Impeach the moron, for real

Thin Line By Tim McGivern

Several weeks ago, President George W. Bush, jackass that he is, stood next to a filing cabinet in Parkersburg, W. Va., that was filled with $1.7 trillion in U.S. Treasury bills belonging to the Social Security trust fund. The staged event went off flawlessly with no tough questions asked, and Bush, following the script, described the cabinet’s contents as “a worthless stack of IOUs.”

With our president making these kinds of boneheaded statements, is it any wonder the U.S. dollar continues to collapse overseas? And if that isn’t bad enough, a lawyer friend e-mailed me suggesting Bush’s photo-op might actually be an impeachable offense. According to U.S. Constitution amendment XIV(4): “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” The amendment intended to punish any elected official who disparaged the credit of the United States. And the president swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, didn’t he?

Justice Sunday: Stopping the Filibuster Against People of Faith

Faith and the filibuster fight By Melissa Rogers

The press release for the event states that certain judicial nominees are being opposed “because they are people of faith and moral conviction.” It labels a broad range of court decisions as “liberal, anti-Christian dogma,” claiming that “activist courts … have been quietly working under the veil of the judiciary, like thieves in the night, to rob us of our Christian heritage and our religious freedoms.” In sum, the release says that “we must stop this unprecedented filibuster of people of faith.”

Thus, according to supporters of this agenda, including one of the foremost leaders in Congress, anyone who has a different view of the Constitution is an advocate of “liberal, anti-Christian dogma.” Anyone who takes a contrary position on Senate rules of procedure is hostile to faith. End of story.

It’s time to tell the truth. [keep reading]

Jack Abramoff

Another chance to learn more about Jack Abramoff, a conservative Republican lobbyist-scoundrel and friend of Tom DeLay’s.

Albuquerque Journal readers should note that only the first half of this article appeared in our paper. mjh

Lobbyist Target of Several Investigations By NANCY BENAC, Associated Press Writer

It was the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994 that brought Abramoff back to Washington, where lobbying firms were looking to strengthen their GOP connections.

Abramoff’s Republican credentials and long ties to Reed and Norquist, head of the conservative Americans for Tax Reform, made him a natural; now, all three are under the microscope of congressional investigators.

Marshall Wittman, a one-time conservative activist who now works for the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, sees Abramoff’s rise and fall as emblematic of what he believes has happened to the conservative movement overall.

“Many other Reagan conservatives came to Washington with the stars of the revolution in their eyes and they ended up with very fat wallets in their back pockets,” he said. “They came to do good and they ended up doing very, very well.”

Truth Teller

mjh’s Dump Bush weBlog: We will continue to fight for the truth.

“Isn’t it true that instead of fixing airline security, port security, mass transportation, local response, and securing loose nukes and biological components, we spent billions on starting a war with Iraq—a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11? And, instead of capturing Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, we captured Saddam Hussein in Iraq with no weapons of mass destruction? Isn’t it true that because of our invasion of Iraq terrorist recruitment for Al Qaeda has soared, making us even less safe than we were before the Iraq war? Remember that we were supposed to go to war in Iraq to eliminate a real threat. Isn’t it true that now because of our foreign policy in Iraq, we have only created a real threat to the world’s security and ours? Isn’t it true that instead of successfully prosecuting Al Qaeda terrorists and bringing them to justice, all we hear about is torturing ‘enemy combatants’ and detaining them indefinitely–a concept far removed from the American ideal of justice? Isn’t it true that instead of opening up government to restore trust and faith, we created the Patriot Act? And, isn’t it true that instead of pursuing alternative energy resources to decrease our dependency on foreign oil, we invaded oil-rich countries and passed no alternative energy legislation in the meantime?

