iPeachment ’08 – Impeachment for the 21st Century

June 10, 2008 · Posted in Bush Administration · Comments Off 

Yes, it took Dennis Kucinich 5 or so hours to read the litany of Bush crimes into the Congressional record yesterday but really, is that so bad? Evidently so, since news broadcast editors have decided it’s far too banal to mention or even discuss on those television news shows everyone watches to get informed. But what if they were presented in 45-second YouTube bullets, just enough to accommodate the Attention Deficit Disorder set while maybe, just maybe, making them afraid, very afraid of the men who made them very afraid?

Here’s something to start the trend. Pass it on to your friendly George Bush apologist and see what he or she thinks. After all, it’s only fitting that the architect of the Culture of Fear also be the one we fear.

Here are the articles of impeachment in convenient, wallet-sized text bullets.

Sphere: Related Content

The Spinning’s Beginning

February 13, 2008 · Posted in Barack Obama, Election 2008, Foreign Policy, Iraq · Comments Off 

In an op-ed published in the Baltimore Sun yesterday and augmented on the Huffington Post today, Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson argues that Hillary Clinton is the only candidate who can come away from the national election still standing.

He centers his argument on a single exchange of letters between Senator Obama and Senator McCain concerning a bipartisan effort to draft campaign finance reform laws. Unfortunately, his Huffington Post article links to a completely unrelated and somewhat bombastic series of comments relating to an exchange between McCain and Obama on the campaign trail last May, shortly after McCain paid a visit to Iraq and then argued for the ‘surge’ upon his return.

The actual letter exchange is very different than Ambassador Wilson describes.

But will Mr. Obama fight? His brief time on the national scene gives little comfort. Consider a February 2006 exchange of letters with Mr. McCain on the subject of ethics reform. The wrathful Mr. McCain accused Mr. Obama of being “disingenuous,” to which Mr. Obama meekly replied, “The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you.” Then McCain said, “Obama wouldn’t know the difference between an RPG and a bong.”

Mr. McCain was insultingly dismissive but successful in intimidating his inexperienced colleague. Thus, in his one face-to-face encounter with Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama failed to stand his ground.

What gives us confidence Mr. Obama will be stronger the next time he faces Mr. McCain, a seasoned political fighter with extensive national security credentials? Even more important, what special disadvantages does Mr. Obama carry into this contest on questions of national security?

Let’s step back and understand something here, beginning with the correct sequence of events. Letters were exchanged on February 2nd (Sen. Obama to Sen. McCain), and February 6th (Sen. McCain to Sen. Obama and reply by Sen. Obama). The exchange ended with this from Sen. Obama:

I confess that I have no idea what has prompted your response. But let me assure you that I am not interested in typical partisan rhetoric or posturing. The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you nor my willingness to find a bipartisan solution to this problem.

The Ethics Reform bill passed in January, 2007. John McCain voted for it. So who, exactly, backed down? Not Sen. Obama, who invited McCain to the table, McCain declined, and the legislation was introduced and passed with a near-unanimous majority.

Then, in a somewhat disingenuous move, Ambassador Wilson links up a comment McCain made in MAY, 2007 with this 2006 correspondence when in fact, it was related to McCain’s argument for the surge in Iraq. The comment was this one: “Obama wouldn’t know the difference between an RPG and a bong.” , which Ambassador Wilson incorrectly attributes to Sen. McCain, when in fact it was a McCain aide. The response from the Obama camp was anything but a retreat:

“America doesn’t need juvenile name-calling from Washington, we need a commitment to end this war and bring our brave troops home.”

Again, how does that equate to ‘backing down’? I would guess that Wilson is taking aim at Sen. Obama’s vote to fund the troops (including the surge), which Hillary Clinton also voted for. Here’s a news flash for Ambassador Wilson: A vote to fund the troops and pay them is hardly a vote for the war in Iraq. Even doves like me who also wouldn’t know an RPG from a bong know that much. I also know that Ambassador Wilson’s characterization of the War Authorization bill that Hillary voted for is incorrect. He may know something about diplomacy, but his knowledge of the actual facts of Senate actions appear to be a bit thin, despite the fact that it’s all in the public record right here on the Internet for anyone to see.

