A Call to Progressives: Investigate Bush!

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?

Budget Cuts Hit Programs for the Poorest

December 27, 2005 · As Congress wrapped up its work last week, most of the headlines were about renewing the Patriot Act and drilling for oil in the arctic. Gaining less notice were several bills that would dramatically cut programs aimed at low-income Americans.
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.

NPR Reports:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5071313

Why Nominate Samuel Alito?

“To Save Bush’s Ass”

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. “

The President is Not Above the Law

“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:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1215/dailyUpdate.html

CNN Reports:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/20/wiretaps/index.html

FOX Entertainment Reports:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179323,00.html

MSN Reports:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10542216/

New York Times Reports:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html

USA Today Reports:
http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-12-15-bush-spying_x.htm?csp=1

Yahoo News Reports:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_nsa

Oppose Samuel Alito

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.

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.

CNN Reports:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/11/alito.ap/index.html

Great American: General Colin Powell

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."

Report:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/index.html

Biographies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Powell

http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/powell-bio.html

Politics that Benefit You

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

What is G.W. Bush Doing?

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:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051205/ap_on_go_pr_wh/sept11_commission_19

The Trial of Saddam Hussein

Is the Iraqi Interim Government under the "authority" of the United States Government executing this trial of Saddam Hussein correctly? Or is this another blunder in the making by the G.W. Bush Administration?

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:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein

Katrina & Fiscal Responsibility

Recently I wrote my Congressman Senator Mel Martinez in regards to my opposition to budget cuts to Programs such as Student Financial Aid, Pell Grants, and Stanford Loans, Medicare, Medicaid, and other Social Programs such as those that fund Church -Faith Based Community Services.

Here is what he had to say:

“Dear Mr. Brooks:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the federal budget. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to respond to your concerns.

The devastation wrought by the recent hurricanes to the Gulf Coast states has left a natural and human disaster the likes of which our nation has never seen. At this point in time, the federal cost of providing assistance, aiding in the recovery, and rebuilding in the affected areas cannot be determined.

In an effort to maintain Congress’s commitment to reducing the federal deficit, Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH), Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Budget, has asked each of the Senate committees to consider policies that would increase mandatory savings beyond their instructed level in the Fiscal Year 2006 Budget Reconciliation.

The budget reconciliation process is an optional procedure that operates as an adjunct to the budget resolution process. The chief purpose of the reconciliation process is to enhance Congress’s ability to change current law in order to bring revenue, spending, and debt-limit levels into conformity with the policies of the annual budget resolution.

The devastating Gulf Coast hurricanes have produced an unanticipated, negative impact on the budget deficit. Each committee is now considering additional policy changes that can be used to help contain the massive federal recovery costs associated with these disasters. Congress is in the process of making tough choices to ensure that the federal response to these disasters is conducted in a responsible manner.

I understand your concerns regarding our federal deficit. Please know, in the coming weeks I will be working with my colleagues in the Senate to find fiscally responsible ways to maintain our commitment to reducing the federal deficit notwithstanding the challenges posed by recent events.

Again, thank you for sharing your views with me.

If you have any other further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. In addition if you are interested in learning more about policy issues, please feel free to visit my website at http://martinez.senate.gov.

Sincerely,

Mel Martinez
United States Senator”

Initially I wrote Senator Martinez about fiscal responsibility not specifically about Hurricane Katrina but that is what he focused on in his response. No because of a lack of courtesy for my concerns I am compelled to elaborate more fully on what I see has happened after Hurricane Katrina.

The current Republican led Government is a conscious participate in Structural-Institutional Injustice. My friends do you realize that these people in charge of your and my Tax Dollars in Congress have flat out failed the residents affected by Hurricane Katrina? Believe me if this were New York, Beverly Hills, or even my little City of Sarasota helicopters would have picked up victims within hours and the government would have had these folk in new homes by the end of the month. But we are now approximately 3 months past Katrina and not only are victims still in hotels, they are being kicked out.

I’ll be frank! I’m not only talking about poor people on government assistance but middle class working folk that owned their homes. Is it cause many were black? Is it cause they were from New Orleans? It is cause they were from a Democratic state?

This failure of our government to provide for its citizens is certainly is no the victim's fault. Do you, my fellow citizen realize we have supported President G.W. Bush is creating the Dept. of Homeland Security after 911 and it with the Billions of our Tax Dollars it has utterly failed when most needed! Natural disasters can strike anywhere, and next time it may be your family, and your children, stranded on a roof top for 7 days and kicked out of hotel 3 months after loosing your home.

I don’t want to hear Congress people tell me about the deficit. It is about how they prioritize the spending of our money. Money that is there, sitting in line items for the Dept. of Defense and Special Appropriations for the Iraq War. I want to see Congress and the President take care of our people.

I am no mathematician but I calculate approximately $30,000 will be spent per family victim of Katrina for hotel rooms. Correct me if I am wrong, but what idiot politician decided to waiste our money on hotels and not permanent housing for these victims. This money could have been put into reconstruction, created needed jobs. $30,000 could equal a new house, a permanent trailer, a long-term apartment.

-Anthony Brooks

Homeless for the Holidays:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/30/katrina.display.ap/index.html

Bad Business

Bad business practices in my opinion are leading to the collapse of major American Industries.

Several major Airlines have filed for Bankruptcy. Car manufactures have decreased their prices. General Motors (GM) announced in November 2005 that it would be cutting 30,000 jobs.

All of these American trends have been occurring while the European Airline industry is booming (Airbus) and Asian Auto Makers are expanding within the United States (Toyota).

