Date:

01 Sep 2006

Time:

06:42:36

Comments

"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty," said Edward R. Murrow in 1954. in 1954. He continues:

"We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear - one, of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of un-reason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men; Not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were - for the moment - unpopular."

And so, good night, and good luck.

Date:

01 Sep 2006

Time:

16:22:12

Comments

It is staggering that anyone could be so self-infatuated as to single out their own particular policy preferences as "anti-war." Anyone who is not a sadist or an idiot is anti-war. The only serious issue is how best to limit, deter or conclude war. But responsibility for confronting this issue is evaded by those preoccupied with the moral preening of being "anti-war."

Thomas Sowell

Date:

02 Sep 2006

Time:

06:53:05

Comments

"I am no appeaser of fascism, for I have fought this administration at every step. Millions have done the same, and will continue to do so. To stand in opposition to this new type of fascism, embodied in the hypocrisies and lies of men like Rumsfeld and Bush, is as much our patriotic duty as the time I spent in that jury room," writes William Rivers Pitt. (Read his entire article on our Update page.)

Date:

03 Sep 2006

Time:

19:44:56

Comments

Date:

04 Sep 2006

Time:

17:05:09

Comments

ymtkdrhip uwce tfbhu qsjn mekorscb pcghfa lawo

Date:

07 Sep 2006

Time:

18:23:34

Comments

If you believe Mr Pitts' first sentence, then you are ignorant of history in the worst way. I would suggest that anyone who has not made the effort to learn what life was like under fascist Germany or Stalin's Russia should do so before posting such trash. If after studying said history one still agrees with Mr Pitts, you are then not only partisan to the point of delirium, but also so abysmally stupid as to defy description. Mr Pitts is an appeaser of idiots. I welcome any discussion into the matter of life under totalitarianism, but would suggest that Mr Pitts and whoever posted his fabulations first read the Diary of Anne Franks or visit the Simon Weisenthal Center. Reading some of the works of Solzenitsyn, either One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch or the Gulag Archipelago would also give communist apologists a dose of reality.

Date:

08 Sep 2006

Time:

01:35:30

Comments

RE: Comment on Pitts, Sept. 7 A person who is only capable of posting verbatim drivel from bloviators such as Pitts, rather than suggesting some kind of digested perspective on said buffoon's writings, is intellectually bankrupt. Moreover, the NY Times has during the last several days made it apparent that it was Richard Armitage and Joe Wilson that outed Valerie Plame, but trust me--Pitts and every other BLAME AMERICA FIRST, BLAME BUSH LIBERAL will say nothing about their reckless accusations. No integrity. BALDEAGLE

Date:

08 Sep 2006

Time:

05:12:59

Comments

Library Journal:

The former Democratic senator from Colorado (1975-87), Hart (The Shield and the Cloak) captures the frustration of many grassroots Democrats with their party's timid and rudderless response to the Bush administration. Hart pointedly mentions the advice that former Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield gave him when he first entered the Senate: "Draw a line. Fix a point beyond which you will not go and stick to it." In Hart's view, far too many Democratic politicians have no such line of principle.

He advises them to return to the four guiding ideas that were the foundation of the party's success in the 20th century: FDR's sense that all Americans are one community, Truman's internationalism, JFK's call to service, and LBJ's dedication to social equality. Hart believes that Democrats must counter right-wing social Darwinism, imperial isolation, corruption, and the veneration of the super-rich at the expense of all others. To regain power, he writes, Democrats need to offer policies that will provide healthcare, a cleaner environment, and opportunity for all. This book will find a ready audience of those seeking an alternative to contemporary policies

Date:

09 Sep 2006

Time:

11:03:34

Comments

Re: Gary Hart's book, he's correct that it's not your father's Democrat party anymore. FDR's recognition that Americans are one COMMUNITY became the slide into one big COMMUNE. LBJ's social equality got bastardized into a Democrat party push into just making everybody EQUAL (punish success--capture the envy vote). Fighting corruption--he certainly meant on both sides of the aisle. Veneration of the super-rich @ the expense of others: this evolved into a Democrat party line of crucifying the "rich" (definition: anyone who has more stuff than you, or flies to a more distant beach for vacation), because appealing to people's envy is a surefire way to knock off a helluva bunch of votes, and people are willfully ignorant of tax data and the fact that the top 10 percent pay 50 percent of the income tax.

