And who can forget the Cone of Silence -- which this Administration has offered to use for Congressional testimony.

Condi as agent 69 - brilliant. would you believe weapons of mass destruction related programs?

Obama and Oprah almost make spinning sound and look good...but not quite

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2007/12/12/obama-talks-the-talk-but-wheres-...

Karen @ 7:

Bush responds:

Oh my god! Noey nukes? Those are even worse than the kind we've been a'fearin'!

By, the way, Condi, you forgot the "Y" in NUYULAR.

Err, uh, NUKYULAR. Heh heh.

People keep talking about seeing Leezzaa with Gene Robinson, and the rumor is he's her 'beard', a cover for the chicks she dates. Actually, he's not only her beard, he's sort of her pimp.

No decent chick would ever hit on Leezzaa, but a lot of them hit on Gene. He takes the cream, and lets Leezzaa sniff the leftovers.

sorry about that chief......................missed it by this much.

The Inhofe response to global warming.

Here's my modified version...

Not so smart

gumby @ 11:

Preacher Boob @ 5:

Just think, when Bill and Melinda Gate's kids, Jennifer, Rory, and Phoebe, reach majority, 2016 to 2022, the money in their trust funds will be enough to buy all US Congressmen, all US Senators, and the Russian Duma, if they so chose.

I sure hope those kids aren't spending a lot of time watching Teletubbies, or attending a public school. And that they're smart enough to keep their religion to themselves. And that they don't have a nuclear war fetish. And that they didn't saw the legs off their beds to keep the Islamofascists from hiding under there.

And that they choose to stay here on earth to help us solve our problems, instead of spending all their time in their folk's fifth summer home, on Mars.

if you happen to experience any of these side effects, please contact your doctor or pharmacist

The last time I saw my doctor was a couple of months ago, she's a PhD, not an MD, but she specialized, as many young women, and a few gay men are doing these days, in CSE. (Curing Satyrical Erections)

odanny @ 14:

The Inhofe response to global warming.

the courage to do nothing???WTF!

Paul Waldman offers some concise, spot-on analysis of Romney's integration of church and state speech, and the media at large.

miss_kitty @ 3:

Why are Condi's arms white?

:P

She's been fisting Michael Jackson?

Merck recalls 1.5 million cases of children's vaccine.

Preacher Boob @ 23:

tr @ 19:

the oil companies, on their own, have enough money to buy the house, senate, and executive branch. They are working their charms in russia too.

Maybe this is the time to invest in politicians. If BigOil and the Gateses start a bidding war, the price could go through the roof. Maybe we could get the exclusive broker rights to stock sales of politicians.

We could market the shares as: 'Buy a Piece of a Putz'.

isn't that what lobbyists do?

In other news, America still loves its soldiers.

Preacher Boob @ 10:

People keep talking about seeing Leezzaa with Gene Robinson, and the rumor is he's her 'beard', a cover for the chicks she dates. Actually, he's not only her beard, he's sort of her pimp.

No decent chick would ever hit on Leezzaa, but a lot of them hit on Gene. He takes the cream, and lets Leezzaa sniff the leftovers.

Gene Washington, innit?

No, he's right. It's the country, or at least the majority of the people in it. At what point do we stop blaming "neocons and the corporations" and point the finger at the people who are more interested in Britney Spears' driving record and Jessica Alba's pregnancy who allow "the neocons and the corporations" to continue to do what they do?

randomstranger @ 34:

No, he's right. It's the country, or at least the majority of the people in it. At what point do we stop blaming "neocons and the corporations" and point the finger at the people who are more interested in Britney Spears' driving record and Jessica Alba's pregnancy who allow "the neocons and the corporations" to continue to do what they do?

The sad thing is: they wouldn't understand it if you did. There's just zero interest in looking any deeper into what's really going on.

Absolutely I want to blame people who don't know what's going on. Ignorance and apathy are inexcusable.