American Industries have no cope out or excuse. There are loosing in market competition because of Bad Business Practices:

1) Exorbitant Prices
2) Poor Quality of Product
3) Poor Employee Policies: Pay, Benefits, Retention, Pensions
4) Exorbitant Executive Pay

Bottom Line, these practices that are known by the Consumer leads them to giving their business and money to companies that adhere to better basic business practices. If American companies begin to take care of its employees, not cut jobs, pay Executives reasonable salaries, and produce a good product instead of cutting corners our poor economic future may adjust itself. Common sense, how can we compete with other nations in trade and product production if our capacity to do so is less? Common sense, who will purchase high-priced American products if workers are out of the job and making less money? American Businesses must take care of its workers! This idea at last was at the foundation of our economy.

In other words, the greedy self-serving American business mentality is coming to bite us in the ass.

CNN Reports:
http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/21/news/fortune500/gm_cuts/index.htm?cnn=yes

MSN Reports:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10141628/

Support Rep. John P. Murtha

After Rep. Murtha's call to bring our troops home, he was attacked by Republicans, led by Dick Cheney. But my friend how can anyone object to the pragmatic words of this respected war veteran, who spoke frankly with common sense.

Here is what he had to say:

The Honorable John P. Murtha

War in Iraq

(Washington D.C.)- The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. The American public is way ahead of us. The United States and coalition troops have done all they can in Iraq, but it is time for a change in direction. Our military is suffering. The future of our country is at risk. We can not continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interest of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf Region.
General Casey said in a September 2005 Hearing, “the perception of occupation in Iraq is a major driving force behind the insurgency.” General Abizaid said on the same date, “Reducing the size and visibility of the coalition forces in Iraq is a part of our counterinsurgency strategy.”
For 2 ½ years I have been concerned about the U.S. policy and the plan in Iraq. I have addressed my concerns with the Administration and the Pentagon and have spoken out in public about my concerns. The main reason for going to war has been discredited. A few days before the start of the war I was in Kuwait – the military drew a red line around Baghdad and said when U.S. forces cross that line they will be attacked by the Iraqis with Weapons of Mass Destruction – but the US forces said they were prepared. They had well trained forces with the appropriate protective gear.

We spend more money on Intelligence than all the countries in the world together, and more on Intelligence than most countries GDP. But the intelligence concerning Iraq was wrong. It is not a world intelligence failure. It is a U.S. intelligence failure and the way that intelligence was misused.

I have been visiting our wounded troops at Bethesda and Walter Reed hospitals almost every week since the beginning of the War. And what demoralizes them is going to war with not enough troops and equipment to make the transition to peace; the devastation caused by IEDs; being deployed to Iraq when their homes have been ravaged by hurricanes; being on their second or third deployment and leaving their families behind without a network of support.

The threat posed by terrorism is real, but we have other threats that cannot be ignored. We must be prepared to face all threats. The future of our military is at risk. Our military and their families are stretched thin. Many say that the Army is broken. Some of our troops are on their third deployment. Recruitment is down, even as our military has lowered its standards. Defense budgets are being cut. Personnel costs are skyrocketing, particularly in health care. Choices will have to be made. We can not allow promises we have made to our military families in terms of service benefits, in terms of their health care, to be negotiated away. Procurement programs that ensure our military dominance cannot be negotiated away. We must be prepared. The war in Iraq has caused huge shortfalls at our bases in the U.S. Much of our ground equipment is worn out and in need of either serious overhaul or replacement. George Washington said, “To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.” We must rebuild our Army. Our deficit is growing out of control. The Director of the Congressional Budget Office recently admitted to being “terrified” about the budget deficit in the coming decades. This is the first prolonged war we have fought with three years of tax cuts, without full mobilization of American industry and without a draft. The burden of this war has not been shared equally; the military and their families are shouldering this burden.
Our military has been fighting a war in Iraq for over two and a half years. Our military has accomplished its mission and done its duty. Our military captured Saddam Hussein, and captured or killed his closest associates. But the war continues to intensify. Deaths and injuries are growing, with over 2,079 confirmed American deaths. Over 15,500 have been seriously injured and it is estimated that over 50,000 will suffer from battle fatigue. There have been reports of at least 30,000 Iraqi civilian deaths.
I just recently visited Anbar Province Iraq in order to assess the conditions on the ground. Last May 2005, as part of the Emergency Supplemental Spending Bill, the House included the Moran Amendment, which was accepted in Conference, and which required the Secretary of Defense to submit quarterly reports to Congress in order to more accurately measure stability and security in Iraq. We have now received two reports. I am disturbed by the findings in key indicator areas. Oil production and energy production are below pre-war levels. Our reconstruction efforts have been crippled by the security situation. Only $9 billion of the $18 billion appropriated for reconstruction has been spent. Unemployment remains at about 60 percent. Clean water is scarce. Only $500 million of the $2.2 billion appropriated for water projects has been spent. And most importantly, insurgent incidents have increased from about 150 per week to over 700 in the last year. Instead of attacks going down over time and with the addition of more troops, attacks have grown dramatically. Since the revelations at Abu Ghraib, American casualties have doubled. An annual State Department report in 2004 indicated a sharp increase in global terrorism.

I said over a year ago, and now the military and the Administration agrees, Iraq can not be won “militarily.” I said two years ago, the key to progress in Iraq is to Iraqitize, Internationalize and Energize. I believe the same today. But I have concluded that the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq is impeding this progress.

