The Big, Evil, Demented Plan - Part Two

This WaPo article is about events BEFORE-9/11. BEFORE-9/11, President George W. Bush spied on Americans. BEFORE-9/11, before the so-called “war on terror,” the Bush Administration contacted communication companies and asked them for information about their customers. BEFORE-9/11, Bush was pushing for warrantless surveillance of Americans!

Stram, can't you just hear the gasps, pointing and name calling from Hank and his Anon alias now..??

A former Qwest Communications International executive, appealing a conviction for insider trading, has alleged that the government withdrew opportunities for contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars after Qwest refused to participate in an unidentified National Security Agency program that the company thought might be illegal.

Former chief executive Joseph P. Nacchio, convicted in April of 19 counts of insider trading, said the NSA approached Qwest more than six months before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to court documents unsealed in Denver this week.

(snip)

Details about the alleged NSA program have been redacted from the documents, but Nacchio's lawyer said last year that the NSA had approached the company about participating in a warrantless surveillance program to gather information about Americans' phone records.


Not only did the Bush Administration ask Qwest to spy on Americans, it punished the company because it refused to do an illegal act. The company lost "contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars." One wonders whether the inside trading conviction was part of the "punishment" as well.

Now Bush has the audacity to tell Congress to pass a bill that gives immunity to companies that were "patriotic" and complied with the illegal request. Congress should encourage true patriotism, the kind that was shown by Qwest when it refused.

Congress does not even have the information it requested from the Whitehouse. It should do nothing until it gets this information. And then it must produce a law that protects American citizens from warrantless wire tapping.

All his talk about the "war on terror," making us safe at home and fighting for democracy abroad is just that, talk. Killing innocent Iraqi's and the slaughter of our brave soldiers is just his means to continue his evil ways. Of course he can get away with it! Hitler kept Germany afraid too...

Now tell me this isn't an evil, demented plan. Tell me that we should rally behind the evil empire and "allow them to protect us." My only question is... who's going to protect us from them?

The Constitution According to McCain

Sen. James Webb has offered an amendment to the annual defense bill that would mandate that troops get a home stay as long as their last combat tour of duty before they can be shipped out again. John McCain has tried to shoot down this rather sensible idea with the claim that the Constitution does not allow Congress to do that.

"Where in the Constitution of the United States does it say that the Congress decides how long people spend on tours of duty and how long they would spend back in the United States? It's blatantly unconstitutional."

Well, I'm not a scholar, but I know how to read. In Article 2, Section 8:

The Congress shall have power to... [long list] To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces.

Call me crazy, but it looks to me like Congress has the power to make just about any sort of rule or regulation it wants regarding the military. Of course, the significance of this battle goes far beyond the particular question of mandating tours of duty. This administration and its supporters effectively maintain that Congress only has an "ON/OFF" switch when it comes to making war. Once Congress declares a war, the argument goes, it's only way to rein in the executive branch is to completely cut off spending. (Of course, they know this is politically almost impossible.)

In fact, if you take the trouble to read the Constitution you can see the Congress is given pretty broad power over the military. And it makes perfect sense. Having thrown off one king, why would the Founders have wanted to create another one? Granted, the religious right beg to differ...

Time to Call our Senators!

On Wednesday, your Senators will vote on an amendment by Senators Feingold and Reid to begin redeployment of troops out of Iraq by October 1, completing withdrawal and cutting funds for the war by March 21, 2008. Call your Senators today and tell them to support the Feingold-Reid amendment!

Next week, the Senate will vote on a new version of the supplemental war funding bill. We don't know the details yet, but it looks like the Senate leadership will surrender to White House pressure by giving the President $95 billion for the war without any fixed timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops.

Call you Senator today. And next week call your Senator again (we'll remind you) to tell them to vote against the supplemental war funding bill!

Your calls do make a difference. Last week, 171 members of the House of Representatives voted for an immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq when they voted in support of the McGovern Amendment. This was a major step forward for the peace movement - we did not expect more than 125 votes! We need a similar showing in the Senate on the Feingold-Reid amendment.

Call the Congressional Switchboard to be connected to your Senators: 202-224-3121 .
Tell Both your Senators:
1. Vote Yes on the Feingold-Reid amendment (amendment no. 1098).
2. Vote No on the supplemental war funding bill next week.

