Great idea! There is not one thing in your post I disagree with. Here's hoping the Dems. know a good idea when they see it.

Brad,
That is a terrific idea. And I'll bet Web can hit one out of the park. Thank you.
Best regards, Zendoman

I can't wait to hear this. Getting ready to listen to you on Nova M radio Brad. Keep up the GREAT WORK! Peace!

Well said, Brad.

The response has been a tradition since 1966, and there are no rules as to where or how the opposition response must be made.

This is a really interesting idea ... and the thought of seeing Dick scowl and squirm behind Jim Webb delivering a great speech is rather enticing.

http://www.citizenboo.com/

Thanks Lisa B (et al)...speaking of NovaM, I may be heading out towards Pheonix way in a couple of weeks to Guest Host PBC's show from there for a few days.

Just FYI.

Beyond that, please spread the word on this editorial! Time is short before the SOTU and this will have to be posted high and low in order to get enough traction to make a difference by next Tuesday!

Brad - Have you sent this idea to Jim Webb yet?

This is an absolutely fantastic idea! I hope the leadership reads this, and makes it happen. It would undoubtedly send the righties into a monumental tizzy, but that fact makes the idea seem even better to me!

Brilliant idea

Webb is awesome

Thanks Brad
GODSPEED
Senator Jim Webb!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Excellent idea, Brad. Glad you looked into it and proposed the idea. Is there a way of taking your idea to have Jim Webb address the full joint session immediately following the Bush lie to the nation and putting it into one of those internet email petitions that MoveON, DFA, and their likes provide for us to sign and click ? Which individuals in Congress should we be phoning and faxing your article to ? Pelosi, Reid, and who else ? Let us not forget, every one of those politicians works for US ! ... we the people ! ... they work for us, dammit ! Thanks for your good work, Brad. Perhaps we'll see you in Washington DC on Saturday January 27th ? - Phil Restino, Central Florida Veterans For Peace, (561) 714-3250 cell.

PS - Our good friend Clint Curtis was out to our weekly CODEPINK anti-war demonstration last night in Daytona Beach, FL and stood with us calling for the the troops to come home. Some of us will be helping to canvas his district again tomorrow to get affidavits from voters with the home that we can help Clint and guys like you do something about these no good electronic voting machines. Clint Curtis is a fine American and an even finer man.

Do the country a favor - expose this:

What's going of with a CONCENTRATION CAMP in Wyoming?
Read the designations on the photos carefully.
Housing for FAMILIES in a forced labor prison camp?

Swift Luck Greens:
http://www.democracyforu...m/showthread.php?tid=297

http://209.157.64.201/fo...f-bloggers/1607403/posts

Latitude: 41.92
Longitude: -106.521944

Civilian Inmate Labor Program:
http://en.wikipedia.org/...ian_Inmate_Labor_Program

Bush's Mysterious 'New Programs'
http://www.truthout.org/...n/exec/view.cgi/47/17936

Hanna Coal Basin “RAG Shoshone 1” facility stopped
production of 1 million-plus tons of coal per year as of 2001:

http://72.14.209.104/sea...=us&ct=clnk&cd=4

Did the government close the mine only to TAKE it for their use?
Interview their former CEO and ask him.
http://www.fmshrc.gov/de...west199934202042004.html

What is the mine used for? Are they storing nasty stuff there?
Is it legal for the Army and DHS to jointly run this facility?
What about the Posse Comitatus Act?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

What about the 15,000 foot military runway?
What's that for?
Is the airspace overhead restricted?

Read this guy's take:
http://tinyurl.com/y48vxo

Great idea, Brad! But if the Dick chooses to stay for the response, I think it would be a good idea to frisk him for piano wire, given his seat just behind Webb. Not to mention shotguns!

There is a chorus of democratic and republican opposition to the wannabe republican dictatorship in the white house. For example:

As one of only a handful of lawmakers with access to the most classified intelligence about the threat from Tehran, Rockefeller's views carry particular weight. He has also historically been more tempered in his criticism of the White House on national security issues than some of his Democratic colleagues.

