Drinking Liberally®

OK, Liberals, here is a blerb from the invitation for tonight's big event. For more details, go to www.horneforcongress.com

Join us for a Celebration of Service
Please join us in honoring Lt. Col. Andrew Horne of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve as we celebrate his lifetime of service to family, country and community.

Friday, March 31, 2006, 7:00 p.m.
United Auto Workers Local 862 Hall
3000 Fern Valley Road
Louisville, Kentucky

Paul HackettAndrew, who served active duty in both Operation Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom, will retire from the Marines on March 31, the 27th anniversary of his enlistment straight out of Pleasure Ridge Park High School. We are gathering to cheer him on his new path, speaking truth to power as a Democratic candidate for Kentucky’s 3rd Congressional District in Louisville!

Our special guest will be Marine reservist Paul Hackett, a Fighting Dem from Ohio. Andrew and Paul -- who gave a hilarious interview this week on “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” -- are buddies who served together in Iraq, and now are taking the battle to Washington and the nation.

Andrew and Paul are also Democratic veterans against the current war. Both, based on their experiences, believe Americans were lied to about the reasons for the invasion. And both witnessed the Bush administration’s failures on a massive, tragic scale.

Paul has recently joined the Board of Advisors of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America Political Action Committee (IAVA PAC). The PAC exists exclusively to help other Iraq and Afghanistan veterans seeking to continue their service through elected office.

Currently, not one person in Congress debating this war has served in it. The result has been a total lack of credibility on the issue to challenge the President. The war in Iraq affects all aspects of American life – from the economy to energy policy to our readiness to handle disasters like Hurricane Katrina or, God forbid, another terrorist attack. Only by charting a course for victory in Iraq that includes metrics for success that are tied to eventual drawdowns can we begin to adequately address the multitude of other issues facing our nation. That simply won’t happen until Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans serve in the halls of power.

Posted by vicki at 06:06 AM

What goes unmentioned in this tale is that the Preznit and most of his Cabinet were on vacation and scattered a mere 6 months in office. And they did so despite months of extremely high levels of red alert that terrorists were plotting to attack inside the US, perhaps with planes. Just read it and weep: here

At Sept. 11 Trial, Tale of Missteps and Management

By SCOTT SHANE and NEIL A. LEWIS
Published: March 31, 2006
WASHINGTON, March 30 — Three weeks of testimony and dozens of documents released in the sentencing of Zacarias Moussaoui have offered an eerie parallel view of two organizations, Al Qaeda and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and how they pursued their missions before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Al Qaeda, according to a newly revealed account from the chief plotter, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, took its time in choosing targets — attack the White House or perhaps a nuclear plant in Pennsylvania? Organizers sized up and selected operatives, teaching them how to apply for a visa and how to cut a throat, a skill they practiced on sheep and camels. Despite the mistakes of careless subordinates and an erratic boss, Osama bin Laden, Mr. Mohammed tried to keep the plot on course.

Mr. Mohammed, a Pakistani-born, American-trained engineer, "thought simplicity was the key to success," says the summary of his interrogation by the Central Intelligence Agency. It is all the more chilling for the banal managerial skills it ascribes to the man who devised the simultaneous air attacks.

If Mr. Mohammed's guiding principle was simplicity, the United States government relied on sprawling bureaucracies at feuding agencies to look for myriad potential threats. The C.I.A. had lots of information on two hijackers, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar, but the F.B.I. did not know the men had settled in San Diego, where Mr. Mohammed had instructed them to "spend time visiting museums and amusement parks" so they could masquerade as tourists.

At the F.B.I., a few agents pursued clues that would later prove tantalizingly close to the mark, but they could not draw attention from top counterterrorism officials. A Minnesota F.B.I. agent, Harry M. Samit, warned in a memorandum that Mr. Moussaoui was a dangerous Islamic extremist whose study of how to fly a Boeing 747-400 seemed to be part of a sinister plot.

Posted by vicki at 05:45 AM

Top secret super dooper insider sources tell me this joker is going to crash DL again tonight. Why won't he leave us alone? OY!

Posted by vicki at 02:27 PM | Comments (1)

Mr. tough on terror, "wanted, dead or alive" Bu$h and cronies had 3 opportunities to get this murderous terrorist and blew it. Just like they blew getting Bin Laden and his top commandos. The utter incompetence of this gang is mind blowing. Some WAR president.

Avoiding attacking suspected terrorist mastermind
Abu Musab Zarqawi blamed for more than 700 killings in Iraq

By Jim Miklaszewski
Correspondent
NBC News
Updated: 7:14 p.m. ET March 2, 2004

With Tuesday’s attacks, Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian militant with ties to al-Qaida, is now blamed for more than 700 terrorist killings in Iraq.

But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself — but never pulled the trigger.

In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.

The Pentagon quickly drafted plans to attack the camp with cruise missiles and airstrikes and sent it to the White House, where, according to U.S. government sources, the plan was debated to death in the National Security Council.

“Here we had targets, we had opportunities, we had a country willing to support casualties, or risk casualties after 9/11 and we still didn’t do it,” said Michael O’Hanlon, military analyst with the Brookings Institution.

Four months later, intelligence showed Zarqawi was planning to use ricin in terrorist attacks in Europe.

The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it. By then the administration had set its course for war with Iraq.

“People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of preemption against terrorists,” according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey.

In January 2003, the threat turned real. Police in London arrested six terror suspects and discovered a ricin lab connected to the camp in Iraq.

The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it.

Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.

The United States did attack the camp at Kirma at the beginning of the war, but it was too late — Zarqawi and many of his followers were gone. “Here’s a case where they waited, they waited too long and now we’re suffering as a result inside Iraq,” Cressey added.

And despite the Bush administration’s tough talk about hitting the terrorists before they strike, Zarqawi’s killing streak continues today.

Posted by vicki at 09:44 AM

From today's NYTimes. Good grief. Things have gotten so bad in this country that upholding the Constitution is considered a victory. But it's not over yet. http://www.nytimes.com/pages/national/index.html

Justices Hint That They'll Rule on Challenge Filed by Detainee

By LINDA GREENHOUSE
Published: March 29, 2006

WASHINGTON, March 28 — As the justices of the Supreme Court took their seats Tuesday morning to hear Osama bin Laden's former driver challenge the Bush administration's plan to try him before a military commission, one question — perhaps the most important one — was how protective the justices would be of their jurisdiction to decide the case.

Associated Press

Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's former driver, is at the center of a legal battle.

The answer emerged gradually, but by the end of the tightly packed 90-minute argument, it was fairly clear: highly protective.

At least five justices — Stephen G. Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter and John Paul Stevens — appeared ready to reject the administration's argument that the Detainee Treatment Act, passed and signed into law after the court accepted the case in November, had stripped the court of jurisdiction.

It was less certain by the end of the argument how the court would then go on to resolve the merits of the case, a multipronged attack on the validity of the military commissions themselves and on their procedures. Lawyers for the former driver, a Yemeni named Salim Ahmed Hamdan who is charged with conspiracy, also argue that he cannot properly be tried before any military commission for that crime because conspiracy is not recognized as a war crime.

Solicitor General Paul D. Clement was on the defensive throughout his argument. His stolid refusal to concede that any of the government's positions, on the jurisdictional as well as ultimate questions of the case, might present even theoretical problems provoked the normally soft-spoken Justice Souter into an outburst of anger.

What appeared to trouble Justice Souter most was Mr. Clement's discussion with Justice Stevens about whether Congress's removal of the federal courts' jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus petitions from detainees at the naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, amounted to "suspending" the writ of habeas corpus.

Suspending habeas corpus is an action, limited by the Constitution to "cases of rebellion or invasion," that Congress has taken only four times in the country's history. Habeas corpus is the means by which prisoners can go to court to challenge the lawfulness of their confinement, and its suspension is historically regarded as a serious, if not drastic, step.

Mr. Clement's position was that Congress had not in fact suspended habeas corpus, but that it might constitutionally have done so given "the exigencies of 9/11." Addressing Justice Stevens, the solicitor general said, "My view would be that if Congress sort of stumbles upon a suspension of the writ, that the preconditions are satisfied, that would still be constitutionally valid."

Justice Souter interrupted. "Isn't there a pretty good argument that suspension of the writ of habeas corpus is just about the most stupendously significant act that the Congress of the United States can take," he asked, "and therefore we ought to be at least a little slow to accept your argument that it can be done from pure inadvertence?"

When Mr. Clement began to answer, Justice Souter persisted: "You are leaving us with the position of the United States that the Congress may validly suspend it inadvertently. Is that really your position?"

Posted by vicki at 08:50 AM

OUT OF CONTROL IMPERIAL PREZNIT

Judges on Secretive Panel Speak Out on Spy Program
Doug Mills/The New York TimesJudges Harold A. Baker, from left, Allan Kornblum and Stanley S. Brotman spoke with one another Tuesday before a hearing on Capitol Hill.

by ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: March 29, 2006
WASHINGTON, March 28 — Five former judges on the nation's most secretive court, including one who resigned in apparent protest over President Bush's domestic eavesdropping, urged Congress on Tuesday to give the court a formal role in overseeing the surveillance program.

Beverly Rezneck/Polaris
Judge James Robertson quit the intelligence court just days after the spy program was disclosed.

In a rare glimpse into the inner workings of the secretive court, known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, several former judges who served on the panel also voiced skepticism at a Senate hearing about the president's constitutional authority to order wiretapping on Americans without a court order. They also suggested that the program could imperil criminal prosecutions that grew out of the wiretaps.

Judge Harold A. Baker, a sitting federal judge in Illinois who served on the intelligence court until last year, said the president was bound by the law "like everyone else." If a law like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is duly enacted by Congress and considered constitutional, Judge Baker said, "the president ignores it at the president's peril."

Judge Baker and three other judges who served on the intelligence court testified at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in support of a proposal by Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, to give the court formal oversight of the National Security Agency's eavesdropping program. Committee members also heard parts of a letter in support of the proposal from a fifth judge, James Robertson, who left the court last December, days after the eavesdropping program was disclosed.

