Saturday, June 30, 2007


Lugar, Warner, Voinovich and Mc Connell. Recognize these names? These are stalwart veteran Republican leaders in the legislative bodies who can no longer hold their tongues any more. They can no longer sit idly by and watch this administration's failed policies, trumped up rationales and complete lack of cognitive thought or planning in the invasion, and occupation of Iraq, drag this country down a spiralling crevasse of ineptitude any longer.
Monday, Richard Lugar took the floor of the senate late in the evening and delivered a 50 minute speech outlining his thoughts, and frustrations of his unheeded advise and counsel to the Bush administration. Lugar, the top Republican on the foreign relations committee, is arguably the smartest guy in the room wherever he goes. Mild mannered and certainly not prone to public displays of party disloyalty or confrontation, it was painfully obvious to everyone that he could stand (at least) publically silent any longer.
Here is an excerpt or two of the speech. You can read it, or read it in its entirety here.
"In my judgment, our course in Iraq has lost contact with our vital national security interests in the Middle East and beyond. Our continuing absorption with military activities in Iraq is limiting our diplomatic assertiveness there and elsewhere in the world. The prospects that the current “surge” strategy will succeed in the way originally envisioned by the President are very limited within the short period framed by our own domestic political debate. And the strident, polarized nature of that debate increases the risk that our involvement in Iraq will end in a poorly planned withdrawal that undercuts our vital interests in the Middle East."
"American strategy must adjust to the reality that sectarian factionalism will not abate anytime soon and probably cannot be controlled from the top. "
"The window during which we can continue to employ American troops in Iraqi neighborhoods without damaging our military strength or our ability to respond to other national security priorities is closing."
A course change should happen now, while there is still some possibility of constructing a sustainable bipartisan strategy in Iraq. If the President waits until the presidential election campaign is in full swing, the intensity of confrontation on Iraq is likely to limit U.S. options.
I am not implying that debate on Iraq is bad. I am suggesting what most Senate observers understand intuitively: little nuance or bipartisanship will be possible if the Iraq debate plays out during a contentious national election that will determine control of the White House and Congress. In short, our political time line will not support a rational course adjustment in Iraq, unless such an adjustment is initiated very soon.
If we are to seize opportunities to preserve these interests, the Administration and Congress must suspend what has become almost knee-jerk political combat over Iraq. Those who offer constructive criticism of the surge strategy are not defeatists, any more than those who warn against a precipitous withdrawal are militarists.


Yet another chess move in the administration's arrogant disregard for subpoenas seeking oversight information. The Democrats will introduce a bill seeking to defund the VP's executive office, which he now claims he is not a part of. Whether the dems are powerlessly flailing away at an administration which has many, many secrets to keep, or can actually force the Bush administration to obey the law, only time will tell. But I do enjoy the congressional branch seeking to chip away from the arrogance and the secrecy of a failed administration.
House Democrats, responding to Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that his office is exempt from certain national security disclosure requirements, said Tuesday they will try to strip some of his funding.
Cheney set off protests from Democrats when he declared that his office was exempt from sections of a presidential order that executive branch offices provide data on how much material they classify and declassify.
Five years ago Cheney claimed executive privilege in refusing to release details about his meetings with oil industry executives to discuss energy policy. "Now when we want to know what he's doing as it relates to America's national security in the lead-up to the war in Iraq and after the fact, the vice president has declared he is a member of the legislative branch." Therefore, Emanuel said, "we will no longer fund the executive branch of his office and he can live off the funding for the Senate presidency." The vice president presides as president of the Senate.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., speaking Sunday on Fox News Sunday, said Cheney's move was "the height of arrogance." She said it might not be a bad idea that money for Cheney's office be held up until he decides whether or not he's in the executive branch.
Buck up Mr. Vice President. If things get tight financially, you can always sell off your Halliburton stock.

