Wednesday, December 28, 2005
I must speak frankly about the Progressive Movement because I believe all camps can realistically achieve their goals but only by putting aside our natural inclinations to be autonomous and form a more unified movement. Current Methods utilized by our organizations & members are unrealistically applicable to achieving our goals.
What do I mean? We have not won elections, and we are not raising enough money.
We need change, not just within our opponents the ‘Radical Republicans’ but within our very Progressive/Liberal Organizations and Approaches.
I have been involved with crazy protest to formal Democratic Party meetings and I observe that we have forgotten something that may seem fuzzy but is the Truth and strength of our cause. There is Power in numbers.
The strength of our opponents lies in there is power in money.
But we have the numbers, however too many liberal groups don’t even have the desire to form sincere coalitions with other organizations possessing the same goal. We must unify and then move our People or we will continue to loose at the ballot.
We must move Progressives to:
1) Vote, 2) Demonstrate 3) Educate 4) Raise Money
Move.On, the Democratic Party, Civil Rights/Liberties Groups, Veterans for Peace, Camp Casey, Hollywood, Religious Institutions, and Unions (just to name a few) cannot and will not win until we suck it up and work together.
I pose this question? What Tangible things are the Movement doing to push its goals?Demonstrations in themselves are a waist of resources if they are not accompanied with a barrage of other coordinated strategies.
Exhibit #1) One Official National Campaign & Petition circulated by all organizations and activist could have been distributed at the Mass Demonstration on Sept 24th - 26th 2005 collecting over 100,000 verifiable signatures. We now should develop and disseminate a Campaign & Petition adhering to legal standards so that it can be recognizable by and acted upon by the Government. This Central Petition could then be presented to the Supreme Court, the President, and Congress.
Exhibit #2) The Time Line. From personal observation, Progressive Organizations and the Democratic Party are setting Timelines for 2006, and placing greater emphasis on 2008. These plans are setting the Movement up for failure. Push the timelines and focus the present energies of these citizens Now! The People of our country are speaking up Now! We cannot wait until 2006 to gamble on Congressional Races, and 2008 to place our full hand on one Presidential race. Our strategies need to pick up Now! We need to push to End the War in Iraq Now, to Have Investigations Now, to Stop Legislation Now, to Impeach the President Now! All of these in addition to directing resources towards the elections of 2006 & 2008. We cannot simply focus on Candidates & Election Cycles but also on our issues.
Exhibit #3) The Constitution must be the foundation for our agenda. Dissenting arguments & Ideological insignificancies against the Iraq War and Bush’s initiatives as President have no merit if they are not in relation to what we believe to be illegal actions in violation of our Constitution and other laws. Furthermore, Conspiracy Theories and Ideological Views may very well be true, but not credible until they are proven. We must work within the United State’s system of Democracy to make change and push for non-partisan investigation of these credible theories & allegations.
A) Define High Crimes and Misdemeanors according to the Constitution clearly & unbiased. State these definitions along with the Movements accusations in speeches and publications.
B) Define what is meant by War Crimes and Humanitarian violations as applicable to the Constitution, Geneva Conventions, matters of Imprisonment, Due Process, and International Laws. According to the U.S. Constitution the U.S. President can be removed from office in violation of International Laws, Agreements, Obligations and possibly violations of Standards of Human Rights.
C) Finally, there is a matter that has not been addressed but I believe could lead to resignations from President Bush to Prime Ministers Tony Blair to Cabinet Secretaries to Military Generals. The United Sates and our closet ally Great Britain are Democracies, specifically the U.S. is a Republic. However boring and insipid it may seem, the Chief Executive (President G.W. Bush) knowingly not adhering to the principles of Democracy and authorities given within the Constitution is criminal. The Constitution of the United States of America the cornerstone of our society grants the People the Power of Oversight via the Congress. The Constitution grants Congress the power of investigation which approximates the power of Oversight.
Let us discuss the matter of Information provided to the Public as it relates to Congress, the United Nations, and International Organizations specifically in regards to Declaring War and its direct relationship to the Constitutionally Power of Oversight by the People. The President nor anyone in the Government has any Right, Constitutional Power, nor Authority to “fix”, alter or manipulate such information in any form specifically in relation to Declaring War. In my opinion this would not only be defined as an act greater than a “High Crime & Misdemeanors” as required by the Constitution for Impeachment but synonymous to Treason. By American Law, Treason is a capital offense, punishable by death.