The intelligence court, created by Congress in 1978, meets in a tightly guarded, windowless office at the Justice Department. The court produces no public findings except for a single tally to Congress each year on the number of warrants it has issued — more than 1,600 in 2004. Even its roster of judges serving seven-year terms was, for a time, considered secret.

But Mr. Bush's decision effectively to bypass the court in permitting eavesdropping without warrants has raised the court's profile. That was underscored by the appearance on Tuesday of the four former FISA judges: Judge Baker; Judge Stanley S. Brotman, who left the panel in 2004; Judge John F. Keenan, who left in 2001; and Judge William H. Stafford Jr., who left in 2003. All four sit on the federal judiciary.

At a hearing lasting more than three hours, the former FISA judges discussed in detail their views on the standards of proof required by the court, its relations with the Justice Department, and the constitutional, balance-of-power issues at the heart of the debate over the N.S.A. program. The agency monitored the international communications of people inside the United States believed to be linked to Al Qaeda.

The public broadcasting of the court's business struck some court watchers as extraordinary. "This is unprecedented," said Magistrate Judge Allan Kornblum, who supervised Justice Department wiretap applications to the court for many years and testified alongside the four former judges.

But the most pointed testimony may have come from a man who was not at the hearing: Judge Robertson.

A sitting federal judge in Washington, Judge Robertson resigned from the intelligence court just days after the N.S.A. program was disclosed.

Colleagues say he resigned in frustration over the fact that none of the court's 11 judges, except for the presiding judge, were briefed on the program or knew of its existence. But Judge Robertson has remained silent, declining all requests for interviews, and his comments entered into The Congressional Record on Tuesday represented his first public remarks on the controversy.

In a March 23 letter in response to a query from Mr. Specter, the judge said he supported Mr. Specter's proposal "to give approval authority over the administration's electronic surveillance program" to the court.

The Bush administration, in its continued defense of the program, maintains that no change in the law is needed because the president has the inherent constitutional authority to order wiretaps without warrants in defense of the country.

Mr. Specter's proposal seeks to give the intelligence court a role in ruling on the legitimacy of the program. A competing proposal by Senator Mike DeWine, Republican of Ohio, would allow the president to authorize wiretaps for 45 days without Congressional oversight or judicial approval.

Judge Robertson made clear that he believed the FISA court should review the surveillance program. "Seeking judicial approval for government activities that implicate constitutional protections is, of course, the American way," he wrote.

But Judge Robertson argued that the court should not conduct a "general review" of the surveillance operation, as Mr. Specter proposed. Instead, he said the court should rule on individual warrant applications for eavesdropping under the program lasting 45 or 90 days.

Acknowledging the need for secrecy surrounding such a program, he said the FISA court was "best situated" for the task. "Its judges are independent, appropriately cleared, experienced in intelligence matters, and have a perfect security record," Judge Robertson said.

He did not weigh in on the ultimate question of whether he considered the N.S.A. program illegal. The judges at the committee hearing avoided that politically charged issue despite persistent questioning from Democrats, even as the judges raised concerns about how the program was put into effect.

Judge Baker said he felt most comfortable talking about possible changes to strengthen the foreign intelligence law. "Whether something's legal or illegal goes beyond that," he said, "and that's why I'm shying away from answering that."

Posted by vicki at 08:16 AM

If you're new to DL and wonder what this project is all about chick here for details.

Posted by vicki at 07:56 PM

We have been offered free tickets to this event. I'll bring them to DL Thursday if you want one.

Please join Marine reservist Paul Hackett and Lt. Col. Andrew Horne for a celebration of Andrew's 27 years of service in the Marine Corps Reserve.

Friday, March 31, 2006, 7:00 p.m.
UAW Hall, Local 862
3000 Fern Valley Road
Louisville, Kentucky

Check out this funny segment on Jon Stewart's Daily Show!
http://horneforcongress.com/2006/03/paul_hackett_on.php

Posted by vicki at 07:50 PM

University Relations www.liberty.edu

What a WHORE! McCain and Hillary seem to be in competition to out fundie each other in courting the wingnut vote. They're playing us all for fools.

Senator John McCain to Address Liberty Commencement Ceremony
March 28, 2006

LYNCHBURG, Va. — American military hero and Arizona Sen. John McCain will deliver the Commencement message at Liberty University on May 13, at 9:30 a.m., in the Liberty University Vines Center. In addition, renowned Christian conservative leader Gary Bauer will speak during the University’s baccalaureate service on May 12, at 7:00 p.m., in the main sanctuary of the Thomas Road Baptist Church.

Sen. McCain is one of America’s most recognized Republican lawmakers. He began his political career in 1982, when he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, serving Arizona’s first congressional district. Four years later, he was elected to the U.S. Senate, replacing the legendary Sen. Barry Goldwater.

In 2000, McCain ran unsuccessfully for the Republican nomination for president of the United States. He is currently the chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, and serves on the Armed Services and Commerce, Science and Transportation Committees.

Sen. McCain’s name cannot be mentioned without most Americans recalling his distinguished service to the nation as a Naval aviator.

The 1958 Naval Academy graduate served 22 years in the U.S. Navy. In 1967, he was shot down over Vietnam and detained as a prisoner-of-war in Hanoi for more than five years (1967-1973). He has been awarded the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.

Sen. McCain, whose father and grandfather were each four-star admirals in the U.S. Navy, recounted his life’s story in his best-selling autobiography, “Faith of My Fathers,” which spent 24 weeks on The New York Times best sellers list.

Paul Douglas of the Institute of Government & Public Affairs has praised Sen. McCain as “a leader in the most critical issues facing our country. He has waged a determined and often solitary campaign against pork barrel spending, fighting for ten years to pass a line item veto. He has been a persistent proponent of lower taxes, deregulation and free trade. He has become one of Congress’ most respected voices for a strong national defense, and for sound foreign policy.”

While Sen. McCain and Liberty University Chancellor Jerry Falwell have had their share of political differences through the years, the two men share a common respect for each other and have become good friends in their efforts to preserve what they see as common values. This will mark his first ever appearance at Liberty University.

Sen. McCain is a practicing Christian. He has seven children and four grandchildren. He and wife Cindy reside in Phoenix.

Posted by vicki at 11:09 AM | Comments (1)

Big Deal. One tool replaces another. Earth to Bu$h, it ain't gonna help.

Andrew Card Resigns as White House Chief of Staff
By TERENCE HUNT, AP

Andrew Cards's departure comes at a time when President Bush's approval ratings are down sharply. He plans to depart April 14.

WASHINGTON (March 28) -- White House chief of staff Andy Card has resigned and will be replaced by budget director Joshua Bolten, President Bush announced Tuesday amid growing calls for a White House shakeup and Republican concern about Bush's tumbling poll ratings.

Bush announced the changes in an nationally broadcast appearance in the Oval Office.

"I have relied on Andy's wise counsel, his calm in crisis, his absolute integrity and his tireless commitment to public service," Bush said. "The next three years will demand much of those who serve our country. We have a global war to fight and win."

Card stood stoically with his hands by his sides as Bush lauded his years of service through the Sept. 11 attacks, war and legislative and economic challenges. Gripping the podium, Card said in his farewell: "You're a good man, Mr. President." [Hahahahahahaha] Card's eyes were watery. Card said he looks forward to just being Bush's friend. Bush then gave him five quick slaps on the back and the two walked out of the Oval Office together.

The president called Bolten a man with broad experience, both on Wall Street and in Washington, including the last three years as director of the Office of Management and Budget.

"Josh is a creative policy thinker," Bush said. "He is an expert on the budget and our economy. He is a man of candor and humor and directness. No person is better prepared for this important position."

"I'm deeply honored now by the opportunity to succeed Andy Card as White House chief of staff," Bolten responded. "I said, 'Succeed Andy Card, not replace him,' because he cannot be replaced."

The move cames as Bush is buffeted by increasing criticism of the drawn-out war in Iraq and as fellow Republicans have suggested pointedly that the president bring in new aides with fresh ideas and new energy.

Card came to Bush recently and suggested that he should step down from the job that he has held from the first day of Bush's presidency, said an administration official earlier.

Bush decided during a weekend stay at Camp David, Md., to accept Card's resignation and to name Bolten as his replacement, said the source who spoke on condition of anonymity because he did not want to pre-empt the president.

Bolten is widely experienced in Washington, both on Capitol Hill as well as at the White House, where he was deputy chief of staff before becoming director of the Office of Management and Budget.

At a White House news conference last week, Bush was asked about rumors that a shake up in the White House staff was in the works. Bush said, "I'm satisfied with the people I've surrounded myself with. We've been a remarkably stable administration, and I think that's good for the country."

"I've got a staff of people that have, first of all, placed their country above their self-interests," he said at the time. "These are good, hard- working, decent people. And we've dealt with a lot. We've dealt with a lot. We've dealt with war. We've dealt with recession. We've dealt with scandal. We've dealt with Katrina.

"I mean, they've had a lot on their plate. And I appreciate their performance and their hard work and they've got my confidence," he said.

A veteran of the administrations of both President Ronald Reagan and the first President Bush, Card was widely respected by his colleagues in the Bush White House. They fondly called him "chief."

He usually arrived at work in the West Wing by around 5:30 a.m. and frequently did not leave until 9 or 10 p.m.

Card plans to stay on the job until April 14, when the switch with Bolten takes place.

Associates said that Card, who was secretary of Transportation and deputy chief of staff, had wanted to establish himself as the longest serving White House chief of staff. James Steelman, who was President Harry S. Truman's chief of staff, had served for six years and Card's tenure will have gone not much longer than five years.

A recent AP-Ipsos Poll found that Bush's job approval has dipped to 37 percent, his lowest rating in that poll. Nearly 70 percent of people say the U.S. is on the wrong track, a six-point jump since February. Bush's job approval among Republicans plummeted from 82 percent in February to 74 percent, a troubling sign for the White House in an election year.

