Here.
We're winning this battle, and we're going to win the war on Social Security. But we can't let up. Here's what MoveOn is doing:
"George W. Bush is going to make Social Security privatization a key part of his State of the Union address this week. After his speech he is going on a cross-country tour to promote his agenda. That’s why, as Americans form their opinions about his plan, we need to make sure they know the facts – privatization means benefit cuts of up to 46%.
Today, we’re releasing a new ad – Working Retirement – which builds off our famous Child’s Pay ad to explain why privatization is a bad idea. The ad footage was shot by Charlie Fisher, who also did Child’s Pay. We’re working to raise $500,000 to run it in key Congressional districts where members of Congress are considering supporting Bush’s plan."
Posted by not sam at February 1, 2005 7:13 PMPosted by: PEREZ at February 9, 2005 8:03 PM
Make your representatives represent you. Tell your Senators to vote NO to Torture Czar Alberto Gonzales. Democrats get nothing by going along with Bush and his cronies on the Hill. The first step to taking back the White House is showing the country the party stands for something, and right now that has to be this: that torture sympathizers should not be in charge of the Justice Department. Go to this page, find your Senators and demand they vote NO on Gonzales.
Then go The Pen, and use their Gonzales page to do it again.
Posted by not sam at February 1, 2005 07:17 PMPosted by: devinevision at February 1, 2005 07:38 PM
Posted by: jh4567 at February 1, 2005 08:46 PM
Go to
http://crisispictures.org
and see what it looked like in f'ing Ramadi."
Tel George to reserv
me a table at the Gitmo
Cafe cuz I HATE FREEDOM long as they got dbl
capps Im cool
ANYWAYS IM not alloud w/in 100 yds of BARBRA
an DIANE never retrns my calls...
TEL GOERGE I HATE FREEDOM AN HES A FREEK DBL
TO HIS BUDY ALBERTO--
Dear Senators Cantwell and Murray
I'm writing to urge you to vote no on Gonzales' appointment. The
Geneva Conventions are not quaint, they are vital. Americans should
fight torture, not condone it, but how can we do that when we
promote people who do condone torture? How can we do that when the
man who is among the most responsible for turning Americans into an
instrument of torture is ready to become the nations top lawyer?
Sincerely,
Carl Ballard
Posted by: Carl Ballard at February 2, 2005 06:11 PMof the real State of the Union.
thanks to petemoon.
Posted by not sam at February 2, 2005 6:34 PMMorally speaking, Americans would never agree to cut or modify programs if they could pay for it because nobody wants to look like they are attacking seniors, childrens, minorities...
But by creating a crisis, the Administration can cut whatever they want and spin it as a plan to save the American people.
Posted by: Tony Chang at February 2, 2005 8:18 PMPosted by: Shelly at February 3, 2005 3:00 AM
Posted by: Rusty at February 3, 2005 7:08 PM
Join House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and other leaders of the House of Representatives to stand up against privatization of social security
Social Security Rally
Cannon Terrace, Capitol Hill
(in front of the Cannon Building at the intersection of Independence
and New Jersey)
Thursday, February 3, 2005
9:00 am
(Please arrive NO LATER than 8:45 a.m. for setup)
This will be the morning after the State of the Union so it is essential that we have many people present to show Democratic unity against privatization.
Posted by not sam at February 2, 2005 8:39 PMBefore you go send a message to your Congressman at http://www.dudewheresmyretirement.com
Posted by: Mike Panetta at February 2, 2005 10:36 PMThat's O.K. tho..it's mobilizing Baby Boomers and
the AARP and the Dems(hearing from their base)
against these freaks..BRING IT ON--
Posted by: kyball at February 4, 2005 4:11 PM
Join House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and other leaders of the House of Representatives to stand up against privatization of social security
Social Security Rally
Cannon Terrace, Capitol Hill
(in front of the Cannon Building at the intersection of Independence
and New Jersey)
Thursday, February 3, 2005
9:00 am
(Please arrive NO LATER than 8:45 a.m. for setup)
This will be the morning after the State of the Union so it is essential that we have many people present to show Democratic unity against privatization.
Posted by not sam at February 2, 2005 8:39 PMBefore you go send a message to your Congressman at http://www.dudewheresmyretirement.com
Posted by: Mike Panetta at February 2, 2005 10:36 PMThat's O.K. tho..it's mobilizing Baby Boomers and
the AARP and the Dems(hearing from their base)
against these freaks..BRING IT ON--
Posted by: kyball at February 4, 2005 4:11 PM
Posted by: texas holdem at February 18, 2005 7:51 AM
Posted by: Keith Best at February 20, 2005 2:56 PM
Posted by: mike at February 21, 2005 9:17 PM
Join House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and other leaders of the House of Representatives to stand up against privatization of social security
Social Security Rally
Cannon Terrace, Capitol Hill
(in front of the Cannon Building at the intersection of Independence
and New Jersey)
Thursday, February 3, 2005
9:00 am
(Please arrive NO LATER than 8:45 a.m. for setup)
This will be the morning after the State of the Union so it is essential that we have many people present to show Democratic unity against privatization.
Posted by not sam at February 2, 2005 8:39 PMBefore you go send a message to your Congressman at http://www.dudewheresmyretirement.com
Posted by: Mike Panetta at February 2, 2005 10:36 PMThat's O.K. tho..it's mobilizing Baby Boomers and
the AARP and the Dems(hearing from their base)
against these freaks..BRING IT ON--
Posted by: kyball at February 4, 2005 4:11 PM
Posted by: texas holdem at February 18, 2005 7:51 AM
Posted by: Keith Best at February 20, 2005 2:56 PM
Posted by: mike at February 21, 2005 9:17 PM
How much will privitization cost you? Find out here.
Posted by not sam at February 17, 2005 4:36 PMWalmart is always hiring old people. "would you like a cart, sonny?"
Posted by: Madmaxi at February 17, 2005 10:02 PMAnd then the enormity of the Social Security issue hit me. If the lunatics in Washington are able to undermine, privatize, steal, destabilize the Social Security system, Medicare, Medicaid, who will take care of the mentally and physically handicapped and disabled and those born with crippling congenital deformities?
What kind of country would this be if the least amongst us, those
who concievably were born into a life of absolute suffering remained
uncared for, unable to obtain health care or a means to survive?
What would this nation look like with an army of disabled of all
ages, races, religions and ethnicities littering it's streets from
coast to coast?
That Bastard in the Whitehouse does not posses the creative capacity
to discuss the concept of Social Security. He is bereft of humanity.
I caught some of your program covering for Randy Rhodes and parts of your other broadcasts this week - You were on fire. You and Janeane are doing great radio.
Keep up the good work.
A Listner
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Posted by: Stephen Duncan at February 18, 2005 8:06 PM
take back the country. It's part of a cooperative effort of blogs
to start Howard Dean's tenure off with some momentum. So give if you
can.
Total as of this posting:
$106781.83.
I think that Dean's ascension is the best event that has occured for Democrats since Kennedy's presidency. I do not think that he will resurrect the Democratic party, but I will contribute some money to him for auld lang syne.
Posted by: Michael the Anti-Colonizer at February 15, 2005 4:11 PMI encourage everyone to do their own research into his dubious credentials, and you can begin with the thumbnail sketch found here:
http://www.counterpunch.org/cp02152005.html
Don't allow yourselves to be fooled by Dean's blustering style. Look beyond the smart power tie and peer into the dark corners of his substance.
Posted by: Dammit at February 15, 2005 8:32 PMPosted by: sr at February 15, 2005 8:42 PM
Posted by: mike at February 21, 2005 9:27 PM
Then write on it (or print a copy of the picuture out from the web and write on it) "From the Citizens of Honduras." Then send it to Mr. Negroponte, c/o The White House, 1600 Pennylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C., 20500
You might also want to send a copy to your Senators along with the message: Don't confirm Negroponte.
Thanks for taking today's action!
This comes courtesy of First Draft (via Atrios).
Read more about Negroponte here (thanks to Star Vox from the blog).
Posted by not sam at February 22, 2005 4:18 PM
http://cryptome.org/negro-eyeball.htm
Media Omissions on Negroponte's Record
To read the media advisory, go to:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2452
Promoting the 'Ambassador of Torture': Bush Nominates Negroponte for Intel Czar
As President Bush nominates Ambassador John Negroponte, current U.S. ambassador to Iraq, as the first Director of National Intelligence, we look back at Negroponte's bloody history in Central America in the 1980s.
More with Amy Goodman:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/18/157206&mode=thread&tid=25
The Action Alerts that I post on Tuesdays and Fridays at First-Draft are sent to me by well-known Eschaton commenter Hecate. From now on I will give her credit in the Alert itself. Please keep posting them - it all helps.
Posted by: Tena at March 8, 2005 1:21 PMBut in a good way. From Americablog:
"ACTION ALERT: Tell your US Senators to sign the Durbin letter about Gannon."
By Jeff Adams
NorthEastTn.Info
I received a Social Security Statement today and I was very upset to see that the bush administrations decided to use tax payers money to try and promote the privatization of Social Security. The letter is dated January 20, 2005 so you can tell that this was all coordinated with the state of the union to kick off a massive deceptive campaigned to deceive the average American citizen.
Here my take on what the Bush Administration is trying to do:
For the last 20 years real wages for the middle class have been on the decline in the United States, this is what I call the stripping of wealth from the middle class. This large group of people (Rich) are made up of Democrats and Republican and they don't look at time like me and you do, I.e. we look at time as days, months and years when we plan, they look at time as 10, 20, 50 years down the road and they realizes that over the next 2 decades that America will have less money to invest and that wall street will go into a decline because of the continued decline of the wages and living standards in the United States. What the Bush Administrations is doing is creating a funding stream for wall street by realigning the Taxes from Social Security and allowing them to go though Wall Street so the rich can add fee's to them and make up for loss of revenue that will happen over the next 2 or 3 decades.
Anyway here is what the Social Security Administrations Letter Said. please check and see if you got this letter and lets spread the word.
Work to build a Secure Future...
Social Security is the largest source of income for most elderly
Americans today. It is very important to remember that social
security was never intended to be your only source of income when
you retire.Social Security can't do it all. You also will need other
savings, investments, pensions or retirement accounts to make sure
you have enough money to live comfortably when you retire.
( They should tell that to the Corporation who dumped 88,000 pension in the last 4 or 5 years. )
About Social Security's Future...
Social Security is a compact between generations. For more than 60
years, America has kept the promise of security for it's workers and
their families. But now, the Social Security system is facing a
serious future financial problems, and action is needed soon to make
sure that the system is sound when today's younger workers are ready
for retirement. Today there are almost 36 million Americans age 65
or older. Their Social Security retirement benefits are funded by
today's worker and their employers who jointly pay Social Security
taxes - Just as the money that was paid into Social Security was
used to pay benefits to those who retired before them. Unless action
is taken soon to strengthen Social Security, in just 14 years we
will began paying more in benefits than we collect in taxes.Without
Changes, by 2042 the Social Security trust Fund will be exhausted.
By Than, the number of Americans 65 or older is expected to have
doubled. there wont be enough Younger people working to pay all of
the benefits owed to those who are retiring. At that point, there
will be enough money to pay only about 73 cents for each dollar of
scheduled benefits.We will need to resolve there's issues soon to
make sure Social Security continues to provide a foundations of
protections for future generations as it has done in the past.
Welcome to the world of economic Slavery.
Drop by my Blog and post your comments on this.
Jeff Adams
NorthEastTn.Info
NorthEastTn.Info.Blog
Posted by: Jeff Adams at February 23, 2005 7:14 PMAlso, you guys should get a clip of Ron Silver late in the third season of West Wing saying, "You got played, Sam..." It's very "Please... don't... hurt... me..."
Posted by: Ryan at February 24, 2005 3:08 AMDear Diane--
As you know (or should know), Sen.Richard Durbin is circulating a
petition in the Senate,to be presented to Pres.Bush.It concerns the
infiltration of the W.H.Press Corps by an obvious W.House
Propogandist,J.D.Guckert(Jeff Gannon).The
man had no formal journalistic training and had
been writing for ONE WEEK,when he was issued press-passes,under a
phony name. He has ties to Republican operatives.
There is NO WAY in,as Mr.Bush puts it,"a post-9/11 world",that a fake writer with an assumed name, could obtain security clearance and subsequent proximity to the President,w/o the Administration knowing it.
This is an assault upon Journalistic Integrity
and upon the American Public's right to an
open,unfettered,unmanipulated Press.
If you agree with this,you will sign Sen.Durbin's
letter.If not,you will have lost the respect of myself and countless
others.
J.K. / OAKLAND
Posted by: J.K./OAKLAND at February 24, 2005 7:59 AMWrite and ask why the gay male prostitute ring inside the White House is not being investigated. I think it is slightly more important than Spongebob's square pants.
*** warning, writers will have to click the submit button several times -- FOTF scans messages and presents a list of "faqs" based on key words in the message, then asks if the writer really wants to submit the question.
Sample message (please use your own words):
Dear Guardians of our Morals,
I am very concerned that Jeff Gannon/Jim Guckert -- a gay male prostitute and pornography webmaster -- was able to get hundreds of White House press passes while using a fake name.
I would like Focus on the Family to investigate how this happened, if there are other gay male or female prostitutes in the White House, and if steps have been taken to prevent it from happening again.
I would also like to know if President Bush knew that Gannon/Guckert was gay and, if so, why he and Scott McClellan consistently called on Gannon/Guckert to answer questions. Could those be coded messages to the homosexual community?
God save us,
A concerned lamb
Posted by: DubyasNightmare at March 2, 2005 12:22 PM
From Think Progress.
"Influential conservative strategist Frank Luntz has produced a 160-page playbook to advance the right-wing agenda. Think Progress cuts through the spin and gives you the tools you need to fight back. Check here for updates throughout the week.
Luntz's playbook is full of things people should never say if they don't want to undermine the right-wing agenda. Here's how you can be Frank Luntz's worst nightmare."
Posted by not sam at February 24, 2005 11:35 AMgreat article giving an excellent set of areas where the neocons are weak.
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at February 24, 2005 2:04 PMEveryone here will read and study them carefully..
They will pause on moment..
Then scream "Bush is a Nazi!"
Case Closed!
Posted by: s at February 24, 2005 3:08 PM
Posted by: s at February 24, 2005 03:08 PM
--===========================================---
Ha ha ha ha...
See what I mean???
Case Closed!
Posted by: s at February 24, 2005 11:05 PM
Also,I happen to enjoy the presence of the mildly miscreant War
Dog on the Blog.He's a good
example of the inane ineptitude defecated upon Society by Rt. Wing
dolts. I don't understand,tho,why Real People even attempt to argue
with an aging adolescent...
Frank
Luntz:
Pollster, Republican Political Consultant, and president and CEO of
Luntz Research Companies.
His latest release is a 160 page briefing book on how the Republicans should be framing the arguments to selectively deceive the American people and appeal in turn to our best and worst qualities.
http://watchingthewatchers.org/index.php?p=364
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. NEVER SAY Government - INSTEAD SAY: Washington
2. NEVER SAY Privatization/Private Accounts - INSTEAD SAY: Personalization/Personal Accounts
3. NEVER SAY Tax Reform - INSTEAD SAY: Tax Simplification
4. NEVER SAY Inheritance/Estate Tax - INSTEAD SAY: The Death Tax
5. NEVER SAY A Global Economy/Globalization/Capitalism - INSTEAD SAY: Free Market Economy
6. NEVER SAY Outsourcing - INSTEAD SAY: Taxation, Regulation, Litigation Innovation, Education
7. NEVER SAY Undocumented Workers - INSTEAD SAY: Illegal Aliens
8. NEVER SAY Foreign Trade - INSTEAD SAY: International Trade
9. NEVER SAY Drilling for oil - INSTEAD SAY: Exploring for energy
10. NEVER SAY Tort Reform - INSTEAD SAY: Lawsuit Abuse Reform
11. NEVER SAY Trial Lawyer - INSTEAD SAY: Personal Injury Lawyer
12. NEVER SAY Corporate Transparency - INSTEAD SAY: Corporate Accountability
13. NEVER SAY School Choice - INSTEAD SAY: Parental Choice/Equal Opportunity in Education
14. NEVER SAY Health care �Choice� - INSTEAD SAY: �The Right to Choose�
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
see the actual document here... he goes into detail about each one...
Posted by: 13ben at February 27, 2005 11:30 AMNo, that would be your hero and popular junkie Rush Limbaugh who calls people nazis.
We prefer the historically correct and accurate term "fascist."
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html
Posted by: Cat Chew at March 1, 2005 2:14 AMThe diarist ttagaris at Mydd has the idea to make the "hey hey, ho ho" video into an ad. We think it's a great idea. Details here.
Posted by not sam at February 25, 2005 10:09 AMElection Rigging 101:
The First National Teach-in,
in Honor of the 40th Anniversary of the
Voting Rights Act of 1965
Saturday, February 26th, 10:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
First Congregational Church, 2501 Harrison St., Oakland CA
Please come early, car pool, or take public transit due to
limited parking.
Bring your lunch; no food will be provided during the brief 45
minute intermission.
Directions & Parking
Program Details
Download Flyer (PDF File)
Please RSVP to Don Goldmacher
Program Overview
I. The Arc Of Justice: We've Been Here Before
Â
DVD excerpt: Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr., "Martyrs of the Civil Rights Movement"
Lynn Landes, journalist, "How America Used to Vote"
John Gideon, VotersUnite!, "Analysis of HAVA Misinformation in the Press"
II. Voter Suppression
Â
DVD excerpt: "Columbus Ohio Election Day Footage", by Linda Byrket, http://www.votecobb.org/video/#video5
Bob Fitrakis, Free Press (Columbus, Ohio), "The Taking of Ohio Prior
to Nov. 2"
Emily Levy, Juice for Justice, "Precinct Analysis in Ohio"
Warren Stewart, National Ballot Integrity Project, "Recounting New Mexico"
5 Minute Stretch
III. What Happened In 2004: Exit Polls - Were They Right?
Â
DVD excerpt: Susan Truitt, Ohio attorney
Jonathan Simon, Alliance for Democacy, "Analysis of Exit Polls"
Allyson Washburn, US Countvotes.org, "The Reluctant Republican Responder"
Larry Bensky, KPFA, "The Disappearing Media"
IV. The Age of the Machines
Â
Jim March, Blackboxvoting.org, "How to Hack a Diebold Vote Tabulator"
Wayne Madsen, journalist, "The Privatization of the Vote"
Lunch (45 Minutes)
V. Litigation
Â
Paul Lehto, Washington attorney, "Verifying Democracy 101: Sue First, Ask Questions Later"
Bob Fitrakis, Free Press, "History of Moss v. Bush, the Sanctions, Future Legal Actions"
VI. Legislation
Â
Butch Wing, political director, Rainbow PUSH, "Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s Constitutional Amendment Guaranteeing the Right to Vote"
Bob Kibrick, Verifiedvoting.org, "Pending Federal Legislation for Electoral Reform"
Sharon Cornu, Alameda County Central Labor Council, "Organized Labor and Election Reform"
Medea Benjamin, Code Pink, "A Voters' Bill of Rights"
VII. Action
Â
Walter Riley, community activist, "Organize County by County, Precinct by Precinct"
Lynn Landes, journalist, "A Paper Ballot is the Only Solution"
Alan Dechert, Open Voting Consortium, "Open Source Code Machines"
Kathy Dopp and Allyson Washburn, UScountvotes.org, "Citizen Precinct Analysis"
Judy Bertelsen, Wellstone Voting Rights Task Force, "Keep Kevin
Shelley's Reforms"
Megan Matson, Founder, the MMOB, "Getting Past 'Get Over It: How
to Communicate the Need for
Election Reform"
Open Microphone
Logistics
Map
Location: 2501 Harrison at 27th Street; about 2 blocks from Lake
Merritt near Fairyland. The program will be in the main sanctuary of
the church. Enter through the main doors facing the intersection of
27th and Harrison. (Disabled enter through the rear parking lot).
Other groups will be using other parts of the church.
Parking: Nearby parking is limited. Towards downtown and towards the
Lake, it is mainly two hour meters. Away from downtown and the Lake,
there is unlimited time parking, but not a whole lot of it.
AC Transit: The number 11, 12, 51, 59 and N buses pass within a few
blocks.
BART: Get off at the 19th street station, go up Broadway to 24th,
right on 24th to Harrison, left on Harrison and you are there. It is
about 0.6 miles.
Food: The closest restaurants are three to four blocks away. Bring
your lunch. Food and drink are not allowed in the sanctuary.
Fortunately, the weather forecast is for partly cloudy next weekend
and we will be able to eat on the lawn.
Â
Â
Â
Â
This Teach-In has been organized by the Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club, http://democraticrenewal.us and the MMOB (Mainstreet Moms Operation Blue), http://www.themmob.com.
Organizing a pro-democracy movement at the grassroots involving local Democratic clubs, Assembly District committees, the MMOB, the Green Party, Code Pink, and every group that is concerned about every citizen voting and every vote being counted.
[Top] [Program Details] [RSVP/More Info]
Â
Â
Just how badly does Joe Lieberman want to be the next Zell Miller and stab the party that gave him a Vice Presidential nomination in the back? We'll find out. Social Security is the defining issue of the day. Whichever party wins this fight is going to be in the driver's seat for the forseeable future. And it's also THE core issue of what being a Democrat means. If you're not economically progressive, you're not a Democrat. All signs point to Joe Lieberman as the dealmaker. This is from the good folks at First Draft:
"Today's action is simple. Contact Senator Joe Lieberman and tell him that if he helps Bush out of the political mess that Bush has created for himself on Social Security, you'll contribute to Joe's primary opposition. You can contact Lieberman at (202) 224-4041."
Posted by not sam at March 1, 2005 5:25 PMFive Demo. senators voted for torture-czar
Gonzales. The most notable were Lieberman and
Nelson of Florida.That was a litmus test for
any Leftist who promotes a stand for civil
rights.True Colors?
The Social Security "issue" is an over-reach
by Right-Wing Weasals.They've already started
to alienate the largest voting-block in the
U.S. (the AARP), who also are beginning to
realize that they were hoodwinked by that massive
give-away to pharmaceutical and ins. cos.--
the Medicare Bill.
Social Security "Reform" is a big fat juicy
softball pitch down the middle of the plate for
the Left. It's a proven success that realizes
the Leftist ideal of a society where the elderly,
and the disabled are cared for.Any "Democrat"
who wants to take the bat out of our hands on
this one needs to be identified and kicked off
the team.--Would you rather deal with someone
who tells you up-front that they oppose you,
or someone who calls you friend,then stabs
you in the back??
Posted by: FalafelKerfuffleX at March 4, 2005 9:47 PM
ACT is back:
On Saturday, March 5, we'll be leading volunteers from New York City to Staten Island, Long Island, and Westchester to knock on doors and to encourage voters to pressure their GOP Representatives to oppose Bush's privatization plans. The trip to each target area will be easy and inexpensive--so we strongly encourage you to come. And if you live in or near those areas already, it'll be even easier!
ACT NY has committed to providing at least 20 volunteers in each of these target areas as part of the In This Together Campaign, a coalition of progressive groups recently formed to address this critical issue. Many of you have told us how anxious you are to get back out in the field--so please RSVP now!
Staten Island: meet at the S.I. Ferry Terminal in Downtown Manhattan or in S.I.
Long Island: meet outside Penn Station or in Massapequa.
Westchester: meet at the Grand Central Info Booth/Clock or in Peekskill.
Posted by not sam at March 2, 2005 12:33 PMAnd the Disabled--they"re using YOUR
money to sit
at home and get fat!They're having steak and
lobster---for BREAKFAST!Delivered,because they're
too lazy to drive--have you ever seen a LEGAL vehicle in a Disabled
Parking Spot??uh-huh,let 'em
eat rice and beans and Top-Ramen!
DON''T waste your time and tax-dollars on these
scoundrels--our Great and Glorious Leader and CEO,
--G.W.Bush wants to use your money wisely...to
liberate Syria ! and Venezuela!maybe even Cuba!!
So DON'T GO on Saturday,stay at home,watch
cartoons,vegetate.Unlike the intolerant Janeane
Garafalo,we like vegetables--especially obedient
ones!!
"Hagel's plan
In a conference call with Nebraska reporters Thursday, Sen. Chuck
Hagel (R-Neb.) announced his intention to unveil a Social Security
reform bill in Nebraska Monday. Hagel has kept a lid on the details,
but sources say that Hagel plans to raise the retirement age to 68
and to allow taxpayers less than 45 years old to divert 4 percent of
their payroll tax to personal savings accounts. Hagel also is
planning to peg the age at which certain future beneficiaries may
begin collecting benefits to life expectancy, a complicated formula.
Hagel is scheduled to appear on CBS's 'Face the Nation,' this
Sunday, sources say, and is expected to discuss his plan. Unveiling
a Social Security reform package is risky for a rumored White
House-hopeful such as Hagel. It will be interesting to see if other
presidential aspirants in the Senate gamble by wading into Social
Security, known as the 'third rail' of American politics.
Hastert's timetable
While Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) was in no apparent
hurry to pass a Social Security overhaul earlier this week, his
counterpart at the other end of the Rotunda appears to be in more of
a hurry. Asked about his own timeline for passing reform
legislation, House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) told reporters
Thursday, 'I think we need to do it as quick as possible.'
Hastert has also declined to give an exact timeline for passage of a
Social Security reform bill, which is no surprise considering
leadership and the White House have yet to settle on a bill. But
most GOP insiders are skeptical that congressional Republicans would
vote on the measure in an election year, especially considering
their early preparations for 2006. The National Republican
Congressional Committee holds its first fundraising dinner March 15.
Grassley's on board
It looked Wednesday, at least to some Iowa reporters, that President
Bush had lost a key ally in his push to privatize Social Security
accounts: Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), who as chairman of the
Finance Committee will play a large role in the debate. The Des
Moines Register reported March 2 that Grassley told Iowa reporters
in a conference call that day that Congress should focus first on
solvency rather than the creation of personal investment accounts,
which the president favors. However, in a clarification released by
his office Thursday, Grassley made no mention of the conference call
and said, 'I support personal accounts.� Grassley set himself
squarely on the president�s side: �Democrat leaders are tearing
down personal accounts rather than taking responsibility for the
future of Social Security.'
Target Byrd
Senate Republicans are signaling that they won�t give the dean of
the Senate, Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.), a free ride if he decides to
seek a ninth term in 2006, as he is expected to do. The National
Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) sent an email this week
slamming Byrd for delivering a pointed speech about the so-called
'nuclear' option to end the Democratic filibuster of judicial
nominees. The release, titled �Robert Byrd flies off the deep
end,� included quotations from Byrd comparing the use of the
nuclear option to Adolph Hitler�s use of constitutional means to
put forward his policies. The email includes a photograph of Byrd
delivering his speech on the Senate floor with a sweeping hand
gesture, and notes that Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) congratulated
Byrd after his remarks. Kennedy issued a recent fundraising appeal
based on the threat of GOP use of the nuclear option, which
Republicans call the �constitutional option.� Asked about the
NRSC statement, Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told The Hill,
'They�re good at attacking people. They�ve attacked me since I
took the job. They�ve attacked everything about me. It�s part of
their game.'"
Posted by: FalafelKerfuffleX at March 4, 2005 9:46 PM
Posted by: MattTaibbi RestInPieces at March 4, 2005 9:52 PM
Chestnuts,Walnuts, or
just lonely 'ol
Right Wing-Nuts lookin desperately for
a screw??
Posted by: Aunti Suzi at March 7, 2005 7:00 PM
Posted by: Sanderson Witcombe at March 7, 2005 9:42 PM
So proclaimed by Atrios:
"Call Senator Santorum's office and ask him why he thinks people who earn tips should work for free. You could also ask if, say, this provision applies to people in the dog grooming industry."
For all the details, go here.
Posted by not sam at March 7, 2005 2:09 PMWhat does a medium Enhance?
What does a medium Retrieve?
What does a medium Restore?
What does a medium Obsolesce?
So, if you're not getting paid, that means you shouldn't need to be hired. And it means you can yell at your boss and come and leave as you please. What could he do? Fire you?
If I need an extra $50, I should just go to the Locke-Ober, push
away the regular waiter, and wait on a table with fat-cats, pocket
the $50 in tips and be on my way.
More recently it was learned that HHS
similarly contracted a media firm to create
“pseudo news” to hype the evils of marijuana. This was followed in
rapid succession by news of Armstrong Williams being paid $240k+ to
hype “No Child Left Behind” as actual news stories; Marie
Gallagher $25k to present “news” articles promoting Bush’s
initiative to “strengthen marriage;” and Mike McManus at least
$4000 to promote the same marriage legislation.
The President has consistently lauded the need for transparency in a free democracy. However, the record seems to portray a deliberate pattern to control, manipulate, distort, obscure, and even lie about critical information necessary for an informed electorate, as well as for their elected representatives to enact and control legislation and perform essential oversight.