Our troops have become the primary target of the insurgency. They are united against U.S. forces and we have become a catalyst for violence. U.S. troops are the common enemy of the Sunnis, Saddamists and foreign jihadists. I believe with a U.S. troop redeployment, the Iraqi security forces will be incentivized to take control. A poll recently conducted shows that over 80% of Iraqis are strongly opposed to the presence of coalition troops, and about 45% of the Iraqi population believe attacks against American troops are justified. I believe we need to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis. I believe before the Iraqi elections, scheduled for mid December, the Iraqi people and the emerging government must be put on notice that the United States will immediately redeploy. All of Iraq must know that Iraq is free. Free from United States occupation. I believe this will send a signal to the Sunnis to join the political process for the good of a “free” Iraq.
My plan calls:

To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces. To create a quick reaction force in the region.To create an over- the- horizon presence of Marines. To diplomatically pursue security and stability in Iraq

This war needs to be personalized. As I said before I have visited with the severely wounded of this war. They are suffering.
Because we in Congress are charged with sending our sons and daughters into battle, it is our responsibility, our OBLIGATION to speak out for them. That’s why I am speaking out.

Our military has done everything that has been asked of them, the U.S. can not accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. IT IS TIME TO BRING THEM HOME.


The Honorable Rep. John Murtha:
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/pa12_murtha/pr051117iraq.html

The Democratic Party Supports Murtha:
http://democrats.org/page/petition/shameonthem

Iraq War Pledge

If you disagree with the Iraq War please take a moment to sign this pledge which is being conducted by a grass roots organization, Democracy for America.

Also please consider passing this pledge along to your family, friends, and co-workers.

Pledge: http://tools.democracyforamerica.com/local/

Thanks,

-Anthony Brooks

G.W. Bush Put us in Debt

Republicans must take voting American citizens as fools if they think we believe the way in which they are currently running our government is “fiscally responsible”.

G.W. Bush has borrowed more money than any U.S. President. Yes, more than all Democrat Presidents combined. Wars cost for much more than reasonable Social Programs that Democrats are trying to push. For example: Universal Healthcare. it’s a matter of priorities and fiscal responsibility.

Democrats are for the People. Republicans are for their Pocket.

Report:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200511%5CNAT20051104b.html

The Iraq War, God’s Way.

I quote a Republican calling Muslim Fanaticism as an “evil ideology”. He said that “people of good will” are trying to eliminate such an ideology which believes that a man that kills innocent in the name of their God will have “72 virgins” waiting for him in heaven (I saw a Muslim youth say this on TV).

Now, when it comes to War must we be partisan? Honestly, as a Christian, this concept of defeating evil ideology is important. However Religion/Faith can define “people of good will” through examples such as Jesus Christ.

“And the World was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten son of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” - John 1:14

The Bible says Jesus Christ was “full of truth” As I see it, I gotta tell you the truth:

If America is truly a Christian nation this specific War we are waging on Terror & in Iraq is in itself supporting an “evil ideology”. Let me be very clear: I am not a pacifist, I believe War can be justified. Through the execution of this War in Iraq, we the United States of America are killing innocent people, women, and children. And listen, with no justification! I’m not trying to appeal to Democrats or Republicans but Americans and especially Christians whom may feel a call from the spirit of God.

Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Prince of Peace gave himself for the World and the individual soul. It is through this example that America, which proclaims to be a Christian nation must not take for granted one individual life especially when our God tells us, his way, not that of military force is the path to Victory.

Republican leaders say Democrats want to “cut and run” and have no alternative plan for this failing War. Why don’t we contemplate trying this War on Terror God’s way? Being “full of truth”, the Christian Faith and its believers should be called & compelled to demand an immediate end to the War in Iraq. G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney have said ’ don’t loose your memories’. We, the People of the United States of America were told Iraq and Saddam Hussein were a threat to our security, possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, and were linked to 9/11. All of these allegations told to use are false, therefore there is no truth nor justification for American soldiers to continue to occupy the sovereign nation of Iraq.

-Anthony T. Brooks
Checks & Balances Blog

A Call to Bring Our Troops Home

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Warning that other global threats "cannot be ignored," Rep. John Murtha, D-Pennsylvania, a leading adviser on defense issues, called Thursday for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

"U.S. and coalition troops have done all they can in Iraq," the senior lawmaker said. "It's time for a change in direction.

"He said he believes all the forces could be redeployed over a six-month period.

Murtha, a former Marine Corps colonel and veteran of the Vietnam war, is the first senior lawmaker to call for an immediate withdrawal. Other critics of the war have asked President Bush to set up a timetable for withdrawal. GOP lawmaker: Withdrawal 'a mistake'Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, blasted Murtha for his comments.

"I am saddened by the comments made today by Rep. Murtha," Hastert said in a statement. "It is clear that as [House Minority Leader] Nancy Pelosi's top lieutenant on armed services, Rep. Murtha and Democratic leaders have adopted a policy of cut-and-run. They would prefer that the United States surrender to the terrorists who would harm innocent Americans.

"Rep. Duncan Hunter, a Republican from California and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, described calls for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq "a mistake," arguing that leaving Iraq would make it appear that America cannot sustain prolonged military operations."I just wanted to remind our friends that now is the time for endurance," Hunter said. "Right now, in Iraq, we are changing the world. ... We're changing a very strategic part of the world in such a way that it will not be a threat to the United States and, in fact, will be an ally in the global war against terror.