Am I wrong? Such an act I assert has been committed by President G.W. Bush has and is causing unjustified American deaths in Iraq & Afghanistan? This duty in providing unadulterated information specifically in the matter of War is, and I cannot say any more strongly, a sacred duty placed at the responsibility of our President , Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces.The Progressive Movement needs bright lawyers with clear unbiased, non-partisan minds to explore this Constitutional Power of Oversight belonging only to the People via Congress. In light of recent events we certainly cannot rely on any ‘Radical Republican’ to stand up with integrity.
This Power of Oversight must also be evaluated as it relates to Government Officials, Agencies & Offices providing information and in light of Hurricane Katrina services to the Public. The duty of the President and Congress, if any and if so the appropriate punishment for this derelict and/or abuse of these offices of Public Service.
There are also other issues that have been effectively mucked up by the White House. They include but are not limited too Information provided to the Public and too Congress in relation to this Constitution Power of Oversight, clear unethical & immoral correlations between Dick Cheney his role as Vice President, his former position as Secretary of Defense, his relationships with the Oil Industry, and how this literally ties into the company of Halliburton. President Bush’s role as President as it relates to the Oil Industry and his knowledge of unethical acts involving his Vice President. And even more pressing possible illegal and Impeachment violations of the U.S. Constitution in regards to Domestic Surveillance.
What I believe is urgent and must be pushed aggressively by the Movement and other agreeing citizens are a Series of Independent Non-Partisan (not bi-partisan) Investigations to answer these questions. I speak respectively to my Republican and Conservative friends, you call many assertions stated in this letter as lies or conspiracy theory. If you are truly honorable to the flag of our great nation you cannot object and I pray you will join in this call demanding for such Investigations. Influenced by no Political Party, but only guided by American Standards of Justice.
The White House and Congress are fully aware it is their interest to prevent Independent Investigation (s). But I ask you, is this suppressment of investigation (s) in the interest of you, your family, your money and your nation?
One was the annual spending for the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education.
Its final passage went almost unnoticed Wednesday night, because the Senate declined to take a roll call on a measure that reduces funding for popular social programs by more than $1 billion.
Lawmakers then passed a second spending bill that lops another 1 percent from the same programs.
According to Bob Greenstein, executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the cuts include a $350 million reduction in child and family services programs, including Head Start, a cut of 4 percent, he says. That means there will be 25,000 fewer Head Start slots for low-income children.
A separate budget bill approved by the Senate Wednesday got somewhat more attention, after Vice President Dick Cheney cast a tie-breaking vote.
That measure would reduce spending for Medicaid, Medicare and other major health and welfare programs.
"Today what we voted on means that we're going to cut entitlement spending, slow that growth by $40 billion," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN). "It demonstrates fiscal responsibility. It shows that we're going to eliminate wasteful Washington spending."
Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) said that Democrats were overreaching when they claimed the cuts would hurt poor people.
"What we've done here today is we've made some changes to those programs that make those programs better, more efficient and more targeted to the people in need," Santorum said. "That is not cutting benefits to those who are entitled to entitlements; it is making those programs work better and in the context of more fiscal responsibility."
But Greenstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities disagreed.
"Rhetoric saying things like 'Oh, this just slows the rate of growth' makes it sound like low-income families are getting expanded benefits and the benefit will simply expand a little less. That is flatly not true," Greenstein said.
"No knowledgeable person who follows the low-income programs would accept the view that there's no pain to needy and vulnerable people in this bill," he added.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill would, among other things, cut funding for enforcement of child support, resulting in children losing some $8 billion. Also, poor families would pay more for their health care. And seniors would have a harder time qualifying for nursing home care.
Greenstein says one of the most potentially damaging provisions would require those applying for Medicaid to present proof of citizenship -- either a birth certificate or passport.
Many low-income Americans don't have access to their birth certificates -- or don't have one at all.
For example, African Americans born in the south in the 1930s and '40s -- as many as 20 percent, according to one study -- don't have birth certificates because hospitals wouldn't accept black women in labor.
As a result, Greenstein says, "We're facing the prospect of significant numbers of elderly black Americans being thrown off of Medicaid because they can't provide a birth certificate -- because they weren't born in a hospital due to discrimination."