The administration has also consistently attempted to discourage or delay requests for information sought under FOIA. They have systematically attempted to classify information not previously considered classified, and even classified reports and data previously released, in an apparent attempt to inhibit Congressional functions of oversight and legislation. Typically this is done under the guise of national security stemming from the War on Terror. More often it appears to reflect the government’s attempt to bury facts which will not support its policies or pronouncements. The testimony of Don North, first director of the Iraqi broadcasting system under the Coalition Provisional Authority, echoes again how the government – through Paul Bremer – systematically managed, censored, and controlled the flow of information in a presumably fledging democracy.
Questioned about the government’s role in the Armstrong Williams, et al payola prank, the President responded: “There needs to be a nice, independent relationship between the White House and the press." Shortly thereafter a reporter asked: “"How are you going to work - you said you're going to reach out to these people - how are you going to work with people who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?"
Now it is learned that reporter, using the name of Jeff Gannon, was granted credentials and daily pass to the White House Press Room for two years, despite the fact he had no known education, training, or experience in journalism. In fact, at the time of his first access to the White House, he and his “news organization” had only existed for 96 hours! Incredibly, he obtained White House clearance after being denied acceptance by both the House and Senate.
This reporter’s real name is James Guckert, representing Talon News, a wholly owned subsidiary of Texas Republicans, which was only created as a website @ March 2003 just hours before Gannon/Guckert obtained entrance to the White House Briefing Room as a journalist. His subsequent articles – posted primarily at Talon News – consisted of reprinting White House talking points. His most noted article asserted during the recent campaign that “…John Kerry…might some day be known as the first gay president.’
Ironically, it appears just prior to his spontaneous eruption as
a journalist, Gannon
was actively engaged as a male escort/gay prostitute with pictures
permeating the Internet. He actively advertised to solicit clients.
Some five or more of his gay oriented websites remained on the
Internet in an inactive status until the day he went into hiding.
Certainly any person is entitled to their own private lifestyle, but
one can not help but wonder why this Administration, so publicly
anti-gay, would grant him access to the Presidential Press Secretary
and even the President! It has been suggested the White House used
the daily pass process in order to avoid having Gannon/Guckert
vetted by the FBI. This again suggests a deliberate attempt to
propagandize news.
"I can't speak to the White House vetting process," Guckert/Gannon
told CNN in the only answer he gave that even bordered on being
substantive. "I suppose that they don't - they aren't interested in
reporters' sexual history either." This would come as a surprise to
the ABC producer/reporter in Iraq who was outed by the infamous Matt
Drudge (because, as Drudge told The Washington Post, "Someone in the
White House communications shop tipped me to it") as being not only
gay, but Canadian.”
Perhaps the most troubling facet of this story lies in the Gannon association with the Valerie Plame scandal. His statements of what he knew and when he knew it appear to be contradictory. So too are his statements as to whether or not he had access to the original classified document naming Valerie Plame as spouse of Wilson. Moreover, it now appears that even the supposed CIA secret memo may have been a false document.
Like the Abu Ghraib – prisoner detainee – scandal, news continues to ooze out slowly but steadily. On 18 February it was reported that Gannon first appeared at a White House press briefing as early as January 03 – months before Talon News was even formed. A major network news reporter has stated Gannon informed him of the US plan to attack Iraq four hours before the President announced the initiative! Again, this was before Talon was even formed. In a recent interview, Former Press Secretary Ari Fleischer stated he had concerns calling on Gannon because he worked for GOPUSA. GOPUSA later established Talon News. Mr Gannon also attended White House Christmas parties for the past two years while claiming he had no association with the White House.
Gannon clearly was involved in GOP politics. CBS reported 20 February that in 2003 he wrote a series of articles claiming the editor of South Dakota’s leading newspaper was a paid member of Senator Daschle’s campaign. These articles spread through right wing blogs, generating email and articles to critically discredit both the paper and the Senator! Gannon continued to use an SD blog site originally owned by a Rove associate as a “dumping ground for opposition research” against Daschle throughout the election cycle. He was also talking about the Dan Rather “forged documents” before they became public knowledge! A more cynical observer might conclude that a blue collar worker / male prostitute from Maryland with no journalistic or political background had been brought on board as a conduit of political propaganda!
This is not an issue about partisan politics, and certainly not an issue – per se – about individual sexual proclivity. It is a matter of the abuse of power attempting to unduly influence or control the media! As Bruce Bartlett, former Reagan and Bush Sr official pointed out, for Gannon to have served in that position two years the White House had to be actively involved in hiding his true identity.
With a few notable exceptions, there appears to be precious little attention or concern expressed within the halls of Congress or the meeting rooms of media! Democracy can not endure without the Free flow of information. Legislators can not responsibly legislate without access to all the pertinent facts. Time and again this administration has withheld information critical for decisions required from Congress. The full cost of the recent Medicare prescription program is but one recent example. The President has consistently omitted the costs of the wars in order to distort budget figures and deficits, as well as to include pet defense projects into later “emergency” authorizations. The Pentagon, CIA, EPA, and Justice have also consistently withheld information critical for proper oversight and budget considerations and engaged in propaganda both at home and abroad. Vital information was also withheld and delayed from the 911 Commission which might well have effected the election.
I believe Congress should demand a Special Prosecutor be named to
investigate what if any Administration involvement there was in the
previously discussed instances of payola and “pseudo news,” as
well as the Jeff Gannon/ James Guckert incident. Specifically:
1 - Who initially approached each of the above-named persons?
2 – Who authorized it? Is there a connection to the White House?
3 – Who provided clearance to Gannon/Guckert to enter White House?
4 – How was he made known to White House? To GOPNEWS?
5 – Has the Administration directly interfered in blocking
legitimate stories or alternate voices which questioned
Administration assertions?
6 - Has the Administration used undue pressure on news outlets to
push stories to mislead or misrepresent various proposals –
including 911
the causes and management of the Iraq War? Was Agent Orange used.
7 – How and why were Federal Agency reports traditionally sent to
Congress withheld or even discontinued?
The President went to great lengths to tell Russian journalists of our transparent society and how comfortable he is with a free press and open society that makes him “accountable.” Sadly, he has a four year history that suggests the opposite. Indeed, his obsession to control information and escape accountability was made transparently conspicuous to the world when his German “Town Hall” meeting had to be cancelled because Germans had the Integrity not to participate in a screened/staged event.
PLEASE – Demand Accountability Now!
---------------
HI All
i really had no thought beyond content when i typed the last three
words. As i looked, i thought - crappola: that's my name. After
reflecting, it srruck me as a catchy acronym for a campaign to
fnally nail ths ship of fools; the
DAN Campaign - DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY NOW
Posted by: ProProleteriat at March 9, 2005 7:20 AM
Posted by: ProProleteriat at March 9, 2005 7:47 AM
Posted by: Which came first, the website or the Congressman? at March 10, 2005 1:13 AM
The funny thing is, some of the morally bankrupt sell-outs on this list actually think they might one day be given the Democratic nomination. Today's action: go here, and then contact these "Democratic" Senators, and tell them that you will never forget the day they chose the predatory Banking Lobby over the American Family.
Posted by not sam at March 9, 2005 06:02 PMI confess
that I thought Biden was Presidential
material last year...oh well.Lieberman,Nelson(Fl)
and Salazar have voted with repubs on almost every
major issue and appt.,so far. They need to take off the masks...
Posted by: Eugene Newman at March 10, 2005 06:58 PM
Posted by: cb at March 11, 2005 12:22 AM
Thank you for your e-mail message. I appreciate having
the benefit of
your views.
This response is an acknowledgement that we received your message
and
will make note of your comments. For more information about the work
I do as a Senator for Delaware,
please visit my web site at
http://biden.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
United States Senator
Posted by: rj at March 14, 2005 01:32 PM
monday (Solar 08)
12.19.12.2.1
12 Imix
4 Cumku
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WHITE SOLAR DOG
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PULSE in order to LOVE,
REALIZING LOYALTY.
seal the PROCESS of HEART
with the SOLAR tone of INTENTION.
guided by the power of DEATH.....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
9 oc ~~ white solar dog ~~ kin 230/260 ~ north
day 9/13 of white wind power of spirit wavespell 18/20 of 260 day tzolkin
day 2/4 of spectral process harmonic ~ 58/65 ~ "Formulate Free-Will of Liberation"
day 08/28 of solar power of intention moon 9/13 of 365 day solar year
year of the blue crystal storm ~ 8/16 of Tel-ek-ton-on Cycle
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
give thanks...heartlove...in lak'ech...
Ah Yum, Hunab Ku, Evam Maya E Ma Ho!
Ah Yum, Hunab Ku, Evam Maya E Ma Ho!
Ah Yum, Hunab Ku, Evam Maya E Ma Ho!
N�o esque�a-so amor..
Posted by: 13ben at March 15, 2005 02:21 AMPosted by: rj at March 16, 2005 06:44 PM
Please pass this around. California is around the corner:
PRESS! PRESS! PRESS! PRESS! PRESS! PRESS! PRESS!
April 7, 2005
CONTACT INFO:
HANK RAMEY,
Major Organizer
Recall Arnold Movement
Owner, Grassroots-CA-OH-FL
21845 Grand Terrace Rd., #23
Grand Terrace, CA., 92313
TEL.: (909) 872-1826
bighank98@yahoo.com
doeramey@sbcglobal.net
recallarnold@sbcglobal.net
http://www.angelfire.com/biz/hankramey/page4.htm
recallarnold.blogspot.com
Dot, Moderator
Grassroots-CA-OH-FL
wwwdothello@yahoo.com
GRAND TERRACE, Calif.-California liberal progressive activists are
announcing an initiative drive to put the California Honest Voting
Act of 2005 Initiative on the Ballot. They will request California
Attorney General Bill Lockyer’s Office for a “Title and Summary” for
their Initiative.
Hank Ramey, whose prior foray in any initiative was a failed
Initiative in 1990 in Bell Gardens, regarding an Amendment to the
General Plan is planning with a message board and others into
circulating the Honest Voting Act for more likely the June 2006
Ballot.
“We don’t think that we would get on this November’s Ballot”,
Ramey said, “even if any of Arnold’s ((Schwarzenegger) Initiatives
did qualify for the November Ballot. We are OPPOSED to all of
Arnold’s Initiatives, because he favors hospitals, businesses,
far-right educational activists. We believe at Grassroots-CA-OH-FL
(standing for Grassroots-California-Ohio-Florida) that the Democrats
and Greens should recall Arnold, and send a message to the minority
Republican Party that we want progressive changes in California
Government, and we will not have a Governor who curries with the
REAL special interests. Hell, we didn’t like Gov. Gray Davis for
being the Dialing for Dollars Governor!”
The Honest Voting Act of 2005 would ban any new uses of voting
machines, but would require Counties with existing machines to
require a paper trial on the existing machines. Those Counties would
also require poll workers to randomly count at least 10% of the
ballots at least four times during election day.
Most of the reforms were hashed out in the Grassroots-CA-OH-FL Yahoogroup, as well as in the CASE_OH Yahoogroup. “We are trying to avoid the problems Ohio and Florida had in 2000 and 2004,” Ramey said, “If California adopts this Initiative, other States would follow. We are also trying to Initiative campaigns started with similar provisions in Ohio and Florida.”
In Ohio, an initial petition with 100 signatures is needed before
Grassroots-CA-OH-FL could start with similar initiative in Ohio. In
Florida, they need proponents, which is hard to come by.
“Given the urge by Republicans to force us to have electronic voting
by fiat,” Ramey said, “we would need to educate voters to get voting
reform initiatives in all States where the initiative process is
available. Where it’s not available, we will try to get States like
Connecticut, Illinois, Hawaii, and Oklahoma to vote for a
Constitutional Convention, even though Oklahoma has an initiative
process.”
As to Florida, “in light of the Terri Schiavo case,” Ramey explained, “the attempted gutting of the Minimum Wage Initiative, and the wholesale gutting of the Initiative Process, Florida also needs a Constitutional Convention yesterday.”
The supporters of the Honest Voting Act of 2005 would need to
request the “Title and Summary”, which goes on top of each of their
Petitions. Ramey and his Group would need over 600,000 signatures to
get it on the June 2006 Ballot. After the group receives the “Title
and Summary” in a couple of months, Ramey and the group would have
up to five months to get all the necessary signatures.
ADDENDUM
THE HONEST VOTING ACT OF 2005.
First-Section 4 of Article II of the Constitution of California is amended as follows:
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE II, SECTION 4
SEC. 4. (a) This Section shall be named “The Honest Voting Act of 2005”.
(b) Neither the State of California nor any County shall be allowed to purchase, operate, and authorize the use of any voting in any Federal, State, County, City, or other election by electronic means, but the Legislature shall authorize the use of paper ballots, as of the effective date the amendment of this Section is adopted by the voters. The People find and declare that all computerized touchscreen voting machines can break down, they are very expensive, and they are not easily distributed in an equal manner to all voters. This does not affect Counties that have already purchased, operate, and authorize any voting by electronic machines, but use of those machines shall be subject to subdivisions (c) through (e).
(c) In Counties that already purchased, operate, and authorize any voting by electronic machines, each vote from each of those machines shall contain a receipt of each vote made by the voter.
(d) On election day, there shall be a Precinct Board containing five Members who are in the Registrar of Voter Service defined in Subdivision (i). At least four times a day, a different Member shall count and tally at least 10 percent of the receipts from the electronic machines, but shall not disclose the results of each tally until the receipts and tallies are turned over to the Office of the Registrar of Voters.
(e) The software source code of each electronic machine shall be a public record, and shall not be exempted under Government Code Section 6254 or any other law or statute.
(f) The Legislature shall prohibit improper practices that affect elections and shall provide for the disqualification of electors while mentally incompetent or imprisoned.
(g) All persons shall be allowed to register or re-register to vote up to election day.
(h) Nothing shall prevent the voter from voting by mail, if only the voter or a relative not beyond the third degree of relationships so mails his or her vote to the Registrar of Voters of the County.
(i) All votes shall be hand-counted by registered voters who appointed in the same manner as petit jurors under the supervision of the Registrar of Voters. The master rolls shall be randomly selected from the voter registration rolls, driver's license records, and real estate records for each County. Those called for an election shall be selected in order from a Registrar of Voters service list on paper, and filed by January 1 of the year of selection. Requests for excuses shall be in writing, which would be for (a) illness or injury, (b) financial hardship, (c) on a previously scheduled vacation, and/or (d) a temporary or permanent disability; all to the extent the previous reasons would interfere with Registrar of Voters service. Excused absences shall be granted in writing, stating the name, the excuse, and when was the excuse granted. No employer can terminate for the required performance in doing Registrar of Voters service. No counting of the votes shall be given to persons not selected for Registrar of Voters service or to private corporations.
(j) Each County shall be divided up into precincts of no more than 400 voters each.
(k) No voter shall be mislead by any election official, any
person engaged in Registrar of Voters service, any member of the
precinct board, any member(s) of any political party, or any
supporter or opponent of any candidate or any initiative or
referendum as to when
and/or where he or she can vote, who could vote, and any
qualifications as to voting or voter registration.
(l) No voter shall be denied his or her right to vote on the basis of race, gender, orientation, religion, or previous condition of servitude or incarceration.
(m) Any voter who has previously voted at a previous address, but has moved from a prior address shall be entitled to register to vote and vote at the new precinct. All votes from voters that have moved before election day who refuse to vote at the new precinct will not have their vote counted, unless a provisional ballot is required to be given to the voter to be cast.
(n) Only the members of the precinct board or if none, the chief election officer of the County, may disqualify a voter before he or she may cast a vote, and only then, if required by law, may allow the voter to vote by provisional ballot.
(o) The voter shall not be prevented by way of arrest from voting, nor shall any peace officer shall prevent the voter from going to his or her polling place unless there is a reasonable belief or suspicion that the voter will engage in any illegal activity.
(p) All Counties, and in municipal elections, all cities, shall provide for enough absentee ballots, provisional ballots, paper ballots, and all other election materials at each polling place, provided, that each polling place shall have in excess of 125% of their supplies. If there is a need for a County, city, or a Registrar of Voters needing assistance, other Counties, cities, and Registrar of Voters may assist the County, city, or Registrar of Voters so requesting.
(q) All polling places shall be opened at 7 o'clock ante meridian and shall close at 10 o'clock post meridian, and shall not allow any more voters after that time, unless the voters are already in line at the time of closing. In each polling place in any election, there shall be two precinct boards, one operating between 7 o'clock ante meridian and 2 o'clock post meridian, and the other shall operate between 2 and 10 o'clock post meridian. Persons serving on Registrar of Voters Service shall be divided among both precinct board shifts, and the third group shall be used after hours to hand-count the ballots.
(r) Any violation of this section shall be reviewed by mandamus,
quo warranto, or by way of elections contest and the court of
competent jurisdiction may declare that the person receiving more
elected votes to be the winner, whether any measure is approved or
rejected, or may require another election. If any of the provisions
of this Section is violated, or the election results were obtained
by way of fraud, the costs and attorney’s fees, including the costs
of any recounts, shall be assessed to the County conducting the
election where the provisions of this section was violated or where
the fraud occurred. This section is expressly applied to all
elections for Federal and statewide offices, and for Members of the
Legislature. In any proceedings regarding violations of this
section, any contestants or petitioners shall have a right to secure
all voting records, and all discovery under the Code of Civil
Procedure and California Rules of Court shall be permitted.
Posted by: Best Direct TV at July 4, 2005 06:11 PM
Where? At gopcaughtontape.com, of course.
Current stars:
Charles Boustany (R-LA)
Heather Wilson (R-NM)
Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL)
Rob Simmons (R-CT)
Chris Chocola (R-IN)
John Kline (R-MN)
Jon Porter (R-NV)
Bob Beauprez (R-CO)
Know people in these people's districts? Even if you don't, send
the link around anyway. One of the best tools you can use against
these scumbags is just to shine the light on them.
From a mydd diary by murshedz:
"I imagine most of you already had a chance to read the latest bombshell ethics scandal implicating Tom DeLay this morning in The Washington Post. Based on the latest story, we are expanding the lobbying targets of our phone calls to the Capitol Hill demanding full scale investigation into the latest ethics scandals implicating Tom DeLay. Specifically we are targeting the GOP House Leadership."
Posted by not sam at March 11, 2005 02:36 PMYou can sign up for automatic alerts at their website.
Post how your calls, letters, and e-mails are going on their blog.
Check it out:
Posted by: Star Vox at March 12, 2005 02:26 AMthinks hes above the ethical fray
toms cooking the books
but the rest of the crooks
take his money so what can they say
Posted by: RWiley at March 13, 2005 11:51 AMI would rather deal with a
braggart-criminal
like DeLay,tho,than an insidious conservative
wearing a Liberal's mask like,say,Nicholas
Kristof..
Okay,now that I have cleverly segued onto the
subject of Kristof--he may have stolen or
bought the label of Liberal somewhere,but he
is the worst sort of conservative.He propogates
neo-con-types of misinformation and professes
strategies for the Left straight out of the
K.Rove wish-list.
This Fake Liberal appeals to the weak-link
Excuse-me Democrats with his his push for
Enviros to present their"nuanced" case to this
hostile Admin. politely,with plenty of evidence
in tow..EXCUSE ME,but dozens of top scientists,
nat'l and worldwide have been trying for four+
years now to get through to this Admin. King
George's response? As not sam pointed out,he
has politicized,manipulated,bullied the USFWS,
and ignored concerned scientists from PEER
and WCS. He has also stonewalled or outright
attacked esteemed orgs. like The Sierra Club
or Wilderness Society.
So,what strategy does Mr. Kristof propose for
the stonewalled Enviros? He attacks the more
vocal ones as "alarmist" ,"empty of nuance".
Karl could not have stated it any more
"eloquently"..perhaps Enviros,and Liberals even,
should stand in the back of the room,wait for
Mr. Bush to call on them.Would it be too
offensive for them to raise thir hand,Mr.Kristof?
Maybe they should make an appt. for say,2018
when "Clear Skies " is supposed to kick in.
This be-nice,tone-it-down chiding is an old
cons. ploy.They don't want the Left to engage
in the same YELLING AND POUNDING that helped
them gain power.Tom DeLay is boastingly
called The Hammer,not the Tepid Tapper.Kristof
knows this as much as any Paid Propogandist.
He is also aware of the cons. tactic of taking
anecdotal evidence and presenting it as hard,
all-encompassing evidence.Ooo-ooo--they were
wrong about Caribou Herds,those Alarmists,AND
I found an Alarmist book about population
growth!The whole movement is mis-lead and a
failure!(such a failure that even an idiot
like Bush can correctly state that we're
better off today environmentally than 25 to
30 yrs ago.)
Kristof sites the fact that he was an eviron.
groupie(in the days before he sold-out)as
qualification,I suppose,for his article.Yeah,
righjt,big Whoop.75% of the country is
concerned about the environment.With Right-
Wingers it's a matter of Priority.I don't
believe that it's one of N.Kristof's priorities
(as much as $$ ?)
While it is important to go after the big,loud
arrogant rats like "Hammer" DeLay,it's also
essential to shine a light(SUNSHINE-WEEK!)
on their brethren--the smaller,insidious
creatures like Mr.Kristof,who skirt around the
edges of Liberalism...
Read my commentary about conservative blowhards at
www.mark-gelbart.com
Posted by: Mark Gelbart at March 28, 2005 08:24 PMJUDICIARY COMMITTEE TO VOTE ON GANNON RESOLUTION ON WEDNESDAY AT 10 A.M.
BROADCAST LIVE ON THE INTERNET, at http://judiciary.house.gov/
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Tomorrow, March 16, at 10 a.m. the House Judiciary Committee will vote on a House resolution which will direct the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to respond to remaining questions on Gannongate.
Posted by not sam at March 15, 2005 6:17 PMThe House
Judiciary Commitee voting will be broadcast on the internet:
http://blog.dccc.org/mt/archives/002393.html
Internet Broadcast: Wednesday, March 16th, 2005, 10 am
http://judiciary.house.gov/
Contact members of the House Judiciary Committee regarding their vote on whether the House of Representatives will hold the White House accountable regarding this lapse in security. http://judiciary.house.gov/contact.aspx
Individual members' DC and Local Office follows in subsequent posts in comments section. The local contact info will save constituents and anyone concerned with government transparency on this issue long distance charges!
Posted by: Peanut at March 15, 2005 11:50 PMRemind individual members that their respective votes supporting or preventing further investigation of security policies that allowed a self-advertising gay hooker using an assumed name to get past President Bush's security detail will be re-examined during the members' future statements and actions on security, the issue of same-sex marriage, and so=called "moral values".
At issue:
* the administration's practices regarding national security
* the administration's use of propaganda to misrepresent their own agenda and smear critics of the president and his policies
* the administration's use of a self-advertised gay hustler to promote an anti- gay-rights agenda
* the administration's use of a self-advertised gay hustler to mispresent George Bush's promise to promote conservative religious "moral values"
REPUBLICAN MEMBERS PART ONE
Henry J. Hyde (R) Illinois, 6th
2110 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-4561
http://www.house.gov/hyde/
Henry J. Hyde's Addison, IL office
zip code 60101
Phone: (630) 832-5950
Fax: (630) 832-5969
Howard Coble (R) North Carolina, 6th
Phone: (202) 225-3065
Fax: (202) 225-8611
http://coble.house.gov/
Howard Coble's Asheboro Office NC 8am to 5 pm
zip code 27203
Phone: (336) 626-3060
Fax: (336) 629-7819
Email Rebecca Redding rebecca.redding@mail.house.gov
Howard Coble's High Point Office NC 8am to 5 pm
zip code 27262-7723
Phone: (336) 886-5106
Fax: (336) 886-8740
Email Nancy Mazza nancy.mazza@mail.house.gov
Howard Coble's Greensboro Office NC 8am to 5pm
zip code 27408-5100
Phone: (336) 333-5005
Fax: (336) 333-5048
Email Chris Beaman chris.beaman@mail.house.gov
Email Kathy Benfield kathy.benfield@mail.house.gov
Email Amanda Page amanda.martinpage@mail.house.gov
Email Jan Scott jan.scott@mail.house.gov
Howard Coble's Salisbury Office NC 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
zip code 28144-8388
Phone: (704) 645-8082
Fax: (704) 645-0896
Email Terri Welch terri.welch@mail.house.gov
Howard Coble's Graham Office NC 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
zip code 27253-0812
Phone: (336) 229-0159
Fax: (336) 228-7974
Email Janine Osborne janine.osborne@mail.house.gov
Lamar S. Smith (R) Texas, 21st
2231 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-4236
http://lamarsmith.house.gov/
Email contact form:
http://lamarsmith.house.gov/contact.asp
Lamar Smith's Austin District Office 8am - 5pm CST M - F
zip code 78731
512-402-9743
512-402-9867 fax
Sheila Brown, Constituent Services Liaison
Lamar S. Smith San Antonio Office 8am - 5pm CST M - F
zip code 78209
210-821-5024
210-821-5947 fax
Elton Gallegly (R) California, 24th
2427 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-0523
(202) 225-5811
Contact: Tom Pfeifer
(202) 225-5811
Elton Gallegly's Thousand Oaks, CA office
zip code 91361-3018
Phone: (805) 497-2224
Toll Free: (800) 423-0023
FAX: (805) 497-0039
Elton Gallegly's Solvang, CA office
zip code 93463
Phone: (805) 686-2525
FAX: (805) 686-2566
Bob Goodlatte (R) Virginia, 6th
2240 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5431
(202) 225-9681 fax
Bob Goodlatte's Harrisonburg, VA office
zip code 22801
(540) 432-2391
(540) 432-6593 fax
Bob Goodlatte's Lynchburg, VA office
zip code 24504
(434) 845-8306
(434) 845-8245 fax
Bob Goodlatte's Roanoke, VA office
zip code 24011
(540) 857-2672
(540) 857-2675 fax
Bob Goodlatte's Staunton, VA office
zip code 24401
(540) 885-3861
(540) 885-3930 fax
Steve Chabot (R) Ohio, 1st
129 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-2216
(202) 225-3012 (fax)
Steve Chabot Cincinnati, OH office
zip code 45202
(513) 684-2723
(513) 421-8722 (fax)
Dan Lungren (R) California, 3rd
2448 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5716
(202) 226-1298 Fax
Email:
http://www.house.gov/lungren/talkto.htm
Dan Lungren's Gold River office
zip code CA 95670
(916) 859-9906
(916) 859-9976 Fax
William (Bill) L. Jenkins (R) Tennessee, 1st
1207 Longworth Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-6356
(202) 225-5714 Fax
William (Bill) Jenkins's Kingsport, TN office
zip code 37662
(423) 247-8161
(423) 247-1834 Fax
Chris Cannon (R) Utah, 3rd
email form at:
