Category: Washington DC

Happy Birthday America!

Posted on

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

[….}

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

— John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

It was on this day, 232 years ago. That men decided that freedom was the only way. This post is for them.

A few videos:

A video that tells the story of our National Anthem and how it came to be:

A singing of our National Anthem, that I think is the closest thing to Heavenly Angels singing that we’ll ever get here on Earth:

Another American Classic:

Another one, done, only the way, this man could do it:

Even John Wayne knows:

I posted this, not for some stupid political ploy, not to be clever, but to remind everyone, no matter what your political stripe or conviction or feeling, You are, We are, all Americans. This is our land, and we should, at least once a year, stop and reflect on our freedoms. The freedom to write, the freedom to Pray to whatever God we wish or the freedom to not pray, at all.  The freedom to agree, the freedom of dissent or to disagree, the freedom to assemble or simply the freedom to do nothing at all.

As Always, We remember our soldiers, especially those who have fallen:

One of my favorite songs:

Update: I could not remember the name of this song last night, I remembered the name this morning:

I cannot listen to this without tearing up… it’s tough, even for a guy:

God Bless the United States of America and God Bless and Keep our Soldiers.

Another Stupid Obama smear….

Posted on5 Comments

Yeah, the Neo-Con goons will talk about some stupid loan Non-Story, But they’ll completely ignore the fact the United States tortured detainees with techniques they learned from China.

Yeah, I read it, enough to know that it is big on accusations and little on substance. With a mention of Rezko tossed in for good measure. Kind of like the majority of the stories coming out about Obama.

When Obama spanks the collective asses of the G.O.P. in November, it will be because of the blatant stupidity of the Neo-Conservative right that has milinged the Conservative cause in this country.

Quite frankly, I wish November were tommorow.

Others:
michellemalkin.com, The Swamp, Fox News, Right Wing News, TBogg, Political Machine, Confederate Yankee, The Campaign Spot, Redstate, NO QUARTER, Salon, The Caucus, MSNBC, Hot Air, Ben Smith’s Blogs, Brilliant at Breakfast, Comments from Left Field, Bark Bark Woof Woof, The Political Carnival, JammieWearingFool, TIME.com, Whiskey Fire, Bang the Drum, pandagon.net, Oliver Willis, Spin Cycle, PoliGazette, EconoPundit and American Thinker and more via Memeorandum

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

A Video that asks a few legit questions of Obama

Posted on

Via Tigerhawk:

Obama’s buddy’s from Weather Underground going under the bus in 5…4…3…2..1

Others: Gateway Pundit, alicublog, EconoPundit, Stop The ACLU and Pajamas Media

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

Bush insiders prove to be hostile witnesses

Posted on

As if the country needed any further proof that the Bush Administration engaged in unconstitutional, not to mention unlawful, behavior, this little fine nugget of information drops today in the media.

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post reports that the hearing yesterday failed to produce any substantive information, but rather exposed the parties involved for the heartless, condescending, disdainful people that these men really are.

Consider a couple snippets:

Could the president ever be justified in breaking the law? "I’m not going to answer a legal opinion on every imaginable set of facts any human being could think of," Addington growled. Did he consult Congress when interpreting torture laws? "That’s irrelevant," he barked. Would it be legal to torture a detainee’s child? "I’m not here to render legal advice to your committee," he snarled. "You do have attorneys of your own."

[…]

He had the grace of Gollum as he quarreled with his questioners. In response to one of the chairman’s questions, he neither looked up nor spoke before finishing a note he was writing to himself. When Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) questioned his failure to remember conversations about interrogation techniques, he only looked at her and asked: "Is there a question pending, ma’am?" Finally, at the end of the hearing, Addington was asked whether he would meet privately to discuss classified matters. "You have my number," he said. "If you issue a subpoena, we’ll go through this again.

[…]

However, that was just a warm up of things to come, It also become very testy as the hearing went forward:

He sat slouched in his chair, scratching his mustache, as Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Constitution subcommittee, warned about "the unaccountable monarchy" before offering Addington five minutes to make an opening statement. Addington spoke for a minute and 12 seconds — most of which was devoted to correcting two errors in Nadler’s introduction.

"Is that the entirety of your statement?" the chairman asked.

"Yes, thank you," Addington replied. "I’m ready to answer your questions."

He sure was. When John Conyers (D-Mich.) inquired about Addington’s pet legal concept, a "unitary executive theory" that confers extreme powers on the president, Addington dished out disdain.

"I frankly don’t know what you mean by unitary theory," Addington replied.

"Have you ever heard of that theory before?"

"I see it in the newspapers all the time," Addington replied.

"Do you support it?"

"I don’t know what it is."

The usually mild Conyers was angry. "You’re telling me you don’t know what the unitary theory means?"

"I don’t know what you mean by it," Addington answered.

"Do you know what you mean by it?"

"I know exactly what I mean by it."

[….]

Addington’s insolence appeared to embolden another witness, his former administration colleague John Yoo. Yoo took Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) on a semantic spin when asked about whether a torture memo was implemented.

"What do you mean by ‘implemented’?" Yoo asked.

"Mr. Yoo," Ellison pressed, "are you denying knowledge of what the word ‘implement’ means?"

"You’re asking me to define what you mean by the word?"

"No, I’m asking you to define what you mean by the word ‘implement,’ " the exasperated lawmaker clarified.

"It can mean a wide number of things," Yoo demurred.

After several such dances around the questions (whether, for example, the president could order somebody buried alive), Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) offered his grudging respect: "You guys are great on ‘Beat the Clock,’ " he said.

"I don’t play basketball," replied the 41-year-old Yoo.

"That was a game show," Cohen explained.

As you can see, convicting these guys on charges that they broke the law, and violated the Constitution is not going to be an easy task. Because obviously, these guys are not going to cooperate with Congress or with any other sort of criminal investigation. Lew Rockwell, a fellow Libertarian minded person, says, “Maybe now they’ll impeach them”.  Lew, I respect your work and writings, but I highly doubt that the impeachment or any sort of criminal hearings will take place, until after the November election and until the next President is in office.

Things are changing in Iraq

Posted on

I apologize for the stoppage of Blogging. But the Tim Russert story kind of jarred me quite a bit. in fact, I had to turn the TV to CNN, I just couldn’t not bear watching the stuff at MSNBC anymore. (Yeah, I know, I fired up John Cole for what he said, there’s a difference between me saying I had to change the channel, and taking a nasty swipe at a dead man.)

However, the world, the news, and life does go on, while I will miss Tim Russert’s show and his style of punditry, I must move on….

It seems that things are changing in Iraq.

The Report from the Washington Post:

The Bush administration’s Iraq policy suffered two major setbacks Friday when Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki publicly rejected key U.S. terms for an ongoing military presence and anti-American Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr called for a new militia offensive against U.S. forces.