Randi Rhodes tells caller that she's beginning to doubt whether there really is a person named Osama Bin Laden.
http://www.alexjonesfan58.com/mp3/20071212_caller_randirhodes.mp3
(direct link to mp3 file)

Pakistani kids tell ABC Good Morning America the same thing.
http://www.alexjonesfan58.com/mp3/20071203_pakistanikids_goodmorningamer...
(direct link to mp3 file)

randomstranger @ 41:

I'd say she was nuts if I thought there was no way this president and his minions weren't capable of attempting such a deceit.

The president is a puppet. He is a media creation. Coke head turned born again central texas brush cutter, a nice guy, someone you'd want to have a beer with, except you can't because he's an alcoholic who doesn't drink anymore but chokes on pretzels and passes out. He's a moron's moron. Dick Cheney is a different story.

budda @ 17:

Hillary sickens me going after Obama for drugs! I really hope she looses bad in Iowa and NH. She does not deserve the nomination as she is a fake, corrupt, cold, ruthless lying bitch.

what's wrong? constipation backing up your throat?

miss_kitty @ 31:

randomstranger @ 30:

In other news, America still loves its soldiers.

Christ, this country sucks. Just. Plain. Sucks.

From someone on the northern side of the us- Canadian Border yes I quite agree. your country does suck.

dadams @ 45:

Avid Reader @ 39:

Randi Rhodes tells caller that she's beginning to doubt whether there really is a person named Osama Bin Laden.

Pakistani kids tell ABC Good Morning America the same thing.


[FIFY-Sitemonitor]

oh, yes there is.............and he's in the whitehouse posing as president

The real global terrorists where American flag lapel pins.

Or as the great poet Don Henley sang:

You can arm yourself, alarm yourself
But there's nowhere you can run
'Cause a man with a briefcase
can steal more money
Than any man with a gun

I said gimme, gimme what you got
Said gimme, gimme what you got
Gimme, gimme what you got
Gimme, gimme what you got

BWAHAHAHAHA!

Ron @ 37:

randomstranger @ 34:

No, he's right. It's the country, or at least the majority of the people in it. At what point do we stop blaming "neocons and the corporations" and point the finger at the people who are more interested in Britney Spears' driving record and Jessica Alba's pregnancy who allow "the neocons and the corporations" to continue to do what they do?

So you want to blame prople who don't know whar's going on for what this adminstration and the neocons have been planning for years. They plan this with people that are probably fed a higher or lower, depending on how you want to take it, education than what you have been given. What they lack. is common sense.

The Coporate entity has done a great job in educating us to think corporate. We count our wealth in gold, not in morality. "No nation can remain both ignorant and free. An educated public prevents a potential tyrant from destroying the freedoms we enjoy." TJ

Both Repulicans and Democrates take their marching orders from corporations. The FDA is run by Drug companies, the Parks Service by Mining of Big Oil, ecetera...

The war for real freedom has almost been lost. Yet people are simply polarized over the choice between henious slavery under the Republicans, and a kinder gentler slavery under the Democrates. It is really time to educate your fellow citizens and take to the street. There is no better lobbyist than one million people on the steps of the people in power.

Tequila @ 26:

Merck recalls 1.5 million cases of children's vaccine.

Doses, not "cases."

A case of vaccine is probably something like 144 doses.

Paul in LA @ 53:

randomstranger @ 34:

No, he's right. It's the country, or at least the majority of the people in it.

They have NEVER had the majority. They wouldn't have to STEAL elections if they had the majority. And they wouldn't have to lie if they had the majority.

It is not the country. It is a COUP.

You obviously misunderstood what I said. It's the people who sit at home watching Entertainment Tonight and reading US Weekly who allow this type of governing to continue. Its the people who put more stock in the lives of d-list celebrities than their own well being that allows the neocons to slip in the back door and run things as they see fit. If the majority of Americans simply don't care - and I do believe that's the case - then we're all fucked.

LOL @ 57:

never mind that

Hillary 2008 !

Yeah, that'll solve everything!

Tomorrow night is one of the best meteor showers of the year (Geminids).

(The Gemini Twins? Are they in on it?

I hope they, at least, are not Ladrones y Mentirosos too.)

Peaks at 2 AM/PST.

Daily Reading pt 1...

