Thanks bro.

Dredd Rules!

Now we have to think of something to comment on!

Here's something on the 9/11 black boxes

What's interesting is the author's comment that the black boxes had been found at the Pentagon.

Is that another coverup since there is no other evidence of a passenger jet at that location?

How about Turd Stevens, did you see that pout when the ANWR / Defence bill got shot down?

I thought he was going to cry

And I think there was a Frist Vaccination add-on of some sort in their too, S 2053 Read here, he's trying to slip another one through

Bluebear #3

I always wondered how they could claim to have found Atta's passport, made of paper, and not to have found the black boxes, which like you pointed out, are made to survive

Floridiot #4

Ted did go to his room and cry his eyes out.

Merry Christmas From Bushco and Friends

Take that O'Rielly

I guess my thought today would be that it looks like my son won't have to go back to Iraq again - possibly ever!!!! We'll know for sure on the 1st, but it's looking good!!!! He already spent a full year there. They were supposed to be gone by now, but they delayed and now possibly cancelled them. *doing the happy dance*

Best Christmas present I've ever had in my life. I can't help but feel that there is a HUGE-GIANT-MEGA thank you due to all the bloggers who tirelessly have fought to make the facts about this war heard. Thank you!! You are all finally being heard! There is a road ahead and 150,000 others who need to be home from Iraq soon, but it's a start! I don't know how many still in Afghanistan, but they need to get home too, including my son's best friend who entered the service with him.

America is NOT toast. We are going to make it....

Thank you Brad, Cindy, Arianna, Jon Stewart, John Conners, and others, for your unrelentless efforts with the war. (Thank you Jon for cracking my ass up inbetween the tears.) I truly thank everyone from the bottom of my heart. You helped save my son's life, I hope you are as proud of yourselves as you should be. Sure hope you have a Merry Christmas, you certainly helped make mine the best one ever.

For RL Mills: Didn't know you were an author. I buy a lot of left-wig and alternative media books. Can you give a synopsis of your Lindbergh text?

Any comments about all this spying and how it could also be used to give political and commercial advantage to anybody with access to the "raw data" ,its got to be the ultimate "insider trading".
I wonder about the demise of Raymond Lemme and how he told Clinton Curtis the following (from Brad) "In his 2004 affidavit, Curtis describes a mid-June 2003 meeting with Lemme in which he claims that Lemme told him he "had tracked the corruption 'all the way to the top' and that the story would break in the next few weeks and I would be satisfied with the results."

On July 1, 2003 --- just two weeks later --- Raymond Camillo Lemme was found dead in a bathtub, with his arm slashed twice with a razor blade near the left elbow in Room #132 of the Knights Inn motel in Valdosta, Georgia; a border-town some 80 miles from Tallahassee, Florida where Lemme lived and worked."

Can you get FOIA for anything with "Lemme" as the keyword ?

To...A Concerned Citizen MERRY CHRISTMAS Great to hear your son is still home ,here's hoping you and your family have a wonderful time together.

Evidently the administration is not aware of its lack of credibility. The always present and good American skepticism seems to elude them. In loosing self awareness, and awareness of what country they are in, the admin argues one set of facts one place, and another set of facts in another place. "That part of the world" seems to mean everywhere.

Recently, a right-leaning panel of the Federal 4th Circuit Court of Appeals rebuked the administration for telling different stories at different times (link here).

The president had called defendant Padilla an "enemy combatant" even tho Padilla was an American citizen.

Instead of charging Padilla with a crime by indictment, arresting and booking him, having bail hearings, and moving on thru the process of a jury trial, the administration took him to a military prison somewhere and detained him. Without an indictment or formal charges, denying him any phone calls, denying him a lawyer, denying him access to the courts, and denying any request by anyone to see him.

The problem with this is the same with the NSA Domestic Spying, and the Torture Memo's written for the president by Gonzales and other "yes men" lawyers of the neoCon administration.

The problem is that the checks and balances ... the "what does the other branch of government think about this", the "what do you think about it" asked of congress, and of the judiciary, to them is just a waste of cyber time, admin time, and neoCon time.

I mean, they seem to be saying "Hey you got us, what more do you need?"

I mean ... hey ... no one branch of government can demand that Americans "trust" them. The only people to be trusted under our system of government is the people, that is, those not in power. That is because we believe our forefathers and foremothers who told their children ... in love, in truth, and in their experience that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Anybody.

So the true government of the people says "don't trust me", but here is the record, the full, open, and comprehensive documentation and record of what we have done.

Believe what we do, not what we say. And check and balance us fully. That is the American way.

Other nations trust their government without checks and balances. They suffer accordingly.

Soul Rebel #9 (sounds like love potion number nieeeyiyiyine; 'nine')

Hey dude, RLM is a good writer. A good blogger. And a good American.

I think his book will be safe to read ... which is more than I can say, in good conscience, about things the admin says ...

I remember some good reviews posted about RLM's book ... a few days ago ... and there were some ads about it ... He is a modest blogger, so he may say nothing ... so I suggest you get a link or something from him where there are some third party descriptions or reviews of the book ...

All I can say is that RLM rocks!!!

A Concerned Citizen #8

Joy to you and your son. So glad to hear he will be staying home. It must truely be the best Christmas gift.

Soul Rebel #9

A link to a review of RLM Here you go

I have seen his posts here often and his name seemed familiar although I couldn't place it. After reading his bio at the above link I'm sure that I have heard of him and his works before.

For anyone who thinks electronic elections can EVER be secure ,think again...
Guidance's EnCase software is used by hundreds of security researchers and law enforcement agencies worldwide, including the U.S. Secret Service, the FBI and New York City police. John Colbert, the company's chief executive officer, said Guidance alerted all of its customers less than two days after discovering the break-in, and that it would no longer store customer credit card data.

The link to the Mother Jones article is missing. Try here:
http://www.motherjones.c.../01/counter-coulter.html

#8
Christmas blessings to you and your son! I wish you many a Merry Christmas with your son and a long and healthy life to both of you. Give him a big holiday hug (and thank you) from us. I'll be praying for the safe return of everyone's sons and daughters, husbands and brothers.

For Soul Rebel, Dredd, and Bluebear 2: Thanks for the invitation to me to plug my book.

"The Lindbergh Syndrome: Heroes and Celebrities in a New Gilded Age" wasn't written with the Bush administration in mind, specifically. Believe it or not, the project started in 1988, after my third expedition with the International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery in Downeast Maine, seeking the remains of a French bi-plane, L'Oiseau Blanc, that had disappeared in 1927 just 11 days before Charles Lindbergh's successful New York-Paris flight. The Frenchmen, Nungesser and Coli, were competing with Lindbergh for the Orteig Prize.

I told Ric Gillespie, head of TIGHAR, that I wanted to tell the story because the Frenchmen had been every bit as heroic as Lindbergh...just unluckier. I knew that Franco-American relations in the 1920s (what I call the second Gilded Age) had been tarnished by post-World War I politics (the United States thought France hadn't been grateful enough for our saving their butts). The book discusses this element at length. What I never anticipated was that history would repeat itself, or that John Kerry would become the 21st century equivalent of Nungesser and Coli...hated for being "too French."