During a visit to Jordan, Maliki said negotiations over initial U.S. proposals for bilateral political and military agreements had "reached a dead end." While he said talks would continue, his comments fueled doubts that the pacts could be reached this year, before the Dec. 31 expiration of a United Nations mandate sanctioning the U.S. role in Iraq.

The moves by two of Iraq’s most powerful Shiite leaders underscore how the presence of U.S. troops has become a central issue for Iraqi politicians as they position themselves for provincial elections later this year. Iraqis across the political spectrum have grown intolerant of the U.S. presence, but the dominant Shiite parties — including Maliki’s Dawa party — are especially fearful of an electoral challenge from new, grass-roots groups.

CNN’s Michael Ware, who is in Iraq offers this interesting perspective:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo54NhiyQig&hl=en]

If Ware is even correct and these talks continue to stall, I look for Bush to just pull our troops out and let Iraq go at it alone. I just do not think that Bush is going to dump the Iraq War into the laps of the Democrats. I just do not think that he wants that on his legacy. I could be wrong, but if this is case, I got a sneaking suspicion you will see a unilateral withdrawal of our troops out of Iraq, before Bush leaves office.

More via Memeorandum

The countrywide loan scandal broadens

Posted on

Via Portfolio:

Two U.S. senators, two former Cabinet members, and a former ambassador to the United Nations received loans from Countrywide Financial through a little-known program that waived points, lender fees, and company borrowing rules for prominent people.

Senators Christopher Dodd, Democrat from Connecticut and chairman of the Banking Committee, and Kent Conrad, Democrat from North Dakota, chairman of the Budget Committee and a member of the Finance Committee, refinanced properties through Countrywide’s “V.I.P.” program in 2003 and 2004, according to company documents and emails and a former employee familiar with the loans.

Other participants in the V.I.P. program included former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Alphonso Jackson, former Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala, and former U.N. ambassador and assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke. Jackson was deputy H.U.D. secretary in the Bush administration when he received the loans in 2003. Shalala, who received two loans in 2002, had by then left the Clinton administration for her current position as president of the University of Miami. She is scheduled to receive a Presidential Medal of Freedom on June 19.

As Michelle Makin puts it:

Who in the most ethical Congress will push for an investigation? Show of hands?

Good question. Don’t hold your breath Michelle, you’ll just turn blue.

So much for the new kind of Politics within the Democratic and Republican Parties! Looks like the same old Washington D.C. bad ethics and outright corruption to me.

More commentary via Memeorandum

Special Comment by Keith Olbermann: McCain should know better

Posted on

Transcript: (H/T K.O’s NewsHole)

Finally tonight, as promised, a Special Comment on Senator John McCain’s conclusion that it’s "not too important" when American forces come home from Iraq.

Thoughts, offered more in sorrow, than in anger.

For two full days now, the Senator and his supporters have been outraged at what they see as the subtraction of context from this extraordinary remark.

This is, sadly, the excuse of our time, for everything.

Still. If the Senator claims truncation, we will correct that, first.

"A lot of people," Matt Lauer began, "now say the surge is working."

"Anybody who knows the facts on the ground say that," the Senator interjected.

"If it’s now working, Senator," Matt continued, "do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?"

"No," answered McCain. "But that’s not too important. What’s important is the casualties in Iraq. Americans are in South Korea. Americans are in Japan. American troops are in Germany.

"That’s all fine. American casualties and the ability to withdraw. We will be able to withdraw.

"General Petraeus is going to tell us in July when he thinks we are. But the key to it is we don’t want any more Americans in harm’s way. And that way they will be safe, and serve our country, and come home with honor and victory – not in defeat,  which is what Senator Obama’s proposal would have done. And I’m proud of them, and they’re doing a great job. And we are succeeding. And it’s fascinating that Senator Obama still doesn’t realize it."

And there is the context of what Senator McCain said.

Well… not quite, Senator.

The full context, is that the Iraq you see, is a figment of your imagination.

This is not a war about "honor and victory," Sir.

This is a war you, and the President you support and seek to succeed, conned this nation into.

Yes, sir.

You.

Of the prospect of war in Iraq, you said, quote, "I believe that success will be fairly easy."

John McCain… September 24th… 2002.

"I believe that we can win an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time."

John McCain… September 29th… 2002.

Of the ouster of Saddam and the Baathists:

"There’s no doubt in my mind that once these people are gone, that we will be welcomed as liberators."

John McCain… March 24th… 2003.

Asked, about a long-term commitment in Iraq, quote, "are you talking about something in terms of South Korea, for instance, where you would expect U.S. troops to be in Iraq for decades?"

"No," you answered. "I don’t think decades, but I think years. A little straight talk, I think years. And I hope that we can gradually reduce that presence."

John McCain… March 18th… 2004.

You were asked about the troops, and the future.

"I would hope that we could bring them all home. I would hope that we would probably leave some military advisers, as we have in other countries, to help them with

their training and equipment and that kind of stuff."…I think one of our big problems has been the fact that many Iraqis resent American military presence.

And I don’t pretend to know exactly Iraqi public opinion. But as soon as we can reduce our visibility as much as possible, the better I think it is going to be."

John McCain… January 31st… 2005

When a speaker at your town hall, five months ago, referenced the President’s forecast that we might stay in Iraq for 50 years, you cut him off.

"Make it a hundred! We’ve been in Japan for 60 years. We’ve been in South Korea 50 years or so. That would be fine with me. As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. That’s fine by me…"

John McCain… January 3rd… 2008.

And your forecast of your hypothetical first term.

"By January, 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom. The Iraq war has been won."

John McCain… May 15th… 2008.

That, Senator McCain, is context.

You have attested to: a fairly easy success; an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time; in which we would be welcomed as liberators; which you assured us would not require our troops stay for decades but merely for years; from which we could bring them all home, since you noted many Iraqis resent American military presence; in which all those troops coming home will also stay there, not being injured, for a hundred years; but most will be back by 2013; and the timing of their return, is… not… that… important.

That, Senator McCain, is context.

And that, Senator McCain, is madness.

The Government Accountability Office just released a study Tuesday that concludes that one out of every ten soldiers sent to Iraq, takes with them medical problems "severe enough to significantly limit their ability to fight."

In five years, we have now sent 43-thousand of them to war even though… they were already wounded.

And when they come home, is… not… that… important.

—

Jalal al Din al Sagir, a member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, and Ali al Adeeb, of the rival Dawa Political Party, gave a series of interviews last week about the particulars of this country’s demand for a "Status of Forces" agreement with Iraq — a treaty …which Mr. Bush does not intend to show Congress before he signs it.

The Iraqi politicians say the treaty demands Iraq’s consent to the establishment of nearly double the number of U-S military bases in Iraq — from about 30, to 58, and from temporary, to permanent.

Those will be American men and women who must, of necessity, staff these bases – staff them, in Mr. McCain’s M-C Escher dream world in which our people can all come home while they stay there for a hundred years but they’ll be back by 2013.

And when they come home, is not… that… important.