The budget bill that passed the Senate by one vote, however, is not yet on its way to President Bush. Senate Democrats forced a small change that requires the House to vote again. So there could be further revisions.
That prospect has given groups that oppose the measure another month to try to reverse the handful of votes that would change the outcome.
The seniors group AARP is leading the opposition.
"We're gonna give it our best shot," said AARP's David Certner, "to really educate people what is in this bill, why the choices that were made in this bill were so bad, why it was such a problem to go after poor people on Medicaid and deny people long-term care, and yet give a pass to the pharmaceutical industry and the managed care industry."
Certner was referring to the fact that negotiators for the House and Senate dropped provisions that would have cut spending at the expense of drug and managed-care companies.
For example, one jettisoned provision would have required drugmakers to offer deeper discounts on drugs sold to Medicaid. Instead, most of the reductions in federal outlays rely on boosting the amount that low-income Americans must pay for prescription drugs.
My Opinion: The Iraq War alone cost America $80 Billion Dollars a Year. The Government needs to cut from the Department of Defense and take care of its citizens. Contact your Representative and let them know you do not support how the are spending your Tax Dollars. And that thier vote for this Budget will cost them your vote.
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
There is growing information bringing forth revelations of why G.W. Bush has nominated Samuel Alito.
It is becoming ever more clear why G.W. Bush first nominated Harriet Miers and now, another friend of his, Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court. These 2 different persons, of extremely different qualifications but possessing 2 similar characteristics: loyalty to Bush and possessing the same elite social affiliations.
G.W. Bush is being faced with several legal disasters that could lead to his Impeachment and/or criminal trial. In his interest Bush has nominated persons that have shown they place loyalty, political ideology, social affiliations, justice, and truth above the rule of the Constitution.
Let me be strongly clear about this situation with Domestic Surveillance, authorized by now seating President G.W. Bush and executed by the NSA. I am not outraged about such a Program, but I am outraged that the Courts were overridden in this matter. President Reagan, Bush I, or Clinton are in question but G.W. Bush is. The Office of President does not have hold judicial authority nor legislative powers which all were used in this situation authorizing ‘warrants’ to be issued upon U.S. citizens without first being heard thru the FISA Courts. Let me very clear, because all you Bush supporters fail to hear what folk like me are saying. I don’t give a damn about foreign terrorist, but when it comes to a U.S. citizen flat out, established law must be followed with ZERO deviation.
These legal disasters that G.W. Bush may soon be investigated on include matters dealing with the Iraq War, Habeus Corpus, International Law, Human Rights, War Powers Authorized by Congress specifically for the Iraq War, Domestic Surveillance & Wire Taps on U.S. citizens. The Supreme may be asked to rule of such matters.
President G.W. Bush is fully aware that Nominee Samuel Alito will vote in his favor, and that is precisely why his nomination must not pass. Judge Samuel Alito is simply a nominee to the Supreme Court, he is not yet a Justice, to serve for life.
AP Reports on Alito
WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito defended the right of government officials to order domestic wiretaps for national security when he worked at the Reagan Justice Department, an echo of President Bush's rationale for spying on U.S. residents in the war on terror.
Then an assistant to the solicitor general, Alito wrote a 1984 memo that provided insights on his views of government powers and legal recourse — seen now through the prism of Bush's actions — as well as clues to the judge's understanding of how the Supreme Court operates.