Posted by vicki at 09:36 AM | Comments (1)

From Salon.com News/Politics click here for the entire article

In the Twilight Zone

In Part 2 of his report on the press in Baghdad, Orville Schell attends a pathetic "party" at Fox News and endures surreal Bush spin in the Green Zone.

Editor's note: This article will appear in the April 6, 2006, issue of the New York Review of Books. It has appeared on TomDispatch.com.

By Orville Schell
March 17, 2006 | BAGHDAD, Iraq -- In recent history, there have been few wars more difficult to report on than the war in Iraq today. When I was covering the war in Indochina, journalists went out into the field, even into combat, knowing that we would ultimately be able to return to Saigon, Phnom Penh, or Vientiane where we could meet with local friends or go out to a restaurant for dinner with colleagues. Although occasionally a Viet Cong might throw a hand grenade into a bar, the war essentially was happening outside the city.

I had arrived here in Baghdad naively expecting that as an antidote to their isolation from Iraqi society, journalists might have kept up something of a fraternity among themselves. What I discovered was that even the most basic social interactions have become difficult. It is true that some of the larger and better-appointed news bureaus (with kitchens and cooks) have tried to organize informal evening dinners with colleagues. But while guests were able to get to an early dinner, there was the problem of getting back again to their compounds or hotels by dark, when the odds of being attacked vastly increase. The only alternative was to stay the night, which posed many difficulties for everyone, especially Iraqi drivers and guards.

The result is that reporters find themselves living in a strangely retro mode where their days end before sunset, and they are pulled back to their bureaus for dinner like an American family of the 1950s. Not a few have sought solace in cooking.

One evening while I was in Baghdad, a British security guard mentioned that Fox News was giving a "party" in the nearby Palestine Hotel, once the almost elegant, five-star Le Meridien Palestine on the banks of the Tigris River. I was curious both to see what had happened to this legendary hotel and also what now passed for a social gathering among foreign reporters here. So at dusk, accompanied by two armed guards, I walked over to the Palestine through the maze of blast walls.

The first thing I noticed was that the hotel, which had become something of a household name when U.S. tanks opened fire on it in April 2003, killing three journalists, was now largely dark. Of the major bureaus, only Fox News and APTN are still here. The Palestine and the equally fabled Ishtar Sheraton, known as "the Missile Magnet," are the two tallest buildings in Baghdad. They are situated adjacent to the roundabout in Firdos Square, made famous when a statue of Saddam Hussein was pulled down by a U.S. tank in 2003. Although the Ishtar has long since been excommunicated by the Sheraton chain, the hotel continues to call itself a Sheraton, like some aging divorcée who cannot quite bear the thought of giving up her former husband's last name.

In October of 2005, both hotels were the target of attacks by three vehicles with explosives driven by suicide bombers. The last of them, a cement mixer loaded with explosives that drove through a hole just blasted in the wall by another suicide bomber, might have brought both hotels down if its axle had not got snarled in a razor-wire barricade. Snipers on the roof of the Palestine Hotel then opened fire on the truck, setting off an explosion that, among other things, blew out windows at Reuters, the New York Times, and the BBC several hundred yards away. The Sheraton Ishtar was so badly damaged that it never really reopened, while the Palestine, which had much of its lobby blown out, somehow manages to keep going in a state of suspended animation.

Inside its darkened lobby, a lone Iraqi sits dozing at a battered wooden desk under a caved-in ceiling that is hemorrhaging wires, electrical fixtures, and plumbing. A faded placard still marks the closed Orient Express Restaurant, once the meeting place of all the correspondents who used to live here.

In our search for the alleged Fox News party, we ask the attendant in the lobby for directions. He tells me and my guards to go to the fifth floor, but adds that in order to get upstairs, we must first go downstairs, evidently a strategy to prevent suicide bombers from going directly to their targets. In the basement, amid a stack of discarded cardboard boxes and heaps of broken plate-glass windows, an Iraqi man is kneeling on a rug in front of a cement block wall, presumably facing toward Mecca, in prayer. When we finally arrive on the fifth floor, we have to leave our guards at a checkpoint fortified with a steel door. Inside, we are greeted by the stink of disinfectant and stale air filled with the smell of curry and cigarette smoke. Down a hallway with a greasy carpet I find a small sitting room with shabby furniture and a soccer game playing on a TV. The Fox News staffers who are smoking and drinking seem glad to see almost anyone. The scene makes me think of a group of elderly retired people clinging to a residential hotel slated for demolition.

"Where are all the other guests?" I ask, as one of them thrusts a bottle of beer into my hand. Zoran Kusovac, Fox's bulky, unshaven bureau chief, takes a long drag on his cigarette and explains in his Croatian accent, "Everybody's gone home." He laughs. "It's Saturday. We wanted to have some fun. We used to be able to have parties until late at night. But now our security people told us that if we wanted to have a party, it would have to end no later than 6:00 PM, so that everyone could get home before dark. We started at 3:00!"

"It's a little like being in third grade, where everybody has to be home before dark," someone else says. Everyone laughs.

Posted by vicki at 12:53 AM | Comments (2)

Sad news, Liberals.

Kirk's wonderful Dad, who passed along to his son his beautiful, but premature white hair, passed away late Friday night. I'm told it was a peaceful and loving passing. Please hold Kirk close to your hearts and your thoughts and prayers.

Posted by vicki at 06:08 PM | Comments (2)

Justice Scalia flips the finger in church
BOSTON, March 27 (UPI) -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia startled reporters in Boston just minutes after attending a mass, by flipping a middle finger to his critics. [Hahahahaha]

A Boston Herald reporter asked the 70-year-old conservative Roman Catholic if he faces much questioning over impartiality when it comes to issues separating church and state.

"You know what I say to those people?" Scalia replied, making the obscene gesture and explaining "That's Sicilian."

The 20-year veteran of the high court was caught making the gesture by a photographer with The Pilot, the Archdiocese of Boston's newspaper.

"Don't publish that," Scalia told the photographer, the Herald said.

He was attending a special mass for lawyers and politicians at Cathedral of the Holy Cross, and afterward was the keynote speaker at the Catholic Lawyers' Guild luncheon.

Hahahahahaha. What a farking fool. I love these kindly holy rollers!

Posted by vicki at 02:11 PM | Comments (2)

Jeepers H. Christmas. NOW they tell us? Most of us will not surprised by this but it's disturbing that the Times and other papers buried these kinds of stories for years. Now they find the "courage" to print it on the front page. The picture above should, but won't keep Bu$h and Blair awake at night. Read the very long piece here

Bush Was Set on Path to War, Memo by British Adviser Says

By DON VAN NATTA Jr.
Published: March 27, 2006
LONDON — In the weeks before the United States-led invasion of Iraq, as the United States and Britain pressed for a second United Nations resolution condemning Iraq, President Bush's public ultimatum to Saddam Hussein was blunt: Disarm or face war.

Doug Mills/The New York Times
Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain and President Bush arriving for a White House news conference on Jan. 31, 2003, after a meeting about Iraq that would be summarized in a memorandum by an adviser to Mr. Blair.

But behind closed doors, the president was certain that war was inevitable. During a private two-hour meeting in the Oval Office on Jan. 31, 2003, he made clear to Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain that he was determined to invade Iraq without the second resolution, or even if international arms inspectors failed to find unconventional weapons, said a confidential memo about the meeting written by Mr. Blair's top foreign policy adviser and reviewed by The New York Times.

"Our diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning," David Manning, Mr. Blair's chief foreign policy adviser at the time, wrote in the memo that summarized the discussion between Mr. Bush, Mr. Blair and six of their top aides.

"The start date for the military campaign was now penciled in for 10 March," Mr. Manning wrote, paraphrasing the president. "This was when the bombing would begin."

The timetable came at an important diplomatic moment. Five days after the Bush-Blair meeting, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell was scheduled to appear before the United Nations to present the American evidence that Iraq posed a threat to world security by hiding unconventional weapons.

Although the United States and Britain aggressively sought a second United Nations resolution against Iraq — which they failed to obtain — the president said repeatedly that he did not believe he needed it for an invasion.

Stamped "extremely sensitive," the five-page memorandum, which was circulated among a handful of Mr. Blair's most senior aides, had not been made public. Several highlights were first published in January in the book "Lawless World," which was written by a British lawyer and international law professor, Philippe Sands. In early February, Channel 4 in London first broadcast several excerpts from the memo.

Since then, The New York Times has reviewed the five-page memo in its entirety. While the president's sentiments about invading Iraq were known at the time, the previously unreported material offers an unfiltered view of two leaders on the brink of war, yet supremely confident.

The memo indicates the two leaders envisioned a quick victory and a transition to a new Iraqi government that would be complicated, but manageable. Mr. Bush predicted that it was "unlikely there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups." Mr. Blair agreed with that assessment.

Posted by vicki at 08:56 AM | Comments (1)

Dang! So many laws broken, it's hard to keep up. I saw this here:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/14157929.htm

Posted on Wed, Mar. 22, 2006
Group sues to block budget law that never passed House

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington PostWASHINGTON - For anyone who took fifth-grade social studies, how legislation turns to law always seemed pretty simple: The House passes a bill, the Senate passes the same bill, and the president signs it.
But last month, Washington threw all that old-fashioned civics stuff into a tizzy when President Bush signed into law a bill that never passed the House. The bill -- in this case, a major budget-cutting measure that will affect millions of Americans -- became a law because it was ``certified'' by the leaders of the House and Senate.
After stewing for weeks, Public Citizen, a legislative watchdog group, sued Tuesday to block a law that aims to cut $40 billion over five years, charging that Bush and Republican leaders of Congress flagrantly violated the Constitution when the president signed it into law knowing that the version that cleared the House was $2 billion different from the Senate's version.
The issue is bizarre, with even constitutional scholars saying they could not think of any precedent for the journey the budget bill took to becoming a law. Republicans are evoking an obscure Supreme Court ruling from the 1890s to suggest that a bill does not actually have to pass both chambers of Congress to become law.

Posted by vicki at 10:09 PM | Comments (1)

A message from our DL pal, Mike Bailey at DFA:

Former Marine reservist, congressional and senatorial candidate, and bold presidential critic Paul Hackett is coming to Louisville!