http://www.house.gov/cannon/email.htm
Spencer Bachus (R) Alabama, 6th
442 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
202 225-4921
Spencer Bachus's Northport Office
zip code 35476
205 333-9894 phone
205 333-9812 fax
Spencer Bachus's Birmingham Office
zip code 35243
205 969-2296 phone
205 969-3958 fax
Spencer Bachus's Clanton Office
zip code 35046
205 280-0704 phone
205 280-3060 fax
Bob Inglis (R) South Carolina, 4th
Washington, DC Office
330 Cannon House Office Building
phone: 202-225-6030
fax: 202-226-1177
Bob Inglis's Greenville, SC Office
105 N. Spring St.
Suite 111
Greenville, SC 29601
phone: 864-232-1141
fax: 864-233-2160
Bob Inglis's Spartanburg, SC Office
145 N. Church St.
BTC #56
Spartanburg, SC 29306
phone: 864-582-6422
Bob Inglis's Union, SC Office
phone: 864-427-2205
fax: 864-573-9478
John N. Hostettler (R) Indiana, 8th
Washington, DC Office
1214 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
TEL: (202) 225-4636
FAX: (202) 225-3284
Email- John.Hostettler@mail.house.gov
John N. Hostettler's Evansville District Office
zip code 47708
TEL: (812) 465-6484
FAX: (812) 422-4761
TOLL FREE: (800) 321-9830
John N. Hostettler's Covington District Office
zip code 47932
TEL: (765) 793-2161
FAX: (765) 793-2137
John N. Hostettler's Terre Haute District Office
zip code 47807
TEL: (812) 232-0523
FAX: (812) 232-0526
John N. Hostettler's Vincennes District Office
zip code 47591
TEL: (812) 882-0632
FAX: (812) 882-4298
Mark Green (R) Wisconsin, 8th
Washington DC office
1314 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5665
Fax: (202) 225-5729
Mark.Green@mail.house.gov
Mark Green's Green Bay, WI office
zip code 54301
Phone: (920) 437-1954
Fax. (920) 437-1978
Toll Free: (800)773-8579
Mark Green's Appleton, WI office
zip code 54911
Phone: (920) 380-0061
Fax: (920) 380-0051
Toll Free:(800)773-8579
Ric Keller (R) Florida, 8th
419 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2176
Fax: (202) 225-0999
Ric Keller's Orlando, FL Office
605 E. Robinson St., Suite 650
Orlando, FL 32801
Phone: (407) 872-1962
Fax: (407) 872-1944
Toll Free: (888) 642-1211
Ric Keller's Eustis, FL Office
zip code 32726
Phone: (888) 642-1211
Fax: (407) 872-1944
Ric Keller's Ocala, FL Office
zip code 34471
Phone: (888) 642-1211
Fax: (407) 872-1944
Darrell E. Issa (R) California, 49th
Washington DC Office:
211 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
phone: 202.225.3906
fax: 202.225.3303
Darrell E. Issa's San Diego County Office
Vista, CA
zip code 92083
phone: 760.599.5000
fax: 760.599.1178
Darrell E. Issa's Temecula, CA Office
phone: 909.693.2447
Jeff Flake (R) Arizona, 6th
Washington DC Office:
424 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-0301
(202) 225-2635 - phone
(202) 226-4386 - fax
jeff.flake@mail.house.gov
Jeff Flake's Mesa, AZ Office
zip code 85204
(480) 833-0092 - phone
(480) 833-6314 - fax
Mike Pence (R) Indiana, 6th
Washington DC Office
426 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-3021 office
(202) 225-3382 fax
email contact form at:
http://www.house.gov/formpence/IMA/contact.htm
Mike Pence's Anderson, IN Office
zip code 46016
(765) 640-2919 office
(765) 640-2922 fax
J. Randy Forbes (R) Virginia, 4th
Washington, DC Office 9am - 6pm, M - F
307 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-6365
Fax: 202-226-1170
J. Randy Forbes Chesapeake, VA Office 9am - 5pm, M - F
zip code 23322
Phone: 757-382-0080
Fax: 757-382-0780
Steve King (R) Iowa, 5th
Washington, D.C. Office
Office of Congressman Steve King
1432 Longworth Office Building
Washington D.C. 20515
(202) 225-4426
Fax: (202) 225-3193
Steve King's Storm Lake, IA Office
zip code 50588
(712) 732-4197
Fax: (712)-732-4217
Steve King's Sioux City, IA Office
zip code 51101
(712) 224 4692
Fax: (712) 224-4693
Steve King's Council, IA Bluffs Office
zip code 51503
(712) 325-1404
Fax: (712) 325-1405
Tom Feeney (R) Florida, 24th
Washington, D.C. Office
323 Cannon House Office Building
Washington DC 20515
phone:(202) 225-2706
fax:(202) 226-6299
Tom Feeney's Orlando, FL Office
zip code 32826
phone:(407) 208-1106
fax:(407) 208-1108
Tom Feeney's Port Orange, FL Office
zip code 32129
phone:(386) 756-9798
fax:(386) 756-9903
Tom Feeney's Titusville, FL Office
zip code 32780
phone:(321) 264-6113
fax:(321) 264-6227
Trent Franks (R) Arizona, 2nd
Washington, DC Office
1237 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-4576
Trent Franks Glendale, AZ Office
zip code 85308
Phone: 623-776-7911
Fax: 623-776-7832
Louie Gohmert (R) Texas, 1st
Washington, DC 20515
508 Cannon House Bldg.
phone: 202-225-3035
fax: 202-225-5866
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
DEMOCRATS
DEMOCRATS
RANKING MEMBER Hon. John Conyers, Jr. (D) Michigan, 14th
Washington, DC Office
2426 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126 Phone
(202) 225-0072 Fax
email contact form:
http://www.house.gov/conyers/letstalk.htm
Hon. John Conyers Southgate, MI Office
zip code 48195
(734) 285-5624 Phone
(734) 285-5943 Fax
Hon. John Conyers' Detroit, MI Office
zip code 48226
(313) 961-5670 Phone
(313) 226-2085 Fax
Howard L. Berman (D) California, 28th
Washington Office
2221 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-4695
email contact form:
http://www.house.gov/berman/contact/
Howard L. Berman's Van Nuys, CA Office
zip code 91411
(818) 994-7200
Rick Boucher (D) Virginia, 9th
Washington, DC Office
2187 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-3861
Ninthnet@mail.house.gov
Jerrold Nadler (D) New York, 8th
Washington, DC Office
2334 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-5635
email contact form
http://www.house.gov/nadler/emailform.shtml
Jerrold Nadler's Brooklyn, NY Office
zip code 11224
Tel. 718-373-3198
Jerrold Nadler's Manhattan, NY Office
zip code 10014
Tel. 212-367-7350
Robert C. Scott (D) Virginia, 3rd
Washington Office:
1201 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-8351 Phone
(202) 225-8354 Fax
Robert C. Scott's Newport News, VA
zip code 23607
(757) 380-1000 Phone
(757) 928-6694 Fax
Robert C. Scott's Richmond, VA Office
zip code 23219-1321
(804) 644-4845 Phone
(804) 648-6026 Fax
Robert C. Scott's Norfolk State University Office
Harrison B. Wilson Administration Building
2nd Floor Conference Room
Thursdays 3:00- 5:00 p.m.
Mel Watt (D) North Carolina, 12th
WASHINGTON Office
2236 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC
20515-3312
Tel. (202) 225-1510
Fax (202) 225-1512
Mel Watt's CHARLOTTE, NC office
1230 W. Morehead St.
zip code 28208-5214
Tel. (704) 344-9950
Fax (704) 344-9971
Mel Watt's GREENSBORO, NC office
zip code 27401-2615
Tel. (336) 275-9950
Fax (336) 379-9951
Zoe Lofgren (D) California, 16th
Washington, D.C. Office
102 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3072
Fax: (202) 225-3336
Zoe Lofgren's San Jose, CA Office
zip code 95112
Phone: (408) 271-8700
Fax: (408) 271-8713
Sheila Jackson Lee (D) Texas, 18th
Washington Office
2435 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-3816
(202) 225-3317 Fax
Sheila Jackson Lee's Houston Office
1919 Smith Street
Suite 1180
Houston, Texas 77002
(713) 655-0050
(713) 655-1612 Fax
Sheila Jackson Lee's (Houston) Heights, Texas Office
zip code 77008
(713) 861-4070
Sheila Jackson Lee's Acres, Texas Office
zip code 77091
(713) 691-4882
Maxine Waters (D) California, 35th
Washington DC Office
2344 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
202-225-2201 phone
202-225-7854 fax
contact form:
http://www.house.gov/waters/IMA/issue.htm
Maxine Waters Los Angeles, CA Office
zip code 90003
323-757-8900 phone
323-757-9506 fax
Martin T. Meehan (D) Massachusetts, 5th
Washington, DC Office
2229 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3411
Fax: (202) 226-0771
TTY: (202) 225-1904
Martin T. Meehan's Haverhill, MA District Office
zip code 01830
Phone: (978) 521-1845
Fax: (978) 521-1843
Martin T. Meehan's Lowell, MA District Office
zip code 01852
Phone: (978) 459-0101
Fax: (978) 459-1907
Martin T. Meehan's Lawrence, MA District Office
zip code 01840
Phone: (978) 681-6200
Fax: (978) 682-6070
William D. Delahunt (D) Massachusetts, 10th
Washington Office
2454 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3111
Fax: (202) 225-5658
email: William.Delahunt@mail.house.gov
William D. Delahunt's Hyannis, MA Office
zip code 02601
(508) 771-0666
Toll-Free: (800) 870-2626
Fax: (508) 790-1959
William D. Delahunt's Quincy, MA Office
zip code 02169
(617) 770-3700
Toll-Free: (800) 794-9911
Fax: (617) 770-2984
Robert Wexler (D) Florida, 19th
Washington, D.C. Office
213 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-3001 PHONE
(202) 225-5974 FAX
email contact form:
http://www.house.gov/wexler/contact.htm
Robert Wexler's Palm Beach County (Boca Raton, FL) Office
zip code 33431
(561) 988-6302 PHONE
(561) 988-6423 FAX
Robert Wexler's Broward County (Margate, FL) Office
zip code 33063
(954) 972-6454 PHONE
(954) 974-3191 FAX
Anthony Weiner (D) New York, 9th
Washington, D.C. Address Office
1122 Longworth House Office Building
Washington DC 20515
(202) 225-6616
email: weiner@mail.house.gov
Anthony Weiner's Brooklyn, NY Office
zip code Brooklyn, NY 11235
(718) 743-0441
Anthony Weiner's Kew Gardens, NY Office
zip code Suite 5000
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
(718) 520-9001
Anthony Weiner's Rockaway, NY Office
zip code 11693
(718) 318-9255
Adam Schiff (D) California, 29th
Washington DC Office
326 Cannon HOB
Washington D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-4176
Fax: (202) 225-5828
http://schiff.house.gov/HoR/CA29/Contact+Information/Contact+Form.htm
Adam Schiff's Pasadena, CA Office
zip code 91105
Phone: (626) 304-2727
Fax: (626) 304-0572
Linda T.Sánchez (D) California, 39th
1007 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-6676
Fax: 202-226-1012
email contact form:
http://www.lindasanchez.house.gov/index.cfm?section=contact
Linda T.Sánchez's Lakewood, CA office
zip code 90712
Phone: 562-429-8499
Fax: 562-938-1948
Adam Smith (D) Washington, 9th
Chris Van Hollen, (D) Maryland, 8th
There are refs in this
article too.Here is the link to page where this was found:
http://groups.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=messageboard.viewThread&entryID=1454432&categoryID=0&IsSticky=0&groupID=100058044&Mytoken=20050318111314
Bless the Beasts and the Children
Photographer for White House child sex ring arrested after Thompson
suicide
Tom Flocco | March 13, 2005
The Justice Department, acting through the FBI and the U.S. Attorney?s Office in Omaha, emerges from the record of the Franklin investigations not so much as a party to the cover-up, but as its coordinator. Rigging grand juries, harassment of witnesses, incitement to perjury and tampering with evidence--federal personnel were seen to apply all of those techniques in the Franklin case. (John W. DeCamp, Esq., The Franklin Cover-up , Second Edition, January 2005)
WASHINGTON -- Photographer Russell E. "Rusty" Nelson was recently arrested two days after journalist Hunter Thompson reportedly committed suicide four weeks ago on February 10, according to two phone interviews with attorney John DeCamp last week.
Nelson was allegedly employed by a former Republican Party activist to take pictures of current or retired U.S. House-Senate members and other prominent government officials engaging in sexual criminality by receiving or committing sodomy and other sex acts on children during the Reagan-Bush 41 administrations.
Hunter Thompson?s death and the news blackout of Rusty Nelson?s simultaneous arrest raise questions that someone may be attempting to limit Nelson?s freedom or threaten him, since according to testimony, both men had allegedly witnessed homosexual prostitution and pedophile criminal acts in a suppressed but far-reaching child sex-ring probe closely linked to Senate and House members--but also former President George H. W. Bush.
[In U.S. District Court testimony, Rusty Nelson told Judge Warren Urbom he took 20,000 to 30,000 pictures, 2-5-1999, p.52]
Pedophile victim Paul Bonacci--kidnapped and forced into sex slavery between the ages of 6 and 17--told U.S. District Court Judge Warren Urbom in sworn testimony [pp.105, 124-126] on February 5, 1999: "Where were the parties?...down in Washington, DC...and that was for sex...There was sex between adult men and other adult men but most of it had to do with young boys and young girls with the older folks...specifically for sex with minors...Also in Washington, DC, there were parties after a party...there were a lot of parties where there would be senators and congressmen who had nothing to do with the sexual stuff. But there were some senators and congressmen who stayed for the [pedophile sex] parties afterwards...on a lot of the trips he took us on he had us, I mean, I met some people that I don't feel comfortable telling their name because I don't want to --- ...Q: Are you scared?...Yes..."
DeCamp, a former Nebraska state senator and decorated Vietnam War vet, told TomFlocco.com "there are tons of pictures still left; law enforcement is currently looking for them," adding, "you can also assume there are senators and congressmen implicated; otherwise this would not be such a big issue." But no federal official has stepped forward to protect Rusty Nelson's life, as Congress would be reluctant to hold hearings or force a federal prosecutor to probe its own members for sex acts with children--still punishable by law.
Sex with minors?
In his testimony before Judge Urbom, Bonacci specifically named
Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) as having participated in the
parties--also telling the judge he had "relationships with him" in
Washington, DC and was flown to Massachusetts for sex in the
basement of Frank's Boston home. [2-5-1999, p. 126]
However, Urbom did not subpoena all the photos and did not ask Bonacci to identify photos of specific senators and congressmen, or reveal their names in court transcripts and depositions we examined; nor did Judge Urbom explain why investigations have never commenced regarding which members of congress had sex with children
The evidence DeCamp presented was so credible and substantial that Urbom awarded Paul Bonacci $1 million for child abuse on February 19, 1999 regarding his lawsuit involving Larry King. This, despite a Nebraska jury having already indicted Bonacci for perjury in 1990, ultimately sending an intentionally damaged, spiritually and physically abused young man to prison for five years--and despite his treatment by King, described in court testimony:
"They put guns up to my head. Had guns put in my mouth...Larry King sent out boys, men, to jump me...he had them pretty well beat the tar out of me from the waist down so nobody would see the marks...I had my fingers broken...I can remember them burning me with hot instruments...placing stuff inside me...almost what I call a cattle prod...But it would be put inside then they'd shock me inside my -- ...Judge Urbom: Anus?...Yes... And they would -- ...Judge: You mean electrically heated?...They would put it in and then push a button and it would shock me...Judge Urbom:..done by Larry King at his direction?...At his direction..."
"I threatened to go to the police in California, thought maybe they would listen whereas in Omaha they were in his pocketbook...he had me hung out of an airplane with a rope by my ankles... If they wanted to get something passed through the legislature, he would put some people that were against it in a compromising position. By using us boys and girls ...Judge Urbom: Was this by your being the sexual partner of that person?...Yes...Judge Urbom: ...Any estimates of how often you participated as the sexual partner of one of these persons that he wanted to get some kind of control over?...There were times when it would be four or five in a night...on probably a couple thousand times...sometimes dozens of times with the same person..." [U.S. District Court testimony, 2-5-1999, pp. 146-151]
Curiously, Paul Bonacci told investigators that the sex ring was based out of Offutt U.S. Air Force Base near Omaha, having been taken there to be abused since he was three years old in 1970. At Offutt, Paul said he was "trained" by tortures, heavy drugging and sexual degradation. [Offutt AFB played a major role immediately following the 9/11 attacks as George W. Bush made the base his post-attack headquarters for a short period.]
So intent upon his physical harm, the government "moved Bonacci to different facilities--despite agreements worked out by DeCamp, purposefully given food to which he was allergic while his weight dropped, and denied a blanket for months...beaten several times in jail and placed with potentially violent people associated with Larry King," according to Decamp.
John DeCamp told us last week that "Larry King was released from prison on April 11, 2001 after serving about five years," adding "he's back in Washington, DC and now involved in this story again." [DeCamp's book also said "King went to prison for embezzlement, conspiracy and making false financial record entries...there was no trial on any other charges, and the evidence of child prostitution and abuse perpetrated by King was never presented in any court." Franklin Cover-up , p. 224]
John DeCamp just released an updated 2005 edition of his original book about the secret White House-linked national child sex-ring entitled The Franklin Cover-up [$12.95 + $4.00 shipping: contact decamplegal@inebraska.com for 2005 edition]. The carefully researched and graphic expose involves convicted [and recently released from prison] GOP operative Lawrence E. "Larry" King Jr. who allegedly hired photographers to capture legislators and high officials in compromising sexual positions with children while he managed the Franklin Federal Credit Union--according to court testimony on 2-5-1999. [Franklin was raided by federal agencies and shut down two days before George H. W. Bush was elected president in 1988.]
Past mysterious deaths, clandestine arrests, court testimony, and credible evidence of FBI and CIA participation in their cover-up also raise questions as to why elderly pedophile priests are removed from their pulpits, prosecuted and imprisoned for sex acts committed 40 years ago and why famous music entertainers are prosecuted for pedophilia; yet elderly pedophile federal legislators may still remain in the U.S. House and Senate--drawing a free pass for past criminal child-sex acts.
Regarding his role in taking blackmail photos of government officials, Rusty Nelson confirmed Bonacci?s testimony to Judge Urbom: "Q: Children on the airplane?...yes. Q: How young?...There was one situation went back to Washington, DC...he had probably 10, 12 years old...Q: Boys, girls?...Both...Q: Who attended the parties?...Prominent business people, very prominent high-ranking officials, politicians. The younger people. What would transpire was they would have a party and then a party after the party...after the party was more of a sex-type deal...That?s what Larry [King] would -- -- Q: These old politicians were having sex with each other?...Or people Larry would bring...some younger people...Did you take pictures of the parties?...I took pictures at some of the parties, yes..." [U.S. District Court testimony, 2-5-1999, pp. 89-91]
After the Secret Service allowed Paul Bonacci to have access to the White House on July 3, 1988, one of DeCamp?s investigators said the young pedophile victim was able to draw a floor-plan of the presidential inside living quarters of the White House--an area not available to the public--lending stong credence to a June 29, 1989 Washington Times front page story, "Homosexual prostitution inquiry ensnares VIPs with Reagan, Bush," when reporters Paul Rodriguez and George Archibald said "Call-boys took midnight tour of White House."
Presidential indiscretions--or criminal acts?
According to a Nebraska state police report, Nebraska Foster Care Review Board letter to the Attorney General, Nebraska Senate?s Franklin committee investigative report, and a 50-page report by Omaha?s Boys Town welfare case officer Mrs. Julie Walters, pedophile victims Nelly and Kimberly Webb detailed a massive child sex, homosexual and pornography operation run out of Nebraska by Larry King--but with close ties directly to the White House.
Mrs. Walter?s Nebraska Dept. of Social Services report (3-25-86) revealed: "[14 year-old] Nelly said at these trip parties hosted by Larry King, she sat naked ?looking pretty and innocent? and guests could engage in any sexual activity they wanted, but penetration was not allowed...Nellysaid she first met V. P. George Bush at the Republican Convention where King sang the national anthem, and saw Bush again at a Washington, DC party Larry hosted...Last year [1985] she met V.P. Bush and saw him at one of the parties Larry gave while on a Washington, DC trip. At some of the parties there are just men (as was the case at the party George Bush attended)...Nelly said she has seen sodomy committed at those parties."
The Walters report continued: "On December 19, 1988, Nelly was contacted and voluntarily came to the FBI offices on December 30, 1988. She was interviewed by [FBI agents] Brady, Tucker and Phillips...in September or October, 1984 when Lisa was 14 she went to Chicago with Larry King and 15-20 boys from Omaha...She indicates she attended a party in Chicago with King and the male youths. She indicated George Bush was present...she sat at a table at the party wearing nothing but a negligee. She stated George Bush saw her on the table. She stated she saw George Bush pay King money and Bush left the party with a nineteen year old black boy named Brent. Lisa said the party Bush attended was in Chicago in September or October 1984. The Chicago Tribune of October 31, 1984 said Bush was in Illinois campaigning for congressional candidates at the end of October."
Bush 41 surfaced again in Lowe's May, 1989 review of reports by Thomas Vlahoulis from the state attorney general's office: "Sorenson told Vlahoulis that both Kimberly and Nelly [Webb] brought up the name of George Bush and indicated that they had both met him..."
In spite of four polygraph tests administered by a Nebraska state trooper who said he was convinced Nelly was telling the truth, a Washington country, Nebraska judge in December, 1990 ignored Julie Walter?s 50-page report, numerous debriefings of the girls by foster care officials and youth workers stating the sisters told the truth--specifically about George Bush Sr., and dismissed all charges against their foster parents Jarrett and Barbara Webb, who Nelly and Kimberly said had allowed them to be abused.
Regarding his role in taking blackmail photos of government officials, recently re-arrested Rusty Nelson confirmed Bonacci?s testimony to Judge Urbom: "Q: Children on the airplane?...yes. Q: How young?...There was one situation went back to Washington, DC he had probably 10, 12 years old...Q: Boys, girls?...Both...Q: Who attended the parties?...Prominent business people, very prominent high-ranking officials, politicians. The younger people. What would transpire was they would have a party and then a party after the party...after the party was more of a sex-type deal...That?s what Larry [King] would -- -- Q: These old politicians were having sex with each other?...Or people Larry would bring...some younger people...Did you take pictures of the parties?...I took pictures at some of the parties, yes..." [U.S. District Court testimony, 2-5-1999, pp. 89-91]
Gosch to Guckert to Gannon?
Cable television news reports have recently linked an alleged male prostitute to the present White House since George W. Bush permitted James Guckert to use an unprecedented Secret Service-approved alias (Jeff Gannon) while having access to the White House for two years as a pool reporter serving the younger Bush--before which Gannon had advertised himself on internet pornography sites as a male "escort" charging $200 an hour. [Gannon is the subject of independent news reports which have referred to him as the former kidnapped Des Moines, Iowa paperboy Johnny Gosch--forced into child sex-slavery.] John DeCamp told this writer "I believe Johnny Gosch and Jeff Gannon are one and the same person--but I am not in a position to know positively."
During a recent phone interview, Noreen Gosch told TomFlocco.com that she is still not sure whether her missing son Johnny is in fact James Gannon, because she has "not seen enough evidence." But having been abducted in 1982, Johnny Gosch would now be about 35-36 years old. Gannon claims to be 47 but his "male4male" website escorts profile lists him as 31 in 2000, which would also make him 35-36 years old today.
George W. Bush has not explained how Guckert/Gannon--who had advertised himself as a male escort--could apparently operate in the White House as a reporter for two years using a Secret Service-approved alias and regularly be called upon by George W. Bush and press secretary Scott McClellan during nationally televised presidential press conferences.
Questions can be raised as to whether Gannon also had access to the White House living quarters as Paul Bonacci and other call-boys did during his father?s administration--as the Washington Times reported. Photos of George W. Bush and Jeff Gannon together indicate that they have a cordial personal relationship.
Noreen Gosch said her son Johnny is living under an assumed name after being abducted on September 5, 1982 while serving his Sunday morning paper route. During a clandestine visit from her son when he was 27 or 28, Mrs. Gosch said Johnny told her he was taken by a highly organized, very corporate global pedophile/pornography ring--linked to the Washington, DC congressional call-boy scandal during the 1980's.
Hunter Thompson directed child murder-sex film?
A controversial author, Hunter Thompson was allegedly linked to Larry King as implicated in Paul Bonacci's testimony in which the pedophile victim revealed that Thompson directed a graphic ?snuff? film [Franklin Cover-up, pp.102-105 & 327] made near Sacramento, California at a location called " Bohemian Grove ."
Bonacci--flown numerous times across state lines for sexual exploitation to Washington, DC and other cities--testified on videotape [5-14-1990] for Nebraska State Police investigator Gary Caradori. Bonacci said that while on a trip to Sacramento, he was forced at gun-point to commit homosexual acts on another boy before he watched other men do the same--after which the boy was shot in the head.
In separate testimony, Decamp said Bonacci told him "Larry King was smiling and laughing the whole time the film was being shown...as the men watched, they passed Nicholas [another victim] and me around as if we were toys, and sexually abused us." [U.S. District Court, 2-5-1999, pp.115-129]
Bonacci?s testimony has been evaluated as credible and well-informed by leading child abuse experts, psychiatrists, psychologists and polygraph tests; and he has also testified that he was forced to lure Johnny Gosch into being kidnapped--considered by many to be the most notorious U.S. child sex-slavery case.
Protecting legislators at the expense of children
John Decamp told TomFlocco.com that Franklin child-abuse witness "Alisha Owen was convicted of lying that as a minor, she had sex with Omaha Chief of Police Robert Wadman. She was placed in solitary confinement for years--the most brutal treatment of a female inmate in Nebraska history for a first-time offense," to which Decamp added, "it was done to keep her silent and away from other inmates, but also as a warning to the other children."
21 year-old Alisha Jahn Owen was sentenced on August 8, 1991 to serve nine to twenty-seven years in prison for telling a grand jury that she was sexually abused as a juvenile by a Nebraska District Court judge, by Omaha's Chief of Police, by the manager of the Franklin Credit Union, and others.
DeCamp said "Alisha witnessed abuse of other children and functioned as an illegal drug courier traveling nationwide for some of Nebraska's wealthiest, most powerful and prominent businessmen." But a local and a federal grand jury indicted the victim-witnesses for perjury--throwing the key young people in prison to cover up child-sex and illegal drugs.
The Nebraska State Senate?s primary Franklin Committee investigator Gary Caradori's March 14, 1990 notes revealed that on the day of the federal agents' raid on Franklin Credit Union, "a large amount of pornographic material was taken out of the credit union, including videos and photographs depicting sexual acts. I was told that if Friedrichs or any of the other people working for the CPA firm contacted by the government [audit] would say anything, they would automatically lose their jobs."
That evidence was never made available to the Nebraska Senate's Franklin Committee, nor was its existence publicly acknowledged by the FBI; and all raid warrants were sealed by United States Magistrate Richard Kopf--the same court official who ordered to have Larry King taken by federal agents to a federal psychiatric facility for "tests," on February 7, 1990 as President George H. W. Bush was coming to Omaha for a fundraising event.
Alisha Owen testified to the Franklin Committee on June 11, 1990 that the FBI attempted to influence federal witness testimony--that her former lawyer Pam Vuchetich had come to see her in the spring: "giving a proposal from the FBI that if I recanted my story then nothing would happen to me; I could get out of prison and no charges would ever be brought against me...they would write letters to the judge asking for my sentence reduction..."
Her parents, Donna and Alvin Owen told the committee about the incident on June 21, 1990: "Q: You testified that your husband was there?...sitting in the living room, I remember...Q: Did she tell you who in the FBI made that deal, made that offer to her?...Mickey Mott...He works closely with Rick Culver and John Pankonon...
Curiously, state policeman Gary Caradori, died July 11, 1990 in a small-plane explosion, one month after FBI officials attempted to coerce a key child witness to recant her testimony--and even though a deputy sheriff first at the crash site said there was child pornography scattered all over the farmer?s field and the farmer said he witnessed the plane exploding in mid-air before crashing to the ground
Johnny Gosch?s mother, Noreen, said "undisclosed sources told her
the FBI immediately arrived with three flatbed trucks [modus
operandi of FBI and Gov. Jeb Bush confiscating 9/11 hijacker
documents at Venice, Florida?s Huffman flight school?], grabbed the
evidence from the sheriff?s hands, cordoned off the field, walked
the field, picked up every piece of evidence, took the plane and all
its parts and put it on the flatbed trucks, and told the peace
officer, ?This is confidential information and don?t ever speak of
it again.? The evidence has never surfaced again in Nebraska?s
Franklin investigation or any other investigation." [ Ted Gunderson
Report , June 28, 2000]
DeCamp's book reveals more clear evidence of witness tampering and possible accessory to murder: On the evening of July 11, 1990, the day her husband crashed to his death, Sandie Caradori received several phone calls from [key Franklin child-abuse witness] Troy Boner. She wrote in her notes: "I am familiar with his voice and can be 100% assured that I did in fact receive telephone calls from him...Troy: Gary wasn't lying. He didn't tell me what to say. What I told him was the truth. (He spoke rapidly, fighting back tears) They made me take it back. They threatened me...You don't understand, they threatened me. They made me take it back. I was so scared..." [pp. 186-187]
In 1990, according to DeCamp, "Troy Boner was going to provide the information in open court, under oath, that would blow the lid off the Franklin case and force a new trial for Alisha Owen...As Troy came into the courthouse, he was immediately ushered into a private room by county judicial authorities...the hearing was delayed for one hour...Troy was in the room with a "Special Attorney" and with other officials from the prosecutor's office-- the very same prosecutorial team Troy was about to testify against."
"... Troy leaned over and whispered to me, "Oh God, forgive me. They guaranteed if I talk here today, they will put me away for twenty years...told me I would be charged with perjury for my original testimony if I opened my mouth today in court...Look what they did to Alisha...Look what they did to my brother." [found dead after playing "Russian Roulette"]
DeCamp's 2005 edition incredibly reveals, " In late 2003 [just before the 2004 election campaign started to heat up], Troy Boner [key abused child witness to national sex-ring] walked into a hospital in New Mexico screaming "they're after me, they're after me because of this book." The book Boner was waving was The Franklin Cover-up . Boner was '... mildly sedated and calmed down...and put in a private room for observation .' "
"When nurses came back to check on him early next morning, Boner was sitting in a chair, bleeding from the mouth and quite dead. Former FBI Los Angeles Bureau Chief Ted Gunderson tried to get autopsy and other information and details that were promised him on Boner's death, but Gunderson and apparently every other entity, were totally shut out of all information. No news stories were published on Boner's death despite his "notoriety" in the Franklin case." (John DeCamp, The Franklin Cover-up ) Another witness was gone.
DeCamp added that the FBI had also confiscated Larry King?s flight manifests from various airline charter companies, thus helping to cover up proof of sexual exploitation of children and interstate transportation of minors across state lines for sexual purposes.
