Kicking Ass: The Democratic Party's Blog

Wedneday Open Thread

Posted by on December 20, 2006 at 09:44 AM

Hey, Look! It's an Open Thread!

Comments (228) «

Happy Holidays, everyone.

Oil dependency 'weakening US'

US dependence on oil imports has weakened the nation's foreign policy influence, while the sway of crude producers such as Iran, Russia and Venezuela has grown, a Council on Foreign Relations report said on Monday.

1
Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 09:55 AM

Iraqi lesson in Hanukkah story

One wonders whether Donald Rumsfeld and Co. ever read this ancient tale, because our former defense secretary never seemed to grasp the concept that local people, religiously motivated, will always defeat a foreign occupation over time.
2
Kristen on December 20, 2006 at 09:58 AM

what Americans should do is to rise up and end these benefits for the priviledged class. I bet we would see some fast actions on these problems then!

Posted by goodfoe on December 20, 2006 at 09:46 AM

goodfoe, this is an oft noted issue. But not "oft" or loud or strongly enough. Let's light a fire.

PUT CONGRESS ON SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE!!Posted by salutetheDems on December 20, 2006 at 09:55 AM

3
salutetheDems on December 20, 2006 at 10:03 AM

You sell yourself short, sistah. The cheeseheads would probably love to hear your perspective coming from the west coast, and all...And you might change someone's mind. For "regular people", negative racial attitudes can be rooted in fear.

Posted by fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 08:15 AM

Negative racial attiutdes are rooted in two things. First is change. Folks don't want to do it and second again, change. People do excatly as they see fit. And most keep their racial attitudes as fits their lifestyle and value system.

The Reagan administration said it was alright to deny black folks and any other minority a chance to succeed by erasing diversity in the public arena. The Bushes, both administrations said it was alright to not only deny folks of color, but there is nothing wrong with racism and bigotry. This current Bush administration even thinks that it SHOULD be publicized how one feels about people of color. In a way that mindthink has it's points because many ethnic makeups especially blacks just as soon know how a person feels, racially. Everything out in the open, no games to play which can get very weary.

I know exactly how FOS feels when she get to an event or meeting and the participants were unaware she was black. Folks get that look in their eyes that says, "Oookkaayy, didn't know she was black?" If I had a nickel for everytime it has happened personally iI would have some change. But one preseveres on and lets everyone know that an intelligent, educated and culturally rounded black woman is participating and has the skills and ability togive good input.

4
J on December 20, 2006 at 10:07 AM

So...all that hard work so we can go from Bush cronyism to Pelosi cronyism? Read Dowd's article in the NYTimes today. Reyes doesn't know the difference between Shiite and Sunni? Nothing on Hezbolah? This is an outrage. The voters have spoken. They want qualified people in office not buddies. I'm sick. Just sick. The Dems have a chance to do something good...Pelosi should step down. She's just as bad as Bush on rewarding loyalty not substance.

5
shannonb on December 20, 2006 at 10:09 AM

Shannon, Pelosi can't do anything alone. Reyes got the nomination because it was assumed that his time with the House Intelligence Committee had prepared him for the position of chairman. It's just like many other decisions being made at the federal level, too much is based on assumption.

6
Marine on December 20, 2006 at 10:17 AM

Repost from Tuesday thread:

Marine on December 20, 2006 at 09:54 AM,

Ever since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1987 there had been much talk of the peace dividend, that is, until 2001. Contrary to popular believe what is happening in the Middle East currently is the goal of this administration.
While Clinton and the Republican Congress fought to balance the budget during the 1990's there was much derision about the decline of our military strength, and our military becoming outdated.
The current administration needed this Middle East activity to raise the fear initiative to convince the American people that we need a three-quarter of a trillion dollar defence budget.
Therefore, the objective of this administration has been very much consistant with it's goal.

Posted by davidual on December 20, 2006 at 10:12 AM

Furthermore, Republicans in the 1990's wanted more cuts upon cuts in any and all social programs, including Social Security, and less cuts in the Defence Department budget. This debate was the cause of a constant row bewteen the Clinton administration and the Republican Congress.

Posted by davidual on December 20, 2006 at 10:15 AM

7
davidual on December 20, 2006 at 10:17 AM

To be honest, I think the best thing to do after your nominee gets up there and makes a fool of himself is to replace him. No hard feelings for Reyes, but first appearances are everything.

8
Marine on December 20, 2006 at 10:19 AM

Davidual, if anything I see the decision to allow civilian contractors into Iraq prior to the end of military operations as just another way to buy votes. Via promises of profiteering, this administration was able to win the support of many already wealthy individuals who then chose to invest their many in many schemes that the administration would allow in exchange for the votes they purchased. Those who are doing well financially tend to vote for the party in power, giving out defence contracts is a sure way to buy votes.

9
Marine on December 20, 2006 at 10:25 AM

Think of the think tanks as nothing more than a marketing scheme. Businesses who seek to benefit from the information being distributed by these organizations can justify donations as just another advertising expense. Owners and members of the board would not come right out and admit that this is how they see it, but these people didn't get rich by giving their money away.

10
Marine on December 20, 2006 at 10:28 AM

Just think, a major industry may even justify enormous bonuses to top executives by asking in exchange that these individuals contribute to related think tanks. The company could then deny manipulation of said think tank as it would not be seen actually contributing money directly.

11
Marine on December 20, 2006 at 10:32 AM

SalutetheDem's....hear! hear!well said, thank you!...I'm listening to Bush (barf bag handy) I just wish one of the reporters would ask Bush why he has "his" attack fleet off the coast od Iran. Marine, any thought on this?

12
goodfoe on December 20, 2006 at 10:32 AM

Yahoo has taken away the comment section to its articles. This is another way Free Speech is being controlled by the media. When America has lost its voice, politicians like Bush will be Saints.

Why cannot we as American be allowed the right to discuss the world around us. With the Patriot Act we have rights like Chinese citizens, to open their independent voices.

Can Congress open forums for their employers (We the people...), the citizens have a right to have an open dialog, or must Free Speech be done in secrecy of Don't Ask Don't Tell political closed closets.

With my sister Hotmail account not being able to reach my Hotmail account, I wonder how soon we will be in prison, with filters telling us what to do. What governmental agency do you complain to about email delivery, at least with the Post Office you had a gaurantee. Try contacting Microsoft and you get filtered like Democracy and Freedom.

I think it is time to start impeaching for Constitutional rights!

13
dlesterpoet on December 20, 2006 at 10:32 AM

Also, in today's world there is much accusation of Democrats thinking they can close their eyes and wish terrorism will go away. This republican hyperbole is consistant with the Democratic rational that the more you fight terrorism, and henceforth give it a firm platform in which to grow, the more you will have to fight terrorism. The latter being exactly what what Republicans desire. Therefore, they (Republicans) make idiotic statements about Democrats rationality with the assistance of the conservative media, which by the way needs this wave of devastation to sell air time/news print.

14
davidual on December 20, 2006 at 10:35 AM

Posted by goodfoe on December 20, 2006 at 10:32 AM

Honestly, I think Bush wants to build up and provoke Iran into a conflict that justifies his expansionist dreams.

15
Marine on December 20, 2006 at 10:36 AM

morning all,


When your top General in Iraq has been trying to retire and get the hell out of this debotched Folly of Bush's, what does that tell you?

Top G eneral in Mideast to Retire By Peter Spiegel
The Los Angeles Times

Washington - Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, has submitted plans to retire and will leave his post in March, a step likely to make way for a change in military strategy at a time the Bush administration is seeking a new plan for Iraq.