—

Last year, a 20-year old soldier from the Bronx, on the day of his re-deployment to a second tour in Iraq, said he just couldn’t face the smell of burning flesh again. So, Jonathan Aponte paid a hit man 500 dollars… to shoot him in the knee.

Mount Sinai Hospital in New York reported treating a patient identifying himself as another Iraq-bound soldier, who claimed he had accidentally swallowed a pen at the bus station. No one doubted his story until examinations proved there was a second pen in his stomach bearing the logo of Greyhound Bus Lines.

In 2006, says his sister, a 24-year old Army Specialist from Washington State, on the eve of his second deployment, strapped a pack full of tools to his back, and then jumped off the roof of his house, injuring his spine.

And when they come home — or more correctly all those like them who did not risk death or disability to avoid going back — when they come home, is not… that… important.

You’ve sold them all out, Senator.

You.

You, whose sacrifice for this country was as all-encompassing and as horrible as the rest of us can only imagine in our darkest moments.

You, who survived, so that you could make America a better place where young men did not have to go and die in pointless wars… or be maimed… or be held prisoner… or have to hire hit-men to shoot them in the knee because that couldn’t be worse.

You… who should know better.

—

Where, Senator, is the man who once said "veterans hate war more than anyone else, because veterans know, because veterans know these brave Americans, and others, know, that there is nothing more painful than the loss of a comrade."

Where is he, Sir?

Where is the man who described that ineffable truth?

Oh, so long ago you touched the essence of the reality of Iraq. Your comments about your lost comrades — yesterday.

The men and women in Iraq, today, Senator — they are your comrades, too.

And you are condemning them to die.

To die, for your misdirection, for Mr. Bush’s lies — for whoever makes the money off building 58 permanent American bases and all the weapons and all the bullets and all the wiring so costly and so slip-shod that it electrocutes our comrades as they step, not to fight freedom’s enemies, but into the shower at the base.

That, Senator, that is context.

It is an easy thing to dismiss Senator McCain as a sad and befuddled figure, already challenging for some kind of campaign record for malaprops.

Just yesterday in Philadelphia he answered Senator Obama, not by defending or explaining his own "not that important" remark, but by seizing upon Obama’s "bitter" remark – or trying to.

Obama had foolishly said that some, in despair, in small towns, cling to their religion and their guns.

Senator McCain vowed he’d go to those towns and tell them, "I don’t agree with Senator Obama that they cling to their religion and the Constitution because they’re bitter."

It was hard not to dismiss with a laugh, Senator McCain, or any Republican, for even accidentally implying that he’s clung to the Constitution — not after the last seven years.

It was hard, the day before, not to become almost bemused when the Senator tried to say he would veto every single bill with ear-marks, but wound up, instead, vowing "I will veto every single beer."

It was hard, this week, not to laugh at how Senator McCain could offer any serious defense against the accusation that he is running for President Bush’s third term, when a 2006 interview suddenly surfaced in which McCain said he would consider Dick Cheney for a position in a McCain administration.

"I don’t know if I would want him as Vice President. He and I have the same strengths. But to serve in other capacities? Hell, yeah."

These are all very funny, in a macabre yet unthreatening way.

And then one remembers Senator McCain’s inability to separate Sunni and Shia, or his insistence that Iran is training Al-Qaeda for service in Iraq, and then being corrected about it, and then saying the same thing again anyway.

And then one is, inevitably, drawn back again to the overlooked substance of yesterday’s remark…

"If (the surge) is now working, Senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?"

"No."

No?

The surge is working and even that still tells Senator McCain nothing about when we can ransom our soldiers?

Wasn’t that the ultimate purpose of the surge? To get them out?

If we cannot tell — if McCain cannot even guess — doesn’t that, by definition, mean… the surge isn’t working?

—

And ultimately we are drawn back to the "not… too… important" remark, in its full context:

The context of the kaleidoscope of confused rhetoric, and endless non sequitur, and mutually exclusive conclusions — and what they add up to: a veritable tragedy, a microcosm of the American tragedy that is Iraq, a tragedy of a man who himself will never understand… "the context."

Your tragedy, Senator McCain?

No. I’m sorry.

This tragedy… is of Justin Mixon of Bogalusa, Louisiana.

And it’s of Christopher McCarthy of Virginia Beach.

It’s of Quincy Green of El Paso, and Joshua Waltenbaugh of Ford City, P.A.

The tragedy is of Shane Duffy of Taunton Mass, and Jonathan Emard of Mesquite, Texas.

It’s of Cody Legg of Escondido in California, and David Hurst of Fort Sill in Oklahoma.

The tragedy is of Thomas Duncan the 3rd of Rowlett, Texas, and Tyler Pickett of Saratoga, Wyoming.

And who are they, Senator?

They are ten Americans…. who have died in Iraq… since the first of this month. There are four more. The Defense Department has not yet identified the others.

And while you, Senator, may ask for all the context you can get, those ten men… will never know any of it.

Because the true context here, is that if you could ask those American war heroes, or the family and the friends that loved them, if they have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq…

They could rightly say, "No. But that’s… not… too… important."

Good night, and good luck.

Who am I voting for?

Posted on

Yesterday, I said that I was withdrawing my support for Chuck Baldwin. I also announced it in the “Chuck Baldwin” for President forum.

Needless to say, I was not prepared for such a response. I got the normal, “What? Are you crazy?” e-mails. I also got a few from a couple “Ron Paul” nut cases, telling me the Chuck Baldwin was Ron Paul 2.0. I also got a couple vulgar e-mails as well, and these from so-called “Christians”.

I dropped my support for Chuck Baldwin after reading his very silly idea of doing away with Taxes. Baldwin supporters tried telling me, that I don’t understand the Tax system in America. In the contrary, I understand it perfectly. It is the Chuck Baldwin and Ron Paul supporters who do not understand it, or don’t care to and would rather listen to the fairy tales of old fools who claim to be the hidden “Last Hope” for America, but rather in all reality, couldn’t save the broad side of a barn in a hail storm.

Now, back to the tax issue, this is how the tax system works in America. There are three different Taxes that are collected; they are Federal, State and Local.

Federal Taxes go to support Federal Projects, Paying Federal employees, and social programs, which I do not have an issue with, at all, as I am a Christian and I believe in giving to those in need. Unlike some, who claim to Christians and don’t wish to see any help given to the poor. How they can serve Christ and believe this way, is beyond me.

State Taxes Go to just that, The State, for fixing highways, paying state employees, and the like.

Local Taxes, Same deal as above. But for Local level…

Now here are some examples as to why we need a Federal Tax, State Tax and a Local Tax:

Your local city has a big road project, that they cannot afford to do themselves, so, they petition their State officials, “Hey, we need some HELP down here!”, and so, the local representative pushes a bill through to get assistance for the local city and the money comes down to them.