When the facts are considered, the air is blown right out of Ambassador Wilson’s argument, leaving a trail of ‘vapid rhetoric’ in the wake.

Folks, this is classic Clinton fighting style. Take facts, twist them around into a spin that demonizes the opponent, and then use a ‘weighty voice’ to carry them across the internet and airwaves as her proxy. This is why she cannot be the Democratic candidate — her ‘get in the gutter and fight’ tactics that Mr. Wilson admires so much are divisive, manipulative, underhanded and will guarantee John McCain the Presidency.

I have previously expressed great respect for Ambassador Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame Wilson. It’s disappointing to see him spend such a monumental store of goodwill on a dying candidacy. If this is an indication of what Senator Clinton has up her sleeve, then she really should suspend her campaign now, before she and Fmr. President Clinton tear the Democratic party apart and the country along with it.

A personal note to Ambassador Wilson: My own family served in the US Department of State for 30 years, and I have nothing but the utmost respect and fondness for the intelligence and passion of the US Diplomatic Corps. Your self-indulgent fact-twisting on the Huffpo piece is insulting to me on a personal level. In your haste to do Hillary Clinton a favor, you trounced all over the credibility of your colleagues. That’s truly a disappointment.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

Sphere: Related Content

Through the eyes of unregistered voices

February 9, 2008 · Posted in Election 2008 · 5 Comments 

Note: this is guest-blogged by my 13-year old daughter, who came home today in a huff after tussling with friends and peers at school over such diverse subjects as the Iraq war, warrantless wiretapping, Election 2008, and illegal immigration all in the span of a 90-minute PE class. I asked her to blog it because I was taken aback by her passion and by the depth of her own thought and knowledge on the topic. Hers is a self-described small voice that “doesn’t matter” (her words, not mine), but her post represents the voices of the next wave of voters, and how our decisions today have such a deep impact on their lives, tomorrow. I know she’d love comments, please feel free to leave some. :)

Beware!

…small girl speaking–giving opinions–on big subjects.

Though my voice does not matter, and won’t be wanted until I’m eighteen, I can nevertheless help but speak it.

The presidential election of 2008 is, in fact a) a historical one; b) an exciting one; and, c) an important one. It’s a crucial time in our history, what with the war and the economy, etc… and the kids, children, teens, or whatever you want to call us can’t help but notice. We have the influence of the news and reporters telling us this and that; we have our parents’ influence whether it be Democratic or Republican, all the while learning about the Constitution and our government in history class. In short, we develop opinions, and with opinions come disagreements.

Unlike the majority of my peers I don’t have the luxury of believing what my parents believe in terms of politics. My daddy is a Republican, born and bred; my mom is a Democrat. My dad’s side of the family (Republican) lives closest to us, and I get more exposure to them than my mother’s side of the family (Democratic). My mom’s side of the family, however, is more involved and opinionated about politics. Basically I pretty much see both sides of the issues. I also see one or more small disputes that come up because of this. In addition to that, I’m also a blogger and the daughter of a blogger and seem to pick up reports and information more than my friends on these issues. This helps when you’re in an advanced history class, learning government, and are constantly bombarded with projects in which you must take various issues, research, and reflect on them. I will say we are pretty lucky to be learning this during an election. It makes it easier to understand, but unfortunately as I said before, adds to more opinions and more disputes.

Lately, these discussions have been more frequent in school. They started in our yearbook class when our teacher wasn’t there to tell us not to. There are usually about six of us who are the most involved. Two of us, me and another, are very independent thinkers, and very open to opinions which, luckily, agree with each other. The rest are fairly spread out.

It usually starts out, “I want a women president, that would be sooo cool.” I personally hate these comments, why should someone be nominated or elected based on their gender or race? Shouldn’t it be on their ideas, how they would lead us? I voice my opinions and the response is, “Whatever, I still want a women president!” Whatever.