Make it clear to your Senator that a yes vote on Feingold-Reid is not a substitute for using the power of the purse to end the war - they must vote against any more money for the war by voting no on the supplemental.

Your calls today are important! BUT - your calls next week are also vital! The bills that fund the war are the most crucial votes because that's where our leverage lies. Of the 171 House Members who voted for the McGovern bill, 159 of them turned around and voted to fund the war. Let's do better in the Senate!

More Information:

Senate Plays Charades on Iraq, by Bob Fertik:
http://democrats.com/senate-plays-charades-on-iraq

They're Not Benchmarks, by David Swanson:
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/22389

Live blogging of last week's House votes by David Swanson:
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/22334

_________________


We can do this, together we can change the direction of this country. Together we can end this illegal occupation. Together we can move mountains. For now, well work on moving Senators!

A High Five to Murtha!

It looks like our impeachment efforts are making a real difference. On CBS's Face the Nation on Sunday, Rep. John Murtha raised the possibility of impeaching the president.

"We've already compromised," Murtha said. "And we need to make this president understand, Mr. President, the public has spoken. There's three ways or four ways to influence a president. One is popular opinion, the election, third is impeachment, and fourth is the purse." Host Bob Schieffer followed up, pressing him on whether impeachment was a serious option on the table. Murtha responded, "I'm just saying that's one way to influence a president."

Murtha no doubt cleared his comments with Speaker Nancy Pelosi before his appearance, which would indicate that impeachment is back "on the table" where it belongs. But Murtha is going to get a lot of heat for speaking truth to power, and his staff will be inclined to back off. Murtha needs to hear our support and encouragement immediately.

Call Jack Murtha to thank him and ask him to sign onto Dennis Kucinich's bill to begin impeachment proceedings against Vice President Cheney: (202) 225-2065.
___________________

Tell the Pollsters: No More Excuses

There is no longer any possible excuse for polling companies' refusal to ask Americans whether they support the impeachment of Cheney or Bush. Articles of impeachment have been introduced in Congress. Prominent Congress Members are discussing the topic on television talk shows. Please go here to ask all the polling companies to start asking the question.

On Saturday, April 28th, impeachment events were held in 43 states and several foreign countries. George W. Bush met a major protest in Miami, Fla. The California Democratic Party passed a resolution demanding impeachment at a convention in San Diego hosted by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Citizens on both coasts spelled I-M-P-E-A-C-H with their bodies on numerous beaches. Rallies and town forums gathered crowds and made the news everywhere.

Together, our one voice has brought us this far. Did you really think we would be seeing this two years ago? We did this. We can finish this. Then... We celebrate! then... we work together to rebuild this great nation to all that we know it can be, that it should be, that it once was and shall be again!

Howard Dean Says..

President Bush has hit a new low -- and I'm not talking about his 28% approval ratings.

Today, he ignored the majority of Americans and he defied the majority of Congress. And what's worst, he told our brave men and women in uniform that they will be the ones to pay the price.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: a Democratic president wouldn't veto that bill. We put forward a thoughtful plan and the President rejected it.

Here's what Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had to say about the Democratic plan to start bringing our troops home:

"The debate in Congress...has been helpful in demonstrating to the Iraqis that American patience is limited. The strong feelings expressed in the Congress about the timetable has had a positive impact...in terms of communicating to the Iraqis that this is not an open-ended commitment."

But President Bush's veto sends the opposite message. It refuses to allow the Iraqi people to stand up for their own country. It blatantly disregards the need for a political solution. Worst of all, it puts the lives of our troops right in the middle of it.

That's not a road to victory. It's a road to nowhere.

The Democratic Party is working overtime to stop this madness. We're doing all we can to change course in Iraq and to elect leaders who are accountable to the American people.

When President Bush rejects a troop withdrawal plan supported by nearly two-thirds of the country, he's not working for the American people -- he's working for himself.

The wave of support to end this war won't stop. The Democratic Party is ramping up the pressure on President Bush every day, and we're working hard to make sure that none of his Republican allies will continue his legacy.

This country has suffered through President Bush's failed policies for long enough.

One veto isn't enough to stop us. The Democratic Party brought change in 2006, and with your help we'll do it again in 2008.

Sincerely,

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

Well said Howard!