"A respected voiceMurtha's call for a withdrawal, however, could have a significant impact on the debate over the future of the Iraq war, as both Democrats and Republicans seek his advice on military and veterans' issues."A man of stature of John Murtha -- that's a pretty heavy hit, I don't mind telling you," said North Carolina Republican Rep. Walter Jones, sponsor of the House resolution that calls for a timetable for withdrawal. "He ... gives a lot of weight to this debate." Jones said he thinks this will make "some Republicans think about their responsibility as relates to the war in Iraq" and that "this is a week that will help further the debate -- ignite the debate."Another Democrat who voted for the war, Rep. Harold Ford of Tennessee, said he had heard of Murtha's comments and wouldn't endorse his call for immediate withdrawal.But, Ford said, "It a powerful statement coming from arguably the most respected voice in the Congress," and it will be hard for the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney to dismiss these comments as easily as other Democratic criticisms on the war. Presence 'uniting enemy against us'Murtha, who has served in the House for over three decades, is the senior Democrat and former chairman of the Defense Appropriations Committee and voted in favor of the Iraq war. Now, he said, the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq are "uniting the enemy against us.""Our military has accomplished its mission and done its duty," he said. "Our military captured Saddam Hussein, captured or killed his closest associates, but the war continues to intensify."He said the redeployment will give Iraqis the incentive to take control of their country.The statement comes amid increasingly heated debate over the Iraq war and the intelligence leading up to the March 2003 invasion. A recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll also found the public increasingly dissatisfied with the Iraq war. The poll, released Monday, found that 60 percent of Americans said the war was not worth fighting, while 38 percent said it was worthwhile. (Full story) Monday's poll found that 19 percent of Americans want to see the troops come home now and 33 percent said they wanted them home within a year. Only 38 percent said they should remain "as long as needed." On Tuesday, the Senate also voted 79-19 for an amendment that called for progress reports on the Iraq war every 90 days. The amendment's purpose was "to clarify and recommend changes" to U.S. policy in Iraq. The vote was seen as a reflection of the increasing bipartisan dissatisfaction over the war's progress.On Wednesday, Vice President Dick Cheney dismissed Democratic critics, calling allegations that the administration misled the country as "one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges ever aired in this city." (Full story)Murtha took issue with the administration's counter-criticism, specifically President Bush's Veterans Day speech in which he said it is "deeply irresponsible to rewrite how that war began."'Flawed policy'"I resent the fact that on Veterans Day, they criticized Democrats for criticizing them," Murtha said. "This [the war] is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. The American public knows it, and lashing out at critics doesn't help a bit. You've got to change the policy. That's what's going to help the American people. You need to change direction.

"Murtha -- who recently visited Iraq's Anbar province -- said it is Congress' responsibility to speak out for the "sons and daughters" on the battlefield, and relayed several emotional stories from soldiers recovering at Bethesda's Walter Reed Medical Center.

"I tell you, these young folks are under intense activity over there, I mean much more intense than Vietnam," he said. "You never know when it's going to happen."


CNN Reports:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/17/murtha.iraq/index.html

The Budget II: Damn Republicans!

Those damn Republicans instead of decreasing funding from the Department of Defense, the Wars in Iraq & Afghanistan, the pork within the Highway Bill, and incentives to Oil companies found in the Energy Bill are cutting Billions from Education.

There is a myth that the United States Government spends to much money on Social Programs like Welfare, and Food Stamps. This is outright false.

Let me break this Down for You:

Spending on Defense & Security = $533 Billion Dollars
Spending on Health, Education, Labor = $141 Billion
Spending for Veterans, Housing & Urban Development = $90 Billion

And to fund efforts to rebuild regions affected by Hurricane Katrina the Republicans don’t look to cutting from Defense but plan on spending more money that we do not have. Call this fiscally responsible? Hell no! It’s Reckless.

The needs of American soldieries, American Veterans, American children & families, American workers are being neglected. Politicians are elected to serve.A specific example of their dereliction of their duty to the People: Republicans are proposing cutting $15 Billion from Education, leaving Veteran Hospitals $1 Billion in the red, and $50 Billion from Social Programs needed for victims of Hurricane Katrina. Money that should have already been in place.

The Dept. of Homeland Security which is funded Billions of your Tax Dollars was created by Bush under his watch but I failed to prepare the nation for a natural disaster.

On Labor, American jobs are being taking by illegal aliens and outsourced to India while at the same time the United States is falling behind other nations in the education & training of its work force.

On Education President Bush said we need to send more people to school and that we would “leave no child behind”. However these budgets cuts seek to do just that in decreasing financial assistance, therefore many poor but bright young people will not even have the opportunity to go to school.

Republicans are even turning their back on funding social programs for Churches which provide vital support to local communities.

I am tired of hearing those of you that blindly support President Bush. Common sense should tell even the strongest Conservative (whom claim to be fiscally responsible) that policies and priorities of the current Administration need to change.


White House Budget:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/tables.html

Churches Oppose Cuts:
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/051020BudgetCutPlans.html

News Report:
http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?f...%20and%20Policy

A Lack of Leadership

I have spent much time on Checks & Balances condemning Republican policy and promoting Democrats. Now in November 2005 the United States finds itself at a moment where we must shed our political affiliations and have a frank discussion on certain matters.

I also ask you this: is your political interest and your side winning so crucial that Integrity, Character and Truthfulness are no longer important, and God forbid, necessary?