Friday, June 29, 2007

CONSERVAPEDIA: AN ENCYCLOPEDIA IN SHEEPS CLOTHING Maybe you have heard of it. Maybe you already smell it. The half truths, extreme bias and the hate. The conservatives, complaining about the liberal slant in the media, started Fox news, among other conservative outlets. Fine. It is a free country, go right ahead. So they did. And Bill O'Reilly quit his paper route and found a real job.
But now they have really gone too far. Obviously unnerved with the reader supported definitions in Wikipedia (which offer tame definitions on a variety of subjects), the conservatives have started, the most biased piece of trash I have read in a long time.
And, I do not have a problem with its existence. What I do have a problem is with their self described definition: "The Trustworthy Encyclopedia." Folks, the true definition of encyclopedia is that of a fact filled unbiased reference manual. Conservapedia is so right wing, well....take a look at two definitions, from Wikipedia and Conservapedia and make up your own mind.
Conservapedia: Homosexuality is an immoral sexual lifestyle between members of the same sex. It is more than simply a sexual act, it is going beyond the boundaries that God has setup for marriage; one man and one woman.
Wikipedia: Homosexuality can refer to both sexual behavior and sexual attraction between people of the same gender or to a sexual orientation. When describing a sexual orientation, it refers to enduring sexual and romantic attraction toward others of the same sex, but does not necessarily involve sexual behavior.
Conservapedia: Social Security is an involuntary social insurance program enforced by the United States federal government. The socialistic program was one of the "hottest" topics under consideration in the 2004 U.S. presidential election and in early 2005, when President George W. Bush began an unsuccessful campaign to give Americans the right to voluntarily opt out of the system and seek personal retirement accounts by depositing their payroll taxes into personally owned and invested accounts similar to 401(k) plans or IRAs.
Wikipedia: Social security primarily refers to social welfare service concerned with social protection, or protection against socially recognized conditions, including poverty, old age, disability, unemployment and others.
Now you tell me, which is the more serious, fact based, hate free, relevant reference manual?
This is yet another example of a group of people unraveling by the minute.
Another Murdock- like piece of tripe, to be sure.
Think this is bad? What until Murdock buys Dow Jones, and its Wall Street Journal?
You will be able to add the journal to the list of newspapers unworthy of wrapping fish in, like the New York Post, which was absolutely ruined guessed it, Rupert Murdock.
Really want a laugh? Check out Qubetv, the rightwing answer to Youtube.
Another wonderful entry into the conservative parties legacy of the early 2000's.

Friday, June 22, 2007


Vice President Cheney's office has refused to comply with an executive order governing the handling of classified information for the past four years and recently tried to abolish the office that sought to enforce those rules, according to documents released by a congressional committee yesterday.
Since 2003, the vice president's staff has not cooperated with an office at the National Achieves and Records Administration charged with making sure the executive branch protects classified information. Cheney aides have not filed reports on their possession of classified data and at one point blocked an inspection of their office. After the Archives office pressed the matter, the documents say, Cheney's staff this year proposed eliminating it.
The dispute centers on a relatively obscure process but underscores a wider struggle waged in the past 6 1/2 years over Cheney's penchant for secrecy. Since becoming vice president, he has fought attempts to peer into the inner workings of his office, shielding an array of information such as the industry executives who advised his energy task force, details about his privately funded travel and secret service logs showing who visits his official residence.
"He's saying he's above the law," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which released a series of correspondence yesterday outlining the situation. "It just seems to me this is arrogant and shows bad judgment."

Saturday, June 16, 2007


CRAWFORD, Texas - President Bush warned Congress on Saturday that he will use his veto power to stop runaway government spending.
“The American people do not want to return to the days of tax-and-spend policies,”
Bush said in his radio address.
Any one not seeing the irony in the President's statement, signify by putting a "I am one of the 26 percentile" bumper sticker on your automobile. You would do well to remember which party is against ear-marking bills with pork and a return to "pay as you go" spending, meaning when the administration comes up with another "trickle down" tax cut for the ultra rich, he must cut programs to pay for them. You might also want to look up the last time we had a balanced budget.....And now for a brief moment of sanity, from the Senator from Louisiana....
"I know people don't like to pay taxes, but the fact of the matter is, is that this administration has produced a record deficit that is really threatening in long measure our ability to make the kind of investments we need to keep America safe," Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-Louisiana, said in a Fox News interview.

