Hypocrisy

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

If there is one party who can really step into a mess, it’s the Democratic party.

If there is one party who can exploit that mess, it’s the Republican party. The republicans have a viciousness to them, a ‘pit bull’ streak that finds an opening and goes in for the kill. And like any wild animal when cornered, the attack is bloody and savage. Just look at the attacks on Nancy Pelosi over the last couple of weeks.

“I think this is the most despicable, dishonest and vicious political effort I’ve seen in my lifetime.”

“She is a trivial politician, viciously using partisanship for the narrowist of purposes, and she dishonors the Congress by her behavior.” -Newt Gingrich

Accusations of ‘viciously using partisanship’ from Newt Gingrich are not only comical but over the top,unabated, pure hypocrisy. Newt is the poster child for being the loudest one to complain, condemn and prosecute  someone else for doing exactly the same thing he was secretly doing.  As if his infidelity while his mission to attack Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky affair wasn’t proof enough of his hypocrisy, his problem of using tax-exempt funding to advance his political goals should have limited his ‘Pelosi dishonors Congress’ rhetoric. But, it didn’t.

Newt is old news though, an unimportant politically partisan pitbull hoping his hypocrisy has been forgiven. It hasn’t.  But what about newer more relevant GOP members?

“Lying to the Congress of the United States is a crime,” Boehner said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “And if the speaker is accusing the CIA and other intelligence officials of lying or misleading the Congress, then she should come forward with evidence and turn that over to the Justice Department so they can be prosecuted.”

He added: “And if that’s not the case, I think she ought to apologize to our intelligence professionals around the world.”

That’s right, Nancy Pelosi should apologize to the CIA from claiming that they have misinformed congress. It is a disparaging remark and like Boehner says, she needs to ‘put up or shut up’.

It doesn’t matter that Pelosi’s accusations that the CIA memo’s are misleading seem to be panning out or that even some Republicans agree that the briefing notes contain many errors, such as briefings that listed former Chairman Porter Goss as the head of committee when Rep. Pete Hoekstra had already taken over. Because Hoekstra says, those errors are meaningless

Of Course those errors are meaningless. It doesn’t matter that 2 separate briefings have a low-level staffer as  being in on the top-secret,code-word clearance briefings. It’s meaningless that this staffer says he was actually asked to leave, which would be expected since he  only  two walked members to the room. It doesn’t matter that this staffer,Paul Juola, has asked the CIA to “immediately correct this record.”

It doesn’t matter that former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham came out and said not only did the CIA hide details from him during his briefings, but that 3 of the 4 dates the CIA said they briefed Graham were in error

…he(Graham) asked agency officials to confirm how many times they briefed him on torture. They gave him four dates, but after Graham went through his personal records and disproved three of those dates, he said the agency admitted their mistake and confirmed that he had, in fact, received only one briefing.

When our intelligence agency says they briefed someone 4 times and they really only briefed them once, when they say the person who headed  the committee was someone who had already been replaced, when they say that they allowed a staffer in on a code-word clearance briefing, none of it is relevant, in fact it’s ‘meaningless’. But when you go out in public and say that the CIA is misleading congress, that disqualifies you as from continuing as speaker. Or so Newt Gingrich says.

“To have the person third in line to be president say that the CIA misleads us all the time is so utterly irresponsible and such an attack on the men and women who are risking their lives … that she disqualifies herself for being speaker of the House,”

Now, this has nothing to do with partisan attacks, Newt,Boehner and Hoekstra wouldn’t do that. No, they are truly outraged that someone would smear the CIA by claiming they have mislead congress on some issue…

Well, except when it’s Hoekstra, and the CIA has just destroyed torture video tapes that they were warned not to destroy. When that happens

…it’s important for Congress to hold this community accountable. This community did not tell — the CIA did not tell us about the existence of these tapes. They did not tell us that they were going to be destroyed. They need — there’s a Constitutional responsibility for them to keep Congress informed and they have not and we need to hold them accountable

Or so Mr. Hoekstra says.

It’s OK for Mr. Hoekstra to say the CIA  mislead Congress. Even better, when you are on Fox News being interviewed by Chris Wallace, it’s ok to get down right nasty on the CIA.

WALLACE: Congress man Hoekstra, Hayden appeared this week before your committee. Are you satisfied that over the years the CIA acted in good faith?

HOEKSTRA: No, I’m not. There are certain statements that might have been misleading to Congress as to exactly what existed. I think you’ve got a systemic problem here. I think the community is incomPetent. It is arrogant. And it has developed — it’s become political. This — you know, you take a look at wmd in iraq. They were wrong.

Hoekstra went even farther than just calling them arrogant,incompetant and saying that they have mislead congress , he also said

…you’ve got a community that’s incomPetent. They are arrogant and they are political, and they don’t believe that they are accountable to anybody. They don’t believe that they’re accountable to the president. They’ve clearly demonstrated through the tapes case that they don’t believe they are accountable to Congress. And when we are at war, that is a terrible position for the intelligence community to be. If they had done what they are supposed to do on the tapes, keep us informed, listen to the kind of recommendations that my colleague Jane Harman made to them, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion today. But because of their arrogance and their willingness to move independent, that’s it.

The CIA? they’re political? They don’t believe they are accountable the President much less Congress? They’re incompetent?  These are just a few of the things that are OK to say about the CIA, unless of course you’re Nancy Pelosi.

Quick question, if the CIA mislead Congress, destroyed evidence… are arrogant,political,incompetent and admittedly prone to briefing errors.. why exactly are we or the GOP taking anything the CIA says over Nancy Pelosi?

It wouldn’t be to get the stink of another political land-mine off of them would it?