Abizaid has been the primary architect of U.S. military strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan since becoming head of the U.S. Central Command more than three years ago. He has strenuously resisted calls to increase troop levels to quell rising violence in Baghdad, arguing it would increase Iraqi dependence on Americans.

According to Defense officials, Abizaid submitted his retirement documents just over a month ago, shortly before Donald H. Rumsfeld was pushed out as Defense secretary. One recently retired Army general said Abizaid had wanted to retire earlier but that Rumsfeld blocked the move, insisting his war commanders stay in place.

"Going to war isn't like having a regular job," said the retired general, who, like the others, spoke on condition of anonymity because Abizaid's plans had not been made public. "It's extremely stressful, it's heavily responsible. I can understand why he'd want to retire."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/122006K.shtml

16
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 10:38 AM

Then again, it would facilitate a quick withdrawal from Iraq.

17
Marine on December 20, 2006 at 10:39 AM

I've got to get some things done. Have a nice day.

18
Marine on December 20, 2006 at 10:41 AM

Marine...I agree...it's very transparent...Bush is stumbling through the press conference badly...

19
goodfoe on December 20, 2006 at 10:43 AM

PamB on December 20, 2006 at 10:38 AM,

It tells me that the shit is going to get deeper because the idiot-in-chief, through the Defence Sec., et al., will just promote someone into that position that is comprehensible to the ideals of the administration, which is mainly stay the course.

20
davidual on December 20, 2006 at 10:46 AM

the idiot-in-chief is on TV right now in a Press conference.

HOW the media sits there, watching him skirt the questions, spin the same ole bulls**t, refuse to acknowledge we have lost this Illegal excursion and occupation into Iraq, just boggles my mind.

I would have stood up early on in this, and stood with my back to him!!

21
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 10:55 AM

Me too, Marine!! Everyone have a good day.

Just another insight that I received from my born again christian family. Did you realize that if it were not for abortions, over the past fifty years (even before Roe v. Wade), Social
Security would be in good shape because we'd have all those individuals in the system that would be paying into Social Security that we do not have now because they were aborted? WHEW!!!

It's my life folks. Makes me glad I'm not born again, even though that means that God doesn't know me. But wait a minute, according to these anti-abortion christians Gods knows everyone before entering the womb. I guess God then suffers from dementia and forgots everyone until they are reborn of the Christian faith. Sigh...

...and they wonder why I choose to believe as I do. Not desiring to get wrapped up in a world of hypocrisy. I still love them though!!

Gotta get something done today!!

22
davidual on December 20, 2006 at 11:04 AM

Contractors lost in Pentagon bureaucracy

The Pentagon is still struggling to get a handle on the unprecedented number of contractors now helping run the nation's wars, losing millions of dollars because it is unable to monitor industry workers stationed in far-flung locations, according to a congressional report.


The investigation by the Government Accountability Office, which released the report Tuesday, found that the Defense Department's inability to manage contractors effectively has hurt military operations and unit morale and cost the Pentagon money.

23
Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 11:09 AM

Ohioan to lead House ethics panel

Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) named Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones on Tuesday to become chairwoman of the chamber's troubled ethics committee.

The committee, formally known as the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, is expected to be under increased scrutiny in the new Congress. Democrats swept control of Congress in the November elections in part because of corruption allegations against Republicans.

24
Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 11:11 AM

Bush to sign massive tax and trade bill

A sweeping tax and trade bill awaiting President Bush's signature would revive some 20 tax breaks, extend trade benefits for developing countries and protect doctors from a big cut in Medicare payments.

The bill is a patchwork of must-do items that were left for the lame duck Congress. It was bundled together and passed just before the House and Senate adjourned last month.

25
Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 11:15 AM

Anger in US as China escapes currency 'manipulator' tag

The US government has drawn a chorus of fierce protests from politics and industry after once again refusing to label China a currency cheat.

26
Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 11:20 AM

WHY should Laura Bush get any more Privacy than any other American citizen? If they can listen to OUR phone calls, check our internet emails and sites visited, see what library books we take out, check our Financial records and our medical records, then why the hell can't we have access to the Stepford Bimbo???

"Well, in the afternoon press briefing by Tony Snow, it seems the White House still doesn’t believe that the health of Mrs. Bush may be a public matter. He drew the distinction that medical information about President Bush and Vice President Cheney was released because they were elected officials.
Mr. Snow continued to insist to the White House press corps that her medical treatment was a privacy issue, despite several questions about how she and others have campaigned for better awareness of illnesses like malaria, breast cancer, etc.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/19/more-on-the-first-lady/

27
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 11:21 AM

now this one made me LOL. the Newt has a Base????


Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has decided to break with President Bush.

Sources close to Mr. Gingrich said that, after having kept silent for more than a year, he has become openly critical of the administration, portraying the president as a weak man akin to Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. The former House speaker has warned conservatives not to expect anything from the White House over the remaining two years and instead focus on building a base for leadership for 2008.

"Newt bit his tongue for months and now feels he has to tell his base the truth: the White House does not have the will or the power to promote any agenda," a source close to Mr. Gingrich said.

http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/Gingrich3.htm

28
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 11:25 AM

Dead deer on Cheney compound yard? personally, I think someone was just a poor shot, myself!

"A tipster grabbed these two cell phone pictures of the poor massacred beast, which is still decomposing on the grounds of the Cheney Compound. Where did it come from? Who killed it? Nobody knows.

New York Daily News gossips Rush and Molloy picked up our [EXCLUSIVE MUST CREDIT WONKETTE] story and called Cheney’s office for comment. They received a chilling non-denial denial that our Vice President had shot the animal himself (or possibly strangled it with his bare hands).

The DC cops remind us that you’re not supposed to hunt in Washington, because we’re not even allowed to have guns.

http://www.wonkette.com/politics/dick-cheney/cheneys-victim-still-rots-on-observatory-grounds-222867.php

29
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 11:30 AM

Sen. Clinton on the view

30
Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 11:36 AM

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The White House is considering an expansion of the U.S. Army and Marines for "the long struggle against radicals and extremists," President Bush said during a Wednesday news conference.

Bush would not elaborate on where that struggle would take place, only that he wanted to ensure that the U.S. military "stays in the fight for a long period of time."

"I'm not predicting any particular theater, but I am predicting that it's going to take a while for the ideology of liberty to finally triumph over the ideology of hate," he said.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/20/bush.main/index.html

Is that all this man can do is babble in secret code? Expansion? What the H does that mean? Draft??? And, everyone knows but Barney that when you say no "particular theater" you mean IRAN.

31
BlueinIdaho on December 20, 2006 at 11:58 AM

Draft???

Posted by BlueinIdaho on December 20, 2006 at 11:58 AM

My guess is Yes

32
Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 12:00 PM

CNN POLL:

Do you agree with President Bush that the United States needs to increase the size of the military?

http://www.cnn.com/

33
BlueinIdaho on December 20, 2006 at 12:00 PM

That CNN Poll....seems that 50% of respondents don't understand Prince George's secret code for "Draft"....

34
BlueinIdaho on December 20, 2006 at 12:04 PM

Good afternoon, all.

Posted by PamB on December 20, 2006 at 10:38 AM

Pam,

It's not just Abizaid, it's also Casey.

Long-rumored shuffle of generals expected

By PAULINE JELINEK, Associated Press Writer
Wed Dec 20

WASHINGTON - A shuffle of top American generals in
Iraq is likely to accompany the shift in U.S. policy that President Bush is considering.

Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, has submitted plans to go ahead with a retirement that is months overdue, according to the U.S. Central Command.

And the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, has indicated in recent months that he also may not stay much longer than the end of this year.

Since they have opposed sending more troops to Iraq, their departures could make it easier for Bush and his new Defense Secretary Robert Gates to switch course in the troubled campaign, where they are considering a short-term surge in forces...

Bush is again driving out anyone who opposes him. Who is he going to put in charge of the forces next? Laura or his mother? Nobody else wants to service under this stubborn, incompetent Commander-in-Chief.

The twins have wisely refused to volunteer.

35
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 01:20 PM

That CNN Poll....seems that 50% of respondents don't understand Prince George's secret code for "Draft"....

Posted by BlueinIdaho on December 20, 2006 at 12:04 PM

I don't think Bush would try for a draft. It would alienate a whole generation of young voters against the GOP.

But then Bush thinks he's a law unto himself. He's the Decider and the Destroyer of any hopes of GOP candidates in 2008.

36
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 01:31 PM

Hi Sandy,

I will bet big bucks, that every single General over there, would LOVE to get out of the middle of this Failure of a mess! To have to lie every day about things going on must be so hard for men who swore themselves to HONOR!

37
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 01:32 PM

Give 'em hell Sandyh and don't stop! If Mr Bush succeeds in prevoking a conflict with Iran, it would appear to me that he has clearly oversteped the authorization he was given by Congress for military action in Iraq. I believe that impeachment should be swift at that point.We can not allow this president to elevate himself above the will of Congress and the will of the people

38
goodfoe on December 20, 2006 at 01:37 PM


I suspect the generals in Iraq are good men, but men caught up in a losing proposition. They don't make the decision to go to war, nor are they trained at maintaining civil peace. It's just not a good situation period.

39
kurtg on December 20, 2006 at 01:41 PM

w won't try for a draft...the democrats will enact that legislation.

40
Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 02:11 PM

Time to go to my corner, my grandaughter wants the computer. I live with 3 lovely ladies, I'm well trained....Later...Maybe...

41
goodfoe on December 20, 2006 at 02:19 PM

w won't try for a draft...the democrats will enact that legislation.

Posted by Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 02:11 PM

I know Rangle has been advocating this to make a point about who is serving and making the biggest sacrifice. But why do you think the Democratic leadership would actually put this up for a vote?

I can see that the threat of such a move is just as effective as actually adopting that policy. It puts the responsibility directly back on the the President who started this bogus adventure.

If another military draft is called to support this losing occupation, I will personally work against anyone or any party that enacts it. It's a waste of time, money, energy, and lives. I saw how it demoralized our country back in the 1960's and '70s. Never again unless we are attacked.

You cannot "win" an occupation. And there is no commitment by the American people for continuing this foreign entanglement or for a new military draft.

I will not allow Saudi Arabia to blackmail us into protecting their dictatorship. It's time they dealed with their own internal social problems...and it's time we dealt with our dependence on their foreign oil.

We need to spend our tax money on developing alternative fuels not instituting another military draft that allows a failed foreign policy to continue unabated. The futility is obvious to anyone who lives in a reality-based world.

It's that age old stuggle of empire versus the public good. The ruling class is not going to get any indentured servants to fight for their dreams of "globalization."

And if the Democratic Party allows itself to be drawn into this struggle and support it, they lose me, too, in 2008.

I guess it's obvious I feel strongly about this, eh? Sorry for the rant. I just hate it when bad history repeats itself because nobody remembers how bad it can get.


42
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 02:40 PM

Maybe if he tries the draft he`ll wake up the type of protests that were in the 60`s.That may be the ingredient our youth has not experienced?

43
virgo on December 20, 2006 at 02:48 PM

I agree, Sandy. The party that puts the draft back in, commits suicide ! The Democrats are against this Invasion and occupation, so certainly will not appear to be trying to grow the troops by drafting them. A volunteer Military works the best, as has been proven.

Charlie Rangel admits that his talk of Drafts is merely to make the Republican Chicken Hawks think twice about sending American girls and boys into combat! He does advocate mandatory 2 year Service roles. I think that is bulls**t. If my daughters had wanted to join the Peace Corp or something, they would have without the Gov telling them they HAD to.

44
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 02:55 PM

Sandy,


This global war on terror is getting out of hand. Everything is global. I "feel" that we will have an attack on our homeland and it will be necessary for the dems/legislators as a whole to enact some sort of law that would be a draft, even if they give it a catchy little name.

I don't want a draft due to personal reasons. My daughters, even though they are adults (22 & 18) doesn't make up for them being too "sheltered" (small town living can do that to a person) and not armed service material. They have no desire to join.

Do any of us here really know what is going on in our government? If w and his administration are really doing something illegal, wouldn't they be out on their asses by now?


If/when we pull out of E rack, we better well be loaded with military to protect us. And our borders had better be secured as well. (but then, the USA doesn't own it's ports)
sigh...

45
Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 02:55 PM

Sandy,I couldn`t agree with you more!This past election was about change.If the Democratic Party wants to just slide into the repubs position it`s all for nothing.Rest assured I`ll be looking for another 3rd party.This is about bringing back this party to the people in this country.I`m not interested in a bunch of power brokers getting rich while they play us with what they think we want to hear.We have already witnessed what the repubs did with their opportunity and where it got them!Our country is at stake here!

46
virgo on December 20, 2006 at 03:03 PM

If you start a bogus occupation and institute a draft to support, this is the kind of government surveillance activity that starts happening:

FBI releases final John Lennon files

Wed Dec 20, 10:06 AM ET

LOS ANGELES - The FBI has released its final surveillance documents on John Lennon to a university historian who has waged a 25-year legal battle to obtain the secret files.

The 10 pages contain new details about Lennon's ties to leftist and anti-war groups in London in the early 1970s, but nothing indicating government officials considered the former Beatle a serious threat, historian Jon Wiener told the Los Angeles Times in Wednesday's editions.

The FBI had unsuccessfully argued that an unnamed foreign government secretly provided the information, and releasing the documents could lead to diplomatic, political or economic retaliation against the United States.

The newly released documents include a surveillance report stating that two prominent British leftists had courted Lennon in hopes that he would finance "a left-wing bookshop and reading room in London" but that Lennon gave them no money. Another page states that there was "no certain proof" that Lennon had provided money "for subversive purposes."

"I doubt that Tony Blair's government will launch a military strike on the U.S. in retaliation for the release of these documents," Wiener told the newspaper. "Today, we can see that the national security claims that the FBI has been making for 25 years were absurd from the beginning."...

Bush already has his NSA spy machine set up and running...watching over the unAmerican activities or Quakers, nuns, animal rights activists, and no doubt Matt Damon for inferring that the Bush twins should be serving in Iraq instead of poor kids who have no other job opportunities.

Posted by virgo on December 20, 2006 at 02:48 PM

virgo,

Cheney is far too subtle. It must make him angry at how obvert Bush can be at times. It must really screw up the crime family operations at times. They work much better when they fly under the radar.

47
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 03:04 PM

Do any of us here really know what is going on in our government? If w and his administration are really doing something illegal, wouldn't they be out on their asses by now?

Essie,

You were but a child when Watergate and the Vietnam happened. Believe me, these crorupt and inept politcal/economic control freaks can do all kinds of stuff...and get away with it, too. Unless...you are on them and don't ever cooperate with them.

You don't stop anarchists with military operations. It's all done with intelligence and covert agents/operations. It's been done this way for centuries and it works.