The book is about more than this. But I count myself lucky that after 17 years it finally arrived in print when it did. Details (and a sample chapter) are available at robertlockwoodmills.tripod.com. I'm offering a free signed copy (postage paid) to anyone who contributes $50 or more to Bradblog.

Thanks again, guys. And thanks to Jim Cirile for his review at Amazon. I'm humble and very grateful.

A Concerned Citizen #8

Like your fellow bloggers here have said, it is a form of happiness that this situation worked out for you and yours.

I remember going for the first time to the movie Schindler's List.

After crying for several hours it ended. I worked my way toward the exit, and finally, had to confront my son.

I tried to talk but could not. I tried again ... and again ...

Finally I was able to gurgle out the words "now you know what greatness is".

I meant, and my son understood, that I felt that Mr. Schindler was a great man.

Because he cared for the oppressed, the needy, the downtrodden, the you and the me ... somewhere some time.

And he laid down his life toward that end. And we do not ... nay dare not ... bring up his race, color, nor political persuasion before concluding his legacy.

I love the man.

IMPEACH BUSH IMAGES

... BUSH TREASON TRIAL

30 X 60 Oil, Color Paper on Canvas 2001

FREE 2 COPY E Send AT...

http://www.RogerART.com

Copy - Paste - Away - U - All

John Kerry had some interesting comments about voting machines and wiretaps today on the Ed Schultz Show. Look for more bombshells about the BCFOL in the coming weeks. Also, Abramof is about to explode and Fitzmas II is coming.

The only reason the Bush assministration would take the enormous political risk of bypassing the FISA court is if they knew the court would turn them down.

There is no way, and the record supports this, that the court would turn down any legitimate surveillance of terrorist suspects and since they have 72 hours after the fact to apply for approval there are no timeliness issues.

This leads to the inescapable conclusion that they are spying on people they have no legitimate reason to be spying on.

My guess is journalists, politicians, and maybe Fitzgerald.

What do you think?

I think they were spying on people that they had no legitimate reason to spy on. This is just my opinion. We will have to wait to see if this is true. It does seem to smell a trifle...
I also heard John Kerry on the Ed Schultz show today. I agree, It was interesting.

good question, Onyx (#23)...What is the "end", when the "means" consists of circumventing a fairly simple law?

ignoring BushCo's official explanation for the moment, which may or may not have been truthful at some point in the program, this is all pure speculation on my part, of course.

- a J.Edgar Hoover-style dossier on Americans, in readiness to feed into the Republican attack machine at a moment's notice, or for simple blackmail. for example, i seem to recall Bolton's unusual access to classified files, pre-CIA leak, of American citizens... like Joe Wilson & Valerie Plame, hmmmm? for that matter, he could have been looking at any American's dossier, for information that could be useful now or later...

- it's a great opportunity to listen to any conversation of any ambassador to the U.S. or to the U.N., for strategies and, of course, blackmail

- an idea i heard floated today: the illegal taps were used to gather enough evidence to then ask the judge for wiretap approval

- frankly, the list of potential targets, and their relative worth, could be endless

BushCo has been working on stacking the Supreme Court with loyalists, presumably to lurch the country even further to the right. of course, that also stacks the court in their favor, should any cases come before the court dealing with wrongdoing or abuse of power. Friends in high places are very good to have, indeed.

we already know from this administration that they traffic in moral relativism --- the end justifies the means, any means. they will contort common sense and morality, ethics and responsibility, not to mention the very laws of the land, to achieve their goals.

This is an excerpt from a NYTimes article. If it is already posted somewhere on the blog I apologize. Catholic social worker terrorists? I think he may have had trouble getting a warrant to wiretap nuns helping the poor.

"But the documents, coming after the Bush administration's confirmation that President Bush had authorized some spying without warrants in fighting terrorism, prompted charges from civil rights advocates that the government had improperly blurred the line between terrorism and acts of civil disobedience and lawful protest.

One F.B.I. document indicates that agents in Indianapolis planned to conduct surveillance as part of a "Vegan Community Project." Another document talks of the Catholic Workers group's "semi-communistic ideology." A third indicates the bureau's interest in determining the location of a protest over llama fur planned by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals."

SisTwo - Thanks for posting a not-broken link (as my originally one was previously). I've now fixed that original link. Much appreciated!

Speculation on the motive for avoiding the FISA court, which makes sense to me, is that they are using very sophisticated electronic "mining" technology which picks up "magic words" or "magic numbers." This is the ultimate "fishing expedition" which is ALWAYS rejected by the court.

It is thought that the FISA judge that resigned (and the three that are really upset) feel they were manipulated and used by the intelligence community. That mined evidence (obtained illegally) was used in affidavits to obtain warrants. These warrants are then illegal because they are based upon illegally obtained evidence (the proverbial "fruit of the poisonous tree"). I would rather have seen the judge order the perpetrators into court and hold them in contempt. But, perhaps these judges have such narrow jurisdiction that they can't do that. Will Gonzalez's Dept. of Justice do their job and investigate these crimes? Can Patrick Fitzgerald "interpret" his investigative/prosecutorial charge broadly enough to include this? (Gonzales is broadly interpreting the Senate Resolution for Presidential War Powers to include warrantless searches.)

Ah, yes. We do live in interesting times.

Raw Story has an excellent article about the FISA judges planning a meeting to discuss the warrantless searches. If I knew how to make a link, I would. Link here

There are three layers in the public dialogue, concerning spying or surveillance.

That is the Patriot Act, the FISA, and the NSA. The NSA has been historically only foreign spy work, FISA is spying on foreign activity in the US, and the Patriot Act is spying on activities in the US by al Queda types mainly, if I understand correctly.

What throws me and makes me suspicious is that the admin demands the patriot act, and perhaps FISA, then does not use them.

They use NSA, avoid the courts, and tell us how important the things are that they are avoiding anyway.

It does not make sense and it looks quite clearly like they are making it up as they go along.

A federal prosecutor, lawyer, and legal scholar's view of the presidential claim to have plenary power to spy on Americans:

"But even worse, such a scheme threatens basic democratic principles. This Administration wants virtually unlimited power with essentially no accountability. I might almost be able to stomach Bush's 'just trust me' claims of Executive power, if the President could be made truly accountable for his decisions down the road. But Bush wants the power with no public debate and a minimum of public disclosure.

Against that backdrop, the new revelations of warrantless wiretapping, and the Administration's latest set of explanations, sound less like a plan to fight terror than like tyranny's engines, raring to go." (link here).

This legal scholar's position is clearly justified, especially in the light of the president and the NSA leader having been caught lying in public by saying they were not spying on Americans (link here).

For Onyx: Immediately after 9/11 Bush had an 80% approval rating. If he had thought FISA was out of date and didn't protect us adequately, he could have asked Congress to update it quickly, maybe as part of the Patriot Act. Congress would have rubber-stamped his request in a heartbeat.