This is your chance to meet the man who first called Bush a "chickenhawk!" [woo hoo!] This is your opportunity to hobnob with the fearless fellow who compared extreme right-wing American fundamentalists to the Taliban!

The front page of Lt. Col. Andrew Horne's website has all the details about the event, which is coming up on Friday, March 31:

http://horneforcongress. com/

Check out this funny segment on Jon Stewart's Daily Show!:

http://horneforcongress. com/2006/03/paul_hackett_on.php

And here is another good one on Bill Maher's show, from back when Hackett ran for Congress in 2005:

http://onegoodmove.org/1 gm/1gmarchive/002309.html

Hackett is coming to Louisville to show his support for Lt. Col. Andrew Horne, who is running against Rep. Anne Northup for Congress, and who DFA has overwhelmingly endorsed. In addition to enjoying the tough-talking, hard-charging Hackett, we will be celebrating Andrew Horne's 27 years of service. "Andrew, who served active duty in both Operation Desert and Operation Iraqi Freedom, will retire from the Marines on March 31, the 27th anniversary of his enlistment straight out of Pleasure Ridge Park High School. We are gathering to cheer him on his new path, speaking truth to power as a Democratic candidate for Kentucky’s 3rd Congressional District in Louisville!"

Tickets for the main event are available here!:
http://horneforcongress.com/events/hackett

There is also a smaller social reception with Paul Hackett and Andrew Horne. You can get tickets for that here:

http://www.horneforcongress.com/events/hackettreception

Please forward this note to everyone who complains that Democrats need to get a spine. Those folks will really enjoy Hackett and Horne! These tough Marines are still fighting for truth and justice.

Mike Bailey, co-organizer
DFA Change for Louisville
--------------------------------------

Posted by vicki at 08:00 PM | Comments (1)

OMG! You have got to check out this Kos diary. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/25/0382/50871

It will make your day! Here's a sample:

He [Wilson] was pretty funny through the speech but really had a lot of good insights into Iraq in particular that manifested itself through some visible displays of frustration and anger. He is obviously someone with his heart well into serving his country and someone who is pained watching his country that he has served for over two decades get washed down the toilet by a band of thugs in power right now.

His final remarks were really powerful.

George Orwell once said that "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." What I did was not extraordinary. It's the environment in which we act that makes this truth-telling event revolutionary. There's something very wrong with this picture. What is wrong with this picture that we are even having this discussion?

He minced no words by concluding in saying that the administration considers the constitution nothing but toilet paper and we are hanging in the balance in a time when people of all types need to stand up and do their duty to save their country and government. The Bill of Rights is not just a listing of what we can do, he said, but rahter what we are responsible for doing. Freedom of the press is also the responsibility of the press to report the truth and to hold the government in check. Freedom to petition the government for a redress of grievances is also the responsibility of every citizen, as he did through his NY Times column, to petitition the government when we see them going over the edge. The only way this nation will survive is by its people, not by its government. Power wants more power and it will not stop until people stand up and come together as a nation to take the country back from those in power. He did not give any details beyond that as to waht he thinks that entails specifically but the charge was put there for the last 10-15 minutes of his speech that our nation is in our hands at this point if it is going to be saved and that is the only way it will make it.

I'm sure I've forgotten half of the good remarks he made and they'll probably come to mind well after I post this but, suffice to say, it was a very fascinating and inspiring speech from somebody who is in a position to make judgement calls about much, if not all, of what he was speaking about.

He was really serious throughout his answers and his speech but he was also very friendly and humorous as well. During the reception, one of the students said "Ambassador, my dad is a big fan of yours and I was wondering if I could call him on my cell and let him say hi to you" and Joe was all smiles and said "sure why not".

Posted by vicki at 11:26 AM | Comments (1)

The National staff just reminded me that today marks Drinking Liberally Louisville's first anniversary! Here's to many happy returns of the day. Cheers!

Posted by vicki at 09:38 AM | Comments (3)

U.S. to Contract Foreign Co. to Scan Cargo By TED BRIDIS and JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writers
Fri Mar 24, 11:50 AM ET

WASHINGTON - One of Americans' favorite beach destinations, the Bahamas, is getting a new U.S. arrival — sophisticated equipment to detect radioactive materials in shipping cargo.

But U.S. customs agents won't be on site to supervise the machine's use as a nuclear safeguard for the American shoreline that is just 65 miles away from Freeport. Under an unusual arrangement, a Hong Kong company will help operate the detector.

The Bush administration says it is finalizing a no-bid contract with Hutchison Whampoa Ltd. It acknowledged the deal is the first time a foreign company will be involved in running a radiation detector at an overseas port without American customs agents present.

The administration is negotiating a second no-bid contract for a Philippine company to install radiation detectors in its home country, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. At dozens of other overseas ports, foreign governments are primarily responsible for scanning cargo.

While President Bush recently reassured Congress that foreigners would not manage security at U.S. ports, the Hutchison deal in the Bahamas illustrates how the administration is relying on foreign companies at overseas ports to safeguard cargo headed to the United States.

Hutchison Whampoa is the world's largest ports operator and among the industry's most-respected companies. It was an early adopter of U.S. anti-terror measures. But its billionaire chairman, Li Ka-Shing, also has substantial business ties to China's government that have raised U.S. concerns over the years.

"Li Ka-Shing is pretty close to a lot of senior leaders of the Chinese government and the Chinese Communist Party," said Larry M. Wortzel, head of a U.S. government commission that studies China security and economic issues. But Wortzel said Hutchison operates independently from Beijing, and he described Li as "a very legitimate international businessman."

"One can conceive legitimate security concerns and would hope either the Homeland Security Department or the intelligence services of the United States work very hard to satisfy those concerns," Wortzel said.

Three years ago, the Bush administration effectively blocked a Hutchison subsidiary from buying part of a bankrupt U.S. telecommunications company, Global Crossing Ltd., on national security grounds.

And a U.S. military intelligence report, once marked "secret," cited Hutchison in 1999 as a potential risk for smuggling arms and other prohibited materials into the United States from the Bahamas.

Hutchison's port operations in the Bahamas and Panama "could provide a conduit for illegal shipments of technology or prohibited items from the West to the PRC (People's Republic of China), or facilitate the movement of arms and other prohibited items into the Americas," the now-declassified assessment said.

The CIA currently has no security concerns about Hutchison's port operations, and the Bush administration believes the pending deal with the foreign company would be safe, officials said.

Supervised by Bahamian customs officials, Hutchison employees will drive the towering, truck-like radiation scanner that moves slowly over large cargo containers and scans them for radiation that might be emitted by plutonium or a radiological weapon.

Any positive reading would set off alarms monitored simultaneously by Bahamian customs inspectors at Freeport and by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials working at an anti-terrorism center 800 miles away in northern Virginia. Any alarm would prompt a closer inspection of the cargo, and there are multiple layers of security to prevent tampering, officials said.

"The equipment operates itself," said Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration, the agency negotiating the contract. "It's not going to be someone standing at the controls pressing buttons and flipping switches."

Hutchison's ports subsidiary said in a statement Friday from its headquarters in Hong Kong it was confident that Bahamian customs inspectors will notify U.S. authorities whenever it is appropriate.

The administration is finalizing the contract amid a national debate over maritime security sparked by the furor over now-abandoned plans by Dubai-owned DP World to take over significant operations at major U.S. ports.

Rep. Bennie Thompson (news, bio, voting record), the senior Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, said President Bush "needs to explain what safeguards are in place at foreign ports to assure that operators are not jeopardizing our security."

"If a port operator has been identified as posing a potential threat to national security, it is only common sense that Americans should be working on site to assure U.S. security is taken seriously," Thompson said. "If the president needs more U.S. Customs inspectors to get the job done, I'd be happy to lead the charge to get however many is needed to keep America safe."

Some security experts questioned whether the U.S. should pay a foreign company with ties to China to keep radioactive material out of the United States.

"Giving a no-bid contract to a foreign company to carry out the most sensitive security screening for radioactive materials at ports abroad raises many questions," said Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y.

A low-paid employee with access to the screening equipment could frustrate international security by studying how the equipment works and which materials set off its alarms, warned a retired U.S. Customs investigator who specialized in smuggling cases.

"Money buys a lot of things," Robert Sheridan said. "The fact that foreign workers would have access to how the United States screens various containers for nuclear material and how this technology scrutinizes the containers — all those things allow someone with a nefarious intention to thwart the screening."

Associated Press writers Bill Foreman in Hong Kong and Jim Gomez in Manila contributed to this story.

___

Posted by vicki at 07:00 PM

This is from the Boston Globe www.boston.com What the hell is wrong with Congress? Bu$h is abusing his power, breaking laws and making a mockery of the Constitution and they do nothing to stop him. They are basicly irrelivent.

Bush shuns Patriot Act requirement
In addendum to law, he says oversight rules are not binding
By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | March 24, 2006

WASHINGTON -- When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers.

The bill contained several oversight provisions intended to make sure the FBI did not abuse the special terrorism-related powers to search homes and secretly seize papers. The provisions require Justice Department officials to keep closer track of how often the FBI uses the new powers and in what type of situations. Under the law, the administration would have to provide the information to Congress by certain dates.

Bush signed the bill with fanfare at a White House ceremony March 9, calling it ''a piece of legislation that's vital to win the war on terror and to protect the American people." But after the reporters and guests had left, the White House quietly issued a ''signing statement," an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law.

In the statement, Bush said that he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act powers were being used and that, despite the law's requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would ''impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive's constitutional duties."

Bush wrote: ''The executive branch shall construe the provisions . . . that call for furnishing information to entities outside the executive branch . . . in a manner consistent with the president's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch and to withhold information . . . "

The statement represented the latest in a string of high-profile instances in which Bush has cited his constitutional authority to bypass a law.

After The New York Times disclosed in December that Bush had authorized the military to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans' international phone calls and e-mails without obtaining warrants, as required by law, Bush said his wartime powers gave him the right to ignore the warrant law.