“..when you say that the community is incompetent, I’m telling you I don’t have confidence in the community. You know, I have high confidence that the community continues to be broken and is not giving us as policymakers the information that we need to make good decisions.-HOEKSTRA

Hypocrisy

“She is a trivial politician, viciously using partisanship for the narrowist of purposes, and she dishonors the Congress by her behavior.” -Newt Gingrich

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

UPDATE

Yes, the CIA has lied to Congress and covered it up. I think Newt might be the one who should step down and go back into hiding, after apologizing to Pelosi of course…

Related articles by Zemanta

• Gingrich: ‘Absolute obligation’ to investigate Pelosi (cnn.com)
• Did the CIA lie about torture? (guardian.co.uk)
• Newt Gingrich: CIA Bully-Boy Since 1995 (firedoglake.com)

In July 2002, Condoleezza Rice, national security adviser to former President George W. Bush, verbally approved the water-boarding of an al Qaeda terrorist named Abu Zubaydah.  On August 1st, after ignoring dissenting legal opinion on the legality of water-boarding and whether it was ethical or even productive, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales and the Justice Department gave the green light to water-board Abu Zubaydah in what is now being called the ‘‘torture memos’. One memo, dated August 2002, grants authorization to use “harsh interrogation techniques” on a high-ranking terrorist( Abu Zubaydah) on the grounds that previous methods had not been working.

Zubaydah was water-boarded 83 times  that month.

According to many, including Marc Thiessen President Bush’s former speech writer, the technique was a success. Jose Padilla was apprehended in Chicago on May 8,2002 because of information learned through Zubaydah’s water-boarding sessions.

The problem with this is, in May 2002 Condelezza Rice hadn’t yet given her verbal authorization to water-board and the Justice Department, along with Gonzales and Ashcroft hadn’t yet given the written authority. Rice’s authorization wouldn’t come for another 2 months and the ‘Torture memo’ authorizing  the water-boarding would not be written for another month after that. If Abu Zubaydah gave interrogators the information needed to apprehend Jose Padilla, he did it without being water-boarded or he was water-boarded without consent of the NSA,White House or the justice department.“

one of the top

three leaders

in the [al-Qaeda] organization.

Another question raised is, if Abu Zubaydah was cooperating  and had already given up the information that lead to Padilla’s capture in May, then why did he need to be water-boarded 83 times in August?

In a story from CBS news, dated March 29, 2009, a former senior government officials said that not only was the information Abu Zubaydah gave after being tortured worthless, but it also caused the FBI and CIA to run aimlessly around the globe chasing made up shadows.

President Bush, in order to justify what he was allowing to take place, called Abu Zubaydah “al Qaeda’s chief of operations” and “one of the top three leaders in the organization.”

Not long after his capture though, this was found to be inaccurate..

Abu Zubaida was not even an official member of al Qaeda, according to a portrait of the man

Image via Wikipedia

that emerges from court documents and interviews with current and former intelligence, law enforcement and military sources. Rather, he was a “fixer” for radical Muslim ideologues, and he ended up working directly with al Qaeda only after Sept. 11 – and that was because the United States stood ready to invade Afghanistan.

This is not to say Zubaydah wasn’t a criminal or even part of a terrorist conspiracy, but he was not what he was water-boarded for. He was being water-boarded, so they told us, because he was the number 3 in al Qaeda, he wasn’t cooperating and he knew things that would help us stop the next wave of the attacks.

a senior terrorist leader

and a trusted associate of Osama bin Laden

But was he a high-ranking Al Qeada member with close ties to Osama Bin Laden? Was he uncooperative under normal interrogations? Author Ron Suskind wrote, which the Washington Post has confirmed, that President Bush was so invested in Zubayduh that another question that be must be asked is; is it possible that his ties to Bin Laden or his level of cooperation really didn’t matter at some point?

Suskind writes in his book, “The One Percent Doctrine” which Barton Gellman reviews, that not only was Zubayduh just the ‘go-to guy’ for minor purposes, but  he was also mentally ill.

Abu Zubaydah, his captors discovered, turned out to be mentally ill and nothing like the pivotal figure they supposed him to be. CIA and FBI analysts, poring over a diary he kept for more than a decade, found entries “in the voice of three people: Hani 1, Hani 2, and Hani 3″ — a boy, a young man and a middle-aged alter ego. All three recorded in numbing detail “what people ate, or wore, or trifling things they said.” Dan Coleman, then the FBI’s top al-Qaeda analyst, told a senior bureau official, “This guy is insane, certifiable, split personality.”

During this time President Bush’s outward proclamations were that we had captured a major leader in Bin Laden’s network. Privately though he wasn’t so sure, at one point even asking George Tenet “‘I said he was important,’

…’You’re not going to let me lose face on this, are you?’

To which Tenet replied, “‘No Sir, Mr. President.’”

The Chinese used water-boarding as a way not to get their enemies to confess their crimes, but to get them to confess to things they had not done. In the middle of 2002, what was going on that would require someone to force a person to falsely confess to something?

The Bush administration applied relentless pressure on interrogators to use harsh methods on detainees in part to find evidence of cooperation between al Qaida and the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s regime, according to a former senior U.S. intelligence official and a former Army psychiatrist.

It’s true that a link from those responsible for the 9/11 attack  to Saddam Hussein would have made the case for the war in Iraq that much easier, but is that the reason for Zubaydah’s treatment?

In 2002, this country was still reeling from the attacks only a few months earlier, crews were still digging out ground zero and our hearts were still broken into pieces as we remembered  those flag-draped remains being brought home to those who loved them. Would we have tortured anyone to get  any information telling us who, why and if there was another attack coming?