He didn't do that, did he? Either he was so fixated on invading Iraq (which had no connection to 9/11),
or (as you suggest) he wanted to spy on people for political reasons, as Nixon did (and, to be honest, as Robert Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson did, also).

The chickens are coming home to roost. And with his approval rating around 40%, Bush is no longer the fox in charge of the coop.

This administration has been asking for blank checks almost since day one, and congress has been all too willing to dole them out. Except for a few. the more I think about what this administration has pushed on congress (and the despicable way they have done it), the more I am convinced that Paul Wellstone was assassinated. There's no way he wouldn't have been leading some kind of movement for sanity in congress. God I miss him. When did his plane go down? Oct 25, 2002. When did we invade Iraq? Mar 19th, 2003. Somebody knows something.

There will be only a very few congresspersons who will (or should) receive recognition for demanding truth. Conyers, of course. Boxer. Byrd, for his magnificent prewar speech, perhaps. Cynthia McKinney. Most, however, were silent and passive when it could have made the most difference.

It would be very interesting to see the names of these so called dangers to society - terrorists? Isn't that what they are implying?

Onyx and Jo

I too think they very well may be spying on their competion.

MSNBC Survey

Should Bush be impeached?
87% yes
12% no

I think there should be a discussion, about how the Republicans, led by Cheney's tie-breaking vote, just "robbed from the poor, and gave to the rich" again with this latest budget they passed in the senate. The Republicans voted for cutting medicare/medicaid/college grants.

Here's my question: Does there exist any footage of ANY REPUBLICAN on TV, stating that this budget includes 70 billion worth of tax cuts for the rich? While they're claiming we (who's "we") all have to tighten out belts to cut the budget??? What are the super-rich sacrificing to cut the deficit? They're getting billions in tax cuts, coming from cuts in medicare/medicaid/college grants.

I will repeat my question: DOES THERE EXIST ANY TV FOOTAGE OF ANY REPUBLICAN MENTIONING THE BILLIONS OF TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH, IN THE REPUBLICAN-PASSED SENATE BUDGET???"

All I see is the Republicans saying, "We have to tighten our belts, we're spending too much money."

For all those good repug "Christians"

Big Dan

The ONLY place I've seen the tax cuts mentioned have been at the progressive blogs!

So the Patriot Act was extended for six months, as a result of Spector (single bullet theory in JFK assasination)who worked tirelessly all day to 'fix' the problem, so all could be home for the Holidays. Six months....when I was watching all the speeches on C-Span, the R's were adament that bush would not sign any extension, none, period. Guess bush was happier than a fly on shit to get 6 more months to finish the job and install himself as leader for life. The next 6 months will be interesting as we watch the Bill of Rights and Constitution thrown out the window, total and complete obliteration of everything this Nation was founded on and replaced by God knows what.

GWB: "I'm the comander-see, I don't need to explain-I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explantion." quoted in Bob Woodward "Bush At War".

Very interesting quote, very telling, from an unselected president. Only a dictator would say such a thing. bush answers to no one, not Congress, the Courts, or the people he works for, oops that was fruedian slip, he doesn't work for 'we the people.' He DOES answer to his Handlers and does everything they tell me to do, just does not need to explain that the puppet strings that operate him are not Made in America. M4 (who has to control the urge to vomit everytime she sees his face on tv)

M4 said:

"who has to control the urge to vomit everytime she sees his face on tv"

Ain't that the truth!

I wonder if the troops are being replaced with the oil baron armies?

Are they using our tax dollars to build an army to protect their own business in oil? (link here).

Dredd

Thanks for the link - looks like Ike knew what he was talking about!

Another Bush Lie revealed!

"President Bush asserted this week that the news media published a U.S. government leak in 1998 about Osama bin Laden's use of a satellite phone, alerting the al Qaeda leader to government monitoring and prompting him to abandon the device.

The story of the vicious leak that destroyed a valuable intelligence operation was first reported by a best-selling book, validated by the Sept. 11 commission and then repeated by the president.

But it appears to be an urban myth."

More Bushco highjinks!

"The National Weather Services Duties Act (S.786) would ban NWS from "competing" with private entities by making it unlawful for the agency to publish user-friendly weather data and barring NWS experts from speaking one-on-one to news agencies. Why? Because Senator Santorum believes that companies like AccuWeather would make more money if they didn't have to compete with "free.""

sign the petition and get yourself on the NSA list!

Able Danger ?

#40 - M4 - GWB keeps saying he is commander and he brought up Article II of the Constitution. But you will see that it is quite clear that he is commander-in-chief of the army and navy and militia (when called into service). He is not commander-in-chief of the American people.

The Des

> BushCo has been working on stacking the Supreme Court with loyalists, presumably to lurch the country even further to the right. of course, that also stacks the court in their favor, should any cases come before the court dealing with wrongdoing or abuse of power. Friends in high places are very good to have, indeed.

Conservative presidents get to pick conservative judges.

> we already know from this administration that they traffic in moral relativism --- the end justifies the means, any means. they will contort common sense and morality, ethics and responsibility, not to mention the very laws of the land, to achieve their goals.

That is just your opinion! Subjective opinion! Where is your proof?

Saint Paul - there is so much. But you would refuse to admit it even if we spelled it out for you (which this blog has done on many issues.

How about the Plame leak - anyone who was involved would no longer work for the administration...where did that go??

How about WMD to fighting terrorists there instead of here to liberating Iraqis and installing democracy...when we weren't going to do nation building.

There's so much more - but you're not interested...you never were.

This administration baits and switches like the professional con men that they are. Chump.

"Conservative presidents get to pick conservative judges."

So, here's a question for you, Paul.. If it was "proved" that Bush didn't really win the election, that the entire election was rigged (not by Bush, but by psycho republicans) and Bush was NOT the "duely elected president of the United States".. Would you call for the removal of those judges appointed by him? (and so you don't wet yourself, I would fully support removing -any- judges put up by -any- president that was found to have -not- be duely elected.. This isn't a partisan question, though I'm sure you'll try to spin it into a partisan context)..

Ok, here is some Ha Ha's and ho ho ho's from late night humor.

"I was coming to work this morning, and they're playing Christmas music on the radio, and they were playing that song, "He knows when you've been sleeping, he knows when you're awake, he knows when you've been bad or good ..." So apparently Santa works for the National Security Agency." --Jay Leno

"President Bush is trying to put the best spin he can on this eavesdropping scandal, like he said today: "This proves we have a government that listens to the people." --Jay Leno

"Over the weekend, Vice President Dick Cheney made a surprise visit to Iraq, it was yesterday. Cheney was there, and he gave the troops one of his warm holiday sneers. And if you think about it, when you're at war in some far off corner of the world, what better than a visit from a guy who got five draft deferments? Iraqi officials met with Dick Cheney, or as they call him over there, Lawrence of Arythmi." --David Letterman

Where is your proof? With the WMD's

Concerned Citizen,
That is great news! So happy for you!

hey, my group could use a donation too. i need 650 dollars to put an ad on the local transit bus advertising 911 truth. lol

Where is your proof?