Thursday, June 14, 2007


Just over the AP wire...
WASHINGTON - A federal judge said Thursday he will not delay a 2 1/2-year prison sentence for I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby in the CIA leak case, a ruling that could send the former White House aide to prison within weeks. U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton's decision will send Libby's attorneys rushing to an appeals court to block the sentence and could force President Bush to consider calls from Libby's supporters to pardon the former aide. No date was set for Libby to report to prison but it's expected to be within six to eight weeks. That will be left up to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, which will also select a facility. "Unless the Court of Appeals overturns my ruling, he will have to report," Walton said. Libby's wife, Harriet Grant, wiped away tears but Libby was stoic as Walton ruled.


" I have never craved the position, but there are some things I want to do that only a President can do. So, yes, I want the Presidency."
Fred Thompson
as told to Jay Leno on the Tonight show,
when asked; "Do you want the job of the Presidency?"

Wednesday, June 13, 2007


Subpoenas have been issued today to two former top ranking White House officials today, former chief counsel Harriet Miers, and political director Sarah Taylor on their roles in the firings of eight federal prosecutors in the continuing investigation of Alberto Gonzales. Both Taylor and Miers operated in the role of close advisers to the President, and have inside knowledge of many of the affairs of the current administration.
The Bush administration continues its attempts to both stonewall any investigations by Congress, as well as deny any wrongdoings. They will, of course, deny any subpoenas, as complying with the legal documents would could set a precedent for testimony by another adviser not yet on the subpoena list: presidential counselor Karl Rove. Be assured, that Bush will start WW III before the world hears any secrets Karl Rove is privy to.
White House officials pointed out that White House Counsel Fred Fielding already has offered a compromise by suggesting that Miers, Taylor, Rove and their deputies be interviewed by committee aides in closed-door sessions, without transcripts. Leahy and Conyers have rejected that offer.
The subpoenas came a day after newly released Justice Department documents revealed that Taylor was closely involved in the firings. In a Feb. 16 e-mail, she described a U.S. attorney in Arkansas who was fired last year as "lazy" — "which is why we got rid of him in the first place," according to the documents. Taylor also complained that Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty told senators that Cummins was replaced at the urging of Miers, then White House counsel.
Technically, if the showdown between the White House and Congress is not resolved, the matter could end up with House and Senate contempt citations and a session in federal court.
You may remember Ms. Miers was nominated to the Supreme Court by Bush, then took her name out of consideration. Ms. Taylor has been a Bush strategist on campaigns for the president since 1999. Before that, she worked on the 1995-96 presidential campaign of Phil Gramm, another southern "intellectual."

Sunday, June 10, 2007



(CBS) The United States should launch military strikes against Iran if the government in Tehran does not stop supplying anti-American forces in Iraq, Sen. Joe Lieberman said Sunday on Face The Nation. "I think we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq," Lieberman told Bob Schieffer. "And to me, that would include a strike into... over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers." The Indepedent former Democrat from Connecticut said that he was not calling for an invasion of Iran, but he did say the U.S. should target specific training camps. "I think you could probably do a lot of it from the air, but they can't believe that they have immunity for training and equipping people to come in and kill Americans," Lieberman said.