When Zubaydah was water-boarded in 2002, the CIA video-taped it. Some of the question we have today could be answered by just reviewing those tapes. Unfortunately, the CIA’s director, Michael Hayden had them destroyed for security reasons. But there are many principals left who can answer some of these questions.

ABC News Video

One of the 1st questions being, why was the Vice President the one to  give the order to use these techniques and where was President Bush during these discussions and decisions?

Allah had visited

him in his cell

during the night and

told him to cooperate,”

Do we ‘cross the Rubicon’ as my colleague says and open an investigation of the previous administration? And if by doing so, do we damn all other Presidents who come after him? Dick Cheney wants more memo’s released so that his side of the story can be told. But will he stand before congress and give his side under oath is the question. Judging by the last time his administration was under oath in in front of Congress..

In several hours before the Judiciary Committee on Thursday, Gonzales said he had done nothing improper in firing the eight prosecutors, but conceded the case had been badly handled. At the same time, he said 71 times that he either could not recall or did not remember conversations or events surrounding the dismissals.

The answer to that question is not as clear as it should be.

Abu Zubaydah was captured in 2002, he was water-boarded 83 times in August 2002 for not cooperating with interrogators even though 3 months earlier he had given enough information for officials to arrest Jose Padilla. A CIA operative involved in handling high-value al Qaeda targets, John Kiriakou now retired, told ABC News that what happened to Zubaydah was in fact torture, but it was also necessary. He goes on to say  the water-boarding was so effective that Zubaydah broke within 35 seconds and the next day told investigators  that “Allah had visited him in his cell during the night and told him to cooperate” and that… “From that day on, he answered every question,”

If Zubaydah broke after only 35 seconds, broke to the point where he spoke with Allah and Allah told him to answer every question then why did he need to be water-boarded an additional 82 times that month?  The Chinese used water-boarding to make their victims give false confessions.  What question did he either refuse to answer or not know the answer too?

Before the release of the ‘torture memos’ Kiriakou was sure about the number of water-boardings and even had actual quotes made by Zubaydah, but after the memo’s release, ABC contacted him and he had this to say

When I spoke to ABC News in December 2007 I was aware of Abu Zubaydah being water boarded on one occasion. It was after this one occasion that he revealed information related to a planned terrorist attack. As I said in the original interview, my information was second-hand. I never participated in the use of enhanced techniques on Abu Zubaydah or on any other prisoner, nor did I witness the use of such techniques.”

So who has the 1st hand information on this session where these comments were made? Who can answer if  Zubaydah was tortured before NSA Rice gave a verbal nod allowing it? Who can answer if Zubaydah was in fact cooperating with interrogators 3 months before the “Torture memo’s” were even put to paper? Who can answer if he really broke after only 35 seconds of one session or if he needed an additional 82 more before he gave information that had the CIA and FBI running all over the world to confirm? Did traditional interrogation methods work with Zubaydah? Did he give up the information he had on Jose Padilla and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, did the Bush Administration really get ‘actionable intelligence’ from by using these ‘enhanced’ techniques? The man who really was there, Ali Soufan says he questioned Zubaydah from March to June 2002 using traditional methods and he was successful in gathering actionable intelligence and the information Zubaydah gave up on KSM and Jose Padilla came before he was water-boarded in 83 times in August. Mr. Soufan goes on to say that not only were the enhanced technique unnecessary and useless, they even created a wall between the FBI and the CIA, similar to wall that impeded the sharing of information before 9/11. It was so detrimental to the rival bureaus that the person who knew Khalid Shaikh Mohammad more than anyone else in the government, was  not allowed to speak with him.

There are so many questions that need to be answered and we know the principals involved who need to be asked.  But the biggest question of all is, do we really want the answers? Do we really want to go down that road and if so, just how far are we willing travel on it?

Related articles by Zemanta

• How the Bush administration waterboarded a low-level operative, who was brain-damaged, 83 times (americablog.com)
• FBI Zubaydah Interrogator Calls George Bush a Liar: “No Actionable Intelligence Gained from Using Enhanced Interrogation Techniques” (firedoglake.com)
• Rice approved CIA waterboarding (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Released memos don’t answer age-old question: Does torture work? (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

In this day and age of excessive greed by our political leaders, trusted investors, and big businesses are there any more stories out there that can anger us? Bailout after bailout, private jets,lavish parties, exorbitant bonus packages… have we had enough? Are we so saturated by the misuse of our money that we just don’t care anymore? Well, I think I have one more story that may be the apex on the ‘era of Greed’.

Brevard County Property Appraiser Jim Ford, who was re-elected last month, is using a clause in

state law that will allow him to retire his official current position in order to collect stateretirement benefits. Then, when he takes office again, he’ll receive his new salary.

Yes, you read that right. Our diligent property appraiser is retiring from his old job as property appraiser, so he can start working at his new job of… Property Appraiser. What’s the big deal about this?

Oh, you’ll love this…

Ford is using a program called DROP. He will get a lump sum check of $337,192. He will also get a retirement check of $6,892 a month.

and it’s not only a $7,000 retirement check he gets each month, he’ll also be getting his new salary for his new job (which is the same job he’s just retired from) that pays him $139,000 annually. .

Who is paying for this? We’ve had to cut $300 million from our school budget this year and if things don’t change, that number will soar to a total of $780 million next year. So who is paying for Jim Ford’s scam?

Maybe who is paying isn’t as interesting as why there is a loss of all this money. Among other things, $266 billion is how much statewide property values are expected to fall next year. Property values that were inflated by nefarious property appraisers.

What was Jim Ford’s title again?

Now, I am by no means blaming Jim Ford or his office for any of this. In fact, Lance Larsen Deputy Property Appraiser was acquitted on charges that he misused his office by giving tax breaks as political favors.