YOU are my proof Paul, you asshole.

YOU are living proof, and those brainless twits like you who think they are following ANYTHING that is either conservative or liberal!!!!

When there is foolish bigots as clueless as you afoot, who have completely disregarded the law and become neoliberals without knowing it, that's proof in itself!

You are an idiot- and enabled this destruction of the constitution. Now we're going to dissolve the whole thing and start over.

Doug E.

Paul #47

Look Here and here and here here's a good one yet another or here another one this is a good one ok - enough

A search of "bush breaks law" yielded 623,000 hits - about 60% of which were directly related to bush and his breaking or stretching the law.

oh, Paulie (#47).... haven't you been keeping up with the latest revelation that Bush admitted to breaking the law he was sworn to uphold? i am referring directly to his nationally televised speech of only a few days ago in which he admitted to bypassing the law (FISA) of the land, with no checks or balances against his unlimited power from other branches of government (violating the very structure of our government as mandated in the Constitution), and said he would continue to violate that law as often as he chose?

what part of CONFESSION TO A CRIME on national television does not look like "evidence" to you?

regarding your other statement --- thanks for stating the obvious: "who ever is president gets to pick the judges". duh.

WHY each president selects a specific person to be a judge was my point. is it to further the ideals of the Constitution? promote an ideology and direct the future course of the country (as is the right of the one in office, checked and balanced by Congress)? or can it also --- hold onto your hat here --- be an opportunity to put your most loyal friends in high places to ensure that no one will ever be able to get to you, or to anyone on your ideological payroll, for the next three to four decades, even after you and cronies are long gone?

history is written by the victors, i think the saying goes. in my rampant speculation above, for which "proof" is not technically required, i posit the last option as being of the highest priority to Bush. that's my own opinion. there is no way to "prove" the internal thought process of any human being, so it is by definition something for which there is no proof.

the pendulum swings, back and forth. the reason the FISA law had to be passed in the first place was because another enterprising president with a less than stellar moral compass decided he had to lie, cheat, steal and trample on the rights of his fellow Americans --- for their own (his) good.

Bush apologists, many of whom i'm sure attacked Clinton for violating that oft-repeated meme "the rule of law", seem to be mired in hypocrisy. there is no defense for a President to violate the Constitution in word or spirit.

(for the record, i thought what Clinton did was awful and egregious, but somehow perjury on a personal matter does not rise to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors" in the same way that flagrant violation of the rights of an entire nation does. IMHO)

Des

Well said!

Okay, my apologies if this has already been posted, but I received it in email today and it's just TOO GOOD not to share. (In fact, this is one time I wish I could start a headline)

I'm not Christian but I celebrate the holiday with my family for cultural reasons. I'll be in Alabama tomorrow, in Virginia next week, and back in Alabama some time after that - not much time to check in here. So, in case I don't make it back before then - may I say that I hope all of you are safe and warm and far from need and hunger during this holiday season.

Merry Christmas to all of you..and a Merry Solstice...and to Bill O'Reilly and the Fox News gang - HAPPY FREAKIN HOLIDAYS!!!

*****

The Grinch factor
by Rosa Brooks

December 16, 2005

THE WHOS down in Who-ville

Were a tolerant lot:

Who Christians, Who Muslims - a Who melting pot.
Who Hindus! Who atheists! Who Buddhists, Who Jews!

Who Confucians, Who pagans,

And even Who Druze! The Who 1st Amendment's Establishment Clause

Said, "No creches in courts," and the Whos loved their laws.

Because somehow . they worked. The Whos rarely fought,
Mostly, each Who did just what he ought.

Every Who down in Who-ville

Loved the Consti-Who-tion a lot.

But the O'Reilly, who lived up in Fox-ville,

Did NOT!

The O'Reilly DETESTED the Who Consti-Who-tion,

He thought it was some sort of liberal pollution.

Now, please don't ask why, for I really don't know.

Perhaps it had something to do with his show.

It could be that his head wasn't screwed on quite right.

Or it could be, perhaps, that his shoes were too tight.

But I think that the most likely reason of all

May have been that his RATINGS

Were two sizes too small.

Well, whatever it was, bad ratings or tight shoes,

He stood there one Christmas, just hating the Whos.

"They're so multicultural," he sneered, "and wherever they're from,

They lack the good sense to just launch a pogrom!

There's no Who ethnic cleansing, no Who Inquisition,

If this PEACE can't be stopped, I may lose my position.

Those sensitive, tolerant Whos! It's quite grating.

I must think of something to fix my show's ratings!"

Then he said with a smirk, "I know just what to do

To destroy all the joy in the land of the Who!

I think I can end that PC Who peace.

This year, not one Who will enjoy his Roast Beast!

"Here's just how I'll do it:

I'll tell each Who Christian

That the liberal Whos have devised a new mission

To take away Christmas!

To mock and destroy

Till no little Who Christian is left with a toy!

And when secular Whos - most likely Who Jews -
"

Attempt to deny it? Why,

I'll just SPIN THE NEWS!

"I'll bluff and I'll lie; I'll sow seeds of mistrust.

Soon they'll form battle lines into

Who 'THEM' and Who 'US,'

Based on which Whos prefer

To sing out, 'Merry Christmas'

And which Whos say, 'Kwanzaa!'

Or 'None of your business!'

"They'll get so confused and so MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD

That they won't even notice the way

They've been HAD!

They'll be so busy squabbling

They won't notice the war!

They won't care if Who rich

Start to trample Who poor!

"Forget torture, and terror, and taxes, and health!

They'll waste all their time on some red-hatted elf.

"And the Who Consti-Who-tion?

They'll stretch it or burn it!

If it came as a gift, they would try to return it!

"The Who Christians will think that they fight the good fight,

They won't know that they're puppets of the Fox-ville Far Right.

They'll forget all that DRIVEL about faith, hope and LOVE

And say 'Merry Christmas' with a sneer and a shove.

"But I? I will prosper! My ratings will soar,

And maybe at last they'll forget I'm a BOOR.

Then for every Who Christmas tree

A most fitting adornament:

My O'Reilly MUG on the tackiest ornament!"

-
. And what happened then?
Well, the rest's up to you.

But I know what I'd like this holiday season:

A little less NOISE and a little more reason.

So Who Christians! Who Buddhists! Who Muslims! Who Jews!

WHOever you are, just say NO to Fox "News!"

If you don't want to lose the whole Who Consti-Who-tion

It's time to reject the Far Right Revolution.

So turn off O'Reilly and everyone shrill,

Let's have some peace

And old-fashioned GOODWILL.

Wow...that was long.

I sowwy *sheepish grin*

But I swear, it was a good use of bandwidth!!

This is what pisses me off about the MSM: They just hold fucking microphones up to Republicans, and let them say, "Yes, we're the party who's trying to cut the deficit", and the fucking reporters don't say, "Aren't YOU the party that squandered a several-hundred-billion-dollar SURPLUS?", or the reporters hold a mic up for them to say, "See? We're tightening our belts!", but the reporter doesn't say, "Are there billions of dollars of tax cuts for the rich in this budget that's cutting medicare/medicaid/college grants?"