Another person, “My dad is registered as a Democrat so he can vote for Hillary and she can lose to McCain.” I personally think that’s not a trait I would want to share with others, why play like that? Not cool, dude. The other independent, “Obama ‘08! We need change after Bush, not more war and fighting, or more lies like Hillary.” Another person, “Ew, Bush sucks, all my family supports him but me, and they get mad at me for it. I don’t get it, we’re fighting a war that’s not ours to fight.” Me: ”I agree, but why should they be mad at you for your own opinions and differences?” Anyway it usually carries on like this till the end of the period, usually just discussion on the latest primary or caucus, not fighting. The real disagreements came today in PE.

After awhile of the debates and speeches, I decided I was with my mother on Obama, and here’s the great part: My dad, the homegrown Republican, voted Obama too, Woo! So we usually have 10 minutes or so before class starts since it’s 1st period PE, and I usually talk with my friends, and some others, usually the other people in my Honors classes.

The day after Super Tuesday I was talking with them and I asked what the end result of the democratic primary in California was. “I think Hilary won by about 15%,” someone says. “That sucks,” I say. “Why? You WANT Obama to win??” by someone else. Now that’s not cool, don’t you dare get mad at me for my opinions. “Yes I do.” “Seriously? WHY?” (…did you seriously just say that? sigh…) ”Because he is who I prefer, I would personally not like to send in more troops, and I agree with most of his ideas. Jeez, you don’t have to get indignant over a difference of opinions, not cool.” “Whatever.” Haha I love this, “Bananas not War.” I say, and just as the whistle blows to get in our spots she says, “What!?” Haha, live, laugh, love.

So then, next PE the subject of politics comes up again, someone says,”Mitt Romney dropped out last night, that’s too bad I wanted him to be president.” Really? I didn’t know that, Cool. “Well McCain’s going to win anyway so he shouldn’t waste his money.” Another says we are all idiots. If that person wasn’t my friend I would be getting mad again at the intolerance they have toward other’s opinions.

“Hillary better be the Democratic candidate, she’ll be easier to beat.” That’s true, it was projected that if it was Hillary and McCain, McCain would win, but with McCain and Obama, Obama was projected to win. Of course that isn’t exactly the election, anything could happen.

“It bugs me how, although Hillary is the one running for president, lately you see more Bill than Hillary. We’re voting for Hillary, not Bill and Hillary. But I suppose you get them as a package, that’s one of the things I don’t like, some of the remarks he made were uncalled for.” Such as after S. Carolina. haha, NOT.

“I don’t really care.” Another says. The other person again, “I don’t care–McCain’s going to win.” “Do you really want that huge war hawk as president?” I say, I’m starting to lose my temper, although I shouldn’t. Come on, it’s early, I’m sleepy and I’m about to run a mile. I’m still civil though. “What?” she askes. “Dude, he’s like all for the war in Iraq, it’s time to bring our troops home, stop spreading our chaos and messing everything up even more.”

“Oh. My. Gosh, we can’t leave Iraq! Are you kidding? As soon as we leave they are like, going to bomb us!”

“Are you serious? They aren’t going to bomb us. And they don’t have weapons of mass destruction either.”

“Do you read at all? Hellllo, 9/11! If we leave they will Iraq will bomb us again!” hmm, I wonder if I say 9/11 they will jump, because they seem reaaally paranoid.

“Ok, first of all, do not say ‘Iraq will bomb us’. 9/11 was terrorists, NOT Iraq. By saying that you are condemning everybody in Iraq, all the innocent people whose homes WE have invaded, for NO reason! Second off, IRAQ and IRAN do NOT have nuclear bombs! It’s proven, do you know Iraq said they did to keep from being attacked?”

“As soon as we leave they will get Nuclear Bombs and bomb us.” grr…

“From where? They have no Money! We’ve already destroyed so much of their land, with no help to clean it up, How on earth would that happen!”

“Thats not true!”

“Really? Prove it to me.”