Issues where there is a lack of leadership within the United States:

• The economy
  
• Profiteering by Corporations and Politicians
  
• Corruption
  
• Poor approval of the Government
  
• An economically stretched population
  
• Uncommon natural disasters raising the issue of global warming
  
• Energy Independence, and alternative energy technologies
  
• Poverty
  
• The Voting System
  
• The Patriot Acts
  
• The War in Iraq
  
• Monetary & tax policies regarding corporations, & the wealthy versus the worker & Consumer
  

We are behind other Nations in:

• Education
  
• Health Care
  
• Work Force Training
  
• Trade
  

These are not Republican nor Democratic issues, they are only American. They deal with the economic power & stability, international influence, and constitutional integrity of America. As I look at recent trends it tells me that millions of children are being left behind in our schools, citizens are more indebted to bill collectors than to their families, and American workers are loosing out to illegal aliens in addition to their jobs being outsourced to India. Issues dealing with the Right to Life and the Right to Privacy which are the focus of current political energies are irrelevant while those things that truly are important to the strength of our nation and people are tumbling down.


Where is the leadership on these matters?

The Budget: Damn Republicans!

Those damn Republicans instead of cutting funding from the Department of Defense, the Wars in Iraq & Afghanistan, the pork within the Highway Bill, and incentives to Oil companies found in the Energy Bill are cutting Billions from Education.

And to fund efforts to rebuild regions affected by Hurricane Katrina they don’t look to cutting from any of the mentioned above but plan on spending more money that we do not have. Call this fiscally responsible? Hell no! It’s Reckless.

"Mr. Danger"

One world leader calls G.W. Bush “Mr. Danger”. 9/11, the War on Terror, the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, NASA Space Shuttle Blowing Up, Asian Tsunami, Hurricane Katrina, Abused Prisoners, Secret Laws, Secret Police, Secret Courts, Secret Prisons, Bird Flu, and Weapons of Mass Destruction.

The South American President calling Bush “Mr. Danger” however is referring to his economic policies.

Is this Karma, coincidence or all Bush’s fault?In the entire Presidency’s of Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton did the U.S. endure so many negative occurrences? Maybe this title of “Mr. Danger” is warranted.

Links:

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/03/venezu...h_mr_danger.php

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/050506/w050658.html

Great Britain Rejects "Patriot Acts"

Blair Suffers Major Defeat on Terror Bill By Ed Johnson
The Associated Press

Wednesday 09 November 2005
London - In a political blow to Prime Minister Tony Blair, British lawmakers on Wednesday rejected tough anti-terrorism legislation that would have allowed suspects to be detained for 90 days without charge.
The House of Commons vote was the first major defeat of Blair's premiership and raises serious questions about his grip on power. Blair had staked his authority on the measure and doggedly refused to compromise.
Lawmakers, including 49 members of Blair's Labour Party, opted instead for a maximum detention period for terror suspects of 28 days without charge.
Michael Howard, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, said Blair's authority had "diminished almost to vanishing point" and said he should consider resigning.
"This vote shows he is no longer able to carry his own party with him. He must now consider his position," said Howard.
But Blair was defiant. He ruled out resignation and insisted lawmakers had been wrong to put the civil liberties of a small number of terrorists ahead of the "fundamental civil liberty of this country to protection from terrorism."
"The country will think that Parliament has behaved in a deeply irresponsible way today," he added.
Lawmakers voted 322 to 291 against 90-day detentions and backed the 28-day period by 323-290 votes.
The result is a humiliating blow to Blair. For eight years, his Labour government commanded an unassailable lead in the Commons and easily swatted aside opposition to its legislation.
But Blair's popularity has slumped in the wake of the divisive Iraq war, and his party was punished in national elections earlier this year. Labour's huge 161-seat advantage in the Commons shrunk to just 66, making the government vulnerable.
In the immediate aftermath of the July attacks on London's transit system, Blair had considerable cross-party support for new anti-terror legislation.
He drafted the Terrorism Bill, which aims to tackle Muslim extremism by outlawing training in terrorist camps as well encouraging acts of violence and glorifying terrorism.
But the political consensus broke down over the plan to extend the period terror suspects can be held without change from the current 14-day maximum to three months. Authorities argued more time was needed in complex cases where suspects have multiple aliases or where the help of foreign intelligence agencies is needed. But critics countered that extending it to 90 days would erode civil rights.
Blair took a considerable political gamble in refusing to back down and had called in every supporter to shore up numbers. Treasury chief Gordon Brown was called back from an official visit to Israel only two hours after arriving there. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw cut short an official EU visit to Russia, while Labour Party chairman Ian McCartney, who is recuperating from heart surgery, volunteered to return for the vote.
The defeat comes at a difficult time for the prime minister. His party, and even his Cabinet, is split over his plans to encourage greater private sector investment in public services such as health care and education. Earlier this month, Blair's strongest ally, Work and Pensions Secretary David Blunkett, was forced to resign due to a scandal over his business dealings.
The prime minister has said he will not seek a fourth term in office. He could serve until 2010, but pressure for him to quit sooner may intensify following Wednesday's vote.
Bookmakers Ladbrokes cut the odds on Blair stepping down next year from 11 to 4, to 5 to 2 in the wake of the defeat.
"The prime minister has just fallen off the high wire," said Scottish Nationalist Party leader Alex Salmond. "He is a victim of his own arrogance. He may well be on the way out of office."

“Regrettable Unfortunate Phenomenon”

Because of the extremely polarized political climate within the United States intensified by the Wars in Iraq & on Terror, liberals and conservatives have both been accusing each other of literally being Nazis. I am not Jewish but I do write out of respect to this community. I write this as an opinion, not fact and welcome discussion on my remarks.

