Writing by Marq on Wednesday, 25 of July , 2007 at 5:45 pm
In what can only be seen as an unexpected show of testicular fortitude, the Democrats have done something! In a 22-17 vote the House Judiciary Committee voted to charge former White House hack Joshua Bilton, and almost Supreme Court Justice (she never had a chance) and questionable legal mind (oh and former White House Counsel) Harriet Miers for contempt of Congress for their failure to comply with subpoenas.
The vote was along party lines, no surprise the republicans have refused to stand up for constitutional democracy for over a decade now, so why start now.
The showdown will begin, because if you will recall, the Justice Department, headed by uber-discredited Alberto Gonzales, has stated that the Attorney General for the District of Columbia does not have to execute the charges laid out by Congress, which has basically destroyed the creditability of the Justice Department as a neutral arbiter of the law, and laid waste to the idea of checks and balances.
The question every American should be asking is, “If, as they claim they have nothing to hide, then why are they hiding SO MUCH?”
Writing by Marq on Monday, 14 of May , 2007 at 7:22 pm
I would like nothing more than for Joe Lieberman to be recalled by the morons that elected him. This man is a hack in every definition of the word. Now the “Democrat” is doing fundraisers for Republicans, that is how great a dem he is, so great he is helping Republicans.
Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) is never going to win any popularity contests among his party’s liberal base — a fact he seems decidedly unconcerned about despite his 2006 Democratic primary loss to Ned Lamont.
Not only has Lieberman endorsed Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine.) — one of Democrats’ biggest targets in the 2008 cycle — but he’s planning to co-host a fundraiser for her on June 21 in Washington, D.C.
The event, which will be held in a Capitol Hill location still to be determined, will feature Lieberman and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) — a very rare bipartisan fundraiser. Attendees are being asked to raise $3,000; $2,000 would come in the form of a political action committee donation while the other $1,000 would be a personal contribution, according to an electronic invite for the fundraiser obtained today by The Fix.
“Let’s try to make this a bi-partisan tour de force,” reads the invite.
“Senator Specter approached Senator Collins with the idea of doing a joint fundraising event with Senator Lieberman,” said Collins spokeswoman Jen Burita. “Both senators are colleagues with whom she works well and good friends, so we thought it was a great idea.”
Today on CNN, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said he “strongly disagrees” with Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) bipartisan delegation to Syria, calling it a “mistake” and “bad for the United States of America.”
Lieberman added, “I say this because we’re in a war. We’re in a war against the Islamic terrorists who attacked us on 9-11-01.” CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer responded, “But they had nothing to do with 9-11.” Lieberman dodged the issue and changed topics.
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), who visited Syria last year, defended Pelosi’s trip. “I believe in the maxim, hold your friends close and your enemies closer,” Specter said. “President Ronald Reagan declared the Soviet Union to be the Evil Empire. Immediately thereafter he undertook negotiations with them.” Specter said he has been to Syria 14 times over the last two decades “and have been able to be helpful in a number of situations that I can document.”
SPECTER: I believe that Assad can be negotiated with. I’ve made 14 trips there, Wolf, in the last two decades, and have been able to be helpful in a number of situations that I can document. And I think opening discussions with Syria are very, very important, and I’d rather Condoleezza Rice did it, but if not, it’s up to Speaker Pelosi and Arlen Specter and others.
BLITZER: What about Senator Lieberman, what do you think?
LIEBERMAN: I respectfully and strongly disagree with Arlen Specter and with Nancy Pelosi. I believe her visit to Syria was a mistake, that it was bad for the United States of America and good for the Syrians. And I say this because we’re in a war. We’re in a war against the Islamic terrorists who attacked us on 9-11-01. Syria is a state sponsor of terrorism.
BLITZER: But they had nothing to do with 9-11.
LIEBERMAN: But they have — but let me tell what you they have to do with what we’re into now. The Bashir Assad Syrian government has allowed terrorists and arms to flow across its country into Iraq that are being used to kill Americans today. Syria has been implicated in the assassination of a very strong popular Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri. Syria is supporting Hezbollah, which is trying to unseat our ally, Senora, in Lebanon. Syria is supporting the terrorist group Hamas against our allies in the Fatah Palestinian movement, and of course, Israel. The administration, in all fairness — people in Washington should know, if they don’t know, the administration has been trying in many ways, in diplomatic discussions with Syria since 9-11, to get Assad to change his behavior and he has not. When Nancy Pelosi goes there, she sends a message of disunity. She legitimizes the Syrian goverment.