Paris Hilton. She is all you see in the headlines these days. I have withheld judgement, and avoided wasting space in this blog on her plight, because the media attention on her the last two weeks is repugnant to say the least. So many other more important matters to deal with, to be sure. But, I want to make some observations over her case, especially now that she has, at least in a cosmetic fashion, seemed to start to get it. Please read the following statement issued by Ms. Hilton to follow....
Today, I told my attorneys not to appeal the judge's decision. While I greatly appreciate the Sheriff's concern for my health and welfare, I intend to serve my time at L.A. County Jail. "Being in jail is by far the hardest thing I have ever done. During the past several days, I have had a lot of time to think and I believe that I am learning and growing from this experience. "I have also had time to read the mail from my fans. I very much appreciate all of their good wishes and hope they will keep their letters coming. "Thank you as well to my family who has always stood by me. I love you and miss you so much! "I must also say that I was shocked to see all of the attention devoted to the amount of time I would spend in jail for what I had done by the media, public and city officials. I would hope going forward that the public and the media will focus on more important things like the men and women serving our country in Iraq and other places around the world."
So there it is. Not exactly the mea culpa we, and the justice system deserves, but it is a legitimate first step. And, although I agree with her sentence and resulting incarceration, there is no doubt in my mind she is a victim here.
First, the entire way her jail time has been spent is abominable, and has made a complete laughing stock of the American jurist prudence system. She serves her time in a jail in Lynwood, and actually comes in voluntarily early to serve it. Next, we are served up reports of how she spends her time, and the "fragile" state she is in. Where is the leak?
Step in Sheriff Lee Baca, who decides to put his finger in the pie (so to speak), and releases her to house arrest. She is not eating or sleeping, he says. Has to go home, he says.
Deplorably weak, Sheriff.
Next, there is a court hearing in regards to her status, and it is announced that she will attend the hearing over the phone. The Judge in this case, ego bruised by the early release already, takes umbrage to this, and generously decides to send Ms. Hilton an escort to the hearing instead. Of course, this couldn't be done quietly, libidos are at stake. No doubt if he took Ms. Hilton's legal team into chambers, they would have sent for Paris and she would have been delivered to the Judge as requested.
Not good enough for the Judge. What was to follow was the sickest media frenzy outside of her home ever. World wide coverage of what should have been (or could have been) secret, or at least low key. Not good enough. The judge had his feelings hurt. What was about to unfold had no bearing on her crime. It had more to do with politics, and / or the judge's penis size than what was relevant. Ego's and libidos were at stake.
"Let's go live to the Hilton residence", was the cry from local stations. Literally hundreds of reporters and paparazzi, helicopters flying overhead. A media circus. One reporter for NBC actually seemed to try and stage being hit by a squad car when the black and white took her away. Not shocking at all. Multiple squad cars to pick her up. Had to handcuff her as well. She was obviously a flight risk, or could have overpowered the 12 police officers sent to her residence to retrieve her. When Ms. Hilton arrived at the court house, everyone knew she was going right back into jail. The judge was making a statement, and I do agree, she should serve her sentence. But by putting her into jail, letting her go from jail, then putting her back into jail is more mental punishment than anyone should endure, especially someone who is as (apparently) sickeningly weak as Ms. Hilton.
It must make for quite a life....millions of dollars thrown at your feet. The best of everything money can buy. No need to do, well, anything. No worries, no problems, absolutely no reason to get out of bed at all. Once you have bought everything you wanted, the only thing left is complete boredom, so why not fill the void with drugs, sex and alcohol. Why not anesthetize yourself to the point where life seems normal and purpose-full? At least her active social calendar gave her a reason to get up in the am.
And therein lies the rub for Ms. Hilton. She has lived her life with no driving force, no purpose, no goals, no nothing. Is it any wonder she is so screwed up?
She is in the absolute media vortex of attention in the media outlets. Her every move is photographed and scrutinized. She is a big, albeit gorgeous, dollar sign, to the world, and to all those clamoring to be in her entourage. Is it any wonder she can't figure out who loves her for her, and not just a dollar sign?
Quite the irony. What has made her life so easy, is also destroying it, as well. Like it or not, the world is watching, Ms. Hilton. Watching and waiting to see if someone can be forced to grow up. Waiting to see if you finally realize that you could do a lot of good in the world if you put your mind to it. Lord knows you have the medias attention. Why not put it to work for something good, instead of just another entry into your biography; the latest public boner you pull (pun intended) .