Date:

09 Sep 2006

Time:

14:13:04

Comments

If we are to pick an choose, could we not pick FDR's failure to ward off the Pearl Harbor attack, Truman's Korea, JFK's Bay of Pigs, and LBJ's Viet Nam? Were theses presidents not themselves among the super rich? I guess only poor politicians such as Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and Hillary "cattle futures" Clinton are worthy of respect. Are the popular politicians on this page only the ones who get caught in illicit extramarital affairs? Why ask Democrats to alter their timid and rudderless response to the Bush administration, it is only an extension of the Democrat's push for a timid and rudderless response to terrorist attacks.

BTW, if you want to quote Mr Hart, you would do well to research his intelligence credentials, which are not negligible despite being a Democrat, although a Democrat of days past where they cared more about their country than scoring cheap political points. G. Hart warned B. Clinton about the dangers of radical Islam and Osama, and was ignored. He was recently on a program where he advocated, in his words: "aggressively seeking out terrorists, kicking in the door, and cutting their throats". Do we agree with him on security?

Date:

10 Sep 2006

Time:

10:30:58

Comments

A DAY OF REMEMBRANCE

Air America Radio’s programming, all day on Monday, September 11, 2006, will be in remembrance of the day, five years ago, that put horror in our hearts, but that gave us the opportunity to be one nation again.

Click here to find a local station that carries the programming. Or listen on XM satellite, channel 167. Or to listen on the internet, go to the Air America Radio website, and click on the Listen Live text.

Brent Budowsky

Historians Will Morally Impeach George W. Bush For Exploiting, Not Honoring, 9-11

09.09.2006

Who was not moved by the courage of our police and fire fighters rushing into burning buildings to save our fellow Americans? Who wasn't inspired by the courage and valor of Pentagon workers who rushed out of the building when the attack first struck and then, realizing their collagues and friends were in grave danger, turned around and rushed right back in, to save them?

The infamy of the crime was met with the united will and the united spirit of a United America, backed by the decent opinion of men and women in every corner of the world.

Never before in our history have our people been more hurt by a single act that struck on our shores.

Never before in our history have our people reacted to such infamy, to such hurt, with a greater and more powerful proof of our courage and nobility.

Never before in our history has the patriotism and honor of our people inspired such respect and admiration throughout the free world.

And never before in our history has any leader of our Nation exploited such an event with such smallness, such partisanship, such disunity, such contempt and such vindictiveness...

Date:

10 Sep 2006

Time:

12:28:51

Comments

Fury Among Former Clinton Administrations Officials -- And Clinton -- At Misleading ABC Series on 9-11. We Wonder if it Will Have the Scene Where Bush Kicks the CIA Briefer Who Tells Him About Osama Planning Attacks Against the U.S. Out of the Room. Bush Told Him, "Now You've Covered Your Ass and You Can Leave" -- And Then Bush Did Nothing to Prevent 9-11

Date:

11 Sep 2006

Time:

20:07:25

Comments

RE: DAY OF REMEMBRANCE, Sept. 10: In the NEVER BEFORE category, NEVER BEFORE has the opposition party, committed to going to war early on, sold out for votes to the point of sedition. A predictable repeat of Viet Nam. All the enemy has to do is wait for the defeatists to effect the American mindset (mainly among those who can- not name two Supreme Court justices, but still have a vote), and eventually the enemy gets what it wants--the party in power who will be easy to deal with. The party that would wage a more "sensitive war on terror"(John Kerry's words).

Date:

11 Sep 2006

Time:

21:49:18

Comments

RE: Never has a leader of our nation exploited...

