Not that Biden!

I watched Biden in Iowa this week, in someone's living room, talking about the issues as he sees them. I watched him on Charlie Rose this week too, and thought he made some sense (about Iraq). I wasn't really considering him as "my" candidate, but I want to be informed, so I gave him some of my time.

As I learned about another infraction by this current administration (I'm new on the scene of the reality-based community), notably the repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act in 2006, in conjunction with the news about clergy aiding and abetting the Federal Government (h/t prisonplanet) in corraling the sheep, I found another good article (thirdworldtraveler) about the Act, that included this tidbit:

One of the most hawkish congressional enthusiasts for Bush's plans to send U.S. troops to the streets of Baghdad is Joseph Biden, Democrat of Delaware. Apparently he wants to see the same troops on the streets of U.S. cities. Interviewed on Fox News on July 21[2002], he strongly endorsed giving power of arrest to U.S. soldiers. Posse Comitatus, said Biden "has to be amended." Even Mr. Homeland Security Tom Ridge begged to differ.

OMG! It's bad enough that the Dems cave time after time, but Biden's endorsement is beyond my comprehension. Now he is definitely off my list, and I won't listen to him again. Obviously, he would not only NOT roll back Presidential powers, but would continue to expand them.

We live in scary times, folks. When, oh when, do we take to the streets????

Glenn Greenwald at YearlyKos

For my own sake, so I don't have to search for it, I am posting the clip of Greenwald at Yearlykos because I admire his direct address of the issues relating to our sickened media.

The US is in tatters

The Iraq War profiteers: all in the name of capitalism."

Today I watched Robert Greenwald's Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers which caused me great heartache and anger. All the cowchips are piling up and I pray that the military-industrial complex set up by the Bush family, Cheney and Rumsfeld comes tumbling down one day, preferably in an International Crimes Court. Every single one of them.

After watching the video, I went to the website's blog, found jessehaff's post about DynCorp, looked them up, and found this July 18, 2007 Washington Post article: Zinni Takes Full-Time Position With DynCorp. Okay, you might think this is old news, but lo and behold, there is a comment posted by one "DynCorp Employee 10 Years" on 08.08.07 that is quite revealing. Needless to say, I also posted a comment.

Then I started crying. I'm angry, I've been getting angrier and angrier each time another rock is turned over and more creepy crawly things squirm in the light. When we all say "Enough is enough!" ???

But now my anger is manifesting in uncontrollable tears. Where is the country I was so proud of? Where are the protestors? Are you all so comfortable with your lives that you don't see, or don't care, what the hell is going on? The robber-baron war profiteers are making billions off of our hard-earned wages. Wake up, America!

Redecorating - Pubs curtains choices way back when

Thanks to blogger demwinz (blog located at The Young Turks), a journey through recent history brings some quotes that the Dems should be using today. Every time they hear Clinton's name, they should come back with one of these quotes and the question, if it was okay to say this then, why not now? Guess I'll be firing off this very idea to a few CongressCritters today. I think I'll even take a ride to Vern Buchanan's office this weekend and slide a copy under the door. Unless he's there, then I'll hand it to him.

VERBATIM QUOTES
KY's Senior Senator Mitch McConnell said during a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate
"Domestic terrorism is not a cause we have to fight or a project we need to fund. We are not interested in capturing bin Laden. Even though he has been offered to us. We are not the world's policemen. It's not our job to clean up other countries messes or arrest it's bad guys."


WHEN CLINTON WAS COMMITTING TROOPS TO BOSNIA:
"You can support the troops but not the president."--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)
"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"--Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)"

American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."-- Governor George W. Bush (R)-TX

Noise Machine

I am totally perplexed by the mainstream media screaming that media is "liberal" but those of us who are liberal see crystal-clearly that the MSM is quite non-liberal.

So that they can stay on the right (not to mean correct) side of issues, the MSM accuses itself of being liberal. What a conundrum!

(im)Peaches

Having received an email today from The Pen, I added the following comments to the Impeach Them All letter they will send to my representatives.

The reason polls show that We the People are disgusted with Congress is because you have not done ENOUGH to stop the Bush Administration from further damage to our Constitution, our foreign policy, our international relations, and our civil rights.

For those of you who wish to point to Clinton, consider this notice that that does not work anymore. This Administration has committed more high crimes and misdemeanors that (1) would have not been tolerated by the Republicans in a Democratic President, (2) have been enabled by Congress, and (3) is totally intolerable to your constituents.