Only those who don't know one end from the other try to fight their way out of a losing proposition. You bargain and trade with rouge nations. Terrorists aren't nations. And Iraq is not where the 9/11 terrorist are. They are laughing their butts off in Pakistan and Afganistan watching Bush do his impression of Nero.

And so are the Chinese and Russians laughing. We have far more problems out there that alterantive fuels and nobody in the White House is even aware of what's going on.

Corraling a bunch of unwilling young men and telling them to shoot people they don't see as dangerous is a bad idea. Just ask the homeless men living under underpasses in major metropolitan areas. Ask those doctors treating soldiers coming back from Iraq with mental issues.

The reason WWII veterans never talked about what happened in combat is not because they were humble...it was because it was so horrible. You do not want to sacrifice your next generation to this sort of hell unless it's the last resort.

I used to date guys that came back from Nam. Once they had a few drinks in them, they told you things they didn't really want you to know. I felt so ashamed that they had to go throught that for nothing.

I repeat...we are not in Iraq because of 9/11. We can't give Bush an inch on this.

There maybe a time when our children will have to face a draft, but it should be for survival...nothing less. Let the spooks and the diplomats do what they do best and get us the hell out of there.

I have to finish a project. later.

48
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 03:27 PM

Do any of us here really know what is going on in our government? If w and his administration are really doing something illegal, wouldn't they be out on their asses by now?

Jacque, the fact that no one knows what was really going on, and that charges have not been brought for those actions we now know are illegal, were all due to a Republican majority. No hearings nor investigations could be run before. that is why it is such a blessing to have Dems now in power, but now we have Pelosi saying we won't be looking to impeach! Same, timid, wussies that were in before and afraid to make any noise! It is up to Conyors, and others to make sure we start looking at crimes.

49
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 03:29 PM

I know the repugs have already started targeting Z politically. It will be difficult for the newly elected democratic congress to get anything worthwhile completed in the next 2 years.

50
Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 03:33 PM

Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) named Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones on Tuesday to become chairwoman of the chamber's troubled ethics committee.

Posted by Esmeralda on December 20, 2006 at 11:11 AM

Alright Ms Tubbs! You have definitely earned it.

51
J on December 20, 2006 at 03:41 PM

Good Afternoon, ALL!!

It looks as if Liebermud is a big ol' LIAR.

It's official: Lieberman and Co. lied about "hacking"

52
DPD on December 20, 2006 at 04:31 PM

Do any of us here really know what is going on in our government? If w and his administration are really doing something illegal, wouldn't they be out on their asses by now?

It all depended on the lock stepping rubber stamp Republicans who have let W skate for his entire term.

From C & J @ KOS,

One Year Ago in C&J: December 20, 2003...

JEERS to the Republican thugocracy. File this under 'pathetic': the Washington Post counted up the congressional subpoenas against Clinton and the Democrats for alleged misconduct over 8 years vs. those issued against King George W. Bush and his goons over 5. Ready for this? Subpoenas against Democrats under Clinton: 1,052. Subpoenas against Republicans under Bush: 3. Lawdy Lawdy, Gladys...what an honest administration we have!

(Yes. I know he did a typo on the date)

53
DPD on December 20, 2006 at 04:50 PM


This might be a good time to write and/or call your congressmen and women...

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Pentagon wants the White House to seek an additional $99.7 billion to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to information provided to The Associated Press.

The military's request, if embraced by President Bush and approved by Congress, would boost this year's budget for those wars to about $170 billion.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/20/war.funds.ap/index.html

54
BlueinIdaho on December 20, 2006 at 05:10 PM

The Bush Administration: Making America safer, one failed project at a time.

Federal health officials yesterday scuttled the largest piece of the Bush administration's two-year program to counter bioterrorism, canceling an $877.5 million contract with VaxGen to develop an anthrax vaccine after the company missed a deadline to begin human testing.

The decision, delivered in a one-page letter, ends a troubled effort by the small California firm that has come to symbolize the failures of the government's ambitious $5.6 billion Project BioShield. The termination occurred on the same day President Bush signed legislation attempting to salvage the program by reorganizing its management and pumping more money into firms doing the work.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/19/AR2006121901689.html?nav=rss_email/components

55
BlueinIdaho on December 20, 2006 at 05:22 PM

Here's somrthing for Lizzy if she's lurking. It just never ends with these creeps.

In NY-19, Fleischer May Run

56
DPD on December 20, 2006 at 05:59 PM

The Great Intimidator

Constitutional Freedom and Democracy
Has turned into a White House Creative version,
Executive Privilege had reigned in the power,
Autocratic President of Guantanamo justice,
Supreme Judge of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,
Secret closet of political fraternity favors.

War President of Mission Accomplished,
He labeled himself with that smirk grin!
Why he is a Cowboy Judged Supreme,
Redefining torture and the Constitution,
So it had a Corporate CEO Enron attitude,
Anything goes under totalitarian command.

Well things are not so good in Iraq’s Civil War,
Soon more troops will be sent in for peace!
The President having blinders of power on,
Could he not talk to the Iraqi people directly,
Praying for human respect of divine equality!

But the Bush White House is about isolation,
You must have a divine ticket of this loyalty.
Royalty to promise total devoted allegiance,
Never expressing honest opinions in debates,
Bush Republicans of a country club mentality.

President Bush walk public streets of America,
Go into the neighborhoods serving Iraq reserves.
Why must he surround himself with a military?
Who have no recourse, but to follow you blindly!
Can we again have a “We the people.. White House?

57
dlesterpoet on December 20, 2006 at 06:08 PM

The Great Intimidator

I wish I could afford a ticket to see Mr. Bush, but then
You banned all Poets from Free Speech views.
Now your audience must be segregated approval
That means 60 % of US have lost their rights.
Those left have the wealth to buy your ticket!

Mr. President what kind of Freedom ‘n Democracy
Are you giving the Iraqi people to live under?
Why have you aborted check ’n balances?
Where one branch intimidates, in extreme fear,
Anyone using their Free Speech public opinions.

It seems Congress is starting to do your job,
Sending ambassadors to find pliable solutions,
While you ignore nations, like they were France!
Like they were the United Nations, NATO, allies,
Labeling a whole world, against your demands.

But treating China as a country of religious rights
Green-blooded compassion of a pure profit line.
Who filters Constitutional Freedom ‘n Democracy
In this true hearted American Bush patriotism?
I am proud of the new breed of Republican voice!
Now we need, a new breed of Democrat, on the streets!

58
dlesterpoet on December 20, 2006 at 06:14 PM

I want Post Office Email, under Ben Franklin rules. I do not want Bush, Corporate, or Chinese filtered email.

59
dlesterpoet on December 20, 2006 at 06:18 PM

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Pentagon wants the White House to seek an additional $99.7 billion to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to information provided to The Associated Press.
****

This is an absolute outrage. I'll say it once and say it again and again. If the Democrats don't limit funding for Iraq to that which is needed to redeploy then they are as useless as the Republicans. I don't want to hear anymore about surges, staying the course and Iraqification. We done enough - in fact, we messed up Iraq too much already. It's time to get out.

60
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 06:28 PM

This is a list of the Out of Iraq caucus. It may have changed a bit post November elections:

http://www.democracyrising.us/content/view/288/165/

If you Congressional Rep is not a member of this caucus ask them why not? By the way, it is bipartisian - there is at least one Republican in the caucus.