Rockefeller was biting in his criticism of how Bush has dealt with the threat of Islamic radicalism since the Sept. 11 attacks, saying he believed that the campaign against international terrorism was "still a mystery" to the president. "I don't think he understands the world," Rockefeller said. "I don't think he's particularly curious about the world. I don't think he reads like he says he does."

(Raw Story, emphasis added).

The term "co-equal" is a McDonalds quickie phrase. It has been perverted to insinuate that on any matter all three branches are co-equal. The phrase, even at first blush, does not hold up in very many constitutional contexts.

Article I, the first one , is about the legislature. Article II, the second one , is about the presidency. Article III, the third one , is about the judiciary. Is that a pecking order ?

These three branches are absolutely not co-equal where the rubber meets the road. The judiciary has full authority over things judicial, the congress has full authority over things legislative, and the presidency has full authority over things administrative.

They are not co-equal in any sense to the extent that the presidency can exercise judicial authority or legislative authority.

Fuzzy gloss-over may be a great passtime, however, it does not engender a mature and compreshensive understanding.

The better inquiry is "what powers does each branch of the three have?". It is civics and law baby.

Jim Webb
US Senator, Virginia
DC phone: 202-224-4024
DC FAX: 202-224-5432

I can't find an email address for Senator Webb - anyone have it?

Brilliant idea, Brad!

If I were Webb, here's the extent of my SOTU opposition speech:

"Mr. Butt-F--k Bush...YOU'RE FIRED! And you are under arrest; Mr. Cheney, you are under arrest; Ms Rice, you are under arrest, etc."

The SOTU speech is the PERFECT TIME for members of the US military to storm the chambers and arrest many of the Bush cabal, don't cha think? A mass arrest of the "leaders" needs to happen with one single criteria: who voted for the Iraqi war and the Patriot Act--anybody else is exempt from arrest...and this includes Dems as well as the RepugnantRepubs. After the mass arrest of everyone, by decree from the arresting members of the Constitution-supporting US military, a nation-wide voting with paper ballots shall proceed to elect new people to replace those who have been arrested.

Alas, as what happens to most fantasies, this mass-arrest of the war-mongering, Constitution-bashing "leaders" won't happen. Ugh.

Kudos, brad! A Fabulous Idea! Please send it to Nancy Pelosi, Reed, and Webb. I believe that if this congress wants to get the backing of the american people right now this is absolutely essential that they make their stand in opposition to the "status quo" and enliven belief in this country once again. People have become complacent because they have not heard the "rallying cry" from the Democrats loudly enough and they've slipped back into a state of detachment. If Webb actually does this, it may be just the jump start this country needs right now....to catapult them right into a cry for impeachment which is the next thing this country needs to press for....along with severe voting reform! Go - Brad - Go!

a bit off topic but dovetailing into Mozart's scenario a bit....I do believe that those running for office need to pass the "litmus test of Iraq". After all, their vote to enable a maniac's trigger finger was not just because they were misled....how could they be when they were exposed to much more information than the american/foreign public and over half of all americans and the entire rest of the world were against occupation of Iraq. So, these "enablers" (Dem and Repub) need to be "outed" for what they did to the people who trusted them and ostracized from public office....certainly not EVER elected to the Presidency of this country as a "reward" for their culpable neglicence and derelection of duty as our elected representatives.

The "war monger - yes voters" were: Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Joe Lieberman, Flipper McCain, John Edwards, and John Kerry. These individuals do not deserve the respect of the people nor can handle the scope of the job (look at how abysmally they failed when they voted "yes" on such a critical issue). Simply put: this group is not enlightened enough, smart enough or can be trusted enough to be President.

The "enlightened group" of anti-war "no voters" include: Wesley Clark, Russ Feingold, Dennis Kucinich, and Barak Obama (didn't vote but would have voted "no")....