PLEASE DO THIS: 2007 Energy Bill: We Need ONE VOTE TODAY (for 60 - http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/12/12/13130/878
Call this morning and leave message (vote yes on Bill HR 6) it takes all of 35 seconds (yes I timed it) Most likely to switch vote: Judd Gregg (R-NH) 202 224-3324 & John Sununu (R-NH) 202 224-2841
I don't have to tell you how important this is....you already know

THIS SAYS IT ALL: The EU to Busheviks: We Don't Want You in Climate Talks as Long as You Continue to Deny the Dangerous Environmental Deterioration of Planet Earth
- http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071213/ap_on_sc/bali_climate_conference;_yl...
"The United States is the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases and the only major industrial country to have rejected Kyoto, which expires in 2012. It has been on the defensive since the conference kicked off on Dec. 3."
Damn straight, until we get non-oil men into the WH, they don't need to be there because they're going to do whatever they can to squash the talks, cause they're Big Oil whores

California Defeats Automakers' Legal Challenge to Climate Progress - http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iYEaejYD3iUh75IJHORDjmAZj5LgD8TG4MOO0
Handing a major defeat to the auto industry, a federal judge ruled Wednesday that California can regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Anthony Ishii in Fresno clears one of the hurdles in California's effort to reduce tailpipe emissions from cars, trucks and sports utility vehicles. "It's a major victory and a giant step forward for California," California Attorney General Jerry Brown said.

Edwards Is More Electable. Period. - http://agonist.org/ian_welsh/20071211/edwards_is_more_electable_period
It's not 2004 any more. CNN's latest poll shows ONLY Edwards crushing ALL of the Republican candidates. Time to look at the numbers and realize Hillary and Obama can't win--and we can't afford a Republican president for 4 more years. Instead, can finally have it all--an electable candidate, with progressive policies, that makes it to the Whitehouse: John Edwards.
He's been the leading environmental candidate according to GristMill (they hosted the presidential forum on climate change - him, Kucinich, & Clinton were the only candidates to show up, all parties' candidates were invited)

Dana Perino, Press Secretary to the President of the United States, Didn't Know What the Cuban Crisis Was But Said It Was Irrelevant Anyway During a Press Briefing. For a Former Journalism Major, That Makes You the BuzzFlash Media Putz of the Week. It Kind of Makes You Sound Stupid and Dishonest Too.
- http://mediaputz.com/07/12/putz1213.html

Democracy Now (Amy Goodman interview with Al Gore): http://www.democracynow.org/2007/12/11/it_is_time_to_make_peace

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html the dems roll over again...

Stagflation: This Is Going To Hurt. A lot!

Mulroney in sworn testimony this morning:
"A lie can make its way around the world before the truth can put on its pants in the morning"
E. R. Morrow

http://www.wednesday-night.com/BrianMulroney.htm

RobertD @ 32:

Preacher Boob @ 10:

People keep talking about seeing Leezzaa with Gene Robinson, and the rumor is he's her 'beard', a cover for the chicks she dates. Actually, he's not only her beard, he's sort of her pimp.

No decent chick would ever hit on Leezzaa, but a lot of them hit on Gene. He takes the cream, and lets Leezzaa sniff the leftovers.

Gene Washington, innit?

-------------------------------------------
i learn new cool stuff all the time on here! i'd never heard the term 'beard' before, thanks.
my daughter used to date a lot of gay guys as their 'cover girl'. she'd go to family dinners and actual real dates like dancing, out to dinner, all sorts of stuff. she's cute and sexy so it's not a biggy for a guy to approach her but he might be interested in the obviously gay guy with her. he gets to hit on a gay guy that he'd never have been able to approach unless he pretended to look at the chick. meanwhile she meets all sorts of other cover girls and everybody goes to a rave. ah the good old days in the 80s.

odanny @ 14:

The Inhofe response to global warming.

I'm sure he doesn't believe in evolution, either.