Friday, June 8, 2007


"The Federal Trade Commission today approved a complaint challenging Whole Foods Market, Inc.’s approximately $670 million acquisition of its chief rival, Wild Oats Markets, Inc., and authorized the staff to seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in federal district court to halt the deal pending an administrative trial on the merits. According to the complaint, the transaction would violate federal antitrust laws by eliminating substantial competition. “Whole Foods and Wild Oats are each other’s closest competitors in premium natural and organic supermarkets, and are engaged in intense head-to-head competition in markets across the country,” said Jeffrey Schmidt, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition.
It's hard to see how permitting Whole Foods to convert existing Wild Oats into Whole Foods outlets and perhaps close a few dozen redundant stores will deprive foodies of a unique retail experience. The nation's foodies have been salivating at the prospect that Whole Foods would buy out the company and convert the Wild Oats into a Whole Foods. Fresh sardines, luscious tomatoes, and lovingly cured salamis were only a merger away. But not if the FTC has its way.
Whole Foods sees it this way, "All of Whole Foods Market's 11 operating regions will gain stores, with three of its smallest regions gaining critical mass, and Whole Foods Market will gain immediate entry into a significant number of new markets* Whole Foods Market expects to recognize significant synergies through G&A cost reductions, greater purchasing power, increased utilization of support facilities and new team member talent."
There's one final canard in the FTC's argument. The agency argues that if a merger were to go through, Whole Foods would be able to raise prices. But even with Wild Oats—and a gazillion other competitors—in the marketplace, Whole Foods has managed to do a pretty good job of doing that.
This merger should go through and the FTC needs to go on to some real issues. Basically, the FTC needs to get out of the bologna aisle and look into some natural colonic cleansers. Leave it to those damn Republicans....they want to control our every move.

Tuesday, June 5, 2007


The judgement came down in the penalty phase of the Scooter Libby trial, a trial which found him guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice in the CIA leak case re: the outing of CIA covert operative Valerie Plame. The judgement? 30 months in a minimum security prison, forfeiture of his ability to practice the law, and a stiff fine, estimated at $250,000. Not to mention public disgrace and a mountain of legal fees.
The judgement was passed down despite numerous high ranking officials writing letters of reference for the former Chief of Staff to Vice President Cheney. Unfortunately for Mr. Libby, the word of gentlemen such as Kissinger, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and Bolton, among others, carry very little cache anymore. Not to mention any comment from the administration, who sat idly by and watched their scapegoat headed for the gallows, so to speak.
And, although I am all for law and order, as well as sending a message to any one even remotely thinking about engaging in the arrogant, childish retaliatory dirty deed this man engaged in (over an inspection of no yellow cake found in Niger by Plame's hubby), I think it is time to reel in your claws, sprout some huevos, and pardon this man. He has suffered enough for supervisors unworthy of experiencing any pain for at all.
Seriously, let him off the hook with a pardon.
Show a little loyalty King George.
No possible good can come from this man serving time in prison.

Monday, June 4, 2007


Say what you want to about this woman (and you will), she actually won last nights debate in a landslide. She was strong, intelligent and didn't so much as flinch when asked the tough questions, or when responding to the attacks from the nutcase from Alaska (Gravel) or the $400 haircut. She looked Presidential to many as well. A very, very nice start.

The only upsetting part of the debate was how chummy she and Obama seemed to be.....running mates? A solid "maybe."

