cheney about a month before.
Russert was asked by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald whether the two discussed Wilson. "No, that would be impossible because I did not know who that person was until several days later," Russert said.
Asked whether Libby told him about Wilson, Russert responded, "No."
CNN
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
2-11-2006 - A day we will never forget.
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
9:32 AM
Democrats note Cheney incident on their calendar
 U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent out the Democrats' 2007 calendar this week, which includes the House vote schedule, holidays, commemorative days, the dates when key economic data is published, the anniversaries of key acts of Congress and other special events.
The e-mail from Pelosi's office reads, "Attached is a calendar for 2007 that has been prepared by Speaker Pelosi's office. It was originally e-mailed out to Democratic offices in mid-December, but we wanted to e-mail it out again to ensure that all offices had seen it. We hope this calendar helps Democratic offices to plan press events and other activities for their member throughout the year."
Included in the calendar is a Feb. 11 entry reminding House members of the anniversary of the day Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shot fellow hunter Harry Whittington at the Armstrong Ranch.
The item reads simply, "Cheney hunting accident (2006)."
Birdshot
Permalink
::
3 comments
::
|
|
Libby testimony details White House plot to discredit critic
posted by
Wally
8:27 AM
On tape, he says Bush and Cheney planned leaks to reporters.
Former White House official I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby told a grand jury in 2004 that Vice President Dick Cheney was upset by an ambassador's public questioning of the Iraq war and that President Bush, Cheney and Libby were involved in a plan - kept secret from other senior White House officials - to leak previously classified intelligence to reporters to counter the criticism.
Libby's audiotape testimony, played for jurors in federal court here, offered new details about how the White House orchestrated a campaign to discredit the Iraq war critic, former envoy Joseph C. Wilson IV. Wilson's wife, undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame, was subsequently exposed in the media, triggering a criminal investigation.
(snip)
Libby said that Cheney "thought we should get some of these facts out to the press. He then undertook to get permission from the president to talk about this" to reporters.
and Clinton was impeached for a blowjob
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:30 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit your caption 
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
|
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
|
Thirty-Six Sure-Fire Signs That Your Empire Is Crumbling
posted by
Wally
12:53 PM
So. You've built yourself an empire, eh?
Well, bully for you!
What's next, you ask? Well, now you've got to do what everybody does when they have an empire, of course. You've got to worry about it falling apart, mate!
But how to tell for sure? Let me see if I can be helpful. Here are some rules of thumb to keep in mind, thirty-six sure-fire indicators that your empire is falling apart:
You know your empire's crumbling when the folks who are gearing up their empire to replace yours start blowing up satellites in space. And then they don't bother to return your phone calls when you ring up to ask why.
You know your empire's crumbling when those same folks are cutting deals left, right and center across Asia, Latin America and Africa, while you, your lousy terms, and your arrogant attitude are no longer welcome.
You know your empire's crumbling when you're spending your grandchildren's money like a drunken sailor, and letting your soon-to-be rivals finance your little splurge (i.e., letting them own your country).
You know your empire's crumbling when it's considered an achievement to pretend that you've halved the rate at which you're adding to the massive mountain of debt you've already accumulated.
(snip)
You know your empire's crumbling when just about your entire military land force is tied up in a worse-than-useless war launched on the basis of complete fabrications, that every day is actually making you less - not more - secure from external threat.
Here's your signs (31 more of them)
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Bush approval = 28%. Getting kicked in the nuts = 41%
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
9:49 AM
You read it right....
Fruitcake Polling Higher Than Bush
According to the latest CBS News poll, the president's overall approval rating has dipped to 28 percent-the lowest number in his presidency and dangerously close to Nixon's all-time low of 24 percent. To lend a little context to this historic feat, we found some other people and things with equal or greater popularity.
OTHER THINGS WITH A 28 PERCENT APPROVAL RATING
Cottage Cheese Boxer Briefs Body Hair on Guys A Wall Along the Mexican Border Kelly Osbourne Reptiles Text Message Flirting
THINGS WITH AN APPROVAL RATING HIGHER THAN GEORGE W. BUSH
Kevin Federline (45%) Fruit Cake (40%) The Dentist (45%) Hanson (53%) Ryan Seacrest (60%) The "Dude, You're getting a Dell!" Guy (42%) Small Breasts (50%) Getting Kicked in the Balls (41%)
Lots More!
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
Republicans were for cutting funding for troops before they were against it.
posted by
Wally
9:18 AM
Mark M February 6, 2007
I saw this and thought you and your readers would like it.