And when Congress passed a law forbidding the torture of any detainee in US custody, Bush signed the bill but issued a signing statement declaring that he could bypass the law if he believed using harsh interrogation techniques was necessary to protect national security.

Past presidents occasionally used such signing statements to describe their interpretations of laws, but Bush has expanded the practice. He has also been more assertive in claiming the authority to override provisions he thinks intrude on his power, legal scholars said.

Bush's expansive claims of the power to bypass laws have provoked increased grumbling in Congress. Members of both parties have pointed out that the Constitution gives the legislative branch the power to write the laws and the executive branch the duty to ''faithfully execute" them.

Posted by vicki at 01:01 PM

State Senator Dan Seum, R-Louisville, has been on a tear trying to kill off the STAR program designed to reduce deadly toxins in Louisville's air. When given the choice, Seum sides with major polluters over the health of the people in his own city.

Call or email Seum and tell him to drop his opposition. 502-564-2450 or dan.seum@lrc.ky.gov The Courier Journal weighs in on the issue today:

Taking children hostage

In the latest cynical effort to subvert or destroy Louisville's Strategic Toxic Air Pollution program, the STAR ripper plan has been attached to, of all things, a bill designed to protect kids from lead poisoning and from ATV head injuries.

It's hard to imagine a tactic more profoundly ironic or deeply disturbing.

Clearly, holding children's health hostage is not something with which Ford Motor Co. should want to associate its name, whatever its concerns about STAR.

Nothing could do more to undermine the company's professions of civic responsibility and environmental sensitivity than seeing it join in such irresponsibility. Nothing could more easily damage its effort to burnish a national reputation for outstanding corporate citizenship.

The same firm that boasts of rebuilding its historic Rouge plant into an environmental model surely cannot condone the callousness being practiced in its name. Surely, it cannot approve of making passage of the lead poisoning and ATV measures depend on whether Rubbertown polluters and Associated Industries of Kentucky get their way with STAR.

Ford has been here a very long time. It has been good to Louisville, and Louisville wants to be good for Ford.

In contrast, the only good that Sen. Dan Seum, the ripper's sponsor, apparently cares about is prolonging his political career by doing what he's always done: exploit fear and misdirect the grievances of ordinary citizens against society's elites, even when that does great civic harm.

But he is not the issue. The issue is his effort to destroy STAR -- Metro Louisville's pioneering program to cleanse the air of highly toxic pollutants, improve public health and make this city more competitive as an economic development location.

One benefit, however, has come from the conflict over STAR during the current session of the General Assembly:

The local air pollution control district and the administration of Mayor Jerry Abramson have proven by their dealings with Ford's concerns that they are fully willing and able to address any legitimate complaints that the real opponents of this program, Rubbertown and AIK, may have.

The decent thing for opponents of STAR to do is rip the ripper out of the childhood safety bill, in which it has no business intruding.

Posted by vicki at 11:00 AM

Great blog by Steve Gilliard today. He happens to be black, (not that there's anything wrong with that! Hahahahahaha) so he has cred on this issue, as do all reasonable folks.

www.stevegilliard.blogspot.com

Are you really one of these people, Ben?

I know there are more important stories than a 24 year old homeschooled git being hired to write for the WaPo, but the fact that he was hired says a lot about the Post and their approach to the internet. And that IS important.

First of all, the Washington Post.com editors clearly did not do due dilligence in researching Ben Domenech's public comments. Honestly, I had not heard of this guy until yesterday, but once I did, I was barraged with a sea of his writing and reposting which would have given me a clear picture of what this guy does. To call him immature would be kind.

His friends say he's a nice guy, I bet none of them are black. But this isn't about his personality. He could have unicorn posters and play with kittens and tie cute ribbons on them. But that doesn't mean that he's not a dangerous little prick who should not have a national forum in one of the nation's leading national newspapers. Not only is he arrogant, but that's hardly a crime at 24, but he's ignorant.

I mean, he's not a Southerner, he's from the DC area, but he's embraced the worst sterotypes of the region. A creationist, confederacy-loving racist who thinks Coretta Scott King is a communist. Most Southerners would be appaled by such views, white or black. I bet he takes day trips to the Museum of the Confederacy. The ONLY people who would say this are one sheet shy of a Klan outfit.

I have to wonder what he learned while being homeschooled, because it sounds like a bundle
full of hate to me. That post he put up from "First Events" is rephensible, even if he didn't write it. He certainly didn't object to it, nor did Krempasky. That kind of thing is usually reserved for Stormfront, but let's not fool ourselves. Krempasky is a consultant to America's largest corporation, Wal-Mart, as well as the RNC and Domenech now works for the Washington Post. These are not fringe players churning out anti-ZOG leaflets from their basement. These are no sheet wearing freaks burning crosses and cursing race traitors or looking to Matt Hale for guidance as they listen to Johnny Rebel and Skrewdriver.

Remember, Domenech is an alumus of William and Mary, as is Jon Stewart. This guy is not some marginal loon posting from mommy's basement.

The Washington Post seems to have hired him based on Dana Milbank's recommendation. If Milbank takes this guy seriously, he's a fool, if he suggested him in the way Harry Reid suggested Harriet Miers, he really hates his bosses. Because this is about to be a major embarassment for his employer.

Second, hiring Domenech shows how blind the WaPo editors are to their own future. Hiring a white, well, half-Latino racist, to a promenent position in their paper is insane. The WaPo needs to retain the support of the majority black community it serves, not just inside the district, but in the Maryland counties north of the city. As the black professionals leave the District for the safety of Maryland and increasingly Northern Virginia, and as the growing Asian and Latino base joins them, these are the most likely new customers for print subscriptions. What's more suburban than having home delivery of the newspaper.

But why would they read a paper who hires an open racist?[/end snip]

Ummmm, because they are closet racist themselves? You cannot make this stuff UP!

Posted by vicki at 12:10 PM | Comments (2)

Notice sent out by the Horne For Congress action front:

This weekend the Horne Campaign has several projects fit for any and all volunteers who want to help!

First, we’re hosting a fundraiser at the end of the month to celebrate Andrew’s retirement from the Marines, and special guest will be Paul Hackett. Starting tonight, we need phone bank volunteers to help get the word out about this special event.

On Saturday, the rescheduled “Honk for Horne” street rally is going to be held on the corner of Bardstown Rd. and Eastern Parkway in the Highlands, from 11:00-1:00. This is a great grassroots way to simply increase Andrew’s name recognition. There will also be a Horne meetup at Heine Bros Coffee, on the same streetcorner, starting at 10:00. Come early to make signs and get acquainted with each other and the campaign.

And on Sunday, we will conduct another literature drop, this time targeting Crescent Hill. Meet up at Horne HQ (640 Barrett Ave, building in the back of Jillian’s parking lot) at 1:15pm. Rain or shine, we’ll have something that we’d like your help with.

This is not an endorsement. Just something to consider if you're so inclined.

Posted by vicki at 11:42 AM

OK, peeps. Rep. Anne Northup has been a disaster for Louisville and the Nation. Time to get off our butts and confront her lousy voting record. Here's our chance. Sandy, A Moveon.org member has passed this info to me. If you have a few minutes on your lunch hour to spare, please show up at her office and express yourself:

MoveOn has asked me to coordinate the "Stand and Deliver" against the Reverse Robin Hood Budget. Tomorrow, Thursday, March 23, delegations of MoveOn will deliver thousands of letters to over 100 high priority Republican members of Congress. Since we only need a few more to go our way in the final budget fight, this is very important.

Since I don't know what I'm doing, [bull!] or why I've volunteered to do something so far outside my comfort zone, I could sure use some support.

We will meet in front of Anne Northup's local office (she's supposed to be in town) at 6th & Broadway
600 Martin Luther King Jr. Place, Suite 216
Thursday, March 23, at 2:00

If anyone can show up, with personal stories about how this budget affects them, signs, (beer LOL), to take my place, or just to pick me up if I fall (or post bail if I lose control) I'd appreciate it.

Thanks,
Sandy

Please do your part to show our robotic Bu$h supporter Rep. your displeasure with her horrible voting recod that is hurting America.

Posted by vicki at 09:57 PM | Comments (1)

Who knew? Great DL buddy Ron points out this sad fact:

You might inform the DL folks that tonight (Wed.) and tomorrow are the last chances to catch "Why We Fight" at the theatre (Baxter). It is reviewed in this week's LEO. I went last night at 7:45 and disappointly was the only person in the theatre.

Jeepers! I really want to see this movie and it's only been out a short while. I regret that we didn't make this a DL event. We'll know better next time. If you can't make it, be sure to ask your local rental joint to stock it.

Posted by vicki at 09:31 PM | Comments (2)

I found this on Gunguy.com. What is this lust for shooting folks all about? What the hell is the NRA promoting here, anyway, murder? I'm sure all the yahoos we have in the State House will find this bill a good thing.

ense to Murder in Kentucky, Indiana, Alabama
The NRA keeps pushing the License to Murder bill in all 50 states, despite the fact that it all but encourages violence.

-In Kentucky and Indiana, the NRA echoes its line about the bill: that it supposedly only codifies the right to self-defense in this country.

The Kentucky House and Senate have each passed a bill to enact the measure and are working to settle on a single version.

But versions of the bill have failed in states including Wyoming, Iowa and Virginia, among the 15 where the NRA has made its passage a priority.

Dubbed the “castle doctrine” by the NRA, the measure specifies that people have no “duty to retreat” — or attempt to flee — if they believe they are being threatened on their property or in their vehicle.

“Your home is your castle, and you should be able to protect it with any means necessary,” NRA spokeswoman Ashley Varner said.

But here’s the thing: everyone in this country already has a right to self-defense, with or without this bill. In many places, this bill is called the “Deadly Force” bill, but you already have the right to use deadly force as a last resort to defend yourself or your family. The problem with this bill is that it moves deadly force from “last resort” to “first option.”

In Wyoming, the bill died when the legislature adjourned, said Rep. Jack Landon, a Republican and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Some lawmakers believed Wyoming state law and court decisions already provide for people to defend themselves when threatened, he said.