Sunday, June 3, 2007


Pictured below is the 2 term senator of Alaska from 1969 to 1981, Mike Gravel. Since his 12 years in the Senate, he has held no position in our government, yet, he thinks he has a chance at becoming the Democratic nominee for the Presidential election in November of 2008. Obviously, if you collected all of the people who honestly thought he had a legitimate shot at our party nomination, you could fit them into a phone booth, and still have room for multiple fruitcakes, which I consider him nuttier than. So why does he run?
In tonight's debate it became clear why he is running. He wants to tear down every Democrat with a legitimate shot at becoming President. he was hostile, he was rude , he was in full attack mode. He also appeared to be suffering from some sort of emotional difficulties, even going so far as to sit noticeably far away stage left than any of the other debaters. Mental issues for this gentleman is not an unwarranted concern since, by his own admission when he lost his bid at reelection in 1980, ""I had lost my career. I lost my marriage. I was in the doldrums for ten years after my defeat."[6] There is a resume builder!!!
During his first term in the Senate, Gravel wrote a book titled Citizen Power, in which he advocated the implementation of numerous populist ideas: a guaranteed annual income (dubbed the "Citizen's Wage"), public financing of elections, progressive tax with no deductions or exemptions, steps against the military-industrial complex (which he calls the "Warfare State"), a national law to do away with voter registration and other barriers to voting, abolition of the death penalty, universal health care, school vouchers, a drastic reduction in government secrecy, and an end to America's imperialistic foreign policy. The book also contained the complete text of the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and the complete platform adopted by the Populist Party during the 1892 presidential election.
In 2007, he is for, among other things, allowing citizens to cast their vote by multiple means, and change their vote as many times as they like until the ballot is closed. Proposed acceptable methods to vote may include telephone, kiosk, or Internet website. Responding to a caller on a CSPAN program asking about marijuana and the drug war, Gravel stated “That one is real simple, I would legalize marijuana. You should be able to buy that at a liquor store.”
All right Senator, the jokes over, and your 15 minutes are more than up. Yield back the remainder of your time to people who really can win the nomination. Here's ten bucks, you go back to your liquor store and buy some more of your wacky tobaccy. You were a lightweight 25 years ago, and you have reduced yourself to a joke today. Bye Bye.


The G-8 summit set to begin this week in a small coastal village off the Baltic Sea has experienced protesters (as usual) over such topics as a new arms race, lackadaisical efforts at eradicating AIDS, and the exploitation of the situations in war torn Africa, among others.
In response, security for the G-8 summit is understandably tight, including performing background screens for each of the 300 local residents prior to the summit.
The summit, caricatured above, consists of Russia, Canada, United Kingdom, Japan, Italy, Germany, France and the United States.
Topics will include all world issues, including AIDS and the spread of diseases, world monetary issues, the Middle East situation, and a possible showdown between Germany's Andrea Merkel and George Bush, and his watered down climate change policy proposal.

But the main event will almost certainly be the following new skirmish between Bush and Putin. Angered by the U.S. plans to place a radar facility (missile defense system) into Eastern Europe (among other issues, including Kosovo), Putin has gone public with repeated threats of a new arms race, as well as insinuating his missiles will be pointed towards selected European targets, as in the Cold War days of long ago.
Putin was asked whether the U.S. plans would force the military to direct its missiles at locations in Europe, as during the Cold War. "Naturally, yes," Putin said. "If the American nuclear potential grows in European territory, we have to give ourselves new targets in Europe. It is up to our military to define these targets, in addition to defining the choice between ballistic and cruise missiles."
Putin, in an interview to be published Monday that the U.S. shield would "increase the possibility of unleashing a nuclear conflict." He said Washington was "forcing a reaction" from Moscow.
The president raised the specter of a new arms race Thursday, saying the U.S. plans had prompted a test earlier in the week of a new multiple-warhead missile.
The reaction from the U.S. has been to claim Putin is merely posturing and trying to bully the E.U. in rejecting the U.S. missile defense system, and has further criticized Putin for his abysmal record in the area of human rights.
Russian insiders say the U.S. missile defense plan was by far the most bitter conflict between Moscow and Washington. But they also point to "elements of cooperation" in the Middle East and over nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea. "Yes there are general differences, but you must not speak of a confrontation and you must not speak of a Cold War."
Mikhail Margelov, chairman of the Federation Council's International Affairs Committee, downplayed the differences as pre-election campaigning. "The current rhetoric of American politicians and journalists does not reflect the real state of Russian-U.S. relations," Margelov said in an e-mailed statement. "The political culture in both countries demands strong words during election campaigns. But there are number of problems in the world that can only be addressed by friendly ties between Russia and the U.S."
Kremlin spokesman Peskov also said electoral campaigning played a role. Russia holds parliamentary elections in December and a presidential vote in March, while the United States will elect a new president later next year.
Maybe King George II should take Nancy Pelosi, just in case things get tight.
I would pay a few dollars just to see his Al Gore impersonation.