In case you aren't aware, if you don't move in the direction advised by your constituents, there is a major movement among us: we will be looking to replace each and every incumbent with a person who will listen to us.

It's time to clean up Washington, and either you're with us or you're against us!

This last sentence is my new mantra, and I think it would make a great bumper sticker.

Pelosi: wrapped in red, white & blue striped curtains

Tim Grieve posts at Salon.com the statement by Speaker Nancy Pelosi regarding impeachment. She again admonishes the very thought of curtailing these criminals from further damaging our country and our Constitution. Several commenters to that article state that impeachment would be a waste of time because we won't get it past the Senate. Others argue, correctly, that it doesn't matter if they aren't indicted because at least it would send a message that this behavior is unacceptable. I argue that there is a good chance that indictment would come once the sweeping executive privilege is unwrapped from around the box of shit.

I sent an email to Pelosi, using an excerpt from C.Mosby's post at the above Salon article (kudos, Mosby). I would like to repeat that comment here for my own posterity's sake (I'd probably forget where I heard it, read it, saw it at some future date):

Where’s Barbara Jordan, now that we REALLY need her?
This shouldn’t be about vote counts in the Senate or concerns about being perceived as politically motivated whining Democrats. Any acceptance of that rationale by this congress, regardless of party affiliation, suggests that witnessing the current relentless dismantling of the Constitution and the erosion of balance crucial to effective government presumed in the theory of separation of powers is secondary to party control of the runaway dictatorship that’s left in place.

What good is control of any constitutional leg of this government if the Constitution is eventually rendered irrelevant? It’s incredible that no one in congress seems to see that. But perhaps they all do. The cynical side of me acknowledges that the appeal of the Rovian philosophy of single party control and de facto, eventually de ju-re, dictatorship may be tempting to venal politicians of either stripe. After all, governing is hard work (to quote a folksy prominent politician). Why not make it easy?

That, in fact, may be what we are all witnessing here. There is little doubt that the degree to which corporations, big money lobbyists and other special interests control “The Honorable (fill in the blank)” of either party is the only meaningful variable about their allegiances. What may be left is simply jockeying and political maneuvering for who gets the reins on this horse Mr. Rove has been creating. Certainly, the MSM and a distracted, brainwashed or disinterested “electorate” represent no credible deterrents.

No one knows what Harry Reid is thinking; but the problem is not with Harry Reid or the Senate. Impeachment is initiated in the House. The power to impeach is reserved explicitly by the constitution (temporarily, it now seems), for the House of Representatives. Unfortunately, right after the election of November 2006, for political expediency and perhaps, wishful thinking, Nancy Pelosi said: “I have said it before and I will say it again: Impeachment is off the table,” Democrats “are not about getting even” with Republicans. In the context of those statements, she also said:

“Democrats pledge civility and bipartisanship in the conduct of the work here and we pledge partnerships with Congress and the Republicans in Congress, and the president — not partisanship.”

How’s that working out for you, Madame speaker?

There are so many grounds for impeachment of these people that there is no need to enumerate them here. What is desperately needed now, is more people like former Texas congressional representative Barbara Jordan in the house.

Quoting the late Ms. Jordan during the Nixon years….

B.J.: "If the impeachment provision in the Constitution of the United States will not reach the offenses charged here, then perhaps that 18th-century Constitution should be abandoned to a 20th-century paper shredder."

That statement is, at the very least, equally relevant today.

B.J.: "My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total. And I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction, of the Constitution."

Therein lies the problem with this congress, more specifically, the problem in this House of Representatives.

Do Ms. Jordan’s sentiments ring any bells, Madame speaker? You may think you were elected primarily to be “civil” and partner up with noble Republicans; but you should be reminded that your oath is to the constitution.

A truly responsible congress would recognize that this case MUST be brought, regardless of the outcome. At least, an intervention process would have been attempted and presented to the American people. It may be hopeless; but at least they would have had the opportunity to see what is happening to their government as it is transcending to a new American “ism” that their forebears would not recognize and, surely, could not support.

If presented properly, they may even be persuaded to put enough pressure on their elected representatives to overcome the influence of their true owners. Otherwise, it is truly hopeless.

Somebody has to step up, or recognize they are simply plugging in the shredder while pretending not to marvel at its efficiency of operation.

-- C. Mosby