“I think there was some concern that this was just going to give people an opportunity to shoot somebody and not be held responsible,” he said.

That’s exactly what the bill does. It removes all responsibility of a shooter to make sure he’s doing the right thing. “License to Murder” lets anyone holding a gun open fire without regret.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence derides the legislation as a “shoot first” bill and is working against the measure in other states.

Zach Ragbourn, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign, said most states already have laws that protect people who truly are acting in self-defense.

“This is not about self-defense,” he said.

Some gun owners and enthusiasts disagree about the bill.

It’s not about self defense. But that doesn’t stop the gun lobby from lying about it.

“This codifies that you are under no obligation to retreat if you are under attack,” said Robert Pruden, a supporter of the bill and secretary and treasurer of the Kentucky Firearms Foundation.

It’s a vicious circle with these people. You try to tell them the truth, try to explain that this bill causes way more problems than it “solves” (who’s in jail right now because they weren’t able to use deadly force as a first option?), but none of it matters. Because the NRA says they need this bill, these lawmakers are hell bent on passing it.

Posted by vicki at 12:41 PM

width="612" height="408" />

Candidate John Yarmuth, top. Jimmy, middle picture, and the DL gang bottom.

Posted by vicki at 08:14 PM | Comments (1)

This is from an item on Salon.com:

War Room
The president and the straw man

Asked this morning about Russ Feingold's censure resolution, George W. Bush said that "during these difficult times," Americans "expect there to be an honest and open debate without needless partisanship." If that's the case -- and we don't doubt that it is -- why won't the president help give the people what they want?

Over the weekend, the Associated Press documented the way in which Bush uses "straw man" arguments in his speeches. When the president says that "some say" or "there are some who believe," an unfair characterization of somebody else's beliefs is sure to follow. "The device usually is code for Democrats or other White House opponents," AP reporter Jennifer Loven wrote. "In describing what they advocate, Bush often omits an important nuance or substitutes an extreme stance that bears little resemblance to their actual position." Having mischaracterized his opponents' arguments, the president "typically then says he 'strongly disagrees' -- conveniently knocking down a straw man of his own making."

Maybe Bush wasn't trying to illustrate Loven's point today at his press conference today, but it sure did seem like it. To hear the president tell it, there are "some in this country" who "don't view the enemy" as the serious threat he does. "I guess they, kind of, view it as an isolated group of people that occasionally kill," Bush explained. "I just don't see it that way. I see them bound by a philosophy with plans and tactics to impose their will on other countries." Likewise, Bush said, when faced with warnings that al-Qaida will use Iraq as a base for destabilizing the Middle East, "maybe some discount those words as, kind of, meaningless propaganda." "I don't," Bush said. "I take them seriously. And I think everyone in government should take them seriously and respond accordingly."

To whom, exactly, was the president referring? Maybe he didn't realize what a threat al-Qaida was back in 2001, but we can't think of a soul "in this country" today who thinks that al-Qaida isn't a serious threat now. And while the president and his aides rushed into Iraq despite warnings that a war there could destabilize the entire Middle East, we can't think of anyone "in the government" today -- except for Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, of course -- who would "discount" the threat that the war in Iraq presents now.

But Bush was just getting started. He said he has a message for "people" who say that the blessings of liberty should only be "for one group of people": You -- whoever you are -- are "denying the basic rights to others." And even when the president named names, he seemed incapable of taking anything other than a caricature approach to the ideas of the opposition. Accusing the Democrats of political cowardice, Bush said he's noticed that "nobody from the Democratic Party has actually stood up and called for getting rid of the terrorist surveillance program."

"You know, if that's what they believe, if people in the party believe that, then they ought to stand up and say it," Bush said. "They ought to stand up and say, 'The tools we're using to protect the American people shouldn't be used.' They ought to take their message to the people and say, 'Vote for me. I promise we're not going to have a terrorist surveillance program.'" But maybe the Democrats haven't said that because that isn't, in fact, what they believe. As Bush knows, any number of Democrats and at least a handful of Republicans have said that the government should continue to monitor the calls of suspected terrorists, but that it should either get warrants in the process, as current law requires, or change the law to make the president's program legal in the future.

Posted by vicki at 05:12 PM

Those stupid, stupid clowns in the KY House waste valuable time considering such crap as whether clogging should be the official state dance. Then they throw scarce Homeland Security money at great terrorist hot spots such as Sandy Hook. Yet Louisville cannot get much needed money for an emergency radio system. I detest our legislators. They prove every day to be unworthy of office. From the C-J:

KENTUCKY GENERAL ASSEMBLY
No money in budget for metro radio fix
Homeland Security projects target many rural counties
By Joseph Gerth
jgerth@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal

FRANKFORT, Ky. — The Kentucky House has loaded the state budget with hundreds of Homeland Security projects in 61 counties — but not Louisville's $70 million planned emergency radio system.

The House plan would require the state's Department of Homeland Security to spend nearly half its expected federal grant money on the legislators' earmarks, which are heavily weighted toward the home counties of some of the House's top Democrats.

The plan has drawn the ire of Metro Mayor Jerry Abramson, who argues that such funding should be allocated after "a threat analysis." Louisville has the highest concentration of federally designated terrorism targets in the state.

But one legislator defended the project, saying Kentucky's rural counties could be terrorist targets, too.

"Big cities aren't the only ones at risk," said Floor Leader Rocky Adkins, D-Sandy Hook, whose counties would receive 58 earmarks.

For the first time, the federal government is having states compete for Homeland Security money. That means Kentucky might get less if its spending doesn't match state and federal security priorities, said Alecia Webb-Edgington, state director.

The priorities focus heavily on updating communications systems, such as Louisville's radio system. Police officers now use two different systems and must rely on a patch that allows officers in the urban areas to talk with officers in suburban areas.

Webb-Edgington said her agency is concerned about any plan in which communities don't have to apply for funds and justify their expenditures. In the past, the department made all spending decisions.

Posted by vicki at 01:53 PM

How to spot a baby conservative
KID POLITICS

Whiny children, claims a new study, tend to grow up rigid and traditional. Future liberals, on the other hand ...
Mar. 19, 2006. 10:45 AM
KURT KLEINER
SPECIAL TO THE STAR

Remember the whiny, insecure kid in nursery school, the one who always thought everyone was out to get him, and was always running to the teacher with complaints? Chances are he grew up to be a conservative. [hahahahahahahaha]

At least, he did if he was one of 95 kids from the Berkeley area that social scientists have been tracking for the last 20 years. The confident, resilient, self-reliant kids mostly grew up to be liberals.

The study from the Journal of Research Into Personality isn't going to make the UC Berkeley professor who published it any friends on the right. Similar conclusions a few years ago from another academic saw him excoriated on right-wing blogs, and even led to a Congressional investigation into his research funding.

But the new results are worth a look. In the 1960s Jack Block and his wife and fellow professor Jeanne Block (now deceased) began tracking more than 100 nursery school kids as part of a general study of personality. The kids' personalities were rated at the time by teachers and assistants who had known them for months. There's no reason to think political bias skewed the ratings — the investigators were not looking at political orientation back then. Even if they had been, it's unlikely that 3- and 4-year-olds would have had much idea about their political leanings.

A few decades later, Block followed up with more surveys, looking again at personality, and this time at politics, too. The whiny kids tended to grow up conservative, and turned into rigid young adults who hewed closely to traditional gender roles and were uncomfortable with ambiguity.

The confident kids turned out liberal and were still hanging loose, turning into bright, non-conforming adults with wide interests. The girls were still outgoing, but the young men tended to turn a little introspective.

Block admits in his paper that liberal Berkeley is not representative of the whole country. But within his sample, he says, the results hold. He reasons that insecure kids look for the reassurance provided by tradition and authority, and find it in conservative politics. The more confident kids are eager to explore alternatives to the way things are, and find liberal politics more congenial.

In a society that values self-confidence and out-goingness, it's a mostly flattering picture for liberals. It also runs contrary to the American stereotype of wimpy liberals and strong conservatives.

Posted by vicki at 11:41 AM | Comments (4)

Attention, fans of Andrew Horne and Paul Hackett! Paul Hackett (fighting Marine Dem from Ohio who nearly beat "Mean Jean" in ultra red district and dumped by the DLC) will be visiting Louisville to honor Lt. Col. Andrew Horne at his official retirement from the US Marine Corp. Details and a hilarious video of Paul Hackett's *interview* with Ed Helms on The Daily Show can be found here:

Watch the video; attend the event And BTW, General Wes Clarke has also endorsed Andrew.

Posted by vicki at 10:34 AM

Mike and Billy want PEACE.

Here are some DL'ers who showed up to respect the war dead after three long years of illegal invasion and mis-management in Iraq. We're all the sadder and less stable for it.

Vicki and Maria holding up the shirts.

Lucy at the *far* left holding up sign. June is to the right (sorry!) holding another sign.

Thanks for the pictures, Mike

Posted by vicki at 08:51 PM | Comments (1)

Take THAT, freedom warriors!

Posted by vicki at 06:01 PM

I was struck by how utterly divorced from reality the war supporters were yesterday. From their claims that promoting peace and calling for the end of war was hurting *our troops* to the bizarre claim that we would have been on the side of the Natzis, these folks are on another plannet. Anyway, here is how the C-J saw it:

Protesters for peace soldier on
3rd anniversary of Iraq war marked

By Katya Cengel
kcengel@courier-journal.com The Courier-Journal

Hundreds of pink, black, yellow, white and even tie-dye T-shirts hung on lines of twine stretched around the intersection of Hurstbourne Parkway and Taylorsville Road yesterday afternoon. Alongside them were handwritten signs stating "I played the guitar," "I loved sunsets" and other sentiments.

The T-shirts represented the more than 2,300 American soldiers who have been killed in Iraq. The statements were sentiments the Louisville Peace Action Community, which sponsored the event, thought some of the deceased might have shared.

The event marked the third anniversary of the start of the war in Iraq, which began on March 20, 2003.

