One interesting --- dare we say, hopeful --- point we just noticed about last night's speech.

In the text transcript at the White House website, the speech was written to end, curiously enough, with the following words:

"See you next year"???

Anybody ever recall such an ending to a State of the Union address?! Now why would they include something like that, one has to wonder.

But as odd as it was to include those words in the first place, what's even more interesting is that Bush didn't say them, choosing instead to end simply with "God bless."

Shall we take this as an encouraging omen? I say we do.

Beyond that, consider this an Open Thread and/or describe the reasons for your vote below...

John Conyers op/eds in tomorrow's WaPo on Impeachment. Or a lack thereof. Or otherwise responds to the strawman nonsense from the Republicans of late running on the notion that a vote for Dems this fall is a vote for impeachment of Bush by the incoming Judiciary Committee Chair, John Conyers.

While it may ultimately turn out to be a vote for impeachment, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney will have only themselves to blame. Not John Conyers.

And, as one might expect, his response in WaPo to those sad charges and transparently desperate attempts to scare America, displays his usual grace, dignity and old-style statesmanship...in stark contrast to the nattering nabobs of fear-mongering that are today's disgraceful Congressional Republicans.

Not to give anything away, since we hope you'll read the whole thing, but the last line underscores why John Conyers is a hero for all times...

Bravo. And thank you, sir.

Guest blogged by David Edwards of Veredictum.com

Video in Streaming Flash format...
Video in Windows Media format...

We posted this video from ABC's This Week at Crooks and Liars yesterday. If you are a fan of DNC Chairman Howard Dean then you'll enjoy this video. For those that get physically sick at the sight of DeLay, you might want to skip the first 5 minutes.

Outgoing, indicted and disgraced Republican Rep. Tom DeLay spews the same hate-filled attacks on Democrats that we've heard for several years now. DeLay still manages to brandish the freshest Republican talking points.

Most notable was DeLay's attack on John Conyers' concerns that President Bush may have committed impeachable offenses. The Republicans believe that they can motivate their party to get out to the polls in November to save their favorite President from certain doom if the Democrats take control.

Howard Dean largely ignores DeLay's bluster. Chairman Dean has really improved the focus and delivery of his message. Dean doesn't dodge the tough questions. He delivers clear answers, straight talk and real hope the the American people. Having DeLay and Dean on the same segment really exposes the great disparity in the quality of their character.

From Charlie Savage in today's Boston Globe...

I began to try and pick and choose a few grafs to highlight from this extensive article. Upon reading it in full, however, I was generally so sickened I had no idea where to start.

Suffice to say, that --- unless someone can offer some alternative view to the situation about which Savage adeptly reports --- those so-called "Bush Haters" who've been saying for years that we are on a clear trajectory, hurling towards full-blown tyranny and/or fascism and/or dictatorship, were far more correct than I'd ever given them credit for.

Without some mitigating information in reply to Savage's work, the article suggests we are in a gravely serious Constitutional Crisis in this country. Far above and beyond what I believe has generally been understood. At least by me.

Please read the full article...

(A non-registration-required version here.)

Neil Young's new protest album, Livining With War, which includes "Let's Impeach the President" and other anti-war/anti-Bush tunes, is now released for listening online at NeilYoung.com.

It's also available, if you have any problem streaming from Young's site, at Justice Through Music (their version is handy, since it also allows you to pause listening, if needed.)

Jim Cirile provided an exclusive early preview of the album for The BRAD BLOG last weekend. Feel free to leave us your review here in comments!

UPDATE: "LET'S IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT" ONLINE HERE
Though we recommend listening the whole album, as you're required to do on the Neil Young site, etc. (we've now done so twice and the whole thing kicks ass), here is a streaming version of "Let's Impeach the President" only...

"Let's Impeach the President" in Streaming Flash format...

Care to sing along?

Let's impeach the president for lying
And leading our country into war
Abusing all the power that we gave him
And shipping all our money out the door
He's the man who hired all the criminals
The White House shadows who hide behind closed doors
And bend the facts to fit with their new stories
Of why we have to send our men to war...

Complete lyrics here...