The last blow for prosecutors was when the judge would not allow them to have a witness testify that Larsen kept separate files for people he was allegedly favoring by lowering the value of their homes and property.

Prosecutors met with the judge in his chambers to discuss that issue and when they returned to court, the judge acquitted Larsen on seven counts of misconduct and one count of grand theft.

It must have been some other uncontrollable event that led up to this budget deficit that is going to effect every single aspect of our society in this state. What I will blame Jim Ford and the other 211 elected officials who have used the DROP law to charge the state $300 million since it’s passage, is being a part of the larger problem facing this country. Just because the law is there doesn’t mean you should take advantage of it. Especially in this day age when most American aren’t sure how they are going to feed and clothe their children this winter.

There is another Ford in the news these days trying trying to prove that they need a helping hand from Congress because of the financial abuses by Wall Street and her banks. That Ford is being dragged over hot coals and is as close to being drawn and quartered as you can get for not being more market savvy and fiscally responsible. When are we going to put all the corrupt players under the same microscope? From the giant banks who have broken their promises to the tax payer, to the bought and paid for property appraisers who were the first pebble that started this whole sub-prime mortgage avalanche, all of whom are still raping the system with our consent.

Sadly, Jim Ford may not have broken any laws but that doesn’t mean what he did was righteous either. This bleed needs to stop. This kind of cancer needs to be cut out. The days of extraordinary privileges, ridiculous ‘golden parachutes’ and unchecked greed needs to end, Rome is burning people… and we need to rid ourselves of the elected officials who are sitting and playing the fiddle while she cooks.

UPDATE

This is worse than I expected.. How much more corruption can this state pay for without going broke? How much more school funding can we take to pay for these rogue characters to live the life of Riley? Damnit this is my kids education as much as it’s yours. Isn’t it time to do something about it?

TALLAHASSEE — A growing number of elected officials are quietly taking advantage of a loophole carved into the state retirement law a few years ago that allows double dipping — collecting a state pension while still getting a regular paycheck from taxpayers.

Records indicate that 211 elected officials in Florida — including legislators, judges, sheriffs, circuit clerks, school board members and county commissioners — have taken advantage of the benefit. Thirty-one signed up in the past six months.

They are ‘quietly’ taking ‘advantage’… It’s time to bring this into the light isn’t?

What could that money have paid for?

Gov. Charlie Crist’s top budget advisers are floating lists of potential budget changes, including “saving” $436 million by suspending the Bright Futures college scholarship program, FLORIDA TODAY’s capitol bureau reported.

Well yeah, I mean it’s more more important that our elected officials recieve this money rather than letting poor kids get scholarships to college… But that’s probably ok though, since we we’ve run out of money to teach them while their in public schools.

To date, our district has been forced to cut programs/make reductions in the amount of $76.4 million ($31.4 million cut 2007-08 and $45.0 million cut thus far in 2008-09) in order to offset state and local revenue shortfalls, as well as budgetary shortfalls. An additional anticipated state holdback of $9.8 million, a loss of $1.4 million in school recognition/lottery funding, and a reduction of at least $2.9 million in lost state monies due to declining enrollment bring Brevard’s two-year loss to just over $90 million. Now, we were informed at a meeting last week that the state’s “per student allocation” may be cut by another $150 per student-this action may result in a special legislative session early next year, and will likely mean an additional $10.8 million cut prior to June 30, 2009, in addition to all of our previous budget reductions. All of these cuts total just over $101 million and more importantly, $70 million for the current school year.

As you know, we have been able thus far to maintain staffing and avoid layoffs. If this latest reduction comes to pass, reducing our budget without a reduction in personnel will be a challenge of enormous magnitude. It is my intention to make reduction recommendations to the School Board in January. We will communicate with you again at that time.

What are we doing? When does someone stand up and finally say “Enough!”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Franchise Fraud Loans
• Affected By Foreclosure
• Paulson: Big Financial Firms Are Stable

Why do they need a bailout?

Because even though I’m a die-hard Mustang girl….

I want my new fucking camaro…!

Sweeeet!

The front of this car looks like it’s saying ‘fuck you’..

…and that beautiful ass looks like it’s saying “No really, Fuck you!”

Why else do we need to bail them out?

3 words….

American Muscle Baby….

But most of all?

Because of this…

the 725hp Super Snake Mustang….

Yes….. you read that right 725hp in a mustang….

The Automakers didn’t create cars we didn’t want. They didn’t force us to buy the Hummer,Escalade and Expedition and make them some of the most popular cars on the road while plunging conservative cars like the Chevy Cobalt into the crapper. That was us people. You and I. We’re Americans! Bigger,Badder, Faster is what we live by. People ask, “where is the market for this kind of gluttony?” The market is us. The big 3 wouldn’t have kept making them, Bigger,Badder and Faster if we didn’t buy them and demand more.

No, this wasn’t the Automaker’s fault. It was ours… And now that we’ve decided to go from “teen-age boy” to “old-woman” overnight… it’s our duty to give Ford,Chevy and GM some time to catch up.

Of course, using something  until we toss it like a worn-out old whore is also the American Way…But we can’t do that this time.

Because this…

can never die.

Any questions?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Detroit Steel
• “Imagine an America with no more Corvettes! No more Caddies, Trans Ams, Camaros or Mustangs.”
• STUDY: Detroit bankruptcy would cost four times more than bailout

Seriously though, why not?
Let’s put aside the socialistic aspect of this. Let’s put aside the ridiculousness of it. Let’s just suspend political dogma just for this conversation and really consider the idea.
We are going to give up $700 billion dollars…. That’s BILLION, with a “B”. We, you and I, are going to give this money to banks and investment companies. We are going to buy their bad debt from them.. -Couldn’t afford that pair of Prada that you just had to have? Eh, forgitaboutit we‘ll just trim a little fat off your debt and add it to ours- … Our National debt before this bailout is $10 Trillion dollars. There aren’t even enough spaces on the national debt clock to show $10 Trillion dollars.