The National Archives released the memo and scores of other documents related to Alito on Friday; the Associated Press had requested the material under the Freedom of Information Act. The memo comes as Bush is under fire for secretly ordering domestic spying of suspected terrorists without a warrant.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said Monday he would ask Alito about the president's authority at confirmation hearings beginning Jan. 9. The memo's release Friday prompted committee Democrats to signal that they will press the conservative jurist about executive powers.The memo dealt with whether government officials should have blanket protection from lawsuits when authorizing wiretaps. "I do not question that the attorney general should have this immunity," Alito wrote. "But for tactical reasons, I would not raise the issue here."Despite Alito's warning that the government would lose, the Reagan administration took the fight to the Supreme Court in the case of whether Nixon's attorney general, John Mitchell, could be sued for authorizing a warrantless domestic wiretap to gather information about a suspected terrorist plot.The FBI had received information about a conspiracy to destroy utility tunnels in Washington and to kidnap Henry Kissinger, then national security adviser, to protest the Vietnam War.In its court brief, the government argued for absolute immunity for the attorney general on matters of national security."The attorney general's vital responsibilities in connection with intelligence gathering and prevention in the field of national security are at least deserving of absolute immunity as routine prosecutorial actions taken either by the attorney general or by subordinate officials."When the attorney general is called upon to take action to protect the security of the nation, he should think only of the national good and not about his pocketbook," the brief said.Signing the document was Rex E. Lee, then the solicitor general, officials from the Justice Department and Alito.Alito's analysis about the court and the need for an incremental legal strategy proved prescient. The case ultimately led to a 1985 ruling by the Supreme Court that the attorney general and other high level executive officials could be sued for violating people's rights, in the name of national security, with such actions as domestic wiretaps."The danger that high federal officials will disregard constitutional rights in their zeal to protect the national security is sufficiently real to counsel against affording such officials an absolute immunity," the court held.However, the court said Mitchell was protected from suit, because when he authorized the wiretap he did not realize his actions violated the Fourth Amendment.The decision was consistent with the Supreme Court's unanimous ruling in 1972 that it was unconstitutional for the government to conduct wiretaps without court approval despite the Nixon administration's argument that domestic anti-war groups and other radicals were a threat to national security.Alito had advised his bosses to appeal the case on narrow procedural grounds but not seek blanket immunity."There are also strong reasons to believe that our chances of success will be greater in future cases," he wrote. He noted that then-Justice William H. Rehnquist would be a key vote and would recuse himself from the Nixon-era case.The documents were among 45 released by the National Archives as the holiday weekend approached. A total of 744 pages were made public. The White House and Sen. John Cornyn (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, a member of the Judiciary Committee, dismissed any link between the 1984 memo to Bush's authorization of electronic surveillance without a warrant to thwart terrorism. "Any connection between Judge Alito's 1984 memorandum and the current discussion of terrorist surveillance by the NSA is a real stretch," Cornyn said in a statement. But Democrats seized on the memo and vowed to press Alito on the matter at his confirmation hearings. "At a time when the nation is faced with revelations that the administration has been wiretapping American citizens, we find that we have a nominee who believes that officials who order warrantless wiretaps of Americans should be immune from legal accountability," said Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass. Bush picked Alito to take the Supreme Court seat held by Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who is retiring. Among the documents released Friday was a June 1985 memo in which Alito said abortion rights should be overturned but recommended a roadmap of dismantling them piece by piece instead of a "frontal assault on Roe v. Wade." The June abortion memo contained the same Alito statements as one dated May 30, 1985, which the National Archives released in November — but with a forward note from Reagan administration Solicitor General Charles Fried acknowledging the volatility of the issue and saying it had to be kept quiet.
"I need hardly say how sensitive this material is, and ask that it have no wider circulation," Fried wrote.
Alito, a federal appellate court judge, has been seeking to assure senators that he would put his private views aside when it came time to rule on abortion as a justice. O'Connor has been a supporter of the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling affirming a woman's constitutional right to an abortion. “
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
“The Beginning of the End to the Bush Administration”
Warrant less domestic surveillance authorized by President George W. Bush conducted by the National Security Agency (NSA) may be in violation of the U.S. Constitution. These violations such as wire taps on U.S. citizens also show a disregard for civil liberties and the Right for Privacy.
Supporters of the President state that President G.W. Bush was simply doing his duty to protect the American public. Supporters also state that there is no evidence that abuses on and subsequent action upon U.S. citizens and organizations have occurred.
In my opinion these denials of guilt do not hold water. Why not? First think on this philosophy by a former president and general the Honorable Dwight Eisenhower: “we must not trade honor, for security.” Are we going to sacrifice our strongly held American values of freedom and civil liberties in the name of security? Hell No, it is the job of the President to provide for our security within the parameters of established law without abandoning the freedoms he was elected to preserve.
Secondly, knowledge of abuses on U.S. citizens do not come forth because these activities are done in secret.
Much faith is lost in G.W. Bush as I observe him speak and he appears to be almost disgusted with leaks of information and news agencies that report on such activities. How can our President continue to do his job if he sincerely believes that he can authorize and direct U.S. Government Agencies in secret according to no law, and at the very least subject to Congressional oversight. A belief held on the premise that War Powers grant the President such authorities. This assertion is clearly false because provisions within the Courts explicitly set law during War. The President simply does not possess the authority nor legal right to circumvent establish law even during War.