“Thats not the point.” Ha, no you’re avoiding the point. “The point is we are in a war that we need to win, then we can bring all the troops in that you like.”

“Dude, so many people are there right now, fighting for us! You want to send in more innocent people to go and mess up the other innocent people’s homes? You dont find any of that wrong?”

“If they don’t want to fight for us they don’t have to, heck I’ll go. It gives me an excuse to shoot people.”

“What if you get shot?” another person asks.

“I don’t care, I just won’t get shot, and even so I’ll just come home with one leg.”

Dear God, someone shoot me now so I can stop listening to this. “Are you kidding me!” It occurs to me that the people I’m standing next to all have no older brothers. “You don’t get it, you don’t get how serious this is, dude people are dying, DYING, over there and you’re joking about it–”

“I’m not joking.”

“–either that or you haven’t watched an older brother join the army–”

“If he didn’t want to go, don’t enlist.”

“Stop cutting me off! He didn’t have a choice. He needed to pay for college. I was little at the time, and didn’t always understand, but the first night he left I had nightmares that he would be out there fighting, in danger! Killed! Fighting for people like you, who could care less for one life. And as you said if people didn’t enlist they would start up the draft again, the draft that my OTHER BROTHER was MADE to sign! You don’t get that, you’ve never seen that, never had that small chance of something that important taken away from you. Also on the subject of 9/11, did you know Bush was tapping our phone lines before it happened?”

“Really?” one person pipes up.

“He did that so he could catch the people planning to do it!”

“So he knew it was going to happen then?” I ask.

“No but, just in case.”

“Well, I can see how well that worked out, so why are they still doing it? And why in such an unproductive manner? What if we accidently say something that’s like, I dont know. a code for something else? Then that person is automatically being watched, innocent because they accidently said something.”

“Well if they are innocent then they don’t have anything to hide.”

“Seriously? Have you heard of the INNOCENT people detained right NOW? Being deprived of their right of habeas corpus? Thats AGAINST the Constitution, the thing the president SWEARS to uphold and protect. Just because they aren’t citizens–”

” Well if they aren’t citizens they can get their butts out off our country!”

“Oh my gosh!” That wasn’t me, that was the girl from Vietnam standing right next to me. She is not a citizen. I lost my temper completely now.

How could anybody so arrogant to say something as that? How much of an arrogant fool do you have to be to shoot off your mouth like that and say that to a friend!

“Oh!” another person pulls the girl from Vietnam away from the group as I go stomping away, the arrogant person cries halfhearted apologies and the whistle blows. I’m still quite mad by the time PE is over and can’t help but remark on my way to the dressing rooms, “You know not everyone has the abilities and resources to become a citizen right away, including money, and time.” I’m not sure if she replied. I didn’t care enough to listen.

I’m pretty sure that’s it. I probably shouldn’t have gotten mad, and could have handled it better, but what can I say? These kinds of disputes really suck, they completely ruin your day. How could we, only 13, have such big mouths? haha jk, but we really do. It’s annoying sometimes…

–If you choose to comment on my post please keep a civil tongue and I will keep one as well. We all have differences of opinion which you are welcome to say as long as it is conducted appropriately. thankyou.—-

Can we?

“Yes we can!”

peace, love, dance.

I hope you all enjoyed the opinions of the world through the eyes of the voices that do not yet register as important :P

cross-posted on my own blog, too

Sphere: Related Content

Impeach Gonzales

June 1, 2007 · Posted in Bush Administration · Comments Off 

A new video from ImpeachGonzales.org, summarizing the lies and bull that comprised Gonzales’ testimony before the House and Senate subcommittees:

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Sphere: Related Content

Journalism and the Erosion of our Rights

March 14, 2007 · Posted in Election 2008 · Comments Off 

Thomas Hawk posted an update on Carlos Miller that links to this Category305 article.  The update is interesting, but this should chill you right to the bone.  Right. to. the. bone.