The MSM stinks on ice. THEY SUCK! They just hold microphones in front of Republicans.

When are they going to start a real news channel on TV? I just can't believe there's not one yet!

I was unemployed for about a year and a half. Before that, I was not in tune at all to how the news stinks and is controlled by Corporate America. And Corporate America and the GOP are interchangable, I realized.

I am 100% convinced by the facts that DIEBOLD and electronic voting machine companies are in bed with the GOP, and they stole the last 2 presidential elections, and we don't have a democracy in America. We're being run by Corporate America/GOP. And they are the minority.

I had the time, so I examined literally a hundred different internet news sites, TV news, and radio. I think the best news sites on the internet are raw story and brad blog. The best newspaper is American Free Press, because they don't suppress news, although I think they are conservative (?). And there's a site called rbnlive, that has lots of good articles, I think they are conservative as well. One thing I realized, is that these Republican freaks in power are not conservative. I don't consider myself a conservative. But good, unsuppressed news is great.

I think the Democrats stink less than the Republicans, and I think we need a 3rd party. I'm thinking of joining the Green Party, actually. But I respect the Libertarians, because they are truely conservative, not these freaks who took over the GOP (the neo-cons). I have great respect for both Cobb of the Green Party and Bednarik of the Libertarian. I don't think either of them are pulling any punches like the majority of both Republicans and Democrats.

I also want to know why Cobb, Bednarik, and Nader aren't allowed in the presidential debates. I heard that Corporate America pays for and sponsors the presidential debates, that's why. And Cobb, Bednarik, and Nader would talk about issues that Americans are concerned about, not gay marriage.

big dan #60:

About the best news outlets I've found - beyond those you've mentioned - are The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.

Strange thing is they are on Comedy Central - go figure!

Here's a good topic for discussion:

What is a conservative?

What is a liberal?

They used to call politicians who spent and spent "liberals". But the so-called conservatives/Republicans turned a surplus into a deficit and are spending more than any regime in American history. Conservatives were against pre-emptive strikes, and were for a defensive army only.

So, who are these guys running the Republican party? Are they liberals because liberals were once known as the free spenders and pre-emptive strikers.

And all of these idiots who back the Republicans, let's ask them "What is a conservative?" and "What is a liberal?" And let's ask them, which "liberal" idea they want to get rid of: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, or air bags in cars???

bluebear: It's true, the Daily Show and Colbert Report are the best news on TV. Ever notice, rightwingers have no sense of humor? It's a fact that humor takes intelligence.

OT

Great Diebold news at the top of the blog!

Big Dan #64

LOL, It's the truth!

Time for a joke.

3 guys were golfing and a funeral procession drove by along the fairway. In the middle of his swing, Joe stopped, and removed his hat placing it on his heart in silence. One of the golfers whispered to the other, "Look at Joe, did you know he was that religious? Who's funeral is that?" The other golfer whispered back, "It's his wife's funeral."

Off topic, but this is an open thread.

It just came out that Chalabi is claiming election fraud in Iraq. His coalition obtained exactly .36% of the vote. That's not a misprint. He got barely over 1/3 of one percent, and he says he was cheated.

THAT'S A CONSPIRACY THEORY FOR YOU.

I loved the Who-ville poem.
I have wondered what conservative and liberal mean also. I think most people are in the middle. Moderate. What do conservatives conserve? Not the environment, money or national resources. Doesn't liberal mean generous? It is an interesting question. Social security, medicare,public education are all "liberal" programs. Doesn't most of America benefit from these programs?

Why would the BCFOL commit felonies (Snoopgate) and treason (Plamegate)? There are two very good reasons. They are stupid and they are arrogant. The combination is very dangerous. They won't resign like Nixon & Co. Even if they lose Congress in 2006, they will go out kicking and screaming and maybe something worse.

I believe that one year from now we will look back at 2005 and think that it was mild in comparison to 2005. Buckle up and hold on!

Big Dan:

Like I said they're all neoliberals.....especially the democrats of the DLC.

Conservative? Hardly. Sununu is a conservative and Reid and so on. The rest are all fakes spending so liberally they should be thrown in jail.

Doug E

Big Dan #63

Good question. My first impression is "urban myth". The terms "conservative" and "liberal" have taken on a religious, mythical air. I think that was caused, in substantial part, by the infusion of the religious movements into politics.

The ranks of the religious scholar and preacher do not hold themselves to intellectual honesty the way scholars from other disciplines tend to. There are exceptions to the rule, but by-and-large it is so.

And so we have had people throwing the terms around loosely and now they really have no meaning. Neither do the political parties ... I mean in absolute definitive terms. There are "democrats" who believe in the "republican" party platform or who support Bush to the hilt.

So my conclusion is that these group notions are really just devices to instill group think into the equation. The better solution is to deal with issues on the merits of that issue, instead of asking what does group x think about it, then adopt the position of group x. There may be times when we can not research an issue, and have to go with a group. I think that should be used sparingly, because it leads to group think otherwise.

Truth Seeker #70

What in the world could make us look back at 2005 from say 2006 and think 2005 was a good year for the United States?

Bush made a comment about "martial law" a while back which was made in the context of the discussion of the possibility of a bird flu pandemic.

When the NSA/President spy on America program came up, I began to "connect the dots".

I think the NSA has probably been used to prepare for martial law.

Who wants to bet that the Pentagon has a huge martial law plan written up and printed in manuals, or on hard drives somewhere? Ready to use.

They have probably been using "terrorist attack" scenarios to begin the practice makes perfect phase of implementation. We see these from time to time in our cities.

And notice how many military looking squads they have, and can bring them out in an instant. Unless it is to help hurrican victims. These "SWAT" and other quasi military squads are injected into police forces and keep up on training.

Seriously, I do not at all put it past them. So, your words got me to thinking ... what would happen if martial law were invoked in 2006 near the time of the elections?

One of the mantra talking points of the neoCons is that they want judges who will "interpret" the law rather than make the law up for themselves by wayward interpretation.

Now they interpret the authorization to use force if necessary, outside the US, as authority to use the NSA to spy on Americans. Will they ask a judge to interpret it that way and still maintain the ruse that they want judges who do not do that?

One of the main shakers and movers at the time that legislation was drawn up says it did not at all say what the admin says it says.

Actually the admin requested that power at the last minute, but it was specifically rejected (link here).

The lovely Des

> i am referring directly to his nationally televised speech of only a few days ago in which he admitted to bypassing the law (FISA) of the land, with no checks or balances against his unlimited power from other branches of government (violating the very structure of our government as mandated in the Constitution), and said he would continue to violate that law as often as he chose?

I do not think that Bush actually said those exact words. I also do not think it has been proven he broke the law. Many legal experts have said he has that right and Clinton did the same. If the laws are vague, then lets make the laws not vague.

> is it to further the ideals of the Constitution?