Gonzo's Crumbling Cookie

This is the way Gonzo's cookie crumbles.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales confronted a fresh call for his resignation from a fellow Republican Thursday as he struggled to survive a bipartisan Senate challenge to his credibility in the case of eight fired prosecutors.
"The best way to put this behind us is your resignation," Sen. Tom Coburn (news, bio, voting record) bluntly told Gonzales, one GOP conservative to another.

Disagreeing, Gonzales told the Oklahoma Republican he didn't think resigning would put the controversy to rest.

The exchange punctuated a long day in the witness chair at a Senate hearing for the attorney general, who doggedly advanced a careful, lawyerly defense of the dismissal of the prosecutors. He readily admitted mistakes, yet told lawmakers he had "never sought to deceive them."

Nope, not deceive, just fire some judges who were not sympathetic to the bushies, lose 5,000,000 e-mails.....

Gonzales sat alone at the witness table in a crowded hearing room for the widely anticipated hearing. There was no doubt about the stakes involved for a member of

President Bush's inner circle, under pressure to resign since the dismissals of the prosecutors.

"The moment I believe I can no longer be effective I will resign as attorney general," Gonzales said after first making it clear he did not believe it had come to that.

The White House offered support. Spokeswoman Dana Perino told reporters, "I think the president has full confidence" in his attorney general.

Struggling to save his credibility and perhaps his job, Gonzales testified at least 45 times — before lunch — that he could not recall events he was asked about.

Returning for an afternoon session, Gonzales faced fresh challenges to his credibility, including from Republicans. "Why is your story changing?" asked Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, noting that the attorney general was now accepting responsibility for the firings after initially saying he had played only a minor role.

In response, Gonzales replied that his earlier answers had been "overbroad" and the result of inadequate preparation.

Preparation? What's to prepare for? I mean, if you're being summoned to answer questions honestly, and that is your intent, then what's to prepare for? Unless, of course, you need to attempt to get your stories straight.

Interestingly enough, even the republicans in the senate are turning against him, calling for Gonzo's resignation. Bush, of course insists upon standing by his latest scapegoat. One would think that these victims of loyalty would learn. This administration will not protect them, they will not help them, they sit high above on their golden thrones and watch as their riches pile high and their loyalist pay the price.

If one of these scapegoats would sing, tell all, we could impeach this idiots, end a war, save lives and use congress to tackle real issues, like health care, stem cell research, things that would actually help the basic American.

United We Stand

I know it seems I've been derelict in my duties lately, and for that I apologize. I have an URI and all I seem to care to do is sleep. Except in times like this.

We have sat back and watched the double-standard corruption of a stolen presidency. We have screamed "enough!" and our voices were cast aside under the guise of "patriotism". We have sat on the sidelines, bound and gaged, as this administration led us into an illegal war and defied engineers who demanded the levees of New Orleans be replaced. My God! Spend money there?? What about the Carlyle group? Halliburton? .... wait.... I mean the troops...

We fought for truth when we heard the lies, we fought for honesty in the middle of corruption. We stood for sanity while they insisted we be afraid and pointed at maps calling blobs WMD's. We heard the people cry over their flag draped coffins while they used them as pawns for political gain. We heard "stay the course" while mothers, Iraqi and American, wept. We heard, "...in the last throws.." and knew lies. We heard, "troop surge" and saw truth.

The only thing we have not seen, the only thing we have not heard these last seven years in hell, is justice. We have demanded, cried and begged for it. Now, with the power of the pen, we may see it.

Please join me. Sign this, pass it to your readers, your friends, your enemys, anyone, everyone. The time is now to end the madness, the corruption. The last mother has cried out at the needless death of her child. The last child has wept at his parents grave site. The time is now for the American people to stand up and demand to be heard. The only way for us to be heard, is in one voice.

Reid Says, "Screw You!"

"It's time the self-appointed strategists on Capitol Hill understood a very simple concept: You cannot win a war if you tell the enemy you're going to quit," Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday at fundraising luncheon for Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.

Well Dick, we are about to win the war with you, and we're even telling you when.