Funny how the Republican Party was ok with "enabling the enemy" with their criticism when the President had a (D) after his name:
"It is a remarkable spectacle to see the Clinton Administration and NATO taking over from the Soviet Union the role of sponsoring "wars of national liberation." -Representative Helen Chenoweth (R-ID)
"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning...I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area." -Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)
"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?" -Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99
(much more)
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Democrats: Bush's Budget "full of debt and deception
posted by
Wally
8:05 AM
President George W. Bush's request for record U.S. military spending and cuts in the growth of entitlement programs met stiff criticism from Democrats in Congress, who vowed to reorganize his spending priorities.
Democratic lawmakers, who hold majorities in the House and Senate, denounced the president's $2.9 trillion budget, saying it emphasizes the Pentagon at the expense of health care and research on alternative and renewable fuels.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad said Bush's budget was "filled with debt and deception." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said it would "mortgage our children's future to the president's misguided policies in Iraq."
Debt and Deception
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Whatever happened to "Up or Down" vote? Republican hypocrites still blocking debate on Bush's "surge"
posted by
Wally
7:25 AM
For the past 6 years, while the GOP was in complete control of the House, Senate, Presidency, and courts, we had to listen to their constant whining about the "obstructionist" Democrats. For 6 years we've watched the Republicans change the rules, bend the rules, or flat out break them in order to ramrod through whatever crazy-ass laws Bush told them to ramrod through, without allowing for debate or dissent, sometimes in the middle of the night, sometimes without even allowing the Democrats to see the bills they were voting on until just before the vote. Now, after 6 years of behaving like spoiled brats, they are proving that the past 6 years hasn't been an illusion. They really are spoiled brats.Republicans blocked a full-fledged Senate debate over Iraq on Monday, but Democrats vowed they still would find a way to force President Bush to change course in a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,000 U.S. troops
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky described the test vote as merely a "bump in the road" and added that GOP lawmakers "welcome the debate and are happy to have it." Yeah, sure you do Mitch. That's why you're doiing everything in your power to block it. Frikking liar.Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Democrat, echoed Reid. "If the Republicans want to stand by their president and his policy, they shouldn't run from this debate. If they believe we should send thousands of our young soldiers into the maws of this wretched civil war, they should at least have the courage to stand and defend their position," he said. Republicans are afraid to even TALK about the measure. They sure as hell don't want to have to "vote" on it on the record. Soldiers are dying. Civilians are dying. Our nation's reputation is dying. And all the GOP cares about is not looking bad in the next election. Sorry guys, you already lost. We're on to your games. Now do the job you were hired to do and quit stalling and playing politics with people's lives.
"we welcome the debate"
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
|
Monday, February 5, 2007
|
What the hell, we've got money to burn right?
posted by
Clyde
3:14 PM
Bush budget cements expiring tax cuts
President Bush asked Congress on Monday to slash taxes by $1.9 trillion over the next decade, cementing his first-term tax cuts while changing the way health insurance is taxed.
The lion's share of the president's proposed tax reductions would come from making permanent his signature cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003, at a cost of $1.6 trillion over the next 10 years. Those cuts would otherwise evaporate at the end of 2010.
"Well-timed, pro-growth tax policies helped create the right climate for innovation and entrepreneurship," powering a resilient economy, Bush said in his budget message.
$$$$
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
Senator Graham: "9/11 hijackers tied to Saudi government" So Bush attacked Iraq?
posted by
Wally
7:51 AM
Two of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers had a support network in the United States that included agents of the Saudi government, and the Bush administration and FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship, Senator Bob Graham wrote in a book to be released Tuesday.
The discovery of the financial backing of the two hijackers "would draw a direct line between the terrorists and the government of Saudi Arabia, and trigger an attempted coverup by the Bush administration," the Florida Democrat wrote.
And in Graham's book, "Intelligence Matters," obtained by The Miami Herald yesterday, he makes clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi Arabia were in the 27 pages of the congressional inquiry's final report that were blocked from release by the administration, despite the pleas of leaders of both parties on the House and Senate intelligence committees.
Investigate and Impeach
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:31 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit a caption.
Permalink
::
6 comments
::
|
|
|
Sunday, February 4, 2007
|
A friend has passed
posted by
Clyde
7:07 AM
It is with profound sadness that we report that Bob Kincaid's father has passed away after a long illness.
In life, Kenneth Kincaid had worked as a coal miner, furnace operator and proudly served his country as an aircraft carrier water tender.
It has been said that "it is the Father that makes the child, but it is the Dad that makes the son" and if you were to look at Bob, Kenneth must have been one helluva man. His passing makes the world a little less bright.
Dookie, Wally and I want to express our deepest condolences to the Kincaid family.
If you want to leave a message for Bob and his family or if you'd like to make a donation toward flowers and the hospice house where Kenneth spent his final days.