Bush is a "strict constructionist" of the US Constitution and so am I. He is doing what he said he would do. The Right wanted someone other than Miers because we wanted a proven conservative and I was actually looking for another Clarence Thomas "fight." I wanted him to pick an African-American female. I wanted to expose the Democrats as the new plantation owners. It is refreshing when you hear an African-American say they left the Democrat plantation years ago.

Here are some of what liberals on this blog have been saying -

1. The war is for Halliburton

2. Delay is guilty

3. Frist is guilty

4. Bush stole the election

5. Bush lied about WMDs

6. All Republicans are corrupt and immoral

7. Cheney is evil

8. The war is about oil

9. A search of "bush breaks law" yielded 623,000 hits

#1 Has not been proven
#2 Has not been proven
#3 Has not been proven
#4 Has not been proven
#5 WMDs was only part of going to war and I do not see the proof he lied
#6 Not true
#7 Has not been proven
#8 Has not been proven
#9 So what!

But, if you want to believe all of these things, then you certainly have the right too. Impeachment is what the Bush haters want and eveything for them is wishful thinking at this point. They continue to look for that one thing that will impeach Bush and this is the latest.

#1 Halliburton got the contract under Clinton and can only make 2% profit. It is not proofitable for them and they are trying to sell the contract - no buyers! Why no buyers? Not proofitable.

#8 If the war costs $200 billion, it would take 10 years for Iraq to produce $200 billion in oil.

#9 There are thousands of Bush haters with webpages and/or who visit Bush hating blogs.

Sorry about the length. More of this article on the AP.

Iraqis March, Say Elections Were Rigged
By SINAN SALAHEDDIN, Associated Press Writer

1 hour ago
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Large demonstrations broke out across the country Friday to denounce parliamentary elections that protesters say were rigged in favor of the main religious Shiite coalition. Also, the U.S. military said two soldiers were killed when their vehicle struck a roadside bomb in Baghdad on Friday.

No other details were released. At least 2,163 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.

Meanwhile, two Arab satellite television channels said that a Sudanese diplomat and five of his countrymen had been kidnapped in Iraq, and a Sudan Foreign Ministry spokesman appealed for their release.

Al-Jazeera's Web site reported the kidnappings but did not give details about where and when the six nationals were seized.

Several hundred thousand people demonstrated after noon prayers in southern Baghdad Friday, many carrying banners decrying last week's elections. Many Iraqis outside the religious Shiite coalition allege that the elections were unfair to smaller Sunni Arab and secular Shiite groups.

"We refuse the cheating and forgery in the elections," one banner read.

> At least 2,163 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.

America would lose 200-300 planes a night and 600 men during WWII and Germany never attacked us.

Some single battles saw thousands of men killed.

Then we rebuilt Germany.

"us"? You were in WWII? My Dad was. You are correct, it was by all accounts horrible.

Every number has a name and a family. My heart goes out to the families who are getting the Christmas news that their loved one died today. I have been in their place (Viet Nam).
We got the sad news just after new years day. I offer tears for them and prayers for the world.

I put the article above up as a current event. I invite you to make of it what you wish.

#55
> ...bluebear2 said on 12/22/2005 @ 2:59pm PT...
> Paul #47
> Look Here and here and here here's a good one yet another or here another one this is a good one ok - enough

Again, leftist bogus websites that prove nothing. Our soldiers have found some chemical weapons when one of the webpages you pointed out said "not a drop of any chemical weapons has been found anywhere in Iraq."

Global Warming and the Kyoto Agreement is bogus!

Not curbing small arms is pro-US Constitution thank you very much.

Results of the repug "Faith Based Abstinence Only" sex education. Red state vs blue state.

The girls are better looking in the red states than in the blue states - LOL

> Every number has a name and a family. My heart goes out to the families who are getting the Christmas news that their loved one died today

One of my grandmothers died yesterday.

One soldier came home from Iraq recently and his wife's teenage boyfriend shot him with his wife's help.

If you compared that chart to education dollars spent per student, it would be pretty close to the same I bet

Paul #76

Your entire post has not been proven. Link to posts here that support your assertion, and I will link to posts here that controvert your assertion.

The cherry picking behavior you display here over and over discredits your argument. So it is dull, not sharp, noisy, not musical.

In the absence of that all I can say is you enjoy the clutter you provide us more than we enjoy it.

But whatever, this is the season of joy and I would not want to take away from your joy. I would, however, enjoy more intellectual honesty from you.

Paul #76

I see you are still trying to use the argument that "Clinton did it too" did you not check out my link here? There is a difference and that difference is the basis of the uproar and the reason that what Bush has done is illegal!!!!!!!!!!

Paul and Rick's Historic Election

"As many as 20,000 people demonstrated after noon prayers in southern Baghdad Friday in a protest organized by Sunni Arab groups and attended by representatives of secular Shia parties."

"Sheik Mahmoud al-Sumaidaei of the Association of Muslim Scholars, a major Sunni clerical group, told followers during Friday prayers at Baghdad's Umm al-Qura mosque that they were "living a conspiracy built on lies and forgery.""

#85
> Your entire post has not been proven. Link to posts here that support your assertion, and I will link to posts here that controvert your assertion.

I do not have to link to posts that support my assertion. Has Delay been proven guilty? Frist? Cheney? Bush? Only when they are proven guilty will they be proven guilty. Remember, if Bush is impeached, you get Cheney as your president! Be careful what you wish for!

> In the absence of that all I can say is you enjoy the clutter you provide us more than we enjoy it.

I do love jacking with you guys! It is so easy!
I could really have some outrageous fun with you kooks but I'd be banned.

> and I would not want to take away from your joy.

I am full of joy. It is you guys who are joyless.

> I would, however, enjoy more intellectual honesty from you

It's common sense sweetness! Again, I don't need some internetr link to prove what I believe.

BlueBear #87

Thanks for bringing up that election. Ricky may stop pouting for awhile now.

Paul #88

You are becoming Paul and Pauler.

Thanks Dreddhead!

I preferred Wayne's World!

#63 Big Dan A few of the Neocons were dems. Many had connections to Henry "Scoop" Jackson, Senator from Washington State, a democrat hawk. They switched parties but the R's weren't as radical as they wished, so they became NeoConservatives. I have posted this info before and still believe the majority of people calling themselves Republican are clueless that their party has been hijacked. They would be wise to do their homework. I also think that is part of The Program, to keep the people in a constant state of confusion...up is down, white is black, etc., not to mention the 'wedge' issues being thrown at us on a daily basis, ie: "War on Christmas". One must be very focused and grounded to keep the Truth in the forefront. I do not see in black and white, how simple would that be, imo everything is grey, and I have to work real hard at keeping everything in perspective. M4

Paul #88 said:

"I don't need some internetr link to prove what I believe."

Paul has also said: "It's only a lie if you believe it's a lie"

Paul seems content to create his own reality.

Condolences on your Grandma. Rejoice in the gift of her life and her time with you.
I trust she lived a long and relatively healthy life. I am assuming she was not snuffed out in the peak of life, in a foreign land. She did not lay in a pool of blood and dirt crying out in pain and agony, surrounded by strangers as her young life ebbed away. I hope she never had to trade any of her children for a flag draped coffin and a lifetime of regret and loss. My prayers are with these families. As I said, I know their pain.
"Also, the U.S. military said two soldiers were killed when their vehicle struck a roadside bomb in Baghdad on Friday."