Michelle Malkin hates Huckabee .............
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2007/12/12/meet_the_gops_border_control_cross-dressers

Concerns:

1. The War Crimes Problem

There is a large pile of evidence suggesting there is a massive war crimes problem which the US legal community and US government are reluctant to confront. One tenet of sovereignty is whether the government can be trusted to comply with written law. Legitimacy requires an assent to written law. Without complying with written legal requirements in the Geneva Conventions, the US Government cannot call itself legitimate; neither can the legal community, aware of its legal obligations under its oath of office and as attorneys, argue they are working for a legitimate system. Nuremberg is precedent for adjudicating war crimes not only against civilians, but against legal counsel.

2. Congress Fails To Meet Legal Obligations

Congress well understands the war crimes issues, but refuses to impeach. Of concern are the unfolding revelations members of Congress were notified of water boarding; the JAGs did work with DoJ OLC to identify concerns with ICC prosecution of civilians; and the Congress was indirectly informed of the CIA waterboarding. Congress also has the power to review the open records: DOJ OLC has memoranda which cites case law concluding waterboarding is torture. It's baffling to see Congress -- with this much evidence -- take impeachment off the table; pre-judge the evidence it has not seen; and, in effect, refuse to use it's power to get the evidence related to alleged war crimes. Congress needs to lead: Nuremberg well stated that a nation that refuses to either impeach or prosecute alleged war crimes or breaches of Geneva cannot call itself civilized.

3. Geneva Obligations on US As Detaining Power

Former WH counsel have been linked with discussions on rendition; and making the (absurd) claim that the US Constitution does "not" provide protections to prisoners of war. This is a non-sense, convoluted argument which misses an important point: The issue isn't the Constitution, but the oath of office to the US Constitution; the US Constitution, as the Supreme Law incorporates all Treaties including Geneva.

The US, as a detaining-occupying power has an obligation to comply with Geneva. Whether the belligerent is or is not a lawful combatant has no bearing on whether the US is obliged to comply with Geneva. The US cannot deprive someone of rights protected by Geneva.

One right which cannot be deprived unless by competent judicial proceeding is the right of all prisoners of war to be tried, and have charges heard. Geneva explicitly grants to all Prisoners of War the same rights as similarly situated persons of the detaining power. This means the US -- because it grants to US service personnel UCMJ rights to a trial -- must afford the same trial procedures to the POWs. The issue isn't whether the POW is or isn't lawful; but the reverse: Whether the US -- as a signatory to Geneva -- will comply with the obligations of the United States under Geneva.

If the US refuses to comply with it's Geneva requirements, then other nations may also ignore similar Geneva obligations. The issue of the POWs is the allegation that non-charged civilians have been detained, held without charge or trial, and have been denied their Geneva protections which the US -- as a signatory -- must make available to the POWs. The issue has nothing to do with whether the "US Constitution" does or doesn't grant rights; but whether the US will or will not comply with its treaty obligations; and whether US Members of Congress -- per their 5 USC 3331 oath of office -- will or will not enforce the mandatory protections Geneva says must be afforded to all POWs.

If the US refuses to do this, then US leaders -- under the principle of retaliation and reciprocity -- could be similarly detained, held without charges, and not given the chance to challenge their detention. Any nation -- just as the US has done -- may similarly on accusation alone, define any US civilian leader under their control as being an subject to retaliation: Held without trial, charges, or any prospect of release.

4. Turley Outlined Solutions To Problems He Well Discusses

Georgetown Law Prof has publicly raised concerns Congress is not challenging the President. However, this is -- or should not be -- a problem: Turley himself in 2000 published a scholarly work on how a sitting President can be prosecuted outside Congress outside impeachment. The State AGs or local prosecutors, in Turley's argument, could lead the effort. [ Turley, Jonathan, "'From Pillar to Post': The Prosecution of American Presidents," 37 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 1049 (2000) ]

Of concern are Turley's recent remarks that the Congress must act, or if it doesn't, the voters will have to challenge them in 2008. Yet, we've seen Congress was unresponsive to the "mandate" of 2006; there's no reason to wait until 2008 to be disappointed again, especially given the option for non-Federal prosecutors outside impeachment proceedings/outside Congress could act.