Washington, DC: child sodomy hotbed?
Rusty Nelson?s quick arrest following on the heels of Hunter Thompson?s ?suicide? and alleged assertions that Jeff Gannon could be Johnny Gosch may all have serious criminal implications, as Thompson and Nelson were said to be closely linked to child sexual criminality at the highest levels of government--acts still punishable by law and easily meriting cover-up attempts by powerful forces.
Paul Bonacci, forced to help kidnap Johnny Gosch into sex-slavery, also told Franklin Committee investigators he toured the White House at midnight on July 3, 1988 with Craig Spence--a lobbyist and political operative who arranged male prostitute visits to the White House but who turned up dead himself just three months after the 6-29-89 Washington Times call-boy headline. The police were quick to call a suicide.
Spence had "hinted the tours were arranged by ?top-level? persons, including Donald Gregg, national security advisor to Vice-President Bush," according to the Washington Times [8-9-89], adding, "Spence, according to friends, was also carrying out homosexual blackmail operations for the CIA."
Spence and Gregg were reportedly close friends, as Spence had sponsored a dinner in Gregg?s honor in the spring of 1989 at Washington posh Four Seasons Hotel in Georgetown just before the White House prostitution scandal broke at the beginning of the Bush 41 tenure. [ George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography , Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin, Chapter 21--Omaha]
A June 30, 1989 Washington Times report said "Rep. Barney Frank, Massachusetts Democrat and a self-proclaimed homosexual who several weeks ago threatened to reveal a list of Republican homosexuals in Congress, said he was ?not surprised? by the revelations."
The Times also said [8-25-1989], "A male prostitute convicted of drug trafficking and sex offenses against a minor used the Chevy Chase Elementary School in late 1987 to run his prostitution operation after the school's principal began buying sex from him."
"The call-boy was allowed to sleep and use phones in the school even after the principal left at 5 p.m., while teachers and the children were still involved in after-school activities such as chorus," said the principal, Gabriel A. Massaro, who also revealed "he had a four-year relationship with the prostitute and provided him with a guidance counselor's office and telephone at the model ?magnet school? even while children were in classes elsewhere in the building."
Also according to the Times, "Massaro acknowledged that he attended a meeting between Davis and his Alexandria probation officer at the Capitol Hill home of Rep. Barney Frank, Massachusetts Democrat, another client whose home the call-boy used to perform sexual services." The paper did not reveal the age or name of the call-boy or whether he serviced Congressman Frank.
A clearly unethical and likely illegal presidential appointment was also linked to the White House child sex-ring: "In August, 1990, Bush appointed Ronald Roskens of Nebraska to head the Agency for International Development (AID). Roskens had been fired the previous year as chancellor of the University of Nebraska, where Larry King was a member of his advisory committee.
[State Police "Franklin" investigator] Gary Caradori?s daily notes for February 19, 1989 record: ?I was informed that Roskens was terminated by the state because of sexual activities reported to the Regents and verified by them. Mr. Roskens was reported to have had young men at his residence for sexual encounters." [ Franklin Cover-up , p.177]
DeCamp added that AID assignments have been used as a "cover" by CIA agents; and in spite of Roskens? sexual background and termination by Nebraska educators and his clear potential for being blackmailed, President Bush appointed him anyway.
Karl: ?Rove?ing DC, approving 'special' WH press passes?
The extent to which White House Senior Domestic Policy Advisor Karl Rove played a part in approving the Gucket/Gannon White House press passes is not known.
However, CBS News spoke of a Rove-Gannon connection , saying "Gannon's aggressively partisan work and the ease with which he got day passes for the White House press room the past two years make it hard to believe that he wasn't at least implicitly sanctioned by the "boy genius."
Following on the heels of Guckert-Gannon, Walter Storch, editor of
the Barnes Review News reported a three weeks ago that "Karl Rove
was seen by one of my people entering a private homosexual orgy at a
five-star Washington hotel over the Mid-Atlantic Leather (MAL)
weekend last year." [2004]
A Barnes reporter told Storch that "Karl greatly enjoyed the supervision of a certain hairy 350-lb. Leather Dominator who had won the Miss Virginia Daddy Bear title at the MAL festivities."
Storch wrote, "Karl used to hang out a JR?s, which is on 17th between P & S streets, before he became so well-known. This is a respectable gay bar for discreet people...," adding, "there is an expensive apartment...over near Dupont Circle that certain powerful senators take turns visiting with their pickups."
"Bush, via Karl Rove, was projected as a moral man who would return a hedonistic America to the simpler virtues of a bygone era. A large part of the American public, unhappy with what they saw as debilitating liberalism, abortion on demand, gay marriage and other forms of moral decay, put Bush back in office," said the Barnes editor.
"Now they have to deal with rampant male whores prancing around the White House in consort with a small army of closet queens, all of whom very obviously have the ear, and the confidence, (and hopefully, that?s all they have) of their ?moral? choice for President," said Storch.
Interestingly, TBRNews.org also counts "one Supreme Court Justice, several governors (all Republican) and at least one very prominent televangelist" among those high officials who are saying one thing and doing another with respect to Storch's closet queen issue.
While American citizens watch, unanswered questions remain as Democrats and Republicans ignore young witnesses with clear and credible evidence--refusing to hold each other's legislators criminally accountable for their unspeakable crimes against children.
Andy Stephenson and Mary Schneider contributed to this report.
Posted by: H. Meyer at March 18, 2005 3:14 PMPosted by: H. Meyer at March 18, 2005 3:35 PM
From Stopbolton.org:
"Think Bolton's the right man for the job of UN Ambassador? Take a look [at this video] and decide for yourself."
For more on Bolton, read this great post by Steven Clemons at The Washington Note.
Posted by not sam at March 28, 2005 10:51 AMloltheinternet.com
ytmnd.com
Needs More Garafalo
Posted by: I Want Jeneane at March 27, 2005 03:36 PM
http://dehydratedlol.ytmnd.com/
Posted by: I Want Jeneane at March 28, 2005
Posted by: I Want Jeneane at March 28, 2005 03:23 PMa cute white mustache like an elf
let him sit with wise men
so he can tell the u n
they can go fuck themselves hisself
Posted by: RWiley at March 29, 2005 08:22 AMPosted by: Robert at April 1, 2005 04:29 PM
A businesswoman describes belligerent behavior by Bolton.
An intelligence analyst's accusations of pressure are further detailed.
Excerpts:
A Texas businesswoman has written to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that John R. Bolton is unfit to serve as U.N. ambassador because he threatened, berated and harassed her in a dispute over an overseas contract.
"His behavior back in 1994 wasn't just unforgivable, it was pathological," wrote Melody Townsel, a businesswoman from Dallas, in a letter to the committee that was made public Saturday by Democrats who opposed Bolton's appointment. "I cannot believe that this man is being seriously considered for any diplomatic position, let alone such a critical posting to the U.N."
But two Republicans on the panel, Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, have voiced concerns about Bolton's character and personal behavior.
The third analyst, Rexon Ryu, was a State Department Middle Eastern proliferation specialist now on temporary assignment working for Hagel. Ryu was transferred from his State Department assignment at Bolton's request.
Hagel's support for Bolton had been seen as assured until the senator learned Friday about the transfer, according to a Hagel aide.
Link to article:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-bolton17apr17,1,694605.story?coll=la-headlines-politics
Posted by: Star Vox at April 17, 2005 08:41 AMfrom your TV. With this simple device. It costs only nine bucks, which it makes back by saving you so much bullshit.
Posted by not sam at March 28, 2005 11:37 AMloltheinternet.com
ytmnd.com
Needs More Garafalo
Posted by: I Want Jeneane at March 27, 2005 03:36 PM
http://dehydratedlol.ytmnd.com/
Posted by: I Want Jeneane at March 28, 2005
Posted by: Need more Garafalo at March 28, 2005 03:24 PMThat statistic (taken from the Fox Blocker story) just proves what I always thought. That people who watch Fox News aren't really readers. While their audience is being spoonfed propaganda by the TV, the audience of radio shows like Majority Report are reading. That is why we know facts and they know lies. It is also why pro wrestling still has viewership, they share the same audience. While they are watching the Wrestling and Fox News we are engaged in different pursuits.
Posted by: Jason at March 28, 2005 07:58 PMCheck out my website and my commentary on Fox--full of excrement.
www.mark-gelbart.com
Posted by: Mark Gelbart at March 28, 2005 08:19 PMPosted by: Ron McIntosh at March 28, 2005 08:31 PM
Posted by: sexy jeneane at March 29, 2005 02:57 PM
In reality, it's a simple notch filter that filters out a single channel from the cable, but the price is really good...after a quick look through the internet, the cheapest price for a single channel notch filter was over $20. The guy either got a bunch at an auction for cheap, or is taking a loss on each one, or I didn't find the best price in my search.
Posted by: Lance at March 29, 2005 05:17 PMPosted by: Juan Miguel at March 29, 2005 09:01 PM
http://www.nancho.net/911/mariani.html
It's most known for its DEFINITIVE LISTING of almost 100 warnings the W admin received just before 9/11.
=======================================
ELLEN MARIANI, Individually, as )
Personal Representative of the Estate )
of LOUIS NEIL MARIANI, deceased, )
and others similarly situated[1], )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) Case No. 03-5273
)
GEORGE W. BUSH[2], President of ) Judge Eduardo C. Robreno
the United States, Officially and )
Individually, ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
)
and )
)
RICHARD CHENEY, Vice President of )
The United States, Officially and )
Individually, )
)
and )
)
JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General of )
the United States (DOJ), Officially and )
Individually, )
)
and )
)
DONALD H. RUMSFELD, Secretary of )
Defense (DOD), Officially and )
Individually, )
)
and )
)
GEORGE J. TENET, Director, Central )
Intelligence Agency (CIA), Officially and )
Individually, )
)
and )
)
NORMAN Y. MINETA, Secretary, )
Department of Transportation (DOT), )
Officially and Individually, )
)
and )
)
PETER G. PETERSON, Chairman of the )
Board, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN )
RELATIONS (CFR)[3], Officially and )
Individually, )
)
and )
)
CONDOLEEZZA RICE, National )
Security Advisor, to Defendant Bush, )
Officially and Individually, )
)
and )
)
GEORGE H. BUSH[4], Former, )
Director, Central Intelligence Agency, )
(CIA), Vice-President and President of )
the United States of America, Officially, )
and Individually, )
)
and )
)
KENNETH R. FEINBERG, Special Master, )
"September 11 Victim Compensation )
Fund of 2001" Officially and Individually, )
and )
)
Other unnamed past, present, officials, )
representatives, agents, and private )
consultants of THE UNITED STATES )
OF AMERICA, )
)
Posted by: Marion Delgado at March 30, 2005 02:48 AMThe Fox-Blocker is the worst idea I've heard you promote in the
six mos. I've been following yr show.Please stop--it's
embarrasing.This is a form
of censorship,akin to book-burning.
Don't you trust people to control themselves,to have better
judgement? One of the basic tenets of
Liberalism is the FREE AND OPEN EXCHANGE OF IDEAS.
Far-Right Freaks will hit you over the head with
your Fox-Blocker.
Here's an idea--create an up-front Liberal-bias TV
station and promote it as the antidote to Fox--
Posted by: a at March 30, 2005 12:56 PM
Posted by: Jethro Zappa at March 30, 2005 07:36 PM
And as to knowing what they are saying, I get my stuff from Media matters and Air America and FAIR
It's been proven that people who watch Fox slip in their IQ by 20%, hardly worth the risk ;)
And a is absolutely right.
Posted by: Fancy Pants Elitist at March 30, 2005 09:21 PMPosted by: Belger143 at March 30, 2005 09:44 PM
As a patriotic
service,I am going to risk my sanity and leave Fox News ON (sound
off) and give
people the "skinny" as to what they're saying...people can add 2+2
and reach their own
conclusions--
3/31,12:51a.m.--Terri Schiavo Still alive/5 yr old
calls 9-11/buy a fabric steamer/DANGER from ACLU!/
Terri clings to life/....1:06A.M.--Al Sharpton vs.
Jesse Jackson/MICHAEL JACKSON!/Terri's lawyer/ACLU
LIKES CHILD PORN/Michelle Malkin,Analyst/DANGEROUS
TIMES!/Terri's mother near collapse/ACLU vs.PATRIOTIC MINUTEMEN WHO
GUARD OUR BORDERS/buy
hair-growth tonic......(more manana)--
Posted by: by the way i need garafalo at March 31, 2005 02:16 PM
But this isn't about me! Just think how lovely it would be to install one of those in your health club, local restaurant, or any place else that habitually tunes in to that tripe. Heck, it would probably take them *weeks* to figure out what was wrong, and then only after calling in professional help! ;)
On the other hand, the universal on/off remote that somone developed last year is probably a better investment, because (a) it's quicker, (b) it stealthier, and (c) what ends up on the TV is definitely better!
Posted by: JeffK at March 31, 2005 11:51 PM12:57PM--Pat Boone on Terri/Pope's Health Unstable/BREAKING NEWS-TERRI'S FAMILY TO HOLD CONFERENCE ON HER DEATH/Child-soldiers on the Ivory Coast/buy this book--The End of Faith/Terri's spiritual advisor/Terri's Grieving Brother/PICTURE OF PRETTY 25 YR OLD TERRI/POPE NOT IN A COMA/Prayers For Terri/
7:48PM--Dick Morris,Analyst/Democrats silent about Terri/Afghan Rebels Caught/POPE STILL NOT IN A COMA/pope,not,in,a,comma/(sorry about that last one)/buy Sizzler Steaks/TERRI LIVES ON IN OUR HARTS AND MINDS/Terror Alert--Elevated/
11:05PM--THE RELIGIOUS IMPACT OF TERRI SCHIAVO/Wolfowitz approved
for World Bank/PRESIDENT BUSH REMEMBERS TERRI/buy a new
stove/jghgyffxcrdxftrTERRI!BLAHBLAHOIKHJ7YG..WHerE
aM I,WHU AR YU//(sorry,they wounded me,but just superficially)
12:17AM--POPE RECEIVES LAST RITES/Another Picture Of Pretty Terri,20 yrs old/Labor Unions Misusing Funds?/Terri At 15 yrs old/LIFE AND DEATH LAWS/Another TV Evangelist/......WE REPORT,YOU ..DECIDE..WE REPORT,YOU DECIDE..WE REPORT....WE...DECIDE
Posted by: ProProleteriat at April 1, 2005 07:06 AMPosted by: Robert at April 1, 2005 03:48 PM
Posted by: roboteating at April 4, 2005 01:18 PM
www.starvethefox.com
Posted by: Fogyreef at April 10, 2005 03:36 AMPosted by: frater_volen at April 11, 2005 10:28 PM
Posted by: Tuesday at April 21, 2005 06:31 AM
Posted by: Andrej at April 30, 2005 01:57 AM
Here's what Tom Delay said after over a dozen state and federal courts decided to follow the law in the Terri Schiavo case: "The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior."
Given the number of assassination attempts (many successsful) against judges recently, this could easily be interpreted as a death threat. So much so that Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey sent a letter to Delay's office demanding an apology and clarification. Raw Story has the letter. It quotes Federal criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. 115 (a)(1)(B):
"Whoever threatens to assault...or murder, a United States judge...with intent to retaliate against such...judge...on account of the performance of official duties, shall be punished [by up to six years in prison]."
The U.S. Marshals service is charged with protecting judges. Their official mission states:
"The Marshals Service protects more than 2,000 sitting judges and countless other court officials at more than 400 court facilities throughout the nation."
CALL the U. S. Marshals Judicial Protective Services number at 202-307-9500.
Ask whether an investigation of Tom Delay has been opened, and, if it hasn't, why not? Is Tom Delay above the law? If a regular person issued such a threat, the Marshalls would--rightly--act on it. Do we have to wait for a judge to be murdered before taking action against Delay?
Posted by not sam at April 1, 2005 02:12 PMKKKlove to kill blacks byrd and the murderer Ted Kennedy many years ago but we won't talk about reality just liberal bullshit and now the crooked as can ever be hillary wants to run ha ha ha ha ha gotta love the shit as it piles up on the democrat loving europe side and hating america
Posted by: robert at April 1, 2005 04:36 PMPosted by: deana at April 1, 2005 07:52 PM
Posted by: Dr. Paul Armstrong at April 1, 2005 08:28 PM
Temporary lapses in judgement,by
Byrd or Kennedy
or any Left-Winger,no matter how insignificant,no matter how quickly
they're rectified,are ruthlessly advertised,non-stop by the
hypocrites.
Of course,using their logic,our current "President" is a drunk/dope
fiend.
The truth is that Bush's & Kennedy's drinking problems,as well as Byrd's very temporary exploration of the KKK,did'nt actually hurt anybody.
On the other hand,given the weak,cowardly state of our current congress,DeLay is a very real threat of corruption.He has demonstrated no conscience,even after being reprimanded by his own party.He needs to be called at every suspicious move.
Posted by: ProProleteriat at April 2, 2005 07:33 AMPosted by: rj at April 2, 2005 09:27 AM
Where is murder or assault mentioned in this statement?
Oh, thats right, liberals don't understand the definition of 'responsible'.
Posted by: Rush at April 4, 2005 10:00 PMA doubting Thomas DeLay inspecting the wounds of a resurrected Terri Schiavo, done by some maniac who calls himself Skikky the elf. Sick, but funny in its context.
http://www.geocities.com/the_skikky_show/risen.html
Happy Birthday, Air America!
Posted by: Easton R. at April 5, 2005 06:46 PMPosted by: JOHN at April 5, 2005 06:56 PM
For the thick-headed or lame-brained who can't
or don't want to understand what DeLay is
doing---it's called a veiled threat.It was
meant to be taken as an implied message of
violence against judges who buck the Neo-Con
agenda.It was'nt designed to be an explicit
threat for obvious reasons. Comprende?
If any violence results because of this,Tom
DeLay and his cohorts are at least partially
RESPONSIBLE.
--------
--------
Oh yeah? Write a letter about the President using that language to your local newspaper, or just send it to the White House. There's about a 100 percent chance you'll be getting a visit from the Secret Service. They, and the Marshals, are not just there to save the President, or judges (a co-equal branch of government)--their job is to sniff out and prevent attacks before they happen. One of the ways they do that is to use their brains in how they read people's language, something you're clearly incapable of doing. If you think there's no implied threat to Delay's language, or now Cornyn's, then you're quite likely mentally retarded, and you should probably not apply for a job with the Secret Service, or any protective agency.
Posted by: a at April 6, 2005 02:19 PMKKKlove to kill blacks byrd and the murderer
Ted Kennedy many years ago but we won't talk about reality just
liberal bullshit and now the crooked as can ever be hillary wants to
run ha ha ha ha ha gotta love the shit as it piles up on the
democrat loving europe side and hating america
Posted by: robert at April 1, 2005 04:36 PM
How come I get the impression that the only ones who pronounces Byrd's name that way are disgruntled KKK members (including Hannity)? They are fuming at the mouth adn still feel the betrayal that Byrd abandoned them, saw the wrong of his ways, and joined the good forces.
Posted by: Bjorn at April 6, 2005 02:21 PMWell to the bleeding heart liberal, I can understand how they would FEEL 'held responsible' is a veiled threat. Well, after all, responsible is being accountable for you actions and behavior and not blaming it on someone else and that can be a darn near impossible for liberals.
Try again...
"Democratic National Committee spokesman Tony Welch suggested the president should be held responsible for the retracted claim."
"The president is held responsible for the health of the national economy."
"And it concerns me that Hillary is excusing his
behavior when in fact she should be insisting that he be held
responsible for it."
"Third, all states and school districts must be held responsible
for the quality of their teachers"
--President Clinton, State of the Union address
"But this is Bush's war, and he ought to be held responsible for it."
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHH! RUN!
Veiled threats everywhere!!!!!!!!!!!
The judiciary has been shredding the
Constitution right under your noses. Recent example, Ginsberg wants
international law to govern us 'should not lead us to abandon the
effort to learn what we can from the experience and good thinking
foreign sources may convey,'
'the U.S. Constitution is a document essentially frozen in time as
of the date of its ratification'
Except when the Constitution is convenient to use for her own
agenda.
I look at the facts objectively and with logic. Following the logic of one poster, all those quotes should be forwarded over the proper authorities as veiled threats for investigation and possible prosecution, or no?
Hard feelings, never... hard logic, always...
Gee,Rush,I hate to disappoint you after all that
hard work defining the word "responsible",but
that's NOT what this is about.
You're right,tho! being responsible IS "being
accountable for your actions,not blaming it
on someone else"...BTW, can you explain that
to
Atty. Gen. Gonzales--he sez he's not responsible
for that torture memo that he SIGNED, 'cuz
it was written by someone else. Oh yeh, and
Bush sez he was'nt responsible at all for 9/11
,or all those job losses,or the disapppearance
of Clinton's huge surplus,replaced by a huge
deficit, OR attacking an unarmed,third-world
(but oil-rich)country which posed NO REAL THREAT
.Since you've obviously done your homework
defining "responsibility",maybe you can explain
it to Bush or Gonzales or...DeLay??
So,here's a tricky one--how about the phrases
1. "The time will come",or 2. "to answer for
their behaviour"..?
1."The time will come"--what time? when?--these
guys are'nt up for election in 2006,they're
appointed for life. Mr. DeLay used a vague
(veiled),unspecified time for the judges to
be "answered" (punished?)
2."answer for their behaviour"-answer to who?
The Judiciary is purposely kept independent.
Theoretically,they answer to the Constitution,
NOT to Tom DeLay. Also,"answer" ,in DeLay's
context,is purposely vague,veiled,used in a
phrase typically associated w/mob-types.
Let's consider the source of this statement--
Sen. Tom DeLay,censured TWICE by the bipartisan
Ethics Commitee,under investigation for tax-
payer paid junkets,lobbyist for Russia,etc.,etc.
So, nice try Rush,keep listening to Air America,
Majority Report,maybe you can learn a new word
EVERY day--
For elected officals, this could mean being not elected next time, but for a Supreme Court Justice, there is nothing anyone can really do, since they are seated for life... so how is he suggesting that they would "answer for" not "saving Terri"??? I think DeLay will be found to be so corrupt. I bet it starts a tumble in Texas that spills over to Florida and then Ohio and DC....
Posted by: Loki at April 8, 2005 05:14 PM"Atty. Gen. Gonzales"
- Not the issue, why even bring it up?
1. The time can never come because they are appointed for life? You might need to brush up on something called 'Checks and Balances', I'll even give you a hint, impeachment.
'Mr. DeLay used a vague (veiled),unspecified time'
Ohhhh, and now its a veiled time frame for
'answering' not a 'veiled threat'?
'Also,"answer" ,in DeLay's context,is purposely vague,veiled,...'
So the word 'answer' used in such a statement is a threat? If you
don't want to convey a threat, then can you say:
'...need to reply for their behavior'
'...need to respond for their behavior'
I wouldn't imagine so, since they are synonyms. I hope no public
officals have ever used thoses phrases before, or they might be in
big trouble.
Uh oh, now we have problems:
'The drug companies need to made to answer for their behavior'
-ICSSP
'students picked up by campus police at Rice University may have to
answer for their behavior'
-edc.org
Plus 194 more 'veiled threats' out there on the Internet, go get 'em tiger.
Possibly to many Hollyweird movies running through your head about mobsters?
'So, nice try Rush,keep listening...'
Who said I was listening?
Posted by: Rush at April 8, 2005 07:25 PM_______________
Damn. Guess you won't be explaining the meaning
of "responsibility" to George or Alberto or
Tom..prob'ly a waste of time.
I enjoy arguing with cons. because it gives me
insight into their inane logic and strategies.
So you've deconstructed a veiled threat to
show that words such as "responsibility" and
"answer", taken separately,out of context are
innocuous. Well..duh.(Here's a similar project--
deconstruct the phrase "make him an offer he
can't refuse"--nope,no threatening words there,
nice innocent phrase.)
Tom DeLay made his now infamous veiled threat
on March 31.After(I assume) consulting with
"turd blossom" Karl Rove for an interpretation,
he finally comes up with something a week+
later.Clarification:Tom was talking about
impeaching juges!Coincidentally,it took you the
same week to come up with that explanation.
Right. So here's what you guys are NOW saying--
REPUBLICAN LEADER DELAY WANTS TO IMPEACH JUDGES
BECAUSE OF THE SCHIAVO CASE. go for it,jokers
*next up,from the eloquent Mr.DeLay--judges
"ignoring the legitimate will of the people"
...huh??
Karl Rove can jump off a freaking bridge for all I care. Once again, I am not a Republican. Hold on, I'll say it one more time, I'm not a Republican!
The Republican party has become what the Democrats were 30 years ago and I don't subscribe to their platform any more.
Delay is making a huge moral issue over this when he did the same thing to his own father and used a "trial lawyer" to get paid for the accident. The hipocracy is hard to stomach.
If you want to talk impeachment forget the judges, go after GWB and his entire corrupt administration. Culture of life? BS!
Posted by: zeke at April 11, 2005 12:28 PMFrom Jerome, at MyDD:
I've signed the list over on Agonist to tell the Members of the National Press Club to invite John Aravosis onto their panel that will be discussing conservative political operative Jeff Gannon/Guckert. The phone numbers and contact information at the National Press Club are: Julie Shue or Rick Dunham. Here are their numbers: 202-662-7500 or 202-662-7501 or email at tglad@press.org and info@npcpress.org.
I think they are scared of having John Aravosis come to the event, because he scares the shit out of Republicans and the status quo in DC that cowers to Republican dominance. How could John be excluded? He, more than anyone on the web, broke this story wide-open.
Posted by not sam at April 3, 2005 11:37 AMThe Mainstream Media "Watchdogs" have gotten fat
and lazy,which results in their resentment of
the new dogs who are'nt afraid to bite into a
story(Bloggers,esp. Liberal ones).The MSM would,
of course,prefer to growl at Janet Jackson"s
breast or Baseball Players' steroid-produced
chests than to attack a REAL story.Phony White-
House shills in the W.H. Press Corps is page 2
stuff with these guys.
Interesting that the reason given for Gannon/Guckert's inclusion
on a panel defining
"reporters" is his NOTORIETY,as opposed to any
credible qualifications.Sounds like standards
befitting the Nat'l Enquirer...
p.s--when is Gannon/Guckert's book coming out??
Posted by: ProProleteriat at April 5, 2005 08:05 AM
Title: Is "Jeff Gannon" really Johnny Gosch? (GOP child sex ring
kidnap victim) (graphic)
Source: bellaciao
URL Source:
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3? id_article=5409
Published: Mar 12, 2005
Author: bellaciao
Post Date: 2005-03-12 19:07:43 by joe_the_aroma
8 Comments
I’ve been watching this story percolate since the weekend, and with Thursday’s return of "Jeff Gannon" to the blogosphere with a column entitled "Fear and Loathing in the Press Room" really bringing it all full circle, several questions are begged here.
As the Jeff Gannon story progressed and turned into a Bush White House homosexual prostitution scandal, Internet investigators started asking if there could be a connection to the previous Bush White House homosexual prostitution scandal.
If you recall, the stories of 15-year-old callboys wandering through the White House in the middle of the night was linked to the "Franklin Cover-Up" case exposed by Nebraska State Sen. John DeCamp. In that case, a Republican operative named Larry King was involved with procuring boys and girls from Boys Town in Nebraska and elsewhere and entrapping them in a child sex-slave and espionage ring. King, with an annual salary of under 20K, was throwing sex parties for the powerful in a $5,000-a-month condo in Washingotn, DC; apparently taping the proceedings for blackmail purposes.
One of the victims of this ring was one Paul Bonacci, who testified in court proceedings that he helped kidnap Johnny Gosch into this ring in 1982. It was apparently at 2:29 AM, Sunday, Feb. 20 that the question was first asked -- is "Jeff Gannon" really Johnny Gosch?
By the end of the day, Hunter S. Thompson was reported dead.
Posted by: Crime_waves at April 8, 2005 05:31 PMA new Tom Delay fan site. Give it a look.
Also check out their flow chart of Tom Delay's Web of Corruption.
Posted by not sam at April 6, 2005 05:13 PMCome on Bacardi, you gave $3,000 to the defense fund for that slimy ole dinosaur Tom DeLay?
I always had this youthful image of Bacardi. Young people having a good time at the beach with some rum. I even have bought it a few times in the past.
Oh, Well. I guess I won't be able to shake the image of Tom DeLay from my mind the next time I browse in the likker store. Shudder.
An image of rotten corruption, smelly old socks, fat old boys club having a good time at a bordello.
I'll spread the word. There's probably 30 million liberals in my demographic group. Nothing woudl make me happier than seing you idiots lose, say $15M in revenues for propping p an old crook like this. I will surely do my part and spread the word!
Posted by: Bjorn at April 6, 2005 05:54 PMDamn, I never thought I'd be giving O'Reilly props for anything, but he was all over her. And I had a sudden premonition...