But they tell us we need this bailout! From the looks of the global market right now, we’re not the only ones either.

What do we stand to gain  with spending this kind of money? Well, we are doing it in the hopes that people will start loaning and spending money again. Fine! I get it. I don’t like it, you don’t like it, no one likes it but we have to do it.

I have better idea.

Ok, it’s not my idea. Howey said it 1st and then Russell Crowe said it again. I like Russell’s better…. Of course I like his better because it’s bigger.. But mostly it’s because …

c’mon, it’s Russell Crowe..

But while Russell’s idea was attractive, his math (and mine) was off. His plan would cost about $300 Trillion and I’m sure that would pretty much break us. So I have a better idea.

There are about 300 million people in the United States. 140 million of them pay taxes every year

Why don’t we give everyone of them $70,000 dollars ? That amount would work out to equal our National debt before the $700 Billion bailout that has a price tag of $840 Billion, but will really cost us $1-2 trillion when it’s all said and done. We don’t even know if this is the money is the beginning of the end or the end of the beginning. When all is said and done, with Iraq’s end no where in sight, with Afghanistan coming up to bat soon, we could end of tripling our National Debt in 5 years. All we know is that this money isn’t the end of the problem. This bailout isn’t helping the problem at the street level. It’s like the took the rotten apple off the top of the pile and expected that to stop the decay. They forgot that bottom of the barrel was also rotting away. Why are people so opposed to helping out their fellow man, but will glady help out their fellow CEO making millions of dollars every quarter?

My plan is expensive, it’s dangerous, but it just might be the painful answer we’re looking for because it actually puts the money in the system and helps stop the rot from the ground up. Trickle down economics didn’t work, but trickle up just can’t fail.

Before you blow this off, think about it. Besides possibly being a lot cheaper in the long run and actually helping Main Street while letting Wall Street live with it‘s own greed and corruption for once, why wouldn’t it work? I know it’s a hell of a lot of money
Take me as an example. Since there are 2 taxpayers in my house, 3 if you count my 17 year old daughter, we would have enough to pay off my subprime mortgage. That would take my debt off of my mortgage company and they could turn around and loan it to someone else. After the interest from my account and the other persons account, my mortgage company will have made a nice penny. Multiply this by however many people pay off their mortgage or just get back in the black with them and that’s a lot of money back into the system.

I would also buy health insurance for my family. Not only does that help the financial strain on the healthcare system, but whoever actually sells me my policy will have a nice little commission to use however they want. Multiply this by however many people would buy coverage or make it mandatory for the uninsured to do this and we’re talking about some serious money back into the system. When you add in the money this would free up for the hospitals to use for research or new equipment, the benefits become incalculable.

I would hire a tutor for my kids and travel during the summer helping them to see the things they have actually learned about. This helps the tourist economy in the places we visits and the tutor will be getting extra money to use however they want because it doesn’t matter… it’s all going back into the system. It would also help my children to be more prepared to work in this ‘world market’ and face it, more of our kids need to be ready to compete with other emerging countries.

I would help pay for college for my kids. Again, our kids need a college education to keep up with the rest of the world.

Two houses around me are going to auction for $25,000 I would buy one and fix it up, instead of letting them sit there and rot. This would raise the value of my home and the other homes around me. I would remodel my own home and spend way too much money at the Home Depot. Besides just benefitting everyone at Home Depot, it would also raise the value of my home, which helps the value of my neighbors.

Everything… Everything I would do would come right back into the system and the people that I paid would add mine and theirs into the system and so on and so on. The ripple effect would bring us from the edge of destruction that we seem to be looking at.

I know the argument is that Joe-Six Pack would spend all his on cigarettes and PBR, but even if he did… that’s money back into the system. Pabst would have to produce more product, which would create more jobs.

When Joe looks for a hand out for more? Well sorry Joe, this is a one time deal. See, anyone who signs up for this ‘hand-out’ can never go on the system again. No welfare, no Social security, nothing! The only public assistance available to Joe would be public transportation.

I was telling someone this idea today and she brought up a great point… … If everyone had a $70,000, a lot of people would quit work for awhile. I’m sure that would be the case in some people, but not all of them. We would be more of a free-market after this bailout and smart people would be using this money to their advantage and not using it to live off of for a year only to be right where the started from. I know people who could have Warren Buffet’s money and would still build their own homes or their own pools and then open a business to build other peoples homes.

Another positive ripple effect? With all of this wealth, builders would be in high demand, but they would also be a forced to pay competitive wages to their employees and that helps Joe when he blows his money on those PBR’s. If Joe still needs help, then he can go to any number of the charities that I am sure will be set up by some of the more altruistic people.

One argument is that it would bring on inflation and our money would be worthless. This doesn’t pass the stink test though. Our debt +$10 Trillion dollars as it is.One canidate running for office is promising ‘No new taxes’. Inflation? Recession? Depression? We’re already heading that way.

I know it goes against everything in the free-marketer’s, capitalist’s soul to even consider this idea. But if my plan works, and right now I don’t see how it wouldn’t, isn’t it worth the bending of the ideals just once better than losing everything?
Handing out the money isn’t the only part of my plan. Attached to my bill is a ban on special interest groups and lobbyists and an end to Social Security for those that choose to take the bail-out. In fact, the money that is in the Social Security budget now can help pay of the benefit. We can invest our own money. I’m not exactly for this with the way things are now, because we’re not all on even ground here so some people really do need this ‘socialist security’. But if my bailout was enacted, I would give this, the end of Social Security for anyone who accepts the money, as an olive branch to those opposed to my idea.