Permalink
::
4 comments
::
|
|
Another success George?
posted by
Clyde
7:01 AM
Mahdi Army gains strength through unwitting aid of U.S.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - The U.S. military drive to train and equip Iraq's security forces has unwittingly strengthened anti-American Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militia, which has been battling to take over much of the capital city as American forces are trying to secure it.
U.S. Army commanders and enlisted men who are patrolling east Baghdad, which is home to more than half the city's population and the front line of al-Sadr's campaign to drive rival Sunni Muslims from their homes and neighborhoods, said al-Sadr's militias had heavily infiltrated the Iraqi police and army units that they've trained and armed.
"Half of them are JAM. They'll wave at us during the day and shoot at us during the night," said 1st Lt. Dan Quinn, a platoon leader in the Army's 1st Infantry Division, using the initials of the militia's Arabic name, Jaish al Mahdi. "People (in America) think it's bad, but that we control the city. That's not the way it is. They control it, and they let us drive around. It's hostile territory."
Link
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
|
Saturday, February 3, 2007
|
How much more do they need?
posted by
Clyde
6:16 AM
DoD to request $622.6 billion for 2008
The Pentagon is expected to send Congress a $622.6 billion defense budget for 2008. The sum includes $141.7 billion to continue fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Bush to seek $100B more for wars this year
The Bush administration will ask for another $100 billion for military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan this year and will seek $145 billion for 2008, a senior administration official said Friday.
Pentagon likely to seek '08 supplemental
The Pentagon likely will seek an emergency supplemental for the 2008 budget to finance operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, despite congressional pressure to begin requesting combat-related dollars in annual budget plans, said Lisa Marie Cheney, acting U.S. defense undersecretary for legislative affairs.
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
Now they cry for minority rights
posted by
Clyde
5:45 AM
Senate Republicans Threaten to Block Start of Debate on Iraq
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Republicans will block the start of debate on a nonbinding resolution opposing President George W. Bush's Iraq strategy unless two Republican alternatives are also considered.
Democrats, who control the chamber 51-49, need the votes of 60 senators to begin debate on Monday on a resolution expressing opposition to Bush's plan to send 21,500 more U.S. troops to Iraq. McConnell said all Republicans will vote against starting debate unless Democrats consent to consider other measures.
"We insist on a process that allows several different approaches on our side to this issue,'' McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, told reporters in Washington. "We have a lot to say about the process by which the matter is debated.''
Payback
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
Up is down, black is white and war is peace
posted by
Clyde
5:30 AM
U.S. Defense Minister says U.S. not planning on attacking Iran
In a conversation with reporters on Friday, United States Defense Minister Robert Gates said that the U.S. does not plan on attacking Iran.
According to Gates, the decision to send additional aircraft carriers to the Persian Gulf does not indicate a desire on the part of the U.S. to go to war with Iran.
Gates said the United States is trying to prevent Iran's involvement in the violence in Iraq, and is trying to force them to abandon their uranium enrichment activities.
Gates added that there is still no evidence that Iranian forces were involved in an attack last week on American forces in Karbala, Iraq in which 5 U.S. soldiers were killed.
Link
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
|
Friday, February 2, 2007
|
Eating their own
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
10:19 AM
Even Scarborough is making sense...
Scarborough: Bush willing to take his party over a cliff to prove his point The slow demise of the national Republican Party just took a turn for the worse. Hard to believe that the GOP's prospects could actually become more bleak after two years of unrelenting bad news, but it has.
Republican senators are now turning their rhetorical guns away from Democrats and toward one another. A few conservative Republican senators, whose votes usually cheer me up during bleak political times, are actually accusing Virginia's senior senator, John Warner, of providing comfort to terrorists. The White House even got involved in the name calling when Tony Snow suggested Warner's actions could embolden the likes of Osama Bin Laden.
The message from the Bush administration seems to be this: "Thanks for carrying our water on this miserable war for four years. Now we're going accuse you of helping terrorists."
More Good Stuff
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Caption This
posted by
Wally
7:52 AM
Use the "Post a Comment" link to submit your caption 
Permalink
::
12 comments
::
|
|
|
Thursday, February 1, 2007
|
Cafferty: "Federal Prosecutors Being Replaced With Bush Insiders"
posted by
Wally
3:31 PM
Jack Cafferty talks about the Bush administration firing high level federal prosecutors and Alberto Gonzalez replacing them with members of President Bush's inner circle, using a little known provision in the PATRIOT Act to bypass Senate confirmation hearings and consolidate power of the executive branch.
Could it be that the Bush admin sees the subpeonas on the wall, and they are trying to put bodies in place who will let them get away with the crimes they've committed?
Permalink
::
2 comments
::
|
|
Senate agrees to bill to Censure Bush's escalation plans
posted by
Wally
3:19 PM
While it may be a non-binding, toothless, act of symbolism, it is still a congressional, very public, very embarrassing bitchslap to the President.US lawmakers on both sides of the US Senate drummed up support for a compromise bill slamming a hike in US forces in Iraq, saying it was the best chance of forcing President George W. Bush to drop his unpopular plan.