Adolf Hitler referred to the “ethnic cleansing” resulting in the death of Jews and other “classes” of people as Regrettable Unfortunate Phenomenon. Some said the Holocaust was in the name of God. I viewed an interview from a survivor, they said a thought they focused on was to “wait a while.” “wait a while”.

As an American citizens no matter your political or religious affiliations you must be aware of the direction our nation is being led. The alarms being raised no longer equate to partisan politics. The International community, President Jimmy Carter, and President Bill Clinton are attempting to raise public awareness. When you hear these former guardians of our democracy speak, what they are saying is practical.

The comparison of specific activities of the G.W. Bush Administration to that of Adolf Hitler possesses merit.

The United States operates under a system of Checks & Balances, however under G.W. Bush’s watch this system has been corrupted threatening our very institution of Democracy. Systematic and Legal changes that are gradually chipping away at freedoms and increasing the tangible powers of the Executive Branch, Law Enforcement and the Military.

These measures were achieved by taking advantage of national disasters such as 9/11 (resulting in the Patriot Acts & Iraq War) Hurricane Katrina (policy of using the Military for Domestic/ Civilian responsibility instead of fixing FEMA), Bird Flu ( a plan to use the Military to quarantine cities instead of utilizing our Health Care Infrastructure). These plans came directly from the G.W. Bush Administration

Adolf Hitler took control of Germany in part by altering laws, usurping existing Ministries/Departments, and through ambiguous laws exactly like the Patriot Acts.

Specifically there are 3 Items that must be done dealt with:

I: Provisions of the Patriotic Act, which permit for sneak and peak searches. Our Constitution guards against unlawful searches and seizures. There should be no exceptions. Provisions which allow for law enforcement to have surveillance on citizens or seek information on a citizens without first going through judge. These provisions overrides the People’s power of Oversight.

II. Detaining Prisoners, the U.S. now under G.W. Bush’s watch has a policies that are in the “spirit of the Geneva Convention” towards detainees. In my opinion this is crime. I strongly believe we should follow the Geneva Convention and other humanitarian standards with no exceptions.

II. Voting: the situation with voting machines must be corrected immediately. There should not be any voting district that cannot be accurately audited. Furthermore citizens being given a receipt after they vote is entirely reasonable.

“Divide & Rule” was Hitler’s policy. It is to the advantage of politicians for our nation to be divided. But let me tell you, there is no reason why America cannot pursue policy that benefits all of its citizens and that adheres completely to its Constitution, with no exceptions and no ambiguous interpretations.

Also, with all do respect to President George W. Bush and advocates for the present Wars, what do you call the civilians and children dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunate Phenomenon? How much longer must these people live in such conditions? And how much longer will the American people continue to permit & tolerate bad leaders to take our country in the wrong direction?


President Jimmy Carter Speaks on Secret Prisons:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9903864/

Senate Debates Iraq War

Democrats force Senate into unusual closed session"

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrats forced the Republican-controlled Senate into an unusual closed session Tuesday, questioning intelligence that led to the Iraq war and deriding a lack of congressional inquiry."I demand on behalf of the America people that we understand why these investigations aren't being conducted," Democratic leader Harry Reid said.Taken by surprise, Republicans derided the move as a political stunt."The United States Senate has been hijacked by the Democratic leadership," said Majority Leader Bill Frist. "They have no convictions, they have no principles, they have no ideas," the Republican leader said.Reid demanded the Senate go into closed session. The public was ordered out of the chamber, the lights were dimmed, and the doors were closed. No vote is required in such circumstances.Pre-war intelligence at issueReid's move shone a spotlight on the continuing controversy over intelligence that President Bush cited in the run-up to the war in Iraq. Despite prewar claims, no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, and some Democrats have accused the administration of manipulating the information that was in their possession.Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was indicted last Friday in an investigation that touched on the war, the leak of the identity of a CIA official married to a critic of the administration's Iraq policy. (Full story)"The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really all about, how this administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions," Reid said before invoking Senate rules that led to the closed session.Libby resigned from his White House post after being indicted on charges of obstruction of justice, making false statements and perjury.Democrats contend that the unmasking of Valerie Plame was retribution for her husband, Joseph Wilson, publicly challenging the Bush administration's contention that Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium from Africa. That claim was part of the White House's justification for going to war.A rare moveSen. Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, said Reid was making "some sort of stink about Scooter Libby and the CIA leak."A former majority leader, Lott said a closed session was appropriate for such overarching matters as impeachment and chemical weapons -- the two topics that last sent the senators into such sessions.In addition, Lott said, Reid's move violated the Senate's tradition of courtesy and consent. But there was nothing in Senate rules enabling Republicans to thwart Reid's effort.As Reid spoke, Frist met in the back of the chamber with a half-dozen senior GOP senators, including Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, who bore the brunt of Reid's criticism. Reid said Roberts reneged on a promise to fully investigate whether the administration exaggerated and manipulated intelligence leading up to the war."

Mission Accomplished

President Bush has recently said “'best way to honor' the Iraq war dead is to complete mission.”

We went into Iraq to find WMD’s and to protect the United State’s Homeland and there were none. We have Saddam in custody. Mission Accomplished?

I see no more reason for United States troops to be in Iraq.

What is the Mission?

How can an unjustified War have a mission? Following this premise, how can the death of these soldiers be honored?

How do we define a completed Mission in Iraq?