Hilary was mocked for wanting to give every baby born in the United States a $5000 account that will help them pay for college when they are ready for it. She was mocked by her own party and the other one. It’s funny how things have panned out over the last few months though isn’t it? At that time it seemed ridiculous to even mention giving away all that money and now, we can’t hand it out to the CEO’s on wall street fast enough.

My plan is the better plan. Of course there are parts that have to be worked on and tweaked, but not nearly as much as what is being worked on, tweaked and added right now.

We could enact a flat tax. With the tax money, we could rebuild our schools and our infrastructure that are in such bad conditions that it seems like the only way they will ever get fixed is if we are invaded and then that country pays for it when they are done raping and pillaging the rest of the country.
Our taxes could be used to strengthen our borders, our defense and our country. We used to be able to compete in the world, but too many years have gone by and we are so far past our 5000 mile maintenance schedule that now we have to rebuild the entire thing.

Get over it people and open your eyes. We have a Trillion dollar war debt that is growing every month. We don’t have this money handy so we’re borrowing it from anyone who will lend it. We just signed a $700 billion dollar bailout plan that will actually cost $840 Billion, and possibly into the Trillions. And we’re going to cut taxes? I haven’t even added in the National Debt. Are you kidding me? What world do you live in where you think we can have this kind of debt and not raise the taxes to pay for it. We’ve raped the education system so bad that it’s just a giant gaping wound so there is no money there. Medicare? yeah, good luck. Infrastructure? There’s no money there either. We’ve had our bloody adventures and the great whore has suckled us until we are fat and happy and can suckle no more.

Why wouldn’t this work. Please comment and explain to me why this is the worst idea in the history of ideas. Feel free to explain why this idea is so much worse than the one Congress voted on. Explain to me why we should only be helping out the AIG, WAMU, Goldman Sach’s CEO’s and not the Muffin Man who lives on Drury lane. Explain how this idea doesn’t create money to fix parts of our system that are worn down and in danger of total collapse. The way I see it my way actually helps main street and no matter what, if we don’t help that road… all other roads are going to fall. It doesn’t matter if we put a $700 Billion dollar patch on them or not, these roads need to ripped up and re-paved and nothing I’ve read in Congress’ plan is going to do this.
So tell me… why not?

How gracious of him.

The Justice Department said Wednesday that in light of requests from members of Congress for more information, Mr. Mukasey would agree not to sign the new guidelines before a Sept. 17 Congressional hearing.

How very gracious that the Attorney General would wait to sign the new guidelines for the FBI and their new investigative plan. The plan by the way allows the FBI to open an investigation, conduct surveillance, pry into private records and take other investigative steps “without any basis for suspicion.”

Yep, you read that right. “Without any basis for suspicion”

In a letter to Mukasey, Senators Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, Edward M. Kennedy said that this new plan “might permit an innocent American to be subjected to such intrusive surveillance based in part on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, or on protected First Amendment activities,”

What are we doing?

Why are we allowing this.

Look, I get that we were attacked by extremists on 9/11. I watched in horror and sadness just like everyone else did. I was angry and wanted revenge on the people who were behind the attack, just like everyone else did.

I know they attacked us because the loathe us and our way of life. They loathe that we allow our women to live freely. That we worship a different God than they do. They loathe our laws and constitution that protects it’s citizens. They loathe us for having the choices we have, the democracy that we are built on. They want to crush that which makes us what we are.

But they didn’t. Yes the 9/11 attacks were shocking and horrible to watch. They ripped a hole in our hearts and our lives that will never heal. They humbled us. But they did not beat us. We still worked on 9/11. We still went to school, the grocery, the soccer fields. They devastated our sense of security..yes. But most of all,they didn’t beat us.

They pissed us off.

But in the infinite wisdom of our esteemed President and his gang. They took out that anger on the wrong people. They didn’t take our anger out on the Saudis.. They took it out on the Iraqis. They didn’t take it out on the Bin Laden family, they took it out on yours and my family.

Osama won. We have less ‘freedom’ today than we did on 9/10/01. Because of ‘fear’ and ‘anthrax scares’ the Patriot Act was rushed in law. Less than 2 months after being attacked, a bill was thought of, written, edited, copied and signed into law. A bill that gave overwhelming powers to those in charge of protecting us.

And we cheered.

Did you know that law enforcement can use Truly Nolan to search your house for them and that if they find something you can be arrested. I don’t mean that they can walk into your house and see a vat of meth cooking and then call it in. I mean that while they are spraying in your cabinets,behind your sink, around you refrigerator….you know, stuff law enforcement would need a search warrant for, now they can get around that and just use your ‘pest-man’.

I’ve already talked about warrantless search and seizure, warrantless surveillance, nonviolent protestors being labeled terrorists and detained as such. Detainment without representation, acknowledgement or even family notification. No one listens. No one cares. These things are here to protect us, they are in place to keep the terrorists from striking again. This is a new war, a new age, an age where we have to fight differently and give up just a little bit of our freedoms in order to win.

Really? Has history not shown us what happens when people in authority get too much power? Has science not shown us how normal people, given the chance to rule others , abuse that power?

Once again, in the name of safety… This administration is enacting a new policy that will save us from terrorism. The plan is…. They can investigate who they want, how they want, whenever they want…. All because they want to. Clear suspicion is not even needed. Don’t you get that? Doesn’t anyone see how insane this is, how dangerous this can be under the wrong ‘power’?