Recent reports of an alleged terrorist plot to blow up the gas line leading to JFK airport has induced various responses, from utter relief to utter disbelief, as expressed by a reader on one of the left wing blogs (The Daily KO's).
"I don’t believe the latest terrorist plot bullshit. If this ever goes to trial, and if they show actual evidence that these guys they arrested weren’t just talking trash, I’ll admit I was wrong and apologize for what I’m about to say: "I knew there’d been plenty of stupid shit busts like this over the last few years, but dumb to you have to be to believe the U.S. government at this point? The U.S. government has ZERO credibility. FDA—failing to protect U.S. consumers, FEMA—catastrophic failure in New Orleans, Iraq War—lies upon lies to get Americans to launch an illegal war of aggression, 9-11—failure to prevent what anyone with a lick of sense could see coming for years (ask me why I wasn’t surprised that day—shocked by the massive slaughter, but not the attack), Economy—govt economic figures distorted and made essentially useless, i.e. inflation figures, unemployment data, etc., etc., etc.... Unless something is done to change that lack of credibility via impeachment or at least a democratic administration/congress that tells the truth occasionally post 2008, it will remain an unbelievable and nauseating purveyor off horseshit and unrestrained violence."
Now, obviously this person has gotten off to the deep, dark side of the political spectrum, and quite possibly was wearing a "Rosie" t-shirt when commenting, however it is not an exaggeration to say that a large portion of the country, and in fact the world, does not believe anything coming out of the Bush administration, or any portion of the federal government as long as Bush/Cheney are in office. A huge number of people (voters) believe that the Bush administration is, in deed, capable of the most despicable deeds, including/but not limited to carrying out plots which will result in the unnecessary deaths of their own constituents.
Nefarious isn't the word. An alarming number of the citizens of the U.S. do not approve of the Bush administrations record over the past six years, but it goes deeper than this. They believe them to be the core root of what is wrong with the nation, and in fact, a lot of the world's problems today. I am not talking about Islamic-fascists around the world, I am talking about the Jones family in Iowa, and Mayor Smith in North Dakota. I am talking about the librarian in a small, rural town in West Virginia, I am talking about good people who do not trust the executive branch of the United States, a country they have loved all of their lives.
How we got there is not really the issue. As in all things, there is blame to be had on all sides. This is a polarized nation at the moment, who not only do not share the same opinions, the only thing they seem to share is an increasing hatred of each other. This fire has been kindled by the propaganda machines dressed up as "journalists." "Smart talk" has been replaced by political "smack downs." Civil, public discourse has been replaced by partisan hatchet jobs who do not discuss the issue at hand, they attack the people, and the issue is completely secondary. As always in this country, it is all about the money, fame and power. And if you have to dress up in clown makeup to get it, so be it.
But I digress. The core question is, can a government continue to function without the faith and support of its people? Can it succeed with no support from the global community?
We are seeing what happens when a country solicits support in advance of an invasion and the majority of the world says "hell no." Yes, we got some support, but even countries that owed us for our countries past heroism turned their backs on us. In hindsight, they may have been smart to do so.
When 16 to 19% of the administrations own party believes they had some sort of involvement in a national tragedy such as 911, there is definitely something wrong here.
In my mind, the GOP has to address this situation if they are going to have any kind of success in the next election. The country has turned their backs on the administration, and is starving for some semblance of leadership, some semblance of a national candidate who they can trust. As I have said in previous posts, the American people will vote for what they perceive to be lacking in their previous national leader. Nixon's wrongdoings resulted in the American people voting honesty first, which brought a peanut farmer Governor from no where to the forefront.
And how did that work for us?
And that is the "World According to Kimba"
Thanks for reading, and commenting.
And caring.