This tears it. Delay is going down. He's road kill. The echo-chamber is deserting him. The Repubs themselves are going to tie him on the altar and tear out his beating hear and throw it to the dogs, and then, of course, claim they've drvien the corruption from their ranks.
And even if the Repubs let him live out his natural lifespan (i.e. 2006), all the Dems have to do is run a populist do-gooder type against him in his home district and they'll kick his ass out of DC, just like they did with "B-1 Bob" Dornan in California.
It's time for the Dems to tear a page from the Newt Gingrich playbook and run on an anti-corruption platform. Anyone who took money from Delay is suspect. Every one of them is a target now. The more money they took the bigger target they are. I hope Howard Dean has enough sense to realize this and use it.
The Right may have taken down Tom Dashcle, but if the Left takes down Tom Delay and his pals, I think the Left wins the exchange.
Posted by: Joe Max at April 7, 2005 04:53 AMO'Reilly said he's going to put a poll up on his website tomorrow asking "his viewers" if they think Delay has gone too far. He assured Delay's lawyer that his viewers are not "the New York Times" and aren't out to "get" Delay just because they disagreee with him. So it's time for us to stand up and be counted! Go to O'Reilly's site and vote! Let it be known that Fox viewers think Tom Delay is corrupt!
Posted by: Joe Max at April 7, 2005 04:58 AMUmmm..yr idea about voting on O'Reilly's poll
sounded gd, but the only poll there was about
the pope.AND Bill wanted money for everything;
free enterprise at it's finest,I guess.Maybe
O'Reilly needs $$ for legal fees...
HEY here's an idea--maybe Tom DeLay can open
a for-profit hotline to pay for his looming
legal fees("hi..I'm Tom DeLay,persecuted Senator,
can I make an obscene proposition to you..?")
"Is it wrong for Tom DeLay to pay his wife & daughter with politically donated funds?"
Although the wording doesn't really convey the spirit of the issue: was it wrong for Delay to pay his family HALF-MILLION BUCKS of politically donated funds?
So go vote anyway!
Here's the court papers: http://ccweb.co.fort-bend.tx.us/results.asp
Posted by: BusyLawyer at April 7, 2005 05:25 PM1)Will he resign under pressure??? Not likely.
2)Is he an embarrassment to the radical right?? Yes.
3)Assuming Delay does not step down, would a long drawn out scandal
weaken the strangle hold the extream right has on the reigns of
power in America? Yes.
4)Has Tom Delay clearly become a liability to the win at any cost
wing of the radical right? Probably.
5)If Tom Delay were to be assassinated by some wack-job-nut-case
would it benefit Democrats? NO. Absolutely not.
6)Would it benefit the radical right if Tom Delay were to be
assassinated by some wack-job-nut-case (particularly if the guy
could be framed up as a “Liberal left-wing wack job)? Almost
certainly. Major embarrassment gone along with one man who knows too
much and would otherwise be under considerable pressure to talk.
7)Would radical right wing extreamists sink to this level??? I hope
not... but there is reason enough to belive they might.
Should Delay be taken into protective custody. Probably... although the Hague may be the only safe place to keep him.
Posted by: Watchful Eye at April 10, 2005 01:43 AMOne more post like that, and I will tilt.
Posted by: Bjorn at April 12, 2005 05:26 PMPosted by: FLS at April 12, 2005 08:13 PM
If you could say something -- in a big way -- to the people of Congressman Tom DeLay's district in Texas, what would it be?
We're looking for a slogan -- something short, something memorable, and something that lets the people of his district know that it's time for him to go.
We're buying billboards in the 22nd Congressional District, and if your slogan is selected, it will be part of Democracy for America's big splash in Tom DeLay's backyard.
Suggest your Tom DeLay slogan here:
http://bsd.democracyforamerica.com/page/s/slogan
Posted by: mondo at April 16, 2005 06:00 AM
From FAIR:
When Rose asked if there could ever be a successful progressive version of Fox News Channel, [new CNN President] Klein thought not. He explained that while Fox was tapping into a brand of "mostly angry white men" conservatism, "a quote/unquote, 'progressive' or liberal network probably couldn't reach the same sort of an audience, because liberals tend to like to sample a lot of opinions. They pride themselves on that. And you know, they don't get too worked up about anything. And they're pretty morally relativistic. And so, you know, they allow for a lot of that stuff."
And then:
CALL JONATHAN KLEIN: at 212-484-5000
Let him know your opinion about whether progressives ever get "worked up." Fill him in on the fact that progressives are not "morally relativistic," but, simply: moral.
Don't hold back.
Posted by not sam at April 13, 2005 05:10 PMPosted by: Dr. Paul Armstrong at April 13, 2005 07:25 PM
I told him that I was upset about his comments to Rose regarding the possibility of progressive TV. I told him his comments regarding moral relativism and about liberals not getting worked up about things, were offensive.
I also mentioned that I found offensive the implications on Blitzer's show that liberals are somehow less moral, or less religious, than conservatives.
Posted by: Dr. Paul Armstrong at April 13, 2005 07:48 PMWhat Mr. Klein just proved to me is that he is more worried about better ratings than informing the public (you know, what "news" is supposed to do). The problem with news today (and this is coming from a high school student) is the apparant lack of news. When I turn on the television, I get people yelling back and forth at each other "you're wrong" "no you're wrong" "no you're wrong" and by the end of the show they have only gotten louder, but haven't brought anything new to the table.
"'progressive' or liberal network probably couldn't reach the same sort of an audience, because liberals tend to like to sample a lot of opinions".... so because liberals try to get the other side of the story, that's bad. I guess that isn't "fair and balanced". Or maybe it isn't interesting enough? I'm sorry, but when I ask for news, I'd like all of it, not one side of it. It helps me to formulate an opinion about the issue (as opposed to taking only what is shoved down my throat by the right). The fact that we don't have every side fairly represented in the media, and the fact that the media only dishes out infotainment is hurting America. And Mr. Klein here is only adding to the problem.
Posted by: Tony at April 13, 2005 08:32 PMLike now, I'm pissed about this estate tax repeal, which, when coupled with the imposition of the Alternative Minimum Tax, creates a wider divide between the classes and places a larger burden on the middle class.
As for Bert, who was on your show yesterday, there is a really easy way for him to avoid getting taxed on his house. He can either leave his entire estate to his spouse, without paying a dime, then she can make her kids Joint Tenants on the deed, so that they become survivors rather than devisees and get the whole shebang, TAX FREE!!!!!
So, sorry Bert, I'm not going to listen to your ridiculous sob story. Not listening. La la la la la la la la!!
Posted by: lbn at April 14, 2005 02:37 PMToday's Religious Rightwing should be called the Modern Western Pharisees.
Posted by: nora at May 1, 2005 09:34 PMI can only think Klein is part of a strategy to put Liberals on the defensive when in reality there is so much phoniness and hypocrisy the Media could expose about the Right it boggles the mind. We've got the Religious Right controlling the Republican Party with pure Pharisaic double-vision. (The Right is clearly opposed to "do-gooder" liberal programs, but willing to take untold taxpayer dollars for faith-based "charities"; are they really not doing any "good", and instead, faith-based charities are just a means to force evangelical preaching/brainwashing on desperate individuals and families?! Is this how they "reason" their receipt of these monies under "doing God's work?!)
Can only think Klein is part of a strategy to put Liberals on the defensive when in reality there is so much phoniness and hypocrisy the Media could expose about the Right it boggles the mind. We've got the Religious Right controlling the Republican Party with pure Pharisaic double-vision. (The Right is clearly opposed to "do-gooder" liberal programs, but willing to take untold taxpayer dollars for faith-based "charities"; are they really not doing and "good" and instead just a means to force evangelical preaching/brainwashing on desperate individuals and families?! Is this how they "reason" their receipt of these monies under "doing God's work?!)
Today's Religious Rightwing should be called the Modern Western Pharisees.
Does Klein expect us to PROVE that it has been the work of Liberals that have made the United States as open a society as it is? Was it not Liberals who forged ahead with abolition, suffrage, civil rights....? History proves Klein wrong. Or proves Klein flunked history (or read only revisionist schoolbooks and never picked up any other clarifying history books in his post high school years!).
The Media is missing the mark, the corporate despots know it, are on the defensive, and comments like this expose their desperate position. The Media-Emperor has no clothes.
Posted by: nora at May 1, 2005 09:59 PMHelp save the filibuster...
From Kos:
We have all 44 Dems and Jeffords. We have McCain and Chafee.
These are the swing votes. We need four of them.
Collins (ME)
Hagel (NE)
Snowe (ME)
Sununu (NH)
Gregg (NH)
Lugar (IN)
Warner (VA)
If you are a constituent (and only if you are a constituent), it's time to make that call.
Update: Call your own senators, even if they're not on the list
above. Some might absolutely be persuadable. These eight are the top
targets, but others (like Stevens) might still vote for sanity.
Go here for the links to the Senators' contacts.
We must organize to push the Dems to start fighting. Can we get something together before the re-education camps begin. It's so hard to organize behind barbedwire.
Posted by: Damon at April 15, 2005 05:32 PMLetter from PFAW President Ralph G. Neas to Senator Bill Frist
Excerpt from letter:
I urge you to repudiate the "Justice Sunday" event at which you are scheduled to speak later this month. The event is being promoted with deeply offensive materials suggesting that the filibuster is being used to target people of faith, and that proponents of the filibuster are forcing individuals to choose between serving in public office and Christian faith.
This is religious McCarthyism. It is dishonest, destructive and despicable.
================================================================
People for the American Way link:
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oId=18519
Take action:
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=16842
Posted by: Star Vox at April 15, 2005 08:34 PM===========================================================
The Clergy and Laity Network will sponsor a national prayer vigil on April 24 and is inviting citizens of all faith traditions to protest this unprecedented attack.
The CLN and DriveDemocracy are the coordinators of a national coalition of more than 65 religious organizations. Their national "Breaking the Silence" campaign kicked off April 4 at Riverside Church in NYC and is continuing with a national tour of America.
DriveDemocracy link:
http://www.drivedemocracy.org/blog/
Clergy and Laity Network United for Justice:
Posted by: Star Vox at April 15, 2005 09:08 PMWake up people! To call them Theocrats and Wingnuts and Pulpit Bullies is to use euphemisms. They are wolves in sheep's clothing, they are the emperor who is wearing new clothes, they are the Dark Lords of the Sith.
They and their apocolypto-cult comrades are on a moral crusade from Washington to Damascus, make no bones about it. If Jerusalem were destroyed by Arabs then the prophesies in Revelations could not come true, could they?
Never mind that the verb "to abort" (or its ancient greek counterpart ekbollein) never appear in Biblical texts -- and yes they did have abortion back then. In fact abortion has been practiced longer than written history has been recorded, which was a major factor in the Roe vs. Wade decision. The justices thought -- who are we now, in the 20th century, to outlaw a millenia-old practice that will continue whether it is outlawed or not, and which is only demanded to be outlawed by an extremist religious faction that has invented a belief not proven to have been held by those individuals who wrote their own religious text?
Yes, these apocolypto-cult wacko extremists that are holding this disgusting satellite spectacle are the same ones who are most likely to blame for our most recent imperialistic crusade to protect the Holy Land such that it may remain in tact for when the prophesies in Revelations come true.
If they are conservative, then what exactly are they conserving, when favoring laws against abortion -- especially considering that the oldest societies known to man feature "the tossing out of the male seed" as a common ritual conducted amongst women? Find me a culture that does not have a thousands-of-years-old practice of contraception and purgative drug injestion.
If they are conservative, then what exactly are they conserving, when they spend hundreds of billions of dollars invading a country with a pre-emptive and unprecedented war based on fabricated lies and motivated by the profits of corporations closely tied to the private-sector interests and occupations of the Vice President and President of the United States? WHAT ARE THEY CONSERVING?
What are they conserving when they sacrifice pristine natural areas for the sake of a few dollars? And don't tell me jobs, because I was doing just fine before they allowed terrorists to harm our economy on 9/11 -- before their own inattention to security allowed FRICKING JUMBO JETS to hit the WTC! OOOPS I DIDN'T SEE THAT ONE COMING! ><
Even though on 9/12/94 an airplane came a few meters from hitting the White House itself (it took off on 9/11/94), which combined with the Oklahoma City attacks served as a catalyst for a huge review of security policies. You would think that during that huge (and CONFIDENTIAL) review of policies (a meeting to which no first-ammendment activists were invited), which resulted in Pennsylvania Ave. being blocked off in front of 1600 block except to emergency vehicle traffic (like that's gonna stop an airplane!), you would think that they would have talked about AIRPLANES HITTING BUILDINGS AND HOW WE CAN POSSIBLY STOP THAT FROM HAPPENING! AND PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE TO THAT EFFECT!
Yeah, yeah, I know, we screwed up, Clinton screwed up, everybody screwed up and it happened. However... who has benefited most from this fiasco? Not Osama, certainly, although I'm sure he has plenty of new recruits due to later actions by Bush. No, certainly BUSH and his crew of apocolypto-cult wrong-wing wackos are the ones who benefited most from 9/11. They are the ones whose creepy-ass policies now dominate American politics as a result of a religious fear-base reaction from the general population.
AND I SAY IT'S A CROCK OF SHIT! AND SO SHOULD YOU! Don't let this madness go any farther, PLEASE LORD...
J.S. GILBERT
Posted by: Jon Gilbert at April 18, 2005 05:19 AMWe need to preserve the filibuster because otherwise the right-wing activists will appoint more right-wing Judges like Judge Donald L. Graham, who is an 1992 Bush I appointeee and is out of control. Judge Graham is dangerous!
I found some interesting links which will conclusively prove that
the present system of judicial discipline is a joke. These links
describe a well-known problem that needs to be addressed. There is
no "judicial discipline" with respect to the federal judiciary and
that is a terrible mistake. "Absolute power corrupts." Every other
branch of government is subject to some type of discipline except
federal judges.
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who recently appointed a six
member commission to study judicial discipline, knows full well that
complaints of judicial misconduct are routinely dismissed and NEVER
acted on, no matter how bad the alleged and proven misconduct is.
Moreover, complaints [section 372(c)] are kept in total secret.
Additionally, complaints of judicial misconduct lodged through the
appellate process are ignored as well. Judges, or law clerks, give
themselves permission not to publish cases, consequently acts of
misconduct never reach the light of day. There is no effective way
to discipline a rogue federal judge and everybody in the legal
profession is keenly aware of this fact. If you want to see how bad
the current system is, then read the links provided below. If you
don' read anything else,click on this link,
http://mmason.freeshell.org/edmondson. This link will
demonstrate how the right-wing Reagan appointee, Chief Judge J.L.
Edmondson, a 1986 Reagan appointee, attempted to conceal the
activism and misconduct of Judge Donald L. Graham. The links below
will demonstrate every thing that is wrong with the current system.
Congressman Sensebrenner and his committee should look into this
matter.
For really outrageous behavior, read the links below and the
documents referenced by the links. Download the documents and save
them.
These links generally discuss the misconduct of Judge Donald L.
Graham
http://donaldlgraham.blogspot.com
http://secretlaw.com
http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/ContemptAbuse.html
These links discuss the efforts of the US Court of Appeal, Eleventh
Circuit to conceal the misconduct.
http://mmason.freeshell.org/trickery/trickery.htm
http://mmason.freeshell.org/refusetodiscuss.html
http://mmason.freeshell.org/inherent/inherent.html
Judge Graham Lies and the Eleventh Circuit lies for him!!
* Lied and intentionally misrepresenting the law. Donald L. Graham did this by telling Mason one version of the law and another version of the law to a different Plaintiff. Graham stated in Mason's lawsuit that he could not state a claim under 42 U.S.C. � 1981 against a state actor while at the very same time he allowed a Plaintiff to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. � 1981 against the very same state actor. In Mason's lawsuit, Case No. 99-14027-CIV-Graham, Graham's Court stated:
"Counts Eight, Nineteen, Twenty-One, Twenty-Three and Twenty-Five deal with �1981 claims. This Court believes that those claims should likewise be dismissed pursuant to the Eleventh Circuit's opinion in Butts v. County of Volusia, 222 F.3d 891(11th Cir. 2000). In Butts, the Eleventh Circuit held that �1983 constituted the exclusive remedy against state actors for violation of rights contained in �1981. The Plaintiff has a valid �1983 count pending concerning his termination of employment. He has two Title VII claims as well as a disparate treatment claim pending. The Plaintiffs response does not give sufficient reason why he is entitled to plead a �1981 claim in light of the Buffs decision. Therefore, this Court is going to recommend to the District Court that Counts Eight, Nineteen, Twenty-One, Twenty-Three and Twenty-Five be dismissed with prejudice." See http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/DE-435/de435.pdf
At the very same time, Graham was saying that Mason could not state
a claim against a state actor under �1981, he was allowing the
Plaintiff to state a claim under �1981 against the very same state
actor, Highlands County Board of County Commissioners, in Case No.
00-14094-CIV-Graham, Fa Nina St. Germain v. Highlands County Board
of County Commissioners. See
http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/00-14094/de58.pdf
. Fa Nina St. Germain's �1981 was disposed of on the facts, not
the law and not Butts v. County of Volusia, 222 F.3d 891(11th Cir.
2000), in Case No. 00-14094-CIV-Graham. Clearly, Judge Graham either
lied to Mason or Fa Nina St. Germain as he could not have told the
truth to the both of them. See Page 3, Report and Recommendation,
http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/DE-435/de435.pdf
,(DE #435). Graham signed this Report and Recommendation. See (DE
#466),
http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/DE-466/de466.pdf .
See http://secretlaw.com and
http://geocities.com/mcneilmason.
On May 2004, Judges Carnes and Hull , Case No. 04-11894, were
willing to lie or intentionally misstate the facts in order to cover
for Judge Graham. Proof?
Mason merely asserts that Judge Graham was not impartial because �
(2) would not let Mason file a � 1981 claim, but did let another
plaintiff with similar claims do so... Moreover, a review of
Mason�s complaint and the other plaintiff�s complaint reveal
that their claims are not similar. Mason�s complaint alleges that
county entities and employees violated his First Amendment rights,
which is actually a 42 U.S.C. � 1983 claim. The plaintiff to which
Mason compares himself, however, brought racial and national origin
discrimination and retaliation claims under 42 U.S.C. � 2000e
(Title VII) and � 1981. Both Title VII and � 1981 can be used to
bring race discrimination claims.
See pgs. 2-3, Opinion, Eleventh Circuit Case No. No. 04-11894-B, URL: http://geocities.com/mcneilmason/secret/04-11894/04-11894.pdf. Both Judge Graham and the Eleventh Circuit know that this assertion is false because Mason's complaint specifically alleges racial discrimination and retaliation claims under 42 U.S.C. � 2000e (Title VII) and � 1981. See (DE #321, pps. 1, 2, 11; 63-64, 65, ��1, 2, 3, 85, 459-462, 465-466, 473-474), URL: http://geocities.com/mcneilmason/secret/99-14027/ConsolidatedAmendedComplaint.doc. It is hard to imagine that judges would outright lie when they know the record clearly contradicts their statements. Aren't Judges required under the law to tell the truth? What is the punishment for judges that intentionally lie and misrepresent the truth?
*Usurped legal authority in violation of the First and Tenth
Amendment. Judge Graham issued orders stating that Mason must
request the permission of private for profit attorneys in order to
speak to the government or request Public Records under Florida law.
Judge Donald L. Graham and his magistrate issued the following
orders to an unrepresented Plaintiff in a civil lawsuit. The
Defendants being referred to is the Highlands County Board of County
Commissioners and other governmental agencies. You can't find an
order like this nowhere else in the written United States History.
Plaintiff shall be prohibited from contacting any of the
[Government] Defendants, including their supervisory employees
and/or the individual [Government] Defendants, regarding any matter
related to this case.
Plaintiff shall correspond only with Defendants' [Government]
counsel. See
http://secretlaw.com//NewComplaint/HelpLetters/DE201Orders/de201.pdf
. Order June 19, 2000 (DE #201).
Plaintiff shall correspond only with Defendants' [Government]
counsel including any requests for public records. See
http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/DE201Orders/de246.pdf
. Order dated July 25, 2000 (DE #246).
Plaintiff shall be prohibited from contacting any of the named
[Government] Defendants in this case, including their supervisory
employees and/or the individual Defendants, who are parties in other
actions (Fellin, St . Germain, etc .) and are represented by counsel
in those other actions regarding any matter related to those cases
since Plaintiff is not an attorney or the attorney of record for the
plaintiffs in those other cases,. See Order dated July 25, 2000 (DE
#246)http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/DE201Orders/de246.pdf
.Judge Graham actually dismissed a lawsuit because he said Mason
talked to the government without the permission of a private for
profit lawfirm. See Court Orders, (Doc. #201), (Doc. 246) . See
http://secretlaw.com and
http://geocities.com/mcneilmason.
* Allowing a motion for a preliminary injunction for to languish in
court for 574 days and not make a ruling. The motion for preliminary
in injunction was initially filed on November 24, 1999. Essentially,
Graham gave himself permission not to rule on a motion for
injunctive relief. Despite repeated requests, Graham refused to
disclose why he wouldn't rule on the motion for a preliminary
injunction. As a side matter, when Mason filed petition for mandamus
(Case No. 01-11305) with the Eleventh Circuit, the Eleventh Circuit
simply stated: "His mandamus petition, however, is frivolous because
he has failed to establish that he is entitled to mandamus relief to
compel the district court to rule on his motion for preliminary
injunction." See
http://Secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/11305/11305.pdf
On May 2004, Judges Carnes and Hull , Case No. 04-11894, were willing to lie or intentionally misstate the facts in order to cover for Judge Graham. Proof?
Mason merely asserts that Judge Graham was not impartial because (1) he allowed many of Mason's motions to languish...As to the alleged languishing, a review of the district court docket sheet shows that the court ruled upon his motions in a timely manner .
See pgs. 2, 3 Case No. 04-11894 Opinion,
http://geocities.com/mcneilmason/secret/04-11894/04-11894.pdf.
How is NEVER ruling on scores of motions and filings ruling "upon
his motions in a timely manner"? This answer is false, dishonest,
absurd, and insulting. Review the docket and see where Graham never
ruled on the motions and filings listed above. See
http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/PacerReportsDocketEntries99-14027.html.
* Allowing scores of motions to languish in court for up to 8 months and not taking any action. For a complete listing, see web page languishing motions . See http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaintpLetters/languishingmotions.html
* Concealing Information and Falsely Completing a Civil Justice
Reform Act Report. When Graham completed his Civil Justice Reform
Act Report for March 31, 2001, he shows that he has no motions
pending for more than 6 months. This information is false because
the motion for a preliminary injunction had been pending for more
492 days or about 16.4 months. See Judge Graham's CJRA Report,
http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/CivilJusticeReformActReport.pdf.
* Abuse of the Criminal Contempt Procedure. Judge Graham abused the criminal contempt procedure to intimidate Mason and attempt to force Mason to drop an embarrassing lawsuit filed against him. See Grahams Lawsuit, http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/GrahamLawsuit.html and Contempt Abuse, http://secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/ContemptAbuse.html .
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal are masters of artifice, treachery, trickery, and dishonesty. The Eleventh Circuit employed these techniques as a part of an overt conspiracy to conceal Judge Graham's misconduct and abuse of power. Even though all manner of appeals, mandamus, and Section 372(c) complaints have been filed, you will not even see these allegations in the Eleventh Circuit's secret and unpublished "opinions". See the Trickery web page for a listing of these techniques, http://mmason.freeshell.org/trickery/trickery.htm . The Eleventh Circuit's "creativity"in avoiding discussing these serious allegations is only exceeded by its dishonesty.
The Eleventh Circuit absolutely Refuses to Address the Veracity
of the allegations of misconduct
The allegations of misconduct directed at Judge Donald L. Graham
were raised on direct appeal, mandamus, Section 372(c) Complaints,
however, the Eleventh Circuit simply ignored them. Sometimes the
Eleventh Circuit just outright lied when it felt like it. See Briefs
and Opinions below in Case Nos. 01-13664-A, 01-15754, 02-14646A,
04-11894, and 05-10623-I. See the Trickery web page,
http://mmason.freeshell.org/trickery/trickery.htm , for details
of the tricks the Eleventh Circuit uses to crush appeals.
05-10623-I,
http:/secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/05-10623/05-10623.pdf
petition http:/secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/05-10623/PetitionMandamus.swf
01-15754-A, http:/secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/15754/mandamus_denied.pdf
petition, http:/secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/15754/WritOfMandamusAndWritOfProhibition.pdf
01-13664 , http:/secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/01-13664/OrderAffirmingTrialCourt/Opinion-OCR.doc
Initial Brief, http:/secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/01-13664/CorrectedInitialBrief.swf
04-11894, http:/secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/04-11894/04-11894.pdf
Mandamus Petition, http:/secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/04-11894/mandamus.swf
02-14646A , http:/secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/02-14646A/02-14646.pdf
Mandamus Petition , http:/secretlaw.com/NewComplaint/HelpLetters/02-14646A/mandamus.swf
I believe the "so called" nuclear option has become a necessity. Preferably, only for cases involving the Senates role in "advise and consent" of appointees. Democrats have now taken the role of "advise and consent" and created "advise and obstruct". By not allowing a vote, they are not fulfilling their constitutional duties. Once they have been "advised" through hearings, I believe it is their duty to engage in the "consent" and allow a vote. They have set a dangerous precedent by forcing a two thirds vote required for appointees.
It was bad enough when they turned judicial appontments into a popularity contest based on their individual positions, rather than how they apply the law. it has come down to pro-life judges need not apply. I also believe any judges that may have a strong religious upbringing may also be denied. It would be terrible to allow the wisdom of Solomon to somehow guide their thinking.
In conclusion, I would not like to see filibusters eliminated, however we must get good conservative judges, who represent the majority of Americans, back in office. This may be the only way unless the democrats get back to the business of processing judges like it has been done for 200 years.
Posted by: Bruce G. at April 18, 2005 10:48 PMRepublicans already control ALL the branches of our government. The Neo-Cons control the White House and the Congress, so now they are gunning for the Judiciary - at the expense of TRUE Republicans (and Democrats and the U.S. Constitution).
See the details and stats at www.usjudges.net
Todd
Alaska - Sen. Murkowski - 202-224-6665
Arizona - Sen. McCain - 202-224-2235
Arkansas - Sen. Pryor - 202-224-2353
Arkansas - Sen. Lincoln - 202-224-4843
Colorado - Sen. Salazar - 202-224-5852
Connecticut - Sen. Lieberman - 202-224-4041
Florida - Sen. Nelson - 202-224-5274
Indiana - Sen. Lugar -202-224-4814
Indiana - Sen. Bayh - 202-224-5623
Louisiana - Sen. Landrieu - 202-224-5824
Maine - Sen. Collins - 202-224-2523
Maine - Sen. Snowe - 202-224-5344
Nebraska - Sen. Hagel - 202-224-4224
Nebraska - Sen. Nelson - 202-224-6551
Nevada - Sen. Reid - 202-224-3542
New Hampshire - Sen. Sununu - 202-224-2841
North Dakota - Sen. Dorgan - 202-224-2551
North Dakota - Sen. Conrad - 202-224-2043
Ohio - Sen. Dewine - 202-224-2315
Oregon - Sen. Smith - 202-224-3753
Rhode Island - Sen. Chafee - 202-224-2921
In the case of the filibuster, that point is this: that if the Republican party were *truly* so concerned with fairness, and procedual reform, then why have they not proposed to make the changes to the filibuster rules take effect at the *end* of George Bush's term?
My point is this. American democracy was designed to evolve (the alleged pro-Christian, Creationist dogma of our forefathers notwithstanding). Changes in rules, even in standard games, is not taboo, or even necessarily undesireable. But the changing of rules *mid-game* is indisputably unfair.
For example, if a pair of baseball teams playing three Sunday games stand tied before the beginning of the rubber game, and mutually decide that the last team to bat must break any ties or suffer a loss, with no extra innings played, that's fair, so long as the first at bat is determined by, say, a coind toss. Both teams will know what to expect in the final game.
However, if the the first team to bat ties the ballgame in the seventh inning, *then* proposes such a change in rules, where they clearly have an advantage, no amount of debate over how fair or reasonable or equitable such a rule would be in the long run can be justified: they will drastically improve their chances of victory at the expense of their opponents if their propsed rule is adopted.
The same is true of the right. To push for a major change in the rules which the previous president's nominees were forced to suffer, and in time to gain an advantage, is not a support of fairness. It is a brutal, bullying tactic to win at any cost.
I could easily see this same congress, four years from now beneath a liberal president, that the filibuster is a tried-and-true way to assure fairness to the miniorty, as if it was there idea, and it was the left that had just struck down so venerable and equitable a rule.
I wish that this point were being clearly made, and beaten to death by the left in public forums.