They won’t even need clear suspicion anymore. Clear suspicion is.. There are 2 people in the house, Bill and Sue. Sue comes home after being gone all day and the lamp on the table is broken. There are no animals, there was no natural event and there was no one in the house other than Bill. The clear suspicion to Sue is that Bill broke the lamp. This new plan says…. There is a broken lamp at Bill and Sue’s house. Johnny, who lives 3 doors down was home during the day and can be investigated. Johnny can have his phones tapped, his house searched, medical and financial records searched and detained without an arrest warrant.

And in the name of safety, we cheer.

As Larry the cable guy says….. What the hell is this, Russia?

Yes Larry…. Yes it is. But don’t fret. This is what we need to be safe and to save our society. Of course to be safe and to ensure that ’they’ don’t win, we have to kill our constitution and strip our population of it’s rights. But if it saves just one building… well, it’s worth it.

I’ve heard the excuse that in times of war we must sacrfice and do things that we normally wouldn’t do. To those people saying this I have a question. When will it end? The war on drugs has been going on since the 80’s and there is no end in site. So how long do you think we’ll have to give up these rights? 20 years? 30? 50? And when it’s over, when we have done what no other society in the history of the world has done and have rid the world of religious extremism… Do you really think the powers that be will just give up the power we’ve given them?

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.

It’s such a simple concept, but it makes you a conspiracy theory nut if you believe it.

I… am not cheering

Orwell is not cheering…

Osama Bin Laden…..is cheering.

Can they do this?

Some people use the Internet simply to check e-mail and look up phone numbers. Others are online all day, downloading big video and music files.
For years, both kinds of Web surfers have paid the same price for access. But now three of the country’s largest Internet service providers are threatening to clamp down on their most active subscribers by placing monthly limits on their online activity.

One of them, Time Warner Cable, began a trial of “Internet metering” in one Texas city early this month, asking customers to select a monthly plan and pay surcharges when they exceed their bandwidth limit. The idea is that people who use the network more heavily should pay more, the way they do for water, electricity, or, in many cases, cellphone minutes.

Are you fucking kidding me? Is this the future of the internet? That we get charged for how much we are online.

All three companies say that placing caps on broadband use will ensure fair access for all users.

No, it’s not fair. Just because someone only goes online to check their email doesn’t mean I need to charged more because I , or someone in my house spends all day online. Why do the ones using it get punished and the ones not using it get all the fucking glory?

How about this. Set up a package for people who only use the internet for email and leave the rest of us alone. It could be like $10 a month for 450 minutes, that’s 15 minutes a day x 30 days. That’s all you need for an email check right? Once you do that though I guarantee more of these ‘email-only’ users will say “oh wait, I need an hour a day for email because I write really long letters”.

Yeah right. Too bad! You want to complain that that’s all you use it for… well then you get the small package, if you want more, then you pay what everyone else pays.But to start charging like we do for electric or water is just ridiculous. The internet is what makes us all equal in the world. Everyone has access to it and noone is richer/poorer than the next guy. But once you start putting a meter on it, the poorer people are going to have a hard time paying for more access while the rich people just run willy-nilly all over.

But the companies imposing the caps say that their actions are only fair. People who use more network capacity should pay more, Time Warner argues. And Comcast says that people who use too much — like those who engage in file-sharing — should be forced to slow down.

These people can suck my dick! No I don’t engage in ‘file-sharing’ but to hell with being ‘forced to slow-down’ ….. what the fuck is that all about?

In that trial, new customers can buy plans with a 5-gigabyte cap, a 20-gigabyte cap or a 40-gigabyte cap. Prices for those plans range from $30 to $50. Above the cap, customers pay $1 a gigabyte. Plans with higher caps come with faster service.

A high-definition episode of “Survivor” on CBS.com can use up to a gigabyte, and a DVD-quality movie through Netflix’s new online service can eat up about five gigabytes. One Netflix download alone, in fact, could bring a user to the limit on the cheapest plan in Time Warner’s trial in Beaumont.

Are you kidding, so one online DVD rental gets you over your monthly limit?

Again, why are the people using the internet being the ones punished?

“Should be forced to slow down”

Wtf? It’s a superhighway sure… but it’s not I-95. What is more speed, more sharing, more learning, more evolution hurting?

This whole thing is about greed and money. Companies are drooling all over themselves to find a way to tap into making more money off something they did not create and have nothing to do it’s evolution. They can’t charge you for content (well, they can, but you know what I mean) so they charge you to get on to the content…. And they charge you royally. But that’s not enough, now they want to charge you for how fast you use that free content.

Imagine, being charged at the library a higher rate because you read faster and more than someone else.

“Im sorry Ms. X, but you read Gone with the Wind way too fast so we’re going to have charge you double for War and Peace. You understand don’t you? It’s not fair to the slow reader that you get the same fee-guidelines as they do.”

fuck that!

I don’t know how to stop this from happening. I don’t know who to call or write to complain. I am afraid that congress really thinks the internet is a ‘series of tubes’ so they won’t help. Even they do know what the internet is, they’re pretty much sucking at getting anything done. Obviously I can’t go to my provider, because they are one of the ones pimping this horrible idea.

So I come to you, the ones on the internet that will be charged more money because you decided to read this blog instead of just checking the latest dick-growth fat burner. We need idea’s to stop this. BitTorrent couldn’t. But maybe that was because it happened to them too fast. We actually have warning. Unfortunately I make problems and don’t solve them so I am at a loss for what to do. But someone, somewhere has the solution. …. He or she has to. Putting a meter on the internet is putting a meter on learning and in this country we need all free the learning we can get.

Ok… so… I wonder if there was anything of interest in the news this week
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon Tuesday made public a now-defunct legal memo that approved the use of harsh interrogation techniques against terror suspects, saying President Bush’s wartime authority trumps any international ban on torture.

John Yoo’s memo was rescinded nine months later by his Justice Department successor.