Yes, dear readers and fellow bloggers, the great house has spoken. It proclaimed loudly, "Veto this jackass!"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Monday he wants to cut off money for the Iraq war next year, making clear for the first time that Democrats are willing to pull out all the stops to end U.S. involvement.
(snip)
"In the face of the administration's stubborn unwillingness to change course, the Senate has no choice but to force a change of course," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who signed on Monday as a co-sponsor of Reid's proposal with Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record), D-Wis.
(snip)
Reid has previously stopped short of embracing Feingold's position. When asked whether he would ever consider pulling funds for the troops, Reid said Congress would provide troops what they needed to be safe.

Reid's latest proposal would give the president one year to get troops out, ending funding for combat operations after March 31,2008.

"If the president vetoes the supplemental appropriations bill and continues to resist changing course in Iraq, I will work to ensure this legislation receives a vote in the Senate in the next work period," Reid said in a statement.(snip)
"It appears they're still content to work on a bill that does not have serious plans to fund troops or make Iraq, America and the world more secure, but rather attempts at forcing us into giving up in Iraq without regard to the consequences of failure," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.
(snip)
Reid's proposal is unlikely to pass. But Democrats say they believe with each passing week — as the violence in Iraq continues and voters grow increasingly tired of the war — they pick up additional support.

The Senate last week passed its anti-war proposal by a 50-48 vote after winning support from Sens. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record), R-Neb., and Ben Nelson (news, bio, voting record), D-Neb., who just two weeks prior had opposed a similar measure.

Reid spokesman Jim Manley said if legislation to cut off funding for the war fails, Reid will try again with the hopes of getting new supporters. "It is the next in a series of steps to try to ratchet up the pressure to try to get the administration to change its policies," he said.

The bill to cut off funds for the war would likely be introduced as standalone legislation and would not be tied to the supplemental spending bill, Manley said.

Ah yes, the sweet sound of the purse strings, the blank check, the bowing to the king, having the door slammed in it's face. This may be a long battle but it seems as if the good guys are up for the it. It's a good day for democracy. It's a good day for the troops these idiots set up to fail. It's a good day for the Iraqi's. And the good days have just begun.

*\O/* Go Nancy Go *\O/*

If you haven't seen this video, I highly recommend you do.

Nancy tells Bush to "calm down with the threats" in a way that makes you want to place a cheerleader on either side of her. She is, of course, right. The blank check, no questions asked era is over. Now is the time for a true democracy, not the fake one we've been subject to for the last four years. This man had best head her warning - or, knowing Nancy, he'll never have a moments peace. Ya' just gotta love that!

Cowboy Shrub Strikes Again

Not that this comes as any surprise, but shrub is stomping his feet, slamming doors and name calling - Again. This time, it's over the Iraqi timetable for troop withdraw.

Just over an hour following the vote, Bush angrily accused Democrats of playing politics and renewed his promise to veto the spending legislation if it included their withdrawal timetable, despite administration claims that the money is needed next month by troops.

"These Democrats believe that the longer they can delay funding for our troops, the more likely they are to force me to accept restrictions on our commanders, an artificial timetable for withdrawal and their pet spending projects. This is not going to happen," he said.

Any guesses what the Dems "pet spending projects" are?

I think bush has completely lost touch with not only the American people but reality as well. He goes off like a spoiled child if he doesn't get his way. He's responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's and his policy's have put our troops and our country in more danger than we were in on 9/10/01.

During my trip across the country I noticed a popular bumper sticker that seemed to be, shockingly, seen more in the red states. "We are making enemies faster than we can kill them." This is his legacy. His failed policies and his cowboy attitude. His warped ideas of religion and even more abstract ideas of other religions and cultures. It is doubtful that this man could even pass a literacy test without cheating.

Now, here we are, standing on a precipice. Our way of life could go either way. We could allow this "man" to lead us into more "designed to fail" illegal wars of aggression and spend us further into oblivion, or we can say, "NO!" Four years ago, I felt alone in my fear of what was happening to my country. Today, I feel like a majority. We, the truly sane and rational, have declared in one voice, "We will not stand for this anymore. We will not stand idly by while you wipe out our liberties. We will not be guided by your fear mongering and war profiting." We spoke loudly last November. We have been on the phone to our senators and signed petitions and stood and marched and this is just the beginning.

"The American people have lost faith in the president's conduct of this war," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "The American people see the reality of the war, the president does not."

"We're going to make a difference with this bill," bellowed Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., a Vietnam War veteran who helped write the legislation.