Posted by: Dan at May 17, 2005 03:13 AMPosted by: Dan at May 17, 2005 03:19 AM
As I just said this just hit me on the way home but please try to follow my logic and please be kind if I make any mistakes. On the other hand I do want to see if any of this makes sense, so blast away. The way I understand it the GOP leadership is proposing a vote to not so much to change the rules midstream because they are not getting their way (the spoiled brat method of governing), but to declare that the filibuster is in fact unconstitutional. They base this on "by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate" meaning only an up or down vote by the full senate would qualify. Well…
Shouldn’t every member of The Senate remember this little gem:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation
or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge
the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me
God. – Senate Oath of Office.
So, what happens if any of the current Senators EVER held up a nomination in committee in any way, including the old blue slips or denying a nominee a vote in committee? Now if the Senator in question agrees on the elimination of the filibuster for any nomination, not just judicial nominations, based on the idea that the filibuster is unconstitutional, that Senator has just admitted that, under their own logic, they have violated their oaths of office. Shouldn’t that mean by extension they are now required to leave the Senate for violating that oath? If they do not is this not an admission instead that this has nothing at all to do with The Constitution and everything to do with a crass partisan power trip by a bunch of spoiled brats?
Just asking.
Fight against the attempt by Frist and his RaptureRight goons to eliminate the role of the judiciary in this country. If you can't make it, pass this along to anybody you know you might be able to.
This ACTION ALERT comes from Mydd:
The Freedom AND Faith rally, will take place at 2:30 Sunday the 24th, at Central Presbyterian Church and the adjacent park, in Louisville, just a few hours before the right-wing Family Research Council telecast begins...
It's co-sponsored by DriveDemocracy, and you can read their announcement of the event here.
Posted by not sam at April 21, 2005 12:37 PMPosted by: Corey Griffith at April 21, 2005 07:18 PM
http://blogs.ardice.com/scottsoperson
Posted by: scottsoperson at April 24, 2005 01:58 PMhttp://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERhitler.htm
Posted by: scottsoperson at April 24, 2005 02:07 PMPosted by: Justin at April 26, 2005 01:02 PM
Posted by: Justin at April 26, 2005 01:03 PM
Posted by: syssy at April 26, 2005 06:26 PM
I one semester away from graduating college with a history degree so I feel I must comment on your Hitler comment. Hitler was not a socialist. Hitler was a fascist. A fascist has no politcal agenda. They advocate emotionalism and are not rational. A socialist is someone who wants the state to provide some care for the people and provide social saftey nets. They have a plan and an agenda.
So before you compare the President to Hitler please do your reserach so you know what you are talking about.
It makes me sick that you would compare any American President to
a Nazi. Did the President kill 12 million people in death camps? No!
Did the president try to take over the world? No! He simply removed
two of the most evil men of the 21st century from power.
Mr. Bush is doing what Clinton should have done! But Clinton was to busy messing around with women, playing footsy with our enemies and giving away our technology to them. He undermined our security. He bombed worthless sites. He continued to kill our own innocent unborn babies, and gaynizing our culture. What else could he have done wrong?
Mr. Bush is not perfect, but at least he has taken the war on terror to the terrorists own back yard. Sure, some of our young men and women are dying and getting hurt, and many of the innocent Iraqis are also dying and getting hurt. But it’s happening over there, not over here.
It is important for the liberal reader to know and understand that the enemy we are facing and fighting is the worst of any other kind of enemy we have ever encountered in our time. This enemy is everywhere in the world, and they have one goal in mind, and that is to conquer the wold for Islam at whatever the cost.
This enemy will lie, cheat and steal; this enemy will befriend you and become your ally... …although it hates you and what you represent. This enemy will lay dormant for years waiting for the opportunity and the moment to strike, terrorize and kill. This enemy hates the Jew, the Christian, the agnostic and the atheist. All of the herein mentioned are considered infidels. And infidels must submit to Islam or be killed! This enemy has the Quranic commission, and ultimate goal to bring you into the House of Islam or die. Their intention is for the whole world to submit to Islam or perish. Jihad is serious business people; and it’s coming our way! We must put a stop to it, soon!
Islam is NOT the religion of love and peace as portrayed by the media and some imams that appear in radio and television trying to explain what Islam is NOT! Our own President Bush uttered that Islam is a religion of love and peace. Let’s not be fooled by such rhetoric.
You liberals stop working against President Bush and his administration. He knows what he’s doing.. ..and you don’t! You are seriously undermining he’s effort against this common enemy; you’re screwing up royally, and the knowledgeable voters know this.
If you can, please purchase the book entitled "Islam and Terrorism" by Mark A Gabriel, Ph.D. Published by Charisma House. www.charismahouse.com
Posted by: Ezekiel Rodriguez at June 27, 2005 01:25 AMFight against the attempt by Frist and his RaptureRight goons to eliminate the role of the judiciary in this country. If you can't make it, pass this along to anybody you know you might be able to.
This ACTION ALERT comes from Mydd:
The Freedom AND Faith rally, will take place at 2:30 Sunday the 24th, at Central Presbyterian Church and the adjacent park, in Louisville, just a few hours before the right-wing Family Research Council telecast begins...
It's co-sponsored by DriveDemocracy, and you can read their announcement of the event here.
Posted by not sam at April 21, 2005 12:37 PMPosted by: Corey Griffith at April 21, 2005 07:18 PM
http://blogs.ardice.com/scottsoperson
Posted by: scottsoperson at April 24, 2005 01:58 PMhttp://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERhitler.htm
Posted by: scottsoperson at April 24, 2005 02:07 PMPosted by: Justin at April 26, 2005 01:02 PM
Posted by: Justin at April 26, 2005 01:03 PM
Spread this poster around to let people know how important it is for them to call Congress and support the GOP's effort to end the Estate Tax.
Unless YOU act NOW, almost HALF of the MILLIONS that Paris Hilton and countless other weathly young people have partied so hard for may instead go to pay for schools, police, firefighters, healthcare for children, security for the aged, better roads and safer streets across America through the evil of TAXATION!!!
THOUSANDS of BILLIONAIRES could lose MILLIONS unless YOU ACT NOW!!!!!!
Posted by not sam at May 4, 2005 04:16 PMPosted by: Steve A. at May 4, 2005 06:28 PM
Posted by: Johnny Turk at May 5, 2005 12:51 AM
The CBO estimated that overall charitable giving would decline between 6 and 12 percent, and the decline in charitable bequests would range from 20 to 30 percent, if the estate tax were fully repealed.
"The CBO studies confirm results from independent analysts, and show that estate tax repeal would cause charities to lose between $12 and $24 billion in giving per year," said John Irons, Senior Economic Policy Analyst at OMB Watch, a Washington, D.C.-based government watchdog group.
To read more about the studies, go to:
http://www.faireconomy.org/press/2004/EstateTaxCharitableGiving_pr.html
To learn more about the estate tax, check out:
http://www.responsiblewealth.org/
Posted by: Johnny Turk at May 5, 2005 11:36 AM
As far as why they should pay taxes in the first place, it's because the system that allowed for them to become rich didn't come out of nowhere and isn't free. Things like enforcement of contracts, a court system, a system which stores and guarantees their wealth--that's all gov't financed, and, in the history of the world is relatively recent. Many countries--Russia for instance--don't have similarly effective ones now. If you're in a country without those things, the expenses for those come out of your overhead. Not to mention clean water (it's hard for your workers to work when they're vomiting), safe roads (your workers need to get to work). So the notion of "self-created" wealthy businessmen in this country is utter bullshit. We all helped create and pay for the system that allowed them to get rich, and which doesn't exist in many other countries, and so they should fucking pay some fucking taxes for it. Understand Johnny retard?
Posted by: a at May 5, 2005 12:21 PMPosted by: Johnny Turk at May 5, 2005 04:13 PM
Posted by: a at May 5, 2005 05:27 PM
And a's points are spot on.
Posted by: Johnny's Superego at May 5, 2005 09:31 PMNow, to respond to you. the wealthy in America provide jobs, look at Bill Gates how many thousands of people does he employ? Also to the Paris Hilton point even though her shows suck and she is sleeze look at all of the advertising money she brought in. That money provided people with jobs. It employed writers, cameramen, set designers and so on. The people that got paid then spent the money at Wal-Mart or some other store. That gave Wal-Mart money. Wal-Mart then hired more people who then got paid put thier own money back into the economy. All of the people who recieved pay checks had to pay income taxes. They also had at least five different taxes taken out of thier checks. So the governemnt is actually making more money by leaving the wealthy alone. If you tax the wealthy to death then they won't spend money and you have a problem. Spending money is good! It helps us all and the government should make it easier for money to circulate in the system. They shouldn't be taking large amounts of money out of the system with taxes. This only hurts the system. The government can make enough money to provide services without the death tax.
If you over tax the rich they either won't be rich anymore which would put in a situation like what Russia is dealing with or they won't spend anything. The result is the same. DOOM! MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Posted by: Johnny Turk at May 6, 2005 12:22 AMhttp://www.forbes.com/2002/02/28/0228faq.html
Keep up the hard work!
Mike in Boulder
Posted by: Johnny Turk at May 7, 2005 09:20 PM
I don't like this ad because it simplifies the issue, and is far too negative and misleading.
The estate tax is a complex issue. Only estates over $2.5 million will be subjected to gift and estate taxes which begin at 18% and rise to 50%.
The Reps. would like the A.P. to believe that estate and gift taxes are a big burden on every hard-working American - they are not.
The Dems. would like the A.P. to believe that only the very, very wealthy are affected - not true either.
The fact is, that the inheritance does pose a threat to farmers, and also unfairly burdens those who live in places where real estate is out-of-sync with the rest of the nation.
In San Francisco, for example, you will be hard-pressed to find a three bedroom house for less than a $1.5 million. A five bedroom house in Normal, IL costs about $120,000. Because our cost of living is so much higher than other states, residents of NY and CA shoulder a much higher income tax burden than those in less expensive areas. And then when it comes to assessing property upon the death of your parents - you may find your small family farm in CA. valued at $5 mil. - even though you have barely kept afloat over the years. So you must pay the estate tax - but you cannot afford it so you are forced to sell the farm. Then, when you sell the farm, you get to pay capital gains tax - unless you buy a property of the same value in the same county (often), but now you must pay property tax on a $5 mil. property, and you have lost your livelihood by the sale of your family's farm.
We already pay a huge tax burden in CA and NY. Taxation should be ammended to consider cost-of-living. We are not sitting out here on a pile of money, but are actually struggling just to stay afloat in our tiny little apartments *I only speak for myself and people I know, of course!* but it sure ain't cheap out here.
I would rather have a poster about the way gay couples are screwed beyond. No matter what a gay person puts in their will, their significant other will get to pay inheritance taxes which absolutely NO straight married couple EVER pays.
Gay people pay WAY more taxes than their heterosexual counterparts, and for that priviledge they get no representation and a permanenet second-class citizen status. They get to live their entire lives as single tax-payers no matter how long they are with their spouse. If a gay soldier gets killed in Iraq, his spouse will not recieve and of the benefits entitled to him under federal law - no berevement pay, no s.s. benefits, nothing.
That is unfair taxation *illegal* and unequal represenation. In a word, that is f#cked!
Posted by: RiotGirl at May 9, 2005 04:29 PMPosted by: Johnny Turk at May 9, 2005 07:08 PM
http://agitprops.org/estatetax.html
Posted by: agitprops.org at May 9, 2005 08:03 PMAnd as to the Turk's point about the rich creating jobs, that's another Republican red herring.
You talk about the jobs that Bill Gates creates. Do a quick cost-benefit analysis on the ratio of the World's Richest Man's billions to the jobs at Microsoft. Not a good deal.
Now consider the economic effect of raising the minimum wage -- placing millions more dollars into the pockets of people who will actually spend it. (As you know, the wealthy spend far less of their income than the poor live paycheck to paycheck.) That would increase consumer spending across the economy, not just a Jaguar dealerships, and generate a genuine, broad-based economic boost.
Now isn't that a much better idea than borrowing money from your grandkids and sending it to some rich guy's off-shore account hoping that he'll tip you better when you park his car?
C'mon Turk, you gotta admit that.
Posted by: agitprops.org at May 9, 2005 08:27 PMAlso, the most "generous" domestic partnershit benefit program is in CA which grants 15 rights and protections - compare that to the 300 + state rights and protections married heterosexuals enjoy.
Also, what happens if you leave California?
*poof* - no rights and protections.
Also, to the post above - no disrespect - but that is not true. I know of two people who got seriously screwed due to the Estate Tax. One family owned a very large ranch in Olema, CA. They had this farm for two generations. The real estate prices in the Bay Area are unbelievable and when his parents died the ranch was assessed with a very high value due to the land value. They did not make much money from the ranch, in fact it barely paid for itself after expenses but he grew up there, and was devastated when he was faced with selling it. It was his livelihood and he wanted his kids to grow up there too. I heard all about it, because we shot a photoshoot out there, and he went on and on about it. He was trying anyway he could to earn money, but he said he was going to have to sell it anyway. I also know someone else who had a large nursery in Los Angeles, similar story, but they actually didn't end up having to sell but it was a big hardship.
I am not against estate tax per se, I just think that all taxation needs to be re-evaluated to consider factors like cost-of-living. It isn't as cut-and-dry as people seem to think. It isn't just about the extremely wealthy getting a free ride. It should be. It should be fair and porportional. If you live in Normal, IL., an estate of 2.5 million is probably unheard of - it isn't as unimaginable in areas where the median price home is $700,000, not $100,000. That's median. $2.5 mil. is a huge cap, and then there is the generation skipping clause to consider... But still, I think it needs to be re-examined so that everyone pays their fair share. Why should Californians and New Yorkers have to pay such a high tax burden? It would be interesting to see what percentage of Californians and New Yorkers end up paying estate tax in relation to the rest of the nation. It would be interesting to see what percentage of our income goes to taxes when you factor cost-of-living comparisons btwn us and other parts of the nation.
Anyway, the federal gov. has PLENTY of money. They just spend it on military toys they can't wait to unleash on soveriegn nations.
What is the bill now - $18.4 Billion for Iraq alone - now what could we do with that!?
Posted by: riotGirl at May 10, 2005 05:06 PMThe estate tax does NOT "only affect estates of MORE that $3 Million!?"
That is a complete distortion. Where in the tax code does it say that the estate tax exemption begins at more than $3 million!?
Last I checked there is a graduated estate tax exemption plan in effect as signed by Bush (June 2001) which means that currently this year estate tax exemptions begin at $1.5 million, go to $2 million for 2006 through 2008 and eventually reach $3.5 million in 2009. In 2010 the estate tax will be eliminated for one year and will roll back to $1 mil. in 2011.
So is it suddenly 2009!?
Bush's estate tax plan is as whack as every other initiative he has tried to bring to the fore, but so is your poster. I hate it when facts are manipulated for an emotional response. We have more important things to worry about than Bush's estate tax plan anyway.
BUT if you are going to address this issue NOW - address it with today's FACTS, which is, that the estate tax exemption for 2005 is $1.5 million.
You don't believe me? - Here is the link to the IRS website with all the facts you need.
this is directly from the IRS:
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=98968,00.html
Unified Credit
A credit is an amount that eliminates or reduces tax. The unified credit applies to both the gift tax and the estate tax. You must subtract the unified credit from any gift tax that you owe. Any unified credit you use against your gift tax in one year reduces the amount of credit that you can use against your gift tax in a later year. The total amount used against your gift tax reduces the credit available to use against your estate tax.
In 2001, the unified credit was $220,550, which eliminated taxes on a total of $675,000 (applicable exclusion amount) of taxable gifts and taxable estate. These amounts were increased for gifts made, and for estates of decedents dying, after 2001. The following shows the unified credit and the applicable exclusion amount for the calendar year in which a gift is made or a decedent dies.
For Gift Tax Purposes in years 2002 and 2003 the Unified Credit is $345,800, the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,000,000. For Estate Tax Purposes in years 2002 and 2003 the Unified Credit is $345,800 and the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,000,000.
For Gift Tax Purposes in years 2004 and 2005 the Unified Credit is $345,800, the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,000,000. For Estate Tax Purposes in years 2004 and 2005 the Unified Credit is $555,800 and the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,500,000.
For Gift Tax Purposes in years 2006, 2007 and 2008 the Unified Credit is $345,800, the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,000,000. For Estate Tax Purposes in years 2006, 2007 and 2008 the Unified Credit is $780,800 and the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $2,000,000.
For Gift Tax Purposes in year 2009 the Unified Credit is $345,800, the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,000,000. For Estate Tax Purposes in year 2009 the Unified Credit is $1,455,800 and the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $3,500,000.
Estate Tax
Estate tax may apply to your taxable estate at your death. Your taxable estate is your gross estate less allowable deductions.
Gross Estate
Your gross estate includes the value of all property in which you had an interest at the time of death. Your gross estate also will include the following.
* Life insurance proceeds payable to your estate or, if you owned
the policy, to your heirs.
* The value of certain annuities payable to your estate or your
heirs.
* The value of certain property you transferred within 3 years
before your death.
* Trusts or other interests established by you or others in which
you have certain powers.
Taxable Estate
The allowable deductions used in determining your taxable estate include:
1) Funeral expenses paid out of your estate,
2) Debts you owed at the time of death, and
3) The marital deduction (generally, the value of the property that
passes from your estate to your surviving spouse).
*GAYS DON'T GET THIS PRIVILEDGE, THANK YOU!*
Posted by: OverTaxedGay at May 10, 2005 05:45 PMIf the "majority" wants to deny our basic constitutional rights - right to obtain a marriage license and right to privacy - we should get together an enact a bill that makes us exempt from taxation.
Think about it, we pay into social security but will never be able to pass it on to our spouses upon our death. Our spouses have to pay estate taxes - straights do not. Our spouses get no military benies, or any benies from the state if we are killed in the line of duty (police, fireman, etc...) yet we pay into to all of these systems and live our entire lives as single taxpayers. we put more into the system than we ever get in return. Also, we often do not have children, yet we pay for straight married couples' children through school and other benefits that our families will never get.
the simple fact is, gays and lesbians carry an unfair tax burden.
We should not put up with it anymore. I even read a quote from right-winger James Dobson that argued against gay marriage because of the drain on social security if we were actually given our due benefits.
They know they are screwing us - on taxes, medical insurance, inheritance, retirement benefits - and they want it to stay that way.
Why should they change when they get such a great deal? We should just thank our lucky stars that we can walk the streets without being jailed or beaten, right?
We have made so much progress. We even get to have a parade once a year in our little glbt ghettos. And there are even a few gay characters on TV. And it is even "cool" to have a gay friend or two. We are so lucky.
Posted by: Mark at May 10, 2005 06:17 PMPosted by: Kathryn at May 11, 2005 09:02 PM
However, I would like to point out that the design is TERRIBLE.
If progressives want to make their voices heard, they'd better hire some good graphic designers. No one worth convincing is going to take the time to read this mess.
Posted by: Dyana at May 11, 2005 11:31 PMThe estate tax does not only affect estates over 3 million.
Check out current IRS info. Current estate tax exemption begins at 1.5 mil for 2005.
Posted by: Derik at May 12, 2005 02:47 PMWe support you 100%!!!
:)
Posted by: Sally at May 12, 2005 04:18 PMGays have eqaul protection under the law. You have the right to
free speech, freedom to own property, the right to bear arms, and
all of the other freedoms that we all have. Gays want extra rights.
Does it matter that 95% of the country is oppsoed to this and all
but two states have voted against gay marraige? No. Why is it that
the minority in this country always tries to force thier will on the
majority?
Unamericans.
Posted by: Tom DeLay at May 13, 2005 11:03 AMPosted by: dumjuan at May 13, 2005 03:39 PM
As a gay person I am denied the right to privacy and the right to obtain a marriage license.
These are rights that you enjoy as a straight man or woman.
Because I am denied both of these rights, I am also denied 1,300+ federal and state rights and protections that are afforded straight married couples.
We are not asking for "special rights", just equal rights.
Further, the issue has nothing to do with "beliefs". Private institutions and religions are perfectly able to exclude us. The government is public, and must protect the rights of ALL its citizens. So you can "believe" gays are sick, twisted, whatever - but you cannot legislate based on those beliefs. You cannot selectively grant rights to one group, while excluding another.
That is America. We are not a homogenous society, and that is our strength.
You have the right to privacy and the right to obtain a marriage license. I pay takes, am part of society *like it or not*, and I absoultely deserve the same rights that even convicted felons enjoy in this country.
Posted by: Mark at May 15, 2005 05:03 PMNow, I understand that health insurance and life insurance for homosexual individuals, men especially, is *much* higher than that for heterosexuals - courtesy of your local HMO, or whatever. In any case, this is not an issue as long as you do not divulge to Insurance Company that you are gay. Now, if you are man married to a man, it is not going to be hard for Insurance Company to figure out that you are gay and apply higher premiums - higher than any applied to married women for that matter.
As your employer, I have to pay for the health insurance of all my employees without regard to marital status. I have become fiscally responsible for your pursuit of hapiness, which does not reduce expenses or increase profits but has exactly the opposite effect. So, while you save on your taxes, I have an unholy hike in the cost of my employee benefits - or I have to reduce those benefits for all my employees and become less attractive to job seekers. It would be one thing if the burden were shared amongst all taxpayers, but this is not the case - rather, your tax break becomes, quite directly, my tax hike or worse - my direct loss of profit from inability to compete. I protest.
If we can remove sexual orientation as a factor from ALL legal policy, I will be the best man at your gay wedding. Until then, there is no way in hell I am going to support homosexual marriage, or any other policy that demands particular sectors of the society be solely responsible for the utterly unrelated whim of any person.
Posted by: Justice at May 28, 2005 04:27 AMPosted by: Justice at May 28, 2005 04:31 AM
Posted by: idiot at June 6, 2005 07:44 AM
Posted by: osha compliance at June 22, 2005 01:04 AM
The rich dont want you to belong in their crowd. It's not like the country club is welcoming every shlub who can pony up the initiation fee. You are one of the "Not Our Kind, Dear" folks.
Posted by: Sail at June 28, 2005 08:29 AMwhat she "earns" is hers what you earn is yours
and its nobody's buisnes.
never mind what other people have. take care of yourself. she's one
of the exceptions. most rich prople work very hard and deserve
everything they get.
Spread this poster around to let people know how important it is for them to call Congress and support the GOP's effort to end the Estate Tax.
Unless YOU act NOW, almost HALF of the MILLIONS that Paris Hilton and countless other weathly young people have partied so hard for may instead go to pay for schools, police, firefighters, healthcare for children, security for the aged, better roads and safer streets across America through the evil of TAXATION!!!
THOUSANDS of BILLIONAIRES could lose MILLIONS unless YOU ACT NOW!!!!!!
Posted by not sam at May 4, 2005 04:16 PMPosted by: Steve A. at May 4, 2005 06:28 PM
Posted by: Johnny Turk at May 5, 2005 12:51 AM
The CBO estimated that overall charitable giving would decline between 6 and 12 percent, and the decline in charitable bequests would range from 20 to 30 percent, if the estate tax were fully repealed.
"The CBO studies confirm results from independent analysts, and show that estate tax repeal would cause charities to lose between $12 and $24 billion in giving per year," said John Irons, Senior Economic Policy Analyst at OMB Watch, a Washington, D.C.-based government watchdog group.
To read more about the studies, go to:
http://www.faireconomy.org/press/2004/EstateTaxCharitableGiving_pr.html
To learn more about the estate tax, check out:
http://www.responsiblewealth.org/
Posted by: Johnny Turk at May 5, 2005 11:36 AM
As far as why they should pay taxes in the first place, it's because the system that allowed for them to become rich didn't come out of nowhere and isn't free. Things like enforcement of contracts, a court system, a system which stores and guarantees their wealth--that's all gov't financed, and, in the history of the world is relatively recent. Many countries--Russia for instance--don't have similarly effective ones now. If you're in a country without those things, the expenses for those come out of your overhead. Not to mention clean water (it's hard for your workers to work when they're vomiting), safe roads (your workers need to get to work). So the notion of "self-created" wealthy businessmen in this country is utter bullshit. We all helped create and pay for the system that allowed them to get rich, and which doesn't exist in many other countries, and so they should fucking pay some fucking taxes for it. Understand Johnny retard?
Posted by: a at May 5, 2005 12:21 PMPosted by: Johnny Turk at May 5, 2005 04:13 PM
Posted by: a at May 5, 2005 05:27 PM
And a's points are spot on.
Posted by: Johnny's Superego at May 5, 2005 09:31 PMNow, to respond to you. the wealthy in America provide jobs, look at Bill Gates how many thousands of people does he employ? Also to the Paris Hilton point even though her shows suck and she is sleeze look at all of the advertising money she brought in. That money provided people with jobs. It employed writers, cameramen, set designers and so on. The people that got paid then spent the money at Wal-Mart or some other store. That gave Wal-Mart money. Wal-Mart then hired more people who then got paid put thier own money back into the economy. All of the people who recieved pay checks had to pay income taxes. They also had at least five different taxes taken out of thier checks. So the governemnt is actually making more money by leaving the wealthy alone. If you tax the wealthy to death then they won't spend money and you have a problem. Spending money is good! It helps us all and the government should make it easier for money to circulate in the system. They shouldn't be taking large amounts of money out of the system with taxes. This only hurts the system. The government can make enough money to provide services without the death tax.
If you over tax the rich they either won't be rich anymore which would put in a situation like what Russia is dealing with or they won't spend anything. The result is the same. DOOM! MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Posted by: Johnny Turk at May 6, 2005 12:22 AMhttp://www.forbes.com/2002/02/28/0228faq.html
Keep up the hard work!
Mike in Boulder
Posted by: Johnny Turk at May 7, 2005 09:20 PM
I don't like this ad because it simplifies the issue, and is far too negative and misleading.
The estate tax is a complex issue. Only estates over $2.5 million will be subjected to gift and estate taxes which begin at 18% and rise to 50%.
The Reps. would like the A.P. to believe that estate and gift taxes are a big burden on every hard-working American - they are not.
The Dems. would like the A.P. to believe that only the very, very wealthy are affected - not true either.
The fact is, that the inheritance does pose a threat to farmers, and also unfairly burdens those who live in places where real estate is out-of-sync with the rest of the nation.
In San Francisco, for example, you will be hard-pressed to find a three bedroom house for less than a $1.5 million. A five bedroom house in Normal, IL costs about $120,000. Because our cost of living is so much higher than other states, residents of NY and CA shoulder a much higher income tax burden than those in less expensive areas. And then when it comes to assessing property upon the death of your parents - you may find your small family farm in CA. valued at $5 mil. - even though you have barely kept afloat over the years. So you must pay the estate tax - but you cannot afford it so you are forced to sell the farm. Then, when you sell the farm, you get to pay capital gains tax - unless you buy a property of the same value in the same county (often), but now you must pay property tax on a $5 mil. property, and you have lost your livelihood by the sale of your family's farm.
We already pay a huge tax burden in CA and NY. Taxation should be ammended to consider cost-of-living. We are not sitting out here on a pile of money, but are actually struggling just to stay afloat in our tiny little apartments *I only speak for myself and people I know, of course!* but it sure ain't cheap out here.
I would rather have a poster about the way gay couples are screwed beyond. No matter what a gay person puts in their will, their significant other will get to pay inheritance taxes which absolutely NO straight married couple EVER pays.
Gay people pay WAY more taxes than their heterosexual counterparts, and for that priviledge they get no representation and a permanenet second-class citizen status. They get to live their entire lives as single tax-payers no matter how long they are with their spouse. If a gay soldier gets killed in Iraq, his spouse will not recieve and of the benefits entitled to him under federal law - no berevement pay, no s.s. benefits, nothing.
That is unfair taxation *illegal* and unequal represenation. In a word, that is f#cked!
Posted by: RiotGirl at May 9, 2005 04:29 PMPosted by: Johnny Turk at May 9, 2005 07:08 PM
http://agitprops.org/estatetax.html
Posted by: agitprops.org at May 9, 2005 08:03 PMAnd as to the Turk's point about the rich creating jobs, that's another Republican red herring.
You talk about the jobs that Bill Gates creates. Do a quick cost-benefit analysis on the ratio of the World's Richest Man's billions to the jobs at Microsoft. Not a good deal.
Now consider the economic effect of raising the minimum wage -- placing millions more dollars into the pockets of people who will actually spend it. (As you know, the wealthy spend far less of their income than the poor live paycheck to paycheck.) That would increase consumer spending across the economy, not just a Jaguar dealerships, and generate a genuine, broad-based economic boost.
Now isn't that a much better idea than borrowing money from your grandkids and sending it to some rich guy's off-shore account hoping that he'll tip you better when you park his car?
C'mon Turk, you gotta admit that.
Posted by: agitprops.org at May 9, 2005 08:27 PMAlso, the most "generous" domestic partnershit benefit program is in CA which grants 15 rights and protections - compare that to the 300 + state rights and protections married heterosexuals enjoy.
Also, what happens if you leave California?