Paul: Germany never attacked us, but we fought them, defeated them, then rebuilt their country. So far, so good.

Paul's (Apparent) Point: Even though Iraq never attacked us, we're fighting them, will defeat them, then rebuild their country. This creates a moral equivalency with World War II. Uh, no.

Facts: Germany attacked several of our allies... England, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Norway, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg, and Soviet Russia (yes, they were our ally when Germany invaded).

Iraq attacked no ally of the United States.

We invaded Iraq, but they weren't our enemy at the time. Germany was our enemy; we declared war on them the day after declaring war on Japan.

When the German army surrendered, that constituted victory (V-E Day). There is no way to defeat Iraq and claim victory, because we aren't at war with Iraq. In fact, there's no way to determine what victory is in Iraq, or when we've achieved it.

We should rebuild Iraq as a matter of honor. But the American people were told that oil revenues would suffice to pay the bill. Those oil revenues have gone somewhere...pnly Allah knows where.

Fact: There is no moral equivalency whatsoever between World War II and our invasion of Iraq.

Another loss of liberty

"Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place"

"One state representative said it resembles Gestapo-style tactics of government, and there could be changes coming on the streets of Ohio's small towns and big cities.

The Ohio Patriot Act has made it to the Taft's desk, and with the stroke of a pen, it would most likely become the toughest terrorism bill in the country. The lengthy piece of legislation would let police arrest people in public places who will not give their names, address and birth dates, even if they are not doing anything wrong."

Paul #89

You said "Thanks Dreddhead"

You are welcome.

Have a Merry Christmas!

One more for Saint Paul #47

http://mediachannel.org/blog/node/2500

On domestic surveillance:
"So now we really see what it's come to. The law is just a nuisance to these people. They don't feel like "marshaling arguments" or doing the "paperwork" that the law requires – the law, mind you, that was written to protect people's civil liberties, and the arguments/paperwork that are specifically required to make sure there is a check on Presidents whose henchmen are conducting surveillance operations on political enemies (ie. civil rights, anti-war, environmental, animal cruelty, and poverty relief groups).

#94

Good points!

We are in a war against terrorists and Iraq was a good second place to start. It helped change Lybia's terrorist ideology. It will influence others like Iran.

You also have to remember that Iraq invaded our ally Kuwait. Part of ending that war was an agreed resolution. A resolution that Saddam ignored which caused the UN to keep creating more resolutions. Something like 17 of them. I would have been all for Clinton attacking Iraq because they broke these resolutions. He only sent a few missiles. He was never serious about it. Those ignored resolutions alone is justification in attacking Iraq and removing Saddam from power.

We are technically still at war with N. Korea.

Personally, I wanted the US to hit 6 terrorists hotspots in 6 countries the very first night of the War on Terrorism. Now that would have been a war on terrorism.

I will predict that Israel will attack Iran’s nuclear capabilities as soon as it is warranted. Israel will not put up with the crap!

Many folks are unhappy about the war because they want us to be even more aggressive.

The question for the kooks is - Do you guys believe we are in a war against terrorists?

Paul #98

You said "Those ignored [UN] resolutions alone is justification in attacking Iraq and removing Saddam from power."

In your mind perhaps, but not in international or American law. Otherwise bu$hit, your fuhrer, would not have asked congress for that right.

The UN denied the US the right to invade Iraq. It was the republican controlled congress that voted to give the president military power should all the other options fail.

He failed all other options and decided to make Iraq the home and training ground of al Queda and other terrorists groups. Now the terrorists are getting stronger and stronger. Thanks neoCons.

Now they have the unending war they can use to scare the "willing" into compliance.

I am not scared so I am not complying. Down with the fascists in '06 Paul and Pauler.

I believe we are in a war with a country which had no terrorists, although the gov. was very represive.
Since then that country has been a hot bed of terrorists moving in on the chaos we have created.

I believe the anger against us, which has been fostered by our occupation, will fuel the terrorist movements for years to come.

I believe we went to war on lies and falsehoods.

I believe there is no good way out of this mess.

I believe Iraq is on the verge of civil war.

I believe Iraq is also on the verge of a Holy war.

I believe the US is being driven down a road to ruin.

Merry Christmas Paul!

> In your mind perhaps, but not in international or American law. Otherwise bu$hit, your fuhrer, would not have asked congress for that right.

Clinton did it without UN support - without international law. He sent 1000 missiles I think.
Did you call for his impeachment? Please tell me you did. What about Kosovo? Without UN support again. Did you call for his impeachment then? Please tell me you did.

The UN did give us the right to invade - grave consequences.

I do not think they thought that we would and we have since found out they were in bed with Saddam.

I live in the United States - I want my president and my congress to determine whether we go to war or not, not some international incompetent UN irrelevant body. That is constitutional my friend!

We didn't need a world body to tell us to break away from England. Only about 1/3 wanted independence by the way. 10,000 folks fled to Shelburne, Nova Scotia. After the war, the rich went back to England while the rest had to go back to New York. Shelburne is now a tiny town.

I want to live in a country where our leaders and our people make the decisions to protect ourselves! I will win that argument any day with the America people my sweet dreddlock friend.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to the 6 or 7 and everyone else.

And personaly to Concerned Citizen who has one of the best Christmas gifts.

Time to go home and internet down at home right now - see ya tuesday.

#100
> Since then that country has been a hot bed of terrorists moving in on the chaos we have created.

Good place to kill them all!

> I believe Iraq is on the verge of civil war.
> I believe Iraq is also on the verge of a Holy war.

My father-in-law has told me that the Arab world and/or Muslin world is very upset at the Sunni's. The Sunni's are killing Muslims and Arabs in all of these bomb attacks. He said when the US leaves, they are going to come down on the Sunni's in all Arab/Muslim countries. So, you may be right about that.

I believe the children are our are future
Teach them well and let them lead the way
Show them all the beauty they possess inside
Give them a sense of pride to make it easier
Let the children's laughter remind us how we used

> Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to the 6 or 7

Merry Christmas to you 6 or 7 too.

You guys could almost start a commune!

For Paul: We are in a war against terrorism in the same sense that we're in a war against cancer, or a war against hurricanes, or a war against murder. These are all bad things, certainly, just as terrorism is bad and Saddam Hussein was bad.

But there's no beginning or end to such wars. We aren't going to end terrorism whether we stay in Iraq for six months, six years. or six centuries. Terrorism is a TACTIC, not a definable enemy. At best it can be controlled, never defeated...and military action merely exacerbates it, by making the terrorists feel more oppressed and victimized. Proof of the pudding is that terrorism in Iraq has multiplied exponentially since we invaded there.

Terrorism is a RESPONSE to oppression. We're treating it as the primary oppressive force. A good way to look at our dilemma is to follow Ronald Reagan's example. Reagan said government can't be the answer to problems because government IS THE PROBLEM. I don't agree completely, but he did have a point...the harder government tries to remedy social ills, the worse they become. At some point government has to step away.