Your State has a road project, and there’s not enough money in the States funds to pay for it, your State officials contact their representative in Washington D.C. and says, “Hey! We need some help down here!” and they put through legislation to get some money down to the people at the state level. It is called, “Taking up the slack”, as most States and local cities, do not make the revenue from Taxes to pay for city and state projects and to pay the salaries of their employees.

Now that’s the truth, and please no more e-mail from the idiotic Ron Paul supporters, as I do not wish to read your idiot pipe dream garbage no more.

Yes, I pay my Taxes, Yes, I do know that it goes for the proper things. (like the huge road construction project happening near my house)

As to whom I am voting for in this election? No sure, at all, really. I may not vote at all, as I am not really happy with anyone running.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

A telling story about this war

Posted on

You know, I have always been a Independent voice in the Blogging world. I don’t answer to either side. But there is one thing, even as a Conservative/Libertarian/Constitutionalist, or in just plain terms, a center right type of person. I cannot and will not gloss over this kind of a story.

This my friends, is Bush’s true legacy:

Seven months after Sergeant Christopher LeJeune started scouting Baghdad’s dangerous roads — acting as bait to lure insurgents into the open so his Army unit could kill them — he found himself growing increasingly despondent. "We’d been doing some heavy missions, and things were starting to bother me," LeJeune says. His unit had been protecting Iraqi police stations targeted by rocket-propelled grenades, hunting down mortars hidden in dark Baghdad basements and cleaning up its own messes. He recalls the order his unit got after a nighttime firefight to roll back out and collect the enemy dead. When LeJeune and his buddies arrived, they discovered that some of the bodies were still alive. "You don’t always know who the bad guys are," he says. "When you search someone’s house, you have it built up in your mind that these guys are terrorists, but when you go in, there’s little bitty tiny shoes and toys on the floor — things like that started affecting me a lot more than I thought they would." – America’s Medicated Army – (via TIME Magazine)

All that, because Bush acted on some very admittedly now, false intelligence and did not properly prepare for it. Unlike many of the Iraq War’s planning, these guys have to live with the scars, both mental and physical.  

This extremely sad story continues:

"In a Total Daze"
And yet the battlefield seems an imperfect environment for widespread prescription of these medicines. LeJeune, who spent 15 months in Iraq before returning home in May 2004, says many more troops need help — pharmaceutical or otherwise — but don’t get it because of fears that it will hurt their chance for promotion. "They don’t want to destroy their career or make everybody go in a convoy to pick up your prescription," says LeJeune, now 34 and living in Utah. "In the civilian world, when you have a problem, you go to the doctor, and you have therapy followed up by some medication. In Iraq, you see the doctor only once or twice, but you continue to get drugs constantly." LeJeune says the medications — combined with the war’s other stressors — created unfit soldiers. "There were more than a few convoys going out in a total daze."

About a third of soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq say they can’t see a mental-health professional when they need to. When the number of troops in Iraq surged by 30,000 last year, the number of Army mental-health workers remained the same — about 200 — making counseling and care even tougher to get.

"Burnout and compassion fatigue" are rising among such personnel, and there have been "recent psychiatric evacuations" of Army mental-health workers from Iraq, the 2007 survey says. Soldiers are often stationed at outposts so isolated that follow-up visits with counselors are difficult. "In a perfect world," admits Nash, who has just retired from the Navy, "you would not want to rely on medications as your first-line treatment, but in deployed settings, that is often all you have."

And just as more troops are taking these drugs, there are new doubts about the drugs’ effectiveness. A pair of recent reports from Rand and the federal Institute of Medicine (iom) raise doubts about just how much the new medicines can do to alleviate PTSD. The Rand study, released in April, says the "overall effects for SSRIs, even in the largest clinical trials, are modest." Last October the iom concluded, "The evidence is inadequate to determine the efficacy of SSRIs in the treatment of PTSD."

Chris LeJeune could have told them that. When he returned home in May 2004, he remained on clonazepam and other drugs. He became one of 300,000 Americans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan and suffer from PTSD or depression. "But PTSD isn’t fixed by taking pills — it’s just numbed," he claims now. "And I felt like I was drugged all the time." So a year ago, he simply stopped taking them. "I just started trying to fight my demons myself," he says, with help from VA counseling. He laughs when asked how he’s doing. "I’d like to think," he says, "that I’m really damn close back to normal."

That which I just quoted, is President George W. Bush’s true legacy. How that man sleeps at night, knowing full well, that he has caused this, is beyond me.

I just truly hope, that the Republican Party has learned it’s lesson. I thought that they would have after Nixon. I guess, that I was wrong.

God Bless our suffering troops and those still in actions overseas now.

Others: VetVoice

In Short: Obama Clinches, Hillary does her swan song, and Grandpa McSame told a bedtime story.

Posted on

My take on it all:

Obama sounded very Presidential, Hillary did the swan song thing…  She’s not making any decisions tonight. 

Grandpa McSame told another bed time story……Even the Conservatives/Republicans hated it! 

Of course, in the General, you can expect the attacks on Obama to continue.

Should be an interesting race, come this November.

I will be away tomorrow, Me and my Father will be out doing some work. So, I will be posting later in the afternoon. Until then….

Good Night and Good Luck

Senator Robert Byrd in Hospital

Posted on

Putting politics aside for a moment. There is some sad news to report. Senator Robert Byrd, who is 90 years old, has been admitted to the Hospital.

90 years old people! If and when I happen to live to 90 years old, I hope I am able to speak, much less walk, and he is still a Senator! Holy Hell! Hee heeBig Grin

Hang in there Senator, I think I can speak for all the Blogs, Democrat, Republican, Conservative and Liberal and everything in between, that we’re ALL pulling for you.

Get well soon and get your butt back up there and keep them idiot Right Wingers in line! TongueWinking

Good Thoughts and Prayers headed his way from here. I would assume there is some coming from all corners of the Blogging world. Praying

Technorati Tags:

Nutroots Divided?

Posted on

Seems the Liberal sissy Moonbats have no love for one another. Devil

This comes via Ann Althouse.

TNR’s Dana Goldstein writes:

As anybody with high-speed Internet knows, MyDD and Daily Kos sit at the top of the liberal Netroots movement, which over the last five years has made astonishing strides in its campaign to transform the Democratic Party into a hard-fighting, proudly liberal, and, most importantly, victorious entity. Though their websites offer distinct communities and commentaries, and though they have very different personalities, MyDD founder Jerome Armstrong (a former astrologer) and Kos’s Markos Moulitsas (a former Army man) have always gotten along–the two co-authored a 2006 book, Crashing the Gate, about the rise of their movement. Their bond has been rooted mostly in common foes: Republicans, namby-pamby Democrats, the Iraq War, divisive "identity politics," and the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. But the harmony that existed between MyDD and Kos since the birth of the Netroots no longer exists today, and a bitter internecine struggle within the progressive blogosphere is to blame. Just as bilious in tone as previous fights with Republicans or Joe Lieberman, it has revealed fault lines in the movement that will be tough to cover back up. There have been charges of misogyny and of bullying, and some longtime members have walked away from their cause altogether. And what’s at the heart of it all is that most loaded of questions: Barack or Hillary?