Braving a chilly wind, Lisa Markowitz stood next to an "I loved banana pudding" sign. Markowitz, a University of Louisville anthropology professor, said "anger and sadness" over the war brought her out and added that protesting "is the way things get done.

"It is the work of the people to move their government in a different direction," she said.

The 150 to 200 protesters want the government to move toward ending the war in Iraq.

Chris Harmer, a volunteer with Louisville Peace Action Community, said the event was meant to support those fighting and honor the memory of those who died.

"And to bring them home so no more have to die," Harmer added.

About 500 like-minded groups around the nation planned protests for the war's anniversary, according to United for Peace and Justice, a coalition of local and national groups calling for an end to the war.

An increasing number of Americans are questioning the war. A recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll found that 57 percent of Americans felt that the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq and 63 percent disapprove of the way President Bush is handling things there.

But not everyone who turned out in Louisville yesterday was against the war. Alongside those calling for the troops to be brought home were about a dozen others holding signs saying "We support our troops," "God bless the free Iraq" and "Hey Iran buckle up."

"We are primarily here to present an alternative message," said Keith Warren, holding an American flag. "We support the troops and the mission."

Billie Beachy happened to be in the neighborhood, and was wearing her "My daughter is a Marine" T-shirt, when she spotted the war supporters and joined them.

"I don't want people to think there is not support for those men and women who have laid everything down," said Beachy, whose daughter is an Iraq war veteran.

Posted by vicki at 08:25 AM

Well, the Louisville Peace Action Community did its part to promote Peace and highlight the terrible loss of life in Iraq today by commemorating the 3rd anniversary of Bu$h's invasion of Iraq and honoring the war dead.

Due to this administration's incompetence in initiating a *war* of choice under false pretenses and bungling its aftermath, we are wittnessing the dreadful results. Makes you want to holler.

Over 2000 T-shirts were strung out along a wide stretch of the ultra busy road (the reason it was chosen) between Hurstborne Ln. and Taylorsville Rd. at Stonybrooke, symbolizing the empty shirts of lost US lives in that *war.* Protest signs were mingled in between the T-shirts as well as Peace signs. June took up the Peace Corner near Taylorsville Rd. where she enthusiasticly gave mortorists the Peace Sign even as a few of them gave her the one finger salute and hurled Cheney-like insults at her. Atta girl, Junebug!

Mike and Billy pounded in wooden stakes along the route to help support the thousands of T-shirts strung along the very long route. It was a good effort, and very worthwhile. Apathy has nearly destroyed this country. I hope we did a small part to rebutt that apathy today.

Last but not least, the Little Green Army Men made hay today as well. I planted them on public trash/recycle cans, in Starbucks, Kroger, a Restaraunt and everywhere else I could think of.

DL was well represented. I counted 9 DL folks whom I actually saw, but more may have been there. I saw Maria, (we were once again photographed together by the C-J), June, Hank, Lucy, Billy, Lee, Mike, Treva and me. The only 3rd District Candidate to make a showing of support was Lt. Col. Andrew Horne. We are grateful for his support.

As a reward, Hank, new author, Lee, June and myself had a lovely late afternoon snack together. It was a good day.

Thanks for REALLY supporting the troops, Louisville. Bring them home.

Peace!

Vicki

Posted by vicki at 07:52 PM

Got 2 hours to spend? Here's how you help. From the Horne Campaign notice:

We hope to see you Sunday!

Sunday, March 19 Lit Drop Details: We'll be meeting with materials, maps and instructions in the Mid-City Mall parking lot on the back side, near the movie theater, at 1:30 p.m. (Just look for the "Horne for Congress" bumper stickers)! We will finish up no later than 3:30 p.m. In the event of rain, we'll meet at the Mall but proceed to HQ instead to make some phone calls to households in that neighborhood. We have several phone lines, but feel free to bring your cell phone -- and your free weekend minutes!

Paid For and authorized by Andrew Horne for Congress.

Posted by vicki at 08:16 AM

Excellent speech every member of Congress should be giving day in and day out. Only Russ Feingold seems willing to stand up for real American values and the rule of law these days. Shame on Congress for failing their Constitutional duty. They've let us down. Again.

Click here for the video and despair that it's only aTV show

Posted by vicki at 08:00 AM

Louisville Peach Action Community presents: 2,000+ shirts event

commemorating those who have died in the Iraq war.

When: Saturday, March 18
12:00 noon: set up
1:00-3:00 p.m. demonstration with shirts

Where: At the intersection of Hurstbourne Ln. and Taylorsville Rd.
(Along the street in front of Stoneybrook Theater complex)

Please come and bring your friends. It will take a lot of bodies to hold the lines of shirts and signs.

Posted by vicki at 12:23 PM

Maria sent us this pic from DL last night. Lee is responsible for the costume. Hahahahahahaha

Posted by vicki at 10:15 AM

OK, peeps. On Friday, 3/17, the KY legislature will be voting on a bill called HCR 40. It is supposed to insure that all citizens have a guaranteed right to health care. Seems fair enough to me. The problem is that these bills go back and forth and get rejected by the yahoos in the sticks on a regular basis without the public at large ever knowing about it.

Do yourself a favor and educate yourself on this bit of legislation. I'm not able to find any info on the state website that is at all helpful. Any smart folks out there who have it, shoot it to me and I'll be glad to post it.

Call your Reps at 1-800-372-7181 and demand that they explain their reason for voting for or not for giving all of us the right to health care.

Posted by vicki at 11:03 PM

Cry me a river, Loserman!

From the Courant.com

CONNECTICUT NEWS
Lieberman Takes Issue With Lamont's Tone
3:35 PM EST, March 16, 2006
The Associated Press

U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman took issue Thursday with the tone of his Democratic opponent's campaign.

Ned Lamont formally announced Monday that he will oppose Lieberman for the party's nomination, becoming Lieberman's first Democratic challenger since he first won election to the Senate in 1988.

Lamont has blasted Lieberman for his support of the Iraq war, calling him, "Republican Light." During his kickoff speech said that unlike the senator, he would never be called, "Bush's favorite Democrat."

"This shouldn't be about one issue or about name calling ... angry name calling," Lieberman told the Associated Press Thursday. "I don't think the public wants that."

Lamont denies he is being negative, noting he spent a lot of time talking about issues such as education and health care in his announcement.

Posted by vicki at 05:55 PM

Make it happen. Go here for more:

Posted by vicki at 12:24 PM

Alert the bouncer. I know *W* hearts DL, but we don't heart him.

Posted by vicki at 12:19 PM

Thanks for the great catch, June. This is High-larious!

Click here for the Hackett vido from The Daily Show. Hahahahahahahahaha.

Posted by vicki at 04:57 PM

I'm sure Northup, McConnell and Bunning will be all over this! Why, I'm sure they and Bu$h are writing legislation even as I type. We know who they work for. The NYTimes article can be found here:

click here

Many Utilities Collect for Taxes They Never Pay

By DAVID CAY JOHNSTON

Published: March 15, 2006
Many electric utility companies across the nation are collecting billions of dollars from their customers for corporate income taxes, then keeping the money rather than sending it to the government.

Myer Shark, 93, a lawyer outside Minneapolis, sued in vain in an effort to recover $300 million in taxes paid by Minnesota customers of Xcel, a big regional utility. He saw "an unjust and unreasonable rate of return."

Pocketing Taxes. The practice is legal in most states. The companies say it is smart business.

But some representatives of utility customers say that the practice, which involves using losses from other subsidiaries to reduce taxes owed, is not fair. They say that money that utilities are required to collect for federal and state taxes — typically a nickel on each dollar paid for electricity — should go for just that, or not be included in electric bills.

Otherwise, they argue, these legal monopolies make more than they are authorized to, and other taxpayers have to make up the difference in higher taxes or reduced services.

An examination of regulatory filings by The New York Times shows that companies with electric utilities in at least 26 states have pocketed money intended for income taxes, and that utilities can legally do so in 21 more states.

Because they are legal monopolies, utilities must charge rates set by state regulators. These cover all costs — from buying fuel, to building new power plants, to a virtually guaranteed profit and paying the taxes on that profit.

Normally, customer payments for those taxes eventually find their way to federal and state governments. That is usually the case for independent utilities like Consolidated Edison, which serves the New York area, and American Electric Power, which operates in 11 states from Kentucky to Oklahoma.

Posted by vicki at 10:05 AM

Hey gang! Mark your calendars for this Thursday, March 16. John Yarmuth will be visiting DL. He has a great many fans among us, so this should be good. Spread the word!

Click here for his website It's worth it for the pictures alone!

Posted by vicki at 09:41 AM

Here's a new video of Andrew Horne telling the world that Bu$h lied the country into war in Iraq and then blew the invasion. Ouch!

Andrew, a Marine Reserve lieutenant colonel, served active duty in both Operation Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom. But make no mistake -- Andrew is opposed to the war in Iraq, and is telling anyone who will listen.

Click here: for the video

Chicken Hawk Bu$h should hang his head in shame. And be sent to the Hague.

Posted by vicki at 09:08 AM

OK, This is just too much. Get busy!

The Republican Whining and Posturing on Feingold

by Matt Stoller, Tue Mar 14, 2006 at 03:56:06 PM EST

According to Progress Now, Senator Wayne 'Whiny' Allard, Republican of Colorado, accused Feingold of 'siding with terrorists' by introducing his censure resolution. They have a petition up demanding Allard apologize. Frankly, Senator Whiny Allard should be expelled from the Senate for accusing a colleague of treason.

Senator Feingold, you are a man of integrity and a real Democrat. I'm proud of your strength and your leadership.

Senator Allard, your weak, cowardly nature means that you don't know what it means to fight the fear that terrorists seek to spread. You and conservatives like you enable terrorists with your weakness and posturing. May I recommend Depends brand undergarments, in case you soil yourself in the Senate as you cower in the corner?"

Hahahahahahaha. Contact your reps and complain. Google has it all.