This latter group deserve the respect and trust of the american people. The election of 08 will be another referendum by the people on the mistake called Iraq....so we cannot exonerate these aforementioned enablers (Hillary, Biden, McCain, et al) for their complicity in allowing this war to even begin.

That's the way the ball bounces....and perhaps the next time one of these yokels votes on something so important, they'll give it the consideration, evaluation, and time it deserves.

Out with all of the war mongers in 08! Impeach Bush & Cheney now so Pelosi beats sneaky Hillary to the punch! Besides, Hillary doesn't have a chance in hell of becoming Pres....her whitewater dealings and dalliance with Foster will finish her off before her campaign gets off the ground. This country seems to consider adultery more serious than torture, treason, and trampling of the constitution so Hillary won't have a chance.

Dredd #14,
But Brad is using the term 'co-equal' here referring to the dems & the repugs, not the three branches, correct?
So where does that leave the SOTU? I think the dems should embrace Brad's suggestion forcefully, not by timidly asking permission but by announcing this is how it's going to be. The two parties are equal and they are now in the majority. They need to quit the timidity.

#12 Czaragorn,
Hahaha, good freakin' point!

ALL -

Here's the contact info for three key folks to make this happen:

Sen. Jim Webb
Phone: 202-224-4024

Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Phone: (202) 225-4965
Email: sf.nancy@mail.house.gov

Sen. Harry Reid
Phone: (202) 224-3542
Email: reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm

Get busy!

I'll send my messages and hope it happens. Why not? Wonder how the CMSM will treat it?

I also hope that everyone laughs rather than applauds during the SOTU, but I guess that's too much to ask.

Best idea ever.

I didn't mention this in my very polite message to Pelosi and Reid, but I think it would be completely fair to make Bush give his speech via radio from the basement.

Good idea Brad!

I'd prefer a parallel government.

Joan #20

Brad is reporting the news. He is reporting what is actually happening in the public dialogue. It is for real that this "co-equal" dialogue is taking place.

The public dialogue is rarely on point, however, when it comes to things constitutional. Public polls show that Americans are the most ignorant when it comes to their own constitution. Historically only a small minority reads it regularly. I hope that changes.

That is why the fascists can operate so freely in what is claimed to be a constitutional democracy.

Use it or loose it.

The current regime is the most lawless, criminal, lying, and unamerican regime I know of.

None of its unconstitutional behavior is "co-equal", it is criminal.

The public discussion that uses the term "co-equal" is a straw man, a red herring, and a shame.

Only congress can declare war ( Article 1, Section 8 ), and only after congress has done so does the president become "commander in chief", and then he is only commander in chief of the armed forces.

To American citizens he is the civilian president at all times, never commander in chief of them.

Yet the public dialogue is that the president is commander in chief at all times of all of us.

Bu$hit!!

Listen to your constitution, not politicos:

The Congress shall have Power To ... provide for the common Defence ...To declare War ...To raise and support Armies ... To provide and maintain a Navy ... To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces ... To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions ... To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States ... To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers

(Article I, Section 8).

Keep listening:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

(Article II, Section 2, emphasis added).

The president is commander in chief of the armed forces only when they are called by an act of congress. And they are not called anymore when congress withdraws its declaration or declares any war finished.

The president is never commander in chief of the people who are not in the armed forces.

The president is NOT co-equal such that he can declare war or anything else in congress' sole power.

DUH!!!

OT

And as to impeachment, it is not an option or a discretionary function such that it "is not on the table" once the conditions for impeachment have arisen:

The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

(Article II, Section 4, emphasis added).

The congress "shall" is the language, not "may", when the conditions for impeachment have been met.

It is not a discretionary function, and they have taken an oath to obey the constitution.

I find it interesting that the impeachment clause is contained in Article II ... the presidency Article.

Our forfathers knew that the power of government is most likely to be abused by the presidency. The constitution, then, has a bias towards the presidency because it is one person, a place where corruption tends to happen because one person can break down.