“Why do we accept these choices? Why do we condone a government that uses over-classification to obfuscate such choices? …

“We–the American public–find ourselves adrift and overwhelmed. Pre-occupied with fear, we fail to unearth the truth or understand what choices we should or can make to effectively make our world safer. We are simply told that this is our ‘new norm.’ …

“Alarmingly, we accept all of this in the name of our ‘ongoing fight against the enemy.’ But, with a timeless, faceless, nameless and stateless enemy, when will our ‘fight’ ever end so we can return to our sensibilities and the truth? How can we ever define what success or victory might ever mean? …

“How can we trust a Congress that holds hearings on steroids in baseball and yet does not want to find out why our FAA received 52 warnings about hijackings in the summer of 2001? … How do we trust a Congress willing to work through a Sunday night on the Shiavo debate yet unwilling to hold public hearings on the ‘dead wrong’ intelligence that brought us to war in Iraq? …

“We will continue to fight for the truth. … And, respectfully, our hope is that in future years this award might be rendered obsolete. Simply because there will be no need to bestow an award or any special status onto a truth-seeker because truth-seekers will have become our new norm.” — Kristin Breitweiser, accepting one of the second-annual Ron Ridenhour Awards [read her whole speech]

We will continue to fight for the truth.

The Nation | Blog | The Daily Outrage | Ari Berman

Kristin Breitweiser found herself widowed at age thirty when her husband Ron died at Tower Two of the World Trade Center on September 11. Along with four other widows (nicknamed the “Jersey Girls”), Breitweiser fought tirelessly for the 9/11 Commission, in spite of initial opposition from President Bush, whom she voted for in 2000. Below is a transcript of her remarks on April 19, 2005, a clear-headed, compelling and scathing indictment of how the Bush Administration has changed our post-9/11 world for the worse.
—–
“I am honored to accept the Ridenhour Truth Award and I accept it on behalf of all men, women and children who have sought Truth in their lives, including the four women—Mindy Kleinberg, Lorie Van Auken, Patty Casazza, and Monica Gabrielle–who fought along with me to seek the truth about 9/11. I am humbled by the ceremony of this award, and I accept it also in honor of my late husband, Ron Breitweiser.

In the past three years I have spent a lot of time talking about being a 9/11 widow and a victim’s advocate for intelligence community reforms. I appeared frequently in the print and televised media discussing my transformation from a stay-at-home mom whose specialty it was to design children’s gardens to a victim’s rights advocate whose specialty has become national security. My transformation was urgent, drastic and not chosen by me. But, I no longer want to talk about my transformation. Instead, I want to talk about my country’s post-9/11 transformation. A transformation unlike mine in that it was systematically and deliberately chosen.

Where are we today? Are the democratic principles that Osama Bin Laden tried to destroy on 9/11 still safely intact? Do nations around the world still respect and admire Americans? Are we still ‘all Americans’ like we were in the immediate wake of September 11th when almost every country in the world declared their solidarity with us? Or have we squandered that worldwide good will, faith and common purpose to fight terrorism? Have we learned any lessons since 9/11? And, most importantly, have our country’s choices made us any safer than we were pre-9/11?

Isn’t it true that instead of fixing airline security, port security, mass transportation, local response, and securing loose nukes and biological components, we spent billions on starting a war with Iraq—a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11? And, instead of capturing Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, we captured Saddam Hussein in Iraq with no weapons of mass destruction? Isn’t it true that because of our invasion of Iraq terrorist recruitment for Al Qaeda has soared, making us even less safe than we were before the Iraq war? Remember that we were supposed to go to war in Iraq to eliminate a real threat. Isn’t it true that now because of our foreign policy in Iraq, we have only created a real threat to the world’s security and ours? Isn’t it true that instead of successfully prosecuting Al Qaeda terrorists and bringing them to justice, all we hear about is torturing ‘enemy combatants’ and detaining them indefinitely–a concept far removed from the American ideal of justice? Isn’t it true that instead of opening up government to restore trust and faith, we created the Patriot Act? And, isn’t it true that instead of pursuing alternative energy resources to decrease our dependency on foreign oil, we invaded oil-rich countries and passed no alternative energy legislation in the meantime?

Why do we accept these choices? Why do we condone a government that uses over-classification to obfuscate such choices? We ask questions, and they give us answers and explanations that are just stylized sound bites and catch phrases (taking the fight to the enemy; tracking every terrorist down and bringing them to justice; being with us or against us)? How do such over-simplified answers adequately explain our very complex reality? None of these phrases are ever defined. We just repeat these mantras over and over again, not knowing what they really mean—not realizing that they fail to answer or justify any of our nation’s drastic actions and decisions since 9/11–chosen actions and decisions that have actually made us less safe from terrorists.