Am I the only one who remembers Bill Clinton at the Ron Brown funeral, laughing until he noticed that he was being videotaped, whereupon, in mid stride, he started weeping? And the Academy Award for Hypocrisy goes to.....

Date:

12 Sep 2006

Time:

11:09:37

Comments

RE: CLINTON AT THE RON BROWN FUNERAL. Darn, you're good. I forgot all about that, and the questionable events around Brown's demise. Thanks for the reminder. Problem is, most people reading this are clueless as to who Ron Brown was. Please keep posting--it's kinda lonesome here at times.BALDEAGLE

Date:

14 Sep 2006

Time:

11:33:46

Comments

A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION by Brent Budowsky

For the first time in the history of our Republic, the coming election in November is nothing less than a national referendum, in which the American people will be voting whether to pursue, or prevent, the next dark and unalterable road to tragic and unwise war... In Vietnam, the war decision was made regardless of the election, by the Congress. In Iraq, the war decision was made before the election, by the Congress. For the next war, the decision will made before the election, by the VOTERS... What I urge, propose, implore and call for is an urgent summit of the financial leaders of the Democratic and progressive community, supported by President Clinton, President Carter, and Vice-President Gore to finance an emergency infusion of $25 million into Air America, the progressive blogosphere, and African American, Hispanic and Labor groups to combine a massive communications assault with a massive voting power assault for the closing weeks of this historic campaign.

I come from the JFK, Kenny O'Donnell school of politics and we are in the fight of our lives and it is time fight hard, and fight to win.

It is time to be deadly serious and understand the full magnitude of the coming assault that will soon be launched against us, and the ominous and deadly consequences if they prevail again.

It is time to do what the financiers for the one party state have been doing for thirty years.

It is time to put real money, real muscle and real power behind the real voices of real Democrats, and to fight like hell for the real democracy, and the real majority, of the real America.

It is time to man the barricades, with a sense of urgency and passion, with an immediacy and power equal to the magnitude of the forces we are up against, the unprecedented attack that is hours from beginning, and the extreme consequences of two more years of one party rule.

It is time to cut the cards, cut the crap, cut through the niceties, and play to win...

Date:

14 Sep 2006

Time:

12:56:59

Comments

RE: BUTTINSKY'S SEPT. 14 PLATITUDES. Can you "progressives" ever get down to specifics? "Man the barricades" is as specific as you get. Would that be at the point of invasion (Mexican border), or the usual Utopian vagueries you spout. We had basically a one-party system (60's forward), until a few people woke up to your "free lunch" failures and appeasement foreign policies. Now it's not going your way, and you just radicalize yourselves and sabotage your whole movement in doing so. Go ahead--give some specifics--it'll be a first for "progressives", who heretofore can only cultivate the envy vote, the blame the US and Israel vote, and the "government can't tell me what to do with my body" vote, while mortgaging the population's future with Ponzi schemes such as "social security" (oh yeah-there's a trust fund).

Date:

14 Sep 2006

Time:

13:16:46

Comments

Good grief, Bush thinks he's leading some religious awakening that sanctions a war that will go on, he said, for decades....We are in some serious trouble. It's like when you realize that your father is blazing drunk and driving the car on the thin shoulder of a mountain road screaming that Jesus is behind the wheel and everything will be okay.

Date:

14 Sep 2006

Time:

20:10:44

Comments

CHARLIE BROWN'S "GOOD GRIEF". My dad was a t-totaler, so maybe you're talking about yours. IF you could answer a question directly, here it is: Which decade was it when Jews didn't need somebody to stick up for 'em? If it takes decades to give them help, and that's how it's looking...some of you out there will campaign to have Uncle Sam turn his back on Israel. You can see it coming.BALDEAGLE

Date:

15 Sep 2006

Time:

21:18:01

Comments

re: Brent Budowsky's delusions. When has any election NOT been considered the election of all times. You have yelled the same chicken little story every election! If you want to have the electorate decide the running of a war, and base that on your success in condemning millions to death and misery after your forcing the Viet Nam defeat, please consider this. If the electorate could have decided what to do with the war of North Korean aggression, we would have pulled out and condemned the South Koreans to your favorite torture, life under communist oppression. If you would like to review public opinion of the time, be my guest (please). Thank God or whatever you worship we had a president, a Democrat no less, whose motto was "the buck stops here", and who held fast in the face of disaproving public opinion. Just for the record, if you were around then, Brent Budowsky, were you in favor of the cut and run strategy in Korea too? How about WW II?