It is troubling to see one of the leading Constitutional scholars who has outlined a well though out scholarly piece on prosecuting a sitting President apparently not mention this option despite his many public appearances in the media. It's as if he sees the train wreck unfolding, but fails to guide the media to the solution he himself well discussed in 2000. It is troubling to see a person of his calibre, scholarly work, legal background, and Constitutional expertise related to the unfolding fact patterns to not use his public stature to point to the solution he outlined in 2000: Even if Congress does nothing, there are options at the State and local level to directly prosecute the President.

5. ICC Appears Last Legal Obligation To Impose Discipline

Unless the Congress, States, and US government prosecutors are willing to enforce Geneva through direct prosecutions or impeachment, then it appears the only option is to forward the evidence to the ICC for prosecution. The JAGs in 2001 going forward documented to the DOJ and DoD leadership at the POW Working Group meetings that ICC could prosecute civilians fpr war crimes.

Going Forward

Our obligations under 5 USC 3331 is to have no mental reservation, use all lawful options, and see the Geneva conventions are fully enforced. Otherwise, we expose ourselves to reciprocal violations under the laws of war by other nations, combatants, or belligerents. This retaliation could include similar indefinite detentions without trial or charges; and no ability to see evidence or witnesses against us.

A. State Prosecutions of Sitting President, VP

Would like to see some discussion at Turley's blog about his scholarly paper outlining how a sitting President can be prosecuted outside Congress, outside impeachment; and a request that Turley provide a public comment-statement on whether he supports -- in the absense of Congressional leadership on impeachment -- a state-level effort to prosecute a sitting President, VP, or Member of Congress.

- Is Turley going to provide the leadership in the legal community to mobilize the State and local prosecutors to prosecute a sitting President, consistent with his work of 2000?

- If not, does Turley have a reason why he apparently no longer stands by his 2000 article "Pillar to Post" and views Congress as the only platform to enforce Geneva against the President, VP, and others?

- Is there a reason Turley apparently feels State AGs and local prosecutors cannot prosecute a sitting President outside impeachment, outside Congress?

- Why, if there is the option for the State AGs or local prosecutors to prosecute a sitting VP or President for war crimes, does Turley apparently want to wait for more elections before challenging Congress?

B. Remove Pelosi As Speaker To Make Way For Impeachment

Please discuss whether -- in the absence of House leadership effort to start an impeachment investigation -- whether there exists House interest in supporting removal of Pelosi as Speaker, to make way for impeachment.

- What is getting in the way of the House DNC-GOP members -- who defied Pelosi on the impeachment resolution calling for Cheney's impeachable offenses to be investigated -- from forming a majority caucus outside the GOP or DNC and remove Pelosi as Speaker?

- Impeachment proceedings would deprive the President and VP of any chance of a pardon. The nation is talking about challenging the President and VP for impeachable offenses, but the Congress and House leadership appears to be in the way. What is the reluctance to take "removing the Speaker from office"-option off the table?

- How does the nation reconcile [a] the Geneva obligations to enforce the laws of war; with [b] the failure of the US Congress to use all 5 USC 3331-required options to enforce the law; with [c] the refusal of the Congress to either make way for impeachment or prosecutions?

C. ICC Intervention

If the US Congress, Turley, and others are not willing to exercise leadership on enforcing Geneva through either prosecutions, impeachment, or other federal level judicial action, then there needs to be an effort to support the ICC in gathering evidence to support a war crimes prosecution against: The President, VP, Members of Congress, and legal counsel allegedly complicit with war crimes policy making, funding, and alleged frivolous legal arguments to prevent enforcement of the laws of war. The JAGs well understand the real threat the ICC has of prosecuting these issues which the United States does not appear interested in enforcing, prosecuting, investigating, or adjudicating. Legal counsel who make frivolous legal arguments to justify, support, or not remove themselves from this alleged illegal war crime activity could be implicated and prosecuted for war crimes.