CNN Reports:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/29/bus...o.ap/index.html

United Methodist Church Calls For Withdrawal

It's one thing when former high-ranking members of your own Administration come out against your war. It's another thing when two-thirds of the country calls the invasion and occupation a mistake. It's really something when your own church issues a statement urging you to pull out the troops now.
Last week, the United Methodist Church Board of Church and Society--the social action committee of the church that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney belong to--resoundingly passed a resolution calling for withdrawal with only two 'no' votes and one abstention.
"As people of faith, we raise our voice in protest against the tragedy of the unjust war in Iraq," the statement read. "Thousands of lives have been lost and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted in a war the United States initiated and should never have fought.... We grieve for all those whose lives have been lost or destroyed in this needless and avoidable tragedy. Military families have suffered undue hardship from prolonged troop rotations in Iraq and loss of loved ones. It is time to bring them home."
The board also issued a strong statement against torture, urging Congress to create an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate detention and interrogation practices at Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan.
"It is my hope and prayer that our statement against the war in Iraq will be heard loud and clear by our fellow United Methodists, President Bush and Vice President Cheney," said Jim Winkler, General Secretary of the UMC's Board of Church and Society. "Conservative and liberal board members worked together to craft a strong statement calling for the troops to come home and for those responsible for leading us into this disastrous war to be held accountable."
With its bold stands against the Administration, the UMC is fulfilling the words of Martin Luther King Jr., who called for the church to be "not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion" but "a thermostat that transformed the mores of society."
Bush has asserted that he entered Iraq on a direct order from God. Now, he has a direct order from his own church to leave. Is he listening?
We also want to hear from you. Please let us know if you have a sweet victory you think we should cover by e-mailing nationvictories@gmail.com.
Co-written by Sam Graham-Felsen, a freelance journalist, documentary filmmaker and blogger (www.boldprint.net) living in Brooklyn.

Discussion of Alternative Energy is Rising

People across economic spectrums are discussing a shift from an Oil based economy to one of more energy diversification. The Alternative Energy Methods that could become realties within the next decade include Hybrid Cars and Solar/Bio Homes. Such energy efficient technologies are already in limited use and are becoming ever more affordable. In the long run these Technologies will save you money.

Recent Polls show a drop in consumer support of Oil Companies to approximately 20%. This drop in support will result in changes in behavior of energy use and spending by consumers.


U.S. Dept. of Energy:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/

Energy Efficient Homes:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/10/26/solar.cooking.reut/index.html

http://www.icfconsulting.com/Markets/Community_Development/cd-expertise-3.asp

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=new_homes.hm_faq&layout=print

Fuel Efficient Cars:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/AUTOS/10/12/most_efficient_cars/


My Opinion: In my opinion the ultimate goal for where at least the United States should move in regards in regards to Energy must focus on energy efficiency in addition to saving money for the America Government, the Private Sector, and the Consumer. But most important the implementation of such changes and uses of available technologies should be aimed at creating energy independence for families. More specifically every family should live in a home partially powered by some form of alternative energy (Solar) and own a more gas efficient (“hybrid”) automobile. In light of current government policy neglected to take care of its citizens as seen in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and Oil Companies attempting to rip off the average citizens through artificially inflated gasoline prices it would only be practical for America to move towards these more efficient and individually independent energy sources. It would be a great benefit if those in the Industries of Building Solar Panels and Energy Efficient Homes would make their products more affordable to the consumer. If this occurs these technologies could become the standard.

Back Flash: Bush's Case for War Against Iraq

“The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.

The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary; he is deceiving. From intelligence sources we know, for instance, that thousands of Iraqi security personnel are at work hiding documents and materials from the U.N. inspectors, sanitizing inspection sites and monitoring the inspectors themselves. Iraqi officials accompany the inspectors in order to intimidate witnesses.

Iraq is blocking U-2 surveillance flights requested by the United Nations. Iraqi intelligence officers are posing as the scientists inspectors are supposed to interview. Real scientists have been coached by Iraqi officials on what to say. Intelligence sources indicate that Saddam Hussein has ordered that scientists who cooperate with U.N. inspectors in disarming Iraq will be killed, along with their families.

Year after year, Saddam Hussein has gone to elaborate lengths, spent enormous sums, taken great risks to build and keep weapons of mass destruction. But why? The only possible explanation, the only possible use he could have for those weapons, is to dominate, intimidate, or attack.

With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East and create deadly havoc in that region. And this Congress and the America people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.

Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes. (Applause.)

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option. (Applause.)

The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages -- leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained -- by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning. (Applause.)

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country -- your enemy is ruling your country. (Applause.) And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. (Applause.)

The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends and our allies. The United States will ask the U.N. Security Council to convene on February the 5th to consider the facts of Iraq's ongoing defiance of the world. Secretary of State Powell will present information and intelligence about Iraqi's legal -- Iraq's illegal weapons programs, its attempt to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups.

We will consult. But let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him. (Applause.)

Tonight I have a message for the men and women who will keep the peace, members of the American Armed Forces: Many of you are assembling in or near the Middle East, and some crucial hours may lay ahead. In those hours, the success of our cause will depend on you. Your training has prepared you. Your honor will guide you. You believe in America, and America believes in you. (Applause.)

Sending Americans into battle is the most profound decision a President can make. The technologies of war have changed; the risks and suffering of war have not. For the brave Americans who bear the risk, no victory is free from sorrow. This nation fights reluctantly, because we know the cost and we dread the days of mourning that always come.

We seek peace. We strive for peace. And sometimes peace must be defended. A future lived at the mercy of terrible threats is no peace at all. If war is forced upon us, we will fight in a just cause and by just means -- sparing, in every way we can, the innocent. And if war is forced upon us, we will fight with the full force and might of the United States military -- and we will prevail. (Applause.)