"We're going to bring those troops home. We're going to start changing the direction of this great nation," he said, bringing a standing ovation and hugs from his colleagues.

A dear friend of mine smiles when she reads things such as this. She grins brightly and says, "He is going to be the downfall of the Republican party." Ah, her lips to Gods ears.

When They've Got You Over a Barrel

Bush signs $464 billion spending bill


President Bush on Thursday signed a $464 billion spending bill that closes out last year's unfinished budget business but made clear he wasn't entirely happy about it.

Bush said in a statement that he was pleased the bill sticks to his overall budget caps. But he said the Democratic-led Congress did so by shifting "funding needed for our armed forces to unrequested domestic programs."

"The Congress should work to address these priorities without adding to the deficit," he said.


Unrequested domestic programs?? I have called this man clueless, but this statement takes that to a whole new level. Unrequested. He really does think that all the Americans want and need is his little losing wars of aggression, doesn't he? And to what point and purpose?
He's concerned that congress will "add to the deficit"? What? Is he and his war-mongering, war-profiting pirates the only ones allowed to spend our hard earned tax dollars?

The mammoth bill pulls together nine unfinished spending bills funding foreign aid and every domestic agency budget except the Homeland Security Department. This budget work should have been completed months ago but was delayed because of election-year pressures.

It freezes most accounts at 2006 levels while awarding exceptions for other programs favored by Democrats and many Republicans -- paid for primarily by putting off the cost of implementing a 2005 round of military base closings.

Among the beneficiaries is the National Institutes of Health, the FBI, and an increase in the maximum Pell Grant for lower-income college students. The rapidly growing veterans health care budget got a 13 percent boost. U.S. contributions to fight AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis overseas would rise 40 percent.

The bill provides increases for underperforming schools and community health centers, and grants to state and local law enforcement agencies. Amtrak's budget would be frozen at $1.3 billion instead of absorbing a $400 million cut proposed by Bush.

Despite the shrubs stamping and childlike tantrums, this congress flipped him off and put, for the first time in six freaking years, the American people first. Let us all hope that this will be the first of many kicks the decider receives.

Dare We Hope?

Dems challenge Bush's power to wage war


It was a united dream that the new congress stood up to this tyrant and his merry men. We, collectively, applauded the first 100 hours. Then, we sat, holding our breadth, waiting. We waited for the "Hell No!" rubber stamp to be used. We waited for the hand slap that needed to be in regards to Iran and the troop "surge" and the clusterfuck bushco called a budget. What we saw was something a bit different. We saw talks and compromise and name calling.

Just as I was about to abandon all hope, I read this:

Murtha, D-Pa., is preparing legislation that would set strict conditions on combat deployments, including a year rest between combat tours; ultimately, the congressman says, his measure would make it impossible for Bush to maintain his planned deployment of a total of about 160,000 troops for months on end.

Murtha's proposal also might block the funding of military operations inside Iran — a measure intended to send a signal to Bush that he will need Congress' blessing if he is planning another war.

"The president could veto it, but then he wouldn't have any money," Murtha told an anti-war group in an interview broadcast on movecongress.org.

and this:

In an interview Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., noted that Bush consistently said he supports a diplomatic resolution to differences with Iran "and I take him at his word."

At the same time, she said, "I do believe that Congress should assert itself, though, and make it very clear that there is no previous authority for the president, any president, to go into Iran."

We may not see a standing congress, but they did make it up to their knees. Maybe, with a little luck, they'll be able to stand up to the usual:

"The enemy wants our men and women in uniform to think their Congress doesn't care about them," said Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas, who was a prisoner of war during Vietnam. "We must learn from our mistakes. We cannot leave a job undone like we left in Korea, like we left in Vietnam, like we left in Somalia," Johnson said.

Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, called the political maneuvering by Democrats "extremely dangerous."

"It could stop reinforcements from arriving in time to stop major casualties in any of a number of scenarios," said Hunter.

Democrats will have to fight critics in the Senate as well.

"I will do everything in my power to ensure the House resolution dies an inglorious death in the Senate," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.


Do you think these clueless republicans know the truth? The enemy is their own president and "extremely dangerous" is staying in Iraq and worse, invading Iran? And, what the hell is this "job undone"? What was the job? Finding WMD's? Hanging Saddam? Stealing 75% of their oil? If so... then Mission Accomplished! Now, get us the hell out!