[….]

After announcing her departure from the site, Alegre was the subject of insults by dozens of commenters. Moulitsas fumed on the site’s front page, "People expect me to give a damn that a bunch of whiny posters ‘go on strike’ and leave in a huff. When I don’t give a damn, people get angry that their expectations aren’t being met." Of course, characterizing Clinton supporters, especially female Clinton supporters, as "whiny," didn’t sit well with many. A Maryland mother of two in her mid-40s, Alegre said she won’t publicize her real name because she fears harassment from anti-Clinton bloggers and commenters.

There’s no doubt that the tone of the Netroots’ Clinton-bashing has veered rather far from policy substance. After the Huffington Post scoop, Daily Kos front page writer Dana Houle wrote a bizarre diary (one he didn’t post to the homepage) recounting how his impressions of Hillary Clinton had changed since 1992, when he saw Bill Clinton give a speech at the University of Michigan. "It was the night I learned the term MILF, and it was applied to Hillary Clinton," wrote Houle. In the same post, he described seeing a couple in the crowd at the Clinton speech engaged in a sex act. Later Houle, who is 43 and was once  chief-of-staff for New Hampshire Congressman Paul Hodes, brushed off the suggestion that sexualizing Clinton had been inappropriate. "Some people will look for a reason to be outraged no matter what," he explained, telling me that most of Clinton’s support in the liberal blogosphere comes from marginal writers.

However, Ann Althouse disagrees:

Really? Upper middle class? I can believe there are more men than women, but enough to make it "relatively homogenous"?

She has a point, I did not care of Barry’s style either, Being a former Conservative-Minded Democrat, He lacked substance, this was before all the Jeremiah Wright nonsense came out. He never could directly answer a question. He would always, and still does, dance around direct questions, he has zero substance, it is all flash and glam and personality. He might be a great person, but if he has no substance, what good is he? Nobody seems to want to address that question.

The answer is simply this, the Democrat Party is all about entitlements, Hillary is a Woman, she seems to believe that she is entitled to be President, because she was Bill Clinton’s wife and because she is a woman, because she has a vagina, that makes her entitled to be President. The same way with Barry, He is a black man, He believes that he is entitled to be President, because of the injustices that were perpetuated against his people over 300 years ago, that makes B. Hussein Obama entitled to be President. Never mind that the fact that he is an empty suit with zero political experience. Never mind the fact that he did little or nothing of great impact in the Chicago senate, that is unless you count the cocaine snorting and gay sex.  However, because he is black, and he is the Obamassiah, he will ride into the White House on the shoulders of one the biggest liberals and communist sympathizers out there, the late Martin Luther King Jr.  By the way, the true story on Larry Sinclair’s Lie detector is:

The raw computer readings showed that Larry Sinclair passed the test with flying colours. But two testers hired by Whitehouse.com re-interpreted the readings to claim that they showed deception. One of the testers was Edward I. Gelb who has been exposed by specialists in the field for claiming a phony Ph.D.

Can you say, Cover up? I knew you could!

Like I said, it is all about the entitlements. It is what the Democrats are all about. That and identity Politics, and we all know, Barry is a master at that.

Clinton to wrap it up in New York after Tuesday Primary

Posted on

It seems that finally, Mrs. "I am a female and you owe me the Presidency", has finally seen reality.

Ben Smith @ Politico Reports:

Members of Hillary Clinton’s advance staff received calls and emails this evening from headquarters summoning them to New York City Tuesday night, and telling them their roles on the campaign are ending, two Clinton staffers tell my colleague Amie Parnes.

The advance staffers — most of them now in Puerto Rico, South Dakota, and Montana — are being given the options of going to New York for a final day Tuesday, or going home, the aides said. The move is a sign that the campaign is beginning to shed — at least — some of its staff. The advance staff is responsible for arranging the candidate’s events around the country.

With the future of her campaign in doubt, Clinton hasn’t announced her plans for the final election night of the primary cycle or beyond, but the aides said she would stage her election night event in New York City. Her entourage is currently expected to wake up Tuesday in New York and to arrive in Washington, D.C. Tuesday night.

However, Ben does report:

Clinton’s senior aides didn’t respond to requests for comment on her Tuesday night plans.

Well, of course, she’s not going to say, "Yeah, I’m dropping out", and risk not getting the votes. She is not stupid. She is looking to get a cabinet position or something out of all this.  Of course, I think it would be absolutely hilarious if Obama simply told her, "I will be in touch" and never called her, at all.  It would be the ultimate payback for all the stuff she said about him.

Did I mention that I am not a big fan of her? Sorry. I’m not. Hee hee

Other commentary via Memeorandum

Chuck Baldwin on "Washington’s Culture Of Deception"

Posted on

(Taken from Here)

A bomb exploded inside Washington, D.C., this week, and, no, it was not the work of a Middle Eastern terrorist. It was the work of former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan. He, perhaps more than anyone else, was the face of President Bush’s White House. He faithfully served President George W. Bush for close to a decade and served as Bush’s Press Secretary for some three years, resigning on April 19, 2006. He was also regarded as one of the most loyal and tight-lipped of the Bush insiders. However, his new book, "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception" has exploded in the face of what history will probably regard as one of the most deceptive and manipulative Presidential administrations in American government. The Washington Post (and a host of other media) released a report regarding McClellan’s book this past Wednesday.

According to McClellan’s book, the Iraq war was sold to the American people with a sophisticated "political propaganda campaign" led by President George W. Bush himself. McClellan charges that Bush aimed at "manipulating sources of public opinion" and "downplaying the major reason for going to war." He also says he was deceived by some within the President’s inner circle about the leak of a CIA operative’s name.

He has especially harsh criticism for former White House advisor Karl Rove for misleading him about his role in the CIA case. He also accused Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice of being "deft . . . at protecting her reputation," and called Vice President Dick Cheney "the magic man" who steered policy behind the scenes.

In a chapter titled "Selling the War," McClellan says the administration repeatedly "shaded the truth." He also stated, "In the permanent campaign era, it was all about manipulating sources of public opinion to the president’s advantage." In what might be the most disturbing statement in the book (at least among those that were released by press reports), McClellan said, "What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary."

McClellan said his motive for writing the book was this: "Like many Americans, I am concerned about the poisonous atmosphere in Washington. I wanted to take readers inside the White House and provide them an open and honest look at how things went off course and what can be learned from it. Hopefully in some small way it will contribute to changing Washington for the better and move us beyond the hyper-partisan environment that has permeated Washington over the past 15 years."

I am confident the reaction that will spew forth from both sides of the political aisle will simply reinforce McClellan’s basic assertion. Republicans will attempt to impugn McClellan’s credibility, while Democrats will shout, "We told you so!"

In previous columns, I have written much regarding the poison of deception that emanates from Washington, D.C., which is mostly due to the preoccupation with political partisanship. It seems the only time the Republican and Democratic parties care about "ethics" and "honesty" is when it condemns the other party. Otherwise, life in Washington, D.C., is exactly as McClellan describes it: a culture of deception.

McClellan’s book will be a bitter pill to swallow. To think that the war in Iraq was "unnecessary" creates angst and even anger in the meekest of men. Yet, how many times have governments spent the lives and fortunes of their people for causes and reasons that historians would later judge to be "unnecessary"? It might even be safe to say that most of history’s wars have been "unnecessary."

The propensity of rulers to engage in war for personal, transient, or even adolescent purposes is exactly why America’s Founding Fathers created a constitutional republic in this country. In America, the Constitution–not the President, Congress, or even the Supreme Court–is the Supreme Law of the land. Each branch of government is to remain separate from the other, and no branch is supposed to be able to run roughshod over the other. It is fidelity to constitutional government that forms the vanguard of our liberty, not to mention our safety.

This is why our President and members of Congress take an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. They are not sworn to uphold the will of party bosses or special interest groups, or even the whim of the people. They are required to uphold the Constitution.

Sadly, America’s civil magistrates (especially at the federal level) have been ignoring the Constitution for much of the 20th Century, and–for the most part–still ignore the Constitution today. And it has not mattered to a tinker’s dam which party has been in power. Both major parties are equal opportunity violators of the Constitution.

None of us (including this writer) wants to believe that McClellan’s bold assertion is true. None of us wants to believe that we are spending trillions of hard-earned tax dollars and sending thousands of brave soldiers and Marines (not to mention tens of thousands of Iraqis) to their deaths "unnecessarily." I sincerely pray that McClellan is wrong about that.

One thing I do believe to be true, however, is this: Unless the American people begin demanding that their civil magistrates uphold their oaths to the Constitution, and until the American people rid themselves of this blind loyalty to the two major political parties, we are going to be continually subjected to "Washington’s Culture of Deception."

Chuck Baldwin’s Personal Website

Chuck Baldwin – Constitution Party Candidate for President 2008 – Official Website

Scott McClellan implicates Bush in Valerie Wilson scandal

Posted on

Holy Crap… SurprisedSurprise

Scott McClellan : But the other defining moment was in early April 2006, when I learned that the President had secretly declassified the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq for the Vice President and Scooter Libby to anonymously disclose to reporters. And we had been out there talking about how seriously the President took the selective leaking of classified information. And here we were, learning that the President had authorized the very same thing we had criticized.

Viera: Did you talk to the President and say why are you doing this?

Scott McClellan: Actually, I did. I talked about the conversation we had. I walked onto Air Force One, it was right after an event we had, it was down in the south, I believe it was North Carolina. And I walk onto Air Force One and a reporter had yelled a question to the President trying to ask him a question about this revelation that had come out during the legal proceedings. The revelation was that it was the President who had authorized, or, enable Scooter Libby to go out there and talk about this information. And I told the President that that’s what the reporter was asking. He was saying that you, yourself, was the one that authorized the leaking of this information. And he said "yeah, I did." And I was kinda taken aback.- Via Emptywheel

This is a serious accusation and I do believe that the Democrats and possibly some Republicans might just turn on Bush because of this. It just depends though, most of the Republicans up on Capital Hill are Bush Loyalists and Nancy Pelosi is so scared of Bush, I highly doubt that anything will even happen.

However, it is an interesting revelation.

Other Opinions via Memeorandum

Trust me, this is only the beginning of the Books whacking Bush and his White House

Posted on

Shocking Yes. Surprising? Not hardly. Not talking

Quote:

Among the most explosive revelations in the 341-page book, titled “What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception” (Public Affairs, $27.95):

• McClellan charges that Bush relied on “propaganda” to sell the war.

• He says the White House press corps was too easy on the administration during the run-up to the war.

• He admits that some of his own assertions from the briefing room podium turned out to be “badly misguided.” 

• The longtime Bush loyalist also suggests that two top aides held a secret West Wing meeting to get their story straight about the CIA leak case at a time when federal prosecutors were after them — and McClellan was continuing to defend them despite mounting evidence they had not given him all the facts.

• McClellan asserts that the aides — Karl Rove, the president’s senior adviser, and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the vice president’s chief of staff — “had at best misled” him about their role in the disclosure of former CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity. -  McClellan whacks Bush, White House (Via Politico.com)

Other Interesting tibits:

Among other notable passages:

• Steve Hadley, then the deputy national security adviser, said about the erroneous assertion about Saddam Hussein seeking uranium, included in the State of the Union address of 2003: “Signing off on these facts is my responsibility. … And in this case, I blew it. I think the only solution is for me to resign.” The offer “was rejected almost out of hand by others present,” McClellan writes.

• Bush was “clearly irritated, … steamed,” when McClellan informed him that chief economic adviser Larry Lindsey had told The Wall Street Journal that a possible war in Iraq could cost from $100 billion to $200 billion: “‘It’s unacceptable,’ Bush continued, his voice rising. ‘He shouldn’t be talking about that.’”

• “As press secretary, I spent countless hours defending the administration from the podium in the White House briefing room. Although the things I said then were sincere, I have since come to realize that some of them were badly misguided.”

• “History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided: that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder. No one, including me, can know with absolute certainty how the war will be viewed decades from now when we can more fully understand its impact. What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary.”

• McClellan describes his preparation for briefing reporters during the Plame frenzy: “I could feel the adrenaline flowing as I gave the go-ahead for Josh Deckard, one of my hard-working, underpaid press office staff, … to give the two-minute warning so the networks could prepare to switch to live coverage the moment I stepped into the briefing room.”

• “‘Matrix’ was the code name the Secret Service used for the White House press secretary."

Unlike Jack Moss, who totally trashed Scott and his book, and even goes as far to say that Scott is lying about Bush in his book. I will say this, it is a good chance that Scott is actually telling the truth about Bush in his book. I think Jack Moss thinks that unless someone is praising Bush and saying he is 100 percent right and Iraq was a great idea, and Katrina was not his fault, they’re lying in their books. In other words, if they do not toe the party line, (of B.S.) they are just lying liberals out to discredit Bush. You see how screwed up the mind set is of the Bush apologists and Neo Conservatives?

The truth is, this book is most likely going to be one of the more stunning books, seeing that it is from an insider, someone who was in his inner circle. I personally would like to get a copy of it.

You can pre-order yours at:

Like I said in the title of this post, this is only the tip of the iceberg. I believe that torrent, a flood, if you will, of books will come out, after Bush leaves office, by former staffers, and friends of his, some glowing and some will be glaring. Bush might lose some friends over it too. You cannot stifle truth and it will prevail in the end.  It shall be interesting, to say the least.

Update: The White House responds:

The White House is panning a new book by former presidential spokesman Scott McClellan.

"Scott, we now know, is disgruntled about his experience at the White House. For those of us who fully supported him, before, during and after he was press secretary, we are puzzled. It is sad – this is not the Scott we knew," Dana Perino, one of his successors at the podium, says in a statement to reporters.

"The book, as reported by the press, has been described to the president. I do not expect a comment from him on it – he has more pressing matters than to spend time commenting on books by former staffers," she says.

How prissy. Rolling Eyes

More Opinions @ Memeorandum

Chuck Baldwin officially launches his campaign website….

Posted on

I received some great news this morning in my e-mail inbox. Dancing

Pastor Chuck Baldwin has officially launched his Campaign website.  

I am voting for Chuck Baldwin because he more represents the American values that I, as a Christian, as a Libertarian and as a Constitutionalist, hold very dear.

He might not win, but I will know that my vote went for someone who still believes in the old Paleo-conservative values that I hold dear. I will also know, that my vote did not go to a third term of George W. Bush, a Neo-Conservative, Globalist, Shill or a Socialist, Marxist, Liberal. 

This notion that if you don’t vote for John McCain, that your vote is a vote for Hillary or Obama is the biggest lie and the great travesty ever heaped upon this Nation. Heaped upon it by warmongering bastards who want to send this Nation into a pit that it will never get itself out of.

I ask you today, Libertarian, Constitutionalist, Conservative, Republican, wake up and realize that this Nations only hope, is found in this man.

Check out his Website, Forum  and go to his "Money Bomb" page.

Let’s get American back on the right track, vote for Chuck Baldwin

A perfect example of the far left loon delusional movement

Posted on

Can be found right here.

This Blog entry is a perfect example of the Left’s attempt to paint people, like myself, who care about the problem of Illegal Immigration as racist, lunatic conspiracy theorists.

The fact of the matter is, that illegal immigration is real and not an imagined problem, and yes, Illegal immigration is a very common source of infectious diseases, and is a BIG MAJOR cause of crime in this country. 

One of my favorite Blogs that covers this problem in the greatest detail is Freedom Folks. Freedom folks is the home of Blogs for Borders, which is a Video Podcast or Blogburst as it is called, that carefully documents the crimes and other illegal immigration news that affects our country every day.

So, don’t buy the lie of the Homosexual Communist Liberals, Illegal Immigration IS a problem and unless we, the American people STAND UP for our land and demand that our feckless Government do something about it. We will be in deep trouble.

So, join Blogs 4 Borders and put the Liberal Lie machine, out of Business.

Some other organizations that are on the leading edge of this fight are Save our State, NewsWithViews, The Republic Broadcasting Network, and The Constitution Party. 

Remember folks, unless we stand now, we will serve on our knees later.

Let us not forget our United States Servicemen

Posted on

While I have been a very vocal critic of the Bush Administration’s Handling of the war in Iraq. I will always stand in honor for our United States Military.

Here is a video that I think everyone, Liberal, Conservative and everything in between, needs to watch: (H/T to Army Wife Toddler Mom and Tammi)

Please, support Military Ministry or Soldiers’ Angels

Let’s not forget those, who choose to serve our Nation, so that Bloggers, like me, can write and be free.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

President Bush, keeping secrets and lying to American in a whole new way….

Posted on

Welcome to your new America.

The Story: Keeping Secrets: In Presidential Memo, A New Designation for Classifying Information (via washingtonpost.com)

Sometime in the next few years, if a memorandum signed by President Bush this month ever goes into effect, one government official talking to another about information on terrorists will have to begin by saying: "What I am about to tell you is controlled unclassified information enhanced with specified dissemination."

That would mean, according to the memo, that the information requires safeguarding because "the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure would create risk of substantial harm."

Bush’s memorandum, signed on the eve of his daughter Jenna’s wedding, introduced "Controlled Unclassified Information" as a new government category that will replace "Sensitive but Unclassified."

Such information — though it does not merit the well-known national security classifications "confidential," "secret" or "top secret" — is nonetheless "pertinent" to U.S. "national interests" or to "important interests of entities outside the federal government," the memo says.

Hmmmm.. Whatever happened to open and transparent Government? Thinking 

U.S. to build new prison in Afghanistan

Posted on

I can hear the Liberals whining now….

The Article: U.S. Planning Big New Prison in Afghanistan (Via New York Times)

Quote:

The Pentagon is moving forward with plans to build a new, 40-acre detention complex on the main American military base in Afghanistan, officials said, in a stark acknowledgment that the United States is likely to continue to hold prisoners overseas for years to come.

The proposed detention center would replace the cavernous, makeshift American prison on the Bagram military base north of Kabul, which is now typically packed with about 630 prisoners, compared with the 270 held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Until now, the Bush administration had signaled that it intended to scale back American involvement in detention operations in Afghanistan. It had planned to transfer a large majority of the prisoners to Afghan custody, in an American-financed, high-security prison outside Kabul to be guarded by Afghan soldiers.

The reason why I would say that Liberals will whine about this, is because Bush said he would scale back American involvement in detention centers in Afghanistan. However, if you read the REST of this article. You will see why were having to get involved and stay involved.

Quote:

But American officials now concede that the new Afghan-run prison cannot absorb all the Afghans now detained by the United States, much less the waves of new prisoners from the escalating fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

(Snip!)

Faced with that, American officials said they wanted to replace the Bagram prison, a converted aircraft hangar that still holds some of the decrepit aircraft-repair machinery left by the Soviet troops who occupied the country in the 1980s. In its place the United States will build what officials described as a more modern and humane detention center that would usually accommodate about 600 detainees — or as many as 1,100 in a surge — and cost more than $60 million.

“Our existing theater internment facility is deteriorating,” said Sandra L. Hodgkinson, the senior Pentagon official for detention policy, in a telephone interview. “It was renovated to do a temporary mission. There is a sense that this is the right time to build a new facility.”

American officials also acknowledged that there are serious health risks to detainees and American military personnel who work at the Bagram prison, because of their exposure to heavy metals from the aircraft-repair machinery and asbestos.

“It’s just not suitable,” another Pentagon official said. “At some point, you have to say, ‘That’s it. This place was not made to keep people there indefinitely.’ ”

That point came about six months ago. It became clear to Pentagon officials that the original plan of releasing some Afghan prisoners outright and transferring other detainees to Afghan custody would not come close to emptying the existing detention center.

You see, this is not being done, so that the American Government can keep us in that country forever, as Liberals like Keith Olbermann and his hyperventilating special comments want us to believe. They’re doing this out of a human concern for Prisoners housed there, Yes, my friends, the United States is still a caring Country, that cares for the well-being of people, even those who would want to kill us.

I am writing this to prove a point, that even if President George W. Bush is an idiot, and Yes, I do believe that he is not the brightest bulb in the box, there are people still working in the United States Government, that do still possess a great deal of intelligence and still have the morals and integrity that this Nation is known for.

The New York Times’s Liberal bias aside, the article is quite informative as to the real conditions on the ground in Afghanistan. I suggest you read it.

Clinton wins West Virginia…

Posted on

Go Read

What the Liberal media won’t tell you is, she was expected to do this anyhow… So, why even report it?

Just gives the old attention whore more publicity.

She still is not going to clinch the nomination, she doesn’t have the delegates.

Stupid is as stupid does, I guess.

Charges dropped against "20’th" 9/11 Hijacker

Posted on

Go read.

Fester over at NewsHoggers, put’s it better than I ever could.

This amazing lack of faith in American institutions still astounds be
at times coming from such dime story patriots and nationalistic tinged
messaging machines. America ‘s restraint and faith in the rule of law
is a strength and not a weakness. Today torture is an embarrassment
whose stain can not be easily removed even as it lessens our
credibility, legitimacy and moral orientation. Grow some balls
America, and believe in your principals again.

Amen.

I hate to tell Media Matters for America this, But……

Posted on

That is what the majority of America is thinking….

Here’s the Video and Transcript: (via Media Matters for America)

Full Transcript:

From the May 12 edition of ABC Radio Networks’ Imus in the Morning:

DIETL: Well, I got real a problem with the president, the former president. You know, this weekend, I go to gas up my car, my M6, the BMW. Uses a lot of gas, we all agree with that. It’s 510 horsepower.

IMUS: Sure.

DIETL: Four dollars and fifty cents for the high test now. Now, I did a little investigation through the whole — you know, through the whole weekend there to find out really where it lies. And I got a problem with President Bush the father, my friend. I got a problem with this guy sitting across from me, Bill Clinton, and Fredo over here. We all — Fredo, the president, the current, sitting president, with those stupid faces that he makes. There was tornadoes in the Midwest, and he’s making a press conference with his wife sitting there. He’s making these stupid —

IMUS: This is your guy.

DIETL: He’s — nobody’s my guy.

IMUS: No, he was your guy —

DIETL: Nobody’s my guy.

IMUS: No, no. He was your guy when he ran.

DIETL: Here’s what I call out to the Senate majority —

IMUS: I did not vote for him. You did.

DIETL: Senate majority —

IMUS: Did you vote for him? Did you vote for him?

DIETL: Yes. Yes, I did.

IMUS: OK.

DIETL: People make mistakes.

IMUS: Well, yeah. You made a big mistake. You voted for him twice.

DIETL: Well, I made a few big mistakes when I didn’t invest my money into oil and gold.

IMUS: True.

DIETL: OK. But my point is, there should be a congressional investigation. One, into all these former presidents. What kind of money is being influxitated [sic] into their libaries [sic]? I’m talking about this guy sitting across from me, Bill Clinton. They have hundreds of millions of dollars that were pumped in there from these Aba Daba Doos over there in the Middle East, controlling the oil. Right now in the Middle East, you’ve got Saudi Arabia, who’s got their finger. Why doesn’t Fredo get on his Air Force One, fly over to Riyadh, get those little hamel [sic] humpers over there, sit ’em down, and say, "Look, we got our F-16s –"

IMUS: It’s, uh, "camel humpers."

DIETL: "We got our F-16s guarding you against Iran. We saved you from Saddam Hussein. We’re going to move all our troops out of here and leave you to defend your own country." ‘Cause you know what? They couldn’t do it. ‘Cause all they do is pick their nose and eat their boogies, and that’s the end of it. That’s all they do.

BERNARD McGUIRK (executive producer): Hey, oh.

DIETL: I’ve been there.

IMUS: Hey, calm down here a minute. We’re trying to have breakfast.

DIETL: All right. ‘Cause this aggravates me. We protect Saudi Arabia.

IMUS: [unintelligible] to be eating your boogers. [unintelligible]

DIETL: Saudi Arabia controls the oil flow.

IMUS: That is disgusting.

DIETL: And right now, people are starving.

IMUS: Why are you hollering?

DIETL: Families can’t put their kids into their SUVs and take them to school because the gas is so expensive.

IMUS: Here’s what’s happening now. People’s houses are being foreclosed on.

DIETL: Right.

IMUS: So they put their furniture in storage. Then they can’t pay the storage bill, so they’re losing that.

DIETL: Right. Now, America that listens to you, Don, and everyone’s ears are out there today. I want people to realize and understand, these former presidents and the current president now have a relationship with Saudi Arabia that they should go over there to — President Bush, my friend there, the cowboy, should hop on his plane and go over there, sit down with the ministers and say, "Here’s the way it’s going to be. We’re pulling out all our men over there protecting you."

You go now — you go to the next stop, Dubai. Do you know what’s going on in Dubai now? Twenty-five percent of the cranes in the world are in Dubai. You got Philippine workers dying two a day, construction workers are dying two a day. They can’t put up a building fast enough. They got three buildings programmed that’ll be double the size of the former World Trade Center. They’re building islands. They’re building man-made islands.

You know what is there? I’ll tell you what’s there. A bunch of hookers from Russia and all over there.

IMUS: Yeah, well —

DIETL: It’s a playground for —

IMUS: I wouldn’t bring that up if I were you.

DIETL: It’s a playground for all these people who are pumping all the oil out of the ground, making all this money. Our Americans dying defending them over in Iraq, and they stand around there [imitates ululation]. They go running around, hopping on their private planes, hopping on their camels.

The Congress should be getting involved with this. Where is the senators and where is the congressmen to step up and step on Saudi Arabia and stop with my fuel pump? ‘Cause I got people that can’t drive their cars.

And I ran for Congress back in ’86. I wish I would’ve won. ‘Cause I would be there in Congress slapping people around, saying, "How much money? You want to take a trip over to Saudi Arabia?"

IMUS: You would’ve made — you’d have made Vito — what’s that guy’s name, Bernie?

DIETL: I like Vito Fossella.

McGUIRK: Fossella.

IMUS: You would’ve made Vito Fossella look like a Boy Scout.

DIETL: Guy made a little mistake. Guy made a little mistake. We all make little mistakes in our lives.

The "Boogies" joke aside, I hate to break it to David Brock and the rest of the crew over at Media Matters for America, but, this is what the majority of America is thinking right about now. I, for one, cannot afford to drive my car, much anywhere at all, either.

I am fully aware that the Arab slam was offensive, but Christ Almighty man, the guy is right. I think he should be applauded for telling the damn truth, if anything at all.

Smooth Move Juan McSame

Posted on

Boy, it’s like shooting fish in a barrel. Doh

Seems ol’ Juan McSame’s choice to manage the GOP convention this summer is lobbyist Doug Goodyear, whose firm once represented Burma’s repressive regime.

Since this came out, he has resigned, but gee wiz already, do these Republican know anything other than sleaze?

You see now, why I will never, ever, vote Republican? Rolling Eyes

This is why we need this guy in there:

He’s getting my vote in November. I don’t care if he wins or not, what I do care about is, if my vote doesn’t go for a Marxist or a Continuation of George W. Bush and his idiotic policies.