And as we and our coalition partners are doing in Afghanistan, we will bring to the Iraqi people food and medicines and supplies -- and freedom. (Applause.)
Many challenges, abroad and at home, have arrived in a single season. In two years, America has gone from a sense of invulnerability to an awareness of peril; from bitter division in small matters to calm unity in great causes. And we go forward with confidence, because this call of history has come to the right country.

Americans are a resolute people who have risen to every test of our time. Adversity has revealed the character of our country, to the world and to ourselves. America is a strong nation, and honorable in the use of our strength. We exercise power without conquest, and we sacrifice for the liberty of strangers.
Americans are a free people, who know that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. (Applause.)

We Americans have faith in ourselves, but not in ourselves alone. We do not know -- we do not claim to know all the ways of Providence, yet we can trust in them, placing our confidence in the loving God behind all of life, and all of history.

May He guide us now. And may God continue to bless the United States of America”

-President G.W. Bush, State of the Union 2003


NPR Reports:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4764919

Civil rights leader Rosa Parks dies

Known as the 'mother of the civil rights movement'

(CNN) -- Rosa Parks, whose act of civil disobedience in 1955 inspired the modern civil rights movement, died Monday in Detroit, Michigan. She was 92.
Parks' moment in history began in December 1955 when she refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white man in Montgomery, Alabama.
Her arrest triggered a 381-day boycott of the bus system by blacks that was organized by a 26-year-old Baptist minister, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
The boycott led to a court ruling desegregating public transportation in Montgomery, but it wasn't until the 1964 Civil Rights Act that all public accommodations nationwide were desegregated.
Facing regular threats and having lost her department store job because of her activism, Parks moved from Alabama to Detroit in 1957. She later joined the staff of U.S. Rep. John Conyers, a Michigan Democrat.
Conyers, who first met Parks during the early days of the civil rights struggle, recalled Monday that she worked on his original congressional staff when he first was elected to the House of Representatives in 1964.
"I think that she, as the mother of the new civil rights movement, has left an impact not just on the nation, but on the world," he told CNN in a telephone interview. "She was a real apostle of the nonviolence movement."
He remembered her as someone who never raised her voice -- an eloquent voice of the civil rights movement.
"You treated her with deference because she was so quiet, so serene -- just a very special person," he said, adding that "there was only one" Rosa Parks.
Gregory Reed, a longtime friend and attorney, said Parks died between 7 p.m. and 8 p.m. of natural causes. He called Parks "a lady of great courage."
Parks co-founded the Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute for Self Development to help young people pursue educational opportunities, get them registered to vote and work toward racial peace.
"As long as there is unemployment, war, crime and all things that go to the infliction of man's inhumanity to man, regardless -- there is much to be done, and people need to work together," she once said.
Even into her 80s, she was active on the lecture circuit, speaking at civil rights groups and accepting awards, including the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1996 and the Congressional Gold Medal in 1999.
"This medal is encouragement for all of us to continue until all have rights," she said at the June 1999 ceremony for the latter medal.
Parks was the subject of the documentary "Mighty Times: The Legacy of Rosa Parks," which received a 2002 Oscar nomination for best documentary short.
In April, Parks and rap duo OutKast settled a lawsuit over the use of her name on a CD released in 1998. (Full story)
Bus boycott
She was born Rosa Louise McCauley in Tuskegee, Alabama, on February 4, 1913. Her marriage to Raymond Parks lasted from 1932 until his death in 1977.
Parks' father, James McCauley, was a carpenter, and her mother, Leona Edwards McCauley, a teacher.
Before her arrest in 1955, Parks was active in the voter registration movement and with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, where she also worked as a secretary in 1943.
At the time of her arrest, Parks was 42 and on her way home from work as a seamstress.
She took a seat in the front of the black section of a city bus in Montgomery. The bus filled up and the bus driver demanded that she move so a white male passenger could have her seat.
"The driver wanted us to stand up, the four of us. We didn't move at the beginning, but he says, 'Let me have these seats.' And the other three people moved, but I didn't," she once said.
When Parks refused to give up her seat, a police officer arrested her.
As the officer took her away, she recalled that she asked, "Why do you push us around?"
The officer's response: "I don't know, but the law's the law, and you're under arrest."
She added, "I only knew that, as I was being arrested, that it was the very last time that I would ever ride in humiliation of this kind."
Four days later, Parks was convicted of disorderly conduct and fined $14.
That same day, a group of blacks founded the Montgomery Improvement Association and named King, the young pastor of Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, as its leader, and the bus boycott began.
For the next 381 days, blacks -- who according to Time magazine had comprised two-thirds of Montgomery bus riders -- boycotted public transportation to protest Parks' arrest and in turn the city's Jim Crow segregation laws.
Black people walked, rode taxis and used carpools in an effort that severely damaged the transit company's finances.
The mass movement marked one of the largest and most successful challenges of segregation and helped catapult King to the forefront of the civil rights movement.
The boycott ended on November 13, 1956, after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that Montgomery's segregated bus service was unconstitutional.
Parks' act of defiance came one year after the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision that led to the end of racial segregation in public schools. (Full story)
U.S. Rep. John Lewis of Georgia, a Democrat, told CNN Monday he watched the 1955-56 Montgomery drama unfold as a teenager and it inspired him to get active in the civil rights movement.
"It was so unbelievable that this woman -- this one woman -- had the courage to take a seat and refuse to get up and give it up to a white gentleman. By sitting down, she was standing up for all Americans," he said.