I hear Air America is indeed in need of a cash infusion. Why is it that they are not popular? Free enterprise at work and your views lose out.

Peter N.

Date:

16 Sep 2006

Time:

09:58:39

Comments

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), for one, decided she'd had enough.

"In light of the rantings that went on for 30 minutes by two colleagues from the other side, I'd like to state for the record that America is not tired of fighting terrorism; America is tired of the wrongheaded and boneheaded leadership of the Republican party that has sent six and a half billion a month to Iraq while the front line was Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. That led this country to attack Saddam Hussein, when we were attacked by Osama bin Laden. Who captured a man who did not attack the country and let loose a man that did. Americans are tired of boneheaded Republican leadership that alienates our allies when we need them the most. Americans are most certainly tired of leadership that despite documenting mistake after mistake after mistake, even of their own party admitting mistakes, never admit they do anything wrong. That's the kind of leadership Americans are tired of."

She concluded,

"I'm not going to sit here as a Democrat and let the Republican leadership come to the floor and talk about Democrats not making us safe. They're the ones in charge and Osama bin Laden is still at loose."

Well put.

Date:

17 Sep 2006

Time:

13:48:15

Comments

There Is No War On Terror Robert Dreyfuss September 13, 2006

President George W. Bush, Vice President Cheney and the entire Republican election team are scrambling to make their so-called war on terror the focus of the next seven weeks. As in 2002 and 2004, they’re counting on their ability to scare Americans with the al-Qaida bogeyman. And while the trauma of 9-11 has begun to dissipate and American voters seem less susceptible than ever to the scare tactics used by the White House, for the past five years the Democrats have been singularly unable to develop an effective counter to the Bush administration on terrorism. So, for that reason, here are 10 important facts about terrorism that opponents of President Bush should understand...

I. The threat of terrorism is wildly exaggerated...

II. Al-Qaida barely exists at all as a threat...

III. There is no Terrorist International...

IV. Iraq will not, and could not, fall to al-Qaida...

V. The Taliban is not al-Qaida...

VI. Neither Iran nor Syria sponsor anti-U.S. terrorism...

VII. It is not a “war.”...

VIII. There were never any al-Qaida sleeper cells in the United States...

IX. Vulnerabilities are not threats...

X. No one is in charge.

After 9-11, the Bush administration launched an open-ended war on an ambiguous enemy ("terror") while offering the nation no definition of what victory would look like. Five years later, the nation has spent billions in taxpayer dollars and lost thousands of American lives fighting a threat that should be the province of law enforcement and intelligence services, not the military. And the White House tells us there is no end in sight.

Mr. Bush: Do you still want the November election to be decided on this sorry record?

It isn’t about security in the homeland. It’s about financial security for Republican contributors. The New York Times

Date:

17 Sep 2006

Time:

20:32:16

Comments

Right! Mary Landrieu as secretary of Defense would solve all our problems. During the last Democrat President's eight years in office, we suffered numerous terrorist attacks and did nothing of significant effectiveness. The attacks continued unabated, culminating with 9 11. You may not like the course we have taken since, but at leat the fight was taken to them, and we have not been attacked since, in case you did not notice. You had your chance as Democrats, and you are not happy now that your financial security for Democrat contributors has dried up - no more Lincoln bedroom sleepovers. If you could come up with a good alternative strategy, the electorate would be appreciative, but stop insulting us with your saturday night quarterbacking. Thank heavens most of us do see the NYT's reasons I thru X as credible facts, and while Republicans may be largely deplorable, right now they are a hell of a lot better alternative than the party of Dean and Gore.