61
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 06:32 PM

Baghdad suicide car bomb kills 11
A suicide car bomber has killed at least 11 people and injured about 30 others in Baghdad, Iraqi officials say.
Full Story:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6195643.stm

62
DemocratKickingAss on December 20, 2006 at 06:32 PM

Tony Blair blames Iran for Middle East conflicts
Tony Blair today labelled Iran as the main obstacle to hopes for peace in the Middle East.
Full Story:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,1975930,00.html

63
DemocratKickingAss on December 20, 2006 at 06:34 PM
64
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 06:35 PM

Stop funding the war - listen to Jim McGovern (D-MA) from Worster, MA:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeKsXxu69mk

65
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 06:41 PM

Failure is not an option.

All the Republican pundits and politicans keep saying this like it's true. It isn't. It's more strawman language. Somebody needs to write an op ed calling them out on it.

People fail all the time and pick themselves up and go on, hopefully learning something from it.

Bush failed. It is a fact. They can't keep on perpetrating the lie that it's still possible for Bush to be in control of the situation in Iraq. He's wandering around in the desert and the Lord didn't send him there...and isn't going to lead him out. That is the truth.

He made a critical mistake and now it's time for him to make a strategic retreat or redeployment until the next President can fix the mess he made. Bush is not incapable of waging war or peace in Iraq, because he has lost all his crediblity with the various factions fighting there.

He can admit defeat or stay and make a continued fool of himself and destroy the Republican Party in the process. You'd think he would care.

Saying he wants to rebuild the Army and Marines means absolutely nothing if they remain in a quagmire. Iraq will eat up any resources we put in these services in short order if we stay.

So it's time to go home and rebuild our battered and weakened military establishment. Someone needs to tell him it's over.

66
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 06:41 PM

Tony Blair today labelled Iran as the main obstacle to hopes for peace in the Middle East.

Posted by DemocratKickingAss on December 20, 2006 at 06:34 PM

DKA,

Someone needs to tell Blair it's all over, too.

67
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 06:42 PM

All the Republican pundits and politicans keep saying this like it's true. It isn't. It's more strawman language. Somebody needs to write an op ed calling them out on it.
****

sandy,

Ned answered the call:

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/op_ed/hc-lamont1220.artdec20,0,1845610.story?coll=hc-headlines-oped

68
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 06:43 PM

It's time for Democrats to cut off funding for this Iraq war! Enough is enough! We can't even take care of own people over here, more cuts being made to Medicare and Medicaid while Bush asks for more money to continue to this illegal war in Iraq. Write to your Representatives and Senators and tell them to stop funding this Iraq war and bring our troops home now! You can do so by visiting the websites in the links below:

http://www.house.gov

http://www.senate.gov

69
DemocratKickingAss on December 20, 2006 at 06:44 PM

Someone needs to tell Blair it's all over, too.
****

sandy, Blair is just about out and Gordon Brown is in real soon. I can't quite read Brown on Iraq - he's made contradictory statements.

70
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 06:48 PM

Posted by SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 06:41 PM

Failure and Success are all in the spin. If the "coalition's" mission was to make certain Hussein did not have useable WMDs, then Success has been obtained. If the mission was to rid Iraq of a ruthless dictator, again, Success. On the other hand, if the mission was to export democracy to a nation governed by religious fundamentalism, we have Failure.

If Prince George's spin doctors can make GW into a war hero and Kerry and McCain and Cleland into failed cowards, they surely can make Success out of Iraq.

71
BlueinIdaho on December 20, 2006 at 06:50 PM

We can't even take care of own people over here, more cuts being made to Medicare and Medicaid while Bush asks for more money to continue to this illegal war in Iraq.
****

kicking,

This is what the people of this country have to get straight. The longer we stay, the less money we have for everything else. No nation can borrow money endlessly - eventually the economy collapses when the currency becomes worthless.

72
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 06:50 PM

If Prince George's spin doctors can make GW into a war hero and Kerry and McCain and Cleland into failed cowards, they surely can make Success out of Iraq.
****

I'll tell you what. Bush can give himself a medal of honor, declare mission accomplished, work on the 200 million dollar Bush library to falsify his legacy as long as he gets the troops out of iraq.

In fact, I'll even write one niece thing about him ... it will be exactly one nice thing ... after all, he is still Dumbya.

73
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 06:56 PM

Posted by rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 06:48 PM

rjsnj,

Brown probably doesn't know what to make of the mess Blair in handing over to him. He just wants to get out gracefully... but hasn't figured out yet how to do it.

It will come to him. Or Labor will be in the same fix as the GOP. I think it will come to Brown a lot quicker than it will to Cheney.

It's a shame Bush Sr. doesn't hunt more often with Old Blunderbuss. I think Poppy knows what needs to be done. And he might be tempted to do it too, if he had a gun in his hands.

Maybe Poppy is ready to quit crying and start fighting?

74
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 06:56 PM

If Prince George's spin doctors can make GW into a war hero and Kerry and McCain and Cleland into failed cowards, they surely can make Success out of Iraq.

Posted by BlueinIdaho on December 20, 2006 at 06:50 PM

Blue,

No they can't. That's the problem...all those flag draped coffins and wounded at VA hospitals just can't be explained away. It works in political campaigns, but it doesn't work in wars.

75
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 07:00 PM

On the other hand, if the mission was to export democracy to a nation governed by religious fundamentalism, we have Failure.

Blue,

The mission was to get Bush re-elected. That was the only mission. That is the problem. It was a selfish, callus political mission not a military or ethical one. Bush can't talk himself on this one.

76
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 07:03 PM

We aren't winning and we aren't losing.

This was more strawman talk from the administration today. It isn't an either or proposition. It's getting out without destroying the military any future....that is the military's mission now, IMO.

But not Bush's. His mission is to just keep the facade up till he can stroll out of the White House in 2008 without anyone labeling him as a loser. He's going to fail in that, too.

77
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 07:07 PM

Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) named Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones on Tuesday to become chairwoman of the chamber's troubled ethics committee.
****

Okay. That's a good choice. I enjoy listening to Stephanie Tubbs Jones. The other possibility is Louise Slaughter. Maybe Louise Slaughter can work on real lobbying reforms ... not the garbage that the Goppies passed last year.

78
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 07:09 PM

Stephanie Tubb-Jones ... also in the Out of Iraq caucus!

79
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 07:11 PM

I wonder with Delta Pension Plan now defunct, did the Judge also make Corporate Officials Pension plans go belly up? Did the Court readjust the Corporate royalty paychecks and benefits? I think that the CEO's of the past having made those mistakes, must get nothing in returen for their retirements. Maybe they can go to government for Enron support. Does anyone know if the benefits were eliminated for past Corporate Delta officials?

80
dlesterpoet on December 20, 2006 at 07:15 PM

rj....Right on! Bush doesn't care about the American taxpayor who has to pay for all of "Bush's Folly"...his attitude is "screw them, I know what is best"....the trillion dollars that "Bush's Folly" is going to cost before we get this meglamanic stopped is money that could have been usused to improve education, healthcare, ...money used to help the people who pay the bills

81
goodfoe on December 20, 2006 at 07:15 PM

Rep. Waters: "President between a Rock and a Hard Place"
Submitted by davidswanson on Wed, 2006-12-20 21:51. Congress

Contact: Mikael Moore (202) 2250-2201

Washington, DC - U.S. Representative Maxine Waters (CA-35) issued the following statement regarding President Bush's press conference today:

"Prior to November's election, the President said, 'we are absolutely winning.' However in today's press conference, he said, 'we're not winning; we're not losing.'"

"The President can't have it both ways. The fact is that we are losing in Iraq. Today's polls indicate that 67 percent of Americans believe that we are losing the Iraq war and want us to conclude our involvement in Iraq. Today's press conference yielded no new information about the President's plans to get us out of Iraq."