The Justice Department memo, dated March 14, 2003, outlines legal justification for military interrogators to use harsh tactics against al Qaeda and Taliban detainees overseas — so long as they did not specifically intend to torture their captives.

Even so, the memo noted, the president’s wartime power as commander in chief would not be limited by the U.N. treaties against torture.

“Our previous opinions make clear that customary international law is not federal law and that the president is free to override it at his discretion,” said the memo written by John Yoo, who was then deputy assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel.

……

“The whole point of the memo is obviously to nullify every possible legal restraint on the president’s wartime authority,” Jaffer said. “The memo was meant to allow torture, and that’s exactly what it did.”

The 81-page legal analysis largely centers on whether interrogators can be held responsible for torture if torture is not the intent of the questioning. And it defines torture as the intended sum of a variety of acts, which could include acid scalding, severe mental pain and suffering, threat of imminent death and physical pain resulting in impaired body functions, organ failure or death.

The “definition of torture must be read as a sum of these component parts,” the memo said.

The memo also includes past legal defenses of interrogations that Yoo wrote are not considered torture, such as sleep depravation, hooding detainees and “frog crouching,” which forces prisoners to crouch while standing on the tips of their toes.

“This standard permits some physical contact,” the memo said. “Employing a shove or slap as part of an interrogation would not run afoul of this standard.”

The memo concludes that foreign enemy combatants held overseas do not have defendants’ rights or protections from cruel and unusual punishment that U.S. citizens have under the Constitution. It also says that Congress “cannot interfere with the president’s exercise of his authority as commander in chief to control the conduct of operations during a war.”

I’m going to let that last part sit there for a minute.

Before I go on, I really have to ‘tourette’ for a second….power hungry, Ego-fucking-tistical, Should be thrown in jail and have to learn the law , worst President of all time and more dangerous to the United States than an outbreak of the plague, asshole…

I am so disgusted by the ”’I don’t have to follow laws b/c I’m President Bush” motto that this administration has adopted. But at the same time it is interesting to see first hand the falling of Rome. I am a history nut so it’s an honor to be able to view as it’s happening the end of a great civilization where Presidents had to follow laws and if they didn’t Congress would step in and in they didn’t the public would outcry and if they didn’t the print news would dig in and expose something….well, that kind of stuff is what fairy-tales are made of.

I have a question and I really hope to get a well thought out answer.

If our President can claim that he doesn’t have to follow international law… And have his lawyer prove the one-sided argument by saying international law is not federal and therefore the President of the United States is not subject to following them…….. then why in the FUCK did we go to war b/c Saddam was breaking international laws?

What kind of simple minded, ego-thumping, death-star-dark-lord did you fucking people elect…..not once, but twice?

what the fuck is wrong with you? I can’t blame him for being what he is… but I can goddamn well blame you for letting him get away with it.

Yes, YOU…. the ones who stood by and watched and/or cheered. The Media whores who said nothing, the pundits who explained how he was right and good and out for our protection….. or just simply “This is War-War-War”

How could you stand by and cheer while he invaded, captured and killed a president of sovereign country with the excuse of “He’s dangerous to the Iraqi’s and he’s breaking international laws and resolutions.” and then turn around and say “Republican-good…President Bush-good…he no break law because he no have to follow them”… Didn’t Saddam have just as much right to say International Law and US Federal Law is not Iraqi law so it does not apply to me”

You douche bags can’t have it both ways……….. But you will. You will because you are the types that can’t be wrong. You can’t come back 7 years later and say “Oh dear god was I drunk or just stupid, dude really…my bad”

By the way, you allowed your president to murder another president… I just thought you should know.

Remember the last part of that article I quoted above, the part that I let sit there. Do you remember what it said?

“..The memo concludes …that Congress “cannot interfere with the president’s exercise of his authority as commander in chief …during a war”

You let him decide that not even Congress can stop him if he wants it.

What have you done?

Centers Tap Into Personal Databases
Intelligence centers run by states across the country have access to personal information about millions of Americans, including unlisted cellphone numbers, insurance claims, driver’s license photographs and credit reports, according to a document obtained by The Washington Post.
One center also has access to top-secret data systems at the CIA, the document shows, though it’s not clear what information those systems contain
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/01/AR2008040103049_pf.html

You’ve given him ‘above the law’ status.

You’ve given him mine and your entire personal information

You’ve given him all the rights and have let him take all of mine and yours.

Military skirting law to spy
The military is using the FBI to skirt legal restrictions on domestic surveillance to obtain private records of Americans’ Internet service providers, financial institutions and telephone companies, the ACLU said Tuesday.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080402/ap_on_re_us/national_security_letters

You’ve allowed the military to investigate it’s own civilians on it’s own soil.

Memo Justified Warrantless Surveillance
For at least 16 months after the Sept. 11 terror attacks in 2001, the Bush administration believed that the Constitution’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures on U.S. soil didn’t apply to its efforts to protect against terrorism.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080402/D8VQ1NG80.html

In some cases you’ve stood by and cheered because you are a republican and he is a republican and really, it’s not like were are really losing anything… Plus, we haven’t been attacked again have we?

In other cases you watched and kept silent for fear of being labeled unpatriotic for thinking the President is wrong. Because we all know that if anyone is infallible it’s the President because they screen for that kind of thing before letting him take the oath.

You’ve attacked the others who have tried to show you the dangers you are allowing. You’ve called them ‘crazies’ and ‘conspiracists‘. You made them out to be a members of the “Fox Mulder Club” and belittled them at every corner.

Shame on you. Bush may have wanted to turn the United States into something that resembles Saudi Arabia or Cuba, but he couldn’t have done it without You.

Was it worth it you son of a bitches?

Do you feel safer?

Do you even care?