BLITZER: So I assume you disagree with Senator Specter’s decision. I want Senator Specter to respond. Why do you think Senator Lieberman, Senator Specter, is wrong?
SPECTER: I believe in the maxim, hold your friends close and your enemies closer. President Ronald Reagan declared the Soviet Union to be the evil empire, and immediately thereafter undertook negotiations with them. Look, Assad is not a boy scout, but we have to deal with him. he’s there. In my conversation with him, I think there are ways to get him to stop arming Hezbollah and to stop arming Hamas. They came on the brink of a solution to the Golan Heights in 1995 and again in the year 2000. That was done by active negotiation that President Clinton engaged in. So there are ways to move through it, and to isolate them has not been successful.
Writing by Marq on Thursday, 29 of March , 2007 at 9:22 am
I am glad to see that the Democrats are growing a set of balls and standing up for our troops against the abuse of the President. The Democratically controlled Congress on both side passed the war funding bill. Bush is scared out of his scull, never before has Congress ever stood up to him, and he does not know what to do.
He is calling all of the House Republicans to the White House, attempting to shore up support for his veto. Never in my life have a ever heard of a president needing to shore up support for a veto. Why is he doing this? Easy, the Republicans know that if he vetoes this bill, a real argument can be made that the Republican president stopped funding for the war. If you want proof of this theory, you need look no further than the Senate vote on this bill, even with the timetables, the Republicans would not filibuster this, because they knew it would not look good to filibuster the funding of the troops. The Republicans also fear that if the President vetoes this bill the Democrats my not bring it’s successor to the floor, ending the war by default, and the blame will be on the Republicans. This president has only vetoed one bill in his whole life, a stem cell research bill, do Republicans really want the other bill Bush vetoes to be funding for our troops? The war is unpopular to the American people, and the Republicans are already bleeding to death, they may be willing to throw Bush under the bus to save their asses.
I would warn the President not to veto the Iraq War spending bill, because when it is all said in done the fact remains that the Congress passed the funding, and a Republican president vetoed it.
Writing by Marq on Thursday, 15 of March , 2007 at 2:09 pm
The stand-off will soon begin between the White House and Congress. The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Patrick Leahy said he wants answers in the political firing of US attorneys, and he does not care what the White House thinks about the soon to be issues subpoenas to haul Karl Rove, the failed Justice Harriet Miers, and the more.
Now I do not think it takes a political genius to see that the White House is going to try to tell Congress to shove it all up their asses, and use some corny “Executive Privilege” crap. The real battle is not the response from the White House, but what Congresses response is to the White House’s Screw you… Sadly, given the boneless nature of the Democrats, I bet they do nothing, If you ask me, Impeach Bush’s sorry ass.
Now ThinkProgress already has posted that the White House plans to fight. Go for it George, American needs yet another reason to kick your ass out. I bet the Republicans are kicking themselfs for all the precedence setting crap they did to Clinton.
They write…
During a press briefing yesterday, presidential counselor Dan Bartlett signaled that the White House will fight congressional efforts to have Karl Rove testify about his role in the U.S. Attorney purge.
I find it highly unlikely that a member of the White House staff would testify publicly to these matters, but that doesn’t mean we won’t find other ways to try to share that information.
Well, as you know, Ed, it has been traditional in all White Houses not to have staffers testify on Capitol Hill. So I think what we have been trying to do is to work in a way to be as forthcoming with members of Congress — you saw all the emails coming out today — give them all the information so that they can make a fair judgment about it.
Top House Democrats retreated Monday from an attempt to limit President Bush’s authority for taking military action against Iran as the leadership concentrated on a looming confrontation with the White House over the Iraq war.
Officials said Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other members of the leadership had decided to strip from a major military spending bill a requirement for Bush to gain approval from Congress before moving against Iran.
Conservative Democrats as well as lawmakers concerned about the possible impact on Israel had argued for the change in strategy.