"The President would have us believe he is waiting for advice from his new Secretary of Defense and others. However, the President has shown that he is not willing to take advice. He has already dismissed the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, former Secretary of State Powell, and the Join Chiefs of Staff, among others."

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16571

82
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 07:18 PM

Representative Maxine Waters is Chair of the 73-member 'Out of Iraq' Congressional Caucus. The Caucus was founded in June 2005 to pressure the Bush Administration to conclude the Iraq war as soon as possible.

....

My gut tells me the caucus will grow in numbers with the 100th Congress. This is what all of us need to do - urge our Congressional Rep to join this caucus. Both Reps in my area - Pallone and Holt - are in it.

83
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 07:20 PM

Bush doesn't care about the American taxpayor who has to pay for all of "Bush's Folly".
****

goodfoe, my Congressman Frank Pallone (NJ - 6th distict) says that the Iraq war alone is costing the taxpayer 40 cents out of every tax dollar. That is an outrage. Bush wants to up the ante and spend even more just to save face! Cut off the money.

Another way everyone can help is to urge their Congressional Rep to get behind Jim McGovern's bill to limit Iraq funding to just what is needed to redeploy.

84
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 07:25 PM

Well, some leaders have decided to withdrawal their forces....from Afganistan. This is not good news.

French pulls troops from Afghanistan

By ELAINE GANLEY, Associated Press Writer
Wed Dec 20, 2:15 PM ET

PARIS - As violence mounts in Afghanistan, France is pulling 200 of its best soldiers out. But military officials here insist France remains fully committed, with 1,100 troops still based in Kabul.

Nevertheless, France's decision to withdraw its Special Forces comes amid concerns in Paris that
NATO's mission in Afghanistan has grown confused and that the alliance may be overreaching in its efforts to stabilize and rebuild the nation....

//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061220/ap_on_re_as/france_afghanistan

Another confused mission?

85
SandyH on December 20, 2006 at 07:33 PM

Top U.S. Commander in Middle East Opposes Troop Increase
Another day, another top military commander coming out against President Bush’s vague plan to pour 30,000 additional U.S. troops into Iraq without a clear mission. Today the honor belongs to Gen. John Abizaid, senior U.S. commander in the Middle East, who would eschew extra military force in favor of the White House’s least-favorite option: regional diplomacy. Says Abizaid: “You just can’t apply a microscope on a particular problem in downtown Baghdad and a particular problem in downtown Kabul and say that somehow or another, if you throw enough military forces at it, that you are going to solve the broader issues in the region of extremism.”
email this page

****

At least, the military realizes the "surge" is nonsense. But, Bush doesn't listen to anyone. It's now about the chimp saving his ugly face.

86
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 08:02 PM

Joint Chiefs Oppose Troop Increase, Believe Bush Has No Plan
The nation’s top military commanders unanimously disagree with a plan, being pushed aggressively by Bush officials, that would send as many as 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq. The Joint Chiefs reportedly believe that the White House is latching on to the idea in part because of limited alternatives, and have warned that any temporary surge may only set up the U.S. for bigger problems when it ends. This comes as the Pentagon reports violence in Iraq reaching a new high at about 960 attacks a week, and polls show public support for Bush’s Iraq policies falling to 28%, yet another new low.

87
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 08:04 PM

SENATE---DON'T GIVE BUSH ANY MORE MONEY FOR THE WAR, PLEASE.

A KNOWN LIAR, WHO CAN'T BE TRUSTED.

THE PEOPLE ARE WALKING AROUND, GRUMPY AS ALL GET OUT, THE CHILDREN ARE FIGHTING A WAR NO ONE BELIEVES IN, FOR WHAT?

COST OF LIVING IS RISING, EVEN THE DOLLAR STORES SEEM TOO EXPENSIVE.

SO, PLEASE, SENATE, DON'T FUND A WAR WE DON'T WANT.

SINCERELY,
A VOTER

88
wackat on December 20, 2006 at 08:21 PM

Posted by wackat on December 20, 2006 at 08:21 PM

The Senate has nothing to do with funding. The HOUSE controls the bucks.

89
DPD on December 20, 2006 at 08:31 PM

The Senate has nothing to do with funding. The HOUSE controls the bucks.

****

Yep, that's why we need to get behind Congressman Jim McGovern's bill to restrain Iraq funding to what's needed to redeploy out of there.

90
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 08:40 PM

Bush Floating Another Shady "Deal", This Time on the Minimum Wage

by Jonathan Singer, Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 07:10:04 PM EST

The storyline for the first session of the 110th Congress is already beginning to emerge: A contrite George W. Bush lays out a "compromise" -- on Social Security, immigration, etc. -- and the spirit of bipartisanship should compel the Democrats to accept it, if not outright at least as a jumping off point. Continuing in this vein, the President is now laying out a "deal" on the minimum wage, as Jennifer Loven reports for the AP.

President Bush endorsed one of the Democrats' top priorities for the new Congress, a $2.10-an-hour minimum wage increase -- and on a faster timetable than they have proposed.
But his support comes with a catch.

Bush said at a Wednesday news conference that any pay hike should be accompanied by tax and regulatory relief for small businesses, potentially a tough sell for Democrats, who are about to reassume control of the House and Senate.

But his support comes with a catch.

Bush said at a Wednesday news conference that any pay hike should be accompanied by tax and regulatory relief for small businesses, potentially a tough sell for Democrats, who are about to reassume control of the House and Senate.

I don't mean to sound glib or cynical (or repetitious, for that matter), but it's imperative that the Democrats remain impervious to entreaties by the Bush White House -- at least when they're not good faith deals. This is not to say that Democratic leaders in Congress should not follow through with their pledge to open up the process in the Capitol and allow the minority to play a role in crafting policy. Yet at the same time, if the Democrats have the votes to pass a necessary and, frankly, highly popular piece of legislation like increasing the minimum wage, then they should do so with or without Republican support. If this means that the bill will not be enacted into law in the first pass because the President is so foolish and bull-headed that he would veto it, so be it. While the country needs an increase in the minimum wage -- and I do not mean to downplay this need at all -- at the same time we cannot afford to indulge the President's desire to appease his highly partisan and ideological base for politics' sake.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/12/20/19104/661

We bring this on ourselves. Why in the world is someone like Barney Frank trying to cut "deals" with the corporatists? We must pass a clean minimum wage increase bill this time around. Put the pressure on Bush and Republicans to make even more enemies with the voters. Democrats need to start acting like they won in 2006. The hell with making deals with Bush. He has shown that he won't listen to anyone and these phony compromises just give him a backhanded way to appease his extreme base. Stop giving in to this, all out confrontation is needed with this man.

91
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 08:44 PM

Well, well, well. Junior wants "more troops" for Iraq, so a "new" al Qaida tape gets released. Who says Bush and these guys aren't working together?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16292639/

92
Domingo on December 20, 2006 at 09:00 PM

On Wisconsin The new session, Day 3: State health-care cures?

Some say that with Democrats now in control of the state Senate and the governor's office, the climate is ripe for health-care reform in Wisconsin's legislative session to begin next month.

...

A total of 82 percent of voters in Dane County and 10 other Wisconsin communities approved referendums in November asking for universal health care.

...

... Wisconsin is one of several states, including Minnesota and Illinois, showing movement toward universal health care.

Two main plans

The two main plans differ in two primary ways: the first plan involves the insurance industry, while the second plan largely replaces it; and the second plan would cover more mental health and drug-abuse treatment.