Fox "News", of all sites, posts the full lyrics to Neil Young's "Let's Impeach the President" tune to be released this Friday online along with his Living With War album.

[See BRAD BLOG's (p)review of the album as posted last weekend.]

Says Roger Friedman at Fox about the album; "[It's] an incendiary, moving, totally American document of peaceful protest that is going to make a lot of people crazy one way or another."

He calls it "serious and searing" and an "extraordinary and eye opening new recording."

About "Let's Impeach the President," Friedman describes it as "a melodic, rocking, campfire ode" and "the catchiest protest song since Country Joe and the Fish's anti-Vietnam ditty, 'I Feel Like I'm Fixin' to Die.'"

Enough hype for ya? Okay, then...

While waiting for Friday, be sure to check out Op-Critical's new protest songs (and video contest), which RAW STORY covered a day or two ago, along with Justice Through Music's collection of protest tunes to hold you over.

UPDATE 4/28/06: The complete album --- as well as the single "Let's Impeach the President --- is now released online for your listening pleasure...

Guest Blogged by Jim Cirile

Neil Young wants to keep on rockin' the free world.

His new record, Living With War, makes very clear that if the Bush regime is allowed to continue, there may not be a free world to rock for much longer.

At 7:30 PM on Friday, April 21, 2006, Reprise Records' Dan Rose ushered a small cadre of us into a Reprise's Burbank headquarters for an exclusive listen to Young's new CD. For the next 50 minutes, listen we did.

Let's get one thing out of the way right now: this album rocks. It's post '80s electric Neil Young at his grunge best, and of the 10 cuts on Living With War, the first eight are mostly uptempo rockers. In fact, this may be the 60-year-old Young's most crossover-worthy album yet, since many of the songs should appeal to fans of bands as diverse as Green Day and Pearl Jam and will likely be embraced on campuses across America.

But there's one other tiny thing that makes this record stand out: it is one mother%^&*#% of a protest album. In fact, Living With War may just be the Fahrenheit 9/11 of rock.

Guest blogged by David Edwards of Veredictum.com

Video in Streaming Flash format...
Video in Windows Media format...
Audio in MP3 format...

Yesterday, Senator Barbara Boxer delivered a letter to President George W. Bush demanding that he apologize for his role in using NIE intelligence for political purposes. Boxer's letter begins, "I am writing to request that you apologize to the American people for your role in declassifying information for political reasons and authorizing its dissemination."

Senator Boxer appeared on MSNBC Hardball to explain her reason for writing Bush. Boxer also spoke in support of Senator Feingold's censure resolution.

From the MSNBC transcript:

Velvet Revolution's ImpeachMobile has so far received nothing but thumbs-ups and high-signs from those who've seen it! (With the exception of a few cops who have pulled it over to make sure all papers were in order. They are.)

That may change this week, as the intrepid Velvet Revolutionary drivers take the rolling billboard into a few less-friendly settings. We'll see!

In the meantime, we still (The BRAD BLOG is a co-founder of VR) welcome and appreciate your contributions to the effort. They help to fill up the gas tank, as well as to pay for future billboards. Perhaps we'll not be so subtle next time with our message

Al Gore's speech, to a bi-partisan audience, on our "Constitutional Crisis" has just concluded. UPDATE: We've posted extended video highlights from the speech here...

Gore was to have been introduced by former Congressman Bob Barr (R-GA), but Barr's live video feed broke down at the last moment. We are told by the Liberty Coalition's Michael Ostrolenk (who jumped up to introduce Gore in an improvised statement), that Barr will be appearing on CNN's Situation Room later this afternoon.

An early highlight from Gore's address: "The President of the United States has been breaking the law repeatedly and persistently."

MORE HIGHLIGHTS...

Much more in the extraordinary full speech, for which RAW STORY now has the complete prepared text.

UPDATE: FBI Whistleblower, Sibel Edmonds issues an exclusive statement to BRAD BLOG in reply to Gore's speech...

Crooks and Liars has video highlights.

Last June, 42% of Americans in a Zogby poll felt that Bush should be impeached if he lied about the War on Iraq while 50% opposed.