The developments occurred as Democrats pointed toward an initial test vote in the House Appropriations Committee on Thursday on the overall bill, which would require the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq by Sept. 1, 2008, if not earlier. The measure provides nearly $100 billion to pay for fighting in two wars, and includes more money than the president requested for operations in Afghanistan and what Democrats called training and equipment shortages.
Writing by Marq on Friday, 23 of February , 2007 at 11:48 am
Under the Republicans, who shirked their duty every chance they had in doing any level of oversight on the war in Iraq, the Bush Administration was able to manage it any way they wanted, and what have we gotten under Bush management, a nation descending into the bowels of hell. The Republicans never once said no.
When Bush said, “I want to rotate the troops back in so fast they do not even get a chance to screw their wives and watch the baby be born”, the Republicans said “Sure thing!”
When he said, “I would like to load money into trucks and dump it at Halliburton’s door”, the Republicans said, “What ever you say boss!”
Bush said, “The troops mean so little to me that I do not care if they are housed like 3rd world prisoners on a bad day”, the GOP leadership in congress said, “Say it and we will make it happen.”
At ever turn, and at every moment for the last 5 years of the Bush “Presidency” the Republicans in the House and Senate have covered for him, ran interference for him, turned a blind eye to him, or flat out lied for him, the mess in Iraq, the drain on the Treasury and the death of ever soldier falls squarely in the laps of George, Dick, and the GOP who acted as enablers to the disaster. Bush has had it all, and look what we have to show for it.
Last week the Republicans tried to bluff their way out of dealing with Iraq, many of them said on the floor of the Senate that they would not support the “Non-binding resolution” because it was non-binding. Some went so far is to dare the Democrats to put forth a binding resolution, something that made the debate more than symbolic, well you got what you asked for, and I am sure in Republican circles the administration is shitting itself right now…
And for you right wingers out there that are screaming something to the effect of “Democrats don’t support the troops” Shut the fuck up, we do support the troops, many of us (Unlike the GOP cacus) were troops, and we are bring them home, or we are asking that they be fully trained and equipped before they go over. How is asking for them to be trained and equipped not supporting the troops? Will it hamper the Bush war machine, your damn right it will, because right now we is sending them over to Iraq with little or no training, and no equipment, how is that supporting the troops again?
As a disabled-vet, I support the moves being made by the Democrats!
Writing by on Tuesday, 23 of January , 2007 at 10:52 pm
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 Democratic Response of Senator Jim Webb To the President's State of the Union Address
Good evening.
I'm Senator Jim Webb, from Virginia, where this year we will celebrate the 400th anniversary of the settlement of Jamestown - an event that marked the first step in the long journey that has made us the greatest and most prosperous nation on earth.
It would not be possible in this short amount of time to actually rebut the President's message, nor would it be useful. Let me simply say that we in the Democratic Party hope that this administration is serious about improving education and healthcare for all Americans, and addressing such domestic priorities as restoring the vitality of New Orleans.
Further, this is the seventh time the President has mentioned energy independence in his state of the union message, but for the first time this exchange is taking place in a Congress led by the Democratic Party. We are looking for affirmative solutions that will strengthen our nation by freeing us from our dependence on foreign oil, and spurring a wave of entrepreneurial growth in the form of alternate energy programs. We look forward to working with the President and his party to bring about these changes.
There are two areas where our respective parties have largely stood in contradiction, and I want to take a few minutes to address them tonight. The first relates to how we see the health of our economy - how we measure it, and how we ensure that its benefits are properly shared among all Americans. The second regards our foreign policy - how we might bring the war in Iraq to a proper conclusion that will also allow us to continue to fight the war against international terrorism, and to address other strategic concerns that our country faces around the world.
When one looks at the health of our economy, it's almost as if we are living in two different countries. Some say that things have never been better. The stock market is at an all-time high, and so are corporate profits. But these benefits are not being fairly shared. When I graduated from college, the average corporate CEO made 20 times what the average worker did; today, it's nearly 400 times. In other words, it takes the average worker more than a year to make the money that his or her boss makes in one day.
Wages and salaries for our workers are at all-time lows as a percentage of national wealth, even though the productivity of American workers is the highest in the world. Medical costs have skyrocketed. College tuition rates are off the charts. Our manufacturing base is being dismantled and sent overseas. Good American jobs are being sent along with them.