It is in my opinion that he cannot contine to do his job, and in these admitted 30 different authorizations by G.W. Bush to circumvent established Law in using the Courts to administer surveillance warrants specifically against U.S. citizens. There are, in these actions, do justification to remove President G.W. Bush from the Office of President of the United States of America.
Christian Science Monitor Reports:
FOX Entertainment Reports:
New York Times Reports:
USA Today Reports:
Yahoo News Reports:
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
I'm writing once again to express deep concerns about the direction our nation is headed, and to discuss President Bush's proposed "Ownership Society". I write with all do respect to our nation's leader, President George W. Bush.
The major obstacles impeding America’s system of democracy and capitalism from leading the world is its great disparity of wealth between the poor, working families, and the rich. Policy that bridge these gaps must be applied before the United States can not only lead militarily, but also economically. In addition we must adhere to policies that can be admired international.
I ask you, to think upon those whom are part of our society that do not own anything? About those that do not have the resources to own a home, business, health insurance, stock, mutual funds, or a retirement plan. About those that are productive citizens but are not concerned with ownership, but with living, paying thier bills, and with simply surviving.
The United States of America, a great nation of wealth, has millions of people in this “society”. They are too the President's constituents rendering the presidency and its powers not simply subject to the agendas of the Republican nor Democratic Parties, but obligated to serve every citizen; rich, middle class, or poor.
President Bush and Congress should make efforts to elevate ALL Americans to a point in which they can participate in this “Ownership Society”? If this is not their collective goal, then they are neglect to their duty to the American people.
Instead of simply criticism I will offer specific examples of programs that must be improved and/or fully funded.
Programs that create Jobs that earn at the minimum a living wage. What do I mean by a ‘living wage’. No American that is a productive tax paying citizen working full time should struggle with: Healthcare, and basic utilities. Is this too much to ask of America?
Fully Funding all programs that offer financial assistance to qualified students. Politicians must posses the compassion to realize that and to not deny a bright young person that happens to come from a poor family the opportunity to gain a higher education.
Economic Development Programs that directly invest and create jobs in improvised communities.
Welfare Programs with incentives linked to education and employment achievements for those capable. And compassion for those not capable.
There are two directions our country can move: forward or backward. The nation’s economic prosperity cannot progress if a segment of the population’s economic stability is not merely stagnant, but moving backwards. The measures implemented in 2000 which will continue passed 2009 that increased the financial foundation for the rich, and corporate America are over weighted favoring the already wealthy. They also show a lack of responsibility to and planning for domestic policy.
Measures such as tax breaks during a recession, high unemployment, wars, and a sky rocketing national deficit show ignorance and an utter lack of compassion on crucial real & pressing money snatching matters affecting the majority of American citizens. Housing, Heating, Insurance, Gas, Utilities, and Consumable prices continue to snatch our money while wages remain stagnant. In light of these conditions this ‘Ownership Society’ will be impossible for millions to reach because they will be left with no disposable income.
The publics apathy and misseducation on these multiplicity of issues is expected, but it is the job of the White House and Congress to give them due attention. "Conservatives" overwhelmingly winning elections though out the nation is not a mandate endorsing a neglect to the responsibility to the pure national good.
Health Care is neither affordable, or accessible. In my opinion Health Care must be gradually converted into a public good. Only after this problem is solved do I believe the public will support efforts to re shape Social Security. How can we in good conscience allow for a corporation to gain at the expense of someone's life and livelihood? There is simply no reason that healthcare should cost what it does, prices are artificially inflated and must be readjusted and regulated. Health Care is not similar to making a bad financial decision. In most occasions health problems are matters out of our control. Yes, there should be room for profit, but also fair to the public. For Example: Most health plans are capped at $100,000. A major surgery and hospital stay can far exceed this amount. This is one of many matters that should be regulated upon insurance companies. Health Care is a right and is in the interest of all Americans. Comprehensive Health Care is a necessity which must be made accessible and attainable to all Americans. The vested interest in insurance companies to earn profit instead of saving lives, and promoting a good quality of life is borderline criminal. And the neglect of the nation’s leaders to correct this problem is pure incompetence.