Earlier this month, in a new poll by Ipsos, a majority of 50% were in favor of impeachment, while just 44% were opposed.

And today, the latest poll from Zogby asking the same question, says 53% support impeachment of Bush while just 42% oppose.

In the meantime, even while the Mainstream Media were relentlessly discussing impeachment every day, wall-to-wall, about Bill Clinton back in September and August of 1998 (while hardly mentioning it today in relation to Bush) "only 36% supported hearings to consider impeachment, and only 26% supported actual impeachment and removal" according to a study of 16 major polls which asked the question back then (versus the 3 major polls now, 2 of them which had to be funded by American citizens donating to AfterDowningStreet.org.)

ImpeachPAC.org, a new organization from the AfterDowningStreet.org folks (of which The BRAD BLOG is an affiliate) have begun raising money for Congressional candidates who support impeachment of both Bush and Cheney. They have much more on all of the above.

UPDATE: Two commenters have taken us to task for what they consider to be a misleading headline on this item, noting that the 53% who "support Bush Impeachment," as the headline states were answering whether or not they would do so "if President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq."

Though we did make that point clear in the first sentence of the article, the commenters (one of them an habitual troll here at BRAD BLOG, but we do not discriminate) still had a problem with the headline.

When we posted this article, what we didn't delve into (mostly due to lack of time) was what the sponsors of the poll --- who similarly headlined their article announcing the results as "53% of Americans Support Impeachment," by the way --- also discussed how many Americans feel already that "Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq."

From their article:

Thus, 53% of Americans support impeachment "if Bush did not tell the truth" and anywhere from 52% to 57% believe he did not tell the truth.

Do the math. We stand by the original headline. (And still hope Bush gets a blowjob so impeachment proceedings may begin.)

We've been on the road for the past few days, and thus not locked into our usual media routine. Out here, in the desert, we get a dose here and there of Cable News, though without the erstwhile FOX News drone to keep us as aware of what the Evil Doers are up to.

Rush comes in partially, with much static, so I haven't been able to keep up with the Right Wing Marching Orders with my usual alarming up-to-the-moment accuracy. Nor have I had any Internet Access for the last 3 days or so, so please pardon me if I'm missing a beat or two, and - unbeknownst to me - the entire Blogosphere is abuzz with this already. But from here, I've got just one big question since last Sunday's Bob Woodward explosions on 60 Minutes.

(DISCLAIMER: Both CBS, the producer of 60 Minutes and Simon & Schuster, publisher of Woodward's Plan of Attack are owned by the same parent company, Viacom. I have watched CBS before and have read books published by Simon & Schuster. As well, I have also watched both VH-1 and MTV on several occasions. Both of those cable channels are also owned by the parent company Viacom.)

So, anyway...The various Cable News programs we've been able to catch since Sunday, seem to be dwelling on the Powell-outta-the-loop and Bush-Saudi-low-oil-prices-before-the-election issues.

Yes, the most alarming item from Woodward on Sunday to my ears, was the bit about Bush having diverted some $700 million from the Congressionally approved Afghanistan spending over to a secret unapproved pre-Iraq War effort.

So my question is this...If Bill Clinton lying about a blowjob is an Impeachable offense, how can it be that subverting the US Constitution by diverting $700 million to a Congressionally Unapproved project by the this Administration barely raises an eyebrow by anyone? Both the House of Representatives (responsible for instituting Impeachment Proceedings) and the supposed "Liberal Media" seem to be completely ignoring the issue.

Now, I realize that the House is controlled hard by Republicans, but where is that supposedly "Liberal Media" on this one? And how can even the supposedly "Conservative" Republicans in the House sit by and ignore such a blatant disregard - if true - for the United States Constitution by this Administration?

Surely there must be at least a couple of intellectually honest Republicans out there who are outraged enough by this report to begin a very serious investigation into this very serious alleged breach of ethics by this Administration. No?

Can you imagine the Republican apoplectics that would be occurring today if it was Bill Clinton (or John Kerry!) who was reported to have done such a thing?

As Bill Bennet would have certainly asked in such a situation had this been a Democrat at the helm, "Where's the outrage??"

Or is it out there and I'm just missing it?