In short, the middle class of this country, our historic backbone and our best hope for a strong society in the future, is losing its place at the table. Our workers know this, through painful experience. Our white-collar professionals are beginning to understand it, as their jobs start disappearing also. And they expect, rightly, that in this age of globalization, their government has a duty to insist that their concerns be dealt with fairly in the international marketplace.
In the early days of our republic, President Andrew Jackson established an important principle of American-style democracy - that we should measure the health of our society not at its apex, but at its base. Not with the numbers that come out of Wall Street, but with the living conditions that exist on Main Street. We must recapture that spirit today.
And under the leadership of the new Democratic Congress, we are on our way to doing so. The House just passed a minimum wage increase, the first in ten years, and the Senate will soon follow. We've introduced a broad legislative package designed to regain the trust of the American people. We've established a tone of cooperation and consensus that extends beyond party lines. We're working to get the right things done, for the right people and for the right reasons.
With respect to foreign policy, this country has patiently endured a mismanaged war for nearly four years. Many, including myself, warned even before the war began that it was unnecessary, that it would take our energy and attention away from the larger war against terrorism, and that invading and occupying Iraq would leave us strategically vulnerable in the most violent and turbulent corner of the world.
I want to share with all of you a picture that I have carried with me for more than 50 years. This is my father, when he was a young Air Force captain, flying cargo planes during the Berlin Airlift. He sent us the picture from Germany, as we waited for him, back here at home. When I was a small boy, I used to take the picture to bed with me every night, because for more than three years my father was deployed, unable to live with us full-time, serving overseas or in bases where there was no family housing. I still keep it, to remind me of the sacrifices that my mother and others had to make, over and over again, as my father gladly served our country. I was proud to follow in his footsteps, serving as a Marine in Vietnam. My brother did as well, serving as a Marine helicopter pilot. My son has joined the tradition, now serving as an infantry Marine in Iraq.
Like so many other Americans, today and throughout our history, we serve and have served, not for political reasons, but because we love our country. On the political issues - those matters of war and peace, and in some cases of life and death - we trusted the judgment of our national leaders. We hoped that they would be right, that they would measure with accuracy the value of our lives against the enormity of the national interest that might call upon us to go into harm's way.
We owed them our loyalty, as Americans, and we gave it. But they owed us - sound judgment, clear thinking, concern for our welfare, a guarantee that the threat to our country was equal to the price we might be called upon to pay in defending it.
The President took us into this war recklessly. He disregarded warnings from the national security adviser during the first Gulf War, the chief of staff of the army, two former commanding generals of the Central Command, whose jurisdiction includes Iraq, the director of operations on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many, many others with great integrity and long experience in national security affairs. We are now, as a nation, held hostage to the predictable - and predicted - disarray that has followed.
The war's costs to our nation have been staggering. Financially. The damage to our reputation around the world. The lost opportunities to defeat the forces of international terrorism. And especially the precious blood of our citizens who have stepped forward to serve.
The majority of the nation no longer supports the way this war is being fought; nor does the majority of our military. We need a new direction. Not one step back from the war against international terrorism. Not a precipitous withdrawal that ignores the possibility of further chaos. But an immediate shift toward strong regionally-based diplomacy, a policy that takes our soldiers off the streets of Iraq's cities, and a formula that will in short order allow our combat forces to leave Iraq.
On both of these vital issues, our economy and our national security, it falls upon those of us in elected office to take action.
Regarding the economic imbalance in our country, I am reminded of the situation President Theodore Roosevelt faced in the early days of the 20th century. America was then, as now, drifting apart along class lines. The so-called robber barons were unapologetically raking in a huge percentage of the national wealth. The dispossessed workers at the bottom were threatening revolt.
Roosevelt spoke strongly against these divisions. He told his fellow Republicans that they must set themselves "as resolutely against improper corporate influence on the one hand as against demagogy and mob rule on the other." And he did something about it.
As I look at Iraq, I recall the words of former general and soon-to-be President Dwight Eisenhower during the dark days of the Korean War, which had fallen into a bloody stalemate. "When comes the end?" asked the General who had commanded our forces in Europe during World War Two. And as soon as he became President, he brought the Korean War to an end.