Peter N.

Date:

17 Sep 2006

Time:

21:45:55

Comments

George Clooney and Madeleine Albright say we should send troops to Darfur. War mongers. Why is this a good idea, if it was a bad idea in Iraq or Afghanistan? Here are 15 reasons that we should let the Sudanese slaughter each other, according to the reasoning of the Democratic Party: First, there are no weapons of mass destruction in Sudan. Second, the United States is not directly threatened. Third, it's a civil war -- none of our business. Fourth, we don't need to shed innocent U.S. military blood for a war half way around the world. Fifth, war never solved anything. Sixth, you can't hug your children with nuclear arms. Seventh, there are many despots who are cruelly brutalizing their people. Why is Sudan special? Why not invade Indonesia or North Korea? Eighth, have all diplomatic efforts been exhausted yet? Ninth, give peace a chance. Tenth, think globally, act locally -- imagine a world with no war -- and, most importantly, Eracism. Eleventh, Africa is still suffering from centuries of white European colonialism. Why add insult to injury? Who are we to inflict our Western, white imperialist ideology on indigenous Africans? This is simply their way of resolving conflict. Who says our way is better? Twelth, we need to spend more money on education here in the United States, not on the Pentagon war machine. Thirteenth, no blood for oil. Fourteenth, this whole thing is a CIA-created conspiracy meant to draw attention away from President Bush's incompotence. Fifteenth, cowboy diplomacy is dead.

Date:

18 Sep 2006

Time:

11:45:11

Comments

RE: DOING SOMETHING ABOUT DARFUR. You forgot reasons 16 and 17! Sixteen is that it must be just part of the vast RW conspiracy. Seventeen would be something like (let's see--let me think--oh well I can't think. OK,OK--I got it! It's a Halliburton conspiracy. BALDEAGLE

Date:

24 Sep 2006

Time:

07:40:20

Comments

The Army Corps of Engineers improperly created fake entries in government ledgers to maintain control over hundreds of millions of dollars in spending for the reconstruction of Iraq, according to a federal audit released Friday. "They took this money and parked it to use later," said one senior US official who requested anonymity. "It's improper. It's wrong. This is not the way you do government business."

Date:

24 Sep 2006

Time:

07:40:22

Comments

The Army Corps of Engineers improperly created fake entries in government ledgers to maintain control over hundreds of millions of dollars in spending for the reconstruction of Iraq, according to a federal audit released Friday. "They took this money and parked it to use later," said one senior US official who requested anonymity. "It's improper. It's wrong. This is not the way you do government business."

Date:

24 Sep 2006

Time:

07:40:47

Comments

The Army Corps of Engineers improperly created fake entries in government ledgers to maintain control over hundreds of millions of dollars in spending for the reconstruction of Iraq, according to a federal audit released Friday. "They took this money and parked it to use later," said one senior US official who requested anonymity. "It's improper. It's wrong. This is not the way you do government business."

Date:

24 Sep 2006

Time:

11:24:27

Comments

Having campaigned all those years and still the bad guys get into power. Don't you feel that by now we should realise that it is the system that is rotten and who me vote for makes little or no difference. We have had wars, imperialism and corruption following on from corruption, imperialism and wars, therefore we should be campaigning to scrap the system and come up with something different than this blind allegiance to the nation state. Ann Arky.

Date:

25 Sep 2006

Time:

15:59:23

Comments

What did the Army Corps of Engineers do?

Date:

26 Sep 2006

Time:

13:47:00

Comments

Five months ago, the combined resources of the American intelligence community issued a National Intelligence Estimate which held that the war in Iraq was creating more danger, creating more terrorists, creating more threats to America.

This was not some idle statement, this was the authoritative viewpoint of our combined intelligence services. What did the President and his advisors do? Did they make any change to the policy? No. Did they tell the truth to the people? No. Did they honorably represent the views of commanders? No. With even our combined intelligence agencies warning of danger, did they do anything al all differently? No.