Likewise, the longer we stay in Iraq, the more terrorism we will engender. All the neo-con rhetoric in the world can't change that fact. We can't fix the problem there, BECAUSE WE ARE THE PROBLEM.

Saint Paul...you are entirely wrong about Kosovo.

Colin Powell (active General at the time) told NATO that the US would not contemplate military intervention in the Bosnian-Serbian conflict without UN approval, on April 27, 1993. At the same meeting NATO said that if intervention was to be used, there needed to be clear political objectives. The first American soldiers arrived in Macedonia on 10th June as part of a NATO-UN security force designed to protect safe areas for Bosnian Muslims, and to prevent conflict from spilling beyond currently embattled territories. The UNPROFOR (United Nations Protection Force) was highly critical of NATO’s unwillingness to act directly and emphatically in the Bosnian conflict, when it was clear that there was a flagrant humanitarian crisis, including “ethnic cleansing” – genocide. Thus, there was strong international pressure for US and NATO intervention. The Dayton peace accords were signed on December 14th, 1995, and by the end of 1996, a NATO stabilization force of approximately 30,000 troops remained, with some 5,000 Americans. Clinton took into consideration that keeping troops in the region may negatively affect his re-election campaign and yet chose to keep them there alongside the other NATO troops. These troops were not fighting insurgents or trying to gain territory. They were a peacekeeping force.

In June of 1998, when it was clear that Slobodan Milosevic was going to continue his ethnic cleansing mission against Albanians Muslims in Kosovo, NATO resolved to intervene against the Serbian government. This was transparent. The US (as a part of the NATO body) agreed to support this mission, and announced its intentions to do so in August. It should also be noted that there was considerable debate within NATO about intervention, and that intervention was strictly because of the humanitarian crisis being placed upon the Albanian population in Kosovo. NATO did not support the Kosovo rebels in their desire to separate from Serbia, and feared that their intervention would promote such a separation. It was because of such debate, and the desire for diplomacy to win over military strikes, that it took until March of 1999 for the US and NATO to be decisive about military action, and only because the Serbian government refused all international pressure to sign a peace treaty with the Kosovars, and has amassed 40,000 troops in Kosovo after the Kosovars had signed a peace treaty which included non-separation from the Serbian state. In all of this, President Clinton was transparent with the American people, and had the full support of the international community (with the exception of Serbian ally, Russia – and even Russia objected to Serbia’s actions, they just didn’t want to set precedent for breakaway regions) and the NATO alliance. If anything, the impeachment hearings allowed president Clinton less political maneuverability than he would otherwise have had, precisely because he knew his motives would be questioned – and yet military action was a joint NATO decision. Clinton then faced criticism for not acting swiftly enough to avert the humanitarian crisis. It was a no win situation for Clinton – in his words “I was left with a bunch of bad choices.”

THE POINT IS: Bill Clinton never lied about Kosovo. He lied about Monica Lewinsky. And that didn’t cause anyone’s death. The stark differences between Clinton’s war and Bush’s war are numerous. Clinton exhausted diplomacy; Bush didn’t. Clinton had full allied and international support; Bush didn’t. Clinton had effective intelligence, had precise objectives, met them, and left; Bush didn’t. Clinton was transparent from the start that his objective was humanitarian; Bush lied to get us into war based in conjured specters of WMD, then when they didn’t materialize he claimed that the mission was for “liberation.” Clinton had no need to deflect his impeachment hearings with a military conflict, he wasn’t up for re-election; Bush was. The Balkans have no OIL; Iraq does.

The spy on Americans beat goes on.

There has been ethnic spying (link here), massive spying (link here), all of which is stupid spying, which is engendering some lawsuits against the regime (link here).

Dredd #74

Exactly! And 2007 could be worse again unless we get an accurate count of the votes in 2006. I vote only by absentee ballot and I urge all others to do the same.

I wonder...

Does anyone think Dennis Hastert will be mentioned in connection with the Abramoff probe?

This is a cute satire from www.theonion.com. :0)

Rove Implicated In Santa Identity Leak

December 21, 2005 Issue 41•51

WASHINGTON, DC—The recent leak revealing Santa Claus to be "your mommy and daddy" has been linked to President Bush's senior political adviser and deputy chief of staff Karl Rove....

This is also amusing:
December 9, 2005

Bush wounded in War on Christmas

By John Breneman

President Bush continued to draw fire today from enraged Christian extremists who see him as the latest enemy combatant in the rapidly escalating War on Christmas.

The president touched off the firefight by sending out a White House communication emblazoned with the incendiary terminology: "Best wishes for a holiday season of hope and happiness."

Bush claimed he received faulty intelligence from his Christmas card team and failed to realize the mere mention of "Happy Holidays" is enough to send some of his biggest supporters into a yuletide rage. Many critics regard the card as a slap in the face of Jesus himself.

Meanwhile, the airwaves are abuzz with the inane debate over whether America is "taking the Christ out of Christmas."

Sources say Bush is working with the Pentagon to draft a new card carrying the preferred wording: "Merry Birth Anniversary of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior who died on the cross for our sins so that we may ascend to the Kingdom of Heaven."

As critics blasted the card for being too "politically correct," a White House insider noted that at least one other version did feature Jesus but was nixed for being too "anatomically correct."

"Karl Rove joked that we should go with 'Peace on Earth'," said the senior official, who asked to remain anonymous for fear that Dick Cheney would strangle him and bury his lifeless body in an undisclosed location.

The Homeland Security Department cautioned citizens that uttering the words "Happy Holidays" may put them at heightened risk of attack by Christian extremists.

In a related story, a Texas man reportedly shot a Mexican for wishing him "Feliz Navidad."

Sources say the president is planning a damage-control press conference later today to wish everyone a "Merry Christmas, especially all our friends in the Muslim world."

Related stories:
Don't Let Them Steal Your Christmas --- RedState.org
Bush's secular greetings raise Christian ire --- The Australian
"Yes Virginia, there is a Christmas war" --- North Country Gazette
Flap Over White House Holiday Card --- CBS News

• 3 Comments
• Permalink: http://www.humorgazette.com/blog/item/251/

What's up with that gray bar floating over Soul Rebel's text at #106?

BB2...I don't see it. Must be special for you. Perhaps its the NSA? Ever wonder about that...like when you're walking past sodium vapor streetlights at night and they all of a sudden shut off when you walk by? ...maybe that was the drugs...

Also, I'm still waiting for Saint Paul to respond to my #106. Guess he knows he got punk'd. Not that it was difficult to do.

Right on Soul Rebel ... he got punk'd.

He should consider himself blessed and move on ... to the good side of the force.

It can happen ....

Soul Rebel #113

Today the bar is gone - strange!

The thing about the lights reminds me of when I was in college - the fun thing to do was kick the lamp post which would interupt the arc and cause the light to go out temporarily. They were mercury vapor back then.
Great fun until the night the lens fell off and busted over my friends head - 8 or 9 stitches as I recall!