*poof* - no rights and protections.
Also, to the post above - no disrespect - but that is not true. I know of two people who got seriously screwed due to the Estate Tax. One family owned a very large ranch in Olema, CA. They had this farm for two generations. The real estate prices in the Bay Area are unbelievable and when his parents died the ranch was assessed with a very high value due to the land value. They did not make much money from the ranch, in fact it barely paid for itself after expenses but he grew up there, and was devastated when he was faced with selling it. It was his livelihood and he wanted his kids to grow up there too. I heard all about it, because we shot a photoshoot out there, and he went on and on about it. He was trying anyway he could to earn money, but he said he was going to have to sell it anyway. I also know someone else who had a large nursery in Los Angeles, similar story, but they actually didn't end up having to sell but it was a big hardship.
I am not against estate tax per se, I just think that all taxation needs to be re-evaluated to consider factors like cost-of-living. It isn't as cut-and-dry as people seem to think. It isn't just about the extremely wealthy getting a free ride. It should be. It should be fair and porportional. If you live in Normal, IL., an estate of 2.5 million is probably unheard of - it isn't as unimaginable in areas where the median price home is $700,000, not $100,000. That's median. $2.5 mil. is a huge cap, and then there is the generation skipping clause to consider... But still, I think it needs to be re-examined so that everyone pays their fair share. Why should Californians and New Yorkers have to pay such a high tax burden? It would be interesting to see what percentage of Californians and New Yorkers end up paying estate tax in relation to the rest of the nation. It would be interesting to see what percentage of our income goes to taxes when you factor cost-of-living comparisons btwn us and other parts of the nation.
Anyway, the federal gov. has PLENTY of money. They just spend it on military toys they can't wait to unleash on soveriegn nations.
What is the bill now - $18.4 Billion for Iraq alone - now what could we do with that!?
Posted by: riotGirl at May 10, 2005 05:06 PMThe estate tax does NOT "only affect estates of MORE that $3 Million!?"
That is a complete distortion. Where in the tax code does it say that the estate tax exemption begins at more than $3 million!?
Last I checked there is a graduated estate tax exemption plan in effect as signed by Bush (June 2001) which means that currently this year estate tax exemptions begin at $1.5 million, go to $2 million for 2006 through 2008 and eventually reach $3.5 million in 2009. In 2010 the estate tax will be eliminated for one year and will roll back to $1 mil. in 2011.
So is it suddenly 2009!?
Bush's estate tax plan is as whack as every other initiative he has tried to bring to the fore, but so is your poster. I hate it when facts are manipulated for an emotional response. We have more important things to worry about than Bush's estate tax plan anyway.
BUT if you are going to address this issue NOW - address it with today's FACTS, which is, that the estate tax exemption for 2005 is $1.5 million.
You don't believe me? - Here is the link to the IRS website with all the facts you need.
this is directly from the IRS:
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=98968,00.html
Unified Credit
A credit is an amount that eliminates or reduces tax. The unified credit applies to both the gift tax and the estate tax. You must subtract the unified credit from any gift tax that you owe. Any unified credit you use against your gift tax in one year reduces the amount of credit that you can use against your gift tax in a later year. The total amount used against your gift tax reduces the credit available to use against your estate tax.
In 2001, the unified credit was $220,550, which eliminated taxes on a total of $675,000 (applicable exclusion amount) of taxable gifts and taxable estate. These amounts were increased for gifts made, and for estates of decedents dying, after 2001. The following shows the unified credit and the applicable exclusion amount for the calendar year in which a gift is made or a decedent dies.
For Gift Tax Purposes in years 2002 and 2003 the Unified Credit is $345,800, the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,000,000. For Estate Tax Purposes in years 2002 and 2003 the Unified Credit is $345,800 and the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,000,000.
For Gift Tax Purposes in years 2004 and 2005 the Unified Credit is $345,800, the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,000,000. For Estate Tax Purposes in years 2004 and 2005 the Unified Credit is $555,800 and the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,500,000.
For Gift Tax Purposes in years 2006, 2007 and 2008 the Unified Credit is $345,800, the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,000,000. For Estate Tax Purposes in years 2006, 2007 and 2008 the Unified Credit is $780,800 and the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $2,000,000.
For Gift Tax Purposes in year 2009 the Unified Credit is $345,800, the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $1,000,000. For Estate Tax Purposes in year 2009 the Unified Credit is $1,455,800 and the Applicable Exclusion Amount is $3,500,000.
Estate Tax
Estate tax may apply to your taxable estate at your death. Your taxable estate is your gross estate less allowable deductions.
Gross Estate
Your gross estate includes the value of all property in which you had an interest at the time of death. Your gross estate also will include the following.
* Life insurance proceeds payable to your estate or, if you owned
the policy, to your heirs.
* The value of certain annuities payable to your estate or your
heirs.
* The value of certain property you transferred within 3 years
before your death.
* Trusts or other interests established by you or others in which
you have certain powers.
Taxable Estate
The allowable deductions used in determining your taxable estate include:
1) Funeral expenses paid out of your estate,
2) Debts you owed at the time of death, and
3) The marital deduction (generally, the value of the property that
passes from your estate to your surviving spouse).
*GAYS DON'T GET THIS PRIVILEDGE, THANK YOU!*
Posted by: OverTaxedGay at May 10, 2005 05:45 PMIf the "majority" wants to deny our basic constitutional rights - right to obtain a marriage license and right to privacy - we should get together an enact a bill that makes us exempt from taxation.
Think about it, we pay into social security but will never be able to pass it on to our spouses upon our death. Our spouses have to pay estate taxes - straights do not. Our spouses get no military benies, or any benies from the state if we are killed in the line of duty (police, fireman, etc...) yet we pay into to all of these systems and live our entire lives as single taxpayers. we put more into the system than we ever get in return. Also, we often do not have children, yet we pay for straight married couples' children through school and other benefits that our families will never get.
the simple fact is, gays and lesbians carry an unfair tax burden.
We should not put up with it anymore. I even read a quote from right-winger James Dobson that argued against gay marriage because of the drain on social security if we were actually given our due benefits.
They know they are screwing us - on taxes, medical insurance, inheritance, retirement benefits - and they want it to stay that way.
Why should they change when they get such a great deal? We should just thank our lucky stars that we can walk the streets without being jailed or beaten, right?
We have made so much progress. We even get to have a parade once a year in our little glbt ghettos. And there are even a few gay characters on TV. And it is even "cool" to have a gay friend or two. We are so lucky.
Posted by: Mark at May 10, 2005 06:17 PMPosted by: Kathryn at May 11, 2005 09:02 PM
However, I would like to point out that the design is TERRIBLE.
If progressives want to make their voices heard, they'd better hire some good graphic designers. No one worth convincing is going to take the time to read this mess.
Posted by: Dyana at May 11, 2005 11:31 PMThe estate tax does not only affect estates over 3 million.
Check out current IRS info. Current estate tax exemption begins at 1.5 mil for 2005.
Posted by: Derik at May 12, 2005 02:47 PMWe support you 100%!!!
:)
Posted by: Sally at May 12, 2005 04:18 PMGays have eqaul protection under the law. You have the right to
free speech, freedom to own property, the right to bear arms, and
all of the other freedoms that we all have. Gays want extra rights.
Does it matter that 95% of the country is oppsoed to this and all
but two states have voted against gay marraige? No. Why is it that
the minority in this country always tries to force thier will on the
majority?
Unamericans.
Posted by: Tom DeLay at May 13, 2005 11:03 AMPosted by: dumjuan at May 13, 2005 03:39 PM
As a gay person I am denied the right to privacy and the right to obtain a marriage license.
These are rights that you enjoy as a straight man or woman.
Because I am denied both of these rights, I am also denied 1,300+ federal and state rights and protections that are afforded straight married couples.
We are not asking for "special rights", just equal rights.
Further, the issue has nothing to do with "beliefs". Private institutions and religions are perfectly able to exclude us. The government is public, and must protect the rights of ALL its citizens. So you can "believe" gays are sick, twisted, whatever - but you cannot legislate based on those beliefs. You cannot selectively grant rights to one group, while excluding another.
That is America. We are not a homogenous society, and that is our strength.
You have the right to privacy and the right to obtain a marriage license. I pay takes, am part of society *like it or not*, and I absoultely deserve the same rights that even convicted felons enjoy in this country.
Posted by: Mark at May 15, 2005 05:03 PMNow, I understand that health insurance and life insurance for homosexual individuals, men especially, is *much* higher than that for heterosexuals - courtesy of your local HMO, or whatever. In any case, this is not an issue as long as you do not divulge to Insurance Company that you are gay. Now, if you are man married to a man, it is not going to be hard for Insurance Company to figure out that you are gay and apply higher premiums - higher than any applied to married women for that matter.
As your employer, I have to pay for the health insurance of all my employees without regard to marital status. I have become fiscally responsible for your pursuit of hapiness, which does not reduce expenses or increase profits but has exactly the opposite effect. So, while you save on your taxes, I have an unholy hike in the cost of my employee benefits - or I have to reduce those benefits for all my employees and become less attractive to job seekers. It would be one thing if the burden were shared amongst all taxpayers, but this is not the case - rather, your tax break becomes, quite directly, my tax hike or worse - my direct loss of profit from inability to compete. I protest.
If we can remove sexual orientation as a factor from ALL legal policy, I will be the best man at your gay wedding. Until then, there is no way in hell I am going to support homosexual marriage, or any other policy that demands particular sectors of the society be solely responsible for the utterly unrelated whim of any person.
Posted by: Justice at May 28, 2005 04:27 AMPosted by: Justice at May 28, 2005 04:31 AM
Posted by: idiot at June 6, 2005 07:44 AM
Posted by: osha compliance at June 22, 2005 01:04 AM
The rich dont want you to belong in their crowd. It's not like the country club is welcoming every shlub who can pony up the initiation fee. You are one of the "Not Our Kind, Dear" folks.
Posted by: Sail at June 28, 2005 08:29 AMwhat she "earns" is hers what you earn is yours
and its nobody's buisnes.
never mind what other people have. take care of yourself. she's one
of the exceptions. most rich prople work very hard and deserve
everything they get.
How close is your representative to king of all sleaze Tom Delay?
This handy site will tell you.
Find out here.
PLEASE SEND ME AN EMAIL BACK & LET ME KNOW! I WILL DIE WITHOUT YOU GUYS!!!
BOBI
TULSA, OK
"The crowd dined on filet mignon and salmon and a dessert of red-white-and-blue frosted cake decorated with candy hammers, a reference to the nickname DeLay earned when he was House majority whip."
Does that mean his nickname is the Candy Hammer?
Posted by: swabmenot at May 13, 2005 01:38 PMPosted by: www.dumbassincharge.blogspot.com at May 25, 2005 02:33 AM
This is where you can find the memo
Posted by majority at May 17, 2005 08:30 PMBush and Blair made secret pact for Iraq war
Decision came nine days after 9/11
Ex-ambassador reveals discussion
David Rose
Sunday April 4, 2004
The Observer
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,6903,1185407,00.html
Posted by: Sherrie at May 18, 2005 10:35 PM
http://sltrib.com/opinion/ci_2738809
The word is getting out. Submit letters to the editor, keep calling your local newspapers. Keep up the pressure on the MSM. :)
GBC
Posted by: Gay Boi Charlie at May 19, 2005 02:32 PMWe're not going to get many chances to make this one stick so let's give it all we got folks.
Send letters to the editor.
Mail it from the NY Times site to everyone you know. Let�s make sure this story is active on their site.
Send the link to your representatives; make sure your congressman and senators know it�s in the Times.
We can force other media to pick this up, post it everywhere, blogs, and/or forums.
Good luck!
Peace!
Posted by: Paxil at May 20, 2005 01:44 AMCarl Rove is smacking somebody around his office!
Ha ha ha
Posted by: Art Deco at May 20, 2005 12:49 PMThe website for the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs has removed testimony from UK MP George Galloway from its website.
Posted by: Art Deco at May 20, 2005 12:58 PMPrint media continue to downplay story
Action Alert (5/20/05)
Following FAIR's call for more mainstream coverage of the "smoking gun memo"--the secret British document containing new evidence that the Bush administration manipulated intelligence to justify its plan to invade Iraq--a steady trickle of news reports have appeared. But that coverage has been downplayed in general and is still completely absent from the nightly news.
ACTION:
Please contact the nightly news programs and ask them to investigate and report on the new evidence that the Bush administration manipulated intelligence to support its plan to invade Iraq.
LINK:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2520
They are very seriuosly persuing this in many counties
Posted by: Hermon at May 20, 2005 08:56 PMWho broke the blog?
p :)
Posted by: pete Nobel Dime-Store-Psychology Prize Nominated moon at May 20, 2005 10:51 PMthink they spaced posting a post show post?
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at May 20, 2005 10:53 PMhttp://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/l...memoltr5505.pdf
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/r...potuspr5605.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/politics/20weapons.html
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wo...1,7966962.story
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/n...on/11691493.htm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0517/dailyUpdate.html
http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
Whatcha's think?
Posted by: josie at May 20, 2005 11:09 PMhttp://www.newamericancentury.org/iraq-042005.pdf
Posted by: josie at May 20, 2005 11:11 PMthanks for the links!
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at May 20, 2005 11:12 PMPosted by: josie at May 20, 2005 11:12 PM
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at May 20, 2005 10:53 PM
==============================================
That would normally be my assupmtion, except, somebody closed the Hour 3 thread, and then failed to open a post-show. Could be incompetence, but, and here's the eerie part, the Air America Place server crashed at exactly the same time!!!
p :)
Posted by: pete Nobel Dime-Store-Psychology Prize Nominated moon at May 20, 2005 11:23 PMhttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/20/173435/910
From the Newsweek Controversy to the Downing Street Memo by Congressman John Conyers
WHAT: Forum: "Media Bias and the Future of Freedom of the Press"
PANEL: Al Franken, David Brock, Randi Rhodes, Joe Madison, Justin Webb, Senior Washington Correspondent of BBC News, Eric Alterman, Steve Rendall, media watchdog group FAIR, John Aravosis, America Blog, Mark Lloyd, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, Ben Wickler, Producer, Air America Radio
WHEN: Tuesday, May 24, at 1 p.m.
WHERE: 2226 Rayburn House Office Building
about "them' having something up their sleeves
can't be anything to serious. maybe get sam off
his ass and let us admin this blog and get
some serious functionality and
security going, free speech
indeed for sure but i want
accountability!
email reggies etc. i love those periods where it's relatively troll free. the trolls have disgusted a fair amount of peeps over the year. i'd love to shunt the more aggressive trolls to an under the bridge thread.
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at May 20, 2005 11:39 PMthanks for the tip off.
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at May 20, 2005 11:41 PMPosted by: Sunshine Jim at May 20, 2005 11:39 PM
=============================================
The new AAR blogmaster-in-charge on Laura's blog last Sunday said that all the blogs would be moving into his domain, and that format. He can't possibly mean to include MR in that. For that matter, I can't imagine any of the other blogs relinquishing their autonomy!
p :)
Posted by: pete Nobel Dime-Store-Psychology Prize Nominated moon at May 20, 2005 11:43 PMA friend was just asking me if I knew about that, so, I was able to share!!!
p :)
Posted by: pete Nobel Dime-Store-Psychology Prize Nominated moon at May 20, 2005 11:43 PMwhen i read that. this is on Sammers
nickel last i heard, we got some great deals
here in vancouver with linux servers to boot!
may be worth it to have a foreign server
if the neofacists get their wet dream
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at May 20, 2005 11:49 PMyou end up here:
first look i've had behind the curtains!
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at May 21, 2005 12:03 AMPosted by: Sunshine Jim at May 21, 2005 12:03 AM
==============================================
really? It's been doing that ever since they added the pink side-bar.
p :)
Mr Pete "the Wizard" Moon!
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at May 21, 2005 12:22 AMjogging his elbow fer a new thread
if they're havin probs might take few days
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at May 21, 2005 12:24 AMfinally quit raining enough to give the doggers a walk, i no sooner thought that and they both woke up!
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at May 21, 2005 12:26 AMp :)
Posted by: pete Nobel Dime-Store-Psychology Prize Nominated moon at May 21, 2005 12:28 AMPosted by: noah at May 22, 2005 01:29 AM
oct 21 2002 Washington post was pointing out
a few cases that Bush was making that were
false. I guess they hadnt "gotten with the program yet.". Funny,
they were reporting the
war lies then.
hello again from your activist friends at The People's Email Network. we noticed you have a new entry in your right column about the Downing Street memo action. please consider adding our
also to that section. the main index page above is now dedicated to the question of whether Congress should investigate Bush's Iraq War Lies, leading to impeachment if the contents of the Downing Street memo are in fact true as we believe they are. we send your personal message with one click directly to each of your individual members of Congress on this, whereas the Conyer's petition is meant specifically for the president.
thank you again for doing so much to mobilize real effective action.
peace,
The Pen
Posted by: ThePen at June 2, 2005 07:31 PM
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at June 2, 2005 07:35 PM1) The head of MI6 (Richard Dearlove) is extremely unlikely to circulate ultra sensitive memos like that to anyone including the prime minister. Was it filed in a drawer, who got it past MI6 security ?
2) The British government didn't deny it. No investigation has been launched into the leak.
3) The British government could have used a so called 'D notice' to prevent publication in ANY newspaper or magazine which they have numerous times in the past.
"In the UK, a 'D notice" is a censorship notice issued by the
Department of Defence to the media to prohibit the publication of
information on matters alleged to be of national security. The
system dates from 1922."
http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0015818.html
4) It was published in a Blair supporting Murdoch newspaper.
That's enough in itself.
5) All the US authorities have to do is deny it. No individual or
organisation is specified as the source.
6) Congress would find it easier to get Elvis as a witness than the head of MI6.
7) All the dodgy pieces of information about Iraq have come from British intelligence, they aren't known for their incompetence.
Posted by: Frank McStay at June 7, 2005 05:19 PMIt only barely slipped out in the 1975 Church Committee hearings on CIA abuses that hundreds of CIA operatives were in the media to steer public opinion and give the White House 'plausible deniability.'
http://www.class.uidaho.edu/mickelsen/Media%20Readings/Berstein%20-%20CIA%20and%20the%20Media.htm
CARL BERNSTEIN: "The history of the CIA�s involvement with the
American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of
obfuscation and deception . . . .
Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were William Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Time Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the Louisville Courier-Journal and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Pres International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald-Tribune.
By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc."
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmockingbird.htm
>snipsnip<
In 1975, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence headed by Frank Church (the Church Committee) focused its attention on the Agency�s use of American news outlets. The CIA went to great lengths to curtail this part of the committee�s investigation, though, and some members of the committee later admitted that the Agency was able to get the upper hand. Colby and his successor, George Bush (CFR, TC), were able to convince the Senate that a full inquiry would cripple their intelligence-gathering capabilities and would unleash a �witch-hunt� on the nation�s reporters, editors and publishers.
�The Agency was extremely clever about it and the committee played right into its hands,� one congressional source told Carl Bernstein. �Church and some of the other members were much more interested in making headlines than in doing serious, tough investigating. The Agency pretended to be giving up a lot whenever it was asked about the flashy stuff � assassinations and secret weapons and James Bond operations. Then, when it came to things they didn�t want to give away, that were much more important to the Agency, Colby in particular called in his chits. And the committee bought it.�
Rex
I think its incredibly important to anticipate the next move of this Junta. They always go on the offensive when they are backed into a corner. Their trump card, the best one they have is War. This makes it highly likely that one of two things will occur over the summer-fall period to create hysteria among the populace and raise mindless but willing 'support' for the bush slash-and-burn agenda of Dominion.
Most likely is the bush-turd staging a 2nd terrorist attack on his own country. The first was so wildly successful for him that Cheney and the rest of the crime gang could literally pull off the linear demolition of the WTC in less than 10 seconds and never even arouse suspscion amongst the corporate conventional media. Simply amazing. Then how bout pulling building 7 and the 9/11 Commission never even addressing it? How is that for the Borg-Government control. Yes their most likely tactic will be to stage another attack. Remember the bush-turd garnered 90% approval ratings the day after at that time even though on the day of the murders he stared off into space for 10 full minutes like a lobotomized chimp after the Andrew Card message and then proceeded to hide at various locations around the country the last of which was the most heavily fortified nuclear bunker in North America. Talk about a coward.
The other most likely tactic which needs to be anticipated is joint air operations against Iran with Israel. They will be labeled as defensive strikes just as the air offensive against Iraq which began a year before the Invasion was described. It will be a full scale War with intent to destabize the Iranian power structure and install a puppet but it will be represented all the while as a limited series of surgical strikes. The press will be embedded and not allowed in to see what is really going on. The main war will be the Information War. There will be Delta force and Special Ops crawling all over Iran but there will be no reporting of it. None whatsoever. See no evil, hear no evil.
So thats about it. Instead of constantly reacting to Rove it is high time that sharp thinkers on the Left anticipate his next moves. Remember he has more policy and strategy power now. He is not concerning himself with Downey Street or Schaivo or the rest, all the stuff the Left is now obsessed with. These are diversionary. He is crafting along with Cheney and others the next forage into the MidEast and, I beleive, the next 'terror' attack on the homefront. Please. It is with 100% certaintly that the 'people' and the 'media' would fall right into line and begin waving flags madly again behind the Texas Turd following a second 9/11 play. It is so obvious as to be inevitable. Remember their main inspiration has always been Hitler. Yes Trotsky too but Hitler was most successful at overthrowning a moderate government seated with intellectuals and a long tradition of Parlimentary discourse. He repeatedly voiced his central propaganda theme for anyone who wished to listen. The Big Lie. Its always the Big Lie which is the one you want to disseminate. It is the one which is most readily consumed by the public. What is a bigger Lie than 9/11, the obvious demolition of 3 huge buildings and the immediate 'discovery' of 19 hijackers supposed identities and their links to 'Al Quaeda'. Then the immediate launching of an undeclared revenge War on Afghanistan. A perfectly executed Big Lie in the grand tradition of Adolph Hitler.
r. thaler
Posted by: robert thaler at June 18, 2005 01:10 PMFrist/Rice 2008!
Posted by: Adair at June 21, 2005 09:49 PMPosted by: Becky at June 21, 2005 10:16 PM
From DavidNYC at Kos:
The battle to preserve the rights of minority political factions - and the public interests those factions represent - is about to be fully joined. Here are the simple steps you need to take to gear up for the fight to save the filibuster:
1. Sign up for text message alerts on your cell phone with People for the American Way. This way, you'll know instantly when we need to take action and what you need to do.
2. Regionalization is becoming increasingly important - elected officials always respond more eagerly to their constituents, and good local media coverage is key. BlogPAC is helping to organize state-by-state efforts, so if you haven't yet signed up there, do so by clicking here. If you have a blog of your own, be sure to input that in the appropriate field. (Non-bloggers should sign up as well.)
3. MoveOn PAC is organizing citizen filibusters - along the lines of the tremendously successful Princeton filibuster - tomorrow at noon. Click on over to their site to find a location near you. If you go, be sure to take a digital camera or a camcorder and post pics or videos online when you get home. Thanks to inflation, pictures are worth even more than 1,000 words these days.
4. When things really, finally go down, everyone needs to be able to contact as many people as fast as possible. We need people to hear our unfiltered message from friends and family and co-workers and neighbors before they hear the sterile and misleading he-said/she-said version on the news. So people need to pull together email addresses for everyone they know before it happens so that our message can immediately spread virally.
We don't know exactly when Frist will try to go nuclear, but people need to plan to drop everything and get in front of a computer. The process of breaking the rules to end the filibuster won't take that much time. We need instant mobilization and widespread distribution. With everyone's help, we can win this in the Senate - and on the local level.
All hands on deck!
Posted by not sam at May 23, 2005 04:20 PMStop the Right Wing's "Nuclear Option"
On Tuesday, Republican Senator Bill Frist, answering the call of the most extreme right-wing elements in America, is poised to pull the "nuclear trigger" on one the most fundamental principles of our cherished democracy: the filibuster, the right of the minority to make its voice heard on the floor of the United States Senate.
Call George Allen, Bill Frist, John McCain, and Chuck Hagel now -- 4 Republican Senators who are thinking about running for President in 2008 -- and tell them to uphold 200+ years of American values. Senator Feinstein and myself are fighting to defeat the right-wing's "nuclear option," but if you live outside California, please call your own Senators as well.
Then submit your completed online call sheet below so we can track the phone calls you've made.
Link to Nuclear Option Call Sheet:
http://ga4.org/pacforachange/filibuster_calls.html?member_key=s3gdsk4f5j8jdj
Posted by: Star Vox at May 23, 2005 06:59 PMConnecting You to the Progressive Community
To read more about the nuclear option and to take action.
Link:
http://www.movingideas.org/content/en/in_the_fight/nuclear_option.htm
Posted by: Star Vox at May 23, 2005 07:13 PMRead the compromise agreement:
http://www.c-span.org/pdf/senatecompromise.pdf
Posted by: Star Vox at May 23, 2005 09:26 PM
Post from TNR:
CENTER FOLDS: So a deal has been struck on the filibuster.
Republicans will allow Democrats to keep the filibuster as long as
Democrats never use it. This way, both sides win (except for the
Democrats).
Once again, the Republicans have shown their skillfulness when it comes to resetting parameters. Until recently, the perception had been that Bush had consistently filled the courts with extreme conservatives, with only a handful of truly batty nominees failing to meet the standards of Democrats. Now, facing the threat of the "nuclear option," Democrats have backed down on these as well. Thanks to the "finest traditions of the Senate" (Robert Byrd's words yesterday), there's a new agreement under which, presumably, only the certifiably insane can possibly be blocked--or, to put it as the senators did, nominees can "only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances." That way, if Bush's pick for a judgeship finally goes too far even for Republicans--if he nominates, say, an Irish setter who, during confirmation hearings, runs up and bites Orrin Hatch in the leg, then Democrats will be allowed to play the bad guys and employ their filibuster. Otherwise, they'd better hold off, since, if they don't, Republicans might have to take the filibuster away for real.
Of course, if Democrats had been filibustering half of Bush's 200-some nominees instead of only a handful, or if, for example, they had spoken endlessly of "maintaining balance on the courts" and insisted that Bush also nominate some "centrists" and not only "extremists," then a compromise position would have looked very different. But by bracketing the debate between two right-wing extremes--confirm every nominee except for a handful or confirm every nominee through use of the nuclear option--the Republicans had won before they'd even begun.
Meanwhile, skilled negotiators that they are, Republicans have been wise enough not to gloat over their victory. "It has some good news and it has some disappointing news, and it will require careful monitoring," says Bill Frist, admirably feigning disappointment. Meanwhile, Democrats, who must now back down and allow the confirmation of some truly radical judges, don't feel humiliated. In fact, they speak as if they've won. "In a Senate that is increasingly polarized, the bipartisan center held," Joe Lieberman proudly announced. And here's Assistant Democratic Leader Richard Durbin of Illinois: "There is nothing more exhilarating than being shot at and missed."
Exhilarating indeed. Can somone please resurrect the Whigs?
--T.A. Frank
Rob
Posted by: Rob Kapsar at May 25, 2005 04:27 PMThe CAGING OF AMERICA: A WARNING!
http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/the_caging_of_america_.html
Catch Sam Seder on cable...Sam will be subbing for Ron Reagan on MSNBC's Coast-to-Coast this Wednesday at noon.
And regular Majority Report listeners know that Sam has been covering Ohio's "Coingate" scandal, which, as it continues to snowball, threatens to take down most if not all of Ohio's Republican Party.
Today, the Ohio Blade covered some of the Coingate converage:
Readers of DailyKos.com are not only debating the political ramifications of the coin scandal but also finding humor in it. One reader asked why the state was investing its money in rare coins in the first place.Posted by not sam at May 31, 2005 08:19 PM"That defies my imagination," the DailyKos.com reader wrote, joking "at least the state didn’t try to corner the market on Maurice Clarett bobblehead dolls" — poking fun at the former Ohio State University football star.
A link was posted to a phone call made by Sam Seder on Air America Radio to the bureau, inquiring about the state buying his baseball card collection as an investment.
Posted by: Julia at June 8, 2005 12:47 AM
Posted by: Julia at June 8, 2005 12:56 AM
John Conyers has written a letter to President Bush demanding answers about the "serious ramifications for the integrity of the United States Government" regarding the Downing Street Memo. Go to Johnconyers.com, read the letter, and then sign it.
From the site:
"You and I know the White House is just hoping that this matter will fade away, but in a few short weeks, with our steadfastness, the memo has found its way into leading newspapers and White House press briefings. With your help, we can hold this Administration accountable.
Please pass on this important letter to your friends and colleagues, and ask them to sign as well.
Thank you for your help and support.
John Conyers, Jr."
Posted by not sam at June 2, 2005 05:31 PMIf this isn't a silver bullet nothing will suffice but the real thing.