Posted by vicki at 11:49 PM

Be sure to come to DL this week and pick up your Army Men. We have a bunch to give out. The Army Men Project can be found at this excellent site

Posted by vicki at 08:04 PM

The spinless Democrats just gave their blessing to Bu$h to continue breaking the law and spy on innocent Americans any time he pleases. Have these morons not read the polls? The latest Gallup/CNN poll shows Bu$h's approval at 36%

Feingold draws little support for censure

By LAURIE KELLMAN
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Sen. Russell Feingold's effort to censure President Bush is headed for the Senate Judiciary Committee, advancing a contentious debate over whether the president deserves a formal rebuke for his secret wiretapping program.

"I look forward to a full hearing, debate and vote in committee on this important matter," Feingold, D-Wis., said in a statement. "If the committee fails to consider the resolution expeditiously, I will ask that there be a vote in the full Senate."

A possible presidential contender in 2008, Feingold said Bush broke the law and violated the Constitution when he authorized the National Security Agency to conduct a warrantless wiretapping program as part of the war on terrorism.

"Congress must respond," Feingold said Monday on the Senate floor. "A formal censure by Congress is an appropriate and responsible first step to assure the public that when the president thinks he can violate the law without consequences, Congress has the will to hold him accountable."

Feingold's introduction of the five-page censure resolution set off maneuvering among his fellow Democrats to prevent a vote that could alienate swing voters.

Republicans savored the Democrats' discomfort. Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., pushed for an immediate floor vote; Democrats protested, saying they hadn't yet read the resolution. Several Democrats offered empathy for Feingold's frustration but no overt support for his resolution.

Feingold is undeterred, saying that simply debating it will keep the Bush administration and congressional Republicans from playing down the matter this midterm election year.

Several Democrats said that before any censure, they want the Senate Intelligence Committee to finish an investigation of the warrantless wiretapping program. In that program, the National Security Agency is allowed to eavesdrop on international calls and e-mails of U.S. residents when terrorism is suspected.

Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., said Tuesday that Feingold's censure effort was "born out of intense frustration" with the administration's lack of candor on the eavesdropping program - and not out of any effort to further his 2008 presidential ambitions.

"We have no idea what this program is," said Biden, himself a potential 2008 presidential contender, on NBC's "Today" show. He said Feingold was expressing his "absolute frustration with the failure of this administration and this Congress to insist it come forward and tell us what it's doing."

Asked at a news conference whether he would vote for the censure resolution, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., declined Monday to endorse it and said he hadn't read it.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., said he had not read it either and wasn't inclined simply to scold the president.

"I'd prefer to see us solve the problem," Lieberman told reporters.

Across the Capitol, reaction was similar. Feingold's censure resolution drew empathy but no outright support from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Feingold's resolution accuses Bush of violating the Constitution and the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

It reads in part:

"Resolved that the United States Senate does hereby censure George W. Bush, president of the United States, and does condemn his unlawful authorization of wiretaps of Americans within the United States without obtaining the court orders required."

The resolution says censuring Bush also is warranted by "his failure to inform the full congressional intelligence committees as required by law, and his efforts to mislead the American people about the authorities relied upon by his administration to conduct wiretaps and about the legality of the program." [/end]

Bu$h has been blatently breaking the law by eavsdropping on American citizens without FISA court oversight. What the hell does this Congress think their own check on the balance of power and their DUTY to uphold the Constitution is in their oath of office for? And that crap about scaring swing voters in nonsense.

Posted by vicki at 01:43 PM

Maybe Northup can ask her pal Ted Stevens (Wingnut, ALaska) for some of those hundreds of millions of dollars to build two bridges to nowhere that only a handful of folks will use. And where is our all powerful senator, Mitch McConnell on this? ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Bridges project funds in jeopardy
U.S. agency wants state to spend more

By Tom Loftus
tloftus@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal

FRANKFORT, Ky. — Kentucky lawmakers have a dilemma: Either spend more on the Ohio River bridges project and delay many projects around the state, or lose federal funding for the spans.

The Federal Highway Administration warned in a letter last week that the Louisville bridges could lose future federal funding if lawmakers fail to contribute more state money to the project.

The state Senate could fix the problem. Senate President David Williams, R-Burkesville, said Senate leaders were reviewing the letter and would consult with the Transportation Cabinet.

State Transportation Secretary Bill Nighbert said the letter makes it clear that Kentucky must add more money to the bridges project than the House has proposed in its budget.

"The Federal Highway Administration is saying the way the House did this effectively shuts down the bridges," Nighbert said.

The problem occurred when the House proposed shifting away some money from the bridges to provide more construction projects in the state.

Tim Crawford, 41, of Garrard County, said he was glad the House shifted the money because it meant the state would widen U.S. 27, a project long sought in his county.

"All that money for the bridges would be quite all right if everyone lived in Louisville, but we have businesses to run here as well," said Crawford, who owns a company that cleans and repairs parking lots.

Now the fate of that project is unclear.

"And families are endangered by this primitive road we have here that is two lanes, carries 20,000 and 30,000 vehicles a day, and is the main conduit from Somerset to Lexington," Crawford said.

The bridges project would erect two spans, one downtown and one in eastern Jefferson County. It also calls for rebuilding Spaghetti Junction downtown.

U.S. Rep. Anne Northup's spokesman said Northup, R-3rd District, hoped the letter would cause the Senate to restore full funding and keep the bridges on schedule.

"It means that if the final product is as the House proposed on this matter, the Federal Highway Administration will not approve the state's finance plan and the project would come to a halt," said Terry Carmack, Northup's chief of staff.

But Rep. Rob Wilkey, chairman of the House budget subcommittee that oversaw changes in the proposed transportation budget, said federal officials have misinterpreted the House proposal.

The letter from federal highway officials in Indiana and Kentucky says the House plan would eliminate funding for the bridges project after the 2006-07 fiscal year.

"We did not do that," said Wilkey, D-Scottsville. "We simply limited how much they could spend in the first year to $130 million."

The $130 million was $55 million less in federal funding than Gov. Ernie Fletcher had recommended. The intent behind the House plan was to free up the $55 million for other projects around the state.

Wilkey said that state Transportation officials told him the move could be done without threatening the bridges project.

"We want to see the bridges project continue moving forward. We acted in reliance upon the information received from the cabinet officials," Wilkey said.

But in an interview, Jose Sepulveda, Federal Highway Administration administrator for Kentucky, disagreed with Wilkey. He said federal administrators believe the budget assures no funding for the bridges after 2007.

Wilkey said to restore the $55 million to the bridges, federal funding may have to be taken back from many smaller projects across the state.

"That's the only place to get the money," Wilkey said.

Williams said the matter is complicated because Transportation Cabinet officials have told him the House also budgeted more federal spending for projects than the state anticipates receiving.

"That's a second issue that in itself could endanger federal funding," he said.

Nighbert agreed that the House budgeted too much federal highway spending. He said his staff's analysis shows the House called for about $81 million more in federal spending during the next three years than Kentucky is expected to receive.

He said that could jeopardize all federal funding for Kentucky roads.

Wilkey disagreed with Nighbert and Williams, saying the House budgeted no more in federal spending than was proposed by Fletcher.

Reporter Tom Loftus can be reached at (502) 875-5136.

Posted by vicki at 01:10 PM

Woo Hoo! From "The Bridge." Http://thebridge.typepad.com

Thanks for the tip, Maria!

Save the Date: Helen Thomas Is Coming to Louisville

Front Row at the White House with Helen Thomas

ACLU of

Kentucky

2006 Bill of Rights Dinner

Thursday, August 31, 2006

Kentucky International Conventional Center in Louisville, KY

Featuring veteran White House Correspondent Helen Thomas

Commonly referred to as “The First Lady of the Press,” former White House Bureau Chief Helen Thomas is a trailblazer, breaking through barriers for women reporters while covering every President since John F. Kennedy. For 57 years, Helen also served as White House correspondent for United Press International. She recently left this post and joined Hearst Newspapers as a syndicated columnist.

Helen Thomas has written three books, including her latest, Thanks for the Memories Mr. President: Wit and Wisdom from the Front Row at the White House. [/end]

I heart Ms. Thomas, as is reflected on this blog. Hell, I once chipped in to send her flowers for being the only WH reporter to truly ask HARD questions about motives and plans for invading Iraq.

Posted by vicki at 03:14 PM

Sweet baby Jeepers! You cannot make this s**t UP! From today's WaPo:

The Gridiron's Betters, Skewered With a Butter Knife

Granted, some skits -- seen at rehearsal -- were pretty funny. Helen Thomas dressed up in green curtains, complete with long brass drapery rod across her back, as Scarlett O'Hara/Hillary Clinton. She sang: "All I want is a plantation, Big White House paid by taxation. A Hil'ry coronation, Oh, wouldn't it be loverly."

Tim Russert, making his first appearance as a new member, decked out in a blue dress and a shiny blond wig as one of the cable news bunnies. But there were also some true clunkers. Singing about torture, subbing "rendition" for "tradition" and borrowing the "Fiddler on the Roof" song was not funny at all. The chumminess of the politicos and the press corps can be cloying. [Ya think?]

At the Gridiron Dinner, journalists mingled with politicos such as Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and, below from left, former secretary of state Madeleine Albright, Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer and D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams. (Photos By Robert A. Reeder -- The Washington Post)

The evening began with an a cappella chorus and the Marine Corps Band. Celebrities in the audience included actor William Devane, who plays the secretary of defense on "24," Ron Silver from "The West Wing," former senator Fred Thompson, now on "Law & Order," and NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue.

And Vice President Cheney, who was the butt of many jokes.

Obama told the formally attired crowd, "They're serving drinks and I'm about 30 yards from the vice president." Then he riffed a little on the Olympic Games and said of the biathlon: "Not your sport, Mr. Vice President."

The Gridiron Club, said Hall, is for those "who say there is only a grim and troubled solution to any problem. Laughter is the best balm for difficulty."

Asked if the experience was everything he thought it might be, Russert said, "It's the zenith. It's the pinnacle."

In the spirit of the evening, Bush said he told Cheney:

"Dick, I've got an approval rating of 38 percent and you shoot the only trial lawyer in the country who likes