NEW YORK - Federal authorities say they foiled an alleged plot by a retired airport worker, a former Guyanese Parliament member and other Muslim extremists to plant explosives on jet fuel arteries at John F. Kennedy International Airport, triggering massive casualties and economic havoc. Three men were arrested and a fourth sought in Trinidad for reportedly hatching the brazen scheme that they boasted would be worse than 9/11 and put "the whole country in mourning," authorities said.
In an indictment charging the four men, one of them is quoted as saying the foiled plot would “cause greater destruction than in the Sept. 11 attacks,” destroying the airport, killing several thousand people and destroying parts of New York’s borough of Queens, where the line runs underground. One of the suspects, Russell Defreitas, a U.S. citizen native to Guyana and former JFK air cargo employee, said the airport named for the slain president was targeted because it is a symbol that would put “the whole country in mourning.”
“It’s like you can kill the man twice,” said Defreitas, 63, who first hatched his plan more than a decade ago when he worked as a cargo handler for a service company, according to the indictment. Authorities said the men were motivated by hatred toward the U.S., Israel and the West. Defreitas was recorded saying he “wanted to do something to get those bastards” and he boasted that he had been taught to make bombs in Guyana.
Authorities had been monitoring the activities of these people through the use of a convicted drug dealer turned FBI informant. The U.S. Joint Terrorism Task Force recorded and surveilled the men, learning that Defreitas drove around and videotaped JFK on four occasions this past January. The U.S. threat level is unchanged at high, or orange, for all domestic and international flights, according to the department of Homeland Security.

Saturday, June 2, 2007


California has begun allowing overnight visits for gay and lesbian partners of prison inmates to conform to the state's domestic partnership law. California is one of just six states that allow overnight family visits, which take place in trailers or other housing on prison grounds. But attorneys, gay rights advocates and corrections officials said they know of no other state that permits conjugal visits by same-sex partners.
Since the 1970s, immediate family members have been able to visit many prison inmates for up to three days at a time. The privilege is being expanded to registered domestic partners under a law signed by former Gov. Gray Davis that took effect in 2005. It requires state agencies to give the same rights to domestic partners that heterosexual couples receive.
Vernon Foeller had requested an overnight visit from his partner a year ago while he was serving an 18-month sentence at the California Medical Facility in Vacaville for an attempted burglary conviction. When his request was denied, Foeller complained to the ACLU.
"To tell a couple like my partner and I that we weren't eligible, that to me is absolute discrimination," Foeller said in a telephone interview. Foeller, who was paroled in April and lives in Sacramento, registered his domestic partnership in August 2005, before he was incarcerated.
"You have a condition of unequal treatment," ACLU staff attorney Alex Cleghorn said. "They were being denied something for which they were eligible."
The new regulations permit visits only by registered domestic partners who are not themselves in custody, and the domestic partnership must have been established before one of the partners went to prison. The policy will formally take effect later this year, but the department already is complying. Foeller was allowed an overnight visit with his partner in December.
Overnight visits allow inmates to remain connected to their families and help prepare them for their eventual release, Cleghorn said. There is no record of how many domestic partners are serving prison terms.
Family visits are not permitted for condemned inmates, inmates serving life without parole or those who have not had a parole date set, or for sex offenders. Inmates serving time for a violent offense against a minor or a family member also are ineligible.


JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- The valedictorian of Wolfson High School's class of 2007 spoke out in an address at graduation that lasted nearly 20 minutes and urged fellow students to find Jesus Christ, and warned them of consequences if they do not. Shannon Spaulding's speech centered on God and Jesus Christ -- a topic that prompted a commencement controversy.
"I want to tell you that Jesus Christ can you give you eternal life in Heaven," Spaulding said in her speech. David Sundstrom, a member of the superintendent's executive staff, on Tuesday called the speech "wholly inappropriate," and accused Spaulding of behaving dishonorably. He stated, "Protocols were in place for the school's principal … to review the text of the speech." Sundstrom's letter went on to state "… she played the adults who had trusted her to behave responsibly and she betrayed that trust." Spaulding said school administrators never gave her any guidelines about the length nor the content of her speech, and she said they didn't make a big deal about proofreading the speech before graduation.
"They knew I was busy trying to get everything else ready, so they just said, 'Don't worry about it.' They knew I would get it done," Spaulding said. Of course the outstanding student finished her speech in time. However, Spaulding said she did not think the religious comments she made would cause such a controversy.
She said the attention has not taken anything away from her accomplishments as the school's valedictorian, and if she could do it over again, she would say the same things. "I can't say I'm sorry for the message I shared. I'm sorry if people were offended, but I still believe what I said," Spaulding said.