Congressional power is vested in almost 600 people, so corruption of that magnitude is less likely. So that shows how corrupt the 109th republican congress was, and it also shows another aspect where these two branches are not co-equal ... the presidency is weaker in terms of being subject to corruption.

Dredd #s 26 & 27,
But KNOWING all that to be true doesn't solve the problem! We can read the Constitution till we're blue in the face...that will not change the fact that it is disregarded in practice by the government!
Ed Schultz was playing clips the other day of the hearings that were held right after the whole warrantless wiretapping thing came out...senator after senator saying things like: "The president is breaking the law", "Laws are being broken here", "This is clearly against the law".....
Did they arrest anybody? No. Laws were broken. No biggie. Move along....
I've lost COUNT of how many times I've sent letters to this one or that one or whole groups of them saying in every way I can THINK of that
"Impeachment is written into our legal system for a REASON!"
Listening to that it occurred to me for the umpteenth time that this is not government, it's FARCE! Only not FUNNY farce, but obscene, tragic bloody farce. And it goes on and on and on and on until you want to scream.

By the way, I was not successful in sending Brad's excellent piece re the SOTU to Harry Reid, but I did send it to Webb, Boxer, Kennedy and I THINK it got through to Pelosi but I'm not sure. And a few others that I forget. Oh, John Conyers and Barney Frank.
I always feel, sending anything like this, that I'm shooting arrows in the dark. I have no idea if I hit anything. Probably a big stone wall with a moat around it that's full of sharks. And now a couple of arrows.

Dredd --- I think you are 100% right. One of the problems, though, is the "bully" factor. The President, as the chief executive, can bully more effectively than can Congress. He can persuade the public that he is protecting their interests or that Congress is abusing him far more efficiently than Congress can state its case, and members of Congress are always aware of it. (Of course, if the Constitution were better known in detail and lived, this wouldn't be as much of a problem.)

So, we have kind of a propaganda, PR factor where the President has the upper hand. It wouldn't be a problem if people took "civics"/civic responsibility seriously and lived it day-by-day, moment-by-moment.

If we would get to the point of actual impeachment, then the dynamics would change. (Presidential incompetence and lying has already changed it significantly.)

As a true American, I insist on my representatives living up to their Constitutional responsibilities and oaths of office, so I'm just laying out some factors to consider in our campaign to make the Constitution a significant and living document and way of life.

I must also point out that in view of what I've just been saying, Brad's idea of a full-fledged response to the SOTU is inspired.

Didya see today's Washington Post + ABC News poll showing Hillary Clinton leading the pack of Democratic Party candidates for the presidency? Do any of us believe that garbage?

The press, being corporate, wants the most conservative Dem candidates they can get, so they boost Hillary. I'm guessing it's Obama and Edwards who are getting the most support and in time some may fail and others continue. It'll be interesting. As Sen. Ted Kennedy said this morning, the list represents the full range of American views, so it bodes well for the big-tent Democratic Party. I think what he meant was that the list of Democratic Party candidates includes a few Republicans as well as some Democrats.

The more I watch broadcast television's coverage of politics and government the more I want to throw up. Blecchhh!

I heard there were a bunch (over 100) of journalists who quit their jobs and started a new blog named politico.com or politicos.com or something like that. I wonder if that's as much commentary of newsprint v. internet journalism as it is of the urge to really write the 'not corporate approved' news.

Oh, Bush doesn't need to be refuted. There's nothing he has to say which is relevant any more. His policies need to be stopped, but so long as he refuses there's really nothing Congress can do. They can't get him impeached & convicted, so don't waste time on it. So, let America puke and wretch for the next couple years to grow very very weary of all Republicans.

It would be beyond amazing if Republicans in Congress called for the impeachment and conviction of Bush. Don't expect it.

May God have mercy on America for having committed soooo many sins.

OT

Everyone should read Jane Smiley's post on huffington: "... the worst possible president."

Good Idea. . . . .Though this regime believes they are more equal . . .

Dredd sedd:

The current regime is the most lawless, criminal, lying, and unamerican regime I know of.

None of its unconstitutional behavior is "co-equal", it is criminal.

The public discussion that uses the term "co-equal" is a straw man, a red herring, and a shame.

Of course, I agree with both your general sentiment and your various Constitutional interpretations as expressed in several notes above, Dredd.

(As a side note: Isn't it telling that disgraced Colonel Oliver North used to parade around and pull out his copy of the U.S. Constitution, during the Clinton era in order to constantly draw our attention to the "Owner's Manuel" as he referred it. Haven't see old Ollie pull that out lately --- or ever --- in the past 6 years. Have you?)

But I digress...The particulars of your points are well-taken. On various specific issues, the branches are not co-equal. On the overall, however, they each have their part to play and while there is always a push and pull for power between branches (more now than ever as Exec has attempted and as been allowed to usurp both Legislative and Judicial), no one branch has more over-all authority over another.

Even if you might argue (as you have) that Congress has most authority --- particularly when it comes to the declarations and operations of war --- clearly the Dems need the boost in realizing that they are atleast co-equal. Once they get back to that point, which the idea expressed in the original post is meant to underscore and encourage, then we can get around to the particulars of who may have even more Constitutional weight in any one specific aspect of policy.

In other words, your points are well-taken, even they manage for now to miss the forest for the trees.

Anyone think THIS story is big???

"Rep. Hinchey: New bill would break up media monopolies & restore fairness doctrine; Warns media reform critical to prevent 'end of Democratic republic'"

“If Rush shoots his mouth off, he must give equal access to our side,” Hinchey said. “The American public will begin to get both sides or all sides of an issue. That is basic—fundamental to a democracy.”

http://www.rawstory.com/...ia_reform_bill_0121.html

Will the CMSM that this bill is addressing as ruining democracy...COVER THE STORY???

R.I.P. Denny Doherty

Brad ya may or may not be .. .. ..

California Dreamin

All the leaves are brown
And the sky is grey
I went for a walk
On a winters day
Id be safe and warm
If I was in l.a.
California dreamin
On such a winters day

I stopped into a church (stopped into a church)
I passed along the way (passed along the way)
You know, I got down on my knees (got down on my knees)
And I pretend to pray (I pretend to pray)
Oh, the preacher likes the cold (preacher likes the cold)
He knows Im gonna stay (knows Im gonna stay)
Oh, california dreamin (california dreamin)
On such a winters day

All the leaves are brown (the leaves are brown)
And the sky is grey (and the sky is grey)
I went for a walk (I went for a walk)
On a winters day (on a winters day)
If I didnt tell her (if I didnt tell her)
I could leave today (I could leave today)

Oh, california dreamin (california dreamin)
On such a winters day (california dreamin)
On such a winters day (california dreamin)
On such a winters day (california dreamin)
On such a winters day
Written by john and michelle phillips, © 1966
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKogZEryU9I
-99 check out the tubs . . .
To each their own;
http://www.youtube.com/r...+papas&search=Search

""(Democrat) Hinchey believes takeover of the U.S. media has been carefully calculated by the “political right wing,” starting with abolition of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, which had required that broadcasters give equal time for people who wished to express an opposing viewpoint. It was originally adopted in 1949 due to the rise of global fascism after World War II. ""

Note the key date 1987...Reagan began what is now the Corporate MainStream Media!!!

My #31 --- One of my points is that extra-Constitutional factors, such as media control through corporate connections and "access" (what to do about them), have to be considered in rebuilding Constitutional politics, which I hope is a goal of all of us. (Constitutional politics, naturally, concerns functions and powers of the branches of government as delineated in the Constitution.)

Which leads to Big Dan #36. Fantastic news. Thanks for bringing it up. Eliminating the Fairness Doctrine was just plain stupid, with no sense of history or understanding of the danger of media "unfairness". In regard to concerns (in the Raw Story article) about reinstituting it, once again you have to look at history. The media actually performed service to the nation under the Fairness Doctrine. It was respected. Now it's nothing but a mouthpiece for corporatism and "neo-fascism" --- precisely what it was set up originally to discourage. (Of course, breakup of monopoly has to go hand-in-hand with it.)