- What is the explanation for the JAGs in 2001 mentioning in the POW working group meeting notes concerns to DOJ OLC that the civilian leaders could be prosecuted for war crimes; but the WH Counsel -- which relies on DoJ OLC for legal guidance -- would have us believe they are "not familiar" with these legal requirements of Geneva or the risk that the ICC could prosecute current and former WH counsel for alleged frivolous legal arguments in re war crimes?

- What evidence does any current or former WH counsel have that they actively took the required legal actions -- after the JAGs notified them in 2001 of the risks that POWs when mistreated -- to enforce Geneva?

- How does current and former WH counsel explain the DOJ OLC memoranda explicitly referring to waterboarding as torture; yet, the same counsel would have us believe that US Geneva obligations -- as a detaining power -- are "vague" or "uncertain"?

Here’s another link, which may give you a big picture approach to the CFR, Title 32.

As you scroll down the link, look for the following:

A. CHAPTER XX–INFORMATION SECURITY OVERSIGHT OFFICE, NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION

Note that this is Chapter XX, and includes sections 2000-2004.

B. CHAPTER XXVIII–OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Not this is Chapter XXVIII, which includes section 2800 of Title 32.

Questions For OVP

- Is it the View of OVP that it is not under Title 32?

- Which standards does the OVP rely on when complying with 32 CFR 2800 data retention requirements, and other reporting procedures on compliance with provisions of 32 CFR 2800?

- Which standards, if any, is OVP using to ensure its personnel — as listed in 32 CFR 2800 — who must enforce/comply with these procedures are or are not meeting the requirements of Title 32?

- Is it the position of OVP that its personnel would never — under any circumstances — ever read any guidance from Chapter XX to provide anything of substance to requirements in 32 CFR 2800?

- How does OVP explain ISOO being in the same CFR as OVP security requirements?

- Is it the view of OVP that it is not in the Title 32 CFR at all?

- What standarsd, if any, does OVP use to assess whether it is or is not meeting the reporting/disclosure requirements under 32 CFR 2800?

- How are compliance audits conducted by OVP staff to ensure all staff counsel assigned to the DC Bar are fully meeting all legal requirements related to safeguarding classification of sensitive information?

- If there is a concern that classified information — related to the identify of a CIA agent — was disclosed, who in OVP would make the referral to which agency to investigate this violation which OVP staff counsel would learn?

- When would DC-bar-assigned counsel ensure that they were not making frivolous legal arguments, and/or that they were fully complying with their legal obligations not to support/tolerate/contribute to illegal violations of security classification requirements?

- Is it the view of the OVP counsel that all standards related to the protection of all CIA agent names in the hands of OVP staff counsel are not governed by any standard in 32 CFR 2800?

- What happens if there is a violation of the 32 CFR 2800: Which standards do OVP legal counsel use to assess whether they should make a mandatory withdrawal from that alleged illegal activity within OVP, as required under the DC disciplinary standards of conduct in re attorneys?

- If the reporting requirements of 32 CFR 2800 were fully audited, which staff counsel would have to resign because of allegations they knew or should have known that the identity of CIA agent Plame was not fully protected as required under 32 CFR 2800; and that staff counsel knew, or should have known, that the OVP Security program was well below what was required in 32 CFR 2800?

- How many of the OVP Legal counsel know that the OVP staff has destroyed evidence of war crimes; and has specific knowledge of CIA interrogation tape destruction; but they have not resigned, despite requirements on them as counsel in re Geneva conventions?

- Are any of the OVP Staff counsel worried that the 32 CFR 2800 security-retention requirements in re alleged war crimes evidence (CIA interrogation tape/audio/transcript in re waterboarding) has not been retained, but destroyed in contravention to 32 CFR 2800?

- When did OVP staff counsel get a copy of the CIA audio, transcript, and DVD tape (not video tape) made of the original interrogation;

- Was there a reason this information was not fully disclosed to the court in re 32 CFR 2800 compliance requirements in re Geneva, alleged war crimes evidence in re prisoner abuse?

It appears to be Al Gore's fault that the US is not backing the effort against global warming. He should have stepped aside and let the repugs take over so they could harvest the credit.

Have you noticed that they wanted to make Social Security their own? Medicare too.