David Newby, director of the state AFL-CIO, which proposed the second plan, said most of its savings comes from eliminating the existing insurance structure.

Neither bill has been endorsed by Doyle, a Democrat entering his second term.

Instead, the governor wants to expand BadgerCare, create a catastrophic insurance pool and allow tax deductions for health-insurance premiums.

"I'm going to be much more focused on very practical things that can get done," Doyle said.

============

I don't want to pick on Doyle. His posture is typical. But just as politicans were/are behind the curve on Iraq they are behind the curve on health care.

In MN, coalition groups are trying to organize residents in districts that are represented by key committee members and to educate the legislature at large.

The hope is that grassroots activism can play a tipping point roll in getting Health Care Reform to move a faster pace.

93
dorsano on December 20, 2006 at 09:04 PM

"Kristol is in the Biden shot camp. It'll be one last shot, then one last shot, them one last shot…"

Kristol: If we surge in troops and we take one more shot in stabilizing Baghdad—I think we really do have a shot at winning this war.

Crooks and Liars

94
Domingo on December 20, 2006 at 09:11 PM

Dispatches from an alternate reality: Free Republic on the Bush Press Conference

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/12/20/194823/48

Warning ... read only if you have a strong stomach.

95
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 09:12 PM

dors,

you lump politicians together...please...

anyway... here's a piece for you

did you vote for Reagan?

96
fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:14 PM

What the hell is going on?
by Mike Stark
Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 05:09:58 PM PST

Why are we stuck wondering what the Dems are going to do regarding Iraq? We've been told over and over again that they got the message from the American people - loud and clear - last November. So why is there so much equivocation?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/12/20/2032/4381

Exactly Mike Stark, whomever you are, what in the hell is going on? It's clear enough that voters said they had enough. Heck, the Democratic Party ran on that slogan. So why are we gearing up for more of the same?

97
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 09:14 PM

Congressman won't apologize for islamophobic comments

Virginia Republican, Vigil Goode has decided to throw the "macaca republicans" some more red meat by making bigoted anti-Muslim statements against a fellow house member.

In the letter, Goode wrote, "The Muslim representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran."

Goode said the U.S. needs to stop illegal immigration "totally" and reduce legal immigration.

What the racist right seems to forget is that Rep. Keith Ellison was born and raised in Detroit, MI and grew up in a Catholic household. That's in America, last time I checked. What definition of "immigration" is Virgil Goode using as a basis for his statement?

Or is it possible he gets "them darkies" confused and really meant to talk about Barak Obama, whose father was a Muslim immigrant. Was he following up Debbie Schlussel who said of Obama: "Once a Muslim, Always a Muslim?"

Who knows...

Dailykos

98
Domingo on December 20, 2006 at 09:16 PM

Kristol: If we surge in troops and we take one more shot in stabilizing Baghdad—I think we really do have a shot at winning this war.
****

Can you believe these neocons? Well, there is little we can do about them directly. Cut the gun money off already ... it's our only SHOT at ending this debacle.

99
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 09:16 PM

John Lennon files

Jacque...this should help you to understand how criminals in government get away with it...

100
fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:19 PM

The hope is that grassroots activism can play a tipping point roll in getting Health Care Reform to move a faster pace.
****

Progressive Democrats of America advocate for single payer system. Marilynn Clement of Healthcare-Now is now on the steering committee.

Personally, I would settle for a system like they have in the Netherlands that is multi-payer with strict price controls.

Either way, the key point is that we need a comprehensive system NOT this patch work mess that leads to immense health care inequality.

101
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 09:19 PM

Well Malloy is on. So have a good night.

102
rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 09:21 PM

Posted by fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:14 PM you lump politicians together... please...

I'm not sure what you're getting at Fade, but

politicians can be classified in many ways. By caucus, by subcaucus, etc ... There are some attributes that apply to them all such as their job.

Every serving Democratic Senator gave Lieberman a standing ovation when he reported for work after wining the election. Including Dayton from MN and Durbin from IL. So I could lump them together that way.

did you vote for Reagan?

I'm curious why you ask?

103
dorsano on December 20, 2006 at 09:23 PM

Posted by fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:14 PM here's a piece for you

That link doesn't work, Fade - at least on Netscape.

104
dorsano on December 20, 2006 at 09:26 PM

I agree, Sandy. The party that puts the draft back in, commits suicide ! The Democrats are against this Invasion and occupation, so certainly will not appear to be trying to grow the troops by drafting them. A volunteer Military works the best, as has been proven. Charlie Rangel admits that his talk of Drafts is merely to make the Republican Chicken Hawks think twice about sending American girls and boys into combat! He does advocate mandatory 2 year Service roles. I think that is bulls**t. If my daughters had wanted to join the Peace Corp or something, they would have without the Gov telling them they HAD to. Posted by PamB on December 20, 2006 at 02:55 PM

PamB, it might be "suicide" if it were ever put into effect, but it's not meant to ever be put into effect. Just like outlawing abortion and gay marrage are never meant to ever be put into effect by the Republicans. It's meant to make the Repugs vote against supporting the troops so their "no" vote can be used in campaign ads against them in the next up-comming elections. Dems need to get their "Karl Rove" groove on and beat these cowardly chickenhawks at their own game.

105
Domingo on December 20, 2006 at 09:29 PM

Posted by rjsnj on December 20, 2006 at 09:19 PM Progressive Democrats of America advocate for single payer system. Marilynn Clement of Healthcare-Now is now on the steering committee.

The progressive subcaucus of the MN Democratic party works with groups I posted a link to to advance some form of single payer in MN.

They coordinated a training hour for delegates at the MN state convention last.

106
dorsano on December 20, 2006 at 09:33 PM

dors, try this

107
fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:35 PM

you did, didn't you?

108
fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:37 PM

Bush Warns of More U.S. Losses in Iraq

WASHINGTON -- Acknowledging deepening frustration over Iraq, President Bush said Wednesday he is considering an increase in American forces and warned that next year will bring more painful U.S. losses. New Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in Baghdad that a troop surge was an obvious option.

Bush was unusually candid at a year-end news conference about U.S. setbacks and dashed hopes in the war, which has claimed the lives of more than 2,950 U.S. military members.

He said "2006 was a difficult year for our troops and the Iraqi people.

LA Times

109
Domingo on December 20, 2006 at 09:38 PM

dors,

classification and taxonomy are useful in biology

110
fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:40 PM

I want you to remember this the next time you need health care and they won't give it to you. And I also want you to remember this when some goofy wing-nut starts shooting off his big mouth about "tax and spend liberals".

Pentagon Wants $99.7B More for Wars

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon wants the White House to seek an additional $99.7 billion to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to information provided to The Associated Press.

The military's request, if embraced by President Bush and approved by Congress, would boost this year's budget for those wars to about $170 billion.

Military planners assembled the proposal at a time when Bush is developing new strategies for Iraq, such as sending thousands of more U.S. troops there, although it was put together before the president said the troop surge was under consideration.

Overall, the war in Iraq has cost about $350 billion. Combined with the conflict in Afghanistan and operations against terrorism elsewhere, the cost has topped $500 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

The additional funds, if approved, would push this year's cost of the war in Iraq to about $50 billion over last year's record. In September, Congress approved an initial $70 billion for the current budget year, which began Oct. 1.

LA Times

111
Domingo on December 20, 2006 at 09:44 PM

"But I also don't believe most Americans want us just to get out now," the president said.


Gates was an excellent choice. Not at all a shill.