There are fewer jobs. An Ownership Society CANNOT exist with this condition. The country must be 1) prospering , 2) have low unemployment, 3) and have good paying jobs available (especially if President Bush's Social Security reforms are enacted).
President Bush calls for education and hard work , but he allows for financial assistance (Pell Grants) to be decreased. This is in direct contradiction to his proclaimed goal to create an "Ownership Society". I ask you Mr. President, what society do those that own nothing belong too? I ask you Mr. President to what society do those that have no resources to own a home, business, health insurance belong too? And when you respond as you already have that the key is for them to get an education, I ask you why have Pell grants not been increased? And after these people follow your words and get an education, and at that point in time they only own a $40,000 student loan, I ask you where are the jobs?
President Bush's foreign policy has created a world turned against us, and anxious of our unjustified actions. Russia has reestablished vestiges of a dictatorship. Europe is competing and humiliated us in an economic and cultural struggle. China is unaffected by our sanctions. North Korea and Iran can be expected to make progress towards nuclear armament for only reason, our unjustified invasion and incompetent intelligence. We are criticizing and alienating the United Nations, an ally as committed as Great Britain, simply because they desired to what is procedurally correct, humanitarian, justifiable and credible. The same standards we should never negate. And do we forget this organization is housed in New York City, and that we serve on its Security Council.
We have seen ethical & moral deterioration within Congress and the White House. National policy under the Bush administration possesses an utter lack of respect for and disregard for universal human rights, military codes of ethics, and the policies of the Geneva Convention as indicative at Abu Grave & Guantanamo Bay Prisons. And also seen in Congressional leaders changing rules of ethics to suit their self-interest and neglecting their duty to preserving the pure uncorrupt essence of American Democracy.
We are seeing a decrease in funding for social services while concurrently out of pocket expenses on all levels have increased. The average American citizen has less money and fewer savings.
The Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have drained the nation of resources and divided us ideologically. Every year President Bush requests $80 Billion more to fund these wars. The justification for these wars has now been disproved and leaders from both parties allow for the White House to change its story and reasons for justification. The ends do not justify the means.
President Bush claims to be a Christian, as I have been all my life. So I must ask where is his compassion towards the poor in this country. Where is his compassion towards the workingmen, women, and families in our country? Where is his compassion to the human beings we imprison, allow to be “tortured” and assert they have no human rights in Iraq & Afghistan (some whom are American citizens). Where is his compassion to Innocent Iraqi citizens & children who are killed in their own homes because of our actions.
In Iraq the death toll of civilians is 10 times greater than that of our soldiers and civilian contractors. Terrorism is growing exponentially and the White House, Department of State, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Congress, and the military forgets that a martyr is worth more than an American paycheck towards recruiting countless sympathizers to the causes against our nation. This is simply the result of killing a true (“Fanatical Muslim”) terrorist.
But what! But what about the pure hatred created towards the United States of America because of the death of an innocent child. Do we forget that Christianity itself gets its strength from a martyr, in Jesus Christ? Where, President G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney is your compassion for the streets of Afghanistan, dripping with heroin? And where is your faith towards the dead American soldiers who may have given their lives in vain? And where is there an increase in the area of domestic programs right here in America? And in what ways has your proclaimed faith in God guided and prevailed in any of these matters?
The revelations found within the Downing Street Memo/Minutes where British Prime Minister Tony Blair, our 'closet ally' substantiated claims that President George W. Bush and his Administrators knowingly fixed intelligence to promote the War in Iraq before September 11, 2001 brings heightened importance to my concerns..
This Ownership Society of President George W. Bush would leave millions of American citizens behind. The millions that are concerned with living, paying their bills, providing basic needs for their family and whom presently are not even capable of reaching his idea of "ownership".
What will the White House and Congress do to decrease great economic disparities found in every segment of our nation? For example; clear economic disparities, cultural and structural restraints within the African American community? How can our nation’s leaders expect that the United States can prosper as whole if any segment is left behind and neglected? The working class will have no benefit from President Bush's plans for an “ownership society” and I predict these plans will further put our nation on a road to economic failures. For example: see the value of the dollar, see the trade deficit, see the national deficit, see the stock market, see the decrease in average household income, see the decline in average wages and salaries.