Date:

02 Oct 2006

Time:

14:33:19

Comments

Members of the September 11 commission said today that they were alarmed that they were told nothing about a White House meeting in July 2001 at which George J. Tenet, then the director of the CIA, is reported to have warned Condoleezza Rice, then the national security adviser, about an imminent al Qaeda attack and failed to persuade her to take action.

Date:

05 Oct 2006

Time:

12:27:11

Comments

FOCUS: Bill Moyers - Lincoln Weeps

Bill Moyers writes: "Once upon a time the House of Representatives was known as 'the people's house.' No more. It belongs to K Street now. That's the address of the lobbyists who swarm all over Capitol Hill. There are 65 lobbyists for every member of Congress. They spend $200 million per month wining, dining and seducing federal officials. Per month!"

Date:

06 Oct 2006

Time:

17:19:15

Comments

Moyers is right. However, the following is worth reading.

On a typical day, according to the Times, “a gang of about two dozen Democrats mill around Murtha’s seat. A procession of others walk back to request pet spending projects.” Republicans come by, too, hoping to convince Murtha to enlist Democrats “to join them on close votes.”

As the Times puts it, “As the top Democrat on the House military spending subcommittee, Murtha often delivers Democratic votes to Republican leaders in a tacit exchange for earmarks for himself and his allies. ” Whether lawmakers are looking for votes or a piece of pork, “Nobody ever leaves completely disappointed, ” says one member.

Earmarks waste a whopping $64 billion a year, and they corrupt lawmakers, bribing them “to vote for a piece of legislation they wouldn’t ordinarily give two minutes to, ” according to another member.

They also allow special-interest groups to put a stranglehold on our political system. But Murtha is unapologetic about what he does. “Deal making is what Congress is all about, ” he says.

Date:

06 Oct 2006

Time:

19:40:39

Comments

It's probably true that the Republican leadership should have done more with the early warnings they received. Memo to file: Any number of e-mails above one from a grown man to a teenage boy or girl is too many. Full stop.

But for the Democrats to be clutching the draperies in horror is a little hard to credit. This is not the first time members of Congress have hit on pages. In 1983 there was a bipartisan page scandal. The Republican, Dan Crane, had been involved with a teenage girl page. He tearfully apologized but was defeated in the next election in a heavily Republican district. Gerry Studds, a Democrat, was involved with a teenage male page. But Studds was re-elected six more times by his Massachusetts constituents. Both Studds and Crane admitted to having sexual affairs with the 17-year-olds. And while the House censured both men, neither resigned. Foley has so far not been charged with actually touching anyone.

It goes without saying that if the Republican leadership had moved against Foley based solely on his "overly friendly" e-mails, they would have been accused of homophobia, of drawing prejudicial inferences based on the fact that he was gay. It is also the case that a number of leading Republicans and conservatives have called upon Speaker Denny Hastert to resign. How many Democrats called for Bill Clinton to resign? Ted Kennedy? William Jefferson (of the cash in the freezer fame)?

But the Democrats, who overlook so much by so many, and who instructed us sternly that Bill Clinton's affair was a trivial matter despite the fact that it fit the classic sexual harassment scenario the Democrats themselves enshrined in law, are fortunate that Foley's target was under 18. If he were older, they would be debarred from expressing any disapproval at all. In fact, if shame were able to silence anyone anymore, Washington would be a tomb.

Mona Charen

Date:

11 Oct 2006

Time:

05:17:05

Comments

While Bush Was Obsessed with Iraq and Iran -- and Causing Needless Death and Misery -- North Korea Developed the Nuclear Bomb. The Christian Science Monitor Says, "North Korea's atomic weapon test Sunday night leaves Washington's nuclear elimination strategy on the peninsula in tatters." Are you feeling safer now?

Date:

11 Oct 2006

Time:

13:32:50

Comments

William Rivers Pitt writes: "George W. Bush is making some history of his own these days. When all is said and done, he will go into the books as the first American president to lose two wars at the same time."