We–the American public–find ourselves adrift and overwhelmed. Pre-occupied with fear, we fail to unearth the truth or understand what choices we should or can make to effectively make our world safer. We are simply told that this is our ‘new norm.’ Our government parodies our search for truth by churning out report upon report and conclusion after conclusion—none of which ever gets acted upon.

Alarmingly, we accept all of this in the name of our ‘ongoing fight against the enemy.’ But, with a timeless, faceless, nameless and stateless enemy, when will our ‘fight’ ever end so we can return to our sensibilities and the truth? How can we ever define what success or victory might ever mean? Don’t we need the trust and cooperation of the world to effectively contain terrorism? How are we to really know if our government’s choices taken since 9/11–in the name of ‘national security’– are truly worth it and, in fact, making us any safer? Simply because our government tells us to trust them?

How can we trust a Congress that holds hearings on steroids in baseball and yet does not want to find out why our FAA received 52 warnings about hijackings in the summer of 2001? How do we trust a Congress that is so reluctant to address immigration issues that we have exasperated vigilantes on the southern border taking matters into their own hands–too frustrated to wait for Congress to do its job? How do we trust a Congress willing to work through a Sunday night on the Shiavo debate yet unwilling to hold public hearings on the ‘dead wrong’ intelligence that brought us to war in Iraq?

If we can be on a red alert for a dirty-bomb, why can’t we choose to be on a red-alert for our dire need to invest in alternative energy resources so as to become less dependent on foreign oil? Realistically, our dependence on foreign oil makes us less safe than any dirty bomb ever will.

Or why can’t we choose to be on an orange alert about the serious human rights abuses that are being carried out by our military and intelligence officials against ‘would be’ terrorists? How is it possible that in our post-9/11 world, the average American citizen thinks that it is ok to torture ‘enemy combatants’ while throwing any modicum of our rule of law out the window? How is it feasible to ‘track every terrorist down and bring them to justice’ when we have yet to define who qualifies as a terrorist or what the definition of justice really is?

How did I get here today? I got here by asking questions. I got here by being an American citizen. Not by choice, widowed at 30 and finding myself frightened and with no faith in my government, I decided to seek the truth as to why my husband died. I wanted to know that my daughter and I were safe living in this country. Along with four other widows, I played a role in our democratic process by simply asking who, what, where, how, and most importantly, why 9/11 happened.

Recently, many people are wondering what the widows will be doing next. It is simple. We will continue to do what we do best. We will continue to ask questions and demand answers about our government’s choices in the name of ‘national security.’ We will continue to work on issues that mean something to our children and to us. Issues that will make our future safer from terrorism like alternative energy resources, human rights abuses, congressional oversight and intelligence community reforms. We will continue to fight for the truth.

And, respectfully, our hope is that in future years this award might be rendered obsolete. Simply because there will be no need to bestow an award or any special status onto a truth-seeker because truth-seekers will have become our new norm.”

E-mail hurts IQ more than pot

Fortunately, blogging raises IQ almost as much as coffee! mjh

CNN.com – E-mail hurts IQ more than pot – Apr 22, 2005

LONDON, England — Workers distracted by phone calls, e-mails and text messages suffer a greater loss of IQ than a person smoking marijuana, a British study shows.

The constant interruptions reduce productivity and leave people feeling tired and lethargic, according to a survey carried out by TNS Research and commissioned by Hewlett Packard.

[via dangerousmeta!]

I’m Recycling on Earth Day

Earth Day 2002

I celebrated Earth Day idling in line at the drive-up window. As I burned my part of the world’s resources, I waited for chemical-laden beef raised on clearcut forest land, served with genetically modified potatoes grown in the desert, watered by rapidly melting polar icecaps. On the radio, the president called for arctic drilling. On the TV, the vice-president called for nuclear power plants. On my cell phone, I called for replacement batteries for my laptop, my digital camera, my CD player, my pacemaker. On my palm-pilot, I wrote “need to get away.” I used a search engine to look for a campground with hook-ups, preferably near a convenience store. mjh

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." — Sam Adams