After days of hardknuckle bargaining, top congressional Democrats and key Republicans finally agreed late Wednesday on a bill that censures Bush's plan to boost US forces in the war zone with another 21,000 troops.
The breakthrough measure, likely to garner wide support, means the White House could face an embarrassing -- but ultimately symbolic -- vote of no-confidence when the bill hits the Senate floor next week.
"Now we have a real opportunity for the Senate to speak clearly. Every senator will have a chance to vote on whether he or she supports or disagrees with the president's plan to send more troops into the middle of a civil war," said Senator Joe Biden, one of the key authors of the motion. Not only does it give each senator to "speak clearly" on the issue, it also gets them on record as to whether or not they support a very unpopular escalation plan from a very unpopular president.
Surge This
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Boy do they LOVE G.W.B.
posted by
Dookie The Webmaster
8:33 AM
Just like Halliburton, look at their stock price since Chimp took office....

ExxonMobil has best year ever for any U.S. company even as Q4 profit falls
NEW YORK (AP) - ExxonMobil (XOM) on Thursday posted the largest annual profit by a U.S. company - $39.5 billion - even as earnings for the last quarter of 2006 declined 4%.
The 2006 profit topped the previous record of $36.13 billion, which Exxon set in 2005.
Revenue from the world's largest publicly traded oil company rose to $377.64 billion for the year, surpassing the record $370.68 billion that Exxon posted in 2005.
For the fourth quarter, net income slipped to $10.25 billion, or $1.76 a share, from $10.71 billion, or $1.71 a share, a year earlier.
Oil
Permalink
::
1 comments
::
|
|
Gonzalez finally releases trickle of info about illegal wiretapping - brags about "working with Congress"
posted by
Wally
7:53 AM
Congress is finally going to get to see some of the information about Bush's illegal wiretapping program, after months or years of asking for it. Now that the Dems are in control, it looks like Gonzo is starting to realize that his stalling tactics are going to land him in court, where he knows he can't win (a federal judge has already declared the program unconstitutional).Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said yesterday that he will turn over secret documents detailing the government's domestic spying program, ending a two-week standoff with the Senate Judiciary Committee over surveillance targeting terror suspects.
"It's never been the case where we said we would never provide access," Gonzales said. "We obviously would be concerned about the public disclosure that may jeopardize the national security of our country. But we're working with the Congress to provide the information that it needs." Sure Al, you're "working with" them now that they're threatening to subpeona you for your unconstitutional activities. Or you're "pretending" to work with them, hoping they're as stupid and gullible as the previous Republican Congress, and can be cowed with declarations of "national security".The administration still won't release other documents that could explain how the court's orders comply with the 1978 surveillance law that the court oversees, said Representative Heather Wilson, a New Mexico Republican and a senior member of the House Intelligence Committee. She said the deal to release the documents stems from a briefing in front of that panel last week.
"We are playing hide the ball down at the Justice Department," said Wilson, who has told Silvestre Reyes, the Texas Democrat who heads the House panel, that she will support a subpoena, if need be. Gonzo is still trying to weasel out of his illegal activities, claiming things like the ACLU's lawsuit against the DOJ is moot because the administration finally decided to start obeying the law after 5 years of breaking it, even though Bush claims that he still retains the right to start breaking it again. That's like a crack dealer saying he can't be prosecuted because he stopped selling crack. Until he decides to start again. Keep playing games Al. There's an orange jumpsuit waiting for you down at PMITA Federal Pen.
Wiretap This
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
Watch out Heaven, Molly Ivins is comin'
posted by
Wally
7:50 AM

Syndicated political columnist Molly Ivins died of breast cancer Wednesday evening at her home in Austin. She was 62 years old, and had much, much more to give this world.
She remained cheerful despite Texas politics. She emphasized the more hilarious aspects of both state and national government, and consequently never had to write fiction. She said, "Good thing we've still got politics—finest form of free entertainment ever invented."
Although short, Molly's life was writ large. She was as eloquent a speaker and teacher as she was a writer, and her quips will last at least as long as Will Rogers'. She dubbed George W. Bush "Shrub" and Texas Governor Rick Perry "Good Hair."
(snip)
Molly was a hero. She was a mentor. She was a liberal. She was a patriot. She was a friend. And she always will be. With Molly's death we have lost someone we hold dear. What she has left behind we will hold dearer still.
Molly's enduring message is, "Raise more hell."
Rest in Peace Molly. We miss you already
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
|
|
|
|
Headlines
& Comments |
 |
|
|
| |
|
|
Store |
 |
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Amazon.com |
 |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|