It is my hope that these issues will be brought to the forefront. That these plans for an "Ownership Society" will put forth aggressive programs to deal will economic disparities and enable all Americans willing and qualified to be able grasp the cornerstone to this “society“; an education. And with our nation's present economic situation I pray our nation’s leaders can assure that good paying jobs will be available, which is the foundation for this entire plan of an ownership society. However, this is only true if our President and government are sincere in their intentions and actions.
The current mentality of political leaders is that “government is not the solution, but the problem.” I beg to differ. It is the role of government to allocate tax dollars in the service and interest of its citizens. Our Constitution clearly establishes the role of government in promoting the common good of our nation. Everyman & woman for himself is not inherently an American value. This approach is a plan for failure as seen in our nation's response to Hurricane Katrina. Where was the Government, where were the non-profits, where was the private sector? It was and shall always be the role of Government to act and protect its citizens in such disasters.
In addition as seen with Corporations defaulting on agreed upon Pension Plans the private sector cannot be trusted to uphold its responsibilities to its employees.
It is also my hope that we finally see an end to excuses, diverting the blame for mistakes and a renewed focus on the true needs of All Americans. The accountability for the state of our nation lies more with no one, but our President.
-Anthony T. Brooks
Monday, December 12, 2005
Opposition to Samuel Alito is necessary to preserve the Right of Privacy. As seen with the tragic life of Teri Schaivo and the intervention of Republican politicians into this private family matter they will go to the farthest lengths to push their warped ideological agenda. As far as placing someone on the Supreme Court that will ignore this Right to Privacy in order to dismantle a women’s right to choose an abortion.In addition, Mr. Alito will render judgments that side with Corporations. In light of the state of our economic where business slash agreed upon Pension Plans, I will be damned if we need a Supreme Court Justice that is in their pocket.
Furthermore it is in my humble opinion that allegations of corruption on the part of G.W. Bush & his ‘Administrators’ leaves America to discuss not approving another Supreme Court nominee and frankly leaving this seat vacant until the next President fills it. The Senate can and must consider this option, it being a life-time appointment. President in G.W. Bush whose approval, trust, integrity, and competents is in deep question cannot appoint someone that will determine the pillar of American Justice for decades to come.
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
Colin Powell, the highest ranking former member of the Bush Administration who I personally believe is man of character and who intended to have the best interest of the United States in mind. That is precisely why he is no longer in our service. Frankly, he was fired for actually serving the American people well.
I know without a doubt that when compared to President Bush's telling Former FEMA Director Mike Brown that he was doing a hell of a job, but not keeping Colin Powell as Secretary of State that the President G.W. Bush and his 'Administrators' are corrupt.
Colin Powell, the soldier, the diplomat, the general, public servant was the only shining light within the Bush Administration.
(CNN) -- A former top aide to Colin Powell says his involvement in the former secretary of state's presentation to the United Nations on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was "the lowest point" in his life.
"I wish I had not been involved in it," says Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a longtime Powell adviser who served as his chief of staff from 2002 through 2005. "I look back on it, and I still say it was the lowest point in my life."
Wilkerson is one of several insiders interviewed for the CNN Presents documentary "Dead Wrong -- Inside an Intelligence Meltdown." The program pieced together the events leading up to the mistaken WMD intelligence that was presented to the public. A presidential commission that investigated the pre-war WMD intelligence found much of it to be "dead wrong."
Powell's speech, delivered on February 5, 2003, made the case for the war by presenting U.S. intelligence that purported to prove that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Wilkerson says the information in Powell's presentation initially came from a document he described as "sort of a Chinese menu" that was provided by the White House.
"(Powell) came through the door ... and he had in his hands a sheaf of papers, and he said, 'This is what I've got to present at the United Nations according to the White House, and you need to look at it,'" Wilkerson says in the program. "It was anything but an intelligence document. It was, as some people characterized it later, sort of a Chinese menu from which you could pick and choose."
Wilkerson and Powell spent four days and nights in a CIA conference room with then-Director George Tenet and other top officials trying to ensure the accuracy of the presentation, Wilkerson says.
"There was no way the Secretary of State was going to read off a script about serious matters of intelligence that could lead to war when the script was basically un-sourced," Wilkerson says.
In one dramatic accusation in his speech, Powell showed slides alleging that Saddam had bioweapons labs mounted on trucks that would be almost impossible to find.