Last week, Miller received a call from Miami Police Internal Affairs, saying they’d been trying to track him down for two weeks, after someone who saw an account of his arrest sent it to Homeland Security, in an apparent attempt to label him a national security threat of some kind. The feds forwarded the message to Miami PD, but they told Miller they couldn’t get ahold of the blogger who sent it.

Now, the reason that this should chill you is because the hammer of Homeland Security is being wielded against citizens of our own country in an effort to quash free speech.

If this is allowed to stand, it will give free reign to those who have no respect for our Constitution (including those at the top of the governmental food chain) to escape accountability and effectively turn us into a police state.

I received a comment on my Carlos Miller post yesterday essentially making a lot of anonymous claims that Miller wasn’t a “real journalist” and that if he were, he would have known that he shouldn’t have photographed police officers. Commenter “experienced” wrote the following:

More and more web folks who think they can claim they are working
journalists will soon learn the lessons Carlos has. To do the job,
get pics and not get arrested, takes experience. Not just some weak
claim of “I’m a journalist, don’t arrest me”.

My response was predictable — one look at Miller’s resume blows the anonymous commenter’s argument out of the water.  I will also note that the IP address of the comment tracked back to a major media outlet.  Could it be that some folks within mainstream media are feeling a bit threatened?  Of course, there’s also the possibility of a spoofed IP too, so I don’t put a ton of weight on the IP, but still…

Carlos Miller isn’t alone.  Josh Wolf is rotting in a California prison and has been for six months because he won’t be bullied by the prosecutors and police who claim that by not turning over his tapes to the court, he is obstructing justice.  Nonsense.  Whether you think Josh Wolf is or is not a true “journalist”, he should have the right to due process of law and a fair hearing of the facts which landed him there, neither of which has occurred.  An attempt at mediation failed last week, and there is no re-attempt scheduled at this time.

Wolf has some powerful words, words we should all consider carefully, when looking at situations like Carlos Miller’s and others, including those fired US Attorneys who wouldn’t bend to political pressure.

On the erosion of our rights:

One night I went to sleep in a free America, but I woke up in a police state. It’s hard to say when this transformation transpired; many would contend that it began shortly after September 11th, some would argue that it wasn’t until lies led us into the War in Iraq, and still others would say we started down this road soon after the American Revolution. I’m not sure who is right, but I do know that the process of waking up to this grim reality has been a painful one.

And on the media, journalism, and ‘web folks’:

The face of the media is changing. This we know for sure. But what remains to be seen is the role professional journalists take in developing this new landscape. Will the battle lines be drawn with two classes of warring voices or will we work together in solidarity to develop a massive chorus as diverse and eclectic as our society itself? As journalists is our commitment to an economic system or is it to the pursuit of the free flow of information? The power is in your hands. Choose wisely.

It’s all fine and good to talk about user-generated content, but we now have newspapers firing their professional reporters in exchange for user-generated reporting.  Yet, these same users are at risk, because they will not be protected (as Josh Wolf has discovered) like they would if they were considered “professionals”.  Further, we are ALL at risk because of the unbridled power that has been granted to law enforcers at the expense of our civil rights.  When citizens cannot exercise their rights without fear of being labeled a terrorist and a threat to national security, we are all at risk.

(crossposted to my personal blog)

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Sphere: Related Content

Dr. Dobson Needs Some Toughlove

March 8, 2007 · Posted in Zealotry · Comments Off 

Dobson is at it again. Really, his non-profit status should be revoked because he wields his political club with force and my taxpayer dollars should not fund it, directly or indirectly.

We implore the NAE board to ensure that Mr. Cizik faithfully represents the policies and commitments of the organization, including its defense of traditional values. If he cannot be trusted to articulate the views of American evangelicals on environmental issues, then we respectfully suggest that he be encouraged to resign his position with the NAE.

I call on James Dobson and friends to seriously consider Jim Wallis’ call for a real debate and discussion on whether global warming is a moral issue, and what solutions he proposes for the population growth issues.

Further, I suggest that the IRS explore the legitimacy of the tax-exempt status of Focus on the Family, which indirectly funds Dobson’s political meddling.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Sphere: Related Content

Next Page »