Date:

14 Oct 2006

Time:

06:13:59

Comments

In a blistering attack on Tony Blair's foreign policy, General Sir Richard Dannatt, head of the British Army, said that Britain must withdraw from Iraq "soon" or risk serious consequences. The continuing military presence in Iraq has jeopardized British security and interests around the world.

Date:

14 Oct 2006

Time:

06:20:10

Comments

Robert Parry writes: "There's always been the frightening question of what would happen if a President of United States went completely bonkers. But there is an equally disturbing issue of what happens if a President loses touch with reality, especially if he is surrounded by enough sycophants and enablers so no one can or will stop him."

Date:

14 Oct 2006

Time:

06:25:40

Comments

"The Ground Truth: After the Killing Ends" takes an unflinching look at the training and dehumanization of US soldiers, and how they struggle to come to terms with it when they come back home. This film overrides familiar images of heroic soldiers in battle and their overjoyed returning faces as they reunite with their families with one effortless stroke. Instead, we see a scenario that includes illness, amputation and injury, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), of which Iraq has become a fertile breeding ground. While America's poor treatment of veterans is not news to most, "The Ground Truth" makes it so personal and real, it is impossible to dismiss its characters simply as war statistics.

Date:

17 Oct 2006

Time:

10:51:34

Comments

Bush to sign law for tough interrogation WASHINGTON - President Bush is signing a law that sets tough standards for interrogation and prosecution of terror suspects, a major White House victory that demonstrates Bush still has the political power to set the rules of war even as Iraq clouds his presidency. Be honest, AP. This law isn’t about “tough” interrogations. It pretends to give George Bush the authority to hold people without charges and to torture them, which are both unconstitutional. We can only pray to goddess that the Supreme Court will put a stop to this nonsense.

Will the Supreme Court shackle new tribunal law? The terror legislation set to be signed into law Tuesday by President Bush sits atop an ideological fault line that sharply divides the US Supreme Court and highlights the emerging power of Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Date:

19 Oct 2006

Time:

05:21:12

Comments

Bush Sets Defense as Space Priority

President Bush has signed a new National Space Policy that rejects future arms-control agreements that might limit US flexibility in space and asserts a right to deny access to space to anyone "hostile to US interests." Truthout

So now, this man, not satisfied with wanting to control the entire world, is planning to control all of outer space.....the whole universe!!!!!! Matilda

Date:

19 Oct 2006

Time:

05:24:17

Comments

Bush Signs Bill on Terror Prosecution

In response to Bush's signing of the Military Commissions Act on Tuesday, Senator Russ Feingold stated: "We will look back on this day as a stain on our nation's history. It allows the government to seize individuals on American soil and detain them indefinitely with no opportunity to challenge their detention in court, and the new law would permit an individual to be convicted on the basis of coerced testimony and even allow someone convicted under these rules to be put to death."

Quoted from Truthout by Matilda

Date:

25 Oct 2006

Time:

00:31:21

Comments

Date:

26 Oct 2006

Time:

06:20:26

Comments

Paul Sheehan | We Fiddle as the Continent Turns to Dust

Paul Sheehan says: "I wonder what history will say about us when we are gone ... That we fiddled while Rome burned? That we were the wealthiest society in our history, worth more than $350,000 for every man, woman and child, with the biggest homes, the most cars, the highest debt, the lowest savings, the highest rates of obesity and excess weight, and the greatest amount of consumerism, gambling and drug consumption, while the landscape, the lifeblood of the nation, died around us, a disaster drowned out by the clamor of consumerism."

Date:

29 Oct 2006

Time:

14:29:11

Comments

There's a dirty little secret everyone in Washington knows, or at least should. The vast majority of economists and budget analysts agree: The ship of state is on a disastrous course, and will founder on the reefs of economic disaster if nothing is done to correct it.

Date:

30 Oct 2006

Time:

19:25:51

Comments

Preved Medvedi!