#37 - JoJ --- What?...both papas and only one mama left? And I just watched "Monterey Pops" last week and it seemed like yesterday. Guess it wasn't.

Now it's nothing but a mouthpiece for corporatism and "neo-fascism" --- precisely what it was set up originally to discourage. Of course, I mean what the Fairness Doctrine was meant to discourage.

Big Dan, You got, chief . . . . . It all about da Fairness Doctrine .. .. ..

The use of the Highways & the Air Waves are not a right. . . . . IT'S A PRIVILEGE !

And must be used to benefit the peeps not just the gop (GREEDY OLD _ _ _ _ _ _ _). . .

big dan:

If they bring back the fairness doctrine, the Republicans are going to have to retool. They only have pundits, (learned persons), who can lie. If they have to conduct honest debate now, who in the heck is going to do it?

I was wondering when the fairness doctrine came into being. 1949? I'll be darned. If the media was required to have honest debate since 1946, then there couldn't have been a "liberal media" after 1949.

Are you listening Hannity?

"The use of the Highways & the Air Waves are not a right. . . . . IT'S A PRIVILEGE !"

That's exactly right JOJ! Clear Channel shouldn't have a license. They have been broadcasting under the influence of an intoxicant. MONEY!

#39 --- My brain and extremities are not connecting today. What I mean, of course, is both papas gone and one mama left. And I mean "Monterey Pop".

I may return when the synapses begin to function.

Here's another one...the typical AP syndicated article sent around the CMCM about Ney/slammer. Do you see the word "HAVA" anywhere in this article? I didn't. It didn't say, "Bob Ney, the author of HAVA, responsible for e-vote machine proliferation, was sent to the slammer today." That's not important to mention? That he authored "HAVA"??? If you read this article and you're an average person, you would not know Bob Ney authored HAVA. Now that's a BLATANT, KNOWING OMISSION!!! No accident here, no way! Am I missing the word "HAVA" in Bob Ney/slammer articles??? I'm not imagining it, am I?

http://news.bostonherald...view.bg?articleid=178065

I think they use an HTML "variable" and replace the word "Republican" with the Republican's real name...and reuse the same article, because they're cutting news staffs and trying to save money.

The skeleton HTML is "Republican {&name} has been thrown in the slammer today..."

JOJ: Didn't Mama Cass choke on a can of spam, because she forgot to take it out of the can? ...or something like that...

Let's keep tabs on who screams the loudest to crush any Fairness Doctrine introduction of bills...

I believe the bill you are referring to is the Freedom Preservation Act introduced by Byron Dorgan (D-ND) & Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) in January 2007 to require fair & equitable access to all Internet content.

I think Representatives Ed Markey & Maurice Hinchley are connected to that in some way. Maybe they are sponsoring something to do with the Fairness Doctrine.

I'm not sure what the bill numbers are. Anyone know?

Lieberman and McCain were the featured guests at the AEI event McCain spoke at.

They were also the featured guests at the recent JINSA Awards banquet held to honor McCain with their annual War Mongers Award (Scoop Jackson Award), given out annually to the American militarist who best serves the interests of Israel (last year it was General Peter Pace).

McCain / Lieberman is your future - and this will NOT be determined by your votes. This is preordained.

DO THE MATH

Possible McCain-Lieberman Alliance

Introducing McCain to a packed ball room of pro-Israel business executives, defense contractors, and Washington insiders, was Sen. Joseph Lieberman, fresh from being re-elected as an independent after losing the Democratic Party primary in Connecticut.

Lieberman's glowing tribute to his Republican colleague did not go unnoticed. "McCain-Lieberman? There's something to that," JINSA board member Morris J. Amitay told the crowd.

http://www.newsmax.com/a...6/12/6/111221.shtml?s=lh

"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio.