"In fact, Secretary Powell was not told that one of the sources he was given as a source of this information had indeed been flagged by the Defense Intelligence Agency as a liar, a fabricator," says David Kay, who served as the CIA's chief weapons inspector in Iraq after the fall of Saddam. That source, an Iraqi defector who had never been debriefed by the CIA, was known within the intelligence community as "Curveball."
After searching Iraq for several months across the summer of 2003, Kay began e-mailing Tenet to tell him the WMD evidence was falling apart. At one point, Wilkerson says, Tenet called Powell to tell him the claims about mobile bioweapons labs were apparently not true.
"George actually did call the Secretary, and said, 'I'm really sorry to have to tell you. We don't believe there were any mobile labs for making biological weapons,'" Wilkerson says in the documentary. "This was the third or fourth telephone call. And I think it's fair to say the Secretary and Mr. Tenet, at that point, ceased being close. I mean, you can be sincere and you can be honest and you can believe what you're telling the Secretary. But three or four times on substantive issues like that? It's difficult to maintain any warm feelings."
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
After Protest, after falling approval ratings, failure in Iraq, failure to respond to Hurricane Katrina, an economy on the edge I believe it is about time that Conservatives, Moderates, Liberals and Independents agree at the very least that a change within our Government is needed now!
You should be concerned. The policies, lack of action & leadership of the current Republican led Government is not benefiting you and your family. My friends our current Government in the President, the Senate and the House or Representatives are controlled by the Republican Party. It seems that a call for change today, has merit. There must be a balance of ideologies running our nation.
I suggest that American Organizations, Politicians, and Individuals to respectively demand for non-partisan practical action in regards to:
1. Victims of Hurricane Katrina
2. The Iraq War: Congress has the opportunity in December 2005 to end this quagmire & debacle! This month Congress will vote on the Budget for the Wars in Iraq & Afghanistan. Senators & Representatives whom do not vote to cut funding entirely for the Wars or at least vote for a reduction bring question if they should be reelected to serve the People of the United States of America.
3. The Economy, Job Sustainability, and Job Creation (employee pay/benefits & employer obligations)
4. Balancing the Budget and addressing the Deficit
5. Corruption in Government: we need to clean house. Politicians, Bureaucrats, and Generals need to resign, be investigated, be fired, or be removed.
6. Supreme Court Nominee Samuel Alito: allegations of corruption on the part of G.W. Bush & his ‘Administrators’ leaves America to discuss not approving another Supreme Court nominee and frankly leaving this seat vacant until the next President fills it. The Senate can and must consider this option, it being a life-time appointment. President in G.W. Bush whose approval, trust, integrity, and competents is in deep question cannot appoint someone that will determine the pillar of American Justice for decades to come.
You can make a difference. Write a letter, make a phone call, donate your money, vote, go to a protest, join a group but don’t sit back an let your country go to shit.
-Anthony T. Brooks
Checks & Balances Blog
Monday, December 05, 2005
President Bush created the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees natural dissipaters. This new Department funded by Billions in Tax Dollars did not work as seen with Hurricane Katrina. Even now months after Katrina this government has not properly served the victims of this disaster. In addition, the 9/11 Commission has reported the U.S. has failed to prepare the nation for another Terrorist attack. So I ask, what is the use for the Dept. of Homeland Security? I propose eliminating this Department and reallocating this money to local communities to improve infrastructure that will create jobs and add to security. Example: improving Transportation that will help in evacuations.
President Bush took us to War in Iraq. His justifications are false, and we are failing in the War.
GM, one of America’s largest employers is cutting 1/3 of its jobs.
Natural Disasters, Wars, maintaining the Economy. These are the things Americans put in the care & trust of their President. And I do not use the word “trust” lightly. What is Bush Doing? When the President/CEO of a company fails they are Fired.
What happens when the president of a country fails. What recourse do WE the People have? Impeachment, Forced Resignation, Protest & Civil Disobedience, a Trial for deliberately misleading & misinforming the People, a Revolt?
Your comments are welcome.
9/11 Commission Report:
Yes, Democrats and Republicans hate Saddam, but Justice is Justice. He needs a fair trial, his co-defendants and lawyers given proper protections according to American standards.
Profile of Saddam Hussein: