by blues, Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 08:48:33 AM EDT
Cindy Lee Miller Sheehan was born on July 10, 1957. She will become the next President of the United States. And why not? Who has given more for this nation? Who has had the courage to speak openly, unscripted, with infinite passion? The time has come for all decent Americans to simply forget about partisan allegiances. Principles and courage are all that will save us now; all else is sheer vanity.
Let's forget about our latest crop of sell-outs and elect someone with heart and courage and determination. In 2008, I am going to vote for Cindy Sheehan for president. If you are a real US Citizen, you will do likewise!
by blues, Sun Jun 24, 2007 at 08:34:34 AM EDT
Even if prosecutors and judges refuse to uphold Congressional subpoenas sent to the White House, Congress can still put White House staffers in jail if they refuse to testify under oath before the House and Senate. I see no need to elaborate on this, as I believe the references I cite below tell the whole story:
The New Republic
by Jeffrey Rosen
Post date 11.13.06 | Issue date 11.20.06
Even if the Supreme Court eventually ruled against Congress in Conyers v. Gonzales, Congress could always enforce contempt citations on its own. In a little-used procedure, Congress has the power to punish recalcitrant witnesses for "inherent contempt." As Morton Rosenberg of the Congressional Research Service points out in an invaluable 1995 report on investigative oversight that House Democrats are now heavily consulting, the defiant witness can be brought before the House or Senate by the sergeant at arms, tried, and locked up in the capitol jail. (In 2004, a citizen-activist was sentenced to a six-month term there for "disrupting Congress" by demanding to testify at a judicial confirmation hearing.) This inherent contempt procedure hasn't been invoked by Congress for more than 70 years, because a cumbersome trial for contempt has the potential to grind Congress to a halt. But, if the White House is obdurate and the courts are unsympathetic, congressional Democrats might decide that a contempt trial--unlike a presidential impeachment--would be good politics as well as good theater. And, of course, the House is always free to impeach Gonzales for his refusal to cooperate, which might be less politically risky than an impeachment of Bush.
Point of Order:
An Insider's Guide to Surviving Congressional
By: Raymond Shepherd 1 and Don R. Berthiaume 2
by blues, Fri May 25, 2007 at 11:57:19 PM EDT
Senators Clinton, Dodd, and Obama did indeed vote "Nay" on the retched bill to give the white house A BLANK CHECK to continue its Middle East fiasco, and that is most commendable! See:
That bill is:
H.R. 2206 (U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007) -- "Making emergency supplemental appropriations and additional supplemental appropriations for agricultural and other emergency assistance for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes."
BUT: Senators Dodd, Clinton, Obama, and Lugar Have just now pushed through an absurd resolution denouncing Venezuela for not renewing the license of a TV station that actively supported the 2002 military coup against that democratically elected government.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jump! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by blues, Fri May 25, 2007 at 02:57:46 AM EDT
We WORKED OUR ASSES OFF to elect Democrats who would put an stop to the Iraq occupation. What did we get: CAPITULATION to the chimperator!!! They are giving him BILLIONS MORE for more war! Time to vote with your BLOOD! This is war, after all. The "Red Cross" pretends that your donated blood will go to some sweet grandma, or maybe you, in some hospital. IT WILL NOT! It will go to keep some poor trooper alive in Iraq who never should have been there to begin with (so saith the Geneva Conventions, and the ELECTED Iraqi Government). If they keep some soldier alive with your blood, they will only send him or her back to be finished off anyway!!!
Now is the time to vote with your BLOOD, since you were already denied any chance to vote in a booth in any meaningful way anyway. STOP DONATING BLOOD!!! This is war. People are going to suffer. Maybe some of us need to suffer too!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jump! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by blues, Tue May 22, 2007 at 04:33:13 AM EDT
It goes like this:
We generously offer to stuff two months of war funding, not to exceed $40 BILLION
, into Bush's hot, grubby little hands. And in return for this utterly insane generosity (for which the world should demand we get psychiatric exams to protect our treasure), WE DEMAND THAT UN INSPECTORS PUT METERS ON EVERY OIL WELL AND PIPELINE IN IRAQ, AND TAKE ACCOUNT OF WHERE EVERY LAST DROP, AND EVERY LAST OIL PENNY GOES.
by blues, Tue May 08, 2007 at 09:56:13 PM EDT
Well, now it's happened in France. The winner, right-wing candidate Sarkozy, was the only candidate to support use of the machines:
A French e-voting "catastrophe"
By Jon Stokes | Published: April 24, 2007 - 01:56PM CT
One of the more controversial of America's exports has managed to unite factions from across France's political spectrum, with the major parties in France's hotly contested presidential election uniting to inform AFP that a "catastrophe" has taken place. No, I'm not talking about the opening of a new McDonald's. The catastrophe in question is an electronic voting catastrophe of the kind that occurred in a number of counties in America during this past November's mid-term elections.
In the few French cities that used the new electronic machines, the problems encountered were typical of what we've seen here in the US: malfunctions and complications that resulted in long lines at the polls and, ultimately, in voters who had to leave without voting. The technical glitches were compounded by some issues that appear to be specific to France. I'm talking about the elderly French's confusion and general distrust of the machines (as reported by the AFP), responses that are probably rooted in the country's long and cherished tradition of paper ballots and ballot box transparency--literally, the ballot boxes are see-through, and anyone can monitor them during an election to ensure that there's no funny business.
A Reuters report indicates that the Dutch models account for over 80 percent of the French e-voting machines, with the ES&S models making up the remainder. This being the case, I suppose it's not entirely fair to call e-voting an "American export," and indeed this distinction may answer the question of why no French farmer has yet to demolish a polling place with a tractor in protest.
So, riots have broken out all over France for a second night. Also see:
by blues, Mon Apr 16, 2007 at 02:51:29 PM EDT
by blues, Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 07:45:00 AM EDT
Vote on whether Imus deserved to be canned!
Cape Cod Online
Vote at: "Do you agree with
the network's decision?"
by blues, Wed Apr 11, 2007 at 12:50:26 PM EDT
How long have we listened to that Maggot In The Morning Don 'Stealth Fascist' Imus? How much neocon scum can be pumped into our early-hour heads by these scum?
Fuck 'Don Imus'. May he and his Satanic neocon henchmen rot in hell.
by blues, Sun Apr 08, 2007 at 04:10:38 PM EDT