112
fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:45 PM

Reposting Sy Hersch's piece from last month in New Yorker magazine...

Iran is the double of the "double down"

113
fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:50 PM

It worked for a while, this idea of Republican political tactician Karl Rove to win national elections by appealing solely to evangelicals and fundamentalists. Rove's famed strategy was to fire up white religious folks with the bogymen of gay marriage, abortion and stem cell research, enlist pastors to reinforce and expand voter loyalty, and then mobilize these voters in a final 72-hour push to the polls.

You have to give Rove and his machine credit, it turned out huge masses of Republican voters, even in 2006. But what Rove didn't count on were the voters he was losing, particularly those economic conservatives who chaffed at their shotgun marriage to the religious right.

Is divorce in the offing? Sure seems to be.

The libertarian vote is up for grabs in a way it may have never been before. A compelling case is being made for the economically conservative yet socially liberal libertarians to switch their political allegiances from Republican to Democrat, a trend that has already begun.

TMS Features

114
Domingo on December 20, 2006 at 09:50 PM


"But I also don't believe most Americans want us just to get out now," the president said.

evening {{fade}}


I heard Bush when he said this this morning, and you can always tell when this guy is lying. His shifty eyes get smaller and he tries to semi-smirk. A little throw up came into the back of my throat at this one! Now WHO actually believed this bullshit????


115
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 09:51 PM

speaking of those hard core, Greedy Republicans, Lou Dobbs poll tonight was " Do you believe that the Federal $5.25 minimum wage is too low"?

94% voted Yes.


WHO are these 7% of the population who have the balls to say NO, not too low? Koolaid drinkers, defenders of this administration to the death, so blind they will not admit what a mistake this administration is, and their call to invade Iraq! It embarasses me that they are citizens of this country so ignorant.

116
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 09:55 PM

Hi WilliamD


that DailyKos article on Lieberman lie being exposed, had a comment on it which stated exactly what happened to Ned's campaign. I will not forget for a long time what happened with the Democrats sandbagging Lamont!!


"Yale conference on Ct. senate race. (3+ / 0-)

This conference was made up of media people and campaign staff for all three senatorial candidates. It was shown on C-Span and on our Connecticut public service network. Unfortunately, they didn't mention the website thing. Two things stand out in the analysis of why Joe Lieberman won and I'm taking this opportunity to inform those who might be interested. First, the Lamont campaign was "sandbagged" (their word, not mine) by party insiders who encouraged Ned to give them time to convince Joe to pull out of the race. Joe's people claimed that he never heard from anyone on this, but Joe used this time to emerge from the primary pretty much unscathed and he also used the time to frame Ned. Joe quickly took all attention away from the Lamont campaign which was made to look inept for not responding to Joe and being visible. Second, and maybe even more important was the fact that the Republican Party did not put up a credible candidate, so Joe actually was running on two tickets, or even three, claiming to be a Democrat, an Independent, and a Republican, too. That made the race what some called "unwinnable" for Ned. Joe won with slightly less than 50% of the total vote, so it wasn't an overwhelming endorsement of Joe, and a strong Republican candidate could probably have given the victory to Ned. Lieberman got about 30% of the Dem. vote and 70% of the Republican vote. Schlesinger got about 10% of the total vote, not enough to help Ned.

117
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 09:59 PM

Posted by fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:40 PMclassification and taxonomy are useful in biology

I think you read my post as "all" politicans rather than "some" politicans.

Cynacism is one of the more potent campaign tools the GOP uses. It plays into the anti-government rhetoric and the two work together to suppress the vote and keep the public unengaged.

I try not to help them in that effort. As it makes whatever engagement I do more difficult. I generally try to stay pretty upbeat. It seems to work the best.

I've posted links to United States National Health Insurance Act, H.R. 676 quite a few times now. And pointed to the 77 members of the House who've endorsed it. So there are clearly "some" politicans who are not behind the curve on health care.

Perhaps I should have been more precise.

118
dorsano on December 20, 2006 at 10:00 PM

hi Pammie

i know that little piece of vomit taste, so well...

i read that Lamont's team didn't hack into the crybaby's website, after all..big surprise!

same flavor, as is the minimum wage b/s

the working poor have been so abused by these thugs...and Texas has the largest percentage in the nation...of course...

119
fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 10:04 PM

dors,

Doyle is very astute to do what he can with the existing programs. taking on the insurance industry is a loser. he has milwaukee and madison with him...and plenty of opposition upstate.

i will apologize for my cynicism, but i know Doyle and he is a decent man. can't say that about too many...

i'm from WI and see Tommy Thompson in my rear view mirror...

120
fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 10:09 PM

Posted by fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 09:37 PM you did, didn't you?

Help coordinate the training hour for delegates at the MN state convention?

No - I'm helping to organize in my Senate district. We have a Democratic state senator who is behind the curve on health care.

I helped to organize a meeting at a church in the district to try to come up with ways of getting more people engaged on the issue and how best to effect a change in thinking in the legislature.

121
dorsano on December 20, 2006 at 10:21 PM

dors,

you did vote for him, didn't you? ;)

122
fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 10:23 PM

Evening,

This troop escalation in Iraq will be in action on January 4th to deflect and distract from the new congress's 100 hour agenda.

Bush said today it is going to take a lot more sacrificing, and we need more troops for the long time it's going to take to fight this "war on Terror".

He is at this muddled propaganda thing again trying to confuse the occupation of Iraq with the fight or actions against terrorists. He is misleading the people again and needs to be stopped before he can cause any more damage.

He wants damage because then we will have sacrifices and investments from which we cannot honorably retreat.

Cutting off the funds will be a fight and can't come quickly enough. Revoking the authorization for force will stop this dangerous other-agenda man faster, and will stop the kidnappings and torture as well.

123
TomN on December 20, 2006 at 10:23 PM

Posted by fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 10:09 PM Doyle is very astute to do what he can with the existing programs.

I'm sure he is.

taking on the insurance industry is a loser.

It is without grassroots support. It's also required in order to achieve universal coverage. 15% of every dollar spent on health care goes to the administrative overhead caused by the proliferation of plans and coverage and the overhead in the insurance companies themselves.

Medicare has 2% overhead in contrast.

124
dorsano on December 20, 2006 at 10:26 PM

Unfortunetly, fade, that conception that they created on primary day will hold, because the media will not pay much attention to this Retraction of blame on Lamont.


Do you get TIME mag btw? They had an article this time, The Real War, where they interviewed 6 different authors of books (Woodward, Wright, Gordon, Trainor, Ricks and Suskind).

The most notable comment to me, was one where they asked them "Did failure to capture bin Laden play a role in the deicison to go to war?"


One of the guys,(Wright), said:

"Al_Qaeda essentially was dead after December 2001. the 'war on terror, you know had suceeded". If we had captured the leaders, I think people would've felt a sense of finality, and might not have had that impulse to roll into Iraq."


So THAT was why Bush brushed off Bin laden after that and said he was not concerned about him! To capture him, is to project an image that his imaginary War on Terror is over in the american's eyes!!

125
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 10:26 PM

Posted by fade2bluz on December 20, 2006 at 10:23 PM you did vote for him, didn't you? ;)

Lieberman? Yes, I voted for him when he ran with Al Gore. :)

126
dorsano on December 20, 2006 at 10:28 PM

heading out. The CA daughter flying in tonight, and landing late. Want to head to the airport and wait for her. Eager to see her again!


Have a good evening all.

127
PamB on December 20, 2006 at 10:28 PM

So THAT was why Bush brushed off Bin laden after that