These Presidents took the right kind of action, for the benefit of the American people and for the health of our relations around the world. Tonight we are calling on this President to take similar action, in both areas. If he does, we will join him. If he does not, we will be showing him the way.
Writing by on Thursday, 4 of January , 2007 at 3:24 pm
One of the great things about America is that we transfer the power from one party to another with out a coup or war. In the history of the United States the outgoing Speaker of the House hands the gavel of the House over to the new incoming Speaker of the House, a celebration of the transfer of power. Well leave it to the bitter ass Republicans to sit out this 200 year tradition. Fat load Dennis Hastert could not get his fat ass out of his chair and climb the 4 steps to the podium and hand the gavel to Nancy Pelosi. He was in the room, he just refused to participate, that is how bitter he and the Republicans are. He forced the now Minority Leader John Boehner to do it for him.
Thank you Republicans for showing the Nation just how much you hate America, you will not even play along in the few parliamentary traditions we do have. Why do Republicans hate America? Why do they hate the Will of the People that pushed them out of Power?
Writing by on Wednesday, 3 of January , 2007 at 8:37 pm
I have spoken a lot about the new Republican strategy, pure unadulterated racism and hate mongering. Want proof, all you have to do is take a look at the sick things belched from the future president of the reinstate slavery committee, Republican Congressman Virgil Goode (From the same state as uber-Racist George Allen (VA)), in a letter to his people he said that if we do not start kicking out the Muslims that we will be overrun, and that the newly elected Congressman Keith Ellison is somehow evil.
Well Keith Ellison has done a great job at holding his tongue against the disgusting statements of Goode. So on the eve of his swearing in as the first Muslim Congressman ever, Ellison will have the last laugh. In a move that I think is classic, he has made a call over to the Library of Congress and asked the curator of the Rare Books and Special Collections to allow him to take his oath of office on not just any Quran, but the very Quran that was owned by the founding father, Thomas Jefferson. This Quran was printed in the 1700 in England, translated from Arabic into English. In what makes this such a great classic move is that the birth place of Thomas Jefferson is a highlight of Goodes district.
Writing by on Tuesday, 2 of January , 2007 at 7:07 pm
Wow it is almost shocking to me how stunningly cowardly the Republicans are. Now that they are in the minority, and can not even take a shit without having to ask the Democrats, they are begging for the Democrats not to treat them the same way they treated them when they had power.
TPM has a new letter by the Republicans begging for the house to take up a Minority Bill of Rights the very same bill that the Republicans refused to even thing of hitting the floor when they were in charge
Here is the letter, dated December 29, 2006 Now lets look at a new story by the Washington Post dated June 24, 2004, Mr. Haster told the Democrats to stick it!
In short here is the new cowardly Republican mantra, "Please for the love of god do not do to us what we did to you", I say to them, We will get to your bill as soon as we are done fixing the Nation you so quicky distroyed. Oddly a few weeks ago they were in charge, you would think thay would have been smarter with their time, and maybe passed this?
Writing by on Wednesday, 8 of November , 2006 at 10:44 am
I am pleased to say that the Democrats did not lose a singe incumbency yesterday. Every Democratic incumbent that ran, won.
This is for lack of a better word, an ass raping. The Democrats did to the Republicans what Jeff Gannon did to Karl Rove.
The democracy lives again, checks and balances have been restored, the lights have been turned on, and the roaches that once ruled now scurry for cover. Americans have spoken, and in a load and clear voice they say, No More! No more middle of the night meetings to find ways to destroy the Union. No more shitting on the Constitution because it stands in the way of your ego. No more lies. No more cheats.
NO MORE!
It is time
It is time to ask the hard questions, like what did we know going into Iraq
It is time to make sure that the vote can never be stolen again
It is time to protect the least among us, not to turn a blind eye as the corporations rape the land
It is time to reinstate the lost art of science
It is time to stop the abused in the Marion Island
It is time for the nation to reclaim its glory as the inventors of the world
It is time to place our veterans at the top of the stack, not the bottom
In short, it is time to ask the hard questions, the ones the administration refuses to even acknowledge are there
I would like nothing more than for Joe Lieberman to be recalled by the morons that elected him. This man is a hack in every definition of the word. Now the “Democrat” is doing fundraisers for Republicans, that is how great a dem he is, so great he is helping Republicans.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007 