STOP.

Stop talking about politics - and the elections that are nearly two years away. Haven't you noticed? It's the MEDIA that has convinced you that this topic is valid every day of every year.

THINK BACK.

Remember when there were no 24/7 cable news channels? Remember when there were no TV shows devoted solely to politics?

When election cycles were over, they were OVER. Those who were elected set about doing the people's business, and the people got back to focusing on the issues that MATTER.

Look at what the system of Politics hath wrought.

Why is the topic of a Presidential race nearly two years away relevant on every news show, and every message board so early? This country has been reduced to EXACTLY what our MASTERS have chosen for us.

Bickering over which preordained puppet will be (s)elected by the globalists to (appear to) run the country is just masturbation.

Only men and women of low moral character (subject to bribes and blackmail) are even allowed in to the political arena in the first place. Why do you think the Congress is so complacent and compliant? They all work for the same boss - but it's not you.

The social scientists and propagandists have managed to divide the country in half, with people who call themselves Democrats and Republicans talking AT each other 24/7 - as if it mattered.

We are all mindless sheep, doing as we are programmed by the images we see on our screens and the messages that are conveyed to us by Used Car Salesman who just happen to have been put in positions of (apparent) power by those in REAL POWER.

Since 1950, the Council on Foreign Relations has been David Rockefeller's child. The CFR serves the interests of Rockefeller's global empire of oil and financial interests (Exxon, Chase Manhattan Bank, JP Morgan Chase).

Founder of Council On Foreign Relations:

http://www.youtube.com/w...tch?v=ensmPJm5B5A&NR

David Rockefeller & Dick Cheney:

American Traitors...

Cheney laughs about lying to his constituents in order to get elected:

http://www.youtube.com/w...tch?v=HdxLYuvvbgs&NR

Expose the sham that politics has become. It's just a game to redistribute wealth and your tax dollars. Politicians for the most part are paid actors - playing a role.

see this ?

Sarasota, Florida the cesspool of illegality and stolen elections. Where did those 18,000 votes go ?

Link to web article.

Now THIS is the way to protest a dirty election. Whatcha doin' on the 27th?

"""World exclusive: International nuke watchdog disputes claim Iran barred inspectors; Says enough in place... AP carries Iran's claim as fact without comment from IAEA... Developing..."""

...coming on Raw, but Raw is catching on, the blending of govt + corporate america = AP propoganda = war = uninformed citizens = FASCISM!!!!!!!!!!.

We need the Fairness Doctrine more than ever!

Brad #38:

In other words, your points are well-taken, even they manage for now to miss the forest for the trees.

It is true that the "forest" (the people and their constitution) is missed in a false dialogue about "co-equal" (the tree).

I am the one that quotes the constitutional text most often here. I prefer to do that than simply use the word "constitution" because it is a mythic word. The neoCons and their detractors both use that word to mean "co-equal" things.

Co-equal is another double take that does nothing more than double up "co" and equal. Equal would be a single wrong yet better english, but to couple it with "co" makes it twice as bad. It is like "both-two" of them.

Straight talk comes from strait words. And the supreme words are in the constitution. It is the supreme law and there is nothing "co-equal" about it.

What the use of the term "co-equal" reveals is that there is a power struggle, and it most certainly is not a struggle for equality, it is a struggle for supremacy. And "all both" of that is based on error.

Brad,

I had some polite but differing comments on this post that appear to have been removed.

Sad to see that BradBlog is becoming a repository for progressive dittoheads.

Kind of funny when the frenzy on this post is all about how Bush is abusing the powers of his democratic office. I've enjoyed your publication for quite some time but you've lost me now. When progressives start sounding like Goldwater "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice" - you know it's time to check out of the scene.

John --- I thought there were some excellent, reasonable responses to your postings. All kinds of people, though, so what's new?

Oh, and if you are still here, I think you are on the wrong item for your postings. If you go up to "Tell Congressional Dems..." you'll see they are still there.

At least that's the way it looks to me.