Posted by: God of War at June 2, 2005 08:03 PMPosted by: Kate Anne at June 7, 2005 03:58 AM
Posted by: James (Jimmy) McWhorter at June 7, 2005 01:44 PM
Posted by: David L. Jordan at June 8, 2005 06:07 PM
yep...
Posted by: ¹³ß£N at June 8, 2005 06:36 PMPosted by: ¹³ß£N at June 8, 2005 06:37 PM
The ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee has scheduled hearings on the 2002 minutes between senior British and American officials which asserted that intelligence was "being fixed" to support the case for war in Iraq, RAW STORY has learned.
The hearings, which will be held next Thursday, will bring renewed attention to what is being called the "Downing Street memo," actually official minutes of a secret 2002 meeting.
Conyers' office has revealed that they will introduce new documents that corroborate the Downing Street Memo at the hearings June 16.
LINK:
Posted by: Star Vox at June 10, 2005 08:15 AMJaneane Garofalo and Sam Seder are mentioned on the blog (along with a few other names from Air America Radio).
Check it out!
LINK:
Posted by: Star Vox at June 10, 2005 08:35 AMAmong our handbills is an Action Alert to sign John Conyer's letter to President Bush. The address to our handbills is: http://www.justicefornone.com/handbills/index.htm
Posted by: Dan & Cindy at June 10, 2005 05:13 PMThere is only one explanation. Some of the most powerful Democratic Senators knew that the intelligence against Iraq was weak, knew it was being manipulated, and kept quiet about it. Why would they do that? The Bush people presumably brought in every powerful Democratic senator who was a possible presidential candidate for 2004 and/or spokesperson for the Democrats in that election. That definitely would have included Kerry, Clinton, Biden, Lieberman. They would have been flattered to be wooed by the Republicans, and figured their involvement would allow them to participate in claiming credit for getting rid of Hussein.
Rove is smart enough to figure this is a good way to compromose and corrupt them, which he has done.
Look at Kerry during the election. The only thing he could come out with about Iraq is that he would have sent more troops. Why didn't he scream in outrage that the Bush people had lied to him, and lied to the American public? Because he couldn't claim that they had lied to him, because he knew the truth.
Why do the Democrats stand silent today? Why aren't they all over this Downing Street memo. (I mean the Senators - not the Representatives). Because they are compromised and corrupted, because they knew the truth, and they went along.
Those Democrats need to be outed, and they need to leave politics and leave the Democratic party. Without that, the party cannot take a principled stand on this war.
Mark my words, it will be a Republican who comes along and speaks out against the war, and he will tar all the sitting Democrats for their support. The Republicans don't care if Bush is now damaged - he's done. So Gingrich will come along and promised a fresh outsider's view starting with ending the war. And the Democrats will sit silently.
We need to demand of each Senator: what did they know about Iraq
before the U.S. invaded.
http://www.unlearning.org/library/control.wmv
This video link shows clearly how we all allowed ourselves to be misled. Are there any members of Congress, other than Ron Paul or Cynthia McKinney, who are willing to impeach this president and most members of Congress who voted for this entire charade?
This is only the most recent of lies, allowed to come into existence because we are a culture of liars. To un-peel these lies from your mind, check into my website repeatedly.
Happy Tuesday!
Patrick Mooney
The Institute of Unlearning
This is in no way intended to take away from the downing street memo effort and John Conyers' efforts. But we should also raise 9-11 -- now is the time!
Alex.
Posted by: Alex at June 14, 2005 05:08 PMPosted by: Winston Smith at June 17, 2005 11:06 AM
JUSTIFYING THE SILENCE ON DOWNING STREET MEMOS
One of the features of the newfound media interest in the Downing Street Memo is a profound defensiveness, as reporters scramble to explain why it received so little attention in the U.S. press.
But the most familiar line--the memo wasn't news because it contained no "new" information--only raises troubling questions about what journalists were doing when they should have been reporting on the gulf between official White House pronouncements and actual White House intentions.
The truth is that the Downing Street Memo is a reminder of how poorly the media served the public before the war-- which might explain their reluctance to take it seriously.
LINK:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2556
Posted by: Star Vox at June 17, 2005 09:01 PMPosted by: mayGod at June 20, 2005 12:35 AM
Posted by: Johnny Turk at June 20, 2005 08:35 PM
Downing Street Memo Originals Destroyed
The so called Downing Street Memo - which was presumed to be authentic when Bush administration critics began touting it last month as evidence the president committed impeachable crimes - is actually a manually recreated copy - with the source of the memo now admitting he retyped the document before destroying the originals.
British reporter Michael Smith, who broke the memo story in the London Times on May 1, revealed to the Associated Press over the weekend that he "he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals."
Story Continues Below
Smith's admission means there's now no independent way to determine
the accuracy of the Downing Street Memo, i.e., whether he made any
typos or transcription errors that could have changed the memo's
meaning.
The revelation has conjured up memories of the CBS News forged
document scandal last year, where anchorman Dan Rather argued that
damaging records he obtained from President Bush's National Guard
file were essentially accurate, even though they had been faked by
his source.
While British officials hadn't disputed the authenticity of the Downing Street Memo, a senior member of the Blair government who reviewed the Downing Street Memo in light of reporter Smith's admission could say only that its contents "appeared authentic."
That official, however, requested anonymity, refusing to make an on-the-record endorsement of the memo's accuracy.
New questions about the authenticity Downing Street Memo come at a particularly awkward time for Democrats in America. Only last week, House Democrats staged a mock impeachment hearing based on the re-created document.
Former presidential candidate John Kerry announced on June 2 that he intended to confront Congress with the Downing Street Memo, believing at the time that the document's authenticity was beyond reproach.
"I think it's a stunning, unbelievably simple and understandable statement of the truth and a profoundly important document that raises stunning issues here at home," he told a reporter.
Last week, a Kerry aide said his boss was sending a letter to
President Bush demanding that he answer questions about the fake
memo.
__________________
Posted by: SoCalifer at June 22, 2005 05:24 AM
Satan rules this world!
From Job 1:1
�There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job, and
that man was blameless, upright, fearing God, and turning away from
evil.�
The possibility is that Job was, living in a time before Abraham,
was the only �upright� man on earth about 1890 B. C. E. OK? And
Satan hated Job!, as the ruler of this world God let him have this
power.
�Job 1:7, �And (YAHWEH) lord (God) said to Satan �From where
do you come?�
Then Satan answered the Lord and said, �From roaming about on the
earth and walking around on it.�
Now in Matthew (N.T) 4 (Jesus� temptation) verse 8, �Again the
Devil took him (Jesus) to a very high mountain, and showed him all
of the kingdom of the world, (then and future times) and their
glory; and he sid to him �
�All these things will I give you, if you fall down and worship
me.�
Jesus� reply was: (verse 10),
�Begone Satan for it is written (Deuteronomy 6:13, Deuteronomy
10:20) you shall fear the lord your God and serve him only!�
Now Jesus worshipped the God of Heaven. But Jesus refused the Devil
� but not George W. Bush � He wants to be � and is the �most
powerful man in the world.� Ruled by the Devil!
War brings death, and the devil loves this world�s bloodshed. But Bush forgets Devil and death have a great price to pay; when they come to collect, how will his power and money save him and all of his cohorts with him? Does he dare open the door to them when they come for him?
I. M. Aman
That's the name of a group in Ohio trying to get election reform on the ballot there. Go to their site here, sign up to volunteer.
You can learn more about the effort in Pounder's Kos diary, or at the Swing State Project.
If we can't get legislators to enact election reform, we can do it ourselves. Plus, as the right wing has shown, ballot measures get the faithful to polls. It's just that ours won't be designed to, you know, ruin the country.
Posted by not sam at June 4, 2005 04:35 PMi liked the lil pop up in the lower
left hand corner of my browser that tipped me off.
whats that proggie or option called?
Posted by: Sunshine Jim at June 4, 2005 07:45 PMhttp://www.policymattersohio.org/
Thank you so much for drawing attention to the rapidly growing clusterf*** that Ohio is becoming. We desperately need your help in exploiting these TRUE MORAL crimes that are being committed. The election fraud, mismanagement of funds, corporate giveaways and tax evasion, public service cuts, school funding cuts.
BTW Jerry Springer is completely missing the boat with these issues. He is at republican ground zero and yet he doesn't use this opportunity! Instead he holds republicans hands and babbles incessantly about irrelevant things or things that everybody already knows. His slogan claims he is progressive and the voice of the middle class, and yet he says NOTHING ABOUT the massive crimes being committed in OHIO. Ugh. I can't even listen to him anymore!
AAR as a whole needs to pay consistent attention to Ohio. It is being used as the HQ for these scum to do their dirty work.
Thanks Sam for calling and mocking Thomas Noe. That was priceless. Pun intended. Keep it up we need you!!!
Posted by: yellosnapdragon at June 7, 2005 01:37 PMPosted by: Mr. Carl Howard at June 8, 2005 08:58 PM
Posted by: Strong King (Reknowned at the Spear) at June 8, 2005 09:21 PM
Posted by: jjoats at June 10, 2005 02:13 PM
Posted by: yellosnapdragon at June 13, 2005 07:33 AM
http://www.unlearning.org/library/control.wmv
Happy Tuesday!
Patrick Mooney
The Institute of Unlearning
Posted by: b at June 21, 2005 04:03 PM
Posted by: Diane at June 21, 2005 10:11 PM
Posted by: whosie at June 23, 2005 09:37 AM
Please change it!!!
Posted by: Marc Ruben at June 24, 2005 03:27 PMPosted by: Jim Swinson at June 27, 2005 04:41 PM
Posted by: Master of None at June 30, 2005 11:22 AM
Yesterday Common Cause officially endorsed the effort to qualify and pass a ballot initiative of three common-sense reforms that will signal the beginning of the end of the culture of systematic political corruption in OHIO.
Together, these three amendments will:
Limit campaign contributions to $2,000 for statewide candidates and $1,000 for legislative candidates, ban corporate contributions and require full disclosure of contributions.
Create a truly Independent Redistricting Commission, preventing politicians from creating their own legislative districts, and from making closed doors redistricting decisions without input from citizens, requiring the creation of competitive legislative and congressional districts.
Establish an independent state elections board, removing partisan politicians from the administration of state elections and allowing Ohioans to vote by mail ensuring easy and equal access to elections.
In the next 17 days, Common Cause will be working with you and with our partners at Reform Ohio Now to gather signatures in key areas throughout the state.
We need volunteers and resources to gather enough signatures and ensure that Ohio voters get to decide if these are the right reforms to solve Ohio's problems.
For more information, go to:
http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=192888
Posted by: Star Vox at July 15, 2005 07:54 PMThe Star Tribuune in Minnesota has one of the toughest editorial boards in the country. They have been early critics of the Bush fiasco.
They recently came out in support of Durbin and his remarks on torture. Despite the fact that Durbin backed down, we should show our love.
The Tribune is under assault by right wing nuts here and here and may be losing some subsrciptions. Know anybody in minnesota? anybody who wants to read a great local minn paper? Want to support truth telling media.
SUBSCRIBE!!!!!!! call (612) 673-4343 or 1 (800) 775-4344 .
No, no one wants to read the
strib, or support it.
Posted by: rick at June 29, 2005 11:56 PM
I'm just one more Nick Coleman editorial away from dropping the subscription anyway.
Posted by: Master of None at June 30, 2005 11:21 AMIn other words, the Strib is "wrong but accurate?"
The various Northern Alliance blogs (Powerline, Fraters, Captain Ed, Shot in the Dark, SCSUScholars) have owned the Strib's ass for years, catching the "tough" editorial board over and over again in errors, slanders, and dozens of "errors of fact". It's gotten to the point where the Strib won't face them; they launch little slanders periodically, and then go back and hide in their offices. They are, in short, pathetic.
Some advice from a former liberal and a former reporter; if you in the Fantasy-Based Community want to hitch your wagon to a newspaper, you could do a LOT better than the Strib.
Posted by: Reader, Writer, Pirate at June 30, 2005 11:36 AMMaybe you should triple up on your own subscription..I hear that there's quite a few extra copies laying around.
Posted by: Swiftee at June 30, 2005 01:59 PMhttp://restraininorder.blogspot.com/2005/06/star-and-sickle-is-accused-of-lying.html
and here
href="http://www.fraterslibertas.com/2005_06_01_archive.html#112008897554738866
and here too!
http://www.shotinthedark.info/archives/005937.html
Maybe you should triple up on your own subscription..I read some where ( http://www.startribune.com/stories/468/5480888.htm )that there's quite a few extra copies laying around.
Posted by: swiftee at June 30, 2005 02:07 PMTough! That's Tough!
Posted by: Janeane Garbonzolo at June 30, 2005 02:48 PMI've also noticed that if you can stand the unsightly ink smudges, the Strib's softness is a very effective alternative to Charmin, and it flushes even easier.
Posted by: chachi at June 30, 2005 03:22 PMit's a freakin newspaper!!!! even if it didn't SUCK i'd never love a newspaper.
Posted by: KC at June 30, 2005 05:14 PMPosted by: MissM at June 30, 2005 08:12 PM
They have let me down at times, with election coverage last fall, for example. Too much on Bush's appearances with his fake audiences, but they probably didn't know what to do with his numerous visits to the state. Lately they seem to be coming out even more strongly as a good newspaper for facts and truth.
Thanks for the good word on the Star Tribune! I doubt the Powerline guys are doing all that much damage due to the fact that they are all basically idiots over there and who even reads their blog anymore? The conservatives even gave up on them, or so I hear.
Minnesota is still a true Blue state, so I doubt that the Strib is losing many subscriptions, but yes by all means subscribe to it! It's worth every penny. Who cares what a few hack bloggers say about it. (And I see they aren't very busy these days since they all seem to be here.)
The Strib's editorials are great; at the very least get it for them. Think of it as the Anti-Powerline. Oh, and SACK's cartoons are classics!
Posted by: Shelly Thomas at July 1, 2005 04:33 AM"ey have let me down at times, with election coverage last fall, for example. Too much on Bush's appearances with his fake audiences,"
Fake? I was there, twice. No mannequins to be seen.
"Thanks for the good word on the Star Tribune! I doubt the Powerline guys are doing all that much damage due to the fact that they are all basically idiots over there and who even reads their blog anymore?"
Only about 100,000 people a day.
" The conservatives even gave up on them, or so I hear."
Was the "conservative" you "heard" "that" from sitting at the bus stop telling it to nobody in particular?
"Minnesota is still a true Blue state, so I doubt that the Strib is losing many subscriptions, but yes by all means subscribe to it! It's worth every penny. Who cares what a few hack bloggers say about it. (And I see they aren't very busy these days since they all seem to be here.)"
That's because this isn't the real thread. For whatever reason, this isn't the live version of the show blog.
Ah, well. Shelly? We're going red in '08, baby! But by that time, you'll have grown up, maybe, and joined the good guys.
Posted by: Velotte at July 1, 2005 08:27 AMThe Red Star is also known for doing push polls and other polls with a such slanted methodology so it's never accurate.
I stopped subscribing four years ago and I'm proud to drive around with a Mr. Yuck Star-Tribune bias bumper sticker.
If you want REAL news, there's always the Pioneer Press who doesn't engage in fraud to pad their subscription numbers and gives both sides of the story (That's probably why the likes of Shelly Thomas hate it!)
Posted by: Piranha at July 1, 2005 01:15 PMPosted by: NightBreed614 at July 1, 2005 03:40 PM
Posted by: Dave at July 1, 2005 04:04 PM
Information can be found at: http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2005/6/30/175730/180
This campaign is being held in conjunction with the Center for Constitutional Rights. There will be a rally in NYC on Monday, July 4th. Details and flag downloads at the link.
Posted by: Man Eegee at July 1, 2005 06:37 PMHey righties, how's that oil busines... um er... I mean the WAR going? Seen any memos lately? And to think, this is just what we know NOW. Can't wait for your shit to unravel quicker than Osama's turban in a windstorm.
Posted by: RatsoRizzo at July 2, 2005 03:29 AMPosted by: Anonymous Coward at July 3, 2005 12:38 AM
May 27, 2005: �This is going to be a heavy-duty series of articles this week. In the first place, I have been told that Fat Karl the Eunuch is trying to spread rumors that I am actually someone else; that I do not exist and that everything I write about is all fiction and left-wing garbage. Fat Karl is losing his grip and if he is not careful, he might soon lose his head.
From two sources, neither of whom know each other and both of whom are well-placed in the system, I have been receiving information that indicates that a coup d'etat against the Bush administration is apparently being seriously contemplated in certain circles.
The first of these is the higher commands of the U.S. military which is disgusted with Bush and his ruination, as they see it, of the discipline and legitimate tasks of the military and the other is a loose confederation of very high level American businessmen who see Bush as a complete and fatal disaster to American business, most especially in the areas of foreign trade.
Bush has harassed the high military command for not being sufficiently servile to him and for not going along with his outrageous and weird ideas. He has insulted, in public, a number of their top officers and now has decided to supply commercial mini-vans to transport the troops in Iraq. A mini-van is about as safe to ride around in as a go-cart but Bush�s friends in the collapsing auto industry have bribed him to demand this change. All that will happen is that more soldiers will die quicker. It is not possible to adequately armor plate a mini van and there is no intention of armor plating them. Bush has also enraged veteran members of the CIA , not because they did not give him adequate intelligence concerning Iraq but because they did. Bush does not want facts. He demands obedience to his whims and because the CIA reports did not favor his propaganda, he hated them and trashed their abilities in public. They retaliated by releasing material that made Bush look like the vicious fool that he is and he cracked down on them, appointing the awful Porter Goss to control them. Goss, acting like a drunk bull in a china shop, has fired very competent personnel and replaced them with obedient, and worse, Republican faggots who will do the Head Queen�s biddings.
http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a1616.htm
juicy, possible cool insider
Posted by: ag at July 6, 2005 11:07 PMsadness
Posted by: Sad Nobel Prize Blogger at July 6, 2005 11:58 PMfrickin Nazi's.
Posted by: Sad Nobel Prize Blogger at July 7, 2005 12:00 AMPosted by: ¹³Ъзй at July 7, 2005 12:06 AM
i went and looked Randi's blog. they are
strict over there. I am on 'probation' right now.
serious, thats what they call it. I can't post my own thread or
anything.
THE BLOG'S ON FIRE!
Posted by: Shrieks, the Monk at July 7, 2005 01:11 AMHappy Birthday Fishgrease!
♪-♥-♫-♥-♪-♥-♫-♥-♪-♥-♫
Posted by: #6Vig at July 7, 2005 01:20 AMFor anyone wanting to subscribe to my home town paper online, please go here... http://24hour.startribune.com/login/
Posted by: Willow at July 7, 2005 01:43 AMPosted by: Q.M. ;) at July 7, 2005 02:41 AM
http://www.majorityreportradio.com/weblog/archives/002462.php
Posted by: Q.M. at July 7, 2005 02:43 AMPosted by: credit card debt at July 8, 2005 02:46 PM
Posted by: MDEN at July 8, 2005 08:16 PM
As far as losing subscriptions is concerned, keep in mind that newspapers everywhere are losing readers. No big deal.
Posted by: John D. Sens at July 8, 2005 08:24 PMPosted by: pacific poker at July 8, 2005 11:01 PM
As far as losing subscriptions is concerned, keep in mind that newspapers everywhere are losing readers. No big deal.
Posted by: John D. Sens at July 8, 2005 08:24 PM
Prove it! Blah blah rhetoric, whine. Liberal press wheeze.
I am willing to bet that the strib ran just as
many Monica blow job stories as your average paper.
#
Thanks for sending me to Powerline!
Now I've got to go shower again.
That newspaper has been all over the landscape in recent years. They bought into the admin line & took a long time to challenge the right wing noise that keeps popping up, long after being debunked.
The Star Tribune has gone pretty well right wing in a number of areas, not the least of which is to put a nutcase Powerline columnist aboard in that Kersten woman. (I used to know a Kersten who sounds like her, but unless there was a sex change involved...). Also the concerned editor is quite right wing in his apologies for coverage.
They have added Garrison Keillor, but not in a political spectrum. Still a plus.
So, if people subscribe to support the paper's honesty in coverage, then they'd better be vocal, because they also support the columnists who have a decided right wing agenda & their minions � who blow hard & long.
Which is fine, provided there is an attempt to address inaccuracies in those columnists writing.
Counting references made by one side or another does not address equal time for truth.
Posted by: Pounding at the Gate at July 9, 2005 10:00 AMAt least the strib is a place where both sides have an opportunity to be heard, if those sides have a capacity to listen.
Yes, if you subscribe, you need to be more than a consumer when there are factual errors.
I think they need to take a stand when it comes to op-ed, to be very clear where there are inaccuracies. Or be glaring in that they are not endorsing the writings. They're pretty good on that, I suppose.
You always have the opportunity to disagree, but when there is a
decided agenda forwarded by a columnist, its not as easy to do.
Most of us aren't great writers to respond in kind.
But we can't walk away & cede another forum because we sometimes
disagree. It has a regional flavor & deserves some support, just as
Bush's home town paper did for courageously not endorsing him in
2004.
Posted by: blackjack at July 10, 2005 01:28 AM
Posted by: mortgage calculators at July 11, 2005 03:28 AM
Posted by: free online texas holdem at July 11, 2005 04:54 AM
Posted by: texas holdem room at July 11, 2005 06:57 AM
Posted by: texas holdem tournament software at July 11, 2005 06:58 AM
Posted by: pacific poker signup bonus code at July 11, 2005 07:20 AM
Posted by: free pacific poker at July 11, 2005 07:28 AM
Posted by: texas holdem at July 11, 2005 07:42 AM
Posted by: texas holdem at July 11, 2005 07:45 AM
Posted by: pacific poker com at July 11, 2005 08:03 AM
Posted by: party poker at July 11, 2005 08:49 AM
Posted by: free pacific poker at July 11, 2005 10:18 AM
Posted by: pacific poker download at July 11, 2005 10:19 AM
Posted by: blackjack at July 11, 2005 10:23 AM
Posted by: blackjack at July 11, 2005 10:24 AM
Posted by: free internet blackjack at July 11, 2005 11:17 AM
Posted by: ۞ŴįĻ۞ at July 11, 2005 05:24 PM
Posted by: online poker at July 11, 2005 10:38 PM
Posted by: poker gamer at July 12, 2005 02:36 AM
Posted by: online poker bonus at July 12, 2005 02:37 AM
Posted by: pacific poker bonus code at July 12, 2005 02:56 AM
Posted by: online casino at July 12, 2005 07:05 AM
I will always read this paper, the op-ed page is pure comedy, the out of touch liberal & DFL (determined to forever loose)voice has me laughting all the way to work.
HFG
Posted by: gallagherhenry at July 12, 2005 12:18 PMAll I can say is Jerry had his head up his chunnel or some other region on charter schools. If Air America radio claims it is supposed to be the accurate alternative then why is Jerry running his mouth saying that charter schools are failing and giving the impression that they are doing lousy? No matter how much you want to stretch what Jerry said as opinion or argue it using grey standards of definition that seem to bog down these types of debates, there is no way you can justify the statements by Jerry Thursday on charter schools. That’s why a retraction should be made. Nothing could be farther from the truth than what Jerry said and no subject is of more pointed importance for kids failing the education system. I know Jerry isn’t a crap artist, but I demand a retraction and apology of this manure spread by Air America. The statements he made are full of fallacies and myths. You can start with the myth that charter schools cost school districts money. They can save money because they educate kids more cheaply based on the low, non-union wages of the teachers they employ and they are especially good at reaching kids where the public school system has already failed.
CNN just ran an article stating how charters in California are doing better than public schools, (substantially). And there are plenty of good sources of information that pretty much indicate the opposite of what Jerry was claiming, that charters are doing worse than public schools, much less failing. The conventional wisdom by almost all organizations assessing this, usually find that charter schools are doing better than public schools and most studies at best only claim slightly different results than this. I include some references below.
If Jerry wants to contribute to better understanding of whether charter schools are a positive force in education and use his celebrity to gain forums to further education and help kids he should stay away from all the talking heads and fierce politics surrounding this issue, especially the statistics both sides use to try to further their case on the issue of charter schools. Frankly there are groups involved in this who have kids as their last priority and they are probably the most deft at using statistics to further their goals. But there are people, teachers and administrators who work in the field that he can talk with to get a better feel for what is going on. Visiting a charter school is one way to get a feel for it. Then his advocacy can be vetted and my guess is that it would surely change. My wife's school is one where he could get a pretty good idea.
Otherwise common sense helps and I think someone who doesn’t have much direct contact with the situation or doesn’t trust statistics will find some of the following telling about charter schools. First, there is no method of teaching, class construction, facility or general teaching gimmick that will ensure success in the classroom. Otherwise everyone would adapt it. It is the quality of the administrators and what they demand from teachers and the quality of teachers that ensures success. So from that perspective it would seem charter schools aren’t especially necessary.
There are however personality differences in students. Different school environments, especially the size of a school, vastly improve the chances of success for at risk kids. It is reasonable that certain kids, who for most intents and purposes have never had a parent, would need a warmer environment. One with a little more parenting by the teachers and an environment where for once they can feel safe in and get personal support rather than the mixed problems, alienation and isolation by numbers and pressures of some of the huge city schools.
But its not just at risk kids or kids looking for a little parenting and support, there are a lot of kids who’s personality needs a smaller school to thrive (or they would prefer). Class size also helps, and its not just from the perspective of individual kid personality, but that it gets physically impossible to teach more than 30 kids at once. So there are definite, tangible reasons and proven success for charter schools and they are demonstrated as an important tool for getting kids a high school degree, especially those at risk for dropping out and never getting a high school education. No sense trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Most kids will fit just fine into the larger public schools and have no need of this.
The other issue I used to agree with Jerry on and argue with my wife. How could it possibly help a school district to have money taken away from it? Well it may seem that any time you are taking money from one school and giving it to another that you are hurting it. One, money isn’t what necessarily determines the success of a school and two these charter kids are supposed to be educated anyway and some in the form of partnership schools will give kids who are already out of the system another chance. Charter schools often cost a school district less per pupil which saves the district money and solves a big problem for them. At least here in Milwaukee.
But the main reason it helps to have charter schools is that it keeps public education systems from being monopolies, not that they can save a district money. We’ve all run into civil servants or workers who know that they can do whatever they want because you can’t go anywhere else. They know that the monopolistic status quo empowers them to continue incompetence and the stagnation can become endless without some catalyst. Charter schools are a good way for there to be balance by keeping administrators looking back over their shoulder. Even if there aren’t higher standards by the nearest competing charter school the unsaid knowledge that someone else is on the block can be enough to raise standards in non-charter schools. Having an alternative is a powerful force for improvement and it gives at least some kids a chance to go somewhere else in the schools that are locked into continued failure by its administrators.
Charter schools also have powerful enemies who keep the negatives in the limelight without regard for the kids. Teacher’s unions appear to hate charters for what is no particular good reason. In Milwaukee they choose not to unionize the charter schools which would be beneficial for both the charter teachers and themselves. The pursuit of power, having monopolistic control is likely the main basis for the venom, even though charters are really not affecting its enemies all that much, if it all.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ran a series on charter schools that was terrible in its journalistic standards. It had the approach that is so prevalent today asking two people to take opposite sides on the issue. If one side decides to lie and the other doesn’t, how have you presented both sides of the story? Which is what happened and what the Republicans harness so well. It becomes propaganda for the other side if one side is good enough at lying which is what a paper is supposed to be investigating. Reporting a story or concept involves a lot of hard work involving researching and investigating facts. Its lacks integrity and is lazy to avoid this necessary research by abrogating this responsibility to guest editorial columnists. It lowers the standard of discourse and makes important information undiscernable.
The columnist implied a lackluster record for charter schools in Milwaukee, saying two huge lies. She talked about how none of the kids were going on to school after graduation and how terrible the graduation rates are. The opinionist mentioned by name in her column one of the schools my wife runs with two other administrators as an example of how even the best charter schools are abject failures. The kids in the school are at risk kids who have already been kicked out or have dropped out of the Milwaukee school system. They often come from severe problem homes, some have been or are in the worst gangs in Milwaukee which has a pretty fair murder rate for a small town, shot at, kicked out of school multiple times, some are LD and likely less than 10% would ever graduate if not for the school.
She compared these kids to the overall graduation statistics of Milwaukee Public schools and then gloats that there is an inferior graduation rate in this school, plus throws in that no one goes on to college or more school, which begs the question how could you compare these kids to the mainstream in the first place? It’s a little disingenuous. Why are there always so many effective and outrageous lies stated in prominent places about charter schools?
The funny thing is that the graduation rate from my wife’s school blows away the public schools. It is at least 20% higher and they have a lot of kids who go on to trade schools, college, junior college, etc.. They graduate anywhere from 70 to 90%. Well if you’re going to lie might as well make it a whopper, which the columnist did. Its been truly inspiring to listen to the stories over the years from my wife, but unfortunately the public doesn't know about the success of charter schools. This is the dismal type of spin and misinform